To: Maui County Planning Commission
From: Gary & Perry, Homeowners at Kaanapali Royal
Reference: Oppose Bill 9, Protect Kaanapali Royal from Proposed Ban on Short Term Rentals (STRs)
As West Maui residents and property owners for over 15 years, we respectfully ask that you protect Kaanapali Royal from the proposed ban on STRs/apartment-zoned condos within Kaanapali Beach Resort, which were master-planned for short term visitor use. These units offer needed resort living for visitors/owners that desire multiple bedrooms and kitchens during their stay on Maui. Kaanapali Royal was built in 1980 with 105 two bedroom/two bath condos zoned as apartment (A2) and is legally part of the famous Kaanapali Beach Resort, which attracts visitors from all over the world. Most owners at Kaanapali Royal use their property as STRs. At a recent BOD meeting at Kaanapali Royal, it was reported that 8 out of 105 units were owner occupied (8%). The remaining 92% of owners rent their units as STRs (52%), a combination of owner occupancy and STR (28%) or long-term rental (12%).
STRs in resort areas should be exempt from Bill 9, like legislation that was passed in Kauai in 2009 (Bill 2298). STRs provide needed visitor accommodations that hotels do not offer and provide needed Transient Accommodations Tax (TAT) revenue that is used for schools, roads and affordable housing. TAT income is vital to restoring Lahaina and West Maui’s infrastructure to continue to attract visitors on a global level.
If Kaanapali Royal units were offered as long-term housing, they would not fit the profile of “affordable” housing needed for displaced Lahaina fire victims as described in Senate Bill 2919 and from messages conveyed by Governor Green and Maui Mayor Bissen. The profile of that person has been described as 87% were renters and paid approximately $1800/month for one-bedroom accommodations. Recent long-term rentals in Kaanapali Royal are at a rate of approximately $6000/month. Further, Kaanapali Royal does not offer assigned parking, does not offer private garages/carports and has limited storage space.
To compound the situation in West Maui further, domestic air travel to Maui is down 50% from last year. This is likely due to the uncertainty and mixed messaging that vacationers are receiving from the Governor of Hawaii and Mayor of Maui regarding the ban on STRs.
Protect Kaanapali Royal and Kaanapali Beach Resort (KBR) as a whole, from the proposed ban on STRs for the following reasons:
1. Protecting Kaanapali is consistent with legislation passed in Kauai in 2009 that zoned Visitor Destination Areas (VDAs) which allow STRs.
2. STRs within VDAs on Maui generate a large percentage of revenue from TAT which is needed to rebuild Lahaina and to build new affordable housing.
3. STRs within the Kaanapali Beach Resort VDA do not meet the Governor’s & Mayor’s objective to provide “affordable” housing to displaced Lahaina fire victims. In a press release & article published by the Star Advertiser on May 2, 2024, Maui Mayor Richard Bissen said, “It is important to note that most, if not all of these, TVRs impacted by this legislation were previously built and designed for workforce housing in West Maui and our goal is to return them to their intended purpose.” Kaanapali Royal was not designed or built as workforce housing.
4. Enforcing the ban on STRs within resort areas will cause a large inventory of condos zoned as A1/A2 (apartment) to be placed on the market. Low demand for these units due to uncertainty over the situation will drive home values lower. Property taxes will decline as a result.
5. Local employees that support STVs such as property management teams, housekeeping, and maintenance personnel will lose their jobs.
6. Original zoning documents for Kaanapali Royal complex dating back to 1978-1980, show that the project was designated as short-term vacation rental.
Protect and preserve the original intent of Kaanapali Beach Resort as it was master planned over 50 years ago. Continue to attract tourists to a world class resort which was never intended to be offered as “affordable” housing for the workforce population of Maui. Per the Maui Economic Development Board (MEDB) website, 70% of Maui County revenue comes from tourism. A “win-win” for both sides of the arguments for and against Bill 9 is to re-zone Maui like what was accomplished with Kauai Bill 2298 where areas such as Kaanapali Beach are zoned as “Visitor Designated Area” (VDA.) This approach will support the tourism industry, provide jobs for local residents and provide TAT taxes to rebuild affordable housing and schools. Housing in VDAs is generally not affordable and was designed for short term needs (no garages, no assigned parking, high HOA fees, limited storage).
All of the uncertainty, risk and proposed ban on STRs has caused the inventory of condos listed for sale in West Maui to increase significantly in comparison to last year. We respectfully ask to stop the uncertainty and take time to re-zone Maui similar to legislation passed in Kauai so that a balance can be reached.
While efforts to address Maui’s housing crisis are necessary and valid, this proposal risks undermining the very economic foundations that support our communities. Bill 9 would dismantle an entire segment of the island’s diversified lodging economy, one that not only generates substantial tax revenue, but also sustains thousands of local jobs and service contracts across small businesses.
Eliminating TVRs does not eliminate visitor demand; it displaces it. This category of traveler often chooses vacation rentals for reasons that hotels cannot substitute. It is a misconception to assume this demand will be absorbed by hotels, especially given their capacity constraints and pricing models. Instead, visitors may look to other islands or destinations altogether, leading to a measurable decline in both county and state revenues.
The TVR sector plays a vital role in diversifying Maui’s hospitality landscape, creating space for economic inclusion, entrepreneurship, and community-driven participation in the visitor industry. Preserving this segment supports a more resilient and locally rooted tourism economy, where a broader range of residents can contribute to and benefit from the industry that sustains the islands.
If the concern is environmental or cultural impact, then the focus should be on managing tourism behavior, not eliminating legal segments of it. Hawai‘i Visitors and Convention Bureau and HTA has already made progress on regenerative tourism through programs like Mālama Hawai‘i, and community-oriented education like the Meaningful Travel Map of Hawai‘i. These tools deserve investment and expansion. The newly introduced Green Fee will tax vacation stays and use the funds to help with preservations of unique cultural and natural resources.
Removing TVRs undercuts these broader efforts and may ultimately reduce funding sources that protect the very cultural and natural resources we seek to preserve.
A more balanced solution might include stronger enforcement of rental operations, possible incentives for voluntary conversions to long-term use, and expanded efforts to regulate behavior and manage visitor impact responsibly.
While the focus rightly remains on advancing and accelerating housing solutions and development, there should be a balanced approach without jeopardizing livelihoods or undermining economic diversification.
I respectfully urge the Committee not to advance Bill 9.
My name is Gaye Nell Heck, and my family owns at Kaanapali Royal which is located within the planned master resort boundaries of Ka’anapali and is located on the 16th fairway of the Ka'anapali Royal Golf Course. My family has been a part of the Maui community for over 22 years. We are opposed to Bill 9.
Ka’anapali Royal has always been a part of the master planned resort of Ka’anapali and was built in 1980 for short-term rental use and has continuously been primarily used as short-term rentals. The Maui County Code identifies Ka’anapali, Wailea, Kapula and Makena as a “planned resort destination area.” MCC Sec. 2.80B.020. The Code further states that a planned resort destination area is “intended as a major tourist destination area, consistent with general and community plans.” Id. In accordance with the Maui Code, the Maui Planning Commission has designated Ka’anapali as a place where visitor-oriented activities and lodging should be located. Permitting Ka’anpali Royal to continue to offer short-term vacation rentals is consistent with Ka’anapali as a place where visitors come to stay, visit, eat and play. If Bill 9 passes and Ka’anapali Royal is banned from hosting resort vacation rentals, visitors who prefer a STR lodging will be pushed into STRs located in residential areas where Maui residents reside. Banning STRs at Ka’anapali Royal seems antithetical to the Maui County Code which intends Ka’anapali to be a major tourist destination where visitor-oriented activities and lodging should be located.
In December 1978, the State of Hawaii issued a public Preliminary Condominium Report on Ka’anapali Royal (Registration No. 1066) (the “Report”). In the Report, the State of Hawaii granted rights to Ka’anapali Royal that run with land, including that the intended purpose and building use of Ka’anapali Royal Apartments “shall be occupied and used only as permanent or temporary residences or lodgings.” (Page 10, Preliminary Condominium Report on Ka’anapali Royal). No where in the Report does the State of Hawaii state that the Kaanapali Royal Apartments’ intended purpose or building use was intended for workplace housing. Given that the proposed bill’s reason for passage is to return the properties back to their purported original purpose to provide workplace housing, the bill as proposed is based on false supporting facts and recitals/premises, especially as it relates to Ka’anapali Royal.
The covenants and declarations contained in the deeds that are granted to Ka’anapali Royal Apartment Owners allow owners to operate resort vacation rentals. (See covenants, conditions and restrictions as set forth in the Deed from Amfac, Inc., a Hawaii corporation to Ka’anapali Royal Associates, a Hawaii general partnership, dated December 1, 1978, filed as Document No. 911189). Accordingly, the right of Ka’anapali Royal Owners to operate a resort vacation rental is not a right granted by county ordinance but is a property right that runs with the land, its deeds, covenants and restrictions. Taking away a property right is against the U.S. Constitution Fifth Amendment. For the government to take away an owner’s property right, the government must show that the taking is for a “public use” and then it must provide “just compensation for the taking of that right. (See Fifth Amendment, U.S. Constitution). Taking a private property right and giving it to another private property owner is not a “public use” and is not permitted in our democracy. Ka’anapali Royal is a well-maintained property and is not a “blighted property” that needs to be developed. Even if Maui County could prove that the taking is a “public use,” Maui County would have to pay ALL Ka’anapali Royal Owners (not just those operating STRs) for the taking away of their property right to operate a resort vacation rental. The budgetary impact of litigating whether the County can take away an individual’s constitutional property right and the costs of the County paying every Ka’anapali Royal owner the fair market value of its property should give this Commission pause and should result in a Vote “no” on the bill.
