Formal Testimony in Support of Bill 9 – Addressing Legal Concerns and Community Impact
Aloha Chair and Councilmembers,
I write in strong support of **Bill 9**, a long-overdue corrective measure to ensure that Maui’s apartment-zoned lands are used to house residents—not to serve as de facto hotels for speculative profit. I specifically wish to address one of the more persistent arguments against Bill 9: that the bill is allegedly “doomed” in court and that its passage will trigger economic chaos and legal uncertainty. This argument, while dramatic, does not withstand factual, legal, or moral scrutiny.
I. Legal Authority for Bill 9 Is Sound and Precedented
Opponents claim that “Bill 9 will not survive in the courts,” but this is a speculative and misleading assertion. Counties in Hawai‘i possess clear authority under **HRS §46-4** to regulate land use through zoning, and this power has been upheld repeatedly by Hawai‘i courts. As affirmed in *Vacation Rentals by Owner, Inc. v. County of Maui* and similar cases, counties have the right and responsibility to regulate short-term rentals and to define the appropriate uses of zoning districts.
Furthermore, this power is strengthened by **Maui County Charter Section 3-6**, which entrusts the Council with legislative powers over land use. The purpose of Bill 9—to return apartment-zoned units to their intended residential use—falls squarely within this authority and reflects a compelling governmental interest: to alleviate a housing crisis that continues to displace our residents, increase homelessness, and destabilize our workforce.
II. Courts Do Not Automatically Strike Down Controversial Laws
The notion that legal challenges will “cloud” titles or freeze the market misunderstands how law and lending interact. Every major piece of land use legislation—especially those that challenge entrenched economic interests—faces legal scrutiny. That does not mean they are invalid. Laws are tested, refined, and upheld or adjusted through normal judicial processes. That is a feature of democracy, not a flaw.
Moreover, the County has a clear path to preempt litigation by including strong legislative findings, transition periods, and narrowly tailored provisions. If the Council clearly articulates the *public purpose* of Bill 9—protecting housing for residents and ending improper use of apartment zones—the courts will have a well-documented rationale to uphold the law.
III. Fear of Economic Harm Is Misplaced
Opponents claim that the bill will prevent local people from getting loans due to “clouded legal status,” forcing a wave of cash-rich investors to “swoop in” and buy distressed properties. But let’s be clear: that is already happening now. The existing system allows for absentee ownership, corporate hoarding, and unchecked commodification of Maui’s housing supply.
What Bill 9 does is *reduce* speculative value by removing the short-term rental premium and restoring these units to their *original intended use*—long-term housing. This shift favors local families and workforce renters over speculators. Long-term rentals offer more stable income and are more attractive to local lenders. Claims that banks will stop lending on properties due to the bill are anecdotal and unsupported by any formal analysis.
IV. The Status Quo Is the Real Threat to Residents
Ironically, the same voices warning that Bill 9 will “invite big investors” are defending the very system that has made it impossible for local families to compete. The truth is: **short-term rental conversion is already a driving force behind displacement, overcrowding, and housing scarcity.**
Bill 9 addresses the root problem—misuse of zoning and the financialization of housing—by enforcing existing land use norms and correcting a well-known loophole. Far from being a reckless legal gamble, it is a prudent, measured, and necessary intervention.
V. Moral and Constitutional Imperatives Support Bill 9
The Hawai‘i State Constitution (see **Article XI, Section 3**) affirms the public trust and the kuleana of government to manage lands and resources for the benefit of current and future generations. While incentives for long-term rentals may be appropriate tools, they are insufficient alone. Without enforcement and structural reform, soft measures will be gamed, delayed, or ignored by those who benefit from the current imbalance.
Bill 9 reflects the County’s duty to serve its people, not investor interests. As Maui faces a growing housing emergency, the moral question is not whether the County can act—but whether it *will.*
VI: Full support of Bill 9 by this Committee
In closing, Bill 9 is not just legally defensible—it is morally urgent. The argument that the bill is too risky legally or economically is an attempt to paralyze bold action through fear. The greater risk is doing nothing. Failure to pass this bill means continued displacement, rising inequality, and the erosion of the very communities this Council was elected to protect.
I urge you to pass Bill 9 and reject the politics of paralysis. Uphold your kuleana to the people of Maui, and let this be the moment we chose residents over revenue.
The bottom line is that Bill 9 will not survive in the courts. No matter how much testimony you hear, if you proceed with Bill 9, it will be tangled up in the courts for years to come. Even if property values decrease during that time, no loans will be given by banks to properties under the cloud of a legal issue. No Hawaiian, or small family investor, will be able to get a loan to purchase a property. Only big investors with deep pockets who will pay cash will be able to purchase properties. And you can bet that is exactly what will happen here. They will swoop in and buy every distressed property on Maui and Molokai. That is your unintended consequence here.
