Mob rule is not a vital part of democracy

Mob rule is not a vital part of democracy

Nancy Park says, “A discussion of all aspects of a project of this size is vital to an informed citizenry and a working democracy.”

Just when and where should this “discussion” take place, I’m wondering?

During the creation and approval of the General Plan, what courts call the “Constitution of land-use policy”? That discussion ended in 2011.

How about the conversations between 2008 and 2023, when the developer was openly discussing and meeting with stakeholders and incorporating inputs to refine the plan? Or the numerous planning meetings, and public comments under CEQA? The discussions before and during the planning commission hearings? City Council public hearing?

No, 15 years of systematic debate is not sufficient. By “discussion” she means forget all that, and just let the voters decide. If we are going to make our decisions by popular vote, we can just do away with all that other discussion and have voters decide instead, and they will be plenty busy.

But should that vote have been in 2008, 2011, or 2023? Think of the money we’ll save by getting rid of all those planners and nasty developers. Imagine how our housing stock will soar!

“Mob rule” is one way to describe a conniption fit, but tantrums are not planning. Thankfully, we follow a process that is open and fair to everyone. But for Nancy, it’s just fair to the wrong people, like those who build and buy housing.

— Rob Berry, Chico

Protect small businesses from frivolous lawsuits

It should come as no surprise to readers that small businesses in Chico are suffering. The impacts of inflation, a difficult labor market, high tax-burden from the state, and many more factors have made owning and operating a small business in our community almost too difficult to bear.

Many of these issues are national in scale, but some are a direct result of decisions made in Sacramento. Our local businesses have been fighting for their literal survival through a slew of costly state-induced burdens.

To the average reader, things like Prop-65, ADA, and PAGA likely sound like obscure acronyms that only a lawyer or professor would care about. But ask any Chico small business owner about PAGA or ADA violations, and you’ll likely get a strong, passionate education on the flaws of those policies.

No matter which problem you focus on, the core issue is that the state is making it easier for anyone to sue a business in ways that don’t protect against scammers and fraud. It doesn’t matter how minute the problem is or if damages even occurred; it has become frighteningly easy to leverage a lawsuit for financial gain, and we all end up paying for it. No one is spared.

If lawmakers want to ensure our state has a prosperous future ahead of it, they need to protect our small businesses from lawsuit abuse. There’s no time to waste, and the legislature already in session, let’s hope they do the right thing and prioritize small businesses.

— John Dennison, Chico

Nothing ‘mob’ about democratic processes

I read Rob Berry’s recent LTE on the Valley’s Edge referendum with some amusement.

“The people of Chico are being asked to abandon the defined, systematic, and orderly rules for long-range land use planning in favor of mob politics. Mob rule and the rule of law are not compatible.”

I find it hilariously ironic that Berry, an attorney, doesn’t seem to grasp basic democratic processes.

A referendum is a direct form of democracy, a chance for the public to vote on an issue in order to right a wrong or rein in the actions of public officials who are not acting in the best interests of their constituents. The recent referendum on Valley’s Edge was, of course, conducted in full accordance with the law. While I suppose one may compare the perfectly legal workings of our democracy to “mob rule” it all seems a bit … hyperbolic.

If I had to speculate, I’d guess the reason for this latest rant, aside from the pleasure of seeing his own name in print, was this: Rob has fallen from favor in some local conservative circles, as his lawsuits against the city and over-the-top vitriol finally caused even some ardent councilmember supporters to rethink their associations with him. Perhaps he believes that aligning himself with Valley’s Edge proponents will curry him favor again.

However, for the sake of this letter, I’ll assume this was simply a show of ignorance. Rob, this may help: https://electionbuddy.com/process/ballot-types/referendums/

— Angela McLaughlin, Chico

Permanent skating rink a boon for community

With the loss of some 5,000 students and the concomitant loss of millions of dollars in revenue, we have to face the prospect that Chico State may never recover its student population. These easy-to-get-in party schools with four-year graduation rates of only 20% to 30% may be a thing of the past.

