Publication Date: Wednesday, May 25, 2005
Letters
Letters
(May 25, 2005)
Real estate and schools
Editor,
For the past two months I have been looking at houses in Palo Alto with a relative who is relocating to the area. We have looked in Palo Alto, Atherton, Menlo Park and Los Altos at houses selling from $1.5 million to $10 million.
What is shocking, in addition to the housing prices, is the price discrepancy between Palo Alto and the neighboring cities: Palo Alto is at least 15 percent higher -- if not more -- for houses that are smaller in size and on smaller lots. At the upper levels, for example, there are many homes in Atherton on large lots selling for much less than Palo Alto homes, if you compare them on a per-square-foot basis.
Prices of condos in Palo Alto are at least 20 percent higher than in Mountain View. Last week, I saw a Palo Alto house that is almost a teardown with an unbelievable asking price of $8.5 million. The question we asked the realtor was: Why these crazy prices?
The answer: It's the school district.
Everyone wants Palo Alto Schools. In the upcoming Measure A ballot on June 7, voters need to remember that their real-estate values are tied to the school district. Failure to pass Measure A might save tax payers a few hundred dollars per year, but cost them thousands when it comes to sales prices of their homes if the school district cannot maintain its excellence.
Esther Wojcicki
Tolman Drive
Stanford
No immunity
Editor,
Jon Foster's column (May 18) hit the nail on the head. As a 40-plus year resident of California, I can attest to the fact that even great schools are not immune to the effects of lack of adequate funding.
Yes, Palo Alto schools deservedly have a great reputation, and no, that will not disappear overnight if the voters fail to pass Measure A. However, people who believe that the quality can be sustained indefinitely in the face of very real budget cuts are simply fooling themselves.
If you believe our schools are important, please vote "yes" on Measure A.
John Mamin
St. Michael Drive
Palo Alto
Survival not enough
Editor,
In a flyer left on my doorstep this week, Measure A opponents state that if this measure doesn't pass, PAUSD will find "alternative ways to survive."
Whether or not the school system will survive has never been in question. Certainly cutting faculty and axing programs are ways to survive, as is a general lowering of standards. If mediocrity is all we want for our children and our community, survival is no problem.
As the mom of a kindergartner, I'm looking at where my son will spend the next 12 years of his academic life and profoundly hoping our schools will do much more than survive.
Joanna Holmes
Addison Avenue
Palo Alto
Teachers deserve support
Editor,
I write as a former PAUSD School Board member and as a grandparent of two currently enrolled in the district. I have had concerns over the last several years regarding the present administration and the leadership of some members of the school board.
I have been particularly concerned with the expenditures on administrative salaries and benefits. I believe that a $500,000 interest-free loan to the superintendent never should have been allowed. I also believe that the administration and certain members of the school board have treated this issue in a cavalier fashion.
Having said that, I must also say that I agree with Ray Bachetti and his colleagues in their recent analysis of PAUSD finances. There is no legitimate alternative to the adoption of Measure A. It must be supported by all of us. For those of us who are 65 or older, we can opt out of Measure A if we so choose, although I hope we don't opt out if we do not need to do so.
I have little sympathy for the argument that teachers are overpaid. As far as I am concerned, teachers should be in the top one percent of pay of their counterparts. That's how we can continue to attract and retain the very best teachers. Of course, I know that the finances of the district will continue to prevent us from paying teachers what they deserve.
But if we could, we should. We have great teachers who deserve our support.
Alan C. Davis
St. Michael Drive
Palo Alto
Recruiting woes
Editor,
I am writing to voice my concern about military recruiting in our public schools. While I support the troops and the rights of a volunteer military, I do not support institutionalizing involuntary recruitment practices.
The No Child Left Behind legislation automatically gives the military the right to take any students private information without any form of parental permission or notification. This snooping into students' private school information needs to stop.
There is an opt-out provision in the legislation but rarely are students or parents informed of it. I encourage students and parents all over our state to send a letter to their school's administrators asking them to keep their information private. A sample form can be found at www.militaryfreezone.org.
Elizabeth Cox
Elena Avenue
Atherton
Prop. W problems
Editor,
I was for Atherton's Proposition W. However, Atherton's Town Council has given me reason to rethink throwing Proposition W money at a noble but a poorly thought-out means to a cause, and the probable numerous lawsuits likely to result from passage of Ordinance 557.
Last Wednesday's (May 18) council meeting showed that this ordinance is ill conceived, arbitrary and dangerous. Ill conceived because it has no basis in a prior, publicly vetted and careful study; and arbitrary because the council passed a law for only one section of our town.
And it is dangerous because its Exhibit A lists artifacts both in citizens' yards and interiors, many outside the ordinance's stated area of jurisdiction -- suggesting a far greater agenda.
In short, Ordinance 557 requires you to obtain a fee-based permit and undergo visits by Atherton town (and perhaps state) officials should you want to move a flower pot in your yard that has been designated (without your knowledge) an historical artifact.
With much sadness I urge my fellow Athertonians to keep their Proposition W monies in their pockets. Either you will spend it on compulsory bureaucracy if your doorknob is designated an historic artifact or your town will spend it on the lawsuits that will result from their insistence to maintain and extend Ordinance 557.
William Grindley
Laurel Avenue
Atherton
E-mail a friend a link to this story. | 
