Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 1437.003 1984-1988 --olELOPsE4;,,,, - - `t: -.T.1 HAWAII REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY k' COUNTY OF HAWAII ''.''.,( ri..ii.O 35 WAILUKU DRIVE • HILO, HAWAII 96720 • PHONE (808) 935-9923 January 25 , 1988. Councilwoman Merle K. Lai County of Hawaii 25 Aupuni; Street Hilo , HI 96720. Dear Councilwoman Lai : . APPEALS FROM ADVERSE HRA DECISIONS RELATED . TO . THE DOWNTOWN HILO COMMER- CIAL ZONING DISTRICT ( CDH ) Enclosed i.s the opinion rendered by the Corporation Coun- sel ' s Office regarding the above subject . This is in response to your request of January 18 , 1988 subsequent to the County Council ' s deliberation on Bill 467 . I trust this clarifies the matter . Very truly yours , . (A7-2-.i., GORDON H . NOBRIGA Manager GHN/dd Encl . APPROVED : 40( ---- 69i i°1- / , ie-n...ec_r- DANT K. CARP ER , MAYOR file No. H U- zA! Ref. � v. _ _. MBAR 1'' • r • .. b, COUNTY OF HAWAII --RECEIVED J A N 2 2 1988 '1- ICE OF THE CORPORATION COUNT ���' Hilo Lagoon Center 101 Aupuni Street, Suite 325 Hilo, HI 96720 MEMORANDUM To: Mr. Gordon Nobr i a Date: 9 January 22, 1988 Manager, Hawaii Redevelopment Agency From: Patricia K. O'Toole, Assistant Corporation Counsel QX`-'bt Subject: Appeals - from HRA . Adverse- Decisions: You have asked for responses to two questions relating to Bill 467, adding a Downtown Hilo Commercial zoning district (CDH) . The questions and replies are as follows: 1. Whether HRA's adverse rulings are subject to review by the planning board of appeals? No. 2.. Whether the county council can be included in HRA' s appeal procedures? No. Your first question is whether HRA's adverse rulings are subject to review by the planning board of appeals. Under the proposed bill, the HRA will be part of the approval process for developments within the CDH. We believe that decisions made by HRA which are adverse to an applicant are not appealable to the planning board of appeals. The jurisdiction of the planning board of appeals is established by §5-6. 3 of the Hawaii County Charter. This section states that " [t] he board shall hear and determine all appeals from the actions of the planning director and planning commission. In addition, the board shall hear and determine appeals from the actions of the chief engineer or his staff regarding the enforcement of the building, plumbing, and electrical code and laws. " The charter only empowers the board of appeals to hear decisions of the planning director and commission and the chief engineer and staff. No authority is given to review the actions of the HRA. You indicate that the HRA has adopted rule 6 pursuant to chapter 91. This is consistent with §53-5 (2) , HRS, which gives HRA the authority to adopt rules and regulations pursuant to chapter 91, HRS. Rule 6 relates to urban design and will be the rule used 'by the HRA in its approval procedure under Bill 467. Adverse decisions would be appealable pursuant to §91-14, HRS, as appeals from contested case proceedings. Mr. Gordon Nobriga Page 2 January 22, 1988 You next ask whether the county council can be included in HRA's appeal procedures. We believe that it would not be appropriate for the council to hear appeals from HRA' s decisions. By §53-2 (a) , HRS, the council creates by resolution a local redevelopment agency. Its powers and duties are described in §53-5, HRS. Section 53-5 (7) , HRS, indicates that HRA may make rules to carry into effect its purposes and that the rules are to be subject to chapter 91. Chapter 91 describes a route for judicial review through contested case appeals. No section of chapter 53 indicates that the council, after creating the HRA by resolution, retains any authority to review the decisions made by HRA. The charter vests the legislative powers of the county in the council. Its functions are described as "legislation and public policy formulation, as distinct and separate from the executive administration of county government. " Section 3.1, Hawaii County Charter. An appeal from an administrative agency would be part of the administration of the county and thus appears outside the scope of authority of the council. Since HRA will be conducting contested case hearings to make its decision on urban design, appeal to circuit court from a contested case hearing is a matter of right established by §91-13, HRS. The council cannot by ordinance eliminate this right. Apparently, the council is concerned with avoiding the costs of a judicial review. It should be pointed out that a contested case appeal is limited to the record of the hearing held before the administrative agency. The record of proceedings is prepared by the agency and transmitted to the court. Usually the court requires a written brief and argument. The procedure is designed to be speedy and inexpensive. If there are any specific proposals, we could review them. Let me know if you have any questions concering our response. PKO:jn APPROVED: QAfAe/,-6,c--% JO A. Wa ER Co )poration Counsel ' �OJaSV OF Nyh`' T. KASHI DOMINGO `' Councilman ' ''I'' grE•O F_�N PYI, COUNTY COUNCIL COUNTY OF HAWAII HAWAII COUNTY BUILDING 25 A UPUNI STREET HILO, HAWAII 96720 March 28 , 1988 In Reply Refer To: Bills 467 & 468 C-1437 . 2 & 1437 . 3 Mr . John Wagner Corporation Counsel County of Hawaii Hilo, Hawaii RE : Amendments to Chapter 25 ( Zoning Code ) Hawaii Redevelopment Agency At its meeting held today, the Committee on Planning adopted the following recommendation with regard to the above subject matter : "Refer to Planning Director and Corporation Counsel for comments and recommendation . " TAkashi Domingo Chairman COMMITTEE ON PL NNING Atts . \.