Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Tax Policy Open Space topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Solicitor outlines steps for possible 0.25% earned‑income tax referendum to fund farmland and open‑space preservation
Summary
Township solicitor David Backenstoe described the statutory process for placing a 0.25% earned‑income tax referendum on the ballot to fund farmland and open‑space acquisition or easements, and outlined oversight, permissible uses and next procedural steps; residents raised questions about tax impact and tradeoffs with public-safety funding.
Solicitor David Backenstoe briefed the Board on the legal and procedural mechanics for putting a referendum before voters to adopt an additional 0.25 percentage‑point earned‑income tax dedicated to farmland and open‑space preservation.
Backenstoe explained required steps: adopt a notice of intent to adopt an ordinance that calls for the referendum; draft and advertise the ordinance; ensure the ballot question and a plain‑English summary are submitted to the county registrar at least 12 Tuesdays before the election; and, if voters approve, establish an oversight body (an EAC or land‑preservation board) with criteria for selecting land or easement acquisitions. He noted allowable uses include fee‑simple purchases, conservation easements, purchasing development rights (farmland preservation), and limited maintenance (up to 25% of receipts) of acquired lands; partnerships with county programs or conservancies are possible.
Questions from Board members and residents focused on priorities and trade‑offs. David Hess observed that asking voters to fund open space would compete with other priorities such as police staffing; Zack Szoke illustrated tax impact by saying, “If someone was making $100,000 per year, the additional tax would be $250.” The solicitor said administrative and appraisal costs may be paid from the fund and the Township should craft local criteria for funding priorities and oversight.
No referendum was placed on the ballot during the meeting; the Board discussed scheduling a more public presentation but a motion to hold a separate advertised meeting at the Fire Company received no second. The solicitor and staff indicated additional public education would be appropriate before launching a ballot initiative.
