Good Governance & Speeches

I picked up the MJ this morning and read your [Gwyn Lurie] editorial, the transcript from last week’s BOS meeting. I loved it. It captures what I hold as the essence of the expectation – the hope, to borrow from you – of good governance. 

I also delighted in the eclectic choices of sources and quotes. Let’s see, off the top of my head: Mao via McCain via Jerry; Alfred E. Newman; Bette Davis, and a linguist, too! 

But the stand-out for me was when you wrote that inexperience was what appealed to you about Roy Lee. Yes!

That’s what the Founders intended. We (at the time, white, male property owners) step up and at personal sacrifice, give the republic a few years of our life, and then return home. I’ve at times reflected that we could do away with elections and just hold a lottery. It would be an interesting experiment.

Actually, that’s what we do with the civil grand jury. Springtime, community members submit their names. On June 30, the superior court judge takes names out of a hat – one to 19 with alternates – and voila! A County Civil Grand Jury for one year.

I served as a juror for 1992-93. We did some good work, too. But we were randomly chosen. As such, any agenda we may have brought to the jury room ended when the door closed and we were forced to work with 18 others. I was the liberal. Frank Leck from Santa Maria, the conservative. Poor Wendy Henderson, the UCSB undergrad, forced to sit between us. 

But we got past that. Our foreperson, Shirley Hopkins, was herself randomly selected to lead us. After selection, the judge chose the first person picked, Shirley, to start us off that first day. When it came time to vote for foreperson, to a person we stayed with Shirley. It was interesting how leaders can be formed simply by tossing them into the role. 

Coincidentally, compromise and civility formed the gist of Mike Jordan’s remarks at last week’s city council meeting, upon being sworn into office.

Celeste Barber First Order of Business

Supervisors Laura Capps and Bob Nelson should be commended for their forthright intention to move quickly on reform of Santa Barbara County cannabis policy. Notwithstanding the effort that went into the current policy, it has not turned out as planned. At one point, it was thought cannabis revenues would be a significant net financial surplus to the County. Now, they are a net financial deficit. 

Santa Barbara County should not subsidize the cannabis industry. For too long, the industry has not policed itself and there remains a large black-market component. Odor is a problem at most sites. 

Stronger odor-control regulations are the first order of business for the Board of Supervisors. Communities and neighborhoods should not be affected by cultivation of cannabis in their vicinity. The most promising approach is to require all growers to install carbon filtration technology, known as “scrubbers,” in order to reduce odor. 

Over time, additional changes in the County cannabis ordinance should be considered, including to reduce the acreage that may be cultivated – particularly in the Carpinteria valley – and to increase the distance that cultivation must be from schools and other public institutions. For now, though, the focus should be to reduce odor from existing cultivation sites at the earliest possible time.  

Lanny Ebenstein
Santa Barbara