Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Ag Land Preservation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners approve 11 agricultural land‑preservation district applications covering 1,429 acres
Summary
After a public hearing with one speaker in support, Washington County commissioners approved 10‑year agricultural land preservation district agreements for 11 properties totaling about 1,429 acres; estimated county cost roughly $17,000 per year in tax credits.
The Washington County Board of County Commissioners voted 5‑0 to approve agricultural land‑preservation district applications for 11 property owners, a packet the county planning staff said totals approximately 1,429 acres.
Chris Boggs, the county’s rural preservation administrator, described the program as a voluntary, 10‑year commitment by landowners not to develop enrolled properties commercially, industrially, or residentially. Qualifying parcels must be in a rural zoning designation outside growth areas, generally have at least 50 acres (or 20 acres if contiguous to other preserved land) and at least 50% Class 1–3 soils.
Boggs told the board the county has more than 32,000 acres in the program and estimated the fiscal impact of the current applicants at roughly $12 per acre per year — about $17,000 annually for this set of applications. He said applications had been vetted by the County Agricultural Land Advisory Board and included maps in the agenda packet.
During the public hearing, one resident, Jeremy Tindall, said he supported the program and asked for transparency, specifically that the county publish the list of property owners who enter the program so the public can see the process is open and not preferential to friends or neighbors. Boggs explained the program is strictly property‑based and the minimum criteria are objective; applications that do not meet the criteria are ineligible. He added that if a property lies inside a designated growth area, the Maryland state rules and the county planning commission generally oppose preservation easements in growth areas and such applications are typically denied.
After closing the hearing, the board moved and approved the recommended motion to adopt the 10‑year districts for the listed applicants, with a recorded vote of 5‑0.
Boggs noted the agenda packet included maps and the applicant list. The county will continue to process and administer the ten‑year agreements and tax credits in accordance with the program rules.
Meeting materials: staff provided application maps and an applicant list as part of the meeting packet.
