Honolulu City Council Budget Committee Meeting - July 14, 2026
Honolulu City Council Committee on Budget Meeting Summary - July 14, 2026
The Committee on Budget, chaired by Councilmember Okimoto, convened on Tuesday, July 14, 2026, at 9:07 a.m. to consider appointments, real property tax measures, and fund allocations. The meeting featured extensive discussion on tax relief for homeowners, kupuna, and vehicle owners, balanced against revenue concerns raised by the administration. No public testimony was offered. Several bills were advanced to second reading, while others were postponed for further study.
Public Comments & Testimony
- No public oral testimony was provided for any agenda item.
Discussion Items
Appointments
- Resolution 26-154 – Confirmed Shannon Smith to the Real Property Tax Board of Review. Councilmember Kia Aina questioned her about evaluating workforce housing properties; Smith affirmed that finishes and materials matter in market value. Chair Waters asked about independence from administration pressure. The resolution was amended to a CD1 and reported out for adoption.
- Resolution 26-155 – Confirmed Shannon Allevado to the Grants and Aid Advisory Commission. She discussed her government relations background and community work in Waimanalo. Councilmember Tupola and Kia Aina raised capacity-building concerns for nonprofits. Reported out for adoption.
Real Property Taxation
- Bill 29 (DeSantos Tam) – Sought to allow mortgage documents to qualify for low-income rental property tax exemptions. BFS Director Kawano strongly opposed, citing a potential $40 million revenue loss and lack of oversight. The bill was postponed to a date to be determined.
- Bill 45 (Waters) – Increased the homeowners’ exemption by $20,000, saving approximately $5.83/month ($70/year) for an average residential homeowner. BFS opposed, warning of compounding cost pressures from collective bargaining and inflation, and urged a permitted interaction group (PIG) to study the entire tax structure. Reported out for second reading and public hearing.
- Bill 46 (Waters) – Increased the kupuna (65+) homeowners’ exemption by $20,000. Director Kawano noted that a real property tax credit already caps taxes at 3% of income for those earning $80,000 or less, with benefits doubling to $9 million after the income threshold was raised. Chair Waters highlighted the “Mrs. Iquera” case. Reported out for second reading and public hearing.
- Bill 67 (2025) – Proposed a real property tax assessment cap. BFS opposed, citing inequities and a “lock-in” effect that discourages downsizing. Postponed.
- Bill 68 (2025) – Would exclude non-title-holder spouse income from the real property tax credit income cap. BFS opposed due to administrative burden and unknown revenue loss. Reported out for second reading and public hearing.
Funds and Revenues
- Bill 33 (Tupola) – Created a Parks Maintenance and Recreation Services Revolving Fund to allow multi-year planning. Director Thielen supported, noting that the department lacks a special fund and that lapse funds are now mainly from salaries. Amended to a CD2, then postponed for further amendments.
- Bill 44 (Kia Aina) – Allocated 100% of the 8.34% TAT set-aside (approx. $9 million/year) to the Department of Parks and Recreation (75% to maintenance, 10% to botanical gardens) and 25% to the Honolulu Zoo. Director Thielen and Zoo Director Barry supported, emphasizing deferred maintenance and conservation programs. Reported out for second reading and public hearing. Councilmember Nishimoto voted with reservations, citing reduced flexibility during downturns.
- Bill 49 (Tupola) – Similar to Bill 44 but split 50% to parks and 50% to the general fund. Councilmember Tupola deferred to Bill 44. Postponed.
- Bill 50 (DeSantos Tam) – Repealed the inactive Land Conservation Fund (approx. $220,000 balance) as a cleanup measure. BFS supported. Reported out for second reading.
- Bill 47 (Waters) – Reduced the motor vehicle weight tax by 20%, saving the average passenger car owner about $52.50/year. Director Hashiro (Customer Services) and DTS opposed, estimating a $20–30 million revenue loss that would impact roads, safety, and transit. Discussion included potential kupuna-only relief. Reported out for second reading and public hearing.
Key Outcomes
- Resolution 26-154 adopted as amended (CD1).
- Resolution 26-155 adopted.
- Bill 29 postponed.
- Bill 33 amended to CD2, then postponed.
