COM 0118.027 2002-2004 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Comments: As I stated at the Pepeekeo meeting, it is not proper that a farmer must obtain advance permission from the tax authority to change the agricultural use of his land, as is implied in the wordirx~ of Draft 3. The change proposed to paragraph (1) clarifies this as well as clarifies that the tax authorities are only concerned with the overall use of the owners taxable land unit. For instance, the tax authority needs to know 'rf 10 acres of land is changed from 8 acres of pasture and 2 acres of roger to 5 acres of pasture and 5 acres of ginger. It is of no concern rf a farmer chooses to periodically change which 2 acres are used for ginger as long as the use of the remaining 8 acres remains as pasture. As it appears to me, the only purpose of the twenty-four month conversion period described in paragraph (2) of this section of Draft 3 is to recognize a period of time in which the land might not appear to be m agricultural use. In many, if not most cases, an owner will probably have completed a conversion prior to notifying the county. I believe that the changes t propose provide clar'rfication and needed flexibility for the owner. Following is an example of why I included subparagraph (C): A couple of years ago, I planned to convert some of my pasture to awa production. Just as I was ready to begin the land preparation, a health scare essentially destroyed the fast growing commercial market for awa root. Although I didn't intend to spend twenty-four months preparing the land, if I had started this work prior to the time the unfavorable news broke, I would have had to salvage the work in a manner to either revert the land use to pasture or change it to a different commercal agricultural use. Government permission should not be required for these changes unless they could not reasonably be performed within the allotted twenty-four month period. If the unanticipated change of plans occurs near the end of the twenty-four month period, a special situation would exist in which the landowner should be allowed to declare a new conversion and establish a new twenty-four month conversion period. I didn't provide for this option in my recommendation above but, perhaps, it should be added. Paragraph (3) in this section of Draft 3 required interim progress reports from the owner during the twenty-four month conversion period. This seems to be just "busy work" for both the owner and the tax authority. I suggest that the owner only be required to report when the conversion is completed so that the new valuation may be properly applied. My proposed paragraph (4) is new as I don't believe it was clear in Draft 3 as to when the new agricultural land valuation would apply. My proposed paragraph (5) corresponds to Draft 3 paragraph (4) except that it specifies that the land in question must be in any commercial agricultural category at the end of the conversion period to avoid penalty. The reason for this was discussed in regard to paragraph (2) (C), above. My paragraph (6) is the same as Draft 3 paragraph (5). Please contact me if I may provide clarification. My mailing address is shown in the header. I regularly check my email or can usually be reached by phone as follows: email: kolekolefarmQureach.com phone: 963-6808 Sincerely, Lr_ ~C~~` -t_ ~ ~ Jo?~Smith Councilman Dr-Fred Holschuh~