Blog Archives

March 11 – 17, 2020

Highlights this week:

BRATTON… back soon, really!… GREENSITE…on yet another oversized luxury development. KROHN… on election results. STEINBRUNER… thankful for the votes. PATTON… UCSC strike… EAGAN…Sub Cons and Deep Cover JENSEN… on Emma… UNIVERSAL GRAPEVINE GUEST LINEUP. QUOTES…”QUARANTINE”



A GENUINE KITCHEN BROTHERS PROJECT. Raymond Kitchen built most of this abalone shell, stone, and concrete “temple” in 1947. Dr. Stoller ,who did mushroom fertilizer research, finished the structure in 1954. According to John Chases book, Kitchen got the idea from a postcard he received from India. This temple is at 1211 Fair Avenue.

photo credit: Covello & Covello Historical photo collection.

Additional information always welcome: email

Back home, but taking it easy for another week, Bruce is gearing up to be back to his usual Brattoning soon. We sure have missed him, so watch this space!

PROGRESS? When I picked this week’s historic photo, I wanted to check up on it.

This is what you see when you google 1211 Fair Avenue and pick “street view”. It makes me very sad that I missed going by there and seeing that house! I’ve been reading up on the Kitchen brothers – truly fascinating! They built their houses at night in the moonlight, in part because of a penchant for eastern mysticism, and only in part because they didn’t have the necessary permits… Imagine that today! [Gunilla]

March 9th 2020

On Removing A Watermark

Over 50 residents filled the room at the Oblates of Saint Joseph for a public meeting on yet another large-scale development coming our way. The proposed project of 100 units, if approved, will occupy a 3- acre site, the former home of Gateway School on Eucalyptus Avenue, a cul de sac off Pelton Avenue, opposite the Monarch Butterfly site in Lighthouse Field. The upbeat tone of the developer was not matched by most of the residents in attendance, including yours truly. 

The developers, Oppidan Investment Corporation from San Jose have 6 such projects around the country. This would be the 4th on a Catholic campus. The Oblates would continue to own the property. Residents would not own but would lease the units and a different entity from the developer would be the operator. 

This project is planned as a senior complex although the developer did not know the age cutoff. It already has a name: The Watermark at Santa Cruz. Of the 100 units, 15 are for independent living, 62 for assisted living and 19 for memory care. Out of the 100 units, 4 are slated to be “affordable.” Despite a projected staff of 20, there are only 64 parking spaces planned with delivery trucks directed to use Eucalyptus Avenue, a quiet street of single-family homes with little traffic. The site is not only zoned R1 or single family but also lies within the West Cliff Drive Overlay District and the Coastal Zone Overlay District, both of which have specific protections. It will need a Special Use Permit plus a Historical Alteration Permit.  Despite all this, the city planner in attendance thought it might be CEQA exempt. I asked how many heritage trees are earmarked for removal but the project Landscape Architect didn’t know. 

In fact the Investment Corporation didn’t seem to know much about Santa Cruz except that it is the perfect place for their project, which I interpreted as it will make a lot of money. They waxed on about the delights of seniors thriving in the warm California sun. More than one of us exchanged looks, which were unmistakable as: “don’t they know about the fog?” Apparently not, since they presented with pride the plan for a small vineyard onsite.

While Father Mathew of the Oblates, who has been in Santa Cruz for 1 year (17 years with the Oblates order) talked about this being about “care for the dignity of all human beings” I have a sneaking suspicion that it really is about care for the elderly wealthy. The developers encouraged us to check out a similar Oppidan project being built in Napa, which I did. The Watermark at Napa Valley is larger (173 units on 5.8 acres) with a higher percentage of independent living units, about 40% whereas the Santa Cruz version has 15%. In Napa, leased units for independent living start at $4,000 a month for 700 square feet, assisted living starts at $6,295 per month and memory care starts at $7,195 per month. New residents will pay a one-time membership fee ranging from $30,000 to $60,000. For all this you get three dining area options, courtyard gardens and gathering spaces, a fitness center, salon, theater, spa, wine bar, coffee bar and pizza oven.

I didn’t have to do mental arithmetic to know these are not meant for the likes of me. Nor for any of the hard working or retired local seniors I know. Similar to most of the developments in Santa Cruz city, they are meant for the well off who don’t yet live here. If you are tired of hearing the whine of “we need more housing” rather than the real need, which is Section 8 and affordable housing, check out the rents and sale price of the plethora of housing already approved, underway or planned for the city 

While memory care and assisted living are unmet needs, especially for the working class, we should not be guilt-tripped into providing luxury resorts for wealthy seniors. Especially not one of this size, imposed on a neighborhood of single-family homes, opposite the overwintering site of a monarch butterfly grove. One gets the distinct feeling that we who live here don’t matter any more. 

