Marin IJ Readers’ Forum for Feb. 18, 2026

Marin should not support Trump’s deportation agenda

It does not reflect Marin values for our sheriff to cooperate with the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency. Considering that, I’m relieved the county executive removed funding from the State Criminal Alien Assistance Program from the budget (“Marin might eschew federal money linked to migrant detainees,” Feb. 11).

The Marin County Sheriff’s Office must stop facilitating and profiting from what I consider to be a thinly veiled undocumented immigrant “bounty hunter” reward system. I consider President Donald Trump’s mass-deportation agenda to be cruel, chaotic, lawless, racist and murderous. Supporting it is offensive to citizens and our immigrant neighbors, co-workers, friends, family members and common humanity.

ICE agents and the U.S. Border Patrol appear to have become paramilitary armies with U.S. residents as their enemy. The violence and terror they create is unconscionable. It has no place in Marin.

— Susan Deluxe, Greenbrae

Ross Valley schools need support from community

The Ross Valley School District ranks in the bottom 4% of per-pupil funding statewide and our teachers are the lowest-paid in Marin. Despite this, in May 2025, a routine parcel tax supported since 1987 was defeated. I think this happened in large part to a campaign in opposition by the Marin Coalition of Sensible Taxpayers. Notably, following the election, the group was fined by the Fair Political Practices Commission for breaching state code under the Voter Reform Act by omitting disclaimers and identifying information in its online ads opposing Measure E.

As a parent, I refuse to let our schools become a battleground for an anti-public education agenda driven by a countywide group that doesn’t appear to represent the best interests of our community. We cannot allow our schools to be shuttered or lose local control because our community is “low-hanging fruit” for some groups.

We have seen this playbook across the country, but Ross Valley is different. We value our children and our teachers. I know many care about protecting property values at all costs — having a well-supported school district helps.

School closures and state receivership are not abstract threats; they are the looming reality if we do not act.

Our current parcel tax is the second-lowest in the county, and we currently pay 72% (or $518) more for sewage than for our schools in the Ross Valley. I believe our community understands that excellent public schools are the bedrock of a thriving town. Let’s keep local control and protect RVSD this June by supporting the upcoming, routine parcel tax.

— Mandy Workman, San Anselmo

Election: Increasing the amount means it is a new tax

As a director of the Marin Coalition of Sensible Taxpayers, I am responding to the letter by Claire McDonald urging support for the upcoming ballot tax measure for the Ross Valley School District.

McDonald insists it is a renewal and not a new tax, but it’s both. It’s a renewal and then a 73% increase of the current tax. I call that a new tax.

Without commenting on the tax itself, I must urge supporters of new tax measures to tell the truth. I find it particularly galling when people who purport to support our schools are so willing to mislead voters. Let’s show our kids that we can tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Only then can voters make a fact-based decision.

— Doug Kelly, Fairfax

Neighbors should help fund San Rafael program

I was glad to read that the SAFE (Specialized Assistance For Everyone) service for nonviolent distress calls is funded to continue serving our community (“San Rafael renews contract with crisis response team,” Feb. 10).

It is a shame, though, that San Rafael’s funding could be in jeopardy, with limits keeping the service from expanding to 18 hours a day. The pilot program came in under budget and SAFE handles 8.5% of calls that would have gone to the police, which helps reduce the response time by the police for other issues by 12%.

Why can’t other towns in Marin, many of which don’t have many homeless individuals (but do have residents who use San Rafael businesses and services), chip in some funding for the good of the county? I consider this to be another example of how San Rafael bears a larger burden of the cost to help people on the streets.

— John Bischoff, San Rafael

Chileno Valley Road needs a wildlife undercrossing

I am writing in regard to Jerry Meral’s informative Marin Voice commentary (“Chileno Valley Road crossing is deadly for our newts,” Jan. 31). As a volunteer with the Chileno Valley Newt Brigade, I can attest to the heartbreaking loss of all kinds of life caused by the road cutting through the migratory paths of thousands of animals.

In addition to the live animals saved by hand carrying them and the dead animals that are documented and removed from the road, there are also many injured animals who can only be gently relocated in the hope that they are able to survive their injuries — or succumb quickly.

I would like to strongly urge the Transportation Authority of Marin to consider a wildlife undercrossing for Chileno Valley Road when deciding Measure AA funding priorities. In addition to reducing wildlife mortality and reconnecting critical habitat to help protect the smaller species along Laguna Lake, it would reflect well on the community’s modern approach to environmental ethics and serve as a model for other locations across the country.

— Katie Brammer, Petaluma

Biodiversity of Duxbury Reef deserves to be protected

Duxbury Reef off Bolinas is a treasured place for generations of many families throughout the Bay Area. I’m a part of one such family and I want to speak up for the Environmental Action Committee of West Marin’s proposal to protect it.

Simply, the EAC asks us to protect the reef by not removing things from it. This preserves the biodiversity of this rare reef. The committee started a program in 2022 to train volunteers to teach reef visitors protective practices when visiting the tide pools. It’s helping.

I worry it is becoming a trend to blame environmentalists for doing the difficult work entrusted to them. I think that’s a shortsighted way to treat those committed to protecting the very lands and waters that sustain us. We all need to be treated respectfully, even though we have differing views, maybe especially when views differ, so we can work together.

It’s hard to not notice the callous manner in which the Earth is being treated. Monetary interests over our environment are dangerously affecting all of us. The issue of shortsighted planning seems more prevalent now with increasing instability about the future.

In my view, we need to protect the things we love for the long term. We do this all the time: adhering to safe consistent boundaries for children, protecting our ancient forests and giving up something we’ve enjoyed for decades so it/we can flourish. None of it is easy, but from my experience, it is a worthy pursuit.

In January, EAC staff and Bolinas community members spent the day at Duxbury Reef and were encouraged to continue to work together to protect it. The time on the reef and challenge extended to those involved can’t be lost. If you love the reef, now is the time to protect it for the long term.

— Kathleen Eagle, San Anselmo

Supreme Court’s misguided priorities are detrimental

In my view, our country is plagued with a misguided Supreme Court seemingly driven by the conservative “right wing” majority ideologues.

On the one hand, it appears the court has consistently given deference to Second Amendment gun rights, upholding such laws as “open carry.” On the other hand, the high court has been recalcitrant with respect to voting rights, the backbone of maintaining a democratic republic, evidenced by recent decisions that appear to eviscerate or restrict a section of the 14th Amendment. I think that decision allows some states to enact voting laws that make it harder to vote effectively. That disenfranchises minority voters.

I think the high court is blinded by its dogma while giving deference to Second Amendment gun rights. It seems to me that it has relegated constitutionally protected voting rights under 14th,15th, 19th and 26th amendments to a lower standard of judicial regard.

To our detriment, it appears to me that the Supreme Court suffers from misguided priorities.

— Gene Colombini, Santa Rosa