Farmers, ranchers and vintners all oppose Measure A. There’s a
good reason why stewards of the land are all against this ballot
measure
With Measure A, Santa Clara County voters are being asked to amend the county’s general plan to “modify certain existing provisions and add provisions for hillsides, open space, ranch lands, and rural areas in unincorporated areas of the county, including limiting minimum parcel size on ranch lands and hilltops to 160 acres, with exceptions, limiting building size, and prohibiting the Board of Supervisors from making changes to the General Plan inconsistent with these amendments.”
We strongly urge a no vote on this poorly written and deceptive measure.
Measure A proponents like to claim that the measure won’t harm farmers.
If that’s the case, why are the Santa Clara County Farm Bureau, the Santa Clara County Cattlemen’s Association and the Wine Growers of Santa Clara Valley opposing it?
Perhaps it’s because Measure A’s draconian restrictions on parcel sizes threaten the future of family-owned ranches and farms. Perhaps it’s because the measure is a labyrinth of restrictive land-use babble.
Measure A proponents claim that they worked with farmers and ranchers in developing the initiative. That’s patently untrue. Just talk to a farmer or a rancher.
Measure A was not a collaborative effort with farmers, ranchers or vintners, who can point to the revamping of the county’s Williamson Act, water resource protection efforts, county zoning ordinance rewriting work and viewshed protection as collaborative efforts with environmentalists and government policy makers.
Measure A proponents like to point out that the measure only affects land in unincorporated Santa Clara County, not land in municipalities.
But given that the vast majority of that land is in South County, yet all Santa Clara County residents get to vote on it, Measure A amounts to populous North County imposing its will on sparsely populated South County. Ever hear the phrase “the tyranny of the majority?” Measure A is a prime example.
Proponents claim that they’re trying to protect the county’s dwindling open spaces, but the author of the measure, a former Stanford professor, exempted Stanford University, which owns vast tracts of rural land in North County, from its provisions. In addition to the distasteful hypocrisy, it reinforces the sad North County versus South County theme of this measure.
If Measure A passes, any changes to it would require a countywide election – another expensive and draconian provision.
One good reason to vote for Measure A? We can’t think of any.
A resounding no on Measure A on Nov. 7.
