Is Janet Steely or Sweet?
In case anyone was wondering what treacly means -- it means cloyingly sweet or sentimental. The first paragraph described her as steely....a study in contrasts perhaps, it's clear that the template for these article at least includes finding one detractor. It's got to hurt being called a puppet -- but Das, Dr. Dan and The Guzz got a hit too. Equal opportunity I guess....
posted by Sara De la Guerra | 5/11/2006 07:24:00 AM
Our Community Guidelines ask that you use the Blogger/Open ID login or the
more private Name/URL option when making comments. Comments using "Anonymous" will not be published. For more info, see choosing an identity.
36 Comments:
equal hits? who knows. Barney starts out with a spin on all of them and will go to any lengths to make that spin be the story. Using his thesaurus to find a new word to spin a stereotype is not that interesting.
The biggest hit goes to Landecker, who finally found his place in the sun-----personally attacking an erstwhile ally......he obviously hasn't listened well---or at all----to Janet when she has articulated most eloquently why she is running. At least you're no longer just whispering, David. Now please go away you've made your mark
Janet's article was pretty tame with its level of criticism, by comparison to the others. I thought Das' was the most critical, followed by Guzzardi's.
Janet overcame a heart attack and cancer - me thinks she can survive the petty jealousies of a price tag switching, egomaniac who spent less time on the City Council than Das Williams.
Landecker is just mad that nobody listens to him. And why would they when your judgement is so impaired by ego, anger and ambition?
Yes, but Joe can always say "I ran for Governor on the Recall ballot". He got 21 votes in Santa Barbara. Wow, and most of us only thought Das was up for a statewide run.
Joe Guzzardi of Santa Barbara did not run on the governor recall ballot. It was a different guy with the same name. I think he lives in Lodi, CA.
Interesting comments in today's NP on land use (re More Mesa):
"...Beyond purchasing More Mesa, candidates also supported strengthening existing land-use policies to control growth in adjacent areas.
Neighborhood activists say proposals for large-scale homes in the More Mesa perimeter threaten the neighborhood's quality of life.
Ms. Wolf called for creating design standards that would limit the scale of nearby buildings to one-story. "We need to have an understanding of what our standards are as a community," Ms. Wolf said. "I would push for those design standards."
But Mr. Williams called design standards "insufficient.""It's subjective," he said, touting work done in the city of Santa Barbara to craft ordinances that restrict home sizes. Mr. Guzzardi said that the city still has a long way to go before it can effectively control growth in neighborhoods."After two years, the process has been a complete failure," Mr. Guzzardi said, referring to a city advisory committee that has aimed to craft a neighborhood preservation law. He is a member of the panel..."
Beyond the words, one should look at the facts on the ground, so to speak. Ms. Wolf's one-story design standards would produce large sprawling houses like hers (probably about 4,000 sq ft on .5 acre), showing no respect for the neighbors. (In her neighborhood where, btw, despite yesterday's lead sentence, not all her neighbors at all support her, the houses are very large.)
Williams's comment about such design standards being subjective is right on: who's going to decide on "design standards"!!! Architects whose income evolves from large buildings? ...That's been part of the problem with the NPO committee.
Guzzardi has been on the NPO committee and has been on the losing end of the votes to rein in the mcmanansion process underway in Santa Barbara. (Those interested should go to the NPO "unveiling" tomorrow at the Faulkner Gallery.) He's the only one running for the 2nd District who has hands-on involvement in this important issue.
gee 757 you're getting "a little close to [candidates] homes" arent you? Unless you're ready to unveil the housing locations and choices of all the candidates [and granted with regard to Das that would take some time] you shouldn't ask questions you don't knjow the answer to
7:57Am,
Purchasing the land would eliminate the need for design standards at all since the land would be preserved. I think Wolf was saying that if we are unable to purchase the land, since the developer already has existing zoning (something Guzzardi is loathe to change ever because of his support for private property rights)for housing, than one way to restrict big houses is to put in design standards.