Gillian Greensite is a long time local activist, a member of Save Our Big Trees and the Santa Cruz chapter of IDA, International Dark Sky Association    Plus she’s an avid ocean swimmer, hiker and lover of all things wild.


March 10, 2020

Election results

Former Mayors Krohn, Fitzmaurice, Weed, Beiers and Laird

In the aftermath of March 3rd primary election, Councilmember Drew Glover is currently down by about 2200 votes, and I am losing to the “yes” money-crowd by around 1400. There are 9,000-10,000 votes left to count in the city of Santa Cruz.  After everything is tallied I am holding out hope that we will prevail. Other good news, it looks like Cyndi Dawson and Stacey Falls will gain seats on the Democratic Central Committee, 3rd District (city), and Nora Hochman looks like a good shot to get a seat too in the 1st District; Annrae Angel is headed to a run-off in the Superior Court judgeship race and our hope in that one is that there are currently over 11,000 “under votes” (voters who left it blank) and third place finisher Jack Gordon (14,000 votes) just might endorse Annrae; and finally, Adam Bolaños Scow is winning for second place in the 20th Congressional District primary over the Republican in the city of Santa Cruz, but he is down by over 14,000 votes district-wide. Lots more votes are still to be counted!

“Cops Off Campus, COLA in my Bank Account”
That was the chant heard up and down the state last week following the firing of 80 UCSC graduate student workers. On March 5th, there was a day of solidarity with actions on all 10 UC campuses demanding the fired graduate student TAs be reinstated. Grad Student leader, Stephen David Engel wrote to the Chancellor on March 9th observing how the strike is not winding down at UCSC, but spreading to other campuses. “Grads at Santa Barbara have gone on full strike. Grads at Davis and San Diego are on grading strike. Dozens of departments at Berkeley and Los Angeles are strike-ready, and more are following their lead. Four other campuses are organizing and starting to catch up.” Although things might slow down (campus closure?) because of the Corona Virus, grad students have no intention of letting up off the gas pedal in their demands for a cost of living adjustment (Cola).

Professor Drafts Open Letter Directed Toward UCSC Chancellor, Cindy Larive
I’ve known Ronnie Lipschutz almost since he arrived to the UCSC campus in 1990. He is a credible voice on how we–the campus and community–arrived at this crisis point wrapped tightly in the overlapping issues of affordable housing, educational quality, homelessness, and the notion of shared governance. I print Ronnie’s letter in its entirety because it is a bright light explaining the complex and difficult situation the Town-Gown currently finds itself.

February 20, 2020
To: Chancellor Cynthia Larive, Provost & EVC Lori Kletzer
From: Ronnie Lipschutz


I write this letter as an individual faculty member who has been at UCSC since 1990.  I am not representing any faculty group, department or Academic Senate Committee. It is my own assessment after 30 years at this campus.

I attended the Academic Senate meeting on Wednesday, February 19, and felt a growing sense of dismay as I listened to your presentations and your responses to questions from the floor.  I was especially dismayed by EVC Kletzer’s repeated statement that she did not know what would happen after the Friday midnight deadline issued to the striking TAs to turn in Fall grades.  Nor was I reassured by her state position that, should a shortage of qualified TAs follow, departments and faculty are responsible for dealing with problems of enrollments, class capacity, teaching and workload. While I am aware that such decisions are generally made “locally,” this response a rather disingenuous one and ignores the fact that the present situation is a consequence of Administration decisions and actions taken over the past decade. Over that time, the Administration has paid little heed to either Senate or faculty warnings about the lack of funding to support new initiatives, such as graduate growth, Silicon Valley and others.  Now the faculty is being asked to address the results of 20 years of poor administration, planning and judgement.  

I will not belabor this last point except to point out that the increase in undergraduate enrollments since 2000—which have greatly exacerbated the local housing crisis—have also required growing graduate student enrollment to teach them, without having in hand the necessary resources to support the latter.  Generally, the formula was something like the following: undergraduate growth would bring in the tuition required to fund teaching while graduate growth would facilitate research and recognition which, in turn, would provide the extramural research funds and private donations that would support such growth.

