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)
Alice Lee and the Council have acknowledged they are still “formulating opinions” in private. That’s unacceptable. The public has a right to know: Who is shaping this policy? Who is paying for the lobby? And why are we using tragedy as political cover?
Bill 9 phased‑out the Minatoya List by July 1, 2025 in West Maui and January 1, 2026 elsewhere. This aligns with state law (SB 2919) allowing counties to regulate STVRs—especially when it’s clearly in the interest of affordable housing. Yet it’s courage—transparency and accountability—that are missing at every Council turn.
If the Council won’t lead transparently, let the public demand it. Get it on the ballot! Or Vote yes on Bill 9 to finally use apartment zoning as intended—for residents, not transient profit. Expose the closed-door influence peddling. Respect the voices of the 115,000 registered voters, not just the loud industry lobby. The people deserve better. Now is the time.
Councilmember Lee warns of economic harm from Bill 9. Yet compare that to the disaster we’ve already suffered:
• August 2023 wildfires caused $5.5 billion in damage (2,200+ buildings destroyed, 102+ lives lost) 
• Moody’s and Fast Company estimate $4–6 billion in economic loss—some estimates even reach $8–10 billion ()
That is money lost forever—through destruction, displacement, lost productivity, and rebuilding — far more than any short‑term STVR rent could ever bring in.
Any litigation that follows passage of BILL 9 will proceed through the normal judicial process. The County is in a STRONG POSITION to DEFEND the ordinance on constitutional and statutory grounds. If necessary, the County may consider TIME-LIMITED TRANSITIONAL MEASURES to further mitigate potential claims, though such measures are not LEGALLY REQUIRED to uphold the ordinance’s validity.
In summary, the LEGAL RISK posed by litigation is LOW, the COUNTY’S AUTHORITY is CLEAR, and the POLICY OBJECTIVES of BILL 9—restoring appropriate land use, protecting housing stock, and promoting zoning consistency—are LEGITIMATE and DEFENSIBLE. I urge this Council to PROCEED with the ENACTMENT of BILL 9 without hesitation.
From: County Clerk <County.Clerk@mauicounty.us>
Sent: Monday, July 14, 2025 9:43:33 AM (UTC-10:00) Hawaii
To: HLU Committee <HLU.Committee@mauicounty.us>
Subject: Fw: Testimony from non - local (german researcher)
________________________________________
From: Mila <djami.saadi@googlemail.com>
Sent: Monday, July 14, 2025 9:11 AM
To: County Clerk <County.Clerk@mauicounty.us>
Subject: Testimony from non - local (german researcher)
You don't often get email from djami.saadi@googlemail.com. Learn why this is important
Aloha,
My name is Djamila (Mila) Saadi, and I’m writing in strong support of Bill 9. I am not from Lahaina, but I’ve had the privilege of spending several months there conducting research, sharing story, attending community workdays, and listening — deeply — to residents who are living through the aftermath of the 2023 fires.
I write today as an outsider, but also as someone who has witnessed the strength, pain, and clarity of this community. I’ve seen firsthand how families are navigating loss not just of homes, but of belonging. I’ve heard story after story of kūpuna pushed out, while condos sitting empty and locals are told there’s no space, of ʻāina treated as investment portfolios while lineages are being broken.
What strikes me most is this: the people most impacted have been showing up — testifying, organizing, rebuilding, resisting. Yet too often, their words are dismissed as emotional or idealistic.
I believe the voices of Native Hawaiian families, long-time residents, and grassroots organizers should be leading this conversation. If the community is not protected it will also cause negative effects on the tourism, because Maui will lose its spirit without its people. But thats not why people visit it - they visit it because of the Alhoa-spirit. The heart to heart relationships.
Bill 9 is not about “taking something away.” It’s about restoring what should never have been taken: housing as a right, ʻāina as relationship, and community as the center of policy.
This is not a simple housing shortage, but a housing injustice. And Bill 9 is one step toward correcting it.
Mahalo for your time.
Greetings from Cologne, Germany
Mila
From: County Clerk <County.Clerk@mauicounty.us>
Sent: Monday, July 14, 2025 7:34:10 AM (UTC-10:00) Hawaii
To: HLU Committee <HLU.Committee@mauicounty.us>
Subject: Fw: Vacation rental ordinance
________________________________________
From: J Best <jenpete@aol.com>
Sent: Saturday, July 12, 2025 4:36 AM
To: County Clerk <County.Clerk@mauicounty.us>
Subject: Vacation rental ordinance
[You don't often get email from jenpete@aol.com. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ]
Dear Supervisors:
Our family loves visiting the islands, but we very much value the maintenance of residential neighborhoods for full-time residents. Sure, we’d enjoy the peace of staying in a neighborhood, but we see across the country the impact these short term rentals have on our communities: lack of long-term housing for locals, loss of affordable housing (whether renting, leasing or buying), loss of community.
As I have proposed for our own tourist-industry-dependent community, I propose at least a shift in ownership of such units to locals with a limit on the number of units. Say, one rental per local resident. That allow for secondary income for an actual resident, rather than, say, 440 units for one resident (or absentee) owner. Don’t live there? Don’t profit.
You might look at San Luis Obispo, California. They have a policy which only allows for the rental of primary dwellings. If I want to rent out the house I LIVE in, I can vacate and do that on a limited basis. It must be my primary residence. I may also rent out a room in my house. But no one can make a housing unit in that city a full-time vacation rental. There are more details to their ordinance which you can find in municode or simply by reaching out to staff.
Yes, we want to visit. Yes, we will need a place to stay. But we understand there’s only so much room, only so many beds, only so much space on your beautiful islands. And locals should be prioritized.
