Connect with us

Hawaii

Maui County weighs phasing out vacation rentals – West Hawaii Today

Published

on

Maui County weighs phasing out vacation rentals – West Hawaii Today


WAILUKU — A Maui fire marshal ordered officials to thin the crowds inside a Maui County Planning Commission hearing Tuesday to review a proposal from Maui Mayor Richard Bissen to phase out thousands of vacation rentals.

The initial turnout inside the eighth-floor hearing room at the Kalana o Maui Building was so robust that attendees spilled into the side and back aisles and were standing outside the hearing-room doors. People also were gathered on the lawn of the county building to watch the proceedings on a screen, and at the morning peak more than 900 people had tuned into the meeting virtually on Cisco Webex.

Some 130 testified in person; another 30 or so testified virtually. Though the meeting began promptly at 9 a.m., some 50 people were still on the list to testify at about 8 p.m. when the commission recessed the meeting until July 9. Those who did not have have a chance to testify will be able to do so at the next meeting after the testifiers who were already on the list are given their turn. The Planning Commission will not make a decision until working through all the testifiers, who by then could grow.

The crowded conditions were a sign of the importance of the hearing, which is the first test of Senate Bill 2919, which became Act 017 on May 3 and clears up issues of state preemption of vacation rental management by allowing counties to craft their own policies, which “regulate the time, place, manner, and duration in which uses of land and structures may take place.”

Advertisement

Those in support of the state and county legislation hope to use vacation rentals to play a larger role in solving Hawaii’s housing crisis, which was made worse by the devastating Aug. 8 Maui wildfires. However, others warn that removing vacation rentals will result in large economic trade-offs, including decreases in tourism and visitor spending, lost jobs and reductions in tax revenue.

The commission is the first official group to hear Bissen’s proposal, which would phase out 2,200 vacation rentals in West Maui apartment districts by July 1, 2025, and eventually all 7,000 units in apartment districts across Maui.

Bissen rolled it out May 2, the day before Gov. Josh Green signed Act 017 into law. He was flanked by Maui Council member Keani Rawlins-­Fernandez. Also present were members of the advocacy group Lahaina Strong, who called for a ban on Maui short-term vacation rentals in the aftermath of the Maui wildfires.

The Maui County Council tried to limit short-term vacation rentals to hotel districts in 1989, but an opinion written by then-­Deputy Corporation Counsel Richard Mina­toya exempted units built before March 5, 1991. Bissen’s bill seeks to repeal these units, which are known as the “Minatoya list.”

Bissen told the Planning Commission on Tuesday: “Our housing crisis stems from a myriad of complex issues that have challenged our community for decades. Paired with the displacement of approximately 12,000 people and 5,400 households due to the Maui wildfires, this crisis has resulted in an estimated 4,000 residents leaving Maui.

Advertisement

“This is a consequence we cannot accept. The system is broken and long overdue for change,” he said.”And while this is only part of the solution, we have to continue to seek innovative ways to address our housing crisis.”

Bissen has said that he expects some legal challenges. However, his testimony Tuesday indicated he remains steadfast in his resolve to see his bill through.

“Today you will hear concerns from nonresident owners, booking platforms, property managers, mortgage lenders and Realtors — all of which stand to lose money on their investments. I would remind you that all investments involve speculation and risk,” he said. “In contrast, you will also hear from our residents, who are being priced out of their homes, struggle to make ends meet and are simply fighting to take care of their ohana. We simply cannot continue to prioritize offshore investments over the needs of our people.”

Kate L.K. Blystone, Maui County planning director, recommended that the commission support Bissen’s proposal by amending Maui County Code Chapters 19.12, 19.32, 19.37, removing transient vacation rentals as a permitted use within the A1 and A2 apartment zoning districts.

“Our job in the planning department is to protect health, safety and general welfare, and all three are deeply affected because our local residents do not have the housing that they need,” Blystone said. “Making this change to the code is one way we can help address this problem more quickly, while working through the real constraints to developing new housing created by our county’s lack of supporting infrastructure like water and wastewater.”

