Dear Editor:

Thank you for your editorial on smart growth and the newly formed Hillcrest Town Council.

Contrary to what is stated in your editorial, the Hillcrest Town Council does not have a “no growth” position. Our development committee passed a motion asking the Town Council to approve the following policy statement: “New development in Hillcrest should fit in with adjacent housing in terms of size, lot footprint, height, bulk, setbacks, type of housing, character and integrity, with allowances made for zoning boundaries.”

My hope is that if the Town Council approves this policy, we won’t see more four-story condo buildings looking down on the backyards of single family homes. But it may be a vain hope. City officials will ignore us until we get in their faces so much that they can’t ignore us any longer.

I just spoke to a lady who faces the prospect of losing her backyard privacy and light because the house next door to her house was demolished without notice to her or the community and is being replaced by a three-story condo development. The developer “maxed out” and didn’t take the Uptown Community Plan into account – which is typical.

Don Skolnik calls the development committee motion a “no growth” motion. He is wrong. A high-rise would “fit in” next to another high-rise. Adding another high-rise to the community is not following a “no growth” policy.

Skolnik is also wrong when he says that his row house would never have been built under the policy statement approved by the development committee. There have been condos and row houses in Hillcrest and North Park (where Skolnik lives) for a long time, and I didn’t notice many single-family homes where Skolnik’s row house is located.

“Smart growth” is supposed to create low income housing. It doesn’t. The 96 units proposed at 301 University would include only 4 low income units. If the city is interested in creating low income housing why is it allowing tens of thousands of condo conversions, which reduce the stock of low cost rental housing?

The “smart growth” that Skolnik advocates is supposed to prevent sprawl development in the countryside and outer suburbs. It doesn’t. Sprawl development is continuing in north, east and south county and in Riverside county even while developers are demolishing houses in Hillcrest and replacing them with condos and high rises.

You write that we can have more growth and preserve the village character of Hillcrest.

Well, just keep this in mind: The San Diego Development Services Department, Economic Development and Community Investment Department, Planning Department, City Council and Mayor routinely ignore community groups that object to huge projects like 301 University.

They listen to developers, not residents. That is the problem. Telling them that growth of any kind is okay is like handing an alcoholic another drink.

Andrew Towne

Dear Editor:

How far back in time do we go? Shall we return to the days when being gay or lesbian was grounds for firing a teacher under the morals clause? How about when female teachers had to resign their positions once they got married or became pregnant?

Your publishing links to material, supplied to you by SDUSD, that is no longer—oops—was no longer public, only served to add unnecessary fuel to the fire that’s consuming Gerald Gapusan’s life and career. And you continue to fuel the escalation by publishing the words someone else posted on Mr. Gapusan’s former web site without any context or explanation.

Gerald Gapusan never asked to be placed in the spotlight and he deserves to be left alone to learn from what has happened. His students deserve a wiser, chastened teacher who remains committed to teaching his students and preparing them for life. Parents and community supported Mr. Gapusan because he is a quality teacher whose rights were being violated.

SDEA stands by all teachers whether they are threatened by reactionary forces like GLT, administrators who coerce vulnerable educators, or misinformed politicians who continually blast public education in an effort to undermine the foundation of our democracy.

This case is not about the quality of a teacher. It is about what a teacher, or anyone, does in his/her private life. It is about an employer’s obligation to handle personnel matters with care and respect. One would think that of all publications, the GLT would be defending that cause!

Your editorial is tantamount to gay-bashing and nothing else.

Camille Zombro

President, San Diego Education Association

Dear Editor:

I read that the Mayor of San Diego, Jerry Sanders held a press conference to endorse John McCain for president. McCain is one of the most anti-gay candidates. He supported the Arizona ban on gay marriage and has been chumming up to religious right leaders such as Jerry Falwell and James Dobson.

Since our city government is in shambles with insurmountable financial problems, Jerry Sanders needs to concentrate on his job as mayor and forget telling us who to vote for as president.

Carson McIntyre

Dear Editor:

I find it interesting on how many in the community lie and or hide there reality. In several letters to the editor or articles on regards to the bath house shutting down, many blame the police or the city attorney for the actions that are taking place! There are those who are ignorant and say that the bath house is a SAFE and clean atmosphere for consulting adults to have sex. The truth is Drugs and Unsafe sexual practices have ALWAYS taken place by most that attend these businesses. There is a reason that men stay there ALL night, there not sleeping! It is in the interest of the city to monitor a place that creates unhealthy practices that can cause HIV or STD’s or even major drug addiction! Those who become infected with STD’s, HIV become a burden on the community and its tax payers, as most have no health insurance or don’t have a stable income! So the rest of us without choice become the care takers of those who have made poor personal decisions! Now instead of blaming others out side of the gay community for our problems, lets start working on the instability of those who need to be helped and provide therapy and psychological help to those who attend these places searching for a deadly FIX and provide a longer lasting pleasure of self respect! Lets be responsible for our community and its actions before we blame others!

Paul Benson

Dear Editor:

I propose a new law. Everyone should be mandated by law to be checked for HPV.

All boys, 13 years and older, should be prosecuted as adults and put in jail if they knowingly spread HPV without warning the girls, as HPV is shown to maybe, perhaps, but who knows, be the cause of cervical cancer in a tiny percentage of some women exposed to it.

And just for the sake of equal rights for women, girls knowingly spreading HPV to boys should be treated the same.

If such laws against knowingly spreading disease are good enough for the mostly gays and blacks affected as regards supposed HIV infection, then they are good enough for everyone. Ain’t this one crazy planet?

Michael Geiger

HEAL San Diego