The Experience of Term Agreements in Farm and Ranch Land Protection Programs

1. The Experience of Term Agreements in Farm and Ranch Land Protection Programs Bob Wagner, American Farmland Trust

2. Term Easements in PDR Programs • Pennsylvania: 1988. Provided a 25-year term easement option @ 10% of full value. No takers. Repealed in 1994. • Montana: 1999. Offered term easement as an option. No takers. Program has since • sunset. • West Virginia: 2000. Amended 1990 law to remove term easement as an option in voluntary farmland protection programs authorized by the state.

3. Term Easements in PDR Programs • Florida: 2001. 30-year term easement option w/RoFR for properties with significant natural areas. No more than 10% of funds dedicated to program maybe used for this purpose. No funding to date. No experience to date. • Arizona: 2002. Program provides for a 25-year term easement option. No details on valuation. No experience to date.

4. Term Agreements in Incentive Programs • Federal Farm Bill Programs: • CRP – 10-15 year contracts. • WRP – 30 year easements. • WHIP – 5-10 year contracts. • GRP – 10-30 year contracts or 30 year easements.

5. Term Agreements in Incentive Programs • Massachusetts, Farm Viability Program: Encourages farm business planning and farm re-investment. 5 or 10 year covenants depending on grant size. • Florida, Resource Conservation Agreements: Annual payments to improve habitat and water restoration/conservation. 5-10 year agreements. Yet to be implemented.

6. Term Agreements in Incentive Programs • New Jersey, Ag District Program: 8-year term easement. Eligible for conservation cost- share funds.

7. Term Agreements in Tax Programs • California, Williamson Act: “Rolling” 10-year term easement in return for use-value taxation. “Super” Williamson Act: 20-year term = more benefits, including additional 35% property tax reduction. • Clifton Park, NY, Local Tax Reduction: 10- 20% additional tax reduction in return for 15-25 term easement.

8. Term Agreements in Zoning Ordinances • Southampton, NY, Ag Planned Development District: 10-year term easement in return for development density based on gross acreage for the purpose of PDR, TDR, fee purchase or conservation subdivision.

9. Pros and Cons • Pros: • Cheaper. • Potentially attracts more landowners. • Provides landowners with more options in the future. • Good linkage with conservation programs.

10. Pros and Cons • Cons: • Not permanent. • Limited return on investment. • May reduce public’s interest in providing funds. • Structural and legal complications – valuation, status at transfer, disruption of funds.

11. Issues to Consider • Remember that Development is rarely temporary – match conservation option to the alternative. • Use the right tool for the job – temporary agreements do not achieve long-term solutions. • Maximize return on investment – link programs to a clear public benefit.

12. Issues to Consider • Match term to achieving the desired outcome – length of agreement should = time needed to realize public benefit. • Be prepared – organizational issues, legal complications, monitoring and enforcement.