Campaign 'war chest'

Editor,

The latest disclosure filings for the Menlo Park City Council election show that challenger Christina Angell-Atchison has accepted campaign contributions totaling more than $52,000. At least $40,000 of that is from organizations and individuals whose "special interest" is real estate development.

Additionally, the Menlo Park Community Association, which is supporting Miss Angell-Atchison's campaign, reported about $27,000; and, as reported in the local media, half of that can be identified with real estate development interests.

From the unprecedented magnitude of this campaign "war-chest" (more than three times the final accounting of previous heavily-funded Menlo Park council candidates) and, from the tone and target of the campaign they are funding, it appears that the development community is desperately trying to finance a return to the days of a city council majority that would rubber stamp almost any development proposal to come before it.

Hopefully, Menlo Park voters who are concerned about the impacts of excessive development will re-elect Paul Collacchi, a conscientious and knowledgeable council member who understands and works for the tradeoffs necessary to protect our neighborhoods and environment from the consequences of unrestrained growth.
Jack Morris
Baywood Avenue
Menlo Park

Collacchi not collaborative

Editor,

I find your endorsement of Paul Collacchi disturbing. Your editorial endorsement refers to Paul Collacchi's style as more abrasive and confrontational than collaborative and consensus building.

Paul Collacchi has obstructed the widening of Sand Hill Road between Santa Cruz and Oak Avenues by refusing to meet with Stanford in order to reach a reasonable solution. His actions will create a major traffic bottleneck when the Stanford West apartments are occupied later this month.

Stanford has set aside $12 million and will sacrifice a portion of their golf course to widen this portion of Sand Hill Road. They will also improve the intersections at Junipero Serra and Alpine Road as well as Santa Cruz Avenue and Sand Hill Road. Stanford's plan offers significant protection to those who live along this corridor.

Paul Collacchi has disregarded the pleas of the residents who live along Sand Hill Road to address their safety and health related issues. He has stated publicly that he wants to cause traffic congestion along Sand Hill Road in order to cause Stanford commuters pain. In so doing, he jeopardizes the many regional residents who rely on the medical facilities at Stanford Hospital, Palo Alto Medical Foundation and the many health services along this corridor.

Who will benefit from this traffic bottleneck situation?

This is not the attitude that we need in Menlo Park City Council. We need council members who are willing to work with their neighboring communities in a collaborative and constructive manner.

I believe that Christina Angell-Atchison is more in touch with the community's needs and has a proven record of consensus building and collaboration then does Paul Collacchi.
Willie Wolf
Sand Hill Road
Menlo Park

Misleading remarks

Editor,

I am quite disturbed by the misleading accusation made by Menlo Park City Council candidate Christina Angell-Atchison in a recent televised debate. She contends that Councilman Paul Collacchi "ran former City Manager Jan Dolan out of town".

Thankfully, this unfounded claim was repudiated by Ms. Dolan in a Country Almanac interview. Ms. Dolan said she left Menlo Park to advance her career, and she landed the prestigious position of City Manager for Scottsdale, Arizona, a much larger city.

This inexperienced newcomer to Menlo Park is being backed by an unprecedented $63,000 raised on her behalf, mostly by real estate developers. Such a careless and insidious charge by Ms. Angell-Atchison should be a red flag to all Menlo Park residents.

Our incumbents, Collacchi and Kinney, have served us well and deserve re-election.
Mitchel J. Slomiak
Pope Street
Menlo Park

More years of 'waste'?

Editor,

Given the Weekly's well-deserved censures of Paul Collacchi, I find it incomprehensible that your editors would endorse his reelection. What Menlo Park doesn't need is four more years of Mr. Collachi's arrogance and waste. Spiteful lawsuits, obstructionist tactics and disrespect for anyone who fails to agree with his extreme positions are standard practice under the current council majority.

