Hawaii counties to regulate or ban vacation rentals via this landmark bill. This move intended to help fix the housing crisis, also underscores a major shift in Hawaii’s travel paradigm.
Get Breaking Hawaii Travel News
Hawaii counties to regulate or ban vacation rentals via this landmark bill. This move intended to help fix the housing crisis, also underscores a major shift in Hawaii’s travel paradigm.
Get Breaking Hawaii Travel News
This bill does not ban short-term rentals. On Oahu, short-term rentals of less than 30 days are already banned except for limited exceptions in resort areas and a few hundred STRs permitted before 1989. What this bill does is allow the counties to take away the right that has existed since Hawaii has been a state–the right to rent your home for a min period of 30 days. Such a ban will make rentals harder to find in Hawaii for students, visiting nurses, people here on ST military postings, researchers, grandmas and grandpas visiting ohana, and others needing a rental for a month or two. The state and counties cannot evade their responsibility to develop affordable long-term housing by putting it on the backs of individual homeowners.
These comment sections on STR’s are full of mostly housing speculators stuck in an echo-chamber thinking these mini-hotels in residential neighborhoods are somehow good for Hawaii, but clearly they don’t live here and don’t see all of the many negative impacts of having housing hoarded by those wishing to profit, completely unaware of the huge out-migration of the labor force (at all levels) due to truly absurd housing prices (mortgages/rents).
There are many negative effects of having profiteers hoarding housing for personal gain. Your “investment” is not guaranteed a return. Most of these speculative investments have not gone through a true real estate downturn and recession with job loss.
You must be a lobbyist for the hotels. You’re probably the loan person here making comments in support of a ban on short term vacation rentals. They bring money to locally economies, they bring work, they bring visibility to areas of the island less known. I can drive through any neighborhood, I can’t tell you that this property or that property is owned by one person or more. You should drive through some of the properties that the local and look at what they have done to the property… Dumping cars, 40 chickens, unleashed feral dogs. So before you start complaining about how bad they are why don’t you come out and visit and see what is really going on?
Touche’ Andy! I’m sick of being judged by what our government is doing and blinded locals that are content to live off the system. Tourists being blamed is ludicrous. They did not abandon their car, appliances and rubbish all throughout the island. I 4 wheel and rental Jeeps could not make it to where we go and find rubbish. We carry trash bags to pick the areas. Eco conscious, and pointed fingers? Really. I can’t wait until they get a dose of reality. Unfortunately it will affect the responsible residents and visitors as well.
Since you stated that you are a realtor with a speculative investment, maybe if you reply to everyone in the comments (mostly other realtor/speculators), you’ll change the course of State and County laws so your speculative investments don’t flop.
Remember, all investments are no guaranteed a positive return, yours included.
Well said and I agree. So many mainlanders here who own STRs on Hawaii trying to justify why they should have the right to continue to do their part in adding to the local housing crisis while they profit from it.
From your comments Bill, you don’t sound like a homeowner, Hawaii business owner or resident. This article pertains to Hawaii not about all of the other areas you continue to bring up which do not compare to the Hawaii islands. Perhaps you are still a US citizen and can see this as against our constitutional rights. We appreciate different points of view and being part of the solution with relevant information. Mahalo!
Hawaii needs to dump All STVR’s across the entire State that are located in RESIDENTial or AG zoning.
KTLA in California. “The Santa Ana City Council has voted to ban short-term residential rentals within city limits. A recent spike in short-term rentals proliferated by sites like Airbnb and Vrbo has led to ‘a range of issues’ in Santa Ana, city officials said. ‘These rentals, typically lasting less than 30 days, have been linked to a range of issues including trash and litter, excessive noise, parking problems and neighborhood degradation,’ the city’s release stated.”
Why do they need to dump all of the vacation rentals that are located in residential or AG zoned areas? You realize that with the exception of downtown Kona and downtown Hilo, the rest of the island is zoned AG. How is that going to change anything?
Just a few cities and countries (most much larger populations than the entire State of Hawaii) where speculative short term rentals have been severely restricted ……or banned entirely:
– New York City
– Barcelona
– New Zealand
– Palm Beach
– Berlin
– Amsterdam
– Santa Monica
– San Francisco
– Canada
– Malaysia
– Irvine
– Japan
– Santa Ana
– Palm Springs
– Florence, Italy
– Munich
– Netherlands
– France
– Many, many more cities and countries….
Everyone knows speculators hoarding housing to try to make a profit with mini-hotels in areas zoned residential is terrible for society.
What’s your point? It sounds like what you’re really mad about is that there are people making money and you aren’t one of them.
Andy,
He just likes to say “speculator.” A lot. Maybe it’s his go to scrabble word? If this comment thread was a drinking game, and we had to do shot every time Bill says “speculator” we’d all be dead. I speculate Bill spends a lot of time speculating about how speculators will be first against the wall when he is King and imposes despeculation.
Ughhh, no way I’d want to be a airbnb “superhost”, so many better and liquid ways to invest.
I am a New Zealander and are watching what happens in Maui, as we have used VRBO for accomodation there. However currently in NZ there are No restrictions on short term rentals of any nature anywhere.
There are tons of existing and upcoming restrictions all across New Zealand.
This law will not result in the conversion from short term rentals into long term rentals. What it will do is force Kapuna like my wife and I to sell and move to mainland. The new buyers won’t be locals because of the prices and many homes will sit vacant except for short periods of time when occupied by owners on vacation. The state and counties will lose millions in both Transient taxes and property taxes. Until tenant landlord laws are changed to create a balance between tenants rights and landlord rights there is no incentive to rent long term. Economically it makes no sense to have a high property tax rate and rent at half to a third of previous Transient rentals income. It’s a bad law!
It’s already that way anyway most of these places we have heard have remained vacant while they are not there. Meanwhile locals are in desperate need of housing. We can’t have more short term rentals over permanent housing. Most of the people who own places here don’t even live here. They just rent out to visitors all year. So how is that helping?
A short term rental provides accommodations on areas of the island where there are no hotels. A short term rental provides accommodations and a more reasonable price than a hotel. They provide better paying jobs because we know that the hotels are going to pay minimum wage. Owners of vacation rentals pay to their staff. It is county over regulation that is creating the problem of a lack of affordable housing. The keyword here is affordable. There would need to be a radical shift in basic housing economics, but that isn’t going to happen
Erika – You answered your own question. It does not help. Instead of renting to visitors, they will rent to no one, and just use the place themselves (and family and friends) from time to time. So, no added residential housing, but just decreased tourists (sounds good if you don’t rely on tourists for your job) and decreased taxes collected (‘doh!) Some will sell, but I speculate (I get to use that word, too) that the buys will mostly be buying second homes or maybe move here and work remote.
By providing jobs and thus food on your table. Get rid of illegal rentals and those in residential areas. Limit the people who move here like other countries do. They must be a benefit not a burden to Hawaii or come to retire. College age are taking up much of the housing, come to visit, take jobs and then stay. I only say this because we have limited resources but need tourism to survive. Wake up people. The enemy is disguised and it is not our visitors. Just getting rid of residential and illegal rentals be be huge!
You are right. People are going to continue to short-term rent. They’re going to do it underground. They’re not gonna pay taxes. The county is going to lose millions of dollars in revenue properties won’t magically get cheaper. The proponents of eliminating short term rentals have no idea what they’re talking about.
Except you’ll have to sell at a lower price because mainland buyers who need to offset expenses, will require a lower purchase price in place of that. The lower prices will make it more affordable to locals. Kind of like a Hawaiian Homelands where the selling price is capped.
Of course this only works on home that are below a certain dollar value. All the $6m – $14m beachfront homes will still not have enough price decrease to make them affordable. Maybe millionaires will be able to buy what billionaires were buying!
There needs to be a major shift in the economics for that to happen. There will always be a buyer for the property in Hawaii. It will always be somebody from the mainland. That’s not going to create more housing stock for locals. Locals don’t buy the same price point that mainlanders do. The product they are buying is completely different.
When, not if, Hawaii becomes even more exclusive, buyers with money will still pay the high prices and just use the homes for vacations and their friends and family. Same thinking as buying a Mercedes… There will always be someone that can afford to buy up Hawaii.
This situation is not just happening in Hawaii. It is happening all over the world, in popular tourist spots. Canary Islands residents were on hunger strike 3 weeks ago for the exact same reasons.
Exactly. and what do we see? Look at the cost o going to and staying at any of these locations, it’s horribly expensive. It’s for the one percent, it’s for the super rich. There have been hundreds, if not, thousands of posts and comments on all platforms about the cost of travel and lodging in Hawaii. The airfare is cheap for the most part, but hotels gouging the consumer. The county is saying that vacation rentals are damaging the environment, they’re not good for the communities. They have no idea what they’re talking about because I bet none of them have been out here to the big island and spoken to the locals.
From Joshua Montgomery, Director of Ohana Aina Association, an organization that represents STR owners in Hawaii:
“STRs employ 49,000 people in Hawaii and generate $4.8 billion in visitor spending a year, including more than $720 million dollars in tax revenue. ”
“You know, I keep seeing this number that 52% of them are owned off the island. [But] I want to flip that around and just remind people nearly 100% of the hotels are owned by institutions and organizations off the island…He said that means almost all hotel profits go back to the mainland, whereas “when they stay at a vacation rental, that’s not what happens. When they stay at a vacation rental, the money stays here.”
Source: grassrootinstitute.org/
Absolutely correct
Those numbers would also indicate 48% of the STVRs are owned by Hawaiian residents, not an insignificant number. Those locals are going to be hurt by this change too.
There was a ton of opposition, but they were ignored. The legislature was paid off. The hotels lobbied a lot. I bet they spend 10’s if not 100’s of millions of dollars to push the bill through
Well the Wall Street Journal or the New York Times just did an expose on Hawaii politics. There are these parties where donors bring wads of cash. Then at the end of the party, the piles of money are divided up to the politicians.
It’s disheartening that we can never know the truth. Everyone’s working an angle.
Absolutely obvious!
Mahalo Eric for providing facts!!!!!! All will suffer if they ban STRs.
I agree with all of the comments opposing this new law. Another potential negative effect – job loss. There will be no need for housekeepers on a regular basis if STRs are banned. And what happens to local brokerages of vacation rentals? Much of their business would be killed off, too. The ripple will be felt far and wide – and not in a good way.
Much more than hospitality! Stores, retailers, restaurants, activity businesses, crafters, artists, car rentals, airlines, loss of revenue and taxes. Can’t our greedy government see this? They did not extend unemployment on Maui for fire victims, how will residents survive! State welfare is not enough to support us.
As I’ve stated previously how many locals can either afford to rent or qualify for a mortgage at market rates? Many that were living in Lahaina before the fire were either paying below market rental fees or living at Aunties for no rent.
Also you will see an increase of black market cash only vacation renting going on. I know there was a recent law passed making this practice unlawful, but locals with rental properties will get away with it.
I have said the same thing. I have lived other places where a fire came through and wiped out a bunch of homes. You had people that were under insured, you had people that didn’t carry insurance, you had people that were renting. Now you have a lot of people that need homes and there’s not enough. That just drives the price up. Mortgage rates are outrageous and everybody says well. They used to be back much higher in the 1980s properties didn’t cost what they cost now. I know very few local families that can carry a mortgage right now. Most people coming into the market are using cash. Local families don’t have that kind of cash.
Perhaps the ruins of CoCo Palms on Kauai will be a fitting monument to where all this is headed?
It could be housing? But developers have paid too much money for it and have successively gone broke. The State needs to buy it and convert it into housing, if that’s what they want.
Yes, counties will limit STRs because the islands are suffering from overtourism and from a housing shortage. Local politicians know that they can’t be too drastic because many locals own STRs and STR serving businesses. Local voters will keep limitations in check.
20 years ago 7 Million visitors came to Hawaii, last year it was 9.6 Million, a 35% increase but the roads and other infrastructure is largely the same. Hawaii residents do not want another 35% increase over the next 20 years. The islands are not getting any bigger.
Your data is correct.
But I find it interesting that the Governor and several mayors are not trying to limit hotels. Even as downtown Honolulu has more brand new hotels – all voices say the problem(s) are:
a. vacation rentals and
b. lack of affordable housing.
So if 9.6 million tourists stay in hotels / timeshares, stress on our infrastructure is ok? But if any of them stay in vacation rentals, it is a problem?
I continue to find it interesting that non-Hawaii corporations (hotels & timeshares) who donate to local politicians are immune from criticism while (often locally owned) vacation rentals are presented as the cause of all the problems.
There are real problems – but scapegoating will not solve them.
Hotels are mostly owned by corporations that is true but they are not suitable for local residents to live in. That’s why STR condos and houses are the main problem.
I don’t know exactly how many new hotel developments are ready to go in Hawaii, it doesn’t look like that many and their numbers will always be limited by zoning restrictions. You can’t build a hotel in a residential area.
I wonder when this will go into effect.
On Kauai, it would be very surprising if the county barred vacation renting in the condos. It’s impossible in Poipu, where we have only three (very expensive) hotels, but lots of condos. Maybe the county will stop vacation rentals in single-family homes. Problem is, even with a value reduction that would result, many Poipu homes will still be too expensive for local folks to buy or rent.
Seems like the county will have to be very careful that any vacation rental prohibition actually helps the local housing situation without squashing tourism.
So how will you know if your vacation rental will be available or not this could get interesting
Right now, since the bill just passed, it’s unlikely that there will be anything significant this year, maybe even next year. I suspect there’s going to be many lawsuits.
I may be naive, but the counties are not going to ban All the vacation rentals, as your title infers. They will go after VRs that are in non VDAs (visitor destination areas). Watch for lawsuits.
R M:
I agree most likely scenario, at least on Kauai island, is that they target NCU TVRs. Maybe not immediately, maybe try something like the permit cannot pass with the land in a sale. Get’s tricky if held by a corporation and becomes change in shareholders without any change in ownership. There are only a little over 400 NCU TVRs left on Kauai since the 2008 cut-off, so I expect this to have little to no impact on housing market. But, like you say, just need to wait and see. Who knows.
There is always going to be a workaround. On Maui, a bed-and-breakfast license won’t convey to a new owner. So what’s gonna happen is I could see the buyer and the seller forming a trust and transferring ownership that way. Keeping it all in the family. Skirting around the issue. The other issue will be it’ll all go underground.
Mark my words, because at least three things are going to happen;
1) Panicked STR owners will start selling soon, as they don’t want to get trapped into what is unforeseen and unstable now.
2) STR owners that will essentially be forced to become LTRs will undoubtedly increase rents to cover the loss of income from not being an STR.
3) Tax loss revenue from STR TAT will force local counties to increase owner occupied rates, as Maui County has already lowered Tier 3 and increased Tier 2. (Ironically subsidizing Tier 3 now over $3m)
This state couldn’t manage its way out of a paper bag.
There are residents of Hawaii that need to rent out rooms in their primary residence to help make their monthly house payment. Probably the only way they could afford to buy in the first place. What will happen to them if this policy goes through?
Maybe they haven’t been challenged but there are other counties in US states that ban AirBNB etc. I’m not sure a constitutional challenge will succeed unless there is something unique in Hawaii state constitution
They are getting banned or severely restricted globally. Just a few examples:
– New York City
– Barcelona
– New Zealand
– Palm Beach
– Berlin
– Amsterdam
– Santa Monica
– San Francisco
– Canada
– Malaysia
– Irvine
– Japan
– Santa Ana
– Palm Springs
– Florence, Italy
– Munich
– Netherlands
– France
Look at Lake Tahoe as an example of what can happen. They also banned STR as a means to ease the housing problem. Instead of owners of those unit’s selling them. They just didn’t rent them, and left them vacant. Most people who own STR are wealthy enough to just leave them vacant except when they are staying in them a couple times a year. There are exceptions. But the vast majority of them are owned by the wealthy.
Property values in Lake Tahoe actually went up after this law passing. In addition, Lake Tahoe is practically a ghost town now. With tourism in the toilet.
Yes, they put other policies in place to boost home prices and value. Like Santa Barbara having slow growth initiatives. The community is nice, I used to live there, prices have continued to escalate even with restrictions on short term vacation rentals.
Seems to me any laws that attempt to dictate what a citizen can do with their personal property, except, of course, if they’re doing something while committing any type of crime, is going to make a pretty far run through the justice system. I do empathize with the folks regarding the cost of housing (I’m in San Diego), but an outright ban seems untenable legally. But I’m no lawyer. Now, if the counties enact, say, a 1000% tax on any rental of any property, they might have more luck. That might drive businesses out of that market. But there are likely also plenty of people who can afford to leave their places vacant. Or homes that were sold would be sold to people who won’t rent them either. Then what?
If you think March tourist numbers were down, it will be interesting to see future numbers with the possibility of STR being phased out. How many vacationers are going to cancel already standing reservations since they could be cancelled down the road without warning and just travel where they will be welcomed.
Tourists are not Hawaiis personal ATMs
Careful what you wish for you just may get it!
We are in the process of paying in advance, in installments, for a condo stay in Kihei this winter. It’s a well-known established condo complex we’ve been coming to for years. Technically, it’s a “vacation rental” — or is it? I guess I don’t understand the actual definition, in Hawaii, of “vacation rental.” Is a regular established condo a vacation rental? Or does this mean one of those pop-up VRBOs? Please advise. If a regular condo is not one of these, the lack of definition adds even more negativity and fear from visitors.
This is great thinking. Steal the vacation rental value from the owners who invested based on that, in the hope that it will lower rents for residents, who will probably end up on welfare because tourism jobs will collapse because the preferred accommodations are outlawed. No worries though, the rest of us can pay more taxes to pay for this. Way to build back better.
Aloha-
Does the legislation address existing reservations at STRs? Is my less than 30 day reservation in jeopardy of being cancelled?
thanks
The funny thing is that I’m sure it wasn’t even addressed. It wasn’t part of the bill. The bill basically gave the counties the right to enact ways to eliminate short term. Vacation rentals. I mean, Oahu and Maui already have more restrictions and look how expensive it is there. It’s not gonna get any cheaper. I see what sells over there and I see who’s buying it, it’s not locals. It’ll be a mainlander and maybe they’ll put a long-term tenant in. They’re going to charge them a lot. For short term, vacation rentals already booked, I really wouldn’t worry about it. The wheels of government don’t work that fast.
Boondoggle for the Hotel Industry!
