Print friendly
E-mail story
Tip Us Off
Comments
Share Article
Facebook
Twitter
Google+1
del.icio.us.
Digg!
Yahoo! Buzz
Diigo
google
newsvine
reddit
technorati
Yahoo!
MyspaceEleven of the 12 candidates running for Santa Barbara City Council showed up for a forum organized by PUEBLO, at the Franklin Center on Thursday evening, July 23.
Each candidate was given no more than one minute to provide his or her best answer to each question asked by the community. Five of these questions were prepared beforehand by the organizers; the rest were asked by the audience.
Forum organizers hoped to focus on issues of affordable housing, public transportation, gang violence, immigration, and the voting privacy of the disabled. The candidates who attended were Catherine McCammon, David Pritchett, Dianne Channing, Grant House, Harwood “Bendy” White, John J. Thyne III, Justin Tevis, Lane Anderson, Michael Self, Olivia Uribe, and Bonnie Raisin. Frank Hotchkiss was the only no-show.
Paul Wellman
Santa Barbara City Council candidates in the Franklin Community Center for the PUEBLO sponsored forum on July 23, 2008
Right off the bat, a member of PUEBLO’s housing committee who identified herself as a single mother of two tackled the topic of affordable housing, asking what each candidate would do as a city councilmember to expand it. Pritchett said that it is most important now to protect and preserve the current rental housing stock. Also important, according to both Channing and Pritchett, would be to work on tenant protection and displacement, so that when affordable housing is converted into high-priced rental housing, or condos, the renters being displaced will have some protection.
An instantly popular topic among the candidates was the debate surrounding Measure B - a height initiative capping building height at 40 feet in El Pueblo Viejo and 45 feet elsewhere downtown, instead of the current 60-foot height limit. The initiative’s supporters outnumbered its opponents among the candidates, though not overwhelmingly. Uribe and House, who oppose the height initiative, said Santa Barbara should work with the Redevelopment Agency, and in partnership with the development community, to develop more affordable units while also preserving existing stock. Thyne spoke in strong opposition to the height limit, arguing that it would “interfere with provision of affordable housing,” and suggesting that Santa Barbara offer incentives for the creation of rental housing. Raisin and Anderson oppose the initiative as well; Anderson is in favor of giving city council the power to negotiate downtown housing for workers in return for flexible heights.
Others insisted that higher density would not necessarily translate into a significant number of more affordable units. It might just mean a greater number of expensive condos and those, in turn, could create a need for more service workers in need of housing. Tevis, a supporter of the initiative, explained that our city doesn’t need more density because the logistics of the situation is that Santa Barbara “can’t provide low-income housing for that many people.” Also supporting the height initiative were candidates Channing, McCammon, Pritchett, Self, and White.
After 11 minutes of housing discussion, the meeting moved on to questions about the expansion and affordability of public transportation. Both Anderson and Channing emphasized the importance of improving the biking systems and making it easier to travel safely in ways other than by personal automobile. Anderson suggested more bike-rack space on public buses. McCammon and Raisin recommended incorporating smaller buses in hopes of an increase in travel efficiency or access to more locations. Pritchett disagreed, explaining that smaller buses don’t pay for themselves. A few of the candidates voiced their support for commuter rail. Self said she believes bus service should be expanded, and she also said that the widening of the freeway will significantly help with current transportation issues.
Paul Wellman
Santa Barbara City Council candidates in the Franklin Community Center for the PUEBLO sponsored forum on July 23, 2008
Asked about gang violence, virtually all of the candidates opined that the strongest focus should be on prevention. They called for more mentoring, collaboration between police and communities, and involvement by parents of at-risk youth. House argued against gang injunctions, saying, “We need injunctions against ignorance.” Thyne, on the other hand, supported the idea of gang injunctions, saying he believed they have proven themselves effective in Los Angeles and Oxnard.
Self suggested parenting classes where parents can develop skills both for controlling their kids and making them feel loved. Tevis suggested consequences for parents who’s kids get in trouble, such as fines. Preventing problems while children are young is the most important step according to McCammon, something that can be improved upon through after-school programs, programs for parents, and mentoring programs. Family and individual mentoring was also a key goal from Raisin’s perspective.