Article 8, Section 3 of the Hawaiian state constitution gives you the legal wiggle room to incentivize condo owners to rent long term. I would suggest you put your energies towards looking into that.
Regards,
Ken Carpenter
Condo owner
Wavecrest
Molokai
Submitted to: Maui County Council – Housing and Land Use Committee
Hearing Date: June 23, 2025
Aloha Chair Kama, Vice-Chair, and Councilmembers,
Thank you for your work on Bill 9. I support this bill and encourage you to move it forward because it is what Maui needs right now.
My family owns three short-term vacation rentals (STVRs) that are currently operating in apartment zones where they shouldn’t be. We know these are illegal under current zoning rules. We are planning to sell them because the investment is no longer working for us, and it’s time to move on.
Why Bill 9 Matters
For too long, apartments meant for local residents have been used as vacation rentals instead. These units were not built to be hotels or resorts, but to provide housing for people who live here.
Many of these units can’t really serve long-term renters because of how they are set up or managed. That’s why some owners treat them like hotels—renting to tourists for short stays and making more money. But this hurts Maui’s people, especially those who need affordable housing.
The Reality of Investment Properties
Most of these vacation rentals are investments, not homes. Owners use tax breaks, defer taxes when they sell, and expect high profits from short stays.
But this creates problems: workers like teachers, nurses, and other local people can’t find homes. Our community loses because so many apartments are used for tourists instead of residents.
It’s Time for Change
Bill 9 will close the loophole allowing these illegal rentals to keep operating. It gives owners time to adjust or sell, like my family is doing.
We need to protect Maui’s people, workforce, and future. This bill helps make housing more available for locals, stops unfair profit from loopholes, and respects the original zoning rules.
Final Thought
I support Bill 9 because it puts the community first. I urge you to pass it and protect Maui’s residents and the land.
Submitted to: Maui County Council – Housing and Land Use Committee
Hearing Date: June 23, 2025
Aloha Chair Kama, Vice-Chair, and Honorable Councilmembers,
Thank you for holding the line in service of the public trust. I am writing in **firm and resolute support of Bill 9**. It is long past time we closed the apartment zoning loophole, restored integrity to our land use process, and finally said—with courage and clarity—that **Maui is not for sale to the highest bidder at the expense of our own people**.
This Isn’t Just a Bill—It’s a Turning Point
Let’s be clear: this isn’t a technical land use amendment. This is a decision about **who Maui is for**.
For years, apartment-zoned properties—intended for residents—have been exploited through an informal loophole known as the **Minatoya List**, allowing commercial transient vacation rentals (TVRs) to flourish in residential areas. These are not legally zoned hotel districts. Yet these properties operate as de facto hotels, with higher profits, fewer restrictions, and zero alignment with the community’s needs.
Bill 9 corrects this distortion.
This is your chance to restore public faith, rein in investor privilege, and give Maui a fighting chance to remain a livable, local place—not just a luxury experience curated for tourists and remote investors.
Investment Properties Are Not Homes. They Are Businesses.
We must speak truthfully about how these units function. These are **not primary residences**. These are **income-producing assets**, typically owned by investors who:
* Claim tax write-offs (depreciation, mortgage interest, repairs, and management fees)
* Use **1031 exchanges** to defer capital gains
* Extract **high short-term cash flow** through dynamic pricing platforms
* Write off travel expenses under the guise of “property management”
* Walk away from the property entirely when the market crashes
During the **2008 financial crisis**, we watched second, third, and fourth homes in Hawaiʻi hit the market as **short sales and foreclosures**—abandoned because they stopped producing profit. Those units flooded the banks, not the rental market. Let us not pretend these are sacred family homes. They are **tools of speculation**, and when they lose their luster, they’re discarded like any other depreciated asset.
Is that what we want for our apartment-zoned neighborhoods?
RAM's Position Is Politically Timid and Economically Unrealistic
The **Realtors Association of Maui (RAM)** has failed to meet this moment with the strength and clarity our community deserves. Instead of a clear defense of residential housing, RAM proposes a **5-year phase-out** and pushes for **AOAO-led rezonings**—a process that is legally unnecessary, practically burdensome, and arguably dishonest.
Why should apartment complexes—already zoned for residential use—have to “earn” back their zoning by rezoning again? RAM knows this would sow confusion, delay justice, and fracture AOAO communities in costly legal battles.
Worse, it suggests we must negotiate with investors over public land use decisions—as if **profit is more important than people**. That is a betrayal of every working family struggling to rent, every employer trying to hire, and every child forced to leave their homeland because their parents can’t find stable housing.
