As most Californians know, there is only one consolidated city-county in the state, San Francisco. The other 57 counties have 481 cities and towns within their borders; San Benito County has only two, Hollister and San Juan Bautista. A good case can be made for making San Benito the second consolidated city-county in the state to improve our economic and political future and to ensure that the residents of Hollister are fairly represented at the county level.
Excluding San Francisco and the three counties that have no cities or towns, the largest cities averaged 29 percent of each county’s population. In the 2010 census Hollister had 63 percent of people in San Benito County, second statewide to only Yuba City with 68 percent of the population of Sutter County. Hollister has more than three-fifths (60 percent) of the county’s population but city residents are in the majority of only two (40 percent) of the five supervisorial districts. Giving a voting bloc overwhelming majorities in fewer districts is called stacking or packing and it is a districting tactic designed to ensure minority control – in this case control by the rural areas.
According to the 2012 data of registered voters supplied by the San Benito County Elections Department, District 3 had 99.6 percent and District 5 had 95.1 percent Hollister residents. By packing Hollister’s residents into two districts, the other three districts retain significant non-Hollister majorities; District 1, 55 percent to 45 percent; District 2, 62 percent to 38 percent; and District 4, 71 percent to 29 percent. This effectively gives minority control at the county level unless the registered voter and population data is significantly different.
The issue is now at the forefront as the rural areas are once again fighting to steer all future population growth into the city. Their argument is that Hollister already has the water and wastewater infrastructure in place and “the country is for farmers and the city is for people.” On the surface that seems reasonable, but it does not make any sense when only one city in the county can absorb growth. If that is the case, we should be looking at making another city that can have an infrastructure of its own.
Would it be healthy for Hollister to have 70 percent or even 80 percent of the county population? Would it be fair to gerrymander that population to 40 percent of the county control by packing?
Some county residents play on the fears of city residents to achieve their goal. The pitch goes like this: “If there is another significant city in the county, you would lose business and political control.” The facts are as it now stands Hollister has neither the business nor the political control. Other county areas have to take their fair share of population growth and refrain from trying to shoehorn it all into the City of Hollister.
The only other option is a countywide vote to consolidate the county into a single political entity, the City and County of San Benito, and rid ourselves of an unnecessary layer of government.
I do not generally support contentious political fights, but the county needs to take its share of development and give the city residents a fair chance at political power. Those who walked in recently and bought homes paid for the privilege and have as much legal and moral right to determine the fate of San Benito County as those who have lived here for generations. Having the county government stuck in the mud has not served the residents well, and the city government – representing more than 60 percent of the county population – must stand up for its residents.
