BlogaBarbara

Santa Barbara Politics, Media & Culture

Tuesday, January 17, 2006

Wither Mission County?

The NP online posted a letter this morning but failed to identify who the writer was. The writer made a good case for why the county split study was a waste of money other than to find disparities in services between the north and south.

The Citizens for County Formation group, which organized on behalf of Mission County, seems to have lost the bog mo' in a serious way. One of the most interesting things I've seen during the process is that more than a few environmentalists have chosen the bunker mentality to support south county succession to promote slow-growth policies. The assumption is that without a north county voting block we could protect more open space. Still, the social justice activists show how services in north county would drop heavily. Can't enviros and social justice activists find a middle ground here?

23 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

it wasn't a letter, it was a NewsPress Editorial piece.

1/17/2006 7:42 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The "social justice activists" simply want the extra tax revenue from south County to pay for social services to north County people.

This is the same, tired, old story, centering around a tax-and-spend approach to relief of poverty. If most of the north County poor population would learn English and stop getting pregnant before age 20, then they might deserve some more tax money from south County.

So I will read the outrage comments here, but someone feel free to write how this is not true. Go ahead.

Why should south County taxpayers subsidize the unwillingness of north County interests to help themselves?

1/17/2006 11:30 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

and it will only get worse...after the next redistricting, the North will have an absolute lock on the Third Dist---effectively ending any chance for a progressive majority on the Board of Supervisors. can you say "Gaviota WalMart"

1/17/2006 5:50 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Boy, am I sick of the word progressive. Its smarmy self-congratulatory air, its implication that those not "progessive" are regressive. It has a exclusionary quality to it that suggest a reverse snobbery. No one is quite pure enough to join who isn't already a member. Kind of like Birnam Wood with more denim. It's as if your family changed their name to get into a better neighborhood or club. When did being a liberal become something to be ashamed of? Why break up a coalition that can win instead of insisting on the "purest progressive"? 2nd place and proud of it. That will get it done.

Syd Camore Canyon

1/17/2006 7:28 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sorry about the typo. Should read: Why break up a coalition that can win to insist on the purest progressive?" Actually not a typo but a gramatical error.

Syd

1/17/2006 7:33 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Interesting that a progressive is really a conservative.

Progressives do not want anything to change. Nothing new or different is good.

The environment is static and cannot adapt to change.

People must be protected against the opprotunity to prosper.

At least Liberals are intellectually honest.

1/17/2006 8:05 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Interesting that a progressive is really a conservative.

Progressives do not want anything to change. Nothing new or different is good.

The environment is static and cannot adapt to change.

People must be protected against the opprotunity to prosper.

At least Liberals are intellectually honest.

1/17/2006 8:05 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Is that supposed to be a joke, "Wither Mission County?"

And if so or not, shouldn't it be "Wither, Mission County! Wither away and let us be free of your teeming masses!"

1/17/2006 9:31 PM  
Blogger Sara De la Guerra said...

Cut out another one -- let's be a little more civil and on topic.

1/17/2006 10:38 PM  
Blogger Sara De la Guerra said...

As for 9:31 pm -- the point of the post exactly. People like yourself feel one way -- others feel another that might normally be allies. Read the whole post before you comment please!

1/17/2006 10:40 PM  
Blogger Bill Carson said...

It's all becoming oh, so clear.

1/17/2006 11:23 PM  
Blogger Sara De la Guerra said...

Deleted another off-topic post -- please don't campaign for someone when it's not even the topic! We just can't do that any longer...it's blog spam.

1/17/2006 11:42 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Secord is looking better to me if only to stick a fork in the dysfunctional local Dems and hope for a rebirth from the ashes. A Fox tie? Are you kidding me? Is this a costume party?

1/18/2006 7:27 AM  
Anonymous unprogressive enviro said...

Sara De la Guerra said...
"As for 9:31 pm ..."

I was making a grammatical point, about the importance of commas, not a substantive point; after all, you made that in the originating post.

As for the fox tie, I, not at that gathering, didn't get the reference until the N-P today.

As for a middle ground between enviros and social justice advocates, that's a hard one. I remember council memer Folayemi's comment at a city council hearing on an appeal for a west side large creek-side building. He said to the effect that balconies and patios counted, in his opinion, as part of the open space requirement and therefore there could be construction more than would otherwise be allowed under city regs. He lost my vote for his re-election right then and there, especially when he repeated it for another project.

There isn't a middle ground on protecting what's left of the environment. There seems not to be a middle ground for social justice either, although some of them do sometimes have a NIMBY mentality when the proposed housing development, for instance, is next door.

Good editorials in today's N-P, both of them.

1/18/2006 9:22 AM  
Anonymous Valerio said...

The necktie of Das Williams was a WOLF, not a fox. I saw it up close. Quite the inside joke on that one.

Shows McManigal the NewsPress reporter does not know a fox from a wolf, and bodes poorly for his skills at enviro reporting.

1/18/2006 10:57 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

what did people think of Das' speech?

1/18/2006 11:29 AM  
Blogger Bill Carson said...

Weak. Very little "eye contact", due to looking down to read his notes. If your passion is real (yes, as opposed to fake), you don't need to read what you want to say.

1/18/2006 11:34 AM  
Anonymous Valerio said...

"bill carson":
dude, you definitly are drinking and blogging. I was there up close. Das had no notes, but should have.

1/18/2006 1:08 PM  
Anonymous Valerio said...

In the insipidly-narrated TV news story by KEYT, the video did show Das referring to a note card for his declaratory statement, but after that (not shown by KEYT) all the remarks and responses to questions were fully free of notes.

1/18/2006 1:45 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Valerio arriving 1st in the Das apologist sprint classic. KEYT "insipid" and McManigal "baiting" and species identity challenged. God forbid Das do anything wrong.

1/18/2006 1:56 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

McManigal does know a silly tie when he sees one.

1/18/2006 3:44 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Figures Das would be cute and wear a Wolf tie. Very silly and very odd. Das needs to mature to serve in these times.

1/19/2006 2:25 AM  
Anonymous _ Fashion Police said...

a funny think happened on the way to the forum...

The cute one was Dr. Dan and his black jacket over a black t-shirt at the CSP forum last night. Who now needs to mature with one's wardrobe?

I have to agree about how insipid KEYT is and how baiting some Newspress reporters are. Seems like some anonymous posters here think criticism of those news organizations is the same as praise for a certain candidate.

1/19/2006 11:07 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home