Comments by sbdude
Page 1 of 3 | Next
Posted on October 26 at 3:34 p.m.
Alan, you are incorrect: California State Law provides that if the front bumper of your car enters an intersection (i.e. passes the limit line) before the light turns red, you are legally in the intersection and cannot be given a ticket. Like someone already said, ask for the picture and fight the ticket.
Otherwise, there is nothing illegal about the cameras, nor is it extortion. It would be the same as having an officer stationed at the intersection all the time. If you can't do the time, don't do the crime.
Also, it's ridiculous to say you should avoid an entire city because of red-light cameras. I suppose we should also stay out of Pasadena, Las Vegas, Miami . . . the list goes on.
Posted on October 19 at 11 a.m.
Bird, I believe this is what we refer to as "stakeholders" in the grand scheme of development and land ownership. I think we would be remiss if we told people what to do with their land without their input. That sort of unilateral thinking and government spawned the declaration of independence (taxation without representation, etc.).
It is one thing to preserve public lands for future generations to enjoy (at a significant cost to a state that has increasing difficulty in maintaining park land), it is another to require a private landowner provide public access and enjoyment at their cost (not to mention the added liability that entails). We might as well let the goverment tell us what to paint our houses.
Posted on October 12 at 4:21 p.m.
sorry, not everyone. just a select few.
Posted on October 12 at 4:19 p.m.
so i think it's safe to say that everyone who has commented thus far have lived their entire lives in santa barbara, objected to the construction of the California before it was built, spend most of their time enjoying the view of the mountains from lower state street, and have therefore established standing to dictate development of another's property.
i'm also going to guess none of you made your money developing property.
1 of 1 people thought this was a good comment.
Posted on October 6 at 10:02 a.m.
because the height of a suicide barrier on the granada garage would exceed 45'.
Posted on September 28 at 1:27 p.m.
or maybe the county should not have issued a building permit to Mr. Warner allowing him to use "countless heavy vehicles" on Channel Drive to deliver his palm trees.
way to stay on topic.
Posted on September 1 at 1:42 p.m.
hank, i have no doubt in my mind that's how it happened.
Posted on August 6 at 11:10 a.m.
Sounds like Mr. Romasanta has a bit of a conflict of interest here. Any plans for a ritz-carlton-type hotel would surely force him to spend money to improve his own hotel. what a terrible, terrible thing competition is. welcome to the free market economy, Mr. Romasanta.
Posted on August 4 at 4:46 p.m.
Gaijin, thank you. Finally someone who gets it.
Page 1 of 3 | Next
Previous Month
2 of 2 people thought this was a good comment.
Posted on November 13 at 2:10 p.m.
perhaps pk. but it is another to campaign and win on withdrawal and fiscal responsibility, then turn it on it's head because you suddenly realize that the administration before you was right all along.
it smacks of the pot calling the kettle black when you perpetuate what you publicly project as abhorrent.
On Health Care Victory Bittersweet for Capps