Ka’anapali Royal is not affordable housing. As stated previously, Ka’anapali Resort is located within the boundaries of the Ka’anapali Beach Resort. The State of Hawaii requires Ka’anapali Royal to pay a portion of its AOAO budget to the Ka’anapali Operator’s Association. (See Page 15, Preliminary Condominium Report on Ka’anapali Royal). In addition, the monthly AOAO dues of each unit are $1,629. These dues will not decrease if STRs are banned on the property since the AOAO relies on parking fees from STR guests as a significant part of the AOAO’s budget.
Since the Ka’anapali Resort was built to allow vacation resort rentals, the Ka’anapali Royal is not conducive to multi-family housing. The bylaws are numerous and include such rules as no pets are allowed (not even goldfish), allow each unit only one parking space, and limited storage.
Given the above reasons, we oppose the bill, and the Committee should exercise its power and vote “No” on Bill 9. By denying the passage of this bill, this Committee will be deciding on facts and in Maui’s best interest.
Submitted by: Mitchell Moore
Resident, Ke Nani Kai, Molokai
Aloha Chair and Members of the Maui County Council,
I’m writing in strong support of Bill 9, which addresses the proliferation of short-term vacation rentals in apartment-zoned areas — particularly as it affects small, resource-limited communities like Molokai.
As a full-time resident of Ke Nani Kai, I’ve seen firsthand how these rentals have shifted the character of our neighborhood and added stress to our already limited infrastructure. Molokai operates on a much thinner margin than Maui or Oʻahu. We have fewer emergency services, tighter housing availability, and perhaps most pressing — constrained air transportation options.
Short-term rentals attract high turnover tourism that significantly increases the demand on our small airport and limited commercial flights. For residents, this can mean fewer seats available for medical appointments, family emergencies, or other essential travel. When you live on Molokai, these aren’t just inconveniences — they’re barriers to basic needs.
Beyond transportation, vacation rentals change the rhythm of residential life. They often displace long-term renters and inflate property values beyond what local families can afford. The community suffers when the housing stock is diverted away from residents toward visitors.
Bill 9 is a step in the right direction. It reaffirms that apartment-zoned areas should prioritize housing for residents, not high-turnover rentals. I urge the Council to pass it without delay and help preserve the unique balance of our island communities.
Mahalo for your time and dedication to this issue.
Roger Hoyer
3 Madrone Place
Orinda, CA 94563
925-254-5802
roger.hoyer@comcast.net
June 6, 2025
Dear Chair Kama, Vice Chair U’u-Hodgins and members of the Land Use Committee:
RE: Opposition to Bill 9 and request to remove Mahina Surf from any STR ban.
I purchased a short term rental unit at Mahina Surf 54 years ago. It suited our family needs since it was built to accommodate our family and guests for short periods of time. We knew it was small, but for short stays it would be perfect. We were lucky to find a building that built must to suit our needs.
We have rented this unit for all these years as a short term renal and paid the GET as well as the TAT for both the state and county of Maui as they were added. The property is simply not suited for long term rental as it was never designed for that purpose.
Hence I definitely oppose Bill 9 as drafted and believe the council should amend it to exclude the Mahina Surf complex at 4059 Lower Honoapiilani Road, Lahaina.
There has been discussion that some of these early condominiums were built for workforce housing, but this complex was never used for such a purpose.
We have and continue to hire many local residents to assist us with the condominium. This not only includes the short term rental staff, but also many local trades including housekeeping, painting, general contractors and now HVAC.
Please continue to exempt Mahina Surf from any short term rental ban as it has been rented on a short term basis since it was built in 1969.
Aloha Chair Kama, Vice Chair U’u-Hodgins, and Committee Members,
This letter is from Jim and Kari Hori; we are owners of a short-term rental property in Maui County. We write today to strongly oppose legislation to phase out over 7,000 vacation rentals.
These rentals are vital to the local economy and by phasing them out you will be doing long-term damage to Maui. For our rental property we employ local service providers ranging from property managers, cleaners, construction workers, while also supporting local artisans who make treats and spices that we leave for our guests. In our welcome book we promote and recommend local restaurants and events.
We understand the need to find more housing options for the local community. That does need to happen but phasing out a key revenue and job generator for Maui County will not accomplish meeting this need. Please consider alternatives that will utilize other resources available and create a thriving community versus a community with uncertain revenue streams and ultimately unhappy residents.
Let’s work together to find a path forward that is fair and balanced and creates a team environment where we are working together for the benefit of all people in Maui.
06/09/2025
Aloha Maui County Council and Housing & Land Use Committee Members,
Thank you for the opportunity to testify on Bill 9 (2025). While everyone on Maui supports Affordable Housing for our residents, we stand in opposition to this bill as it is written. I represent Hana Kai Maui, a legally operating short-term condo-tel, located in Hana. Built in 1970, vacation rental use was written into our original bylaws and has continued for 55 years offering accommodations to visitors and employment for our local community.
Employment & Local Impact
We currently employ 10 local residents—80% Hawaiian, 90% women, all lifelong Hana residents. We provide living wages, health insurance, vacation pay, and annual bonuses. Most of us have been here between 5 and 19 years.
This legislation could eliminate 10–15 stable jobs in an area where good employment is just as scarce as housing.
In addition, we hire outside services for groundskeeping, flower deliveries, massage therapy, photography and catering.
Personally, my job at Hana Kai has helped my husband and me buy back our family land and build a home—a dream 50 years in the making.
Hana’s Unique Challenges
Hana is not like the rest of Maui—geographically isolated, predominantly Hawaiian, and economically challenged.
Hana Kai sits oceanfront on the windward side; a very salty environment:
We operate the only wastewater treatment plant (WTP) on the east side.
• Maintenance costs range from $20,000–$30,000+ per year on a system that cost over $800,000 to install
• WTP Loan repayment averages $550/unit/month not including the operational and replacement costs
• Our wastewater system is too small to support full-time residential use and would require a significant investment to enlarge or replace the system.
Appliances last 3–5 years due to corrosion, painting and upkeep of exterior buildings is constant. We have limited parking, no elevators or air conditioning and electricity is limited to 25 or 50 amps/unit.
Affordability Reality
Hana Kai simply cannot offer affordable housing. Without significant subsidies, units will likely be rented by non-locals—outsiders with the means to afford an oceanfront escape. If Hana Kai Maui loses the ability rent short-term, the community will lose jobs, the state and county will lose nearly $600,000 in annual tax revenue and Hana Kai would likely fall into a state of disrepair.
We Give Back
• Hana Kai supports events and local programs like Hana Art Barn, Junior Lifeguard, Hana School, our Senior Center, Hana Athletics, Kahanu Gardens, Hana Canoe Club, Hana Buddhist temple, Ala Kukui and many more with monetary donations and free accommodations.
• We provide free accommodations to grieving families for funeral services.
• We fund a $5,000 annual scholarship for Hana School graduates and offer part time employment to students of Hana School.
• Our guests support local vendors, food trucks, stores, and activity providers
What We Ask
At the very least, please allow the Hana community and Hana Advisory Committee to weigh in on this decision. Hana Kai has had a symbiotic relationship with our town for over half a century—please don’t erase a beneficial community-based business, like Hana Kai.
Mahalo for your time and your service.
Susan J Pu
GM – Hana Kai Maui
Life-long resident of Hana
Aloha Chair, Vice Chair, and Committee Members,
I strongly oppose the proposed legislation to phase out more than 7,000 vacation rentals. My name is Carol Carolan and I’ve owned a condo in Honokowai for approximately 16 years. The complex was built in the 60’s specifically for vacationers. My husband (now deceased) and I lived in our unit for four years before my husband’s health issues forced us to return to the mainland. Wanting to be able to use our condo for family vacations, we placed it on a vacation rental program.
Our unit is professionally managed and we’ve worked hard to be responsible and to be aware of our community. Local businesses like the excellent fish shop across the street are recommended to our visitors as are local restaurants, shops and touring facilities. Of course, we employ local service providers like our lovely house cleaner, Marietta, as well as men like Jack who fixed our wood floor after a guest failed to report a leaking refrigerator and instead placed a towel on top of the wet floor (for days)! Darren replaced our air conditioning unit and rebuilt the doorway to the washer and dryer so everything fits properly. Heather, our property manager, has this uncanny ability to support her property clients as well as the guests renting their units. As time moves on, it becomes a family … people working together … providing for one another. Rather than being cooped up in a resort where guests are encouraged to remain on the grounds, our guests are encouraged to go out into the community, learn about the culture, and spend their hard-earned money on local businesses. Guests are happy and feel connected to the island. In fact, it’s not uncommon for guests to say they wouldn’t come to Maui if a vacation rental option didn’t exist.
Owning an oceanfront condo in an old complex hasn’t been easy. Maintenance costs are very high due, in part, to massive increases in insurance. Soon, we’ll face a special assessment to pay for major repairs to our building. Rest assured, these are NOT luxuries. We’re just trying to keep our building intact, appealing and safe. Again, local businesses are supported as we keep our building in pristine condition.
This legislation feels like a knee-jerk reaction to the Lahaina fire. It seems rushed and one-sided. Please find a fair and balanced path forward … one that supports the economy and protects local jobs while holding STR owners to high standards.
Mahalo for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Carol Carolan
Aloha Chair Kama, Vice Chair Cook and members of the committee
My name is John Kevan, and I have the privilege of working with local families every day as a Realtor on Maui and partner in a Lahiana real estate management firm. We had 23 of our employees who lost everything in the fire. We have managed over 10% of FEMA's fire victims and still are today, have provided over 4000 free nights in support of victims and are heavily involved in community support.
I’m writing to ask you to reconsider Bill 9—not just as a real estate professional, but as a neighbor who has seen firsthand how these policies affect real people AND know the real financial numbers it takes to support these vacation rental units on the Minatoya list. Although UHERO's study was good, the numbers presented on cost to live in and maintain these properties were significantly off and did not include any of the endless assessment these properties get his with every 3 or so years.
We have over 100 employees who's familities and careers depend on this business, putting them out of work does not make sense and believing they will work for substandard pay at hotels not a realistic plan. Over 80% (I can prove) of the money STR's brings in stays and supports the island and the local businesses. Hotel ship vast majority of money back to corporate. Why would you not support the local businesses and residents? That’s not just an economic loss—it’s a loss of community.
We need housing, my employees need housing, but this bill doesn’t solve that problem. Even the governor's proclamation in July 2023, noted many many reasons for lack of housing, not one of them was due to STR's but all government related issues. The DCCA and HTA websites show that between 2004 and 2024 there was only an increase of 500 vacation rentals on Maui but a population increase of 35,000. Again, not an STR issue. According to RAM’s recent survey, only a tiny fraction of owners would convert their units to long-term housing. These properties are often not affordable due to high HOA fees, maintenance costs, assessments, insurance, mortgage and property taxes even using the Long Term rates.
Rather than targeting legal, tax-paying owners, let’s focus on smarter enforcement, using the money STR's produce to support local building of new housing, and supporting those who already provide long-term rentals. This is our home—we can do better than tearing apart livelihoods in the name of a solution that doesn’t work.
Please defer Bill 9 and consider a more compassionate, logical and effective path forward.
As West Maui homeowners at Kaanapali Royal and full-time residents of Maui, my husband and I oppose Bill 9. We have owned a unit at Kaanapali Royal for 15 years which is part of the master planned resort of Kaanapali. We purchased this unit solely because it was designated as a short-term vacation rental and could be rented when we were not occupying. We purchased another unit in Kaanapali Royal last year as an investment property at a high price, under a 1031 exchange because we wanted to rent it on a short-term vacation rental basis. A month after closing escrow on the property, the STR ban proposal was announced by the Mayor on May 2, 2024.
We listed the second unit for sale at our purchase price shortly thereafter. It was on the market for over 4 months without any offers or inquiries. At that point, we tried to rent the unit as a short-term vacation rental with a professional Maui property management team. The demand for short-term rental condos was down due to messaging regarding the ban on STRs.
At that point, we had no other choice but to rent the unit on a long-term basis for one year. Our lease ends in September 2025 and now our realtor is indicating that demand for long term rentals in Kaanapali Royal has softened considerably and is down approximately 35% in terms of price in comparison to last year.
We respectfully ask that the master planned resort of Kaanapali, which includes Kaanapali Royal, be exempt from Bill 9. Kaanapali Royal was never designed as workforce housing and in fact helps to keep the economy of Maui alive in places where hotels, restaurants and amenities planned for tourism exist. Again, we purchased both of our units in Kaanapali Royal because the legal documents dating back to 1978-1980, showed this complex as designated for short term vacation rental.
Dear members of the Housing and Land Use Committee,
As a concerned renter and member of our community, I urge you to support the Minatoya short-term rental (STR) phase-out. This policy is a necessary step toward restoring housing affordability and availability for residents.
Renters are being priced out of the communities we work in and contribute to. Prioritizing housing for residents over tourists is a matter of fairness, sustainability, and economic stability.
Please stand with local residents and take action to support the Minatoya STR phase-out.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony. I am writing in opposition to Bill 9.
We own a unit in Ka’anapali Royal, a condo complex that is part of the Ka'anapali Resort area. Ka'anapali Royal is in a master planned resort destination area which is intended for use by visitors as a destination for their travel. Our complex is a member of the Ka'anapali Operations Association of the Ka'anapali Beach Resort and Ka'anapali Royal is required by the KOA to pay a portion of its AOAO budget to the Ka'anapali Operations Association. Our 105 condo complex houses a combination of many full-time and part-time residents. We are also considered a condo hotel by many lenders.
Our STR has directly supported local contractors from various expensive renovations we have made over the years with additional work planned in the next year. Further, our STR directly supports local jobs including property managers (about $145,000 since 2013), cleaners, maintenance workers—along with the restaurants, shops, and tour operators that our guests frequent. In addition, we’ve paid close to $200,000 since 2013 in GET and TAT taxes to the County. If the STR ban were to go through, the county would lose significant tax revenues and local employers would lose substantial business resulting in layoffs of local workers.
Dear Chair Kama, Vice Chair Uʻu-Hodgins, and Members of the Housing and Land Use Committee:
I am writing to express my strong opposition to Bill 9 as currently drafted and to respectfully request that the Council amend the bill to exclude Papakea Oceanfront Resort, which the County has long recognized as being zoned A-2/H-2.
Background on Papakea:
Papakea was originally marketed and sold as a legal vacation rental property—long before any zoning restrictions on transient vacation rentals (TVRs) in apartment-zoned areas. For nearly fifty years, owners have operated short-term rentals at Papakea in good faith and in full compliance with Maui County ordinances and State laws.
Papakea has never served as workforce housing, nor is it suitable for conversion to such use. Most units are under 600 square feet and the property has limited parking. It is not located in a residential neighborhood, but rather along a stretch of hotel-zoned and commercially-zoned properties, making it far more compatible with visitor accommodations than long-term residential use.
Unlike typical apartment complexes, Papakea includes resort-specific amenities such as a front desk, activity concierge, and multiple recreational features tailored to visitors—not long-term tenants.
Papakea owners purchased their properties with the reasonable expectation that short-term rentals were legal, based on multiple ordinances—some as recent as 2022. Many owners made substantial financial commitments, including mortgages, renovations, and furnishing costs, all grounded in these legal assurances. To retroactively revoke those rights through an amortization scheme not only violates fundamental fairness but also undermines investment-backed expectations protected by state and federal law.
Papakea’s Contributions to the Community:
Papakea directly employs 35 local residents in full-time, benefited positions. Several employees have been with the resort for over 17 years. We are proud that some have grown from entry-level jobs into supervisory roles. Notably, after the August 2023 wildfires, Papakea provided housing to a fire victim, who later became a valued employee at our resort.
We also ensure that our workers—including cleaners and maintenance staff—receive living wages, reflecting our commitment to economic dignity and local employment.
Our operations support a broad network of local trades and professionals—from HVAC, pest control, and electrical work to entertainers and fitness instructors—many of whom are self-employed or own small businesses. Ending STRs at Papakea would effectively tell these entrepreneurs that their independence, flexibility, and income potential are no longer valued.
Papakea units contribute significantly to public revenues through property taxes at the STR rate, Transient Accommodations Tax (TAT), General Excise Tax (GET), and the Maui County TAT. In turn, our guests stimulate the local economy by patronizing restaurants, food trucks, shops, parks, and tour operators across the island.
The Bigger Picture:
We urge the Council to look to examples like South Lake Tahoe, where a ban on vacation rentals led to economic decline and failed to deliver affordable housing. In fact, a court later ruled that the ban was unconstitutional. Rather than helping local families, the ban hurt the very families it was trying to help and put local businesses and service providers out of business.
We believe there are more productive, community-positive solutions to Maui’s housing crisis. These include:
• Issuing more building permits for affordable housing;
• Investing in vocational training programs to help residents secure high-paying jobs;
• Providing targeted housing subsidies;
• And using tax revenue (such as TAT proceeds) to build workforce housing directly.
Our Community Commitment:
Papakea is more than a resort. It is a community partner. Our owners and guests volunteer at beach cleanups, support organizations like the Maui Humane Society, hospitals, and cultural nonprofits, and routinely give back through philanthropy and service.
We respectfully ask you to amend Bill 9 to exclude Papakea Oceanfront Resort and preserve our longstanding, community-based model of responsible short-term rental use.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony.
My name is Jennifer Taylor, and I own a condominium in Wailea in Maui County. My husband and I bought our property in 2013 and, when we are not on Maui, we rent it out to others to help pay for the extremely high AOAO fees for which we are responsible – fees that are increasing significantly each year due to the insurance crisis. Our condominium complex was designed and intended for short-term rentals, as is made clear in the Declaration filed with the County of Maui, and we bought it knowing that it could be used for short-term rentals.
We use a local broker to manage our property when we are not here, as required by Maui County, and we pay all of the required TAT, GET, and property taxes. The local broker that we use to manage the property employs at least a dozen people to manage the STRs in her portfolio.
We have also worked with numerous local vendors and contractors to maintain the property over the years, including a licensed contractor who has repeatedly helped us as we went from room to room updating a very old and outdated condominium unit, an upholsterer in Haiku that has become a good friend, and a wonderful group of cleaners, among others. We do not rely on Amazon to ship things to Maui; rather, we rely on local stores and spend money here on Maui, even when we are not here ourselves. Not only do we support local businesses, we support Maui as a whole through our involvement in Maui wildlife rescue and significant yearly donations to the Maui County Food Bank. We do this because we want to be involved with and support our neighbors.
I am very concerned about the potential STR ban not because we will not have income from rentals to help with the AOAO fees, which we will adjust to, but because it will hurt all of the people with whom we work and that we have come to know on Maui. Tourism has long been the biggest source of income and taxes in Maui and tourism has been suffering lately, first due to the pandemic, then the tragic Lahaina fire, then the proposal of Bill 9, and now what we seeing coming out of Washington.
In this environment, Maui needs the money that tourism brings to provide services to its residents, so it needs legal tax-paying STRs, particularly in its planned resort communities of Wailea, Ka’anapali, and Kapalua. Maui also needs more housing, but it will not get significantly more housing by phasing out over 7,000 STR units. Instead, Maui will receive less in tax revenue (GET, TAT, and property), its local businesses will receive fewer tourism dollars, and some Maui residents will lose their jobs. With less money and higher unemployment, Maui County Council will compound, not fix, its core problem of a lack of workforce and affordable housing. The UHERO study is very clear that phasing out over 7,000 STRs will hurt, not help, Maui County residents, and that the phaseout will not fix the housing crisis. There is no study that suggests the opposite.
As for the claim that tourists will still come even with a limited number of STRs, that is not true for many tourists. When my children were young and our family came to Wailea, we never even considered staying in a hotel; we would have gone elsewhere if that was all that was available. We wanted a place with at least two bedrooms, a kitchen, and space for the kids to play, which is what a condo offers, but not a hotel. The pools at the hotels are great, but the hotels are not otherwise family friendly, and they cost far more than an STR. Maui should want families to come here, particularly to its planned resort communities of Wailea, Ka’anapali, and Kapalua, and to spend at local businesses what they save by using an STR.
Dear Council members:
My wife and I have traveling to Maui every year since the mid 1980s and always said we’d move the Maui if we could find a way to support the move. In 2020, we were finally able to purchase a condo in Kamaole Sands. We are now retired and intend to live in Maui from October to March. We will rent the unit the remaining six months. That’s the only way we could live there and still pay for the property taxes and HOA fees
We are strongly opposed to the proposed legislation to eliminate short term rentals. We and our guests make substantial contributions to the Maui economy. We purchase groceries, rent cars and gas, frequent restaurants, go to luaus, book excursions, purchase local items from the various craft fairs, and try to support local artisans whenever we can. We pay a local management company to take care of our property when not on island, pay for cleaning services, by furniture and appliances periodically to update the unit, and hire various local handymen to perform needed repairs. The elimination of STR will not only put an unplanned burden on us to continue our lifelong plan to live on Maui but it will also have a huge impact on all the vendors we support. Many businesses like the ones I mentioned previously who depend on the STR business will be forced to close their doors. The UHERO report confirmed that 1,900 Maui residents will lose their livelihoods and the county will lose $900 million dollars in tourist spending
Our's, like many condos have always been operated as resorts and are not suited for permanent housing. They have no closet space for storage, only one parking space, and the HOA fees are over $1,500 per month. Too expensive for a typical family to afford and too small to live in
There has to be a better way to solve the housing crisis on Maui than to take away something from families such as ours who have been following all the laws and guidelines that were in place when we bought our property. I am asking you to VOTE NO on the elimination of short term rentals and to begin focusing on other possible solutions that are more promising long-term solutions
Aloha Maui County Council Chair, Vice Chair and Members
My wife and I own an apartment zoned condo in Kihei for the past four years.
Our condo complex was designed and built for short term vacation rentals. Each condo in our complex is very small, has no storage, one car parking space and very high AOAO fees that keeps increasing due to high insurance cost and aging infrastructures.
We and our guests support the local economy. In the past year since the STR ban was first announced, we saw the decline of our property value, our property management company laying off their staff and significant reduction in rental bookings resulted in less income to our cleaning and maintenance staff.
We support the County in providing affordable, decent and long term housing for all residents. The Mayor’s proposal of banning short term rental is not going to accomplish this goal. It will NOT improve the living experience of the local residents by reducing the crowding condition in multi-generation homes nor shortening the commute to work/school. The decline of State and County revenue and the loss of permanent jobs as indicated on the UHERO and other economic impact reports will devastate the County and will cause locals to leave Maui for better paying jobs or any jobs.
We urge the Council to find a fair and balanced approach in providing long term housing for local residents, one that protects local jobs, and supports the economy.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony on the proposed ban on transient vacation rentals in Maui. I oppose Bill 9.
I believe that there is a false conflation that banning TVRs will solve the very real affordable housing crisis in Maui. Without question residents deserve affordable, dignified housing options. Continued attention and investment in building new, modern options should be a priority for the Mayor’s office and Maui County Council. I own in Ka'anapali Royal, a 40+ year old complex with aging infrastructure, high AOAO costs, limited parking, storage, no pets or smoking. The carrying costs, upwards of $6000/month and rising, are not affordable.
Ka'anapali Royal is within the Ka'anapali Beach Resort area. According to the originating documents, Ka'anapali Royal was not built for, nor has it ever been, intended as workforce housing. Rather, as a required member of the Ka'anapali Beach Operator’s Association, it was always conceived as having “resort rentals” thus creating an attractive tourist option to boost the tourism sector in the 1980’s and beyond. It remains so today. We are happy to be able to supply a comfortable, affordable alternative to hotels in close proximity to Ka'anapali beach. My condo generally attracts families with small children who are less likely to stay in hotels but go to local restaurants, shops and tours. I am told that without TVRs, they will vacation elsewhere. Significant dollars will be lost across the many industries that rely on tourism.
You will undoubtedly get a lot of data on the estimated large-scale negative impact of lost jobs (estimated ~14k jobs lost), millions in lost TAT/GET/MCTAT tax revenue and property tax revenue ($213MM in 2023). This is not hyperbole. We saw during Covid businesses shut down without tourists and TVRs, and many of the businesses that support my TVR barely hang on to survive. Such a ban would create an immediate and extensive impact that is very personal. My cleaners have told me that without TVRs, their 20 year old business will fold, they will lay off 5 people and they will leave Maui. All of the other local skilled trades who regularly service my condo - HVAC, contractors, local suppliers, electricians, plumbers will lose significant work and jobs will be lost as there is much more maintenance required for the upkeep of a TVR.
I urge you to recommend denial of the proposed legislation to avoid known and unintended consequences of a TVR ban, which is a false solution to the real problem of lack of affordable housing.
As a homeowner at Kaanapali Royal, located in the Kaanapali Resort area, I strongly oppose Bill 9 (2025). This bill unfairly targets responsible owners in apartment districts who have long operated legally and contributed to Maui’s visitor economy. Kaanapali Resort is a designated visitor destination area, and eliminating permitted vacation rentals here would negatively impact local jobs, small businesses, and property values. Please reject this bill and support balanced and fair regulation.
Dear Chair Kama, Vice Chair Uʻu-Hodgins and Members of the Housing and Land Use Committee:
I strongly oppose this Short-Term Rental Bill. Papakea’s resort operations provide full-time, benefited, employment for 35 local resident employees; some have worked at the property for over 17 years; some started in entry-level positions and worked into supervisory roles. We have been operating as a STR since conception of our resort almost 50 years. Papakea STRs support the State of Hawaii and County of Maui through payment of property taxes (many at the short-term rental rate), Transient Accommodations Tax, General Excise Tax, and Maui County Transient Accommodations Tax. We are A1 but also H according to your list. People relied on this information when making educated real estate decisions. Taking it away is essentially stealing and owners should be compensated.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony. I am writing in opposition to Bill 9.
I am Rick Beck on the Board of Ka'anapali Royal, one of the Minatoya list complexes in the Ka'anapali Resort area. I am writing to express our strong opposition to Bill 9. Here is a bit of information on our condo complex, with the hope that it can help your decision making when you consider Bill 9.
Mayor Bissen has repeated several times that about 2000 units from the Minatoya list were purposely built as workforce housing. This is not the case with Ka'anapali Royal. Our condo complex, built in 1980, is located within the Ka'anapali Resort boundaries and sits on the 16th fairway of the Ka'anapali golf course. It was part of the larger master planned development of Ka'anapali beach resort as a tourist area in the 70's/80's, and we’ve been welcoming tourists to stay at Ka'anapali Royal since we received our certificate of occupancy.
In December 1978, the State of Hawaii issued a public Preliminary Condominium Report on Ka'anapali Royal (Registration No. 1066) (the “Report”). In the Report, the State of Hawaii granted rights to Ka'anapali Royal that run with land, including that the intended purpose and building use of Ka'anapali Royal Apartments “shall be occupied and used only as permanent or temporary residences or lodgings.” (Page 10, Preliminary Condominium Report on Ka'anapali Royal). There are also several mentions of "resort rentals" throughout the Report. No where in the Report does the State of Hawaii state that the Ka'anapali Royal’s intended purpose or building use was intended for workplace housing.
Our condos grant a single parking place per unit, have limited storage, do not allow pets and were designed for tourists. Our close proximity to Whaler’s Village and location within the Ka'anapali resort boundaries keeps short term rentals in the tourism zone of Ka'anapali, while providing an alternative to families who wish to stay in an apartment rather than a hotel room. By providing visitor accommodations within the Ka'anapali Beach destination resort, Ka'anapali Royal assists the County in keeping STRs out of affordable residential areas.
In response to Mayor Bissen’s recommendation of rezoning to Hotel, we did some research on process and tax implications. According to the Real Property tax division, because individual units are taxed at “highest possible use”, all individual condos would still be taxed at TVR rates, unless they are classified as owner-occupied or LTR. If they were changed to Hotel tax rates, it would be lower. Moreover, consultants tell us that the entire process, with environmental assessments and many reviews, would take 3-5 years and cost up to $500k in consultant fees. Most importantly, it has the potential for significant unintended consequences, as described by the Ka’anapali Operator’s Association:
“The Mayor's suggestion to change zoning from Apartment to Hotel is unreasonable and incorrect. Maui has built out all existing hotel zoned lands except for our driving range clubhouse lot to my knowledge (Lot 40 which is HM 2 story zoned). Changing zoning to hotel can mean an increase in density to hotel densities which range from two stories to 12 stories and will increase overtourism in my opinion.”
There is a false conflation that banning TVRs will solve the very real affordable housing crisis in Maui. Without question residents deserve affordable, dignified housing options. Continued attention and investment in building new, modern options should be a priority for the Mayor’s office and Maui County Council. I urge you to recommend denial of Bill 9 to avoid known and unintended consequences of a TVR ban.
To: Maui County Planning Commission
From: Gary & Perry, Homeowners at Kaanapali Royal
Reference: Oppose Bill 9, Protect Kaanapali Royal from Proposed Ban on Short Term Rentals (STRs)
As West Maui residents and property owners for over 15 years, we respectfully ask that you protect Kaanapali Royal from the proposed ban on STRs/apartment-zoned condos within Kaanapali Beach Resort, which were master-planned for short term visitor use. These units offer needed resort living for visitors/owners that desire multiple bedrooms and kitchens during their stay on Maui. Kaanapali Royal was built in 1980 with 105 two bedroom/two bath condos zoned as apartment (A2) and is legally part of the famous Kaanapali Beach Resort, which attracts visitors from all over the world. Most owners at Kaanapali Royal use their property as STRs. At a recent BOD meeting at Kaanapali Royal, it was reported that 8 out of 105 units were owner occupied (8%). The remaining 92% of owners rent their units as STRs (52%), a combination of owner occupancy and STR (28%) or long-term rental (12%).
STRs in resort areas should be exempt from Bill 9, like legislation that was passed in Kauai in 2009 (Bill 2298). STRs provide needed visitor accommodations that hotels do not offer and provide needed Transient Accommodations Tax (TAT) revenue that is used for schools, roads and affordable housing. TAT income is vital to restoring Lahaina and West Maui’s infrastructure to continue to attract visitors on a global level.
If Kaanapali Royal units were offered as long-term housing, they would not fit the profile of “affordable” housing needed for displaced Lahaina fire victims as described in Senate Bill 2919 and from messages conveyed by Governor Green and Maui Mayor Bissen. The profile of that person has been described as 87% were renters and paid approximately $1800/month for one-bedroom accommodations. Recent long-term rentals in Kaanapali Royal are at a rate of approximately $6000/month. Further, Kaanapali Royal does not offer assigned parking, does not offer private garages/carports and has limited storage space.
To compound the situation in West Maui further, domestic air travel to Maui is down 50% from last year. This is likely due to the uncertainty and mixed messaging that vacationers are receiving from the Governor of Hawaii and Mayor of Maui regarding the ban on STRs.
Protect Kaanapali Royal and Kaanapali Beach Resort (KBR) as a whole, from the proposed ban on STRs for the following reasons:
1. Protecting Kaanapali is consistent with legislation passed in Kauai in 2009 that zoned Visitor Destination Areas (VDAs) which allow STRs.
2. STRs within VDAs on Maui generate a large percentage of revenue from TAT which is needed to rebuild Lahaina and to build new affordable housing.
3. STRs within the Kaanapali Beach Resort VDA do not meet the Governor’s & Mayor’s objective to provide “affordable” housing to displaced Lahaina fire victims. In a press release & article published by the Star Advertiser on May 2, 2024, Maui Mayor Richard Bissen said, “It is important to note that most, if not all of these, TVRs impacted by this legislation were previously built and designed for workforce housing in West Maui and our goal is to return them to their intended purpose.” Kaanapali Royal was not designed or built as workforce housing.
4. Enforcing the ban on STRs within resort areas will cause a large inventory of condos zoned as A1/A2 (apartment) to be placed on the market. Low demand for these units due to uncertainty over the situation will drive home values lower. Property taxes will decline as a result.
5. Local employees that support STVs such as property management teams, housekeeping, and maintenance personnel will lose their jobs.
6. Original zoning documents for Kaanapali Royal complex dating back to 1978-1980, show that the project was designated as short-term vacation rental.
Protect and preserve the original intent of Kaanapali Beach Resort as it was master planned over 50 years ago. Continue to attract tourists to a world class resort which was never intended to be offered as “affordable” housing for the workforce population of Maui. Per the Maui Economic Development Board (MEDB) website, 70% of Maui County revenue comes from tourism. A “win-win” for both sides of the arguments for and against Bill 9 is to re-zone Maui like what was accomplished with Kauai Bill 2298 where areas such as Kaanapali Beach are zoned as “Visitor Designated Area” (VDA.) This approach will support the tourism industry, provide jobs for local residents and provide TAT taxes to rebuild affordable housing and schools. Housing in VDAs is generally not affordable and was designed for short term needs (no garages, no assigned parking, high HOA fees, limited storage).
All of the uncertainty, risk and proposed ban on STRs has caused the inventory of condos listed for sale in West Maui to increase significantly in comparison to last year. We respectfully ask to stop the uncertainty and take time to re-zone Maui similar to legislation passed in Kauai so that a balance can be reached.
Aloha Chair and Committee Members,
I respectfully oppose Bill 9.
While efforts to address Maui’s housing crisis are necessary and valid, this proposal risks undermining the very economic foundations that support our communities. Bill 9 would dismantle an entire segment of the island’s diversified lodging economy, one that not only generates substantial tax revenue, but also sustains thousands of local jobs and service contracts across small businesses.
Eliminating TVRs does not eliminate visitor demand; it displaces it. This category of traveler often chooses vacation rentals for reasons that hotels cannot substitute. It is a misconception to assume this demand will be absorbed by hotels, especially given their capacity constraints and pricing models. Instead, visitors may look to other islands or destinations altogether, leading to a measurable decline in both county and state revenues.
The TVR sector plays a vital role in diversifying Maui’s hospitality landscape, creating space for economic inclusion, entrepreneurship, and community-driven participation in the visitor industry. Preserving this segment supports a more resilient and locally rooted tourism economy, where a broader range of residents can contribute to and benefit from the industry that sustains the islands.
If the concern is environmental or cultural impact, then the focus should be on managing tourism behavior, not eliminating legal segments of it. Hawai‘i Visitors and Convention Bureau and HTA has already made progress on regenerative tourism through programs like Mālama Hawai‘i, and community-oriented education like the Meaningful Travel Map of Hawai‘i. These tools deserve investment and expansion. The newly introduced Green Fee will tax vacation stays and use the funds to help with preservations of unique cultural and natural resources.
Removing TVRs undercuts these broader efforts and may ultimately reduce funding sources that protect the very cultural and natural resources we seek to preserve.
A more balanced solution might include stronger enforcement of rental operations, possible incentives for voluntary conversions to long-term use, and expanded efforts to regulate behavior and manage visitor impact responsibly.
While the focus rightly remains on advancing and accelerating housing solutions and development, there should be a balanced approach without jeopardizing livelihoods or undermining economic diversification.
I respectfully urge the Committee not to advance Bill 9.
Sincere Aloha,
Viktoria Ujj
My name is Gaye Nell Heck, and my family owns at Kaanapali Royal which is located within the planned master resort boundaries of Ka’anapali and is located on the 16th fairway of the Ka'anapali Royal Golf Course. My family has been a part of the Maui community for over 22 years. We are opposed to Bill 9.
Ka’anapali Royal has always been a part of the master planned resort of Ka’anapali and was built in 1980 for short-term rental use and has continuously been primarily used as short-term rentals. The Maui County Code identifies Ka’anapali, Wailea, Kapula and Makena as a “planned resort destination area.” MCC Sec. 2.80B.020. The Code further states that a planned resort destination area is “intended as a major tourist destination area, consistent with general and community plans.” Id. In accordance with the Maui Code, the Maui Planning Commission has designated Ka’anapali as a place where visitor-oriented activities and lodging should be located. Permitting Ka’anpali Royal to continue to offer short-term vacation rentals is consistent with Ka’anapali as a place where visitors come to stay, visit, eat and play. If Bill 9 passes and Ka’anapali Royal is banned from hosting resort vacation rentals, visitors who prefer a STR lodging will be pushed into STRs located in residential areas where Maui residents reside. Banning STRs at Ka’anapali Royal seems antithetical to the Maui County Code which intends Ka’anapali to be a major tourist destination where visitor-oriented activities and lodging should be located.
In December 1978, the State of Hawaii issued a public Preliminary Condominium Report on Ka’anapali Royal (Registration No. 1066) (the “Report”). In the Report, the State of Hawaii granted rights to Ka’anapali Royal that run with land, including that the intended purpose and building use of Ka’anapali Royal Apartments “shall be occupied and used only as permanent or temporary residences or lodgings.” (Page 10, Preliminary Condominium Report on Ka’anapali Royal). No where in the Report does the State of Hawaii state that the Kaanapali Royal Apartments’ intended purpose or building use was intended for workplace housing. Given that the proposed bill’s reason for passage is to return the properties back to their purported original purpose to provide workplace housing, the bill as proposed is based on false supporting facts and recitals/premises, especially as it relates to Ka’anapali Royal.
The covenants and declarations contained in the deeds that are granted to Ka’anapali Royal Apartment Owners allow owners to operate resort vacation rentals. (See covenants, conditions and restrictions as set forth in the Deed from Amfac, Inc., a Hawaii corporation to Ka’anapali Royal Associates, a Hawaii general partnership, dated December 1, 1978, filed as Document No. 911189). Accordingly, the right of Ka’anapali Royal Owners to operate a resort vacation rental is not a right granted by county ordinance but is a property right that runs with the land, its deeds, covenants and restrictions. Taking away a property right is against the U.S. Constitution Fifth Amendment. For the government to take away an owner’s property right, the government must show that the taking is for a “public use” and then it must provide “just compensation for the taking of that right. (See Fifth Amendment, U.S. Constitution). Taking a private property right and giving it to another private property owner is not a “public use” and is not permitted in our democracy. Ka’anapali Royal is a well-maintained property and is not a “blighted property” that needs to be developed. Even if Maui County could prove that the taking is a “public use,” Maui County would have to pay ALL Ka’anapali Royal Owners (not just those operating STRs) for the taking away of their property right to operate a resort vacation rental. The budgetary impact of litigating whether the County can take away an individual’s constitutional property right and the costs of the County paying every Ka’anapali Royal owner the fair market value of its property should give this Commission pause and should result in a Vote “no” on the bill.
Ka’anapali Royal is not affordable housing. As stated previously, Ka’anapali Resort is located within the boundaries of the Ka’anapali Beach Resort. The State of Hawaii requires Ka’anapali Royal to pay a portion of its AOAO budget to the Ka’anapali Operator’s Association. (See Page 15, Preliminary Condominium Report on Ka’anapali Royal). In addition, the monthly AOAO dues of each unit are $1,629. These dues will not decrease if STRs are banned on the property since the AOAO relies on parking fees from STR guests as a significant part of the AOAO’s budget.
