Latest on ex-San Rafael officer is very concerning

I am shocked by the audacity of Brandon Nail, the former San Rafael police officer, who is seeking to reclaim his job while facing felony charges (“Former San Rafael officer in abuse case seeks reinstatement,” April 25). Reinstating him would invite disaster.

I trust that the San Rafael Police Department will vehemently reject his appeal. Taxpayers have already footed the bill for a year of paid leave during the investigation, which rightfully led to his termination. Now, he faces criminal charges that could result in imprisonment, potentially leading to significant financial settlements for his victim, Julio Lopez.

The judicial system’s sluggishness in delivering justice is concerning; this case should have gone to trial much sooner.

As for the subpoena compelling the victim to testify at Nail’s appeal hearing, it’s wholly unnecessary. Lopez has already provided numerous interviews and testified at the preliminary hearing, not to mention the existence of explicit body camera footage capturing the entire incident. This smacks of intimidation.

The people of San Rafael deserve a police force that protects and serves their community, not one that intimidates and assaults its citizens.

— Louette Colombano, Mill Valley

San Rafael can join other cities opposed to SB 9

San Rafael, Marin’s only designated charter city, missed an opportunity to join five charter cities in Southern California in bringing a lawsuit against the state.

Now Redondo Beach, Carson, Torrance, Whittier and Del Mar are celebrating Judge Curtis Kin’s finding that Senate Bill 9 is unconstitutional for charter law cities (“LA judge strikes down California lot-splitting law,” April 27). Kin is a judge on the Los Angeles County Superior Court in California and issued his ruling April 22.

SB 9 was passed in 2022. It allowed property owners to split a single-family lot into four parcels to accommodate four homes. SB 9 ruled out community input, parking requirements or setbacks. Instead, it only required “ministerial” review; in other words, a rubber stamp of the city clerk.

Attorney Pam Lee of Aleshire and Wynder LLP prevailed. She argued that SB 9 was “neither reasonably related to its stated concern of ensuring access to affordable housing.” The court found the state failed to present evidence to support its assertion that upzoning would increase the supply of below market-rate housing.

I am a program manager for the activist group Catalysts for Local Control. For years, we have said the state methodology to determine housing mandates is unreliable. The state audit in 2022 described the process as flawed. The Department of Finance pointed out that the California population is flat through 2060, diminishing Sacramento’s frenzied call for more building.

This is a big deal. Now, thanks to Lee and Kin, we can also say housing legislation for charter cities is unconstitutional.

It is time for the San Rafael City Council to support these five charter cities. The Legislature needs to understand that we are not interested in zoning for an additional 3,220 units based on the flawed housing needs assessment.

— Raymond G. Lorber, San Rafael

Housing, homelessness issues pin state into corner

The public housing model was successful from the end of the Depression through the 1970s or so, but sufficient funding for maintenance and upkeep was not provided.

Now we have a growing slice of the population trying to live in RVs on the roadside, in parks and in other public spaces. In a market of inflated values, the state’s housing mandate requiring affordable new housing be provided by local builders and owners seems to me magical thinking.

— Potter Wickware, Mill Valley

Sausalito dock integrity is district’s responsibility

As a former Sausalito mayor and City Council member, I would like to add context to a recently published letter to the editor by Sandra Macleod White.

It implied that recent lengthy discussions about the Sausalito ferry “landside” improvements project could be to blame for inaction that led to issues at the dock last month. However, the defect that closed the dock had nothing to do with the improvement plan.

Don’t blame the contentious landside hearings for the dock integrity, which is the responsibility of the Golden Gate Bridge District.

— Sandra Bushmaker, Sausalito