What if we have spent years blaming the wrong people?

What if the affordable-housing crisis was created less by landlords than by government policies that increased demand, restricted supply, expanded public spending, and then blamed property owners for the predictable result?

For years, living in California, I heard the same solutions: blame landlords, pass rent control, create another subsidy, increase regulation, and spend more public money.

But if those policies work, why do many of the same cities remain among America’s least affordable?

Santa Barbara: How Did We Get Here?

Recently, Edhat reported that Santa Barbara ranked 298th out of 300 cities selected by WalletHub for first-time home buyers and 299th for affordability.

That does not mean Santa Barbara had the highest home prices. WalletHub’s affordability ranking considers housing costs relative to local incomes, along with insurance, cost of living, cost per square foot, and property taxes.

That distinction matters.

Meanwhile, local left-wingers push for turning the city’s 108-acre Municipal Golf Course into an affordable housing mecca.

The proposed solutions focus on greater density, converting shopping centers into apartments, and now potentially sacrificing the municipal golf course, while giving far less attention to how Santa Barbara’s affordable-housing problem developed or to the forces affecting both supply and demand.

Defining the Problem

Santa Barbara’s central problem is not simply a shortage of housing at every price point. It is a shortage of housing that lower- and moderate-income residents can afford.

And that problem isn’t new. Local newspapers reported inadequate housing in 1920 and a severe shortage by 1948.

After more than a century of housing plans, mandates, subsidies, zoning policies, and government intervention, how are we doing?

And should the answer now be sacrificing public recreation or forcing mom and pop property owners to subsidize housing?

Muni is not an exclusive country club. It is one of the area’s limited affordable regulation 18-hole public golf courses, offering discounted local rates, $23 junior rounds, and established youth programs.

Once those 108 acres are developed, they are gone.

Before sacrificing public recreation, open space, or commercial centers, shouldn’t we first examine the policies affecting the supply of and demand for affordable housing?

Follow the Facts

Modern residential rent control is concentrated overwhelmingly in Democrat-controlled jurisdictions. During my research, I could not verify a Republican-controlled municipality that enacted a modern residential rent-control ordinance.

However, more than 30 states prohibit or restrict local governments from imposing rent control or rent stabilization.

So, let’s ask if rent control has worked.

A widely cited San Francisco study found affected landlords reduced rental housing supply by roughly 15 percent as units were converted, sold, or removed from the market. Researchers estimated the resulting reduction in supply increased rents for uncontrolled units by about 5.1 percent.

Rent control helped some existing tenants.

It also reduced rental housing supply and increased housing costs for others.

Government didn’t eliminate the cost.

It shifted it.

Then Affordable-Housing Demand Increased

From early 2021 through early 2024, illegal immigration increased dramatically as border encounters reached historic levels.

Democrats argued comprehensive immigration reform was necessary and introduced the U.S. Citizenship Act of 2021.

Despite controlling the presidency, the House, and a functional Senate majority, Democrat leadership never advanced its signature immigration bill to final passage.

Nor did Democrats rewrite President Bill Clinton’s Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996, which remains a cornerstone of federal immigration enforcement. That law created expedited removal, expanded mandatory detention, and broadened the offenses triggering deportation.

Both the Clinton and Obama administrations relied substantially on IIRIRA and related immigration laws to carry out deportations.

If lasting reform was truly the priority, why wasn’t it enacted?

Meanwhile, a 2026 Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas study concluded unauthorized immigrant-worker flows from 2021 through 2024 materially increased housing demand where housing supply could not respond quickly. Researchers estimated those flows accounted for roughly 30 percent of home-price growth and 20 percent of rent growth in the average metropolitan area studied.

The study does not conclude illegal immigration created the housing crisis. It concludes increased demand contributed to higher housing costs where supply remained constrained.

That is basic economics of supply and demand.

Now Combine the Policies

One policy reduced rental supply.

Another increased housing demand.

Many Democrat-run jurisdictions embracing rent control are also sanctuary or limited-cooperation jurisdictions providing taxpayer-funded services that illegal immigrants may access, including public education, medical care, shelters, legal assistance, and some housing programs.

Many illegal immigrants work in lower-wage occupations and therefore compete for lower-cost housing already in shortest supply.

That matters particularly in Santa Barbara because the problem being discussed is specifically the shortage of affordable housing.

California has been estimated to spend approximately $31 billion annually on costs associated with illegal immigrants.

Taxpayers foot the bill.

Perhaps that helps explain why California continues pressing communities such as Santa Barbara to permit higher-density development.

Why I Began Asking Questions

The more I watched what was happening locally, the more I questioned the motive behind these policies.

City leaders know the affordable-housing problem is not new. They know research has documented significant tradeoffs from rent control, including reduced rental supply and placing a financial burden on mom-and-pop property owners.

Yet they continue promoting it.

Why?

Is the goal simply to protect lower-income tenants?

Is it to win votes?

Or is it also intended to reduce housing costs for illegal immigrants competing for the same limited affordable housing?

After watching anti-ICE demonstrations, hearing local officials criticize federal immigration enforcement, and seeing hundreds of thousands in local taxpayer dollars directed toward legal and support services for immigrants affected by federal immigration enforcement, while housing costs are increasingly shifted onto private property owners, I began asking:

Are these policies really solving housing affordability, or are they protecting a political constituency at the expense of property owners and taxpayers?

The Pattern

Many of these same jurisdictions now face structural budget deficits, including Santa Barbara. Immigration is not the only factor. Pensions, inflation, employee compensation, homelessness programs, and debt all matter.

But public policy doesn’t operate in isolation.

When governments restrict rental supply, increase demand for affordable housing, expand public spending, and add regulatory costs, housing affordability and public finances both come under pressure.

Property owners are expected to provide below-market housing.

Taxpayers are expected to fund expanding public services.

Developers are expected to build despite increasing regulations and costs.

And now residents may be expected to surrender 108 acres of public recreational land.

Meanwhile, many of the same officials continue promising that one more law, one more subsidy, and one more spending program will solve this century-old problem that according to the Dallas Fed has been exacerbated by illegal immigration.

So, who bears greater responsibility for today’s affordable-housing crisis?

The landlord?

Or the policymaker?

At some point, we must stop asking why landlords fail to solve a government-created affordable-housing crisis.

We need to start asking why the politicians responsible are still being trusted to solve it.

Leave a comment

Share Santa Barbara Current

Subscribe now

Community Calendar:

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

How to promise affordable housing, create endless committees, and somehow make housing even more expensive.

What if the greatest obstacle to affordable housing isn’t the free market?

What if it’s the people promising to fix it?

And what if the easiest way to win votes isn’t by solving problems—but by finding someone else to blame?

Welcome to the City of Compassion.

Every election season the banners appeared.

“We care.”

“We’ll help.”

“We’re fighting for you.”

The people applauded.

Then came the annual tradition.

A promise.

Another promise.

Then another committee to study why the previous promises hadn’t worked.

The City loved committees.

Committees required consultants.

Consultants required studies.

Studies required more committees.

It was the only truly sustainable industry left.

The Miracle

One day the City unveiled its newest miracle.

“Affordable Housing!”

The Mayoral candidate stepped forward.

“I have the answer.”

“To address our one-hundred-year housing emergency…”

” …we declare a Rent Freeze!”

Thunderous applause.

One citizen slowly stood.

“Forgive me,”

“…if this has been an emergency for more than a century…”

“…what exactly makes it an emergency today?”

The room grew quiet.

After all…

By 1920, newspapers were already reporting that the supply of habitable housing did not meet demand.

By 1948, the local paper described a “severe housing shortage.”

By the 1970s, reports showed large numbers of households were already struggling to afford rent.

Generation after generation…

Committee after committee…

Housing plan after housing plan…

The emergency somehow survived them all.

An old carpenter quietly raised his hand.

“Wonderful idea.”

“Will the City reduce property taxes?”

“No.”

“Permit fees?”

“No.”

“Will you shorten approval times?”

“No.”

“Lower development costs?”

“No.”

“Stop making homes so expensive to build?”

The room fell silent.

The Mayor looked horrified.

“Certainly not.”

“Why?”

“Because then housing might actually become cheaper.”

The carpenter sat down.

Clearly…

…he didn’t understand government.

Temporary

The Mayor returned to the podium.

“Don’t worry.”

“The rent freeze is only temporary…”

“…until we finish writing the permanent version.”

The room looked confused.

“And how long is temporary?”

The Mayor smiled.

“Government temporary.”

Everyone nodded knowingly.

Government temporary had a remarkable ability to outlive elections, consultants, committees, and sometimes even the politicians who invented it.

Enter Rent Control

The Mayor raised both hands.

“And now…”

“Rent Control!”

The crowd erupted.

Finally.

Someone was going to make those greedy landlords pay.

A little old economist cautiously approached the podium.

“Forgive me…”

“…but has rent control ever made an American city broadly affordable?”

Silence.

“So… rents became affordable?”

“No.”

“More rental housing?”

“No.”

“Better maintained buildings?”

“No.”

“Lower rents for everyone?”

“No.”

“What actually happened?”

The economist opened his notebook.

“Research has repeatedly found tradeoffs.”

“Some existing tenants benefit.”

“But over time, rental supply can shrink, investment in maintenance can decline, mobility can decrease, and many new renters face tighter markets.”

He turned another page.

“In one widely cited San Francisco study, researchers estimated that expanding rent control reduced the city’s rental housing supply by approximately 15% and increased citywide market rents for uncontrolled units by about 5.1%.”

The room stared.

Finally, someone asked,

“So… why are we doing it?”

The Mayor smiled.

“Because it sounds compassionate.”

“And we need the votes.”

The applause returned.

Facts make campaign speeches unnecessarily complicated.

Looking for Success

A citizen raised his hand.

“Has this ever worked?”

The Mayor smiled.

“Of course.”

“Where?”

The Mayor thought for a moment.

“Well…”

“…it has a long history.”

“Such as?”

“Cuba.”

The room became quiet.

“You mean the country known for deteriorating housing, chronic shortages, and a government deciding who gets what?”

“Yes.”

“That’s your example?”

The Mayor straightened his tie.

“No.”

“That’s just the part we’re not supposed to mention.”

Another citizen leaned forward.

“I thought the goal was affordable housing.”

The Mayor smiled.

“No.”

“The goal is campaign slogans.”

The room erupted in applause.

Affordable Housing?

Another citizen timidly raised his hand.

“If the City truly wants affordable housing…”

“…why not reduce property taxes on rental housing?”

The room fell silent.

“Why not reduce permit fees?”

“Shorten approval times?”

“Lower the cost of building homes?”

The councilmembers looked at one another.

The microphone immediately malfunctioned.

Safe Parking… Just Not Ours

Then came the Safe Parking Program.

“We must help those living in their vehicles.”

The citizens looked toward the City’s thousands of parking spaces sitting empty every night.

“Excellent,” they said.

“The City will open its parking lots.”

The Mayor beamed.

“We’ve opened twenty-five.”

“Twenty-five?”

“Out of thousands?”

“Yes.”

“What about the rest?”

“We’re asking businesses, churches, and everyone else to volunteer theirs.”

The crowd applauded.

Shared Sacrifice

A landlord stood.

“So, the government is going to tell me what I may charge for my property?”

“Yes.”

“And if the government requires me to provide housing below market rates for the benefit of others…”

“Correct.”

“…will the government compensate me?”

The Mayor laughed.

“Of course not.”

“You’re a greedy landlord.”

The landlord stunned as he nodded.

“So, tenants receive the benefit…while I bear the cost. And the City doesn’t share in this hundred-year-old issue?”

The Mayor nodded.

“We prefer the phrase…”

“…shared sacrifice.”

The Unexpected Winner

Then another developer stood.

“I’d actually like to thank the City.”

The room looked confused.

“Your policies have made my existing properties more valuable.”

“You’ve made it harder for competitors to build.”

“My newer developments escape rent control.”

“And when smaller landlords can no longer afford rent control and government policies along with rising property taxes, insurance, maintenance, and regulatory costs…”

“…I’ll be there to buy their properties.”

The room became very quiet.

Some tenants smiled.

They heard the promise of a free lunch.

Many property owners looked around the room.

For the first time…

…they realized they weren’t watching a housing policy debate.

They were watching a political strategy.

One Final Question

The old carpenter stood once more.

He had built homes for fifty years.

He asked only one question.

“If your goal is affordable housing…”

” …why do so many of your policies make housing more expensive to build?”

Silence filled the room.

No consultant answered.

No committee volunteered.

No study was commissioned.

The room remained quiet.

Sometimes the simplest questions are the hardest to answer.

Leave a comment

Share Santa Barbara Current

Subscribe now

Paid Advertisement:

Community Calendar:

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

(The following was sent out to all Santa Barbara media on July 19, 2026. You’d be forgiven if you hadn’t seen or read it, as the likelihood it would receive any prominent display is, well, nil. Only left-wing propaganda and other detritus worthy of prominence is allowed dissemination in and around the Santa Barbara area.

Other informative evidence of faulty thinking (or worse) on the part of Santa Barbara’s environmental “watchdogs” is always removed from day-to-day news items.

Santa Barbara Current has made it one of its missions to see that as much of this kind of information – regardless of its impact on the sensitive or the fragile – is released to the public in a timely manner:)

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

July 19, 2026

Bob Smith Calls for Immediate State and Federal Investigation Into Oil Covering South Coast Beaches

CARPINTERIA, CA. Bob Smith, candidate for California’s 24th Congressional District, today called for an immediate, coordinated state and federal investigation into the unusually heavy oil and tar washing onto South Coast beaches.

“This requires an all-hands-on-deck response from the state and federal government,” Smith said. “Our beaches and ocean are the lifeblood of the Central Coast. They support our wildlife, tourism, local businesses, recreation, and quality of life. We cannot wait for the damage to worsen while elected officials remain silent.”

Initial assessments indicate the petroleum may be coming from natural seeps. Natural seeps have existed here for thousands of years and are deeply connected to the history of the region. Spanish explorers named the area La Carpintería after observing Chumash craftspeople building tomols using naturally occurring tar to seal their vessels.

“But natural does not mean normal, harmless, or unworthy of an emergency response,” Smith said. “We need to determine why the volume has become so severe, identify the source, understand what is driving it, and establish both an immediate cleanup plan and a long-term remediation strategy.”

UC Santa Barbara researchers have studied the Coal Oil Point seep field for decades. Their research has found that oil and gas production from the South Ellwood Field reduced reservoir pressure and was associated with lower natural seepage.

“If the politically forced shutdown of production at South Ellwood and Platform Holly contributed to increased seepage, the public deserves to know the truth,” Smith said. “Environmental policy should be judged by its actual environmental results, not by political narratives.”

Smith called for immediate chemical fingerprinting, offshore seep measurements, reservoir pressure analysis, inspection of active and abandoned infrastructure, wildlife and economic impact assessments, and the public release of all findings.

“We have a world-class university in our own community, yet our elected officials continue to ignore its expertise when the findings may be politically inconvenient, whether the issue is geology, housing, or rent control,” Smith said.

“Career politicians wait until it is politically convenient to speak. Leaders solve problems. We need to stop voting for career politicians and start electing leaders.”

Media Contact
Bob Smith for Congress
info@bobsmithforcongress.com
805-847-0288

Leave a comment

Share Santa Barbara Current

Subscribe now

Paid Advertisement:

Community Calendar:

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

I went to college.

Oh, and it was during the late ‘60s. Yup… those ‘60s. You know, the ‘60s of peace and love and…. protests?

And I was a part of it.

We had all sorts of stuff to protest. There was Vietnam. And civil rights. And of course, “The Man.” That was code for government. The great oppressor. The bastion of all things evil.

And we had the freedom to protest it all. Unfettered.

Sure, some buildings were burned. Some bombs went off. And to quote the esteemed congress-they-person from Minnesota, Ilhan Omar, “Some people did something.”

We had Watts. And Kent. And Chicago. Those were turbulent times.

But compared to today…. Benign.

“communism” with a small “c”

When I took my history classes in college, I had a professor who described communism as “a system that sows the seeds of its own destruction.” Can you imagine that? A college professor who actually discussed communism as a failed ideology? And that was during an era when many of “my generation” believed that “communes” were the ideal way to live.

Communes. As in, commune-ism. Perfection in living.

Not.

Where are they now?

Well, many of the former residents of those communes… the hippies, beats, and members of “my generation” … are still out protesting. Holding those pretty “Resist” and “No Kings” signs. The “Support Palestine and Iran” signs. The “Kill Trump” signs. And, oh, this is the best part. These are the media elite and teachers and professors instructing our kids today. No “sowing the seeds of their own destruction” for them.

No sir. No indeed. No way, Jose.

Or Karen. Or Vincent. Or Autumn Star. Or Zohran.

And our children are being polluted with their hideous nonsense.

What the Hell Happened?

Since when did we start treating this crap as the solution to all of life’s problems? Perfection in living. Everyone is cared for. No reasons to worry about anything. All are equal.

Definition: No motivation to care for yourself. No reason to excel and be a full human. No opportunities to create and innovate and advance one’s life to enhance the greater whole.

Equally inert. Flaccid.

And equally unhappy.

As Woody Allen once said: “Life is divided into the horrible and the miserable.” I agree… but only under communism (I won’t “capitalize” the term. Get the joke?). Anyway, under communism/Marxism/ democratic socialism… call it what you will, that “horrible and miserable” is evenly distributed. Everyone gets to suffer together.

Kumbaya

Except for the privileged, of course. They get a pass. And they control it all. Starting from the universities, the media, and the gated-community sycophants.

And all of them would be lined up against a wall under communism. Read your history. It’s the end game. Their end. And they’re dumb enough not to see it… as they hold hands, singing and skipping happily along to their own destruction.

Highly educated. And stupid.

And they’re teaching our children, for God’s sake. And many of our youth are now carrying the virus and spreading it as we speak. Especially through media, social and otherwise.

And they’re getting elected to office.

And adored.

Good grief.

A Lesson Learned

Ok, here’s a lesson from “my generation.” It wasn’t intended to apply to today’s twisted world. But it’s prophetic nonetheless. It comes from a ‘60s musical group you may have heard of: Crosby, Stills, and Nash. Oh, and then Neil Young joined them, but it never sounded right.

Just CSN. I like threes.

Here ya go.

“Teach your children well.”

No one else will do it for you.

And then the next “my generation” will thank you.

Leave a comment

Share Santa Barbara Current

Subscribe now

Paid Advertisement:

Community Calendar:

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

Before There Was State Street, There Was the Saddle

We love Santa Barbara; its people, its sense of community, and its extraordinary beauty. So have generations of visitors who come here to celebrate and experience a city unlike any other.

But Santa Barbara did not become important because of tourism.

It became important because of the Spanish military, the Mission, and the ranching economy. And horses were indispensable to all three.

Before California was American, or a property of Mexico, Santa Barbara was a Spanish military outpost. Spain established the Presidio, built the Mission, and introduced European ranching. Families whose names still define Santa Barbara today – De la Guerra, Ortega, Carrillo, and many others – arrived from Spain and helped build a community where horses weren’t simply part of life.

They made life possible.

Horses connected the missions, worked the ranches, moved cattle, hauled supplies, and built the local economy long before automobiles.

The horse wasn’t a footnote in Santa Barbara’s history. It was one of its foundations.

That heritage is exactly what Old Spanish Days celebrates.

Every August, horses once again fill our streets. Riders honor generations of ranching families and California’s Spanish and Californio traditions. Old Spanish Days describes El Desfile Histórico as “one of the largest equestrian parades in the country.”

But preserving history requires more than staging a parade.

It requires preserving the knowledge that makes the parade possible.

Last year I was blessed to be able to ride across one of California’s original Spanish land-grant ranches. It reminded me these traditions aren’t museum pieces.

They are living history.

I also learned firsthand that horses aren’t machines.

During a mountain ride, a rider ahead of me was struck by a low branch and thrown from the saddle. The narrow trail became blocked. Horses stacked up behind us with nowhere to turn around. As the delay grew longer, they became increasingly restless.

Only because the horses were exceptionally trained – thank you Los Padres Outfitters – there were experienced horsemen who calmly managed the situation.

That experience taught me something no committee meeting could.

Experienced horsemen understand how horses respond to heat, noise, crowds, confined spaces, waiting, and unexpected stress. Those instincts come from years in the saddle, not from reading procedures.

Which raises a simple question:

When planning one of America’s largest equestrian parades, shouldn’t the people who know horses best have a meaningful voice?

Over recent years, many Rancheros, horse owners, trainers, riders, and veterinarians believe their practical knowledge has not always been welcomed in planning the portions of the parade involving horses. Whether one agrees with that concern or not, it’s a fair question to ask. Equestrian expertise isn’t simply tradition.

