HLU-4 Bill 9 (2025) BILL 9 (2025), AMENDING CHAPTERS 19.12, 19.32, AND 19.37, MAUI COUNTY CODE, RELATING TO TRANSIENT VACATION RENTALS IN APARTMENT DISTRICTS (HLU-4)
Dear Maui Council Members,
Mahalo for taking our testimony on Bill 9 to convert over 7,000 Short Term Rental condos on the Minatoya list from Short Term Rentals to Long Term.
My husband and I live in and rent an STR condo at a South Kihei resort which is designated as a Hotel, therefore, our condos would not be directly impacted by this measure, however, we still strongly oppose it and we are asking you to reject it. Below are our reasons for this position:
• This measure would have a devastating impact on the local economy, because:
o If the STR inventory is cut drastically, the tourists who typically stay in STR’s, will not stay at Maui hotels instead, because they cannot or will not pay 2 – 5 times more per night at a hotel. These tourists will find other destinations to travel to, where they can find affordable accommodations for their vacation. We say this based on our 14 years of experience renting STRs in Kihei.
o These tourists support the local economy by eating out one or more times each day, by renting vehicles and using driving services such as Uber/Lyft/Private Transportation services. They shop at local stores for food, clothing, services and souvenirs. They go to salons and on tours and shows. All this revenue will be lost in our local economy. Several businesses will close and terminate the employees who work for them.
o The STR condo owners also provide the majority of Maui County’s property tax revenue, employ cleaners, handymen, electricians, air conditioning installers, plumbers etc. and they spend money on furnishings and upgrades for their condos. These services will be drastically cut if the condos are converted to Long Term Rentals.
• The Minatoya condominium properties are not ideal housing for local Maui residents because they are mostly 1 Bedroom / 1 Bath, approximately 700 sq feet, without garages or storage.
• This proposal is destructive to the fabric of our community. As evidenced in the testimony at prior hearings on this matter, it has literally pitted neighbor against neighbor. At a time when we need to stand and work together for a desperately needed solution to a challenging problem, this proposal is literally tearing the community apart. This division will be obvious to tourists as well, who ironically come to Hawaii to experience not just its natural beauty, but the feeling of peace and joy that Maui promises. This will further dampen tourism.
What we need is a solution to the Affordable housing problem that the whole community can support. That solution is to build appropriate Affordable Housing for Maui’s residents. This can be done by streamlining the housing permitting process to enable construction to proceed and by using the millions that the STR’s generate in property taxes and contributions to the Affordable Housing Fund (over $31 Million in the past 5 years) to help fund this construction.
Please help our community to heal by promoting such a unifying solution and by rejecting the current proposal to convert over seven thousand condos currently on the Minatoya list to Long Term Housing which would devastate our local economy and severely damage several Maui residents who own STR’s and rely on that income to support their families.
Thank you for allowing us to provide this testimonial about this important matter.
Thank you, Council, for the opportunity to testify and for listening to our concerns. I oppose this bill.
My name is Cloe, and I was born and raised in Pāʻia, Maui. I own a short-term rental with my parents in Maui County. I clean the unit and manage the guest communications.
My short-term rental job empowered me to be a caregiver for my grandfather. My STR job supports me while I take classes part-time at UHMC to be a future healthcare worker. My STR job allowed me to take a low-paying internship at the National Park. My STR job lets me live here, in my home.
My STR pays for the county budget. In 2022, the county generated $160M in revenue from the Real Property tax, while hotels generated just a quarter of that. Source: Maui County Real Property Tax. Taxes are my largest expense. Some might say, “Good, I don’t mind hotels as much as I mind STRs.” But how much of the hotel’s profits are sent off-island? Sent to more billionaire CEOs? Hotels have strong lobbying power, which is influencing this bill. Hotels use more water, resources, and land, and are driven by private equity to build value for their shareholders. STRs decentralize ownership in the hospitality industry. Since I opened my STR, my central goal has been to use sustainable practices.
“…the most direct local impact of prohibiting TVR use in the Apartment Districts will fall on the 450 Maui residents who owned and operated TVR units as of 2023.” -UHERO
That’s 450 Maui families who would be collateral damage from this proposal. They would be part of the 1,900 to 3,800 jobs lost per the study. Each of those is a Maui small business. This proposal is an attack on small businesses that benefits corporate hotels.
There’s a better way to support Hawaii residents. Let’s focus on building more affordable housing. In the 2024 Hawai‘i legislative session, housing advocates helped pass two landmark bills to increase the local housing stock, including one that allows multifamily housing in commercial zones and simplifies office-to-apartment conversions. Thank you for your time.
I was raised in Lahaina and my entire life I have seen outsiders move in and buy their 2nd, 3rd, 4th homes, call themselves Kama’aina and then go back to where their real home is (not Maui). This isn’t a place we visit for a few months out of the year. Many of us don’t even have a first home to call ours.
These condos were never supposed to be used the way they’re being used. This has caused so much damage to our community and is still doing so.
I implore you to consider us, Maui residents. We just want to live peacefully on the island that is our home without worrying that we will be forced to leave.
Aloha Chair and Members of the Committee,
I am a fourth-generation resident of Maui. My great grandparents built a life here, my parents raised me here, and I’m doing everything I can to keep our family rooted here — but it’s becoming harder with each passing year. I also run a local business, and I’m speaking today not only as a lifelong resident but also as an employer who is struggling to keep workers because of Maui’s skyrocketing housing costs.
This bill — to remove exceptions for property owners operating transient vacation rentals and short-term rentals — is not only necessary, it’s long overdue.
Every week, I hear from employees who are considering leaving Maui. These are hardworking, reliable people — many born and raised here — but they simply cannot afford to stay. They’re living with multiple families in one home, commuting from distant areas, or even couch-surfing and living out of their cars. Meanwhile, I see homes sitting empty most of the year, used only as income properties for people who don't live here. It’s heartbreaking and infuriating.
We can’t build community when housing is treated like a luxury investment instead of a basic need. TVRs and STRs have flooded our housing market, driving up prices and taking inventory away from local families. It’s not sustainable, and we’re losing our people — our workforce, our culture, and our future.
To those who object to this bill, I want to address a few common points directly:
• “But I followed the rules when I got my permit.”
I understand that, and I appreciate those who played by the rules. But the rules were written during a different time — when the scale of the housing crisis was not what it is today. We now face an emergency, and the rules need to reflect that. Public policy must evolve to protect the greater good.
• “I depend on this income.”
Many local families depend on stable, year-round housing, too. Our employees can’t live off of seasonal wages or on-island part time. What about the income lost when we lose our workforce, when businesses can't stay open because their employees can't find a place to live?
• “Tourism supports the economy.”
Tourism is a part of our economy — but not at the expense of housing for residents. This bill doesn’t end tourism. It prioritizes long-term community stability over short-term profit. Without a resident workforce and thriving local families, there is no sustainable tourism.
I’m not asking you to solve everything with one bill. But I am asking you to make a courageous choice to protect the people who make this island what it is. We cannot let Maui become a playground for the wealthy while our own children are forced to move away.
Please pass this bill. It's a critical step toward restoring balance and ensuring that Maui remains a place where local people can live, work, and thrive — not just survive.
Mahalo for your leadership and for standing up for our community.
I submit this testimony on my own behalf, as a Kanaka who has witnessed firsthand the ongoing injustices and oppression affecting our people across Hawaiʻi. Here on Maui, I am deeply concerned by the continued disregard for our aina and the growing gap between land use decisions and the values that have guided my kupuna for generations. I write in strong support of Bill No. 9 as it begins to correct a trajectory. Below, I offer just a few key community issues that this bill seeks to address:
What’s behind Bill No. 9 is not punishment—it’s protection.
This bill responds to years of cumulative harm:
– A limited housing inventory that leaves local families with nowhere to go.
– Long-term rents pushed out of reach by competition with short-term profits.
– A visitor industry that has exceeded the island’s carrying capacity, straining infrastructure and damaging natural resources.
– Cost of living driven up by speculative investment and non-resident ownership.
– A decline in quality of life for those who live, work, and raise families here.
– Absent owners with no connection to this place, but a sense of entitlement over it.
– A growing disconnect between the values of community and the priorities of profit.
This isn’t a debate about rights—it’s about direction.
For too long, land use loopholes and inconsistent enforcement allowed apartment-zoned housing to become vacation rentals. What was built for residents became income for absentee owners.
It’s time to return these units to their rightful purpose—permanently.
THE COMMUNITY HAS SPOKEN—clearly and consistently.
This bill reflects the voice of those who hold a deep kuleana for their home and community— people who are no longer willing to stand by while policies allow harm to continue—physically, socially, and morally.
TO THE COUNCIL: THIS IS YOUR KULEANA.
Now that the community has brought this forth. This decision is now in your hands. True leadership requires standing firm, especially when it’s hard. You won’t please everyone. But you can act with courage, clarity, and compassion.
Pass Bill No. 9 and take a meaningful step toward restoring trust, realigning policy with values, and honoring the people of this land.
I have an 18-month-old daughter with blue eyes and dimples. She loves books, turtles, bubbles, and stickers. She is my bundle of light—pure and full of joy. In April, she was hospitalized at Maui Memorial on Haleakalā East with pneumonia. She couldn’t breathe. Her gasps sounded like gravel getting raked across asphalt. I was terrified I might lose her.
After two nights in the hospital and weeks of recovery, she’s finally better. Now I sit with her and just listen to her breathe—smooth, clear, pure. It’s the most beautiful music I’ve ever heard. It brings me peace.
And yet, in the division this proposal has stirred, there are those who would say that she and I are “without breath.” You see, my husband and I are both residents of Maui and owners of a short-term rental. Because of that, we’ve been mocked, vilified, called greedy and entitled. We've been told we are not part of the community. We are others.
But the truth is, we are deeply rooted here. My husband was born in Maui Memorial, just like our 2 children. We shop at Foodland Kehalani. We pay tuition to St. Anthony’s School. We buy birthday cakes at Stillwell’s.. The money from our rental stays on Maui and supports local businesses and families—not corporate profits in mainland boardrooms.
We chose to invest in a condo because we saw the vast profits going to hotel chains like Marriott and Hyatt. We asked—why shouldn’t a local family have the same opportunity? We rehabbed an uninhabitable condo with our own blood, sweat and tears - Spending long days and nights fixing it, instead of being present at the dinner table.
If this ban passes, we stand to lose more than $100,000 in property value and will go red more than $20,000 every single year after our costs. For a family like ours, that’s devastating. And worse, there are people who will celebrate our pain. Who want us to fall.
When you cast your vote, please think carefully about the real harm inflicted on families like mine. Ask yourself: do the numbers show that this truly will solve the housing crisis? Or will it simply divide us further?
I’m a community nurse. My daughter sings "la la la" to butterflies. My husband is helping a friend rebuild his home in Lahaina. We are not outsiders. We are not villains. We are your neighbors.
There are faces and lives behind your choices. I’m asking you: Please, stop fueling the hate. Let’s find solutions that lift ALL local families up—together. This isn't it.
My name is Gokay Taskin, and I strongly oppose Bill 9 (2025), which proposes phasing out transient vacation rentals (TVRs) in Maui County's apartment-zoned districts. While I understand the urgency of Maui's housing crisis, particularly after the 2023 wildfires, this bill is detrimental to Maui’s economy and local livelihoods and may not solve housing affordability for those most in need.
A University of Hawai’i Economic Research Organization (UHERO) analysis forecasts significant economic contraction due to Bill 9:
Substantial Decline in Visitor Spending: Phasing out TVRs in Apartment zones could reduce visitor accommodations by 25% and visitor days by 32%. This is projected to cause a $900 million annual decline in visitor spending, nearly 15% below 2022 levels. Even with higher per-person spending, the reduction in visitor days leads to this decline. A "low-demand" scenario could see a 24% decrease compared to 2022.
Significant Job Losses: The decline in visitor spending is expected to result in approximately 1,900 lost payroll jobs (3% reduction), primarily in accommodations, food service, arts, entertainment, and retail. This could halt economic recovery from the 2023 fires. A severe scenario could lead to 3,800 job losses.
Reduction in Gross Domestic Product (GDP): Maui’s real GDP could decline by 4%, from $11.8 billion in 2022 to $11.3 billion, with an 8% drop in current-dollar GDP. The low-demand scenario predicts an 8% real GDP drop, over $1 billion in reduced output, highlighting Maui's reliance on visitor spending.
Decreased Tax Revenues: The policy is projected to significantly reduce county tax revenues. Property tax revenues could fall by $60 million annually by 2029 due to tax class changes and decreased property values. General Excise Tax (GET) and Transient Accommodations Tax (TAT) revenues are projected to fall by 10% and 8% respectively, an additional -$15 million annually. Overall, total county tax revenue could decline by 9% in the baseline scenario, threatening funding for essential public services.
These are not minor adjustments but a substantial blow to Maui’s economic stability. The Realtors Association of Maui (RAM) opposes Bill 9, fearing it will damage the economy, undermine small businesses, and threaten local livelihoods without creating truly affordable homes. Mayor Bissen notes that economic models "cannot fully shape the future of our communities." UHERO highlights that Maui’s TVR concentration (21% of housing) is globally unprecedented, making exact economic outcomes uncertain and potentially more disruptive than estimated.
While some proponents emphasize benefits to the hotel industry by creating a "level playing field," the direct impact on local residents participating in the tourism economy through STRs must be considered.
TVRs Enable Direct Participation of Maui Residents in Maui's Main Income of Tourism
While UHERO states 85% of affected TVRs are owned by out-of-state investors, approximately 450 Maui residents owned and operated TVR units in 2023. This phase-out reduces their participation in Maui’s significant tourism-based short-term rental segment. As an STR owner, I, and others, actively contribute to the local economy by:
Employing Local Service Providers: STRs rely on local cleaners, maintenance technicians, landscapers, and other contractors, supporting their livelihoods. The projected 1,900 job losses will impact these crucial service industries.
Supporting Local Small Businesses: STR owners frequently recommend local restaurants, tours, shops, and activities to guests, driving visitor spending to diverse Maui small businesses. Some guests may not visit Maui without vacation rental options. This contrasts with arguments that hotel money "all leaves the island," while STR money "stays right here," regardless of owner residency.
Maintaining Property Value and Infrastructure: STR ownership involves significant costs like maintenance, assessments, and insurance. STR income helps cover these, keeping properties safe, functional, and appealing and supporting local construction and service industries.
Providing Diverse Visitor Accommodation: Maui's tourism relies on a mix of accommodations. Removing TVRs would eliminate a preferred option for some tourists, potentially reducing overall visitor numbers and spending.
This bill risks centralizing tourism profits within large hotel conglomerates, rather than allowing Maui residents to directly benefit through their own properties, contradicting shared prosperity and local empowerment.
While Bill 9 aims to increase long-term housing supply and affordability by converting TVRs, its feasibility and broader implications are questionable. Affected units are often older, smaller condominiums (median ~800 sq ft, built ~1977) with single parking stalls. RAM argues these are "impractical" for long-term family living with high carrying costs (e.g., >$6,000/month), far exceeding the ~$2,500 affordable rental cap for median-income families. Even with a projected 20-40% condo price decrease, many units remain unaffordable, potentially ~$4,600/month for median-income families, with only the top 21% able to afford without exceeding 30% of income. Direct benefits to lower-income households would be indirect and may take time.
The proposed rapid phase-out schedule raised concerns about market disruption. While amendments propose extending the deadline to 2028 or 2030, the issue of a sudden, forced transition remains.
Alternative Solutions for a Balanced Approach
Instead of a sweeping ban, Maui County should explore balanced strategies for housing goals without crippling the economy. UHERO suggests alternatives:
Increasing Property Taxes on TVRs: Higher taxes could incentivize long-term conversions and generate revenue for affordable housing programs. Less profitable units would transition, while more profitable ones (often luxury properties) could remain as TVRs.
Auctioning Limited TVR Permits: A cap on STR licenses with auctions would allow the most profitable units to remain, capturing economic value while controlling numbers.
Empty Homes Tax: Taxing vacant properties would incentivize renting or selling underutilized housing, complementing TVR restrictions. Vancouver saw a 54% vacancy reduction with such a policy.
Zoning and Permitting Reforms: Updating policies for denser, mixed-use developments and streamlining approvals could encourage redevelopment and create more housing through increased floor area ratios, eased parking minimums, and streamlined multifamily project permitting.
Homeownership Assistance Programs: Expanding down payment assistance (e.g., "Kama‘āina Homes," 'ohana assistance), and loan guarantees (e.g., Office of Hawaiian Affairs) could help local buyers access units.
These alternatives offer pathways to address housing without the severe economic dislocations UHERO predicts. The current proposal risks undermining Maui’s economic foundation and residents' ability to stay. We must seek a balanced path protecting jobs, supporting the diverse economy, and addressing housing through sustainable, well-planned initiatives, rather than a policy with significant and uncertain negative consequences.
Aloha. I own a one-bedroom unit at the Napili Point Resort. I purchased my unit in July 2021.
I oppose the proposal before the Maui County Council to eliminate short-term rentals in resort areas, outside of residential neighborhoods.
The stated goal of the elimination of STRs on Maui is to provide affordable worker housing. This goal not be met by the proposal. It will cause dire unintended consequences for the very people it purports to help. The proposal is thus the epitome of shooting oneself in one’s foot.
While I acknowledge the need for affordable worker housing, the County (and State) must acknowledge that they have been kicking the can down the road on this issue for decades. . Thus, the question arises why should one group of private property owners, and one group only, bear the cost of resolving a problem that has been decades in the making, and has been caused not by these property owners but primarily by government (which has permitted inappropriate tourism development), and the multi-national hotel industry (which has lobbied for and benefitted the most from this development)?
Nothing about a solution based on eliminating STRs is fair. Instead, it reeks of politics of the worst sort – it is a demagogic, lazy, uncreative solution that shifts costs that should be borne more generally to a group less able to buy off the decision-makers. The proposal to eliminate STRs will benefit the hotels, as visitors to the island will have no choice but to give their business to these international corporations. In turn, elected officials receive considerable political donations from the very wealthy, internationally-based hotel industry. Politicians know what side their bread is buttered on. So, the losers are mom and pop property owners, many of whom are island residents who depend on income from their modest property investments.
Leaving aside the issue of fairness, however, this proposal won’t even solve the problem and in the process will have dire effects on the Maui economy. Besides being a lazy and uncreative solution, it is a sledge-hammer solution. Face it: today Maui’s economy is overwhelmingly a tourist economy, particularly with the collapse of agriculture on the island. This economy supplies the tax revenue and supplies the jobs. The elimination of STRs will depress the tourist economy and drive what is left to multinational hotels. Already, the mere threat of eliminating STRs has driven up hotel rates, putting a Maui vacation beyond the reach of middle-class families, and has caused a decrease in tourism. Eliminating STRs will give the hotels a monopoly on accommodations, causing room rates to rise even further. In turn, fewer visitors will be able to afford a Maui vacation and will take their travel dollars elsewhere. In turn, hospitality jobs will be eliminated, tax revenue will drop, and the Maui economy will be wrecked.
STRs not only bring in substantial tax revenue to the county (and state) directly, but they also bring in tax revenue indirectly. STRs employ property managers and cleaning crew, who pay taxes on the income they make servicing this market, and visitor spending on food, transportation, and entertainment also creates tax revenue. How do elected officials who vote to eliminate this revenue, revenue that benefits those who live on the island far more substantially than it benefits the visitors who pay those taxes, propose to find it elsewhere? Do these politicians think that residents of the island will be so glad to have eliminated the presence of tourists that they won’t notice the collapse of government services?
Certainly one way to eliminate the affordable housing problem is to eliminate the people who need affordable housing. If people can’t find jobs, if the government can’t deliver services, then there will be an exodus from the island. Perhaps that is actually the goal of this proposal – to eliminate certain residents. If that is what the County seeks, then be honest about it. But how do politicians propose to eliminate those they dislike while keeping those they like? And how will even the few (desirable) people who are left on the island survive?
If Maui seeks to become like Molokai, with virtually nothing beyond a subsistence economy, that doesn’t even actually subsist but must rely on heavy infusions of (federal) government aid, then be honest about it. But don’t pretend then that this proposal is about affordable housing. It is about creating a new economy for Maui that is hostile to both private property ownership and a commercial economy, and instead welcomes those who would prefer to live on government handouts. Yet that will only create a whole new problem for the politicians – how to extract those handouts from the only level of government equipped to provide them – the national government. Do you really think that the government of Donald Trump and DOGE, after paying out huge sums via FEMA to fire survivors for years, will be willing to fund a new welfare generation after local politicians have wrecked the economy?
Finally, none of this takes into account the law, including constitutional law, which protects private property rights. The Maui government’s allowance of STRs, even encouragement of them, over decades arguably has created vested rights for owners of these properties. Any effort to restrict those rights will be challenged in court. Owners will win restraining orders out the gate, citing irreparable harm, that will put the STR elimination on ice while litigation continues. The litigation will go on for years and could even go to the U.S. Supreme Court. Litigation costs money – taxpayer money. And it will be abundantly evident that every dollar spent on this litigation is a dollar the government could be spending – DIRECTLY – on building and providing affordable housing during the years that the litigation will transpire. The end result will be a ruling that prohibits the government from taking away a vested property right, meaning no affordable housing provided via the elimination of STRs, AND taxpayer dollars wasted on a losing cause that could have been spent directly and years earlier to build affordable housing. Any politician who thinks that they will win election or reelection to office having made or supported such an ill-fated choice is foolish.
Economies are delicate things, as the mismanagement of the Maui economy in the wake of the Lahaina fire has demonstrated. It is all about finding the sweet spot. The proposal to wholesale eliminate STRs will fall far wide of that sweet spot. Yes, it is beyond time for elected officials to address the need for affordable worker housing. But they need to do so in a sophisticated way that protects private property rights; says no to the multi-national hotel industry that has for decades lined the pockets of these politicians; and employs taxpayers’ and visitors’ hard-earned dollars in a responsible, ethical and efficient way that will actually achieve the goal of affordable housing, rather than simply achieving the goal of demagoguing voters and creating hate and division in the community.
I strongly oppose Bill 9. I was born and raised here in Hawaii and love working in the hospitality industry. Majority of our workforce depends on tourism. I work for a small local family owned vacation rental company and they are wonderful people. If this bill passes, it will hurt everyone in our workplace and many vendors we work with on a daily basis. This will have a significant impact on many people that work in this industry and the affect it will have on our economy on Maui. I urge the council not to ban the legal short term rentals and help the community find a better solution for affordable housing on Maui. Mahalo Nui Loa
I am writing as I strongly oppose Bill 9. I do not own on maui but have rented for years. I also was a victim of the fires. The decoration that took place to the island from that infamous day is still being felt. I oppose this because this could be the final fiscal blow to maui county. The amount of job loss as well as the ability to fund public projects for the betterment of maui will all be impacted. I feel there are other strong ways that can be done and bill 9 is not the answer. Maybe propose a fee to the STR owners and use that for the affordable housing fund.
I would love to be able to purchase a property on maui but due to job insecurity, I do not know if I could afford to purchase if bill 9 is indeed passed, we have too many insecurities already and this would just add to another problem facing many families. If making affordable housing is the plan for the council which I feel is your direction, please oppose this bill and find ways to utilize the funds to make affordable truly affordable
I highly oppose this bill. Maui desperately needs housing, but this is not the solution. In the short run and long run this would be detrimental to the people of Maui. I have emailed all council members my opposing testimony I detail.
I strongly oppose Bill 9. Most of the condos on the list are 1 or 2 bedrooms and were designed for short term hotel style use. They lack parking spaces, yards for children to play and storage space for long term tenants.
I am a Maui resident for over 25 years.
Thank you.
Mardi Werner
Aloha Chair, Vice Chair, and Committee Members,
My name is Patricia Cadiz, and I own, with two other Maui family members, a short-term rental property in Maui County. I am writing today to express my deep concern and strong opposition to the proposed legislation to phase out more than 7,000 vacation rentals.
We’ve worked hard to be responsible and community-oriented owners. We recommend local restaurants and activities in our welcome guide. We educate about sensitive environmental issues and encourage respectful tourism. We employ local service providers — cleaners, maintenance techs, and we patronize local suppliers. My guests often leave Maui saying they felt more connected to the island because of the personal experience they had in our home. That matters — not just to me, but to all the small businesses they supported during their stay.
UHERO is already predicting a “mild recession” and that the parties that would suffer the most from this proposal are the property owners like us that are Maui residents. And then there’s the small businesses that lose business from our guests -neighborhood restaurants, art shops, retailers. Now is not the time to be causing more strife in our community.
This proposal harms our small businesses and benefits the mainland private equity firms that own hotels here. That is not good for Maui.
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,
Patricia Cadiz
Paia, Maui, Hawaii 96779
I am testifying in strong support of Bill 9 with the Mayor's proposed amendments. 2028 gives more than enough time for these properties to become complaint as we have been kicking this can down the road for decades! I reject the second proposed amendments, shifting the timeline to 2030 and carving out exemptions for timeshares.
For Maui County residents, the additional 2 years (to 2030) would be felt drastically. Current short-term rental owners have had plenty of time to pivot to a less extractive investment strategy, but they've chosen instead to continue betting on the value of their investment increasing.
It is clear that there are two definitive sides in this discourse:
1) the residents of Maui County who have been pleading with our elected officials to take steps to solve our housing crisis
2) (Mostly) out-of-state STR owners are concerned about their investment(s)
Your choice could not be more clear: pass Bill 9, taking the first of many necessary steps towards balancing out Maui's inequitable economy OR reject this bill, remain indebted to the realtors and co., and look your constituents in the eye while you tell them you're not willing to take this step towards immediately bringing more housing supply into the market although you have no answer when you would be able to provide them with more housing.
The opposition always comes here saying that they love Hawai'i and the aloha spirit -- while simultaneously not understanding that aloha at its core is empathy, which means putting yourself in someone else's shoes. They'll tell you that they purchased this property because it's their retirement plan. But what about generational families who never had any intention to leave? Where is your aloha for them?
Hawai'i is an occupied state that has been forcing its own people to leave by refusing to take a stand against extractive industries. But the people are standing up... for each other and for our 'aina. And we've decided that it is time to put our people over profit.
Housing is a human right.
Guess what's not a human right?
Investment. Capital. Wealth.
Bill 9 is the first step towards telling your community that you believe that they deserve housing. I don't believe much in "entitlements," but I do know that we are entitled to food, shelter, and clothing. There are nonprofits that you as our government, MUCH of the time, look to for providing your constituents with food and clothing. When it comes to shelter, there is much less that those nonprofits can do. Partially because to house people you need land, and most of our land on Maui is controlled by a handful of different entities. This is a puka that requires our government to legislate righting the wrong that has been done here. You cannot keep putting off this question because of fear of litigation or the realtors' lobby said so.
The narrative coming from those who oppose Bill 9 is the kind of "entitlement" that I do not believe in. This isn't about individuals - it's about our community and our ability to function. While I understand that you may not know what it's like to be renter on Maui in 2025, that's a significant gap in your knowledge. Renters are often chronically stressed, as you never really know how long you'll be able to live in a rental. We need STABLE housing, and our economy needs people who will support local. Tourists who visit Maui and stay in short-term rentals buy their food at Costco and Safeway. We need them to be eating at local restaurants who purchase from local farmers and buy souvenirs crafted by people who live her. It does not help our economy for tourists to stay in accommodations with kitchens so that they can save money and buy their trinkets from Walmart. We bypassed our Community plan's ideal tourist to visitor ratio years ago, and it's exploded since 2020. I've watched more and more housing on west Maui be pulled out of our rental market to provide transient accommodations for tourists, and I don't see anyone in my community benefitting from that. The Ka'anapali Trolley is still painted with the words "Ka'anapali: Where the World Comes to Play" and I dream of a day when I see that and breathe a sigh of relief because we're working towards that reality rather than laughing so that I don't cry from the irony.
Our community is living in their cars and on the streets. This is often not due at all to personal failure, but rather a County government who has chosen to ignore the growing problem. You know that the County, State, or even Federal governments do not have the resources to solve our housing crisis within a generation. While Bill 9 would not solve our housing crisis, it will be a huge first step towards housing security. It will also have significant environmental impacts, as transient vacation rentals use more water than long-term rentals. (Makes sense: constantly washing towels & sheets, tourist-driven water features, etc)
Many HOA fees have gotten out of control and locals have lost the ability to have pets for the same reason: most of these HOA boards are run by people who don't live there. When your main concern is tourist sentiment, the Board makes VERY different decisions than when your main concern is the comfort of your friends and neighbors.
Neighborhoods are for neighbors. This is one of the things that has caused the Lahaina fire survivors the most distress: being completely removed from their neighbors.
As an advocate for fire survivors with disabilities and kupuna, I have watched our community die from sadness, loneliness, stress, and anxiety. So many people have lost the will to live or become sick from staying inside. Speaking from experience, I don't think any of us truly understood the level of independence that kupuna and other individuals with disabilities had ripped away from them by being removed from their support systems. We all know that building community has immense benefits for everyone, but the reverse is also true.
And that's what I keep coming back to, don't I?
Community needs to be your number one priority.
Not the status of your donors' investment portfolios.
Please pass Bill 9 through this committee to take effect in 2028 and without any special exemptions for timeshare or the like.
Mahalo for your time and consideration.
Jackie Keefe
Lahaina Resident
Greetings. I’m writing to you today to urge you to reject Bill 9, as its premise relies on several incorrect assumptions and will likely hurt Maui more than it will help. (I also outline a recommendation for beneficial affordable housing policy.)
The first assumption is that forcing the closure of all short-term rentals (STRs) in areas zoned for apartments will automatically increase Maui’s housing supply. While potentially partly true, in reality, it’s more than likely that owners will simply restrict the use of their STRs to themselves or their family members, continuing to own their properties without allowing others to stay there. The units will remain off the market and vacant for most of the year, similar to what happened in 2020, because it’s likely that many short-term rental owners who don’t live on Maui also use those short-term rentals for their own use. There’s no guarantee that simply because a property loses a short-term rental function that it will lead to that property shifting uses or being sold. Moreover, it could unfortunately be that some short-term rental owners keep renting out their units under the table, short-changing the county of millions of dollars every year. An illegal-short-term-rental enforcement policy should be created before any short-term rental ban is passed, because (much like the reaction to the 18th amendment), some people will keep doing whatever they want, regardless of rules.
The second assumption is that short-term rentals that current owners decide to sell will become housing that long-time Maui residents wish to live in.
- First, some short-term rentals (despite their zoning) are nowhere near centers of business, parks, schools, or other amenities that those living in communities wish to have.
- Second, a fee-simple property selling at a market rate may still be unobtainable housing for those living locally due to its price. (There’s no guarantee of affordability or income requirement.)
- Third, leasehold properties may be affordable to purchase but will saddle local buyers with thousands of dollars of leasehold fees in perpetuity, on top of mortgage costs and outstanding land maintenance fees that might arise. Not only will these additional fees make leasehold properties exceedingly expensive, but local owners will never truly own their homes while paying exorbitant amounts for the places they live.
- Fourth, depending on the unit (condominium vs home), properties that were originally built as short-term rentals may not be able to suit the needs of some / many local families. Parents with two or three kids might want a home with a large yard for kids and dogs to run around, carports for cooking and gathering outside together, and a place to park multiple cars. They may want more than half-size closets, communal laundry, and properties where dogs are actually allowed on property. Many short-term rental places don’t allow dogs, don’t have yards, only allow for one parking space per person, and don’t have the in-unit facilities that some families (2-4 kids or larger) would benefit from having...all things that many families want. Even if such properties were to be listed for sale, and be affordable, these homes still wouldn’t fit the needs of some who are searching.
The third assumption is that all short-term rentals are money-making vehicles for those who live elsewhere. The truth is that many local families rely on short-term rentals to pay for their own home mortgages. It’s been said that converting every short-term rental into housing would drop the price of all Maui’s homes by 40% - already a faulty assumption, predicated on the idea that every single STR owner sells their property, which is unlikely to happen – but even if the price of all Maui homes dropped, that doesn’t drop the mortgage price of properties people already own. Locals with STRs still must pay their expensive mortgages, and with STRs abruptly disappearing, they’ll lose the ability to do that and be negatively impacted.
The fourth assumption is that every building in apartment zones were intended to be apartments. If that was so, they’d have multiple parking spaces per apartment, have enough storage on-site for every unit, and allow animals throughout the property. The fact that many of these properties don’t have these amenities that so many potential homebuyers would seek means that most of these units would be off of buyers’ radars anyway, and were only really intended for short-term use. (I'd urge you to look back at the original plans for each property that was built. How was it classified at the time it was constructed?)
The immediate impact of banning short-term rentals in apartment-zoned areas will be a rapid decrease in tourism from the middle-class consumer, with losses in the millions of dollars. While it may drive more tourists to stay in hotels, many tourists choose to stay in short-term rentals because of the amenities that short-term rentals provide (namely, kitchens and washing machines). Fewer people will choose to visit Maui should this ban go into effect, which will immediately impact jobs and the tourist economy which Maui relies on. Remember the impact of a lack of visitors in 2020 and 2023, and the urgency with which visitors were encouraged to (respectfully) return after those quieter times.
One byproduct I’ve heard is that having no short-term rentals in apartment zones will lead to both fewer tourists and an uptick in tourists visiting who spend more money. This could be true (and is seen as a benefit), but the wealthier, fancier tourists who visit are the ones who are most likely to see Maui as a commodity instead of as a community that deserves respect. They will be used to ritzy, glamorous places that cater to their needs, and will look at Maui locals as people to serve them instead of people who are spouses, parents, and neighbors just like themselves. While a single wealthy tourist will spend more in one trip than your average short-term rental tourist, it’s the short-term rental tourist who’s most likely to return to Maui again and again, to learn to cherish the island and show more respect to its people and the land. Staying in short-term rentals in places closer to communities is a tangible reminder that Hawai‘i, first and foremost, is a place to be treasured and a place where people live, raise families, and care for each other. These middle-class short-term rental visitors are more likely to spend time over the years supporting non-big box stores and learning about (and abiding by) local customs. Sure, forcing all tourism to occur at hotels will attract the wealthiest clientele, but the amount of respect you’ll receive from people who simply look at the entire state as another commodity is doubtful.
You witnessed what happened in 2020 and 2023 when visitation was greatly curtailed, and the impact on Maui jobs and families. I fear that such a ban will have a similar impact, if not bigger, as visitors choose other places to visit. Though the housing supply may go up, how will homes be paid for if jobs abruptly disappear?
If you want to guarantee affordable housing on Maui, designate sites where affordable housing will be built and are sold only to families who meet low-income requirements. (Think about Habitat for Humanity’s home loan qualifications, or those in effect for people who receive other social safety net programs like Medicaid.) Stipulate that buyers have to have lived in Hawai‘i as their primary residence for the past ten years, that they have to own the home for at least 15 years and, when the property sells, that it sells for 1/8th the going market rate. Finally, make it so that the next person / people the home is sold to also meet(s) strict low-income requirements and has/have lived in Hawai‘i for the past ten years. This ensures that housing that’s intended to be affordable always STAYS affordable, that it’s bought by people who actually live in Maui (instead of wealthy mainland or foreign investors), and that families who buy homes at a lower, subsidized rate can’t turn around and make a market-home-rate fortune off a home that was sold to them at a much lower rate. Most of all, such requirements will ensure that the home continues to stay affordable for other local families, instead of being bought at an affordable, subsidized price and being sold at a market rate.
We all want local families to have places they want to live, but a ban on these short-term rentals – because of leaseholds, the available properties, the features that many STRs have built (or not built) into them, and the unlikelihood that they’ll be sold and be available for purchase once such a ban goes into effect – may not be the way to do it.
Please oppose Bill 9 and allow short-term rentals to remain…then build affordable housing and find ways to keep it affordable throughout every sale. Ask those who want housing what kind of housing they want. Is it units with no yard and only one parking spot, or places where dogs can run and families can gather? Finally, no matter what ban on short-term rentals passes, it will not automatically convert every unit into a home that a resident can purchase.
Aloha Council Members,
I strongly oppose Bill 9.
This will negatively impact so many people whose livelihoods depend on work related to legal short term rentals.
There must be a better solution than simply eliminating legal short term rentals in an attempt to solve a housing crisis.
Please do not pass this bill.
Mahalo for your time and consideration.
Sophia Borland
I strongly oppose Bill 9. I am one of the owners of Maui Paradise Properties and this bill would greatly affect our staff as well as all of our on island vendors. We are a small, locally owned and operated vacation rental business. We only do business with legal vacation rentals.
We would have to greatly reduce our 78 person staff and also largely cut down our 15 contracted cleaning teams we use as well as all of our other outside vendors such as handyman, electricians, remediation companies, glass companies, ac companies, plumbing companies, and the list goes on. I am very proud to say, we carefully choose our vendors and use locally owned small businesses for the majority of situations. The locksmith is good friends with one of our employees, the plumber lives up the street from me, the glass company is a long time friend, the electrician is surfing buddies with one of our employees, the handyman is a longtime friend and neighbor of another employee. We are so lucky to have a small business that also gets to employ other small businesses in our community. That is the way things should be, locally owned and locally referred. If this bill were to pass as it stands, this scenario would no longer be the case. These small businesses in our small community would hurt and many would end up going out of business. We aren’t a hotel, we are not corporate, these changes hurt the people who live here: not some large entity who takes the majority of the money off island.
We all understand affordable housing is an issue that we need to find a solution to together. I urge you to vote no on Bill 9 and let’s work together to find a better solution for our community that does not destroy our economy at the same time.
My name is Sanoe Awai, and I am a lifelong resident of Maui. I am writing in strong support of Bill 9, which would restructure short-term rentals in apartment-zoned areas and return much-needed housing to our long-term residents.
We have watched as our housing stock has decreased and we've seen prices rise beyond what local families can afford. Many of the vacation rentals, particularly those on the Minatoya list, are not even owned by Maui residents. These units serve as investment properties for off-island owners, while kamaʻāina struggle to find a place to live on their own island.
Bill 9 represents a step toward correcting this imbalance. By phasing out short-term rentals in apartment-zoned complexes, we can begin to restore housing opportunities for Maui families, workers, and future generations. This is not just a housing issue, this is also a matter of justice, sustainability, and aloha for our local community.
Please continue to put the people of Maui first. I urge you to pass Bill 9 and help return housing to those who call this place home.
To the council,
I strongly support this ban of these short term rentals. This is the chance for residents to have a chance to buy or rent something at a someone reasonable price. We do not need this many places for tourists to rent, but we do need these places for locals to live. These rentals were once lived in by locals so the excuse that they are not good for long term living is not true. This was converted work force housing. We are letting people from the mainland take this money made from tourists off island and not used in our community. I left the teaching profession and entered tourism because I could not afford to live here as a teacher. After taxes I brought home $2700. A studio apartment is going for $2000 without utilities. That is impossible to live on Maui and teach. The short term rentals are giving people a cheaper deal to come to Maui and not spend the money to stay in a hotel. We would rather make Maui more affordable for tourists but not people living in our community. If you can about the people of Maui, please vote in support of the short term rental ban.
Sincerely,
Anna Leahey
Dear Chair Kama, Vice Chair Uʻu-Hodgins and Members of the Housing and Land Use Committee:
I oppose Bill 9 as drafted and propose that the Council amend Bill 9 to exclude Papakea Oceanfront Resort which the County has historically identified as having A2-H2 zoning. We have been a Condo owner for the past 16 years. I find it hard to believe that it would be beneficial for the County of Maui to eliminate short term rentals at the Papakea Resort. The loss of jobs which will be incurred if Bill 9 passes will be substantial. The current employees at Papakea such as maintenance crews, service crews. cleaning crews and front desk crews will be eliminated because the long term rental rates will not support the current employees and the rental income will be insufficient to cover basic services. Furthermore the units are too small to support young families as most of the units are limited to one bedroom. Who is going to make up the loss of revenue generated to the county of Maui for GET, TAT and Maui County TAT which is in the millions of dollars annually ???. I can see no benefit to the county of Maui or the public to change the current zoning. Sincerely, Papakea owner.
Dear Maui Council Members,
Mahalo for taking our testimony on Bill 9 to convert over 7,000 Short Term Rental condos on the Minatoya list from Short Term Rentals to Long Term.
