More on vacation rentals...

[randomq]

I know of many in Puna making land payments on raw land and living/homesteading in tents or shacks. Some embrace that lifestyle, others have chosen it because it's what they can afford, and significantly cheaper than rent. It's an option available to working folks on Hilo side, but not so much Kona side. In that and many other ways we are different housing markets.

[Carey]

Kona side, if you have spent time living there, they actually do have many people living on land with substandard housing, they have people renting out & people living in "coffee shacks", there are lower priced lands (esp Kau & there are some lands that have been in families for generations, back when Kona land was less "desirable" than Hilo side lands...)

So it is not just what those moving in now & living in the now, to look at the county as if it is just what the market is today would not give you anywhere near the full picture of housing issues in this county (BTW, today is far different than even a few months ago... Puna land values have escalated...)

[PaulW]

"Moi, against? Say what?"
Yes, I can go back and dig up all your comments against VRs, in all of your sockpuppet accounts, but you would then fall silent, as you always do.
If you have an opinion, even if it's just based on jealousy, then stand by it.

"There are a specific number of housing units, every one in short term is one less in long term"
Speaking of simplistic! Do you not realize how many extra houses have been built specifically for the VR boom?
They're not building them for long-term rentals, I can assure you. The building of more houses seems like a
good idea if you want to solve a housing problem.

I bet if I researched your good friend Mary I could find out pretty soon her real reason for being against VRs.
I find it amazing that someone who works at the "Hawaii County Economic Opportunity Council" would be so keen to destroy an important part of the local economy.

This is not about "establishing guidelines". If the current plan is implemented then eventually there will be ZERO vacation rentals in Puna.

Now I'll put it in terms that even you can understand. My neighbor runs a very successful vacation rental and he keeps his gardener and cleaner (both born here) very busy and they earn a lot of money and they all pay a lot of tax. If eventually there are no vacation rentals then they will earn no money and pay no taxes. As a result, YOU will have to pay more tax. Get it now?

[MarkD]

Civil Beat posts another article: https://www.civilbeat.org/2019/04/vacati...ew-limits/

Excerpt: The other measure, Bill 89...makes it easier for homeowners to operate “bed and breakfasts” in homes where they live, but cracks down on so-called transient vacation units, or TVUs, which are whole homes rented out by people who don’t live in the property.

This sounds reasonable, allowing in-home rentals but suppressing what has largely turned into the business of rich people--and sometimes, corporations--buying additional homes for the sole purpose of setting up mini-hotels.

[leilanidude]

MarkD - I disagree.
I know a number of people who owned vacation rentals (now destroyed) that are just common folks who saved enough to buy that vacation rental. In many cases, they rented it out for 4/6/8/10 months of the year while they were still working towards retirement on the mainland. It certainly is not the business of rich people.

[HereOnThePrimalEdge]

It certainly is not the business of rich people

Agreed.
With good credit, friendly banking terms and a low down payment you don't have to be a Rockefeller to buy a home with a mortgage. The rentals pay for the expenses, and help the owner gain equity. It's an investment that requires constant attention.

We're not talking about Russian oligarchs parking their money in multi-million dollar New York or London high rises.

[kalakoa]

The rentals pay for the expenses, and help the owner gain equity.

Doesn't everyone see this is exactly why it's not permissible? Ordinary people cannot be allowed to gain wealth of any kind, it dilutes the power of King Kim and the Good Old Network.

[MarkD]

"It certainly is not the business of rich people."

We ought to agree, as is the case in many topics, that the answer is both. I also should have added out-of-state owners.

From a year-old T-H story:

"County Council (received a) ...presentation from computer analyst Stefan Buchta, who’s concerned about his Leleiwi neighborhood being overrun by the short-term rental business.

Buchta said Big Island residents are being squeezed out of neighborhoods by out-of-state investors who pay cash for properties and turn them into vacation rentals...Buchta said the original concept of “home-sharing,” where people rented out a room in their home, has dwindled to 11 percent of vacation rental revenue. Now, the market is dominated by whole-house rentals, many owned by commercial hosts who own more than one house or condo unit."

https://www.hawaiitribune-herald.com/201...hborhoods/

- - - -

When I was living in my tiny Waikiki condo, which I now rent to a Section 8 mental disability case (a small effort to help Hawaii's homeless problem), a guy in my building who owned 11 units and was running VRBOs bugged me for years to turn my unit over to his rental pool. He offered me more than I get from my Section 8.

The VRBO industry has drawn a fair number of sharks.

[kalakoa]

The VRBO industry has drawn a fair number of sharks.

So tax them accordingly.

[MarkD]

Much agree. Higher rates for

1) properties valued over $1.5 million;
2) Second, third, fourth (etc.) properties placed into VRBO status (with escalating rates);
3) Foreign investors

Ideally higher tax rates would also be placed on mainland investors but that might not be legal.