Advertisement

She added that county staff looks forward “to the opportunity to discuss this item and consider ways to address concerns that come up in testimony.”

Bissen’s proposal also needs to go before Planning Commissions on Lanai and Molokai before it heads to the Maui County Council, which must wade through the commissions’ recommendations as well as a range of statistics, public opinions and strong feelings to determine whether it becomes law.

People on both sides of the issue shed tears or displayed other heightened emotions Tuesday.

Andrew Church, who owns three properties on Maui’s Minatoya list, said he hasn’t slept since Bissen announced his plan, and was disappointed that the mayor didn’t stay to hear Tuesday’s testifiers.

“All of my retirement is in these vacation rentals. My daughter would inherit nothing if this happens,” he told the Honolulu Star-Advertiser. “We would have to leave Maui. I hope I could afford a plane ticket out of here.”

Advertisement

Church also expressed concern that the Minatoya list phaseout would eliminate work for the cleaning service and other vendors that he uses.

Numbers were flying throughout Tuesday’s hearing.

Paul Brewbaker, principal of TZ Economics, has estimated that Maui would lose 5,000 to 10,000 jobs conservatively by extinguishing 7,000 vacation rentals. Brewbaker said with induced effects Maui could lose up to 14,000 jobs, and other islands could lose 2,000 to 3,000 jobs.

Brewbaker, who estimated Maui also would lose some $2 billion to $3 billion in gross domestic product, questioned “how Maui workers who lose their jobs in pursuit of performative anti-­tourism denialism masquerading as ‘housing policy’ pay their rent if they don’t have a job. We’re all dying to hear how workers pay for the ‘new’ housing that Maui will magically create by extinguishing their jobs and their businesses.”

Brewbaker’s position is that Maui should get out of its housing crisis by “building more housing.”

Advertisement

However, Matt Jachowski, a housing data consultant, provided data showing that transient vacation rentals on Maui could have a role to play in addressing Maui’s housing crisis.

Jachowski said Maui is only the third-largest county but has the most vacation rental units actively listed of any county at 10,084, which comprises 14% of its housing stock. Jachowski said that after the phaseout Maui would fall back to the third-place spot among counties for vacation rentals with 5,512 actively listed vacation rentals, comprising about 8% of the housing stock.

He argued that tourism is resilient and that there is enough vacant lodging for visitors without the Minatoya list.

Moreover, Jachowski said Maui County has the highest rental costs in the state, leaving at least 53% of families rent-burdened and 28% of families severely rent-burdened.

A full analysis from the University of Hawaii Economic Research Organization is still in the works. However, UHERO released a blog post Tuesday that said the proposal “would increase Maui’s long-term residential housing stock by 13%, representing a dramatic increase in housing supply.”

Advertisement

Courtney Lazo, a Lahaina Strong member whose family lost their home in the fires, said she is ready to see the Minatoya list phased out, although as a Realtor she said that in the past she had represented buyers and sellers on the list.

“After watching Matt’s presentation, I knew that the housing crisis here on Maui was bad; I just didn’t know it was that bad,” Lazo said. “People are here worried about their investment or their commission. But there are people who don’t even have a first home, let along a second, third, fourth and fifth home.”





Source link

Hawaii

No. 3 Rainbow Warriors continue winning ways against No. 6 BYU | Honolulu Star-Advertiser

Published

on

No. 3 Rainbow Warriors continue winning ways against No. 6 BYU | Honolulu Star-Advertiser


The third-ranked Hawaii men’s volleyball team had no problem recording its 11th sweep of the season, handling No. 6 BYU 25-18, 25-21, 25-16 tonight at Bankoh Arena at Stan Sheriff Center.

A crowd of 6,493 watched the Rainbow Warriors (14-1) roll right through the Cougars (13-4) for their 11th straight win.

