Publication Date: Wednesday, April 13, 2005
Letters
Letters
(April 13, 2005)
Drains sustain value
Editor,
As a resident of Palo Alto for more than 36 years and a residential realtor and homeowner, I urge the property owners of Palo Alto to vote "Yes" on the storm-drain ballot measure.
I served on the storm-drain committee at the request of former Mayor Vic Ojakian, and took part in the discussions regarding the need to increase storm-drain fees to fund very needed repairs. I believe that it is imperative for the property owners to understand the necessity for these infrastructure upgrades.
We cannot go back in time to find fault with previous city councils, but must move forward to do the major current repairs necessary to eliminate street flooding. The Southgate neighborhood must also have the storm drains that should have been installed many years ago.
The provisions for a 12-year sunset clause, independent oversight committee and a cap on inflation increases provide necessary safeguards. Current homeowners must understand that this small increase in fees is just the cost of a double latte per month, and it will show that Palo Altans care about their city and understand the need to address basic infrastructure needs before we move on to any cosmetic issues.
This measure will ultimately help maintain our property values by taking care of the underpinnings of this town, just as we should be maintaining our foundations and major house systems. Let's pass this measure so that we can improve the community for our children and grandchildren who ride bicycles to school during inclement weather.
Leannah Hunt
Lytton Avenue
Palo Alto
Why no flood action?
Editor,
I am a 17-year-old junior at Palo Alto High School and my house was flooded in 1998. Going to Duveneck in fourth grade was hard enough, but when our house was flooded four feet, it almost seemed like my life would never be the same again.
Almost everything we had was ruined, my mom was barely able to save our photo albums and home videos, spending hundreds to repair them. Our family of four was forced to stay in my grandfather's one-bedroom apartment in Midtown for more than six months.
Renovating our house took almost two years, and I am sure that if our storm drains were better that this kind of catastrophe would never have happened. Flooding may seem like something that doesn't happen in the perfect bubble of Palo Alto, but I assure it is quite possible.
Now every time it rains for more than two days, my father checks the San Francisquito Creek's water level because very little has been done to protect our house from flooding the next time it rains. Eight years have passed since the flood and I am shocked that our city has done so little in response.
The storm-drain tax is a much-needed fee that the city has finally put into motion. I'm sure that the last thing the residents of this city want is another flood and the best way to prevent that would be to implement the storm-drain tax.
Floods are a real danger, not just freak accident that happens once every hundred years.
Lia Economos
De Soto Drive
Palo Alto
Fix floods, not puddles
Editor,
There has been a lot of rhetoric regarding the current storm-drain fee increase. Certainly Palo Alto's storm-drain system is important. However, this tax misses the point that Palo Alto should solve its flood-control system first for a truly effective overall system.
The storm-drain changes will not help flood control, as some people think. The pumping will be shut down when the creek reaches a certain level, so the surface water remains the same -- although, if the timing is wrong, I suppose it could add to the flooding. Delay on flood control can cause far greater damage than "puddle control," both for the city and for its citizens.
It would be more beneficial if the city government would put more effort and money on fixing San Francisquito Creek to handle flooding correctly. The Joint Powers Authority has had many meetings and done lots of studying over the years, but still no "bricks and mortar" flood control. If they can't get the federal government to go faster, it may be worth forming a flood-control district and get the work done before the next big flood.
Regarding funding, the drainage is a city responsibility, not the utility's. Some ask, "OK, what service should the city cut to pay for it"?
The answer is that since Palo Alto's cost per citizen is far higher (even double) than other cities with comparable amenities, cut the excess. A business corporation would go broke with such an uncompetitive expense structure. A good place to start would be a zero-based budget, with no department or position exempt from justifying its cost.
I don't mean to offend those who disagree, but my "No" vote on the storm-drain increase is the only way I have to say: "Fix the floods, not the puddles ... and do it by overall cost control."
Rich Scholz
Lois Lane
Palo Alto
Piggy-bank raid?
Editor,
It is encouraging that upgrading the storm drains should energize the electorate. It is a pity that flood-control issues do not merit the same attention.
Upgrading the storm drains will not mitigate the flooding problem and the ensuing misery and devastation. On the contrary, upgrading the storm drains will increase the danger of flooding by directing more water into the creeks.
This astute observation was made by the Weekly's staff writer, Bill D'Agostino (April 6), who quoted a statement from Senior Engineer Joe Teresi of the Palo Alto Public Work's Department: "Improving the efficiency of the storm drains shouldn't significantly worsen flooding."
Passage of the storm-drain ballot will send a "laissez faire" message to our "top-heavy" city staff (hard to believe Richard Alexander's statistics -- 300 managers for 800 employees and 150 mangers earning more than $100,000). I applaud the Weekly and many insightful letter writers for focusing much-needed attention at the crippling deficit and analysis of city spending.
The business model of private industry should be emulated to trim back unnecessary expenditures -- including staff reductions. Our roads and parks are in an appalling state. It seems the only visible "city" vehicles to be seen are those with a decal, "on contract with the city of Palo Alto."
I urge the City Council and city staff to make the tough choices to balance the budget before asking the electorate to raid their piggy banks.
Jagjit Singh
Louisa Court
Palo Alto
A bumpy ride
Editor,
I am over 80 years old and still like to ride my bicycle. But the roads in Palo Alto are so horribly bumpy and there are dangerous potholes and large cracks in the road to avoid.
It feels like being in a developing country that needs money desperately.
When I drive into Mountain View, Menlo Park or Stanford, the roads are pleasantly smooth. Why are our roads so awful? We have an expensive management team in Palo Alto and after paying for it there is little left over for actual work.
If our city gets more money it probably would expand the management team, get more pay raises or do both. I am a 48-year resident of Palo Alto and remember when Palo Alto was a really nice place and the roads were smooth without potholes and cracks -- and the city was managed efficiently.
Werner Wadensweiler
Greer Road
Palo Alto
E-mail a friend a link to this story. | 
