SOUND OFF
Editor Mike Jenner and The Californian staff welcome your comments and suggestions. To offer your input by phone, please call 395-7649 and leave your comments in a voice-mail message or send an e-mail message to soundoff@bakersfield.com. Please be sure to include your phone number so we can call you if we need more information.
Reader: I just sent an e-mail to your ace reporter regarding his very informative story about the city guaranteeing a $1.8 million loan for the fixtures and equipment for the Padre Hotel.
He wrote that the loan was either secured by the hotel or the fixtures and equipment because obviously he failed to check the facts. One does not have to be a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist to conclude the loan was not secured by the probably already over-encumbered hotel.
In the event this loan goes into default, the collateral might be worth 10 cents on the dollar. That's what I would call a toxic loan! Once again our redevelopment agency in concert with our City Council have made another brain dead deal.
Would it not be incumbent upon your ace reporters to at least have all the facts when they write a story presumed to be somewhat informative? Does your editorial board think this is a prudent decision?
-- Jack Balfanz
Jenner: Who's your gripe with? Our "ace reporter" or the city? Because John Cox did check his facts.
If you think the hotel isn't good for the money, fine. If you want our editorial board to take a position (it hasn't), fine. But it's not our reporter's job to stop this thing.
The city staff report states the collateral will be the hotel property or the fixtures and equipment. The City Council thinks the hotel's good for the money -- and if the feds agree, they'll extend the loan. If they don't, they won't.
I don't mind running your thoughts on the deal because printing readers' opinions is part of our job. But you could have made your accusations at the council meeting before the vote instead of taking potshots at the messenger.
Our story on the council meeting said the resolution passed unanimously, with no comment from the council -- or the public.
n n n
Reader: Why does The Californian insist on encouraging unsafe activities by glorifying them through photos?
Swimming in the lakes at the Park at River Walk may be fun, but it is neither safe nor should it be encouraged. Maybe the next grieving family suing the city for not providing lifeguards will also sue The Californian.
I encourage all parents concerned with the safety of their children to keep them out of the lakes at the Park at River Walk.
-- Reed Fullmer
Jenner: Whenever we print a picture of someone doing anything with an element of risk -- from swimming in the Kern to riding a bike without a helmet -- we hear this criticism.
I don't disagree that parents should keep their kids out of the lakes at that park. But I also must disagree with your suggestion that we "glorify" an activity by publishing a photo.
n n n
Reader: I saw my first artist-decorated newspaper dispenser today. It was beautiful.
What a wonderful way to showcase local budding artists. And what fun for them. Now I can hardly wait to "find" more of them.
"Thank you" Californian, for helping make downtown infinitely more colorful and interesting.
-- Howard Krauter
n n n
Reader: The last two paragraphs of Herb Benham's Friday column say: "Wave if you see me. I'm easy to spot. ... I'm the guy talking on the phone driving a dark green steam bath."
If you can see him talking on the phone he will be holding it up to his ear! This is illegal, and if he does it, he surely should not be joking about it! If he is using an earpiece, you would not be able to look at him and know that he is on the phone.
I see way too many who ignore not only the law, but common sense. Most times when you see people with phones to their ears, they're drifting into another lane, speeding up or slowing down inappropriately.
-- Bobbie Hulson
Jenner: I agree with your assessment of drivers on hand-held phones. Herb uses a BlueTooth earpiece. I know that because I've seen him walking through the office apparently talking to himself -- with the device blinking in his ear.
His column should have made that point clear.
