Letter: Douglas open space worth preserving

The Sierra Business Council is an association of over 450 businesses in the Sierra Nevada Region (including Minden-Gardnerville) that works to secure the economic and environmental health of their members' communities for this and future generations.

In 1998, SBC won a national award for their publication, "Planning for Prosperity," which focused in large part on urban sprawl and the high cost to businesses, citizens and local government of that development. It is clear throughout the Sierra Business Council's literature that preserving farms and ranches is the most economically conservative solution to sprawl. On page 9, SBC notes:

"Sprawling development patterns also compromise the economic viability of the working landscape. As more and more agricultural land is converted to development, agricultural suppliers, processors and other support services often move out of the area, increasing the costs of owning and operating large ranches, farms and forests. Sprawling development also expands the frequency of conflicts between these traditional industries and new residents. As costs and conflicts grow, longtime landowners often become discouraged and subdivide their ranches for development. This, in turn, can diminish the quality of rural landscape, reducing property values throughout the community, and degrading the Sierra's most important and irreplaceable competitive asset."

Like the Sierra Business Council, and as a small business owner, preserving our rural qualities in Douglas County is my number one concern. Purchasing development rights is a great deal for taxpayers, landowners and the business community. As noted again by SBC in their publication, a 1992 study calculates that there will be additional capital costs attributable to sprawl development patterns in the Central Valley of California of over $1.3 billion over 20 years for things like roads, water, sewer and schools.

In Douglas County, for every $1 collected in property tax on residential developments, it costs taxpayers $1.30 to provide services to those residences. For every $1 in property tax collected on farm and ranch land, it costs 37 cents to provide those same services. The potential for 3,500 homes in some of the areas targeted for open space will costs taxpayers up to $24,500,000 at $7,000 per residence for services such as roads, police, fire protection and other services. This does not include the cost of potentially replacing the flood control currently provided by the ranches and farms. That cost could easily add another $50,000,000 to the cost to taxpayers, not to mention the additional levels of government that will have to be in place for a flood control system and management of the additional services. Thanks, but no thanks. It makes more economic sense to act now to preserve open spaces.

The Douglas County Business Council has taken a position in opposition to the 1/4 cent sales tax. As a member of the Douglas County Business Council, I disagree with that position. I strongly support the 1/4 cent sales tax because it makes good "business sense" to me. For taxpayers, having open space is a better deal than having new development in the wrong places.

The 1/4 cent sales tax is the most economically viable method to preserve open space and retain the economic benefits of the farms and ranches in Douglas County.

Vote Yes on Question 1!

LINDA TURRIA

Minden