Publication Date: Wednesday, November 02, 2005
Letters
Letters
(November 02, 2005)
Foothills value
Editor,
The Palo Alto City Council did the right thing Monday night (Oct. 24) in voting to keep the longstanding rules on access to Foothills Park.
As a Palo Alto resident old enough to recall driving through miles of cherry, apricot and plum orchards on the way to San Jose, I feel strongly we should honor the vision that created Foothills Park and ensure that this lovely place continues to be protected from population pressures associated with the aggressive development in the valley below.
I am dismayed by LaDoris Cordell's comment that "the perception sometimes is as important as the reality." When a perception is wrong, it should be corrected. The reality -- that only Palo Alto was willing to pay for the creation of Foothills Park more than 40 years ago after inviting neighboring communities to join in -- has nothing to do with "racism" or any other self-serving accusations.
Like the barnyard animals in "The Little Red Hen," now everyone wants some of what they would not help with.
Foothills Park stands as a wonderful example of the value of foresight, planning and spending wisely for the future. We should not be bullied into giving up an environmentally sensitive resource that cannot withstand the trauma of increased recreational access.
It is not "elitist" to want to ensure that natural habitat will survive in this special place. Foothills Park is worth protecting. Hike in on the trails and see for yourself.
Paula Elster
Jackson Drive
Palo Alto
No 'elitist' decision
Edtor,
Bravo to the City Council for leaving our Foothills Park alone.
Normally I'm a solid supporter of some of the council members who questioned the current access policy, but on this issue I can't see their problem with appearances.
I'm sure none of us question the idea of property rights, and these naturally include control of access. If we think it proper for Neil Young or Robert Redford, for example, to be able to enjoy and limit other people's access to large tracts of nature, why would it look improper for ordinary people to band together, say as a city, and do the same?
Given our overwhelming dedication to growth and progress, the pressure to use up everything to the fullest extent is great. Open space may be the only thing of real value we can bequeath to our progeny.
How can it be elitist or racist to restrain ourselves (and others) from trampling over everything the first chance we get? It's just common sense and part of the education of anyone who has anything to preserve -- which means all of us.
It is quite elitist, however, to propose to give other people's property rights away, in a private fit of generosity. One could, instead, lead by example -- take down the fence around the backyard, do away with locked doors, and call for open borders with Canada and Mexico, for a start.
All of that looks un-neighborly and discriminatory, maybe even bigoted.
Juri Vilms
Harker Avenue
Palo Alto
Creek pledge
Editor,
The Crescent Park Neighborhood Association, as part of its ongoing effort to address the flooding threat from San Francisquito Creek, asked all of the candidates for the Palo Alto City Council to take the pledge set forth below:
As a candidate for the Palo Alto City Council, I pledge to the citizens of Palo Alto, to:
1) Familiarize myself with the damage caused by the February 1998 flood, when storm water filled the San Francisquito Creek to 7,200 cubic feet per second (cfs);
2) Educate myself regarding the continuing flooding risk of San Francisquito Creek, at flow rates even less than 7,200 cfs;
3) Confirm for myself that a "100 year flood" (9,600 cfs) solution, being pursued by the San Francisquito Creek Joint Powers Authority (JPA), will not be completed for 20 or more years, at a cost of tens of millions of dollars;
4) Recognize that, while the JPA pursues a "100 year flood" solution, flooding risks will continue to threaten the citizens of Palo Alto;
5) And I pledge, if elected to the Palo Alto City Council, to take a leadership role on the City Council in pursuing and supporting an interim course of action to reduce the risk of flooding from the creek at flow rates of up to 7,200 cfs, the rate reached during the 1998 flood.
The following candidates signed the pledge: Harold Justman, Karen Holman, Larry Klein, John Barton and Peter Drekmeier.
Norman Beamer
University Avenue
Palo Alto
Appalled at vigil
Editor,
I was appalled to see all the "candle holders" at the corner of Middlefield Road and Colorado Avenue last Wednesday night (Oct. 26) and I wonder how many more deaths will result from such activity.
The terrorists realize that the only chance of "victory" for them is by continuing their strategy of killing innocent Iraqis and American and coalition military in hopes that political pressure will cause us to give up.
People that participate in activities like the candlelight vigil on Wednesday just extend the situation and further motivate the terrorists to keep up their campaign of killing.
Regardless of what you believe brought us to our current status in Iraq, why can't we all support the leader of the free world, demonstrate to the terrorists that their efforts are futile, bring as much democracy to Iraq with the hope that freedom will spread in the Middle East and get out of there?
Wouldn't this be the best way to limit more deaths of American solders? Will you think about it?
Brad Steinhoff
Middlefield Road
Palo Alto
Rest and learning
Editor,
The Weekly asks (Oct. 28), "Should schools start later so kids could get more sleep?" Of course they should.
