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 June 30, 2021: • Standby letters of credit issued by the Company's lenders under the Company's revolving credit facilities totaled $1.1 million as of June 30, 2021. These letters of credit primarily relate to the Company's workers' compensation plans and construction activities; if drawn upon the Company would be obligated to reimburse the issuer. • Bonds related to the Company's construction and real estate activities totaled $273.1 million as of June 30, 2021. Approximately $253.8 million represents the face value of construction bonds issued by third party sureties (bid, performance and payment bonds), and the remainder is related to 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. As of June 30, 2021, the Company's maximum remaining exposure, in the event of defaults on all existing contractual construction obligations, was approximately $83.0 million. The Company also provides certain bond indemnities and guarantees of indebtedness for certain of its unconsolidated affiliates that it accounts for as equity method investments (e.g., real estate joint ventures). • Bond indemnities are provided for the benefit of the surety in exchange for the issuance of surety bonds and cover joint venture construction activities (such as project amenities, roads, utilities, and other infrastructure). 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 complete construction of the joint ventures' construction projects if the joint venture does not perform. The maximum potential amount of aggregate future payments is a function of the amount covered by outstanding bonds at the time of default by the joint venture, reduced by the amount of work completed to date. • Guarantees of indebtedness may be provided by the Company for the benefit of financial institutions providing credit to unconsolidated equity method investees. As of June 30, 2021, the Company had one arrangement with third party lenders that provided for a limited guarantee on any outstanding amounts related to an unconsolidated equity method investee's line of credit; related to borrowings on such line of credit by the equity method investee, there was none outstanding as of June 30, 2021. 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 also 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 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. No decision has yet been rendered by the Supreme Court of Hawai‘i. 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 considered and approved a renewal of the four revocable permits for an additional year, through December 31, 2021. On December 7, 2018, a contested case request filed by the Sierra Club (regarding the BLNR's November 2018 approval of the 2019 revocable permits) was denied by the BLNR. On January 7, 2019, 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. The time to appeal has not yet run. The court is separately considering a lawsuit filed by the Sierra Club appealing the BLNR’s decision to deny them a contested case hearing on the 2021 revocable permits, which were granted by the BLNR on or about November 13, 2020. On May 28, 2021, the court issued an interim decision that the Sierra Club’s due process rights were violated and ordered the BLNR to hold a contested case hearing on the 2021 permits, and that the permits should be vacated. The court has taken under advisement how the revocable permits should be handled while a contested case hearing proceeds and, at present, the permits remain in effect. 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. 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, the outcomes of which, in the opinion of management after consultation with counsel, 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. |