I have friends who are having trouble finding reasonably priced long term rentals. It’s truly a problem.
When I purchased my STVR 10 years ago, it was priced, and is now taxed as a vacation rental. I could never afford to convert the house into a long term rental. I would either have to sell my property or move in. Neither scenario will solve the housing issue. The county and state would lose the extra taxes, and the people who help with the upkeep of this property will lose their income from it.
I would assume that most people who buy properties to rent out to vacationers do so with the idea that they will use their own properties as a vacation destination a couple of weeks a year (or more) and rent the rest of the time to make it a profitable venture. If they are forced to rent their properties long-term, their own vacation home/condo becomes unavailable to them for as long as the property is leased. I’ve not seen that aspect discussed much on this forum, but I can’t see why people would want to continue owning a property if they were no longer able to use it as their own vacation home/condo.
STVRs are already regulated by Hawaii County independent of the State. I don’t understand what this bill does that changes anything for Hawaii County.
That’s part of the point of the legislation. They’re hoping to shift vacation housing into local housing, via long-term rental and from off-island owners selling their island houses. A further hope is that cost of housing will decrease as a result of the above. However, because it’s like an extreme version of rent control, I suspect that in the longer term it may backfire like rent control does.
Le Anne,
You are correct. Our house on Kauai is a vacation rental when we are off island, be we are here 4-5 months a years a year. If the county terminates our license, all that happens is the house sits empty, unless we (or our friends/family) are here. Plus, some people lose work, and local businesses lose customers. And, it will cost the county a lot in lost tax money. According to the RE Broker who manages our rental operation, every one of her owners says the same thing. None of these homes will become “affordable” long term housing.
Exactly! How can this even be legal for an already existing home owner?
This is what they are hoping will happen. If enough people can’t rent short term, they will just sell. If enough people sell, prices will go down making housing more affordable. However, most people I know who own these are wealthy enough to just let them sit vacant and use them a few times a year themselves, or let family and friends use them.
The people who need to rent units out in order to keep them are the minority.
You make an excellent point. The Kaanapali condo we stay at is owned by a couple who live there 5 months out of the year and rent the rest of the time. If the STR are banned will they be forced to sell?
There are soooo many homes that sit empty all but 2 weeks a year here in Kihei while locals can’t find suitable or any housing. Something has to change.
Ane T (clever!)
If these homes are already sitting empty most of the year, why would this law change anything?
So, do you suggest forcing those who own homes but only visit 2 weeks a year to sell their property? Unless I misunderstand your statement, property owners can occupy their property as they see fit.
That just shows what we already know to be reality: a lot of owners of properties that are currently used as a second home or short term vacation rental don’t need to sell them. Maui already has a lot of restrictions and even before the fires, the lack of affordable housing was an issue just like it has been in any other desirable part of the country.
From recent article:
“In Palm Springs, a cap on short-term rentals in specific high-demand neighborhoods has all but frozen the market in those communities.
Sales are down. Homes languish on the market for months. And investors who bought up Palm Springs properties during the COVID-19 pandemic are facing hundreds of thousands of dollars in losses.”
Cite your source, or this is made up.
Does this tourism change with potential ban on rentals includes all the islands, condos as well as private properties?
The hotels must be looking forward to getting to test their pricing power.
Yes, the one thing we know for sure is that the hotels will jack up their prices for everything. They will be laughing all the way to the bank and none of that money is going to come back into the local economy.
The recurring comment on short term rentals belonging to nonislanders is just short sided as an excuse to eliminate them. Who do you think owns the hotel and resort properties? They are islanders.
I’m pretty sure most of the hotels are not owned by islanders but large corporations from all over the world
Don’t bite the hand that buys the booze.
My message to county lawmakers: be careful what you wish for. If you limit STRs and the ones remaining jack up rates, many visitors (like me) already being squeezed will be priced out, especially when hotels are out of the question (when a Courtyard by Marriott in Kahului charges $500 a night, or Wailea hotels start at over $1,000, you know something is wrong).
I can’t wait to get back to Maui this summer. I hope it won’t be the last time. I choose to go to Hawaii (I’ve been 10 times). I don’t need to go (coming from NY, it’s a process). Making Hawaii a playground for the rich spells doom. Limiting STRs won’t do much to fix the housing crisis. But it will kill the economy.
One can rent a 2 bedroom timeshare that sleeps 6 for about 2100 a week or $300 per night And have a kitchen + BBQs to prepare a few meals without some of the restaurant bills. (Perhaps not in HNL but the other islands) True, it may not be Wailea but is everyone after that? If so, pay the 500-1,000 per night.
Not for long. Timeshare share prices to buy and rent are going up, up, up since talk of this bill began. Savvy vacationers and existing Hawaii timeshare owners are buying it up to insure they will be able to get back to Hawaii without paying crazy hotel rates. If they don’t use their timeshares they will rent them out for what the market will bear which will be higher than 300 a night. Timeshares are selling like hotcakes here right now!
We rent a studio condo on Kaanapali Beach for 5 wks every year to escape some of harsh Midwest winter. In the past two yrs, the price has nearly doubled and is now over $700 a night range, plus resort fee of
$25 a day. We will have to shorten our stay. Car prices are ridiculous. I don’t believe residents of Maui can afford to buy or rent the strs. Tourism will be greatly impacted, jobs will be lost. Not a win for anyone. We’ve been visiting yearly since 1985. Probably not able to afford to come for much longer
Rates are where they are because visitors are booking at those rates. I happen to know many property management companies in Maui reduced rates drastically in Maui since the fire and continue to do so. We need visitors. It’s time to book Maui now before rates go back up as they obviously will. Safer to book in hotel zoned condos. We appreciate your support. Keep your hosts contact info🙏 The Airbnb and Vrbo fees add 100s & over $1000 to bookings.
Your comment shows that you don’t understand the local sentiment and economy. Limiting STRs or even getting rid of them entirely won’t kill the economy. There will always be hotels and resorts and there will always be visitors. It will however reduce the number of visitors which is exactly what the locals want. And it will open up housing availability for locals. Which is also what the locals want. They are tired of seeing their family members being driven out by mainlander STR owners.
Yes, Peter, there will always be visitors. But there will be many fewer visitors because not everyone can pay $1,000 a night plus tax plus resort fees for a room. Do locals really want fewer visitors if that reduces the tourist infrastructure that’s the lifeblood of an island like Maui? What then? Based on what I’ve read (in part, on this board and from friends in Maui, that’s Not what most locals want).
And what about all the people displaced from Lahaina? Not all of them want to live where many STRs are (read Kihei). Nor are they all suited for families who can’t count on FEMA to pay their rent long-term. Or existing schools can’t handle the influx. People want, need and deserve Permanent housing. Many STRs won’t fit that bill.
You know I was originally for getting rid of STRs in local neighborhoods, I thought it would help.
But now, I discover that a lot of people that used to live in Lahaina aren’t willing to live in Kihei even though the government will pay the Entire Rent because it’s too far away!
Get a grip people, it’s a relatively small island. Yes, it might take an hour to get to the other side of the island, but the people on OAHU drive an hour a day to get to Honolulu and a lot of people that live near a large city have to drive an hour each way. I’ve kind of stopped feeling so bad for them.
Yes, they’ve been dealt a shitty hand, but people are willing to help if they would accept it.
I was affected by the Lahaina fire as were many friends. You are correct. Many of us couldn’t wait to go back to work instead of waiting for handouts. So glad we did because there will be a job shortage worse than it is now. Hubs are already closed or about to close, FEMA is denying assistance finally. You can’t count on FREE and be picky. Wow. We are blessed and there are many that feel entitled and will have a wake up call. We are not owed free help!
I own a STR on Maui, if the county converts my str to long term I won’t sell it, I will continue to use it when ì want to vist(about 12 week a year). A lot of the owners in my complex would do the same thing. I would never make it a long term rental. It was built as a STR in the 1970’s and has always been a STR (zoned hotel).
I don’t think properly zoned STR will be band on Maui.
Unfortunately this is why they want to re-zone residential, agriculture and hotel zones. You are right in not wanting to rent long term. I have friends that can’t evict non paying, harassing tenants that are causing damage. Even with a police report one friend lost a court battle. The tenant lied and had his own police report against her. If a woman landlord cannot evict a man renting a room in her own home that is deliberately damaging, running around naked, smoking and letting her pets out, we don’t have a chance. Judge said wait 3 months of non payment and go back to court. Even then no recourse.
You got it mostly right except for the fact about it opening up housing for locals. It’s not gonna do any of that.
Not sure how anyone can say that “[l]imiting STRs won’t do much to fix the housing crisis.” What are you basing that on? I’ve read elsewhere that thousands of housing units on Maui are used as STRs. If that utilization ends or is limited, those units will not just disappear. I’m guessing that they’ll either be sold or rented long-term.
Still, at this early point in the process, I think it’s anyone’s guess what the effect will be.
Who’s gonna make up the financial shortfall? We know it won’t fix the housing crisis because these same types of restrictions have been put in place in other parts of the country and it hasn’t done that. Why would Hawaii be different?
“….converting vacation rentals into local housing.” I’m confused about this. Aren’t most vacation rentals owned by owners? (vs corporations) How exactly would they be ‘converted’ if they are privately held? Not agreeing or disagreeing but is there something I’m missing? Mahalo!
