Publication Date: Wednesday, December 17, 2003
Letters
Letters
(December 17, 2003)
Penny-wise proposal
Editor,
I am dismayed by Governor Schwarzenegger's proposed suspension of the Lanterman legislation, which guarantees a basic level of community services to California's developmentally disabled citizens. The proposal is penny-wise and pound-foolish.
Not long ago, many of the mentally and physically handicapped people receiving these community services spent their lives in a network of large and very costly state institutions, where conditions were sometimes less than ideal. Today we take a more enlightened view.
With the help of community services like respite care, day care and specific therapies, people with these disabilities, even in severe cases, are able to live at home in the care of their families, who dearly love them. Some of them, with support, are even able to hold jobs and become taxpayers.
As a board member of the Community Association for Rehabilitation (C.A.R.) in Palo Alto, I am privileged to witness on a daily basis the devotion of these families, as well as that of the incredibly caring staff members who provide these critical services.
It will be far, far costlier to the state -- and far less humane -- if we adopt policies that encourage re-institutionalization.
Chris Kenrick
Tennyson Avenue
Palo Alto
Sign abuse
Editor,
Yesterday morning (Dec. 11), we woke up to find "traffic calming works" signs taken from our property and put in the gutter. As we talked with other neighbors we found that some were stolen and many thrown in the gutters.
Unblock must be so insecure that they feel they have to trespass and vandalize our property. Each of us paid at least $10 for our sign. Our neighbor actually has a surveillance camera and got a glimpse of the gentleman that did this at 2 a.m. Thursday morning. We will be working with the police to identify him.
People have a right to their opinions. We're trying to work with everyone in Downtown North so we can come to some compromise about the current plan. It is difficult to do when Unblock takes the law into its own hands and acts with such poor judgment.
Our goal is to minimize cut-through traffic to calm our streets in this wonderful neighborhood and make it safe for our children, elderly and recreation.
This is not a new topic. Many neighborhoods have implemented plans that are working. It's just so controversial because it has inconvenienced so many commuters and downtown workers. And neighbors who didn't have traffic as a problem are now inconvenienced.
Hopefully we can all take a deep breath and focus on working together as a neighborhood again.
Janine Bisharat
Hawthorne Avenue
Palo Alto
Situation better now
Editor,
I live in the traffic-calming area. The traffic calming is working, maybe not perfectly and maybe not to everyone's total satisfaction, but the situation is much better than it was before traffic calming.
The process is also working. Everyone affected has had ample opportunity to have their say and will again when they are surveyed. Once the survey is done, however it is done, and whatever other studies are being conducted are complete, the buck stops with the people who have the authority to make the decision.
Let them make it.
Nick Peterson
Bryant Street
Palo Alto
Successful trial
Editor,
As a homeowner with two children in the Downtown North neighborhood, I am responding to your editorial regarding traffic calming (Dec. 10). The traffic-calming measures put in place starting in June 2003 are a part of a trial to determine if these elements do indeed mitigate the overwhelming problem of cut-through traffic; the data strongly indicates the measures work.
The neighborhood association, city, city services and other interested parties were involved in a lengthy process to identify the best solution to cut-through traffic and safety issues. During this time, all neighbors were welcome to participate, which my husband and I did.
It would be irresponsible of the city to arbitrarily "yank out the barriers" just because there are a few vocal objectors -- there is no good reason to abandon this trial and start over.
There is so much that is right about this traffic-calming solution, especially when you consider the study process, inputs (including assessments by traffic experts) and goals as well as the data gathered showing the success of the trial.
Sure, modifications may be needed, but the neighborhood should work together to make this particular trial into the best livable solution toward a safer neighborhood environment.
Jeanese Snyder
Palo Alto Avenue
Palo Alto
Traffic goals were met
Editor,
No, the city definitely should not "start over" on Downtown North traffic-reduction efforts. The goals of the trial were as follows:
1) Through-traffic reduction of 65 percent. This goal was achieved.
2) Maximum diversion of traffic to other streets of 25 percent. This goal was achieved on busy streets, but previously quiet streets saw an increase in some cases greater than 25 percent. Solution: tweak it, don't rip it out.
3) Speed reduction of 15 percent. This goal was achieved.
4) No vehicle crashes related directly to the plan. This goal was achieved.
5) No vehicle crashes at the Middlefield Road/Everett Avenue intersection. This goal was achieved.
6) Police/emergency vehicle response times. Police response time goal was achieved. No incidents so far during the trial where other emergency vehicles were summoned.
