![[small logo]](logoette1.jpg){kind=small}  |
Open Space and Farmland Preservation Pay OffBefore our diminishing land stores are developed, the rising costs of community services need to be carefully considered. In studies compiled by American Farmland Trust from 1986 to 1998, the cost of community services to the residential sector is high, always resulting in a tax deficit to communities. Studies consistently show the following: For every dollar raised in revenue from the residential sector, local governments spend more than a dollar for residential services. For every dollar raised in revenue from farmland, forest and open space, local governments spend less than a dollar for public services. Although costs of community services to the industrial/commercial sector are essentially the same as for open space, industry depends on workers who need housing. Industrial development spawns residential development as a by-product, while open space does not. In a broad sense, preservation of open space pays local governments. There is always a negative return on property tax from the residential sector: Public education costs consume more than 50% of local government expenditures. If a government does not have to send school buses to a piece of land, or hire teachers for it, or build school houses on it -- and corn, wheat, soybeans, trees, and grass do not go to school or require sewerage systems or police protection -- then all local taxpayers must benefit. No matter how the fiscal pie is sliced, the studies conclude, residential land development never pays for itself. |
| © 1999-2000 by Scenic Virginia, Inc. | |
| Last Updated: | |