Many thanks to Ms. Adams from shedding light on this ongoing confidence game. I would ask; where is our SB County Republican Party and Local Tax Payers Association? Asleep at the wheel?
Yes, this is a typical lefty con game. Burdening one segment of our community (property owners) with footing the bill for others, knowing full well that rents cannot be raised accordingly to offset increased taxes due to rent control. What a sham, but wait there’s more! At the same time float a policy under SBCC “Promise Program” that all local high school students can attend free of tuition. Yes, free of tuition! What can go wrong? That’s right, stick it to the minority of SB residents lucky enough to own real estate!
Everyone wins under this sham except the taxpayers. The unions, students, faculty and lefty activists, all winners.
There appears to be an escalation in local resentment of the “have and have nots” relative to property ownership. Where are our elected officials speaking up for us? Nowhere? Why? Because our local officials are under the financial obligation of the Unions to toe the line. Very simple, interrupting the money train will cause Union support to turn on them.
What we need here locally is a Howard Jarvis style taxpayer revolt! Enough is enough…no hay dinero!
Thank you for taking the time to fight this! SBCC has sadly gone the way of public miseducation and administrative bloat, seen throughout the entire public education field. We need more accountability for the vast amounts of tax money this institution already gets, and rewarding them with even more meets Einstein’s definition of insanity.
Hi Peter: I have no personal knowledge of the actual ratings of SBCC and after looking it up on Google one can get more confused as the rankings are arbitrary. I'd certainly like to think that the nursing program is a good one. There is a lot of competition , though, as I have seen over 100 nursing schools in California listed. A little off this particular point but I think important, is how many actual local students (from Santa Barbara) attend compared to out of towners. Originally community colleges were built to service the local town but in this day in age when money seems to be the goal in education, I am guessing that is not the case. More's the pity.
Haha: The nursing program left flying in the wind with local hard working deserving nursing students abandoned! Generous donor David Grotenhuis stepped up w Westmont’s college opening a downtown nursing program as a stop gap for SBCC’s neglect, its failed priorities leaving local
108: Like many paraprofessionals, housing costs impact local retention for SBCC two-year nursing graduates. Need for services is acute. No dispute there. Other locations offer more attractive employment options.
The SBCC ranked coding program is an online program. It does not require campus infrastructure.
The SBCC 2 year associate degree nursing program now has competition with Westmont's four year nursing degree program, with unfortunately few two year degree nursing grads hired locally.
As critical as community college vocational training programs are, they are very expensive to operate - they have strict student/faculty ratios, and take large dedicated classroom space that cannot be used for other purposes.
However, granting vocational certificate degrees is a primary community college function under the state education code. Auto-tech, radiology, marine diving along, cosmetology, LVN along with the highly regarded ADN programs are among SBCC's vocational degree offerings.
J.L. - Licensed clinics plus Long term care medical facilities locally for rehab, Alzheimer’s, elder needing skilled nursing, and for mentally treatment ) HIRE and are dependent on SBCC 2-year nurses. SBCC abandoned the medical community. What’s the basis for your statement about no jobs for 2-year RNs? If a RN wants acute care specialty work, they transfer for a 4-or 6-year RN degree.
According to East Coast niche.com whose rating you reference. BETTER business Bureau reports Niche cannot be trusted: the bulk of revenue then came from partners who helped schools market and advertised to potential students, ranking reflect revenues. Same holds when Aspen Institute ranked SBCC #1 decades ago: impossible for a mediocre school to attract donor dollars. Everyone blindly jumps on bandwagon of the #1 Team.
SBCC is like a big leech sucking money from tax payers. It is no longer fit for the local purpose for which it was created.
It's mission has become one of self-perpetuation for the financial benefit of the people employed there and students who are not remotely connected with Santa Barbara, who also contribute significantly to the local housing shortage.
The campus is perfect place to build more affordable housing.
Approving measure P would be just another act to accelerate the decline in livability here in Santa Barbara.
Aug 15·edited Aug 15Liked by Santa Barbara Current
I read this article titled "As I Was Saying...NO, NO, NO ON MEASURE P"
By Denice Spangler Adams............. and I quote "Total debt service on Measure P (Principal and Interest $198M) is almost a half billion dollars: $451,555,000! Taxes impact the cost of our housing."
BANG......... Thank you for that article Denice Spangler Adams because that is
EXACTLY what my retired City College neighbors have been telling me for years and years
while they PULLED THEIR HAIR OUT over the Destruction of a once Solid City College.
However the much, much bigger problem here in this SB County is the utter failire of the
So-Called-Leaders to manage anything burying the city and county into the poor house
with loads of debts.......... and failure to proivde basic "Honest Services" to the SB Community.
Thank you, Denice, for a terrific column. I've sent links to this and Justin Shores' column yesterday to everyone I know in Santa Barbara.
Santa Barbara is in an abusive relationship with the people who govern it, just like a beautiful woman who's under the control of a gigolo. The gigolo (that would be our government) constantly gaslights and derides the woman for having so much when there are so many who are way more deserving than she is. And the beautiful woman can never do enough for her gigolo. Will the beautiful woman wake up to the reality of this gigolo? And if she does, how much will it cost her to get rid of him? Or will the gigolo catch on and do what so many con artists have done - kill her?
Santa Barbara needs to wake up. It's going to be costly to get rid of the sociopaths with power over this city. Especially since they're anointed by the Ted Bundy look-alike in the governor's seat. But let's make sure Santa Barbara lives the life it deserves: loved and protected, so it can continue to be a truly great community. Not just a haven for rip-off creeps.
Education, rather lack of education is what our government wants.
If the voter is not educated they vote with pure emotion, with their party. They fall for the “free soda & no homework” lies. They fall for the Hollywood paid promoters and paid social influencers.
As a donor to Fair Education, we saw firsthand the wasteful and divisive spending by SBCC. Over $1.5 million spent on so called Just Communities college programs that told students that whites and Christians are systemically racist and bigoted against all others. And then the college tried to ban the Pledge of Allegiance. All under the warped guidance of Trustee Aboud and a willing board. It’s clear SBCC is on the wrong path and certainly does not warrant more tax money from the community. Thomas Cole
That guy who runs Just Communities is very silly. Unfortunately his line of guilt tripping works with the white liberal ladies here and it gets taken seriously. One thing that's always amazed me is how they are ok with paying this guy money for doing nothing but massaging victimization - but really stingy when it comes to tipping the people who are actually trying to earn a living by driving cabs or waiting tables.
Denice, thank you for your many years of service to our community. I remember those days fondly - when 'civic entrepreneurs' from very diverse backgrounds engaged with our elected officials and unelected 'civil servants' (remember that title?) to tackle complex issues facing us. Not only is City College not as great as it once was, but our community as well. As many prior comments point out, we are bombarded with increasing volume of poorly thought-out rules and regulations. So much so, that I, as a dedicated small company owner, am really to lock my doors, to go on STRIKE. I have been slowing coming to the conclusion that continuing to pay taxes has crossed the line into supporting unethical behaviors and actions. What if we taxpayers all hung CLOSED FOR THE DAY signs on our shop doors, made our own signboards and walked down state street... or block the freeway as they did in SLO?? I know many of us think along similar lines, and we share our frustration, and so feel a little less lonely - but can we move that into action? Its admittedly a low probability of success, but at least i would have given them notice that I wont be supporting their pensions any longer.
CD: Another Prop 13 style tax revolt and the repeal of 16th Amendment are perfectly proper considerations today. Put the partisan tax and spend monster back in the bottle. Otherwise we are all accessories to these growing Big Government crimes against our American fundamentals.
What is the full-time equivalent enrollment now ? How many noninstrutional employees are there now ? How many were there the last time enrollment was so low ?
Why not balance your budget and fund maintenance by reducing non instructional employees and “reduced time from teaching” for non- instructional activities?
Well that would be to easy Mr. Naylor and actually require City College "To Act" like a responsible private "Enterprise" or private "Buisness" to actually make money but alas
no no City College is like any other SB City and County Money Guzzler that sucks the Community of all resources including it's money to support another "Money Pit" common
to the financially incompetent So-Called-Leaders aka Tom Hanks the "Money Pit" Movie>>
SBCC's Measure P bait and switch undermines confidence in all future bond issues presented to voters. When the original 2008 SBCC bond measure passed, if was for a fixed term and voters agreed to honor this. Voter confidence in that original 2008 SBCC bond issue has not been earned by the new board of trustees and their ongoing administrative and fiscal mismanagement of the college since that time.
This is 2024, the current board of trustees needs to be accountable for what they did in the intervening years on their own and make their best case to earn the voters confidence on their own.
SBCC needs to explain how they took a college in 2008 with strong reserves, fiscal probity, and community good will to become the college today, now running a deficit and now ask local property owners to make up the difference.
It is folly to extend the 2008 bond issue terms while letting the current 2024 SBCC board of trustees avoid all responsibility for their own now long track record of college mismanagement and current deficit budget status. Do not let this current 2024 SBCC board of trustees coat-tail the good will earned by the college back in 2008, and who now demand those original 2008 terms be extended.
This is no longer your grandfather's SBCC that had earned the community's confidence in 2008. This is a new 2024 SBCC and it needs to make its own case to the voters on its own. Vote no on Measure P and come back on your own terms and track record SBCC. Do not hoodwink voters into thinking this is still the 2008 SBCC and they just asking voters to extend those original 2008 terms. The current 2024 SBCC has not earned this vote.
Is this a capital appreciation bond with accrued interest that doesn't pay debt service until 2033, which is the reason for the almost $500 million in cumulative debt service, or is it just amending the 2008 bond issue, which I didn't think was permissible? Capital appreciation bonds have many problems: they have higher interest rates and the compounded accrued interest results in far higher cumulative debt service and principal repayment than current interest rate bonds.
Lou, hope to God this is not a capital appreciation bond! I feel they are being too coy about this former 2008 bond re-financing scheme with too little and too distorted basic information at this time - not a good way to pass any bond issue. It is a pig in a poke. Please keep asking your questions, Lou and keep us informed. I had not even thought they would consider a capital appreciation bond. Yikes.
There was a time when across the board SBCC had superior instruction. No longer.
I watched a high tech, self funding exercise physiology lab be gutted and then without fan fare eliminated. I watched hiring of instructors that used academic funds for personal purposes. They were fired but the money never returned.
In social sciences the school was and is dragged down by political correctness forget fact.
The current trustee's(?) are suffering under delusion. Pointing to past rankings and pretending to keep similar standards.
How much more? How much money is to be put on the taxpayers to fix what was intentionally broken? Why is the nursing program still viable? Because Cottage needs it as part of their public service education.
How much longer are the tax and spend types going to deceive the public?
It seems to me that many people agree with you, but nobody wants to put their name on a statement against ‘affordable housing’. It labels a person as unkind or something, even though the truth is that welfare is seldom kind. Thank you for your courage
What is a healthy percentage of government subsidized or price controlled housing in any community? At what point does government micro-managing of the economic base of a community rot it from within? Is it time to now demand an upper limit to this continual government takeover of our total housing stock?
We need to know this before we keep adding more and more "affordable" housing and for whom. Where is a tipping point where the economic vitality of a community is lost forever.
We are embarking into uncharted territory from this point foward. What other community has potentially at least one quarter of it entire housing stock under strict government control as we have locally?
What is the upper limit for government subsidized housing? Did we ever vote and approve this number. Where is the audit for the mutual community benefit from these growing numbers of government-controlled housing units already in place, besides being only a windfall benefit for a few.
We have no facts; continual just emotional appeals for more, more, more, more. .........to what end goal. Who in fact is driving this continual push for more and more housing units taken off the tax rolls and locked into permanent government mandated subsidies. Where are we now. Where were we ten, twenty years ago.
How did the community as a whole benefit, and more importantly who in fact specifically benefited from this vast increase in government-controlled housing. What are our parameters to measure success? Where are the deficits created by this past growth of government controlled housing starting to show up?
Government intervention always destroys that which it seeks to remedy. Nothing is as expensive as that which has benefited from government affordability efforts. Affordable healthcare, affordable college and inflation reduction come to mind. As a student I benefitted from rent control in Santa Monica. To secure a cheap apartment I had to enter into a black market. First I had to pay off a middle man $1200 (1982 dollars) in order to have my application accepted. Then I was chosen on the basis of having the highest income among applicants. This is counter to the intention of rent control. Is the process for securing affordable housing in Santa Barbara corrupted?
One day perhaps after it’s too late, folks will come out of the closest. I’ve built lots of affordable and subsidized housing via HUD and the CA Finance Agency. The abuses are so blatant, I quit. My great friend the undersecretary of HUD: she quit. we live in an administrative, totalitarian county, state and country. November 5 is a critical election! Anyone with integrity and ability cannot work in government except to serve as an inside mole to inform the private sector who is stuck paying for it all. Government is synonymous with GREED. Affordable, taxpayer subsidized housing cannot discriminate against unlawful (illegal allies) residents or foreigners.
For many years, I have made it standard practice to just vote NO on any and all bond measures. There is never enough information about how it is going to be used, managed, allocated, etc. To me, it's like someone on the freeway off ramp with a sign.
There is also a statewide school construction bond on the ballot, sponsored by the teachers unions. This additional school bond issue again asks property owners state wide to fund school infrastructure, since much of the already mandatory Prop 98 school funding is also getting spent on personnel costs with little set aside for capital improvements.
Same fungible shell game that SBCC is asking locally. Prop 98 already guarantees 50% of all state general funds goes automatically to K-14 schools which does include community colleges. Yet these schools fail to use this generous Prop 98 tax payer support to keep their plants in good repair.
The open maw of public education funding in this state deserves a far better return than a #45-ranked K-12 system and the ongoing lack of accountability for the SBCC board's failed taxpayer oversight duties.
We currently have a Democrat super-majority legislature (Gregg Hart and Monique Limon) which is increasingly driving away California businesses reducing state tax revenues which does depress the amount of state funding available for schools.
So rather than the Democrat super-majority reforming their long-standing anti-business practices, our "progressive local legislators" (Hart/Limon) double down on taxing those who are still around in order to keep covering up their anti-business policies.
Voters also need to change Sacramento, along with taking a much harder look at new demands for more property taxes. Time to stop this circus. If there is a (D) by any candidates name, realize this now stands for DEBT.
Thank you Denise for your concise argument against MEASURE P!
PEOPLE LISTEN TO DENISE! I feel these arguments are the same as those I would use against the Lompoc School bond, which will create an insurmountable debt to our children all the way to our grand and great- grand children. Presently, the state and country is close to fiscal failure - check out the gigantic increase in the cost of living.
The nursing program was stellar, but totally impacted and took so long to get into that students who completed their prerequisites had to wait and wonder if and when they could get in. A total failure on the part of administration and the board. Students had to commute Channel Islands College to finish. Many of those who were in the program didn’t have cars and were already financially constrained, but had to find their own way to Camarillo just to complete the program. Totally unforgivable. We have students who would do anything to have real vocational education that partners with a local pipeline for employment and SBCC is supposed to fill that role. Local residents can be properly educated for local skilled and well paying jobs and they are already here. How much money have they squandered on bogus equity garbage? SBCC was created to serve our community and now it primarily serves the administrators and feckless board. It’s worth saving, but we would have to unwind the horrible decisions that have thrown it off track. Denise Adams is 100% correct. A brilliant OpEd. Thank you!
Many thanks to Ms. Adams from shedding light on this ongoing confidence game. I would ask; where is our SB County Republican Party and Local Tax Payers Association? Asleep at the wheel?
Yes, this is a typical lefty con game. Burdening one segment of our community (property owners) with footing the bill for others, knowing full well that rents cannot be raised accordingly to offset increased taxes due to rent control. What a sham, but wait there’s more! At the same time float a policy under SBCC “Promise Program” that all local high school students can attend free of tuition. Yes, free of tuition! What can go wrong? That’s right, stick it to the minority of SB residents lucky enough to own real estate!
Everyone wins under this sham except the taxpayers. The unions, students, faculty and lefty activists, all winners.
