I don’t know what to make of yesterday’s front page story in the Star-Advertiser on tax breaks given to “historic” houses (“Hidden homes get big tax breaks” by Rob Perez).
It’s the only story on the front page, and continues in a double-page spread inside on page 12-13.
You have to read down to paragraph #30 (by my quick count) to learn:
Among those benefiting from the program is acting Mayor Kirk Caldwell, who saw his property tax tab drop from nearly $5,500 in 2005 to $100 in 2006, several years before he started working for the city.
That’s seriously burying the lede!
Of course, it appears Caldwell is complying with the conditions of the tax deduction, as are many others.
I came away wondering whether the story deserved so much space and such prominent placement.
Discover more from i L i n d
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I imagine that the story about historic homes was actually about historic homes, and not about Caldwell.
These folks get the tax break in exchange for preserving the historic architecture of Hawaii neighborhoods. It also extremely limits them in what they can do with their homes, so there’s a trade-off.
An original Joe Pao home with all the original design and fixtures SHOULD be listed as a historic home if it’s more than 50 years old, as long as there have been no changes and it looks the way it did in 1959. Apply for it!
So if anyone can spot Jon Van Dyke’s from Waialae Kahala- does that make his house really “visible to the public”?
…and how do we taxpayers get on his invitee list…
There are two separate issues that people are confusing. There is the historic preservation issue which has historically and continually opposed by landowners and development interests and the question of a tax credit for historic preservation. The article focused solely on the tax credit issue and that should be the focus of the discussion. Burial protection is a part of the historic preservation process which like many historic preservation laws is under constant attack by land developers. The question of these tax credits and their over all role in getting land owners to subject their historic properties to preservation laws should be rigorously discussed and reviewed. Historic preservation is an important aspect of land use planning and development and should be considered in its broader context and not be thrown out with a poor tax policy.
It was especially brilliant to fill virtually the whole top half of the Sunday front page, one week before a big election, with a huge, meaningless and poorly composed static shot of some bushes.
At any real newspaper, somebody would get fired for that sort of idiocy.
There were lots of other problems, but it’s just not worth it.