WEATHER »

Paul Wellman

Measure P Lawsuits Commence

First Filing Legal Falls Short, But Are More to Come?


Thursday, August 14, 2014
Article Tools
Print friendly
E-mail story
Tip Us Off
iPod friendly
Comments
Share Article

No sooner had Measure P proponents filed suit in Santa Barbara Superior Court last week ​— ​related to opponents’ argument against it in the Voter’s Sample Ballot ​— ​than attorney Rachel Hooper, whose Bay Area law firm wrote Measure P, said it wouldn’t move forward. The initiative asks voters in November to outlaw all new fracking, acidizing, and cyclic-steaming operations in the county’s unincorporated regions. The complaint alleged that the “No on P” camp erred in its message that the measure will stop all oil production, including existing projects, and requested that a judge strike some language from the document, which ​— ​along with similar papers prepared by the “Yes on P” campaign ​— ​will be mailed to voters ahead of the election. Registrar Joe Holland said he hasn’t had a judge amend a Sample Ballot argument in his time in office.

Linda Krop, chief counsel for the Environmental Defense Center who filed the complaint with Hooper, said the lawsuit was submitted ahead of analyses from county counsel and the auditor-controller. With those reports now part of the voter information package, Krop said, “our clients are happy with going forward trying to educate the public” and no longer see a need to challenge the opposition’s language. A representative for the “No on P” team said it isn’t expecting to file a similar challenge.

Last Friday, county planning staff unveiled a draft of protocols that county counsel recommended be enacted to head off lawsuits from oil companies and landowners if Measure P passes. Although the plans aren’t final yet ​— ​the Montecito and county planning commissions will submit comments on the procedures, with the Board of Supervisors having the final say in October ​— ​the planning department envisions that takings claims would go directly to the supervisors, while arguments for vested rights would be heard by the department’s director, with appeals allowed to the Planning Commission and supervisors. While their claims made their way through the process, companies wouldn’t be required to stop their existing projects.

The two-hour meeting attracted the divided comments typical of previous Measure P hearings, with dozens of environmental activists and industry representatives contradicting each other’s statements about what the ban would mean for the county.

Related Links

Comments

Independent Discussion Guidelines

I still do not understand how Santa Barbara County has permitted such a flawed initiative to be put on the November 4 ballot in the first place. The proponents say our water supply is unsafe. But they don’t say the water used in the steaming process of oil is non-potable, recycled, unusable drinking water. The proponents say Measure P will protect our air quality. But they don’t say that our air quality is the cleanest it has been in 20 years. They say oil drilling causes earthquakes. How many earthquakes have we had that they want to blame on our 100 year old oil industry? Their facts should be based from instances or occurrences from the Santa Barbara County.
When I first heard of Measure P from the Water Guardians it was all about stopping fracking in the Santa Barbara County. The intent of Measure P is to eventually stop all oil drilling in the Santa Barbara County. How does our County allow a group of environmental extremists attempt to stop production of a natural resource that has been a part of our community for over 100 years? You mean to tell me that the environmental rules and regulations that the County of Santa Barbara, State of California, and Federal Government have implemented, are not good enough for the Water Guardians.
I am a woman. I am a wife. I am a mother. Whether we women are from the North County or the South County, we like to pamper ourselves. Do we not? What does this have to do with oil production? As a woman, I couldn’t live without oil and oil by-products. Well, I could…but, why should I? How many oil by-products do you and your family use every single day of your life? I would drive my children in my Chrysler Mini Van to soccer practices and weekly soccer games. I would have to fill up my Chrysler Mini Van with gasoline. I would go to the beauty salon to get my hair done (highlights in the summer). Without oil and oil by-products, most hair processing chemicals used by stylists would be impossible to formulate. What about our acrylic nails, manicures and pedicures? Without oil and oil by-products, the nail salons and spas could not exist.
The economic effect on all businesses in Santa Barbara County will be devastating. The loss of the oil industry will just trickle down to other Santa Barbara County businesses that are indirectly involved with the oil industry itself, not to mention the Water Guardians next targets; targets such as the vineyards, the agriculture industry, and the growing cattle industry in Santa Barbara County. They will be next; there is no doubt about it. We have to stop them…now!
I care about the agricultural industry of the Santa Maria Valley and the vineyards up and down our coast. I care about the beauty and prestige of the cities of Santa Barbara, Montecito and Summerland. Don’t you? WE need to show our support to all of the families and businesses of the entire Santa Barbara County that will be negatively affected by Measure P. Vote “NO” on Measure P.

