BlogaBarbara

Santa Barbara Politics, Media & Culture

Friday, March 21, 2008

Travis Gets Personal. Are you part of the cabal? Everyone else is...

News-Press Editor Travis Armstrong inducted a few more people into the cabal hall of fame over the last few days and continued his retaliation campaign against all enemies of the News-Press. It's amazing to me how many people he can scorch in one column. Tomorrow he will probably try to call each one of them and then say they won't return his calls. Let's review this week's list:

Council Member Helene Schneider: Helene-gate, a term created in jest by David Pritchett over at EdHat, resurfaced again as if it is on our minds on a daily basis. Pritchett does a great job in this post explaining a couple of amazingly complex investigative techniques including the "five minute phone call" and "alphabetizing" to explain the perceived transgression on Schneider's part. Why hasn't TKA made the call to the Community Development Department and reported the facts? Interestingly enough, TKA also made it sound like the News-Press was a Dale Francisco kingmaker but at the same time put him on warning saying he "is off to a slow start". Perhaps that is one and a half cabalistas mentioned....two and a half if you count Schneider's husband.

Mayor Marty Blum: Our Mayor is in TKA's permanent cut and paste file when he has little to write of substance. This time he calls her the "antithesis of Pearl Chase". Them there is fighting words!

Former Council Member Brian Barnwell: Calling him "cocky" -- in just a couple of paragraphs Armstrong implicated Pedro Nava and Das Williams in Barnwell's election defeat. Campaign manager Jeramy Lindamann was also mentioned because he didn't respond to questions from the News-Press -- I don't think that is why Brian lost that election. Out of nowhere TKA then says Barnwell is rumored as a candidate again. Most of us have not heard that rumor spoken at all and have only seen it on the pages of the News-Press -- what's your source Travis?

In a truly low blow, Armstrong continues his appetite for Barnwell's destruction by bringing up his divorce and a law suit from his former wife. Is anything sacred? His divorce has nothing to do with anything other than his personal life.

Former News-Press Reporter Camille Cohee: she is married to Barnwell and a former employee. Double cabal trouble. I always thought that personnel files were personal but I guess they aren't when you are out for revenge. Cohee also was outed for a financial offense that is truly none of anyone's business but her own. Interestingly, TKA feels free to use a quote from Mayor Blum here when it serves his purpose.

Supervisor Janet Wolf: now has broken promises and new cabal inductee and Wolf aide James Kyriaco won't return phone calls. I don't think I would either.

When will you join the cabal?

Labels: ,

38 Comments:

Anonymous UNO said...

You forget to add the Duck Tape Chix who kept screaming F*** You Travis in both the halls of the NewsPress and the halls of Justice.

I guess they get a free pass on bad behavior because TA could have an agenda against them too.

3/21/2008 7:35 AM  
Blogger johnsanroque said...

It’s really just more of the same. Armstrong seems unable to make a distinction between opposing a position and opposing the person taking the position. If someone takes a position Armstrong doesn’t like, that gives him the right to smear the person politically, personally, and ethically. They receive automatic cabal membership. There seem to be several categories of individuals eligible for cabal membership. Some are rotating, some permanent.

An example of the rotating cabal slot is the “Lying Supervisorial Sell-out Woman” position. Janet Wolf has now rotated into the Susan Rose position (formerly held by Gail Marshal). Wolf has quite a while left in her term to fill those big shoes.

There are intermittent cabal members whose terms lapse due to inactivity, but who are destined to rejoin the cabal because their inherent corruptness forces them to serially commit anti-Armstrong acts. Pedro Nava and Brian Barnwell can be counted as charter members in this category, but there are also junior members like Helene Schneider who can rise quickly in the cabal just from a single anti-Armstrong act, even if no one else understands exactly what she did to earn cabal membership.

Finally, you’ve got your lifetime membership category, and I would be naïve here to cite anyone but Marty Blum. Blum represents the gold standard for lifetime membership—a sell-out woman politician intent on the ethical, political, and fiscal destruction of the city in general—and De La Guerra Plaza in particular. There have been pretenders to this position, but Blum cements her life membership stranglehold by publicly dismissing Armstrong as the jerk that he is. Her lock on this lifetime position will be evident by the continuing attention she’ll receive from Armstrong long after she terms out of office and can no longer make sarcastic and insulting comments about the News-Press in her official capacity as Mayor.

You Armstrong supporters need to keep buying the News-Press. Remember you’re helping to create the historical record for Santa Barbara County that will document to future generations how The News-Press single-handedly exposed a cabal that included SB’s ethically-bankrupt enemies of Armstrong, along with every other journalist in the world.

3/21/2008 10:25 AM  
Anonymous mike jordan said...

TKA's recent rants, as usual, continue to be filled with phrases that indicate either an unwillingness or inability to back up his "charges" with appropriate language.

A typical example- "Ms. Cohee also apparently marked down sick time for one of the days...." is usual form for his editorial filler. The convenient use of the word "apparently" delivers the smell of a lack of credibility and cowardice. Either she did or she didn't, such a statement should not need to drift around in a grey area if there is a credible point to be made.

If you'll look, you'll see plenty of other examples in TKA's efforts- "It appears...," "This could mean...," "She might...," and such. Each applied relentlessly in situations where there is obviously a clear answer or point, but one can only presume the answer or point is not the one TKA wants to share, agrees with, meets the agenda, whatever.

If these arguments and phrases were showing up in my email inbox, they would be tossed for what they are, meaningless plays on words. That the equivalent takes place in the supposed structure of a daily local newspaper is indicative of what the content quality has become. There is plenty of meaningful dialogue that could be taking place, but "it appears" that TKA is interested only in fodder similar to what is found in the checkout line at the supermarket.

3/21/2008 11:19 AM  
Blogger Joseph said...

Uno takes an skewed view of things here... the F-you Travis statements in the halls of justice were the result of NewsPress attorneys who insisted on hearing it in court. And that in a case the NewsPress lost because, in part, the judge apparently found no "bad behavior" (or at least nothing illegal) in the F-you utterances. Of course, for any rational person, there can be no confusing the halls of the NPress with the halls of justice.

3/21/2008 12:10 PM  
Anonymous Don Jose de la Guerra y Noriega said...

Greetings everyone

...this is really troubling news Sara...I'm feeling extremely low now because Travis hasn't written a single word about me as part of the Cabal...this really puts me at the very bottom rung of the social ladder...so degrading; it's shameful and degraceful to be so unnoticed. I feel like hiding,completely ignored, unhated and thus unloved.

You others, have this badge of honor... this 'red badge of courage'.

Me? Zip. Nada. And here I've spent so much time and written so many words bugging him about the Plaza...so very unkind of Travis to completely ignore me. I haven't even gotten any calls from Barry, the "hammer", either.

I am a nothing, a real zero. You others are practically all heroes now. The Cabal accusation is now like the old Newspress annual award...maybe there will be a well attended announcement dinner at El Paseo with expensive tickets and a Roast of the winner.

Ladies and Gentleman, this year's featured Cabal Winner, ex mayor Sheila Lodge.

3/21/2008 6:23 PM  
Anonymous Tragic Kingdom said...

The empress of Wendyland doesn't get how much damage Armstrong is doing to her, as he repeats the same Big Lies over and over.

3/21/2008 6:34 PM  
Anonymous the timekeeper said...

I'm Baaaaaaack


Only 3575 more days to wait unit the fired for cause News press employees get their job back.


What fun this waiting.


And bleed the scumbag union dry in the process.

3/21/2008 7:51 PM  
Anonymous Pale Writer said...

Yo timekeeper, how many more days before Wendy McCaw solves the mystery of who downloaded 15,000 images of child porn on her computers? She proclaimed in a front page column that resolving that mess would only "be the beginning" of exposing child porn and bringing it to a screeching halt everywhere.

Reckon she's too busy skiing in Switzerland with her Waterboy, just like O.J. is too busy playing golf to find out who really murdered his ex-wife Nicole.

Where's Snow Job when her insightful opinions are needed? Uh, if they're not full of insight, they're full of something else. But, they are entertaining!

3/21/2008 8:19 PM  
Blogger Bill Carson said...

Mostly to johnsanroque, but to others as well:

Janet Wolf repeatedly promised, during her campaign, to refrain from any rezoning in the unincorporated areas of Goleta until the Goleta Community Plan was completed. Last Tuesday she was instrumental in including "fuzzy language" in the Board Resolution that clearly allows for an exception to that promise. She insisted on creating a loop-hole for the agriculturally zoned property owned by MTD (Calle Real and San Antonio Road). Everyone on planet earth could see the charade that taking place at the Board meeting on Tuesday, and that it was intended to facilitate the rezone of that ag land for what will be 400 units of high-density, low-income, subsidized housing.

Janet flat out lied to the voters.

Travis Armstrong saw it coming. He warned us that it was coming. He wrote about it when it happened. He informed us that Joe Centano was more of a friend to the Goleta area than Janet Wolf was. He told the truth as he exposed what was happening.

How the heck can you protect Janet Wolf, and attack Travis Armstrong on this? Are you THAT blinded by your irrational hatred toward Travis that you will defend the actions of just another slippery politician who clearly pulled the rug out from under her own constituents?

C'mon. You've GOT to be smarter than that. Or are you?

3/21/2008 8:24 PM  
Anonymous Sanger Sally said...

Timekeeper, if all goes well, the News-Press employees could be back before March goes out like a lamb. Stay tuned.

Travis is a proven liar, both under oath and not, and as has been pointed out here, he's good at pointing fingers at others while hiding behind libel-proof formulations. He's got too much venom to spew to vent it all in his columns; he needs to write a book. He couldn't truthfully tell, however, who it was who said "F you" to him, possibly because he is so deserving of that sentiment from so many. But the judge just a few months ago ruled he got it wrong.

And, just as bad, he's a dreadful writer.

3/21/2008 8:27 PM  
Anonymous Al Bonowitz said...

Travis has no choice but to couch his arguments with phrases such as "apparently" and "it appears." Were his rantings to appear without such wrapping, no lawyer in the world could protect him from the lawsuit that would surely come.

The editing ranks are thin at the News-Press ... it'll only take one slip.

3/21/2008 9:12 PM  
Anonymous Pvt. Land Owner said...

TA helped elect Francisco. He is not all bad.

3/21/2008 11:20 PM  
Blogger johnsanroque said...

Bill Carson: Here’s a serious answer to your comment. The issue being discussed here is not the position taken by Janet Wolf. It’s the way she, and others, are treated by Armstrong. He picks people as targets for various reasons, and then seems to believe that he can pile any garbage on them because he has a voice in the local newspaper. Objectivity, fairness, and ethics are thrown overboard. I sometimes agree with the positions that Armstrong takes, but the treatment of individuals in the News-Press is reprehensible. It has nothing to do with journalism. Forget Jerry Roberts for the moment and look at just this week.

His attack on Wolf was at a personal level, calling her a puppet and implying that she was bought by developers. Joe Centano is one of his favorites because he supported the aborted Fess Parker/Chumash megadevelopment a couple years ago, so Centano is always praised by Armstrong. (Where were Armstrong’s big development fears at that time when Centano supported the concept of rezoning for a 500 unit development project for the Santa Ynez Valley?)

And as long as you cited the actual Goleta development issue, Centano didn’t vote against the motion for the Goleta Plan. He abstained, and the other four supervisors voted for it. You wouldn’t know that from reading Armstrong’s editorial because its purpose has little to do with information or news—its purpose is to smear a woman he has targeted, just as he targeted Rose and Marshal before. Is it too much to expect any semblance of factual coverage or fair treatment from Armstrong?

Also this week was another rehash of Barnwell’s divorce and personal issues that were completely and totally unrelated to any political issues being discussed. The editor of SB’s daily paper believes it’s acceptable to attempt to embarrass a man he doesn’t like by dragging in details of his personal life. What rock does Armstrong live under? What does any of this have to do with journalism? If he can't convince people with facts and logic, does that mean personal insult and vilification are acceptable?

The issue is not what position Wolf or Centano or Armstrong has on Goleta Development. The issue is that a community must speak out when a man with a public platform deliberately acts in an unethical manner.

3/22/2008 6:53 AM  
Anonymous Snow Job said...

What exactly is the "public benefit" this county planning loophole provides? Are subsidized housing units de facto public benefits? I don't think so.

Same thing with the SB zoning loophole allowing unfettered modifications for "property improvement". What the heck is that besides a loophole developers routinely drive trucks through.

These are not just Jeopardy questions because no one is getting a prize with the current answers.

3/22/2008 8:59 AM  
Anonymous Speling said...

KYRIACO, no S at the end

Centeno, no A in the middle

Triple-Drunk Armstrong

3/22/2008 9:13 AM  
Blogger Bill Carson said...

JSR,

You've clearly identified the reason that we completely disagree with each other. The issue IS the position taken by Janet Wolf. The issue WAS the way Susan Rose betrayed her constituents.

You see the words that Travis writes about Janet Wolf as a "personal attack" or a "smear". I see them as accurate truth. Plain and simple.

Again, Janet Wolf presented herself as someone who would protect open space in Goleta. The Capps, Flacks, MTD, Pueblo, Coastal Housing crowd helped her win the election and now (as a puppet would) she is giving her political supporters the pay-back they expected.

Joe Centano gave en eloquent speech to explain his opposition to the Resolution language that Janet wanted to include. Only Joe knows why he abstained. But he made his position very clear in his comments that day. Even Salud offered Janet an opportunity to leave the fuzzy language out when he indicated that he would follow Janet's lead on the motion that she was chomping on the bit to make.

John, if you can't see this, then you are blind to the political shenanigans that are going on here. How you can label Travis "unethical" in this scenario is beyond belief.

And as for your accusation that Travis makes "personal attacks", I would offer to you that the only people making personal attacks are the gang of local politicians who consistently ignore their own constituents. I DO take it personally when Janet Wolf is willing to destroy the last, few remaining acres of open space in her efforts to provide MORE high-density development that will never solve the problem her cohorts THINK we have. It's my community. It's our community. And THEY are willing to ruin it.

This is why I am grateful that Travis writes about Janet Wolf. He is attempting to protect MY community from those who are working to destroy it. And it is PERSONAL.

3/22/2008 9:45 AM  
Blogger Sara De la Guerra said...

9:13 AM -- want a job as my editor? need one :) Thanks for the tip.

3/22/2008 12:48 PM  
Anonymous Garry Owen said...

I'm sorry BC THINKS the lack of affordable housing in HIS city is a myth. And that he takes it PERSONAL when some citizens dare disagree with HIM.

But I'm not sorry to point out the highway signs on both ends of the city DON'T say "Welcome to Bill Carson's City." Sadly, the arrogance of his stance is all too familiar and parrots the squawking of Wendy's trained macaw Travis.

Ignore reality BC; it's your God-given right. But don't presume to throw your blinders on anyone else. Some might say a "blind man" could see the issues our city faces (that would be Santa Barbara, not Bill City) but that be an unfair comparison to the blind man. He at least listens. Who isn't aware we lack affordable housing? Who doesn't know something needs to be done about it? Who doesn't understand that some kind of compromise is needed? (Those would be rhetorical questions for you, BC).

There isn't any middle ground for you Bill. You can afford to live here and want no truck with those who can't. You and your pals will support any nonsense that supports your position; hence your love of Travis.

BC...new defintion: Before Common sense.

3/22/2008 4:03 PM  
Blogger Voice of Rezon(e) said...

bill carson,

Please think a little more about what you're saying, and how you're being perceived. To me, you are so one-sided about the NIMBY vs. housing issue that you're letting it cloud your judgment, as johnsanroque so deftly put it in his comment.

As I said in another thread on this blog, Travis is a pretend journalist, and this is exactly his MO. No other Op-Ed columnists use the caustic, repugnant, vendetta-esque tactics he uses. His personal attacks on anyone he perceives that disagree with him are indicative of an less-than evolved human, and certainly not one that should be given a bully pulpit.

Regarding the growth/no-growth issue you're so passionate about, Janet Wolf is doing the best she can in a district in the center of the county with very, very different perspectives on the development/housing issue.

Although I don't agree with your side of the discourse, I respect that there are people that feel the same way you do (is it safe to call them no-growthers?).

What troubles me about your side is that, from what I've seen, there is no room for discussion or the possibility for compromise.

You think Janet and the "gang of local politicians" are consistently ignoring their constituents, and what you fail to realize is that their constituents are a diverse group of people with differing viewpoints on the issue.

From my perspective, the latest action by the Supervisors has enacted a de facto moratorium in Noleta that has not pleased either the NIMBY nor the pro-housing crowds. Maybe you fail to see that a middle-road approach may actually be a good compromise?

3/22/2008 4:14 PM  
Anonymous Mi casa non esta su casa said...

Thinking one can build subsidized housing as a way out of the problem too many people want to live here is the myth.

No one is saying "lack of affordable housing" (for some people) is a myth. There is little that people can buy here under $600,000 and that does make affording housing here a problem for some folks. But people who do come here, can afford the housing.

So what you are protesting by your definition of "lack of affordable housing" (for those who don't want to pay market rates) is not a solvable problem.

It cannot be built out and built away. And this is no myth. It is common sense, sound public policy and living within our resources.

There is nothing immoral about this any more than I can't afford to buy a house in Montecito. There is nothing immoral about that nor any personal, remediable deficiency I have. I cannot afford it so I bought where I could.

Why is not providing housing in some parts of California a moral failing that has to be remedied with public assistence and not being able to buy housing in other areas a morality neutral event.

Is buying a house somewhere you can actually afford the most moral thing you can do? Yes, it is.

So people please, get off this moral failing kick. It is immoral to make people believe taxpayers owe them housing as a windfall they get purely by desiring housing and for no other reason. There is plenty of subsidized and public housing here. We fail no one morally.

Stop letting yourself get led around by the nose by the developers who have bought out city planning staff and subsequently too many elected officials as well.

We need more Dale Franciscos next go around and we sure don't need a mayor who still does not get it.

3/22/2008 6:44 PM  
Blogger johnsanroque said...

Bill Carson,

Here’s my last try, but I know it will make no difference.

If I agree with your logic presented above, then when I disagree with your stance on Goleta development or any other political issue, I have the right to publish on Blogabarbara details about your divorce, drunk driving arrests, credit card debt, or use of sick leave. I can smear your personal life because you don’t agree with me and because I have the means to broadcast embarrassing and demeaning facts, rumors and innuendo about your personal life. I can distort your positions through selective disclosure and attribute your political stance to your lack of ethics, honesty, and susceptibility to bribes. Sara De La Guerra thinks like I do, so she does not let you respond or edits your response before publishing it. And I can repeat personal attacks whenever I like. Anyone who might agree with you is edited out of Blogabarbara.

I can do this because you don’t agree with me and I have the public microphone through Blogabarbara. The reasons for your political stance are irrelevant. The only issue is that you don’t agree with me. Not only does that make you wrong, it makes you deserve to be treated with as much personal disrespect as I can legally broadcast to the community.

These are the issues, Bill. This is what’s happening. And in addition, you want to justify this type of treatment by somehow arguing that the political positions you and Armstrong have taken are 100% right and Wolf’s are 100% wrong? Not only are you in the minority of bloggers, you’re in the minority of your fellow citizens who live here and vote. Do you really believe any of the Supervisors is intentionally “working to destroy” the community, as you wrote?

3/22/2008 8:15 PM  
Anonymous not paid and elected to abstain from voting said...

Why is Centano, or Centeno, so lauded for whimping out and not voting on the zoning freeze?

He voted abstain on this east Goleta Valley plan.

3/22/2008 10:30 PM  
Anonymous Hit man said...

You people are certainly giving Travis Armstrong a lot of credit since all he does is write editorials for a paper nobody reads.

Or, judged by the frothing here, do they?

How can a person with as little credibility as you claim Armstrong has do damage to anyone? Your reactions suggest he carries a lot of weight in this town.

Or, has he hit the nail on the head and that is why everyone squirms over everything he writes.

Judging reactions here, Travis Armstrong is a lot more than irresponsible hot air. He may well be everyones personal adrenalin junkie which is exactly what he is paid to be.

3/22/2008 10:33 PM  
Anonymous Garry Owen said...

Mi casa non esta su casa

One question. Would you be so anxious to slam the door to SB on your son or daughter? Many of our high school graduates can't afford to live here. The vacancy rate hovers between 5-8 percent. The people who cook for you in our restaurants often live in crowded, substandard housing, if they live here at all. Many of the the middle-class people who do work here drive from Lompoc or Ventura every day. Ask your gardener where he lives; more importantly, how. Two years ago the Housing Authority proposed a subsidized housing program of 90 units; not for that restaurant cook or your gardener, but for doctors, lawyers, etc. Professionals you would likely approve of.

"People who don't want to pay market housing rates" is not the root cause, Mi casa is MI casa. It's not even true: people CAN'T pay market rates. But nobody is suggesting affordable housing is the magic fix. It is a piece of puzzle only. To borrow a phrase from Travis, you "apparently" don't want to acknowledge the realities of life in Santa Barbara beyond your front door. Well, keep your door and your mind closed if you want to. Thankfully there are a large number of people living in Santa Barbara who do have open doors and minds. Don't worry though, Mi casa is MI casa. Even after Wendy and Travis abandon ship your opinions will always be welcome; kind of stirs things up for a bit. Much like a Whoopie cushion in church does.

3/23/2008 1:00 AM  
Anonymous Mi casa non esta sua casa said...

UCSB provides plenty of students looking for low-end part time work in restaurants.

Plant your gardens and work the earth yourself. I have no duty to build housing for your gardener.

Learn that you will need to commute to outlying communities for your health care services instead of having them come to you. Plenty of people stay perfectly healthy and lives miles away from immediate health care facilities.

No, your children will not be a able to live in their own separate houses in Santa Barbara when they grow up. But they can keep living with you.

You have room for them now and you can add on to your own house. But I have no obligation to provide housing for your children.

The "emergency first responders" argument is entirely over-rated and pushed only by the developers to people who do not think this though.

Not a single housing unit in the entire housing history in this area has been solely dedicated to "emergency first responders". None.

Pick a number and dedicate existing public housing for them if they are so critical. Stop builing housing for street people and turn it over to emergency first responders if you really want us to believe this is your priority.

I have heard all your arguments before and they are all developer driven. You have not thought through any of them. They are a tired and hollow litany and there is a solution for all of them. And it is not building more housing.

3/23/2008 8:19 AM  
Anonymous Unbelievable said...

Why would anyone approve of building more housing so more lawyers could live here? Get real.

3/23/2008 8:20 AM  
Anonymous Garry Owen said...

