It is always interesting to see how misinformation propagates in a town like Santa Barbara. One of the myths being spread (I suppose by people who get their news from only one source) about the lightblueline project is that this would somehow not be allowed because of the MUTCD—the national guidelines for creating traffic control devices.
Actually, the lightblueline is fully compliant with MUTCD guidelines for street decorations. And we have a traffic engineer, someone who has served on the national committee that reviews the MUTCD (formerly a City employee) who is willing to testify to this compliance.
The MUTCD actually has very little to offer in terms of guidance for street decorations. What guidance it does provide shows that lightblueline is fully compliant.
Note to people writing letters to the MUTCD: The lightblueline color is not blue, but rather “light blue” a color unrestricted by the MUTCD. The design is decorative, not linear. You can find the design on the lbline.org website. And the placement does not conflict with any of the actual street markings used as traffic control devices.
And again: lightblueline is a public art project proposed and funded by local residents, which received the same scrutiny and procedural review as any other public art project.
Note to hopeful city council members (and newspaper editors)… an ounce of research can save a pound of chagrin.
Thursday, October 25, 2007
Thursday, October 18, 2007
Back room Ranting: not simply misleading, but untrue
It has come to my attention that the local News Press Blog and at least one wannabe City Council candidate continue to rant about the lightblueline approval as a "back room" deal made by the City Council. This is absolutely untrue. As the Chair of the Historic Landmarks Commission noted when asked about this "The project went through the same process as any other public arts project."
It took several months of public city arts committee meetings (none of which the Blog attended) before the lightblueline effort was approved (unanimously and enthusiastically) at that level and thus ready to be considered by the City Council. The City Council then approved the project (6 to 1.... guess who the Blog interviewed). Then the project was ready to go before the Historic Landmarks Commission for the installations inside the historic district. The HLC also approved the lightblueline in a public meeting.
The lightblueline was and remains a project of Santa Barbara residents, not a "City-sponsored" effort. Only when the City Council approved this was the project able to coordinate with city staff to plan its execution. This is, of course, true for any public art effort.
That the News Press Blog neglects its responsibility to attend public meetings even though it wants to report on them (it did not even attend the City Council meeting when the lightblueline was approved) is disconcerting. That it neglects its professional responsibility to report facts that come to its attention is unconscionable. That it would support for city council a candidate the only platform of whom is a complaint against a News Press Blog-created fictional "back room" process is...priceless.
It took several months of public city arts committee meetings (none of which the Blog attended) before the lightblueline effort was approved (unanimously and enthusiastically) at that level and thus ready to be considered by the City Council. The City Council then approved the project (6 to 1.... guess who the Blog interviewed). Then the project was ready to go before the Historic Landmarks Commission for the installations inside the historic district. The HLC also approved the lightblueline in a public meeting.
The lightblueline was and remains a project of Santa Barbara residents, not a "City-sponsored" effort. Only when the City Council approved this was the project able to coordinate with city staff to plan its execution. This is, of course, true for any public art effort.
That the News Press Blog neglects its responsibility to attend public meetings even though it wants to report on them (it did not even attend the City Council meeting when the lightblueline was approved) is disconcerting. That it neglects its professional responsibility to report facts that come to its attention is unconscionable. That it would support for city council a candidate the only platform of whom is a complaint against a News Press Blog-created fictional "back room" process is...priceless.
Tuesday, September 4, 2007
Buyer Be(una)ware
In the ever-moving target of accusations and arguments leveled at the lightblueline public education environmental art project the one that happened last was the most improbable: the idea that a temporary public art installation could change property values, up or down, in Santa Barbara.
Of course, the argument was made only in the “lowering property values” vein, although the exact same logic would have property values rising on the other side of the line (where most of Santa Barbara’s real estate happens to be). To begin with, the lightblueline project was elevated from an art project to some form of civic policy. By allowing the lightblueline to show residents a hypothetical new coastline in five hundred years, in order to help them realize that we have a lot to lose if we do not stop human-induced climate change in the coming decade, the city, or so the argument went, was announcing new rules for real estate transactions. Or, at least, the city was authorizing this line as a new vulnerability that property owners would need to figure into their plans.
Actually, all the city did was follow its own rules to allow local resident artists to display a piece of public art. The city made no policy decision/announcement at all. Residents are free to look at the art from all sides and make up their own minds how this information might require more thinking or conversations about climate change. Those who deny the science of climate change are free to laugh. Lightblueline is just as likely to help get the Mariners into the World Series than it would be in changing property values in Santa Barbara.
