HLU-4 Bill 9 (2025) BILL 9 (2025), AMENDING CHAPTERS 19.12, 19.32, AND 19.37, MAUI COUNTY CODE, RELATING TO TRANSIENT VACATION RENTALS IN APARTMENT DISTRICTS (HLU-4)
I 100% oppose this bill . I own 2-STR properties on the West shore that generate a modest return while employing local residents. I also visit the Island multiple times annually and choose to stay in Wailea where I spend double the amount of what my rental properties generate which also supports the local economy but due to the negative mid guidance by Mayor Bissen I do not plan on visiting until he is voted out of office or recalled as his actions and incompetence have single handedly destroyed the Maui economy and he continues to mis guide the local residents
Aloha Maui Council Members,
As someone who spends time on Maui to be close to family, I’m deeply concerned about the impact this bill will have—not just on me, but on the broader community. My STR provides a place for me to stay when I visit and supports local cleaners, maintenance workers, and small businesses year-round. If this bill passes, my condo won’t be sold, but it also won’t be used. It will sit empty most of the time, which feels like a waste and a loss for everyone. Please consider the unintended consequences this could have on both residents and part-time members of the Maui community like me. Thank you,
- Tori Bryan
280 Hauoli St Wailuku, HI C7
I am writing to express my strong opposition to Maui Bill 9, a proposal that, if passed, would place an additional financial burden on residents who are already struggling to afford their bills. While the intention behind this bill may be commendable, its practical effects would be devastating for countless residents.
Homeowners on Maui are already grappling with excessive costs, including soaring HOA fees, exorbitant insurance rates, and the weight of mortgage payments. The last thing we need is another regulation that further complicates our financial well-being. Instead of offering relief, Maui Bill 9 threatens to exacerbate an already precarious situation for families, retirees, and hardworking individuals through lost tax revenue and tourist income.
HOA fees, which are intended to maintain communal spaces and uphold neighborhood standards, have become increasingly unaffordable, due to insurance rates for complexes doubling, tripling, and even quadrupling. Additionally, homeowners and renters insurance costs have skyrocketed forcing homeowners to pay astronomical premiums simply to protect their properties. Combined with mortgage obligations, these expenses have already reached unsustainable levels for many.
Maui Bill 9 would add yet another layer of financial hardship at a time when residents can least afford it. If the goal is to support our community, imposing more costs on residents is not the answer. Instead, lawmakers should be focusing on providing financial relief, stabilizing insurance rates, building additional housing without red tape, and ensuring HOA fees are kept in check.
I urge you to reconsider the implications of Maui Bill 9 and advocate for policies that truly benefit residents, rather than adding to their economic stress. Please stand with the community and oppose this bill.
I own two properties on Maui, one is our home in Kapalua, the other is a rental property, in the hotel zone. Both our housekeeper and our handyman have indicated that they derive most of their income from work on properties that are currently short term rentals that are on this Minatoya list. They do not believe they can stay on Maui if this work is no longer available and are both making plans to move to Las Vegas. Personally, I believe that the Minatoya list was a mistake in the first place, but abruptly ending it will be a huge mistake and will just result in a lot of lawsuits and foreclosures, none of which will place local people into suitable properties. I think it would be better to work with owners of short term rentals who would like to sell their properties (there are many) to enable local families to purchase same properties. I also think the council should prioritize building of suitable local housing over new luxury properties and hotel developments. Finally, I would like to observe that banning these short term rental businesses will really only benefit the large hotels, resorts and timeshares. Banning these short term rental businesses is basically a massive giveaway to corporate interests, who do not really invest that much into the island.
I strongly oppose this bill. I own a short-term rental on Maui, which I also use when visiting my family on the island. If this bill passes, I will not sell my condo—but it will sit empty for most of the year. This outcome benefits no one and would negatively impact the local economy by reducing visitor spending and eliminating income for local businesses and service providers who rely on responsible short-term rental owners like myself.
-Caleb McKim
Aloha Maui Council Members
I believe Bill 9 will be a disaster for the residents of Maui, if passed. I strongly believe this bill will cause more harm than good to our community. It threatens the livelihoods of countless local residents. If passed, income will drop for many, businesses will be forced to close, and thousands of jobs will be lost. This includes housekeepers, handymen and contractors, plumbers, A/C technicians, restaurant personnel, property managers, small retailers, and activity providers.
