Santa Barbara Current

******

Ballots are out.

If you plan to vote early, start with California Current’s proposition guide—written from the only point of view that actually pays the bill: the overworked, under-appreciated California taxpayer.

We don’t hand you a cheat sheet and walk away. Every recommendation is backed by clear headed research. Click the link, read the case, then mark your ballot with your eyes open.

Please consider sharing this easy-to-use guide with your neighbors.

NO on 1. The Con Job

NO on 3. The Forever Tax

NO on 4. Your Money, Their Campaigns

NO on 5. Recall Revenge

NO on 37. Robin Hood in Reverse

NO on 38. Pork Barrel Science

YES on 39. Trust, but Verify

NO on 40. Tax Billionaires Today, Tax Everybody Tomorrow

YES on 41. Sergey’s Silver Bullets

YES on 42. Sergey’s Silver Bullets

YES on 43. Stop Getting Steamrolled by Special Taxes

NO on 44. Bleeding Health Clinics Dry

YES on 45. Pondering Prop 45

Note: Props 41 and 42 share one article.

Governor: Steve Hilton

Lieutenant Governor: Gloria Romero

Secretary of State: Donald P. (Don) Wagner

Controller: Herb Morgan

Treasurer: Jennifer Hawks

Attorney General: Michael Gates

Insurance Commissioner: no good choice, no endorsement

State Superintendent of Public Instruction: Sonja Shaw

*******

Community Events:

Possibly Strongest El Niño on Record On Its Way

Mon, 19 Oct 2026 13:31:34 GMT

Click here to see how you may be affected. Source: SBCOEM

This record shattering Super El Nino 2026-27 is predicted to at least double the average annual rainfall for Southern California, with a potential to match, even exceed, the intensity of the storms of 1995. In any case, this upcoming El Nino is on track to be one of the strongest events on record. Those of us who lived in Santa Barbara during the storm of ‘95 within the months of January and April of that year remember the freeway underpass filled completely with water, lapping at the underside of 101.

People were finding rattlesnakes on local beaches washed down out of the canyons by rushing creeks. Businesses and many homes in the lower regions of the East Side and lower State Street from Mission Creek suffered flooding and costly damage, with overall loss to property said to be in the range of fifty million dollars. That’s around seventy-eight million in today’s world.

The County of Santa Barbara held a virtual El Nino Community Meeting on Thursday, October 1. That meeting is available now on YouTube. However, it’s important to pay attention to the basic preparations one must take especially in those areas of our city which are prone to flooding. Remember the young men kayaking through Alisos Street just a few years ago? This image is amusing, along with the youth who were diving off the freeway guard rail into the 20 feet of water accumulated within the underpass back in ‘95, but the risks to personal property, and to the wider community at large, is no laughing matter.

It was brought to our attention recently that the Laguna Canal looking toward Hwy 101 from Yanonali Street Bridge is overgrown with trees, brush and shrubs and some large debris where storm drains exit into it, resembling more a pastoral field than a strategic flood canal. The remainder of the canal towards the ocean is severely compromised also by excessive growth within and along the canal banks.

Clearing this critical upper portion of the canal could be done within a few days by a large crane equipped with a clamshell bucket as was done post 1995. A convoy of 10-wheeler dump trucks could easily be commissioned to haul away the debris, in similar fashion as ‘95 and after the terrible mudslides in Montecito when Marborg trucks could be seen driving in convoys to dump truckload after truckload of mud and rock into landfill sites and along Goleta Beach to the north of Santa Barbara.

Operational Pumps, Canal Gates, and Catch Basins

A question also arises about the operational function of the pumps at the Laguna Canal. They have been replaced by new electric ones with a backup generator. Will they pump more than the older diesel Caterpillar engines were able to accomplish? If the gates cannot be opened due to storm surge or higher tides, then full reliance will be on those new pumps’ operation combined with the canal’s maximum ability to hold inflowing flood waters while the pumps try to maintain the pace of inflow.

It is essential that the gates are completely operational to allow street flood waters entering the canal from the lower East side to exit them at a substantially accelerated pace than the pumps can guarantee. It is critical that the gates be opened whenever possible and that the canal be cleared substantially for greater holding capacity.

We know that the catch basins below Montecito are cleared and in the case of San Ysidro, substantially enlarged now. Clearly this community has learned from its share of recent historical flooding, and much should be happening all over Santa Barbara in ways of prevention and practical preparation for what may come. This situation with the Laguna Canal was brought to our attention, and we thought others should be made aware.

The Laguna Creek channel between 101 and Montecito St., September 2026. Photo: Gary Simpson

The same Laguna Creek channel after cleanup, mid-October 2026. Photo: Gary Simpson

Here’s hoping that SB City Public Works along with SB County agencies have workable plans in place in a timely fashion to take the precautions necessary to insure minimal loss of property, both private and public. These rains can start any time after October so it’s imperative to be aware and prepared.

SB County Sites Ready and Available

In the October 1 meeting mentioned earlier in this article, various services available to the County were represented, including the National Weather Service, County Fire & Sheriff depts., public works, infrastructure, flood control preparations, and even County schools – all providing their particular angle on protection and preparation for flooding events. Santa Barbara County is clearly not asleep at the wheel given the recent history of devastating flooding events. Creeks county-wide have been or are scheduled for clearing this fall. County roads with a history of flooding have been inspected with a focus on choke points and drainage.

Much work has been completed for channel widening of Mission Creek by SB County during the late ‘90s, and ramped up from 2005-2015. In order to make the most effective use of this widening, the work needs to be completed downstream of not only Mission Creek channel, but those of Sycamore and Laguna Creek channels. As it is, until those downstream improvements are made, when big rain events happen, a bottleneck occurs at these places, with the ensuing result, something like we saw on Alisal Road, mentioned above. Hopefully the substantial funds necessary to finance the clearing of these downstream channels can be made available with the current focus on maximizing preparedness in face of these upcoming storms.

Public to Play Strategic Role in Preparations

Speaking recently with an official in Santa Barbara City Public Works, a strong recommendation was also offered to local citizens living adjacent to creeks to check for debris which they can remove themselves, and to notify the city of any large objects for which heavy or expert assistance would be necessary. Also, property owners with drainage courses running through their property should get those cleared. The County and the City both stress this idea that they cannot see everything and be everywhere, and rely upon the public to inform them about areas that require attention and can help relieve potential threat to life or property.

Basic to property owners, historically, of course, includes the strategic use of sandbags to protect areas of private property which are prone to flooding. Many residents do not realize the limit for sandbags is 25 bags/person. Those sites provided by the county are listed on the County website. We know that the Home Improvement Center at Olive and Gutierrez provides sandbags as well. Other sites may exist throughout the city, but those living in areas experiencing past flooding need to procure those sandbags and get them in place well in advance.

The website www.ReadySBC.org will also provide a link to Real-Time Rainfall and Stream gauge data. Remember how quickly that rain fell the night of the mudslides in Montecito? Also available are shelter services and the homeless response for national disasters and extreme weather. It is highly recommended to be signed up for Ready SBC Alerts, and if you’ve already done so, to make sure all information is current. A Homeowners Guide for Flood Prevention and Response is available.

The Six Ps of Preparedness

I had forgotten that for information about flooding, call 2-1-1. Call 9-1-1 for emergencies only. Imagine how information calls could jeopardize the handling of emergencies when these situations arise. Radio station AM 530 provides updated flooding information.

Many recommendations are made for public preparedness; we can’t list them all here, but watching the meeting will fill in the details. However, one presenter gave an effective guide for preparation for evacuation, the six P’s for preparation:

1) People and pets;

2) Paper;

3) Prescriptions;

4) Plastic (credit cards);

5) Personal devices (iPhone, laptop);

6) Pictures

The fact that most deaths during torrential rain events happen in automobiles. Those people in charge of highway safety stress what we hear each year on the news, but bears repeating:

Never drive into six or more inches of water upon a roadway. Twelve inches of water can float a small vehicle. Two feet can sweep most cars and SUVs.

Remember never to drive over a downed power line. If a power line falls onto your car, stay in the vehicle, and call 9-1-1. As far as evacuation orders are concerned, remember that failing to heed the order means that rescue efforts if required may not be available due to inaccessibility.

Rule of thumb is that if you feel immediate danger do not wait for notification to evacuate. And if that notice is received, to comply, hopefully with the Six Ps listed above well within the ready.

It’s important to note that several of the county representatives at this meeting stressed the importance of public input. Any area of concern should be reported to city or to county authorities. The city and the county are working to keep us safe during events such as what may occur during this strong El Nino year, but they rely on public input and ability to handle as much as can be done before these rains arrive. That is why we are presenting the issue of the clearing of the Laguna Canal so that the expensive equipment already in place can operate to provide the best control of the water which will surely be headed downstream in the coming months.

******

Ballots are out.

We don’t hand you a cheat sheet and walk away. Every recommendation is backed by clear headed research. Click the link, read the case, then mark your ballot with your eyes open.

Please consider sharing this easy-to-use guide with your neighbors.

NO on 1. The Con Job

NO on 3. The Forever Tax

NO on 4. Your Money, Their Campaigns

NO on 5. Recall Revenge

NO on 37. Robin Hood in Reverse

NO on 38. Pork Barrel Science

YES on 39. Trust, but Verify

NO on 40. Tax Billionaires Today, Tax Everybody Tomorrow

YES on 41. Sergey’s Silver Bullets

YES on 42. Sergey’s Silver Bullets

YES on 43. Stop Getting Steamrolled by Special Taxes

NO on 44. Bleeding Health Clinics Dry

YES on 45. Pondering Prop 45

Note: Props 41 and 42 share one article. The Prop 44 article publication pending.

Community Events:

The Defective Deflective Crises - Part II

Sun, 18 Oct 2026 13:31:23 GMT

Covering Up Policy Failures in Santa Barbara County

The Elite Left Enviro-Socialists who run the county never allowed fire breaks, controlled burns, agricultural field barriers, or Turbine pump filled cisterns on the hillsides.

While the Board of Supervisors obsesses over DEI, climate alarmism, massive recycling schemes, and ICE, some County operations are running amok.

1. The Regional Fire Communications Center – Canary in the Coal Mine?

The Santa Barbara County Fire District, a dependent special district governed by the Board of Supervisors has burned down its financial reserves (fund balance) and is requiring an increasing contribution from the County general fund.

Back in 2026 the Board reapportioned the allocation of the property tax to ensure that the District would become self-sufficient and not require increasing general fund contributions. Now the Board has allowed the District to run down its reserves while also providing increased general fund allocations. The table below demonstrates the problem.

Background: Sudden wind-driven wildland fires exploding into urban communities constitute the most threatening public safety risk in Santa Barbara County and similar communities with extensive foothill neighborhoods. The Santa Barbara Painted Cave Fire of 1991, the Oakland - Berkeley Fire of 1991, the 2017-18 Thomas Fire (and subsequent lethal Montecito debris flow) in Ventura and Santa Barbara Counties, the 2017 Tubbs Fire in Sonoma & Napa, the 2018 Paradise Fire in Butte County, and the simultaneous Pacific Palisades and Eaton Fires of 2025 are all recent examples.

Once the fire enters the urban area, the homes and other structures become conflagration breeders sending superheated air and flaming debris ahead of the actual fire wall. Sadly, and once the fire is loose in an urban community, there is little that will stop it until it burns out. The City of Santa Barbara has dodged the bullet several times as close fires have stopped just outside the urban area. The dense City with its rickety early 20th Century wooden cottages, porched Victorians, tight streets, and aging 1950’s apartment houses could burn in hours.

Roughly 40% or more of Santa Barbara County’s land area is in CAL FIRE–designated Fire Hazard Severity Zones (FHSZ) — including High and Very High — and a significant share of residents live in these areas, with about 12.3% of the county’s land in Very High zones and an additional 25–30% in High or Moderate zone.

Over the years, the County has expanded its Fire Department staffing, employed water-dropping aircraft, dispatched brush clearing crews, and conducted extensive annual inspections in high-risk areas. Significantly, in 2016, the Board increased the Fire District’s share of the property tax from 12% to 17%. It has also guaranteed the Department 25% of the annual growth of the property tax.

The latest effort is the establishment of a Regional Fire Communications Center that dispatches resources from the County, Carpinteria Fire District, Montecito Fire District, City of Santa Barbara, City of Lompoc, and City of Santa Maria to not only fires but other types of emergencies as well, especially medical calls.

In establishing the Center, the County separated the fire-medical-emergency dispatch function from its historic co-location within the Sheriff’s dispatch center. A new physically separate center was constructed at a cost of $17.5 million.

While this practice may be valid in terms of the skills of individual dispatchers and their supervisors, given the overall risks, wouldn’t it be more prudent for the separate dispatch groups to be positioned in a unified command and control environment, sort of like The North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD)?

NORAD Command Center

In fact, the design of the new Dispatch Center recognizes this in part, in that it contains space for a Joint Information Center (JIC). The problem is that the JIC is usually only operationalized during a large, protracted emergency. It takes a while to staff it. Now, it is physically remote from the Sheriff’s dispatch center.

The operating budget of the new center, for FY 2026-27, is $7.7 million and includes 29 staff positions. During the transition, the Sheriff deleted 9 dispatcher positions but added 5 call taker positions. The new center added 29 new positions. The net increase is 25 new positions

The 911 calls still come to the Sheriff’s dispatch center as the Regional Public Safety Access Point (PSAP). If the call is fire related, EMS, rescue related hazardous material, etc.; it is switched to the Fire Dispatch Center. The Budget is displayed below. The portion highlighted in yellow represents the cost of the Center operations. Note, there is an $8.5 million appropriation for “Other Financing Uses.” Staff indicates that this is a one-time cost for Fire’s share of costs for replacement of communications repeaters and radio towers that were planned separately from the new dispatch center. However, the reader may notice that similar amounts were budgeted in prior fiscal years.

It appears that all of this is not going to be sustainable within the Fire District’s dedicated tax.

2. Central Coast Community (3CE) Electric Bill rates are now higher than PG&E & SCE.

A few years ago, the Board of Supervisors, consistent with its climate alarmism, joined the new 3CE government authority promising lower electric rates and more green energy than the investor-owned utilities. The tables below demonstrate the current truth: 3CE’s rates are higher.

PG&E

SCE

3CE also promised to deliver more green energy than the investor-owned utilities. In fact, PG&E is far greener than 3CE.

Note that 3CE (for its base plan -3CE choice) is 56% renewables.

When nuclear is counted (no CO₂ emissions), PG&E contains 98% renewables. See the table below for the base plan.

3. The County Attack on Sable Offshore Corporation

Sable seeks to restore and operate the pipeline from offshore platforms in Santa Barbara County. Naturally, the County refused to issue permits. In March 2026 the Federal Government allowed Sable to begin pumping oil. Santa Barbara County and the California Coastal Commission have won court decisions in both Federal and State Court seeking to shut Sable down. The ultimate outcome is murky.

The County opposes the Sable operation on both its ideological climate alarmism policy and the fact that oil pipes can break and leak into the environment, especially the ocean. Of course, all industrial and technological processes can break. Airliners crash, trains derail, medications have unexpected side effects, automobiles kill tens of thousands of people each year, soft drinks promote diabetes and heart disease, and so forth. Life is risky, but risks are accepted for their benefits.

What if the County embraced Sable and worked to reduce risk? What if it worked with other companies to promote energy development? The CalGEM 2024 annual report records Santa Barbara County onshore reserves at approximately 2.04 million barrels of oil and nearly 1.49 billion cubic feet of natural gas. It is estimated that the offshore Santa Ynez unit holds 190 million barrels of recoverable oil. What could a positive partnership yield in long term County revenue?

Notwithstanding all the rhetoric, Santa Barbara Channel releases an estimated 100 to 150 barrels (roughly 4,200 to 7,000 gallons) of crude oil and about 40 tons of methane every single day from active seafloor faults. That is up to 54,750 barrels per year (about what Sable intends to process).

Why wouldn’t it be more positive to harvest this?

4. If the County criminal justice policy is diversion, alternative sentencing, restorative justice, aspirational justice, etc., should it build more jail space?

If those programs really work, how much more jail space is required? Where is justice for the real victims in a therapeutic system that turns the perpetrators into victims?

According to the county’s Criminal Justice Ad Hoc Subcommittee reports, 82% of people held in the County’s custody have not been sentenced, meaning they are in pretrial status awaiting the resolution of their cases. The County has initiated several programs to reduce this number. Some include early release and/or diversion. Separately from the addicted and mentally ill homeless, do such programs deter real criminals (burglars, car thieves, swindlers, drug dealers, racketeers, etc.)? Presumably the violent offenders – the rapists, spouse beaters, armed robbers, knifers, and murderers are not diverted.

5. The capital infrastructure deficit is still untouched. What does the Board plan?

Despite efforts to budget more for roads, building maintenance, and park maintenance, the County has been unable to begin to catch up and continues to fall further behind each year. The table below depicts the current problem. Public Works is mainly roads, sidewalks, and traffic safety controls; General Services is the County buildings, while Community Services is largely parks, recreation structures, beach facilities, and related parking lots.

The County could partner with Sable and other oil and gas developers and receive a per barrel royalty to be applied to these deficits.

6. What is the Return On Investment (ROI) on the KPMG management studies? They spent $5.2 million on the consultant reviews and recommendations. Who is reviewing compliance?

Through a competitive RFP, KPMG was selected to conduct a five-year departmental review looking at organizational structure, resource utilization and productivity, demand and workload, and performance; and identify opportunities to enhance our service levels and recommend evidence-based best practices for implementation.

Key purposes included:

The reports are comprehensive for each department and contain in-depth analysis and recommendations. They can be seen at the link: https://www.countyofsb.org/ceo-kpmg

One question is: Are the Departments following up and implementing the recommendations? Another is: Who is systematically checking and keeping score? The Board really doesn’t have time or the skill to perform this role over time. Similarly, the CEO’s office is burdened with the current treadmill of preparing the Board Agenda and reviewing all the departmental submissions (50 or more 2x per month), annual Budget preparation, and dealing with the crises of the day. It would be a shame to waste this $5.2 million effort.

Perhaps the Board could appoint a temporary Citizen Review Commission that would conduct quarterly or biennial reviews and report to the Board. Staff could prepare standard check sheets tailored to each report. Members might be citizens with financial, systems, engineering, and large enterprise management backgrounds.

7. What is the Board’s position on Proposition 39, Mandatory Voter ID?

The Board periodically supports or opposes legislation and ballot measures. Where are they on this vital issue? Where is each Board member?

8. Is the Fire Department setting up to take another run at the ambulance contract? Where is the Board on that issue?

Several years ago, the County determined to bid the Ambulance contract out to test cost and service quality. An elaborate request for proposals (RFP) was developed by staff and consultants (at cost of about $1 million). In the end there were only 2 bidders, American Medical Response (AMR) a private sector company that held the contract for decade, and the County Fire Department.

After a comprehensive review by staff and the consultants, it was recommended that the contract be awarded to AMR. The Board promptly ignored staff and its million-dollar consultant, awarding the contract to the Fire Department. AMR sued the County and won. Meanwhile it was discovered that the Fire Department was so sure that it would win the bid, that it had purchased 35 ambulances for $7.7 million dollars and hid them in a hangar at the Santa Maria Airport. The County is attempting to sell the ambulances to recover the expense. The Santa Barbara Independent reported:

According to county spokesperson Kelsey Buttitta, the county spent $830,000 on hiring outside legal counsel to defend its case. Taxpayer funds were increasingly drained as the county tried to defend its non-exclusive permit system against American Medical Response (AMR). The county eventually folded and settled after Superior Court Judge Donna Geck and California Attorney General Rob Bonta both issued strong opinions against the county’s handling of the contract.

Additionally, it is estimated that the entire fiasco cost the County $11million.

9. The County suffers a permanent structural financial deficit. The Board is banking on pension Unfunded Accumulated Actuarial Liability (UAAL) reductions in 2030s to free up revenue.

This should be modeled and proven out. How long would the benefit last? What does it mean that the County has a mature system with more retirees than working employees? What if the market has a couple of bad years?

10. How is the installation of Workday Enterprise Resource Planning (the new multi-million dollar financial and HR system) going?

The original budget was $9.8 million. Reportedly, $17 million had been expended as of 2024. The annual maintenance contract is $4.8 million.

What do the employees in the trenches think of its functionality? What would some frontline clerks say if they could report confidentially?

•••

Mike Brown is a retired 43 career city manager/county executive officer who served as Santa Barbara County CEO for 14 years (1996 –2010) and previously as City Manager in Berkeley and Tucson. He also held executive positions in Connecticut, including Chief Deputy Commissioner of the State Department of Housing and Deputy City Manager of Hartford. After retirement from the County, he served for 14 years as the Government Affairs Director for COLAB of San Luis Obispo County from which he retired in 2025.

******

Ballots are out.

We don’t hand you a cheat sheet and walk away. Every recommendation is backed by clear headed research. Click the link, read the case, then mark your ballot with your eyes open.

Please consider sharing this easy-to-use guide with your neighbors.

NO on 1. The Con Job

NO on 3. The Forever Tax

NO on 4. Your Money, Their Campaigns

NO on 5. Recall Revenge

NO on 37. Robin Hood in Reverse

NO on 38. Pork Barrel Science

YES on 39. Trust, but Verify

NO on 40. Tax Billionaires Today, Tax Everybody Tomorrow

YES on 41. Sergey’s Silver Bullets

YES on 42. Sergey’s Silver Bullets

YES on 43. Stop Getting Steamrolled by Special Taxes

NO on 44. Bleeding Health Clinics Dry

YES on 45. Pondering Prop 45

Note: Props 41 and 42 share one article. The Prop 44 article publication pending.

Community Events:

Gabe Escobedo: Financial Records and Unanswered Questions

Fri, 16 Oct 2026 13:31:36 GMT

Santa Barbara’s November 3 election will determine who represents District 6 on the City Council. With depleted reserves, rising costs and major projects under consideration, taxpayers have good reason to examine the financial decisions and proposals of those seeking public office.

I wanted to discuss these matters directly with candidate Gabe Escobedo. I sent three emails requesting an in-person meeting—two to his campaign email address and one to his personal email address. As of October 14, I have received no reply. I do not know whether he read the messages or why he has not responded.

My invitation remains open.

What the Bankruptcy Records Reveal

Gabe Escobedo’s bankruptcy filing. Photo: DYK

In September 2018, Escobedo filed Chapter 13 bankruptcy in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Central District of California. His schedules reported approximately $192,323 in liabilities and $26,233 in assets, including two financed vehicles: a 2016 Jeep Cherokee and a 2011 Volkswagen GTI.

The Volkswagen was designated for surrender, and CoastHills Credit Union subsequently obtained court authorization to recover it. The trustee’s records eventually listed a $12,416 unsecured claim from CoastHills. The file does not establish the date the vehicle was physically repossessed or sold.

The bankruptcy also involved substantial student-loan debt. The Department of Education held an allowed claim of $133,009.85 and received $7,661.37 through the repayment plan.

Escobedo completed his five-year Chapter 13 repayment plan in September 2023 and received a discharge on April 25, 2024. According to the trustee’s final accounting, $9,068.18 was distributed to creditors. Although substantial balances remained unpaid through the plan, the documents do not establish that all were legally forgiven. Most federal student loans ordinarily survive an ordinary bankruptcy discharge.

Another document warrants clarification. In October 2022, the trustee sought dismissal, alleging that required tax returns and financial information had not been supplied to the trustee. The motion was withdrawn, and Escobedo subsequently completed the plan. That allegation did not establish that he had failed to file his tax returns with tax authorities.

Bankruptcy is a lawful process, and filing does not establish wrongdoing. These are nevertheless public records. I wanted to give Escobedo an opportunity to explain in his own words.

From Personal Finances to Public Decisions

Escobedo has also made public financial decisions as a Santa Barbara Unified School Board member. In July 2024, the board unanimously approved a teachers’ agreement providing a 10 percent raise for 2024–25 and another 5 percent for 2025–26, averting a potential strike.

In March 2025, Escobedo voted with the 3–2 majority to send preliminary layoff notices to 85 teachers. Many notices were subsequently rescinded after the district identified alternatives. The district’s September 2026 unaudited figures reported a $5.45 million General Fund deficit for 2025–26—far smaller than previously projected, but a deficit, nonetheless.

Declining enrollment, expiring one-time funding and other pressures affected district finances. Responsibility for its decisions rests with the board as a whole, not one member. Still, examining the forecasts and long-term costs considered when the board voted is reasonable.

Santa Barbara’s Own Financial Challenges

The City adopted a balanced FY2027 General Fund budget while acknowledging that depleted reserves need replenishing. Its State Street Master Plan carries an estimated implementation cost exceeding $96 million, including about $68 million in construction. Adopting the plan did not authorize spending the full amount.

Escobedo has publicly supported a car-free State Street and phased implementation. In published candidate responses, he has said he wants each phase’s costs, funding, and maintenance needs identified before committing tens of millions. At a forum, he also discussed grants, infrastructure financing districts, retirement incentives, reviewing vacant positions and first-year fee relief for Downtown businesses.

When Everything Is a Priority, Who Decides?

Santa Barbara cannot spend the same dollar twice. Aging streets and sidewalks, stormwater systems, fire facilities and dwindling reserves compete for attention. While some of State Street’s underground infrastructure work would be necessary even without the redesign—estimates include more than $17.5 million for utility relocation and $14.5 million for stormwater construction—how much discretionary reconstruction can the City afford?

If Escobedo supports implementing the plan, what would he postpone, reduce, or eliminate to pay for it? Would he commit future property-tax growth through an infrastructure financing district, and what would that mean for other City priorities? These decisions could create obligations lasting years.

Shouldn’t residents know what takes priority before new commitments are made?

The Subjects I Wanted to Discuss

My proposed interview covered the circumstances of Escobedo’s bankruptcy, why two financed vehicles appeared in his schedules, what happened to the surrendered Volkswagen, which debts survived discharge, and whether his student loans were later repaid or forgiven. I also wanted to discuss the withdrawn trustee motion and lessons from completing the repayment plan.

Turning to public finances, I wanted to review his School Board compensation and budget votes, subsequent staffing reductions and the district’s financial outlook. Finally, I wanted to examine the State Street price tag, possible grants and future tax revenues, long-term maintenance, Downtown-only business relief, rent-stabilization administration, housing subsidies, City-owned land, arts initiatives and retirement incentives.

For each proposal, the central question is the same: What will it cost, how will it be funded, and what other services or improvements might be delayed?

An Opportunity to Respond

I hoped to discuss these subjects with Escobedo face to face, allowing him to clarify the records and explain the financial safeguards he would support at City Hall.

Three emails requesting a meeting have received no reply as of this writing. That is not a refusal, and I am not suggesting otherwise. I remain willing to receive his responses, supporting documents or corrections. Or is this the same response we should expect from him if he is elected?

The upcoming election will determine who participates in decisions affecting hundreds of millions of public dollars, essential City services and Santa Barbara’s financial future. Santa Barbara taxpayers have already seen the consequences when spending pressures outpace recurring revenues and reserves are depleted. Before another City Councilmember takes office, the public should know what that candidate is prepared to spend, what can wait, and where the money will come from.

The decision for voters is their own. But the financial questions before Santa Barbara will not disappear after November 3. For every proposal involving public money, the starting questions should be:

What will it cost?

Where will the funds come from?

And, what else must wait?

•••

DYK endorsements coming…

******

Ballots are out.

We don’t hand you a cheat sheet and walk away. Every recommendation is backed by clear headed research. Click the link, read the case, then mark your ballot with your eyes open.

Please consider sharing this easy-to-use guide with your neighbors.

NO on 1. The Con Job

NO on 3. The Forever Tax

NO on 4. Your Money, Their Campaigns

NO on 5. Recall Revenge

NO on 37. Robin Hood in Reverse

NO on 38. Pork Barrel Science

YES on 39. Trust, but Verify

NO on 40. Tax Billionaires Today, Tax Everybody Tomorrow

YES on 41. Sergey’s Silver Bullets

YES on 42. Sergey’s Silver Bullets

YES on 43. Stop Getting Steamrolled by Special Taxes

NO on 44. Unions to Draw More Blood

YES on 45. Pondering Prop 45

Note: Props 41 and 42 share one article.

Community Events:

When Cheating Becomes School Policy

Thu, 15 Oct 2026 13:31:07 GMT

The Election Results Are In (Part II):

by Brian Campbell

The Election Deniers Were Right

Apparently abusing authority over children now comes with balloons and a hero’s welcome

Well, It’s Official

Washington Elementary Principal Arielle Curry admitted she led deliberations that overrode a student election, rejected the students who actually received the most votes, and selected runners-up instead. In the presidential race, that meant denying the actual winner the office he won and installing Curry’s own child, who lost the election, as student body president.

74 to 51. Not even close.

Curry said she “led deliberations.” That means other adults were involved. A group of adults looked at the results, knew who won, and decided the vote would not determine the outcome.

Lose the Election, Install Your Child

The district’s assistant superintendent for Human Resources, John Becchio, stated, “The district expects that for student/ASB elections, the candidate with the most votes wins.”

Yet according to a concerned Washington parent, an Independent reporter told her that cheating had been going on for years.

If cheating has been going on for years, that is not a defense; it makes the story bigger.

A parent who raised two children at Washington remembers three principals in roughly the past 15 years who had children there: Arielle Curry, Ann Hubbard, and Damien. Damien’s children were too young to run for office, and the parent does not recall whether Hubbard’s children ran nearly a decade ago.

A parent also alleges Curry manipulated the previous year’s student election. If true, perhaps somebody should examine those older elections instead of using history to excuse the present.

When Breaking the Rules Becomes the Culture

First, somebody breaks a rule. Then somebody explains why it is not really a big deal. Eventually the exception becomes the norm, and the people questioning it become the problem.

People keep saying politics has become divisive. Maybe politics is only the symptom. Maybe our culture has forgotten what character looks like.

Barna identified the Santa Barbara–Santa Maria–San Luis Obispo region among America’s ten most post-Christian metropolitan areas, while Santa Barbara County has ranked fourth highest in California for juvenile arrests. Santa Barbara Unified has also fought with supporters of the Good News Club over access and inclusion in school programs.

Then we wonder why distrust and disorder grow. Character matters most when doing the right thing costs you something, and here that meant accepting that your own child lost.

Speak Up and Become the Problem

Parents say the ugliness did not end with the vote. When the winning student’s mother challenged what happened, Curry reportedly made a serious accusation against the 11-year-old winner involving her daughter.

Parents also allege the retaliation continues, with school staff harassing parents who spoke up about the cheating.

If those allegations are substantiated, the lesson becomes: lose the election, change the result, install your own child, attack the winner, harass the parents who speak up.

Is this elementary school or a federal political campaign? All we need now is a Super PAC.

Does Race Suddenly Not Matter?

Curry is a Black woman. The child who won the election and was denied the office is Hispanic.

That does not establish racial motive. But reverse the identities. If a white principal overrode an election, denied a Hispanic 11-year-old the office he won, installed her own child instead, and then attacked the winner’s character after his family objected, would race suddenly become part of the story?

It is worth asking, because our culture increasingly appears willing to tolerate unequal treatment while outrage often depends more on the identities involved than on the conduct itself.

A Hero’s Welcome

After administrative leave, Curry returned to the same principal job and received a hero’s welcome, complete with a huge WELCOME BACK balloon display and the school mascot beside her.

No demotion, reassignment, termination, suspension without pay, or other formal discipline has been publicly disclosed.

And Curry did not apologize for cheating, overturning the election, denying the winner the office, or speak directly to the child who won. She apologized “for allowing this practice to persist” and said the process lacked “transparency and fairness.”

She led the deliberations, her child benefited, and she returned to the same leadership position beneath balloons.

From Schoolhouse Rules to the Rule of Law

This selective morality does not stop at the schoolhouse door. Nationally, politicians preach that “Nobody is above the law,” while fighting over which laws and institutions deserve respect.

DHS accused Congressman Salud Carbajal of doxxing an ICE employee during the 2025 Carpinteria raid; Carbajal disputes that characterization.

Fine. Then apply the principle consistently.

Elections cannot matter only when our preferred side wins, and accountability cannot depend on politics, race, power or popularity.

Maybe Voters Should Look Upstream

If this behavior troubles voters, perhaps the question should not stop with one principal. Who oversees the district? Who establishes the culture? Who decides what conduct earns discipline and what conduct ends with the same job and a hero’s welcome?

People talk endlessly about the school-to-prison pipeline. Perhaps we should examine what happens at the beginning of it.

Bad behavior does not become culture overnight. It becomes culture when institutions tolerate it, media excuse it, leaders rationalize it, and the public eventually stops being surprised by it.

Children learn far more from what adults do than from posters about integrity hanging on school walls. They notice who gets punished, who gets protected, who gets harassed for speaking up, and who gets welcomed back with balloons.

If you are only moral when morality benefits you, you are not moral. You are strategic.

Scripture says:

“The integrity of the upright shall guide them: but the perverseness of transgressors shall destroy them.” — Proverbs 11:3

The results are in.

74 beat 51.

The election deniers were right.

And apparently abusing authority still gets you balloons.

••••••••••••••••••

Institutionalizing Cheating and the Problem of Accountability

By Mark Mandrell

The student election scandal at Washington Elementary School has exposed a profound breach of integrity within our public education system. However, the central issue extends beyond the actions of Principal Arielle Curry. It concerns what takes place when an institution permits questionable practices to become routine, thereby compromising its own capacity to discipline those who engage in them.

Curry admitted to overturning student election results, including one instance where her own child was declared the winner despite another student receiving more votes. Children invested effort in campaigning, preparing speeches, and voting, operating under the assumption of a fair and respected electoral process. Instead, they learned that school officials could unilaterally disregard their votes and impose a preferred outcome. This constitutes a profoundly damaging lesson in democracy, honesty, and personal responsibility.

When Misconduct Becomes Standard Practice

Perhaps the most revealing aspect of Curry’s statement was her apology for allowing the practice of overriding election outcomes to persist. Consider the implications: this was not merely a spontaneous individual decision. Her acknowledgment indicates the existence of an established process for altering election results. This shifts the focus from individual culpability to institutional responsibility.

If school officials had previously accepted or tacitly tolerated this practice, the district may have undermined its own authority to enforce meaningful discipline. An employee facing serious repercussions could reasonably argue that the institution had historically permitted the same conduct. When an organization condones misconduct long enough for it to become customary, it creates a self-inflicted accountability crisis.

This dynamic may help explain Curry’s relatively brief administrative leave and subsequent reinstatement. While not conclusive proof of the district’s reasoning, it is a plausible scenario warranting thorough examination. An institution cannot credibly demand integrity from its employees while simultaneously permitting practices that erode the very principles it professes to uphold.

California Law, District Policy, and Enforcement Challenges

California law and the Santa Barbara Unified School District’s own regulations establish frameworks for addressing employee misconduct. California Education Code §44932 and the district’s Administrative Regulation 4118 list dishonesty and unprofessional conduct as potential grounds for disciplinary action against permanent certificated employees.

These provisions do not mandate automatic dismissal. Employees possess legal rights, and a principal’s specific employment classification is a relevant factor. Nevertheless, the core issue persists: the district has codified professional standards, and the public is entitled to assurance that these standards are applied consistently.

If overriding election results had evolved into an accepted practice, the district may have created the precise conditions that complicate disciplinary action. The institution’s historical tolerance could become a central element of an employee’s defense. This is the inherent danger of institutionalized misconduct: ultimately, the organization forfeits its moral authority—and potentially weakens its legal standing—to hold individuals accountable.

Teachers’ Unions and Institutional Protection Dynamics

California’s influential teachers’ unions introduce another layer to this accountability dilemma. Organizations like the California Teachers Association and United Teachers Los Angeles wield significant influence through collective bargaining, political advocacy, and employee representation.

Employees are entitled to due process and protection from arbitrary discipline. However, these protections must not morph into a shield against legitimate accountability. If an employer seeks to discipline an employee for conduct that management previously tolerated, the employee’s union has a compelling argument that the employer failed to establish or consistently enforce the standard in question.

This constitutes a powerful defense in any workplace, particularly within a system governed by extensive employment protections and procedural safeguards.

No evidence suggests a teachers’ union intervened directly in Curry’s case, and principals typically occupy management roles outside teachers’ bargaining units. However, the broader lesson resonates across California’s public education system. A school district that condones misconduct furnishes employee representatives with substantial grounds to challenge disciplinary measures when accountability is finally pursued. The responsibility for preventing this scenario rests squarely with district leadership.

The Enduring Importance of Personal Integrity

None of the foregoing excuses Curry’s individual actions. A principal bears a fundamental responsibility to exercise independent ethical judgment, especially when personal interests are involved. Furthermore, a meaningful distinction exists between voluntarily admitting a wrong and acknowledging it only after being confronted.

If Curry independently recognized her error, proactively came forward, and sought to rectify the election results, such action would merit acknowledgment. Conversely, if her admission followed external complaints or exposure, the context is markedly different. Regardless, the district’s investigation must scrutinize the systemic practice itself, not merely the individual actor.

The Core Failure is Institutional

The public is now aware that student election results were overturned and that the principal acknowledged permitting the practice to continue. What remains obscured is the practice’s origin, its duration, the scope of awareness among staff, and the rationale for its tolerance. These are quintessential questions of institutional accountability.

An independent review should: establish a complete history of the election process; determine whether other administrators participated in or approved of the practice; examine the application of the district’s disciplinary standards; and identify necessary corrective measures to prevent recurrence. The district must also ensure that students who legitimately won their elections receive appropriate recognition.

This incident does not prove pervasive corruption throughout the Santa Barbara Unified School District. It does, however, provide concrete evidence of a compromised electoral process at one school and sufficient justification to rigorously examine the supervisory failures that allowed it to persist. When cheating becomes standard practice, the institution itself becomes complicit in the problem. Consequently, the institution may find its own history impedes its ability to hold anyone accountable.

Our children deserve better than a system where authority figures can arbitrarily override election results. They deserve educators who embody the integrity they teach, administrators who enforce rules consistently, and a school district willing to confront its own failings. Integrity cannot be optional. Accountability cannot commence only upon discovery. An institution cannot expect its employees to respect standards that its own leadership has allowed to deteriorate.

******

Mark Mandrell is a longtime Santa Barbara resident, retired financial executive and former CFO, devoted husband, and father of three sons who values family, integrity, and community.

******

Ballots are out.

We don’t hand you a cheat sheet and walk away. Every recommendation is backed by clear headed research. Click the link, read the case, then mark your ballot with your eyes open.

Please consider sharing this easy-to-use guide with your neighbors.

NO on 1. The Con Job

NO on 3. The Forever Tax

NO on 4. Your Money, Their Campaigns

NO on 5. Recall Revenge

NO on 37. Robin Hood in Reverse

NO on 38. Pork Barrel Science

YES on 39. Trust, but Verify

NO on 40. Tax Billionaires Today, Tax Everybody Tomorrow

YES on 41. Sergey’s Silver Bullets

YES on 42. Sergey’s Silver Bullets

YES on 43. Stop Getting Steamrolled by Special Taxes

NO on 44. Unions to Draw More Blood

YES on 45. Pondering Prop 45

Note: Props 41 and 42 share one article. The Prop 44 article publication pending.

State Street Needs a Shared Plate, Not a Food Fight

Wed, 14 Oct 2026 13:34:09 GMT

It’s Time to Approve the State Street Master Plan

I am reiterating our support for, and urge you to vote for, the currently proposed version of the Master Plan for State Street, with some important exceptions and conditions that, if not recognized and addressed, may do an injustice to the 1300 block of State Street. First, we would like to bring your attention to how the Master Plan boundaries are defined.

The 1300 block: with a major historic theatre, thoughtfully curated retail shops, well-established locally loved restaurants, and innovative galleries, this block is clearly the natural terminus to our commercial downtown

This is acknowledged by the Master Plan in its choice to include the 1300 block within the boundaries of the ARTS District. Sort of... In some sections the Master Plan includes the 1300 block, and in other sections excludes it. We urge you to correct this inconsistent language.

Why?

In addition to being confusing, one of the most commonly-cited difficulties mentioned by stakeholders in the downtown area is uncertainty, so establishing a consistent clarity of inclusion for the 1300 block in the Master Plan would give the community confidence and clarity that this block of downtown is as valued by the city as the other blocks in the Master Plan. Many locals have told us that our block seems to be the “neglected child” of the Master Plan, so we ask the Council to dispel that perception once and for all and allow our block to be accorded the same treatment as the rest of the State Street Paseo by making sure every section of the Master Plan includes the 1300 block in a meaningful way.

Another inconsistency: differential treatment for the 1300 block and the 00 block of West Victoria, which previously were allowed to operate under the same parameters. In extending Title 31, the city is apparently asking to remove the ability to modify traffic patterns from the 1300 block but not from West Victoria. But the Master Plan expressly says that the 1300 block is a special condition with two configuration options still to be resolved during pre-construction design, hence it must evolve. But how can it, if traffic patterns cannot be modified in response to new conditions, or modified to allow the expanded outdoor dining the master plan is supposed to provide?

With greater than six years forecast between the adoption of this plan and its intended completion date, it would seem reasonable and prudent not to prohibit flexibility in the street configuration between now and then. Thus we strongly request this language not be deleted from the new version of Section 31.20.020, but retained as existing in the original version.

Second, please revisit the decision to make traffic two-way on this street and return it to one-way traffic as it was before June 2024. Without going into it here, we believe staff and council are well aware of the unfair manner in which all parklets were removed on our block, but not on West Victoria, by the previous (not current) city administration, which was enabled by differential treatment between these two areas. Having the option to revisit and revise the current traffic patterns on our block would be an important step towards restoring the collaborative approach we have always striven for when working with the city.

Retaining existing Section 31.20.020 as written does not change the Master Plan. In addition to allowing for expanded outdoor dining, it could allow one-way traffic on our block as had previously been allowed, or a return to two-way traffic, or any such decision. It simply avoids unnecessarily foreclosing the one-way alternative before the engineering and design work is complete. So please consider the one-way 1300-block alternative during pre-construction design, especially as it would facilitate greater traffic safety and facilitate safer sidewalk/outdoor dining areas.

Turning to a wider view, the broader picture of what’s best for our town and what best advances the greater public good has always been at the forefront of opal’s guiding principles, even when circumstances require us to advocate for positions key to our business needs.

Thus, automobiles on State Street.

Regarding the future of automobiles on State Street, our support of the current version of the Master Plan is based on the position we presented at the last council meeting. The Waterfront/Funk Zone has become the main attraction for visitors to our town, and tourism is a major part of our economy. With the closure of State Street at the 500 block there is no easy way for the thousands of these weekly visitors to access the upper areas of downtown State Street, as had been true in the past. Along with many businesses in the upper part of State Street affected by the street’s closure to vehicular traffic, opal restaurant and bar has experienced a downturn in business due to this closure. By preventing the easy circulation of visitors into our downtown, the street closure has concentrated the economic vibrancy into the waterfront area and does not allow our area to fully share in the commercial resource that a prime California destination city should create for its businesses.

Accordingly we would like to again present a compromise solution, upon which our support of the most recent version of the Master Plan is predicated. Since cars are allowed, we suggest re-opening State Street to one lane of northbound automobile traffic coming up from the waterfront one-way. This would allow enough space for all other vehicles to travel as they can currently, allow all existing parklets and pedlets to remain intact and preserve a relatively pedestrian friendly environment while allowing upper downtown businesses greater access to the many visitors that currently do not make their way to this part of downtown.

We propose this as an antidote to the current environment, in which two polarized groups have dominated the discussion: those advocating for the return of two-way traffic (pro-car) and those adamantly opposed to any cars (anti-car). In this all-or-nothing scenario, if one side prevails, the town loses. What If instead, we view the compromise as one where nobody gets everything they want, but everyone gets something they can live with, which better enables us to live with each other as well.

Also, this would be the least expensive thing the city could do in the interim. And… the interim is the key. What businesses asking for cars to come back are telling you is that regardless of whether or not a car-free promenade may ultimately be viable in the future, many businesses will not survive the interim unless we take an approach that brings cars back. Where we differ is we feel two lanes of cars are excessive and damaging to the businesses that are doing well in the current environment. We are seeking to encourage winners and winners, not winners and losers.

So this proposal is not necessarily a permanent solution, it is a temporary bridge between when the infrastructure work begins and when it reaches meaningful stages of completion, and when the vitally important, proposed housing begins to be occupied by downtown residents who can bring to the upper downtown what it sorely needs: people. And here is another benefit to this proposal. Set a time limit on it, at the end of which it will be evaluated for effectiveness and whether it should be continued. At the end of, say, two years, we will have data to base our decisions on. Data, instead of opinions. What better way to settle a disagreement?

At the last meeting the council expressed concern and understanding for the needs of the upper State Street business community, particularly in the interim, during which it is likely that infrastructure construction will continue to hamper easy access to customers and guests. As this option could be enacted with minimal expense, please consider authorizing as soon as possible a one-way northbound lane of automobile traffic up State Street, to allow upper State Street businesses a chance to share in the visitor-driven economic vibrancy the Waterfront/Funk Zone area currently enjoys.

****

Mr. Yates and Ms. Takaya are owners of https://opalrestaurantandbar.com

******

Ballots are out.

We don’t hand you a cheat sheet and walk away. Every recommendation is backed by clear headed research. Click the link, read the case, then mark your ballot with your eyes open.

Please consider sharing this easy-to-use guide with your neighbors.

NO on 1. The Con Job

NO on 3. The Forever Tax

NO on 4. Your Money, Their Campaigns

NO on 5. Recall Revenge

NO on 37. Robin Hood in Reverse

NO on 38. Pork Barrel Science

YES on 39. Trust, but Verify

NO on 40. Tax Billionaires Today, Tax Everybody Tomorrow

YES on 41. Sergey’s Silver Bullets

YES on 42. Sergey’s Silver Bullets

YES on 43. Stop Getting Steamrolled by Special Taxes

NO on 44. Unions to Draw More Blood

YES on 45. Pondering Prop 45

Note: Props 41 and 42 share one article. The Prop 44 article publication pending.

Oh, California, Where Art Thou?

Tue, 13 Oct 2026 13:31:12 GMT

My mom’s family worked in the mines in Crested Butte, Colorado in the early 1900s. Hard working people. Salt of the earth. Came here legally. Good Catholic immigrants from Ireland and Yugoslavia.

Oh yes, quite a combination.

But their life was tough, and they heard about “opportunity” in a state called California.

So, they pulled up stakes and moved to San Diego in 1939. And life was good.

Until it wasn’t.

My namesake grandfather, John, had a little convenience store in Mission Beach. It was Christmas Eve, 1940, and he headed home in the evening with the day’s sales.

He was followed.

Then, in his own home, my grandfather confronted two young men. They had a gun. And they told him if he didn’t give them the money, they would take my little aunt as hostage.

My grandfather struggled for the gun. And they shot him to death in front of the entire family.

On Christmas Eve.

I only mention this, because that was our family’s beginning as California residents.

“But,” as Paul Harvey would have said, “here’s the rest of the story…”

It is one of redemption.

My five aunts and uncles rallied around my grandmother, Kate, and put down even more solid roots into our state. Over the years, they became doctors and professors and Red Cross members and one of the first women to create the WASPs, Women Airforce Service Pilots.

And then, as good Catholics, they single-handedly populated California!

I spent much of my young life, off and on, in San Diego… and then Torrance, and eventually up the hill in Palos Verdes. I would join my many cousins going to Disneyland in the ‘50s and then the Sunset Strip in the ‘60s. It was a wonderful time.

A uniquely California time.

The Opportunity State

So much energy. So much hope. So much incredible promise in the Golden State. You could do anything, be anything…. California was filled with opportunities. And those opportunities were the vital driving force of its success.

And over the years, I would return…. while I lived all over the country. Eventually starting a family and settling down.

My parents moved back… to Santa Barbara in the late ‘70s, and our family had many a wonderful time visiting and reminiscing. California was still the dream it always was.

Then in 1995, after anchoring the news in Tampa Bay, Florida and having young children… the yearning began again. During that time, Florida was still pretty wild west. Lots of weird stuff I would have to tell people each night on the news, in the state whose slogan was “The Rules are Different Here.” Indeed, they were then. Not as much now. It has reformed.

But my wife and I wanted to find a small, safe community to raise our family. Not a big city.

God provided an answer. A young Liz Murdoch (yes, Rupert’s daughter), owned some TV stations on the Central Coast of California. And she saw my tape with my agent in New York City. She asked if I was interested in taking a look at the Central Coast and TV station KSBY.

Why not? We knew the area intimately.

And so, we moved here. Perhaps a professional downside… but a lifestyle upside. Family was all that mattered to my wife and me. And a safe and healthy place to raise our children.

They are all still here, with their own families. They ventured out. As they should. Then came back. They knew a good thing once they saw what else was out there.

That was then.

But this is now.

Corroding California Culture

What’s happened during those 30 plus years since we returned to my beloved California?

Well, what’s happened is… it’s turned itself upside down from the Golden State, to the Tarnished State. And it was by design.

The prosperity of living in a state with ample natural resources, keen minds creating incredible technology, and a lifestyle based on movement…. the automobile (does anyone remember the early SoCal car movement and the freedom of getting from A to B in style? Top down. Engine revving. Drive-in burger joints. Drive-in movies. Epic freedom.)

Sure, the advent of this uniquely California culture created some issues. Smog in the LA basin. It’s mostly gone now. Traffic. Long commutes. Still here. The price we pay for paradise.

But … we were independent of most government control. We were still free. We were “America” personified. Everyone, everywhere… wanted to be a “Californian.”

Then the Left began taking over. And little by little…. started to erode our great state and the use of its abundant resources.

The environmental movement was the start of it. Stop the fossil fuels. Hands off the forests. Let the waters flow into the sea.

Shut down the nuclear plants. Shut down the refineries. Shut down the drilling.

Cover the land with windmills and solar panels and…. oh, and build a high-speed rail along the length of the state. Yup, that’ll do it.

Then become a “welcoming” (sanctuary) state for people who wanted to be “Californians,” but didn’t want to take the time to do it legally. They Flooded the schools, the hospitals, the housing…. Many of them good people. Many not.

But all at a price that we pay for.

Taxes. Regulations. Waste. Corruption. Kill the goose that lays the golden eggs.

And, well, here we are.

There’s Always Hope

Pollution? The left has actually “polluted” our state with its ideology, and practiced their “feel-good failure” at all of our expense. It was stealth. Silent. Slowly building. So very sad.

And we allowed it to happen. Perhaps even voted for it. Maybe we thought we were being compassionate and good stewards and….

Here’s what I do know. This is our last chance. I fear we may have gone over the cliff already, and may not be able to recover. But I’m not someone with a doomsday complex.

Just a reality one.

I believe the pain has reached a point where the light bulb has been turned on (when we have power!) and we are now clearly seeing the boogeyman in the dark corner.

Leftism. Progressivism. Socialism. Even communism.

Is this really what we want? I hope not, although “hope” is not a strategy.

Voting is. It’s all we have left. So, vote like our California dream depends on it.

Because it does. My grandparents paid for it.

Dearly.

******

Ballots are out.

We don’t hand you a cheat sheet and walk away. Every recommendation is backed by clear headed research. Click the link, read the case, then mark your ballot with your eyes open.

Please consider sharing this easy-to-use guide with your neighbors.

NO on 1. The Con Job

NO on 3. The Forever Tax

NO on 4. Your Money, Their Campaigns

NO on 5. Recall Revenge

NO on 37. Robin Hood in Reverse

NO on 38. Pork Barrel Science

YES on 39. Trust, but Verify

NO on 40. Tax Billionaires Today, Tax Everybody Tomorrow

YES on 41. Sergey’s Silver Bullets

YES on 42. Sergey’s Silver Bullets

YES on 43. Stop Getting Steamrolled by Special Taxes

NO on 44. Unions to Draw More Blood

YES on 45. Pondering Prop 45

Note: Props 41 and 42 share one article. The Prop 44 article publication pending.

California’s Ongoing Civil War

Mon, 12 Oct 2026 13:30:41 GMT

The word “civil” comes from the Latin word civis, meaning “citizen,” so a “Civil War” is where one group of citizens is opposing another group of citizens.

Group One of citizens – the elected Democrats – fired the “shot heard around the state” when they voted for a bill co-sponsored by Santa Barbara Assemblyman Gregg Hart, ABX2-1. After Santa Barbara Senator Monique Limon voted for it in committee, Governor Gavin Newsom signed it into law.

Group Two – Republican and Independent citizens – voted against ABX2-1.

The “shot” was ABX2-1, which is widely referred to as the “refinery inventory mandate.”

The “Civil War” is About Affordability

Affordability of many, if not most, of Californians daily activities.

The battlegrounds are everywhere where the prices are increased because of the increased cost of fuels, including the price of food, deliveries, driving your vehicles, airline flights, asphalt for roads, anything made of plastic, the cost of some pharmaceuticals, and a variety of other items.

The weapon will be in restricting the supply of petroleum products.

How?

ABX2-1 gives the California Energy Commission the power to decide that when petroleum refiners shutting down for refinery maintenance “may” impact price spikes the Commission has the authority to require California’s petroleum refiners to implement resupply plans and arrangements that lead to lower average retail prices, increase the fuel supply, and reduce the price volatility at the pumps for consumers.

In essence, Hart’s bill empowered the five California Energy Commissioners selected by the governor and approved by the California Senate, to require California petroleum refineries to continue to supply the same quantity and quality of product despite being shut down.

But this is impossible.

Refineries

Refineries are, in my words, the “pinch-point” in the delivery of petroleum products, as there is always more supply and more markets than there is refinery capacity.

This point was driven home to me in 1980 when Gulf Oil Company gave me the assignment of handling the anticipated strike at their Port Arthur, Texas, refinery. This was the largest refinery for Gulf Oil, which was a Fortune Top Ten Company with 54,000 employees.

While I was too busy at that time, later I reflected that they may have been a bit foolish assigning just one lawyer, but I was able to successfully manage the 123-day strike.

At refineries, each shipment of crude oil is segregated in a tank farm while the engineers analyze the necessary steps needed to refine the peculiarities of that shipment and whatever sediments it contains.

The refining process is continuous and is managed by operators in rooms with walls full of gauges monitoring every aspect of the temperatures and pressures of the volatile substance as it flows through miles of pipes and tanks. When an adjustment cannot be made electronically, the operator has to run to manually make the adjustments to prevent a detonation.

In the “stacking tower” the various grades from jet fuel to asphalt, and all the in-between products, such as diesel or gasoline, are separated before being piped into separate tanks, as once refined the various products cannot be co-mingled.

The process is a continuous one that is dependent on the finished products continuously being shipped.

Shutdowns are necessary in order to clean and maintain the pipes and tanks. Venezuela refineries are examples of the destruction that occurs without shutdowns.

It is not possible for refineries to produce, or store, sufficient products to comply with ABX2-1during shutdowns.

California

Pre-Hart’s ABX2-1 California had only ten refineries, so a single refinery outage could drastically reduce refining capacity by up to 45% in Northern California and 35% in Southern California.

While Hart’s bill was being considered, Chevron moved its corporate headquarters from California to Texas.

After October 14, 2024, the effective date of Hart’s bill, Phillips 66 shut its L.A. refinery and Valero shut its Benica refinery, reducing California refinery capacity by 17-20%.

On March 25, 2026, Chevron threatened to close its existing El Segundo and Richmond refineries due to over-regulation.

Affordability, or the lack thereof, is impacting Santa Barbarans.

Democrats are searching for some way to blame President Trump while hoping Californians do not realize that they are paying a premium for electing Democrats. For example, the national average price for regular gasoline is $4.35.

Message to Santa Barbarans: the Iran War will end but only you can end the California Civil War against Affordability.

Vote Republican in November.

******

Ballots are out.

We don’t hand you a cheat sheet and walk away. Every recommendation is backed by clear headed research. Click the link, read the case, then mark your ballot with your eyes open.

Please consider sharing this easy-to-use guide with your neighbors.

NO on 1. The Con Job

NO on 3. The Forever Tax

NO on 4. Your Money, Their Campaigns

NO on 5. Recall Revenge

NO on 37. Robin Hood in Reverse

NO on 38. Pork Barrel Science

YES on 39. Trust, but Verify

NO on 40. Tax Billionaires Today, Tax Everybody Tomorrow

YES on 41. Sergey’s Silver Bullets

YES on 42. Sergey’s Silver Bullets

YES on 43. Stop Getting Steamrolled by Special Taxes

NO on 44. Unions to Draw More Blood

YES on 45. Pondering Prop 45

Note: Props 41 and 42 share one article. The Prop 44 article publication pending.

The Defective Deflective Crisis ( Part 1)

Sun, 11 Oct 2026 13:31:55 GMT

This South China News Agency graphic, above, is perfectly emblematic of the perils of government mandated ideological and cultural transformation.

Covering Up Policy Failures in Santa Barbara County

Operating under the camouflage of contrived civility and concocted existential crises, the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors majority (Supervisors Lee, Capps, and Hartmann) has deflected media and public scrutiny away from on-going substantive problems and its failure to tackle real solutions.

Other than the Board majority regularly beating up the Sheriff for jailing criminals and incurring overtime pay, the Board meetings are love fests with the Supervisors fawning over their cozily deferential staff and the county’s coterie of ideologically left-oriented government-funded not for profits and foundations. It’s a team approach under the slogan: “One County – One Future.” As Linguist - Philosopher Noam Chomsky observed:

The point of public relations slogans like “Support our troops” is that they don’t mean anything… That’s the whole point of good propaganda. You want to create a slogan that nobody’s going to be against, and everybody’s going to be for. Nobody knows what it means, because it doesn’t mean anything. Its crucial value is that it diverts your attention from a question that does mean something: Do you support our policy?

That’s the one you’re not allowed to talk about.

The patronage is thick. The South County Democrat Machine harvests the campaign contributions, ballots, and its own promotions to higher office. The average citizen pays for it all in higher County taxes, higher State taxes, and relentlessly rising fees along with poverty inducing foregone business and job growth, agricultural restrictions, severe barriers to housing development, and deferred maintenance of roads, parks, and buildings.

Meanwhile serious program scrutiny and oversight are ignored, banned as politically incorrect or bad for staff morale. It has been years since the Board reviewed the proposed budget in any detail. Instead, the Board spends millions of dollars by inflating the County staff, hiring consultants, promulgating and enforcing new regulations, adopting trendy bleeding edge “crises” driven projects, and banning whole industries.

Three Fake Existential Crises: “Never Let a Crisis Go to Waste”

1) Climate Alarmism

The Board has adopted three successive Climate Action Plans over the past two decades, all of which have failed to reduce CO_2.

The world has been warming up over the last 15,000 years since the end of the last glacial epoch. This natural cycle is ignored, and its impacts are hidden from public disclosure. Recent short-term trends are attributed to human use of oil, gas, and coal, over the past century and a half. Climate alarmists and their Socialist cronies conveniently blame wildfires, disease, storms, annual heat waves, too much rain, too little rain, sea level rise, food insecurity, immigration problems, and mental disorders on the CO₂increase allegedly driven by fossil fuel use. CO₂is a small component of naturally occurring greenhouse gases.

In this regard, the Board has never held a public session or received staff analysis on the validity of the assumed “existential crisis” in the first place. Just what is the status of the dire warnings of the past four decades? Would the Board ever deign to hear a countervailing expert or two, prior to basing its overarching strategic policy on this controversial and politicized phantom?

Would it allow the staff to list the plusses and minuses for various sub-policies? What would be the State, national, and world impacts if Santa Barbara County eliminated every single metric-ton of CO₂generated from within the county?

2) Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI): Similarly, the Board has embarked on a major DEI crusade under which the entire staff is being “culturally transformed” to embrace the outdated and debunked doctrine. In fact, when implementing the dubious program in 2024, the only justification in the entire lengthy agenda item stated:

On December 1, 2020, following the murder of George Floyd and decades-long recognition of injustices towards members of our community, the Board held a special meeting and received a presentation on efforts to develop a systematic approach on advancing racial equity and inclusion in Santa Barbara County. On January 26, 2021, the Board approves a Statement of Commitment to equity and inclusion which commenced the County’s journey of self-evaluation and reflection and commitment to organizational values, policies, practices, and service delivery, which specifically and directly impacts countywide inequities and injustices.

How will management determine if employees are successfully completing their “journey of self-evaluation and reflection?” For decades, the County has run a mandated online course on preventing harassment in the workplace. Everyone is required to take it every two years.

Will the County’s DEI Manager, who is based in the HR Department, indoctrinate a cadre of DEI Commissars to test employees on the new more rigorous historical and cultural paradigm? What about the volunteer members of the County’s numerous Boards and Commissions? Will the policies be spread to purchasing contracts for consultants, not-for-profit service providers, or construction contractors? Are completion of a program test and a statement of confessed guilt part of job requirements used for performance evaluations and promotions?

Which classes of employees are to be subject to the process?

What are examples of the “decade’s long countywide inequities and injustices?” Since at least 1990, and except for the period 2005-09, the Board has been controlled by the left majority. Accordingly, they must share in responsibility for some of the more recent “injustices.”

In mentally calculating injustices, was the Board thinking of the Spanish conquest and feudalization (and near extinction) of the Chumash people in the late 18^th and early 19^th Centuries? Ironically, and throughout the late 1990s and early 2000s, the Board resisted every attempt by the Chumash Tribe to acquire land to build a resort hotel and homes. Only external Acts of Congress and the State broke the political and physical boundaries.

Note that there is also another DEI staff position in the County CEO’S office entitled “Inclusion Initiatives Manager.” What new initiatives have been promulgated?

Another flaring irony is that the same Board that professes to correct racist and discriminatory policies of the past and present adopts policies that contradict that aim. For example, the left Board majority just doubled down on perpetuating poverty by banning new oil wells and directing a multi-year study on the feasibility of buying out existing wells. It adopted the ordinance over pleas to reject the policy by the north County Supervisors, the employees of the oil companies, support companies, and farmers.

Many farmers and ranchers possess oil royalty rights that enhance the value of their land. The Board majority illegally took away this value without just compensation. Hypocritically, the Board majority ignored the fact that the oil jobs are especially important to Hispanic residents.

Perhaps the Board majority will recruit major AI data centers to replace the jobs. After all, the entire County is sitting next to the largest recyclable static source of data center cooling water on the planet.

A further irony is that Santa Barbara County has the second-highest poverty rate among California’s 58 counties. Reportedly 16% of the population (70,000) residents live below the poverty line. The Women’s Fund of Santa Barbara reports that the Hispanic population is disproportionatley affected by poverty in Santa Barbara County.

3) The Tajiguas Recycling Project: Another long-term fetish is overzealous refuse recycling. Over many decades Santa Barbara County has been a leader and has exceeded State requirements for source reduction and recycling, reaching a waste stream diversion of 80%. The success was determined to be insufficient. Accordingly, the Board resolved to shoot the moon by contracting with a turnkey company (Mustang – MSG Investors) to build and operate a $150 million (much more when interest on the debt service is included) trash separator and wet garbage digester (turning the garbage into mulch). The goals were to achieve 100% recycling, to avoid running out of landfill space, and to forestall expansion of the existing landfill.

The project has been constructed and constitutes a major industrial facility on the unique and environmentally fragile Gaviota Coast – sort of Youngstown, Ohio in paradise. The County subjects everyone else to stringent restrictions in Gaviota, including how many cattle can be grazed, banning most homes, and attempting to void any historical permits.

After a very rough start (the project did not work) the County fired Mustang, shipped trash out of County, and determined to expand the landfill. All of this is costing a yet un-summarized millions of dollars. Mustang has filed a $60 million dollar plus costs lawsuit against the County.

The Board should schedule a regular public hearing and disclose at least:

1. How much above the original design, construction, and equipment budget is the project costing?

2. How much above the original annual operating budget per year is the project costing?

3. How much is the landfill expansion costing?

4. Is the County still exporting trash out of the County? How much at what cost?

5. What recycling rate is the County experiencing above that which existed prior to the installation of the project? That is, what is the new increment contributed by the project? The County website is very out of date and muddled in this regard.

6. How does current revenue from sales of recyclables (separate from landfill gas that was previously being sold) compare with projections?

7. Will an independent outside expert engineering firm certify that the facility is performing as planned?

8. What happens when the landfill expansion is full?

9. What is the forecast for tip rates (for garbage trucks to dump at the facility) and the consequent monthly rates passed through to residents, businesses, industry, etc.?

10. How much has the County expended on defending the Mustang lawsuit to date?

Stay Tuned for Next Week Part II: The Deflected Policy Mistakes

1. How is the new separate Fire Communications Center performing?

2. Are 3CE rates now higher than PG&E?

3. How can the County work with Sable to generate revenue rather than spending millions on lawsuits?

4. If the County criminal justice policy is diversion, alternative sentencing, restorative justice, aspirational justice, etc., should it build more jail space? If those programs really work, how much more jail pace is required? Where is justice for the real victims in a therapeutic system that turns the perpetrators into victims?

5. The capital infrastructure deficit is still untouched. What does the Board plan?

6. What is the ROI on the KPMG management studies? They spent $5.2 million on the consultant reviews and recommendations.

7. What is the Board’s legislative program position on voter ID?

8. Is the Fire Union setting up to take another run at the ambulance contract? Where is the Board on that issue?

9. The County suffers a permanent structural financial deficit. The Board is banking on pension UAAL reductions in 2030’s to free up revenue. This should be modeled and proven out. How long would the benefit last? What does it mean that the County has a mature system with more retirees than working employees? What if the market has a couple of bad years?

