HomeMy WebLinkAboutMIN FC 2022/06/14 2020-2022 Committee on Finance
37th Session
West Hawaii Civic Center
74-5044 Ane Keohokalole Highway, Building A
Kailua-Kona, Hawaii
June 14, 2022
CALL TO The regular meeting of the Committee on Finance was called to order at
ORDER: 10:59 a.m., in the Council Chambers, Kona, by Mr. Matt Kaneali`i- Kleinfelder,
Chair.
ROLL CALL:
Present: Mr. Matt Kaneali`i- Kleinfelder, Chair
Ms. Heather L. Kimball, Vice Chair
Mr. Aaron S. Y. Chung, Member(came in later)
Ms. Maile Medeiros David, Member
Mr. Holeka Goro Inaba, Member
Ms. Susan L. K. Lee Loy, Member
Mr. Herbert M. "Tim" Richards III, Member (via videoconference from Hilo)
Ms. Rebecca Villegas, Member (came in later)
Absent and Excused: Ms. Ashley L. Kierkiewicz, Member
STATEMENTS The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business,
FROM THE Statements from the Public on Agenda Items.
PUBLIC ON
AGENDA ITEMS: The following individuals registered to speak regarding Bill 182 (Comm. 830), and
came forward when called by the Chair:
Thomas Vincent Keelan.
Dwight Vincente.
COMMUNI- The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business,
CATIONS: Communications.
Comm. 30.30: REPORT OF FUND TRANSFERS AUTHORIZED: MAY 1 — 15, 2022
From Controller Kay Oshiro, dated May 24, 2022.
FC-37 June 14,2022
Vote on Comm. 30.30: Ms. Lee Loy moved to close file on Comm. 30.30.
Filed Seconded by Mr. Inaba and carried by the following
voice vote:
Ayes: Committee Members David, Inaba,
Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards,
and Chair Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder—6.
Noes: None.
Absent: Committee Members Chung, Kierkiewicz, and
Villegas —3.
Excused: None.
CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Next order of business, please.
Comm. 31.37: REPORT OF CHANGE ORDERS AUTHORIZED: MAY 1 — 15, 2022
From Finance Director Deanna Sako, dated May 23, 2022, transmitting the above
report pursuant to Hawaii County Code Section 2-12.3.
Motion to Close File: Ms. Lee Loy moved to close file on Comm. 31.37.
Seconded by Mr. Inaba.
CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Council Members, discussion? No? Okay,
I have one question. Ms. Sako, are you present in chambers?
MR. BROWN: I believe she's not here today, Chair.
CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Oh, okay. Good for her. Good for
her. Mr. Hunt, I see you on camera. You're next. Or Diane, I'm sorry.
Ms. Nakagawa? Whoever wants to speak for the Department of Finance.
(Note: At this time, Deputy Finance Director Diane Nakagawa and
Controller Kay Oshiro came forward to address the members of the
Committee.
CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Mahalo, Kay.
MS. NAKAGAWA: Good morning, Council Members. Diane Nakagawa, Deputy
Finance Director.
CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Mahalo for joining us today. My question
is regarding, and I like this, I just want to check in on this, the contracts with
Centracs SPM and Centracs Edaptive. This is specific to the Highway 11 and
Highway 130 intersection. And the questions is this is a State highway and a
County-controlled intersection. What is the cost that we're seeing here for this
contract number 009533?
Page 2
FC-37 June 14,2022
MS. OSHIRO: Sorry, you want the original contract amount?
CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Just more so, what is this covering? And
then this is a State highway? I know there's a process between State and County
for working on signalization, and when we have kind of a multi jurisdictional
signal and want to know what these costs are for.
MS. OSHIRO: Sorry, for those questions, we'd probably have to go back to
Public Works, since it's their project. We can do that.
CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. So is there anyone from Public
Works?
MS. NAKAGAWA: We don't see anybody at this time.
MS. OSHIRO: Nobody is here.
CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay, I can follow up with them on my
own, and will do so. Thank you.
