Dear Editor:

I appreciate the opportunity to respond to John Taylor’s letter in last week’s edition of the Gay & Lesbian Times. I agree that elected officials must be prepared to answer tough questions, and I do it every day when walking door to door to talk with voters.

Mr. Taylor states that 11% of my contributions come from individuals. The truth is that 100% of my contributions come from individuals. The almost 800 San Diegans who have chosen to support my message of prioritizing public safety and infrastructure are double the number of individual contributors that my next closest opponent reported.

Additionally, according to the Center for Policy Initiatives’s report referenced in the letter, I have more support from educators, doctors and nurses, small business owners, hi-tech and bio-tech workers, and non-profit leaders than my fellow candidates. These individuals represent 81% of my supporters but Mr. Taylor overlooked them in his letter. My campaign is about the quality of life of everybody in this district, and my contributor base reflects that.

Finally, it is important to emphasize that my answers to questions, my policy positions and my principles do not change no matter what audience I’m addressing. My commitment to our neighborhoods is absolute. My message of leadership, community and results is consistent wherever I go. I leave it to the individuals to decide if they want to support me. Many District 3 residents have chosen to do so with their time, their money and soon their votes, and for that, I am grateful.

I look forward to continuing to answer the tough questions as a candidate and as the Councilmember for District 3.

Todd Gloria

Dear Editor:

I’m writing in response to a recent letter to your publication questioning how Todd Gloria would serve our district if he is elected to the City Council. I am supporting Todd because he is a viable candidate that has earned support from a broad range of our community including renters, home owners, small business owners, bigger business owners, established professionals and young people. Todd serves the GLBT community in so many direct ways – perhaps most visibly as a board member and past chair of The Center. Todd has also been an important force in providing affordable housing for low income renters, people with HIV/AIDS, and seniors as a member of the San Diego Housing Commission. I have observed him working to resolve real issues - complicated issues involving legislative changes and simple issues like helping a elder with HIV identify housing with supportive services. A San Diego native with deep roots in the Third District, Todd knows our neighborhoods intimately - Hillcrest, North Park, South Park, Normal Heights and City Heights. When we clear out of this recession, San Diego will continue to grow and we need a Councilmember who can bring our community together to discuss how to shape and control that growth. Todd Gloria is that person.

Anne B. Wilson

Dear Editor:

Your piece describing Scott Peters’ entry into the City Attorney race omitted any reference to his vote that supported renewing the Boy Scout’s lease in Balboa Park despite the organization’s discrimination against members of the LGBT community. Mr. Peters typically offered a compromise: a 40 year lease rather than one for 50 years, while in the words of GLT Mike Aguirre opposed the lease: “In 2001, Aguirre took an unpopular stand and openly testified against the Boy Scout lease before the city council. In fact, the best thing about Aguirre may be his independence”. One cannot compromise on discrimination, you fight it or go along with it. Some may argue that the City Attorney position merely depends on legal acumen-this also may be questioned from Mr. Peters’ performance on the City Council-or that politicians vote on so many issues that none is really decisive. I would argue that some stands are decisive indeed, and that the Boy Scout lease goes to the heart of constitutional rights in the LGBT community. Peters’ vote on the Scouts lost him my vote way back in 2001 and nothing he has done since has caused me to change my mind about him. We should not put a person in the City Attorney role who can rationalize a vote to discriminate against LGBT kids and their parents. Ever!

Charlie Pratt

Dear Editor:

RE “Clinton Pledges Federal Benefits for Couples” [March 6]: So Hillary Clinton wants to be our friend. On Queer rights, as on so many other issues, she’s trying so awfully hard to present herself as the woman who will heal all the harm her husband did to us when he was President, including signing into law “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and the “Defense of Marriage Act” as well as losing both houses of Congress to the Republicans and a botched attempt at health-care reform, personally supervised by Hillary, that set back the cause of universal coverage by at least 15 years.

Remember the old saying: “Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.” The Clintons have already fooled us once; if we let them do it again, shame on us!

Mark Gabrish Conlan

Dear Editor:

It’s troubling to hear about the shooting of a 15-year-old male student in a public school classroom by another male student. It becomes even more tragic when we learn the victim not only was allowed to wear make-up, female attire and jewellry despite a uniform dress code, but that the victim had come on to the shooter in a previous encounter and asked the shooter to be his Valentine’s Day date! Sorry to say, your newspaper mentions none of these facts in its attack editorial against those seeking to repeal SB 777, a bill supposedly protecting all school kids from anti-Gay harassment. Neither does your editorial chastise the negligent school officials who did nothing to prevent this cold-blooded act from happening in the first place! A huge lawsuit against the Oxnard school district for carelessness is warranted, in my opinion.

Lawrence King was a troubled youth under a court’s supervision and, despite having two parents, living in a foster home. In short, King was already “at risk” as you warn in your castigation of SB 777’s critics. To be sure, something needs to be done to see that kids like the victim and his shooter (who was raised in a violent family atmosphere) are not set adrift in a sea of fear and isolation from healthy influences. SB 777, however, is not the answer. By permitting youth to act out their unhealthy urges and frustrations, it would make matters worse and put more California kids at risk. Teachers should be allowed a free hand to discipline trouble-making kids, such as gang members who have access to guns and not afraid to use them. Protecting youth should be a top priority. But ideas that go beyond education and conceived by those furthering an advocacy agenda will do more harm than good.

John Primavera