Government says a great deal about how Maui is doing. This page sets specific statements beside the public record, with a source for every line, and marks where they match, where they do not, and where the answer is still open.
In March 2024, Chief of Staff Leo Caires reported suspected fraud in Maui County government. He was fired that December. He is suing for retaliation, and the county denies it. In February 2026, a fraud risk assessment for the County Auditor found the county’s controls “not adequate to mitigate likely fraud risks.” The county disagreed with some findings and accepted all five recommendations. In July 2026, the County Council chair asked police to investigate. In October, the chief of that police department was placed on paid leave. He is not accused of wrongdoing. He says the leave is tied to that investigation, and his attorney is threatening to sue. Every line below is attributed. None of it has been decided by a court.
“I believe this is a direct result of criminal investigations involving the mayor and his office.”Civil Beat →
“A felonious crime, and the mayor is the suspect.”Maui Now →
It cannot say more about “the criminal investigation involving Mayor Richard Bissen,” as the matter “remains under investigation.”
Star-Advertiser →“No one has notified me or questioned me or arrested me.”Civil Beat →
“The investigation he referred to began in my department. Mayor Bissen was not its target.”Hawaii News Now →
The chief “told the public something that is simply not true.”
Hawaii News Now →The mayor orders an internal audit of grants under the Office of Economic Development.
The Board of Ethics finds that the office's director, Luana Mahi, oversaw grants to nonprofits tied to her family in a way that “amounted to a conflict of interest,” and tells her to step away from them. Civil Beat reports those nonprofits received more than $1 million in county grants since her appointment in 2023.
The director is placed on paid leave. The prosecuting attorney's office learns of the allegations through the Board of Ethics.
The Department of Finance completes its own investigation and, on November 8, asks the prosecuting attorney for guidance.
The county says that “upon learning of allegations involving County staff, Mayor Bissen directed the Department of Finance to investigate,” and that the mayor then referred the matter to the prosecuting attorney.
The mayor's chief of staff, Leo Caires, receives a termination letter. He had been reassigned to energy commissioner, with a pay cut, around October.
The director is fired on January 6; her case is referred to the state Attorney General. The same month, the prosecuting attorney opens a criminal investigation into possible misuse of county grant funds issued by the Office of Economic Development.
Caires's lawyer sends the county a settlement demand. The mayor later says the county “firmly rejected” an “excessive monetary demand.” The Council is not told.
The Council approves $350,000 to hire the law firm Marr Jones & Wang to represent the county against Caires's allegations.
A fraud risk assessment done for the County Auditor finds the county's controls “not adequate to mitigate likely fraud risks” and “no countywide process for reporting, investigating, and responding to fraud”: nine separate county entities take fraud reports, each with its own standards. The county disagrees with some findings and agrees with all five recommendations.
The prosecuting attorney asks the state Attorney General's public-corruption unit, the Special Investigation and Prosecution Division, to take over prosecutorial decisions in the case.
Caires sues the county under the Whistleblowers' Protection Act. He alleges that in March 2024 he found a $45,532.32 invoice, dated August 16, 2023, to a company he could not verify; that as he looked into it the mayor “ordered him to stop”; and that his demotion and firing were retaliation.
The county asks the court to dismiss the suit with prejudice. It denies that the mayor ordered Caires to stop and says he was reassigned “due to his performance.” The mayor calls the complaint “built on false allegations and a distorted account of the facts” and says “there was no whistle to blow.”
Council members learn from a news report that the April 2025 settlement demand existed. Council Member Kauanoe Batangan: “We were never notified about anything.” A Council committee votes 6-0 for a resolution requiring that settlement offers go to the Council. The county says the demand came before the lawsuit, so it was not an official offer.
The fired director sues the mayor, the Board of Ethics and a Finance Department employee for defamation. The mayor calls her claims “contradictory, inaccurate, and without merit.”
Council Chair Alice Lee asks the police department in writing to open a criminal investigation into the allegations. Police reply that they have none, then learn the Attorney General's office is already investigating.
