I write in **strong support of Bill 9**, which is a necessary and overdue correction to decades of misapplied zoning practices that have worsened Maui’s housing crisis, displaced residents, and undermined our public trust obligations.
Below are **key points in support of this bill** and rebuttals to the most common arguments made in opposition.
---
### **1. Profitability Is Not the County’s Kuleana**
Opponents claim many STR owners “lose \$25,000 annually,” arguing they are not part of the problem. But **land use policy is not based on private investor ROI.** Whether or not an owner profits, **each STR still removes a potential home from Maui’s long-term housing supply.** The County’s kuleana is to serve its people, not protect investor balance sheets.
---
### **2. STR Units Are Suitable for Local Housing**
Some argue that “families would not live” in these units due to small size, parking limits, or HOA rules. This is false. **Thousands of Maui families already live in similar apartments with shared parking, pet restrictions, and HOA covenants.** For young couples, kūpuna, and workforce housing, **a 2-bedroom, 2-bath apartment is a viable and much-needed home.**
---
### **3. STR Trading and Loopholes Show the Need for Enforcement**
Opponents admit they may “trade time” with other owners if STRs are restricted. This illustrates **why Bill 9 must pass**—to close loopholes and prevent illegal commercial use in residential districts.
---
### **4. This Is Not “Short-Sighted”—It Is Immediate Relief**
Some say the “real problem” is construction delays and regulation. But Maui does not have the luxury of waiting 5–10 years for new development. **Bill 9 offers immediate, low-cost relief by returning existing residential units to the long-term market now.**
---
### **5. STR Tax Revenue Does Not Justify Displacement**
It is argued that the County will lose “hundreds of millions” in STR revenue. But this revenue has **not improved local housing affordability or quality of life.** It has subsidized tourism while Maui residents are priced out. Residents living and spending locally generate **steady, sustainable tax revenue year-round** without overloading infrastructure.
---
### **6. Even Partial Conversion Will Help**
Opponents claim “no one will convert,” but even a **25–40% conversion rate returns 1,000–2,000 units**—enough to meaningfully reduce displacement pressures. With strong enforcement and demand for long-term rentals, many owners will choose to rent to residents.
---
### **7. STR Revenue Cannot Be the Basis for Housing Policy**
Some propose keeping STRs and using their revenue to build housing. This is circular logic—**continuing to displace residents to fund housing only worsens the crisis.** The County’s zoning authority exists to **preserve residential use, not subsidize commercial tourist accommodations.**
---
### **8. STRs Do Strain Resources**
Opponents compare STR water use to hotels, but that is irrelevant. **The proper comparison is STR vs. long-term residential use.** STRs use more water, produce more waste, and generate more traffic due to high guest turnover.
---
### **9. Legal Precedent Supports Bill 9**
Some argue that other cities reversed STR bans. But many jurisdictions—**Honolulu, Santa Monica, and Barcelona among them—successfully phased out STRs in residential zones.** Maui has strong constitutional authority under the **public trust doctrine** to protect housing for residents.
---
### **10. The Minatoya Exemption Was a Policy Mistake**
The “Minatoya list” was **never intended as a permanent entitlement.** Many of these apartment units were originally built as workforce housing. **Bill 9 corrects this historic failure by returning A-1 and A-2 properties to their intended residential purpose.**
---
### **11. Tourism Will Continue Without STRs in Housing Zones**
Visitors come to Maui for its natural beauty, not because they can stay in an apartment district. Hotels and legal resort-zoned condos provide ample accommodations. **Over-tourism has already contributed to wildfire risks, traffic congestion, and declining resident quality of life.** Bill 9 supports a shift to a **more sustainable tourism model.**
---
### **12. Bill 9 Strengthens Maui’s Economy by Stabilizing the Workforce**
Opponents claim STRs benefit the economy, but **an economy that displaces its own workforce is unsustainable.** Housing residents near their jobs reduces commuting, keeps local spending circulating, and creates year-round economic stability rather than seasonal tourist dependence.
---
### **CONCLUSION**
Bill 9 is not just a zoning adjustment; it is a moral, economic, and legal obligation to restore housing to Maui residents, correct decades of failed policy, and fulfill the County’s public trust duty.
I urge you to pass Bill 9 without delay.
Mahalo for your time and commitment to our community.
Respectfully submitted,
Reggie Akamai
Deleted User
at July 23, 2025 at 11:32am HST
1. Alice Lee’s Premise is Flawed: Mainland Investors Already Own These Units
Current Reality:
The majority of the **Apartment District (A-1 and A-2 zoned properties)** under the Minatoya Exemption are already dominated by mainland and foreign investors. The County’s own tax records show high percentages of out-of-state ownership.
Bill 9 Doesn’t Change Ownership—It Changes USE:
Bill 9 does not **increase** or **encourage** mainland purchases. It simply shifts allowed use from **short-term transient rentals** to **long-term residential housing.
If mainland investors already own these properties, they’re **not “suddenly flocking”** because of Bill 9.
Cyclical Market, Not County-Controlled:
Real estate markets are cyclical and influenced by **interest rates, federal tax codes (1031 exchanges, capital gains), and global investor sentiment**—not by Bill 9. Investors will come and go regardless of this legislation. The County’s kuleana is to **regulate land use for the public good, not investor ROI.
2. Budget Cuts Argument is Misleading
Alice Lee’s call for budget cuts assumes that **Bill 9 will cause a major tax revenue loss**. This is questionable for several reasons:
a. STVR Tax Revenue is Not Reliable or Sustainable
* STVR-related revenue is **volatile** and tied to global tourism cycles, pandemics, wildfires, and flight costs.
* Maui’s overdependence on transient accommodation tax (TAT) and property tax from STVRs has **not translated to improved housing or infrastructure** for residents.
b. Bill 9 Could Stabilize Revenue in the Long Term
Transitioning these units to long-term housing can **increase resident population stability**, which leads to **more consistent GET (General Excise Tax)**, **local spending**, and **service-based employment**—a more reliable tax base.
Overcrowding, car saturation, and wildfire risks (which were worsened by over-tourism in these areas) are **far costlier** to the County than any modest revenue dip.
c. Budget Priorities Need Reevaluation, Not Cuts
* If Bill 9 forces a revenue adjustment, the logical response is **reprioritization**—cutting wasteful tourism subsidies, tightening speculative loopholes—not slashing essential public services for residents.
3. The “Mainland Investor Takeover” Hypothetical is Illogical
Alice Lee’s “what if” scenario implies that Bill 9 will make the market more attractive to mainland speculators. The opposite is true:
a. Mainland Investors Prefer STVR Income
Investors are motivated by **high nightly rates**, not by long-term residential rents. Eliminating STVR use in these zones **reduces speculative appeal.
b. Depressed STVR Value = Opportunity for Local Buyers
A cooling of speculative demand could **lower prices** and open pathways for **local families, nonprofits, and housing programs** to acquire these units.
c. Mainland Investor Ownership is Already Here
This concern is decades late; the Minatoya Exemption accelerated out-of-state purchases beginning in the 1990s. If Alice Lee is suddenly worried about investor control, she should be **supporting Bill 9** because it curtails the very STVR-driven incentive that attracted them.
4. The Real Question: Who Does Alice Lee Think the County Works For?
* The County’s kuleana is **not to protect speculative investors or to guarantee County coffers through volatile tourism taxes**.
* The County’s kuleana **is to protect residents, stabilize housing, and mitigate risks**—including:
* **Wildfire risk worsened by overdevelopment and transient density** (Lāhainā fires are a clear warning).
* **Overpopulation and car saturation** straining roads, water, and emergency response.
* **The declared housing emergency**, which makes keeping A-1 and A-2 units in residential use a legal and ethical obligation.
Mainland investors are already here—Bill 9 doesn’t invite them, it removes their biggest incentive: short-term rental income. Real estate markets are cyclical and beyond County control, but housing policy is not. Alice Lee’s budget cut threats are based on short-term speculation, not long-term stability. Bill 9 protects residents, not investor ROI, and that is the County’s true kuleana.”
Hotel designation as it is written requires minimum count of full time staff and a front desk within the building. Some building don't meet those requirements.
I strongly support Bill 9 as we desperately need affordable housing now. I wish the amortization period would end sooner than 2028. Reducing the number of TVRs will not devastate tourism; as we have seen during Covid-19, people who want to visit Maui will find a way to come. If some TVRs are no longer available, they can book other TVRs, hotel rooms, B and Bs, and timeshares.
We have an acute shortage of professionals and workers on Maui, incl. teachers, medical professionals, government workers, labor, even lifeguards. People who want to move (back) here to help and contribute by filling the many open positions cannot do so because housing is scarce and too expensive.
I understand that the tourism/vacation rental industries and the developers/construction industries heavily lobby against this bill; I sincerely hope that we can put the well-being of our community first and before profits. Denying residents a basic need (housing) so others (e.g., mainland corporations, mainland investors) can continue to profit is akin to controlling a well and selling water to the highest bidder while people around the well are dying of thirst.
For a healthy and sustainable visitor-to- resident ratio, please consider the Maui Island Plan that suggested a visitor population that is one-third of the resident population, which has been exceeded in recent years to over 40%.
Mahalo for taking the time and earnestly considering and debating this very important issue.
According to the Maui county website it states there no video for todays meeting?! Not everyone can make it in person and surely so many wish to witness what’s happening. Am I mistaken, Is there a link to witness?
While building new affordable housing is absolutely necessary, Bill 9 addresses a different but equally urgent problem—the ongoing misuse of existing housing stock in the Apartment District (A-1 and A-2 zoned properties) for short-term vacation rentals (STVRs).
1. Bill 9 provides immediate relief by returning hundreds of existing, ready-to-occupy housing units to the long-term rental market. Constructing new affordable housing takes 5–10 years, but reclaiming these units can happen in months.
2. Maui’s housing crisis is not only about new construction—it’s about accessibility of existing housing. Even if we build more units, as long as investors continue converting residential apartments into tourist accommodations, locals will keep getting displaced. Bill 9 closes that loophole.
3. The County’s duty is to balance both short- and long-term solutions. Passing Bill 9 and building new affordable housing are not mutually exclusive; in fact, Bill 9 helps reduce pressure on infrastructure, land use, and speculative pricing, making future affordable housing development more viable.
4. Keeping status quo benefits investors, not residents. Failure to act allows speculative buying to continue, pushing housing prices further out of reach for Maui families while taxpayers shoulder the cost of emergency housing and subsidies.
In short, Bill 9 is a necessary first step in stabilizing the housing market and protecting local residents, while new affordable housing projects are planned and built.
Please do not pass this Bill. It will not solve Maui's affordable housing crisis, either short-term or long-term. What you should spend your time, efforts and our money on is BUILDING new affordable housing; for current and future needs of our County.
Good morning.
I support Bill 9 as a solution to recreate long term housing on Maui .
On the maui County Property tax and on the Maui Real estate information , when building were built, it was their property address that confirmed their zoning and use.
In the 1962 Amfac took their agriculturally zoned 1200 acres and decided to create a tourist destination. It did not become a district. It did become a 1200 acre destination with lots zoned for hotel, lots for residential condominiums, apartment use lots, used for employer housing, retail zoned lots and residential house lots. It is not a Hotel “district”.
The same thing happened in Honolua area. Maui Land & Pine changed their Agriculture land into a resort area. The Kapalua bay Hotel was opened in 1978 as a hotel and then became a timeshare. The Ironwoods opened 1979 zoned A-2 , Kapalua bay villas zoned A-2, Kapalua Golf Villas A2, when the the Ridge Kapalua was built it also changed from Ag zoning to Apartment 2. Some of their agriculturally zoned land the developers had rezoned as PD . Kapalua is not and never was all Hotel Use zoned.
Please look at the Maui zoning on a lot by lot basis . We have lost enough residential zoned lots .
Sincerely
Robin ritchie
1. Bill 9 Corrects a Zoning Loophole, Restoring Properties to Their Intended Use
Apartment Districts (A-1 and A-2) were designed for residential housing, not transient visitor lodging. Bill 9 closes the long-standing Minatoya Exemption loophole and realigns zoning with its original legal intent.
2. It Addresses Housing Shortages by Stopping the Bleeding of Units to Tourism
While Bill 9 doesn’t build new housing overnight, it prevents further loss of existing housing stock to STVR use. Every apartment unit removed from STVR circulation is a potential home for a Maui family.
3. Public Trust in Government Requires Fixing Past Mistakes
The County has a legal and moral duty to correct a policy (the Minatoya Exemption) that unintentionally harmed residents. Continuing to allow STVRs in apartment zones undermines public confidence in zoning laws.
4. It Serves the Greatest Public Need: Housing for Residents
The County Council must balance competing interests, but its primary duty is to protect the majority of residents suffering from housing insecurity—not to preserve speculative investments for a smaller group of owners.
5. Economic Stability Depends on a Housed Workforce
Maui cannot sustain a visitor-driven economy without workers who can afford to live here. By restoring housing to residents, Bill 9 stabilizes the workforce, which supports businesses and services across all industries.
6. Local Jobs Will Transition, Not Disappear
Opponents argue that workers (cleaners, landscapers, maintenance staff) will lose jobs, but these same services will be needed for long-term rentals, affordable housing rehabilitation, and resident-occupied apartments, which provide more stable employment.
7. Housing Residents Circulates More Money Locally
Visitor spending disproportionately benefits off-island corporations and investors, whereas resident housing increases local spending, GET, and property tax circulation within Maui’s economy.
8. Bill 9 Reduces Maui’s Dangerous Overdependence on Tourism
The Lāhainā fire and COVID-19 showed how fragile Maui’s tourism-dependent economy is. Bill 9 diversifies the economic base by ensuring more housing for residents, which keeps essential workers on-island.
9. Phasing Out STVRs Reduces Inflationary Pressure on Housing Prices
Apartment-zoned STVRs artificially inflate property values, making apartments unaffordable for residents. Returning these properties to housing use will help stabilize or lower market prices over time.
10. It Protects Community Infrastructure and Public Services
Visitor density in residential zones strains roads, water, sewage, and emergency services. Bill 9 reduces this burden, improving quality of life for residents and lowering County maintenance costs.
11. Tax Revenue from STVRs Has Not Solved the Housing Crisis
Despite millions in STVR tax revenue, housing insecurity has worsened. Bill 9 shifts focus from collecting taxes on the problem to solving the problem itself.
12. Long-Term Housing Generates More Sustainable Revenue
Resident-occupied housing creates consistent GET and income tax revenue from workers who live, spend, and raise families here—rather than relying on volatile tourism cycles.
13. It Reduces Depopulation and Keeps Families on Maui
Bill 9 helps prevent the ongoing exodus of local families who are forced to move to the mainland due to housing costs, preserving Maui’s cultural identity and workforce stability.
14. The Transition is Gradual, Not Abrupt
Bill 9 includes a phase-out period, giving owners and workers time to adjust and redeploy resources toward long-term housing markets.
15. It Reduces Social Inequity Caused by Speculative Ownership
Many apartment STVRs are owned by off-island investors who profit while local residents struggle. Bill 9 prioritizes housing for people who live and work here over speculative income streams.
16. It Decreases Wildfire and Disaster Risks Linked to Overpopulation
Visitor overconcentration increases traffic congestion and evacuation challenges, as seen in the Lāhainā fires. Reducing transient lodging in residential zones improves public safety and disaster preparedness.
17. It Aligns With the Emergency Proclamation on Housing
The Governor and County have declared a housing emergency. Continuing to allow STVRs in apartment zones directly contradicts the declared emergency need for housing.
18. Ending the Minatoya Exemption is Legally Defensible and Ethically Necessary
The exemption was never intended to permanently override residential zoning. Clarifying and enforcing the law protects the County from future lawsuits and fulfills its public trust obligation.
19. It Improves Quality of Life for Residents
Fewer transient visitors in residential zones means less noise, traffic, and overcrowding, improving the livability of Maui’s communities.
20. It Balances Long-Term Community Health Over Short-Term Profit
Bill 9 represents a strategic, long-term investment in Maui’s future. Sacrificing a portion of short-term rental profits now prevents deeper economic and social collapse later.