The discussion then moved on to immigration and the degree to which candidates supported PUEBLO’s current initiatives, which were enumerated as family unity, worker protection, economic recovery, and national security. Each candidate noted that these topics were federal matters, though important issues needing attention.
A representative from the Independent Living Resource Center followed the immigration comments with an inquiry about the ability of the blind to vote privately. His problem was with mail-in ballots, and the lack of an alternative to them. Blind citizens need assistance with such ballots, decreasing the privacy that is a key component of the American voting process. None of the candidates had a basic answer or solution to the problem, but many suggested working with various organizations to create a way for the disabled to still have their privacy when voting.
This story has been expanded since its original posting.
Previous Month
Comments
Thyne just lost my vote. Lowering the city height limit, Measure B, to 40' in the historic, El Pueblo Viejo, part of town - and 45' elsewhere, will NOT affect affordable housing.
Attractive, inexpensive rentals CAN be built relatively low-rise (see the already existing Casa de las Fuentes and others downtown). Peoples' views and the city ambiance can be preserved, all while keeping providing affordable housing.
----unfortunate, though, to have a forum before the close-off date (Aug. 10) to enter the race and to allow only one minute to answer complicated questions.
citti (anonymous profile)
July 28, 2009 at 6:38 a.m. (Suggest removal)
PUEBLO pretty much admits in the above that one of their major constituencies is illegal aliens. Illegal aliens should have zero voice in telling us how to run our city, schools, or how to control gangs.
There was a drive-by shooting on West Sola last week according to KSBY. What will it take to make the citizens of SB stand up to gangs and vote thug-huggers like Grant House out of office? All the candidates support "prevention" to end gang violence. It seems to me that deporting illegal alien gang members and running the rest out of town is the best method of prevention. Once again, I have to ask if our tolerant attitude towards gangs would be the same if said gangs were largely composed of white skinheads?
revisionist (anonymous profile)
July 28, 2009 at 6:54 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Food for thought: was anyone really that concerned about views from Chapala Street? I find height restriction hard to swallow when the arguments always surround the Chapala One and Paseo Chapala developments. Weren't the views of these units, and every other house in a two block radius, already blocked by Paseo Nuevo and other, exisiting buildings on State Street? Or were we concerned with the current, non-existant views of the ocean?
As for the affordable housing argument: whether density is involved or not, there will never be enough affordable housing to sustain the demand so long as the units are less than desirable to build by developers. If the units are remotely attractively incentivized, there might be some impetus for developers. Otherwise, density is the only answer when infill projects are the only kind that can be built in and around downtown and horizontal space is an issue. Though I'm sure the City would kindly take your land off your hands if it was donated for a low rise development . . .
And for the love of God, make with the gang injunction already. I'm tired of the blind eye our 'City Council' has toward 'big city problems' that this 'small' town is facing. We have traffic and we have gangs. There. It's out in the open. Now do something about it.
sbdude (anonymous profile)
July 28, 2009 at 8:53 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Thanks go to the Independent for covering this candidates forum, the first of many this season up through the first day of voting on October 5.
The last question of the article describes an audience question about making ballots accessible for blind people, so they can vote in private without having someone else read and mark the ballot for them, a scenario that the speaker noted was a concern to many of his friends at Independent Living Resource Center.
The Indy news article here stated that none of the "none of the candidates had a basic answer or solution to the problem," which is not quite accurate.
For my one-minute answer to that question during this candidates forum last Thursday, I stated that the City needs to fix that ballot accessibility problem, by either providing ballots in braille or by making a broader pool of trustworthy and confidential readers available to assist blind voters. I further noted that braille ballots would be best for those voters and would allow them full stature and dignity to vote for their City Council choices.
As of this writing, the City has two more days to place that action on the City Council agenda for next week.
David_Pritchett (David Pritchett)
July 28, 2009 at 9:55 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Amen, revisionist.
Holly (anonymous profile)
July 29, 2009 at 2:31 a.m. (Suggest removal)
One of the few polling places will be at the Braille Institute, so some provision will be made for blind voters. Maybe they'll use the system you've seen at all polling places the last few elections, with a ballot-marking device called the AutoMark. It's more generally useful than braille ballots, since not all blind voters use braille.
LindaPhillips (anonymous profile)
August 9, 2009 at 1:58 a.m. (Suggest removal)