This November's Election

[ Excerpt of "Elections by the City, For the City -- Ballot Measure May Switch Voting to Even Years", by Chris Meagher, SB INDEPENDENT, April 26, 2007 ]


Clearly not happy with the county’s projected cost to conduct this fall’s municipal election, Santa Barbara city councilmembers decided on Tuesday, April 24 that the city will conduct its own election this November, when voters will be asked to approve a change to the city’s future election schedule. City officials estimate a traditional poll would cost the city $296,640, a far cry from the $47,000 the County of Ventura is charging the City of Ventura for a similar election. “We are not being offered a good deal,” Councilmember Das Williams said. Councilmember Helene Schneider called the gap between the figures “very frustrating.”

... County Clerk Joe Holland said the city wasn’t comparing apples to apples in all the costs involved. He estimated the cost of running the stand-alone November election at between $550,000 and $650,000. Various factors have caused the cost to go up, he said, including the growing number of absentee ballots, making ballots available in both English in Spanish, and the Help America Vote Act, which ensures that each polling place has special equipment allowing disabled people to vote without assistance. With such a discrepancy in the cost, Councilmember Iya Falcone said it would be “untenable and irresponsible” to still have the county run the election.

The city is one of only three jurisdictions in the county that still holds its elections in odd-numbered years, meaning the city can’t split the costs with others. Over the years, the rest switched to even-year elections to combat the high costs. In 1985, 22 out of the 24 school districts moved to even years, and in the next four years the other two followed suit.

... If Santa Barbara fell under the umbrella of county-operated even-year elections, the cost to the city would be less than $30,000, Holland estimated. The vote on a city measure on last November’s ballot cost the city only $35,000.

The prospect of cheaper elections has led the city to place a charter amendment on November’s ballot that would give voters the option to switch from a stand-alone odd-year election to rejoin the state, federal, and county elections that always take place in even years. The city has been conducting odd-year elections since 1979...

... the proposed change also brings up a dilemma: How would a change in the election schedule impact current and future city councilmembers’ terms? With two options on the table at Tuesday’s meeting, the council voted unanimously to add one year to the terms of Mayor Marty Blum and the three council members voted into office in 2005 — Falcone, Roger Horton, and Grant House — and would grant a five-year term [instead of 4] to whoever is voted into office this November. Williams, Schneider, and Councilmember Brian Barnwell are up for re-election this November, and all are expected to run again. The second option would have allowed voters — in two future elections — to determine all seven city council members who would be sitting on the dais for an extended year.

The charter amendment is part of a trio of election reforms the city is examining, one of which is a program that would allow candidates time to talk about issues on public access channels and possibly in videos posted on the city’s Web site. Also coming before the council in coming weeks will be a campaign finance disclosure ordinance that aims to change the way financial reporting is conducted. The ordinance would incorporate several electronic filing provisions, including explicit explanation of who is paying for mailings, phone calls, and other mass campaign communications.





( Image courtesy of the SB INDEPENDENT )


For the full text of this article, please go to:
SBI: By City, For City

More Parking for RV Dwellers

[ Excerpt from "City OKs More Parking for RV Dwellers" by Melissa Evans, SANTA BARBARA NEWS ROOM, April 25 2007 ]

The City Council on Tuesday agreed to open up more parking for RV dwellers... nine spaces in three parking lots, bringing the total parking spaces for RVs in the region to about 55. The new spaces will open in the Carrillo commuter lot on Castillo Street, the Cota Street commuter lot and the visitor center at Garden Street and Cabrillo Boulevard.

Tuesday's decision was the latest round in a lengthy debate over what to do about the homeless people who park their vehicles on public streets overnight.

In 2004, the courts stopped the city from issuing parking tickets to RV dwellers, ruling that not enough signs had been posted warning them of the ban. The courts also said the practice unfairly targeted the homeless.

Houses on Wheels, the group that successfully sued the city, has long advocated for more areas where RV dwellers with no other housing options can park their vehicles.

The city has since been working with the New Beginnings Counseling Center to administer a program that allows additional city lots to be used, and on Tuesday officials agreed to expand that program. Nonprofit organizations and churches also open their parking lots to some of the estimated 300 RV dwellers in the region.