Some say PROPERTY RIGHTS should come before all else. That if you OWN it, you can DO WHATEVER YOU WANT with it—even in the middle of a housing emergency. But that belief—unchecked—is exactly what turned the Lahaina fire from a NATURAL DISASTER into a HUMANITARIAN FAILURE. Property rights are not absolute. They exist within a SOCIAL CONTRACT. They are subject to PUBLIC TRUST. And when thousands of MAUI RESIDENTS are homeless or displaced, while investors run SHORT-TERM RENTALS in zones intended for COMMUNITY HOUSING, the law must INTERVENE.
The Constitution does not protect PROFITS OVER PEOPLE. The COUNTY has both the DUTY and the AUTHORITY to regulate land use in the interest of PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, and WELFARE. That is what Bill 9 does. It reaffirms that APARTMENT DISTRICT zoning—A-1 and A-2—is for RESIDENTIAL USE, not commercial exploitation. It says: when our community suffers, we don’t double down on extraction—we protect the land FOR THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE HERE.
If you believe that “property rights” mean the freedom to evict locals to host tourists, or to hold housing hostage in the middle of a DISASTER, then you’re not defending liberty—you’re defending ENTITLEMENT. That’s not FREEDOM. That’s FEUDALISM. And it’s exactly the mentality that left our kūpuna and families to sleep in cars, hotel rooms, and shelters—while hundreds of units sat vacant or were listed online for vacationers.
BILL 9 is not an attack on ownership. It is a DEFENSE OF DIGNITY. It says: you can invest here, but you cannot displace us. You can buy property, but you cannot commodify a CRISIS. We cannot keep sacrificing housing to the highest bidder, then pretend we have no responsibility when people suffer.
The fire exposed what happens when we put PRIVILEGE over PREPARATION. This law is how we fix it. If you oppose Bill 9, ask yourself: what’s more valuable—your RENTAL INCOME or your NEIGHBOR’S LIFE?
MAUI DESERVES BETTER. THE TIME TO CHOOSE PEOPLE OVER PROFIT IS NOW.
Aloha Chair and Members of the Housing and Land Use Committee,
I write today in strong support of Bill 9, which is not only a necessary correction to decades of zoning mismanagement but also a vital step toward restoring integrity to Maui’s land use laws and addressing our worsening housing crisis. The opposition has claimed that there is “zero evidence” that any significant number of housing units would become available through this measure, but that argument ignores how housing policy works. No one is suggesting that thousands of units will be instantly handed over to local buyers. What this bill does is restore the original intent of Apartment District zoning—long-term residential use—by ending the use of a loophole that has allowed for resort-style short-term rentals (STRs) in non-resort areas. That correction alone is a powerful act of legal clarity, and it sets the stage for future housing reform. Similar actions on other islands have shown real results: after Kaua‘i’s 2008 law restricting illegal STRs, many units returned to long-term rental use within two years. Honolulu’s Bill 89 likewise resulted in a surge of long-term rental listings when STR activity was curbed. Bill 9 is a step in the same direction—one based on legal precedent and grounded policy.
Opponents argue that property values in these areas have dropped by as much as 30% and that these properties are sitting on the market unsold for over 100 days. But this market correction is precisely what should be expected when a commercial entitlement like vacation rental use is removed from residential-zoned properties. These units were never priced based on their residential value—they were inflated by their income potential as short-term rentals. Removing that commercial use returns these properties to their appropriate legal and market classification. That’s not a failure of the bill; it’s a rebalancing of the market. Many of these STR owners made speculative investments based on a temporary policy loophole, and it is not the County’s job to protect speculative investor returns. It is the County’s kuleana to protect the public interest, uphold the integrity of zoning laws, and ensure that housing resources serve residents—not extractive capital.
Much has been said about the historical pattern of investor cycles on Maui, such as when Japanese owners sold off properties after the yen weakened in the 1980s and mainland buyers took over. But that cycle only happened because the County failed to act. Allowing the market to decide again is not neutral—it is choosing to let speculation repeat itself. This bill interrupts that cycle. It does not guarantee that every unit will be bought by a local family, but without action, no units will be. Simply throwing up our hands and declaring the market too far gone is a political and ethical abdication. We have to intervene if we want a different result. This bill sets the legal and policy conditions for that intervention.
Some opponents argue that these buildings have always functioned as vacation rentals and should continue to do so. That argument is fundamentally flawed. Long-term historical use does not override zoning law. Most of these properties were not legally permitted as STRs until they received the Minatoya Exemption in 2001—a political compromise that was never meant to last forever. The Apartment District (A-1 and A-2 zones) was and is intended for housing. Maintaining STR use in those areas just because they’ve operated that way in the past undermines every principle of zoning, and perpetuates the very displacement crisis that the County has declared an emergency.
A particularly disturbing line of opposition testimony accuses the County of “wiping out the savings of white mainlanders” and calls Bill 9 “disgusting.” This is not only racially divisive but entirely misrepresents the intent and effect of this legislation. Zoning laws are not designed to preserve investor equity. They are designed to shape the physical and economic character of communities in a way that reflects public values and needs. No property owner is guaranteed permanent profit from a use that was never intended to be legal in the first place. Furthermore, the County has no obligation to ensure these properties remain luxury investment commodities forever. The fact that locals may not be able to buy many of these properties today does not justify continuing a failed system that ensures they never will.
Opponents also claim that because these properties are near hotels or in resort-adjacent areas, they should remain as STRs. That argument ignores the fact that many of these apartment-zoned complexes are in mixed-use or residential neighborhoods—with schools, bus routes, and long-term residents. Proximity to a hotel does not turn an apartment zone into a resort zone. Zoning exists for a reason. Maui’s long-term residents need housing stability in these very areas. They are not asking to live inside resorts—they are asking for access to the housing inventory that was legally designated for them in the first place.