There appears to be an escalation in local resentment of the “have and have nots” relative to property ownership. Where are our elected officials speaking up for us? Nowhere? Why? Because our local officials are under the financial obligation of the Unions to toe the line. Very simple, interrupting the money train will cause Union support to turn on them.
What we need here locally is a Howard Jarvis style taxpayer revolt! Enough is enough…no hay dinero!
Thank you for taking the time to fight this! SBCC has sadly gone the way of public miseducation and administrative bloat, seen throughout the entire public education field. We need more accountability for the vast amounts of tax money this institution already gets, and rewarding them with even more meets Einstein’s definition of insanity.
Evidently, SBCC is still a very highly rated educational institution. Great Nursing program as well!
https://sbcc.edu/newsandevents/pressreleases/2023-9-20-SBCC-Ranked-Number-One-Community-College-Campus-Number-Three-Online-Medical-Coding-Program.php
Hi Peter: I have no personal knowledge of the actual ratings of SBCC and after looking it up on Google one can get more confused as the rankings are arbitrary. I'd certainly like to think that the nursing program is a good one. There is a lot of competition , though, as I have seen over 100 nursing schools in California listed. A little off this particular point but I think important, is how many actual local students (from Santa Barbara) attend compared to out of towners. Originally community colleges were built to service the local town but in this day in age when money seems to be the goal in education, I am guessing that is not the case. More's the pity.
Haha: The nursing program left flying in the wind with local hard working deserving nursing students abandoned! Generous donor David Grotenhuis stepped up w Westmont’s college opening a downtown nursing program as a stop gap for SBCC’s neglect, its failed priorities leaving local
Medical facilities without a reliable supply
Of nurses. Faculty Senate is militant: work remote, 4-day work week, same compensation with lifelong pensions. Consider: is SBCC a criminal front for DNC? Possibly! https://transparentcalifornia.com/salaries/2022/santa-barbara-city-college/?page=40
108: Like many paraprofessionals, housing costs impact local retention for SBCC two-year nursing graduates. Need for services is acute. No dispute there. Other locations offer more attractive employment options.
The SBCC ranked coding program is an online program. It does not require campus infrastructure.
The SBCC 2 year associate degree nursing program now has competition with Westmont's four year nursing degree program, with unfortunately few two year degree nursing grads hired locally.
As critical as community college vocational training programs are, they are very expensive to operate - they have strict student/faculty ratios, and take large dedicated classroom space that cannot be used for other purposes.
However, granting vocational certificate degrees is a primary community college function under the state education code. Auto-tech, radiology, marine diving along, cosmetology, LVN along with the highly regarded ADN programs are among SBCC's vocational degree offerings.
J.L. - Licensed clinics plus Long term care medical facilities locally for rehab, Alzheimer’s, elder needing skilled nursing, and for mentally treatment ) HIRE and are dependent on SBCC 2-year nurses. SBCC abandoned the medical community. What’s the basis for your statement about no jobs for 2-year RNs? If a RN wants acute care specialty work, they transfer for a 4-or 6-year RN degree.
Did you just miss the entire point or what?
She noted that. Her point was that academics are slipping and costs are skyrocketing without ANY accountability!!
According to East Coast niche.com whose rating you reference. BETTER business Bureau reports Niche cannot be trusted: the bulk of revenue then came from partners who helped schools market and advertised to potential students, ranking reflect revenues. Same holds when Aspen Institute ranked SBCC #1 decades ago: impossible for a mediocre school to attract donor dollars. Everyone blindly jumps on bandwagon of the #1 Team.
Location #1. Of top 77 CA Community Colleges SBCC isn’t even listed.
SBCC is like a big leech sucking money from tax payers. It is no longer fit for the local purpose for which it was created.
It's mission has become one of self-perpetuation for the financial benefit of the people employed there and students who are not remotely connected with Santa Barbara, who also contribute significantly to the local housing shortage.
The campus is perfect place to build more affordable housing.
Approving measure P would be just another act to accelerate the decline in livability here in Santa Barbara.
I read this article titled "As I Was Saying...NO, NO, NO ON MEASURE P"
By Denice Spangler Adams............. and I quote "Total debt service on Measure P (Principal and Interest $198M) is almost a half billion dollars: $451,555,000! Taxes impact the cost of our housing."
BANG......... Thank you for that article Denice Spangler Adams because that is
EXACTLY what my retired City College neighbors have been telling me for years and years
while they PULLED THEIR HAIR OUT over the Destruction of a once Solid City College.
However the much, much bigger problem here in this SB County is the utter failire of the
So-Called-Leaders to manage anything burying the city and county into the poor house
with loads of debts.......... and failure to proivde basic "Honest Services" to the SB Community.
Howard Walther, member of a Military Family
Thank you, Denice, for a terrific column. I've sent links to this and Justin Shores' column yesterday to everyone I know in Santa Barbara.
Santa Barbara is in an abusive relationship with the people who govern it, just like a beautiful woman who's under the control of a gigolo. The gigolo (that would be our government) constantly gaslights and derides the woman for having so much when there are so many who are way more deserving than she is. And the beautiful woman can never do enough for her gigolo. Will the beautiful woman wake up to the reality of this gigolo? And if she does, how much will it cost her to get rid of him? Or will the gigolo catch on and do what so many con artists have done - kill her?
Santa Barbara needs to wake up. It's going to be costly to get rid of the sociopaths with power over this city. Especially since they're anointed by the Ted Bundy look-alike in the governor's seat. But let's make sure Santa Barbara lives the life it deserves: loved and protected, so it can continue to be a truly great community. Not just a haven for rip-off creeps.
True, hilarious.
They are getting thier WAKEUP Gong now ............ as folllows>>
https://www.fbi.gov/about/faqs/does-the-fbi-investigate-graft-and-corruption-in-local-government-and-in-state-and-local-police-departments
Thank you for posting an opposition.
Education, rather lack of education is what our government wants.
If the voter is not educated they vote with pure emotion, with their party. They fall for the “free soda & no homework” lies. They fall for the Hollywood paid promoters and paid social influencers.
They fall for the false advertising.
Why then, do government-run schools fail so miserably--as reflected by the home schooling movement?
As a donor to Fair Education, we saw firsthand the wasteful and divisive spending by SBCC. Over $1.5 million spent on so called Just Communities college programs that told students that whites and Christians are systemically racist and bigoted against all others. And then the college tried to ban the Pledge of Allegiance. All under the warped guidance of Trustee Aboud and a willing board. It’s clear SBCC is on the wrong path and certainly does not warrant more tax money from the community. Thomas Cole
Thomascoleforcongress.com
That guy who runs Just Communities is very silly. Unfortunately his line of guilt tripping works with the white liberal ladies here and it gets taken seriously. One thing that's always amazed me is how they are ok with paying this guy money for doing nothing but massaging victimization - but really stingy when it comes to tipping the people who are actually trying to earn a living by driving cabs or waiting tables.
Denice, thank you for your many years of service to our community. I remember those days fondly - when 'civic entrepreneurs' from very diverse backgrounds engaged with our elected officials and unelected 'civil servants' (remember that title?) to tackle complex issues facing us. Not only is City College not as great as it once was, but our community as well. As many prior comments point out, we are bombarded with increasing volume of poorly thought-out rules and regulations. So much so, that I, as a dedicated small company owner, am really to lock my doors, to go on STRIKE. I have been slowing coming to the conclusion that continuing to pay taxes has crossed the line into supporting unethical behaviors and actions. What if we taxpayers all hung CLOSED FOR THE DAY signs on our shop doors, made our own signboards and walked down state street... or block the freeway as they did in SLO?? I know many of us think along similar lines, and we share our frustration, and so feel a little less lonely - but can we move that into action? Its admittedly a low probability of success, but at least i would have given them notice that I wont be supporting their pensions any longer.
CD: Another Prop 13 style tax revolt and the repeal of 16th Amendment are perfectly proper considerations today. Put the partisan tax and spend monster back in the bottle. Otherwise we are all accessories to these growing Big Government crimes against our American fundamentals.
