Petition to Hawaii State Supreme Court

8/10/2019 Petition to Hawaii State Supreme Court

1/78

NOTICE OF ELECTRONIC FILING

An electronic filing was submitted in Case Number SCEC-14-0001317. You may review the filing through the Judiciary Electronic Fi

future notifications.

If the filing noted above includes a document, this Notice of Electronic Filing is service of the document under the Hawai`i Electronic

This filing type incurs a fee of $165.00. You must pay by credit card or in person.

Case ID: SCEC-14-0001317

Title: THOMAS WATERS, a/k/a TOMMY WATERS, Petitioner, vs. SCOTT NAGOHAWAII OFFICE OF ELECTIONS; and BERNICE K.N. MAU, in her officialCounty of Honolulu, Respondents.

Filing Date / Time: MONDAY, NOVEMBER 24, 2014 01:09:28 PM

Filing Parties: James Kawashima

Case Type: Election ContestLead Document(s): Complaint

Supporting Document(s):

This notification is being electronically mailed to:

James Kawashima( [email protected] )

The following parties need to be conventionally served:

Bernice K.N. MauScott Nago

Aaron Schulaner

1 of 1


2/78

NO

IN THE

SUPREME

COURT OF

THE STATE OF

HAWAII

THOMAS

WATERS,

alkla

TOMMY

WATERS

Petitioner,

SCOTT NAGO, Chief Elections

Officer; STATE

OF HAWAII OFFICE

OF

ELECTIONS;

and BERNICE K.N.

MAU,

in her

official

capacity

as

the

City

Clerk of

the

City & County

of

Honolulu

Respondents

VS

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

COMPLAINT

DECLARATION OF THO

MAS WATERS

EXHIBITS

'fA

-

H

CERTIFICATE

OF SERVICE

JAMES

KAWASHIMA,

ESQ,

#1145

Topa Financial Center,

Fort Street

Tower

745

Fort Street, Suite

500

Honolulu,

Hawaii 96813

Telephone No:

(808)

275-0300

Facsimile

No:

(808)

275-0399

E-Mail

Address:

[email protected]

Attorney

for

Petitioner

Thomas

Waters

Electronically Filed

Supreme Court

SCEC-14-0001317

24-NOV-201401:09 PM


3/78

COMPLAINT

The

petitioner,

THOMAS

WATERS, a/k/a/

TOMMY WATERS,

by

his attorney

James

Kawashima, Esq., hereby complains and avers as follows:

INTRODUCTION

1, This is an original action

by

the

petitioner

before the

Hawaii

Supreme

Court to contest,

for

cause,

the

respondents'

conducting

of

the

following

general

election,

including

the

reported

results

of

the

November

4,2014

general

election to determine

who shall be the councilmember

for the elective

office of City and County

of

Honolulu

Council

District 4

( District

4 election ),

wherein the respondents erroneously

reported said election's

results

to

be

that

candidate

Trevor Ozawa

prevailed

over

candidate

Waters

by

41 valid ballots

cast,

when

in fact respondents

miscounted or

misapplied

more than

41

valid

ballots cast therein

thereby

causing a situation

that

could have caused

a

difference

in

the election

results.

2.

ln summary,

petitioner

THOMAS

WATERS

( Waters )

avers that

said

results

should

not be

certified,

and that either

(1)

a new

general

election

be

conducted

if

there

is an

abnormality

that

is such that

the

correct result

of election

cannot

be ascertained,

or

(2)

a

particular

candidate won the

election

if after

correcting

the

election

abnormality that could

have

caused a

difference

in

the

election

results,

a

winner

of the election

can be ascertained.

3. Count

I

of

the complaint

avers that the

respondents

miscounted

74 ballots cast

as being

totally blank

in regards

to voting

in

the

District

4

election,

2


4/78

when

those

74 ballots

had

actually

been validly cast

for either candidate

Waters

or candidate

Ozawa,

with said

miscounting being

a cause,

within the

meaning of

HRS,

51

1-172, that could

cause a difference

in

the

outcome of the

District

4

election.

The

petitioner prays

that the supreme

court should

order that the

4,455

allegedly

totally

blank ballots be

manually counted

in an

honest and

fair

manner

by human

beings to determine

which of

those

4,455

supposedly

totally blank

ballots

were actually

the74

ballots

which

were

validly cast

in

the

District

4

election, re-tally the

vote in the District 4 election

based on the

result of counting

these 74

validly cast ballots were first erroneously determined

to

be

totally

blank,

with the supreme court

declaring

who

actually

prevailed

in

the

District 4 election

after

construing

this

re{ally

of

votes.

4. Count

ll

of

the complaint avers

that the

respondents

mishandled

the

11 overages and 39

underages

which

existed

in

the

District 4 election.

This

mishandling

of

the overages

and underages could

have caused

a difference

in

the election

outcome

in the

District 4

election.

ln

both

manual and

machine

elections,

HRS,

S1

1-153

defines an

overage as a situation

where

there

are

more

ballots cast than the

poll

book

indicates

were

issued.

An overage occurs,

rnfer

alia,

in the

ballot

stuffing

situation,

i.e., when

someone

pilfers

ballots,

marks the

pilfered

ballots

and

intermingles

these

pilfered

ballots

with

ballots

which

have

been

validly

cast,

An

underage

occurs,

inter alia,

in

the

ballot

destruction

situation,

i.e.,

when someone

obtains

and sees

which candidate

is voted

for on a

validly cast

ballot, dislikes

that

vote and

then

destroys

the

validly cast ballot.

J


5/78

HISTORICAL

BACKGROUND

5. Upon completion

of the

General

Election on November4,

2014,

petitioner,

through his counsel James Kawashima,

caused

to

be

sent by

U.S.

Mail and

by

facsimile

transmission to the

Office of

Elections a

letter

dated

November

10,2014

(See

Declaration of Thomas

Waters attached

hereto),

requesting information including:

a.

What the

margin of error for

the

system utilized

by

the Office of

Elections;

b.

That the overage and underage

figures

for each precinct

in

our district

be verified;

c. The 4,451

reported

blank

votes/ballots

be investigated

for

accuracy and

validity;

d.

The 16

over

votes

be

reviewed in accord

with

operating

procedures

by

which

you

are

governed;

and

e. As there

may be other tests

and

investigative

processes

that

are

available to

you

that

may

be

applied/utilized to

verify the

results,

we were

not limiting our requests

in any

way

by

making the

foregoing specific

requests.

6.

As

there

was absolutely

no

response, even

to

acknowledge

receipt of our

inquiry, on

November

13, 2014, a

second

letter

(see

Declaration

of

Thomas

Waters)

was transmitted

to the same

addressee by

U.S. Mail

and

facsimile transmission

indicating

:

4


6/78

a.

Our concern that

nothing had been

heard from the office,

even

the

courtesy

of

an

acknowledgement;

b.

Our

concern

that the deadline

by

which

action

needed

to

be

taken

was rapidly approaching;

c.

A

plea

to be

informed

as to

where the Office

was in

responding

to our

requests;

d, A request that

the Office agree to an

extension

of

time,

if

allowed

by law, within

which to

file;

and

e.

An offer

to

meet personally

to

discuss

these

matters;

7.

As there was again,

absolutely

no response to our

repeated requests

for

information,

petitioner,

on

November

14,2014

caused to

be

sent

by e-mail

transmission

a

THIRD

plea

for

information

see

Declaration

of

Thomas

Waters).

8.

Then, and only

then, on that

same afternoon, on

November

14,2014

did the

Office of

Elections reply, with

a

terse

reply devoid of any

meaningful

information and

further devoid of

answers to almost

all of the

questions

previously

posed

See

declaration

of Thomas

Waters).

9.

Thereafter, other

correspondence

was

received from the Office of

Elections on:

See

declaration

of Thomas

Waters)

a.

An emailed

letter

dated

November 19,2014, the

Office

of

Elections

provided

a copy

of the Statewide

Summary

and a

matrix of the

overages and

underage

for each

precinct

in Honolulu City

Council

District

lV.

The state

wide summary

had

not

changed

from

what

had been

5


7/78

reported

the day following

the

General

Election.

The

matrix

indicated an

overage total

of 13 and

underage total of

39;

b.

Later the same

day the Office

of Elections

emailed

another

letter dated

November

19 2014.

The

letter

was

identical to

the

previous

letter

dated

the

same

day however

the statewide

summary

was

different.

The

number of

votes had changed

with

no explanation

whatsoever.

Candidate

Ozawa

gained

four

votes to

16 374

Candidate

Waters

gained

nine votes to

16 333 the blank

votes

increased to

4 455

and the

over

votes

remained the same

at

16.

The

race

was

now separated

by

41

votes;

c. On

November

20

2014

the

Office

of

Elections

emailed a

fourth

letter enclosing

an updated

version

of

the

overages

and

underages

for

the

Honolulu

City

Council

District

lV

race.

The

overage

of two

absentee

mail ballots

in

District/Precinct

22-02 has

been

reduced

to zero ballots

due

to two

federal

write-in absentee

ballots

that

were counted

but

were not

initially

recorded

as

received;

None of the

foregoing

letters responded

to all

of the information

requested

and one even

quoted

INCORRECT

figures

between

what

was

contained

in that letter

and a cursory

reference

to

the

Final Survey

of

Votes.

6


8/78

JURISDICTION

AND TIMELINESSS

10. The above

entitled

court

has

jurisdiction

over

this

matter

under

HRS,

SS1

1-172 and

11-174.5. Said statutory

provisions

provide,

in

pertinent

part,

that,

inter

alia, a

contest to the

results to the instant

general

election

shall

be

for cause and shall

be

filed with the above entitled

court

not

later

than

the

twentieth day following

the

general

election

being contested.

11. ln the

present

case, the

general

election

being contested

was

conducted

on Tuesday,

Novemb

er

4,

2014.1

Under

HRAP,

Rule 26(a), statutory

deadline for

filing

is November

24.

The

instant

complaint

has been timely

filed,

since it

was

filed on

Monday, November

24,the twentieth

day

following the

foregoing

general

election,

The above entitled

court has

originaljurisdiction

over

this matter

under HRS,

SS

11

-172

and

11-174.5 because

the

instant cause

of

action concerns

the contesting,

for

cause,

of the

results of the

foregoing

general

election.

PARTIES

12.

Petitioner

Waters was a candidate

in the

foregoing

general

election for the elective

office of

councilmember

for

District

4

of the City

County

of

Honolulu Council,

and resides

within

District 4.

13.

Respondents Scott

Nago,

in his capacity

as

the

Chief

Election

Officer of the

State of

Hawaii, and

State of Hawaii Office

of

Elections are,

pursuant

to

HRS, Chapter

11,

responsible

for the conducting

of all State

of

t

Hereinafter,

unless

otherwise

noted, all

dates shall

refer

to

ihe

year

2014,

7


9/78

Hawaii elections for all elective

governmental

offices

for

all State

of Hawaii

(State).

ln

addition,

said respondents are

responsible

to and/or

have in

practice

or

pursuant

to

an agreement

materially aided the

municipal and county

governments

in the State

of Hawaii conduct

their

elections

for

elective

offices

in

their

respective

governments,

including

but

not limited to

tallying the

ballots

cast

in said

municipal and/or county

elections and

reporting the election

results

thereof.

Said

respondents

reside in

and

have their

principal

place

of business

in

the

State.

COUNT I

14.

On or

about

November

4,

respondents

chief elections

officer

Nago,

office

of elections

and city clerk

Mau conducted

a

general

election

to

determine

,

inter

alia, who shall

be elected

as

the

councilmember

for District

4.

Petitioner

Waters and

Mr. Trevor Ozawa

were candidates

in

said

general

election

contest

for District

4.

15. Said

respondents

tabulated

the

ballots

cast and

reported

in

the

latest

final

tally

of ballots

cast

given

to

petitioner

on November

19,

(as

demonstrated

infra, this

latest

final

tally

conflicts

with

the

respondents'first

final

tally by

16 ballots)

that the result

of that

District

4

election

was allegedly

that:

(a)

16,374

valid ballots

were cast

for candidate

Ozawa;

(b)

16,333

valid

ballots

were cast

for

candidate/petitioner

Waters;

(c)

4,455

totally blank

ballots were

cast;

8


10/78

(d)

16 ballots

were cast

where

the

voter cast a

vote for

both

candidates

Ozawa and Waters;

(e)

An

HRS,

511-153

overage of

11

ballots/votes

existed;

and

(0

An

HRS, S11-153 underage of 39 ballots/votes existed.

16. ln actuality

,74

of

the ballots that

were

cast

which

the

respondents claimed were totally blank

were actually cast

for either candidates

Ozawa,

Waters or both Ozawa

and

Waters;

17.

The foregoing fact that

74

of

the so-called totally

blank

ballots

were

actually cast for either candidates Ozawa,

Waters or

both Ozawa

and

Waters,

is

buttressed by

the

State

of

Hawaii Legislative

Auditor's

1999

Report

of

the

Election

Oversight Committee

(see

declaration of

Thomas Waters)

wherein

the

Legislative Auditor's

fact finding concluded that:

Blank

votes

occ

ur when a voter

does

not

select

a candidate

in

a

race

or

mismarks a

ballot. ES&S explained

that the blank

vote count

was higher on the

lF central counters

because thev

fthe

electronic

ballot countinq

machinesl do

oick

uo

lreadl

maroinal marks

Report

at

p.

19

The report went

on

to

give pictorial

examples

where

such

partially

marked ballots did

not

fully

black out the

oval on the ballot

which

is

supposed

to

be

totally

blacked

out, Some

of

these

examples showed that

the

box

to

be

blacked

out had a check

mark

in

it,

an

X

mark

in

it

(in

prior

Hawaii State

elections

an

X

mark

was required to be

made in the box),

or had a

line through

the

box next to the

name of

the candidate

who

was

being

voted

for;

18, This

Legislative

Auditor's

report

made a factual

finding that

0.2%

of all voters

mismarked

their

ballots

in

the

manner stated above.

9


11/78

Respondents

reported that 37,178

valid,

blank

and

over

vote

(both

candidates

were

voted

for) ballots were cast). Two tenths

of a

percent (0.2%)

of

said

ballots

cast equals

74

ballots,

Using

the

Legislative Auditor's

foregoing

finding of

fact,

it

is

clear thal74

blank

ballots

were actually cast

for either

candidates

Ozawa,

Waters or both

Ozawa

and

Waters,

but

were

counted

as

totally blank

because

the electronic

reading machines utilized

in

the

foregoing

election

were not acute

enough to

detect the ballots

whose boxes were

not totally

blacked out

but

where

the

voters' choices of candidates

were

clear;

19.

The

foregoing

is

also supported

by

the following circumstantial

evidence

and legal

inference. On or about

November

10,

petitioner's

campaign

chairman

and attorney,

James

Kawashima, inquired

in

writing

to respondents

Nago and State

Elections Office

that they

investigate

the

4,451

reported

'blank'

votes for accuracy

and validity

and report the

results of

said

investigation

to

Mr.

Kawashima.

Said

respondents

have

possession,

dominion

and control

over the

blank

ballots

for the

instant District 4

general

election.

As

of

the

date of

the

filing of

this

complaint,

none

of

the

respondents

have, much

less the

foregoing

respondents

who have

possession,

dominion

and

control over

the

blank

ballots

for the

instant

District

4

general

election,

have

responded to

Mr. Kawashima's

foregoing

request

for

information regarding

a closer

examination

of

the

blank

ballots

to

discern whether

said ballots

were

indeed cast

for a candidate

in

the

District 4 election;

20. lt is a well established

legal

inference and

conclusion

from

circumstantial

evidence

that

when a

party

who

has

possession,

dominion

or

10


12/78

control of crucial evidence

fails

to

disclose

that

crucial

evidence,

it is legally

inferred

and

concluded

in

giyi

cases2

that the withheld

evidence,

if

produced

would be adverse

to the

party

in

possession

of the

withheld evidence

and

would

materially support

the case

of

the

party

requesting the

evidence, e.9.,

lnterstate

Circuit

v.

U.5., 306 U.S.

208,226

(1939),

ln applying this

well established

inference,

n

Anderson

v.

lJ.S.,

185 F.2d 343

(Sth

Cir.

1950)

in applying this

inference

against

Anderson opined as

follows:

"The

intent necessary

in the case

may

be

inferred as a

matter of

circumstantial

evidence

from

the facts

(citations

omitted).

The

pertinent

and controlling evidence was

within

his knowledge

and it

was

within

his

power

to

explain the circumstances

connected

with

the

transaction,

yet

he

declined

to testify.

"His

silence

may well count against

him,

as

against any other civil

litigant.'

(citation

omitted);"

21.

Thus

in

the

instant

case,

the foregoing

inference and

circumstantial evidence

clearly supports

the

Legislative

Auditor's

finding

of

fact

that74

"blank"

votes

were actually cast

for

either

candidates Ozawa,

Waters or

both Ozawa and

Waters;

22.

Further evidence

of

the

respondents' misconduct

or at the

very

least

negligence vis--vis the tallying

of ballots

cast is the switching

or shifting

results

of the election

for

District

4. lnitially,

respondents'

"final"

tally

of District

4

ballots was: Ozawa

=

16,371;

Waters

=

16,324;

Blank

=

4,451;

Over

Votes

=

16.

However, on

November

19, respondent Office

of Elections

issued a

letter to

Mr.

Kawashima

which

attached to

it what

respondent Office of

Elections described

in

2

Of course

in criminal

cases,

the constitutional

right

against

self incrimination

prevents

such an

inference

from

being

reached.

11


13/78

its letter

as

a

copy

of the

final Statewide Summary

(new

final tally).

ln

the

November

19 new final

tally: candidate

Ozawa

had

gained

3 ballots

cast;

candidate/petitioner

Waters

gained

9 ballots cast;

Blank

votes

gained

4

ballots

cast;

and

Over

votes remained the same

at 16 ballots

cast.

This

resulted in

narrowing

the

gap

between

candidates Ozawa

and

Waters down

to

41 ballots

cast

from 47

ballots

cast.

This new

final tally added

4

new supposedly

blank

ballots.

This new final

tally added

16 new

ballots

cast

to the total

amount

of

ballots cast.

This

latest discrepancy,

when added

to the multitude

of

errors

committed

by

the

respondent clearly warrants

the

factual finding that

the at

least

74

blank

ballots which

were

actually

cast for

either

candidates

Ozawa,

Waters

or both

Ozawa

and

Waters;

23.

HRS,

511-172

provides

that

a

petitioner

successfully

contests

the

results of an election,

such as the

general

election

at bar,

if the

petitioner

demonstrates

that

the

respondents engaged

in

improper

conduct,

the

result

of

which

could

cause

a difference

in the election

results.

24.

ln Akizaki

v.

Fong,51

Haw. 354

(1969),

this

court

interpreted

and

applied a

more stringent criteria

for overturning

an election

which

existed

in

the

predecessor

of HRS,

S11-172

in a

general

election

context

and

held that

where

votes that were

invalid because

said

votes

were

submitted

in a tardy

manner were

inextricably

intermingled

with

votes that were

valid

because

they

were

timely submitted,

with said

invalid

votes

being

in an amount

that

exceeded

the difference

in

the difference

in votes

between the

candidate

who had

enough

t2


14/78

votes to

win

the election

and the

candidate

who

had

the

next less

votes, a

new

election

shall be ordered.

25.

By reason

of

the

premises,

the

petitioner

contends

that the

criteria

in

HRS,

51

1-172 HAVE

BEEN MET. The fact

that there

are 74 ballots

that

were cast for either candidates

Ozawa, Waters

or both

Ozawa and

Waters

but

were

counted

by

the

respondents as totally

blank, definitely

is

cause

that

is

sufficient to

find

that

said actions

could have caused

a difference

in

the election

results;

26.

HRS,

51

1-174.5 provides

that

if

the

mistake

or

fraud

of

the

respondent

which could

have caused a difference

in

the

election

results

is

of

such a

nature that

a

correct

result

[of

the election]

cannot

be ascertained,

then

a

new

election

shall be

ordered.

That statutory

provision

further

provides

that

if

the

mistake or

fraud is

of

a nature that after

it

is corrected

or

remedied,

a

certain

candidate

or certain

candidates

received a

majority or

plurality

of the

votes cast

and

were

elected,

than

a

judgment

shall

be served upon

the

chief election

officer

or county

clerk,

who

shall

sign and deliver

to the candidate

or candidates

certificates

of

election,

27.

ln

the

instant case,

once the

respondents

mistake or

fraud of

tallying

74 ballots casted

for either candidates

Ozawa,

Waters

or

both

Ozawa

and

Waters as

totally blank ballots

is

corrected

by counting

by

hand all of

what

the

respondents

deemed

to

be

blank

ballots,

with

witnesses

from

both

candidates

being

present

to observe

the

hand

counting

of said

blank

ballots,

then the

Supreme

Court

can

readily discern

which candidate

received

a majority

13


15/78

of the

valid

ballots

cast.

Thus,

after the foregoing correction

is made, the

supreme court should discern

whether

candidate

Ozawa or candidate

Waters

received a majority of the valid ballots cast, and

thus was elected

as

councilmember

for District

4.

After

making

such

a

determination, the

Supreme

Court should

issue

a

judgment

to that

effect

and deliver the

same

to

respondent

City Clerk

with

the

order

that

she shall issue a certificate

of election

to the

candidate who

was elected.

COUNT

II

28.

The

averments

set forth, supra,

in

paragraphs

1 through

27 are

re-alleged

in

this count

ll

of

the complaint.

29.

The respondents admitted

that there

were

11

overages

within

the

meaning of HRS,

S11-153.

Thus,

1

1 more ballots

were issued and

voted

than

the

amount

of

ballots that

were

supposed

to have been

issued and

voted

according to the

District 4

poll

books.

30.

The

respondents admitted

that there

were 39 underages

within

the meaning of

HRS,

S11-153.

Thus,

39

ballots which

were validly issued and

voted according the District

4

poll

books

disappeared

and

were

not

counted.

31.

The foregoing indicates

that 50 ballots that

issued and

voted

were

intermingled with valid

ballots that had been

voted, and counted

when they

were not

supposed

to

have

been counted,

or

were

issued and

voted and

yet

not

counted

when they

were

supposed

to

have been counted.

t4


16/78

32.

Petitioner

Waters

contends that

the criteria

in HRS,

511-172

have been met,

inasmuch as the foregoing fraud or

mistakes of

the

respondents

in

counting

ballots

11 ballots that should

not have been counted

and

not counting

39 ballots that should have been

counted

could

have caused

a difference

in

the

results

of the

District 4

election.

This

is

especially

so, since

HRS,

S1

1-172 and

S1

1-153

gives

the specific examples

of

the counting

of

HRS,

S1

1-153 overage

ballots and

not

counting

HRS,

S153

underage ballots

as being causes

for the

invalidation of election

results.

These frauds or

mistakes are of such a

nature

that

the correct

result

of

the election cannot be ascertained.

33.

By reason of the

premises,

the

Supreme Court

should order

that a

new election shall be conducted

for the office of

District

4

councilmember,

The Supreme Court

should order that

this

new

election shall

be by mail-in ballot

only so as

to

economically

remediate this already

costly error of the

respondents.

WHEREFORE,

petitioner

Waters

prays

that

this

court:

1.

Order

that a count of the so-called

blank

ballots cast

in

the

District

4

election

be hand

counted to determine

who was actually

voted for on

these so-called

blank

ballots, and based

on

the

results thereof,

determine

who

was

elected

as

the

District

4

councilmember,

and

issue an

order to

respondent City Clerk ordering

her

to

issue a certificate

of

election

to

that

elected

person.

2.

ln the alternative,

petitioner

Waters

prays

that a

new

general

election

be

conducted

for

District 4

via

mail-in ballots only,

with the respondents

15


17/78

being ordered

to

correctly tally

said

ballots

and

issue a

certificate

of

election to

the winner thereof.

3.

Petitioner Waters

further

prays

that this court

order

that the respondents

herein

be

ordered to

pay

the

petitioner

all

costs

incurred

in

prosecuting

this

matter,

including

but

not limited to

reasonable attorney s

fees; and

order such

further relief that this court deems

just

and

proper,

including,

but

not limited to:

a.

Ordering

the

Office

of

Elections to

fully cooperate

with

petitioner

in

answering the various

questions

posed in previous

correspondence;

b.

Allowing

petitioner

to

view

various

results

of

the election,

including

any documents and/or

instruments utilized

in tallying

the

final

results; and

c.

Allowing

petitioner

to complete

a minimal

amount of discovery

over

a

period

of time not to

exceed two calendar

weeks,

assuming the

Office

of Elections

cooperates

with

petitioner.

Dated:

Honolulu, Hawaii,

November

24,2014.

/S/

JAMES

KAWASHIMA

JAMES KAWASHIMA,

ESQ

Attorney

for

Petitioner

16


18/78

NO

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF

THE STATE OF

HAWAII

THOMAS

WATERS, alkla

TOMMY

WATERS

Petitioner,

SCOTT NAGO, Chief

Elections

Officer; STATE

OF

HAWAII

OFFICE OF

ELECTIONS;

and

BERNICE K.N. MAU,

in her

official

capacity as

the City

Clerk

of

the

City & County

of Honolulu

Respondents

DECLARATION OF

THOMAS

WATERS

THOMAS WATERS, hereby

states and declares

as follows:

1.

I

am

the

Petitioner

in the above-entitled

matter.

2. t

make the declarations

herein on

personal

knowledge.

3.

Attached

as

Exhibit

4

is

a true and

correct copy of

a letter

from

James

Kawashima to Scott

Nago dated November

10,2014.

