- Home
- News Grid
- Local News
- Green Hawk
- Business
- Politics
- School Zone
- Nonprofits
- Missing Pets
- Multimedia
- Arts
- Movies
- Outdoors
- Sports
- News Releases
- Columnists
- Blogs
- Opinions
- Classifieds
- Advertise
- Donate
- Partners
Tony Strickland: Irresponsible Past Catches Up with Cash-Poor California
Just the other day I came across one of those stress-relief hand squeeze balls. Except this one was tan and shaped like a peanut and read, “NEVADA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORTY 888-4-NO-TAXES (www.nevadadevelopment.org).” I went onto its Web site and a picture popped up about moving to Southern Nevada. Then an image of a young couple with a baby and such words as no income taxes, labor, lifestyle, cost of living, technology and transportation flashed across the screen. By the time I was done exploring the site, Southern Nevada was looking like a pretty attractive place to live.
In addition, last week I stumbled across an article in The Sacramento Bee newspaper titled, “Golden State Losing Folks as Old Dust Bowl Beckons.” The article talked about “as California housing prices went wild in the middle of this decade, hundreds of thousands of residents scratched their heads and moved to places where homes were still affordable, state and federal statistics show. When prices started falling and unemployment started rising, many continued to leave California for healthier job markets.”
There is no question California has entered a rough patch. However, the direction legislators choose to go from here can make a world of difference.
Unfortunately, the reality is that our state has run out of money. We have overspent for years, and now the painful effects of past decisions have caught up with us. No decisions that the legislature make will be easy. In fact, they will be hard. But the fact is the state must make the tough decisions to solve the state’s deficit before California goes bankrupt.
I believe California must now make the tough decisions to reform old business practices here in Sacramento. Even with our $24.3 billion budget deficit, you wouldn’t believe the kind of waste, fraud and abuse that still exists in government.
For years I’ve been fighting against government waste, which is why once again, just as I had done in the Assembly, I authored a bill to get rid of political patronage by eliminating salaries from certain boards and commissions that make more than $100,000 a year for one to two days worth of work a month. Instead, they should be given a $100 daily per diem for every day they work, like most board members and commissioners get in California. My legislation, Senate Bill 685, which could have saved California $7,177,442 per year, would have done just that but failed in the Senate Government Organization Committee.
California’s government has grown too large and we can’t afford it. We need to learn to live within our means by holding state spending to population plus inflation. If we would have done just that since 1990, we would be faced with a $15 billion surplus instead of historic deficits.
California must reform old practices and make government more accountable for its actions. We need to reform our business tax structure so that we are more in line with other states. Right now, it costs 20 percent more to do business in California.
To strengthen our state, we need to foster a business environment that encourages innovation and the creation of new kinds of jobs entirely. That’s why I’ve introduced legislation to transition California to a renewable more energy economy, to jumpstart the economy, create jobs, reduce our dependence on foreign oil, improve the environment and lower energy prices. We also must focus on job growth by cutting unnecessary red tape on businesses and by improving business competitiveness in California.
California must take into account real fundamental reform in order for us to regain our competitiveness and get back on the right track. Once California has taken the necessary steps to reduce government waste and encourage job development and growth, then we will be headed in the right direction.
We want Nevada sweating over how California’s Development Agency is going to attract Nevadans to California. Not the other way around.
— Sen. Tony Strickland represents California State Senate District 19, which includes portions of Santa Barbara, Ventura and Los Angeles counties.
Comments
Noozhawk's comments are moderated, but by posting here you accept your responsibility to follow our rules as part of Noozhawk's shared online community. Please keep your comments civil and helpful. Don't attack other readers personally, and do not use vulgar, abusive or discriminatory language. Use the "Report Abuse" link if a comment violates these standards or our Terms of Use.
» on 07.01.09 @ 12:21 PM
Keep it up Tony!