Since the Ka’anapali Resort was built to allow vacation resort rentals, the Ka’anapali Royal is not conducive to multi-family housing. The bylaws are numerous and include such rules as no pets are allowed (not even goldfish), allow each unit only one parking space, and limited storage.
Given the above reasons, we oppose the bill, and the Committee should exercise its power and vote “No” on Bill 9. By denying the passage of this bill, this Committee will be deciding on facts and in Maui’s best interest.
Gaye Nell Heck
Owner, Ka’anapali Royal
Testimony in Support of Maui County Bill 9
Submitted by: Mitchell Moore
Resident, Ke Nani Kai, Molokai
Aloha Chair and Members of the Maui County Council,
I’m writing in strong support of Bill 9, which addresses the proliferation of short-term vacation rentals in apartment-zoned areas — particularly as it affects small, resource-limited communities like Molokai.
As a full-time resident of Ke Nani Kai, I’ve seen firsthand how these rentals have shifted the character of our neighborhood and added stress to our already limited infrastructure. Molokai operates on a much thinner margin than Maui or Oʻahu. We have fewer emergency services, tighter housing availability, and perhaps most pressing — constrained air transportation options.
Short-term rentals attract high turnover tourism that significantly increases the demand on our small airport and limited commercial flights. For residents, this can mean fewer seats available for medical appointments, family emergencies, or other essential travel. When you live on Molokai, these aren’t just inconveniences — they’re barriers to basic needs.
Beyond transportation, vacation rentals change the rhythm of residential life. They often displace long-term renters and inflate property values beyond what local families can afford. The community suffers when the housing stock is diverted away from residents toward visitors.
Bill 9 is a step in the right direction. It reaffirms that apartment-zoned areas should prioritize housing for residents, not high-turnover rentals. I urge the Council to pass it without delay and help preserve the unique balance of our island communities.
Mahalo for your time and dedication to this issue.
Respectfully,
Mitchell Moore
Ke Nani Kai, Molokai
Roger Hoyer
3 Madrone Place
Orinda, CA 94563
925-254-5802
roger.hoyer@comcast.net
June 6, 2025
Dear Chair Kama, Vice Chair U’u-Hodgins and members of the Land Use Committee:
RE: Opposition to Bill 9 and request to remove Mahina Surf from any STR ban.
I purchased a short term rental unit at Mahina Surf 54 years ago. It suited our family needs since it was built to accommodate our family and guests for short periods of time. We knew it was small, but for short stays it would be perfect. We were lucky to find a building that built must to suit our needs.
We have rented this unit for all these years as a short term renal and paid the GET as well as the TAT for both the state and county of Maui as they were added. The property is simply not suited for long term rental as it was never designed for that purpose.
Hence I definitely oppose Bill 9 as drafted and believe the council should amend it to exclude the Mahina Surf complex at 4059 Lower Honoapiilani Road, Lahaina.
There has been discussion that some of these early condominiums were built for workforce housing, but this complex was never used for such a purpose.
We have and continue to hire many local residents to assist us with the condominium. This not only includes the short term rental staff, but also many local trades including housekeeping, painting, general contractors and now HVAC.
Please continue to exempt Mahina Surf from any short term rental ban as it has been rented on a short term basis since it was built in 1969.
Sincerely,
Roger Hoyer
Mahina Surf 102
June 6, 2025
Aloha Chair Kama, Vice Chair U’u-Hodgins, and Committee Members,
This letter is from Jim and Kari Hori; we are owners of a short-term rental property in Maui County. We write today to strongly oppose legislation to phase out over 7,000 vacation rentals.
These rentals are vital to the local economy and by phasing them out you will be doing long-term damage to Maui. For our rental property we employ local service providers ranging from property managers, cleaners, construction workers, while also supporting local artisans who make treats and spices that we leave for our guests. In our welcome book we promote and recommend local restaurants and events.
We understand the need to find more housing options for the local community. That does need to happen but phasing out a key revenue and job generator for Maui County will not accomplish meeting this need. Please consider alternatives that will utilize other resources available and create a thriving community versus a community with uncertain revenue streams and ultimately unhappy residents.
Let’s work together to find a path forward that is fair and balanced and creates a team environment where we are working together for the benefit of all people in Maui.
Sincerely,
Kari and Jim Hori
408-621-2813
06/09/2025
Aloha Maui County Council and Housing & Land Use Committee Members,
Thank you for the opportunity to testify on Bill 9 (2025). While everyone on Maui supports Affordable Housing for our residents, we stand in opposition to this bill as it is written. I represent Hana Kai Maui, a legally operating short-term condo-tel, located in Hana. Built in 1970, vacation rental use was written into our original bylaws and has continued for 55 years offering accommodations to visitors and employment for our local community.
Employment & Local Impact
We currently employ 10 local residents—80% Hawaiian, 90% women, all lifelong Hana residents. We provide living wages, health insurance, vacation pay, and annual bonuses. Most of us have been here between 5 and 19 years.
This legislation could eliminate 10–15 stable jobs in an area where good employment is just as scarce as housing.
In addition, we hire outside services for groundskeeping, flower deliveries, massage therapy, photography and catering.
Personally, my job at Hana Kai has helped my husband and me buy back our family land and build a home—a dream 50 years in the making.
Hana’s Unique Challenges
Hana is not like the rest of Maui—geographically isolated, predominantly Hawaiian, and economically challenged.
Hana Kai sits oceanfront on the windward side; a very salty environment:
We operate the only wastewater treatment plant (WTP) on the east side.
• Maintenance costs range from $20,000–$30,000+ per year on a system that cost over $800,000 to install
• WTP Loan repayment averages $550/unit/month not including the operational and replacement costs
• Our wastewater system is too small to support full-time residential use and would require a significant investment to enlarge or replace the system.
Appliances last 3–5 years due to corrosion, painting and upkeep of exterior buildings is constant. We have limited parking, no elevators or air conditioning and electricity is limited to 25 or 50 amps/unit.
Affordability Reality
Hana Kai simply cannot offer affordable housing. Without significant subsidies, units will likely be rented by non-locals—outsiders with the means to afford an oceanfront escape. If Hana Kai Maui loses the ability rent short-term, the community will lose jobs, the state and county will lose nearly $600,000 in annual tax revenue and Hana Kai would likely fall into a state of disrepair.
We Give Back
• Hana Kai supports events and local programs like Hana Art Barn, Junior Lifeguard, Hana School, our Senior Center, Hana Athletics, Kahanu Gardens, Hana Canoe Club, Hana Buddhist temple, Ala Kukui and many more with monetary donations and free accommodations.
• We provide free accommodations to grieving families for funeral services.
• We fund a $5,000 annual scholarship for Hana School graduates and offer part time employment to students of Hana School.
• Our guests support local vendors, food trucks, stores, and activity providers
What We Ask
At the very least, please allow the Hana community and Hana Advisory Committee to weigh in on this decision. Hana Kai has had a symbiotic relationship with our town for over half a century—please don’t erase a beneficial community-based business, like Hana Kai.
Mahalo for your time and your service.
Susan J Pu
GM – Hana Kai Maui
Life-long resident of Hana
Aloha Chair, Vice Chair, and Committee Members,
I strongly oppose the proposed legislation to phase out more than 7,000 vacation rentals. My name is Carol Carolan and I’ve owned a condo in Honokowai for approximately 16 years. The complex was built in the 60’s specifically for vacationers. My husband (now deceased) and I lived in our unit for four years before my husband’s health issues forced us to return to the mainland. Wanting to be able to use our condo for family vacations, we placed it on a vacation rental program.
Our unit is professionally managed and we’ve worked hard to be responsible and to be aware of our community. Local businesses like the excellent fish shop across the street are recommended to our visitors as are local restaurants, shops and touring facilities. Of course, we employ local service providers like our lovely house cleaner, Marietta, as well as men like Jack who fixed our wood floor after a guest failed to report a leaking refrigerator and instead placed a towel on top of the wet floor (for days)! Darren replaced our air conditioning unit and rebuilt the doorway to the washer and dryer so everything fits properly. Heather, our property manager, has this uncanny ability to support her property clients as well as the guests renting their units. As time moves on, it becomes a family … people working together … providing for one another. Rather than being cooped up in a resort where guests are encouraged to remain on the grounds, our guests are encouraged to go out into the community, learn about the culture, and spend their hard-earned money on local businesses. Guests are happy and feel connected to the island. In fact, it’s not uncommon for guests to say they wouldn’t come to Maui if a vacation rental option didn’t exist.
Owning an oceanfront condo in an old complex hasn’t been easy. Maintenance costs are very high due, in part, to massive increases in insurance. Soon, we’ll face a special assessment to pay for major repairs to our building. Rest assured, these are NOT luxuries. We’re just trying to keep our building intact, appealing and safe. Again, local businesses are supported as we keep our building in pristine condition.
This legislation feels like a knee-jerk reaction to the Lahaina fire. It seems rushed and one-sided. Please find a fair and balanced path forward … one that supports the economy and protects local jobs while holding STR owners to high standards.
Mahalo for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Carol Carolan
Aloha Chair Kama, Vice Chair Cook and members of the committee
My name is John Kevan, and I have the privilege of working with local families every day as a Realtor on Maui and partner in a Lahiana real estate management firm. We had 23 of our employees who lost everything in the fire. We have managed over 10% of FEMA's fire victims and still are today, have provided over 4000 free nights in support of victims and are heavily involved in community support.
I’m writing to ask you to reconsider Bill 9—not just as a real estate professional, but as a neighbor who has seen firsthand how these policies affect real people AND know the real financial numbers it takes to support these vacation rental units on the Minatoya list. Although UHERO's study was good, the numbers presented on cost to live in and maintain these properties were significantly off and did not include any of the endless assessment these properties get his with every 3 or so years.