MS. NAKAGAWA: Thank you.
CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay, that's only the questions I had.
Thank you. Council Members, any further questions? No? Okay. Okay, we have
a motion on the floor to close file on Communication 31.37. All in favor?
Vote on Comm. 31.37: The motion to close file on Comm. 31.37 was carried
Filed by the following voice vote:
Ayes: Committee Members David, Inaba, Kimball,
Lee Loy, Richards, Villegas, and
Chair Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder—7.
Noes: None.
Absent: Committee Members Chung and Kierkiewicz—2.
Excused: None.
CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you. Next order.
Page 3
FC-37 June 14,2022
BILLS FOR The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business,
ORDINANCES: Bills for Ordinances.
Bill 182: AMENDS CHAPTER 19,ARTICLE 10, SECTION 19-71, OF THE HAWAII
COUNTY CODE 1983 (2016 EDITION,AS AMENDED),RELATING TO
REAL PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTIONS
Increases the general exemption amount for property that is owned and
occupied as a principal home and adds new age ranges with corresponding
exemption amounts to the schedule of exemptions for property owners of
principal homes who are 60 years of age or older.
Reference: Comm. 830
Intr. by: Ms. Kimball
Motion to Approve Ms. Kimball moved to recommend passage of Bill 182
on first reading. Seconded by Ms. Lee Loy.
CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Ms. Kimball, would you like to lead the
discussion?
MS. KIMBALL: Yes, thank you. So I signaled when we had our conversation
about the property tax rate resolutions that there was something else I wanted us to
consider, which is another way to provide relief to our residents through a different
mechanism that I actually feel is more targeted and more specific in terms of
applying those benefits.
Just to give a little bit of history, the base exemption, which is now at$40,000, was
last changed in 1991, which is over 30 years ago. So at this point, I'm proposing
changing that base exemption to $50,000. The additional 20 percent, not to exceed
$80,000, was implemented in 2005 and has also not changed since that date. It
was applied with the three percent cap at that time to protect homeowners from the
highly variable increases. So, that's a little bit of history.
When that 20 percent, up to $80,000, was implemented, the median home price
was about$400,000, so 20 percent would be $80,000 of that median home price
So, I'm proposing upping that$100,000; so that 20 percent is at the median home
price, which is around $517,000. So 20 percent—$20,000 is 20 percent of
$500,000, so that kind of gets us at the level.
As far as how much this will cost us in terms of lost revenue, we have a baseline
estimate from RPT (Real Property Tax) of about approximately $1.2 million; and
there are some caveats with that. It is a little bit tricky to pull this out, so I wanted
to make sure I was open about those caveats. It doesn't consider the impact of
multiple-home exemptions on a property, which is rare, but it can occur. It doesn't
consider multi-cost properties, but should have a minimal impact on the estimate.
Page 4
FC-37 June 14,2022
And it doesn't consider the impact when only a portion of the property is eligible
for home exemption. That might slightly decrease the estimate.
There are a couple of reasons why I like this. First of all, it targets those that have
home values that are less than the median, so it's—once you hit that median point,
or rough median point of$500,000, you're just getting—it's the same amount. It's
about$200 at these values, for every home value above that$500,00. So what that
means is as a percentage of your home value, your savings are increased by under
$500,000. You're getting that full 20 percent savings; and then once you get
above that median, your percentage of decrease declines.
In addition, I propose changing—adding a couple of classes for the age-based
exemptions, so adding one at 65 and one at 75. The justification for that is that 65
is the point at which many people retire, so they are now on a fixed income. And
the comment about folks living a little bit longer, I did Google while you were
speaking, 82 years is the average life expectancy in our County, which is three and
half years above average by the way, in the country.
So the idea of this is to really target those folks below the median income,
providing the highest percentage relative to their overall home value. And I do
have my spreadsheet here (see Comm. 830.1), so if any of you want to suggest
alternative numbers, I can plug them in and share what that might look like. I did
provide you guys, in a communication, a table that just kind of compared some of
the rate adjustments with what this would like, so it's in your pinky folder. One of
the things that I want to actually clarify on this; so you have the current rate is the
top line, the Mayor's proposed rate reduction for homeowners, and then the two
resolutions that we've considered, or will be considering, and then you have
Bill 182.
