2005-04-01_Defendant-Appellant-Cross_Appellees_County_of_Hawaiis_Amended_Opening_Brief

Home

reflects no PKO ownership or other interest in the subject property implicating any HRS Chapter 205 claims. Although PKO did allege that at least two of its members are descendants of ancestors buried at Pu'u Ohau on the subject property, they failed to allege (or prove)how the county's decision regarding Wlicability of HRS Chapter 205 would impact that interest. A Plaintiff "must establish a causal connection between the injury suffered and the action at issue." Sierra Club v. Hawai i Tourism Authority, 100 Haw. at 252-53, 59 P.3d at 887-888 (bold italics added). In the instant case,there is no causal nexus between the county's allowance of Hokuli'a under Chapter 205 and the disposition of PKO members' ancestors' remains. The legislature has delegated responsibility over burial sites,to the Historic Preservation Division("SHPD")of the state Department of Land and Natural Resources("DLNR") and to island Burial Councils under HRS Chapter 6E. HRS Chapter 205 does not address burial sites at all. Decisions regarding treatment of ancient burial sites and remains interred there are made solely by the state. Haw. Rev. Stat. § 6E-43, 43.6. The Burial Decision itself reflects that burial issues are DLNR's jurisdiction,not the County's. The Burial Decision orders DLNR/SHPD to identify traditional cultural practices on the development pertaining to graves, assess impact of the development on those practices, and provide reasonable protective measures for any such practices,before ground alteration may continue. The County Defendant-Appellants are only ordered to issue no further permits until DLNR/SHPD does its work, and to take measures to avoid conflicts of interest. Burial Decision, Order,R at 52:16555-56. Hawaii County's decisions regarding whether the Oceanside 1250 development is permitted on lands in the agricultural district has no relation to the disposition of the remains of ancestors of members of PKO. The county has no authority under HRS Chapter 205 or Chapter 6E to make decisions regarding the burial sites on Oceanside 1250's property affected by the proposed development. Therefore, any injury associated with burials of PKO members' ancestors cannot be caused by the county's HRS Chapter 205 decisions and the PKO Plaintiff- Annellees fail the second prong of the injury-in-fact requirement to demonstrate standing to bring an action. Moreover, any relief that the courts could provide the PKO plaintiffs in relation to interpretation of HRS Chapter 205 would not redress plaintiffs' alleged injury. The circuit court's 28