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 07.01.09 @ 12:23 PM
Do the job we elected Arnold to do. If you keep up the cuts, maybe we will be able to afford services for illegal immigrants.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 07.01.09 @ 12:24 PM
Yes Tony you are right. But down here where foreclosures are reality while we count how many friends lost their jobs despair, not hope rules the day. To us, you and your colleagues up there in Sacramento just don’t get it. I don’t think politicians ever do. Hell half the people down here don’t get it either. Those who still have their house and aren’t in trouble and still employed just hum along, business as usual, thinking business is evil and the solution to all are problems is more government. Sacramento is run by unions and liberals, you sir are the squeaking minority. The conservatives and GOP in this state are a major disappointment. You have the right ideas and see what needs to be done but you are sorely outnumbered and to make matters worse you think being more liberal like will get you more votes. No It won’t because liberal minded people hate you and when you try to be like them you just lose more base.
Well you guys have one thing going for you. Cap and trade and the new EPA standards being applied to the state will finish off what the housing debacle and broken economy didn’t. The net outflow of jobs is going to be a torrent. Your colleagues are going to get a big lesson in the failure of Keynesian economics and the AGW religious zealots are going to find out in a hurry what the real cost of their feel good policies are thus keeping California in the forefront and blazing the newest trail forward, right over the cliff. Progressives will learn that progress has two directions, forward and backward and they chose the latter. That puts you and your fellow conservatives in the driver’s seat to pick up what’s left. God help you.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 07.01.09 @ 03:25 PM
If we were not spending a trillion or so in our false flag (911) foreign war operations, if businesses had a level playing field that protected the environment, and if the large bank/invest/insurance corporations were found guilty of treason and regulated to prevent future disasters, California would be able to keep a strong budget providing for all public needs. So much for the fake “free market” republicans.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 07.01.09 @ 04:36 PM
If we were not spending a trillion or so in our false flag (911) foreign war operations, if businesses had a level playing field that protected the environment, and if the large bank/invest/insurance corporations were found guilty of treason and regulated to prevent future disasters, California would be able to keep a strong budget providing for all public needs. So much for the fake “free market” republicans.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 07.01.09 @ 05:27 PM
Just look at the population!
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 07.01.09 @ 07:29 PM
There is a wide range between reasonably “regulating” business and “strangling” business. The current state of the economy indicates that we are on the strangling edge. A certain amount of regulation and taxes is reasonable, it is what differentiates us from other countries, and keeps business and capitalism in check. However the pendulum is swinging too fast the other way. When we get too close to strangling business, we may as well be a poverty stricken banana republic socialist third world country, which we are now dangerously close to because of piled on regulation, now in the name of climate change. Stop it. People are suffering. People are becoming penniless and homeless. Stop it.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 07.01.09 @ 07:49 PM
How come more politicians in Sacramento don’t think like Tony S. Until then we will never get out of this mess.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 07.01.09 @ 08:31 PM
With the Colorado River containing less water each year http://www.usbr.gov/uc/feature/drought.html , expanding Nevada will soon have the highest water rates around. And who really wants to live in that desert? If so, please leave and California can retain a bit of land not yet covered with concrete. I think California costs for public services are well worth the extra taxes. Although I could go for a parlimentary form of government to allow for other political ideas to participate based on percentage instead of Republicrats gerrymandering winner takes all.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 07.02.09 @ 03:42 AM
wish we could save the money we are wasting on Phony Tony’s salary. This guy doesn’t get it. Where is his plan for fixing the mess? Certainly he has been in Sacramento in the Assembly and now the Senate long enough to have some solutions. Instead he just blames the Dems and repeats like an automaton, “no new taxes.” He and his wife Audra are career politicians and the only representation we have in Sacramento. Ok Tony, tell us which schools would you close? How big do you want class sizes? You voted against funding for firefighters. Are you going after police officers next?
Unfortunately Tony Strickland is part of the problem in Sacramento, not part of the solution.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 07.02.09 @ 05:16 AM
Tell you what, I’ll sign up for getting rid of the crumbs of waste if you will sign up for getting rid of the crumbs of abuses Republicans have piled on California.
- Restore the Auto Licensing Fee whose reduction was supposed to be only temporary when CA had a surplus. It was never restored and, if restored we would never had had a deficit
- While we’re talking about waste, how about fixing the 3 strikes law so it applies only to violent crimes? I’m tired of wasting money on housing people for life when they committed only non-violent crimes.
