I subscribed to the Courier because I want to keep the printed media alive and well in the electronic environment.

Until today, I have always upheld the right of cartoonists to poke fun at public figures. Mr. DeCinzo has gone much too far beyond fun and below fun. His March 17 "Ballot Initiative" cartoon is offensive.

Our Mayor, Sandra James, is one of the most loyal, dedicated and diligent public servants that I have ever known. Her record of service to our city shows that she deserves respect.

I love Cupertino and am saddened by this ugly cartoon.

Mavis Smith

Senior Block Leader, Cupertino

Walking or biking solves
traffic and obesity

The solution to the nightmare traffic at Monta Vista is glaringly simple. Let the students walk or bike to school. Cupertino is one of the safest of all cities, and California weather is extremely mild. Also this action would help alleviate the current childhood obesity threat.

Diane Cassidy

Cupertino

City questions biased; don't explore other side

The City of Cupertino is conducting a Resident Satisfaction Survey. Buried in this survey are questions 18 and 19 about so-called affordable housing. The survey asks whether a resident supports affordable housing such as condominiums, town homes and apartments along Stevens Creek Boulevard from Stelling Road to Wolfe Road. There is no information about what affordable housing means or its implications to the residents. If you ask residents whether they would like more affordable lattes, more affordable cars, etc , surely the answer would be yes.

Following this is a question designed to obtain the answer the city wants: Would you be more or less likely to support affordable housing if it offers affordable housing to those who cannot afford a single-family residence, if it cuts commuter time, if it relieves traffic congestion, if it helps local businesses, if it creates a greater variety of housing?

There are many in the city who believe that more condos, town homes and apartments would have an opposite effect in many areas, but this question is not asked. Questions are not asked about the impact on schools, the quality of education, the environment, increased costs to the city, increased city budget deficits and the quality of life.

As was the case in the General Plan Task Force, the city is once again trying to bias the outcome of the survey to get the answers they want rather than a true picture of the attitudes of Cupertino citizens.

Robert L. Garten

Cupertino

Children must be ready
to compete worldwide

I've heard that Lynbrook High School gave low grades in the AP US history class. Only 27 percent of the students got As or Bs, and 72 percent of the students got Cs and Ds. Although my kids are in the Monta-Vista high school, I feel sorry about this. I keep thinking about whether society needs to put so much pressure on our children?

The acceleration of civilization seems to make the world smaller, but it also seems to be increasing the competition from all over the world. Do our children need to prepare for tougher competition? I would say "Yes."

In order to stay competitive, education must be a priority for our children to survive the harsh future. As an Asian American and the father of two children, I worry that the competition ahead for our children from the rest of the world will be very strong, something children don't understand now.

That's why we spend 100 percent of our time teaching our kids in the hope that they will grow stronger than our generation. That's why we care so much about their grades and homework. That why we help our children go to a good college.

I heard that the US history teacher at Lynbrook is a very good teacher and the students like her, but for some reason, she gave low grades this year. Is their any purpose in giving low grades to 72 percent of the students? Can low grades make our children more competitive? I really don't know how to answer this question myself. The teacher must have a reason. I can only hope that all the teachers realize that they are handling the future of our children. Hopefully, they take care of their students just as their parents, give them love, encouragement and hope.

Jong-Ming Lin

Cupertino

Hundreds of people, hours create General Plan draft

As a member of the General Plan Task Force, I would like to take issue with some letters to the editor that assert city officials tried to orchestrate acceptance of "their pre-prepared plan."

The General Plan Administrative Draft presented to our task force was 2.5 years in the making and was presented to the task force as a beginning document.

This draft plan was compiled based on input from various meetings in our community: the input from over 200 residents who attended a community congress in 2001; a community survey conducted by Godbe Research & Analysis in 2002; and two joint-study sessions with the city council and planning commission where public comments were received.

In total, hundreds of Cupertino homeowners, community and business members, and others contributed to the development of the initial draft.

