While walking in Santa Barbara’s Shoreline Park on a recent morning, I heard — before I saw — a cruise ship moving into anchorage off the harbor. The ship was massive, music was audible within the park. The winds weren’t onshore, and I believed the music should be blaring on board! Two women passing by had the identical response as me.
I recently read that Santa Barbara Channelkeeper tests the near ocean waters for pollution from the cruise ships that come to Santa Barbara — 30 in total this season.
Curious, I Googled “cruise ship pollution” and the outcomes were shocking. Not only the plain impact to the ocean water, however the air pollution created by the ships presents a big negative impact. Carbon emissions within the Santa Barbara Channel — by all maritime traffic — is one in all the most important causes of air pollution in Santa Barbara County!
I’m uninterested in being forced to comply with “green energy” mandates imposed by the local agencies that govern our city and county, while witnessing the identical leadership allowing gross polluters to go to our coast in such great numbers, selling out for the tourist dollars.
Do the visitors really enjoy what they see on State Street? That topic is for an additional letter.
Mike Larbig
Santa Barbara
• • •
Regarding Noozhawk publisher Bill Macfadyen’s Oct. 14 column and his story of the week, “How California’s Bullet Train Went Off the Rails,” unfortunately the Latest York Times article is behind a paywall so I missed it.
I doubt that it mentioned that the final contractor chosen for the job has a record of immense cost overruns, shoddy construction, deep political connections, political influence, and the violation of court orders to supply documents.
The Democrat-run board in command of the project overrode the recommendations of its technical experts that deemed the contractor unqualified to perform the work. The project is doomed by vast cost overruns on the best portion of the route and the dearth of even a plan to get into the Los Angeles basin.
Also doomed are California taxpayers while California lines the pockets of politicians and the contractor.
Steve Dietrich
Lompoc
• • •
Regarding the Oct. 16 article, “In Goleta Council Race, James Kyriaco and Sam Ramirez on Opposite Sides of Sales Tax Hike,” Ramirez’s opposition to the Measure B sales tax increase is spot on. Voting that down says that we Goletans want higher spending decisions relatively than the City Council telling us, “Pay more tax, then we’ll fix streets and construct Fire Station 10 in western Goleta.”
Goleta streets have been deteriorating for a decade. A part of why is the revenue-neutrality agreement Goleta has with Santa Barbara County. State law requires such agreements last 10 years, but Goleta’s commits 50% of property tax revenue and 30% of sales tax revenue to the county in perpetuity — meaning ceaselessly. Today the council merely asks the county Board of Supervisors to ease up, however the county is not going to surrender that cash simply because we ask.
Ramirez desires to litigate if the county won’t renegotiate. The City of Citrus Hill did just that with Sacramento County and won a more cost effective agreement. Ramirez prefers forcing the county to just accept less “alimony” relatively than increasing a Goleta sales tax. Possibly if more Goletans knew that the county gets $100 million a 12 months ceaselessly from us, they’d vote NO on B and YES on Ramirez.
Western Goleta has needed a latest fire station for many years. The realm has an excessive ratio of population to firefighters and unacceptably long response times. Five years ago, an indication was erected on the corner of Hollister Avenue and Winchester Canyon Road announcing it as the positioning of Fire Station 10, but still we wait.
Another excuse street maintenance is lacking and western Goleta doesn’t have proper fire protection is the town’s recent spending on other latest infrastructure, relatively than cheaper — but not as politically flashy — maintenancee of existing infrastructure.
Sadly, evidence of that not changing are plans for Hollister Avenue in Old Town, where Hollister is to be restricted to 2 lanes from 4 between Highway 217 and South Fairview Avenue, and can have back-in, angled parking on the westbound side.
Councilman James Kyriaco, Ramirez’s opponent, has politicized this unneeded project. He states “Old Town residents and visitors deserve increased pedestrian and bike safety, and there are too many dangerous accidents and near misses. We’d like to guard our most vulnerable residents from accidents attributable to speeding vehicles. It advantages pedestrians and native businesses by slowing vehicles down while reducing noise and exhaust fumes.”
