Aloha
One issue that deserves clarification is the effect of older subdivision CC&Rs on accessory dwelling units (ADUs).
Many of Maui’s subdivisions were created decades ago under very different housing conditions. Their CC&Rs often contain language limiting lots to a single dwelling or otherwise restricting additional residential units. However, recent changes in state law were specifically intended to increase housing opportunities and prevent private restrictions from undermining that public policy.
As the County considers implementation of the State’s ADU legislation, it is important to recognize that older CC&Rs may no longer operate as an absolute barrier to ADUs. In many cases, state law may preempt private restrictions that conflict with the Legislature’s intent to expand housing opportunities on residentially zoned property.
This is particularly relevant in older subdivisions where restrictions have not been consistently enforced over many years. Across Maui, numerous subdivisions contain existing cottages, ohanas, converted garages, and other secondary living arrangements that have become part of the established character of the neighborhood. In these circumstances, the practical reality on the ground may differ significantly from the language contained in decades-old CC&Rs.
The County should not assume that every recorded CC&R prohibition remains enforceable or that private restrictions automatically supersede state housing policy. Property owners, associations, and County officials will need to carefully evaluate whether particular restrictions remain valid in light of current law, the history of enforcement, and the Legislature’s clear intent to expand housing opportunities.
As Maui confronts a continuing housing shortage, it is important that outdated private restrictions not be treated as an automatic justification for denying housing opportunities that state law was enacted to encourage.
TESTIMONY ON BILL 78 (2026)
ACCESSORY DWELLINGS ON RESIDENTIALLY ZONED LOTS
Housing and Land Use Committee
June 3, 2026
Aloha Chair, Vice-Chair Batangan, and Members of the Housing and Land Use Committee,
I submit this testimony in a neutral position on Bill 78 (2026).
I recognize that Maui County is operating within the framework established by Act 46 (2024), which requires counties to allow two accessory dwelling units on residentially zoned lots by December 31, 2026. As such, this discussion is no longer solely about whether additional ADUs should be permitted, but rather how Maui County will responsibly implement this mandate while protecting existing communities and ensuring adequate infrastructure exists to support future growth.
Like many residents, I support efforts to increase housing opportunities for local families. However, I am concerned that discussions regarding housing production often focus on the number of units that may be created while giving far less attention to the infrastructure, public safety, and resilience challenges that accompany additional density.
Maui County is still recovering from one of the most devastating disasters in Hawaiʻi's history. The lessons learned from August 2023 should compel us to evaluate growth through a broader lens than simply housing production. Every additional housing unit increases demand on roads, water systems, wastewater systems, electrical infrastructure, emergency services, schools, communications systems, and evacuation routes.
Before implementation of this statewide mandate, I encourage the Council to publicly identify:
* The estimated number of additional ADUs that could be created under Bill 78.
* The anticipated increase in population resulting from those units.
* The cumulative impact on water demand and water system capacity.
* The cumulative impact on wastewater and septic systems.
* The impact on road capacity and traffic circulation.
* The impact on emergency response services.
* The effect on evacuation planning during wildfires, hurricanes, flooding events, earthquakes, and other disasters.
These are practical questions that deserve answers.
Maui faces increasing risks from severe weather events, wildfires, flooding, shoreline impacts, infrastructure failures, and other natural hazards. Many communities already have limited access and limited evacuation options. Before adding density, residents deserve assurance that public infrastructure and emergency preparedness systems can support additional growth safely and responsibly.
I also believe an important conversation is missing from this discussion.
If the State of Hawaiʻi is requiring counties to increase residential density, where is the corresponding state funding to support the infrastructure needed to accommodate that growth?
The State should not mandate density while expecting Maui County taxpayers to absorb all associated costs.
I encourage the Council to formally identify the infrastructure improvements necessary to support Act 46 implementation and seek state funding assistance for:
* Water system upgrades.
* Wastewater improvements.
* Road and transportation improvements.
* Wildfire mitigation measures.
* Emergency evacuation planning.
* Public safety staffing and equipment.
* Disaster resilience projects.
Housing policy and infrastructure policy should move together.
Finally, I encourage the Council to ensure that ADUs created under this bill remain focused on residential housing opportunities and are not diverted into uses that fail to address Maui's housing needs. The public deserves confidence that any increase in housing capacity will primarily benefit residents and local families.
As Maui moves forward with Act 46 implementation, I urge the Council to focus not only on housing production but also on infrastructure readiness, public safety, disaster resilience, and securing state assistance for the costs associated with this mandate.
Aloha
One issue that deserves clarification is the effect of older subdivision CC&Rs on accessory dwelling units (ADUs).
Many of Maui’s subdivisions were created decades ago under very different housing conditions. Their CC&Rs often contain language limiting lots to a single dwelling or otherwise restricting additional residential units. However, recent changes in state law were specifically intended to increase housing opportunities and prevent private restrictions from undermining that public policy.
As the County considers implementation of the State’s ADU legislation, it is important to recognize that older CC&Rs may no longer operate as an absolute barrier to ADUs. In many cases, state law may preempt private restrictions that conflict with the Legislature’s intent to expand housing opportunities on residentially zoned property.
This is particularly relevant in older subdivisions where restrictions have not been consistently enforced over many years. Across Maui, numerous subdivisions contain existing cottages, ohanas, converted garages, and other secondary living arrangements that have become part of the established character of the neighborhood. In these circumstances, the practical reality on the ground may differ significantly from the language contained in decades-old CC&Rs.
The County should not assume that every recorded CC&R prohibition remains enforceable or that private restrictions automatically supersede state housing policy. Property owners, associations, and County officials will need to carefully evaluate whether particular restrictions remain valid in light of current law, the history of enforcement, and the Legislature’s clear intent to expand housing opportunities.
As Maui confronts a continuing housing shortage, it is important that outdated private restrictions not be treated as an automatic justification for denying housing opportunities that state law was enacted to encourage.
TESTIMONY ON BILL 78 (2026)
ACCESSORY DWELLINGS ON RESIDENTIALLY ZONED LOTS
Housing and Land Use Committee
June 3, 2026
Aloha Chair, Vice-Chair Batangan, and Members of the Housing and Land Use Committee,
I submit this testimony in a neutral position on Bill 78 (2026).
I recognize that Maui County is operating within the framework established by Act 46 (2024), which requires counties to allow two accessory dwelling units on residentially zoned lots by December 31, 2026. As such, this discussion is no longer solely about whether additional ADUs should be permitted, but rather how Maui County will responsibly implement this mandate while protecting existing communities and ensuring adequate infrastructure exists to support future growth.
Like many residents, I support efforts to increase housing opportunities for local families. However, I am concerned that discussions regarding housing production often focus on the number of units that may be created while giving far less attention to the infrastructure, public safety, and resilience challenges that accompany additional density.
Maui County is still recovering from one of the most devastating disasters in Hawaiʻi's history. The lessons learned from August 2023 should compel us to evaluate growth through a broader lens than simply housing production. Every additional housing unit increases demand on roads, water systems, wastewater systems, electrical infrastructure, emergency services, schools, communications systems, and evacuation routes.
Before implementation of this statewide mandate, I encourage the Council to publicly identify:
* The estimated number of additional ADUs that could be created under Bill 78.
* The anticipated increase in population resulting from those units.
* The cumulative impact on water demand and water system capacity.
* The cumulative impact on wastewater and septic systems.
* The impact on road capacity and traffic circulation.
* The impact on emergency response services.
* The effect on evacuation planning during wildfires, hurricanes, flooding events, earthquakes, and other disasters.
These are practical questions that deserve answers.
Maui faces increasing risks from severe weather events, wildfires, flooding, shoreline impacts, infrastructure failures, and other natural hazards. Many communities already have limited access and limited evacuation options. Before adding density, residents deserve assurance that public infrastructure and emergency preparedness systems can support additional growth safely and responsibly.
I also believe an important conversation is missing from this discussion.
If the State of Hawaiʻi is requiring counties to increase residential density, where is the corresponding state funding to support the infrastructure needed to accommodate that growth?
The State should not mandate density while expecting Maui County taxpayers to absorb all associated costs.
I encourage the Council to formally identify the infrastructure improvements necessary to support Act 46 implementation and seek state funding assistance for:
* Water system upgrades.
* Wastewater improvements.
* Road and transportation improvements.
* Wildfire mitigation measures.
* Emergency evacuation planning.
* Public safety staffing and equipment.
* Disaster resilience projects.
Housing policy and infrastructure policy should move together.
Finally, I encourage the Council to ensure that ADUs created under this bill remain focused on residential housing opportunities and are not diverted into uses that fail to address Maui's housing needs. The public deserves confidence that any increase in housing capacity will primarily benefit residents and local families.
As Maui moves forward with Act 46 implementation, I urge the Council to focus not only on housing production but also on infrastructure readiness, public safety, disaster resilience, and securing state assistance for the costs associated with this mandate.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify.
Edward Codelia
Kula, Maui
Please see attached