Laserfiche WebLink
(5) Appellants Jin and Lu failed to meet their burden of proof pursuant to HRS § 91-10(5)to <br /> affirmatively show that the Director's decision was arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, <br /> and/or violated law. (R:CV07-1-261K Doc. 021 at 908-910.) <br /> Second, in response to Appellants Jin and Lifs argument that the Board did not shift the <br /> burden of proof to the Director, the Court concluded that the Board did in fact shift the burden of <br /> proof to the Director when it stated in its Decision and Order that"the Denial by the Planning <br /> Director was arbitrary and capricious in that he failed to consider other evidence regarding the <br /> amount of rainfall" (R:CV07-1-261K Doc. 021 at 911.) The Court explained that it is the <br /> applicant for a water variance, not the Director, who is required to show that he or she meets <br /> the requirements of Rule 22-4, and moreover, that there was no COL adopted by the Board to <br /> support such a decision. (R:CV07-1-261K Doc. 021 at 911-912.) Likewise, the Court concluded <br /> that the Board shifted the burden to the Director when it stated in its Decision and Order that"the <br /> Planning Director's reliance on only the isohyet line and one rain gauge was arbitrary in that Rule <br /> 22 contemplates that there would be reliance on more than one rain gauge, and the isohyet line <br /> was within a reasonable distance from Appellanfsproperty" (R:CV07-1-261K Doc. 021 at 912.) <br /> Again, as the Court explained, there was no COL adopted by the Board to support such a <br /> decision. (R:CV07-1-261K Doc. 021 at 912.) <br /> Third, in response to Appellants Jin and Lifs argument that Rule 22-4 is invalid and <br /> unenforceable because the Director did not comply with the rule making procedures of <br /> Chapter 91, HRS, when he deviated from the rule by using methods of measuring rainfall <br /> other than what is provided for in Rule 22-4, the Court concluded that Rule 22-4 is valid and <br /> enforceable and the Director did not depart from Rule 22-4 in contravention of the rule-making <br /> procedures of Chapter 91, HRS, by using methods of measuring rainfall other than what is <br /> provided for in Rule 22-4 based on the following: (1) Appellants Jin and Lu failed to provide any <br /> 11 <br />