IAW (anonymous profile)
August 14, 2014 at 8:04 a.m. (Suggest removal)

IAW needs to disclose a few facts that fail to support his hypothesis and actually undermine his central argument.

The Oil industry comprises less than 0.1% of total Santa Barbara County workforce and only 1.64% of the entire county GDP

Thees levels are no where near what would be required to provide any sort of devastating impact as argued by IAW.

On the other hand, tourism agriculture and the wine industry, all sectors of our economy potentially adversely impacted by effects derived from from the oil industry, collectively comprise over 15% of the Santa Barbara County workforce and an order of magnitude greater share of the County GDP.

If we need to be careful to preserve an economic engine in Santa Barbara County, it certainly is not the oil industry we need to be concerned about.

RobEgenolf (anonymous profile)
August 14, 2014 at 8:24 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I see that proofreading is not a very high priority at the Independent.

discoboy (anonymous profile)
August 14, 2014 at 9:31 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Well at least Egenolf seems to acknowledge the real purpose of the initiative is to kill off the oil industry in Santa Barbara despite supposedly only being a ban on fracking (which isn't even taking place in this County). Given how successful the wine industry as been in SB County while co-existing with the oil industry, that claim is nothing more than a scare tactic. However, you claim this initiative is necessary to protect the tourism and wine industries from being "potentially adversely impacted by effects derived from the oil industry." Lots of hypothetical scare tactics loaded in that sentence. Not much fact.

If the purpose is to bank fracking, why not propose a narrow initiative tailored to that objective? Why continue to push a poorly written overly broad initiative?

You may comfortably dismiss the impact of cutting 1.64% of GDP from Santa Barbara County but economists won't. What do you tell those who will lose their jobs? Tough luck? Fire and Police personnel have already come out and said the impact on their budgets due to loss in tax revenue will be substantial.

Plus, you haven't even mentioned the real cost of the lawsuits, taking claims, etc. against the County. Ask the County Counsel's office their opinion and they make it clear the cost to the County could be in excess of $1 billion. What will those costs due to the economic engine in Santa Barbara County........

WilliamMunny (anonymous profile)
August 14, 2014 at 10:06 a.m. (Suggest removal)

The best write-up I have read on Measure P was in the Santa Barbara View.

Is Increased Oil Production Worth the Risks?
by Editor on August 7, 2014 in News
By Santa Barbara View contributor Katie Davis

Here in Santa Barbara County we have co-existed with the oil industry for a long time and if Measure P passes in November, will continue to do so for a long time to come. The initiative exempts all current oil operations and so does not affect any current oil jobs or revenue. It also doesn’t limit future oil wells using conventional techniques.

What Measure P is designed to do is to head off the expansion of specific, high-risk techniques – fracking, acidizing and steam injection – that are causing environmental destruction, water contamination and health impacts in California and elsewhere. While primitive versions of these techniques have existed for decades, advances in the technology have brought a substantial increase in their use, as well as the associated risks and problems.

The question Measure P poses is whether that dramatic increase in risk to Santa Barbara County is worth the small amount of additional oil produced for the benefit of a few.

- See more at: http://www.santabarbaraview.com/is-in...

The post by IAW is so full of erroneous statements, it is head-hurting.

tabatha (anonymous profile)
August 14, 2014 at 10:18 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Nope Munny I did not acknowledge in the least that Measure P is intended to or ever would kill the oil industry and the recent action by the County Board of Supervisors directly and completely contradicts that false claim.

I was responded to the false claims that preceded my comment and I certainly did not dismiss the impact of the oil industry economic impact but merely stated it was not nearly what was claimed. .

Can't you find some facts that are actually accurate to raise?

RobEgenolf (anonymous profile)
August 14, 2014 at 10:24 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Katie Davis' excellent piece also appears in this week's Sentinel.

EastBeach (anonymous profile)
August 14, 2014 at 10:29 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Rob Egenolf.I am not a “his”; I am a “her”. I do not claim to be an expert on Measure P. I appreciate your input; that is how I am learning about the impacts of Measure P. However, as I said, our government is protecting our environment with all of their stringent rules and regulations that must be imposed, not only by the oil industry, but by all agriculture, manufacturing, etc. The Water Guardians may find reasons to believe these industries could be a threat to our clean environment, too. I used the vineyards as an example. I think the oil industry was an easy target for their agenda; that’s just how I feel.

IAW (anonymous profile)
August 14, 2014 at 11:07 a.m. (Suggest removal)

' our government is protecting our environment with all of their stringent rules and regulations' um, no they are not. Gulf spill by BP (still in business), trains exploding carrying oil in tankers not suitable for the task, killing people, destroying infrastructure. The government is not doing its job re: oil industry, fracking, EPA is bought and paid for.

spacey (anonymous profile)
August 14, 2014 at 11:28 a.m. (Suggest removal)

How could anyone possibly know what gender a person is from the name IAW?

There are hundreds of organizations fighting to protect the environment and trying to get government to do more.

And as far as the big, bad, government is concerned, all legislation about the environment is passed in congress - i.e. by a majority in both the house and the senate. In most instances, not all, that means the approval from all parties. So the big, bad, government is US.

tabatha (anonymous profile)
August 14, 2014 at 12:04 p.m. (Suggest removal)

tabatha - "How could anyone possibly know what gender a person is from the name IAW?

Basic literacy would work: "I am a woman. I am a wife. I am a mother. "
IAW (anonymous profile)
August 14, 2014 at 8:04 a.m.

14noscams (anonymous profile)
August 14, 2014 at 12:38 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I am a woman/wife - IAAW
I am wild - IAW
I am wicked - IAW
I am wrong - IAW

Basic literacy? Does that include acronyms, that most people hate.

Here are lists for the meaning of IAW - take your pick

http://www.acronymfinder.com/IAW.html
http://acronyms.thefreedictionary.com...
http://www.abbreviations.com/IaW

Here are just a few.....

IAW In Accordance With
IAW I Agree With
IAW If and When
IAW In Agreement With
IAW Information Assurance Workshop
IAW Internet Adressen Wijzer (Dutch website)
IAW In Another Window
IAW Independent Association of Wrestling (professional wrestling circuit)
IAW Israel Awareness Week
IAW It's About Websites, Ltd. (UK)
IAW Interactive Weather Analysis
IAW Interamerican Workshop Inc (Milwaukee, WI)
IAW International Arrest Warrant
IAW Islam Awareness Week
IAW International Alliance of Women
IAW Israel Apartheid Week
IAW Inactive Window
IAW International Association Welding
and more

A superficial reading did not come up with yours.

tabatha (anonymous profile)
August 14, 2014 at 12:46 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Tabatha:
Its clear the 'water guardians' need remedial tutoring in oil production, so you dont sound so LOL silly when you attempt to instruct us about the industry

Lesson 1:
Steaming. There are two kinds, cyclical steaming, (SC) and steam flooding (SF). One of the two methods are needed in more and more parts of the county because remaining oil is heavy. 8-9 API gravity is common. Oil this heavy must be heated before it can be produced. Heavy and extra heavy oil is pretty much all thats left, so steaming has been going on (right under your noses) since the 1960s. You might call steaming conventional production now.

Tomorrows lesson - Acidizing

nuffalready (anonymous profile)
August 14, 2014 at 7:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I am sure that the Water Guardians thoroughly researched the subject, and conferred with experts. They probably know more than you.

Lesson 1:
a) I believe people are aware that steaming is currently being used, and that it will continue after Measure P is passed.
b) Current steaming does not add toxins to the water, as fracking would.

What was your point?

tabatha (anonymous profile)
August 14, 2014 at 7:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Measure P allows steaming? Isnt cyclical steaming one of the 'extreme' production methods the guardians claim will destroy tourism, wineries, and the Central Coast generally?

nuffalready (anonymous profile)
August 14, 2014 at 8:47 p.m. (Suggest removal)

While I'm no fan of fracking, I would not support Measure P if you care at all about the county being able to fund public safety, public works, parks, etc. since the measure as written is so poorly done, it will certainly result in successful litigation against the county, at massive taxpayer expense.

Indyholio (anonymous profile)
August 15, 2014 at 12:53 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Wow Tubitha, reading some of your 800+ comments reveals a lot about you. I'd encourage you to do some true fact finding rather than suck down and propagate what you've "gleaned" from the left-wing agenda blogs.

ClayT (anonymous profile)
August 15, 2014 at 1:05 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Dear Water Guardians:
Training offered here so you all dont sound so silly when instructing us about oil production.

Lesson 2 - Acidizing
Oil is produced locally from the Monterey formation. Nature already massively fracked this formation. The realm apparently survived .

As oil is produced thru natures frack job, minerals start scaling up the cracks. Its just like the screen thing on the kitchen faucet. We acidize that every once in awhile with Lime Away. We also acidize wells. We have to or pretty soon they are all scaled up. Acid neutralizes real fast in the alkaline downhole environment . So a truck load of acid doesnt go all that far. Acidizing has been conducted since the 1940s or 1950s, right under your noses. Acidizing is necessary. We could call it a conventional production method.

If you end acidizing under Measure P, you are shutting down oil production locally. Its really that simple.

This is why Im conducting class for you all. You think that cutting off acidizing and steaming doesnt hurt local production. It does, big time.

Please join us on this planet, and drop your breathtakingly silly Measure P campaign.

nuffalready (anonymous profile)
August 15, 2014 at 3:30 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Wow, ClayT called her "Tubitha"! I'll bet shes really scared now!

If someone called me named I would be crying like a baby!

dolphinpod14 (anonymous profile)
August 15, 2014 at 4:35 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Clay T Thank you for today's lesson on the methods of oil production. You forgot to say that acidizing is also used on WATER WELLS to help clean up the mineral deposits. Please keep up with the lessons MAYBE the water guardians and Tubitha will learn something instead of spreading their propaganda and untruths to unknowing bystanders.

IAW You are my kind of woman. Tubitha really? She is a wife and mother. I Am Woman - duh. Glad you wasted so much time trying to figure out what her gender was.

gearjammer (anonymous profile)
August 15, 2014 at 6:11 p.m. (Suggest removal)

The number one problem with big oil, as in any huge profit industry is that its restraint from disregarding what is best for the people is constantly under siege by their own army of lawyers and lobbyists. They only care about the blood they will suck from our area and the riches it will bring to them. Residents be damned. If they get their way, this stretch of prime California coastland will look like Kern County.

RickWorth (anonymous profile)
August 16, 2014 at 8:38 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Shame on those that comment and don't really know the oil production process. There is no way they will be convenienced. It now becomes an issue of just arguing. (We all have those in our families, don't we?).
Ask yourself. How few oil wells are visable as you drive the beautiful coast, who really said 7000 new wells and over how many years when there is barely 100 permitted new wells a year in this county, when was the last damaging earthquake you predict will happen, not because they happen even in non-oil producing areas, but because of oil drilling, what about new technology where fields are monitored 24/7 now and a problem is instantly recognized, do we still need oil, should we be supporting countries that hate us, what about the huge cruise ships now allowed in SB harbor, what about most new wells no longer needing pump jacks but just a short pipe out of the ground no longer an eye sore, what about the new generators being purchased to keep GHG down, what about the true fact that the air quality in SB Co. is better than it has been in years? These are just a few questions I and many that appreciate the valuable assest we have. Please get yourself educated and help make this a better place instead of pitting one against another just to see who can win the debate. Vote NO on Measure P because it encompasses more than it should.

