Appeal Under HRP Bylaw §117 

From: Tammy Ash Perkins, State Committee Member
To: Art Hanneman - State Chair, Hawai’i Republican Party
Date: September 12, 2025
Subject: Appeal of Improper Actions at Special State Committee Meeting 

I. Introduction 

Pursuant to HRP Bylaw §117, I hereby appeal the rulings and actions that occurred at the September 11, 2025 Special State Committee Meeting. The proceedings were conducted in a manner inconsistent with: 

• the Bylaws of the Hawai’i Republican Party (HRP);
• Robert’s Rules of Order Newly Revised (12th ed.) (RONR); and 
• the contractual and fiduciary duties owed to Party members under Hawai’i Revised Statutes (HRS) Chapter 429. 

II. Grounds for Appeal

1. Absence of the State Chair & Improper Denial of Chair Pro Tem Motion 

• The State Chair was absent from the Special State Committee meeting. 
• A proper motion was made, pursuant to RONR §§47:20-23, to elect a chair pro tem so the meeting could lawfully proceed. The motion was improperly ruled “out of order” under HRP Bylaw §308(b). 
• Under RONR (12th ed.) §47:20-23, at a special meeting, when the regular presiding officer (State Chair) is absent, the assembly itself must elect a chair pro tem. 
• Unless the HRP bylaws expressly give the Vice Chair the right to preside at a special meeting in the Chair’s absence (HRP’s Bylaws do not), the Vice Chair has no inherent authority to take the chair. 
• If the Vice Chair presides without an election, everything that follows is procedurally defective. In strict parliamentary terms, the meeting is void abinitio (invalid from the start). 
• By misapplying §308(b) and refusing to recognize the right of the assembly to elect its own presiding officer, the ruling deprived members of their fundamental parliamentary rights and left the meeting fatally defective.. 
• The motion should have been in order. 
• HRP §308(b) was misapplied. 
• The Vice Chair had no authority to preside without election. 
• Therefore, everything done in the meeting is invalid. 

2. Ultra Vires Agenda 

• The published agenda contained items that exceeded the lawful authority of the State Committee. 
• Specifically, the agenda sought to overturn the determinations of the State Rules Committee, which had properly upheld county sovereignty under the bylaws. 
• Such actions are ultra vires - beyond the lawful power of the State Committee - and in direct conflict with HRP Bylaws §§406, 408, and 412, which recognize the autonomy and jurisdiction of county committees over their own rules, officers, and internal governance. 
• Accordingly, any attempt by the State Committee to usurp this autonomy is void and without effect. 

3. Violation of the Unity Pledge 

• By attempting to control county committees and override their duly adopted bylaws, the State Committee’s Executive Committee violated the Party’s Unity Pledge. 
• These divisive and authoritarian actions undermine republican self-government, erode trust, and fracture Party unity. 

4. Failure of Appellants to Speak to or Defend Their Appeal (Waiver) 

• Appellant members who submitted the appeal that led to the challenged agenda were in attendance. 
• Yet, they failed to speak in defense of their own positions or address the procedural and substantive objections raised. 
• Under parliamentary doctrine and principles of fair process, and appeal or motion not defended is deemed waived. 
• Their refusal to engage demonstrates not only lack of merit but also bad faith, leaving the record devoid of justification for the actions taken. 
• A valid appeal cannot be sustained when those advancing it refuse to openly defend it before the body. 

5. Pattern of Non-Compliance by the State Chair 

• Since assuming office, the State Chair has never presided over a meeting, instead delegating or avoiding duties in ways that disregard both the Bylaws and RONR. 
• This ongoing refusal to comply with governing rules has fostered systemic dysfunction, silenced member rights, and endangered the integrity of the Party. 

6. Improper Influence = Prejudice to Rights 

• If the Vice Chair uses that unlawfully assumed role to steer debate, cut off objections, or sway the State Committee toward a predetermined outcome, it creates material prejudice to the rights of members. 
• RONR recognizes that an improperly presiding officer can alter results by controlling:
• Recognition of speakers (§3:33-37
• Rulings on points of order (§23:1-6)
• Declaring motions out of order (§23:2) 
• Declaring vote results (§4:35) 

Each of those actions, taken without proper authority, is ultra vires (beyond power) and subject to appeal. 

III. Legal Ramifications 

• Under HRS CH. 429 (unincorporated Nonprofit Associations), members are entitled to governance consistent with bylaws and established rules. 
• By overriding those rules, the Vice Chair arguably breached fiduciary duty of loyalty and care (§429-33, §429-34). 
• Courts can provide remedies such as: 
  • Declaratory judgment (declaring the meeting actions void). 
• Injunctive relief (blocking enforcement of the votes). 
• Attorney’s fees for members forced to challenge unlawful acts. 

IV. Relief Requested 

Accordingly, I respectfully appeal and request that: 

1. All actions taken at the September 11, 2025 Special State Committee Meeting be declared null and void, on the grounds that the meeting was conducted without a lawfully elected presiding officer. The Vice Chair assumed the chair without authority and in direct contravention of RONR §47:21 and HRP Bylaws.. 
2. Require that any future “special meeting” be properly noticed, with a duly elected chair pro tem presiding if the State Chair is absent or unwilling to preside. 
3. Reaffirm the autonomy of county committees, consistent with HRP Bylaws and the rulings of the State Rules Committee. 
4. Direct the State Chair to comply with his duties under HRP Bylaws, including presiding at meetings and ensuring adherence to lawful procedures. 

V. Conclusion 

This appeal is not about personalities or factions. It is about the rule of law, the contractual rights of members, and the preservation of republican self-government at every level of the Party. 

If unlawful procedures and ultra vires agendas are allowed to stand, member rights are meaningless and the Party itself becomes unaccountable. For these reasons, I urge the State Committee to sustain this appeal and restore lawful, principled governance to the Hawai’i Republican Party. 

Respectfully submitted, Tammy Ash Perkins State Committee Member 

VI. Notice of Escalation 

Failure to provide corrective action will compel members to seek judicial relief under HRS Chapter 429 and HRCP Rule 65, including but not limited to: 

• Declaratory judgment that the meeting and its actions were ultra vires and void;
•  Injunctive relief restraining further unlawful attempts to override county sovereignty;
• Costs, attorney’s fees, and all other remedies available at law and equity. 

Respectfully,
Tammy Ash Perkins State Committee Member 8/12/25