Most of the vacation rentals in question are located within designated “resort” communities. These areas were never intended to provide affordable housing. The cost of living in these communities is prohibitively high — HOA dues, utilities, maintenance and taxes on these condos can cost $30 to $40K a year, without including the cost of a mortgage. Who can realistically afford that? Only the wealthy — or those who are able to generate revenue through vacation rentals. These costs continue to rise every year. Even if home prices were to temporarily dip, these units would still not offer sustainable, affordable housing, nor would they serve the families who need housing the most.
If we want real solutions, we must look to successful models. I recently saw an ad for the new Hale O’Piʻikea affordable housing development in Kīhei ($897-$1897) for a 3 bedroom unit— a great example of what can be done. It leverages multi-level funding from both federal and state programs. And crucially, funding for these programs is made possible by property tax revenue — including the $160 million generated last year from short-term rental properties. These new affordable housing projects are designed with long-term affordability in mind, offering lower maintenance costs than aging resort communities ever could.
Banning short-term rentals in expensive resort areas will not solve our housing crisis. Other states and cities have tried similar approaches — and it did not work. This bill will not create affordability. It will only create economic damage — to our neighbors, our economy, and our island community. I am deeply concerned about the far-reaching consequences this bill will have.
I oppose this bill. If passed it would cost the island a fortune in lost tax revenues, and lost jobs per the UHERO study, and would force the County to pay insane legal costs defending the bill against all the lawsuits. Most units on the Minatoya list have very high fixed costs and are not suitable for long term local housing (HOA fees from $1,500-$3,000 per month, special assessments to deal with shoreline erosion, high property taxes, high an increasing insurance costs, limited parking, no pets allowed, etc.). Even at the current 40-50% reduction in sales prices for these condos they are not being purchased by locals as primary homes as they are far too expensive for an average family to live in and maintain.
I strongly support the creation of affordable housing units. Maui needs to cut all the red tape and accelerate the construction of permanent, affordable housing across the island.
I urge you to oppose Bill 9 entirely. However, if it passes, please retain the CD1 amendment exempting timeshares. We own Seventeen (17) weeks at the Kuleana Club. Timeshares are not TVRs. Timeshares, Interval ownership are deeded personal property to hundreds of families. We use our weeks yearly and love our time in your beautiful state. We financially support the community. This exemption is a fair, balanced, and lawful solution that protects many jobs, housing neutrality, and tax revenue—without compromising the County’s broader goals.
We strongly oppose this bill. Mahalo for your time, your service, and for considering the perspective of owners like me.
Blaine and Paula Nichols Family Trust
Spring Creek, Nevada
Kuleana Club Timeshare Owner – Seventeen weeks in multiple units.
I oppose this bill. I have a STR in Wailea. My HOA alone is over $1800 a month. When I purchased in 2012 it had been on the market for a while so I did not take from locals. I recommend local people and places to my renters who like to return and put money into the Maui economy. My housekeeping service and all the restaurants and services would hurt to take away this business. I pay monthly TAT, GE and Maui county taxes which also help the economy.
Dear Chair Kama, Vice Chair U'u-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 for the same reasons as other owners have identified as having A2-H2 zoning. Papakea was initially marketed and sold as a legal vacation rental property before any restrictions limited transient vacation rentals in apartment zoned properties. We have been operating legal vacation rentals for over 45 years. We have been there for almost that time and attest that Papakea has never been workforce housing, so Papakea is not an example of a property that coverted from workforce housing to transient vacation rental use. The majority of units at Papakea are well under 600 sq ft. and there is limited parking. Papakea is not in a residential neighborhood and is located alongside a stretch of hotel-zoned properties and directly adjacent to multiple commercially zoned properties. We always had a front desk, activity concierge, shared activity space and numerous other common resort amenities, unlike apartment buildings designed for long-term residential use. No doubt Papakea has been a part of the economic community on Maui as we employe over 35 local residents on a full-time basis, a lot who have worked there for over 15 years. So many small businesses owned and operated by local residents from the Maui community rely on Papakea short-term rentals including housekeepers, handymen and on-island agents and contractors. We use these services all the time. They rely on this industry and shutting down short-term rentals at Papakea means that their business will be greatly challenged and difficult to stay afloat. Furthermore, our STRs have supported the economic wellbeing of the State of Hawaii and County of Maui, through payment of property taxes at a higher short term rental rate. Of course, in addition to Transient Accommodations Tax, General Excise Tax, and Maui County transient Accommodations Tax, all good revenue for the state and county. We purchased our condo at Papakea with the reasonable expectation that STEs were legal. We invested in costly renovations, furnishings and made financial commitments such as a mortgage that would make any phase out of STR rental right offensive of our investment-backed expectations. Thank you for your consideration and would like to thank you for this opportunity to comment on why we oppose Bill 9, as drafted, and believe should exclude Papakea instead.
Sincerely
ALOHA
MY HUSBAND AND I HAVE BEEN VISITING KAPALUA FOR 39 YRS. OUR FIRST TIME WAS FOR OUR 1 YR ANNIVERSARY IN 1986. WE STAYED AT THE KAPALUA BAY HOTEL AND FELL IN LOVE WITH IT AND ALL OF THE KAPALUA RESORT. WE VISITED OFTEN AND BOOKED MANY VACATIONS THRU THE HOTEL TO STAY IN THE BAY VILLAS. WE UNDERSTAND THE THE KAPALUA RESORT VILLA COMMUNITIES HAVE BEEN SHORT TERM VACATION RENTALS SINSE THEIR BEGINNING IN THE 1970'S. WHY SHOULD THIS CHANGE NOW?
WE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY IN 2018 TO PURCHASE A BAY VILLA, OUR LIFE LONG DREAM. WE COME A FEW TIMES PER YEAR WITH OUR FAMILY AND RENT IT ABOUT 75% OF THE YEAR. IT MAKES ECONOMIC SENSE FOR US TO DO THAT.
WE INFORM EACH GUEST OF THE STORES, SHOPS, RESTAURANTS, GOLF COURSES AND ACTIVITIES AVAILABLE TO THEM ON THEIR VISIT. WE HAVE HAD MANY RETURN GUESTS FOR THESE PAST FEW YEARS. ISN'T THIS THE LIFE BLOOD OF THE ISLAND?
WE ARE AWARE OF THE HOUSING CRISIS ON MAUI ONLY MADE WORSE FOLLOWING THE DEVASTATING LAHAINA FIRE.
MAUI WILL NEVER BE THE SAME!
WE SAW THE HOUSING THAT WAS CONSTRUCTED ON KAPALUA PROPERTY TO HELP THE CURRENT HOUSING CRISIS FOR THE DISPLACED WORKFORCE AT KAPALUA. MORE OF THIS COULD BE A SOLUTION.
WE STRONLY OPPOSE THE CURRENT BILLS TO BAN TRANSIENT VACATION RENTALS ON MAUI. WITH THE DOWNTURN IN TOURISM ON MAUI, HOW DOES THIS BAN IMPROVE THE ECONOMICS OF THE ISLAND??
LOCALS NEED HOUSING, BUT FIRST THEY NEED JOBS.
FIRST IT WAS COVID, THEN THE LAHAINA FIRE AND NOW THIS.
MAUI WILL NEVER BE THE SAME!
WE LIVE IN NORTHERN CALIFORNIA. THE VACATION AREA OF SOUTH LAKE TAHOE IN CALIFORNIA SUFFERED THE SAME LOCAL HOUSING SHORTAGE ISSUES AS MAUI IS FACED WITH. A BAN WAS PLACED ON VACATION RENTALS AT THE SOUTH LAKE. FOLLOWING YEARS OF DEBATE, HEARTACHE BY PROPERTY OWNERS, LAW SUITS AND MUCH MONEY WASTED BY ALL INVOLVED THE BAN HAS NOW BEEN REVERSED.
WHAT A PITY TO SEE MAUI TAKE THIS SAME PATH!
ALOHA
Kamaole Sands, where I own my condo, is perfect for short term rentals. We spend a fortune on taxes and maintenance that helps support the economy. It was never intended to house families long term. If this bill passes, I will never rent this condo long term.
My name is Nancy Vierra, and I have owned a short-term rental property in Maui County for over 30 years. I am currently renting long term, below market value, non-FEMA rates to local fire survivors. My hope would be to continue this arrangement until they can rebuild, or to give them the right of first refusal if I do decide to sell. However given the fact that my current monthly property obligations already exceed their monthly rent, it is not likely that they would be able to successfully purchase my unit. However I am writing today to express my deep concern and strong opposition to the proposed legislation to phase out more than 7,000 vacation rentals.
I’ve worked hard to be a responsible and community-oriented owner. When I do rent sort term, I employ local service providers — cleaners, maintenance techs, and landscapers — many of whom have become like family over the years.
Owning in this complex has not been easy. We’ve faced huge maintenance costs, special assessments, and massive increases in insurance after the fires. These aren’t luxuries —they’re costs that ensure the property remains safe, functional, and appealing. STR income helps cover those costs while supporting local workers.This legislation feels rushed and one-sided. I urge the Council to work with owners like me to find a fair and balanced path forward — one that protects local jobs, supports the economy.
