A state House bill to create a backdoor solution to what is admittedly a difficult and complicated mess surrounding the proposed Hokuli'a development on the Big Island is the wrong approach.

It is classic special-interest legislation. And arguments that the bill would head off potentially expensive litigation by the aggrieved developer and potential home buyers do not hold water.

The right answer — and indeed the state is already moving in this direction — is to rationalize the law that governs what can happen on agricultural lands.

Meanwhile, a Circuit Court decision that stopped the multimillion-dollar project near Kealakekua Bay is now being appealed before the state Supreme Court. At a minimum, the legal process should be allowed to work itself out before the Legislature acts.

The developers of Hokuli'a, the Lyle Anderson Co., doing business as 1250 Oceanside Partners, planned a super-luxury "second home" development on some 1,550 acres of largely barren agriculturally zoned land.

They relied on county assurances that they could go ahead, so long as the lots were sold as "agricultural" lots and some incidental agricultural uses were included.

But the ag-use promise was largely a fig leaf.

The right course would be to ask the state Land Use Commission for redesignation, Circuit Judge Ronald Ibarra said. And he cited some legal communications that suggested the developers should have done just that.

In the time since this case emerged, the Legislature has finally moved on a longstanding mandate to designate "prime" agricultural lands that would be forever protected against development; less desirable ag lands could be more easily opened for other uses.

The site of the Hokuli'a project certainly fits into the latter category; there was no active agriculture there.

By all accounts, Hokuli'a would be an attractive and appealing project, bringing jobs and other community benefits to the Kona area. There are many good reasons to see it go forward, but not through a legislative end-run.