4. Attached as

Exhibit

r'8

is

a

true and

correct

copy

of

a

letter

from

James Kawashima

to Scott

Nago

dated November 13,2014.

5.

Attached as Exhibit

rC

is

a

true and correct

copy of an

email

to

Scott

Nago

dated

November

14,2014.

VS.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)


19/78

6. Attached

as

Exhibit

D

is

a true

and correct copy

of a

letter

from

Scott

Nago

to James Kawashima

dated

November

14,2014.

7.

Attached

as

Exhibit E

is a

true

and

correct

copy

of a letter

from Scott Nago to James Kawashima dated

November 19,2014.

8. Attached as

Exhibit

F

is a true

and

correct

copy

of a letter

from

Scott

Nago

to

James Kawashima dated November

19,2014.

8.

Attached as Exhibit

rrc

is

a true

and correct copy of

a

letter

from

Aaron Schulaner to James

Kawashima dated November 20,2014.

9.

Attached as Exhibit

'H

is

a true and correct

copy of the

Report of

the

Election Oversight Gommittee on

the

Audit

of

the

1998

General

Election

dated

March 31, 1999.

I

declare under

penalty

of

perjury

that

the

foregoing

is true and

correct.

Dated:

Honolulu, Hawaii, November

24,2014.

/S/

THOMAS WATERS

THOMAS

WATERS


20/78

J,tUrcS

I(,IWa.SIIIMA

ALC

TRIAL

CONSULTANT

Sender's Informa

Direct:

(808)

275

E-mail:

ik@jkalc

November

10,

2OL4

VTA

FACSTMT

&

U.S.

MATL

Office

of Elections

820

Lehua

Avenue

Pearl

City,

Hawaii

96182

Attention

Mr-

Scott

Nago

Chief El-ections Officer

Re:

Result.s

of 201-4

General Election

f or

a

and

Count

Dear

Mr.

Nago

f am

writing to

you

as

Campaign

Chair

and

Counsel

for

the

Tommy

Waters

Committee for

Cit.y Council.

We would

be remiss

in

noL extendng

our appreciation

for

the fine

work

of

you

and

your

office in carrying out a difficult. election very welt.

As

you

have

said in

Lhe

past.r

/o1r

were

"just

doing

your

job,

"

and

t.hat

was

accomplished

very

well

under

very

trying

circumst,ances.

fn

the case of

our race,

the

outcome

was

decided

on a

report.ed

47

vole dif f

erence

between

my

opponent and myself

.

hlith

a total

turnout

of a reported

3'7,1-62

vot,ers

casting bal1ots,

we

woul-d

think

that difference

t,o

be

well within

the margin

of error

of

the

system

you

utilize.

May

I

ask what

the

margin

of error is

wlth

the

system

utilized?

e

are

t.herefore

requesLing

that

t.he

I'overag:e"

and

Itunderagert

figures for

each

precinct.

in our district

be

verified

and

investgated for possible errors.

We

also

request

that

you

invest.igate

the

4,457-

report.ed

"bfank'r

votes for

accuracy

and

valdity.

While

perhaps

not

rel-evant

Lo

our

inquiry,

we also

request

that the L6rrover

vot.es'r

be

revj-ewed

in

accordance

wt.h

t.he

operating procedures

by

which

you

are

governed.

UHIBff

k

-

opa

Financial

center, Fort street

Tower

.745

Fort street,

sute

5oo

.

Honolulu,

Hawa 96813

.

rEt

808.275.0300

.

FAX

9oa.275.o3gg


21/78

Office

of

Electi-ons

November

10,

201 4

Page

2

Ife

realize

that

there

may

be

other

test.s

and investigat.ive

processes

Lo

be applied

to verify

the results

and

we are

not

limiting our

request

in

any

way

by

making

the

above

specific

requests.

Please

apply

every

test

or process

available to

you

in

making

sure

the result

was

accurate

and valid..

I

provide

contact

information

below

should

you

wsh

to

d.iscuss

any aspect

of

these

requests

with

us

and

further

request

that

you

keep

us informed.

of

your

progress

as

allowed

by

law so

that

we can

be

sure

to

protect

our rights

and

time

limits

by

other means

if

necessary.

Thank

you

for

your

time,

patience

and service to the

people

of

Hawaiti.

Very

truly

k -.

,JAMES

KAhTASHTMA

Tommy

Waters

Campaign

Committee,

Chair

CONTACT

TNFORMATTON:

James

Kawashima,

Esq.

James

Kawashima,

ALC

745

Fort Street, Suite

500

Honolu1u,

Hawai-i

968l-3

(808)

275-0304

(808)

27s-0399

(rax)

j

koj

kalc.

com

Thomas

lVaters

1130

Nimtz

Highway

Suite

B-299

Honolulu, Hawaii

968L7

(808)

354-1-1-78

tommywatersl@me.

com


22/78

J.rvlrcS

l{aw,tsrrlrrtA

ALC

TR IAL

CONSULTANT

Sender s

Informat

Dlrect:

(808)

275-

E-mail

:

jlgej-l


23/78

J,rurcs

l(ew'sFrrM'

ALC

TRiAL

CONSULTANT

Sender's

Inform

Direct:

(808)

27

E-mail

:

ik@-ika

November

10,

20L4

VTA

FACSTMTLE

&

.S.

MAIL

Office

of

Elections

820 Lehua

Avenue

Pearl

City,

Hawaii 96782

Attention

Mr. Scott

Nago

Chief Elections

Officer

Re:

Result.s of 201-4

General Election

for

Citw and

Countw

of

Honolul-u

District 4

Dear

Mr.

Nago:

f

am

writing

to

you

as Campaign

Chair

and Counsel

for

the

Tommy

hlaters

committ,ee

for city

council.

te

would

be remiss

in

not

extending'our

appreciation

for the fine

work

of

you

and

your

office

in

carrying

out, a difficult

election

very well.

As

you

have

said in the pastr

/o1r

were

rrjusL

doing

your job,,'

and

t.hat

was

accomplished

very

well

under

very

trying circumst.ances.

fn

tlre

case

of our race,

Lhe

outcome

was

decided

orl

a

reported

47

voLe

dfference

between

my

opponent

and myself.

With

a

total

turnout.

of

a

report.ed

3i, 62

voLers

casting

ballot,s,

w

would

think

that

difference

to

be

wel-l

within

the

margin

of error

of

the

syst.em

you

uti-lize.

May f

ask

what

the

margin of error

j-s

with the

system

utilized?

We

are

Lherefore requesting

that.

the

"overager

and

'runderag'e't

figures for

each

preci-nct

j-n

our district

be

verified.

and

investgat.ed

for possible errors.

we

also

reguest.

t.hat. you

investigat.e

t.he

4,457-

reported

"blank"

voLes

for

accuracy and

validity.

While

perhaps

not

relevant

to

our

i-nquiry,

we

also

request

that the

L6

trover

votes"

be

reviewed

in

accordance

wth

the

operati-ngi procedures

by

which

you

are

governed.

Topa Financial

Center,

Fort

Street Tower

'745

fort

Street,

Suite

5OO

.

Honolulu,

Hawai

g6A

--rEL

BOB.Z75.O3OO

.

FAX

BOg.Z7S.O3gg


24/78

Office

of

Electi-ons

November

10,

20L4

Page

2

te

realize

that

there

may

be other tests

and

j-nvestigative

processes

to

be

applied

to verify

the results

and we are not

limiting our

request

in

any

way

by

making

the

above

speci-fic

requests.

Please

apply every

test or

process

available to

you

in

making

sure

the

result was

accurate

and

valid.

I

provide

conact

information

below

should

you

wish

t.o d.i-scuss

any aspect

of these

requests

with

us

and further

request

that

you

keep us informed

of

your

progress

as allowed

by

law

so

that

we

can be

sure

to

protect

our

rghts

and

time

limits

by

other

means

if necessary.

Thank

you

for

your

tme,

paLience

and service

to the

people

of

Hawai'i.

Very

truly

*-

JAMES

KAWASHTMA

Tommy

aters

Campai-gn

Committee,

Chair

CONTACT

TNFORMATTON:

lTames

Kawashima,

Esg.

.Tames

Kawashima,

Al,C

745

Fort Street,

Sui_te

Hono1ulu,

Hawaii

g6BL3

(808)

27s-0304

(808)

275-0399

(rax)

-j

k@i kalc.

com

Thomas ?rlaters

1130

Nimtz

Highway

Suite

B-299

Honolulu,

Hawaii

968L7

(808)

3s4-1-L78

Lommvwatersl-@me.

com

500


25/78

Chervl

R. Kitazaki

From:

Sent:

To:

Cc:

Subject:

Attachments:

Cheryl R. Kitazaki

Friday, November

14,2014

10:54

AM

elections@hawaii.

gov

James

Kawashima

Results

of

2014

General

Election

for

City and

County

of

Honolulu

District

4

DOCOO9.PDF

Mr.