10. The County is a player in the homeless industrial complex. It is subsidizing expensive housing and continued addiction.

11. How is the installation of Work Day (the new multi–million dollar financial and HR system) going? How much over the budget for the system and consultants have they spent thus far? What do the employees in the trenches think of its functionality? Is the production version actually up and running?

•••

******

Correction: In the October 9, 2026 Letters to the Editor (“Background Check, Anyone?”), a contributor incorrectly linked City Council candidate Gabe Escobedo to a DUI. The accompanying screenshot was of a different person with the same name. Mr. Escobedo has confirmed he has “never been arrested, charged, or convicted of a DUI.” (The bankruptcy filing referenced in the letter was his.) We have removed the false DUI statement and apologize to Mr. Escobedo and our readers for the error.

******

******

Ballots are out. This is the first weekend you can vote them.

We don’t hand you a cheat sheet and walk away. Every recommendation is backed by clear headed research. Click the link, read the case, then mark your ballot with your eyes open.

Please consider sharing this easy-to-use guide with your neighbors.

NO on 1. The Con Job

NO on 3. The Forever Tax

NO on 4. Your Money, Their Campaigns

NO on 5. Recall Revenge

NO on 37. Robin Hood in Reverse

NO on 38. Pork Barrel Science

YES on 39. Trust, but Verify

NO on 40. Tax Billionaires Today, Tax Everybody Tomorrow

YES on 41. Sergey’s Silver Bullets

YES on 42. Sergey’s Silver Bullets

YES on 43. Stop Getting Steamrolled by Special Taxes

NO on 44. Unions to Draw More Blood

YES on 45. Pondering Prop 45

Note: Props 41 and 42 share one article. The Prop 44 article publication pending.

Community Calendar:

Experience Comes in Different Forms

Sat, 10 Oct 2026 13:31:18 GMT

When voters choose a member of Congress, what kind of experience should matter?

Is it the number of years someone has held elected office? Or should voters also consider leadership, management, military service, technical knowledge and experience working inside the federal government?

That question is especially relevant in California’s 24th Congressional District.

Salud Carbajal has been an elected official since 2004.

Bob Smith has never held elected office.

But Smith is hardly inexperienced.

Two Very Different Paths

Carbajal served eight years in the Marine Corps Reserve while attending UC Santa Barbara, where he earned his bachelor’s degree. Trained as a mortarman, he was mobilized during the Gulf War to Camp Lejeune, North Carolina, but never deployed overseas. He left the Reserve as a sergeant in 1992 and later earned a master’s degree in organizational management from Fielding Graduate University.

Carbajal then worked in Santa Barbara County government, including for First District Supervisor Naomi Schwartz. In 2004, he was elected to the County Board of Supervisors, where he served 12 years before winning election to Congress in 2016.

That gives Carbajal roughly 22 years in elected office.

Smith followed a very different path.

He spent more than 26 years on active duty in the United States Navy, beginning as an enlisted AEGIS technician and eventually becoming a commissioned officer and Navy Commander. He served more than 900 days deployed and is a combat veteran.

Smith’s military career gave him unusually broad experience inside the federal executive branch. Over 26 years, he served at bases across the United States and operated in nearly 40 countries, including strategically important regions of the Middle East, Southeast Asia, and Africa. His service included Operation Iraqi Freedom, Operation Enduring Freedom, counter-piracy operations and overseas humanitarian disaster relief.

Smith also earned bachelor’s and master’s degrees in engineering-related disciplines and built a career working on some of the Navy’s most sophisticated defense systems.

These Were Not Small Programs

Smith worked in four major Navy acquisition areas: the AEGIS Combat System, AEGIS Ballistic Missile Defense, Air and Missile Defense Radar program — now known as SPY-6 — and the DDG destroyer shipbuilding program.

These are major defense programs involving enormous taxpayer investment, national security, sophisticated engineering, contractors, procurement, schedules, and congressional oversight.

That experience is relevant to Congress.

Congress doesn’t simply debate and pass legislation. It authorizes programs, appropriates taxpayer dollars, and is responsible for overseeing how federal agencies spend that money.

Military and executive-branch experience like this was once a common path into federal office; today, it is increasingly overshadowed by the career-political track.
And this is where an important part of Smith’s résumé has largely gone unnoticed.

Smith Already Knows the Congressional Process

I asked Smith directly about his experience working with Congress.

His answer was detailed — and carefully qualified.

For roughly a decade during his Navy acquisition and program work, Smith worked on programs subject to continuous congressional authorization, appropriations and oversight, particularly involving the House Armed Services Committee and House Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense.

His responsibilities included preparing and supporting responses to congressional Requests for Information, developing and delivering program and budget briefings, supporting authorization and appropriations actions requiring congressional notification and approval.

Smith was also formally trained through Defense Acquisition University in the Pentagon’s Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and Execution process and legislative affairs.

But here’s something else I found noteworthy.

Smith specifically cautioned me not to say he spent ten years continuously working with Congress.

He didn’t.

Most of his day-to-day work occurred within the Navy and Pentagon as those major programs moved through the federal budget process. Direct congressional interaction occurred periodically when program, authorization, appropriation or budget issues required it.

That distinction matters.

It would have been very easy for a congressional candidate to turn “roughly a decade working on programs involving congressional oversight” into “I worked with Congress for ten years.”

Smith wouldn’t let me do it.

His Washington experience also continued after leaving the Navy. Smith says that in his post-Navy defense work, he periodically works with his company’s political team developing issues and briefing congressional staffers or congressional offices.

So yes, Smith would arrive in Congress as a freshman legislator.

But he wouldn’t arrive as a freshman to Washington, the Pentagon, federal budgeting, or congressional oversight.

And Then There Are the Awards

Smith’s record has also earned significant recognition.

In 2023, he was named U.S. Navy Engineer of the Year.

That recognition shouldn’t be reduced to another line on a campaign résumé.

It reflects a career involving engineering, acquisition, weapons systems, leadership, and responsibility within one of the largest and most complicated organizations in the federal government.

Smith’s experience with AEGIS, missile defense, SPY-6 and DDG shipbuilding raises the larger question voters should be asking:

What exactly qualifies someone to serve in Congress?

So, Why Not Debate?

There is a remarkably simple way for voters to compare these two candidates.

Put them on the same stage.

Smith formally invited Carbajal to participate in a two-hour, in-person televised debate in Santa Barbara before ballots were mailed.

The proposed rules were straightforward: both candidates remain on stage for the entire debate, a mutually acceptable moderator, no teleprompters, no electronic devices and no prewritten notes. Smith offered flexibility over the moderator, venue, format, and speaking times.

Carbajal has publicly expressed reluctance, saying:

“I’m not going to give Mr. Smith a forum where he can spew lies.”

He has said he would consider debating Smith but expressed concern that a debate would provide Smith a platform for claims Carbajal considers false.

But isn’t that exactly what a debate is supposed to resolve?

If Smith makes a false statement, Carbajal can challenge him — immediately and in front of the voters.

If Carbajal believes his nearly ten years in Congress and 12 years as a County Supervisor make him better qualified, he can make that case.

If Smith believes 26 years of active-duty Navy service, command experience, engineering, defense acquisition, and firsthand experience with the federal budget and congressional oversight process better prepare him, he can make his case.

Then voters can decide.

Twenty-Two Years Versus Zero

If we measure experience only by elected office, the comparison is easy:

Carbajal: roughly 22 years.

Smith: zero.

But those numbers don’t tell the whole story.

One candidate built his career through local government, elected office and ultimately Congress.

The other built his through 26 years of active-duty military service, leadership, engineering, defense acquisition, the Pentagon and work involving the congressional authorization and appropriations process before ever asking voters to elect him to anything.

Carbajal’s elected experience is real.

So is Smith’s real-world experience.

Carbajal has now spent nearly a decade representing this district in Congress. He has a voting record and a record of accomplishments he can defend.

Smith has a lifetime of leadership and professional experience outside elected politics that voters can examine.

So put those records side by side.

Let Carbajal defend his.

Let Smith defend his.

And let voters ask both men the questions they deserve to have answered.

After nearly ten years with the same congressman, voters shouldn’t have to rely on campaign mailers, television commercials, carefully prepared statements, or political parties, to decide who is best qualified to represent them.

They should be able to see the candidates standing next to each other, answering the same questions, defending their records and explaining what they intend to do for the 24th Congressional District.

LET THEM DEBATE!

Then let the voters decide.

******

Ballots are out. This is the first weekend you can vote them.

We don’t hand you a cheat sheet and walk away. Every recommendation is backed by clear headed research. Click the link, read the case, then mark your ballot with your eyes open.

Please consider sharing this easy-to-use guide with your neighbors.

NO on 1. The Con Job

https://california.ballottrax.net/voter/

NO on 3. The Forever Tax

NO on 4. Your Money, Their Campaigns

NO on 5. Recall Revenge

NO on 37. Robin Hood in Reverse

NO on 38. Pork Barrel Science

YES on 39. Trust, but Verify

NO on 40. Tax Billionaires Today, Tax Everybody Tomorrow

YES on 41. Sergey’s Silver Bullets

YES on 42. Sergey’s Silver Bullets

YES on 43. Stop Getting Steamrolled by Special Taxes

NO on 44. Unions to Draw More Blood

YES on 45. Pondering Prop 45

Note: Props 41 and 42 share one article. The Prop 44 article publication pending.

Community Calendar:

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

Fri, 09 Oct 2026 13:31:29 GMT

(A sampling of just some of the letters we’ve received over the past week concerning both issues and candidates for election or re-election. – J.B.)

And the Oscar goes to…. Councilmember Kristen Sneddon

When the rent stabilization ordinance (RSO) was on the consent calendar, ‘actress’ Kristen Sneddon made a motion to set the rent cap at 3%. After a multitude of meetings with housing providers, all saying 60% of CPI was too restrictive, she didn’t make any such motions during previous opportunities.

Hearing from critics that this RSO is too restrictive and it’s hurting her mayoral campaign, she tried to make a pivot that was pure theater. Councilmembers Friedman, Jordan, and Rowse all said this proposed change could have happened months ago.

Her angle? She can tell voters that she listened and tried to compromise, but that it was too late to make that move without creating legal liability, which is something she has not shied away from in the past. There was nothing sincere about her motion. She amended and moved to adopt the ordinance in its original form.

It passed.

It was all theatrics meant to benefit her bid to become the next mayor of Santa Barbara. Do we really want a mayor that manipulates governmental processes for her benefit, or do want true, responsive, transparent leadership as demonstrated by Mayoral Candidate Eric Friedman?

Michele Carbone,

Mom-and-Pop Housing Provider

Santa Barbara

*****

Eric Knows How to Make Balanced Decisions

Santa Barbara needs a mayor who can match our aspirations with our ability to pay for them. I’m supporting Eric Friedman because his emphasis on fiscal responsibility, transparent budgeting, and long-term financial stability aligns with what I want from City leadership.

Our city faces difficult choices. Housing affordability, essential infrastructure, public safety, and dependable services, all deserve attention. But worthy goals do not eliminate financial limits. Responsible leadership requires deciding what we can sustain, how we will fund it, and what obligations we are passing to future residents.

I appreciate Eric’s willingness to question reliance on reserves and press for sustainable funding. Reserves protect our ability to respond when revenues fall, emergencies occur, or unexpected costs arise. Spending them deserves careful scrutiny, even when the proposed use is worthwhile.

I also share his skepticism about adding another layer of local rent regulation. Tenant stability matters deeply. So do maintaining rental homes, encouraging investment, and expanding housing opportunities. I favor an approach that weighs those responsibilities together and takes unintended consequences seriously.

For downtown, I want practical leadership that listens to businesses and residents, remains open to adjustments, and pairs a long-term vision with a credible implementation plan. Eric’s emphasis on reducing barriers to investment and supporting local businesses speaks to those priorities.

As an accessibility advocate, I also trust Eric to take access seriously. Fiscal responsibility and accessibility are not competing goals. Thoughtful planning should help us spend wisely while making community life available to people of all abilities.

An endorsement does not require agreement on every issue. Nor does it diminish my respect for others seeking the office. It reflects a judgment about which candidate’s approach best fits the challenges ahead.

For me, that candidate is Eric Friedman.

Nick Koonce

Santa Barbara

*****

NO on Rent Control

As an owner of properties in Santa Barbara, I find it amusing that the city council should even consider a rent stabilization ordinance. Wages are going up, cost of goods and services are going up, labor costs are going up.... so the city council wants to pick on one industry – property rental – to hammer and not allow the owner to make a fair return on his or her investment in real estate.

Tenants can move if they feel rents are too high due to a mis-managed economy run by people who are less than talented in many cases in handling rental issue, other than rent control, which this bill is all about. Vote NO on it. This is America, not some Communist Community where everything is controlled by the city and state.

Vote NO on the “Rent Ordinance.”

Jim Delmonte

Santa Barbara

*****

Background Check, Anyone?

The Democratic Central Committee and the Democratic Socialists of America endorsed Gabe Escobedo for Santa Barbara City Council in District 6.

Do these groups run a simple background check?

Escobedo’s Chapter 13 petition, case 9:18-bk-11465-RC, filed September 7, 2018, lists no business and no entrepreneurial experience. He worked as an UCSB intramural organizer. In his bankruptcy filing he reported $26,233 in assets, no real estate, and $192,322.90 in debts, including $132,294 in student loans.

In 2022 the trustee moved to dismiss the case because Escobedo failed to produce three years of tax returns. The trustee withdrew that motion four weeks later. The Department of Education received $7,661 of its claim. Other unsecured creditors received a few hundred dollars apiece.

Of course, people make mistakes. But such mistakes should be learned from, not hidden. None of this information is in his campaign bio. Is a candidate who doesn’t explain or own up to such failures the right person to lead our city? Are the Democrats and Democratic Socialists choosing their best and brightest? Or for people who don’t respect property rights and financial responsibility, is this as good as it gets?

R. Morrison

Santa Barbara

******

Fighting Fraud in Solvang

One of our residents at Atterdag has suffered in a major fraud scheme, and I am so worried that I had to write this. I don’t know if you can use it, but culturally we are in big trouble. I appreciate Santa Barbara Current’s work to get Santa Barbara back on track.

Overpopulation, climate cooling, climate overheating, polar bears dying, all fizzled. Then climate change and covid didn’t work either, and the treatment and vaccine were worse than the disease. Now the big boogeyman is AI to put fear into our hearts. But maybe something else has been seeping in, so slowly we were unaware.

Even in the 1950s and ‘60s there was a moral standard in our nation. We did see media and politicians who lied to us, but we could find the truth if we looked deep enough. Criminals were generally punished and not set free again. We didn’t lock our homes and cars, and shoplifting wasn’t a casual occurrence.

When we saw news clips on TV, we believed what we saw, maybe we even believed commercials. Now even when we know it’s a lie, can we even make our voices heard? When photoshopping and AI are able to distort reality and make the innocent guilty and the guilty innocent, how can our innate common sense create order of it all?

If we adults are having a hard time, how much more difficult is it for our future generations to even learn that there is a standard of truth and proper behavior to live by? Every time someone gets away with a criminal or dishonest act and ends up idolized, what kind of message does that send?

We see fraud, blatant theft of taxpayers’ money supporting extravagant lifestyles of the perpetrators, our U.S. money scattered all over Earth. Thank goodness there are finally investigators uncovering the theft and shutting down the money faucet.

We don’t know how detrimental data centers are to local communities, or whether protests are initiated by Chinese influencers to give them an advantage. We don’t know whether they will really produce local jobs once the construction is finished. We don’t know anything and maybe that’s the plan.

Even, maybe especially, we must look to uncover corruption in local school boards and city, county, and state government. In the founding days of our country, people served not to enrich themselves, but to build a new constitution guaranteeing freedom for all. But we must be a moral people if it’s going to continue to work.

All we can see is that our current government is keeping the border closed, deporting illegals and criminals, rescuing trafficked children, uncovering fraud, trying to open our own energy resources to lower our cost of living instead of importing it from across the oceans, and caring for our own people instead of all those who have illegally entered our country.

This is a very important election coming up. Vote wisely, and may it be an honest process. May our loving God watch over us.

Gretchen Kiedling

Solvang

*****

Why You Should Vote Early

We’re not asking you to join the military.

We’re not asking you to walk 100 miles.

We are asking you to vote. Yes, that’s right. To simply vote. To fill out your ballot as completely as you can and make sure it is returned as early as possible.

We have web sites to go to for all our recommendations on all the candidates, on all the measures, on all the propositions. All the Very Important Propositions, on all the judges requiring a Yes or No vote.

Yes, it’s a long ballot. Yes, it will take a little of your time.

But we are Americans. We still have choices in our country. Choices of where to live, what jobs to take, how to spend our time and our money. We even can decide whether to vote or not to vote.

Why would you want to let someone else make those decisions for you? If you don’t vote, that is exactly what you are doing. So please vote!

But why should you Vote Early?

Here’s why:

1) Vote Early because Life Happens! You or someone in your family has an accident: your water heater breaks; the car won’t start; the skies deluge Santa Barbara County with inches of rain and flood the roads as happened in 2022, or you just plain forget.

Did you know several races in our county were decided by less than 50 votes in 2022 and 2024?

Vote early because your vote does matter!

Don’t be one of the more than 20% of high propensity election day voters who did not make it to the polls in 2022.

2) Vote Early so you have enough time to fill out your ballot completely.

Astonishingly, many people vote for only a few candidates or items and leave many races, measures and propositions blank.

It takes time to read, study and vote intelligently on many items. Here are a few websites to assist you and they tell you about the Propositions too.

3) Vote Early so Your Envelope and Ballot will be accepted.

Did you Sign and Date in the right spaces?

Did you sign with a signature that matches your registration name and signature?

If something isn’t acceptable and you voted early, the Election Office has enough time to contact you and get it fixed (curing) before Election Day.

Otherwise, your ballot and envelope are collected in a separate pile and will be dealt with after Election Day. It’s also called curing but if your ballot cannot be cured in the allotted time, it will not be counted.

4) Vote Early so that your name can be removed from the list of those who can vote at the polls on Election Day because the Election Office knows you already voted.

Remember, there isn’t any photo voter ID checking at the polls. Which is another reason why you need to vote early and to vote Yes on Proposition 39 for Voter Photo ID.

If your ballot is sitting on your kitchen counter or in a drop box or in the U.S. mail a week or so before Election Day, the Election Office doesn’t know about it.

You would still be on the list of voters eligible to vote in person at the polls (making you a target for impersonation on Election Day).

5) Vote Early so that no one can vote in your place at the polls. If someone does vote as you at the polls, once their ballot is placed in the ballot box it cannot be removed, and it will be counted before any ballots still sitting in the mail, in a drop box, or not yet processed in the days before the election.

If someone can impersonate you at the polls and votes, your ballot in the envelope will not count; there is no way to fix this afterwards.

6) Vote Early and Sign up for Ballot Tracking to be sure your ballot has been received by the Election Office. They will send you an email or text. If you don’t see that it was received, you will have time to contact the Election Office and correct the problem. Sign up at:

7) Vote Early to eliminate election mail, phone calls and text messages. Your political party accesses the Secretary of State lists of those who have voted and removes you from their contact list. Every early voter costs the party $1, every voter who votes at the polls costs the party $20!

8) Vote Early and encourage others to do the same. You can set an example for the nearly 50% of registered voters who never even vote at all, even in presidential elections, by showing them how easy it is to vote early using their Vote by Mail Ballot and the Websites above.

9) Vote Early because waiting to vote after 2 pm on Election Day can be a little risky. It’s like waiting until the very last minute to do something very important.

10) So, VOTE EARLY … But if you still decide to go to the polls on Election Day – GO EARLY!!

Julie Bischoff

Santa Barbara

•••

Julie Bischoff taught classes on Election Integrity for several years, was a poll worker, a poll observer, and observed the processes of Ballot Adjudication, Signature Verification, installation of Dominion Software and other processes. She feels our county elections officials and employees do the best they can with the laws they have to follow. But many laws are a problem and encourage voter fraud. To reduce some of the problems – VOTE EARLY!

Greg Lukianoff - Spotlight SB - Lobero Theatre

Community Calendar:

When Details Matter: What Election Is This Ad Talking About?

Thu, 08 Oct 2026 13:32:16 GMT

A paid political advertisement for Gabe Escobedo tells voters, “Vote on or before June 2!” But Escobedo is running for Santa Barbara City Council in the November 3 election. Is it simply a printing mistake—or does it raise a larger question about paying attention to details before decisions are made?

Sometimes one little detail raises a lot of questions.

Take a look at a paid political advertisement for Gabe Escobedo appearing on the Santa Barbara Independent.

It reads:

“Vote Gabe Escobedo for City Council.”

Then:

“Representing YOU.”

And immediately underneath:

“Vote on or before June 2!”

At the bottom it says:

“Paid For By: Gabe Escobedo for City Council 2026.”

There is an obvious problem.

Today is October 5. Ballots are being mailed, and the Santa Barbara City Council District 6 election in which Escobedo is running is November 3, 2026.

So why does a paid City Council campaign advertisement tell voters to vote on or before June 2?

Was June 2 Left Over From Another Campaign?

Escobedo previously ran for California State Assembly District 37. He announced that campaign in January 2022, before then-Santa Barbara County Supervisor Gregg Hart entered the race. Escobedo suspended his Assembly campaign in March 2022.

But that doesn’t explain this advertisement.

California’s 2022 primary election was June 7, not June 2.

June 2 was California’s primary election date in 2026. But Escobedo wasn’t running for Assembly this year.

And his current advertisement doesn’t say Assembly.

It says:

“Gabe Escobedo for City Council 2026.”

So where did June 2 come from?

Was it simply a typographical error?

Was an old template used?

Who designed the advertisement?

Who proofread it?

Who approved the final copy?

Did anyone notice the election date before the advertisement was published?

There may be a perfectly innocent explanation.

But shouldn’t voters be able to ask?

Details Matter at City Hall

Maybe getting an election date wrong on an advertisement seems insignificant.

But isn’t attention to detail exactly what we should expect from people asking to serve on the Santa Barbara City Council?

Councilmembers are responsible for reviewing budgets, staff reports, contracts, labor agreements, development projects, fee increases, and multimillion-dollar expenditures.

A date matters.

A decimal point matters.

A funding source matters.

And a sentence buried on page 100 of a staff report can matter just as much as the headline on page one.

Santa Barbara’s recent budget problems demonstrate why.

During June’s difficult budget deliberations, Councilmember Kristen Sneddon said she was surprised by how contingency reserves had been used in previous years to help balance the budget. Councilmember Eric Friedman responded that he, Mayor Randy Rowse and Councilmember Mike Jordan had voted against the previous year’s budget because they were concerned about exactly that problem. Santa Barbara News-Press

Sneddon subsequently clarified that she knew reserves were declining and said her surprise concerned the failure to follow previous Council direction to replenish $2 million in reserves. Noozhawk

Either way, isn’t there an important lesson here?

Shouldn’t council members know exactly what they are voting for before they vote?

No More “Surprises”

Santa Barbara ultimately adopted an approximately $730 million FY2027 all-funds budget on June 30.

City Administrator Kelly McAdoo acknowledged that reserves had been depleted over the years and said continued fiscal discipline would be necessary both to balance future budgets and replenish those reserves. City of Santa Barbara

So shouldn’t we be asking every candidate:

When you vote for a budget, will you know whether ongoing expenditures exceed ongoing revenues?

When you approve employee contracts, will you calculate their costs beyond the first year?

When you approve a new program, will you ask what it will cost five years from now?

When staff recommends spending money from reserves, will you know what will be left afterward?

And when something doesn’t add up, will you ask questions before casting your vote?

Those questions are particularly relevant because Escobedo isn’t running as someone new to public decision-making.

He currently serves on the Santa Barbara Unified School District Board. He previously served on Santa Barbara’s Planning Commission and Community Formation Commission. Santa Barbara News-Press

His campaign says Santa Barbara residents deserve a City Hall that is responsible with their tax dollars. Gabe Escobedo for City Council

Good.

Then shouldn’t voters examine the record?

What About the City’s Deficit?

At a recent District 6 forum, candidates were specifically asked about Santa Barbara’s depleted reserves.

Escobedo proposed offering retirement incentives and determining whether some vacant City positions actually need to be filled.

He also proposed forgiving or suspending first-year license fees for Downtown businesses. Santa Barbara News-Press

That creates another set of questions.

Why Downtown businesses only?

If eliminating a City fee helps a new business on State Street survive, why wouldn’t the same reasoning apply to a small business opening on Milpas Street, De la Vina or Upper State?

How much revenue would the City lose?

Which fees would be waived?

For how long?

And with Santa Barbara trying to replenish depleted reserves, where would that lost revenue be replaced?

Again, those aren’t accusations.

They’re budget questions.

And shouldn’t we want councilmembers who ask budget questions before voting?

What About His School Board Record?

There is another record worth examining.

Escobedo currently serves on a school board that has faced significant deficits, reductions and layoffs.

At that same September forum, reporting noted that Escobedo previously voted to issue preliminary layoff notices to 85 teachers. Santa Barbara News-Press

That doesn’t mean one board member caused the school district’s financial problems. Declining enrollment, expiring one-time funding, compensation increases, and other expenses all contributed.

But Escobedo has cast votes involving public money.

So what budgets did he approve?

What employee compensation increases did he approve?

What were the district’s reserves when he joined the board?

What are they now?

And when did the board first know reductions would become necessary?

Those are questions we will continue examining from the actual board records.

Back to June 2

Which brings us back to that little advertisement.

Perhaps “June 2” is nothing more than a mistake.

Mistakes happen.

But City Council decisions can involve tens of millions of taxpayer dollars, and correcting those mistakes isn’t as easy as correcting an advertisement.

So before November 3, perhaps voters should ask something larger than why the wrong election date appeared:

Who checks the details?

Who asks questions when the numbers don’t add up?

Who reads beyond the executive summary?

Who asks where the money will come from before voting to spend it?

And most importantly:

Can Santa Barbara afford another councilmember who is surprised after the decision has already been made?

Maybe the June 2 date has a simple explanation.

Let’s hear it.

Because whether we’re talking about an election date, a City budget, or millions of dollars in public spending, shouldn’t Santa Barbara expect its elected representatives to get the important details right before they act?

That seems like a question worth asking before November 3.

•••

DYK extras:

#1- Barry Liker, since no gifts were allowed at your party—and you’ve been asking me for months to start writing again—I can’t think of a better 90th birthday gift than to dedicate my return to “Did You Know?...”, to you. Happy 90th Birthday, my friend!

#2- Did you buy your tickets for SPOTLIGHT tonight at the Lobero? Find your discount code below:

As Greg Lukianoff, the CEO of FIRE—who will be speaking at the Lobero this Thursday, October 8—noted when the rankings were released: “The overall state of free speech on campus is grim.” This is an understatement. Despite giving rise to the free-speech movement in the 1960s, UC Berkeley now gets an “F” from FIRE

for its lack of commitment to free expression. Sadly, it is hardly alone. Of the 27 California colleges ranked by FIRE, only two received passing grades.

18 other schools, in addition to UC Berkley, received Fs

Santa Barbara is lucky—for the very first time—to have FIRE CEO Greg Lukianoff

at the Lobero (Yes, it is air-conditioned!) tonight at 7pm—Free Speech Under Fire: Greg Lukianoff on the New Age of Censorship: Greg Lukianoff - Spotlight SB - Lobero Theatre. Greg’s topics will be ripped from today’s headlines because, as we are all aware, there is no shortage of free-speech issues to discuss.

This will be interactive with much audience participation so, YES, we want our supporters to come which is why I want to remind you of the discount promo code we provided very early on: SPEECH. Tickets start at just $34, but we really do want our Spotlight Supporters to add to the discussion so please take advantage of the discount and attend.

Community Calendar:

Election Deniers: Corruption Starts at School

Wed, 07 Oct 2026 13:30:28 GMT

Who is Teaching Your Child Morals and Values?

Character Starts Young. It is often said that politics are downstream of culture. Long before someone runs for office or decides whether an election result is acceptable, somebody teaches that person right from wrong.

So perhaps the better question is simpler: Are honorable adults born that way, or are children taught honesty, fairness, courage, self-control, and respect for rules until those qualities become character?

Santa Barbara’s Bigger Warning Sign

Earlier this year, The Santa Barbara Independent reported that Santa Barbara County ranked fourth highest in California for juvenile arrests, at roughly twice the statewide rate. Parent groups have warned for years about what is commonly called the school-to-prison pipeline.

Could one rigged elementary-school election really matter?

Children don’t learn by watching adults, right!

Remember the old sayings: “Do as I say, not as I do” and “Rules for thee, but not for me.”

Election Deniers

Which brings us to Washington Elementary.

Principal Arielle Curry is now on administrative leave, coincidentally, after parents alleged she disregarded the results of a student election and had her own child announced as president despite another student receiving substantially more votes.

SBUSD spokesperson Ed Zuchelli confirmed Curry had been placed on leave but declined to disclose the reason.

It feels a little like watching Dr. Fauci take the Fifth.

A screenshot shared with parents shows 194 votes. The leading candidate received 38.1% (74 votes). Curry’s child received 26.3% (51 votes), while the third-place candidate received 22.2% (43 votes).

Yet parents say the student with 51 votes was announced president over the school PA system.

So, if the election results we were shown were false, why was Curry placed on leave after parent complaints?

Apparently, election denial now has an elementary-school division.

Maybe this is where the No Kings crowd learned to question election results.

Apparently, 74 Is Not Greater Than 51

Perhaps we should go easy on the arithmetic. Only 37% of California students met the state math standard in 2024–25, while just 48% met the English-language arts standard. Yet roughly 95% graduate high school.

Yes, that math doesn’t exactly add up either.

Still, I’m reasonably confident 74 is greater than 51.

So how does a candidate trailing by nearly **12 percentage points (23 actual votes)** become president?

I understand this is California, so perhaps we’re still waiting for ballots to roll in from students who graduated and moved out of state years ago.

Welcome to Civics Class

Parents also allege that several teachers supporting Curry discussed retaliation against the family that questioned the election outcome, including trying to create professional problems for the parent.

If all of this proves true, imagine the lesson these children received: work hard, prepare your speech, campaign, win the most votes and lose anyway.

Wait, is this a Trump kid? Did somebody just yell “rigged election”?

Ask what happened and suddenly you become the problem. Perhaps you get labeled an “election denier” or a “threat to democracy” for asking why the candidate with the most votes didn’t win.

What Are Our Schools Teaching?

For decades, parents dropped their children at school believing the adults inside were teaching more than reading, writing, and arithmetic. We assumed they were reinforcing honesty, fairness, integrity, self-control, and basic human decency.

Maybe we should stop assuming.

SBUSD has already faced a public fight over the Christian Good News Club, whose supporters said they were stonewalled and denied fair access while the club was excluded from a district-managed enrichment program because it was religiously oriented.

Whatever your theology, who is shaping the moral character of our children?

In “Decay of Santa Barbara,” I noted a Barna Research identified the Santa Barbara–San Luis Obispo corridor as one of America’s most “post-Christian” regions, ahead of several large cities commonly associated with cultural and social decay.

Maybe that has nothing to do with anything.

Maybe it does.

But when a community distances itself from traditional moral instruction while ranking fourth highest for juvenile arrests, parents have every right to ask what is filling the vacuum.

And seriously, what is so offensive about teaching children to treat others as they want to be treated, do not steal, do not kill, honor their parents, tell the truth, control themselves, and respect others?

You don’t have to be Christian to recognize those are solid rules for building decent human beings.

The question is not whether children are being taught values. They are. The question is whose values they are learning.

Character Is Revealed by Power

Children do not learn integrity from hallway posters. They learn by watching adults; how they treat others, whether personal interests come before what is right, and whether rules still matter when following them becomes inconvenient.

Perhaps that helps explain why we increasingly see people resist federal authorities when laws they dislike are enforced. The lesson becomes simple: rules matter when they restrain someone else but become optional when they interfere with what we want.

Character is revealed when you have the power to bend the rules for your own benefit and choose not to.

The Lesson Children Will Remember

Maybe politics really is downstream of culture, and maybe culture begins much earlier with the examples children see from adults entrusted with guiding them.

Children may forget the speeches and who served as student body president. But they will remember whether the adults around them played fair.

Scripture puts it more simply:

“The integrity of the upright shall guide them: but the perverseness of transgressors shall destroy them.” (Proverbs 11:3)

So perhaps every parent should be asking:

Who is teaching your child morals and values—and what are they teaching when the children are watching?

Community Calendar:

Open Letter to Kelly McAdoo

Tue, 06 Oct 2026 13:30:14 GMT

I am writing to point out some problems with your management of the recent Amendment of Title 31 and Adoption of the State Street Master Plan.

The new amended Title 31 has no sunset date. According to the City Attorney, Title 31 is the legal mechanism by which the City Council can continue to ban automobile traffic on State Street. By passing this version of Title 31 the City of Santa Barbara is asserting it can keep cars off State Street forever, with no limits, barring future Council action.

Since we have discussed this issue in person, and you have received copies of both my City Ethics Complaint from September 2023, and my Grand Jury Referral documents from that same month, I know you are aware of the ethical and procedural irregularities in the passage of the original Title 31 stemming from the actions of Councilmember Kristen Sneddon, State Street Master Planner Tess Harris, and City Staff member Sarah Clark.

Suffice it to say Sneddon and Harris both lied to and misled the HLC Commissioners and the public and City Council in 2023. The creation of Title 31 was based on lies and subterfuge.

By codifying a limitless new Title 31 you have enabled the City Council to keep our Main Street closed forever. It also, again, illegally changes and restricts the HLC’s City Charter powers with regard to the State Street Master Plan.

You have allowed the Council to do so without ever having to cast a clear and transparent vote on the closure of State Street to traffic. Why?

Our Main Street has been closed for six years. You have been here for just over two years. You have no sense of the history and traditions of our city. Your children and grandchildren have not grown up here participating in the Old Spanish Days Fiesta Parade, or the Christmas Parade.

You have no real ties to this place.

And it shows.

Those of us who have helped build and maintain this city and Downtown over decades and generations deserve to know how each current councilmember and mayoral candidate would vote on a simple transparent open/close vote before we implement the new, never-ending Title 31.

You have carefully engineered at least two, maybe more, informal “hands raised,” polls at Council to see where councilmembers stand on allowing automobile traffic back on State Street. Each time it looked like four hands were raised in favor of continuing the ban on cars. Each time you announced that it looked like there was a “consensus” and subsequently removed any discussion of cars at any time from the Master Plan discussion.

Kelly, it would seem you do not know the meaning of the word “consensus.” Generally, “consensus” is defined as “unanimous” or a “general agreement” with no serious opposition.

That was not case at all.

And, I think you know it.

You have protected them from such a public vote. This is a political act. Especially in an election year, when two current council members are running for mayor. How is this not an “in kind” campaign contribution? And how is it serving the Santa Barbara voters?

How is it possible that you and the City Council can commit the City to a project that will cost well over $100 million without a clear vote on the basic circulation function of the roadway?

About “Politics”

I have been in business in Santa Barbara since 1981. I have known and worked with numerous City Councils and at least five former City Administrators. Each of those previous City Administrators made a big effort to avoid “politics” in their professional dealings. While polite and professional, they would not have catered to agenda-driven special interest groups like Strong Towns SB or Friends of State Street.

You have put your thumb on the scale in other ways. During early Downtown Santa Barbara Business Improvement Association discussions, the Board passed a unanimous motion to formally ask the City Council to re-open State Street to traffic while the Master Plan was still being worked on. You intervened and told Executive Committee members that a full reopening would be too much to ask and would be rejected by the City Council.

For some reason, the Executive Committee followed your recommendation and changed the City Council request to a “one-way” re-opening.

Without a vote of the full Board.

Again, a clear conflict of interest. And a “political” act. You were telling a Private Property/Business Owners association what to do, and how to do it, in a way that you thought would be “politically” palatable.

Due respect, that is not your job.

Permanently closing State Street to traffic will be a long-term disaster. We have over 60 years of history in the U.S. detailing the failure of such efforts. Even the Master Plan Consultant Stefanos Polyzoides warns in his presentations that, “90% of all streets in the country that had transformed their main streets into pedestrian walkable environments ended up failing, and ended up opening back up to traffic.”

What kind of people would risk $100+million with those odds?

This failure will be on your watch.

Community Calendar:

PURELY POLITICAL Mid-Term

Mon, 05 Oct 2026 13:31:23 GMT

Why We Must Stay (and Vote) with President Trump

There are people who voted for Donald Trump once, twice, even three times who – if you believe the polls (and that is a stretch) – have decided they are not going to vote Republican this time around. They are supposedly going to vote for the “Democratic Socialists of America” (DSA).

What?

Really?

Who are those people?

Are you one?

If that is indeed the case (and I’m having trouble believing that), here is what you have apparently been convinced of:

Democrats such as the smarmy “Doctor” Abdul El-Sayed, a self-described “lifelong Michigander,” is – according to his website – “taking the fight to the billionaire class.”

Not sure what “fight” that is, but hey, even would-be terrorist candidates are allowed a little hyperbole, aren’t they?

“Life in Michigan has become too hard. And too expensive. Abdul if fighting to fix that,” his election website states.

Really?

By doing what? Voting for and/or promoting all the crap the newly formed DSA and his Democrat friends have thrown at you for the past, oh say, forty years?

If one is to believe the pollsters and pundits, you, the voter, are so ignorant of past and recent history that you now believe that the party that brought you 20% inflation, along with tens of millions “asylum seekers” pouring across our southern border, is now ready and willing to roll up their collective sleeves to remedy the situation caused during the four short (and ugly) years of the Biden administration.

I don’t believe you the voter are that clueless.

But I could be wrong.

Here’s another reason you may be using to turn your back on the president:

“He has brought us into war again.”

Well, yeah, the timing sucks, that’s for sure. And that “four to six weeks” is going on a year.

But, don’t forget, this “country” – Iran – has, for the past forty-seven years or so, been inhabited by enormous numbers of sad, angry, and misbegotten women who apparently love to wear their black chadors that cover everything but their faces in order to go shopping, and who make themselves available to “protest” against anything and everything the U.S. and/or Israel do or might do, shouting “Death To America” and “Death To Israel” on cue. They do this pretty much every time the men of Iran tell them to gather for yet another demonstration of hate for America and Israel.

And, let’s be fair, a little “Two Minutes of Hate” a la George Orwell has often proved useful.

Here’s how Mr. Orwell describes this mandatory daily procedure in his “1984” fiction novel:

“The ritual begins at 11:00 AM, typically in workplaces like the Ministry of Truth. A harsh, grinding screech erupts from the large telescreen, followed by the image of Emmanuel Goldstein, the “Enemy of the People” and former Party leader turned primal traitor. He is depicted with a clever but despicable, sheep-like face, delivering a rapid, mocking speech that denounces Big Brother and advocates for basic freedoms (speech, press, assembly). Behind his face, hostile enemy soldiers (such as Eurasian troops) march menacingly on the screen.

“Within thirty seconds, the crowd dissolves into an uncontrollable, frenzied hysteria. People scream curses, leap up and down, hiss, and throw objects (like heavy dictionaries) at the screen to drown out Goldstein’s maddening voice.”

According to Orwell, it works every time.

But, enough about Hate. Here’s why folks like me are standing by this Trump presidency regardless of his recent missteps:

The Long (and Growing) List of Accomplishments and Changes:

President Trump managed to escort three conservative (more or less, but certainly not liberal) Supreme Court Justices (Neil M. Gorsuch, Brett M. Kavanaugh, Amy Coney Barrett) onto the Court, along with 54 conservative appellate judges.

The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 slashed the corporate rate to 21 percent, doubled the standard deduction and child tax credit, and zeroed out the ACA (Affordable Care Act) individual-mandate penalty. The July 2025 “One Big Beautiful Bill” locked in the individual provisions that were set to expire and added no tax on tips, overtime, and Social Security, for seniors.

The Big, Beautiful Bill represents the greatest durable change to federal tax policy in a generation.

Within a month of being sworn in as the 47^th President, Donald Trump reduced the number of illegal border crossings to, essentially, ZERO. There is no more “Catch and Release” at the border, and asylum claims are looked at thoroughly and suspiciously. Perhaps as many as three million of the eleven million souls who crossed into the United States during the Biden administration’s “Open Border” fiasco have been sent back or have returned to their country of origin… so far.

The “Abraham Accords” of 2020 finally began to normalize Israel’s relationship with other Mideast countries; the Gaza ceasefire with Hamas brought all October 7 massacre hostages back to Israel – dead or alive; The U.S. Air Force in a “Midnight Hammer” action, removed any possibility of Iran being able to restart its nuclear program undetected; In January, 2026, in another lightning-fast and unexpected move, U.S. troops captured and removed Venezuela’s sitting president (Nicolas Maduro), freeing that country’s political class to open itself up to the U.S. and the rest of the world, and in the process, significantly weakened Russian and Chinese influence in this hemisphere.

The Trump Administration rolled back the international classification of Carbon Dioxide (CO2) and Water Vapor as dangerous “greenhouse gases,” since both are requirements of life as we know it. Under President Trump’s watch, the United States is now Energy Independent and has become the chief producer of energy in the World.

The U.S. Space Force has begun to play an increasingly important role in the conquest of space.

The U.S. federal workforce has begun to shrink, saving all taxpayers extra taxes and at the same time freeing up formerly tied-up entrepreneurial projects.

Memphis, Tennessee, New Orleans, Louisiana, and Washington, D.C. are among the cities to have taken up President Trump’s offer of federal help to make those cities “safer” for the average citizen. Crime rates had dramatically been reduced in all three.

Bye-bye “Gender Identity”

It’s not over yet (I recently stopped in the middle of applying for some personal medical information when I was asked what my “preferred pronouns” were), but that bizarre development is slowly being removed and being tossed into the dustbin of history.

Title IX mandates now only recognize biological “males” or “females” and have stopped treating “gender identity” as a substitute for sex.

Though certain states such as California have yet to comply with federal guidelines, many no longer permit school administrators to hide a student’s new or changed sexual orientation from parents.

Before Trump, one could be charged with “sex discrimination” by refusing to refer to one’s child by his/her “preferred” gender status. During Biden’s Reign of Terror, a parent had no legal right to either contest, discover, or challenge any change in their child’s sexual proclivity.

On February 5, 2025, Executive Order 14201 (“Keeping Men Out of Women’s Sports”) tied federal education money to sex-based eligibility. The NCAA changed policy the next day; the U.S. Olympic body followed. Investigations and settlement deals pushed campuses to restore sex-separated teams and, in some cases, apologize to female athletes.

During President Trump’s first term, he required most troops to serve in the sex they were born as. Biden reversed that. The second term again barred transgender service and removed “gender ideology” from service academies.

The Trump Administration ended federal Medicaid and CHIP funding for most “gender-affirming” medical care for minors. K–12 orders treat social transition (pronouns, opposite-sex facilities, hiding status from parents) as something schools may be punished for facilitating. During the Biden era, it was parents who had to worry.

By virtue of President Trump’s common sense approach to governance, we can all once again tell off-color or politically incorrect jokes without fear of prosecution. Because of President Trump, DEI (Diversity! Equity! Inclusion!) as a policy in hiring at the federal level is on its way to the Dustbin of History.

Because of President Trump, there’ll be no “Wealth Tax.”

I could go on, but the significance of the Trump Presidency and its effects on personal freedom and liberty cannot be overlooked.

I’ll be casting my votes on November 3^rd as if Donald Trump were on the ballot, and I’ll be voting for anyone who promises to support him and his policies.

I hope you’ll do the same.

Vote for Change

Sun, 04 Oct 2026 13:31:32 GMT

Vote for Change

Some people vote with their feet; others don’t vote at all. Speaking of CA, more than ten million people have left in the last sixteen years. Yes, you read that right. Ten million.

Why did so many people leave? The high cost of housing? Taxes? Poorly performing schools? Failing roads and infrastructure? Crime? A struggling economy? Problems associated with the homeless, despite tens of billions of dollars spent on the same? An oppressive and corrupt state government?

Yes, to all the above.

According to the Public Policy Institute of CA, “Much has been made of the California exodus to other states, and rightly so. This migration, over the decades, has the power to reshape the state. (That is an understatement, if I have ever heard one). From 2010 through 2024 almost 10 million people moved from California to other states.” Of course, many more have left since then.

Much of the replacement population is comprised of immigrants, legal and otherwise, and their children. On average, they are poorer and less educated than the people they replaced. Hence, CA, along with Louisiana, has the highest poverty rates in America.

According to various polls, another one-third of the state’s population would also like to leave.

I would offer an alternative. Vote for change. And, by that, I mean quit voting for Democrats who are, by their complete control of the state for the past 20 years, driving it into a political and economic abyss.

Here are my personal ballot recommendations:

Steve Hilton for Governor.

Gloria Romero for Lt. Governor.

Don Wagner for Secretary of State.

Michael Gates for Attorney General.

Herb Morgan for State Controller.

Jennifer Hawks for State Treasurer.

Sonja Shaw for Superintendent of Public Education.

Bob Smith Congress CD 24

Sari Domingues State Assembly 30

Shannon Kessler State Assembly 37

Maribel Aguilera for 5^th District Supervisor

A word of caution on the ballot propositions. As you would expect from a third-world banana republic, our state Attorney General distorts the meaning and intent of ballot measures with a title that is purposefully confusing to voters. In many instances, the title of the ballot measure does not accurately reflect the proposed outcome of a yes or no vote. In other words, voter beware!

Ballot Propositions:

NO on Proposition 1 Authorizes Bonds for Housing Affordability Programs.

Vote No. Why? California needs to reform land use regulations to enable more affordable housing to be built, rather than to continue borrowing us into oblivion, as borrowing actually makes housing less affordable.

NO on Proposition 2 Increases California’s Rainy Day Fund

Vote No! Why? This measure simply assures more government spending while ignoring existing budget deficits.

NO on Proposition 3 Provides Permanent Funding for Schools and Health Care by Extending Existing Tax on High Incomes.

Vote No. Why? Prop. 3 makes temporary income taxes permanent while Sacramento wastes billions on failed programs instead of enacting voters’ priorities.

NO on Proposition 4 Repeals Prohibition Against Public Funding of Election Campaigns.

Vote No. Why? Instead of fixing potholes and the like, this measure would use tax dollars on political campaigns.

NO on Proposition 5 Changes Recall Election Process for Statewide Officers.

Vote No. Why? Voters should be able to recall and choose the replacement for the office should the recall succeed. Proposition 5 limits voters’ right to select a replacement for recalled officials. Instead, when statewide elected officials are recalled, other politicians would choose a replacement.

NO on Proposition 37 Creates Loan Program for Middle-Income Buyers of Qualified New Homes.

Vote No. Why? This is a “nice try, but no cigar” proposition. It can help with the down payment but at the cost of having both a first and second mortgage from the onset! The one benefit? The monies for this program will not come from taxpayers but the private sector. The limitation? Private lenders will surely require a really high interest rate for holding the second mortgage.

NO on Proposition 38 Authorizes Bonds for Immunology Medical Research.

Vote No. Why? Again, the state wants to borrow money (over $8 billion) instead of budgeting for the same. In this case, for research. However, half of the funds automatically go to one research facility instead of letting all researchers compete for the money based upon merit, innovation, and promise.

Yes on Proposition 39 (Warning, very deceptive title!) Prohibits Citizens from Voting Unless They Present Government-Issued Identification.

Vote Yes. Why? This measure allows qualified voters to vote upon presenting a valid ID. This measure is supported by 80% of all voters across all party lines because it ensures election integrity.

NO on Proposition 40 Imposes One-Time Tax on Certain Taxpayers.

Vote No. Why? This is the so-called billionaire’s tax, which, if enacted, will eventually cause all taxes to rise. How so? Because most billionaires have already left the state, our legislators will have to raise taxes on the rest of us to make up for the lost revenue arising from this measure.

Yes on Proposition 41 (Another title meant to confuse) Prohibits New State Taxes That Exclude Revenues from State Spending Limit. Requires Audits for New State Special Taxes.

Vote Yes. Why? For example, billions of tax dollars have flowed into programs like homelessness, and nobody knows where the money went or if it accomplished anything! Prop. 41 requires the independent State Auditor to conduct public audits of programs funded by new taxes—so we get more transparency, more accountability, and better outcomes for taxpayers.

YES on Proposition 42 Prohibits New State Personal Property Taxes and Certain Retroactive State Taxes.

Vote Yes. Why? California’s Constitution currently allows the Legislature to tax your savings, including for retirement and regular savings—even though you already paid taxes on that money when you earned it! Prop. 42 protects Californians from this double taxation.

YES on Proposition 43 (Very deceptive title!) Limits Voters’ Ability to Raise Revenues for Local Government Services.

Vote Yes. Why? This measure preserves Prop. 13! Prop. 43 protects taxpayers by restoring Proposition 13’s two-thirds vote requirement to pass local special taxes, including sales taxes, real estate taxes, and utility taxes.

NO on Proposition 44 Requires Community Health Clinics Spend 90% Of Revenue on Program Services.

Vote No. Why? Prop. 44 is a dangerous measure by a greedy union that will shut down hundreds of community health clinics and eliminate vital patient services for millions of Californians. The goal of the measure is to create leverage over employers in labor negotiations.

