The National Park Service’s narrative regarding water quality in Point Reyes National Seashore, as relayed in a recently published Marin IJ article (“State to review Point Reyes water contamination strategy,” April 3), does not add up.
It’s true that monitoring stopped in the Pacific Ocean watersheds in 2013 and that water quality improved between 2000 and 2013, although saying “in some areas by as much as 95%,” is classic cherry-picking and quite meaningless. But I think David Lewis, the director of Marin County’s University of California Cooperative Extension, was deceptive when he implied that testing stopped because the managers were confident that measures were sufficient.
Why do I feel this way? Because I read the Park Service paper, which generated this optimism, which I think is naïve or feigned. When testing ceased, measures in those watersheds were still illegally high — between 47% and 76% frequency. Furthermore, I believe it is well known that the best management practices (BMPs) in this arena have a steep declining curve of effectiveness.
The San Francisco Regional Water Quality Board pointed out the issues in comments on the Park Service’s problematic management plan. It was done under the heading “Technical or financial infeasibility of implementing appropriate BMPs, management or mitigation measures to eliminate or reduce impacts.” To quote the comments: “the requirement to eliminate stormwater run-on into areas containing waste products, may be technically or financially infeasible.”
Lewis’ own paper regarding management practices in nearby Olema Creek watershed admits that 85% of the measured benefit was realized by the first 15% of the actions taken.
The more likely reason the testing ended was because, in the previous year, Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar directed the Park Service to pursue 20-year lease extensions. It seems obvious that more water quality data would have been inconvenient.
— Ken Bouley, Inverness
Marin County voters overwhelmingly approved Measure A in 2012 to support local parks, open space and trail maintenance and improvements. Before Measure A, the maintenance of Marin County Parks and Open Space preserves was on life support. Measure A has been a real success, helping make Marin an incredible place to live, appreciate and engage in outdoor activities.
These funds also provide equity-focused programs to connect people to parks and ensure that all of our communities have access to safe, accessible parks.
Measure A also funds crews to remove flammable vegetation on open space preserves, restore our local ecosystems and maintain our trails, all while helping young people get job training. When residents observe the annual goat grazing program, which provides a needed fuel break between the open space areas and residential housing helping protect against wildfires, they should remember that these wildfire protection breaks are funded by Measure A.
We need to continue to support these efforts. Please join me in supporting the Measure A extension on your June ballot at no increase in your tax rate.
— Pat O’Brien, San Rafael
I would like to express my enthusiasm and delight regarding Ida Times-Green’s candidacy for District 12 California Assembly in the upcoming June 7 election. I am a longtime Marin County resident, now with grandchildren attending schools in Marin City and the Sausalito Marin City School District. I have observed Times-Green in expert action.
During the historic state-mandated unification of the school district and amid the COVID-19 pandemic (with its essential development of prevention protocols, online school platforms and actual schools reopening), Times-Green has persevered in her roles and responsibilities with focus, care and unwavering determination on behalf of the students and families in the school district and broader community.
Times-Green is organized, listens attentively and promotes concepts and actions related to better health and improved overall wellbeing in Marin County and beyond. She understands and articulates concerns and raises awareness to causes important to this district and the state. From health care to planet care, she embraces them with energy. She meets the demands of elected posts requiring commitment, collaboration and accountability.
Times-Green brings experience, intelligence, heart, strength and dedication to her work. District 12 would be fortunate to have such representation at our state Assembly.
— Jeannie Pimentel, Greenbrae
I wish to comment on the editorial published March 29 in the Marin IJ written by the Bay Area News Group editorial board with the headline “California PUC failing to oversee PG&E wildfire safety.” I object to tactics by Pacific Gas and Electric Co. in efforts to get out of the financial problems it has caused itself.
Company leaders have asked the California Public Utilities Commission to approve a place for severe rate hikes. It appears the CPUC just can’t say no to PG&E.
From my perspective, it seems impossible for PG&E to serve the public and be a for-profit corporation at the same time. Most of us use PG&E’s service, yet we seem to be helpless as Northern California burns. Some of PG&E’s negligence has led to the loss of human and animal lives, as well as the loss of many homes and businesses, because of past decisions not to spend enough money to care for their infrastructure. It seems the stockholders and management came first.
Now, after multiple disasters, PG&E has the insufferable gall to want us, the innocent ratepayers, to pay more to cover the vile mistakes fueled by carelessness and greed.
Reading about the high salaries for PG&E management feels like the final insult. It is beyond disgusting.
— Sally Seymour, San Rafael
“Don’t say gay” is a catchy slogan. However, this saying has no relevance to the Florida “Parental Rights in Education” law in question. The new state law forbids teachers from teaching students about sexual orientation or gender identity in schools before the fourth grade (“Marin students protest Florida ‘don’t say gay’ law,” April 2).
How is this controversial? I didn’t even know how babies were born until I was in the third grade. I suppose the concern would be a third grader saying “my dads are gay” and a panicked teacher disciplining the child. But I’m pretty sure students will not be punished for using the word gay.
As for teachers, they are supposed to be teaching reading, writing, arithmetic and a basic introduction to science and social studies to those young students. I suspect that no early grade teachers in Marin are actually preparing lesson plans to teach their students about what sexual orientation means. Nor are they teaching kids about gender identity, the definition of which our society doesn’t even agree on.
Young children are innocent. They might know that they have two dads or two moms, while most of their friends have a mom and a dad, but they don’t need to know more than that. At that age, I don’t believe they care.
The other portion of the law is of concern. It doesn’t seem to be clear whether it might require mental health professionals in schools to turn over notes to parents. This would be a violation of confidentiality.
— Anne Rettenberg, San Rafael
