XML 29 R16.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT
v3.23.3

Commitments and Contingencies | 9 Months Ended
--- | ---
Sep. 30, 2023
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract] |
Commitments and Contingencies | Commitments and Contingencies Commitments and other financial arrangements The Company has various financial commitments and other arrangements including standby letters of credit and bonds that are not recorded as liabilities on the Company's condensed consolidated balance sheet as of September 30, 2023: •Standby letters of credit issued by the Company's lenders under the Company's revolving credit facility totaled $1.1 million as of September 30, 2023. These letters of credit primarily relate to the Company's workers' compensation plans and if drawn upon, the Company would be obligated to reimburse the issuer. •Bonds related to the Company's real estate activities totaled $18.7 million as of September 30, 2023, and represent commercial bonds issued by third party sureties (permit, subdivision, license and notary bonds). If drawn upon, the Company would be obligated to reimburse the surety that issued the bond for the amount of the bond, reduced for the work completed to date. •Bonds related to Grace Pacific totaled $357.4 million as of September 30, 2023, and represent the face value of construction bonds issued by third party sureties (bid, performance and payment bonds). If drawn upon, the Company would be obligated to reimburse the surety that issued the bond for the amount of the bond, reduced for the work completed to date. As of September 30, 2023, the Company's maximum remaining exposure, in the event of defaults on all existing contractual construction obligations, was approximately $139.1 million. The Company also provides certain bond indemnities and guarantees of indebtedness for unconsolidated affiliates accounted for as equity method investments related to Grace Pacific. •Bond indemnities are provided for the benefit of the third-party surety in exchange for construction bonds (bid, performance and payment bonds). Under such bond indemnities, the Company and the joint venture partners agree to indemnify the surety bond issuer from all losses and expenses arising from the failure of the joint venture to complete the specified bonded construction; the Company may be obligated to reimburse the surety that issued the bond for the amount of the bond, reduced for the work completed to date if the joint venture does not perform. •Guarantees of indebtedness may be provided by the Company for the benefit of financial institutions providing credit to unconsolidated equity method investees. As of September 30, 2023, the Company had no such arrangements with third party lenders related to its unconsolidated equity method investees and no amounts outstanding. The recorded amounts of the bond indemnities and guarantee of indebtedness were not material individually or in the aggregate. Other than those described above, obligations of the Company's joint ventures do not have recourse to the Company, and the Company's "at-risk" amounts are limited to its investment. Legal proceedings and other contingencies Prior to the sale of approximately 41,000 acres of agricultural land on Maui to Mahi Pono Holdings, LLC ("Mahi Pono") in December 2018, the Company, through East Maui Irrigation Company, LLC ("EMI"), also owned approximately 16,000 acres of watershed lands in East Maui and held four water licenses to approximately 30,000 acres owned by the State of Hawai‘i in East Maui. The sale to Mahi Pono included the sale of a 50% interest in EMI (which closed February 1, 2019), and provided for the Company and Mahi Pono, through EMI, to jointly continue the existing process to secure a long-term lease from the State for delivery of irrigation water to Mahi Pono for use in Central Maui. The last of these water license agreements expired in 1986, and all four agreements were then extended as revocable permits that were renewed annually. In 2001, a request was made to the State Board of Land and Natural Resources (the "BLNR") to replace these revocable permits with a long-term water lease. Pending the completion by the BLNR of a contested case hearing it ordered to be held on the request for the long-term lease, the BLNR has kept the existing permits on a holdover basis. Three parties (Healoha Carmichael; Lezley Jacintho; and Na Moku Aupuni O Ko‘olau Hui) filed a lawsuit on April 10, 2015, (the "Initial Lawsuit") alleging that the BLNR has been renewing the revocable permits annually rather than keeping them in holdover status. The lawsuit challenged the BLNR’s decision to continue the revocable permits for calendar year 2015 and asked the court to void the revocable permits and to declare that the renewals were illegally issued without preparation of an environmental assessment ("EA"). In December 2015, the BLNR decided to reaffirm its prior decisions to keep the permits in holdover status. This decision by the BLNR was challenged by the three parties. In January 2016, the court ruled in the Initial Lawsuit that the renewals were not subject to the EA requirement, but that the BLNR lacked legal authority to keep the revocable permits in holdover status beyond one year (the "Initial Ruling"). The Initial Ruling was appealed to the Intermediate Court of Appeals ("ICA") of the State of Hawai‘i. In May 