HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0103.040 2020-2022 i
From: Donald Rudny
Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2021 7:34 PM
To: Roth, Mitch D; Kimball, Heather; Kierkiewicz, Ashley; David, Maile; Kanealii-Kleinfelder, Matt,-
Richards,
att;Richards, Tim; Chung, Aaron; Lee Loy, Sue; Inaba, Holeka; Villegas, Rebecca; Council
Testimony; Sako, Deanna COUNTY CLERK
Subject: County Budget Testimony COUNTY OF HAWAII
RECEIVED
3
Aloha All Date MAY 1 8 2021 ,
Mahalo for allowing me to give testimony today regarding the County budget. A transcript of it is below_ I did not
get a chance to give the last sentence which suggested the possible formation of an exploratory committee to address
the assessment system. If you have any questions, I will be happy to try and answer them.
i
On a personal note, I have gotten to know many people who are upset about this unfairness, but don't say anything. I
brought it up in a community meeting with Mayor Kim when he was pushing the GET increase a while back, and I
someone else brought up the "sod farms" that some claim. It was obviously satirical, but made the point.
I think something needs to be done. The impact to me is minimal, but I am troubled to see hard working families
struggle to make ends meet while these wealthy land owners take advantage of the system and don't contribute their
fair share. Why more isn't done about this is a puzzle to me.
I
The attempt to purchase the Glenn Hara property in Puna under the PONC program was an example of gross under
assessment or over payment. Assessed at $1.1 million,the County agreed to pay $2.7 million. County Charter
requires that PONC purchases shall not exceed the market value established by a certified appraiser hired by the
3
County. It looks like Pele saved us from that bad deal.
Mahalo for listening.
Don
s
Aloha County Council members and mahalo for giving me this opportunity to test.
I come today to address the revenue side of our budget. The past year has had a substantial negative impact on
government revenues and the gear future doesn't look very promising. Hawaii's heavy reliance on tourism has taken
a toll and the full impact is yet to befell.
For several decades, our County has perpetuated the notion that agriculture would develop on the Big Island by
giving property tax breaks in the form of assessment exemptions for agricultural uses. It is called the "Ag program"
and reduces property assessed values to the point of collecting virtually no tax. $200 minimum in most cases. It,
unfortunately, has not really worked well.
The program has turned into a tax dodge for the wealthy as they purchase property for investment and estate
development, and establish phony farms or uses that don't resemble in any way an Ag operation. Some properties
have no activity at all but continue to get the exemption. I can give you examples, and, in fact, have done so on many
occasions. I recently copied you all on an email to our Planning Dept. regarding a complaint made about a dumping
operation in Pepeekeo. The property owner has enjoy an Ag exemption for a number of years, and only pays $200 on
a property worth nearly a half million dollars. Before that, the property was used as a gravel pitfor years with no
apparent Ag use. 10 -4
Comm.No.
Ref.To; P I LOUTUA
1 fief,Dafe
3
I'm not hereto report this or any other particular properly. I only use it as example of the systemic problem that
exists with our property tax assessment system. There are numerous other examples of un�justed exemptions and
gross under assessments of large tracts of land on the Big Island. The County is losing millions of dollars in taxes
that otherwise shift to the working families of the Big Island whose properties are properly assessed.
3
I rage the County Council to considered legislation that will address these issues and close the Ag loopholes used by
wealthy property investors. You can call it the Big Island fair property tax bill. The bill should include the following
basic fairness principles:
1. Yearly assessment of all properties.
2. Yearly review and confirmation of all exemptions.
3. Enforcement of the Ag exemption by requiring GET records to ensure a continuous intensive Ag business exists
that meets the yearly revenue threshold $2000/yr presently.
4. Raise the Ag revenue threshold to $10,000/year.
5. Ensure that the homeowner exemption is limited to an owner actually living in the home on a permanent
basis. State income tax records can be used as some proof.
6. Commercial uses such as zip lines, gravelpits, short term rentals, disposal sites and other non agricultural
business uses should be assessed and taxed as commercial property with no Ag exemptions. The bill should include a
list of non complying uses.
Perhaps forming an exploratory committee to address the details and options might be in order. In any case, I trust
the Council will do the right thing and correct this unfair taxing practice.
Mahalo for your time and consideration.
Don Rudny
Pepeekeo, HI 96783-0106
I
i
i
2