To those who argue that every supporting argument is “wishful thinking,” I say this: Bill 9 offers tangible, measurable benefits. It restores legal zoning boundaries. It begins the process of recovering thousands of potential housing units. It mitigates environmental impacts by reducing tourism-related car traffic. It lowers fire risk by reducing transient population turnover, especially in high-risk areas like West Maui. It helps the County manage tourism growth and rebalance its economy. And perhaps most importantly, it begins to undo a policy failure that let a temporary exemption become a permanent entitlement. That’s not a fantasy—it’s public policy doing what it is meant to do.
Finally, the claim that “3,000+ testimonies oppose this bill” is not evidence of consensus. It is evidence that those with a financial stake in STRs have organized a robust lobbying campaign. This committee must recognize the difference between orchestrated opposition and genuine public interest. The silent majority—the working families, kūpuna, and young people who cannot access stable housing—are not writing testimony because they are working two jobs, living in cars, or couch surfing with relatives. This bill is for them.
The County Council has an opportunity to take a bold, necessary step toward restoring housing balance on Maui. Bill 9 is not a silver bullet, but it is a foundation. It reflects a commitment to place-based policy, legal integrity, and future generations. I urge you to pass it.
If you won’t listen to Stan Franco, listen to the Governor; he authorized the counties to enforce zoning codes that will create long term housing, not steal from it.
Some say PROPERTY RIGHTS should come before all else. That if you OWN it, you can DO WHATEVER YOU WANT with it—even in the middle of a housing emergency. But that belief—unchecked—is exactly what turned the Lahaina fire from a NATURAL DISASTER into a HUMANITARIAN FAILURE. Property rights are not absolute. They exist within a SOCIAL CONTRACT. They are subject to PUBLIC TRUST. And when thousands of MAUI RESIDENTS are homeless or displaced, while investors run SHORT-TERM RENTALS in zones intended for COMMUNITY HOUSING, the law must INTERVENE.
The Constitution does not protect PROFITS OVER PEOPLE. The COUNTY has both the DUTY and the AUTHORITY to regulate land use in the interest of PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, and WELFARE. That is what Bill 9 does. It reaffirms that APARTMENT DISTRICT zoning—A-1 and A-2—is for RESIDENTIAL USE, not commercial exploitation. It says: when our community suffers, we don’t double down on extraction—we protect the land FOR THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE HERE.
If you believe that “property rights” mean the freedom to evict locals to host tourists, or to hold housing hostage in the middle of a DISASTER, then you’re not defending liberty—you’re defending ENTITLEMENT. That’s not FREEDOM. That’s FEUDALISM. And it’s exactly the mentality that left our kūpuna and families to sleep in cars, hotel rooms, and shelters—while hundreds of units sat vacant or were listed online for vacationers.
BILL 9 is not an attack on ownership. It is a DEFENSE OF DIGNITY. It says: you can invest here, but you cannot displace us. You can buy property, but you cannot commodify a CRISIS. We cannot keep sacrificing housing to the highest bidder, then pretend we have no responsibility when people suffer.
The fire exposed what happens when we put PRIVILEGE over PREPARATION. This law is how we fix it. If you oppose Bill 9, ask yourself: what’s more valuable—your RENTAL INCOME or your NEIGHBOR’S LIFE?
MAUI DESERVES BETTER. THE TIME TO CHOOSE PEOPLE OVER PROFIT IS NOW.
Yes—Bill 9 in its current form may be imperfect, but it is more real than any theoretical CIP project or voluntary compliance program. The alternatives offered by critics often rely on nonexistent pipelines, fantasy conversions, or corrupt spending cycles. If this Council cannot implement it, they should allow voters to approve or reject it—and let the public weigh in on whether our land should serve residents or speculation.
Aloha Chair Kama
Bill 9 is not an affordable housing bill. It creates no new housing units, provides no financial support for low-income housing development, and does not alter any affordability thresholds under county or state law. Its primary purpose is to restore compliance with the original land use designation of the Apartment District (A-1 and A-2 zones), which was established to provide long-term, multi-family housing. The claim that Bill 9 addresses affordable housing is a rhetorical device used to frame opposition to the bill as socially responsible, when in fact, the bill is focused on zoning enforcement. The indirect impact of returning apartment units from short-term to long-term use may marginally increase housing availability, but that outcome is incidental, not the intent.
The use of short-term rentals in apartment-zoned properties originated from a 2001 legal opinion known as the Minatoya Memo. This memo interpreted existing law to allow certain grandfathered vacation rentals to continue operating without undergoing formal rezoning or conditional use permitting. The memo was never adopted as ordinance, was not subject to democratic review, and has since been misapplied to justify widespread transient use in zones where it was never legally or procedurally intended. Continued reliance on this exemption effectively undermines the zoning code and the legislative role of the County Council.
Opposition testimony that centers on economic impact often fails to acknowledge the economic distortion caused by STRs in residential zones. The proliferation of STRs in apartment buildings reduces housing supply, inflates rents, and displaces long-term tenants. These effects are well-documented and contribute directly to Maui’s ongoing housing crisis. Local businesses that benefit from tourist traffic in residential areas operate on an externalized cost model, in which their profits depend on the sacrifice of residential stability. These businesses do not address the loss of school teachers, health care workers, and public employees who cannot afford to live on the island due to housing scarcity fueled by transient vacation use.