My husband and I live in and rent an STR condo at a South Kihei resort which is designated as a Hotel, therefore, our condos would not be directly impacted by this measure, however, we still strongly oppose it and we are asking you to reject it. Below are our reasons for this position:
• This measure would have a devastating impact on the local economy, because:
o If the STR inventory is cut drastically, the tourists who typically stay in STR’s, will not stay at Maui hotels instead, because they cannot or will not pay 2 – 5 times more per night at a hotel. These tourists will find other destinations to travel to, where they can find affordable accommodations for their vacation. We say this based on our 14 years of experience renting STRs in Kihei.
o These tourists support the local economy by eating out one or more times each day, by renting vehicles and using driving services such as Uber/Lyft/Private Transportation services. They shop at local stores for food, clothing, services and souvenirs. They go to salons and on tours and shows. All this revenue will be lost in our local economy. Several businesses will close and terminate the employees who work for them.
o The STR condo owners also provide the majority of Maui County’s property tax revenue, employ cleaners, handymen, electricians, air conditioning installers, plumbers etc. and they spend money on furnishings and upgrades for their condos. These services will be drastically cut if the condos are converted to Long Term Rentals.
• The Minatoya condominium properties are not ideal housing for local Maui residents because they are mostly 1 Bedroom / 1 Bath, approximately 700 sq feet, without garages or storage.
• This proposal is destructive to the fabric of our community. As evidenced in the testimony at prior hearings on this matter, it has literally pitted neighbor against neighbor. At a time when we need to stand and work together for a desperately needed solution to a challenging problem, this proposal is literally tearing the community apart. This division will be obvious to tourists as well, who ironically come to Hawaii to experience not just its natural beauty, but the feeling of peace and joy that Maui promises. This will further dampen tourism.
What we need is a solution to the Affordable housing problem that the whole community can support. That solution is to build appropriate Affordable Housing for Maui’s residents. This can be done by streamlining the housing permitting process to enable construction to proceed and by using the millions that the STR’s generate in property taxes and contributions to the Affordable Housing Fund (over $31 Million in the past 5 years) to help fund this construction.
Please help our community to heal by promoting such a unifying solution and by rejecting the current proposal to convert over seven thousand condos currently on the Minatoya list to Long Term Housing which would devastate our local economy and severely damage several Maui residents who own STR’s and rely on that income to support their families.
Thank you for allowing us to provide this testimonial about this important matter.
Elizabeth & Charles Voigt
Thank you, Council, for the opportunity to testify and for listening to our concerns. I oppose this bill.
My name is Cloe, and I was born and raised in Pāʻia, Maui. I own a short-term rental with my parents in Maui County. I clean the unit and manage the guest communications.
My short-term rental job empowered me to be a caregiver for my grandfather. My STR job supports me while I take classes part-time at UHMC to be a future healthcare worker. My STR job allowed me to take a low-paying internship at the National Park. My STR job lets me live here, in my home.
My STR pays for the county budget. In 2022, the county generated $160M in revenue from the Real Property tax, while hotels generated just a quarter of that. Source: Maui County Real Property Tax. Taxes are my largest expense. Some might say, “Good, I don’t mind hotels as much as I mind STRs.” But how much of the hotel’s profits are sent off-island? Sent to more billionaire CEOs? Hotels have strong lobbying power, which is influencing this bill. Hotels use more water, resources, and land, and are driven by private equity to build value for their shareholders. STRs decentralize ownership in the hospitality industry. Since I opened my STR, my central goal has been to use sustainable practices.
“…the most direct local impact of prohibiting TVR use in the Apartment Districts will fall on the 450 Maui residents who owned and operated TVR units as of 2023.” -UHERO
That’s 450 Maui families who would be collateral damage from this proposal. They would be part of the 1,900 to 3,800 jobs lost per the study. Each of those is a Maui small business. This proposal is an attack on small businesses that benefits corporate hotels.
There’s a better way to support Hawaii residents. Let’s focus on building more affordable housing. In the 2024 Hawai‘i legislative session, housing advocates helped pass two landmark bills to increase the local housing stock, including one that allows multifamily housing in commercial zones and simplifies office-to-apartment conversions. Thank you for your time.
Aloha Chair, Vice Chair, and Committee Members,
I’m in strong support of this bill.
I was raised in Lahaina and my entire life I have seen outsiders move in and buy their 2nd, 3rd, 4th homes, call themselves Kama’aina and then go back to where their real home is (not Maui). This isn’t a place we visit for a few months out of the year. Many of us don’t even have a first home to call ours.
These condos were never supposed to be used the way they’re being used. This has caused so much damage to our community and is still doing so.
I implore you to consider us, Maui residents. We just want to live peacefully on the island that is our home without worrying that we will be forced to leave.
Aloha Chair and Members of the Committee,
I am a fourth-generation resident of Maui. My great grandparents built a life here, my parents raised me here, and I’m doing everything I can to keep our family rooted here — but it’s becoming harder with each passing year. I also run a local business, and I’m speaking today not only as a lifelong resident but also as an employer who is struggling to keep workers because of Maui’s skyrocketing housing costs.
This bill — to remove exceptions for property owners operating transient vacation rentals and short-term rentals — is not only necessary, it’s long overdue.
Every week, I hear from employees who are considering leaving Maui. These are hardworking, reliable people — many born and raised here — but they simply cannot afford to stay. They’re living with multiple families in one home, commuting from distant areas, or even couch-surfing and living out of their cars. Meanwhile, I see homes sitting empty most of the year, used only as income properties for people who don't live here. It’s heartbreaking and infuriating.
We can’t build community when housing is treated like a luxury investment instead of a basic need. TVRs and STRs have flooded our housing market, driving up prices and taking inventory away from local families. It’s not sustainable, and we’re losing our people — our workforce, our culture, and our future.
To those who object to this bill, I want to address a few common points directly:
• “But I followed the rules when I got my permit.”
I understand that, and I appreciate those who played by the rules. But the rules were written during a different time — when the scale of the housing crisis was not what it is today. We now face an emergency, and the rules need to reflect that. Public policy must evolve to protect the greater good.
• “I depend on this income.”
Many local families depend on stable, year-round housing, too. Our employees can’t live off of seasonal wages or on-island part time. What about the income lost when we lose our workforce, when businesses can't stay open because their employees can't find a place to live?
• “Tourism supports the economy.”
Tourism is a part of our economy — but not at the expense of housing for residents. This bill doesn’t end tourism. It prioritizes long-term community stability over short-term profit. Without a resident workforce and thriving local families, there is no sustainable tourism.
I’m not asking you to solve everything with one bill. But I am asking you to make a courageous choice to protect the people who make this island what it is. We cannot let Maui become a playground for the wealthy while our own children are forced to move away.
Please pass this bill. It's a critical step toward restoring balance and ensuring that Maui remains a place where local people can live, work, and thrive — not just survive.
Mahalo for your leadership and for standing up for our community.
Aloha Chair and Council members,
I submit this testimony on my own behalf, as a Kanaka who has witnessed firsthand the ongoing injustices and oppression affecting our people across Hawaiʻi. Here on Maui, I am deeply concerned by the continued disregard for our aina and the growing gap between land use decisions and the values that have guided my kupuna for generations. I write in strong support of Bill No. 9 as it begins to correct a trajectory. Below, I offer just a few key community issues that this bill seeks to address:
What’s behind Bill No. 9 is not punishment—it’s protection.
This bill responds to years of cumulative harm:
– A limited housing inventory that leaves local families with nowhere to go.
– Long-term rents pushed out of reach by competition with short-term profits.
– A visitor industry that has exceeded the island’s carrying capacity, straining infrastructure and damaging natural resources.
– Cost of living driven up by speculative investment and non-resident ownership.
– A decline in quality of life for those who live, work, and raise families here.
– Absent owners with no connection to this place, but a sense of entitlement over it.
– A growing disconnect between the values of community and the priorities of profit.
This isn’t a debate about rights—it’s about direction.
For too long, land use loopholes and inconsistent enforcement allowed apartment-zoned housing to become vacation rentals. What was built for residents became income for absentee owners.
It’s time to return these units to their rightful purpose—permanently.
THE COMMUNITY HAS SPOKEN—clearly and consistently.
This bill reflects the voice of those who hold a deep kuleana for their home and community— people who are no longer willing to stand by while policies allow harm to continue—physically, socially, and morally.
TO THE COUNCIL: THIS IS YOUR KULEANA.
Now that the community has brought this forth. This decision is now in your hands. True leadership requires standing firm, especially when it’s hard. You won’t please everyone. But you can act with courage, clarity, and compassion.
Pass Bill No. 9 and take a meaningful step toward restoring trust, realigning policy with values, and honoring the people of this land.
I want to tell you a story.
I have an 18-month-old daughter with blue eyes and dimples. She loves books, turtles, bubbles, and stickers. She is my bundle of light—pure and full of joy. In April, she was hospitalized at Maui Memorial on Haleakalā East with pneumonia. She couldn’t breathe. Her gasps sounded like gravel getting raked across asphalt. I was terrified I might lose her.
After two nights in the hospital and weeks of recovery, she’s finally better. Now I sit with her and just listen to her breathe—smooth, clear, pure. It’s the most beautiful music I’ve ever heard. It brings me peace.
And yet, in the division this proposal has stirred, there are those who would say that she and I are “without breath.” You see, my husband and I are both residents of Maui and owners of a short-term rental. Because of that, we’ve been mocked, vilified, called greedy and entitled. We've been told we are not part of the community. We are others.
But the truth is, we are deeply rooted here. My husband was born in Maui Memorial, just like our 2 children. We shop at Foodland Kehalani. We pay tuition to St. Anthony’s School. We buy birthday cakes at Stillwell’s.. The money from our rental stays on Maui and supports local businesses and families—not corporate profits in mainland boardrooms.
We chose to invest in a condo because we saw the vast profits going to hotel chains like Marriott and Hyatt. We asked—why shouldn’t a local family have the same opportunity? We rehabbed an uninhabitable condo with our own blood, sweat and tears - Spending long days and nights fixing it, instead of being present at the dinner table.
If this ban passes, we stand to lose more than $100,000 in property value and will go red more than $20,000 every single year after our costs. For a family like ours, that’s devastating. And worse, there are people who will celebrate our pain. Who want us to fall.
