For City Council: Brian Barnwell, Helene Schneider, Das Williams
Vote No on Measure A
When you go to the voting booth on Tuesday, November 6 — or cast your absentee ballot — The Independent strongly urges you to vote for Brian Barnwell, Helene Schneider, and Das Williams for City Council. We also urge you to vote no on Measure A.
Brian Barnwell, Helene Schneider, and Das Williams bring unique sensibilities to the job. Barnwell is a centrist Democrat and a passionate planning wonk, given to brilliant — if at times anguished — soliloquies. Williams is a progressive Democrat who embodies an intriguing blend of evangelical Christianity, surfer-dude environmentalism, and economic populism. And Schneider is endowed with rare administrative savvy, which she deploys to tackle seemingly insoluble social problems, like chronic homelessness. On their individual merits, these three incumbents richly deserve to be reelected. As a group, they’ve developed a fruitful working rapport throughout the years that would be foolish to throw away.
All have worked energetically and creatively to address the stiff challenges confronting both City Hall and the broader Santa Barbara community. They’ve struggled to address the social violence inflicted when working families find themselves evicted so luxury condominiums can be built. We trust they will bring wisdom, insight, and good faith to bear when balancing the need for maximum housing affordability and neighborhood preservation. The rise of gang violence defies simple solutions and cheap slogans, but we’re confident these three will not shirk from finding the best combination of carrot and stick. When it comes to traffic congestion, we’re not so utopian as to believe the automobile can be rendered obsolete within our lifetime. But as a society, we clearly need alternatives right now. Improved mass transit, better bike lanes, commuter rail, telecommuting, staggered work schedules — all of these will be part of the solution. And these three have demonstrated a commitment to making this happen. Finally, when it comes to sustainability, the City of Santa Barbara is now committed to walking the walk, not just talking the talk. This did not happen overnight, nor did it happen by accident. Were it not for the three incumbents — Barnwell, Schneider, and Williams — it’s doubtful it would have happened at all.
In recent months, City Hall has approved two major solar installations on its own structures, and eliminated many of the design guidelines that have inhibited its citizens from going solar on their own. City parks use far less pesticide today than they did four years ago, and steps are being taken to make Santa Barbara’s creeks more accommodating and hospitable to steelhead trout. Not only that, but City Hall is leading the charge to convert South Coast trash into cleaner-burning fuels, and changing its architectural design guidelines to ensure maximum energy efficiency in the future. There’s still much work to be done. Reelect Barnwell, Schneider, and Williams, and let them finish the job.
Measure A would change the timing of city elections from odd-numbered years to even-numbered years so city elections would coincide with state and federal contests. Close, but no cigar. This is a fiscal quick fix designed to save money (which it would) masquerading as political reform (which it’s not). Call us parochial, but we like the fact that when Santa Barbara voters cast their ballots, they’re focused solely on matters concerning Santa Barbara. We don’t want to give that up. We see little benefit to hitching the outcome of Santa Barbara’s debates about growth, traffic, gentrification, or crime to state and federal elections, which are driven by such hot-button issues as gay rights, abortion, capital punishment, or the Iraq War.
Reelect Brian Barnwell, Helene Schneider, and Das Williams to the City Council, and vote no on Measure A.
Double-clicking on any word or phrase in this story will open a reference window with definitions and links to other reference material.

Print friendly
E-mail story
Contact an Editor
iPod friendly
Comments
Bookmark This
Previous Month


Comments
Discussion Guidelines
Based upon the past 12 years of elections data, voter turnout is nearly twice as high during even year elections, which would be the effect of Measure A.
And it would save Santa Barbara City taxpayers a net $245 thousand each election, forever.
This seems like the Independent writer thinks voters do not know the difference between Iraq and Islay, or abortion and Anacapa.
Voters are smarter than the Indy thinks they are, and know the differences.
www.YesOnMeasureA.blogspot.com
David_Pritchett (David Pritchett)
October 25, 2007 at 12:11 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Okay, I'll call you parochial but only if you'll call me sensible: Measure A will surely save tons of money that could be used for, say, much needed after school gang-prevention activities; it will nearly double the number of citizens participating in municipal elections, increasing the "democracy quotient"; and I have a hunch (call me predictable, er, predictive, uh, predicative--oh heck, just don't call me late for dinner) that Measure A will also lead to a much better informed Santa Barbara electorate--voters will have "caught the bug," so to speak, from increased media coverage of all things political, local as well as national. (And David, I tremendously enjoyed your "Iraq to Islay, abortion to Anacapa." May I add "from gay marriage to gaping holes in our unbiased daily news coverage"?)
Anyway, that's how I feel so you can call me finished.
jonkwilliams (anonymous profile)
October 26, 2007 at 2:14 p.m. (Suggest removal)
This may seem like an off-topic issue but I'm just wondering what these three people the Independent endorse are going to do about the proliferation of bars downtown.
People seem to forget that this is a residential area and the city decided in its ignorance (or was it callous indifference to the people who lived down there) to issue license after license after license to prospective bar owners and while it's great for the people who want to go there to drink and "hook up" it has happened very much at the expense of those living there and as we speak I know several people--residents and business proprietors-- who once again have to take yet more time out of their lives to petition the city for the right to be able to live their lives and pursue their livelihood without drunks from these bars keeping them up at night with the noise they make as well as using their properties as a public toilet.
So if Das Williams, Helene Schneider and Brian Barnwell are so socially conscious, why don't they stand up for the people they claim to represent instead of trying to make the bar owners happy? Oh, and by the way, weren't these bars supposed to bring in revenue for the city?
I'm not per se against raising taxes (Provided it helps people) but if this city can't properly manage the money the bars (and other businesses which don't encroach on the day-to-day landscape) brings in in a way that makes things run efficiently, then why should we believe that any other plan they come up with to raise revenue will be beneficial?
billclausen (anonymous profile)
October 26, 2007 at 2:54 p.m. (Suggest removal)
The Barnwell for Council sign in Eos speaks volumes.
Thinkitover (anonymous profile)
October 26, 2007 at 3:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Yes, billclausen, it was off topic.
FirstDistrictStreetfighter (anonymous profile)
October 26, 2007 at 7:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"Yes, billclausen, it was off topic."
Upon reconsideration perhaps it wasn't since I was addressing the endorsment of three candidates who are incumbents in a city that panders to the bar scene.
billclausen (anonymous profile)
October 26, 2007 at 8:32 p.m. (Suggest removal)
All DEMOCRAT recommendations? Haven't we grown up yet ?
Social violence? How about get a job? If you can't make it here don't do it on the backs of the rest of us! MOVE
BeachLivin (anonymous profile)
November 6, 2007 at 12:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Post a comment