The legal tug-of-war over who gets a say in key West Maui water decisions is far from over. On June 17, the Intermediate Court of Appeals revived open-government claims tied to the 2023 redeployment of M. Kaleo Manuel, a top Commission on Water Resource Management official, and sent the case back to circuit court. At stake is a deceptively simple question with big implications: do high-level personnel moves tied to water policy have to be handled in a publicly noticed meeting?
Appeals Court Revives Sunshine Law And Rule-Making Claims
In a Summary Disposition Order, the Intermediate Court of Appeals concluded that the trial court jumped the gun when it dismissed the plaintiffs' Sunshine Law and illegal rule-making claims as moot. The panel said those claims still deserve a full judicial ruling. The court emphasized that the plaintiffs asked for declaratory relief, not just an injunction, and said the trial court must answer whether transfers of the “First Deputy” position have to occur in a noticed public meeting, according to the Intermediate Court of Appeals.
Plaintiffs Say The Public Was Shut Out
Plaintiffs Kekai Keahi and Jennifer Kamahoʻi Mather are challenging how Manuel was moved out of his role, saying his redeployment on August 16, 2023 shut the public out of a decision that should have been handled in an open, noticed meeting. Their legal team has framed the move as part of “a coordinated campaign” that followed renewed complaints from major private West Maui landowners.
Attorney Lance D. Collins called the appeals ruling “an important victory for the public,” and Mather added that “the public deserves transparency, accountability, and a real voice,” according to Maui Now.
Court Says Case Over Declaratory Relief Is Not Moot
The appeals court was not persuaded by the argument that Manuel's later reinstatement ended the controversy. In its order, the panel explained that his return to the position did not fully resolve the plaintiffs' request for a legal ruling, because declaratory relief could still guide future conduct and potentially prevent repeat violations.
The Summary Disposition Order also noted that the case could clarify whether any delegation of Commission power amounted to a “rule” that should have gone through the rule-making procedures of the Hawaii Administrative Procedure Act. On those grounds, the Intermediate Court of Appeals vacated the Circuit Court's dismissal and sent the case back for more proceedings, according to the Intermediate Court of Appeals.
What Happens Next
Now the spotlight shifts back to the Circuit Court. Judges there will have to decide whether moving the “First Deputy” must happen in a noticed public meeting, and whether any handoff of authority in this situation counted as rule-making that should have triggered HAPA procedures. The Department of Land and Natural Resources declined to comment on the pending case, according to Maui Now.
Legal Stakes For Water Governance
If the Circuit Court ultimately sides with the plaintiffs, DLNR and the Commission on Water Resource Management could be looking at a new requirement to hold public, noticed meetings for personnel moves that touch water policy. That would mean a more formal, public-facing process for changes that could ripple through how West Maui water decisions are made.
Hawaii courts have already recognized that citizens may seek declaratory relief under HRS §92-12(c) to resolve open-meetings disputes. The appeals panel leaned on that line of authority, including the Hawaii Supreme Court's handling of similar claims in Justia.