When you cast your vote, please think carefully about the real harm inflicted on families like mine. Ask yourself: do the numbers show that this truly will solve the housing crisis? Or will it simply divide us further?
I’m a community nurse. My daughter sings "la la la" to butterflies. My husband is helping a friend rebuild his home in Lahaina. We are not outsiders. We are not villains. We are your neighbors.
There are faces and lives behind your choices. I’m asking you: Please, stop fueling the hate. Let’s find solutions that lift ALL local families up—together. This isn't it.
Aloha Chair, Vice Chair, and Committee Members,
My name is Gokay Taskin, and I strongly oppose Bill 9 (2025), which proposes phasing out transient vacation rentals (TVRs) in Maui County's apartment-zoned districts. While I understand the urgency of Maui's housing crisis, particularly after the 2023 wildfires, this bill is detrimental to Maui’s economy and local livelihoods and may not solve housing affordability for those most in need.
A University of Hawai’i Economic Research Organization (UHERO) analysis forecasts significant economic contraction due to Bill 9:
Substantial Decline in Visitor Spending: Phasing out TVRs in Apartment zones could reduce visitor accommodations by 25% and visitor days by 32%. This is projected to cause a $900 million annual decline in visitor spending, nearly 15% below 2022 levels. Even with higher per-person spending, the reduction in visitor days leads to this decline. A "low-demand" scenario could see a 24% decrease compared to 2022.
Significant Job Losses: The decline in visitor spending is expected to result in approximately 1,900 lost payroll jobs (3% reduction), primarily in accommodations, food service, arts, entertainment, and retail. This could halt economic recovery from the 2023 fires. A severe scenario could lead to 3,800 job losses.
Reduction in Gross Domestic Product (GDP): Maui’s real GDP could decline by 4%, from $11.8 billion in 2022 to $11.3 billion, with an 8% drop in current-dollar GDP. The low-demand scenario predicts an 8% real GDP drop, over $1 billion in reduced output, highlighting Maui's reliance on visitor spending.
Decreased Tax Revenues: The policy is projected to significantly reduce county tax revenues. Property tax revenues could fall by $60 million annually by 2029 due to tax class changes and decreased property values. General Excise Tax (GET) and Transient Accommodations Tax (TAT) revenues are projected to fall by 10% and 8% respectively, an additional -$15 million annually. Overall, total county tax revenue could decline by 9% in the baseline scenario, threatening funding for essential public services.
These are not minor adjustments but a substantial blow to Maui’s economic stability. The Realtors Association of Maui (RAM) opposes Bill 9, fearing it will damage the economy, undermine small businesses, and threaten local livelihoods without creating truly affordable homes. Mayor Bissen notes that economic models "cannot fully shape the future of our communities." UHERO highlights that Maui’s TVR concentration (21% of housing) is globally unprecedented, making exact economic outcomes uncertain and potentially more disruptive than estimated.
While some proponents emphasize benefits to the hotel industry by creating a "level playing field," the direct impact on local residents participating in the tourism economy through STRs must be considered.
TVRs Enable Direct Participation of Maui Residents in Maui's Main Income of Tourism
While UHERO states 85% of affected TVRs are owned by out-of-state investors, approximately 450 Maui residents owned and operated TVR units in 2023. This phase-out reduces their participation in Maui’s significant tourism-based short-term rental segment. As an STR owner, I, and others, actively contribute to the local economy by:
Employing Local Service Providers: STRs rely on local cleaners, maintenance technicians, landscapers, and other contractors, supporting their livelihoods. The projected 1,900 job losses will impact these crucial service industries.
Supporting Local Small Businesses: STR owners frequently recommend local restaurants, tours, shops, and activities to guests, driving visitor spending to diverse Maui small businesses. Some guests may not visit Maui without vacation rental options. This contrasts with arguments that hotel money "all leaves the island," while STR money "stays right here," regardless of owner residency.
Maintaining Property Value and Infrastructure: STR ownership involves significant costs like maintenance, assessments, and insurance. STR income helps cover these, keeping properties safe, functional, and appealing and supporting local construction and service industries.
Providing Diverse Visitor Accommodation: Maui's tourism relies on a mix of accommodations. Removing TVRs would eliminate a preferred option for some tourists, potentially reducing overall visitor numbers and spending.
This bill risks centralizing tourism profits within large hotel conglomerates, rather than allowing Maui residents to directly benefit through their own properties, contradicting shared prosperity and local empowerment.
While Bill 9 aims to increase long-term housing supply and affordability by converting TVRs, its feasibility and broader implications are questionable. Affected units are often older, smaller condominiums (median ~800 sq ft, built ~1977) with single parking stalls. RAM argues these are "impractical" for long-term family living with high carrying costs (e.g., >$6,000/month), far exceeding the ~$2,500 affordable rental cap for median-income families. Even with a projected 20-40% condo price decrease, many units remain unaffordable, potentially ~$4,600/month for median-income families, with only the top 21% able to afford without exceeding 30% of income. Direct benefits to lower-income households would be indirect and may take time.
The proposed rapid phase-out schedule raised concerns about market disruption. While amendments propose extending the deadline to 2028 or 2030, the issue of a sudden, forced transition remains.
Alternative Solutions for a Balanced Approach
Instead of a sweeping ban, Maui County should explore balanced strategies for housing goals without crippling the economy. UHERO suggests alternatives:
Increasing Property Taxes on TVRs: Higher taxes could incentivize long-term conversions and generate revenue for affordable housing programs. Less profitable units would transition, while more profitable ones (often luxury properties) could remain as TVRs.
Auctioning Limited TVR Permits: A cap on STR licenses with auctions would allow the most profitable units to remain, capturing economic value while controlling numbers.
Empty Homes Tax: Taxing vacant properties would incentivize renting or selling underutilized housing, complementing TVR restrictions. Vancouver saw a 54% vacancy reduction with such a policy.
Zoning and Permitting Reforms: Updating policies for denser, mixed-use developments and streamlining approvals could encourage redevelopment and create more housing through increased floor area ratios, eased parking minimums, and streamlined multifamily project permitting.
Homeownership Assistance Programs: Expanding down payment assistance (e.g., "Kama‘āina Homes," 'ohana assistance), and loan guarantees (e.g., Office of Hawaiian Affairs) could help local buyers access units.
These alternatives offer pathways to address housing without the severe economic dislocations UHERO predicts. The current proposal risks undermining Maui’s economic foundation and residents' ability to stay. We must seek a balanced path protecting jobs, supporting the diverse economy, and addressing housing through sustainable, well-planned initiatives, rather than a policy with significant and uncertain negative consequences.
Mahalo for your time.
Sincerely, Gokay Taskin. gokaytaskin@gmail.com
Aloha. I own a one-bedroom unit at the Napili Point Resort. I purchased my unit in July 2021.
I oppose the proposal before the Maui County Council to eliminate short-term rentals in resort areas, outside of residential neighborhoods.
The stated goal of the elimination of STRs on Maui is to provide affordable worker housing. This goal not be met by the proposal. It will cause dire unintended consequences for the very people it purports to help. The proposal is thus the epitome of shooting oneself in one’s foot.
While I acknowledge the need for affordable worker housing, the County (and State) must acknowledge that they have been kicking the can down the road on this issue for decades. . Thus, the question arises why should one group of private property owners, and one group only, bear the cost of resolving a problem that has been decades in the making, and has been caused not by these property owners but primarily by government (which has permitted inappropriate tourism development), and the multi-national hotel industry (which has lobbied for and benefitted the most from this development)?
Nothing about a solution based on eliminating STRs is fair. Instead, it reeks of politics of the worst sort – it is a demagogic, lazy, uncreative solution that shifts costs that should be borne more generally to a group less able to buy off the decision-makers. The proposal to eliminate STRs will benefit the hotels, as visitors to the island will have no choice but to give their business to these international corporations. In turn, elected officials receive considerable political donations from the very wealthy, internationally-based hotel industry. Politicians know what side their bread is buttered on. So, the losers are mom and pop property owners, many of whom are island residents who depend on income from their modest property investments.
Leaving aside the issue of fairness, however, this proposal won’t even solve the problem and in the process will have dire effects on the Maui economy. Besides being a lazy and uncreative solution, it is a sledge-hammer solution. Face it: today Maui’s economy is overwhelmingly a tourist economy, particularly with the collapse of agriculture on the island. This economy supplies the tax revenue and supplies the jobs. The elimination of STRs will depress the tourist economy and drive what is left to multinational hotels. Already, the mere threat of eliminating STRs has driven up hotel rates, putting a Maui vacation beyond the reach of middle-class families, and has caused a decrease in tourism. Eliminating STRs will give the hotels a monopoly on accommodations, causing room rates to rise even further. In turn, fewer visitors will be able to afford a Maui vacation and will take their travel dollars elsewhere. In turn, hospitality jobs will be eliminated, tax revenue will drop, and the Maui economy will be wrecked.
STRs not only bring in substantial tax revenue to the county (and state) directly, but they also bring in tax revenue indirectly. STRs employ property managers and cleaning crew, who pay taxes on the income they make servicing this market, and visitor spending on food, transportation, and entertainment also creates tax revenue. How do elected officials who vote to eliminate this revenue, revenue that benefits those who live on the island far more substantially than it benefits the visitors who pay those taxes, propose to find it elsewhere? Do these politicians think that residents of the island will be so glad to have eliminated the presence of tourists that they won’t notice the collapse of government services?
Certainly one way to eliminate the affordable housing problem is to eliminate the people who need affordable housing. If people can’t find jobs, if the government can’t deliver services, then there will be an exodus from the island. Perhaps that is actually the goal of this proposal – to eliminate certain residents. If that is what the County seeks, then be honest about it. But how do politicians propose to eliminate those they dislike while keeping those they like? And how will even the few (desirable) people who are left on the island survive?
If Maui seeks to become like Molokai, with virtually nothing beyond a subsistence economy, that doesn’t even actually subsist but must rely on heavy infusions of (federal) government aid, then be honest about it. But don’t pretend then that this proposal is about affordable housing. It is about creating a new economy for Maui that is hostile to both private property ownership and a commercial economy, and instead welcomes those who would prefer to live on government handouts. Yet that will only create a whole new problem for the politicians – how to extract those handouts from the only level of government equipped to provide them – the national government. Do you really think that the government of Donald Trump and DOGE, after paying out huge sums via FEMA to fire survivors for years, will be willing to fund a new welfare generation after local politicians have wrecked the economy?
Finally, none of this takes into account the law, including constitutional law, which protects private property rights. The Maui government’s allowance of STRs, even encouragement of them, over decades arguably has created vested rights for owners of these properties. Any effort to restrict those rights will be challenged in court. Owners will win restraining orders out the gate, citing irreparable harm, that will put the STR elimination on ice while litigation continues. The litigation will go on for years and could even go to the U.S. Supreme Court. Litigation costs money – taxpayer money. And it will be abundantly evident that every dollar spent on this litigation is a dollar the government could be spending – DIRECTLY – on building and providing affordable housing during the years that the litigation will transpire. The end result will be a ruling that prohibits the government from taking away a vested property right, meaning no affordable housing provided via the elimination of STRs, AND taxpayer dollars wasted on a losing cause that could have been spent directly and years earlier to build affordable housing. Any politician who thinks that they will win election or reelection to office having made or supported such an ill-fated choice is foolish.
Economies are delicate things, as the mismanagement of the Maui economy in the wake of the Lahaina fire has demonstrated. It is all about finding the sweet spot. The proposal to wholesale eliminate STRs will fall far wide of that sweet spot. Yes, it is beyond time for elected officials to address the need for affordable worker housing. But they need to do so in a sophisticated way that protects private property rights; says no to the multi-national hotel industry that has for decades lined the pockets of these politicians; and employs taxpayers’ and visitors’ hard-earned dollars in a responsible, ethical and efficient way that will actually achieve the goal of affordable housing, rather than simply achieving the goal of demagoguing voters and creating hate and division in the community.
Mahalo for your time and attention, Donna Schuele
Aloha Chair and Councilmembers,
I strongly oppose Bill 9. I was born and raised here in Hawaii and love working in the hospitality industry. Majority of our workforce depends on tourism. I work for a small local family owned vacation rental company and they are wonderful people. If this bill passes, it will hurt everyone in our workplace and many vendors we work with on a daily basis. This will have a significant impact on many people that work in this industry and the affect it will have on our economy on Maui. I urge the council not to ban the legal short term rentals and help the community find a better solution for affordable housing on Maui. Mahalo Nui Loa
Aloha Council,
I am writing as I strongly oppose Bill 9. I do not own on maui but have rented for years. I also was a victim of the fires. The decoration that took place to the island from that infamous day is still being felt. I oppose this because this could be the final fiscal blow to maui county. The amount of job loss as well as the ability to fund public projects for the betterment of maui will all be impacted. I feel there are other strong ways that can be done and bill 9 is not the answer. Maybe propose a fee to the STR owners and use that for the affordable housing fund.
I would love to be able to purchase a property on maui but due to job insecurity, I do not know if I could afford to purchase if bill 9 is indeed passed, we have too many insecurities already and this would just add to another problem facing many families. If making affordable housing is the plan for the council which I feel is your direction, please oppose this bill and find ways to utilize the funds to make affordable truly affordable
I highly oppose this bill. Maui desperately needs housing, but this is not the solution. In the short run and long run this would be detrimental to the people of Maui. I have emailed all council members my opposing testimony I detail.
I strongly oppose Bill 9. Most of the condos on the list are 1 or 2 bedrooms and were designed for short term hotel style use. They lack parking spaces, yards for children to play and storage space for long term tenants.
I am a Maui resident for over 25 years.
Thank you.
Mardi Werner
Aloha Chair, Vice Chair, and Committee Members,
My name is Patricia Cadiz, and I own, with two other Maui family members, a short-term rental property in Maui County. I am writing today to express my deep concern and strong opposition to the proposed legislation to phase out more than 7,000 vacation rentals.
We’ve worked hard to be responsible and community-oriented owners. We recommend local restaurants and activities in our welcome guide. We educate about sensitive environmental issues and encourage respectful tourism. We employ local service providers — cleaners, maintenance techs, and we patronize local suppliers. My guests often leave Maui saying they felt more connected to the island because of the personal experience they had in our home. That matters — not just to me, but to all the small businesses they supported during their stay.
UHERO is already predicting a “mild recession” and that the parties that would suffer the most from this proposal are the property owners like us that are Maui residents. And then there’s the small businesses that lose business from our guests -neighborhood restaurants, art shops, retailers. Now is not the time to be causing more strife in our community.
This proposal harms our small businesses and benefits the mainland private equity firms that own hotels here. That is not good for Maui.
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,
Patricia Cadiz
Paia, Maui, Hawaii 96779
I am testifying in strong support of Bill 9 with the Mayor's proposed amendments. 2028 gives more than enough time for these properties to become complaint as we have been kicking this can down the road for decades! I reject the second proposed amendments, shifting the timeline to 2030 and carving out exemptions for timeshares.
For Maui County residents, the additional 2 years (to 2030) would be felt drastically. Current short-term rental owners have had plenty of time to pivot to a less extractive investment strategy, but they've chosen instead to continue betting on the value of their investment increasing.
It is clear that there are two definitive sides in this discourse:
1) the residents of Maui County who have been pleading with our elected officials to take steps to solve our housing crisis
2) (Mostly) out-of-state STR owners are concerned about their investment(s)
Your choice could not be more clear: pass Bill 9, taking the first of many necessary steps towards balancing out Maui's inequitable economy OR reject this bill, remain indebted to the realtors and co., and look your constituents in the eye while you tell them you're not willing to take this step towards immediately bringing more housing supply into the market although you have no answer when you would be able to provide them with more housing.
The opposition always comes here saying that they love Hawai'i and the aloha spirit -- while simultaneously not understanding that aloha at its core is empathy, which means putting yourself in someone else's shoes. They'll tell you that they purchased this property because it's their retirement plan. But what about generational families who never had any intention to leave? Where is your aloha for them?
Hawai'i is an occupied state that has been forcing its own people to leave by refusing to take a stand against extractive industries. But the people are standing up... for each other and for our 'aina. And we've decided that it is time to put our people over profit.
Housing is a human right.
Guess what's not a human right?
Investment. Capital. Wealth.
Bill 9 is the first step towards telling your community that you believe that they deserve housing. I don't believe much in "entitlements," but I do know that we are entitled to food, shelter, and clothing. There are nonprofits that you as our government, MUCH of the time, look to for providing your constituents with food and clothing. When it comes to shelter, there is much less that those nonprofits can do. Partially because to house people you need land, and most of our land on Maui is controlled by a handful of different entities. This is a puka that requires our government to legislate righting the wrong that has been done here. You cannot keep putting off this question because of fear of litigation or the realtors' lobby said so.
The narrative coming from those who oppose Bill 9 is the kind of "entitlement" that I do not believe in. This isn't about individuals - it's about our community and our ability to function. While I understand that you may not know what it's like to be renter on Maui in 2025, that's a significant gap in your knowledge. Renters are often chronically stressed, as you never really know how long you'll be able to live in a rental. We need STABLE housing, and our economy needs people who will support local. Tourists who visit Maui and stay in short-term rentals buy their food at Costco and Safeway. We need them to be eating at local restaurants who purchase from local farmers and buy souvenirs crafted by people who live her. It does not help our economy for tourists to stay in accommodations with kitchens so that they can save money and buy their trinkets from Walmart. We bypassed our Community plan's ideal tourist to visitor ratio years ago, and it's exploded since 2020. I've watched more and more housing on west Maui be pulled out of our rental market to provide transient accommodations for tourists, and I don't see anyone in my community benefitting from that. The Ka'anapali Trolley is still painted with the words "Ka'anapali: Where the World Comes to Play" and I dream of a day when I see that and breathe a sigh of relief because we're working towards that reality rather than laughing so that I don't cry from the irony.
Our community is living in their cars and on the streets. This is often not due at all to personal failure, but rather a County government who has chosen to ignore the growing problem. You know that the County, State, or even Federal governments do not have the resources to solve our housing crisis within a generation. While Bill 9 would not solve our housing crisis, it will be a huge first step towards housing security. It will also have significant environmental impacts, as transient vacation rentals use more water than long-term rentals. (Makes sense: constantly washing towels & sheets, tourist-driven water features, etc)
Many HOA fees have gotten out of control and locals have lost the ability to have pets for the same reason: most of these HOA boards are run by people who don't live there. When your main concern is tourist sentiment, the Board makes VERY different decisions than when your main concern is the comfort of your friends and neighbors.
Neighborhoods are for neighbors. This is one of the things that has caused the Lahaina fire survivors the most distress: being completely removed from their neighbors.
As an advocate for fire survivors with disabilities and kupuna, I have watched our community die from sadness, loneliness, stress, and anxiety. So many people have lost the will to live or become sick from staying inside. Speaking from experience, I don't think any of us truly understood the level of independence that kupuna and other individuals with disabilities had ripped away from them by being removed from their support systems. We all know that building community has immense benefits for everyone, but the reverse is also true.
And that's what I keep coming back to, don't I?
Community needs to be your number one priority.
Not the status of your donors' investment portfolios.
Please pass Bill 9 through this committee to take effect in 2028 and without any special exemptions for timeshare or the like.
Mahalo for your time and consideration.
Jackie Keefe
Lahaina Resident
Greetings. I’m writing to you today to urge you to reject Bill 9, as its premise relies on several incorrect assumptions and will likely hurt Maui more than it will help. (I also outline a recommendation for beneficial affordable housing policy.)
The first assumption is that forcing the closure of all short-term rentals (STRs) in areas zoned for apartments will automatically increase Maui’s housing supply. While potentially partly true, in reality, it’s more than likely that owners will simply restrict the use of their STRs to themselves or their family members, continuing to own their properties without allowing others to stay there. The units will remain off the market and vacant for most of the year, similar to what happened in 2020, because it’s likely that many short-term rental owners who don’t live on Maui also use those short-term rentals for their own use. There’s no guarantee that simply because a property loses a short-term rental function that it will lead to that property shifting uses or being sold. Moreover, it could unfortunately be that some short-term rental owners keep renting out their units under the table, short-changing the county of millions of dollars every year. An illegal-short-term-rental enforcement policy should be created before any short-term rental ban is passed, because (much like the reaction to the 18th amendment), some people will keep doing whatever they want, regardless of rules.
