AUGUSTA, Maine — Every year since 1984, a surveyor from the Nature Conservancy walks the 10-acre coastal property off Ledgemere Road in Georgetown to make sure the landowner isn’t cutting down too many trees.
The annual survey and the tree-cutting provision is enshrined in a deed restriction, part of a 1984 land deal between the Nature Conservancy and Richard and Constance Porter.
When State Treasurer Bruce Poliquin bought the property in 2001, he inherited the restriction. According to Tom Abello, a policy adviser at the Nature Conservancy, Poliquin has honored the terms of his deed. With the exception of a storm blow-down a few years ago, trees have not been removed from the property, Abello said.
The deed restriction appears to conflict with the purpose of Maine’s Tree Growth Tax Program, in which Poliquin enrolled 10 acres in 2004. The 40-year-old tax law is designed to bolster the state’s forest products industry by giving significant tax breaks to landowners in exchange for sustainable, commercial timber harvesting.
The treasurer’s political opponents have highlighted the conflict between the deed restriction and the goals of the Tree Growth program, suggesting that the treasurer has exploited the program as a tax shelter. Members of the group Maine’s Majority, which was first to publicize the issue, are expected to show up at the Georgetown Board of Selectmen meeting Thursday night, Feb. 16, and press town officials about it.
However, no one knows whether Poliquin is honoring the terms of his timber management plan — which is mandatory under the Tree Growth program — except the treasurer himself, who has declined to talk about it.
But he doesn’t have to. Although the Tree Growth program can give a landowner a substantial tax break, the landowner’s forest management plan is confidential, sealed by the Maine Forest Service. And while the Forest Service certifies the plans, it is not involved in enforcing them.
Enforcement falls to town assessors, who can request from the Forest Service technical advice about the Tree Growth program and additional information about management plans. Geoff Herman, with the Maine Municipal Association, which represents Maine towns and cities, said assessors are reluctant to take enforcement steps, despite potentially losing thousands of dollars in property taxes.
“A lot of assessors don’t want to get involved because they’re not foresters, they’re assessors,” Herman said.
Geoff Birdsall, chairman of the Georgetown Board of Selectmen, hinted at another reason towns don’t jump in. Asked whether the Georgetown board planned to ask the Forest Service for details about Poliquin’s management plan, Birdsall said the town would probably wait until 2014 when Poliquin’s 10-year plan is up for review by the state.
“Given the nature of this, I think there would be some retribution if we were to single [Poliquin] out,” Birdsall said. “If we’re going to take a look at Tree Growth, we need to take a look at all of them. We can’t single people out based on personality or political opinions.”
Georgetown has 15 properties enrolled in Tree Growth, Birdsall said. Some landowners, he said, have expressed concern to him that the Poliquin matter would lead to unfair scrutiny of their management plans.
Potential problems with Tree Growth are hardly confined to Poliquin, or to Georgetown. The Legislature each session deals with several bills attempting to change the law or beef up enforcement.
The Legislature’s Taxation Committee on Wednesday unanimously endorsed one such bill. The proposal, sponsored by Senate President Kevin Raye, R-Perry, would direct the Forest Service to perform an annual, random survey of properties in Tree Growth to check for conformance and report to the Legislature. The survey sunsets in 2014.
The bill appears to focus the Forest Service’s efforts on waterfront properties. Raye said this week that’s because most of the complaints he hears about Tree Growth occur in coastal towns where it seems unlikely that a landowner can commercially harvest timber while adhering to shoreland zoning standards.
Landowners exploiting the program, he said, also unfairly push the property tax burden inland on residents with modest homes.
Rep. Seth Berry, D-Bowdoinham, said recently that he was glad the Legislature was taking steps to address the issue, but he worried they may not go far enough.
For example, it remains to be seen whether Raye’s bill addresses an issue raised by Poliquin’s deed restriction: Despite thousands of dollars in potentially lost property tax revenue, no one checked Poliquin’s deed — and its Nature Conservancy cutting restrictions — before he enrolled in the Tree Growth program.
No one is required to.
Town assessors are responsible for administering and signing off on forest management plans. They are not required to check a landowner’s deed for possible restrictions that would make tree harvesting difficult.
Donald Mansius, of the Maine Forest Service, said property deeds — public documents — are not considered by the foresters who certify the plans.
