Chair Sugimura and Members of the Budget, Finance, and Economic Development Committee,
My name is Renee Kaiama, a resident of Kula and a Maui resident for 5 generation, as well as a small business owner and licensed Real Estate Broker.
I oppose Bill 181.
This bill is not real property tax reform. It is another small adjustment to a system that continues to burden the people who actually live here.
The argument in support of this bill is that assessments have risen dramatically, so exemptions must rise too. But that should force this Council to ask a much harder question: why are resident homeowners being placed in a position where they constantly need relief from their own County government?
Too often, Maui County policy appears to be shaped by PACs, political organizations, outside policy groups, lobbyists, and think tanks instead of by the residents who are actually trying to survive here. That is backwards.
Residents do not need another policy memo telling them what is good for them. They need this Council to listen to what they are saying.
They are saying insurance is too high.
They are saying food is too high.
They are saying utilities are too high.
They are saying property taxes are too high.
They are saying their children cannot afford to stay here.
They are saying kūpuna are afraid of being priced out of homes they have lived in for decades.
Bill 181 does not answer those concerns. It simply raises exemptions after assessments have already increased. That is not critical thinking. That is reacting after the damage has already been done.
If assessments are rising so fast that exemptions must be increased every few years, then the real issue is the assessment system itself. This Council should be considering owner-occupied assessment caps, stronger kūpuna protections, long-term residency exemptions, and whether hotels, resorts, timeshares, and visitor-serving properties should carry more of the burden.
Maui residents should not be treated as the easiest revenue source because they are rooted here and cannot simply leave.
I urge this Council to stop accepting surface-level solutions and start asking better questions. Who benefits? Who pays? Who is being protected? Who is being ignored?
That is the critical thinking residents deserve.
I respectfully ask the Committee to file Bill 181 and return with real property tax reform that protects resident homeowners, kūpuna, and long-term Maui families first.
TESTIMONY IN OPPOSITION TO BILL 181 (2025)
INCREASING THE AMOUNT OF THE HOME AND LONG-TERM RENTAL EXEMPTIONS FROM REAL PROPERTY TAX
Chair Sugimura and Members of the Budget, Finance, and Economic Development Committee,
My name is Edward Codelia, a resident of Kula, REALTOR®, and longtime Maui County resident.
I am in opposition to Bill 181 (2025) as currently drafted.
While I appreciate the intent of providing tax relief to resident homeowners and long-term rental property owners, this bill represents another temporary adjustment to a tax system that continues to move in the wrong direction.
The County's argument for increasing these exemptions is straightforward: assessed property values continue to rise, which increases the tax burden on homeowners and long-term rental property owners. However, if the County must repeatedly return every few years to increase exemptions because assessments continue rising, then the exemption is not solving the problem. It is simply offsetting a problem created by the assessment system itself.
The County estimates this proposal will reduce real property tax revenues by approximately $4.9 million and affect more than 25,000 parcels. Yet nowhere in this bill is there any discussion of why assessments continue to rise so dramatically, why resident homeowners require continual relief from their own government, or why visitor-serving properties are not being asked to shoulder a greater share of the burden.
At the same time, many residents have watched their assessed values increase far beyond wage growth and inflation.
This bill does not address the underlying issue.
More importantly, the bill provides the same relief to a recently arrived homeowner as it does to a resident who has lived on Maui for decades. It provides no additional protection for kūpuna, fixed-income residents, or longtime local families most vulnerable to displacement.
If the Council is serious about protecting residents, it should pursue meaningful reform rather than periodic exemption increases.
I respectfully suggest the Council consider the following:
Create a Senior Homeowner Exemption.
Residents age 60 or older who occupy their homes as their principal residence should receive an additional exemption of at least $250,000 above the standard homeowner exemption.
Create a Long-Term Residency Exemption.
Residents who have occupied a principal residence in Maui County for ten years or more should receive additional tax relief recognizing their long-term contribution to the community.
Cap Annual Assessment Increases for Owner-Occupied Homes.
No resident homeowner should experience unlimited annual increases in assessed value while continuing to occupy the same property.
Shift More of the Tax Burden to Visitor-Serving Properties.
Hotels, resorts, timeshares, and other tourism-related properties generate significant impacts on County infrastructure and services. Before continually increasing taxes on residents and then adjusting exemptions to compensate, the Council should review whether visitor-serving properties are paying their fair share.
Protect Resident Homeowners First.
Any future property tax reform should prioritize owner-occupied housing before providing additional benefits to investment properties.
Conduct a Comprehensive Review of Property Tax Policy.
The County should evaluate the cumulative impact of assessment increases, classification changes, exemption policies, and tourism-related taxation before making piecemeal adjustments every few years.
Maui County should not operate a system where assessments continually rise, residents complain about the resulting tax burden, and government responds by periodically increasing exemptions. That cycle is evidence that the underlying policy is not working.
For these reasons, I respectfully urge the Committee to reject Bill 181 in its current form and return with a more comprehensive proposal focused on resident homeowners, kūpuna, and long-term Maui families.
TESTIMONY IN OPPOSITION TO BILL 181 (2025)
Chair Sugimura and Members of the Budget, Finance, and Economic Development Committee,
My name is Renee Kaiama, a resident of Kula and a Maui resident for 5 generation, as well as a small business owner and licensed Real Estate Broker.
I oppose Bill 181.
This bill is not real property tax reform. It is another small adjustment to a system that continues to burden the people who actually live here.
The argument in support of this bill is that assessments have risen dramatically, so exemptions must rise too. But that should force this Council to ask a much harder question: why are resident homeowners being placed in a position where they constantly need relief from their own County government?
Too often, Maui County policy appears to be shaped by PACs, political organizations, outside policy groups, lobbyists, and think tanks instead of by the residents who are actually trying to survive here. That is backwards.
Residents do not need another policy memo telling them what is good for them. They need this Council to listen to what they are saying.
They are saying insurance is too high.
They are saying food is too high.
They are saying utilities are too high.
They are saying property taxes are too high.
They are saying their children cannot afford to stay here.
They are saying kūpuna are afraid of being priced out of homes they have lived in for decades.
Bill 181 does not answer those concerns. It simply raises exemptions after assessments have already increased. That is not critical thinking. That is reacting after the damage has already been done.
If assessments are rising so fast that exemptions must be increased every few years, then the real issue is the assessment system itself. This Council should be considering owner-occupied assessment caps, stronger kūpuna protections, long-term residency exemptions, and whether hotels, resorts, timeshares, and visitor-serving properties should carry more of the burden.
Maui residents should not be treated as the easiest revenue source because they are rooted here and cannot simply leave.
I urge this Council to stop accepting surface-level solutions and start asking better questions. Who benefits? Who pays? Who is being protected? Who is being ignored?
That is the critical thinking residents deserve.
I respectfully ask the Committee to file Bill 181 and return with real property tax reform that protects resident homeowners, kūpuna, and long-term Maui families first.
Thank you.
Renee P Kaiama
Please see attached
TESTIMONY IN OPPOSITION TO BILL 181 (2025)
INCREASING THE AMOUNT OF THE HOME AND LONG-TERM RENTAL EXEMPTIONS FROM REAL PROPERTY TAX
Chair Sugimura and Members of the Budget, Finance, and Economic Development Committee,
My name is Edward Codelia, a resident of Kula, REALTOR®, and longtime Maui County resident.
I am in opposition to Bill 181 (2025) as currently drafted.
While I appreciate the intent of providing tax relief to resident homeowners and long-term rental property owners, this bill represents another temporary adjustment to a tax system that continues to move in the wrong direction.
The County's argument for increasing these exemptions is straightforward: assessed property values continue to rise, which increases the tax burden on homeowners and long-term rental property owners. However, if the County must repeatedly return every few years to increase exemptions because assessments continue rising, then the exemption is not solving the problem. It is simply offsetting a problem created by the assessment system itself.
The County estimates this proposal will reduce real property tax revenues by approximately $4.9 million and affect more than 25,000 parcels. Yet nowhere in this bill is there any discussion of why assessments continue to rise so dramatically, why resident homeowners require continual relief from their own government, or why visitor-serving properties are not being asked to shoulder a greater share of the burden.
Maui residents are already paying for:
• Rising insurance costs.
• Rising utility costs.
• Rising food costs.
• Rising construction and repair costs.
• Rising healthcare costs.
• Rising housing costs.
At the same time, many residents have watched their assessed values increase far beyond wage growth and inflation.
This bill does not address the underlying issue.
More importantly, the bill provides the same relief to a recently arrived homeowner as it does to a resident who has lived on Maui for decades. It provides no additional protection for kūpuna, fixed-income residents, or longtime local families most vulnerable to displacement.
If the Council is serious about protecting residents, it should pursue meaningful reform rather than periodic exemption increases.
I respectfully suggest the Council consider the following:
Create a Senior Homeowner Exemption.
Residents age 60 or older who occupy their homes as their principal residence should receive an additional exemption of at least $250,000 above the standard homeowner exemption.
Create a Long-Term Residency Exemption.
Residents who have occupied a principal residence in Maui County for ten years or more should receive additional tax relief recognizing their long-term contribution to the community.
Cap Annual Assessment Increases for Owner-Occupied Homes.
No resident homeowner should experience unlimited annual increases in assessed value while continuing to occupy the same property.
Shift More of the Tax Burden to Visitor-Serving Properties.
Hotels, resorts, timeshares, and other tourism-related properties generate significant impacts on County infrastructure and services. Before continually increasing taxes on residents and then adjusting exemptions to compensate, the Council should review whether visitor-serving properties are paying their fair share.
Protect Resident Homeowners First.
Any future property tax reform should prioritize owner-occupied housing before providing additional benefits to investment properties.
Conduct a Comprehensive Review of Property Tax Policy.
The County should evaluate the cumulative impact of assessment increases, classification changes, exemption policies, and tourism-related taxation before making piecemeal adjustments every few years.
Maui County should not operate a system where assessments continually rise, residents complain about the resulting tax burden, and government responds by periodically increasing exemptions. That cycle is evidence that the underlying policy is not working.
For these reasons, I respectfully urge the Committee to reject Bill 181 in its current form and return with a more comprehensive proposal focused on resident homeowners, kūpuna, and long-term Maui families.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify.