Agriculture Today - September 2009

Regional effort to focus on saving Land Conservation Program

County Leaders attended a meeting at FCFB to discuss the fate of the Williamson Act, including from left, CA Department of Conservation's Brian Leahy, FCFB's Ryan Jacobsen, Nisei Farmers League's Manuel Cunha, and Fresno County Supervisors Judy Case and Phil Larson.

The popular Land Conservation Program, more commonly known as the Williamson Act, may be a current victim of the state’s budget crisis, but if nine San Joaquin Valley counties have their way, the land use tool may see new life.

Representatives from the nine counties, including members of the Boards of Supervisors, agricultural commissioners, planning departments and various agricultural organizations, met at the Fresno County Farm Bureau on Aug. 31 to hear an update status on the Williamson Act from the CA Department of Conservation and to discuss taking a regional approach to finding an alternative path to keep the 37-year old program going. The participating counties include Fresno, Kings, Kern, Madera, Mariposa, Merced, San Joaquin, Stanislaus, and Tulare. Within this region, more than 2.4 million acres are included under contract in the Williamson’s Farmland Security Zone, and eight of these nine counties are listed in the top 10 counties currently receiving subvention payments from the state.  

The regional representatives agreed to form a smaller group made up of one supervisorial representative from each county, as well as each county’s agricultural commissioner, an agricultural organization and agricultural finance representatives. This group will formulate key messages about the Act’s value in helping keep farmland in production, the benefits that reach beyond the farm in regional economic viability, and the inevitable costs to the state treasury from the loss in economic value from land that could go out of production without Williamson Act protection. “I think there will be a lot of lost economic activity because of the loss of Williamson Act and land going out of production,” said Fresno County Supervisor Judy Case.

The group will use these points to appeal to Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to replace the $38 million in state subvention funds that help reimburse counties for the reduced property taxes from farm and range land under the Land Conservation contract. An eventual legislative fix also may become necessary and was discussed.

During the meeting, county supervisors outlined how their individual counties will administer the program given the lost subvention funds.  Many of the county supervisors discussed placing an immediate moratorium on any new Williamson Act contracts and additional review of the sub-standard size parcels that may currently fall under the contract. Kings County Supervisor Joe Neves said they have discussed the possibility of creating a redevelopment-type of agency to help preserve prime farmland and to maintain the county’s ag focus. Mariposa County already has voted to continue to honor the Williamson Act contracts that cover 183,000 acres in the county, said Cathi Boze, Mariposa County agricultural commissioner.

All of the county supervisors and agricultural commissioners expressed the important role the Williamson Act plays in helping keep farmland in production.  “Any incentive we have to keep people in business next to an urban setting is good,” said Kings County Agricultural Commissioner Tim Niswander.  With the current pressures on farmers and ranchers, such as low commodity prices, inadequate water supplies and costly environmental regulations, any increased production costs--such as increased land-based taxes--could be enough to drive farmers out of production. The agricultural commissioners are concerned with management of abandoned crops and orchards and subsequent pest management problems, as well as the forced sale of farmland into other uses promoting sprawl and loss of open spaces.  Tulare County Agricultural Commissioner Gary Kunkel said, “[Williamson Act] is extremely critical to Tulare County. A lot of farms [under contract] are not large parcels and they operate on the edge of town. If they are forced to sell, it just begins the process to it pave over.”

The non-renewal process
The Williamson Act has been an important tool to help preserve farmland in California.  Nearly one-third of all private land in the state is under a Williamson Act contract, said Brian Leahy, of the CA Department of Conservation. “The Williamson Act is a very important tool for orderly growth and to help protect ag viability,” said Leahy. More than 176,000 acres of farmland and grazing land were lost between 2004 and 2006 including 81,247 acres considered as prime farmland, Leahy said.

Counties can’t cancel existing Williamson Act contracts, but they can initiate the process for a non-renewal, Leahy explained. It is a nine-year path, where the property taxes gradually increase each year. Either the landowner or the County may initiate nonrenewal process.

If the local agency chooses to not renew the contract the landowner can protest the non-renewal and retain the full value of their Williamson Act tax reduction for four years until their property taxes begin to ramp up, over the following six years, to the non-Williamson Act rate, explained Leahy. If the city or county seeks to non-renew a contract, they must give the landowner notice at least 60 days prior to next renewal date, he added. 

Likewise, local governments cannot refuse to accept contracts with other landowners within the Farmland Preserve once the preserve is established. “Landowners in an established preserve have a right to a contract,” Leahy said. But, local governments can change the boundaries of existing preserves to exclude parcels that are not already under contract. If a city or county wants to stop entering into contracts or establishing agricultural preserves, they might need to change their existing local rules for governance of the preserve, he said.  However, changing or reducing the boundaries of a preserve would be a discretionary act which might trigger California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review.