Nago:

I

assume

you

received

the

attached, but

am

sending

the

two

letters faxed and

mailed to

you

this

week.

Thank

you,

Cheryl

Kitazaki

Legal

Assistant

James

Kawashima,

ALC

745

Fort

Street,

Suite 500

Honolulu,

Hawaii 96813

(808)

27s-03s0

The information

contained

in this message

or attached hereto

is between attorney

and

client

and,

therefore

privileged

and

confidential.

The use

thisinformationisintendedforthesoleuseoftheindividualand/orentitynamedastherecipientofthistransmittal,

Copying,dissemination,or

distributionofthismessageoritsattachmentsisstrictlyprohibitedwithoutthepriorapproval

ofthenamedrecipienthereunder.

lfyouhave

received

this

communicaton

in error,

please

immediately

notify

us

by

telephone

(808)275-0300

or by return

e-mail, and delete

the original

message.

Your cooperation

is appreciated.

U}lIBT

c

1


26/78

J.rwNS

I{ew,tSI{IM.

ALC

TRIAL CONSULTANT

Sender s Informa

Direct:

(808)

275

E-mai1:

ik@ikalc

November

1-3

,

20L4

VA

FACSTMTLE

6. U.S.

MAIL

Office

of

Elections

820

Lehua

Avenue

Pearl

City,

Hawaii

96792

Attention

Mr.

Scott Nago

Chief

Elections

Officer

Re

Result.s

of 20L4

General

Elect.ion

for

City

and

Countv

of

Honolu1u

District

4

Dear

Mr.

Nago:

On

Monday, November

l-0

,

2074,

T

t.ransmj_Lted

the

attached

lett.er

to

your

offj-ce

by fax

and

regular

mail but

r

have

yet.

to

lrear

from you,

even

to

merely

acknowledge

receipt. of

the letter.

I realj-ze

this is

a

very

busy

and

difficult.

time for

your

office

because

of

deadlines

yoLr

have,

but, in

our case, the 2A

day

deadline

to

take

1egal

action

is

approaching

even more

rapidly

than

yours.

Is it possible to

j-nform

us

of

where

you

are in

respond.ing

Lo

our inqury? Also,

may

f

assume

that

you

will not object

to

our

seeking

a

lengtkrening

of t.he deadline

(assuming

that is

even

possible)

f

,

by

your

actions

or inaction,

add.itional

t,ime

is

need.ed

to

take

legal act.ion?

I

stand

ready

to

meet and

discuss

any and

all

issues

at

your

convenience

and

at

your

office.

Mahalo

for

your

courtesies.

Very

truly

yours,

JAMES

KAWASHTMA

Tommy

lriaters

Campaign

CommitLee,

Chair

Att,achment

cc:

Thomas

R

Waters

Topa

Financial

Center,

Fort

Street

Tower 745

Fort

Street,

Suite

50O.Honolulu.

Hawaii

96813.TEL

8O8.275.03OO.FAX

e}e.ZTS-O3gg


27/78

J.ttrrns

l{,twesrrrM'

ALC

lRIAL

CONSULTANT

Sender's

Tnfor

Dj-rect:

(808)

2

E-mai1:

jk@ik

November

10,

20L4

VA

FACSTM

6.

U.S. MATL

Office

of

Elections

820

Lehua

Avenue

Pearl

CiLy,

Hawaii

96782

Attention

Mr-

Scott

Nago

Chief

Elections

Officer

Re:

Result.s

of 201-4

General

Elect.ion

for

Ci-tw

and

Countw

of

Honolulu

District 4

Dear Mr.

Nago:

r

am

wrj-ting

to

you

as

campaign

chair

and

counsel

for

the

Tommy

Waters

CommiLt.ee

for

City

Council.

Ife

would

be remiss

in

not

extendingf

our

appreciat.ion

for

the fine

work

of

you

and.

your

office

in

carrying

out.

a difficult

elect.ion

very well.

As

you

have

said

i-n

Lhe

past, o\t

r/ere

"jusL

doing your

job,

"

and

tkrat

\/as

accomplished

verY

well

under

very trying

circumstances.

fn

the

case

of our race,

Lhe

ouLcome

was

d.ecided

on a

reported

47 vote

difference

between my

opponent

and

myself.

With

a

t,otal

turnout.

of a reported

37,L62

voters

castingf

ballots,

w

would

lhink

that. difference

to be

well

within the

margin

of error

of the

system

you

utiLize.

May I

ask

what. the

margin of error

is

wiL}- the

sysLem

utilized?

We

are

tlrerefore

requesting

that

the

t'overage"

and

trunderage,

figures

for

eackr

precinct

in

our district

be

verified.

and

investigated for

possibl-e

errors.

tVe

also

reguest.

that

you

investigate

the

4,45L

reported

.blank'

votes

for

accuracy

and.

validity.

While

perhaps

not.

relevanL

to our inquiry,

we also

request.

that the

L6trover

voLes"

be reviewed

in

accordance

with

the

operati-ng procedures

by

which

you

are

governed.

Topa

Financial

center,

Fort

Street

Tower '745

Fart street,

suite

5oo

.

Honolulu,

Hawai

g6a

.fEL

9o8.275.Q300

.

FAX

808.275.o39g


28/78

Office

of

Elections

Novemer

10,

2OA4

Page

2

We

realize

that

there

may

be

ot.her

tests

and

investigative

processes

t.o

be applied

to verify

the

result.s

and

we are

not.

limiting

our

request

in

any

way

by making

the

above

specifc

requests.

Please

apply

every

test or

process

available

Lo

you

in

maki-ng

sure

the result

was

accurate

and.

val1d.

f

provide

cntact,

information

below

should

you

wish

Lo d,iscuss

any

aspect

of

these

requests

with

us

and

further

request

thaL

you

keep us

informed

of

your

prog:ress

as

allowed by

law

so that

we

can

be

sure

to

protect

our

right.s

and.

time

limits

by

other

means

if

necessary.

Thank

you

for

your

time,

patience

and.

service

to

the

people

of

Hawai

'

i.

Very

trul

1

fourS,


29/78

James Kawashima

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Attachments:

Hard copy

to

follow

[email protected]

Friday

November 14 2014 4:27

PM

James

Kawashima

City and County

of

Honolulu

District 4

Letter

to

James

Kawashima

-

November

14

2014.pdf

ENHIBIT

D

1

-


30/78

SCOTT T. NAGO

CHIEF

ELECTION

OFFICER

STATE OF HAWAII

OFFICE

OF

ELECTIONS

802 LEHUA

AVENUE

PEARL

CITY

HAWAII

96782

M.hawi.

gov/lections

November

14 2A14

James

Kawashima

Esq.

745

Foft.

Street

Suite

500

Honolulu

Hawaii

96813

Dear

Mr.

Kawashima:

This

is in response

to

your

November

10

2014

and November

19 zo14

letters

There

are

a

variety

of

things

that

must

be

done after

an

election

before we

can finalize

the results.

We

are

currently

involved

in

that

process.

Upon

the

conclusion

of

that

process

we

will

issue

a final

summary

report

of

the

election

results

and forward

you

a

copy

along

with

the

overage

and underage

related

to

the

precincts

associated

with

yciur

contest.

Very

truly

yours

SCOTT

T. NAGO

Chief Election Officer

STN:AHS;cr

oE-14-262


31/78

James Kawashima

From:

Sent:

Subject:

Attachments:

[email protected]

Wednesday November 19 2014 2:03 PM

Response to James Kawashima 11110

and

11113114

Correspondence

oE-14-265.PDF

ilHIBI

t

1


32/78

SCOTT

T, NAGO

CHIEF

ELECTION OFFICER

STATE

OF HAWAII

OFFICE

OF

ELECTIONS

802

LEHUAAVENUE

PEART

CITY, HAWAII

96782

www.hswll.Bov/lectlons

November 19,2014

Mr.

James

Kawashima

745

Forl Street,

Suite 500

Honolulu, Hawaii 96813

Dear Mr.

Kawashima:

Thank

you

for

your

letters

dated

November

10

and

13,

2014. Attached

is

a

copy

of

the

final

Statewide Summary.

Also attached

is

a

matrix

of

the

overages

and

underage

for

each

precinct

in Honolulu

City

Council District lV.

Please

note

that

voters

in district-precinct

26-

02

received

an absentee ballot only,

pursuant

to

Act

100, Session

Laws

of

Hawaii

2012.

lf

you

have

any

further

questions,

please

contact Auli i

Tenn,

Counting

Center Operations,

at 453-VOTE(8683).

