Our electoral system rewards unions using their dues to elect their negotiating partners. The incentives are reversed from the private sector where efficiency, productivity and reduction of head count is the goal. In the public sector, the more employees, the more dues, the more political influence is generated. Thus the opposite of efficiency and productivity. The answer is to change the electoral system. It's a waste of time to merely complain or try to change this politician or that politician. Change the system. www.hearthepeople.org.
Which is one of the few functions enumerated in the constitution for the federal government. Secure borders and provide for the common defense. These are functions the Democratic Socialists would cut in favor of more spending on social programs, rebates for electric cars, windmills, student loans, redistribution of wealth from those who produce to those who do not.
Now, does that require all the other things that are done?
How much did it cost to kill the guys on a boat, that by NO MEANS could have ever made it to the US shore (not enough fuel)?
How much has it cost us for Trump to move a lot of the fleet to Iran, which has shown NO intention to attack us?
Why do we have a military that, as a percentage of the population, is massively larger than China, India, and Russia? Why do we have a military that, as a percentage of military spending worldwide, is 3x China's, 10x India's?
The DoD is a welfare program.
The government is there to provide for its citizens. Our government has decided to spend the most on the military rather than on its citizens.
It is called deterrence Dave and it costs money. It is certainly in the interests of the American citizens to protect us from foreign threats. It is foolish to wait for Iran to obtain nuclear capability and delivery capability before we act. In the spirit of a ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure, deterrence is the cheapest way to protect the American people. Is Obama's nuclear deal with Iran the equivalent of Chamberlain's "peace in our time"? In both cases the price of appeasement is much higher that the cost of deterrence.
Citizens demand services from the government. Those services require humans and other products. Those are not free. The humans (aka employees) are free (isn't that wonderful!) to work where an employer will hire them. If the government wants those employees to provide the services, then they have to pay them. If the employee can choose working at Panda Express for X$ or be a cop for X+2k$, where do you think the employee will work?
So yes, the private and public sectors compete for labor.
Are you telling me that you want the services and do not want to pay for them?
Are you telling me that you want the services but want to control labor costs so the employee makes less than flipping chicken?
All politics are local, David. The biggest government expense is service on the public debt, used primary to prop up the partisan "welfare state" and government personnel obligations, pensions and benefits, along with billions in leaky waste, fraud and abuse.
Are you suggesting the city should take out pension obligation bonds? Make your best case, David, and ground it in data and fact.
Loweg, I am not going to argue that the previous bennie programs were good for the taxpayer. This is NOT an SB local government issue; this is an ALL local governments' issue. When I lived in South Florida, this was a HUGE issue with the City of Hollywood. I like that Jerry Brown passed PERPA and that we now have a two-tier system: those pre-2013 and those post-2013. This eventually does work itself out on the death of the pre-2013 employees. However, courts across the country have stated that you can't retroactively and unilaterally change an agreement.
I will say that this was also a public company issue. Public companies, such as automakers, used to have 30-and-out programs that would pay you for a long time. And before you go, it was all unions, no, there were plenty of non-union companies that did this.
My wallet is actually happy for this. My father-in-law was at GE for 30ish years. He is now in his late 80s. He gets $4k a month plus healthcare from GE. Had he not had that, I suspect I would be stroking a check each month. Somehow, the adage of you don't marry the woman, you marry the family would have kicked in :)
So if you are asking me, would I cut services? Probably not. In SB, they seem fairly well balanced. Some I don't like, some I do. I know that I can't kill the pre-2013 issue from a legal and moral standpoint. I may not have been here when that employee earned that, but I more than likely have gotten some benefit from their work.
Guard against your paralysis by over-analysis deflection tactic, David .Yours is a tactic and serves no local purpose. However, continuing to do so, lands you well within in the intentional trolll category. Eric Berne - "Games People Play" - would be well-recommended read right now.
We are talking about the city of Santa Barbara, here and now and what local voters will soon face in the coming November elections., only a few months away. Local voters are change agents.
Now please tell us the pros and cons for the city to go out for "pension obligation bonds" to resolve this longstanding underfunded and growing pension deficit issue. (aka kick the can down the road one more time.)
Stellar reporting Bonnie, while continuing to sound the alarm about the ticking, looming, financial time bomb that threatens our standard of living. It’s the same old song and dance; spend more than the city takes in, continue to raise sales, TOT, weed and property taxes with no corresponding reduction in spending.
I’m really sorry to be pessimistic, but the only way out of the financial mess that liberal, Democratic Socialists have left us is for the city to declare bankruptcy! Nothing else ever seems to change. The Unions continue to fleece taxpayers, and clearly have an allegiance to their membership and not the citizens they serve.
Then, (as the grift goes) when conservatives start shouting for reforms, the left pulls the same old time tested reaction of playing the fascist, race card shouting down any chances of positive dialogue or change.
Really sad state of affairs with the same lefty playbook remaining in tact; Deny, Deflect, Deceive and Defame.
So let's see here we have a product that costs more and more to produce and maintain but the buyers of said product can't afford it anymore....Can we rename taxes "rent" and then impose a "rent stabilization freeze ordinance"?? Strictly "temporary" of course! ;)
I mean what's good for the goose is good for the gander am I right?
I actually wish I didn't see it or think that way, a blissful life would be easier... but...you know...elementary school and stuff. I blame society 😆🤦♂️
The hypocrisy and lack of any self awareness in these people is staggering to me.
As a kid I was taught a very simple truth that makes life easier: "Live within your means"
We could start telling the 5000 or so graduating UCSB students every year .......no you probably cannot afford to live in Santa Barbara. At least, not yet.
Thank you, Bonnie, for sounding the alarm-I am livid this morning to read that the Finance Committee is moving to increase the real estate transfer tax from .55 cents per 1000 value to 9.50!
Once again sticking it to property owners! Call the council members and say "No more Taxes" cut the bloat of city staff.
Increasing the "cannabis tax "is also getting headlines. Another budget busting boon doggle promised to "solve future budget issues", but has only added to the current budget woe. These literally are the fumes voters have been living off for far too long- a total shell game. Just stop it, voters .Just stop it.
An illustration of the economic ignorance of the majority City Council is imposing rent control and additional fees for rental units. It will necessarily depress the future value of residential income property via reduced NOI (net operating income) and in turn property tax revenues going forward. Not only is the real estate removed from the tax rolls, the resulting subsidized housing often requires significant tax dollars to maintain those properties in perpetuity.
Suggestions:
Before qualifying for elected office each potential candidate should be required to pass a basic Econ 101 exam and a course on the Fifth Amendment…Takings Clause.
Require voter approval for diverting tax revenue (ignoring the sad fact Santa Barbara and California voters are very enthusiastic about increasing taxes on themselves).
Prioritize many functions currently carried out by the City such as public works, school maintenance, plan check, etc., to compete in a bidding process with zero consideration for DEI. Those existing departments and agencies able to compete in the bidding process.
Not giving away $500,000+ to illegal aliens and/or their advocates...especially when running a budget deficit. (See recommendation about passing Econ 101 course above).
Eliminate District Based elections and return to At Large Elections.
Incorporate AI software (absent a biased algorithm) to review the entire City budget in great detail with firm recommendations to improve and eliminate waste and inefficiency at every level (no doubt the Left will be triggered by such an effort…confirming the legitimacy of the effort).
B, we need to reprint your articles on 3’ poster boards and post them around the city for all to see! The fiscal mismanagement is shocking. It’s ok not to follow our more than competent Finance Director’s advice but only if you have a modicum of financial experience which many on the council don’t possess. You can’t tax your way out of a structural budget deficit. Even with the sales tax increase FY 2026 revenue was less than 2025 ( Yeah, this is sort of what happens when you trade Nordstrom for Dollar General). TOT was also flat because simply raising hotel prices—without giving tourists a vibrant downtown to visit—is not a solution. What the social activists on the council don’t “get” is the idea of GROWING our economic pie vs. cutting smaller slices of a shrinking pie. My guess is that we will see at least two initiatives in November to raise taxes (TOT/Property Transfer)—stop! Develop a VISION and FOCUS on attracting private sector business, coddle business, make it easy for business because we all can’t work for our only expanding sector—the Public Sector. Four more years of this and SB will be transformed into Portland. SAD!
I won't second guess Bonnie, but her value as an outside watchdog should not be compromised. However, a slate of four dedicated candidates who are inspired by Bonnie work, is a very worthy goal.
Currently, we have one lone voice howling into the wilderness, (the mayor), so having only two voices howling to the wildness is not really progress.
Parse out the districts up for election and start calculating the odds to make a material shift in city politics are reality. Handicap each mayor candidate for these critical issues at the same time. This election offers four (4) chances to get things back on track. Mayor and three city districts:
Here’s an idea. How about letting non-union local licensed contractors bid on city and county projects without having to pay “prevailing wages“ to their employees while working on these jobs?
The city and county Forse local contractors to pay higher wages while working city and county jobs. This adds a INCREDIBLE amount of money to these contracts. The unholy alliance between government and unions is driving these outrageous tax rates they are forcing on the rest of us.
Unions are an outdated, unnecessary idea do to all the existing labor laws that have been passed since the days of child labor and other horrific abuses by employers. Nobody can get around these laws so I say allow direct negotiations within individuals for employment. I’m sure we could find highly qualified people to take everyone of these jobs at a much reduced rate of employment. And be HAPPY to have the opportunity
Educate voters on the material differences between the former private sector unions in the past who were revenue producers , and the current growing numbers of public sector unions who depend 100% only on tax dollars.
The word "union" still carries too much emotion baggage. Clarity of the term today is absolutely necessary.
Private sector unions bargained at arms length, and increased production to increase revenues. When private sector unions over-reach, the company fails and falls into bankruptcy.
Public sector unions have gamed the system to sit on both sides of the bargaining table, with tax dollars their only source of revenues. Public bankruptcies selling off public assets, are not as simple as private sector bankruptcies selling off private assets.
Until voters stop slavishly supporting every yard sign that claims ........ Teachers Support XYZ"...... we will never dig ourselves out of this either.
I believe the PLA was current Assemblyman Gregg Hart's pay to play token to dump on the city, in order to earn insider favors for his next fail upwards in the local political food chain. Correct me if I am wrong.
Brilliant, Bonnie. Every single issue covered from cause, effect and solutions.
Only thing missing right now, remains sufficient public will that requires a brand new set of elected leaders. A new city council majority is required this November. Four fiscally prudent community members, committed to ending this fiscal crisis .......in this company town, that now runs heavily on structural-deficit fumes.
Who are these four persons? Mayor Randy Rowse gets it. Who are the other three new faces that will work together to solve this in our names.
SBCC is also facing these exact same structural budget challenges. How many other local agencies are in similar fiscal stress? Voters, this is on us now and no one else.
Voters are the primary change agents, but collective bargaining units also must be part of this required change too . In the starkest terms, it comes down to taxpayers vs government employee unions. Either working together, or self-destructively driving off the cliff together.
The false promises made to employee bargaining units twenty years ago, have now come due. This is the crunch time more astute voices saw coming, demonstrated by pure actuarial data but were ignored. "They'll find the money" ......for too long has been the sole partisan response to these warnings.
Collective-bargaining unit interests can no longer sit on both sides of the bargaining table, which voters let happen over these past twenty years. Non-partisan independence is required for all future elected offices. Independence, fiscal probity, prioritizing institutional integrity and oversight - these are the qualities needed to be sitting in any elected office today.
May we find a productive partnership between these two, currently opposing forces: Taxpayers vs government employee unions. Voters, this is in your hands. You are the primary change agents.