The overall effect on ALL property values and property taxes, not just STRs, the lost revenue from transient accommodation tax, loss of local jobs and loss of business revenue from visitors choosing to go elsewhere would be astronomical.
Could other solutions be found?
Stop illegal STRs that are not licensed or paying the appropriate State and Local taxes? Enforce the current laws regarding this.
Have low income units remain low income permanently, not just for a designated period. (See Measure J in California which insures low income sells to low income for the entire life span of the property.)
Prohibit future conversion or licensing of additional STRs, allowing the current units to stay with the right to transfer the license upon the sale of the unit. This would eliminate additional future growth, while maintaining the current number of units to accommodate visitors. This would also preserve local jobs, TA taxes and property values.
I am more than willingly to continue to rent to my local family for as long as it takes them to rebuild. Mayor Bissen asked for my help and I responded. I now ask for his help as well as the council’s in preserving my ability to continue to legally rent short term in the future.
My unit is 600 square feet 650 including lanai. HOA fees are between $900-1000 before rent. The HOA fees alone are the price of rent in many cities. Parking allocation of one spot per condo. In my opinion it would not be suitable for a fixed income family. It would work for perhaps a single or couple but with the HOA fees added to rental charge it would be very costly. Waiohuli Beach Hale was never used as long term housing. We are the second owners of a condominium that was built in 1974. Thank you for your time. Barbara Cooper
We need more long term rentals for Maui, we cannot survive with rentals being used for tourism. We have many hotels with empty rooms that can accommodate tourist. It’s time to put the working class of Maui first and that starts with providing more long term rentals for the locals.
My name is Serena, and I am a born and raised resident of Maui and a kanaka maoli that has had to move away because of the high cost of living and being affected by the Lahaina fires. I am writing to strongly support Bill 9 and the phaseout of illegal and non-conforming short-term vacation rentals (STRs) in the apartment districts of Maui County.
Short-term vacation rentals have directly contributed to the housing crisis in Hawaiʻi by taking long-term homes off the market and driving up rental prices beyond what local residents can afford. According to the Hawaiʻi Appleseed Center for Law and Economic Justice, STRs remove thousands of housing units from the local rental supply — units that could otherwise serve kamaʻāina families.
A 2020 report by the University of Hawaiʻi Economic Research Organization (UHERO) found that STRs are associated with a statistically significant increase in housing prices and rents, particularly in communities already vulnerable to displacement. In Maui County alone, STRs make up a disproportionately large share of the housing market compared to most places in the U.S.
Every vacation rental that replaces a long-term home is a step away from housing justice for local families. While tourism is a part of our economy, it should not come at the expense of our people’s ability to live, work, and raise families in their ancestral homeland.
Bill 9 is not anti-tourism — it is pro-community. It restores balance. It ensures housing is for residents first, not investment properties. And it begins to reverse the decades of displacement caused by unchecked speculative real estate.
I urge you to pass Bill 9 without delay. Mahalo for your time and for standing with the people of Maui County.
My name is Fiona Van Der Mark and 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.
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.
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 has never been workforce housing so Papakea is not an example of a property that converted from workforce housing to transient vacation rental use. 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 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
Kamaole sands carrying costs are NOT affordable for locals.
Upwards of $7500 a month with mortgages and dues.
UHERO findings not accurate, sale prices are down by 50% from last year and they are still not selling to locals!
Aloha Chair, Vice Chair, and Committee Members,
My name is Gerald Ramirez and I own a short-term rental property in Maui County. I am writing today to express my deep concern and strong opposition to the proposed legislation to phase out more than 7,000 vacation rentals.
I’ve worked hard to be a responsible and community-oriented owner. I recommend local restaurants and tour guides in my welcome guide. I employ local service providers — cleaners, maintenance techs, and landscapers — many of whom have become like family over the years. My guests often leave Maui saying they felt more connected to the island because of the personal experience they had in my home.
Some of my guests have even said they wouldn’t have come at all if they didn’t have a vacation rental option. That matters — not just to me, but to all the small businesses they supported during their stay.
Owning in this complex has not been easy. We’ve faced huge maintenance costs, special assessments, and massive increases in insurance after the fires. These aren’t luxuries — they’re costs that ensure the property remains safe, functional, and appealing. STR income helps cover those costs while supporting local workers.
This legislation feels rushed and one-sided. I urge the Council to work with owners like me 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.
