Publication Date: Wednesday, September 29, 2004
Letters
Letters
(September 29, 2004)
Save for rainy day
Editor,
So the city wants the voters to increase the storm-drain fee more than 100 percent in order to fund some basic maintenance issues. I should know, living over in Southgate where the streets turn into rivers at the slightest sprinkling.
But the city has known that there are problems in its streets and it hasn't fixed them. It tried to increase fees four years ago and it was rejected, and it's sat on its hands since.
Oh wait, I'm sorry, it's done more than that. It's spent millions of dollars on empty parking garages, speculated on real-estate deals, hired who knows how many consultants to figure out what any 5th grader can tell you by casual observation, remodeled the council chambers and paid millions of dollars in staff fees to "go back and study some more" numerous projects.
It's asking for an increase for basic maintenance. When a light bulb burns out at City Hall, or it needs a new lawnmower to mow the "rarely if ever" used Lawn Bowling Green, is it going to want to tax us for that as well?
Here's an idea that most of us were taught when we were young: Stop wasting money and save it for a rainy day.
Keith Ferrell
Escobita Avenue
Palo Alto
'Priceless' storm-drains
Editor,
Our family lived for eight years in Southgate, and spent hundreds of dollars dealing with the flooding that neighborhood annually experienced, from damages in supposedly dry basements to fallen trees during El Nino.
We now live in Community Center, and welcome the Lincoln/Channing "quadruple curb-side surgery" that will disrupt our personal lives and home, but will result in properties not damaged the way our previous home experienced.
The thousands of dollars that our insurance company paid, along with what we paid, makes $15 a month or less pale in comparison. And the price of less stress around losing one's home, or belongings therein: priceless.
Paul Losch
Lincoln Avenue
Palo Alto
What $25 million?
Editor,
Recently I received a copied piece of paper in my mailbox from the Palo Alto Committee Against Measure I. This document purported to "bust myths" about the need for the Palo Alto Unified parcel tax (Measure I).
The most ludicrous of its claims was that "parents' fundraisers and other unreported funding" increase annual PAUSD spending to more than $13,000 per student in Palo Alto.
Well, I certainly wish that claim was true, because Palo Alto schools would be in far better shape if it were. That $13,000 per student equates to more than $25 million per year that's "unreported" -- and completely unknown to the school district, the Partners in Education campaign and PTAs.
As a member of the Partners in Education fundraising campaign, I have worked on and studied Palo Alto school fundraising and categorically deny that anything even close to that amount is raised.
This kind of outrageous and unsubstantiated "data" certainly demonstrates a shoddy level of research and credibility offered to Palo Alto by the Palo Alto Committee Against Measure I.
Don't be misled by their false claim.
For generations Palo Alto has valued and trusted its schools and district leadership. Today that leadership has asked us to affirm our commitment to excellent education by continuing the current parcel tax and increasing it by $19 a month.
I urge every Palo Alto citizen to vote to support Palo Alto's schools, its youth and its future.
Kathy Schroeder
Adobe Place
Palo Alto
Inappropriate support
Editor,
I am concerned by what I have read in the newspapers regarding our police chief, Lynne Johnson. It seems to me that the police chief has been covering up for her officers and will continue to do so.
Her automatic support for her officers has been made pretty clear by her recent statements and non-action involving Mr. Hopkins' beating by officers Kan and Lee. She could have kept quiet or she could have disciplined them. Instead, she claims publicly that they did no wrong and should not be held to answer for their actions.
What's even more frightening is that she claims the officers violated no departmental procedures.
Such an attitude encourages police misconduct and demonstrates a failure to recognize those officers who do display restraint and good judgment.
Her unconditional support for the two officers who beat an elderly man is an insult to the good officers on the force. She also put officers Kan and Lee on paid administrative leave both before and after the district attorney made the decision to bring them to trial on felony assault charges, rather than suspending them without pay.
We need a civilian police oversight commission, as many cities and small towns have. Such a commission would advise the City Council and conduct its own investigations.
In regard to racial profiling, Chief Johnson has been presenting statistics to the Human Relations Commission for months and could continue to do so for years. But she will never find any of her officers at fault. This statistic gathering is just a delaying tactic to avoid dealing with the issue.
I fear greatly what will happen once the Palo Alto Police Department acquires Tasers. Officers Kan and Lee would no doubt have used them on Mr. Hopkins. Such use might have killed him.
Natalie Fisher
Ellsworth Place
Palo Alto
Take a harder look
Editor,
Perhaps the most offensive part of Jason Yen's Guest Opinion (Weekly, Sept. 22) on the Republican National Convention was his unapologic hijacking of Barack Obama's now-famous line, "a skinny black kid with a funny name."
Yes, the America that President Bush advocates with massive tax breaks for the wealthiest among us and the America that Arnold advocates by vetoing an increase in the minimum wage is an America that I find abhorrent.
Let me suggest, Jason, that before you become too enthusiastic about the conservative values espoused at the Republican National Convention that you find some time to see how those values are affecting people in communities Palo Altans are frequently able to ignore.
Try volunteering at the Ecumenical Hunger Program or at one of the East Palo Alto elementary schools. Then, let me know if you still yearn for a Republican renaissance in our state.
Lissy Bland
Wilton Avenue
Palo Alto
Stem-cell progress?
Editor,
The article about Robert Klein's crusade for embryonic stem-cell research for diabetes (Our Town Aug. 18) prompted me to write. I don't know how or why Mr. Klein could ignore advances in "adult" stem-cell research.
An Aug. 20, 2004, press release from the Lee Iacocca Foundation reads, "Researchers at Massachusetts General Hospital have received FDA approval to begin human trials of an adult cell therapy that reverses Type 1 (juvenile) diabetes in animals. The team, led by Harvard's Dr. Denise Faustman, has treated diabetic mice with adult spleen cells."
It is a mystery to me why $3 billion must be taken from California taxpayers for speculative and unethical research when progress is being made now with "adult" stem cells.
Pat Puccio
Grayslake Road
Rancho Palos Verdes
Editor,
With more than 1,000 American soldiers dead in Iraq, Americans can no longer afford to hear Bush's sunny spin on Iraq. It's time to get the facts.
In July, the CIA completed a comprehensive report on Iraq. President Bush should release the CIA's report immediately,-with any secret information removed--- as Bush's fellow Republican John McCain and others have urged.
Our soldiers' lives are on the line. Our sons and daughters will continue to die as long as we are in Iraq. For their sake, we need know all the facts and assess them honestly.
Oliver Vogel
Lambert Avenue
Palo Alto
Several other letters stating the same points in closely similar language were also received. -- Editor.
E-mail a friend a link to this story. | 