The Old Town speed limit is already 25 mph. Slowing traffic more are traffic signals; two midblock, signaled crosswalks; and traffic enforcement.
Kyriaco cites “dangerous accidents” and “near misses” but traffic accident statistics may not support that and no statistics exist on “near misses.” A greater danger is impaired pedestrians failing to obey the crosswalk lights then being hit by vehicles or bicyclists. Reduced liquor sales and fewer pot dispensaries could higher address that issue.
The traffic congestion that comes with narrowing to 2 lanes will force vehicles to maneuver through Old Town with periods of time stopped with engines idling. Vehicles, bumper-to-bumper, crawling together with numerous idle time will increase, not decrease the “exhaust fumes” about which Kyriaco is anxious.
Backing into angled parking will likely be, at best, difficult. Mix that with bumper-to-bumper westbound traffic and collisions will result. That can worsen, not reduce congestion.
If a collision is greater than a fender bender, first responders will battle the bad traffic to get there. Occasional gridlock traffic will make it tougher for pedestrians, even with green lights, to cross streets by picking their way between cars.
Goletans should vote against the sales tax increase, vote for Sam Ramirez, and tell the remaining of the council that narrowing Hollister Avenue through Old Town is a nasty idea and to place that cash into street maintenance.
Hib Halverson
Goleta
• • •
We’d like a more inclusive, diverse Santa Barbara County Board of Education, and I used to be excited to see that Rosanne Crawford was running for the Area 1 board seat. I actually have followed
her for a few years, and I’m at all times impressed along with her ideas and verve.
The county board has been working in an ivory tower of respectable, establishment members largely appointed by a previous superintendent during his long tenure. What’s the record that these respectable people must run on, when greater than half of the scholars within the district are performing below grade level in English and only 30% can do math?
One-party rule is dangerous. Even should you’re a part of that party, one-party rule over many years is a nasty thing, and results in stagnation and even corruption. All board members profit once they must justify their positions to those that would raise questions or another standpoint. Otherwise, boards just turn out to be an echo chamber. Socrates said, “The unexamined life isn’t price living.”
Personally, I’m uninterested in the identical people and the identical politicians and the identical establishment nonprofit organizations doing the identical thing over and once more with no accountability for outcomes. I need a parent-grandparent-volunteer on that board, someone who is targeted on the nuts and bolts issues, not making the suitable sound bites that ring like a tin bell.
Crawford has each vision and demanding considering skills. She is going to bring perspective from the surface of a grandparent, a parent, someone who has worked with school districts — but not for school districts — for 3 many years of volunteering within the classroom and as a voice of the general public within the boardrooms.
Our boards must be more inclusive, with diverse points of view and perspective to make clever decisions. Crawford goes to give attention to literacy. She has my vote.
Peggy Wilson
Santa Barbara
• • •
With the upcoming Nov. 8 election, it’s incumbent upon voters to exercise their right to elect officials to represent our greatest interests.
Our family roots return to the 1750s in Santa Barbara, and my husband and I raised three children who were educated within the Santa Barbara public school system. These children have gone on to be responsible, law-abiding, taxpaying individuals who have used their educations to realize gainful employment and to be the sort of residents we’d like.
Up to now few years, I actually have been very concerned by the extent of abuse that our educators have been facing in lots of parts of our country. I don’t consider this volatility and lack of civil discourse is in any way helpful. The efforts to overthrow incumbents and declare schools and students failures isn’t good for anyone. It’s a miracle anyone desires to pursue that profession.
In my experience, educators are hard-working, dedicated individuals who spent quite a few years attaining an education that will qualify them for a profession that supports the expansion and development of the kids in our community. We’d like individuals who will give their time, energy and focus to reinforce what we have now.
I used to be so completely happy to learn that Marybeth Carty is running for re-election to the Santa Barbara County Board of Education seat she has held for nine years. I actually have known her for the 24 years I actually have run a neighborhood nonprofit organization.
Carty is intelligent, compassionate and works amazingly well with people from all walks of life. She understands business and financial responsibility, and has at all times been dedicated to the welfare of our community. There isn’t any substitute for experience that Carty has in abundance with our academic system. Her experience is critical to deal with the needs of the entire child, including their social and emotional well-being in these difficult times.
I hope all voters in the world encompassing Carpinteria, Summerland, Montecito and parts of Santa Barbara will support Marybeth Carty to proceed representing Trustee Area 1 with their vote on Nov. 8.
Kate Carter
Santa Barbara
• • •
On this time when there was a lot occurring with schools, I felt compelled to put in writing a letter in support of somebody who I do know personally and someone who’s currently serving on the Santa Barbara County Board of Trustees: Judy Frost.
Frost has spent the past 4 years representing Trustee Area 5. She understands the role of the County Education Office because it supports 21 school districts on this county.
Her goal is to work collaboratively with other board members with the intention to improve services and academic outcomes for all students within the county. It’s imperative that we allow an experienced and dedicated person like Frost to proceed to assist construct the longer term of our county.
Frost has an excellent deal of experience as a volunteer in arts and education. She has a background in finance and understands the necessity to guage every aspect of the support that the county provides to every district. She is willing to explore latest innovations and methods to have interaction students in order that they will be successful. She has the guts and fervour to proceed to be effective on the county school board.
Vote for Judy Frost to make sure positive outcomes for each student!
Linda Cordero
Santa Maria
• • •
I’m writing in support of Judy Frost, a Santa Barbara County Board of Education leader who will make a difference for our kids. I actually have known Frost for nearly 20 years and I worked closely along with her husband, Erik Frost, as an educator earlier in my profession.
Frost will at all times do what is correct for teenagers and our schools, and she or he has the integrity and work ethic to make an actual difference.
Thanks for supporting Judy Frost in support of our students and their future.
Rhett Carter
Santa Maria
• • •
Efi Banales is strictly what the Santa Barbara Unified School District needs without delay in an elected leader. Here’s why:
Educational Commitment — “It’s against the law that our Spanish-speaking students are testing on the fourth-grade level,” Banales said in a recent online interview. She appropriately understands how English as a Second Language (ESL) tracking is tragically making a two-tiered system that isolates Spanish-at-home speakers and is holding children back. Her work at La Cumbre Junior High’s after-school homework program with parents and students is a model for what truly works.
Hiring Skills — One of the necessary roles of an Santa Barbara school board is vetting and recommending future principals. Banales has served for years at the suitable hand of multiple principals, and she or he has an eagle eye for the difference between a very good principal and a nasty principal.
Student Connection — As a 28-year SBUSD worker from 1989 to 2021, at 4 schools — Franklin and Washington Schools, Santa Barbara Community Academy and La Cumbre Junior High — she has known literally 1000’s of scholars from the Eastside and Westside by name. She knows their stories.
Local Connection — She knows the community and has lived on Santa Barbara’s Eastside for greater than three many years. She is a distinguished and revered member of the community.
Quiet Courage — Nearly all of students in Santa Barbara are Latino, and Banales is unafraid to be a voice for this unique and special parent community. She’s not afraid to “make waves” as many immigrant parents are, and she or he is enthusiastic about getting Latino parents involved of their students’ education.
Harold Crawford
Santa Barbara
• • •
I’m running for a Los Olivos Community Service District board seat because I do know I can balance our town’s pressing need for an economical groundwater solution and our similarly pressing must preserve the historic and rural character of our community.
Back in 2018, I opposed forming the LOCSD because I believed we didn’t need more government. As a substitute, we only needed to construct a sewer for our town and just connect right into a neighboring community service district or city’s system, and all can be good.
I used to be unsuitable!
After I saw that 76% of Los Olivos voters decided to form the LOCSD, I knew my neighbors didn’t desire a large-scale system, and I used to be curious to learn more.
