Brilliant Thoughts
County of Santa Barbara Planning and Development
by Ashleigh Brilliant Born London, 1933. Mother Canadian. Father a British civil servant. World War II childhood spent mostly in Toronto and Washington, D.C. Berkeley PhD. in American History, 1964. Living in Santa Barbara since 1973. No children. Best-known for his illustrated epigrams, called “Pot-Shots”, now a series of 10,000. Email ashleigh@west.net or visit www.ashleighbrilliant.com
What is it Worth?
H
ow do we determine the value of things? Is it only the question of what people will pay? Some American railroad tycoon of the “Robber Baron” era spoke in terms of exacting “all the traffic will bear” – meaning that he charged not what seemed fair or reasonable, but simply as much as he could get. Going by that standard, life would appear to be an auction, and the best things go to the highest bidder. But of course, not only money is involved. Not many people would literally give their right arm for what they most desire. But many parents sacrifice a great deal for the betterment of their children. On a personal note – when meat was still rationed in England, I remember my parents sometimes letting me and my sister eat their portion, as well as our own. And it shames me now to acknowledge that I felt no appreciation, but just took this as the normal course of events.
Isn’t there anything that has the same value everywhere to everyone? Still, money is the generally recognized standard of value. One of the great achievements of civilization has been the evolution of money. Isn’t it amazing that, from a simple system of barter, in which you exchanged things of supposedly equal worth, we have evolved through currencies of metal and paper, which merely symbolized values, to the point where transactions are now conducted through almost imaginary electronic channels? But how do we decide the value of things? One complication is that different people put different values on the same things. A young healthy person may highly value a bicycle, which is useless to someone who’s bedridden. But do usefulness and value mean the same thing? Maybe they should, in which case a screwdriver would in most cases be far more valuable than a diamond ring. Another complexity is that the same item may have varying value in different situations. A warm blanket means more on a chilly winter night than in a hot summer. Isn’t there anything that has the same value everywhere to everyone? 9 – 16 April 2020
What about the air we breathe? But it’s too hard to package and quantify. If the government could control it, there would soon be a tax on air. But what about the so-called precious metals, like gold and silver and platinum? Traditionally gold has been a standard of value, even though, except for a few specialized uses such as in dentistry, any sensible person would much rather have a tool-kit than a bar of gold. In any case, if gold were the standard, it would always have the same value. But we know that, like other commodities, it varies from day to day. I know I am only tiptoeing lightly here, over a very complicated subject. But the fact remains that, whatever name you give it – price, worth, cost, value – what we are talking about is how much something matters to someone, in comparison with something else. And, ever since numbers were invented, I suppose these qualities have been expressed in numerical terms. In the 1950s there was a very popular song which asked, “How much is that doggie in the window?” – but we never found out the answer. Of course, if you are writing a love song, you can get away with sentiments like these (at least, if you are Irving Berlin): ow much do I love you? I’ll tell you no lie – H How deep is the ocean? How high is the sky? How many times a day do I think of you? How many roses are sprinkled with dew? In practical terms, however, we need to have a basic standard of value. Until comparatively recent times, that standard was gold. Hard as it may be to believe, you could take a paper dollar into a bank and change it for a gold dollar. That was called being on the gold standard. But that doesn’t work anymore. Your paper dollar, which used to be a promise, is now just a piece of paper. Its value is based on whatever faith you have in your government. Establishing a stable international standard of value may prove to be as difficult as it has been with weights and measures. Considering the success which the pharmaceutical industry has had in turning little tablets and capsules into huge profits, I would suggest that the currency of the future be based on PILLS. With proper accreditation and validation, a certified pill could be the remedy for all our financial ills. •MJ
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING SANTA BARBARA COUNTY MONTECITO PLANNING COMMISSION CASE NUMBERS:
