Letters to the editor

State blackouts no excuse to stop renewables quest

CalMatters columnist Dan Walters blames California’s commitment to clean energy for the recent rolling blackouts (“California’s relying on unreliable third-world electrical service,” Opinion section, Aug. 20), mischaracterizing our worthwhile efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions as mere “political policies.” He makes a seemingly powerful case by criticizing the intermittency of solar and wind like a cynical backseat driver.

Walters ignores the fact that the extreme heat we are experiencing is being caused by the buildup of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. If we ignore the climate change problem, it will continue to get worse. His solution is to bury our heads in the sand and let the Earth continue to get hotter.

Serious people are doing everything they can to solve the problems of climate change. California should continue to forge ahead with more renewable energy and work proactively to solve the problems associated with intermittency.

— Doug Peterson, San Jose

SJUSD should follow county lead on restraint

Restraint is inequitable. I refer to California Assembly Bill 2657, Article 5.2 Restraint and Seclusion noting Ed Code 49005. The Legislature finds and declares: (f) “Students with disabilities and students of color, especially African American boys, are disproportionately subject to restraint and seclusion.” We know this practice goes beyond our school boundaries and is a national issue.

When the approval of the Black Lives Matter Resolution by the San Jose Unified School District board was up for consideration, I advised the district that as they accept this resolution, they should examine their own policies. If this resolution is in response to the rekindling of the Black Lives Matter movement following the fatality of George Floyd, who was restrained while prone, Policy 5131.41 — Students — Use of Seclusion and Restraint should be revisited and the district should join the Santa Clara County Board of Education in banning prone restraint.

— Kristen Brown, candidate, Trustee Area 3, San Jose Unified School

District, San Jose

401(k) saving plans offer retirees too little security

In his letter, Jerry Mungai touts the benefits of 401(k) taxdeferred saving plans as an alternative to pensions (“Only one way to stem state’s public pension debt,” Opinion section, Aug. 18). The benefits of the 401(k) to the employer are obvious: The employer Pontius Pilates responsibility for the employee’s retirement while pocketing money that would otherwise go to pensions.

However, with a 401(k) there are no guarantees as with a pension, since a 401(k) plan puts the onus entirely on the employee — a worker who often has little understanding of investment principles or finance.

It is notable that Mungai and others only tout 401(k)s when Wall Street is on a roll. In bad economic times, there is never a peep from 401(k) boosters.

— Kirch DeMartini, Saratoga

Rail project’s rewards outweigh challenges

Dan Walters has taken another unfair potshot at California’s ambitious high-speed rail project (“North-South bullet train reflects California’s crisis of competence,” Opinion section, Aug. 18) and those doing the heavy lifting and the hard work to accomplish great things for our state.

Yes, high-speed rail has had its share of problems — and it’s naive to think there won’t be more challenges in the future — but that’s the nature of any great endeavor of consequence we’ve undertaken together.

It turns out, high-speed rail is California’s largest green energy project and a rapidly growing source of jobs in our state, with about 1,000 construction workers on-site every week during this time of economic distress.

Other developed nations have been able to deliver fast trains for their people and we can, too. It is the big, tough, visionary and transformative infrastructure projects like high-speed rail that will allow our state to continue to thrive.

— Michael Lane, San Jose

SETTING THE RECORD STRAIGHT

An editorial appearing in Friday’s paper incorrectly characterized the American Civil Liberties Union’s position on Proposition 25. The ACLU is neutral on the ballot measure.