Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0923.014 2014-2016 October 4, 2016 RE: Testimony Against Bills 218 and 219 October 4, 2016 Name: Wesley Takai --;` Dear Members of the Hawaii County Council: "c M This is my testimony against Bills 218 and 219. A similar written testimony was »' K: submitted at the September 20 hearing in Kona. It is my belief that these bills show; —. be voted against and defeated today for the following reasons: • As a retired real property employee, I am very familiar with the provisions of the nondedicated agricultural use assessment and the commercial agricultural use dedication programs as I worked with these for over 34 years. • These two programs may not be perfect but are functional and accepted by the agricultural community as written. • It is unwise to continue to spend more time on these two bills that are unpopular with..the agricultural community who are directly affected by the proposed changes. • There are only two more months left in the current council term. It would be unfair to the upcoming council members to be handed these bills should they be deferred or continued which may likely happen if it is not defeated today, especially when the authors of both bills will no longer be in office. • It would be much wiser for the council to spend the next two months working on and finalizing issues that are not so controversial and will positively benefit the citizens of this county. • If a member of the new council feels that the agricultural code should be amended, let that person write a new bill. At least the council will have much more time to review the new proposal. I had submitted other comments at the finance committee meeting on July 18, 2016 and to the agricultural workshop on September 8, 2016. I'll be available if you want to ask me any questions. Thank you. Sincerely, Corm , 1 Ref. To: (c-e. WESLEY TAKAI Ref. Date OCT 0 4 201B Retired County Real Property Tax Administrator SUBJECT: Comments to Proposed Council Bill 219 Public Hearing: Monday, July 18, 2016 BILL 219 &Bill 218 These are pencil pushing bills and many farmers are not pencil pushers. Many of the farmers are doing whatever they can to put food on the table and some money to invest for their families' future. Please remember the old saying: Do not criticize someone else until you have walked in their shoes? As I have been saying for all the previous bills that have come up on these agricultural issues, if it is not broken, don't fix it. I truly believe that the real property division has recently started to implement a workable agricultural use inspection program that was Recommendation # on the IAAO audit of the county's real property tax program. How many of you have picked a bunch of bananas rather than going to the super market or farmers market for your bananas. I have picked hundreds of bunches of bananas for years to give to friends and relatives and it is not an easy job. Based on my experience, I think farmers are hard working and these pencil pushing bills are really a disservice to these hard working citizens of our community. They really need to be given some slack as they also pay real property taxes. It is easy for higher paid officer workers such as attorneys to criticize that these farmers are getting away from paying their fair share of taxes but have you ever been in the shoes of the Kona coffee farmer who toils over his coffee fields after coming back from his job at one of the hotels? Being raised in a plantation camp and as a real property appraiser with the county real property tax office seeing the hardships endured by those coffee farmers for almost 20 years, I truly believe in the intent of the non-agricultural use program passed by the legislators in 1973. The purpose of Act 175, (state the intent) is still very applicable today to the coffee farmers and all other hardworking farmers and ranchers in this county. As I have mentioned in several of my past testimonies on this subject, if it is not broken, don't fix it. 1