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)
My wife and I are owners of a Kapalua Golf Villa, which we have owned for years and operate it as a short-term rental when not on-island. We are writing regarding our concern of the negative impacts of the passage of the proposal to eliminate over 7,000 vacation rentals on Maui, given both the effects on us personally as well as the overall community of Maui County, and express our extreme opposition to it.
In our case, we purchased our condo because we have loved spending time on Maui during vacations, because we love the community, and because it would allow us to live on Maui part time during our working years. Being able to rent out the condo when we are not staying in the condo is critical for us as the expenses are so high, including mortgage, taxes and the $1,400/month HOA fees. If we are no longer able conduct short-term rentals in our condo, we would be forced to sell our condo…which we have put so much time, love and financial resources into over the years we have been here….and up root ourselves from a community we love so much. Certainly, long-term rental income cannot cover the monthly costs that we have, and we would loose use of our home away from home if we did rent long term.
The result of taking away the right to rent our condo would not have the desired benefit the Maui community….because it is highly unlikely that one from the local Maui community could afford to purchase such a condo in a resort community such as Kapalua, especially considering ongoing costs such as the HOA fees. Given that the condo has very little storage and is relatively small, the purchasers would surely be someone from the mainland that is retiring in Maui, which would not have desired effects….not providing housing to the local working community, reducing the County tax income significantly (from $13/sf to $2/sf, if I have the tax rates correct), and significantly reducing the money spent in the community by the families that rent our condo (condo cleaning staff, restaurants, tourism in general). To think that vacationing families coming for weeks or months at a time and rent our condo would be just going to a resort hotel instead is not very logical, based just on affordability…and those tourists would just go to another island or vacation destination. Vacationers that rent condos usually have a number of reasons why they would not rent the significantly more expensive hotel rooms.
We ask that you seriously consider the overall negative outcome that would come from passing this legislation as it pertains to the Kapalua resort community, and vote NO. This entire issue needs to be addressed with a scalpel, and not a sledge hammer….there are certainly condos that should be returned to the community for long-term use, but certainly not a condo constructed in a resort community for the purpose of short-term rental.
Mahalo for considering our perspective in hour decision making.
Sincerely,
Rick McCartney and Jessie Lin
925-408-8151
I strongly support Bill 9 and as the Mayor already told us, some of these properties will change their zoning. There are options for 94% of all TVRs that are owned by Non-Maui Residents. As the Planning Commission is aware, the number of Maui County residents that own a property in question is 0.16%. We hope that with Mayors support and the wide variety of options to offset any concerns regarding tax revenue, the Housing and Land Use Committee will chose Maui residents over mainland investors. It appears to be a certainty a yes vote will not immediately solve any of the housing issues at the moment. It simply kicks off the litigation process. That is fine, we need to squash all these errors that the opposition has. No property is being stolen. The idea that it is so expensive, only these investors should have these properties and that residents should not bother since most on Maui cannot afford it. Well one big thing we are looking forward to is the realignment of any HOA dues. Maintaining for a resident is very different than providing for vacation rental guest expecting a five (5) star experience.
Residents are watching closely. We know outside of West and South Maui this issue does not have the greatest effect on the Council Members. As someone who has lived and will once again live in a Minatoya Property, you can be assured the experience is like living in a hotel. Lots of turnover, a constant disruption with people that need to be reminded very often to just have common decency whilst they are in the middle of their vacation. In addition to shifting visitors towards appropriate accommodations, passing this measure will improve the lives of the residents at these properties. This is an aspect we have not seen talked about very often.
We have all those rents headed back to the mainland investors as well as all that Costco and Wal-Mart profits. When you have a dozen people stuffed into a two (2) bedroom unit with a kitchen, we see most of the meals, drinks and everything else happen at the TVR, not in the community. We have no affiliation with the Hotel industry and would just like to see our residential community returned from the current investor controlled community. Eliminating TVR's and expanding STHR would go a long way to restore quality of life for many, not just us.
Maui's economic situation is resilient. You would believe the world will end if these investment properties convert to long term tenants or even get sold to residents. The fear mongering is plentiful, well organized and shows the reality that the investment community will create false narratives and attempt to distract from the fact this is about residents over profits.
The people who want this bill to pass are the same ones who tint their windshields and have to drive at night with their brights on blinding all the other drivers. Don't be like those fakas.
My name is Dawn Theodore and my family has owned short term rentals in Maalaea Kai since 1988. I am writing today to express my deep concern and strong opposition to the proposed legislation to phase out more than 7000 vacation rentals.
My family has worked hard to be a responsible and community- oriented owners. My mother, Skipper Smith, began renting her condo in 1988 before there was airbnb and vrbo. She soon became a regular on the island teaching dance every summer in programs to local children through the parks. She later went on to have a dance studio in Maui at the MACC where she taught to local children and adults. She lived on Maui for 14 years and continued to have her short- term rental because she had many return guests who came to Maui because they loved staying in her unit. Many guests said they would not come to Maui if they could not stay in a short- term rental because of the price of the hotels and food.
My husband and I bought our condo 21 years ago. We have all employed local residents for cleaning, carpets, handyman, electricians, painters, window washers, plumbers, etc. We have relationships with all the people we employ and know they depend on the work of the short- term rentals for their income to live on Maui. We recommend local restaurants, water sports and other island activities from our unit with brochures for the guests. Many of our guests leave on boat trips daily from the Maalaea Harbor.
During the fires in 2023, we came to Maui and helped with buying and stocking needed supplies. We would bring all supplies to Maalaea where we live to have the boats take them to Lahaina. We also gave our unit to a local family who had lost their home and needed a place to live for 3 months, rent free.
We have always tried to follow the aloha spirit by giving back to local businesses. Without the income of the short -term rental, we will not be able to afford the costs of maintenance, taxes, and insurance increases. I have been coming to the island since 1969 and have always felt like Maui was my second home. I was married in the yard at Maalaea Kai and my mother was buried there.
I was a flight attendant for 34 years and brought millions of visitors during my time with United Airlines. The tourism business will definitely take a downturn if the legislation is passed as many people would not be able to afford to bring families to Maui. I am also a licensed psychotherapist in Hawaii and see clients from all islands.
