Total property tax collections for the year are estimated at $215.9 million, an almost 8 percent increase over the $200 million tax levy for 2007.

Thanks to a rate cut, the county expects to collect only $19.6 million in taxes from homeowners – residents who qualify as owner-occupants of their homes, whether single-family residences or condominiums. That's down 14 percent from $22.9 million last year.

The tax break will be offset by an expected assessment-driven increase in almost every other category, with the hotel classification seeing the biggest hike. Hotels and resorts are expected to pay nearly $80.3 million in property taxes this year, up 14 percent from $70.2 million last year.

The tax breakdown highlights a historic trend in county tax policy in which hotels and resorts carry a larger share of the tax burden, while homeowners are given a break.

The hotel/resort category will be the county's largest taxpayer by far this year, contributing 37 percent of all property tax revenues. Improved residential landowners – those who are not owner-occupants – will take a distant second place, with 16 percent of the tax load.

In contrast, homeowners are expected to pay around 9 percent of the county's property taxes, even though they are equal to hotels in their total assessed property value – the amount on which taxes are levied.

"One way of looking at it is that, for the same assessment, the hotel or resort pays four times as much," said Bruce Erfer, a member of the Real Property Tax Review Board, who has previously advocated for reforms to the tax appeals process.

That disparity has gradually widened over the past several years as the council has cut tax rates and provided exemptions for homeowners to provide relief for skyrocketing assessments, while the rate for hotels and resorts has largely held steady, Erfer noted.

Erfer said it was important for county policymakers to be aware of how revenues break down.

"It definitely should be a conscious decision," he said.

Maui County Council Chairman Riki Hokama said the division of the tax burden is very much a conscious decision and has "historic roots" going back many decades.

The county has always tried to minimize tax impacts on homeowners, he said. When County Councils of the 1960s began to focus on developing tourism, they intended it to serve as an economic engine that would pull a major portion of the county's tax load.

"They made a philosophical decision that the impact of land development should not be a burden on residents and homeowners," Hokama said.

The current tax rate structure reflects a recognition that increasing tax assessments are largely the result of resort-driven real estate development, and a decision to offset that impact by reducing rates for homeowners and keeping them high for hotels.

A downside to the current tax policy is that it makes the county dependent on the visitor industry for a vast portion of its property tax revenues, Hokama acknowledged.

That's a problem he'd like to see addressed through economic diversification, rather than a restructuring of the tax system.

Nascent industries like high-tech are currently in the "nurturing phase," with comparatively low tax rates. That should change as the industry strengthens, he said.

"In the future I'd like to see high technology contributing more to real property taxes," he said.

Hotel and resort properties will cover most of this year's increased tax revenues, paying $10.1 million more in property taxes this year over last year, or more than 63 percent of the county's increase in collection.

Other landowners will also see bigger tax bills, including time shares, expected to pay $14.1 million in property taxes, an increase of 15 percent over last year. Commercial properties are expected to pay $11.9 million, an 11 percent increase, while industrial properties will pay $9.1 million, a 15 percent increase, and agricultural lands are expected to pay $17.6 million, up 10 percent over last year.

Outside of the owner-occupant category, most residential properties are also expected to pay more this year. Improved residential will pay around $34.3 million in tax, up 7 percent over last year, while apartment properties are budgeted to pay $24.1 million, a 4 percent hike.

Unimproved residential is the only other category expected to see reduced tax revenues, paying $2.9 million, an 11 percent reduction from last year. That is largely due to a reduction in inventory rather than any breaks on tax rates.

Hotel managers on Maui said they recognize their properties are carrying a lion's share of the county's property tax load, but they accept the policy.

"I think it's just the cost of paradise, from a business perspective," said Matthew Hart, general manager of the Grand Wailea Resort.

He said utility costs are a bigger concern, with electricity expenses up 50 percent in the past five years, and water "not far behind," while employee costs, especially health care, have also skyrocketed.

Hart said the disparity between taxes on resorts and on homeowners was due to Maui's high cost of living, especially housing, and the county's desire to lighten the load on residents.

Kaanapali Beach Hotel General Manager Mike White agreed it was "appropriate" for hotels and other commercial properties to take on a bigger share of the tax burden than residents. But he said he'd like to see his industry's contributions better recognized.

"I don't believe the hotels and resorts get enough credit for the degree to which we support county services," he said.

In addition to property taxes, hotels also contribute a significant source of revenues in the form of transient accommodations taxes, which are collected by the state and distributed to the counties. That's expected to provide an additional $22 million in revenues to Maui County this year.

But Hart said that if the county is going to depend so heavily on tourism for revenues, it also needs to maintain a "welcoming" attitude toward visitors.

"It becomes a challenge if we are both overly dependent, and at the same time are allowing resident sentiment to turn south on the industry," he said.

Council Member Michelle Anderson said she wanted to see hotels paying their "fair share." She said the county used the industry's taxes to pay for infrastructure improvements that serve resorts, and noted that the economic boom wrought by tourism has led to negative impacts, such as tightening the labor market and making it harder and more expensive for the county to finish projects and provide services.

"I just feel those who can most afford it, who are using our resources for profit, should pay for the increasing cost of county services," she said.

Lucienne DeNaie, acting president of Maui Tomorrow, said it was appropriate for hotels to carry the tax burden, because Maui was "sold" on the idea of a resort economy as a source of revenues. The county gave up its prime shoreline lands to resorts in exchange for an industry that promised to generate jobs and provide a strong tax base, she said.

"That's the model – sell off the prettiest daughters and the rest of the kids can eat," she said.

It would be unfair for the industry not to provide those revenues now, she said.

But DeNaie added that too much dependence on the visitor industry was "not prudent," noting that Maui relied on tourism for a larger share of its revenues than any other county.

"It's the eggs in one basket," she said. "I don't think they're paying an unfair share, but I think we are overly reliant on this one sector of our economy to be our everything for us."