Pila‘a 400, LLC v. Board of Land and Natural Resources.

Concurring and Dissenting Opinion by

NAKAYAMA, Acting C.J.

I concur with the majority’s holding that the BLNR had jurisdiction to institute the enforcement action and that the BLNR was not required to engage in rule-making before imposing financial penalties against Pila'a 400. However, I respectfully dissent from the majority’s holding that Pila'a 400 received reasonable notice before the contested case hearing.

Prior to the catastrophic events at issue in this ease, Pila'a Bay was characterized as a *275beautiful area, an excellent site for swimming, snorkeling, fishing, and gathering edible…