No matter which set of unknowable population planning numbers you use for year 2035 – the 84,000 from the Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments (AMBAG) or the 94,000 from Parsons Consulting – responsible planning means providing San Benito County with another growth-capable city. It’s not a matter of political preference; it’s simply common sense.
Trying to absorb either population increase into only Hollister and the unincorporated areas of the county is an invitation to an unhealthy political and physical environment, uncontrolled sprawl, and a fiscal disaster for a county that can barely stay afloat as is. Additionally, our current lack of economic resources means we cannot just maintain the status quo – it is not going to get any cheaper to provide even minimal services. The city solution solves the problems.
County residents who say that people belong in the cities are correct but they are only expressing half the thought. The cities are where people belong but you cannot put all growth into only one city, Hollister. Simple math shows that another city is essential, and failure to plan for one right now is a betrayal of future generations. It’s a political hot potato, but our elected representatives must plan for a county future that works even if it costs votes or campaign contributions today.
The low 2035 planning estimate, 84,000, has a modest 25-year compound growth rate of 1.7%; however, even that means adding 28,731 residents to the 2010 census. Distributed proportionally, Hollister would take over 18,000 new residents, Ridgemark 1,568, San Juan Bautista 968, and the other county areas more than 7,100. But we know that San Juan cannot take almost 1,000; Ridgemark would need to add 1,568; and 1,000 between Aromas and Tres Pinos is not reasonable. So then where? The alternative, growing Hollister to 60,000 in a county of 84,000 makes no political or economic sense and may not be physically possible.
Sticking the county with one or more money-draining service areas or scattering those homes over a checkerboard of unplanned community parcels that are nothing but patches of homes here and there makes even less sense. Remember that is the low estimate – should the real number come in higher, it would be even worse.
A new planned city would be a financial boon and it would be responsible for funding its own services – government, police, fire, water and wastewater. If properly designed it would be efficient and effective, not sprawled out and taking up a lot more space than necessary. Hollister, my home, will have to learn to compete with another entity, but there are many things a lot worse than competition, which often improves one’s own operations; besides, it’s still the county seat and the added population will generate a lot of government business.
If we do not plan for a new city we will have to accept the alternative, which is a lot worse in all respects – political, social, financial, environmental and quality of life. It comes down to this question, do you want to determine your own future or do you want unfriendly circumstances and unplanned events to determine it for you?
There is hardly a more irresponsible social act than to care nothing for the future in order to preserve your personal or political present. Acting will cost some votes among those of our residents who want to build walls and keep out the future and frightening change, but we need to plan for another city and it must start right now before it’s too late.
