HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0830.003 2020-2022 P/Fc
ii! ( 2
From: Ruth Bennett
Sent: Sunday, June 12, 2022 9:04 AM
To: Council Testimony
Cc: Kimball, Heather ti h
Subject: Testimony in favor Tax Relief Proposals, Bill 182
i
Dear Heather Kimball and the Hawaii County Council,
3
I am providing testimony in favor of Bill 182 as well as any measures being considered to reduce the4wpacf 4
property taxes on the kupuna stressed families and farmers/ranchers in our communities
My name is Ruth Bennett. I am 76 years old, single, and live in mauka Pa'auilo on a small agricultural parcel. I
intend to live on this property for the rest of my life. My age and a disability entitle me to tax exemptions that have in
the past reduced my property tax burden. I
i
A few years back, I applied for and received an agricultural classification for my property, on which I have livestock
and grow fruits and vegetables. In past years, having the ag classification meant a small savings in property I
taxes. Still, my property taxes amount to about $3,000 per year.
The recent assessment(2022-2023) came as quite a shock! The assessed value of my property had increased
significantly, and the great majority of the increase (20%) came as a result of a much higher assessment of the value
of my house. Since I was in the ag classification, the 3% cap on an increase in home assessed value didn't apply to
me. Without any improvements or modifications done to my home, I am now looking at an increase in my property
taxes of over $1,400 per year!
I discussed my situation with the property tax division and was told that my home's value increased due to a SINGLE
comparable sale in my area which was only vaguely similar to my property. I was told that my only option was to
relinquish the agricultural classification and return to homeowner,thus restoring the 3% cap on future home value
increases.
z
However, the change would not result in the 3% cap being applied to the 2022-2023 valuation- I would still be taxed
on a home assessed value that was 20%higher than the year before. And the increased home value assessment would
set the precedent for future years,just capped at 3%per year.
I dont live in a home that is 20% better for me, a disabled woman, than it was a year ago. tl y fixed income,from
Social Security and savings, isn't increasing by 20%. I get nofnancial benefit from having a home that others might
consider 20% better than other homes. By giving up my agricultural classification to avoid outrageous future home
value increases, I am losing any tae benefits from keeping my land in agriculture.
All of these consequences seem to be unconscionable and unjustified. I'm sure that my situation isn't unique, and that
many others are in situations that are much more dire than mine is.
I am not at all sure how the components of Bill 182 would apply to my situation, but I feel very strongly that the
county's current policies for assessing property values and calculating taxes are seriously out of alignment with our
Hawaii island agricultural and ethical values, in which growing food and protecting our most vulnerable are part of
aloha and malama'aina.
Please adopt Bill 182 and don't stop there! Review the policies and procedures of the Property Tax division to
uncover any ways in which unfair and inconsistent consequences can result. The welfare of kupuna, farmers and
i
Comm No �V Q'
iZet To: �'G
Ref.Date_ I B
I
i
ranchers, and already struggling families is at stake.
I will happily share my tax information if needed.
i
Sincerely,
Ruth Bennett
I
2