sensiblemolly (anonymous profile)
August 16, 2014 at 9:07 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I think that we need to stay on track with the issue at hand; “Measure P Lawsuits Commence”. Remember, I Am the Woman who needs to understand the impacts of Measure P, should it pass. Am I wrong to think that there is something very deceptive of Measure P if the proponents own lawyers are filing lawsuits and then decide it’s not the right time to file a lawsuit? Aren't these the same lawyers who wrote Measure P? It was their language; and now they want to change it. Is this correct? If lawyers have to be involved in the legalities of an initiative that isn't even law yet, then how in the world was this initiative even allowed to be on the ballot in the first place?
The Water Guardians, the Katie Davis’s of the world and her followers are trying to save the world. That is great! But, do it in a manner that doesn't destroy communities and livelihoods; and stop brainwashing people with their untruths. We are living in the 21st century. How could we even survive in the 21st century with our same quality of life without oil and oil by-products? The United States relies on coal, OIL, and natural gas for its energy. Let’s look ahead to the future when other forms of renewable energy and oil coexist. We do need renewable energy…but, we will ALWAYS need oil, too. As our Country grows no one source of energy would be able to keep up with our demand.
Don’t allow Katie Davis to continue with her scare tactics. She knows oil produced in Santa Barbara County has the strictest regulations in the world. Our Santa Barbara County air quality is the cleanest it has been in 20 years! That’s a fact.
Katie Davis’s lawyers felt it necessary to have to file a lawsuit with the County Registrar to strike some language from their Measure P. Is this not a fact? Sooner or later, Katie Davis’s followers will be following her all the way to the court house. Where is the common sense in all of this? Vote “NO” on Measure P.

IAW (anonymous profile)
August 16, 2014 at 11:18 a.m. (Suggest removal)

RickWorth: Rest easy. The existing county land use rules are far too stringent to allow anything like you see in Kern County. Tightly controlled oil production is still possible here so it still brings in jobs and revenue.

Measure P winds down production completely (regardless of what the 'water guardians' say). The county cant afford the loss.

nuffalready (anonymous profile)
August 16, 2014 at 1:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Measure P is a lie. Those like Katie Davis and Bill McKibben hold extremists views anyone can learn about by researching 350.org. There are no facts in CA to back up their arguments. Instead they use examples from states where there is little regulation and new wells proliferate the landscape. There is no chance of that taking place here.

I say to them them take your fight to where its needed, because it's not needed here.

Validated (anonymous profile)
August 16, 2014 at 3:43 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Yes it is. The measure P folks are running scared. Katie and Rachel ordered the troops to stand down, today. They have a big event planned this week. The disinformation will be at a maximum for the next few days. Stay tuned, this thing is going to get fun.

Normal people can see through the deception. Why bankrupt the county for a few minions of Al Gore and George Soros. Our property rights belong to us not them.

nativegeo (anonymous profile)
August 17, 2014 at 9:31 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Oil workers of Santa Barbara the only thing you have to lose are your chains!!! I am Sparticus! To the barricades! What a load of crap. When this measure passes there will still be significant oil production in the county. I am in favor of an extraction tax.

Herschel_Greenspan (anonymous profile)
August 17, 2014 at 9:45 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Don't pee on Ess Bee.

JarvisJarvis (anonymous profile)
August 17, 2014 at 10:58 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Looks like somebody's been hittin' the long bottom leaf.

Ken_Volok (anonymous profile)
August 17, 2014 at 11:06 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I tend to agree with you, Mr Volok.

dolphinpod14 (anonymous profile)
August 18, 2014 at 4:56 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Mr. Greenspan, I KNEW Sparticus, and you are definitely no Spartacus.

dolphinpod14 (anonymous profile)
August 18, 2014 at 5:02 a.m. (Suggest removal)

The real disinformation campaign appears in places like this where nearly all of those who oppose Measure P refuse to even post using their actual names.

That speaks volumes about how proud they are of their remarks.

