Letters to the editor | August 31, 2018 | Palo Alto Weekly | Palo Alto Online |

Palo Alto Weekly

Spectrum - August 31, 2018

Letters to the editor

Publish meeting notices more, not less, widely

This story contains 1031 words.

Stories older than 90 days are available only to subscribing members. Please help sustain quality local journalism by becoming a subscribing member today.

If you are already a subscriber, please log in so you can continue to enjoy unlimited access to stories and archives. Subscriptions start at $5 per month and may be cancelled at any time.

Log in     Subscribe


6 people like this
Posted by JCP
a resident of Old Palo Alto
on Sep 1, 2018 at 7:31 am

Castilleja should be ashamed, not just sorry. Ms Tuck has only lived in the neighborhood for a few years and has no clue about the long history of deceit by the school. Neighbors have complained for more than 25 years.

Like this comment
Posted by Nancy Tuck
a resident of Old Palo Alto
on Sep 1, 2018 at 11:00 pm

Actually, "JCP", it will be seven years in December that I've lived on Melville Avenue. And to quote Mary Sylvester's letter to the editor: "As a 40-year neighbor of Castilleja School, I was a largely respectful supporter of the school for decades until three years ago when the school's disrespect for the truth and the law and the neighbors caused me to speak up." So it would seem that Ms. Sylvester actually had no issue with traffic, nor any complaint about the school prior to three years ago. And three years ago, the school had already paid a fine to the city, undertaken significant traffic abatement efforts, reduced enrollment, and held over a dozen meetings with neighbors to discuss mutually accepted solutions to any new issues that had cropped up following Nanci Kauffman's admission of over-enrollment. You don't share your name, or your address, but if you are a neighbor, or even a resident of Palo Alto, I hope you will try to be part of the solution.

Like this comment
Posted by Huh.
a resident of Duveneck/St. Francis
on Sep 2, 2018 at 1:14 pm

The problem is that the school considers deceipt and bad faith to be trivial, surface problems that can be addressed with PR and retroactive pronouncements.

It’s current administration simply cannot be trusted.

To move forward, it needs new people who understand that honesty and good faith interactions themselves are helpful for the school’s relationship to its community. Chasing a reputation of good membership in the commmunity is one thing, but that is not the same as actually walking their espoused values and those of its community.

If the school had been acting in good faith and being honest for decades, do you think it’s surrounding community might be more likely to trust and work with the school to recognize and advance mutual goals?

The solution to the current problem is to hold the school to its use permit of four years ago. If it can be a good, honest citizen for a few years, it’s worth looking at how to help the school benefit its community more.

But if the school cannot break free of its addiction to deceipt, bad faith, and misleading communication to the public, it should be treated as a bad actor that has to be watched and monitored carefully to minimize and mitigate the damage it will inevitably bring.

Despite its current well-placed connections.

Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.

Stay informed

Get daily headlines sent straight to your inbox.


Register today!

​On Friday, October 11, join us at the Palo Alto Baylands for a 5K walk, 5K run, 10K run or half marathon! All proceeds benefit local nonprofits serving children and families.

Learn More