Taxes and fairness I would regard the debate over “fairness” in property taxes with some amusement were it not so typical of the “much ado about nothing” that occupies so much of our council’s time. Fairness, like beauty, is in
Taxes and fairness
I would regard the debate over “fairness” in property taxes with some amusement were it not so typical of the “much ado about nothing” that occupies so much of our council’s time.
Fairness, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. One might ask: Was it “fair” for our county government to refuse to implement the will of the voters a few years ago (‘Ohana Kaua’i Charter Amendment) and sue itself all the way to the state Supreme Court to avoid the will of the voters?
Was it “fair” for that court to rule that taxpayers and voters have absolutely nothing to say about how much they are taxed except through their elected representative because the word county in the state constitution (in their view) meant our government, not our people? This, in spite of the fact that our charter clearly states the county IS the body politic?
Furthermore, how is it “fair” for property owners to pay the bulk of county expenses while non-property owners receive the same or in some cases even more in county services? I have been paying property taxes for over 25 years on this island and have received little or no county services ever. No water, no sewer and for many years we had to maintain the road ourselves. Koolau Road was so bad we drove on the smoother shoulder. Now the county comes around every month or so with four or five guys and a half million in equipment to mow the grass. So much for the efficient use of OUR hard-earned tax dollars.
In my view, the only “fair” form of property taxation would be to base the assessed value on what was paid for the property as opposed to the current method of basing it on what others pay for theirs (current “fair” market value).
This would eliminate the much time and expense the county spends implementing its current methodology and provide some stability for property owners and county coffers.
An additional benefit would be that average people might actually be able to comprehend the method by which they are taxed, as opposed to the various formulas, deductions, etc., that are currently in use, then changed, then changed again.
In the name of ‘fairness,” I urge all our elected representatives to lower our taxes, not raise them, as the county already has (or had?) a surplus of OUR money. Just simplify, not complicate, our property tax rules.
Lower property taxes, cut non-essential services and personnel and spread the pain of taxation with service and use taxes for those who choose to use county services. If you use the service, pay for it. If not, don’t. That seems “fair” to me.
Michael Wells, Moloa‘a
KCC Winter Concert
My wife and I attended the Winter Concert at KCC last night and we enjoyed it. But we left feeling empty because there were no Christmas songs being played.
The attendance was small, and I wonder if this is the reason. Christmas is a national holiday, so why not play more Christmas songs?
Doug Henry, Kalaheo
Beyond simplification
As the political scene heats up in anticipation of the 2012 elections, it may serve us to be reminded of the dangers of over-simplifying.
Lurking within and around all of us is a lazy willingness to settle for readymade, popularly paraphrased answers and responses to the very deep and profound issues we face.
In lieu of taking the time, and exercising the intellect required to engage in lengthy dialogue aimed at exploring long-term solutions, the temptation is to settle for a temporarily comforting and reassuring strategy of being immediately and simply for or against what others are simply against or for.
There is an old saying that when people feel free to do as they please they usually do what pleases or displeases others. That is like leaning ladders up against each other to keep them from falling down. The current presidential candidacy debates are clear examples of this.
Rather than addressing the real issues facing us, the candidates settle for “sound bites” that attack each other’s “sound bites” and elicit echoing “sound bites” from adoring echo-ers.
To paraphrase that great American philosopher Stephen Colbert, “We like our truth like our coffee—either black or white.”
The alternative is to stand nakedly exposed, rapt only in the awe of the open opportunities facing us, in the absence of simplification, open to the possibility of working out solutions with the potential of long-term benefit for all.
There is another old saying suggesting that we can receive no more than what we deserve. The emergence of the Tea Partyand the Occupy movements is evidence that we may yet deserve better than what we are receiving from our current political and economic systems.
Throughout our history as a human species the disenfranchised have always, if not immediately, begun to “think for themselves,” expecting and finally demanding an upgrade to the imposed system.
Not until the beginnings of democracy did the “upgrades” begin to emerge from the “bottom up.” All previous upgrades were imposed from the top down, imposed by those who “know better,” and tolerated by the lazy willingness of others who settled for not knowing better.
To be informed and effective takes time; to settle for business as usual could go on forever, or until we self-destruct.
Robert P. Merkle, Koloa