Louis Sakanoko put down a match-high 15 kills and Adrien Roure added 11 kills in 18 attempts. Roure has hit .500 or better in three of his past four matches.

Junior Tread Rosenthal had a match-high 32 assists and guided Hawaii to a .446 hitting percentage.

Advertisement

UH hit .500 in the first set, marking the third time in two matches against BYU it hit .500 or better in a set.

Hawaii has won seven of the past eight meetings against the Cougars (13-4), whose only two losses prior to playing UH were in five sets.

Advertisement

Hawaii has lost six sets all season, with five of those sets going to deuce.

UH returns to the home court next week for matches Wednesday and Friday against No. 7 Pepperdine.




Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Hawaii

Travelers Sue: Promises Were Broken. They Want Hawaiian Airlines Back.

Published

on

Travelers Sue: Promises Were Broken. They Want Hawaiian Airlines Back.


Hawaiian Airlines’ passengers are back in federal court trying to stop something most people assumed was already finished. They are no longer arguing about whether they are allowed to sue. They are now asking a judge to intervene and preserve Hawaiian as a standalone airline before integration advances to a point this spring where it cannot realistically be reversed.

That approach is far more aggressive than what we covered in Can Travelers Really Undo Alaska’s Hawaiian Airlines Takeover?. The earlier round focused on whether passengers had standing and could amend their complaint. This court round focuses on whether harm is already occurring and whether the court should act immediately rather than later. The shift is moving from procedural survival to emergency relief, which makes this filing different for Hawaii travelers.

The post-merger record is now the focus.

When the $1.9 billion acquisition closed in September 2024, the narrative was straightforward. Hawaiian would gain financial stability. Alaska would impose what it described early as “discipline” across routes and costs. Travelers were told they would benefit from broader connectivity, stronger loyalty alignment, and long-term fleet investments that Hawaiian could no longer fund independently.

Eighteen months later, the plaintiffs argue that the outcome has not matched the pitch. They cite reduced nonstop options on some Hawaii mainland routes, redeye-heavy return schedules that many readers openly dislike, and loyalty program changes that longtime Hawaiian flyers say diminished redemption value. They frame these not as routine airline integration but as signs that competitive pressure has weakened in our island state, where airlift determines price and critical access for both visitors and residents.

Advertisement

What is different about this filing compared with earlier debates is that it relies on developments that have already occurred rather than on predictions about what might happen later.

The HA call sign has already been retired. Boston to Honolulu was cut before competitors signaled renewed service. Austin’s nonstop service ended. Multiple mainland departures shifted into overnight red-eyes. And next, the single reservation system transition is targeted for April 2026, a process already well underway.

Atmos replaced both Hawaiian Miles and Alaska’s legacy loyalty programs, and readers immediately reported higher award pricing, fewer cheap seats, no mileage upgrades, and confusion around status alignment and family accounts. Each of those events can be described as aspects of integration mechanics, but together they form the factual record that the plaintiffs are now asking a judge to examine in Yoshimoto v. Alaska Airlines.

The 40% capacity argument.

One of the more interesting claims tied to the court filing is that Alaska now controls more than 40% of Hawaii mainland U.S. capacity. That figure strikes at the core of the entire issue. That percentage does not automatically mean monopoly under antitrust law, but it does raise questions about concentration in a state that depends exclusively on air access for its only industry and its residents.

Hawaii is not a region where travelers have options. Every visitor, every neighbor island resident, and every business traveler depends on our limited air transportation. The plaintiffs contend that consolidation at that scale reduces competitive pressure and gives the dominant carrier far more leverage over pricing and scheduling decisions. Alaska says that competition remains robust from Delta, United, Southwest, and others, and that share shifts seasonally and by route.

Competitors reacted quickly.

While Alaska integrated Hawaiian’s network under its publicly stated discipline strategy, Delta announced its largest Hawaii winter schedule ever, beginning in December 2026. Delta’s Boston to Honolulu is slated to return, Minneapolis to Maui launches, and Detroit and JFK to Honolulu move to daily service. Atlanta also gains additional frequency. Widebodies are appearing where narrowbodies once operated, signaling Delta’s push into higher capacity and premium cabin layouts.

Advertisement

Those moves complicate the monopoly narrative. If Delta is expanding aggressively, one argument is that competition remains active and responsive. At the same time, Delta filling routes Alaska trimmed may reinforce the idea that structural changes created openings competitors believe are profitable, and that markets respond when gaps appear.

What changed since October.

In October, we examined whether the case would survive dismissal and whether passengers could refile. That moment felt more procedural than what’s afoot now. It did not alter flights, fares, or loyalty programs.

This filing is different because it is tied to post-merger developments and seeks emergency relief. The plaintiffs are asking the court to prevent further integration while the merits are evaluated, arguing that each added step toward full consolidation this spring makes reversal less feasible as systems merge, crew scheduling aligns, fleet plans shift, and branding converges.

Airline mergers are designed to become embedded quickly, and once those pieces are fully intertwined, unwinding them becomes exponentially more difficult, which is why the plaintiffs are pressing forward now rather than waiting any longer.

The DOT conditions and the defense.

When the purchase of Hawaiian closed, the Department of Transportation imposed conditions that run for six years. Those conditions addressed maintaining capacity on overlapping routes, preserving certain interline agreements, protecting aspects of loyalty commitments, and safeguarding interisland service levels.

Advertisement

Alaska will point to those commitments as evidence that consumer protections were built into the core approval. The plaintiffs, however, are essentially claiming that those conditions are either insufficient or that subsequent real-world changes undermine the spirit of what travelers were told would remain. That tension between formal commitments and actual experience is at the core of this dispute.

Hawaiian had not produced consistent profits for years.

That is the actual financial situation, without sentiment. Alaska did not spend $1.9 billion to preserve Hawaii nostalgia. It purchased aircraft, an international and trans-Pacific network reach, and a platform it thinks can return to profitability under tighter cost control.

What this means for travelers today.

Nothing about your Hawaiian Airlines ticket changes because of this filing. Flights remain scheduled. Atmos remains the reward program. Integration continues unless a judge intervenes.

However, Alaska now faces a renewed court challenge that points to concrete post-merger developments rather than speculative harm. That scrutiny alone can bring things to light and influence how aggressively future route decisions and loyalty adjustments occur.

Hawaiian Airlines’ travelers have been vocal since the start about pricing, redeyes, lost nonstops, and loyalty devaluation. Others have said very clearly that without Alaska, Hawaiian might not exist in any form at all. Both perspectives exist as background while a federal judge evaluates whether the integration should be impacted.

Advertisement

You tell us: Eighteen months after Alaska took over Hawaiian, are your Hawaii flights better or worse than before, and what changed first for you: price, schedule, routes, interisland flights, or loyalty programs?

Lead Photo Credit: © Beat of Hawaii at SALT At Our Kaka’ako in Honolulu.

Get Breaking Hawaii Travel News

Advertisement





Source link

Continue Reading

Hawaii

Lawsuit claims Hawaiian-Alaska Airlines merger creates monopoly on Hawaii flights

Published

on

Lawsuit claims Hawaiian-Alaska Airlines merger creates monopoly on Hawaii flights


HONOLULU (HawaiiNewsNow) – An effort to break up the Hawaiian and Alaska Airlines merger is heading back to court.

Passengers have filed an appeal seeking a restraining order that would preserve Hawaiian as a standalone airline.

The federal government approved the deal in 2024 as long as Alaska maintained certain routes and improved customer service.

However, plaintiffs say the merger is monopolizing the market, and cite a drop in flight options and a rise in prices.

Advertisement

According to court documents filed this week, Alaska now operates more than 40% of Hawaii’s continental U.S. routes.

Hawaii News Now has reached out to Alaska Airlines and is awaiting a response.

PREVIOUS COVERAGE



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending