Hawaii’s high housing costs are major hurdles for the state’s public school and charter school teachers, and hamper the Department of Education (DOE) in recruiting new teachers. The state House is headed at least partly down the right track with two bills that have survived crossover to the Senate:

>> House Bill 2514, which would supply vouchers to aid with housing costs for some, though it’s arguably too restrictive; and

>> HB 1631, to require collaboration between the School Facilities Authority (SFA) and DOE, and progress reports on constructing teacher housing. Though well-intended, this bill is entangled with the uncertain fate of the SFA.

HB 2514 would provide housing vouchers of up to $500 monthly to eligible teachers, to be used for rent, mortgage payments or a down payment on a primary residence. Eligibility would be restricted to qualified, full-time DOE teachers who are employed at a “hard-to-fill” school, whether a public school or public charter, commit to teach at such a school for a minimum of five consecutive years and do not own or rent other residential property in addition to a primary residence.

Hawaii’s schools suffer from “chronic teacher turnover” related to high costs, the bill states in its preamble, forcing an over-reliance on emergency hires and substitute teachers. Meanwhile, only 50% to 60% of teachers in Hawaii have worked at their current school for five or more years.

The DOE submitted testimony that teachers in all work locations could benefit from vouchers, and that teachers in “easy-to-fill” schools often face the highest costs of housing, or must suffer long commutes — and this is persuasive. However, the state itself has tight limits on funding available, particularly this year when Maui fire costs are multiplying, and “hard-to-fill” schools often serve students with the highest needs, so the bill’s cost-saving restrictions can be justified at this time.

Total funding for the program is left blank in HB 2514. A top limit on the salary that can be earned by an eligible teacher is also blank, and given cost concerns, appropriate limits here, too, are justified.

Meanwhile, HB 1631 requires the SFA to collaborate with the DOE “to prioritize” building workforce housing for teachers and DOE staff, and requires the SFA to include plans for workforce housing in its annual report to the Legislature. The DOE would be required to collaborate with state and county agencies in arranging for the transfer of land for workforce housing, and to report to the Legislature on these properties. With urgent need for teacher housing, a law requiring collaborative effort and reports on progress should be enacted.

However, HB 1631 may be moot or require reworking, given the crossover of Senate Bill 3328, which seeks to dissolve SFA and fold its duties into a new, DOE-administered Office of Facilities and Real Estate Development. Should the fledgling SFA be dissolved, mandatory reporting should be required of the Facilities Office, and reports on land acquisition should be mandatory from the DOE.

Teachers’ struggles to afford housing, even at mid-career, come against the backdrop of a severe shortage of “affordable” housing for those earning Hawaii’s median income or less, calculated at about 50,000 units. Honolulu’s current median income is $91,700 for a single person, while, according to the state DOE, teachers’ salaries in 2024-2025 range from an entry-level of $51,835 to $76,058 for those with a college degree, and a high of $82,143 for those with a master’s degree.

Clearly, financial supports for Hawaii’s valued instructors — both vouchers and affordable housing — are necessary if the state hopes to improve teacher recruitment and retention. In return, Hawaii students will benefit from access to teachers who remain in one location, offering better access to experienced, reliable educators.