In closing, the legislation feels rushed and unfair to those who have owned in Maalea Kai for almost 40 years. Please take into consideration owners like me to find a fair and balanced path forward to help the short- term rentals and the local businesses.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Mahalo,
Dawn Smith-Theodore, MA, MFT, CEDS
Maalaea Kai #220
I strongly oppose Bill 9.
I am an owner at the Grand Champions Villas in Wailea.
Behind Kaanapali, Wailea was designed and built as Maui's second "Master Planned Resort Community". Being a resort community means that it has amenities that cater to visitors seeking a resort experience, and not those seeing a residential/neighborhood/family/child-rearing life. There are no schools, no playgrounds, no gas stations, no grocery stores and very few non-tourism related workplaces. There are however, many expensive restaurants, several golf courses, a half dozen luxury hotels, well over a thousand LEGAL short-term rentals, as well as hundreds of multi-million dollar luxury homes.
I am 100% in support of increasing Maui's affordable housing inventory and like knowing that a portion of the taxes collected from my short-term rental are earmarked for the Affordable Housing Fund. Short term rentals are the largest contributor to this fund.
But if the goal of phasing out short-term rentals in the apartment district is to make condo units available to local residents for long-term occupancy, then it doesn't seem reasonable to phase out condos in a renowned resort community, surrounded by hotels, hotel zoned STRs, thousands of tourists, and devoid of the amenities that simplify daily living.
Mayor Bissen's bold approach to solving the housing crisis on Maui is admirable, but he, along with our esteemed council, are erudite and refined individuals who are capable of a more nuanced and surgical approach to this phase-out. It is my hope that the 4 complexes in the resort are of Wailea be excluded from the phase-out and are permitted to continue to rent on a short-term basis. By doing so, these prohibitively expensive condos can continue to employ local workers at high wages, continue to bring in high net-worth travelers who spend disproportionately high amounts while on vacation, and most of all, will continue to collect taxes which will yield positive outcomes through developments paid to the Affordable Housing Fund.
Mahalo,
My name is Gina Howell and my husband and I own a property in the Kapalua Resort in Maui County. I am writing to strongly oppose the proposed short-term rental ordinance. I believe that Kapalua Resort should be exempt from the proposed short-term rental ban, as the Kapalua Resort is a master planned resort community. We were built for vacation use, including short-term rental. It has been this way for over 45 years. They are definitely not affordable housing. Our HOA fees and very expensive, as well as the insurance and taxes. Not to mention the price of these condos. They are very expensive to maintain and afford and are not new construction, so they require a lot of maintenance to upkeep.
We have bought our appliances, air conditioner and furnishings/decor from local businesses. We have many service providers that we use on a regular basis. These are locals who will be greatly affected by the loss of their livelihood. Please consider all of the local lives who will be affected by this proposal.
Please exclude the Kapalua Resort from any short-term rental ban you might recommend.
Mahalo for your time and careful consideration.
Sincerely,
Gina Howell
Kapalua Bay Villas, 11G-1
832-660-6444
gwhowell@aol.com
I'm a full-time resident, and 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 job 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.
Folks who rely on this work to take care of their families are not just numbers. These are real people — my neighbors, my cousins, my 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,
Alexander Kaminer
I oppose this bill
It will not solve the housing problem
It will hurt jobs of those working on vacation rentals
Letting time share of the hook is not equitable
My property is in a resort zone and would not be effected and I would benifit from it passing
But I oppose it
It’s not fair or a solution
If you want a solution redone land from dormant agg to residential
Then allow easy building permits at reasonable costs
Respectfully submitted
Robert Schmaltz
Property owner
Don’t pass the bill
Mahalo
Kaheāwai Media, a local news organization, is submitting the following testimony, an excerpt from an article published on our website on June 6, 2025, which is accessible at the URL below.
Our reporting identified six key narratives based on extensive conversations with Maui community members, affordable housing advocates, water protectors, immigrant justice advocates, and other stakeholders.
We humbly offer this testimony as a resource to inform the HLU Committee as it considers this important bill that will impact both current and future generations of our Maui, pae ʻāina, and diaspora communities.
Mahalo nui loa
###
“Centering community voices in Maui’s proposal to phase out short-term rentals”
1. Maui is at a crossroads over water — and TVRs already have water
There is extreme concern about the rate at which Maui is using water from a variety of sources including ʻāina stewards, researchers, and government agencies.
The water situation limits Maui’s ability to build its way out of the housing crisis
There is an upper limit to how much water Maui can use per day — even for affordable housing
In some areas, like parts of West Maui, it has already hit that limit
In those areas, without new water sources available for the foreseeable future, experts say that Maui will have to reallocate existing uses to satisfy public trust uses
TVRs already have water — and a phaseout could help reallocate water to residents without having to wait on new sources County and anecdotal data suggests TVRs use more water than non-TVRs (Maui Department of Water Supply) — and converting them to other uses could lead to additional water conservation
2. Policies impact real people, not just “the economy”
The lived experiences of Maui’s people are realities — not just academic estimates
Economic analyses often erase significant (quantitative and qualitative) cultural, environmental, social, quality of life, and generational impacts
3. We need to look at the assumptions and biases that shape economic analyses
Economics as a field has been criticized as being systemically biased against women, people of color, Indigenous, low-income populations, and the environment — and that can skew the research that emerges.
Underrepresentation of certain demographics in the field has led to concerns about underweighting of the things those groups value [such as] the value Indigenous people assign to the environment and relationships.
Ultimately, all policy decisions are made with imperfect information, and are influenced by sources that seek to control the narrative and secure outcomes that will benefit them, and our reporting found other narratives that may have been overpowered by such sources, and that many community members support Bill 9 despite being fully aware of potential short-term negative impacts to the GDP or overall job market.
4. Phasing out TVRs will likely help with affordability — and other steps will be needed
Even UHERO, despite its potential institutional biases, estimates the phaseout could increase long-term housing by 13% and reduce condo prices by 20-40%. This aligns with a growing number of studies on TVRs.
However, because prices are so high on Maui already, those homes would still be unaffordable for many lower-income — but not all — local families.
That means, if Maui (and Hawaiʻi) actually want to make the Minatoya List properties affordable, they could — and would need to — implement additional policies.
And, by that same logic, if Maui doesn’t phase out TVRs, they’ll need to do even more to address housing affordability Maui will likely need to build new housing, but doing that alone — or instead of trying to reallocate TVRs — will take generations.