The Police Commission votes 6-0 to place Chief Pelletier on paid leave pending an independent review of his oversight of the Criminal Intelligence Unit, whose commander faces federal bribery charges. The commission says it “has made no finding of misconduct.” Acting Chief Wade Maeda says the chief has not been accused of a crime or of violating administrative rules.
At a press conference with his attorney, the chief says his leave is “a direct result of criminal investigations involving the mayor and his office,” and that a second case involves “a felonious crime, and the mayor is the suspect.” Council Chair Lee: “We're talking about criminal allegations of embezzlement,” and “no one's keeping us apprised of it.” The Attorney General's office “will not make statements on the existence or status of investigations.”
The mayor: “No one has notified me or questioned me or arrested me.” He calls the chief's claims politically motivated and timed to the election. A county spokesperson says they “are completely false.”
The chief's attorney, Eric Seitz, writes to the Police Commission chair demanding that the chief be reinstated immediately. If not, “we will initiate appropriate litigation,” including claims of “deliberate and malicious defamation.”
Hawaii News Now reports, from a police department email it obtained, that the Attorney General's public-corruption unit is leading the investigation into county staffers.
The county's attorneys reply that the commission chair “does not have the authority to reinstate Mr. Pelletier on his own,” and that the request “would need to be placed on a Police Commission agenda and considered by the entire commission.” The county says the mayor had no role in the leave.
Prosecuting Attorney Andrew Martin: “The investigation he referred to began in my department. Mayor Bissen was not its target.” The chief, he says, “told the public something that is simply not true.” The chief maintains that a separate police case involves the mayor, and gives no details.
The police department, in a written statement from Assistant Chief Joy Medeiros: “At this time, the Maui Police Department is unable to provide any additional information regarding the criminal investigation involving Mayor Richard Bissen, as the matter remains under investigation.” Police officials would not say what the mayor may have been accused of, or what kind of investigation was opened.
A criminal investigation into county grant money is confirmed by the county's own prosecuting attorney, who says the mayor was not its target. The chief says a second case involves the mayor and has given no details. The same day the prosecutor spoke, the police department referred in writing to “the criminal investigation involving Mayor Richard Bissen,” and said it could not say more because the matter “remains under investigation.” The chief remains on paid leave; his attorney has threatened to sue, and no suit had been reported as of October 21. The Council says it is not being kept informed. Two civil suits are pending; the Caires trial is set for April 2028. No court has ruled on any of this.
In May the county's recovery dashboard counted 195 rebuilt homes. By August the county said nearly 600. Most of the jump came from a change in method, made after a news organization asked questions, that added apartment and condominium units, including a 200-unit complex that broke ground a year before the fire. Both counts are the county's own. Here is the claim, and what sits behind it.
195 homes rebuilt: 191 in Lahaina and four in Kula.
Maui Now →“Nearly 600 homes have been rebuilt and occupied.”Maui Now →
“2,248 of the 2,746 housing units lost (81.9%) are now actively on a path to rebuild.”Hawaii News Now →
“There's 577 homes rebuilt.”PBS Hawaiʻi, at 38:51 →
“Nearly 600 homes have been rebuilt and occupied.”
“There's 577 homes rebuilt.”
In May the same dashboard counted 195 rebuilt homes. On July 31, eight days before the anniversary and “in response to questions from AsAmNews,” the county changed its method and began counting apartment and condominium units as rebuilt homes. That added 313. Of those 313, 200 are one complex, Kaiāulu o Kūkuʻia, which broke ground on July 19, 2022, a year before the fire, and which county officials call a “new build.” A week after the fire, Hawaii Business reported it “suffered moderate damage from wind but was not affected by the fire.” Set those 200 units aside and 414 of the 2,746 homes lost have been replaced, about one in seven.
“2,248 of the 2,746 housing units lost (81.9%) are now actively on a path to rebuild.”
