Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Aina Kupuna topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee considers freezing Aina Kupuna program intake while exploring targeted relief for long-term owners
Summary
The committee considered Bill 110 to effectively freeze new eligibility under the Aina Kupuna program after a proposed cutoff tied to long-standing ownership; staff described the program as successful but noted enrollment had stalled and recommended a replacement targeted relief program; the item was deferred for further consideration.
The Special Committee on Real Property Tax Reform discussed Bill 110, which would change the county's Aina Kupuna program (real property dedicated as Aina Kupuna) by limiting new entries while allowing existing qualified participants to remain under current code provisions.
Marcy Martin, director of finance, said the Aina Kupuna program has been "very successful" but enrollment had stalled. The department's recommended approach was to preserve benefits for qualifying owners through the end of the year while considering a different, more targeted circuit-breaker or tax-relief approach for long-time owners going forward.
During public testimony Tom Crowley, who had served as a resource to prior property-tax workgroups, said the committee should ask whether the program had met its original goals and cautioned against unintended future abuse if it remained open without additional controls. The committee discussed specific eligibility phrasing in the draft, including references to ownership dating and an 80-year prior ownership threshold that would be used to cap new applicants (staff described the draft using an ownership cutoff tied to Dec. 31, 1945).
Committee members debated process and scope and emphasized they would confine deliberation under Sunshine Law to the items posted on the agenda. After discussion the chair declared the item deferred to a future meeting so members and staff could refine language and consider whether an alternate targeted relief program should be drafted.
No vote to adopt the draft ordinance was taken; the item was deferred so staff can return with clarifications and potential replacement options.
