Submit your letter to the editor via this form. Read more Letters to the Editor.
Vote no on regressiveSan Ramon Measure N
Here’s what San Ramon won’t tell you about Measure N:
Measure N is a regressive tax — primarily hurting the middle class.
The City Council balanced the budget for 40 years. Why the sudden need for this sales tax increase?
They raised no other tax, like the hotel tax.
Sales tax revenue keeps pace with inflation. But, when both went up 17% the city budget went up 31%.
History shows Measure N is just first in a series of increases.
Measure N is a general tax — it has no special “citizen oversight.”
The city has yet to institute strict fiscal discipline, like: cutting staff to only essential personnel; freezing staff salaries and compensation; prioritizing expenses and eliminating as needed from the bottom up.
There should be no bailout for poor planning. They’re rezoning retail/commercial — a tax generator — to prioritize housing — a tax loser.
The city is spending $400,000 of taxpayer money on this.
Jim BlickenstaffSan Ramon
Evaluate candidates asindividuals before voting
I won’t tell you who to vote for for president. I leave that to your better judgment.
Carefully consider who you are voting for. Each of us will be voting for a person for president, not a party.
What are the person’s values, beliefs, morals and past performance? Are they honest, truthful and trustworthy? Do they believe in the rule of law and follow the law? Can you trust them with our future?
What do the people they have worked with say about their skills, knowledge, intelligence and ability to handle this job?
Carefully evaluate your source of information: Have they demonstrated their honesty, reliability and truthfulness?
Our vote is the most powerful thing that most of us exercise in participating in our government. Your vote is needed and essential for our democracy. Please vote in a well-informed and considered way. Our future depends on it.
Dwight LangLivermore
Paper offers trustedvoice on Price recall
Re: “Recall District Attorney Pamela Price” (Page A12, Oct. 27).
The East Bay Times editorial endorsing the recall of Alameda County District Attorney Pamela Price made me realize how important our local newspaper’s voice is in our community. Who else is more capable of sounding an alarm that actually will be heard?
A former DA’s office employee could warn us of Price’s incompetence, but his comments can easily be dismissed as the rantings of a disgruntled voice from the old regime. This is how Price has addressed the views, for instance, of Rep. Eric Swalwell.
Juxtaposed against the voices of people with direct, but assailable knowledge are the voices of people who speak but are not knowledgeable. For example, elected officials like Barbara Lee, Nancy Skinner and Keith Carson intone generally about how recall elections are not nice — definitely unhelpful.
But when the Times speaks, we listen. It has presented its views factually, cogently and from an unassailable position of neutrality. Thank you.
Clifford CampbellDanville
Measure W won’t helphousing in Berkeley
Vote no on Berkeley’s Measure W, which will make housing less affordable.
Pitched to “establish a homeless services panel of experts,” it then concedes, saying the City Council “need not follow the panel’s recommendations and may spend the revenues for any legitimate municipal purpose.” Indeed much of Measure P (which W would increase), was not used for homeless programs. Instead of burdening residents and small businesses, Berkeley needs to curtail plans for unneeded, out-of-scale projects, such as the $158 million proposed Civic Center upgrade.
By making housing prohibitive to buy and develop, raising Berkeley’s already-high transfer taxes will hurt low-income residents. Transfer taxes are inherently unfair, as they usurp equity the owner paid principal and interest for, apply even to properties sold at a loss, and disproportionally impact families who soon relocate. Rather than raising already extreme taxes, Berkeley must live within its means, so working residents and their children can remain here.
Joel LiboveBerkeley
Alameda County votersshould retain DA Price
Re: “Congressman threatens DA with lawsuit” (Page B1, Oct. 26).
Eric Swalwell’s attorneys were “surprised and shocked” that Price didn’t kowtow to the congressman?
Barbara Lee and Nancy Skinner are correct in their assessment of the recall process. This attempt is nothing more than the sore loser wasting their, and your, money and time. Retain Pamela Price.
R CoteCastro Valley
Dublin should rejectMeasure II at polls
The handling of Measure II by Dublin’s City Council has been dismissive and unaccountable. Despite strong opposition from local residents, officials have ignored legitimate concerns, particularly about the financial burden this measure places on taxpayers.
Related Articles
Letters: College trustee | Concerning democracy | Educators’ experience | Minimum wage | Prop. 4 | Your vote | End inaction | Measure E | Exacerbating divisions | MAGA candidates | Sunnyvale council
Letters: Fremont mayor | Measure J | Housing crisis | Squandering sacrifice | Disdain for institutions | Overwhelming defeat
Letters: Prop. 4 | Taxpayers’ burden | Children’s future | U.S. first | Tragic legacy | Hope and faith
Letters: East Bay parks | Gas prices | Dems’ no votes | Harris’ inexperience | Racism’s role
Letters: Stebbins for judge | Prop. 33 | Prop. 5 | Artificial turf | Trump and Musk | Affirmation vs. punishment
Measure II would cut protected open space and shift Livermore’s share of the Dublin Boulevard extension costs onto Dublin residents. The projected tax revenue from new commercial developments won’t cover even half of what’s needed, leaving taxpayers to foot the bill.
Meanwhile, the “Yes on II” campaign’s claim that local opponents are “out of town radicals” is misleading. The real support for Measure II comes from out-of-town developers, not our community.
Dublin deserves better leadership — leadership that respects our voices and preserves our green spaces. Vote no on Measure II.
Aaron Oehrle-SteeleDublin