Submit your letter to the editor via this form. Read more Letters to the Editor.

FasTrak reluctance
comes down to finances

I was surprised by reading Mr. Roadshow today that neither querent nor responder understood why people don’t want to use FasTrak.

The problem is a financial one. The “convenience” FasTrak offers, namely automatic debits, may work great for someone of means. Yet for low-income individuals and those living paycheck to paycheck, an automatic debit can unexpectedly overdraft a person’s bank account, resulting in overdraft fees, bounced checks and declined debits for necessities. Furthermore, the amount of automatic debits increase proportional to one’s FasTrak use and can be more than $200 for daily commuters. Not everyone has the luxury of an extra $200 that can be withdrawn from one’s account at any time.

For a person with financial constraints, the prospect of an automatic debit is not a comfort but a trap.

Erin McCall
Oakland

Smoke danger just one
threat of climate change

Re: “Smoke from California fires may have killed more than 1,000 people,” Sept. 23:

I wanted to commend Paul Rogers for his article highlighting Professor Marshall Burke’s analysis of the mortality caused by inhaled smoke during the recent California wildfires.

Too often in the public discourse about climate change we talk about theoretical harms or predictions of future catastrophe. The fact is, climate change has happened, extreme weather is here and, as a result, we are going to suffer tragic repercussions.

As difficult as it may be, quantifying the effects of climate change in human terms is essential. We need broad, collective action to slow the rate of climate change and avoid thousands, or millions, of preventable deaths. I know I will be more cognizant of my own energy usage thinking about people in our community choking on smoke.

Nathan Juergens

Oakland

Wang a great asset
for Livermore schools

Let’s elect Kristie Wang to Livermore School Board. Kristie is highly qualified to start the job on day one. Her master’s degree in public policy trained her to think strategically and negotiate to solve problems for the public good.

Kristie demonstrated key leadership in Livermore during the last two years by working diligently to combat the youth vaping epidemic with local policy. She replicated this effort throughout the Bay Area and a new state law ending the sale of flavored tobacco was signed last month.

For nearly a decade, Kristie served our community as a Tri-Valley Haven volunteer and in protecting the health, education and well-being of children and families.

Kristie knows our Livermore schools firsthand as a mother of two students and frequent volunteer for classroom service. Vote for Kristie Wang, a proven and knowledgeable leader, for Livermore School Board.

Barbara Kornblum
Livermore

Allen ‘complete package’
for Pleasanton council

Looking ahead to our upcoming election for Pleasanton City Council, one candidate clearly represents a “complete package” of Pleasanton’s local values.

Nancy Allen’s support for responsible land use, preserving the small-town character of our downtown, and a strong partnership with the local school board are three values that will serve Pleasanton well.

However, Allen stands out on one crucial issue — she has steadfastly avoided business connections that could create any conflict of interest in her decision-making on the council. She does not accept campaign contributions from anyone who may bring projects before the council. This characteristic sets her apart.

In her long history of service to Pleasanton, including six years on the Planning Commission, she has demonstrated independence and integrity. Pleasanton voters need not look farther than Nancy Allen for a candidate who will serve their interests without conflict on the Pleasanton City Council.

Daniel Sapone
Pleasanton

Women’s abortion rights
shouldn’t be infringed

I appreciate the concern pro-lifers have for the unborn. Yes, the unborn can’t speak for themselves. But I question the pro-lifer’s right to interfere with someone else’s lifestyle. A woman must raise that child, it is her choice to make, and abortion is really between her, her doctor and her God.

I also question some of their rationale. If you feel this strongly about trying to save the life of the helpless, why don’t you also demand gun management? Mass shootings at schools, theaters and even places of worship have killed and maimed hundreds, yet all we get are “thoughts and prayers.”

Some countries limit families to only one child. I don’t want to live in a society that has that much control. What if the government forced all males to be circumcised? Or demanded vasectomies? Why should limiting women’s rights be any different?

Jim Cauble
Hayward

Going big on COVID aid
best for Americans

A battle rages in Congress about who will pay the costs of the COVID virus.

Some forces want the burden to be on the citizenry, by limiting how much the federal government will spend on assisting families, small businesses and local government. The weight of the virus is falling on the American people through unemployment, increased debt, homelessness and so on.

Another group in Congress wants to put the burden of COVID costs on corporations and well-off individuals by raising taxes and perhaps incurring debt. They would provide support to keep families, small businesses and local government afloat so fewer workers are laid off and the economy can recover more rapidly.

The latter approach makes more sense for now and as the country tries to recover from the pandemic.

David Port
Walnut Creek