Santa Barbara is a town that regularly brags of its history, but whose historians seem politically selective.

Consider, for instance, a man born in Santa Barbara who achieved a series of historic firsts of the sort this city’s political fathers and mothers ordinarily celebrate. His name is Romualdo Pacheco, who was born on this day (October 31) in 1831, a few blocks from the present junction of Carrillo and State Streets. Beyond a single, one line on-line mention by a foundation now situated in the Hill-Carrillo house where he was born, there is no street, building, school, bridge, alley, statue, scholarship, or other public memorial that carries his name or memory.

It is as though in his hometown of Santa Barbara, he never existed.

He was the first governor of California of Mexican descent.

He was the first governor born on what would become the state of California soil.

He was the first person of Latino heritage elected to the United States Congress, and the first to chair a standing House committee.

He was also the only governor of California known to have lassoed a grizzly bear.

He was related to both the Carrillo and de la Guerra families, yet the Santa Barbara Historical Museum and the Old Santa Barbara Mission display little more than the bare records of his birth and baptism. No dedicated or significant holdings on Romualdo Pacheco appear in UC Santa Barbara Library Special Research Collections. Old Spanish Days, the city’s annual festival of Spanish, Mexican, and early Californio heritage, has never featured him.

At the age of twenty-two, Romualdo became a county judge in San Luis Obispo. He served in the State Senate and was appointed State Treasurer by then Governor Leland Stanford. During the Civil War he held a commission as brigadier general and was sent to disarm companies in the Los Angeles area that were disloyal to the Union. He later became lieutenant governor and then governor. After that, he served in Congress and closed his career as United States Minister to Central America.

One need not feel particularly remiss for not knowing the name or his achievements. Hardly anyone in his hometown of Santa Barbara does either. For some reason, his is not the memory we tell.

The public curriculum materials of the Santa Barbara Unified School District contain no reference to him, even in its mandatory ethnic-studies courses.

When the City Council recently considered a replacement for Calle Cesar Chavez, Pacheco’s name was not among those put forward.

The local newspapers, so far as their extensive online archives show, have published little, if anything, about him.

He must, one might think, have done something seriously wrong, but there are no accounts of personal misconduct.

He voted, along with every other Democrat and Republican California representative for the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882. One of those like-minded colleagues was William S. Rosecrans, a Democrat. Rosecrans Avenue runs twenty-seven miles through Los Angeles and Orange Counties; there is Fort Rosecrans National Cemetery, and a school and a park also carry the Rosecrans name. Given that Mr. Rosecrans is still celebrated, the silence around Pacheco is even more curious.

It may simply be that he is the wrong kind of Latino figure for the narratives currently preferred. He came from a landed and educated Ranchero family, not from poverty or recent migration. He was schooled in Hawaii and became fluent in English and French. He worked within and helped strengthen the institutions of the state rather than amend them or tear them down.

He was not a victim.

Perhaps he inadvertently committed a quieter form of offense against the memory keepers in his hometown. While rising to the lieutenant-governorship, he left the Democrat Party and joined the Republicans, a designation he retained until death.

Whatever the reason for his erasure from his hometown’s memory, Happy 195th Birthday, Romualdo Pacheco. You and your trailblazing achievements are not – yet – completely forgotten.

Leave a comment

Share Santa Barbara Current

Subscribe now

******

Take 5 minutes to fill out your ballot, or forever hold your peace.

This is the last weekend you can vote your ballot (if you do so, bring your ballot to collection boxes, don’t mail this late)

If you plan to vote early, start with California Current’s proposition guide and Statewide Candidate recommendations—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.

NO on 1. The Con Job

NO on 2. Supersizing California’s Slush Fund

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

*******

Need a little help with the 20 judicial retention choices for the Second Appellate District (Los Angeles, Ventura, San Luis Obispo, and Santa Barbara Counties)? Click here.

It has been reported that over 1,000 people marched down Anacapa Street in Santa Barbara on Saturday, Oct 17^th to protest something they call “No Kings Day.” This is one of the many rallies that occurred in some of our largest cities in California and the United States.

The march in Santa Barbara was sponsored by an organization calling itself “Indivisible Santa Barbara,” a group purportedly set up to “resist authoritarianism and combat oligarchic power in the U.S.” Besides encouraging people to vote early, the goal seemed to be to vilify President Trump and pretty much everyone in the Republican Party, along with independent voters who don’t share their apocalyptic vision of America.

A former California State Senator, Hannah-Beth Jackson, hyperbolically claimed that Republicans “are trying to destroy everything we have worked for.” Indivisible Santa Barbara featured other over-wrought speakers mimicking the bombastic rhetoric from Jackson.

Rather than respond to the many insane attacks from some of the speakers at the rally, I would like to focus on the laughable charge or boogeyman that people who don’t agree with the marchers are fascist Nazis intent on turning the U.S. into a despotic hellhole. Obviously, this nonsensical hallucinatory babble is a figment of drug-induced imaginations. However, rather than get into a tit-for-tat with unhinged people, it might be instructive to see who are be the real autocrats lurking in our political system.

For me, the Covid pandemic opened my eyes wide about how left-wing Democrats attempted to suspend or abolish the most fundamental civil liberties we have all taken for granted in the U.S. The first batch of civil liberties might fall under the grouping of freedom of movement and association. The lockdowns, curfews, quarantine periods, and travel limits, were all designed to restrict personal movement and the ability of individuals to gather freely.

Calling on Dr. Freud

If this wasn’t enough, Democrats then attempted to curtail our freedom of speech by censoring dissenting views on social media. They also prohibited religious gatherings, challenging our first amendment rights to worship and freely assembly. Most outrageously, they attempted to challenge our bodily and individual autonomy by instituting vaccine and mask mandates.

All this was done without any due process, just decrees and unilateral suspension of laws by public health authorities and tyrannical left-wing governors such as Gavin Newsom. I don’t know about you, but I never imagined in my worst nightmares that anything like this could happen in our country.

Anyone with a rudimentary understanding of history knows that the political left – in the form of socialist regimes – always attempts to impose its unrealistic, idealized version of egalitarianism by any means necessary, even if it requires the imposition of their ideas through undemocratic means.

These very same people marching about imaginary kings are also hypocritically supporting anti-democratic ideas in an attempt to permanently vanquish their opposition. They have vowed to pack the Supreme Court with four more Justices, giving them a 7-6 majority, make Puerto Rico and Washington DC states to ensure control of the U.S. Senate, and force every state in the union to implement California election laws so only Democrats can get elected.

Sigmund Freud described what these marchers are doing as “psychological projection,” a defense mechanism that occurs when a person attributes their own unacceptable thoughts, feelings, and motives to someone else to deny their own guilt, shame, or fears.

Ideally, it would be great if we could gather all the spurious “No Kings” marchers together and put them on a couch in one massive psychoanalytic therapy session to heal whatever trauma ails them. Since this is quite unlikely, the only real alternative is to defeat these people at the polls so they can never be able to impose their deranged views of how we should all arrange our lives to satisfy their emotional distress or imaginary fears.

We know who the real kings, are and they reside among the marchers who self-righteously believe they know what’s best for you and me. What makes them so dangerous is that they have no self-awareness or clue that they are the real danger to the freedoms and liberties our forefathers fought and died for.

Leave a comment

Share Santa Barbara Current

Subscribe now

******

Ballots are out. Only a few day remain until the Nov 3 election.

If you plan to vote early, start with California Current’s proposition guide and Statewide Candidate recommendations—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.

NO on 1. The Con Job

NO on 2. Supersizing California’s Slush Fund

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

*******

Need a little help with the 20 judicial retention choices for the Second Appellate District (Los Angeles, Ventura, San Luis Obispo, and Santa Barbara Counties)? Click here.

Have you ever gone down a rabbit hole? Well, for the past four years, I have been in one: deep down into the bunny warren that is the California State Capital Legislature. I feel like Alice in Wonderland and Gregg Hart is the Cheshire Cat. He facilitates the craziness, voting with the Democrat supermajority, grins, and disappears when the bill comes due.

He did not invent every absurd law, but he voted for them and even authored some. Then he smiles and fades when Central Coast residents ask why their gas, power, and housing bills keep climbing.

Hart follows the extreme agenda Sacramento legislation has in place and not the people who live and work here. This agenda and bills that are created and passed is causing our state to go the wrong way.