- And while we are talking about wast, how about legalizing the use of marijuana, proven to be less dangerous than alcohol and over the counter drugs? We can save money on law enforcement, the courts and the jails…and we could tax the sale too, much like we do booze.
- How about fixing prop 13 so that commercial property is covered?
- How about raising the tax on cigarettes. Some states have a $3 tax on cigarettes and getting back to waste, we could save a ton on healthcare costs if it reduced smoking.
- How about having a tax on oil extraction? Nearly every other state with oil has such a tax, even Republican Alaska! You might be worried jobs are leaving CA but if we impose such a tax, the oil can’t leave.
If you get off your butt and do these things then we liberals will be glad to pursue the wasted spending you want to stop.
And if you take all these measures, CA would have a surplus and this liberal would be glad to join you in an across the board tax cut.
If you do all this, I would even consider voting for you!
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 07.02.09 @ 05:16 AM
If Nevada is so great to live in because it is cheaper, has less government, and has lower taxes, then why don’t more people live there? Why is California so crowded if the business taxes are so high and we have so much waste in government spending? If Nevada is such a draw for businesses and people, then they should go there. California would only benefit from a lower population. Your argument, Senator Strickland, is specious. We do not need to make any special effort to attract more people and more businesses to operate in this “overspent” state. California is great enough to attract people and businesses. I do not want my state to follow Nevada’s model, which is largely dependent on gambling revenues. I still have a great deal of faith in California AND it’s government. We simply have problems to work out, such as the government waste you mention. If there is waste in government, then it’s your job to search it out, make it public, and get rid of it.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 07.02.09 @ 06:17 AM
Nice comments, Tony; that’s why you were elected. Notice the partisan bickering in these postings? Typical of CA voter thinking and the reason why CA is in such a mess. The answer is radical reduction in the size of government; this will require folks in CA to understand that ya can’t have what ya can’t pay for. The ‘tax the rich’ strategy is a, perhaps THE, primary cause of CA’s wild fluctuations in revenue. When 1% of the taxpayers pay 25% of the budget, the golden goose is clearly near death. If CA wants to continue all the existing social programs, then taxes on EVERYONE must go up, not just taxes on everyone else.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 07.02.09 @ 06:30 AM
this from a guy who doesn’t have the spine to raise cigarette taxes and who is owned by the tobacco companies..sounds like an Arnold clone…
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 07.02.09 @ 07:14 AM
To blame Republicans for ANYTHING in what has been a Democrat dominated and controlled political climate for decades is laughable Richard Sauders. Even Schwarzenneger has proven to be a liberal, powerless, sell-out, cave-in girly man. All of his initiatives were out voted by Democrats, so don’t blame him either.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 07.02.09 @ 09:04 AM
Your errors and omissions are enough to destroy your credibility.
The auto license fees just rose from .65 percent to 1.15 on May 19th,2009 That is double!
http://cbs5.com/consumer/vehicle.license.fee.2.996782.html
The three strikes law already does apply to violent or serious felonies only:
Violent offenses include murder, robbery of a residence in which a deadly or dangerous weapon is used, rape and other sex offenses; serious offenses include the same offenses defined as violent offenses, but also include other crimes such as burglary of a residence and assault with intent to commit a robbery or rape.
http://www.lao.ca.gov/analysis_1995/3strikes.html
Raising a tax on cigarettes will do little to reduce smoking, since addicts normally will pay any price. Even if it did reduce smoking it would also reduce the revenue from the tax resulting in no gain.
There already is tax on oil extraction, and when liberals such as yourself won’t allow expanded drilling anyway, what good is raising it other than to make the current drilling unprofitable? Eventually even the oil companies will be run out of business.
Your omission?
Eliminating services to illegal immigrants, one of the major but unspoken contributors to the destruction of the budget and economy..
