This community opinion was contributed by residents Tony and Cathy Alameda. The opinions expressed do not necessarily represent BenitoLink or other affiliated contributors. BenitoLink invites all community members to share their ideas and opinions. By registering as a BenitoLink user in the top right corner of our home page and agreeing to follow our Terms of Use, you can write counter opinions or share your insights on current issues. Lea este artículo en español aquí.
Measure A’s promises to control growth and reduce traffic simply don’t add up. The real growth is in Hollister, not in the unincorporated areas Measure A targets. instead of polarizing our community with ineffective measures, we need strategic planning and real investments in infrastructure that tackle our actual challenges. Measure A distracts from the real issues and fails to deliver on its promises. It’s time to focus on solutions that genuinely support a thriving and united San Benito County.
San Benito County voters are being urged to support Measure A by the “Campaign to Protect San Benito,” originate formed under PORC (Preserve Our Rural Communities).
This group also operates under the Hollister Guardians—as seen in BenitoLink and has connected with external environmental groups from Palo Alto and Walnut Creek.
Despite frequent rebranding, it’s the same core group of people pushing their agenda in our small, underfunded county. One of their leaders described politics as a “bloodbath” at a Hollister City Council meeting reflecting the group’s justification for their confrontational approach. This rebranding creates the illusion of a broad coalition when it’s really a familiar strategy to resist change through aggression.
Their approach often relies on fear rather than constructive dialogue about the county’s complex needs. Confrontational and uncompromising, they respond to opposition with lawsuits, new groups, new measures, and appeals to state representatives, while promoting overly simplistic, black-and-white messages. By selectively using data, they present themselves as protectors, avoiding the nuanced realities of land use planning. This misleads voters and shifts the focus away from the informed, balanced decision-making that San Benito County requires.
Measure A proponents claim that San Benito County has “lost 43% of its farmland” because “local officials allowed developers to pave over our farmland.” However, according to the California Department of Conservation, this claim doesn’t hold up.
The figures reflect changes in farmland classification, often due to shifts in irrigation,
agricultural practices, or market conditions—not rampant development. Farmland
may be reclassified if it’s not irrigated within a four-year period, which has more to
do with crop rotations or temporary fallowing than construction. The idea that housing and commercial projects are consuming our farmland is simply inaccurate.
No elected representative on the Board of Supervisors or within the Hollister or San Juan Bautista City Councils supports turning San Benito County into another Santa Clara County. Our local leaders have repeatedly demonstrated their commitment to preserving our rural character, protecting farmland, and ensuring that growth is carefully planned and sustainable. This debate isn’t about politicians catering to special interests; it’s about finding balanced, responsible solutions that meet the needs of our community. Our leaders are focused on managing growth in a way that protects our open spaces, supports local agriculture, and addresses the real infrastructure challenges we face, rather than imposing blanket restrictions that stifle economic opportunity.
Contrary to the narrative of rampant sprawl, only 1.1% of the county’s nearly 893,000 acres is classified as urban. Between 1984 and 2020, urban land increased by less than 5,000 acres, reflecting 12.6% of farmland reclassification since 1984—not unchecked growth.
Proponents argue that development along US 101 constitutes sprawl, citing projects like Strada Verde which faced obstacles from community input and planning considerations, not Measure A. Development near major transit corridors is strategic, using existing infrastructure to support growth without overburdening urban centers like Hollister. This approach disperses economic benefits—unlike true sprawl, which stretches resources thin.
The data clearly shows one thing, our county excels at conservation. Measure A proponents argue it’s needed to protect wildlife along US 101, yet San Benito County is
already dedicated to wildlife conservation. We’ve invested in the US 101 corridor to connect critical habitats and have increased grazing lands by over 21,000 acres since
1984, enhancing biodiversity without restrictive measures like Measure A. We need environmental strategies that work across multiple objectives rather than imposing
unnecessary limitations.
San Benito County already has robust protections in place: nearly 50% of agricultural parcels are enrolled in the Williamson Act, and conservation easements, land trusts, and environmental reviews further safeguard our lands. With only 1 .1% of the county’ developed, the existing measures are working. Additional restriction would only serve to complicate decision-making and hinder reasonable, balanced growth.
Does anyone really want our San Benito County locked in polarizing Land use battles every election cycle?
The narrative of significant farmland loss due to development isn’t supported by evidence. Farmland reclassification is driven by shifts in agricultural practices, water use, and economic factors—not a surge of housing or commercial growth. Measure A imposes needless restrictions, legal battles, and confusion at the ballot box—especially since voters already rejected a similar proposal, Measure Q, by 56.09% in 2022. Instead of addressing our real challenges, it adds more hurdles and costs for a small community already struggling to fund its infrastructure.
San Benito County deserves policies grounded in facts, not fear. Vote no on Measure A
to support informed, balanced approaches that genuinely protect our agricultural heritage and strengthen our economic future. Our county’s well-being depends on it.
The post COMMUNITY OPINION: Vote no on Measure A appeared first on BenitoLink.