Hollister is 45 miles south of downtown San Jose, a small town that seems far faraway from the freeways and office towers of Silicon Valley. But a bill coming to a vote this fall could have a serious impact on each communities.
Activists in San Benito County, the agricultural county on the southern border of Santa Clara County, have qualified for the November ballot a bill that might drastically slow latest development within the county. They argue that Silicon Valley residents looking for cheaper housing are causing an excessive amount of traffic and sprawl.
The measureIf passed by a majority of San Benito County residents, it will prohibit most latest construction on land designated for agriculture and ranching within the county unless voters approve it.
The area is legendary for its rolling hills, the towering California condors of Pinnacles National Park and the 18th-century Spanish mission at San Juan Bautista.
As real estate prices proceed to rise within the Bay Area, increasing development in San Benito County is bringing a brand new generation of commuters, there may be a necessity to construct latest schools and businesses, and orchards and farmland are being lost as suburbs emerge – not unlike what happened in Santa Clara County within the Nineteen Fifties and Sixties, some say.
“We are growing extremely fast,” said Andy Hsia-Coron, a retired teacher who’s one in every of the organizers of the initiative. “There are forces in Silicon Valley that want to use our district as a residential area and a garbage dump. It is a rural district next to a huge metropolitan area. And we are paying the consequences.”
Opponents say such measures could go too far, restrict property rights and slow local economic growth.
“Land-use measures like this are pretty drastic,” said Donald Wirz, president of the San Benito County Farm Bureau in Hollister. “They cause farmers and ranchers to become stalled in terms of the improvements they can make on their land. They make it harder to get bank loans and can limit the flexibility of property owners.”
From 2020 to 2023, San Benito was the fastest-growing of all 58 counties in California, with growth of 5.6%, in line with the U.S. Census. By comparison, the nine Bay Area counties each lost between 1% and seven% of their population throughout the same period.
However, San Benito County has a much smaller population base. Although its land area is identical as his direct neighbor, its population is just 3% as large – 68,175 in 2023 – concerning the same size as Santa Clara County's population in 1910.
Napa, Sonoma and Ventura counties already require voter approval to vary land use and develop orchards, pastures, vineyards and farms. Supporters of the ballot measure say San Benito County needs that protection, too.
“County governments allowed developers to clear our orchards and build housing projects to house Silicon Valley workers,” the November ballot proposal states. “For years, inadequate road tolls have caused our roads to deteriorate. Our schools are overcrowded and residents feel that county governments have not charged developers enough to support our schools. The majority of San Benito residents live in neighborhoods with fewer than three acres of parks or open space per 1,000 residents. Many residents now realize that the cumulative land use decisions of our county governments are negatively affecting our quality of life. Our peaceful, rural lifestyle is disappearing.”
Ten years ago, San Benito County voters shocked the oil industry after they passed a ban on fracking. In 2020, voters also defeated a plan to construct hotels, gas stations and restaurants at 4 sites along Highway 101 south of the Santa Clara County border.
But the forces of slow growth suffered a setback two years ago when voters rejected a measure just like the present popular initiative.
The San Benito County Farm Bureau, the San Benito Chamber of Commerce and several other labor unions opposed the measure, saying it went too far. The board voted 4-1 against it.
Supporters of that initiative, Measure Q, included the Sierra Club Loma Prieta Chapter, the Santa Clara Valley Audubon Society, Green Foothills, and Save Mount Diablo. But opponents outspent them 10-1 and the initiative failed.
This time, said Hsia-Coron, all the pieces is different.
Because of the presidential election, voter turnout this fall is predicted to be much higher than two years ago, he said. And in March, voters gave the county board a slower-growing majority. That vote followed a controversial proposal to expand the John Smith Road landfill near Hollister fivefold to accommodate more garbage from Santa Clara County and other Bay Area counties.
Waste Connections, the Texas-based company that operates the landfill, withdrew the plans in April within the face of widespread public opposition. The debate led to people turning out in large numbers to planning commission meetings, voicing their concerns about more garbage trucks on narrow streets, water pollution and other impacts. Signs sprouted from front yards. And slow-growth advocates, who call themselves the Campaign to Protect San Benito, had no trouble collecting nearly twice as many signatures as they needed to get on the November ballot after telling those who passing the bill would block future landfill expansions with no public vote.
“The frustration is really increasing,” Hsia-Coron said.
However, the proposed latest rules provide for some exceptions. Public facilities equivalent to libraries and schools, in addition to housing needed to satisfy government-mandated quotas, could possibly be built on farmland with no referendum.
That's wonderful, said Hsia-Coron. But it's not excessive urban sprawl.
“Since most of the newcomers who are moving here work in Silicon Valley, it's not a very viable model for them to drive three hours to work and back home every day,” he said. “The housing needs to be closer to people's jobs. You're pricing the locals out of the market here.”
image credit : www.mercurynews.com