Comments by at_large

Previous | Page 2 of 58 | Next

Posted on October 23 at 6:58 a.m.

Only in Montecito is dirt "gold". In Santa Barbara dirt is brown. Thanks for explaining those curious, laughable signs on patches of dirt where once there had been a straggling lawn.

On Dry Enough For You?

Posted on October 23 at 6:48 a.m.

Didn't she rule that traditional law enforcement methods ARE sufficient, not "she ruled that their conduct constitutes a public nuisance that could not be adequately remedied via traditional law-enforcement methods."?

Wasn't sure about Sterne's underlying decision, but this one about attorneys' fees is right on. It may be that the winning party should always recoup attorney's fees but that is not the way the system is. It is hard to see the signficant public benefit in the win by these defendants that they should not be subject to a gang injunction.

On Gang Injunction Winners, Losers

Posted on October 22 at 2:41 p.m.

And Vote No on S after or before you've voted for Yes on P!

On 194,819 People are Registered to Vote

Posted on October 21 at 8:52 a.m.

i live in Santa Barbara but long for Carpinteria. Especially if SB is forced to go to district elections, those in Carp. will have better representation, while we will have only one councilperson to vote for. (In Goleta, no one seems to give much of a damn, or few do, since so few run for council.)

On Which is the better city to live in? And why?

Posted on October 21 at 8:48 a.m.

Capps's frequent demands for money are not only relentless, but insulting. I think she's a good representative of this area and voted for her, but she needs to do more honest explaining of why she's accumulating such a huge war chest.

Williams, on his last run for the Assembly, also should explain why he's accumulating so much money.

On Capps Trouncing Mitchum in Campaign Dollars

Posted on October 20 at 9:22 a.m.

Many excellent comments here, starting with gardengal's and continuing to John_Adams's and on, especially nomore's, "We have to begin building within the capacity of our environment. Making special case exemptions is bad public policy."

Further up the creek from this lot there is a beautiful restoration of that same creek. A similar restoration should be worked here, not least for flood control purposes. 25' is already much too little that not an inch should be seized.

Low-income anyone, not just seniors (are there really that many in SB presently without housing? J_A's question points accurately: where are the residents presently living?

On Can Creek Restoration and Affordable Housing Coexist?

Posted on October 17 at 11:01 a.m.

Agree with RHS. How can anyone who cares about education support this major tax measure that's all about construction and encouraging SBCC to increase its size!

What's needed are funds for education, usually thought to be teachers, to lower the high student-teacher ratio. What's needed is not rebuilding the Sports Pavilion and tearing down rebuilding a larger Wake "Campus". What's needed is an emphasis on locals and that is not a mega tax measure.

In combination with the No on P, this recommendation shows how out-of-touch with the needs of the south coast the once proud Independent is.

On Endorsements 2014

Posted on October 13 at 8:19 a.m.

The SBCC foreign students have been on campus since August; surely, in that time they have heard and seen the trains, noticed that there is but one track.

Yes, that bridge is scenic and maybe there should be yet another sign warning of the danger of walking, standing on the tracks, especially tracks over the arroyo from which there is no escape.

I do have sympathy for those who fall off cliffs and those who get hit by trains, but how much warnings of danger should be made and how much protection needs there be for risks that are to most self-evident?

On Train Hits and Kills One Pedestrian, Injures Two Others

Posted on October 13 at 8:11 a.m.

How about the city working with someone other than developer-architect Peikert! He bulldozes his way through citizen advisory committees, charged with upholding city policies! Surely, there is someone in the development/architectural community who has respect for city requirements?

The 50-foot setback is not just a guideline to be abandoned at will. It is, as Creeks director Cameron Benson said, the scientifically "minimum" requirement. In Santa Barbara it's a basic policy to work to restore natural waterway, which are healthy for wild creatures and humans.

And why is it that one City agency, the SB Housing Authority, shows so little respect for another city agency, the Creeks Department?

On 90-Unit Senior Project Gets Warm Embrace

Posted on October 10 at 8:30 a.m.

I say yes, too, to this panel but I object to the age discrimination, of charging anyone over the age of 18 $10 to see this film/panel discussion - therefore charging most all SBCC students.

On Capps to Talk Women in Power After Film Screening

Previous | Page 2 of 58 | Next

event calendar sponsored by: