Readers’ comments: January 31, 2025
Support for city enforcing leaf blower ban
Dear editor:
I just read Evaggelos Vallianatos’ letter [“Claremont should follow LA’s lead, enforce leaf blower ban,” January 24] regarding Claremont enforcing a leaf blower ban. I totally agree with the comments. Nearly every Saturday morning between 8:30 and 9 a.m. we have a “wake up” call from our neighbor’s gardener using a leaf blower. The blower is used for a good 20 plus minutes, I assume to blow stuff around and give the neighbor their 30 minutes of service.
If I was not retired, I would be visiting said neighbor with a request. But since I am not getting up at 5 each morning to commute to LA, I let the smoke exit my ears and make a cup of tea.
Passing on responsibility to the homeowner might work. It could be added on to the quarterly bill from the city.
A.V. Schmoyer
Claremont
Charlottesville a hoax? Um, no
Dear editor:
I would like to offer the facts regarding Leslie Watkins’ claim [“Progressives: Google ‘Charlottesville hoax’ for tips on tolerance,” January 24] that the August 12, 2017, neo-Nazi attack on counterprotesters in Charlottesville was a hoax.
A group of far-right fanatics gathered in Charlottesville to protest the decision to remove a statue of Confederate leader Robert E. Lee. The event turned violent when a group of counterprotesters showed up and culminated with the racist James Field driving his car into the counterprotesters, killing one and injuring 35. Field pled guilty to this crime and was sentenced to life plus 419 years. Absolutely none of this is a hoax. It is well documented and factual. I wonder at the reason why anyone would want to portray this tragic event as a hoax.
Leslie also states that Kamala Harris “ … endorsed ‘Hitler’ to become our next POTUS with nary a whimper!” I have no idea what this means as Ms. Harris was herself running for that position and therefore made no endorsement of another.
Regarding gas prices, Pam Stevenson gave an intelligent factual response last week so no need to keep beating that drum.
I was at Vons today and the price of eggs was $8; thank you Trump, sarcastically. I know the reason is because of the recent bird flu that has disrupted production. But if Biden was still president the Republicans would be blaming him and Democrats for every ill wind that blows. But they never, ever take responsibility when they are in charge. For example, Republicans complain that Democrats increase the national debt. But when they are in charge, they give tax cuts to the wealthy and the debt increases substantially — $7 trillion under Trump. But it’s never an issue when they do it. Even Nikki Haley blamed Trump for growing it more than any previous president.
Sidney Pollard
Claremont
The national debt, explained
Dear editor:
At this time of federal government transition, I notice an interesting economic fact.
The U.S. national debt is the total amount the federal government owes to individuals, corporations, states and local governments, and other entities.
When Calvin Coolidge left the White House 100 years ago, the U.S. had a surplus of $635 million. At the end of 2024, the Biden Administration left us with a deficit (national debt) of $36 trillion. Simply put, the national debt is similar to a person using a credit card for purchases and not paying the full balance each month. The cost of purchases exceeding the amount paid represents a person’s overall debt, or deficit, while accumulated deficits over time represent a person’s (or nation’s) overall debt.
What in your wallet, Mr. Trump and Congress?
Patrick Kelly
Claremont
Stand up to Trump’s xenophobic refugee policies
Dear editor:
In its first week, the Trump Administration issued stop orders to refugee resettlement organizations throughout the country. What does this mean? It immediately and without notice terminated all federal funding to nonprofits that provide welcome and integration services to refugees arriving under the auspices of the U.S. government. And it leaves federally approved and admitted refugees without the integration support promised them, literally leaving them abandoned in their new country.
Since 1980, when the U.S. Congress passed the Refugee Act, the federal government — in partnership with the U.N. and national and local nonprofits — has welcomed refugees, people who have been legally proven to be fleeing persecution and have met extensive health and security standards. They are the most extensively screened of any population in the U.S.
With a xenophobic vengeance, the Trump administration, without any notice and in violation of congressional authorization, has abruptly ended the U.S. refugee program, thereby canceling a nearly 50-year-old, well tested national infrastructure comprised of volunteers, faith-based organizations, nonprofits, and state and local governments. This cataclysmic cancelling of the refugee program strands newly arrived refugees to fend for themselves in a new country.
Historically the U.S. has been a global beacon of welcome for refugees. It appears the Trump Administration is illegally ending its global, legal and moral commitments to refugees, toppling the historic beacon of welcome of the lady in New York Harbor.
These totalitarian actions result in desperation for refugee newcomers and suggest a moral decay that has eroded our historic values as a nation.
We call on all people of good will to contact their elected representatives to reverse this injustice.
We sign this as members of the Pilgrim Place community who have held leadership roles with refugee resettlement organizations.
Joy Hofer, the Rev. Eric Shafer, the Rev. Sid Mohn
Claremont
Trump’s ‘bait-and-switch’ on water
Dear editor:
Last Friday President Trump told us he would sign an executive order to “open up the pumps and valves in the north,” and that by doing so, “ … you will have unlimited water.” This is the bait. As was the case in his first term, he blamed the nearly extinct Delta smelt — the keystone fish of the San Francisco Bay Delta Estuary — for our perceived water scarcity.
Trump argues that by releasing water through the bay delta to support fish populations, we are wasting water that could be used for firefighting. This is false for the following reasons: first, the reservoirs that support central valley agriculture and southern cities are at more than healthy levels. Second, urban water systems are built to deliver water to municipal users, not put out enormous wildfires. If they were built for firefighting at that scale, the cost would trigger a taxpayer revolt. Third, even if “unlimited water” was sent south, there are no unused reservoirs in which to store it.
To claim that municipal water supply and delivery systems were mismanaged so as to cause undue death and destruction in the recent fires is more than disingenuous. Just last month, new State Water Project and Central Valley Project pumping rules went into effect after years of negotiation from agricultural, municipal, and environmental supply advocates. Imperfect as all compromises are, the new rules at least provide stability and protect water access for us in Southern California while adaptively managing delta flows to aid imperiled fish species.
And here is the switch. Trump’s proposed order seeks only to secure more water for the largest irrigated agriculture districts in the state (and thus nation). This deal would benefit a select group of water barons, not us. Please follow CalMatters and the Public Policy Institute of California for objective news on the subject.
Jeff Hanlon
Claremont
Jeff Hanlon is the Division 3 Director of Three Valleys Municipal Water District, representing Claremont and La Verne.
Readers’ comments: February 14, 2025