Regarding the Oct. 6 article, “Santa Barbara Rent-Stabilization Ordinance Passes After Push for Final Change Fails,” governments by constitutional law must allow investors a fair return on their investment without undue impedance by regulation or ordinances.
If they take the property outright, they must pay for it. It’s called Imminent Domain.
The rent stabilization ordinance incorporates a petition process for fair return, if a property owner finds that the limited rent impositions have reduced a property unfairly below that threshold. But the Santa Barbara version appears expensive and can become unbridled and exorbitant.
There is no limit to the possible petitions, which apply per each property and not per landlord.
And at a projected $27,000 per petition, which is not covered in the registry fees or anywhere else, every 37 will be yet another million dollars.
A single landlord may have several petitions or even a bundle. And each property is applicable year after year as the fair return is an annual calculation and an annual obligation on the city to show it is not opposing a fair return against that citizen.
I have seen some scholarly suggestions made in submissions, about alternative approaches to the same problems wanting to be addressed in the rent stabilization ordinance. This really needs more organizing and discussion.
David Sullins
Santa Barbara
• • •
“Rent stabilization?” Never heard that term. It’s called rent control.
Fake news. Sad.
Troy Hoidal
Santa Barbara
• • •
Under California Code of Regulations, Title 25, Section 42, any apartment building or complex with 16 or more residential units must have a resident manager, caretaker or other responsible person living on the property.
Any properties owned by the same owners that are completely separate, noncontiguous properties and located blocks apart, are treated as entirely distinct parcels under state law. The same person is not allowed by law to oversee other properties in different addresses and pieces of land.
The Live-In Rule: The designated person must physically reside at the location. An off-site management company, regional supervisor or off-property manager does not fulfill this state mandate.
There should absolutely be separate on-site managers for any properties with 16 or more units. Separate on-site managers are required when the apartment complexes are on noncontiguous (separate) parcels or addresses, rather than a single continuous piece of land. It doesn’t matter if the same person owns multiple land pieces/apartment complexes!
Why do property management companies and landlords take advantage of employees who need to make a living and spread them thin to the point of putting them and their tenants at risk when incidents take place where the police are involved?
How do you expect 100% focused and proper work done when one person has to run to different properties at different addresses? This should be not allowed under any circumstances.
Gabby Kallona
Santa Barbara
• • •
I care about everyone in Santa Barbara and the importance of each perspective.
The division I am seeing and hearing in our community is not healthy or good. This has been caused by the exclusion of many community voices and is not “the Santa Barbara way.”
Considering our financial situation and depleted reserves, implementation of a costly rent stabilization ordinance and major changes to our historic downtown (known as the State Street Master Plan) should be better understood and then decided by a formal vote of the community.
Right now, there is more than one group that feels their concerns have not been heard and that their only option is to demand a costly referendum and/or to file a lawsuit against the city.
There are others whose voices have been heard and who are working to block the democratic process that mandates a referendum — a vote by the entire community for decisions on important matters.
City leadership should be fully aware when a vote of the people is needed for big cost decisions and to avoid frustration and division.
More than ever at this complex, difficult time, our community needs to be working together in earnest with compassion, understanding, and the willingness to compromise for peace and balance. The Golden Rule should be our guiding principle.
Cassandra Ensberg
Santa Barbara
• • •
Regarding the Oct. 5 article, “ICE Agents Detain Parent of Student on Allan Hancock Campus,” the unthinkable happened in our community.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents detained the father of a college student on the Allan Hancock College campus!
According to Kevin Johnson, a national immigration UC Davis law professor, it is the first he has heard of ICE action on a college campus.
We want to be first in the country for strawberry production. We want to be first in California for tri-tip barbecue. But to be first to have an illegal ICE raid on a college campus is not a FIRST we want.
ICE has heavily targeted the Santa Maria community since January 2025, ranking our city among the highest at-large “arrests” in the region. And now, it is targeting school campuses where our young adults have felt safe to learn and thrive, until now. We can’t let this happen.
It’s time for you to stand up for our community members and create spaces of safety for their education and their families. AND keep ICE out of 805.
The time is NOW for you to uphold the law, protect the people of Santa Maria and most of all, find your moral courage to do what is right.
Shirlee Heitman
Santa Maria
• • •
I am dismayed by Noozhawk’s one-sided reporting on illegal immigration arrests or actions that ICE may take.
This time Noozhawk brings out the Allan Hancock College superintendent and two Santa Maria city council members to condemn the supposed illegal actions. So 805UndocuFund members have a news conference and Noozhawk publishes what they say without stating any actual facts and before following up with an ICE representative.
Why is it that Noozhawk never addresses the 800-pound gorilla in the room and tells the reading public about the successes of enforcing U.S. laws against illegal immigration, or of the cost to taxpayers or the important priority of removing illegal criminals who plague our communities?
Why is Noozhawk not explaining that we, the taxpaying public, demanded that the federal government enforce our immigration laws and remove those who came here illegally or ask Congress to change the laws.
It is interesting to note that Santa Barbara County and some of its cities have partly subsidized these nonprofit illegal immigration support groups to the tune of more than $200,000 of taxpayer money — money that obviously would have been better spent supporting citizens who are homeless, mentally ill or veterans.
Please invest in some articles that show a fair and unbiased balance of the facts, and not unsubstantiated word of mouth.
Roy Belluz
Lompoc
• • •
Regarding the Oct. 6 article, “Planning Commission Approves Carpinteria Surfliner Inn on 3-1 Vote,” the rendering looks like a damn In-N-Out Burger. How is this the beach?!
A.J. Tarman
Carpinteria native, Lompoc resident
• • •
In her Sept. 18 commentary, “Los Olivos Can Still Choose Its Own Future with Wastewater Vote,” Santa Barbara County Supervisor Joan Hartmann argues that Los Olivos must send wastewater to Solvang to protect public health.
We need to protect shallow groundwater, but do our nitrates prove that a $60 million pipeline is the only or best solution?
The June Los Olivos Community Services District report found one well at 12 milligrams per liter (mg/L) nitrate, one at the 10 mg/L drinking-water limit and three below it.
These shallow monitoring wells are not drinking-water wells. Contamination matters, but it calls for evidence-based action rather than portraying a pipeline as inevitable.
Hartmann says isotope testing attributes nitrate to septic systems. Residents should be able to see the data, which shows how agricultural and watershed sources contribute and whether shallow groundwater threatens our deeper drinking-water aquifers.
The Preservation of Los Olivos (POLO)-funded REGEN study developed a less expensive phased system using gravity, effluent and advanced onsite treatment.
Those options deserve an honest and transparent comparison to the Solvang pipeline.
The Santa Ynez Valley Community Plan discourages sewer extensions except to protect public health. Before overriding that safeguard and excavating our streets, the community deserves proof that less disruptive local solutions are inadequate.
The concern is that the LOCSD could secure approval of the sewer through a weighted postcard ballot in which the commercial core, representing only 12% of parcels, controls 53% of the vote, while the remaining 88% of parcels — primarily residential — share only 47%.
Jeanne Hollihgsworth
Los Olivos
• • •
As someone who follows Central Coast news, I have been reading Noozhawk’s mental healthcare coverage, and it is some of the most useful local reporting I have read this year. It looks past single incidents and asks how Santa Barbara County’s system actually works, or does not, for the people and families involved.
As the founder of MSB Protection, a California licensed private patrol operator working mostly in residential and executive protection, a lot of what our officers meet on calls is a mental health situation, not a crime. Reporting that explains the gaps really helps us understand our own community.
I also enjoyed last weekend’s mix: the state budget earmarks for local projects, and Mark Patton’s column on Jesse Orosco 40 years after his World Series heroics with the New York Mets. Local news needs both kinds of story.
Thank you for the work Noozhawk puts into covering our area. It is noticed.
Michael Braun
MSB Protection founder and CEO
• • •
Article 26 of the U.S. Constitution states, “The right of citizens of the United States, who are eighteen years of age or older, to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of age.”
In California, “you must be a United States citizen and a resident of California, 18 years old or older on Election Day, not currently serving a state or federal prison term for the conviction of a felony and not currently found mentally incompetent to vote by a court.”
I wonder if anyone is verifying this requirement in Santa Barbara County?
