At the Oct. 11 planning commission meeting, the commissioners finalized a change to the R1 building specification of an increase of 50 percent from 35 percent for the second-floor space of the homes.

The 35-percent second-story floor space for homes was approved during R1 building specification changes in 1999 to limit the building of monster homes. This increase from 35 percent to 50 percent is an increase of 42 percent (15 divided by 35). During a recent survey of citizens, one of the questions was should the second story 35 percent size limitation for homes be increased. More than 50 percent of the responses were to leave the 35 percent as had been defined in the R1 specification in 1999.

The planning commission members, with the exception of Commissioner Lisa Giefer, pushed ahead, making the change with little discussion. Commissioner Giefer wanted to make the increase a small increment rather than such a large increase.

There have been many discussions recently on problems with communication from the council/commission to the citizens resulting in the three petitions heading for the ballot. In the R1 case, with more than 50 percent of the citizens communicating by written response that they wanted no change in the R1 specification of 35 percent for second-story floor space, these citizen inputs are being ignored.

The basic result of this decision to increase the second floor to 50 percent is a return to monster-type homes.

Leslie Burnell

Cupertino

Resident thinks Cupertino
is fine without downtown

I keep hearing that we need a downtown for the city of Cupertino. I think the city council members are just listening to themselves repeat that phrase. We moved to Cupertino in the early '70s. We came because schools here were excellent. We liked the Town Center and thought of Cupertino as a town—our town. We loved the glimpses of the hills to the west.

We enjoyed Stevens Creek Boulevard, which bespoke its name with its wide green edges. We sat on those raised green edges, in front of the Marketplace shopping center, and watched the Cupertino Parade of Bands. We won't ever be able to do that at the new Blaney and Stevens Creek area, which resembles West San Carlos, with no setback.

We saw the declining San Jose downtown and were glad we had such a gracious area in which to live. We shopped here and enjoyed the town life.

Recently I was to meet a friend for lunch at Le Boulanger. We were to go to the "new" location. After a frustrating 15 minutes spent hunting for a place to park, we went to the "Le Bou" in El Paseo Shopping Center. Sadly, the increased cars in Cupertino are driving me to spend my money in neighboring towns.

We have watched high-density housing spring up everywhere, bringing lots of cars and residents, but in many respects we have lost our town. We do not need to tear up the sidewalks along Stevens Creek to build—we do not need five stories of housing to block views and add many more cars to already congested intersections.

I'm sorry that the Cupertino City Council is not listening to so many of its own citizens. They could save the costs of special elections and could cooperate with its own citizens and help save Cupertino. Instead, they seem to be ramming through permission to continue the building frenzy up to the last minute, when they will have to listen.

I wish they would just listen, now.

Louise Otewalt

Cupertino

Council has stopped
listening to community

In regard to the city's apparent decision to force a "showdown" concerning clarification and specifications to the city's General Plan, I don't understand why the city can't just better adhere to its own "heart of the city" vision.

Simply requiring city council approval of exemptions by either a major majority or unanimous vote, as opposed to a mere simple majority, could possibly prevent egregious, controversial deviations from the General Plan. The building conglomeration at the historical Cali Mills site that has caused such community concern (and was even described as a "train wreck" of development in a Mercury News article) serves as an example of why the city should require stricter requirements for deviations from plans or for making improvements to the current plans.

The suggestion that council members were following the direction of the community in their building development seems far-fetched to me. I think that most residents' concept of a downtown resembled that of Los Gatos or Saratoga and not a city block in San Francisco. The only reason why residents would consider supporting initiatives to clarify the General Plan is if the city shows no resolve in preventing unsightly overbuilding that detracts from the attractiveness of the city. I don't think that the community wants to be forced to choose between extreme solutions and expecting its council members to recognize and adhere to a General Plan which maintains the ambiance and atmosphere that the "heart of the city" concept was intended to provide.

The city council needs to make some amends to restore community confidence in the direction of development within the city.

Ann Shirkey

Cupertino

No proof that The Blue Pheasant has problems

I read with interest the statements that the Cupertino City Council listens to its residents (only?). I am sorry, but the city of Cupertino is also an integral part of the San Francisco Bay Area, and as such should listen to all of Bay Area residents.

