Thursday’s Letters to the Editor


Ask the public

EDITOR: I am protesting the removal of Rasta Charlie from the Montgomery Village shopping center (“Rasta Charlie forced to find new home,” Sept. 1). The village is part of our history, where we shop and enjoy its diverse offerings, evoking a feeling of kinship. Maybe this is why I am so dismayed at the abrupt decision by the management based on the request of one woman. We, the people, have a voice and we need to be heard. I have written asking the management to consider reviewing the situation by inviting comments from patrons of their establishment.



Misleading discussion

EDITOR: For the water well permit ordinance before the Board of Supervisors, much of the discussion, and the materials from Permit Sonoma, focus on whether the legal concept known as the public resources trust doctrine (and the ordinance) applies only to navigable waters or also to nonnavigable waters. This is an unnecessary and misleading discussion.

First, the public trust doctrine is a common law concept courts refer to when there is no applicable statutory law. It is a red herring to debate the public trust doctrine when discussing the pros and cons of a proposed statute.

Second, to state the obvious, the proposed ordinance would regulate wells. While some wells may be located close to navigable waters, all wells draw from groundwater, which is necessarily nonnavigable. To argue that an ordinance to regulate wells that draw from groundwater is limited to navigable waters makes no sense and flies in the face of the language of the ordinance, which states: “The people of Sonoma County have a primary interest in the protection of groundwater resources.”

All living things require water, and the human occupants of the county get most of their water from groundwater, a public resource, as the ordinance states: “The purpose of this chapter is to protect the groundwater resource of the county.”



Embracing diversity

EDITOR: On a clear day, one can see forever. It may be possible that the management firm of Montgomery Village cannot acknowledge the worth of Rasta Charlie, but I am confident that Charles Schulz could. Surely the citizens of Santa Rosa can embrace diversity and set the foundation of enlightenment firmly upon the ground of acceptance and humanity. We grow not in leaps and bounds, but rather step by step, holding equality as our guiding star.


Santa Rosa

Indict Trump

EDITOR: Donald Trump has dodged a lot of bullets, but this time around he needs to be indicted. I think the Justice Department and everybody else knows that he took classified government documents — and then lied about it — because he and his people want to figure out a way to make money on this stuff or use it as leverage in ways yet to be determined. I do not think anybody thinks he took the stuff because he wanted to make a scrap book or have a library of top secret mementos.

Even if the Justice Department does not yet have evidence that he devised a plan to monetize classified government property, federal prosecutors still have plenty of evidence to charge him with obstruction of justice and violation of the Espionage Act. Former president or not, it’s time to formally charge this guy with the crimes of stealing classified documents and lying about it.


Santa Rosa

A two-state solution

EDITOR: A recent letter illustrated some of the misinformation being circulated regarding Israel and the Palestinians.

Israel — the state of the Jewish people who have returned to their indigenous homeland — is a state with equal civil and political rights for all its citizens, Jewish, Christian and Muslim. There is not a single right held by an Israeli Jew not also held by an Israeli Arab. The situation with the Palestinian Arabs — a population that has quintupled since 1967 — is indeed different, as they are not citizens of Israel. Half of them are ruled by Hamas; most of the rest are governed by the Palestinian Authority, led by Mahmoud Abbas, who is now in the 18th year of his four-year term, while 300,000 live in areas under Israeli military occupation.

The long-term solution to this situation would be peace between the Jewish state of Israel and a future Arab state of Palestine that would agree to live beside it in peace. Unfortunately, this is what Palestinian leaders turned down in 1947, 2000 and 2008. Sadly, they have made it clear that their main concern is not creating a Palestinian state, but rather eliminating the Jewish one.


Bodega Bay

You can send letters to the editor to

Source link

Leave A Reply

Your email address will not be published.