Hawaii high court considers ballot eligibility for Honolulu City Council seat

The Hawaii Supreme Court heard arguments Tuesday over whether a delayed swearing-in years ago now blocks Tommy Waters from a third term.

by Jeremy Yurow, Court House News, August 25, 2026

HONOLULU (CN) — Tommy Waters has served on the Honolulu City Council for more than seven years. On Tuesday, Hawaii’s Supreme Court considered whether four of those months — the time between a voided election and Waters’ belated swearing-in — actually count toward a term limit.

The justices heard arguments in two related cases over whether the Honolulu City Council chair can appear on the November ballot for a third consecutive term, a question that has already thrown the District IV race into uncertainty, with 8,654 votes cast for Waters in the Aug. 8 primary now hanging over the race.

Two of the court’s regular justices stepped aside from the case. Acting Chief Justice Sabrina McKenna and Justice Lisa Ginoza were joined by three judges brought in to fill out the bench: Michael Soong, sitting in for Chief Justice Vladimir Devens; Peter Cahill, sitting in for Justice Todd Eddins; and Peter Kubota, filling a separate, ongoing vacancy on the court.

Charter Section 3-102 limits council members to two consecutive four-year terms. Waters’ path to the seat was unusual. The Hawaii Supreme Court invalidated a November 2018 election for the seat over a vote-counting dispute, Waters won the special election that followed in April 2019, and he was sworn in that May, roughly four months after what would have been the start of a regular term.

He was reelected in 2022. Judge James Ashford ruled in July that Waters’ 2019 term counts fully against the limit, making him ineligible to run again.

Waters’ attorney, Joseph Stewart, argued the charter’s math rules that out.

“A four-year term means just that. It’s four years,” Stewart told the justices. “You can’t start midway into a term of four years.”

Stewart argued Waters’ shortened first term isn’t the same as a full one, since the charter allows for irregular terms that don’t start on the usual date.

Ginoza pushed back, saying the charter only recognizes two kinds of terms, regular and vacancy, and she asked why three prior councilmembers who filled vacancies had been treated differently than Waters. McKenna pressed further, walking Stewart through what would have happened if Ozawa, not Waters, had ended up winning the 2019 do-over election instead.

“A term is a set period of time,” Attorney Judie Marie Iha, representing Ozawa said. “Standing here today, I can tell you the exact start dates of every city council election for the next 100 years.”

A second related lawsuit, brought by dozens of East Honolulu voters, was argued alongside Ozawa’s case. Their attorney, Thomas Otake, argued Ozawa never had the legal right to challenge Waters’ eligibility in the first place, and the legal fight violated a process state law already had in place to settle such questions before anyone votes.

“How can anybody in this building think that’s okay?” Otake asked, describing the votes cast for Waters in the primary.

Third-place primary finisher Tara Gregory, representing herself, urged the justices to affirm Ashford’s ruling, telling the court she’d raised concerns about Waters’ eligibility with election officials as early as March, months before the legal fight became public. She read back a statement she’d made publicly right after Ashford’s ruling, before the outcome of her own race was known.

“It’s important, I think, for Tommy’s voters that they should be able to vote again,” Gregory said.

McKenna asked Iha about rulings from other states, including a 2025 Alaska Supreme Court decision, holding that when a candidate’s eligibility is genuinely unclear, courts should let them stay on the ballot rather than kick them off. Iha argued the justices don’t need to answer that broader question at all, since they can simply decide, before the general election, who moves forward.

The justices will rule by Friday’s statutory deadline. Whatever the outcome, only two names can appear on the November ballot for the seat: Waters and Ozawa, or Ozawa and Gregory.

---30---

SA: Hawaii Supreme Court hears arguments in Tommy Waters’ eligibility | Honolulu Star-Advertiser

CB: Supreme Court To Shape One Of Hawaiʻi's Hottest Political Races - Honolulu Civil Beat

KHON: Supreme Court hears Tommy Waters reelection eligibility

HNN: Hawaii Supreme Court hears high-stakes appeal over Tommy Waters’ council eligibility | Hawaii News Now