HLU-4 Bill 9 (2025) BILL 9 (2025), AMENDING CHAPTERS 19.12, 19.32, AND 19.37, MAUI COUNTY CODE, RELATING TO TRANSIENT VACATION RENTALS IN APARTMENT DISTRICTS (HLU-4)
I write in strong support of **Bill 9**, which will restore the intended residential use of properties in the **Apartment District (A-1 and A-2 zoned properties)**, phase out transient vacation rentals (STVRs), and help address Maui’s housing crisis.
The arguments against Bill 9—particularly around **financing and litigation risks for condos**—are overstated, historically inconsistent, and fail to address the true kuleana of this Council: **to serve residents first, not to protect speculative investor markets.**
1. Housing is a Public Trust, Not an Investor Guarantee
* As Maui faces **displacement, overcrowding, homelessness, and housing insecurity**, it is **not the County’s kuleana to protect investor ROI**.
* The County has a **public trust obligation** to stabilize housing for residents.
* STVRs in the Apartment District were never meant to be permanent; the decades-old **Minatoya Exemption** created a loophole that allowed residential-zoned housing to be used as de facto hotels.
Restoring these units to residential use will **free up badly needed housing stock** and align with the emergency housing proclamations already declared by the County and State.
---
2. Condos Already Face Litigation—And Sales Continue
Councilmembers have expressed concerns about **financing and litigation risk**. But let’s be clear:
* **Condo litigation is normal and routine.**
HOAs foreclose on units, evict tenants, and file lawsuits for construction defects, insurance disputes, or unpaid fees regularly. None of this has ever stopped the condo market from functioning.
* **Financing adjusts, but markets continue.**
Lenders and realtors have navigated condo litigation since condos were first developed. Units may temporarily shift to cash buyers or private lenders, but sales continue, and properties retain value.
* **Bill 9 litigation risk is no different.**
Fears about “new” litigation ignore the fact that real estate markets have absorbed much worse disputes without collapsing. The financing market is built to adapt.
3. Bill 9 Actually Improves Financing Stability Long-Term
* **STVR-heavy condos are already harder to finance.** Many are treated as “condo-hotels” by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, restricting FHA, VA, and conventional lending.
* **Once restored to residential use, more local buyers will qualify** for traditional loans, which strengthens local demand and reduces speculative volatility.
The real threat to financing has been the **uncertainty caused by the Minatoya Exemption**, not Bill 9. Clarity and stability are what lenders want—and Bill 9 provides that.
4. Markets Are Cyclical, Not Controllable**
Some argue, “What if these units are bought by mainland investors after Bill 9?” This is the wrong question.
* Mainland investors already own a significant share of these units **today**, under the STVR model.
* **Real estate markets are cyclical and driven by global economic trends**, not County zoning.
* The Council cannot and should not attempt to control who buys property through zoning—it **can** control whether those properties are used for housing or for tourism.
Bill 9 ensures these units are returned to their intended purpose: **housing for residents.**
5. Kuleana: The Moral and Economic Obligation**
**Maui is one of the most expensive places to live in the United States.** If we want families, teachers, nurses, and kūpuna caregivers to stay here, we must make hard decisions that prioritize housing over speculative profit.
Every business and property owner on this island has a kuleana to support livable wages and livable housing. As a community, we cannot sustain a system where housing is treated primarily as a tourism commodity.
Bill 9 is a necessary step to protect our people, reduce car saturation, lower wildfire risks from overdevelopment, and stabilize our neighborhoods.
Conclusion
Litigation fears are exaggerated, financing will adjust as it always has, and the real risk to Maui is doing nothing.
Bill 9 is not just a zoning clarification—it is a statement that this Council is serious about protecting housing for residents, reducing speculation, and restoring stability to our communities.
I urge you to pass Bill 9 without weakening amendments.
Mahalo for your time and consideration.
Ronald and Victoria Lee, Lahaina Residents, STVR Owners
Good morning to all. I wanted to share my situation and thoughts on the STR ban in apartment districts.
My wife and I own a condo in S Kihei, we stay there for 1 month in the winter and 1 month in the summer and rent it out for short term stays when not here. We plan on living here full time once we retire. We do not make any profit on our unit - the stays help to offset some of our costs but as an investment we are in the red over $25k every year. Our unit is 2bdrm / 2 bath, no smoking, no pets, and 1 assigned parking stall with no guest parking — so I am not sure if this would work for most families as their home. And if the bill were to pass we would not sell this unit - we would find other groups or couples to trade time in our unit for time in their units elsewhere - removing the county revenue generated with no additional housing stock
I am sympathetic to the need for additional housing in Maui for local residents and native Hawaiians but I just find this bill to be short sighted. I don’t believe the bill addresses the true root cause of the problem - which is government rules and regulations that promote and make new construction easier and more available. The solution proposed could add up to the 5000 units if all were to convert to long term housing - which I am not sure they would. But give up several hundred millions of dollars a years in perpetuity. Why not find a way to use some of the revenue generated from STRs to fund construction of single family homes after easing construction costs and regulations
The other comment I wanted to make was on water usage - I have read numerous comments on STRs using much more water than long term housing so this conversion will also save water usage. But that is a false comparison and conclusion. Our unit is usually occupied by families with kids, it can sleep up to 6, with 4 adults. So if our unit is not a STR - these families ( if they can afford to come at all ) will probably need 2-3 hotel rooms at a resort or hotel. So the true comparison to ask would be the average daily water usage in 1 STR versus the average daily water usage of 2-3 hotel rooms - which I am sure will look much different
Finally, this has been tried in some large cities on the mainland - and were reversed for legal reasons in some cases and in others they found they did not help the root causes of the problems and the lost revenue was too great to overcome
So, I believe most STR owners would like to and be willing partners to help in finding solutions for the true root cause of the housing issues - but this bill as proposed is not it
Has anyone considered keeping the original minatoya list short term,
The properties listed from beginning could be “grandfathered in” and stay short term .
All the ones after hat should go to long term,
The problem is owners at many complexes took it upon themselves turning into short term after they were long term for years, example is pacific shores
It makes more sense to keep our tourist industry healthy by letting the original minatoya list stay short term since that is what they have been from the start
It shouldnt be very hard to determine the difference, too many condo owners changed on their own
From: County Clerk <County.Clerk@mauicounty.us>
Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2025 7:15:49 AM (UTC-10:00) Hawaii
To: HLU Committee <HLU.Committee@mauicounty.us>
Subject: FW: Bill 9 STR testimony
From: Syl Cabral <sylviacabralmaui@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2025 7:09 AM
To: County Clerk <County.Clerk@mauicounty.us>
Subject: Bill 9 STR testimony
I understand that Minatoya took the workforce housing away from the working people with very little or no hearings for the public. It’s time to give the workforce housing back.
1. many of those units were requirements for developers to build elsewhere.
2. This is an executive order that is needed for public survival
ask yourselves . ‘’how did Mantonya have the authority to take the workforce housing away from the working people?”
On Thu, Jun 12, 2025 at 4:38 PM Syl Cabral <sylviacabralmaui@gmail.com> wrote:
Thinking there might be an exception to some residents if that is their only income on a case by case decision w requirements. That might reduce the banter 15 or 20%.
From: AOL.MAIL <butchandkate@aol.com>
Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2025 5:24:57 AM (UTC-10:00) Hawaii
To: HLU Committee <HLU.Committee@mauicounty.us>
Subject: Bill 9 Testimony
Aloha,
George McDowell, #A-306, 940 S. Kihei Road, Kihei, HI. My hope today is that common sense is what guides you as you move forward on Bill 9, for without it, the Committee could inflict irreparable harm to the economy and people of Maui.
Mahalo,
George
My family of four has been to Maui the last three years. We love it and spend a lot of money in the community. However, we will not return if short term rentals are not available. They provide so much flexibility and comfort for a small family versus a hotel. I think there will be many unintended consequences to Maui if Short term rentals are disallowed.
Mahalo for your time and commitment to addressing one of the most critical issues Maui faces: the long-term housing crisis and the urgent need to rebalance our Apartment District (A-1 and A-2 zoned properties) away from transient vacation use.
I have reviewed the recent testimony from Mr. Ron Hansen, who presents himself as a “30+ year appraiser/analyst.” While he cites selective sales data to argue against Bill 9, his own information actually proves why Bill 9 is working exactly as intended. His statements are full of misrepresentations, misleading comparisons, and loophole-defending arguments that deserve to be called out.
⸻
1) “Prices are Dropping” – That’s the Point
Mr. Hansen claims mainland retirees are buying Minatoya List condos at 30–37% discounts compared to 2024 STR-inflated prices. That is not evidence of failure; that is proof Bill 9 is deflating the speculative investor bubble.
For years, STR speculation has artificially driven up condo prices beyond what locals could compete with. Now, by removing the STR income premium, prices are trending back toward reality. If Mr. Hansen were truly concerned about affordability for local residents, he would celebrate this correction instead of defending inflated investor profits.
⸻
2) Cherry-Picked Sales ≠ Market Truth
Mr. Hansen’s entire argument rests on two cherry-picked sales at Maʻalaea Banyans—one of the smallest and least representative condo complexes on Maui.
• He ignores the broader market trend, where many former STR units are sitting unsold, with prices continuing to drop.
• He conveniently leaves out that 2024 was an abnormal STR-driven high, not a stable baseline.
The Council should not base policy on selective anecdotes designed to protect a loophole, especially from someone who has likely profited from STR appraisals.
