Centering community voices in Maui’s proposal to phase out short-term rentals

A guide to help Maui residents navigate the stories surrounding Bill 9

---

On Monday, June 9, 2025, Maui County Council’s Housing and Land Use Committee will hear public testimony on Bill 9, a proposal to phase out around 7,000 short-term rentals known as the “Minatoya List.”

We created this guide to center community-identified narratives from the Maui community, especially communities that we believed were being overlooked by existing media, and by better resourced industries and institutions that can often exert an outsize amount of control over the public conversation.

Contents

Our intentions & biases: why trust us?

Get caught up

How narratives are shaped

The narratives:

1. Water
2. People
3. Assumptions
4. Affordability
5. Equitable communities
6. Cultural divide

Our intentions & biases: why trust us?

We want to start by recognizing that housing is a complicated and emotionally charged topic. That makes sense given how high the stakes are — and the long history of wealthy outsiders displacing Hawaiians and other communities from their lands and homes.

Access to stable housing provides significant cultural, emotional, physical, financial, and community safety, and being displaced from your home can be a literal matter of life or death.

And, we acknowledge the fear people often feel when they believe that a major change, especially one proposed by the government, might threaten their economic livelihood. 

We also believe that how Hawaiʻi collectively can and should respond to the current housing inequality crisis is ultimately a question of values, not just “economic” analysis.

Our values influence our biases when it comes to topics like housing, we just rarely talk about it — especially journalists, economists, and others who claim their work is “objective” or “independent.” Yet, those values and biases shape the stories we choose to tell.

This guide is intended to center community-driven narratives surrounding the short-term rental debate on Maui in an effort to offset the bias that mainstream media often has toward more powerful institutions, whether within government, industry, or academia.

Kaheāwai Media’s work is heavily guided by our values and community partners. Unlike most mainstream media, where decisions about which stories to tell (and how) are made entirely within the newsroom, we make those decisions in collaboration with our community.

One of our partners, Lāhainā Strong, proposed creating this guide, and we listened to their team, many of whom are fire survivors, to help ensure we focused on gathering information that is reflective of — and useful to — our shared communities on Maui.

Additionally, our reporting here is influenced by two main biases:

1. We believe Hawaiʻi deserves more equitable housing policies that still protect ʻāina, and that equity and sustainability can coexist.
2. We believe that being transparent about our biases builds trust with readers, and that we can still tell stories accurately and fairly.

Get caught up

What’s happening now?

The bill, as written now, would make it illegal for properties within apartment zones to operate as “transient vacation rentals” (TVRs or short-term rentals). If passed, it would require the owners of “Minatoya List” properties (8,834 total units, 6,127 of which are currently operating as TVRs), to cease operating them as short-term rentals by July 1, 2028.

The recent background

For anyone unfamiliar with the history of the Minatoya List, this blog post provides more context. 

August 8, 2023 | the Maui fires destroy more than 2,000 homes, displace more than 12,000 Lahaina residents, and deeply exacerbate Maui’s housing crisis

August 2023 – May 2024 | Lāhainā Strong and other community members occupy Kā’anapali Beach for nine months, advocating for stable long-term housing and other basic needs

May 2, 2024 | The community’s collective action leads to an agreement with Maui County Mayor Richard Bissen and County Council member Keani Rawlins-Fernandez to introduce a bill phasing out short-term rentals — an issue disproportionately affecting West Maui, given its high concentration of rental units

May 3, 2024 | Gov. Josh Green signs off on the Hawaiʻi State Legislature’s Senate Bill 2919, which clarifies that counties have the authority to regulate or phase out short-term rentals, paving the way for Mayor Bissen’s proposal

May 3, 2024 | Mayor Bissen announces what would become known as Bill 9 

May 24, 2024 | The Maui County Planning Commission approves the proposal

June 3, 2024 | Maui County Council schedules hearings on Bill 9

How narratives are shaped

BIll 9 proposes a major change to Hawaiʻi’s housing policy. When policymakers propose major changes like this, and the stakes (financial and otherwise) are high, people who stand to gain or lose a lot often try to sway both the public and policymakers.

The amount of resources someone has — like money, time, and political ties — and their own positionality — things like race, gender, geography, and profession — can significantly influence how they’re able to shape narratives and even policy outcomes through social media, news, government, academic research, and other channels.

For example, Airbnb, worth $82 billion, has deployed teams of lobbyists, policy experts, attorneys, and PR staff to become “one of the most litigious startups in Silicon Valley” (Bloomberg), bankroll short-term rental owners’ efforts to fight local regulations (Wall Street Journal), and engage in its own lobbying (Truthout). Expedia Group, worth $22 billion and the parent company of VRBO, is a funder of Rent Responsibly, a support network for property owners that offers resources like a blog post titled: “How to pick a short-term rental lobbyist” (Rent Responsibly).

Due to the outsize influence of these industries on media narratives — and by extension, short-term rental owners, who are disproportionately high-wealth households (EPI) — we did not interview or seek direct comment from either group for this guide.

Sometimes, industries exert influence more subtly by funding research that people may perceive as more independent and, therefore, unbiased.

One of the most widely cited economic analyses of Maui’s proposed TVR phaseout was authored by The University of Hawaiʻi Economic Research Organization (UHERO). While its website says it publishes “rigorous, independent” research, the majority of UHERO’s top funders are also some of the largest companies in (or closely connected to) Hawaiʻi’s tourism and real estate industry, such as Howard Hughes, Bank of Hawaiʻi, and Maui Land & Pineapple Co.

Because economic research is so expensive, larger corporations and other institutions with more funding are often better able to influence which studies are funded and how they’re structured (National Laboratory of Medicine).

The underlying inequality in our economy often makes it more difficult for communities, like those on Maui, to determine, shape, or audit the research that’s done about them.

Systemic inequalities also impact who gets to be in a position to shape narratives.

Inequalities in our education system mean the researchers themselves are often not reflective of the communities they’re researching, which can lead to implicit bias (6 of the 9 co-authors of the UHERO analysis are white men).

A similar dynamic exists in media as well. A 2019 report by Columbia Journalism Review found that while white people make up just 25.7% of Hawaiʻi residents, Civil Beat’s newsroom was 75% white.

To be clear, individual researchers and journalists can and do produce quality work regardless of factors like ethnicity, gender, cultural upbringing, or place of birth, but those biases can still influence their work (you can read about this reporter’s biases here).

At a systemic level, biases can lead organizations to, over time, create or reinforce distorted narratives that aren’t reflective of the communities their work serves or impacts.

At Kaheāwai Media, we believe journalists have a kuleana to share stories that center community voices — especially communities that will be most impacted by proposed changes and/or are typically left out of the public conversation by mainstream media.

Below, we highlight six narratives surrounding Maui’s proposed short-term rental bill, synthesized from extensive conversations with Maui community members, affordable housing advocates, water protectors, immigrant justice advocates, and other stakeholders.

The narratives

1. Maui is at a crossroads over water — and TVRs already have water

Why does this matter?

There is extreme concern about the rate at which Maui is using water from a variety of sources including ʻāina stewards, researchers, and government agencies.

If you distrust the government, there are Hawaiians, academics, and others who have raised the alarm about unsustainable water practices for generations.

• Climate change and overuse are both to blame — and experts say the problem will keep getting worse if we don’t change course
• South, Central, and Upcountry Maui have increasingly faced water restrictions
• Upcountry Maui residents have dealt with a water meter waitlist since 1993
• The Commission On Water Resource Management declared West Maui (a hotspot for Minatoya List properties) a water management area in 2023 amid a risk of overuse

Hawaiʻi’s “public trust” doctrine prioritizes public over usesover commercial uses

• But even new public trust uses, like Pulelehua, an affordable housing project in West Maui prioritizing fire survivors, can’t get water
• The Commission On Water Resource Management said water availability in West Maui is “unknown,” and doesn’t have a definitive timeline for issuing new permits

The water situation limits Maui’s ability to build its way out of the housing crisis

• There is an upper limit to how much water Maui can use per day — even for affordable housing
• In some areas, like parts of West Maui, it has already hit that limit
• In those areas, without new water sources available for the foreseeable future, experts say that Maui will have to reallocate existing uses to satisfy public trust uses

TVRs already have water — and a phaseout could help reallocate water to residents without having to wait on new sources

• County and anecdotal data suggests TVRs use more water than non-TVRs (Maui Department of Water Supply) — and converting them to other uses could lead to additional water conservation

Community voices

Pāʻele Kiakona
Māla & Moaliʻi, Lahaina, Maui
Lead Organizer, Lāhainā Strong | Maui Board of Water Supply member | President, Save Honolua Coalition

“People say we should just build more new affordable housing, and I agree, we should — and we’re trying to. But just look at Pulelehua, which is ready to be built and still is at a dead stop because there’s no water available.

Between water and other factors, it will take the county at least 10-15 years and millions of dollars to build enough new housing. But we need that housing now, and phasing out TVRs isn’t the only solution, but it’s a huge step in the right direction.

We also know that TVRs use significantly more water than non-TVRs, for a couple of reasons. Short-term renters don’t have to pay the water bill, so compared to a local family, they’re less likely to be price-conscious when it comes to conserving water.

Second, every time a short-term rental turns over to the next visitor, cleaners are going in and washing everything from sheets to the bathrooms — far more often than someone would if they lived there full time.

Finally, these homes often have lush landscaping and swimming pools that require far more water to maintain than typical local homes. Phasing out TVRs would have a snowball effect: as we conserve more water, the land will also become more fertile, humid, and wet, helping regenerate our water sources more quickly, which could eventually help us build more housing in the long-run.”

Lucienne De Naie
Puʻolua, Hāmākualoa Moku, Maui
Author,“Maui’s Water Resources” | Vice President, Maui Tomorrow Foundation board of directors

“Maui is at a crossroads with its water policies: we can choose to get the data we need to use our water resources much more efficiently and at sustainable levels, or we can continue to seek water from new sources, with limited data, and gradually degrade our aquifers- serving our short-term needs, but leaving  a mess for future generations to try to fix.”

West Maui is a perfect example of the need to look long term and get good data. Declining stream flow numbers and declining surface water levels in Lahaina aquifers have only recently been acknowledged. Maui water managers will need some time to get sound aquifer data, and make viable decisions about new water sources, yet the need for water to serve new affordable housing in West Maui is acute. It’s time to look at some attainable ‘social engineering’ solutions, such as converting apartments that already have a water supply from ‘short-term’ to ‘long term’ rentals if they are appropriately sized and not burdened by excessive upkeep costs.”

Jonathan Scheuer
Mānoa, Kona, Oʻahu
Independent consultant | Chair, ʻAha Wai O Maui Hikina (East Maui Water Authority)

“Climate change is causing reduced recharge into our aquifers, which means there will be less water available in them. In some places, like some of West Maui’s aquifers, we are already extracting an unsustainable amount per day. While we may be able to eke out a little more efficiency in surface and ground water through steps like better well locations, fixing ditch leaks, or using recycled water, those will only make a dent.

The reality is, moving forward, some people are going to get less water in order for other uses, like public trust uses, to be satisfied.

One example of the severity of Maui’s water situation is the fact that the County doesn’t even have a water source available for Pulelehua, a planned and approved affordable housing project in West Maui that explicitly prioritizes fire survivors, because the County has to serve existing users, including short-term rentals.

Short-term rental owners pay the same water rates as residents, even if short-term rentals use more water per home in order to maintain features like lush lawns and pools. Converting more short-term rentals to long-term residences could reduce the County’s water uses, making more water available for affordable housing. At the very least, the County could raise the water rates on short-term rentals and explore other ways to incentivize them to use less water.”

2. Policies impact real people, not just “the economy”

Why does this matter?

The lived experiences of Maui’s people are realities — not just academic estimates

• Economic analyses often erase significant (quantitative and qualitative) cultural, environmental, social, quality of life, and generational impacts
• A multi-generational resident of Maui Komohana (a TVR hotspot) shared how TVRs have pushed out her neighbors — an impact that’s impossible to quantify
• An immigrant justice advocate told us how undocumented and migrant workers in the TVR industry want better housing security and job security — yet focusing only on total expected job losses, especially in the current political environment, can make them feel like they have to choose between the two
• A formerly diaspora Hawaiian who struggled to find housing on Maui told us how opponents of Bill 9’s arguments about “suitability” don’t match her lived reality

Community voices

Jordan Ruidas
Honokōwai, Lahaina, Maui
Lead Organizer & Founder, Lāhainā Strong

“I’ve lived in Honokōwai my whole life, and this is the epicenter of the housing crisis. I’ve literally watched my neighborhood change from all local families when I was a kid, to now I’m surrounded on three sides by three Minatoya properties. I don’t know my neighbors anymore, so when the power went out recently, I couldn’t just go ask them for help because it’s a revolving door of tourists.

We know this isn’t going to fix everything. But we can’t wait 30 years to lose more Hawaiians, and one of the fastest ways to get people into housing is to get them into housing that already exists. Phasing out short-term rentals gets us one step closer to that. And, Lāhainā Strong is dedicated to taking other steps that get us even closer, like rent caps, deed restrictions, and empty home taxes.”

Veronica Mendoza
Hāmākualoa, Hāmākualoa, Maui
Founding Executive Director, Roots Reborn

“Maui’s current housing crisis is a dead end for our marginalized immigrant community. Rents keep rising and already insufficient wages fall farther and farther behind. Our community survives by crowding into substandard housing, even going so far as to rent couch space. The TVR phaseout won’t fix all problems, but it’s an important step in the right direction—adding significant housing 

In today’s political climate, where our immigrant neighbors face unprecedented attacks, the County’s support of this bill would send an unmistakable message to our most marginalized residents: you are seen, you are valued, and you are not forgotten.

These community members will face struggles regardless—that’s the harsh truth of their circumstances. But there’s a profound difference between struggling in a void of hope and struggling toward something better. Passing Bill 9 doesn’t eliminate their struggles, it ensures those struggles have purpose and direction. We’re creating a pathway for their strength and determination to actually lead to meaningful benefits and opportunities. That’s the difference between one day thriving in the community they’ve chosen to call home — not just surviving.”

Stacey Alapaʻi
Makawao, Hāmākuapoko, Maui
Mom, newsfluencer, activist, and homeowner

“As a Hawaiian who returned home five years ago, the ongoing displacement of Hawaiians and generational families is deeply personal. My husband and I lived in my parents’ garage when first moving back, so I laugh when people who can afford to own multiple properties on Maui talk about what’s ‘suitable’ for locals. That garage was small, I had no closet, and had to walk around the back of the house to reach the bathroom, but it was PERFECT for us at the time.

To hear wealthy people saying an apartment without a walk-in closet or multiple parking spaces isn’t “suitable” tells me they’ve never had to sleep on a friend’s couch while looking for housing. No one’s worried about parking a second car they don’t have when they don’t know where they’ll be sleeping tomorrow.

‘Suitability’ goes out the window when people are sleeping in their cars — not because they can’t afford our inflated rent prices, but because there aren’t even any available due to the housing shortage.”

3. We need to look at the assumptions and biases that shape economic analyses

Why does this matter?

Economics as a field has been criticized as being systemically biased against women, people of color, Indigenous, low-income populations, and the environment — and that can skew the research that emerges.

• A survey of economists found that two-thirds of women said their work was taken less seriously than their male colleagues (American Economics Association)
  • People of color were eight times more likely to face discrimination
• The resulting groupthink may have played a major role in the industry’s failure to anticipate the 2008 financial crisis (Quartz)
• Economics is essentially about assigning numbers to things we all value, from labor to food to housing, and underrepresentation of certain demographics in the field has led to concerns about underweighting of the things those groups value
  • The value Indigenous people assign to the environment and relationships isn’t accounted for in many economic models (Environmental Science & Policy)
• One study found that each of 10 of the key hypotheses behind these models “fails to satisfy one or more of the basic requirements of scientific practice” (Cambridge)
  • It also found that “a large body of literature finds that [neoclassical economics] is largely responsible for environmental destruction and social inequality”

How economic studies are designed — and the stories told about them — are inherently based on subjective assumptions.