Mahalo for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Gerald Ramirez
2219 S. Kihei Rd A407
Kihei, Hawaii
I 100% oppose this bill . I own 2-STR properties on the West shore that generate a modest return while employing local residents. I also visit the Island multiple times annually and choose to stay in Wailea where I spend double the amount of what my rental properties generate which also supports the local economy but due to the negative mid guidance by Mayor Bissen I do not plan on visiting until he is voted out of office or recalled as his actions and incompetence have single handedly destroyed the Maui economy and he continues to mis guide the local residents
Aloha Maui Council Members,
As someone who spends time on Maui to be close to family, I’m deeply concerned about the impact this bill will have—not just on me, but on the broader community. My STR provides a place for me to stay when I visit and supports local cleaners, maintenance workers, and small businesses year-round. If this bill passes, my condo won’t be sold, but it also won’t be used. It will sit empty most of the time, which feels like a waste and a loss for everyone. Please consider the unintended consequences this could have on both residents and part-time members of the Maui community like me. Thank you,
- Tori Bryan
280 Hauoli St Wailuku, HI C7
I am writing to express my strong opposition to Maui Bill 9, a proposal that, if passed, would place an additional financial burden on residents who are already struggling to afford their bills. While the intention behind this bill may be commendable, its practical effects would be devastating for countless residents.
Homeowners on Maui are already grappling with excessive costs, including soaring HOA fees, exorbitant insurance rates, and the weight of mortgage payments. The last thing we need is another regulation that further complicates our financial well-being. Instead of offering relief, Maui Bill 9 threatens to exacerbate an already precarious situation for families, retirees, and hardworking individuals through lost tax revenue and tourist income.
HOA fees, which are intended to maintain communal spaces and uphold neighborhood standards, have become increasingly unaffordable, due to insurance rates for complexes doubling, tripling, and even quadrupling. Additionally, homeowners and renters insurance costs have skyrocketed forcing homeowners to pay astronomical premiums simply to protect their properties. Combined with mortgage obligations, these expenses have already reached unsustainable levels for many.
Maui Bill 9 would add yet another layer of financial hardship at a time when residents can least afford it. If the goal is to support our community, imposing more costs on residents is not the answer. Instead, lawmakers should be focusing on providing financial relief, stabilizing insurance rates, building additional housing without red tape, and ensuring HOA fees are kept in check.
I urge you to reconsider the implications of Maui Bill 9 and advocate for policies that truly benefit residents, rather than adding to their economic stress. Please stand with the community and oppose this bill.
I own two properties on Maui, one is our home in Kapalua, the other is a rental property, in the hotel zone. Both our housekeeper and our handyman have indicated that they derive most of their income from work on properties that are currently short term rentals that are on this Minatoya list. They do not believe they can stay on Maui if this work is no longer available and are both making plans to move to Las Vegas. Personally, I believe that the Minatoya list was a mistake in the first place, but abruptly ending it will be a huge mistake and will just result in a lot of lawsuits and foreclosures, none of which will place local people into suitable properties. I think it would be better to work with owners of short term rentals who would like to sell their properties (there are many) to enable local families to purchase same properties. I also think the council should prioritize building of suitable local housing over new luxury properties and hotel developments. Finally, I would like to observe that banning these short term rental businesses will really only benefit the large hotels, resorts and timeshares. Banning these short term rental businesses is basically a massive giveaway to corporate interests, who do not really invest that much into the island.
I strongly oppose this bill. I own a short-term rental on Maui, which I also use when visiting my family on the island. If this bill passes, I will not sell my condo—but it will sit empty for most of the year. This outcome benefits no one and would negatively impact the local economy by reducing visitor spending and eliminating income for local businesses and service providers who rely on responsible short-term rental owners like myself.
-Caleb McKim
Aloha Maui Council Members
I believe Bill 9 will be a disaster for the residents of Maui, if passed. I strongly believe this bill will cause more harm than good to our community. It threatens the livelihoods of countless local residents. If passed, income will drop for many, businesses will be forced to close, and thousands of jobs will be lost. This includes housekeepers, handymen and contractors, plumbers, A/C technicians, restaurant personnel, property managers, small retailers, and activity providers.
Most of the vacation rentals in question are located within designated “resort” communities. These areas were never intended to provide affordable housing. The cost of living in these communities is prohibitively high — HOA dues, utilities, maintenance and taxes on these condos can cost $30 to $40K a year, without including the cost of a mortgage. Who can realistically afford that? Only the wealthy — or those who are able to generate revenue through vacation rentals. These costs continue to rise every year. Even if home prices were to temporarily dip, these units would still not offer sustainable, affordable housing, nor would they serve the families who need housing the most.
