HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0675.129 2022-2024 Lind(' Sgnkovich
To the members of the Planning and Policy Committee,and the full body of the Hawai'i County
Council.
I am opposed to the language that has been introduced in the third version of proposed changes to
Bills 121 and 122.The county has devoted much time to this introduction and, unfortunately,the
third time is not the charm.
After the second version of the proposed language, council members met with stakeholders
discuss concerns and impacts. Many constituents who rely on income through hosting were r>a
repeatedly assured in that meeting that the proposed language would not apply to them if they
operated as a"bed and breakfast"even if breakfast was not provided.That"safe harbor"is novz
gone without rationale provided. Bed and breakfast accommodations provide residents the :
opportunity to enhance their income by providing short term accommodation.Visitors of this to
do not damage neighborhoods or make noise or other problems.
For the districts of Puna and Hamakua,which are currently predominantly zoned as agricultural,
the proposed changes hold extra weight.These areas have few,if any, hotel room space. Available
options will shrink dramatically and have a harmful effect on agricultural operators who provide
unique and aina-enriching experiences. Farming can be a"break-even"business even in good
times and this will take away a source of supplemental income which is reinvested in the area. My
home is in an agricultural zone yet that is not the reality of the residential neighborhood of
Hawai'ian Paradise Park.
Fire,divorce,destination wedding, inner-island vacation, retirement and relocation are realities.
Each of these circumstances may necessitate housing on Hawai'i that does not require 90-180
days of accommodation. But,they would need amenities beyond what the hotel industry can
supply(like the ability to cook and storage)and hotel costs would make trips of more than a few
days outrageously expensive foremost families. Our ohana cost is less than$50 per day and that is
an all-inclusive price.Tenants spend in the local economy to strengthen and support it. Eliminating
these kinds of accommodation options will have a seriously negative impact on second tier
businesses and individuals who provide rental cars, dining establishments,artisans and
craftspeople,airline companies,and so on.Anyone associated with providing visitor services will
be impacted.
Let's think about what that looks like down the road. People may not be able to make their
mortgages if they now rely on hosting to meet household expenses. This will have day to day,
practical negative impacts for families already living within stretched means.Staff reductions or
layoffs in businesses that need tourism at the current rate to survive. Real estate sales will drive
more foreign or off-island investment/purchasing. I am sure these are not the outcomes that the
Council or any responsible government wants.
Hawai'i is not O'ahu yet wants to act as if it were the same.The proposed length of permissible
leases and fines associated with violations are identical to those in the O'ahu ordinance.That
legislation faced a court challenge and was ruled to be an unfair prescription on property owners. In
December 2023,a federal judge permanently enjoined O'ahu county from raising rental lengths to
180 days. For Hawai'i County to follow the same path is foolhardy,will be expensive,and likely
unfruitful in the end.These proposed changes are wrong for Hawai'i and wrong for Puna.
Comm. N.. (PI
Ref.To: I Mai
•
Ref. Dote JAN 2 3 212';