Parts of wedding firm's suit dismissed
By Christie Wilson
Neighbor Island Editor
WAILUKU, Maui — Maui County has won a partial victory in a federal lawsuit filed by a West Maui wedding business that was denied a county permit to operate out of a beachfront home.
U.S. District Judge Alan Kay dismissed claims that the county violated the business owner's constitutional rights of due process, free speech and the free exercise of religion, county officials reported yesterday.
Kay also rejected the plaintiffs' claims under the federal Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act, which prohibits zoning regulations that impose a substantial burden on religious expression unless there is a compelling governmental interest.
Sandra Barker and her company, A Romantic Maui Wedding, and Laki Ka'ahumanu, the pastor of Harvest Chapel Church of God, filed the lawsuit after the Maui County Council voted in 2000 to deny Barker's request for a conditional use permit.
Barker began arranging weddings in 1998 at her Mahinahina home and provided access through her property for ceremonies on the public beach. Because the property is in a residential district, she applied for a conditional use permit, which was denied after neighbors opposed the business.
The county later fined Barker $1,000 for continuing to conduct weddings on the beachfront property.
In the partial summary judgment filed June 19, Kay pointed out that the permit request did not mention religion or religious practices, and that neither Barker nor Ka'ahumanu had said anything about the religious nature of the weddings, or how the permit denial restricted their religious practices.
He said that running a commercial wedding business, even though some religious aspects may be involved, is not a clearly established right under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act.
Barker, who no longer runs her business from her home, said she was outraged by Kay's ruling.
Barker received a $29,000 settlement from the state in 2001 after filing a federal lawsuit charging that her constitutional rights were violated by a state requirement that she obtain a right-of-entry permit to a public beach and pay for a state conservation enforcement officer to be at the weddings.
