By Cara Latham, Staff Writer
UPPER FREEHOLD — Voters will decide on Nov. 6 whether to approve a 2-cent increase in the open space tax rate in order to raise about $265,000 annually in additional tax revenue for farmland preservation.
The Township Committee voted unanimously on Aug. 16 to put the question on the general election ballot. Currently, the open space tax is 4 cents per $100 valuation. The owner of the average-assessed township property ($519,800) currently pays about $208 annually for open space preservation. Raising that tax by 2 cents per $100 in assessed valuation will add about $100 to that bill, according to Mayor Stephen Fleischacker.
If the referendum passes, it will bring in an additional $264,000 annually, Chief Financial Officer Dianne Kelly said during the Aug. 16 meeting.
The township might be able to buy 10 acres of farmland with that tax revenue, or it can use it as leverage to support a bond ordinance for open space and farmland spending, she said.
If the township borrows roughly $2.5 million for farmland preservation, the $264,000 in extra tax revenue each year will cover the annual principal and annual interest costs over 20 years, Ms. Kelly said.
”So what you will get for your 2 cents is the ability to spend about $2.5 million to preserve farmland, and one of the options for preserving farmland is to help the county in their farmland preservation efforts,” she said. “Our responsibility for supporting that effort is 16 percent of the acquisition of the development rights cost, so that’s probably the best way to use that 2 cents.”
The arrangement could potentially save five to 10 farms, Ms. Kelly said.
According to Mayor Fleischacker , there are about 10,000 acres of developable land in Upper Freehold, and the municipality, county and state are in negotiation with willing sellers on more than 1,500 acres at this time. So far, the township has already preserved more than 7,000 acres.
Before the vote, Committeeman Bill Miscoski said that about half of the town is already preserved or in open space, and that he felt the farms left there now are not looking to enroll in farmland preservation.
”I’m not against tax money to preserve open space,” he said. “But I’m just wondering what’s left?”
He said owners of large parcels are not going to want or need to preserve their farms, so he didn’t find the tax hike necessary.
However, he ultimately voted to put the question on the ballot.
After the vote, Mr. Fleischacker pointed out that in the past, other landowners, including Mr. Miscoski, who didn’t want to do so in the past have been convinced to enroll in farmland preservation.
”Things can change,” Mr. Miscoski said after the meeting. “(I was) never going to go into preservation.”
Committeeman Bob Faber pointed out that the state provides forms for residents of 65 year of age or older who are on fixed incomes to fill out to have their property taxes frozen, which could be helpful if they want to avoid being affected by higher open space tax, if it is approved by voters.
In 2005, a single resident on a fixed income of $41,972 or less and a married couple with a fixed income of $51,466 were eligible. In 2006, a single resident earning $43,693 or less and married couples earning $53,576 or less were eligible to have their taxes frozen.
Committee members also said they were still looking into ways to exempt farmers from the increase in the open space tax who have already preserved their land.
Committeeman Steve Alexander said he talked with many people in the community, and got varied responses, including those who supported raising the tax as high as 10 cents, and others who were skeptical because they wanted to see a plan for exactly how the money would be used.
In response to Mr. Miscoski’s initial comments, Mr. Alexander said the closing of Princeton Nurseries exemplified the need for the township to be ready to preserve large tracts of land, especially since funds at the state and county level might dwindle as time moves on. He said he supported putting the referendum out to voters.
”I don’t think we’re going to be getting a lot more money. Is this a futile effort? It might be, but we need to be in the game, and if we don’t do anything, it’s even more futile to sit back and watch properties go,” he said.
Mr. Alexander also said residents who really want to spare more money can do so by making voluntary contributions, which are tax deductible, to the township’s Open Space Preservation Trust Fund. According to the township’s newsletter, all money received for this purpose is deposited and designated according to the donor’s instructions, and residents can donate funds to be used specifically for farmland preservation.
A handful of township residents showed up to voice their support for the referendum question.
”We do need to be in the game, and we do need to preserve every piece we can,” said Meirs Road Phil Sinicropi.
Powderhorn Way resident Gerald Nathanson said it was the first time he agreed with what every member of the committee has said, and that $100 more a year in open space taxes is minimal.
He said the idea that it was a unanimous vote “is something you folks should be very proud of.”