Maui will also likely need to implement other policies to offset or minimize economic impacts — and future analyses could look at who would be hit hardest to help Maui understand where and how to target those policies.
5. TVR phaseouts are part of a trend toward prioritizing equitable communities over equity for individual homeowners
TVRs are very likely making inequality worse.
In response, more communities are restricting or eliminating TVRs (Bloomberg).
Phasing out TVRs consistently lowers home values (UHERO)
While lower home values can help new buyers, this may worry existing owners who have equity in their home
However, as Maui residents see their communities being displaced, views are shifting on the value and reason behind owning a home. Community land trusts and other models aimed at keeping homes in local hands for future generations are emerging (Overstory)
These approaches separate housing stability from housing inflation and speculation
6. Bill 9 seems to have surfaced a cultural divide: should Maui prioritize collective welfare or individual rights?
Nearly all of the arguments we heard from proponents of Bill 9 seemed motivated by a belief that it would help current and future generations of Maui residents collectively. This was true even for those who believed it wouldn’t benefit them financially.
Among opponents’ arguments, while negative macroeconomic impacts were cited, we frequently heard arguments that prioritized individual economic benefits and “property rights.”
While reducing the TVR phaseout to this narrative would be oversimplifying the policy challenge, our reporting consistently found a divide between proponents and opponents over the cultural values that they believe Maui County should promote.
Donald Gibson
Unit G-106
Papakea Resort
3543 Lower Honoapiilani Road
Lahaina, Maui
I oppose Bill 9 as drafted and propose that the Council amend Bill 9 to exclude Papakea Oceanfront Resort.
While I have only owned at Papakea since 2010, I know that Papakea has operated as a resort property since inception in the 1970’s. I cannot imagine a situation where Papakea would operate successfully as an apartment for workforce housing.
• Units are small with little to no storage space.
• Parking is very limited.
• Situated on the oceanfront, in an area completely dominated by hotels and other resort properties, the economics of Papakea are completely unsuitable for permanent housing. The intrinsic land costs are simply too high to attract families, or low- to- average wage workers, and the unit size too small to attract high income permanent residents. Papakea is home to some permanent residents, but they tend to be retirees at a time in their life where small space is acceptable.
The unsuitability of Papakea Resort as workforce housing is obvious with even cursory examination. An additional consideration is that for almost 50 years people have purchased property at Papakea with the knowledge that they were purchasing legal vacation rental property. Papakea appeared on County documents for most of those years as zoned as Apartment/Hotel. An arbitrary decision to trample these long-held property rights will probably fail in the nations courts but certainly serves as a moral failure on the party of Council.
My ownership at Papakea is structured under a corporation, Tropica USA Corp. but usage is primarily for our personal use. When not in use by us we rely on sort term rentals to defray the high costs of ownership.
Exclude Papakea Resort from any inclusion in Bill 9.
Hello:
I am writing to submit testimony in opposition to Bill 9 (Minatoya Bill) and its potential impact.. As an owner of a vacation rental at Maui Kamaole, I am concerned that the current version of the bill could significantly affect not only myself, but local businesses and working families who depend on short-term rentals for their livelihoods.
These vacation rental complexes were originally developed for short-term rentals, and contribute to the local economy and support jobs in the service industry, such as cleaning, maintenance, and hospitality services. The bill's blanket approach would unfairly target these properties that were built (and approved) for short-term rental use.
To be honest, I challenge whether or not local families are even interested in properties like these. Opportunities existed prior to my purchase and my place remained available - even at much lower prices. I wonder if any studies have been conducted to determine if local families would purchase these properties, and if so, at what pricing.
I respectfully urge the council to reconsider this bill and work towards a solution that allows properties like Maui Kamaole to continue their current operation as short-term rentals. This proposal will not solve the housing crisis - there must be better solutions.
Subject: Testimony on Bill 9 (2025) – Oppose Bill Entirely; Support Timeshare Exemption if Passed
Aloha Council Members,
I am writing to express my strong opposition to Bill 9 (2025). This bill would eliminate long-standing, legally operating short-term rentals—including timeshare usage—that have contributed positively to Maui’s economy and community for decades.
However, I do appreciate the amendment in the current draft (CD1) that exempts validly existing timeshare units and timeshare plans from the phase-out. If the Council moves forward with Bill 9, I urge you to retain this exemption as a minimum safeguard to prevent serious harm to owners, workers, and the local economy.
I am a timeshare owner at the Kuleana Club. Like hundreds of others, I own one week per year—not a second home, not an investment property. I return regularly, support local restaurants, spend at neighborhood shops, and have built lasting relationships on the island. Timeshare owners like me are part of a stable community of repeat visitors who care deeply about Maui’s well-being.
Timeshare properties are fundamentally different from vacation rentals. Units are deeded one week at a time to hundreds of families, which makes them impossible to convert to long-term housing. Including timeshares in a short-term rental ban would not create housing—but it would devastate workers and remove a reliable source of local tax revenue. Properties like Kuleana Club operate legally under Maui County Code 19.37.010, and are fully compliant with TAT and GET tax regulations. Our occupancy rates are high, and our owners consistently contribute to the island’s economy, even in difficult times.
More importantly, timeshares support stable jobs. Many employees at the Kuleana Club have been with the property for over 25 years. Several lost their homes in the Lahaina fire. If timeshare usage is eliminated, these long-standing staff members risk losing the only thing they have left—their livelihood.
Timeshare owners and resorts have also stepped up in times of crisis. The industry has contributed millions to wildfire recovery and donated thousands of room nights to displaced families and first responders. That commitment continues today.
In summary:
I urge you to oppose Bill 9 entirely.
But if it passes, please retain the CD1 amendment exempting timeshares.
Timeshares are not TVRs.
This exemption is a fair, balanced, and lawful solution that protects jobs, housing neutrality, and tax revenue—without compromising the County’s broader goals.
Mahalo for your time, your service, and for considering the perspective of owners like me.
Chris Wolland
Garden Grove, CA
Kuleana Club Timeshare Owner – Unit 712, Week 43,44,46 and Unit 722, Week 19
Aloha Chair, Vice Chair, and Council Members,
My name is Rosalie Heymanson, and I own a condo at The Ridge at Kapalua Resort. My late husband and I first purchased in 1990, drawn to the island’s beauty and the resort’s privacy, position and magnificent design.