It's sad really. You assume so much, because it allows your vision to remain unobstructed by those of lesser stature. You clumsily deflect questions by turning them around, never answering directly. When's the last time you saw a UCSB student working in a restaurant kitchen? And in case you didn't know, they can't afford to live here any more the the people who really do work in those kitchens. And my gardener? He's sitting here pounding the keyboard in amazement.

Developer driven? I have no affinity for developers. But I am intrigued by all the venom and anger spewing forth from the anti-affordable folks. It seems more fear driven than anything else.

But maybe I'm all wet, Casa. You've alluded to but never explained what your solution is. Enlighten us please...

3/23/2008 9:42 AM  
Blogger Voice of Rezon(e) said...

garry owen,

You're wasting your typing, I'm afraid. There are many people that comment often on this blog that are completely closed to anything other than their own self-serving point of view. mi casa and bill carson, I'm afraid, have bought into the NIMBY Koolaide and drank mightily.

As I've stated previously, that kind of crusade to stop anything, anywhere, anytime is not part of a productive, effective discourse to move the argument forward. That is their tactic. Lock everything down and delay, delay, delay.

They pretend to be sad about the Supervisors vote but have successfully delayed any new projects in Noleta for the next three years, at least. So, they may say they're upset but they are gloating on the inside.

3/23/2008 2:59 PM  
Anonymous Your Average Joe said...

Who's this David Pritchett guy?

3/23/2008 4:32 PM  
Anonymous Mi casa said...

We have no societal duty to build subsidized housing so some people can hire gardeners.

There was a time when maids quarters and gardeners cottages were part of the landowners burden. Right here in Santa Barbara.

Until all the gardeners cottages and maids quarters start getting re-used for their original purposes, one should not even think about subsidizing this service industry for the wealthy.

Garry Owens, reign in your own projections because you sure are easy inflicting them on others. Didn't think you would like a taste of your own medicine. And you did not. Stick to the subject and stop speculating and accusing writers who do not agree with you because that wins no arguments.

3/23/2008 5:29 PM  
Blogger Bill Carson said...

JSR,

You're going off on a tangent. Regarding the issue of the Goleta Plan, Travis only wrote about Janet Wolf and her broken promise to protect existing zones while the plan was being written. Your diatribe about drunk driving, divorce court, credit card debt, etc. doesn't make sense.

Stick to the facts. Janet broke a promise, a promise that help get her elected. And it was obvious to everyone at the hearing that her actions last Tuesday were aimed at paving the way to develop the ag space owned by MTD.

Voice of Rezon(e),

You use the word "compromise", and you scold me for being "no growth". Tell me then, in the Goleta area, what is shrinking? Ag zones or residential zones? How many orchards have disappeared in the last, say, 40 years? How many acres of ag land are left?

You have an odd view of compromise. You probably think Manifest Destiny was compromise.

3/23/2008 11:26 PM  
Anonymous Eat The Rich said...

Until all the gardeners cottages and maids quarters start getting re-used for their original purposes, one should not even think about subsidizing this service industry for the wealthy.


Only in Santa Barbara will you hear people advocating for a return to feudalism. It takes a lot to out do the Bush-ites who long for a return to the 1950s. You people long for a return to 1250's.

Hey, I'm all for it - as long as I can be part of the revolution that runs your ignorant asses out of town.

3/24/2008 12:49 AM  
Blogger Sara De la Guerra said...

Hey now ETR....they'd probably say I'm an ignorant ass too...take it easy :)

3/24/2008 7:18 AM  
Blogger johnsanroque said...

First, I apoplogize for writing again after I said I'd made my last comment on this subject. I promise to shut up after this.

Bill Carson says I'm going off on a tangent about Janet Wolf by bringing up divorce issues and credit card debt as examples of how people are smeared by Armstrong. Actually, the subject of this blog (Travis Gets Personal. Are you part of the cabal?) is exactly what I'm discussing: how people get smeared personally by the News-Press. Somewhere in the middle of this discussion, some Armstrong supporters wanted to make it into a debate on Goleta expansion. Evidently, their logic is pretty simple: Janet Wolf supports Goleta expansion, therefore it's okay for Armstrong to trash her personally. Really--it's that simple.

Goleta expansion is a worthy topic and it should be discussed. Bill, you might be really surprised to find out that I'm against it. However, it still doesn't give Armstrong the right to smear personally people like Wolf and Barnwell with issues that are completely irrelevant to their political stances. That's what this discussion is about, but you Armstrong guys don't want to have that discussion for obvious reasons.

3/24/2008 7:39 AM  
Blogger Voice of Rezon(e) said...

bill carson,

The reason that Ag zones are being re-zoned is that Ag zones should be outside the urban limit and residential, commercial and industrial zones within it. That's how planning and zoning is supposed to work. It's not rocket science.

I agree with you we all should fight to keep these zones within the urban boundary, thereby eliminating "sprawl" type development that typifies other parts of southern California, Colorado and other areas.

The difference I think we have is that you don't want any development including that within urban areas.

To mi casa,

I'm sorry, but you keep referring to the housing shortage as effecting maids and gardeners. I think you're missing the point. It's not about maids and gardeners as much as it's about cops, firefighters, teachers, nurses, engineers, architects, etc.

What occupation do you/did you do? What about your kids? Are they living here locally? Ask around a bit and see what your friends and neighbors reply to those questions.

Another big myth that's being perpetrated by the NIMBYs is this idea that we're all talking about use of public money for subsidized housing. That's their straw man way of getting the general public fired up to fight for their side. The reality is all the government needs to do is proper planning and zoning and private industry will take care of the rest without any public money or subsidies. What has been happening to many projects locally is that they are being approved at a density that is LOWER than the existing site zoning. This must be corrected so as to allow developments to be built in accordance with the zoning density.

3/24/2008 10:37 AM  
Anonymous Su casa esta una condo said...

Huh, I never brought up housing for gardeners and maids. I was responding to someones slur on that matter.

Professionals can commute just like anyone else if there is no housing they like, or can afford. There are plenty of affordable condo's right here and right now in Santa Barbara.

If they want t stop communting they can choose any number of very affordable condos. I don't get what your point is. Explain it more carefully and more specifically.

Everyone claims they want to apply European life-style smart growth principlehere, but they fail to acknowledge most European professionals live in walk up flats. They do not own 3BR homes with yards, unless they too also want to commute.

3/24/2008 5:46 PM  
Anonymous Garry Owen said...

Voice of rezon(e)

You're right, of course; there's no purpose wasting further finger time responding directly to "mi casa es un cabeza vacio." (My apologies to linguists). I'll stay away from metaphors, etc, and stick to the simple stuff for him.

Like do a cut and paste of his own words: "...reign in your own projections because you sure are easy inflicting them on others. Didn't think you would like a taste of your own medicine. And you did not. Stick to the subject and stop speculating and accusing writers who do not agree with you because that wins no arguments."

Does he read his own words? He certainly doesn't practice what he preaches. But he is at least clear about his predjudices: "I got mine and I don't give a crap about anybody else."

Adios, Casa dude.

3/24/2008 9:49 PM  
Anonymous Mi casa protects me from slurs said...

Garry, you refuse to acknowledge the critical point. In Europe professionals live in condos. Condos are horizontal ownership concepts whose origins were in Germany.

If professionals here refuse to accept horizontal ownerships, then they alone make the choice to commute to where they can still purchase vertical ownership housing. Just like they do in Europe.

The solution is transportation, not more vertically housing. And you refuse to acknowledge this.

Save the personal insults because all they prove is you have no answers and refuse to accept points of view different from your own.

There is a glut of condos on the market at very attractive prices in this town. There is no reason to build a single SFR house here in the near and far future until every one of them are sold.

Because if people don't want to live in condos, it is not the obligation of the rest of us to accomodate their selfishness.

3/25/2008 7:49 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home