• We need protection from tax hikes • Profits should not be at land’s expense • Faith in council’s decision about Bill 2491 • Taxes paid should reflect services received We need protection from tax hikes Walter Lewis again does
• We need protection from tax hikes • Profits should not be at land’s expense • Faith in council’s decision about Bill 2491 • Taxes paid should reflect services received
We need protection from tax hikes
Walter Lewis again does an outstanding job of analyzing the gross inefficiency in the way our county government is run — his editorial “Understanding the real property tax cap” published Aug. 9.
As Mr. Lewis points out, those who run this county vigorously opposed the Ohana Kauai Charter Amendment that would have rolled back tax amounts to the 1999 level on the Homestead Class (the class that pays 9 to 10 percent of total property tax revenues) and impose a 2 percent cap on the annual tax increase that would be allowable.
But when the people by more than a 2-to-1 margin voted for the amendment, our “leaders” (being the political animals they are) knew that they had to do something to placate their constituents. So they adopted by ordinance a 2 percent annual limit on tax amount increases after 2004, a distinct disadvantage to tax payers over the Ohana Kauai proposal that would have set the 2 percent date at 1999.
Thus the tax payers have had this 2 percent safety net for almost 10 years and it was badly needed.
Yes, the never talked about tax rate is a major tool that the council has to set our property tax — property assessment multiplied by tax rate equals our tax obligation.
As Mr. Lewis wisely points out, the proposed removal of the 2 percent cap to leave the people subject to the council’s arbitrary use of the tax rate would be extremely risky. Least we forget, when property values were skyrocketing and our council had a chance to lower the rates to keep taxes affordable, they failed to do this and some taxes went up 100 and 200 percent!
“Citizens can only hope that council deliberations should conclude that deletion of the cap should not be made unless a meaningful protection for residents against undo tax increases is enacted” — excellent advice, Mr. Lewis, with the your operative word being MEANINGFUL!
Glenn Mickens
Kapaa
Profits should not be at land’s expense
Genetically modified seeds must to be bought from biotech seed companies every year. Farmers cannot germinate biotech seeds from crops grown from these seeds. This is the basis for profit within these companies. Although genetic splicing is supposed to make the plants more insect and disease free, the continued regular use of pesticides and herbicides belies this assertion.
The claim that this approach to agriculture is engaged in to help the projected 9 billion people to eat is also rather suspect.
There are other ways to control the problem of overpopulation, including education, easily obtainable birth control, and so on.
The bottom line appears to be profits, and these profits are at the expense of the long-term health of the aina.
Kauai still has not recovered its soil quality from pineapple and sugar cane production, let alone the effects of genetically spliced plants. Every company needs to make profits, but this should not be at the expense of the land.
Meanwhile, the county council has acted in an historically typical fashion, which is to sidestep or postpone an important decision by hiring expensive consultants, or becoming snarled in legal questions.
If members of the council are being threatened because of the GMO bill, this should be reported so everyone knows about it. I have heard that the biotech companies have been threatened, this is newsworthy and should not be tolerated by the community.
Molly Jones
Kealia
Faith in council’s decision about Bill 2491
All too often, but frequently with good reason, Americans bemoan the performance of their elected officials.
Having witnessed the performance of the Kauai County Council at the marathon July 31 hearing concerning Bill 2491, I felt proud to be a resident of Kauai with these individuals representing us.
The sincerity of their questioning, the objective professionalism of their behavior, and their sheer stamina in conducting this very lengthy session was extremely impressive.
The fact that our elected officials cared enough about this island and its citizenry to listen to hours of passionate testimony was nothing short of moving.
Video excerpts of this hearing would be a great case study for our local high school government classes. Regardless of which side of this issue we citizens of Kauai stand, as long as excessive corporate money is not allowed to be thrown at Bill 2491, I believe that our Kauai County Council will appropriately reach a solution that will protect both the safety and the security of this island and its people.
Thank you, council.
Dr. John Wichert
Kalaheo
Taxes paid should reflect services received
If our local government had not sued itself some years ago to avoid implementing the will of the voting public, and had not the Hawaii Supreme Court ruled the word county meant the elected government as opposed to the body politic, as clearly stated in our charter, none of these property tax raises, fixes, credits and workarounds would be happening or necessary.
As for fairness, it is in the eye of the beholder, like beauty.
To me, fairness would be to have a nexus between services received and taxes paid. The solution, it seems to me, is to broaden the property tax base to include all nonprofits, including churches, and at same time reduce government spending and inefficiencies.
The council could also impose its own one cent per container landfill fee on all non-biodegradable food and drink packaging and a 1$ per day road maintenance fee on all rental cars.
Michael Wells
Moloaa
