Evidence doesn’t fit
Bob Cuddy’s support of SB 432 (“A good bill?” Aug. 21), the bill mandating hotels use fitted instead of flat sheets, failed to identify the single most important reason the bill should be defeated: Bill supporters have no evidence that fitted sheets are better for hotel employee working conditions than flat sheets. None. The bill is sponsored by trial attorneys looking for new ways to sue. That’s the impetus, not worker safety.
No one is more motivated than the hotel industry to ensure safe working conditions. We need healthy housekeepers to succeed and do everything possible to prevent injuries, which lead to increased costs through absenteeism, medical costs, and insurance premiums.
Estimates to comply with SB 432 are $30 million to $50 million to replace the sheets and purchase the necessary laundry equipment. These costs will be passed to hotel guests.
But even if this bill were cost neutral, we would still oppose it because there is no evidence fitted sheets will improve working conditions or provide a safer work environment.
The legislature shouldn’t mandate fitted sheets in hotels when there’s no substantiation it will make a difference. The legislature has more pressing concerns such as jump-starting the economy and creating jobs.
president, California Hotel & Lodging Association
Mattresses are heavy
Bob Cuddy’s recent column was very informative. On a recent visit to a motel in Pacific Grove, I noticed the mattresses were at least 10 inches thick. Whose back wouldn’t get strained with the weight of those mattresses?
Our mattress at home is the same. We cannot turn it over as instructed by the maker. Your experts making the decision on fitted sheets didn’t try lifting mattresses!
A safer interchange
Many thanks to the city planners, engineers and road crew members who worked on the Highway 101/Highway 46 West interchange and Theatre Drive realignment. What an improvement!
Having driven through this confusing intersection daily for more than 20 years, I witnessed an increasing number of frightening near-misses. While still not perfect, this intersection is much easier to navigate, especially for tourists. Thank you for all you do to make our highways safe.
California was first
Aug. 26 this year was the 91st anniversary of the passage of the amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which finally enabled women to vote in federal elections. For years, the National Organization for Women has held public observances of Women’s Equality Day, which offers a chance for all of us to reflect on the importance of the right of suffrage. Women campaigned tirelessly for more than 70 years to bring this momentous change in our politics to fruition; immediately after passage, those who led the fight for suffrage became the League of Women Voters, which remains an important force in American politics.
But how many people know that California already had the vote? By a close margin, the special election of Oct. 10, 1911, brought suffrage to the women of California. That same League of Women Voters is spearheading a centennial commemoration of the right of women to vote in California, culminating in a grand party at the Dallidet Adobe on Oct. 10. Check out www.votes4women.org for more details, and celebrate your right to vote.
San Luis Obispo
Don’t like sprawl?
This is a response to Wayne Roberts’ letter of Aug. 24, objecting to relentless sprawl in Pismo Beach. Wayne, you ain’t seen nothing yet unless you and others who feel that way express your opinions more often. At least you write to the editor, while others will wait until it’s too late to do anything but complain.
There will be a very important public workshop Sept. 21 at 7 p.m. at the Pismo Beach Veterans’ Hall. The important part is that it will be attended by the commission that decides whether Pismo Beach gets to annex all that land in Price Canyon.
All the surrounding cities and townships will be affected if and when the land in Price Canyon gets developed and then becomes part of the city. Please tell your friends who feel as you do to attend this meeting and put your two cents in. LAFCO does listen to the public input.
You can find out what LAFCO does by visiting their www.slolafco.com.
We need relief
Pay no attention to Andrew Christie’s article “Regulatory relief a false issue” (Aug. 19).
First of all, Christie betrays his obvious bias with the liberal talking-points ploy of knocking Rep. Fred Upton, R-Mich., for taking contributions from the electric power and mining industries, as if no politician on the opposite side of the issue would let political contributions sway their thinking.
The fact is people and organizations make political contributions to legislators who agree with their thinking. Like it or not, it’s the way our system works.
Then Christie goes on to quote a 2010 EPA report that, surprise, amounts to the regulatory behemoth patting itself on the back.
I agree that the regulations of the past 40 years have had some positive effects, but from what I’m reading is that the shaky economy is about to experience an “environmental” disaster called regulations on steroids.
For example, according to a Senate committee on the Environment and Public Works, new EPA ozone regulations will cost 91,700 jobs by 2030 in the Cincinnati-Dayton, Ohio, area alone.
Locally, don’t be surprised when you see a “drainage fee” on your utility bill to offset the costs of complying with new clean water regulations.
No wonder Republicans are looking at ways to soften the EPA’s blows.