Moreover, so far as I can recall, during those two decades, a number of strategic academic plans were prepared explaining that such growth was necessary for the glory of UCSC, without any transparent, public explanation of how the necessary funding was to be procured. This hallucinatory vision became dogma ten years ago when UCOP offered “rebenching” funds in exchange for a new “graduate growth” initiative. These funds were accepted with in full recognition that they were insufficient to support the new FTEs and graduate students coming to campus.  

I will not repeat here the many assurances that were offered by the Administration about how such growth would be achieved—those are available in the many documents and studies, none of which clearly explained how this would be financed.  And, until the TA strike, the Administration continued to blithely assume continued undergraduate and graduate growth as necessary from both financial and branding perspectives. Needless to say, we are now reaping the whirlwind. The Administration appears poised to use the TA strike as a pretext for reducing graduate enrollments to levels that can be funded given available resources.  If this is the plan, it is an extremely cynical one.  

Furthermore, to put the onus on faculty for dealing with the resulting crisis is even more cynical.  I do not blame you for this situation; it is the result of two decades of administrative ineptness and opacity as mentioned above.  But to shift the burden of coping to faculty, who will have to scramble to adapt, and undergraduates, who will be shut out of necessary classes and receive a degraded education, is inexcusable.  Finally, to announce that yet another committee will be established to consider the contradictions is simply kicking the can down the road. We all know that such committees tend to make reasonable recommendations that cannot be funded, and that their reports end up on a (metaphorical) shelf somewhere, to be ignored the next time a similar problem arises.

Which leads to the fiction of “shared governance.”  Somehow, there is a wide (mis)perception that this means joint management between administration and faculty.  Of course, it means no such thing: the Administration decides what it wants to do and then consults with the Faculty Senate for comments (with objections routinely ignored). Over the past decade, there were ample warnings from faculty that the graduate growth initiative was unsupportable, but these were simply dismissed with the proviso that “we will take care of it.”  So, perhaps you should take care of this, rather than shifting the onus onto the faculty.

If this letter sounds bitter, it is—very bitter. For 30 years, I participated in what was a promising and exciting experiment and that has been transformed from gold to dross.  I am retiring at the end of June and so none of this matters very much to me in practical terms. But it matters greatly to undergraduates, whose credentials may well be very tarnished by this fiasco, to the graduate students, who were made promises that have been broken repeatedly and many of whom have, at best, a future career of “freeway flying” in store, and to faculty and staff, who have to bear the burden of the Administration’s generally inept administration.  We have ethical obligations to our students and, if we cannot fulfill them, we would do better not to make empty promises to them in the first place.

Yours sincerely,

Ronnie Lipschutz

Professor of Politics, 1990-2020
Provost, Rachel Carson College, 2012-2018

(Chris Krohn is a father, writer, activist, and was on the Santa Cruz City Councilmember from 1998-2002. Krohn was Mayor in 2001-2002. He’s been running the Environmental Studies Internship program at UC Santa Cruz for the past 14 years. He was elected the the city council again in November of 2016, after his kids went off to college. His current term ends in 2020.

Email Chris at


While I did not gather enough votes to win the public service job of County Supervisor, I am very grateful for the trust that one in three voters placed in my abilities and conviction to be a responsive leader with fresh ideas for solutions to the County’s problems. I met wonderful people I would not otherwise know, and will continue to work to serve the Community to the best of my ability.

Thank you for that rich experience. I am honored and humbled.

The race for County Supervisor in District 2 is done. I got nearly one-third of the votes. Not enough to win, but I did win by making many new acquaintances, and gaining more knowledge and experience.

In pondering the outcome and process, I have to wonder how genuine are the claims that Santa Cruz County politics supports women in government? It certainly did not feel that way from the Democratic side of the show, or the local unions. None of the unions invited me to speak to their groups and in fact, most made their endorsements even before the nominations closed.

The Women’s Democratic Committee refused to let me speak, as did the Democratic Committees with the exception of the Pajaro Valley Cesar Chavez Committee (only because the Pajaronian published the meeting was open to the public).

Here is what Mike Rotkin, leader of the Democratic Women’s Committee, wrote me when I simply asked to be able to participate in speaking to the group, not asking for any endorsement at all:

Dear Becky Steinbruner,

The charter and by-laws of all of the chartered democratic clubs, including the Democratic Women’s Club of Santa Cruz County do not allow us to endorse non Democratic candidates, so I am sorry, our forum is not open to your participation as you are not a registered Democrat.

