A County Charter amendment that mandates lower homeowner property taxes is now law. That’s the claim an Ohana Kauai member made yesterday in court where a ruling was made on the County of Kaua‘i’s unique lawsuit against itself. The amendment
A County Charter amendment that mandates lower homeowner property taxes is now law.
That’s the claim an Ohana Kauai member made yesterday in court where a ruling was made on the County of Kaua‘i’s unique lawsuit against itself.
The amendment was passed by a ma-jority of voters in the general election in November and is now the focus of a lawsuit involving the County of Kaua‘i.
But that doesn’t mean anything is go-ing to change for resident homeowners right away, following a ruling made by Fifth Circuit Court Judge George M. Masuoka.
Masuoka decided Thursday that an injunction to keep the county from implementing the amendment was un-necessary.
So the county should begin imple-menting the law, said Walter S. Lewis, one of the leaders of ‘Ohana Kaua‘i and a party in a lawsuit.
Lewis said in a phone interview with The Garden Island after court yesterday that state law requires the county to publish a public notice within 30 days of the adoption of the law, promptly notify taxpayers, and be in a position to rem-edy the budget for the shortfall a drop in residential property taxes would bring.
“There is no longer any reason why they should not begin implementing the law,” he said. “Until now, the county has taken the position” that they would probably get the injunction.
“The Charter Amendment is now law,” Lewis continued. “We urge the county to take timely action as law requires.”
But the judge also delayed ruling on a motion for sum-mary judgment for three weeks, and denied four ‘Ohana members’ motion to dismiss the County of Kaua‘i’s case.
County officials responded that they were going to wait the three weeks following the judgment before taking any additional action.
“Judge Masuoka has taken the county’s motion for sum-mary judgment under advise-ment, and indicated he would be making a ruling in three weeks,” said Cyndi Mei Ozaki, county public information of-ficer. “Any action plan is con-tingent on the court’s ruling. Implementation decisions, if any, will be made once a ruling is issued.”
So, the amendment, and its projected tax relief to hom-eowners, remains in limbo.
And even a Matsuoka deci-sion might not be the final sway, the judge said in a rare statement made directly to the public.
“A summary judgment de-nial doesn’t mean the case is over,” said Masuoka, as the losing side has the opportunity to appeal the decision.
Lewis, who with three other ‘Ohana members, Ming Fang, Monroe F. Richman, and Gor-don Smith, have intervenor status on the case.
Their lawyer, Harold Bron-stein, has been arguing for the county to implement the law.
“We hope, on reflection that the court would recognize that Kaua‘i’s voters should have the lawful right to adopt tax relief,” Lewis said, “to protect themselves against the effects of rising government spend-ing and increased property values.”
The county argued, through Deputy County Attorney Carmen Wong and outside counsel from Goodsill, Ander-son, Quinn and Stifel, Gary M. Slovin and Corlis J Chang, that the amendment is uncon-stitutional because it takes away the taxing power of the county.
“This case is not about real property tax relief,” since the county agreed it’s needed, said Slovin.” The issue is if the abil-ity to amend the real property system (through amendment) is valid.”
Bronstein argued, among other points, that the county, if it thought the amendment was illegal, should have stopped the plan before it hit the ballot.
“They had a responsibility to keep (it) off the ballot,” said Bronstein.
“The county attorney looked at it and passed it through. These people just went along their merry way, certified the election,” and then sued themselves. Should the charter amendment be implemented, the impact to the county bud-get has been estimated any-where from $3 million to $9 million, Ozaki said.
So far, the lawsuit has cost taxpayers $10,444.67, she add-ed. But the case has progressed along, and naturally, addi-tional billing will be coming in. $60,000 has been allocated for outside counsel to help the county with the amendment.
Tom Finnegan, staff writer, can be reached at 245-3681 (ext. 252)
