Letters to the editor

Editor,

I am a reader of your newspaper and have recently followed closely the trial of Quincy Norton Sr. I had a vested interest in this trial because I am the mother of his wife and victim, Tamika Mack Norton.

This has been a most difficult and painful time for me and my family. However, having said this, I do recognize that this crime also represented noteworthy subject matter that warranted news coverage. I would like to at this time commend your reporter Michelle Durand for her sensitive, yet candid writing with regard to covering this trial. I believe that Ms. Durand covered the trial with integrity and decorum. I am impressed with the scruples of this writer and believe that Ms. Michelle Durand is an asset to your newspaper. She is one that I believe is "worth her weight in gold.” Thumbs up to Ms. Durand and the San Mateo Daily Journal.

Charene Mack

San Francisco

San Mateo’s illegal EIR?

Editor,

The San Mateo City Council’s rubber-stamping of the 20-year Bay Meadows construction project is illegal because it is based on a defective Environmental Impact Report. When the landowner/developer sold its Bay Meadows "plan” to the San Mateo City Council, he based his project on traffic mitigation measures that included: 1) three grade separations (underpasses) at 25th, 28th and 31st Avenues; and 2) the current Hillsdale train station being moved north several blocks, so it would be the in the heart of the new development. No. 2 was required because the project was touted as a "high-density ... transit-oriented-development,” helpful to the environment because new residents would take Caltrain to work and not use their cars.

However, the developer’s "assumptions” for traffic mitigation measures were all based on Caltrans paying to move the Hillsdale station and pay for the grade separations — i.e. the developer has no control over Caltrans approving or paying for these plans or not. Well, the EIR’s "assumptions” were incorrect and misleading lies. Now, there are several new "changed conditions” making the original EIR defective, useless and illegal. Recently, Caltrans stated they will not pay to move the Hillsdale train station, nor pay for more than one grade separation.

So the EIR’s "assumptions” are incorrect, the EIR traffic analysis is insufficient based on these "changed conditions,” and a new EIR is legally required to measure what the true traffic, environmental, etc. impacts will be for San Mateo residents due to this 20-year construction project. Get it right City Council.

Mike Brown

San Mateo

Learning as we go

Editor,

Only an incompetent coward who’s never seen a day of combat in his life could lead a nation into senseless war, label his opponent as "inexperienced” and then ask the country’s support for "learning as we go.”

Damien Castaneda

San Mateo

How soon can we get better mileage?

Editor,

We’re in the information age here, so I’ll share something I’ve learned: According to Forbes Auto, "Soon drivers will be able to get at least double the gas mileage of a Toyota Prius hybrid, thanks to a spate of new aftermarket kits that convert any car into a plug-in electric vehicle. But they’ll have to pay upwards of $10,000 to do so.”

Now, for a lot of us in the street, that’s a hefty chunk of change – and it’s not guaranteed that we can float the loan that would be necessary. The price of necessities is totally out of sight. So, here’s a possibility: Make the conversion affordable, and promote the viability of PHEV (plugin hybrids) as ‘commuter cars.’ Not all these PHEVS are small – Toyota, for example, has expanded its hybrid line into some of the ‘more comfortable’ sizes.

The sooner we can begin to mass produce the kits, the faster the price will begin to drop; the sooner we can save the energy by not driving the guzzlers on our morning commutes, the sooner we can breathe – at least one – sigh of relief. How willing, politically, are we in the street to take this on?

Martin R. Flick

San Mateo

Tale of two cities

Dear Editor,

Isn’t it curious that two adjoining cities can think so differently. On one hand, you have the city of Burlingame, whose city council is determined to save its history and the associated buildings by forming committees to seek out, study history and preserve its heritage? On the other hand, you have the city of San Mateo whose city council is anxiously awaiting the destruction of perhaps the cities most famous landmark Bay Meadows race track. Burlingame will continue to be a great city with a great heritage, while San Mateo will turn into an over-used, traffic-snarled mass of mediocrity compliments of the current pro-growth at-all-costs city council.

Robert Lingaas

San Mateo