The Hawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals ruled this week that courts can enforce a constitutional requirement to provide “sufficient” funding for the operations of the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands.
The decision could further complicate the state’s budget picture by requiring the legislature to substantially increase its support for DHHL.
The ruling overturned an earlier decision by Circuit Court Judge Bert Ayabe, who had agreed with state attorneys that the question of DHHL funding is essentially “political” and must be left to the legislature’s discretion. The state argued that there are no clear standards for judging whether any particular level of funding is “sufficient” and, therefore, the funding decisions must rest with the legislature.
The lawsuit was brought by the Native Hawaiian Legal Corporation on behalf of six Hawaiian beneficiaries of DHHL. David Kimo Frankel argued the plaintiff’s case before the Intermediate Court in September.
The lawsuit focuses on a 1978 amendment to the State Constitution. Article XII, Section 1 of the Constitution was amended to read:
The legislature shall make sufficient sums available for the following purposes: (1) development of home, agriculture, farm and ranch lots; (2) home, agriculture, aquaculture, farm and ranch loans; (3) rehabilitation projects to include, but not limited to, educational, economic, political, social and cultural processes by which the general welfare and conditions of native Hawaiians are thereby improved; (4) the administration and operating budget of the department of Hawaiian home lands; in furtherance of (1), (2), (3) and (4) herein, by appropriating the same in the manner provided by law. [emphasis added]
The 1978 amendment substituted the word “shall” for the previous phrase, “may, from time to time, make additional”.
Plaintiff’s relied on the records of the 1978 Con Con to show delegates intended to take away the legislature’s discretion and instead require adequate funding of DHHL.
Even after passage of the amendment, the legislature appropriated no general funds for DHHL until 1987. The funding peaked at over $4 million in 1997, and has fallen since. During the Lingle administration, DHHL pursued an ambitious program of commercial development and leases to private parties in order to raise the funds necessary to operate the department and its programs.
It was exactly the practice of relying on income provided by leases to non-Hawaiian corporations that prompted the 1978 amendment, according to Con Con minutes cited by the plaintiffs.
The lawsuit faults DHHL for failing to submit budget requests for sufficient funds, and the state for failing to provide such funds.
The appeals court agreed with plaintiffs that the record of the 1978 Constitutional Convention provides numerous standards that can be applied to determine whether a particular level of funding is “sufficient.”
The decision sends the case back to the Circuit Court for further proceedings to determine whether actual funding levels are “sufficient” to meet the suggested standards.