The San Benito River was a controversial topic for county
residents at the San Benito County Board of Supervisors meeting
Tuesday.
The Board unanimously approved a motion for the San Benito
County Planning Commission to continue working on a drafted study
to stabilize the San Benito River and its tributaries
– a plan that has many residents fearful it will encroach on
their rights.
The proposed ordinance, which the Planning Commission has been
wrestling with for some time, would provide policy for the
management and stabilization of land use on the San Benito River,
said Planning Director Rob Mendiola.
The San Benito River was a controversial topic for county residents at the San Benito County Board of Supervisors meeting Tuesday.
The Board unanimously approved a motion for the San Benito County Planning Commission to continue working on a drafted study to stabilize the San Benito River and its tributaries – a plan that has many residents fearful it will encroach on their rights.
The proposed ordinance, which the Planning Commission has been wrestling with for some time, would provide policy for the management and stabilization of land use on the San Benito River, said Planning Director Rob Mendiola.
The purpose of bringing it in front of the Board was to solely decide whether to continue working on the study, he said.
“I know that at some point somebody said that you were going to consider this ordinance today,” Mendiola said. “That is not the case… the only version of this ordinance is a draft version. It is for discussion purposes and as a starting point.”
Studies relating to the ordinance have been done for almost 15 years and due to a number of reasons they have been delayed, Mendiola said to the Board.
“We have done different studies and worked on different ordinances,” Mendiola said. “We had to go back and try to figure out a more comprehensive study.”
The public comment period was laden with concerned residents, asking the Board not to send the ordinance back for more consideration, but to put a stop to it immediately.
Many of them were farmers and ranchers who believe there are enough laws and regulations concerning the river already and that instating this one could adversely affect the county’s cattle industry.
“You have 16 agencies that regulate that river,” said Paul Wattis, a rancher in Paicines. “This ordinance is written as an all-encompassing ordinance that goes too far, too fast and takes in everything that doesn’t need to be done… I don’t want it to go back for more study, I want it killed.”
To truly understand what an ordinance could do to ranchers around the county, there needs to be better communication between the residents who would be effected by the ordinance and those with the power to instate it, said Mike Baumgartner, a South County farmer.
The families who have lived and worked on and around the river for generations have to be taken into account – people who dealt with the river long before many of the current problems and impacts occurred, Baumgartner said.
“You have to take into consideration what these people have learned over the years,” he said. “They’re your best source of how that river runs, how it will cut or change location. I’m opposed to this going forward like this.”
The San Benito County Water District is interested in the matter and is looking at a long term plan for the river, said representative John Gregg.
While they understand that the ordinance continues to pursue a comprehensive river management plan, they are concerned about how it will be resourced and funded, Gregg said.
“I think that an inability or lack of commitment in this community to a practical river plan is why it’s been going on so long,” Gregg said. “We think there’s serious issues that need to be addressed just in the practicality of what we’re doing. We understand it to be a work in progress and there’s clearly work to be done, and we’re committed to participate in it.”
The only resident to agree with the ordinance was miner Jim West of Graniterock, who said he feels everything in the ordinance is accordant and critical to the future of the river.
The issue is of great concern to many residents, which is why it is best to proceed cautiously and work toward a solution that addresses all the concerns at whatever level they may be, said Supervisor Reb Monaco.
While it is a time-consuming matter, it would be better to spend the time now to adequately and comprehensively cover all the issues and continue to receive public input and study the positive and negative aspects of such an ordinance, Monaco said.
“I encourage the Planning Commission and staff to continue this process that they’ve already begun,” Monaco said. “…To review all the issues and considerations of technical information and public concerns and then take an action in advising this Board of Supervisors as to the most appropriate policies to adopt.”
A public workshop to further discuss the matter is being held Tuesday, Feb. 3 at 5 p.m. in the Board of Supervisor’s chambers.
Any member of the public is invited to attend, Mendiola said.
“My phone number is 637-5313, and I’m more than willing to take input,” Mendiola said. “I would appreciate your comments.”
