A Honolulu Circuit Court judge on Tuesday ruled that City Council Chair Tommy Waters is ineligible to run for a third consecutive term representing East Honolulu’s District 4, handing a legal victory to council candidate Trevor Ozawa and setting the stage for an appeal that could affect the Aug. 8 primary.
Ruling and immediate effects
Judge James H. Ashford sided with Ozawa in a challenge over term limits written into the City Charter, concluding that Waters has exceeded the allowable consecutive service. The decision prevents Waters from continuing his reelection campaign unless it is overturned on appeal.
Waters, who first joined the council in April 2019 and was reelected in 2022, said in a written statement that he and his team respect the court’s ruling but will seek review by the Intermediate Court of Appeals because of the broader implications for city governance.
"We respect the court’s decision and appreciate its consideration of this matter. We plan to file an appeal because, given the broader implications this case has for Honolulu’s governance, we believe review by the Court of Appeals is appropriate. I believe that the voters should have the ultimate decision come election day," Waters wrote. "My focus, however, remains unchanged, and I remain committed to serving the people of Honolulu and fulfilling the responsibilities the voters entrusted me with for the remainder of this term."
The Honolulu City Clerk’s office said its Elections Division is reviewing the ruling and consulting legal counsel to determine what it means for administration of the election. Mail-in voting for the Aug. 8 primary has been underway for about a week; officials warned that if Waters’ appeal is unsuccessful, any ballots already cast for him would not be counted.
What this means for voters and the calendar
The decision creates immediate uncertainty for District 4 voters and election administrators. At stake are procedural questions about ballot validity and the status of a sitting council member whose term continues through the remainder of the current council session.
- Ballots already cast: The City Clerk indicated votes cast for Waters may be invalidated if the ruling stands and an appeal fails.
- Timetable: With the primary days away, any appellate review would be compressed and could land after ballots are counted, complicating certification.
- Governance: Waters will remain in office through his current term unless other legal steps change that status; the ruling only addresses eligibility to run.
Background of the dispute
Waters, a prominent figure on the council who returned to office in 2019 and secured reelection in 2022, argued that the charter permits him to seek another consecutive term. Ozawa filed the lawsuit in June asking the court to determine whether Waters had exceeded the charter’s term limits.
Judge Ashford’s written opinion found in favor of Ozawa’s interpretation of the charter. The ruling focuses narrowly on whether Waters’ prior service counts toward the charter’s consecutive-term prohibition.
| Event | Date |
|---|---|
| Ozawa files challenge over term limits | June (2026) |
| Mail-in voting begins for Aug. 8 primary | Early July (2026) |
| Circuit Court ruling | July 28, 2026 |
Local consequences and next steps
The ruling is likely to prompt swift appellate action. Waters publicly committed to an appeal, citing the decision’s implications for governance across Honolulu. How quickly the Court of Appeals moves and whether it will issue any stay could determine whether ballots for Waters are ultimately counted and how quickly the city can certify primary results.
For East Honolulu residents, the controversy underscores how legal interpretations of city charter language can translate into immediate political consequences. The coming days will test both the speed of the courts and the capacity of election officials to respond while preserving voter confidence.
Until the legal process runs its course, District 4 voters face the unusual prospect that votes already mailed could be rendered void by a post-submission judicial ruling — a reminder that the mechanics of local government and the precise language of municipal charters can matter as much as the campaign season’s rhetoric.
