Concerns over street sweeping, Alameda roads
To the Editor:
Hmm, this morning I indeed forgot to move my car by 8 a.m. for street sweeping. Mea culpa. Thanks to the faithful ticketing person for the $55 ticket. Payment to be sent to San Jose no less?? No doubt outsourced.
I feel impelled and entitled to give you a $55 piece of my mind. I am 76 and have lived in Alameda since 1983 (40 years). I have lived on Third Street for 25 of those years. There is no need to do weekly street sweeping anywhere. I view that policy as a means of income for the City.
Driving and parking on Webster and Park Streets is impossible. Changing to single lanes with bump-outs has resulted in greatly reduced parking. So I just don’t go there.
And those streets designated as “no car traffic” since the pandemic? Exactly when will I be allowed to drive down Santa Clara Avenue from Sixth Street to Third Street again? Never?
And since the “strip park” from Webster to Main Street on Appezzato removed parking for teachers at the two schools on Third, they all park on Third. That street, as I’m sure you don’t know, only has parking on one side of the street. If I go anywhere during a school day, I can count on not being able to get another parking space on Third when I return home.
And about “The Launch” and “Star” complexes—who decided one parking space was sufficient for each unit? If a couple can afford to live there, surely it requires two incomes, with the probability of two cars for each unit.
And about traffic here. It is difficult to get out of Alameda at commute times. Imagine an event that required all 76,000 residents to vacate Alameda. It’s not remotely possible. Remember, we are an island. There are limited routes on and off.
I only wish the City showed the same alacrity to solve issues—or at least not keep creating more—as it shows in the issuing of street-sweeping tickets.
Editor’s note: We received a copy of this letter addressed to the Mayor.
Why does the City deny liability for Mr. Gonzalez’s death?
To the Editor:
The City of Alameda issued the following statement along with its agreement to pay $11.4 million to the families of Mario Gonzalez: “The parties further agreed that the settlement shall not be construed as an admission by any party of liability or of any fact that might give rise to liability for any purpose.”
Could someone explain to us how the City can deny that it accepts any liability, i.e., responsibility, for its police officers killing Mr. Gonzalez while still agreeing to pay out $11.4 million dollars for that very act?
Editorials and Letters to the Editor
All opinions expressed on this page are the author's alone and do not reflect those of the Alameda Post, nor does our organization endorse any views the author may present. Our objective as an independent news source is to fully reflect our community's varied opinions without giving preference to a particular viewpoint.