Today, we filed the Reply Brief in DeJetley v. Kahoohalahala, No. 29929, the appeal now pending in the Hawaii Supreme Court regarding the Lanai member of the Maui Council who is alleged to not be a resident of Lanai as required by the county charter.
Section 3-3 of the Charterprovides that “If a council member … ceases to be a resident of thecouncil member’s residency area during the council member’s term ofoffice, or if a council member is adjudicated guilty of a felony, thecouncil member shall immediately forfeit office and the seat shallthereupon become vacant.”
Several Lanai residents sought a declaratory judgment in circuit court that the council member had forfeited office, and that the seat was vacant because he is not a Lanai resident. The Circuit Court dismissed the complaint, holding that declaratory relief was not available, and the remedy was impeachment or recall. The Lanai voters appealed, and the case was transferred from the Intermediate Court of Appeals to the Supreme Court.
Here are all the briefs in the case:
This case is related to Dupree v. Hiraga, No. 29646 (Oct. 20, 2009), in which the Hawaii Supreme Court held that in order to register to vote as a resident of a district, a person musthave a fixed habitation in the district in which he is attempting toregister, as well as a “physical presence” there. In that case — the councilmember’s appeal from a determination by the StateBoard of Registration that he is a Lahaina resident and hisattempt to register to vote as a Lanai resident was invalid — the court held “there was nothing in the record to establish that Kahoohalahala actually lived [at his brother’s home] or anywhere else on Lanai in any commonly-understood meaning of the term.” Dupree, slip op. at 53.
Oral arguments have not yet been scheduled.