As NPR and the LA Times and others noted, the impact of the “property values” argument was to reinforce the perception of Santa Barbara as a city fixated on the real-estate bubble that has turned a three-bedroom, one-bathroom house into a winning lottery ticket. The notion that public education and awareness is bad for business and should be stopped leads to some seriously indefensible conclusions. If withholding environmental science information is a legitimate practice in the name of profit, then what other information should we withhold in order to keep the property values sky high? What else can we not tell the buyer so that they feel better about the deal?
The real irony is that lightblueline is working as hard as its volunteers can to save not only property values, but actual PROPERTY down by the waterfront. The whole point is to help coastal cities become more involved in the solutions to climate change so that their long-term sustainability is more secure. Realtors and property holders might be better served (in the long run) by joining lightblueline. All are welcome. I should note that a number of realtors have written me in support of lightblueline. So we will move on together.
Of course, the argument was made only in the “lowering property values” vein, although the exact same logic would have property values rising on the other side of the line (where most of Santa Barbara’s real estate happens to be). To begin with, the lightblueline project was elevated from an art project to some form of civic policy. By allowing the lightblueline to show residents a hypothetical new coastline in five hundred years, in order to help them realize that we have a lot to lose if we do not stop human-induced climate change in the coming decade, the city, or so the argument went, was announcing new rules for real estate transactions. Or, at least, the city was authorizing this line as a new vulnerability that property owners would need to figure into their plans.
Actually, all the city did was follow its own rules to allow local resident artists to display a piece of public art. The city made no policy decision/announcement at all. Residents are free to look at the art from all sides and make up their own minds how this information might require more thinking or conversations about climate change. Those who deny the science of climate change are free to laugh. Lightblueline is just as likely to help get the Mariners into the World Series than it would be in changing property values in Santa Barbara.
As NPR and the LA Times and others noted, the impact of the “property values” argument was to reinforce the perception of Santa Barbara as a city fixated on the real-estate bubble that has turned a three-bedroom, one-bathroom house into a winning lottery ticket. The notion that public education and awareness is bad for business and should be stopped leads to some seriously indefensible conclusions. If withholding environmental science information is a legitimate practice in the name of profit, then what other information should we withhold in order to keep the property values sky high? What else can we not tell the buyer so that they feel better about the deal?
The real irony is that lightblueline is working as hard as its volunteers can to save not only property values, but actual PROPERTY down by the waterfront. The whole point is to help coastal cities become more involved in the solutions to climate change so that their long-term sustainability is more secure. Realtors and property holders might be better served (in the long run) by joining lightblueline. All are welcome. I should note that a number of realtors have written me in support of lightblueline. So we will move on together.
Thursday, August 30, 2007
Champion of Ignorance
When the News Press reported that the oceans would rise seven meters in “about ten years” they did two things. First, they scared their own readers, apparently by choice, and second they put these words into my mouth. I never said anything like this, and never would. So why did the News Press chose to frighten its readers and use a campaign of misinformation against the lightblueline art project?
Perhaps they read the Independent and the Daily Sound and realized that the responsible journalistic positions had already been taken. After all they waited several days to report the City Council approval of the lightblueline. But then, they chose to not attend the council meeting. They also chose not to attend the various public city arts committee meetings where the lightblueline project was scrutinized and then unanimously approved. Instead they offered up opinions about lightblueline being a pet project on some hidden inside track. Then there was the twelve thousand dollars the city put up to pay the overtime for street workers to help protect the safety of the hundreds of volunteers who would be painting the line. That’s about one percent of the City’s art budget.
Next there was the “soliciting donations” accusation. As though no other public charity in Santa Barbara had ever done this before. The “link to a private website” was another curious position. Almost all of the science education content in the US is served up by non-governmental sources. Perhaps the News Press would prefer that the city hire an “information tzar” to monitor the content of the local non-profit websites. Who knows what the Santa Barbara Museum of Art might post next? When the Historic Landmarks Commission approved the lightblueline there was some hope that the actual message of the project still might rise above the steady stream of misinformation from the News Press.
However, the News Press had no intention of fulfilling its role in the public sphere. Any self-respecting newspaper would have looked into the actual science of global warming and at least make a gesture to talk to local scientists about this. Lightblueline gave the News Press contact information for several prominent UCSB experts, none of which the paper chose to interview.