Mike Rotkin
Program Chair

Conversely, the Republican Women’s Committee invited me to speak to their group. I did not ask for any endorsement, and was treated with the utmost of respect and consideration. The Republican Committee also invited me to speak, and again, I did not request any endorsements for my non-partisan candidacy. However, the Republican Committee did endorse me. That seemed to anger many people, without knowing any of the details, or recognizing that I am registered “Independent” and was running for a non-partisan office.
Let me ask you this: Are the Santa Cruz County politics hypocritical and reactionary? Do the actions of the Democrats really match what the group says they support? It seems to me that the Democrats have behaved like a reactionary and ill-informed junior high click, and this was born out in the Sentinel Letter to the Editor urging voters NOT to vote for me simply because of political associations of one of the legions of people helping me.

Anyone who knows Kris Kirby knows that she is a hard-working, honest and very generous person who cares about the community. She was one of many, many people who worked to help me, and I was honored to have her help. The letter-writer refused to meet with me for discussion, as did a member of the Cabrillo College governing board when I repeatedly asked…their answer was NO! (in one case, the response was very rude).

Sand box politics…what a disappointment.

This Wednesday, March 11, the California Coastal Commission will consider Agenda item #W22b, granting a consolidated permit application 3-20-0014 to Soquel Creek Water District for the PureWater Soquel Project. This permit would streamline the permitting required for this energy-intensive project to inject 1.3 million gallons of treated sewage water daily into the groundwater drinking supply for the MidCounty area. Rather than individual jurisdictions of Santa Cruz County, and cities of Santa Cruz and Capitola reviewing permit applications, The Coastal Commission will consider a consolidated permit under the Coastal Act.

I am asking that you please send a letter to the Coastal Commission today to protest the Project based on energy requirements that are not sustainable and Project components that would hold water supplies hostage to overseas equipment and technology suppliers.

Instead, the area’s water supply needs can be better supported by continued conservation and regional water transfers for which infrastructure is already in place. This will support better environmental stewardship and sustainability, while ensuring dependable water supplies during emergencies and Public Safety Power Shutoff (PSPS) events.

This is in alignment with the City of Santa Cruz 2015 Water Supply Advisory Committee recommendations for secure and environmentally-sound regional water supply and storage solutions.

Please send your written comment on Item #W22b as soon as possible, and before March 10, to Ryan Moroney <>

Attend the Coastal Commission public hearing on Wednesday, March 11 at the Hilton in Scotts Valley (6001 La Madrona Drive ) near Highway 17.

Here is a link to the staff report

Here is a link to the exhibits

Thank you very much.

The Soquel Creek Water District Board often schedules important issues to be heard on Election Night. Such was the case on March 3 when the Board not only approved spending $6.2 million for the design of first phase of the treatment plants to inject millions of gallons of treated sewage water into the Midcounty drinking water supply, but also to make rate payers fund yet another trip to Washington, D.C. for Board and staff to glad-hand.

The Board insisted these are very necessary trips and must be made in order to secure additional funding for the expensive and environmentally damaging PureWater Soquel Project. It does not seem to matter that the ratepayers are already paying $45,000/year for Capital Edge lobbyists to do this very work.

There were nine consultants in the audience of the Election Night Board meeting. I was the only member of the public not affiliated with one of the District’s cheerleading Sub-Committees who attended and spoke. Board Chair Bruce Daniels refused to allow me more than 2 minutes to speak, even when I asked respectfully. When I continued reading from a legal sworn declaration by General Manager Ron Duncan about how the cut-off date for the Project expenses was February 29, 2020, a staff member unplugged my microphone. Wow. Some transparency.

Ka-ching, ka-ching, ka-ching.

Every year, the County Administrative Officer (CAO) presents a mid-year financial report to the Board of Supervisors. This Tuesday, March 10, Carlos Palacios will give that report sometime after 1:30pm. This is a very telling report, and often presents a more realistic picture of the County’s finances than what is given later in June at the Budget Hearings. The real report is in Item #17 that follows this somewhat rosy report but states the County needs to sell bonds because of a looming deficit.

Here is the link to the rosy report in Agenda Item #16

Here is some info from the actual Report:

  • Sales tax revenues are up nearly $3 million
  • Property tax delinquency rates are slightly higher
  • Transient Occupancy Tax is up by $81,676, now totaling over $5.5 million
  • The Cannabis industry has brought in over $3.7 million in tax revenue

Here is a quote regarding expenditures:
“For the first seven months of the fiscal year, the County has expended 50.00% of the total updated budgeted General Fund expenditures of $585,219,288. Salaries and Benefits are the county’s largest expense reflecting 56.5% of the budget that has been spent as of the end of the first seven months of the fiscal year which is reasonable compared to the budget. At the end of the first seven months in the prior 2018-19 fiscal year, 51.45% of the expenditure budget had been spent.”

Now, look at this report in Item #17….asking to set a public hearing on March 24 to sell bonds to finance the County budget’s anticipated deficit:

Continued Budget Shortfalls Anticipated.
Looking ahead, the General Fund is expected to meet its obligations for FY 2020-21 through further reductions to department projections. However, due to some declining revenues in the current year and continuing through FY 2024-25, or remaining flat, the General Fund is unlikely to meet its obligations without new or increased revenues and/or major cost reductions that could potentially impact programs and services. Based on updated projections for average expenditures and slowly declining revenue growth, the annual budget shortfall is $3-$7 million but it could be as high as $8-$12 million if prior year savings are not achieved and revenues stagnate or decline further. The five-year forecast is provided below.

Rising Retirement Rates Drive Costs.
The primary cost driver in the next five years is the continued increased cost of retirement due to rising rates which is facing all agencies invested in CALPERS. Retirement rates are anticipated to double by FY 2024- 25 and grow from $33 million to $81 million since 2013-14. The General Fund net cost increase is anticipated to grow from $24 million to $58 million since 2013-14. Rates have been impacted primarily by (1) the loss of investment earnings during the Great Recession, (2) decreases in projected future investment earnings from 7.75% to 7.0%, (3) changing demographics.

I’ll be back with the link to that March 24 Bond sale hearing.

Write the Supervisor with your thoughts.

I think it is important to attend the meeting because what is said, and what is printed for the public record, sometimes do not match.

This Thursday, March 12, you can find out what the University is planning to do to house the thousands of new students enrolled. We can follow the good example that the City of Davis and the County of Yolo set with UC Davis and negotiate a win-win agreement, or we can follow our old pathway of lawsuits that just make the attorneys richer and do not solve anything.

Take a look at what Davis did: City of Davis, Yolo County and UC Davis Agree to Memorandum of Understanding on Partnership and Growth

Attend one of the meetings, and submit written comment if you can

Becky Steinbruner is a 30+ year resident of Aptos. She has fought for water, fire, emergency preparedness, and for road repair. She just ran for Second District County Supervisor and got nearly 30% of the votes.

Email Becky at


#71 / Why Are They Having So Much Fun?

I had to laugh, recently, when a friend who teaches at the University of California, Santa Cruz (the locals call it UCSC) told me about a comment allegedly made by a city resident, someone who lives near the entrance to the UCSC campus.

A wildcat strike by graduate student Teaching Assistants has disrupted life on the campus quite significantly during the last month or so – and nearby neighbors have also been impacted. Among other things, traffic to and from UCSC has, periodically, been completely blocked, and those who live in the neighborhood have had traffic-related frustrations. Check these photos to get the flavor. If you are a local, of course, you may well have had experience with strike-related traffic disruptions yourself:

Well, here is the remark, supposedly made by a neighbor who was impacted by the strike, and with this remark apparently made in a rather accustatory tone of voice:

Why are they having so much fun?
What made me laugh was my recollection of what Hannah Arendt said about revolution, in her wonderful book, On Revolution. When fundamental changes are being fought for, said Arendt, one common experience is a spontaneous erruption of “public happiness,” an almost giddy realization that we are not alone, and isolated, but that we are, in fact, as I so frequently say, “together in this life.” It is not by chance that our Declaration of Independence says that we hold it to be self-evident that all persons are created equal, and that we all have the unalienable right to “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”

Why are they having so much fun? Because there is nothing more energizing and more empowering – more happiness producing – than working together to change the world.

That the strikers and demonstrators are “having fun” is a pretty good sign that significant and even “revolutionary” changes may be coming to UCSC – and perhaps to the UC System as a whole, since strike support activities are spreading to other campuses.

Yes, I really laughed when I heard that comment! It’s lots of fun to change the world. What a concept!!

Gary Patton is a former Santa Cruz County Supervisor (20 years) and an attorney for individuals and community groups on land use and environmental issues. The opinions expressed are Mr. Patton’s. You can read and subscribe to his daily blog at

Email Gary at


EAGAN’S SUBCONSCIOUS COMICS. Classic peeks inside our secret places…maybe?

