them . The County created multiple ways , in addition to federal and state programs already in place , for landowners to regain the equity in their land and also keep it in farming . Eligibility for each program is based on a range of factors including the quality of soil , size of acreage , road frontage , location , and proximity to other protected farmland . Almost 40 years later , each of the programs still exists , but the source of funding for each fluctuates with patterns in the greater economy .
How well are the programs working ?
The State Agriculture Transfer Tax has been an important source of funding for the Agriculture Easement Program , generated when land previously assessed as agricultural is sold for development , thus “ transferred ” out of agriculture into non-ag use . As less ag land in the County is available for sale , that pool of funds has declined in recent years .
In the early years of the Ag Reserve farmers and other large landowners made use of the programs , most often through the County easement program or the TDR program . The BLT program was created in 2009 , increasing the value of a farm ’ s last remaining TDR to provide greater incentive to sell an easement , after it became clear that some farmers held onto one TDR for the possibility of future cash needs .
However , with 4500 + TDRs remaining in the Ag Reserve , and some having the possibility of applying for a well and septic system and a building permit , the County ’ s fund to support TDR and BLT easements is dwindling as the Ag Transfer Tax revenue declines .
According to Michael Weyand , MoCo Ag Business Development and Preservation Administrator , who helps landowners determine which programs their land might qualify for , there is much more demand for easements than available funds . Weyand explains that down county developers formerly needed to purchase TDRs to achieve the density to realize the profitability they want , instead they can now offer other “ public benefits ” to be approved by Park and Planning for greater density , such as donating land for school sites , dog parks , or playgrounds , or building more moderately priced housing .
While Weyand wants as many properties as possible to be preserved by some kind of easement , he and other County officials prefer the County ’ s Ag Easement Program for its flexibility . Weyand says “… the County ’ s AEP offers us the best chance to shape an offer for the specific property , and gain approval quickly . But unfortunately it also has the least consistent funding , because it ’ s dependent on the Ag Transfer Tax , and that ’ s a shrinking source .”
Mike Scheffel , Director of MoCo Ag Services and Weyand both believe that lack of consistent funding for the existing preservation programs is a primary threat to farming in the County . Scheffel also notes that creating more receiving areas for TDRs would strengthen ag preservation efforts . That process happens during the Park and Planning Master Plan review . For example , Commercial- Residential ( CR ) mixed use zoned areas , and the Life Sciences Center ( LSC ), the Shady Grove Hospital / Johns Hopkins area could be reviewed to accommodate better land use . The Montgomery County Planning Department has submitted to the Office of Ag an Incentive Zoning Update ( IZU ) project to propose ideas for new ways to bolster funding for the TDR and BLT programs .
Jeremy Criss , who served for more than 25 years in the County Office of Agriculture and is now retired , has an invaluable longterm perspective . Criss says “… with the current focus on mixed use development where people can ‘ live , work , and play ’ in their own neighborhood , the approach to receiving areas needs to be completely updated .” Criss also points to opportunities to create a framework for funneling existing taxes into dedicated ag funding . In the first 20 years the Ag Transfer Tax was in use it generated more that $ 7 million in interest for the County , but that money all went to the County ’ s general fund rather than any portion being set aside for ag preservation . Adjustments to tax regulations could generate significant support for ag preservation .
John Zawitoski , who now works for Montgomery Soil Conservation District but was with MoCo Office of Ag for decades , suggested that a variety of new funding sources should be implemented . Among them , for example , could be a type of property tax or income tax “ check off ” box similar to what the State implemented to boost donations to the Chesapeake Bay Trust Fund . This new revenue could be dedicated to the County
plenty I summer growing 2024 37