San Benito County’s biggest industry might take another shot to
the chin this year with state officials ready to once again whack
the long-standing Williamson Act funding from the budget.
San Benito County’s biggest industry might take another shot to the chin this year with state officials ready to once again whack the long-standing Williamson Act funding from the budget.
The county relies heavily on the Williamson Act property tax subvention payments. This would be the second consecutive year with essentially no state funding toward the program, as an already decreased amount of about $200,000 on the table for San Benito County – from a statewide amount of $10 million – has been lopped from the latest budget revision.
The Williamson Act is a conservation act passed in 1965 that allows counties to contract with private owners, usually with 10-year terms, to restrict agricultural and open-space uses. The landowner receives a lower tax assessment – based on its actual use as opposed to the potential market value. Since 1971, counties had received subvention payments from the state until they were reduced two years ago.
Before the cut in 2009-10, San Benito County had been in line for about $700,000 annually of the $40 million pot. That year, it decreased to about $200,000 to the county before 2010-11, when the state allocated just $1,000 statewide, or $21 to this area. The county placed a moratorium on Williamson Act contracts last year due to the loss of subvention payments, according to the assessor’s office.
The Williamson Act applies to nearly 600,000 acres of county land – which amounts to around three-quarters of San Benito’s privately owned property, the assessor’s office has reported. As a whole, agriculture is the No. 1 industry in San Benito County and generates more than $250 million in revenue each year.
There was some hope for the Williamson Act program this year when legislators had included $10 million in an initial budget draft. But it since has been removed from the slate of allocations, causing concern among local farmers and ranchers.
South County orchardist and farm bureau treasurer Gregg Swett noted how the ranching business would be hit the hardest because there is less production per acre.
“The benefits to the individual ranchers to keep them in business, especially in the cattle business, is very important,” Swett said.
He believes the void of the Williamson Act funds, over a long period, will probably force some form of change – either property owners splitting their parcels or selling their properties to others.
“If you look at the act, it has basically kept development away from San Benito County in comparison to some other areas,” Swett said.
One of those places that has been slow in developing is the San Juan Bautista where Anthony Botelho, an orchardist himself, is the supervisor.
Botelho said the elimination of funding from the state “jeopardizes a number of ranching families we have and it’s not fair.” He called the subvention payments “a significant benefit that we’re dependent on.”
“A lot of these lands have been in families for generations,” he said. “Pretty soon, your taxable value exceeds the value of what it could produce.”
Swett is additionally concerned considering the county already has a relatively low rate of return on the tax revenue sent to the state.
“One of the fundamental problems that San Benito County has is its rate of return, meaning 11 percent of any tax dollar that goes to the state is all that’s returned,” he said.
Botelho acknowledged, meanwhile, he understands financial constraints in tough budget times. But he doesn’t believe cutting the act’s funding makes fiscal sense.
“I honestly don’t think with the lands we have in the Williamson Act (that this) is the answer for a county such as ours,” he said.
