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)
Dear Maui County Council:
We are the owners of a “short-term” rental property at Kapalua Golf Villas. We strongly oppose the proposed ban these rental properties. These are a legally allowed property right that is both cited by our AOAO rules, the intention of the Kapalua Resort as planned, and as used in this way for over 45 years. The ban will cause great economic hardship to the Maui community generally, will not create more affordable housing and will be years in litigation.
If needed, we support the amendment that would allow resorts to function as they were initially intended allowing short-term rentals as an exception to the ban.
Lawrence & Lisa Hanf
500 Kapalua Drive, Apt 16v2
Lahaina, HI 96761
510 813 0407
Aloha ia oukou. O Derek ko'u inoa a e noho nei au i Kihei. My parents bought a riny studio in a complex in Lower Honoapiilani 7 yrs ago that is zoned H1-A1 (multi-zoned) in the hopes of helping them out in terms of income from transient rentals since they were both very old and semi-retired. My father then passed away a year or so after so now the deed is under myself and my mother's.
Since then, the cost of maintaining the studio has increased dramatically ($1,100 for monthly HOA, $1,200 for annual insurance) and not to mention the fact that it recently had an assesement of over $32 million for the whole complex (changing the interior plumbing). The studio will therefore need to contribute total of $60K the next few years to pay off that renovation. Having to rent the unit out long term would mean the cost of the rent would be at minimum $2,300 (excluding utilities). I really do not understand how anyone can afford the rent for a studio (not even one bedroom!),
Ke noi nei makou i kou no'ono'o ke olu'olu...we kindly ask of you to please consider how this bill will NOT contribute to housing shortage. In fact, it would make it worse! Ke ku'e ana makou i keia pila. We strongly oppose this bill that is not just deceiving in its intentions, but will cause further economic hardships to the mokupuni. Mahalo piha!
I am a land owner in Haiku. I have been visiting Maui since 1987 and lived in Maui from 1991-2004. At that point I realized I could not afford to purchase land because of the cost so I went to the mainland 20 years ago to make enough money to purchase my land in Haiku in 2021. So I am not local but I do have history and love Maui as much as many of my friends born and raised there. I also realize the fact that the Island has changed. When you allow the island to be purchased by people that do not live there to rent solely to the visitors that also do not live there you are selling out. If you continue to allow 90% of off island vacation rentals to be owned by mainland visitors you are not protecting your people.
Solutions:
Allow vacation rental but require the owner to be a full time Hawaiian resident with a local mailing address paying maui taxes, eating at Maui restaurants and participating in Maui?!
You recently increased the Ohana area from 1000 to 1500 square feet in my area. What does this do? It allows 1 family more space!
I have 2 acres of land and would gladly build another long term rental to allow for another person to rent. Why not allow 1000’ Ohana and another small 500 square foot Ohana. This way you are allowing 2 families to rent.
These are ways to increase the long term rental shortage with a solution instantly.
So I am in favor of getting rid of ALL short term vacation rentals and turning the beautiful island of Maui back to legal hotel and condo rentals that employee many more people and quit lining the pockets of people that do not even live there. Vacation rental are bringing in people that want a Deal not a Hawaii experience. They do not want to spend the hotel cost of vacationing which in turn I’m guessing has decreased the amount spent on all
Island amenities.
If you do not rid the islands of VRBO and Air b and B you will end up like Vail, Apen Whistler etc… you will have no housing for the people, the workers and the common folk. You will be left with rich and poor and a mess.
This would destroy the tourist trade, reduce tax dollars for the island, effect jobs loss, these units are not built for long term use. no parking, no storage space. Destroy wealth building. Short term fix with long term negative impact.
My husband and I own a short term rental on West Maui. We love Maui, and the ability to share our very very very small home (500 Sq feet) with friends and family and those who want to visit the island and have a very small budget is very important to us.
We have a lot of people that depend on our property being rented to short term people. Our cleaners, our maintenance staff, local restaurants, health care specialists, recreational businesses and local tour guides, If this bill is passed the horrible repercussions will be immense, small businesses will fail, and the locals will not have income.
We have operated our property faithfully within your licenses and guidelines, and face huge amounts of expenses to make sure that our property is safe and still attractive to people that want to share in the beauty of Hawaii.
Please don’t create untoward hardships by passing this legislation. This legislation will not answer your housing crisis. It will make Maui a NON-Destination for vacationers with small budgets, which will be the reverse of what Maui and Hawaii needs.
We hope you listen to your constituents, property tax payers and accommodations/luxury tax payers and don’t pass this legislation.
Sincerely,
Doug and Diana Cummings
Kuleana Resort
tubcol12@gmail.com
720-839-5110
Aloha Chair, Vice Chair and Committee Members
I am in full support of Bill 9 because I'm a Kanaka born and raised here and I ain't leaving my home. There's many local families who are houseless because of outrageous prices and/or shortage of rentals. How and when will you start taking care of the descendants of Maui. Now is the time to hear and listen to the actual residents of Maui and huli this system. This should be about the full-time Kanaka's who is from this Aina and not the part timers trying to make a quick buck. Support of Bill 9 will be great for many local full-time residents. Let's keep it in Hawaiian hands. Mahalo 🤙
Dear Chair Kama, Vice Chair Uʻu-Hodgins and Members of the Housing and Land Use Committee:
I oppose Bill 9 as drafted and propose that the Council amend Bill 9 to exclude Papakea Oceanfront Resort which the County has historically identified as having A2-H2 zoning.
Background on Papakea
Papakea was initially marketed and sold as a legal vacation rental property before any zoning restrictions limited transient vacation rentals in apartment zoned properties.
For almost fifty years, Papakea owners have been operating legal vacation rentals.
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.
There is limited parking at Papakea and most units are under 600 square feet.
Papakea is located in an area alongside hotel-zoned properties and commercially-zoned properties.
Unlike apartment buildings designed for long-term residential use, Papakea has a front desk, an activity concierge, shared activity space, and numerous other common resort amenities.
Owners at Papakea purchased condos with the reasonable expectation that short-term rentals were legal based on ordinances as far back as 1989, and as recent as 2022.
In reliance on the Maui County ordinances and published documents, Hawaii state law, and constitutional protections, owners invested in costly renovations, furnishings, and long-term financial commitments such as mortgages that make any phase out of short-term rental right offensive of each buyer’s investment-backed expectations.
Papakea’s Contributions to the Community
Papakea’s provides full-time, benefited, employment for 35 local resident employees. Some have been employed at the property for over 17 years, and some started in entry-level positions and ultimately advanced into supervisory roles.
Papakea supports a wide variety of local trade professionals including pest control, HVAC, painting, plumbing, electrical, general contracting, masonry, tile and flooring, fitness instructors, entertainers, and tree trimming.
Individual Owner Contributions to the Community
Many small businesses owned and operated by local residents from the Maui community rely on Papakea short-term rentals including housekeepers, handymen, on-island agents, and contractors. These service providers set their own rates, work hours, select their own clients, work conditions and standard operating procedures. Shutting down short-term rentals at Papakea means telling local entrepreneurs that worked hard to build a small business that they need to just go get a job somewhere else to make less money, have less flexibility, and be subject to oppressive corporate policies.
Papakea STRs support the State of Hawaii and County of Maui through payment of property taxes (many at the short-term rental rate), Transient Accommodations Tax, General Excise Tax, and Maui County Transient Accommodations Tax.
Papakea guests support many small businesses on the island including restaurants, food trucks, tour operators, activities, state parks, the national park, and shops.
Papakea owners and guests regularly participate in community activities including volunteering at beach cleanups, Maui Humane Society, the hospital, and many other local organizations, and contribute to local philanthropic nd cultural efforts.
I would like to thank the committee for their time and consideration.
Sincerely,
John Mueller
3543 Lower Honoapiilani Road, Apartment G-301
Dear Chair Kama, Vice Chair Uʻu-Hodgins and Members of the Housing and Land Use Committee:
I am writing against the proposed Bill 9 that impacts short term housing in Hawaii. 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.
RECOMMENDATION: PAPAKEA SHOULD BE REMOVED FROM THE MONTOYA LIST
• “Consider excluding those properties that are community plan designated for hotel use and those that are already partially hotel zoned-Planning Commission comments to County Council (Unanimous)
• “Papakea has partial H2 zoning-Planning Commission Chair-Planning Department Staff
• “The Zoning Designation (for Papakea) is still A2-H2—Planning Department Staff
I have owned my property for over a decade, but more importantly I have been traveling to Hawaii for forty years. We purchased our condominium to reflect the love my parents had for Hawaii—as they spent fifty years traveling across the islands. They instilled that same love for the islands in us. When they died, I was able to purchase a condominium—Papakea on Maui- and every stay I thank them for the love they had—for one another and for Hawaii. As a California resident, Hawaii is our ideal vacation location. I now bring the fourth generation there because we bring our Parisian grandchildren there! They have learned to swim in Hawaii. My daughter’s husband loves the Hawaiian beaches.
Let me describe Papakea---a location I have visited on numerous occasions for at least 30 years before finally purchasing a small unit. My children and now grandchildren have visited many times over the years—and long before our purchase.
Background on Papakea
• Papakea was initially marketed and sold as a legal vacation rental property before any zoning restrictions limited transient vacation rentals in apartment zoned properties.
• Papakea owners have been operating legal vacation rentals for almost fifty years.
• Papakea has never been workforce housing so Papakea is not an example of a property that converted from workforce housing to transient vacation rental use.
• The majority of units at Papakea are under 600 square feet and the property has limited parking.
• Papakea is not in a residential neighborhood and is located alongside a long stretch of hotel-zoned properties and directly adjacent to multiple commercially-zoned properties.
Unlike apartment buildings designed for long-term residential use, Papakea has a front desk, an activity concierge, shared activity space, and numerous other common resort amenities.
• Owners purchased condos at Papakea with the reasonable expectation that short-term rentals were legal based on ordinances as far back as 1989, and as recent as 2022.
• In reliance on the Maui County ordinances and published documents, Hawaii state law, and constitutional protections, owners invested in costly renovations, furnishings, and long-term financial commitments such as mortgages that make any phase out of short-term rental right offensive of each buyer’s investment-backed expectations.
Papakea’s Contributions to the Community
• Papakea’s resort operations provide full-time, benefited, employment for 35 local resident employees; some have worked at the property for over 17 years; some started in entry-level positions and worked into supervisory roles.
• Papakea supports a wide variety of local trade professionals including pest control, HVAC, painting, plumbing, electrical, general contracting, masonry, tile and flooring, fitness instructors, entertainers, and tree trimming.
Papakea’s Attributes
• Papakea owners have been operating legal vacation rentals for almost fifty years.
• Papakea has never been workforce housing so Papakea is not an example of a property
that converted from workforce housing to transient vacation rental use.
• The majority of units at Papakea are under 600 square feet and the property has limited
parking.
• Papakea is not in a residential neighborhood and is located directly adjacent to a long
stretch of hotel-zoned properties and multiple commercial 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.
• Papakea’s resort operations require extensive maintenance which makes the monthly
maintenance dues very high, compared to properties designed for long-term housing
with lower maintenance dues. Unsubsidized long-term rental rates do not come
close to covering the maintenance dues, special assessments, mortgage payments, property taxes, and insurance which prevents Papakea from ever becoming a
sustainable long-term housing option.
• The counties already have authority to regulate illegal short-term rentals that are
disrupting residential neighborhoods.
• This bill does nothing to solve the problem of illegal short-term rentals.
• This bill would create the perception of authority for Maui County to retroactively ban
the primary purpose that Papakea was designed for and built in 1978.
• We purchased condos at Papakea with the reasonable expectation that short-term
rentals were legal based on nearly 50 years of Maui County ordinances, Section 46-4
of the Hawaii revised statutes that protect vested use, the Hawaii Constitution, and the
US Constitution.
• In reliance on the Maui County ordinances, Hawaii state law, and constitutional
protections, we have invested in costly renovations, furnishings, and long-term
financial commitments such as mortgages that make any phase out of short-term rental
use unconstitutional without payment of just compensation.
• Long-term rental is not an economically viable use at Papakea given the costs of
maintaining and insuring an ocean-front property.
Individual Owner Contributions to the Community
• Many small businesses owned and operated by local residents from the Maui community rely on Papakea short-term rentals including housekeepers, handymen, on-
island agents, and contractors. These service providers set their own rates, work hours, select their own clients, work conditions and standard operating procedures. Shutting
down short-term rentals at Papakea means putting these folks out of business with
fewer employment opportunities. We have hired a housekeeper and a local business owner to assist us with all of our Papakea needs. We recommend local restaurants and guides
• Papakea STRs support the State of Hawaii and County of Maui through payment of
property taxes (many at the short-term rental rate), Transient Accommodations Tax,
General Excise Task, and Maui Transient Accommodations Tax.
• Our Papakea guests support many small businesses on the island including restaurants, food trucks, tour operators, state parks, the national park, and shops.
• Our Papakea unit sees many returning guests that have been visiting Maui for years
and have deep connections with the community.
For the reasons stated herein I recommend Papakea be excluded and urge the council vote no on this matter.
I believe that the return travelers depend on these condos to enjoy family vacations together.Having a kitchen to eat at least one meal at home together is often that families don't do on a daily basis. That has encouraged travelers to invest on this island. To keep their family coming back & rent it out for others to enjoy. Iti s important to keep condos available as transient accommodations.
Leslie Knoles
Dear Chair Kama, Vice Chair Uʻu-Hodgins and Members of the Housing and Land Use Committee
We are the owners of a unit at Mahina Surf — a legally permitted short-term rental (STR) in a development purpose-built for visitor accommodation since 1969. We write to express our respectful but firm opposition to the proposed legislation that seeks to phase out all STRs in Apartment-zoned districts, including legacy properties like ours.
We appreciate Mayor Bissen’s acknowledgment during his recent townhall that the issue of STRs is deeply complex and, at times, divisive. His comments reflect a key reality: there is strong demand both for visitor accommodations and for affordable housing for the residents. We also acknowledge and agree with his point that many of the 7,100 units on the so-called Minatoya List — including ours — are inappropriately grouped under a blanket policy.
In the same speech, Mayor Bissen pointed thar majority of STRs are owned by people who do not live on Maui, but that alone should not justify a policy that introduces sweeping consequences for all legally operated units. Owners like us are invested in the community long-term — hiring local tradespeople, and supporting Maui’s economy through visitor spend and full tax compliance. Many jobs that are created by STR business will be irreversibly lost from Maui's economy with the proposed ban.
We urge the Council to consider the significant economic risks of phasing out STRs entirely, as outlined in the May 2025 study by the University of Hawaiʻi Economic Research Organization (UHERO):
• A projected $900 million decline in visitor spending, 1,900 jobs lost, and a 4% drop in real GDP.
• Up to $75 million per year in lost County tax revenue by 2029, impacting services, recovery, and infrastructure.
These are significant numbers for Maui's economy!
Although UHERO’s report suggests that condo prices may decline, it cautions that housing affordability may not improve meaningfully for local residents due to:
- Job and income losses following visitor spending drop,
- Interest rates and borrowing constraints,
- Potential for out-of-state buyers to take advantage of lower prices.
They stress that “benefits of lower prices may not be evenly distributed” and that policy risks include worsening affordability for lower-income residents if the economy contracts. It is clear that the proposed STR ban will most likely worsen Maui's economy. And assuming that improvement of housing availability is the core objective of the proposed ban, it is clear that the ban is unlikely to provide a meaningful improvement there.
Rather than pursuing divisive and broad-based elimination, we encourage the County to adopt creative and targeted housing strategies. As UHERO suggests, there are viable alternatives such as auction-based permits, higher-tiered property taxes, or phased, evidence-based transitions. These approaches allow Maui to preserve essential economic activity while encouraging housing where it makes practical and social sense.
Mahina Surf has never been workforce housing so it is not an example of a property that converted from workforce housing to transient vacation rental use. Mahina Surf, and properties like it, are simply not designed or feasible for long-term housing. Eliminating them from the visitor accommodation pool will not create livable homes — but will directly reduce employment, diminish County revenue, and increase friction at a time when unity and collaborative problem-solving are most needed.
We urge the Council to avoid a high-risk, one-size-fits-all strategy. Please consider a more balanced path that distinguishes between STR types, preserves legally operating legacy properties, and fosters both economic and housing resilience for Maui’s future.
Mahalo for your time and thoughtful leadership.
Sincerely,
Parviz Salimov and Mehri Salimova
Owners, Unit 227 – Mahina Surf
June 4, 2025
Hello Chair, Vice Chair, and Committee Members,
My name is Dean Sandow. My wife 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.
We have worked hard to be a responsible and community-oriented owner. I recommend local restaurants, grocery stores, shopping malls, car rental companies, and tour guides in my welcome guide. I employ local service providers — cleaners, contractors, property managers, and maintenance personnel — 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 would not have come at all if they did not have a vacation rental option. Similarly, many families simply will not come because they cannot afford to stay at hotels, which would be a shame. All of this matters — not just to me, but to all the small businesses they supported during their stay.