Very truly

yours,

SCOTT

T.

NAGO

Chief Election Otficer

STN:AT:cr

oE-14-265

Enclosures

c: TommyWaters

Trevor Azawa

Bernice Mau, City Clerk


33/78

GENERAL ELECTON 2014

-

Stte of Hawall

-Slatowld

Novsmbor

4, 2014

SUMMARY

REPORT

.FINAL

SUMMARY

RPORT"

psge

1

Prntd

on:

f 1/0120'14 at 0'1:26:20 m

U,S. Sanalot Vacancy

247

o1247

(O)

SCHATZ, Brln

(R)

CAVASSO, Csm

{L) KOKOSKI. Mlchal

246,770

86.Ayo

97.983

26.5%

8,936

2.4yo

Blank Votsr

Ovgr Votes:

15,774

43%

0.0%

U.S.

Represanlalve,

Dsl

I

113 of'113

(D)

TAKAI, Mark

lR) DJOU. Chrlos

93,360 51.2%

86,415 47,40/o

Blank Volss:

Ovr

Vols:

2,365

1.3./6

58

0.0%

U.S. Reprcsentatlve, Dist

ll

134

of

'134

(O)

GABBARD, Tulsl

(R)

CROWLEY, Kewlka

fL KENI- Jo

141,998

75.8%

33,624 17.5%

4,592

2.5%

Elank

Votes:

Ovr Vol6:

7,018 3,7./o

82

0,0%

Govanor and Llaulanant Govarnot

247

o'247

(D)

rGE / TSUTSUT

(R)

A|ONA

/

AHU

(I)

HANNMANN

/

CHANG

tr } DAVIS / MARI IN

181.065 49.0%

135,742

3A.f%

42,525 11.1Vo

6.3S3

1.70/o

Blank

Volosi

Ovr

Vologi

2,998 0.8vo

431

0.1t

Slafa Senator, O/sl

I

I

ol9

(O)

KAIIELE, Gllbsrl

11,838

78.S70

'1.860

12.6%

l

ARIANFF

Grru

lkblr

BlankVotes:

Ov6r

Vol6s:

1,247 8,50/0

0

0.0%

Slle Senfo/,.Dlsf 3

12 ol

12

(D)

GREEN, Josh

8,896

76.17c

1.89t

16.2%

Blank Votes:

Ovr Votag:

s08 l.aolo

1

0.00/0

State SenatoL Dlsl 4

12 ol

12

(D)

INOUYE, Larrain Rodeo

{L}

SCHILLER.

Alain

8,842

72,3Yo

2,536

20 .7o/o

8lnk Volos:

Over

Vglesi

852

6.90/.

7

O.1o/o

Stal

Senalo Disl 5 Vacanay

11

ol 11

(D)

KEIIH-AGA AN,

Gll S,

Coloma

I,Itg

64.r%

4,149 27.Vo

Rl

KAMAI(A. Jo

BlankVots:

Ovr Vols:

1,172

t0

7.8%

0,1%

Slale Serlo/', Oisf 6

g

of 0

(O)

BAKER, Ro

(R)

DUBOIS, Jard P.

(Pka)

7,210

56.80/.

2,916

23.0/o

1.196

9.4'/. KAAHIll rn. Kkrhil

BlEnk Vots:

OvrVoles:

1,349

't0.6yo

13

0,1%

Stt

Senlor, lst 12

'10

of

10

(D)

GALUTERIA, Srlokwood

M.

6,426 53%

4,544

37.8o/.R I FTHFM Chi

BlankVotos:

OvrVoles:

1,046 6.lc/o

.10h0

Slo6

R6presentaliye,

Dist

I

7

o7

(0)

SOUKI, Joe

lR KPOl Crsl

Kllslhe

6,369

60.870

2.716

30.80/,

Elank

Voles:

OvrVoles:

73 8.3%

5

0.1%

Slale

Roprssenlatyo, Olst

r0

5 of 5

(D)

MCKELVEY, Angur L.

lR

MARTEN.

Chh

M

3,522

't,5%

r.66

20.1%

Bank Vot6s:

Ov6rVots;

534

0.3%

6

0.1%

Slate

Represanlatve,

Dsl 11

4 o:14

(O)

lNG, Kani6la

ll I BROK Pl

4,926

70.80/

1.362

19.6%

Blank Voles:

Ovr Votss:

66t 9.5%

7

0,1%

Stle Rprsonlalive,

Disl

12

6 016

(D)

YAMASHITA,

Kylo T

lR

POHLE. Riherd H.

,639

0.0%

'1,950

20.0%

1,174

12,OY.

3

0.0%

Blnk

Voles:

OvorVotos:

State Represnlalve,

Dsl

14

5 of 5

(D)

KAWAKAMI,

D6rok S.K.

Rl HMANAWANUI- Jon8thEn K-

6,817

69.4%

1,736

21.4./.

738

5.10

I

0.16/o

Blank Vote:

OvrVotog:

Sfale Repressnlarve, Olsl

,5

5 of 5

(O)

TOKIOKA, Jsmss Kunano

R YDR SIv

5,367

67.3%

1,892 23.7%

Slank

Votes:

OvaVolE:

717 9.0%

1

0.07o

State

Representative,

Dst 16

6

o16

(O)

MORIKAWA,

Dayn6tto

(Dee)

lR|

FRANKS. Vlctorl

{Vlcklel

5,320

6,8%

1,A12 22.70/.

10.570

0,0%

836

2

BlEnk

Votes:

OvsrVole:

Stats Reprsontallva,

Dst

17

4 al4

(R)

WARO.

Gsn

lDl STtIMP

Chrs

7,5?3

71.6%

2,665

24,30

0.10h

4.1%12

6

6lank Voles;

Ov6rVotes:

State

Represenlailve, Disl 18

4

ol4

6,884

62.0%

3.473

31.370

(D)

HASHEM, Ma Jun

lRl

HALVORSN. Sussn Kehsulnl

738 6.6%

4 0.09/"

Blsnk Voles:

Over Volss:

Stale Rpresanlatlva, Dst

19

ot3

(D)

KOBAYASI'II, Bertrand

(86rt)

(R)

MATHIEU,

Vlotorla

Ellzaboth

IL

HIGA,

AIhonv

5,404

1,924

783

91.6%

21,7%

6.6%

713

6.0"to

I

0.t%

Blak Vol8:

OvarVolgs:

Stat Snalol Dlst

17

I of I

(D) NlSHllARA,

Clarnc6

8,312

64.80lo

3.531 27.5/ol'ICtEMENIE Rr

Blank Votes:

Ovgr

Volos:

s73

7.6v.

2

0.oo/o

Sfat

Senator,

Dlsl l8

I

of

0

(DlKlOANl,

Mcholls

(R)KlM,

Denns C.H.

10,253 54.6%

7,345 39.1l.

389

2.1roL) BANA

Rvnd

lll

Elank

Vole6:

Ovr Vots:

769

4.1/o

I

0.0%

Slslo Saralor, Ol 2l

6 ol5

(D)

SHIMABUKURO, Mallo S.L.

6,078

64.870

2.868

30.6%

R kLJ Terc L

Blank Voles:

Over

Vols:

433

4.8T.

6

0.'1%

Sfatd Senlor Dist 23

I ol9

(o)

RrvIERE, Gir

lR'l FALE. Rlchard L66

5.319

50.4%

4,854

46.0%

Bank

Volesi

Owr

Vols:

377

3.6Vo

10 0.10l"

Stata Snator, DIst

24

11

ol

11

(o)

foKUDA,

Jil N.

lRl

DANNER. Kllomana

Mlchsl

13,814 /0.%

4,625

23.71

Blank Vot8:

Ov6rVolos:

1,073

5.50/6

4

0.0olo

Slsle epresentalvg, Osf I

g

of I

(D)

NAKASHIMA, Mark

M,

614

f5.11o

1,452

17.4y.

ll WlNRl. Erlc Drk

Blank Volgs:

OwVoto6:

578

2

6.9%

0.ov.

Sfalo Repressnlal,vo, Dsf 3

f ol7

(D)

ONlSHl, Rlchard H.K.

(R)olcKsoN.

Bir

/l FGF| Fr.d

F

5,076

69.9olt

997

13.7%

all f .2

Blank Volos:

OvrVotss:

371

5.1o/o

3 0.070

State

Re

prec

ntallva,

D

i

sl

4

4

ol4

(O)

SANEUENAVENTURA, JOy

A,

4.337

68.0%

'1,719

26.9%

R THOMAS. Cru

Blank

Vols:

Ov6r Volos:

319

4

5,0%

0,10/c

Sfal

Rgprosontsfye,

Disl 5

'I ol8

(D)

CREAG/N, Rcherd P

(R)

BATEMAN, Dave

fl I

A

ANNF

.l

A

3,712 55.9%

2,3E9

36.0%

253 3.Solo

Blank

Vologl

OvorVot8:

282 4.20/.

