Block · one region of the page, as the scanner read it. It may hold a whole story, part of one, several, or an advertisement; stitching blocks into articles is the next step. Text is supplied OCR.
Page 4 · column 2 of 7 · from the scan, no model involved
land really carrying the tax burden or are they merely doing what people who own land have always done, namely: pay taxes on it? Most people don’t have any open space land, therefore they are not fortunate enough to be able to pay taxes on it.
In reaching its conclusion that people with open space land carry the tax burden, the PEC seized upon data that, for instance, shows how few’ field and forest fires are put out compared with residential fires. Taken as a microcosm, that statistic is supposed to prove that owners of open space land subsidize the putting out of residential fires.
That point is misleading. It is not the case that, because fewer actual fires are put out on open space land, owners of open space land receive less of a service from the fire department. The primary task of a fire department is to provide constant insurance that fires, once started, will be put out. The service is in the insurance, and everybody gets that to an equal degree.
Also, we believe the putting out of a fire, regardless of its location, is a service to everybody in the county. Presumably it is in the interest of a farmer to drive into Sperryville and not find the charred remains of a town.
Our point is that the return on taxes cannot be quantified for a particular land use. In general, everybody benefits, directly or indirectly, from all services rendered in the county. To say that farmers get no return for their taxes when fires are put out in towns is a highly questionable claim - a claim which the PEC study implicitly makes.
Without question, fewer direct services go to open space land. But surely it is the owners of open space land who have the biggest stake in the availability of those services. Those with open space land, after all, have the largest holdings. They, more than anybody else, rely for the security of their property on the maintenance of society.
All of this is not to say that we oppose the preservation of open space land. We are very much for it. What we do mean to say is that it is neither helpful nor correct to hail one group in the county as the carrier of the tax burden.
94.5%