If we want real solutions, we must look to successful models. I recently saw an ad for the new Hale O’Piʻikea affordable housing development in Kīhei ($897-$1897) for a 3 bedroom unit— a great example of what can be done. It leverages multi-level funding from both federal and state programs. And crucially, funding for these programs is made possible by property tax revenue — including the $160 million generated last year from short-term rental properties. These new affordable housing projects are designed with long-term affordability in mind, offering lower maintenance costs than aging resort communities ever could.
Banning short-term rentals in expensive resort areas will not solve our housing crisis. Other states and cities have tried similar approaches — and it did not work. This bill will not create affordability. It will only create economic damage — to our neighbors, our economy, and our island community. I am deeply concerned about the far-reaching consequences this bill will have.
Please, vote no on Bill 9.
Thank you
Dana Inman
I oppose this bill. If passed it would cost the island a fortune in lost tax revenues, and lost jobs per the UHERO study, and would force the County to pay insane legal costs defending the bill against all the lawsuits. Most units on the Minatoya list have very high fixed costs and are not suitable for long term local housing (HOA fees from $1,500-$3,000 per month, special assessments to deal with shoreline erosion, high property taxes, high an increasing insurance costs, limited parking, no pets allowed, etc.). Even at the current 40-50% reduction in sales prices for these condos they are not being purchased by locals as primary homes as they are far too expensive for an average family to live in and maintain.
I strongly support the creation of affordable housing units. Maui needs to cut all the red tape and accelerate the construction of permanent, affordable housing across the island.
Jean Wilson
To whom it may concern,
I urge you to oppose Bill 9 entirely. However, if it passes, please retain the CD1 amendment exempting timeshares. We own Seventeen (17) weeks at the Kuleana Club. Timeshares are not TVRs. Timeshares, Interval ownership are deeded personal property to hundreds of families. We use our weeks yearly and love our time in your beautiful state. We financially support the community. This exemption is a fair, balanced, and lawful solution that protects many jobs, housing neutrality, and tax revenue—without compromising the County’s broader goals.
We strongly oppose this bill. Mahalo for your time, your service, and for considering the perspective of owners like me.
Blaine and Paula Nichols Family Trust
Spring Creek, Nevada
Kuleana Club Timeshare Owner – Seventeen weeks in multiple units.
I oppose this bill. I have a STR in Wailea. My HOA alone is over $1800 a month. When I purchased in 2012 it had been on the market for a while so I did not take from locals. I recommend local people and places to my renters who like to return and put money into the Maui economy. My housekeeping service and all the restaurants and services would hurt to take away this business. I pay monthly TAT, GE and Maui county taxes which also help the economy.
Please oppose this bill
Dear Chair Kama, Vice Chair U'u-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 for the same reasons as other owners have identified as having A2-H2 zoning. Papakea was initially marketed and sold as a legal vacation rental property before any restrictions limited transient vacation rentals in apartment zoned properties. We have been operating legal vacation rentals for over 45 years. We have been there for almost that time and attest that Papakea has never been workforce housing, so Papakea is not an example of a property that coverted from workforce housing to transient vacation rental use. The majority of units at Papakea are well under 600 sq ft. and there is limited parking. Papakea is not in a residential neighborhood and is located alongside a stretch of hotel-zoned properties and directly adjacent to multiple commercially zoned properties. We always had a front desk, activity concierge, shared activity space and numerous other common resort amenities, unlike apartment buildings designed for long-term residential use. No doubt Papakea has been a part of the economic community on Maui as we employe over 35 local residents on a full-time basis, a lot who have worked there for over 15 years. So many small businesses owned and operated by local residents from the Maui community rely on Papakea short-term rentals including housekeepers, handymen and on-island agents and contractors. We use these services all the time. They rely on this industry and shutting down short-term rentals at Papakea means that their business will be greatly challenged and difficult to stay afloat. Furthermore, our STRs have supported the economic wellbeing of the State of Hawaii and County of Maui, through payment of property taxes at a higher short term rental rate. Of course, in addition to Transient Accommodations Tax, General Excise Tax, and Maui County transient Accommodations Tax, all good revenue for the state and county. We purchased our condo at Papakea with the reasonable expectation that STEs were legal. We invested in costly renovations, furnishings and made financial commitments such as a mortgage that would make any phase out of STR rental right offensive of our investment-backed expectations. Thank you for your consideration and would like to thank you for this opportunity to comment on why we oppose Bill 9, as drafted, and believe should exclude Papakea instead.
