Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0193.008 2008-2010 MAR-16-2009 09:308 FROM:KRREN CLRRKSON 8087759050 T0:9618912 P.1 BELL 4q Pl F-C COMM. Iq'5 March 14, 2009 RE: Testimony on Bill 49 2fl09 ~lRfl 16 Dear J. Yoshimoto, Chair, and Council Members, I am testifying as a member of the Save our Land Citizens Committee that proposed the 2% for Land initiative and gathered signatures for the initiative that became law through a majority vote. It requires that 2% of tax revenues be set aside each and every year for the purchase of open space, natural resources, conservation and public access. Please consider the grave and far- reaching consequences of Bill 49 which would strip the funding requirement First, you would be betraying voter trust to substantially amend a law that sprang from the people through the grass roots initiative process. The citizens have said loud and clear that making a permanent commitment to open space preservation is of great importance. It is your duty to do the will of the people and to uphold the law. It would also a betrayal of our duty to our children and grandchildren and future to fail to preserve lands that once developed can never be retrieved. This duty is sacred. I am also testifying as a real estate broker who has been in the business for 32 years. Passage of Bill 49 would cost taxpayers more in the long run than it saves in the short term because preserving open space actually increases property tax revenues and saves government money.. Study after study has shown that open space increases property values and therefore tax revenues, whereas development actually costs government more than it generates in tax revenues. The cost of providing such services as police and fire protection and road improvements and maintenance been shown to cost governments 10% to 67% more than the additional property tax revenue generated by development. Studies have also found that where there are ordinances that preserve open space, municipal bond ratings are improved, reducing the cost of government borrowing. As property values rise it will cost more and more to purchase open space, again costing taxpayers more in the long run than continuing to fund purchases on a regular basis. Another factor to consider is that open spaces make our island home appealing to visitors as well and are critical to the health of our tourism industry, the mainstay of our economy. Therefore. I urge you to vote against Bill 49. Sincerely yours, q~ /~Qh taw C tAal ' Karen Clarkson P.O. Box 1396 Honokaa, HI 96727 Comm. No. (`1-3- Ref. To: ereaeofad Ref. Date ^ MAR t 7 22