I write to express my family’s concern about the proposed phase-out of short-term rentals and respectfully request that Kapalua be excluded.
We live in Australia and have cherished our Maui home for 35 years. Our family and friends have also become loyal Maui visitors, supporting local businesses and experiences we proudly recommended.
We've renovated our unit several times using local contractors and suppliers, even inspiring other homeowners to update theirs. Our cleaners and property manager are like family.
We were in Kapalua during the fires and saw the devastation firsthand. We placed our unit in the FEMA program to house a displaced local resident. This meant giving up our own visits—but it felt right to help in the best way we could.
However, we do believe Kapalua is not the answer for long-term housing:
• It was designed as a resort, not a residential community and lacks child-friendly spaces and family support services.
• There is limited occupancy, storage, parking, and pet restrictions
• It’s remote from job centers and transport
• It is not affordable housing, for purchase, or rental, for most local residents
Since my husband died in 2013, it has been more difficult for me to visit long term, but my family wish to return. Having a long-term tenant makes this virtually impossible. In addition, the very high AOAO dues (over $32,000/year), insurance, and assessments are making it increasingly difficult to keep the condo in our family. Having it sit vacant helps no one.
We are responsible, community-minded owners who love Maui deeply. Please consider a fair path forward—one that supports both residents and the many visitors who help sustain the West Maui economy.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Rosalie Heymanson
The Ridge, Kapalua
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 the Papakea Oceanfront Resort which the County has historically identified as having A2-H2 zoning.
Papakea was initially built, marketed and sold as a legal vacation rental property before any zoning restrictions limited transient vacation rentals were introduced. It was not built as workforce housing and has never been a converted property for transient vacation use. Maui County and the state of Hawaii identified Papakea with partial hotel zoning for decades and still does today. Papakea is not in a residential neighborhood and is located alongside other like hotel-zoned properties. Unlike long term residential apartment buildings, Papakea has a front desk, an activity concierge, numerous other tourist type amenities. There are 35 full time local employees with families that rely on their employment at the Papakea resort. Papakea is the largest single contributor of property taxes in all of the West Maui on the Minatoya listed properties. In the last 5 years it has contributed $16,902,298.17 on top of the TAT, GET and MCAT revenues.
I would like to share with you some of my current AOAO costs with you. Currently my AOAO is $1950/mo which was an 8% increase from last year. In March of 2026 it is projected to increase again, which would then bring our AOAO MONTHLY fees to over $2600. This is for a one bed/one bath under 600 sq ft of living space, now add power, taxes, maintenance upkeep and even a small mortgage and you quickly get well over $5500.per month. Papakea has several ongoing maintenance challenges due to its proximity to the ocean and pending necessary repair projects due to its ageing infrastructure to attend, all of which will be added to the monthly AOAO fees.
Other reasons to exclude Papakea from this bill is that Papakea STR owners support multitude of privately owned small businesses, operated by your local residents. Some of these family businesses include housekeepers, essential local trade and repair persons, on island rental agents and other professional career people. Even the major furniture, building supply companies and the grocery store chains are going to feel the reduced demand, jeopardizing their existence on the island. These businesses and their families rely on Papakea STRs to support their business and by shutting down the STR’s industry it puts many local residents’ employment at risk and the financial viability of their families. Papakea guests also support a multitude of other small and big business on the island ranging from local gift and retail shops, restaurants, food trucks, golf clubs to across the island businesses like car rental agencies, airport workers tour and activity companies and state and national parks.
I would like to thank the committee for the opportunity to comment.
Sincerely,
Mike Krauchek
3543 Lower Honoapiilani Road, Apartment L101
I am writing to express my strong opposition to Bill 9 (2025). This bill would eliminate long-standing, short-term rentals—including timeshare usage—that have contributed positively to Maui’s economy for decades.
However, I do appreciate the amendment in the current draft (CD1) that exempts validly existing timeshare units and timeshare plans from the phase-out. If the Council moves forward with Bill 9, I urge you to retain this exemption as a minimum safeguard to prevent serious harm to owners, workers, and the local economy.
I am a timeshare owner at the Kuleana Club. Like hundreds. I own one week per year—not a second home, not an investment property. I return regularly, support local restaurants, spend at neighborhood shops. Timeshare owners like me are part of a stable community of repeat visitors who care deeply about Maui’s well-being.
Timeshare properties are fundamentally different from vacation rentals. Units are deeded one week at a time to hundreds of families, which makes them impossible to convert to long-term housing. Including timeshares in a short-term rental ban would not create housing—but it would devastate workers and remove a reliable source of local tax revenue. Properties like Kuleana Club operate legally under Maui County Code 19.37.010, and are fully compliant with TAT and GET tax regulations.
More importantly, timeshares support stable jobs. Many employees at the Kuleana Club have been with the property for over 25 years. Several lost their homes in the Lahaina fire. If timeshare usage is eliminated, these long-standing staff members risk losing the only thing they have left—their livelihood.
Mahalo for your time, your service, and for considering the perspective of owners like me
David Hull
Claremont,CA
Kuleana Club Timeshare Owner – Unit 619, Week 24
We strongly oppose the bill being considered. It is a short-term solution to a long-term problem and does not consider the ramifications of passing the bill - economically, Maui will struggle even more - fewer tourists means fewer jobs for Maui residents. Owners of short-term rentals pay more in taxes, so the county government will be seriously impacted. Please consider, instead, using your resources to build housing, hiring local workers.
I am opposed to ending short term rentals. If the purpose is to provide locals more affordable housing, this is not the way to do it. The value of these housing units is based largely on their income producing capacity. As such, the values will drop. However anyone can buy them. A local could buy them but so could anyone else in the world looking for a retirement condo or 2nd home. Even the whole f locals buy them all. How can they pay their mortgages as it is likely they will not have jobs to support them? Tourism will drop. No one wants to pay the outrageous hotel costs for the tiny accomodations they provide. This proposal is Short-Sighted.
Aloha Committee Members,
My wife and I are owners of a Kapalua Golf Villa, which we have owned for years and operate it as a short-term rental when not on-island. We are writing regarding our concern of the negative impacts of the passage of the proposal to eliminate over 7,000 vacation rentals on Maui, given both the effects on us personally as well as the overall community of Maui County, and express our extreme opposition to it.
