That $300,000 dropped by the mainland-created dark money group Hui O Maui found little to no traction in Maui County’s local election, judging from the latest summary election reports released this morning by the state.
The 501(c)(4) group, hidden behind a Hawaiian name swiped from a local Maui organization remains deeply opaque, with only a San Francisco attorney identified as an organizer. Its two subsidiaries, “Hui O Maui Citizens for Change” and the awkwardly named “Vote No on Charter Amendments Hui O Maui Nui We Can’t Afford It” failed in their objectives to elect a conservative, business-oriented slate of county council representatives and to defeat all seven charter amendments.
The super PAC Hui O Maui Citizens for Change, chaired by Las Vegas political consultant Grant David Gillham (who appeared to be running the campaign from Puerto Vallerta), raised a reported $177,500 (donated by Hui O Maui) to elect Yuki Lei Sugimura, Alice Lee, Tasha Kama, Mike Molina, Alberta de Jetley, Claire Kamalu Carroll, Tom Cook, Rick Nava and Stacy Crivello.
Let’s see how that worked out. Sugimura and Lee ran unopposed, so no help was needed there, both wins were guaranteed. The Citizens for Change super PAC spent general monies and a specifically targeted $16,000 on a mailer to help de Jetley, who so far has garnered only 34.2% of the vote to progressive candidate Gabe Johnson’s 44.8%. Incumbents Tasha Kama and Mike Molina were already projected to win their races, although Kama’s margin of victory is the slightest of all so far. The well-funded Kama leads with 41% to 38.6% over Carol Lee Kamekona, whose campaign chest was meager. Molina easily retained his council seat with 57.6% of the vote to challenger Aja Eyre’s 25.8%.
Challengers Tom Cook, Rick Nava, Claire Kamalu Carroll, and Stacy Crivello all lost their bids against incumbents Kelly King (47.7% to Cook’s 35.6%), Tamara Paltin (47% to Nava’s 37.1%), Shane Sinenci (46.1% to Carroll’s 36.6%) and Keani Rawlins-Fernandez (44.3% to Crivello’s 36.8%). Crivello’s loss also must come as a blow to the Chicago-based National Association of Realtors, which committed $60,000 to support her campaign.
The results give a solid majority to the progressive slate of candidates supported by Maui-based organizations such as Maui’s Green Future Project and Maui Pono Network. They promise to give Mayor Michael Victorino heartburn on budget issues and the ongoing Lahaina injection well lawsuit that he has stubbornly insisted on pursuing despite an unfavorable U.S. Supreme Court decision earlier this year.
Six of seven proposed charter amendments were easily winning in this morning’s summary count, despite the $120,000 raised by the Vote No on Charter Amendments ballot issue committee chaired by Roselani ice cream executive Buddy James Nobriga (who steadfastly has refused comment on Hui O Maui’s 100% funding of his committee). The Vote No campaign saturated Maui with radio ads and banners urging rejection of all the proposed amendments. However, the latest tally indicates strong voter approval for term limits on the mayor and council members, the creation of a Maui Department of Agriculture and a Maui Affordable Housing Fund, plus amendments related to resolving disputes over the county charter and giving the council the upper hand in appointing charter commission members.
The one amendment that was defeated called for the creation of a new Managing Director position, which was vigorously opposed by Victorino in ads paid for by Nobriga’s committee. However, Mark Hyde, who helped draft the amendment, pointed to the new progressive majority on the county council as a reason he remained hopeful for one day establishing the position.
“In effect, this election was a significant defeat for the mayor and his allies, who spent gobs of money to achieve a far different result on multiple fronts,” Hyde wrote in an email to supporters Wednesday.
While political junkies wait for final results and precinct breakdowns to fully crunch the numbers, the big loser in Maui’s 2020 election cycle seems to be dark money.
“I think Maui voters signaled that they recognize the difference between a genuine organization that’s representing Maui and one that’s made up,” said Colin Moore, director of the University of Hawaii’s Public Policy Center.
“There wasn’t any ambiguity in the results,” he added. “It was encouraging for proponents of transparent government. It indicated that you can’t just slap a Hawaiian name on a mainland dark money outfit and get what you want.”