Ron Fink
Lompoc
• • •
In the Oct. 8 mayoral candidate forum moderated by Bob Kupiec of AIA Santa Barbara and Barry Taugher of the Coastal Housing Coalition, Kristen Sneddon, when asked why voters should vote for her, stated that she “brings the balance.”
Well, if you are a housing provider in Santa Barbara, you know very well how she lied to the mom-and-pop small landlords with her “fair and balanced” approach.
If Sneddon’s rent stabilization ordinance was fair and balanced, there wouldn’t be a referendum building to put the ordinance to the ballot.
Landlords have been shut out of the conversation, the rental registry board is stacked against them, and the fees are unknown and surely growing from the $154 annual fee per unit that was originally advertised.
Sneddon voted against allowing Santa Barbara residents to vote on this controversial issue because she said it was too complicated for voters to understand.
A vote for Eric Friedman is a vote for democracy.
Michele Carbone
Santa Barbara
• • •
I normally do not involve myself in elections involving districts where I do not live, but this year is an exception.
This is a face-off between common sense and political ideology, and it is not an exaggeration to say that this election will likely shape Santa Barbara for the next decade.
With that in mind, I strongly endorse Cevin Cathell for City Council District 5.
In any normal year her strong record of local involvement, her experience in navigating the business side of Hollywood, and her track record as a lifelong Democrat would make her a lock to win the seat. However, as we all know, this is not a normal year.
Cathell brings a strong commitment to fiscal stability, policies focused on doing the most for the city, and a compassionate approach to challenging issues like homelessness and affordable housing.
I hope the residents of District 5 will concur and vote for Cevin Cathell for City Council.
Barney Melekian
Retired Santa Barbara police chief
• • •
I have lived in Santa Barbara for nearly 60 years and cherish my home. This means I pay attention to local and state politics and follow the candidates up for election.
Having heard Eric Friedman speak about his view of the current state of local government, and his agenda if elected, I found his opinions to be based on facts, which he has at his fingertips, and I appreciate his sober assessment of our city’s present state of affairs.
He is a working man with his feet on the ground, and I believe he is the mayor we should elect.
Susan Shields
Santa Barbara
• • •
Choosing a mayor is about more than finding someone who shares our values. It’s about choosing someone with the experience, independence and determination to turn those values into results — especially now as we deal with the onslaught of chaos on the national level.
Kristen Sneddon has spent nine years serving her City Council district, working to make Santa Barbara a more sustainable, resilient and inclusive community. I believe that record makes her a compelling choice for our next mayor.
Consider Sneddon’s commitment to public safety. Wildfire preparedness is essential to the future of our region, and her strong work on wildfire protection has earned her the coveted endorsement of the Santa Barbara City Firefighters Association.
Her commitment to sustainability has also earned her the endorsement of the Sierra Club, reflecting her understanding that protecting our environment requires both scientific knowledge and practical action.
Sneddon brings that same commitment to the challenge of housing affordability. Too many families are struggling to stay in the community they call home. Workers endure long commutes that worsen traffic and increase carbon emissions.
And too many people are living in their cars, including a growing number of older women. These are not abstract policy debates; they are real hardships affecting our neighbors.
Sneddon understands that protecting Santa Barbara’s character and addressing its housing shortage must go hand in hand. She has challenged a housing system that leaves too many people behind.
And importantly, she isn’t funded by developers or corporate landlords — a distinction that matters in the debate over rent protections.
When the City Council considers policies that can have profound consequences for tenants, property owners and the future of our neighborhoods, residents deserve a mayor who can approach those decisions independently, without the influence of developer campaign contributions.
Santa Barbara faces serious challenges, from housing costs to wildfire risk to the need for a cleaner, more sustainable future. Meeting them will require more than good intentions.
It will take experience, courage, collaboration and a willingness to tackle difficult problems rather than accept the status quo.
I hope you’ll join me in supporting Kristen Sneddon for mayor.
Laura Capps
Santa Barbara County supervisor
• • •
I’m an 18-year firefighter and current captain. We don’t do a great job talking about feelings, but I’m going to try.
I’ve known Eric Friedman since I was 12. He was a kid who got A’s when I didn’t, and always laughed at my jokes. Decades later, he still does both.
I responded to the Jesusita Fire and the Montecito debris flows. Montecito hit hard because it was close to home. I saw devastation no one should ever see.
I attended the memorial at the Santa Barbara County Courthouse. Friedman was there, now a city councilman, surrounded by important people.
And what did he do? He bragged about me, his old friend, hurting from a catastrophe that devastated our community. He proudly introduced me as his friend, the firefighter.
I was just doing my job. Friedman saw something different. Without realizing it, he helped me begin to heal.
That’s Eric Friedman. He remembers. He listens. In moments that matter, he shows up.
After almost 40 years, I know the man on that ballot. Titles come and go, but core principles endure. Eric Friedman, the person, shows up for everyone.
Sammy Rodriguez
Lompoc
• • •
It is no secret that the Santa Barbara Unified School District has a $10 million deficit, an administration out of touch with student and teacher needs, and that English achievement among Hispanic students remains low.
These concerns have brought some great new candidates to the table to turn things around, as demonstrated by the recent candidates forum hosted by the Coalition for Neighborhood Schools (CNS).
New energy and ideas can bring the school district in line with student and community needs.
Trustee area One candidates are Jacqueline Inda Karlsen and Mark Philibosian. Trustee area Four candidate Valerie Amparan is challenging Rose Munoz.
Rosanne Crawford
Santa Barbara
• • •
Santa Barbara needs a mayor who can match our aspirations with our ability to pay for them.
I’m supporting Eric Friedman because his emphasis on fiscal responsibility, transparent budgeting and long-term financial stability aligns with what I want from city leadership.
Our city faces difficult choices. Housing affordability, essential infrastructure, public safety and dependable services all deserve attention.
But worthy goals do not eliminate financial limits. Responsible leadership requires deciding what we can sustain, how we will fund it, and what obligations we are passing to future residents.
I appreciate Friedman’s willingness to question reliance on reserves and press for sustainable funding. Reserves protect our ability to respond when revenues fall, emergencies occur or unexpected costs arise. Spending them deserves careful scrutiny, even when the proposed use is worthwhile.
I also share his skepticism about adding another layer of local rent regulation. Tenant stability matters deeply. So do maintaining rental homes, encouraging investment and expanding housing opportunities.
I favor an approach that weighs those responsibilities together and takes unintended consequences seriously.
For downtown, I want practical leadership that listens to businesses and residents, remains open to adjustments, and pairs a long-term vision with a credible implementation plan.
Friedman’s emphasis on reducing barriers to investment and supporting local businesses speaks to those priorities.
As an accessibility advocate, I also trust Friedman to take access seriously. Fiscal responsibility and accessibility are not competing goals. Thoughtful planning should help us spend wisely while making community life available to people of all abilities.
An endorsement does not require agreement on every issue. Nor does it diminish my respect for others seeking the office. It reflects a judgment about which candidate’s approach best fits the challenges ahead.
For me, that candidate is Eric Friedman.
Nick Koonce
Santa Barbara
• • •
Good intentions are not enough when spending public money. Before making a commitment, Santa Barbara’s city leaders should explain how they will pay for it, what other needs will have to wait, and what the choice could mean years to come.
That is my concern with mayoral candidate Kristen Sneddon’s record. Her votes suggest a willingness to commit first and settle important financial questions later. When Santa Barbara’s savings are already low, that approach puts everyone’s financial safety net under added pressure.
During June’s budget talks, the city reported that its savings for unexpected budget problems were depleted. Total reserves — the money set aside for emergencies and other needs — were about $30 million below the city’s target.
These savings protect residents. They help the city handle unexpected bills without rushing to cut services, delay repairs or seek more revenue. A smaller cushion leaves the city less able to absorb the next costly surprise.
The clearest example of committing before settling the financial plan came in June 2025. Sneddon supported promising $2 million from city savings to the following year’s housing fund. The same motion directed staff to develop a plan to balance the budget later.
City Councilman Eric Friedman, also a mayoral candidate, voted against that commitment. At a subsequent council meeting, Sneddon admitted to everyone that she did not understand the budget.
Affordable housing deserves support. But money promised to housing cannot also remain in emergency savings. Taxpayers deserve to know how that money will be replaced before it is committed.
Sneddon supported the rent-control program and rental registry; Friedman opposed them. The council (including Sneddon) approved $500,000 from housing and homelessness funds to start the program.
Running this new bureaucracy is reportedly estimated to cost $2 million to $2.4 million each year. Fees may cover those costs, but any amount the city must make up remains uncertain.
Another example of making a commitment before developing a plan: Sneddon promising funds directed to her supporters for the promises that she cannot keep is deceitful and disingenuous.
While Sneddon did not cause every budget problem, she has voted several times in support of depleting the budget reserve. The records do not prove that her votes canceled a particular fire-station project or drainage repair.
The concern is her willingness to support commitments that compete with rebuilding savings while important financial questions remain unsettled.
In my view, that is poor judgment with public money. It leaves less room to meet important community needs and increases the risk that taxpayers will face harder choices later.
Friedman opposed the commitments described here. On these decisions, his record shows he has thoroughly and thoughtfully informed himself on these critical issues facing our city. Sneddon did not.
Santa Barbara needs a mayor who understands the funding, considers the long-term effects, and protects emergency capacity before making promises. That is why I believe Eric Friedman is the stronger choice for everyone.
Bruna Trip
Santa Barbara
• • •
As publisher of Goleta newspapers from 1982 to 2005 I had the editors focus on our county and federal governments as they affected what was unincorporated Goleta at that time.
I first met now-Rep. Salud Carbajal, D-Santa Barbara, when he was the chief of staff for then-First District Supervisor Naomi Schwartz. When she retired in 2004, he ran for the office and then, via the newspaper’s coverage as well as as a homeowner in his district, I had a constant connection with him on many civic issues to work out.
After Rep. Lois Capps, D-Santa Barbara, retired in 2017, he ran for her seat and won, and continues to serve us steadily.
Carbajal immigrated here with his family at the age of 5 and worked alongside his dad in the fields as a farmworker during his high school summers.
At 19, he enlisted in the U.S. Marine Corps for five years, during which time he enrolled at UC Santa Barbara and got his bachelor’s degree and then went to the Fielding Institute to for a masters degree in organizational management.
Carbajal’s motives regarding his education and life’s direction have been to serve working families. His legislative priorities have focused on supporting middle-class families, expanding veterans resources and supporting public safety as well as migrating climate change.
Bottom line: Carbajal is a person I trust to do what we need to be done.
Dave Novis
Santa Barbara
• • •
Races for public office should be about qualifications, such as running a business successfully and making a profit, and having workers’ good will by decent pay, not just photos of smiling folks facing the camera.
Jim Delmonte
Santa Barbara
• • •
While the 2028 Los Angeles Olympics will be a great thing for the city, there are undoubtedly some major problems that will need attention.
One of the biggest problems is a huge amount of plastic trash that eventually will lead to an increase in micro plastics all over the world with this global event.
I recently went to a Jack Johnson concert at the Santa Barbara Bowl, which is committed to using reusable plastic cups during events. I thought that was very aspirational.
It seems like a realistic solution as opposed to the one using plastic bottles and cups that will be used at the Olympics, which would create metric tons of litter and waste.
This could be one step in eliminating single-use plastic at the Olympics.
I hope Santa Barbara can be an example for Los Angeles and the rest of the world in the Olympics.
Matthew Sax
UC Santa Barbara
• • •
Is anyone else worried about the impacts the 2028 Los Angeles Olympics will have on our entire region?
Specifically, the environmental impacts of millions of people descending on Los Angeles seems like it was in poor taste to host if they are not going to account for environmental impact.
I’m not just talking about carbon footprint. So far there has been no major commitments regarding plastic waste.
The 2016 Games in Rio de Janeiro created more than 6,000 metric tons of trash. With Los Angeles Olympic Games organizers predicting millions more visitors than Rio, this could mean even more waste, spreading pollution throughout our state and our coastline.
Even though we are Los Angeles’ northern neighbors, the Olympics is an international event, and we should all have some say.
I call on the Olympic planning committee to ensure the games are plastic-free.
Sierra Ferrante
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.