19DVP-00000-00030 & 19CDP-00000-00098
DATE:
April 22, 2020
HEARING BEGINS: 9:00 A.M. PLACE:
View hearing online via CSBTV or YouTube at: https://www.countyofsb.org/plndev/hearings/mpc.sbc
SUBJECT:
San Ysidro Roundabout
Hearing on the request of County Public Works to consider the following:
Case No. 19DVP-00000-00030 [application filed on July 11, 2019] for approval of a Development Plan in compliance with Section 35-174 of Article II, the Coastal Zoning Ordinance, on land zoned TC (Transportation Corridor), to reconfigure the intersection at San Ysidro Road, North Jameson Lane, and the northbound Highway 101 on- and offramps from two stop-controlled intersections to a roundabout. The project would include new sidewalks, roadway pavement, curb and gutter, median islands, landscaping, stormwater improvements/bioretention areas, lighting, signage, and fencing. One retaining wall of 110 feet long and 3.8 to 20.9 feet high is proposed. Grading would include approximately 650 cubic yards of cut and 1,400 cubic yards of fill. The project would require the removal of 38 trees, including 8 coast live oak trees. A total of 114 replacement trees are proposed; Case No. 19CDP-00000-00098 [application filed on July 11, 2019] for a Coastal Development Permit in compliance with Section 35-169 of Article II, the Coastal Zoning Ordinance on land zoned TC, for improvements described under 19DVP-00000-00030, above; and; Accept the Addendum (dated March 2020) to the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prepared for the Caltrans Highway 101 HOV project (including the EIR dated August 26, 2014, revised EIR dated October 27, 2017, and EIR Addendum dated June 1, 2018) (the EIR) pursuant to the State Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as there are no new significant environmental impacts as a result of this project. The EIR found potentially significant and unmitigable (Class I) effects on the environment for project-specific and cumulative Visual Resource impacts and Transportation/Circulation impacts. The EIR found potentially significant but mitigable (Class II) effects on the environment in the following categories: Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Noise, Paleontology, and Water Quality.
This project site is located at the intersection of San Ysidro Road, North Jameson Lane, and the northbound Highway 101 on- and off-ramps in the Montecito Community Plan Area, First Supervisorial District. All documents associated with this project may be reviewed online at www.sbcountyplanning.org. To receive additional information regarding this project and/or to review the application and plans, please contact Nicole Lieu by email at nlieu@countyofsb.org or by phone at (805) 884-8068. This project site is located at the intersection of San Ysidro Road, North Jameson Lane, and the northbound Highway 101 on- and off-ramps in the Montecito Community Plan Area, First Supervisorial District. The Montecito Planning Commission hearing begins at 9:00 a.m. The order of items listed on the agenda is subject to change by the Montecito Planning Commission. If you wish to make a written comment on a specific agenda item, please submit your comment via email by 12:00 p.m. on the Friday prior to the commission meeting. Please submit your comment to the Montecito Planning Commission Recording Secretary at dvillalo@countyofsb.org. Your comment will be placed into the record at the Montecito Planning Commission meeting. If you wish to make verbal comments on a specific agenda item, please submit your telephone number via email by 9:00 a.m. on the day of the hearing. During the public comment portion of every item, staff will call you using the contact information provided, and you will be able to make your verbal comments via telephone (speaker phone). Please submit your contact information to the Montecito Planning Commission Recording Secretary at dvillalo@countyofsb.org. If you are watching the live stream of the Montecito Planning Commission meeting and wish to make a general public comment or comment on a specific agenda item as it is being heard, please submit your comment, limited to 250 words or less, to the Montecito Planning Commission Recording Secretary at dvillalo@countyofsb.org. Every effort will be made to read your comment into the record, but some comments may not be read due to time limitations. Comments received after an agenda item will be made part of the record if received prior to the end of the meeting. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this hearing, please contact the Hearing Support Staff at (805) 568-2000. Notification at least 48 hours prior to the hearing will enable the Hearing Support Staff to make reasonable arrangements.
COUNTY OF SANTA BARBARA MONTECITO PLANNING COMMISSION
• The Voice of the Village •
MONTECITO JOURNAL
23
