Regarding the Jan. 29 article, “2 Critically Injured When Plane Crashes, Burns on Bishop Ranch in Goleta,” the single-engine Cirrus SR22 aircraft comes equipped with a whole-aircraft emergency recovery parachute system that obviously wasn’t deployed in this case for some reason.
Addison Thompson
Santa Barbara
• • •
I would like to personally thank Noozhawk publisher Bill Macfadyen for the wonderful piece he wrote about Erin Graffy in his Jan. 24 column, “In the History of Santa Barbara, Erin Graffy Earns Her Own Chapter.” It was very much deserved as she was a contributor on so many different fronts.
I am a fortunate one who is able to call her friend as she stood by my side through many battles. She will be missed for all she contributed.
Roger Perry
Santa Barbara
• • •
What a wonderful tribute to Erin Graffy. She was such a kind soul with a lovely spirit, funny, with a fondness of chocolate!
I was just getting to know her the last couple years. I envy Bill Macfadyen having had the benefit of knowing her for many years.
Karen Poythress
Santa Barbara
• • •
Thank you to Bill Macfadyen for his wonderful piece on Erin Graffy. I was shocked to learn of her death. She was indeed a great Santa Barbaran.
Frank Hotchkiss
Savannah, Georgia
• • •
Bill Macfadyen’s uplifting remarks and praise of Erin Graffy are greatly appreciated.
And vivacious a word we hear … but not so often. Indeed, Erin was most vivacious and then some.
Macfadyen’s comments and good work are always welcome.
Dean Severson
Santa Barbara
• • •
The Jan. 29 article, “Sales Tax Revenues Spark City Hall Debate Over Affordable Housing Priorities,” is typical of government.
More revenue rescues the City of Santa Barbara from a big deficit, and we can’t find ways to spend it quickly enough.
Whatever happened to prioritizing current and any additional needs/wants, and budgeting carefully to include a surplus?
I bet it won’t be long before the city faces yet another self-induced budget crisis — and an accompanying demand for more tax money.
I sure wish citizens had the same way to manage business or household budgets. Just buy whatever you want, run out of money, and tell others you need more.
It’s time for some adult supervision at city hall.
Kirk Greene
Santa Barbara
• • •
As someone who attended multiple city council budget meetings, and advocated aggressively for the Measure I sales tax increase, I can affirm that it was clear from the beginning that the primary driver of that increase was the need to close the Santa Barbara’s $10 million structural budget deficit.
That deficit had been the subject of contentious hearings for some time as the city looked for ways, including changing parking fees, to address the structural revenue shortfall.
That was in all the materials that the city produced regarding the ballot measure, and it was reflected in conversations that many of us had with voters as we encouraged them to support the increase.
It’s unfortunate if some people felt that a promise had been made to spend 30% to 35% of total Measure I revenue on affordable housing. Certainly many of us have advocated for spending that much of any surplus that the measure might generate.
But it is impossible for the city to meet its obligation to balance the budget if it sets aside a third of the total revenue generated for affordable housing.
I have to agree with Council members Meagan Harmon and Mike Jordan that bringing this item to council now was premature.
The city has no numbers yet as to how much additional revenue the sales tax increase will generate. Given that sales have been flat overall, it’s possible that it will just barely succeed in covering that structural deficit.
That is certainly what it looked like at Tuesday’s council meeting when the matter was presented by staff.
We are desperate for affordable housing and I support every reasonable effort to increase it. But the city also has fundamental obligations to provide basic services, and as Councilwoman Wendy Santamaria pointed out, the people who need those services most are the lower income residents who are paying most as a result of the sales tax, which is regressive, in that it has a heavier impact on lower income taxpayers.
We need to continue working together as a community to support the efforts of our Housing Authority and community organizations to find solutions to the housing crisis.
But setting aside 30% to 35% of total Measure I revenue, whatever that might be, would contradict the messaging that the city has generated since the conversation began.
Lee Heller
Santa Barbara
• • •
Timely article on sales tax revenues and affordable housing. The last I heard was Santa Barbara has more tax-exempt housing, affordable housing, per capita than anywhere in the United States.
Everyone needs to pay for the benefit of city services and our public schools, but too few of us do pay.