Arguments that tourists feel unwelcome due to regulations like Bill 9 are anecdotal and irrelevant to land use law. Planning decisions are not based on visitor preferences or customer sentiment. The role of zoning is to allocate land uses in accordance with the general plan, infrastructure capacity, environmental impact, and public interest. There are designated resort zones and hotel districts throughout Maui that serve the needs of the visitor industry. Apartment zones were not intended to accommodate transient occupancy, and enforcing those boundaries is a matter of law, not hospitality.
Suggestions for compromise, such as imposing impact fees or allowing STRs under density caps, have been explored in the past and have generally failed to produce meaningful results. Enforcement has proven difficult and often selective, with illegal operations continuing despite formal rules. Many of the STRs operating in apartment-zoned properties are owned by absentee landlords, investment trusts, or limited liability companies whose owners do not reside or vote in Maui County. Their interests are often represented through political action committees, not through the democratic channels of local participation. This structural imbalance limits the County’s ability to govern land use in the public interest.
Bill 9 does not impose new burdens; it corrects a long-standing deviation from the lawful purpose of the Apartment District. Continuing to allow STRs in these zones is tantamount to an informal rezoning without proper legislative process or community input. The County has a legal obligation to uphold its zoning code, protect the integrity of its planning framework, and ensure that apartment-zoned housing serves its intended residential function.
From: County Clerk <County.Clerk@mauicounty.us>
Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2025 7:26:32 AM (UTC-10:00) Hawaii
To: HLU Committee <HLU.Committee@mauicounty.us>
Subject: Fw: Bill 9 concerns
________________________________________
From: Arbonne Molina <maui3dp@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, July 9, 2025 7:20 PM
To: County Clerk <County.Clerk@mauicounty.us>
Subject: Bill 9 concerns
Aloha Councilmembers,
My name is Arbonne, and I was born and raised on Maui. I’m writing today as a local business owner who does not own a short-term rental — but whose livelihood relies on the tourism industry.
I support the need to create more affordable housing for our local families — that’s a priority we all share. But Bill 9 goes too far, and I’m deeply concerned about the damage it will do to our island’s already fragile economy. Many of my customers stay in short-term rentals, especially those who can’t afford hotels or prefer more flexible options. If those visitors disappear, many local businesses — including mine — will suffer.
Beyond the economics, I’ve also seen a troubling shift in how welcomed visitors feel. Through my own social media presence and conversations with guests, it’s clear many tourists now feel like they’re walking on eggshells, unsure if they’re wanted here. This perception is growing — and policies like Bill 9 only reinforce that tension. It creates a message that visitors aren’t part of the solution, when in fact they support thousands of local jobs and businesses.
I respectfully ask that you reconsider this bill and instead pursue a more balanced approach, such as:
• Limiting STRs by region or density, rather than eliminating them outright
• Enforcing illegal operators while supporting compliant ones
• Charging impact fees or creating incentives for conversion to long-term rentals
• Working with the tourism sector to find win-win solutions that preserve both housing and jobs
Maui has already been through an incredibly painful year. The last thing we need is more economic instability, especially for those of us who are working hard to rebuild and support our families.
Mahalo for your time, service, and for considering the voices of the small local businesses who keep Maui running.
The current economic hardship facing Maui is not rooted in the elimination of short-term rentals, but in decades of land use mismanagement, speculative real estate practices, and the commodification of our housing stock. To frame this crisis solely as a “tourism downturn” due to lost Airbnb and VRBO options is to ignore the deeper truth: Maui has suffered because the needs of its residents have been subordinated to outside investor returns for too long.
Maybe tourism is down—by 38 to 41 percent (depending on who you believe)—but blaming that on the loss of illegal or non-conforming STVRs in Apartment Districts is a narrow and misleading narrative. Tourism declined globally and nationally due to inflation, recession fears, natural disasters, and changes in travel behavior—not simply because some vacation rentals were regulated. Meanwhile, Maui families face homelessness, overcrowding, and intergenerational displacement
these Apartment-zoned STVRs were not designed to be hotels. They were intended to house our working families, kūpuna, and essential workforce. Turning them into de facto hotels violates the original intent of zoning laws, displaces residents, inflates property values and rents, and shifts tax burdens onto the working class.
The “warm hospitality of the Hawaiian people” should not be manipulated into a justification for speculative profiteering. True hospitality requires that the host has a home from which to offer it. As it stands, many Native Hawaiian and long-time local families have been forced off-island or into substandard living conditions because housing has been monetized into a luxury product for tourists.
The myth that STVRs “benefit everyone” is an outdated fantasy. While some restaurants and tour operators may benefit, the overall economic system has become extractive. Revenues generated by STVRs have not meaningfully improved County infrastructure, schools, hospitals, or housing supply. Instead, they have created economic dependencies that collapse when tourism slows—just as we are seeing now.
It is not the County’s kuleana to protect investor ROI while residents suffer from displacement, overcrowding, and housing insecurity. The County’s duty is to its people—first and foremost. Upholding zoning laws, rebalancing our land use, and restoring housing for residents is not “punishment”—it is protection.
Maui is not in “deep disparity” because of STVR enforcement. It is in disparity because for years, policymakers looked the other way as residential communities were hollowed out, priced out, and turned into vacation enclaves.
Supporting Bill 9 is a courageous step toward correcting that imbalance. We owe it to the future of this island to stop romanticizing the era of unregulated short-term rentals and start building a model based on equity, sustainability, and local wellbeing.
Mahalo for your time and your commitment to responsible leadership.
My formulated opinion is this dies in committee. thank you.
Alice Lee and the Council have acknowledged they are still “formulating opinions” in private. That’s unacceptable. The public has a right to know: Who is shaping this policy? Who is paying for the lobby? And why are we using tragedy as political cover?
