Many of the country’s most desirable communities are “scrambling to address skyrocketing housing prices, workforce displacement, and increasing homelessness.” Silicon Valley in California was recently dubbed an “affordability wasteland” when the median home price reached $800,000.2 Two islands in Hawaii are not far behind, with Kauai’s median home costing $785,000 and Maui’s $734,000 in 2006.3 Quickly rising housing prices make the lack of affordable housing a growing crisis. For example, the median price for a single family home in Honolulu rose 74% in the last three years; in comparison, wages grew just 9%.4 The problem is not isolated to affluent and resort areas. In fact, one out of every seven households in the United States pays more than half of its gross income for housing, while the Department of Housing and Urban Development suggests that a family should spend no more than 30% of their gross monthly income on housing. This article explores whether these types of affordable housing requirements constitute constitutional takings that warrant due compensation. It explores where to draw the line between the proper exercise of the state’s police power to regulate land use and development and the unconstitutional shifting of a social burden onto the shoulders of the few by exacting their property, with primary focus on developers that are building residential units. Because Hawaii is actively grappling with proposed affordable housing legislation, and the four counties (City and County of Honolulu/Oahu (hereinafter “C&C”).