Send Who to SBCAG?

They’re adding another a. m. train to Goleta from the South on April 1.

That is a good question since the rails are not public. They are owned by Union Pacific, a freight company. Their freight trains have priority use of the rails and they charge the public a pretty penny for use of their rails. Any commuter rail would undoubtedly require the installation of more sidings to allow trains to pass and to park for storage. The real waste is the High Speed Rail line to nowhere that has been started but will likely never be finished, but that is yet another huge political morass. The money being squandered on the High Speed Rail Project would surely be enough money to achieve commuter rail on existing lines in many parts of the State.

Yeah, I had to look that up, too. I thought it meant the same as covfefe.

To Mas Gaviota @ 3:11 P.M- Jason Dominguez has never supported the position of encouraging people to sue SBCAG nor has he ever supported the position that the city withhold the required permits for the 101 widening project if the city did not get $100 million for city- owned street repairs from SBCAG. Both of those things Helene Schneider and Cathy Murillo did in 2014. Because of the actions of Schneider/Murillo the U.S. Department of Transportation refused requests from SBCAG for federal funding of the 101 project. In January, 2017 the council voted to send a letter to CalTrans objecting to the Draft Revised EIR for the 101 project, There was no threat of suing SBCAG or withholding permits in the January, 2017 vote.

But he was on the council in 2017 when he voted to support the same policy, that is to reject the eir.

Dominguez was not on the council in 2014 when Schneider called for people to sue SBCAG and threatened to withhold the required permits for the 101 project. Murillo supported Schneider's actions. Threatening to sue and withhold required permits from the very people you're trying to get money from is stupid.

In January 2017 the entire City Council, including newcommer Dominguez, voted to object to the Caltrans EIR. So what is your point?

The city's election process would be better served if no candidate received more than 50% of the vote to hold a run-off between the top two. This is done in many jurisdictions and would preclude the constantly lurking question about someone winning with only 28% of the vote.

Odd - I find your contribution embarrassing. You see yourself as a reasoned debater, while characterizing my regard for Mayor Murillo as “emotional” and the result of “falling for” some line of blarney. You are sensible you tell us; I am deluded and ignorant. My concern as to council member Dominguez's vote to do nothing re the contamination at the Astree Clark Bird Refuge is a “rant,” but your unflattering characterizations of Ms. Murillo's abilities and character are objective observations. In fact, I have seen most of the city council sessions this year. I find Ms. Murillo's conduct of meetings competent and respectful of others. I have the same opinion as to previous council sessions I've watched. I also see that public commentators praise her for coming to their homes or relevant sites to assess their concerns. You condemn Ms. Murillo's not going to the sites of our fires and mud slides, ignoring her explanation that doing so would have required emergency personnel to devote some of their time to assuring her safety. But you absolutely KNOW what losing mayoral candidates would have done since this knowledge is part of your instinctive grasp of reality, even though you failed to mention council member Sneddon's public praise of Mayor Murillo's behavior during those crises as “above and beyond” what might be expected from her. You and others repeatedly state – or imply - that a candidate in a five-person race who receives via plurality the most votes should not be considered a legitimate winner; if these are other than childish wishes, I don't know what to call them. I was active several years ago in supporting “Instant Runoff Voting” in such cases. To my knowledge, you and others voicing this complaint have done nothing in that regard but complain endlessly about the result in this particular case. And even had you shown some political support for that method, what do you propose the result could be under current law other than what it has been? After reviewing the language and nature of your post- using phrases and slogans which I think it's fair to say you did not originate – I feel quite confident in my intellectual capacity and expressive skills by comparison. And always I actually identify who is giving my opinion. William Smithers

"Febble minded?" Mr. Pot, meet Mr. Kettle.

To the out-of-control anon: you spelled feeble wrong in your rant about spelling, LOL!!

MAS GAVIOTA, you cannot say on any basis whatsoever that Murillo would have won in a one-on-one race. The other voters don't just disappear, they pick a new side. There is no way to tell, however, odds are very much against your hypothetical theory.

Murillo one on one with any of the other candidates would have won as well.

@MAS GAVIOTA: You are just as FEBBLE-MINDED and UNEDUCATED as Murrillo! Learn to spell correctly---UNDERSTAND not UNDERSTND! Yeah, these are the supporters of Murrillo----Provincial and Limited

MAS GAVIOTA, where is the misunderstanding of elections? I think it might be you that is confused. 28% of the vote went to Murillo, who won with the "most votes", and the other 72% was split among the other candidates, aka Anything But Cathy.

You really do not understnd how elections work. The candidate with the most votes wins. I am sorry that your candidate did not win. I have watched every City Council meeting this year and Murillo has done an excellent job.

He won't....

....when are you going to run out of words?

Calling people names makes you look like you have no real ideas. Just saying.

When you bust out "kool-aid" references and infantile statements like "dumb as dirt" you have already lost the argument.

Typo: a MONTH ago.