We use local hardware stores, paint stores, furniture stores, and appliance stores. We shop at farmers markets and craft fairs whenever possible. All of these local merchants and every one of their employees are at risk under the proposed phase out. There is no way to replace the economic contribution that STR owners provide to these merchants and to the county and state tax base.
We sold an interest in a unit in our complex a few years before buying the current unit during COVID. We came back because we love the complex, we love the local people, and we love the islands.
Owning in this complex has not been easy. We have faced huge maintenance costs, special assessments, and massive increases in insurance after the fires. These are far from luxuries — they are 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.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Dean and Tammy Sandow
Maui Kamaole G201, Kihei
As someone whose great-grandparents immigrated to Maui, I am deeply connected to this island. I’m fortunate that some of my family members still have housing passed down through generations, but I also witness many friends and relatives who are struggling to find stable, affordable homes—especially in the wake of the fires.
Even people who are fully employed are now housing insecure. That’s not acceptable, and it points to a larger systemic issue. Our island’s limited housing stock should serve the people who live and work here—not be treated as an investment vehicle for people who don't even reside in Maui.
I've heard concerns from non-resident condo owners worried about falling property values. But these are business investments, not homes. If this bill cools the speculative market and helps bring prices back within reach for local families, then it's a step in the right direction.
I support Bill 9 (2025) because it prioritizes housing for Maui’s people over profit.
Dear Chair Kama, Vice Chair Uʻu-Hodgins and Members of the Housing and Land Use Committee:
I oppose Bill 9 as drafted and propose that the Council amend Bill 9 to exclude Papakea Oceanfront Resort which the County has historically identified as having A2-H2 zoning.
Background on Papakea
• Papakea was initially marketed and sold as a legal vacation rental property before any zoning restrictions limited transient vacation rentals in apartment zoned properties.
• Papakea owners have been operating legal vacation rentals for almost fifty years.
• Papakea has never been workforce housing so Papakea is not an example of a property that converted from workforce housing to transient vacation rental use.
• The majority of units at Papakea are under 600 square feet and the property has limited parking.
• Papakea is not in a residential neighborhood and is located alongside a long stretch of hotel-zoned properties and directly adjacent to multiple commercially-zoned properties.
Unlike apartment buildings designed for long-term residential use, Papakea has a front desk, an activity concierge, shared activity space, and numerous other common resort amenities.
• Owners purchased condos at Papakea with the reasonable expectation that short-term rentals were legal based on ordinances as far back as 1989, and as recent as 2022.
• In reliance on the Maui County ordinances and published documents, Hawaii state law, and constitutional protections, owners invested in costly renovations, furnishings, and long-term financial commitments such as mortgages that make any phase out of short-term rental right offensive of each buyer’s investment-backed expectations.
Papakea’s Contributions to the Community
• Papakea’s resort operations provide full-time, benefited, employment for 35 local resident employees; some have worked at the property for over 17 years; some started in entry-level positions and worked into supervisory roles.
• Papakea supports a wide variety of local trade professionals including pest control, HVAC, painting, plumbing, electrical, general contracting, masonry, tile and flooring, fitness instructors, entertainers, and tree trimming.
Individual Owner Contributions to the Community
• Many small businesses owned and operated by local residents from the Maui community rely on Papakea short-term rentals including housekeepers, handymen, on-island agents, and contractors. These service providers set their own rates, work hours, select their own clients, work conditions and standard operating procedures. Shutting down short-term rentals at Papakea means telling local entrepreneurs that worked hard to build a small business that they need to just go get a job somewhere else to make less money, have less flexibility, and be subject to oppressive corporate policies.
• Papakea STRs support the State of Hawaii and County of Maui through payment of property taxes (many at the short-term rental rate), Transient Accommodations Tax, General Excise Tax, and Maui County Transient Accommodations Tax.
• Papakea guests support many small businesses on the island including restaurants, food trucks, tour operators, activities, state parks, the national park, and shops.
• Papakea owners and guests regularly participate in community activities including volunteering at beach cleanups, Maui Humane Society, the hospital, and many other local organizations, and contribute to local philanthropic nd cultural efforts.
I would like to thank the committee for the opportunity to comment.
Sincerely,
Norman Vesala
3543 Lower Honoapiilani Road, Apartment G205
My name is Jeanette Odelberg and I own a STR in Kamaole Sands Resort.
I been coming to Maui since I first fell in love with the island and the people over 15 years ago.
I am deeply concerned for the local work force and I'm opposing this bill to eliminate over 7000 vacation rentals.
There are so many businesses that has already closed since the pandemic and the devastating fires.
When I speak to waiters, bartenders, housekeepers, massage therapists and shop owners, plumbers, electricians etc they are very concerned about banning STR's.
Self-employed housekeepers for example make a much better living than the ones employed by the hotels,
What are all these people employed by the STR going to do? Front desk staff, security, pool staff, cleaners, property managers and maintenance etc.
They all have rent/mortgages, car payments and bills to pay.
The STR are contributing millions in taxes to build affordable housing.
Kamaole Sands Resort has majority one bedroom units with no storage and only one parking spot per condo with very high monthly fee's so it doesn't seems like that is what is really needed.
I spent my life savings to be able to purchase this unit and made sure it was STR approved/allowed.
Owning this condo has not been easy, with the massive rising costs of monthly dues, home owner insurance, property insurance increasing over 600% and huge special assessments to keep the property safe, functional and looking appealing.
The STR income helps cover a part of that cost while supporting the local work force.
This legislation feels very one-sided and in my personal opinion I do not think it is good for the people of Maui or the local economy.
I think it will really hurt Maui, so therefore I am strongly against this bill.
Aloha Chair, Vice Chair ans esteemed council members,
I am an individual short term rental owner in Kapalua. I strongly oppose restricting or banning short term rentals. In my opinion, this is economically ruinous for Maui.
Based on trailing 12 months occupancy on my unit only, if this ban passes, my unit would go unoccupied for 9 months of the year. The following revenue losses to the county of Maui and it's business community would occur:
1) Loss of G.E.T tax to county of $15,000.00 per year
2) Loss of real estate taxes to county via reduced propert value of approximately $10,000.00 per year.
3) 240 nights not rented, assuming average guest spends $300 per day on Maui: $72,000.00 Loss of local tourist revenue
4) termination and lost revenue and jobs:
A) housekeeping
B) propert management company
C) handyman
D) electrician
E) HVAC company
F) Plumber
G) lost revenue and jobs at Napili Market, Monolog store, Merriman, Aloha mixed plate, Gazebo, Sea House, Fond Fish Market and so very many more.
Our renters spend money in, on and for Maui. I am grateful because I do not have to rent my STR. But I do it because I know it helps Maui and it's people financially. Renters who stay in my STR tell me the would never stay in a hotel. Please don't wreck Maui's economy. Vote no on STR bans.
Dear Chair Kama, Vice Chair Uʻu-Hodgins and Members of the Housing and Land Use Committee:
I oppose Bill 9 as drafted and propose that the Council amend Bill 9 to exclude Papakea Oceanfront Resort which the County has historically identified as having A2-H2 zoning.
Papakea was initially marketed and sold as a legal vacation rental property before any zoning restrictions limited transient vacation rentals in apartment zoned properties.
Papakea owners have been operating legal vacation rentals for almost fifty years.
Papakea has never been workforce housing, so Papakea is not an example of a property that converted from workforce housing to transient vacation rental use.
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.
In reliance on the Maui County ordinances and published documents, Hawaii state law, and constitutional protections, owners invested in costly renovations, furnishings, and long-term financial commitments such as mortgages that make any phase out of short-term rental right offensive of each buyer’s investment-backed expectations.
Papakea contributes significantly to the Maui economy in several ways.
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.
Papakea STRs support the State of Hawaii and County of Maui through payment of property taxes (many at the short-term rental rate), Transient Accommodations Tax, General Excise Tax, and Maui County Transient Accommodations Tax.
I would like to thank the committee for the opportunity to comment.
Sincerely,
Greg and Kathleen Paganelli, 3543 Lower Honoapiilani Road
Aloha, I am an STR owner and have been for over 20 years. I fell in love with Maui when we celebrated our wedding over 50 years ago. My wife and I decided to purchase a property rather than rent every year. Now retired, we share our condo with friends, children, and grandchildren. Without the ability to rent our condo out, we would not be able to afford our condo. To rent our place would cost a family about $6,000.00 a month due to the high taxes and AOAO fees as well as the high insurance rates we now pay. When we come, we spend a lot of money at restaurants and other places. This would disappear if we could not come. Multiply this by the over 50-75 people that stay each year and the County would loose thousands of dollars that they pay. The County would also loose the TAT and Excise taxes they pay. Thank you for taking your time to hear my plea to oppose this measure. Mshhalo
Testimony Opposing the Mayor’s Bill to Phase Out Legal Vacation Rentals
To: Maui County Council and Housing and Land Use Committee
From: Steve Bartel
Aloha Chair and Councilmembers,
My name is Steve Bartel. I’m a retired property owner who depends on the income from a legally permitted short-term rental to support myself and my wife in retirement. I’m writing to express my strong opposition to the Mayor’s proposal to eliminate over 7,000 lawful vacation rentals in apartment-zoned areas.
Like many retirees, we worked hard all our careers to invest in a unit that was legal for short-term rental at the time of purchase, with the understanding that this would provide supplemental income to help us stay financially secure. Eliminating this income stream would be devastating—not just to me personally, but to thousands of other owners, workers, and small businesses across the island.
We have enjoyed traveling to and vacationing in Maui for many years, after honeymooning in Kaanapali Beach in 1991. The residents are so compassionate and friendly and we are deeply concerned about the impact on jobs for those living on island. Short-term rentals support a wide network of local employment: housekeepers, handymen, landscapers, cleaners, and small business operators who rely on the steady, year-round work this industry provides. This bill threatens to wipe out entire income streams for working families and small business owners—people who don’t have the luxury of "waiting it out" or "finding something else."
We also fear for the negative long-term impact to the local economy. Visitors who stay in vacation rentals spend their money in local restaurants, grocery stores, surf shops, tour companies, and farmers markets. They rent cars, take excursions, and spread their dollars far beyond the building where they sleep. We do this ourselves when visiting beautiful Maui. You can’t remove 7,000 units and not expect serious consequences to the businesses that rely on those guests.
Eliminating our ability to rent out our units is incredibly unfair and unjust. The costs of owning these properties for owners like me don’t just go away. We still have to pay high monthly HOA dues, elevated property taxes (specifically as a short-term rental), insurance, utilities, and special assessments. Without rental income, it becomes financially unsustainable. The idea that these units will somehow convert to affordable housing is simply not realistic. These properties are not set up for long-term living, and many would not be accessible or affordable for working families even if they were.
This is about fairness, stability, and trust. We followed the rules. We invested in a legal use. If the County can suddenly change the law and retroactively strip away property rights and livelihoods, what confidence can any resident or business owner have in the stability of our local government?
I urge you to reject this proposal and look instead for balanced solutions that preserve jobs, protect local investment, and maintain the visitor revenue that sustains so many on this island.
Mahalo for your time and thoughtful consideration.
My name is Jahya Costa, and I am a Native Hawaiian, born and raised in Hawaiʻi. I currently serve as a Program Operations Manager overseeing properties that are housing fire survivors through the FEMA long-term housing program. I’ve been in this industry nearly six years and have worked directly with property owners, contractors, tenants, and FEMA to help displaced families find safe housing.
I’m writing today in strong opposition to Bill 9, which would phase out short-term rentals in apartment-zoned areas across Maui County. I understand the desire to create more housing for local residents, and I support that goal. However, this bill, as written, will not achieve that outcome. In fact, it could create more harm than good.
Since the Lahaina fires, I’ve helped place families into many of these short-term rental units. Are they perfect? No. Families have told me they struggle with limited parking, no storage space, restrictions on pets, and layouts that are not ideal for long-term living. But right now, these units are the only available option for many displaced residents. If these properties are phased out without any real alternative in place, we risk displacing people again, this time because of policy decisions.
What is often misunderstood is that removing short-term rental use from apartment districts does not guarantee those units will become affordable long-term housing for local families. Many owners rely on the short-term rental income to cover their mortgage and may not be able to offer their unit as a traditional long-term rental. Without clear programs or financial incentives to help transition these properties, the most likely outcome is that many of these units will sit vacant, be sold to off-island buyers, or be removed from the rental market altogether. That is not a solution to the housing crisis.
This bill also threatens the livelihood of local workers who support the STR economy. I work alongside cleaners, landscapers, inspectors, and small business vendors, many of them Native Hawaiian or born and raised on Maui, who rely on the steady work that this industry provides. Eliminating that income source without offering another option will cause serious hardship for hundreds of working families.
As a Native Hawaiian, I deeply care about protecting our land and ensuring that local people can continue to live, work, and thrive here. I support solutions that are thoughtful, balanced, and community-informed. We do need affordable housing, but we also need stable jobs, temporary housing for survivors, and a realistic plan for how to move forward. This bill takes away critical resources without offering anything concrete in return.
Please do not move forward with Bill 9 as currently written. I ask you to work with community members and industry professionals to find a more sustainable path forward. Let’s create a strategy that protects our families, preserves economic opportunity, and provides truly viable housing for our people.
Mahalo for your time and for listening to our voices.
Jahya Costa
Kaanapali Royal owner written testimony, May 28, 2025
My wife Toko and I purchased Kaanapali Royal unit Q302 in 1999. We spent
the next two decades working to pay down our Bank of Hawaii mortgage along
with a mortgage on our residence in Tokyo while raising and educating our two
daughters. It wasn’t always easy. We visited Maui when we could and dreamed
all along of moving to Maui when we retired. The dream came true in 2018,
when our second daughter graduated from college. We finally closed up our
business that year, sold our apartment in Tokyo and moved to our beloved
island home. I was 72 years old (13 years older than Toko) and more than
ready for the peaceful, fulfilling life Maui offered.
The Lahaina Fire of August 8, 2023, shattered the dream. We and our condo
survived the fire intact, suffering only a scary night and a few weeks without
power or Internet, but the infrastructure supporting our lives was decimated.
Our doctors, dentist and attorney had all been burned out, and even the bank
where we had done business for 25 years was burned to the ground. We
recognized how lucky we had been compared to our many neighbors who had
lost their homes, businesses and even their lives. But we also realized for the
first time how vulnerable we were, living on the outer edge of a remote disaster-
prone island whose long succession of governments had failed to provide for
the safety and security of its citizenry. Too old to wait for Lahaina’s recovery,
we decided to move to Honolulu, a city on an island we liked but hadn’t yet
learned to love that offered the type of varied, extensive and secure
infrastructure people generally require in their later years. We packed up and
said a fond farewell to Maui in April 2024.
Our plan was to sell our Kaanapali residence, which was now listed on the
then-active Maui real estate market, and purchase a new home in Honolulu
with the proceeds. We were not wealthy. We were living mainly off profits from
the sale of our apartment in Tokyo, augmented by a limited income flow from a
second condo we had purchased in Kihei as an investment property. We had
planned carefully and should have been able to live fairly comfortably for the
remaining years of our lives.
But we could not have foreseen the irresponsible behavior of Maui’s mayor
Bissen, who announced his ill-conceived LTR ban out of the blue on May 2.
Maui’s economy, which had led the state’s recovery after the Covid pandemic,
was almost immediately plunged into near-recession as tourists learned of the
vociferous anti-tourist sentiment of Bissen influencers such as Lahana Strong
and stayed away in droves, further undermining a job market that had already
been seriously damaged by the fires. Hundreds of businesses that depended
completely or in part on tourism, the mainstay engine of Maui’s economy, were
forced to close their doors, and thousands of residents, including scores of
native Hawaiians, began abandoning the island for greener pastures.
Again, Toko and I have suffered less than many others. Still, our assets, most
of them tied up in Maui real estate, have shrunk by as much as 40%, putting
our ability to support ourselves for the remainder of our lives in doubt. We
missed a chance to buy a condo in Hawaii Kai because we couldn’t sell our
Kaanapali condo and are living frugally in a rental apartment while awaiting
the Maui County Council’s decision on the Bissen scheme. It’s not easy to wait
patiently. With my 80th birthday looming next year, and time running out to
enjoy the retirement we planned for throughout our working lives, we can only
ask that the Council consider the evidence carefully, recognize the fact that
affordable housing and STRs are completely separate issues, and reject the
Bissen bill out of hand. Any other decision will result in many more months or
years of uncertainty, and in needless pain for many or most Maui residents.
Mick and Toko Smith
Kaanapali Royal, unit Q302
Dear Maui County Council:
We are the owners of a “short-term” rental property at Kapalua Golf Villas. We strongly oppose the proposed ban these rental properties. These are a legally allowed property right that is both cited by our AOAO rules, the intention of the Kapalua Resort as planned, and as used in this way for over 45 years. The ban will cause great economic hardship to the Maui community generally, will not create more affordable housing and will be years in litigation.
If needed, we support the amendment that would allow resorts to function as they were initially intended allowing short-term rentals as an exception to the ban.
Lawrence & Lisa Hanf
500 Kapalua Drive, Apt 16v2
Lahaina, HI 96761
510 813 0407
Aloha ia oukou. O Derek ko'u inoa a e noho nei au i Kihei. My parents bought a riny studio in a complex in Lower Honoapiilani 7 yrs ago that is zoned H1-A1 (multi-zoned) in the hopes of helping them out in terms of income from transient rentals since they were both very old and semi-retired. My father then passed away a year or so after so now the deed is under myself and my mother's.
Since then, the cost of maintaining the studio has increased dramatically ($1,100 for monthly HOA, $1,200 for annual insurance) and not to mention the fact that it recently had an assesement of over $32 million for the whole complex (changing the interior plumbing). The studio will therefore need to contribute total of $60K the next few years to pay off that renovation. Having to rent the unit out long term would mean the cost of the rent would be at minimum $2,300 (excluding utilities). I really do not understand how anyone can afford the rent for a studio (not even one bedroom!),
Ke noi nei makou i kou no'ono'o ke olu'olu...we kindly ask of you to please consider how this bill will NOT contribute to housing shortage. In fact, it would make it worse! Ke ku'e ana makou i keia pila. We strongly oppose this bill that is not just deceiving in its intentions, but will cause further economic hardships to the mokupuni. Mahalo piha!
I am a land owner in Haiku. I have been visiting Maui since 1987 and lived in Maui from 1991-2004. At that point I realized I could not afford to purchase land because of the cost so I went to the mainland 20 years ago to make enough money to purchase my land in Haiku in 2021. So I am not local but I do have history and love Maui as much as many of my friends born and raised there. I also realize the fact that the Island has changed. When you allow the island to be purchased by people that do not live there to rent solely to the visitors that also do not live there you are selling out. If you continue to allow 90% of off island vacation rentals to be owned by mainland visitors you are not protecting your people.
Solutions:
Allow vacation rental but require the owner to be a full time Hawaiian resident with a local mailing address paying maui taxes, eating at Maui restaurants and participating in Maui?!
You recently increased the Ohana area from 1000 to 1500 square feet in my area. What does this do? It allows 1 family more space!
I have 2 acres of land and would gladly build another long term rental to allow for another person to rent. Why not allow 1000’ Ohana and another small 500 square foot Ohana. This way you are allowing 2 families to rent.
These are ways to increase the long term rental shortage with a solution instantly.
So I am in favor of getting rid of ALL short term vacation rentals and turning the beautiful island of Maui back to legal hotel and condo rentals that employee many more people and quit lining the pockets of people that do not even live there. Vacation rental are bringing in people that want a Deal not a Hawaii experience. They do not want to spend the hotel cost of vacationing which in turn I’m guessing has decreased the amount spent on all
Island amenities.
If you do not rid the islands of VRBO and Air b and B you will end up like Vail, Apen Whistler etc… you will have no housing for the people, the workers and the common folk. You will be left with rich and poor and a mess.
This would destroy the tourist trade, reduce tax dollars for the island, effect jobs loss, these units are not built for long term use. no parking, no storage space. Destroy wealth building. Short term fix with long term negative impact.
June 5, 2025
Aloha,
My husband and I own a short term rental on West Maui. We love Maui, and the ability to share our very very very small home (500 Sq feet) with friends and family and those who want to visit the island and have a very small budget is very important to us.
We have a lot of people that depend on our property being rented to short term people. Our cleaners, our maintenance staff, local restaurants, health care specialists, recreational businesses and local tour guides, If this bill is passed the horrible repercussions will be immense, small businesses will fail, and the locals will not have income.
We have operated our property faithfully within your licenses and guidelines, and face huge amounts of expenses to make sure that our property is safe and still attractive to people that want to share in the beauty of Hawaii.
Please don’t create untoward hardships by passing this legislation. This legislation will not answer your housing crisis. It will make Maui a NON-Destination for vacationers with small budgets, which will be the reverse of what Maui and Hawaii needs.
We hope you listen to your constituents, property tax payers and accommodations/luxury tax payers and don’t pass this legislation.
Sincerely,
Doug and Diana Cummings
Kuleana Resort
tubcol12@gmail.com
720-839-5110
Aloha Chair, Vice Chair and Committee Members
I am in full support of Bill 9 because I'm a Kanaka born and raised here and I ain't leaving my home. There's many local families who are houseless because of outrageous prices and/or shortage of rentals. How and when will you start taking care of the descendants of Maui. Now is the time to hear and listen to the actual residents of Maui and huli this system. This should be about the full-time Kanaka's who is from this Aina and not the part timers trying to make a quick buck. Support of Bill 9 will be great for many local full-time residents. Let's keep it in Hawaiian hands. Mahalo 🤙
Dear Chair Kama, Vice Chair Uʻu-Hodgins and Members of the Housing and Land Use Committee:
I oppose Bill 9 as drafted and propose that the Council amend Bill 9 to exclude Papakea Oceanfront Resort which the County has historically identified as having A2-H2 zoning.
Background on Papakea
Papakea was initially marketed and sold as a legal vacation rental property before any zoning restrictions limited transient vacation rentals in apartment zoned properties.
For almost fifty years, Papakea owners have been operating legal vacation rentals.
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.
There is limited parking at Papakea and most units are under 600 square feet.
Papakea is located in an area alongside hotel-zoned properties and commercially-zoned properties.
Unlike apartment buildings designed for long-term residential use, Papakea has a front desk, an activity concierge, shared activity space, and numerous other common resort amenities.
Owners at Papakea purchased condos with the reasonable expectation that short-term rentals were legal based on ordinances as far back as 1989, and as recent as 2022.
In reliance on the Maui County ordinances and published documents, Hawaii state law, and constitutional protections, owners invested in costly renovations, furnishings, and long-term financial commitments such as mortgages that make any phase out of short-term rental right offensive of each buyer’s investment-backed expectations.
Papakea’s Contributions to the Community
Papakea’s provides full-time, benefited, employment for 35 local resident employees. Some have been employed at the property for over 17 years, and some started in entry-level positions and ultimately advanced into supervisory roles.
Papakea supports a wide variety of local trade professionals including pest control, HVAC, painting, plumbing, electrical, general contracting, masonry, tile and flooring, fitness instructors, entertainers, and tree trimming.
Individual Owner Contributions to the Community
Many small businesses owned and operated by local residents from the Maui community rely on Papakea short-term rentals including housekeepers, handymen, on-island agents, and contractors. These service providers set their own rates, work hours, select their own clients, work conditions and standard operating procedures. Shutting down short-term rentals at Papakea means telling local entrepreneurs that worked hard to build a small business that they need to just go get a job somewhere else to make less money, have less flexibility, and be subject to oppressive corporate policies.
Papakea STRs support the State of Hawaii and County of Maui through payment of property taxes (many at the short-term rental rate), Transient Accommodations Tax, General Excise Tax, and Maui County Transient Accommodations Tax.
Papakea guests support many small businesses on the island including restaurants, food trucks, tour operators, activities, state parks, the national park, and shops.
Papakea owners and guests regularly participate in community activities including volunteering at beach cleanups, Maui Humane Society, the hospital, and many other local organizations, and contribute to local philanthropic nd cultural efforts.
I would like to thank the committee for their time and consideration.
Sincerely,
John Mueller
3543 Lower Honoapiilani Road, Apartment G-301
June 5, 2025
Dear Chair Kama, Vice Chair Uʻu-Hodgins and Members of the Housing and Land Use Committee:
I am writing against the proposed Bill 9 that impacts short term housing in Hawaii. 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.
RECOMMENDATION: PAPAKEA SHOULD BE REMOVED FROM THE MONTOYA LIST
• “Consider excluding those properties that are community plan designated for hotel use and those that are already partially hotel zoned-Planning Commission comments to County Council (Unanimous)
• “Papakea has partial H2 zoning-Planning Commission Chair-Planning Department Staff
• “The Zoning Designation (for Papakea) is still A2-H2—Planning Department Staff
I have owned my property for over a decade, but more importantly I have been traveling to Hawaii for forty years. We purchased our condominium to reflect the love my parents had for Hawaii—as they spent fifty years traveling across the islands. They instilled that same love for the islands in us. When they died, I was able to purchase a condominium—Papakea on Maui- and every stay I thank them for the love they had—for one another and for Hawaii. As a California resident, Hawaii is our ideal vacation location. I now bring the fourth generation there because we bring our Parisian grandchildren there! They have learned to swim in Hawaii. My daughter’s husband loves the Hawaiian beaches.
Let me describe Papakea---a location I have visited on numerous occasions for at least 30 years before finally purchasing a small unit. My children and now grandchildren have visited many times over the years—and long before our purchase.
Background on Papakea
• Papakea was initially marketed and sold as a legal vacation rental property before any zoning restrictions limited transient vacation rentals in apartment zoned properties.
• Papakea owners have been operating legal vacation rentals for almost fifty years.
• Papakea has never been workforce housing so Papakea is not an example of a property that converted from workforce housing to transient vacation rental use.
• The majority of units at Papakea are under 600 square feet and the property has limited parking.
• Papakea is not in a residential neighborhood and is located alongside a long stretch of hotel-zoned properties and directly adjacent to multiple commercially-zoned properties.
Unlike apartment buildings designed for long-term residential use, Papakea has a front desk, an activity concierge, shared activity space, and numerous other common resort amenities.
• Owners purchased condos at Papakea with the reasonable expectation that short-term rentals were legal based on ordinances as far back as 1989, and as recent as 2022.
• In reliance on the Maui County ordinances and published documents, Hawaii state law, and constitutional protections, owners invested in costly renovations, furnishings, and long-term financial commitments such as mortgages that make any phase out of short-term rental right offensive of each buyer’s investment-backed expectations.
Papakea’s Contributions to the Community
• Papakea’s resort operations provide full-time, benefited, employment for 35 local resident employees; some have worked at the property for over 17 years; some started in entry-level positions and worked into supervisory roles.
• Papakea supports a wide variety of local trade professionals including pest control, HVAC, painting, plumbing, electrical, general contracting, masonry, tile and flooring, fitness instructors, entertainers, and tree trimming.
Papakea’s Attributes
• Papakea owners have been operating legal vacation rentals for almost fifty years.
• Papakea has never been workforce housing so Papakea is not an example of a property
that converted from workforce housing to transient vacation rental use.
• The majority of units at Papakea are under 600 square feet and the property has limited
parking.
• Papakea is not in a residential neighborhood and is located directly adjacent to a long
stretch of hotel-zoned properties and multiple commercial 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.
• Papakea’s resort operations require extensive maintenance which makes the monthly
maintenance dues very high, compared to properties designed for long-term housing
with lower maintenance dues. Unsubsidized long-term rental rates do not come
close to covering the maintenance dues, special assessments, mortgage payments, property taxes, and insurance which prevents Papakea from ever becoming a
sustainable long-term housing option.
• The counties already have authority to regulate illegal short-term rentals that are
disrupting residential neighborhoods.
• This bill does nothing to solve the problem of illegal short-term rentals.
• This bill would create the perception of authority for Maui County to retroactively ban
the primary purpose that Papakea was designed for and built in 1978.
• We purchased condos at Papakea with the reasonable expectation that short-term
rentals were legal based on nearly 50 years of Maui County ordinances, Section 46-4
of the Hawaii revised statutes that protect vested use, the Hawaii Constitution, and the
US Constitution.
• In reliance on the Maui County ordinances, Hawaii state law, and constitutional
protections, we have invested in costly renovations, furnishings, and long-term
financial commitments such as mortgages that make any phase out of short-term rental
use unconstitutional without payment of just compensation.
• Long-term rental is not an economically viable use at Papakea given the costs of
maintaining and insuring an ocean-front property.
Individual Owner Contributions to the Community
• Many small businesses owned and operated by local residents from the Maui community rely on Papakea short-term rentals including housekeepers, handymen, on-
island agents, and contractors. These service providers set their own rates, work hours, select their own clients, work conditions and standard operating procedures. Shutting
down short-term rentals at Papakea means putting these folks out of business with
fewer employment opportunities. We have hired a housekeeper and a local business owner to assist us with all of our Papakea needs. We recommend local restaurants and guides
• Papakea STRs support the State of Hawaii and County of Maui through payment of
property taxes (many at the short-term rental rate), Transient Accommodations Tax,
General Excise Task, and Maui Transient Accommodations Tax.
• Our Papakea guests support many small businesses on the island including restaurants, food trucks, tour operators, state parks, the national park, and shops.
• Our Papakea unit sees many returning guests that have been visiting Maui for years
and have deep connections with the community.
For the reasons stated herein I recommend Papakea be excluded and urge the council vote no on this matter.
Sincerely
Jeanne Ann Conry
Bruce E Webb
3543 Lower Honoapiilani Road, Apartment L308
I believe that the return travelers depend on these condos to enjoy family vacations together.Having a kitchen to eat at least one meal at home together is often that families don't do on a daily basis. That has encouraged travelers to invest on this island. To keep their family coming back & rent it out for others to enjoy. Iti s important to keep condos available as transient accommodations.
Leslie Knoles
Dear Chair Kama, Vice Chair Uʻu-Hodgins and Members of the Housing and Land Use Committee
We are the owners of a unit at Mahina Surf — a legally permitted short-term rental (STR) in a development purpose-built for visitor accommodation since 1969. We write to express our respectful but firm opposition to the proposed legislation that seeks to phase out all STRs in Apartment-zoned districts, including legacy properties like ours.
We appreciate Mayor Bissen’s acknowledgment during his recent townhall that the issue of STRs is deeply complex and, at times, divisive. His comments reflect a key reality: there is strong demand both for visitor accommodations and for affordable housing for the residents. We also acknowledge and agree with his point that many of the 7,100 units on the so-called Minatoya List — including ours — are inappropriately grouped under a blanket policy.
In the same speech, Mayor Bissen pointed thar majority of STRs are owned by people who do not live on Maui, but that alone should not justify a policy that introduces sweeping consequences for all legally operated units. Owners like us are invested in the community long-term — hiring local tradespeople, and supporting Maui’s economy through visitor spend and full tax compliance. Many jobs that are created by STR business will be irreversibly lost from Maui's economy with the proposed ban.
We urge the Council to consider the significant economic risks of phasing out STRs entirely, as outlined in the May 2025 study by the University of Hawaiʻi Economic Research Organization (UHERO):
• A projected $900 million decline in visitor spending, 1,900 jobs lost, and a 4% drop in real GDP.
• Up to $75 million per year in lost County tax revenue by 2029, impacting services, recovery, and infrastructure.
These are significant numbers for Maui's economy!
Although UHERO’s report suggests that condo prices may decline, it cautions that housing affordability may not improve meaningfully for local residents due to:
- Job and income losses following visitor spending drop,
- Interest rates and borrowing constraints,
- Potential for out-of-state buyers to take advantage of lower prices.
They stress that “benefits of lower prices may not be evenly distributed” and that policy risks include worsening affordability for lower-income residents if the economy contracts. It is clear that the proposed STR ban will most likely worsen Maui's economy. And assuming that improvement of housing availability is the core objective of the proposed ban, it is clear that the ban is unlikely to provide a meaningful improvement there.
Rather than pursuing divisive and broad-based elimination, we encourage the County to adopt creative and targeted housing strategies. As UHERO suggests, there are viable alternatives such as auction-based permits, higher-tiered property taxes, or phased, evidence-based transitions. These approaches allow Maui to preserve essential economic activity while encouraging housing where it makes practical and social sense.
Mahina Surf has never been workforce housing so it is not an example of a property that converted from workforce housing to transient vacation rental use. Mahina Surf, and properties like it, are simply not designed or feasible for long-term housing. Eliminating them from the visitor accommodation pool will not create livable homes — but will directly reduce employment, diminish County revenue, and increase friction at a time when unity and collaborative problem-solving are most needed.
We urge the Council to avoid a high-risk, one-size-fits-all strategy. Please consider a more balanced path that distinguishes between STR types, preserves legally operating legacy properties, and fosters both economic and housing resilience for Maui’s future.
Mahalo for your time and thoughtful leadership.
Sincerely,
Parviz Salimov and Mehri Salimova
Owners, Unit 227 – Mahina Surf
June 4, 2025
Hello Chair, Vice Chair, and Committee Members,
My name is Dean Sandow. My wife 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.
We have worked hard to be a responsible and community-oriented owner. I recommend local restaurants, grocery stores, shopping malls, car rental companies, and tour guides in my welcome guide. I employ local service providers — cleaners, contractors, property managers, and maintenance personnel — 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 would not have come at all if they did not have a vacation rental option. Similarly, many families simply will not come because they cannot afford to stay at hotels, which would be a shame. All of this matters — not just to me, but to all the small businesses they supported during their stay.
We use local hardware stores, paint stores, furniture stores, and appliance stores. We shop at farmers markets and craft fairs whenever possible. All of these local merchants and every one of their employees are at risk under the proposed phase out. There is no way to replace the economic contribution that STR owners provide to these merchants and to the county and state tax base.
We sold an interest in a unit in our complex a few years before buying the current unit during COVID. We came back because we love the complex, we love the local people, and we love the islands.
Owning in this complex has not been easy. We have faced huge maintenance costs, special assessments, and massive increases in insurance after the fires. These are far from luxuries — they are 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.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Dean and Tammy Sandow
Maui Kamaole G201, Kihei
As someone whose great-grandparents immigrated to Maui, I am deeply connected to this island. I’m fortunate that some of my family members still have housing passed down through generations, but I also witness many friends and relatives who are struggling to find stable, affordable homes—especially in the wake of the fires.
Even people who are fully employed are now housing insecure. That’s not acceptable, and it points to a larger systemic issue. Our island’s limited housing stock should serve the people who live and work here—not be treated as an investment vehicle for people who don't even reside in Maui.
I've heard concerns from non-resident condo owners worried about falling property values. But these are business investments, not homes. If this bill cools the speculative market and helps bring prices back within reach for local families, then it's a step in the right direction.
I support Bill 9 (2025) because it prioritizes housing for Maui’s people over profit.
June 4, 2025
Dear Chair Kama, Vice Chair Uʻu-Hodgins and Members of the Housing and Land Use Committee:
I oppose Bill 9 as drafted and propose that the Council amend Bill 9 to exclude Papakea Oceanfront Resort which the County has historically identified as having A2-H2 zoning.
Background on Papakea
• Papakea was initially marketed and sold as a legal vacation rental property before any zoning restrictions limited transient vacation rentals in apartment zoned properties.
• Papakea owners have been operating legal vacation rentals for almost fifty years.
• Papakea has never been workforce housing so Papakea is not an example of a property that converted from workforce housing to transient vacation rental use.
• The majority of units at Papakea are under 600 square feet and the property has limited parking.
• Papakea is not in a residential neighborhood and is located alongside a long stretch of hotel-zoned properties and directly adjacent to multiple commercially-zoned properties.
Unlike apartment buildings designed for long-term residential use, Papakea has a front desk, an activity concierge, shared activity space, and numerous other common resort amenities.
• Owners purchased condos at Papakea with the reasonable expectation that short-term rentals were legal based on ordinances as far back as 1989, and as recent as 2022.
• In reliance on the Maui County ordinances and published documents, Hawaii state law, and constitutional protections, owners invested in costly renovations, furnishings, and long-term financial commitments such as mortgages that make any phase out of short-term rental right offensive of each buyer’s investment-backed expectations.
Papakea’s Contributions to the Community
• Papakea’s resort operations provide full-time, benefited, employment for 35 local resident employees; some have worked at the property for over 17 years; some started in entry-level positions and worked into supervisory roles.
• Papakea supports a wide variety of local trade professionals including pest control, HVAC, painting, plumbing, electrical, general contracting, masonry, tile and flooring, fitness instructors, entertainers, and tree trimming.
Individual Owner Contributions to the Community
• Many small businesses owned and operated by local residents from the Maui community rely on Papakea short-term rentals including housekeepers, handymen, on-island agents, and contractors. These service providers set their own rates, work hours, select their own clients, work conditions and standard operating procedures. Shutting down short-term rentals at Papakea means telling local entrepreneurs that worked hard to build a small business that they need to just go get a job somewhere else to make less money, have less flexibility, and be subject to oppressive corporate policies.
• Papakea STRs support the State of Hawaii and County of Maui through payment of property taxes (many at the short-term rental rate), Transient Accommodations Tax, General Excise Tax, and Maui County Transient Accommodations Tax.
• Papakea guests support many small businesses on the island including restaurants, food trucks, tour operators, activities, state parks, the national park, and shops.
• Papakea owners and guests regularly participate in community activities including volunteering at beach cleanups, Maui Humane Society, the hospital, and many other local organizations, and contribute to local philanthropic nd cultural efforts.
I would like to thank the committee for the opportunity to comment.
Sincerely,
Norman Vesala
3543 Lower Honoapiilani Road, Apartment G205
Aloha Chair, Vice Chair and Committee Members,
I thank you for your time and consideration.
My name is Jeanette Odelberg and I own a STR in Kamaole Sands Resort.
I been coming to Maui since I first fell in love with the island and the people over 15 years ago.
I am deeply concerned for the local work force and I'm opposing this bill to eliminate over 7000 vacation rentals.
There are so many businesses that has already closed since the pandemic and the devastating fires.
When I speak to waiters, bartenders, housekeepers, massage therapists and shop owners, plumbers, electricians etc they are very concerned about banning STR's.
Self-employed housekeepers for example make a much better living than the ones employed by the hotels,
What are all these people employed by the STR going to do? Front desk staff, security, pool staff, cleaners, property managers and maintenance etc.
They all have rent/mortgages, car payments and bills to pay.
The STR are contributing millions in taxes to build affordable housing.
Kamaole Sands Resort has majority one bedroom units with no storage and only one parking spot per condo with very high monthly fee's so it doesn't seems like that is what is really needed.
I spent my life savings to be able to purchase this unit and made sure it was STR approved/allowed.
Owning this condo has not been easy, with the massive rising costs of monthly dues, home owner insurance, property insurance increasing over 600% and huge special assessments to keep the property safe, functional and looking appealing.
The STR income helps cover a part of that cost while supporting the local work force.
This legislation feels very one-sided and in my personal opinion I do not think it is good for the people of Maui or the local economy.
I think it will really hurt Maui, so therefore I am strongly against this bill.
Mahalo for your time.
Sincerely
Jeanette Odelberg
jodelberg@gmail.com
Aloha Chair, Vice Chair ans esteemed council members,
I am an individual short term rental owner in Kapalua. I strongly oppose restricting or banning short term rentals. In my opinion, this is economically ruinous for Maui.
Based on trailing 12 months occupancy on my unit only, if this ban passes, my unit would go unoccupied for 9 months of the year. The following revenue losses to the county of Maui and it's business community would occur:
1) Loss of G.E.T tax to county of $15,000.00 per year
2) Loss of real estate taxes to county via reduced propert value of approximately $10,000.00 per year.
3) 240 nights not rented, assuming average guest spends $300 per day on Maui: $72,000.00 Loss of local tourist revenue
4) termination and lost revenue and jobs:
A) housekeeping
B) propert management company
C) handyman
D) electrician
E) HVAC company
F) Plumber
G) lost revenue and jobs at Napili Market, Monolog store, Merriman, Aloha mixed plate, Gazebo, Sea House, Fond Fish Market and so very many more.
Our renters spend money in, on and for Maui. I am grateful because I do not have to rent my STR. But I do it because I know it helps Maui and it's people financially. Renters who stay in my STR tell me the would never stay in a hotel. Please don't wreck Maui's economy. Vote no on STR bans.
Respectfully Submitted,
Bernie and Jody Smit
Dear Chair Kama, Vice Chair Uʻu-Hodgins and Members of the Housing and Land Use Committee:
I oppose Bill 9 as drafted and propose that the Council amend Bill 9 to exclude Papakea Oceanfront Resort which the County has historically identified as having A2-H2 zoning.
Papakea was initially marketed and sold as a legal vacation rental property before any zoning restrictions limited transient vacation rentals in apartment zoned properties.
Papakea owners have been operating legal vacation rentals for almost fifty years.
Papakea has never been workforce housing, so Papakea is not an example of a property that converted from workforce housing to transient vacation rental use.
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.
In reliance on the Maui County ordinances and published documents, Hawaii state law, and constitutional protections, owners invested in costly renovations, furnishings, and long-term financial commitments such as mortgages that make any phase out of short-term rental right offensive of each buyer’s investment-backed expectations.
Papakea contributes significantly to the Maui economy in several ways.
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.
Papakea STRs support the State of Hawaii and County of Maui through payment of property taxes (many at the short-term rental rate), Transient Accommodations Tax, General Excise Tax, and Maui County Transient Accommodations Tax.
I would like to thank the committee for the opportunity to comment.
