Marine Athletes seeks family of W. Marshall
My name is Gene Carrington. I am the president of a small, not-for-profit group called Quantico Marine Athletes of the Sixties Inc. One of our missions is to honor and perpetuate the honor of our fallen teammates. To help honor our fallen teammates, we have raised the money and have purchased a monument, which will be dedicated at Quantico, VA, sometime during the month of June, 2007. There will be 11 names on the monument.
One of these names is Willard Dale Marshall. Captain Marshall was killed in Vietnam on June 11, 1968. He is buried at El Toro Cemetery, El Toro, Calif. At the time of his death, he had listed La Jolla as his home of record. Dale Marshall was a 1961 graduate of the United States Naval Academy. He was married and his wife’s name was Marie. He had two sons, Rod and Rowland. I have been trying for two years to find his family but I have had no luck.
I was hoping that you may be able to put something in your newspaper that explains why we are trying to find his family. We would love to have them know about our monument and perhaps have one of them attend the dedication next year; but first we have to find them. Any help or suggestions you could give us would be appreciated.
Gene Carrington, Leesburg, Fla.
” Please contact the Village News, [email protected] or (858) 270-3103, ext. 133, if you have any information about the Marshall family and the info will be forwarded to the Quantico Marine Athletes.

Ban-happy mentality
Someone ought to tell Penny Campbell that the people have indeed spoken, but that she has a problem counting correctly (Letter to the editor, Village News, Aug. 31, page 8).
The majority of the voters in the City of San Diego in 2002 elected to continue to allow alcohol on Ocean, Mission, and Pacific Beaches. Actual beach residents voted nearly 2-to-1 against an alcohol ban.
It never ceases to amaze me how these people think they can just make up numbers to somehow justify their ban-happy mentality.
She stated that “if councilman Kevin Faulconer wants to keep the alcohol he should do it in his neighborhood. He can deal with the noise and lack of parking.”
Excuse me? Exactly what does allowing someone to enjoy a beer on a beach have to do with noise and parking problems? Does she mean that if alcohol is banned the beaches will suddenly become quiet and parking spaces will suddenly and mysteriously appear?
This lack of logic is typical for the anti-alcohol crusaders. They are turning society into nothing but incessant whiners.
There are already laws against underage drinking, disorderly conduct and drunk driving, but yet to these self-absorbed control freaks, that isn’t enough either. They insist on banning alcohol for everyone. (No, I don’t drink alcohol.)
It’s easy to create these blanket bans and the zero-tolerance nonsense. However, it takes intelligence, rational thought and constructive examination to solve problems without penalizing the masses for the acts of a few.
I’d be careful if I were them. The next thing banned might be something they enjoy.
Mark Gorski, Birdrock

LJ swimming choices
Last weekend when I visited the Casa/Children’s Beach in La Jolla, I was dismayed to see people on the beach and children swimming. Don’t the parents realize the health danger?
Aside from disturbing the seal colony, children are swimming in water that has rip currents and which contains seal-bacteria. Shouldn’t there be LARGE signs telling parents this?
There are many safer beaches in La Jolla, including the adjacent Shell Beach and, of course, La Jolla Shores.
Sara Ohara, Pacific Beach

Hooray for intestinal fortitude
Many residents in University City are deeply grateful that Scott Peters and five other members of the City Council voted to build the Regents Road Bridge. We have been waiting for years for a representative in District 1 with the fortitude to study this project and make a decision based on facts rather than the hysterical ranting of the bridge opponents.
This bridge will solve so many of our traffic and safety problems, and will have few long-term negative impacts on a canyon that also contains sewer and power lines as well as railroad tracks. The entire community will share the traffic, just as city officials originally planned, instead of unfairly placing the entire burden on central and east UC.
Like spoiled little children, bridge opponents now threaten to sue the city. It is sad they cannot face reality and join the rest of the community.
Janet Newman, University City

Kroll or Police Study … which will cost more?
The mayor, city attorney, city council and citizens of San Diego were appalled by the cost of the Kroll investigation. Was it really necessary to spend $20 million dollars on such an investigation? Was the city overcharged? The mayor has retained a company to do a comprehensive study of compensation for city employees. What will the final cost of this study be and is it necessary?
Twenty million dollars was a lot of money to spend on the Kroll investigation, but where would we be without it? We still would not have financial reports capable of being completed, the IRS would revoke the tax-exempt status of the pension system and the city would be forced by the IRS to pay tens of millions of dollars back into the pension system. The bottom line is the city paid $20 million for the investigation so the city could “move forward.”
“Moving forward” is what the mayor is claiming to be doing about police retention with his salary study. Mayor Sanders has allotted $250,000 for a comparison of take-home pay for city employees as compared to other municipalities. However, the hidden costs of this survey will far surpass the price of the Kroll report.
Despite already being down nearly 200 officers (10 percent of the entire force), a number that is increasing at an average of 17 per month, Mayor Sanders refuses to negotiate with the SDPOA to make any mid-year adjustments to stem the departure of the officers. Instead, the mayor says he will wait until next year to do anything about the contracts imposed on the officers and their exodus.
At the rate of 17 officers leaving per month, the SDPD will be down an additional 204 officers this time next year as we wait for the compensation study and meet and confer process. Although not all of those officers will be leaving for other agencies, they will all have to be replaced (eight officers left for other agencies in July). It is estimated to cost $500,000 to train a journeyman officer, which equates to $102 million in training expenses to the city just to maintain our current critically understaffed levels, let alone filling the nearly 200 vacant positions. For the sake of argument, should you only count the officers leaving for other agencies, the cost is $48 million (In addition to the $36 million for the 72 officers that went to other agencies last year). Either way you look at it, the cost far exceeds the tab for the Kroll report.
Matt Dobbs, El Cajon
” Dobbs is a San Diego police officer at the Western Division in Bay Park.

Thanks to guardian angel
Several weeks ago while riding my electric cart through the parking lot at the swimming pool on Governor Drive and Mercer Street, my vehicle suddenly jumped into high gear, throwing me out onto the pavement on my back. I was dazed and unable to get up when a car drove up and the driver rushed over to pull me up onto my feet.
The three-wheeler had jumped the curb and become stuck so we were unable to get it back on the sidewalk.
The lady (I called her my guardian angel) told me to stay by the cart while she went into the office at the pool to get help. She returned with a young girl and the three of us got the three-wheeler onto the sidewalk so I could get home.
I’m hoping you will print this so everyone living in beautiful University City will have one more reason to be thankful we reside in this community.
Our neighbors go out of their way to help one another. Without these two ladies, I don’t know what I would have (don’t want to even guess) done.
My heartfelt thanks to the ladies who came to my aid.
Mary E. Eickhoff, University City

Smoking ban not priority
The new and much-heralded ordinance banning smoking in parks and at the beach is undermined by none other than our city staff.
Despite the good intentions of he City Council, a police officer was on TV over Labor Day weekend announcing that he decided that enforcing the ordinance was “not a good use of taxpayers’ money.” He said that he had directed his officers not to enforce the ordinance.
So I wasn’t surprised to see smokers light up on the sand.
Certainly the police need to prioritize law enforcement, but to announce that nobody will be cited for violation of a law isn’t helpful.
Bill Collins, Pacific Beach