HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0739.130 2016-2018C Y MEN}}
From: Bob and Kathy Fitts O .H.A . t 11J(L1 10%
To: Council Testimony �Aq
Valerie; Chun Aaron; Lee Lo Sue' Ohara Eileen R s fifer av ' .M eiluha. DruV
Cc: Poindexter,Q. x, �� .
Eoff. Karen: Richards, Tim
Subject: Bill 108
Date: Saturday, June 02, 2018 1:37:39 PM
Greetings Honorable Hawaii County Council Members,
I am writing regarding Bill 108. I am opposed to the bill as currently written, particularly the
recently added item (e) Good Neighbor Policy. A further clarification and detailing of how to
properly and correctly measure sound, and the ramifications of infraction seems quite
necessary.
While I do agree with the idea of a "good neighbor policy", it doesn't seem clear that this
would be the outcome (good neighbor relations). The (e) seems to indicate that these things
are to be communicated to the guests prior to arrival, and displayed prominently in the
Vacation Home Rental (VHR). With those two items in place, what then happens if these are
not followed through by the guest? Fines? Revocation of the Nonconforming Use Permit for
the property owner? It is not clear. If it IS a revocation of the permit, this would do
considerable harm to neighborly relations, economic hardship for the property owner (for us, a
couple in our 60's, it -provides a substantial part of our monthly income), economic hardship
for the management company and all the service providers currently employed. This is not to
mention the volume of guests anticipating (and having paid for) a vacation on the island.
The items 1, 2 and 3, relating to sound, have no quantitative measurements by which to
determine if there has been an infraction, leaving the burden of proof on the guest/property
owner/property management. Sound that crosses a boundary line?? What about that
neighborhood dog that barks all night? Or that party (with amplified sound) by a homeowner
that extends well beyond the proposed 9 PM quiet time for a VHR? This opens wide the door
for any neighbor to report a VHR even if there has been no infraction, simply because they
don't want a VHR in the neighborhood.
What IS the sound that is normally "associated with a residential area"? Is it a decibel
number? Does it change by neighborhood? The penalty seems to have the great potential of
being more severe for a VHR than for a long-term rental or owner occupied. While everyone
in a neighborhood, guest and resident alike, should be aware of the sound being produced and
having consideration for others, there needs to be substantiation that there IS an infraction.
Secondly, with our visitor volume in jeopardy because of the current (and who knows how
long) volcanic eruption and all the broad news coverage it is receiving, it seems like now is
not the time to be hampering either the availability of visitor accommodation options, or to cut
off the tax flow revenue that is generated by VHR. I read last week the county is concerned by
lost property taxes from the destroyed homes in Puna. We are residents of Kailua-Kona since
198 Land have been homeowners and property tax payers since 1988. Our "family home" is
now a permanent VHR, and we pay a considerable amount more property taxes than when we
had the property tax exemption when we lived in the home. We own and live in a 1 BR condo
now. To cut off the flow of the inflated Property Tax that is charged for a VHR, as well as the
TA and GE taxes generated by VHR, seems quite short-sighted for the much-needed revenue
production for Hawaii County.
Cry► No. 1 39t I7.7
Ref. Tm f
Ref. ®ate JUN 0 5 2013 '
Thank you for allowing input on this most important decision the effects not only the owners
and operators of VHR, but by the great number of people who maintain their livelihood by
servicing the properties that provide wonderful vacation holidays for thousands of guests.
Sincerely,
Kathryn Fitts
76-6246 Alii Dr #242
Kailua-Kona, HI 96740