Editorial

Local law enforcement leaders oppose Proposition 47. Although well intended, its consequences will not be as advertised.  The proposition promises to channel funds from prisons to schools and rehabilitative programs by reducing many crimes from felonies to misdemeanors. However, what we’re not hearing in pro Prop 47 arguments is that many successful programs currently exist for offenders that Prop 47 would negatively impact. In Sonoma County we have an extensive diversion program for drug offenders, and specialized courts to address drug and alcohol addiction.  By reducing these crimes to misdemeanors, the incentive to combat these addictions is replaced by a revolving door at the jail.  Worse yet, date rape drugs will be reduced to misdemeanor crimes.  

Editor: Based upon the bridge rating analysis recently completed

Vote ‘yes’ on F

The City of Healdsburg, like many communities throughout our state, is facing a number of housing related challenges. These challenges have been exacerbated in Healdsburg due to the recent recession, elimination of redevelopment funds by the state and many have argued the limitations of the growth management ordinance, which inadvertently has curtailed construction of new market rate, multi-family units for sale or rental units. This has all become much more personal and painful for our community over the past two months, with the news of families being evicted from their apartments as well as reported rent increases. While it seems like a perfect storm of housing issues, the city has been working for some time to address these issues with short, mid and long-term approaches in mind.

Quality of life?

EDITOR:Lastwinter,inspiteoftryingtokeepthethermostatlow,mypropanebillskeptgoingup.Well,theculpritturnedoutnottobemyusage.My(nowformer)propanesupplierhadbeenquietlyraisingthepricebymorethan$1pergallon. Isay"quietly"becausethestatementsIwaspayingdidnotshowthepricepergallon,onlythegallonsandtotalcharge,soittookmeawhiletorealizewhatwasgoingon.InMarch2005,thepricewasabout$2.65pergallon.ButbySeptember,itwentupto$2.98pergal.Then$3.34pergalinNovember.Andupto$3.66pergalinMarch2006‹morethat$1pergalhigherthanthepreviousyearandalmosta40percentincrease. Atfirst,Ithoughtthatthiswasageneraltrend‹liketheincreaseingasoline.WhenIcalledotherlocalpropanesuppliers,Iwassurprisedtolearnthattheywerestillquotingbetween$2.45and$2.75pergallon,nowhereclosetothe$3.66my(former)supplierhadbeencharging.Andtheirtankrentalswerelower,too.Iuseabout500gallonsperyear,whichistypical.Unlikeelectricity,somepropanesupplierschargemorepergallonthelessyouuse. WhenIcomplainedtomyformersupplieraboutthehighprice,theyimmediatelyrefiguredmylasttankfillatabout$2.50pergallon(a$100credit). Buttheywouldn'tgivemeanycreditforthefillssinceNovemberthatchargedwaymorethan$2.50pergallon.IfigureIwasstilloverchargedby$200. So,ifyouhavebeenpayingmorethanabout$2.75pergallon,checkwhatothersuppliersarecharging.Itwaseasytoswitch.Ittookaboutanhourformynewsuppliertoremovetheoldtank,transferthegas,andinstallthenewtank.Andaskyournewsupplieriftheycandeliveryouroldtanktoyouroldsupplieratnocharge.Thatmayalsosaveyouover$50thatsomecompanieschargetopickuptheiremptytanks. Apparently,thereislittleornoregulationofthepropaneindustry.So,shoparound. -DonKelsey,Guerneville

Perception