YES on Proposition 45 Modifies Environmental Review for Certain Projects.

Vote Yes. Why? FINALLY, a proposition that amends the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) to expedite environmental review for certain projects (including most housing, transportation, water, and health projects) by setting deadlines to complete environmental review and resolve lawsuits challenging project approvals. Amending CEQA is the ONLY way to lower project costs and increase affordability in our state.

Community Calendar

Got a Santa Barbara event for our community calendar? Fenkner@sbcurrent.com

Extreme Weather Update

Sat, 03 Oct 2026 13:31:35 GMT

El Nino is coming. Be afraid. Be very afraid…

…Not.

Many of you may remember a Saturday Night Live skit by dearly departed comedian Chris Farley as “El Nino.” He played a professional wrestling character that represented that weather system by saying: “I am El Nino…. Which is Spanish for … The Nino!”

That was 1997. Thirty years ago. And yes, we had aberrant weather systems even then. Can you believe it? Weather?

Oh, and yes, we are told by our weather “experts” that we will likely have another El Nino coming soon… to a California Central Coast near you.

Just like it always has.

Where did the term “El Nino” come from? Answer: South American fishermen/women in the 1600s. It was to honor the baby Jesus (El Nino) because the weather phenomenon occurred around Christmas.

They welcomed it because a good El Nino usually brought a lot of much-needed rain.

I’m pretty sure those south-of-the-border folks didn’t drive 1963 Chevy Impala SS low-riders at the time… so you can’t blame it on fossil fuels. The doomsayers, however, try. Oh, how they try.

But as Bob Dylan brilliantly observed, “You don’t need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows.”

And you can’t blame the weather on anything but…. wait for it… the weather.

Still, it’s good to have a warning. And it’s good to heed that warning and prepare.

But there will be those who will blame all this on “man-made climate change.”

What is important here, is to acknowledge that the weather changes…. as it always has…. And that as humans we need to be vigilant, and adapt.

And take advantage of it.

We remember the Montecito mudslides in 2018. That was a horrible event. People died. Homes were destroyed. The mud and water crossed the 101. It was seen as an epic event that had never been seen before.

Except it had been seen before.

Similar “debris flows” had happened many times before in recorded history. It’s not something new. The blame can fall in many places, but… not on “man-made climate change”

No indeed.

Remember the land/mud slides in La Conchita in ‘95… and then again in 2005?

How about all the slides constantly plaguing Coast Highway 1 along the Big Sur? That road has been closed, more than open, for as long as I can remember.

Weather happens. The earth reacts. And people are affected.

This isn’t just about rain and mud. It’s about everything that occurs naturally. Heat. Cold. Drought. Wind. Earthquakes. Fire. You name it.

My parents had to evacuate their home on the La Vista Ridge during the Painted Cave fire on Route 154 in 1990. Yes, it was started by a human…. But fueled by years of neglect of not cleaning out the vegetation in the canyon, followed by a “sundowner” wind.

Weather.

And then there was the Pacific Palisades fire that, again, was started by a human but festered for days and ultimately destroyed an entire region because we didn’t clean out the brush and store enough water in the reservoirs to put out the flames. And the natural sundowner winds didn’t help things there either.

Weather.

And if you think that the recent hot (“record breaking”) weather is due to something “man” created… records show that in 1859 the temperature apparently reached 133 degrees in Santa Barbara; birds fell from the sky. Santa Barbara claimed the record for the hottest recorded temperature on this continent until 134 degrees was recorded in Death Valley in the 1930s. But if you scoff at that because perhaps the temperature gauges weren’t accurate then… consider that “record” temperatures have occurred ever since. Most not during a time when “man” could have had anything to do with it.

Weather.

But it’s fashionable to blame humans.

We’re going to be hearing lots of howling and wailing and blaming for the weather to come… which it always does. And maybe we’ll have some heavy stuff this year. Maybe not.

What I do know is that we won’t take advantage of it here in California. God’s gifts… or Mother Nature’s, if you will. Rain…. which for the low information voter is the same as “water.” And we need water. We need it for us humans. We need it to grow crops. We need it to put out fires.

We need to store it. Then use it to our benefit. Not some stupid smelt fish.

But once again, we’ll have to listen to doomsayers blaming everything on us. We’re the cause of weather. We need to curb our reliance on fossil fuels and gas-powered autos and using a leaf blower to blow a leaf all the way to Lompoc and yada yada yada….

Here’s my prayer.

Accept life as it happens. Use it to your advantage. Go with the flow.

And for the doomsayers… shut up. We don’t need your negativity.

Celebrate weather. And life. It’s all a gift… If you use it as intended.

Oh, and vote for common sense this November. Please.

And kick the doomsayers out.

Weather or not!

Community Calendar

Got a Santa Barbara event for our community calendar? Fenkner@sbcurrent.com

Where Has Congressman Salud Carbajal Been for the Last 10 Years?

Fri, 02 Oct 2026 13:31:47 GMT

I have lived on the Central Coast for 21 years. I am Latino. I am a Democrat, and for the first time in my life, I no longer feel represented by the Central Coast Democrat Party I have always called home.

That feeling has a name: Salud Carbajal. He has represented our district in Congress for a decade, and in that decade I have watched our immigrant neighbors grow more afraid, not less. I have watched three close friends pack up and leave for Mexico because they could no longer live with the fear of deportation hanging over their families. One of my closest friend’s fathers achieved his dream of owning his own restaurant in Santa Barbara three years ago. He was recently deported, leaving behind his wife and two young children to keep the family restaurant running without him.

There is no “American Dream” left for families like his. And through all of it, the one person with the actual power to fight for immigration reform in Washington has been, as far as I can tell, MIA: Missing in Action.

Don’t take my word for it. Go to Congress.gov yourself and look up his record. What you will find is thin. The clearest, most concrete accomplishment tied to his name is a bill to rename a Santa Maria post office after Larry Lavagnino.

That’s it.

Meanwhile, he recently praised himself publicly for the passage of a bipartisan housing bill, yet when you check the roll call, his own vote isn’t there. A congressman can’t take credit for a law he didn’t even vote for. If I’m wrong about any of this, I invite him to show us the record. Until then, the record speaks for itself, and it says he has not delivered a single meaningful step toward immigration reform for the community he claims to represent.

Here is what makes this worse: he is protected.

The Democratic Party of the Central Coast keeps propping him up, no questions asked, while local Latino voices who tell the truth about this party get pushed out and attacked.

This is a party that talks about caring for Latino families while pushing higher taxes, making it harder to build housing so our cost of living keeps climbing, and blocking State Street in ways that choke off the small businesses our community depends on. When someone local dares to point that out, they go after them.

When a congressman does nothing for ten years, they hand him the endorsement anyway.

That is not an accident. That is a party protecting power, not people.

What Happened to the “Dreamers?”

I want to be clear about what I am not saying. I am not saying I will turn against the Democratic Party. I am saying it’s time we start holding our local Democratic Central Committee accountable. I am saying stop accepting a Latino face on a ballot as a substitute for a Latino agenda.

We are the majority of voters in this county. That is not a talking point. That is leverage we have refused to use. It is time we start asking every candidate, of any party, the same question: what have you actually built for this community, not with your title, but with your hands and your record?

DACA students should have had a clear path to citizenship years ago. This should be the easiest fight of Salud Carbajal’s career; he came to this country as an immigrant himself. He knows exactly what our Dreamers are living through. There are no more excuses left for him to hide behind. So I’ll ask the question again, plainly: where has Congressman Salud Carbajal been?

While families in the Central Coast are being separated and our neighbors are living in fear, we deserve more than a plaque on a post office and a press release taking credit for votes he never cast.

I would like to see Salud debate Bob Smith. If Bob Smith is willing to step up to that challenge, Congressman Carbajal should be too. We deserve to see him come out and actually fight for the title he’s held for ten years, not just campaign on it from a distance.

Enough is enough. Latino voters, it is time we stand together and put people in office who have actually earned it through years of real work in our community, instead of politicians who are simply using our community to build a career.

I feel compelled to write this because I’m not sure I have a future here. I see clearly that the cost of living on the Central Coast is pushing people like me out, while the people in power get to enjoy a comfortable pension and job security for life, protected by a political structure here that was built to keep incumbents in office, not to serve working families like mine.

*****

Angel Rodriguez works in the restaurant business. His family immigrated from Mexico City. Angel attended SB schools and is the oldest in his family.

Community Calendar

Got a Santa Barbara event for our community calendar? Fenkner@sbcurrent.com

The City’s Own Numbers Say: “Reopen State Street”

Thu, 01 Oct 2026 13:30:51 GMT

For five years, the fight over closing State Street to cars has run on talking points. Boosters promised a European-style promenade; downtown merchants warned it would hollow out our commercial core. Rhetoric, though, doesn’t pay the rent or make payroll.

I wanted an answer in numbers, not spin. So I filed a California Public Records Act request (PRR-2026-00322) for ten years of the City’s sales tax receipts, district by district. Ten weeks and three delays later, the City released the certified figures compiled by its own consultant, HdL.

Here is what those figures show:

Of Santa Barbara’s eleven commercial districts, downtown State Street is the only one that is shrinking.

Every other district grew between 2019—the last full year before the closure—and 2025: the Waterfront (+33%), the Westside (+27%), the Airport area (+19%), the Funk Zone (+15%), Milpas (+14%), Mid State (+13%), Upper State (+6%), and the Mesa (+2%). Downtown State Street: +1% in nominal dollars. It actually collected fewer dollars in 2025 than it did in 2016. Strip out the roughly 25% inflation since 2019, and downtown has lost about a fifth of its real sales.

Upper State Street now out-earns our historic Central Business District.

The sharpest comparison is Coast Village Road, a walkable shopping street that stayed open to cars. Its sales tax revenue is up 42% since 2019 and 80% since 2016. One street kept its vehicle access and thrived. The other closed to cars and stalled.

What has the experiment cost?

Had downtown simply matched the 11.6% average growth of the other ten districts, downtown merchants would have rung up roughly $540 million more in sales over the past five years. That is half a billion dollars that would have covered rents and wages and kept beloved, multi-generational shops open. The City treasury lost about $5.4 million in sales tax revenue along the way—money that should have gone to police, road repair, and parks.

If anything, those figures are conservative. They leave out Measure C’s local sales tax, which roughly doubles the City’s loss; 2020’s COVID dip hit every district, not just downtown.

Meanwhile, the City keeps pouring money into consultant studies, traffic experiments, and a $96 million, multi-decade master plan for the same eight blocks—while the aging sewer and wastewater systems Measure C was sold to voters to fix wait their turn. Our priorities are upside down.

This is not a partisan issue. It doesn’t matter whether you lean left, right, or center.

If you care about working families and small businesses, this policy is starving them.

If you care about public safety and city services, it is draining the treasury.

If you care about the environment, forcing cars into longer idling detours around the perimeter while core infrastructure lapses helps no one.

We cannot wait 20 to 30 years for a master plan while downtown bleeds out. We need leadership that puts real infrastructure and economic sanity ahead of urban-design experiments. That is why a growing, cross-political coalition of residents, property owners, and small business operators is lining up behind Councilmember Eric Friedman and Monte Wilson. Both have looked at the data, listened to the community, and pledged to do what the evidence demands: restore vehicle circulation, protect safety for everyone on the street, fix core infrastructure, and reopen State Street.

The results of this five-year experiment are in, certified by the City’s own records. It is time to stop asking small businesses to sacrifice their livelihoods for a failed idea.

Follow the math.

Reopen State Street.

Fig. 1 — Same City, Same Six Years: Coast Village Road, open to cars, is up 42% since 2019. Downtown State Street, closed to cars, is up 1%—a real-terms loss of roughly 20% after inflation

.Fig. 2 — Ten Years of Sales Tax, Street by Street: Downtown State Street collects fewer sales-tax dollars than it did in 2016. Every other district in the city grew since 2019.

Fig. 3 — What Has the Closed Street Cost Us?: If downtown had matched the rest of the city’s growth, it would have generated about $5.4 million more in city sales tax—roughly $540 million in merchant sales—between 2020 and 2025.

Source for all three: City of Santa Barbara / HdL, “Historical Sales Tax by Geographic Area” (non-confidential release), obtained via CPRA request PRR-2026-00322, Sept 2026. Nominal dollars; inflation reference is approximate CPI-U change 2019–2025.

•••
Craig Saling is a multi-generational Santa Barbarian and the owner of Santa Barbara Cash Register, which support payment processing, point-of-sale systems, and camera security for local and national businesses.

------------------------------------------------------------

Community Calendar

Got a Santa Barbara event for our community calendar? Fenkner@sbcurrent.com

Newsom & California Legislators’ “Anti-Affordability” Campaign

Tue, 29 Sep 2026 13:30:58 GMT

California Governor Gavin Newsom created and exacerbated California’s affordability problems by his support of the Biden-Harris administration’s open borders policy that added millions of migrants to California while shutting down private industry, including builders, during COVID, and shutting refineries.

Imagine how “Anti-Affordability” (to coin a phrase) the bills passed by the California legislatures were for that same Governor Newsom to veto them.

The irony increases when considering that the primary theme of the Governor’s Democrat Party, besides of course the obligatory “hate Trump,” is “affordability,” while stacking the ballot with multiple thinly hidden Propositions trying to convince voters to voluntarily send more money to Sacramento.

Anti-Affordability

Governor Newsom, perhaps influenced by his ambitions after being term limited out of the governorship, showed he opposed his party’s “Anti-Affordability” approach by vetoing several bills that were passed by the California legislatures dominated by his Democrat Party.

The California State Senate has 29 Democrats, including Santa Barbarian Monique Limon as President pro Tempore, only 10 Republicans, and one vacancy.

The California State Assembly has 60 Democrats, including Santa Barbarian Gregg Hart, an only 19 Republicans, and one vacancy.

Newsom’s Vetoes

The Governor’s vetoed attempts by the current legislators to reverse some of Governor Jerry Brown’s reforms, known as PEPRA, that maintained benefits for current government workers and retirees but reduced them for future hires and made employees shoulder a larger share of the financial burden.

In the early 1990’s I was involved in negotiating the same type of structure that saved my company a great deal of money while protecting the benefits current employees had negotiated.

AB 1383

California legislators passed Assembly Bill (AB) 1383, which was sponsored by a raft of public employee unions, to:

—Lower the minimum retirement age for state and local public safety employees (police officers and firefighters) enrolled in CalPERS from 57 to 55.

—Increase Pension Formulas by allowing public safety unions to bargain locally for higher pension benefit formulas (such as increasing maximum accrual/multiplier rates, e.g., up to 3% at 55).

—Compensation Cap Adjustments in order to modify limits on pensionable compensation caps for workers not enrolled in Social Security.

The bill won nearly unanimous approval in the Legislature, but Newsom rejected it, saying it would cost too much.

The Governor added “I still recall — before PEPRA’s passage in 2012 — the alarming forecasts, the fierce criticism of public employees, and the growing pressure to eliminate defined benefit plans all together.”

“This is an era of California history I do not wish to repeat.”

AB 1729

AB 1729, another union-backed bill aimed at making it easier for state employees to work from home, was also vetoed by Governor Newsom.

After all, why should public employees have to pay for the increased price of commuting that their actions caused?

Although Newsom had sanctioned remote work during the COVID-19 pandemic, he has since cracked down, ordering state employees to work in their offices at least four days a week, with some exceptions.

AB 1729 provided that state agencies would need to provide a detailed, written explanation if they required employees to work in the office instead of teleworking.

Requiring a manager to write a “detailed” explanation for every employee on why they have to be in the office rather than requiring the employee to write an explanation why they should not, reminds me of the saying among employment lawyers “He who has the burden of proof loses.” You see, no matter how well you write the explanation there is a judge out there who will issue an injunction against you.

Senate Bill 954

Senate Bill 954 would have reinstated some of the California Environmental Quality Act regulations that the Governor and the Legislature had streamlined last year after rejecting environmentalists’ contentions that the 2025 overhaul went too far.

954 had many provisions, including restricting the “advanced manufacturing” exemption to final-tier operations (such as assembly or testing) rather than raw material processing, while implementing public health, environmental, labor, and tribal protection standards, that could prevent building projects.

In his veto message Governor Newsom called the 2025 action “a long-overdue overhaul to get California building again,” adding, “If implementation reveals problems, they should be addressed through targeted, evidence-based changes — not by pre-emptively rolling back our progress.”

Conclusion

Even Governor Newsom voted against the “Anti-Affordability” group.

Your turn to vote will be in October to November 3.