Opinion ID: 3164956
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: conclusion

Text: The LUC in this case properly reclassified D.R. HortonSchuler’s property from the agricultural land use district to the urban land use district. Article XI, Section 3 and Act 183 reveal no intent to require the LUC to stay reclassification proceedings pending formal designations of IALs. Further, the Appellants did not provide persuasive argument that the LUC’s D&O violated HAR § 15-15-77. First, the Appellants did not challenge the LUC’s finding that the reclassification was reasonably necessary for urban growth; therefore, this court is bound by that finding. Even if it were not, substantial evidence supported the LUC’s additional findings that the reclassification would not substantially impair agricultural 47  FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAII REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER  production. Second, the Appellants did not provide argument on the issue of whether the reclassification violated the Hawaii State Plan. Consequently, we cannot conclude that the LUC’s D&O violated HAR § 15-15-77. For the foregoing reasons, the circuit court’s decision and order, which affirmed the LUC’s D&O and dismissed the Appellants’ appeal, is affirmed. We take this opportunity to reiterate, however, that pursuant to the first statute within Part III, HRS § 205-41, the legislature has declared as follows: Declaration of policy. It is declared that the people of Hawaii have a substantial interest in the health and sustainability of agriculture as an industry in the State. There is a compelling state interest in conserving the State’s agricultural land resource base and assuring the long-term availability of agricultural lands for agricultural use to achieve the purposes of: (1) Conserving and protecting agricultural lands; (2) Promoting diversified agriculture; (3) Increasing agricultural self-sufficiency; and (4) Assuring the availability of agriculturally suitable lands, pursuant to article XI, section 3, of the Hawaii State Constitution. Accordingly, although there is no basis under the law to overturn this reclassification, the state and county governments are reminded of the importance of agriculture to the future of 48  FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAII REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER  this state and of the need to effectuate the mandate of Article XI, Section 3 through the implementation of Act 183. Eric A. Seitz, /s/ Mark E. Recktenwald Della A. Belatti, and Sarah R. Devine, /s/ Paula A. Nakayama for petitioners /s/ Sabrina S. McKenna Gregory W. Kugle and Matthew T. Evans /s/ Gary W. B. Chang for respondent D.R. Horton-Schuler Homes, LLC 49