close

Washington County questions Clean and Green program changes

5 min read
article image -

Changes in preferential tax assessments for farmettes has gained the attention of the Washington County commissioners, but it’s too early to tell how taxpayers enrolled in the program – known colloquially as Clean and Green – may be affected.

Diane Adams, who owns what was regarded as a 10-acre tract in Buffalo Township, received a letter in late December from the Washington County Tax Revenue Office informing her that, after subtracting a road right-of-way, the land did not meet a minimum requirement by a mere eighth of an acre.

To overcome that barrier, she needed to show annual gross farm income of $2,000. The letter arrived not long after she sold her small herd of goats, a flock of chickens and a six-acre cutting of hay, and left Adams, who purchased the land 13 years ago with the specific intention of taking advantage of the property tax break, distraught. She concluded she could be forced to buy adjacent land if she wanted to remain in the Clean and Green program.

“There is a lot of concern and worry over it,” she wrote in an email.

The tax revenue letter cited a Commonwealth Court decision in a Berks County case – a matter that was decided nearly six years ago – where “land spanning a public road” was found to be ineligible for Clean and Green program, formally known as the Pennsylvania Farmland and Forest Land Assessment Act of 1974.

Two of the three members on county board of commissioners held office in 2010, the year that Commonwealth Court handed down its decision in the case known as Way v. Berks County.

“It was just brought to our attention,” said Commission Chairman Larry Maggi on Wednesday of the Dec. 30 letters sent from the tax revenue office. “We’re looking into it. We, the county commissioners, did not officially adopt that. We’re very much a rural county and part of that is keeping our country charm. We want to do what’s right.”

The chairman blamed the reassessment, which the commissioners contested for years in court until they ran out of options at the appellate level, for “throwing this into flux.” He said he’s had “a couple of people contact me informally. You used to buy property and you owned from the middle of the road back. Then it became a 33-foot right-of-way that just got gobbled up. Sometimes, the right-of-way went through the middle of their property. That minimizes the property under 10 acres and kicks them out of Clean and Green.”

If people who are angry about being tossed out of the Clean and Green program, Maggi said they have every right to be.

“We have this program to keep our rural environment and, all of a sudden, it’s chopped away. We’re going to try to fix that if we can do it.”

Commission Vice Chairman Diana Irey Vaughan said the board instructed Solicitor J. Lynn DeHaven to research the matter, and she thinks it’s up to the board of commissioners if it wants to implement the Commonwealth Court decision in the Way vs. Berks County case.

“Barring anything unforeseen, and with our current understanding, it’s the intent of the board of commissioners for this to remain as it was with calculations using a gross acreage,” Irey Vaughan said Thursday. “When it was presented to us in 2010, it was not presented as discretionary. We are waiting for confirmation from our solicitor that we do, in fact, have discretion whether to implement the Way case.”

DeHaven said he intends to discuss the matter with the assessment office on behalf of the commissioners “and provide some guidance.”

Even a ray of hope came as welcome news to Adams. “I’m very encouraged and it’s a relief to me and a lot of people who have called me since the article came out,” she said, referring to an article in Tuesday’s Observer-Reporter about her dilemma. “It affects a lot of my friends and people that I know.”

Mike Christoff, a resident of Nottingham Township who owns 10.099 acres, also received the Dec. 30 letter from the Washington County Tax Revenue Office telling him his enrollment in the program was in jeopardy.

He questioned why he and others are being penalized when “we didn’t strip mine or log or subdivide.”

Bradley Boni, Washington County chief assessor, said the Dec. 30 mailing went out to about 500 property owners.

Doug Wolfgang, director of the Bureau of Farmland Preservation for the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture, who’s been on the job since 1998, said last week he’s been among those in touch with the Washington County Tax Assessment office since the batch of letters went out.

The state Constitution had to be amended in 1973 before Clean and Green could take effect the following year.

“One group of taxpayers is paying a different tax rate on their property based on use rather than fair market value,” Wolfgang said. “We believe the intent of the legislation was that it would apply to gross deeded acreage for eligibility purposes, but it’s not clear in the statute and I would most likely request a legislative fix to make that clear. I’m not aware of any legislation, although that may change. I’m not sure.”

There are 9.5 million acres are enrolled statewide in the Clean and Green program, and 10-acre tracts are in the minority because the average size of a Pennsylvania farm is 120 acres.

The Way decision in 2010 failed to set off a flurry of phone calls and emails about the Clean and Green program, Wolfgang said, because “it would mostly become an issue for those tracts that teeter on the 10-acre eligibility requirement.”

Adams is yearning for some peace of mind.

“I do hope there is a resolution and the program remains the same for all of us in it. It seems like something none of us should have to worry about,” she said.

CUSTOMER LOGIN

If you have an account and are registered for online access, sign in with your email address and password below.

NEW CUSTOMERS/UNREGISTERED ACCOUNTS

Never been a subscriber and want to subscribe, click the Subscribe button below.

Starting at $3.75/week.

Subscribe Today