Marin IJ Readers’ Forum for Aug. 11, 2024

Marin families not required to buy any school supplies

Families in Marin are not required to spend their money on school supplies for their kids. Some may not have noticed the recent report by the Marin County Civil Grand Jury. It explained that California has long forbidden public schools from asking students or families from providing supplies needed for their students’ education.

This includes everything a student will need at school and at school-related extracurricular activities (like sports or band). Of course, families, community organizations, PTSA-style groups and any other kind people may choose to donate supplies to their local schools, which is fantastic. I encourage it and have contributed to those efforts. But no Marin public school family should see a “supply list” from their school this fall.

If they do see one, they should know that they are not required to buy anything on that list. A free public education was one of the first things enshrined in the California Constitution. All children residing here are entitled to that, in full.

Read the report online at bit.ly/3WAXgLW.

— Trish Goodman, Ross

Spotswood misses impact of ranches in Point Reyes

In his recent opinion piece (“Political centrist lens puts focus on Marin issues,” Aug. 4), IJ political columnist Dick Spotwood does a nifty three-sentence trick on the Point Reyes National Seashore.

First, he says most Marinites supported the formation of the park. That’s probably correct, though its relevance is unclear, since the Seashore already exists and is part of the national park system.

Then he says that ranching there is “low impact,” which implies to me that Spotwood is unfamiliar with the science evaluating that question. Then he says the cattle operations in Point Reyes should be there for the long term. I suggest that, in the midst of climate and extinction crises, we should not make federal land management decisions based on 60-year-old imaginary opinion polls and his misunderstanding of what “low impact” means.

— Ken Bouley, Inverness

For safety, keep cyclists off Sorich Park trails

I oppose allowing bicycle access to Sorich Park trails (“San Anselmo considers Sorich Park multiuse trail options,”Aug. 7). I am a senior who has hiked there for 30 years.

In the past, I have been pushed by a biker when I was in his way. I feel uncomfortable on trails when I am around youth cyclists going way too fast. Many bikers act appropriately, but I don’t know which are respectful when I hear them coming down behind me on the road.

The trails in the park were not designed for hikers and bikers. Bikers should be restricted to fire roads with clear designations.

— Steven Schreibman, San Anselmo

Higher construction costs constricting new builds

I read an interesting factoid in “firsttuesday Journal,” an online real estate news source: “Compared to the 150,000 (single-family rental) starts achieved in 2005 at the height of the millennial boom, the 64,500 … starts achieved in 2021 were just a fraction of the starts needed to meet demand.”

That’s eye-opening. Back in 2005, there were absolutely none of the many state-mandated zoning changes we have today. Our political leadership can’t see the forest for the trees. Officials are missing the simple fact that we have an industry that, seemingly overnight, is expected to add millions of units to an inventory that is already shrinking.

The industry is expected to do this in the face of massive supply dislocations, labor shortages and, in general, an industry that is shrinking rather than growing. All of those factors are helping to drive up the cost of housing (and land) rather than the stated/implied goal of lowering the costs of construction.

It really is like our leaders are stepping on the gas and the brake at the same time. But, in this case, it’s more like racing down the freeway and throwing the car into reverse. Really bad things are going to happen pretty quickly.

— Guy Palmer, Mill Valley

Have Republicans dropped Second Amendment talk?

Forgive me if I missed it, but did anyone else notice a rather unusual feature of the platform that emerged from this year’s Republican National Convention? As far as I could tell, there was no mention of support for the Second Amendment.

— Dr. Martin Blinder, San Anselmo