I also shared Bill 182, the values with respect to the various age groups. This is
not quite an apples-to-apples, oranges-to-oranges comparison. I wanted to be
transparent about that. I should have compared it with the other proposals with the
age deduction, and that is not on the spreadsheet, but I have that here if anybody
wants to dive deep into that.
The last thing I'll mention, and I know my time went off, is the other thing that is
nice about this approach is that it applies to other property classes other than the
homeowner class. So as long as they are currently taking the homeowner
exemption and they're using it as their primary residence, they can still take this
exemption. So it would apply if they're on an agricultural property, or a portion of
their home, or a portion commercial, or things like that. So it's benefitting a
slightly a larger pool.
Page 5
FC-37 June 14,2022
With that, I'm happy to answer any questions. I know we have members from
RPT (Real Property Tax) over in the Hilo Chambers. But I'm looking for
everyone's support to move this forward to Council. Thank you.
CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Mahalo, Ms. Kimball. Council Members,
discussion? Ms. Lee Loy, go ahead.
MS. LEE LOY: Thank you. Yeah, I just wanted to hear from Real Property Tax,
Mr. Hunt or Lisa. Maybe Lisa.
(Note: At this time, Real Property Tax Administrator Lisa Miura and
Internal Control Manager Steve Hunt came forward to address the
members of the Committee.)
MS. MIURA: Good morning, Council. Lisa Mira, Real Property Tax
Administrator.
MS. LEE LOY: Thanks, Lisa. Yeah, go ahead.
MS. MIURA: So for the Administration, I understand from Deanna who can't
be here today, is that they do support this bill. All the information that Council
Woman Kimball reported is correct, and that is based on the numbers that were
run earlier. The only thing Real Property Tax wants to clarify for Council,
because we do have that half-year home exemption, is that even though this is
effective January 2023, if passed, the intent is for this to go to the 2023 tax year.
So it would begin July 1st, 2023, and the members of the public won't see that
exemption increase until their August 20 bill.
MS. LEE LOY: Thanks, Lisa. You're just so perceptive. My question really was,
when would our constituents see the relief? We wouldn't actually see this relief
until next year, correct?
MS. MIURA: The way read the bill, that's correct.
MS. LEE LOY: You know, Ms. Kimball, is that the intention, to give us some
little bit of a breathing room? You have a few things going on. And I do support
this in collaboration with some of the other things that this body has been
discussing. It's the challenge though, right, to have this exemption, look at the
rates, you know, all the classes, and so I just really wanted to understand from a
bigger, broader, and more complex perspective of our Tax Code. How do you see
this working and being implemented?
MS. KIMBALL: Yeah, I thank you for that; and thank you, Lisa, foroh, sorry,
Chair, may I respond? Yes, okay.
Page 6
FC-37 June 14,2022
CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Sorry, I was reading the bill. Yeah, go
ahead, Ms. Kimball.
MS. KIMBALL: Yeah, thank you for clarifying the implementation time period.
So yes, this would apply to next year's valuation process; and therefore, the
savings would not actually you know, they would hit the August bill of 2023.
And so that's a caveat to this in terms of this approach. It's not immediate.
Yes, it was my intention to do that. There's a lot of uncertainty right now, and
certainly about how things are going to go in the markets and whatnot. So I think
in interplaying with all of these certain things as you mentioned, you know,
thinking about it on that cycle. And there are some other things that I expect you
and others to bring forward, that I think contribute to this conversation. Yeah, I'll
leave it at that at this point. But I think this is an important part of the mix, and
that's why I introduced it. Thank you.
