CITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU, Petitioner-Appellant, vs. LAND USE COMMISSION, STATE OF HAWAI‘I, DEPARTMENT OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, STATE OF HAWAI‘I, OFFICE OF PLANNING AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT, STATE OF HAWAI‘I, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, STATE OF HAWAI‘I, Respondents-Appellees.

Supreme Court Courtroom
Ali‘iōlani Hale, 2nd Floor
417 South King Street
Honolulu, HI 96813

The oral argument will also be livestreamed for public viewing via the Judiciary’s YouTube channel at YouTube.com/hawaiicourts and ‘Ōlelo at olelo.org/tv-schedule/, subject to ‘Ōlelo’s programming availability.

Attorneys for Petitioner-Appellant CITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU:
     Duane W.H. Pang, Brad T. Saito, and Brianna L. Weaver, Pono I. Arias, and Patricia A.V. Sendao, Deputies Corporation Counsel

Attorneys for Respondents-Appellees LAND USE COMMISSION, STATE OF HAWAI‘I, DEPARTMENT OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, STATE OF HAWAI‘I, OFFICE OF PLANNING AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT, STATE OF HAWAI‘I, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, STATE OF HAWAI‘I :
    Julie H. China, Daniel A. Morris, and Miranda C. Steed Deputy Attorneys General

NOTE:     Order assigning Circuit Judge Trish K. Morikawa due to a vacancy, filed 08/05/26.

NOTE:     Order setting oral argument for Tuesday, 09/22/26 at 10:00 a.m, filed 08/24/26.

NOTE: Amended Memo of Setting dated 09/10/26, amended for the purpose of adding:

     -Deputy Attorney General Miranda C. Steed. Notice of appearance filed 08/31/26.

COURT:    Devens, C.J., McKenna, Eddins, and Ginoza, JJ., and Circuit Judge Morikawa assigned by reason of vacancy.

Brief Description:

This transfer case involves whether the City and County of Honolulu (the City) met procedural notice requirements for important agricultural lands (IAL) designation under HRS chapter 205 and the Land Use Commission’s administrative rules. 

The Department of Planning and Permitting (DPP) developed recommended lands for designation as IALs.  This approximately six-year process included internal county review, an advisory committee, and community meetings to develop maps of agricultural lands that met the statutory IAL standards and criteria.  The Honolulu City Council adopted the IAL designation recommendation and submitted the City’s recommendation to the Land Use Commission (LUC).

The LUC held a public hearing, at which many landowners testified they had not received notice that their lands were being proposed for IAL designation.  Based primarily on its determination that the City had not met landowner notice requirements under Hawaiʻi Revised Statutes § 205-47 and Hawaiʻi Administrative Rules § 15-15-125, the LUC rejected the recommendation and remanded the matter to the DPP for further action. 

The City appealed to the Circuit Court of the First Circuit.  The circuit court transferred the appeal to this court.  This court denied the LUC’s motion to dismiss.

The City argues that the LUC erred in using contested case hearing procedures rather than rulemaking procedures to reject and remand its IAL submission.  It also claims it took “reasonable action” to notify landowners as required.  The LUC argues that it properly applied a quasi-judicial procedure that satisfied the landowners’ due process rights.  It maintains that the City failed to provide reasonable notice to each of the affected landowners when preparing the proposed IAL maps.