Marin budget should not be expanded this way

I am writing in response to the article published May 10 with the headline “Marin County budget outlook: New spending and ‘economic uncertainty.’”

According to the article, “The cost of the second largest budget adjustment, $2.5 million to add 20 full-time employees to the Office of the County Executive, will not be reimbursed by the state or federal government.” That’s problematic. I also find it curious that nine of the employees will form a new “climate and sustainability” team.

In terms of obvious need, if this money is available, I think it would be far better to go to road repair. As I bounce over Marin’s numerous potholes, I wonder what exactly will be the work of an eight-hours-a-day, five-days-a-week person on that team doing something actually useful for the taxpayers? When, exactly, will we see the benefits of that expense? I suspect it will almost certainly not be in our lifetimes.

On the other hand, we will surely notice that the potholes are not fixed. I think Marin County supervisors need to think more about whether money spent will actually benefit us. In this uncertain financial time, the creation of nine jobs that I do not believe can be measured by cost benefit or efficiency is a bad move.

— Kip Maly, Woodacre

Corte Madera plan needs to have smaller units too

I have resided on Lucky Drive in Corte Madera for 35 years. I am concerned about the proposed housing project at 240 Tamal Vista Blvd. (“Corte Madera residents appeal housing project,” May 9). Despite its aim to address the affordable housing crisis, I think it is failing to meet the essential needs of key vulnerable populations: the elderly, seniors on fixed incomes and single parents.

This development is exclusively offering three- and four-bedroom units. By overlooking the need for one- and two-bedroom apartments, the project appears to discriminate against elderly individuals and single-parent households that won’t be able to afford larger units.

I can only hope that management will have a policy of one-family per unit and that it enforces it. I suspect parking will be problematic as the number of residents increases. I believe the Lucky Drive corridor is currently overused beyond capacity and the traffic congestion will affect all, including emergency services.

Affordable housing should be reflective of the needs of the community. By excluding smaller, cost-effective unit options, the project shuts out a large segment of the population who are most in need, particularly low-income seniors and single parents trying to provide for their children on limited budgets.

To serve the community, the project should provide equitable access to housing that will align with goals of social responsibility and urban inclusivity. The current housing mix should be revised or officials should find a less congested area viable and affordable for seniors. To seemingly ignore that 41% of all seniors in Marin County are low income is unacceptable.

— Judy Christadore, Corte Madera

Fairfax council members should not be recalled

I’ve lived in Fairfax for decades. I raised my kids here. I worked for many years in local grocery stores serving our community. I stay civically engaged and care deeply for my community.

That’s why I want to speak up in strong support of Mayor Lisel Blash and Vice Mayor Stephanie Hellman, who are the target of a recall effort right now. I’ve watched these two in action. They’re always prepared and organized.

They have serious work to do. The sad truth is, it’s not always possible to get it done in a way that leaves everyone happy. I believe that recalls should not be brought about for differences in ideology. Recall efforts should be saved for cases of real malfeasance. From my perspective, that’s simply not the case here.

The mayor and vice mayor continue to show up to do the work of the people. Just for doing that, I have seen and heard many rude and untrue comments targeting them. Some of the allegations hurled at them are unsubstantiated and, frankly, a distraction. And yet, Hellman and Blash continue to show up.

Now is the time for thoughtful, united action — not unnecessary disruption. Let’s work together and support our mayor, vice mayor, the other Town Council members and our town.

Resist this needless recall effort which only threatens to divide us. Please do not sign the recall petitions.

— Maureen McManus, Fairfax

Downtown San Rafael traffic is already very bad

Any person driving at rush hour past Second, Third or Irwin streets in downtown San Rafael would be incredulous to believe that plans are afoot to build a 17-story building with more than 200 apartments nearby (“San Rafael high-rise apartment tower plan grows,” May 11).

Already, the traffic is so heavy that it causes considerable delays. If a majority of the new residents have cars, it will overwhelm and seriously delay transportation in the vicinity. I urge all responsible officials to do everything in their power to deny the permit.

— Ernest B. Hook, San Rafael

Disappointed by law firms capitulating to Trump

I’m a lawyer, and I think it’s disgusting that some major law firms are appearing to bend the knee to President Donald Trump (“Trump reaches deals with 5 law firms, allowing them to avoid prospect of punishing executive orders,” April 12).

Perhaps I’m a naïve idealist who left practicing law for legal education, but I think when you graduate from law school and pass the bar that you join a “priesthood” devoted to the rule of law and the integrity of the legal institutions that undergird our country. The purpose of a legal career is not to make money, although that may be a happy result of effort. The purpose is to do justice.

Those lawyers in major law firms who bow to external pressure in order to retain their high fees or preserve client relationships with major corporations have missed the central goal of their profession. For too long, I’ve seen legal newspapers tout verdicts that result in high recoveries from which lawyers receive their proportional fees. Congratulations should be given not to the size of the fee but rather to the quality of the verdict. I hope our graduating law students avoid the firms that have capitulated. And I hope these firms come to their senses. They are not protecting the rule of law, but rather their fees from major clients. Shame on them.

— Jack Wilson, Greenbrae

Trump’s behavior worthy of significant protest

I’m writing to disagree with a recent letter by Tim Peterson congratulating the IJ for running a letter by Bill McLaughlin in support of President Donald Trump.

Peterson writes that “irrational rage “ is the only response from Democrats to the current situation our country finds itself in. Well, I counter that it is not irrational to be outraged by a president who appears to refuse to obey the law and who seems to think it’s OK to deport American citizens to other countries without due process. I think Trump is destroying our government without any rational plan. From my perspective, he is ignoring climate change like it isn’t happening right now.

I think we should be outraged at these and other actions by Trump and the out-of-control Republican Party. To do anything less is basically un-American and will only lead to more abuses of power. Trump’s actions are why there are more Americans taking to the streets to protest. He seems ready to blow it all up to justify another tax break for the richest people.

It is disgusting that the inequality in this country has grown to such a wide division. Trump’s plans appear to take resources from underprivileged people and give them to the rich. It deserves more than just rage, it deserves protest like we haven’t seen since the 1960s.

— Paul Bartolini, Santa Rosa