Laserfiche WebLink
0 0 <br /> authority. See Curtis v. Board of Appeals of the County of Hawai`i, 90 Hawaii 384, 393, <br /> 978 P.2d 822, 831 (1999). <br /> Moreover, Board's Rules § 3-18 does not require the parties to submit FOFCOL. <br /> Because the Board found in favor of Mrs. Calvert, it requested Mrs. Calvert's attorney to <br /> submit proposed FOFCOL, effectively waiving the requirement for the Director to submit <br /> proposed FOFCOL pursuant to Board's Rule § 8-13. (ROA at 451.) The Director's <br /> attorney was not requested or required to submit proposed FOFCOL or to submit <br /> objections to Mrs. Calverts' proposed FOFCOL. (ROA at 451.) Board's Rule § 3-18 <br /> merely provides a time limit for submitting objections to FOFCOL, if a party desires to <br /> do so. <br /> C. The Board Exceeded its Statutory Authority or Made an Error of <br /> Law When it Decided That Mrs. Calvert's Water Variance <br /> Application Was Automatically Approved By Operation of <br /> HRS 4 91-13.5. <br /> HRS § 91-13.5 provides that: <br /> Unless otherwise provided by law, an agency shall adopt <br /> rules that specify a maximum time period to grant or deny a <br /> business or development-related permit, license,or <br /> approval. . . . <br /> (Emphasis added.) <br /> It is well established that HRS § 91-1 clearly excludes legislative branches from <br /> the definition of"agency"and therefore, from compliance with the provisions contained <br /> in HRS, Chapter 91. See Sandy Beach Defense Fund v. City Council, 70 Hawaii 361, <br /> 369, 773 P.2d 250, 256 (1989). The Hawaii County Council (hereinafter"Council") is <br /> the legislative branch of Hawaii County. See Article III, Section 3-1,Hawaii County <br /> Charter. In 1982, the Council adopted Ordinance No. 763, Sec. 5, and codified as <br /> 6 <br />