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)
The thing that strikes me is that I have not hear any mention of banning TVR in apt. district ON SALE AND TRANSFER OF THE UNIT.
Currently permitted TVR's (that got a permit specifically for their house) generally can't be TVR rented by new owners for years.
If they ban the use for existing owners it is a double whammy: you can't offset expenses with TVR money PLUS you will experience a big hit when you sell: and you will have to sell unless you are rich..
Prices will drop significantly.
I could see recently bought units with big mortgages having loan defaults cause they are now under water.
They will abandon the property and the whole Maui condo market will take a big hit as in a depression.
So Maui Conty looses 3 ways:
Upsidedown market.
Reduced tvr tax income.
And less property tax income.
Aloha Chair, Vice Chair, and Committee Members,
Me and my wife reside about 50% of the time in Maui and we short-term and long term rent our property in Maui County when we are not on island. I am writing today to express my strong opposition to the proposed legislation to phase out more than 7,000 vacation rentals of which is our home which would never be a workers home due to the lack of parking and the $1100 month HOA fees.
We spend money and hire local people to service and maintain our home. I employ local service providers — cleaners, maintenance techs, and landscapers — many of whom have become friends over the years.
Some of my guests have even said they wouldn’t have come at all if they didn’t have a vacation rental option. That matters — not just to me, but to all the small businesses they supported during their stay.
Owning in this complex has not been easy. We’ve faced huge maintenance costs, special assessments, and massive increases in insurance after the fires. These aren’t luxuries — they’re costs that ensure the property remains safe, functional, and appealing. STR income helps cover those costs while supporting local workers.
This legislation is improper because it ultimately hurts those who it is supposed to help by reducing the tourist element on the island which ultimately reduces jobs. I urge the Council to work with owners like me to find a fair and balanced path forward — one that protects local jobs, supports the economy, and holds STR owners to high standards, instead of phasing us out completely.
Mahalo for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Kevin & Shawn Martin
500 Kapalua Drive Unit 21P7 & P8
This is regarding the more than 13,000 units (per Maui County) on the Minitoya list.
When they are mapped, the Minitoya units are overwhelmingly on the ocean or between the closest major street and the water. Most of these were designed and built as vacation rental communities from the start.
Regarding SMA areas and EHL areas ( sea-level rise exposure areas and erosion hazard line mapped zones), there was in fact a Planning Sustainable Land Use Committee proposal that proposed that those properties in the shoreline EHL areas would be able to continue that use as vacation rentals. But those outside and EHL area would be banned from TVR use. The proposal hoped to get approx 3000 units out of TVR's and into 6+ month leases.
This does make sense to a certain degree. Costal properties are high maintenance and often have very limited parking.
PLUS many if not most Maui residents would say that resort communities are where tourists "should be".
When mapped the Minitoya units are mapped against the EHL, Kihei would "donate" some offshore resorts to local housing and there are a few on the West side and in other parts of the island.
Finally , we need to tackle the myth that the majority of TVR owners are in it for money and profit. Owners who rent TVR's largely do so to offset expenses like property taxes. if they can't then they will sell to others who will own the rental and keep it vacant.
This says that not only will Hawaii loose vacation rental taxes but property taxes as well.
Our names are Lynn Stotka, Bob Stotka, and Robin Longchamps (daughter), and our family owns a condo in Maalaea that we rent out to families and friends throughout the years as well as vacation renters.
We are contacting you to let you know our frantic and deep concern and extremely strong opposition to the proposed legislation on phasing out a d taking away many vacation rentals which will hugely negatively affect us and our local employees we hire.
We have owned our condo for 30+ years and have been responsible owners, loving our place and surrounding land and surrounding businesses. We have been community orientated owners for three decades and dedicated ones I might add.
In my flyer, I send to all of my friends, family and vacation renters that come year to year as regular vacationers due to comfortability and Maui beauty. We always recommend restaurants, marina, stores, food trucks, just everything local to boost the economy and be a good neighbor. Four Winds, Trilogy, local fishing excursions, Coconuts, Havens, Tante’s, Aquarium and it’s adjacent restaurant, Snorkel Bob’s, Longs, Foodland, Monkeypod, Lahaina, restaurants near the airport, etc., etc. etc.
Since we are not at the condo consistently, we employ many local businesses and employees throughout the year, such as lock companies, door/screen companies, maintenance, technicians, plumbers, contractors, carpet cleaners, all things needed since our condo is used by vacation renters. This supports your local companies. With less people using our condo because you have restricted vacationers to be able to come and rent it; these local people most likely will go out of business and your economy will even get worse. These employees and companies that have worked for us over the years here are like family and we’ve gotten to know them as well as can always count on them when vacationers are here to be there for us.
My housecleaner expresses the sadness of her business and the lack of work, and all of her fellow housecleaner businesses she knows are all struggling to keep their families fed due to the devastation of the fire and people not coming as vacation renters for awhile. Having short-term rentals taken away from them will devastate them further. She has said vacation renters are her livelihood and you’re wanting to take that away? They are struggling without work and vacation. Renters provide the work they need.
From my friends and renters they almost always comment that it is indeed a slice of heaven and truly a paradise and how grateful and how kind and how helpful all of the people were there. Their personal experience they have there is because of your Maui businesses and your Maui people as they are so kind and helpful.
Many renters have said to us that they are thankful to be able to use a condo as they wouldn’t be able to come at all if they didn’t have a vacation rental option. They like the long stay discounts that hotels don’t offer. A lot of them are families because they are more comfortable in a condo. They dont like crowded touristy hotels. As well as able to use it as a home for cooking and keeping things such as food and snacks for their children and family. And to have quiet, restful peaceful home-like experiences and luxuries of their home but in paradise.
That matters to us and all the small businesses we come to adore and love and whom our vacation renters support during their stay — helping our … and your … long-term local Maui employment businesses, our l employee/friends and of course helping out Maui in general.
We have had many and expensive maintenance costs such as having to replace the combo door lock every year due to saltwater corrosion, painting, upkeep, erosion, replacements, our homeowners dues went up more than half, paying for special assessments, and many many increases after the fires for insurance, as well as other increases due to the fire. We are more than happy to pay to help out with the fire and the displaced. But helping out would have to go away if we’re not allowed to have vacation renters there anymore. In fact, we let people who were working to help out with the devastation and the fire to stay in our condo for free for a couple of months. As well as other people who needed a place to stay to get back on their feet. We donated as well. But it is a quite a monetary hardship that we were not expecting as no one was expecting.
There are costs for our condo to stay safe, usable and in working condition. And of course pleasantly and joyfully presented to our friends, family, and vacationers. Having vacation renters helps tremendously to pay for these overwhelming costs that were not expected. Prior to that and during — vacationer rent income has helped Lynn and Bob with major medical bills that they would not have been able to afford to be taken care of without this extra income coming in. This extra income was crucial for their lives and medical. And this also helps to pay for all the extra and good maintenance and care for the condo in which we use Maui‘s people — local workers that live in Maui to fix and care for our condo to keep it up-to-date and safe and lovingly continuing to be a home.
What’s going on with this legislation feels pushy, expedited and a unilateral push where we don’t have a voice. That does not feel good.
We plead and urge and request the Council to work with owners like us to find a fair way forward hearing us and our local workers who've become family to us. Don’t take this away from them. Their livelihood. Their income to cloth and feed their families.We need a balanced path forward. Which protects local personnel their jobs and supports the economy so we can get Maui back to its glory after the devastating fire as well as keeping upkeep all over Maui. I’ve seen the roads and they are in heavy repair with potholes and erosion all around, and there are broken down vehicles all over that need cleaning up.
We want to support Maui’s economy and we want our vacation renters to come year after year to continue to help us help Maui and it’s economy. Don’t let it go backwards. This would be devastating. We ask to hold you to high standards. Please do not phase us out completely.
Mahalo and appreciation for reading our concerns and taking time to consider.
Our names are John and Liza Hanes, and we own a short-term rental property in Kihei. We are writing today to share our concern and strong opposition to the proposed legislation to phase out more than 7,000 vacation rentals.
When we travel, we prefer Short Term Rentals, on Air BnB or VRBO for our stays. We like to cook for ourselves, share the living space with family and friends, and not have a “hotel” experience.
We love Maui, so we want to share our love of the island with our guests who also don’t want a hotel stay.
We support the local community and give recommendations for restaurants, grocery stores, food trucks, and entertainment events.
We have always paid our TAT, GET taxes on time, followed all of the laws, registered our business, but owning a Condo here is expensive.
We do all the we can to provide a safe, cost effective, and enjoyable space for our guests. We are regularly upgrading, repairing, and maintaining our condo so that our guests have a great vacation. All of these costs to us go back to the community; Ace Hardware, Benjamin Moore Paints, The Home Depot, Lowes are all regular visits for us. Our furniture is locally bought as well.
We also hire local plumbers, air conditioning services, and local cleaning services in order to maintain the highest standards possible for our guests.
Our guests appreciate all of our hard work and diligence and we have receive nothing less than 5 Star reviews. Our guests appreciate and enjoy the vacation rental option and all of the amenities and recommendations that have for them, and our guests return to visit again.
This legislation may help the big hotels, who may use their scale to push workers to settle for less. The hotels will not use local hardware stores, furniture stores, their guests will not shop at local groceries, and will not rent sports equipment from local retailers when the hotels corner that market as well.
Maui has a well developed tourist market that relies on short term rentals for tax income, to support local businesses, and to draw tourists to the island. STR’s provide a large amount of TAT and GET taxes and we are happy to pay these to help the island economy.
Please look at the scale of the economic impacts of this decision and weigh it against the reality of trying to provide housing for locals. An 800 square foot condo with a $1200 HOA fee is not the solution for long term housing, but it is a solution to drawing tourist dollars and tax income to the island.
We urge you to hold STR owners to high standards but to protect the jobs and economy that we contribute to by finding a balanced path and not phasing out STR. Sincerely,
Firstly, I wish to thank you for your service to the island of Maui to serve on this committee in what is most certainly a trying time for the community.
Our family has been an owner of a Golf Villa within the Kapalua resort since 1991 and we wish to formally object to the proposed STVR ban on the island of Maui and we ask the Planning Commission to reject this proposal as well. We have currently enrolled our unit into the long term rental program thru FEMA and are housing a local family displaced by the fire; but are scared to potentially have our options striped away from us once this lease is completed or the FEMA program is no longer viable. We were very happy to participate in this program and help out the island in any way that we could.
Echoing many of the same comments from our respective Kapalua Association Board Members, this ban would be economically devastating to the island. We’ve enjoyed getting to know many of the property managers, maintenance and cleaning staff that have helped us run our island home from afar. Firstly, with the staff directly employed by Maui Land and Pineapple with the Kapalua Villas and now with Outrigger; all those jobs would be immediately lost. Many of the units who do rent short term, at least in Kapalua and other resort communities, simply do it to help offset significant costs to maintain a home on the island. These are not profit centers…..
The life blood of the island is tourism…and with tourism still down significantly since the tragic fire; how much lower would it get by completely taking away an option for tourists? The hotels would most certainly raise their rates and drive up costs for families to visit - leading directly lower occupancy rates.
In order to keep my comments as brief as possible – I also wish to simply state that it is admirable to try and find ways to help with the housing affordability and availability. Perhaps there are zones within the rebuilding area that are to be rental fee. This is where the importance of zoning and land use will be critical as Lahaina begins to get rebuilt; but anytime you do an outright ban you simply create more problems. Perhaps with greater economic impact than being more selective..….
Again, we ask that you reject with outright ban on STVR. The continuing dialogue on how to appropriately rebuild with all island stakeholders is important though and we look forward to being a small part of that dialogue going forward.
Thank you for your time.
Ryan Boman
On behalf of the Boman Family and our Golf Villa Unit.
I am writing to let you know that I am convinced that significantly reducing short term rentals will not solve the long-term housing problem on Maui, and respectfully ask the Committee to recommend denial for this proposal.
I moved to Kihei in 1987 to start Kihei Lutheran Church as its first pastor. Over the eight years I lived in Kihei I developed many friendships and a close tie to the island of Maui. Eventually I had to move to Texas due to family concerns, but my son still lives and has worked in Kihei for the past 19 years.
In 2014 my wife and I purchased a condo at Maui Vista; primarily for us to have a place to stay on our frequent return trips to the island. We could not afford the high price of Maui hotels. We are blessed to be able to spend time with our son, our longtime friends, our church ohana, and the aina we love. The fact that we have been able to rent the condo as a short-term vacation rental has provided us the opportunity to own property in Kihei.
Our condo monthly expenses, including mortgage, taxes, monthly and special assessment fees, utilities, insurance, maintenance, etc., total more than $7,000 per month. The only way we can afford those costs is by using it as a short-term vacation rental. We are not making money; we are just breaking even. Should it be converted to long-term rental only, I don’t think $7,000 per month (to break even) for an 822 square foot, 1-1/2 bedroom apartment can be considered affordable housing. If we sold it, the cost to the new owner would be higher due to the increase in interest rates.
Our ownership and use of the condo as a short-term rental has not only benefited us, but it has also financially benefited the County of Maui and the State of Hawaii. Last year we paid $10,020 state Transient Accommodation Tax, $2,935 County Transient Accommodation Tax, $3,600 State General Excise Tax, and $15,636 County Property Tax, for a total of $32,191.
Maui Vista was built for vacation rentals in 1980. The units are small with small kitchens and baths and parking limited to one car. Maintenance fees are high. There is no storage nor playground for families. These condos were never intended for full-time family living. FEMA funded families who moved into Maui Vista after the fire did not stay long, often only a few weeks, because it did not work well for families. Also, many condos in Maui Vista made available by FEMA funding were not chosen by locals, again because the condos are not well suited for families.
The need for affordable housing on Maui was crirical when I moved there in 1987, and remains so today. It was exasperated by the loss of housing in West Maui following the tragic fires. Maui needs affordable long-term housing, but eliminating short-term vacation rentals is not a way to do that. Please vote in opposition to revoking rights to operate short-term rentals in Minatoya listed properties. Instead, build new affordable housing.
Mahalo nui loa for your consideration,
The Reverend Captain George D. Bement, M.Div., LCSW
2191 South Kihei Rd. #2409
Kihei, HI 96753
kahukeoke@yahoo.com
To the Honorable Members of the Maui County Council:
My name is Meara Boling, and I am an owner of a studio condominium in one of Maui’s apartment-zoned buildings currently exempted for short-term rental (STR) use under what is commonly known as the “Minatoya List.” I am writing to express my strong opposition to Bill 9.
Personal Investment Framework
My husband and I are not large real estate investors or moguls. We own one unit. This property is a significant part of our personal investment portfolio and future retirement plans. When we purchased this studio, we did so after thoroughly reviewing the legal framework, County policy, and building governance in place—where STR use was clearly authorized and had been for decades. Like many middle-class individuals, we made this investment carefully and with full reliance on the law at the time.
Economic Impact and Local Jobs
Our unit supports numerous local jobs and businesses. We employ a Maui-based property manager, cleaners, and maintenance workers. Additionally, our guests support restaurants, shops, tour operators, and countless small businesses on the island.
A 2025 study by the University of Hawaii Economic Research Organization (UHERO) estimates that eliminating STRs would result in the loss of nearly 1,900 local jobs and a $900 million annual decline in visitor spending. It would also reduce property tax revenues by an estimated $60 million per year—funds that are critical to supporting Maui County’s public services.
Beyond that, falling property values—driven by forced STR phase-outs and spiraling condo prices—will erode household wealth across the board. For many individual owners, especially retirees who rely on STR income and property value as part of their retirement planning, this could create serious financial hardship and may even force some to return to work simply to meet basic living expenses.
Unfair Policy Shift and Financial Hardship
Our STR income is essential to covering the mortgage, HOA dues, and other costs of ownership. In the last five years, our HOA fees for a 500-square-foot studio have roughly doubled—from approximately $500 per month to over $1,000 per month. On top of this, the property has flooded twice in the past four years, which has driven up both maintenance costs and insurance premiums.
It is simply not realistic to expect that this unit could be converted into long-term affordable or workforce housing. The economics do not support it.
Suitability of the Units
Our building’s bylaws restrict occupancy to no more than two permanent residents per unit. Combined with the small size of the unit and its flood-prone nature, this inventory is ill-suited for permanent housing.
Timing Does Not Address Lahaina Housing Crisis
Phasing out STRs by 2030 does nothing to address the immediate housing needs of those displaced by the Lahaina fire. It is disingenuous to suggest that this bill provides a solution for the current crisis.
Conclusion
I urge the Council to reject Bill 9. This bill will cause significant economic harm, undermine legal property rights, and fail to deliver meaningful relief to those most in need. There are better, more targeted ways to address Maui’s housing challenges—solutions that honor existing commitments, protect local jobs, and strengthen, rather than destabilize, the community.
Thank you for your time and thoughtful consideration.
I said this just about a year ago when I spoke via zoom. I stated that if you pass this, you’ll be wiping out a whole other population. We can see a year later how accurate my statement is. Please consider the majority of the population that you will be affecting. Do not pass this bill if you care about local families.
Bill 9 will not create housing for local residents. Bill 9 does not “convert” any units from short-term rental to long-term rental. The repeated use of the word "conversion" is misinformation that creates the false impression that Maui County is going to be playing Oprah by handing out condos if the bill passes. If Bill 9 passes, there will be lawsuits that will be costly and disruptive for the County given the number of investment-backed decisions made in reliance on decades of vested property rights. Even if the County prevails, how many owners will actually conduct long-term rental? When monthly carrying costs grossly exceed what local residents consider to be reasonable monthly rent, how can these condos become sustainable long-term rentals? Who would want to own a condo that operates at a monthly loss with no ability to use the property? With property values rapidly declining, why are local residents not rushing to purchase any one of the numerous units on the market? Is it because local residents are not excited about the $1,000-$2,000 per month association dues and the risk of future special assessments? Passage of Bill 9 may prevent short-term rental, but it won't create long-term rentals. Passage of Bill 9 will create vacation properties. Those that cannot afford to hold these properties as vacation properties will sell and the buyers will be wealthier individuals who can.
Why are we still talking about this? The answer is that Bill 9 is part of a global anticompetitive strategy by BigHotel to eliminate the privately-owned STR industry. BigHotel consists of hotel brands such as Marriott, Hyatt, and Hilton which are really just management companies for the hotel properties which are owned by real estate investment trusts operated by hedge funds such as Blackstone. BigHotel is behind every instance of short-term rental regulation globally. In jurisdictions where these regulations have passed such as New York, the hotel rates skyrocketed, yet the legislation did not lower long-term rental rates or create housing. Companies like Marriott, Hilton, and Hyatt pay executives 8 figure total compensation and then systematically mistreat the front-line workers until there is a mass strike. BigHotel tells its investors that unionization of employees will jeopardize its profits and disrupt operations. BigHotel does not pay livable wages. BigHotel avoided obligations to build affordable housing for workers and now seeks re-direct the focus on STR properties that have been operating as vacation rentals for nearly 50 years. BigHotel are the largest water consumers on the island. Ironic when Lahaina Strong pretends to care about water use but then blindly props up the biggest and most wasteful water consumers on the island.
