Letters to the Editor

Editor:

There is a major error in a story that ran in the February edition of the Richmond Review entitled: "Presidio Plan Tries to Balance Needs of Old, New Forests."

First, the story states the Presidio is a Superfund site, such as the highly lethal and toxic "Love Canal" or even Hunters Point Naval Shipyard. This is not so.

We simply follow the Superfund cleanup process (or CERCLA process) for our hazardous substance release sites. Petroleum sites are managed under a different cleanup process.

Neither the Presidio, nor any of the specific remediation sites are listed on the Superfund statute's National Priorities List.

This is the list of highest priority federal cleanup sites. Traditionally, a site is given this moniker of "Superfund site" only if it is assessed by the US Environmental Protection Agency under its Hazard Ranking System and scores high enough to be formally listed as such.

In the case of the Presidio, the U.S. EPA has delegated the lead agency responsibility for Presidio cleanup to the State of California, Department of Toxic Substances Control or DTSC.

The Presidio's landfill cleanups (about 35 of them) are being implemented and overseen by DTSC for compliance with the provisions of the State's hazardous substances cleanup law, which is similar in its nature to the federal Superfund law. We make sure our cleanups meet the standards of both state and federal cleanup laws. 

Secondly, in the same story, the author writes the following paragraph. "The dumps won Superfund designation for the Presidio, so all landfill material is excavated and tested and all hazardous waste is taken to an appropriate environmental remediation site."

Not all landfill material is excavated for off-site disposal.   A landfill can often be more than satisfactorily controlled by stabilizing it in place under a cover or "cap."

The statement that we remove, test and haul away all landfills is misleading, because the final remedial action plans for all Presidio landfills have not yet been made. Caps are being considered in a few instances.

The Presidio is not a Superfund site and readers of the Sunset Beacon and Richmond Review who visit the Presidio deserve to know the truth about their park.

Ron Sonenshine
Presidio Trust

Editor:

After reading "Top Producer" John M. Lee's description of housing market economics, I could not help but weigh in on the matter. 

Lee speaks as though housing prices are dependent solely on interest rates and wars. A home is a market asset just like any other and, as such, demand for it is mostly driven by expectations on future returns.  The rent-to-price ratio (a standard method of valuation) is the lowest that it's been in many years. That is, rents in the Richmond District, relative to housing prices, show just how acutely over-valued this market is.

It's one thing for Lee to be out of touch with basic economic principles or for him to ignore expert consensus as to the existence of a bubble, but it's quite another for The Richmond ReView and Sunset Beacon to publish his consistently up-beat columns while running his ads in the same pages. Lee's motivations are clear enough, but why compromise the integrity of an otherwise excellent local paper?

Aaron Fein

Editor's Note: John M. Lee answered this newspaper's clarion call seeking columnists in 1988. He has written high-quality commentary on the state of real estate on the west side of San Francisco ever since. He also supports the community newspaper by purchasing an advertisement. His column would be published regardless of his status as an advertiser.

- Paul Kozakiewicz