True by the county's definition, which is a broad one. The 2,248 adds three things from the same report: about 600 homes completed, about 400 under construction, and about 1,264 with a permit issued or an application still in review. On the October 2 dashboard, 526 of the homes counted were applications still being processed, not yet approved. So “on a path to rebuild” runs from a finished house to a form in a queue, and finished homes are about a quarter of the figure.
homes completed, by the county's count
22% of the 2,746 units lost
without the 200 units begun before the fire
15% of the 2,746 units lost
Maui County recovery dashboard, updated October 2, 2026. The split of the 313 multifamily units is from AsAmNews. The arithmetic is ours.
“When I hear claims about the number of residential and commercial permits issued, I have to ask: Where is the rebuilding? … For many of us, Lahaina has not been rebuilt. It is still waiting.”
“I don’t expect government to rebuild everything overnight. … But I do expect honesty. I expect transparency. I expect accountability.”
By the county's count, 614 homes are completed. Without the 200 units begun before the fire, 414. The county has not published a count that separates replacement from new construction. Our Maui's other pages use the county's count, and say so.
On July 1, 2026, the county announced that five commercial permits had been issued for Lahaina town and that one building was under construction. A month later a reporter checked the five addresses. The approvals were historic-district and shoreline sign-offs, the steps that come before a building permit, and none of the five had a building permit. In September the mayor said 14 of the 36 buildable Front Street lots had permits “at some stage.” The county’s own report puts those 14 at six planning permits, five in plan review and three in early consultation. The first building permit to rebuild a business on Front Street was issued on September 22, 2026, three years and six weeks after the fire. Three more are pending: one is marked “Waiting for Payment” in the county’s permit system, and two are still in review.
“Overall, five commercial permits have been issued for Lahaina town (one is under construction).”County of Maui →
“Of the 36 remaining (mauka) properties, 14, over a third, are actively moving through planning and permitting.”Maui Now →
“Six have received planning permits (some also with building permits in review), five are in plan review and three are in preapplication consultation.”Maui Now →
“Of those 36, 14 have permits at some stage. Some of them have already received their historical district permit, which means they can rebuild in this historic district.”PBS Hawaiʻi, at 39:34 →
“Overall, five commercial permits have been issued for Lahaina town (one is under construction).”
Maui Now checked the five addresses a month later: 612, 632, 714, 724 and 764 Front Street. At the July 1 meeting and a July 2 press conference a county deputy managing director had listed them as having “received a permit”; what they had received was historic-district approval, with shoreline and flood sign-offs where needed. Those come before a building permit, not instead of one. The manager of 612 Front Street said he was getting calls after a county official said the property already had a building permit: “This is not the case yet.” The paper’s finding: “Not one recovery building permit has been issued for a commercial property destroyed on Front Street.” We checked the county’s permit system on September 17: no rebuild building permit at any of the five, and three applications in review, the oldest filed May 30, 2025.
“Of the 36 remaining (mauka) properties, 14, over a third, are actively moving through planning and permitting.”
“Of those 36, 14 have permits at some stage.”
The county’s own report breaks the 14 down: six with a planning permit, five in plan review, three in pre-application consultation. A planning permit is the historic-district approval; it does not allow construction. A building permit does. When the mayor spoke on September 3, no building permit had been issued to rebuild a destroyed business anywhere on Front Street. We checked every permit of every type on the street on September 20. The first came on September 22, 2026, for 612 Front Street, the former six-tenant retail building: permits B2025-02062 and B2025-02063, applied for December 23, 2025. Three years and six weeks after the fire. At the end of September, 714, 744 and 764 Front Street were still in review.
One building permit to rebuild a Front Street business, issued September 22, 2026, for 612 Front Street. The application for 714 Front Street, filed May 30, 2025, is marked “Waiting for Payment” in the county’s permit system; 744 and 764 Front Street are still in review.
Everything above comes from public records and reporting you can open. Start here.
The reporting this page relies on: Honolulu Civil BeatMaui Now and the Hawaiʻi Journalism InitiativeHawaii News NowAsAmNews
Found something that belongs here, or something we got wrong?
Send it to us, with a source