EAGAN’S DEEP COVER. See Eagan’s comic down a few pages. As always, at you will find his most recent  Deep Cover, the latest installment from the archives of Subconscious Comics, and the ever entertaining Eaganblog

Lisa writes: “You my never think of a Jane Austen novel as excoriating, but her fourth novel, Emma, bristles with savage social satire on the idleness of the upper classes. The savvy and stylish new movie adaptation of Emma captures the bite of Austen’s ironic asperity, as well as the beauty of her world, this week at Lisa Jensen Online Express ( ” Lisa has been writing film reviews and columns for Good Times since 1975.



UNIVERSAL GRAPEVINE. Each and every Tuesday from 7:00-8:00 p.m. I host Universal Grapevine on KZSC 88.1 fm. or on your computer, (live only and archived for two weeks… (See next paragraph) and go to WWW.KZSC.ORG. Peter Klotz-Chamberlin from the Resource Center for Non Violence guests on February 4. After which Nancy Macy who is  Environmental Committee Chair of the Valley Womens Club talks about PG&E and other problems. Jean Brocklebank and Michael Lewis will talk about our Santa Cruz Public library issues on Feb 11. Distinguished Artists Series founder John Orlando and pianist Lembit Beecher guest on March 3. OR…if you just happen to miss either of the last two weeks of Universal Grapevine broadcasts go here You have to listen to about 4 minutes of that week’s KPFA news first, then Grapevine happens. Do remember, any and all suggestions for future programs are more than welcome so tune in, and keep listening. Email me always and only at 

This is great. Better than great, this woman kicks butt!

UNIVERSAL GRAPEVINE ARCHIVES. In case you missed some of the great people I’ve interviewed in the last 9 years here’s a chronological list of some past broadcasts. Such a wide range of folks such as Nikki Silva, Michael Warren, Tom Noddy, UCSC Chancellor George Blumenthal, Anita Monga, Mark Wainer, Judy Johnson, Wendy Mayer-Lochtefeld, Rachel Goodman, George Newell, Tubten Pende, Gina Marie Hayes, Rebecca Ronay-Hazleton, Miriam Ellis, Deb Mc Arthur, The Great Morgani on Street performing, and Paul Whitworth on Krapps Last Tape. Jodi McGraw on Sandhills, Bruce Daniels on area water problems. Mike Pappas on the Olive Connection, Sandy Lydon on County History. Paul Johnston on political organizing, Rick Longinotti on De-Sal. Dan Haifley on Monterey Bay Sanctuary, Dan Harder on Santa Cruz City Museum. Sara Wilbourne on Santa Cruz Ballet Theatre. Brian Spencer on SEE Theatre Co. Paula Kenyon and Karen Massaro on MAH and Big Creek Pottery. Carolyn Burke on Edith Piaf. Peggy Dolgenos on Cruzio. Julie James on Jewel Theatre Company. Then there’s Pat Matejcek on environment, Nancy Abrams and Joel Primack on the Universe plus Nina Simon from MAH, Rob Slawinski, Gary Bascou, Judge Paul Burdick, John Brown Childs, Ellen Kimmel, Don Williams, Kinan Valdez, Ellen Murtha, John Leopold, Karen Kefauver, Chip Lord, Judy Bouley, Rob Sean Wilson, Ann Simonton, Lori Rivera, Sayaka Yabuki, Chris Kinney, Celia and Peter Scott, Chris Krohn, David Swanger, Chelsea Juarez…and that’s just since January 2011. 


Democratic institutions form a system of quarantine for tyrannical desires.
~Friedrich Nietzsche

The vast distances that separate the stars are providential. Beings and worlds are quarantined from one another. The quarantine is lifted only for those with sufficient self-knowledge and judgment to have safely traveled from star to star.
~Carl Sagan

Unhappiness can be like a virus spreading from one person, to the next person, to the next one and so on. When someone is mean or rude to you, do not let their unhappiness infect your own life. If you are the unhappy one, please quarantine yourself so you do not infect others!
~Jennifer O’Neill

The way that worms and viruses spread on the Internet is not that different from the way they spread in the real world, and the way you quarantine them is not that different, either.
~David Ulevitch

COLUMN COMMUNICATIONS. Subscriptions: Subscribe to the Bulletin! You’ll get a weekly email notice the instant the column goes online. (Anywhere from Monday afternoon through Thursday or sometimes as late as Friday!), and the occasional scoop. Always free and confidential. Even I don’t know who subscribes!!

Snail Mail: Bratton Online
82 Blackburn Street, Suite 216
Santa Cruz, CA 95060

Direct email:
Direct phone: 831 423-2468
All Technical & Web details: Gunilla Leavitt @