HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024-03-27 PL-CCI-2024-000003 Bill 121 Gordon Lindquist Testimony From: oordon lindouist
To: WPCtestimony
Subject: Vote NO on Bill 121
Date: Wednesday,March 27,2024 5:35:11 PM
As a former planning commissioner for 7 years in a growing suburb in the San Francisco Bay area
during the late 1990s into mid 2003, 1 know the work and difficulties in making decisions that effect
people's lives.
Bill 121 has not been thought through, it has received little public input from those it would directly
effect, and no studies were done to support the measure. I and my wife are Kapuna in our 70's,
retiring here in Kailua-Kona after a career in public education as a teacher and administrator. We
have a hosted STVR that IS our retirement plan. We could not afford to continue to live in Kailua-
Kona if this measure passes as written for several reasons. Please consider the following:
1. The income from the STVR or TAR far exceeds what the small unit would rent for long term.
Reducing our annual income by 75%.
2. Our taxes have increased from $6.10 to$11.15 per 1000 valuation and then it was rolled back
three years. I could not afford to rent long term with those tax rates
3. The State and County receive over$11000 annually which would disappear since I refuse to
rent long term. This is due to having been a landlord for years in a very liberal state. Hawaii is
no different in their policies which favor tenant right over landlord rights. The time to evict
someone not paying rent is not worth the risk.
4. If this bill passes in its present form, as a current host, I am being asked to sign a notarized
form stating that the improvements to my home were made with a building permit. If I lie on
the form, I am subject to prosecution. Therefore I will not lie, sign the form and would be
forced to stop renting as a TAR. The solution is to allow the improvements to be verified as
meeting health and safety and building codes by a county licensed home inspector, building
contractor, or structural engineer (if such improvements made to the structure required such
engineering)
5. Not only do we lose as a retired couple just trying to survive in this outrageously expensive
state, but our service contractors such as landscaper, pool maintenance, and cleaning
personnel could very well lose as well.
6. The guests we host either do not want to stay at a resort or they simply can't afford those
rates. We host many families from south Korea, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Germany,
Italy as well as many states on the mainland. They love the quiet and secure surroundings that
we offer in our hosted unit.
7. Where is the documentation of complaints? We have never had a single complaint. We our
on the property and greet our guests and control any behavior which could cause our
neighbors irritations. I would like to see the number of complaints that have been made to
hosted vs. unhosted TARs.
8. Where I live in my own home is my business and not the counties. There should be no
requirements for interior floor plans. Only sufficient off street parking should be addressed.
9. There should be no requirements for signage on the property. Our guests find our location
without any need for signage. This is government over reaching once again.
Go back to the drawing board. Vote No on this measure 121 and have the council proponents start
again, this time with input from those effect, studies from institutions. Come back with a bill that
everyone can live with.
Thank you for reading this letter.
Sincerely
Gordon and Rhonda Lindquist
Sent from Mail for Windows