COM 0394.002 2002-2004 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

BUDGET IMPACT • Is the intent of the bills to be revenue-neutral? • Based upon the principle of revenue neutrality, should we first assess where we stand respective to: ? upcoming UPW & HGEA negotiations ? possible liability stemming from Hokulia-related lawsuits ? the outcome of the Legislature's action re: a City & County of Honolulu sales tax and reapportionment of TAT revenues to the Neighbor Islands ? an assessment of growing county debt and projected CIP needs ? action on the administration's ag lands tax bill ? a "rainy day" account or the creation of a disaster and emergency special fund ? solid waste solutions ? extending sewerage systems • What is the breakdown of our county revenue projections over the next six years? What is the basis for making these projections? • What is the "island-wide infrastructure and services catch-up" plan? • What is the corresponding expenditure plan? EXAMINATION OF FAIRNESS • Hawaii ranks No. #1 in the nation in fuel taxes; 10`h in total state and local taxes per capita (survey data from 1998-2000); and 42nd in per capita property tax collections. In focusing on real property tax relief, we may be ignoring the most regressive features of tax policy in Hawaii -that is, the state income tax rates and deductions, which have not kept pace with the lower federal tax rates or deductions for over twenty years. • How do council members justify raising the Homeowner rate in 2002 and giving relief in 2003? • If the aim of the bills is to give relief to those who can not afford to pay, why not immediately propose a circuit breaker bill? • If reducing the tax burden is the main objective, then why not reduce the RPT rates? • Based on the three bills, will the increase in the market assessments offset the decrease in the bill assessments? For example, if the market assessment are 11% and the Bills are 2%, why not give every class a reduction in the RPT payment closer to the tune of 11%?