How many tourists can you possibly concentrate around Hapuna beach for example? Puako? Kawaihae? What is the carrying capacity? How many golf courses, pools, hot tubs, AC systems, individual inside and outside kitchens and bathrooms can this fragile ecosystem support? I wish there was a much more comprehensive review of the tourism industry and careful planning for the future. This is not sustainable.

Vacation Rentals on Agricultural land

Looking at the map, do you think it makes sense to have no vacation rentals in agricultural zoning (green), which represents 45.79% of this island?

Who would benefit? Who would lose? Only 2.18% of the island is zoned urban. Everybody else currently has a Nonconforming Use Certificate (NUC) or would need to get one. The county can and should have vacation rentals on agricultural land.

Big Island - State Land Use: Agricultural (green): 45.79% Conservation (blue): 51.97% Rural: 0.06% Urban (red): 2.18%

Bill 47 NOT a "Simple Registration"

At a County Planning Committee hearing, Oct 2nd, 2024, Heather Kimball introducing a new amendment to TAR Bill 121 says: “This amendment puts forth the most restrictive actions we could legally take…”  Now we are presented with Bill 47 and told it’s just a “Simple Registration”.

Issues with the bill, for example:

1.   Registration under Bill 47 is like signing an incomplete contract that has blank clauses to be filled in later. The county intends to change zoning and use restrictions and regulations regarding vacation rentals later.

Councilmember Heather Kimball says "We will have to do a cleanup of chapter 25” and “I'm not going to make any commitments about what we're going to do ..." while presenting the timeline (at about 26 min in zoom briefing).

2.   Bill 47 removes the transferability of existing STVRs with Nonconforming Use Certificates (NUC) at the sale of the property. This is a regulatory taking without compensation of existing legal STVRs in agricultural zoning. That is not a good sign for the future of vacation rentals in agricultural zoning.

3.   Unusually large fines $10K + twice the highest daily rate for a wide variety of potential reasons “basis”.  Immediate cancellation and “cease and desist.”   Automatic liens if you can’t pay and the threat of non-judicial foreclosure.

A “Simple Registration” of a vacation rental should not lead to punishment like this.

What is the intent? What is in here that supports vacation rentals?

We are not in this bill. There is nothing in this that represents us.

I will not be registering. I do not agree to being “deemed registered”. I already have a registration and permit.

What if the County decides to go after our legal nonconforming use certificate, which represents our way to make a living on this island, and our house and family in this way?  This is too much to lose for too many families.

Should we trust the county?

There are very strong protections for property rights in the Hawaii and US constitutions. Furthermore, Hawaii County has extensive use of nonconforming uses and subdivisions. People rely on these foundational assurances. Hawaii County needs to tread very carefully because they could potentially open up a huge legal can of worms based on historical layers of fraud, mislabeling and mishandling of so-called "Ag" land on this island. The county's actions created every single piece of this mess and they do not have clean hands.

With both SB2919 of 2024 and the Rosehill Supreme Court decision, the State dumped the legal due diligence squarely on the Counties.   SB2919 itself only changes the statute; it is up to the County to make sure their regulations do not violate property rights protections in Hawaii and Federal constitutions. Of course, the County could also just choose to support vacation rentals on agricultural land.

Outlook is dire

An ugly side of County government emerges: Corruption, greed and collusion with the corporate hotel industry. This is no longer the county government we used to have, which used to let people live and make a living. This is a direct threat to the little bit of economy we have in the more remote rural areas of the island.

If the County goes to the level of fining people who do not have the money to pay the fines, with liens and the threat of taking their house, at the same time stopping their income flow, if people are not able to buy the basics such as food and don't know how to keep their house, they will go nuts on you. What do you think will happen? How do you think people will react? Tourism is already way down and the country is falling into a deep recession.

Tourism is our Main Economy

Small scale transient accommodations like family-owned vacation rentals and bed and breakfast are much more appropriate for the Big Island's rural character. Several of the Community Development Plans explicitly mention this. They offer economic input for otherwise underserved and lower-income areas. Many communities on the island don't want any resort development in their areas. If the County is serious about supporting small scale farming on this island for food sustainability, vacation rentals are a great way to make small farms financially viable.

We often hear "We want vacation rentals only in resort zones" and "We want the champagne tourist" they are all slogans that lead to one thing: a monopoly for corporate hotels and resorts. Somebody needs to work for achieving a balance and reining in the monopoly of the resort industry.

Under the guise of “Destination Management" the hotel industry now seems to want to control every beach, reef and scenic point on the island. With these bills and various related state bills they are pushing local residents out of their vacation rentals all across the island, while securing and expanding a monopoly for the resorts towards owning 100% of the tourist accommodation market.

Penny Lee, May 19, 2025

Bill 47: Text, Status

2024: State Supreme Court: No TVRs on Ag Land