RobEgenolf (anonymous profile)
August 18, 2014 at 8:50 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Why does Katy Davis et. al, refuse to debate opponents of Measure P? Maybe because they can't hide behind ambiguous monikers and acronyms, and must therefore own their systematic distortions, and hysterical, junk-science regurgitation's...

zionist (anonymous profile)
August 18, 2014 at 9:20 a.m. (Suggest removal)

There is nothing like free advice from an attorney. Thanks Rob!

nativegeo (anonymous profile)
August 18, 2014 at 11:38 a.m. (Suggest removal)

It looks like the main argument pro or con on Measure P is oil versus grapes and wine. I do not need wine in order to exist. But the solar panels on the roof of my car are not cutting it as far as getting me from Cuyama to jury duty in Santa Maria. I think I need oil!
I have read all 29 pages of this ordinance and do not see where it exempts any existing operations. All oil fields reinject their wastewater back into the formation from which it came out and all oil wells produce some water as well as oil. This bans the reinjection of waste water and also natural gas which have been done for as long as there have been oil wells.

wdpcuyama (anonymous profile)
August 18, 2014 at 6:38 p.m. (Suggest removal)

WDCC, Oil and Gas is just the first domino to fall. Measure P is really an unconstitutional attack on private property rights. Next year they will attack irrigated farming followed by cattle grazing. Look what they (Hooper and company) did to the Klamath River basin. Organic farmers, vintners, hear that flushing sound? Mom and pop business's up and down the coast will all take an economic hit thanks to their (Water Guardians) elitist greed that serves their billionaire masters and their own self interests.

nativegeo (anonymous profile)
August 18, 2014 at 7:55 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Many animal lovers have made peace with their decision to eat meat.

But the Center for Biological Diversity has a new campaign that hopes to convince them that a hamburger habit does wildlife a disservice.

"We need to see a drastic reduction in meat consumption to protect land, water and wildlife," Stephanie Feldstein, population and sustainability director for the Center for Biological Diversity, tells The Salt.

The conservation group says that some populations of grizzly bears and wolves have already been driven extinct by the livestock industry, and an additional 175 threatened or endangered species, like the prairie dog, could be next

Ranchers also all but wiped out the Mexican gray wolf, the most endangered wolf species in the world, in the U.S.

Feldstein says grazing cattle also degrade grassland habitat for prairie dogs.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2014...

nativegeo (anonymous profile)
August 18, 2014 at 9:05 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Thank You Water Guardians!

"After measure P qualified for the ballot, the unemployment rate in Santa Barbara County jumped, according to the State Employment Development Department, from 5.4% in June to 6% in July."

nativegeo (anonymous profile)
August 19, 2014 at 1:52 p.m. (Suggest removal)

The next paragraph reads as below - why did you leave it out? And consider the source.

"The liberal Measure P supporters may have hoped that it was oil industry jobs that were being cut. But of the 4,000 lost jobs last month, 2,800--or 70%--came from government."

http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-Ca...

WHO in the government would have lost their jobs because of Measure P? PLEASE EXPLAIN. Please explain how ANY jobs could be lost because measure P qualified for the ballot. The jobs lost probably have more to do with sequestration than Measure P.

I cannot think of a connection. Since you have posted this on every oil thread, please provide a list of what jobs were lost and why ON THOSE THREADS. Otherwise the post is a huge, steaming pile of BS.

nativegeo - that was a really dumb, misleading, out-of-context post.

tabatha (anonymous profile)
August 19, 2014 at 3:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"California may be a climate leader, but when it comes to managing our water sustainably, we are way behind. In fact, California is the only state in the country that doesn't regulate or even measure groundwater usage statewide. In the middle of the worst drought since 1895, we don't know where our water is going or even how fast we are lowering our water table.

Fortunately, there is growing momentum to manage our water resources more wisely. The California State Legislature will soon vote on urgently-needed legislation to manage groundwater. This marks a historic opportunity for California to begin protecting our water for generations to come."

Climate change is increasing the frequency and severity of drought in California. As climate change decreases snowpack (California's largest water storage system) and surface water dwindles, groundwater use is increasing at an alarming rate. Since the 1990s, California's Central Valley has lost about 41 million acre-feet of water—equivalent to 1.5 times the volume of Lake Mead, the nation's largest man-made reservoir. And one agricultural county reported that groundwater pumping has tripled since last year.

