What are the most significant problems facing Kauai that county government has the power to address via changes in public policy?
Most residents would probably say traffic, affordable housing and our ever expanding landfill. Others I am sure would add in stream diversions, coastal water pollution, and the protection of the cultural resources including the traditional practice of making pa’akai.
Today, my focus is on affordable housing.
The good news is that the Kauai County Council has taken some significant yet incremental steps toward increasing the availability of affordable housing. The passage of the additional rental unit law has the potential to facilitate the addition of meaningful numbers of new affordable rentals. The recent move to allow kitchens in guest houses, likewise will help increase the number of new rental units available to local residents.
It is noteworthy that both of these measures are simply changes in public policy and require no public funds to implement. It is also important that while new housing inventory will be created, the development will not result in increased sprawl into our valuable agricultural lands. An additional huge plus is that the financial benefits of the new rentals will go to local owner/builders and the construction labor and materials will come from local contractors and suppliers.
Because of these basic changes in public policy, the potential to dramatically increase our affordable housing inventory is significant.
But there is one remaining element that still needs to be put into place to bring this reality to fruition: Incentives
Aggressive financial incentives for those who begin building affordable ARUs within a defined time period (say during the next 36 months) and commit to keeping those units affordable — would “jump start” and motivate property owners to build affordable ARU’s in the immediate future.
Without strong incentives, the good intentions and foundational nature of these new measures, may very well not meet the need nor the potential.
The incentives need to be designed to encourage owners to build quickly, with perhaps extra incentives for the first X number of units built and rented.
Councilmembers Chock and Evslin have recently proposed the reduction or waiving of certain permitting fees for those property owners who construct an affordable ARU on their property. This is a good first step and they and the council should be commended for supporting this effort.
However, in order to seriously spur the new construction of affordable ARUs and motivate owners to build now, the incentives must be stronger and as enticing as possible.
The waiving of any increase in property tax that would normally occur from the increase in value that comes with all new construction, is one potential powerful option.
A new home costing $200,000 to construct would normally generate between $610 and $1,210 per year in additional property tax revenue (depending on applicable tax rate). A 10 or 20 year waiver would thus reduce the cost of constructing the ARU by 5 to 10% (over a 10-20 year time period).
Note: Because the property tax waiver discussed above only applies to the new construction of affordable ARUs, there is no out of pocket expense to the county. The county would continue to receive the normal tax revenue from the main residence and land. The only “lost” revenue is revenue that is not coming into the county now anyway.
If the property tax waiver was combined with additional fee waivers for the water meter, electrical hook-ups and other fees — it may be possible to achieve as much as a 20% benefit (of construction costs) to the owner/builder, which would then be at a level to truly motivate a surge in new affordable ARU development.
Affordability must be a prerequisite that owner/builders would agree to in order to qualify for the incentives AND it would be important to limit the benefits to the first XXX number (say 500) of affordable ARUs constructed so as to motivate owners to build
Some of course will say the incentives are too “rich” and while others will assert that they are not rich enough.
Erring on the side of making the incentives too “weak,” risks receiving minimal results in terms of moving the needle on affordable housing. Erring on the side of making the incentives “too strong” on the other hand, risks creating a construction boom and creating an abundance of affordable housing opportunities.
Nothing of course is free, but it’s important to remember that the proposed incentives are paid entirely from fees and taxes that would not be realized anyway, if not for the construction of the affordable ARU unit. As such, the incentives would have a zero impact on the county budget.
The above is intended to facilitate the broadening and continuation of a discussion our community and our county council has already begun.
Stay tuned for future columns reviewing potential public policy initiatives, that could be utilized in dealing with other significant county problems.
•••
Gary Hooser formerly served in the state Senate, where he was majority leader. He also served for eight years on the Kauai County Council and was former director of the state Office of Environmental Quality Control. He serves presently in a volunteer capacity as board president of the Hawaii Alliance for Progressive Action (HAPA) and is executive director of the Pono Hawaii Initiative.
check out the new rules
This won’t reduce the cost of housimg.
This will increase densities and the island will experience increased influx further jamming up the roads on the island.
Property tax waivers do nothing to improve infrastructure so tax increases will be necessary.
Bad idea. Misleading promises.
Let Kauai remain rural and uncongested!
I am with you, Westside!
Omgerd, my TGI subscription is up for renewal and in this instance, I have found that the media newspapers from Kauai to Hawaii island have been sideswiped with fake politicians, who have been sideswiping these islands for so long, folks think it is supposed to be like this, all G. However, if you are or were paying attention the last 126-years, or even two decades worth, you would know and see what is truth and has integrity! FB is actively monitoring the “movement” and even though the Z-team falls right in with kuleana purchases as has the fake state and counties. Ive asked the council and the 5th circuit to “show us the treaty of annexation”. Sidelining is what the government does best and they have several hundo years practice or teaching terrorism 101 with their wishywashy compadres.
Interesting article. So, is the goal is to provide enough incentives so that anyone who wants to live on Kauai will have an option of renting affordable housing, no matter how many people that may be? Do we really want that? I suppose the ideal goal would be to provide affordable housing for “locals”, whomever that term applies to or is defined, but, remember, you can’t discriminate with housing. Any new arrival would be just as likely to rent these affordable housing units as someone born and raised here. I’m not ready for more people, more traffic, more pressure on our infrastructure, and more urbanization. I’m more of a slow growth or even no growth advocate. Not everyone who wants to live here can afford to live here. Sad, but true. We don’t want to end up like Maui or Oahu, do we?
As long as property taxes remain one of the highest in the country, there will not be any affordable housing. Our property taxes are outrageous! With the new influx of tourist who contribute to our economy, why do our taxes remain at the extreme levels they have reached? What do we get for our tax money? Good roads? No it always gets spent. Ask the politicians who run our government what happens to the tourism money that taxpayers see no benefit from. It hasn’t reduced our taxes and therefore will not allow the landowners to offer homes or cottages at a reasonable rate. They simply afford to offer it!