• UHERO’s report includes 70 mentions of the words, assume/assumption, estimate, or simulation

Here are three examples of how Trey Gordner (a Policy Researcher, Data Scientist, and co-author of UHERO’s analysis, who lives in Honouliuli, ʻEwa, Oʻahu) responded when we asked possible blindspots in the analysis:

• As to TVRs’ potential higher water use and possible economic impacts of reallocation or conservation, Gordner told us: “I haven’t seen definitive data on this… Regardless, trying to account for potential alternative uses of water and their potential economic impact would be highly speculative.”
  • Kaheāwai Media hasn’t yet conducted its own data analysis, but Maui’s Department of Water Supply told the Maui County Council that “very limited review of water consumption data between properties with and without TVR usage suggests that non -TVR properties consume less water.”
  • Our reporting found that this appears to supported anecdotally by extensive firsthand accounts from Maui community members
  • Maui DWS has property- and meter-level data on water consumption, meaning UHERO technically could have, but did not, include this in their analysis 
  • Given the housing market’s reliance on water availability, water usage would seem to be an important input in determining economic impact
• As to whether and how Maui’s undocumented population is accounted for in UHERO’s analysis, Gordner said: “I am not familiar with the extent to which GDP and other estimates we used are or are not corrected for undocumented workers.”
  • Getting more reliable data on undocumented populations may take more time and trust-building, but is possible — other researchers have done it (EPI)
  • Roots Reborn and the Council for Native Hawaiian Advancement have both done surveys of this community on Maui specifically
  • Accurately counting undocumented populations in economic analyses is even more critical amid the backdrop of increased violence and threats against migrants by the federal government
  • While it doesn’t fall entirely on UHERO to do population-level analyses, it shows how potential data and author biases and priorities can influence these types of analyses
• As to how the scope and focus of the analysis were determined — tourism impact, affordability of phased out TVRs, and property taxes — Gordner said it was guided by the size of the tourism industry on Maui, conversations among the co-authors, and guidance from the funder of the analysis, Hawaiʻi Community Foundation.
  • Multiple community members told Kaheāwai Media that they felt the focus and framing of the study left out or minimized important impacts, such as tax revenue lost from out-migration, increased disposable income that could result from lower housing costs, and “leakage” (negative costs to the host community of a tourism-heavy place)
  • All of the UHERO analysis co-authors are Oʻahu-based, meaning crucial place-based context about the nature of the Minatoya List properties may have been missed
    • A team of two Lāhainā Strong organizers researched and walked a majority of properties on the Minatoya List, compiling qualitative and quantitative data on original intended use, current use, employment, and community member knowledge, data that Maui County could use to deepen its understanding of the potential impacts

To be extremely clear, this is not a criticism of individual UHERO authors — the intent is to highlight potential systemic issues and limitations with macroeconomic analysis.

• UHERO’s own report acknowledged that, given Maui’s extremely high rates of TVRs, “without reliable comparisons, predictions of exact economic outcomes are more uncertain”
• In the interest of transparency, we’ve included Gordner’s full set of responses to our emailed questions about the analysis’ assumptions below
• Ultimately, all policy decisions are made with imperfect information, and are influenced by sources that seek to control the narrative and secure outcomes that will benefit them, and our reporting found other narratives that may have been overpowered by such sources, and that many community members support Bill 9 despite being fully aware of potential short-term negative impacts to the GDP or overall job market

Community voices

Matt Jachowski
Hāmākuapoko, Hāmākuapoko, Maui
Data scientist, Hawai’i Open Stats

“A naive reading of UHERO’s analysis emphasizes the loss of tourism spending and tax revenue, which are real, but not insurmountable issues. But, their most important finding is that a TVR phaseout would significantly improve condo affordability while dramatically increasing resident housing supply – two outcomes that Maui’s local families desperately need.”

Biased interest groups have commissioned economic studies and surveys built on fundamentally invalid assumptions, like the absurd idea that Maui will lose every single visitor who currently chooses to stay in one of these TVRs, or the false assertion that Maui has thousands of illegal short-term rentals. For years, these “reports” have paralyzed our county and state governments from taking bold, meaningful steps to address our housing crisis. So, when someone like Mayor Bissen sticks their neck out politically with a proposal that could actually make a difference, we have to push against these studies and demand action from our other local leaders. We’ve already seen where decades of inaction takes us – to the worst housing crisis in Maui County’s history.”