Sincerely,
Greg and Kathleen Paganelli, 3543 Lower Honoapiilani Road
Aloha, I am an STR owner and have been for over 20 years. I fell in love with Maui when we celebrated our wedding over 50 years ago. My wife and I decided to purchase a property rather than rent every year. Now retired, we share our condo with friends, children, and grandchildren. Without the ability to rent our condo out, we would not be able to afford our condo. To rent our place would cost a family about $6,000.00 a month due to the high taxes and AOAO fees as well as the high insurance rates we now pay. When we come, we spend a lot of money at restaurants and other places. This would disappear if we could not come. Multiply this by the over 50-75 people that stay each year and the County would loose thousands of dollars that they pay. The County would also loose the TAT and Excise taxes they pay. Thank you for taking your time to hear my plea to oppose this measure. Mshhalo
Testimony Opposing the Mayor’s Bill to Phase Out Legal Vacation Rentals
To: Maui County Council and Housing and Land Use Committee
From: Steve Bartel
Aloha Chair and Councilmembers,
My name is Steve Bartel. I’m a retired property owner who depends on the income from a legally permitted short-term rental to support myself and my wife in retirement. I’m writing to express my strong opposition to the Mayor’s proposal to eliminate over 7,000 lawful vacation rentals in apartment-zoned areas.
Like many retirees, we worked hard all our careers to invest in a unit that was legal for short-term rental at the time of purchase, with the understanding that this would provide supplemental income to help us stay financially secure. Eliminating this income stream would be devastating—not just to me personally, but to thousands of other owners, workers, and small businesses across the island.
We have enjoyed traveling to and vacationing in Maui for many years, after honeymooning in Kaanapali Beach in 1991. The residents are so compassionate and friendly and we are deeply concerned about the impact on jobs for those living on island. Short-term rentals support a wide network of local employment: housekeepers, handymen, landscapers, cleaners, and small business operators who rely on the steady, year-round work this industry provides. This bill threatens to wipe out entire income streams for working families and small business owners—people who don’t have the luxury of "waiting it out" or "finding something else."
We also fear for the negative long-term impact to the local economy. Visitors who stay in vacation rentals spend their money in local restaurants, grocery stores, surf shops, tour companies, and farmers markets. They rent cars, take excursions, and spread their dollars far beyond the building where they sleep. We do this ourselves when visiting beautiful Maui. You can’t remove 7,000 units and not expect serious consequences to the businesses that rely on those guests.
Eliminating our ability to rent out our units is incredibly unfair and unjust. The costs of owning these properties for owners like me don’t just go away. We still have to pay high monthly HOA dues, elevated property taxes (specifically as a short-term rental), insurance, utilities, and special assessments. Without rental income, it becomes financially unsustainable. The idea that these units will somehow convert to affordable housing is simply not realistic. These properties are not set up for long-term living, and many would not be accessible or affordable for working families even if they were.
This is about fairness, stability, and trust. We followed the rules. We invested in a legal use. If the County can suddenly change the law and retroactively strip away property rights and livelihoods, what confidence can any resident or business owner have in the stability of our local government?
I urge you to reject this proposal and look instead for balanced solutions that preserve jobs, protect local investment, and maintain the visitor revenue that sustains so many on this island.
Mahalo for your time and thoughtful consideration.
Sincerely,
Steve Bartel
Retired Property Owner
Aloha Chair, Vice Chair, and Councilmembers,
My name is Jahya Costa, and I am a Native Hawaiian, born and raised in Hawaiʻi. I currently serve as a Program Operations Manager overseeing properties that are housing fire survivors through the FEMA long-term housing program. I’ve been in this industry nearly six years and have worked directly with property owners, contractors, tenants, and FEMA to help displaced families find safe housing.
I’m writing today in strong opposition to Bill 9, which would phase out short-term rentals in apartment-zoned areas across Maui County. I understand the desire to create more housing for local residents, and I support that goal. However, this bill, as written, will not achieve that outcome. In fact, it could create more harm than good.
Since the Lahaina fires, I’ve helped place families into many of these short-term rental units. Are they perfect? No. Families have told me they struggle with limited parking, no storage space, restrictions on pets, and layouts that are not ideal for long-term living. But right now, these units are the only available option for many displaced residents. If these properties are phased out without any real alternative in place, we risk displacing people again, this time because of policy decisions.
What is often misunderstood is that removing short-term rental use from apartment districts does not guarantee those units will become affordable long-term housing for local families. Many owners rely on the short-term rental income to cover their mortgage and may not be able to offer their unit as a traditional long-term rental. Without clear programs or financial incentives to help transition these properties, the most likely outcome is that many of these units will sit vacant, be sold to off-island buyers, or be removed from the rental market altogether. That is not a solution to the housing crisis.
This bill also threatens the livelihood of local workers who support the STR economy. I work alongside cleaners, landscapers, inspectors, and small business vendors, many of them Native Hawaiian or born and raised on Maui, who rely on the steady work that this industry provides. Eliminating that income source without offering another option will cause serious hardship for hundreds of working families.
As a Native Hawaiian, I deeply care about protecting our land and ensuring that local people can continue to live, work, and thrive here. I support solutions that are thoughtful, balanced, and community-informed. We do need affordable housing, but we also need stable jobs, temporary housing for survivors, and a realistic plan for how to move forward. This bill takes away critical resources without offering anything concrete in return.
Please do not move forward with Bill 9 as currently written. I ask you to work with community members and industry professionals to find a more sustainable path forward. Let’s create a strategy that protects our families, preserves economic opportunity, and provides truly viable housing for our people.
Mahalo for your time and for listening to our voices.
Jahya Costa
Kaanapali Royal owner written testimony, May 28, 2025
My wife Toko and I purchased Kaanapali Royal unit Q302 in 1999. We spent
the next two decades working to pay down our Bank of Hawaii mortgage along
with a mortgage on our residence in Tokyo while raising and educating our two
daughters. It wasn’t always easy. We visited Maui when we could and dreamed
all along of moving to Maui when we retired. The dream came true in 2018,
when our second daughter graduated from college. We finally closed up our
business that year, sold our apartment in Tokyo and moved to our beloved
island home. I was 72 years old (13 years older than Toko) and more than
ready for the peaceful, fulfilling life Maui offered.
The Lahaina Fire of August 8, 2023, shattered the dream. We and our condo
survived the fire intact, suffering only a scary night and a few weeks without
power or Internet, but the infrastructure supporting our lives was decimated.
Our doctors, dentist and attorney had all been burned out, and even the bank
where we had done business for 25 years was burned to the ground. We
recognized how lucky we had been compared to our many neighbors who had
lost their homes, businesses and even their lives. But we also realized for the
first time how vulnerable we were, living on the outer edge of a remote disaster-
prone island whose long succession of governments had failed to provide for
the safety and security of its citizenry. Too old to wait for Lahaina’s recovery,
we decided to move to Honolulu, a city on an island we liked but hadn’t yet
learned to love that offered the type of varied, extensive and secure
infrastructure people generally require in their later years. We packed up and
said a fond farewell to Maui in April 2024.
Our plan was to sell our Kaanapali residence, which was now listed on the
then-active Maui real estate market, and purchase a new home in Honolulu
with the proceeds. We were not wealthy. We were living mainly off profits from
the sale of our apartment in Tokyo, augmented by a limited income flow from a
second condo we had purchased in Kihei as an investment property. We had
planned carefully and should have been able to live fairly comfortably for the
remaining years of our lives.
But we could not have foreseen the irresponsible behavior of Maui’s mayor
Bissen, who announced his ill-conceived LTR ban out of the blue on May 2.
Maui’s economy, which had led the state’s recovery after the Covid pandemic,
was almost immediately plunged into near-recession as tourists learned of the
vociferous anti-tourist sentiment of Bissen influencers such as Lahana Strong
and stayed away in droves, further undermining a job market that had already
been seriously damaged by the fires. Hundreds of businesses that depended
completely or in part on tourism, the mainstay engine of Maui’s economy, were
forced to close their doors, and thousands of residents, including scores of
native Hawaiians, began abandoning the island for greener pastures.
Again, Toko and I have suffered less than many others. Still, our assets, most
of them tied up in Maui real estate, have shrunk by as much as 40%, putting
our ability to support ourselves for the remainder of our lives in doubt. We
missed a chance to buy a condo in Hawaii Kai because we couldn’t sell our
Kaanapali condo and are living frugally in a rental apartment while awaiting
the Maui County Council’s decision on the Bissen scheme. It’s not easy to wait
patiently. With my 80th birthday looming next year, and time running out to
enjoy the retirement we planned for throughout our working lives, we can only
ask that the Council consider the evidence carefully, recognize the fact that
affordable housing and STRs are completely separate issues, and reject the
Bissen bill out of hand. Any other decision will result in many more months or
years of uncertainty, and in needless pain for many or most Maui residents.
Mick and Toko Smith
Kaanapali Royal, unit Q302