Higher Taxes, More Regulations, Less Freedom, More Confusion

More taxes and fees increase the financial burden on California families, workers, and businesses. Hart agrees that California and District 37 is too expensive, but he continues to vote for more bills that will create higher taxes. (Editor’s note: The California Tax Foundation (a taxpayers’ advocacy group) reported that the Legislature and Governor Newsom approved $14.3 billion in annual tax and fee increases during the 2025-26 session. Some 1,040 bills were passed into law and become effective January 1, 2027.)

AB 1421 Vehicles: Road Usage Charge Technical Advisory Committee (2025-2026) Rabbit Hole. Hart in on the Assembly Transportation Committee and voted YES to study how we can charge constituents taxes on the mileage they drive.

AB-1228 Fast food restaurant industry: Fast Food Council: health, safety, employment, and minimum wage (2023-2024) Rabbit Hole. This has only caused more expense on the consumers.

More Regulations: Additional government mandates increase compliance costs, paperwork, and obstacles to economic growth. Hart voted YES on all the following…

AB 1448 Coastal Resources: California Coastal Sanctuary: Tidelands and Submerged Lands: Oil and Gas Development (2025-2026) Rabbit Hole. Authored by Hart. It limits circumstances in which the state can authorize offshore oil and gas extraction and places additional restrictions on using state waters to support future federal offshore drilling.

AB 631 Oil and gas: enforcement: penalties (2023-2024) Rabbit Hole. Authored by Hart. This bill significantly expanded California’s authority to penalize oil and gas operators

AB1866 Oil and gas: idle wells. (2023-2024) Rabbit Hole. Again, authored by Hart, this bill increases the financial obligations placed on oil companies.

We Californians have energy beneath our feet; why are we making it more expensive to access it?

Less Freedom

Expanding government restrictions on our Second Amendment rights.

AB-1127 Firearms: converter pistols (2025-2026) Rabbit Hole. Hart is co-author of this bill. It restricts licensed dealers from selling certain otherwise semiautomatic pistols, even when no conversion device is installed.

SB-2 Firearms (2023-2024) Rabbit Hole. It changed concealed-carry licensing requirements and greatly expanded statutory “sensitive place” restrictions governing where licensed individuals may carry concealed firearms.

One wonders just how far Sacramento lawmakers will go in gutting the Second Amendment. Increasingly complex laws create uncertainty for families, businesses, and communities trying to understand their rights and responsibilities.

The Government-Spending Waste-and-Fraud Rabbit Hole.

Greg Hart is currently on the Budget Committee and has approved the budget every year since he has been in office with an operating deficit of many billions of dollars each year.

Hart is also the chair of Subcommittee No. 7 on Accountability and Oversight. Is he investigating any of this waste and fraud? Here some examples:

1. Homelessness spending: Billions spent, incomplete evidence of results. 2024 State Auditor findings.

2. Employment Development Department (EDD): Improper payments and operational failures. Improper unemployment payments, 2023-2024.

3. High-speed rail: Project spending, delays, and cost accountability. The State Auditor’s review identified flawed decision.

The people of California deserve to know whether their representatives are listening to the communities they serve—and whether Sacramento’s policies are delivering the results those communities need.

None of this happened by accident. A one-party supermajority sets the agenda. Hart keeps the machinery running and the grin intact. When roads still need repair, young families are priced out, and energy costs hit working people hardest, the Cheshire Cat of the Central Coast just smiles and vanishes.

The laws stay, along with the rising taxes, burdensome regulations, and policies that leave families struggling to get ahead.

Let us Follow Common Sense, Not Confusion

Common Sense — Protect our freedoms, strengthen families, respect parental rights, and demand government accountability.

Real Solutions — Lower the cost of living, reduce wasteful spending, support businesses, improve education, and keep our communities safe.

A Stronger Tomorrow — Restore opportunity, encourage homeownership, create good-paying jobs, and build a brighter future for our children and grandchildren.

California needs leadership that solves problems—not creates more of them.

Let’s get California out of the rabbit hole and back on the path to prosperity!

Vote Sari Domingues CA State Assembly #37 by Tuesday November 3, 2026.

Leave a comment

Share Santa Barbara Current

Subscribe now

******

Ballots are out.

If you plan to vote early, start with California Current’s proposition guide and Statewide Candidate recommendations—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.

NO on 1. The Con Job

NO on 2. Supersizing California’s Slush Fund

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

*******

Need a little help with the 20 judicial retention choices for the Second Appellate District (Los Angeles, Ventura, San Luis Obispo, and Santa Barbara Counties)? Click here.

Activist Judges Legislate from the Bench. Voters Should Stop Them.

If you have already opened your November ballot, you’ve seen the 20 judicial retention questions. You may have missed these in the past, as they are often sandwiched between the partisan offices and propositions. Most voters glance at the unfamiliar names and reflexively vote YES.

That trusting habit has become very costly.

A Quiet Process No Longer

California’s retention elections were designed to be quiet. This year they offer one of the few practical checks on appellate and Supreme Court justices who treat the law as a vehicle for activist policy. After years of one-party partisan appointments, that pattern is hard to miss.

Tax and Housing

In Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association v. City of Los Angeles, Justices Armen Tamzarian and Audra Mori upheld Measure ULA, the city’s progressive real-estate transfer tax. They ruled that voters could use the initiative process to impose the tax without the supermajority requirements of Proposition 13 and the city charter. A neutral reading of the law did not compel that result. These activist judges put their own left fingers on the scale.

A similar approach has occurred in housing policy. In California Apartment Association v. City of Pasadena, Justice Natalie Stone and Presiding Justice Gonzalo Martinez largely upheld Measure H. The measure imposed rent control, just-cause eviction rules, and a tenant-dominated board. The court rejected arguments that the measure rewrote the city charter and could not be adopted by initiative. The outcome tracked the political preferences of those who appointed these justices more closely than any clear constitutional rationale.

Speech and the Racial Justice Act

At the California Supreme Court, the activist streak is on full display. In Taking Offense v. State of California, Justices Joshua Groban and Kelli Evans joined the majority that preserved a law requiring long-term care staff to use residents’ preferred pronouns. The Court treated the rule as a regulation of conduct rather than compelled speech. Contested social norms were treated as settled legal conclusions.

The California Supreme Court used the Racial Justice Act to reverse a death sentence based on a prosecutor’s language. In People v. Bankston, the Court reversed Bankston’s death sentence because of the prosecutor’s “Bengal tiger” and “thug” language under the Racial Justice Act, even without a showing that the language affected the jury’s verdict on guilt. The convictions stand, for now. The case was sent back for resentencing, and the prosecution may again seek the death penalty. Groban joined the majority; Evans agreed with the reversal but said the Court should have gone further.

The Broader Pattern

The result of California’s activist judiciary is the undemocratic expansion of progressive policies. Tenant protections expand. New revenue tools are created and legislation limiting government is rejected. Gender rules are enforced. Racial language is policed. Far too many justices act as partners in a progressive political project rather than as neutral interpreters of existing law.

A Bench Without Diversity

Most of the justices on the ballot are Democrats. Over the past decade of appointments by Governors Brown and Newsom, the share of registered Democrats is estimated at 90–95 percent, roughly double the party’s share of registered voters in California. How can all Californians be fairly represented under such a lopsided judiciary?

How We Evaluated the Record

Craig Huey (craighuey.com) has long evaluated judges based upon questionnaires, case records, appointment history, and a focus on activism versus restraint. We built on that process by analyzing the decisions of each justice on the ballot. The Yes/No recommendations that follow reflect that review.

Our Recommendations: Mostly Nos

The Supreme Court justices on the ballot, Joshua Groban and Kelli Evans, merit a loud and clear NO. Their names appear on multiple decisions that expand progressive policy at the expense of clear textual limits.

Within the Second District, our recommendations largely align with Huey’s assessments. The sole exception is Tari L. Cody. Huey rates as an “acceptable” retention. A closer look at her opinion rejecting Bill of Rights challenges better supports a NO vote. Popular outcomes in California do not justify departing from the Constitution. If voters dislike the law, they can elect legislators to change it. They should not expect politically aligned judges to rewrite it.

Insist on Restraint

California’s one-party domination has produced a bench skewed toward activism. A no vote does not require labeling any justice corrupt. It requires only the judgment that the published record shows a preference for activism over judicial restraint. The question is simple: whether any of the 20 individual judges are acting as impartial arbiters (Vote YES), or as partisan appointees (Vote No). In our judgement, only four pass the basic test; 16 fail it, some miserably.

Retention elections were never meant to become policy referendums just as justices were never meant to be policy makers. However, when justices consistently favor outcomes over the law, the ballot becomes a citizen’s only direct check on such unchecked power.

Voters have one clear chance to insist that justice remain fair and blind, not blindly partisan.

Come November 3rd, that chance should not be missed.

Leave a comment

Share Santa Barbara Current

Subscribe now

******

Ballots are out.

If you plan to vote early, start with California Current’s proposition guide and Statewide Candidate recommendations—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 2. Supersizing California’s Slush Fund

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

*******

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.

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.

Leave a comment

Share Santa Barbara Current

Subscribe now

******

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 2. Supersizing California’s Slush Fund

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 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.

Leave a comment

Share Santa Barbara Current

Subscribe now

******

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 2. Supersizing California’s Slush Fund

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.

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

Leave a comment

Share Santa Barbara Current

Subscribe now

******

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 2. Supersizing California’s Slush Fund

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.

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.

Leave a comment

Share Santa Barbara Current

Subscribe now

******

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 2. Supersizing California’s Slush Fund

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.

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?

Leave a comment

Share Santa Barbara Current

Subscribe now

Community Calendar:

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.

Leave a comment

Share Santa Barbara Current

Subscribe now

Community Calendar:

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!

Leave a comment

Share Santa Barbara Current

Subscribe now

Community Calendar

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

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.

Leave a comment

Share Santa Barbara Current

Subscribe now

Community Calendar

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

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.

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

Leave a comment

Share Santa Barbara Current

Subscribe now

Community Calendar

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

The World According to Baseball Cards

When I was a kid in the 1950s, we all collected baseball cards. This was before we even had a major league team here in California. You would buy a Topps bubble gum pack that contained some cards… throw away the crummy cardboard gum… and hope you would get a Mickey Mantle, a Ted Williams, or a Pee Wee Reese.

But you w…

Read more

That this state can count on less than 25% of registered voters is a situation that needs to be corrected.

Somehow.

Some day.

So, how about today as the starting point for Republicans to becoming a force once again in California?

California Republicans do not need to persuade every Californian to become a Republican. They just need to persuade Californians that California can be governed differently.

Read more

About half of SBUSD students are not meeting grade-level standards in reading. In math, the ratio is closer to six in ten. That is not a talking point. That’s thousands of kids already playing catch-up through no fault of their own.

How does a generous and educated city let that become normal?

Ask district leaders and you hear two familiar answers. Some s…

Read more

Q. Who are the real environmentalists?

A. Not Santa Barbara County’s three “liberal” Democrats.

This past week, the SB County Board of Supervisors, on a 3-2 vote, with Nelson and Lavagnino opposing, voted to proceed with banning all future oil development in Santa Barbara County.

The vote wasn’t shocking. In past hearings, Roy Lee, Laura Capps, and Joan Hartmann have made it clear that they could care less about the jobs that will be lost. (Interesting because these are the three liberal supervisors that claim they care about minorities and environmental justice, and yet 80% of the jobs in North County in the oil industry are held by Hispanics who will end up unemployed under this policy direction.)

They could care less about the fact that the county, which has significant financial problems, could receive an additional 20-30 million dollars in property taxes if oil projects proposed in North County could go forward.

Read more

Oh, where to turn?

We’ve been having discussions lately about tar seeping up on our beaches. That’s what the Chumash called “pismo”… and they used it to waterproof their boats for centuries.

It occurs naturally.

And it has forever.

I recall having to clean off my Adidas after an innocent jog along Haskell’s Beach in the ‘70s. What the heck? Oil spill? Nope.…

Read more

On September 14, 2001, the German destroyer FGS Lütjens asked permission to pull alongside the USS Winston S. Churchill in the English Channel. Her crew held a banner reading, “We Stand by You.”

Read more

We gave away jobs, weakened our independence, borrowed trillions, and called it progress.

During the housing crisis, I watched wealthy people borrow against their homes, walk away from the debt, and drive off in their Porsches. Some left behind unpaid gardeners, contractors, and tradesmen; everyday people who needed every dollar they earned.

That image st…

Read more