Page 2 of 20
Posted on March 17 at 10 a.m.
Gaskin's "non-confrontational manner" should be an embarrassment to academics, political philosophers, citizens, artists and anyone who believes in freedom of thought and ideas. This experiment was sort of mundane and tepid but deserves more of a defense of intellectual experimentation than Dr. Gaskin offered. Wouldn't you love to have her on your side when push comes to push back? She is only interested in building her career resume and is a sorry excuse for an academic leader. Let's move on.
On Tempest in a Teepee at SBCC
Posted on March 15 at 10:32 a.m.
Priceless: Check out Sunday's News Press which shows that the Sheriffs department is vastly overspending its budget with overtime and other wasteful practices which would most certainly includes the maintenance and staffing of a 7 helicopter air force. This agency does not need money taken from the people you describe ("those in need to acqire basic necessities of life..."). W-C gets big tax deductions for the money they distribute which means that even folks who live in mushroom holes help pay for this. W-C is required to comply with the tax law when making distributions, they are not free to act with impunity if they want the tax breaks.
On Heli Donations Rankle Board
Posted on March 14 at 10:15 a.m.
RVs should just keep on moving? Wow!! Isn't this what they said to Blacks not a few years ago? What bigotry.The right to drive is a privilege? So we can deny it to people in poverty because they drive older vehicles? What bigotry.The poor in RVs should park in RV Parks? Do you know what these places charge--$50 a night and more. If they had that kind of money they would not be forced into this housing. So American rights to basic things like sleep and shelter is dependent on wealth. Poor people have no right to these things?What bigotry.
On RV Dwellers Sue City
Posted on March 13 at 10:29 a.m.
Thanks for the sympathetic but repetitive complaint about the County and the failure of County Mental Health. But they don't care. For forty years I too have fought against this nonsense in official and nonofficial capacity. Instead of expanding or adding another PHF the Board of Supervisors is funding Sheriff Browns grandiose jail expansion, with some pretense (and that is the right word) that some mental health care might be dispensed in these new dungeons. Look at the failure of the current jail in this field, especially since the contract the work to the lowest bidder private service. County Mental Health is the most embarrassing operation in government. They continually expend money on bureaucracy and resist treatment and intervention. They study stuff forever. When forced to take patients and dispense care they accept the least difficult first and send the rest to jail or out of county. Nick, please direct your spotlight on these failures and find out what the county is doing with our share of the billions of $ collect by Prop 63.
On Ask Not for Whom the Dog Barks
Posted on March 13 at 10:16 a.m.
No salaries for elected officials. Let me see what that means...Oh! the rich get to rule even more directly and the middle class gets shut out as its members have a living to make to support the family. OK, maybe those on welfare could serve or those on social security. Except the same advocates for this idea would abolish both of these programs.
On Salary Shootout at the County Corral
Posted on March 12 at 2:27 p.m.
"Private sector reality" like the ability of Wall Street bankers to avoid criminal prosecution for the biggest theft in the history of humankind? The private sector screws the workers and protects the liars and thieves that do the screwing. At least we get to vote for the "electeds."
Posted on March 12 at 2:21 p.m.
In answer to the question "what gives these people the right to have RVs on the street" the answer is, at least in part, that the California Constitution guarantees the people's right to travel within the state. Laws that prohibit RVs, but no other class of motor vehicle, from stopping in SB are in interference with that right. Additionally, the state handicap law permits handicapped people to special dispensations when parking and does not say this only applies if you are not driving an RV. Selecting RVs for exclusion from such laws is illegal as it targets handicapped people for no other reason than that the city has prejudices against them.
Posted on March 12 at 2:11 p.m.
There can be no good from anonymous donations of this size. Undue influence and secret agendas are inevitable. Woods-Claeyssens Foundation says on their web site that they are founded to give money to "those in need to acquire the basic necessities of life – food, clothing, shelter, social services, public safety, and self-actualization..." Maybe the Sheriffs Dept is an agency "in need" of charity? Seems to me that an awful lot of "in need" people are being denied help to support a helicopter crew. And, where is the BOS in attending to the budget responsibilities? The Sheriff should not be allowed to encumber the treasury with monstrous "gifts" such as this and the US Military which require big care, management and operational costs absent debate and disclosure to the public of these obligations.
Posted on March 12 at 1:38 p.m.
How can Locke defend Adams as the voice of "economic reason" when Adams says the BOS needs a pay cut, votes against a pay raise and then accepts the raise? Talk about knee jerk reactions. I agree the issue is difficult but if anyone was posturing it was Adams. At least the others were true to their vote.
Posted on March 12 at 9:31 a.m.
What hyprocrisy. Let's be honest, what is being discussed here is not about RVs but about poor people in RVs. Rich tourist RVs are never targeted and are actually ignored when people park them in neighborhoods while visiting SB. I see water hoses, electrical lines connected to RVs at the curb in my area on a regular basis. What is being attacked is poor people and the prejudice expressed is that they are criminals, child molesters and generally:"undesireable"! (The City once noted that a reason to ban RVs from parking was that they are not aesthetic!} This is the same blanket bigotry that was used to pass laws prohibiting blacks from being in town at night, Asians from owning property, Mexican-Americans from sending their children to public schools, etc. Good luck with the lawsuit.Btw, the city does not ban large trucks or buses from the "No RV" parking blocks--just RVs. More hypocrisy.