Musings: Unforeseen Consequences

It's odd that Kauai Councilman Tim Bynum wants to eliminate the ag tax subsidy for seed companies when it accounts for just $500,000 of the $8.5 million in annual ag subsidies countywide.

In other words, that particular subsidy is small potatoes, but removing it could have serious unforeseen consequences, as a number of Councilmember were astute enough to observe.

Tim thinks it's reasonable to charge seed operations market value taxes because the landowners are making good money off those leases. But Tim and his co-supporter Councilman Gary Hooser never bothered to determine how much folks are paying for ranching and diversified ag leases in order to compare.

Nor did they check to see how many of the multi-million-dollar TVRs on ag lands have ag dedications, which means taxpayers are also subsidizing those lucrative operations. It seems no one is being scrutinized but the seed companies.

But under Tim's double speak, he's not singling them out.

“I'm being accused of targeting the seed industries,” he said. “Well, it's the seed industry that came in and made this dramatic change in use. It's not targeting that industry, it's just where that use has occurred.”

Huh?

Councilman Mel Rapozo didn't buy it. “We're targeting an industry and I'm not comfortable with that. There's got to be a rational basis. It's not the way to treat farmers when we say we're supporting agriculture.”

“There's all this rhetoric about this is an attack on ag,” Tim said. “No, it's not. It's just that on Kauai it doesn't fit our ag dedication.”

How does he figure that? Tim himself acknowledged the dedication was conceived to provide “incentives for active use of our ag lands and keep ag lands in production.”

Aren't the biotech companies doing both, whether their crops are for the purpose of research or sale? Or as Mel noted, “We're helping farmers all over the world. We're helping farmers across the U.S. to produce food.”

Gary, who introduced an amendment specifying the bill applies only to research on crops with genetically engineered DNA, was clear about his motives: “We're here to address the appropriate use of our ag lands. In this case we're looking at major corporations that don't need the subsidy, don't contribute to local food sustainability and have a substantial impact on air, land and water.”

Gary brushed off the impact of pulling 24,000 acres out of ag dedication, saying even if it's developed, they could build only five units on a single parcel. But as Councilwoman JoAnn Yukimura pointed out, dropping the dedication means a “tremendous increase in assessed value. If they subdivide, it's not just five units, it's multiple parcels with up to five units each.”

Or as Kilauea land agent/farmer Mike Dyer noted: “If you want to drive ag land to development, keep a nice high tax on it and you'll get it developed.” And with the recent sales of large ag parcels for hundreds of millions dollars, the assessed value of ag parcels could go way up.

So really, what is the intent of this bill? Especially when coupled with Tim and Gary's push to halt development in Lihue by designating it a groundwater management area?

“I've gotten very scared where the state is headed with those commercials you see regarding the Maui [anti-GMO ballot] initiative,” Councilman Ross Kagawa said. “If we get away from big ag, I'm worried about how that westside, my home town, will look like.”

JoAnn wants to keep the seed land in an ag dedication, but charge them higher taxes, though not as high as market value. “There is the issue in my mind of the contribution of the seed companies to managing the water systems that are really important to the sustainability of our ag lands. I think it's really appropriate to have some input from the seed companies and others that are involved.”

Councilman Mason Chock, in a welcome departure from Tim and Gary's influence, said he is still “stuck on unintended consequences. I haven't heard enough from farmers and the public and the seed companies on the bill. I've heard things about infrastructure that might be a concern.”

Ross agreed, saying the seed companies are maintaining water systems that benefit the many farmers raising cattle, sweet potatoes, cattle, beans, mangoes and other crops in Kekaha and elsewhere on the westside.

Gosh, it seems agricultural co-existence is not only possible, but actually happening on the westside.

The bill was deferred until Nov. 12, by which time Tim and Gary hopefully will have been defeated.

Meanwhile, Mayor Bernard Carvalho Jr. has announced he's working with the state Department of Ag to convene a joint fact finding group (JFFG) to examine the possible health and environmental impacts associated with the use of pesticides on genetically modified crops.

That's good news for two reasons: First, it's an opportunity to assess the issue and gather scientific data to offset all the anecdotal allegations that have thus far driven the Bill 2491 debate. It's where we should've started, but didn't. Second, it takes the process out of the County Council, where it was doomed to be politicized and biased, and thus of questionable value.

It's also interesting that the Administration gave JoAnn credit.

As it's now structured, a facilitator under contract to the state will choose at least nine panel participants after interviewing candidates. They will be seeking “knowledgeable local experts with pertinent backgrounds, experience or detailed understandings of agriculture, environmental health, epidemiology, toxicology, biostatistics, medicine or other related disciplines.”

“The JFF process will presumably define the scope of further work and studies to be done...possibly an EPHIS (Environmental and Public Health Impact Study),” wrote county spokeswoman Beth Tokioka in an email. “We are hoping that we can again partner with the state on the follow up and avoid any legal pre-emption issues that might arise.”

Bill 2491, which included resolutions calling for a JFFG and an EPHIS was overturned by a federal judge on the grounds it was pre-empted by state law. That decision is currently on appeal.

The county and state each are kicking in $50,000 to fund the JFF process, which should be pau by December 2015.