Posts: 306
Threads: 29
Joined: Oct 2006
Wondering if there is any more discussion by government officials about offering government land to homeowners who lost their homes to lava ?
Posts: 1,238
Threads: 39
Joined: Jun 2018
Considering that the land that Ruderman wanted to swap was leasehold, not surprised that this issue has gone quiet.
Posts: 3,210
Threads: 109
Joined: Jun 2010
They are also/instead considering giving tens of millions in tax dollars to Shipman, so they can improve and sell their privately owned land at a huge profit. Lava evacuees will get the first chance to pay for these lots.
Posts: 1,179
Threads: 7
Joined: Jul 2012
huge profit? cool... they deserve it.. aloha
common sense would tell you ... everything is a 'profit' when you bought your land for 29 cents/acre from the Lunalilo Estate 140+ yrs ago...
******************************************************************
save our indigenous and endemic Hawaiian Plants... learn about them, grow them, and plant them on your property, ....instead of all that invasive non-native garbage I see in most yards... aloha
******************************************************************
save our indigenous and endemic Hawaiian Plants... learn about them, grow them, and plant them on your property, ....instead of all that invasive non-native garbage I see in most yards... aloha
Posts: 1,070
Threads: 9
Joined: Mar 2014
In addition to this - Ship-man is being paid by the Feds via USDA -
$2000.00 per month per acre NOT to grow sugar for the next 40+ years,even after sugar closed down in the 1970s -- 1980s.Sort of like the current bailout of soybeans and compensating soybean farmers in the tariff tussle with China at this time.The Sako's had 2000 acres in sugar from upper Huina Rd to above Mtn View and to this day are being paid $2000.00 per acre / per month by the USDA NOT to grow sugar for the next 40+ years.
Mrs.Mimosa
Posts: 14,121
Threads: 424
Joined: Aug 2012
Ship-man is being paid ... $2000.00 per month per acre
This explains why none of that land is getting developed.
Posts: 1,070
Threads: 9
Joined: Mar 2014
kalakoa - Exactly and to the point.Ship-man will for the next 40+ years only lease those sugar lands to ag related farming as allowed by the USDA.The Sako's own the land between Hwy 11 and the different subdivisions all the way to Fern Forest . Once all sugar and have sold very few large parcels but still get the 2K a month per acre NOT to grow sugar. The acreage from Hwy 11 to the subdivisions is considered a flood zone . Open space - not homes at 2K an acre per month for the next 40+ years NOT to grow sugar.Land swap doubtful .
Mrs.Mimosa.
Posts: 11,051
Threads: 753
Joined: Sep 2012
This explains why none of that land is getting developed.
Does it also explain why Shipman contributes next to nothing in real estate taxes to Hawaii County? Collect $2000 per acre from the Federal government, then pay a few bucks per acre to County government in real estate taxes.
It's good work if you can get it. Especially when there's no work involved.
Is the jury still deadlocked? The odds that natural climate variability can account for the magnitude of the temperature changes over the course of the satellite record are roughly five in a million, researchers report. - Science, July 19, 2018.
"I'm at that stage in life where I stay out of discussions. Even if you say 1+1=5, you're right - have fun." - Keanu Reeves
Posts: 14,121
Threads: 424
Joined: Aug 2012
Does it also explain why Shipman contributes next to nothing in real estate taxes
I believe the land is classed as "pasture" for tax assessment purposes; County has no special provisions for "tax farming", maybe they should.
1000 acres * $2K/mo * 12 mo/yr == $24M/year, for one of the "smaller" Shipman parcels.
Posts: 2,151
Threads: 73
Joined: Mar 2007
I would love someone to provide some documentation for these supposed $2,000 per month per acre payments. Of course, bashing the Shipmans on Punaweb is a popular local sport, so I don't expect to see any proof. Sounds like a wildly inaccurate rural legend to me. And before you jump all over me, I do agree that the tax bill on much of the property in question is ridiculously low.