Deleted User
at July 22, 2025 at 9:05am HST
In August 2023, Maui faced a catastrophic wildfire that destroyed over 2,200 structures—96% residential—across Lāhainā and burned more than 17,000 acres, resulting in at least $5.5 billion in property damage. Housing recovery alone is projected to cost $2.4 billion, with three-quarters of those units formerly rental homes—more than 5,500 units destroyed, deepening displacement and skyrocketing rents. Many displaced households now pay 43% more in rent for equivalent housing, and the broader economic toll—including lost tourism income, jobs, and tax revenue—is estimated at $12 billion, with over 12,000 residents displaced.
And yet, humanitarian aid and housing recovery measures have been stalled in committee for nearly two years, delayed by lobbying from desperate, inhumane investor groups who have fought to preserve this zoning loophole at the expense of wildfire survivors. This obstruction has kept thousands of displaced residents in hotels, cars, and unsafe temporary housing while investors argue for their right to continue extracting profits from Maui’s limited housing stock.
Compared to this scale of destruction—the economic, social, and human cost—the financial correction imposed by Bill 9 is minimal. The real devastation is the ongoing suffering of Maui’s people, held hostage by policy gridlock driven by STR investors. Closing this loophole is not just zoning reform; it is an urgent humanitarian necessity.
Here is a Bill 9 Fact Sheet designed to quickly debunk the misleading narratives being pushed by realtors and STVR owners. This can be attached to written testimony, handed to committee members, or used as talking points for oral testimony.
⸻
FACT SHEET: Debunking Misleading Claims About Bill 9
Restoring Housing for Maui Residents – Correcting Decades of Abuse in the Apartment District (A-1 and A-2 zoned properties)
⸻
1. “Local families won’t buy these apartments – they’re too small and too expensive.”
FALSE.
✅ Not all households are families of four. Teachers, nurses, kūpuna, single parents, and young professionals urgently need one- and two-bedroom units.
✅ Prices and HOA fees are artificially inflated by STVR use—wear-and-tear, transient insurance costs, and speculation all drive costs up.
✅ As visitor demand decreases, market prices and long-term rental rates will adjust downward, making these units accessible to residents.
⸻
2. “Bill 9 will hurt Maui’s economy.”
FALSE.
✅ “Economic impact studies” cited by STVR owners were funded or influenced by the tourism industry and measure visitor spending—not community well-being.
✅ Maui’s economy is already collapsing for residents because workers cannot find housing; without a workforce, businesses, schools, and hospitals suffer.
✅ Over-tourism costs (traffic, wildfires, infrastructure strain) outweigh the short-term profits of STVR speculation.
⸻
3. “This isn’t an investment property – it’s our family home.”
FALSE.
✅ If a property is used part-time and rented for income when not in use, it is an investment property by definition.
✅ Emotional appeals about “family memories” do not change the fact that these homes are unavailable to residents who have no housing at all.
⸻
4. “One-bedroom condos aren’t suitable for local housing.”
FALSE.
✅ Maui’s housing crisis affects all household types—kūpuna, single workers, young couples, and childless families also need safe housing.
✅ Claiming “if it’s not big enough for a family of four, it’s useless” is a stall tactic to protect STVR profits.
⸻
5. “We should just build more housing instead of taking ours.”
FALSE.
✅ New construction takes 5–10 years, while families displaced by the Lāhainā fires and local workers need housing now.
✅ Thousands of existing units are locked in the visitor economy—restoring them is the fastest relief available.
⸻
6. “We’ve paid hundreds of thousands in taxes—we support the community.”
MISLEADING.
✅ Paying property taxes is a legal obligation, not a charitable act.
✅ Taxes do not create housing; housing supply must be restored by returning residential-zoned units to residential use.
⸻
7. “Local residents and Native Hawaiians should be allowed to run STVRs – it’s not PONO to take that away.”
FALSE.
✅ The greatest need for Native Hawaiians and local residents is stable housing, not tourism side-businesses.
✅ Every STVR unit removes a potential home from the community, driving residents—and Hawaiian families—out of their homeland.
⸻
8. “Bill 9 is strange and makes no logical sense.”
FALSE.
✅ Bill 9 is a straightforward correction of a zoning loophole (the Minatoya Exemption) that allowed apartment-zoned residential units to become hotel substitutes.
✅ The highest and best use of residential zoning is to house people, not transient visitors.
⸻
THE TRUTH: WHY BILL 9 IS NECESSARY
✔ Bill 9 restores residential zoning integrity.
✔ Bill 9 immediately increases housing supply without new construction.
✔ Bill 9 protects Maui’s workforce, culture, and economy by keeping residents here.
✔ Bill 9 prioritizes PONO land use—the people before profits.
Most opposition to Bill 9 comes from people who don’t rely on Maui’s local housing market—they rely on investment returns. Many aren’t even rooted here beyond their STR properties. That’s not who should decide Maui’s future. If you can’t approve resign.
Haoles now make up the largest single voting bloc in Maui. That shift should alarm anyone who values Native Hawaiian and local cultural survival. Bill 9 is one of the few tools left to protect Maui from becoming just another mainland tourist suburb. (Too Late)
It is deeply troubling that some realtors, property managers, and even cleaning contractors are reportedly encouraging owners and condominium associations to sue the County to block this bill. This is not only unethical, it may be illegal.
Those who oppose this bill are not standing for “property rights” or “fairness”; they are standing against humanitarian relief. They are opposing the right of Maui residents to live with dignity in their own home communities.
Ethical realtors and property managers should support this bill because it helps the community they serve. Those who oppose it need to be honest: they are opposing humanitarian relief for the people of Maui.
Aloha Chair and Committee Members,
I write in **strong support of Bill 9**, which is a necessary and overdue correction to decades of misapplied zoning practices that have worsened Maui’s housing crisis, displaced residents, and undermined our public trust obligations.