We don't need another quarter-million-dollar growth study that will be ignored if it does not support Mr. Collachi's preconceived notions. We don't need a councilman who hectors city staff in public. We don't need a council that insults our neighbors and leaves a choke point in our principal east-west traffic artery. We don't need a politician who tries to trade confidential city information for votes.

I look forward to more civil debate in Menlo Park when Christina Angell-Atchison is elected. The Menlo Community Association, a collection of several hundred residents tired of the current council's throwing tax dollars down the drain, has endorsed her candidacy.
Kathleen Much
Hillside Avenue
Menlo Park

The environmental measure

Editor,

As your representative for District 5 on the Santa Clara Valley Water District Board of Directors I am asking for you to vote Yes on Measure B.

Measure B provides an opportunity for the residents of Santa Clara County to improve their quality of life -- and preserve it for their children and grandchildren. Without Measure B, that quality of life will be jeopardized, as will life and property.

Measure B is the Clean, Safe Creeks and Natural Flood Protection program, put together over two years in partnership between our communities and the Santa Clara Valley Water District. Measure B is the only countywide measure on the ballot to provide environmental enhancements; specifically to improve water quality and creekside habitats and to provide additional open space and trails. Measure B will also work to protect our roads and highways from flooding -- which can cause gridlock during storms.

Measure B replaces an expired funding source previously approved by the voters. Now, the voters need to act again, looking forward and providing the resources necessary to continue comprehensive watershed management activities in our County. Measure B sunsets in 15 years. There is an independent community-based committee which will monitor implementation of the program and its costs. Measure B does not raise water rates.

Without Measure B the risk of flooding and deterioration of existing flood control facilities will increase.

Measure B provides benefits throughout Santa Clara County. Every community has a stake in its success. Look who supports Measure B: the League of Women Voters, the League of Conservation Voters, the Farm Bureau, the Silicon Valley Chamber of Commerce and many others.

These groups don't agree on a lot of things, but they agree Measure B is good for Santa Clara County. I urge your YES vote.
Greg Zlotnick
Silverwood Avenue
Mountian View

Being 'neighborly'?

Editor,

To vote 'No' on Measure J, Palo Altans only have to know about the shabby treatment accorded the DeSoto neighbors when they recently appeared before the Planning and Transportation Commission (PTC) to get approval for their single-story overlay petition.

In their hearing the commission turned them down six to one. This despite the fact that virtually everyone on the city staff, PTC and city council agreed the neighbors qualified according to the Palo Alto zoning laws.

At the council for a final decision, the neighbors turned out en masse and put on a memorable show complete with stage props. The council passed their petition unanimously. One council member said the commission was just trying to "tweak the council's nose." To 'streamline' operations, the council should appoint and only reappoint PTC commissioners who adhere to the current zoning laws in their advisory role to council. In the Desoto case, this would have avoided a lengthy council hearing by numerous neighbors who turned out in fear the council might also deny them.

Vote 'No' on Measure J to prevent the probability that non-elected commissioners would make the final decision on these issues in the future.
Tom Ashton
Bryant Street
Palo Alto

Common-sense measure

Editor,

Vote yes on measure J, Palo Alto. This minor reform measure will allow Palo Alto to begin reducing "Process for process sake." Measure J allows the City Council to delegate minor, noncontroversial items to the Planning Commission. Measure J reduces duplicate public hearings and eliminates process where no benefit is gained.

Unproductive public process now consumes approximately 10 percent of the City Council public hearing time annually. This comes at considerable cost to tax payers. Allowing our volunteer Planning Commission to make final decisions on these applications encourages leadership, shares responsibility and builds trust and better government.

The time is right to reduce costs, streamline and build trust in government. Palo Alto has big challenges ahead. Our infrastructure needs our attention. Libraries, schools, community centers, storm drains, streets and parks need reinvestment. The community must decide how to meet these needs. But that will require we all focus on Palo Alto's core responsibilities.

Vote Yes on Measure J. It makes common sense.
Nancy Lytle
Palo Alto
City Councilmember