⸻
3) “Mainlanders Are Buying” – And That Will Change
Yes, some mainland retirees are buying now. But Bill 9 was never intended to instantly transfer ownership to locals; it was designed to stop the bleed of investor-driven transient use.
Hansen fails to acknowledge that as prices continue to normalize, local and workforce buyers will re-enter this market. His assumption that retirees will permanently dominate ignores basic market behavior:
• When profit margins collapse and property taxes shift to residential rates, many absentee owners will sell.
• The investor gold rush is ending, and that’s good for Maui residents.
⸻
4) “Locals Don’t Rent STR Condos” – Because Prices Were Rigged by STR Investors
Mr. Hansen claims locals “do not rent STR-type apartments” and cites a 47% Craigslist vacancy rate. But his logic is upside down:
• Locals aren’t renting because STRs kept rents artificially high to match vacation rental ROI.
• Once STRs are permanently banned, owners will have no choice but to drop rents or sell.
• He also compares luxury STR condos to affordable rentals like Kaulana Mahina—a dishonest comparison designed to confuse workforce housing with high-end investor products.
Bill 9 will force a long-overdue rental price correction.
⸻
5) “Locals Can’t Buy” – Another STR Loophole Myth
Mr. Hansen claims locals “cannot” buy these units because of $4,600/month “carrying costs” and condotel lending restrictions. But this is misleading for three reasons:
1. Those costs are STR-driven (high insurance, investor-risk premiums, STR tax rates). As more STRs convert to residential, carrying costs will decline.
2. FHA and conventional lending expand once transient use is removed. Many financing barriers disappear when these buildings are no longer classified as “condotels.”
3. His focus on “cash retiree buyers” ignores the long-term impact of investor withdrawal; the speculative demand he defends is exactly what priced locals out in the first place.
Every “concern” Hansen raises ultimately argues for maintaining the status quo that benefits off-island investors, appraisers, and STR operators:
• Cherry-picked data to exaggerate retiree demand
• Selective vacancy numbers to claim STR units don’t benefit locals
• Fearmongering about financing to discourage policy change
The reality is simple: Bill 9 closes the Minatoya loophole that turned our residential-zoned apartments into speculative commodities. Returning these properties to long-term housing use—gradually, but permanently—is the only sustainable path for Maui.
⸻
Conclusion
The Council’s kuleana is not to guarantee investor ROI or to act as an appraiser’s marketing tool for off-island buyers. Your responsibility is to restore balance, protect the public trust, and ensure Maui’s housing serves Maui’s people.
Ron Hansen’s own testimony, when read critically, proves that Bill 9 is already achieving its goals: cooling speculative pricing, removing investor incentives, and shifting the market back toward local housing.
Please continue to move Bill 9 forward and close this loophole once and for all.
All of these non-resident TVR owners are living in a "Me" world and it sure would be nice for them to join us in a "We' world. They are doing just fine in their mainland residence as everyone struggles to survive. And so many have left are will be leaving. Do we like 27% resident homes and 73% investments by people that want to put up walls, fences and gates. TVR investors more interested in good reviews than being a good neighbor. The ones that are on island for a week but since they own a property, they consider themselves "Part of the community"? The opposition is clearly about them selves at the expense of the community. They can long term rent or rezone if they choose not to sell. Also, they need to be prepared to accept the fact they most likely bought an inflated property but someone else that knew this was coming. There was a testifier that bought for $500k in 2021 and tried to sell for $600k in 2025. 4 years and they were so upset they did not get a 20% return they decided to pull from the market. That same home will sell for a reasonable amount to a resident. Yes we can afford them. We are just aware of the actual value and are not fooled by the real estate person saying it will pay for itself if you TVR these properties. Unlikely they fully disclosed the delicate nature of the Minatoya list. Then again so many speculative investors hope for the best. Take your losses and move along investor.
To: Tasha Kama, Chair, Housing & Land Use Committee
From: Ron Hansen, 190 Hauoli St., Wailuku
Aloha, Chair Kama,
As a 30+ yrs. real estate appraiser/analyst, I've been analyzing Bill 9's possibilities for the past 9 mos.
I hope my observations are helpful for deciding Bill 9.
A) MAINLANDERS ARE BUYING THE STR-BAN APTS.
The word is spreading...that Maui condos. are for sale at discount prices.
As confirmed by anecdotes from Maui realtors, as well as sales data, retirees
& family vacationers from the mainland are looking at and buying apts. that are on
the Minatoya List. For example, at our Maalaea Banyans condos the most
recent sales to non-residents were $665k on 5/30/25, and on 5/16/25 at $599k...
.....which sold immediately on the listing day.
These prices represent (for identical 1 bdr. units) a discount of 30% and 37%, respectively,
from the $945k to $950k 1 bdrm. sales in 2024..... prior to proposal of Bill 9.
In addition to price discounts, the new retiree/buyer enjoys a $9,500/yr. savings
in property taxes (see schedule 1.0 attached) as an owner-occupied apt.
Since the Minatoya List apts. are nearly all located on beachfront or near (walk to) beach,
realtors' increasingly successful marketing to mainland retirees is robust....as 76,000 U.S.
residents reach age 65 every week.
B) LOCALS DO NOT RENT STR-TYPE APTS.
STR-type apts. have been, and are abundantly available on offerings such as Realtor.com
and Craigslist.com. Yet many of these offerings are not rented even after 30 or more
days listed. (see surveys 2.1, 2.2, 2.3 attached reveal 47% not rented after 30 days).
These 1 & 2 bedroom apts. are small,
lack storage or private yards, and are not as attractive for families as non-STR design
apts., duplexes, or modest houses that are offered for rent. And prices, due to the carrying
costs on STR apts., are usually $3500 or more.
Even newer, non-STR apts. on Maui are not fully occupied. For example the new (since 2023)
340 units, more affordable Kaulana Mahina Apts. in Wailuku has reduced rent rates (from 2024),
offers 1 month free move-in rent, and still has vacancies for their 1 & 2 bedroom apts......that are
very similar in size to Minatoya-List apts.
So adding 6,172 Minatoya-List apts. to the long term rental market is likely to provide very little benefit
to local residents.
C) LOCALS DO NOT QUALIFY....OR EVEN WANT....TO BUY A MINATOYA LIST APT.
The $4,600 per month "carrying costs" (per testimony presented) for insurance, HOA fees,
mortgage loan, property tax, etc. would require an income of $11,500 to $15,300 per month
to qualify for a mortgage loan of 30% to 40% of qualifying income. The average $1,050/mo.
HOA fees makes all STR apts. unattractive as family homes/investments...relative to
non-STR apts., duplexes, or modest houses. Even with some current apt. prices as low
as $300k to $500k , they are still on the market...with price drops being offered (see Redfin.com).
Unfortunately, most STR apts. are difficult (or impossible) to find mortgage financing, since
they are classified as "condotels" for lenders...not qualifying for regular FHA loans.
So the all-cash buying by retirees edges out locals' purchase efforts.
After months of observations and analysis, I can only conclude that,
UNFORTUNATELY, BILL 9 CANNOT AND WILL NOT ASSURE THAT ANY MINATOYA LIST
APTS. ARE ACTUALLY OCCUPIED BY LOCAL RESIDENTS.
Thank you..and your committee members... for your extraordinary time and attention!!
Mahalo,
Ron Hansen, 22 yrs. Maui Resident, 190 Hauoli St.
Attached: *Hansen Appraiser Qualifications
*Schedule 1.0 Price & Prop. Tax Discounts
*Surveys 2.1, 2.2, and 2.3 -STR-type Rentals
3 Attachments
• Scanned by Gmail
Bill 9 will not correct housing shortage. It will only punish owners of short term rental properties and the Maui citizens that are employed maintaining those properties. The County Council was elected to serve all, not just the people that want to destroy lawful owners.
Hurting one part of the population does little good and will cause major damage which will not be easily overcome.
Harry Hecht
From: Mike Pytlinski <bronco67@hotmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2025 11:10 AM
To: HLU Committee <HLU.Committee@mauicounty.us>
Subject: Bill 9 Testimony
Aloha Chair, Vice Chair, and Committee Members,
My name is Michael Pytlinski, and I own a short-term rental property in Maui County. I am writing today to express my deep concern and strong opposition to the proposed legislation to phase out more than 6,000 vacation rentals.
I appreciate your efforts to address the need for more affordable housing on Maui. I do not believe that eliminating over 6,000 current licensed STRs is the answer. I applied back in 2006 to be able to rent out my unit in a short-term capacity. I, like the other 6,000 licensed STR owners, applied to Maui County and the State of Hawaii and were granted licenses and permission to do so legally. Every dollar we collect we contribute nearly 18% in GE, TA, and MCTAT taxes. Since 2006, I have contributed nearly $400,000 myself to the State of Hawaii and Maui County in tax revenue. You have over 6,000 legal licensed STRs that are generating money for the State and County. The State and County will lose 14% of every dollar generated by STRs if you ban the 6,000 STRs for operating as they have been legally been able to do. Eliminating these STRs erases a whole revenue stream that generates millions of dollars for Maui County and Hawaii annually. Just all of this threating to cut them has greatly decreased this revenue that I am sure is very visible now.
My, and all STRs, bring guests to the island that then contribute to many Maui businesses: Aloha-Rent-A-Car, Kihei Rent a car – two locally owned Maui businesses that employee many local residents. Our guests eat at many local restaurants and coffee shops also owned by local residents. Many of the Maui activities thrive due to our guests: Start Me Up (Blue Water) fishing, Maui Adventure Cruises, Kainani Sails, Scotch Mist Sailing Charters – All staffed by local residents. Just to give a few of the many examples of local businesses and residents that benefit from STRs.
Please reconsider your efforts to increase affordable housing by eliminating the legal STRs. The revenue they generate can greatly be used to assist with developing other solutions.
Mahalo for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Michael Pytlinski
honokowaipalmsb7@hotmail.com
From: Belinda Battistelli-Meeker <mauipalms213@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2025 10:45:19 AM (UTC-10:00) Hawaii
To: HLU Committee <HLU.Committee@mauicounty.us>
Cc: Cristina Graziano <cristina@destinationmaui.net>; Sherry Kennedy <sherry@destinationmaui.net>; Robb and Linda Haskins <rlhaskins@msn.com>; Barbara Olson <barbaracolson@msn.com>; Keani N. Rawlins <Keani.Rawlins@mauicounty.us>; Thomas M. Cook <Thomas.Cook@mauicounty.us>
Subject: Bill 9 Testimony
A pertinent question for the STR RENTAL owners to consider is what transpired during the prosperous times. Maui was flourishing well before the onset of COVID, and as the world reopened, Maui began to prosper once more with an influx of visitors. Throughout this period, Maui County was accumulating TAT and GET taxes from all of us—amounting to thousands upon thousands of dollars. Additionally, fees were imposed on the business owners of Property Managers—where did all that money go? If the concerns revolve around the homeless and houseless natives of Maui, where were the leaders of Maui, including politicians, mayors, and other influential figures, in their efforts to create housing for their own? We acknowledge that the Lahaina fire caused immense destruction for many, but the reserves generated from all the taxes collected by Maui, along with the contributions from hotels, raise the question—where are the homes? The crisis of homelessness and "houselessness" has been escalating long before the Lahaina fires, and the leadership of Maui is aware of this; they are failing to address their responsibility in a project that has long been overdue and is essential for the islanders. Do not stifle tourism on your island by penalizing those who have contributed taxes to you and the beautiful island of Maui. You are aware of where the funds are and the programs necessary to resolve the houseless crisis. Stop overtaxing the STR owners that generate the income that MAUI needs so badly.
From: Laura Chadwick <lchadwick@traveltech.org>
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2025 10:30:50 AM (UTC-10:00) Hawaii
To: HLU Committee <HLU.Committee@mauicounty.us>
Subject: Travel Tech Opposition to Proposal to Phase Out Legal Short-Term Rentals
Dear Chair Kama, Vice Chair Uʻu-Hodgins, and Committee Members:
On behalf of the Travel Technology Association (Travel Tech) and our members, I appreciate the opportunity to submit these comments concerning the proposal to eliminate legal short-term rentals in the Apartment Districts of Maui County.
Travel Tech represents the leading innovators in travel technology, including online travel agencies (OTAs), metasearch platforms, travel management companies, and short-term rental platforms. Our members connect travelers to lodging options and support Hawaiʻi’s tourism economy by empowering consumer choice and helping thousands of local property owners, small businesses, and workers thrive. Our members’ vital role in the travel and tourism industry empowers consumers, creates a fair and competitive marketplace, fosters accountability, and promotes positive customer experiences.
We strongly oppose the proposal to phase out lawful short-term rentals in Maui’s Apartment Districts. These units—which are tax-compliant and legally permitted—play a vital role in Maui’s visitor infrastructure. According to a June 2024 economic analysis conducted by Kloninger & Sims and commissioned by Travel Tech, short-term rental guests in Maui County spent $2.2 billion in 2023, generating $4 billion in total economic activity. These visitors support thousands of jobs, contribute substantially to local businesses, and help sustain a wide range of economic sectors beyond just lodging.
The analysis also projected that removing short-term rentals in the Apartment Districts could cost Maui County tens of millions annually in lost tax revenues—including up to $91.8 million in combined real property, transient accommodations, and general excise taxes.
Such losses would severely impact the County’s ability to fund essential services and community investments. Rather than eliminating these accommodations, we encourage Maui County to focus on targeted enforcement of existing regulations, which can address community concerns without destabilizing a critical component of the tourism economy. We welcome the opportunity to partner with Maui County to ensure responsible short-term rental practices while supporting the local economy.
For these reasons, we urge the Maui County Council to reject this proposal and consider balanced alternatives that preserve Maui’s economic health, protect local jobs and revenues, and maintain the variety of lodging options that make the island accessible to a wide range of visitors.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Laura
Laura Chadwick | President & CEO
Travel Technology Association
3033 Wilson Blvd., Suite 700, Arlington, VA 22201
P: +1 (703) 214-8878 | lchadwick@traveltech.org
I submit this testimony in **strong support of Bill 9** because the **status quo is not working**. The housing crisis on Maui has reached emergency levels, as formally declared by the County itself, and it will only worsen if we continue to allow residential housing in the **Apartment District (A-1 and A-2 zoned properties)** to be operated as de facto hotels.
---
### **The Status Quo Is Broken**
For years, a zoning loophole has allowed **short-term vacation rentals (STRs)** in Apartment Districts, diverting homes from local families and workforce housing. This loophole has **extracted billions of dollars from our community every year**—wealth generated on Maui but leaving Maui—while simultaneously:
* **Driving up housing prices and rents beyond what working families can afford.**
* **Pushing multi-generational families into overcrowded homes, cars, or off-island entirely.**
* **Causing workforce shortages in essential services, from teachers to healthcare workers.**
The people of Maui are bearing the cost, while investors—many of whom live off-island—reap profits from what was always intended to be residential housing.
---
### **Fire Damage and Housing Emergency Demand Action**
The devastation of the **Lāhainā and Kula wildfires** exposed how fragile and inequitable Maui’s housing system has become. Thousands of displaced residents remain without permanent homes, while STRs continue to operate in housing-zoned buildings.
The economic and social damage from these fires is **far greater than the financial impact of correcting a zoning loophole**. Continuing the status quo—prioritizing STR investor returns over resident housing needs—is not only morally unacceptable, it directly obstructs wildfire recovery efforts by keeping homes out of reach for the very workers and families needed to rebuild.
---
### **Bill 9 Is a Necessary First Step**
Bill 9 is not a complete housing solution, but it is a **necessary first step** toward restoring housing to its intended purpose. By phasing out STRs in Apartment Districts:
* **More housing units will become available for long-term residents.**
* **Property values and rents will stabilize instead of being driven by speculative STR income.**
* **Workforce housing efforts will finally have a fighting chance to succeed.**
The County has a **legal and moral obligation** to act in the public trust. Housing is a basic human need; STR income is not.
---
### **Correcting a Loophole, Not Punishing Anyone**
It is important to remember that STR operators in Apartment Districts were never promised perpetual commercial use of residential housing. **Compliance with existing STR rules is a legal requirement, not a charitable act**, and cannot outweigh the collective harm caused by speculative use of housing stock.
Yes, some investors will experience financial losses. But no private investment—especially one based on a zoning loophole—can be guaranteed against policy correction, particularly when the broader community is suffering.
---
### **Conclusion**
Bill 9 restores balance, corrects a zoning misuse that has contributed to the housing crisis, and begins to return housing to the people who live and work on Maui. **The real devastation is the ongoing displacement of Maui residents, not the market correction that will come with closing this loophole.**
I urge the Committee to pass Bill 9 without delay.
Mahalo for your time and commitment to the people of Maui.
From: Sara Briendel <daisycircle@yahoo.com>
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2025 6:39:52 AM (UTC-10:00) Hawaii
To: HLU Committee
Subject: Bill+9+Testimony
To Whom This Concerns:
I am offering my testimony against Bill 9 on Maui. I live off island but have a deep family connection to it. My parents came here every year for twenty years until they passed. My father contributed to the economy as a musician, performing with his beloved friends, local musicians. He recorded an album about and on Maui called “Where the Warm Winds Blow.”
My parents could not afford to buy a home in Maui but felt it to be a second home.
We spread both parents ashes by the airbnb complex my parents annually stayed.
My husband and I scraped together every last cent after they passed and invested it in an Airbnb in Kihei near where they stayed so we could continue to come to our beloved Maui with our children, as well as help pay for that second home through STR. As we approach retirement, this place was planned to be our retirement income and eventually, our permanent home. We threw everything we had into this condo, only a few years ago, because of our love for the island of Maui, where we continued to stay and planned as our future home.
Plan 9 will devastate us financially, losing at least a third of equity in our Maui condo, as well as income intended to see us through retirement. We cannot afford the outlandish prices of the resorts, so will have no options for continuing our decades-long annual return to Maui. We will also lose a significant portion of our retirement income, forcing us to have to continue to labor beyond what our health will allow. Enormous hardship will befall us if Plan 9 passes.
Many of the friends we have made who work in the tourist industry will also suffer - restaurant owners, activity providers, performers will also lose their livelihood and we are terrified for them as well.
We love Maui and want to see affordable housing created for all natives but this bill is not the answer.