When the LOCSD was formed, it was already established that a “phased” system was the popular approach for our community: the business core was Phase 1, the adjoining small-lot residences were Phase 2, and the remaining residential lots were Phase 3.
The plan was to start out with Phases 1 and a pair of, using a set system and compact package plant in, or near, the downtown core.
The system now installed at The Inn at Mattei’s Tavern has since proven that that is perfectly doable. That, and several other other aspects, helped me see the importance of local governance for this local issue.
First, an old-fashioned sewer for your entire district isn’t compatible with our lifestyle or our uses of this land. Large-scale infrastructure invites developers to construct, construct, construct.
Second, it might be outrageously disruptive and expensive to construct, operate and maintain a standard sewer system and a latest sewage treatment plant to serve every lot. On top of the increased assessment fees, every lot owner would even be required to pay for their very own “lateral connection” to large sewer mains.
Third, the entire point of forming our own community service district was to avoid having a “big government” solution imposed on our small town.
My original “big government” considering was misguided. A less complicated, more cost effective, less-growth-inducing “phased” plan had been, and still is, the suitable approach.
Like many, nevertheless, I became aware earlier this 12 months that the plan had modified.
I started digging through the LOCSD’s online records, and learned that the district board abandoned the phased plan in 2021, and has been working on an “entire district” plan ever since.
The community will vote on the one plan presented within the Proposition 218 vote when that point comes. There will likely be just one selection: either approve or reject the plan the LOCSD Board of Directors puts up for a vote.
If we do nothing, we’ll all get — and must pay for — the “big government” sewer and sewage plant, and we can even pay the value of all the event that can attract.
My desire to assist preserve our historic town and contain the prices of this project led me to hunt appointment to fill the LOCSD board seat that opened up just a few months ago, and I’m asking on your vote so I will help get us back to work on the suitable plan for our community.
Thomas Nelson
Los Olivos
• • •
Regarding Robert Sulnick’s Oct. 18 commentary, “Established Fossil Fuel Interests Are Ignoring Climate Change,” some facts are so as.
In keeping with the U.S. Energy Information Administration’s April monthly energy review, the USA’ energy consumption sources for all of 2021 break down this manner: 36% petroleum, 32% natural gas and 11% coal — accounting for nearly 80% of energy sources between them.
“Renewables” make up the remaining 20%, with nuclear contributing 8% and other renewables 12%. This latter 12% is broken all the way down to 40% biofuels (like wood), 27% wind, 19% hydroelectric and 12% solar.
It’s pretty obvious that this country needs fossil fuels as it really works its option to produce more renewables over the subsequent few many years. The transition will take time, money, and numerous mining for copper, cobalt, lithium, manganese, rare earth elements, iron ore, etc.
Those minerals will take a number of fossil fuel to extract, process, mix and produce to the manufacturers that can then need more energy to show into batteries, transmission lines, electric vehicles, battery-operated hand tools, etc.
I do know the above is difficult for an environmental warrior like Sulnick to listen to as he has probably been shaking his fist at oil and gas corporations and utilities for years. Yet he, me, all of us depend upon these corporations to permit us to live comfortably in our homes. The moment our power goes out, what can we blame? Why Southern California Edison or PG&E.
“Why are they so careless? Why do they not provide us with reliable energy?” that all of us demand for our cell phones, video games, computers, fridges, fans, air-con and furnaces?
Or, “Why are gasoline prices so high?” One answer is since it isn’t a straightforward problem to resolve. Try producing energy without producing carbon units in a politically liberal state like California.
Sulnick seems to also like taking up the mantle of President Joe Biden, hiding behind the will to forestall global warming while creating inconceivable goals. Speak about double standards.
Biden is sharply drawing down the U.S. Strategic Petroleum Reserve while turning to a brutal dictator in Venezuela and bowing to a self-important monarch in Saudi Arabia to supply more oil. From the moment he was inaugurated, his administration has been throwing up costly and counter-productive regulation and environmental impossibilities for our own pipelines and domestic producers.
Our own environmental warriors in California and Santa Barbara County have been making it inconceivable for oil corporations to do their work here, not just by insisting on oversight, but with an attitude of outright hatred and loathing for the very corporations that keep the lights on for us and that produce and transport fuels in a cleaner and more efficient manner than anywhere else on the planet.
And don’t get me began on Gov. Gavin Newsom, who supports putting off our cleanest type of fossil fuel, natural gas — an indispensable second source of energy utilized in furnaces, water heaters, generators and cooking that’s a vital source of energy within the event of electrical failure.
I appeal to those more moderate and down to earth environmental residents who recognize that going green is definitely something all of us strive for but additionally know it can’t be done cheaply, carbon-free or abruptly, and that there are a lot of ideas that must be considered.
Listening to our fossil fuel producers and understanding their industry and the challenges they need to forgo with the intention to meet our energy needs is a very good place to start out.
J.W. Burk
Santa Barbara
• • •
It’s a undeniable fact that fossil fuels powered the Industrial Revolution and improved the lives of thousands and thousands of individuals worldwide.
But many years ago, coal, oil and gas corporations began to comprehend the dark side of their products. The pollution alone from burning these fuels was literally killing people. Today, greater than 8 million lives are cut short every 12 months by respiratory illnesses attributable to their emissions.
These corporations have now known for many years that emissions from burning these fuels are overheating the planet with catastrophic and increasingly irreversible impacts.
Financially and politically, the fossil fuel industry has long been essentially the most powerful force in society. Why have they not used their enormous wealth, expertise and influence to transition us toward a clean energy economy? Why have they not directed their teams of scientists and engineers to diversify away from their dirty fuels and into solar, wind or other renewable energy sources?
Sulnick is correct that fossil fuel interests proceed to do all they will to delay the transition and to hold on to their profitable business model, even on the expense of the health and well-being of humanity. Despite their intransigence, clean, reasonably priced renewable energy sources have turn out to be available. Solar and wind energy are already cheaper than fossil fuels in most areas.
The U.N. International Panel on Climate Change has concluded that the one obstacles to transitioning to wash energy are political. We residents should not without political power.
Within the upcoming midterm elections, let’s give our votes to candidates who will end fossil fuel subsidies, enact laws that can make the polluters pay for the devastation they’re causing, and jump-start the transition to a clean energy future.
Robert Taylor
Montecito
• • •
Is it lawful for the Santa Barbara County Elections Office to count ballots before Election Day?
On Oct. 17, I received a text message from BallotTrax, a Denver company, that my ballot had been received and COUNTED already.
Santa Barbara County is single-party controlled in any respect levels of presidency, including the Elections Office. Early counting can enable the county election staff to receive vote count updates to in turn tell partisan party leaders the best way to goal ballot harvesting, canvassing and voters. Ballot counts are updated, possibly each day, to know exactly what number of votes are needed by a candidate or proposition by district to win.
My understanding as per the U.S. Structure is that ONLY state legislatures and state courts have the constitutional authority to find out exactly how elections are conducted. Is there California laws related to counting ballots early, hiring an out-of-state company to process California ballots, or to shut a few of our local in-person precinct voting locations?
Denice Spangler Adams
Montecito
• • •
Mail Calls
Noozhawk welcomes and encourages expressions of all views on Santa Barbara County issues. Letters needs to be BRIEF — as in 200 words-BRIEF — and letters under 150 words are given priority. Each must include a sound mailing address and phone information. Pseudonyms is not going to be used, and repeat letters will likely be skipped. Letters could also be edited for clarity, length and magnificence.
With rare exceptions, this feature is published on Saturdays.
By submitting any content to Noozhawk, you warrant that the fabric is your original expression, freed from plagiarism, and doesn’t violate any copyright, proprietary, contract or personal right of anyone else. Noozhawk reserves, at our sole discretion, the suitable to decide on to not publish a submission.
Click here for Noozhawk’s Terms of Use, and click here for more information about the best way to submit letters to the editor and other announcements, suggestions and stories.
