Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0280.006 2014-2016 PkG Com . 2�so Murashige, Laura From: Larry& Elaine Jones <elj@hawaii.rr.com> Sent: Monday, January 04, 2016 9:33 AM To: Council Testimony Subject: Finance Committee testimony Attachments: Bill 317 and 126 2.odt Please submit the attached letter as testimony on Bills 317 and 126 to be considered the Finance Committee meeting on January 5th at 2:15PM. Thank You Larry Jones C=1 y C) t �. • COMM No. QS') Ref. Ref. Dote jANALIEg___. 1 To: Hawaii County Finance Committee January 3,2015 From: Larry Jones 59-356 Kanaloa Dr. Kamuela, Hi 96743 Re: Testimony concerning Bills 317 and 126 Ladies and Gentlemen, I am a resident of Kohala Ranch where I own two lots. One is my principal residence, taxed at the homeowner's rate, and the other is the adjoining, undeveloped lot,taxed at the agricultural rate. If Bill 317 is passed as written, the economic rational for keeping this lot undeveloped vanishes, as it does for thousands of other Nondedicated parcels. Island wide, the value of undeveloped land will plummet and owners, who were able to keep the land because of low taxes, will be forced to sell to someone with development in mind. Bill 317 is written in such a way as to exclude the cattle grazing operation at Kohala Ranch from the proposed Short Term Agricultural classification. Kohala Ranch has a legitimate agricultural operation with close to 2000 acres of pasture utilized by Kahua and Ponoholo ranches for open range grazing. A simple change in the proposed bill; adding language authorizing all the agricultural lots at Kohala Ranch to be considered as one grazing unit and placing the $2000 income requirement on Kahua and Ponoholo Ranches,the owners of the grazing cattle, would allow Kohala Ranch to participate in the Short Term program. An even simpler solution would be to eliminate the income requirement entirely allowing many small-time operators who cannot meet the $2000 threshold and many owners who consume rather than sell what they produce to participate. My advice is to kill Bill 317. There is a much simpler way for the County to raise revenue, and to also avoid the administrative nightmare promised by the provisions of Bill 317. Keep the Nondedicated agricultural designation and raise the minimum tax from the current$100 per year.. Bill 126 is merely Bill 317 with a minor concession in the form of a small tax reduction for a ten year vacant land dedication, available to all those who do not qualify for the new Short Term designation. The proposal to tax undeveloped, agriculturally zoned land at a lower rate is sound but the tax reduction too small to keep agriculturally zoned land undeveloped. A more effective approach would be a tax assessment at 30% of market value. This would result in a significant tax increase for most Nondedicatedparcels, but perhaps not enough to force owners to sell. P p Thank You, Larry Jones