Opinion editor's note: Strib Voices publishes letters from readers online and in print each day. To contribute, click here.

•••

Among the many executive orders and other directives being issued by the current administration, it appears that one has gone unnoticed by the Minnesota Star Tribune. Earlier this month, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services removed former Surgeon General Vivek Murthy's 2024 advisory calling gun violence a public health crisis from its website. That 2024 advisory had called for increased research funding about gun violence as well as other ways to limit harm from gun violence.

To be clear, gun violence is a serious issue in our country as witnessed by yet another mass shooting in New Mexico. Firearm-related deaths continue to be the leading cause of death among youth in this country — including accidental deaths, homicides and suicides — and adversely impact Black and Native American youth. More than three-quarters of school shootings involve a gun from the shooter's home. About 80% of youth firearm suicides involve a family member's gun. Minnesota is not immune to this epidemic of gun violence. Just last August, four children were injured by gunshots in north Minneapolis. Suicide deaths due to firearms are the major cause of suicides for all ages in Minnesota. In 2022, 31 children and youth died in Minnesota due to firearms.

Now is not the time to reduce funding or advocacy efforts to reduce gun violence injuries and deaths. Instead, all of us, the public and the Legislature, must do all we can to make it harder to obtain a gun illegally or accidentally and put an end to this horrible epidemic of gun violence.

Sheldon Berkowitz, St. Paul

The writer is former president of the Minnesota chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics.

•••

I am a pharmacist and mother of a 3-month old. In my career, I have vaccinated thousands of people against a variety of illnesses.

When vaccines had just become available during the COVID-19 pandemic, we were only allocated 15 doses per day. If we had extra, we contacted people who had either asked to be called, or who had serious conditions that increased risk of complications.

I remember calling one patient a few times with no answer. Eventually, he came in to the pharmacy thinking he had a prescription to pick up. When I explained why we had called, he scoffed at me. I will always remember the look on his face.

I also remember his face from the obituary I read a couple of months later when he died of COVID-19 complications. This still haunts me. I feel responsible (albeit indirectly) for his death. Why couldn't I convince him to get vaccinated? Why were conspiracy theorists more reliable than my medical expertise?

I read the story about the Minnesotan who has been diagnosed with measles ("State has 1st measles case of year," March 26). My daughter cannot get the MMR vaccine until she is 12 months old. She is just one of the many people at risk from this disease who are unable to get vaccinated. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is a danger to the American people by not promoting vaccination.

This is just one of the reasons why I will be at the Hands OFF! protest at the State Capitol on April 5. I hope you'll be there too.

Kehly Todd, Lakeville

•••

I just read an article in another publication containing the opinion of the parents of the unvaccinated 6-year-old who recently died of measles in Texas. They have multiple other children and are quoted as saying they have no intention of vaccinating those children, and that measles is good for them.

I am from the generation before a vaccine existed. We all got measles. The fever traveled to the brain of one of my brothers, causing permanent brain damage. The fever traveled to the heart of a friend, 8 years old, severely and permanently damaging her heart. She was never again allowed to play with us, the children in the neighborhood, or participate in normal activity. I don't know how long she lived. Measles is not good for children. Without vaccination, parents are risking the rest of their children's lives, if their children live.

Gayle Gaumer, Crystal

RETURN TO OFFICE

Attract by choice, not by mandate

Requiring employees to return to the office just to prop up downtown real estate is like demanding people buy VHS tapes to save Blockbuster — it's outdated, irrational and doomed to fail ("State workers are ordered back to office 50% of time," front page, March 26). Forcing workers back into their cars to endure mind-numbing commutes so they can sit in cubicles under fluorescent lights doesn't spark economic growth — it just fuels traffic congestion, carbon emissions and employee burnout.

Let's be clear: The pandemic didn't kill downtowns — antiquated policies and leadership did. The insistence on clinging to a pre-2020 office model ignores reality. Remote and hybrid work have increased productivity, improved work-life balance and kept countless cars off the road. Forcing a return simply to justify high commercial rents or fill empty parking ramps is not just lazy governance — it's economic malpractice.

And speaking of cars, the environmental impact alone should give policymakers pause. More commuters means more gas-guzzling vehicles, more pollution and more wear and tear on already crumbling infrastructure. Pushing workers back into the office, when they've proven they can be just as effective from home, is a backward move in the fight against climate change — a cause these same policymakers love to virtue signal about.

But beyond the environmental benefits, remote work saves taxpayers millions. With fewer employees in the office, cities spend less on infrastructure maintenance, utilities and public transportation subsidies. Reduced wear on roads, less strain on public transit and lower energy consumption in government buildings all translate into significant public savings. Clinging to an outdated office model just to prop up downtown landlords is not only foolish — it's fiscally irresponsible.

If downtowns are failing, it's not because people are working from home — it's because cities have failed to evolve. Instead of dragging employees back into the office as unwilling life support for struggling real estate moguls, how about reimagining downtown spaces into affordable housing, entertainment hubs or green spaces that attract people by choice, not by mandate? The solution to urban decay isn't chaining people to desks — it's creating cities worth visiting, working and living in. If leadership can't figure that out, maybe they should consider working from home permanently.

David Long, Pine City, Minn.

•••

While repopulating downtown St. Paul is important, it should not disrupt the lives of those who work at home by necessity. Gov. Tim Walz and many businesses should recognize the specific needs and circumstances of each individual worker. Many parents have made special arrangements for their children, or moved away to distant homes the last five years that continue to work well for them; mandatory return-to-office dictates would require many of them to quit their jobs out of necessity, unable to travel or leave their young or disabled children alone. My son bought a home specifically to continue his stay-at-home work with a first-floor office and bedroom for his disabled father-in-law who requires special care for all his needs. This special arrangement still allows him to perform his work exceptionally well.

We can all understand the need for compassionate, reasoned exceptions, and that those able to reach offices can step up for the others at home. Mandatory dictates are cruel and unnecessary. As home workers continue to outperform; give them a break!

Michael Tillemans, Minneapolis