We need new upscale businesses to recover economically since so many downtown stores are shuttered and closed (and half the children in the Chico Unified School District go hungry, necessitating school breakfasts as well as school lunches).

I propose we build an Olympic size skating rink. Charles Schultz, the Peanuts cartoonist, built a Swiss chalet style ice skating rink in Santa Rosa in 1969 and it’s one of the best rinks in the world.

An ice rink can have restaurants, blade sharpening services, skate rental, gift shops, etc. and would be a cool place to go in our hot summers. With a large roof, solar panels could provide free electricity to freeze the ice. Professional skating ice is only 7/8 to 1.5” thick and is kept at 24 to 28 degrees Fahrenheit. (The ice in the downtown skating rink this past season was 6” thick and kept much colder, which entailed a large cost in electricity, so this should not be used as a reference model.)

Just envision the new cement building at the Sierra Nevada beer factory as an ice skating rink and you can see the possibilities. We could host national and international ice skating events and make a ton of money for the community.

— Michael Peters, Chico

General Plan could not predict the future

Supporters of Valley’s Edge have made much of Chico’s General Plan. According to these supporters, thousands of Chico residents were involved over 14 years that would create a plan that meets the future needs of Chico. Planning, recreational and environmental professionals would flock to Chico to view this model plan, if they could get past the potholes.

If the creators of this plan had paid attention to the needs of Chico at that time, they should have recognized that there were sewer, water and and other infrastructural needs which still exist today. Fourteen years ago there had not been a Paradise fire nor a pandemic crisis. These events required additional fire and police protection. The Paradise fire resulted in 18,000 additional Chico residents the next day. These events were not foreseen 14 years ago.

The Chico General Plan is not a sacred document. Valley’s Edge is not not a good plan.

— Jerry Schacht, Chico

Time to stifle the speech of ‘parrots’

Ugh, I am beyond sick and tired of reading all these treasonous letters from those ungrateful MAGA cultists who clearly have no love for America, our government, our Constitution, or our way of life.

Honestly, it’s painfully obvious that these people are not intellectually capable of coming up with their own ridiculous ideas. They’re just regurgitating the same anti-American garbage that’s spewed by that two-time impeached Piece Of Stuff failure of a president, Trump, and his sorry band of sycophants like Marjorie Traitor Greene the elevator flatulator, Matt Gaetz, and Jim Jordan, and so on.

These MAGA reprobates are nothing but parrots parroting their master’s words in their asinine letters.

I mean, seriously, I perused the Constitution, and nowhere does it guarantee the right of parrots to spew their garbage.

So why does the E-R even give these unpatriotic MAGA propagandists a platform?

And don’t even get me started on the outrageous, anti-American lies they tell.

MAGA traitors actually have the nerve to try and establish an equivalency between migrants crossing our borders to make a better life for themselves and their children with Putin’s goons who cross the Ukrainian border just to kill innocent children and rape Ukrainian women. It’s disgusting.

— Jorge Smirnoff, Chico

Sometimes, students need the protection

Your “hits and misses” editorial last weekend reminded readers that there are circumstances where state law demands educators withhold information about LGBTQ+ students. But it fails to go a step further: it is the morally correct thing to do.

An educator of 17 years, my first priority is the wellbeing and safety of my students; a legal and moral obligation to protect them from harm. The far majority of parents I’ve known are wonderful, but I sometimes have to protect students from their own families.

Sometimes, it’s when students come out to me. I have had gay, lesbian and trans students whose parents did not accept who they are. Some were kicked out, or left home, when family refused to acknowledge their identities. Some were threatened with physical harm. Some were abused.

I will not put my students in that position. I love them far too dearly to subject them to that kind of treatment. And no law, or school board, or threat to my livelihood or person will cause me to do any different. I wouldn’t out a student against their will if Jesus Christ himself materialized in my classroom and demanded it. It would still be wrong.

I wish we lived in a different, more accepting world. I wish every parent loved their child unconditionally, as they should. But until then, trusting a young person to know if their parents are safe is the best we can do, and the only morally correct option.

— Matt Sutter, Chico