Union of Concerned Scientists email.

tabatha (anonymous profile)
August 19, 2014 at 4:05 p.m. (Suggest removal)

The real disinformation campaign appears in places like this where nearly all of those who oppose Measure P refuse to even post using their actual names.

That speaks volumes about how proud they are of their remarks.

RobEgenolf (anonymous profile)
August 18, 2014 at 8:50 a.m.

Mr. Egenolf, with all the stupid, pointless posts I've added to this site, Y would I possibly post under my real name?

Even though I go out of my way to be foolish, there are those (I don't include you in that list) who manage to beat me at my own game, even though they THINK they are saying something of merit.

dolphinpod14 (anonymous profile)
August 19, 2014 at 5:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Tabatha, I was hoping Katie and Rachel would release you from the stand down. You guys are really running scared now. Rumor has it that you will take it to the next deff con level??? You poked a bear in the face with a sharp stick. We will not go away. EVER!!

Lots of govt workers lost their jobs in SB county. Unemployment is rising dramatically across the county. Next month will be much worse. Good job carrying the water for Katie and Rachel.

Please post some statistics on ASTRO TURF injuries...

nativegeo (anonymous profile)
August 19, 2014 at 6:48 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Egenolf will profit handsomely if the county goes bankrupt. Bottom feeder.

nativegeo (anonymous profile)
August 19, 2014 at 6:50 p.m. (Suggest removal)

You never answered the question, but obfuscated.

In what job sectors is unemployment rising across the county? What is the cause? What does it have to do with Measure P?

tabatha (anonymous profile)
August 19, 2014 at 6:54 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I'll answer the question, and ooooh, it is soooo scary.

From NoozHawk

Unemployment rose slightly in Santa Barbara County last month, although the percentage of jobless residents was a full point lower than a year ago.

The county unemployment rate was 6 percent in July, up from a revised 5.4 percent in June, according to data released last week by the State Employment Development Department.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>The most recent rankings show the county is faring better than others across the state, however. California had an unemployment rate of 7.8 percent for the same period, with a national rate of 6.5 percent.>>>>>>>>>>and agriculture-related jobs, which declined by 1,000 nearing the end of growing season.>>>>>>>>>>>“Overall, our county continues to fare better than many of the 57 other counties and our targeted industry sectors are performing well,” Workforce Investment Board of Santa Barbara County Executive Director Raymond McDonald said in a statement.<<<<<<<<<<<<

What on earth has any of this got to do with Measure P.

You have lost all credibility.

tabatha (anonymous profile)
August 19, 2014 at 6:59 p.m. (Suggest removal)

If they stopped oil production tomorrow, the county would not go bankrupt. Nativegeo, light a match!

Herschel_Greenspan (anonymous profile)
August 19, 2014 at 7:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)

The county is virutally bankrupt right now. With $800,000 in unfunded employee pension liabilities and who knows how much in unfunded infraztructure repair and maintenance, why wait until it finally bounces checks to pay it all off.

I honestly do not know how the coounty will dig itself out of this mess as mor county workers retire and the pension fund gets drained beyond capacity. We all know the infrastructure is getting badly short-changed right here and right now. That is all too real.

County employees need their own Plan B for retirement.We can no longer afford to pay for two employees for each job position - one who is working and one whose pension we are also having to fund.

JarvisJarvis (anonymous profile)
August 19, 2014 at 7:57 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I'm so glad Tabatha and Herschel we're released from the stand down. Thank you Katie and Rachel. I'm sorry you set off the domino effect of unemployment (you own it). Keep running scared. Our supervisors are........ November will be a blood bath for the ASTRO TURF Water Guardians.

Herschel, my match landed in your bong! I hope you can sleep well worrying about your Carbon Foot Print (LOL). Hit the long leaf!

thanks for the free entertainment!

nativegeo (anonymous profile)
August 19, 2014 at 8:39 p.m. (Suggest removal)

LOL, tabatha *owns* nativegeo for laying bare his attempt at pulling off a dishonest quote.

