HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0044.002 2012-2014 Ag tourism bill--still needs work Page 1 of 1
P/PC
Murashige, Laura GOMM. 745
From: Janice Palma-Glennie [palmtree7 @hawaiiantel.net]
Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2013 11:45 AM
To: council testimony
Subject: Ag tourism bill--still needs work
Attachments: Ag tourism written testimony 1_13.doc
Aloha,
Please find my testimony regarding the latest draft of Bill 266, Ag Tourism.
Mahalo, janice palma-glennie
Comm. No. 44, 2
Ref.To: P/P6-
Ref. Date JAN 0 S X013
1/8/2013
PO Box 4849
Kailua-Kona, HI 96745
Re: Bill 266, current draft
January 8, 2013
Aloha, councilmembers:
Many thanks and especially to Brenda ford for your hard work trying to hone a better ag
tourism bill. With the latest amendments, this draft is closer to being acceptable than the
rest. However, work remaims if, in fact, an ag tourism bill is what Hawai'l Island farmers
really need to keep them farming.
It's impossible to speak to these many issues in three minutes, but there are a few i'll try
to address.
First, the enforcement of a final ag bill remains crucial, yet there are no iron-clad
provisions to give the public a sense of real protection from abuses that will definitely
occur. Fyi, here's another lack of enforcement story...
Close friends of ours bought 5 acres of ag land for what would become a thriving mango
farm and business. Their new, off-island neighbors decided to create an events and
lodging venue across the street. After following the County protocol for stopping the
illegal use of that property, my friends, far from being sue-happy, hired a lawyer. They
knew their case was tight and planned to live their retirement days there. Even though
they won their case all the way through an appeal, no agency, including the county,
stopped the operation which continues today. Feeling totally let down by the County after
over 4 decades of residence and being fed up with the illegal, daily intrusions, they put
their beloved home and farm up for sale.
The other issue is daily guest count. It eludes me how this hasn't been included and why
the numbers remain so high. For a person to count visitors per week, they need to count
visitors per day. Can anyone please explain why this requirement is being avoided and
how anyone can be sure that any count that is only voluntarily enforced won't be
abused?
My final, looming question: who is this bill for? Is it for real farmers or is it for people who
want to cash in and be a part of the tourism trade? If there's been more than one or two
bonafide, long-time farmers who've testified in favor of this law in any of its incarnations,
then I've been asleep at the many hearings I've attended. Though one woman continues
to testify that she's speaking on behalf of 100 farmers in favor of this legislation, I keep
wondering where they are, what they know about the drafts of the bill, and if they have
any idea what the proposed changes including increased traffic, parties, overnight
guests, and noise will mean for their farms and their lives. Do they understand that, even
if they don't choose the ag tourism route, their property value and taxes could
dramatically increase if their neighbors do? That isn't what someone who wants to grow
mangos or coffee or a successful plant nursery wants in the long run. However, that's
exactly what speculators and other people depending upon tourism for a living want and
want to promote, and I wonder if it is they who initiated this ag tourism idea in the first
place.
Last, automatic approval for this or any permitting should never be an option.
Mahalo for your time and attention to my concerns.
Sincerely, Janice Palma-Glennie