Plan for Marinwood is a big win for community

Congratulations to the Marin County Board of Supervisors for its recent approval and allocation of funds to build housing at Marinwood Plaza (“Marin supervisors allocate $6.25M for Marinwood housing,” Dec. 21).

The property has been sitting vacant for so long. The contamination that slowed plans in recent years has been remedied. Marinwood Market hung on for years with that unattractive land next door.

For the first time, I think the state Legislature’s decision to approve laws promoting more housing worked well. Truthfully, I think the new rules made it impossible for nearby residents to sabotage the development. Marin has an acute need for housing for those in middle and lower income brackets. People who work here deserve housing here. Providing it will reduce their need to live as far away as Vacaville, forcing them to commute across Highway 37. It’s one way to reduce pollution.

On a personal level, I am delighted that Marinwood Market will remain. It is my go-to market and I appreciate their efforts to provide a well-stocked store.

— Gladys C. Gilliland, San Rafael

Supervisors should not have approved MC lights

I am disappointed that the Marin County Board of Supervisors agreed to approve Marin Catholic High School’s field lights plan and to grant the school an exemption from having to undergo an additional environmental review.

At a time when the environment is suffering (I expect it will suffer even more during the upcoming federal administration change), our supervisors waived an impact report and went for the votes.

There’s a huge push for fewer lights and more “dark sky,” because without it we all suffer. Nighttime lighting impacts wildlife (including their migrations), plants, people with vision problems and our general health.

Yes, I understand, this is framed as helping young people. But I’m not certain this is really best for them. I think teaching a lesson about living within appropriate boundaries may be better for them (and their parents).

— Marie Salerno, Greenbrae

Board, superintendent are out of touch at TUHSD

When it comes to building a team, the amount of advice available can feel overwhelming. Similarly, if you want to bake a cake that most people will enjoy, you’ll likely need a key ingredient like sugar.

But one ingredient alone doesn’t make a cake. The same principle applies to developing young people into productive adults. Education is a crucial ingredient. It plays a central role in shaping productive individuals and creating a better future.

Considering that, I think arguments calling the Tamalpais Union High School Board of Trustees and Superintendent Tara Taupier “out of touch” are spot on. Their pointed anger over another dip in test scores illustrates how past policies allowed the slide to happen (“‘Lipstick on a pig’: Tam Union student test scores rankle trustees,” Dec. 14).

I first noticed it at Archie Williams High School several years ago (when it was known as Drake High). Leadership there seemed to have a philosophy that everyone who participates in an activity, regardless of skill level or outcome, should be recognized for effort. In practice, it meant students were rewarded merely for showing up. I worry it led to teachers being encouraged to give students passing grades regardless of performance. I know some highly experienced senior educators opted for early retirement in the face of that philosophy.

I think it’s similar for the TUHSD board. It supports initiatives that, in many cases, do not align with preparing our youth for a competitive, engaging and successful future. In the IJ article, Trustee Kevin Saavedra is quoted calling attempts to minimize the students’ poor scores “lipstick on a pig.” But even that “hogwash” rings hollow when we consider the board’s lack of leadership and inability to build a productive team.

The really sad part: It’s our young people who lose out.

— Ken Mayer, San Anselmo

Path to electrification makes sense for state

As vice chair of the San Anselmo Climate Action Commission, I am writing in response to Walt Rose’s recently published letter headlined “California needs a better plan to produce electricity.” Rose questions whether California will have enough electric energy to supply electrification and wonders if it will cause electricity prices to go up.

My studies show we will have enough, and the price of it is likely to become less than the price of so-called “natural” gas for equal energy. We’ll have enough electricity for three solid reasons.

First, the transition from natural gas and gasoline won’t happen all at once. It will take 20 years for this transition to play out — time for generation, transmission and distribution facilities to keep up with demand.

Second, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, “Clean energy production in the state is increasing at a rapid pace. Solar and batteries have ended blackouts that plagued California for years. Renewable resources, including hydropower and small-scale (less than a megawatt) customer-sited solar photovoltaic systems, supplied 54% of California’s total in-state electricity generation in 2023.” This transition to clean energy will continue its explosive growth.

Third, electrified homes and vehicles use significantly less energy than those powered by fossil fuels. Furthermore, soon electric vehicles and home batteries will have the technology to send their unused energy back to the grid during times of high power demand. They will help supply, not deplete the electricity needed to power California.

As to price, new electric generation by solar and wind is already cheaper than new electric generation by fossil fuels, and as fewer and fewer people use natural gas, the price of these fuels will increase due to decreasing demand.

Finally, our health benefits from removing toxic natural gas from our homes. Electrification is a win for everyone.

— Susannah Saunders, San Anselmo

Health exec death should give pause for reflection

Corporate products deliver vast benefits, including longer, healthier lives. But corporations are not benevolent societies. They are human-created profit devices that frequently conceal their true nature. Deceit has deep traditions.

Don’t forget the parable of the crocodile offering a monkey a ride across the river. In midstream, the crocodile lowered its back, forcing the monkey onto its snout. As the crocodile flipped the monkey into the air and opened its jaws to swallow, the monkey exclaimed, “Why are you going to eat me? You promised to take me across the river.” The crocodile replied, “It’s in my nature.”

Corporations deliver wonderful products, if they are profitable. They resist making products that may be beneficial, but not profitable. We don’t have treatments for widespread deadly infectious diseases in poverty-stricken Africa because there’s little profit.

I saw many in the media quoting Jay Feinman’s book “Delay, Deny, Defend” in response to the awful killing of United Healthcare CEO Brian Thompson on Dec. 4. The section reads, “An insurance company’s greatest expense is what it pays out in claims. If it pays out less in claims, it keeps more in profits. Therefore, the claims department became a profit center rather than the place that kept the company’s promise.”

Similarly, companies increase profits by dumping untreated waste products. Their savings are society’s loss, multiplied ten-fold, not just in dollars, but in the vast pain and destruction from climate change related events. Sometimes catastrophes have upsides.

Thompson’s killing opened an important discussion of people’s frustrations with our for-profit health care system. Attempts to curb climate change draw back the curtain on corporate political power, obfuscation and callousness. The election of our incoming president revealed widespread unhappiness with the status quo.

We might stumble, but we are steadily moving to a better place. I’m hopeful. It’s in my nature.

— Barry Phegan, Greenbrae