The second assumption is that short-term rentals that current owners decide to sell will become housing that long-time Maui residents wish to live in.
- First, some short-term rentals (despite their zoning) are nowhere near centers of business, parks, schools, or other amenities that those living in communities wish to have.
- Second, a fee-simple property selling at a market rate may still be unobtainable housing for those living locally due to its price. (There’s no guarantee of affordability or income requirement.)
- Third, leasehold properties may be affordable to purchase but will saddle local buyers with thousands of dollars of leasehold fees in perpetuity, on top of mortgage costs and outstanding land maintenance fees that might arise. Not only will these additional fees make leasehold properties exceedingly expensive, but local owners will never truly own their homes while paying exorbitant amounts for the places they live.
- Fourth, depending on the unit (condominium vs home), properties that were originally built as short-term rentals may not be able to suit the needs of some / many local families. Parents with two or three kids might want a home with a large yard for kids and dogs to run around, carports for cooking and gathering outside together, and a place to park multiple cars. They may want more than half-size closets, communal laundry, and properties where dogs are actually allowed on property. Many short-term rental places don’t allow dogs, don’t have yards, only allow for one parking space per person, and don’t have the in-unit facilities that some families (2-4 kids or larger) would benefit from having...all things that many families want. Even if such properties were to be listed for sale, and be affordable, these homes still wouldn’t fit the needs of some who are searching.
The third assumption is that all short-term rentals are money-making vehicles for those who live elsewhere. The truth is that many local families rely on short-term rentals to pay for their own home mortgages. It’s been said that converting every short-term rental into housing would drop the price of all Maui’s homes by 40% - already a faulty assumption, predicated on the idea that every single STR owner sells their property, which is unlikely to happen – but even if the price of all Maui homes dropped, that doesn’t drop the mortgage price of properties people already own. Locals with STRs still must pay their expensive mortgages, and with STRs abruptly disappearing, they’ll lose the ability to do that and be negatively impacted.
The fourth assumption is that every building in apartment zones were intended to be apartments. If that was so, they’d have multiple parking spaces per apartment, have enough storage on-site for every unit, and allow animals throughout the property. The fact that many of these properties don’t have these amenities that so many potential homebuyers would seek means that most of these units would be off of buyers’ radars anyway, and were only really intended for short-term use. (I'd urge you to look back at the original plans for each property that was built. How was it classified at the time it was constructed?)
The immediate impact of banning short-term rentals in apartment-zoned areas will be a rapid decrease in tourism from the middle-class consumer, with losses in the millions of dollars. While it may drive more tourists to stay in hotels, many tourists choose to stay in short-term rentals because of the amenities that short-term rentals provide (namely, kitchens and washing machines). Fewer people will choose to visit Maui should this ban go into effect, which will immediately impact jobs and the tourist economy which Maui relies on. Remember the impact of a lack of visitors in 2020 and 2023, and the urgency with which visitors were encouraged to (respectfully) return after those quieter times.
One byproduct I’ve heard is that having no short-term rentals in apartment zones will lead to both fewer tourists and an uptick in tourists visiting who spend more money. This could be true (and is seen as a benefit), but the wealthier, fancier tourists who visit are the ones who are most likely to see Maui as a commodity instead of as a community that deserves respect. They will be used to ritzy, glamorous places that cater to their needs, and will look at Maui locals as people to serve them instead of people who are spouses, parents, and neighbors just like themselves. While a single wealthy tourist will spend more in one trip than your average short-term rental tourist, it’s the short-term rental tourist who’s most likely to return to Maui again and again, to learn to cherish the island and show more respect to its people and the land. Staying in short-term rentals in places closer to communities is a tangible reminder that Hawai‘i, first and foremost, is a place to be treasured and a place where people live, raise families, and care for each other. These middle-class short-term rental visitors are more likely to spend time over the years supporting non-big box stores and learning about (and abiding by) local customs. Sure, forcing all tourism to occur at hotels will attract the wealthiest clientele, but the amount of respect you’ll receive from people who simply look at the entire state as another commodity is doubtful.
You witnessed what happened in 2020 and 2023 when visitation was greatly curtailed, and the impact on Maui jobs and families. I fear that such a ban will have a similar impact, if not bigger, as visitors choose other places to visit. Though the housing supply may go up, how will homes be paid for if jobs abruptly disappear?
If you want to guarantee affordable housing on Maui, designate sites where affordable housing will be built and are sold only to families who meet low-income requirements. (Think about Habitat for Humanity’s home loan qualifications, or those in effect for people who receive other social safety net programs like Medicaid.) Stipulate that buyers have to have lived in Hawai‘i as their primary residence for the past ten years, that they have to own the home for at least 15 years and, when the property sells, that it sells for 1/8th the going market rate. Finally, make it so that the next person / people the home is sold to also meet(s) strict low-income requirements and has/have lived in Hawai‘i for the past ten years. This ensures that housing that’s intended to be affordable always STAYS affordable, that it’s bought by people who actually live in Maui (instead of wealthy mainland or foreign investors), and that families who buy homes at a lower, subsidized rate can’t turn around and make a market-home-rate fortune off a home that was sold to them at a much lower rate. Most of all, such requirements will ensure that the home continues to stay affordable for other local families, instead of being bought at an affordable, subsidized price and being sold at a market rate.
We all want local families to have places they want to live, but a ban on these short-term rentals – because of leaseholds, the available properties, the features that many STRs have built (or not built) into them, and the unlikelihood that they’ll be sold and be available for purchase once such a ban goes into effect – may not be the way to do it.
Please oppose Bill 9 and allow short-term rentals to remain…then build affordable housing and find ways to keep it affordable throughout every sale. Ask those who want housing what kind of housing they want. Is it units with no yard and only one parking spot, or places where dogs can run and families can gather? Finally, no matter what ban on short-term rentals passes, it will not automatically convert every unit into a home that a resident can purchase.
Thank you for your time.
Aloha Council Members,
I strongly oppose Bill 9.
This will negatively impact so many people whose livelihoods depend on work related to legal short term rentals.
There must be a better solution than simply eliminating legal short term rentals in an attempt to solve a housing crisis.
Please do not pass this bill.
Mahalo for your time and consideration.
Sophia Borland
Aloha Council Members,
I strongly oppose Bill 9. I am one of the owners of Maui Paradise Properties and this bill would greatly affect our staff as well as all of our on island vendors. We are a small, locally owned and operated vacation rental business. We only do business with legal vacation rentals.
We would have to greatly reduce our 78 person staff and also largely cut down our 15 contracted cleaning teams we use as well as all of our other outside vendors such as handyman, electricians, remediation companies, glass companies, ac companies, plumbing companies, and the list goes on. I am very proud to say, we carefully choose our vendors and use locally owned small businesses for the majority of situations. The locksmith is good friends with one of our employees, the plumber lives up the street from me, the glass company is a long time friend, the electrician is surfing buddies with one of our employees, the handyman is a longtime friend and neighbor of another employee. We are so lucky to have a small business that also gets to employ other small businesses in our community. That is the way things should be, locally owned and locally referred. If this bill were to pass as it stands, this scenario would no longer be the case. These small businesses in our small community would hurt and many would end up going out of business. We aren’t a hotel, we are not corporate, these changes hurt the people who live here: not some large entity who takes the majority of the money off island.
We all understand affordable housing is an issue that we need to find a solution to together. I urge you to vote no on Bill 9 and let’s work together to find a better solution for our community that does not destroy our economy at the same time.
Mahalo for your time and consideration,
Kelly Hartman
Maui Paradise Properties
Testimony in Support of Bill 9
Aloha Chair and Councilmembers,
My name is Sanoe Awai, and I am a lifelong resident of Maui. I am writing in strong support of Bill 9, which would restructure short-term rentals in apartment-zoned areas and return much-needed housing to our long-term residents.
We have watched as our housing stock has decreased and we've seen prices rise beyond what local families can afford. Many of the vacation rentals, particularly those on the Minatoya list, are not even owned by Maui residents. These units serve as investment properties for off-island owners, while kamaʻāina struggle to find a place to live on their own island.
Bill 9 represents a step toward correcting this imbalance. By phasing out short-term rentals in apartment-zoned complexes, we can begin to restore housing opportunities for Maui families, workers, and future generations. This is not just a housing issue, this is also a matter of justice, sustainability, and aloha for our local community.
Please continue to put the people of Maui first. I urge you to pass Bill 9 and help return housing to those who call this place home.
Mahalo for your time and consideration,
Sanoe Awai
To the council,
I strongly support this ban of these short term rentals. This is the chance for residents to have a chance to buy or rent something at a someone reasonable price. We do not need this many places for tourists to rent, but we do need these places for locals to live. These rentals were once lived in by locals so the excuse that they are not good for long term living is not true. This was converted work force housing. We are letting people from the mainland take this money made from tourists off island and not used in our community. I left the teaching profession and entered tourism because I could not afford to live here as a teacher. After taxes I brought home $2700. A studio apartment is going for $2000 without utilities. That is impossible to live on Maui and teach. The short term rentals are giving people a cheaper deal to come to Maui and not spend the money to stay in a hotel. We would rather make Maui more affordable for tourists but not people living in our community. If you can about the people of Maui, please vote in support of the short term rental ban.
Sincerely,
Anna Leahey
Dear Chair Kama, Vice Chair Uʻu-Hodgins and Members of the Housing and Land Use Committee:
I oppose Bill 9 as drafted and propose that the Council amend Bill 9 to exclude Papakea Oceanfront Resort which the County has historically identified as having A2-H2 zoning. We have been a Condo owner for the past 16 years. I find it hard to believe that it would be beneficial for the County of Maui to eliminate short term rentals at the Papakea Resort. The loss of jobs which will be incurred if Bill 9 passes will be substantial. The current employees at Papakea such as maintenance crews, service crews. cleaning crews and front desk crews will be eliminated because the long term rental rates will not support the current employees and the rental income will be insufficient to cover basic services. Furthermore the units are too small to support young families as most of the units are limited to one bedroom. Who is going to make up the loss of revenue generated to the county of Maui for GET, TAT and Maui County TAT which is in the millions of dollars annually ???. I can see no benefit to the county of Maui or the public to change the current zoning. Sincerely, Papakea owner.