I don't think there's any real doubt that Tiffany "resides" in Hawaiian Acres and is registered to vote in District 5, and uses Kurtistown PO as her mailing address (used to file).
The issue I see is that she was knowingly getting a tax break on a property where she was not residing, by claiming that she resided there. Those of us who claim homeowner's exemptions are I would hope clear that we get the tax break on our primary residence only. (Husband and wife get only one between them if they live separately.)
quote:
Who qualifies for the home exemption?
You are entitled to the home exemption if:
1. You own and occupy the property as your principal home for more than 200 calendar days of a calendar year. The term Òprincipal homeÓ is defined as the place where an individual has a true, fixed, permanent home and principal establishment, and to which place the individual has, whenever absent, the intention of returning. It is the place in which a person has voluntarily fixed habitation, not for mere special, temporary, or vacation purposes, but with the intention of making a permanent home.
The three elements that are necessary for real property to be considered a Òprincipal homeÓ are:
The taxpayer has no other home exemption, or principal home in any other jurisdiction
Intent of the owner to create or maintain a principal home within the County
OwnerÕs actual physical occupancy of the principal home within the County [emphasis mine]
http://www.hawaiireporter.com/hawaii-rea...-taxes/123
Obviously, it she resides in Hawaiian Acres, she doesn't meet either of the elements I bolded above.
You're supposed to go in and change it if you move out of that home. It's a simple form. You just walk into the County Property Tax office and relinquish your exemption or if you own a different home you shift it. The tax break itself may not change until the next billing goes out, but the change is in effect right away in terms of you complying with the rules.
I doubt she should be disqualified on residency requirement, but there is an ethical question for the voters regarding taking an unentitled tax break. She's between a rock and a hard place now. Either she lives in the Hilo house and is not eligible to run in District 5, or she falsified a homeowner's exemption. I don't see a middle road here, but very likely her attorney is working one up. Meanwhile, she already said publicly that she lives in HA, so that leaves the improper HO exemption as the problem.
Then she's between a rock and a hard place there too, because either she admits some fraud or she pleads stupidity and confusion. Calling it the homeowner exemption "thing" is I guess going with the I don't really get it defense?
Anyone who in all honesty and attempt to be "akamai" as she puts it on the video takes a couple years to "sort out" the rules on where she can take an HO exemption might not be equipped to be a councilperson and write legislation. JMHO, but it's not rocket science and the form is very clear. And if you're not clear, the clerk in the Property Tax Division will make it clear in under five minutes. There's no "what's best" for your marital estate consideration. It's simply what you're entitled to based on where you actually reside.
ETA. There's no question of which property gets the exemption when spouses reside in the same home. When spouses reside separately, then yes there is a decision as to which spouse's property gets the exemption. But Tiffany clearly stated that she and her husband reside together, so that's not a viable excuse.
