Good day to all HLU committee members, Chair Kama, and Vice Chair U'u-Hodgins.
Thank you for reading and considering my comments in strong opposition to Bill 9, which would uniformly, indiscriminately, and categorically eliminate STRs on the Minatoya list.
I am a frequent visitor and part-time resident of Hawaii. When I am on Maui, I reside at the Papakea resort community.
As was suggested by the Planning Commission last July, I feel the Papakea should be excluded from this proposed sweeping change.
Here are a few of the many reasons.
* Papakea is situated along a string of hotel-resort zoned properties and shares amenities with the neighboring property of Ka'annapali Shores.
*Papakea is already partially hotel-zoned and has been for decades. Papakea functions as a full resort community with front desk registration, concierge, and provides independent hotel and resort amenities.
*Papakea Oceanfront Resort was sold and marketed as a legal vacation rental property from the beginning. It has been functioning as a legal vacation rental for 50 years. Owners purchased condos at Papakea with the reasonable expectation that short-term rentals were legal, based on ordinances, historically since 1989 and most recently in 2022.
* The Papakea resort and its' operations provide jobs with competitive wages for 35 benefited on-site staff. Many of them employed here for over 17 years. This does not include the ancillary operations which employ housekeepers, handymen, contractors, fitness instructors, entertainment, and management companies. Many locals would immediately lose their jobs. I know many of them personally.
Furthermore, the Papakea has a 32-million-dollar plumbing project that is underway with Hawaii-based contractors. Since the Papakea is an older property, ongoing projects and repairs are the norm and not the exception. Other costly repairs in the immediate future are concrete spalling repairs and electrical rewiring improvements. These costs are being absorbed by owners at the Papakea.
*Current maintenance dues range from $ 1,100 to roughly $ 2,800 per month and have been increasing annually along with other carrying costs such as insurance and fees in the form of special assessments..
Other facts to consider:
*Papakea was NEVER designated as workforce housing and therefore was never 'converted' to vacation rental use.
*Papakea has generated nearly $17,000,000 in tax revenue in the last 5 years alone.
Tourism dollars circulating back into the Maui economy would also be lost, creating a negative ripple effect on the economic health of Maui.
A final point that I am sure you are already aware of, given the drop in tourism. Many people I have spoken with have already stated they will not visit Maui due to the threat of these properties being eliminated. Most do not want to stay in hotels due to less convenience and increased expense. Hotels pay a proportionately lower tax rate than STRs, and a large percentage of the money generated is sent to corporate headquarters on the mainland and not back into the Maui economy.
I firmly believe that good governance requires leadership that does not harm large numbers of people in an attempt to 'fix' a multifactorial and complex problem, but instead looks to preserve the economy, constitutional rights, and liberties while coming up with mutually beneficial solutions. This bill in its current form, will actually create more harm than any realized good.
I restate, the Papakea Resort community should not be included in Bill 9 for the many reasons outlined above.
Hello,
As an owner of condos on Maui at Napili Point and Napili Shores for more than fifty years, I strongly oppose limiting their use as short term rentals. As a owner I contribute tax and guest tax revenues to the island as well as offering a desirable place for visitors to stay. Tourism remains a very significant source of income for Maui and limitations on housing for visitors will surely negatively affect that income. Additionally, while the condos are desirable places for vacationers, I cannot imagine that they would provide a solution to the need for permanent housing for Maui residents as they are not designed for that use. Thank you for considering my comment.
Hello,
I am writing to express my concern and opposition to the proposed ban on apartment-zoned short-term rentals (STRs) on the island of Molokai. While I understand the intent behind regulating tourism and housing on the islands, it is crucial to recognize that Molokai's circumstances differ significantly from those of Maui. Applying the same regulations uniformly across these distinct islands could inadvertently harm Molokai's economy and community.
Molokai is a unique and special place with a relatively small number of STRs and only one hotel. Unlike Maui, where tourism is well-developed and diversified, Molokai relies on a modest influx of visitors. This limited tourism is essential for sustaining local jobs and businesses. A ban on apartment-zoned STRs would disproportionately impact Molokai's economy, particularly the livelihoods of house cleaners, maintenance workers, on-island representatives, and those working in restaurants and other local businesses.
One specific location of concern is the Wavecrest Resort, which, although zoned as an apartment complex, is essential for accommodating visitors on the east side, providing the only lodging option in that area.
I love Molokai and the people who live there, and I strive to support them as much as possible. As an owner, I have hosted numerous locals at our condo for "staycations." They seek a break from their everyday lives but cannot always afford to fly off-island, so I offer them a generous discount to enjoy themselves in a beautiful location at an affordable price. Wavecrest provides a much-needed respite on the east side for many people. This summer, a group of coaches will come from off-island to teach football to Molokai youth. The head coach specifically requested they stay on the east side because it is where he grew up, and he wanted to share that experience with them. If Wavecrest no longer allows short-term rentals, opportunities like these will no longer be possible.
Additionally, I have shared my condo with residents from the west side who need to work on the east side, allowing them to stay overnight instead of making a late-night drive across the island. Many visitors from neighboring islands attend family gatherings on the east side, such as weddings, funerals, and family reunions. Without accommodation options there, it would be challenging for them to commute from the opposite end of the island or from town, especially considering the additional expenses like gas costs, which could deter their visit altogether.
We encourage our guests to support the local economy as well. Our condo has a Welcome Guide listing all the small businesses and restaurants that our guests can support. Some of these individuals cannot afford to advertise for themselves and are happily recommended by us. All of them depend on the extra income for their livelihood.
Housecleaners and on-island reps often depend on the income from servicing STRs. Eliminating these rentals would directly reduce their job opportunities, leading to financial instability for many families. Furthermore, for those living on the east side of the island, a ban would force them to drive to the other side of Molokai to find work, resulting in higher fuel expenses and time, effectively eating into their profits and making their jobs financially unsustainable. This added burden could lead to job losses and further economic distress for these individuals and their families.
Since learning about the potential ban, our house cleaner has been deeply concerned, fearing she may need to leave the island if she can no longer earn enough income there. I intentionally schedule bookings for my condo with her in mind, ensuring she has consistent work with rapid turnovers, thereby maximizing her opportunities to earn income. The livelihood of our housecleaner, along with many others in similar positions, heavily relies on servicing STRs for their income.
I would like to note that even if apartment-zoned STRs were banned, I wouldn't convert my condo into a long-term rental. The rental income isn't necessary to cover my mortgage; rather, I enjoy sharing my condo and supporting the local economy in this way. I can visit every 4-6 months and leave it vacant otherwise. Many Wavecrest owners share this viewpoint. Therefore, banning STRs wouldn't necessarily increase long-term housing availability but could lead to more vacant properties that contribute nothing to the local economy.
When I purchased my unit, numerous condos were for sale at very reasonable prices, indicating local residents lack of interest in purchasing and residing at Wavecrest. This ongoing trend, evident over the past two decades through price trends and condo availability, underscores the significant role that STRs play in utilizing these properties to bolster the local economy, rather than letting them remain vacant or underutilized.
I would hate to see Molokai overrun by tourism; it would be incredibly disheartening. However, I believe that for the island to prosper, there must be a careful balance with tourism, ensuring its sustainability. I’d like to imagine that Molokai can be likened to a younger sibling who has had the chance to observe where their older siblings may have gone wrong. Molokai has the opportunity to learn from these experiences and implement modifications without swinging to the extreme opposite end of the spectrum. Instead of imposing a ban on condos that are already built and have been used for their entire history as short-term rentals, perhaps grandfathering them in and stopping new growth would be a more balanced approach that reflects the distinct needs and circumstances of Molokai.
I urge the Maui County Council to consider Molokai's unique situation and to refrain from imposing a ban on STRs in apartment-zoned areas on Molokai. Instead, a more nuanced approach that considers the island's specific needs and circumstances would be more appropriate. Preserving the option for STRs can help maintain economic stability and support local employment.
Thank you for your attention to this matter. I trust that the Council will consider the significant differences between Maui and Molokai and make a decision that supports the well-being of all its communities.
Opposition to Short-Term Rental Phase-Out Legislation
Aloha Chair, Vice Chair, and Committee Members,
My name is Kim Godell, and my husband and I own a short-term rental property at Maui Vista in Kihei. I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed legislation aimed at phasing out short-term rentals in South Maui.
Over the years, we’ve had the privilege of becoming part of the local community—not just as property owners, but through the relationships we’ve built with people like our incredible cleaner, Hydie, and our dependable and kind handyman, John. Both are long-standing residents of the area and rely heavily on the income they earn from working with short-term rental owners like us. This proposed legislation puts their livelihoods, and those of many others in the community, at serious risk.
Eliminating short-term rentals would have far-reaching consequences. Hydie could lose her primary source of income, jeopardizing her ability to support her family. John, who has provided timely and reliable service for years, might find himself without work, as larger hotels typically staff in-house maintenance teams. These are real people with families and stories—not just statistics.
In addition, we consistently host visitors who are unable to afford expensive hotels and seek out more accessible, family-friendly accommodations like ours. Many of them have expressed hesitation about visiting Maui due to the uncertainty caused by this legislation. Taking away these affordable options could deter a significant portion of tourists, hurting not just property owners, but local businesses, service providers, and the broader economy.
The recent economic study clearly outlined the harmful financial impact this legislation could bring. I respectfully urge you to consider the data, listen to the voices of those directly affected, and reflect on the broader implications for our community.
Thank you for your time and for your thoughtful and balanced consideration of this important issue.
Sincerely,
My husband and I have been visiting Maui since 1980 and often stayed at The Ridge at Kapalua as short term renters. When we finally retired, we purchased a condo at the Ridge and have loved it as our home. We need to keep it as a short term rental when we are not there so we can afford to keep it. We purchased it as a short term rental and we were told that The Ridge was built in 1980 for use as a short term rental. Now the County wants to change all of that, to what purpose? Those units could not possibly be affordable housing with the way they are structured.
My husband and I are both Oakland, California natives and understand the pain of what large fires can do to a community. It would be even more impactful in an island community and our hearts go out to those who have been hurt by this event. Yet how does creating more hurt for others and loss of jobs for those who make a living in the short term rental industry cure that pain? We urge you to rethink these choices.
Dear Council Members,
I respectfully oppose the proposed bill to eliminate short term rentals on the Minatoya list.
While the overall intent of the bill is understood, it is not at all clear to me how limiting short term rentals will translate to more affordable housing for Maui residents.
My wife and I own a short term rental property at Luana Kai in Kihei.
We love Maui and spend as much time as possible on Maui. Hotels are not practical nor affordable and the only viable option is a short-term rental condo.
The cost of ownership is steep; our 1 bedroom unit is modest at 650 sf yet our unit would have to rent for >$4500 per month just to cover our costs. Moreover the costs to maintain and insure these aging buildings is continually increasing.
Unfortunately, if our ability to short term rent our condo is eliminated we will not be converting the unit to long term rental as we wish to use it ourselves throughout the year.
Instead our condo will sit vacant for 8-9 months a year. We will no longer be able to engage the services of our cleaner, handyman or any other island services and tragically our cleaner will lose her business.
Additionally, we will have less disposable funds to spend at restaurants and shops etc while we are in Maui and of course we will have no visitors contributing to the local economy.
I am certain that our situation is very similar to the majority of short-term unit owners on Maui. It seems clear that implementation of this proposal will have a devastating economic impact on Maui and its’ residents and will provide little to no relief to the housing problem.
In closing, I ask the council to vote against this legislation.
I strongly oppose this bill in its current form. Please learn from the mistakes of other communities who have introduced sweeping STR bans with disastrous consequences. I was directly impacted as a small business owner in Lake Tahoe. Eliminating all STRs in the areas caused housing stock to be absorbed by out of town seasonal residents. These new residents had a very limited contribution to the economy and the locals had to move out with no jobs and no improvement to the local housing stock. I would suggest a very targeted approach and leave resort communities alone and operate as they were designed. Apartments in traditional local communities should be designated for LTR only. Increase taxes and build affordable housing.
Dear Chair Kama, Vice Chair Uʻu-Hodgins and Members of the Housing and Land Use Committee:
I oppose Bill 9 as drafted and propose that the Council amend Bill 9 to exclude Papakea Oceanfront Resort which the County has historically identified as having A2-H2 zoning.
Background on Papakea
• Papakea was initially marketed and sold as a legal vacation rental property before any zoning restrictions limited transient vacation rentals in apartment zoned properties.
• Papakea owners have been operating legal vacation rentals for almost fifty years.
• Papakea has never been workforce housing so Papakea is not an example of a property that converted from workforce housing to transient vacation rental use.
• The majority of units at Papakea are under 600 square feet and the property has limited parking.
• Papakea is not in a residential neighborhood and is located alongside a long stretch of hotel-zoned properties and directly adjacent to multiple commercially-zoned properties.
Unlike apartment buildings designed for long-term residential use, Papakea has a front desk, an activity concierge, shared activity space, and numerous other common resort amenities.
• Owners purchased condos at Papakea with the reasonable expectation that short-term rentals were legal based on ordinances as far back as 1989, and as recent as 2022.
• In reliance on the Maui County ordinances and published documents, Hawaii state law, and constitutional protections, owners invested in costly renovations, furnishings, and long-term financial commitments such as mortgages that make any phase out of short-term rental right offensive of each buyer’s investment-backed expectations.
Papakea’s Contributions to the Community
• 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.
• Papakea supports a wide variety of local trade professionals including pest control, HVAC, painting, plumbing, electrical, general contracting, masonry, tile and flooring, fitness instructors, entertainers, and tree trimming.
Individual Owner Contributions to the Community
• Many small businesses owned and operated by local residents from the Maui community rely on Papakea short-term rentals including housekeepers, handymen, on-island agents, and contractors. These service providers set their own rates, work hours, select their own clients, work conditions and standard operating procedures. Shutting down short-term rentals at Papakea means telling local entrepreneurs that worked hard to build a small business that they need to just go get a job somewhere else to make less money, have less flexibility, and be subject to oppressive corporate policies.
• 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.
• Papakea guests support many small businesses on the island including restaurants, food trucks, tour operators, activities, state parks, the national park, and shops.
• Papakea owners and guests regularly participate in community activities including volunteering at beach cleanups, Maui Humane Society, the hospital, and many other local organizations, and contribute to local philanthropic and cultural efforts.
I would like to thank the committee for the opportunity to comment.
Sincerely,
Karene Vernor
3543 Lower Honoapiilani Road, Apartment J203
I feel that the UHERO report has been left out of these comments. I am including the Executive Summary and would ask that the whole study be included in the comments. I have included my own comments after the Executive Summary.
UHERO Executive Summary: This report examines the Maui County proposal to phase out transient vacation rentals (TVRs) in Apartment districts, including removing long-standing exceptions for pre-1989 properties widely known as the “Minatoya List.” The policy aims to improve housing affordability, worsened by the 2023 wildfires, by converting TVRs into long-term housing units. Our analysis includes effects on tourism, employment and output, the housing market, and county tax revenues.
To estimate the economic impacts, we built the Maui County Computable General Equilibrium (M-CGE) model. This model quantifies the effects of reduced visitor spending under two scenarios: a 15% decline (baseline) and a 25% decline (low-demand). It captures both direct and indirect impacts on tourism and related sectors. A separate regression model is used to predict year-over-year condominium price changes, accounting for factors like inflation, payroll growth, and inventory of for-sale condominium units. Key findings are as follows.
Tourism Industry Impact
•
Eliminating all TVRs in Apartment zones could reduce visitor accommodations by 25% and visitor days by 32%.
•
Total visitor spending is projected to decline by $900 million annually (-15%).
•
The decline in spending also results in the loss of 1,900 jobs (-3% of total payroll jobs).
•
Real GDP could therefore decline by 4%.
Housing Market Impact
•
The policy could add up to 6,127 units to the long-term housing stock—a 13% increase, equivalent to a decade’s worth of new housing development.
•
Condo prices are projected to decline by 20–40%, improving affordability but also reducing household wealth and property tax revenues.
•
Affected TVRs are disproportionately owned by out-of-state investors (85%), but market-wide price declines also impact owner-occupants.
Tax Revenue Impact
•
Property tax revenues could fall by up to $60 million annually by 2029 due to both changes in tax class and decreasing valuations.
•
General Excise Tax (GET) and Transient Accommodations Tax (TAT) revenues are projected to fall by 10% and 8% respectively, totaling to an additional -$15M annually.
We briefly explore policies and adjustments that could help mitigate the economic disruptions of the TVR phase-out while still promoting long-term housing availability. Increasing property taxes on TVRs could incentivize conversions to long-term residential use and generate revenue. Alternatively, auctioning a limited number of TVR permits would allow only the most profitable units to remain while capturing economic value for the county. A more gradual phase-in of the policy could also give property owners time to adapt and policymakers the opportunity to evaluate the policy before scaling up, reducing the risk of sudden housing market disruptions.
After reading the report, I can see no rational way to support this bill. I would also ask how your legal counsel has advised you as to your standing. I see no way that any units under the Minatoya Exemption can be legally reclassified. I'm sure your counsel has explained Equitable Estoppel to the board. To include units under the Minatoya Exemption in this bill is acknowledging you have knowingly set the bill up to fail. $900 MILLION dollars in lost in island income and no chance that the bill will survive a legal challenge are two big reasons to vote against this bill.
Kind regards, Ken Carpenter
My name is Rajiv Malik, my wife and I own a property at the Kapalua Resort in Maui County, which my family use for occasional personal use and we employ a local Maui based rental management company to rent out as a Short Term Rental. I am writing today to express my deep concern and strong opposition to the proposed legislation to phase out Short Term vacation rentals in Maui. I ask that you are selective in identifying the properties that are identified in providing housing for our Maui people.
My wife and I purchased this property during the distressed Covid times of 2021. We invested life savings into the beauty and potential and future of Maui. We have been responsible owners and community supporters. We joint the Lahaina Yacht Club and built relationships and friendships on the island. In 2022 we undertook renovations, employing a local contractor and buying materials from local retailers, investing in ourselves and investing in the Manu economy. Our Short Term rental supports numerous local jobs at the property and our rental management company, including jobs in management, accounting, marketing, maintenance, landscaping and housekeeping. Our guests visit local restaurants and stores, supporting jobs across the island. Just in 2024 our unit has generated close to $50,000 in property and occupancy taxes paid to Maui county. Large part of the rest of the revenue pays for management fees, AOAO/HOA dues and maintenance, which all stay on the island. Short Term Rentals are a economic and effective way for families to enjoy the beauty of Maui and its hospitality, while giving back to the economy at the same time. For us it is a labor of love. Ultimately, the well being of Maui and all the small local businesses supported by us and our guests matters to us.
Owning at the Kapalua Resort has not been easy. We’ve faced huge maintenance costs, special assessments, and massive increases in insurance after the fires. The annual AOAO expense alone is now over $32,000 annually, and upcoming roof and road repairs will dramatically increase this amount. These costs are necessary to ensure that the property remains safe and functional. The Kapalua Resort was also never intended to be constructed for workforce housing. The residences limit occupancy, prohibit pets, and lack ample parking and storage space.
This legislation will result in the loss of island required income, the loss of jobs, the loss of homes, and the loss of Maui people who would be forced to ultimately leave the island. As the County has approved a $1.56 billion budget for 2025, it seems feasible that measures should be enacted to attract visitors to the island to bolster our economy and support our financial needs rather than further discouraging such. I urge the Council to find a fair and balanced path forward — one that protects local jobs, supports the economy, and holds STR owners to high standards, instead of phasing us out completely. Please exclude the Kapalua Resort from any STR ban.
Mahalo for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Rajiv and Tania Malik
rmalik2005@hotmail.com
100 Ridge, unit 811-13, Lahaina, Maui, HI
Aloha Chair and Committee Members,
As an owner of condo in Kapalua Golf Villas going back to 1997, I have seen many changes come to Maui. There is no way that anyone could argue with the housing shortage and housing affordability issues on Maui. However, this Bill 9, including some of the amendments proposed, does not truly address these very important issues. Yes, it satisfies some political agendas. Yes, some of those who blame all tourists, the tourism industry, the visitors that come and go, yes, they may believe this will “fix” so many issues. But let’s be very clear and honest. This proposal will do far more harm to Maui’s economy and to those local people who the Mayor claims he’s looking out for. Jobs will be lost, local employees will suffer reduced, or no income, entire industries will be impacted. And when you negatively impact those industries, who truly is harmed? It’s the very people who live and work on Maui. I have not even mentioned the tax revenue reduction that would be created by this proposed ban. There are county services that simply will not survive with the sort of reduction in revenue this proposed ban would bring. Those are additional jobs and services lost. Again, who suffers when that revenue and those jobs are lost? The local families who should be the exact folks being watched out for. There is no doubt there needs to be thorough consideration to solving housing shortages on Maui, however, let’s work together to resolve this very important issue rather than pit one good group against another.
Aloha Chair, Vice Chair, and Committee Members
I own a condo at Maui Eldorado Resort located in Kaanapali above the Royal Kaanapali golf course and the hotels on Kaanapali beach. The Eldorado is a member of the Kaanapali Resort Association and pays approximately $100,000 to the Association each year. The Eldorado was developed and built over 50 years ago for short-term rentals and was never intended for long-term leasing. It has a check-in desk and operates as a hotel. I own a one bedroom, and my current association dues are over $3,000 per month. I anticipate they will rise due to the homeowner’s insurance problems that all are facing island-wide. This monthly fee does not include the property taxes. There are not enough parking stalls for the 200 condos, there is no storage, and there is no off-street parking available. The condos in my resort are not appropriate for long-term rental and too expensive to be considered work-force housing. Our resort is also zoned resort/hotel in the community plan. It should be exempt from the STR ban.
As you are all aware, the recent economic study has pointed out the problems that can result if the 7,000 STR phase out is put in place. Please give all aspects of this bill your thoughtful consideration.
Mahalo,
Kathy Matulewicz
Maui Eldorado Resort
To whom it may concern, as an owner of 2 STRs on Maui and a part time resident, I strongly oppose Mayor Bissen's proposal to ban STRs.
- STRs provide better jobs and hotels and help the economy
- it is UNFAIR to even propose this and cause property values to crash. This is hard earned money that Mr Bissen is propose to evaporate
- STRs have also provided a strong stream of income to the COUNTY, until Mr Bissen started doing this
- Like ours at Kamaole Sands most are not so suitable for families to live in long term, they were built and meant as appart-hotels
Thanks for your consideration, and not approving Mr Bissen's bill. There are better ways to solve housing issues
My name is Carl E. (Joe) Gatlin and I would respectfully like to offer written testimony in opposition to the repeal of the Minatoya Act, which allows short term rentals on Maui.
My wife, Linda, and I bought an 850 square foot condominium at Maui Kamaole, more than twenty-one years ago. For the entire time we have been owners we have operated our condominium in compliance with all laws and regulations, paid our taxes, employed local contractors and suppliers, and contributed to the local economy. In 2015, we upgraded and remodeled our condominium, spending more than $150,000 dollars in the process. Those were 2015 dollars, not 2025 dollars. To the maximum extent possible, we used locally sourced materials and employed local contractors and suppliers.
First, we are not the “bad guys” here. We are residents of Maui, not some far-off, monolithic corporation squeezing every bit of revenue we can from our condominium. Generally, about 40 percent of our days rented each year are from returning guests. We manage the rentals ourselves. In 2024, our small, one-bedroom, condominium generated more than $26,000 in taxes (property, MCTAT, TAT and GET). In 2025, that figure was more than $21,000. In the last nine years, our condominium has generated almost $61,000 in property taxes and that figure is increasing at an alarming rate – by almost 45 percent between 2023 and 2024. Our gross revenue in 2024 was more than $68,000. In 2023 that figure was more than $78,000. In 2024, our expenses exceeded our revenue by almost $8500. One can easily see the chilling effect that the Lahaina fire and the absence of the Aloha spirit by some has had on the tourist industry – Maui’s major economic engine. Potential tourists are aware of the discussion regarding the Minatoya Act. If the County’s objective is drive away tourism – you are succeeding.
I have seen previous testimony by some residents who want to overturn the Minatoya Act and prohibit STRs. Their anger and disdain towards STR owners was palpable. Was I born on Maui? No. Have I lived on Maui my entire life? No. I cannot help where I was born and I spent more than 31 years in the Navy. During the Vietnam war I served in a Destroyer home ported in Pearl Harbor. When I see the testimony by some of the residents directed at owners like me, I wonder how many of them would have joined the military, worked and served in some of the places that I did. Not many, I think.
Repealing the Minatoya Act will not solve the affordable housing crisis on Maui, plain and simple. Affordable housing is not solely a Maui problem. It is a world-wide problem. In the past year, The Wall Street Journal published several articles addressing this issue, including Portugal and Spain. Residents there are not happy that tourists have “invaded” their country, but the local leaders know that they need the tourist revenue to pay for much needed services and infrastructure.
Many of the complexes on Maui are not suited for conversion to long-term rentals. The renter(s) would ultimately be paying for landscaping and infrastructure originally intended for tourists. Parking and the prohibition of pets are other issues.
I have had occasion recently to be on the mainland, because my wife is undergoing treatment for cancer. I observed that communities like Irvine, California, are constructing high density, multi-story apartment building developments to address the problem. The County needs to develop the infrastructure to support affordable housing such as Irvine's example, rather than take away a much-needed source of revenue.
Thank you for your consideration.
Joe Gatlin
Maui Kamaole
Councilmember Tasha Kama, Chair
Councilmember Tom Cook, Vice Chair
Committee on Housing and Land Use
RE: Bill 9 – A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTERS 19.12, 19.32, AND 19.37 MAUl COUNTY CODE, RELATING TO TRANSIENT VACATION RENTALS IN APARTMENT DISTRICTS
Hearing Date – June 9, 2025
Aloha Chair Kama, Vice Chair Cook and members of the committee,
My name is Mary M Kerstulovich and I am a licensed Realtor, with Hawaii Life. I have been a Maui resident for over 23 years. I’m writing to strongly oppose Bill 9, which seeks to phase out legal transient vacation rentals (TVRs) in apartment-zoned areas. While I fully support addressing our housing crisis, this bill creates more problems than it solves—particularly for our local economy, small businesses, and property owners.
At what price $$$$$??? That was asked the other day on a social media travel group. AND the answer is there is no price. No price for taking away “four out of five households” income away.....
There is no monetary price for this. The price is more valuable that that. AND I will tell you the price. The price our sense of community. After the fires people came together and since then the islands ALOHA and COMMUNITY has been torn down by the them vs us narrative for too long now. A lof of the longtime residents may not be Hawaiian, but we are here because we have Aloha in our hearts.
THIS RISK OF JOB LOSS IS NOT A theoretical risk—this is a real threat to Maui’s service industry, real estate market, and real property tax base. The proposed ban will severely disrupt sectors desperately trying to recover from the Lahaina 2023 wildfire.
From a business perspective, if you vote to pass this Bill,the economic fallout will be significant.
Aren’t we already facing goverment cut backs on a Federal Level?
• Our Kihei Recyling center isn’t even open becuase their funding got cut.
• Loss of jobs. I am not just talking about tourist industry jobs. This has a huge impact on all sectors of our workforce. Who cuts your hair, does your nails, massage, chiropractic? Helps you at the grocery store? Maintains your home? Details your car? Babysits your kids? Everyone will cut all unnessary things from their life that support our small businesses. Who pays your rental income on your Ohana? Will entire households be able to stay here? Our homeless population is growing daily.....Crime is rising daily.... Our families with food insecurity is growing...the need for medical benefits and HUD is all growing daily. We simply don’t need this kind of economic loss throughout our island.
• Loss of income from TAT, GET, and general commerce trading locally.
• HAS ANYONE THOUGHT OF THE LOCAL BANKS??? AND WHAT WILL PEOPLE DO TO PAY THEIR BILLS? BANKS HOLD TITLE TO THESE PROPERTIES, CAR LOANS OR PERSONAL LOANS. WHEN THE LOSS OF INCOME STARTS TO IMPACT PAYMENTS BY ALL LOCALS??? WILL OUR LOCAL BANKS BE IN JEAPORDY? DO YOU KNOW THAT MANY OF OUR CONDOS ARE ONLY ALLOWED TO BE FINANCED LOCALLY
SOLUTION BASED:
• Start a lottery and allocate the funds to Hawaiian homes and subsidized housing. Who wouldn’t buy a scratch off ticket when vacationing here?
• MAKE the builders accountable for adding affordable to the master plans of their communities.
• Find out why all of our water systems are owned privately. The mistakes of the past need to be learned from and the future needs to be more community-based.
• Tax the hotels for taking much of our valued resources.
• Property taxes for new resident homeowners. CHANGE THAT BASIS immediately. WHEN a home purchase is made from a local. Often the tax basis is an obstacle for a home owner and affordability.
Maui county clearly relies on tourism. EVERY financial play is always “tax the tourist”. Green Tax, Rental Car tax to pay for our new roads, rising Transient tax. The list is endless. Pick one you either need to tourist dollar to keep our community together or you don’t. You can’t force the hand of we don’t want you here, and they expect everyone to keep coming. The “Quality no Quantity” doesn’t work for our small businesses. People who go to the hotels don’t spend the majority of their money outside of the hotel that supports small businesses.
The island has less than 5% of the land that is allocated to be built. Over the last 20 years almost every affordable housing project that I know of has been met with some obstacle to overcome.....Water, infrastructure, protected lands, fudning etc. BUT meanwhile the county is allowing more and more building that doesn’t need to be here and takes our resources. The amount of fast-food chains and new establishments has grown while we say there is no water. The failure of the systems in the past do not need to be the focus of the future.
The “affordable housing” of the past is now having to be reclassified as “subsidized”. It has to be. Use the funds we have and that can be collected to build something that works for families. Homes, with yards and parking for multigenerational families.
I strongly urge the Council to pursue smart, balanced regulations that grow our housing stock and our economic foundation. With targeted zoning reforms and better enforcement of illegal rentals, we can preserve responsible TVR operators and the jobs they provide.
Please consider PROTECTIONG OF THE MINATOYA LIST by doing a mass re-zoning on complexes that are currently on the Minatoya list from apartment to hotel, so that these issues don’t come up every few years. AND remember ......
The Minatoya list was brought into law in 1989....in many cases before the large hotels were even built. Corporate money doesn’t stay here. Local money does.
DID YOU KNOW IF THIS BILL IS PASSED THAT A CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT WILL LIKELY MAKE EVERY UNIT ON THIS LIST UNSELLABLE VIA A LOAN. WHICH MEANS WITH FALLING PRICES THE PROPERITES WILL BE SWEPT UP BY CASH BUYERS.
Our community deserves a balanced economy that supports local businesses.
Mary M Kerstulovich R(S)
Aloha Committee Members:
My name is John Ferreri, I purchased a 2/2 condo from Kamaole Sands in 1993 as a part time resident and as a STR when not on Island to help me pay for the unit as the costs continued to escalate. Over the course of these 30+ years we have paid Hundreds of Thousands of dollars in Property Taxes and GET and TAT taxes. Just this one complex contains 440 units built in the mid to late 1970's (I think!) and I'm sure produced BILLIONS in revenue to the State & County government. I truly hope you folks are not 'KILLING THE GOOSE THAT LAYS THE GOLDEN EGGS' to keep this GREAT State in operation. The tax revenue from these STR's runs throughout the economy, probably 70-80% of each family arriving at OGG load up at Costco, Walmart and Target goods (how much tax revenue do they generate for the State)??? By your actions you will KILL THE ECONOMIC engine that keeps the Island running, allowing local families to live a wholesome/worthwhile life. This is to say nothing about the over-all value of ALL REAL ESTATE PROPERTIES!! You will be DEPRESSING these values and greatly reducing the income to both the County and State government. By your actions you will have NO VISITORS to speak of and have to layoff most of your County & State staff as well as the ripple effect to the bars/restaurants, rental car agencies, airport employees. Even the large major Hotels will be effected which will cripple the County & State revenue stream. You folks need to think 'LONG & HARD' BEFORE YOU KILL THE GOOSE!!!
You will have thousands of Island NATIVES have to leave and go to the mainland in order to support their wonderful families. Think about your own families and relatives that live on-Island. Do you want to create a 'Wasteland' in the generations to come?? PLEASE don't KILL the GOOSE!!! Sincerely, John Ferreri Reno, Nv 925 353 0099 jpf3003@aol.com
Apps an owner of a condo in Maui, I acknowledge the housing crisis demands urgent solutions. What I struggle with is that I just do not see how Bill 9, as it's currently drafted, doesn't end up creating more of a problem long term vs contributing to a solution.
Bill 9 may, in the short term, benefit local housing but long term would have an overall negative impact to Maui with a significant reduction in visitor spending, job losses, and decreased tax revenue. UHERO’s analysis estimated a possible $900 million annual drop in visitor spending and the loss of approximately 1,900 jobs, a $900 million drop in annual visitor spending, and a $60 million reduction in property tax revenue. This Bill likely doesn't solve one existing crisis and creates a new crisis that damages our economy, destroys small businesses, and threatens the livelihoods of local residents without providing truly livable, affordable home solutions for the needs of Maui families.
The County could prioritize sustainable solutions to expand affordable housing for local residents. Things like policy reforms, tax incentives, deed restrictions, infrastructure investment, and new development should be the near term focus. County leaders should prioritize legislation already within reach including: enforcing regulations on illegal STRs, streamlining and expedited permitting and infrastructure approvals, pursuing targeted rezoning where appropriate, and using proven tools like public-private partnerships and affordable housing incentives. This would explore long term results without the negative side effects from the well meaning but faulty approach proposed under Bill 9. A direct quote from the UHERO blog post succinctly summarizes my thoughts on why Bill 9 is a faulty approach: “Shifting 6,172 housing units from the short-term to the long-term market would have benefits for local housing affordability on Maui. However, the shift could trigger a substantial loss of property tax revenue for the county and could negatively impact the recovery of tourism on Maui by lowering accommodation capacity. These drawbacks could have significant consequences for Maui’s local population in terms of reduced county services, higher taxes, or a weakening labor market. While falling home prices are a benefit to those struggling to find housing, incumbent homeowners could lose equity if the price of homes fell county-wide, which could have broader economic impacts.”
I am a STR owner in Maui County, and I’m writing to respectfully express my concerns about the proposed legislation to phase out over so many vacation rentals.
Short-term rentals play a vital role in supporting Maui’s local economy. Guests staying at my property dine at family-owned restaurants, shop at local stores, and participate in cultural tours and activities. Their spending directly benefits small businesses that are the backbone of our community.
Short-term rentals also play a key role in supporting local employment. I rely on skilled Maui residents for essential services like cleaning and maintenance—offering reliable, well-compensated work that helps sustain families and strengthens the local economy. These individuals are not just part of my team; they are valued contributors to the success of my business and the well-being of our community.
Personally, owning and operating a short-term rental has allowed me to invest in the property, maintain high standards, and continue employing local workers despite rising costs for maintenance, insurance, and upgrades. This income ensures the property remains a safe, welcoming space for guests and a benefit—not a burden—to the neighborhood.
One more thing—and I don’t think this has been emphasized enough: if this legislation passes and causes a collapse in the real estate market, it could wipe out home equity for all property owners on Maui. This would have a devastating impact on local residents who purchased homes in the past decade or who rely on home equity lines of credit (HELOCs). Thousands of locals could find themselves underwater on their mortgages, unable to refinance when interest rates drop or access emergency funds when needed. The ripple effects of such a downturn would be far-reaching and deeply harmful to the very community this legislation seeks to protect.
While I understand the need to address housing and tourism concerns, I believe this legislation is overly broad and risks harming the economic and financial well-being of Maui’s residents. I urge the Council to consider a more balanced approach—one that holds property owners accountable while preserving the positive contributions we make to Maui’s economy, workforce, and community.
Thank you for your time and thoughtful consideration.
My name is Cory McKim. I'm a full-time resident and I run a small local business that’s really feeling the impacts of the drop in tourism. I wanted to share what this proposed phase-out of short-term rentals could mean for families like mine and the people we work with every day.
My business depends on visitors who stay in short-term rentals. Many of them come back year after year, and they support local restaurants, shops, and tour companies — not just the big-name spots, but the mom-and-pop places that make Maui special. If these rentals go away, I worry we’ll lose those repeat visitors, and with them, a huge part of what keeps us going.
Directly or indirectly, everyone on Maui is connected to the visitor industry. Unfortunately, due to the geographical location of Maui, we are not able to export products that employ a large number of local workers. A 2024 University of Hawaiʻi Economic Research Organization (UHERO) report identified potential opportunities to diversify the state’s economy by analyzing the variety of industries across counties in the U.S. and Hawaiʻi.
The conclusion of this UHERO report is that the industries we found for diversifying the economy will be incredibly difficult to establish. Industries like aquaculture. Still, it is not clear which industries Hawai‘i could diversify into.
Even the $1.5B budget that was just passed by the council will depend on short-term rental revenues.
There are currently major challenges at the global, federal and county level for local businesses due to extremely low levels of tourism. Local businesses do not need more reasons to downsize or close. When local businesses thrive, they create a ripple effect that benefits the entire community, from boosting the local economy and creating jobs to fostering a stronger sense of identity and pride.
Local workers rely on tourism work to take care of their families. We’re not just talking about numbers. These are real people — my neighbors, family and friends — who are going to be hit hard if these jobs disappear.
This phase-out feels like it’s targeting the very people who are trying to make it here — local families doing our best to stay afloat. I understand there are concerns about housing, and I agree we need real solutions. But taking away our income without a clear plan just makes things harder.
We need the County to protect locals on every front — not just in housing, but in employment, education, services, and economic opportunity. We need a balanced approach, not one that removes critical sources of income and support.
Please, don’t move forward with this phase-out. Work with us. Listen to us. Let’s find a way that protects our jobs, preserves our communities, and helps Maui thrive.
Mahalo for your time and for listening to our stories.
I am an 81 year old Maui born man. In the 1960's, our local people were promised by our politicians that tourism jobs would replaced the jobs lost by the phase out of pineapple and sugar cane jobs. These new jobs will make life better for our local people. Today, the promise of a good life because of tourism is not happened for most of us. Our workers including the higher paid jobs of police officers, nurses, and doctors are scrambling to find an affordable place to call home. We have an opportunity to acquire the housing units for our local workers with Bill 9. Yes, some of our residents will lose out on their investment in these Minatoya Listed Properties, but the majority of the investors are not residents of Maui County. Therefore, I urge the Maui County Council to approve Bill 9 so that we can finally care for our local residents who were promised a better life because of tourism, but have suffered by these investments from outsiders. Let us stem the flow of our local people from their ancestral lands to the US mainland to find an affordable place to live. Pass Bill 9 for the common good of our people.
Good day to all HLU committee members, Chair Kama, and Vice Chair U'u-Hodgins.
Thank you for reading and considering my comments in strong opposition to Bill 9, which would uniformly, indiscriminately, and categorically eliminate STRs on the Minatoya list.
I am a frequent visitor and part-time resident of Hawaii. When I am on Maui, I reside at the Papakea resort community.
As was suggested by the Planning Commission last July, I feel the Papakea should be excluded from this proposed sweeping change.
Here are a few of the many reasons.
* Papakea is situated along a string of hotel-resort zoned properties and shares amenities with the neighboring property of Ka'annapali Shores.
*Papakea is already partially hotel-zoned and has been for decades. Papakea functions as a full resort community with front desk registration, concierge, and provides independent hotel and resort amenities.
*Papakea Oceanfront Resort was sold and marketed as a legal vacation rental property from the beginning. It has been functioning as a legal vacation rental for 50 years. Owners purchased condos at Papakea with the reasonable expectation that short-term rentals were legal, based on ordinances, historically since 1989 and most recently in 2022.
* The Papakea resort and its' operations provide jobs with competitive wages for 35 benefited on-site staff. Many of them employed here for over 17 years. This does not include the ancillary operations which employ housekeepers, handymen, contractors, fitness instructors, entertainment, and management companies. Many locals would immediately lose their jobs. I know many of them personally.
Furthermore, the Papakea has a 32-million-dollar plumbing project that is underway with Hawaii-based contractors. Since the Papakea is an older property, ongoing projects and repairs are the norm and not the exception. Other costly repairs in the immediate future are concrete spalling repairs and electrical rewiring improvements. These costs are being absorbed by owners at the Papakea.
*Current maintenance dues range from $ 1,100 to roughly $ 2,800 per month and have been increasing annually along with other carrying costs such as insurance and fees in the form of special assessments..
Other facts to consider:
*Papakea was NEVER designated as workforce housing and therefore was never 'converted' to vacation rental use.
*Papakea has generated nearly $17,000,000 in tax revenue in the last 5 years alone.
Tourism dollars circulating back into the Maui economy would also be lost, creating a negative ripple effect on the economic health of Maui.
A final point that I am sure you are already aware of, given the drop in tourism. Many people I have spoken with have already stated they will not visit Maui due to the threat of these properties being eliminated. Most do not want to stay in hotels due to less convenience and increased expense. Hotels pay a proportionately lower tax rate than STRs, and a large percentage of the money generated is sent to corporate headquarters on the mainland and not back into the Maui economy.
I firmly believe that good governance requires leadership that does not harm large numbers of people in an attempt to 'fix' a multifactorial and complex problem, but instead looks to preserve the economy, constitutional rights, and liberties while coming up with mutually beneficial solutions. This bill in its current form, will actually create more harm than any realized good.
I restate, the Papakea Resort community should not be included in Bill 9 for the many reasons outlined above.
Thank you.
Mary D
Hello,
As an owner of condos on Maui at Napili Point and Napili Shores for more than fifty years, I strongly oppose limiting their use as short term rentals. As a owner I contribute tax and guest tax revenues to the island as well as offering a desirable place for visitors to stay. Tourism remains a very significant source of income for Maui and limitations on housing for visitors will surely negatively affect that income. Additionally, while the condos are desirable places for vacationers, I cannot imagine that they would provide a solution to the need for permanent housing for Maui residents as they are not designed for that use. Thank you for considering my comment.
Elaine Lindheim
Hello,
I am writing to express my concern and opposition to the proposed ban on apartment-zoned short-term rentals (STRs) on the island of Molokai. While I understand the intent behind regulating tourism and housing on the islands, it is crucial to recognize that Molokai's circumstances differ significantly from those of Maui. Applying the same regulations uniformly across these distinct islands could inadvertently harm Molokai's economy and community.
Molokai is a unique and special place with a relatively small number of STRs and only one hotel. Unlike Maui, where tourism is well-developed and diversified, Molokai relies on a modest influx of visitors. This limited tourism is essential for sustaining local jobs and businesses. A ban on apartment-zoned STRs would disproportionately impact Molokai's economy, particularly the livelihoods of house cleaners, maintenance workers, on-island representatives, and those working in restaurants and other local businesses.
One specific location of concern is the Wavecrest Resort, which, although zoned as an apartment complex, is essential for accommodating visitors on the east side, providing the only lodging option in that area.
I love Molokai and the people who live there, and I strive to support them as much as possible. As an owner, I have hosted numerous locals at our condo for "staycations." They seek a break from their everyday lives but cannot always afford to fly off-island, so I offer them a generous discount to enjoy themselves in a beautiful location at an affordable price. Wavecrest provides a much-needed respite on the east side for many people. This summer, a group of coaches will come from off-island to teach football to Molokai youth. The head coach specifically requested they stay on the east side because it is where he grew up, and he wanted to share that experience with them. If Wavecrest no longer allows short-term rentals, opportunities like these will no longer be possible.
Additionally, I have shared my condo with residents from the west side who need to work on the east side, allowing them to stay overnight instead of making a late-night drive across the island. Many visitors from neighboring islands attend family gatherings on the east side, such as weddings, funerals, and family reunions. Without accommodation options there, it would be challenging for them to commute from the opposite end of the island or from town, especially considering the additional expenses like gas costs, which could deter their visit altogether.
We encourage our guests to support the local economy as well. Our condo has a Welcome Guide listing all the small businesses and restaurants that our guests can support. Some of these individuals cannot afford to advertise for themselves and are happily recommended by us. All of them depend on the extra income for their livelihood.
Housecleaners and on-island reps often depend on the income from servicing STRs. Eliminating these rentals would directly reduce their job opportunities, leading to financial instability for many families. Furthermore, for those living on the east side of the island, a ban would force them to drive to the other side of Molokai to find work, resulting in higher fuel expenses and time, effectively eating into their profits and making their jobs financially unsustainable. This added burden could lead to job losses and further economic distress for these individuals and their families.
Since learning about the potential ban, our house cleaner has been deeply concerned, fearing she may need to leave the island if she can no longer earn enough income there. I intentionally schedule bookings for my condo with her in mind, ensuring she has consistent work with rapid turnovers, thereby maximizing her opportunities to earn income. The livelihood of our housecleaner, along with many others in similar positions, heavily relies on servicing STRs for their income.
I would like to note that even if apartment-zoned STRs were banned, I wouldn't convert my condo into a long-term rental. The rental income isn't necessary to cover my mortgage; rather, I enjoy sharing my condo and supporting the local economy in this way. I can visit every 4-6 months and leave it vacant otherwise. Many Wavecrest owners share this viewpoint. Therefore, banning STRs wouldn't necessarily increase long-term housing availability but could lead to more vacant properties that contribute nothing to the local economy.
When I purchased my unit, numerous condos were for sale at very reasonable prices, indicating local residents lack of interest in purchasing and residing at Wavecrest. This ongoing trend, evident over the past two decades through price trends and condo availability, underscores the significant role that STRs play in utilizing these properties to bolster the local economy, rather than letting them remain vacant or underutilized.
I would hate to see Molokai overrun by tourism; it would be incredibly disheartening. However, I believe that for the island to prosper, there must be a careful balance with tourism, ensuring its sustainability. I’d like to imagine that Molokai can be likened to a younger sibling who has had the chance to observe where their older siblings may have gone wrong. Molokai has the opportunity to learn from these experiences and implement modifications without swinging to the extreme opposite end of the spectrum. Instead of imposing a ban on condos that are already built and have been used for their entire history as short-term rentals, perhaps grandfathering them in and stopping new growth would be a more balanced approach that reflects the distinct needs and circumstances of Molokai.
I urge the Maui County Council to consider Molokai's unique situation and to refrain from imposing a ban on STRs in apartment-zoned areas on Molokai. Instead, a more nuanced approach that considers the island's specific needs and circumstances would be more appropriate. Preserving the option for STRs can help maintain economic stability and support local employment.
Thank you for your attention to this matter. I trust that the Council will consider the significant differences between Maui and Molokai and make a decision that supports the well-being of all its communities.
Sincerely,
Cari Wilson
Opposition to Short-Term Rental Phase-Out Legislation
Aloha Chair, Vice Chair, and Committee Members,
My name is Kim Godell, and my husband and I own a short-term rental property at Maui Vista in Kihei. I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed legislation aimed at phasing out short-term rentals in South Maui.
Over the years, we’ve had the privilege of becoming part of the local community—not just as property owners, but through the relationships we’ve built with people like our incredible cleaner, Hydie, and our dependable and kind handyman, John. Both are long-standing residents of the area and rely heavily on the income they earn from working with short-term rental owners like us. This proposed legislation puts their livelihoods, and those of many others in the community, at serious risk.
Eliminating short-term rentals would have far-reaching consequences. Hydie could lose her primary source of income, jeopardizing her ability to support her family. John, who has provided timely and reliable service for years, might find himself without work, as larger hotels typically staff in-house maintenance teams. These are real people with families and stories—not just statistics.
In addition, we consistently host visitors who are unable to afford expensive hotels and seek out more accessible, family-friendly accommodations like ours. Many of them have expressed hesitation about visiting Maui due to the uncertainty caused by this legislation. Taking away these affordable options could deter a significant portion of tourists, hurting not just property owners, but local businesses, service providers, and the broader economy.
The recent economic study clearly outlined the harmful financial impact this legislation could bring. I respectfully urge you to consider the data, listen to the voices of those directly affected, and reflect on the broader implications for our community.
Thank you for your time and for your thoughtful and balanced consideration of this important issue.
Sincerely,
Kim Godell
My husband and I have been visiting Maui since 1980 and often stayed at The Ridge at Kapalua as short term renters. When we finally retired, we purchased a condo at the Ridge and have loved it as our home. We need to keep it as a short term rental when we are not there so we can afford to keep it. We purchased it as a short term rental and we were told that The Ridge was built in 1980 for use as a short term rental. Now the County wants to change all of that, to what purpose? Those units could not possibly be affordable housing with the way they are structured.
My husband and I are both Oakland, California natives and understand the pain of what large fires can do to a community. It would be even more impactful in an island community and our hearts go out to those who have been hurt by this event. Yet how does creating more hurt for others and loss of jobs for those who make a living in the short term rental industry cure that pain? We urge you to rethink these choices.
Dear Council Members,
I respectfully oppose the proposed bill to eliminate short term rentals on the Minatoya list.
While the overall intent of the bill is understood, it is not at all clear to me how limiting short term rentals will translate to more affordable housing for Maui residents.
My wife and I own a short term rental property at Luana Kai in Kihei.
We love Maui and spend as much time as possible on Maui. Hotels are not practical nor affordable and the only viable option is a short-term rental condo.
The cost of ownership is steep; our 1 bedroom unit is modest at 650 sf yet our unit would have to rent for >$4500 per month just to cover our costs. Moreover the costs to maintain and insure these aging buildings is continually increasing.
Unfortunately, if our ability to short term rent our condo is eliminated we will not be converting the unit to long term rental as we wish to use it ourselves throughout the year.
Instead our condo will sit vacant for 8-9 months a year. We will no longer be able to engage the services of our cleaner, handyman or any other island services and tragically our cleaner will lose her business.
Additionally, we will have less disposable funds to spend at restaurants and shops etc while we are in Maui and of course we will have no visitors contributing to the local economy.
I am certain that our situation is very similar to the majority of short-term unit owners on Maui. It seems clear that implementation of this proposal will have a devastating economic impact on Maui and its’ residents and will provide little to no relief to the housing problem.
In closing, I ask the council to vote against this legislation.
Sincerely,
Jason Gobey
I strongly oppose this bill in its current form. Please learn from the mistakes of other communities who have introduced sweeping STR bans with disastrous consequences. I was directly impacted as a small business owner in Lake Tahoe. Eliminating all STRs in the areas caused housing stock to be absorbed by out of town seasonal residents. These new residents had a very limited contribution to the economy and the locals had to move out with no jobs and no improvement to the local housing stock. I would suggest a very targeted approach and leave resort communities alone and operate as they were designed. Apartments in traditional local communities should be designated for LTR only. Increase taxes and build affordable housing.
David Montagne
Palms at Wailea
Dear Chair Kama, Vice Chair Uʻu-Hodgins and Members of the Housing and Land Use Committee:
I oppose Bill 9 as drafted and propose that the Council amend Bill 9 to exclude Papakea Oceanfront Resort which the County has historically identified as having A2-H2 zoning.
Background on Papakea
• Papakea was initially marketed and sold as a legal vacation rental property before any zoning restrictions limited transient vacation rentals in apartment zoned properties.
• Papakea owners have been operating legal vacation rentals for almost fifty years.
• Papakea has never been workforce housing so Papakea is not an example of a property that converted from workforce housing to transient vacation rental use.
• The majority of units at Papakea are under 600 square feet and the property has limited parking.
• Papakea is not in a residential neighborhood and is located alongside a long stretch of hotel-zoned properties and directly adjacent to multiple commercially-zoned properties.
Unlike apartment buildings designed for long-term residential use, Papakea has a front desk, an activity concierge, shared activity space, and numerous other common resort amenities.
• Owners purchased condos at Papakea with the reasonable expectation that short-term rentals were legal based on ordinances as far back as 1989, and as recent as 2022.
• In reliance on the Maui County ordinances and published documents, Hawaii state law, and constitutional protections, owners invested in costly renovations, furnishings, and long-term financial commitments such as mortgages that make any phase out of short-term rental right offensive of each buyer’s investment-backed expectations.
Papakea’s Contributions to the Community
• 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.
• Papakea supports a wide variety of local trade professionals including pest control, HVAC, painting, plumbing, electrical, general contracting, masonry, tile and flooring, fitness instructors, entertainers, and tree trimming.
Individual Owner Contributions to the Community
• Many small businesses owned and operated by local residents from the Maui community rely on Papakea short-term rentals including housekeepers, handymen, on-island agents, and contractors. These service providers set their own rates, work hours, select their own clients, work conditions and standard operating procedures. Shutting down short-term rentals at Papakea means telling local entrepreneurs that worked hard to build a small business that they need to just go get a job somewhere else to make less money, have less flexibility, and be subject to oppressive corporate policies.
• 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.
• Papakea guests support many small businesses on the island including restaurants, food trucks, tour operators, activities, state parks, the national park, and shops.
• Papakea owners and guests regularly participate in community activities including volunteering at beach cleanups, Maui Humane Society, the hospital, and many other local organizations, and contribute to local philanthropic and cultural efforts.
I would like to thank the committee for the opportunity to comment.
Sincerely,
Karene Vernor
3543 Lower Honoapiilani Road, Apartment J203
I feel that the UHERO report has been left out of these comments. I am including the Executive Summary and would ask that the whole study be included in the comments. I have included my own comments after the Executive Summary.
UHERO Executive Summary: This report examines the Maui County proposal to phase out transient vacation rentals (TVRs) in Apartment districts, including removing long-standing exceptions for pre-1989 properties widely known as the “Minatoya List.” The policy aims to improve housing affordability, worsened by the 2023 wildfires, by converting TVRs into long-term housing units. Our analysis includes effects on tourism, employment and output, the housing market, and county tax revenues.
To estimate the economic impacts, we built the Maui County Computable General Equilibrium (M-CGE) model. This model quantifies the effects of reduced visitor spending under two scenarios: a 15% decline (baseline) and a 25% decline (low-demand). It captures both direct and indirect impacts on tourism and related sectors. A separate regression model is used to predict year-over-year condominium price changes, accounting for factors like inflation, payroll growth, and inventory of for-sale condominium units. Key findings are as follows.
Tourism Industry Impact
•
Eliminating all TVRs in Apartment zones could reduce visitor accommodations by 25% and visitor days by 32%.
•
Total visitor spending is projected to decline by $900 million annually (-15%).
•
The decline in spending also results in the loss of 1,900 jobs (-3% of total payroll jobs).
•
Real GDP could therefore decline by 4%.
Housing Market Impact
•
The policy could add up to 6,127 units to the long-term housing stock—a 13% increase, equivalent to a decade’s worth of new housing development.
•
Condo prices are projected to decline by 20–40%, improving affordability but also reducing household wealth and property tax revenues.
•
Affected TVRs are disproportionately owned by out-of-state investors (85%), but market-wide price declines also impact owner-occupants.
Tax Revenue Impact
•
Property tax revenues could fall by up to $60 million annually by 2029 due to both changes in tax class and decreasing valuations.
•
General Excise Tax (GET) and Transient Accommodations Tax (TAT) revenues are projected to fall by 10% and 8% respectively, totaling to an additional -$15M annually.
We briefly explore policies and adjustments that could help mitigate the economic disruptions of the TVR phase-out while still promoting long-term housing availability. Increasing property taxes on TVRs could incentivize conversions to long-term residential use and generate revenue. Alternatively, auctioning a limited number of TVR permits would allow only the most profitable units to remain while capturing economic value for the county. A more gradual phase-in of the policy could also give property owners time to adapt and policymakers the opportunity to evaluate the policy before scaling up, reducing the risk of sudden housing market disruptions.
After reading the report, I can see no rational way to support this bill. I would also ask how your legal counsel has advised you as to your standing. I see no way that any units under the Minatoya Exemption can be legally reclassified. I'm sure your counsel has explained Equitable Estoppel to the board. To include units under the Minatoya Exemption in this bill is acknowledging you have knowingly set the bill up to fail. $900 MILLION dollars in lost in island income and no chance that the bill will survive a legal challenge are two big reasons to vote against this bill.
Kind regards, Ken Carpenter
Aloha Chair, Vice Chair, and Committee Members,
My name is Rajiv Malik, my wife and I own a property at the Kapalua Resort in Maui County, which my family use for occasional personal use and we employ a local Maui based rental management company to rent out as a Short Term Rental. I am writing today to express my deep concern and strong opposition to the proposed legislation to phase out Short Term vacation rentals in Maui. I ask that you are selective in identifying the properties that are identified in providing housing for our Maui people.
My wife and I purchased this property during the distressed Covid times of 2021. We invested life savings into the beauty and potential and future of Maui. We have been responsible owners and community supporters. We joint the Lahaina Yacht Club and built relationships and friendships on the island. In 2022 we undertook renovations, employing a local contractor and buying materials from local retailers, investing in ourselves and investing in the Manu economy. Our Short Term rental supports numerous local jobs at the property and our rental management company, including jobs in management, accounting, marketing, maintenance, landscaping and housekeeping. Our guests visit local restaurants and stores, supporting jobs across the island. Just in 2024 our unit has generated close to $50,000 in property and occupancy taxes paid to Maui county. Large part of the rest of the revenue pays for management fees, AOAO/HOA dues and maintenance, which all stay on the island. Short Term Rentals are a economic and effective way for families to enjoy the beauty of Maui and its hospitality, while giving back to the economy at the same time. For us it is a labor of love. Ultimately, the well being of Maui and all the small local businesses supported by us and our guests matters to us.
Owning at the Kapalua Resort has not been easy. We’ve faced huge maintenance costs, special assessments, and massive increases in insurance after the fires. The annual AOAO expense alone is now over $32,000 annually, and upcoming roof and road repairs will dramatically increase this amount. These costs are necessary to ensure that the property remains safe and functional. The Kapalua Resort was also never intended to be constructed for workforce housing. The residences limit occupancy, prohibit pets, and lack ample parking and storage space.
This legislation will result in the loss of island required income, the loss of jobs, the loss of homes, and the loss of Maui people who would be forced to ultimately leave the island. As the County has approved a $1.56 billion budget for 2025, it seems feasible that measures should be enacted to attract visitors to the island to bolster our economy and support our financial needs rather than further discouraging such. I urge the Council to find a fair and balanced path forward — one that protects local jobs, supports the economy, and holds STR owners to high standards, instead of phasing us out completely. Please exclude the Kapalua Resort from any STR ban.
Mahalo for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Rajiv and Tania Malik
rmalik2005@hotmail.com
100 Ridge, unit 811-13, Lahaina, Maui, HI
Aloha Chair and Committee Members,
As an owner of condo in Kapalua Golf Villas going back to 1997, I have seen many changes come to Maui. There is no way that anyone could argue with the housing shortage and housing affordability issues on Maui. However, this Bill 9, including some of the amendments proposed, does not truly address these very important issues. Yes, it satisfies some political agendas. Yes, some of those who blame all tourists, the tourism industry, the visitors that come and go, yes, they may believe this will “fix” so many issues. But let’s be very clear and honest. This proposal will do far more harm to Maui’s economy and to those local people who the Mayor claims he’s looking out for. Jobs will be lost, local employees will suffer reduced, or no income, entire industries will be impacted. And when you negatively impact those industries, who truly is harmed? It’s the very people who live and work on Maui. I have not even mentioned the tax revenue reduction that would be created by this proposed ban. There are county services that simply will not survive with the sort of reduction in revenue this proposed ban would bring. Those are additional jobs and services lost. Again, who suffers when that revenue and those jobs are lost? The local families who should be the exact folks being watched out for. There is no doubt there needs to be thorough consideration to solving housing shortages on Maui, however, let’s work together to resolve this very important issue rather than pit one good group against another.
Aloha Chair, Vice Chair, and Committee Members
I own a condo at Maui Eldorado Resort located in Kaanapali above the Royal Kaanapali golf course and the hotels on Kaanapali beach. The Eldorado is a member of the Kaanapali Resort Association and pays approximately $100,000 to the Association each year. The Eldorado was developed and built over 50 years ago for short-term rentals and was never intended for long-term leasing. It has a check-in desk and operates as a hotel. I own a one bedroom, and my current association dues are over $3,000 per month. I anticipate they will rise due to the homeowner’s insurance problems that all are facing island-wide. This monthly fee does not include the property taxes. There are not enough parking stalls for the 200 condos, there is no storage, and there is no off-street parking available. The condos in my resort are not appropriate for long-term rental and too expensive to be considered work-force housing. Our resort is also zoned resort/hotel in the community plan. It should be exempt from the STR ban.
As you are all aware, the recent economic study has pointed out the problems that can result if the 7,000 STR phase out is put in place. Please give all aspects of this bill your thoughtful consideration.
Mahalo,
Kathy Matulewicz
Maui Eldorado Resort
To whom it may concern, as an owner of 2 STRs on Maui and a part time resident, I strongly oppose Mayor Bissen's proposal to ban STRs.
- STRs provide better jobs and hotels and help the economy
- it is UNFAIR to even propose this and cause property values to crash. This is hard earned money that Mr Bissen is propose to evaporate
- STRs have also provided a strong stream of income to the COUNTY, until Mr Bissen started doing this
- Like ours at Kamaole Sands most are not so suitable for families to live in long term, they were built and meant as appart-hotels
Thanks for your consideration, and not approving Mr Bissen's bill. There are better ways to solve housing issues
My name is Carl E. (Joe) Gatlin and I would respectfully like to offer written testimony in opposition to the repeal of the Minatoya Act, which allows short term rentals on Maui.
My wife, Linda, and I bought an 850 square foot condominium at Maui Kamaole, more than twenty-one years ago. For the entire time we have been owners we have operated our condominium in compliance with all laws and regulations, paid our taxes, employed local contractors and suppliers, and contributed to the local economy. In 2015, we upgraded and remodeled our condominium, spending more than $150,000 dollars in the process. Those were 2015 dollars, not 2025 dollars. To the maximum extent possible, we used locally sourced materials and employed local contractors and suppliers.
First, we are not the “bad guys” here. We are residents of Maui, not some far-off, monolithic corporation squeezing every bit of revenue we can from our condominium. Generally, about 40 percent of our days rented each year are from returning guests. We manage the rentals ourselves. In 2024, our small, one-bedroom, condominium generated more than $26,000 in taxes (property, MCTAT, TAT and GET). In 2025, that figure was more than $21,000. In the last nine years, our condominium has generated almost $61,000 in property taxes and that figure is increasing at an alarming rate – by almost 45 percent between 2023 and 2024. Our gross revenue in 2024 was more than $68,000. In 2023 that figure was more than $78,000. In 2024, our expenses exceeded our revenue by almost $8500. One can easily see the chilling effect that the Lahaina fire and the absence of the Aloha spirit by some has had on the tourist industry – Maui’s major economic engine. Potential tourists are aware of the discussion regarding the Minatoya Act. If the County’s objective is drive away tourism – you are succeeding.
I have seen previous testimony by some residents who want to overturn the Minatoya Act and prohibit STRs. Their anger and disdain towards STR owners was palpable. Was I born on Maui? No. Have I lived on Maui my entire life? No. I cannot help where I was born and I spent more than 31 years in the Navy. During the Vietnam war I served in a Destroyer home ported in Pearl Harbor. When I see the testimony by some of the residents directed at owners like me, I wonder how many of them would have joined the military, worked and served in some of the places that I did. Not many, I think.
Repealing the Minatoya Act will not solve the affordable housing crisis on Maui, plain and simple. Affordable housing is not solely a Maui problem. It is a world-wide problem. In the past year, The Wall Street Journal published several articles addressing this issue, including Portugal and Spain. Residents there are not happy that tourists have “invaded” their country, but the local leaders know that they need the tourist revenue to pay for much needed services and infrastructure.
Many of the complexes on Maui are not suited for conversion to long-term rentals. The renter(s) would ultimately be paying for landscaping and infrastructure originally intended for tourists. Parking and the prohibition of pets are other issues.
I have had occasion recently to be on the mainland, because my wife is undergoing treatment for cancer. I observed that communities like Irvine, California, are constructing high density, multi-story apartment building developments to address the problem. The County needs to develop the infrastructure to support affordable housing such as Irvine's example, rather than take away a much-needed source of revenue.
Thank you for your consideration.
Joe Gatlin
Maui Kamaole
June 6, 2025
Councilmember Tasha Kama, Chair
Councilmember Tom Cook, Vice Chair
Committee on Housing and Land Use
RE: Bill 9 – A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTERS 19.12, 19.32, AND 19.37 MAUl COUNTY CODE, RELATING TO TRANSIENT VACATION RENTALS IN APARTMENT DISTRICTS
Hearing Date – June 9, 2025
Aloha Chair Kama, Vice Chair Cook and members of the committee,
My name is Mary M Kerstulovich and I am a licensed Realtor, with Hawaii Life. I have been a Maui resident for over 23 years. I’m writing to strongly oppose Bill 9, which seeks to phase out legal transient vacation rentals (TVRs) in apartment-zoned areas. While I fully support addressing our housing crisis, this bill creates more problems than it solves—particularly for our local economy, small businesses, and property owners.
At what price $$$$$??? That was asked the other day on a social media travel group. AND the answer is there is no price. No price for taking away “four out of five households” income away.....
There is no monetary price for this. The price is more valuable that that. AND I will tell you the price. The price our sense of community. After the fires people came together and since then the islands ALOHA and COMMUNITY has been torn down by the them vs us narrative for too long now. A lof of the longtime residents may not be Hawaiian, but we are here because we have Aloha in our hearts.
THIS RISK OF JOB LOSS IS NOT A theoretical risk—this is a real threat to Maui’s service industry, real estate market, and real property tax base. The proposed ban will severely disrupt sectors desperately trying to recover from the Lahaina 2023 wildfire.
From a business perspective, if you vote to pass this Bill,the economic fallout will be significant.
Aren’t we already facing goverment cut backs on a Federal Level?
• Our Kihei Recyling center isn’t even open becuase their funding got cut.
• Loss of jobs. I am not just talking about tourist industry jobs. This has a huge impact on all sectors of our workforce. Who cuts your hair, does your nails, massage, chiropractic? Helps you at the grocery store? Maintains your home? Details your car? Babysits your kids? Everyone will cut all unnessary things from their life that support our small businesses. Who pays your rental income on your Ohana? Will entire households be able to stay here? Our homeless population is growing daily.....Crime is rising daily.... Our families with food insecurity is growing...the need for medical benefits and HUD is all growing daily. We simply don’t need this kind of economic loss throughout our island.
• Loss of income from TAT, GET, and general commerce trading locally.
• HAS ANYONE THOUGHT OF THE LOCAL BANKS??? AND WHAT WILL PEOPLE DO TO PAY THEIR BILLS? BANKS HOLD TITLE TO THESE PROPERTIES, CAR LOANS OR PERSONAL LOANS. WHEN THE LOSS OF INCOME STARTS TO IMPACT PAYMENTS BY ALL LOCALS??? WILL OUR LOCAL BANKS BE IN JEAPORDY? DO YOU KNOW THAT MANY OF OUR CONDOS ARE ONLY ALLOWED TO BE FINANCED LOCALLY
SOLUTION BASED:
• Start a lottery and allocate the funds to Hawaiian homes and subsidized housing. Who wouldn’t buy a scratch off ticket when vacationing here?
• MAKE the builders accountable for adding affordable to the master plans of their communities.
• Find out why all of our water systems are owned privately. The mistakes of the past need to be learned from and the future needs to be more community-based.
• Tax the hotels for taking much of our valued resources.
• Property taxes for new resident homeowners. CHANGE THAT BASIS immediately. WHEN a home purchase is made from a local. Often the tax basis is an obstacle for a home owner and affordability.
Maui county clearly relies on tourism. EVERY financial play is always “tax the tourist”. Green Tax, Rental Car tax to pay for our new roads, rising Transient tax. The list is endless. Pick one you either need to tourist dollar to keep our community together or you don’t. You can’t force the hand of we don’t want you here, and they expect everyone to keep coming. The “Quality no Quantity” doesn’t work for our small businesses. People who go to the hotels don’t spend the majority of their money outside of the hotel that supports small businesses.
