2012-COH-A Technical Assistance Report Evaluating Property Tax Policies and Administrative Practices in Hawaii County

Home

• Vague property class definitions and an over-reliance on zoned use rather than actual use in determining property class. How a property is classified can affect its tax class and its valuation. Yet neither the Code nor the Appraisal Manual provides a clear definition of the tax classes in Section 19-53(e)(1), and the Manual does not reconcile those nine classes with the nine main "PITT" code classes. Some areas of the County have long been urbanized, yet the land is zoned agricultural, which can lead to seemingly inconsistent land values. • Limited use of digital maps and photographic images. Digital vertical photographic images are helpful in understanding land use and spatial relationships, and they, together with oblique, and street-level photographic images are helpful in determining whether improvements are correctly described. We were informed that the County has a geographic information system (GIS) and has acquired oblique imagery of buildings. Yet we were informed that the Division does not routinely use these technologies and has no plan to implement them. • Lack of analysis of workloads, productivity, and standards against which to evaluate performance. Current budgeting and management practices do little to ensure that the County is receiving value for money for the funds and staff resources that are allocated to property tax administration. The County should consider our specific recommendations in the above areas. It also could make a self-assessment of the strengths of its administration of the real property tax and of opportunities for improving the accuracy of valuations, the fairness of assessments, efficiency in operations, and greater public understanding and acceptance of the real property tax. The IAAO's Assessment Practices: Self-Evaluation Guide could be used in this evaluation.1 We believe that many of the issues that we have identified can be rectified, wholly or partially, without major budget or resource implications (apart from upgrading the CAMA system). For example, efforts to better train staff and better communicate with them could serve the secondary goal of empowering staff. This could lead to more uniform appraisals and, in conjunction with a cyclic property and exemption inspection program, could lessen complaints and build or strengthen the positive image of the Division. We hope that this analysis and report will provide impetus toward promoting and reinforcing positive goals that will lead to greater equity for all the taxpayers in Hawaii County. Our specific recommendations, which are discussed in detail in the body of the report, are listed below. It is not our expectation that the County implement these recommendations immediately or even, in some cases, in short order. Rather the recommendations are in- tended to provide a roadmap for changes that ultimately will facilitate the overriding goal of increasing fairness and equity in property tax policies and assessment administration. 1 When the County is satisfied with its assessment operations, it could consider applying for lAAO's Certificate of Excellence in Asscssrnent Administration. xii