Who is the four person slate, absolutely required this November to get our city back on track?
I searched can government employees be sued for wsteful spending. The can and It has been my pet peeve for 50 years.
I haven't read the article yet so I don't know if it is filling out a form with details or hiring an attorney.
Ideally if there were enough filings around the country it would be wake up call. Although it didn't seem to have an effect on Newsom's 1 billion expendure on defective Covid masks from China.
OT: Breaking news - is the public sector union ice jam finally breaking up?: ..... "the 9th Circuit has ruled that President Trump can go ahead with stripping collective bargaining rights from thousands of government employees."
See RedState for more details and full status of this case.
Reinforcing the axiom, all politics are local. The statewide governors race also now grapples with this exact same topic we are forced to deal with locally - structural budget deficits. Is this solved primarily by (1) increasing revenues (taxes); or by (2) reducing expenses.
Let's draw the same. simple lines as Bonnie suggests, when choosing our next city council members and mayor this coming November. Do we have a revenue problem or a spending problem? The following is reported from Govern for California:
........"Last night’s CA gubernatorial debate hosted by Jewish California reminded me of Li’l Abner, a comic strip I read as a kid in which the residents of a town lived in a state of perpetual war with tax agents whom they called “Revenooers.”
This time around, the Revenooers are Tom Steyer and Eric Swalwell who, when asked how they would address California’s budget problems, said “more revenues.”
Taking the opposite side were Steve Hllton, Matt Mahan and Antonio Villaraigosa, who in one form or another said the state should spend its existing tax resources more effectively........."
Only bankruptcy will offer a potential catalyst for change. But not if the city council and top city executives remain the same people.
The majority of those who vote in city elections will not change their voting patterns even as disaster looms. The district voting process, except for the mayor, is one of the root causes of the current ultra-left wing make-up of city council members.
The two to one majority of Democratic Party party registered voters over Republicans is an insurmountable hurdle against material change. This is also a root cause for a potential descent into bankruptcy, because there is no leverage for change in the face of this outcome.
District elections and two "racially-protected by fiat" seats on city council, do not fairly represent the critical issues that impact this city at large: its future solvency.
Thank you for writing. Dan Waters repeated what most of us are thinking: electing people to office that understands leadership and economics is the answer; not doing this will continue the budget "burn."
I'm sure that we can do a top five list of what to do to "balance the budget," but unless the Dias changes, prepare for taxation and less services. This election could move the needle, but how do we move the voters?
You listed 10👍; most of us could name five, but you, repectfully missed the most important point, namely ELECT leaders that understand economics; expenses must never exceed income.
The present elected elite falsely believe that they are doing good while naively destroying the City (County and State).
Our electoral system rewards unions using their dues to elect their negotiating partners. The incentives are reversed from the private sector where efficiency, productivity and reduction of head count is the goal. In the public sector, the more employees, the more dues, the more political influence is generated. Thus the opposite of efficiency and productivity. The answer is to change the electoral system. It's a waste of time to merely complain or try to change this politician or that politician. Change the system. www.hearthepeople.org.
What is the largest employer in the world?
Ready to cut?
It is the Department of Defense (or as the alocholic bro calls it, WAR)
Which is one of the few functions enumerated in the constitution for the federal government. Secure borders and provide for the common defense. These are functions the Democratic Socialists would cut in favor of more spending on social programs, rebates for electric cars, windmills, student loans, redistribution of wealth from those who produce to those who do not.
That is accurate Jeff. That is enumerated.
Now, does that require all the other things that are done?
How much did it cost to kill the guys on a boat, that by NO MEANS could have ever made it to the US shore (not enough fuel)?
How much has it cost us for Trump to move a lot of the fleet to Iran, which has shown NO intention to attack us?
Why do we have a military that, as a percentage of the population, is massively larger than China, India, and Russia? Why do we have a military that, as a percentage of military spending worldwide, is 3x China's, 10x India's?
The DoD is a welfare program.
The government is there to provide for its citizens. Our government has decided to spend the most on the military rather than on its citizens.
It is called deterrence Dave and it costs money. It is certainly in the interests of the American citizens to protect us from foreign threats. It is foolish to wait for Iran to obtain nuclear capability and delivery capability before we act. In the spirit of a ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure, deterrence is the cheapest way to protect the American people. Is Obama's nuclear deal with Iran the equivalent of Chamberlain's "peace in our time"? In both cases the price of appeasement is much higher that the cost of deterrence.
David, stay with us.
Oh, I am here, Bonnie :).
My point still stands.
Citizens demand services from the government. Those services require humans and other products. Those are not free. The humans (aka employees) are free (isn't that wonderful!) to work where an employer will hire them. If the government wants those employees to provide the services, then they have to pay them. If the employee can choose working at Panda Express for X$ or be a cop for X+2k$, where do you think the employee will work?
So yes, the private and public sectors compete for labor.
Are you telling me that you want the services and do not want to pay for them?
Are you telling me that you want the services but want to control labor costs so the employee makes less than flipping chicken?
All politics are local, David. The biggest government expense is service on the public debt, used primary to prop up the partisan "welfare state" and government personnel obligations, pensions and benefits, along with billions in leaky waste, fraud and abuse.
Are you suggesting the city should take out pension obligation bonds? Make your best case, David, and ground it in data and fact.
Loweg, I am not going to argue that the previous bennie programs were good for the taxpayer. This is NOT an SB local government issue; this is an ALL local governments' issue. When I lived in South Florida, this was a HUGE issue with the City of Hollywood. I like that Jerry Brown passed PERPA and that we now have a two-tier system: those pre-2013 and those post-2013. This eventually does work itself out on the death of the pre-2013 employees. However, courts across the country have stated that you can't retroactively and unilaterally change an agreement.
I will say that this was also a public company issue. Public companies, such as automakers, used to have 30-and-out programs that would pay you for a long time. And before you go, it was all unions, no, there were plenty of non-union companies that did this.
My wallet is actually happy for this. My father-in-law was at GE for 30ish years. He is now in his late 80s. He gets $4k a month plus healthcare from GE. Had he not had that, I suspect I would be stroking a check each month. Somehow, the adage of you don't marry the woman, you marry the family would have kicked in :)
So if you are asking me, would I cut services? Probably not. In SB, they seem fairly well balanced. Some I don't like, some I do. I know that I can't kill the pre-2013 issue from a legal and moral standpoint. I may not have been here when that employee earned that, but I more than likely have gotten some benefit from their work.
Guard against your paralysis by over-analysis deflection tactic, David .Yours is a tactic and serves no local purpose. However, continuing to do so, lands you well within in the intentional trolll category. Eric Berne - "Games People Play" - would be well-recommended read right now.
We are talking about the city of Santa Barbara, here and now and what local voters will soon face in the coming November elections., only a few months away. Local voters are change agents.
Now please tell us the pros and cons for the city to go out for "pension obligation bonds" to resolve this longstanding underfunded and growing pension deficit issue. (aka kick the can down the road one more time.)
Focus.
Stellar reporting Bonnie, while continuing to sound the alarm about the ticking, looming, financial time bomb that threatens our standard of living. It’s the same old song and dance; spend more than the city takes in, continue to raise sales, TOT, weed and property taxes with no corresponding reduction in spending.
I’m really sorry to be pessimistic, but the only way out of the financial mess that liberal, Democratic Socialists have left us is for the city to declare bankruptcy! Nothing else ever seems to change. The Unions continue to fleece taxpayers, and clearly have an allegiance to their membership and not the citizens they serve.
Then, (as the grift goes) when conservatives start shouting for reforms, the left pulls the same old time tested reaction of playing the fascist, race card shouting down any chances of positive dialogue or change.
Really sad state of affairs with the same lefty playbook remaining in tact; Deny, Deflect, Deceive and Defame.
