Salud Carbajal's 'no' vote on Kate’s Law
“Help me Dad.” These were Kate Steinle’s last words as she died in her father’s arms after being shot by an illegal immigrant who had been deported five times, had a record of seven felony convictions, but still found refuge in the sanctuary city of San Francisco.
As a result of this travesty, Kate’s Law was introduced in Congress to punish deported illegal immigrants who reenter the United States with a mandatory five years in prison.
Salud Carbajal voted against Kate’s law. In doing so he chose to play politics rather than protect the safety of his constituents. Kate Steinle was an innocent young girl whose life was cut short because there were no consequences for her killer’s serial illegal conduct. The devastation of a life so cruelly taken will have lifelong effects on those who knew and loved her. We cannot let tragedies like this keep happening and as citizens we need to hold Congress accountable for protecting us with laws that prioritize our safety.
Many illegal immigrants are hardworking and contribute to our society, but this legislation was a no brainer and that's why it passed the House easily in spite of Carbajal’s no vote. We need Representatives who look out for us constituents, not ones who play politics just to receive more votes.
Board’s rule questioned
I watched a recent Board of Supervisors meeting on TV, a segment of which started with the hydrogen sulfide well concern and then dealt with Das Williams’ major frustration that in Montecito, private wells were stealing aquifer water from the county.
After 18 landowners provided public input — including C.J. Jackson, Alisal Ranch, who did not want any restrictions on new well permits — supervisors Williams, Wolf and Hartmann ignored the public, Adam and Lavagnino and voted for flow meters. If you are using city or district water, you cannot have a well permit.
The three supervisors also ignored the Sustainable Ground Water Management Act, and added another bureaucratic layer to county government.
Who will monitor, calibrate, maintain the meter, and what will be the costs? It was pathetic as to how little the three supervisors know about water drilling or that the county may not have a handle on where existing wells are.
Why is it that whenever the government is involved, either someone or something is unjustly enriched at the cost of the taxpayers? The Hancock College Police Chief resigns after 10 months of "service" and he receives a 10-month severance package. Really?? Obviously the trustees and the President of Hancock aren't aware of their responsibilities to the taxpayers.
One of the chief's assignments was to evaluate the campus police department, which he said was underfunded. His severance package could have hired two to three extra officers for an entire year.
I think there should have been a contract that states if he leaves before his contract expires, he would have to reimburse the college part of the fees paid in the search for a new chief. Not reward him with a severance package. That sounds like pure common sense.
When President Walthers says, "he is grateful for the Chief's service and appreciates his professionalism during his tenure," he doesn't have much in the way of expectations from his employees. Ten months of work and 20 months of pay is offensive. Next time I pay my property taxes, I'll remember when I vote for trustees, all the current ones either don't care about us taxpayers, or aren't competent to hold the position.