Parking will still be restricted at the Carrillo Commuter lot, but three more spaces will be available to RV residents. Council members stressed on Tuesday that the use of city lots should be viewed as a temporary fix to a much larger problem.

Although “compassion is a moral imperative,” said Councilman Das Williams, “the purpose here is to get housing. That should be clear.”

During the course of its budget hearings in the next few months, the city will look into providing up to $62,000 to New Beginnings to help the agency enforce program rules, including the requirement that RV dwellers leave the lots by 6 a.m.

Residents who live near lots with RVs have complained about excessive noise, particularly from generators. City leaders asked that those enforcement issues be closely monitored.

Council members extended the program on Tuesday after months of review by the Downtown Parking Committee and the Harbor Commission. The City Council will review the new policy again in one year.

-----------------------

To view the complete article, please go to: SBNR: More RV Spaces

Economic Forecast Project

[ Excerpt from "Home Prices and Poverty Levels Rise, Says UCSB Economic Forecast," by Martha Sadler, SB INDEPENDENT April 20, 2007 ]

"I agree with [Bill Watkins of the Economic Forecast Project] about some of the problems; I don't agree about what to do about it," commented Santa Barbara City Councilmember Das Williams. "The forecast has drummed for additional housing for a long time," he said, "But if it's market rate housing I don't think that would solve the problem, because there is too much competition with high-end folks who want a second vacation home." Workforce housing is part of the solution, said Williams, who also favored encouraging the emergence of a sustainable energy sector to expand the economy.

-----------------------

To read the full article, please go to:

SBI: EFP

Recycling Progress & Problems

"Even if they work overtime and we work them to death, I don’t see how they can accomplish all the things we want them to get done."
— Santa Barbara City Councilmember Das Williams, lamenting the small number of staff positions dedicated to city recycling effort 


[ Excerpt from "Trash Talk," By Nick Welsh, SB INDEPENDENT, April 12, 2007 ]

Recycling Efforts Draw Praise and Fire


The Santa Barbara City Council discussion on Tuesday of the state of its recycling efforts bore a striking similarity to a water polo game: All the real action took place out of sight. On the surface, the council deliberations resembled a typical staff presentation detailing goals achieved and progress yet to be made. To that end, the City of Santa Barbara can lay claim to diverting — recycling — a full 67 percent of materials from the Tajiguas landfill. By the standard of state law — which mandates 50 percent diversion — that’s a screaming success.

But lurking just beneath the surface was the extreme impatience and vexation of several councilmembers over lack of progress on what they regard as basic recycling efforts that should be taking place within city limits. Chief among these is the absence of a mandatory commercial recycling program or a requirement that the city’s two franchised trash haulers — BFI and MarBorg — provide recycling services to Santa Barbara’s apartment dwellers. Likewise behind schedule is a pilot program to recycle and compost food scraps...

Perhaps most agitating of all was the three years it took city public works officials to force BFI to comply with what the officials say were the terms of its contract and offer its customers one free green-waste recycling bin. Only last Friday, said city solid waste czar Steve Mack, did BFI agree to credit roughly $190,000 to the accounts of 907 customers overbilled for green cans they should have gotten free. In addition, BFI agreed to pay the city $100,000 for staff time related to the green can investigation. Those credits, he said, should be finalized as of April 13. Negotiations between City Hall and BFI proved protracted and grueling, requiring no fewer than three separate service audits.

The problem was brought to light more than three years ago by BFI’s archrival, MarBorg Industries, when MarBorg started serving half the city. But even after the problem was exposed, City Hall proved slow to act, much to the exasperation of councilmembers like Brian Barnwell. Twenty-four hours before Tuesday’s meeting, Barnwell was threatening to find BFI in breach of its contract over the green-waste bin debacle. But during Tuesday’s meeting, Barnwell proved more tempered. Even so, he blamed the distraction caused by the green-waste bins for the city’s failure to meet its own goals and timelines in passing ordinances requiring commercial recycling and construction and demolition materials recycling. That delay, he charged, resulted in Santa Barbara sending to the Tajiguas landfill enough recyclable material to fill City Hall three times.