Case in point: the "smear" campaign being waged against the Blue Pheasant Restaurant. The Blue Pheasant has been operating in the same location and under the same management for about 30 years—far longer than most of the local residents have been living in the city. I believe the Blue Pheasant has the right to continue operating under the same conditions that they have had for all these years. Folks, they were there first.

I challenge anyone to bring forth positive proof of the allegations of drugs, prostitution, brawls, etc., for all to see. Perhaps the Courier could ask the sheriff for a summary of all drug and prostitution arrests at the Blue Pheasant over the last 30 years ... let the truth speak!

Another case: the recent NIMBY regarding a cell tower site. Get with it, Cupertino, you need to be a good citizen of the South Bay and consider the common good of all, not just the squeaky wheels.

After locating my business in Cupertino for 15 years, I am now happy to be elsewhere.

Charles H. Rulofson

Now of San Jose

City's commission has
gotten rid of local landmarks

I have read the Courier and its numerous pros and cons on what to do with the Blue Pheasant. I happen to agree with the Oct. 6 letter by Jim Carlisle, "Somebody wants to close the Blue Pheasant," and his reasoning. We have lived in Cupertino since 1958, when there was nothing on either side of the Blue Pheasant except the Blackberry Farm. There were no issues then and should be no issues now. The growth around that area is a buyer-beware risk that comes with the territory. The golf course is part of this landmark and should stay intact with its 19th hole. I am tired of the Cupertino Planning Commission and their leniency toward tearing down last remnants of our landmarks in the interests of filling city coffers. I am also tired of seeing the end-result building decisions that resemble Hong Kong-ization of properties along the De Anza and Stevens Creek boulevards intersection.

Let's put the Blue Pheasant situation to a public vote and see what happens!

Glenn Bloesch

Cupertino

Blue Pheasant is where people are treated with respect

I was raised in Cupertino and have been a patron of the Blue Pheasant for over 20 years. Not once have I witnessed a fight or been solicited by a prostitute. However, I have been treated kindly, walked safely to my car and met many new friends.

I would think the city of Cupertino would encourage this type of establishment instead of trying to force it from the city. The Pheasant is the kind of place a single man or woman can go and be treated with respect and a smile, an older couple can go and enjoy a nice meal at a fair price and even stop for a dance. It is the kind of place that welcomes you after a fun round of golf and it is just the kind of place people of all ages and backgrounds can go, be welcomed and have a fun time.

It is one of the few places around that caters to so many.

It frightens me that unfounded rumors can now close down a business in Cupertino. What can we expect next? Why doesn't the city council come down to the Pheasant and have a bite to eat, make some new friends and possibly enjoy a spin around the floor? Or is it the city council is afraid of having a good time and maybe have to admit they are making a big mistake?

Jane Morales

Sunnyvale

It looks like someone wants
to close down Blue Pheasant

I would like to echo Jim Carlisle's Oct. 6 letter to the editor comments about the Blue Pheasant. It definitely appears that somebody wants to shut it down. The Pheasant not only serves great food but also provides a place to dance and socialize with friends—one of the few such establishments in this area.

The fact that it's been in business for 30 years ought to count for something to a city council that claims to support small business.

Instead of suing the Pheasant, the council should find a way to build some flexibility and common sense into its lease agreement. It would be a real shame if a few vocal opponents succeed in hanging a closed sign on this Cupertino tradition.

I urge the city council not to allow that to happen.

Marcie Lynn Smith

Cupertino

Initiatives will mean costly,
unintended consequences

The three initiatives [proposed by the Concerned Citizens of Cupertino] propose to make Cupertino safe from urbanization. Many good ideas have unintended consequences that may be worse than the good they purport to do.

Recent stories in the Cupertino Courier and the San Jose Mercury News talked about the loss of property tax revenue for the Fremont Union High School District that resulted in a 4.9 percent cut in salaries. According to an analysis by Bay Area Economics, the unintended consequences of these initiatives will be a financial disaster with a loss of revenue of up to $10,000 per new student for the district.

FUHSD is a basic aid district: that means all of their revenue comes from local property taxes, unlike the Cupertino Union School District, whose revenue is allocated from the state of California.

The initiatives support low-density housing over commercial. Low-density housing means more students per home. It is estimated that an additional 166 students would enroll in the FUHSD, which would increase the already capacity shortage to 479 spaces. So, another unintended consequence for FUHSD would be to suffer further cuts in staffing and programs. Is this what we want for one of the finest high school districts in California? I think not.

Before voting on these initiatives, I urge you to consider the fate of the FUHSD's programs. These excellent schools are what help to make Cupertino property values what they are.

Think twice about the unintended consequences, and vote no.

Harvey Barnett

Retired Director of Technology

Cupertino Union School District

Could the state's sample ballot
really mean what it states?

I am sure I do not understand the text of the Sample Ballot sent out by the state for Measure L.

From what I read, it says that if I own 100 apartments in Cupertino, the occupants of which have 246 kids in the schools, that I would pay only $98 and the occupants zero. Surely I did not read the words right. Talk about freeloading on the backs of ...

Also, it says, "with an exemption for 'seniors'" but does not define or even reference a definition of a senior. Given that I am senior to all those older than the age of 25, I must assume that I am exempt and that those of lesser age must pay.

The "Complete Text of Measure L" as given in the Sample Ballot clearly indicates the problem with the schools in not just money but basic English education of the adults that run the schools.

William D. Evans

Cupertino

Pheasant management
is most responsible

I noticed in the Oct. 6 issue of the Courier that Jim Carlisle's letter suggests someone is trying to stick it to the Blue Pheasant. I heartily agree; the place has never been under more responsible management. And our experience goes back to when my 50-year-old kids were in Jollyman.

In those days, before there were booths in the main dining room and the disc jockey worked from the bay window at the west end of the dance floor, some hanky-panky did occasionally occur, according to the police blotter.

But the rumors being spread nowadays are not supported by the police blotter. Those spreading these unsupported and hence libelous rumors ought to be your targets.

R.A. Blais

Cupertino

Schools will suffer great
loss if L and O don't pass

I am a teacher at Monta Vista High School in the Fremont Union High School District. I am concerned that the level of information surrounding measures L and O is sparse. I am not sure if residents truly understand the ramifications on the schools in Cupertino if these measures do not pass.

We are coming out of a recession. Property, business and local sales taxes are not what they used to be, and our district survives solely on this source of funding to pay for the high school education of Cupertino's children.

Our schools have endured reduction of staffing both in and out of the classroom so that students aren't getting the support they need and deserve. We have weathered program cuts to the point where some students cannot enroll in classes that they want. We have survived salary rollbacks, instructional material budgets being frozen, classes being eliminated, and the list goes on.

All of this lead to one conclusion: our children aren't getting the experience that they should be getting in high school.

But nothing can prepare us for the devastation that we will see next school year if measures L and O do not pass. Electives (like music business and drama) may be eliminated or significantly reduced. Students may only be allowed to take six or even five classes, reducing their opportunities for instruction. Advanced placement programs could disappear. A virtual catastrophe is waiting for us around the corner, and there is only one thing that can stop it—voting in favor of measures L and O.

From what I understand, nothing is exempt from the chopping block. The more we cut, the less our kids walk away with; the lower they perform. Some of you in Cupertino enjoy high property values. You get the prices for the homes in your neighborhoods largely because of the performance and desirability of the schools. Is $98 per house worth it for you to keep your property values where they are and ensure them to continue to go higher? What amount is too high?

We need this as much as you do to ensure the quality of instruction at our schools remain at a high level and our schools continue to stay strong for years to come.

I am encouraging you to get out and vote in favor of measures L and O.

Jonathan Fey

Director of Instrumental Music

Monta Vista High School

Diwali stirs memories
of festivals back home

Enveloped in an aura of joy and fervor, the Diwali Mela, a festival of light held in the Quinlan Center, was a grand success. The hall reverberated with Indian music and dance on Oct. 3. The lavishly dressed ladies in their latest fashion, colorful churidars, crowded mostly at the mehandi stall and at the palmists, who wore dotted red Rajesthani turbans.

The artistic, flower-shaped Rangoli, designed with yellow and orange lentils, was indeed eye captivating. Our taste buds were also taken care of, by the hot and spicy samosas and bhelpuries.

I would like to give a thumbs up, to those who organized it and to the dedicated volunteers who worked smilingly, to brighten our day and help our nostalgia subside for the festivals we miss because we are many miles away from our country.

Shashi Nagendra

Cupertino