Despite Some Opposition, Cold Spring Bridge Plan Advances

Chris, your info on the costs is not quite complete. The $605,000 was the capital expenditure, and that has risen to about $1 million. The figure near $3 million was *always* known and available, and the additional $2 million consists of all the costs of Caltrans staff assignable tot he project, which will be expended whether the barrier is built or not; however, their salaries etc would be attributed to different projects if this one does not go through.

There is a lot of discussion in the DEIR that addresses the points raised by McGinnes and Glasgow, but you decided not to balance your article by including that DEIR information in your article.

What the headline portrays as "some opposition" is, in fact, very widespread and rapidly increasing public opposition. The barriers project is opposed by numerous community organizations representing thousands of local citizens and taxpayers, including the Santa Barbara County Taxpayers Association, Santa Barbara County Action Network, Santa Barbara Trust for Historic Preservation, Los Padres Chapter of the Sierra Club, Womens Environmental Watch, Citizens Planning Association South County Land Use Committee, Santa Ynez Valley Alliance, Pearl Chase Society, Los Padres ForestWatch, and Friends of the Bridge.

While there continues to be "some support" for the proposal, the momentum of public opinion is clearly moving to opposition in light of evidence that is coming to light about its deeply flawed justification, excessive cost, and failure to adequately consider a superior no-barriers alternative plan based on the recommendations of a leading expert on addressing suicidal behavior on bridges. So the story is far, far from over, and the tide is turning against barriers proposal.

Three important public meetings are on the immediate horizon and provide citizens with excellent opportunities to become better informed and to express their views about the barriers proposal and the more effective, less costly and less damaging "human connections" alternative to it:

Monday, June 2:
Free public program Monday June 2 6:30-8:30pm at the Faulkner Gallery of the Santa Barbara Public Library, 40 E. Anapamu. Invited speakers Dr. Lisa Firestone of the Glendon Association and Dr. Garrett Glasgow of UCSB will address the question "Do Suicide Barriers on Bridges Save Lives? Considering the Evidence in Evaluating the Cold Spring Bridge Barriers Proposal." Co-sponsored by Friends of the Bridge and Pacifica Graduate Institute.

Monday, June 9 and Tuesday June 10:
Public hearings in both Santa Barbara and Solvang addressing the questions about the purpose of the proposal and the adequacy of the analysis of its impacts in the community:
Santa Barbara (June 9, 5:30-8:30 at the Faulkner Gallery of
the Santa Barbara Public Library, 40 E. Anapamu) and
Solvang (June 10, 5:30-8:30 at the Veterans Memorial Bldg, 1745 Mission Dr.)

For further information please contact bridgefriends@hotmail.com

Actually sevendolphins, that $3 million figure was not publicly available until Marc McGinnes requested internal Caltrans documents under the California Public Records Act a couple of months ago. Caltrans was compelled at that point to release the true budget for the project to the public.

Until then, Caltrans was telling the public the cost of the barrier was $605,000 -- no mention of the actual cost was made public. For instance, in their public presentation on the project last July the only cost figure mentioned was $605,000. Check out the Caltrans powerpoint presentation:

http://www.dot.ca.gov/dist05/projects...

Further, other barrier supporters were also telling the public the cost was $605,000. Here is Lisa Firestone repeating that figure in the press, claiming the barrier would cost less than a stoplight:

http://sbdailysound.blogspot.com/2007...

I'm assuming that the Glendon Association was not deliberately trying to mislead the public, but was as in the dark as the rest of us about the true cost of the barrier.

Public accounting generally distinguishes capital expenditures and staff salary, benefits, etc. The original $605,000 was the capital expenditure of a modest, architecturally plain barrier. The escalation to $1,000,000 in the capital expenditures occurred because there was a lot of protest for a more aestethically pleasing project.

http://www.dot.ca.gov/dist05/projects...

Pretty clearly says the `Project Construction Cost'... that is generally understood to be capital expenditure... was $605,000.

If one compares to a stoplight, then all staff/salary costs should be included too, and that will drive the stoplight cost up above the simple capital expenditures.

Staff salary etc would have been spent whether or not this project or any project or no project got done; State Employees aren't laid off easily.

Any representation that costs got out of control and escalated from $605,000 to $3 million is inaccurate. That is not an apples-to-apples comparison; there is simply diffrerent account used.

If the barrier is canceled that $2 million in staff salary will likely be spent in a different CalTrans district, which explains why the CalTrans folks in this district are fighting like hell for this stupid idea. They have a clear financial incentive to build the barrier.

Thank you Marc McGinnis for continuing to be our environmental conscience.

This kind of project, which has come into favor among frustrated bridge bureaucrats, has no scientific basis; it is purely emotional. Barriers do not stop suicides they merely shift them to other locations. CEQA requires an EIR to make findings based upon science not emotional arguments, taming even the most obstinate and unresponsive of agencies like CALTRANS. Lucky for us, we have citizen attorneys like Marc who will courageously fight the good fight to enforce CEQA.

In the meantime, cherished landmarks including bridges from Cold Springs to the Golden Gate get defaced with these chain link prisons, removing some of the joy we take for granted.

We need to care about the reasons people choose to commit suicide and address them as a society. But any truly spectacular place becomes a magnet for jumpers. I for one don't think the solution is to destroy the beauty. Natural vistas and aesthetics in our natural world have value in and of themselves.They have become a precious and diminishing quality in our harried urbanized world.

As a employee of the county and seeing funding restraints on the ADMHS by both state and county level brings the question. Why is a single project funded when funds are cut which can help a vast more number of citizens with the same issues at hand?

It seems people are more interested in having a great view and saving money than perhaps saving a life.Are you putting a monetary value on life. It might be that the time it takes prospective suicide jumpers have from jumping off the bridge to figure out another place to do the act will be the time they decide NOT to do it. As Dr. Lisa Firestone says it is a "moment in time" for people to change their minds about doing something so permanent. It gives them a chance to make another choice.