Santa Barbara County assesses every property regardless of its tax EXEMPT status. Get answers for all to know:
- Amount of revenues lost from exempt properties within city limits
- The number and names of businesses occupying tax-exempt properties
- The number of residents residing in each tax-exempt property, including all Housing Authority projects, HUD and California-financed projects, dorms, Valle Verde, Wood Glen Hall, Samarkand, Cornerstone, Hillside, Westmont College faculty housing, Santa Barbara Cottage Hospital and all its related facilities and staff housing
- Assessment of each religious church property, public government property and school/education property that are exempt from taxes
- Total of property taxes assessed all properties in city limits, total amount of taxable properties and total amount not collected due to tax exemptions
Loud shoutout to any elected council member requiring answers to tough tax, revenue and housing questions.
Denice Spangler Adams
Santa Barbara
• • •
Regarding the Jan. 16 article, “UC Santa Barbara Buying Downtown Apartment Complex, Commercial Space,” it may seem a wonderful event — UCSB helping out its workforce with housing in Santa Barbara — but of course there is a downside.
This purchase of the newly completed apartment complex and nearby buildings removes 160 apartments from local use.
Soon all will be rented out to UCSB employees, government employees, and all at under-market rates. No groundskeepers, cooks or even professors are going to be paying $6,700 a month for a two-bedroom apartment, the going rates in the new complex on East Gutierrez Street.
UCSB will use its millions of state and federal taxpayer dollars to buy a perfectly good local housing project, and then will cut the rents for its people, all on the backs of California taxpayers.
After all that taxpayer largesse in buying the block, the property now becomes state property, free of property taxes. The tax income loss to Santa Barbara County is huge.
No sales figures were provided, but if we assume around $50 million as a sale price, with 1.5% yearly property tax, that’s $50 million x 1.5% = $75,000 per year in property taxes lost. Times the fifty-year life of the building equals a $3.75 million immediate and permanent tax loss to the county.
Considering the cost of infrastructure, fire and police protection, streets, traffic and government protections that building in the city and county offers to any project, UCSB is ripping us off.
Why can’t they build on their own land at UCSB? Why are they buying out our local housing? Why is UCSB using endless taxpayer dollars — when our state is trillions of dollars in debt, burning down, flooded with red ink, and Santa Barbara County is rated the poorest in California — to buy up blocks of our private property?
Answer: Because they can. There are no limits on head-in-the-cloud academics freely spending taxpayer dollars on “good” causes.
But the obvious result of this free spending of taxpayer money is less and less private property and more and more government property.
And government property, just like government itself, produces zero wealth and pays no taxes. It is us, the people who pay all the taxes and create wealth. And government is supposed to encourage, allow and promote that wealth creation.
The question is, who are we building for?
Thomas Cole
Montecito
• • •
As a permanent Montecito resident and a retired fire marshal and arson investigator with decades of experience, I feel a duty to share my growing concerns with our community.
Recent incidents, such as the Pacific Palisades fire, should serve as a critical reminder of the wildfire risk we face in and around Montecito.
Montecito and Pacific Palisades share many similarities: both are affluent communities within the wildland urban interface, surrounded by hiking trails and natural beauty.
While I am not directly involved in the investigation of the Pacific Palisades fire, based on my experience, I believe it to be incendiary in nature — possibly arson.
The behavior of arsonists is well-documented. These individuals often target areas like ours. They may appear to lead normal lives but often display a lack of concern, empathy or respect for others, and are generally unresponsive to rules or authority.
I have personally witnessed this type of behavior while encountering hikers near the Hot Springs trail parking area and along the nearby trailhead.
Recently, when the Hot Springs trail was legally closed due to a red flag warning, I observed many hikers blatantly ignoring the closure — hopping locked gates and proceeding up the trail in total disregard for the law and safety of our community.
These actions are deeply troubling, particularity given the increasing popularity of illegal activity in the area, such as the overcrowded and unsanctioned use of the Hot Springs pools.
In addition, there is frequent illegal overnight parking in areas where parking is prohibited from sunset to 8 am. Vehicles are often left parked for days without moving, leading one to suspect that the occupants are camping illegally near the Hot Springs.
