More than 9.3 million acres of farm and forestlands in Pennsylvania receive a tax break under the Clean and Green program, but one state legislator wants to make sure every landowner realizing the financial savings is also following the law.
State Rep. Mike Sturla, D-Lancaster, has introduced a bill requiring any landowner in the Clean and Green program to have a conservation plan in order to receive the tax break.
Clean and Green is a preferential tax assessment program that bases property taxes on use values rather than fair market values. This ordinarily results in a tax savings for landowners, sometimes as much as 50%, and is seen as a way to protect farmland and forests from development. If the use of a property enrolled in Clean and Green is changed, the landowner is subject to seven years of rollback taxes at 6% interest per year.
According to Sturla, an estimated 50% of Pennsylvania farms don’t have a conservation plan. His proposed legislation (House Bill 685) would require any landowner — farmland or forestland — who is enrolled in Clean and Green to have a conservation plan, something he said is required by law.
The motive behind the bill, Sturla said, is to make landowners abide by the conservation plan requirement, which would ultimately help reduce erosion and nutrient runoff.
“We have the most miles of polluted streams in the nation. Maybe if everyone had a conservation plan it would help just a little bit, and I’m OK with that,” he said. “When it comes to improving water quality, every little bit helps.”
The cost of a conservation plan depends on the use of the property, Sturla said. Factors such as livestock, streams or wetlands on the property and the utilization of practices such as cover crops all factor into the equation. Plus, there are cost-sharing programs available to have plans developed.
Whatever the cost for a conservation plan, the tax breaks afforded by Clean and Green will likely offset the expense and then some, Sturla added.
“There are also people who own property and lease it to farmers, so they make money and they get a tax break from Clean and Green on top of it, yet they don’t have a conservation plan,” he said. “Why are we giving them this?”
Sturla has proposed similar legislation in the past but the bills never advanced. His current bill is in the House Agriculture and Rural Affairs Committee, and Sturla expects pushback on the proposal.
According to Sturla, those opposing the bill have told him if a conservation plan is required for Clean and Green, some landowners might not pursue the program or withdraw their property. As a result, he said, there’s a concern that more farm and forestland might be converted to development.
“I’m missing the logic on that,” he said. “If they don’t want to keep the property in Clean and Green, they can get out and pay all the back taxes. It’s not a reason not to comply with the law.
“Why would we give this financial incentive and look the other way when it comes to a conservation plan?”
Pennsylvania Farm Bureau opposes Sturla’s proposed bill.
“Generally, our members are opposed to attaching additional conditions, such as conservation plan verification, to Clean and Green eligibility and enrollment,” said Grant Gulibon, the regulatory affairs specialist with the Pennsylvania Farm Bureau.
Conservation plans are already required by law to enroll in the Clean and Green program, but Sturla said in his memorandum that there is low compliance.
Gulibon said adding additional requirements is not the way to fix a lack of compliance to existing requirements.
“I think it speaks to a larger issue with our state’s regulatory climate,” Gulibon said.
Pennsylvania Farm Bureau strives for and promotes compliance to its members, he said. Educating people about what funding resources are available is the best approach to improve the low numbers.
Source: lancasterfarming.com
Photo Credit: gettyimages-songbird839
Categories: Pennsylvania, Crops, Livestock, Rural Lifestyle