HAMAKUA CDP MEMO v4 - redacted - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

expenses of supplies, machinery, overhead, etc.) The Institute for Local Self Government (California) reported six years ago that even the most lucrative fruit and nut crops would only support land values of $5,500 per acre. So the break-even in the best of circumstances would be 015 years or more. Many parcels nearby parcel 055 were purchased at even higher per acre amounts and have been improved with more elaborate and expensive homes which makes agriculture even less feasible. In Hamakua even seasoned large farms are finding it difficult to stay in business: one example is Richard Ha who closed his Hamakua Springs Farms because it was no longer profitable, http://www.bizjoumals.com/pacific/news/2016/01/06/big-islands- hamakua-springs-country-farms-shutting html. The 2005 General Plan at section 14.2.1 Land Use Agriculture states: "Agricultural land values have risen beyond their value for agricultural purposes.... One of the key factors in adjusting to changing socio-economic conditions is the restructuring of our land use regulatory system to distinguish between important and other agricultural land." Land where agriculture cannot support a living wage can never be IAL. Lumping all the parcels higher than some arbitrary elevation into IAL without considering productivity does not properly characterize "Important Agricultural Land" or mean that any agriculture will be feasible. It does risk many unintended consequences and hardship for the owners of such parcels. The 2005 General Plan at section 14.3.5.3 North Hilo states: "Commercial development is limited in the North Hilo district.... Population in the district has been declining over the past thirty years." North Hilo and particularly Laupahoehoe needs the County to help them: not to restrict their options by imposing the burdens of IAL. As the 2005 General Plan section 15.1 states: "Regulations rely on government's police power to control what people can do or not do ... Regulation can be restrictive, reactive, and divisive. Incentive measures, on the other hand, can invite creative "win-win" solutions. Examples of incentive measures include property tax exemptions such as for agriculture.... Community Development Plans shall consider appropriate incentive measures to achieve various objectives...." The CDP should be opting to give micro or small farms and the rural homestead lands support and flexibility of how to operate so there is some incentive to engage in agriculture. Even without any "support", the property owners on Kihalani Homestead Road still try to contribute by helping to "keep the country, country" and by making a small but helpful contribution to agriculture. 3. The CDP rationales for: 3A. taking TMK -55 out of LUP; 3B. putting TMK _055 into IAL; 3C. not considering a Rural designation for TMK _055 are not convincing and should be revised. In this section 3., excerpts of "rationales" from the CDP are shown in blue in 12 point Calibri with a 1 point borde ; and COMMENTS are shown in black print. Relevant text in the CDP and in the comments is highlighted in yellow with particularly relevant wording in bold. References to the "CDP" are to the Hamakua CDP. 7