Cap: Cape May County is spying on its farmers from the sky and using the pictures to take away a tax relief program. Two farmers have already lost their lower farmland assessments.

By Richard Degener

WEST CAPE MAY _ Local farmer Les Rea is in his 70s now so he isn't farming as much land as he used to. Cape May County has the pictures to prove it.

The county calls it "Pictometry." It's a new high-tech system of aerial shots taken of farmland. One result can be increased assessments, and therefore higher taxes, on lands not under the plow.

Tony Monzo, Rea's attorney, said it's all about getting more tax revenue. He said the county is doing this on the backs of hard-working farmers.

"You have a guy that works from sunup to sundown farming his land and we're telling him he's not farming enough? "It's an absolute disgrace. Nobody works harder than Les Rea. He farms as much as he can," said Monzo.

Cape May County Tax Administrator George R. Brown III said it's about fairness. Brown said if Rea is not paying his fair share then everybody else picks up the difference.

"Fair is fair. If they're getting a significant break (on the taxes) then they better be farming," Brown said.

Brown said he plans to do this with all of the 400 or so farms in the county. Rea's farm here off Stevens Street just happens to be one of the first. The program began in the south end of the county and is working its way north. One farm in the borough, and one nearby in Lower Township, had their farmland assessment pulled already.

"None of this looks like farm activity to me," Brown said, while looking over some aerial pictures of Rea's farm on Monday. "If it doesn't add up to active devotion (to farmland) then we have a right to raise questions."

A state law passed in 1964 allows farmers to pay reduced taxes on farmland. The farmers fill out a form every year listing exactly what they are doing with their acreage. The county disputes some of Rea's figures. This includes: a 1.62-acre plot that the county wants to increase the assessment from $1,000 an acre to $76,500; 13.68 acres where the assessment would go from $1,000 an acre to $10,000 an acre; and boost the assessment on an old 18th century house Rea put a commercial kitchen in to make pies and jellies for his produce stand. Brown said this house now represents food processing, which is a higher tax. The Reas say the lands are used in some way for the farming operation, even if farm equipment is just parked there.

Brown argues he cut Rea a break on several sections of his property. In one area he said Rea claimed 19 acres of pumpkins but the aerial system only showed 12 acres.

"It was brought to light by new technology. We did multiple fly-bys with different angles of the photos. We can measure farmland areas and buildings down to the cubic meter. It's a great assessment tool," Brown said.

Monzo wrote a letter to County Counsel John Porto complaining about the conduct of the Cape May County Tax Board. Monzo wants the new tax initiative to be halted.

When Rea recently went before the tax board he did so with the local tax assessor, Arthur Amonette, on his side. That in itself is a rarity, Brown acknowledges, as the assessor is usually lined up with the board. Amonette was ready to settle the case by giving Rea the lower tax rate. The borough admitted it lost the Rea's farmland application, which triggered the scrutiny, though Brown said they would have looked at the farm eventually anyway since every farm is being studied.

The board sided with Brown and against Amonette's proposed settlement. Rea is now appealing the decision to the state tax court. Monzo's letter to Porto complains that the tax board is supposed to be impartial and it was not.

"There was no impartiality or objectivity by the board. They would not let my clients complete sentences and statements. They were argumentative with respect to every position we attempted to advance," Monzo wrote.

Mayor Pam Kaithern also came to support Rea.

"The borough is on our side," Monzo said.

In the past, that was all that mattered. Local assessors ruled on farmland assessment applications with no interference from the county. Brown said the state changed its Administrative Code several years ago giving the county more authority over farmland applications.

Monzo argued the areas in question have farm-related uses, such as to store equipment, a big pile of lime used to treat the fields, and other uses. The 1.64-acre tract off Bayshore Road was being used to grow shrubs until some rogue pigs from a nearby farm destroyed them. Brown, however, supplied pictures that seemed to indicate only about one-third of that plot was ever farmed as the rest is wooded.

Kaithern supports Rea and questions whether the program is just to bring in more ratables or to force farmers to develop. Kaithern argues farmland helps reduce "the burden of development" on her town and benefits the environment since the borough is on an internationally significant pathway for migrating birds. She noted the Reas have used a county program to preserve much of their farm from being developed. She said tax officials should go after those using the farmland assessment system to avoid taxes, but not really farming, and not to harm legitimate farmers like Rea.

Kaithern said "it appears" the county is using the new system "to encourage development." Bill Maher, a Lower Township farmer who recently lost his farmland assessment under the new program, argues the initiative is to force farmers to develop. In Maher's case, encroaching saltwater tides apparently reduced his tillable acreage below the 5-acre minimum.

"The ratables argument is bogus," Maher said. "Open space is the best investment. More houses equal more government. If the ratable argument is true, why are all the governments bankrupt?"

Maher said the peninsula's sandy loam soil is perfect for growing vegetables and with the prices of produce rising rapidly farming will become more and more viable.

"Why take away our children's farmland when they can't balance the budget now," Maher said.

Brown argues that any farm under 100 acres is not viable. He said all farms in the county are less than 100 acres and are therefore suspect. He said the program has uncovered farms that do not even have the required five acres to receive farmland assessment.

Increasing the assessment does boost taxes. Rea's 13.68-acre tract would generate another $1,105.65 per year in taxes if the assessment stands at $10,000 an acre instead of $1,000.