Dear Editor,
Isn’t it great that the First Amendment allows for the freedom of Alvaro Huerta’s opinion on Arizona Senate Bill 1070 [Enough With Draconian Anti-Immigration Laws!, Santa Monica Mirror April 29 – May 5, 2010], even though he misrepresents the true facts? If Mr. Huerta had read the bill (simply Google “Senate Bill 1070, Arizona), he would learn that the Arizona bill simply mirrors what is already federal law. However, the one thing the Arizona law does that the federal law does not, is to go to further lengths to require that no racial profiling or violation of federal law occurs while enforcing the Arizona law. Mr. Huerta, and those that have not read the language of the Arizona law, are basing their counter arguments on pure hype and fear mongering.
I challenge Mr. Huerta and others to review U.S. Immigration Codes 1301-1306 and the Arizona law. If he has concluded the Arizona law to be Draconian, then he is concluding the same for the U.S. law. Instead of living by the laws, or advocating change of the laws if he does not like them, Mr. Huerta instead justifies breaking of the laws with the argument that “both employers and consumers alike, benefit from undocumented immigrants and their willingness to perform jobs that most Americans reject.” Isn’t another term for that called philosophy called anarchy?
I am a Latino, Hispanic and Mexican-American. My family came here from Mexico three generations ago. They did it legally. They assimilated and learned the language, all without compromising our heritage. If it helps the country to bring our immigration policies under control so that we know who is entering, who is here and who leaves, I will be the first in line to offer to carry my passport or a copy of my birth certificate. After all, it’s not all about me. It’s about the security and fiscal responsibility of our country.
Steve Gallardo, Santa Monica
Dear Editor,
RE: Airport Noise
I often read the argument that those who buy near an airport have no right to complain about the noise since they knew what they were getting. That’s like converting a suburban side street into a shipping highway for 18-wheelers, and telling residents, “you knew when you moved in that there’s a street in front of your house.”
The endless stream of massive corporate jets using the airport bear no resemblance to the single-engine Cessnas that predominated back in the 1970s when I grew up in Santa Monica. This once-small airport has turned into a miniature LAX.
James Toomey, Gardena
Dear Editor,
I related to Councilmember Kevin McKeown’s comment [Council Greenlights Green Street, Santa Monica Mirror April 29 – May 5, 2010] that “bicycles have a right to be on the road . . . is forgotten by California motorists.” Last year I moved to Cambridge, MA. Despite the less favorable weather there are many times more bicyclists here. In Santa Monica I pretty much confined my biking to the beach. In Cambridge I bicycle for transportation. The set-asides for bike lanes in Cambridge are no greater than in Santa Monica, but it’s the motorists who make the difference. Here they swing a wide berth around bicycles, or wait until there’s an opening to do so. In Santa Monica I felt as though they played a game to see how close they could get without actually hitting me.
Carol Agate, Santa Monica
Dear Editor,
Thank you for your coverage on SM City Hall and their apparent ceaseless obsession with ’developing’ every available space left in our small downtown. I was born and raised in Santa Monica and am so weary of witnessing the Disneyfication of our beach town. There is so much vehicle and pedestrian congestion downtown it looks like Times Square most of the week. What is enough development for City Hall?
Catherine Farrell, Santa Monica
Dear Editor,
As a lifelong resident in the OP neighborhood, I feel Ocean Park Boulevard as a through-fair, was ruined already when they decided to make it one lane on each side past Cloverfield.
Has anyone who voted for this tried to get to Bundy via Ocean Park Boulevard at 5:30 p.m. any weekday? It’s horrible. Now they want to make it worse by adding boxes at intersections where bikes are in front of cars 1070 [Council Greenlights Green Street!, Santa Monica Mirror April 29 – May 5, 2010]? Traffic is bad enough in the Lincoln/Ocean Park intersection. Then to add a median with trees and such makes absolutely no sense and personally, I think is a terrible idea.
Note the drawing showing the 4th Street Overpass… if you fill a median with trees, who is going to see the murals if they are blocked from view by foliage?
– Jessica Smith, Santa Monica
