Sunday’s Letters to the Editor

Unfair subsidies

EDITOR: I just finished the commentary by former Insurance Commissioner Steve Poizner (“I lost my fire insurance — and you could too,” April 17). I understand Poizner’s frustration over the lack of affordable options for homeowner’s insurance coverage. I would just like to point out that the insurance industry will seek to pass on its costs to all ratepayers.

Insurance is profitable, because insurers spread risks to all available ratepayers, which means we all pay for the higher costs associated with the increased frequency and severity of wildfires.

I live in a small Northern California city that is not too close to open space, hopefully resulting in a lower risk from wildfires. It seems to me that people such as myself are facing potentially higher insurance costs to subsidize people living in areas more prone to wildfires. In my view, this is patently unfair.

ANDY SANCHEZ

Rohnert Park

Overlooked concerns

EDITOR: It is unfortunate that your article related to the proposed affordable housing project in Sebastopol chose to cast a racist shadow, made no mention of the valid concerns of the neighbors and excluded the voices of people who attended the public meetings (“Another try at apartments,” April 13).

If you had done some investigative journalism, you would have learned that this project proposed a dangerously high retaining wall right on the property line, that they plan to remove heritage trees that are not even on their property, and they plan to bulldoze an entire hill, hauling off over a thousand truckloads of dirt. That’s enough to bury Sebastopol’s Main Street 20 feet deep. Those are valid concerns that your article never mentioned. Everyone attending the meetings was in favor of affordable housing but wanted a project that respected the sloping land and neighboring properties.

The company proposing this project is an out-of-state, for-profit developer. While I have no issue with people profiting from affordable housing, they need to respect the land and property rights of others in the process.

Shame on The Press Democrat for not doing any investigative reporting before painting an inaccurate and unfair picture of the citizens of Sebastopol.

TED LUTHIN

Sebastopol

Settlers vs. squatters

EDITOR: The Euro-American expansion west to California in 1845 was called Manifest Destiny. This migration into Native American and Mexican lands was “destined by God,” said President James Polk. The Homestead Act, passed in 1862, allowed homeless settlers to claim 160 acres of “free” land to build homesteads. Today, Sonoma County’s homeless are called squatters and freeloaders, but in Manifest Destiny America, homeless immigrants from Europe and the East were called settlers. I guess it is all about who is doing the migrating.

DAVE HEVENTHAL

Windsor

No place for politicians

EDITOR: I’m at a loss for words over states banning abortion — now Oklahoma, with a 10-year prison sentence for a doctor performing them. How is it right for politicians to dictate what a woman can or cannot do with her body? I know, it’s an old question, but it’s been ramped up lately by mostly Republican rhetoric at the expense of women everywhere.

What, I wonder, would one of the male governors do if his daughter became pregnant? Make her have a child at 16? Or younger? Give it up for adoption? Keep it? Put her body and mind through that trauma? Or, heaven forbid, an uncle raped the daughter? If she became pregnant and fearing the wrath of daddy and mommy, tried to sort it out herself, or sought out illegal means?

Of course, if a child wants a baby, oxymoron there, and the parents are anti-abortion and want to raise their grandchild, then I guess that dynamic works for them. But we are raised (or should be) to know what’s best for ourselves. That includes our minds and bodies. We should be able to make these decisions on our own and rely on professional physicians to ensure we are safe. Not politicians.

DEB McGAULEY

Santa Rosa

Who benefits?

EDITOR: Jeff Quackenbush’s thorough article about Amazon and its distribution plans left out a couple details (“Why Amazon opened a site in Napa Valley,” April 17). That enormous warehouse south of Sonoma sits adjacent to Highway 12, not in a quiet suburban neighborhood. All those delivery vans are going to be driving the streets and roads of Sonoma County anyway. The county has turned its back on all those tax dollars, even though all those vehicles will be creating wear and tear on county roads without ever buying any fuel here. Who benefits from all this obstructionism?

JOE ROBERTS

Sebastopol

You can send letters to the editor to letters@pressdemocrat.com.