Submit your letter to the editor via this form. Read more Letters to the Editor.
VTA puts ‘more for less’
mantra on its head
In everything from manufacturing, agriculture, communication, heath care, housing and supply chain design, more for less is the mantra. It’s the driving ethos.
With the BSVII project and large single bore, VTA has managed to design this with:
• More excavation and less efficient use of space
• More concrete, steel, and labor with no increase in speed, capacity or efficiency
• More greenhouse gas in a time of growing climate crisis
• More public resources in the face of economic uncertainty
• More maintenance and security costs in a time of questionable fare box revenue.
When families, businesses and governments are trying to do more with less, VTA has managed to convince people less for more is good, and that they should pay for it.
VTA has put this driving ethos in reverse and not looked back.
David Dearborn
San Jose
YIMBY win should give
housing a boost
A huge shout-out to Sonja Trauss and other Yes In My Back Yard advocates for helping to push the Terraces of Lafayette complex toward the finish line (“East Bay YIMBY activists on the brink of a victory,” Page A1 Dec. 12).
For that matter, a big thanks to state Sen. Scott Weiner for his legislative efforts to enable denser housing and to columnist Dan Walters, the most sensible and pragmatic voice on all things California, for calling out the misuse of the California Environmental Quality Act to stymie new housing developments (“Environmental law’s misuse blocking housing brings calls for CEQA reform,” Page A9, Jan. 8).
It’s infuriating to hear about residents of affluent cities such as Palo Alto complaining that housing density could ruin the character of their neighborhoods or create more traffic as if such considerations trumped giving low- and middle-income people a place to live. Most of us have benefited from the Bay Area’s tremendous job creation. The trade-off is that living in a 1950s-style suburbia is no longer sustainable.
John Sanford
San Jose
State should treat
water with reverence
Paul Rogers’ Jan. 13 article regarding the “2-inch fish” (“Tiny fish hindering water capture,” Page A1, Jan. 14) does not tell the whole story.
Managers of upstream dams in California’s interior have many “masters.” They deal with flood control downstream, senior water rights holders and legal obligations to ensure flow downstream for restoration of spring Chinook salmon runs. While snowmelt runoff estimates are more accurate with better modeling, this is a particular challenge this season, after recent record snowfall.
Additionally, the article did not address to what extent anthropogenic climate change played a role in the intensity of this recent, record-breaking weather pattern.
With over 1,500 dams in California, and with 39 million people having a straw sucking water from nearly every surface water facility, all of us need to treat this resource with the same reverence our society seems to have for petroleum.
Sean Boyd
Fresno
Facial recognition
security is less safe
Re. “How facial recognition will transform airport security,” Page A7, Jan. 17:
With more than 6,542 illegal weapons seized at airport screenings in 2022, one wonders why anyone would recommend replacing these searches by relying on facial recognition technology.
Professor Sheldon Jacobson is clearly interested in the subject, but there is no number of pictures confirming that I am who I am that will also confirm I’m not carrying guns, drugs or other illegal items.
What nonsense, unless I have a previous criminal record with guns and drugs. Surely The Mercury News has better subjects to publish.
Allan MacLaren
San Jose
ID’ing backpack issue
is first step to solution
Re. “Why it matters that students’ backpacks are too heavy,” Page A8, Jan. 13:
I appreciate how you shone a light on an under-exposed topic that is affecting millions of students, myself included. I am intrigued by the solutions you proposed, especially the rolling backpacks and lockers.
As a teenager, I know how rolling backpacks and lockers are considered “uncool” among us. Rolling backpacks are inconvenient and noisy, while lockers scream “outdated” because much of our coursework is online-based.
However, it is concerning that so many school students are sacrificing their health by sticking to carry-on backpacks, which are also fashion statements. Is fitting the mold of “cool” worth the body strain, exhaustion and back damage? Peer pressure and bandwagoning can lead to detrimental activities.
At the root, I do not think there is a viable solution. Humans, especially teenagers, are social creatures who strive to be “in.” Nevertheless, raising awareness of the backpack crisis is the essential first step toward helping students.
Shannon Ma
Saratoga
Source: www.mercurynews.com