Raye was taken aback when told about Poliquin’s deed restriction and his enrollment in Tree Growth.
“On its face it doesn’t seem to be in the spirit of the Tree Growth program,” Raye said. “That certainly raises eyebrows.”
Numerous attempts by the Sun Journal to get comment from Poliquin over the past two weeks have been unsuccessful.
Abello, with the Nature Conservancy, said his organization has conservation restrictions with many landowners enrolled in Tree Growth, about 250,000 acres statewide. About 185,000 acres of that is along the St. John River where J.M. Huber does frequent commercial harvesting. However, the restrictions on those properties are different from the ones that exist on Poliquin’s.
Advocates of Tree Growth point to the latter as evidence that the program doubles as an economic development and conservation tool.
“I think it’s important to recognize that, for the most part, Tree Growth is very, very successful,” Raye said. “That said, I think it’s important to find out if there are problems with the program, so as not to ruin it for those who are using it properly.”
To see more from the Sun Journal, visit sunjournal.com.
This is why targeted tax credits to promote a specific behavior do not work in Maine – the credits were meant to be used by democrats only, not republicans. Poliquin should have realized this. Seriously though, incentive based tax credits are poor fiscal policy, never ever return anything to the treasury and are prime targets for people looking to take advantage of the system.
Like you Bruce Poliquin thinks he’s entitled 4 life.
Strange you should state that since the Tree Growth Law, Tax Credits as you call them, was established by a Republican Legislature in the late 1960’s when Maine was a “Republican” State, and some believed it was a “paper plantation” ruled by the paper companies, who also owned the vast majority of Maine’s forest lands.
I agree a lot of individuals look for ways to “use” the system, thus better enforcement and clarification is constant, but if society, the State, the Country, the economy is the better for such a policy then I’d rather judge (and enforce) the purpose while punishing the abusers such as our esteem State Treasurer who is an educated man who, I assume intentionally abused the system for the purpose to evade paying the proper taxes.
Don’t feed the troll.
I will note, that there is no response. And there is a reason why there is no response: he can “google” all he wants, but a fact is a fact.
Your assumption that he abused the system to evade paying “proper” taxes is wrong on several counts.
I don’t think Senator Pray ever assumed that the man evaded pay property taxes? I think that the former Senate President was indicating that he used the avenue to claim a tax credit that is questionable. You do understand that this man was the Senate President for as many years as equal to Joe Sewell , of Old Town, Both are respectable and honest representatives, both have made their mark. My state senator, who was then Asst. Minority Leader, at the time introduced me to Mr. Sewall, the then President gave me a personalized tour of the office, and explained that his office used to be the governor’s. And made sure that me, as a student, had unlimited access to the legislative process. My senator became the President, for an equal number of years.
That is learning, when you are 17 and when you are 25. This man is a Vietnam veteran, an also a person who was a legislator for over 30 years. If I had my way, he would be the Lt. Governor of the State of Maine. He knows the process, he isn’t neccessarily always political, and he is smart. He should be teaching this stuff! I’ve seen him vote for republican ideas, the reason why? because it was a good idea!, not politics, not anything,…..he thought it was a good idea! Imagine That!!!!
And yes, I will always , always be grateful to both persons who teaches a young man, rather than direct them towards a specific agenda They taught me the specifics, not the politics. The politics are mine, what happens at the State House, is, up to the majority.
None of that addresses any argument about Polequin or the tree growth program. It is an authoritarian attempt to manipulate people into going along. Being in the senate for a long time or Vietnam or any of the rest of it is not relevant to the content of what is written.
You write: “I don’t think Senator Pray ever assumed that the man evaded pay property taxes?” He wrote that he wants to “punish the abusers such as our esteem State Treasurer who is an
educated man who, I assume intentionally abused the system for the
purpose to evade paying the proper taxes.”
Please educate me. What are the “several counts”? I am willing to be enlighten.
They include the assumption that he abused the system, that it was intentional, that he “evaded”, and that there is anything improper about not paying higher taxes or wanting to pay less taxes. Much of this smear campaign (which you are not running) is based on a moral — as opposed to presently legal under the tree growth law — presumption of inherent guilt by wealthy individuals not paying higher taxes, daring to arrange their affairs to not pay more than they have to, and somehow “causing” others to pay what they claim is his “fair share” despite the fact that his land is costing the town practically nothing in services, especially the schools which are the largest part of the costs. I don’t speculate whether you support that since you didn’t specifically write about that dimension.
level the field and remove all the politics, a flat rate tax system with no loopholes would be much more fair.
Taxing owners of undeveloped land for government services is not fair. The tree growth program is a “current use” tax assessment program. The tax burden is so high that attempting to apply it to everything equally causes even worse destructive distortions.
Democrats Only…? Really! If you think companies like JD Irving, Seven Islands, Prentice and Carlisle, Plum Creek, etc., , that are by far the reason that there is a tree growth program, are Democrats or support Democrat candidates, you must be severely challenged.
Does the 10.3 acre parcel Bruce Poliquin claims for a forestry tax reduction of about $5000 per year actually meet the Maine Tree Growth Tax Law requirements for a 10 acre minimum of “forestland”? The law specifically excludes ledge and “similar areas that are not suitable for growing a forest product”. The diagram of the 10.3 acres included in Mr. Poliquin’s application clearly indicates the east and west property boundaries are the high tide lines. However, as much as 0.7 A of the included area is ledge bordering the water (appearing white in the satellite images). Another 0.2 A is roadway, and there is an additional open area of 0.1 to 0.2 A in the middle of the property that may or may not be rocky. This might seem like nitpicking to some, but it certainly is no worse a technicality than the loophole that allows a management plan to be filed for trees which, by covenant and town restrictions, cannot ever be legally cut. If the validity of this plan is revisited by the Georgetown Board of Selectmen or others, consideration should be given to whether the 10 A minimum was actually met.
I think the town officials are going to find out in a short while, and i think some of us already know the answer !
Even if the 10 acre minimum was met, if he filed a Tree Growth Plan with the full knowledge that his deed restriction prohibited harvesting of trees, that is FRAUD.
The deed does not prohibit harvesting trees. It prohibits “excessive cutting”. You have no idea what is in his tree growth plan and what it calls for cutting over the 10 year period.
It is worse than “nitpicking”. It is not illegal for him to cut trees and shoreland zoning restrictions do not as a matter of law disqualify land for tree growth. Neither do “roads” or clusters of rocks in the woods.
I see no problem with any Town doing a full review of Tree Growth properties – 15 TOTAL in the case of Georgetown might take a few hours to go over, Guess it’s easier to just have the remaining residents pay someone else’s share. I wished I lived in Georgetown, they must be pretty flush to sit on this for a couple of more years and let Poliquin off the hook for another $10K… As for the other 14 property owners, if they are in compliance they have nothing to fear.
There is no evidence that Poliquin isn’t in compliance. He does not have a “share” he is making anyone else pay. He has 10 acres in a current-use tax assessment program that costs the town nothing in services like schools.
I don’t see why they aren’t jumping on tree growth everywhere, I’m sure there are a lot of people that have property in tree growth that have no intention of harvesting. That is revenue that the state needs, and for anyone that has land in tree growth and doesn’t see why they need to have a management plan, well set it up so you can cut some cordage out of it, because it’s as simple as that.
You do not understand the tree growth program.
The state “needing” revenue is not a justification to raise property taxes.
I understand it as a way for landowners that would like to get the most out of their land being able to pay less in taxes while being able to utilize the renewable resource of timber responsibly if they so choose. I don’t understand how people with no intention of utilizing the resource and not creating management plans, are able to keep their property taxes low. That is the problem, and those that abuse the privilege of tree growth are not paying what would be owed in taxes, which is revenue lost. All the state need do is enforce the tree growth rules, and those that opt out can pay what they owe. There are many people out there with land in tree growth that have gone astray from their plans, don’t update them, and I’m sure there is more where use of the system is being utilized where it shouldn’t.
No one is in the program without a forest management plan filed every ten years. If the state doesn’t get the plan they remove the land and impose penalties. The abuse in this regard is the opposite of what you think. People have been thrown out and assessed enormous penalties over minor paper work issues or genuine oversights. There is legislation intended to reform that.
If land is in tree growth there is no reason why it should not be assessed for current use even without the tree growth program. That is not the law, but should be. Land used for growing trees is not costing the town anything for schools or other such ‘services’. Not taxing the land higher is not a “loss” to anyone, it only fosters a desire on the part of some to discriminate against the landowners for more. (Think about what would happen if they got away with that for other assets like your bank account or retirement plan.)
Some people may have “gone astray” following their plans, but the requirements are very loose, spread out over decades at a time, and there is no reason to make more of a bureaucracy out of it. Trees take a long time to grow and there are lot of options for managing them that don’t necessarily make much difference. The tree growth program does not require tree harvesting in any 10 year period at all, and some uses don’t require logging at all. That is determined in the individual’s plan.
I think Poliquin should just resign and focus on rechartering his club. He can call it the Disgraced Republican Logging and Social Club. Membership would skyrocket.
resign seems to me as a recurring theme…..People have been asking Poliquin , Le Page, and now Webster to resign……that’s kind of a recurring theme?
The recurring theme is the radical left trying to hound their enemies out of office.
That’s funny, a few barks from the hounds and all the hogs take a leap over the nearest cliff. Who knew it could be this easy?
We are “radicals” now……we are “hounds”…….and we apparently don’t care about our state? They are making it easy, we just, sit back…wait, and they will own up to their own volition, not ours. That maybe an upgrade from “liberals” …..but I doubt it.
You do “care” about the state. You want to control it and everyone in it.
And not only failing; but opening the door to even criminal indictments…Pat Barnes, Warden/ developer; Paul the credit card king Violette and today, Dale ‘if you’re a feminist or gay, I’ve got a sole source contract for you’ McCormick.
AG cleared Poliquin; LePage is winning kudos for his progressive energy policies and has the backing of Obama for his school choice programs as well as a dialogue with the Federal DHHS head on Medicaid waivers.
So keep whining, just do it by your beloved wind turbines so you won’t be noticed.
They are the one’s that are responsible for their office’s, they are the ones that ran for them, they are the ones that are accountable. Make it as you want, but you cannot make it as it is.
And I’m quoting the Hon. Senator Margret Chase Smith…
Poliquin is a spoiled bully who likes to nit pick everyone else.He has a long history of exaggerating other people faults in order to make himself look like a big man.
Now that some sunshine has been shone on Poliquin’s own double dealing he is fully of excuses and he is playing the blame game.
There is no such “sunshine”, only a smear campaign with a manufactured scandal.
You should read the article again. our State treasurer has a real problem telling right from wrong.
Rejecting leftist class warfare demands to pay even higher outrageous taxes than he already is not a difficulty distinguishing right from wrong. “Carefully” reading this hit piece or any of the others in this campaign in order to be morally intimidated by class warfare resentment does not change that. There is no evidence that he has done anything wrong. It is emotional manipulation appealing to envy and resentment in the usual fashion of leftist class warfare demanding higher taxes and smearing their enemies with contrived accusations manufacturuing phony scandals for political purposes.
There is no evidence that Poliquin is “cheating”. There is nothing wrong with him not paying even more exorbitant property taxes than he already does by enrolling in a current-use property tax assessment that thousands of others do for the same legitimate reason. He is paying over $13,000/year in property taxes. His land in tree growth costs the town nothing in schools and other such ‘services’. No one is paying “his share”.
If you where one of the people of Georgetown who has to pay extra property taxes so that cheaters like Poliquin can game the system you wouldn’t think this is a “leftist” or a rightest issue.
Pretty shabby, Mr. Treasurer, pretty shabby. One might think you could do better, but one would be wrong. Perhaps for you, it’s better go back to the world of casino capitalism, to financial finagling and bilking, where the victims actually ask for what they get.
Something stinks around here.
Hangem, Hangem High!
Stampeding the public into “hanging” is the intended results of the radical left’s strategy of “Smear ’em, Smear ’em low”.
If the objective is to: Bolster Maine’s Forest Products Industry. I don’t see how that objective is met simply by harvesting trees.
As it currently operates, over half of the acreage in tree growth is being harvested in Maine and tranformed into FOREST PRODUCTS in Canadian mills.
Why are we subsidizing the Canadian forest products industry?
Why are we at the forefront when it comes to complaining to Washington about unfair Canadian trade practices, when we’re the ones subsidizing their forest product industry?
Trade with people in Canada is not “subsidies”. They pay for what they buy.