Legally Sound. Morally Necessary. Economically Smart.
Let’s anchor this in fact:
* **Act 17 (2024)** affirms County authority to phase out transient accommodations
* **Case law** from the Hawai‘i Intermediate Court of Appeals (1997, 2016) supports phasing out non-conforming uses—especially when vested rights are not explicitly codified by law
* **Bill 9 provides a fair sunset window**, giving owners ample time to adjust
* This is not a “taking” under the Constitution—it is the **County enforcing zoning law**, which is entirely within its police power
Those who scream “unconstitutional” are trying to frighten you into submission. Don’t fall for it. This is fear-based lobbying from a small, well-resourced subset of investors—not the voice of the people.
Our Workforce Is Disappearing While Units Sit Empty for Tourists
We’ve become a cautionary tale. Maui is now:
* **Losing teachers, nurses, and public workers** because they can’t afford rent
* Dependent on **fly-in labor** for construction and hospitality
* Watching as **youth leave for the mainland** to chase housing security
* Living in a paradox where there are more homes than ever—but fewer places to live
And the most painful irony? **Jobs are going unfilled** in precisely the same sectors TVRs depend on—cleaning, landscaping, hospitality. This is what happens when a tourism economy cannibalizes its own labor force.
Spain Has Reached Its Breaking Point. Will We?
Look no further than **Barcelona**, **Mallorca**, or **San Sebastián**. There, the saturation of STRs has led to public protests, tourist harassment, and anti-visitor graffiti that reads, *“Tourists Go Home.”*
We don’t want that for Maui. But if we continue ignoring our local people in favor of outside profit, we are sowing the same seeds of resentment. Bill 9 is a **peace offering** to the community—a signal that we value locals, not just luxury.
This Is Not Too Aggressive. It’s Already Too Late.
To the Council: **you are not overreaching—you are catching up.**
The damage has been done. It is already illegal, already harmful, already corrosive to our economy and social fabric. What we are asking you to do is **stop the bleeding before the patient dies**.
Delaying this bill to placate a handful of STR owners is not compromise—it’s capitulation.
It’s Time for the County to Lead—and the Courts to Follow
Some are calling for lawsuits. Let them come. The County is on solid legal ground, especially when defending the health, welfare, and housing of its residents. If challenged, **you are defending the common good**, not discriminating against lawful use.
And unlike the past, **this time the public is behind you**. We’re watching. We’re testifying. We’re voting.
---
PASS BILL 9—FOR MAUI, NOT WALL STREET
This is your moment to show that:
* **Maui belongs to its people**
* **Apartment zoning means housing—not loopholes**
* **Local working-class families are not expendable**
* **The long arc of public policy still bends toward justice**
You will hear please. You will hear fear. You will hear threats of legal action. But beneath all that noise is a simple truth:
**You are not here to protect investor ROI. You are here to protect your community.**
FINAL MAHALO
Thank you for your tireless work on this bill. Thank you for listening to the public instead of placating private interests. And thank you for making the hard choices that leadership demands.
**Pass Bill 9.** Not for headlines. Not for harmony. But for housing—and for the people of Maui.
Testimony in Opposition to Bill 9
Submitted by: Jennifer Nichols, Property Owner
Aloha Chair and Council Members,
My name is Jenn Nichols, and I am a property owner in West Maui. I am writing today to express my strong opposition to Bill 9.
Let me begin by acknowledging the painful truth that underlies much of this discussion: Maui is facing a housing crisis. Local families are struggling, and the cost of living has made it increasingly difficult for many residents to stay in the communities they love. As someone with deep respect for Maui and its people, I understand the urgency of action—but urgency must not override logic, long-term thinking, and sound policy.
Bill 9 is an emotional reaction to a complex, systemic issue. While it may offer the appearance of taking bold action, in reality, it fails to provide a sustainable or effective solution to the island’s housing challenges. Instead, it threatens to damage Maui’s economy, eliminate vital income for small property owners like myself, and ultimately leave residents no better off in the long run.
The narrative that removing short-term rentals will solve the housing crisis is misleading. The reality is that most short-term rental properties are not suitable or affordable for long-term occupancy. In many cases, these units lack the infrastructure, zoning, or layout required for full-time housing. More importantly, there is currently no plan in place to transition these units into viable homes for local families—no guarantee they would be used for housing at all.
At the same time, the economic damage from this bill would be swift and severe. Vacation rental income supports not only property owners, but also cleaners, maintenance workers, local contractors, hospitality staff, and countless small businesses across Maui. By gutting this sector without a realistic replacement plan, we risk creating more economic instability and job loss—ultimately harming the very residents we are trying to protect.