Plan 9 will destroy the lives of so many locals and Plan 9 does not guarantee the housing stolen from STR owners will be affordable to locals, many ultra rich will rush in to buy third, fourth, fifth homes they will leave vacant most of the year. Rents will still be too high for the average local, especially when the industry upheld by Airbnb tourism will collapse. How can Plan 9, that will devastate so many lives actually be helpful? I beg you to consider that the current tragedy of housing unavailability will be replaced by further financial and housing devastation for others in the community. Plan 9 is not an answer, it is a road to more suffering than currently exists.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sara Breindel and family
Submitted to the Maui County Housing and Land Use Committee
Aloha Chair and Committee Members,
I submit this testimony in strong support of Bill 9 and in direct opposition to the misinformation being circulated by some realtors and short-term vacation rental (STVR) owners who either misunderstand or intentionally distort the purpose and impacts of this bill.
Bill 9 is a targeted, lawful correction of a zoning loophole that has allowed properties in the Apartment District (A-1 and A-2 zoned properties)—originally intended for residents—to be diverted into the visitor economy for decades. Restoring these units to their lawful residential purpose is not only PONO, it is essential for the survival of our local community.
⸻
1. The False Narrative: “Bill 9 will not add housing because families won’t buy small condos.”
Many realtors and STVR owners argue that local families will not purchase or rent these apartments because:
• They are “too small for families.”
• HOA and insurance costs are too high.
• Parking and amenities make them unsuitable.
These claims are misleading and self-serving:
✅ Not every household is a large family. Teachers, nurses, kūpuna, single parents, and young professionals desperately need smaller, affordable units close to jobs. One- and two-bedroom apartments are ideal for many of these residents.
✅ Costs are artificially inflated by STVR use. High insurance premiums, wear-and-tear, and elevated HOA fees are driven by the transient rental market. As STVRs phase out, operating costs stabilize and long-term rental markets naturally adjust.
✅ Affordability improves when speculation is reduced. Removing visitor-driven demand will reduce inflated purchase prices and rents, making these units accessible to residents.
⸻
2. The False Narrative: “Bill 9 will hurt Maui’s economy.”
STVR owners cite “economic studies” predicting decline. But those studies:
• Were funded or influenced by the tourism industry.
• Measured economic impacts only in terms of visitor spending, not community wellbeing.
The reality is:
✅ Maui’s economy cannot survive if its workforce leaves. Businesses, hospitals, and schools are already losing staff because there is no housing. A healthy economy requires residents, not just tourists.
✅ The cost of over-tourism is greater than the revenue it generates. Overcrowding strains infrastructure, increases wildfire risk, drives up car saturation, and displaces residents, eroding the very cultural fabric visitors come to experience.
⸻
3. The False Narrative: “This is our family home, not an investment.”
Many second-home STVR owners claim, “We didn’t buy it as an investment; it’s where we make memories.” But if a property is:
• Occupied part-time,
• Rented for income when not in use, and
• Treated as a way to offset $7,000/month carrying costs,
…it is, by definition, an investment property. Emotional language does not change the fact that these units are being withheld from Maui residents who have no housing at all.
⸻
4. The False Narrative: “One-bedroom condos aren’t suitable for local housing.”
This is a convenient but dishonest argument. Maui’s housing crisis isn’t just about families of four; it’s about everyone who needs a safe, stable home. Smaller condos are perfect for:
• Single kūpuna living on fixed incomes,
• Newly hired teachers or healthcare workers,
• Local couples or single parents with one child.
The idea that “if it’s not perfect for a family of four, it’s useless” is a delay tactic to protect rental profits.
⸻
5. The False Narrative: “Just build more housing; don’t take ours.”
Building new housing is important, but it takes years and massive funding. Meanwhile:
• Thousands of existing units sit locked in the visitor economy.
• Families displaced by the Lāhainā fires cannot wait 5–10 years for new construction.
Bill 9 provides immediate housing relief by restoring already-built residential units to their intended purpose.
⸻
6. The False Narrative: “We should just raise taxes instead.”
Taxes alone do not create housing. Even if STVR taxes were raised, it would not instantly make units available for displaced families. Housing supply—not just revenue—is the immediate emergency.
Further, STVR owners claiming they’ve “paid $250,000 in taxes over 20 years” present it as a charitable act. Paying property tax is not philanthropy—it’s a legal obligation.
⸻
7. The False Narrative: “Local residents and Hawaiians should be allowed to run STVRs.”
Some claim that restricting STVRs is “HEWA” because it shuts locals and Native Hawaiians out of the visitor economy. This argument ignores the bigger truth:
✅ Locals need housing more than a side business in tourism. Without housing, residents will continue to leave Maui entirely, further eroding Hawaiian cultural presence on the island.
✅ Tourism profits must not outweigh the right to housing. PONO governance requires prioritizing community survival over speculative profit.
⸻
Conclusion
Bill 9 is not anti-tourism and not anti-resident. It is a correction of a decades-old zoning abuse that has fueled displacement, overpopulation, and economic inequity.
STVR owners and realtors misrepresent Bill 9 because it threatens their profits, but public policy cannot be dictated by individual investors’ financial comfort while our own residents are forced to leave their homeland.
I urge this Committee to pass Bill 9 without dilution or delay. The land’s highest and best use is to house our people, not to serve as transient lodging for part-time visitors.
Mahalo for your time and for standing for the future of Maui.
From: Kelly Beggrow <kellybeggrow@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, July 21, 2025 6:15 AM
To: HLU Committee <HLU.Committee@mauicounty.us>
Subject: Bill 9 Testimony
We are home & landowners for the past 21 years at the Ridge In Kapalua.
We spend 1/2 our time in this home and our other home in Eagle. It is our home where we have made memories with our children and now grandchildren growing up.
We did not buy it as in investment property but as a home to be family and escape the harsh winters in Idaho for our health.
We have paid more than $250,000 in taxes over this period. Property taxes continue to rise.
We have supported the local community and families throughout this time including our wonderful property managers Ridge Realty Rentals whom we love like family.
We are confused as to the strangeness of this bill.
It makes no logical sense to us.
To just maintain and keep our home, we have to pay around $7,000 a month even though it is paid off. This include property taxes, HOA fees, etc.
We have one space for parking.
This one bedroom condo is not conducive for long term family housing at all.
I do not understand how a family can afford $7,000 a month in a residential area.
The solution is to build more. What happened to the concept of build back better?
Don’t these displaced victims of the Lahaina fire deserve to build back better?
As one family we have donated to families trying to help. Shouldn’t their governor & mayor do the same?
If a bill is presented to increase taxes for 5 years to directly be used to build back better for these victims, and it went directly to them, no one would deny that.
Do the right thing and build back better for these victims.
From: Colleen Medeiros <colleenpmedeiros@gmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, July 20, 2025 6:41 PM
To: HLU Committee <HLU.Committee@mauicounty.us>
Subject: Bill 9 Testimony
Aloha HLU Committee Members,
Please let this serve as my testimony for Bill 9, the Proposed phase out of Short term rentals in Apartment zoning for the purpose of adding affordable house to Maui's housing market.
It is my educated opinion that the proposed phase Will Not serve its intended purpose, and several studies show, it will hurt the overall economy of Maui County.
Firstly, based on current and past trends, I don't believe that local families will purchase these apartments, mainly because most are too small for families but also because the current state of exorbitant insurance and other HOA fees are making these apartments more expensive than they were in the past. Hopefully some state subsidized insurance options will come online soon and that would help, but for now there are many caveats, and I believe these caveats should be taken into consideration, perhaps Apartment complexes should be phased out based on their Actual Potential for suitability as local family homes;
• parking stalls that come with units (2 or more spaces available)
• in unit laundry
• cost of grounds maintenance; pools, tennis courts, amenities that drive HOA fees up.
• Insurance costs
• unit size (2 bedroom or more)
• storage space
• pets allowed?
I strongly urge the HLU to read all the studies conducted on the economic impacts of phasing out this sector of our economy, every study has predicted an economic decline across the county, impacts that will be felt by all citizens. I do believe that could be reduced if only the most suitable apartments were phased out, if the phase out process were more precise based on where local families will actually have a suitable living arrangement; enough space, storage, parking, and affordable HOA and insurance. I would assess all complexes to find the most suitable ones.
Lastly I'd like to reiterate what I have said for many years now; Local Maui residents, haole and Hawaiian alike, must have an avenue to DIRECTLY benefit from our tourism economy. The OFF-SHORE, BIG BOX, HOTEL CONGLOMERATES, should not be the ONLY entities to benefit from our Islands, in a perfectly sustainable world, they would have never been allowed to proliferate and small mom and pops inns and bed and breakfasts would have been the best model. What we need to do is SCALE BACK the GIANT RESORT AREAS, take back the beachfront, require the GIANT BIG BOX hotels to provide affordable housing within their hotels, and house their own employees, which they already import from other countries en mass.
Allow full time Maui residents and ethnic Hawaiians to run the short term vacation rentals and B&B's. Allow full-time Maui residents and Hawaiians to DIRECTLY BENEFIT from our biggest economic driver, do not shut us out.
Perhaps this can be done by raising the STRH tax on out of state owners and offering an "tax exemption" for resident STRH owners.
Disallowing local residents and Hawaiians from benefiting from our main economic driver, is shutting us out economically, is a means to SUPPRESS financial and overall advancement, to shut out more local families and Hawaiian families from getting ahead in their own homeland and that is wrong...not PONO... HEWA.
With Aloha,
Colleen P Medeiros
Realtor-Associate | RS-80134
Island Sotheby's International Realty
Aloha Chair and Councilmembers,
I write in strong support of **Bill 9**, which will restore the intended residential use of properties in the **Apartment District (A-1 and A-2 zoned properties)**, phase out transient vacation rentals (STVRs), and help address Maui’s housing crisis.
The arguments against Bill 9—particularly around **financing and litigation risks for condos**—are overstated, historically inconsistent, and fail to address the true kuleana of this Council: **to serve residents first, not to protect speculative investor markets.**
1. Housing is a Public Trust, Not an Investor Guarantee
* As Maui faces **displacement, overcrowding, homelessness, and housing insecurity**, it is **not the County’s kuleana to protect investor ROI**.
* The County has a **public trust obligation** to stabilize housing for residents.
* STVRs in the Apartment District were never meant to be permanent; the decades-old **Minatoya Exemption** created a loophole that allowed residential-zoned housing to be used as de facto hotels.
Restoring these units to residential use will **free up badly needed housing stock** and align with the emergency housing proclamations already declared by the County and State.
---
2. Condos Already Face Litigation—And Sales Continue
Councilmembers have expressed concerns about **financing and litigation risk**. But let’s be clear:
* **Condo litigation is normal and routine.**
HOAs foreclose on units, evict tenants, and file lawsuits for construction defects, insurance disputes, or unpaid fees regularly. None of this has ever stopped the condo market from functioning.
* **Financing adjusts, but markets continue.**
Lenders and realtors have navigated condo litigation since condos were first developed. Units may temporarily shift to cash buyers or private lenders, but sales continue, and properties retain value.
* **Bill 9 litigation risk is no different.**
Fears about “new” litigation ignore the fact that real estate markets have absorbed much worse disputes without collapsing. The financing market is built to adapt.
3. Bill 9 Actually Improves Financing Stability Long-Term
* **STVR-heavy condos are already harder to finance.** Many are treated as “condo-hotels” by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, restricting FHA, VA, and conventional lending.
* **Once restored to residential use, more local buyers will qualify** for traditional loans, which strengthens local demand and reduces speculative volatility.
The real threat to financing has been the **uncertainty caused by the Minatoya Exemption**, not Bill 9. Clarity and stability are what lenders want—and Bill 9 provides that.
4. Markets Are Cyclical, Not Controllable**
Some argue, “What if these units are bought by mainland investors after Bill 9?” This is the wrong question.
* Mainland investors already own a significant share of these units **today**, under the STVR model.
* **Real estate markets are cyclical and driven by global economic trends**, not County zoning.
* The Council cannot and should not attempt to control who buys property through zoning—it **can** control whether those properties are used for housing or for tourism.
Bill 9 ensures these units are returned to their intended purpose: **housing for residents.**
5. Kuleana: The Moral and Economic Obligation**
**Maui is one of the most expensive places to live in the United States.** If we want families, teachers, nurses, and kūpuna caregivers to stay here, we must make hard decisions that prioritize housing over speculative profit.
Every business and property owner on this island has a kuleana to support livable wages and livable housing. As a community, we cannot sustain a system where housing is treated primarily as a tourism commodity.
Bill 9 is a necessary step to protect our people, reduce car saturation, lower wildfire risks from overdevelopment, and stabilize our neighborhoods.
Conclusion
Litigation fears are exaggerated, financing will adjust as it always has, and the real risk to Maui is doing nothing.
Bill 9 is not just a zoning clarification—it is a statement that this Council is serious about protecting housing for residents, reducing speculation, and restoring stability to our communities.
I urge you to pass Bill 9 without weakening amendments.
Mahalo for your time and consideration.
Ronald and Victoria Lee, Lahaina Residents, STVR Owners
Good morning to all. I wanted to share my situation and thoughts on the STR ban in apartment districts.
My wife and I own a condo in S Kihei, we stay there for 1 month in the winter and 1 month in the summer and rent it out for short term stays when not here. We plan on living here full time once we retire. We do not make any profit on our unit - the stays help to offset some of our costs but as an investment we are in the red over $25k every year. Our unit is 2bdrm / 2 bath, no smoking, no pets, and 1 assigned parking stall with no guest parking — so I am not sure if this would work for most families as their home. And if the bill were to pass we would not sell this unit - we would find other groups or couples to trade time in our unit for time in their units elsewhere - removing the county revenue generated with no additional housing stock
I am sympathetic to the need for additional housing in Maui for local residents and native Hawaiians but I just find this bill to be short sighted. I don’t believe the bill addresses the true root cause of the problem - which is government rules and regulations that promote and make new construction easier and more available. The solution proposed could add up to the 5000 units if all were to convert to long term housing - which I am not sure they would. But give up several hundred millions of dollars a years in perpetuity. Why not find a way to use some of the revenue generated from STRs to fund construction of single family homes after easing construction costs and regulations
The other comment I wanted to make was on water usage - I have read numerous comments on STRs using much more water than long term housing so this conversion will also save water usage. But that is a false comparison and conclusion. Our unit is usually occupied by families with kids, it can sleep up to 6, with 4 adults. So if our unit is not a STR - these families ( if they can afford to come at all ) will probably need 2-3 hotel rooms at a resort or hotel. So the true comparison to ask would be the average daily water usage in 1 STR versus the average daily water usage of 2-3 hotel rooms - which I am sure will look much different
Finally, this has been tried in some large cities on the mainland - and were reversed for legal reasons in some cases and in others they found they did not help the root causes of the problems and the lost revenue was too great to overcome
So, I believe most STR owners would like to and be willing partners to help in finding solutions for the true root cause of the housing issues - but this bill as proposed is not it
Thank you
Has anyone considered keeping the original minatoya list short term,
The properties listed from beginning could be “grandfathered in” and stay short term .
All the ones after hat should go to long term,
The problem is owners at many complexes took it upon themselves turning into short term after they were long term for years, example is pacific shores
It makes more sense to keep our tourist industry healthy by letting the original minatoya list stay short term since that is what they have been from the start
It shouldnt be very hard to determine the difference, too many condo owners changed on their own
From: County Clerk <County.Clerk@mauicounty.us>
Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2025 7:15:49 AM (UTC-10:00) Hawaii
To: HLU Committee <HLU.Committee@mauicounty.us>
Subject: FW: Bill 9 STR testimony
From: Syl Cabral <sylviacabralmaui@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2025 7:09 AM
To: County Clerk <County.Clerk@mauicounty.us>
Subject: Bill 9 STR testimony
I understand that Minatoya took the workforce housing away from the working people with very little or no hearings for the public. It’s time to give the workforce housing back.
1. many of those units were requirements for developers to build elsewhere.
2. This is an executive order that is needed for public survival
ask yourselves . ‘’how did Mantonya have the authority to take the workforce housing away from the working people?”
On Thu, Jun 12, 2025 at 4:38 PM Syl Cabral <sylviacabralmaui@gmail.com> wrote:
Thinking there might be an exception to some residents if that is their only income on a case by case decision w requirements. That might reduce the banter 15 or 20%.
Syl Cabral
808 879 9007
From: AOL.MAIL <butchandkate@aol.com>
Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2025 5:24:57 AM (UTC-10:00) Hawaii
To: HLU Committee <HLU.Committee@mauicounty.us>
Subject: Bill 9 Testimony
Aloha,
George McDowell, #A-306, 940 S. Kihei Road, Kihei, HI. My hope today is that common sense is what guides you as you move forward on Bill 9, for without it, the Committee could inflict irreparable harm to the economy and people of Maui.
Mahalo,
George
My family of four has been to Maui the last three years. We love it and spend a lot of money in the community. However, we will not return if short term rentals are not available. They provide so much flexibility and comfort for a small family versus a hotel. I think there will be many unintended consequences to Maui if Short term rentals are disallowed.
Aloha Chair Kama and Committee Members,
Mahalo for your time and commitment to addressing one of the most critical issues Maui faces: the long-term housing crisis and the urgent need to rebalance our Apartment District (A-1 and A-2 zoned properties) away from transient vacation use.
I have reviewed the recent testimony from Mr. Ron Hansen, who presents himself as a “30+ year appraiser/analyst.” While he cites selective sales data to argue against Bill 9, his own information actually proves why Bill 9 is working exactly as intended. His statements are full of misrepresentations, misleading comparisons, and loophole-defending arguments that deserve to be called out.
⸻
1) “Prices are Dropping” – That’s the Point
Mr. Hansen claims mainland retirees are buying Minatoya List condos at 30–37% discounts compared to 2024 STR-inflated prices. That is not evidence of failure; that is proof Bill 9 is deflating the speculative investor bubble.
For years, STR speculation has artificially driven up condo prices beyond what locals could compete with. Now, by removing the STR income premium, prices are trending back toward reality. If Mr. Hansen were truly concerned about affordability for local residents, he would celebrate this correction instead of defending inflated investor profits.
⸻
2) Cherry-Picked Sales ≠ Market Truth
Mr. Hansen’s entire argument rests on two cherry-picked sales at Maʻalaea Banyans—one of the smallest and least representative condo complexes on Maui.
• He ignores the broader market trend, where many former STR units are sitting unsold, with prices continuing to drop.
• He conveniently leaves out that 2024 was an abnormal STR-driven high, not a stable baseline.
The Council should not base policy on selective anecdotes designed to protect a loophole, especially from someone who has likely profited from STR appraisals.
⸻
3) “Mainlanders Are Buying” – And That Will Change
Yes, some mainland retirees are buying now. But Bill 9 was never intended to instantly transfer ownership to locals; it was designed to stop the bleed of investor-driven transient use.
