Back to the Weekly Home Page

Classifieds

Palo Alto Online

Letters

Editor,

I never met Amy Malzbender, but that didn't stop me from attending last Sunday's (March 2) memorial bike ride in her honor.

I showed up at her street last Sunday afternoon and was awestruck by the sheer number of people present. I couldn't see to the end of the long line of bikes that extended down the stretch of road. Each bike had a cluster of purple memorial ribbons dangling from the left handlebar and as a volunteer handed me one, I solemnly attached it to my own bike.

As a giant line of bikers, our procession started off toward Nixon Elementary School along the three-mile course that Amy and Chloe regularly took to school. We moved together in a long, connected snake of people: children and adults together.

The variety of bikers was impressive, consisting of Amy's classmates, neighbors, relatives and friends. Others were members of the Silicon Valley Bike Coalition or the Palo Alto Unified School District PTA. Still others -- like me -- had no direct affiliation with anything. Even so, I felt like I belonged because I was a part of the community.

And all of a sudden I realized that this is what community is; this is what it means to be a community. The hit-and-run was a horrible tragedy, but there is absolutely nothing anyone can do to rewrite the past. What we can do is unite together to try to change the future.

If it takes a tragedy to bring a community together, so be it. On that Sunday ride, we certainly were a community. Linked together, we became a powerful force. Now, let us channel that power into making streets safe for all bikers and children.

Together we can take preventive measures in hope that such an accident never happens again. Elissa Brown, 10th grade Julie Court Palo Alto
Briones memories

Editor,

The ruling for the City of Palo Alto in the Juana Briones house case was wonderful news to me (Weekly, Feb. 26). My family owned that amazing home and property for 80 years. I spent much of my childhood running through the hills and orchards there with the spirit of Juana and Joaquin Murieta whispering in my ear. Legend has it he was allowed to come to the house sans his guns and stolen loot.

My great aunt Edith Cox, one of San Francisco's leading dressmakers in the early 1900s, taught me to dry apricots from those orchards. As Juana before her, Edith held on to her land even though her husband ran off with his nurse.

My aunt, Marjorie Eaton, actress and painter, brought the most amazing guests to our always-full table. Her life included Frida Kahlo, Diego Rivera and Louis Nevelson. My young life inside those thick adobe walls was rich with history. We all knew that we were caretakers of a place that belonged to everyone.

As an adult, my husband and I continued the tradition of opening the house to the public and delighted in the many school children who came to learn about Juana and early California history. At our musical soirees we were graced with the likes of Wallace Stegner and the early folks of Apple, as well as many others.

After the quake I had no choice but to sell and very sadly left in 1993. Much heartache has ensued for me over the past 10 years. The house has been hurt and neglected and is not totally protected yet, but there is hope.

Juana's house is a historic treasure, to the people of Palo Alto and I believe to the state. Perhaps, with this ruling, a way can be found to eventually restore this sacred place so that once again children can visit there and let their imaginations be stimulated by the stories of Juana Briones and those that came after her, continuing a marvelous chain of unbroken history. Susan Hill Kirk (Berthiaume) Whiskey Hill Road La Selva Beach
Voting clarity

Editor,

Since democracy is dependent on an informed electorate and there is a referendum seeking to put the 800 High Street project before the voters, I want to be sure Palo Altans clearly understand the votes by the City Council.

Articles in the media and other sources I have seen state that the council was divided 6-3 with Freeman, Kishimoto and Lytle opposed.

But that's only half of the story and very misleading.

Two versions of the project were presented to the council. One was for 61 units of housing, a small retail store and two levels of underground parking. Developers also presented a version with 54 units of housing, a small retail unit and only one level of parking.

After much discussion and public comments, council member Ojakian made a motion to approve the original 61-unit project. Council member Freeman made a substitute motion for the 54-unit version, eliminating the retail space and, while retaining some semblance of historic perspective, adding one level of parking and seven additional units of housing.

Council member Freeman's motion was defeated 3-6 (Freeman, Kishimoto, Lytle voting yes). Council member Ojakian's motion was approved 6-3 (Beecham, Burch, Kleinberg, Morton, Mossar and Ojakian voting yes).

In reporting only the 6-3 vote, perhaps the idea is to portray certain council members as voting for or against the project. I don't know. But with an election coming up, I believe it is an oversimplification and misleads our community to suggest that the council was somehow split about the critical components of this project.

All nine council members voted in favor of the project (whether expressed as "61 " or "54 plus seven" housing units). All nine voted to remove the former laundry building. And all nine voted for two levels of underground parking. Jim Burch Palo Alto City Council Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto
Watch the watchman

Editor,

Once upon a time a city had a vast scrap yard in the middle of town. The council said, "someone may steal from it at night." So they created a night watchman position and hired a person for the job.