This bill is a short-term emotional response masquerading as a solution. Maui deserves better. Our residents deserve a plan grounded in reality—one that invests in true affordable housing development, infrastructure improvements, streamlined permitting, and incentives for local ownership. We need thoughtful, collaborative solutions that address the root causes of the crisis, not a reactive measure that creates new problems while failing to solve the original one.
I urge the Council to reject Bill 9 and instead work toward real, actionable, and sustainable housing reform—one that lifts up Maui’s residents rather than dividing and destabilizing our island further.
Mahalo for your time, and for considering the broader impacts of this bill.
Respectfully,
Jennifer Nichols
Property Owner – West Maui
We own and live full-time in an STR zoned building and have for some time. As we plan for our future, we fear that the design may not be comfortable for an aging couple as there are lots of stairs. We would love to continue living in our community and purchase a home nearby with space for extended family or even a caregiver when that time comes, but the growing disparity in cost,caused by the pending recision of the Minatoya list, between our condo and nearby homes will force us to either leave the island or relocate to an area far from friends, church, and neighbors (yes, even STRs have community). It is a heartbreaking choice that we hope not to be forced into making as we love the community we call home Kihei.
The condos that were built for short term rental are neither suitable or affordable for full time residents so the premise that eliminating short term rentals to provide more housing is an in both unrealistic and not feasible . Theses units are small and typically lack storage needed for long term living and are accompanied by huge HOA fees that full time resudents would not find affordable . This is a pie in the sky , stab in the dark try at a solution that will not solve the problem it has proposed to resolve and will create both hardship and more economic loss for Maui.
Aloha. I am a part-time resident of Kamaolesands. My husband and I have owned the condo for almost 8 years. We are opposed to the Bill for many reasons.. unfortunately so many people will be losing their jobs if the bill passes and the tourism is gonna to decrease dramatically. Hotels are going to take advantage of people with higher prices. Neighborhood stores are going to be closing down like they did during the pandemic and families with children who come to condos so they have kitchens and laundries and places for kids to play are going to be gone. We saw how the economy suffered during the pandemic and it breaks our heart to receive that happen again. We own a one bedroom two bath, and we will not be renting it long-term.. we want to be able to come back many times a year and enjoy beautiful Maui. With HOA fees and taxes that have risen dramatically in the last couple years, we cannot afford to price our condo for less than what it cost us to keep it.. I understand that housing is needed, but I don’t think this is the way to do it
Respectfully submitted
Rick and Patricia Passanisi
I am in full support of Bill 9. I am disturbed hearing from those who oppose Bill 9 who are saying it is the local residents choice to leave Maui. They do not have a choice! There is no housing for them here. Very insenstive.
As a homeowner at Wailea Ekahi III, I also concur with Patricia Char’s testimony on June 18. Our complex is in a PD-H (Hotel) zoning district, and short-term rentals have operated legally here for decades. Applying this bill to hotel-zoned properties like ours is unfair and potentially unconstitutional. Please exclude PD-H properties like Wailea Ekahi from Bill 9.. Patricia’s testimony captured the concerns shared by many responsible, long-term owners in our community. I want to highlight and reinforce several key points she raised:
Legal Use and Zoning Compliance
Wailea Ekahi III is located within the PD-H (Planned Development – Hotel) zoning district — not an apartment zone. This is a zoning classification intended for visitor accommodations, making short-term rentals fully consistent with the original and current land use plan. Despite this, Bill 9 would apply to our property simply because of its inclusion on the Minatoya list, disregarding the actual zoning intent and history of permitted use.
Good-Faith Reliance on County Policy
Owners at Ekahi have operated short-term rentals transparently and legally for decades, relying on the County’s repeated affirmations of STR legality through the Minatoya opinion and zoning records. Many of us purchased our units in good faith based on this understanding.
Constitutional and Property Rights Concerns
Retroactively eliminating these rights without compensation or a reasonable transition period raises serious constitutional issues — including potential violations of due process and the takings clause. These concerns were also outlined in detail by former Attorney General David Louie during his testimony.
Real-World Harm to Responsible Owners
Patricia Char spoke from experience — she, like many of us, is not a commercial investor, but a responsible owner who uses STR income to afford upkeep and long-term viability. The sudden elimination of STR use would cause disproportionate financial harm to owners who have followed all the rules.
Support for Fair Compromise
I respectfully urge the Council to consider exempting all hotel-zoned properties like ours.
Listen to Stan Franco
Apartment units should house people, not portfolios. Zoning is not for sale. Tax revenue cannot substitute for shelter.
Listen to
Stan Franco
Formal Testimony in Support of Bill 9 – Addressing Legal Concerns and Community Impact
Aloha Chair and Councilmembers,
I write in strong support of **Bill 9**, a long-overdue corrective measure to ensure that Maui’s apartment-zoned lands are used to house residents—not to serve as de facto hotels for speculative profit. I specifically wish to address one of the more persistent arguments against Bill 9: that the bill is allegedly “doomed” in court and that its passage will trigger economic chaos and legal uncertainty. This argument, while dramatic, does not withstand factual, legal, or moral scrutiny.
I. Legal Authority for Bill 9 Is Sound and Precedented
Opponents claim that “Bill 9 will not survive in the courts,” but this is a speculative and misleading assertion. Counties in Hawai‘i possess clear authority under **HRS §46-4** to regulate land use through zoning, and this power has been upheld repeatedly by Hawai‘i courts. As affirmed in *Vacation Rentals by Owner, Inc. v. County of Maui* and similar cases, counties have the right and responsibility to regulate short-term rentals and to define the appropriate uses of zoning districts.
Furthermore, this power is strengthened by **Maui County Charter Section 3-6**, which entrusts the Council with legislative powers over land use. The purpose of Bill 9—to return apartment-zoned units to their intended residential use—falls squarely within this authority and reflects a compelling governmental interest: to alleviate a housing crisis that continues to displace our residents, increase homelessness, and destabilize our workforce.
II. Courts Do Not Automatically Strike Down Controversial Laws
The notion that legal challenges will “cloud” titles or freeze the market misunderstands how law and lending interact. Every major piece of land use legislation—especially those that challenge entrenched economic interests—faces legal scrutiny. That does not mean they are invalid. Laws are tested, refined, and upheld or adjusted through normal judicial processes. That is a feature of democracy, not a flaw.
Moreover, the County has a clear path to preempt litigation by including strong legislative findings, transition periods, and narrowly tailored provisions. If the Council clearly articulates the *public purpose* of Bill 9—protecting housing for residents and ending improper use of apartment zones—the courts will have a well-documented rationale to uphold the law.
III. Fear of Economic Harm Is Misplaced
Opponents claim that the bill will prevent local people from getting loans due to “clouded legal status,” forcing a wave of cash-rich investors to “swoop in” and buy distressed properties. But let’s be clear: that is already happening now. The existing system allows for absentee ownership, corporate hoarding, and unchecked commodification of Maui’s housing supply.
What Bill 9 does is *reduce* speculative value by removing the short-term rental premium and restoring these units to their *original intended use*—long-term housing. This shift favors local families and workforce renters over speculators. Long-term rentals offer more stable income and are more attractive to local lenders. Claims that banks will stop lending on properties due to the bill are anecdotal and unsupported by any formal analysis.
IV. The Status Quo Is the Real Threat to Residents
Ironically, the same voices warning that Bill 9 will “invite big investors” are defending the very system that has made it impossible for local families to compete. The truth is: **short-term rental conversion is already a driving force behind displacement, overcrowding, and housing scarcity.**
Bill 9 addresses the root problem—misuse of zoning and the financialization of housing—by enforcing existing land use norms and correcting a well-known loophole. Far from being a reckless legal gamble, it is a prudent, measured, and necessary intervention.
V. Moral and Constitutional Imperatives Support Bill 9
The Hawai‘i State Constitution (see **Article XI, Section 3**) affirms the public trust and the kuleana of government to manage lands and resources for the benefit of current and future generations. While incentives for long-term rentals may be appropriate tools, they are insufficient alone. Without enforcement and structural reform, soft measures will be gamed, delayed, or ignored by those who benefit from the current imbalance.
Bill 9 reflects the County’s duty to serve its people, not investor interests. As Maui faces a growing housing emergency, the moral question is not whether the County can act—but whether it *will.*
VI: Full support of Bill 9 by this Committee
In closing, Bill 9 is not just legally defensible—it is morally urgent. The argument that the bill is too risky legally or economically is an attempt to paralyze bold action through fear. The greater risk is doing nothing. Failure to pass this bill means continued displacement, rising inequality, and the erosion of the very communities this Council was elected to protect.
I urge you to pass Bill 9 and reject the politics of paralysis. Uphold your kuleana to the people of Maui, and let this be the moment we chose residents over revenue.
Mahalo for your time and service.
Sincerely,
John Bonilla
Maui Resident
The bottom line is that Bill 9 will not survive in the courts. No matter how much testimony you hear, if you proceed with Bill 9, it will be tangled up in the courts for years to come. Even if property values decrease during that time, no loans will be given by banks to properties under the cloud of a legal issue. No Hawaiian, or small family investor, will be able to get a loan to purchase a property. Only big investors with deep pockets who will pay cash will be able to purchase properties. And you can bet that is exactly what will happen here. They will swoop in and buy every distressed property on Maui and Molokai. That is your unintended consequence here.
