Readers’ comments: December 2, 2022

Blatant gender inequality at CPD
Dear editor:
For a quarter century there has been severe inequality between male and female facilities at the Claremont Police Department building on Bonita Avenue, constituting a continual flagrant disregard for Title VII, CAL OSHA and ACLU gender equality guidelines.
Female workers, approximately 40 in number, have no locker room, a single-stall toilet (50” by 31”) which serves all women, and there is a conglomeration of inadequate lockers, some donated or used, from very small, to mid-sized, and a couple that are a little larger. The lockers are lined against the small bathroom wall and some are tucked in the corner, thus making the tiny room even smaller.
A small alcove outside the tiny toilet room is crammed with five 69” by 15” lockers and six 34” by 81” lockers; a 31” by 31” shower blocked by a chair (if shower is used there is very little room to dry and dress in this tiny space); and a filthy padded bench (to sit on and change shoes?). There is little space for more than one person at a time to change clothing.
The door into this area is labeled “Women’s Locker.” It’s disgusting what we provide our female police department workers. I expect the City of Claremont to rectify this blatant, cesspit situation ASAP. All city buildings have equal gender facilities except for the police department.
Males at CPD have a locker room, several urinals, an enclosed toilet, wash basins, showers, full-size lockers, benches for sitting and space to change clothing.
It only takes one concerned person to request an onsite review of the situation at CPD regarding gender equality guidelines. Reports or requests can be made to CAL OSHA, the ACLU and/or the U.S. government regarding Title VII.
Joyce H. Sauter
Claremont

Historic proof of Claremont’s rising temperatures
Dear editor:
In our household the number of extremely hot days this last summer seemed to again exceed our expectations. We read about incremental changes over decades in average temperatures, but humans are not well adapted to feeling that change.
However, we are slapped in the face by the outliers, by those days when the temperature exceeds some personal threshold such that it limits what we can engage in during the day or affects how well we sleep at night.
With the close of the 2022 United Nations Climate Change Conference last month, it seems timely to share one way a changing climate is being felt locally. Plotted below is data from the National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration showing the average number of “hot” days (daytime high exceeding 95°F) and the average number of “hot” nights (nighttime low exceeding 65°F) in Claremont each year as we progress through the decades.
While ultimately arbitrary, the temperature thresholds of 95 and 65 degrees employed here were selected simply because their application led to just about 10-11 days per year being tallied as excessively hot though the two-decade span of the 1950s and 1960s, as can be seen on the plot. But it also reveals just how far we have come in the 71 year span of this data. During the first three years of the current decade Claremont now experiences four to five times as many days each year with temperatures exceeding those thresholds. Of further note, the data suggests that while we often talk about these changes in terms of daytime highs, the nighttime temperature may be rising yet more quickly.
Kersey Black
Claremont

Shout out to the bounty of CBG’s Waterwise Festival
Dear editor:
It’s rare to have a facility as creative and forward thinking as California Botanic Garden in our own backyard. On my refrigerator is a flier I found in a drawer entitled Ecological Landscaping for Southern California Homeowners. It took place almost 40 years ago, on October 12, 1985, way before the current water shortages we are facing due to climate change and drought.
California Botanic Garden’s Waterwise Community Festival on November 13, presented in partnership with Sustainable Claremont, carried on this tradition. The event was another great example of what organizations can do when they come together to work on a problem as daunting as drought.
While I’ve been undertaking water conservation in my own yard for many years, the Waterwise Festival was chock-full of new information about native plants, water conserving technologies, and steps each of us can take to save water and contribute to the health of our watersheds. California Botanic Garden hosted the Friends of Los Angeles River’s Rover bus, free native plant classes, informative panels, live music, water themed crafts, and storytelling for kids.
While the interest and turnout seemed very high, I would have loved to see the COURIER cover this event and share some of these important resources for community members throughout the region who could not make it. I am not looking forward to drought, but I am looking forward to California Botanic Garden’s continued water conservation programs in the months and years ahead. See you there!
Drew Ready
Claremont

It ain’t over ‘til it’s over
Dear editor:
Thank you for the informative article regarding the preservation efforts to save three historic Claremont Village structures. It raises community awareness of a drastic demolition that is not yet a “done deal.”
I had spoken personally with the architectural historian consultant who said that the buildings did indeed have historic and architectural merit and that the historic character of the Claremont Village would benefit from their preservation. She informed me the city has the authority to mandate the buildings be preserved for almost any reason: historic, architectural, sustainability, or citizen demand.
Her report has the power to influence state and federal authorities to step in and forbid any modification whatsoever if she determines the buildings to be highly significant. But that is not the case here.
It has been publicly stated that city planners, the architect, property owner, Claremont Heritage, City Council and many Claremont citizens would like, as their first preference, to preserve and restore our historic treasures and to properly retain and maintain our mature city trees.
The problem appears to be that the corporate developer does not have the money to do the job right. “Economic feasibility” is a relative term.
As an ordinary citizen, I am not aware of how money flows in these deals, but I believe there are astute, ambitious investors who would jump at the opportunity to rocket their reputation as development partners and turn this historic diamond-in-the-rough project into the gleaming gem Claremont deserves.
I believe that, in good faith, the architectural and planning commissions and the City Council all jumped onto a moving train they thought was unstoppable.
There is rousing support for city planners who will find a creative and mindful alternative to demolition that preserves Claremont’s identity and legacy.
Elizabeth Tulac
Claremont

Three Valleys voters are a fickle bunch
Dear editor:
Regarding the COURIER story from November 18, “Three Valleys severs ties with Cadiz, Bonanza Springs,” in only two divisions of the seven trustee areas of Three Valleys Municipal Water District, which extends to south Pomona, north Pomona, Hacienda Heights, Glendora, La Verne, Walnut, Diamond Bar, Covina, [and Claremont] has the issue of the proposed Cadiz/Bonanza study been a tool for galvanizing voters to the polls and chip away at the accomplishments made by TVMWD for over 40 years. North Pomona’s Division VI and La Verne/Claremont Division III are the only voting areas vulnerable to be misinformed.
Being connected to liberal Claremont Colleges and to the Claremont and Pomona Democratic Club helped Sierra Club activists to infiltrate and exploit the Cadiz/Bonanza issue among members to secure two seats.
In every other district of TVMWD apathy and disinterest reigns. About the study: the fact that the Cadiz/Bonanza study issue has been on the shelf and a non-agenda issue for two years since the pre 2020 election and now the 2022 election makes one wonder if the hand chosen general manager or some board members bungled the handling of the study that caused a board member to lose his seat. He, like past board members, will forever be branded with the scarlet letter X as being not environmentally friendly and disconnected from the public. Such is the nature of opportunism that reigns for three months every four years when voters go to the polls.
John Mendoza
Pomona