San Francisco Chronicle - (Sunday)
Larger police presence doesn’t lead to increased safety
Regarding “Oakland council slammed by chief ” (Front Page, June 29) and “More police didn’t stop Lake Merritt shooting” ( June 29): The socalled news that the Oakland police chief is mad at the city council is utterly unsurprising and hardly rates frontpage, abovethefold treatment. Of course, any department chief will resist cuts to his budget, even if the supposed cuts are actually only cuts to the proposed increase.
In light of this, I would like to belatedly appreciate your printing Cat Brooks’ column. Among the incessant drumbeat of scare stories about crime rates, someone needed to point out that police do not actually prevent crime, but only respond to it, and that if more police equated to more safety, we would be by far the safest country in the world! When the only responders to 911 calls are armed police, that can often mean a death sentence for Black and brown people. It is long past time to divert those mental health calls to more appropriate agencies (such as the fire department).
Fail by Cal State East Bay
Regarding “Disturbed by racism” (Letters, June 29) and “The ‘race realist’ on campus” (Front Page, June 27): I second the writer’s comments on Jason Fagone’s investigation into Professor Christainsen’s racist teachings at Cal State East Bay. Thanks go also to Yalonda M. James, Santiago Mejia, Alex K. Fong, Noah Berger and Caron Creighton who produced the podcast. This type of indepth reporting is extremely important now more than ever. Coincidentally,
I was thinking of taking a postgraduate summer ethnic studies class at Cal State East Bay. Now, I’ve changed my mind. Ethnic studies is a program that upholds the values of diversity and social justice inquiry that the university promotes in its marketing materials. However, the school’s failure to censure Christainsen or strip him of tenure for his discredited “race science” writings is shameful.
This is a quote from Cal State East Bay President Cathy Sandeen’s bio page: “The university is recognized nationally for its diversity and impact on social mobility.” How does that sentiment square with the university’s support of a professor who teaches that Black and brown students are inferior? Where is it written that academic freedom protects the rights of a professor to teach white supremacist pseudoscience?
Entrepreneurship is key
Regarding “Small businesses hurting in S.F. as economy rallies” (Front Page, June 25): We were lucky. We had a supportive network during the pandemic. But as the article outlines, too many other small businesses were not as lucky. Lawmakers recently passed a series of budget bills that includes critical provisions to help small businesses stay afloat. We hope Gov. Gavin Newsom signs this bill quickly because these resources are desperately needed and long overdue. But Roland Li’s article clearly supports why we can’t stop there. We must now turn our attention to swiftly rolling out additional funds for the California Relief Grant and Rebuilding Fund. Approximately 198,000 small businesses either have been or will be awarded grants from the initial allocation of these programs. That’s almost 200,000 small businesses that will be given an opportunity to contribute to the fabric of the San Francisco community and build on the rich history our neighborhoods share. S.F. is resilient.
But we must do all that we can to keep our magical community of entrepreneurs alive. We have to establish a stronger safety net before the next crisis. I hope this administration recognizes that entrepreneurship is central to California’s economy and creates a strong policy agenda to support that.
No term limits for court
“Court term limits not a cureall” (Editorial, June 26) engages in merely just a flight of fancy into something that is completely unworkable. Supreme Court nominations take place with the advice and consent of the U.S. Senate. That cannot be legislated away. What happens when a justice dies on the bench after the president has already had two selections? Liberals consider a balanced court one that has a majority of liberals. Their problem with this one is that it doesn’t. Keep the court as it is.