Bill 9 phased‑out the Minatoya List by July 1, 2025 in West Maui and January 1, 2026 elsewhere. This aligns with state law (SB 2919) allowing counties to regulate STVRs—especially when it’s clearly in the interest of affordable housing. Yet it’s courage—transparency and accountability—that are missing at every Council turn.
If the Council won’t lead transparently, let the public demand it. Get it on the ballot! Or Vote yes on Bill 9 to finally use apartment zoning as intended—for residents, not transient profit. Expose the closed-door influence peddling. Respect the voices of the 115,000 registered voters, not just the loud industry lobby. The people deserve better. Now is the time.
Councilmember Lee warns of economic harm from Bill 9. Yet compare that to the disaster we’ve already suffered:
• August 2023 wildfires caused $5.5 billion in damage (2,200+ buildings destroyed, 102+ lives lost) 
• Moody’s and Fast Company estimate $4–6 billion in economic loss—some estimates even reach $8–10 billion ()
That is money lost forever—through destruction, displacement, lost productivity, and rebuilding — far more than any short‑term STVR rent could ever bring in.
Any litigation that follows passage of BILL 9 will proceed through the normal judicial process. The County is in a STRONG POSITION to DEFEND the ordinance on constitutional and statutory grounds. If necessary, the County may consider TIME-LIMITED TRANSITIONAL MEASURES to further mitigate potential claims, though such measures are not LEGALLY REQUIRED to uphold the ordinance’s validity.
In summary, the LEGAL RISK posed by litigation is LOW, the COUNTY’S AUTHORITY is CLEAR, and the POLICY OBJECTIVES of BILL 9—restoring appropriate land use, protecting housing stock, and promoting zoning consistency—are LEGITIMATE and DEFENSIBLE. I urge this Council to PROCEED with the ENACTMENT of BILL 9 without hesitation.
From: County Clerk <County.Clerk@mauicounty.us>
Sent: Monday, July 14, 2025 9:43:33 AM (UTC-10:00) Hawaii
To: HLU Committee <HLU.Committee@mauicounty.us>
Subject: Fw: Testimony from non - local (german researcher)
________________________________________
From: Mila <djami.saadi@googlemail.com>
Sent: Monday, July 14, 2025 9:11 AM
To: County Clerk <County.Clerk@mauicounty.us>
Subject: Testimony from non - local (german researcher)
You don't often get email from djami.saadi@googlemail.com. Learn why this is important
Aloha,
My name is Djamila (Mila) Saadi, and I’m writing in strong support of Bill 9. I am not from Lahaina, but I’ve had the privilege of spending several months there conducting research, sharing story, attending community workdays, and listening — deeply — to residents who are living through the aftermath of the 2023 fires.
I write today as an outsider, but also as someone who has witnessed the strength, pain, and clarity of this community. I’ve seen firsthand how families are navigating loss not just of homes, but of belonging. I’ve heard story after story of kūpuna pushed out, while condos sitting empty and locals are told there’s no space, of ʻāina treated as investment portfolios while lineages are being broken.
What strikes me most is this: the people most impacted have been showing up — testifying, organizing, rebuilding, resisting. Yet too often, their words are dismissed as emotional or idealistic.
I believe the voices of Native Hawaiian families, long-time residents, and grassroots organizers should be leading this conversation. If the community is not protected it will also cause negative effects on the tourism, because Maui will lose its spirit without its people. But thats not why people visit it - they visit it because of the Alhoa-spirit. The heart to heart relationships.
Bill 9 is not about “taking something away.” It’s about restoring what should never have been taken: housing as a right, ʻāina as relationship, and community as the center of policy.
This is not a simple housing shortage, but a housing injustice. And Bill 9 is one step toward correcting it.
Mahalo for your time.
Greetings from Cologne, Germany
Mila
From: County Clerk <County.Clerk@mauicounty.us>
Sent: Monday, July 14, 2025 7:34:10 AM (UTC-10:00) Hawaii
To: HLU Committee <HLU.Committee@mauicounty.us>
Subject: Fw: Vacation rental ordinance
________________________________________
From: J Best <jenpete@aol.com>
Sent: Saturday, July 12, 2025 4:36 AM
To: County Clerk <County.Clerk@mauicounty.us>
Subject: Vacation rental ordinance
[You don't often get email from jenpete@aol.com. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ]
Dear Supervisors:
Our family loves visiting the islands, but we very much value the maintenance of residential neighborhoods for full-time residents. Sure, we’d enjoy the peace of staying in a neighborhood, but we see across the country the impact these short term rentals have on our communities: lack of long-term housing for locals, loss of affordable housing (whether renting, leasing or buying), loss of community.
As I have proposed for our own tourist-industry-dependent community, I propose at least a shift in ownership of such units to locals with a limit on the number of units. Say, one rental per local resident. That allow for secondary income for an actual resident, rather than, say, 440 units for one resident (or absentee) owner. Don’t live there? Don’t profit.
You might look at San Luis Obispo, California. They have a policy which only allows for the rental of primary dwellings. If I want to rent out the house I LIVE in, I can vacate and do that on a limited basis. It must be my primary residence. I may also rent out a room in my house. But no one can make a housing unit in that city a full-time vacation rental. There are more details to their ordinance which you can find in municode or simply by reaching out to staff.
Yes, we want to visit. Yes, we will need a place to stay. But we understand there’s only so much room, only so many beds, only so much space on your beautiful islands. And locals should be prioritized.
Aloha,
Jennifer Best
Creston, California
Listen to Stan Franco
Listen to Stan Franco
Some say PROPERTY RIGHTS should come before all else. That if you OWN it, you can DO WHATEVER YOU WANT with it—even in the middle of a housing emergency. But that belief—unchecked—is exactly what turned the Lahaina fire from a NATURAL DISASTER into a HUMANITARIAN FAILURE. Property rights are not absolute. They exist within a SOCIAL CONTRACT. They are subject to PUBLIC TRUST. And when thousands of MAUI RESIDENTS are homeless or displaced, while investors run SHORT-TERM RENTALS in zones intended for COMMUNITY HOUSING, the law must INTERVENE.
The Constitution does not protect PROFITS OVER PEOPLE. The COUNTY has both the DUTY and the AUTHORITY to regulate land use in the interest of PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, and WELFARE. That is what Bill 9 does. It reaffirms that APARTMENT DISTRICT zoning—A-1 and A-2—is for RESIDENTIAL USE, not commercial exploitation. It says: when our community suffers, we don’t double down on extraction—we protect the land FOR THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE HERE.
If you believe that “property rights” mean the freedom to evict locals to host tourists, or to hold housing hostage in the middle of a DISASTER, then you’re not defending liberty—you’re defending ENTITLEMENT. That’s not FREEDOM. That’s FEUDALISM. And it’s exactly the mentality that left our kūpuna and families to sleep in cars, hotel rooms, and shelters—while hundreds of units sat vacant or were listed online for vacationers.
BILL 9 is not an attack on ownership. It is a DEFENSE OF DIGNITY. It says: you can invest here, but you cannot displace us. You can buy property, but you cannot commodify a CRISIS. We cannot keep sacrificing housing to the highest bidder, then pretend we have no responsibility when people suffer.
The fire exposed what happens when we put PRIVILEGE over PREPARATION. This law is how we fix it. If you oppose Bill 9, ask yourself: what’s more valuable—your RENTAL INCOME or your NEIGHBOR’S LIFE?
MAUI DESERVES BETTER. THE TIME TO CHOOSE PEOPLE OVER PROFIT IS NOW.
Albert Dejardine
Kahului Resident
Aloha Chair and Members of the Housing and Land Use Committee,
I write today in strong support of Bill 9, which is not only a necessary correction to decades of zoning mismanagement but also a vital step toward restoring integrity to Maui’s land use laws and addressing our worsening housing crisis. The opposition has claimed that there is “zero evidence” that any significant number of housing units would become available through this measure, but that argument ignores how housing policy works. No one is suggesting that thousands of units will be instantly handed over to local buyers. What this bill does is restore the original intent of Apartment District zoning—long-term residential use—by ending the use of a loophole that has allowed for resort-style short-term rentals (STRs) in non-resort areas. That correction alone is a powerful act of legal clarity, and it sets the stage for future housing reform. Similar actions on other islands have shown real results: after Kaua‘i’s 2008 law restricting illegal STRs, many units returned to long-term rental use within two years. Honolulu’s Bill 89 likewise resulted in a surge of long-term rental listings when STR activity was curbed. Bill 9 is a step in the same direction—one based on legal precedent and grounded policy.
Opponents argue that property values in these areas have dropped by as much as 30% and that these properties are sitting on the market unsold for over 100 days. But this market correction is precisely what should be expected when a commercial entitlement like vacation rental use is removed from residential-zoned properties. These units were never priced based on their residential value—they were inflated by their income potential as short-term rentals. Removing that commercial use returns these properties to their appropriate legal and market classification. That’s not a failure of the bill; it’s a rebalancing of the market. Many of these STR owners made speculative investments based on a temporary policy loophole, and it is not the County’s job to protect speculative investor returns. It is the County’s kuleana to protect the public interest, uphold the integrity of zoning laws, and ensure that housing resources serve residents—not extractive capital.
Much has been said about the historical pattern of investor cycles on Maui, such as when Japanese owners sold off properties after the yen weakened in the 1980s and mainland buyers took over. But that cycle only happened because the County failed to act. Allowing the market to decide again is not neutral—it is choosing to let speculation repeat itself. This bill interrupts that cycle. It does not guarantee that every unit will be bought by a local family, but without action, no units will be. Simply throwing up our hands and declaring the market too far gone is a political and ethical abdication. We have to intervene if we want a different result. This bill sets the legal and policy conditions for that intervention.
Some opponents argue that these buildings have always functioned as vacation rentals and should continue to do so. That argument is fundamentally flawed. Long-term historical use does not override zoning law. Most of these properties were not legally permitted as STRs until they received the Minatoya Exemption in 2001—a political compromise that was never meant to last forever. The Apartment District (A-1 and A-2 zones) was and is intended for housing. Maintaining STR use in those areas just because they’ve operated that way in the past undermines every principle of zoning, and perpetuates the very displacement crisis that the County has declared an emergency.
A particularly disturbing line of opposition testimony accuses the County of “wiping out the savings of white mainlanders” and calls Bill 9 “disgusting.” This is not only racially divisive but entirely misrepresents the intent and effect of this legislation. Zoning laws are not designed to preserve investor equity. They are designed to shape the physical and economic character of communities in a way that reflects public values and needs. No property owner is guaranteed permanent profit from a use that was never intended to be legal in the first place. Furthermore, the County has no obligation to ensure these properties remain luxury investment commodities forever. The fact that locals may not be able to buy many of these properties today does not justify continuing a failed system that ensures they never will.
Opponents also claim that because these properties are near hotels or in resort-adjacent areas, they should remain as STRs. That argument ignores the fact that many of these apartment-zoned complexes are in mixed-use or residential neighborhoods—with schools, bus routes, and long-term residents. Proximity to a hotel does not turn an apartment zone into a resort zone. Zoning exists for a reason. Maui’s long-term residents need housing stability in these very areas. They are not asking to live inside resorts—they are asking for access to the housing inventory that was legally designated for them in the first place.
