Excellent points
Editor:
Daniel Jansenson makes many excellent points in his column (September 6-7), and in particular his suggestion that the city "enforce the noise and smoking laws", adding that "downtown bus stops have become outdoor smoking rooms".
Indeed! And the most shocking example of this recently was when I was walking toward the stop on Broadway near 4th Street, and saw that a BBB driver was standing there, puffing away! Shouldn't they, of all people, be setting a good example? If it hadn't been for the fact that my bus was pulling up just as I got to the stop, I would have checked to see whether her uniform had some identifying information on it (name, or driver number) so that I could have reported her.
But perhaps the powers-that-be at BBB headquarters could remind their staff -- especially the drivers — that they should obey the city's smoking ordinance.
Audrey Shauer
Santa Monica
Too much tax
Editor:
The City's new proposed transfer tax makes the new bus shelters look like a good idea. We have too much traffic and not enough water and the City wants to tax us to fund development? To add insult to injury we are actually paying the salaries of people in City hall to come up with these ideas. Based on the current average price of a home for sale, the average resident of Ocean Park would pay $23,232 and Sunset Park would pay $15,551 to pay for development when they sold their homes. Personally, when I sell my home, I'm going to need that money for assisted living. How ironic we hear about affordable housing and this very tax makes living here less affordable.
I hope the residents of our City are wise enough to vote no on this tax, but I would greatly appreciate if the City Council would cancel this proposal and remove the risk that this unaffordable, traffic generating and water wasting tax goes through.
Jaime Gomez
Santa Monica
In the SMPD we read Mr. Rakunas letter 'follow the money' wherein he points out a recent pro airport mailer that he says has contact information for anyone who may want to donate to their Measure D effort. And as he does he takes a swipe at the movers and groovers who avail themselves of private aviation to achieve all the things they do. Before closing Mr. Rakunas snarkely remarks that only graphic designers and printers jobs are being created @SMO. May I reply that if the anti-airport crowd carry this vote, there will be hundreds of jobs lost, tens of thousands of dollars of revenue to the city lost, and a net loss to the community at large. When one stops to consider the impact on everyone else, if this economic engine is deliberately shut down, Mr Rakunas flippantly remarks 'what the hell' about the loss of peoples livelihoods so cavalierly, I respond in kind here by stating like hell! This airport has historically served the city well as an economic partner, it has served the greater society as a transportation hub and could serve better as one in to the future and as it does, it provides good jobs that closing the airport simply does not address. Attempting to close the airport has already cost the tax payers too much in lost lawsuits and foolish appeals. If the AOPA wants to fight the good fight based on the law and the facts, continue to garner favorable court decisions and they are willing to campaign on their own dime to do it? Then fine, let's have that vote.
Stewart Resmer
Santa Monica
