Deadly force is sometimes necessary
“Police cannot be the last line of defense for mental illness. Here are some solutions” (sacbee.com, May 17): Sacramento Police Chief Daniel Hahn and Sacramento Mayor Darrell Steinberg have teamed up in their opinion piece to feed us pablum. Sure, more government resources dedicated to helping the mentally ill is a no-brainer. However, the police have always been, and always will be, the last line of defense against anyone posing a threat to innocent life – whether they are mentally ill or not. Hahn and Steinberg seem to hope that future controversy can be avoided if somehow the police don’t get called to deal with these difficult situations. If they don’t get called, they won’t have a chance to shoot someone and cause bad press. This is naive and ridiculous. Utopia is not possible. Deadly force will continue to be necessary in some situations to protect officers and innocent citizens. Our government leaders should prepare us for that inevitability and support their people who have to make those tough split-second decisions.
Newsom has housing options
“California cities killed a sweeping housing reform bill. Can Gavin Newsom find another option?” (sacbee.com, May 20): Gov. Gavin Newsom has far more than a few options to address the state’s housing crisis that are even more powerful than Senate Bill 50, contrary to what Monday’s front page story suggests. Several bills would go even further to specifically and directly address affordability for the California households who need help the most. For example, SB 329 protects people with housing choice vouchers from discrimination as they look for homes, preventing or ending homelessness for more many families. Assembly Bill 10 adds $500 million to the Low Income Housing Tax Credit program, the most effective tool available for building homes for California’s lowest-income households. SB 282 directly helps people on parole experiencing homelessness find good housing. And SB 5 provides the local funding needed to build affordable homes and community infrastructure. The housing and homelessness crisis demands these types of big solutions.
What tourism and culture?
“Sacramento bars are one step closer to a 4 a.m. closing time” (sacbee.com, May 21): The state Senate voted for keeping the nightlife lights on until 4 a.m. in a few California cities, including Sacramento. Next stop for the bill is the state Assembly and Gov. Gavin Newsom. Then Sacramento can decide whether to keep its 2 a.m. closing-time requirement or tack on more hours – all in the name of supporting culture, economics, music, tourism and small business. No doubt this bill will generate money. City leaders, I ask you to consider what else it will generate between the hours of 2 a.m. and 4 a.m. Realistically, what tourism and culture will take place then? I live downtown and enjoy many nightlife options on a regular basis, but I’m with former Gov. Jerry Brown on this one – extending the last call for alcohol leads to more “mischief” and “mayhem.” If passed, that collaboration with community stakeholders and law enforcement state Sen. Scott Wiener mentions better be strong. A closing time of 2 a.m. isn’t “outdated” and it does “make sense.” It’s 2 a.m. – time to go home. There’s more culture to enjoy tomorrow.