HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0236.151 2024-2026P/cownci I
15,11 V
COW Z(-
From: Liz Lees
Sent: Monday, June 2, 2025 5:21 PM
To: Council Testimony n
Subject: TAR 47 Draft 2- Oppose C— C;o
c �c
Dear Council,
I reviewing the latest version of the proposal, in addition to my previous comments from May 3rd, I still have-many2>1Q,
concerns and objections. N T
1. 1 am very concerned about the definition of HOSTED. We rent the guest suite in our primary residence, but we also
occasionally travel. We ALWAYS have someone house sit for us to address any guest needs and pet sit.. Some
language needs to be added to any registration bill that the host or their representative is available per the terms and
they will still be in compliance.
2. 90 days for, implementation is too short a window. I can't imagine that the county would be able to handle thousands of
registrations in such a short time frame.
3.Under 6-45 Registration:
#5 May? How can an owner attest to something that MAY be required?
#9 May ? Other information or material as MAY be required???? Could this be a place to require proof that all current
codes and permits are in place. I own a home built in the 70's and all my permits were lost in a court house fire. Who
knows really?
The vague language in this bill leaves many opportunities for hurting local residents that share a portion of their home
either through fines for violations or simply disallowing a registration on a technicality.
This bill is much more than "just a registration" bill. Much of this bill seems to be designed to dissuade any average
resident/homeowner from hosting in their home.
Are you sure you want to keep tourist dollars only in the hands of the off shore owners of the hotel industry?
I oppose this bill as written.
Mahalo for your consideration -
Liz Lees
----- Forwarded Message -----
From: Liz Lees <leeschung@yahoo.com>
To: counciltestimony@hawaiicounty.gov <counci!testimony@hawaiicounty.gov>
Sent: Saturday, May 3, 2025 at 12:22:26 PM HST
Subject: TAR 47-25 Draft Proposal- Please leave us alone!
Dear Council,
I thought there was rule that there needs to be 2 years between re -introducing the same failed proposals before the
council? I understand this is a "portion" of the previously presented bill 121, but it is the same none the less. It is
disingenuous to suggest otherwise. Aren't there more important issues for county council to be spending time on?
Comm. IN-
1 Ref. -k-LL
-
The current proposal is vague and as confusing and full of things that need clarification as much as Bill 121 to which there
was broad opposition There are many portions of the bill that leave open to interpretation whether a host is in compliance
or has committed any perceived violations. The fees for non-compliance are exorbitant! To state this is "just a registration
bill" is again disingenuous.
I am a mostly retired, full time Big Island resident and I host visitors in my guest suite within my primary residence to help
pay the mortgage and make ends meet. We are good neighbors and hosting helps us cover the cost of maintaining our
home. Hosted rentals allow locals to participate in Hawaii's largest economic sector. Do you really want to create MORE
barriers to keeping money in the hands of locals?
By all accounts tourism and the economy are in decline. After more than ten years of successful hosting, for the first time,
we have almost no future bookings. This does not bode well for Hawaii's economy as a whole. Maybe now would be a
good time to take a pause, evaluate how Bill 108 is working and the promised economic study before adding MORE
regulations .
I feel strongly that the current bill is more than "just a registration bill", is overkill and is an unneeded and unwanted
burden to hosted rentals and tax paying county residents. The council should first understand the issues their decisions
will impact before introducing more bureaucratic and unneeded legislation.
Mahalo for your consideration,
Liz Lees
77-110 Nahale PL
Kailua Kona, HI 96740