Public Comment
Letters to the Editor
CHEAP SHOT
Editors, Daily Planet:
Regarding Susan Parker’s recent columns about Measures A and B: This letter is not about Children’s Hospital. It is about the totally unnecessary and unjustified cheap shot of saying that the 14-year-old who wrote supporting the bond issue was being “exploited.”
Can you remember when you were 14? I can. It was a presidential election year, Eisenhower against Stevenson. I worked on the Eisenhower campaign, many of my classmates worked for Stevenson. We debated, in school and out, about the issues, including the always pertinent issue of decaying infrastructure—that was post-war, this is mid-war, but there is never enough money to repair and replace what has been worn out by heavy use. Our school, built in the 1880s, five floors, had classrooms where I could stand on a join in the floorboards, they would sink, and I could look down into the class immediately below me on another floor.
A 14-year-old is a child in some ways and an adult in others. She is old enough to work (work permits are issued starting at age 14). She is old enough to care for herself, she doesn’t need a babysitter, and she is old enough to babysit for younger children or be a caregiver for a senior citizen. She is old enough to be sent to an adult prison if she commits a crime. Having leukemia does not affect intelligence, it does not affect psychological development, it does not affect spiritual development. It may actually, like any chronic illness, increase empathy and awareness of the needs of other.
If, based on her personal experiences with hospitals, she felt that Children’s Hospital was a worthy cause, you may think she was wrong, but it is demeaning and patronizing to imply that she was manipulated, “exploited.” She had valid reasons for her decision, as someone experienced in hospitals, just as you, as a homeowner, had valid reasons for yours. She stood with her friends, just as you stood with your friends.
I think you owe the young lady a public apology, maybe even a chance to explain herself in a boxed column. The administrators of Children’s can take their lumps, including cheap shots, but a young woman who is just starting out on what we hope will be a life of civic activity deserves some respect, rather than the contempt you dished out.
Teddy Knight
•
RENT CONTROL
Editors, Daily Planet:
I think it would be worthwhile to parse Chris Kavanagh’s letter to you “explaining” his resignation from the Rent Board. He states. “Like scores of Berkeley homeowners who own or rent second residences outside Berkeley, since 2002, I rented two separate living spaces: one in Berkeley and a second space in Oakland (located a block from Berkeley).” First of all, is he a Berkeley property owner? Has he put his own money into buying a property in Berkeley? Second, Exactly how many Berkeley property owners “Own or rent” second homes in Oakland? I’ll buy owning a second home in Tahoe, Pinecrest, Strawberry, et al, but Oakland?
“I lived in my Berkeley unit to comply with the city’s residency requirement to hold public office. I rented my Oakland unit because I did not wish to give up a beautiful living space that I had originally acquired through a friend before I was elected to the Rent Board in 2002.” How exactly do you “acquire” a property which you do not own? Through illegal sublet, subterfuge? And then, to resist eviction by a family who bought the place to occupy it with their kids and extended family because it is your “place of residence”? All the while claiming that you actually live in Berkeley, perhaps at the post office?
Then he puts the capper on it: Kavanagh went on to say in his letter that during parts of 2006 and 2007 he had to “involuntarily” vacate his Berkeley unit “and was unable to technically comply with Berkeley’s residency requirement. This latter period of time is the reason for the current legal allegations that have been filed against me.” Pure prevarication. Politicians might call it spin.
Folks, this is exactly what’s wrong with Berkeley’s rent control system, and Oakland’s open-ended, yet to be litigated “Just cause eviction” measure. People “acquire” things where they have no “skin in the game” no “sweat equity,” no risk, no effort. Owners have obligations that are dependent on their tenant’s condition or status. Housing providers have no problem with helping people in need of housing, as long as the cost is shared by the general public and the cost of any entitlement is bourn in common. But let’s do this honestly and in the open, by subsidizing people who need it, not penalizing one group of people who have invested in a particular class of asset and giving entitlements to a group of people who may be better off than the people who must pay for their subsidies.
Mike Mitschang
•
GREEN TRANSIT
Editors, Daily Planet:
People who think they don’t have to worry about Bus Rapid Transit because they plan to avoid driving on Telegraph Avenue or driving downtown need to think again. The planners of BRT readily acknowledge something in meetings where they think opponents aren’t present: They plan to put BRT lines all through Berkeley. That means they plan to remove traffic lanes and many parking spaces on University, Shattuck, San Pablo, and other major thoroughfares. This boondoggle would not get many drivers out of their cars—as AC Transit’s own study confirms—but it would make traffic absolutely miserable everywhere, with drivers frustrated by congestion and delays, cars cutting through formerly quiet residential streets, and idling trucks and cars spewing out more and more polluting exhaust.
Instead of building this expensive, intrusive, and inflexible system, let’s build a fleet of smaller, more maneuverable hybrid or electric buses that serve more parts of the city more frequently—and offer convenient connections to BART. This change, coupled with a city-wide eco-pass that would substantially decrease the cost of bus travel, would get people out of their cars. And that is truly a green solution to our transit problems—as opposed to the gray solution proposed by AC Transit: more concrete and choking diesel exhaust.