The island has less than 5% of the land that is allocated to be built. Over the last 20 years almost every affordable housing project that I know of has been met with some obstacle to overcome.....Water, infrastructure, protected lands, fudning etc. BUT meanwhile the county is allowing more and more building that doesn’t need to be here and takes our resources. The amount of fast-food chains and new establishments has grown while we say there is no water. The failure of the systems in the past do not need to be the focus of the future.
The “affordable housing” of the past is now having to be reclassified as “subsidized”. It has to be. Use the funds we have and that can be collected to build something that works for families. Homes, with yards and parking for multigenerational families.
I strongly urge the Council to pursue smart, balanced regulations that grow our housing stock and our economic foundation. With targeted zoning reforms and better enforcement of illegal rentals, we can preserve responsible TVR operators and the jobs they provide.
Please consider PROTECTIONG OF THE MINATOYA LIST by doing a mass re-zoning on complexes that are currently on the Minatoya list from apartment to hotel, so that these issues don’t come up every few years. AND remember ......
The Minatoya list was brought into law in 1989....in many cases before the large hotels were even built. Corporate money doesn’t stay here. Local money does.
DID YOU KNOW IF THIS BILL IS PASSED THAT A CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT WILL LIKELY MAKE EVERY UNIT ON THIS LIST UNSELLABLE VIA A LOAN. WHICH MEANS WITH FALLING PRICES THE PROPERITES WILL BE SWEPT UP BY CASH BUYERS.
Our community deserves a balanced economy that supports local businesses.
Mary M Kerstulovich R(S)
Aloha Committee Members:
My name is John Ferreri, I purchased a 2/2 condo from Kamaole Sands in 1993 as a part time resident and as a STR when not on Island to help me pay for the unit as the costs continued to escalate. Over the course of these 30+ years we have paid Hundreds of Thousands of dollars in Property Taxes and GET and TAT taxes. Just this one complex contains 440 units built in the mid to late 1970's (I think!) and I'm sure produced BILLIONS in revenue to the State & County government. I truly hope you folks are not 'KILLING THE GOOSE THAT LAYS THE GOLDEN EGGS' to keep this GREAT State in operation. The tax revenue from these STR's runs throughout the economy, probably 70-80% of each family arriving at OGG load up at Costco, Walmart and Target goods (how much tax revenue do they generate for the State)??? By your actions you will KILL THE ECONOMIC engine that keeps the Island running, allowing local families to live a wholesome/worthwhile life. This is to say nothing about the over-all value of ALL REAL ESTATE PROPERTIES!! You will be DEPRESSING these values and greatly reducing the income to both the County and State government. By your actions you will have NO VISITORS to speak of and have to layoff most of your County & State staff as well as the ripple effect to the bars/restaurants, rental car agencies, airport employees. Even the large major Hotels will be effected which will cripple the County & State revenue stream. You folks need to think 'LONG & HARD' BEFORE YOU KILL THE GOOSE!!!
You will have thousands of Island NATIVES have to leave and go to the mainland in order to support their wonderful families. Think about your own families and relatives that live on-Island. Do you want to create a 'Wasteland' in the generations to come?? PLEASE don't KILL the GOOSE!!! Sincerely, John Ferreri Reno, Nv 925 353 0099 jpf3003@aol.com
Apps an owner of a condo in Maui, I acknowledge the housing crisis demands urgent solutions. What I struggle with is that I just do not see how Bill 9, as it's currently drafted, doesn't end up creating more of a problem long term vs contributing to a solution.
Bill 9 may, in the short term, benefit local housing but long term would have an overall negative impact to Maui with a significant reduction in visitor spending, job losses, and decreased tax revenue. UHERO’s analysis estimated a possible $900 million annual drop in visitor spending and the loss of approximately 1,900 jobs, a $900 million drop in annual visitor spending, and a $60 million reduction in property tax revenue. This Bill likely doesn't solve one existing crisis and creates a new crisis that damages our economy, destroys small businesses, and threatens the livelihoods of local residents without providing truly livable, affordable home solutions for the needs of Maui families.
The County could prioritize sustainable solutions to expand affordable housing for local residents. Things like policy reforms, tax incentives, deed restrictions, infrastructure investment, and new development should be the near term focus. County leaders should prioritize legislation already within reach including: enforcing regulations on illegal STRs, streamlining and expedited permitting and infrastructure approvals, pursuing targeted rezoning where appropriate, and using proven tools like public-private partnerships and affordable housing incentives. This would explore long term results without the negative side effects from the well meaning but faulty approach proposed under Bill 9. A direct quote from the UHERO blog post succinctly summarizes my thoughts on why Bill 9 is a faulty approach: “Shifting 6,172 housing units from the short-term to the long-term market would have benefits for local housing affordability on Maui. However, the shift could trigger a substantial loss of property tax revenue for the county and could negatively impact the recovery of tourism on Maui by lowering accommodation capacity. These drawbacks could have significant consequences for Maui’s local population in terms of reduced county services, higher taxes, or a weakening labor market. While falling home prices are a benefit to those struggling to find housing, incumbent homeowners could lose equity if the price of homes fell county-wide, which could have broader economic impacts.”
Dear Council Members,
I am a STR owner in Maui County, and I’m writing to respectfully express my concerns about the proposed legislation to phase out over so many vacation rentals.
Short-term rentals play a vital role in supporting Maui’s local economy. Guests staying at my property dine at family-owned restaurants, shop at local stores, and participate in cultural tours and activities. Their spending directly benefits small businesses that are the backbone of our community.
Short-term rentals also play a key role in supporting local employment. I rely on skilled Maui residents for essential services like cleaning and maintenance—offering reliable, well-compensated work that helps sustain families and strengthens the local economy. These individuals are not just part of my team; they are valued contributors to the success of my business and the well-being of our community.
Personally, owning and operating a short-term rental has allowed me to invest in the property, maintain high standards, and continue employing local workers despite rising costs for maintenance, insurance, and upgrades. This income ensures the property remains a safe, welcoming space for guests and a benefit—not a burden—to the neighborhood.
One more thing—and I don’t think this has been emphasized enough: if this legislation passes and causes a collapse in the real estate market, it could wipe out home equity for all property owners on Maui. This would have a devastating impact on local residents who purchased homes in the past decade or who rely on home equity lines of credit (HELOCs). Thousands of locals could find themselves underwater on their mortgages, unable to refinance when interest rates drop or access emergency funds when needed. The ripple effects of such a downturn would be far-reaching and deeply harmful to the very community this legislation seeks to protect.
While I understand the need to address housing and tourism concerns, I believe this legislation is overly broad and risks harming the economic and financial well-being of Maui’s residents. I urge the Council to consider a more balanced approach—one that holds property owners accountable while preserving the positive contributions we make to Maui’s economy, workforce, and community.
Thank you for your time and thoughtful consideration.
Sincerely,
Jill Chapman
Please see attached
Aloha Chair, Vice Chair, and Committee Members,
My name is Cory McKim. I'm a full-time resident and I run a small local business that’s really feeling the impacts of the drop in tourism. I wanted to share what this proposed phase-out of short-term rentals could mean for families like mine and the people we work with every day.
My business depends on visitors who stay in short-term rentals. Many of them come back year after year, and they support local restaurants, shops, and tour companies — not just the big-name spots, but the mom-and-pop places that make Maui special. If these rentals go away, I worry we’ll lose those repeat visitors, and with them, a huge part of what keeps us going.
Directly or indirectly, everyone on Maui is connected to the visitor industry. Unfortunately, due to the geographical location of Maui, we are not able to export products that employ a large number of local workers. A 2024 University of Hawaiʻi Economic Research Organization (UHERO) report identified potential opportunities to diversify the state’s economy by analyzing the variety of industries across counties in the U.S. and Hawaiʻi.
The conclusion of this UHERO report is that the industries we found for diversifying the economy will be incredibly difficult to establish. Industries like aquaculture. Still, it is not clear which industries Hawai‘i could diversify into.
Even the $1.5B budget that was just passed by the council will depend on short-term rental revenues.
There are currently major challenges at the global, federal and county level for local businesses due to extremely low levels of tourism. Local businesses do not need more reasons to downsize or close. When local businesses thrive, they create a ripple effect that benefits the entire community, from boosting the local economy and creating jobs to fostering a stronger sense of identity and pride.
Local workers rely on tourism work to take care of their families. We’re not just talking about numbers. These are real people — my neighbors, family and friends — who are going to be hit hard if these jobs disappear.
This phase-out feels like it’s targeting the very people who are trying to make it here — local families doing our best to stay afloat. I understand there are concerns about housing, and I agree we need real solutions. But taking away our income without a clear plan just makes things harder.
We need the County to protect locals on every front — not just in housing, but in employment, education, services, and economic opportunity. We need a balanced approach, not one that removes critical sources of income and support.
Please, don’t move forward with this phase-out. Work with us. Listen to us. Let’s find a way that protects our jobs, preserves our communities, and helps Maui thrive.
Mahalo for your time and for listening to our stories.
Sincerely,
Cory
I am an 81 year old Maui born man. In the 1960's, our local people were promised by our politicians that tourism jobs would replaced the jobs lost by the phase out of pineapple and sugar cane jobs. These new jobs will make life better for our local people. Today, the promise of a good life because of tourism is not happened for most of us. Our workers including the higher paid jobs of police officers, nurses, and doctors are scrambling to find an affordable place to call home. We have an opportunity to acquire the housing units for our local workers with Bill 9. Yes, some of our residents will lose out on their investment in these Minatoya Listed Properties, but the majority of the investors are not residents of Maui County. Therefore, I urge the Maui County Council to approve Bill 9 so that we can finally care for our local residents who were promised a better life because of tourism, but have suffered by these investments from outsiders. Let us stem the flow of our local people from their ancestral lands to the US mainland to find an affordable place to live. Pass Bill 9 for the common good of our people.