A Winning Proposition

Who would believe that conservatives and conservationists would ever find an issue to bring them together? But just such an issue has arisen here in Newtown –– and across the nation. Open space conservation is finding ardent supporters equally among those interested in saving tax dollars and those interested in saving wildlife habitat.

The Board of Selectmen met this week with the state director of the Connecticut’s chapter of The Trust for Public Land (TPL) to begin to map a strategy for identifying, financing, and ultimately preserving tracts of open space in Newtown. The state TPL director, Tim Northrop, who happens to reside in Newtown, told the selectmen, “People are in support of taxing themselves for land conservation.” Several towns in Connecticut, including Danbury, Redding, Ridgefield, Southbury, Weston, and Wilton, have approved bonding programs for open space conservation in recent years for amounts ranging from $2.8 million to $24 million. Average voter response for such measures has been 72 percent favorable. Why is open space conservation so popular? It is a shrewd investment.

Over the past five years, those who study the economics of development have been paying close attention to the cost of community services when assessing the benefits of the various types of development. Economists at Ohio State University combined the results of several research surveys and found that, on average, for every dollar collected in taxes and nontax revenue from residential development, between $1.15 and $1.50 was spent by a community on services and education. In a community like Newtown, where the schools are already operating at capacity and the population is spread out over a wide area (60 square miles), the cost of services can be much higher. Consider the family with three children that moves into a Newtown home, paying $12,000 annually in property taxes. The town immediately must shell out $9,000 a year to educate each of those children, which pushes the Newtown’s cost-of-services ratio to $2.25 for every dollar collected in taxes.

The Ohio State study showed that commercial and industrial development cost municipalities between 35 and 65 cents for every dollar collected. The best kind of development, however, is really not development at all. Land conserved for agriculture or open space costs the average municipality 30 to 50 cents per dollar of tax and nontax revenue collected. Land purchased outright by a town stops earning property taxes, but by perpetually avoiding the huge municipal costs associated with residential development, the dividends can be enormous, and they accrue to the town year after year without changing the character of the town the way commercial and industrial development does. These are figures that are encouraging for conservatives and conservationists alike. Save money. Save land. Save the character of the town. It is a winning proposition.

By involving state and national groups like The Trust for Public Land and local groups like the Newtown Forest Association and the town’s own Open Space Task Force, Newtown’s leaders should be able to craft a plan that conserves large tracts of open space through public and private initiatives. By financing this effort through local bonding and matching grants from state and federal sources, Newtown will be able to leverage some of its most spectacular scenery into a more stable tax rate.