Submit your letter to the editor via this form. Read more Letters to the Editor.
Oakland must release
film incentive funds
When a film production receives $1 in financial incentives, it spends $13.66 in the local economy. Let that sink in. That’s a return on investment of more than 1,000%. In Oakland, we have an opportunity to transform a modest investment into a robust economic engine — and we’re hesitating.
What if the path to economic recovery is not through backpedaling and austerity, but through targeted strategic investment?
The City Council unanimously approved an incentive July 16. Now, they need to release the money.
This film incentive helps Oakland do more with more. It costs less than $600,000 to implement, and there are already signed letters of intent worth tens of millions of dollars spent here … if they receive the incentive.
This kind of ROI is back-to-basics finance.
Please reach out to your council member and ask them to release the Film Incentive funds at their Tuesday meeting.
Max Blum
Oakland
BART benefits riders,
non-riders alike
Re: “Don’t tap burdened taxpayers for BART” (Page A6, Dec. 13).
In his letter to the editor, George Mathews objects to “people who, for the most part, never use the system,” by which he means people who never ride BART, being taxed to pay for it.
But people around the Bay Area certainly use BART’s benefits when they drive to and from work or are otherwise on the roads. If all travelers drove cars instead of taking BART (or public transit generally) the roads would be far, far more congested than they are now. And they are congested.
Further, travel by car is subsidized by all, since gas taxes don’t cover the costs of road construction or maintenance. And hybrids and EVs don’t pay as much — or even any — gas taxes.
BART is a public good that benefits all who live in the Bay Area.
Peter Nicoll
Dublin
State should follow
N.Y.’s lead on pet sales
Re: “Bay Area pet lovers battle animal overpopulation” (Page B1, Dec. 15).
In response to the article on pet population, there is some good news out of New York, a new state law banning the sale of dogs, cats and rabbits by pet shops.
The law will also allow pet stores to charge shelters rent to use their space for adoptions. The new law also aims to stop abusive pet breeders.
Others should follow suit. Here in California, late February is the deadline for the introduction of new bills.
Eric Mills
Coordinator, Action for Animals
Oakland
Knee-jerk Trump
hatred should stop now
Re: “Person of the year poor example of president” (Page A8, Dec. 15).
The Time magazine person of the year is not an award of praise or commendation.
The title goes to “the person or persons who most affected the news and our lives, for good or ill, and embodied what was important about the year, for better or for worse,” as former Time Managing Editor Walter Isaacson wrote in the 1998 issue. Previous winners include Adolf Hitler (1938), Joseph Stalin (1939 and 1942), Ruhollah Khomeini (1979) and Vladimir Putin (2007) — hardly a list of do-gooders or positive influencers.
I did not vote for Donald Trump, but 77 million of my fellow citizens thought he was the best choice for president at this time. And it is past time to tone down the rhetoric and the hatred.
I have no problem that Steve Lake does not respect the man, but I believe we should all respect the vote and the office that Trump was elected to. I did not vote for him, but I now pray for his success.
Craig Rieger
Concord
Harris has little
to take pride in
Re: “Harris should take pride in her tireless work” (Page A8, Dec. 15).
Related Articles
Letters: Failed leadership | Me-first view | Reject the worst | Hooked by lies | Democracy’s death | Anti-Israel bias
Letters: Athletes’ dreams | Naïve advice | Person of the Year | Harris pride | End run
Letters: Sites threat | Accessible outdoors | U.S. obligated | Supreme Court | Celebrate Harris
Letters: Burdened taxpayers | State fails businesses | Democrats’ hypocrisy
Letters: BART cost | Transit changes | A good job | Don’t blame landlords | Following playbook
Although Kamala Harris had only 107 days to pitch her candidacy for president, she had some 1,353 days worth of tireless work behind her as the vice president.
The writer states that the Dec 10 article (“Harris fails to ignite Bay Area,” Page A1) did not acknowledge all that Harris did. The question is what did she do to make life better for Americans?
When asked what her weakness is, Harris said her strength is her weakness. How is she strong if that is her weakness? What is one objective piece of information that supports her doing a good job whether as the vice president or in her campaign? She lost all battleground states.
Kirit Shah
Fremont