Those giving Joe accolades for his work on the NPO. If you look into who nominated Joe for the NPO, you'll learn it was Das.
Okay, so now we get to attack based on the houses candidates live in?. And how do you know the Sq. footage and acreage? Did you just make it up? How wierd will you people get? But, by all means, keep the class warfare issue going. This ain't the 3rd. It won't play here.
And my gosh, not every single one of Janet's neighbors supports her?? What shocking news. I guess this won't be an election with a unanimous choice after all. Alert the media!
And let's go a step further, why don't we check where all the supporters of each candidate live. And what their jobs are and what kind of car they drive. It just keeps getting sillier and sillier.
Mike Pinto says...
In all my years in Santa Barbara I have not come upon a less impressive candidate for public office. Janet Wolf will bend to the will of the Firestone crowd on the board. There is nothing in her background to suggest otherwise. She also has made the comment that only she lives in the 2nd. Either she is ill informed, not telling the truth or we have on our hands a massive fraud by Das, secord and Guzz.
Janet did make the comment that only she lives in the 2nd district. I think it was an honest mistake whilst trying to spout this latest campaign buzz phrase: "I'm the only candidate that lives in Goleta Valley."
I've heard her say this a lot. My guess is that she wants to appear connected to the Noleta neighborhood preservationists. But the truth is that she was quite unfamiliar with the Noleta activists, and admitted so, when many of us (yes, me too) met with her at Gary Earle's house in December 2005. At that time, she acknowledged that she had not been active in the land-use battle at all. She said she was "concerned" and wanted to get involved, but didn't have the time and hadn't kept up with all the issues. She downright frightened some of us with her lack of knowledge regarding the mandate and rezoning. Although we found her to be nice, it was clear that she did not have the knowledge or the background to defend the second district from current development pressures.
Since then, she's been studying and gathering lots of endorsements, a fair amount of money and a bit of voter support. She's packaging herself, and I am certainly buying it. The best bet is Guzzardi. Unless, of course, you want to live amongst density and busy streets. In that case, I suggest you move to Los Angeles.
Dear Mike:
and you've lived here how long? Clearly you were either not here or at least not paying attention (or don't consider gay rights worth standing up for) when Janet stood up to the Boy Scouts and their efforts to use public facilities for free while discriminating against members and staff who based upon sexual discrimination and religious belief.
you, or whoever you troll for must be REALLY scared....
When did Janet say she is the only candidate that lives in the 2nd District? She is the only candidate that lives in the Goleta Valley.
Mike,
I'll assume that you are sincere so let me just mention a few things you might not know.
Janet hasn't said she is the only candidate who lives in the 2nd Dist. She has said she is the only one who lives in Goleta. Maybe that's a stretch. You could argue that Joe does too, though many consider the Goleta Valley to be East of where Joe lives.
Sorry you think that there is nothing in Janet's background suggesting she won't bend to the will of Firestone. Actually there are 2 salient indications that she will not.
The first is that her critics argue Janet is a Rose clone. While not completely true, I think she will stand up in at least as many instances Susan did. Susan stood up to Firestone on several votes, most recently voting against his shameful proposal to reorganize Gaviota out of the South Coast Board of Architectural review.
Second, Janet stood up against the entire school board to opposed Boy Scout recruiting in the schools. It wasn't popular to oppose the Boy Scouts (then or even now) but Janet not only stood her ground but turned around the board majority to vote her way, which was to not support an organization that discriminates.
I know this because I was in the room and came away impressed.
I haven't decided whether to vote for Das or Janet. But either would be preferable to Joe, who in my opinion is a one-issue candidate, or Secord, who will, like Firestone, promise to be a bridge, and once in office, vote with his conservative Republican allies, the current Board majority.
I hope this adds some light, not spin to the discussion. Let's keep it as factual as possible.
To Anon 8:16. Here's a real fact: Janet is the one issue candidate. School board, school board, school board, school bored! She never involved herself in the county planning and housing issues until Susan told her to start. She never involved herself in other county issues until she became a candidate.
On the other hand, Joe (who you mischaracterize as a one-issue candidate) has nearly two decades of experience in county government. From environmental issues to planning issues to emergency planning work to housing issues.
I've done my homework. Joe's website spells this out. His comments at public events have been consistent and clear.
As you said, let's keep this as factual as possible.
I was at a forum last week put on by a coalition of housing concerns held at San Marcos High's auditorium--
At that forum Janet said she was the only candidate that lives in the second district.
It was odd when she said it, and I looked around to find the same confusion on the faces of the other people there.
Just so this arguement does not expand beyond more than it is, Goleta School District actually reversed its position on banning Boy Scouts advertising in December 2001. They indeed initiated the ban more than a year earlier with Janet Wolf as leader of the School Board, but that did not last.
Wolf's supporters tend to forget about the reversal of the ban later, per the news article below.
.............
Goleta board rescinds ban on Scout fliers at schools
By CAMILLA COHEE
December 14, 2001
NEWS-PRESS STAFF WRITER
Goleta schoolchildren can once again receive promotional material from the Boy Scouts of America on campus.
After more than a year of emotional debate over the organization's discrimination against homosexuals, the school board decided not to exclude the Boy Scouts from distributing fliers at the district's 10 schools.
A year ago, after the Boy Scouts' national council announced that gays could not serve as Scout leaders, the Goleta school board temporarily banned the group's fliers, which are used to attract new members.
On Wednesday, the board voted 3-2 to reinstate its original policy allowing all nonprofit groups with programs beneficial to children to distribute their materials.
"I've been torn for 15 months," said trustee Manor Buck, whose family is heavily involved in the local Boy Scout troop. He voted in favor of allowing the organization to distribute fliers.
Mr. Buck's main concern was that a policy that excluded the Boy Scouts would not hold up in court. And he was not in favor of banning all fliers, because dozens of groups that provide activities for children rely on schools to reach families.
But trustee Janet Wolf called the decision shameful.
"This is terrible public policy ... basing a decision on who's going to threaten you with a lawsuit," said Mrs. Wolf. She says any group that discriminates has no place in the public school system.
"Everything that we stand for as a district has been thrown to the wind," she said.
Local Scout leaders were pleased with the decision, saying that the ban made it difficult to connect with parents.
"The board listened to their constituents and made the right decision ... let the parents decide. We don't have to be a filter," said David Tate, executive director of the Los Padres Council of Boy Scouts.
He said the group will wait until after the holidays to resume passing out fliers at school.
Not all were satisfied with the board's move.
"This is a sad day where the school district condones discrimination," said David Pritchett, an Eagle Scout who is now a member of Community Alliance Urging Sensitivity and Equality, a five-month-old group in Santa Barbara seeking to raise awareness about the Boy Scouts' anti-gay policy. "The school district caved in and succumbed to the threat of a lawsuit and the bullying tactics of the Boy Scouts."
anon 219: as a "Wolf Supporter" and someone who was deeply involved in the local Boy Scout discrimination issues of 2000-2001, we most certainly don't forget what ultimately happened, under threat of lawsuit from the BSA.
But in the spirit of Truly and unwaveringly "speaking truth to power", School Board member Janet Wolf, who led the earlier effort to ban the Scouts' fliers, never let go of her convictions or, as some like to characterize it, she never stopped "standing up" to bad policy decisions on that or many other issues.
Thanks for reprinting the article above, anon, and especially the quote from Janet, as an elected official, strongly stating:
"This is terrible public policy ... ... any group that discriminates has no place in the public school system.
"Everything that we stand for as a district has been thrown to the wind," she said.
Janet probably meant to say "unincorporated" 2nd District. We all make mistakes. For example Joe said at the same forum that the MTD property would be great for cattle ranching. Also Das claimed Janet really didn't have the endorsement of City Firefighters. Ooops! And Dan said at the CSP forum that the La Conchita mudslide was a "wonderful thing"
Dear Bill,
When exactly was it that Susan told Janet to run? Just curious. Do you have proof? No? I didn't think so. You have also claimed she has the same group of advisers as Susan Rose. And they are? What, you aren't sure? okay then.