In our case, we purchased our condo because we have loved spending time on Maui during vacations, because we love the community, and because it would allow us to live on Maui part time during our working years. Being able to rent out the condo when we are not staying in the condo is critical for us as the expenses are so high, including mortgage, taxes and the $1,400/month HOA fees. If we are no longer able conduct short-term rentals in our condo, we would be forced to sell our condo…which we have put so much time, love and financial resources into over the years we have been here….and up root ourselves from a community we love so much. Certainly, long-term rental income cannot cover the monthly costs that we have, and we would loose use of our home away from home if we did rent long term.
The result of taking away the right to rent our condo would not have the desired benefit the Maui community….because it is highly unlikely that one from the local Maui community could afford to purchase such a condo in a resort community such as Kapalua, especially considering ongoing costs such as the HOA fees. Given that the condo has very little storage and is relatively small, the purchasers would surely be someone from the mainland that is retiring in Maui, which would not have desired effects….not providing housing to the local working community, reducing the County tax income significantly (from $13/sf to $2/sf, if I have the tax rates correct), and significantly reducing the money spent in the community by the families that rent our condo (condo cleaning staff, restaurants, tourism in general). To think that vacationing families coming for weeks or months at a time and rent our condo would be just going to a resort hotel instead is not very logical, based just on affordability…and those tourists would just go to another island or vacation destination. Vacationers that rent condos usually have a number of reasons why they would not rent the significantly more expensive hotel rooms.
We ask that you seriously consider the overall negative outcome that would come from passing this legislation as it pertains to the Kapalua resort community, and vote NO. This entire issue needs to be addressed with a scalpel, and not a sledge hammer….there are certainly condos that should be returned to the community for long-term use, but certainly not a condo constructed in a resort community for the purpose of short-term rental.
Mahalo for considering our perspective in hour decision making.
Sincerely,
Rick McCartney and Jessie Lin
925-408-8151
Aloha Chair, Vice Chair and Committee members,
I strongly support Bill 9 and as the Mayor already told us, some of these properties will change their zoning. There are options for 94% of all TVRs that are owned by Non-Maui Residents. As the Planning Commission is aware, the number of Maui County residents that own a property in question is 0.16%. We hope that with Mayors support and the wide variety of options to offset any concerns regarding tax revenue, the Housing and Land Use Committee will chose Maui residents over mainland investors. It appears to be a certainty a yes vote will not immediately solve any of the housing issues at the moment. It simply kicks off the litigation process. That is fine, we need to squash all these errors that the opposition has. No property is being stolen. The idea that it is so expensive, only these investors should have these properties and that residents should not bother since most on Maui cannot afford it. Well one big thing we are looking forward to is the realignment of any HOA dues. Maintaining for a resident is very different than providing for vacation rental guest expecting a five (5) star experience.
Residents are watching closely. We know outside of West and South Maui this issue does not have the greatest effect on the Council Members. As someone who has lived and will once again live in a Minatoya Property, you can be assured the experience is like living in a hotel. Lots of turnover, a constant disruption with people that need to be reminded very often to just have common decency whilst they are in the middle of their vacation. In addition to shifting visitors towards appropriate accommodations, passing this measure will improve the lives of the residents at these properties. This is an aspect we have not seen talked about very often.
We have all those rents headed back to the mainland investors as well as all that Costco and Wal-Mart profits. When you have a dozen people stuffed into a two (2) bedroom unit with a kitchen, we see most of the meals, drinks and everything else happen at the TVR, not in the community. We have no affiliation with the Hotel industry and would just like to see our residential community returned from the current investor controlled community. Eliminating TVR's and expanding STHR would go a long way to restore quality of life for many, not just us.
Maui's economic situation is resilient. You would believe the world will end if these investment properties convert to long term tenants or even get sold to residents. The fear mongering is plentiful, well organized and shows the reality that the investment community will create false narratives and attempt to distract from the fact this is about residents over profits.
Mahalo for reading my testimony.
The people who want this bill to pass are the same ones who tint their windshields and have to drive at night with their brights on blinding all the other drivers. Don't be like those fakas.
A blanket ban is taking jobs away.
Aloha Chair, Vice Chair and Committee Members
My name is Dawn Theodore and my family has owned short term rentals in Maalaea Kai since 1988. I am writing today to express my deep concern and strong opposition to the proposed legislation to phase out more than 7000 vacation rentals.
My family has worked hard to be a responsible and community- oriented owners. My mother, Skipper Smith, began renting her condo in 1988 before there was airbnb and vrbo. She soon became a regular on the island teaching dance every summer in programs to local children through the parks. She later went on to have a dance studio in Maui at the MACC where she taught to local children and adults. She lived on Maui for 14 years and continued to have her short- term rental because she had many return guests who came to Maui because they loved staying in her unit. Many guests said they would not come to Maui if they could not stay in a short- term rental because of the price of the hotels and food.
My husband and I bought our condo 21 years ago. We have all employed local residents for cleaning, carpets, handyman, electricians, painters, window washers, plumbers, etc. We have relationships with all the people we employ and know they depend on the work of the short- term rentals for their income to live on Maui. We recommend local restaurants, water sports and other island activities from our unit with brochures for the guests. Many of our guests leave on boat trips daily from the Maalaea Harbor.
During the fires in 2023, we came to Maui and helped with buying and stocking needed supplies. We would bring all supplies to Maalaea where we live to have the boats take them to Lahaina. We also gave our unit to a local family who had lost their home and needed a place to live for 3 months, rent free.
We have always tried to follow the aloha spirit by giving back to local businesses. Without the income of the short -term rental, we will not be able to afford the costs of maintenance, taxes, and insurance increases. I have been coming to the island since 1969 and have always felt like Maui was my second home. I was married in the yard at Maalaea Kai and my mother was buried there.
I was a flight attendant for 34 years and brought millions of visitors during my time with United Airlines. The tourism business will definitely take a downturn if the legislation is passed as many people would not be able to afford to bring families to Maui. I am also a licensed psychotherapist in Hawaii and see clients from all islands.
In closing, the legislation feels rushed and unfair to those who have owned in Maalea Kai for almost 40 years. Please take into consideration owners like me to find a fair and balanced path forward to help the short- term rentals and the local businesses.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Mahalo,
Dawn Smith-Theodore, MA, MFT, CEDS
Maalaea Kai #220
I strongly oppose Bill 9.
I am an owner at the Grand Champions Villas in Wailea.
Behind Kaanapali, Wailea was designed and built as Maui's second "Master Planned Resort Community". Being a resort community means that it has amenities that cater to visitors seeking a resort experience, and not those seeing a residential/neighborhood/family/child-rearing life. There are no schools, no playgrounds, no gas stations, no grocery stores and very few non-tourism related workplaces. There are however, many expensive restaurants, several golf courses, a half dozen luxury hotels, well over a thousand LEGAL short-term rentals, as well as hundreds of multi-million dollar luxury homes.
I am 100% in support of increasing Maui's affordable housing inventory and like knowing that a portion of the taxes collected from my short-term rental are earmarked for the Affordable Housing Fund. Short term rentals are the largest contributor to this fund.
But if the goal of phasing out short-term rentals in the apartment district is to make condo units available to local residents for long-term occupancy, then it doesn't seem reasonable to phase out condos in a renowned resort community, surrounded by hotels, hotel zoned STRs, thousands of tourists, and devoid of the amenities that simplify daily living.
Mayor Bissen's bold approach to solving the housing crisis on Maui is admirable, but he, along with our esteemed council, are erudite and refined individuals who are capable of a more nuanced and surgical approach to this phase-out. It is my hope that the 4 complexes in the resort are of Wailea be excluded from the phase-out and are permitted to continue to rent on a short-term basis. By doing so, these prohibitively expensive condos can continue to employ local workers at high wages, continue to bring in high net-worth travelers who spend disproportionately high amounts while on vacation, and most of all, will continue to collect taxes which will yield positive outcomes through developments paid to the Affordable Housing Fund.
Mahalo,
This is not the solution to the housing crisis. Get your act together.
Aloha Chair, Vice Chair and Committee Members,
My name is Gina Howell and my husband and I own a property in the Kapalua Resort in Maui County. I am writing to strongly oppose the proposed short-term rental ordinance. I believe that Kapalua Resort should be exempt from the proposed short-term rental ban, as the Kapalua Resort is a master planned resort community. We were built for vacation use, including short-term rental. It has been this way for over 45 years. They are definitely not affordable housing. Our HOA fees and very expensive, as well as the insurance and taxes. Not to mention the price of these condos. They are very expensive to maintain and afford and are not new construction, so they require a lot of maintenance to upkeep.
We have bought our appliances, air conditioner and furnishings/decor from local businesses. We have many service providers that we use on a regular basis. These are locals who will be greatly affected by the loss of their livelihood. Please consider all of the local lives who will be affected by this proposal.
Please exclude the Kapalua Resort from any short-term rental ban you might recommend.
Mahalo for your time and careful consideration.
Sincerely,
Gina Howell
Kapalua Bay Villas, 11G-1
832-660-6444
gwhowell@aol.com
Aloha Chair, Vice Chair, and Committee Members,
I'm a full-time resident, and 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 job 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.
Folks who rely on this work to take care of their families are not just numbers. These are real people — my neighbors, my cousins, my 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,
Alexander Kaminer
I oppose this bill
It will not solve the housing problem
It will hurt jobs of those working on vacation rentals
Letting time share of the hook is not equitable
My property is in a resort zone and would not be effected and I would benifit from it passing
But I oppose it
It’s not fair or a solution
If you want a solution redone land from dormant agg to residential
Then allow easy building permits at reasonable costs
Respectfully submitted
Robert Schmaltz
Property owner
Don’t pass the bill
Mahalo
Kaheāwai Media, a local news organization, is submitting the following testimony, an excerpt from an article published on our website on June 6, 2025, which is accessible at the URL below.
https://kaheawaimedia.com/2025/06/06/centering-community-voices-maui-short-term-rentals-bill-9/
Our reporting identified six key narratives based on extensive conversations with Maui community members, affordable housing advocates, water protectors, immigrant justice advocates, and other stakeholders.
We humbly offer this testimony as a resource to inform the HLU Committee as it considers this important bill that will impact both current and future generations of our Maui, pae ʻāina, and diaspora communities.
Mahalo nui loa
###
“Centering community voices in Maui’s proposal to phase out short-term rentals”
1. Maui is at a crossroads over water — and TVRs already have water
There is extreme concern about the rate at which Maui is using water from a variety of sources including ʻāina stewards, researchers, and government agencies.
The water situation limits Maui’s ability to build its way out of the housing crisis
There is an upper limit to how much water Maui can use per day — even for affordable housing
In some areas, like parts of West Maui, it has already hit that limit
In those areas, without new water sources available for the foreseeable future, experts say that Maui will have to reallocate existing uses to satisfy public trust uses
TVRs already have water — and a phaseout could help reallocate water to residents without having to wait on new sources County and anecdotal data suggests TVRs use more water than non-TVRs (Maui Department of Water Supply) — and converting them to other uses could lead to additional water conservation
2. Policies impact real people, not just “the economy”
The lived experiences of Maui’s people are realities — not just academic estimates
Economic analyses often erase significant (quantitative and qualitative) cultural, environmental, social, quality of life, and generational impacts
3. We need to look at the assumptions and biases that shape economic analyses
Economics as a field has been criticized as being systemically biased against women, people of color, Indigenous, low-income populations, and the environment — and that can skew the research that emerges.
Underrepresentation of certain demographics in the field has led to concerns about underweighting of the things those groups value [such as] the value Indigenous people assign to the environment and relationships.
Ultimately, all policy decisions are made with imperfect information, and are influenced by sources that seek to control the narrative and secure outcomes that will benefit them, and our reporting found other narratives that may have been overpowered by such sources, and that many community members support Bill 9 despite being fully aware of potential short-term negative impacts to the GDP or overall job market.
4. Phasing out TVRs will likely help with affordability — and other steps will be needed
Even UHERO, despite its potential institutional biases, estimates the phaseout could increase long-term housing by 13% and reduce condo prices by 20-40%. This aligns with a growing number of studies on TVRs.
However, because prices are so high on Maui already, those homes would still be unaffordable for many lower-income — but not all — local families.
That means, if Maui (and Hawaiʻi) actually want to make the Minatoya List properties affordable, they could — and would need to — implement additional policies.