- Bill 44 reported out for second reading and public hearing.
- Bill 49 postponed.
- Bill 45 reported out for second reading and public hearing.
- Bill 46 reported out for second reading and public hearing.
- Bill 47 reported out for second reading and public hearing.
- Bill 50 reported out for second reading and public hearing.
- Bill 67 postponed.
- Bill 68 reported out for second reading and public hearing.
The meeting adjourned after completing all agenda items.
Meeting Transcript
Aloha and good morning, everyone. It is Tuesday, July 14, 2026, and the time is 9 07 a.m. Will the committee on budget please come to order? Welcome to the committee members who are present in the chamber today. We have committee vice chair Nishimoto, Councilmember Kia Aina, Councilmember Tolba, and Council Chair Waters would like to also welcome Councilmember Tupola. Like to excuse Councilmember Cordero at this time. She is on her way. Although remote oral testimony is being permitted, this is a regular in-person meeting and not a remote meeting by interactive conference technology under HRS Section 92-3.7. Therefore, the meeting will continue notwithstanding loss of audiovisual communication with remote testifiers or loss of the public broadcast of the meeting. Members of the public are allowed to provide oral testimony on all items on the agenda in two ways in person in the council chamber and remotely via video conference or phone. Remote and in-person oral testimony will be allowed when each agenda item is taken up. Before testifying, each person shall state their name. Each speaker may not have anyone else read their statement and is limited to a one-minute presentation on each item. As both English and Hawaiian are official languages of the state of Hawai'i, pursuant to Article 15, section four of the Hawaii State Constitution and section one-thirteen of the Hawai'i revised statutes. Members of the public may testify either in either language for oral testimonies offered in Olalo Hawai'i. Please press star nine if you wish to testify, and I will identify you by the last three digits of your phone number. When your number is called, please listen for the prompt to unmute and press star six. Some friendly reminders and tips. Thank you, members at 917, we call the committee on budget back to order. I can like to welcome with us to the chamber, Miss Shannon Smith, our appointee. Thank you. I've moved to Honolulu in 1993, became a licensed um realtor in 1998, and have been exclusively full-time selling residential real estate since 2003. So I'm very excited to try to better understand some of the uh the the way the process works. And I also set on a professional standards committee, so I understand the uh necessity of looking at specific documents in front of you and making a judgment based on the facts that's presented to you during that um, you know, during that process. So if anybody has questions. Thank you, Miss Smith. Maybe there's any questions for the appointee. Uh we'll start with council member Kia Aina. Thank you. Uh good to see you um, Miss Smith. And I do appreciate uh your professional background because this board is critically important for a lot of people, uh, both homeowners as well as um uh developers. And I also appreciate that you have uh certificate in historic preservation. So good for you. Um, you know, over time I've had a various constituents come to my office requesting assistance with property tax disputes. And uh this year I've been contacted by numerous recent condo owners at Ulana at Ward Villages, and I I'm I'm pretty sure that the council member sitting next to me also has been um receiving a lot of inquiries. Um and they've been contacting me about um assessments, tax assessments that they feel are based on inappropriate or incomparable comparisons, some which is twice as much as their appraisals from a few months before the city's assessment. The condo they live in is new, but has minimal amenities and is a hundred percent workforce housing building with simpler and lower quality finishing and materials. One of your key roles as a member of the board of review will be to assess disputes between the city's rural property tax office and property owners. Sorry. What are you intelligent to answer this question? Excuse me, kind of hold that. Wait, I I haven't finished my question. Yeah, I'm not interrupting talking to her. Okay, we'd like to have Councilmember Kiana finish her question for the appointee. And then if the administration would like to come up in during discussion, but please please proceed, Councilmember K. Comparison shells. Um value because of the that's how you evaluate any uh property. I would would be based on what they're made of and um so you uh you could you uh concede that it does matter. I would would be based on what they're made of and okay um so you uh you could you uh concede that it does matter uh so that when you're doing comparable uh comparison and assessments, you can't just compare a um workforce housing building with another building uh uh in in that that's fair market value. I I'm sorry, we we can ask core to chime in on this, but these are active board cases that should in my opinion should not be discussed at this point.
openpublica.com