The 2024 Election Has (Finally) Arrived

by Jim Buckley and James Fenkner

Jim Buckley, Editor-in-Chief

This year’s presidential election should be an easy and quick choice for most thinking people. We – as proud thinking people – are enthusiastically endorsing the Republican ticket of Donald J. Trump and his Vice-Presidential partner J.D. Vance.

The Presidential Contest

We have seen and approve of the job Donald J. Trump did in his first four-year term (2017-2021) and we have also been witnesses to and lament the harassment he received from both Democrat and Republican official Washington (D.C.) during his four-year term in office. Donald J. Trump was victim of not one, but two Congressional impeachment attempts (and not one, but two assassination attempts) and was often stymied in his efforts to construct a wall along the southern border between the U.S. and Mexico, particularly after the 2018 mid-term election, which flipped the House of Representatives from Republican to Democrat control.

Considering the disgraceful, deceitful, and unforgivable conduct of the Democrat Party during Mr. Trump’s presidency and especially after he announced his bid for presidency in this 2024 election – if for no other reason – he should be rewarded with his well-deserved second term. Various Democrat Attorneys General and District Attorneys filed spurious felony criminal and civil charges against him in New York, Washington, D.C., and Georgia, causing him to take up precious time responding to these legal challenges in the hope of preventing the former president from pursuing his electoral goal.

Fortunately, most of both Republicans and Independents saw through the flimsy charges thrown at him and rewarded Mr. Trump with an undisputed presidential nomination. Mr. Trump has solidified his hold on the Republican Party and has attracted many superb formerly Democrat backers and followers, including Elon Musk, Tulsi Gabbard and Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., to name just a few. Donald J. Trump really is a bi-partisan fusion candidate.

The successful Democrat putsch (according to Quora, a putsch is a coup d’etat subtly done and very carefully planned) that removed President Joe Biden from the 2024 race and replaced him with his Vice President Kamala Harris, should also not be rewarded. Ms. Harris really is an illegitimate candidate and would be considered an illegitimate president if elected.

For those reasons and many more, our votes will be going to Donald J. Trump and J.D. Vance.

U.S. Senate (including unexpired term)

Republican candidate Steve Garvey – as far as we can tell – accepted the Republican nomination on a whim but has done very little campaigning. He seems to have awoken recently to his responsibility, however, and has now become a serious candidate. It may be too little too late, and if so, California will end up with the reprehensible Adam Schiff as its new senator, which would be very sad indeed.

We’re endorsing Steve Garvey.

U.S. Representative District 24: Thomas Cole

Republicans have faced severe difficulties getting themselves elected in this coastal zone for decades and, unfortunately, Santa Barbara’s current 24^th District U.S. Representative has very deep tendrils in the area. In a state that allows “ballot harvesting,” it has become almost impossible for a Republican candidate to win, as it is currently very easy for Democrat operatives to sweep into an area (say, the UCSB campus) where they know there’ll be a trove of votes ready for the picking (and filling out and dropping off). Until that changes, Republican candidates will continue to have a very rough road overcoming this clear advantage.

In the face of all that, and in the face of Democrat candidates’ refusal to consider a public debate on the issues, we endorse Thomas Cole, who has worked tirelessly throughout this campaign.

We also endorse newcomer Elijah Mack for State Senator District 21, who would become California’s youngest state senator ever if elected.

SBCurrent also endorses Sari Domingues for State Assembly District 37.

•••

Propositions, Proposals, and Measures

By James Fenkner, Publisher

Vote “NO” on Every Tax Measure and Bond Proposal

In California, taxes are a one-way ladder: they only go up, while the quality of services go down. At the federal level, overspending and the resultant inflation have impoverished us all by raising the cost of everything.    

What are our state and local agencies doing to address this government-induced inflation? They argue that they too need more money, so raise taxes, bonds, and “fees.” Perhaps California’s Democrat elite are hoping that after decades of failing educational outcomes and the long legacy of a lapdog press, the electorate is now ignorant enough to be taxed twice – first by the Fed’s inflation and secondly by higher state and local taxes, bonds, and fees.

We refuse to submit to this agenda. It is long past time for local governments to tighten their belts and to live with less.    

We shouldn’t agree, for example, to lower the bar on future bond issues from 67% to 55% (Vote NO on Prop 5).  The progressive supermajority legislature has placed two $10 Billion bond issues (Vote No on Prop 2 and Prop 4), which will eventually cost taxpayers nearly double that to eventually pay off. We don’t need statewide rent control (No on Prop 33). All “rent control” ever does is reduce supply and breed division and decay.  While there is much to vote “No” about, two statewide propositions are worthy of “YES” votes. Let’s direct medical monies to patients and away from political activism (Vote Yes on Prop 34) and let’s punish crime rather than reward it (Vote Yes on Prop 36).

What proposition is not on your ballot? The one that would limit government spending; it’s called the Taxpayer Protection Act and it is nowhere to be seen.

Why not?