NO REALLY ? I think i mentioned this should happen last week ! The investigation that is !
The Maine Tree Growth program is not a static program. Each tree-growth plan is to be reviewed by town selectmen and reports are to be filed every 10 years. Since a significant tax BREAK is given for having land in the program a significant PENALTY is require (and IS part of the law), if someone is merely using the plan to circumvent taxes. Since it’s clear that timber harvesting was prohibited under Poliquin’s deed restriction, he KNOWINGLY FILED A FRAUDULENT DOCUMENT with the town since one of the REQUIREMENTS of the tree growth plan is to actually HARVEST trees.
i do not believe that tree harvest is required under the law
A forest management plan could easily contain language that no thinning/harvesting is necessary over some extended period of time, including the 10 year timeframe of a Management Plan.
The tree growth requirements for ultimate commercial use are very broad and do not require logging at all, though most do cut some trees over time, often with gaps larger than 10 years as you wrote.
Timber harvesting is not prohibited under his deed. It prohibits “excessive cutting”. Everyone uses the tree growth program to “circumvent” taxes: it is a current use tax assessment program intended to not apply the highest tax rates for land in tree growth. There is no evidence that Poliquin filed a “fraudulent document”. There is no requirement in the tree growth program to harvest trees; it depends on what his management plan says for the ten year period.
Just aother rich leech. Can’t wait to hear him ranting about the social safety net again.
Seems his town is run by cowards who refuse to look into possible fraud because they feel it would “single people out based on personality or political opinions.”
they have 15 properties in tree growth. check them all.
Rejecting leftist ranting discrimination in a Saul Alinsky style demonization smear campaign is not “cowardly”.
Refusing to investigate charges based on apparently damning evidence of fraud is cowardly. Or, if not cowardly, perhaps an investigation into complicity is needed. Perhaps an investigation into all exempt properties in that town should be reviewed, given the reluctance of the town to investigate these specific complaints.
Where the allegations stem from do not make the charges untrue. Silly babbling about leftists or Saul Alinsky only attempts to give a pass to one possibly guilty of fraud.
The nature of this politically motivated smear campaign singling out Bruce Poliquin is more than transparent. There is no evidence that he done anything wrong or that he is using the program differently than thousands of others. Leftist accusations in a witch hunt are not reason to single anyone out for “investigation” intended to generate more sensationalist yellow journalism headlines.
Poliquin could have been just like Senator Dennis Damon and not bothered to pay his taxes at all.
Poloquin – yet another chiseler scamming the State of Maine.
If Raye was indeed “taken aback” by this revelation, maybe he should start “takin’ a’ back” Brucie-poo’s Tree Growth exemption.
yessah
Poliquin is not a “chiseler scamming” anyone. He legitimately enrolled in a widely used current-use land tax program. His crime to the left is daring to not pay more outrageous taxes than he has to.
The extent you stick up for this crap makes me think either you participate in the program yourself, or you work for or are related to Poliquin. There are a lot of negative comments here, bettter get typing, you have only replied to 30!
The “crap” is the smear campaign designed to emotionally manipulate people into making “negative comments”. Accusing someone of holding a position because he is in the tree growth plan or a relative of Poliquin does not address the reasons and explanations given. It is an open substitute for an ad hominem argument.
And the hit’s just keep on coming!
The manufactured scandals in an extended smear campaign “just keep on coming”.
I hope these democrats that have terrorized this admin realize every dog has his day. I hope the people of maine see what a bunch of spoiled little children that have nothing better to do than feed the media with useless crap.It is time to start targeting democrat leaders and put them under a microscope.
Let me see: democratic leaders…..hmmm, which ones? The minority leadership? You guys complain about them just as we do the existing majority. Who else? The fact of the matter is, when you are in the majority, you’re scrutiny is much more intense and complicated….that’s the way it has always been, your government class in high school should have taught you that, honestly.
Now, when you have a governor who is extreme with his proposals, and a legislative majority that is scant and facing re-election guess where the legislator’s are going to land? In the middle!
Why would you scrutinize a minority that is in charge of …..nothing? What do expect a party that is in the minority to do…..not criticize the majority?
Just getting real tired of a party that want’s to change this state and country into something we all will not recognize.
