Planning committee forwards Hudson Valley Community Preservation Act authorization to county executive

The Sullivan County Planning Committee on an affirmative committee discussion voted to forward to the County Executive a proposed resolution authorizing the county to join the Hudson Valley Community Preservation Act, which would let towns and villages within the county create local community preservation funds financed by a fee on some real-estate transactions.

Committee members and staff described the proposal as an enabling step that would let individual municipalities decide whether to create a community preservation plan, hold public hearings, and put a referendum before local voters. The program was discussed as a funding option for farmland-preservation matching funds and other open-space priorities; advocates said it could supplement, not replace, existing grant programs.

Heather (staff member) explained that if the county authorizes the program, it performs the initial home-rule action and the decision to adopt a community preservation fund would then rest with each municipality. A municipality that pursues the program must draft a community preservation plan, publish it for public review and comment (the committee was told the plan typically must be available for at least 60 days), hold a public hearing, and then submit the proposal to a local referendum. Funds collected by the county clerk would be remitted to the participating municipalities; the committee discussed whether transfers to towns would be handled monthly or quarterly and agreed that the remittance schedule would be a separate administrative policy if the program is adopted.

Committee members pressed on how the fee is assessed. The committee was told the fee applies only to the portion of a real-estate transaction above the community—s median home value (the transcript cited a recent median of about $300,000 as an example). Municipalities set the rate subject to statutory caps; the committee was told the statutory cap is up to 6 percent but that municipalities generally set much lower rates (a committee member observed that locally adopted rates have tended to be nearer 2 percent or lower).

The committee heard the program can be used for farmland preservation, open-space protection, and similar conservation purposes identified in a municipality's plan. It was emphasized that funds may only be spent for items included in the locally adopted plan and that the program is separate from other housing-related pilot programs. Heather also said the Sullivan County Agriculture and Farmland Protection Board requested the county explore this as a potential source of local matching funds for purchase-of-development-rights grants, because state and federal grant programs typically require substantial local matches (the committee cited match ranges commonly used in those programs of roughly 50 percent, 75 percent or 87.5 percent depending on the program).

Ulster County was cited as a nearby example: the committee was told Ulster adopted the authority in 2019 and several municipalities there have now established community preservation funds. Committee members agreed the measure should be forwarded to the County Executive for consideration by the full legislature and noted municipalities would still need to do their own planning and referendums before any local fee would take effect.

The committee did not set a date for any countywide implementation; next steps on the county side are a forwarding to the County Executive and then, if the executive and legislature approve, individual municipalities would decide whether to pursue adoption through local planning and referendum processes.