‘Metal coffin on wheels’
EDITOR: You love your dog. You provide the best food and veterinary care. You exercise your pet and arrange fun activities to keep your companion happy and engaged in life.
Then you take your dog for perhaps its last ride, a “quick” trip to the store.
Try this experiment. On a hot Sonoma day, park you metal box, otherwise known as your car, on the street or simply leave it in your driveway. No shade permitted, which matters little anyway. Get in, crack the windows a couple of inches and sit there as the car quickly heats up. Minutes pass as you are inhaling more air than can be replaced by the small window openings. You are not allowed to drink any water. It would not help that much anyway. You’re now becoming more uncomfortable breathing faster, perspiring, perhaps feeling light-headed.
You may become nauseous and are very thirsty. By now you’ve been in your vehicle less than 15 to 20 minutes. If you own a small or dark-colored car the effects are even worse. Possibly you are now becoming frantic by the excessive heat that envelopes you.
But wait! You can open the car door and exit, saving yourself from heat stroke or death. Your precious dog or cat does not have that opportunity. Age and any medical problems increase all side effects of animal overheating.
People, use the most basic common sense and leave your beloved pet at home. You may not have a cool house or air conditioning but your overheated home is still much cooler than this metal coffin on wheels. Trapped in a car on a blistering summer day is a most violent and entirely preventable death. Prove by your actions that you really do love your cherished canine or feline companion. Please heed and pass on this heartfelt advice.
The will of the people
EDITOR: I read with interest James Cribb’s letter regarding the City Council trying to reshape the Planning Commission (“Council Trying to Reshape Planning Commission,” July 18). My concern about the letter is less the politics that may be at play in City Hall, and more with a comment about how the City Council is doing its job properly when it comes to reviewing the EIR of the Hotel Project Sonoma.
The General Plan 2020 for the City of Sonoma is dated October 2006. Since then a number of economic changes have occurred, as well as business models that are very different 10 years later. AirBnB puts huge pressure on the availability of affordable housing. Tasting rooms for wineries that have no facilities proliferate in an area that once serviced the community, and there is intense tourism-based pressure on Sonoma, very little of which the 2006 General Plan addresses. Sure, the pressure of rentals, wineries, and tourists have always been a part of Sonoma, but not like they have in the last few years.
The General Plan likely represents the direction our community should take in 2006. Eleven years later, our priorities have changed, the business models exerting pressure on Sonoma have changed and, hence, the accuracy of the General Plan’s alignment with the citizens’ will has changed.
It is no affront to the Planning Commission that the City Council is questioning the project’s EIR. They represent the people in Sonoma, not the paperwork that was created a decade ago, and it is their job to ensure that the projects which are approved today, meet the will of the people today.