As with many popular tourist destinations, the homes are bought up by individuals or investors from outside the area specifically to use as a STR, so that’s one less house used for islanders to live, squeezing an already tight and very expensive housing market.
They want them rented out long term instead as normal rentals.
Does “long term” mean a month or more? 3 months? yearly? Most LTRs have a minimum of 1 month (not sure about the islands definition). But if I could only rent for one month or longer I seriously doubt it would affect most owners so really wouldn’t add to the housing for locals.
Anything less than 180 days is considered short term.
That is incorrect. Short term is defined as 30days or less in Hawaii.
“Short-term rentals (STRs) are also known as vacation rentals, and are lodgings that provide guest accommodation for less than 30 consecutive days. In order to preserve housing for long-term residents, STRs are only permitted in resort-zoned areas and a couple of specific apartment-zoned areas.”
honolulu.gov/dpp/permitting/short-term-rentals.html
This is the third time I have written this response to this BOH story.
If I can’t find a STVR, I will not be coming back to Hawaii. Maybe that is what the Governor wants, so, Governor, mission accomplished.
It also appears to be what a lot of islanders want too. The local housing market in Hawaii is extremely small and expensive and STR’s just make this worse, removing more and more homes from the local market. Not to mention, who wants their neighborhood to suddenly become another tourist hub, where no one knows their neighbors and the renters are carrying on like it’s Friday night, every night?
There are a number of short term vacation rentals in my neighborhood. They are not loud. I have more problems with the owner occupants of homes than I do with people that are here for vacation. Think a lot of people just assume that everybody’s gonna come out here and party when in reality we have eco-tourists, we have people that want to get closer to some of the things to see on the island instead of being jammed in no hotel. We get people that want to experience the local culture and not just some luau on the hotel grounds. People come here and spend their time and money at local businesses, we see that money come back into the economy.
There won’t be “more and more” short-term rentals created, because STRs have been capped on all of the islands. That makes the rest of your comment moot.
Those of you who “liked” this comment…you know the scenarios mentioned in this comment can no longer happen, right?
There will never be “more and more” STRs created in Hawaii. Your neighborhoods will never suddenly become full of STRs. Saying otherwise is just spreading unnecessary fear.
Ditto. It is exactly what he has in mind. He expects only the rich. If you cannot afford an expensive hotel and eat out at restaurants, he does not want you. He wants first class citizens in Paradise. He did not really mean it when he said he wanted people to come and respect the culture.
The governor needs to stop speaking out of both sides of his mouth!
Can BOH explain how this is going to work? Banning short term rentals….. Does that mean only long term rentals? Most rental houses in Kauai currently cost at least $1000/night. Will the owners of those houses, mostly mainlanders, agree to charge substantially less, when their mortgages and property taxes are already sky high? Gov Green is upset that STR’s are owned by mainlanders and wants to turn them over to locals. How many locals can afford $1-5 million homes? What am I missing here?
Hi Rob.
This is going to unfold over time, and it isn’t clear how it will work in any of the counties of Hawaii yet.
Aloha.
I foresee a long and protracted, divisive and expensive battle should this stand. There will be turmoil that will finally kill tourism in Hawaii. Even BOH’s humble editors will be gnashing their teeth. Good luck surviving this self-inflicted wound. Auwe!
Yes Tom! Maui`s economy has been circling the drain since the tragic fire. This could very well be the kill shot. Most businesses here depend on tourism on one level or another. Will the counties be setting the long term rental rates or the property owners? There is no affordable property ownership on this island. They will have to charge enough rent to cover those expenses. What a mess…
They can’t dictate rates but it will be whatever the market will bear. Rents are already crazy high. Take a look at Zillow listings. Many rentals are poised for long term but at monthly rates that locals cannot afford.
I am assuming that the supporters of this legislation are expecting that without the lucrative short term rental income that the properties will become less valuable and of less interest to out of state owners. Resulting in more properties going onto the market for purchase as long term residences and thus flooding the market and reducing housing prices.
Interesting theory. Who knows if that is how it will really go. My guess is that all this will end up in lengthy court battles.
Yes, I think that there is going to be some lengthy court battles. The proponents think that all of a sudden we’re gonna have a bunch of affordable properties. That’s like saying that the plastic bag ban at the grocery stores magically cleaned up the ocean. It didn’t, the bigger issue was commercial fishing and the nets. The lobbyist had more money so they made the issue all about the end consumer when it really wasn’t.
Normal rentals by most codes are 30 days or more. So, you could likely rent your home out for 11 or 12 times a year and it would still be considered a “single family dwelling”. his in fact is the loophole the STR’s use, most national safety codes require enhanced safety in “transient lodging”, or those rentals of less than 30 days, but not many places are holding people to the Codes, which then allows the “owner” to place guests at additional risk, where hotels, motels, inns and B7B’s must have much more robust safety systems. Basically the national codes didn’t address this issue as it was “not a thing”, now it’s a political hot potato they seem to be trying to steer clear of.