Hansen fails to acknowledge that as prices continue to normalize, local and workforce buyers will re-enter this market. His assumption that retirees will permanently dominate ignores basic market behavior:
• When profit margins collapse and property taxes shift to residential rates, many absentee owners will sell.
• The investor gold rush is ending, and that’s good for Maui residents.
⸻
4) “Locals Don’t Rent STR Condos” – Because Prices Were Rigged by STR Investors
Mr. Hansen claims locals “do not rent STR-type apartments” and cites a 47% Craigslist vacancy rate. But his logic is upside down:
• Locals aren’t renting because STRs kept rents artificially high to match vacation rental ROI.
• Once STRs are permanently banned, owners will have no choice but to drop rents or sell.
• He also compares luxury STR condos to affordable rentals like Kaulana Mahina—a dishonest comparison designed to confuse workforce housing with high-end investor products.
Bill 9 will force a long-overdue rental price correction.
⸻
5) “Locals Can’t Buy” – Another STR Loophole Myth
Mr. Hansen claims locals “cannot” buy these units because of $4,600/month “carrying costs” and condotel lending restrictions. But this is misleading for three reasons:
1. Those costs are STR-driven (high insurance, investor-risk premiums, STR tax rates). As more STRs convert to residential, carrying costs will decline.
2. FHA and conventional lending expand once transient use is removed. Many financing barriers disappear when these buildings are no longer classified as “condotels.”
3. His focus on “cash retiree buyers” ignores the long-term impact of investor withdrawal; the speculative demand he defends is exactly what priced locals out in the first place.
⸻
6) Hansen’s True Agenda – Protecting Investor Loopholes
Every “concern” Hansen raises ultimately argues for maintaining the status quo that benefits off-island investors, appraisers, and STR operators:
• Cherry-picked data to exaggerate retiree demand
• Selective vacancy numbers to claim STR units don’t benefit locals
• Fearmongering about financing to discourage policy change
The reality is simple: Bill 9 closes the Minatoya loophole that turned our residential-zoned apartments into speculative commodities. Returning these properties to long-term housing use—gradually, but permanently—is the only sustainable path for Maui.
⸻
Conclusion
The Council’s kuleana is not to guarantee investor ROI or to act as an appraiser’s marketing tool for off-island buyers. Your responsibility is to restore balance, protect the public trust, and ensure Maui’s housing serves Maui’s people.
Ron Hansen’s own testimony, when read critically, proves that Bill 9 is already achieving its goals: cooling speculative pricing, removing investor incentives, and shifting the market back toward local housing.
Please continue to move Bill 9 forward and close this loophole once and for all.
Mahalo for your leadership.
Kimo and Jolee Bindo, Waikapu
All of these non-resident TVR owners are living in a "Me" world and it sure would be nice for them to join us in a "We' world. They are doing just fine in their mainland residence as everyone struggles to survive. And so many have left are will be leaving. Do we like 27% resident homes and 73% investments by people that want to put up walls, fences and gates. TVR investors more interested in good reviews than being a good neighbor. The ones that are on island for a week but since they own a property, they consider themselves "Part of the community"? The opposition is clearly about them selves at the expense of the community. They can long term rent or rezone if they choose not to sell. Also, they need to be prepared to accept the fact they most likely bought an inflated property but someone else that knew this was coming. There was a testifier that bought for $500k in 2021 and tried to sell for $600k in 2025. 4 years and they were so upset they did not get a 20% return they decided to pull from the market. That same home will sell for a reasonable amount to a resident. Yes we can afford them. We are just aware of the actual value and are not fooled by the real estate person saying it will pay for itself if you TVR these properties. Unlikely they fully disclosed the delicate nature of the Minatoya list. Then again so many speculative investors hope for the best. Take your losses and move along investor.
To: Tasha Kama, Chair, Housing & Land Use Committee
From: Ron Hansen, 190 Hauoli St., Wailuku
Aloha, Chair Kama,
As a 30+ yrs. real estate appraiser/analyst, I've been analyzing Bill 9's possibilities for the past 9 mos.
I hope my observations are helpful for deciding Bill 9.
A) MAINLANDERS ARE BUYING THE STR-BAN APTS.
The word is spreading...that Maui condos. are for sale at discount prices.
As confirmed by anecdotes from Maui realtors, as well as sales data, retirees
& family vacationers from the mainland are looking at and buying apts. that are on
the Minatoya List. For example, at our Maalaea Banyans condos the most
recent sales to non-residents were $665k on 5/30/25, and on 5/16/25 at $599k...
.....which sold immediately on the listing day.
These prices represent (for identical 1 bdr. units) a discount of 30% and 37%, respectively,
from the $945k to $950k 1 bdrm. sales in 2024..... prior to proposal of Bill 9.
In addition to price discounts, the new retiree/buyer enjoys a $9,500/yr. savings
in property taxes (see schedule 1.0 attached) as an owner-occupied apt.
Since the Minatoya List apts. are nearly all located on beachfront or near (walk to) beach,
realtors' increasingly successful marketing to mainland retirees is robust....as 76,000 U.S.
residents reach age 65 every week.
B) LOCALS DO NOT RENT STR-TYPE APTS.
STR-type apts. have been, and are abundantly available on offerings such as Realtor.com
and Craigslist.com. Yet many of these offerings are not rented even after 30 or more
days listed. (see surveys 2.1, 2.2, 2.3 attached reveal 47% not rented after 30 days).
These 1 & 2 bedroom apts. are small,
lack storage or private yards, and are not as attractive for families as non-STR design
apts., duplexes, or modest houses that are offered for rent. And prices, due to the carrying
costs on STR apts., are usually $3500 or more.
Even newer, non-STR apts. on Maui are not fully occupied. For example the new (since 2023)
340 units, more affordable Kaulana Mahina Apts. in Wailuku has reduced rent rates (from 2024),
offers 1 month free move-in rent, and still has vacancies for their 1 & 2 bedroom apts......that are
very similar in size to Minatoya-List apts.
So adding 6,172 Minatoya-List apts. to the long term rental market is likely to provide very little benefit
to local residents.
C) LOCALS DO NOT QUALIFY....OR EVEN WANT....TO BUY A MINATOYA LIST APT.
The $4,600 per month "carrying costs" (per testimony presented) for insurance, HOA fees,
mortgage loan, property tax, etc. would require an income of $11,500 to $15,300 per month
to qualify for a mortgage loan of 30% to 40% of qualifying income. The average $1,050/mo.
HOA fees makes all STR apts. unattractive as family homes/investments...relative to
non-STR apts., duplexes, or modest houses. Even with some current apt. prices as low
as $300k to $500k , they are still on the market...with price drops being offered (see Redfin.com).
Unfortunately, most STR apts. are difficult (or impossible) to find mortgage financing, since
they are classified as "condotels" for lenders...not qualifying for regular FHA loans.
So the all-cash buying by retirees edges out locals' purchase efforts.
After months of observations and analysis, I can only conclude that,
UNFORTUNATELY, BILL 9 CANNOT AND WILL NOT ASSURE THAT ANY MINATOYA LIST
APTS. ARE ACTUALLY OCCUPIED BY LOCAL RESIDENTS.
Thank you..and your committee members... for your extraordinary time and attention!!
Mahalo,
Ron Hansen, 22 yrs. Maui Resident, 190 Hauoli St.
Attached: *Hansen Appraiser Qualifications
*Schedule 1.0 Price & Prop. Tax Discounts
*Surveys 2.1, 2.2, and 2.3 -STR-type Rentals
3 Attachments
• Scanned by Gmail
Bill 9 will not correct housing shortage. It will only punish owners of short term rental properties and the Maui citizens that are employed maintaining those properties. The County Council was elected to serve all, not just the people that want to destroy lawful owners.
Hurting one part of the population does little good and will cause major damage which will not be easily overcome.
Harry Hecht
From: Mike Pytlinski <bronco67@hotmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2025 11:10 AM
To: HLU Committee <HLU.Committee@mauicounty.us>
Subject: Bill 9 Testimony
Aloha Chair, Vice Chair, and Committee Members,
My name is Michael Pytlinski, and I own a short-term rental property in Maui County. I am writing today to express my deep concern and strong opposition to the proposed legislation to phase out more than 6,000 vacation rentals.
I appreciate your efforts to address the need for more affordable housing on Maui. I do not believe that eliminating over 6,000 current licensed STRs is the answer. I applied back in 2006 to be able to rent out my unit in a short-term capacity. I, like the other 6,000 licensed STR owners, applied to Maui County and the State of Hawaii and were granted licenses and permission to do so legally. Every dollar we collect we contribute nearly 18% in GE, TA, and MCTAT taxes. Since 2006, I have contributed nearly $400,000 myself to the State of Hawaii and Maui County in tax revenue. You have over 6,000 legal licensed STRs that are generating money for the State and County. The State and County will lose 14% of every dollar generated by STRs if you ban the 6,000 STRs for operating as they have been legally been able to do. Eliminating these STRs erases a whole revenue stream that generates millions of dollars for Maui County and Hawaii annually. Just all of this threating to cut them has greatly decreased this revenue that I am sure is very visible now.
My, and all STRs, bring guests to the island that then contribute to many Maui businesses: Aloha-Rent-A-Car, Kihei Rent a car – two locally owned Maui businesses that employee many local residents. Our guests eat at many local restaurants and coffee shops also owned by local residents. Many of the Maui activities thrive due to our guests: Start Me Up (Blue Water) fishing, Maui Adventure Cruises, Kainani Sails, Scotch Mist Sailing Charters – All staffed by local residents. Just to give a few of the many examples of local businesses and residents that benefit from STRs.
Please reconsider your efforts to increase affordable housing by eliminating the legal STRs. The revenue they generate can greatly be used to assist with developing other solutions.
Mahalo for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Michael Pytlinski
honokowaipalmsb7@hotmail.com
From: Belinda Battistelli-Meeker <mauipalms213@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2025 10:45:19 AM (UTC-10:00) Hawaii
To: HLU Committee <HLU.Committee@mauicounty.us>
Cc: Cristina Graziano <cristina@destinationmaui.net>; Sherry Kennedy <sherry@destinationmaui.net>; Robb and Linda Haskins <rlhaskins@msn.com>; Barbara Olson <barbaracolson@msn.com>; Keani N. Rawlins <Keani.Rawlins@mauicounty.us>; Thomas M. Cook <Thomas.Cook@mauicounty.us>
Subject: Bill 9 Testimony
A pertinent question for the STR RENTAL owners to consider is what transpired during the prosperous times. Maui was flourishing well before the onset of COVID, and as the world reopened, Maui began to prosper once more with an influx of visitors. Throughout this period, Maui County was accumulating TAT and GET taxes from all of us—amounting to thousands upon thousands of dollars. Additionally, fees were imposed on the business owners of Property Managers—where did all that money go? If the concerns revolve around the homeless and houseless natives of Maui, where were the leaders of Maui, including politicians, mayors, and other influential figures, in their efforts to create housing for their own? We acknowledge that the Lahaina fire caused immense destruction for many, but the reserves generated from all the taxes collected by Maui, along with the contributions from hotels, raise the question—where are the homes? The crisis of homelessness and "houselessness" has been escalating long before the Lahaina fires, and the leadership of Maui is aware of this; they are failing to address their responsibility in a project that has long been overdue and is essential for the islanders. Do not stifle tourism on your island by penalizing those who have contributed taxes to you and the beautiful island of Maui. You are aware of where the funds are and the programs necessary to resolve the houseless crisis. Stop overtaxing the STR owners that generate the income that MAUI needs so badly.
From: Laura Chadwick <lchadwick@traveltech.org>
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2025 10:30:50 AM (UTC-10:00) Hawaii
To: HLU Committee <HLU.Committee@mauicounty.us>
Subject: Travel Tech Opposition to Proposal to Phase Out Legal Short-Term Rentals
Dear Chair Kama, Vice Chair Uʻu-Hodgins, and Committee Members:
On behalf of the Travel Technology Association (Travel Tech) and our members, I appreciate the opportunity to submit these comments concerning the proposal to eliminate legal short-term rentals in the Apartment Districts of Maui County.
Travel Tech represents the leading innovators in travel technology, including online travel agencies (OTAs), metasearch platforms, travel management companies, and short-term rental platforms. Our members connect travelers to lodging options and support Hawaiʻi’s tourism economy by empowering consumer choice and helping thousands of local property owners, small businesses, and workers thrive. Our members’ vital role in the travel and tourism industry empowers consumers, creates a fair and competitive marketplace, fosters accountability, and promotes positive customer experiences.
We strongly oppose the proposal to phase out lawful short-term rentals in Maui’s Apartment Districts. These units—which are tax-compliant and legally permitted—play a vital role in Maui’s visitor infrastructure. According to a June 2024 economic analysis conducted by Kloninger & Sims and commissioned by Travel Tech, short-term rental guests in Maui County spent $2.2 billion in 2023, generating $4 billion in total economic activity. These visitors support thousands of jobs, contribute substantially to local businesses, and help sustain a wide range of economic sectors beyond just lodging.
The analysis also projected that removing short-term rentals in the Apartment Districts could cost Maui County tens of millions annually in lost tax revenues—including up to $91.8 million in combined real property, transient accommodations, and general excise taxes.
Such losses would severely impact the County’s ability to fund essential services and community investments. Rather than eliminating these accommodations, we encourage Maui County to focus on targeted enforcement of existing regulations, which can address community concerns without destabilizing a critical component of the tourism economy. We welcome the opportunity to partner with Maui County to ensure responsible short-term rental practices while supporting the local economy.
For these reasons, we urge the Maui County Council to reject this proposal and consider balanced alternatives that preserve Maui’s economic health, protect local jobs and revenues, and maintain the variety of lodging options that make the island accessible to a wide range of visitors.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Laura
Laura Chadwick | President & CEO
Travel Technology Association
3033 Wilson Blvd., Suite 700, Arlington, VA 22201
P: +1 (703) 214-8878 | lchadwick@traveltech.org
Maalaea is all workforce housing.
On behalf of the Ma'alaea Village Association, MVA we respectfully submit the attached testimony.
Aloha Chair and Members of the Committee,
I submit this testimony in **strong support of Bill 9** because the **status quo is not working**. The housing crisis on Maui has reached emergency levels, as formally declared by the County itself, and it will only worsen if we continue to allow residential housing in the **Apartment District (A-1 and A-2 zoned properties)** to be operated as de facto hotels.
---
### **The Status Quo Is Broken**
For years, a zoning loophole has allowed **short-term vacation rentals (STRs)** in Apartment Districts, diverting homes from local families and workforce housing. This loophole has **extracted billions of dollars from our community every year**—wealth generated on Maui but leaving Maui—while simultaneously:
* **Driving up housing prices and rents beyond what working families can afford.**
* **Pushing multi-generational families into overcrowded homes, cars, or off-island entirely.**
* **Causing workforce shortages in essential services, from teachers to healthcare workers.**
The people of Maui are bearing the cost, while investors—many of whom live off-island—reap profits from what was always intended to be residential housing.
---
### **Fire Damage and Housing Emergency Demand Action**
The devastation of the **Lāhainā and Kula wildfires** exposed how fragile and inequitable Maui’s housing system has become. Thousands of displaced residents remain without permanent homes, while STRs continue to operate in housing-zoned buildings.
The economic and social damage from these fires is **far greater than the financial impact of correcting a zoning loophole**. Continuing the status quo—prioritizing STR investor returns over resident housing needs—is not only morally unacceptable, it directly obstructs wildfire recovery efforts by keeping homes out of reach for the very workers and families needed to rebuild.
---
### **Bill 9 Is a Necessary First Step**
Bill 9 is not a complete housing solution, but it is a **necessary first step** toward restoring housing to its intended purpose. By phasing out STRs in Apartment Districts:
* **More housing units will become available for long-term residents.**
* **Property values and rents will stabilize instead of being driven by speculative STR income.**
* **Workforce housing efforts will finally have a fighting chance to succeed.**
The County has a **legal and moral obligation** to act in the public trust. Housing is a basic human need; STR income is not.
---
### **Correcting a Loophole, Not Punishing Anyone**
It is important to remember that STR operators in Apartment Districts were never promised perpetual commercial use of residential housing. **Compliance with existing STR rules is a legal requirement, not a charitable act**, and cannot outweigh the collective harm caused by speculative use of housing stock.
Yes, some investors will experience financial losses. But no private investment—especially one based on a zoning loophole—can be guaranteed against policy correction, particularly when the broader community is suffering.
---
### **Conclusion**
Bill 9 restores balance, corrects a zoning misuse that has contributed to the housing crisis, and begins to return housing to the people who live and work on Maui. **The real devastation is the ongoing displacement of Maui residents, not the market correction that will come with closing this loophole.**
I urge the Committee to pass Bill 9 without delay.
Mahalo for your time and commitment to the people of Maui.
Respectfully submitted,
Donald Schenk, Waikapu Resident
From: Sara Briendel <daisycircle@yahoo.com>
Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2025 6:39:52 AM (UTC-10:00) Hawaii
To: HLU Committee
Subject: Bill+9+Testimony
To Whom This Concerns:
I am offering my testimony against Bill 9 on Maui. I live off island but have a deep family connection to it. My parents came here every year for twenty years until they passed. My father contributed to the economy as a musician, performing with his beloved friends, local musicians. He recorded an album about and on Maui called “Where the Warm Winds Blow.”
My parents could not afford to buy a home in Maui but felt it to be a second home.
We spread both parents ashes by the airbnb complex my parents annually stayed.
My husband and I scraped together every last cent after they passed and invested it in an Airbnb in Kihei near where they stayed so we could continue to come to our beloved Maui with our children, as well as help pay for that second home through STR. As we approach retirement, this place was planned to be our retirement income and eventually, our permanent home. We threw everything we had into this condo, only a few years ago, because of our love for the island of Maui, where we continued to stay and planned as our future home.
Plan 9 will devastate us financially, losing at least a third of equity in our Maui condo, as well as income intended to see us through retirement. We cannot afford the outlandish prices of the resorts, so will have no options for continuing our decades-long annual return to Maui. We will also lose a significant portion of our retirement income, forcing us to have to continue to labor beyond what our health will allow. Enormous hardship will befall us if Plan 9 passes.
Many of the friends we have made who work in the tourist industry will also suffer - restaurant owners, activity providers, performers will also lose their livelihood and we are terrified for them as well.
We love Maui and want to see affordable housing created for all natives but this bill is not the answer.