Then the city said, "How does the watchman do his job without instruction?" So they created a planning department and hired two people, one person to write the instructions and one person to do time studies.

Then the city said, "How will we know the night watchman is doing the tasks correctly?" So they created a quality control department and hired two people. One to do the studies and one to write the reports.

Then the city said, "How are these people going to get paid?" So they created the following positions, a time keeper and a payroll officer, then hired two people.

Then the city said, "Who will be accountable for all of these people?" So they created an administrative section and hired three people, an administrative officer, assistant administrative officer and a legal secretary.

Then the city said, "We have had this command in operation for one year and we are $1.5 million over budget, we must cutback overall cost." So they laid off the night watchman. Mary Carlstead Walter Hays Drive Palo Alto
Homeless burden

Editor,

I am annoyed that everyone is so eager to vote in funds for the new homeless center. As a longtime resident, homeowner and taxpayer, I am dismayed that Palo Alto would spend another dime on the homeless.

I feel no responsibility to support the homeless, who in my experience are mainly belligerent, aggressive, disrespectful of the cleanliness and beauty of our neighborhoods and in many ways responsible for their own situations through drug abuse.

Because of the homeless who populate the areas on University Avenue by Starbucks and Walgreens, I cannot sit on the benches there. The area is full of trash, cigarette butts and men and women who aggressively panhandle or make sexual comments to me as I walk by.

There are already at least two homeless services downtown to "serve" the homeless and the Alma Street housing project provides nice, low-income housing that, as a poor graduate student, I make just enough to be disqualified for. I have held a lot of "crappy" jobs -- such as cleaning houses and toilets -- which I don't see these pampered folks even trying.

And I am deeply strapped trying to pay the high property tax here, some of which is now going to support those who are a burden on our city.

No, I don't feel sorry for these people who aggressively block my enjoyment of downtown, who litter and disrespect the nice benches that the city has spent money (my money as a taxpayer) to put in, who prevent me from walking down the street without having sexual comments made and who are not even trying to work (no matter how "beneath them" the job might be).

I've had those jobs. I have worked myself up. And giving these people things for free with my hard-earned money really irks me. Spend the money on schools. But don't have your heart bleed for people who do not pull their fair share.

Give me a break. Gina Fiorina, M.D. College Terrace Palo Alto
E-mails a waste

Editor,

Now that the Palo Alto Weekly has settled its brave lawsuit with the City of Palo Alto (Weekly, Feb. 5), what have we learned? Getting out my magnifying glass and reading the e-mails the Weekly was able to obtain, I found that the e-mails were procedural, among people who don't like each other.

This is what the Weekly filed a lawsuit for? What a waste of money and court time.

I'm being threatened by the Hispanic Norteno "red gang" members at my building (they've slashed all four of my tires twice, possibly tampered with my Audi's battery so my car caught on fire, and as of Feb. 20, they tried to knock my door in), so I don't have the amusement factor for this stuff that I once did.

People in Palo Alto are facing real issues too. On Dec. 15, 2002, many Palo alto residents who live near San Francisquito Creek were almost flooded out of their homes. Noted environmentalist Jay Thorwaldson could get some healthy exercise by filling sandbags and giving them to elderly people who live along San Francisquito Creek.

That would be a better use of the money than filing the lawsuit against the City of Palo Alto. The Weekly itself seems to have expressed disappointment in the e-mails it obtained, and not surprisingly so.

The candy is always sweeter when the candy shop is closed and you're just looking through the window. Other people have said this, too, but what you got was less interesting than what you thought you'd obtain. Paul Mendelowitz Chestnut Street Redwood City
Arrogant war

Editor,

What gives Bush the idea he has the God-given right to impose values on other sovereign nations and civilizations? The United States has the right to unilaterally ensure the safety of its citizens, and the sovereignty of its territory -- no less, but no more.

I was shocked and horrified as anyone by the events unfolding on Sept. 11, and thrilled at the heroic response by rescue personnel and the people of New York and elsewhere. I was heartened and truly gratified by the incredible support from the rest of the world in the initial offensive taken against terrorism and with the invasion of Afghanistan.

But that has been completely dissipated by the incredibly arrogant, self-righteous, obdurate (and just plain stupid) actions taken to implement a poorly articulated, shifting, tenuously justified policy for Iraq that flies in the face of everything the United Nations (and America) stands for.

And Bush's shoot-from-the-hip tendencies have prompted a completely unnecessary and ill-afforded crisis in Korea far scarier in potential than Iraq. The "War on Terrorism" could have proceeded quite successfully without jeopardizing hundreds of thousands of lives and imposing such a burden on a foundering domestic economy. Alan Mela Blue Oak Lane Los Altos