HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0675.601 2022-2024 1 /pcLUO
.ail I I21
COWL 615
From: Kathleen T Carr
Sent: Tuesday, November 5, 2024 9:52 PM S'
To: Council Testimony
Cc: Kathleen T Carr
Subject: Bill 121 .Testimony for Nov. 8, 2024 meeting
To the Hawaii County Leeward Planning Commission,
I am writing a testimony to you because I oppose Bill 121 in its current form. I have been operating a
small vacation rental in my home for 22 years, paying all TAT and GET taxes, and have not been required
to register as a hosted vacation rental so far, according to the Planning Dept.With the new bill, I would
need to register as a hosted TAR. I would support a reasonable registration process, but Bill 121 is too
complex and confusing as written.
One of my many concerns about the bill is the following section in the proposal for requirement to register."Section 25-
4-16.5(2).The transient accommodation rental must meet health,safety,and construction code requirements
established by law."My house was built in 1980 with building permits.The building code has changed since 1980,so I'm not
sure whether there would be a requirement to pass current codes. How would this be handled?Will there be inspections,and
if so,by who?There are a lot of homes in South Kona that were built around this time period.
This requirement and other registration requirements are vague and do not inspire trust that a registration application
would be accepted.That places some of us in a situation where if our applications are not accepted,then we become illegal
if we continue to rent,or if we stop renting,we will probably not be able to afford to stay in our homes and may be forced to
leave the island. It has become very expensive to live here,with the rising property tax,insurance and costs of living.And if we
are forced to sell,the local residents would mostly not be able to afford the market prices these days,which means that
mainlanders or foreign interests would be purchasing those properties.
The building division approval is also problematic because the building permits presently can take up to two years to build
a house,and this proposal would overburden the permitting process even more. Part of the housing shortage problem
is the obstacles in getting permits in a timely manner.
One of the reasons for the new proposed regulations is to create more housing for residents. However,my unit and
many others would not be suitable for long term rental.One reason among others, is that there have been no stoves
permitted in these units or rooms,so I only provide a hot plate,microwave and toaster oven.Most vacationers do not do
much,if any,cooking so as a vacation rental it is not a problem.Mine is a 350 sq.ft.downstairs studio,which just doesn't
have satisfactory facilities for long term rentals, including any storage.
A reason that many vacation rental owners are hesitant to do long term rentals is the way the Hawaii rental code is
written.All the benefits go to the renters,and if you end up with a bad renter,it is almost impossible to get them
out.This has happened to me in the past in another location,and not only did the renters not pay rent or utilities for 4 months,
but they were nasty and damaged the place before they eventually left.They ignored the eviction notice,and there was no
prompt action by the county to get them to leave. It was a real financial hardship and left a very bad taste in my mouth.I would
not want to have that situation in my home.
The county passed regulations for non-hosted vacation rentals in 2018 to create additional local housing,but has there
has been any independent research presented on the results?Have those regulations helped the housing situation?
Wouldn't it be better to strengthen those regulations,or make Bill 121 pertain to just non-hosted vacation rentals?They seem
to be creating more of the problems this bill is trying to address.This legislation as written will create far more hardship for
locals than whatever benefits it will provide and will not solve the housing shortage. Comm. 0 7.
DI
Ref. To:
1 Ref. Date N V
A 2020 study commissioned by the Hawaii Tourism Authority found that STRs added$6 billion to the state's economy
and sustained 46,000 jobs.The study also found that 30%of tourists surveyed reported that if there had not been not a
home and vacation rental option available during their recent stay in Hawaii,they would not have made the trip.Hotels
are just too expensive for many people wishing to come to Hawaii.
On June 14,2024 the Travel Technology Association and Hawaii economic consultant Kloninger&Sims released a
study on the economic and fiscal impacts of the short-term rental market in Maui County and across the state.
Across Hawaii,short-term rentals generated$11.3 billion in economic activity in 2023 and 66,000 jobs.
If all short-term rental units throughout the state are phased out by the counties,the following annual economic and
fiscal losses could occur:$803.3 to$955.9 million in taxes to the State and Counties,that includes:$554 million in State
TAT and GET and$121 million in all county GET and TAT surcharges.
I understand that Bill 121 isn't trying to shut down all vacation rental units,but it will dramatically decrease the number
of vacation rental units unless the registration process is more clear and user-friendly,and the penalties of non
acceptance aren't so severe. Fines listed as$2500/day for a first offense,$5000/day for a second offense,and$10,000 a
day for a third offense seem quite hostile and out of proportion to what residents could pay.
This legislation will affect more than 7500 families,including me,plus all the jobs created for service providers who
clean and maintain the rentals.For many of us,we rely on this short term vacation rental income to be able to afford to
live on this island,to make ends meet each month. I am 78,and there are not a lot of other employment opportunities for me,
so it is essential that I be able to continue offering part of my home for short term vacation in order to be able to continue living
in my home and staying on the island.
I live in South Kona,and there was only one hotel,the Manago Hotel,in the area,which is now no longer available as a
hotel.My visitors do not want to stay in a hotel or resort setting,but would rather have a more affordable authentic
Hawaiiana vacation,so they love vacation rentals. I think it is important for our visitors to have a choice in the kind of
experience they want in accommodations.This legislation will also hurt our tourists and the income that the state derives
from these vacation rentals.
I understand that the County Council recently passed a resolution to conduct an economic impact study on the effects of
short-term rentals on the economy,and reiterated the need for information before moving forward with the regulations.That
is a good thing, and I think that the proposed regulations need to take into consideration my
aforementioned concerns so that it benefits all. From my perspective,it seems that this proposed legislation would
create a lot of hardship for the thousands of families currently hosting vacation rentals,create angry constituents,litigation
and unintended consequences,financial and otherwise.
Hawaii's courts have specifically noted that preexisting uses are vested rights protected by the due process provisions
in both the Hawaii and U.S.constitutions, and thus cannot be abrogated by later zoning ordinances.The U.S.Supreme
Court has indicated its willingness to uphold property rights against government regulations. In Tyler v. Hennepin County and
Timbs v. Indiana,the Court sided with property owners on Fifth Amendment and Eighth Amendment grounds, respectively.
This is not a simple issue,and any court battle likely would be both lengthy and costly for the county. If the goal is to address
concerns about the lack of affordable housing,there are more effective ways to approach the problem that would not embroil
the county in complex, lengthy and likely very expensive litigation.
Thank you,
Kathleen Carr
kcarr(a�mcn.org
808-443-9587
2