Letters to the Editor for Coit Tower

San Francisco Chronicle

Letters to the Editor

April 24, 2012


I am shocked by The Chronicle's strong criticism of "a feisty local group" that "has grumbled for years about city neglect of (Coit) tower ("Save Coit Tower from Prop. B," Editorials, April 23).

"It shouldn't be treated as sacred ground." Really?

Basketball backboards and tennis nets, important sports apparatus, thankfully can be replaced when worn or destroyed. On the other hand, exquisitely significant historic art murals, if damaged or destroyed, cannot ever be replaced.

The city thankfully has recognized that art has a place in recreation (create anew, restore, refresh) by allocating $250,000 for panel repairs. But in the end, this money will simply be ill-spent funds if thereafter nothing is done to put a stop to the resumption of damage. Only prevention and ongoing preservation will do so.

Sharon Williams, Redwood City

Irreplaceable artworks

Lillie Coit left a bequest to the city to build "something beautiful," which turned out to be Coit Tower.

The murals inside were created through the Public Works of Art Project and with taxpayer money. The public owns this building and should be given a chance to decide whether party rentals are an appropriate use for a site with unprotected and irreplaceable artworks. It is not a NIMBY issue.

In a perfect world, the public could also decide what to do with a manager who can't squeeze a few basketball backboards out of a $600,000 revenue stream.

Maureen Rogers, San Francisco

This appeared on page A - 9 of the San Francisco Chronicle

Do you like this post?