By eliminating over 7,000 short-term rentals, Maui County would be complicit in BigHotel’s global anticompetitive conspiracy to eliminate competitors in hospitality market and in the labor market. Less competition is never beneficial to consumers or workers. BigHotel would love to have workers with fewer options which drives wages down and increases BigHotel leverage in future collective bargaining negotiations.
Anyone who doubts this theory, just ask yourself why did the Hawaii Hotel Alliance and the American Hotel and Lodging Association have paid lobbyists pushing for passage of SB2919, which had nothing to do with hotels? This was an obvious attack on a competitor sector of the hospitality industry to eliminate competition. Any claim by disingenuous hotel executives that they care about affordable housing rings hollow.
If any Maui County residents believe that Bill 9 is about housing, they are all being played by a massive machine that only cares about profit and used naïve Lahaina Strong organizers to do what BigHotel could never do in its own name; rally the community. BigHotel has Lahaina Strong out shouting about off-island owners while 100% of the BigHotel operations and hedge funds that own the hotels are off-island.
The massive BigHotel operations procure supplies and labor from outside Hawaii through global supply chains whereas independently-owned short-term rentals procure supplies locally and work with local small businesses. A much higher percentage of money generated from independently-owned short-term rentals stays on Maui vs. the BigHotel extractors. Short-term rentals also pay higher property taxes than hotels and object to tax assessments far less than hotels. Some properties on the Minatoya list have on-site, benefited positions to support resort operations.
Marriott plainly tells its investors in SEC filings that competition from privately-owned vacation rentals is the biggest risk factor for profitability. BigHotel is violating federal antitrust law by colluding through the Hawaii Hotel Alliance to eliminate a competitor segment of the hospitality sector and divide the market among large hotel operators. This behavior is illegal and subject to enforcement by the Federal Trade Commission. Maui County must not play into BigHotel’s game to eliminate competition and take control of the Maui hospitality market which will harm consumers and workers.
I am born and raised, Oahu, something like 15 generations of family have lived on all the islands over time. I don't like tourism and don't like most tourists. some are ok. people who are from the south are probably da worst but its the accent that tellms me where they from. I had a long talk with my uncle about this erasing of these condo rights and I just don't see how taking these str from these families makes my ohana have a place to live. I don't want to live besdie mr. texas and his crazy kids. Council can make money from the condos for str and help keep jobs on the ialnd, keep epeople here, and stop this place being to crazy. Went to vagas last month and eeyone is either trump or not trump and Maui is becmoning str or not str. Im older than these condos and remember a tiome not long ago when they were just a bunch of buildings for tourist adn we made the county run on that money. Now these crazy kids fomr lahaina want to just keep everyone figthting so lets go back to a happeir time and keep these str and tell these kids to get a job maybe working in one to have some money to pay rent instead of thiking this is Russia from way back and the state put bread in your basket.
Aloha Chair, Vice Chair, and Committee Members,
As a Canadian owner to a 2 bedroom unit at Maui Vista since 2012, I find it my duty to bring these points to your attention for consideration:
1. As we are all aware, Maui economy relies heavily on tourism. Canadian tourists account for a fairly large percentage especially during the cold winter months. Average middle class Canadians can mostly afford a stay at a short term rental (STR) condo. A $500+ USD per night at those fancy hotels in South or West Maui is out of reach to most Canadians. With the proposed STR ban, you are essentially discouraging average Canadians to visit Maui. This will also have a major detrimental effect on secondary industries that rely on tourism.
2. I believe with this bill the same effect we experienced during COVID restrictions will be felt all across Maui. As per the results of the study conducted at the beginning of the year, small businesses, tax revenue, etc ... will be severely negatively impacted.
3. Instead of going after STR owners, policies should be put in place to build more affordable housing for the displaced residents from Lahaina. These policies should be turned into concrete projects that will address the housing affordability problem right on. Abolishing STR is not the solution; instead it will compound the vicious cycle that may lead to more residents leaving the island. That is the sad reality when the unemployment rate is high due to sluggish tourism.
4. Maui Vista was designed and built to accommodate tourists, not local inhabitants. The whole complex (consisting of 3 buildings) was advertised as a resort, not as family oriented residences for local people. Changing course after its construction albeit that it has been over 45+ years, is unfair and most likely not legal. I urge the Minatoya list to be shortened to exclude complexes like Maui Vista, and not to impose a blanket ban of short term rentals to the 7000+ units originally identified.
5. Owners like us promote and support small businesses (cleaners, handymen, restaurants etc...) on Maui. The income generated is re-invested into the local economy through upkeep/renovation of the rental property. We do have repeated guests who visit Maui yearly, and don’t see themselves staying at these fancy hotels.
Big hotel lobbyists that are in favour of this legislation, are huge corporations that basically target the upscale tourists, and their huge profits are not necessarily re-invested into the Maui local economy.
In summary, Canadians will rather visit other countries (Mexico, South American Destinations etc...) than Maui if this blanket STR ban is in place. Promoting all the attractions that Maui has to offer amongst our fellow Canadians, is becoming harder because all the uncertainties that this legislation is creating.
I do encourage we collaboratively work on a solution that will protect the local economy and simultaneously provide enough affordable housing for the locals on Maui. Point #3 & #4 above are my ‘2 cents’ for a proposed solution.
The shifting of STR’s in hotel districts to long term housing does nothing significant towards providing financially accessible housing for residents and takes work away from housekeepers and other condo support workers.
We're going to hear a lot from those who support this bill that housing for locals should be given primacy over profits for mainland investors. I have DOZENS of emails from Lahaina Strong, Our Hawaii, and direct emails from Mark Ing, Paele Kiakona, Jordan Ruidas and Evan Weber. After the first two lines of pleasantries, a donation button dominates the page. We all know how these guys have monetized and capitalized off the fire, and it is in their financial interest to continue to sew division for their own profit. We hear from the governor that we need to "house our people", as he takes photo op after photo op with prolific hotel lobbyists. We hear how Hawaii is leaning more into the hate part of the love/hate relationship with tourism, but millions are being spent to lure them back.
The disaster capitalists at Lahaina Strong want us locals to believe that we'll be better off because we've stuck it to those "extractive wealthy mainland investors, speculators, and colonizers", and they want us to believe that by stealing from them what they (worked hard for and) legally purchased, we'll inherit their treasures. Never mind the fact that none of us ever bought these units because they were costly to maintain and shared literal property lines with hotels and hotel zoned condos. No thanks.
We'll hear that these condos need to be "returned to their original intended use", except, over the last 12 months, no has come up with any evidence of this being the case! In her 12 month long audition for some of that Lahaina Strong lobbyist cash, on June 3, 2025, Stacey Alapai was soliciting her 19 followers on Instagram to provide her with anecdotes of having "lived in or near" a Minatoya STR. Arguing that someone may have lived in or near one isn't the same as an evidence-based, data-rich analysis of which complexes housed how many locals and for how long. To date, none of that has ever been produced, but tens of billions of dollars in real estate, RPTs, tourist revenue, etc, all hinge on this unsubstantiated claim.
I don't know how much of this will ever be read, but the facts are:
1. These condos have been short term rentals for decades
2. There has been a well-documented housing shortage in the state before some of these condos were even built
3. Just like the ascent of women in society didn't come at expense of men, the development and use of these condos as STRs didn't take a living space from a local resident - they were as free to buy one as anyone else, for DECADES
4. 7 years will have passed since this threat was announced, which should provide the county with AMPLE time to fast track development, while using STR revenue streams to help finance these projects. Also, hard to argue that you're addressing an acute housing crisis, then slow walking for nearly a decade toward the cure.
5. We've seen with other populists and wanna-be strongmen, like Trump, that saying that Mexico will pay for the wall, or saying that tariffs are paid by the "other" country, or saying that he'll "end the Ukraine war on day 1" are just words. Mayor Bissen, like Trump, thinks that by saying he'll "convert" thousands of STRs into LTR that thousands will become STRs. UHERO stated that that number would actually be 8% of these units, or 568 of the 7100.
I have a ton of respect for this council, and I know you have the ability to see how flawed this plan is, and my hope is that those who support the bill see that there are ways to achieve your ends without the Muskian chainsaw approach.
Aloha,
We are against the short-term rental ban we believe it is problematic on many levels:
1. Major loss of property tax revenue. We own a condo in Kahana that we short-term rent as well as enjoy ourselves. The full-time resident owners in our complex WANT our short-term rentals as we greatly subsidize their property taxes. We pay more than 10 times what they pay. If short-term rentals go away, full-time residents' property taxes will have to greatly increase to address the shortfall.
2. Loss of an attractive alternative lodging for visitors. Tourism is the main Maui economy and it's a good business model. Visitors come, spend money and then leave. Short-term rentals afford visitors a different experience than a hotel visit (full kitchens and living rooms, more "laid-back, local" experience.) It's not better or worse than hotels; it's just an alternative (usually less expensive) option that shouldn't be discarded.
3. Related to #2 above, if short-term rentals go away, there will be a corresponding loss of jobs for locals. Locals own and manage Maui Condo & Home, our agency. This firm, in turn, hires cleaning crews, maintenance people and more. In addition, loss of this lodging would result in less visitors and this would affect restaurants, tour operators (boat trips, aquarium visits, shopping, zip lining...you name it.)
4. My wife & I visit Maui three times a year and frequently bring family and guests with us who rent out short-term rentals. We literally spend thousands of dollars each visit, all of which goes to locals. We maintain our unit and purchase locally. We dine out each evening and tip well. We rent cars. We buy groceries. We shop and, in doing so, purchase (expensive) jewelry, local art, clothing and more. We take executions and visit attractions. We annually support the Maui Humane Society, a few other local charities and the Catholic church.
Mahalo for your consideration of the above points.
Bob & Mary Alessandrelli
RLA921@hotmail.com
6/3/25
Aloha Chair, Vice Chair, and Committee Members,
My name is Steve Weber and my wife, and I own a short-term rental in Ma’alaea.
In 2016 we came to Maui on our honeymoon and fell in love with the island. We decided to buy a condo in Ma’alaea to provide income for retirement with the eventual goal of having this be a second summer home. We are not a wealthy corporation, just middle-class individuals that own a short-term rental.
We understand the need for more affordable housing for residents and support you in your efforts. However, we feel you should consider being more selective in which units make sense for Maui families. Our unit is 555 sq. ft., has one parking space and very little storage. There are no pets allowed in our building. Not suitable for most residents and it was designed and remodeled for short term rentals. Additionally, due to the age of the building and proximity to the ocean we recently faced a $10,000 assessment. Not something most families can afford, nor could we if we did not have the income from the short-term rental. We will be facing a similar assessment in the near future for work on the plumbing system. Additionally, there is the HOA fee to pay each month which is significant.
Should the ban on short term rentals be enforced, we do not feel that what we would have to charge for long term renters just to break even every month would be viable for Maui residents, and we would be forced to sell our property. Most likely the buyer would be someone that could afford to have a second home sit vacant for most of the year.
That brings us to our second point. Aside from the $14,000 our unit generates in transient tax each year, we recommend local restaurants and tours to our guests before they arrive. Our guest comment book is filled with suggestions by past guests of restaurants, shops and tours to visit which certainly helps those local businesses with what is essentially free advertising. We also employ a house cleaner that has 2 employees of her own, a handyman, an onsite property manager and a contractor.
We understand the need for more local housing but would hope the council will consider a more measured approach as to which units are viable as long-term rental properties. We would suggest first looking at those properties that are not legal short-term rentals which apparently there are quite a few.
One last thought for consideration. After the terrible Lahaina fire we know of two units in our building that were put up for rent under the program with FEMA. Those units sat vacant as our understanding was that Lahaina residents that had been displaced did not want to live in Ma’alaea, nor did apparently anyone else looking for a long-term rental.
This legislation feels hurried and unbalanced. Please work with owners like us to find a reasonable and even-handed solution, a solution that supports the local economy, helps local businesses while holding owners of short-term rentals accountable to maintain units that promote tourism and benefit the economy.
Mahalo for taking the time to consider our thoughts
Steve and Gail Weber
Aloha Chair, Vice Chair, and Honorable Committee Members,
Mahalo for your time and thoughtful consideration in hearing the voices of our community.
My name is Kelly Moore. I’ve lived on Maui for 35 years, my son was born and raised here. I am a full-time resident, and I manage several vacation rentals on the island. Like many others, I am already feeling the impacts of the decline in tourism. I’m here to respectfully share what the proposed phase-out of short-term rentals could mean for families like mine and for the many local workers who rely on this industry.
My small business depends entirely on visitors staying in legally operating short-term rentals. I currently employ 15 local workers—cleaners, handymen, and service providers—who rely on this income to support their families. These aren’t just contractors; they are my friends, my neighbors, and part of our tight-knit island community. If these jobs disappear, it will be devastating for all of us.
The proposed phase-out feels like it unfairly targets hardworking local families who are simply trying to survive in one of the most expensive places to live in the world. The Minatoya properties I manage are not suited to long-term affordable rentals. Due to high HOA fees, most owners cannot feasibly rent to local families at rates considered affordable. The likely outcome is that these units will sit vacant—used occasionally by owners, friends and family—rather than contributing to the long-term housing stock or the local economy.
We all agree that affordable housing is an urgent and critical issue. We need real, sustainable solutions that support our community. But removing a major source of income for local families—without a clear transition plan or viable alternatives—is not the answer. It puts us at risk and deepens the economic strain for many who are already on the edge.
I respectfully ask that you consider the human impact of these decisions. We are not corporations. We are residents, business owners, parents, and neighbors doing our best to make ends meet while contributing to the local economy. Please don’t take that away from us without a thoughtful and inclusive path forward.
Mahalo for listening and for your service to our island.
This e-comment system does not allow me to create an account (it never sends a verification email), as such I emailed my testimony to the Committee email, however, received a response that you don't want my testimony via email and only on e-comment. As such, the statement is copied here as a guest user, but without my contact information which you can obtain in my email:
Aloha Chair, Vice Chair, and Committee Members,
My name is Barbara Shoji. My late husband and I purchased our condominium unit in the Hale Kamaole complex in Kihei in 1983, which I now own as a widow. It has operated as a short-term rental ever since we purchased it. I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed legislation aiming to phase out over 7,000 short-term rental units in Maui County.
Short-term rentals play a vital role in supporting the local economy. Visitors who stay in these rentals frequent local businesses, such as Fred’s Mexican Cafe or one of my personal favorites Izakaya Genbe, infusing much-needed revenue into our community. Eliminating short-term rentals would significantly reduce tourism spending, harming the livelihoods of countless small business owners and their employees.
Short-term rentals offer a unique lodging option that many families and groups prefer. The spaciousness and home-like amenities of our condo at Hale Kamaole have attracted guests from around the world, including families with young children and multi-generational groups. These visitors specifically choose short-term rentals because they provide a comfortable and convenient alternative to traditional hotel accommodations. Our three children grew up spending their summers on Maui, exploring the island's natural beauty, learning to surf, and embracing the local culture. Now, they are adults with families of their own, and they continue the tradition of bringing their children to Maui to experience the same magic that captivated them as youngsters.
As a short-term rental owner, I provide employment opportunities for local residents. Our property management company employs individuals for cleaning, maintenance, and hospitality. These jobs contribute to the well-being of our community by providing stable income for local families. Phasing out short-term rentals would lead to job losses and economic hardship for those who rely on this industry.
Maintaining our property in Hale Kamaole requires substantial financial investment. We pay significant association dues and special assessment costs, which are essential for upholding the quality and safety of our complex. For example, this year the complex is undergoing a plumbing project which assessed units of our size $75,000+ in costs. These expenses contribute to the overall appeal of our neighborhood and the island as a whole, and are needed, in addition to providing work to locals (i.e., construction companies). The income generated from short-term renting is essential for owners like myself to cover these substantial costs. Without it, affording such crucial maintenance would be incredibly difficult, potentially leading to property neglect and a decline in community standards.
Instead of a sweeping ban on short-term rentals, I urge the council to consider a more balanced approach, such as implementing stricter regulations, enforcement, and a clear permitting process specifically for condominium buildings like Hale Kamaole. This could include regular inspections and avenues for community input to ensure responsible operation, which we, as owners, would welcome.
The proposed legislation to phase out short-term rentals would have far-reaching negative consequences for our local economy, employment opportunities, and the overall well-being of our community. I respectfully request that the council reconsider this proposal and explore alternative solutions that strike a balance between the needs of residents and the interests of those who rely on short-term rentals.
Mahalo for your time and consideration.
I oppose Bill 9 because there is no evidence that the stated goal of this bill will produce the desired effect.
Many who support the phase-out claim that making these 7100 units available for long-term rent will "produce the equivalent of a decade worth of development." Well, the fire happened in 2023. It's now 2025. The phase out is slated for 2030. That's 7years. How about the government, as well as the supporters of this bill, be honest with the people of Maui. The intent is not to remedy this decades old "crisis" of housing, and this recent "emergency. Nothing screams emergency and crisis mitigation like a 7 year timeline.
We respectfully submit this testimony in strong opposition to Mayor Bissen’s proposal to revoke the right to operate legally established short-term rentals in Minatoya-listed properties, including our unit at the Maui Vista complex located at 2191 S. Kihei Rd., Unit 3108.
As property owners and stewards of our unit in South Kihei, we are deeply concerned about the far-reaching consequences of this proposal—not only for us as individuals, but for the people and businesses who rely on our operations to support their livelihoods. We are grateful for the opportunity to voice our perspective, and we thank you for your time and service to the community.
Our condo employs a local cleaning company, a handyman who handles routine repairs, and an on-island contact for guest services. We regularly purchase supplies and appliances from local hardware and home goods stores. Each stay brings direct spending to Maui’s restaurants, shops, and attractions. These relationships are more than transactions—they are part of our commitment to the Maui community.
We are fully aware of the challenges facing Maui, and we share the desire to see more affordable housing options become available. However, our experience with the loss of lawful short-term rentals in the Minatoya-listed properties paints a different picture than the one this bill seems to assume. A ban would not convert our unit into a viable long-term rental. Instead, it would likely force us to sell—and the most probable buyer would not place the unit into the long-term rental market either. In the end, this could mean fewer housing options available, not more.
The economic consequences are significant as well. If this bill passes, it will harm not just individual owners like us, but also the many small, local businesses that benefit from responsible short-term rental operations. From the cleaner who depends on multiple vacation rentals to run her business, to the local electrician we call when something needs fixing—this decision would ripple through Maui’s economy. Our cleaner has already told us that if this goes through, she may be forced to close her business.
We urge the Commission to carefully weigh these real-world impacts against the intended goals of the proposal. We all want Maui to thrive, but eliminating established, legally operating TVRs is not the path forward. There must be alternative, balanced solutions that protect the interests of all stakeholders—local families, small businesses, and responsible property owners alike.
Thank you for considering our personal experience and for your thoughtful leadership on this complex issue. We respectfully ask you to oppose this bill and preserve the rights of owners in Minatoya-listed properties.
Warm regards,
Richard and Rachel Vigil
2191 S. Kihei Rd., Unit 3108
Kihei, HI 96753
The thing that strikes me is that I have not hear any mention of banning TVR in apt. district ON SALE AND TRANSFER OF THE UNIT.
Currently permitted TVR's (that got a permit specifically for their house) generally can't be TVR rented by new owners for years.
If they ban the use for existing owners it is a double whammy: you can't offset expenses with TVR money PLUS you will experience a big hit when you sell: and you will have to sell unless you are rich..
Prices will drop significantly.
I could see recently bought units with big mortgages having loan defaults cause they are now under water.
They will abandon the property and the whole Maui condo market will take a big hit as in a depression.
So Maui Conty looses 3 ways:
Upsidedown market.
Reduced tvr tax income.
And less property tax income.
Aloha Chair, Vice Chair, and Committee Members,
Me and my wife reside about 50% of the time in Maui and we short-term and long term rent our property in Maui County when we are not on island. I am writing today to express my strong opposition to the proposed legislation to phase out more than 7,000 vacation rentals of which is our home which would never be a workers home due to the lack of parking and the $1100 month HOA fees.
We spend money and hire local people to service and maintain our home. I employ local service providers — cleaners, maintenance techs, and landscapers — many of whom have become friends over the years.
Some of my guests have even said they wouldn’t have come at all if they didn’t have a vacation rental option. That matters — not just to me, but to all the small businesses they supported during their stay.
Owning in this complex has not been easy. We’ve faced huge maintenance costs, special assessments, and massive increases in insurance after the fires. These aren’t luxuries — they’re costs that ensure the property remains safe, functional, and appealing. STR income helps cover those costs while supporting local workers.
This legislation is improper because it ultimately hurts those who it is supposed to help by reducing the tourist element on the island which ultimately reduces jobs. I urge the Council to work with owners like me to find a fair and balanced path forward — one that protects local jobs, supports the economy, and holds STR owners to high standards, instead of phasing us out completely.
Mahalo for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Kevin & Shawn Martin
500 Kapalua Drive Unit 21P7 & P8
This is regarding the more than 13,000 units (per Maui County) on the Minitoya list.
When they are mapped, the Minitoya units are overwhelmingly on the ocean or between the closest major street and the water. Most of these were designed and built as vacation rental communities from the start.
See:
https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?mid=14_Bu5cR9sMMlZI12caXq59lRehzQgJQ&usp=sharing
Regarding SMA areas and EHL areas ( sea-level rise exposure areas and erosion hazard line mapped zones), there was in fact a Planning Sustainable Land Use Committee proposal that proposed that those properties in the shoreline EHL areas would be able to continue that use as vacation rentals. But those outside and EHL area would be banned from TVR use. The proposal hoped to get approx 3000 units out of TVR's and into 6+ month leases.
This does make sense to a certain degree. Costal properties are high maintenance and often have very limited parking.
PLUS many if not most Maui residents would say that resort communities are where tourists "should be".
When mapped the Minitoya units are mapped against the EHL, Kihei would "donate" some offshore resorts to local housing and there are a few on the West side and in other parts of the island.
Finally , we need to tackle the myth that the majority of TVR owners are in it for money and profit. Owners who rent TVR's largely do so to offset expenses like property taxes. if they can't then they will sell to others who will own the rental and keep it vacant.
This says that not only will Hawaii loose vacation rental taxes but property taxes as well.
Aloha Chair - Vice Chair - Committee Members,
Our names are Lynn Stotka, Bob Stotka, and Robin Longchamps (daughter), and our family owns a condo in Maalaea that we rent out to families and friends throughout the years as well as vacation renters.
We are contacting you to let you know our frantic and deep concern and extremely strong opposition to the proposed legislation on phasing out a d taking away many vacation rentals which will hugely negatively affect us and our local employees we hire.
We have owned our condo for 30+ years and have been responsible owners, loving our place and surrounding land and surrounding businesses. We have been community orientated owners for three decades and dedicated ones I might add.
In my flyer, I send to all of my friends, family and vacation renters that come year to year as regular vacationers due to comfortability and Maui beauty. We always recommend restaurants, marina, stores, food trucks, just everything local to boost the economy and be a good neighbor. Four Winds, Trilogy, local fishing excursions, Coconuts, Havens, Tante’s, Aquarium and it’s adjacent restaurant, Snorkel Bob’s, Longs, Foodland, Monkeypod, Lahaina, restaurants near the airport, etc., etc. etc.
Since we are not at the condo consistently, we employ many local businesses and employees throughout the year, such as lock companies, door/screen companies, maintenance, technicians, plumbers, contractors, carpet cleaners, all things needed since our condo is used by vacation renters. This supports your local companies. With less people using our condo because you have restricted vacationers to be able to come and rent it; these local people most likely will go out of business and your economy will even get worse. These employees and companies that have worked for us over the years here are like family and we’ve gotten to know them as well as can always count on them when vacationers are here to be there for us.
My housecleaner expresses the sadness of her business and the lack of work, and all of her fellow housecleaner businesses she knows are all struggling to keep their families fed due to the devastation of the fire and people not coming as vacation renters for awhile. Having short-term rentals taken away from them will devastate them further. She has said vacation renters are her livelihood and you’re wanting to take that away? They are struggling without work and vacation. Renters provide the work they need.
From my friends and renters they almost always comment that it is indeed a slice of heaven and truly a paradise and how grateful and how kind and how helpful all of the people were there. Their personal experience they have there is because of your Maui businesses and your Maui people as they are so kind and helpful.
Many renters have said to us that they are thankful to be able to use a condo as they wouldn’t be able to come at all if they didn’t have a vacation rental option. They like the long stay discounts that hotels don’t offer. A lot of them are families because they are more comfortable in a condo. They dont like crowded touristy hotels. As well as able to use it as a home for cooking and keeping things such as food and snacks for their children and family. And to have quiet, restful peaceful home-like experiences and luxuries of their home but in paradise.
That matters to us and all the small businesses we come to adore and love and whom our vacation renters support during their stay — helping our … and your … long-term local Maui employment businesses, our l employee/friends and of course helping out Maui in general.
We have had many and expensive maintenance costs such as having to replace the combo door lock every year due to saltwater corrosion, painting, upkeep, erosion, replacements, our homeowners dues went up more than half, paying for special assessments, and many many increases after the fires for insurance, as well as other increases due to the fire. We are more than happy to pay to help out with the fire and the displaced. But helping out would have to go away if we’re not allowed to have vacation renters there anymore. In fact, we let people who were working to help out with the devastation and the fire to stay in our condo for free for a couple of months. As well as other people who needed a place to stay to get back on their feet. We donated as well. But it is a quite a monetary hardship that we were not expecting as no one was expecting.
There are costs for our condo to stay safe, usable and in working condition. And of course pleasantly and joyfully presented to our friends, family, and vacationers. Having vacation renters helps tremendously to pay for these overwhelming costs that were not expected. Prior to that and during — vacationer rent income has helped Lynn and Bob with major medical bills that they would not have been able to afford to be taken care of without this extra income coming in. This extra income was crucial for their lives and medical. And this also helps to pay for all the extra and good maintenance and care for the condo in which we use Maui‘s people — local workers that live in Maui to fix and care for our condo to keep it up-to-date and safe and lovingly continuing to be a home.
What’s going on with this legislation feels pushy, expedited and a unilateral push where we don’t have a voice. That does not feel good.
We plead and urge and request the Council to work with owners like us to find a fair way forward hearing us and our local workers who've become family to us. Don’t take this away from them. Their livelihood. Their income to cloth and feed their families.We need a balanced path forward. Which protects local personnel their jobs and supports the economy so we can get Maui back to its glory after the devastating fire as well as keeping upkeep all over Maui. I’ve seen the roads and they are in heavy repair with potholes and erosion all around, and there are broken down vehicles all over that need cleaning up.
We want to support Maui’s economy and we want our vacation renters to come year after year to continue to help us help Maui and it’s economy. Don’t let it go backwards. This would be devastating. We ask to hold you to high standards. Please do not phase us out completely.
Mahalo and appreciation for reading our concerns and taking time to consider.
Best regards,
Lynn Stotka, Bob Stotka, and Robin Longchamps
Owners of a condo at Maalaea Kai
Aloha Chair, Vice Chair, and Committee Members,
Our names are John and Liza Hanes, and we own a short-term rental property in Kihei. We are writing today to share our concern and strong opposition to the proposed legislation to phase out more than 7,000 vacation rentals.
When we travel, we prefer Short Term Rentals, on Air BnB or VRBO for our stays. We like to cook for ourselves, share the living space with family and friends, and not have a “hotel” experience.
We love Maui, so we want to share our love of the island with our guests who also don’t want a hotel stay.
We support the local community and give recommendations for restaurants, grocery stores, food trucks, and entertainment events.
We have always paid our TAT, GET taxes on time, followed all of the laws, registered our business, but owning a Condo here is expensive.
We do all the we can to provide a safe, cost effective, and enjoyable space for our guests. We are regularly upgrading, repairing, and maintaining our condo so that our guests have a great vacation. All of these costs to us go back to the community; Ace Hardware, Benjamin Moore Paints, The Home Depot, Lowes are all regular visits for us. Our furniture is locally bought as well.
We also hire local plumbers, air conditioning services, and local cleaning services in order to maintain the highest standards possible for our guests.
Our guests appreciate all of our hard work and diligence and we have receive nothing less than 5 Star reviews. Our guests appreciate and enjoy the vacation rental option and all of the amenities and recommendations that have for them, and our guests return to visit again.
This legislation may help the big hotels, who may use their scale to push workers to settle for less. The hotels will not use local hardware stores, furniture stores, their guests will not shop at local groceries, and will not rent sports equipment from local retailers when the hotels corner that market as well.
Maui has a well developed tourist market that relies on short term rentals for tax income, to support local businesses, and to draw tourists to the island. STR’s provide a large amount of TAT and GET taxes and we are happy to pay these to help the island economy.
Please look at the scale of the economic impacts of this decision and weigh it against the reality of trying to provide housing for locals. An 800 square foot condo with a $1200 HOA fee is not the solution for long term housing, but it is a solution to drawing tourist dollars and tax income to the island.
