In an attempt to gain access to design kits for the Stevens Creek corridor master plan before they were distributed to Cupertino citizens, I attended a Parks & Recreation Commission meeting to ask if the kits could be publicly reviewed prior to their distribution and use. I was told that the content would not be made available before hand. When I asked if this violated the California public meeting statute, I was told that it did not, because the staff simply had to be able to meet and decide on the kit content in private. A staff member said that we would "just have to trust the staff" and their process.

I did not have time to ask why they thought the planned process does "not" violate the spirit, if not the letter of the public meeting statute. If I had had the time, I would have said that I do "not have to trust the staff" or their process, and that I do not. That is the reason for the public meeting statute.

The citizens of Cupertino need to become aware of what is at stake and to begin expressing their opinions on this issue, which will have a significant impact on the quality of life in our city for generations to come.

—G. William Walster, Ph.D., Cupertino

A paid advertisement about the Cupertino Union School District's upcoming review of the superintendent's contract ran in the March 5 issue of the Cupertino Courier and may have led to some confusion. In the same issue, our editorial department published an article exploring district issues and an effort by some parents to recall two board members. The article was carefully researched, and every effort was made to present the information objectively. The advertisement was purchased through our advertising department, which operates independently of our editorial department.