Doug Buckwald
•
AERIAL SPRAYING
Editors, Daily Planet:
The aerial pesticide spraying of the Bay Area, planned to begin in Summer 2008 and continue for three to five years to fight the light brown apple moth, is a horrible idea for so many reasons. Many ingredients in the pesticides are highly toxic and no studies have been done on their long term effect. Biologists agree that eradicating the moth is impossible. Even CDFA says the moth has done no crop damage. The brown apple moth is in Hawaii—they don’t spray and there has been no crop damage there.
How can they spray and put our health at risk without getting our consent? The state claims that the spraying is safe, but I have personal accounts of numerous friends in Santa Cruz that became sick after spraying there. Please contact local, state, and federal officials to ask that CDFA immediately stop the spraying program and shift to pest management methods that are safe for people and the environment. Finally, sign the online petition (www.stopthespray.org) and watch that site for updates.
Ingrid C.L. Mackay
Alameda
•
APPLE MOTH SPRAYING
Editors, Daily Planet:
They dropped 1,600 pounds of a mixture of chemicals on 60 square miles of California’s central coast filled with organic farms and nurseries. Residents developed strep throat, asthma attacks, difficulty breathing, blurred vision, debilitating headaches, inability to concentrate and focus, body tremors, feeling of lethargy and malaise, respiratory illnesses, irregular heartbeats and menstrual cramping, an interruption in menstrual cycles and in some cases a recommencement of menstrual cycles after menopause. Pets died. Sound like a script for chemical warfare on the United States? Only it’s an inside job. U.S. chemical manufacturers refuse to reveal most of the ingredients in the aerial spraying against the apple moth that has already caused more than 600 health complaints documented by physicians along the central California Coast. However one of the chemicals did leak out, polymethylene polyphenyl isocyanate, known to exacerbate asthma and respiratory symptoms in sensitive groups according to Dr. Scott Masten with the National Institute of Health. The material data safety sheet lists its side effects as “breathlessness, severe coughing, chest discomfort, irritation of mucous membranes, and reduced pulmonary functions (reaction may be delayed 4-8 hours), may develop sensitivity, which leads to asthma-like symptoms on subsequent exposure.” If things go as the state has it planned there will be subsequent sprayings monthly for two years. At this rate in two years of monthly spraying 384,000 pounds of pesticides would be dumped in 60 square miles of the Central California Coast or 6,400 pounds on one square mile.
The spraying is slated to begin this August in much of the San Francisco Bay Area.
Blanket spraying of pesticides is not environmentally sound pest management. The state has not prepared an environmental impact report to ensure the chemical droplets are safe for humans and aquatic life. Environmental groups, who say they have broken the law have sued the state. The state is undermining the efforts of organic farmers by spraying these chemicals everywhere, on organic farms, cars, playgrounds, lawns, houses, and swimming pools. The Bush administration has been consistently undermining the EPA without regard to the checks and balances of science to protect all citizens. The Berkeley City Council will meet on Feb. 26 to hear citizen’s views of the proposed spraying. The Albany City Council has already passed a resolution against the proposed spraying. Please come to the city council meeting to voice your opinion about protecting public health. Write the governor; you state Assembly and senate representatives and California Department of Agriculture (CDFA) Secretary A.G. Kawamura to ask the CDFA immediately stop the spraying program.
Pauline Bondonno
•
THE CALL FOR PEACE
Editors, Daily Planet:
The Berkeley City Council made a courageous decision to stand up for peace and oppose the war in Iraq, representing the will of their community. This is not about protesting the Marines themselves, but the machine that recruits our youth and sends them off to fight in an illegal and immoral war in Iraq. Veterans returning from Iraq are far more likely than the civilian population to become homeless, commit suicide or other violent acts and have long-term physical and/or mental health problems. With all this in mind, who can blame Berkeley residents for trying to keep their kids safe?
Meave O’Connor
•
PROTEST
Editors, Daily Planet:
I am sickened that a City Council, whose freedom is preserved by the very men and women represented by the armed services recruiters, and would ask them to leave Berkeley. I am not surprised that the liberal anti-war crowd (mostly high school kids given credit for skipping school to protest, I’m told) have convinced the City Council to provide Code Pink a parking space outside the office building so they can protest at their convenience. (Can I have one so I can support the troops?) Have you noticed that liberal activists will do anything they can to stifle the free speech of others while proclaiming that people who oppose them are trying to stifle theirs? I say let them rant. But not control the actions of government. This is the United States of America. And it is just so because of the brave men and women they are protesting. It is a shame that people like this can not stand to hear opposing points of view and will do anything to shut them up. That is communist and fascist.
Michael Orton
Mill Valley, California
•
PROTECTING YOUR VOTE
Editors, Daily Planet:
Several years ago the state and feds provided funds to county registrars to purchase electronic voting systems to increase accessibility and participation. In 2007, for the first time, the new secretary of state fulfilled one of the main obligations of that office by doing a complete evaluation of all the voting systems in our state. Findings showed that these machines aren’t safe, accurate, reliable, nor do they comply with federal regulations for accessibility and manufacturers knowingly sold noncompliant technology to our counties. This put our underfunded short-staffed county administrators in a bind. In consideration of that, instead of flat out decertifying voting equipment, the secretary provided detailed plans for compensating for these flaws. Many of our county registrars simply refused to comply and encouraged others to refuse. Some attacked our secretary of state and wasted taxpayer time and money suing her for doing her job. Only a few have taken enthusiastic action to protect us from bad technology and ensure the root of our democracy: One person, one vote. Find out where your county registrar and supervisors stand. Insist they do whatever it takes to comply with our secretary of state’s requirements. It’s your vote and their job.
Sharon Ryals Tamm
•
LAURA BUSH
Editors, Daily Planet:
Laura Bush would make an excellent president of the United States.
She has extensive political experience at the highest levels. She was First Lady of the state of Texas for five years. And she is currently serving in her eighth year as First Lady of the United States.
She would be a formidable opponent in the presidential election for Hillary Clinton because First Lady Bush can point to seven scandal-free years as First Lady. She has never been investigated even once by a special or an independent council.
She would also prevail over Barack Obama, as he cannot point to any years at all as First Gentleman, or as spouse of any elected political official.
Once elected, President Laura Bush would be free to appoint her husband, President George Bush, to any important position she might choose. Perhaps as secretary of state or as UN ambassador. And there is always the possibility that President George Bush would simply be appointed as U.S. Senator for the state of Texas.
Laura Bush has the national experience and freedom from any hint of scandal that make her a fine choice for president and a formidable foe to any Democrat in the November 2008 presidential election.
Brad Belden
•
OPEN LETTER TO THE
DIRECTORS OF EBMUD
Editors, Daily Planet:
This past weekend was plumbing weekend. Our great on-demand water heater was not firing and leaking. We know the drill, the rubber gaskets need to be replaced. Before chloramines, those gaskets lasted almost 10 years. Since chloramines, the rubber gaskets disintegrate, clogging the intake valve and leak within two and a half years, a 75 percent reduction in useful life. I finally realized, looking at the disintegrated rubber gasket in my hand, if chloramines does this to the gasket, what does it do to our innards?
With all this bashing of bottled water, if only the East Bay Municipal Utilities District got these poisons out of our tap water. I’ve written Andy Katz, our elected director, who claims to be an environmentalist, about the fluoride and now this terrible chloramines, but like all good elected officials, he’s been non-responsive. Chloramine kills frogs and fish. I bet it’s killing us. I’d like to see Andy and the other EBMUD Board members’ response to how they can get stop or reduce the deliberate poisoning of our tap water.
Yolanda Huang
•
CLASSROOMS AND CHILDREN
Editors, Daily Planet:
I am shocked to find out that in this advanced and internationally envied society the education of children has the lowest priority. These children will be the caretakers of the earth long after we are gone. How shall we educate them not just in science and technology but in caring for others? Example speaks louder than precept. Let us show the children we care for them by designing classrooms which offer encouragement above all—classrooms in which children are treated with respect and attentiveness.
Romila Khanna
Albany
•
LIES AND LIARS
Editors, Daily Planet:
Representative Henry Waxman is leading a congressional kerfuffel about lies and liars in the game of baseball. Either Roger Clemens or his ex-trainer are lying before Congress. Sure, lying about drug use is a terrible thing. But why is Congress spending so much time investigating baseball drug liars while failing to hold Cheney, Rumsfeld, and the Prevaricator-in-Chief accountable for the lies that have trapped us in Iraq’s tar pit of debt, death, and disgrace? Their lies before Congress are far more grave, harming a generation of Americans.
Bruce Joffe
Piedmont
•
BUSH’S LEGACY
Editors, Daily Planet:
I understand that President Bush is hard at work these days attempting to establish a legacy citing his many memorable achievements (??) during his seven years in the White House. From my own personal perspective, shared by many, George W. Bush’s legacy will forever be the haunting image of more than 3,800 white crosses on a hillside in Lafayette, California, marking the needless death of American soldiers in Iraq.
Yes, President Bush—that will be your shameful legacy!
Dorothy Snodgrass
The Berkeley Daily Planet accepts letters to the editor and commentary page submissions at opinion@berkeleydailyplanet.com and at 3023A Shattuck Ave., Berkeley, CA 94705. Letters should be no more than 400 words in length; commentaries should be no more than 1,000 words in length. Deadline for Tuesday edition is 5 p.m. Sunday; deadline for Friday edition is 5 p.m. Wednesday. Please include name, address and phone number for contact purposes. Letters may be edited for length and clarity.