While not so vivid, Councilmember Das Williams also suggested that the city’s diversion numbers were not so impressive, noting that 15 percent of what the city now attempts to recycle is rejected and shipped to the landfill. He also was concerned that 70 percent of the city’s success in recycling depended on MarBorg’s ambitious program to process construction and demolition materials. While MarBorg’s Mario Borgatello was on hand to tell the City Council to pat itself on the back for helping him build — and finance — his giant recycling facility, he also warned the council of bills in the State Legislature that would, for example, require cities to divert 75 percent of their materials...

----------------------

To read the full article and also view comments from SBI readers, please go to:

SBI: Trash Talk

District Elections

[ Following opinion by Larry Ebenstein was published in the SB INDEPENDENT under the title "Voting for Diversity," April 5, 2007 ]


Now Is the Time to Reconsider District Elections
by Lanny Ebenstein, longtime local activist.


It is time to reconsider district elections in the City of Santa Barbara. Few changes that the city could consider would do more to diversify the membership of the City Council and make it easier for individuals with lesser means to run for elected office. District elections have been considered before in Santa Barbara. In 1990, the City Council placed a measure on the ballot that would have allowed voters to choose a system in which each of the six members of the Council was elected from districts.

The 1990 measure came within a hair’s breadth of passing. It lost by a mere 403 votes. If 202 voters had switched their vote from retaining at-large elections to voting in favor of district elections, a district system would have been implemented. The final vote percentage was 50.9 percent for at-large elections and 49.1 percent for district elections. Moreover, the mechanics of the 1990 vote were stacked in favor of retaining the at-large system. Several electoral measures were placed on the ballot simultaneously, and the ballot measure was phrased in such a way as to lead voters to retain the present system.

Could district elections be politically successful in the City of Santa Barbara today? There is every reason to believe the answer to this question is yes. District elections would have many advantages. First, district elections would create more diversity on the City Council. The 1990 vote stemmed from a threatened lawsuit by Leo Martinez, Robert Bakhaus, and others who contended the current council violated the civil rights of Latinos, because there were at that time no Latinos on the council.

Second, district elections would make it easier for individuals of modest means and those unable to raise large sums of money to run for City Council. The council expressed concern last year with respect to the amount of money it costs to run for office. District elections would address this concern, as it is much easier to run for election in a district of about 15,000 residents than in a city of about 90,000 residents. Personal campaigning would make a much larger difference, and councilmembers would get to know many more of their constituents.

Third, district elections would create stronger neighborhoods. Some maintain district elections would lead to deleterious “horse trading” among members of the council, as each would attempt to get pet projects passed that would benefit only that member’s constituents. Actually, the exact opposite would be the case. The fact is that much of the city is currently disenfranchised from the political process because residents are underrepresented on the City Council as it is currently organized. This is particularly the case for lower socioeconomic and minority residents.

As former Mayor John Rickard wrote in the 1990 campaign about the period from the 1930s to 1950s, when Santa Barbara had district elections: “Through the ward system, the mayor and councilmembers were kept abreast of their neighbors’ needs and were able to respond to these needs. This is not provincialism — this is a benefit to the city.” Rickard went on to observe that the beneficial improvements to Santa Barbara during the last district system included promotion of Santa Barbara-style architectural standards, the raising of Gibraltar Dam, the Cachuma project, the South Coast water distribution system, the municipal airport, the harbor master plan, the Hoff Park plan (which developed Earl Warren Showgrounds, MacKenzie Park, and the municipal golf course), the modernization of the city’s sewer system, the offshore state oil sanctuary from UCSB to Ortega Hill, and sign regulation and building codes. Strong neighborhoods would create a stronger city.

What are the political chances of district elections coming to Santa Barbara anytime soon? One City Councilmember, Das Williams, is a champion of district elections, and other councilmembers might be persuaded that it is time to place the issue of district elections on the ballot again. If district elections were made effective beginning with the 2011 city election, then no current councilmember would be affected by the change. However, in the event that it were not possible to persuade a council majority to place a charter amendment on the ballot, then an initiative signed by 15 percent of the city’s registered voters — about 8,000 valid signatures — would be required to place a measure before voters.