Below are **key points in support of this bill** and rebuttals to the most common arguments made in opposition.
---
### **1. Profitability Is Not the County’s Kuleana**
Opponents claim many STR owners “lose \$25,000 annually,” arguing they are not part of the problem. But **land use policy is not based on private investor ROI.** Whether or not an owner profits, **each STR still removes a potential home from Maui’s long-term housing supply.** The County’s kuleana is to serve its people, not protect investor balance sheets.
---
### **2. STR Units Are Suitable for Local Housing**
Some argue that “families would not live” in these units due to small size, parking limits, or HOA rules. This is false. **Thousands of Maui families already live in similar apartments with shared parking, pet restrictions, and HOA covenants.** For young couples, kūpuna, and workforce housing, **a 2-bedroom, 2-bath apartment is a viable and much-needed home.**
---
### **3. STR Trading and Loopholes Show the Need for Enforcement**
Opponents admit they may “trade time” with other owners if STRs are restricted. This illustrates **why Bill 9 must pass**—to close loopholes and prevent illegal commercial use in residential districts.
---
### **4. This Is Not “Short-Sighted”—It Is Immediate Relief**
Some say the “real problem” is construction delays and regulation. But Maui does not have the luxury of waiting 5–10 years for new development. **Bill 9 offers immediate, low-cost relief by returning existing residential units to the long-term market now.**
---
### **5. STR Tax Revenue Does Not Justify Displacement**
It is argued that the County will lose “hundreds of millions” in STR revenue. But this revenue has **not improved local housing affordability or quality of life.** It has subsidized tourism while Maui residents are priced out. Residents living and spending locally generate **steady, sustainable tax revenue year-round** without overloading infrastructure.
---
### **6. Even Partial Conversion Will Help**
Opponents claim “no one will convert,” but even a **25–40% conversion rate returns 1,000–2,000 units**—enough to meaningfully reduce displacement pressures. With strong enforcement and demand for long-term rentals, many owners will choose to rent to residents.
---
### **7. STR Revenue Cannot Be the Basis for Housing Policy**
Some propose keeping STRs and using their revenue to build housing. This is circular logic—**continuing to displace residents to fund housing only worsens the crisis.** The County’s zoning authority exists to **preserve residential use, not subsidize commercial tourist accommodations.**
---
### **8. STRs Do Strain Resources**
Opponents compare STR water use to hotels, but that is irrelevant. **The proper comparison is STR vs. long-term residential use.** STRs use more water, produce more waste, and generate more traffic due to high guest turnover.
---
### **9. Legal Precedent Supports Bill 9**
Some argue that other cities reversed STR bans. But many jurisdictions—**Honolulu, Santa Monica, and Barcelona among them—successfully phased out STRs in residential zones.** Maui has strong constitutional authority under the **public trust doctrine** to protect housing for residents.
---
### **10. The Minatoya Exemption Was a Policy Mistake**
The “Minatoya list” was **never intended as a permanent entitlement.** Many of these apartment units were originally built as workforce housing. **Bill 9 corrects this historic failure by returning A-1 and A-2 properties to their intended residential purpose.**
---
### **11. Tourism Will Continue Without STRs in Housing Zones**
Visitors come to Maui for its natural beauty, not because they can stay in an apartment district. Hotels and legal resort-zoned condos provide ample accommodations. **Over-tourism has already contributed to wildfire risks, traffic congestion, and declining resident quality of life.** Bill 9 supports a shift to a **more sustainable tourism model.**
---
### **12. Bill 9 Strengthens Maui’s Economy by Stabilizing the Workforce**
Opponents claim STRs benefit the economy, but **an economy that displaces its own workforce is unsustainable.** Housing residents near their jobs reduces commuting, keeps local spending circulating, and creates year-round economic stability rather than seasonal tourist dependence.
---
### **CONCLUSION**
Bill 9 is not just a zoning adjustment; it is a moral, economic, and legal obligation to restore housing to Maui residents, correct decades of failed policy, and fulfill the County’s public trust duty.
I urge you to pass Bill 9 without delay.
Mahalo for your time and commitment to our community.
Respectfully submitted,
Reggie Akamai
1. Alice Lee’s Premise is Flawed: Mainland Investors Already Own These Units
Current Reality:
The majority of the **Apartment District (A-1 and A-2 zoned properties)** under the Minatoya Exemption are already dominated by mainland and foreign investors. The County’s own tax records show high percentages of out-of-state ownership.
Bill 9 Doesn’t Change Ownership—It Changes USE:
Bill 9 does not **increase** or **encourage** mainland purchases. It simply shifts allowed use from **short-term transient rentals** to **long-term residential housing.
If mainland investors already own these properties, they’re **not “suddenly flocking”** because of Bill 9.
Cyclical Market, Not County-Controlled:
Real estate markets are cyclical and influenced by **interest rates, federal tax codes (1031 exchanges, capital gains), and global investor sentiment**—not by Bill 9. Investors will come and go regardless of this legislation. The County’s kuleana is to **regulate land use for the public good, not investor ROI.
2. Budget Cuts Argument is Misleading
Alice Lee’s call for budget cuts assumes that **Bill 9 will cause a major tax revenue loss**. This is questionable for several reasons:
a. STVR Tax Revenue is Not Reliable or Sustainable
* STVR-related revenue is **volatile** and tied to global tourism cycles, pandemics, wildfires, and flight costs.
