Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 78

NOTICE OF ELECTRONIC FILING

Electronically Filed
Supreme Court
SCEC-14-0001317
24-NOV-2014
01:09 PM
An electronic filing was submitted in Case Number SCEC-14-0001317. You may review the filing through the Judiciary Electronic Filing System. Please monitor your email for
future notifications.
Case ID: SCEC-14-0001317
Title: THOMAS WATERS, a/k/a TOMMY WATERS, Petitioner, vs. 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.
Filing Date / Time: MONDAY, NOVEMBER 24, 2014 01:09:28 PM
Filing Parties: James Kawashima
Case Type: Election Contest
Lead Document(s): Complaint
Supporting Document(s):

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

This notification is being electronically mailed to:


James Kawashima ( jk@jkalc.com )
The following parties need to be conventionally served:
Bernice K.N. Mau
Scott Nago
Aaron Schulaner

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

1 of 1

NO

Filed
HAWAII
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF Electronically
Supreme Court
SCEC-14-0001317
THOMAS WATERS, alkla TOMMY
)
24-NOV-2014
WATERS
)
01:09 PM
)
Petitioner,
)
)
VS

)
)

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

)
)
)
)

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
(808) 275-0300
Telephone
(808) 275-0399
Facsimile
E-Mail Address: ik@jkalc.com

No:
No:

Attorney for Petitioner Thomas Waters

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,

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.

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

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

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.

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

Hereinafter, unless otherwise noted, all dates shall refer to ihe year 2014,

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

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;

(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
oick uo lreadl maroinal marks
ballot countinq machinesl do
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.

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

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

Of course in criminal cases, the constitutional right against self incrimination prevents such an inference
from being reached.

11

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

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

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

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

1-153 gives the specific examples of the counting of HRS,

S1

S1

1-172 and

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

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

NO
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAII

THOMAS WATERS, alkla TOMMY


WATERS

)
)
)

Petitioner,

)
VS.

)
)

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.
2.
3.

I am the Petitioner in the above-entitled matter.


t make the declarations herein on personal knowledge.

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.

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

J,tUrcS I(,IWa.SIIIMA
ALC

TRIAL CONSULTANT

November

VTA

10,

2OL4

& U.S.

FACSTMT

Sender's Information:
Direct: (808) 275-0304
E-mail: ik@jkalc.com

MATL

Office of Elections
820 Lehua Avenue

Pearl City, Hawaii

Attention

96182

Mr- Scott Nago


Chief El-ections Officer

Re: Result.s of 201-4 General Election


and Count
a

or

Dear Mr. Nago

am writing to you as Campaign Chair and Counsel for the


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.
Tommy

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
Topa Financial center, Fort street Tower

.745 Fort street, sute 5oo . Honolulu, Hawa 96813 . rEt 808.275.0300 . FAX 9oa.275.o3gg

Office of Electi-ons
November 10, 201"4
Page

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

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
(808)

968L7

354-1-1-78

tommywatersl@me. com

Committee, Chair

J.rvlrcS

l{aw,tsrrlrrtA
ALC

Sender's Information:
Dlrect: (808) 275-0304
E-mail : jlgej-l<e.k-gog

TR'IAL CONSULTANT

November 13, 201-4

VIA

FACSTMTLE S.

U.S.

MAIL

Office of Elections
820 Lehua Avenue

Pearl Cit.y, Hawaii


Attention
Re:

96'782

Mr. Scot.t Nago


Chief Elections Officer

Results of 2Ol4 General Election for


City and County of Honolulu Dist.rict

Dear Mr. Nago:


On Monday, November 1-0, 2074 , I transmitted the attached
lett.er t.o your office by fax and regular mail but I have yet to
Lrear from you, even to merely acknowledge receipt of the letter.
I realize this is a very busy and difficult time for your office
because of deadlines yolr have, but, in our case, the 20 day
deadline to take legal action is approaching even more rapidly
than yours.

Is it possible to inform us of where you are in respondj-ng


to our inquiry? Also, ily T assume that you will not object to
our seeking a lengthening of t.he deadline (assuming that is even
possible) if, by your actions or inaction, additional time is
needed to take 1ega1 action?
I stand ready Lo meet and discuss any and all issues at your
convenj-ence and at your office.
Mahalo for your courtesies.
Very truly yours/

Att,achment
cc: Thomas

'JAMES KAIVASHTMA
Tommy Waters Campaign
R

Committee, Chair

Waters

EX}IIBIT
-

Topa Financial Center, Fort Street Tower '745 Fotl Street, Suite 5OO ' Honolulu, Hawaii g6A - TEL 8OB.Z75.O3O0 . rAX eOA.275.O3gg

J,rurcs l(ew'sFrrM'
ALC

TRiAL CONSULTANT

Sender's Information:
Direct: (808) 275-0304
E-mail : ik@-ikal-c. com

November 10, 20L4

VTA FACSTMTLE & .S. MAIL

Office of Elections
820 Lehua Avenue

Pearl City, Hawaii


Attention

96782

Mr. Scott Nago


Chief Elections Officer

Re: Result.s of 201-4 General Election for


Citw and Countw of Honolul-u District

Dear Mr. Nago:

am writing to you as Campaign Chair and Counsel for the


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.
Tommy

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

Office of Electi-ons
10, 20L4

November
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
CONTACT TNFORMATTON:

lTames Kawashima, Esg.


.Tames Kawashima, Al,C
745 Fort Street, Sui_te 500
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

Committee, Chair

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 of

Copying,dissemination,or
thisinformationisintendedforthesoleuseoftheindividualand/orentitynamedastherecipientofthistransmittal,
ofthenamedrecipienthereunder. lfyouhave
distributionofthismessageoritsattachmentsisstrictlyprohibitedwithoutthepriorapproval
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

J.rwNS I{ew,tSI{IM.
ALC

TRIAL CONSULTANT

November

VA

1-3

Sender's Informaton:
Direct: (808) 275-0304
E-mai1: ik@ikalc.com

20L4

FACSTMTLE 6.

U.S. MAIL

Office of Elections
820 Lehua Avenue

Pearl City, Hawaii


Attention
Re

96792

Mr. Scott Nago


Chief Elections Officer
Result.s of 20L4 General Elect.ion for
City and Countv of Honolu1u District

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,

Att,achment
cc: Thomas R

JAMES KAWASHTMA
Tommy lriaters Campaign CommitLee,

Chair

Waters

Topa Financial Center, Fort Street

Tower'745 Fort Street, Suite 50O.Honolulu. Hawaii 96813.TEL 8O8.275.03OO.FAX e}e.ZTS-O3gg

J.ttrrns l{,twesrrrM'
ALC

lRIAL

November

VA

10,

CONSULTANT

Sender's Tnformation
Dj-rect: (808) 275-030,
E-mai1: jk@ikalc.co

20L4

6. U.S. MATL

FACSTM

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

Dear Mr. Nago:

am wrj-ting to you as campaign chair and counsel for the


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.
Tommy

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

Office of Elections
10, 2OA4

Novemer
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

time limits by other means if necessary.


Thank you for your time, patience and. service to the people
of Hawai ' i.
and.

Very trul !1 fourS,

<t^

JAMES KAI^IASHTMA
Tommy Waters Campaign
CONTACT TNFORMATTON:

James Kawashma, Esg.


'-Tames Kawashima, &C

745 Fort Street, Suite 500

Honolulu, Hawaii

968L3

(808) 27s-0304
(808) 275-0399 (Fax)

i k@i

lc

com

Thomas lrlaters
1130 Nimitz Hi-ghway
Sui-te B-299

Honolulu, Hawaii 968L7


(808) 354-La7s
t
atersl- @me. com

Committee, Chair

James Kawashima
From:
Sent:
To:

Subject:
Attachments:

Elections@hawaii.gov
Friday, November 14,2014 4:27 PM
James Kawashima
City and County of Honolulu, District 4
Letter to James Kawashima - November 14 2014.pdf

Hard copy to follow

ENHIBIT D
1

STATE OF HAWAII
OFFICE OF ELECTIONS
SCOTT T. NAGO
CHIEF ELECTION OFFICER

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

James Kawashima
From:
Sent:
Subject:
Attachments:

Elections@hawaii.gov

Wednesday, November 19,2014 2:03 PM


Response to James Kawashima 11110 and
oE-14-265.PDF

ilHIBI
1

11113114 Correspondence

STATE OF HAWAII
OFFICE OF ELECTIONS
SCOTT T, NAGO
CHIEF ELECTION OFFICER

802 LEHUAAVENUE
96782
www.hswll.Bov/lectlons

PEART CITY, HAWAII

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 2602 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

psge

GENERAL ELECTON 2014 - Stte of Hawall -Slatowld

Novsmbor 4, 2014

Prntd

SUMMARY REPORT

on:

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

.FINAL SUMMARY RPORT"


Stat Snalol Dlst 17

U,S. Sanalot Vacancy

Slo6 R6presentaliye, Dist

247 o1247

246,770
97.983

(O) SCHATZ, Brln


(R) CAVASSO, Csm
{L) KOKOSKI. Mlchal

86.Ayo

(D) NlSHllARA, Clarnc6

26.5%

ll'ICtEMENIE Rr

8,936

2.4yo

64.80lo
27.5/o

s73
2

Blank Votes:
Ovgr Volos:

43%

15,774

Blank Votsr
Ovgr Votes:

8,312
3.531

of

7 o7
(0) SOUKI, Joe
lR KPOl Crsl Kllslhe

7.6v.

Elank Voles:

0.oo/o

OvrVoles:

6,369
2.716

60.870

73
5

8.3%
0.1%

3,522
r.66

't,5%

0.0%

Sfat Senator, Dlsl

l8

Slale Roprssenlatyo, Olst r0

U.S. Represanlalve, Dsl I

I
113 of'113

93,360
86,415

(D) TAKAI, Mark

lR) DJOU. Chrlos


Blank Volss:
Ovr Vols:

51.2%
47,40/o

2,365

1.3./6

58

0.0%

(DlKlOANl, Mcholls
(R)KlM, Denns C.H.
lL) BANA Rvnd lll
Elank Vole6:
Ovr Vots:

of 0

10,253

54.6%

(D) MCKELVEY, Angur L.

7,345

39.1l.

lR MARTEN. Chh M

389
769
I

2.1ro

Bank Vot6s:

4.1/o

Ov6rVots;

ll

Slslo Saralor, Ol
134 of

141,998
33,624

(O) GABBARD, Tulsl


(R) CROWLEY, Kewlka

Elank Votes:
Ovr Vol6:

(D) SHIMABUKURO, Mallo S.L.

17.5%

lR kLJ Terc L

6,078
2.868

(O) lNG, Kani6la

64.870

ll I BROK Pl

30.6%

433
6

Blank Voles:
Over Vols:

3,7./o

11

4
6 ol5

'134

2.5%

66t
7

Govanor and Llaulanant Govarnot

Blank Volosi
Ovr Vologi

181.065 49.0%
135,742 3A.f%
42,525 11.1Vo

6.3S3 1.70/o
2,998 0.8vo

431

l ARIANFF Grru lkblr


BlankVotes:
Ov6r Vol6s:

11,838
'1.860

8,50/0

16.2%

s08
1

l.aolo

8lnk Volos:
Over Vglesi

377
10

0.10l"

11

13,814 /0.%

Jil N.

4,625

1,073
4

Blank Vot8:

Ov6rVolos:

20 .7o/o

852
7

6.90/.
O.1o/o

11

(D) KEIIH-AGA!AN, Gll S, Coloma

I,Itg

64.r%

lRl KAMAI(A. Jo

4,149

27.Vo

BlankVots:
Ovr Vols:

1,172

7.8%
0,1%

t0

of 0

(R) DUBOIS, Jard P. (Pka)


f KAAHIll

1.196

9.4'/.

1,349

't0.6yo

rn. Kkrhil

BlEnk Vots:

OvrVoles:

13

56.80/.
23.0/o

0,1%

614

Mark M,

578
2

Blank Volgs:

OwVoto6:

of

f5.11o
17.4y.

1,452

WlNRl. Erlc Drk

6.9%

(D) GALUTERIA, Srlokwood M.


lR I FTHFM Chi

BlankVotos:
OvrVoles:

(L) . LIBRTARIAN

6,426 53%
4,544 37.8o/.
1,046
10

5.10

5,367

67.3%

1,892

23.7%

(O) TOKIOKA, Jsmss Kunano


R

YDR SIv

of 5

717
1

9.0%
0.07o

(O) MORIKAWA, Dayn6tto (Dee)

5,320

6,8%

lR| FRANKS. Vlctorl {Vlcklel

1,A12

22.70/.

836

10.570

0,0%

Slank Votes:

OvaVolE:

State Representative, Dst 16

f
/l FGF|

Bir

ol7

5,076

69.9olt

997

13.7%

all f

Fr.d F

371
3

Blank Volos:

OvrVotss:

.2

BlEnk Votes:

OvsrVole:

o16

5.1o/o

0.070

Stats Reprsontallva, Dst 17

4 al4
State Re prec ntallva, D i sl 4

JOy

A,

lR THOMAS. Cru
Blank Vols:
Ov6r Volos:

4.337

68.0%

'1,719

26.9%

319
4

5,0%
0,10/c

7,5?3
2,665

(R) WARO. Gsn


lDl STtIMP Chrs

412
6

6lank Voles;
Ov6rVotes:

71.6%
24,30
4.1%
0.10h

State Represenlailve, Disl 18

4 ol4
Sfal Rgprosontsfye, Disl 5

(R) BATEMAN, Dave


fl I A ANNF .l A
Blank Vologl

OvorVot8:
5l16

3,712
2,3E9

253
282
3

ol8

55.9%
36.0%

Blank

Voli:

OvrVotes:

6,884

62.0%

lRl HALVORSN. Sussn Kehsulnl

3.473

31.370

738
4

6.6%

Blsnk Voles:
Over Volss:

4.20/.
0.0%

Stale Rpresanlatlva, Dst 19


ot3
(D) KOBAYASI'II,

Bertrand (86rt)

(R) MATHIEU, Vlotorla Ellzaboth


of 5

3,23 s0,t%
2,334 37.1vo

'f3s
3

IL HIGA, AIhonv
Blak Vol8:
OvarVolgs:

5,404

91.6%

1,924

21,7%

783

6.6%

713
I

0.t%

2.20/.
0.0%

.10h

(R) - REPUBLICAN

(G) . GREEN

0.09/"

3.Solo

Raps6nlallva, Olsl 6

IRIVAIENZUEU. Kllv

(D) HASHEM, Ma Jun

6.lc/o

(r) - TNoEPENoENT

0.16/o

,5

Sfalo Repressnlal,vo, Dsf 3

(D) LOWEN, Nlcola


'10 of 10

21.4./.

738
I

0.ov.

5
Stt Senlor, lst 12

1,736

5
g

(D) CREAG/N, Rcherd P

7,210
2,916

(O) BAKER, Ro

OvrVotog:

of 5

69.4%

0.0olo

'I
Slale Serlo/', Oisf 6

0.0%

6,817

Slsle epresentalvg, Osf I

(O) SANEUENAVENTURA,

11 ol

K-

Blank Vote:

5.50/6

4 ol4
Stal Senalo Disl 5 Vacanay

(D) KAWAKAMI, D6rok S.K.


Rl HMANAWANUI- Jon8thEn

Sfale Repressnlarve, Olsl

(R)olcKsoN.
72,3Yo

OvorVotos:

23.71

0.00/0

12 ol 12
{L} SCHILLER. Alain

1,174

(D) ONlSHl, Rlchard H.K.

8,842
2,536

Blnk Voles:

11 ol

lll
1.89t

12,OY.

lR POHLE. Riherd H.

Stata Snator, DIst 24

(D) NAKASHIMA,

76.17c

20.0%

50.4%

0.0%

8,896

0.0%

46.0%
3.6Vo

016

,639

5.319
4,854

12.6%

1,247
0

(D) YAMASHITA, Kylo T

State Represnlalve, Dsl 14

ol9

State SenatoL Dlsl 4


(D) INOUYE, Larrain Rodeo

Owr Vols:

78.S70

12 ol 12

Blank Votes:
Ovr Votag:

Bank Volesi

lRl DANNER. Kllomana Mlchsl

Slle Senfo/,.Dlsf 3
(D) GREEN, Josh

Gir

lR'l FALE. Rlchard L66

(o) foKUDA,

I
(O) KAIIELE, Gllbsrl

(o) RrvIERE,

ol9

'1,950

0.1t

9.5%
0,1%

Stle Rprsonlalive, Disl 12


Sfatd Senlor Dist 23

(D) rGE / TSUTSUT


(R) A|ONA / AHU
(I) HANNMANN / CHANG
tr } DAVIS / MARI IN

o:14

4,926 70.80/
1.362 19.6%

Blank Voles:
Ovr Votss:

4.8T.
0.'1%

0,0%

247 o'247

0.3%
0.1%

0.0%

2l

75.8%

4,592
7,018
82

fL KENI- Jo

of 5

20.1%

534

Slate Represanlatve, Dsl


U.S. Reprcsentatlve, Dist

Slafa Senator, O/sl

30.80/,

{N) - NONPARTISAN

(D} = DMOCFIATIC

6.0"to

GENERAL LECTION 2014 . Stat6 ol Hawall


Novomber 4, 2014

Pg 2

Sttwd

Prlnlsd on: 11/05/2014 al 01:26:20 am

SUMMARY RPORT
.FINAL SUMI\ARY REPORT"

Slal6 Roprosorrlve, Disl 20

Sffe Reposorlalive, O6t 33

Slst Raprasntallv, Dlsl 45

4 ol4
{D) SAY, Calvln K,Y
(G) 8ONK, Kolko
lRlAl I FN .ftdla F

4,621
2,047

52.6%

(O) KONG, Sam

2330

lRl HELSHAM. Robrt C.. Sr

1.791

20.40,/!

322
3

Blank Vots:
Ovf Vots:

6,526
2,346
1,032

Blak Volar

(R) CHEAPE MAISUMOTO, Laurn

3,06e

70,8%

23.7%

lo

1,175

27,1%

91
f

2,1c/o
0.0Ye

4
R)

MAUTAI. Larle Kuul Lanol

4,128
1,183

2A2
1

BlankVot6s:
Ovr Vole6:

o14

74.1%

(D) TAKAYAMA, Grosg

IRIAGUSTIN Jacl

21.2r/o

Blank Vol8;
Over Vol6:

4.7Vr

5'471
3,569

58.370

(R) POUHA, Fskl

38.0%

ll FNIMANA. Kent K.

342
4

3.6%
0.00/o

2,58
2,818

49.1%

28s

4.7./

0,1%

Blank Vol6:

OvffVoli

48,10/

0.0!
Stdlo Rpr'sentalivo, Dd 4A

Stale Reprcsatatve, Dst 22

6 of6
3

2,623
1-929

(D) BROWER, Tom


lR GRACF .lanaf M

265

Elank Volssi

OvrVole6r

of 3

54.4%

(o) TAKU[4], Roy M.


lRl POTI. LuAnn M.

40.0%

Blank Vot6s:
Over Volos:

5.5%
0.0%

3,578
2,023

0.9%

269
4

4,6%
0.1./.

34,40/c

slale Rapresantatva, Dist 24

4 ol4
(D) BELATTI, Olla Au
Rl AMSfERDAM. C. Keui Jochn
glank Volos;
Ovor Volsl

(R) FUKUMOTO CHANG, Blh


rD I FE Merlv B

4,465

64.1%

1,7A4

25.6%

Blank Voles

716
2

103%

OvrVols:

6 ofo
(D) KEOHOKALOLE, Jarotl K.
(R) KUKAHIKO, Eldon L.

5.443

55.7Vo

3,670

37.6.h

(L) TAKAYAMA, Kaimanu

199

2,00/4

lN) NAIPO. Kan

t03

1,1%

345

3.5%

Blnk Voles:
Over Voles:

Sfala Rpresnlt v6, Dl 36


64.57o

s.034

33.3%

'195
6

0.t%

42

14,2%

1,719

20.1%

483
3

0.00/.

of 3

5,E7E

2.1%
0.10/o

0.o1/o

Srsle Repesgntt'ye, Dst 50

4
{R) THIELEN, Cynlhia
lDl BRO4AN. Hollv.

ElankVots:
Ovsr Volos:

Stale Reprcsenlatve, Dlsl 37


State Reprcsentativa, Dsl 25

o'f

5.7%

4 ol4

5.209
2,324

(D) LUKE, Sylvia

fRl l-AM. Ronald Y.K.

423

Elank Volosi
Ovor Votos:

5 ofs

(D) YAMANE, Ryan L

7,26'1

72,47o

65.57o

iR SVRCI4. Emll

2,254

22,5o/

25.2%

474
2

BlnkVolos:
Ovor Vol8:

5.3%
0.0%

0.0%

lR HlKlDA. Wvn

3,858
1,788

sAlKl, Scott K,
ETic B.

353
3

Blank Voles:

OverVols:

64.5%

3.11
't,915

(R) McDERMOTT, Bob

lD MARTINEZ. Ros6

29.6%
6.90/"

0.1%

Slale Representafyo, D/sl

4,745

(D) OHNO, Takashi

lR) FOWLER, Mx R

",652
206

Blank Votss:

vrVobsl

of 5

62.4%

203
0

2,2%

3.5%

247 of247

0.1

wAlHEE, John O.
AKANA, Rowena M.N.

4 ol4

AHU lSA, L6l (Lslnahla)


TRASK, MllllnlB.

138,452
't23.860

12.5%

r13.181

10.2%

102,819

9.301o

8.3%

2,441

47.4Yc

AKINA, Ksll'i

92,247

(R) JREMIAH, Bryan E.

2,178
s56

34.86/o

McINERNY- Hv

74,960

2.7%

Blnk Votes:
Ovor VolB:

0.10/o

't68
5

0,070

NumbrTo Vol For 3

(D) LOPRESTI, Matlhew

34,9%

33,5%

AI-Laea Trusle

36.4%

4l

State Representallva, Dlsl 27

E4.2To

o14

80.0%

't84
7

Blnk Votss:
Ovr Votos:

of 6

5,881
3,070

Over Vots:

4
o17

I
(D) LEE, Chrls

Blanl Volos:

Slate Rpresantatlva, Dlsl 26

State ReNasanlalive, Disl 51

4.70/o

Stdte Reprcsntatve, Dst 40

IR) MARSHALL.

4 ol4

af 3

Sffe Ropresontlyg, Di.9f 35

(D)

Blank Vot68:
Ovaf Votes:

Slate Represanlliy6, Disl 47

Sff Reprsntaliye, Df 34

Nlsl-llMoTo, Scott Y.

iTAGAOAY. Mlch61 Ydo

0.070

Sfato eprosontaliv, O/st 21


(D)

of 6

6s.87

10.4%
0.1%

OvfVotos:

3.7"/o

of 6

18.20/"

2,7%

Blank Votes:

11.2%

6.8%

462,807

102

4't.7%
0.0yc

247

oU1

OvrVols:

0.t%
Maui Rsdnl Trusta

Slate Rpresentalva, Dsl 28

Slale Rapresentatva, Ost 42

4
3,196
1,536

(D) MlZUNo, John M.


f

R) KA,APl.J.

Cle Kauhlwai

'160

Blnk Votes:
Ovgr Votsi

on4

65.3%

(D) HAR, Sharon E.

31.4%

lR) MOgES. Suk

3.3%
0.1%

Elank Vot6s:
Over Voles:

5,133
2,073

223

'l

of 3

LINDSEY, Carmen Hulu

69.1%
27.9%
3.0%
0.0%

87

23.6%

154,966 41,9%

Blank Votos:

10't

Ov6rVolos:

0.0%

Counclmember, Dst 5

Slale Represenlailve, Dlsl 31

State Reprcsentatve, Dist 43

3,698
1.450

(R) JOHANSoN, Aarcn Llng


lD SHARSH I l

288

Blank Vot6B:

OvrVol:

3 ol3
5 ol5

of 6

68.0%

(R) IUPOLA, Andra P.

26.7%

lD AWAN. Krn Lei

53%

Blnk Volesl
Ovr Volos:

0.0%

2,628
2,096
111

58.1"/o

41.4%
2.2%
0,1Y0

PALEKA. Danel K., Jr.


EDWAROS HUNI.

Tifhnv

50.270

259

Blank Votosr
Ov6a VolEl

Counclmomban Dist

4,722
2,340

211
2

Blnk Votes:

OvrVot6s:

of 2

64,9%

(D) JORoAN. Jo

2,7n3

56.070

32,20h

{c) GAIS, Codric Arueg.

1,025

22.0%

2.goh
o.ovo

fll

15.5%

FRNZEL. Allen IAL


Elank Votes:
Ovsr Vots:

3.6%
0.0%

3
2

3 of3
(D) ICHIYAMA, Llnda E.

44.2%

Stale Representatlv, Dlst 44

Slate Repreentatve, Disl 32

lRrlAVil I Mr.laAnn

2,319
2,045

206
4

4.4%
0.1V6

WLLE, Margarol
GN7l FS Rld S

3,192
2.171

266

Blnk Votos:
Over Volcr:

of 3

56.flo
38.80/.

1.7%
0.0%

MayoL County of Mau


34 of34
ARK WA,AlanM.
PALTIN Tr

fml

Blank VolB:

OvgrVotss:

(L). LIBERTARIAN

(I).

INDEPENOENT

(R). REPUBLICA

(G). GREEN

(N). NONPARIISAN

25,435
18,162

55.3%
39.5%

2,372

6.2/,

14

0.0%

(o) = oEMoctlATlC

GENERAL ELECTION 2014 -

Strate

olHawaii

Pag6 3

Stelowdo

Nov6mb6r 4, ?014
Prlntod

SUMI\4ARY REPORT
"FINAL SUMMARY RPORT"

Councllmber

Counclmenbar (Easl Mau)

MAUI: Councll: Atfordable Housng Fund

34 of34
CARROLL, 8ob

27,071

58.90/0

NlKHll ANANDA Nl.k

11.730

25.50/"

BlankVolos:

7,162

15,6%
0.0%

2D

Over Vol:
Co

uncll rnobet (Wa sl M a u )


34 of34

COCHRAN, lls
BUENCONSJO.

Ka'ala

Ovr VotaBr

Cou nclmmber (Wa

lu

7.40h

Blank Votes:

KANESHIRO, Arry

1,97'l

7.10

OvrVoto6:

KULll, KipuKal L.P.

9,985

5.9%

YUKIMURA, JoAnn A.

8,941

5.3%

S[

,730

5.2o/o

CHOCK, Mason K.,


FURFARO, Jay

8,165

4s%

11.00/o

SRUN,

t20

4.8%

Blank VoteGi

4,4%

Over Votes:

COW0N, Fellcla

1,917

4.7v6

gYNUM, Tim

7,502

4.5%

DCOSTA,8lly
I ARANIO Tla

7,243

43%

5.885

3.4.4

8,

42,048

Blnk Vt8:

OverVol:

17.5%

25,00/o
0.00/6

8.5%
0.1%

34 ol 34
YES
NO

8,076

Mhu.

3,915
29

MAU I : Cou ncll : Pe n alti s

PERRY, Dry 0.

12,608 27.4%

28

25.0

12,357

40,5%

8,060

r1,507

KAGAWA, Ross K,

18,792

55.0%

60,4%

NO

7.4%

4,gflo

25,28s

30,532

13.147

,267

0.0%

34 of34
YES

RAPOZO, MI

HOOSER, Gary L.

34 of34

Elank Votos:
Ov6r Vol6s:

Nqmbor To Volo For: 7

48.1%

ku-Wa he s-Wal ka pu )

VICTORINO, Mchal (Mke)


BLACKAURN. Joseoh G.. ll

16 of 16

22,124

5,04f
20

BlnkVol6s:

on: 11/06/20t4 t 0l:26:20 an

17,689
21,355

46.4%

6,901

15,0%

38

MAUI: Vote r lntatve: Genetically


Engneered Oryanss

0.11/

34 of 34

23,062 N,Zrh
22,005 47,9%

YES
NO

872
24

Blnk Vole6:

0.1%

38.5%

OvgrVotE6:

1.9%
0,,1.h

CounalmembaL Dlsl lV
Co u nc il mm b

r (Kah u I u i)

17 of 17
34 of34

OZAWA, Trvor

GUZMAN, Don S.

23,8s6

51.9%

WATERS. Tommv

PONTANILLA.

15,719

34.20h

Blank Voles:

6,373

13.9%

OverVgtes:

Jo

Blsnk Votos;
Over Votsa:

29

KAUAI: Relatlng to the Dpalmont of


Persarngl Sgv,ces

16,371
16,324

44.1%
43,9%

YES

4,451
16

12.0%
0.0%

NO

16 of 16

glnk Vols;
Ov6r Votes:

o..loh

13,825

57.50/6

6,038
4,174

25.1%

|f.4Vo

0.0%

Counclmember, Dst Vl
Coun al lm mbe r (So uth Mau)

21 ol21
34 ol34

COUCH.oon

F7PRlCk .lh

Slank Votos:
Ovor Volos;

24,990

54.3%

13.042

30.3%

7,029

15.30/o

22

FUKIJNAGA, Carol

17,C79

54.7o/o

AIONA. Sam

11,541

38.3%

Blank Volos:
Ovq Vot6s:

8.9%

16

D,1YO

16 of 16

Councl lmembe t ( Ma kaw ao-Ha lku- Pala)


34 of34
WHlfE, Mlko

23,042 50.1t

MOLINA. MIKo J.

16.398

35.770

Elank Vote9:
Ova Vol6a:

6,504

14.1Yo

17,691 73.6'h

YES
N
Elank Voles:

0.0%

2,f75

11.5%

3,569

14.8%

Ov6rVols:

CON AMEND: Relatng to Dsalosura of


Judcial Nolnes

39

2,U2

KAUAI: Ralalng lo Chatler Amdndment

247 01247

302,953
41,308

YES
N

25,177

Blank Vot6s:

6.8%
0.0%

116

OvrVl6:

KAUAI: Relatng to Recll Ballots


16 ol16

Z.U7o
1120/o

11,747

YES
N
Blnk Vols:

73,0o/o

2,156

9.0%

4,138

't7.2.to

OvrVotss:

0.1%

0.00

0.00/

CON AMEND: Rolallng to Agilcuftural


Coun cilma mb

(U pco u ntry)

rlorpnbos
34 of34

BAISA, Glodys Coolho

26,1

17

56.8%

BRUCH. Courtnv A.

12,819

27.90/o

Blnk Votos:
Ovor Volosr

7,025

22

BlankVot3:
OvsrVoles

28.546

62,1%

17,437

37.9%
0.07o

Councilmember (Molokai)
34 ol34
l\/Fll

qlt^uHa

glnk Vols:
Ovr Vols:

YES

38,8%
0.0%

N
Blank Votos:
Over Votes;

Mayon County of Kaua


14.B

b1.17

CON AMEND: Ralatng to Dams and


Resryo/s

8,1S5

34.1%

YES

16 of 16
CARVALHO, Bsrnrd P., Jr
6ARCA- Duslin
Elsnk VotE6:
Ovor Voles:

1.

ts8
2

4.4%
0.o%

TOTAL REGISTRATION

708,830

TOTAL TURNOUT

369,554

52.30/o

PRCINCT TURNOUT

180,507

25,so/o

AESENTEE TURNOUT

189,047

28.7.h

61

0.0%

72.8/o

5.1./.
0.1%

OVERSEAS BALLOTS CAST


OVERSEAS TURNOU

247 01247

160,238
192,247

52.OVo

6.802

4.5Yo

2f

0.1./.

'I

43.4./o

Ovrsse8

39

Ovrsoa8 2

247 ol24'l

106,377

N
Elank Vols;

177

NO
BIank Volesi

Ov6rVol8:

(R) - RPUBLICAN

7,8./o
0.07o

43 of43

34,973
11,148

YES

28.80/o

28,984

HAWAI'I: Tam of Appontnt for the


County Cle*

(l) - INOEPENDENT

GENRAL

234,0',t6 63.3%

OvorVolog:

{L). LIBERTARIAN

Z2.O%

306

CON AMEND: Rlatlng to Eaily Childhd


Education

41.40/"

247 of247

18,884

Blank Volos:
Over Votss:

17,733

8.5%
o.1%

81,408
288.858

YES

24.250

412Yo

258

OverVols:

REGISTRAION ANO TURNOUT

50,2%

31,543

Blnk Vots:

CON AMEN: Rlatng lo Slro Juslcas


and Judges
34 of34

RiKI

15,3%
0.0%

Qouncllmmber (Lanal)
HOKAMA

247 01247

r5,531
152,222

YES

9.7%

4,025

12

(G) . GREN

22.20t

8.0%
0.0/o

(N) " NONPARTISAN

(D).

DEMOCFIATIC

o
ct)

'

)0)c
f

o o o o

o o

c\l

()

o o

o o

o o

o o o

o o o o o

C)

o o o

ro

C\I

c)

o o

c)

0)

c
o)
U'

-o

(.)

o)
(

o O
L

o
c
o
o
L

+t

o)
(

5
of

-=

E
-c
EDO

q)

: Ec)
f,c
=c)o

tt

+.

+>
o

C\

o o

cq)

E()
o>

c)

c',
(U
L

(.)

o o o

r=

(tr

oct

C')

0)

EC

(g

G)

C)

c
'

c)

c)

c{

C\

C\t

co

C)

\f,
C)

c
'

:)

o
L

fL

0-

c)

xoo

CU

fL

(')
L
o O O

c)

o o o

()

g)
o ()

sf

o C\I
o cf)
o

C\I

o
U)

.-oc
g

ftr
bo

o9
(d!F

o
I

l'-

C\

OI
l'r

co

OI
N
r

OI
l*

O
I

00

C\
I

co

O
co
r
r
I

o)
r

O)

o)
r

\t r
O

o)
r

()
I

RI

o ro
I

C\I

N c\

C\.1

C\

ot

(o

OI
C\I

OI
C\J

James Kawashima
From:
Sent:

Subject:
Attachments:

Elections@hawaii.gov

Wednesday, November 19, 2014 2:52 PM


Fw: Response to James Kawashima 11110 and
oe-14-265001.pdf

11113114 Correspondence

Attached please find response with updated Statewide Summary


-----Forwarded by Elections/DAGS/StateHiUS on tL/

: Elections/DAGS/StateH
Date: ILl L9/2OL4 OZ:O2PM
From

19 /

2OL4 O2:47PM -----

iUS

Subject: Response to James Kawashima Lt/LO and 11/13/14 Correspondence


(See attached file: OE-14-265. PDF)

HffiIBIT
1

STATE OF HAWAII
OFFICE OF ETECTIONS
802 LEHUA AVENUE

SCOTT T. NAGO
CHIEF ELECTION OFFICER

96782
www.hwai, gov/elections

PEARL CITY, HAWAII

November 19,2014

Mr. James Kawashima


745 Fort 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 2602 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 Officer

STN:AT:cr

oE-14-26s

Enclosures

c:

Tommy Waters
Trevor Ozawa
Bernice Mau, City Clerk

cENERAL ELEClON 2014 - Slate ol Hawai

Page

Statewde

Novmbr4.2O14
Prnted

SUMMARY REPORT

on: 1 1/18/2014 l 0511 1:19 p

-FINAL SUI!4MARY REPORT''

Slafo Senlo Olsf I

U.S. Sonator Vacancy

State Ropresentalve, Dlst

247 ol 247

246,827
98.006

(D) SCHATZ, Brn


(R) CAVASSO, Cam

B6.B%

26.s%

8,941

rL KKOSKl. Mchael

8,316
3,531

(D) NISHIHARA, Cla.onco


ll\ Cl F[.,lENl. Rr

2.4%

(D) SOUKI, Joe

27.50

lR) KAPOI. Cranston Kaleialoha

Slafe Sen/o4 D,sl

0.00/0

l8

736
5

8.3%

3,522
1,66

61.{t%

30.8%

0.1lo

113

ofIf3

s3.390
86.454

51.2%

(D) KlDANl, Michello


(R) KlM, Dne C.H.

47.4%

lL BANDA. Ravmond. lll

2,366

1.3o/o

58

o.oo/o

10,257
7,348

54.60/6

39.1%

389
769
9

Blnk Voles:

Ov. Voles:

ol8
(D) MCKELVEY, Angus L,
Rl MARTEN. Chvn M.

2.1/D

4.1o/o
0.00,6

29.1%

534
6

Elank Volog:
Over Votes:

of 5

9.3!o
0.1%

State Ropresentatlve, Dst 11

U.S. Represanlalivq, Disl

ll

Slae

SeDsfor Oisl 2t

4 ol4
5

134 ol 134
{D) GABBARD, Tulsi
(R) CRoWLEY, Kawka
ILI KENT Joe

142,010

75,8o/o

(D) SHIIVIABUKURO, Mailo S.L.

33,630

17.9%

lR KU ferci L

4,693

2.5%

Blnk Voles:

BIank Voles:
Over Votes:

7,020
82

3.7o/o

Ovef Votes:

6,079
2,870

of 5

4,8o

(O) lNG, Kaniela

lll

BROCK, Pal

30.60

433
6

Blank Votos:
Over Voles:

4.6o/

4,926
1,362

70.8%

861
7

9.5%

6,639
1,950
1,174

68,070

19.6%

0.f%

0.1%

Slalo Ropraentatve, Dst 12

0.0%

Stare S6nao/: Dlsl 23

Governor and Leutenan( Govarnor


247 ot247
{o) tGE / TSUISUI

18't,106

49.00

(R) ATONA / AHU

135.775

36.70/o

42,934

11.60/o

(I) HANNE/lANN i CHANG


I INAVIS/MARLIN
Blnk Votesi
Ovr Voles:

6,395

1.70/o

3,001

0.8y"

431

Stalo Senalo4 Df

(D) RIVIERE, GI
TRIFAL RichsrdL

(D) KAI-IELE. Glbst

lL ARIANOFF. Greoory (Kobala)

78.9oi6

12.60l

1,247
6

Blank Volsl
Ovr Volos:

8.50/o

8,896
1,891

70.80/"

1,073

8.882
2,536

O.1/o

5 Vacancy

tslank Votes:
Over Vots:

9,770
4,149

(D) KEITH-AGARAN, Gil S. Coloma


(R) KAMAKA, Joe
Blank Votes;
Over Votesl

11

ol9

6,314

15.1"/o

1,452

17.40h

578

6.9%
0.0%

ll FoGFL Frd

10

o.'to,/

Sfalo Serator, Dsf 6


I

7,21o
2,916

(O) BAKER, Roz


(R) DUBOIS, Jared P. (Pik)
/l KAAHIn Rronson Kkhna

56.81o
23.0/o

1,196 9.40/o
f,349 10.6%
13 0.10/0

Blank Vol6i
Ovor Votes:

Slale Sanalor, Dlst

2
10 of 10

(D) GALUTER,A, Brckwood


IRI LETHEM, ChTIs

6,428
4,545

Nl.

Blk Votsl
Over Voles:

(t) - LBRIARIAN

(D

53.41o
37.8o/o

1,046

8.71o

10

0.1"/o

. INDEPENDNT

/R\YnFR

Stv

Blank Vols:
Over Votesl

5,367
1,892

of 5

67.3%
23.7'/o

717
1

9.07o
O.0'/o

6
7 ol7

(D) MORIKAWA, Daynotle (Dee)

5,075

ts9.g'lo

lRl FRANKS Mclr lvickel

997
All

13.70h

Blsnk Vols;
Over Votos:

11 2o/o

371

5.10

0.00/o

Slale.

of 6

5.320
1,812

66,8%

835

10.5%

22.1vo

0.0"h

Represenlalva, Dsl 17

4 ol4
Slate Reprcsenlatve, Dst 4

Rl THOMAS. GaN
Blank Voles:
Ovr VolB:

lDl STLJMP. Chris

7,535
2,555

Blank Votss:
Ov Votss:

432
6

(R) WARD, Gone

4,337
1,715

68.0%

319
4

26.9%
5.00
0.10/.

71.6Yo
24.3o/o
4.1o/o

0.1%

Stat Representatve, Dist 18

4 ol4
Slate Represonlatve, Dist 5

I of I
(D) CRAGAN. Richard P.
(R) BATEMAN, Dave

lll

LALANN. Jon A.
Blnk Voles:
ver Voles:

3,712
2.389

253
282
3

Blank Votes:
Over Voles:

(R)

. REPUBLICAN

lRl HALVORSEN. Susan Kehaulan


Blank Volel
Over Votes:

36.0%

4.2.h

31.3%

739

6,'I%

0.0%

0.0vo

(R) MATHIEU, Vclors Elzblh


of 5

I HIGA Alhv

60.1%

Blank Votes
Ovr Volss:

37 .1o/o

't39

2.20/o

0,0%

(G) - 6REEN

62.0%

Stata Represenlalvo, Ds 19
(O) KOBAYASHI, Berlrand (Bort)

3,423
2 ,334

6,888
3,474

3.8%

Slale Represnfaflve, Dlsl 6


(O) LOWEN, Ncole
lRl VAI FNTtlFl , Kellv

(D) HASHEM, Mark Jun

55.goh

5
1

4.1%
0 1ol"

Stato Representalve, Dst 16

Blenk Votes:
Over Voleg;

27.51o
7.8/o

(O) TOKIOKA, Jam6s Kunane

Stata Representatvo, Dist 3

44.7./o

1,172

21.40h

738
6

(o) SANBUENAVNTURA, Joy A,


11 of

of 5

69.4%

0.0%

4 ol4
D81

Blank Votes:
ver Vls:

5,617
1,73

20.76/o
6.90/6

0.0%

Stalo Representative, Dst 15

72.3%

852
7

{RI HOOMANAWANUI, Joathan K,

5.50

Slalo Represontatve, Dist

(D) ONlSHl, Richard H.K.


(R) DICKSON, BII

12 o 12

(D) KAWAKAT\,i1, Derk S.K.

23.'toto

A.A"/o

State Sonalot, Disl 4

Blnk Votes:
Ovr Voles;

13,817
4,626

11

18.20
7.8/o

12.0o/o

Blnk Vlesl
Over Volesl

76.1%

908
1

20.0%

0.10/o

11 of

12 ol 12

(D) INOUYE. LorinB Rodoro


ll SCHII IFR Alin

Blank Vots:
Over Votes:

016

Slate Reprsontalive, Disl 14

(D) NAKASHIMA, Mark lV,


ll W|NRT Erc Drk

Elank Vols;
Over Volesi

lR) POHLE. Richard H.

4.0V0

0.0lo

Stat Snalo, isl 3


(D) GREEN. Josh
/l I I AST Mchl L

50.4%

Slalo Senator, st 24

ol9

1,850

5,320

10

{R} oANNER. Kilomana Michael

1,638

(D) YAMASHITA. Kt/IE

3.6%

Blank Votes:
Over Voles:

(D) TOKUOA, Jill N.

ol9

4,8s7

0.1o/o

Sfafo Sonao.,

60.8%

sfte Represenlve, Dist 10

Blank Vols:
Over Votss:

Blank Votesi
Ovsr Volos:

7.6o/.

5,359
2,715

0.00/"

U,S. Reprssentalve, Dist I


(o) TAKAI, [rrk
lR D.ltl Chrls

7 ofl

64.00/o

973
2

Blank Votesl
Over Votesl

4.3%

15,77-t
'152

Blank Volesi
OvrVotes:

E of 8

(N)

- NONPARTISAN

of 5

5,466
1,925

61.67o

763

8.6%

7t3

8.070
0.1%

(D) = DEMOCRATIC

21.70/.

cENERAL ELCflON 2014 - Stat of Hewaii


November 4, 2014

Page 2

slelwid
Prntod

SUI\4MARY REPORT

on;

1/18/2014 al 05:1'l:'l9 pm

..FINAL SU/MARY REPORT'

Staf Represenfafve, Dl 45

Slale Reprsnlalive, Disl 33

Slata Raprsentalive, Dist 20

4
(D) SAY. Calvn K.Y

(c) BONK, Keiko


lR ALLEN .hrli
Elank Volas:
Ovr Volss:

o4

4,624
2.047
1,795

52,60h

(D) KONG, Sam

23.3h

(Rl HEISHAM. Robert C,. Sr

322
3

3.7"/.

20.4o/o

Blank Volesl
Ovr VolB:

6,527
2,347
1,032

(R) CHEAPE MATSUI\IOTO, Lauren

3,070

70.8%

23,70

/Dl MAGAAY Micheel Ydso

1,1'16

27.1%

10.470
0.10,6

3
4

262

Blnk Vols:
Over Votes:

f 4

74.Ooh

(D) TAKAYAI,IA, Gress

lRl AGUSTIN .ii

21.2o/o

Blank Votes:
Over Votes;

4.7'/o

5,473
3.569

s1

2,10/o

0.00/o

4 o4

of 3

58.3%

(R) POUHA, Fek

38,0%

(D FONOIMOANA. Kont K.

342

3.60

0.0lo

2.999
2,816

40.1%
46.1Vo

200
6

Blank Vot6s:
Over Votel

4.70/o

0.1%

0,0%
Slaa

Slalo Reprsentatve, Dist 48

Roprosenllvo, sl 35

State Represenlatva, Dst 22

2.626
1,929

(O) BROWER, Tom


(R) GRAC. Janot M.

Blank Vots:
Ovr Volesl

of 3

54,5%

(D)

lR POTI. LAnn M

40.0%

265

5.5%

0.oo/.

TAKUiI, Roy M.
Blank Votesl
Over Votes:

3.57E
2,023

269
4

(D) KEOHOKALOLE,

34.40k

(R) KUKAHIKO, Eldean L.

4.6o/o

(L) TAKAYAMA, Kaimnu

0,10h

l) NAIPO Ken

S|ate Rapresentalvo, Dst 36

4 ol4
4,465
1,784

(D) BELATTI, oela Au


Jochanan

716
2

Blnk Votl

Over Votes:

64.'tvo

(R) FUKUOTO CHANG, Beth


lD I FF Merilvn I

25.6Vo

Blank Votesl
Over Voles:

10.30/o

Jarell

00,9%

K.

Blank Votos:
Ovr Vot8:

Stale Represenlalive, Disl 24

KaU

6 of6
3

IR) AMSTERDAM. C,

Blsnk Voles:
Over Vots:

State Represenlallve, Dlst 47

Stale Represenlatve, Dsl 34

4,129
1.1a5

of 5

65.8%

0.00/0

State Representalivs, Dsl 21

(D) NISHIMOTO, Scott Y.


lR) MANUTAI. Lro Kuulei Lnqi

of 6

5,880
3,034
195
5

of 6

55,7o/o
37.60/o

199
103

2.00/o
1.1

346
I

3.5%
0.lo

of 3

64.5%

Slale Rapresanlatve, Dist 50

4 ol4

33.3%
2.1o/o

(R) THILEN, Cynlha

O.1o/o

lDl BRMAN Hllv A

0,OYo

Blank Vole6:
Ovr Vote:

State Represenlatve, Disl 37

Slale Reprosonlaliva, Dist 25

5,444
3,677

6,346
1.719

483
3

74.2o/o

20.1%
5.6010

0.0%

4 ol4
5
5,215
2,328

(o) LUKE, Sylva


(R) LAM. Ronald Y.K.
Blank Votes;
Ovr Votos:

of 5

65.57o

(D) YAMANE, Ryan l.

lRl SVRCINA. Emll

29.20/o

423

5.3%

O.Oo/

8lnk Vols:
Over Vots:

1,264
2,294

72.4%

474
2

4.7o/.
O.o,to

Slle Raprsssnflivo, Osl 40

4
7 o7
3.858
1.768

Blank Voles:
Over Volesl

354

5.9h

O.1o/o

64.5%

(R) MCDERMOTT, Bob


(D) MARIN2. Ross

29.6%

Elank Vot8:
vr Vols:

3,'t6t

60.0%

1,915

38.4%

184

3.o/o

0.1%

State Roprcsenlative, Dst 27

4 ol4
5

() LoPRESTI, Mailhew

(D) OHNO, Takashi

4,746

62.4Yo

(R) JEREMIAH, Bryn E.

lRl FOmER. Max R

2,654

34.9%

ll BFRG T

208

2.70/o

Blsnk Volos:
Over Votes:

Blank Votes:
Over Voles:

0.10/o

203
0

64.2%
33.5%
2.2o/o

0.0%

At-Large Truslee
247 01247
Number To Vote For: 3

134,474
123,891
113,202

12.5%

AKANA, Rowena M.N.


AHU lSA, Lei (Lena'ala)
TRASK, Mililan B.

102.33

C.30

WAIHEE, John D.

2,983
2,17a

4l,4Yo

AKINA, Kll'l

34 .6o/o

McINERNY. HaNev

956

'15.2%

168

5,E84
3,071

14

Slal RepreEenlatlve, Dl 41
5 of

6 ol
(D) LEE, Chrs
{R} HlKlDA. Wvn T.
Blnk Voles:
Over VoteEi

Stale Ropresontative, Dst 26


(D) SAlKl, Scolt K.
IR} MARSHALL. ETic B.

State Reprssentatve, Dist 51

22.9Yo

2.7Vo

Blank Vole6:
Ovr Vols:

92,261
74,s71
462,938
182

11.20
10.20/0

8.3Vo

6.8%
41.7%
0,0%

0.1%

Maui Resident Trusteo


Slale Representatve, Dis( 42

Slala Ropresantatve, Dist 28

247 o247

3 of

4 otA
3,'197
1,54O

(D) MIZUNO, John M.


tR KMFU Crol Keuhlwi

160
5

Blank Vole6l
Ovor Vols:

65.21/o

(D) HAR, Shron E.

31.4'/o

Slank Vots:
OverVofos:

3.30/o
O.1o/o

5,134
2,073

69.1%
2?.90h
3.00/o

,1

LINDSEY, Carmen Hulu

WFDT M,harlni
Blsnk Voles:
Over Voto6:

127,288 U.40k
87,248 23.6To
155,005 41.9%

101

0.00/o

0.0olo

Councilmembr, Dist 5
Slate Representatve, Dsl 43

Slata Rapresentalva, Dist 31

5
3,698
1,452

(R) JOHANSON, Asron Lng


(D) SHARSH, Lo
Blank Vote6:
Ovor Voles:

3
5 of

of 5

68.00/o

(R) TUPoLA, Andri P

2,829

5ti.1qlo

26.7%

ID AWANA. Kr Linni

2,096

41.60/

289

5.3o/o

0.00/o

Blank Votes:
OvBrVoles:

11'l

2.2o/o

0.1%

PALEKA, OanBl K., Jr.


EDWARDS HUNT. Tifanv
Blenk Vole6:
Over Vols:

of 3

2,319
2,045

50.20/.

259
1

5.6%
0.0%

44.2%

Counclnmbar, Dsl9
State Rapresentatve, Dst 44

State Represenlalve, Dlst 32

3 of
(D) ICHIYAMA, Lnda .
lR) TAGAVILLA, l\rrcia Ann R.
Blank Votes:
Ovr Votsl

3
2 of 2

4,724
2,340

64.9%

(D) JORDAN, JO

32.2V

(c) GATES, Cdrc A6ug

211

2.Soh

0,0%

lll

FRENZEL. Allen IAL)


Blenk Vls:
Over Vot6s:

2,703
1,025

722
20
4

58.0%
22.00
15.5o/o
4.40/o
0.10

of 3

WILLE, Margart

3,'t92

56.7%

GN7AI FS Rnnld S

2,171

38.60/0

266
1

4.7%

Blk Vote:

OverVotes:

0.0%

Mayor, Counly of Maui


34 of34
ARAKAWA, Alan M.
PALllN. lamr lTm)
Blenk Vol6s:
Over Volosl

(L)

. LIBERARIAN

(I)

. INDPNDENT

(R)

- REPUBLICAN

(G) - GREEN

(N). NONPARTISAN

25,435

55.3%

18.12 39.5%
2,372
'14

(D) = DE[,IOCRATIC

5.20/o
o.00/6

GENERAL ELECIION 2014 - Stal f Hawai


November 4, 2014

Pag 3

Statewide
Printd onr

SUMMARY REPORI
..FINAL SUMMARY RPORT"

Counclmamber (Easl Maui)


27 ,O7

CARROLL, Bob
NIKHILANANDA Nck

Blank Voles:

1,730

25.5lo

7,162

BUNCONSEJO. Ka'ala

5,047

Blank Votes;

Qou n ci I me nb

t (W

l u ku

'11,971

7.1o/o

KUALll. KpuKai L.P.

9,985

5.9olo

YUKIMIIRA. JoAnn A.

8,041

5,3%

cHoCK, Mason K,, Sr.

8,730

5.2olo

48.IYo

HOOSR, Gary L.

6,257

4.9o/o

YES

40.9o/o

FURFARO, Jay

8.165

4.9!o

NO

11.Oo/

BRUN, Arthur

8,120

4.A%

Blank Vote6l

PERRY, Darryl D.

8,076

4.8%

verVots:

COWDEN, Fsllcla

1,917

4.7%

BYNUM. Tm

7,602

4.5o/o

DoCOSTA, Billy
IARANI Tin

7,243

4.30h

5.665

3.41

34

0.00/6

34 of

Blank Votes:
Ovor VoteE;

34

25.289
12,606

55.0%

8.060

f7.5oi6
0.1/

28

25.Oo/a

KANESHIRO, Arryl

-Wa i ho e -W ka p u)

VICTORINO. Michael (Mke)


RIACKBIIRN .lshG ll

,507

7.4'/o

20

Ovr Votss:

1 1

12,387

0.0%

22,124
18,792

69.4%

NO

KAGAWA, Ro66 K.

34 ol
Elre

30,532

7.8o/o

Counclmembor (West Maui)

cocHRqN,

34 of34
YES

13,147

20

OvorVoles:

Numbr To Vot For: 7


RAPOZO, ivlsl

5.60lo

05:11:10 pm

16 ol 16

34

58 ,90h

1,/18,/2014 t

MAUI: Council: Affordable Housing Fund

Caunclmember
34 of

27.40/o

42,046

glank Vots:
Ovr Vol6si

25.0Y

3.915

Blank Vots;
Ovr Votesl

29

8.50/.
0.10/o

MAUI: councl: Penalls


34 ol 34

17,689 38.5%

21,355
6,901

46.4y0
15.0%
0.1./o

38

I : Vole r hitative: Ge nolcally


Engneered Organsms

M AU

34 of34

YES

23,042

50.2%

NO

22,005

47,90/0

0.09/.

Blank Votes:
Over Votos:

872

1.9o/o

24

0.1.

CouncilmembeL Dist lV

Counchnmbor (Kaltulu)

17 0t 1-l

34 of
GUZMAN. Don S.
PNTAN|| I A .l
Blank Votes:

23.898
15,719

51.9o/o

6,379

13.9%

29

over Vots:

34

OZAWA, Trevor

WARS. fommv

34.2o/o

I<AUAI: Rlathtg lo lhe epalment


P6rsonn6/ Sruicos

16,374
16,s33

43.90

YES

4,455

12.00h

NO

Blnk Vots:

1B

Ov6r Vol6s:

44.O%

0.00,6

ol
57,50/o

6,0s8 25.t%

4,174

Blsnk Voles:
OverVotes:

o.1o/

16 of16

13,825

17%

0.00/0

CounclmembeL Dst Vl
Cou nclmotnbar (Soul

h Maui)

21 ol21
34 of

COUCH. Don
FITZPATRICK. John

24,590
13.942

N4.

7.029

Blank Voles:

Cou

n c ihne m be

54.3%

f,549

36.30/0

5.3%
0.0%

OverVolos:

r ( M akaw ao- H a ku- P ai a)

23,042
16,398

50.1'/o

6,504

14.10/o

3S

r ( U pco

un

2,844

BAISA, Gladys Coelho

26,111

12,A19 27.g%

7,O25

22

Ov6r Votesl

56.4%

41,315
Blank Votes:
Ov6r Voles;

34 ol34

28,546
17,437

Blank Votes:
Over Votes:

62.10/.

NO

28,250
17.733

Ovgr Votes;

6.80/

110

0.0%

8.50/6

258

YES
NO

CON AMEND: R1lating Io Early Childhood


Educalion

61.41"

YES

38,6%
000

NO

11.'Vo

247 01247

41,428

22.0.h

265,012

72.Ao/o

5.1%
0.10k

160,271
192,285
Blank Vot6si
veVls:

43.40/0

16 of16

Elank Volos:
Over Vot61

4,136

14,688

61.170

CON AMEND: Relalng to Dams and


Resorvoirs

8.195

34.1%

YS

4.8%
0.0%

16 of 16

1,.158

Blank Vots:
Ovr Vot:

Blank Votes:
Ovr Voles:

TOTAL REGISTRATION

706,890

TOTAL TURNOUT

365,642

52.30/0

PRECINCT TURNOUT

180,535

25.5olo

ABSNTEE TI.JRNOUT

'189,107 26.8%

OVERSEAS BALLOTS CAST

overseas

61

Overseas 2

o.'tvo

247 o1247

NO
Blank Votesl
Over Vole6:

{L) - LIBERTARIAN

(I)

. INDEPENDENT

(R). REPUBLICAN

2E.E%
7.80/o

177

0.0%

HAWAI'L Term of Appontmanl for the


Counly Clork
YS

63.3lo

28,999

43

of 43

34,973

69.70/o

11,148

22.2/

4,025

E.0o/o

12

0.oolo

(G). GREEN

O.OYo

GENERAL

4.5o/o

234.063
106,403

9.0%
17,20/o

REGISTRATION AND TURNOUT

Mayor, Counly o Kaua


CARVALHO, Bernrd P., Jr
BARCA Dusll

73.80/o

2.156

NO

52.Oo/

16.814
268

00%

17,747

YES

OVERSEAS TURNOUT

247 01247

14.8%

KAUAI: Relalns to Racall Ballols

O.1o/o

18,806
306

Blank Votesi
Ovr Vols:

0.0%

34 of34
Blank VotBs:

25,189

31,561

Blank Volos:
Over Votes;

3't.9/o

Councilmember (Moloka)

CRIVELL Slcv Hlm

.2%

247 01247
185,576 s0.2%
152.247 41.20/r

YES

QQN AMEND: R6/lng lo Slale Jusces


and Judges

RiK

11

0.0%

Aouncilmomber (Lanai)

Blenk Vote:

73.670

2,775
3.569

Over Volesl

247 01247

NO

15.30/.

NO

17,691

303,022 82.0%

CON AMEND: R'lating lo Agricultural


Enterprsos

8RL,CH. Courtnev A.

'16 f 16

YES

ol

O.10/

lry)

Blank Voto:

8.9%
o.1%

16

YES

35.70lo

34 of34

HKAMA.

AMEND: Relalng to Dsclosuro


Judcl Nomnees

BIsnk Votesl
Ovgr Voles:
c hnetnbe

54,tVo

AIONA. Sam

coN

WHITE. Mike
Ml INA Mike J

1t,342

Blqnk Votes:

34 of34

Cou

FUKUNAGA, Carol

30.3%
1

22

Ovor Votos:

34

KAUA: Ralating to Chaer Amendmenl

(N) - NONPARTSAN

(o) = DE[4OCRAllC

0.0%

0)

(t)
(
L

0)
=( oc

o
0)
F
c
o
tt)

_o

c)

O ()

c\I

C)

C)

c!

C\

:l

o
(t)
(

o O O O O

o o

o
o
c
o
0)

c)

+>

.9
q,
i5

o)
(U
L

l<
(

.i=

8
o=

cDo

cl

C)

() O O

o o

C)

o o o

C)

c)

co

c)

() ()

c!

C\J

|f,

c\l

cl,)

C)

sl-

q)

-o

o
(t)
(d
L
C)

E
:)f
ocD

=c)o

E(J
o>

1J=
(E
U,O

oo

c)

o)
(
L

o
Eg
() :f
c
'

cf)

c\l

o
L

fL

c)
L

fL

'

o
()
o

ll
0)

o)
(g
L

c\
O

cl.)

o () o o

<.

C\I

cf)

c\l

r
o

nt

c\l

fL

(\I

c\I

c
.-o
(dfi

=
fr
bb
"e8
F

O
lr
I

lr

$ r
O o o
l- t-
r
r
r
c)
I

c!

o
I

OI
co
r

O
co
r
I

O
I

o)

OI
o)
r

o)

O)

()
O

cv

C\

O
I

OI

c\

C\

c{

(o

STATE OF HAWAII
OFFICE OF ELECTIONS
802 LEHUAAVENUE
SCOTT T. NAGO
CHIEF ELECTION OFFICER

PAFL CITY, HAWAII 96782


ww, hwaii. gov/lgctions

November 20,2014

James Kawashima, Esq.


745 ForI Street, Suite 500
Honolulu, Hawaii 96813
Dear Mr. Kawashima:
Enclosed is an updated version of the overages and underages for the
districtiprecincts associated with your contest. The overage of two absentee mail
ballots in DistrictiPrecinct 22-02 has been reduced to zero ballots. This is the
result of two federal write-in absentee ballots that were counted but were not
initially recorded as received.
Very truly yours,

AARON H. SCHULANER
General Counsel
AHS:AHS:as

oE-14-266

Enclosure
cc

Tommy Waters
Trevor Azawa
Bernice Mau, Clerk of the City and County of Honolulu

E)(}lIBIT d

o)

(t)
(

c)

0)

=(d 1c

c)

o o

c\l

o o o

O O

C\J

o o

O O

C)

cr)

:f

0)
0)

e)
(t)

-o

CT)

(d
L

0)

O O

o o

C'
L

+>
(tx
{r,

at

u)

i5 i5

.cl !o5
cDo

go
o)>
E
3=

o)
(
0)
l< -tf

0)

.o

o
(f)
(
c)

o o

C)

c\

c\I

tr)

c!

O c)

c)

o
o
(f)
(d

a)
(t)

0)
#a)

FE
rDo
o

()

c
3 l

!t=

GI
l-

c)

cr)

o ()

CN

C)

c
'

fL
P

c)
L

tu

()

tr
'
o
L

o
o
o

o
(:t)
(

o O

C)

cf)

CN

a)

() O o

\t'

C\I

co

O O

N O

O O

c{

c\l

fL

c
.-o
'
B

fr
bb
o9

fq iE
(no

O
It*
r
I

OI
N

o
I

c)
fI

OI OI

v
()

r
I

C)
I
O)

c!

cf)

o)

OJ

OI

rt

c)
I

o)

O
O

C\T

c{
c{

C{

c!

o
I

(o
CN

Report of the
Election Oversight Committee
on the Audit of the
1998 General Election

March 31, 1999

Published by:
The Auditor
State of Hawaii

EX}IIBIT

I+

Election Ovetsight Committee Membors


Mrlon Higa, Ghairperaon
State Auditor. State of Hawaii
Ms, Higa was appointed as State Auditor by the 1992 State Legielature for
an eight-yaar term. The Auditor is a constitutiona[ position with broad
powrs. Shs leads a staff of 30 whose mission s to aasure the
accountability of governmenl agencies for thsir policies, prograrne. and
expenditurae of public funds. The offico conducts a large variety of audits
and studie al ths requo$t of the Legislaturo and at its own initiativ. The
office contracts w'tth csrtified public accounting lirms for solectsd financial
audits and conducts all audite under generally accepted government auditing
standards. Tha oflice ropoils ite findings and recommndations to the
govrnor and the Legislature to gve policy makers timely, accurate, and
objective information for docision making,
Panelope Bonsll

Director. Olfico of Election Administration


U.S. Fedoral lection Commission.
Tha Office ol Election Administration is responsible for the lull realnr ol
olootion activities including accss to the ballot, votr registration and
educaton, ballot tabulation, computer security, canvassing. recounts, and
legislation. As direstor, Ms, Boneall promotes effective election practices
throughout the couhlry through reserch, educational programc. and advice
to stato and local administrators. Sho managed the multi-year national
program to davelop standards to improve ths eccuracy, integrity, and
reliability of computer-based voting systrns. Sha guided national
implementation of the National Voter Ragistration Act ol 1993 and
promulgated regulations nd stt reporting requirements. Before joining tho
Fedoral Efeetioo Commission, she waa tho Supervisor of Elactions for
Alaske's South-csntral Region and Director of Planning and Rosaarch for the
Alaeka court system, She has also worked as an election adminietration
consultant in 1 5 states and as tha Eaet Coast managef of an election
sy6tom6 vondor. Ms. Bonsall holds undergraduate and graduate degrees
f rom Gorge Washingtoo Univorsity.

