Children will lose, if Prop. 30 fails
I have been a computer science and math teacher for 25 years at James Logan High School. The past 10 years my class size has soared because of state budget cuts. I once averaged 30 students a class and now I have more than 40.
It is difficult to make sure each student has the personal attention they need because of the ever-increasing class size.
In addition to increasing class sizes, we have lost transportation, library access for all grades and counseling services for elementary students. We have five fewer days of school to help our children learn a full year of curriculum.
Passing Proposition 30 is critical for us. If it doesn't pass, we would have to cut an additional 15 days of school this year. This would mean New Haven students would have one less month of school compared with New Haven students two years ago.
California children will lose if we do not pass Proposition 30. For our students. For our future. Yes on 30.
President New Haven Teachers Association Union City
We deserve to know what is in our food
Pesticide and junk food companies are spending nearly a million dollars a day parroting one discredited talking point after another in an attempt to make Proposition 37 complicated. But really it's simple -- we have
Sixty-one countries label GMOs and grocery prices haven't gone up. And one line of ink on a label -- as is required for 3,000 other ingredients -- won't cost us a dime here, either.
Henry Miller, the No on 37 campaign's top scientist -- seen in ad after ad -- has advocated for tobacco and DDT, aided Big Oil's effort to deny climate change, and said that some Japanese subjected to Fukushima radiation might benefit from it.
When have the pesticide and junk food industries spent $36 million to improve our health, protect our environment, and save us money?
I deserve to know what's in the food I eat so I can make an informed choice based on my own personal values. Yes on 37.
Natarajan is the right choice for Fremont
Regardless of your priorities, this election will have a dramatic effect on what's important to you.
Anu Natarajan is the only candidate who has consistently brought new ideas, vision and leadership to her role on Fremont City Council.
Want Fremont to attract a lot of high-paying new jobs? Thank Natarajan for bringing Urban Land Institute experts from across the nation to develop a world-class plan for Warm Springs. Thank her for the leadership and vision she brought to the development of Fremont's recently adopted general plan.
Think that quality neighborhoods and business districts are better for Fremont than the railroad switchyard that Union Pacific had in mind?
Thank Natarajan not only for having a different vision than the railroads, but persuasively making the case that Fremont could put the land to a higher and better use.
While all of the candidates want the best outcome for Fremont, Anu Natarajan is the one who is actually offering ideas, has demonstrated her ability to translate them to action, and will be best able to deliver.
We want to know what we're eating
Will Proposition 37 truly cost us?
Only the producer of the genetically engineered ingredient is responsible for the compliance, not the grocery store. Stores can make money on anything. It's easy for producers to substitute ingredients without a major price increase.
The only farmers who could be affected are those who grow GE seed crops, and they're not obligated to grow them. The proposal only requires animals "themselves" that are genetically modified, such as the new GE salmon, to be labeled, not cows because they "ate" a food with GE ingredients. Therefore, there's no inconsistency between products.
Because GE seeds are patented, only their producers can research their effects. Who is most opposed to this proposition, and if these foods are that "safe," why are they afraid to label it?
Will this labeling rule offer us "more" or "less" choice of food? No one is saying we can't still eat these things, we just want to know. Consider the long-term implications of food policy.
Seniors should vote no on Measure A1
The biggest reason seniors should vote no on Measure A1 is that we understand how precious our dwindling wild lands are, having seen more and more of them disappear during our lifetimes.
If we don't fight for what is left and prevent the Oakland Zoo from construction and expansion, which are defined in the text of A1, our descendants will not be able to experience the joy of exploring unspoiled nature.
Knowland Park isn't some vacant lot--it's the largest remaining piece of open space owned by the city, a thriving natural ecosystem with stands of native grasses and plant communities, wildlife and so much more. Our kids don't need a gondola ride and big buildings to learn to love exploring nature.
Let's vote this thing down and send the zoo a message: Rethink these expansion plans and instead expand your imagination for what nature education could be -- with Knowland Park left in its natural state.
Our deadline for receiving Election Day-related letters is Friday. The last day Election Day-related letters will be published is Nov. 2. We will only publish letters that support candidates.