Normally, it would register as a mere blip on the Hawaii Democratic Party’s internal radar: the sending of three prospective names to fill the vacancy left by the late state Rep. Clift Tsuji, with the governor having the final say on the state House appointment. But as this election season has shown time and again, these are not normal times — in fact, a new normal is prevailing, one that rejects business as usual.

Questions of fairness are being raised about the Dec. 3 process that selected Moana Kelii, Stacy Higa and Christopher Todd as the three names to be forwarded to Gov. David Ige.

Dennis “Fresh” Onishi, a four-term Hawaii County councilman, has called on Hawaii Democratic Party Chairman Tim Vandeveer to investigate how the three finalists were picked. Prior to that Saturday’s open interviews with qualified candidates, and voting conducted in public, a text message surfaced the night before, indicating that Kelii, Higa and Todd already had the votes to be selected. It was that message of predetermination that Onishi said led him to skip the interview session, and to a lesser extent, fellow candidate J Yoshimoto, as well.

“It’s clear no rules were broken,” Hawaii County Democratic Party Chairman Phil Barnes told the Hawaii Tribune-Herald later in the week. “It looks terrible … (but) I’m not seeing any kind of fixed outcome.”

Memo to Democratic Party: Appearances do matter. If this tumultuous year has taught nothing else, it’s that voters want inclusion, that closed-door decisions can’t be condoned.

Hawaii Democrats sent those messages loud and clear during their March presidential preference poll, when a whopping 70 percent of nearly 34,000 votes went to unconventional candidate U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders over the establishment’s Hillary Clinton. That hunger for change within Hawaii’s dominant Democratic Party drew in 7,000 new members this year; complaints with the status quo also flew about arrogant mishandling of the presidential polling, in which party and precinct officials arbitrarily set varying voting hours, leaving many members in lines for hours, or worse, shut out of their own party’s decision-making.

That continuing dissension was instrumental in the turnover of Democratic Party leadership in late May, when Sanders supporter and relative newcomer Vandeveer was elected chairman, edging out longtime party activist Florence Kong Kee.

Now Vandeveer is being urged by Onishi to probe the Tsuji- replacement process, welcome action that would send a needed message for transparency. Further, this episode may well prompt proposed rule changes on filling vacancies, an encouraging response. Among the reported proposals to be introduced next month to a Hawaii County Democratic Party committee: barring selectors from discussing favored candidates before the public interviews.

There are lessons in Clinton’s defeat by Republican Donald Trump, in the strength of support for Sanders, in the changeover within Hawaii’s Democratic Party. Citizens want a stop to back-room deals; they want non-insiders to have a chance and say in the political process. The recent process to fill Tsuji’s vacancy, though, raises concerns of participation chill.

The Democratic Party’s bylaws for state House replacement read in part: “The more transparent, open, democratic, and objective the process the more engaged members will feel.”

Party officials need to heed their own guidelines. Openness and inclusion should extend to all party members, from newcomers to stalwarts. What happens within the dominant Democratic Party has consequences for the state.