Article 8, Section 3 of the Hawaiian state constitution gives you the legal wiggle room to incentivize condo owners to rent long term. I would suggest you put your energies towards looking into that.
Regards,
Ken Carpenter
Condo owner
Wavecrest
Molokai
Submitted to: Maui County Council – Housing and Land Use Committee
Hearing Date: June 23, 2025
Aloha Chair Kama, Vice-Chair, and Councilmembers,
Thank you for your work on Bill 9. I support this bill and encourage you to move it forward because it is what Maui needs right now.
My family owns three short-term vacation rentals (STVRs) that are currently operating in apartment zones where they shouldn’t be. We know these are illegal under current zoning rules. We are planning to sell them because the investment is no longer working for us, and it’s time to move on.
Why Bill 9 Matters
For too long, apartments meant for local residents have been used as vacation rentals instead. These units were not built to be hotels or resorts, but to provide housing for people who live here.
Many of these units can’t really serve long-term renters because of how they are set up or managed. That’s why some owners treat them like hotels—renting to tourists for short stays and making more money. But this hurts Maui’s people, especially those who need affordable housing.
The Reality of Investment Properties
Most of these vacation rentals are investments, not homes. Owners use tax breaks, defer taxes when they sell, and expect high profits from short stays.
But this creates problems: workers like teachers, nurses, and other local people can’t find homes. Our community loses because so many apartments are used for tourists instead of residents.
It’s Time for Change
Bill 9 will close the loophole allowing these illegal rentals to keep operating. It gives owners time to adjust or sell, like my family is doing.
We need to protect Maui’s people, workforce, and future. This bill helps make housing more available for locals, stops unfair profit from loopholes, and respects the original zoning rules.
Final Thought
I support Bill 9 because it puts the community first. I urge you to pass it and protect Maui’s residents and the land.
Thank you for your time.
Respectfully,
Lore Menin
Kihei Resident
WRITTEN TESTIMONY IN STRONG SUPPORT OF BILL 9
Submitted to: Maui County Council – Housing and Land Use Committee
Hearing Date: June 23, 2025
Aloha Chair Kama, Vice-Chair, and Honorable Councilmembers,
Thank you for holding the line in service of the public trust. I am writing in **firm and resolute support of Bill 9**. It is long past time we closed the apartment zoning loophole, restored integrity to our land use process, and finally said—with courage and clarity—that **Maui is not for sale to the highest bidder at the expense of our own people**.
This Isn’t Just a Bill—It’s a Turning Point
Let’s be clear: this isn’t a technical land use amendment. This is a decision about **who Maui is for**.
For years, apartment-zoned properties—intended for residents—have been exploited through an informal loophole known as the **Minatoya List**, allowing commercial transient vacation rentals (TVRs) to flourish in residential areas. These are not legally zoned hotel districts. Yet these properties operate as de facto hotels, with higher profits, fewer restrictions, and zero alignment with the community’s needs.
Bill 9 corrects this distortion.
This is your chance to restore public faith, rein in investor privilege, and give Maui a fighting chance to remain a livable, local place—not just a luxury experience curated for tourists and remote investors.
Investment Properties Are Not Homes. They Are Businesses.
We must speak truthfully about how these units function. These are **not primary residences**. These are **income-producing assets**, typically owned by investors who:
* Claim tax write-offs (depreciation, mortgage interest, repairs, and management fees)
* Use **1031 exchanges** to defer capital gains
* Extract **high short-term cash flow** through dynamic pricing platforms
* Write off travel expenses under the guise of “property management”
* Walk away from the property entirely when the market crashes
During the **2008 financial crisis**, we watched second, third, and fourth homes in Hawaiʻi hit the market as **short sales and foreclosures**—abandoned because they stopped producing profit. Those units flooded the banks, not the rental market. Let us not pretend these are sacred family homes. They are **tools of speculation**, and when they lose their luster, they’re discarded like any other depreciated asset.
Is that what we want for our apartment-zoned neighborhoods?
RAM's Position Is Politically Timid and Economically Unrealistic
The **Realtors Association of Maui (RAM)** has failed to meet this moment with the strength and clarity our community deserves. Instead of a clear defense of residential housing, RAM proposes a **5-year phase-out** and pushes for **AOAO-led rezonings**—a process that is legally unnecessary, practically burdensome, and arguably dishonest.
Why should apartment complexes—already zoned for residential use—have to “earn” back their zoning by rezoning again? RAM knows this would sow confusion, delay justice, and fracture AOAO communities in costly legal battles.
