Saturday’s Letters to the Editor

Saturday’s Letters to the Editor

Unfriendly to canines

EDITOR: There are extra canines within the U.S. (76 million) than youngsters beneath 18 (73 million), but Sonoma County is the least canine pleasant county. Residents complain that even leashed canines needs to be disallowed on Bodega Head and different Sonoma seashores.

Having lived in San Francisco and spent quite a lot of time on seashores in San Mateo and Marin counties with off-leash canines, I ponder why Sonoma County has so few off-leash parks and seashores. There’s a small one at low tide at Doran Park, and residents illegally go off leash to toss balls on different distant seashores, however many Sonoma canine homeowners drive to Dillon Seaside, the north finish of Stinson Seaside or Bolinas for recreation.

Wholesome canines have to run and fetch. Locking them up behind fences causes canines to default into guard canine syndrome. They bark at passersby, and a few develop into aggressive. They develop into maladjusted with lack of stimulating human interplay. Canine domestication started 10,000 years earlier than the domestication of horses, but Sonoma County has an 850-acre park (Shiloh) only for horses — leashed or unleashed canines not welcome.



Constructing plans

EDITOR: A Feb. 13 article cited many causes for Sonoma County’s diminished inhabitants, which apparently has been occurring over the earlier 5 years (“Inhabitants retains falling”). One of many main causes cited for leaving our space was insufficient inexpensive housing. Supervisor Chris Coursey has referred to as for extra inexpensive housing to carry on to our working age inhabitants, so necessary to small companies.

A Feb. 14 article reported that Santa Rosa has had a housing increase currently, and the long-term plan requires including 24,000 new properties by 2050 (“Metropolis unveils housing plan”). The town had licensed 1,404 new housing permits in 2021, essentially the most since 2005, and never together with these for changing burned properties. Nearly none of those permits have been for inexpensive housing for low-income folks, the supposed cause for the constructing increase.

The state has demanded plans for 4,685 items (not required to be constructed, however simply deliberate). But the housing aspect now beneath assessment anticipates 7,029 items over the subsequent eight years. Plans included necessities for streamlining permits. It seems that the town will construct first and implement plans to handle excessive drought after all of the items are constructed. Water provides ought to come first. And can this housing be earthquake proof and fireproof?


Russian River Watershed Safety Committee

SR rail crossing

EDITOR: The California Public Utilities Fee has unique authority over the protection of rail crossings. A March 2 group assembly to debate “an alternate proposal for a bridge crossing” over the SMART tracks on Jennings Avenue (“Metropolis seeks suggestions on bridge,” Feb. 18) appears one more ploy in SMART’s persevering with effort to problem and subvert that authority.

In 2016, after appreciable examine, together with enter from the general public in addition to the Santa Rosa Metropolis Council, the CPUC dominated unequivocally towards an overcrossing, citing quite a few compelling concerns, and accredited an at-grade crossing. The CPUC has since upheld that approval 4 extra instances, even over SMART’s objections that it will be unsafe.

It’s additionally unclear who in our metropolis authorities is cooperating with SMART in ignoring the CPUC’s rulings, nor why. I could have missed it, however I discover no report within the Metropolis Council assembly minutes of dialogue or consent to this motion.

In the meantime, because of SMART’s stalling, chain hyperlink fences on the tracks nonetheless divide our neighborhood, forcing pedestrians and bicyclists onto a 15- to 20-minute detour, and the associated fee for constructing the crossing has gone up. We’d like SMART to construct the accredited at-grade crossing.


Santa Rosa

Fox’s Jan. 6 video deal

EDITOR: Speaker Kevin McCarthy must be held to account. Releasing Capitol safety video from Jan. 6, 2021, to a choose, very biased media supply is a travesty and reveals an absence of excellent religion to each American.

The rationale for these cameras is to guard America’s foremost democratic establishment from terror and revolt, international or home. By this motion, McCarthy undermines our fragile and polarized nation. The end result I concern is that media mogul Rupert Murdoch’s most flagrant propagandists will try to whitewash the horrific occasions of that notorious day. That serves solely the pursuits of those that discover no widespread floor for “brotherhood from sea to shining sea” on this nation.

McCarthy says that “sunshine lets everyone make their very own judgment,” but he’s now fundraising on the transfer. I don’t imagine we’ll get any impartial modifying from Fox Information’ Tucker Carlson. It is a actually dangerous day for unity in America, if not for sanity in our management.



You possibly can ship letters to the editor to

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *