Opinion: Why a No Vote on Measure T is a Vote for the Future of Watsonville T

Written by Sam Earnshaw

Those of us who live in Watsonville know that it is a special city for many reasons. We also know there are the problems that many cities face, including unemployment, decreasing tax revenues and the loss of redevelopment funds. Those of us who live here are also aware of the many vacant storefronts, available building sites, struggling Main Street, and lack of progress in developing the 94 acres of farmland that were successfully annexed by the city in 2006. 

In 2002, Watsonville citizens voted to put in place a 20/25-year Urban Limit Line, which enables the city to put its energy into creating solutions to urban problems without the pressure of having to look at paving over farmland. Measure T is an attempt put together by City Councilman Daniel Dodge to amend the 2002 Measure U Urban Limit Line, pave over 95 acres of prime farmland, entice big box stores to the edge of town, and miraculously revitalize the city. 

In the 1990s, when the city was attempting to annex 1000 acres of farmland, the mantra was “We need to capture the VISA cards that drive by, by the thousands, every day.”  Today, we are hearing that same mantra, coupled with the cry that we need jobs for our youth. Both of these are empty and unrealistic cries in the dark.

The list of reasons why Measure T is an ill-conceived, poorly planned bad policy that creates no serious solutions for Watsonville is long and varied:
Paving over prime farmland that is a national resource, and provides food and jobs now and into the future, is simply bad land use planning. Money created from farming circulates in the community, and urbanized areas create 70 times more greenhouse gases than farmland.·

• Breaking the boundary of 2002 Measure U violates an agreement that was reached after three years of collaboration by a wide cross-section of the Watsonville community, including the city. Leaders should be looking at a vision that incorporates our rich and unique farmland as a benefit and asset to the city, not something to be covered with concrete.
  
• The backers of Measure T have made promises that it will provide low-paying, no-benefits, “entry level” jobs for Watsonville youth.  But they could find those kinds of jobs in the five nearby major urban centers: Monterey/Seaside/Marina; Salinas; Gilroy; San Jose; and Capitola/Santa Cruz. Watsonville does provide many high-quality jobs for people who commute here every day.  The city should focus on job training for these quality jobs, including the many skilled careers in agriculture, so the youth of this city can qualify for them.
  
• The impacts of big box stores on local businesses are well known: these out-of-town corporations destroy local economies.
  
• The City is wasting resources and spending more than $80,000 on this special election rather than focusing on revitalizing Main Street and utilizing existing vacant buildings and sites within city limits for economic development. 

Supporters of Measure T talk about the need for progress, how we need jobs and development to move into the future. What we really need is a vision that values our unique and productive farmland that will produce food and jobs for future generations, and for city leaders to have the intelligence and maturity to look for real solutions to urban problems.    

Sam Earnshaw lives in Watsonville. He is a former farmer who was Program Coordinator for the Community Alliance with Family Farmers, and currently works on conservation and habitat issues on farms throughout California.