Worse, it suggests we must negotiate with investors over public land use decisions—as if **profit is more important than people**. That is a betrayal of every working family struggling to rent, every employer trying to hire, and every child forced to leave their homeland because their parents can’t find stable housing.
Legally Sound. Morally Necessary. Economically Smart.
Let’s anchor this in fact:
* **Act 17 (2024)** affirms County authority to phase out transient accommodations
* **Case law** from the Hawai‘i Intermediate Court of Appeals (1997, 2016) supports phasing out non-conforming uses—especially when vested rights are not explicitly codified by law
* **Bill 9 provides a fair sunset window**, giving owners ample time to adjust
* This is not a “taking” under the Constitution—it is the **County enforcing zoning law**, which is entirely within its police power
Those who scream “unconstitutional” are trying to frighten you into submission. Don’t fall for it. This is fear-based lobbying from a small, well-resourced subset of investors—not the voice of the people.
Our Workforce Is Disappearing While Units Sit Empty for Tourists
We’ve become a cautionary tale. Maui is now:
* **Losing teachers, nurses, and public workers** because they can’t afford rent
* Dependent on **fly-in labor** for construction and hospitality
* Watching as **youth leave for the mainland** to chase housing security
* Living in a paradox where there are more homes than ever—but fewer places to live
And the most painful irony? **Jobs are going unfilled** in precisely the same sectors TVRs depend on—cleaning, landscaping, hospitality. This is what happens when a tourism economy cannibalizes its own labor force.
Spain Has Reached Its Breaking Point. Will We?
Look no further than **Barcelona**, **Mallorca**, or **San Sebastián**. There, the saturation of STRs has led to public protests, tourist harassment, and anti-visitor graffiti that reads, *“Tourists Go Home.”*
We don’t want that for Maui. But if we continue ignoring our local people in favor of outside profit, we are sowing the same seeds of resentment. Bill 9 is a **peace offering** to the community—a signal that we value locals, not just luxury.
This Is Not Too Aggressive. It’s Already Too Late.
To the Council: **you are not overreaching—you are catching up.**
The damage has been done. It is already illegal, already harmful, already corrosive to our economy and social fabric. What we are asking you to do is **stop the bleeding before the patient dies**.
Delaying this bill to placate a handful of STR owners is not compromise—it’s capitulation.
It’s Time for the County to Lead—and the Courts to Follow
Some are calling for lawsuits. Let them come. The County is on solid legal ground, especially when defending the health, welfare, and housing of its residents. If challenged, **you are defending the common good**, not discriminating against lawful use.
And unlike the past, **this time the public is behind you**. We’re watching. We’re testifying. We’re voting.
---
PASS BILL 9—FOR MAUI, NOT WALL STREET
This is your moment to show that:
* **Maui belongs to its people**
* **Apartment zoning means housing—not loopholes**
* **Local working-class families are not expendable**
* **The long arc of public policy still bends toward justice**
You will hear please. You will hear fear. You will hear threats of legal action. But beneath all that noise is a simple truth:
**You are not here to protect investor ROI. You are here to protect your community.**
FINAL MAHALO
Thank you for your tireless work on this bill. Thank you for listening to the public instead of placating private interests. And thank you for making the hard choices that leadership demands.
**Pass Bill 9.** Not for headlines. Not for harmony. But for housing—and for the people of Maui.
**With deep respect,**
Allin Bohba
Wailea Resident
Testimony in Opposition to Bill 9
Submitted by: Jennifer Nichols, Property Owner
Aloha Chair and Council Members,
My name is Jenn Nichols, and I am a property owner in West Maui. I am writing today to express my strong opposition to Bill 9.
Let me begin by acknowledging the painful truth that underlies much of this discussion: Maui is facing a housing crisis. Local families are struggling, and the cost of living has made it increasingly difficult for many residents to stay in the communities they love. As someone with deep respect for Maui and its people, I understand the urgency of action—but urgency must not override logic, long-term thinking, and sound policy.
Bill 9 is an emotional reaction to a complex, systemic issue. While it may offer the appearance of taking bold action, in reality, it fails to provide a sustainable or effective solution to the island’s housing challenges. Instead, it threatens to damage Maui’s economy, eliminate vital income for small property owners like myself, and ultimately leave residents no better off in the long run.
The narrative that removing short-term rentals will solve the housing crisis is misleading. The reality is that most short-term rental properties are not suitable or affordable for long-term occupancy. In many cases, these units lack the infrastructure, zoning, or layout required for full-time housing. More importantly, there is currently no plan in place to transition these units into viable homes for local families—no guarantee they would be used for housing at all.
At the same time, the economic damage from this bill would be swift and severe. Vacation rental income supports not only property owners, but also cleaners, maintenance workers, local contractors, hospitality staff, and countless small businesses across Maui. By gutting this sector without a realistic replacement plan, we risk creating more economic instability and job loss—ultimately harming the very residents we are trying to protect.
This bill is a short-term emotional response masquerading as a solution. Maui deserves better. Our residents deserve a plan grounded in reality—one that invests in true affordable housing development, infrastructure improvements, streamlined permitting, and incentives for local ownership. We need thoughtful, collaborative solutions that address the root causes of the crisis, not a reactive measure that creates new problems while failing to solve the original one.
I urge the Council to reject Bill 9 and instead work toward real, actionable, and sustainable housing reform—one that lifts up Maui’s residents rather than dividing and destabilizing our island further.
Mahalo for your time, and for considering the broader impacts of this bill.
Respectfully,
Jennifer Nichols
Property Owner – West Maui
We own and live full-time in an STR zoned building and have for some time. As we plan for our future, we fear that the design may not be comfortable for an aging couple as there are lots of stairs. We would love to continue living in our community and purchase a home nearby with space for extended family or even a caregiver when that time comes, but the growing disparity in cost,caused by the pending recision of the Minatoya list, between our condo and nearby homes will force us to either leave the island or relocate to an area far from friends, church, and neighbors (yes, even STRs have community). It is a heartbreaking choice that we hope not to be forced into making as we love the community we call home Kihei.
The condos that were built for short term rental are neither suitable or affordable for full time residents so the premise that eliminating short term rentals to provide more housing is an in both unrealistic and not feasible . Theses units are small and typically lack storage needed for long term living and are accompanied by huge HOA fees that full time resudents would not find affordable . This is a pie in the sky , stab in the dark try at a solution that will not solve the problem it has proposed to resolve and will create both hardship and more economic loss for Maui.
Aloha. I am a part-time resident of Kamaolesands. My husband and I have owned the condo for almost 8 years. We are opposed to the Bill for many reasons.. unfortunately so many people will be losing their jobs if the bill passes and the tourism is gonna to decrease dramatically. Hotels are going to take advantage of people with higher prices. Neighborhood stores are going to be closing down like they did during the pandemic and families with children who come to condos so they have kitchens and laundries and places for kids to play are going to be gone. We saw how the economy suffered during the pandemic and it breaks our heart to receive that happen again. We own a one bedroom two bath, and we will not be renting it long-term.. we want to be able to come back many times a year and enjoy beautiful Maui. With HOA fees and taxes that have risen dramatically in the last couple years, we cannot afford to price our condo for less than what it cost us to keep it.. I understand that housing is needed, but I don’t think this is the way to do it
Respectfully submitted
Rick and Patricia Passanisi
I am in full support of Bill 9. I am disturbed hearing from those who oppose Bill 9 who are saying it is the local residents choice to leave Maui. They do not have a choice! There is no housing for them here. Very insenstive.
As a homeowner at Wailea Ekahi III, I also concur with Patricia Char’s testimony on June 18. Our complex is in a PD-H (Hotel) zoning district, and short-term rentals have operated legally here for decades. Applying this bill to hotel-zoned properties like ours is unfair and potentially unconstitutional. Please exclude PD-H properties like Wailea Ekahi from Bill 9.. Patricia’s testimony captured the concerns shared by many responsible, long-term owners in our community. I want to highlight and reinforce several key points she raised:
Legal Use and Zoning Compliance
Wailea Ekahi III is located within the PD-H (Planned Development – Hotel) zoning district — not an apartment zone. This is a zoning classification intended for visitor accommodations, making short-term rentals fully consistent with the original and current land use plan. Despite this, Bill 9 would apply to our property simply because of its inclusion on the Minatoya list, disregarding the actual zoning intent and history of permitted use.
Good-Faith Reliance on County Policy
Owners at Ekahi have operated short-term rentals transparently and legally for decades, relying on the County’s repeated affirmations of STR legality through the Minatoya opinion and zoning records. Many of us purchased our units in good faith based on this understanding.
Constitutional and Property Rights Concerns
Retroactively eliminating these rights without compensation or a reasonable transition period raises serious constitutional issues — including potential violations of due process and the takings clause. These concerns were also outlined in detail by former Attorney General David Louie during his testimony.
Real-World Harm to Responsible Owners
Patricia Char spoke from experience — she, like many of us, is not a commercial investor, but a responsible owner who uses STR income to afford upkeep and long-term viability. The sudden elimination of STR use would cause disproportionate financial harm to owners who have followed all the rules.
Support for Fair Compromise
I respectfully urge the Council to consider exempting all hotel-zoned properties like ours.