4. Phasing out TVRs will likely help with affordability — and other steps will be needed

Why does this matter?

Even UHERO, despite its potential institutional biases, estimates the phaseout could increase long-term housing by 13% and reduce condo prices by 20-40%.

• This aligns with a growing number of studies on TVRs (EPI, Purdue, Wharton)
• However, because prices are so high on Maui already, those homes would still be unaffordable for many lower-income — but not all — local families (UHERO)

That means, if Maui (and Hawaiʻi) actually want to make the Minatoya List properties affordable, they could — and would need to — implement additional policies:

• For example, they could tax empty homes to encourage more long-term rentals (Hawaiʻi Appleseed)
• And, by that same logic, if Maui doesn’t phase out TVRs, they’ll need to do even more to address housing affordability

Maui will likely need to build new housing, but doing that alone — or instead of trying to reallocate TVRs — will take generations.

• At current rates, to build the same number of resident homes as there are Minatoya List properties, it would take:
  • 73 years in West Maui (Matt Jachowski)
  • 208 years in South Maui (Matt Jachowski)

Maui will also likely need to implement other policies to offset or minimize economic impacts — and future analyses could look at who would be hit hardest to help Maui understand where and how to target those policies.

5. TVR phaseouts are part of a trend toward prioritizing equitable communities over equity for individual homeowners

Why does this matter?

TVRs are very likely making inequality worse.

• TVRs “significantly raise housing costs” in their surrounding neighborhoods (UHERO)
• They do bring in economic benefit — in 2023, Maui TVRs generated $1.05 billion in booking revenue alone (AirDNA)
• However, the economic costs “likely outweigh the benefits” (EPI)
  • TVRs are disproportionately owned by white, high-wealth households (EPI)
  • 94% of Minatoya List properties are owned by non-residents (Matt Jachowski)
  • 54% of Maui TVRs are owned by hosts with more than 20 listings (AirDNA)
  • Therefore, a lot of economic benefit is likely extracted upward and out of Maui

In response, more communities are restricting or eliminating TVRs (Bloomberg).

• Phasing out TVRs consistently lowers home values (UHERO)
• While lower home values can help new buyers, this may worry existing owners who have equity in their home

However, as Maui residents see their communities being displaced, views are shifting on the value and reason behind owning a home.

• Community land trusts and other models aimed at keeping homes in local hands for future generations are emerging (Overstory)
• These approaches separate housing stability from housing inflation and speculation

Community voices

Stacey Alapaʻi
Makawao, Hāmākuapoko, Maui
Mom, newsfluencer, activist, and homeowner

“I’m proud to say we’re homeowners today (with lots of help from both our families), and I recognize that privilege. And, as someone who purchased in this inflated market, I know we could lose some equity if prices go down because of the phase out — but I don’t plan on selling.

I bought my home for housing stability, not to make money by pushing my neighbors out. This fight is about more than my personal finances or “the economy” as a whole — it’s about the preservation of our communities.

I moved home to be closer to my community, not be surrounded 24/7 by strangers peering into my backyard while my kid plays. You can’t put a price on good neighbors who share lychee from their tree and kids riding bikes and throwing shakas as they pass us on our morning walk. That’s what we all stand to lose if we continue to prioritize vacation rentals over residential housing.”

Autumn Ness
Keokea, Kula, Maui
Executive Director, Lahaina Community Land Trust

“At first, when we talk about our land trust model — which caps the amount your home can appreciate every year at a fair amount — some people worry that we’re robbing a family’s ability to build unchecked equity on their home.

But, the thing about equity is, it’s only real if you plan to sell your home. Even if a real estate speculator says it’s worth $2 million, you have to actually sell to receive any real money. And, because there are so few housing options here, if you sell, you likely have to leave your community.

The real estate industry is founded on the notion that wealth building through equity is the point of property ownership — but if you have to borrow, go into debt, or sell your home just to tap into that equity, what does that mean for our generational families?

We flipped that on its head and told people this phantom “equity” can go into your home on the front end as a subsidy. In other words, you can live in that home now, and so can your kids or grandkids. And you can still sell it down the line if you want to, but that original subsidy will carry forward and benefit the next homeowner, rather than every sale driving prices up for everyone.