Mr. R. Doug Lewir


Director, The Election Centsr
Since 1994, Mr. Lewis has directedthe Election Csntsr, a national nonprofit
organzation tht supports ths elections and voter ragistration professions.
Ths Centar ie tho principal organization ln America lor training and
continuing education of voter registration and slection officials, Under his
direction. lhe Center has estblished the Profeesonal Education Program and
the first Code of Ehics for administrators. He manages th C6ntor'e
resealch and consulting services on voter registration, regulations,
legislatiorr, and slsctions administration aa wsll as conferancas and
workshops to improva methods of oparation and officiancy of elections. Ho
dirocts the Center's Voting Systems Program for the National Associatlon of
State Election Dirsctors that qualifies voting systems hardware and software,
through thair voluntay testing by nationally recognized indspendant testing
laboratorios. as meting or axceeding the faderal Voting Systems Standards,
Mr. Lewis hae also had xteneive oxperietrce in the political arena. He has
managed etate campaigns for Congross, U.S. Senato, govarnor, and U.S.
prasidency; ssrved as oxecutive directo of a political party in two different
states; and was responsible ao an elaction official for two etatewida
primares, ln addition, he has had mor t hn 1 5 years of oxporience ae a
mangmgnt consultant.

State ol Hwai

Th Audltor

Executive Summary
Report of the Electon Oversght Commttee
March 1999

Aer both the 1998 primary and genal elections, candidaEs raised questions
about irregularities in voting and discrepancies in the resuks. A court-ordered
rnanualvotecountrwealedthatsevenprecinctscanningmachineshadmalfinctioned.
The resulting controversy, combined with the change to a new electronic voting
syster4 led to srupiciurs of fraud or incompetence, In order to restore votr
condence, thelegislatr:rein SenateConrurentResolutionNo.3l, S,D. I ordEred
the chiefeletion ofcer to conduct a complete audit oftlre 1998 genetal election
results. Tlrevendo ofthe electrorrie voting sysem, Electronic Systns & Softwae
@SeS) agreed to underwrite the oost of the audit. To cnhancs lhe credibility of
the audit, the Legislatue established an Election Oversht Committe composed
of a rcpresenfative of the Federal Election Commissio4 a representative of the
Houston-based Election Center, and the State Auditor. This report from the
Election Oversight Cfinttee preseirts its findings and recommendations on the
objectivity and accuracy ofthe audit andthe electronic vote counfing process.

Findings

The Committeefoundthattheauclitdemonstratedthattheresults ofthe 1998 general


elections were accuiate and trusq,orthy. The audit was conducted professionally
and with integrity in accordance with ostablished procedures. These procedutes
conform with frrndamentat princles of vote counting in a dcmocracy. Thc
Committee also found th improvements can be rnade in state lection law and to
strengthenthe Office of Blections.
The audit indicatesthat disorepancies inthe 1998 goneral election were confinedto
swen malfunctioning precinct sanners. The overall re.rults wre accurate and the
audit reveals no change in the oucome of any race. The I 998 general electim has
now been counted at least three times: in Novsmber 1998, in the 1999 audit using
high speed inftared central counters and fhen using high speed visible ligtrt central
counters. Finalty, manual audits were done in selected races and precincts. The
results from all the counts were very similar, varying from each ofher, forthe most
'rlYe
prt, by less than I percent.
believe the ES&S has satisfied its obligation to the
State to resolve probloms raised by its equipment during the 1998 elecons.
The audit was conducted with integrity. Priorotle audif tlre Office of Elections
issued a manual of procedures that would be iruplemorted for the audit. Thesc
procedures were adaptations ofones used duringthe 1998 general eleotion, The
manual identifiedteamsthat would be responsible for various aspects of.the audit,

theirrole andresponsibilities, andtheptocsdures theyhadtofollow. Wefoundthat


the tearns operated as instructed by the manual. Open participation, witnessing of
the process, and monioring rvere maintained th'roughout by a tearrr of ocial

Stata of Hawail

Th! Audltor

obsewers. The offioial obssrvers ar reprcsentatives of politioal parties and


organizations liketho League ofWomenVoters and the rnedia. Many oftho official
observors ae enpericnced in elections and in computer operations . TheAssociation
of Clerks and Eletion Offices of tlawaii made up of county clorks and registars

from each ofthe counties also monitored closely all operations. Watchers and other
interested individuals were allowed to view the operations from behind a rail.

To improve the State's electoral process, we believe that the Legislature should
establishataskforce toconductacomprehensive studyofthe State's electionlaws.
Manyarepredicatedonapunchcardsystemthatisnolongerviable. Newprovisions
ae also needed in aeas relating to recounts and votirrg systems. ln addition, nerv
rules are neetled to implerxrem the lan, properly. A reviwv of state election laws
should include the question of tlre placement of the chief election officer and tlre
Office ofElections. Currrtly, no one maintains oversightof or is accourtble for

thechiefelectionofficer, AnElectionAppointnentPanelhasonlythopowertohire
and fire the chief election officcr. We believe that an elected official should appoint
theohiefeleotionofficor. lnmostotlrerstats,thisisthesecrearyofstatewhohas
functions simila to those of Ha$raii's lieutenant govemor. To maintain the
continuity ofthe Office of Elections, certain technical positions in the office should
be made civil service positions.

To further strengt}eir the Office of Elections, we believe that the State's ele,ction
officers should be given opportunities for continuing professonal education.
Worlahops, seminars, and contct with fsllow election administraors on the
mainland would do much to holp tlrem become more familiar with technological
adrrances, fcderal rcquirements, system requirements, and potential problems posed

byvarious types of voting eqnipnrent.

Recommendations

'We

l.

recommend that the Legislature:


Estblish aaskforceto conduct a comprehensive studyoftho Stte's election
laws. Tlre tsk force should be composed of the chairs of Senate and House
Cornnittees onlhe Judiciary, the chiefeiection officer, rtpresentatives fromthe
Association of Clorks and Election Ofcers of Havva, the Blection Advisory
Committee, the political parties, ad other organizations active in tlre electoral
process

2.

liketle

L,eagrre

of WomenVoters.

Thelegislature should lsoconsiderwaystopromoteprossional devement


oflhe State's election staff.

Marion M. Hlga
State Audtor
Stats of Hawail

Office of the Auditor


465 South King Street, Room 500
Honolulu, Hawaii 96813
(8081 587-0800
FAX {808} 587-0830

Report of the
Election Oversight Cornmittee

Published by

THE AUDITOR
STATE OF HAWAII

STATE OF HAWAII

OFFICE OF THE AUDITOR


465 S. King Street, Room 500
Honolulu, Hawaii 96813-2917

MARION M. HIGA
Slate Audltor
(808) 587-0800

FAX: (808)587.0830

Maoh 31, 1999

The Honorable Norman Mizuguchi


President ofthe Senate
State Capitol, Room 003

Honolulu, Hawaii 96813


The Honorable Calvin K.Y. Say
Speaker of the House of Representatives
State Capitol, Room 431

Honolulu, Hawaii 96813


Dear Mr. President and Mr. Speaker:

We are pleased to transmit to you our report on the audit of the November 1998 general election
as requested in Senate Concwrent Resolution No, 31, S.D. l.

We appreciate having been given the opportunity to serve the State in resolving the important
question ofthe integrity of the State's electoral process.
Sincerely,

.,2,*.h,

hrl/r*\

Marion M. Higa, State Alditor


Eleotion Oversight Committee

Offrce of Eloction
Election Commission

R.
Lewis,
The Election Center

Foreword

This extraordinary assignment afforded us the opporhrnity not only to

particate in what we hope will

be a rare and one-time epenence, but


also an opporhm to interact r+'ith a number of dedicated citizens and
oficials. We wishto elpress our appreciation forthe cooperation
extcnded to us by the chief elestron otficer andhis staffatthe Offrce of
Elections, the Official Observers, thevaious county election offrcials,
Eleotion Systems and Soffnrre rqrresentatives, and the many otlrer
individuals who gave us their pspectives on the State's electoral process.

'We

would also like to acknow'ledge the contribution of Ms. Diana M.


Chang, retired Deputy Statc Audir, who assisted us in research,
analysis, andreport writing. We couldnothave carried outtls
assignment withouther skills and, and more importantlg her total
comminsrt to our responsibilities under Senate Concurent

ResolutionNo. 31, Sente

aft l.

The Election Oversight Committec

Table of Gontents

Report of the Election Oversight Cornmittee


Bacorurd

Frndings and Recommendation ..............

Summary

22

Recommelrdations.......

23

Exhibits

Manual,{udit of the 1998 General Election Results ......6

Exibit2
Exhibit 3
Exhibit 4

Steps Taken By tlo Electir Oversight Cornmiee ........9


GerreraUotlA Election, Statewide Summary Report....
Comparison of General Election R,sults with Manual

Exhibit 5
Exhibit 6

Audit Results
Examples of Ballot Markings
List of Officiat Observers

Exhibit

ll

l3
t5

t7

vil

Report of the Election Oversight Committee


March 1999
a new electronic voting
system for the prfunary and general elections. Afte both the primary and

In 1998, the State's Election Office implurrented

general elections, candidates raised concerns about voting irregularities


and discrepancios, These charges, combined with the change to a new
voting systan and high public interest in closely contested racs, eated
considerable colrtto\rsy and suspicions of fraud or incompetnce.
manual vote count ordered by the State Supreme Court fheir revealed that
seven scanning machines used in the precincts had malfinctioned,
Newspaper polls showed that many voters had lost confidence in the
electoral process.

In orderto restore voter confidence, the Legislatnre, in Surate Concurrent


Resolution No. 31, Senate Draft l, otdered the chief elsction officerto
conduct a complete ard duly supeivised audit of tire 1998 gsneral election
results. Since the deadline for cor$esting the general eleotion had passed"
the attorncy general opined thatthe results of the audit would have no
bearing on fhe previously certified election results. Nwertheless, the
Igislature hoped that an audit would estblish whetler the 1998 general
electionhd intgnty and tnrstworthy results. Election Systems ancl
Sofuxare (ES&S), the vendor ofthe new electonic voting systerr agreed
to undernrite the cost of the audit.
To ensure the objeotiv ofthe audit and to cnhance ie crcdibility, tfu
Legislature established an Election Oversight Committee comprised of a
reptesentative ofthe Fcderal Election Connnission (FEC), a represeirtative
of the Houstonased Election Center, ad the State Auditor. This report
preselrts the Election Oversiglrt Comnri$ee's assessflrcnt of the audit
conducted by the chief election officer.
The objectives of the Eleotiou Ovorsight Committee were to:

Background

l.

Observe, review, assess, and report onthe objectivity and accuracy


the audit process, and

2.

Report findings and recommerdations onthe objectivity and accuracy


ofthe audit process and the elechonic votc counting process.

of

To give some perspective to our ndings and recommendations, the


lection Oversiglrt Comrnittce offers some bacround on relevant Hawaii
election law, voting systems and their operation in lhc 1998 general
election, the conduct of the audit by the chief election officer, and the
basis for the assessrnert by the Committee.
1

of thc El.otlon ovrlght commlttee

State

law

Article IV, Section 3, ofthe State Constitutionprovides for a chief


election officer who slull supervise statc elcctions, mrimizevoter
registration, and maintain data m voters, elections, apportionment and
districting. Cbapr 11, Flawaii Revised Stutes (FIRS), sets forth the
State's election process in grealer detit. ft allows the chief election
officer 1o delegate responsibil for sate elections on te Neighbor
Islands to the county clerks of the respeive counties. Other relevant
provisions are contained in Chapter 12, HRS, on Primary Elections,
Chapter 15, [IRS, orrAbsentee Voting, and Chapter 16, HRS, on Voting
Systems.

he Office of Elections
For many years, tlre chief election officer was the lieutenant govemor. [n
1995, the Legislature amended the lawto estblish a five-member
Blec,tions Appointment Panel with tfie powero appoint a chiof election
of;Ecer for a tsrm of four years. The governor appoints one menrber and
one each from liss submittcd by lhe president oftlre Senate, the speaker
of the Housg me,mbers of the Senate belonging to a party differeut from
that ofthe presidelt urd members of a party different from that of the
speaker. Panel mffrs serve aterm offour years and amaximum of
two terms. Tlre panel only has power to select nd remove the chisf
election officer. The Legislature also established an Office of Elections to
provide supportto the chief election offtcer. Borhthe panel and the chief
election of,Ecer axe attached to the Office of tlte Lieutsmt Governot for

aninistrative pulposes.

Precinct oflicials and wtchers


The law reires each preoinct to have a least three precinct officials of
which one is thc chairperson. The chairperson shall be ofthe same
political party as the govemor. The officials are sslectd from names
submittcd by all qualified political parties no later thzur 60 days prior to
the close of filing for any election. Should the nmes submittsd be
insufficient, the chief election offtcer rnay desipate additional precinct
officials. Precinct officials mustundergo a cours of instruction
conduoted by tho ohiofekrction officer and be certified by an instructor.
Eaoh political party is also ontitled to appoint watchcrs in each precinct
and polling place.

Ballots
PaTtVIII of Chapter I l, HRS, specifies the

ccmtents, arrangement

of

rlanes, ballot formats, rd the priuting of tle ballots. It details how the
nnmes are to be arranged and the side ofthe ballot on rvhich votcrs are to
desate their choice of candidates.

Rrport of lho Electlon ovcrclght Commlltoe

Vote disposition
Statc law provides for how votes are to be counted, and what to do wherr
thee are moe or fewer ballots than indicated by the poll books. Precrct
officials and the chief election officer are responsible for the proper
handling, disposition, and securityofrecords. The results ofthe election
aro csrtified by the chief election officer.

Recount provisions
Sestion 11-172, FIRS, providas that any candidate or qualified political
party or any 30 voters may contpst an election by filing a cornplaint in the
state Supreme Court. The coutest must be filed no later than 4:30 p.m. on
the sixth day after a primay or no later than 4:30 p.m. on the 20th day
following the general election. Thc ohallenger must firmish evidence of
fraud or vote overages or undorages that could cause a difference in
eleotion results.

Votng systems
Chapr 16 FIRS, definestwotypes of voting systems-a paperballot
system aud an electronic voting system. It mandas such specics as
requiring officials to record the number ofblank or questionable ballots in
a paper ballot system and to reject votes cast by a voter when the number
of votes exceeds the numbr of candidates to be elected in an elecbonic

voting system.

Voting systems and


opefatons

To assist election officials with assessingthe performance of iacreasingly


comple4 votingtechnology systffrs, Congress arthorized the FEC to
issuo national standards for computer-based s1'stems. In lanuary 1990,
the FEC approved performance and sting proceduros forpunchcard,
markseirse (OMR), and direct electronic (DRE) r,oting systems, a plan for
their implementation, and a process for evaluating independent test
autlorities to tcst the systems. The standrds set parmsters for I'oting
systems des aud a rang for performance. Currmtly, 27 stas have
udopfnd these FEC Vottng System Standards.t Pdor to purchasing or
leasing systn hardware or software, thsse states require thc vcting
equipment to have been subject to qualification tests by an independent
testing author. The qualification tests selectively e><amine fhe software
in depth; inspect and evaluat system documentation; testtlr hardrvare by
simulating sorage, operatioq transportations and maintrance; and
operate the system to test performanc,e undr normal and abnormal
circumstarices.
The Election Center, locaterl in Houston, Texa^s, is the secretriat for the
National Association of State Election Diresors (NASED) for aliSing
voting those systems that meet the FEC Voting Sjstem Standards. l

Feport ol thc Eleotion Ovarcight Qornmitlee

managos the qualifications testing and approval of voting equipmert

through nationally recognized independent testing laboratorics. Those


voting systenrs that meet the FEC Voting S)tstem Standards are designated
asNASED qualified.
The voting sysers lurdwae and sos,arc used inthe Hawaii 1998
primary and generai olections are NSED qualified. TIre State lEased a
systn from ES&S that counted pre ctnct bal[ots using a Model 100
visible light (VL) scarurer and absentee bIlots using a Model 550
infrared (IF) central counter. The Model l00s were used in all precincts
statewide; the Model 550s were used at each counting center on the
Neighbor Islands and at the Stte Capiticl inthe case of tho City and
County ofHonolulu. The results fromthe precinct and absentee ballots
were accumulated by ES&S's eleotionreporting system (ERS) to arive at
summary vote results. Tho Modcl I 00 precinct scarmr, the Model 550 IF
cental counter, andthe ERS are alt NASED qualified.

