Letters to the Editor

Letters to the Editor – Richmond Review

Editor:

RE: Housing coming to CPMC site (July, 2018)

You did not include any comment about the withdrawal of services to the community, especially the elderly, that CPMC/Sutter Health has “accomplished” with this plan: in the Marshall Hale building,

Swindell’s Alzheimer’s Unit, a badly needed 25-bed residential facility, is being shut down and more than 100 post acute (rehab) nursing home beds have been shut down at the Marshall Hale and old Children’s hospital sites in the past few years. These services are being permanently cut and are not included in future building and renovation plans.

These services are needed by the people of San Francisco, but CPMC/Sutter, although a nonprofit corporation, doesn’t seem to care. It is not profitable for them. The corporation is not behaving as a friend of San Franciscans, although its sophisticated marketing says otherwise.

Note: The state’s Department of Justice has filed an anti-trustsuit against CPMC/Sutter for raising the cost of health care in Northern California.

Teresa Palmer, M. D.

Editor:

My sister’s bougainvillea was ripped out yesterday (July 26). It has brought beauty and joy to the Richmond District for more than 23 years on 19th Avenue.

She fought hard, crowd funded a legal suit, went to the SF Rent Board, involved San Francisco Supervisor Sandra Lee Fewer, who mediated, and contacted as many tree loving organizations as she could. The tree was going to come down because the landlord neglected to keep up sewer pipe repairs. It was not the fault of the tree.

The landlord, who lives in San Bruno, has had numerous building code violations over the years. On Monday he is going to pour cement over the entire front entry of the building’s entrance, removing all gardens on front and side. There are “green” building suggestions in San Francisco.

When people protested his actions yesterday he and his wife said the tree was ruining the plumbing. This is a truly a lie since he had not kept up the plumbing for years.

Moira Jean Sullivan

Editor:

Who decided to put all of the new concrete and wood benches in Sutro Heights Park? Did the residents ask for this?

The SF Recreation and Park Department informed me that Sutro Heights Park is in the Golden Gate National Recreation Area (GGNRA), but my inquires to them have been unanswered.

Are more benches being installed than are needed? It’s changing the character of the park and not for the better. When I visit Sutro Heights Park the only benches I see people sitting on are the two overlooking Ocean Beach, and they are usually empty. The new benches are oversized and out of proportion for their setting.

We should not be filling up our parks with concrete. This is a wasteful expenditure of money and resources, harmful to the environment and not a good replacement for the low-profile benches that are in place now.

David Romano

Editor:

For many seniors and disabled public transit riders in the Sunset and Richmond districts, removing Muni bus stops will negatively impact their lives.

In order to halt Muni Rapid/BRT bus stop service cuts, on July 18 I joined other residents from the Sunset and Richmond districts to seek help from the City’s top agency protecting the welfare of seniors and disabled residents, the Department on Aging and Adult Services (DAAS).

According to DAAS Advisory Council members, SF Municipal Transit Agency’s (SFMTA) staff has not made a presentation to DAAS about the negative impacts of policies affecting seniors and the disabled, specifically an analysis of the human and financial costs of removing bus stops relied upon by seniors and the disabled community across San Francisco.

The planners at the SFMTA, which oversees Muni operations, should have made a presentation to the DAAS advisory council before getting approval from San Francisco’s Board of Supervisors.

There are stark differences between Muni and SF Paratransit, especially when it comes to cost and convenience. Seniors age 65 and older ride Muni for free, while SF Paratransit costs a minimum of $2.50 for each trip.

As well, SF Paratransit requires an application process that takes a minimum of 21 days to process and not all people who apply are accepted. Rides on the service require 24 hours advance notice. The cost to taxpayers for a Muni ride is approximately $9, compared to approximately $60 per ride on SF Paratransit.

The DAAS Advisory Council created a resolution and voted unanimously to request the SFMTA report to the council any transit plans that may negatively affect seniors and the disabled.

Antonio White

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s