Friday, July 25, 2014         

 Print   Email   Comment | View 12 Comments   Most Popular   Save   Post   Retweet

City, (de)Occupy to file agreement on property seizures

By Star-Advertiser staff

LAST UPDATED: 11:09 a.m. HST, May 17, 2013

City and (de)Occupy Honolulu lawyers will submit an agreement as early as next week that will outline protections for the group members’ property seized by the city from Honolulu sidewalks.

The filing of the agreement was made clear today at a hearing before U.S. District Judge Michael Seabright on the group’s challenge to the constitutionality of a city ordinance.

The ordinance permits the city to seize tents and other items tagged by city officials at least 24 hours in advance.

The agreement will incorporate a current stipulation between the city and the group that provides protections that include a tent owner being allowed to remove untagged items from the tent before it is impounded.

Richard Holcomb, lawyer for the group, said the agreement will include addition provisions such as developing a procedure for the return of the property.

The group’s challenge is to the ordinance that city has been using to clear sidewalks, but does not contest a bill passed by the city Council this year that allows the city to remove items without the tagging requirement.

The city is in the process of creating rules for its enforcement, which Mayor Kirk Caldwell’s administration believes will begin next month.

Holcomb said the new ordinance hasn’t been enforced yet and it might be appropriate to challenge it in another case.

Seabright did not rule on the city’s request to dismiss the lawsuit.

Holcomb said the judge may dismiss some claims, but enough will remain for the lawsuit to continue.

City attorneys declined to comment, referring questions to the city spokesman. 

 Print   Email   Comment | View 12 Comments   Most Popular   Save   Post   Retweet

You must be subscribed to participate in discussions
By participating in online discussions you acknowledge that you have agreed to the TERMS OF SERVICE. An insightful discussion of ideas and viewpoints is encouraged, but comments must be civil and in good taste, with no personal attacks. Because only subscribers are allowed to comment, we have your personal information and are able to contact you. If your comments are inappropriate, you may receive a warning, and if you persist with such comments you may be banned from posting. To report comments that you believe do not follow our guidelines, email commentfeedback@staradvertiser.com.
Leave a comment

Please login to leave a comment.
Maneki_Neko wrote:
Looks like (de)Occupy stuck one up the City's tail.
on May 17,2013 | 12:00PM
mikethenovice wrote:
Good Riddence! Tax money well spent!
on May 17,2013 | 12:16PM
mikethenovice wrote:
Hemo them over the Pali!
on May 17,2013 | 12:17PM
Papakolea wrote:
If I pitched a tent at a State or City park without a permit, I'd be tossed out like yesterday's newspaper. How is it that ten people can pitch ten tents on a public sidewalk and have the power to negotiate an agreement with the City?
on May 17,2013 | 12:52PM
hilopango wrote:
Protection for property seized...does that mean the City has to store it? Can the owners of the property be charged storage fees?
on May 17,2013 | 01:15PM
UREC wrote:
Thank the ACLU for negotiating an agreement with the City on were protesters could gather when APEC was coming into town. this Occupy group has been using the agreement to house the homeless (I'd bet money that none of the top organizers regularly sleep there). Support the ACLU, then you support (De)Occupy Honolulu?
on May 17,2013 | 01:32PM
tutulois wrote:
What I wonder is -- who has been supplying all those expensive tents ?
on May 17,2013 | 01:51PM
livinginhawaii wrote:
Why is the city negotiating with criminals? I still see their childish graffiti on the sidewalk and cannot understand why they are not forced to clean up their mess and the damage they have done to the park.
on May 18,2013 | 06:28AM
Charliegrunt wrote:
I hope that Judge Seabright will consider the precedence he sets. As Papakolea's comment points out, it could mean that anyone can set up an abode on public property. Forget about camping permits.
on May 18,2013 | 07:06AM
Maneki_Neko wrote:
(de)Leech the streets.
on May 18,2013 | 07:45AM
pridon wrote:
What purpose are these Occupy people serving other than to waste taxpayers money and p*ss everyone off. I say drive buy once a day with a pesticide fogger 2X a day and these pests will move or go away. They can camp pout til the cows come hone and they aren't going to change anything.
on May 18,2013 | 09:45AM
Datahorde wrote:
I had to walk by these bums the other month. They cluttered up the sidewalk SO bad, I had to step out onto the street twice. What about our older folks and less nimble citizens? Just make a blanket law - no 'camping' or staying over night in an area w/o a permit., and add only state parks or areas with 'camp grounds' can have permits. otherwise - GTFO
on May 18,2013 | 10:19AM
Breaking News