top of page
.png)
2027 Legislative Risk Radar
HRHPA believes good housing policy should protect residents while recognizing that Hawaii depends heavily on individual and family-owned rental housing. Our goal is not simply to oppose new regulation. We want to help policymakers distinguish between rules designed for large institutional operators and the practical realities faced by someone providing one, two, or a handful of rental homes.
When new requirements are proposed, HRHPA will ask three questions:
1. Does this protect residents?
2. Is it workable and not create an unreasonable burden for small housing providers?
3. And will it help preserve, or unintentionally reduce, Hawaii’s long-term rental housing supply?
What is it?Rent stabilization laws limit how much a housing provider may increase rent during a specified period. Versions of these laws are already in effect in several states, and Hawaii lawmakers considered similar legislation during the 2026 session.
HRHPA’s PositionWe support policies that improve rental affordability, but believe they should focus on increasing housing supply and preserving existing rentals rather than imposing one-size-fits-all limits on privately provided housing. HRHPA is concerned that broad rent caps do not account for the realities facing small housing providers, including rapidly increasing insurance premiums, property taxes, association fees, maintenance costs, and major repairs.
What is it?Just-cause/Good-cause laws limit the reasons a housing provider may terminate or decline to renew a tenancy. Depending on the proposal, allowable reasons may include nonpayment, lease violations, owner occupancy, major renovation, or removing the property from the rental market.HRHPA’s PositionHRHPA supports fair notice and responsible termination practices, but believes small housing providers must retain reasonable flexibility over the use of their property. Increasing rental housing supply gives tenants the ultimate protection and stability.
What are they?Reusable tenant screening reports allow an applicant to obtain one screening report and provide it to multiple housing providers rather than paying for a new report with every application. Hawaii lawmakers have already considered legislation addressing their use.HRHPA’s PositionHRHPA is open to reusable screening reports when they comply with the Fair Credit Reporting Act. Housing providers must be able to verify that the information is current, complete, accurate, and obtained from a reliable source. Housing providers should retain the ability to establish lawful screening criteria and obtain additional information when reasonably necessary to evaluate an applicant.
What does this mean?Some jurisdictions are limiting when eviction records can be made public or used during tenant screening, particularly when a case was dismissed, resolved in the tenant’s favor, or occurred many years earlier.HRHPA’s PositionHRHPA supports protecting applicants from being unfairly judged solely because an eviction action was filed. At the same time, housing providers need access to accurate information when evaluating rental risk. Any legislation should clearly distinguish between an eviction filing, a dismissed case, a settlement, and a final judgment for possession or unpaid rent.
What does this mean?States are increasingly regulating charges beyond monthly rent, including application fees, administrative charges, payment-processing fees, renewal fees, and other mandatory costs associated with a tenancy.HRHPA’s PositionHRHPA supports transparency. Applicants and residents should understand required costs before entering into a rental agreement. However, legitimate expenses incurred by a housing provider should not automatically be prohibited. We favor clear disclosure requirements over an expanding patchwork of restrictions that can make compliance unnecessarily complicated for small providers.
What does this mean?Hawaii law already provides protections involving lawful sources of income. Recent proposals have focused on expanding enforcement mechanisms, penalties, and attorneys’ fees in discrimination cases.HRHPA’s PositionHRHPA supports compliance with fair housing and source-of-income laws and believes housing providers should receive clear education about their responsibilities. At the same time, policymakers should address the administrative challenges that can discourage participation in housing-assistance programs, including delays, inspections, paperwork, payment processing, and uncertainty about program requirements.
What are they?These proposals require housing providers to give residents standardized information explaining their legal rights, sometimes in multiple languages and at specific points during the tenancy.HRHPA’s PositionHRHPA supports making reliable landlord-tenant information easier for residents to understand. Unfortunately, when we attempt to create a "standard" legal rights notice form it includes only a fraction of the resident's legal rights. If notices are required, the State should create and maintain one standardized form, provide translations, allow electronic delivery, and give housing providers a straightforward way to demonstrate compliance. Alternatively, the DCCA publishes a Landlord Tenant Handbook, which is a more complete distillation of the housing provider and resident relationship. Small housing providers should not be expected to interpret or independently draft government-required legal notices.
What is it?Rental registration systems require housing providers to register rental properties with a government agency. Depending on how a program is designed, registration can remain a simple data and communication tool or expand into licensing, inspections, fees, certifications, and enforcement.HRHPA’s PositionHRHPA supports development of a simple, useful statewide rental registration system designed first to improve rental housing data, communication, education, and access to resources.HRHPA believes the State should retain regulatory authority while the housing-provider-facing platform could be administered through a qualified public-private partnership. HRHPA intends to advocate for a meaningful role in the development and management of the registration software, provider onboarding, education, technical assistance, and ongoing communication. Registration should not become a rental licensing or inspection program.
What does this mean?Tenant-screening companies increasingly use algorithms and automated decision-making tools to evaluate applicants. Policymakers around the country are examining whether these systems can produce inaccurate results or unintentionally create discriminatory outcomes.HRHPA’s PositionHRHPA supports transparency and responsible use of screening technology. Small housing providers should understand what information their screening vendors are using and should not blindly rely on automated recommendations. Regulation should focus primarily on transparency, accuracy, and accountability without creating unrealistic technical obligations for individual housing providers who rely on reputable third-party services.
What is it?Hawaii’s current Act 278 pilot requires participation in mediation in certain nonpayment cases when a resident makes a timely request. The pilot continues through February 2028, making the 2027 legislative session an important period for evaluating how the program is working.HRHPA’s PositionHRHPA supports mediation when it provides a realistic opportunity to resolve disputes, recover unpaid rent, preserve viable tenancies, and avoid unnecessary court proceedings. Whether the current program should be expanded or made permanent should be determined by actual results. HRHPA will advocate for careful review of outcomes, including time to resolution, amounts recovered, compliance with agreements, administrative burden, and the experience of both residents and housing providers.
bottom of page