It’s a safety resource.

Old Spanish Days was created not only to preserve Santa Barbara’s heritage but also to attract visitors, a mission it continues to fulfill today.

Fiesta and the Historical Parade draw thousands of visitors to Santa Barbara each year, benefiting hotels, restaurants, retailers, parking facilities, and countless local businesses. Old Spanish Days itself describes the celebration as providing a “substantial economic benefit” to the community.

If an event preserves Santa Barbara’s history, celebrates its unique heritage, and generates significant economic activity for the City, shouldn’t the conversation be about how to strengthen it rather than how to reduce its funding?

Santa Barbara has every reason to celebrate Fiesta.

It has every reason to invest in its success.

And it has every reason to ensure that the Rancheros, horse owners, trainers, and veterinarians who have preserved this tradition for generations have a meaningful voice in planning the equestrian portions of the parade.

The solution doesn’t require another committee or another layer of bureaucracy.

It simply requires inviting the people who already possess the experience into the room.

Their knowledge complements the work already performed by City staff and Old Spanish Days organizers, helping preserve both the safety and authenticity of one of America’s largest equestrian parades.

The goal isn’t criticism.

It’s collaboration.

By bringing together City staff, Old Spanish Days organizers, and the equestrian community, Santa Barbara can honor its history while ensuring this remarkable tradition continues to thrive for generations to come.

If Santa Barbara’s equestrian heritage matters to you, let City Hall know.

Email the Mayor and City Council at clerk@SantaBarbaraCA.gov.

Tell them why you love the Historical Parade and why preserving it matters. Encourage them to include Rancheros, horse owners, trainers, veterinarians, and other experienced members of the equestrian community in planning the portions of the parade involving horses.

Because traditions don’t survive simply because we celebrate them.

They survive because each generation chooses to preserve them.

If we’re going to celebrate the horses that helped build Santa Barbara, then the people who have devoted their lives to understanding them deserve a meaningful voice in carrying that tradition forward.

•••

Old Spanish Days is celebrated this year from August 5^th through August 9^th.

Viva La Fiesta!

Leave a comment

Share Santa Barbara Current

Subscribe now

Paid Advertisement:

Community Calendar:

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

I used to live in Washington, DC. in the ‘70s. Lots going on then. We had Watergate. Vietnam. And ultimately, the Iran Hostage Crisis, which we’re still living with half a century later.

My wife at the time worked at the White House under both President Ford, and then President Carter. Washington was filled with intrigue and many historical events happening around me real-time… and I had a front-row seat.

That’s where I was inspired to pursue a career in broadcast journalism. And no, not from Woodward and Bernstein at the WaPo. I always felt they were more driven by typical journalistic activism and accolades, than by the pursuit of truth. Indeed, President Nixon was flawed, although I think history will eventually expose the real truth behind his fall.

We’ll see.

But among all the experiences I had living in our nation’s capital, the one that still haunts me to this day was a small exhibit in the Smithsonian History and Technology Museum, as it was called then.

It was a tree stump.

I spent lots of time visiting the various halls displaying our nation’s achievements. I watched the Air and Space Museum being built. And the I. M. Pei designed East Wing of the National Art Gallery (you know, the one with the sharp edge that people can’t help touching). And the Vietnam Wall, which was designed by another Asian American, Maya Lin. They held a contest for best design. Most were traditional above-ground monuments. She won, but it was very controversial at the time. I recall it was referred to then as “the gash of shame.” And now it’s one of the most popular memorials for visitors to D. C.

But back to the tree stump.

As I wound my way through the American Civil War section, I noted chairs and a table from the Appomattox surrender. President Lincoln’s famous top hat. And lots of uniforms and weapons and other artifacts of that grave collision of ideologies.

And then, around a corner in a small glass case, was a tree stump. It was about four feet tall. Perhaps a yard wide. And riddled with small chips and gashes throughout its severed top.

Chips made from lead mini balls, shot from rifles at close range. You can see some of the still imbedded lead slugs, collapsed and flattened.

The once living oak tree originally stood on the battlefield of Spotsylvania, Virginia. One of the bloodiest battles of the entire Civil War. And it was felled by small arms fire.

Hell fire.

Catastrophic.

Imagine being a soldier from the North, or the South, and experiencing a barrage of bullets so intense, that it cut down a tree at chest height. Your chest height.

As a West Pointer, my father would often talk about the Civil War. Both Grant and Lee were graduates of the Academy. And my father was clear to point out that the war wasn’t fought over just slavery… although that was an important component. Both generals were allegiant to their own states. Grant from Ohio. Lee from Virginia. One North. One South.

It was a war between the states.

And President Lincoln was tasked with the job of preserving the Union, and not allowing one group of states to secede from the whole. He paid for it with his life. Along with hundreds of thousands of an entire generation.

Indeed, we were divided by ideologies then.

And a nation divided, cannot survive.

But we did. Through much debate and pain and bloodshed.

And strong leadership.

Sound familiar?

I pray that we learn from our history. We can’t endure another civil war, even if bloodless.

And now the task is to vote… to prevent it. There are powerful forces that want to take that right from you… and everything else.

Learn from history.

Vote as if your life depended upon it.

And your family’s lives.

Because it does.

Leave a comment

Share Santa Barbara Current

Subscribe now

Paid Advertisement:

Community Calendar:

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

This week I was shocked to experience every business owner’s nightmare: a lawyer’s Compliance Remediation Demand letter that alleged I was in violation of a law regarding an “estimated statutory exposure” which could make me liable for potential damages of $15,000 (or more).

I had received a first notice earlier but ignored it, presuming it was just spam. But this one declared “This is your second and final warning,” so I first went to Google and put in the name of the law firm and “spam” and holy smokes, it is actually a real law firm that specializes in threatening businesses about ADA compliance and website privacy tracking violations.

So, then I went to AI for advice from my cyber Guardian Angel, Super GROK. Oh dear. Oh dear. They are a listed law firm, and they specialize in ADA and violations related to website tracking pixels, cookies, and Google Analytics. It is a grift, going after small businesses to frighten them into paying to end the threat.

And what if I continue to ignore it?

GROK says they often follow through with a lawsuit in California Superior Court. So, if you do go to court, even if you win or it is dismissed, you’re on the hook for defense costs, and service of process. If you “lose” they can hit you with multiple statutory damages, as they claim CIPA violations at $5,000 each plus attorney fees, costs, and injunctive relief. It is a process; some cases settle or fizzle after remediation, others pay the demanded amount to remove the threat of worse. Like a plea-bargain, which is how so many court cases are resolved.

Well, that took my breath away. Ignoring it is not an option, and there is a California law firm that advertises that they specialize in responding to this firm. The last thing I want to do is get involved in anything legal. It might escalate and now is not the time to hit my business with a fine of any amount. So, GROK gently suggested the compliant approach: remediation and polite outreach to state I have fixed any issues and I’m a one-person small business so please accept my voluntary remediation and acknowledge my good-faith efforts.

I was in fact ignorant that all websites must sport a banner that lets you opt out of cookies and tracking. I have seen that, of course, and clicked “deny all” and never thought twice about it.

California “Invasion of Privacy Act” Pending

California bill SB690 specifically limiting this sort of predatory privacy lawsuits passed out of the Assembly’s Committee on Privacy and Consumer Protection on 7/1/26 with a vote of 14-0. The statistics quoted say that in the past four years 3,700 CIPA (California Invasion of Privacy Act) shakedowns have been filed in California, with tens of thousands more estimated demand letters sent. At the last minute it was amended, and critics say it is the poster child for abusive lawsuits but now does not go far enough. “This closes one avenue for abusive legislation, however additional major pathways for frivolous lawsuits remain intact, leaving businesses across every industry vulnerable to predatory litigation.” SB690 aims to curb these exact CIPA/website tracking suits, yet we await it becoming law.

A version of SB690 passed the state senate last year, so our state representatives are well aware of the problem. Yet this law firm persists, and in response, there is a law firm known for specializing in responding to the threats.

All of us have heard the Urban Legend of the bitter guy in a wheelchair who rolls into the small family restaurant and extorts a free meal by saying if they don’t feed him, he will file an ADA complaint against them. I used to know an LA restaurant inspector and he told me he saw little Mexican restaurants that had pitiful signs in their windows saying “Please Señor Wheelchair don’t give us trouble.”

Because of knowing that guy really exists and is a danger to any business, I even wrote a stipulation into my business lease about being required to make changes to make the unit more ADA compliant. But it never occurred to me, until this week, that a firm specializing in threatening website owners might come after me.

So now I know this is just part of a large wave of CIPA-based demand letters and lawsuits. Critics call it “privacy trolling” and while it feels like a shakedown it is a technically legal activity, not illegal extortion. They send thousands of intimidating letters hoping for quick settlements, playing the percentages. The applicable privacy laws are often so old and broad – pre-dating the internet in some cases – that courts are still sorting out how far these claims can go. For there to be enough of them that a specific California litigation attorney can make a living actively defending businesses targeted by this specific company is a tragedy and a distortion of justice.

I contemplated whether writing about it for SB Current would be a jinx, but two days have gone by since I made the changes in my websites and sent my response letter back to them. I can only hope that I never do hear any more from them, that my tiny one-person tattoo studio is not a target they can expect to extort enough from to be worth the bother. Meanwhile, I couldn’t stop thinking about it, so I decided to do the journalistic catharsis of documenting the experience.

Leave a comment

Share Santa Barbara Current

Subscribe now

Paid Advertisement:

Community Calendar:

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

One year later, the sky has yet to fall, but you’ve got to hand it to Rep. Salud Carbajal. In his recent letter to folks in the 24th District, he managed to pack more apocalyptic warnings into a few paragraphs than most people do in an entire election cycle. The One Big Beautiful Bill, signed last July 4 with fireworks and all, isn’t just bad policy in his view — it’s apparently a full-scale assault on the middle class, kids, seniors, veterans, apple pie, and pretty much anyone who isn’t a billionaire.

If you believed our current congressman, we’d be looking at bread lines, empty medicine cabinets, and a debt bomb that makes our current fiscal mess look quaint. As someone who’s watched Santa Barbara politics long enough to know the difference between a press release and reality, I figured it was worth taking a closer look. The bill’s first anniversary seemed like the perfect time. Turns out, the evidence is a lot less hysterical than Salud’s unhinged rhetoric.

Let’s start with the tax breaks Carbajal says were reserved for the “ultra wealthy.” Nice try. By making the core 2017 individual cuts permanent, bumping up the standard deduction, and keeping those lower rates in place, the law actually delivers its biggest percentage bang to middle-income households — the very people who rely on the standard deduction instead of hiring accountants to itemize. Typical filers saw their taxable income drop by thousands of dollars a year. That’s real money.

On the Corporate Side

Competitive rates and expensing rules encourage companies to invest here rather than ship jobs overseas. Remember what happened after the original 2017 cuts? Business fixed investment went up, and corporate tax revenue hit record levels by 2019. The 2025 version removed the annual tax-cliff drama that had everyone holding their breath. Early numbers show the same positive vibes continuing: capital investment holding steady and wages ticking up for working folks.

Not exactly Robin Hood in reverse.

Then there’s Salud’s healthcare horror story. Carbajal claims the bill strips coverage from children, seniors, and veterans, while kicking 10 million people off insurance. The actual reforms were more surgical: work requirements and regular eligibility checks aimed at able-bodied adults without dependents. States that tried this — Arkansas and Georgia — saw employment jump 5 to 12 percentage points in those groups, with barely a ripple for kids, the disabled, or the elderly.

Veterans’ Programs and Food Assistance

Untouched. Uninsured rates didn’t explode as predicted, and prime-age workers kept jumping back into the labor market. In other words, the bill encouraged people who can work to do so, without pulling the rug out from under those who truly can’t. Who knew that people would respond to incentives?

Same deal with food assistance. The claim that four million would lose SNAP benefits sounds alarming until you check the fine print and the history books. The 1996 welfare reforms cut caseloads by more than 60 percent, boosted employment among single mothers, and helped bring child poverty down. SNAP has had improper payment rates north of ten percent in multiple years — that’s real money not reaching the people who need it. The 2025 bill applied modest work or training rules only to non-disabled adults without young kids, keeping full protections for children and seniors. Not a gutting, just a bit of adult supervision for a program that had gotten far too loosey goosey with taxpayer funds.

Medicaid and SNAP

Carbajal’s biggest swing is the trillion-dollar gutting of Medicaid and SNAP, plus that scary $4 trillion debt figure. Again, context matters. The bill added guardrails against fraud and runaway expansion rather than slashing benefits for the vulnerable. That $4 trillion number comes from the same static scoring models that assume nobody ever changes behavior when the rules do — a track record that’s about as reliable as a coastal commission prediction on oil projects.

Revenue often beats those gloomy forecasts when growth kicks in, just like it did post 2017. The legislation also raised the debt ceiling to avoid the usual Washington game of chicken, while boosting border security, domestic energy production (good for prices at the pump), and defense priorities.

Funny how those parts didn’t make the congressman’s letter.

Big Bill More Beautiful Than Ever

One year in, the sky has stubbornly refused to fall. Employment and investment trends look solid. Safety nets for the truly needy are still there, just with a little more emphasis on work and efficiency. Families and businesses finally have some tax predictability instead of the usual short-term patch jobs.

Nobody serious thinks we shouldn’t protect the vulnerable or worry about the national debt. Those are real challenges. But pretending the only solution is writing bigger checks funded by tomorrow’s taxpayers — while ignoring what actually works on the ground — isn’t compassion; it’s just kicking the can down the road, leaving our children to deal with the mess.

Santa Barbara’s 24th District voters have heard enough of the same old script. They deserve straight talk and practical results. That’s one reason why pragmatist Bob Smith is running for Congress to replace Carbajal. Smith gets that representatives should work for all constituents, not just the ones who nod along to the party line. After 12 months, the One Big Beautiful Bill isn’t the monster Carbajal warned us about. It’s a pragmatic mix of growth, accountability, and targeted reform.

