In a case stemming from ballot shortages at precincts on Oahu and the Big Island in the 2012 general election, the state Supreme Court on Tuesday ruled that the state Office of Elections needs to establish rules through proper public noticing and hearing on the method it uses to calculate the number of ballots printed for precincts and how to handle ballots cast incorrectly.

The ruling in favor of the Green Party of Hawaii and seven individual plaintiffs, including Molokai resident Karen Holt, overturns previous judgments by the Intermediate Court of Appeals and 2nd Circuit Judge Peter Cahill. The defendants were Scott Nago, chief elections officer, and the state.

Maui County did not have ballot-shortage issues in 2012, but the case was filed in Maui County because the co-chairman of the Green Party was Maui’s Nikhilananda and one of the individual plaintiffs was Holt, said plaintiffs’ attorney Lance Collins on Wednesday.

Maui’s clerk’s office “did a good job and there were no apparent issues,” Collins said.

The case arose from a shortage of English paper ballots at precincts statewide in the Nov. 6, 2012, general election, Collins said. In addition, there was a mix-up that led to ballots being sent to two locations that resulted in 57 voters casting votes on incorrect ballots, according to court documents.

Plaintiff Elizabeth Ruze voted at Hokulani Elementary School in Honolulu near the end of the day and was given a paper ballot with races that she did not know were in her district, court documents said. Poll workers later discovered the ballots were wrong, and she was given the option of voting on a minority language ballot or an electronic voting machine.

She voted electronically.

“Many people were getting off work to vote and were irritated when they had to stand in long lines after the wrong ballots were discovered,” she said in court documents. “Some voted on minority language ballots but a number left because they said they couldn’t wait any longer.”

Nago told the Elections Commission in November that the problem was the result of “a deficient model used for ordering ballots, a failure to follow safeguards that exist to modify the order or to reallocate existing ballots prior to Election Day and a failure to deploy additional ballots in a timely manner on Election Day.”

He said that the problems did not change the results of elections and that everyone in line at the official close of the polling place was allowed to vote.

“What happened is clearly unacceptable,” Nago said in a November 2012 letter to the commission. “Having been entrusted with the integrity of the our elections, our voters deserved better.”

On Dec. 7, 2012, the Green Party filed its lawsuit, arguing that the Office of Elections was required to follow the state administrative rules process to adopt rules on the methodology for determining the number of ballots ordered, regarding the procedures by which precincts request additional paper ballots and on the procedure to count votes cast on incorrect ballots for a precinct.

The lawsuit focused on a change in the ballot ordering methodology. Prior to the 2012 general election, the Elections Office ordered ballots based on 85 percent of registered voters in a precinct. That formula was changed in 2012 to 125 percent of the number of people who actually voted in the previous election – the primary election, which often receives lower turnouts than the general election.

“There was no public hearing,” said Collins. “The public was not notified about the proposed rule. No one got to look at it.”

He noted that the elections officer still would be the final arbiter of the rule but only after public hearings.

The Elections Office countered in court that the issues were a matter of “internal management” and not subject to the administrative rules process.

“The Supreme Court has definitively ruled that the chief elections officer has to promulgate rules,” said Collins. “It is not discretionary . . . if it affects private rights and procedures.”

The case has been sent back to Judge Cahill, but it will be a few months before a hearing is scheduled, said Collins. Cahill will decide “what kind of injunctive relief is appropriate,” he said.

But there is a primary election next month. Collins said that the Elections Office has been advised to exercise as much caution as possible and said that the number of ballots printed will be 125 percent of the number of registered voters in a precinct.

“So there is no possible way there will be a ballot shortage,” Collins said.

Nedielyn Bueno, voter services section head, said she was unaware of Collins methodology of determining the number of ballots. She said Wednesday that the 2012 ballot shortage debacle was “a mistake . . . clearly an error” and not a result of policy changes.

The state Supreme Court ruling is being reviewed, she said.

* Lee Imada can be reached at leeimada@mauinews.com.