SB153 revises Hawaii’s residential landlord-tenant code to give tenants more advance notice before rent increases and lease terminations. For rental agreements longer than 90 days, landlords would have to provide 60 days’ written notice before increasing rent for a renewal or ending the tenancy. The bill also changes termination rules by length of tenancy: tenancies of three years or more would require 90 days’ notice from either party, tenancies under three years would generally require 60 days’ notice for tenant termination and allow landlord termination subject to existing exceptions, and tenancies shorter than month-to-month would require 15 days’ notice instead of 10.
The bill also preserves and clarifies existing special notice rules for certain month-to-month tenancies, including 120 days’ notice when a landlord is ending a tenancy for demolition, condominium conversion, or conversion to transient vacation rental use. It keeps the current 45-day notice for month-to-month rent increases and the 8% cap on late fees, while reorganizing the statute to reflect the new notice periods and to void termination notices used to evade rent-notice obligations.
Impact
If enacted, SB153 would amend sections 521-21 and 521-71 of the Hawaii Revised Statutes, changing notice requirements for rent increases and tenancy termination across several categories of residential leases. The practical effect would be to lengthen the time tenants and landlords must give before ending many tenancies or changing rent, especially for longer-term leases and tenancies of three years or more. The bill would apply to rental agreements and renewals entered into on or after July 1, 2025, and would affect landlords, tenants, and property managers statewide.
Sentiment
The bill’s stated purpose and structure reflect a pro-tenant policy approach focused on housing stability, displacement prevention, and giving renters more time to secure alternative housing in a tight rental market. Based on the bill text, the overall sentiment is supportive of tenant protections and more predictable notice periods. No committee transcripts or recorded votes were provided, so there is no additional evidence of opposition or amendments from the legislative record included here.
Contention
The main policy tension in SB153 is between tenant housing security and landlord flexibility. Supporters of the bill’s approach would likely emphasize the hardship caused by short-notice lease nonrenewals, while landlords may view the longer notice periods—especially the 90-day rule for tenancies of three years or more and the 60-day notice tied to renewals—as reducing their ability to manage property and adjust rents quickly. Another possible point of contention is the bill’s treatment of shorter tenancies and the expanded notice requirement for less-than-month-to-month arrangements, which could be seen as increasing administrative burdens and limiting short-term leasing options.