False claims about sheriff’s deputy firing 

I am writing in response to the Sunday letter titled “Taxpayers stuck with the bill on a technicality.” The letter contains false allegations that my office was responsible for an alleged failure to serve an unnamed sheriff’s deputy a one-page notice of termination, and as a result the deputy received back pay, benefits and interest in the amount of $800,000. No such thing occurred.

None of the matters we have handled for the Sheriff’s Office even remotely resulted in an award of the type claimed. In all events, any allegation that my office failed to serve a notice of termination is also false, for the simple reason that the City Attorney’s Office does not serve notices of termination to sheriff’s employees. I say without reservation that the facts alleged in the letter are completely baseless.

Dennis J. Herrera
City Attorney
San Francisco


Losing vital transit option

If Caltrain makes its proposed service reductions, specifically the seven station closures and the nighttime service cuts, my household will no longer be able to ride Caltrain.

This will not be a temporary change; it will be a life-altering adjustment. We will be forced to buy a second car, and we will not have an opportunity to commute to our jobs by public transportation again.

I don’t think Caltrain management realizes the irreparable damage they will cause throughout the Bay Area if they enact these service cuts. These changes will not only kill ridership for Caltrain (easily two-thirds of its customer base will be affected by these cuts), but it will disrupt people’s lives.

Emily Hunter
Belmont


Insulting service members

Perhaps it is time to reduce ourselves to the level of the Westboro Baptist Church of Topeka, Kan., and send a mission there to “peacefully congregate at or near their place of worship” and voice our concerns about the manner in which they inflict such cruel and needless pain on the surviving families of American military personnel who died in the service of our country.

I don’t think the U.S. Supreme Court would have much doubt that the right to free speech applies there as well as at the funerals of service members. Having an opinion is one thing, but don’t the freedoms of those grieving relatives also deserve protection?

William J. Coburn
San Francisco

About The Author

Examiner Readers

Pin It
Favorite

More by Examiner Readers

Latest in Letters to the Editor

Friday, Aug 28, 2015

Videos

Most Popular Stories

© 2015 The San Francisco Examiner

Website powered by Foundation