This poses a serious risk, as it is likely that individuals are sleeping near the pools, possible using campfires and engaging in other unsafe behaviors.
Such activities create a perfect storm for potential disaster in our fire-prone region.
It’s important to note that individuals who engage in these behaviors often work alone. They tend to carry backpacks, prefer less-traveled trails, and exhibit a pattern of disregard for rules and safety measures.
These behaviors should not be ignored, as they can be an early warning sign of potential risks.
To my fellow neighbors: Please stay alert, observant and report any suspicious activity to the appropriate authorities. By working together as a community, we can reduce the risk of becoming the next Pacific Palisades fire.
In full disclosure, I would add that I am a newly elected director to the Montecito Fire Protection District Board of Directors. I am very proud to serve our community in this capacity.
Let’s remain vigilant and proactive in protecting our beautiful community.
Joseph Pennino
Montecito Fire Protection District director and retired fire marshal and arson investigator
• • •
Any person with the heart of God feels sympathy for those in our world who suffer. This suffering can arise from various sources, prompting such a person to either mitigate the impact or escape the dangerous circumstances.
Thus when a nation like the United States accepts immigrants from anywhere, granting amnesty and a path to citizenship, the people of God are filled with sympathetic goodwill.
In like manner, any person with the wisdom of God recognizes that protection is essential for secure living.
There are those roaming the earth to destroy the unsuspecting and naïve. To allow such persons free access to ourselves, our families and our communities is unwise.
Instead, a process by which each person coming into the United States is questioned, investigated and approved is wise.
It is the dual reality that is true not only about a nation’s immigration but to every aspect of human life.
Loving sympathy and wise security embodies Jesus’ admonition to his disciples when he said in Matthew 10:16: “Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves.”
As with most things in life, focusing solely on one aspect without considering the impact on both the soul and public safety leads to destruction of both.
Ceasing to love sympathetically those who suffer in our world will irreparably damage our individual and national soul.
Conversely, neglecting wisdom about the dangers of the wolves will cause unnecessary destruction both for ourselves and those we are called to protect.
Pastor Denny Wayman
Santa Barbara
• • •
When I read the Jan. 21 article, “Fearing AI Will Take Their Jobs, California Workers Plan a Long Battle Against Tech,” the term “Luddites” immediately came to mind.
For those who do not know the term, Wikipedia describes Luddites as “members of a 19th-century movement of English textile workers who opposed the use of certain types of automated machinery due to concerns relating to worker pay and output quality. They often destroyed the machines in organized raids. Over time, the term has been used to refer to those opposed to the introduction of new technologies.”
Perhaps it might be better to figure out how to use the new tech rather than to oppose it.
Art Thomas
Santa Barbara
• • •
Amber Benton’s Jan. 24 letter to the editor accusing Noozhawk of bias is illogical.
While President Donald Trump’s election has local effects, his inauguration was not local news. Former President Joe Biden’s arrival at Vandenberg Space Force Base and the Women’s March in De la Guerra Plaza were both local events.
Thus, this choice of topics does not demonstrate that Noozhawk is partisan but rather that it is a local news source.
When Fran Lebowitz said recently that everyone who voted for Trump was stupid, I thought she was exaggerating.
Skona Brittain
Goleta
• • •
Mail Calls
Noozhawk welcomes and encourages expressions of all views on Santa Barbara County issues. Click here to submit a letter to the editor.
Letters should be BRIEF — as in 200 words-BRIEF — and letters under 150 words are given priority. Each must include a valid mailing address and contact information. Pseudonyms will not be accepted, and repeat letters will be skipped. Letters may be edited for clarity, length and style.
As a hyperlocal news site, we ask that you keep your opinions and information relevant to Santa Barbara County and the Central Coast. Letters about issues beyond our local region have the absolute lowest priority of everything we publish.
With rare exceptions, this feature is published on Saturdays.
By submitting any content to Noozhawk, you warrant that the material is your original expression, free of plagiarism, and does not violate any copyright, proprietary, contract or personal right of anyone else. Noozhawk reserves, at our sole discretion, the right to choose not to publish a submission.
Click here for Noozhawk’s Terms of Use, and click here for more information about how to submit letters to the editor and other announcements, tips and stories.