3

0.0%

5l16

Raps6nlallva,

Olsl 6

5

of

5

(D)

LOWEN, Nlcola

3,23

s0,t%

2,334

37.1vo

RIVAIENZUEU.

Kllv

Blank

Voli:

OvrVotes:

'f3s

2.20/.

3

0.0%

(L)

.

LIBRTARIAN

(r) -

TNoEPENoENT

(R)

-

REPUBLICAN

(G)

.

GREEN

{N)

-

NONPARTISAN

(D}

=

DMOCFIATIC


34/78

GENERAL LECTION 2014

.

Stat6 ol Hawall

-

Sttwd

Novomber

4,

2014

SUMMARY RPORT

.FINAL

SUMI\ARY

REPORT"

Pg 2

Prlnlsd

on:

11/05/2014

al

01:26:20 am

Slal6

Roprosorrlve, Disl

20

4 ol4

{D)

SAY, Calvln K,Y

(G)

8ONK,

Kolko

lRlAl I

FN

.ftdla

F

4,621

52.6%

2,047

2330

1.791 20.40,/

Blank

Vots:

Ovf

Vots:

322 3.7"/o

3

0.070

Sfato

eprosontaliv, O/st

21

4

o14

(D)

Nlsl-llMoTo, Scott Y.

R) MAUTAI. Larle Kuul Lanol

4,128

74.1%

1,183

21.2r/o

BlankVot6s:

Ovr Vole6:

2A2

4.7Vr

1

0.0

Stale

Reprcsatatve, Dst 22

3 of 3

(D)

BROWER,

Tom

2,623

54.4%

1-929 40.0%R GRACF .lanaf M

Elank

Volssi

OvrVole6r

265 5.5%

2

0.0%

slale

Rapresantatva,

Dist

24

4 ol4

(D)

BELATTI,

Olla

Au

4,465

64.1%

1,7A4 25.6%

Rl AMSfERDAM.

C. Keui Jochn

glank Volos;

Ovor

Volsl

716

103%

2

0.o1/o

State

Reprcsentativa, Dsl

25

5 ofs

(D)

LUKE,

Sylvia

fRl l-AM.

Ronald

Y.K.

5.209 65.57o

2,324

25.2%

Elank

Volosi

Ovor Votos:

423

1

5.3%

0.0%

Slate Rpresantatlva,

Dlsl 26

7

o17

(D)

sAlKl,

Scott K,

IR) MARSHALL. ETic B.

3,858

64.5%

1,788

29.6%

Blank Voles:

OverVols:

353 6.90/"

3 0.1%

State Representallva, Dlsl 27

6 of 5

(D)

OHNO, Takashi

4,745

62.4%

",652

34,9%

R) FOWLER,

Mx R

Blank

Votss:

vrVobsl

206 2.7%

4

0.10/o

Slate

Rpresentalva,

Dsl

28

4 on4

(D)

MlZUNo, John

M.

f R) KA,APl.J.

Cle

Kauhlwai

3,196

65.3%

1,536

31.4%

Blnk

Votes:

Ovgr

Votsi

'160

3.3%

5 0.1%

Slale Represenlailve,

Dlsl 31

6 of 6

(R)

JOHANSoN, Aarcn

Llng

3,698

68.0%

1.450

26.7%

D SHARSH I

l

Blank Vot6B:

OvrVol:

288

53%

2

0.0%

Slate

Repreentatve,

Disl 32

3 of3

(D)

ICHIYAMA, Llnda

E. 4,722

64,9%

2,340

32,20h

RrlAVil I Mr.laAnn R

Blnk

Votes:

OvrVot6s:

211 2.goh

2

o.ovo

Sffe

Reposorlalive,

O6t

33

6

of

6

Slst Raprasntallv, Dlsl 45

5

of 6

6,526

6s.87

2,346

23.7%

(O)

KONG, Sam

lRl

HELSHAM. Robrt C..

Sr

(R)

CHEAPE

MAISUMOTO,

Laurn

lo

iTAGAOAY.

Mlch61

Ydo

3,06e

70,8%

1,175

27,1%

1,032

10.4%

I

0.1%

Blak Volar

OvfVotos:

91 2,1c/o

f

0.0Ye

Blank Vot68:

Ovaf

Votes:

Sff Reprsntaliye, Df

34

3

af

3

Slate

Represanlliy6, Disl

47

4 ol4

(D)

TAKAYAMA, Grosg

IRIAGUSTIN

Jacl

5'471

58.370

3,569

38.0%

(R)

POUHA, Fskl

ll FNIMANA.

Kent K.

2,58

49.1%

2,818

48,10/

342

4

3.6%

0.00/o

Blank

Vol8;

Over

Vol6:

28s

6

Blank Vol6:

OvffVoli

4.7./

0,1%

Sffe Ropresontlyg,

Di.9f

35

6 of6

Stdlo Rpr'sentalivo,

Dd

4A

6 ofo

(o)

TAKU[4], Roy M.

lRl

POTI. LuAnn M.

3,578

0.9%

2,023

34,40/c

(D)

KEOHOKALOLE,

Jarotl

K.

(R)

KUKAHIKO, Eldon L.

(L)

TAKAYAMA,

Kaimanu

lN) NAIPO. Kan

5.443

3,670

199

t03

55.7Vo

37.6.h

2,00/4

1,1%

269

4,6%

4

0.1./.

Blank Vot6s:

Over Volos:

345

3.5%

0 0.t%

Blnk Voles:

Over Voles:

fala Rpresnlt v6, Dl 36

3

of 3

(R)

FUKUMOTO

CHANG,

Blh

rD I FE Merlv B

5,E7E 64.57o

s.034

33.3%

Srsle

Repesgntt'ye,

Dst

50

4 o'f

4

42 14,2%

1,719

20.1%

{R)

THIELEN, Cynlhia

lDl

BRO4AN.

Hollv.

Blank

Voles

OvrVols:

'195

2.1%

6

0.10/o

483

5.7%

3

0.00/.

ElankVots:

Ovsr

Volos:

tale Reprcsenlatve,

Dlsl 37

4

ol4

(D)

YAMANE, Ryan

L

iR SVRCI4. Emll

7,26'1

72,47o

2,254

22,5o/

State

ReNasanlalive,

Disl

51

I of 6

5,881

E4.2To

3,070

33,5%

(D)

LEE, Chrls

lR HlKlDA. Wvn

I

74

4.70/o

2

0.0%

BlnkVolos:

Ovor Vol8:

2,2%

0,070

203

0

Blanl Volos:

Over Vots:

tdte Reprcsntatve, Dst 40

4

o14

3.11

80.0%

't,915

36.4%

(R)

McDERMOTT, Bob

lD MARTINEZ. Ros6

AI-Laea

Trusle

247 of247

NumbrTo

Vol

For

3

Blnk Votss:

Ovr

Votos:

't84

3.5%

7

0.1

Slale

Representafyo,

D/sl

4l

4 ol4

wAlHEE, John O.

AKANA, Rowena M.N.

AHU

lSA,

L6l

(Lslnahla)

TRASK,

MllllnlB.

AKINA, Ksll'i

McINERNY-

Hv

138,452

't23.860

r13.181

102,819

92,247

74,960

12.5%

11.2%

10.2%

9.301o

8.3%

6.8%

(D)

LOPRESTI, Matlhew

(R)

JREMIAH,

Bryan E.

2,441

2,178

s56

47.4Yc

34.86/o

18.20/"

Blank Votes:

OvrVols:

462,807 4't.7%

102

0.0yc

lnk

Votes:

Ovor VolB:

't68

2,7%

5

0.t%

Maui

Rsdnl

Trusta

247 oU1

lale

Rapresentatva,

Ost

42

3

of 3

(D)

HAR, Sharon E.

lR) MOgES. Suk

5,133

69.1%

2,073

27.9%

87

LINDSEY,

Carmen

Hulu

23.6%

Blank Votos:

Ov6rVolos:

154,966

41,9%

10't 0.0%

23

3.0%

'l

0.0%

Elank Vot6s:

Over

Voles:

Counclmember,

Dst

5

3 ol3

tate Reprcsentatve,

Dist

43

5 ol5

2,319 50.270

2,045

44.2%

PALEKA.

Danel

K., Jr.

EDWAROS HUNI.

Tifhnv

R)

IUPOLA, Andra P.

lD AWAN.

Krn Lei

2,628

58.1"/o

2,096

41.4%

259

3.6%

I

0.0%

Blank Votosr

Ov6a

VolEl

11 2.2%

0,1Y0

Blnk Volesl

Ovr

Volos:

Counclmomban

Dist

I

3 of 3

tale Representatlv,

Dlst

44

2

of

2

WLLE, Margarol

GN7l

FS

Rld S 3,192

56.flo

2.171 38.80/.

D)

JORoAN.

Jo

{c)

GAIS,

Codric Arueg.

fll FRNZEL. Allen IAL

2,7n3

1,025

56.070

22.0%

15.5%

266 1.7%

r

0.0%

Blnk Votos:

Over Volcr:

206 4.4%

4

0.1V6

Elank Votes:

Ovsr

Vots:

MayoL

County of Mau

34 of34

ARK

WA,AlanM.

PALTIN Tr fml

25,435 55.3%

18,162

39.5%

6.2/,

0.0%

Blank

VolB:

OvgrVotss:

2,372

14

(L).

LIBERTARIAN

(I).

INDEPENOENT

(R).

REPUBLICA

(G).

GREEN

(N).

NONPARIISAN

(o)

=

oEMoctlATlC


35/78

GENERAL ELECTION 2014 - Strate olHawaii

-

Stelowdo

Nov6mb6r

4,

?014

SUMI\4ARY REPORT

FINAL

SUMMARY

RPORT

Pag6

3

Prlntod

on: 11/06/20t4

t

0l:26:20

an

Counclmenbar

(Easl

Mau)

34 of34

CARROLL, 8ob

27,071 58.90/0

11.730 25.50/lKHll ANANDA Nl.k

BlankVolos:

Over Vol:

7,162

15,6%

2D

0.0%

Co uncllrnobet

(Wa

sl

M

a u

)

34 of34

COCHRAN,

lls

BUENCONSJO. Ka'ala

22,124

48.1%

18,792 40,5%

BlnkVol6s:

Ovr

VotaBr

5,04f

11.00/o

20 0.0%

Cou

nclmmber

(Wa

lu ku-Wa

he

s-Wal

ka

pu

)

34 of34

VICTORINO,

Mchal

(Mke)

25,28s

55.0%

12,608 27.4%LACKAURN. Joseoh G.. ll

Elank Votos:

Ov6r Vol6s:

8,060

17.5%

28

0.1%

Co u nc ilmm

b

r

(Kah

u u

i)

34 of34

GUZMAN, Don S.

PONTANILLA.

Jo

23,8s6

51.9%

15,719 34.20h

Blsnk

Votos;

Over Votsa:

6,373

13.9%

29

o..loh

Coun al m

mbe

r

(So

uth

Mau)

34 ol34

COUCH.oon

F7PRlCk .lh M

24,990 54.3%

13.042 30.3%

Slank Votos:

Ovor Volos;

7,029 15.30/o

22

0.0%

Councl membe t

(

Ma

kaw ao-Ha lku-

Pala)

34

of34

WHlfE,

Mlko

MOLINA.

MIKo

J.

23,042 50.1t

16.398 35.770

Elank Vote9:

Ova Vol6a:

6,504 14.1Yo

39 0.1%

Coun cilma

mb

r

(U

pco

u ntry)

34 of34

BAISA,

Glodys Coolho

BRUCH.

Courtnv

A.

26,1 17 56.8%

12,819

27.90/o

Blnk Votos:

Ovor Volosr

7,025

15,3%

22

0.0%

Qouncllmmber

(Lanal)

34 of34

HOKAMA RiKI 28.546 62,1%

BlankVot3:

OvsrVoles

17,437

37.9%

0

0.07o

Councilmember

(Molokai)

34

ol34

l\/Fll

qlt^uHa

24.250

41.40/

glnk

Vols:

Ovr

Vols:

17,733

38,8%

0

0.0%

Mayon

County of Kaua

16 of

16

CARVALHO, Bsrnrd

P.,

Jr

6ARCA- Duslin

14.B

b1.17

8,1S5

34.1%

Elsnk

VotE6:

Ovor

Voles:

1.

ts8

2

4.4%

0.o%

Councllmber

Nqmbor

To Volo For: 7

16

of 16

RAPOZO, MI

KAGAWA, Ross K,

KANESHIRO,

Arry

KULll, KipuKal L.P.

YUKIMURA,

JoAnn

A.

CHOCK, Mason K., S[

HOOSER, Gary

L.

FURFARO,

Jay

SRUN,

Mhu.

PERRY,

Dry 0.

COW0N,

Fellcla

gYNUM,

Tim

DCOSTA,8lly

I ARANIO Tla k

13.147

12,357

1 1,97'l

9,985

8,941

,730

,267

8,165

8,

t20

8,076

1,917

7,502

7,243

5.885

7.4%

7.40h

7.10

5.9%

5.3%

5.2o/o

4,gflo

4s%

4.8%

4,4%

4.7v6

4.5%

43%

3.4.4

Blnk Vt8:

OverVol:

42,048

25,00/o

7

0.00/6

CounalmembaL

Dlsl lV

17

of 17

OZAWA,

Trvor

WATERS.

Tommv

16,371

44.1%

16,324 43,9%

Blank

Voles:

OverVgtes:

4,451

16

12.0%

0.0%

Counclmember, Dst Vl

21 ol21

FUKIJNAGA, Carol

AIONA. Sam

17,C79

54.7o/o

11,541

38.3%

Blank Volos:

Ovq

Vot6s:

2,U2

16

8.9%

D,1YO

CON AMEND:

Relatng to Dsalosura of

Judcial Nolnes

247

01247

YES

N

302,953 Z.U7o

41,308

1120/o

Blank Vot6s:

OvrVl6:

25,177

6.8%

116 0.0%

CON

AMEND:

Rolallng

to Agilcuftural

rlorpnbos

247

01247

YES

N

r5,531

50,2%

152,222

412Yo

Blnk Vots:

OverVols:

31,543

258

8.5%

o.1%

CON AMEN: Rlatng lo

Slro

Juslcas

and Judges

247

of247

YES

N

81,408 Z2.O%

288.858 72.8/o

Blank

Volos:

Over

Votss:

18,884

5.1./.

306

0.1%

CON

AMEND:

Rlatlng

to Eaily Childhd

Education

247

01247

YES

N

160,238 43.4./o

192,247 52.OVo

Blank Votos:

Over Votes;

'I

6.802

2f

4.5Yo

0.1./.

CON

AMEND: Ralatng

to

Dams and

Resryo/s

247 ol24'l

YES

N

234,0',t6

63.3%

106,377

28.80/o

Elank

Vols;

OvorVolog:

28,984 7,8./o

177 0.07o

HAWAI'I:

Tam

of Appontnt for the

County

Cle*

43 of43

34,973

9.7%

11,148

22.20t

YES

NO

BIank

Volesi

Ov6rVol8:

4,025 8.0%

12 0.0/o

MAUI: Councll: Atfordable Housng Fund

34 of34

YES

NO

30,532

60,4%

r1,507

25.0

Blank Votes:

OvrVoto6:

3,915

29

8.5%

0.1%

MAU : Cou ncll

Pe n

altis

34

ol 34

YES

NO

17,689

38.5%

21,355

46.4%

Blank

VoteGi

Over

Votes:

6,901

15,0%

38

0.11/

MAUI:

Vote

r lntatve: Genetically

Engneered Oryanss

34

of

34

YES

NO

23,062 N,Zrh

22,005 47,9%

Blnk Vole6:

OvgrVotE6:

872

1.9%

24

0,,1.h

KAUAI: Relatlng to the Dpalmont

of

Persarngl

Sgv,ces

16 of 16

YES

NO

13,825

57.50/6

6,038

25.1%

glnk

Ov6r Vols;

4,174 |f.4Vo

I

0.0%

otes:

KAUAI: Ralalng lo Chatler Amdndment

16

of

16

YES

N

17,691 73.6'h

2,f75

11.5%

Elank Voles:

Ov6rVols:

3,569

14.8%

g

0.00

KAUAI: Relatng to Recll

Ballots

16

ol16

YES

N

11,747

73,0o/o

2,156

9.0%

Blnk Vols:

OvrVotss:

4,138

't7.2.to

4 0.00/

REGISTRAION

ANO

TURNOUT

GENRAL

TOTAL REGISTRATION

TOTAL TURNOUT

PRCINCT TURNOUT

AESENTEE TURNOUT

708,830

369,554

180,507

189,047

52.30/o

25,so/o

28.7.h

OVERSEAS BALLOTS CAST

OVERSEAS TURNOU

Ovrsse8 I

Ovrsoa8 2

61

39

0.0%

{L).

LIBERTARIAN

(l) -

INOEPENDENT

Documents

Petition to Hawaii State Supreme Court