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 2 · column 5 of 7 · from the scan, no model involved
also see increased county emphasis on purchasing development rights as a tool for protecting Rappahannock County from the increasing development of the Northern Virginia region.
“I’d like people to look at this as a rescue squad for our view shed,” said realtor Philip Strange, comparing the $.02 Conservation Easement district to the $.04 fire levy.
■ Opposing arguments to the Conservation Easement District focused on the perceived inequality of publicly funding the purchase of development rights, since all residents of Rappahannock County would be taxed while only those owning large parcels of agricultural land would be eligible to sell their development rights to the county. Currently, Rappahannock county funds the purchase of development rights with rollback taxes, which does not burden the average Rappahannock taxpayer.
“Why should the poor have to pay for the rich?” asked Bobby Carter
“Farming in Rappahannock is not economical. It doesn’t make any sense to support a declining industry,” said John Marocki.
Timing is
everything
Many of those opposing the District said that while they supported the idea of conservation easements, they thought the timing of the tax rate increase was poor, or the particular ordinance proposed too broad, or too suddenly proposed.
“Timing, is everything. There has not been one time when we discussed this ordinance,” said Margaret Ralph, of Wakefield district, referring to the fact that the Conservation Easement Ordinance was not brought up by the BOS or McCarthy in public meetings prior to June’s budget hearings. Ralph also questioned the intentions of the ordnance which contains language which would have allowed personal property as well as real estate to be taxed within the district.
94.0%