Vocal Sausalito residents opposed Bridgeway plan

I am writing to add context to the article published April 2 with the headline “Sausalito rejects grant for Bridgeway traffic revisions.”

I attended the entire five-hour special City Council meeting on March 29. It was clear to me that there was overwhelming opposition from those in attendance to remove the median lane on Bridgeway between Princess and Richardson streets in favor of installing bike lanes.

The median has been in place since the mid 1960s to allow for swift police and fire response to Old Town and, now, to the Golden Gate National Recreation Area. It provides an area for loading and unloading. It’s a refuge and escape valve for pedestrians and vehicles. The present configuration has worked for six decades.

Over 1,000 Sausalito residents signed a petition in opposition to this plan. Of comments submitted, 84% opposed the project. Most who commented at the meeting clearly opposed the project.

I found the data presented by the consultant to be confusing and self-contradictory. The police and fire chiefs testified that they did not see any reason to remove the median and install bike lanes. This project was rejected for very good reason.

— Sandra Bushmaker, Sausalito

Meschery lesson brought back fantastic memories

I am writing about the great article by the Press Democrat republished in the Marin IJ about students in the eighth-grade class of Janai Meschery (the daughter of former Warriors standout Tom Meschery). The article (“Miller Creek teacher enlists dad to debunk conspiracy theory about Chamberlain,” April 3) focused on how the elder Meschery helped his daughter teach a lesson about the importance of eyewitness accounts and the amazing 100-point performance by former Philadelphia Warriors great Wilt Chamberlain in 1962.

As a former teacher at Camden High School in nearby New Jersey, I have never forgotten the jubilance Philadelphians experienced that night when we heard about Chamberlain’s awesome feat. Little did we know that the 100-point record would stand today.

Bravo to Tom Meschery for his accomplishments in literature and his teaching career. By speaking to the students, he showed what it meant to take on the doubters and recapture a magical time.

— Marcia Smolens, Mill Valley

Close Richmond Bridge bike lane during commute

Government is supposed to solve problems and support the public. Considering that, I must ask: Why is the bike and pedestrian lane still open on the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge?

On a recent morning, I drove eastbound at 7 a.m. Traffic was backed up for miles going West. It was also crowded on streets accessing the bridge in Richmond. According to reports, it has been this way for many months. Yet the bike lane, which is supposed to be used as a “breakdown lane” to prevent vehicle incidents from causing a backup, is still open.

This appears to be an extreme example of bureaucracy run amok. It seems that no official will do anything without studies, hearings and more. The bike lane must be removed during weekday commute hours. It’s obvious it was a mistake.

It must be removed to help end the daily frustration and anguish of so many drivers.

— Steve Isaacs, Greenbrae

Fairfax recall effort is a waste of time, money

In his recently published letter, Michael Ardito says Fairfax must recall veteran Town Council members Lisel Blash and Stephanie Hellman. I believe the opposite is true for several reasons.

Some of the accusations against them are unverified. Additionally, this dubious attempt to recall them may cost at least $60,000. I worry the price tag could rise to over $100,000 if it passes, considering that it will trigger another election to choose two replacement council members. This considerable sum would be better spent on more pressing issues, such as repairing Fairfax’s “worst in Marin” streets and funding fire station upgrades.

The timeline for the possible recall brings up other problems. It specifies 90 days to collect 1,500 signatures, plus 30 days of staff time for the laborious process of verifying every signature. If the signatures are deemed legitimate, a special election (asking for a yes-or-no vote) must be held within 30 days. Then, if the recall passes, yet another election will be needed to select two new council members.

The entire process adds up to at least five months. Last year’s election for seats on the Fairfax Town Council is now infamous for being the most negative and acrimonious in years. We don’t need another six months of dysfunction. The tension at Town Council meetings will be unbearable as recriminations between opposing parties dominate during open time. Our citizens would be better served with the council concentrating on the business at hand rather than campaigning against one another.

For these reasons I urge you not to sign the divisive recall petition.

— Richard Pedemonte, Fairfax

Protesting Tesla in opposition to Musk is silly

I fully support the act of protesting — especially in today’s world — but directing that energy against Tesla and its vehicle owners because of decisions CEO Elon Musk is making in his role as special adviser to President Donald Trump is misguided.

Musk owns approximately 15% of Tesla, and while the company contributes to over a third of his wealth, losing it entirely wouldn’t strip him of his power. He would still be one of the richest, most influential individuals on the planet. Based on everything I know about him, I think he is a despicable sociopath.

I purchased my used Tesla over six years ago as a personal stand against Big Oil, air pollution and industries that profit from environmental destruction without a second thought. I embraced emerging technology because I believed, and still do, that investing in sustainable solutions is one of the tangible ways an individual can contribute to change.

I put my money — quite a bit of it — where my values are. I proudly consider myself a tree-hugging, dirt-worshiping liberal. Tesla, as a company, represents innovation in clean energy and sustainable transportation, setting an industry standard that has pushed the world toward electrification.

That’s why seeing protests at local Tesla dealerships is frustrating. This kind of misplaced outrage is exactly what the “powers that be” want — an unfocused, ineffective expenditure of energy. Protesting Tesla and its owners only serves to undermine the legitimacy of the movement, making protesters appear like misdirected idealists sabotaging their own cause.

If you want to protest, take a stand against the man. Protest what he is doing, but don’t direct anger at those who are, in many cases, working toward the same future you are fighting for.

— Raul Atkinson, Tiburon

Columbia student’s actions must be examined

I want to respond to the recently published letter by Caroline Shadan about the consequences Columbia University student Mahmoud Khalil faces.

Kahlil was the lead negotiator for the illegal pro-Palestinian encampment at Columbia. According to then Columbia President Minouche Shafik, “The group was informed that they are not permitted to occupy spaces on campus, are in violation of the university’s rules and policies and must disperse. … (All) participants in the encampments are suspended, not authorized to be on university property and are trespassing.”

From my perspective, this case is not a free-speech, political-advocacy issue. Khalil chose to represent people who were violating university policies, disrupting learning on campus and who said they had no plans to leave until their demands were met.

Khalil’s decision to support people who were willing to interfere with an American educational institution’s core mission is political activity and resulted in a request for police action from a university president.

That is why his green card is under threat of revocation.

— Julia Lutch, Davis