Letters for February 28, 2019

Re: “A scourge of scooters?” by Foon Rhee (Editor’s Note, February 14):

I, for one, welcome our new micro-mobility overlords, but want to emphasize that our private decisions can steer how our city looks. Choose the safer and cheaper bike option and leave the expensive scooters to those out-of-towners who prefer to buy the $10 bread-and-butter appetizer on R Street.

The less attention Sacramento gives to the e-scooters, the fewer companies will find the need to dump more of them on The Grid’s sidewalks. Keep this a bike town, or at least use a non-electric kick scooter to get from point A to B.

Nicholas Janusch

Sacramento / via email

Folsom blues

Re: “Checkpoint Walmart” by Scott Thomas Anderson (Beats, February 14):

I’d rather have them check at the end than follow me around the store. Come on people, that’s never happened to you? It’s like a minute or two out of your life; breathe.

M.L. Owyang

Elk Grove / via Facebook

Home delivery

Re: “Refill, not landfill” by Maxfield Morris (15 Minutes, February 7):

We used to have milk, eggs and bread delivered. I wonder if there’s a business model for home delivery here? Leave your empty soap bottles out and the delivery person tops them off.

Grant Koehler

Sacramento / via Facebook

Two deaths not a crisis

Re: “Perilous pond” by Kate Gonzales (News, February 7):

I have two thoughts about this: One is that two people dying in four years does not constitute a serious health concern in relation to the pond. If people were falling in and drowning regularly, say once every few months or even once a year, then I’d say maybe there is a problem with the pond that is leading toward these deaths. But it seems to me that there were other factors, and that the pond was not the cause, but a contributing factor.

My second thought, or concern rather, is with Judy McClaver not being allowed to have her say during the community meeting. I disagree with her and her belief that a fence would have prevented their deaths. However, she should have been allowed to have her say. If you disagree, then you do so openly and state your reasons why.

She is right about one thing, though: Too many people have a notoriously bad habit of dehumanizing the homeless. They are treated like trash or vermin. Still, their deaths have less to do with one pond and more to do with a cruel society that has failed them.

Jeff Doll

Elk Grove / via email

Forest Service at fault

We have had our fair share of wildfires in California, and most look at the utility companies as responsible for the vast damage. While a piece of electrical equipment may have started a local fire, what if someone were to add fuel to that fire? Would we hold the utility company responsible for damage beyond a reasonable containment area? Of course not. We would cite the responsible party for adding fuel to that fire.

I would argue that the U.S. Forest Service is responsible for many devastating fires. For more than 50 years, national forests have been mismanaged to the point there were thousands of dead trees ready to burn. This was a disaster just waiting to happen, and the residents of California have paid that price. We must evolve how we manage forests, and that includes thinning and removing deadwood and decades of organic material. Most importantly, we need to hold the federal government responsible to restore all that has been lost.

Richard Frankhuizen

Folsom / via email