2016, while the appeal of the Initial Ruling was pending, the Hawai‘i State Legislature passed House Bill 2501, which specified that the BLNR has the legal authority to issue holdover revocable permits for the disposition of water rights for a period not to exceed three years. The governor signed this bill into law as Act 126 in June 2016. Pursuant to Act 126, the annual authorization of the existing holdover permits was sought and granted by the BLNR in December 2016, November 2017 and November 2018 for calendar years 2017, 2018, and 2019. No extension of Act 126 was approved by the Hawai‘i State Legislature in 2019. In June 2019, the ICA vacated the Initial Ruling, effectively reversing the determination that the BLNR lacked authority to keep the revocable permits in holdover status beyond one year (the "ICA Ruling"). The ICA remanded the case back to the trial court to determine whether the holdover status of the permits was both (a) "temporary" and (b) in the best interest of the State, as required by statute. The plaintiffs filed a motion with the ICA for reconsideration of its decision, which was denied on July 5, 2019. On September 30, 2019, the plaintiffs filed a request with the Supreme Court of Hawai‘i to review and reverse the ICA Ruling. On November 25, 2019, the Supreme Court of Hawai‘i granted the plaintiffs' request to review the ICA Ruling and, on May 5, 2020, oral argument was held. On October 11, 2019, the BLNR took up the renewal of all the existing water revocable permits in the state, acting under the ICA Ruling, and approved the continuation of the four East Maui water revocable permits for another one-year period through December 31, 2020. On November 13, 2020, the BLNR approved another renewal of such permits through December 31, 2021. On March 2, 2022, the Supreme Court of Hawai’i vacated the ICA’s ruling relating to the BLNR's decision to continue the revocable permits for the calendar year 2015, holding that Hawaii Revised Statutes Chapter 343 (the Hawaii Environmental Policy Act) did apply to the permits. The court remanded the matter back to the Circuit Court to determine if any exceptions would apply and, if not, how HRS Chapter 343 should be applied in light of the steps taken by A&B/EMI toward the long-term water lease. The Supreme Court of Hawai’i also determined that the BLNR had the statutory authority to continue the permits for more than one year, but required BLNR to make findings of fact and conclusions of law determining that the action would serve the best interests of the State. A&B/EMI will continue to defend against the plaintiffs’ claims on remand. In a separate matter, on December 7, 2018, a contested case request filed by the Sierra Club (contesting the BLNR's November 2018 approval of the 2019 revocable permits) was denied by the BLNR. On January 7, 2019, the Sierra Club filed a lawsuit in the circuit court of the first circuit in Hawai‘i against BLNR, A&B and EMI, seeking to invalidate the 2019 and 2020 holdovers of the revocable permits for, among other things, failure to perform an EA. The lawsuit also sought to enjoin A&B/EMI from diverting more than 25 million gallons a day until a permit or lease is properly issued by the BLNR, and for the imposition of certain conditions on the revocable permits by the BLNR. The count seeking to invalidate the revocable permits based on the failure to perform an EA was dismissed by the court, based on the ICA Ruling in the Initial Lawsuit. The Sierra Club’s lawsuit was amended to include a challenge to the BLNR’s renewal of the revocable permits for calendar year 2020. After a full trial on the merits held beginning in August of 2020, the court ruled, on April 6, 2021, against the Sierra Club on its lawsuit challenging the 2019 and 2020 revocable permits. On February 17, 2022, the Sierra Club filed its notice of appeal challenging the decision on the August 2020 trial. The court separately considered a lawsuit filed by the Sierra Club appealing the BLNR’s decision to deny it a contested case hearing on the 2021 revocable permits, which were granted by the BLNR on or about November 13, 2020. In that case, on May 28, 2021, the court issued an interim decision that the Sierra Club’s due process rights were violated, ordered the BLNR to hold a contested case hearing on the 2021 permits, and that the permits would be vacated. On July 30, 2021, the court modified its ruling to say that the permits would not be invalidated, but left in place pending the outcome of the contested case hearing. The contested case hearing was held by the BLNR in December 2021 to address the continuation of the revocable permits for both calendar years 2021 and 2022 and BLNR issued a decision on June 30, 2022. On December 27, 2021, while BLNR’s decision in the contested case hearing was pending, the court further modified its ruling to allow the permits to remain in place until the earlier of May 1, 2022, the date on which the BLNR renders a substantive decision on the continuation of the permits for calendar year 2022, or further order of the court. On April 26, 2022, the court orally granted an extension of the May 1, 2022 deadline to the earlier of June 15, 2022, or the date on which the BLNR renders a substantive decision on the continuation of the permits for calendar year 2022, or as may be further ordered by the court. On June 1, 2022, the court granted an extension of the June 15, 2022 deadline to the earlier of July 15, 2022 or the date on which the BLNR renders a substantive decision on the continuation of the permits for calendar year 2022 or as may be further ordered by the court. On June 30, 2022, the BLNR issued its final decision on the contested case hearing on the permits for calendar years 2021 and 2022, approving the continuation of the permits through the end of calendar year 2022. The Sierra Club filed a notice of appeal of that decision to the Circuit Court of the First Circuit in Hawai‘i and on March 31, 2023, the Circuit Court entered its Order on Appeal dismissing the Sierra Club's appeal as moot. The Company and the BLNR also appealed the court’s determination that the Sierra Club was entitled to a contested case hearing on the 2021 revocable permits. On November 10, 2022, the BLNR voted to continue the revocable permits for calendar year 2023 and, at that same meeting, denied the Sierra Club’s oral request for a contested case hearing. The Sierra Club subsequently submitted a written request to the BLNR for a contested case hearing on the continuation of the revocable permits, which the BLNR denied on December 9, 2022. On November 29, 2022, the Sierra Club filed an appeal of BLNR’s decisions to deny its oral request for a contested case hearing and to continue the revocable permits for 2023 and on December 15, 2022, the Sierra Club amended its appeal to also challenge the BLNR’s denial of its written request for a contested case hearing. On June 16, 2023, the Circuit Court entered its Decision on Appeal; and Interim Modification of Permits Pursuant to HRS 91-14(g) in which the court concluded that the Sierra Club was again entitled to a contested case hearing on the continuation of the revocable permits for calendar year 2023. The court also modified BLNR’s decision to continue the revocable permits by reducing the cap to 31.50 million gallons per day. A&B/EMI filed motions to increase the modified cap and for leave to take an immediate appeal. On August 11, 2023, the court entered its order denying A&B/EMI’s motion for leave to take an immediate appeal. On September 8, 2023, the court entered its ruling denying without prejudice A&B/EMI’s motion to increase the modified cap. On August 17, 2023, Sierra Club filed its First Motion to Modify Permits, asking the court to impose conditions on the revocable permits requiring A&B/EMI to determine the water needs of the County of Maui Fire Department and to line one reservoir. The court has not yet ruled on that motion. In connection with A&B’s obligation to continue the existing process to secure a long-term water lease from the State, A&B and EMI will defend against the remaining claims made by the Sierra Club. In addition to the litigation described above, the Company is a party to, or may be contingently liable in connection with, other legal actions arising in the normal conduct of its businesses. While the outcomes of such litigation and claims cannot be predicted with certainty, in the opinion of management after consultation with counsel, the reasonably possible losses would not have a material effect on the Company's consolidated financial statements as a whole. Further note that certain of the Company's properties and assets may become the subject of other types of claims and assessments at various times (e.g., environmental matters based on normal operations of such assets). Depending on the facts and circumstances surrounding such potential claims and assessments, the Company records an accrual if it is deemed probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount of loss can be reasonably estimated/valued as of the date of the financial statements.

X
- References No definition available. + Details
Name: | us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureAbstract
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | xbrli:stringItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration

X
- Definition The entire disclosure for commitments and contingencies. + References Reference 1: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Topic 440 -SubTopic 10 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Section 50 -Paragraph 4 -Subparagraph (a) -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org//1943274/2147482648/440-10-50-4 Reference 2: http://www.xbrl.org/2009/role/commonPracticeRef -Topic 450 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org//450/tableOfContent Reference 3: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Topic 954 -SubTopic 440 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Section 50 -Paragraph 1 -Subparagraph (a) -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org//1943274/2147480327/954-440-50-1 Reference 4: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Topic 440 -SubTopic 10 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Section 50 -Paragraph 4 -Subparagraph (c) -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org//1943274/2147482648/440-10-50-4 Reference 5: http://fasb.org/us-gaap/role/ref/legacyRef -Topic 440 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org//440/tableOfContent + Details
Name: | us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureTextBlock
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | dtr-types:textBlockItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration