Did David Pritchett really launch a City Council campaign by Facebook? Well, not quite...

Word on the street is that community activist and Off-Leash Public Affairs video producer David Pritchett apparently launched a campaign for City Council via Facebook last weekend. The truth is that a Facebook "status" post almost a month ago asked his network of friends what they thought about him running for council:

David Pritchett is thinking seriously about running for Santa Barbara City Council and wants to know your opinion about that.

Perhaps the confusion was in the wording as Facebook inevitably starts you off with the awkward “David Pritchett is…” when beginning a post on what you happen to be doing at that moment. If you’ve ever used Facebook you know that you are never sure what to do with it if you want to use the past tense. It’s also not easy to find the date as to when the post was made.

Techno-subtleties of Facebook aside, things got more confused when the item was posted outside of the relative safety of his Facebook network last weekend in a way that may have left some people thinking Pritchett was being more public about his intentions than what he had likely intended. What ensued was a Q & A grilling for a candidate who may not even end up a candidate and hasn’t even formally announced yet.

The ironic thing is that those of us involved with politics who also are technologically savvy have been waiting for candidates to get Facebook, blog, and social media savvy for several years. Das Williams did a decent job at it and others have tried – but there is a lot more candidates can do.

Pritchett, in showing his prowess at social media, may have shown us what other candidates have been afraid of…the anonymous blogger. Me? I’m used to people attacking me in their comments and asking me questions they wouldn’t ask their mother. I’ve learned to develop a thick skin and delete mean comments. Most candidates and potential candidates don’t have a lot of experience with that.

It seems like commenters can forget or do not appreciate how a new candidate is at a huge disadvantage when the discussion turns to topics they have not had an opportunity to write a white paper about. It is the commenter’s biggest issue and something near and dear to their heart – but the candidate may just need the commenter to help them form an opinion and identify unexpected issues, and, with apologies to Neal Kinnock and Joe Biden, build a platform upon which to stand. Hopefully Facebook, and local blogs like Blogabarbara can help that happen.

Did the DEA overstep their bounds?

Santa Barbara Housing Bubble Blog had a creative and interesting post last week about marijuana dispensaries -- something we have had a few comments on over the last few months here at BlogaBarbara. Taking a script out of Leave It to Beaver, Saint Barbara told the story of a small cottage on Victoria Street that was recently sold. The untold story in the real estate sections of the newspaper was that it was a dispensary of gange, mota, Mary Jane...(add your favorite Weeds vocabulary here).

A side story included in the post was the following:

Just last month (March 2008), DEA agents hand-delivered another round of threatening notices to the remaining 10 or so local dispensaries. During the weekend of March 15, DEA agents, in cooperation with the Santa Barbara County Sheriff's Department, purportedly raided and shut down Pacific Greens on North Milpas Street (located within Santa Barbara’s city limits). A few days later, on March 18, the Santa Barbara City Council finally approved a new city ordinance governing the operation of medical marijuana dispensaries (or "clubs") within city limits. For details, see this 3/20/08 Independent article....

The City's efforts were designed to create more security and certainty as to where the dispensaries are located and to create a more transparent process. Good for them as medical marijuana was an issue approved and voted on by an overwhelming number of Californians...although, as has been pointed out in other articles, it doesn't mean we need more of them than the many Starbucks we have in town or near schools and the like.

The DEA showing who da' man begs the question, however, as to whether their actions undermined the efforts of council. Apparently, the Santa Barbara Sheriff's Department made a foray into city limits to assist the Feds. Does this require at least tacit approval from the SBPD? Is the relative quiet from council on this rather clear violation of city government jurisdiction not worth fighting because of the subject matter? Sure -- Feds trump the City any day of the week, but this is murky legal water for which they must have had approval to tread.

No matter where any of us come down on the addictive qualities of marijuana -- one has to want to protect someone's right to obtain it (if they desire) when they are suffering from cancer, glaucoma and the like. It is state law -- whether the DEA and the Santa Barbara Sheriff's Department disagree with the result of a statewide election or not. That being said -- yes, let's bust dispensaries that are selling to anyone that shouldn't receive medical marijuana under state and local law. I am all for it...but did they have to choose that time to do it and what kind of precedent does it set?