We urge you to hold STR owners to high standards but to protect the jobs and economy that we contribute to by finding a balanced path and not phasing out STR. Sincerely,
John & Liza Hanes
john@cantikplace.com
Members of the Maui Planning Commission:
Firstly, I wish to thank you for your service to the island of Maui to serve on this committee in what is most certainly a trying time for the community.
Our family has been an owner of a Golf Villa within the Kapalua resort since 1991 and we wish to formally object to the proposed STVR ban on the island of Maui and we ask the Planning Commission to reject this proposal as well. We have currently enrolled our unit into the long term rental program thru FEMA and are housing a local family displaced by the fire; but are scared to potentially have our options striped away from us once this lease is completed or the FEMA program is no longer viable. We were very happy to participate in this program and help out the island in any way that we could.
Echoing many of the same comments from our respective Kapalua Association Board Members, this ban would be economically devastating to the island. We’ve enjoyed getting to know many of the property managers, maintenance and cleaning staff that have helped us run our island home from afar. Firstly, with the staff directly employed by Maui Land and Pineapple with the Kapalua Villas and now with Outrigger; all those jobs would be immediately lost. Many of the units who do rent short term, at least in Kapalua and other resort communities, simply do it to help offset significant costs to maintain a home on the island. These are not profit centers…..
The life blood of the island is tourism…and with tourism still down significantly since the tragic fire; how much lower would it get by completely taking away an option for tourists? The hotels would most certainly raise their rates and drive up costs for families to visit - leading directly lower occupancy rates.
In order to keep my comments as brief as possible – I also wish to simply state that it is admirable to try and find ways to help with the housing affordability and availability. Perhaps there are zones within the rebuilding area that are to be rental fee. This is where the importance of zoning and land use will be critical as Lahaina begins to get rebuilt; but anytime you do an outright ban you simply create more problems. Perhaps with greater economic impact than being more selective..….
Again, we ask that you reject with outright ban on STVR. The continuing dialogue on how to appropriately rebuild with all island stakeholders is important though and we look forward to being a small part of that dialogue going forward.
Thank you for your time.
Ryan Boman
On behalf of the Boman Family and our Golf Villa Unit.
Aloha Chair, Vice Chair, and Committee Members,
I am writing to let you know that I am convinced that significantly reducing short term rentals will not solve the long-term housing problem on Maui, and respectfully ask the Committee to recommend denial for this proposal.
I moved to Kihei in 1987 to start Kihei Lutheran Church as its first pastor. Over the eight years I lived in Kihei I developed many friendships and a close tie to the island of Maui. Eventually I had to move to Texas due to family concerns, but my son still lives and has worked in Kihei for the past 19 years.
In 2014 my wife and I purchased a condo at Maui Vista; primarily for us to have a place to stay on our frequent return trips to the island. We could not afford the high price of Maui hotels. We are blessed to be able to spend time with our son, our longtime friends, our church ohana, and the aina we love. The fact that we have been able to rent the condo as a short-term vacation rental has provided us the opportunity to own property in Kihei.
Our condo monthly expenses, including mortgage, taxes, monthly and special assessment fees, utilities, insurance, maintenance, etc., total more than $7,000 per month. The only way we can afford those costs is by using it as a short-term vacation rental. We are not making money; we are just breaking even. Should it be converted to long-term rental only, I don’t think $7,000 per month (to break even) for an 822 square foot, 1-1/2 bedroom apartment can be considered affordable housing. If we sold it, the cost to the new owner would be higher due to the increase in interest rates.
Our ownership and use of the condo as a short-term rental has not only benefited us, but it has also financially benefited the County of Maui and the State of Hawaii. Last year we paid $10,020 state Transient Accommodation Tax, $2,935 County Transient Accommodation Tax, $3,600 State General Excise Tax, and $15,636 County Property Tax, for a total of $32,191.
Maui Vista was built for vacation rentals in 1980. The units are small with small kitchens and baths and parking limited to one car. Maintenance fees are high. There is no storage nor playground for families. These condos were never intended for full-time family living. FEMA funded families who moved into Maui Vista after the fire did not stay long, often only a few weeks, because it did not work well for families. Also, many condos in Maui Vista made available by FEMA funding were not chosen by locals, again because the condos are not well suited for families.
The need for affordable housing on Maui was crirical when I moved there in 1987, and remains so today. It was exasperated by the loss of housing in West Maui following the tragic fires. Maui needs affordable long-term housing, but eliminating short-term vacation rentals is not a way to do that. Please vote in opposition to revoking rights to operate short-term rentals in Minatoya listed properties. Instead, build new affordable housing.
Mahalo nui loa for your consideration,
The Reverend Captain George D. Bement, M.Div., LCSW
2191 South Kihei Rd. #2409
Kihei, HI 96753
kahukeoke@yahoo.com
To the Honorable Members of the Maui County Council:
My name is Meara Boling, and I am an owner of a studio condominium in one of Maui’s apartment-zoned buildings currently exempted for short-term rental (STR) use under what is commonly known as the “Minatoya List.” I am writing to express my strong opposition to Bill 9.
Personal Investment Framework
My husband and I are not large real estate investors or moguls. We own one unit. This property is a significant part of our personal investment portfolio and future retirement plans. When we purchased this studio, we did so after thoroughly reviewing the legal framework, County policy, and building governance in place—where STR use was clearly authorized and had been for decades. Like many middle-class individuals, we made this investment carefully and with full reliance on the law at the time.
Economic Impact and Local Jobs
Our unit supports numerous local jobs and businesses. We employ a Maui-based property manager, cleaners, and maintenance workers. Additionally, our guests support restaurants, shops, tour operators, and countless small businesses on the island.
A 2025 study by the University of Hawaii Economic Research Organization (UHERO) estimates that eliminating STRs would result in the loss of nearly 1,900 local jobs and a $900 million annual decline in visitor spending. It would also reduce property tax revenues by an estimated $60 million per year—funds that are critical to supporting Maui County’s public services.
Beyond that, falling property values—driven by forced STR phase-outs and spiraling condo prices—will erode household wealth across the board. For many individual owners, especially retirees who rely on STR income and property value as part of their retirement planning, this could create serious financial hardship and may even force some to return to work simply to meet basic living expenses.
https://www.civilbeat.org/2025/03/study-maui-cautious-phasing-out-vacation-rentals/
Unfair Policy Shift and Financial Hardship
Our STR income is essential to covering the mortgage, HOA dues, and other costs of ownership. In the last five years, our HOA fees for a 500-square-foot studio have roughly doubled—from approximately $500 per month to over $1,000 per month. On top of this, the property has flooded twice in the past four years, which has driven up both maintenance costs and insurance premiums.
It is simply not realistic to expect that this unit could be converted into long-term affordable or workforce housing. The economics do not support it.
Suitability of the Units
Our building’s bylaws restrict occupancy to no more than two permanent residents per unit. Combined with the small size of the unit and its flood-prone nature, this inventory is ill-suited for permanent housing.
Timing Does Not Address Lahaina Housing Crisis
Phasing out STRs by 2030 does nothing to address the immediate housing needs of those displaced by the Lahaina fire. It is disingenuous to suggest that this bill provides a solution for the current crisis.
Conclusion
I urge the Council to reject Bill 9. This bill will cause significant economic harm, undermine legal property rights, and fail to deliver meaningful relief to those most in need. There are better, more targeted ways to address Maui’s housing challenges—solutions that honor existing commitments, protect local jobs, and strengthen, rather than destabilize, the community.
Thank you for your time and thoughtful consideration.
Sincerely,
Meara B.
I said this just about a year ago when I spoke via zoom. I stated that if you pass this, you’ll be wiping out a whole other population. We can see a year later how accurate my statement is. Please consider the majority of the population that you will be affecting. Do not pass this bill if you care about local families.
Bill 9 will not create housing for local residents. Bill 9 does not “convert” any units from short-term rental to long-term rental. The repeated use of the word "conversion" is misinformation that creates the false impression that Maui County is going to be playing Oprah by handing out condos if the bill passes. If Bill 9 passes, there will be lawsuits that will be costly and disruptive for the County given the number of investment-backed decisions made in reliance on decades of vested property rights. Even if the County prevails, how many owners will actually conduct long-term rental? When monthly carrying costs grossly exceed what local residents consider to be reasonable monthly rent, how can these condos become sustainable long-term rentals? Who would want to own a condo that operates at a monthly loss with no ability to use the property? With property values rapidly declining, why are local residents not rushing to purchase any one of the numerous units on the market? Is it because local residents are not excited about the $1,000-$2,000 per month association dues and the risk of future special assessments? Passage of Bill 9 may prevent short-term rental, but it won't create long-term rentals. Passage of Bill 9 will create vacation properties. Those that cannot afford to hold these properties as vacation properties will sell and the buyers will be wealthier individuals who can.
Why are we still talking about this? The answer is that Bill 9 is part of a global anticompetitive strategy by BigHotel to eliminate the privately-owned STR industry. BigHotel consists of hotel brands such as Marriott, Hyatt, and Hilton which are really just management companies for the hotel properties which are owned by real estate investment trusts operated by hedge funds such as Blackstone. BigHotel is behind every instance of short-term rental regulation globally. In jurisdictions where these regulations have passed such as New York, the hotel rates skyrocketed, yet the legislation did not lower long-term rental rates or create housing. Companies like Marriott, Hilton, and Hyatt pay executives 8 figure total compensation and then systematically mistreat the front-line workers until there is a mass strike. BigHotel tells its investors that unionization of employees will jeopardize its profits and disrupt operations. BigHotel does not pay livable wages. BigHotel avoided obligations to build affordable housing for workers and now seeks re-direct the focus on STR properties that have been operating as vacation rentals for nearly 50 years. BigHotel are the largest water consumers on the island. Ironic when Lahaina Strong pretends to care about water use but then blindly props up the biggest and most wasteful water consumers on the island.