EastBeach (anonymous profile)
August 19, 2014 at 11:57 p.m. (Suggest removal)

At least Tabatha posts under her name, which is more than I can say for U Mr. Nativegeo.

I would also like to protest that I think this thread is starting to get rather silly.

H._Greespans endless nattering about match lighting is getting disturbing. I think he needs professional help. A licensed mechanic or plumber is in order. I don't care what kind of help he gets, as long at it is professional help.

dolphinpod14 (anonymous profile)
August 20, 2014 at 5:31 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Tabatha: It's a literacy issue, but I dumbed it down for you. Maybe this will be easier to read:

"When I first heard of Measure P from the Water Guardians it was all about stopping fracking in the Santa Barbara County. The intent of Measure P is to eventually stop all oil drilling in the Santa Barbara County. How does our County allow a group of environmental extremists attempt to stop production of a natural resource that has been a part of our community for over 100 years? You mean to tell me that the environmental rules and regulations that the County of Santa Barbara, State of California, and Federal Government have implemented, are not good enough for the Water Guardians.

I AM A WOMAN. I AM A WIFE. I AM A MOTHER.

Whether we women are from the North County or the South County, we like to pamper ourselves. Do we not? What does this have to do with oil production? As a woman, I couldn’t live without oil and oil by-products. Well, I could…but, why should I? How many oil by-products do you and your family use every single day of your life? I would drive my children in my Chrysler Mini Van to soccer practices and weekly soccer games. I would have to fill up my Chrysler Mini Van with gasoline. I would go to the beauty salon to get my hair done (highlights in the summer). Without oil and oil by-products, most hair..."

IAW (anonymous profile)
August 14, 2014 at 8:04 a.m.

14noscams (anonymous profile)
August 23, 2014 at 2:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I have no idea what your post is trying to say, despite your "dumbing it down".

I, unlike you, do not like to pamper myself. I do not use much car gas, house gas, electricity or water. I do not spend money on fancy clothes, cars, shoes, etc. I prefer a walk outside to a walk in the mall.

I use plastic, but I do not waste it. I recycle it and everything else I can. I know the recycling centers at UCSB, Dove Place, and the county very well. I abhor waste and pampering, because I respect the needs of other critters in this world.

There will always be plastic - it has invaded just about every product, and alternatives that could replace some of it have been banned in this country. Furthermore, plastic can be made from things other petroleum, and that is a good thing (especially if it is biodegradable) because mankind will eventually use all of the petroleum that can be drilled.

"A team of chemical engineers has discovered a new way to make plastic bottles from biomass rather than petroleum, with researchers from the University of Massachusetts Amherst and the University of Delaware announcing the discovery on the heels of Earth Day.

The discovery demonstrates an efficient, renewable way to produce the chemical p-xylene, necessary in creating certain plastic containers. Xylene chemicals are used to produce a plastic called PET (polyethylene terephthalate), which is currently used in many products including soda bottles, food packaging, synthetic fibers for clothing and even automotive parts."

And your sentence "The intent of Measure P is to eventually stop all oil drilling in the Santa Barbara County. " is truly dumbed down, because it is not only dumb but false.

I am scratching my head about what was the point of your post.

tabatha (anonymous profile)
August 24, 2014 at 1:50 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Love Place.

tabatha (anonymous profile)
August 24, 2014 at 2:17 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I have to side with 14noscams because either we get oil out of the ground, or use whale oil, and since whales are a lot like dolphins, we could be next.

dolphinpod14 (anonymous profile)
August 24, 2014 at 4:08 a.m. (Suggest removal)

AW You are my kind of woman. Tubitha really? She is a wife and mother. I Am Woman - duh. Glad you wasted so much time trying to figure out what her gender was.

gearjammer (anonymous profile)
August 15, 2014 at 6:11 p.m.

Dewdly says Ken_Volok and Dr.Dan are women. Since people are so obsessed with womanhood, I am considering having a gender reassignment. (Sex change)

dolphinpod14 (anonymous profile)
August 24, 2014 at 4:12 a.m. (Suggest removal)

event calendar sponsored by: