People’s Park debacle
“People’s housing” (Editorial, April 10) tries very hard to thread the needle on whether People’s Park in Berkeley should be developed for more UC student housing or retained as open space. Yes, the university needs more student housing, despite a surge of building in recent years. And yes, People’s Park is still hallowed ground for much-needed breathing room in a densely built area and for services for the homeless.
In previous attempts to build on People’s Park, which has been a thorn in its side, the university backed off to avoid confrontation. Ultimately, the university manages to find suitable sites for student housing when it really wants to, on property it already owns or can readily obtain, under eminent domain if necessary. Why is it any different now?
Alan Goldfarb, San Rafael
Section off northwest Syria
Let’s recognize that President Trump’s overconfidence in his own emotional responses led to the correct instinctive action. This was not the U.S. acting for itself but for all civilized nations who reject the bombing of the civilian population of Syria with gas attacks that the world has outlawed. Our leadership acted out of morality with a carefully, precisely crafted and limited response to a “Hitlerian.” There is no question of wartime powers. It is enough that it came from proper outrage. Now, let’s direct our United Nations ambassador to propose that a major portion of the northwestern region of Syria be set off limits to Bashar Assad as a protectorate of the U.N. countries, that the fighting stop and that ISIS be warned to remain outside or face overwhelming police force.
Make that section of Syria into a place for freedom and safety. If the U.N. cannot come together for that, America should challenge member nations to join it in the declaration and ask for token numbers of troops which we would pay for with other developed nations. This is an opportunity that should not be missed and may not come again.
Mary Beth Starzel, San Francisco
Local liquor licenses needed
Regarding “Wrong to extend bar hours” (Letters, April 7): The author is correct to be concerned about inebriated drivers, but is incorrect about the solution. The proposed new law is intended to allow restaurant liquor licenses in neighborhoods that don’t currently have them, or at least enough of a decent choice. Take my neighborhood — the Bayview — for example. There are several vibrant restaurants here, but none of them have bar licenses.
So, if we want to go to a restaurant with a bar license, we have to get into our cars and drive to another neighborhood, then drive back home after dinner and several drinks. This increases the risk of inebriated drivers on the road. If our local neighborhood restaurants (Old Skool Cafe, with its great cuisine and cool, live jazz, is a case in point) had a liquor license, we could walk there and walk home after a few drinks. This reduces the possibility of inebriated driving, not exacerbates it. George Taylor, San Francisco
Right response to Syria
I’m very critical of President Trump in general, but I think he had the right response to Bashar Assad’s chemical attack. I hope things work out and that evil despots will be deterred from similar actions in the future. I wish former President Barack Obama had done the same thing. Having said that, I believe this situation was somewhat different this time. It was more visual. We saw the bodies lined up. We heard the exact number of adults and children killed and we read how they died. When Obama was president, we heard reports of a chemical attack. Yes, it was awful, but we didn’t really see anything. It was far away and happened to people we didn’t know anything about. The level of outrage was lower. Of this I’m certain: Had Obama reacted as Trump did, Trump would have been the first to criticize him.
Scott Crosbie, San Leandro
Sanctuary city misconception
Regarding “4 Voices: Are sanctuary cities good for the community?” (Insight, April 9): When Attorney General Jeff Sessions wrote that sanctuary cities harm public safety and undermine the rule of law, he was playing on the public’s fears and a common misconception. The truth is that crime is significantly lower in sanctuary cities than in non-sanctuary cities, as a recent analysis by the Center for American Progress demonstrated.
The reason crime is lower in sanctuary cities is simple: Using local police to enforce immigration law encourages racial profiling and erodes the trust between police and members of the community. Immigrants are less likely to report crime or cooperate as witnesses if they believe police might ask about their status or that of family members or friends.
There is another common misconception about sanctuary cities: the belief that they are under a legal obligation to use their resources to assist federal immigration enforcement agencies. The truth is that they are not. The Trump administration is wrong to threaten cities like San Francisco with a loss of federal funds just because these cities have decided against adopting policies that would discourage immigrants from cooperating with the local police.
Naomi Tsu, Montgomery, Ala.
NRA’s stance on shooting
Remember the National Rifle Association’s famous saying, “Guns don’t kill people; people kill people”? Well, a large handgun killed an 8-year-old boy in his special education classroom in San Bernardino, wielded by a homicidal husband seeking to execute his wife in front of her students. Would the NRA dare to comment about this latest senseless tragedy? What spin would they put on this? They probably will yawn and say, “No comment.”
Piers Lahey, Daly City
Unconstitutional order
In a gross overreach of executive power, President Trump is bullying states, cities and counties by threatening to pull federal funds if we do not join him in violating the United States Constitution. For starters, this is a violation of the separation of powers protected in the Constitution. The president does not have the power to unilaterally dictate the conditions of federal funds approved by Congress. Public safety is improved by keeping police and immigration enforcement separate and distinct.
Santa Clara County responds to judicial warrants, and ICE has access to our jail information system. We follow the law. On April 14, Santa Clara County and the city of San Francisco will be asking U.S. District Judge William H. Orrick for a nationwide preliminary injunction against Trump’s executive order. Cities and counties from around the nation are supporting us by filing amicus briefs. This is now a grassroots legal movement against a reckless and unconstitutional executive order. Cindy Chavez, Santa Clara County supervisor,
San Jose
Corporate health comes first
The Chinese people got a chance to see where their economic system is headed with the latest United Airlines debacle. An Asian American doctor rushing to see his patients was kicked off the plane in favor of a United employee headed for an assignment. The takeaway is clear: under capitalism, corporate health comes before human health. David Fairley, San Francisco