Isn’t that what the Tea Party desires..? Your political intuitiveness and meaningless degradation means nothing to the common voter. The fact of the matter is, that this administration is not performing well, and this Legislature doesn’t know what to do.
They know enough to know not to continue imposing class warfare politics of envy and resentment. If you don’t “recognize” the tea party reforms as “this country” you don’t recognize the nature and reasons for the founding of this country. The left generally does recognize it — and wants to destroy it.
I’m also recognizing that there are fractional increments that may…or may not….have a subtle impact upon society. Teddy Roosevelt lost with his Bull Moose party, for instance. I also recognize that regardless of political affiliation, the voter’s will chose when no one is watching. Unless pressured by re-election, which is what those in the Maine House are facing..
A democrat can vote with the other side, and still be considered a democrat, a republican can vote with the other side and be labelled as a moderate….someone that needs to be watched. Unlikely to get into leadership and hopefully get qualified primary candidates.
A democratic candidate would never undermine another demcratic candidate…..we believe in each other, not money.
Democrats, in this era, generally believe in taking other people’s money for redistribution.
Politicians in any party are property identified for what they are and evaluated accordingly, not “money”. Republican “moderates” are those with a tendency towards statism, which is why they are “watched” in for what they are from all sides.
Oh, so because Republicans are doing bad things, it’s the Democrats’ fault? God, for the part of “personal responsibility” you sure have an incredible difficulty in terms of accepting responsibility for yourselves.
Opposing leftist ideology is not “doing bad things”.
Oh! I didn’t realize that is what this article was about. My bad. So Poloquin is just opposing “leftist ideology”?
It is what the whole campaign is about.
Poliquin put his land in the program to reduce his taxes, like everyone else does, not to oppose leftist ideology.
The Penguin hasn’t met an ethical violation or principle that he hasn’t found a way to violate yet. It’s way past time for the Senate to start researching the requirement’s and means to remove him from office. Given the LePage administration’s apparent lack of ethical understandng of elected office, I for one would think that it is also past time to remove the Attorney General if he can’t cut it. This administration is so out of control as far keeping their eye on their office’s responsibilities that it’s impossible to believe anything they say or do asbeing done in the best interests of the State. Outside of the Kestrel mess, Maine’s rapidly being seen as an ethical magic show that is totally out of control. Thank God that November 12th is coming.
With the relentless petty attacks from the losing party it is got to be tough.I hope the people of maine realize the wasted time the dems have spent on personal attacks and petty crap.They are showing why they lost.
Principles need to be defended no matter what Party is in power or involved. And character and ethics are the core of what our elected officials are suppoed to practice. To date there has been a definite lack of either seen in Augusta. The mere fact that both Party’s are now both seeing this lack of ethics and character lacking tells me that sanity and objectiveness is coming back. As far as the political party’s are concerned, well, the recent discussing, debating and compromise regarding the DHHS Budget shows me, at least, that objective sanity and real reason are on the verge of returning. Now if only the Statehouse can keep this progress up we all might get Maine back to an even keel and moving forward.
There is nothing unethical or unprincipled about Bruce Poliquin enrolling his 10 acres in the tree growth plan to avoid paying exhorbitant taxes on it.
I’m sure that if he could, he would claim 10 or 20 acres of the ocean as “Farmland and Open Space” and claim a tax credit.
I’m sure that you make things up about people you are trying to smear.
time to start investigating the money going from the appropriations to legislatures and their home projects.
What “appropriations” to what “home projects”?
The house of cards is coming down it seems.
Another example of a ROBthePUBLICan goon who cries about wasteful state programs yet is currently hiding behind (and violating) the riles of one of those programs…not to mention just being in clear violation of the Maine Constitution while we’re at it. Why do you people support these hypocritical goons who clearly don’t support you??? If it was a Dem you’d be calling for his head!!!
There is no evidence that Bruce Poliquin is violating the rules of the tree growth program and is not in “clear violation of the constitution”.
The tree growth current-use tax assessment program is not a “wasteful state program”. Not taxing people more than they are now is not a government “expense” and is not “wasting” money.
There are a lot of wealthy liberal viros enrolled in the tree growth program.
The tree growth program has gotten out of control over the last 40 years. The intention was to promote the Forrest Products business, not give huge tax breaks to small landowners who are not anywhere close to being in the harvesting business. The average tax payer in small town Maine is getting over taxed becasue of it. Go to any town office and do some digging. 50 acre lots that should be paying $500.oo in annual taxes are paying $50.00 in lots of cases where this exception is being claimed. 10 acres is not the Ponderosa is it?
The tree growth program has not gotten “out of control’ and the intention was not to promote any business. The purpose was to not penalize owners of 10 acres or more in tree growth with Maine’s usual punitive property taxes, making it impossible for most to own land because of taxes artificially computed from highest potential development value to pay for service that have nothing to do with land ownership. The tree growth program is a current-use tax assessment program for land in tree growth that is managed for ultimate commercial forestry purposes — which is broader than logging. Nor do you have to be “in the harvesting business” to qualify — the requirement is based on how the land is managed over the long term, not what you do for a living.
No one is being “overtaxed” because of land in tree growth. Taxes are imposed because of the spending the taxpayers pay for. Land used for tree growth costs the town nothing for schools and other ‘services’. There are no grounds for telling anyone that he “should be paying $500” or anything else instead of “$50”, or for smearing small landowners as not having “the Ponderosa”. The tree growth program is a current-use assessment program for anyone with ten acres or more of land managed for tree growth under the guidelines of the program.
Nicely written reply, I just disagree. I own and old farm that is not in tree growth and have a neighbor that I won’t disclose here that is in tree growth. That’s the $50.00 a year in taxes I speak off. The major use of that property is supposed to be forrestry-it is not. Thanks for comments.
If his land is not in trees at all (for at least 10 acres) then he doesn’t qualify. If it is then you should realize that there are many options for how it may be managed and you shouldn’t assume that he isn’t managing it in accordance with the program.
In any event, if his land is in trees he isn’t costing the town for services and should not have to pay for them; he isn’t the cause of your high taxes.
Presumably most of your farm is not in trees but there are other current use programs you could qualify for, but may not want to because of the penalties for getting out later.
I agree that this is a hodge-podge of patchwork, it’s trying to address a high property tax problem that should not exist and should be solved much more fairly. In the meantime there is no excuse to further increase taxes on landowners as the left is trying to do. Neither you nor your neighbor should have to jump through bureaucratic hoops, and with punitive penalties for leaving a program, just because you are being over taxed for land. Think of what what happen if they imposed an asset tax on your bank account or retirement fund and the injustices and distorted mess that would cause.
“I think it’s important to recognize that, for the most part, Tree Growth is very, very successful,” Raye said. “That said, I think it’s important to find out if there are problems with the program, so as not to ruin it for those who are using it properly.”
So what your are saying, Kevin is: Bruce should be paying up on the back property taxes he owes the town of Georgetown!! GOP is imploding upon itself as everyday passes!
Its time to look at Quimby ! Why is her land on the Tree Growth tax ??
Why doesn’t the Nature Conservancy and some others pay no tax? At least Quimby paid 93,000 dollars.
For all the demagoguery against Poliquin for supposedly not paying his “fair share” (he is paying over $13,000/year in property taxes alone) and somehow “causing” others to pay for town expenses he does not benefit from, they have nothing to say about the much, much larger landholdings of the tax exempt Nature Conservancy right next to him in the same town. The Nature Conservancy is in the business of peddling tax exemptions and is perpetually praised to the hilt, but for the purposes of the smear campaign against Poliquin all we get on the tax-exempt preservationists is dead silence.
If it still is, it is because it was under tree growth when she bought it and she did not pay the penalties for removing it. Since then she has virtually announced that she does not qualify because she has boasted that her management intent is to make any commercial forestry management impossible by turning it over to the Federal government for preservation by 2016.
Well reasoned article…why don’t you buy up the PPH….then I could truly ignore their slanted articles.
Poliquin, as far as i can see, not only inherited the program but did nothing wrong while enrolled in it.
If you want to do a side by side comparison; just try a find the trees in the next door neighbor’s campground which is in apparent violation of the shoreline zoning act…motor home sites are within feet of the high water line!!!
Only a partisan political ideologue would blame him for the shortcomings of the program…way too many people enrolled and many who seem to skirt the law’s intent.
Just try to abolish it, and see how well you weather the firestorm of opposition it will create.