Conduct of the audit

For the audit, ES&S firnished tvvo types of high speed central counting
machines: (I) Model550 central countrs using infraretl 0F) Iight source
for scaruring and (2) Model 550 central counters using visible light (VL)
liglrt source for scaming. The Model 100 precin scruxers rvere not
used.

The Model 550 IF cenftal counters use tlp satne type of light source as
was used to co:uunrt absentee ballots at fhe counting ceuters during the
1998 ge,neral elections. They read ballots marked with carbon based
instruments, such as pencils. They areNASE qualied.
The Model 550 VL central counters ars new machires tat use the same
light source for scaruring ballots as was used bythe Model 100 preoinct
machines during tho general election. They read ballots marked by a
wider range of marking instruments including pencils, pens, and otlter
markers. ES&S recommendedusingttre Model550 VL csntral counters
for the audit since they would read the prccinct ballots in a manner similar
to thE Model I00s. However, the newer VL central counteis e nat
NASED qualified and were not used during the i998 gencral election.

Prior to the stari ofthe audi! the ohiefelection offrcer decided that the
official audit court would be based on results ftom the Model 550 IF
central counters for tluee leasorui: (l) they wete used during the
November 1998 general elecors for counting absentee ballots, (2)
SCR 31, S,D. 1 specically requested ttrat the audit begin $,ilh central
countrs using infrared ligbt, and (3) the Model 550 IF is NSED
qualified. Ho$'e\rer, the chief election offtcer gave ES &S the option of
also running all ballots on the Model 550 VL central counlers.

Raport ol th Elollon Ovsrelghl Commiltc.

Mnnual nudits
As a futhff clreck on the accuracy of the general election results, rnanual
audits were odered. The chief election officer decide4 and the Blection
Oversiglt Committee crcurred, that manual audits qtould be performed
on:
a

Six precincts that had previously been identified as having had


very close races-the vote spread betvtreenthe winning candidate
and losing candiclate had been I percant or less.

Any contests where tl varimce was I percent or greter betweur


votes ca,st for candidates in the November 1998 general election
and votes tallied by the IF central counters.
a

Requests for audits from county clerks or official observers.


Requests for

audi* fromth Election Oversight Committee.

Exhibit I shows the complete list of rnanual audits that was selected by
the Election Oversht Committee, the Office of Electiorx, and the
chairman of the oficial observ'ers.
a total of 16 contests and 72 precincts were manually audited.
Three rsndoi batches ofabsontee ballots from the City and County of
Honolulu were also manually audited. ln addition, because coucerns had
been expressed fhat the numbor ofblank votes forre governor's race was
abnormally low, te Eleotion Oversight Committee requested that a
sample of four Maui precincts be audited for btank votes in the governor's
race. This rvas done by running the blank votes through the VL central
counter and veriSing the results.

Alagether

The Electon Avercight


Committe

To monitor the audit, the Legislahue sought to fashion a committee with


recognized credibility. National expertrse was provided by representatives
fromtlre FEC and Tlre Election Center. Both Parelope Bonsall oftc
FEC's Office of Election Adrninislation and R. Doug Lewis of fte
Elction CEnter are knowledgeable about prevailing clection practices and
procedures nationwide. Local expertiss r1'ls furnished by MarionHiga,
ttre State Auditor. To lead its oversight effort, the members ofthe
commitee seleted Ms. Higa as its chairperson.
Penelope Bonsall has been the Director of the federal Office of Election

.&ninistration for alnrost 20 years. \[orking with election ofcials,


private vendors, and public interest groups, she managed the national
progr4mto develop standards to improve the accuracy, integrity, and
reliability of computor-based voting s)'stems. Her office servcs as a

ol th. lcron Ovrrelght Commlttes

Exhlblt

Manual Audit

of 1998 General Elections Results

Conteet/Candidstes
Ahu lsa / Chino
Kauai Councllmombor
Raoozo / Swain
State Senate Dlstrlct 23
Nakata / Pickard
State Rep. District 44
Auwae / Jones
State Rep. Dlstrlot 6
Rath / Tarnas
lrfadfion lnltatve.

47t

Selected by Election Oversight Committee

1-7

1?0 to 14-10
45-06;

46:

1-4;

Office of Hawalln Affalrs


Maui Trustees and Oahu
Trustees
State Bep. Dlstrict 47
Catalani / Dou
Maul Councilmember
Britton / Nishiki
Govelnor/Lt. Governor**
Cayetano / Hirono
Lingle / Koki
Peabodv / Bartlev

stato sonato Dslfict 4* +


Buen / Corboy
State Rep. Dlstrlct 1O++
Evert / Morihara
State Rep, Dlstdct 26+r

06:

1-7

1-4

09-07 and 12-01

Selected by Election Oversight Commttee.

07-03; 10-01; 16-02; 28O4t a2-08; & 60-03

Selected by Office of Elections as orre of eight


additional precnctsto be manually audited.

o7-03

Selectd by Office ol lections as one of eight


additional orecinctsto be rnanually audited.
Selected by Office of Elections as one of eight
additional Drcinctsto be manually audited.
Selected by Office of Elections as ono of sight
additional orecincts to be manuallv audited.
Selected by Olfice of Elections as one of eight
additional orecincts to be manuallv audited.
Selected by office of Electons to be manually audited
because of reports that Council District 2 candidates
were incorrectly printed next to David Murakami's name
{cnddat for State Rep}. No ballots found to
substantat reoorts.
Selected by Oflice of Elections as one of eight
additional precincts to be manually audited.

10-01

26-04

42"

42-OB

2*'

5GO3

5i*

21-01 and 25-O2

City Council Dstrict

47: 1-3t

48-01
44: 1-3

01-02; 01-05; 02-03; 0305; 03-08; 04-07; 04-09;


0$O3; 05-08; & 0-05

County of Hawaii
Yes Votes / No Votes

Dawson / Luke
State Rep. Distdct
Moses / Timson

27"Q2 and 44-Q1

Reason/Salected Bv
Selected by Election Oversight Committee and Ofice of
Elections - contost decided bv lo/ or less dlference.
Selected by Election Oversight Committso and Office of
Elections - conte.st decided bv 1% or less difference,
Selected by Elction Oversght Committee and Oflice of
Elections - contest decided by I % or less difference.
Selected by Election Oversight Committes and Office of
Elections - contest decided bv 1o/o or less difference.
Selected by Election Oversight Committee and Office ot
Elections - contest decided bv 1o or less difference.
Selected by Election Overslght Committee and Office of
fections - contest decided by 1% or less difference.
The Oversight Committee decided to audit 10 precncts
selected bv the Official Observers.
Selected y Offical Observers.

DIstrctrPrscncte+

27:

state Rep, Dlstrct 27

Aduia lHolmes

City Council Distrlct


{Francis / Mirikitanil
Blank Votes
Sttswids Contesls

Govenor/Lt. Govomot*
Blank votes

3 random batches of
Absentee Ballots from the
City & County of Honolulu
(1 absentee walk and 2

*'

Selected by Bussell Mokulehua, Official Observers


chairperson.

absentee mil),

07-06; 09'05; 08-03; &


1

1-04

Selected by the Election Oversight Committee to verify


the blank vote counts.

Source: Office of Electone, March 14. 1999.


'Total of 72 precincts manually audted.
I rThasc contastc do not includs absentce reults lo the disrriot/precincts lstsd'
'*.The ballotg from these precinct wero procesaad through the visible light cenrral counlor to verify lho blank votas ln thc
Govef nor/Lt. Govsrnor Gonlest.

Rspon of the Elcotion Ovcrsight Committo

cenfral cxcharge for rosearch and infonnation on all mattors rlating to


election administration. Prior to joinirg the FEC, she was a state slection

ofitcer in Alaska.
R. Doug Lewis is the Directo of the Election Center based in Houston.
The Election Center is the secretarit for NASED n aliSing voting
systems tlrtmeet federal Vottng Slstem SYandards. The Election Cerer
is the only nonprofit organization with a ftll-time staffthat specializes in
voter registration and elections administration^ It providos consulting
servicos, continuing professional education, researc and workshops to
member governrnents and elestior ofrcials. Mr. Iwis also has extensive
ererience in manqglrrg state and national campaips for Congress,
govemor, and the U.S. preside,ncy.

Marion Higa, the Sta Auditor, provides her recogpized experience in


auditing and oversight, her knowledge of auditiog principles, and proper
nranagement of govemment programs^

Criteria used
In carrying out its oversight rnctioq the Comnttee based its findings
ard recommendations on prerrailing electisn stndards nationwide and
those criteria that would satisfy roasonable people that the audit was

conducted with integr and would producc rosults that are reliable, Both
Mr. Lewis and Ms. Bonsall have expert knowledge of the limitations of
voting s''stens and acceptable standards of election administration. Their
knowledge of prevailing and acceptable practices guided the comnttee's
findings and recommendations. They emphasize lhat no perfect election
has eve been condued and that no perfcct voting system ests. By their
natlre, elections are participatory oarrying withthem all thc hazards and
ine,fficiencios that exist in a democracy. Thousands of paid volunteers are
marshaled to rork ortreme long hours under intense pressufe, constrt

scrutiny, media attention, and timeconsttaints. Mistakes will occur.


The Conrmittee was also guided by rvhat election experts endorse as
fundanental principles of vote counting in a democracy. Amorlg the most
important principles are the following:2

Accuracy - esablishing clear procedures and manuals, adequate


sfftraining, clear audit tails of ballots and checking and
rechecking methods.

Transparency - encouraging openpartication and witress of the


procoss andthe results ofthe counting process.
Prafesstonalism - having thoroughly trained, nonpartisan, and
committed eleclion ofticials,

of thc Elcqllon

Committre

Securtty - ensuring the secudty ofballots through numbering


systerns, tamper proof seals, and other methods.

ccountabiliry - establishing clear responsibilities for each stage


ofthe process and procedures for complaints.

&luity - ensuring llrat the counting is fair and proper.

Steps taken
To cnsurethatthe audit undertaken bythe Office of Elections mst
prevailing standards, the Election Ovsight Committee reviewed
irformation on the background ofthe audit and monitored the audit from
the initial brieng by to chief election officer to the conclusion of tlre
manual audits. The Committee tookthe stqrs listed in Bxhibit 2.

Findings and
Recomrnendations

The general election

esults wete accurate

The Election Oversight Commitee found that:

The audit dononsEated that the results of the 1998 general elections
were accurato and trustworthy.

2.

The audit was conducted professionally and with inegnty in


accordance with established procedures.

3.

Some irnprovements can be made in state election law and to


strengthenthe operations of the Elections Office.

We concluded that tlre audit conducted by tlre chief election offrcer


dsmonstrated that the general election results were accurate and reliable
The audit was tlre first of its kind in llawa and, as far as we know, the
most extensive inthe history ofthe United States. The 1998 general
election has now been counted at least three times:

Firsq in Nol'ember 1998.

Second, in March 1999 on high speed IF central counters.

Thir{ in March

1999 on high spced VL cental counters.

Fourth, a numbcr of races and precincts lsve had oe or mor


marual lecounts.

Each ofthe above counts produced results that either exactly or vsry
closely matohed the other counts.

of th

Commttoe

Exhibit 2
Steps Takcn By the Electlon Oversight Commttss

1.

Reviewed all complaint letters relating to the 1998 etections

2.

Reviewed testimony and other relevant documents and llterature

lnvestigated areas of potential vulnorabilities in audit mothods or practices.

4.

Listened to concerned citizens, legislators, observer groups, official watchers, elections


officials, representatives o{ ES&S and the news media.

Utilized knowledge of recount procedures, and questions that. occuned in recount situations
in other jurisdctions to assess procedures established for the udit.

Ouestioned elections officials and observers about procedures followed in the 1998
elections and administrative safeguards implemented for the audit.

7.

Observed operations and special tests performed on equipment,

8.

Performed testlng and situation anatysis of precinct level, district level, county and
statswdo lsvels.

Ordered manual counts to examine a variety of conditions including geographical


representaton and level of races in both general and OHA lectons.

10.

Examined ballots first hand to determine how voters marked ballots and to assure ourselves
that ballots wre counted conectly.

11.

Selected samples of precincts as surprise audits as recommended by the official observers,

12.

Met wth county clerks, election officials and official observers to assss election
procedures and practices.

13.

Used comparison team data compiled by the independent accountng firm of Arthur
Anderson to compare and assess the accuracy and reliability of the 1998 general election,

14.

Directed election staff and vendors to resolve and verify any questionable data.

Report of tha Elocrlon

Commltta

Stntewide summrT reporh


ES&S aclnowledged that seven of its prcinct countrs rnalfirnctioned on
election day. The audit indicates that disorepucies in tlre 1998 general
election were confined to sevflt malfrrnctioning Model 100 precinct
scanners. The results ofthe November general election were accurate anil
the audit reveats no change in the outpome of any contest.
To determine the accuracy oftlre gareral election tenfts, ES&S retained
tho independentpublic accounting firm ofArthur Anderson to develop
tables comparing the 1998 general election resnlts with rcsults from the IF
anct VL central coufrers. In developing tle comparison tables, Arthur
Anderson performed agreed-upon proceduros in accordarce with
standards established by the American Institu of Certified Public
Accourtants. The comparison reported statewide and countywide results
for each contesl bythe total votps cast, including absentee ballots and
handcounted damaged ballots that could not be proessed on the central
countsrs. These tbles and other more de{ailed data can be found at the
Ofcc of Elections.
In this report, we illustate the accuracy of the results in Exhibit 3, which
is a copy of the first page of the Statewide Summary Report we received
frorn Arthur ,nderson.

Exhibit 3 compares the originatly reported results from the November 3'
1998 general electiou (Setion A) with the results from the IF cenal
countets (Section B) and the results from the VL csntral cunters
(Section C). The data show tlrc nunrber of votes by rvhichthe three
counts varied and the percentages by which they varied. Column I of
Section B shows the Maroh tally from the IF central counters' Column 2
is the tally for manually counted ballots that could not be processed
through the cefitral counters because they wore damaged or impropedy
maked. Column 3 shows thc totals from columns I ard 2' Column 4 is
ths difference bstween the Novenrber 3, 1998 count and the March audit
count. Column 5 is tho differencc between the two above counts
expressed as pffcentage (colunrn 4 divided by tlte November voto).
Section C presents similar information for counts resulting from the VL
central counters. (Manual counts vi,re not included in tl VL tallies;
instead, damaged or unprocessible ballots were added to the IF manual
counts.) Giveir the nature of marking devices used m election day, ES&S
believes that the

VL results

E:ibit 3 shows tht thc

are more accurats-

percsntag vaiance between tlre three counts is

very small except for the blank votes and overvotes. In the race for U.S'
Senator, for example, the Novembor general election rcsults for Senator
Lrouye were 937 more votss than the IF tally or a variance of 3/l0ths of
I percr they were only 14 votes less thanthe VL count or a variance of
'lVe
found only tluee instances inthe Statervide Summary
0 percent.

10

Report of tho Ehctlon Ov.rslht Comn.c

Exhlbt 3

Ocncal/OHA Eloction
Stwld. gummary epori
g.oon

g..don A

f
llov.3.
gil.to r
lO! lNOtryE. Dnll K,

lll MAttAN, Lloyd

316292

Elmk Volc
Ovlr Vota
8.P. . Dlet.

lll cl{Ull,

l{or.on Lllhr
{l DOUOLASS. Cgol J.
l MINR. Prby Tlmot
Blant Vot.

ovrt votc
t88e62

Slnl

Votc
oYr Vota
Son.ro - Dht. 2
lDl MAT8UUS, Orvid

[l WALKR' Denis
Vtc

.r?lE

2g

1E1q'
288

tol4r

z?e

I l63Be
397
t8?8A

321
18

6TrS

.491

3l

39{7
6A86t

lDl CHUMBI,Y, Avcry


IU YE, MGfiII M
ll LAPONO, Riod

I
6

8lilt Vot

3nar . Dbt. 7
ll CHUal. Jolh.n J.
fl MEASL. Robon, Jr.

42

f30e3

6026'

367

.7o2

l0s

12

2Gtt83

46.2

2:1615

501

1l.247

s62

ts803

313

13
80

r{,J

-2

t4

4668
1201

-1t24

I t87
7227
s237
oaz
4

31

72AA

25

45

s282
gt
4

55
"93

tEs86

t4
4

16880
t 8e2

27

1888

792

4
0

?6
3

-36

(Dl

nASMUSSEN. Clndy
T M, Rod

8lr*, Vot
Ovc

Vcl.

0700
46e2

32

724

.46

l6

3
o

0889

72

980t
lj98

1E

.t

6f62

a
4
0

6r1

2g
2
0
-44

08
e
0
o

t476t

74

'tt34

o.01*

7oss4
I 3s69
33

l6t

1a2A

-8t

2808
9220

2t

.o.o*

33

37.1?*
0.039

.0,?79{

t8882

3t

ast2

t900

6eoo

o,ot*

6323

323

-35

-0.ex

ro0

t09

21

f6.r5t

.7
-21

-o.ot
.o,06t

13201

320r

7o147
r 4432
g33e

6A44?
1 t4326

9338

.3l

r96

ls0

15

204163

2O1163

43

t0t9E0

-0

53.

o,r3*

-30
107
241

13089

372

r862

-72

0.o3t6

'0.009{

.o.379
a5.?1 t6
0.o296

o.o0t6

-o,06

4,104

-3t
15.7tS

3474

1S8t8
4404
3871

1?70

r2?o

72aO
933',l

8331

t10

018

.8

0.06s
,1.32t

r4.e99

6t00

I 690e

-2

18S4

894

.l

122
2

722
2

.2
0

-o.o1{
"o.o*
-o.29'l

.22

-13,0

?280

o.17s
o.o5*

.6,7A

66

976
acoT
661

'7.14

l1

r4

o.30s

9830

0930

oo.1

t4ga
5t73

61

t76,1

t1

l4s4

tdro

0.o0s

.1

17

to

-14

I 1007
70984

721

fO7

0.25

-3,04ri

68

10.019

3
0

o.o4*

o,oo96

-,1

-o-2t?
-o.o0'6

23
0

3.3*
o,oos
o.00s
.o.rela

I 588

't68t

o
-2
-3
?

4,a5t6

4810

14016
1981

0.06r

! 061
135',|

llto
79

t36l

?814
9233

't

'o.o96

o.tt96

0.10*

.o,62X

-2

-33.3396

't

-0.o,r
0,oe*

117

!68t

.31

214
9233
I 682

6880

fl
2l
I

6900
8548

17
22
.41

617
5ft0
tt8

o
-'l

74?

69f 7
0609
ds8

0.5?$

t3

t0

8.88*

4623
795

l3

0,

-0.14f

.0
-l 3

11
11

2800
909

6S17

225

e63
l69l

9t.t snltr - Dlt, 13

lnl

0.1

1000l

Bll Vct!

o.609.

e
96

3t528

l4

0ttf.

t 1007

0.t

o.1

lll.il.l

315284

-0.r

66

f1.:18O7

ftlro Srn.tor - ohr,

Ovr Votc

1i7

3
3

M.roh

Urbt

24e

31r

1422

10
lll GAffONlqt. Drrol ,
l0l lllA4, Lcr, Jr.

r912Q

tot8

s5

0t41

lgil

Vot
Ovar Vola

34

rol

te

s37
40

l.llEEn

l408ft

8lt

lzo

sa

Ov.r Vot

t0

a737

Ov.r Vtc
S.ntor . Ot. 4
lDl BUEN, J0 tY.gi
lRl coBoY. Jhn M.
Bll Vo1.

Stt' Srtor. Dbt.

7070

80
4

707.

4t0

Sonalor - Dt. f
ll C,{BRO.L, John L IX{l
lDt INOUYE' Lorrlm Rodo

Ovr vot

1'1960

4387

IU PEABOY/SARTLEY

Bbk Vgts
Ovu Votc

Blek

3t4316

108

Oov.
(01 CAYEf^NoHtRoNo
(F} LINGL'KOKI

16

40
r45

lsl

0[t
010

t60tt

11420
?09A4

6S06

3t3076

lJofll

(Rl YouN. cryrt.l


BlaI Vot
Ovr Votr
U.S. Rrt. . OIr. 1
fOI ABERCROMBIE. Ndt
l'$l BOWORTH, Nlhol
lRl WARO, G.n.

s.cdon

'1662

.6

-0.329i

22.22fi
o.oo
-o.ot

gourc!: Orfa6 ot gl.ctldr, Mrch 19, 1t99,

11

orl of th Elotlon

Commiltec

Rort

wlrere a candidate's vote count under the IF central coru'rs


ditrersd by more than I percent from that in tho general election. Our use
of the I percent or grater yariance lvrs for audit targeting purposes, so
we could verify the aocuracy of the November 1998 grreral election and
the March 1999 audit. In "official" reount elections, variances of
anyttring more than 3 or 4 votes per precinct would need to be reconciled
to the lorvcst possible number. We opted for tlre I percent variance in
order to speed tho process along and to assure the public that any outcome
which could have charrged the winners of any contest would be thoroughly
examined. In no of tlre instances, the variance tlropp"d below I pet'oent
lvhenthe results were compared withlhose from the VL centrl counters.
In the third instance, the variance vas due to the eadier November 1998
miscount by a malnioning precinct scanner.
Porcentago rariances for blank votes rrcre higlrer. Blark votes occur
whon a voter does not solect candidate in a race or mismaks a ballot,

ES&S explained thatthe blankvote count was higher on the IF cenbal


counters because they do not pick up marginal marks as well as the
precinct VL scanners used during the 1998 elections. Blalk vote and
otlrcr results frorn the VL certral counters were much closer to the
November 3, 1998 results because they use rc same liglt soutce to scan
ballots.
The percentage varizurce for tlre orrcrvotes, or vots disqualifred because
the voter voted for more candidates ttan are to be slectpd, was also ltigh.
This was mainly because the total number of overvotes in each race was
small. Since tbe base is small, a small varjanco in numbers rcsults in a
large percentage variance. For example, in the racc for U.S. Senator, a
difference of 249 fewer oven'otes in the audit from the number of
overvotes in the Novernber 1998 general election resulted in a variance of
46.37 percent (the higher number of overvotes in the November general
election was most like due to the ssvcn malfunctioning machines that
counted lons occlusions as overvotes.) In all cases, the variance in the
numer of blank votes and overvotcs hd no impact on the outcome of any
ta,e.

Manaal audit. Exhibit 4 compares lhe results ofthe tnanual audits witlt
tlre general election results. The dat tpnforrce our concluson about tlre
accufaoy ofthe general olecticnr results. lVhere variarces occurred, they
wero very small, In four of the manual audits, tho results matched the
general olection rssults o:iaotly. Six ofthe manual audits differed from
the general election results by ole vote. The remaining six msnual audits
varied from the general elections by tftree to tm votes.

12

Roport ol

th. Efrctlon overcight commltt.c

Exhiblt 4
Comparlson of Ganelal Election Results with Manud Atdit Results

Results

Manud Audit

Dlstrict/Precincts

11/3/98

3/99

State Representativo
District 27

3703
3684

3683

Contests
AHU ISAT
CHING

Dlfference

3702
10
-3

RAPOZOT

Kauai Council

8832

88+2

SWAIN

2;06-14:10

9083

90s0

NAKATA*
PICKARD

Stato Senate

7309

7263

7304
7262

-5

Da$trc23

AUWAET
JONES

State Representative
Distrlct 44

2680* r
2640) |

2670
2634

-10
-6

RATH*

State Representative
District 6

4337

TARNAS

4265

4336
4254

-1
-1

YEST
NO

lrradiation
Sampled 10 Precincts

6629

6533

701 3

701 B

208
293
241

209

293
240

0
.1

450
355

450
354

-1

State Representative
District 47

4399
4209

4393
4202

-6
-7

Maui Councl

3'r1

311

Abssntes + 2 Precincts

314

315

Govenor

2249

Precincts

3688

2249
3686

State Senate
District 4-1 Preoinct

476

476

471

471

EVERT

Stats Rpresont6tive

Distict

Precinct

239
537

235

MOBIHARA

537

DAWSON

Stote Representativ
Dstrct 26-1 Precinct

641

641

LUKE

09

610

MOSES
TIMSON

State Representative
Distrct 42-1 Precinct

514
248

514

ADUJA

City Council
50-03

248

248

371

371

CAMPOS
HAO

Absentess

OHA-Maui
Sampled 2 Precincts

KAHO'OHANAHANA
OHA-Oahu
+ 2 Precincts

HEE

KAMALII
CATAI.AN

DJOU

Absentees

BRITTON

NISHIKI
CAYTANO
LINGLE
BUEN
CORBOY

HOLMES

1Sl

248

-1

0
-2

0
0

o
o
0
0

Sourc6: Office of Elections, March '1999


'Contosts docldcd by 19 or less.
r rTotal adlustad for overvoto dua to machine malfunction in Preolnct 44-01
'

13

Ropot of rhe Elgctlon Ovcrdght Commlttee

The first six contests in Exhibit 4 are those that had been decided by I
percent or less, These had been selected for manual audits by both the
Eleotion Orrsight Committeo and the chief election officer. The results
showed that tlro maaual counts vaied from the general election results by
fewer tlrar l0 voes. In all iusknces, the outcomes remainedthe same.

Ths Election Oversigk Committee also requested a manual audit of blnk


votes inthe governor's race because of concems that the number of blank
votes vas unusually low. We selected a sample of fourprecincts on
Maui. In three of the procincts, we found no difference in the number of
blankvotes between tho general elefion results and manual audit rezults.
The remaining precinct had a one vote diffeence.
We then physically examined all tlre blank ballots for the four precincts.
veried that all the blank vdes were legitinrate blank. Votors had
failedto vote for any candidate, misruaked their ballots, or made
rnarginal marks. Exhibit 5 is a test ballottlat illustrates some ofthe
markings we saeu. Only item 1 is coreotly marked. It would have been
counted as a vote. Items 6, 7, and I are marginal maks that may have
been counted as votes. The remaining nrala would not have ben
counted as votps. For example, onc vcer circled tho oval instead of filling
it iry another missed the oval; others put check marks or lines in tlre oval,
Still others just left parts ofthe bllot blank.

'We

Despite charges thatthe new voting systm was difficult fof somo voters,
the audit showe.d that 99.8 percent ofthe voters had voted correctly. Only
0.2 percent of the total ballots cotmted were dmged or mismarkcd.

As a final noto, the accuracy and security ofthe 1998 general election is
further verified by comparing the otal number of ballots cast in the
general election with tlnse processed during the audit. The nunber of
ballots cast on electiorr night was 412,52t. The number lallied in March
was 412,521, a diftrence of only one ballot.

The audit was


conducted wth
professonalism and
ntegrty

The audit was conducted at the Hospitality Room at Aloha Stadium,


Prior to the audi! tho Office of Elections had issued amanual of
procedures tur-Rr,lew of the 1998 General Election Results. The
procedures were adaptations of ones the Offrce of Elections inrplenrented
during the 1998 elestions. Viie found they embodied the necessary
principles oftansparency, professionalisrn, securit accountabil, and
equify.

Inttn Reviw, the Office of Elections presented an ovewiew ofthe audiq


tlre schedule of events; grridelines for tlre geireral public, the media, the
Election Oversight Commitee, and oftcial observers; and instrustions for
the operations of various teams. Terns for the audit included the official
observers tam, ballot storage team, ballot preparation team, cornputer

14

R.po f thc Eleclion Ovcrsght Com]rtr

Exhibit 5
Examples of Ballot Marklngs

OFFICIAL EALLOI
ENEAL ELECfON
TUESDY, NOYEilAER 3,

994

ELenoNlslvoltNc |NETR cloNs


xOlG ua{d.ErynarhtuOllotian!6
th ql r arei'n3i
v0x

t:, GENEBAL
ltlhr

ELECTIOH l{D SPECIAL

pd. 9t rs'd t tE ce' F rs. F s c|r ffi


g Fg.a N !* @. C at*tffi
arsra{
rd
M H.
diL.Y4 fft, t t
rr f F Ea fu a ti, s*lt
r d l-D dld yanat.
1W r.@r.**0
a. D rnT r#{r
ts rt hn c | ,ffi| drd.
2 votr

BALLOT

1998 OFFICIAL GENEAL ELECTION

alrEilDllfff3m
sr rE coilsfino[

AllrDtlafiSm
IHE CIIAFER OFIT

Gffl AilD COUI{TT Of


H{[{otulu PnotosED EY

BVIIIC

PBOPOSD

UNElElnIIGIS!^TUE

ilr

bs .qart

I Sun r tu 'wtr rfrO


bt ltrdul Lrt l y..[
f, iod ot aKry t trB.
1* r.rn D h |s,2@?

cBRlER Co$tilEttoll

d l F 4d

l.
6 P bf .|
* jlsl
Pofrs chnt
*t r
Mhioor t,

4 Cdal,

ra

of

d Dpffil cf
B Pt0nh[
PnniI lnd Plmhe lnlo

7: Etrnd 6lr
m!t
Cd

YE3

n0

rhh

9t$

lHti Di8.1
ilncr l@ ly 31
D li

@drpm.

Hl

md

a rrlsu.rlll

lffi

Pc

<:)
Dm

fl
il------:.-e--.:$0
rls a
iY
,r:=:=--::l'
Shdl rlr. Coishilon ol lha

th!

It

t5cFarffi#fh
*rlrF'!
f,ktllt-a

Co.iuil

Sl.9!r ldN d dly d$ttl


nFa.!,

IB
r
t-

PROPoSEo

001{SilUn0il

ard

c0r{rtrll0lt

Dffi

glx tt

ba

0c*
ol

Cutqftr

t.dbr

prqta r irisgl

grr4

Ddrto th. Cd.lutun?

--=6

d rtxr

rrcpti

ot

aM atulol Pteiont

roO

Yt

.::

:..1

5 .t-*

Cor!.t@ Carsl

ta

'i
i

tla CDrd l0{ 9st- :i1


.t
tora3 ot rcartlt
'{

.::

t
Yt8

''.!

..J

'rl

,JorE

8tfi sEs

(ovER)

15

f th Htln

Gommlttc

operations team, and manual auditteam. \\e Review inskucted each


team on its purpose and specific procedures to be followed. For examplg
it outlined the purpose of the offficil observers team, its composition and
ro supewision ovor tho team, and tlre varous tsts that it would conduct
o verifr the ingrity, logig and acouracy of the ballot oounting program.
During the audit, we obsened as the various tpams carried out seal
certictions, opened the ballot boxes, prepared the ballots for scanning,
processed the ballots, tallied and prqpared comparison tables, and
performed rnanual audi. We found thatese tasks rt'ere done in
accordance with the procedures estblished for the audit.

Transparenqt The openness of elections is particularly importntto


eirsure their integrity and to build publio confidence in fhe process. Wb
found tlnt numerous adminisative safcguards were in place to ersure the
opcnnsss of the

audit. Numerous outsideparticipants and witnesses were

on si.

