Our Natural Heritage In the News

By Brian Schied

In the 10 years since voters overwhelmingly approved a plan to spend $59 million on open space, roughly half of the effort's funding has been spent in sparsely populated Upper Bucks County, according to a Courier Times analysis of money spent and land saved in the county's open space program.

Through the county program, three times as much land has been saved throughout the 20 municipalities that make up Upper Bucks as was conserved in the 20 municipalities of Lower Bucks and twice as much land as was conserved in the 14 municipalities of Central Bucks.

Upper Bucks, where residents make up about 15 percent of the county's total population, received $29.3 million of county money to preserve just more than 7,600 acres of land, which breaks down to .08 acres of land and nearly $300 for every Upper Bucks resident.

By comparison, Lower Bucks, where residents make up nearly 59 percent of the county's population, received $18.1 million in county money to preserve about 2,300 acres of land, or .006 acres of land and $49.50 for every Lower Bucks resident, according to the analysis.

The 14 municipalities in Central Bucks, where residents make up about 26 percent of the population, received $13 million of county money to preserve about 3,480 acres, or .02 acres and about $82 for every resident, according to the analysis.

Next week, voters will go to the polls to decide the fate of another countywide open space referendum, this time an $87 million proposal to preserve another estimated 15,000 acres. The bond is expected to cost Bucks taxpayers about $30 per household every year for a decade.

Larry Raffle, one of the few publicly vocal opponents of the open space proposal, said if the past 10 years are any indication, the new land preservation plan will be largely paid for by Lower Bucks taxpayers, while Upper Bucks residents will garner the bulk of the benefits.

“There's a tremendous imbalance,” said Raffle of Newtown Township, a retired advertising executive and former chairman of a mortgage company. “Open space is a wonderful thing, but the people that pay for it should be the ones benefiting from it. It's just unfair.”

However, supporters of the new $87 million open space proposal claim the effort has been a boon to all of Bucks County with a litany of benefits. Open space preservation can curb suburban sprawl, reduce traffic congestion, improve water and air quality and even benefit the county's rural tourism industry, proponents claim.

“It doesn't matter if you're from Lower Bucks, Central Bucks or Upper Bucks,” said former Republican congressman and ex-county commissioner Mike Fitzpatrick, co-chairman of Save Bucks County, the group working to drum up support for the open space ballot question. “Land preservation equals quality of life, equals a better future.”

Former county commissioner Andy Warren, another co-chairman of Save Bucks County, said one of the reasons that Upper Bucks received the most county funding for open space is that land is more readily available and far cheaper in Upper Bucks than in Lower Bucks.

Warren said when open space is preserved in Bedminster, for example, a Bristol resident might not see the immediate benefit. However, Warren pointed out, that preserved land might prevent construction of a new neighborhood that could lead to increased traffic on roads throughout Bucks or spur more water runoff that might worsen flooding down county.

“All of Bucks County wins when there's open space,” Warren said. “Once [undeveloped land] is gone, what will take its place will impact the quality of life of every Bucks Countian.”

At a recent press conference in Bensalem, officials from Bensalem, Morrisville and Penndel touted the county's open space program as a windfall even in built-out communities.

George Mount III, Morrisville's borough manager, called the program a “tool to keep development in balance.”

“It's not the amount of acres, it's the quality of life we're providing with this,” said Edward Kisselback, vice president of the Bensalem council.

“It's going to benefit all of Bucks County,” said Bryan Allen, another Bensalem council member. “Clean air and clean water don't recognize township boundaries. What happens to our neighbors happens to us.”

Under the $87 million proposal, every municipality would receive at least $214,000 from the county for a municipal open space program and, both Warren and Fitzpatrick pointed out, the five municipalities that would receive the most money for that element of the effort are all in Lower Bucks.

“The county has bent over backwards to make sure that Lower Bucks has projects that are proportional to the rest of the county,” said Jeffrey Marshall of Newtown Township, vice president of resource protection with the Heritage Conservancy and a member of the Bucks County Open Space Task Force. “There's no perfect formula, but there is a conscious effort to make it so every citizen in Bucks County has open space in their area. Every county resident benefits from this.”

The new plan includes proposals that would directly benefit Lower Bucks, including plans to buy old industrial sites, also known as brownfields, and turn them into small parks, playgrounds or ball fields.

“It's not just about family farms,” said David Masur, director of PennEnvironment, a statewide environmental advocacy group. “This has as much benefit for someone in Bristol or Bensalem as it does someone in Upper Bucks.”

Still, Raffle disagreed.

In an interview this week, Raffle, who opposed the 1997 open space ballot question, described the county's open space program as “welfare” for Upper Bucks communities. He said those taxpayers are paying the same in taxes as Lower Bucks residents but getting twice the land saved near their homes. Raffle believes the money the county wants to borrow to fund its next open space program could be better spent.

“If you talk to the residents of Lower Bucks, Bristol Township, Falls, Bensalem, wherever, and you ask them what their five biggest concerns are, open space isn't one of them,” Raffle said. “They're concerned about deteriorating bridges, crowded roads, sewers and toilets that don't flush. They're not concerned about open space.”

What the referendum says

“Shall debt in the sum of Eighty-seven Million Dollars ($87,000,000) for the purpose of financing the acquisition and preservation of open space, including agricultural land, municipal open space, county parkland, natural areas and the Delaware riverfront be authorized to be incurred as debt approved by the electors?” YES or NO

PLAIN ENGLISH STATEMENT

After nearly a year's study, the 2007 Bucks County Open Space Task Force recommended to the Bucks County Commissioners a bond issue to acquire and preserve open space over the next decade (10 years). Do you support an $87 million increase in the Bucks County debt limit for that purpose?

It is estimated that the $87 million would be borrowed in phases as follows:

$29 million - 2008

$29 million - 2011

$29 million - 2014

The Open Space Task Force plan allocates $25 million for farmland preservation, $26 million for municipal open space, $18 million for county parkland acquisition, $11 million for preservation of natural areas and $7 million for the preservation of Delaware riverfront land. It is expected that the county investment would leverage an estimated $120 million in supplementary funding from other sources.

The anticipated yearly cost of the $87 million to the residents of Bucks County would range from $10 per household to $31 per household, based upon the above borrowing schedule. This equates to between three and eight cents per day.

A vote “YES” to the ballot question approves borrowing for these purposes.