By eliminating over 7,000 short-term rentals, Maui County would be complicit in BigHotel’s global anticompetitive conspiracy to eliminate competitors in hospitality market and in the labor market. Less competition is never beneficial to consumers or workers. BigHotel would love to have workers with fewer options which drives wages down and increases BigHotel leverage in future collective bargaining negotiations.
Anyone who doubts this theory, just ask yourself why did the Hawaii Hotel Alliance and the American Hotel and Lodging Association have paid lobbyists pushing for passage of SB2919, which had nothing to do with hotels? This was an obvious attack on a competitor sector of the hospitality industry to eliminate competition. Any claim by disingenuous hotel executives that they care about affordable housing rings hollow.
If any Maui County residents believe that Bill 9 is about housing, they are all being played by a massive machine that only cares about profit and used naïve Lahaina Strong organizers to do what BigHotel could never do in its own name; rally the community. BigHotel has Lahaina Strong out shouting about off-island owners while 100% of the BigHotel operations and hedge funds that own the hotels are off-island.
The massive BigHotel operations procure supplies and labor from outside Hawaii through global supply chains whereas independently-owned short-term rentals procure supplies locally and work with local small businesses. A much higher percentage of money generated from independently-owned short-term rentals stays on Maui vs. the BigHotel extractors. Short-term rentals also pay higher property taxes than hotels and object to tax assessments far less than hotels. Some properties on the Minatoya list have on-site, benefited positions to support resort operations.
Marriott plainly tells its investors in SEC filings that competition from privately-owned vacation rentals is the biggest risk factor for profitability. BigHotel is violating federal antitrust law by colluding through the Hawaii Hotel Alliance to eliminate a competitor segment of the hospitality sector and divide the market among large hotel operators. This behavior is illegal and subject to enforcement by the Federal Trade Commission. Maui County must not play into BigHotel’s game to eliminate competition and take control of the Maui hospitality market which will harm consumers and workers.
I am born and raised, Oahu, something like 15 generations of family have lived on all the islands over time. I don't like tourism and don't like most tourists. some are ok. people who are from the south are probably da worst but its the accent that tellms me where they from. I had a long talk with my uncle about this erasing of these condo rights and I just don't see how taking these str from these families makes my ohana have a place to live. I don't want to live besdie mr. texas and his crazy kids. Council can make money from the condos for str and help keep jobs on the ialnd, keep epeople here, and stop this place being to crazy. Went to vagas last month and eeyone is either trump or not trump and Maui is becmoning str or not str. Im older than these condos and remember a tiome not long ago when they were just a bunch of buildings for tourist adn we made the county run on that money. Now these crazy kids fomr lahaina want to just keep everyone figthting so lets go back to a happeir time and keep these str and tell these kids to get a job maybe working in one to have some money to pay rent instead of thiking this is Russia from way back and the state put bread in your basket.
Iokua
Aloha Chair, Vice Chair, and Committee Members,
As a Canadian owner to a 2 bedroom unit at Maui Vista since 2012, I find it my duty to bring these points to your attention for consideration:
1. As we are all aware, Maui economy relies heavily on tourism. Canadian tourists account for a fairly large percentage especially during the cold winter months. Average middle class Canadians can mostly afford a stay at a short term rental (STR) condo. A $500+ USD per night at those fancy hotels in South or West Maui is out of reach to most Canadians. With the proposed STR ban, you are essentially discouraging average Canadians to visit Maui. This will also have a major detrimental effect on secondary industries that rely on tourism.
2. I believe with this bill the same effect we experienced during COVID restrictions will be felt all across Maui. As per the results of the study conducted at the beginning of the year, small businesses, tax revenue, etc ... will be severely negatively impacted.
3. Instead of going after STR owners, policies should be put in place to build more affordable housing for the displaced residents from Lahaina. These policies should be turned into concrete projects that will address the housing affordability problem right on. Abolishing STR is not the solution; instead it will compound the vicious cycle that may lead to more residents leaving the island. That is the sad reality when the unemployment rate is high due to sluggish tourism.
4. Maui Vista was designed and built to accommodate tourists, not local inhabitants. The whole complex (consisting of 3 buildings) was advertised as a resort, not as family oriented residences for local people. Changing course after its construction albeit that it has been over 45+ years, is unfair and most likely not legal. I urge the Minatoya list to be shortened to exclude complexes like Maui Vista, and not to impose a blanket ban of short term rentals to the 7000+ units originally identified.
5. Owners like us promote and support small businesses (cleaners, handymen, restaurants etc...) on Maui. The income generated is re-invested into the local economy through upkeep/renovation of the rental property. We do have repeated guests who visit Maui yearly, and don’t see themselves staying at these fancy hotels.
Big hotel lobbyists that are in favour of this legislation, are huge corporations that basically target the upscale tourists, and their huge profits are not necessarily re-invested into the Maui local economy.
In summary, Canadians will rather visit other countries (Mexico, South American Destinations etc...) than Maui if this blanket STR ban is in place. Promoting all the attractions that Maui has to offer amongst our fellow Canadians, is becoming harder because all the uncertainties that this legislation is creating.
I do encourage we collaboratively work on a solution that will protect the local economy and simultaneously provide enough affordable housing for the locals on Maui. Point #3 & #4 above are my ‘2 cents’ for a proposed solution.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Lily
The shifting of STR’s in hotel districts to long term housing does nothing significant towards providing financially accessible housing for residents and takes work away from housekeepers and other condo support workers.
We're going to hear a lot from those who support this bill that housing for locals should be given primacy over profits for mainland investors. I have DOZENS of emails from Lahaina Strong, Our Hawaii, and direct emails from Mark Ing, Paele Kiakona, Jordan Ruidas and Evan Weber. After the first two lines of pleasantries, a donation button dominates the page. We all know how these guys have monetized and capitalized off the fire, and it is in their financial interest to continue to sew division for their own profit. We hear from the governor that we need to "house our people", as he takes photo op after photo op with prolific hotel lobbyists. We hear how Hawaii is leaning more into the hate part of the love/hate relationship with tourism, but millions are being spent to lure them back.
The disaster capitalists at Lahaina Strong want us locals to believe that we'll be better off because we've stuck it to those "extractive wealthy mainland investors, speculators, and colonizers", and they want us to believe that by stealing from them what they (worked hard for and) legally purchased, we'll inherit their treasures. Never mind the fact that none of us ever bought these units because they were costly to maintain and shared literal property lines with hotels and hotel zoned condos. No thanks.
We'll hear that these condos need to be "returned to their original intended use", except, over the last 12 months, no has come up with any evidence of this being the case! In her 12 month long audition for some of that Lahaina Strong lobbyist cash, on June 3, 2025, Stacey Alapai was soliciting her 19 followers on Instagram to provide her with anecdotes of having "lived in or near" a Minatoya STR. Arguing that someone may have lived in or near one isn't the same as an evidence-based, data-rich analysis of which complexes housed how many locals and for how long. To date, none of that has ever been produced, but tens of billions of dollars in real estate, RPTs, tourist revenue, etc, all hinge on this unsubstantiated claim.
I don't know how much of this will ever be read, but the facts are:
1. These condos have been short term rentals for decades
2. There has been a well-documented housing shortage in the state before some of these condos were even built
3. Just like the ascent of women in society didn't come at expense of men, the development and use of these condos as STRs didn't take a living space from a local resident - they were as free to buy one as anyone else, for DECADES
4. 7 years will have passed since this threat was announced, which should provide the county with AMPLE time to fast track development, while using STR revenue streams to help finance these projects. Also, hard to argue that you're addressing an acute housing crisis, then slow walking for nearly a decade toward the cure.
5. We've seen with other populists and wanna-be strongmen, like Trump, that saying that Mexico will pay for the wall, or saying that tariffs are paid by the "other" country, or saying that he'll "end the Ukraine war on day 1" are just words. Mayor Bissen, like Trump, thinks that by saying he'll "convert" thousands of STRs into LTR that thousands will become STRs. UHERO stated that that number would actually be 8% of these units, or 568 of the 7100.
I have a ton of respect for this council, and I know you have the ability to see how flawed this plan is, and my hope is that those who support the bill see that there are ways to achieve your ends without the Muskian chainsaw approach.
5.
Aloha,
We are against the short-term rental ban we believe it is problematic on many levels:
1. Major loss of property tax revenue. We own a condo in Kahana that we short-term rent as well as enjoy ourselves. The full-time resident owners in our complex WANT our short-term rentals as we greatly subsidize their property taxes. We pay more than 10 times what they pay. If short-term rentals go away, full-time residents' property taxes will have to greatly increase to address the shortfall.
2. Loss of an attractive alternative lodging for visitors. Tourism is the main Maui economy and it's a good business model. Visitors come, spend money and then leave. Short-term rentals afford visitors a different experience than a hotel visit (full kitchens and living rooms, more "laid-back, local" experience.) It's not better or worse than hotels; it's just an alternative (usually less expensive) option that shouldn't be discarded.
3. Related to #2 above, if short-term rentals go away, there will be a corresponding loss of jobs for locals. Locals own and manage Maui Condo & Home, our agency. This firm, in turn, hires cleaning crews, maintenance people and more. In addition, loss of this lodging would result in less visitors and this would affect restaurants, tour operators (boat trips, aquarium visits, shopping, zip lining...you name it.)
4. My wife & I visit Maui three times a year and frequently bring family and guests with us who rent out short-term rentals. We literally spend thousands of dollars each visit, all of which goes to locals. We maintain our unit and purchase locally. We dine out each evening and tip well. We rent cars. We buy groceries. We shop and, in doing so, purchase (expensive) jewelry, local art, clothing and more. We take executions and visit attractions. We annually support the Maui Humane Society, a few other local charities and the Catholic church.