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 07.02.09 @ 10:29 AM
I like the comments that suggest raising taxes is “ok” because that commenter can afford it. Fine, you do it first, no wait, all you liberals out there who think you’re not paying enough taxes already, you fund your pet projects and entitlements yourself. Oh, I know, that entitlement for an illegal alien sounds so warm and compassionate when someone else foots the bill, huh? All taxes no matter where applied end up screwing those who can least afford it. There is no such thing as progressive tax, only varying degrees of regressive tax. Thanks Johnny for reminding our liberal friends you can’t have what you can’t pay for.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 07.02.09 @ 10:39 AM
To the person who tried to correct what I wrote, let’s be clear:
- When you wrote that 3 strikes already applies to serious felonies only, you provided a site. So I checked it out and here is what it said were the impacts of the law after its implementation:
Most Offenders Charged With Nonviolent, Nonserious Offenses. Data we reviewed show that during the first eight months of implementation about 70 percent of all second- and third-strikes are for nonviolent and nonserious offenses.
So much for your attempted rebuttal.
You wrote that the car license fee had recently increased. Yep, but in the 5-6 years it was decreased, CA lost $4-5 BILLION dollars per year, about the amount of our current deficit. And it still hasn’t been raised as much as it was when it was lowered.
All the studies show that raising the cigarette tax does lower smoking rates. And all the studies show that as people quit smoking, their health improves and the state’s health costs go down. That means that either our insurance rates go down or emergency room visits for the uninsured, paid for by taxpayers, also go down.
Nice try but the facts will always trump propaganda.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 07.02.09 @ 10:57 AM
Well, maybe. But a whole lot of those “past mistakes” were ones caused by Tony’s
former boss and mentor, Tom McClintock, and by Tony himself, when he sat in the
Assembly all those years. Some are being caused right now, by Tom’s wife, who got
his old Assembly seat, and by Tom himself, in McClintock’s.
My recollection was that Tony “had the answers to the state financial crisis,” when
he ran for the state senate last year. But notice that he never articulated what those
“answers” were, right up until election day. Just like Nixon’s “secret plan” to end the
Viet-Nam war, huh?
If Strickland actually has any clue how to help the governor and state finance director get us out of this mess, he should stop sniping at people and programs he
doesn’t like for purely ideological reasons, and state specifically - as Tom
Campbell has - what should be done, and how it would work. That, he isn’t doing.
Eighty percent of the state’s structural deficits (as opposed to recession driven
factors) come from just three areas: 1) repeal of the existing vehicle reg fees when
Gray Davis was recalled; 2) lack of fair compensation from Washington for state
costs for providing services to millions of illegal immigrants; 3) no reassessment
of business/corporate land holdings under Prop 13.
Strickland has always been willing to seek federal compensation on the immigrant
issue - he openly covets Congressman Gallegly’s seat - but NOT the other two. Why
not?
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 07.02.09 @ 01:41 PM
Yes and why would that 1% of the taxpayers who pay 25% pf the budget want to live in Caifornia? That upper 1% leaves and there goes 25% of the budget.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 07.02.09 @ 02:06 PM
Richard and Publius, you guys can debate ad infinitum all the details you want. You can find all the GOP boogiemen you want, hell I’ll throw a couple in there with ya starting with our governor, the point is you cannot support the massive spending this state does on a shrinking revenue stream. Those balances you speak of Publius are going in the wrong direction whether the funding was there before or not. We are literally chasing our revenue sources out of the state and even faster now that California wants to adopt the “Amsterdam” model of energy development. You can fund additional services ONLY if your economy is expanding. California led the nation in job killing environmental regulations and then tried to make up the short fall on the backs of illegal immigrants, while simultaneously offering these same illegals entitlements that are counterproductive and a greater drain on services than they can possibly make up for on payroll or sales tax. This is pure insanity gentlemen.
We and I mean WE have got to stop treating this as a partisan issue. It is no longer about the state’s well intentioned liberals verses the pragmatic conservatives. It’s about us, you and me against a government gone insane and dragging us into financial ruin. Wake up guys, we don’t have a lot of time to bicker with each other while the rats in Sacramento are busy blowing their feet off with the proverbial shot gun. We conservatives don’t want our state ruined by over development or environmental damage, Jesus, we live here too! We want some semblance of reason. Not too much to ask for is it? As Johnny Lock elucidated to, once you’ve killed the goose where are you going to go next? Do you really think you have that kind of money? You might want to check if you still have a job before you answer that one. And by God Tony I hope you are reading this.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 07.02.09 @ 06:30 PM
And, by golly, to all of you who tell those who don’t like the current situation to leave the state: who do you think would be left to pay the taxes? I know personally of one family, building a $3M house on a $2M piece of land (clearly wealthy, so paying income taxes at the max rate), who have already decided to declare residence in WY (no income tax) once their house is complete, and thus pay, not a high tax rate in CA, but NO TAX IN CA. You fools who think you can “tax the rich” with impunity need a brain transplant.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 07.02.09 @ 09:36 PM
Re: John Locke’s comment on dual residency. That’s something I think about almost every day, especially with Sacramento working so hard to make it hard on those of us who own businesses and pay taxes here. If I could figure out a way to get it past the IRS, I’d be out of here in a nanosecond. But I’m stuck listening to idiots like the guy complaining because the car tax was repealed. WTF?!
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 07.03.09 @ 06:30 AM
Simple math can be simplistic, but I would like a little analysis based on it. It appears to me that State government at 130 billion takes up about seven percent of the states GNP; add to that the federal and local taxes we pay and the negative return from Washington, and I think it is fair to ask if our taxes are too high. About 4K per resident is spent by the State. If you are married and the kids are grown and you are still working, you are certainly putting in more in taxes than you are receiving in State services. If you have two incomes adding up to 200K, without question you are paying more than you are getting.
By my calculation, the average state employee when you factor in retirement and other benefits costs about 200K per year. A retired state employee is expensive to the taxpayer. 200K times 350,000 employees equals about 70 billion of the state budget. This is middle class welfare for a small segment of the middle class. State employees have a safety net not provided to the rest of the middle class. Probably most of the budget deficit could be erased by bringing bloated state salaries and benefits into line with the private sector.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 07.03.09 @ 06:38 AM
“Tax the rich and the rich leave”
Oh poor babies. I love it when Republicans are up front about their constituency—the rich. Of course even then they lie—tax rates play very little role in where individuals or corporations locate, but they use this blackmail scam to pressure governments to give them a free lunch by trading on the corruption of politicians (like Strickland) and the stupidity of voters like ... well, the ones defending the rich here.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 07.03.09 @ 07:59 AM
Tony, Nevada has no income taxes because they have legalized gambling of a massive scale. Do we want that for Santa Barbara? No!
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 07.03.09 @ 09:25 AM
How’s that alternative energy business of yours going, Tony?
Why would anyone believe a word from this lying sack of ideological right wing Republicanism ... the corporate representative?
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 07.03.09 @ 12:23 PM
Appreciate AN50’s comments and concerns. Clearly all thinking residents of this district are really worried about the state and national economic conditions we’re
living through.
The thinking behind my earlier post is that I’ve encountered Tony Strickland in his
official capacities for a number of years now, and the last “tough decision” I’ve ever
seen him make was ... when he married his wife.
Career politicians - which is what Tony Strickland and Tom McClintock are, no matter how much “small government” rhetoric they mouth - don’t survive this long supping at the public trough by making “tough decisions”. They duck ‘n cover.
Tony supported the Gray Davis recall enthusiastically, and publicly agreed when
Arnold claimed he “had the answers” to California’s budget problems. Tony agreed
when Arnold rolled back the vehicle registration fees, even though that crippled
state financial planning even before the recession. Tony agreed with the “Blow up
all the boxes” strategy, even when the State leg analyst couldn’t find much genuine
“savings” there.
But when the ballot measures all failed, Tony and Arnold had no backup plan. When
the recession tanked the economy, Tony and Arnold refused to consider closing the
30-year old Prop 13 corporate loophole. When a variety of “compromise” budget
schemes were floated by the governor and the “big four”, Tony refused to support
any of them.
Has Tony returned his paycheck to the State Controller’s office, because his body
of the Legislature has failed to do its duty? Has he turned down his per diem? Has
he stopped carpooling home with his wife in a state-supplied vehicle, filling up
with state-supplied fuel? No. Our economic pain is not his pain.
So AN50, this is not about partisan sniping. This is about under-performance from
a career politician who campaigned last year that he “had the answers”, but now is
not supplying any. Does that make him a whole lot worse than his colleagues? No,
of course not. I’ve noticed that HannaBeth Jackson hasn’t stepped up on this issue
either, even though she also promised, last year, that she had “the answers” too.
But in time of statewide crisis, we deserve more than sustained mediocrity. Where
are our “Profiles in Courage” leaders? Where is our plan for shared sacrifice, based
on a long-range strategic plan leading toward sustainable stated government that’s
anchored by reliable revenue? As far as I can tell, we don’t have one. Tony’s just
doing his finger-pointing choreography again. It does get old.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 07.03.09 @ 01:22 PM
Kinko’s, a billion dollar corporation, moved from Ventura to Dallas specifically to save millions of dollars in taxes both on the corporation and on the employees that moved with it. The move paid for itself in less than a year, and employees effectively got a 10% raise (TX is a no-income-tax state - they tax oil at the source, something CA hasn’t discovered yet), not to mention housing at a quarter what it costs here.
Similarly, Fidelity Mortgage moved its HQ from SB to Florida, another no-income-tax, low real estate cost state. Same kind of benefits to the corp and its relocated employees.
Yes, it’s Texas/Florida, not California, not nearly as beautiful nor nearly as nice a climate. Point is, some companies and individuals DO factor taxes into their location decisions, contrary to what Mr. Kincaid claims.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 07.03.09 @ 02:06 PM
Marcel, you have packed an astonishing amount of disinformation and unwarranted assumption into a pretty short post.
According to Marcel “tax rates play very little role in where individuals or corporations locate”. That is hands down the most uninformed reality-defying statement I have ever heard. Are you aware, Marcel, of the huge exodus of companies and jobs from California over the past 20 years? Are you aware of the outflow of population to the other 49 states?
Not defending the rich, Marcel, just pointing out an economic reality that you apparently refuse to face (and BTW ‘rich’ does not imply ‘Republican’ except in a prejudiced mind - there are many, many rich Democrats - and all the evidence indicates they don’t like to pay taxes either - were you following Obama’s appointees tribulations with tax ‘problems’?).
Income tax receipts are down 34% this year. Now since 1% of the CA taxpayers pay 50% of the taxes, it is fair to assume that this drop is primarily due to much lower payments from upper income tax payers. That drop translates into a 17% drop in CA tax revenue, since the income tax accounts for half of CA’s revenue. Upper income taxpayers’ income tends to vary wildly with the business cycle. So collecting half of CA’s tax revenue from the “rich” in a good year (like 1999) simply means a big revenue fall when times aren’t so good. Like now. The net of our current tax structure is that1% of the CA taxpayers can cause HUGE swings in CA revenue just because of the business cycle. Most states seem to understand this. You clearly do not or will not.
And whether you want to believe it or not, people find ways to avoid taxes. Like declaring residence in another state. I’m aware of four such families within a quarter mile of my home (no, I’m not rich and not one of them). One of them commented to me that the last hike on the top taxpayers was the final straw. SO THEY ARE RICH, LIVE HERE HALF THE YEAR, AND PAY NO CA INCOME TAX. WAKE THE HELL UP!
And given your apparent immunity to fact and reason you have no business commenting about the stupidity of voters. Yours would appear to be the ideology that got this Democrat-controlled state into this mess.
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 07.14.09 @ 09:30 PM
The state needs to cut pensions and wages in half in Government—NOW
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
» on 07.15.09 @ 12:34 PM
Tony Strickland is one of Californias worst State Senators
You don't have permission to flag this entry.
More Local News »
Wayne Mellinger: Triple Challenged Can’t Grapple with Their Demons Alone
For the homeless, the mentally ill and the addicted, society needs to step up with institutional help
George Runner: New Tax Interpretation Will Help Farmers Switch to Solar Power
California Board of Equalization clarifies exemption, ensuring its availability for agricultural expenses
Patty DeDominic: What’s On the Minds of High Achievers?
Take control of 2012 with a look at your health, wealth and time management
Adam Probolsky: Voters Are Receptive to Raising Local Revenues
Recent elections indicate voters don't lump in local government with institutional dysfunction in Sacramento and Washington
Helene Schneider: Mayor’s Year-End Message to Santa Barbara Community
There were many accomplishments in 2011 for which the city's residents can be proud, with much work still to be done in 2012
Weather: Fair 44.0º
Search Noozhawk »
