Our question to the county Board of Supervisors: What is the
delay in making a decision regarding the slow-growth ordinance
brought by The Citizens for Responsible Growth in San Benito
County?
Our question to the county Board of Supervisors: What is the delay in making a decision regarding the slow-growth ordinance brought by The Citizens for Responsible Growth in San Benito County?
On April 1, supervisors approved the group’s initiative that would, proponents say, strengthen agricultural policies of the county’s General Plan and help preserve open space and conservation measures of the land’s resources.
After more political moves, a referendum was brought by the Farmers and Citizens to Protect our Agricultural Heritage group, forcing the Board to either repeal the slow-growth initiative, which was turned into County Ordinance 760, or send it to a vote of the people. Then another twist. Legal questions arose about the referendum process and the Board delayed action.
Now, more than a month later, no legal decision has been in front of the Board stating the referendum process was illegal.
It’s time the county stepped up to the plate and send this issue to a vote of the people, something supervisors should have done in the first place when presented with the initiative.
It’s time the county begin making serious strides toward creating a coherent and cohesive long-range, managed-growth plan.
For the better part of a decade, San Benito County has been at or near the top in population growth in the state. Growth concerns should be nothing new to supervisors.
In recent years, the Board has taken some steps toward controlling growth with the passing of a 1-percent growth cap; establishing a points system to help select which subdivisions should receive building permits, based on the benefits they bring to the community; and an ordinance that requires any subdivision of 100 homes or more to be placed on the ballot for a vote of the public. If the Board can understand that a decision such as that should go before the voters, why is it so difficult to realize that a measure which would affect every property owner in the county for the next 20 to 30 years should also be decided by the public.
If voters approve the ordinance, it can remain in place and be put to use. On the other hand, if voters decide to repeal the ordinance, supervisors should take the momentum generated and tie all the separate ordinances already on the books together to create a serious managed growth plan.
Currently, the county has formed a commission to help develop a plan for the use of transferable development credits, something the county has considered for years.
It’s time to look forward to the future of the county and develop a plan to maintain our quality of life, along with economy health, well-paying jobs and a community our future generations will return to.