Next?
Janet Wolf says in today's NP, "I have lived in the Goleta Valley almost 20 years...." Since when is living on the foothills, above Cathedral Oaks (the northern limit of the Goleta Valley) with an extensive ocean and valley view, living "in" a valley?
Whatever Mrs Wolf's qualities, geographical knowledge is apparently not one of them.
How about a Mother's Day "reprieve" for this blog......
As one who does not have fond memories of being a Boy Scout believe that if my daughter went to camp I would want her with women leaders not young men leaders for obvious reasons. And if my son went for the same obvious reasons I would not want a gay young man to go with him.
That is the big horrible issue. That for the same reason I do not want young men with my daughters I would not want gay men with my son. And why would a gay man want to lead boys if he does not relate to them in the pure defination - not easy to get unless you are so blinded by gay rights that you cannot see parents rights or the rights of the young men not to be at risk.
Ms. Wolf seems to feel the Boy Scouts goal to protect the boys is a reason to abuse the Boy Scouts - and she is so proud of it. While I am not a fan of the Boy Scouts they have the right to protect the boys the are empowered to protect.
per 1050 comment by another Anonymous:
Are we re-debating whether gay men also are automatically pedophiles too?
One can go to another blog for that one.
The issue of policy at that time for Goleta School District was whether Boy Scouts (BSA), as an organization, could exercise its Supreme Court-verified right to discriminate against gay people (in membership and employment), while at the same time for BSA to enjoy access to Goleta Schools for distributing advertising and use of school facilities. This then raised the policy issue of whether the School District should allow that special access or if all groups should get their access cut off. I was involved quite a bit in that at the time.
According to the news article included as a comment above, 3 of the 5 School Trustees (not Wolf, though) eventually caved in to pressure from a lawsuit by
BSA. That was my assessment then and still seems true. Wolf was good on that policy, and did not cave in under pressure. But she is not the only one in the race with the same strong beliefs against discrimination as public policy.
Based on my discussions with the 4 candidates for 2nd District Supervisor, 3 of those 4 candidates (still including Wolf and also Das Williams) also would support a policy that a School District or County Board should not facilitate access by BSA to local government facilities because BSA still proudly discriminates against gay men. (BSA apparently has no opinion about Lesbians, though).
In short, Wolf initially led on a good policy of non-discrimination, but the other Democrats in the current race for Supervisor agree with her but did not have the venue at the time to go on-record and vote on it.
And, regarding the spat on geography above, "Goleta Valley" is a common label for all the unincorporated area between Goleta and Santa Barbara cities. Even the flat lands in this unincorporated area really are not in a "valley" but the area is more physically called a "coastal plain". "Noleta" works too to keep away from the physical geography label, or "SantaLeta" also is good.
Mike Pinto says...
I support Das so I am called a "troll". So be it. Janet Wolf is an establishment candidate. A seat filler and nothing more. Why is it that the Democratic power brokers dislike a good progressive like Das. I will tell you why, he will turn the place upside down and that's a good thing.A little bit of Das will change things for good. So, let Janet Wolf's supporters call people names and attack Das but on June 7, Das will be our candidate for Supervisor.
But Das is the canididate of the powerbrokers. Das is the "Officially Endorsed Candidate of the Democratic Party".
Anon 10:50pm,
Since when did being gay become equated with a lack of self control? What is it about being gay that makes people think you have perverted urges, or urges that you can't control. Just who is "protecting" sho here?
Should we have segregated schools for girls with girl teachers and for boys with boy teachers next? Or is it that heterosexuals can control their sexual urges but homosexuals can't? Because if that is true how come we have so many sexual assaults perpetrated by heterosexuals?