Plan 9 will destroy the lives of so many locals and Plan 9 does not guarantee the housing stolen from STR owners will be affordable to locals, many ultra rich will rush in to buy third, fourth, fifth homes they will leave vacant most of the year. Rents will still be too high for the average local, especially when the industry upheld by Airbnb tourism will collapse. How can Plan 9, that will devastate so many lives actually be helpful? I beg you to consider that the current tragedy of housing unavailability will be replaced by further financial and housing devastation for others in the community. Plan 9 is not an answer, it is a road to more suffering than currently exists.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sara Breindel and family
Submitted to the Maui County Housing and Land Use Committee
Aloha Chair and Committee Members,
I submit this testimony in strong support of Bill 9 and in direct opposition to the misinformation being circulated by some realtors and short-term vacation rental (STVR) owners who either misunderstand or intentionally distort the purpose and impacts of this bill.
Bill 9 is a targeted, lawful correction of a zoning loophole that has allowed properties in the Apartment District (A-1 and A-2 zoned properties)—originally intended for residents—to be diverted into the visitor economy for decades. Restoring these units to their lawful residential purpose is not only PONO, it is essential for the survival of our local community.
⸻
1. The False Narrative: “Bill 9 will not add housing because families won’t buy small condos.”
Many realtors and STVR owners argue that local families will not purchase or rent these apartments because:
• They are “too small for families.”
• HOA and insurance costs are too high.
• Parking and amenities make them unsuitable.
These claims are misleading and self-serving:
✅ Not every household is a large family. Teachers, nurses, kūpuna, single parents, and young professionals desperately need smaller, affordable units close to jobs. One- and two-bedroom apartments are ideal for many of these residents.
✅ Costs are artificially inflated by STVR use. High insurance premiums, wear-and-tear, and elevated HOA fees are driven by the transient rental market. As STVRs phase out, operating costs stabilize and long-term rental markets naturally adjust.
✅ Affordability improves when speculation is reduced. Removing visitor-driven demand will reduce inflated purchase prices and rents, making these units accessible to residents.
⸻
2. The False Narrative: “Bill 9 will hurt Maui’s economy.”
STVR owners cite “economic studies” predicting decline. But those studies:
• Were funded or influenced by the tourism industry.
• Measured economic impacts only in terms of visitor spending, not community wellbeing.
The reality is:
✅ Maui’s economy cannot survive if its workforce leaves. Businesses, hospitals, and schools are already losing staff because there is no housing. A healthy economy requires residents, not just tourists.
✅ The cost of over-tourism is greater than the revenue it generates. Overcrowding strains infrastructure, increases wildfire risk, drives up car saturation, and displaces residents, eroding the very cultural fabric visitors come to experience.
⸻
3. The False Narrative: “This is our family home, not an investment.”
Many second-home STVR owners claim, “We didn’t buy it as an investment; it’s where we make memories.” But if a property is:
• Occupied part-time,
• Rented for income when not in use, and
• Treated as a way to offset $7,000/month carrying costs,
…it is, by definition, an investment property. Emotional language does not change the fact that these units are being withheld from Maui residents who have no housing at all.
⸻
4. The False Narrative: “One-bedroom condos aren’t suitable for local housing.”
This is a convenient but dishonest argument. Maui’s housing crisis isn’t just about families of four; it’s about everyone who needs a safe, stable home. Smaller condos are perfect for:
• Single kūpuna living on fixed incomes,
• Newly hired teachers or healthcare workers,
• Local couples or single parents with one child.
The idea that “if it’s not perfect for a family of four, it’s useless” is a delay tactic to protect rental profits.
⸻
5. The False Narrative: “Just build more housing; don’t take ours.”
Building new housing is important, but it takes years and massive funding. Meanwhile:
• Thousands of existing units sit locked in the visitor economy.
• Families displaced by the Lāhainā fires cannot wait 5–10 years for new construction.
Bill 9 provides immediate housing relief by restoring already-built residential units to their intended purpose.
⸻
6. The False Narrative: “We should just raise taxes instead.”
Taxes alone do not create housing. Even if STVR taxes were raised, it would not instantly make units available for displaced families. Housing supply—not just revenue—is the immediate emergency.
Further, STVR owners claiming they’ve “paid $250,000 in taxes over 20 years” present it as a charitable act. Paying property tax is not philanthropy—it’s a legal obligation.
⸻
7. The False Narrative: “Local residents and Hawaiians should be allowed to run STVRs.”
Some claim that restricting STVRs is “HEWA” because it shuts locals and Native Hawaiians out of the visitor economy. This argument ignores the bigger truth:
✅ Locals need housing more than a side business in tourism. Without housing, residents will continue to leave Maui entirely, further eroding Hawaiian cultural presence on the island.
✅ Tourism profits must not outweigh the right to housing. PONO governance requires prioritizing community survival over speculative profit.
⸻
Conclusion
Bill 9 is not anti-tourism and not anti-resident. It is a correction of a decades-old zoning abuse that has fueled displacement, overpopulation, and economic inequity.
STVR owners and realtors misrepresent Bill 9 because it threatens their profits, but public policy cannot be dictated by individual investors’ financial comfort while our own residents are forced to leave their homeland.
I urge this Committee to pass Bill 9 without dilution or delay. The land’s highest and best use is to house our people, not to serve as transient lodging for part-time visitors.
Mahalo for your time and for standing for the future of Maui.
Respectfully submitted,
Tyler Hunter
Kihei Resident
From: Kelly Beggrow <kellybeggrow@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, July 21, 2025 6:15 AM
To: HLU Committee <HLU.Committee@mauicounty.us>
Subject: Bill 9 Testimony
We are home & landowners for the past 21 years at the Ridge In Kapalua.
We spend 1/2 our time in this home and our other home in Eagle. It is our home where we have made memories with our children and now grandchildren growing up.
We did not buy it as in investment property but as a home to be family and escape the harsh winters in Idaho for our health.
We have paid more than $250,000 in taxes over this period. Property taxes continue to rise.
We have supported the local community and families throughout this time including our wonderful property managers Ridge Realty Rentals whom we love like family.
We are confused as to the strangeness of this bill.
It makes no logical sense to us.
To just maintain and keep our home, we have to pay around $7,000 a month even though it is paid off. This include property taxes, HOA fees, etc.
We have one space for parking.
This one bedroom condo is not conducive for long term family housing at all.
I do not understand how a family can afford $7,000 a month in a residential area.
The solution is to build more. What happened to the concept of build back better?
Don’t these displaced victims of the Lahaina fire deserve to build back better?
As one family we have donated to families trying to help. Shouldn’t their governor & mayor do the same?
If a bill is presented to increase taxes for 5 years to directly be used to build back better for these victims, and it went directly to them, no one would deny that.
Do the right thing and build back better for these victims.
Sincerely,
Kelly & Dave Beggrow
From: Colleen Medeiros <colleenpmedeiros@gmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, July 20, 2025 6:41 PM
To: HLU Committee <HLU.Committee@mauicounty.us>
Subject: Bill 9 Testimony
Aloha HLU Committee Members,
Please let this serve as my testimony for Bill 9, the Proposed phase out of Short term rentals in Apartment zoning for the purpose of adding affordable house to Maui's housing market.
It is my educated opinion that the proposed phase Will Not serve its intended purpose, and several studies show, it will hurt the overall economy of Maui County.
Firstly, based on current and past trends, I don't believe that local families will purchase these apartments, mainly because most are too small for families but also because the current state of exorbitant insurance and other HOA fees are making these apartments more expensive than they were in the past. Hopefully some state subsidized insurance options will come online soon and that would help, but for now there are many caveats, and I believe these caveats should be taken into consideration, perhaps Apartment complexes should be phased out based on their Actual Potential for suitability as local family homes;
• parking stalls that come with units (2 or more spaces available)
• in unit laundry
• cost of grounds maintenance; pools, tennis courts, amenities that drive HOA fees up.
• Insurance costs
• unit size (2 bedroom or more)
• storage space
• pets allowed?
I strongly urge the HLU to read all the studies conducted on the economic impacts of phasing out this sector of our economy, every study has predicted an economic decline across the county, impacts that will be felt by all citizens. I do believe that could be reduced if only the most suitable apartments were phased out, if the phase out process were more precise based on where local families will actually have a suitable living arrangement; enough space, storage, parking, and affordable HOA and insurance. I would assess all complexes to find the most suitable ones.
Lastly I'd like to reiterate what I have said for many years now; Local Maui residents, haole and Hawaiian alike, must have an avenue to DIRECTLY benefit from our tourism economy. The OFF-SHORE, BIG BOX, HOTEL CONGLOMERATES, should not be the ONLY entities to benefit from our Islands, in a perfectly sustainable world, they would have never been allowed to proliferate and small mom and pops inns and bed and breakfasts would have been the best model. What we need to do is SCALE BACK the GIANT RESORT AREAS, take back the beachfront, require the GIANT BIG BOX hotels to provide affordable housing within their hotels, and house their own employees, which they already import from other countries en mass.
Allow full time Maui residents and ethnic Hawaiians to run the short term vacation rentals and B&B's. Allow full-time Maui residents and Hawaiians to DIRECTLY BENEFIT from our biggest economic driver, do not shut us out.
Perhaps this can be done by raising the STRH tax on out of state owners and offering an "tax exemption" for resident STRH owners.
Disallowing local residents and Hawaiians from benefiting from our main economic driver, is shutting us out economically, is a means to SUPPRESS financial and overall advancement, to shut out more local families and Hawaiian families from getting ahead in their own homeland and that is wrong...not PONO... HEWA.
With Aloha,
Colleen P Medeiros
Realtor-Associate | RS-80134
Island Sotheby's International Realty