Aloha Chair & Council Members,

I am a local Realtor who has worked on workforce housing developments for several years now. I do not agree with allocating funds to implement Bills 111 & 107. There are a multitude of reasons Bill 111 will do more harm than good, as noted in the 2.97 Pilot Project in Kihei with Hale Kaiola. Although the intention is well and there, the policies in 111 are much too punitive and restrictive. This is not just my opinion but comes from half of the buyers that called or inquired about the Hale Kaiola project.

- Too long of a deed restriction
- The AMI is so complex, it should be simplified into 2 groups rather than 3 or sometimes 4
- Organizing a department or adding to a department to create and maintain a 'waitlist' will be costly, time-consuming, and a great additional burden to the county. The waitlist had changed so many times over the year with buyers moving away, changing jobs, having new families to support, etc. We couldn't rely on the buyers to update us even though the forms they were provided state they have to do this.
- The changes in pricing that Bill 107 implements can further disincentivize developers as costs and labor are great
- timelines for sale in 111 should be scaled back to the origins of 2.96 as the carry risk is great for developers; time is money
- funding could be used to supplement or combat prevailing interest rates. This point is HUGE. The majority that backed out of Hale Kaiola due to rising interest rates could have been helped with a rate buy-down program.
- funding could be used to buy down points in 100% AFH developments
In sum, I do not agree with the council moving to fund the implementation of these bills as the policies can cause more harm than good. It has been heartbreaking to see the direct result of these bills hindering local homebuyers instead of helping them.

With Sincere Aloha,
Gina Duncan
808-250-9858
MauiGina@gmail.com

Aloha Chair & Council Members,
I am a local realtor who has worked behind the scenes with the AFH/WFH developments. I do not agree with allocating funds to implement Bills 111 & 107. There are a multitude of reasons Bill 111 will do more harm than good, as noted in the 2.97 Pilot Project in Kihei with Kai Ola. Although the intent is well and there, the policies in 111 are much too punitive and restrictive.
- Too long of a deed restriction
- The AMI is so complex, it should be simplified into 2 groups rathers than 3 or sometimes 4
- Organizing a department or adding to a department to create and maintain a 'waitlist' will be costly, time consuming, and a great additional burden to the county
- The changes in pricing that Bill 107 implements can further disincentivize developers as costs and labor are great
- timelines for sale in 111 should be scaled back to the origins of 2.96 as the carry risk is great for developers; time is money
- funding could be used to supplement or combat prevailing interest rates
- funding could be used to buy down points in 100% AFH developments
In sum, I do not agree with the council moving to fund the implementation of these bills as the policies can cause more harm than do good. I am sure there are a few other's, in and out of my industry that are like minded in this case... Many of whom are consumers who did not prevail in the most recent AFH development due to circumstances listed above, policies listed above, and timelines listed above - would love to have a chat about it.

Mahalo for allowing me to express my thoughts,
Lena Kamai
(808) 205-3875
lkamai.onmaui808@gmail.com

Aloha. My name is Alan Lloyd. I am a resident of Wailuku. I’m commenting personally. I oppose defunding the implementation of bill 107 and 111. Keep the funding for Bill 107 and 111 in the 2024 budget.