Right outta left field…
The Maine citizenry are not inclined to tolerate more government scrutiny into their private lives, especially when those in charge are bending, if not outright breaking, the rules for their own benefit.
They cannot count on constituents to give them a pass and simply look the other way.
Mainers will remember, come November.
Obama 2012.
No one should tolerate more government scrutiny and intrusion into private lives whether or not politicians are breaking rules. Poliquin is not one of them.
Maybe its time we lQQk into “OTHER” Augusta Lawmakers!
This BDN hit piece against Poliquin is filled with false statements.
The tree growth tax program is a ‘current use’ valuation plan for which anyone is eligible with at least ten acres of contiguous woodland anywhere in the state regardless of the value of the property if assessed for other purposes like ‘highest’ economic value for potential development.
It is not true that “landowners exploiting the program unfairly push the property tax burden inland on residents with modest homes.” The “current use” tax assessment prevents people from being heavily taxed at high valuations for maximum potential development value when their land is only kept in trees. Such minimal use of the land costs the towns nothing for schools and other such ‘services’ (and can limit increases in such spending, costing taxpayers less).
Qualification for the program, properly, does not discriminate against landowners who are wealthy or “on the coast”, to the chagrin of the left, but the “penalties” for leaving the program are unjust and exhorbitant, and are worse when the property is worth more.
The requirement for a forestry management plan for commerical value is properly very broad. It does not require a harvesting plan for logging during the period coverd by the plan. These are ten-year plans for management of the woods. It can take much more than ten years for trees to be suitable for harvesting for different purposes and there are many options. What Polequin is supposed to do in managing his land is specified in his management plan prepared by a forester. The state is not supposed to be dictating that — and neither are the demagogues attacking him.
The goals of the woods management do not have to be logging at all. According to the law:
“Forest products that have commercial value — means logs, pulpwood, veneer, bolt wood, wood chips, stud wood, poles, pilings, biomass, fuel wood, Christmas trees, maple syrup, nursery products used for ornamental purposes, wreaths, bough material or cones or other seed products.”
Restrictions on land use also do not preclude land from being in the program. The rules state:
“3. Land shall not be excluded because of …
b. Statutory or governmental restrictions which prevent commercial harvesting of trees or require a primary use of the land other than commercial harvesting;
c. Deed restrictions, restrictive covenants or organizational charters that prevent commercial harvesting of trees or require a primary use of land other that commercial harvesting and that were effective prior to January 1, 1982; …”
Poliquin’s deed does not prohibit cutting trees, it prohibits “excessive cutting”.
Poliquin is not doing anything contrary to the way this current-use assessment law has been understood and applied for decades, involving thousands of people all over the state with all levels of income and assets. They do it despite the drawbacks in order to save themselves from being bilked with outrageous taxes. To qualify under the program you don’t have to be an ongoing commercial operation, only manage the land for the purposes in the forestry plan that will eventually lead to commercial sales. The program is about management of the land, not what you do for a living.
There is nothing unethical about arranging your affairs to lower the taxes you have to pay — described in sneering terms in this alleged news article as “exploited the program as a tax shelter”. Everyone in the program “exploits” the lower taxes and there is nothing wrong with that.
The recent spate of “news” consists of hit pieces smearing Poliquin on behalf of leftist activists seeking higher taxes on “the rich”; it is no different than the rest of their ugly class warfare “occupy everything” campaign. They have singled Poliquin out, describing with glee the size of his house on the waterfront, as they fan envy and resentment in their usual manner, to try to stampede the public into indignantly supporting higher property taxes on landowners, whom they demagogue as “The Rich”.
The left has long sought “progressive” property taxes. They have been trying to gut the tree growth law to impose more bureaucracy and more restrictions on land owners to drive people out of the program (and out of owning private property) and increase their taxes, and are now exploiting their personal smear campaign against Poliquin — in classic Saul Alinksy demonization demonization fashion — as a rationalization for that campaign — at the same time they are trying to hound him out of office because he threatens their own power and corruption.
Many thanks for your research.
Your commentary is spot on.
It’s not hard to find that background and to identify the nature of the campaign and its purpose, though most people would not normally to take the time or perhaps be able to easily figure how to do it. One of the scandals in this topic is why the journalists aren’t doing it instead of taking their cues from an activist attack group and fanning the flames.