Page 1 of 1
Posted on June 12 at 8:30 a.m.
Long ago, when I voted in favor of the legalization medical marijuana, at no point did I ever consider that the sales & distribution would happen in "dispensaries". Whose bright idea was that? How could the lawmakers possibly think that would be a good idea?
Listen, I am absolutely in favor of the legal distribution of marijuana for medicinal use, but am I the only one that thinks we’ve gone about this in the completely wrong manner? Why can't licensed pharmacies with respectable and well trained pharmacists be the distribution mechanism, just like they are for other controlled substances? Those who are legitimately sick and in need of weed to ease their discomfort should have no problem going to a proper pharmacy to receive their prescription.
If distribution was performed in a responsible and somewhat regulated manner, many of the issues today could be resolved and California could set an example for the world, instead of the joke it is today.
On Authorities Raid Marijuana Dispensary
Posted on July 28 at 11:41 a.m.
Whether we like it or not, the planning model used in most of Southern California development has been a complete and utter mistake from the get go. Relying on individual automobiles and highways while promoting urban sprawl might have been a good idea when the population of the state was in the hundreds of thousands, but it's madness to continue in that direction.
While I completely agree we can't put all trust in the developers, and we certainly don't want the development to mirror the housing projects of Chicago, we do need to put some serious thought into affordable housing for the purpose of sustaining a working population in SB. Businesses will not come to SB if there are no skilled workers, and skilled workers won't come to SB if there is nowhere to live. It's as simple as that.
On "Can't Get There From Here"
Posted on May 9 at 12:29 p.m.
Marie, I'm not suggesting to cut all of the vegetation away. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that some fuels combust much quicker than others, and the types of vegetation that grow back quickly after a fire are usually the ones that burn the fastest. Conveniently, these are the types of vegetation that grazing animals usually prefer to eat.
As for zoning, I certainly agree in regards to new development, but it doesn't solve the problems we are currently facing. I nominate you as our representative to tell everyone on the Riviera that their properties have been re-zoned to "wildland", and to move out immediately.
Or...we could just watch after our land closest to civilization and make sure it doesn't get too out of control. Its not that complicated.
On Updated Jesusita Fire Stats
Posted on May 9 at 9:28 a.m.
Creosote, thanks for the note. My apologies for not being completely up to date on the local news. Born and raised in SB and resident for 30+ years before taking an out of state job a couple years ago.
Listen, I think its great that the mission canyon ass'n has taken some preventative measures in the last year, and I'm happy they employed the method I suggested and found it usefull. I look forward to hearing about more of this in the future.
BUT...this is clearly not just a Mission Canyon issue as much as its a community issue. The point of my message above which I admit was a little unclear, was that these preventative measure need to be long term, continued practice, on a large scale, with a focus on both public and private property. You can't just clear out the Mission Canyon area while neglecting Jesusita and neighboring areas. I was questioning why this practice has not been done on a much larger scale earlier.
Are you really happy with how the community on a whole has handled the situation over the last three decades? If you remember Painted Cave fire back in the 90's, what was done after that besides homeowners cashing with with fancy new homes and building larger perimeters around their properties? Its one thing to beat your chest about how great of a job you're doing protecting your own property, but what about the guy next door? By not working together, the overall danger will continue.
Now I'm not saying goats will solve the problem. There will be fires no matter what is done. I just think its important that the community has a long term plan in place to reduce fuels on public and private property to the point where these fires are either slightly more preventable, or hopefully less devastating.
I hope to see more of what Mission Canyon residents have started, but if you please excuse me, starting only one year ago is a pretty lame attempt given the elevated threat level these areas have had for decades.
Posted on May 9 at 5:08 a.m.
They use goats and sheep in europe to keep the dry brush down. These animals can easily eat away a lot of underbrush in a relatively short period time, effectively leaving the major chaparral growth in place while eliminating the dry brush that invariably provides the kindling for these fires. Why hasn't this ever been considered in SB. Seems perfectly reasonable to me.
The environmentalists would probably protest due to the underbrush being a key part of the chaparral eco system, and/or causing accelerated erosion.
Lets face it, the areas that are burning now have been horribly overgrown and mismanaged for decades, for a region that has such high fire potential. Managed burns are carried out in unpopulated areas regularly, but not much has been done in the foothills around the city to reduce potential fuels that drive these fires.
Now that the city unfortunately will be getting a fresh start, maybe its time to start thinking about how we can manage the vegetation around the county to preserve ascetic looks while keeping check on the fuels that drive these fires. Its not the manzanita, sages and oaks I'm talking about. Its the grasses that spout up shortly after any major rain event, that we all watch dry up into bright yellow twigs that carpet the soil and do nothing about.
Posted on February 22 at 10:50 a.m.
I love the end where the "established" cabbies complain about "new companies" that "swoop in for rush hour".
There's a certain "established" cab company in SB that consistently has shockingly poor service through their unfriendly drivers and extremely rude dispatchers. Maybe another reason for the popularity of the "new companies" is their general friendliness towards clients and flexibility of service.
Meanwhile, certain "established" companies maintain a staff of drivers and dispatchers who regularly insult clients or refuse service due to bloated egos and idiotic company policies.
I don't think I'm alone in saying that I have no sympathy for certain "established" companies, and will certainly not delete the mobile number of a cabby who regularly delivers in a safe and professional manner.
On Cabbies Meet with Cops