Courthouse Without A Courtroom

Non-profit groups being scrutinized by county after unapproved removal of courtroom at Lahaina’s historic courthouse building.

Kenny Hultquist

If you go to the Old Lahaina Courthouse nowadays, you will find something amiss – the courthouse no longer has a courtroom.
County officials are scrutinizing the actions of two nonprofit organizations that operate inside the boundaries of the historic district of Lahaina. Both claim to be dedicated to preserving the town’s past, maintaining its present, and planning its future.
One of these groups is Lahaina Town Action Committee (LAC), a 501(c)4, and the other is Lahaina Restoration Foundation (LRF), a 501(c)3.

The Old Lahaina Courthouse. The stone structure built in the 1800s has a diverse history.

They both have web sites with their mission statements posted. LAC “promotes, preserves, and encourages the historical, cultural, social, commercial, and environmental vitality of significance of Lahaina.” They also state, “Our challenge, as the caretakers of this legacy, is to continue to support compatible tourism while protecting Lahaina's unique cultural and natural resources, and to sustain the viability of our community.” The LRF mission statement: “For the benefit of both our residents and visitors, and in cooperation with others we strive to faithfully restore, maintain and interpret the physical, historical, and cultural legacy of Lahaina, Maui.” The LRF currently holds the lease of the Old Lahaina Courthouse in the Lahaina Historic District.
That noted, there is another group, a branch of the Department of Planning (DOP) known as the Cultural Resources Commission (CRC), that has the power to instruct LAC, LRF and everybody else, how, where, and when they may conduct business inside the boundaries of the Lahaina historical district.
While contemplating a request by the LAC to grant an after-the-fact exemption at their December 2004 meeting, the CRC was informed by this reporter that the Old Historic Courtroom no longer existed on the second floor of the Old Courthouse.
DOP director Mike Foley sent a letter dated Dec. 10 to Theo Morrison, executive director of LAC, stating that the renovations should have been reviewed by county and state agencies, listed a number of reasons why and requested an account of the circumstances leading up to the removal of the courtroom.
Keoki Freeland, executive director of LRF, attended the January 6 CRC meeting and the matter was deferred to allow LRF and LAC time to present an explanation of the alterations at a later date.
On Friday, March 18, 2005, the CRC met in Lahaina at Waiola Church. Agenda item D.1.a. was a request by LRF to approve the use of the Old Lahaina Courthouse Courtroom as a museum and gift shop. Agenda item D.1b. was a request by LRF for an after-the-fact Historic District permit for, guess what – a gift shop and museum in that same courtroom.
A couple things were questionable about the March meeting from the start. First, there was no public notice of the meeting except for the usual notification letters sent to folks on the CRC mailing list. CRC meetings are usually held on the first Thursday of each month, not the third Friday. Mention was made at the regular CRC meeting two weeks prior that some meetings should be held in Lahaina, maybe three or four a year, but no dates were set.
There was an army of LAC and LRF supporters that see to have been recruited to testify in favor of the museum/gift shop. There was little mention during public testimony of the fact that the courtroom had been illegally dismantled and replaced by a gift shop and museum.
Close to twenty people testified before the item was officially called up by the CRC chair, and many then sat down to await a verdict.

Courtroom turned gift shop. Non-profit organizations are being cited as responsible for removal of historical courtroom furnishings.

Joan McKelvey is one of the few who want to see the courtroom returned to its original state. “It should be a courtroom or courthouse museum and the furniture should be put back in place,” she said.
After being questioned by commissioner Barbara Long, McKelvey said, “I could not see the reason for another gift shop upstairs, I am arguing the removal of the courthouse furniture – I do think it’s a little heavy handed.”
Some testifiers seemed to think that the CRC was conducting a popularity poll as opposed to an inquiry.
“The testimony here today is 11–1 in favor of the museum,” said Earl Essiq, a part time west side resident.
Others tried to divert responsibility away from LAC and LRF. J.J. Elkin, property manager at 505 Front Street stated, “The responsibility for lack of proper procedure is the governments mistake, not the private citizenry (or) the private organizations here.” It seemed he was faulting governmental regulations for the fact that LAC and LRF removed the courtroom without proper permission or permits.
At this point commissioner Ke’eaumoku Kapu read the Dec. 10 letter from Foley to Morrison and reminded everyone present that they were there to address the unapproved removal of the courtroom furnishings, without review by the DOP, CRC or the State Historic Preservation Division.
Commissioner Barbara Long took issue with Elkins assessment that the county was at fault. She pointed out to Elkins that his tenants at 505 Front needed to be in compliance with county and state building codes and, “When you have a tenant who tries to do an end run around that, who’s fault is that?” Long stated. “People who are lucky enough to have their businesses and offices in a building that’s on the National Historic Register need to set an example and lead by that example.”
As a point of reference, LAC and LRF have co-published a booklet titled “The Historic Districts of Lahaina, Maui, Hawai‘i. The pamphlet, first distributed to historic district businesses in 1991, lists many “do’s and don’ts” and states that any construction or physical change with a value of over $500 must have a building permit.
Contrary to both LAC and LRF mission statements and county law, it is seems the courtroom alterations may have proceeded in disregard of and without the permission and permits that Freeland and Morrison knew they needed for modification of a historic building in a national historic district. In other words, LAC and LRF knew that it was wrong make major renovations to the courthouse without any notification to or approval by county, state, or federal officials, and were now asking for permission to do what they had already done, as well as for permission to continue on their same course of action.
Freeland and Morrison both served on then-Mayor Linda Lingle’s Old Lahaina Courthouse Task Force in 1995 and are aware that of the five main uses proposed for the courthouse museum/gift shop came last on the list by the Task Force Use Committee. It leaves one to wonder if it crossed anyone’s mind at the time the report was written that any future group in control of the building might remove the courtroom from the courthouse to put in a museum/gift shop.
At the conclusion of public testimony, Commissioner Long was scathing in her assessment of the surreptitious demolition of the courtroom.
She blasted her criticism in the direction of LAC’s Theo Morrison. “I’m amazed that things are still happening without the proper permits. Your board should be holding your feet to the fire,” Long admonished. “You need to set an example for everybody else, you gotta be better than everybody else. I think that it’s the responsibility of the landlord and the tenants to make sure that it stays the way it is.”
The Cultural Resources Commission spent the remainder of the meeting outlining stipulations for the LAC and LRF to adhere to. In another letter dated March 28 from Foley to Freeland, nine conditions were listed for the LRF to comply with. The first was to work with the CRC and the State Historic Preservation Division if they “wish” to have a museum. The second condition says that any construction must “incorporate into its design and message the historic use and features of the Courtroom.” This could be interpreted to mean that any construction in the courtroom needs to be built around or beside the Old Historic Courtroom components, not on top of them.
Condition 2 also states that whatever does go in be “multi-generational (with youth) and include the host culture.” Three thru six state that they work with the Dept. of Planning, the CRC, the Director of Finance, and the Board of Land and Natural Resources for planning and permits. Condition seven says they must adhere to “the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties.” Nine says they must comply “with all other applicable governmental requirements.” And condition Eight is a deadline: Dec. 31, 2005.
Since March, there has been no movement on this issue. Eight months have passed, and the deadline is fast approaching. What will be the fate of the Lahaina Historic District courthouse courtroom?
In a historic district like Lahaina, where organizations that are in charge of preserving history and help create and enforce rules for others, it is important that these organizations follow those rules in a like manner.

The Maui Examiner