A possible hypothesis. To test that hypothesis Hawaii data should be compared with data from similar locales.
Or you could look at a country that has the appropriate diversity in climate. Perhaps a country such as Ecuador, where COVID-19 is ravaging sunny and warm Guayaquil, with the bodies of victims literally rotting in the streets, while colder and temperate Quito is much less affected.
I'm not saying you are incorrect. What I am saying is the drawing inferences of this type require examining more than one example. The typical process for doing this is to see a case such as Hawaii, develop a hypothesis based on the example, then identify other examples to test the hypothesis.
Yes, I do understand science, data analysis, and epidemiology. (And no, you cannot compare it to an entirely different socio-economic environment, or a different standard of living. THAT is apples to oranges. And, yes, there are many confounding variables.) But all you're speaking of is the explanation for the data. I don't really care much about that in this context. The explanation I gave is entirely speculative to be sure. Nonetheless, whether it is due to space aliens guarding the Hawaiian islands, the color of the street signs, or something else, the fact is, Hawaii has had the lowest per capita infection rate and death rate in the United States. And given it's tourism and resulting relatively high exposure risk as a result, SOMETHING has resulted in less infection there than Wyoming, North Dakota, Montana, Idaho, and all the other states, including those with relatively low population densities. A reasonable inference then is that, with reasonable protective/mitigating measures, it will likely remain one of the, if not the, safest places even when tourism returns.
Or, put another way, from a tourists standpoint, all other things being equal, I'd be more comfortable going to Hawaii on vacation than Charlotte, or New York, or almost anywhere else in the US.
