It is a pleasant surprise to see the current City Council govern in a more collegial and collaborative manner despite their political leanings and I feel this has benefited our community as a whole.

I have also been following the debate regarding the council’s plan to ban cars from the park adjacent to Woodland. As a “facts” advocate, I have seen no data suggesting that cars have put pedestrians at risk. I am unaware of any significant injuries as a result of allowing cars to use the short stretch of road and I share previous writers’ views that bicyclists actually are actually more potentially hazardous. Thus, the arguments put forward supporting Option 2 seem to be a solution in search of a problem.

Additionally, the costs associated with Option 2 are significantly greater than Option 4. I, for one, would prefer to see those extra funds utilized to provide more traffic officers, firefighters or street repairs. Finally, I have yet to see a LTE from a resident along Woodland who supports Option 2. Those individuals are the ones most directly affected by the proposed changes and it appears their opinions are being ignored.

I am certain those on the council who voted in favor of Option 2 did so in good faith, however I would encourage them to listen to their constituents and reconsider their support of Option 2 over Option 4. There is no shame in our elected leaders taking a step back and reconsidering their position. Actually, it would be a breath of fresh air.

— Jeff Lobosky, Chico

Editor’s note: Every Sunday, we will select one letter from the previous seven days as our “Letter of the Week.” We’re choosing the letter that, in our view, stands as the best example of civil, thoughtful and fact-based commentary with extra points given on occasion for originality.