Latest news with #OpenForum
San Francisco Chronicle
17 hours ago
- Politics
- San Francisco Chronicle
Letters: What the SCOTUS ruling on judges will let Trump do to the founding ideals of the U.S.
Regarding 'SCOTUS deals huge blow to judges' power to rein in Trump in birthright citizenship case' (Politics, June 27): Six justices of the Supreme Court delivered a scathing opinion, ruling to limit the powers of an independent judiciary to protect the rights of all citizens. As Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote in dissent, 'No right is safe in the new legal regime the Court creates.' What an irony that this week we celebrate our country's birth — founded on the principles and values of freedom, liberty and justice for all — while the occupant of the White House plots his next move to destroy those ideals. Alyson Jacks, San Francisco Cars and transit needed Regarding 'Three ideas to save S.F. Muni that have nothing to do with cutting service' (Open Forum, June 23): Joe DiMento blames San Francisco's transit crisis on 'public subsidies for private cars.' That's misleading. Drivers already pay registration fees, parking fees and gas taxes — much of which funds roads and transit. Everyone wants Muni to succeed. But ridership is falling, routes are shrinking and the budget gap is growing. Blaming cars distracts from real issues: ballooning labor costs, outdated infrastructure and a transit system that hasn't adjusted to post-pandemic patterns. Dismissing residential parking as a luxury ignores reality. Many who rely on street parking aren't driving luxury SUVs — they're working-class people who live far from reliable transit. Taking away affordable parking doesn't help Muni; it just punishes people with few choices. This shouldn't be a war between drivers and riders. We need smart investments to improve public transit — not a crusade against curb space. Let's be honest about equity. Eliminating low-cost parking doesn't hurt the wealthy — it hurts the working class. Muni needs stable funding and practical reform, not scapegoating. That's how we build a city that works for everyone, not just the car-free few. Marie Hurabiell, executive director, ConnectedSF and InspireSF So much narcissism Every day, I read the Chronicle's Letters to the Editor, and I'm struck by the theme running through them all: me, me, me, me, me. I want a park, and screw whoever it inconveniences. I want this or that and am damned well going to take it from someone else or make them pay for it. I demand that someone paint their house the color I want. I don't want some eyesore torn down, so I'm going to fatuously label it 'historic' because my opinion trumps everyone else's. What a depressingly intolerant and self-centered part of the world we live in. Andrew James, San Carlos Faith in humanity restored After 44 years in the Bay Area's cutthroat commercial real estate business, I've become a bit cynical about my fellow man. However, my outlook shifted recently. I was driving on El Camino Real in Burlingame, a busy, four-lane road known for aggressive drivers. As I was dodging traffic, the driver in front of me suddenly braked, pulled across our two lanes, put on his emergency flashers, got out of his car and waved all four lanes in both directions to a stop. Who or what did he hit? Road rager? No, he noticed a mother duck and her five ducklings on the side of the road, fretting to cross the busy boulevard. Like a crossing guard, he held up his arms while mama and her brood crossed El Camino Real single-file in his care. In those 90 seconds, no motorist honked, yelled or flipped the bird. We all watched intently, quietly and admired this hero. It was a moment of glorious humanity in our darkening world that restored my faith in my fellow human. I get a catch in my throat just thinking about this heroic act. He reminded me that we all have the instinct to do the right thing, and that anyone, anywhere and anytime can be a hero. David Klein, Burlingame
San Francisco Chronicle
5 days ago
- Politics
- San Francisco Chronicle
Letters: Allowing denser housing in Berkeley won't rectify past wrongs. Here's why
Regarding 'Is Berkeley finally ready to atone for its single-family housing sins?' (Open Forum, June 25): Darrell Owens, a former California YIMBY staffer (not mentioned in the Open Forum), says that Middle Housing will redress historical redlining and displacement in Berkeley. But, in a letter to the City Council, I, along with representatives from South Berkeley, the historically African American neighborhood, write that, 'These proponents of MH are engaging in moral grandstanding at our expense. MH will destroy our already impacted communities' by accelerating gentrification. As a city report states, Middle Housing projects are more feasible in neighborhoods where existing housing is relatively cheaper, and they will be most impacted. The affluent hills will be exempt because of fire concerns. Owens is also wrong about Middle Housing ending exclusive single-family zoning. He does not mention SB9, which allowed up to four homes on an existing parcel, effectively eliminating single-family only zoning. While the photo published with the op-ed shows beautifully articulated facades of buildings, the proposed Middle Housing rules will allow three-story, box-like buildings. Nico Calavita, Berkeley Another office tower? Regarding 'S.F.'s first new office tower in years is closer to construction, even as vacancies remain high' (San Francisco, June 24): The latest proposal to 'set the stage for San Francisco's future' — with a 41-story glass monolith — is irresponsible. The new building would diminish the prominence of the nearby elegant, iconic Transamerica Pyramid and undermine the thoughtful preservation of historic Jackson Square and its harmonious surroundings. Although the development promises benefits for the city, why does it have to be so big and uninspiring? We already have too many empty office buildings and hotels. If this is the future of San Francisco, we are doomed to mediocrity. Aesthetics matter. Please, do not build this monstrosity. Richard Hutson, San Francisco Keep widening freeways If the population of drivers were fixed, then widening roads would improve traffic. But road widening projects are too slow, so at best, they keep up with the increasing number of drivers, and traffic congestion remains mostly unchanged. But it's magical thinking to assert that improving the roads doesn't alleviate traffic problems. If roads had not been constantly improved and widened in the past, we would be suffering utter paralysis now. Projects such as widening Highway 37 are decades overdue. As a side benefit, they are also good for the environment because cars will once again whiz through the area instead of grinding along in a stop-and-go fashion. Mike Drew, Vacaville Masks invoke terror Regarding 'Mask bill misdirected' (Letters to the Editor, June 23): The letter writer objects to state Sen. Scott Wiener's proposed law to ban police from wearing face masks because it also doesn't ban masks worn by demonstrators. This is perhaps a valid critique, but it overlooks a crucial point. It is now common for Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents and officers from other agencies to wear masks in public. The explanation is that unmasked officers may be identified and subject to retaliation. Masks make their wearers seem robotic, less human. They inspire terror and hopelessness, which is one reason why masked police are the hallmark of despotic regimes. Phil Kipper, San Francisco War nothing to celebrate Regarding 'World is safer now' (Letters to the Editor, June 23): Paul Bacon's letter applauding President Donald Trump's order to strike Iran's nuclear sites is a dangerous mix of blind loyalty and warmongering. Celebrating military escalation as 'decisive leadership' ignores the human cost and global consequences of pushing us closer to nuclear war. Trump didn't make us safer — he gambled with millions of lives, destabilized the region and once again made America look like a bully, not a leader. Real leadership is diplomacy, not dropping bombs and daring a nation to retaliate. War isn't strength. It's failure. And letters like Bacon's prove how easy it is to cheer for war when you're not the one sent to fight it. Alex McMurray, Castro Valley
San Francisco Chronicle
6 days ago
- Automotive
- San Francisco Chronicle
Letters: Is parking in San Francisco too expensive or too cheap?
Regarding 'Three ideas to save S.F. Muni that have nothing to do with cutting service' (Open Forum, June 23): Joe DiMento argues for more regressive taxation targeting drivers in his Open Forum. But people drive in San Francisco because they need to, and not everyone works for Bain Capital. For many in the city, $200 for a residential parking permit is a lot of money. Then there are the other steep parking fees, the dearth of parking, and the rising cost of gas and tolls. Make the Bain Capital billionaires, hedge fund managers and other elites (such as those who can afford to take Lyft and Uber) pay their fair share. Working people need cars to generate income, visit their aging parents, pick up their children from school and go to a job that starts in the middle of the night. Wealthy people need to get out of their bubble and get a clue. Harry Pariser, San Francisco I pay close to $4,000 every year to park my car in a private garage. Cars are private assets, and their storage in public spaces should not be subsidized. Car owners will no doubt object because they have been pampered so long by a society addicted to using cars. I hope the mayor and other relevant authorities are listening and will begin to make car owners in the city pay their fair share. Bill McClanahan, San Francisco Join the 21st century Regarding 'This obscure rule is one reason San Francisco can't build more housing' (Projects, June 21): Isn't it incredible that the city at the forefront of the artificial intelligence revolution is held back by building and safety codes written when copper wires wrapped in paper insulation carried electricity and America was still decades away from transistor radios and television? The story says, 'Agencies in both San Francisco and California governments are currently reviewing how to safely allow taller single stair buildings.' If much of the rest of the world has been doing it safely for decades, what kind of 'review' is needed here? Levi Armlovich, San Francisco Sharks not the villain Regarding ''Jaws' at 50: How Steven Spielberg's shark movie changed my life and cinema forever' (Arts & Entertainment, June 20): I was one of those moviegoers who joined in the feeding frenzy over 'Jaws' in June 1975. I had just graduated from high school and was on my way to studying marine biology in college. The movie was big, the weather was hot, and the futuristic dome-shaped Century 21 theater was packed to the gills. Like any of the best summer blockbusters to follow, 'Jaws' did not disappoint, and the movie left quite a cinematic legacy. Unfortunately, director Steven Spielberg's movie and the book it was based on by Peter Benchley also perpetuated a legacy of misinformation about sharks that justified killing them for recreation or just for their fins to make soup. Since 1975, researchers have learned much about sharks, and Spielberg and Benchley have apologized for their roles in demonizing them. Let's hope that our understanding of sharks has matured enough that we don't repeat bad behaviors as we recognize this cinematic milestone. Geoff Brosseau, Menlo Park I was raised with dogs since I was a baby and consider them as cherished family members. They are loving, loyal and faithful, unlike a great many people I have known throughout my life. Only an uncaring and thoughtless person would discard a dog because it becomes an inconvenience. When you adopt a dog, it is a commitment for the life of the dog. At this point in my life, the more people I meet, the more I love my dogs. Maria Nowicki, San Francisco
San Francisco Chronicle
17-06-2025
- Politics
- San Francisco Chronicle
Letters: The real story is why Padilla wanted to question Noem, not his removal from the room
Regardless of what one may think of Sen. Alex Padilla's actions during Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem's press conference, we should keep foremost in mind what elicited his reaction: Noem's statement. 'We are staying here to liberate the city from the socialists and the burdensome leadership that this governor and that this mayor have placed on this country.' Noem is saying the Trump administration is attempting to use military force to overthrow the democratically elected leaders of Los Angeles and California. Maya Angelou famously said, 'When someone shows you who they are, believe them the first time.' Trump and his administration have told us many times: They want to overthrow our democracy and replace it with a dictatorship. It is time the rest of us believe it and do everything we can to stop it. The controversy over Padilla is just a convenient side show to keep us distracted from the real danger. Why wasn't Noem's statement the story rather than Padilla's reaction to it? Jeffrey Kaplan, Berkeley Dems' stance correct Every Democratic politician he quoted denounced violent protest and property destruction. Meanwhile, our Republican president has pardoned those who attacked police and vandalized the Capitol. I also have to ask, who exactly is initiating the violence in the current round of protests? I have seen video of a police officer in Los Angeles casually firing a rubber bullet at a broadcast reporter in the middle of her live report and heard reports of federal agents dragging people out of their immigration hearings. Is it only violence when Waymos burn? Finally, I don't understand why Gavin Newsom should pay attention to how his words are received in some mythical rural heartland when he is right now the governor of the fourth-largest economy in the world. Please, Joe, back up and look at the bigger picture; you are lost in the details. Mary Mazzocco, Oakland Keep the peace Regarding 'Manny Yekutiel: When hate masquerades as protest, we all lose' (Open Forum, June 13) and 'Will Democrats finally stop defending protesters who turn to thuggery?' (Joe Garofoli, June 15): Manny Yekutiel and Joe Garofoli speak wisdom. If those who attacked Manny's cafe were at the demonstration against immigration arrests on June 9, I doubt their sincerity in being there for a just cause. I suspect they are of the mentality of the Waymo burners, those providing grist for the right-wing social media, as are those with 'F— Trump' signs. At the Hands Off demonstration on April 5, Indivisible advised us not to react to hecklers who benefit from videos they take of violence after they've incited it. Joe Garofoli reminds us of this. What I saw at San Francisco's No Kings march was peaceful except for the ubiquitous 'F— Trump' signs, which seem trite, especially compared to the much more inventive 'No Faux King Dictators.' Tina Martin, San Francisco Better to unite Regarding 'Forget the American flag. These are the flags to fly on July 4 to celebrate liberty' (Open Forum, June 15): I disagree with Joe Mathews' suggestion. This country is as divided as it was during the Civil War. This is not the time to fragment and break up the union. We must fight to preserve the United States of America as one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Here's a suggestion. No matter which side you're on, you surely know someone with the opposite point of view. Call them and see if you can't get them to agree that this country, for all its problems, is worth preserving. Let's stop bickering and name-calling. Let's stand together for liberty and justice. Then let's get to work and work out the details. Ted Tilton, Sunnyvale
San Francisco Chronicle
09-06-2025
- Politics
- San Francisco Chronicle
Letters: There will be consequences for S.F. Mayor Lurie if free parking in Golden Gate Park ends
Regarding 'S.F. Mayor Lurie wants to end free parking in Golden Gate Park' (San Francisco, June 5): Golden Gate Park is a treasured urban refuge and one of the last free things available to residents of San Francisco. Eliminating free parking will ruin the park. Mayor Daniel Lurie should focus on cutting irresponsible city spending, not on increasing taxes. Yes, like tariffs, charging for parking is actually a tax, except that it won't fund any new park projects or services, and it's highly regressive. If the mayor insists on going ahead with this ill-conceived idea, I can pretty much guarantee that he'll lose the support of many voters, including me. Stan Barnett, San Francisco Consider for a moment what San Francisco has done to its streets. The city has restricted driving on numerous (do we know the number?) of roads, designating them as 'Slow Streets.' In addition, the Upper Great Highway is now closed to cars, ditto for many of the streets in Golden Gate Park. Other streets around the city have been reconfigured to include bike lanes, reducing the number of traffic lanes for cars. Do the math: If streets and lanes that cars can drive on are reduced, there are fewer places for vehicles. This forces the remaining open streets to carry more automobile traffic. This will lead to more congestion. I don't believe this is an unintended consequence; it is the desired outcome of the city's Transit First policy, which seems to be intended to make driving in the city so unattractive that people will be forced to take the bus to go grocery shopping for a family of four. Please, let's not pretend that no one knew this is what would happen. Military going backward Regarding 'Trump reportedly to strip Harvey Milk name off naval vessel' (Politics, June 3): Defense Secretary Peter Hegseth seems hellbent on restoring America's warrior values by eliminating diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives and other alleged woke policies that were aimed at making people of color and women feel that they were part of the team, not just tolerated. Hegseth has brought back the names for Fort Bragg and Fort Benning and their Confederate connotations. He has banned transgender people from serving. Now, he plans to strip Harvey Milk's name from a Navy ship. These reactionary policies are likely causing our military to lose thousands of qualified potential recruits who feel they wouldn't be welcome. Seasoned military members are undoubtedly not re-enlisting in this atmosphere of hate. With the United States facing threats from our enemies in Asia, Africa and the Middle East, now is not the time to divide our military with anti-DEI ideology, but to unite it in defending our country. Paul L. Newman, Merion Station, Pa. Newsom can't win Regarding 'What Newsom understands about power that other California Democrats don't' (Open Forum, June 3): Gov. Gavin Newsom's strategy of pandering to conservatives demonstrates how he is out of touch. Newsom is unelectable outside of California because when he was the mayor of San Francisco, he helped to legalize gay marriage. Many of us find this an admirable legacy, but all those misogynists who would rather vote for a felon than a woman won't vote for Newsom, either— even if he bashes trans athletes. Rep. Jasmine Crockett, D-Texas, has said that the Democrats are going to pick a 'safe' white man to win in 2028. Sadly, I agree, someone straight, married and ideally with some military background. I don't know who, but not Newsom. The governor would be a great senator, but he is unelectable nationally. Democrats doing the same thing over and expecting different results is one of the definitions of insanity. There's no point in nominating another woman. Kathy Johnson, Mountain View
