Aloha!  

Commercial Activities at City Beach Parks

 Last year I introduced Bill 5 (2011), which sought to prohibit commercial activities at all beach parks on Sundays.  After looking at the various ways the City has tried to address conflicts between beachgoers and commercial activities, it appeared that the simplest way to address these problems was to ensure that there is one day a week where beach parks would be reserved for exclusive use by beachgoers.  The Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) has acknowledged that the problem of conflicts between users and commercial operators is not limited to Kailua—it is an island-wide problem.  However, DPR had requested an opportunity to try to address these problems through further revisions to their rules.  The department has indicated that they intend to publish the draft revisions early this year.  However, we have not yet seen a copy of these draft rules and the problems continue to escalate.  I have requested that Bill 5 be placed on next week’s Parks Committee agenda for consideration.  It is my hope that the committee will pass this measure out so that we can start addressing this issue now—rather than continue to wait.

Vehicle “Smart Boots”

Just this week, I introduced legislation to establish a City operated “Smart Boot” program aimed at disabling vehicles whose owners have an excessive number of outstanding parking violations.  Modeled after programs already in existence in numerous other municipalities, this program would help to ensure that motorists with outstanding financial obligations are denied the privilege of operating their vehicles on public roadways.

 In a 2008 feasibility study conducted by the Honolulu Police Department it was found that nearly 7,000 vehicles had more than three outstanding parking violations. In one case there was a vehicle with nearly 90 outstanding violations; the majority of vehicles had 3-9 outstanding violations.  The total dollar value of these outstanding violations totaled nearly $1.5M.  Although there is a system in place to prevent vehicles with outstanding violations from being registered, I believe that the data clearly indicates that this program is not all that effective.  While the initial concept of this program is to go after those vehicles with three or more outstanding violations, I believe that if the program is successful, it could be expanded to address more significant issues such as motor vehicles being operated without valid insurance.  The feasibility study also noted that in 2007 there were 660,377 vehicles registered in Honolulu and nearly 27,000 citations were issued for lack of motor vehicle insurance.  The value of the fines associated with this number of citations would be a minimum of $13.5M and a maximum of $40.5M.  I would like to see the program implemented and – if successful – expanded to address other types of outstanding financial obligations related to motor vehicles.

 When you look at the projected costs to run this program—approximately $1M annually—and the value of the outstanding parking violations, it’s very clear that this program would most likely be revenue neutral – that’s assuming you caught every single delinquency in the first year.  I think that it’s more important to get the message across to motorists that you need to meet your financial obligation if you want to operate your vehicle on public roads.

 It is important to note, however, that this program could not be initiated without the State’s approval.  Currently, the City does not have the authority to implement such a program without the explicit approval of the State.  The City could also not operate this program without being allowed to keep the proceeds from the fines collected.  If we can’t get the State’s approval to implement this project, then the idea is dead in the water.  Similarly, if the City can’t keep the fine proceeds to pay for the program, I couldn’t justify adding another subsidized program to the City’s already crowded field of subsidized operations.  I hope the State Legislature will see this as a good and self-sufficient program which will help to encourage motorists to meet their financial obligations to their fellow taxpayers.

Recommendations of the Real Property Tax Commission

Last year, the Council created a commission to assess the City’s real property tax system and offer apolitical recommendations on changes to the current real property tax system.  For those of you who have been following my efforts on real property tax reform, you may not have been surprised by one of the commission’s recommendations: elimination of the exemptions.  You may recall that one of my first actions as your Councilmember was to conduct a thorough and comprehensive review of our property tax system to determine the most efficient, effective and equitable means of providing tax relief to our homeowners.  When my staff and I reviewed the data, we found that if we were to eliminate property tax exemptions and apply the value of the exemptions to a reduced property tax rate, 80% of our homeowners would realize a greater savings than they currently receive through the exemptions.  Of the remaining 20% about half of those homeowners would see a slight increase in their tax bill and the other half would see little change.  Of course, this proposal did not get the support of the majority of my colleagues because of the emotional attachment to “exemptions.”  There was also concern that by eliminating the exemptions, the burden to prudently adjust tax rates would rest solely with elected officials—some of who may be reluctant to raise tax rates to offset declining values because of the possible political risk. 

 I have always believed that the real property tax system has become far too bloated with inefficient “relief schemes” with no direct correlation to taxpayers’ financial need- tax relief MUST BE DIRECTLY CORRELATED TO FINANCIAL NEED.  This has only served to complicate an otherwise simple system: properties are assessed a value and the tax rate is set according to the need of the City’s budget demands.  When values go up, the tax rate goes down.  When values go down, the tax rate rises.  At the end of the day property tax bills should not significantly change year-over-year.  I am going to continue my push for reform of our property tax system to ensure that our tax system is simple, fair and equitable.