Committee recommends action on federal Endangered Species Act lawsuit alleging streetlights harm native seabirds

The Government Relations, Ethics and Transparency Committee recommended forwarding Resolution 25-46, which seeks settlement authority in response to a federal Endangered Species Act complaint alleging that Maui County streetlights cause incidental take of three protected seabird species.

The committee voted to recommend adoption (recorded as 7 ayes, 0 nos, 2 excused) after executive-session briefings and an open-session summary of topics the committee put on the public record. The motion to recommend adoption was made by Member Cook and seconded by Member Tsukimura.

The nut graf: The complaint, filed Nov. 19, 2024, alleges artificial lighting associated with county streetlights disorients seabirds in flight — causing them to circle, fall to the ground and become vulnerable to predation, dehydration or vehicle strikes — and asks the county to seek a federal incidental-take permit and adopt mitigation measures. Counsel reported a stipulation in which plaintiffs agreed not to seek monetary damages in the suit; settlement terms and mitigation proposals were discussed in executive session and summarized for the public.

Deputy Corporation Counsel Brian Bilberry and county counsel staff described the lawsuit as brought under the Endangered Species Act, 16 U.S.C. §1531 et seq. In open session Bilberry explained that the plaintiffs asked the county to apply for a federal take permit and to adopt mitigation such as lighting adjustments and predator control measures; Bilberry said the plaintiffs had committed by stipulation not to pursue monetary damages in the present case. He noted evidence and specific mitigation proposals were discussed in greater detail in executive session.

The complaint names three species in its allegations: the uaʻu (Hawaiian petrel), the aʻo (Newell’s shearwater), and the ʻakeʻake (band-rumped storm petrel). Bilberry said the plaintiffs requested mitigation measures and a permit process; the county will need to evaluate potential mitigation commitments and any required permitting. Members asked whether mitigation could be part of a federal permit and whether documentation of fallouts and field evidence exists; counsel said evidence and mitigation options were discussed in closed session and that additional details would be provided in records the committee chose to place on the public record.

Ending: The committee voted to recommend adoption of Resolution 25-46 and will present the item to the full council; counsel will continue to work with plaintiffs and staff on potential mitigation and permitting paths.