Family asks commission to vacate dismissal, reopen contested case alleging procedural defects

Representatives for petitioner Dana Maderas (docket 202501405‑SIDASH‑O) asked the commission to reopen a contested‑case hearing and vacate a dismissal they say was procedurally defective. Hiba Kahiakoo Rodenhurst, appearing as the ohana representative, told commissioners petitioners never received the hearing officer's report and that an amended order of dismissal served on Sept. 8 omitted referenced exhibits, creating an incomplete record.

Rodenhurst argued the commission relied on materials not served to petitioners, citing Hawaii Administrative Rules (HAR) procedural requirements, and requested the dismissal be stricken and the contested case be heard before the full board to afford petitioners a full opportunity to be heard. She described long family efforts to preserve their homestead and alleged administrative missteps by DHHL staff that have harmed kupuna and that the procedural errors violate fundamental fairness.

The commission announced a recess to hold the contested case hearing and deliberate. Commissioners indicated the submitted reply to DHHL's memorandum of opposition would be distributed to them before deliberation.

Selected quote: "Because the record was incomplete and the commission's order was issued without full notice in service, the dismissal and report is procedurally defective and must be vacated in its entirety," — Ohana representative in testimony.

What happens next: The commission recessed specifically to conduct the contested‑case hearing and to deliberate; the public session noted the hearing officer report and the petitioners' reply would be considered during deliberations.