Plea to Supervisor Arnold: Change your vote on Bob Jones Trail extension | Opinion

Keep Bob Jones trail alive

“SLO County won’t redesign Bob Jones trail,” (sanluisobispo.com, May 22)

As a resident of District 5, I am distressed to hear that Supervisor Debbie Arnold will not support the plan to construct the Bob Jones Trail extension. The need to utilize a small piece at the edge of the Bunnell property, that already has development restrictions, should not stop the county from completing this important project and getting the $18.2 million dollars to help fund construction.

The Bob Jones Trail is not simply recreation. It is also a safe transportation corridor, important to the county’s goal of supporting multi-modal transportation. The trail will allow fire trucks to access Barron Canyon, improving safety for residents. Further, our low-income county residents with service jobs are most likely to use bicycles for this commute and will be safer riding on the trail. It is alarming to see these individuals, and I have, riding along unsafe major routes.

The trail also benefits the tourist economy as an amenity that helps to keep San Luis Obispo County a tourist destination. A family might stay an extra day to walk or ride the trail from San Luis Obispo to Avila Beach, benefiting hotels, restaurants and other businesses.

Please, Supervisor Arnold, end your term with a gold star decision supporting the county’s ability to provide this important project for our residents. Please vote to support all of us by choosing to utilize eminent domain in acquiring this smidgen of property.

Emily Rosten

San Luis Obispo

Hearst Castle oak tree removal

“Hearst Castle was built around this stately oak tree. Here’s why it’s coming down” (sanluisobispo.com, May 21)

The article published May 21, which calls attention to the removal of one of the historic oaks on the grounds of Hearst Castle, contains sentiments I find very problematic for a number of reasons.

In the body of the article is a quote by the current superintendent that likens the removal of the historic Coastal Live Oak on the North Tea Terrace to “moving a piece of furniture” and assures us that no one will notice its absence because it is “not what people look at” when on tour. This series of quotes indicates a complete lack of understanding of W.R. Hearst’s and architect Julia Morgan’s design and planting of the gardens and the Olmsted Study, done years ago, which is supposed to inform the understanding, maintenance and interpretation of the historic gardens of the castle.

Even though the article cites the “hefty” historic documentation available with regard to the creation and evolution of the gardens, the superintendent’s comments demonstrate that he is unaware of the most basic concepts regarding the care and understanding of how one should address and interpret any changes to the gardens.

The other important information left out of this article is the fact that all gardens are always changing and evolving. Therefore, the challenge with historic garden care and maintenance is to manage in such a way as to provide for those changes as time moves on. This includes the important understanding of any context, history and knowledge, and the ability to communicate such information in an appropriate manner, in accordance with state park mission statements that all parks use as their pathway. Unfortunately, interpretation seems to have fallen away as an important component of Hearst Castle management policies.

Having been a guide and trainer there for decades, it is extremely distressing to witness the deterioration of management and decision making currently on display at the one state historic monument within the Park Service and one of the great house museums in this country.

Muna Cristal

Cayucos

Send him back to TV land

We now have been reassured that at least one part of our legal system — the jury— still works the way it was designed, while the rest of the judicial system, from the Supreme Court down, wallows in the muck left from egregious presidential appointments.

D.J. Trump has been convicted by a jury of his (and our) peers, whose impartiality was vetted in court by Trump’s own legal team. No politics here. Is it still possible that the Trump Travesty might be reinstalled in the White House by that larger jury of Trump’s intellectual/moral peers among the general public, none of whom would ever be allowed to sit on any legitimate jury?

Let’s see if we can distract him before that even becomes a nightmarish possibility.

Let me propose that Mr. T instead returns to the airwaves with a sequel to his early TV show, which you may remember was called “The Apprentice: You’re Fired.” This replacement can be called You’re Convicted, and will feature as contestants Trump’s former henchmen, sycophants and colleagues. I would not be averse to backing it. How about you?

Gene Strohl

San Luis Obispo

It works!

Donald Trump’s conviction on 34 counts shows that, for all its flaws, the American justice system can live up to its name. Presidents are not, and should not be, above the law.

Roscoe Mathieu

San Luis Obispo

They deserve our thanks

Every U.S. military service member, no matter enlisted or enscripted, swears the same oath: “to support and defend the Constitution of the United States of America.” That’s a blank check from the service member payable with their lives if called upon.

Less than 15% of service members are ever engaged in active combat. Most perform their military duties peacefully and return to civilian life. Whether deployed internationally or stationed domestically, every military service member is honor bound to perform their duties even at the cost of their lives.

That’s the sacrifice we honor on Memorial Day and the service to country that we salute on Veterans Day. Every veteran, regardless of branch of service, rank, military job or combat deployment, deserves our heartfelt “Thank you for your sacrifice.”

Paul Worsham

Arroyo Grande