FIDO LAWS
At least we aren’t going to require doggie seat belts, but the city’s consideration of animal laws are another example of government being the answer to too many things. Patti Bushee hit it on the head when she observed that the city is “trying to anticipate any and all possible occurrences…and I don’t think you can legislate that way.” This certainly isn’t the only case in which the city overregulates by concentrating on everything bad that might happen, while ignoring the benefits.

COMMENT!

WATER
Is it timidity that causes the city to move so slowly on so many issues? Finding solutions for our water problems has proceeded at a snail’s pace while other entities plead with the city to move. The city’s concentration on the negative is causing it to miss many opportunities. C’mon folks, let’s get moving.

COMMENT!

COMMENT!

May 18, 2004

We got dozens of responses to the launch of this newsletter, mostly in support of our somewhat quixotic goal of bringing sense to the City Different. Here's one we liked. It's called Obituary.

Today we mourn the passing of a beloved old friend by the name of
Common Sense who has been with us for many years.
No one knows for sure how old he was since his birth records
were long ago lost in bureaucratic red tape.
He will be remembered as having cultivated such value lessons as
knowing when to come in out of the rain, why the early bird gets the
worm and that life isn't always fair.
Common Sense lived by simple, sound financial policies
(don't spend more than you earn) and reliable parenting strategies
(adults, not kids, are in charge).
His health began to rapidly deteriorate when well intentioned but
overbearing regulations were set in place.
Reports of a six-year-old boy charged with sexual harassment
for kissing a classmate; teens suspended from school
for using mouthwash after lunch; and a teacher fired
for reprimanding an unruly student, only worsened his condition.
It declined even further when schools were required to get parental
consent to administer aspirin to a student; but, could not inform the
parents when a student became pregnant and wanted to have an abortion.

Finally, Common sense lost the will to live as the Ten Commandments
became contraband; churches became businesses; and criminals received better treatment
than their victims.
Common Sense finally gave up the ghost after a woman failed to
realize that a steaming cup of coffee was hot, she spilled a bit in her lap,
and was awarded a huge settlement.
Common Sense was preceded in death by his parents, Truth and Trust,
his wife, Discretion; his daughter, Responsibility; and his son,
Reason.
He is survived by two stepbrothers; My Rights and Ima Whiner.
Not many attended his funeral because so few realized he was gone.
If you still know him pass this on, if not join the majority and do
nothing.

COMMENT!

April 4, 2004

Welcome to CommonSense SantaFe. This website is designed to get Santa Feans thinking about how this wonderful community can be the best it possibly can be. The major impetus for this effort was the recent election in which voters chose to retain all incumbent city councilors despite the problems facing our community that many feel are not being dealt with in a timely manner.
And perhaps one of the many reasons voters chose the status quo was that our local newspapers recommended no change. Thus the emergence of this new voice to cast an alternative focus on the challenges we face.
The purpose is not to vilify current council members. They all must be commended for their willingness to devote countless hours in developing solutions to better our community. But perhaps they haven’t considered all possibilities. Perhaps discussions with readers this site may initiate will help shed new light on more reasonable and effective ways to better our city.
This site is intended to be neither pro nor anti any of the interest groups currently working to influence policy in Santa Fe. The intent is to bring some Common Sense to the discussion of how our city can be better by discussing all sides of the story.

COMMENT!

THE CITY DIFFERENT 
Most of us chose to live in Santa Fe. And most of us likely made that choice based on it being different in one way or another from other places we considered. So we’re proud about living in the City Different and expect it to be different. That’s part of the allure about the town we’ve picked in which to live. So we don’t want to change it to be like all those places we decided not to live. We just want it to be the best

COMMENT!

CAMPAIGN REFORM COMMISSION
Creation of a Campaign Reform Commission was a great way for the City Council to settle its dispute with Santa Fe Grass Roots. With a good cross-section of Santa Feans, is should come up with something that will help us all.
Common Sense wants to get its two cents into the discussion. The most important requirement is to enhance informed and open debate. Please don’t try limiting debate. In the first place, it’s unconstitutional. And secondly, even if it weren’t, prohibitions are very difficult to enforce.
My point has been artfully stated by David Henderson, attorney for Santa Fe Grass Roots. He says, “When speech is unpleasant or offensive, the best remedy is usually more speech, not laws that prohibit speech. Our society was founded on the idea that citizens have the common sense and the civic responsibility to make political decisions based on the free flow of ideas rather than what may be said or how it may be said.”
As the Journal North has editorialized, political entertainment doesn’t get much better than it already is in Santa Fe. So why squelch it?

COMMENT!

April 2, 2004

IS SOMETHING ASKEW IN SANTA FE?
In many communities all incumbents seek reelection and are successful in their efforts. But maybe only in the City Different do incumbents win by big margins, without having to spend large sums of money, and then get mad at the losers. Not only were they angry, they allocated city money to investigate the people they beat. That’s a bit of a head-scratcher.

But then the losing candidates’ strategy was a bit odd too. Three of them greatly outspent their opponents, to no avail. And those three were backed by a mysterious “grassroots” organization that suddenly appeared in the final days of the election. Following the election, we learned that the “grassroots” organization had only two members. It’s hard to grow much of a lawn with only two grass roots, but they now claim to have a groundswell.

The few Santa Fe voters who went to the polls did distinguish themselves on one matter however. Normally money wins elections. But in this case, it didn’t. Money, apparently, is not what it takes to win elections in this town.
What does win elections?
- Could it be knowing how many votes are needed in a low turnout election?
- Could it be knowing where those votes are?
- Could it be intelligent discussion?
- Could it be common sense?
I’m hoping that intelligent discussion and common sense will influence Santa Feans when they cast their ballots and I’d like to help further the discourse with this Web site. The site does not have an agenda. It merely hopes to foster some common sense.

COMMENT!

April 4, 2004

ADIEU SANTA FE REVIEW

For a couple of months, Santa Feans were treated to a prolific amount of good writing and intensive research by George Johnson on his Santa Fe Review Web site. Although I didn’t always agree with what he had to say about the local political scene, the site was a valuable contribution to the dialogue that Santa Feans should be having about their chosen city.
Johnson is the author of numerous books, mostly on astronomy and quantum physics. He has announced that in order to fulfill two book contracts with major publishers, he will have to at least suspend his blogs until the books are finished. Possibly by summer, he says, we may see more from him.
The Santa Fe New Mexican mistakenly reported that the New York Times, for which Johnson free-lances articles on science, had halted his political commentary. The mistake occurred after Johnson announced that he had rescinded a political contribution upon learning that it was a violation of the New York Times ethics guidelines discouraging the taking of sides in a political contest.
The New Mexican’s confusion likely stemmed from the fact that Johnson’s two announcements were contained in the same Web posting, only two paragraphs apart. It is amazing that a newspaper could become that confused about an issue with such 1st Amendment implications.
We hope to see Johnson’s participation in this site’s dialogue. We also plan to put you in touch with other Web sites that comment on the Santa Fe scene.

COMMENT!