Human induced climate change is the single largest challenge that human society has posed for itself in our history on this planet. We have about ten years to mitigate the effects of global warming by cutting back on our greenhouse gas emissions. This will mean sacrifices large and small from each of us. That is the reason why lightblueline was formed: to help all of us in Santa Barbara realize what we have to lose in the long term if we don’t act together in the short term.
Lightblueline is assembling a robust educational service on its website; a place for teachers, students, and the public to learn about climate change and sea-level rise. Apparently the need for this resource is more critical than we thought. For example, the whole idea that drawing the line in Santa Barbara would affect property values is based on a profound ignorance of the facts of the project and of climate change. But now ignorance has found a champion. Surely the editors of the News Press realize that this just another distraction from the real problem. What is the position of the News Press on human-induced climate change?
A big loser here is the News Press, which just wasted the remnants of its reputation in a vendetta against a volunteer-based, educational public art project. The need to come together to work against climate change grows stronger. Education will overcome ignorance. It’s simply sad that this happened in Santa Barbara. We all lose when our mediasphere has been poisoned for private reasons.
For the record, I told the News Press that sea-level rise due to inaction to stop climate change would take centuries. The real problem is that we only have a decade to protect our future waterfront.
Perhaps they read the Independent and the Daily Sound and realized that the responsible journalistic positions had already been taken. After all they waited several days to report the City Council approval of the lightblueline. But then, they chose to not attend the council meeting. They also chose not to attend the various public city arts committee meetings where the lightblueline project was scrutinized and then unanimously approved. Instead they offered up opinions about lightblueline being a pet project on some hidden inside track. Then there was the twelve thousand dollars the city put up to pay the overtime for street workers to help protect the safety of the hundreds of volunteers who would be painting the line. That’s about one percent of the City’s art budget.
Next there was the “soliciting donations” accusation. As though no other public charity in Santa Barbara had ever done this before. The “link to a private website” was another curious position. Almost all of the science education content in the US is served up by non-governmental sources. Perhaps the News Press would prefer that the city hire an “information tzar” to monitor the content of the local non-profit websites. Who knows what the Santa Barbara Museum of Art might post next? When the Historic Landmarks Commission approved the lightblueline there was some hope that the actual message of the project still might rise above the steady stream of misinformation from the News Press.
However, the News Press had no intention of fulfilling its role in the public sphere. Any self-respecting newspaper would have looked into the actual science of global warming and at least make a gesture to talk to local scientists about this. Lightblueline gave the News Press contact information for several prominent UCSB experts, none of which the paper chose to interview.
Human induced climate change is the single largest challenge that human society has posed for itself in our history on this planet. We have about ten years to mitigate the effects of global warming by cutting back on our greenhouse gas emissions. This will mean sacrifices large and small from each of us. That is the reason why lightblueline was formed: to help all of us in Santa Barbara realize what we have to lose in the long term if we don’t act together in the short term.
Lightblueline is assembling a robust educational service on its website; a place for teachers, students, and the public to learn about climate change and sea-level rise. Apparently the need for this resource is more critical than we thought. For example, the whole idea that drawing the line in Santa Barbara would affect property values is based on a profound ignorance of the facts of the project and of climate change. But now ignorance has found a champion. Surely the editors of the News Press realize that this just another distraction from the real problem. What is the position of the News Press on human-induced climate change?
A big loser here is the News Press, which just wasted the remnants of its reputation in a vendetta against a volunteer-based, educational public art project. The need to come together to work against climate change grows stronger. Education will overcome ignorance. It’s simply sad that this happened in Santa Barbara. We all lose when our mediasphere has been poisoned for private reasons.
For the record, I told the News Press that sea-level rise due to inaction to stop climate change would take centuries. The real problem is that we only have a decade to protect our future waterfront.
Thursday, August 16, 2007
If you love global warming vote for me
In today's Independent, Nick Welsh notes that the six new candidates running for City Council are all motivated in part by their opposition to lightblueline. While the idea that all six of them will need to keep up the rhetoric all the way through the election is curiously encouraging--the whole point of public art is to get people talking--such a platform is more of a plank.
The City is spending zero dollars on lightblueline, a fact all of them knew before they filed. Lightblueline is a temporary art project, and will, in any case, be gone before the next council term is up. Maybe they don't like art. They could, of course, run against the Santa Barbra Museum of Art, a much more visible, durable opponent. They could argue that a science center would be a better use of the space.
