I’ve been angry since reading the Sept. 7 editorial “Commissioners are micromanaging.” I don’t believe in writing while angry, so I’ve given myself a week to calm down to write this letter. My conclusion: You are still wrong.

You chide the three county commissioners for not buying the special committee recommendation. Frankly, I’m glad they didn’t. Special commissions and committees have put their stamp of approval on so many ill-considered projects in the community. Letters to the editor are limited to 500 words!

You say, “The commissioners are micromanaging.” Again, you have that reversed. If anybody would be guilty of “micromanaging,” it would be the committee that wanted to deny the access for Kwik Trip. This appointed committee wanted to make decisions for us — and the county board considered but rejected the decision. You call that “micromanaging” — but the reality is that the majority of the county board came to that conclusion. To upset the majority just because you think it is for the better would indeed be “micromanaging.”

Contrary to your assertion that the county board was “not working with the city,” nothing would be farther for the truth. The reality is that the county board DID vote unanimously to support two of the three suggestions. That’s pretty good evidence that they carefully considered the recommendations. The irony of your charge of not working with the city is shown on your own front page on the date of the editorial. The county received an investment grant of $400,000, and along with $200,000 from the city, the money was loaned to a new business. Is this NOT a good example of county-city cooperation?

You mention that the majority “didn’t defer to the view of Commissioner (Chris) Shoff, in whose district the proposed station would be.” This is akin to Congressional “earmarks” — special favors accorded to individual representatives. The hypocrisy of the editorial couldn’t be clearer. You initially spoke of the need for “county-city cooperation,” and “what is best for the business district as a whole.” Yet you now expect the majority to defer to a single commissioner.

You uncivilly call the majority commissioners “rogue.” That language has no place in a truly neutral newspaper. You “urge them to stop making their votes based on what’s being said at coffee shops and start being leaders.” It is high time that all of our elected officials start paying attention to what the public has to say — especially in “coffee shops” instead of elitist government “think tanks.” We have representative government in this country — not government by what bureaucrats “think is best for us.”

The attitude is indicative of what has befallen the rest of the nation. Your headline banner proclaims that you are a defender of First Amendment rights — the right of the people to not only be heard, but to petition and make their wishes known on laws. Your editorial says otherwise.

 

Marlene Wangen

Hayward