MS. LEE LOY: Yeah, thank you for that. I think it's you know, the tools that
we have in the toolbelt and the different levers that we can pull on, and this is one
of them. And I really do appreciate that this provides a different class, which is the
agricultural class when they have actually a home on it, which is another lever we
can pull. But I'd also like to see it kind of in the mix, as you put, with some of the
other things that we have discussed. I think we do have some time as we vet this
and other things, we'll be able to provide relief to our different constituents
throughout the different classes. I'm going to yield at this time until I hear from
the rest of my colleagues. Thank you, Chair.
CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Ms. Lee Loy. Mr. Richards.
MR. RICHARDS: Yeah, thank you. Thanks, Ms. Kimball. Listening to the
conversation and I agree with kind of the broad spectrum of what we're trying to
accomplish here. You answered the questions; financial impact, why you chose
the levels that you did, and trying to construct it, so it was thoughtful. And I do
like it because it is broad-reaching, but it's also mindful of trying to strike that
balance in there.
So we do need to give some reprieve, and I'm very supportive of that. And I like
how this is going, but it also is setting up for not just now but for the future as we
go forward. So, I am supportive of this going forward. Thanks, Chair. I yield.
CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Mr. Richards. Ms. David, go
ahead.
MS. DAVID: Thank you, Chair. Ms. Kimball,just reading your proposal and
your explanation, I think the group that you are trying to address and assist with
what's going forward as far as the rising taxes everywhere is very notable, and I
Page 7
FC-37 June 14,2022
thank you for doing this because I think as we talk about housing shortages and the
inability of our kupuna on maintaining their homes, this I think puts it and gives
relief. I mean, although it's going to start—we have to allow the process to start.
But I really thank you for doing this because this I can see will really benefit the
people that need the help right now, so thank you. And I will be supporting this.
Mahalo.
CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Ms. David. Mr. Inaba.
MR. INABA: Thank you. Ms. Kimball, sorry, can you just clarify for me? This
does allow those living on ag land or in the ag class could benefit?
MS. KIMBALL: Yeah, anybody that is currently able to claim the homeowners
exemption would benefit from this. And so the homeowners exemption is not
exclusively tied to the homeowner class land type as far as rates.
MR. INABA: Got it. Thank you. I'll be supporting. Thank you for bringing this
forward.
CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Mr. Inaba. Ms. Lee Loy, go
ahead.
MS. LEE LOY: Thanks. Thanks for giving me a second shot. You know, Lisa or
maybe Steve, you know, this is kind of targeted in an age group, and I was just
wonderingI mean, we know our kupunas need help, but I was also wondering of
curious around just income levels because some of these homeowners, you know,
they've got really good retirements not the testifiers—and trying to strike that
balance. Just some thoughts around that.
MR. HUNT: Steve Hunt, Internal Control Manager. It is true that giving
exemptions doesn't necessarily target income, and you can't equate age to income
level, but what you can say as a more generic statement, is exemptions are
progressive whereas rate relief is regressive. The greater benefits are going to be
seen by those who have properties that are valued lower, and typically that's also a
reflection of income level. So I think that is important to recognize that when you
are giving relief in the form of increased exemptions, those that are on the typical
lower spectrum will be the greater beneficiaries, at least from a percentage of
relief.
MS. LEE LOY: So then my follow-up question is to that who are outside of the
age, how do we provide relief to those still at that maybe 40 to 60 age group who
have lower income levels?
MS. KIMBALL: Chair, may I respond? Okay. That's actually that 80 percent of
the value up to $100,000. So what that aspect of it means is that as a percentage of
Page 8
FC-37 June 14,2022
the home value, if you have a property value under the median home value, you
will get that full 20 percent in benefit. Then once you go beyond the $500,000 that
percentage of the value of your home decreases because you're capped at that
$100,000. And so it's an indirect way to accomplish what you're talking about,
providing a greater percentage of relief to the homeowners, that the income folks,
regardless of age, that is under that median income; whereas as it goes up to
$1 million, $2 million beyond, it comes to a teeny,teeny, teeny percentage, yeah.
MS. LEE LOY: Thank you. Not to over simplify, but that's the catch-all. So we
have the age areas with the exemptions, and then the $100,000 for the catch-all.
Got it. I see them nodding. Steve, any other comments?
MR. HUNT: No, that's correct. So the bonus-up is the age. But you're still
getting the basic exemption under this bill. You're getting the—moving from
$40,000 to $50,000, plus if you can max out at your 20 percent, up to another
$100,000. So we're looking at basic exemptions for people whose homes hit that
median price of$150,000, where they're currently at$120,000, and additional for
age.
MS. LEE LOY: Great. Thanks. Thanks, Steve. Thanks, Lisa. I yield.
CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Ms. Lee Loy. Ms. Kimball.
MS. KIMBALL: Yeah, I just was going to make one final comment. And I'm just
going to ask Judge Strance a thumbs-up or a thumbs-down. Like I said, I did
create a spreadsheet template. I'm hoping I can share it with you guys after this
conversation, so if you want to play with any of these numbers, and see how that
affects the relative comparison, then you can plug whatever you want. I'd rather
not have to plug it in right now. You know, that's still a discussion-point. I just
boilerplate some numbers that made sense to me. But it's something to consider as
we review this bill. So Judge Strance, can I share that spreadsheet with everybody,
or is that a violation of Sunshine? It's just got all the formulas built in. You know
what? Think about what you want. If you want me to plug it in next meeting,
presumingI will do that, okay. Okay, thank you. Chair, I yield.
CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay, Council Members, any further
discussion. I have a few questions for Ms. Miura. So I'm looking at this, and
folks who want to utilize the exemptions will have to apply and be at the correct
age. Lisa, I don't expect to have numbers off the top of your head, but I mean just
on the other side of the equation, what is the potential, and I won't say loss, but is
the loss for the County on this if we were to move forward?
MS. MIURA: It's estimated to be at$1.2 million. There would be no new
applications that need to be filed; because as we collect the homeowner exemption
Page 9
FC-37 June 14,2022
applications now, they already provide the birthdates, so they're already in our
system.
CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. $1.2 million per year?
MS. MIURA: Correct.
CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. Well, in my eyes, I think that's very
acceptable. But what I really like about this, even though it's going toI mean, I
actually wish it would take place sooner and go into effect sooner, to the maker of
the bill, but I like that. And as I've grown older and I've watched some of my
kupuna and the different families in my district start to have to rely on a set income
as we've seen prices across the board just go crazy, and although that could change
what I'm seeing is I would hope that we can provide our residents some security as
they get older and not have to be concerned about if they can live or not, and I
think this bill starts to address that issue.
Our testifier here in Kona today, you came in during our budget hearings. You are
very outspoken, and I really appreciate your testimony to that effect. So yeah, I
appreciate the intention of the bill. I'll be supporting this today. And well done,
yeah. Mr. Chung joined us. Mr. Chung, did you have something to add?
MR. CHUNG: Yeah, thank you. And I wanted to thank our Deputy County Clerk
for keeping me abreast of this matter all the way until I returned. Yeah, yeah, I
wanted toI'm glad a chance to speak at the committee level instead of just
having it at the Council level because I certainly support this measure, you know,
it's in keeping with the times. It's just an adjustment.
But I did want to give some thoughts. I don't know if anyone really has the guts to
do this, but maybe I can't even say that I do, but I think at some point when we're
dealing with these homeowner exemptions, we might want to consider who we're
trying to help. And what I'd like to see ideally, in my opinion, for this homeowner
exemption, you know, over a certain age, to be tied into the years that a person had
their homeowner exemption. Because I'm not really keen onI'm not picking on
anybody who wants to move to Hawaii; that's terrific, I guess but coming here,
buying a new home, and then immediately getting a home exemption only because
they're a senior citizen. I don't get it. I really don't. So that's all I wanted to say.
But I do support this, yeah. Thank you.
CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Mahalo, Mr. Chung. Okay, seeing no
further discussion. We do have a motion on the floor to forward Bill 182 to
Council with a favorable recommendation. All in favor?
Page 10