San Juan Bautista voters face two crucial decisions on the Nov. 6 ballot – both of which should garner victories if citizens hope to keep this troubled city afloat in the long term.
The ballot includes Measure B, which would increase San Juan’s growth cap from 1 percent annually to 3 percent, and Measure C, which would raise the city’s sales tax from 8 percent to 8.5 percent. Both initiatives stand to improve San Juan’s footing in the city’s effort to rejuvenate a faltering government and flattened economy.
In this time of crisis for San Juan Bautista – a historic city facing fiscal ruin and declining tourism – voters must take control where they can and redirect a path that’s been pointed in the wrong direction for years.
One of these proposals, Measure B, is needed to not only get the Mission City’s economic engine rolling, but raising the growth cap also has been deemed a requirement by the state Department of Housing and Community Development.
It’s a no-brainer for either reason.
There must be a change of perspective in San Juan – to a more realistic, progressive view on economic development and growth – if the city hopes to survive far into the future.
The current, broken model is unfair to surrounding communities continually absorbing much more growth than San Juan. That’s why the state won’t approve the city’s housing element in its general plan, an issue, as City Manager Jan McClintock pointed out, with potential to wreak havoc on the local planning process.
The ultra-stringent growth restriction also leaves San Juan’s tourist-reliant economy in a constant struggle just to tread water as other area communities – with the temporary exception of Hollister as it endures through its building moratorium – are better off from new growth in commercial and industrial sectors.
San Juan’s economic problems coincide with a city government that’s fluttering from rising costs and decreased revenues. The city’s financial collapse was most prominently on display recently when the federal Economic Development Administration took back a $3.8 million grant intended to help fix San Juan’s water system. The federal agency cited that the city hadn’t provided enough information to prove it could properly manage the grant.
It’s one example of many fiscal problems before San Juan officials, who’ve been forced to cut services – most recently a drastic reduction in code enforcement – in recent years. At this point, the sales tax increase is necessary to even think about improve a crumbling state of affairs in San Juan government.
The city faces a financial emergency, and citizens are at a crossroad of deciding whether an investment of this kind is worth it in the long run.
