There's a mantra among those opposed to allowing development in Blaine County's agricultural land. County officials often recite it at public meetings. In various incarnations, it usually includes something about how having people and houses far from population centers will stretch county services at taxpayer expense. Opponents of agricultural land development contend the increased tax revenue generated by building residences on former farmland will not cover the costs of expanding public services, such as sheriff's patrols, school buses, road maintenance and fire and ambulance, to these remote areas. Chairman Len Harlig in a recent interview.
People cause more of an impact than bare land.
Last summer, a subdivision just east of rural Picabo in southern Blaine County proposed by the Hofstetter family was denied by county commissioners because the property was determined to be too far from a population center. Had it been approved, it would have meant a threefold increase in tax revenue for the county before the first home was built, according to information from the Blaine County Assessor's Office. One of the studies Harlig referred to was completed in 1986 by the conservation group, American Farmlands Trust. Additionally it is clear that on the whole residential units cost more from the standpoint of the services demanded as compared to tax revenue generated. That statement is such a big issue, a study to determine whether it applies to Blaine County is underway at the county planning office, Harlig said.