Mike Pinto my friend, you should sit through at least one meeting of the Board of Supervisors, which by your comments in this blog its evident you have never done, to find out what the job Das is applying for really consists of....... your comments indicate you think he is competing for an episode of the Apprentice, Survivor, or some other "reality" show......
David Pritchett:
Its nice if, as per your assertion that "the other Democrats agree with" Wolf's actions in standing up to the Boy Scouts. The point, though, is what actions people choose to take while in elected office. Of course people are never faced with the identical set of circumstances while in office so to diminish the significance of what Wolf did in office is disingenous.
A look back at the News-Press Feb 13, 2004 article "Gays Rally For Marriage Rights" is an insight into some related issues. While on the City Council, Das Williams was asked about the recent same-sex marriages performed in San Francisc and also asked about his opinion of same-sex marriage:
"Councilman Das Williams said San Francisco is setting itself up for a lawsuit. Santa Barbara shouldn't invite further legal action, he said.
Mr. Williams supports same-sex unions and said he believes they should have the same rights as married couples. He stopped short of saying that they should receive marriage licenses.
"To me, marriage has nothing to do with a piece of paper," Mr. Williams said. "I believe marriage is in the heart, and I don't understand the importance of the word."
Sorry Das, if you don't "understand the importance of the word". But many gay and lesbian people who DO understand the word are sorry that you think marriage has nothing to do with a piece of paper. Love may not, and commitment may not, but in the State of Calfornia and United States of America the "piece of paper" you cavalierly dismiss affords hundreds if not thousands of rights. We know that Janet Wolf has stated that she supports the rights of gays and lesbians to marry. Would you, Das? You hedged when the News-Press asked you. Will you hedge now?
We know that Janet Wolf has stated that she supports the rights of gays and lesbians to marry. Would you, Das? You hedged when the News-Press asked you. Will you hedge now?
Whatever. Like that has anything to do with the 2nd district. Somehow I think that gay marriage will not be brought up at Supervisor meetings, unless of course Michael Towbes introduces the Critical Homosexual Workforce Growth Mandate.
Or, Gay in the..., the point is what the other current candidates in the current election think about an issue that one of the candidates touts as an important issue and past record. 3 of the 4 candidates (including Wolf) support the same position on School District policy towards a group that blatantly discriminates but also enjoys access to the schools. That is all my point was intended to be.
You are making a different point; a good one, but indeed different.
David Pritchett: what would be even BETTER is, if rather than trying to deconstruct the positions and achievements of OTHER candidates, your candidate [you are listed as an endorser of Das] and his supporters would instead hold up his own---stand on his own courageous stances rather than trying to undermine the record of others. Its tough I know with less than two years of a record by the time he announced but still, wouldn't that be the "clean campaign" way to go?.
Here's a challenge to all candidates and their supporters on blogabarbara: under your own name or a pseudonym, only post accurate non-spin statements touting your candidate====no sleazy undermining of others....
actually, anon, 611, what the candidates believe and have stated about issues are very important, whether its the Board of Sup or School Board that they're vying for. And Yes, being gay and having the right to marry does effect people in the 2nd District; Das is a candidate who seems to believe in bringing resolutions on statewide issues and propositions to the elected body whether or not that body directly has a voice in them [ex: last years 11th hour "anti-labor propositions" press conference and resolution from Das]; its called "bully pulpit". A anti-gay marriage initiative is wending its way through the secty of states office; a gay marriage bill is pending in the State Leg. Beyond your attempt to marginalize the significance of the issue, any officeholder or candidate, anywhere, should be prepared to weigh in on the issue. Same with immigration legislation. We never know what public office they may want to leapfrog to next so its good info to know....
Have a candidate go talk about gays and the BSA. Have them support the gay point of view. Watch that candidate lose even if he/she is a democrat.
Anon 212: your kind of thinking is best left for another era, another part of the country. pandering to homophobia won't play all that well here. There are hordes of us in the 2nd District who will make sure that it does not. tell THAT to Pat Robertson.........
Post a Comment
<< Home