Back to BLM, Defund the Police, and Cancel Culture?
By Bonne Donovan
Will we have another mass exodus of the police force?
Are our elected representatives indicating a reluctance to pursue individuals engaged in illegal activities? All illegal activities? Or just those they want to ignore? It raises concerns about whether the rule of law is being upheld.
This situation prompts questions about the morale within our police/sheriff departments and whether it is on the rise or decline.
Furthermore, these actions could jeopardize our financial stability, leading to even larger budget deficits.
Considering these challenges, perhaps our elected officials should consider contributing their salaries to address the demands they are making, thereby demonstrating their deep commitment to social justice.
Check out the projected deficit
Click on the this link that shows a potential deficit of $8,052,695.00 in 2026 all the way to a $21,893,962.00 deficit by 2030! (If you add the deficit listed per year, could we be at a total deficit of $89,299,341.00)
And they want to spend public funds to fund their narrative.
Could or should this be considered hypocritical?
Santa Barbara District Attorney John Savrnoch welcomes Pedal the Pacific, a group committed to bringing awareness of Sex Trafficking.
Pedal the Pacific had raised $62,000 of its goal of $80,000. Did the group receive anything from Santa Barbara?
This was the same day Savrnoch submitted his letter against the ICE raid at Glass House that saved a number of children from suspected trafficking.
Attached here is the DA’s letter
The City of Santa Barbara has another Special Meeting on Immigration Enforcement or Unenforcement
It is important you click and read each link
Council Agenda Report - FOLLOW UP ON TOWN HALL ON FEDERAL IMMIGRATION ENFORC.pdf
Measure C & General Fund Capital Projects FY2026-FY2027
A2690_City SB City Administrator_C658-20250728134303
Two letters to City Council, regarding above information/meeting
Dear City Council,
This is a veiled objective that will cost taxpayers more money, that the city does not have, to protect illegal immigrants by materially supporting illegal immigrants, defying federal laws on the matter.
The wording of the proposal deliberately does not identify illegal immigrants as the beneficiaries of the agenda proposals.
Given the broad application of this proposal, it will adversely affect citizens not only in the city, but also in adjoining areas.
The effects will also adversely affect the legal immigrants in and around Santa Barbara, in competition for jobs.
The illegal immigrants who will benefit from the passage of this proposal will contribute to existing budget deficits and increase in taxes for city residents.
Police protection for existing legal residents will likely be adversely affected by the increased population of illegal immigrants, among whom there is an unknown number of criminals.
Today, California has the largest number of illegal immigrants being protected by this sanctuary state. They outnumber the homeless Americans in California by a very large margin.
2024: There were 2,600,000 illegal immigrants in California.
2025: There were 187.084 homeless people in California.
The illegal immigrants out-number the number of homeless people by 13.89 times.
Gavin Newsom has already confessed that the state of California has lost more than $20 billion in unaccounted spending on the homeless problem. That money ends up in government deficits, which, in the end, we all pay for.
At this rate of lost government expenditure on one social issue, can you imagine the potential costs for the community at large for harboring 2.6 million illegal immigrants at nearly 14 times the number of the homeless population
Down to the level of the city of Santa Barbara, it is obvious that approval of this proposal will lead to substantial increases in city government budget deficits on top of existing annual deficits against the annual budgets going into the future and continued underfunded future retirement pensions and benefits.
The only way out for the city council will be increased taxes and/or reduced services with legal immigrants and American Citizens paying the bill.
The magnitude of these proposals cry out for a city-wide plebiscite, not a city council decision, whose paid members are largely servants of the Democrat Party.
DBH
Second Letter opposing SB City Council's Resolution 120.09 July 31, 2025
Dear Mayor Rowse and City Council,
I strongly oppose the city council's resolution to spend taxpayer dollars to join/finance the ACLU lawsuit and or any action against the Federal Government Dept of Homeland Security regarding illegal immigration.
Instead, stand up to Sacramento and fight the housing bills that are robbing the city of local input and control, which are changing our city rapidly by overbuilding and giveaways to out of touch developers. Hard fought preservation is going out the window in the guise of affordable housing, which is a misnomer. It is subsidized housing, of which the city already has 20%.
Regarding part B of the resolution, allocating financial resources? No. The city has no money but does have a healthy deficit, which is created by your outlandish spending on projects of dubious value such as this.
This grandstanding resolution in response to ICE, is not in your purview nor any reason you were elected.
Adopting changes of the city's legislative platform to advocate on behalf of immigrant communities at the State and Federal level is void by several articles in the Constitution, and another distraction from your elected capacity. Your job is to keep SB as good as it can be for the people who pay your salaries: the taxpayers. Your job ends at the city limits.
The only winner here will be those climbing another rung of their political future, on the backs of taxpayers.
What a waste of time and money, like State St Promenade, DLG Plaza, bike lanes detrimentally changing the city's circulation, while the skyline is disappearing for a "community benefit." Who benefits and how many?
You want to take on the Federal government, but you won't stand up to Sacramento. Why not?
Respectfully,
C. Neuhauser
Eastside
What they should be doing
The City Council (along with all elected officials) should provide clear guidance to those who express fear in our community. It is essential to address these concerns with practical advice to ensure safety and compliance with the law.
Since they aren’t, may I suggest the following:
Avoid visiting the residence of known gang members or individuals with outstanding warrants.
Report any knowledge of human or sex trafficking to the authorities immediately.
If trafficking is reported by someone else or a victim, your presence may be noted.
Do not work in prohibited environments; for example, individuals under 21 cannot work on a pot farm.
To avoid being caught in a raid, inform authorities of any illegal activities before going to work. This is what happened supposedly by former employees of Glass House.
Employees at California pot farms must not transport cannabis across state lines, as this is illegal. Some reports claim this is what was happening at Glass House.
If you are aware of such illegal transport, federal agents may soon intervene.
Seek assistance from Legal Aid to regularize your status; funding is available for support, due to our taxes being used for this.
Prioritize your safety and legal standing by staying informed about local laws.
Always act responsibly and report illegal activities to protect yourself and others.
Where the schools are in all of this
What are the regulations within the school district regarding the reporting of suspected child abuse or neglect? Is there a concern that cases involving immigrant children might be overlooked or inadequately addressed?
Additionally, what has become of the requirement for children to obtain a work permit from their school to work a limited number of hours during the academic year? (more hours were always allowed during the summer). Furthermore, where do organizations like Child Protective Services and CALM stand in this context? It raises questions about whether there are different standards applied based on a child’s background or status.
If you want the information it is out there
On July 11, at 11:56 am, I received the news reports regarding the raid in Camarillo/Carpinteria that was reportedly linked to child labor and potential trafficking. Despite the seriousness of these allegations, our elected officials and their staff have yet to acknowledge this situation publicly. This lack of response raises questions about the accountability of those in power.
It is perplexing that local and state officials, who have access to the same information as the rest of us, do not take the initiative to research these matters independently. Instead, they seem to adhere to a predetermined narrative. Furthermore, if our city, county, and state, claim not to question individuals' legal status, do they apply the same principle to the provision of free housing and other resources? Potentially knocking our citizens in need further down the line to receive help.
Is that not creating another crisis?
805DocuFund wants Fiesta Canceled!
The funny thing is, again 805DocuFund had another demand: Cancel Fiesta.
805UndocuFund executive Director Primitiva Hernandez says she does not want to see Fiesta take place this year. Speaking Tuesday July 15 outside the Board of Supervisors hearing room she said this was not the time for this type of event and had issues with its overall history in Santa Barbara.
She continued “My own learning has been acknowledging the struggles that the people here have gone through. And I think if we want to move forward in a positive way and reparations need to be made” (KEYT.com John Palminteri July 17, 2025)
This was before she headed to the City of Santa Barbara Special Meeting the same night with another demand.
Back to the sales tax
No sales tax is collected from street vendors, food trucks, retail that operate out of Trucks-Vans, selling goods. Same goes for scooter and B-Cycle rentals.
See how the Government plays you!
Viva La Fiesta!
Bonnie, thank you again for your excellent work. I have questions:
Is our government trying to send Santa Barbara into bankruptcy? I mean, actually doing what they're doing to put us into bankruptcy? They seem corrupt and uncaring enough to do it on purpose. And if so, why? What would be the gain? Who would gain from it? Or are they just too stupid to know that's what they're doing?
Why won't they stand up to Sacramento about the crazy eight story building we're being required to have behind the Mission? Why won't they stand up to the Fed about the airport noise and jet paths which cause pollution and disruption in the Goleta area for taxpaying residents and businesses - but they will fight the Fed about ICE? Do they really have that much contempt for the people who pay their salaries? And are the people who continue to vote them in just plain masochistic?
All those food carts magically appear staffed, stocked up, have a supply of cash, and are picked up at the end of the day. Coordinated logistics, purchasing, running employees without collecting FICA, unemployment tax, state or federal income tax, insurance, avoiding health code inspection and enforcement. They do not hire these people after vetting and doing required federal status checks. Who benefits? Why are the city and county agencies not sued for ignoring enforcement? They put citizens at risk, harm legitimate businesses, contribute to underfunding the state unemployment insurance fund, and more. It’s time for citizens and businesses to hold elected officials responsible for the actions. It’s time to hold city and county employees responsible for their actions.