District elections provide the opportunity for a rare left-right political alliance in Santa Barbara municipal affairs. In better representing the currently unrepresented or underrepresented in city affairs, district elections would move Santa Barbara to a healthier and more diverse center. District elections would create a more level electoral playing field. City Council candidates could win by dint of shoe leather and ringing enough doorbells. Now is the time to reconsider district elections.

Hybrid Buses

MTD just added some hybrid buses to the fleet. Das was there for the unveiling, along with other government officials. Full story with images at the DAILY NEXUS (and also SANTA BARBARA NEWS ROOM):

New Buses To Lower Smog, Noise

Another Two-Step Flip

[ Excerpt of "Two-Step Flip Triumphant" By Martha Sadler, SB INDEPENDENT, March 29, 2007 ]

City Allows Contested Condo Conversion

Expressing frustration that they can do little — possibly nothing — to put a stop to a maneuver known as “the two-step flip,” Santa Barbara city councilmembers approved yet another one at their March 27 meeting. Developers execute the flip by obtaining a permit to construct apartments, then convert the apartments to condo units as soon as they are built. The advantage is that apartments slide through the city’s review process more easily.

City policy necessitates preservation of its existing rental stock and construction of new apartments. Few want to build apartments, however, because condos are more profitable. Robert and Deborah Hart, who just built four brand new apartments at 3408 and 3412 State Street, are no exception, and the council’s decision will allow them to redesignate their apartments as condos. The Harts explained to the council their intention all along had been to build small, sustainably designed, modestly priced two-bedroom condos. However, erroneous counsel from their insurance adviser led them to believe that was out of the question, so they applied to build luxury apartments using the same floor plan.

Discovering their adviser’s mistake, they attempted to make the conversion to condos immediately, but the Planning Commission kiboshed their condo plan on a 7-0 vote, citing technical violations that were partly the doing of the city’s own planning staff. That brought the Harts to the City Council to appeal the Planning Commission’s denial of the conversion. During Tuesday’s three-hour hearing and discussion, the city councilmembers all said that the confusion could not be blamed on the Harts. Besides, their Spanish-style two-bedroom condos, priced at just over $800,000 each, implement a second floor above commercial space — just the kind of mixed-use development the city has envisioned for outer State Street. Das Williams and Helene Schneider cast the two dissenting votes, with Williams saying the city must send a message that it will not continue to roll over for the two-step flip.

According to City Attorney Steve Wiley, seizing on technical violations is the only legal way to stop the flip. Within the first five years of construction, apartments can be changed to condominiums only if they already conform to all the condo zoning requirements without any more renovation. Though their main agenda was to preserve apartments, the citizens who urged the council to deny the Harts’ appeal had little choice but to pick on the project’s noncompliance with noise, setback, and parking regulations. The parking argument fell particularly flat. True, each unit is allotted only one parking space, but two current tenants testified that parking has presented no problem at all because they use the spaces that the commercial tenants downstairs use during the day. And the setback violation — pillars six inches too close to the sidewalk — had actually been committed for aesthetic reasons at the request of the city’s Architectural Review Board.

The complex’s failure to comply with noise regulations presented a more substantial problem: City regulations call for a maximum noise level of 60 decibels in outdoor areas. Even the tenants who testified on the landlord’s behalf said their State Street-facing patios are too noisy to use on weekdays. Ambient noise level on that block has been reportedly recorded at 70 decibels, even discounting bus traffic.

At this point, however, the only way to correct that design flaw would be to reconstruct the project. If it had been initially presented as a condo complex, the project would have undergone design review at the hands of the Planning Commission before it was constructed rather than after it was a fait accompli. Even city planner Betty Weiss acknowledged that with the eyes of all seven planning commissioners on it, violations would have been caught earlier. More importantly, the civic activists would have gotten involved earlier rather than keeping quiet because they believed apartments were being built...

----------------

Read full text at:

Two-Step Flip Triumphant