Submit your letter to the editor via this form. Read more Letters to the Editor.
Walgreens call shows
Newsom’s arrogance
Re: “Newsom says state is done with Walgreens over limiting abortion drug distribution” (Page A1, March 7).
California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s arrogance knows no limits. Upset with Walgreens for following reproductive laws in other states, the governor threatened Walgreens with a loss of business in California. The state followed up by canceling $54 million in contracts.
Where you stand on the issue of reproductive rights is not the issue here; following the law is what is at stake. The governor is telling Walgreens to not follow the laws of many states they do business in because it conflicts with California’s laws. How arrogant. Since when do California’s laws trump those of other states? To ignore the laws of the states they do business in would place Walgreens in legal jeopardy in those locations.
Newsom obviously doesn’t care, but I think I know how he would react if the shoe were on the other foot.
Mark Carbonaro
Monterey
Bring charges over
$1M book fraud
In reading the March 7 article by Gabriel Greschler, “Plagiarized $1M history book is canceled,” (Page A1) one is left to wonder why there has been no referral to our county district attorney, or to the California attorney general, and if they will not take on a political hot potato to send the referral to the U.S. Prosecutor for California Northern District for the fraud and false claims that . Jean McCorquodale perpetrated against our county that was revealed last June.
Also, I believe an ethical review should be conducted on County Council James Williams, who is trying to sweep McCorquodale’s acts under the rug when as he was quoted “legal actions could span from dropping the matter entirely to filing a contract dispute,” in addition to keeping the $1 million.
No, she should be forced to discourage her ill-gotten gains and pay penalties of up to three times those illicit gains under the false claims act.
Jack Field
San Jose
Tell Cupertino to say
no to lighted sign
The Public Storage facility on Highway 280 near De Anza Boulevard was supposed to emulate an office building (it does not) and not be visible from the highway (it is). Now, they want a huge illuminated sign with four.5-foot-tall letters along a 50-foot orange wall that will distract motorists and residents. Residents already suffer from the building’s brightly illuminated fake façade that resembles hallways with orange doors.
On March 21, the City Council will reconsider its February 4-to-1 decision that allowed the sign. The Planning Commission previously rejected it because it didn’t meet city code: “… sign’s color and illumination shall not produce distraction to motorists or nearby residents.” If approved, other businesses might claim entitlement to signs facing residents’ homes or our mostly-dark highway.
Write the City Council (citycouncil@cupertino.org) and say no to the sign and excessive lighting on the Public Storage building.
Rhoda Fry
Cupertino
Hydrogen cars’ cost
doesn’t pencil out
Re: “Hydrogen cars should be bigger part of state’s future” (Page A7, March 3).
Claims are made that using hydrogen cars will avoid increasing global warming and avoid overtaxing the electrical grid when, in fact, the opposite would more likely occur.
To use hydrogen, you produce it using one of two methods. One method uses the fossil fuel natural gas and produces carbon dioxide along with the hydrogen. Using this method increases global warming.
The other method uses electricity to split water into hydrogen and oxygen. This method will tax the electrical grid even more than electric car batteries. After hydrogen is produced, it must be passed through a fuel cell to produce electricity. This is much, much less efficient than using electricity to charge a car battery.
The economics tell the tale: Fuel cost is roughly four times more to drive a mile in a hydrogen car compared to driving in a battery electric car.
Andy Poggio
Palo Alto
Source: www.mercurynews.com