The tragic and unexpected events of September 11 have sent shock waves
throughout our economy; these will have major impacts on federal, state
and local budgets. These events highlight the need for continuous fiscal
prudence as well as the need for us to critically assess public policies
and their effect on government budgets.
In addition to working with the local government to improve fiscal
efficiency for specific services and tax years, the Taxpayers
Association looks at long term policies and trends and their impact on
our taxes and quality of life in the future. The growing pressure for
westward development caused our association to form an adhoc committee
to look at how this pressure might affect our future. The following is
from the report issued by this committee which we will be forwarding to
the County Commission.
The County has adopted a "Sustainable Vision" for our future, including
where land development should take place in the County, through
community workshops. Martin County's adopted "vision" is of a compact,
developed area along the coast, inside the existing urban services
boundaries, with undeveloped green space retained for agriculture or
preserved lands (except for Indiantown) in the middle and west county.
There are many reasons why taxpayers should support this future. Compact
development is more efficient than suburban sprawl, which saves
taxpayers money for government services. New residential development at
the fringes of suburbia generally does not pay its share for services.
Impact fees are less expensive the further west one goes, yet it is
significantly more expensive to provide services, so overall cost of
government increases faster than population. Other obvious effects are
more roadway congestion at key intersections, more road construction,
more road maintenance and higher taxes.
Our Comprehensive Plan allows at least one unit per 20 acres outside the
urban service boundary. The real estate market is hot for 20 acre
"ranchettes", with several thousand acres outside the urban service area
recently converted to this development pattern, and more in the planning
stages. The Growth Management Department reports there are now 638 such
ranchettes outside the urban service area, covering more than 13,000
acres. All the agricultural land outside the urban service boundary that
our "vision" shows as being kept green may be headed for a common form
of suburban sprawl; a very low density land use and ecosystem-consuming
development pattern.
This happened in Palm Beach and Broward counties, where agriculture land
was first legally divided into smaller acreage parcels and sold to
individuals for "rural" equestrian communities. These residents then
demanded and eventually received better services from county government.
Once the services are extended, and after the ranchettes are converted
from native land to pasture, those closest to the urban fringe were
reassembled and developed into typical suburban subdivisions. The
political rationale is these homes are already requiring services but
not paying enough taxes, so by raising density, the assessed valuation
and tax revenues will increase. This pattern of land consumption is
opposite of the sustainable vision in Martin County.
It is unrealistic to believe that our current strict land development
regulations will preserve the overall ecology of central and west Martin
County if it is subdivided into private parcels of 20 acres each. A tour
of existing ranchette lands, including the new subdivisions, suggests
that native uplands and wetlands are not and will not be protected and
preserved per the urban rules in a rural ranchette setting.
There are some major problems with outright public purchase of vacant
land. The land is seldom maintained properly, it is subject to rapid
exotic plant invasions, illegal dumping, and insufficient funding in
general. Private persons and entities tend to view land management
differently than government, and the agricultural and conservation
interests, who have control of large acreage, are often more effective
stewards of land.
In addition, when the county purchases land, it removes that land from
the tax rolls, and all of us then pay more taxes. More significantly,
the land is generally removed from agriculture production. It is easy to
overlook how important farm revenues are to our community economy, but
these revenues are multiplied many times over in value because farm
products are more like basic industry products than services, and just
as worthy of keeping in terms of economic sustainability as new industry
is worthy of attracting. The secondary benefits of agriculture in
providing open space and wildlife habitat are generally undervalued by
most of us.
The Taxpayers Association established ad hoc committee investigated
these issues. We learned that a number of techniques have been
successfully used in other locales to deal with the problem of sprawling
consumption of the agricultural community, and our Comprehensive Plan
already allows us to use some of these planning techniques. Many of
these have been developed by organizations such as the American Farmland
Trust, founded to preserve agricultural lands. There are too many
examples of alternatives in planning techniques to cover in this space,
but if any of our readers are interested, we would be glad to share our
research.
The future development pattern allowed under the existing Comprehensive
Plan, and the consequences for taxpayers, are of great concern to the
Martin County Taxpayers Association. We urge our County Commissioners
and community leaders to extend our initial research on these issues.
There is no point in having a sustainable vision that is precluded by
the Comprehensive Plan. A formal planning effort with extensive
community involvement is necessary, and it should be begun promptly.