After decades of leftist governors appointing leftist judges to the California Supreme Court, the judiciary has lost any semblance of political impartiality and balance. California’s one-party state killed the Taxpayer Protection Act, so you can’t vote on it.

So much for diversity and choice.  

On a local level, Santa Barbara Current advise voters to vote NO on all new taxes and school bonds on the ballot. Vote against all TOT (Transient Occupancy Tax) measures, not because hotels or short-term rentals are wonderful, but because much of the $5 million in additional taxes will come at the expense of less spending at local businesses.

Tax increases should not be the answer to all local government shortfalls. Payroll headcount reductions and pay limits can also balance budgets. A total of $669 million in five school bonds are proposed across Santa Barbara County.

None of these bonds are worthy of voter support.  

Our school boards first need to do their homework to make far better cases for the funds they are requesting. Maybe it is time we rein in school administrator salaries (ya think?). The president of Santa Barbara City College was paid over $465,000 in 2022. And there is something wrong at the college because they don’t stick around. SBCC has had 9 presidents in the past 15 years. Lack of money doesn’t seem to the problem. SBCC also has over 50 administrators, staff, and professors who are compensated at well more than $200,000 per year.  Lompoc Unified pays its superintendent over $450,000 a year. The Santa Maria Bonitas superintendent receives a total compensation of just under $400,000.

These puffed-up payroll costs for “administrators” and other positions are the real reason that bonds and other spending proposals appear on the ballot.

Such superintendent pay isn't bad for nine months’ work, unless, of course, you are the taxpayer duped into footing the bill. For perspective, that pay is many multiples of Santa Barbara County’s medium personal income of just $36,000.

Perhaps it's time for shared sacrifice amongst the educrat elite? Such fairness would go a long way.

School Board Candidates

Several excellent school board members and city council members have stepped forward and are standing for election this year.  These include Jason Lekas, Gabriel Morales, Chris Johnson, David King, James Mosby, Richard Foster, Ethan Woodill, Eric Gordon, Christy Lozano, and Tony Becerra.  For school board members, we based our endorsements on one-on-one conversations and a straightforward question: Which school board members are focused on improved educational outcomes?   

Endorsement Do’s and Don’ts

At this point, we crossed out any candidate endorsed by the Santa Barbara County Democrat Central Committee (SB DCC).

Why?

Not because we are opposed to Democrats, per se.

Here’s why.

A DCC endorsement is a red line because of a dirty little secret within that powerful political machine: To snag the DCC endorsement, a candidate must plead fealty to most, if not all, of the DCC’s radical policies. An example of this progressive litmus test is here.

We expect all our endorsed candidates to think for themselves and work, first and foremost, for the citizens who they were elected to represent, not a bunch of backroom progressive operatives who have long manipulated the local political process.   

That endorsement of common sense, fair-minded candidates crosses over from school board to city council. As with all elections, we are endorsing candidates relative to the choices on offer; we are not picking valentines. We are endorsing candidates we believe will consider spending limits before tax increases and favor less government interference rather than more red tape.

SBCurrent doesn’t endorse candidates seeking rent control, and neither should any thinking, responsible voter. That brand of radicalism doesn’t work anywhere.  

Most of all, we strenuously encourage all legal registered voters to vote. The average voter turnout in California in presidential elections is less than 70%. One of the reasons is probably because a Republican candidate for president has had virtually no chance of winning in this state. The remaining 30% of ballots left on the kitchen table or stuck in a drawer somewhere, however, could prove critical in every single race and ballot measure. With enough votes, underdogs can become victorious. 

In California, election integrity is a real problem,  especially after Governor Newsom signed a bill banning voter I.D. For those who may have a sneaking suspicion that our elections are not as secure and fair as they should be, do not give up; don’t let the bastards win.

The answer is simple:

Fight, Fight, Fight.

Vote, Vote, Vote.

Get your friends and neighbors to vote their ballots. Make your voice loud and make this election turnout too big to rig. Should you decide to mail your ballot, it can be tracked here. 

Do your part so that a government of the people, by the people, and for the people does not perish from this earth. 

ENDORSED FEDERAL AND STATE CANDIDATES

President and Vice President. Donald J. Trump and JD Vance

United States Senator, including Unexpired Term. Steve Garvey

United States Representative, District 2 Thomas Cole

CA State Senator, District 21. Elijah Mack

CA State Assembly, District 37 Sari M. Domingues

ENDORSED SCHOOL BOARD TRUSTEES

County Board of Education:

Trustee Area 2. Christy Lozano

Trustee Area 3. Brian Cox

Trustee Area 4. Write in "Jill Crang"

Trustee Area 6. Nicholas Sebastian

Santa Barbara City College:

Trustee Area 2. Lisa Sloan

Trustee Area 3. Sebastian Aldana Jr.

