Measure Y

Measure Y

Re: Ardell properties on Mariners Mile are potentially up for sale (Jan. 1 issue). There is absolutely nothing in Measure Y that could not be performed without it being on the ballot. Council can allow for this area to be developed. It is not a difficult process, and it is far less complex and less expensive than passing a sweeping proposal like Measure Y. Whoever you got that information on, do not trust them again. They have an agenda and are making you look like a fool.

Robert Johnson
Submitted on TheLog.com

Ethanol bad for boats? Quick, someone warn Brazil!

Re: EPA increases ethanol mandate (Jan. 1 issue). In Brazil, you can’t buy straight gasoline. All of their gas is E26 or higher. Are you telling me that Brazil, where their interstate system is the Amazon and its tributaries has more problems with their boat motors? They don’t have roads, they have water. That’s ridiculous! The NMMA is either directly or indirectly associated with the petroleum industry, just like AAA. These organizations fight corn based ethanol because it’s the only biofuel that is a threat to them. Biobutanol is many years from being commercially viable. When the industry adopted E10 they had the blender’s tax credit to offset losing 10 percent of their profit. When that left, the gloves came off. Learn about Brazil, it’s an ethanol success story. No special cars, no special boats or motorcycles and they all get E26 with E30 as the goal. They didn’t all break down when they went from E10 to E15 after all. Give us choice at the pump, let people decide on their own and find out the boogey man isn’t there.

Joe
Submitted on TheLog.com

Public access to shoreline

Re: Back Bay Landing project approved with modifications (Jan. 1 issue). I hope this project will have shoreline access for the public for float-tubers, kayakers and fishermen. If not, I’ll be complaining to the Coastal Commission for a re-review or appeal.

Anonymous
Submitted on TheLog.com

Corrections

Re: Back Bay Landing project approved with modifications (Jan. 1 issue). The article incorrectly stated “a mobile home park, Bayside Village, would be removed and replaced.” In fact, the RV storage area will be removed, not the mobile home park. The article has been updated with the correct information.