If you want to put them on your real estate watch list or save them on Google Maps -- NORML has a list of Santa Barbara/Goleta dispensaries on their web site. Hopefully, DEA raids prior to public policies being set will not become a common occurrence -- it could be construed as intimidating.

Tax the Internet? Time for a Tea Party!

Santa Barbara County Taxpayers Association Executive Director Joe Armendariz sent the following to the the media. It's interesting food for thought as VoIP technology is clearly within the realm of the Internet rather than traditional telephony.

Last week, there were a few stories on Google's possible buy of Skype from eBay. Google with their new Android cell phone operating system, free 411 and Grand Central voice mail technology could easily change the telephony landscape with wireless internet based calls that they host. Indeed, Google recently made a play with the FCC for a new part of the wireless spectrum. Does that mean we should be taxed on innovation? And, how would you tax someone that uses a proxy server in Timbuktu? -- SDLG

Below Written by Joe Armendariz from the SB Taxpayers Association

The Santa Barbara City Council "ordinance committee" (which consists of three sitting council members) voted today to move ahead with a new expanded local Utility Users Tax (UUT) which will impose a new tax on cell phone, satellite television and VoiP service.

This is an interesting issue. The question I have is whether or not new technologies such as VoiP should be exempt from taxation due to the federal governments moratorium on taxing internet access. Voice over internet Protocol (VoiP) is clearly an internet based communications technology. Why should an economically clumsy, technology illiterate municipality attempt to swoop in and force national and/or international providers like Vonage to begin collecting a local utility tax on only those customers unfortunate enough to live within a certain zip code? Because they need the revenue of course. But this will be a nightmare for the provider and impossible to enforce by the city.

Plus, VoiP service is completely mobile, all it requires is a notebook computer with an internet connection to function. There are local area codes associated with the phone numbers, but area codes cover large regions of the state and transcend individual city boundaries. Collecting this new UUT on VoiP's will prove challenging at best as subscribers simply use out of town mailing addresses to avoid the new tax.

Furthermore, the suggestion by local government officials that this expansion in the UUT is to level the existing playing field is absurd. There are other ways to level the playing field when it comes to the existing level of taxation; eliminate the current utility users tax on telecommunications service across the board…treat all information technologies equal, make them a tax free zone to help spur innovation.

Consumers are shrewd when it come to this stuff. The status quo, where some providers (COX/Comcast) services are being taxed while others (DirecTV) are not, is bad enough. Imposing a utility tax on all providers isn't the solution. Indeed, even without taxing DirecTV, the status quo places COX and Comcast at risk of losing market share as more sophisticated and especially younger consumers access all of their information and entertainment content online (YouTube/MySpace).

If local governments need the money in order to balance their budgets, which they always do, they should find other sources of revenue. Besides, what entitles local governments to tax these new technologies and information services in the first place? What public owned infrastructure exists to avail these internet based technologies to local residents? I think California should lead the way in abolishing all user taxes on local telecommunications and other information technologies to help incentivize the next generation of technological innovation.

It is worth remembering that when you tax something, you get less of it…why is the City of Santa Barbara trying to discourage innovation by taxing it? Maybe a statewide taxpayer initiative is the remedy?

Off Leash "Chews" on the Candidates

Off-Leash Public Affairs is making their public access show special Chewing on the Candidates series available on line at the above link.

Off-Leash co-hosts Cathy Murillo and David Pritchett asked the city council candidates five questions and gave them about two and half minutes to respond with short follow-up. This more structured approach is in sharp contrast to Larry Nimmer's open ended style highlighted about a week ago here on BlogaBarbara.

The series will be available on public access television (CH 17) through election day.

Touring with the Candidates

Despite all the talk yesterday on Measure A, there is a city council race in less than a month as well. Who would know with the traditional Labor Day kick off slipping into almost mid-October?

Larry Nimmer, who should be nominated for some kind of award real soon for his civic involvement, produced the following videos of all the candiates on Google Video. You can see Bob Hansen's Laker bobble-heads and Bob's John Travolta hat from Urban Cowboy. There is also Helene Schneider's tour of the Westside and Das William's library, chile relleno and a cute story about how he reads to his partner --- some highlights of this series that is sponsored by the League of Women Voters.