And, by that same logic, if Maui doesn’t phase out TVRs, they’ll need to do even more to address housing affordability Maui will likely need to build new housing, but doing that alone — or instead of trying to reallocate TVRs — will take generations.
Maui will also likely need to implement other policies to offset or minimize economic impacts — and future analyses could look at who would be hit hardest to help Maui understand where and how to target those policies.
5. TVR phaseouts are part of a trend toward prioritizing equitable communities over equity for individual homeowners
TVRs are very likely making inequality worse.
In response, more communities are restricting or eliminating TVRs (Bloomberg).
Phasing out TVRs consistently lowers home values (UHERO)
While lower home values can help new buyers, this may worry existing owners who have equity in their home
However, as Maui residents see their communities being displaced, views are shifting on the value and reason behind owning a home. Community land trusts and other models aimed at keeping homes in local hands for future generations are emerging (Overstory)
These approaches separate housing stability from housing inflation and speculation
6. Bill 9 seems to have surfaced a cultural divide: should Maui prioritize collective welfare or individual rights?
Nearly all of the arguments we heard from proponents of Bill 9 seemed motivated by a belief that it would help current and future generations of Maui residents collectively. This was true even for those who believed it wouldn’t benefit them financially.
Among opponents’ arguments, while negative macroeconomic impacts were cited, we frequently heard arguments that prioritized individual economic benefits and “property rights.”
While reducing the TVR phaseout to this narrative would be oversimplifying the policy challenge, our reporting consistently found a divide between proponents and opponents over the cultural values that they believe Maui County should promote.
Donald Gibson
Unit G-106
Papakea Resort
3543 Lower Honoapiilani Road
Lahaina, Maui
I oppose Bill 9 as drafted and propose that the Council amend Bill 9 to exclude Papakea Oceanfront Resort.
While I have only owned at Papakea since 2010, I know that Papakea has operated as a resort property since inception in the 1970’s. I cannot imagine a situation where Papakea would operate successfully as an apartment for workforce housing.
• Units are small with little to no storage space.
• Parking is very limited.
• Situated on the oceanfront, in an area completely dominated by hotels and other resort properties, the economics of Papakea are completely unsuitable for permanent housing. The intrinsic land costs are simply too high to attract families, or low- to- average wage workers, and the unit size too small to attract high income permanent residents. Papakea is home to some permanent residents, but they tend to be retirees at a time in their life where small space is acceptable.
The unsuitability of Papakea Resort as workforce housing is obvious with even cursory examination. An additional consideration is that for almost 50 years people have purchased property at Papakea with the knowledge that they were purchasing legal vacation rental property. Papakea appeared on County documents for most of those years as zoned as Apartment/Hotel. An arbitrary decision to trample these long-held property rights will probably fail in the nations courts but certainly serves as a moral failure on the party of Council.
My ownership at Papakea is structured under a corporation, Tropica USA Corp. but usage is primarily for our personal use. When not in use by us we rely on sort term rentals to defray the high costs of ownership.
Exclude Papakea Resort from any inclusion in Bill 9.
Hello:
I am writing to submit testimony in opposition to Bill 9 (Minatoya Bill) and its potential impact.. As an owner of a vacation rental at Maui Kamaole, I am concerned that the current version of the bill could significantly affect not only myself, but local businesses and working families who depend on short-term rentals for their livelihoods.
These vacation rental complexes were originally developed for short-term rentals, and contribute to the local economy and support jobs in the service industry, such as cleaning, maintenance, and hospitality services. The bill's blanket approach would unfairly target these properties that were built (and approved) for short-term rental use.
To be honest, I challenge whether or not local families are even interested in properties like these. Opportunities existed prior to my purchase and my place remained available - even at much lower prices. I wonder if any studies have been conducted to determine if local families would purchase these properties, and if so, at what pricing.
I respectfully urge the council to reconsider this bill and work towards a solution that allows properties like Maui Kamaole to continue their current operation as short-term rentals. This proposal will not solve the housing crisis - there must be better solutions.
Thank you for considering my testimony.
Subject: Testimony on Bill 9 (2025) – Oppose Bill Entirely; Support Timeshare Exemption if Passed
Aloha Council Members,
I am writing to express my strong opposition to Bill 9 (2025). This bill would eliminate long-standing, legally operating short-term rentals—including timeshare usage—that have contributed positively to Maui’s economy and community for decades.
However, I do appreciate the amendment in the current draft (CD1) that exempts validly existing timeshare units and timeshare plans from the phase-out. If the Council moves forward with Bill 9, I urge you to retain this exemption as a minimum safeguard to prevent serious harm to owners, workers, and the local economy.
I am a timeshare owner at the Kuleana Club. Like hundreds of others, I own one week per year—not a second home, not an investment property. I return regularly, support local restaurants, spend at neighborhood shops, and have built lasting relationships on the island. Timeshare owners like me are part of a stable community of repeat visitors who care deeply about Maui’s well-being.
Timeshare properties are fundamentally different from vacation rentals. Units are deeded one week at a time to hundreds of families, which makes them impossible to convert to long-term housing. Including timeshares in a short-term rental ban would not create housing—but it would devastate workers and remove a reliable source of local tax revenue. Properties like Kuleana Club operate legally under Maui County Code 19.37.010, and are fully compliant with TAT and GET tax regulations. Our occupancy rates are high, and our owners consistently contribute to the island’s economy, even in difficult times.
More importantly, timeshares support stable jobs. Many employees at the Kuleana Club have been with the property for over 25 years. Several lost their homes in the Lahaina fire. If timeshare usage is eliminated, these long-standing staff members risk losing the only thing they have left—their livelihood.
Timeshare owners and resorts have also stepped up in times of crisis. The industry has contributed millions to wildfire recovery and donated thousands of room nights to displaced families and first responders. That commitment continues today.
In summary:
I urge you to oppose Bill 9 entirely.
But if it passes, please retain the CD1 amendment exempting timeshares.
Timeshares are not TVRs.
This exemption is a fair, balanced, and lawful solution that protects jobs, housing neutrality, and tax revenue—without compromising the County’s broader goals.
Mahalo for your time, your service, and for considering the perspective of owners like me.
Chris Wolland
Garden Grove, CA
Kuleana Club Timeshare Owner – Unit 712, Week 43,44,46 and Unit 722, Week 19
Aloha Chair, Vice Chair, and Council Members,
My name is Rosalie Heymanson, and I own a condo at The Ridge at Kapalua Resort. My late husband and I first purchased in 1990, drawn to the island’s beauty and the resort’s privacy, position and magnificent design.
I write to express my family’s concern about the proposed phase-out of short-term rentals and respectfully request that Kapalua be excluded.
We live in Australia and have cherished our Maui home for 35 years. Our family and friends have also become loyal Maui visitors, supporting local businesses and experiences we proudly recommended.
We've renovated our unit several times using local contractors and suppliers, even inspiring other homeowners to update theirs. Our cleaners and property manager are like family.
We were in Kapalua during the fires and saw the devastation firsthand. We placed our unit in the FEMA program to house a displaced local resident. This meant giving up our own visits—but it felt right to help in the best way we could.
However, we do believe Kapalua is not the answer for long-term housing:
• It was designed as a resort, not a residential community and lacks child-friendly spaces and family support services.
• There is limited occupancy, storage, parking, and pet restrictions
• It’s remote from job centers and transport
• It is not affordable housing, for purchase, or rental, for most local residents
Since my husband died in 2013, it has been more difficult for me to visit long term, but my family wish to return. Having a long-term tenant makes this virtually impossible. In addition, the very high AOAO dues (over $32,000/year), insurance, and assessments are making it increasingly difficult to keep the condo in our family. Having it sit vacant helps no one.
We are responsible, community-minded owners who love Maui deeply. Please consider a fair path forward—one that supports both residents and the many visitors who help sustain the West Maui economy.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Rosalie Heymanson
The Ridge, Kapalua
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 the Papakea Oceanfront Resort which the County has historically identified as having A2-H2 zoning.
Papakea was initially built, marketed and sold as a legal vacation rental property before any zoning restrictions limited transient vacation rentals were introduced. It was not built as workforce housing and has never been a converted property for transient vacation use. Maui County and the state of Hawaii identified Papakea with partial hotel zoning for decades and still does today. Papakea is not in a residential neighborhood and is located alongside other like hotel-zoned properties. Unlike long term residential apartment buildings, Papakea has a front desk, an activity concierge, numerous other tourist type amenities. There are 35 full time local employees with families that rely on their employment at the Papakea resort. Papakea is the largest single contributor of property taxes in all of the West Maui on the Minatoya listed properties. In the last 5 years it has contributed $16,902,298.17 on top of the TAT, GET and MCAT revenues.
I would like to share with you some of my current AOAO costs with you. Currently my AOAO is $1950/mo which was an 8% increase from last year. In March of 2026 it is projected to increase again, which would then bring our AOAO MONTHLY fees to over $2600. This is for a one bed/one bath under 600 sq ft of living space, now add power, taxes, maintenance upkeep and even a small mortgage and you quickly get well over $5500.per month. Papakea has several ongoing maintenance challenges due to its proximity to the ocean and pending necessary repair projects due to its ageing infrastructure to attend, all of which will be added to the monthly AOAO fees.
Other reasons to exclude Papakea from this bill is that Papakea STR owners support multitude of privately owned small businesses, operated by your local residents. Some of these family businesses include housekeepers, essential local trade and repair persons, on island rental agents and other professional career people. Even the major furniture, building supply companies and the grocery store chains are going to feel the reduced demand, jeopardizing their existence on the island. These businesses and their families rely on Papakea STRs to support their business and by shutting down the STR’s industry it puts many local residents’ employment at risk and the financial viability of their families. Papakea guests also support a multitude of other small and big business on the island ranging from local gift and retail shops, restaurants, food trucks, golf clubs to across the island businesses like car rental agencies, airport workers tour and activity companies and state and national parks.
I would like to thank the committee for the opportunity to comment.
Sincerely,
Mike Krauchek
3543 Lower Honoapiilani Road, Apartment L101
I am writing to express my strong opposition to Bill 9 (2025). This bill would eliminate long-standing, short-term rentals—including timeshare usage—that have contributed positively to Maui’s economy for decades.
However, I do appreciate the amendment in the current draft (CD1) that exempts validly existing timeshare units and timeshare plans from the phase-out. If the Council moves forward with Bill 9, I urge you to retain this exemption as a minimum safeguard to prevent serious harm to owners, workers, and the local economy.
I am a timeshare owner at the Kuleana Club. Like hundreds. I own one week per year—not a second home, not an investment property. I return regularly, support local restaurants, spend at neighborhood shops. Timeshare owners like me are part of a stable community of repeat visitors who care deeply about Maui’s well-being.
Timeshare properties are fundamentally different from vacation rentals. Units are deeded one week at a time to hundreds of families, which makes them impossible to convert to long-term housing. Including timeshares in a short-term rental ban would not create housing—but it would devastate workers and remove a reliable source of local tax revenue. Properties like Kuleana Club operate legally under Maui County Code 19.37.010, and are fully compliant with TAT and GET tax regulations.
More importantly, timeshares support stable jobs. Many employees at the Kuleana Club have been with the property for over 25 years. Several lost their homes in the Lahaina fire. If timeshare usage is eliminated, these long-standing staff members risk losing the only thing they have left—their livelihood.
Mahalo for your time, your service, and for considering the perspective of owners like me
David Hull
Claremont,CA
Kuleana Club Timeshare Owner – Unit 619, Week 24
Save the FREE ENTERPRISE system that keeps our economy healthy.
We strongly oppose the bill being considered. It is a short-term solution to a long-term problem and does not consider the ramifications of passing the bill - economically, Maui will struggle even more - fewer tourists means fewer jobs for Maui residents. Owners of short-term rentals pay more in taxes, so the county government will be seriously impacted. Please consider, instead, using your resources to build housing, hiring local workers.
I am opposed to ending short term rentals. If the purpose is to provide locals more affordable housing, this is not the way to do it. The value of these housing units is based largely on their income producing capacity. As such, the values will drop. However anyone can buy them. A local could buy them but so could anyone else in the world looking for a retirement condo or 2nd home. Even the whole f locals buy them all. How can they pay their mortgages as it is likely they will not have jobs to support them? Tourism will drop. No one wants to pay the outrageous hotel costs for the tiny accomodations they provide. This proposal is Short-Sighted.