Archive » October 25, 2012
By SYVJ Staff
Buellton councilAm I the only taxpayer in Buellton who has had enough of our city council? When these people are running for election, they all want to save our small-town charm. Once they are elected, they start buying a golf course property for $500,000 and removing it from the tax rolls.
After they purchase the property, they renovate it at a cost to tax payers around $150,000 of our money.
I can’t think of any investors who would have spent that kind of money for a golf course that has gone under twice. Now they raise our water rates after giving more than $30,000 of free water to the golf course over two years. Really? I know one of the city council members who wanted the golf course was Dave King.
I went to the debate and listened to what each city council candidate had to say. Mr. King talks as though he wants to save money yet he will spend it as though it is his, as long as it is in his own interest. I emailed Mr. King after the debate with my phone number and I never got a reply back. I for one want anyone running to at least have the courtesy to respond. Leo Elovitz did respond, and I think he would be dedicated to our wonderful city because he has the willingness to do what it takes to see our town reach its full potential. He has characteristics that lead me to believe we will be hard-pressed to find a more qualified candidate.
Anybody running for Buellton City Council who genuinely wants to keep the “old town charm” and eliminate “good ol’ boy” politics has my full support.
Larry R. Rankin
Decisions, decisionsWe need Mike Stoker.
I think it’s time we have a candidate who looks out for the working person and small businessman who has been struggling to survive. That person for the 19th is Mike Stoker.
His opponent, dubbed by the press as taxin’ Hannah Beth Jackson, is responsible for the high taxes and overregulations killing jobs in California. Why would we give Jackson another chance to destroy the state? Jackson voted to increase your taxes 100% of the time while in office.
I recommend a vote for Peter Adam for 4th District Supervisor. Peter is a farmer and a businessman. He understands economics and finance, and he understands that government needs to live within its means. He also recognizes that you cannot generate revenues to sustain important public services unless you have a growing economy. That means eliminating useless, costly and counterproductive rules and regulations, which harm private business.
As Supervisor, Peter will fight to set the right priorities: funding the Sheriff’s Department, the jail, and fixing our roads, bridges and other infrastructure. He won’t waste your money on unsustainable pension obligations, payoffs to the public employee unions, or “global warming” studies. Vote Peter Adam for Supervisor.
Bond. School bond.As a Santa Ynez Valley resident for more than 32 years, I have always been moved by the spirit of our community, a spirit that has ensured, time and time again, that we take care of our own. As a teacher at Santa Ynez High, I have been particularly proud to be part of a community that takes such excellent care of our students’ educational, social and athletic needs.
Unfortunately, however, with the financial state of California being what it is, we must now once again turn to each other in order to keep our school operating at a level that has earned us both state and national rankings. The infrastructure of our physical plant needs serious attention so that our students can continue to have a safe, well-functioning environment; additionally, we must continue to update technology so that our students remain competitive in the future. As a teacher with three decades in the classroom, I know first-hand how much this support is needed to keep our classrooms operating and our students prepared for college.
Please join my husband and me in supporting Measure L2012. Your support now will pay real dividends for our community in the future.
In the Voter Sample Ballot for Santa Barbara County, there is no argument against Bond Measure K2012, which provides for the modernization of facilities within the College School District. In the interest of fairness, I will try to remedy that situation.
Under Measure K2012, there are plans for extensive demolition followed by new construction to take place on the lower campus (College School). However, this campus currently has only three classrooms – for kindergartners and first graders.
Wouldn’t it be more cost-effective to have the entire modernization take place on the upper campus (Santa Ynez School), which now serves grades 2-8, instead? After all, why do we need to maintain two campuses for 230 students? A single campus, which would include not only all of the classrooms for grades K-8 but the administrative facilities as well, would also produce greater operational efficiency.
All of the lower campus not used by the charter school could be sold for commercial or residential development, and the proceeds used to reduce the amount needed to be raised from the sale of bonds. I personally will find it difficult to vote for any bond measure that does not require campus consolidation.
Charles Patrick Shields
Bureaucrats at the Santa Ynez High School are pushing to add $40 million more in debt payments onto local taxpayers. Rather than give you a balanced view of the facts, the school district decided instead to mail slick brochures to convince you to vote for the higher new taxes.
Elections Department official reports show money being funneled through a so-called “citizens committee,” which is actually headed up by school administrators. There are no Valley citizens whatsoever listed on the reports. What the reports do show is that the contributors are exclusively corporations and vendors that do business with the school district and stand to profit handsomely from the bond (Measure L2012) issue.
For example, the architect from Fresno gave $7,500 and the bond finance attorney from San Francisco wrote a check for $6,000 in an attempt to get you to vote for this bad news bond. Just the bond financing costs alone are expected to be more than $2 million once the interest is figured in – every penny of it paid by you the taxpayer to big-city, high-priced consultants and Wall Street bankers.
We are all for the kids, and many of us have given a lot, but this new tax scheme is not something for the kids. Instead, it’s a get-rich scheme for others who do not even live here. Worse, it’s way too much spending on non-critical items and lacks plans, bids and proposals for public review. Vote no on Measure L.
Social studiesThe word Socialism is sometimes used to refer to welfare states as also being governments that are Socialist. This is not true as the word Socialism means “Government ownership of the means of production and distribution” and Communism means the same but goes one step further as “To each according to their needs and from each according to their ability.”
I found your recently published letter “History lesson” to be interesting, since I once lived in Sweden and spent a lot of time in Denmark and some time in Norway. First, it is true that the taxes in Denmark are probably the highest taxes in the world, and there are a lot of things that don’t work very well there for many reasons. However, it is not a socialist country, as there isn’t much there that is owned by the government, but it is a highly developed welfare state, and in most cases you could say with accuracy that the U.S. also is.
Like most of the rest of Europe, there are only a few more things more owned by the government than here in the USA. They are the railroads, communications, hospitals, etc.
As for Sweden, it is about the same, but you could add liquor stores. Up until recently, I had been visiting Scandinavia, especially Sweden, about every five years. Since I speak the language and since it is about the same language in all three countries, I can communicate quite well throughout Scandinavia, so I consider myself knowledgeable about conditions there.
As for Sweden, the taxes are also higher there than here in California, our highest-taxed state. However, the taxes in Sweden compared with California are not that much higher when all taxes are considered. More than one study has shown this to be true.
The big difference is that in Sweden, they get something for their taxes. First, there is almost no poverty there – the exception being drug addicts, alcoholics and those who don’t want to work. People don’t have to lose their life savings or go bankrupt due to medical expenses, and I could go on and on describing why life is better there than many places in the U.S. Also, those countries have almost no government corruption, undemocratic electoral college (Gore wins, Bush is president), gerrymandering (Lois Capps gets a free pass for 10 years), and most important they don’t have governments run by well-financed pressure group lobbyists who buy the votes needed to get what they want.
In summary, life is better in Scandinavia, especially Sweden, and the only I reason I returned to live in Santa Maria for 52 years is Sweden’s long, harsh winters.