That’s the conversation we’re having with our Lahaina families and it’s really well received.”

6. Bill 9 seems to have surfaced a cultural divide: should Maui prioritize collective welfare or individual rights?

Why does this matter?

Nearly all of the arguments we heard from proponents of Bill 9 seemed motivated by a belief that it would help current and future generations of Maui residents collectively.

• This was true even for those who believed it wouldn’t benefit them financially, like homeowners who might lose equity or short-term rental income, or whose jobs were most at risk

Among opponents’ arguments, while negative macroeconomic impacts were cited, we frequently heard arguments that prioritized individual economic benefits, for example:

• In an interview, Realtors Association of Maui president Lynette Pendergast (a resident of Makawao, Hāmākuapoko, Maui since 2009) told us she opposed Bill 9 because it “takes away property rights” from owners who bought properties expecting to be able to make money from operating short-term rentals
  • Pendergast told us: “I think it needs to be a choice of the owner, I don’t think it’s the government’s responsibility or ability to take what has been a legal practice and say okay, it’s not anymore”
    • However, the government has in countless cases made once-legal uses of private property illegal, such as banning racially restrictive housing covenants or capping rents, and courts have previously ruled that eliminating short-term rentals is not an illegal regulatory “taking” of private property
• Given the legitimate concerns about affordability of the Minatoya List properties, we asked whether RAM would support the phaseout if Maui County or the state implemented additional policies to increase affordability, to which Pendergast said “we’re all for the carrot instead of the stick, but there again it has to be the choice of the owner — we can’t make people do it.”

While reducing the TVR phaseout to this narrative would be oversimplifying the policy challenge, our reporting consistently found a divide between proponents and opponents over the cultural values that they believe Maui County should promote.

Community voice

Pāʻele Kiakona
Māla & Moaliʻi, Lahaina, Maui
Lead Organizer, Lāhainā Strong | Maui Board of Water Supply member | President, Save Honolua Coalition

“When it comes to doing anything in Hawaiʻi, there’s no way to make everyone happy. And recently, I’ve noticed a difference between two sides that often emerge on issues.

On one side, there are people with the intention of staying here and making this place better, not for themselves as individuals, but for everyone: their kids, future generations, other locals — and visitors included.

The other side seems to be largely looking out for themselves or their bottom line. We share endless data points and personal stories with them, but there’s a cognitive dissonance where the only thing that matters is economics, and they totally ignore cultural, social and environmental impacts, even though that’s ultimately what actually impacts us the most.

With Lahaina Strong, the reason we’ve been able to build such deep community power is because it’s always been about our place and people — not controlling economic resources. It’s also a type of power that those who rely on economic power can’t control, silence, or discredit. Instead, we’ve seen them resort to personal attacks on us, which has been disappointing and painful, but it’s also given me clarity that we’re succeeding.”

---

We encourage anyone to share your feedback with us. Mahalo nui!

Kaheāwai Media’s emailed questions (bulleted) & responses (italicized) from Trey Gordner, UHERO:

Summary/assumptions/framing

• The top numbers highlighted in UHERO’s executive summary (e.g. 25% visitor accommodation reduction, $900 million spending decline) are based on a scenario where all 6,127 units are phased out…
  • Why did UHERO assume full and immediate compliance by TVR owners rather than accounting for delays, legal challenges, or phased implementation, which would be typical in major policy changes?

We were asked to deliver and delivered an economic analysis of the draft proposal as it was written and submitted to Maui County Council. To be clear, we did account for the two-phase implementation schedule that the Mayor proposed, and noted in the Discussion section that changing the phasing would change the timing but not the overall effect of the policy. 

Assuming that the law will be followed and enforced also simplifies the analysis–if we didn’t assume compliance, we would have to assume many more facts about non-compliance: How many would ignore the law and continue operating? How soon would they be caught? How would prices change as a result of the risk borne by both owner and visitor? etc. etc. Accounting for legal challenges would have likewise introduced subjective assessments about the likelihood of injunctions, the strength of each side’s case, the length of time that the case would take to be resolved, etc.