* Maui’s overdependence on transient accommodation tax (TAT) and property tax from STVRs has **not translated to improved housing or infrastructure** for residents.
b. Bill 9 Could Stabilize Revenue in the Long Term
Transitioning these units to long-term housing can **increase resident population stability**, which leads to **more consistent GET (General Excise Tax)**, **local spending**, and **service-based employment**—a more reliable tax base.
Overcrowding, car saturation, and wildfire risks (which were worsened by over-tourism in these areas) are **far costlier** to the County than any modest revenue dip.
c. Budget Priorities Need Reevaluation, Not Cuts
* If Bill 9 forces a revenue adjustment, the logical response is **reprioritization**—cutting wasteful tourism subsidies, tightening speculative loopholes—not slashing essential public services for residents.
3. The “Mainland Investor Takeover” Hypothetical is Illogical
Alice Lee’s “what if” scenario implies that Bill 9 will make the market more attractive to mainland speculators. The opposite is true:
a. Mainland Investors Prefer STVR Income
Investors are motivated by **high nightly rates**, not by long-term residential rents. Eliminating STVR use in these zones **reduces speculative appeal.
b. Depressed STVR Value = Opportunity for Local Buyers
A cooling of speculative demand could **lower prices** and open pathways for **local families, nonprofits, and housing programs** to acquire these units.
c. Mainland Investor Ownership is Already Here
This concern is decades late; the Minatoya Exemption accelerated out-of-state purchases beginning in the 1990s. If Alice Lee is suddenly worried about investor control, she should be **supporting Bill 9** because it curtails the very STVR-driven incentive that attracted them.
4. The Real Question: Who Does Alice Lee Think the County Works For?
* The County’s kuleana is **not to protect speculative investors or to guarantee County coffers through volatile tourism taxes**.
* The County’s kuleana **is to protect residents, stabilize housing, and mitigate risks**—including:
* **Wildfire risk worsened by overdevelopment and transient density** (Lāhainā fires are a clear warning).
* **Overpopulation and car saturation** straining roads, water, and emergency response.
* **The declared housing emergency**, which makes keeping A-1 and A-2 units in residential use a legal and ethical obligation.
Mainland investors are already here—Bill 9 doesn’t invite them, it removes their biggest incentive: short-term rental income. Real estate markets are cyclical and beyond County control, but housing policy is not. Alice Lee’s budget cut threats are based on short-term speculation, not long-term stability. Bill 9 protects residents, not investor ROI, and that is the County’s true kuleana.”
Hotel designation as it is written requires minimum count of full time staff and a front desk within the building. Some building don't meet those requirements.
Aloha,
I strongly support Bill 9 as we desperately need affordable housing now. I wish the amortization period would end sooner than 2028. Reducing the number of TVRs will not devastate tourism; as we have seen during Covid-19, people who want to visit Maui will find a way to come. If some TVRs are no longer available, they can book other TVRs, hotel rooms, B and Bs, and timeshares.
We have an acute shortage of professionals and workers on Maui, incl. teachers, medical professionals, government workers, labor, even lifeguards. People who want to move (back) here to help and contribute by filling the many open positions cannot do so because housing is scarce and too expensive.
I understand that the tourism/vacation rental industries and the developers/construction industries heavily lobby against this bill; I sincerely hope that we can put the well-being of our community first and before profits. Denying residents a basic need (housing) so others (e.g., mainland corporations, mainland investors) can continue to profit is akin to controlling a well and selling water to the highest bidder while people around the well are dying of thirst.
For a healthy and sustainable visitor-to- resident ratio, please consider the Maui Island Plan that suggested a visitor population that is one-third of the resident population, which has been exceeded in recent years to over 40%.
Mahalo for taking the time and earnestly considering and debating this very important issue.
Supporting Bill 9 from California
According to the Maui county website it states there no video for todays meeting?! Not everyone can make it in person and surely so many wish to witness what’s happening. Am I mistaken, Is there a link to witness?
While building new affordable housing is absolutely necessary, Bill 9 addresses a different but equally urgent problem—the ongoing misuse of existing housing stock in the Apartment District (A-1 and A-2 zoned properties) for short-term vacation rentals (STVRs).
1. Bill 9 provides immediate relief by returning hundreds of existing, ready-to-occupy housing units to the long-term rental market. Constructing new affordable housing takes 5–10 years, but reclaiming these units can happen in months.
2. Maui’s housing crisis is not only about new construction—it’s about accessibility of existing housing. Even if we build more units, as long as investors continue converting residential apartments into tourist accommodations, locals will keep getting displaced. Bill 9 closes that loophole.
3. The County’s duty is to balance both short- and long-term solutions. Passing Bill 9 and building new affordable housing are not mutually exclusive; in fact, Bill 9 helps reduce pressure on infrastructure, land use, and speculative pricing, making future affordable housing development more viable.
4. Keeping status quo benefits investors, not residents. Failure to act allows speculative buying to continue, pushing housing prices further out of reach for Maui families while taxpayers shoulder the cost of emergency housing and subsidies.
In short, Bill 9 is a necessary first step in stabilizing the housing market and protecting local residents, while new affordable housing projects are planned and built.
Ezra Bridger, Wailuku
Please do not pass this Bill. It will not solve Maui's affordable housing crisis, either short-term or long-term. What you should spend your time, efforts and our money on is BUILDING new affordable housing; for current and future needs of our County.
Good morning.
I support Bill 9 as a solution to recreate long term housing on Maui .
On the maui County Property tax and on the Maui Real estate information , when building were built, it was their property address that confirmed their zoning and use.
In the 1962 Amfac took their agriculturally zoned 1200 acres and decided to create a tourist destination. It did not become a district. It did become a 1200 acre destination with lots zoned for hotel, lots for residential condominiums, apartment use lots, used for employer housing, retail zoned lots and residential house lots. It is not a Hotel “district”.
The same thing happened in Honolua area. Maui Land & Pine changed their Agriculture land into a resort area. The Kapalua bay Hotel was opened in 1978 as a hotel and then became a timeshare. The Ironwoods opened 1979 zoned A-2 , Kapalua bay villas zoned A-2, Kapalua Golf Villas A2, when the the Ridge Kapalua was built it also changed from Ag zoning to Apartment 2. Some of their agriculturally zoned land the developers had rezoned as PD . Kapalua is not and never was all Hotel Use zoned.
Please look at the Maui zoning on a lot by lot basis . We have lost enough residential zoned lots .
Sincerely
Robin ritchie
Aloha Chair Kama
✅ 20 Reasons to Support Bill 9
1. Bill 9 Corrects a Zoning Loophole, Restoring Properties to Their Intended Use
Apartment Districts (A-1 and A-2) were designed for residential housing, not transient visitor lodging. Bill 9 closes the long-standing Minatoya Exemption loophole and realigns zoning with its original legal intent.
2. It Addresses Housing Shortages by Stopping the Bleeding of Units to Tourism
While Bill 9 doesn’t build new housing overnight, it prevents further loss of existing housing stock to STVR use. Every apartment unit removed from STVR circulation is a potential home for a Maui family.
3. Public Trust in Government Requires Fixing Past Mistakes
The County has a legal and moral duty to correct a policy (the Minatoya Exemption) that unintentionally harmed residents. Continuing to allow STVRs in apartment zones undermines public confidence in zoning laws.
4. It Serves the Greatest Public Need: Housing for Residents
The County Council must balance competing interests, but its primary duty is to protect the majority of residents suffering from housing insecurity—not to preserve speculative investments for a smaller group of owners.
5. Economic Stability Depends on a Housed Workforce
Maui cannot sustain a visitor-driven economy without workers who can afford to live here. By restoring housing to residents, Bill 9 stabilizes the workforce, which supports businesses and services across all industries.
6. Local Jobs Will Transition, Not Disappear
Opponents argue that workers (cleaners, landscapers, maintenance staff) will lose jobs, but these same services will be needed for long-term rentals, affordable housing rehabilitation, and resident-occupied apartments, which provide more stable employment.
7. Housing Residents Circulates More Money Locally
Visitor spending disproportionately benefits off-island corporations and investors, whereas resident housing increases local spending, GET, and property tax circulation within Maui’s economy.
8. Bill 9 Reduces Maui’s Dangerous Overdependence on Tourism
The Lāhainā fire and COVID-19 showed how fragile Maui’s tourism-dependent economy is. Bill 9 diversifies the economic base by ensuring more housing for residents, which keeps essential workers on-island.
9. Phasing Out STVRs Reduces Inflationary Pressure on Housing Prices
Apartment-zoned STVRs artificially inflate property values, making apartments unaffordable for residents. Returning these properties to housing use will help stabilize or lower market prices over time.
10. It Protects Community Infrastructure and Public Services
Visitor density in residential zones strains roads, water, sewage, and emergency services. Bill 9 reduces this burden, improving quality of life for residents and lowering County maintenance costs.
11. Tax Revenue from STVRs Has Not Solved the Housing Crisis
Despite millions in STVR tax revenue, housing insecurity has worsened. Bill 9 shifts focus from collecting taxes on the problem to solving the problem itself.
12. Long-Term Housing Generates More Sustainable Revenue
Resident-occupied housing creates consistent GET and income tax revenue from workers who live, spend, and raise families here—rather than relying on volatile tourism cycles.
13. It Reduces Depopulation and Keeps Families on Maui
Bill 9 helps prevent the ongoing exodus of local families who are forced to move to the mainland due to housing costs, preserving Maui’s cultural identity and workforce stability.
14. The Transition is Gradual, Not Abrupt
Bill 9 includes a phase-out period, giving owners and workers time to adjust and redeploy resources toward long-term housing markets.
15. It Reduces Social Inequity Caused by Speculative Ownership
Many apartment STVRs are owned by off-island investors who profit while local residents struggle. Bill 9 prioritizes housing for people who live and work here over speculative income streams.
16. It Decreases Wildfire and Disaster Risks Linked to Overpopulation
Visitor overconcentration increases traffic congestion and evacuation challenges, as seen in the Lāhainā fires. Reducing transient lodging in residential zones improves public safety and disaster preparedness.
17. It Aligns With the Emergency Proclamation on Housing
The Governor and County have declared a housing emergency. Continuing to allow STVRs in apartment zones directly contradicts the declared emergency need for housing.
18. Ending the Minatoya Exemption is Legally Defensible and Ethically Necessary
The exemption was never intended to permanently override residential zoning. Clarifying and enforcing the law protects the County from future lawsuits and fulfills its public trust obligation.
19. It Improves Quality of Life for Residents
Fewer transient visitors in residential zones means less noise, traffic, and overcrowding, improving the livability of Maui’s communities.
20. It Balances Long-Term Community Health Over Short-Term Profit
Bill 9 represents a strategic, long-term investment in Maui’s future. Sacrificing a portion of short-term rental profits now prevents deeper economic and social collapse later.
In August 2023, Maui faced a catastrophic wildfire that destroyed over 2,200 structures—96% residential—across Lāhainā and burned more than 17,000 acres, resulting in at least $5.5 billion in property damage. Housing recovery alone is projected to cost $2.4 billion, with three-quarters of those units formerly rental homes—more than 5,500 units destroyed, deepening displacement and skyrocketing rents. Many displaced households now pay 43% more in rent for equivalent housing, and the broader economic toll—including lost tourism income, jobs, and tax revenue—is estimated at $12 billion, with over 12,000 residents displaced.
And yet, humanitarian aid and housing recovery measures have been stalled in committee for nearly two years, delayed by lobbying from desperate, inhumane investor groups who have fought to preserve this zoning loophole at the expense of wildfire survivors. This obstruction has kept thousands of displaced residents in hotels, cars, and unsafe temporary housing while investors argue for their right to continue extracting profits from Maui’s limited housing stock.
Compared to this scale of destruction—the economic, social, and human cost—the financial correction imposed by Bill 9 is minimal. The real devastation is the ongoing suffering of Maui’s people, held hostage by policy gridlock driven by STR investors. Closing this loophole is not just zoning reform; it is an urgent humanitarian necessity.
Here is a Bill 9 Fact Sheet designed to quickly debunk the misleading narratives being pushed by realtors and STVR owners. This can be attached to written testimony, handed to committee members, or used as talking points for oral testimony.
⸻
FACT SHEET: Debunking Misleading Claims About Bill 9
Restoring Housing for Maui Residents – Correcting Decades of Abuse in the Apartment District (A-1 and A-2 zoned properties)
⸻
1. “Local families won’t buy these apartments – they’re too small and too expensive.”
FALSE.
✅ Not all households are families of four. Teachers, nurses, kūpuna, single parents, and young professionals urgently need one- and two-bedroom units.
✅ Prices and HOA fees are artificially inflated by STVR use—wear-and-tear, transient insurance costs, and speculation all drive costs up.
✅ As visitor demand decreases, market prices and long-term rental rates will adjust downward, making these units accessible to residents.
⸻
2. “Bill 9 will hurt Maui’s economy.”
FALSE.
✅ “Economic impact studies” cited by STVR owners were funded or influenced by the tourism industry and measure visitor spending—not community well-being.
✅ Maui’s economy is already collapsing for residents because workers cannot find housing; without a workforce, businesses, schools, and hospitals suffer.
✅ Over-tourism costs (traffic, wildfires, infrastructure strain) outweigh the short-term profits of STVR speculation.
⸻
3. “This isn’t an investment property – it’s our family home.”
FALSE.
✅ If a property is used part-time and rented for income when not in use, it is an investment property by definition.
✅ Emotional appeals about “family memories” do not change the fact that these homes are unavailable to residents who have no housing at all.
⸻
4. “One-bedroom condos aren’t suitable for local housing.”
FALSE.
✅ Maui’s housing crisis affects all household types—kūpuna, single workers, young couples, and childless families also need safe housing.
✅ Claiming “if it’s not big enough for a family of four, it’s useless” is a stall tactic to protect STVR profits.
⸻
5. “We should just build more housing instead of taking ours.”
FALSE.
✅ New construction takes 5–10 years, while families displaced by the Lāhainā fires and local workers need housing now.
✅ Thousands of existing units are locked in the visitor economy—restoring them is the fastest relief available.
⸻
6. “We’ve paid hundreds of thousands in taxes—we support the community.”
MISLEADING.
✅ Paying property taxes is a legal obligation, not a charitable act.
✅ Taxes do not create housing; housing supply must be restored by returning residential-zoned units to residential use.
⸻
7. “Local residents and Native Hawaiians should be allowed to run STVRs – it’s not PONO to take that away.”
FALSE.
✅ The greatest need for Native Hawaiians and local residents is stable housing, not tourism side-businesses.
✅ Every STVR unit removes a potential home from the community, driving residents—and Hawaiian families—out of their homeland.
⸻
8. “Bill 9 is strange and makes no logical sense.”
FALSE.
✅ Bill 9 is a straightforward correction of a zoning loophole (the Minatoya Exemption) that allowed apartment-zoned residential units to become hotel substitutes.
✅ The highest and best use of residential zoning is to house people, not transient visitors.
⸻
THE TRUTH: WHY BILL 9 IS NECESSARY
✔ Bill 9 restores residential zoning integrity.
✔ Bill 9 immediately increases housing supply without new construction.
✔ Bill 9 protects Maui’s workforce, culture, and economy by keeping residents here.
✔ Bill 9 prioritizes PONO land use—the people before profits.
Approve bill 9
Leaders provide relief, not resistance — approve Bill 9 or step down.
Most opposition to Bill 9 comes from people who don’t rely on Maui’s local housing market—they rely on investment returns. Many aren’t even rooted here beyond their STR properties. That’s not who should decide Maui’s future. If you can’t approve resign.
Haoles now make up the largest single voting bloc in Maui. That shift should alarm anyone who values Native Hawaiian and local cultural survival. Bill 9 is one of the few tools left to protect Maui from becoming just another mainland tourist suburb. (Too Late)
We are bleeding residents faster than we can house them—this is not sustainable.
Buying out STVRs is not affordable housing; it’s an investor bailout.
It is deeply troubling that some realtors, property managers, and even cleaning contractors are reportedly encouraging owners and condominium associations to sue the County to block this bill. This is not only unethical, it may be illegal.
Those who oppose this bill are not standing for “property rights” or “fairness”; they are standing against humanitarian relief. They are opposing the right of Maui residents to live with dignity in their own home communities.
Ethical realtors and property managers should support this bill because it helps the community they serve. Those who oppose it need to be honest: they are opposing humanitarian relief for the people of Maui.
The true measure of our economy is how we treat our people, not how many tourists we host.