HomeMy WebLinkAboutHenderson, Richard II
Tsuneda, Kaci
From:Ritchie Henderson <ritchie.henderson@rinvest.com>
Sent:Monday, August 31, 2026 11:51 AM
To:Council Testimony
Subject:Written Testimony - Richard Henderson II
Regarding Bill 147 – Short-Term Vacation Rental (STVR) Regulations Hawai ʻ i County Council
Chair and Members of the Council,
Thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony on Bill 147. I submit this testimony as an individual
resident who is concerned about the practical, legal, and economic impacts this bill will have on existing
housing, property rights, and long-established communities across Hawai ʻ i Island.
Bill 147, as drafted, makes several significant changes to the regulation of short-term vacation rentals.
While I appreciate the County’s effort to bring clarity and consistency to Chapter 25, several provisions
of the bill create unintended consequences that warrant reconsideration.
1. RM Zoning and Vested Rights Bill 147 reverses long-standing policy by removing STVR eligibility from
RM-zoned condominium projects that were legally developed, permitted, and marketed for transient
visitor use. Many of these projects—some dating back 40–50 years—were expressly identified in their
Developer’s Public Reports as visitor accommodations, and purchasers relied on those representations
when making investment decisions. As you will note, “Bill 147 reverses that policy and makes the use
illegal in many condo complexes built, used, and permitted for transient rental purposes.” This change
would create inequitable treatment within the same CPR project, where some units retain rights while
identical neighboring units are permanently prohibited. More than 2,000 units islandwide fall into this
category.
2. Use of General Plan Resort Nodes The General Plan is a long-range policy document, not a
parcel-level regulatory tool. Zoning—not General Plan designations—has always been the mechanism by
which property owners determine permitted uses. It should be noted, “General plan designations are
not intended to be used at the granular parcel level.” Linking STVR eligibility to Resort Nodes introduces
uncertainty and inconsistency, remove the reference.
3. CN Zoning STVRs are consistent with the commercial nature of the CN district, which already permits
lodging houses, restaurants, retail, and other commercial uses. Excluding CN while allowing STVRs in
CG and CV lacks a clear planning rationale.
4. Hosted Rentals vs. Bed & Breakfasts The bill merges hosted rentals with Bed & Breakfasts, despite
B&Bs traditionally requiring special permits and higher service expectations. This change may trigger
unintended consequences for mortgages, insurance, HOA compliance, and Department of Health
requirements. It should be apparent that this terminology could “affect eligibility for traditional
homeowner insurance, increase premiums, require commercial coverage, or create underwriting
concerns.”
1
5. Temporary Workforce Housing Not all rentals under 180 days are visitor lodging. Traveling nurses,
construction workers, teachers, disaster-displaced families, and relocating households rely on
temporary housing. The bill should expand exemptions beyond medical professionals and allow
documentation-based verification rather than requiring STVR registration for legitimate housing needs.
6. Additional Operational Concerns Several provisions—such as the five-bedroom cap, reachability
requirements, and restrictions on multiple guest groups—need refinement to avoid unnecessary
burdens on owners while still addressing legitimate neighborhood concerns.
Recommendation I respectfully urge the Council to adopt amendments that:
• Retain RM zoning as a permitted district for legally established STVR CPRs, or provide an opt-in
rezoning pathway to Resort zoning.
• Remove reliance on General Plan Resort Nodes for determining permitted uses.
• Preserve STVR eligibility in CN zoning.
• Separate hosted rentals from Bed & Breakfasts to avoid unintended commercial reclassification.
• Expand temporary housing exemptions and provide clear documentation standards.
• Refine operational definitions and requirements to ensure clarity and fairness.
Bill 147 is an important effort, but it must protect long-standing property rights, avoid inequitable
outcomes, and ensure that regulations reflect the realities of Hawai ʻ i Island’s housing and
visitor-accommodation history. I appreciate the Council’s consideration and urge thoughtful
amendments before passage.
Respectfully submitted,
Richard Henderson II
2