Letters: Oakland Zoo tax | Vote for Kaplan | Note No gambling Renewable energy

Submit your letter to the editor through this form. Read more letters to the editor.

There is no property tax
for the Oakland Zoo

I am writing to oppose the imposition of a new property tax on Oakland residents. Oakland Zoo has proposed a new levy that supports paid staff, even though the number of interpretive volunteers is decreasing. This unnecessarily increases their cost of doing business and contributes to their fiscal deficit.

The zoo limits the number of interpretive volunteers on the California trail because they believe their insurance is necessary to track the volunteer’s location at all times, so they must have a radio anchor on the trail. This is highly unlikely; Almost all insurance for commercial establishments makes a distinction between employees and non-employees; Insurance allows volunteers (non-employees) to entertain guests at the zoo and visit the California Trail at any time.

Please oppose the new property tax to support the Oakland Zoo.

Louise Hayes-Booth

Vote for Kaplan
Alameda County Board

Voters in Alameda County must elect Oakland Councilwoman Rebecca Kaplan for Supervisor to replace incumbent Wilma Chan.

Rebecca possesses the necessary knowledge and skills to be an effective and creative leader in a time of negative impacts on the lives of Alameda residents: increased homelessness, increased crime, lack of affordable housing, and unaccountable guidance in the Santa Rita Jail and inadequate Department of Social Services. control.

Rebecca demonstrated her ability to hold public servants accountable for failing to protect taxpayers’ money by demanding they perform at a higher level. She has brought together state and federal officials to address these issues with both resources and innovative solutions.

A vote for Rebecca Kaplan is a vote for effective governance.

Eddie Dillard

Prepare your own
Mind on gambling

We are all currently inundated with TV commercials on the 26th and 27th. To help California tribes, heal homelessness, provide mental health and drug treatment services, etc.

Both of these proposals are about gambling, pure and simple. Proposition 26 would allow sports betting at local tribal casinos and some other venues. Proposition 27 would allow all sports betting to be legal in California and available on computer devices (computers, phones, iPads, etc.).
Please don’t be fooled that Proposition 27 will magically solve homelessness, drug addiction, mental illness, or anything else. It’s about gambling – that’s all.

Personally, I am tired of being mistaken about the intent of a proposal to become law. Both are about legalizing gambling. Please read and make your own decision about gambling.

Moira Fry
San Leandro

Vote not to bring
Sports betting to the situation

Thomas Elias’s commentary, “Big-Time Sports Betting to Beat California” (Sept. 13), includes this comment. “The most sane response from voters is to reject both measures, but if the demand for sports betting in California and the voters approve of things that have long been considered bad, that’s not going to happen.”

The big money spent advocating for both proposals should be a clear signal to voters that big money is available, regardless of which proposal gets more yes votes. Advocates of both 26 and 27 want you to believe that the other side is a fraud and that their intentions are good for everyone involved.

Voters, I strongly recommend NO votes on both Propositions 26 and 27 this November.

Bill Hansen

The state should invest more
with renewable energy

I agree with Denise Kalm in her Sept. 15 letter to the editor (“Time to Build Water, Power Supply,” p. A6) that we need to significantly increase water and power supplies in California. However, I strongly disagree with the solutions.

Leave a Comment