It
’s high time for Santa Clara County to clean up its Williamson
Act.
It’s high time for Santa Clara County to clean up its Williamson Act. The longer the county lets the mess percolate – and it has virtually ignored this problem for more than two years – the more likely lawyers will get involved and the more hassle it will be for landowners who are caught between an unclear criteria and a looming property tax bill.
The county has known its standards for granting Willi-amson Act status to land parcels has been out of compliance with state law since 2002 when the state conducted an audit and found plenty of trouble. The state made it clear in that report that Santa Clara County has been deficient in setting proper rules and in monitoring the land parcels to see if those who applied for tax breaks actually deserved them.
Since the audit, virtually nothing of substance has been accomplished and, meanwhile, the state has doubled the penalties for properties improperly included under the Williamson Act. Property owners, plenty of whom are in South County, could be facing back taxes and 25 percent penalties. It’s a mess, and it’s the county’s fault for not setting clear criteria and for failing to remove from Williamson Act status those property owners who subdivided their land and no longer met the law’s guidelines.
The problem has mushroomed because the Board of Supervisors has not established clear rules or placed the responsibility for monitoring Williamson Act compliance squarely on anyone’s shoulders.
Why isn’t that the county assessor’s job? Larry Stone should be at the forefront of this issue. It’s all about tax fairness and, of course, county revenue.
The Williamson Act provides a tax break to farmers, ranchers and stewards of open space who agree to protect their land from development in 10-year periods. The goals are noble: To protect agriculture and preserve open space and promote orderly growth.
The problem is that a “rancher” with a tax break should not be someone with a 5-acre spread, a 4,200-square-foot house and two goats. That person is not operating a financially viable agriculture operation. That person is in violation of the letter and the spirit of the law, and is unfairly exploiting the system to the detriment of neighbors who are paying more in property tax.
Certainly there are grayer areas than the aforementioned case, but those have to be identified and dealt with. Where has the county leadership been in the last two years?
Reality is setting in now. There’s a May deadline looming, so Supervisor Don Gage’s office has announced the first of a series of community meetings to deal with revamping the policy. That will be on Tuesday, Feb. 22, at 3pm at the San Martin Lions Club on Murphy Avenue. A 3pm meeting isn’t likely to draw a crowd, but it’s better than putting the date off again.
In late March, the county should have a draft policy available for circulation. Hopefully, that policy will draw on the best practices in the state related to Williamson Act eligibility and spell out who’s responsible for enforcement and how, exactly, that enforcement will take place.
That leaves us with a process and one big question: Should landowners who unfairly claimed Williamson Act status be forced out and made to pay back taxes and penalties?
The answer isn’t clear yet, but hopefully, through the series of community meetings and discussion at the board level, enough data will emerge to make the answer clear.
Meanwhile, we’re left with this thought from Rachael Gibson, Gage’s land-use aide. She opined, “Anytime you have an issue that resembles an onion, you’re going to have several different layers of meaning.” Fair enough – now, let’s get down to business and peel that onion.
To respond to this editorial or comment on issues in the community, e-mail
ed******@mo*************.com
, mail to Editor, Morgan Hill Times, 30 E. Third St., 95037, or drop off at our office downtown.