Our city officials have gone to much effort to seek input from the community over the past few years. The draft plan represents the voices from a broad spectrum of Cupertino. Now the recommendations from the task force will be included in the draft plan for further comments from our community. Let's keep the process open and continue a healthy community dialog.

Nicol Lea

General Plan Task Force
member

High-density won't mean
housing for seniors

"Politics is the art of preventing people from taking part in affairs which properly concern them." Paul Valery.

That quote has never been more appropriate than to describe the efforts of the developers that drafted the General Plan Minority Report and the efforts of the city council to derail the three smart-growth ballot initiatives.

It is bogus to assert that if the three initiatives pass, or if the majority report is adopted, that it will hurt employers or Vallco. The industrial areas of the city will be unaffected. Vallco was in decline long before the initiatives were proposed. No one is naive enough to believe that more high-density development will revitalize Vallco.

It is also bogus to assert that high-density developments will provide

affordable housing to seniors and/or their adult children. This popular lie is regularly trotted out by developers, but has no basis in fact. Seniors usually have paid off their mortgages, and are paying very low property taxes. Some seniors choose to cash out, and move away. Some move away, but allow their adult children, and grandchildren, to live in their houses (this is an undesirable side-effect of proposition 13 that is eroding the tax base of many cities with good schools, not just Cupertino).

The future of Cupertino demands that the people take part in the affairs that properly concern them. Developers, and their cronies, have already caused irreversible damage. Adoption of the developer-written minority report will be a disaster. It will drive down property values, further destroy the character of the community, lower the quality of life, cause urban blight, drive away retail stores, and put Cupertino in the same company as downtown San Jose.

Steven M. Scharf

Cupertino

Trees supplant beautiful
Fountain, now they wilt

Daily we go for a walk through Memorial Park. On the way we pass the once beautiful fountain in back of the community center. To our dismay, this fountain has been in disrepair (without running water) for years.

Instead of fixing it, someone has decided to put about fifteen trees with their planter containers at the bottom of the basin. I guess this was to prevent kids from using this place as skateboard ramp. We were hoping the trees would eventually be planted in the ground somewhere in our park, but this does not seem to be the plan. Now the trees are wilting.

We are wondering if this is the way our city spends our tax money? These trees must cost almost as much as it could cost to fix the fountain.

We were blessed with such a beautiful community center, but building it is only part of it, it must also be maintained!

What are the plans to fix this?

Manfred Trogisch

Cupertino

Letters about teachers
has the facts all wrong

I want to address Jim Carlisle's April 7 letter, "School District needs to face reality; we're broke."

Carlisle asserts that our local school districts face a $100 million plus shortfall. The fact is the Fremont Union High School District may face a $2 million shortfall

Carlisle asserts that the district does not want to consider layoffs. The fact is last year, we went through a reduction in force. This year despite having an enrollment that includes 165 additional students, we have 19 fewer teachers, which has reduced our teaching expense.

Carlisle asserts that "the union" (he doesn't state which one) is asking for a 6 percent salary increase. The fact is the Fremont Education Association—the association that represents the 430 teachers of our high school district, has asked for no such increase. We are willing to live by the contract that is currently valid—which allows for salary increases, and decreases, depending on specific sources of funding that the district receives.

Furthermore, contrary to Carlisle's assertion, we have never asked for more "personal necessity" days, nor have we asked for reducing the number of students in our classrooms.

In conclusion, the community can discuss whether a parcel tax designed to improve our children's education is worthwhile or not. However, I would hope that the discussion centers on factual data as opposed to perpetuating a laundry list of inaccuracies. I also think the Cupertino Courier bears some journalistic responsibility in checking the facts before printing any letter.

Tom Avvakumovits

Fremont Education Association

Mr. Avvakumovits is correct; we should have fact-checked Mr. Carlisle's letter. The figures and proposals Mr. Carlisle mentioned came from a story on contract negotiations currently taking place between the Cupertino Education Association and the Cupertino Union School District, which are separate entities from the Fremont Union High School District and its employee unions. Mr. Avvakumovits' facts, however, are correct. —Editor