Mahalo for your consideration of the above points.
Bob & Mary Alessandrelli
RLA921@hotmail.com
6/3/25
Aloha Chair, Vice Chair, and Committee Members,
My name is Steve Weber and my wife, and I own a short-term rental in Ma’alaea.
In 2016 we came to Maui on our honeymoon and fell in love with the island. We decided to buy a condo in Ma’alaea to provide income for retirement with the eventual goal of having this be a second summer home. We are not a wealthy corporation, just middle-class individuals that own a short-term rental.
We understand the need for more affordable housing for residents and support you in your efforts. However, we feel you should consider being more selective in which units make sense for Maui families. Our unit is 555 sq. ft., has one parking space and very little storage. There are no pets allowed in our building. Not suitable for most residents and it was designed and remodeled for short term rentals. Additionally, due to the age of the building and proximity to the ocean we recently faced a $10,000 assessment. Not something most families can afford, nor could we if we did not have the income from the short-term rental. We will be facing a similar assessment in the near future for work on the plumbing system. Additionally, there is the HOA fee to pay each month which is significant.
Should the ban on short term rentals be enforced, we do not feel that what we would have to charge for long term renters just to break even every month would be viable for Maui residents, and we would be forced to sell our property. Most likely the buyer would be someone that could afford to have a second home sit vacant for most of the year.
That brings us to our second point. Aside from the $14,000 our unit generates in transient tax each year, we recommend local restaurants and tours to our guests before they arrive. Our guest comment book is filled with suggestions by past guests of restaurants, shops and tours to visit which certainly helps those local businesses with what is essentially free advertising. We also employ a house cleaner that has 2 employees of her own, a handyman, an onsite property manager and a contractor.
We understand the need for more local housing but would hope the council will consider a more measured approach as to which units are viable as long-term rental properties. We would suggest first looking at those properties that are not legal short-term rentals which apparently there are quite a few.
One last thought for consideration. After the terrible Lahaina fire we know of two units in our building that were put up for rent under the program with FEMA. Those units sat vacant as our understanding was that Lahaina residents that had been displaced did not want to live in Ma’alaea, nor did apparently anyone else looking for a long-term rental.
This legislation feels hurried and unbalanced. Please work with owners like us to find a reasonable and even-handed solution, a solution that supports the local economy, helps local businesses while holding owners of short-term rentals accountable to maintain units that promote tourism and benefit the economy.
Mahalo for taking the time to consider our thoughts
Steve and Gail Weber
Aloha Chair, Vice Chair, and Honorable Committee Members,
Mahalo for your time and thoughtful consideration in hearing the voices of our community.
My name is Kelly Moore. I’ve lived on Maui for 35 years, my son was born and raised here. I am a full-time resident, and I manage several vacation rentals on the island. Like many others, I am already feeling the impacts of the decline in tourism. I’m here to respectfully share what the proposed phase-out of short-term rentals could mean for families like mine and for the many local workers who rely on this industry.
My small business depends entirely on visitors staying in legally operating short-term rentals. I currently employ 15 local workers—cleaners, handymen, and service providers—who rely on this income to support their families. These aren’t just contractors; they are my friends, my neighbors, and part of our tight-knit island community. If these jobs disappear, it will be devastating for all of us.
The proposed phase-out feels like it unfairly targets hardworking local families who are simply trying to survive in one of the most expensive places to live in the world. The Minatoya properties I manage are not suited to long-term affordable rentals. Due to high HOA fees, most owners cannot feasibly rent to local families at rates considered affordable. The likely outcome is that these units will sit vacant—used occasionally by owners, friends and family—rather than contributing to the long-term housing stock or the local economy.
We all agree that affordable housing is an urgent and critical issue. We need real, sustainable solutions that support our community. But removing a major source of income for local families—without a clear transition plan or viable alternatives—is not the answer. It puts us at risk and deepens the economic strain for many who are already on the edge.
I respectfully ask that you consider the human impact of these decisions. We are not corporations. We are residents, business owners, parents, and neighbors doing our best to make ends meet while contributing to the local economy. Please don’t take that away from us without a thoughtful and inclusive path forward.
Mahalo for listening and for your service to our island.
Kelly Moore
Maui Resident & Small Business Owner
This e-comment system does not allow me to create an account (it never sends a verification email), as such I emailed my testimony to the Committee email, however, received a response that you don't want my testimony via email and only on e-comment. As such, the statement is copied here as a guest user, but without my contact information which you can obtain in my email:
Aloha Chair, Vice Chair, and Committee Members,
My name is Barbara Shoji. My late husband and I purchased our condominium unit in the Hale Kamaole complex in Kihei in 1983, which I now own as a widow. It has operated as a short-term rental ever since we purchased it. I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed legislation aiming to phase out over 7,000 short-term rental units in Maui County.
Short-term rentals play a vital role in supporting the local economy. Visitors who stay in these rentals frequent local businesses, such as Fred’s Mexican Cafe or one of my personal favorites Izakaya Genbe, infusing much-needed revenue into our community. Eliminating short-term rentals would significantly reduce tourism spending, harming the livelihoods of countless small business owners and their employees.
Short-term rentals offer a unique lodging option that many families and groups prefer. The spaciousness and home-like amenities of our condo at Hale Kamaole have attracted guests from around the world, including families with young children and multi-generational groups. These visitors specifically choose short-term rentals because they provide a comfortable and convenient alternative to traditional hotel accommodations. Our three children grew up spending their summers on Maui, exploring the island's natural beauty, learning to surf, and embracing the local culture. Now, they are adults with families of their own, and they continue the tradition of bringing their children to Maui to experience the same magic that captivated them as youngsters.
As a short-term rental owner, I provide employment opportunities for local residents. Our property management company employs individuals for cleaning, maintenance, and hospitality. These jobs contribute to the well-being of our community by providing stable income for local families. Phasing out short-term rentals would lead to job losses and economic hardship for those who rely on this industry.
Maintaining our property in Hale Kamaole requires substantial financial investment. We pay significant association dues and special assessment costs, which are essential for upholding the quality and safety of our complex. For example, this year the complex is undergoing a plumbing project which assessed units of our size $75,000+ in costs. These expenses contribute to the overall appeal of our neighborhood and the island as a whole, and are needed, in addition to providing work to locals (i.e., construction companies). The income generated from short-term renting is essential for owners like myself to cover these substantial costs. Without it, affording such crucial maintenance would be incredibly difficult, potentially leading to property neglect and a decline in community standards.
Instead of a sweeping ban on short-term rentals, I urge the council to consider a more balanced approach, such as implementing stricter regulations, enforcement, and a clear permitting process specifically for condominium buildings like Hale Kamaole. This could include regular inspections and avenues for community input to ensure responsible operation, which we, as owners, would welcome.
The proposed legislation to phase out short-term rentals would have far-reaching negative consequences for our local economy, employment opportunities, and the overall well-being of our community. I respectfully request that the council reconsider this proposal and explore alternative solutions that strike a balance between the needs of residents and the interests of those who rely on short-term rentals.
Mahalo for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Barbara Shoji
I oppose Bill 9 because there is no evidence that the stated goal of this bill will produce the desired effect.
Many who support the phase-out claim that making these 7100 units available for long-term rent will "produce the equivalent of a decade worth of development." Well, the fire happened in 2023. It's now 2025. The phase out is slated for 2030. That's 7years. How about the government, as well as the supporters of this bill, be honest with the people of Maui. The intent is not to remedy this decades old "crisis" of housing, and this recent "emergency. Nothing screams emergency and crisis mitigation like a 7 year timeline.
Dear Planning Commission Members,
We respectfully submit this testimony in strong opposition to Mayor Bissen’s proposal to revoke the right to operate legally established short-term rentals in Minatoya-listed properties, including our unit at the Maui Vista complex located at 2191 S. Kihei Rd., Unit 3108.
As property owners and stewards of our unit in South Kihei, we are deeply concerned about the far-reaching consequences of this proposal—not only for us as individuals, but for the people and businesses who rely on our operations to support their livelihoods. We are grateful for the opportunity to voice our perspective, and we thank you for your time and service to the community.
Our condo employs a local cleaning company, a handyman who handles routine repairs, and an on-island contact for guest services. We regularly purchase supplies and appliances from local hardware and home goods stores. Each stay brings direct spending to Maui’s restaurants, shops, and attractions. These relationships are more than transactions—they are part of our commitment to the Maui community.
We are fully aware of the challenges facing Maui, and we share the desire to see more affordable housing options become available. However, our experience with the loss of lawful short-term rentals in the Minatoya-listed properties paints a different picture than the one this bill seems to assume. A ban would not convert our unit into a viable long-term rental. Instead, it would likely force us to sell—and the most probable buyer would not place the unit into the long-term rental market either. In the end, this could mean fewer housing options available, not more.
The economic consequences are significant as well. If this bill passes, it will harm not just individual owners like us, but also the many small, local businesses that benefit from responsible short-term rental operations. From the cleaner who depends on multiple vacation rentals to run her business, to the local electrician we call when something needs fixing—this decision would ripple through Maui’s economy. Our cleaner has already told us that if this goes through, she may be forced to close her business.
We urge the Commission to carefully weigh these real-world impacts against the intended goals of the proposal. We all want Maui to thrive, but eliminating established, legally operating TVRs is not the path forward. There must be alternative, balanced solutions that protect the interests of all stakeholders—local families, small businesses, and responsible property owners alike.
Thank you for considering our personal experience and for your thoughtful leadership on this complex issue. We respectfully ask you to oppose this bill and preserve the rights of owners in Minatoya-listed properties.
Warm regards,
Richard and Rachel Vigil
2191 S. Kihei Rd., Unit 3108
Kihei, HI 96753