Mailbag - June 29, 2000

It is telling that Jean Forbath, who lives in Mesa Verde, would demand

that folks should give up their quality of life to provide more housing

in Costa Mesa. (“Mailbag,” June 22). She even goes so far as to imply

that anything less would be sinful and selfish.

This reader has trouble accepting the statement that finding room for

everyone to live in Costa Mesa is a critical social issue.

Please, Ms. Forbath, don’t throw a guilt trip on your neighbors to

fulfill your goals.

A quick scan of the Costa Mesa zoning map shows that Forbath lives in an

area that is immune to the scourge of small-lot subdivisions. Unlike the

folks on the East Side, who will suffer from a reduced quality of life,

she has no worry--her lifestyle won’t be “cramped.”

The idea that more density is A-OK because the Standard Pacific

development is surrounded with commercial and high-density residential

uses is ridiculous. That argument is akin to saying “Costa Mesa is full

of blight, so let’s build more blight.”

To those who cry out for more housing in Costa Mesa, I ask: Where do we

draw the line?

Costa Mesa already has the highest ratio of rental to owner-occupied

housing in the state of California, among cities of comparable size.

In conclusion, Forbath, I encourage you to give freely that which is

yours, but please do not covet the quality of life of others to meet the

needs of your social work.

ERIC BEVER

Costa Mesa

Teachers should have competitive salaries

As a resident of Newport Beach and a property owner, I have news for Judy

Franco.

Yes, good programs and small classes help keep teachers happy. But the

bottom line is: Good salaries and good benefits will do much more to

attract and retain quality teachers.

That is the premise at the base of our capitalistic system. And for the

first time in many years, teaching positions are opening up. If you want

to keep our children, property owners and teacher all happy, pay our

teachers competitive salaries.

LYNN FORENZ

Newport Beach

More than one evolutionary theory needed

I agree with school board trustee Wendy Leece regarding teaching other

theories of man’s origin (“Textbooks’ theories have not fully evolved,

Leece says” June 17).

There are two unfortunate consequences when only one theory is presented

to students:

1. Children do not usually comprehend that evolution is only a theory,

and they end up assuming it is a scientific fact.

2. The above causes confusion for many who believe in the Bible. Taught

in church and at home from an early age that God created them and often

uncomfortable in questioning authority, their quandary intensifies and

can create problems.

The above need not happen.

There is growing data accumulated by respected professionals in the field

of science that makes the theory of “intelligent design” credible and

even compatible with certain aspects of evolution. It is certainly worthy

of presentation to students in a science classroom.

Explaining two theories offers opportunities for student discussion,

clarification and understanding. Man’s origin is of vital concern to

everyone.

Students presented with both theories in an unbiased atmosphere will be

provide a more complete picture, allowing them to come to their own

informed conclusion. Isn’t that what education is all about?

BONNIE O’NEIL

Newport Beach

Traffic counts won’t change problem

No amount of mitigating gobbledygook of traffic counts will change what

happens daily at Bayside Drive and Pacific Coast Highway! Now add 4,000

more cars daily, then ask the mayor and City Council what type of

concrete jungle they are allowing our city to become.

WILLIAM H. and ELAINE PARKER

Newport Beach