But then again, by opposing lightblueline they are also running against the science of climate change. They have joined forces with what Newsweek called "the denial machine." This means they have to spend the next three months attacking the science that NASA and NOAA and the world's top science organizations, including UCSB, consider to be the best science available. That should lead to some interesting interviews, and more conversations. Perhaps the Art Museum could be turned into flat-Earth science center.
This is the year that the US Government (the Bush Administration is hosting a summit in September on reducing greenhouse gas emissions), including the House and the Senate, and the California governor and legislature, and Santa Barbara City have all adopted measures to reduce greenhouse gases in response to the threat of human-induced climate change. Stopping climate change is a long-term sustainability issue for all coastal cities. A fitting backdrop for these six, these brave contrarians, to step up and actually support climate change, or at least support the continuing lack of public awareness of climate change. And the platform-turned-plank gets longer still.
They have a strategy. They claim a few gallons of paint decorating the city streets for a few years might lead to property value changes. Of course they don't accept the logic of their own argument: if it lowers values on one side of the line it must raise values on the other side--and guess which side has much more property? This means that art will accomplish what floods, mudslides, fires, and earthquake and tsunami risk have failed to do. Such a narrow plank to stand on.
Of course they do have a so-called newspaper on their side. A newspaper that managed to misrepresent the lightblueline project from its first "news" coverage and subsequent editorial rants. Fortunately there are a lot of other sources for news in Santa Barbara. And all of these other news sources are going to be asking real questions about the candidates and their positions. So, over the next three months we can all watch them walk the plank.
NOTE: Bob Hansen would have run anyhow, art or no art.
The City is spending zero dollars on lightblueline, a fact all of them knew before they filed. Lightblueline is a temporary art project, and will, in any case, be gone before the next council term is up. Maybe they don't like art. They could, of course, run against the Santa Barbra Museum of Art, a much more visible, durable opponent. They could argue that a science center would be a better use of the space.
But then again, by opposing lightblueline they are also running against the science of climate change. They have joined forces with what Newsweek called "the denial machine." This means they have to spend the next three months attacking the science that NASA and NOAA and the world's top science organizations, including UCSB, consider to be the best science available. That should lead to some interesting interviews, and more conversations. Perhaps the Art Museum could be turned into flat-Earth science center.
This is the year that the US Government (the Bush Administration is hosting a summit in September on reducing greenhouse gas emissions), including the House and the Senate, and the California governor and legislature, and Santa Barbara City have all adopted measures to reduce greenhouse gases in response to the threat of human-induced climate change. Stopping climate change is a long-term sustainability issue for all coastal cities. A fitting backdrop for these six, these brave contrarians, to step up and actually support climate change, or at least support the continuing lack of public awareness of climate change. And the platform-turned-plank gets longer still.
They have a strategy. They claim a few gallons of paint decorating the city streets for a few years might lead to property value changes. Of course they don't accept the logic of their own argument: if it lowers values on one side of the line it must raise values on the other side--and guess which side has much more property? This means that art will accomplish what floods, mudslides, fires, and earthquake and tsunami risk have failed to do. Such a narrow plank to stand on.
Of course they do have a so-called newspaper on their side. A newspaper that managed to misrepresent the lightblueline project from its first "news" coverage and subsequent editorial rants. Fortunately there are a lot of other sources for news in Santa Barbara. And all of these other news sources are going to be asking real questions about the candidates and their positions. So, over the next three months we can all watch them walk the plank.
NOTE: Bob Hansen would have run anyhow, art or no art.
Wednesday, August 15, 2007
Earth Scientists love the lightblueline
Although I'm still a social scientist, I've been working in a community of earth scientists, earth data providers, and geographers for almost a decade now, including leading scientists and information specialists here in Santa Barbara (Catherine Gautier, David Lea, Jim Frew, Mike Goodchild, Keith Clarke, Reg Golledge, to name just a few), and every one of them--from NASA Goddard to the Artic workshop in Seattle-- that I've talked with about lightblueline in the past year is excited and grateful about the lightblueline project.
Excited, because they really like how the message can be condensed into a simple story so that the public can realize the scope of what climate change might do in the centuries ahead. Grateful, well because they've been dedicating their lives to bring this information to the public and every time they read the news, the message is lost. It seems that the work of a thousand top scholars can barely hold its own in the press against the work of the paid skeptics.
Sure, there are a lot of new discoveries to be made, particularly in the area of regional-scale effects of climate change. The global picture has much less noise left in it.
This month, 400 scientists studying the Antarctic will convene at UCSB. Lightblueline hopes to get their opinions about the project. Not that that would hold any weight against the skeptical blogs, but it certainly will with the people of Santa Barbara who like their information straight up with a dash of fact.
It can't be said too often that lightblueline is ART. It is temporary, but then so is our chance of stopping dangerous climate change. Scientists are getting tired of shouting and not being heard. That's why they are excited about lightblueline... what's your reason?
Excited, because they really like how the message can be condensed into a simple story so that the public can realize the scope of what climate change might do in the centuries ahead. Grateful, well because they've been dedicating their lives to bring this information to the public and every time they read the news, the message is lost. It seems that the work of a thousand top scholars can barely hold its own in the press against the work of the paid skeptics.
Sure, there are a lot of new discoveries to be made, particularly in the area of regional-scale effects of climate change. The global picture has much less noise left in it.
This month, 400 scientists studying the Antarctic will convene at UCSB. Lightblueline hopes to get their opinions about the project. Not that that would hold any weight against the skeptical blogs, but it certainly will with the people of Santa Barbara who like their information straight up with a dash of fact.
It can't be said too often that lightblueline is ART. It is temporary, but then so is our chance of stopping dangerous climate change. Scientists are getting tired of shouting and not being heard. That's why they are excited about lightblueline... what's your reason?
Sunday, August 12, 2007
Pulling the City Together
For the first time in decades a major environmental crisis has actually united our squabbling political parties at the national level. While they may support a differing range of policy solutions, all of the leading candidates for president, Republican and Democrat, agree on one thing: human induced climate change is a real threat to our nation's resources and economy.
Next month President Bush will be hosting a meeting of the world's industrial nations on this very issue. Governor Schwarzenegger has put the State of California at the forefront in responding to the need to cut greenhouse gas emissions. Both of our Senators and our local Congresswoman are supporting the effort (and also leading this) to address climate change.
Our Mayor has joined with hundreds of other mayors across the nation to show that cities can take a lead in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Now our City Council together with the City's Visual Art in Public Places Committee and Historical Landmarks Commission agree: it is time to allow a public art statement on this vital issue.
Most people living in Santa Barbara grew up somewhere else. We've all settled here for a reason: Santa Barbara is a fantastic place to live. We love the waterfront and the recreation and beauty of our coastline. We may have come from a thousand other places but we share a common future: the future of Santa Barbara. The lightblueline art project is our community's way of showing we care about Santa Barbara's future. We want to help protect our waterfront resources for future generation.
When we decorate the street we challenge ourselves to get real about climate change. We stand on this possible future coastline and say to each other, "this is not the future we will leave our great-grandchildren."
Stopping global warming will not be easy. It will not be inexpensive. But the cost of not stopping global warming is far more expensive. Painting a decoration on the street announces we understand why each of us has to do our part to stop global warming. As a city we must pull together in our response to climate change. Fortunately we have real leaders on the City Council. Together we can protect Santa Barbara's future.
Next month President Bush will be hosting a meeting of the world's industrial nations on this very issue. Governor Schwarzenegger has put the State of California at the forefront in responding to the need to cut greenhouse gas emissions. Both of our Senators and our local Congresswoman are supporting the effort (and also leading this) to address climate change.
Our Mayor has joined with hundreds of other mayors across the nation to show that cities can take a lead in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Now our City Council together with the City's Visual Art in Public Places Committee and Historical Landmarks Commission agree: it is time to allow a public art statement on this vital issue.
Most people living in Santa Barbara grew up somewhere else. We've all settled here for a reason: Santa Barbara is a fantastic place to live. We love the waterfront and the recreation and beauty of our coastline. We may have come from a thousand other places but we share a common future: the future of Santa Barbara. The lightblueline art project is our community's way of showing we care about Santa Barbara's future. We want to help protect our waterfront resources for future generation.
When we decorate the street we challenge ourselves to get real about climate change. We stand on this possible future coastline and say to each other, "this is not the future we will leave our great-grandchildren."
Stopping global warming will not be easy. It will not be inexpensive. But the cost of not stopping global warming is far more expensive. Painting a decoration on the street announces we understand why each of us has to do our part to stop global warming. As a city we must pull together in our response to climate change. Fortunately we have real leaders on the City Council. Together we can protect Santa Barbara's future.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
