A quarter of Honolulu’s 20 charter amendment questions before voters this year aim to address the housing crisis on the island.
According to a state Department of Business, Economic Development and Tourism report from 2024, Oʻahu could need up to 24,000 additional housing units through 2035 to meet the projected demand.
Housing experts said the amendments could boost efforts to build that housing.
“They alone will not end Oʻahu's chronic housing shortage, but what they do is they provide city government with more tools to housing production and preserve existing housing,” said Perry Arrasmith, the policy director for the nonprofit Housing Hawaiʻi’s Future. “The city wants a strong revolving fund that helps finance housing construction for residents. That's something that we should already have, especially with the housing shortage we have right now on Oʻahu.”
The biggest impacts the amendments could have would be on Honolulu's Affordable Housing Fund, which the city uses to buy land and build affordable housing units. It's currently funded by 0.5% of the city's annual property tax revenue, which amounts to about $8 million.
One question would ask voters to let the revolving fund allow state, federal and philanthropic contributions. Another proposes to clarify that AHF earnings would go back into the fund. Both could help add to the fund and keep it self-sufficient.
Currently the fund is focused on projects to build housing for households earning up to 60% of the area median income, but the proposals would expand how that money can be used.
“Housing supported by the fund may be located in mixed-use or mixed-income development projects including projects not limited to households with incomes at or below 60% of the median household income,” according to the proposed language.
Limiting AHF funding only to low-income housing isn't an effective strategy to help struggling residents, proponents say.
“Decades of research have shown that income-restrained housing, on its own, does not create the economic opportunity residents need,” said Kevin Auger, director of the Honolulu Department of Housing and Land Development, in a written testimony supporting the proposal. “To truly address the intertwined crises of housing availability and cost of living, the City must be able to support whole communities — where people across income levels can live, work, access services, and have opportunities to play and recreate.”
That means funding could assist in rail-focused housing developments, for example.
Expanding the fund's usage could also help those who don't qualify but are still impacted by the lack of affordable housing in the city, such as those who earn just over 60% AMI.
Another charter amendment question would require the housing department to create a 10-year functional housing plan for the city.
Approving the amendment would require the Honolulu director of housing and land management to prepare a 10-year functional plan for the city to improve its housing supply. It would also undergo a review and revision every five years.
Hawaiʻi Appleseed, in a written statement, said a housing plan would “require action on behalf of the city to meet said plan.”
The City Charter currently requires the administration to prepare long-term planning documents for parks, transportation and environmental services — but not for housing.
Other proponents said a plan holds the city accountable for improving housing by establishing deliverables and a pathway to create more housing. The plan would also persist beyond specific administrations.
Another question on the ballot asks to clarify the city's intention to address the housing crisis on Oʻahu. The City Charter doesn't have a statement acknowledging the island's housing shortage and its impact on outmigration.
The initial proposal would have asked voters if they would like to introduce a controversial “empty homes tax,” which proponents said would tax secondary homes and investment properties to support local housing efforts.
The fifth charter proposal is a housekeeping measure that would remove a public hearing requirement for real property transactions and activity. Arrasmith said they don’t lead to much public engagement.
