Letters to the Editor 03.08.18

Gunning For It

So they put down the tide pods to lecture the rest of us on gun control… anyone who thinks it’s a good idea to have teenagers lead public policy needs to get their head checked (“As #NeverAgain sweeps the nation after a school shooting, local students get on board,” March 1-7). Eliot Davis | via Facebook

This article is concerning. The Monterey High School senior’s misguided mission sends an awkward message. She uses Iran and UAE as examples of how we should operate as a country here with no gun sales to the public. I applaud young people who show an interest in getting involved in politics, but I am wondering if anybody has mentioned to her that we have something called the Constitution and in that Constitution there is something called the Second Amendment.

If she feels those Middle Eastern countries are doing a better job of governing with public hangings and such, then maybe she should consider trying to become a citizen herself of one of those stellar, special needs countries. Kevin Kreyenhagen | Carmel Valley

Do not dismiss the power of the next generation. They just might be the solution. ill Hollingsworth | via Facebook

I served with the U.S. Army in Vietnam in 1971. I carried an M-16 rifle with 15 round ammunition clips in Saigon, Long Binh, Bien Hoa and Ho Nai. Never in my mind could I ever conceive someday in the future, civilians and teenagers would be allowed to carry an AR-15 (M-16 prototype), with 30 round magazines, on the streets of America. The news that Dick’s Sporting Goods will immediately end sales of assault-style rifles, and not sell any gun to anyone under 21, is a step in the right direction. Reportedly, the shooter at Florida’s Stoneman Douglas High School was 19 when he fired and slaughtered young students.

The AR-15 is designed in a very similar manner as an M-16. For too long, a weapon of war has been permitted to be sold to bloody our children in our schools and in our time. Albert H.Maldonado | Monterey

Buy the Public

Another waste of ratepayers’ money! (“Cal Am deploys paid contractors to ‘educate’ voters who might sign a petition for public water,” March 1-7.) Brian McCarthy

Well, if that isn’t a big red flag that Cal Am stands to lose big money if Monterey County goes public, I don’t know what is. A good reason to get enough signatures and then go public to get out from under their thumb. Joseph W. Borawski | via Facebook

Thread Bare

What doesn’t sell – like shelving, etc that could be useful – I hope they give to nonprofits that house the homeless (“Robert Talbott clothing company set to auction off manufacturing equipment,” posted March 3). I know Talbott was a good and generous supporter of nonprofits, providing needed funding to the Monterey County AIDS Project as one example.

They will be missed. Sherry Lessen | via Facebook

Rent or Buy

Private property rights are not respected in Pacific Grove… is this Russia? (“Anti-vacation rental measure in P.G. inches closer to reality as city eyes initiative to raise revenue,” Feb. 22-28.)Frank Calamia | via Facebook

Short-term renting (less than 30 consecutive days) is not a “property right,” it’s a type of use that is subject to zoning rules. The initiative simply re-establishes the city’s prohibition, which existed for decades, on this type of use. Luke Coletti | via Facebook

This is considering the needs of the many. Only a few people own enough housing space to rent some out to vacationers. It is disruptive to neighbors, and inconsiderate of the small business that depend on tourism to survive. Ann Carin Noll | via Facebook

Welcome to America’s Last Hometown. Unless you’re visiting, renting, an RV’er, or a potbelly pig. Devin Podeszwa | via Facebook

Life in Prison

She got off way too easy. We need the death penalty with an express line (“Tami Huntsman pleads guilty to murdering two children in her care,” posted Feb. 28). Michele Dela Cruz Tucker | via Instagram

At least the poor child witnesses won’t have to endure a trial. Valentina Rosendeau | via Facebook

Page Count

While 350 pages of environmental review isn’t a full-blown EIR, the California Environmental Quality Act actually requires no environmental review for Marina Coast’s annexation application (“As the push for development continues on Fort Ord, concerns about its water supply go unheeded,” March 1-7).

Here’s why: This “project” is simply to include existing Ord Community customers in Marina Coast’s political boundaries. There’s a provision of CEQA that exempts this annexation from environmental review.

Marina Coast knows about the threats to its groundwater. That’s why it became a Groundwater Sustainability Agency, why it paid for the first ever aerial electromagnetic survey of groundwater in a large chunk of the Salinas Valley and why it strongly opposes slant wells on the Cemex property. It’s also why Marina Coast has the strongest and oldest water conservation program on the Central Coast and why it’s currently building the pipeline to bring recycled water to the Ord Community and Cal Am service area. Tom Moore | Marina

Editor’s note: Moore is president of the board of Marina Coast Water District.