Voters on Maui, Molokaʻi and Lānaʻi are being asked in November to decide the fate of eight proposed amendments to the Maui County Charter, including two seeking to address the high number of vacancies on influential boards and commissions.

In recent years, vacancies have essentially paralyzed some of the county’s volunteer boards and commissions, sometimes preventing them from meeting and deciding on issues such as wildfire rebuilding, public corruption investigations and approving liquor licenses.

If passed, one of the amendments would dissolve the Independent Nomination Board, change various deadlines related to the nomination process and allow the Maui County Council to pass legislation creating additional policies related to boards and commissions. The other would allow members of the Board of Ethics to serve a second consecutive term, rather than require members to step down at the end of their term before they can be reappointed.

Independent Nomination Board

After being approved by voters in 2022, the Independent Nomination Board was established in 2024 and was intended to improve the quality of candidates being considered for the county’s roughly 40 boards and commissions and improve transparency surrounding the nomination process. However, the nomination board has instead been accused of limiting the public’s access to information about who has applied for positions and further exacerbating the county’s high vacancy rate.

“Unfortunately, the INB has become more of an obstacle and has not served the purpose intended,” said Keani Rawlins-Fernandez, who introduced the proposed amendment to dissolve the board, during a subcommittee meeting in June.

Currently, the Independent Nomination Board’s job is to recruit and interview applicants for boards and commissions — as well as for certain staff positions like corporation counsel and prosecuting attorney — before sending a short list of candidates to the mayor, whose pick is then considered by the county council for approval. 

But in the months following the board’s creation, the county continued to struggle recruiting residents to serve in these positions, and the board missed deadlines to nominate candidates. Because the county charter does not outline a way to make appointments when a deadline is missed, council members needed to draft and pass legislation establishing one.

In a May 2026 report, members of the Cost of Government Commission said at least some of the Independent Nomination Board’s issues stem from “resource and capacity constraints” that limit its effectiveness.

“At a 10,000-foot level, we acknowledge that there are recruitment and quorum challenges across boards and commissions,” Dino Goossens-Larsen, who chairs the commission, told council members during a meeting in June. “We actually, in response to that, recommended retaining and strengthening the INB.”

In part, that means authorizing and providing funding for the board to conduct background checks on applicants as part of their vetting process and considering the possibility of providing the board with additional administrative support, he said. 

“The County Council and Administration should treat investment in the INB’s operational capacity as an investment in the quality of all the boards and the commissions,” Goossens-Larsen said.

He added that county officials should reevaluate the confirmation process and requirements for various positions, “given consistent evidence that the process deters qualified applicants” from applying for what are largely volunteer advisory roles.

In the May report, members of the Cost of Government Commission also noted that involving the Independent Nomination Board, mayor and council in the appointment process “can lead to diffused accountability, organizational confusion, and strained support arrangements.” They recommended prioritizing the adoption of the administrative rules that would provide procedural clarity for applicants and staff.

If county residents vote in favor of dissolving the board, the county would revert to its previous method for nominating and approving candidates for these positions and give the mayor authority to make appointments without choosing from a pre-determined list of potential nominees.

Dick Mayer, a longtime Kula resident, spearheaded calls for the creation of something like the Independent Nomination Board and suggested that it be modeled after the state’s Judicial Selection Commission. He supported the 2022 charter amendment, but he has been disappointed and frustrated by the county’s implementation, he said.

“I thought it would be a great thing. I was anticipating being able to help them,” said Mayer, who in 2006 was appointed by then-Mayor Alan Arakawa to chair an ad hoc committee with similar responsibilities to the Independent Nomination Board.  “I don’t think they knew what was going on themselves. It was so new, and no one had experience in what this was all about and where there were going to be dangers and difficulties coming up. They didn’t even know how to ask the right questions.”

Mayer added that the committee he chaired, called the Blue Ribbon Committee, had been very effective, so he and others had ideas for ways to improve the current Independent Nomination Board. 

During the same committee meeting in June, Mayer told council members that seeking out ways to reform the board was a much better option than dissolving it before it ever served its intended function.

“Let’s get it done right. It’s a very important function,” he said. “Let’s work together as a community to make sure we have an effective INB, and I think that can be done.”

Board of Ethics

Council members have been largely unified in support of a separate proposed amendment that seeks to allow the mayor, pending Council approval, to reappoint Board of Ethics members to a second consecutive term. Currently, members must step down at the end of their terms and wait two years before they can be reappointed.

Board of Ethics Executive Director Lauren Akitake said the change would not only make it easier for the board to maintain quorum needed to hold meetings, but also ensure continuity while the board is in the midst of several multi-year initiatives related to revamping important county policies, such as those related to nepotism, lobbyist guidelines and conflict-of-interest disclosures.

Having a year of operations with full-time staff has reinforced “how important continuity and institutional knowledge is,” she said, referencing the approved 2024 charter amendment allowing the board to hire for its office.

“We’re not handling one complaint anymore and then moving on to the next. We’re developing rules and issuing advisory opinions. We’re working on ethics policies and we’re training departments. We’re building processes that the county is going to rely on as its framework for years to come. So members who have been around when we develop those policies understand why they were developed, not just the final rule.”