Buellton’s first Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) helped launch my political career, and for good reason.

Back in 2007, when the City of Buellton planned to expand its Sphere of Influence sixfold without any real plan or public input, land speculators circled like vultures, hoping to cash in on the sudden spike in property values.

People, both inside and outside city limits, were alarmed — and rightly so. We knew that once agricultural land entered the city’s sphere, annexation and rezoning for urban uses would follow, forever changing Buellton’s landscape.

The City Council at the time didn’t exactly inspire confidence. Many of us feared that once we turned our attention elsewhere, they’d push for expansion again.

So, we took action. We introduced a UGB initiative, modeled after Ventura County’s “Save Our Agricultural Resources” (SOAR) program.

It required that any development beyond the city’s existing boundaries get approval from voters before the council could act.

Voters overwhelmingly passed the measure, and since then, growth has focused on infill, protecting the surrounding agricultural and natural lands.

But that 2007 UGB is about to expire in 2025. If we don’t replace it, the City Council will regain the power to annex land without a public vote.

Fortunately, the city manager and council have collaborated with various stakeholders to propose a new UGB that extends modestly — just 123 acres across three parcels on the east side of Highway 101.

Importantly, it preserves the requirement that the people vote on any expansion beyond that area. This new UGB would last for 12 years, after which it can be renewed or adjusted based on future needs.

Some opponents are concerned about a potential equestrian resort in one of the parcels and are considering a no vote because of it. Let me be clear: rejecting the UGB over one possible development would be a mistake.

First, even if the resort were outside of the UGB, it could still pursue annexation. Second, having the development inside the new UGB doesn’t guarantee development. It would still have to go through many steps such as annexation, rezoning and permitting that all involve public hearings.

Most critically, by voting no, we lose the public’s ability to vote on any future expansion outside the UGB.

The first UGB has served Buellton well, preserving its small-town character and safeguarding surrounding lands. The proposed new UGB balances the need for modest growth with the community’s desire to keep that special character intact.

I urge you to vote yes on Measure C. If we lose the UGB, we lose the people’s voice in shaping the future of Buellton.

Let’s not throw that power away.