HONOLULU — The Maui County Council unanimously appointed Moana Lutey as county clerk and Richelle Thomson as deputy county clerk on Friday.
The two are familiar faces to the Council, having served as corporation counsel and first deputy corporation counsel, respectively, under the last county administration. Lutey and Thomson had been serving in the roles on an interim basis and, in fact, were administering the meeting on which they were voted on and appointed. Both will serve two-year terms expiring in 2025.
The appointments cap a tumultuous last few months for the office.
Shortly after incumbent Alice Lee was declared the winner of the Council’s Wailuku-Waihee-Waikapu seat in the November general election, challenger Noelani Ahia and 30 other Maui residents contested the results based on County Clerk Kathy Kaohu’s alleged mishandling of ballots that were not counted due to missing or irregular signatures on their return envelopes.
The state Supreme Court agreed last month that the clerk took too long to send out some of the notices informing affected voters of the problem and instructing them on how to correct the defect. However, the court ruled that mistake was not enough to change the result of the election, thus allowing Lee to retain the seat.
As that case was still in progress, the county opened the application process for the next county clerk. Lee initially proposed deputy clerk James Krueger take over the top position but later backed Lutey when new Maui Mayor Richard Bissen opted not to retain her as corporate counsel.
Lutey remained the frontrunner for the position even after the application deadline was extended and 10 other challengers emerged.
On Friday, the questioning Lutey faced from the Council lasted longer—and went into far greater depth—than that of the other five candidates who appeared at the meeting combined.
Lutey, who has worked with the county for 27 years, emphasized her familiarity with Maui elections and the processes of the county government, as well as her long working relationship with Thomson.
“My interest is to first try to avoid any mistakes that were made previously in elections by catching those early,” she said. “Richelle and I are phenomenal planners, and I think as a team, based on our backgrounds, we’ll be ahead of the ballgame in terms of figuring out what the laws are here, planning with our staff, recruiting people early and trying to make this next round of voting as accessible to as many people as possible, including in our more rural areas.”
Lutey said one of her major focuses will be to update voter information to include current email addresses, cellphone numbers and other means of reaching out to voters with timely information. Along similar lines, she said the office will need to work on getting information out via a variety of platforms, including social media. She also said getting updated signatures will also help with verification since signatures can change over time.
Council member Keani Rawlins-Fernandez noted that Lutey’s availability to be the new county clerk was created by Bissen’s decision to appoint a new corporation counsel and asked Lutey whether she is still interested in litigating.
“Honestly, I don’t miss it,” Lutey answered. “To the extent that you guys are willing to have us, I’m willing to stay. I’m a committed county employee and have been for 27 years now. I wouldn’t commit if I didn’t mean that I was going to stay. I’m not looking.”
Council member Shane Sinenci was the only member to vote aye with reservations, a for-the-record note of concern regarding the significant increase in salary for the newly filled positions. Lutey will earn $156,982 per year compared to Kaohu’s former salary of $105,000. Thomson will make $149,132 annually; Krueger previously made $94,000.
Sinenci, referencing Lutey and Thomson’s legal credentials as justifications for the salaries, noted that the positions “are not legal positions, nor is the law degree required.”
“The position was funded at a lower rate to reflect the nature of the duties and job responsibilities,” he said. “So, it seems to me that if we were looking for the legal experience at this position, the chair might want to re-craft the position description and requirements and advertise the position with a pay that is comparable to county legal positions because it does seem that the response that we did receive did not attract those legal backgrounds. I’m curious what legal applicants might have applied for the higher rate.
“Just out of fairness, if we are to set the salary at the proposed rate, we should have advertised that rate to attract comparable applicants,” Sinenci said.
Michael Tsai covers local and state politics for Spectrum News Hawaii. Email him at michael.tsai@charter.com