Nimmer has brought the decidedly mature and wise LWV into the 21st Century and is to be commended for his non-partisan effort to increase voter participation in the age of YouTube. These videos are a must see if you are serious about the next election and checking out what each candidate has to say.

LIGHTer Blue Lines, Two Times the Value

In a story that one of our avid readers uncovered two days before the News-Press on EdHat, David Pritchett reported on the Historic Landmarks Commission discussion on the LIGHTer Blue Line that will now last two years rather than five because of the paint being used. Google Video is available here on the KEYT story.

It's interesting to read how the HLC is acting like the HLC about this project. There will be no URL's on the medallions that are included in the project -- so no self promotion! And, the paint will have to last two years rather than five. Rather subjective opinion, it will really depend on traffic and the message will already have had a major impact.

Two things are important about this:

1) Approving the Light Blue Line project means it continues with no need for an appeal to the City Council.
2) More importantly, $12,000 worth of lighter blue lines has been spent to get at least twice as much public relations value. Irony of ironies for those that think it should have been spent somewhere else, the LIGHTer Blue Line has promoted the problem of global warming very cheaply. Council Member Helene Schneider had it right in the video linked to above. See it.

Paper Not Plastic -- 9/80 Work Week

The City of Santa Barbara made some changes this week and took some initiative in the fight against global warming.

The Santa Barbara Newsroom reports that the City of Santa Barbara may ban plastic bags. Good for them -- and I think Helene Schneider is correct that further study is warranted as to the cost to small businesses.

The city also adopted a 9/80 work week like most county workers have had for awhile. Again, good for the environment, traffic and morale of workers. You can check out this story at The Daily Sound's May 16th edition.

Opinion: Clean Money for Even-Year Terms

I've been reading a few articles about the possible change in city elections with great interest:

Santa Barbara Newsroom
Santa Barbara Daily Sound
The Santa Barbara Independent
The Santa Barbara Independent (2)

In this scenario, the City would conduct its own election only once to bring about even year election cycles which would save the City $300,000. Nothing to sneeze at and I have to wonder if this effort is also fueled by the recent city election for the unnecessary Measure P. Why, city officials must have asked, are we spending 100s of thousands on a measure which tells the Police Department to do what they pretty much already do?

The total cost for this November's election is estimated at $600,000 because the County Clerk says new requirements will make them more expensive. With an outside consultant, council thinks they can hold an election for half that cost. As a one-time deal for three incumbents who will likely little opposition, I think it can be done although I think it would be worthwhile to reconsider a mail-only election. Santa Barbara voters will not get confused and it may even increase participation.

A consistently even-year election will create higher voter participation in the long run, save city funds and bring the City in line with every other council election in the County. It will add a "free" year to their terms but perhaps they can give something back. If voters saw a concerted effort to support a "Clean Money" ordinance which changed the way city elections are financed, they might be more amenable to the extra year in their terms.

NPO Ordinance Vote Tuesday

The Newsroom ran a story about how the Neighborhood Preservation Ordinance will be voted on by the Santa Barbara City Council Tuesday after three long years of debate, hearings and community meetings. The ordinance is designed to fight the mansionization of our neighborhoods. I bet the ordinance will pass...and any of you interested in being a member of the new committee that is formed can start applying on May 8th for meetings which would begin as early as July 16th. I guess our city government figures it will pass too :)

Status of Measure P

Would anyone like to report on what they see as the progress of Measure P? This aptly named initative went into effect a few months ago and I heard on the radio that a City Council Committee was meeting soon to review its progress. Personally, I'm not sure the local police made such a big deal about marijuana anyway and it seems like a big waste of time and money if we have to have meetings on it at City Hall....what do you think?

The Next SB Council Race

Its seems really early to be talking about this when I have only just about recovered from the lashing I took in moderating you folks around the 2nd District Supervisor race....still, at least one person has been consistently pushing a 'next council race' context (or is that agenda?). With a Mayor's seat soon to be open and three council seats -- this will be a big race. Nominations from the floor anyone?