Reader: Your column about handicapped parking tickets ("We're the state's hotbed of disabled parking violations," May 15) was very interesting and informative. I have similar feelings about the issue. I have disabled license plates on my personal vehicle because my wife has physical walking problems.

This issue is somewhat similar to my particular complaint about the lack of enforcement on missing front license plates in California. I contacted the Highway Patrol office about their checking on missing front license plates when they do DUI checkpoints. I was told they did check for missing front license plates and did issue citations for missing front license plates. A Bakersfield police officer informed me that during DUI checkpoints stops they do not check for missing front license plates.

They have the vehicle stopped and are checking personal driver license and registration documentation, so they could easily look at the front of the vehicle for a license plate. Violations would mean more money for the city and get people to comply with the Vehicle Code 5200 requirement for this display.

Thanks for your very informative opinion piece today.

— Doug Blankenship

Price: By issuing front and back plates for vehicles but enforcing only the display of rear plates, it seems to me police are giving car thieves a break: Just slap an unused front plate on the back of the car and you may not be pulled over, at least not as quickly.

I guess front plates are simply a low priority.

Reader: I like your thoughts on the blatant disregard for disabled parking violations. However, what bothers me more than anything — other than obnoxious “crotch-rocket” motorcyclists that wake you and can be heard for several miles — are red-light runners. Remember when the “yellow” light was more than a mere suggestion that the driver prepare to stop? It has now become commonplace to simply blow through yellow lights.

What’s even worse, that fudging by many has now become a complete disregard of yellow ... or red. There is not a single day that I don’t see some suicidal driver blowing through a red light.

The recent 1 percent sales tax increase hopefully will add more traffic enforcement. However, BPD could probably fully fund itself if it could magically “man” the intersections and ticket the ne'er-do-wells.

— Neil Walker

Price: No disagreement here.

Reader: I live in McFarland and Wednesday I went to the local post office to check my mailbox. As I exited my vehicle, I noticed a big delivery vehicle from a nationally known overnight shipping company parked in the only handicapped parking in the small lot. They usually park in front, but this time the driver opted to use the handicapped parking.

Too bad this was the one time I chose to leave my phone in my vehicle. I would have snapped a pic of his vehicle and license and sent it to DMV and the delivery company's headquarters. Thank you for your articles.

— Angelo Esquibel

 Price: You'd think the post office would have ample loading-zone parking for the FedExes and UPSes of the world, which do business with the U.S. Postal Service on a daily basis.


Reader: I am dismayed over the unequal treatment in the case of Monsignor Harrison ("Second man accuses Monsignor Craig Harrison of sexual misconduct," May 2). Why is it that the accuser can be guaranteed anonymity and the good name of Monsignor Harrison is splashed all over the news media?

I assume this unfortunate situation will go on and on. If there is credence to the so-called victims’ accusations, why don’t they have the courage to identify themselves? Then and only then will justice be served.

— Rita Loken

Price: This is the way the Roman Catholic Diocese of Fresno has chosen to approach these allegations: Suspend the priest in question, notify the public by way of the news media, and keep the identity of accusers confidential.

With regard to the accusers, that's the way responsible news media organizations handle such cases anyway: They protect the identity of alleged victims of sexual assault. Surely you've seem that disclaimer before. So that part is understandable.

I assume the diocese suspends accused priests once it's notified of credible allegations, however tenuous, because the church would be that much more exposed, legally speaking, if a priest the diocese was already "watching" were to commit another assault while he is under review. (Know that I'm speaking in general terms here.)

I agree that the treatment might seem unequal, but I can't think of a fairer way for the diocese to proceed. All parties here are in agonizing positions.

Reader: Thank you for Sunday's sympathetic column on Monsignor Harrison and his adopted son, Roy Keenan ("‘He’s a life-giver’: Monsignor Craig Harrison’s adopted son stands behind him," May 12). I am studying Richard Moss’ book, "The Mandala of Being: Discovering the Power of Awareness," in which a few pages discuss the unreliable nature of memory.

I like to think we’re all doing our best, even in a serious confrontation like this where a great deal of forgiveness will be needed to transcend it. The information in these pages is not new. Maybe you’ll have an idea of who they can help.

— Jo Speegle

Price: The unreliable nature of memory is indeed one of the core issues here, and the primary reason no resolution, if and when one comes, will ever be wholly satisfactory.

Roy Keenan's story was horrifying and heartwarming all at once. I doubt that anyone who knows Harrison well was shocked to learn about the lengths he went to help his adoptive son. It doesn't have any bearing on the investigation, but it's a powerful character testimony.

Reader: Thank you for writing your article about Monsignor Craig Harrison. This side of the story needs to be told.

— Patti Young

Price: It seemed that way to me, too.


Reader: In his Sound Off column on May 4, Robert Price cited false information and assumptions for declining to publish my letter regarding the Trump-Russia probe.

I beg to differ for this reason: Our perspectives are shaped by conflicting reports and opinions. I happen to rely mainly on Fox News, which has yet to be proven wrong about perhaps the biggest political scandal to rock the nation.

For those stunned by the outcome of the Mueller report, it may only get worse when a report comes out soon from Inspector General Michael Horowitz on the role of a dossier in securing a surveillance warrant for a former Trump campaign aide. Until then, as Sean Hannity remarked on his Fox News show, it's “tick tock.”

— Joel Torczon

Price: You could have knocked me over with a feather when I read "I happen to rely mainly on Fox News." You really ought to escape the echo chamber and seek out a range of news providers. We all should.

But if you prefer your news with a conservative slant, I recommend The Wall Street Journal. Too even-handed? Then try The Washington Times, which at least makes an effort to report and deliver news. Fox, like CNN and MSNBC, is almost strictly commentary, debate and analysis. 

The Media Bias Chart, created by the nonprofit Ad Fontes Media, ranks news organizations on two sliding scales: original factual reporting vs. biased persuasion and left vs. right partisanship. It places Fox News low in terms of original factual reporting ("selective or incomplete" stories) and squarely in the hyperpartisan-right category. The chart also ranks several news organizations on the left poorly in terms of bias and lack of original reporting: Alternet and Daily Kos, to name two. 

Again, you wanted to know why your letter was rejected. I'll repeat one of the reasons I cited last week. You wrote that the Russians sought to undermine our democracy without favoring either party. False, according to the Mueller report, which you cite elsewhere in your letter. One of its primary conclusions was that the Russians interfered “in favor of presidential candidate Donald J. Trump while disparaging presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.” Boom, black and white. Your letter made an unequivocally false claim.


Reader: Just read your column on Oleander-Sunset and really enjoyed it ("Where We Live: Get a car alarm, but historic, walkable Oleander-Sunset inspires devotion," April 28). Enjoyed especially the comments by present residents and their love of the area. I lived on Palm about a half block from Beale Park and probably in one of those Sears & Roebuck mail-order houses. Sorry to hear about the crime in the area. Virtually crime-free when I lived there.

Your story was really filled with inviting details.

— Jerry Kirkland

Price: I'm learning, as I write these neighborhood profiles, that each of these distinct areas of the city has its own personality, its own strengths and weaknesses, much like each of us as individuals.

The Californian's Robert Price answers your questions and takes your complaints about our news coverage in this weekly feedback forum. Questions may be edited for space and clarity. To offer your input by phone, call 395-7649 and leave your comments in a voicemail message or email us at Include your name and phone number; they won’t be published.

(2) comments


I rest my case:


Robert, just because Mueller's report found that Russia interfered with our elections to the detriment of Hillary's campaign does not make my claim to be a false one. I have heard other officials and experts express their belief that Russia was messing around with both campaigns simply to create division in this country. It is no secret that it has long engaged in such dirty tricks.
Mueller's conclusion is not the final say in the truth of the matter, period. One only needs to consider that his investigative team was stacked with Clinton supporters, and there was every reason for Trump and his supporters to be doubtful of Mueller and his team being objective and fair. While I was surprised that the report came out mostly in Trump's favor, I am still disgusted that his team dragged this garbage for more than two years and possibly causing the GOP to lose the House in the midterms in 2018.
If the former FBI director, James Comey, and others were not able to verify the Steele dossier, why did they still use it to get warrants to spy on Trump's campaign without revealing that it was funded by Clinton's campaign and based on Russian disinformation? That can only mean one thing: If anyone was trying to fix the election, it was our OWN government. Time will tell, but I sense Trump will prevail once again.

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.