We have over 100 employees who's familities and careers depend on this business, putting them out of work does not make sense and believing they will work for substandard pay at hotels not a realistic plan. Over 80% (I can prove) of the money STR's brings in stays and supports the island and the local businesses. Hotel ship vast majority of money back to corporate. Why would you not support the local businesses and residents? That’s not just an economic loss—it’s a loss of community.
We need housing, my employees need housing, but this bill doesn’t solve that problem. Even the governor's proclamation in July 2023, noted many many reasons for lack of housing, not one of them was due to STR's but all government related issues. The DCCA and HTA websites show that between 2004 and 2024 there was only an increase of 500 vacation rentals on Maui but a population increase of 35,000. Again, not an STR issue. According to RAM’s recent survey, only a tiny fraction of owners would convert their units to long-term housing. These properties are often not affordable due to high HOA fees, maintenance costs, assessments, insurance, mortgage and property taxes even using the Long Term rates.
Rather than targeting legal, tax-paying owners, let’s focus on smarter enforcement, using the money STR's produce to support local building of new housing, and supporting those who already provide long-term rentals. This is our home—we can do better than tearing apart livelihoods in the name of a solution that doesn’t work.
Please defer Bill 9 and consider a more compassionate, logical and effective path forward.
John
As West Maui homeowners at Kaanapali Royal and full-time residents of Maui, my husband and I oppose Bill 9. We have owned a unit at Kaanapali Royal for 15 years which is part of the master planned resort of Kaanapali. We purchased this unit solely because it was designated as a short-term vacation rental and could be rented when we were not occupying. We purchased another unit in Kaanapali Royal last year as an investment property at a high price, under a 1031 exchange because we wanted to rent it on a short-term vacation rental basis. A month after closing escrow on the property, the STR ban proposal was announced by the Mayor on May 2, 2024.
We listed the second unit for sale at our purchase price shortly thereafter. It was on the market for over 4 months without any offers or inquiries. At that point, we tried to rent the unit as a short-term vacation rental with a professional Maui property management team. The demand for short-term rental condos was down due to messaging regarding the ban on STRs.
At that point, we had no other choice but to rent the unit on a long-term basis for one year. Our lease ends in September 2025 and now our realtor is indicating that demand for long term rentals in Kaanapali Royal has softened considerably and is down approximately 35% in terms of price in comparison to last year.
We respectfully ask that the master planned resort of Kaanapali, which includes Kaanapali Royal, be exempt from Bill 9. Kaanapali Royal was never designed as workforce housing and in fact helps to keep the economy of Maui alive in places where hotels, restaurants and amenities planned for tourism exist. Again, we purchased both of our units in Kaanapali Royal because the legal documents dating back to 1978-1980, showed this complex as designated for short term vacation rental.
Dear members of the Housing and Land Use Committee,
As a concerned renter and member of our community, I urge you to support the Minatoya short-term rental (STR) phase-out. This policy is a necessary step toward restoring housing affordability and availability for residents.
Renters are being priced out of the communities we work in and contribute to. Prioritizing housing for residents over tourists is a matter of fairness, sustainability, and economic stability.
Please stand with local residents and take action to support the Minatoya STR phase-out.
Mahalo,
George W Chyz
Haiku, HI 96708
Thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony. I am writing in opposition to Bill 9.
We own a unit in Ka’anapali Royal, a condo complex that is part of the Ka'anapali Resort area. Ka'anapali Royal is in a master planned resort destination area which is intended for use by visitors as a destination for their travel. Our complex is a member of the Ka'anapali Operations Association of the Ka'anapali Beach Resort and Ka'anapali Royal is required by the KOA to pay a portion of its AOAO budget to the Ka'anapali Operations Association. Our 105 condo complex houses a combination of many full-time and part-time residents. We are also considered a condo hotel by many lenders.
Our STR has directly supported local contractors from various expensive renovations we have made over the years with additional work planned in the next year. Further, our STR directly supports local jobs including property managers (about $145,000 since 2013), cleaners, maintenance workers—along with the restaurants, shops, and tour operators that our guests frequent. In addition, we’ve paid close to $200,000 since 2013 in GET and TAT taxes to the County. If the STR ban were to go through, the county would lose significant tax revenues and local employers would lose substantial business resulting in layoffs of local workers.
We recommend rejection of Bill 9.
Respectfully,
R. K.
Dear Chair Kama, Vice Chair Uʻu-Hodgins, and Members of the Housing and Land Use Committee:
I am writing to express my strong opposition to Bill 9 as currently drafted and to respectfully request that the Council amend the bill to exclude Papakea Oceanfront Resort, which the County has long recognized as being zoned A-2/H-2.
Background on Papakea:
Papakea was originally marketed and sold as a legal vacation rental property—long before any zoning restrictions on transient vacation rentals (TVRs) in apartment-zoned areas. For nearly fifty years, owners have operated short-term rentals at Papakea in good faith and in full compliance with Maui County ordinances and State laws.
Papakea has never served as workforce housing, nor is it suitable for conversion to such use. Most units are under 600 square feet and the property has limited parking. It is not located in a residential neighborhood, but rather along a stretch of hotel-zoned and commercially-zoned properties, making it far more compatible with visitor accommodations than long-term residential use.
Unlike typical apartment complexes, Papakea includes resort-specific amenities such as a front desk, activity concierge, and multiple recreational features tailored to visitors—not long-term tenants.
Papakea owners purchased their properties with the reasonable expectation that short-term rentals were legal, based on multiple ordinances—some as recent as 2022. Many owners made substantial financial commitments, including mortgages, renovations, and furnishing costs, all grounded in these legal assurances. To retroactively revoke those rights through an amortization scheme not only violates fundamental fairness but also undermines investment-backed expectations protected by state and federal law.
Papakea’s Contributions to the Community:
Papakea directly employs 35 local residents in full-time, benefited positions. Several employees have been with the resort for over 17 years. We are proud that some have grown from entry-level jobs into supervisory roles. Notably, after the August 2023 wildfires, Papakea provided housing to a fire victim, who later became a valued employee at our resort.
We also ensure that our workers—including cleaners and maintenance staff—receive living wages, reflecting our commitment to economic dignity and local employment.
Our operations support a broad network of local trades and professionals—from HVAC, pest control, and electrical work to entertainers and fitness instructors—many of whom are self-employed or own small businesses. Ending STRs at Papakea would effectively tell these entrepreneurs that their independence, flexibility, and income potential are no longer valued.
Papakea units contribute significantly to public revenues through property taxes at the STR rate, Transient Accommodations Tax (TAT), General Excise Tax (GET), and the Maui County TAT. In turn, our guests stimulate the local economy by patronizing restaurants, food trucks, shops, parks, and tour operators across the island.
The Bigger Picture:
We urge the Council to look to examples like South Lake Tahoe, where a ban on vacation rentals led to economic decline and failed to deliver affordable housing. In fact, a court later ruled that the ban was unconstitutional. Rather than helping local families, the ban hurt the very families it was trying to help and put local businesses and service providers out of business.
We believe there are more productive, community-positive solutions to Maui’s housing crisis. These include:
• Issuing more building permits for affordable housing;
• Investing in vocational training programs to help residents secure high-paying jobs;
• Providing targeted housing subsidies;
• And using tax revenue (such as TAT proceeds) to build workforce housing directly.
Our Community Commitment:
Papakea is more than a resort. It is a community partner. Our owners and guests volunteer at beach cleanups, support organizations like the Maui Humane Society, hospitals, and cultural nonprofits, and routinely give back through philanthropy and service.
We respectfully ask you to amend Bill 9 to exclude Papakea Oceanfront Resort and preserve our longstanding, community-based model of responsible short-term rental use.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony.
Sincerely,
Neelu Manrao
3543 Lower Honoapiilani Road, Apartment F205
My name is Jennifer Taylor, and I own a condominium in Wailea in Maui County. My husband and I bought our property in 2013 and, when we are not on Maui, we rent it out to others to help pay for the extremely high AOAO fees for which we are responsible – fees that are increasing significantly each year due to the insurance crisis. Our condominium complex was designed and intended for short-term rentals, as is made clear in the Declaration filed with the County of Maui, and we bought it knowing that it could be used for short-term rentals.
We use a local broker to manage our property when we are not here, as required by Maui County, and we pay all of the required TAT, GET, and property taxes. The local broker that we use to manage the property employs at least a dozen people to manage the STRs in her portfolio.
We have also worked with numerous local vendors and contractors to maintain the property over the years, including a licensed contractor who has repeatedly helped us as we went from room to room updating a very old and outdated condominium unit, an upholsterer in Haiku that has become a good friend, and a wonderful group of cleaners, among others. We do not rely on Amazon to ship things to Maui; rather, we rely on local stores and spend money here on Maui, even when we are not here ourselves. Not only do we support local businesses, we support Maui as a whole through our involvement in Maui wildlife rescue and significant yearly donations to the Maui County Food Bank. We do this because we want to be involved with and support our neighbors.
I am very concerned about the potential STR ban not because we will not have income from rentals to help with the AOAO fees, which we will adjust to, but because it will hurt all of the people with whom we work and that we have come to know on Maui. Tourism has long been the biggest source of income and taxes in Maui and tourism has been suffering lately, first due to the pandemic, then the tragic Lahaina fire, then the proposal of Bill 9, and now what we seeing coming out of Washington.
In this environment, Maui needs the money that tourism brings to provide services to its residents, so it needs legal tax-paying STRs, particularly in its planned resort communities of Wailea, Ka’anapali, and Kapalua. Maui also needs more housing, but it will not get significantly more housing by phasing out over 7,000 STR units. Instead, Maui will receive less in tax revenue (GET, TAT, and property), its local businesses will receive fewer tourism dollars, and some Maui residents will lose their jobs. With less money and higher unemployment, Maui County Council will compound, not fix, its core problem of a lack of workforce and affordable housing. The UHERO study is very clear that phasing out over 7,000 STRs will hurt, not help, Maui County residents, and that the phaseout will not fix the housing crisis. There is no study that suggests the opposite.
As for the claim that tourists will still come even with a limited number of STRs, that is not true for many tourists. When my children were young and our family came to Wailea, we never even considered staying in a hotel; we would have gone elsewhere if that was all that was available. We wanted a place with at least two bedrooms, a kitchen, and space for the kids to play, which is what a condo offers, but not a hotel. The pools at the hotels are great, but the hotels are not otherwise family friendly, and they cost far more than an STR. Maui should want families to come here, particularly to its planned resort communities of Wailea, Ka’anapali, and Kapalua, and to spend at local businesses what they save by using an STR.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Dear Council members:
My wife and I have traveling to Maui every year since the mid 1980s and always said we’d move the Maui if we could find a way to support the move. In 2020, we were finally able to purchase a condo in Kamaole Sands. We are now retired and intend to live in Maui from October to March. We will rent the unit the remaining six months. That’s the only way we could live there and still pay for the property taxes and HOA fees
We are strongly opposed to the proposed legislation to eliminate short term rentals. We and our guests make substantial contributions to the Maui economy. We purchase groceries, rent cars and gas, frequent restaurants, go to luaus, book excursions, purchase local items from the various craft fairs, and try to support local artisans whenever we can. We pay a local management company to take care of our property when not on island, pay for cleaning services, by furniture and appliances periodically to update the unit, and hire various local handymen to perform needed repairs. The elimination of STR will not only put an unplanned burden on us to continue our lifelong plan to live on Maui but it will also have a huge impact on all the vendors we support. Many businesses like the ones I mentioned previously who depend on the STR business will be forced to close their doors. The UHERO report confirmed that 1,900 Maui residents will lose their livelihoods and the county will lose $900 million dollars in tourist spending
Our's, like many condos have always been operated as resorts and are not suited for permanent housing. They have no closet space for storage, only one parking space, and the HOA fees are over $1,500 per month. Too expensive for a typical family to afford and too small to live in
There has to be a better way to solve the housing crisis on Maui than to take away something from families such as ours who have been following all the laws and guidelines that were in place when we bought our property. I am asking you to VOTE NO on the elimination of short term rentals and to begin focusing on other possible solutions that are more promising long-term solutions
Mahalo,
Bruce and Debra Henley
Aloha Maui County Council Chair, Vice Chair and Members
My wife and I own an apartment zoned condo in Kihei for the past four years.
Our condo complex was designed and built for short term vacation rentals. Each condo in our complex is very small, has no storage, one car parking space and very high AOAO fees that keeps increasing due to high insurance cost and aging infrastructures.
We and our guests support the local economy. In the past year since the STR ban was first announced, we saw the decline of our property value, our property management company laying off their staff and significant reduction in rental bookings resulted in less income to our cleaning and maintenance staff.
We support the County in providing affordable, decent and long term housing for all residents. The Mayor’s proposal of banning short term rental is not going to accomplish this goal. It will NOT improve the living experience of the local residents by reducing the crowding condition in multi-generation homes nor shortening the commute to work/school. The decline of State and County revenue and the loss of permanent jobs as indicated on the UHERO and other economic impact reports will devastate the County and will cause locals to leave Maui for better paying jobs or any jobs.
We urge the Council to find a fair and balanced approach in providing long term housing for local residents, one that protects local jobs, and supports the economy.
Mahalo for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Ka-Ngo and Betty Leung
.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony on the proposed ban on transient vacation rentals in Maui. I oppose Bill 9.
I believe that there is a false conflation that banning TVRs will solve the very real affordable housing crisis in Maui. Without question residents deserve affordable, dignified housing options. Continued attention and investment in building new, modern options should be a priority for the Mayor’s office and Maui County Council. I own in Ka'anapali Royal, a 40+ year old complex with aging infrastructure, high AOAO costs, limited parking, storage, no pets or smoking. The carrying costs, upwards of $6000/month and rising, are not affordable.
Ka'anapali Royal is within the Ka'anapali Beach Resort area. According to the originating documents, Ka'anapali Royal was not built for, nor has it ever been, intended as workforce housing. Rather, as a required member of the Ka'anapali Beach Operator’s Association, it was always conceived as having “resort rentals” thus creating an attractive tourist option to boost the tourism sector in the 1980’s and beyond. It remains so today. We are happy to be able to supply a comfortable, affordable alternative to hotels in close proximity to Ka'anapali beach. My condo generally attracts families with small children who are less likely to stay in hotels but go to local restaurants, shops and tours. I am told that without TVRs, they will vacation elsewhere. Significant dollars will be lost across the many industries that rely on tourism.
You will undoubtedly get a lot of data on the estimated large-scale negative impact of lost jobs (estimated ~14k jobs lost), millions in lost TAT/GET/MCTAT tax revenue and property tax revenue ($213MM in 2023). This is not hyperbole. We saw during Covid businesses shut down without tourists and TVRs, and many of the businesses that support my TVR barely hang on to survive. Such a ban would create an immediate and extensive impact that is very personal. My cleaners have told me that without TVRs, their 20 year old business will fold, they will lay off 5 people and they will leave Maui. All of the other local skilled trades who regularly service my condo - HVAC, contractors, local suppliers, electricians, plumbers will lose significant work and jobs will be lost as there is much more maintenance required for the upkeep of a TVR.
I urge you to recommend denial of the proposed legislation to avoid known and unintended consequences of a TVR ban, which is a false solution to the real problem of lack of affordable housing.
Respectfully,
Nicola Dourambeis
Kaanapali Royal
As a homeowner at Kaanapali Royal, located in the Kaanapali Resort area, I strongly oppose Bill 9 (2025). This bill unfairly targets responsible owners in apartment districts who have long operated legally and contributed to Maui’s visitor economy. Kaanapali Resort is a designated visitor destination area, and eliminating permitted vacation rentals here would negatively impact local jobs, small businesses, and property values. Please reject this bill and support balanced and fair regulation.
Dear Chair Kama, Vice Chair Uʻu-Hodgins and Members of the Housing and Land Use Committee:
I strongly oppose this Short-Term Rental Bill. Papakea’s resort operations provide full-time, benefited, employment for 35 local resident employees; some have worked at the property for over 17 years; some started in entry-level positions and worked into supervisory roles. We have been operating as a STR since conception of our resort almost 50 years. Papakea STRs support the State of Hawaii and County of Maui through payment of property taxes (many at the short-term rental rate), Transient Accommodations Tax, General Excise Tax, and Maui County Transient Accommodations Tax. We are A1 but also H according to your list. People relied on this information when making educated real estate decisions. Taking it away is essentially stealing and owners should be compensated.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony. I am writing in opposition to Bill 9.
I am Rick Beck on the Board of Ka'anapali Royal, one of the Minatoya list complexes in the Ka'anapali Resort area. I am writing to express our strong opposition to Bill 9. Here is a bit of information on our condo complex, with the hope that it can help your decision making when you consider Bill 9.
Mayor Bissen has repeated several times that about 2000 units from the Minatoya list were purposely built as workforce housing. This is not the case with Ka'anapali Royal. Our condo complex, built in 1980, is located within the Ka'anapali Resort boundaries and sits on the 16th fairway of the Ka'anapali golf course. It was part of the larger master planned development of Ka'anapali beach resort as a tourist area in the 70's/80's, and we’ve been welcoming tourists to stay at Ka'anapali Royal since we received our certificate of occupancy.
In December 1978, the State of Hawaii issued a public Preliminary Condominium Report on Ka'anapali Royal (Registration No. 1066) (the “Report”). In the Report, the State of Hawaii granted rights to Ka'anapali Royal that run with land, including that the intended purpose and building use of Ka'anapali Royal Apartments “shall be occupied and used only as permanent or temporary residences or lodgings.” (Page 10, Preliminary Condominium Report on Ka'anapali Royal). There are also several mentions of "resort rentals" throughout the Report. No where in the Report does the State of Hawaii state that the Ka'anapali Royal’s intended purpose or building use was intended for workplace housing.
Our condos grant a single parking place per unit, have limited storage, do not allow pets and were designed for tourists. Our close proximity to Whaler’s Village and location within the Ka'anapali resort boundaries keeps short term rentals in the tourism zone of Ka'anapali, while providing an alternative to families who wish to stay in an apartment rather than a hotel room. By providing visitor accommodations within the Ka'anapali Beach destination resort, Ka'anapali Royal assists the County in keeping STRs out of affordable residential areas.
In response to Mayor Bissen’s recommendation of rezoning to Hotel, we did some research on process and tax implications. According to the Real Property tax division, because individual units are taxed at “highest possible use”, all individual condos would still be taxed at TVR rates, unless they are classified as owner-occupied or LTR. If they were changed to Hotel tax rates, it would be lower. Moreover, consultants tell us that the entire process, with environmental assessments and many reviews, would take 3-5 years and cost up to $500k in consultant fees. Most importantly, it has the potential for significant unintended consequences, as described by the Ka’anapali Operator’s Association:
“The Mayor's suggestion to change zoning from Apartment to Hotel is unreasonable and incorrect. Maui has built out all existing hotel zoned lands except for our driving range clubhouse lot to my knowledge (Lot 40 which is HM 2 story zoned). Changing zoning to hotel can mean an increase in density to hotel densities which range from two stories to 12 stories and will increase overtourism in my opinion.”
There is a false conflation that banning TVRs will solve the very real affordable housing crisis in Maui. Without question residents deserve affordable, dignified housing options. Continued attention and investment in building new, modern options should be a priority for the Mayor’s office and Maui County Council. I urge you to recommend denial of Bill 9 to avoid known and unintended consequences of a TVR ban.