Ask:
What is the full-time equivalent enrollment now ? How many noninstrutional employees are there now ? How many were there the last time enrollment was so low ?
Why not balance your budget and fund maintenance by reducing non instructional employees and “reduced time from teaching” for non- instructional activities?
No blank checks until reforms are made.
W Naylor
Well that would be to easy Mr. Naylor and actually require City College "To Act" like a responsible private "Enterprise" or private "Buisness" to actually make money but alas
no no City College is like any other SB City and County Money Guzzler that sucks the Community of all resources including it's money to support another "Money Pit" common
to the financially incompetent So-Called-Leaders aka Tom Hanks the "Money Pit" Movie>>
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TLLQquBdU8M
SBCC's Measure P bait and switch undermines confidence in all future bond issues presented to voters. When the original 2008 SBCC bond measure passed, if was for a fixed term and voters agreed to honor this. Voter confidence in that original 2008 SBCC bond issue has not been earned by the new board of trustees and their ongoing administrative and fiscal mismanagement of the college since that time.
This is 2024, the current board of trustees needs to be accountable for what they did in the intervening years on their own and make their best case to earn the voters confidence on their own.
SBCC needs to explain how they took a college in 2008 with strong reserves, fiscal probity, and community good will to become the college today, now running a deficit and now ask local property owners to make up the difference.
It is folly to extend the 2008 bond issue terms while letting the current 2024 SBCC board of trustees avoid all responsibility for their own now long track record of college mismanagement and current deficit budget status. Do not let this current 2024 SBCC board of trustees coat-tail the good will earned by the college back in 2008, and who now demand those original 2008 terms be extended.
This is no longer your grandfather's SBCC that had earned the community's confidence in 2008. This is a new 2024 SBCC and it needs to make its own case to the voters on its own. Vote no on Measure P and come back on your own terms and track record SBCC. Do not hoodwink voters into thinking this is still the 2008 SBCC and they just asking voters to extend those original 2008 terms. The current 2024 SBCC has not earned this vote.
Is this a capital appreciation bond with accrued interest that doesn't pay debt service until 2033, which is the reason for the almost $500 million in cumulative debt service, or is it just amending the 2008 bond issue, which I didn't think was permissible? Capital appreciation bonds have many problems: they have higher interest rates and the compounded accrued interest results in far higher cumulative debt service and principal repayment than current interest rate bonds.
Lou, hope to God this is not a capital appreciation bond! I feel they are being too coy about this former 2008 bond re-financing scheme with too little and too distorted basic information at this time - not a good way to pass any bond issue. It is a pig in a poke. Please keep asking your questions, Lou and keep us informed. I had not even thought they would consider a capital appreciation bond. Yikes.
There was a time when across the board SBCC had superior instruction. No longer.
I watched a high tech, self funding exercise physiology lab be gutted and then without fan fare eliminated. I watched hiring of instructors that used academic funds for personal purposes. They were fired but the money never returned.
In social sciences the school was and is dragged down by political correctness forget fact.
The current trustee's(?) are suffering under delusion. Pointing to past rankings and pretending to keep similar standards.
How much more? How much money is to be put on the taxpayers to fix what was intentionally broken? Why is the nursing program still viable? Because Cottage needs it as part of their public service education.
How much longer are the tax and spend types going to deceive the public?
It seems to me that many people agree with you, but nobody wants to put their name on a statement against ‘affordable housing’. It labels a person as unkind or something, even though the truth is that welfare is seldom kind. Thank you for your courage
What is a healthy percentage of government subsidized or price controlled housing in any community? At what point does government micro-managing of the economic base of a community rot it from within? Is it time to now demand an upper limit to this continual government takeover of our total housing stock?
We need to know this before we keep adding more and more "affordable" housing and for whom. Where is a tipping point where the economic vitality of a community is lost forever.
We are embarking into uncharted territory from this point foward. What other community has potentially at least one quarter of it entire housing stock under strict government control as we have locally?
What is the upper limit for government subsidized housing? Did we ever vote and approve this number. Where is the audit for the mutual community benefit from these growing numbers of government-controlled housing units already in place, besides being only a windfall benefit for a few.
We have no facts; continual just emotional appeals for more, more, more, more. .........to what end goal. Who in fact is driving this continual push for more and more housing units taken off the tax rolls and locked into permanent government mandated subsidies. Where are we now. Where were we ten, twenty years ago.
How did the community as a whole benefit, and more importantly who in fact specifically benefited from this vast increase in government-controlled housing. What are our parameters to measure success? Where are the deficits created by this past growth of government controlled housing starting to show up?
Government intervention always destroys that which it seeks to remedy. Nothing is as expensive as that which has benefited from government affordability efforts. Affordable healthcare, affordable college and inflation reduction come to mind. As a student I benefitted from rent control in Santa Monica. To secure a cheap apartment I had to enter into a black market. First I had to pay off a middle man $1200 (1982 dollars) in order to have my application accepted. Then I was chosen on the basis of having the highest income among applicants. This is counter to the intention of rent control. Is the process for securing affordable housing in Santa Barbara corrupted?
One day perhaps after it’s too late, folks will come out of the closest. I’ve built lots of affordable and subsidized housing via HUD and the CA Finance Agency. The abuses are so blatant, I quit. My great friend the undersecretary of HUD: she quit. we live in an administrative, totalitarian county, state and country. November 5 is a critical election! Anyone with integrity and ability cannot work in government except to serve as an inside mole to inform the private sector who is stuck paying for it all. Government is synonymous with GREED. Affordable, taxpayer subsidized housing cannot discriminate against unlawful (illegal allies) residents or foreigners.
For many years, I have made it standard practice to just vote NO on any and all bond measures. There is never enough information about how it is going to be used, managed, allocated, etc. To me, it's like someone on the freeway off ramp with a sign.
There is also a statewide school construction bond on the ballot, sponsored by the teachers unions. This additional school bond issue again asks property owners state wide to fund school infrastructure, since much of the already mandatory Prop 98 school funding is also getting spent on personnel costs with little set aside for capital improvements.
Same fungible shell game that SBCC is asking locally. Prop 98 already guarantees 50% of all state general funds goes automatically to K-14 schools which does include community colleges. Yet these schools fail to use this generous Prop 98 tax payer support to keep their plants in good repair.
The open maw of public education funding in this state deserves a far better return than a #45-ranked K-12 system and the ongoing lack of accountability for the SBCC board's failed taxpayer oversight duties.
We currently have a Democrat super-majority legislature (Gregg Hart and Monique Limon) which is increasingly driving away California businesses reducing state tax revenues which does depress the amount of state funding available for schools.
So rather than the Democrat super-majority reforming their long-standing anti-business practices, our "progressive local legislators" (Hart/Limon) double down on taxing those who are still around in order to keep covering up their anti-business policies.
Voters also need to change Sacramento, along with taking a much harder look at new demands for more property taxes. Time to stop this circus. If there is a (D) by any candidates name, realize this now stands for DEBT.
SBCC used to be a good school. Get woke, go broke, i guess. I'm ready for the pendulum to swing HARD in the other direction.
Thank you Denise for your concise argument against MEASURE P!
PEOPLE LISTEN TO DENISE! I feel these arguments are the same as those I would use against the Lompoc School bond, which will create an insurmountable debt to our children all the way to our grand and great- grand children. Presently, the state and country is close to fiscal failure - check out the gigantic increase in the cost of living.
The nursing program was stellar, but totally impacted and took so long to get into that students who completed their prerequisites had to wait and wonder if and when they could get in. A total failure on the part of administration and the board. Students had to commute Channel Islands College to finish. Many of those who were in the program didn’t have cars and were already financially constrained, but had to find their own way to Camarillo just to complete the program. Totally unforgivable. We have students who would do anything to have real vocational education that partners with a local pipeline for employment and SBCC is supposed to fill that role. Local residents can be properly educated for local skilled and well paying jobs and they are already here. How much money have they squandered on bogus equity garbage? SBCC was created to serve our community and now it primarily serves the administrators and feckless board. It’s worth saving, but we would have to unwind the horrible decisions that have thrown it off track. Denise Adams is 100% correct. A brilliant OpEd. Thank you!