Submit your letter to the editor via this form. Read more Letters to the Editor.

Downtown needs more than workers to thrive

Re: “San Jose’s downtown requires workers more than soccer fans” (Page A6, July 16).

Larry Stone’s opinion piece about eliminating remote work for the sake of San Jose’s downtown elicited an involuntary, automatic response from me — “OK, boomer.” However, I realized that I am technically a boomer too, so that response seemed a tad reductive.

I don’t agree that if someone is working at home, they are actually not working at all. There is plenty of work that can be done productively at home (computers, the internet). Granted, this requires management to be sophisticated enough to judge whether individual work output is sufficient.

It is true that the Super Bowl and the World Cup will not be enough to revitalize our downtown. It will require some creativity — more interesting activities downtown and more permanent downtown residents. It will require some forward thinking instead of looking back at what worked in the good old days.

Jim Von De BurSan Jose

S.J. should moderate downtown expectations

Re: “San Jose’s downtown requires workers more than soccer fans” (Page A6, July 16).

Larry Stone suggests downtown San Jose would be “revitalized” if workers reported to the office five days a week. In fact, San Jose’s downtown has struggled for decades, long before remote work existed.

In the 1970s, the proposed solution was to attract large employers downtown. Instead, corporate campuses located in North San Jose and generated redevelopment funds. Those funds prompted a study that concluded that residents were needed to achieve the 24/7 downtown. Post‑COVID, Stone narrows his view to the last five years and blames remote work. Recent research shows work‑from‑home boosts productivity and allows employers to recruit from a wider talent pool.

Perhaps the culprit is structural: San Jose is a sprawling suburban city whose residents meet their needs closer to home. Maybe San Jose needs to reimagine its downtown as a place people will visit several times a year and adjust its expectations and investments accordingly.

Katherine HaraszCapitola

CEQA gives public a voice in development

Re: “Poll points to strong Prop. 45 backing” (Page A1, July 16).

I was an elected official in Santa Cruz County for 20 years. I know firsthand what the California Environmental Quality Act does. It gives residents a legal framework to ask real questions about project impacts before project approval, and it gives local officials a process grounded in evidence, not pressure. Developers may call this “red tape,” but this is how communities get a say in decisions shaping where they live.

If enacted, Proposition 45 would profoundly weaken environmental review requirements for a wide array of polluting industries and lock those changes in permanently. The Legislature could amend the measure only by a two-thirds vote — and only if the amendments were deemed “consistent with” the measure.

Written by the California Chamber of Commerce, Proposition 45 is not reform to advance affordability. It is a brazen and completely unjustifiable attempt to put corporate interests permanently beyond the reach of the democratic process.

Gary PattonSanta Cruz

Trump’s election efforts define Machiavellianism

Re: “The many ways Trump is trying to tip the scales for the midterms” (Page A1, July 18).

The article describing Donald Trump’s manipulation of the electoral system provides the very definition of Machiavellianism; see, for example, this entry in Encyclopedia Britannica: “… politics is amoral and that ordinarily unscrupulous actions involving deceit, treachery, and violence are thus permissible as effective means of acquiring and maintaining political power.”

Trump’s deceit includes constant lying about the results of the 2020 election, despite a lack of evidence from multiple investigations. Other deceits include descriptions of the status and progress of inflation, unemployment and peace in the Iran, Gaza and Ukrainian wars. His treachery and violence are revealed in the 2021 congressional hearings and in the role of the Proud Boys on Jan. 6, then their 2025 pardon.

I urge every voter to ponder the corrupting insight of Machiavelli (a 15th-century philosopher) before voting this November, and especially in 2028 for Trump’s successor.

Campbell ScottLos Gatos

Hegseth plan a fascistic violation of privacy

Re: “Hegseth says policy will test troops for low testosterone” (Page A4, July 16).

Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth thinks testosterone is what makes a man and suggests that military personnel be tested for testosterone levels and then augmented to his standard. This is not only ludicrous but dangerous, as well as an invasion of personal privacy.

And what levels of testosterone are necessary to make a “strong” man? I doubt that anyone can provide that answer.

A good man’s strength, military or not, cannot be measured in a lab. There is no one pill or injection that gives one strength, agility, courage, bravery, patriotism, integrity, critical thinking, empathy or good moral character, all qualities I assume a soldier needs. A good man’s strength comes from within, from his heart and his brain; a masculine swagger and bulging biceps do not make a man.

Our country’s military has always been known as the best in the world. To alter personnel with testosterone seems fascist.

Pauline ChandSan Jose