According to the article Northampton County passed an ordinance to do so in 2006, but each taxing body must agree.
School Board President Kenneth Butz and board member David Hensley both noted a need to look at the financial implications before commenting on whether or not the NASD would support the ordinance.The township's adoption of the ordinance, which could occur at the Feb. 7 board of supervisors meeting, is just one step -- every taxing body affected by the ordinance must adopt it for the freeze to set.
A part of that financial consideration ought to be the impact of farmers selling to developers because they can no longer be profitable, due in part to the the school's inability to cap taxes. As one farmer is rightly quoted in the article:
"The only way the land is worth anything is when you sell it for building," Kahler said. "And that's a one-time crop."
6 comments:
I hate to stand with the school board on this but I believe that all of us should be equal partipants when it comes to paying taxes. Personally I doubt whether this would stop Mr. Kahler from going to a second job.
I oppose the whole idea of government owning more land and that is what this farm preservation is all about. This is pure blatant favoritism of a certain group in our society. Why should I be taxed to preserve the life style for a farmer? When Mr. Farmer passes from the scene what will happen to his land? Don't even attempt to tell me that his son will take over the land. No, it is going to fall into the hands of the local governing body who will then have to take care of it. Guess who gets to pay for that? Or the local officals could sell the land for development, land that the taxpayers bought under false pretenses and don't think this doesn't or can't happen because it has.
One of the biggest problems we have in this nation is the reduction of taxpayers at all levels. As more taxpayers are taken off the rolls as a favored group those of us left to pay the bill are growing smaller and smaller and ultimately we will never be able to get taxes and spending reduced. I would also suggest that when someone is removed from the tax rolls he no longer has a stake in this nation. Thus it becomes easier to turn your back on the country.
Chris you are way off base in all aspects of your post. I welcome you to sit in and ask questions at the next monthly Environmental Advisory Council meeting to learn about open-space preservation. Our next meeting is February 12th at at 7:00PM at the Bushkill Township Municipal Building.
Anon,
Would be interested to post information from your meetings if you'd be able to provide some notes.
Contact me via email - editor@newsovercoffee.com
In regard to the tax issue this is one component of a very multi-dimensional issue. Having the open space is environmentally sound as well as aesthetically pleasing.
Once developed, you really can't go back.
I want the land to be farmed so it isn't developed. How many homes, with how many children, who will flood into our schools can be had in a hundred or two hundred acre farm? Alot. How many tax 'new' tax dollars - not enough when each kid costs about $12,000 a piece.
Economics aside, our green is gone, which is not good, more pollution, less ability to convert it naturally.
The equation doesn't work in the big picture.
The school claims to support the environment when it comes to building their new MS, but to then turn around and deny conservation efforts because they lose a few bucks is just wrong. Then again, trying to take the Calandra's property wasn't right and they didn't seem to have an issue with that.
Anon
First off let me note I don't sit down with folks who sign in as anonymous but feel free to point out where I have erred. Kindly answer my questions. Who will own this land that is now being preserved after the farmer is gone? What will be done with it when it is vacated? Who will pay for whatever we will do with it? What prevents the supervisors from selling the land to their favortie developer as the school board did in Salisbury? Since I am paying for this, can I now go out and walk, hunt the preserved farm land? Is the favoring of the farmer by locking him into his taxes constitutional, I think not. Can you honestly tell me that a farmer can make a living today on 200 acres which is a right fair size farm in Northampton County. I'll wager he cannot do that. I've lived in Bushkill Township all my life with the exception of a few years. My grandfather had a general store and was a major Farmall farm equipment dealer. He ran his businesses for almost 60 years. The biggest developer in Bushkill Township is a farmer who sits on the Board of Supervisors and now claims to be a "greenie". The planning for the future of Bushkill Township stinks. There is no real commercial zone and the one we do have on Route 512 needs revision. Nothing is being done to reduce the cost of taxes in this township.
There is no foresight in the township. We have folks who are dedicated to keeping the area rural well it is not a rural area. Those days are long gone. The horse is not only out of the barn he has left the township. This township had chances to keep it rural but they chose not to so they could prosper. We like to blame those nasty new folks who moved into the area from NJ and NY when in reality it was the good old boys who sold out the rural nature of this township for their own profit while screwing the population. Now we're suppose to pay farmers to preserve their land and I get no benefit from that? Do you really think this will some how restore the rural nature of this community, a community that lies midway between NYC and Philly? If you do, I think you need a reality check. Heck, it was my elementary school teacher who told us that one day there would be a megalopolis stretching from Boston to Miami. Now there was a lady with vision.
Chris-
I also feel you are way off base in your comments. First of all, you have no idea what farmers are really going through and many of your questions can be answered using common sense. The government does not "own" the farmland once it is preserved and is still owned by the family members. It is simply preserved as farmland and cannot be developed. Even if the farmer's son or daughter does not care to farm it themselves, there are still available avenues they can take to continue to make the farm profitable (renting the land to other farmers, etc.) And yes, I can honestly say that a farmer can make a very profitable existance on 200 acres of farmland. Try half of that acreage. My father, for example, owns 100 acres and has made a name for himself selling nothing by hay to horse farmers and even the Philadelphia Zoo. He has been able to retire and work exclusively on the land. Yes, it has been extremely difficult, primarily due to property taxes. Without some extra business savvy, many farmers are falling short of even being able to pay their mortgage. Farming is a full time job and farmers should not be punished for having to pay 4 times the amount of taxes on land that the average person has to pay, just to make a living. You feel you get no benefit from farmers staying here? Well, then enjoy your soon to be megalopolis lifestyle.
Nancy
I do believe that stated that I grew up around farmers and my grandfather, George N. Miller, ran a farmers geneal store for 60 years and a farm equipment business. Congrats to your dad for a successful business I am well aware of the fact that farmers work 24 hours a day but if I recall correctly they are already protected under programs like act 319 that substantially reduces the taxes for those who carry out an agricultural endeavor if they have 11 acres, one acre for the house and ten in farmland preservation. I sell real estate and have sold farms so I know farmers are already a protected group when it comes to taxes.
You and I both know that farmers have always struggled in this area and they will continue to struggle. The farmer's situation is this--if he has a good crop all farmers in the area have a good crop, and the price goes down. If he has a poor crop all his neighbors have a poor crop, the price goes up but he has nothing to sell. Meanwhile the price of equipment, fertilizer and seed all go up. The small farmer gets whacked by this situation. That's why we do not have the farmers we had when I was a kid lifting hay bales onto wagons for Bill Knitter. We did it for free so we could get in shape for football. Farmers raising hay are making money selling it to horse farms at $6 per bale meanwhile horse farmers are going out of business--great story in the WSJ last week on how the rich and famous are dumping there horses including pure bred Arabs. It was a very sad story. The next sad story will be the one about the farmers who got hosed raising corn for ethanol---use 100 gallons of oil to produce 90 gallons of ethanol.
As to the megalopolis, I am not happy about it but I am tired of having people protected under the law and taken off the tax rolls given a special tax status that is unconstitutional. Don't believe me? Take a look at the Supreme Court case involving the Agricultural Adjustment Tax. Taxes are to be levied fairly across all the people no matter your vocation
Post a Comment