Ms. Bonsall and Mr. Lewis were particular impressed by the role played
by Hawaii's Election Advisory Committee (EAC) who form tlp coe of
the official obseners. The EAC seryes 8 the "eyes and ears" oftlre
general public to ensure the security and irfngrity ofthe ballot processing
and tbulation system. It is composod of representatives of political
parties, and organizatiorts such as tbe League ofWomen Voters, the State
Bar Association, and the Information Systems Audit and Control
Association (ISACA). Traditionall the chairperson ofthe EAC is also
the chairperson of tlre official observers.
Section I 645, HRS, authorizes the chief election officer and the county
clerks to designate official observers to be preselrt at the counting cnters'
They are to include at least one observer dosigrated by each political
parfy and one from the nelvs media, They are rcsponsible for conducting
logic and acuracytsts on the ballot counting program, conducting
manual audits, and monitoring the activities of the counting center team to
ensure that prescribed rules and procedures are followed precisely'
During the audit, represenatives of the Leaguo, the llawaii Nervspaper
Agency, State Bar Association, Demoratic Parfy, Republicarr Party, and
ISACA sen ed as official observers. The list of official observers is
shown in Exhibit 6.
Obssrvers art private citizens who have no direct connection with state
govemment. Many of them have had expericnce in past elections. They
know r'hat o watch for and what tests are needed. Some official
observers are vry knowledgeable about computer operations' For
example, the curret EAC chairperson, Mr. Russell Mokulellra, is a
private consultalrt who specializes in computer auditing.

16

Reporr ol

th.

Elocllon Overcloht Commltlc

Exhibit 6
Lst of Official observers
The Official Observer team is composed of members of the Election Advisory Council
(EAC) including reprssentatives from the various political parties and the news media. Other
interested prsons or groups may be included pursuant to HRS 516-45(31 "Additionalofficial
observers as space and facilities permit designated by the chief election officer in state
elections and the clerk in county elections."
Below is a list of observers who offered their time to participate in the audit.

9itv and County of


Russefl Mokulehua

Dave Harris

Alice Kealoha
Forence Loebel
Robert Chung

Bixby Ho
Luree Hays
Dennis Kam
Al Katagihara
Hugh Jones
Aulani Apoliona

Honollu

lnformation Systerns Audit and Control Association (ISACA)


Republican Party of Hawaii
Republican Party of Hawaii
Republican Party of Hawaii
Repubfican Party of Hawaii
Democratic Party of Hawaii
Laague of Women Voters
Hawaii Newspaper Agency
Office of the Legislative Auditor
Hawaii State Bar Association
Office of Hawaiian Affairs

Countv of Maui
Selberio Menor
Harriet Santos

Concerned Citizen
Concerned Citizen

Countv of. Kauai


Melinda Nesti
Wilfiam Scamahorn
Edward Coll

Kauai Republican Party Chair


Nonpartisan

Hawaii Green Party

Countv of Hawaii
Marcella DeWeese
Hobert Duerr, Jr.

HGEA

Parants Against lrradiation

Souroo: Office of Elections, March 1999.

17

Reporl ol thc Elactlon Ovarsisht ommlttoo

The Election Oversiglrt Committee found thc otrcial observersto be


diligent and dedicated. They clearly uderstood their lesponsibilities.
Prior to te audit they conducted "logic and aceuracy tests" using test
ballots to see ifttre machines were counting accurately. They observed
and monitored all operations to determine rvhether they met vith
prcscribed procedures.

Ms. Bonsall and Mr. Iwis ranarked on the extet of authority exercised
bythe official observers. They say that h no other jurisdictionhadthey
seen observers given so much latitude. Observers could stop the cpntral
countels and run rarrdom tests at any time to makc sure the machines lvere
counting ctutately and that sofpare w not breached. They also asked
periodically for such safeguards as listings of directories inthe conrputer
programto vorifr the integf ofthe sofrware systems. Tbroughout the
audil ttrey were able to discuss problems or complaints immedialy with
tlre ohief slection officer or his staff.

For example, the chair of tlre EAC notedthatt[e audit hadgone very
snoodtly, but he also voiced concem that tho system documentation logs
generated by the central counters had been discarded. Thesc logs are
printouts from the centrl counters that doonnent such events as when the
maohines stated and stopped, whenthe hoppers were empf, and whet
thers wsre feed jams. They are important as an audit trail for election
results, They verifr which batches ofballots wee read and rvhstler there
has becn unwamantcd acocss to the system. Th fedetal lhtng Slttem
Standards require an audit trail ofsystern activity related o vote tllying
fromtbe time vote counting begins until itis completed. Fedeal law
requires electon officials to preserve all recorrls and iapers relating to the
voting for 22 months.3 While this lapse was not important for the
prrposes ofthis audit, it woukl be signicant in any futrrre election.
In additionto the official observers, the ,{ssociation of Clerks and
Election Officers of Hawaii watched every step of the procoss' The
association is made up of county clerkS and elcction officials ftonr the
Neighbor Islands and Honolulu. Theywatched as thc ballotboxcs wcre
unsealed, oversaw the ballots being prepared for processing on the
maohines, watched the IF and VL central counters to veri$ that ballo
n'ere fed and processed correctlg watched the processed ballot continers
being trasfered to the storage areq and rnonitored the malrual audits.

Finally, watchos uho are menrbers oftho general public were allowed
rnto the counting center to view the operations from bshind a rarl' Many
carne. Some school achers saw the autlit as an opportunity to educate
their students about the election process and brought their classes in to
view the oporation.

18

n of tho Elecdon

Commltt

Prossianahsm, security, accoantabillty, and equity. The Election


Oversight Cornnittee was reassured to obsene tlre professional behavior
of sate and county election staff. ftey each knerv tlreir respective
responsibilities for tlre audit and carried them out effectively. We
observed that they responded equally respeotfully to inquiries from
individuals of differsnt parties and interests. Elections office staffalso
ensured the security ofthe audit by posting security guards at the entrance

to the Stadium Hospitality Room, Each particant or visitor was asked


to s in and was required to wear a badge. Also, video cameras were
instlled to provide 24-hour surveillance ofthe counting center and to
ensure that ballots wers not tampered rvith.

Some suggestions to
mprove future
electians

The audit demsnstrated that the ES&S machines used in the general
election resuld in accurate and relible vot counts, It also affirms tlre
competency and integrity of Hawaii's elsction officials and oitizen
participants. Certain ohanges are needed, ncvertheless, to keep up with
changingtimes andtechnologies: (l) the $tate's olection stafutes should
be amerrded to remove obsolete or rleficient provisions; new rules are also
needed; (z)lt Office of Elections needs to be strenghenedto reducethe
lelihood of firture problems.
The Igislature should consider establishing a task force to studytle
changes needed. Such a task foce was estnblished in Maryland. The
fask force could be composed of monbers of the Legislahrre such as tlre
chairs ofths Senate and House Committees onthe Judiciary the chief
election officar, representatives from the Association of Clerks and
Election Officers of Hawaii, the Elections Advisory Committee, the
political parties, and othor organizations active in the electoral proeess
such as tho lague ofWome,nVoters.

Amend state law


Many state statutes and rules ae obsolete or over specific. They are
geared to a punchcard system. They sink to a level of detail tlut
conshains attempts to use new election technology. For example, fhe

provision relating to ballots speci$ing that votes are to be marked on the


right sidc of a candidats's name should be rcmove.d. ES&S had to des
special ballots and programs for Harvaii because in most other states
votes are marked to the left of oandidat' narnes.

The provisions for recounts are inadequate. They place candidates in an


untenable position whera they have to produce evideeice offraud or
difforeiroes in votes cast that would cause a difference in election results
whenthey hve no access to the ballots that would produce the evidence.
ln many jurisdictrons, contsts are automatically recormted when tlre
difference between winning and losing candidates is I percent or less.

19

Rcport of tha Elclion Ovuaight Gommlttaa

In additicr to amending the statutes, new nrles are needd. ln response to


a request from the Senate Committee on Judiciary, the Department of the
Afomey General notd that dministrative rules are needed properly

implanent Sectisn I l-97, HRS, that rvould prescribe wheir election


records ae available for inspection. The rules also need to be updated to
reflest advances in election lechnology. Currcnt rules are predicated on
using a punchcard systom and may be inapplicable or restrictive. The
Lqgislature could reestthat the task forco conduot a comprehensive
study ofhese and other questionable stiate laws that should be amended.

Strengthen the Oflice of Elections


We believe that the State would benefit if the Office of Blections were
reorganized, given greater suppot, and its staffwere given opporhrnities

for professional development.

A snrdy of state election laws bythe taskforce should include an


cxmination ofthc placernent ofthe Oce of Elections. Currently the
offrce is only adminisrratively attached to the Office of the Lieutenant
Governor. It has lost many of the former advantages it had when it rvas
part ofthe lieutenant governor's office. These advantages included
periodic research and analytic support greatr ltitude in budget
execution, and higher credibility. In most other states, the elections office
is under the direction of tle secrotary of statq an eleoted position wilh
functions simila to those of }Iwa's lieutcnant governor. In Utah and
Alaska, elections are under the lieutenant govnor.
We believe tlat Hawdi's Oftc of Elections would benefit if it were an
ingral part of the Office ofthc Licutenant ftvemor and subject to the
supervision of an elosted official. The chiefelection officer could be
appointed by the lieutenant govemor as a deputy in charge ofelections.
Currently the chief election ofcor is appointed by au Elections
Appoinnent Panel that has no authori except to hire and firc the chief
election officer. The chief election offrcer is givenno continuing oversiglrt
by someone who can be held accountable, The public cannot hold the
appointmrt panel accountble for its actions whereas the public could
hold the lieutsrant govemor responsiblc forthe integrrty of elections,
Tlre ofce would also benefit ifit were given a certain number of civil
seffice positions for technioal and clerioal staff, This would maintain
continuity in elections. Ms. Bonsall and M. Lewis warn that chaos has
resulted in certain eleotions offices when newly elected officials
terminated all ofthe elections staff.
We no that the budget for rhe Office of Electisns has decreased a total
af 21.4 porcent since the 1993-1995 fiscal bianium, To acc,ommodate
this decrease, the office had to cut its own staff as well as its hiring of
precinct offrcials during slections. Rururing an election is a relatively

20

Rrport of rhe Electlon Ovarrlght Commltt..

invisible function until something goes wrong. But the declining level of
support is jeopardizing the integrity of this basic dernocratic function. It
should be noted that the number of precincts has inoreased brt the number
of precinct officials has had to be cut. Tt number ofprecrcts inceased
from 325 in 1994 to 32E in 1996 to 334 in 1998. At the same time, the
number ofprecinct officials hadtobe cut from 3,578 in 1994 to 3,260 in
I 996 to 2,922 m 1998. hr 1998 ths offic.e also dela'ed hiring 5
warshouso seasonal staffand releed 6 clerical/warehouse seasonal s,$ff
earlier than scheduled. This means that the precincts \ilete covered nrfre
thinly and had to operate with less supervision.

while budgets were being cut, the trumbe of citizens nd voters to


be served was growing. The implenretrtation of the Nationl Voter
Rsgistration Act (NVRA) began in January of 1995 whidr fostered
significant increases inthe voter registration roles. The NVRA also
added significant administrative costs to comply with the act. Combined
with aprosidential election in 1996 (the most expensive of election years
in the four-year budget cycle of elections), the impact of budget roductions
had a sigrificant advsrse impact on the Office of Election's abilto
administer its frnctions. Elections may be one of the few places in
govemment that ought to be exempted from budgetary reductions unless it
can be demonshated thatthere are equivalent reductions in citizens to be
^A,lso,

served.

Smallerbudgets madethe rnoye away fromthe old punchcard system


unavoidable. The former systern was labor intensive and time consuming.
The Offrce of Elections could no longer afford staffto run it. ln additiorl
tlrc office could no longer re on support frorn the State's Informtion
and Communication Services Division (ICSD) which had suffered budgel
cuts of its own. In past elections, ICSD had provided 60 staff during
elections to preparc the punchcaril voling s'stem, proof ballots, and test
machinss. ICSD also supplied the Office of Elections with four full-time
stafffom April until the end of elections. Without technical support from
ICSD, ths Officc of Elections had ao alternative but to look for another
systen one that it could afford.

lffe believe tbat the Office of Elections mde a reasonable choice in


leasing equipmeirt onr ES&S. The cost for leasing eipment $1.58
mion, was less than the estirnated cost for printing ballots for the
punchcard system alor, $ 1,88 million. ES&S had the only NASBD
qualified equipnront that could couut both precinot and absentse ballots.
The Offioe of Elections estimatedthat it saved S1.27 million using ES&S
equipnrent. We discussed the use of scanning equipment with tlre county
clerks. They unanimously supported its use and say that they would like
to continue rvith this or a similar system.

2t

Fcport of thc Elcctlon Overulght Commlttee

Finally, wo believe that stts eleotion staffars handicapped bytlreir laok


ofacccss to continuing professional education and contact with other
election adminisfiators on the mainland. Ihe State would be well served
by encouraging their professional development tluough continuing
professional education. Iffunds wers available fot elections stffto

atend workshops and seminrs, they could become more familiar with
teclrnologioal advances, system requirements, potntial problems posed by
tlIe various types of voting equipment, and perhaps they could have
anticipated beer some of tlre problems tlnt occurred with the leased
equiprnent. Staffcould also be enoouragedto obtin and maintain
national professional ccrtification as election professionals.

Most of the State's election officials hve lud exporience only with tlie
former puachcard system. They had become well versed with ie
operation. Implementing a nw systcmcreated a new and different set of
probloms. Acoordiug to Ms, Bonsall and Mr, [wis, glitches aro
inevitable anime a change is mado to a ne voting systern. There is a
lEanring curve. Experince withthe systemis the moslimportnt element
in rmning a smoothelection.

Summary

Themembers ofthe Election Oversight Commitoee considored it a


privilege to have had the opportunity to rnonitor the audit of the 1998
general elections. rffe concluded that the voting equipment used inthe
1998 elections is accurate and counted contsts conectly. ES&S has fully
met its sated obligations to work rviththe Stats to resolve problerns
created by its equipment.
We found no oedible evidEnc of any fraud. We einphasize the
dernocraoy is too important to all ofus to allow unfounded or unproved
allegations to undermine our confidsnce in eleions,
There are no easy solutioot trt{,u't problems in administering electionsthe process is too complcxto tirker with. Any clrange to aflew voting
systsm is likely to result in mistakos and some initial consion.
Nevertheloss, the audit found that 99.8 pcrcenf. of Harvaii's voters had
marksd their ballots correotly. \ilhile it takss stafftime to leam what the
significant procedures are with a new system, we found that state and

local level election staffare cornpetentpeople who arc very


knowledgeabls aboutthe process. They are committcdto making sure
that electiors accurate reflect the will of the voting public'

22

l lh

RgcommgndatiOnS

Gommittee

The Elections Oversight Committ recommends that:

l.

The lgrslaturo establish atask force composed of the chairs of the


Senato and House CommitJees on ttre Judiciary, tlre chief elestion
officer, and represe,lrtatives of the Assooiation of Clerks and Election
Officos of Flawaii, the Election Advisory Committee, thepolitical
parties, and other organizations active inthe electoral process such as
the lague of Women Vors. The task force should conduct a
comprehensive study ofthe Sfte's election laws including tlre
placement of the chief electionofficer and the Office of Elsctions.

2.

The Legislature should consider \ilays to encourage the professional


developmeut of Office of Elections' staff.

23

Notes

1'

Federal Election commission, voting $tstem slandards,National


Clearinghouse on Election AdminisFation, 1990.

2.

Dominique-Christine Trnblay and Ron Gould, 'Yote Counting," in


ACE Project, International Foundation for Election Systerns, October
1998.

3.

See U.S. Codg Sections l9?4through 1974e.

25

NO
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAII

THOMAS WATERS, alkla TOMMY


WATERS

)
)

Petitioner,

)
)

VS

)
)

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

)
)
)
)

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on this date a true and correct copy of the foregoing

was duly served by mailing the same, postage prepaid to the following:
Office of Elections
802 Lehua Avenue
Pearl City, Hawa 96782

SCOTT NAGO
Office of Elections
802 Lehua Avenue
Pearl City, Hawa 96782
AARON H. SCHULANER, ESQ
State of Hawaii
Office of Elections
802 Lehua Avenue
Pearl City, Hawa 96782

BERNICE K,N. MAU


City Clerk
City and County of Honolulu
Office of the City Clerk
530 S. King Street, Room 100
Honolulu, Hawaii 96813
Dated: Honolulu, Hawaii, November 24,2014

/S/ JAMES KAWASHIMA


JAMES KAWASHIMA, ESQ
Attorney for Petitioner

Оценить