LETTERS

Henry's responds
I am writing on behalf of Henry's Farmers Market, the 1,925 people we employ in our 27 Southern California stores and the 550 local growers and producers we support in California-the majority of which are located in Southern California. My letter is in reference to your Nov. 15 cover story by Erik Aker, “You gonna eat that?”

We applaud CityBeat for covering such a timely, important topic as this and bringing attention to the increased industrialization of America's food supply. However, we were surprised to see that you shed a negative light on Henry's-particularly as it relates to our commitment to locally produced food and products. Mr. Aker never contacted us at Henry's to inquire about our longstanding and widespread commitment to local farmers in Southern California. Nor are his comments about our stores-as quoted by Mel Lions from San Diego Sustainable Food Project-accurate.

Henry's was founded in 1943 in San Diego and has been a longtime local favorite for produce, natural foods and healthy-living products. We have long-standing relationships with numerous local growers and producers. As I mentioned above, before losing count we were able to identify 550 local California producers who represent nearly 1,300 locally produced items we sell in our stores. At the peak growing season, Henry's produce is approximately 80 percent locally grown and is delivered fresh to our stores seven days a week. Had Mr. Aker contacted us, we would have been able to share these compelling facts-facts about support of local products and farmers that are unrivaled in the San Diego food retail landscape.

Additionally, the point made by Mr. Aker about distribution is also an inaccurate one, as we do accept direct deliveries from farmers to our back doors at all Henry's stores. However, with 27 stores in the Southern California market, it is oftentimes more efficient and emits fewer pollutants into the environment when a farmer can make one stop at our central warehouse in Riverside, Calif., where we already have full truckloads going to each of our stores every day. The alternative would be farmers making 27 stops to sell to all Henry's locations. That being said, should a smaller producer only be able to supply one or two stores, he can deliver his products directly to those stores and bypass our warehouse.

The average fruit or vegetable travels more than 1,500 miles before it gets to your plate. At Henry's, our longtime support of local farmers and producers allows us to stock our stores with products that are grown and produced with care right in our own Southern California backyard. This is better for the environment, better for our local communities and better for people looking for the great taste and freshness of food picked at the peak of ripeness. At Henry's we feel strongly that our unwavering commitment to the San Diego community and our local producer partners deserves more credit than this.

Al Bercuson,
Director of operations,
Henry's Farmers Market

Editor's note: Erik Aker attempted to contact Wild Oats Markets Inc., the parent company to Henry's Farmers Market, but was unsuccessful in getting a human being on the line.

Scott Peters responds
Re: “The gloves come off” [“Guest Opinion,” Jan. 31]. Carl Luna is either dangerously ignorant of the provisions of Proposition F, which established the mayor/council form of government, or he is intentionally misrepresenting them in a (failed) attempt to be humorous. Either way, your readers deserve the facts.

Proposition F, approved by voters in 2004 and, ironically, opposed by Mayor Jerry Sanders, created two branches of government in San Diego, an executive and a legislature. The executive (that's the mayor) is responsible for the city's workforce and day-to-day operations. He prepares a budget proposal, which is then considered, approved or revised by the legislature (that's the City Council.) This is analogous to the president and Congress, and the governor and state legislature. Frankly, I'm surprised to see an expert in American politics so soundly reject shared governance, a hallmark of our country's democracy.

Although we might wish we would have started earlier, this City Council has made tremendous progress in solving the city's financial problems. In 2004, we ended the annual practice begun in the 1990s of underfunding the pension system. In 2005, we established a two-year wage freeze, which cut the pension deficit by $150 million, and we secured a $17 million annual revenue stream dedicated to pension funding through give-backs from city employees. This allowed the city to inject more than $100 million into the pension system last year, and there's enough still left over from that agreement to support another $100 million reduction in the pension deficit. As part of that agreement with employees, we also eliminated costly benefit programs authorized under previous councils.

Unlike incessant press conferences, bankruptcy threats and frivolous lawsuits, these actions by the City Council brought real progress. Recently, the retirement system announced that its funding level is at almost 80 percent, up from the low 60s in recent times.

This council has indeed made tough choices. We denied pay raises for police officers and firefighters in the wake of Sept. 11 and the Cedar fire, despite intense political pressure. We cut library hours and park maintenance and approved the mayor's re-engineering proposals, which eliminate city jobs. And as for taxes, Luna is also wrong. We put two tourist tax increases on the ballot in 2004; one lost because it fell 5 percent short of the required two-thirds vote. These decisions were not easy, but they were necessary and responsible.

Each member of this council recognizes that the level of service provided to citizens will be affected by a tight budget. It is our duty to know what those impacts are and to ensure that citizens know how they will feel those impacts. The public has the right to be informed and participate in the discussion. I invite your readers to join us at the City Council as we craft the new budget over the next several months.

Scott Peters,
President, San Diego City Council

Another new law
I hope it isn't too late to propose a new law that will increase the quality of life in our society [“Feature Story,” Jan. 3]. Here is mine:

When a football player (high school, college or professional) tries to beat an official to the punch by making the call at the end of a play, waving his arms in the air to indicate a score or missed field goal, signaling out of bounds, a violation or foul, etc., that player should be removed from the game for at least 10 minutes of playing time. If a player attempts that same takeover of officials' responsibilities later in the same game, he should be banned from football for life. If six members of the same team all make hand and arm signals after the same play, as though they are officiating, then the team should be dropped from the remainder of its schedule for that season. If all 11 of the players on the field attempt to act as officials on the same play, then the coach should be sentenced to 10 years of coaching women's lacrosse in a prison to be selected by the Department of Corrections.

Lyle Davidson,
Downtown

Money matters
I have a few responses to your “Stuff we want” editorial [Jan. 3]. With regard to the city finances, perhaps Jerry Sanders could establish a voluntary “Tax Me More” fund, into which all those who think taxes should be raised can contribute as much as they think is fair. This would keep his promise not to raise taxes, yet would give those who think more taxes are needed a chance to put their money where their mouths are and save the city finances.

With regard to the minimum-wage hike, this is a bad idea. First, minimum-wage laws have been consistently shown to increase unemployment and particularly to damage the prospects of the disabled, unskilled and other entry-level or marginal workers. The higher the minimum wage, the more damage done. If minimum-wage laws worked, why couldn't we just raise the minimum wage to $100 per hour and everyone could be rich? Second, even if you think that minimum-wage laws are good, they should be set at the state level, where each state could tailor them to suit the local cost of living and economic realities. Setting a one-size-fits-all minimum wage at the federal level is inefficient at best, and (not incidentally) yet another item that is completely outside the scope of the powers that the Constitution delegates to the federal government.

And lastly, I'm sure that all those “people with money” would be perfectly happy to “help us get what we want or get the hell out of the way,” provided only that “what we want” isn't to pay for everything we want by stealing their money.

Philip Boncer,
North Park

Rational thought
I just happened upon your editorial on Congressman Virgil Goode's comments [Dec. 27] through Google News and wanted to say how much I enjoyed it. It was timely, appropriate and well written. This was a year of many things, chiefly fear and bad behavior, and I really appreciate the voice you put out there-especially as a (hopefully) rational mind estranged in conservative Texas.

Eva Sikes,
Plano, Texas

‘Just plain sucked'
I just read the article about Guns N' Roses [“Music”] in the Jan. 10 issue. I found it pretty funny and well-written.

I, too, remember the moment when I and an old buddy, Tom, saw that “Welcome to the Jungle” video on MTV. I think I commented something like, “Fuck, it's about time someone put the kick-ass back into rock 'n' roll. I'm so sick of those gay hair bands.” We really dug that video and Slash's crunchy Gibson Sunburst licks.

So, the new record: I have heard it. A music friend searching and linking website after website found it from Japan and downloaded it. We listened to it. The only way I can describe it is this: Imagine the amount that Use Your Illusion let you down after the killer Appetite record. Well, double that. After hearing for so many years about this follow-up, delayed in the studio, everyone against Axl, etc., etc. Guess what: Most original fans are over it. We are into other cool stuff.

The songs all seemed to start with a sort of electro dance beat and then went into some outdated hard rock. And the Slash guitar sound and urgency are totally missing. I don't think I even listened to the whole thing. It was such a downer. Maybe when it's finally on the radio I may hear the gem I missed, but I don't think so. It just plain sucked, especially after so much hype. And I don't like writing something so harsh. I want to write how cool it was and how it progresses rock and how it kicks ass. But it did not deliver at all. I think Axl may be trapped in some weird time warp. Sorry, Axl, time get back on that bus and go home.

Mike Hulshof,
Encinitas