In politics, that’s about as beautiful as it gets.

Leave a comment

Share Santa Barbara Current

Subscribe now

Paid Advertisement:

Community Calendar:

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

I have a large piece of the Berlin Wall. I’m looking at it right now. I acquired it as the wall was coming down. I had the distinct experience of living in Europe as the wall was being built…. then visiting Berlin when the wall was there… even going into East Berlin to “tour” through “Checkpoint Charlie” …. And then I joined the festivities as the symbol of communism collapsed… as was inevitable.

I consider it one of the greatest moments in history. A lesson learned for how not to run a country or countries.

Now, almost 40 years later, what is happening?

I first heard the term “progressive” about fifteen years ago. It was used by a woman I met named Kat Steyer, who was, and is, the wife of Tom Steyer, the failed billionaire candidate for president, and then failed candidate for governor of California.

Failed.

Thank God.

Oh, and God is anathema to progressivism…. But more on that later.

Anyhoo, I asked Kat Steyer what she meant by the term ‘progressive,’ and she said: “Oh, Tom and I are progressives because we are environmentalists and we believe in eliminating fossil fuels and helping the immigrants and so on and so forth.” And I said: “But Tom’s company where he gained his fortune, Farallon Capital, made its money investing in coal… and private prisons holding illegals. What’s progressive about that? Not to mention that he benefited from capitalism off the backs of fossil fuels and immigrants.”

She turned on her heels and walked away.

Hey, I have a joke. How many progressives does it take to change a lightbulb? Answer: Just one to hold it, and then have the government twist the ceiling around it. Pretty funny, huh? I just made that up. Progressives are natural humor targets. They just don’t realize it, because they have no sense of humor.

I’m listening to all the traditional Democrats desperately trying to navigate the wave of progressivism-socialism-communism-weirdoism taking over their party. But many of them can’t escape being Jewish. It’s that Palestine thing. You know, that thing, to paraphrase Joe Biden when he couldn’t remember: “We hold these truths to be self-evident.” Biden: “That all men and women are created by the, you know, you know… the thing.”

Well, here’s the thing. What about our gay friends?

For whatever reason, many “progressives” support the Palestinians, and Hamas, and Iran, the very same people who would be the first to throw them off a building. Except for the gay ayatollah. He gets a pass. And 72 virgins when he dies. Not that he would care.

And they all claim to have a “big tent” to hold all the weird, creepy fringes of their once respectable party that I used to be a member of. But the only tents I see are strewn about the streets of the cities they control. Little tents.

And lots of poop.

And free needles.

Oh, and they want to get rid of the borders, and law enforcement, and welcome everyone from everywhere.

No strings attached.

Ok, then I vote to have these nincompoops, (emphasis on poop) take the front door off their white privileged house and put a sign outside saying: “Come on in and help yourselves, and stay as long as you want; we’ll pay for everything, including your sex change. And we promise not to call 911 for the non-existent police. Party on!”

There, done.

But of course, they’ll want them to clean the pool.

And trim the tall hedges that cover the iron fence.

No, not the fence at the border. That’s gone… under their rule. Just their fence, to protect themselves.

The Joke’s On Them

I don’t know…. It’s certainly a perplexing state of affairs infecting Democrats these days. Infecting, kind of like the Fauci virus. We know where it comes from. We can try to avoid it. But, what do you think, anti-progressive masks? Perhaps a vaccine? Bleach? You know, that bleach that President Trump was accused of recommending?

Good grief.

Probably would have been better than the vax we got. What a scam.

So where do we go from here? Well, getting back to that God thing I mentioned at the top of this tiny treatise… have faith. For every success, we have to endure many failures. That makes success all the more satisfying. Like watching the Berlin wall fall. And if we believe that our rights come from God, not “man/woman/they” (read government), then we have the upper hand.

Say a prayer.

Hope you enjoyed celebrating our incredible country on its 250^th anniversary of independence from “resisting” kings and oligarchs… and….

Maintain a sense of humor.

God is laughing at the progressives as we speak.

And they don’t get the joke.

Leave a comment

Share Santa Barbara Current

Subscribe now

Paid Advertisement:

Community Calendar:

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

Dear Mayor Rowse, Councilmembers Friedman, Jordan, Santamaria, Sneddon, Harmon and Gutierrez:

I write to you today to express my – as you might have guessed – extreme opposition to the Santa Barbara Rent Stabilization Ordinance. It will achieve nothing besides rent “stabilization,” and as written will have profound, transformative, and do lasting damage to all landlords, real estate investors in rental properties, rental property conditions, and the availability of rental unit stock itself.

In the very short term, this misguided, fact- and history-bare ordinance may momentarily provide stabilized rents for some Santa Barbara residents, but will predictably create degrading buildings, impoverished landlords, and accelerate the selling off of existing rental units.

These effects of rent control have been universal, well known, long-acknowledged and tremendously corrosive in every location that they have been tried.

As the Federal Reserve Bank of St Louis states (Feb 12, 2024), “Microeconomics textbooks depict these rental price ceiling policies as causing supply to fall and demand to increase, leading to a shortage in the market. Suppressing the return on rental property investment does little to incentivize investors to increase the supply, or quality, of housing. Such policies may lead to a permanent change in the housing supply mix, pushing housing supply into the owned market and out of the rental market, and will make renting less affordable in the long term.”

The Brookings Institute in 2018 wrote, “While rent control appears to help current tenants in the short run, in the long run it decreases affordability, fuels gentrification, and creates negative spillovers on the surrounding neighborhood. Caps on rents lead landlords to sell their rental properties to owner occupants so that landlords can still earn the market price for their real estate, as the return on their investments and assets consistently fail to meet real costs and market conditions.”

The National Multifamily Housing Council has, as one of its key precepts, an essay titled “The High Cost of Rent Control.” In it is stated “The profound economic and social consequences of government intervention in the nation’s housing markets have been documented in study after study, over the past twenty-five years. Nevertheless, a number of cities around the country continue to impose rent controls, usually with the stated goal of preserving affordable housing for low- and middle-income families. Rent control does not advance this important goal. To the contrary, rent control has actually reduced both the quality and quantity of available housing.

“When a community artificially restrains rents by adopting rent control, it tells builders not to make new investments and tells current providers to reduce their investments in existing housing, creating the perverse consequence of reducing, rather than expanding, the supply of housing.”

Now, to the specifics of Santa Barbara’s proposed “Rent Stabilization Ordinance.”

1) Section 26.90.040 states that landlords can raise rents no more than 60% of the Consumer Price Index, or 3% of existing rents, annually. WHY ARE LANDLORDS A PERSECUTED CLASS, THAT THEY ARE PENALIZED ON ALL COSTS OF INFLATION, MATERIALS, LABOR, TAXES, INSURANCE AND MORTGAGES?

