The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCOM 0924.003 2014-2016 PIS COMM q24- COUNTY CLERK July 14 2016 COUNTY OF HAWAI'I RECEIVED Time 8:444401 By RE: Bills 218 and 219, Testimonies and Comments Date 2Va JZIL- /3 July 18, 2016 Name: Wesley Takai Dear Members of the Hawaii County Council: Because my testimonies would take much more than the allotted 3 minutes, attached are my July 14, 2016 comments on proposed changes to Bills 218 and 219. The dedication and nondedicated programs are both good agricultural programs and can co- exist as they have for the past 40 plus years. If I can be of any help, please call on me. The one area that I probably can best assist in is as a historian on discussions to improve the nonedicated agricultural use assessment program. I am one of the very few citizens of this county who had worked intensively with this program from its initial passage and had experienced the amendments throughout the years to better its provisions. Thank you, Sincerely, WESLEY TAKAI tomnt No. y, 3 Ref. To: Ref. Date JUL 1 8 2016 SUBJECT: Comments to Proposed Council Bill 219 Public Hearing: Monday, July 18, 2016 BILL 219 • Section 19-57 (1) proposed amendment language: • "or to be fallowed for any of the aforementioned purposes" ❖ This phrase is not necessary as Section 19-2, Definitions, mentions in part that continuous and regular basis require that the activity adhere to generally accepted standards or recognized practices within that industry. Fallow for various crops such as papaya is an acceptable or recognized practice. ✓ "or agricultural waste lands" ❖ Waste lands in an agricultural zoned property can be a very subjective issue. ❖ What is considered wasteland in a specific agricultural use may not be wasteland for another agricultural use ❖ For example, the lava lands in Kapoho may be considered wasteland for pasture but is productive for vandas and papayas. ❖ Questions to be considered ✓ Will the definition for wasteland say that it is for the primary agricultural use for the parcel; for example the lava land would be considered wasteland for a pasture property? ✓ Will there be a maximum land area that can receive the wasteland benefit? ✓ Probably one of the biggest questions to be answered is how will the wastelands be assessed? ✓ Will it be at the minimum value of $100 regardless of size such as gulches are considered unusable land? ✓ Will the wasteland be assessed at the agricultural use value of the primary agricultural use of the property? ✓ Will the wasteland be assessed at a percentage of the agricultural use value of the primary agricultural use of the property? ✓ Will the wasteland be assessed at a percentage of market value? ✓ Hopefully, the above questions have already been considered and if the bill passes, written procedures of this amendment will follow shortly so that the real property staff can smoothly implement this change. • Section 19-57(c)(4) Requiring the letter of approval from the director might be a good idea as the farmer will have a written decision rather than having to wait until the assessment notice arrives in March to know if the application was approved or disapproved, especially if the approval is for only a portion of the area requested in the application. • Section 19-57(c)(6) • The director shall cause an inspection of every property assessed for non-dedicated agricultural use no later than ten years since the last inspection. ❖ Ten years may be too long. ❖ The department has started an inspection program due to one of the recommendations of the 2012 audit report by the International Association of Assessing Officers (IAAO). ❖ The maximum lapse time should be five years but three years may be doable for the staff. ❖ Statistically if there are a total of 12,000 parcels to be inspected, 4,000 would be inspected each year. ❖ There are currently 12 "zone"or"field"appraisers who would be doing the inspections ❖ Each appraiser's annual workload for this project is 333. 1 I � r ❖ If the average daily inspection is 25, this project will take about 14 days for each appraiser. ❖ Aerial or satellite imagery will be a great tool for the appraisers which may lessen the time required for the annual inspections. ➢ Any change in the ownership of the land shall cause an inspection to determine that the land use continues to meet the requirements of subsection (a)(1) of this section. ❖ Recommend that the wording of this sentence be such that any change in the ownership of the land shall void the previous owner's application and that all new owners must file a new application to remain in this program for the oncoming years. • The real property staff may have administratively being doing the above procedure for the past few years. ❖ The new application will be the notification for the staff to re-inspect the property. ❖ Requiring a new application is important as the new owner may have plans to rezone or subdivide in the near future and may not want to go into this program because of the possible rollback taxes. • Section 19-57(d)(1)(D), The land is not being used as required in subsection (a)(a) of this section. • This subsection should not be added to the code. ❖ The granting of the agricultural use assessment is basically a year by year process. ❖ This program does not have a time commitment term like the commercial agricultural use dedication program under Section 19-60. ❖ Should an appraiser by chance observe the non-agricultural use of a property, a letter of non-compliance is usually sent to the owner and if no agricultural activity is observed by the end of the year, the property will be assessed for the following year at its market value, not the agricultural use value. ❖ To introduce subsection (D) essentially will require the department to do inspections on all non-dedicated agricultural use properties every year. The three events (A), (B), and (C) under 19-57(d)(1) that trigger the rollback tax are overt actions initiated by the owner of the property. • These changes occur as a result of the owner's request for the zoning change, subdivision, or creation of a condominium property regime. • Subdivision into parcels of less than five acres is the most common reason for processing rollback taxes for this agricultural program. • One of the main intent of the rollback section of 19-57 was to keep the agricultural parcel as large a unit as possible. • Section 19-57(d)(2) • This section should remain as is and the proposed changes should not be added. • The deferred tax provision is written with a "shall" because of the owner's overt action to change the status of the land by rezoning, subdividing, or creating a condominium. ➢ When signing the application for this program, the owner agreed to the deferred tax provisions. ❖ The three events (A), (B), or (C) under (d)(1) that trigger the rollback tax are overt actions initiated by the owner of the property ❖ These changes occur through the owner's request for zoning change, subdivision, or creation of a condominium property regime. • Section 19-57(e). The administrative rules of the department shall include criteria to determine whether a particular land use is eligible for the nondedicated agricultural assessment under subsection (a)(1) of this section. This subsection should not be added to the code. Section 19-2, Definitions, sufficiently lists examples for intensive agriculture, orchards, feed crops and fast rotation forestry, and for pasture and slow rotation forestry. 2