Golf courses for housing: Letters – Daily News

Re “City-owned golf courses must go” (April 10):

I don’t agree with getting rid of it and possibly throwing on housing. Especially with the bogus idea of ​​a percentage for low income, which we know is such a small amount, it is useless. I don’t want to think about removing our beautiful courses at Griffith Park and the like. Even if you’re not a golfer, seeing deer, hawks, foxes, etc. not to mention the trees, it’s so good for peace of mind, and we need them now more than ever. The courses of the city allow the less fortunate to enjoy golf. I worked over 55 years in Los Angeles and paid my taxes and I think I should be able to enjoy what the city has to offer. Stop covering our green spaces with concrete.

— Vivian Richards, Los Angeles

Gasoline prices in California

Your long article titled “Fuel for change” (April 10) was more of an advertisement for electric vehicles than an explanation for the rise in gasoline prices. How on earth can you endlessly buzz about the details of oil production and markets without whispering about the real reason for the oil price crisis. That reason is of course the current administration’s commitment to the “Green New Deal”.

The first thing Biden did upon his election was shut down the Keystone pipeline that was supposed to bring Canadian oil to our refineries. Then he banned oil exploration on federal lands, including the huge reserves of Anwar, Alaska.

Environmentalists are happy to see gas prices unaffordable for the lower classes. We had been and could still be self-sufficient in oil consumption were it not for the determination of the green progressives who control our CEO.

—Tom Hoffman, Rancho Palos Verdes

Disney Florida

Re “Florida leadership is bad business for Disney” (April 8):

Wow, I think your article talking about the Governor of Florida “attacking” Disney really missed an opportunity to discuss the key question that led to this, which is whether Disney should take on political roles such as declaring that they will everything in their power to overturn a parental rights bill that bans sex education for children ages 5 to 8 without parental consent? What impact could Disney’s political position have on its results? How will Disney shareholders get involved if this is the case? Will taking political positions potentially strengthen or weaken consumer support for Disney?

—Robert Shepard, Castaic

Michael C. Ford