Pila, you scare me! I was wondering the exact same thing driving home around 5:45 EST. Trying to wait till midd 2008 for a return, but you never know what life throws you.

iamq:

No updates -- and that deadline for shutting down the illegal vacation rentals, is looming.

Thanks auntie. It appears that the agents that handle those homes still have them on the rental list. It will be interesting to see what happens after June 30.

sounds like some lawyers will be making some money for awhile.

The owner of the place that I'm wanting to stay at on Maui just told me there will be a hearing on Dec 19 or 20 and they should know then whether the judge will allow an injuction to let them continue to operate.

Dan
Is that the federal lawsuit hearing on Maui ?
There was supposed to have been a Maui County Council meeting last Tuesday but have seen nothing reported on it, maybe it got postponed after the bad weather there ?

It is quite ironic that many of the people whining that they need special consideration to continue to operate their illegal TVRs are also the same ones who are quite vocal about how wrong it was for Lingle to change the law to allow the Super Ferry to resume service, contrary to existing law.

I've read the background of this story (and law), and still don't get it. How exactly is the state impacted differently, if a given home is occupied by its owners or by tenants?

I own rental property (not in Hawaii), and know lots of other rental property owners, and the fact is, impact on housing and land from renters is *much* less than from owners.

I'm not saying people should disregard the law, I'm just trying to understand the reasoning behind the law. Just from the outside, it seems like one group of people are trying to artificially reduce the rental housing market for everyone else.

fdecarlo, my family has rental properties and their is a huge difference in transient rentals and permanent residents.

The transient rentals make a much larger impact on the local environment including the house and furnishings.

Whereas the owner may be a family of four, rentals more typically are six or more people. If every house in the neighborhood has 6+ people in it that are vacationing, that is a lot more impact than mom and dad going off to work every day and the kids going off to school.

Does that make sense?

I live in a house that is surrounded by vacation beach rentals and the amount of trash these people generate over a week is at least five times what my husband and I generate.

Key West went through a similar scenario a couple of years ago with the 28 day minimum rental rule unless you had a special permit.

Truman Annex residents got around that by saying they were charging for a month but were actually renting by the week.

I think Key West abolished the 28 day minimum.

GoTravel, my experience has been the opposite. It's *much* easier to enforce occupancy limits on renters than owners. And if the state had a concern about population densities, they should have denied the building permits in the first place -- not try and play God with other people's property rights.

fdecarlo, if you don't mind me asking, are your rentals annual or transient vacation?

Annual rentals are much easier to police than weekly rentals.

Our rental agency has very strict rules on house parties but they happen all the time anyway.

An annual rental is an entirely different animal than a vacation rental.

They're on initial six-month leases, which convert to month-to-month. So I'll have to defer to your experience with vacation rentals.

But I have to say, I honestly don't believe renters have a greater impact on homes or properties than owners. I'm reminded of this fact every time I visit e.g. Puna District on the BI. It's NOT vacation renters who're trashing Hawaii.

When this whole flap started I was hearing what sounded like goos arguments from both sides, so I did some research on my own, talked to my neighbors and colleagues, read up on the history. The more I learn, the more I have made up my mind where I stand on this issue.

When tourism was first brought to Maui in earnest, when the resort areas were laid out and zoning changes and community plans were made back in the 1970s and 80s, the county promised the residents at that time that tourism would not sprawl into the residential areas outside of the resort areas. Now, 20 some odd years later it is in every neighborhood, and having some negative effects. It is also eating up agricultural land. I have friends who have rentals, owned by absentee owners on all sides of their house. I know others who have seen almost their entire block bought up, piece by piece for short term rentals. They complain when they bought their house it was a neighborhood. Now it is an endless stream of vacationers, changing each week.

I live in a condo that is strictly residential. Short term rentals are not allowed, so I have not had first-hand experience in the erosion of my neighborhood. But I have heard many stories from friends, even those wh live in a very residential area of Wailuku--hardly a tourist destination.

It is about saving the character of the neighborhood, about knowing the cars parked on your street at night, knowing the people roaming the area.

I have heard the Pro-TVR aguments and I don't buy it. Most barely hold water. I have seen numbers that show that most TVR visitors are budget travelers and do not spend anywhere near the amount of money as their counterparts who stay in hotels and condos, so there goes the argument that the loss of these rentals will collapse out economy.

Another one they offer is that they employ hundreds of people from the local workforce. Sure they do--in minimum wage, part-time positions that don't offer benefits, many under the table. Our unemployment is very low and most business owners I know are in dire need of a few more good employees, and they'll offer benefits.

But the one that really gets me is the argument that some of these people will loose their homes if they can't continue to rent them. There was a letter to the paper from one such man, who lives in Washington state and owns a house in Maui Meadows valued at somewhere near 1.7 million at last assessment. I hardly feel sorry for him, since he obviously bought this home with the intent of converting it to a vacation rental.

I personally know some others who refinanaced and took out a big chunk of money to build two "outbuildings" on their ag-zoned land and convert an existing building into two studios with the intent of renting them out short term. Yes, they will now loose their home since she quit her job to stay home play inn-keeper and they can't pay the new mortgage is twice the original. They knew they were not operating legally, they never attempted to apply for a permit. So is it fair that they now get an exemption to continue to operate their little country inn, even after flaunting several existing laws?

What about the unlicensed B&B in Maui Meadows that advertises on the Internet 4 luxury rooms and a deluxe cottage on a property, with a pool on a half acre lot? Oddly, the county tax records show the same property to be residential, paying the home-owner occupied exempt tax rate, with 2 bedrooms, one garage and no pool? I know some of their neighbors and they are not all pleased having a boutique hotel on their quiet residential street. I don't know if any of them have looked up the tax records, but they were brought to my attention more than a year ago by a friend who operates a licensed B&B about a mile away. She, BTW, pays a much higher property tax rate, as well as all the licensing fees and taxes and she is not pleased that others in the area might be allowed to continue to operate without paying the fees, carrying required insurances, paying higher property tax

I didn't read the article posted by auntiemarie but from the tone of the thread, it is the transient rentals that are the problem.

You would not believe what normally sane people do in or to rental houses. Or what they steal.

I don't know what the "REVIEW MY REPLY" and "EDIT" features are supposed to do, but it didn't work for me. Apprently my post posted while I was "editing" it, so please forgive the typos.

But, here is the rest of my reply, er, rant...

I own a small business here. I have the appropriate permits and pay the taxes. I operate under the laws of the state and the county. I don't necessarily like all of it, and sometimes it is "not fair" in my mind. But we live in a community, with other people, and we all need to obey the same laws. Why should you get an exception because you've been breaking the law for x many years and it might cause you a hardship to stop? Whenever I hear a TVR owner say "It's my property and my right to do with it as I please," my response is that it is not your right to impose on the rights of your neighbors. They bought homes in a residential area and it should be their right that the area remain residential.

fdecarlo, the issue enforcing an existing law that defines a B&B and requires a license to operate one. Applying for the permit can be costly, as you have to provide adequate parking and met other requirements to the physical property, as well as carry required insurance, and go through a local review period where neighbors can contest your plans for their neighborhood. And you have to pay the fees and you property tax rate goes up--no more homeowner exemption. I know some people who have gone through the process and operate licensed B&Bs. But most just convert a few rooms and build a website and -- voila! -- they in business, no zoning review, no increase in property tax, no fees, no parking...

TVRs are not allowed by law, unless you have a permit. There are only a handful of them that are legal outside of the resort zones, but that hasn't stopped investor from buying up single family homes and renting them out by the week, many with the owners on the mainland and skirting many of the regulations and taxes associated with rentals, short or long term. Run a VBRO ad, hire someone to come and clean, and you are in business!

There are still many rentals, BTW that are unaffected in resort zones, in Lahaina and Kihei, as literally thousands of condo units in condotel zoned complexes.

<"" Whenever I hear a TVR owner say "It's my property and my right to do with it as I please," my response is that it is not your right to impose on the rights of your neighbors. They bought homes in a residential area and it should be their right that the area remain residential."">

I live on a barrier island off the coast of South Carolina on the beach and I am completely surrounded by weekly vacation rentals. No motels, all condos but mostly beach houses.

Every week from about mid April through the middle of October each of these houses are packed with people.

Of the five permanent residents that used to live in my neighborhood, we are the last to leave. It has just gotten to be too much.

The straw that broke the camels back was when the two houses that went up on either side of me (we are about 1100 square feet) are 8500 hsf and 10,000 hsf and the one neighbor put their pool literally ten feet from my bedroom window.

The setback easment is five feet from the property line.

I am moving to a very tiny neighborhood with rental restrictions.

I'm giving up the beach because I can no longer take the tourists.

Last year we moved from the Bay Area of California to the Central Coast. On the train down here, we met a lady who lived in Cambria, who ranted for 45 minutes about the nasty tourists, how the influx of new residents is destroying the character of the coast, etc etc.

I asked her how long she's lived in Cambria.

"Three years."

Ok, so now that SHE has moved to Cambria, everyone ELSE is ruining her standard of living, she's lobbying city councils for development bans and denials of building permits.

In my experience everyone plays the same game: I belong here (wherever "here" might be) and you don't.

If the problem is that a few residents are following expensive and (in most regards) pointless TVR laws, while most residents aren't following these laws, the obvious solution IMO is to get rid of the laws and level the playing field.

Too funny! It is usually the newbies complaining the loudest.

Since my family has relied on tourism my entire life, I appreciate the tourists and the money they spend.

I'm just ready for a little peace.

Well said fdecarlo.


People do not realize that these short term rentals are often the only affordable vacation for many local families...renting a home on Kawela Bay/North Shore from an old kamai'aina family for a weekend and driving there in their cars that are packed with food, boogie boards, fishing poles and sand toys from home is the most affordable way to go. It is not a tourist issue but also a locals allowing locals to enjoy these beach vacations without having to fly somewhere, stay in a hotel and eat meals out.