Count value of all who rely on children’s center

The recent report about the Fairfax-San Anselmo Children’s Center (“Fairfax kids’ center, school district spar over appraisal,” Feb. 12) prompts me to ask: Which children count in the Ross Valley School District?

Last November, in a document saved on the district website, RVSD board President Shelley Hamilton wrote that the sale price of the property housing the children’s center could be reduced based on the “public benefit” of “children who attend district schools.” That statement has me concerned that district leaders calculate the value based on the number and pattern of attendance in district classrooms of children who also attend or attended the center. If that is true, the value of quality care and education for infants, toddlers and preschoolers will not count.

Additionally, some families, upon a child graduating preschool at the center, choose private school or the charter school. Shouldn’t those children count as important in our community? And children who continue into the center’s school-age care programs would only count if they attend an RVSD school.

The board should have a true sense of the educational needs in its district, regardless of whether it is directly providing them. RVSD is now a basic-aid district. Funding is a percentage of property tax revenue, not a per-child head count. Trustees must work on behalf of all of the voters who elected them and who pay parcel taxes and property taxes.

RVSD leadership says it supports the Fairfax-San Anselmo Children’s Center and wants to get fair value for taxpayers. Disregarding children in our community to call something “fair value” is shameful.

— Peggy Dodge, San Anselmo

Group’s use of the term ‘bounty’ is dehumanizing

In a recently published letter to the editor, Susan Kirsch exposes a pro-housing group for its “bounty program” to call out elected officials. The word “bounty” brings back a rather ugly memory carried by those Trail of Tears survivors who had to move from the area formerly known as the Nations (now Oklahoma) because White people put bounties on Indian families living on land that might become part of the great Oklahoma land rush.

The bounty system continued with discovery of oil in that area. Not only were the Indians murdered for their land, but for their oil rights, which were being mysteriously transferred over to White families. In the westward settlement of America, various states, including Arizona (prior to statehood) and New Mexico (also prior to statehood) placed a bounty on collecting the scalps of Comanche and Apache Indians.

More recently, there are reports that bounties were given out during the Vietnam war by selling the ears of dead enemy troops (by both sides).

Today, bounties are paid out for the killing of coyotes in some states.

The use of the word bounty by the housing group is either a conscious or unconscious move to dehumanize their opponents.

— Rick Johnson, Novato

Energy from rooftop solar helps protect PG&E’s grid

This is in response to Nick Clark’s letter published Feb. 5. He indicated that, during power outages, energy created via rooftop solar panels does not assist Pacific Gas and Electric Co.’s grid. That may be true, but during all other times it helps tremendously.

Rooftop solar sends back energy to the grid on a daily basis. By doing so, rooftop solar substantially reduces the probability of power outage.

— Gaetan Lion, Mill Valley

Huffman must reconsider view on Pt. Reyes ranches

The recently published article about Rep. Jared Huffman (“‘Hitting his stride’: Marin’s Huffman adjusts to shifting political landscape,” Feb. 16) mentioned that he is now ranking member, and was chair, of the House of Representatives Subcommittee on Water, Oceans, and Wildlife.

I find that peculiar. I am not the only one who believes Huffman’s positions are helping to protect dairy ranches at Point Reyes National Seashore. According to data, those ranches disfavor water quality, ocean discharge of livestock-polluted water and native wildlife in this national park.

I think Marin can do better. I hope Huffman doesn’t plan to be a “lifer” in Congress.

— Tom Kucera, San Rafael

Elephant seals need clean water in Pt. Reyes

Northern elephant seals, once nearly extinct, have made a remarkable comeback. About 100 of these marine mammals survived in California in the 1920s. An estimated 124,000 live along our coast today. Point Reyes National Seashore beaches are a critical birthing ground for the species and the National Park Service protects the seals from human disturbance by closing areas in the park to visitors during seal pupping season.

Meanwhile, the park service leases 25% of the park to ranchers whose 5,000 dairy and beef cattle graze these national lands. Cattle in the park annually produce roughly 110 million pounds of manure, some of which flows into park waterways and ultimately the Pacific Ocean, exposing humans and wildlife to dangerous levels of water pollution. On a recent trip to take photos of elephant seals in the park, it was clear that those near ranches were wallowing in the pathogen-laden muck.

Some 2 million visitors a year visit the park, where 100 plant and animal species are listed as rare, threatened or endangered. Nonetheless, the park service dedicates 28,000 acres to private ranching — despite the harmful impacts to the park, wildlife and visitor experience.

Imagine if the park service were to uphold its mission to preserve our national parks unimpaired for future generations and end private ranching in the park. Land now committed to cattle operations would instead be dedicated to public enjoyment and education. Wildlife habitat — much of it overgrazed and trampled by the cattle — could gradually be restored. Climate-destructive methane emissions from the cattle would be eliminated. Water quality — some of the worst in California — would be vastly improved.

This was the national seashore envisioned more than 60 years ago when the park service purchased the ranches for the public. It’s time for that vision to be realized.

— Jocelyn Knight, Corte Madera

Policies in Middle East must reflect all interests

I want to congratulate authors David N. Myers and Daniel Sokatch for having the courage to write the recently published commentary that appeared in the Marin IJ (“Palestinians in Israel have new cause to fear for their future,” Feb. 13).

As the recognized Israel lobby in the U.S., the American Israel Public Affairs Committee is perhaps the ultimate in “cancel culture.” It could be argued that makes it the most powerful lobby in the U.S. No one on either side of the political divide dare speak against it. What other lobby can say that?

Israel is a successful, powerful economic and military power with little realistic threats to its security. We have asked them to move to end the West Bank occupation and move to a two-state solution, to end their settlement building, to end collective punishment and the destruction of Palestinian homes. All of these requests have been ignored with no consequences.

It is no longer true that there are only shared values between the U.S. and Israel, that there is no daylight between us or that there is a special relationship. It is time we treat Israel the same as we treat any other ally. It is time the media bring into the light of day the actions of the Israel lobby.

Israel cannot act as it does without the support of the U.S. It is time our policies reflect American humanitarian and security interests and not the interests of American politicians doing the bidding of a powerful lobby.

— Jack A. Rauch, San Rafael