Sincerely
Doug Brandes
3543 Lower Honoapiilani Road Papakea Resort C-404
ALOHA
MY HUSBAND AND I HAVE BEEN VISITING KAPALUA FOR 39 YRS. OUR FIRST TIME WAS FOR OUR 1 YR ANNIVERSARY IN 1986. WE STAYED AT THE KAPALUA BAY HOTEL AND FELL IN LOVE WITH IT AND ALL OF THE KAPALUA RESORT. WE VISITED OFTEN AND BOOKED MANY VACATIONS THRU THE HOTEL TO STAY IN THE BAY VILLAS. WE UNDERSTAND THE THE KAPALUA RESORT VILLA COMMUNITIES HAVE BEEN SHORT TERM VACATION RENTALS SINSE THEIR BEGINNING IN THE 1970'S. WHY SHOULD THIS CHANGE NOW?
WE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY IN 2018 TO PURCHASE A BAY VILLA, OUR LIFE LONG DREAM. WE COME A FEW TIMES PER YEAR WITH OUR FAMILY AND RENT IT ABOUT 75% OF THE YEAR. IT MAKES ECONOMIC SENSE FOR US TO DO THAT.
WE INFORM EACH GUEST OF THE STORES, SHOPS, RESTAURANTS, GOLF COURSES AND ACTIVITIES AVAILABLE TO THEM ON THEIR VISIT. WE HAVE HAD MANY RETURN GUESTS FOR THESE PAST FEW YEARS. ISN'T THIS THE LIFE BLOOD OF THE ISLAND?
WE ARE AWARE OF THE HOUSING CRISIS ON MAUI ONLY MADE WORSE FOLLOWING THE DEVASTATING LAHAINA FIRE.
MAUI WILL NEVER BE THE SAME!
WE SAW THE HOUSING THAT WAS CONSTRUCTED ON KAPALUA PROPERTY TO HELP THE CURRENT HOUSING CRISIS FOR THE DISPLACED WORKFORCE AT KAPALUA. MORE OF THIS COULD BE A SOLUTION.
WE STRONLY OPPOSE THE CURRENT BILLS TO BAN TRANSIENT VACATION RENTALS ON MAUI. WITH THE DOWNTURN IN TOURISM ON MAUI, HOW DOES THIS BAN IMPROVE THE ECONOMICS OF THE ISLAND??
LOCALS NEED HOUSING, BUT FIRST THEY NEED JOBS.
FIRST IT WAS COVID, THEN THE LAHAINA FIRE AND NOW THIS.
MAUI WILL NEVER BE THE SAME!
WE LIVE IN NORTHERN CALIFORNIA. THE VACATION AREA OF SOUTH LAKE TAHOE IN CALIFORNIA SUFFERED THE SAME LOCAL HOUSING SHORTAGE ISSUES AS MAUI IS FACED WITH. A BAN WAS PLACED ON VACATION RENTALS AT THE SOUTH LAKE. FOLLOWING YEARS OF DEBATE, HEARTACHE BY PROPERTY OWNERS, LAW SUITS AND MUCH MONEY WASTED BY ALL INVOLVED THE BAN HAS NOW BEEN REVERSED.
WHAT A PITY TO SEE MAUI TAKE THIS SAME PATH!
ALOHA
Kamaole Sands, where I own my condo, is perfect for short term rentals. We spend a fortune on taxes and maintenance that helps support the economy. It was never intended to house families long term. If this bill passes, I will never rent this condo long term.
Aloha Chair, Vice Chair, and Committee Members,
My name is Nancy Vierra, and I have owned a short-term rental property in Maui County for over 30 years. I am currently renting long term, below market value, non-FEMA rates to local fire survivors. My hope would be to continue this arrangement until they can rebuild, or to give them the right of first refusal if I do decide to sell. However given the fact that my current monthly property obligations already exceed their monthly rent, it is not likely that they would be able to successfully purchase my unit. However I am writing today to express my deep concern and strong opposition to the proposed legislation to phase out more than 7,000 vacation rentals.
I’ve worked hard to be a responsible and community-oriented owner. When I do rent sort term, I employ local service providers — cleaners, maintenance techs, and landscapers — many of whom have become like family over the years.
Owning in this complex has not been easy. We’ve faced huge maintenance costs, special assessments, and massive increases in insurance after the fires. These aren’t luxuries —they’re costs that ensure the property remains safe, functional, and appealing. STR income helps cover those costs while supporting local workers.This legislation feels rushed and one-sided. I urge the Council to work with owners like me to find a fair and balanced path forward — one that protects local jobs, supports the economy.
The overall effect on ALL property values and property taxes, not just STRs, the lost revenue from transient accommodation tax, loss of local jobs and loss of business revenue from visitors choosing to go elsewhere would be astronomical.