In addition, the level of service at the Middlefield/Lytton Avenue intersection remained at B; level of service at Alma Street/Lytton remained at C. In other words, performance at these key intersections remained the same as before the trial.
This has been a successful trial and much information has been obtained.
The next step should be to poll the neighborhood. This has to be done in a way that's fair to everyone. A decision by the City Council to rip everything out and leave it as it was before would be very disappointing.
In fact, it would make the situation worse as blocks of neighbors on individual streets took action independently through the city's "Spot Treatment" Traffic Calming Program. Now is the time for the City Council to step in and manage the issue.
So much has been achieved and learned, the effort should not be wasted.
Sally-Ann Rudd
Cowper Street
Palo Alto
Time to start over
Editor,
Start over on Downtown North. Any effort to settle the issue by survey, referendum, or any other form of voting is bound to fail. Why? Because it inevitably creates winners and losers, and the resulting community rancor will not easily go away.
The solution lies in backing up a bit and approaching the issue differently.
The community needs help to develop a shared vision in which residents respect one another and support one another in satisfying the varied individual needs.
Start by eliciting a list of desirable qualities for the community that all support by consensus: safety, tranquility, mobility, access for emergency vehicles, customer access to businesses, a welcoming appearance and so on. Avoid mention of any specific street features.
Next, develop consensus on priorities for the qualities. Engage professionals in decision analysis to help with this.
Then turn it over to the transportation department to devise a configuration of street features that will deliver the prioritized qualities that the community has agreed to. Demonstrate by analysis or example that the recommended configuration is the best to be had. Install it on a trial basis before making it permanent.
William H. Cutler
Park Boulevard
Palo Alto
Relocated 'Ritual'
Editor,
Four years ago I was delighted to discover an annual Winter Solstice Ritual offered at the Palo Alto Cultural Center. This ritual, with its candlelight setting and stunning music by Voices of the Coming Tribe, was a non-religious and yet spiritual way to celebrate the seasonal shift from deepest darkness to the return of light.
When I learned that the creator of the Winter Solstice Ritual, Cynthia McReynolds, was moving and would no longer be offering the ritual, I joined with a group of people who have continued the tradition for the past two years at St. Mark's Parish Hall.
This year we are holding the same ritual in Half Moon Bay. We hope to hold it in both communities in the future. We hope that people who have come to depend on this ritual for a deeper experience of the season will be able to attend this year in Half Moon Bay, at the Coastal Repertory Theatre, 1167 Main St., on Dec. 21 at 5 p.m.
We are fortunate to have been given studio time for the Voices to record a CD of the music so that in the future anyone can hold this nourishing ritual in their home or with their group, whether religious or non-religious. It is a beautiful and grounding way to experience the turning of the seasons in community.
Nancy Neff
with Linda Grace Frost, Linda Cornblossom Johnson, Lillie Barrows, Reba Vanderpool and Dena Anthony
Main Street
Half Moon Bay
Editorial tone unfair
Editor,
The Weekly editorial on Dec. 3 ("Award chutzpah points but stick with 50 feet") bothers me. It bothers me the same way as when I sat in council chambers a couple of years ago and the folks who wanted the Jewish Community Center (JCC) to get out of Terman were clapping and hooting at each other's comments.
At the time, I knew that my 18-year relationship with the JCC and the Fitness Center was about over, and I was just there to comment that I hoped the Palo Alto School Board, Palo Alto City Council and the JCC would be able to work something out for the members.
I certainly didn't appreciate the atmosphere in the chambers that night. It would have been appropriate for the mayor or a council member to insist that the group cease clapping and howling (Mayor Kniss merely asked if those folks would stop).
I'm a 48-year-old, lifelong Palo Alto resident. I remember being called a kike a few times in school. By the time I was in the Marine Corps, I had all but erased my Jewish past.
It wasn't until a 6-foot-5-inch Polish Jewish drill instructor told me that he never knew a Freedman that wasn't a Jew. When I told him I was, he asked if I were ashamed and then demanded that I act like I'm not ashamed of it.
Frankly, I'm disappointed with the way my city has handled the JCC issues. And I certainly don't like the tone of the Weekly editorial.
I'm not a member of the JCC (or rather what's left of it) and I hadn't realized that they were considering a structure over 50 feet. Let me point out that the property is a block from Highway 101, it's setback from the road, it's in an industrial area -- and there's not a good reason why the 50-foot height should be maintained in that area in the interest of "tradition."
Andrew Freedman
Verdosa Drive
Palo Alto
E-mail a friend a link to this story. | 