Evidence of the biological shift in adolescent sleep patterns has been around for years. Glazed eyes and heads on desks are the bane of every first-period teacher. The only reason I've heard given for not pushing start times back has to do with after-school activities, primarily sports.
Sorry, but schools are first and foremost about academics, and we all know it is past time for America to get serious about that. We wring our hands about the growing threat from countries like China and the low achievement levels of American students when compared with their international peers -- yet our schools and universities put more and more emphasis on the athlete rather than the scholar (as do our media -- the Palo Alto Weekly doesn't run articles in every issue on the academic exploits of our young citizens, as it does for our water polo, football and basketball players).
Let's help students arrive rested and able to focus on schoolwork. If some want to play games afterward, great. Games are fun -- they just aren't the real job of a school.
Kathryn Henkens
Princeton Road
Menlo Park
Taser danger
Editor,
Tasers are instruments of torture and must not be allowed in Palo Alto, ever. All the training in the world is not going to change what the taser is and what it does.
Natalie Fisher
Ellsworth Place
Palo Alto
Win/win proposition
Editor,
The idea to create a golf course and athletic fields on half of Bayfront Park is great, for many reasons. I can understand people bristling when they hear the words "develop" and "golf course," but if you look at the fine points and how it would benefit Menlo Park, it is a wonderful opportunity. Points that jump out are:
1) A golf course and three athletic fields would be created on approximately 80 acres of Bayfront Park, with the other 80 acres maintained as open space. (I think many people think the whole area would be developed).
2) Highlands Golf would pay for design, the EIR (environmental impact report) and construction. This represents $200,000 to $400,000 for the EIR and in the range of $4 million for construction that Menlo Park would not have to pay. (Many people think the city would bear these costs).
3) The annual maintenance of Bayfront is nearly $200,000 per year, currently covered by the Bayfront Maintenance Fund, where the only revenue is based on interest earnings and will only last eight or nine years. (We need a long-term solution, which the recreation facilities would provide).
4) The facilities would generate revenue.
5) The proposed fields would be lighted and have artificial turf. (No watering or run-off).
6) The developer would lease the land from the city, not own it.
7) Beyond the need of more athletic fields is that this area would open up many opportunities for kids and adults, not to mention that golf has become a "hot " sport for kids nationwide.
This seems like a win/win.
Carla Posthauer
Claremont Way
Menlo Park
Double jeopardy
Editor,
Scooter Libby and Karl Rove have essentially committed treason against the American people by revealing the identity of Valerie Plame. Yet this whole affair is not getting the media coverage it deserves.
They jeopardized her life as part of an effort to make the Iraq War appeal to the American people. The American people and American media need to stand up for themselves and say, "We are horrified by our administration's attempts to lie its way into a war in which thousands of American soldiers have now been killed."
We cannot allow the Bush administration to play down this scandal's significance and we must demand full accountability of all members of the administration involved.
Amos Irwin
La Para Avenue
Palo Alto
Legal 'gray zone'
Editor,
Why is it that our sanctimonious, black and white, good guys vs. bad guys White House regime is suddenly retreating to the gray zone of "legal technicalities" as a defense for its illegal behavior?
Wasn't it hiding from the truth that brought Nixon down? Far from paragons of moral rectitude, this administration has hidden the truth, twisted facts and made up "truths" of its own to advance an agenda that is not in the interest of the American people.
For its lies, misdeeds and mismanagement, we're destined to limp leaderless through the next three years while the White House whines "Washington politics as usual," as if that justifies breaking the law and lying to protect itself.
Richard Haukom
Bishop Lane
Menlo Park
Public's right to know
Editor,
The City Council's decision to keep secret and from public review the utility department scandal report was wrong. This unfortunate episode in our city's governmental operations deserves and demands full public disclosure.
The council's ready willingness to put the privacy of recalcitrant city employees and managers above the public's right to know is outrageous. This report could have been made public by listing the job titles but deleting the names of employees involved.
People who work for a governmental agency should have the expectation that much of their actions are subject to review by the public.
It is even more outrageous that council members decided to hold the discussion and the vote to sequester this report forever by doing so in executive session. We are denied knowing the reasoning followed or how council members voted.
A democratic society can only operate effectively and honestly if the public's business is conducted in the open. This is a basic premise of our Constitution and the basis of many state laws.
The city attorney erred when he took it upon himself to deny release of this report to the press without first consulting with the council. Do we now have governance of this city by the city manager and city attorney, with the council, our elected representatives, mere rubber stamps?
The council's actions in this matter are arrogant and display calloused disregard for the public's right to know. It must be its first principle that discussion of these kinds of situations be conducted in the open, to be put aside only in the rarest of circumstances. Council members have failed in their duty and responsibility to the public.
I hope the courts will agree with my point of view and that of many other Palo Alto residents.
Richard C. Placone
Chimalus Drive
Palo Alto
E-mail a friend a link to this story. | 
