Letters to the Editor Letters to the Editor (September 09, 2005)

Story misrepresented Navy recruiters

Editor:

As the commanding officer for the U.S. Navy Recruiting District San Francisco and the leader of the Navy recruiters in attendance at Shoreline's Summer Jam, I feel obligated to point out the factual inaccuracies of the Aug. 26 Voice article.

The U.S. Navy continues to seek out the best qualified men and women who desire to be part of an elite organization voluntarily dedicated to serving our nation. Interestingly, over 95 percent of Navy recruits have received their high school diploma. Moreover, the Navy does not target minority prospects more than any other group; we seek to mirror the demographics of America at large. To quote Mr. Siegel's statement as fact was incorrect. In fiscal year 2005 to date, over 70 percent of all Navy recruits have scored in the Department of Defense Upper Mental Group Category I-IIIA.

Moreover, to describe the Navy recruiters' professional distribution of career information to voluntary concert attendees as "sporadic propaganda" was neither accurate, nor was it impartial. I also find it ironic that the Voice would note a counter-recruiter's T-shirt that read "Military Recruiters Lie," yet headline those same protesters that purposely avoided the booth fees of Summer Jam with the express intention of setting up a formal information point. Their activities might be more deserving of the term propaganda.

In writing "the recruiters did not seem to have a problem with the counter-recruiter's presence," the Voice significantly downplayed Petty Officer Coleman's strong support of the protesters. It is worth restating his eloquent words: "Every person in the Navy has sworn to uphold the Constitution. ... it is their (the protesters') First Amendment right."

I hope future articles will fairly balance the important discussion we are all engaged in. The process of finding the brightest of our young Americans to voluntarily serve in our nation's defense is too noble an endeavor to obscure with bias and false information. CDR Lance Sapera, U.S. Navy Commanding Officer Navy Recruiting District San Francisco

City needs vision, not more units

Editor:

I was very surprised to read that six of seven city council members rejected Environmental Planning Commission recommendations and neighborhood comments and approved a rezoning, so that 106 residential units could be built along Ferguson Drive.

The council apparently felt they needed to act quickly. But what possible hurry can there be to build a hundred units at $750,000 each? This is hardly an affordable price for young people at the start of their careers or for families of limited means.

And I wholeheartedly agree with the neighbors that a master plan for the area should take precedence over quick building. It's time for Mountain View to renew its vision of the kind of city it wants to be.

Engaging in quick fixes frequently leads to negative consequences. As an example, consider the council's decision to limit access from the new development on Ferguson to the older adjacent neighborhood.

Most residents have chosen Mountain View because they like its character: an open community that encourages a feeling of belonging. Limiting access from one neighborhood to the other foreshadows gated communities or neighborhoods that turn their backs on the rest of the city. That is not the Mountain View so many of us have chosen to live in. Ronit Bryant Dana Street

E-mail a friend a link to this story.