How long is a long-term rental on Maui?
MCC 3.48. 466 states that for twelve (12) months, the dwelling must be: occupied as a long-term rental, and. under a signed contract to lease. Hawaii County deems any rental longer than 180 days to be long-term.
The STVR’s pay a much higher property tax rate, so I suppose the category and rate will change if the house is no longer a vacation rental.
On Kauai, a grandfathered-in STVR is more expensive to purchase, usually in the $200K range depending on the property.
Would it be reasonably safe to assume the Big Island is least exposed to this ‘debatable action’?
Mahalo,
Dodge and Sharon
Hi DodgeandSharon.
It all remains to be revealed. There did appear to be more push back from the Big Island.
Aloha.
The Big Island already has laws that limit STVRs in non-resort areas, but many older STVRs in non-resort areas are grandfathered in. They have been continuously trying to make the rules stricter and stricter there, for example, they want to ban renting of rooms for any period of less than 6 months, even when the owner of the property lives in the house that they are trying to rent a room in.
Appreciate the Beat of Hawaii never sleeps (didn’t expect a response for at least 6 hours) reply.
Another question; in your opinion, is the Hawaii Governmental (mental?) Brain Trust equipped to defend itself (other than a plea of Nolo Contendere) against a probable Class Action law suit?
What is considered to be a short term vs. A long term rental?
service.
“Short-term rentals” means rentals involving payment for use, or swapping, bartering, or exchange, of residential dwellings, or portions thereof, for stays of less than one hundred eighty days, or any shorter maximum duration as determined by a county, by persons other than the owners of the residential dwelling. “Short-term rentals” include “transient vacation rentals” as defined in section 514E-1.
Typically by national Code standards, 30 days is the line. Less than 30 is considered “transient lodging” and must meet greater safety regulations.
It’s usually 30 days or less. They are currently trying to switch it to any stay of less than 180 days on Big Island.
We saw a lot of Palm Springs references by those who wanted this legislation. Now let’s see if there is a measurable, material comedown in home prices.
I’m highly skeptical. Instead I predict a disaster for county property tax rolls, truly exorbitant hotel room pricing, and continued, prolonged tourism weakness that will last a decade, and possibly much longer. The last of these is precisely what the governor and a significant minority of locals wanted. Don’t look for a federal government bailout when the next recession hits; you did this to yourselves.
I completely agree with this. Too many properties are owned by out of state investors and individuals. There is only so much land and having so many properties sitting idle much of the year makes no sense.
Oh yeah. What logic. Plenty of land. Just buy some and build a darn house like most people do. Oh yeah….or just take it from someone else.
Brett,
This will result in way more properties sitting idly by. They will just be second homes. Even if/when the current owners sell, the buyers will mostly be mainlanders buying second homes. Most people who live on the islands cannot compete with mainland money. Kauai county penalizes all non-primary residence homes with exceeding high property taxes. I suspect the other counties also do this. That may encourage some people to sell, but if someone buys it as a primary residence, the county loses a lot of property tax.
Obviously, you are probably in the minority given the feedback on all of these postings. So how many properties are too many? 10, 100, 1000 and what does it matter if they remain empty or not? Should the government force a property owner to put somebody into it?
I have a vacation rental. Even if I lose the right to rent it out as a vacation rental, I still would not rent it to permanent renters because then I wouldn’t be able to use it myself a few times a year. I would keep it empty and let family and friends use it.
Same. The eviction moratoriums etc make it way too risky to rent long term. This will just drive rentals underground and avoid all GET, TAT, and county taxes being paid.
I hope the counties act reasonably, but who knows what will happen.
Good luck and good bye.
You will drive away the returning and frequent visitor who knows hotel rooms are way too high. Without short term rental Hawaii is no longer an affordable concept when compared with other beach worldwide.
‘Cutting your nose off to spite your face’
Yep. I guess I should just go ahead and cancel my STR reservation for January 25. Oh well. I always liked visiting Hawaii, I guess those days are over. No way I am paying hotel rates.
Nothing will happen for years
So here’s what sad. We Volunteered our condo after the fire, but it was too small, it was in the wrong location, so why now with this STR become someone’s dream home? We know for a fact that the displaced survivors from the west end have been asking to remain in the west. Why the governor is taking this stance across the entire island of Maui seems so ridiculous. Short term rentals bring in the highest tax into the county (TAT) In the world. Such a good opportunity for that money to be converted into affordable housing in the west where they want to reside. Close to their Ohana, the keiki schools, church etc. One size does not fit all