Upper Milford supervisors moved one step closer last week to putting an open space referendum on the November ballot, instructing township staff to come up with wording for a referendum which would call for a small increase in the earned income tax.

Supervisors took the action at a joint meeting May 11 with the open space committee, attended by about 35 interested residents. Support for action to preserve open space and farmland in the township was virtually unanimous; the principal debate was over how to fund it.

The idea would be for the township to raise money to buy development rights from farmers and other owners of large parcels of land so it would be protected from development. The debate was over whether to seek an increase in property taxes or the earned income tax.

Those at last week’s meeting who favored using the property tax, such as open space committee member Philip Vanim, argued that in that way, everyone in the township would be contributing. Others, like Supervisor Robert Sentner, were concerned raising the property tax would hurt older residents on fixed incomes.

Still others said, while they could see the rationale for using the property tax, they thought it would be easier to get residents to approve an increase in the earned income tax.

Open space committee member Joyce Moore said she would prefer raising the money through the property tax, but an increase in the earned income tax is more likely to be palatable to voters.

Resident Sue Weber said, “I hear constant complaints about property taxes. I think you have a better chance of passing it if you’d use the earned income tax.”

When supervisors asked the audience for a show of hands of which income source they’d prefer, the majority supported using the earned income tax.

In directing the township staff to come up with wording for the referendum, supervisors recommended an earned income tax hike of .1385 percent. This would mean an annual increase of $13.85 for someone making $100,000, Sentner said.

Township Manager Daniel DeLong said if the referendum is defeated, it couldn’t be put on the ballot again for another five years. For this reason, the prevailing sentiment at the meeting seemed to be not to go for too much money right away.

“We have to start somewhere,” several people agreed.

The next step will be an educational campaign aimed at reaching all residents before the November election.

A slide show enumerating some statistics regarding the loss of open space was projected above the supervisors’ table.

Sentner argued the township must preserve 2,129 acres as open space or farmland in order to achieve a goal of preserving 25 percent of the township’s land. So far, just 735 acres have been preserved.

“It’s very important to save the farms we have,” he said.

It would cost $5,000 to $7,000 an acre for the township to purchase development rights, officials said, and Planning Coordinator Brian Miller said value of preserved farmland is increasing.

DeLong reviewed some of the criteria for an open space program his staff has found when researching what other communities have done.

Participation should be voluntary, he said, and the township’s goals must be identified: for instance, whether they just want to preserve high quality farmland, or woodlands and environmentally sensitive areas as well. There also has to be a way to preserve farms smaller than 10 acres, he said.

But DeLong sounded one warning note: “Every successful open space program became an attractant to more development.”