I just read the front-page story "Parcel tax and bonds possible on the ballot" in the March 31 edition of the Courier. Watching the many school superintendents, their principals and the many, many vice principals and their big administrative staffs from the three school districts discussing how to cover their $100 million-plus shortfall in their budgets would have been funny to read if it wasn't so serious.

They remind me of a fish that just got caught and is trying everything it can to get out of the mess it is in. They are trying to figure out how they can continue doing business as usual even though the state is essentially flat broke. They do not want to consider layoffs, reduced salaries or benefits or even combining any of their responsibilities.

They really believe they can solve the budget problem by getting an increase in property taxes (They like to call it a parcel tax that will expire after a certain time, but we, the voters, of course know it will be a permanent increase in our property taxes.) and also float some bonds. Bonds issued in California are of course considered junk bonds because of California's finances. The people who run the various parts of the governing organizations in California just don't get it. We are broke and we need to drastically cut expenses.

What makes it more laughable is the story on page 7 of the same issue that explains that all of the union contracts for all three school districts are coming up for renewal at the same time. If I understand it correctly, all the union is asking for is a 6 percent salary increase, make sure the district continues to pay all of their health insurance premiums, give the teachers more "personal necessity days," reduce the number of students in their classrooms and of course that same old nonnegotiable stipulation that the teachers do not have to work more than 8¹/2 months a year.

I, like most other people, just got finished filing tax returns for 2003 and paid many thousands of dollars in income and property tax. I don't mind paying my share, but I just don't want to pay any more taxes. And I bet I am not alone feeling this way.

Jim Carlisle

Cupertino

Majority report is simply
a no-growth document

"Those who are too smart to engage in politics are punished by being governed by those who are dumber."—attributed to Gandhi

That quote has never been more appropriate than to describe the majority members appointed to the General Plan Task Force. Now the rest of us must engage in politics if we are to save our city from a slow and painful death.

The so-called majority report is simply a "no-growth" document. The limitations on height and densities are too restrictive to allow any development. It will crush employers like Apple, HP and Tandem. It will drive down property values. It will put Cupertino in the same company as Santa Cruz and Berkeley.

The minority report, which has reasonable height and density limits, allows our city to grow, employers to prosper, and property values to rise and preserves the character of our community. Those who advocate no growth in the guise of unreasonable limits condemn our city to certain demise.

Three ballot measures are now proposed to bypass the very process intended to provide reasonable planning. It is no secret their proponents use fear and intimidation to stifle opposition.

Many of us opposed the previous General Plan that allowed massive growth under the now defunct tier system. That approach was reasonable. Now we are attacked as developer pawns or council flacks.

If the proposed initiatives pass, Vallco will remain a ghost mall, employers will expand elsewhere, and our homes will devalue quickly. The setback restriction is so severe in one initiative that current property owners will not be allowed to improve their existing property.

If the smart people really want that result, they need only refuse to participate in elections. Then they can be punished by allowing ignorance to become public policy.

Richard Robinson

Cupertino

Minority report signed by
citizens who care deeply

I would like to clear up some misconceptions about those of us who signed the General Plan Minority Report. We who drafted and signed this report are all concerned citizens who care deeply about our community. We are not just developers. We are longtime residents, public employees, and homeowners.

I signed the report because I want to see the city provide affordable housing for people who work here, for our children who are starting their adult lives and for seniors who want to remain in this community. I felt that the report prepared by the task force diluted the positive statements about affordable housing that were included in the original staff draft of the plan and reduced the flexibility that the original height and density limits provided for creation of affordable housing.

Other task force members signed because they would like to see more successful retail stores and improve the quality of life in Cupertino. It is essential that the city council listen to our voices this year as they finalize the General Plan.

Roberta Hollimon

Cupertino

Answer to traffic is let child walk or ride bike

In a letter published in the March 31 Courier, Adrian Kolb complains about the traffic and discourteous driver behavior when dropping off and picking up her child at Monta Vista High School. I have a simple solution. Have your child walk or ride a bicycle. Better for the environment, your child's health, your stress level, and the traffic situation around the school. All good, no bad.

You can get just about anywhere in Cupertino about as fast, if not faster, on a bicycle than in an automobile when traveling during the time one would be transporting a child to or from school. There are safe routes to go anywhere and our weather is nearly always pleasant. Why drive?

Scott Frake

Cupertino