By Julia Scott
Posted: 08/09/2011 03:57:25 PM PDT
Updated: 08/09/2011 03:57:26 PM PDT
REDWOOD CITY -- Property tax discounts will no longer accrue to 128 rural San Mateo County landowners whose parcels were removed from a list of properties kept in agriculture under the state Williamson Act, though it's unclear what fiscal benefit the county will derive from the move.
The county Board of Supervisors voted 3-1 Tuesday, with one member absent, to annul the Williamson Act contracts of 128 out of 540 contract-holders, many of whom have been in the state program since 1967. Those cut from the rolls aren't farming their land and therefore don't qualify for the tax breaks, according to county staff.
The county lost its annual state Williamson Act reimbursements in 2007 when it became clear that too many landowners were unfairly taking advantage of a law aimed at conserving land from development through farming. A state audit called for sweeping changes to the program.
"We fell out of the compliant group and we need to get back in," said Planning Director Jim Eggemeyer.
Tuesday's vote will allow those cut from the program to appeal the decision within 60 days, at a cost of roughly $470. An appeal would automatically stay the county's action for three years.
But considering the list was drawn up based on surveys the landowners themselves returned to the county, Eggemeyer said his staff is confident the parcels in question simply do not meet the stringent -- and, some would say, anachronistic -- definitions of commercial farming under the Williamson Act.
For instance, cattle ranching is considered a legitimate agricultural use, but horse ranching is not. Timber harvesting falls outside the accepted definition, but farming that produces even the smallest amount of profit generally makes the cut. Meanwhile, multimillion-dollar properties like Martin's Beach in Half Moon Bay get massive tax breaks because part of one parcel is used to grow hay.
And then there are the gray areas. Half Moon Bay property owner Gilbert Gossett had two parcels that fell within the Williamson Act. Gossett grows apples on one 15-acre parcel, but Tuesday's vote struck his larger piece of land from the Williamson Act. He said he will likely appeal.
"There are in fact two English holly trees (on my land) from which I received $125 last December selling English holly at the farmers market," Half Moon Bay resident Gilbert Gossett told the supervisors Tuesday. "I need to know what's happening, because if I have to clear the upper parcel and put it back into agricultural use, that has to be done fairly soon."
County officials aren't sure how much property tax the county could reap from the 128 parcels, especially because Proposition 13 has kept the values of many of the same properties well below market rate.
There's also the fact that Gov. Jerry Brown cut all funding for the Williamson Act for the first time in state history this March, which means counties won't be reimbursed for the tax breaks they dole out, regardless of whether they reform their local programs to bring them into compliance. Roughly half of California's privately held farmland is under Williamson Act contracts.
The Williamson Act program is still on the books, but Supervisor Carole Groom wondered aloud about the merits of initiating a mass contract nonrenewal at a time when it might not bring value to the county.
"If we do all this work and the state decides to discontinue the Williamson Act, what will we have gained or lost?" she said before voting against Tuesday's action.
No comments:
Post a Comment