To those who argue that every supporting argument is “wishful thinking,” I say this: Bill 9 offers tangible, measurable benefits. It restores legal zoning boundaries. It begins the process of recovering thousands of potential housing units. It mitigates environmental impacts by reducing tourism-related car traffic. It lowers fire risk by reducing transient population turnover, especially in high-risk areas like West Maui. It helps the County manage tourism growth and rebalance its economy. And perhaps most importantly, it begins to undo a policy failure that let a temporary exemption become a permanent entitlement. That’s not a fantasy—it’s public policy doing what it is meant to do.
Finally, the claim that “3,000+ testimonies oppose this bill” is not evidence of consensus. It is evidence that those with a financial stake in STRs have organized a robust lobbying campaign. This committee must recognize the difference between orchestrated opposition and genuine public interest. The silent majority—the working families, kūpuna, and young people who cannot access stable housing—are not writing testimony because they are working two jobs, living in cars, or couch surfing with relatives. This bill is for them.
The County Council has an opportunity to take a bold, necessary step toward restoring housing balance on Maui. Bill 9 is not a silver bullet, but it is a foundation. It reflects a commitment to place-based policy, legal integrity, and future generations. I urge you to pass it.
Larry Worth
Kihei Resident
If you won’t listen to Stan Franco, listen to the Governor; he authorized the counties to enforce zoning codes that will create long term housing, not steal from it.
Some say PROPERTY RIGHTS should come before all else. That if you OWN it, you can DO WHATEVER YOU WANT with it—even in the middle of a housing emergency. But that belief—unchecked—is exactly what turned the Lahaina fire from a NATURAL DISASTER into a HUMANITARIAN FAILURE. Property rights are not absolute. They exist within a SOCIAL CONTRACT. They are subject to PUBLIC TRUST. And when thousands of MAUI RESIDENTS are homeless or displaced, while investors run SHORT-TERM RENTALS in zones intended for COMMUNITY HOUSING, the law must INTERVENE.
The Constitution does not protect PROFITS OVER PEOPLE. The COUNTY has both the DUTY and the AUTHORITY to regulate land use in the interest of PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, and WELFARE. That is what Bill 9 does. It reaffirms that APARTMENT DISTRICT zoning—A-1 and A-2—is for RESIDENTIAL USE, not commercial exploitation. It says: when our community suffers, we don’t double down on extraction—we protect the land FOR THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE HERE.
If you believe that “property rights” mean the freedom to evict locals to host tourists, or to hold housing hostage in the middle of a DISASTER, then you’re not defending liberty—you’re defending ENTITLEMENT. That’s not FREEDOM. That’s FEUDALISM. And it’s exactly the mentality that left our kūpuna and families to sleep in cars, hotel rooms, and shelters—while hundreds of units sat vacant or were listed online for vacationers.
BILL 9 is not an attack on ownership. It is a DEFENSE OF DIGNITY. It says: you can invest here, but you cannot displace us. You can buy property, but you cannot commodify a CRISIS. We cannot keep sacrificing housing to the highest bidder, then pretend we have no responsibility when people suffer.
The fire exposed what happens when we put PRIVILEGE over PREPARATION. This law is how we fix it. If you oppose Bill 9, ask yourself: what’s more valuable—your RENTAL INCOME or your NEIGHBOR’S LIFE?
MAUI DESERVES BETTER. THE TIME TO CHOOSE PEOPLE OVER PROFIT IS NOW.
Joelle Condo
Kihei Resident
Listen to Stan Franco
Good luck. We praying for you.
So much drama for nothing.
Yes—Bill 9 in its current form may be imperfect, but it is more real than any theoretical CIP project or voluntary compliance program. The alternatives offered by critics often rely on nonexistent pipelines, fantasy conversions, or corrupt spending cycles. If this Council cannot implement it, they should allow voters to approve or reject it—and let the public weigh in on whether our land should serve residents or speculation.
Aloha Chair Kama
Bill 9 is not an affordable housing bill. It creates no new housing units, provides no financial support for low-income housing development, and does not alter any affordability thresholds under county or state law. Its primary purpose is to restore compliance with the original land use designation of the Apartment District (A-1 and A-2 zones), which was established to provide long-term, multi-family housing. The claim that Bill 9 addresses affordable housing is a rhetorical device used to frame opposition to the bill as socially responsible, when in fact, the bill is focused on zoning enforcement. The indirect impact of returning apartment units from short-term to long-term use may marginally increase housing availability, but that outcome is incidental, not the intent.
The use of short-term rentals in apartment-zoned properties originated from a 2001 legal opinion known as the Minatoya Memo. This memo interpreted existing law to allow certain grandfathered vacation rentals to continue operating without undergoing formal rezoning or conditional use permitting. The memo was never adopted as ordinance, was not subject to democratic review, and has since been misapplied to justify widespread transient use in zones where it was never legally or procedurally intended. Continued reliance on this exemption effectively undermines the zoning code and the legislative role of the County Council.
Opposition testimony that centers on economic impact often fails to acknowledge the economic distortion caused by STRs in residential zones. The proliferation of STRs in apartment buildings reduces housing supply, inflates rents, and displaces long-term tenants. These effects are well-documented and contribute directly to Maui’s ongoing housing crisis. Local businesses that benefit from tourist traffic in residential areas operate on an externalized cost model, in which their profits depend on the sacrifice of residential stability. These businesses do not address the loss of school teachers, health care workers, and public employees who cannot afford to live on the island due to housing scarcity fueled by transient vacation use.
Arguments that tourists feel unwelcome due to regulations like Bill 9 are anecdotal and irrelevant to land use law. Planning decisions are not based on visitor preferences or customer sentiment. The role of zoning is to allocate land uses in accordance with the general plan, infrastructure capacity, environmental impact, and public interest. There are designated resort zones and hotel districts throughout Maui that serve the needs of the visitor industry. Apartment zones were not intended to accommodate transient occupancy, and enforcing those boundaries is a matter of law, not hospitality.
Suggestions for compromise, such as imposing impact fees or allowing STRs under density caps, have been explored in the past and have generally failed to produce meaningful results. Enforcement has proven difficult and often selective, with illegal operations continuing despite formal rules. Many of the STRs operating in apartment-zoned properties are owned by absentee landlords, investment trusts, or limited liability companies whose owners do not reside or vote in Maui County. Their interests are often represented through political action committees, not through the democratic channels of local participation. This structural imbalance limits the County’s ability to govern land use in the public interest.
Bill 9 does not impose new burdens; it corrects a long-standing deviation from the lawful purpose of the Apartment District. Continuing to allow STRs in these zones is tantamount to an informal rezoning without proper legislative process or community input. The County has a legal obligation to uphold its zoning code, protect the integrity of its planning framework, and ensure that apartment-zoned housing serves its intended residential function.
Margie Vida
Haiku Resident
From: County Clerk <County.Clerk@mauicounty.us>
Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2025 7:26:32 AM (UTC-10:00) Hawaii
To: HLU Committee <HLU.Committee@mauicounty.us>
Subject: Fw: Bill 9 concerns
________________________________________
From: Arbonne Molina <maui3dp@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, July 9, 2025 7:20 PM
To: County Clerk <County.Clerk@mauicounty.us>
Subject: Bill 9 concerns
Aloha Councilmembers,
My name is Arbonne, and I was born and raised on Maui. I’m writing today as a local business owner who does not own a short-term rental — but whose livelihood relies on the tourism industry.
I support the need to create more affordable housing for our local families — that’s a priority we all share. But Bill 9 goes too far, and I’m deeply concerned about the damage it will do to our island’s already fragile economy. Many of my customers stay in short-term rentals, especially those who can’t afford hotels or prefer more flexible options. If those visitors disappear, many local businesses — including mine — will suffer.
Beyond the economics, I’ve also seen a troubling shift in how welcomed visitors feel. Through my own social media presence and conversations with guests, it’s clear many tourists now feel like they’re walking on eggshells, unsure if they’re wanted here. This perception is growing — and policies like Bill 9 only reinforce that tension. It creates a message that visitors aren’t part of the solution, when in fact they support thousands of local jobs and businesses.
I respectfully ask that you reconsider this bill and instead pursue a more balanced approach, such as:
• Limiting STRs by region or density, rather than eliminating them outright
• Enforcing illegal operators while supporting compliant ones
• Charging impact fees or creating incentives for conversion to long-term rentals
• Working with the tourism sector to find win-win solutions that preserve both housing and jobs
Maui has already been through an incredibly painful year. The last thing we need is more economic instability, especially for those of us who are working hard to rebuild and support our families.
Mahalo for your time, service, and for considering the voices of the small local businesses who keep Maui running.
Mahalo,
Arbonne
Listen to Stan Franco
Aloha Chair and Committee Members,
The current economic hardship facing Maui is not rooted in the elimination of short-term rentals, but in decades of land use mismanagement, speculative real estate practices, and the commodification of our housing stock. To frame this crisis solely as a “tourism downturn” due to lost Airbnb and VRBO options is to ignore the deeper truth: Maui has suffered because the needs of its residents have been subordinated to outside investor returns for too long.
Maybe tourism is down—by 38 to 41 percent (depending on who you believe)—but blaming that on the loss of illegal or non-conforming STVRs in Apartment Districts is a narrow and misleading narrative. Tourism declined globally and nationally due to inflation, recession fears, natural disasters, and changes in travel behavior—not simply because some vacation rentals were regulated. Meanwhile, Maui families face homelessness, overcrowding, and intergenerational displacement
these Apartment-zoned STVRs were not designed to be hotels. They were intended to house our working families, kūpuna, and essential workforce. Turning them into de facto hotels violates the original intent of zoning laws, displaces residents, inflates property values and rents, and shifts tax burdens onto the working class.
The “warm hospitality of the Hawaiian people” should not be manipulated into a justification for speculative profiteering. True hospitality requires that the host has a home from which to offer it. As it stands, many Native Hawaiian and long-time local families have been forced off-island or into substandard living conditions because housing has been monetized into a luxury product for tourists.
The myth that STVRs “benefit everyone” is an outdated fantasy. While some restaurants and tour operators may benefit, the overall economic system has become extractive. Revenues generated by STVRs have not meaningfully improved County infrastructure, schools, hospitals, or housing supply. Instead, they have created economic dependencies that collapse when tourism slows—just as we are seeing now.
It is not the County’s kuleana to protect investor ROI while residents suffer from displacement, overcrowding, and housing insecurity. The County’s duty is to its people—first and foremost. Upholding zoning laws, rebalancing our land use, and restoring housing for residents is not “punishment”—it is protection.
Maui is not in “deep disparity” because of STVR enforcement. It is in disparity because for years, policymakers looked the other way as residential communities were hollowed out, priced out, and turned into vacation enclaves.
Supporting Bill 9 is a courageous step toward correcting that imbalance. We owe it to the future of this island to stop romanticizing the era of unregulated short-term rentals and start building a model based on equity, sustainability, and local wellbeing.
Mahalo for your time and your commitment to responsible leadership.
Henry Kaaina