On December 16, 2024, we finally received some documents in partial compliance with our years of document requests. However, among the documents, there was no legal opinion that explains the legal authority for the Board's resolution of December 20, 2022.

A quick reminder, that, in a letter to owners dated January 5, 2023 that explains the resolution, the Board states:

Yet, the Board has no proof (or is unwilling to provide such proof after being ordered to do so by the Arbitrator) that any such legal opinion was ever presented to the Board. Without any explanation forthcoming from the Board, it is hard to escape the conclusion that the statement quoted above from the January 5, 2023 letter was an outright lie to owners.

With the departure of Board president Mary Sipes on December 6, 2024, we have “paused” the arbitration in an effort to re-engage in direct communication with Board members. Such discussions are scheduled to occur in early February.

Stay tuned.

On Wednesday, September 4, an oral hearing was held with the arbitrator and the parties' attorneys to consider opposing briefs on a motion for summary judgment submitted by the claimants (RMOG). Motions to dismiss are appropriate where there are no material facts in dispute. The arbitrator, Judge Yim (retired) held that there are material facts in dispute but declined to specify which facts. As a result, we are proceeding forward with the arbitration.

Sorry again for the long silence. Two big events since the last update:

First, we were unable to agree to a binding arbitration agreement. Such an agreement would have meant that the arbitrator's decision would be final and the parties would agree to abide by it. Instead we have a non-binding agreement, which means that the parties must abide by the agreement or file a suit in a court of law to challenge the ruling of the arbitrator. While neither party wishes to take this matter to a court of law, the parties could not agree on the wording of a question to be resolved by the arbitrator. Essentially the Owners Group wanted to have the arbitrator make a determination as to what the bylaws and statutes require in order for the Board to institute any kind of use-based fee on owners. The Board refused to agree to such a determination being binding. Instead, they favored a narrow ruling on just whether the particular usage fee as implemented by the Board is OK or not. This was not acceptable to the Owners Group. As a result, we were unable to come to an agreement on a non-binding arbitration.

In June, we were able to agree to a non-binding resolution, with Judge Patrick K.S.L. Yim (retired) serving as our arbitrator. Since the owners requested this arbitration, and since it is non-binding, the owners get to decide what question will be addressed by the arbitrator. The question to be resolved is as follows:

On July 2nd, a scheduling order was issued listing the following dates. Hopefully, with the non-binding agreement in place and a scheduling order, things will start to move more quickly going forward.

• September 13, 2024: Substantive motion shall be filed on or before this date with DPR [i.e., “Dispute, Prevention & Resolution, Inc.”] with hard copies to be submitted for Judge Yim. The briefing schedule for said motions shall be determined following the filing of the motion.
• October 1, 2024: Pre-Arbitration briefs shall be due with hard copies to be submitted for Judge Yim
• October 1, 2024: Exhibits shall be exchanged among the parties with hard copy of the exhibits to be filed with DPR.

Send any questions to contact@royalmauianowners.org

Sorry for the radio silence. Here is what we know:

After missing for the second time a deadline agreed to by the attorneys to produce requested documents, a new deadline for the association to produce requested documents was set in mid-March for April 12th and an April 30 deadline to resolve all document production issues. After that, we will trade briefs on uncontested facts and by May 28 should have the question resolved as to whether there are any undisputed facts relevant to the sole issue in Arbitration, which is whether the December 2022 resolution was permitted under Bylaws or whether it was ultra vires – that is, whether the Board exceeded its authority in passing that resolution.

Full history of events

We are a group of concerned owners of units in the Royal Mauian building in Kihei, HI.

Due to instances of spam and a general lack of activity, I shut this down. Contact us if you think a general topic discussion board is a good idea.