Letters: Students ‘choosing’ gender a bad idea

What happens at Gilroy High when Johnny decides he prefers to
shower with the girls?
Dear Editor,
A new state law (SR777)
amp;#8194;requiring California public schools to, among other
things, allow students to

choose their own gender

when deciding whether to use the boys or girls restroom and
locker room is just another glaring example of the cultural assault
taking place in America.
What happens at Gilroy High when Johnny decides he prefers to shower with the girls?

Dear Editor,

A new state law (SR777) requiring California public schools to, among other things, allow students to “choose their own gender” when deciding whether to use the boys or girls restroom and locker room is just another glaring example of the cultural assault taking place in America. 

This latest step of  “political correctness” is, to use an analogy, just another sad, sick example of the tick on the flea on the tail of the dog wagging the entire dog whenever the tick wishes. 

So, how is Gilroy High School going to handle it when “Johnny” decides that he is really a “she” entrapped in a male body, and has the lawful right to use the girls’ showers – especially when the girls are present? Will any sane girl who refuses to shower with Johnny there be called a bigot or accused of acting in a discriminatory manner and therefore subject to school discipline? 

The bizarreness of this kind of insanity goes on and on, all because of the influence that special interest groups hold over our lawmakers resulting in poor (and downright crazy) legislation that is out of touch and unrepresentative of the values of the majority of American people. I think it’s time for another American Revolution to kick the bums out that sponsor and push this distorted garbage upon us and our children.

James Fennell, Gilroy     

Crime increase and incessant vandalism has longtime resident ready to pack it up

Dear Editor,

Gilroy is a disgrace and I am embarrassed that I live here.

I have been here for almost 21 years and have seen many positive changes but the crime rate is a disgrace to the police department and this town.  

My car window got bashed in on Christmas Day by yet another low-life. I didn’t report it because what’s the point? This comes after NUMEROUS eggings and destruction of our home, cars, and boat. Those crimes have costs us thousands of dollars.

All I’m waiting for is the housing market to recover and I’m getting tout of this dirt-bag town.  Yes, I will miss the wonderful friends that I have here but how can our family feel secure when the people we pay, “to protect and to serve”, fail us.

I heard we might be getting a “Hooters” here in Gilroy.  Why, that fits this town just perfectly. 

Mel Rose, Gilroy  

Likes the local newspaper with a cup of coffee every day – at least keep Kat Teraji in print

Dear Editor,

I have been trying (somewhat unsuccessfully) to get used to the recent changes in The Dispatch.  As someone who is used to sitting down with a cup of coffee and my paper at 6:30 a.m. each morning, the internet issue just doesn’t quite always work.  I do understand the economics of the change, however.

One thing I would like to see continue from the “old days” is the publication in the paper copy of stories of local human interest.  This past week I was extremely disappointed to NOT find Kat Teraji’s column in Friday’s paper.  I didn’t even know she had written a column until someone forwarded it to me via email.  The people and stories that Kat writes about put a very human face on the city of Gilroy, and helps instill community pride and spirit.  I believe relegating her to the online issue does Gilroy and its people a huge disservice.

Please reconsider where you place Kat Teraji’s column, and return it to the printed edition.

Alene Creager, Gilroy

Editor’s note: We did publish Ms. Teraji’s column on the Web only one week, but have made the appropriate adjustment. She will be in print weekly and online at www.gilroydispatch.com.

Yikes, what’s going on with paying a GUSD administrator who’s not working $120,000?

Dear Editor,

How can Mr. Michael Lyons resign and still get paid $120,000 by the Gilroy Unified School District until he finds a job?

He is getting sued related to his former position at the Stockton Unified School District, plus he must have lied on his application or during his job interview.

GUSD reportedly will not fill that post, so that means a burden on the rest of the staff without any incentives or wages for after-hours projects. Have him stay on the job and do the right thing.

Daniel Rhodes, Gilroy

Make users pay the freight or we’ll bankrupt the system faster than a speeding bullet train

Dear Editor,

Now that the governor has said that he won’t support the bullet train’s November ballot bond measure unless the High Speed Rail Authority comes up with some private sector money, we should re-think this thing.

We want to save fuel, reduce congestion and accidents on highways, and lower road maintenance expense, plus move passengers by rail. Taxes and fees are already at unsustainable levels. Is there another way? Yes: user fees. Users should be both freight and passengers. We’ve done it before, successfully.

The bullet train’s Executive Director, Rod Diridon, said if the governor won’t change his mind, then we’ll never see it built in California. But we could have high speed rail passenger service, if we combined the losing passenger fares with profitable freight revenue.

This is the solution I’ve suggested for at least 15 years. Unless we want to change into a socialist country like France, Japan, Germany, etc., we should be looking at user fees, not tax subsidies.

Building the bullet train is not the problem; maintaining its operation for future generations is the key issue. Why not do it the way it was previously done, combining profitable freight revenue with losing passenger fares? 

Understand this history: The Big Four’s railroad construction company, going east, and Union Pacific’s construction company  coming west, made profits in building the transcontinental railroad. But, keeping those trains going was a real test, and it is the issue we face with high-speed rail. Bechtel undoubtedly will make profit building HSR, just like its predecessors did, but if we are remembered by future generations, it will be because we created a transport service that will withstand the test of time, and not collapse like the USSR did. We don’t have to adopt socialism to have high speed passenger trains. Amtrak’s subsidies are already so much that its supporters make the Robber Barons look like altar boys.

You’ve seen the north-south tonnage flows on I-5 and Highway 99. That’s a revenue stream, and some of the flow could be moved by intermodal service, especially the long hauls.

 If you had enough Fedex, UPS, & the postal service, and other tonnage, bringing in enough money, then you would not need to ask the taxpayers for unbearable subsidies. So, the governor is on the right track, but he needs to upgrade the design from unsustainable to long-lasting, otherwise our children will see the biggest train wreck in the history of public works projects. 

If we shift our paradigm, not just build HSR, but keep it as a transport resource for future generations, and recognize that we are quite different than Japan, quite different than France, then we should send HSR folks back to the drawing board and design a railroad that has a capitalist foundation, not a socialist one like Japan and France do.

America’s taxpayers net profit in the quid-pro-quo with the land grant railroads was more than $560 million measured in 1940 dollars. This net gain to 1940 was derived from freight revenue savings for our government’s freight.

Another alternative: Build it so that double-stack container trains can operate on the same rails. Run the passenger bullets when there are passengers in larger numbers; then run your fast container trains in the off hours. Then you reap the rewards of environmentally friendly freight transport, and the revenue you make off it, and use that money instead of taxpayers’ subsidies like we do with Amtrak and Caltrain.

As recommended about 10 years ago, have the taxpayers own the right-of-way and roadbed, but let private sector operate the for-profit trains. The fuel savings are about 75 percent per ton each mile with intermodal. Those corporations could earn carbon footprint reduction credits by shifting tonnage off the highways, and onto railroad. We could have eco-freight pass incentives to shippers and receivers similar to the ecopass that we have for passengers.

The recent National Commission Transport Policy Report mandates that we re-think our approaches, and our policies. There’s no better place to do that than with California’s bullet train, built on the lasting foundation of capitalism, with “user fees” paying for its continued operations.

Joseph P. Thompson, Gilroy

Leave your comments