YOU CAN SEND LETTERS TO THE EDITOR TO [email protected]
September 22, 2022, 12:06AM
Trump’s veiled threat
EDITOR: If it weren’t so dangerous, it would just be the most pathetic, sad and desperate act by an American political figure anyone has ever seen. It is “stand back and stand by” 2.0. Donald Trump’s response to conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt that if he were to be indicted the “country would have problems the likes of which perhaps we’ve never seen before” is nothing less than a call for his MAGA-influenced violent supporters to come to his rescue by trying to start another American civil war.
Hewitt immediately recognized the danger in Trump’s words and gave him an opportunity to walk back his statement, which he refused.
With these words, the defeated ex-president has once again proven himself to be a danger to our nation and its citizens. Whether or not this behavior is legally treasonous, it should add weight to the mounting investigations against him and the moral imperative of their ensuing prosecutions.
Sad and desperate? In 1865, after the American Civil War, Confederate President Jefferson Davis was apprehended in his flight from justice wearing a dress and shawl. What shall be Trump’s legacy?
EDITOR: Sarah Phillips maintains that a green law is prima-facie proof that water is being unnecessarily wasted (“Lawns don’t lie,” Letters, Sept. 11). Although I agree wholeheartedly with her concern on the matter of water conservation, I do wish to offer something to consider. Although rare, some homes are equipped with rain harvesting or grey water systems that, when operated by a pump, are able to water foliage deep into the dry months. We have such a system and are able to keep our plants (barely) alive. The water made available by such systems is not good for much else. I just believe that this is worth considering before rushing to judgment.
RICHARD A. DURR
Keeping paths safe
EDITOR: Bollards are sturdy posts put in place to keep four-wheeled vehicles off public pathways (“Effort to replace safety poles,” Sept. 11). They may impinge upon cyclists’ desires to be speedy and to ride squeezed together in groups, but they somewhat alleviate the danger to pedestrians, often walking leashed dogs or pushing strollers, who must fend for themselves when cyclists whiz by unannounced, two abreast. Pedestrians can be forced to take refuge in poison oak, weeds or ditches beside the path. Some walkers fall when they’re startled and twist around. We always profusely thank cyclists who ring a bell and/or call out and slow down and ride single-file. Getting rid of bollards would be like getting rid of stop signs because there are accidents when people run through them.
EDITOR: PG&E CEO Patricia Poppe’s commitment and promise to underground 10,000 miles of distribution lines over 10 years is absolutely unattainable. For this to occur, the utility must clear, trench and bury an average of 2.8 miles of line per day, 365 days a year for 10 years.
Undergrounding distribution lines would be painfully slow, extremely expensive and not provide the prevention needed. Many 2017 wildfires, the 2018 Camp Fire and 2019 Kincade Fire were not caused by distribution lines, but rather from high-voltage transmission lines in areas of extreme fire danger where environmental impacts, transmission heat losses and extremely hazardous terrain absolutely prevent undergrounding.
State Sen. Mike McGuire, D-Healdsburg, introduced and passed Senate Bill 884 to hold PG&E accountable for its pledge. Gov. Gavin Newsom should veto this bill. It would be a reckless waste of time and money to oversee, regulate and fine PG&E for falling behind from day one on its unattainable promise.
Since October 2017, I have read everything available about wildfire prevention. Not one credible expert recommended undergrounding. PG&E must prioritize updating and hardening its equipment and reducing combustible vegetation throughout its grid.
The price of safety
EDITOR: Back in June of 2021 I tripped over a poorly placed unpainted wheel stop at the Bennett Valley golf range and broke a pelvic bone. I filed a claim against the city of Santa Rosa, which never inquired about my well-being but rejected my claim. I later won a small claims action against the city. But my whole approach was to make things of this nature safer for others. The city decided if it painted the wheel stops at my accident scene, it may have to paint them citywide. The city wasn’t willing to go that far. Why make things safer?
You can send letters to the editor to [email protected].