+- Punaweb Forum (http://punaweb.org/forum)
+-- Forum: Punaweb Forums (http://punaweb.org/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: Punatalk (http://punaweb.org/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=10)
+--- Thread: Cultural Rifts? (/showthread.php?tid=15291)
RE: Cultural Rifts? - kalakoa - 12-29-2014
They did this in violation of their own planning codes
Related: a lawmaker tried, multiple times, for legislation that would require Ag lots to be a minimum five acres, because it's really difficult to run a "farm" on 7500 square feet.
"substandard roads" - created by the CoH - have been disenfranchised from services, maintenance or access to Fuel Tax Revenue
Again: if it's okay for County to violate their own rules, fine, just don't expect everyone to sign up for "permits" and "inspections".
RE: Cultural Rifts? - Johnd - 12-29-2014
ditto. The County is a nest of yakuzas. How long before they reap what they sowed?
jdo
RE: Cultural Rifts? - geochem - 12-29-2014
little racist there jdo - care to make the same statement about Detroit, New York, or our nation's capitol? and somehow, I don't think Helene Hale would qualify for any yakuza gang I am familiar with.
RE: Cultural Rifts? - Rob Tucker - 12-29-2014
Geochem,
Please let's not start another bickerfest.
RE: Cultural Rifts? - PunaMauka2 - 12-29-2014
i'm guessing there wasn't much real, if any, racist intent in Johnd's statement. maybe he just enjoys watching old yakuza themed movies (samurai too) like i do. but then i am assuming the best here.
by the way, Helen Hale have all her digits intact?
RE: Cultural Rifts? - geochem - 12-29-2014
quote:
Originally posted by Rob Tucker
The road requirements stated road widths, road frequency, road beds and road surface. None of these requirements were enforced in 1959. In fact for many subdivisions the tract maps were approved and property offered for sale before even the most rudimentary paths were bulldozed.
all you say may well be true - but the subdivisions were approved by the county government - in the prevailing government culture at the time, that was acceptable. I don't think that makes those subdivisions illegal. You also have to remember that, at the time, there were few small, privately-held parcels that were available for fee simple ownership - nearly all the arable land was producing sugar and not available unless you were very wealthy.
In retrospect, it was a bad idea to subdivide those lands - but neither the government, nor anyone else, had the knowledge at the time that the volcanic risk is as high as we now know it is.
Bottom line, it's probably not a fruitful exercise to claim that current property owners on the island (aka the County government) is under an obligation to make Puna property owners whole for decisions that were made a half century ago. Those (Puna) owners reaped the benefit of a lower property cost and lower property taxes - knowingly or not, they took on the obligations of self-maintained (substandard) roads and minimal utility support as well as a higher risk for lava inundation and earthquake frequency.
I'd also note that the tradition of "tax mining" of off-island owners, continues unabated today - non-resident owners pay a higher rate than resident owners - not because they place a heavier governmental burden on the County, but simply because they aren't part of the voter base and the politicos can get away with it.
RE: Cultural Rifts? - steve1 - 12-29-2014
"Bottom line, it's probably not a fruitful exercise to claim that current property owners on the island (aka the County government) is under an obligation to make Puna property owners whole for decisions that were made a half century ago. Those (Puna) owners reaped the benefit of a lower property cost and lower property taxes - knowingly or not"
I disagree. After buying a house in HPP and looking the differences in valuations and tax assessment it looks to me like HPP owners routinely subsidize Hilo's lower tax assessments.
Have successfully argued my point before the County tax appeal board to get my valuation dropped to the actual purchase price which I firmly believe was the true value at the time, but why should I have even had to argue that? Because the County compares values of people who live in HPP with other houses in HPP owned by off-island people who probably won't contest increased "valuation". Higher tax valuation is not an advantage for people who just want to live in their house.
I see Hilo properties sell for multiple hundreds of thousands of dollars and assessment rate stays well under 100k even after being sold. And they get access to piped water, sewers, street sweepers (ever see one in Puna?), many developed parks, etc. But more property owners in Hilo live on-island (my assumption) and are probably more likely to challenge higher assessed values than off-island Puna property owners.
Someone more knowledgeable and politically connected than me could probably successfully argue tax bias in the Oahu tax court, but you could be sure that the County would spare no expense (and very
expensive legal council) trying to defend their position.
RE: Cultural Rifts? - Rob Tucker - 12-29-2014
The county needs to be taken on in Federal court. The CoH's liabilities are huge.
RE: Cultural Rifts? - JohnDW - 12-29-2014
Gee Rob, instead of a bicker fest with nightly pissing matches and pontificating exhibitions PunaWeb could actually be an organizing tool. How much to join that cause?
Un Mojado Sin Licencia
RE: Cultural Rifts? - Johnd - 12-29-2014
quote:nope, I used the term quite literately actually. that is what they have been and that is what they are. Careful when pulling the racist card boys; don't be so fast with that one, there is more than meets the eye...in any culture.
Originally posted by PunaMauka2
i'm guessing there wasn't much real, if any, racist intent in Johnd's statement. maybe he just enjoys watching old yakuza themed movies (samurai too) like i do. but then i am assuming the best here.
by the way, Helen Hale have all her digits intact?
jdo