Are there any other segments of our industries that are likewise handcuffed to lower-than-inflation prices that they can charge? Why not? It seems that landlords current and future are targeted unfairly simply by offering people a place to live.

2) Public Registry: All private information on landlords must now be entered into a public registry, for all to see and judge - Ownership history, Rents, Assets, Tax Base. And a landlord MUST publish this information in this public registry, or face charges of FRAUD - and be prevented from renting out their properties, prevented from pursuing eviction of deadbeat tenants, and prevented from advertising their properties. WHY MUST LANDLORDS EXPOSE ALL THEIR PRIVATE INFORMATION TO THE PUBLIC WHEN THEY CANNOT EVEN CHECK A POTENTIAL TENANT’S FINANCES OR RENTAL HISTORY, to help them assess a tenant’s ability to afford the rent? The question is - why would any landlord be foolish enough TO CONTINUE OFFERING THEIR PROPERTIES FOR RENT? Again - incredibly one-sided, and insanely unfair.

3) Section 26.90.070: Tenants may petition for lower rents, oppose their evictions simply by citing any dispute with the landlord or lack of repair or improvement not to their approval, or the rent calculation behind the rents they are charged. ONE COMPLAINT BY AN ADVERSARIAL TENANT CAN HALT EVICTION PROCEEDINGS AND FORCE THE PROPERTY OWNER INTO THE COURTS. Here we are again — incredibly one-sided, and insanely unfair.

4) Mortgage interest and property depreciation are excluded from calculated expenses — resulting in real losses to the land owner of upwards of 10-15% annually at current interest and depreciation rates. The ordinance provides a “right of petition” by the landowner, but the lawyering costs, time loss and aggravation are an undue burden placed upon this select group of individuals and is a prime disincentive for anyone to continue providing rental units to the public

5) Capital improvement cost pass-alongs are impeded by the ordinance’s cap of $100/month or 10% of the existing rent. This calculation removes the incentive for any land owner to make needed and desirable repairs and improvements to their properties.

WHAT SANTA BARBARA IS REFUSING TO ACKNOWLEDGE IS THAT IT ISN’T LANDLORDS WHO ARE THE PROBLEM - IT IS THE DRACONIAN BUILDING CODES AND POLICIES THAT HAVE CREATED THIS HOUSING SHORTAGE TO BEGIN WITH.

No wonder no new housing is being built in this mad, mad, mad regulatory environment.

THESE SOCIALIST BUILDING POLICIES ARE CREATING THE HOUSING SHORTAGE - AND SANTA BARBARA’S PROPOSED “SOLUTION” IS TO INSTEAD TURN ON THE SMALL CLASS OF INDIVIDUALS WHO OFFER WHAT LITTLE HOUSING REMAINS FOR THE PUBLIC.

I am astonished that you Councilmembers who support these corrosive ordinances, and your staff, either do not know all this, or purposefully ignore the deep, old, and widespread evidence of these terrible policies.

It’s like the old Leftist saying - “Socialism/Communism is awesome - it just hasn’t been implemented correctly.” I wonder if the Councilmembers think that you are simply smarter than all throughout history, and you won’t be subject to reality, economics, and history? I am just appalled to see dangerous ideas like this “Rent Stabilization Ordinance” coming to fruition here.

We were thinking of renting our own house out while we go to Virginia to help with our grand babies who are due in a few months — but as my husband and I both instantly agreed — WE WOULD RATHER SELL OUR DREAM HOME — AGAIN — RATHER THAN RENT IT OUT UNDER THESE CONFISCATORY POLICIES, ACCEPT SUCH RISK AND HEADACHES, AND POTENTIALLY LOSE IT ALTOGETHER.

None of this is news. None of this is a surprise. None of this is unpredicted.

DO WHAT IS THE ONLY REALISTIC AND LOGICAL THING THAT WILL SOLVE SANTA BARBARA’S HOUSING CRISIS — LOOSEN YOUR DRACONIAN BUILDING REGULATIONS AND ALLOW HOMES TO BE BUILT SENSIBLY AND AFFORDABLY.

Thank you.

Elizabeth Crawford is a housing provider living in Goleta, CA

****

More on the upcoming Santa Barbara rent stabilization vote, and how you can get involved, here.

Leave a comment

Share Santa Barbara Current

Subscribe now

Community Calendar:

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

I like milestones. I celebrate them.

Birthdays. Anniversaries. Major events.

We have a big one coming up. Among the biggest of the big. The country’s 250^th anniversary of its birth. Our official declaration advising King George that we no longer desire to be part of his kingdom, that we were our own country, independent of his.

It’s everything wrapped into one. A birthday. An anniversary. A major event.

And I’ve celebrated more than a few.

As Jackson Browne sings: “In ’69 I was twenty-one and I called the road my own.” Indeed, I did. In the summer of 1969 I hit the road in my 1953 Oldsmobile that I painted an American flag on.

I loved America, then and now.

But it was misinterpreted by some.

One was Maria von Trapp. Yep, that Maria von Trapp from the “Sound of Music.” She ran the Trapp Family Lodge in Stowe, Vermont, where I secured a dish-washing job for the summer between college semesters.

I parked that car one night – my “Flag Mobile” – where all the waitresses stayed. A big “no-no.”

Maria wasn’t happy.

But it wasn’t just about the girls. Her big complaint was that I was “defecating” the flag. She was Austrian and a new, very patriotic, American citizen.

I think she meant “desecrating.” I wasn’t… but I took my one week’s severance pay of $35 and bought some moccasins and hit the road once again down to the Jersey Shore.

Odd Jobs and Odd Places

I worked construction there, near the site of where the Hindenburg went down, in Lakehurst. I stayed at the Breakers Inn, a tired old 1920’s former resort hotel in Seaside. It was filled with hippies and “free spirits,” me among them.

And then on July 20^th, I drove the Flag Mobile to see a friend in New London, Connecticut, and watched the moon landing with her that evening.

Epic.

Then there was Woodstock. I bought tickets, but I didn’t want to wallow in the mud. I gave them away.

Maybe I should have gone.

Then on August 24^th I turned 21. I celebrated with a drink featuring an American flag in it and mulled over where I’d been, and where I was heading.

In America, we can all call the road our own.

So, a few years later, in 1976, I found myself living in Washington, DC. I had a company that designed restaurant interiors. My wife at the time (who just passed recently), worked in the First Lady’s office at the White House under President Ford. It was an unsettling time. We had just pulled out of Vietnam with the fall of Saigon. We were still dealing with a gas crisis and long lines. Mortgage rates were upwards of 9%. Inflation rates were around 6% and rising.

And we think we have it bad today?

But despite all that, we had reason to celebrate. We were turning 200. Our Bicentennial!

Celebrating America’s Bicentennial

I spent that July 4^th day and evening in 1976 on a boat in New York Harbor. It was filled with tall ships. Masts rising high. Flags flying. Sails full. And thousands of smaller boats. Millions of people all around. The Statue of Liberty was all lit up.

And then the fireworks. The Harbor was calm. The water mirrored the explosions in the sky.

Spectacular.

And here we are today. 50 years later. A half century. Can you believe it?

And we’re all still here. Our America. And you, if you’re reading this!

I include my own family… children and grandchildren. All thriving here on the Central Coast.

What a blessing. I am thankful every day. Who wouldn’t be?

For those who aren’t, I wish enlightenment for you. In this life, in this country, with our rights to live in liberty and pursue our dreams. Gifted to us by God, through our Founder’s wisdom...

Celebrate your good fortune.

Call the road your own.

Happy Birthday America! Don’t blow out the candles please.

There are wonderful things just waiting… on the road ahead.

Leave a comment

Share Santa Barbara Current

Subscribe now

Community Calendar:

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

Taxes and left-leaning philanthropy keep pouring into blue states and their dominant institutions, yet they deliver the worst return on investment in America. Massive spending on education, health programs, diversity initiatives, and social services produces persistent failures in student outcomes, homelessness, fiscal balance, and basic governance. Fra…

Read more

The Constitution Didn’t Fail. We Did.

America has a fascinating new national hobby.

We blame the Constitution for problems created by people who refuse to follow the principles that made the Constitution possible.

It is rather like blaming a boat because someone drilled holes in the bottom.

“The boat doesn’t work!”

No.

The boat worked for 250 years.

The hole i…

Read more

Imagine the retired schoolteacher on the Eastside who owns one duplex. She didn’t inherit it. She didn’t get lucky. She spent years packing lunches, grading papers, and setting aside whatever she could, month after month, because she believed that if she worked hard enough and long enough, she could build something that would last. That investment is he…

Read more

Happy Pride-Filled Non-Gestating Parent’s Day

(Formally Known as Father’s Day)

Hey y’all. I was thinking lately about Father’s Day and Sunday, 21 June, is fast approaching. I was wondering what version of my better father-self I should be, since I’m a two-spirit and I need to decide which spirit, 1 or 2, gets the better version.

I was leaning toward versio…

Read more

Bring Back State Street Parades

State Street doesn’t need another housing study. It needs a parade. This weekend, the Summer Solstice Parade rolls again. Crowds will show up, the floats will be ridiculous (in the best way), and Alameda Park will do its thing. But the parade won’t march down State Street—our actual main commercial corridor—because City Hall decided a side street was good enough, and a permanent car blockade was even better.

That once was unthinkable. For decades, the Solstice Parade and the Fiesta Historical Parade processed straight through the heart of downtown. These weren’t just cute civic add-ons; they were massive economic engines that turned the city’s primary retail corridor into a temporary gold mine. Spectators didn’t politely disperse afterward. They hit the restaurants, ducked into shops, and kept the registers ringing.

Let’s look at the actual math. Historically, our downtown parades generated roughly $27 million in gross economic impact. If you apply the city’s roughly 2% cut of taxable sales, that is over half a million dollars in direct tax revenue for the general fund. The State Street route for the Solstice parade alone delivered an estimated $300,000 of that, directly feeding 118 small local businesses. Real money. Real activity. No PowerPoint required.

Then the “visionaries” got involved. They barricaded State Street, killed the vehicular traffic, and exiled the parades to parallel streets long after the pandemic excuse expired. The result was entirely predictable. Transaction volume flatlined. Net operating incomes plummeted. Today, we have at least 18 local restaurants on or near State Street quietly listed for sale at “asset-only” fire-sale prices. These are mom-and-pop operations systematically starved of the foot traffic and drive-up customers they desperately need to survive.

And how has our City Council responded to this self-inflicted commercial depression? By completely abandoning the core mandate of its job. The fundamental duty of local government is to fully fund public safety, manage infrastructure, and protect taxpayer assets. Instead, this administration just decided to literally give away the land underneath Paseo Nuevo—a public asset valued at over $30 million—to a billionaire-backed corporate investment firm just to sweeten a development deal.

And in the very same breath – to cover up the budget deficit they created – the Council froze three sworn police officer positions.

They are compromising public safety while handing out the most financially reckless gifts in local government history.

Now, they are proposing to “solve” the dead retail street they created by force-feeding high-density housing. With Sacramento systematically stripping away local control, and radical housing mandates like the “Builder’s Remedy” in play, we are months away from developers legally bypassing Santa Barbara’s historic two-story limit. They are using the failure of State Street to justify bulldozing our Spanish Colonial heritage, paving the way for 14-story high-rises, and turning Santa Barbara into Venice Beach.

The city’s own Community Survey 2026 is currently walking through the wreckage with questions about flat sales, safety problems, the $100 million-plus price tag to reconfigure everything, and the embarrassing fact that the Santa Monica Promenade—the model everyone keeps citing—has itself become a cautionary tale of vacancies. The survey notes that nearly one-third of merchants already want the street back open.

The fiscal math is not complicated. Parades on State Street + open access for customers = more spending = more sales tax = fully funded police. Rerouted parades + permanent barricades + social-service-first planning = local restaurants on the block for pennies on the dollar, multi-million dollar corporate giveaways, and a downtown that feels increasingly optional.

Santa Barbara can skip the remedial course. Stop pretending the experiment is still in beta. Put the Summer Solstice Parade and the Fiesta Historical Parade back on the street they were built for. Reopen State Street to balanced use so people can actually get there, spend money, and keep the lights on in the buildings that aren’t currently for sale.

The city’s survey is live right now. Go take it and answer honestly:
https://www.research.net/r/GKBJTR3?N=4199407

Santa Barbara doesn’t have a downtown problem that requires more ideology, more housing quotas, or more performative street design. It has a downtown problem caused by politicians who forgot that customers, public safety, and small businesses were the whole point of keeping State Street alive in the first place.

Fix that, and the rest gets a lot easier.

Leave a comment

Share Santa Barbara Current

Subscribe now

Paid Advertisement:

Community Calendar:

Read more

Laura Capps and the Consolidation of County Control

At a recent gathering of the Santa Barbara Republican Club at Mulligan’s, longtime radio host and government watchdog Andy Caldwell delivered a pointed critique of local power dynamics. His target: Supervisor Laura Capps and a Board of Supervisors that, he argues, is steadily amassing authority well bey…

Read more

Lee Ohanian Proposes a Free-Market California Comeback

At a packed Timbers Road House on June 6, where Conservative Republicans of Santa Barbara County gathered amid an uncommon air of optimism, UCLA economics professor and Hoover Institution senior fellow Lee Ohanian delivere…

Read more

When most people think of moral collapse, they picture places like Los Angeles or San Francisco. They picture open-air drug markets. Crime. Chaos. Lawlessness. Broken streets. Broken culture.

Nobody pictures Santa Barbara.

That is what makes this so interesting.

Because according to a recent article in the Santa Barbara Independent, Santa Barbara County ha…

Read more

What does the American Flag mean to you? How do you react when viewing others burn it? What does our flag represent to the world?

After the Civil War, Flag Day was created to commemorate the adoption of the Stars and Stripes as the official flag of the United States by the Second Continental Congress on June 14, 1777.

Our Flag honors pivotal moments in th…

Read more