LT, I have been saying that for years now. "Bankruptcy"
Bankruptcy maybe the only way to restructure pensions. This could spell big problems for Calpers as it is now 30% unfunded.
https://calmatters.org/economy/2018/02/commentary-surging-pension-costs-push-california-cities-toward-bankruptcy/
So let's see here we have a product that costs more and more to produce and maintain but the buyers of said product can't afford it anymore....Can we rename taxes "rent" and then impose a "rent stabilization freeze ordinance"?? Strictly "temporary" of course! ;)
I mean what's good for the goose is good for the gander am I right?
I love the way you think Eric🧐
Thanks for the compliment 😊
I actually wish I didn't see it or think that way, a blissful life would be easier... but...you know...elementary school and stuff. I blame society 😆🤦♂️
The hypocrisy and lack of any self awareness in these people is staggering to me.
As a kid I was taught a very simple truth that makes life easier: "Live within your means"
We could start telling the 5000 or so graduating UCSB students every year .......no you probably cannot afford to live in Santa Barbara. At least, not yet.
Or maybe just teach some basic financial skills like economics, bookkeeping, budgeting, investing, and planning? 🤷♂️
I know I know...a boy can dream! 😊
(I also know: "Shut up, Boomer with all your legacy boomer talk!") 😆
Thank you, Bonnie, for sounding the alarm-I am livid this morning to read that the Finance Committee is moving to increase the real estate transfer tax from .55 cents per 1000 value to 9.50!
Once again sticking it to property owners! Call the council members and say "No more Taxes" cut the bloat of city staff.
You do remember the list of 200 ways they put out to increase revenue; they are implementing every one of them! It's time people get involved.
Increasing the "cannabis tax "is also getting headlines. Another budget busting boon doggle promised to "solve future budget issues", but has only added to the current budget woe. These literally are the fumes voters have been living off for far too long- a total shell game. Just stop it, voters .Just stop it.
An illustration of the economic ignorance of the majority City Council is imposing rent control and additional fees for rental units. It will necessarily depress the future value of residential income property via reduced NOI (net operating income) and in turn property tax revenues going forward. Not only is the real estate removed from the tax rolls, the resulting subsidized housing often requires significant tax dollars to maintain those properties in perpetuity.
Suggestions:
Before qualifying for elected office each potential candidate should be required to pass a basic Econ 101 exam and a course on the Fifth Amendment…Takings Clause.
Require voter approval for diverting tax revenue (ignoring the sad fact Santa Barbara and California voters are very enthusiastic about increasing taxes on themselves).
Prioritize many functions currently carried out by the City such as public works, school maintenance, plan check, etc., to compete in a bidding process with zero consideration for DEI. Those existing departments and agencies able to compete in the bidding process.
Not giving away $500,000+ to illegal aliens and/or their advocates...especially when running a budget deficit. (See recommendation about passing Econ 101 course above).
Eliminate District Based elections and return to At Large Elections.
Incorporate AI software (absent a biased algorithm) to review the entire City budget in great detail with firm recommendations to improve and eliminate waste and inefficiency at every level (no doubt the Left will be triggered by such an effort…confirming the legitimacy of the effort).
B, we need to reprint your articles on 3’ poster boards and post them around the city for all to see! The fiscal mismanagement is shocking. It’s ok not to follow our more than competent Finance Director’s advice but only if you have a modicum of financial experience which many on the council don’t possess. You can’t tax your way out of a structural budget deficit. Even with the sales tax increase FY 2026 revenue was less than 2025 ( Yeah, this is sort of what happens when you trade Nordstrom for Dollar General). TOT was also flat because simply raising hotel prices—without giving tourists a vibrant downtown to visit—is not a solution. What the social activists on the council don’t “get” is the idea of GROWING our economic pie vs. cutting smaller slices of a shrinking pie. My guess is that we will see at least two initiatives in November to raise taxes (TOT/Property Transfer)—stop! Develop a VISION and FOCUS on attracting private sector business, coddle business, make it easy for business because we all can’t work for our only expanding sector—the Public Sector. Four more years of this and SB will be transformed into Portland. SAD!
Exactly, Jeff.
Bonnie Donovan for Board of Supervisors and eventual Mayor earns our vote!
Is a seat open in your district, Bonnie. Our city needs you desperately!
I won't second guess Bonnie, but her value as an outside watchdog should not be compromised. However, a slate of four dedicated candidates who are inspired by Bonnie work, is a very worthy goal.
Currently, we have one lone voice howling into the wilderness, (the mayor), so having only two voices howling to the wildness is not really progress.
Parse out the districts up for election and start calculating the odds to make a material shift in city politics are reality. Handicap each mayor candidate for these critical issues at the same time. This election offers four (4) chances to get things back on track. Mayor and three city districts:
Here’s an idea. How about letting non-union local licensed contractors bid on city and county projects without having to pay “prevailing wages“ to their employees while working on these jobs?
The city and county Forse local contractors to pay higher wages while working city and county jobs. This adds a INCREDIBLE amount of money to these contracts. The unholy alliance between government and unions is driving these outrageous tax rates they are forcing on the rest of us.
Unions are an outdated, unnecessary idea do to all the existing labor laws that have been passed since the days of child labor and other horrific abuses by employers. Nobody can get around these laws so I say allow direct negotiations within individuals for employment. I’m sure we could find highly qualified people to take everyone of these jobs at a much reduced rate of employment. And be HAPPY to have the opportunity
Educate voters on the material differences between the former private sector unions in the past who were revenue producers , and the current growing numbers of public sector unions who depend 100% only on tax dollars.
The word "union" still carries too much emotion baggage. Clarity of the term today is absolutely necessary.
Private sector unions bargained at arms length, and increased production to increase revenues. When private sector unions over-reach, the company fails and falls into bankruptcy.
Public sector unions have gamed the system to sit on both sides of the bargaining table, with tax dollars their only source of revenues. Public bankruptcies selling off public assets, are not as simple as private sector bankruptcies selling off private assets.
Do you remember they voted for the "PLA" , until that is reversed all city contracts will be extremely high.
Until voters stop slavishly supporting every yard sign that claims ........ Teachers Support XYZ"...... we will never dig ourselves out of this either.
I believe the PLA was current Assemblyman Gregg Hart's pay to play token to dump on the city, in order to earn insider favors for his next fail upwards in the local political food chain. Correct me if I am wrong.
Am I wrong or did SB Council Members dedicate $600,000.00 dollars this fiscal year for services to ILLEGALS in our city?
That lets us know where we stand. Just another sap to abuse.
I pray that we’ll wake up!
Yes, and don't forget my PRAR years ago where over $3 million for the promenade, and I believe $1.5 million for the housing trust fund.
A toll booth that collects charges from every single electric bike that uses and misuses State Street.
Brilliant, Bonnie. Every single issue covered from cause, effect and solutions.
Only thing missing right now, remains sufficient public will that requires a brand new set of elected leaders. A new city council majority is required this November. Four fiscally prudent community members, committed to ending this fiscal crisis .......in this company town, that now runs heavily on structural-deficit fumes.
Who are these four persons? Mayor Randy Rowse gets it. Who are the other three new faces that will work together to solve this in our names.
SBCC is also facing these exact same structural budget challenges. How many other local agencies are in similar fiscal stress? Voters, this is on us now and no one else.
Voters are the primary change agents, but collective bargaining units also must be part of this required change too . In the starkest terms, it comes down to taxpayers vs government employee unions. Either working together, or self-destructively driving off the cliff together.
The false promises made to employee bargaining units twenty years ago, have now come due. This is the crunch time more astute voices saw coming, demonstrated by pure actuarial data but were ignored. "They'll find the money" ......for too long has been the sole partisan response to these warnings.
Collective-bargaining unit interests can no longer sit on both sides of the bargaining table, which voters let happen over these past twenty years. Non-partisan independence is required for all future elected offices. Independence, fiscal probity, prioritizing institutional integrity and oversight - these are the qualities needed to be sitting in any elected office today.
May we find a productive partnership between these two, currently opposing forces: Taxpayers vs government employee unions. Voters, this is in your hands. You are the primary change agents.
Who is the four person slate, absolutely required this November to get our city back on track?
Hello Bonnie,
I searched can government employees be sued for wsteful spending. The can and It has been my pet peeve for 50 years.
I haven't read the article yet so I don't know if it is filling out a form with details or hiring an attorney.
Ideally if there were enough filings around the country it would be wake up call. Although it didn't seem to have an effect on Newsom's 1 billion expendure on defective Covid masks from China.
https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-24-107198
OT: Breaking news - is the public sector union ice jam finally breaking up?: ..... "the 9th Circuit has ruled that President Trump can go ahead with stripping collective bargaining rights from thousands of government employees."
See RedState for more details and full status of this case.
Reinforcing the axiom, all politics are local. The statewide governors race also now grapples with this exact same topic we are forced to deal with locally - structural budget deficits. Is this solved primarily by (1) increasing revenues (taxes); or by (2) reducing expenses.
Let's draw the same. simple lines as Bonnie suggests, when choosing our next city council members and mayor this coming November. Do we have a revenue problem or a spending problem? The following is reported from Govern for California:
........"Last night’s CA gubernatorial debate hosted by Jewish California reminded me of Li’l Abner, a comic strip I read as a kid in which the residents of a town lived in a state of perpetual war with tax agents whom they called “Revenooers.”
This time around, the Revenooers are Tom Steyer and Eric Swalwell who, when asked how they would address California’s budget problems, said “more revenues.”
Taking the opposite side were Steve Hllton, Matt Mahan and Antonio Villaraigosa, who in one form or another said the state should spend its existing tax resources more effectively........."
Only bankruptcy will offer a potential catalyst for change. But not if the city council and top city executives remain the same people.
The majority of those who vote in city elections will not change their voting patterns even as disaster looms. The district voting process, except for the mayor, is one of the root causes of the current ultra-left wing make-up of city council members.
The two to one majority of Democratic Party party registered voters over Republicans is an insurmountable hurdle against material change. This is also a root cause for a potential descent into bankruptcy, because there is no leverage for change in the face of this outcome.
District elections and two "racially-protected by fiat" seats on city council, do not fairly represent the critical issues that impact this city at large: its future solvency.
Thank you for writing. Dan Waters repeated what most of us are thinking: electing people to office that understands leadership and economics is the answer; not doing this will continue the budget "burn."
I'm sure that we can do a top five list of what to do to "balance the budget," but unless the Dias changes, prepare for taxation and less services. This election could move the needle, but how do we move the voters?
1. Freeze all automatic compensation escalators for all city employees.
2. Offer only Obamacare as the city employee health care benefit.
3. Eliminate redundancies between city and county operations
4. Identify specific and dedicated funding for any new city proposition.
5. 10-20 year pro formas required for any city policy change
6. Clear, accessible visual graphics for all city expenses - each department, each employee.
7 . Transparent Santa Barbara , following the model of Transparent Calfornia
8. Fine anyone whoever claims, ever again ......" they'll find the money"
9. Get rid of the myth we must pay more to attract the best city employees
10. Cross-train city staff to fill vacancies and develop talent already living here
L.
You listed 10👍; most of us could name five, but you, repectfully missed the most important point, namely ELECT leaders that understand economics; expenses must never exceed income.
The present elected elite falsely believe that they are doing good while naively destroying the City (County and State).
Keep reading, Schaumburg. Elect new leaders who promise to do what?
L. (Keep reading¿)
Again..I have no choice but to elect better leaders; ranting is ineffective.
Perhaps the new leaders would vote in your ideas..
I've spoken enough times at council with really great ideas and solutions with very limited results...
How about your success, there?