by Lucy Dukes, Sequim Gazette Staff Writer
       Clallam County, WA - 12/19/01 -A new Conservation Futures Fund proposal allocating $250,000 in 2002 from capital projects for the fund instead of from taxes was approved Dec. 18 at the Clallam County Board of Commissioners meeting.
       Commissioner Steve Tharinger submitted the proposal at a Dec. 13 worksession.
       Because the alternate proposal did not include a tax, it did not have to go before the public, Engelbertson said.
       It will be a one-time cost, so taking money from the capital facilities fund won't dwindle county resources from year to year, he said.
       The appropriation will implement a farmland preservation program but also give the public and commissioners time to discuss supporting the program with taxes in the future.
       The county will not lose too much, he said, because the money would be earning interest in the capital facilities fund and in the Conservation Futures Fund.
       Both the original and alternate CFF proposals attempt to preserve farmland by buying development rights.
       The fund pays the farm owners the difference between farmland value and what it would be worth developed.
       In the original proposal, the money to purchase the rights would have come from a tax of 6.25 cents per $1,000 on real estate, passed by resolution of the county commissioners. That amounts to about $10 more in taxes for a $160,000 property, or a total of about $250,000 countywide.
       While many supported the proposal, the suggestion of new taxes caused public controversy.
       When the commissioners held a public hearing Dec. 11, over 150 people crowded two rooms in the Clallam County courthouse to discuss the fund.
       Commissioners heard more public input Dec. 18.
       State legislative representative Jim Buck (R-Joyce) even added his comment.
       "Money is very tight in Olympia," he told commissioners. Passing the alternate proposal would make it more difficult to secure state funds for essential services in Clallam County, Buck said.
       Several citizens who spoke at the meeting opposed both the original and the alternative fund proposals.
       "It's still public money. It's still tax money," said Fred Norton, who opposed the new proposal.
       Clint Hulse argued it's a bad idea to invest in farming anyway. "You may be buying farmland but you're not buying farming. It's done in the county," he said.
       Lynda Snyder, who negotiated a Teamsters Union contract with the county which cut 131 employees hours from 40 to 37.5 per week, was also opposed.
       Money wasn't available to pay county employees to work 40 hours, so why is it available for the Conservation Futures Fund, she asked.
       Commissioner Tharinger responded, saying "This is a capital account and this is a capital issue."
       Farming is a known industry in Clallam County, and the fund is an investment in industry farming jobs.
       The fund is also an attempt to reduce future taxes.
       "In the long run, communities that have had these sorts of programs have seen their tax pressure diminish," Tharinger said.
       Commissioner Chapman replied that the public had not had time to fully discuss the proposal.
       "This is bad government and this is bad process," he said.
       Commissioner Doherty replied that the topic had been around since the 1970s.
       He also supported the proposal.
       "Ag land helps create a tax base to offset the cost of development," he said.
       "We don't have very many chances in our lifetimes to save 400 jobs," he said.
       

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, any copyrighted work in this message is distributed under fair use without profit or payment for non-profit research and educational purposes only. [Ref. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml]