| Send to Printer | << Back to Article |
| Letters |
|
Counterproductive divisiveness
Today [May 15], the California Supreme Court struck down the discriminatory California law banning same-sex marriage. Good for them, however, the forces of hate and bigotry are already at work trying to put another homophobic proposition on the ballot. Given the sorry state of this nation and the world, one would hope these people would have better things to do with their time and energy. Sadly, it seems that rather than address real problems, these alleged keepers of the public morals prefer to work at promoting exclusion and prejudice. Let us hope enough California voters are sick and tired of this counterproductive divisiveness and rancor. Too many supervisors?Like too many others, Jeanette Aden (Letters, May 10) makes an apples to oranges comparison when claiming that San Francisco has too many supervisors. I must point out that San Francisco is not just a county, it is a combined city and county. The so-called Board of Supervisors performs the function of both a city council and a county board of supervisors. Logically, one can argue that its total membership should be a total of the number in a city council and a board of supervisors. So let’s look at the number of members of the city councils of some charter cities: Oakland, 8; San Jose, 10; Sacramento, 8; Los Angeles, 15; and San Diego, 8. Then add to these the five members of the board of supervisors in the county in which each one is located and the totals become 13, 15, 13, 20 and 13 respectively. The average of these is 14.8. Therefore, one can logically argue that the San Francisco Board of Supervisors should actually have 15 members. San Francisco Speak out against the sheriffWhat happened to the charter amendment change proposed by Supervisor Jerry Hill? San Mateo County voters were promised that Hill and his colleagues on the Board of Supervisors were finally going to address the incident in which our sheriff was caught in a Vegas bordello, but nothing has happened. How can Jerry Hill honestly expect women of San Mateo County to support his Assembly candidacy when he refuses to speak out against a sheriff who attempted to patronize a house of prostitution where women were warehoused as sexual slaves? Gun club is open to all I would like to point out a couple of errors in the logic of letter writer June Wilson (Letters, May 13). She suggests that the 300 stated membership of the Pacific Rod and Gun Club doesn’t justify continued presence at the Lake Merced site. What she fails to mention is that those 300 memberships are family memberships which more than doubles the number. And the gun club is open to all. Scores of nonmembers use the facilities on the three days a week that the club is open. To suggest that the Pacific Rod and Gun Club should be evicted because it is incompatible with all the other newly envisioned uses of the Lake Merced property is akin to saying a long-term senior citizen resident of an apartment house should be evicted because of incompatibility with newer youthful residents of the building. San Francisco Proposition F ‘disastrous’ Ken Garcia’s May 13 column “Prop. F is for fantasy, Prop. G is for gift” hit the nail on the head in pointing out the disastrous consequences of Chris Daly’s Proposition F. Supervisor Daly and his supporters have openly acknowledged that if Proposition F passes it will block any new housing or housing renovation in the Bayview for decades. I fail to recognize how keeping people trapped in poverty and squalor in rundown dilapidated conditions is somehow a progressive virtue. Proposition F promises nothing but economic stagnation, keeping Bayview residents trapped in conditions that are dirty and dangerous. Proposition G, an initiative put on the ballot through a decadelong consensus effort, will produce 300 acres of parks, 8,000 new jobs and 2,500 affordable homes. This vote seems like a no-brainer to me. No on F, yes on G. San Francisco Hiding behind gender Ms. Dominic’s blind adherence to Hillary Clinton (Letters, May 13) solely because of her sex is akin to any other fanatical belief that belies the facts. Her comment “that men are screaming for her to quit” because they feel threatened by a powerful woman is simply laughable. Voters are rejecting Ms. Clinton because she is an opportunistic, cynical and Nixonian politician; if anything, her sex has helped to mask these traits. If she were a man she would have been exposed long ago for the rough-playing, back-room tactician she is. San Francisco The Examiner gives preference to letters containing fewer than 150 words. Please include name, phone number and city of residence. To add your voice-By e-mail: letters@sfexaminer.com By mail: Editorial Page Editor The Examiner, 450 Mission St. San Francisco, CA 94105 By fax: (415) 359-2766 |