**Kalama Couple Faces Heavy Fines for Illegal Airbnb Rentals and Legal Challenges**
:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc():format(jpeg)/renovation-aloha-1-042126-a19ebdaf82e94ec6a5d76d698cafc667.jpg)
The married duo Kamohai and Tristyn Kalama, known for their appearances on HGTV’s “Renovation Aloha,” is currently facing significant legal and financial repercussions for operating short-term rental properties without the necessary permits in Honolulu. Reports indicate that the couple owes the city a staggering £40,000 in fines stemming from their dealings with two illegal rentals listed on Airbnb.
According to a spokesperson from the Honolulu Department of Planning and Permitting (DPP), the Kalamas’ infractions were uncovered during a thorough investigation that concluded in January. The DPP categorises short-term rentals as any accommodation provided for fewer than 30 days. To safeguard the availability of long-term housing for local residents, such rentals are strictly authorised only within designated resort zones or through special permits.
One of the properties under scrutiny is a rental in Kaneohe, which was advertised under Tristyn’s name. This particular listing, described as a “private waterfront escape” with four bedrooms and two bathrooms, was available for a minimum stay of three nights at a rate of £1,000 per night. The absence of a valid permit led to a fine of £10,000 for this property, which has since been adjusted to a mandatory 30-night minimum stay requirement.
In addition to the Kaneohe property, the couple co-owns another residence in Mililani, a three-bedroom, two-bathroom home that has incurred fines totaling £30,000. The DPP outlined that the first citation for this rental dated back to July 2025. Reports from local news outlets reveal that although the Mililani property was no longer listed on Airbnb, it remained available for rent at £6,000 per month on Zillow, only to be removed later.
The Kalamas have faced previous fines as well. In December, a property co-owned with Tristyn’s parents was penalised for violations related to building permits. The couple rectified this issue and paid a fine of £2,800. Additionally, their earlier attempts to begin renovations without city approval on eight properties while filming the first season of their show resulted in £20,000 in fines.
In the midst of these financial woes, the Kalamas are also grappling with a lawsuit initiated by the Attorney General’s Office of Hawaii. The lawsuit alleges that the couple displayed Native Hawaiian ancestral remains on both television and social media platforms without the necessary consent. The complaint states that videos and images posted to their Instagram account appeared to show human skeletal remains, constituting a violation of state law.
The legal action names not only Kamohai and Tristyn but also HGTV, Discovery Inc., and producer Nathan Fields as defendants. Following the uproar, an HGTV spokesperson addressed the issue, expressing their commitment to respecting the Native Hawaiian community and conveying remorse for any unintended offence caused by the content.
In an attempt to mitigate backlash, HGTV reportedly re-edited the controversial episode of “Renovation Aloha” to exclude the content in question. The Kalamas took to Instagram Live in late April to reassure viewers that their show had not been cancelled despite the swirling controversy. Tristyn asserted: “Our show is not cancelled. Not even close,” emphasising their ongoing commitment to the series.
The couple’s circumstances serve as a stark reminder of the regulatory challenges facing property owners in Hawaii and the legal responsibilities involved in operating rental businesses. The Kalamas’ case underscores the importance of complying with local laws, especially in areas undergoing rapid development and tourism growth.
As this situation continues to unfold, there are ongoing concerns regarding the potential impact on the couple’s career and their relationship with the local community. Meanwhile, public interest remains high regarding the couple’s future on television and the implications of their legal challenges.