Growth cap disables county economy
By Sally Haydon
San Benito business owner
We the people – Eve of July 4.
I understand the frustration of the County Supervisors, and the
San Benito County Planning Department. During years of growth, in
the late ’90s, many decisions were made that caused grief in our
valley. We can’t hold on to the errors, we need to move forward. In
these days of volatile and uncertain economic decision, fear is not
a good soul mate. Having been an applicant for construction and
permits since 1977, I can say first hand the planning and building
department (and leaders) are much improved.
Growth cap disables county economy
By Sally Haydon
San Benito business owner
We the people – Eve of July 4.
I understand the frustration of the County Supervisors, and the San Benito County Planning Department. During years of growth, in the late ’90s, many decisions were made that caused grief in our valley. We can’t hold on to the errors, we need to move forward. In these days of volatile and uncertain economic decision, fear is not a good soul mate. Having been an applicant for construction and permits since 1977, I can say first hand the planning and building department (and leaders) are much improved.
Prior to the vote of Measure G, I wrote a letter to the editor. In that letter I set out that Measure G equals ghost town. We, the people voted against Measure G. The supervisors at the time voted on a 1 percent growth cap, representing a managed growth platform.
The sewer moratorium greatly harmed our economic growth and especially the construction/real estate industry (an industry that touches all segments of our economic health in the United States.) The 1 percent cap caused economic suffering in the County. With all the negative vibes, where would you put your funds – San Benito County, or Los Banos, Gilroy, or Salinas? Same percentages, less risk, due to wanted growth.
I have been actively listening and attending the many meetings concerned with growth, gang activity, parents having rights, increasing violence, economic downturn problems, and economic growth (the best meetings were held by DMB, with their unlimited resources for unbiased economic information about our county, number one economic stimulus that brings business, is houses. Houses first, then business.)
We the people, the constituents, the applicants, the local developers, contractors and businesses are all pleading, “We need to increase the growth cap.” Some of the people who moved here in the early ’90s, want better schools, roads, more recreation, and no growth. It is a misconception that we can have these things without growth. A one percent growth is not managed growth. It sends a message to lenders and developers and the economic world that we are a county of no growth.
As mentioned before one of the reports all lending institutions (yes, the developers need to get funding) is a business plan. Within that business plan is an element on “demographics, populations, targets and growth.” The lender wants to see the ability to repay the debt, and the growth of the location! Applicants approved and pending have population needs. Some are fortunate to use the populations on nearby roadways and intersections. Others need a population of residents within a radius, or growth projections as per county and city political desires, i.e., “growth cap.” On another note, Arnold, is an investor. He needs sales tax revenues, gas tax revenues, property tax revenues and revenues from Housing and Urban Development, and state mobile home and RV park agencies showing growth from our county. Cuts and lack of grants are tied to growth, population, and we will continue to suffer economically with this one percent no growth cap.
Infrastructure current and future is mitigated through impact fees through growth and developments. Otherwise, we are faced with increased property taxes to pay for these items through bonds and measures, and increased taxes to the homeowner and landowner.
The Supervisors have voted to make amendments to the general plan allowing for commercial corridors along certain busy intersections within the county. Current applicants seeking approval for their projects, and some with approval, are communicating the need to increase the growth cap, especially due to the rising cost of funding for developing. In the early ’90s the County and city were experiencing double digit growth. Kiplinger reports named us number eight in the US for growth.
Having a no-growth guillotine has caused raising vacancy factors locally; the sub prime and construction crisis has furthered this syndrome. Those of us who had feasibility studies for location of our projects based on those growth patterns have been harmed by no growth.
I am very passionate about my beliefs. One is in this valley. Passions don’t sit, they stir. It is important that your passions lead you to knowledge, wisdom and common sense. It is better that actions are best for the maximum of the constituents, and not a few. I am not suggesting wall-to-wall developments, or take out the hills, (I am against construction on the top of any hill or mountain top of 25 percent from peak to negotiated slope). I am also in favor of the county or city having 100 percent power to veto developments due to CEQA and other agency reports, when the voter may not have understanding of these very technical and costly (to the developer) studies.
Infilling is a priority for both county and city, especially due to emission controls, and let’s talk walking and bike trails (another article). Remember also, that affordable housing is not no cost. Even though these are outside the growth cap, the developers who need to have the percentages we require simply cannot convince lenders of the raising costs to these houses if the not affordable houses cannot be turned in the time frame. In other words, the affordable houses are all sold that have lower profit margins, while the houses that pay for the development sit unsold.
I plead along with contractors, developers, business owners – most of us are local – raise the growth rate immediately. Make it a number one agenda item.
Sally A. Haydon is the owner of the California Rec Mall.