• Did UHERO analyze other scenarios where enforcement is partial, certain properties seek up/re-zoning, or where more visitor demand shifts to hotels or permitted accommodations?

No to partial enforcement. We noted the possibility of rezoning; however, the policy proposal did not comment on or facilitate that possibility in any way, and it is quite difficult to get a Hotel rezoning through the usual channels today. We tested various scenarios relating to visitor demand shifting to hotels and present 2 in the report, a “baseline” and a “low”.

• Why did UHERO choose to highlight this scenario in the summary?

The baseline is what we believe to be the likeliest outcome based on our analysis. Because it includes assumptions about the speed of recovery from the wildfires, we also include the low scenario to keep the analysis relevant in the event of a slower recovery than we projected (e.g., due to macroeconomic risk).

Distribution of economic impact

• The report predicts a $900 million decline in annual visitor spending, which using the M-CGE model, it claims leads to a 4% decline in GDP. Given that GDP does not provide any information about distribution of economic resources (i.e. equity), did UHERO include any analysis of how tourism-related GDP is currently distributed, and/or who would be impacted by a tourism-related decline in GDP? If not, why not?

No, these questions were not in scope for the project, though losses in jobs and incomes will by definition be borne by the workforce. We acknowledge but do not estimate potential distributional effects. For example:

The results are also based on average income decline. In practice, income losses may be concentrated in lower-income households where members are employed in disproportionately affected industries such as food service and retail trade. In that case, affordability could become worse for low earners but better for high earners, while still averaging out to the results in the chart above. These caveats underscore the uncertainty of policy outcomes and the need for continued housing support for low-income households, who would remain financially unable to purchase converted TVR units.”

• Why didn’t UHERO include any analysis of how economic inequality generally would be impacted by the phase-out?

 Same as above.

• Did UHERO analyze any scenarios where declining tourism industry revenues as a result of the phase out increased spending in other industries (e.g. lower housing prices leading to more spending on healthcare or childcare), or led to new economic activity (e.g. by lowering market entry costs)? If not, why not?

The M-CGE represents this at the economy level as changes in outputs and prices across different sectors. The economy is projected to contract overall despite these types of reallocations. A loss in aggregate demand dampens new market activity as well.

• Given the high degree of non-resident ownership of TVRs, and the fact that the stated intent of this bill is to increase affordability for residents specifically, why did UHERO not do more detailed analysis of leakage or local vs. non-local economic impact?

The relevant factors for affordability are the ones we model: household incomes, home prices, borrowing costs, and carrying costs. The market price is what the market will bear given supply and demand. The policy is an upward supply shock (+6000 units) and a downward demand shock (no more STR investors bidding in Apartment zones) simultaneously, both of which cause the price of those units to fall.

• The report projects substantial tax revenue losses but doesn’t model any potential long-term fiscal benefits from stabilizing housing or reducing out-migration. Why was this broader fiscal context not included in the analysis?

The policy proposal is a one-time shock that will not affect the long-term rate of growth in the cost of housing on Maui. As we note in the report, absent the construction of new housing units, we anticipate that prices–though lower than they would have been without the policy–will return to their current levels within a few years.

Jobs

• Did UHERO’s estimate of job impacts include an estimate of how many workers are directly and/or solely employed by the STR industry?
  • If so, can you share more about how it estimated that?
  • If not, why not?

No, that level of detail is not necessary to estimate the overall economic impact. 

• Did UHERO analyze wages earned by workers within the STR industry specifically and/or how those wages would be impacted by the phase out?

Same as above. 

• How, if at all, does UHERO’s job impact analysis account for undocumented/migrant workers, who are often excluded from public/government data sources

I am not familiar with the extent to which GDP and other estimates we used are or are not corrected for undocumented workers.

Other impacts

• Given the higher rate at which TVRs use water relative to long-term/owner-occupied residences, why didn’t UHERO include any analysis of potential economic impacts from  reduction/reallocation of water by phasing out TVRs?

I haven’t seen definitive data on this, so if you have it, please share. Regardless, trying to account for potential alternative uses of water and their potential economic impact would be highly speculative.

• Did UHERO do any analysis about the current level of tax compliance by TVR owners?

No, nor on any other payers of GET, TAT, or RPT.