Maui County Housing and Land Use Committee Reconvened Meeting – August 27, 2026

The Housing and Land Use Committee reconvened on August 27, 2026, at 9:12 a.m. to continue public testimony and deliberation on Resolutions 26-129 and 26-130. These resolutions would refer to the Maui Planning Commission proposed bills to amend community plans and change zoning for certain Apartment District properties in the Sea Level Rise Exposure Area (SLREXA) to allow continued Transient Vacation Rental (TVR) uses. The meeting included extensive public testimony, followed by committee discussion on criteria for selecting properties under Resolution 26-129. The committee voted to adopt criteria for that resolution and recessed further consideration to September 9, 2026.

Public Comments & Testimony

• Nicole Fox (owner, Hale Kai O Kihe) testified in support of including her building in the hotel rezoning list, citing 30% of the property impacted by sea level rise at the 3.2-foot threshold, location in FEMA Flood Zone AH, and the building's age (1969) and condition. She argued that placing local families in such risk-prone units is unwise.
• Tyler Sonamaker (journalist, Kahea Vaya Media) questioned why the county was creating carve-outs that undermine Bill 9's intent, and noted inconsistency among testifiers' motivations—those opposing Bill 9 tended to argue personal financial hardship rather than broader policy goals.
• Jade Moreno (principal researcher, Maui Housing Hui) opposed both resolutions, arguing that the cumulative effect of zoning changes weakens Bill 9 before its impact can be evaluated. She distinguished between legitimate private interests and the county's responsibility to protect housing supply for residents.
• Albert Perez (Maui Tomorrow Foundation) opposed both resolutions, stating that H-3/H-4 zoning would increase property values and incentivize shoreline hardening, contrary to coastal management goals. He also noted that STR-driven HOA fee increases have historically priced out long-term residents.
• Kaya Nishiki testified against both resolutions, calling for a comprehensive coastal analysis including structural condition, shoreline certification, financial reserves, and a managed retreat plan. She referenced Senate Bill 3034 (voluntary acquisition of vulnerable coastal properties) as a more appropriate approach.
• Travis Liggett testified only on Resolution 26-130, raising concerns about wastewater discharge compliance and broader climate risks.
• Additional testifiers opposing the resolutions included: Charles Nahalley (fire survivor in limbo), Jordan Hawker, Leandre Makakoa, Kelsey Salah-Maupa, Paul Carter, John Cardi, Robert Bence, and Jaclyn Thine. They argued the resolutions undermine Bill 9, prioritize investors over local residents, and ignore sea level rise risks.
• Sati Brown testified in support, arguing that property owners—local or not—have the right to support their families through STR income and that STR owners already pay the highest tax rates.
• Shane Albertin (teacher, Baldwin High School) opposed the resolutions, noting his family's experience paying $6,000/week for a vacation rental while their home was being remediated after flooding. He distinguished between properties that function as hotels (e.g., Honua Kai) and those that are clearly apartment buildings.
• Sarah (a nurse and local resident) supported the resolutions, stating that her unit has lost value and that many local owners are being harmed by Bill 9.

Discussion Items

After closing oral testimony, the committee discussed criteria for selecting properties to include in Resolution 26-129. Chair U‘u-Hodgins proposed criteria based on structures fully inundated by the 3.2-foot SLREXA or special flood hazard areas. Members debated the definition of "fully inundated" versus "majority impacted" (51% or more) and whether to include properties subject to shoreline regulations as adopted by the Maui Planning Commission. Councilmember Cook offered an amendment to add the shoreline regulations criterion and clarify that properties originally intended for affordable workforce housing should be excluded. The committee also discussed potential conditions (e.g., structural assessments, no further shoreline armoring, hazard mitigation plans) to be recommended to the Planning Commission; these were deferred for further legal review.

Key Outcomes

• Vote on main motion (criteria for Resolution 26-129): The committee voted 5-4 to adopt the following criteria: structures must be majority impacted by the 3.2-foot SLREXA, subject to shoreline regulations adopted by the Maui Planning Commission, or in a special flood hazard area; and the property must not have been originally intended for affordable workforce housing. Voting Aye: Cook, Sugimura, Batangan, U‘u-Hodgins, Chair Lee. Voting No: Johnson, Paltin, Rawlins-Fernandez, Sinenci.
• Pending criteria: Councilmember Rawlins-Fernandez proposed an additional criterion based on the percentage of owner-occupied units in 2008 (not less than 25%). She will refine the language with staff before the next meeting.
• Next steps: The meeting was recessed to September 9, 2026, at 10:00 a.m. via the same virtual and in-person connections, to continue discussion on Resolution 26-129 and address Resolution 26-130.
• No action taken on Resolution 26-130 at this session.