In seven days, San Benito County voters will decide the fate of
the controversial growth control initiative, Measure G.
In seven days, San Benito County voters will decide the fate of the controversial growth control initiative, Measure G.
The measure’s opponents, who are “cautiously optimistic,” aren’t sure the voting public is fully informed about something they believe could destroy the county, said No on G Committee campaign manager Annette Giacomazzi.
“I think they’re confused,” Giacomazzi said. “And if I think if it’s confusing the only vote you can give is no. If you don’t understand it, don’t vote for it.”
Between the constant, and at times, conflicting news coverage, myriad signs scattered throughout the county, pamphlets, brochures, mailers, demonstrations, forums and advertisements, it’s no wonder the public is confused, said No on G Committee member Dara Tobias.
“We say this and they say we’re lying, and they say this and we say it’s not true,” Tobias said. “The only way to remedy (the confusion) is for people to take the initiative to read and learn from the actual document and develop their own opinion from what they’ve read.”
The opponents of the initiative believe it will economically harm the county in many ways if enacted – restricting agriculture, causing a loss in property value and in turn a major loss to the county’s General Fund.
They also believe the circumstances of its inception is another reason to vote no.
“A small group of people got together and worked within their own group and out-of-town interests – they did not include the school systems or any public offices,” Giacomazzi said. “The key stake holders were missing, and that’s the important part.”
After the Board of Supervisors voted to enact the initiative April 1, 2003, the No on G Committee gathered more than 5,300 signatures to put it on the March ballot.
“This whole element of control that the supervisors tried to take – it was done without any input from the community,” Giacomazzi said.
The constant opposition to their cause has actually bolstered their campaign, uniting the community members who feel it is their common goal to defeat the measure, Tobias said.
“Our campaign has thrived in the deception that has come from the other side,” she said.
It has crystallized what is important in the community – identifying that there are two important issues concerning the initiative – growth control and restrictions, Giacomazzi said.
The growth control aspect of the 1-percent growth cap is agreed upon by both sides, she said.
“We all agree to that, so let’s just take that off the table,” she said. “But now you have all these restrictions… and how restrictive it is, it’s going to decimate the number one industry in our county.”
If the measure is defeated, the committee will be willing to go back to the drawing board and work on a different initiative, but they have no suggestions yet, Giacomazzi said.
“We don’t have another plan – we’re just saying this is a bad one,” she said. “But absolutely, we will be there.”
In the next few days the committee will continue to champion their cause by walking precincts, hosting functions at individuals’ homes and a number of other activities in order to have their voices heard by the voting public.
A commonality between both sides is that they believe they are working to achieve the best possible outcome for San Benito County.
While the intentions may be the same, different people’s perspectives and interpretations of the facts have caused the continental rift between the two sides, Tobias said.
Whatever the outcome of the election, there are some good aspects that have bloomed despite the animosity and the arguments.
“Personally, I have gained far more friends than I’ve lost with this issue,” Tobias said. “I’ve gained more friends, and more true members of this community, than the people that may not speak to me again.”
