Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Nonprofit Tax Compromise topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee backs one‑time real‑property tax compromise for Hui Oha'ula amid community testimony
Summary
The Budget Committee reported Resolution 25‑44, recommending a one‑time compromise of historic tax bills for a nonprofit that operates in a city building in Hauʻula; proponents described the site as a community resilience hub and asked for relief while DLNR finalizes a longer lease.
The Council Budget Committee recommended Resolution 25‑44 be reported out for adoption, approving a one‑time compromise of specified real‑property tax amounts owed by Hui Oha'ula for a parcel identified as TMK 5‑4‑014‑003 and reducing those tax liabilities to the minimum tax of $300, pending appeal or lease clarifications.
Andrew T. Kawano, director designate, said the Department of Budget and Fiscal Services is constrained by law and asked the committee to allow the appeal process to run to conclusion. He said the administration would like to support the resolution but must adhere to the status of ongoing appeals and could not discuss the case’s merits in committee.
Council members and community testifiers described the Hauʻula nonprofit as providing services in a city building that serves kupuna, emergency preparedness, social services and many community programs. Dottie Kelly Paddock, Marie Samudio and resident Renee Fonaimoana testified about the organization’s volunteer work, resilience‑hub planning, and past service delivery in the Koʻolauloa region.
Council Member Weier framed the measure as a remedy for an administrative mismatch: the property is state land leased to the nonprofit and questions remain about lease length and whether the nonprofit should qualify for nonprofit exemptions under the Revised Ordinances of Honolulu. Weier said DLNR has verbally agreed to extend the lease to meet ROH requirements and that the committee’s action seeks to avoid overburdening a nonprofit that provides essential services.
Council members acknowledged precedents and warned that similar requests will recur; the committee chair said the property’s circumstances — city building use and state land lease — make the request distinct from routine appeals. After discussion, the committee reported the resolution out for adoption to full council for final action.