Could other solutions be found?
Stop illegal STRs that are not licensed or paying the appropriate State and Local taxes? Enforce the current laws regarding this.
Have low income units remain low income permanently, not just for a designated period. (See Measure J in California which insures low income sells to low income for the entire life span of the property.)
Prohibit future conversion or licensing of additional STRs, allowing the current units to stay with the right to transfer the license upon the sale of the unit. This would eliminate additional future growth, while maintaining the current number of units to accommodate visitors. This would also preserve local jobs, TA taxes and property values.
I am more than willingly to continue to rent to my local family for as long as it takes them to rebuild. Mayor Bissen asked for my help and I responded. I now ask for his help as well as the council’s in preserving my ability to continue to legally rent short term in the future.
Respectfully,
Nancy Vierra
831.251.0940
My unit is 600 square feet 650 including lanai. HOA fees are between $900-1000 before rent. The HOA fees alone are the price of rent in many cities. Parking allocation of one spot per condo. In my opinion it would not be suitable for a fixed income family. It would work for perhaps a single or couple but with the HOA fees added to rental charge it would be very costly. Waiohuli Beach Hale was never used as long term housing. We are the second owners of a condominium that was built in 1974. Thank you for your time. Barbara Cooper
We need more long term rentals for Maui, we cannot survive with rentals being used for tourism. We have many hotels with empty rooms that can accommodate tourist. It’s time to put the working class of Maui first and that starts with providing more long term rentals for the locals.
Aloha Chair and Councilmembers,
My name is Serena, and I am a born and raised resident of Maui and a kanaka maoli that has had to move away because of the high cost of living and being affected by the Lahaina fires. I am writing to strongly support Bill 9 and the phaseout of illegal and non-conforming short-term vacation rentals (STRs) in the apartment districts of Maui County.
Short-term vacation rentals have directly contributed to the housing crisis in Hawaiʻi by taking long-term homes off the market and driving up rental prices beyond what local residents can afford. According to the Hawaiʻi Appleseed Center for Law and Economic Justice, STRs remove thousands of housing units from the local rental supply — units that could otherwise serve kamaʻāina families.
A 2020 report by the University of Hawaiʻi Economic Research Organization (UHERO) found that STRs are associated with a statistically significant increase in housing prices and rents, particularly in communities already vulnerable to displacement. In Maui County alone, STRs make up a disproportionately large share of the housing market compared to most places in the U.S.
Every vacation rental that replaces a long-term home is a step away from housing justice for local families. While tourism is a part of our economy, it should not come at the expense of our people’s ability to live, work, and raise families in their ancestral homeland.
Bill 9 is not anti-tourism — it is pro-community. It restores balance. It ensures housing is for residents first, not investment properties. And it begins to reverse the decades of displacement caused by unchecked speculative real estate.
I urge you to pass Bill 9 without delay. Mahalo for your time and for standing with the people of Maui County.
Me ka haʻahaʻa,
Serena Umiokalani Alexander
This is my familys home.
My name is Fiona Van Der Mark and 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.
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.
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 has never been workforce housing so Papakea is not an example of a property that converted from workforce housing to transient vacation rental use. 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 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
Kamaole sands carrying costs are NOT affordable for locals.
Upwards of $7500 a month with mortgages and dues.
UHERO findings not accurate, sale prices are down by 50% from last year and they are still not selling to locals!
Aloha Chair, Vice Chair, and Committee Members,
My name is Gerald Ramirez and I own a short-term rental property in Maui County. I am writing today to express my deep concern and strong opposition to the proposed legislation to phase out more than 7,000 vacation rentals.
I’ve worked hard to be a responsible and community-oriented owner. I recommend local restaurants and tour guides in my welcome guide. I employ local service providers — cleaners, maintenance techs, and landscapers — many of whom have become like family over the years. My guests often leave Maui saying they felt more connected to the island because of the personal experience they had in my home.
Some of my guests have even said they wouldn’t have come at all if they didn’t have a vacation rental option. That matters — not just to me, but to all the small businesses they supported during their stay.
Owning in this complex has not been easy. We’ve faced huge maintenance costs, special assessments, and massive increases in insurance after the fires. These aren’t luxuries — they’re costs that ensure the property remains safe, functional, and appealing. STR income helps cover those costs while supporting local workers.
This legislation feels rushed and one-sided. I urge the Council to work with owners like me 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.
Mahalo for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Gerald Ramirez
2219 S. Kihei Rd A407
Kihei, Hawaii