Trustee Area 4. No Recommendation

Santa Barbara Unified School District:

Trustee Area 2. John Robertson

Trustee Area 3. Phyliss Cohen

Trustee Area 5. Jason D. Lekas

Lompoc Unified School District:

Trustee Area 1. Jerri Thiel

Trustee Area 5. LeAnne Woolever

Santa Maria Junior High School:

Trustee Area 3. Gabriel Morales

Santa Ynez Valley Union High School:

Trustee Area 5. Chris Johnson

Hope School District

Trustee Area 3. Cindy Zavala

Santa Maria-Bonita School District

Trustee Area 3. Linda Cordero

Trustee Area 4. Hunter Jameson

Trustee Area 5. Zoraida Noratto-White

ENDORSED CITY COUNCIL CANDIDATES

Santa Barbara City Council

District 1. Alejandra Gutierrez

District 2. Tony Becerra

District 3. Mike Jordan

City of Carpinteria

District 2. Adriana Gonzalez-Smith

City of Goleta

Mayor. Rick Foster

District 3. Ethan Woodill

District 4. Eric Gordan

City of Buellton

Mayor. David King

City of Lompoc

Mayor. James I. Mosby

District 1. No Recommendation

Santa Maria

Mayor. Alice Patino

District 1. Carlos Escobedo

District 2. Mike Cordero

City of Solvang

Mayor. Dave Brown

SB Current Proposition Endorsements. A fuller discussion of each below

LOCAL PROPOSITIONS:

Proposition 2: NO

Wasteful and bloated bond giveaway to failing schools. It does not address educational outcomes or declining enrollment.

Proposition 3: NO

This Proposition is already Federal Law since 2015.

Proposition 4. NO

This bloated bond giveaway to special interest "climate" groups will increase CA indebtedness.

Proposition 5. NO

Weakens local control and Prop 13 protections. This would lower the bond approval threshold from 67% to 55% and is designed to increase taxpayer indebtedness.

Proposition 6. NO

Taxpayers work to fund CA Prisons, but inmates are no longer required to work themselves. Prop 6 is another woke, anti-criminal justice proposition.

Proposition 32. NO

Raises CA minimum wage to $18, which will fuel inflation AND limit important entry-level opportunities.

Proposition 33. NO

Expands local governments’ authority to enact rent control on residential property. This will lead to greater housing unaffordability and a more dilapidated housing supply.

Proposition 34. YES

Forces large healthcare operators to spend tax money on actual, direct patient needs and away from activist political causes

Proposition 35. NO

Locks in all the failed and wasteful Medical spending

Proposition 36. YES

Allows felony charges and increases sentences for certain drug and theft crimes to reduce crime.

LOCAL PROPOSITIONS:

Buellton C2024 Urban Growth Boundary: YES

Adds 123 acres for potential growth in three areas near the city's northeastern section. Responsible growth which may help limit high-density state housing mandates.

Buellton D2024 Transient Occupancy Tax MEASURE D: NO

One of four hotel tax increases on the ballot across SB County. Rather than increase taxes that will limit personal spending and small business viability throughout the county, local governments need to tighten their belts ( just like everyone else)

City of Carpinteria Essential Services Public Safety MEASURE B: NO

One of four hotel tax increases on the ballot across SB County. Rather than increase taxes that will limit personal spending and small business viability throughout the county, local governments need to tighten their belts ( just like everyone else)

City of Santa Barbara Essential Local Services Measure I: NO

The City of Santa Barbara has a pension problem and a high headcount problem which need to be addressed before saddling taxpayers with more regressive taxes.

City of Solvang Measure E-2024 Transient Occupancy Tax MEASURE E: NO

One of four hotel tax increases on the ballot across SB County. Rather than increase taxes that will limit personal spending and small business viability throughout the county, local governments need to tighten their belts ( just like everyone else)

Hope School District Bond: NO

Vote no on Bond Measure Y, a $40 million bond for the Hope School District. The district put it on the ballot before anyone had a chance to object to it or write the ballot arguments opposing it. Measure Y follows a $47 bond measure approved just 3 years ago. They still haven’t spent all the money from those bonds. In addition, there is no specific plan to spend the money from Measure Y.

Lompoc School District Bond - MEASURE M: NO

Irresponsible spending and lack of proper maintenance should not be rewarded. Lompoc Unified has a Superintendent making over $450,000 a year. Cut the administrative fat and focus on educational outcomes before asking Lompoc taxpayers to fund this $160 million bond.

Measure G2024 Goleta Agriculture Land Initiative Extension: NO

Allow local citizens to decide what is the best use of their personal property.

Santa Maria - Bonita School District Bond: NO

Reject Santa Maria - Bonita's $77 million bond issue. It is not that our schools have too little money, it is that they misspend it.

Santa Maria Union School District Bond: NO

Reject Santa Maria' Unions $194 million bond issue. It is guaranteed to raise housing costs with little expectation that educational outcomes will be improved.

Santa Barbara Community College Measure P: NO

Falling enrollment, multimillion-dollar budget deficits, and a staggering lack of strategy: taxpayers should not throw another $198 Million at SBCC.

SB County Transient Occupancy Tax MEASURE H: NO

One of four hotel tax increases on the ballot across SB County. Rather than increase taxes that will limit personal spending and small business viability throughout the county, local governments need to tighten their belts ( just like everyone else)