News Article

Date: June 2, 2006
By J. SCOTT MATHIE

PDR: Give the public the facts and then let them vote

NOTE: Scott Mathie is director of Government Affairs for the Metropolitan Builders Association, Waukesha.

A recent editorial by John Torinus which appeared in the Daily News contends that the county should "skip" a public referendum to gain approval from taxpayers to set aside 10 percent of the county’s sales tax for a Purchase of Development Rights (PDR) program. Our organization disagrees and believes it is in the best interest of the county to have the public engaged on this issue - regardless of the outcome.

Skipping a public referendum might be a quick way to advance a program that the public knows little about; however, it is not the approach to have a vested electorate.

Mr. Torinus pointed out that a recent Washington County survey shows the public supportive of the concept and therefore he believes this gives credence to avoid a public referendum. While surveys are helpful in determining a general opinion about a topic, it should rarely, if ever, be used as marching orders to implement and create a major program that shifts 10 percent of the county sales tax - specifically since the county sales tax was created to reduce property taxes.

Our organization has been supportive of evaluating the PDR program with the understanding that a public referendum and balanced public education would be part of the process. So far, those who have heard about the program know the positive aspects of the program - land preservation. However, we believe that taxpayers should have a legitimate shot at becoming educated about the county’s agriculture land preservation program, which includes the positives and the negatives. At the very least, taxpayers should know what a PDR program is, how it works and be told about some potential areas of interest for taxpayers.

What is PDR and how does it work?

Under a PDR program, a landowner voluntarily agrees to sell the development rights to a parcel of his or her land. The development rights are purchased by a government agency or trust. The agency or trust pays the landowner the difference between the value of the undeveloped land and what it would be worth if it was developed. A legal document called a "conservation easement" is drawn up restricting in perpetuity the land to specified uses such as agriculture or open space. The landowner maintains all other rights and responsibilities for the land - including paying taxes on the land.

Areas of interest for taxpayers

(not an exhaustive list)

* Taxpayers will not have access to the land preserved by the taxpayer-financed PDR program.

* Successful programs will require a substantial public funding source, which may result in future tax increases or adjusting the percentage being directed from the county sales tax.

* The 10 percent share of the county sales tax will only result in $800,000

* Proponents are already speaking of borrowing to pay for the program if there is enough interest from the agriculture community in the program.

* Some entity has to administer the program - in this case, county government would likely be responsible, which may require additional tax dollars, if additional staffing is necessary.

* This program will not stop the demand for housing and business growth - it will only push it to other areas of the county and adjacent counties.

* Allowing for greater development densities will do a better job of preserving agriculture lands than a PDR program.

* 17 percent of Washington County is already preserved in perpetuity through parks and open space planning (state, county, and municipal).

* 27 percent of the county is made up of isolated natural areas and environmental corridors, which have substantial development limitations and tend to have protections built in through the planning process. Some of theses lands are already protected through parks and open space planning.

It is also important to note that on Nov. 6, 2004, 1,261 county residents (a 57 percent majority) voted to defeat a referendum to use tax dollars for a PDR program in the town of Hartford. A similar referendum held in 1998 resulted in a 55 percent to 45 percent defeat for a PDR program. The results of these two public referendums show different results than the telephone survey, which should give the county further indication that a public referendum is necessary to determine the true feelings of the electorate.

If there truly is support for this program, a formal public referendum will only give the effort clear and legitimate support from the taxpayers. Our organization recognizes that there are some positives and negatives to the program that the public should have a legitimate opportunity to consider.

You can’t argue the results of a public referendum. Give the public the facts and let them vote.