HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0533.053 2000-2002 L
~ MALAMA, O PUNS
` P. O. box 1520
' ' Pahoa, Hawai 'i 96778
~1
(808) 965-9254
~ ~ . Preserving Hawai 'i's precious natural heritage
.A ,
-
May 3, 2002
Chairman Arakaki & Councilmembers
Hawai 'i County Council
25 Aupuni Street .
Hilo, HI 96720
RE: REAL PROPERTY TAX RATES
I apologize for being unable to attend the May 15~' public hearing in person, due
to a scheduling conflict. However, as a long-time promoter of the Native Forest Tax dill,
I could not fail to note several crucial points regarding the subject of the hearings:
The Native Forest Tax bill, which a previous County Council passed as an
amendment to Chapter 19 of the Hawai 'i County Code, states that its intent was to oi~Fer
incentives to landowners to protect native forest on their parcels, and also to reward them
for denying themselves, in the public interest, the financial benefits of exploiting these
lands. It was noted that the earlier practice of chopping down the forest, putting a cow on
the land and thus qualifying for the agricultural class of real property, was
counterproductive to the best interests of the County and its need (and mandate) to
protect our natural resources. The Native Forest amendment to Chapter 19 states that
lands which qualify for the native forest tax category and for which the landowners have
applied for and been granted this category, shall pay the lowest tax rate.
Therefore, lumping Native Forest with Agricultural as Class G in your notice of
Public Hearing, and setting the tax rate higher than Improved Residential (A) and
Homeowner (I) is a violation of both the intent and the law under Chapter 19, If you pass
the currently advertised new tax rates as published, any qualified owner of native forest
will have the right to object.
Interestingly enough, the deadline to file an appeal has already passed, although
the tax rates which one would want to appeal have still not been passed by the Council. } ,
This is really "bass ackwards". It also puts the burden of proof on the land owner to file
an appeal without knowing what he or she is appealing, or whether or not an appeal is
really warranted. I believe that in such a case the County is opening itself up to some
interesting and expensive litigation.
Corr~t~n. 2dea~ •
Fite Igo. _
~°o: ~ ~
~f. ~ SAY 2
In light of the above, I urge the Council to:
1. Separate out the Native Forest class from the Agricultural class and set the rate at
lower than that of Homeowner (even if only by one penny); and
2. Set a new appeal deadline to take effect after the Council passes a new rate schedule
and after property owners are notified by the Real Property Tax Office of their tax
assessments for the coming year.
Although I, personally, will not benefit from these suggestions, as a taxpayer I do not
want to see our so-very-limited budget stretched to pay a litigious and righteous land
owner court costs and damages for something that can be so easily avoided.
Goodness knows, there are lots more important ways to spend our tax dollars.
Sincerely,
i~
Rene Siracusa
President