Maui County committee weighs longer deed restrictions for workforce housing; names industry lobbyist as resource

The Maui County Housing and Land Use Committee met Feb. 5 to take public testimony and discuss three related bills that would extend the length of deed restrictions on residential workforce housing units in Maui County.

The committee heard opening remarks and questions about Bill 12, Bill 22 (2024) and Bill 74 (2023), which propose different approaches to lengthening the county's current deed-restriction periods that apply to homes developed under the residential workforce housing code. Committee members and dozens of residents and housing advocates urged longer restrictions; the committee did not vote on any of the bills but did approve one procedural action to name a resource person.

The bills under discussion would change Maui County Code protections for deed-restricted workforce housing. As the county currently administers them, deed restrictions in section 2.9606 run 10 years for below-moderate-income units, 8 years for moderate-income units, and 5 years for above-moderate units. Council member Paulton's Bill 12 would raise those periods to 20, 16 and 10 years, respectively. Bill 74 would add a provision that resets the deed-restriction clock if a unit is sold within the restricted period. Committee Vice Chair Hodgins's Bill 22 would raise the terms more modestly (to 12, 10 and 8 years) and would also remove a requirement for separate council approval for the county administration to exercise the county's first right of refusal on restricted units placed on the market.

Members of the public who testified strongly favored longer or permanent restrictions. "I support the idea of extending the deed restrictions to more years," resident Stacy Alapai said, arguing that a 10-year restriction is too short to preserve long-term affordability when many projects set only 20'to'5 percent of units as affordable. Mikey Burke, describing his neighborhood's experience, told the committee that longer restrictions should "convert that unit of housing from a financial instrument into a community asset," and urged deed terms of 30 to 99 years. Advocate Autumn Ness recommended perpetual (99-year) restrictions and cited examples from ski towns and other U.S. communities that limit resale appreciation to keep housing in the local workforce pool.

The deputy director of the Department of Housing, Somalu Mataafa, spoke to the committee about how the county's current resale formula works during a deed-restricted period. "You take an appraisal before the house is bought by the original purchaser. You do a second appraisal once the, once you decide to resell during the deed restricted period. You multiply the difference between those 2 values, by 25%, and you would add that to the original purchase price," Mataafa said, describing the calculation used under chapter 2.96. He also said the department had no formal position on the bills at the time but wanted to be part of the discussion.

Several council members described the issue as a balance between preserving affordability and ensuring projects remain financially viable to build. Council member Paulton and Vice Chair Hodgins both said their draft bills were intended as starting points for discussion. Committee members asked for more data on tradeoffs, financing impacts, and whether lenders will underwrite mortgages on deed-restricted homes; testimony included conflicting claims on that point and members asked staff to assemble lender guidance and examples from jurisdictions that use long-term or perpetual deed restrictions.

On a procedural matter, the committee voted to designate Andrew Pereira, director of public affairs for the Pacific Resource Partnership, as a resource person to the committee so members could consult him and the home-building community. The roll-call vote was 5 in favor, 4 opposed. The committee recorded the roll call as: Chair Lee (aye), Council member Sugimura (aye), Council member Paulton (no), Council member Johnson (no), Council member Rollins Fernandez (no), Council member Cook (aye), Council member Sennensi (no), Vice Chair Hodgins (yes). The motion passed 5-4.

Committee members discussed forming a temporary investigative group (TIG) or scheduling a series of longer meetings to gather targeted testimony from lenders, nonprofit housing developers, county and state housing staff, community land-trust experts, and construction industry representatives. Possible resources identified during the meeting included Kauai housing director Adam Roborsi (submitted written testimony), community land trust experts, lenders with experience on deed-restricted mortgages (Fannie Mae / Freddie Mac contacts), and speakers from jurisdictions such as Eagle County and Aspen that use long-term or perpetual deed restrictions.

Chair Tasha Kamah said the committee would post future meetings and panels and requested that members submit written questions or specific topics so staff can coordinate panels and resource availability. The committee closed public testimony and adjourned at 11:56 a.m.

Votes, formal decisions and technical follow-ups scheduled by the committee were limited to procedural items at this meeting; the committee did not vote on any of the three bills themselves and preserved those items for future hearings and staff follow-up.