I am happy to be a parent with children in the Cupertino Union School District. I see a need for improvement, and I believe that the ombudsman idea would fulfill that need. Improvement does not mean we are doing things bad but that there is room to do things better. I believe people need to understand the role such a person would have in assisting parents.

An ombudsman is a neutral and knowledgeable mediator who facilitates open communication in resolving issues.

An unbiased ombudsman would benefit our school district and the entire county of 33 school districts. Within our district, there are currently some governance issues at a local elementary school.

These issues are not fully representative of the school district at large, but if there were an ombudsman in place, there would be clear documentation of the previous uniform complaints filed against the administrator, and courtroom resolutions would not be necessary with parents bearing inordinate lawyers fees.

I am pleased to hear that many parents have had wonderful experiences with the district and that the district is responsive and open to soliciting input. In general the district handles simple problems well.

I would like to see the district board agendize for action that delegations be moved to the beginning of the board meetings. This would facilitate the sharing of community input.

I would like to see a complete list of all current committee members (e.g., facilities, budget advisory committee, finance, district advisory committee and others) be made public. I would like information as to their term limits and the process by which one may apply.

It is not for failure to apply for these volunteer positions but for lack of public information and opportunity that some of us have been denied involvement.

Many of these committees have an overlap of committee members who are appointed by the district with no term limits.

When this information is made public, we will all better understand the frustrations of community members who are actively trying to work with the district in bringing about improvements.

The idea of an ombudsman is a start and other ideas can be generated from that.

Previous letters to the editor in the Courier demonstrate a failure to examine the issues at hand and a tendency to attack the messenger.

Yes, it is important to work together, but we must all do so in a professional manner.

Lynette Lee Eng

Cupertino

Two letter writers well-
qualified to teach civics

Kudos to Jim Carlisle who wrote in his letter, "Is there anyone out there who has any sense left?" and Tricia Smart, who wrote, "We should base civil law on morality, not religion." These two letters in the March 2 Cupertino Courier show that both writers are well-qualified to teach at least a twelfth-grade class in U.S. government (civics).

The only point on which I would take exception with Smart is that most of common law is based on property rights: "Protect the barons from the peasants and protect the king from everybody else," not morality (or fairness) of any kind. Otherwise, she is right-on in her understanding of the First Amendment regarding separation of church and state, unlike far too many of my Christian brothers and sisters, regardless of their particular religious persuasion.

F.Vernon Hudnut

Cupertino

Perkins advice on permits goes a little over the top

I usually agree with what Broderick Perkins has to say, but his Feb. 23 column about building permits for do-it-yourself projects around the house seemed to go over the top.

I will agree that if you are adding on a room to your house or undertaking any other large project like that, a permit would be necessary. But in general, the cost, time and hassle of having to get the city to sign off on those projects is unnecessary.

Now I am no Bob Villa or even Bob the Builder, for that matter, and my tool box is of the very basic variety. But I have done some modest projects around my house. And if we are to take Perkins at face value he is saying that each of these projects required a city permit?

Perkins' example of installing a dimmer switch needing a permit is an excellent example. I may get a visit from a building inspector for admitting this, but I have willfully flaunted the permit process and installed a dimmer switch in my house without having the city's prior approval or a follow-up inspection.

The switch cost something in the neighborhood of $2; electrical tape was probably another dollar, and the reference book from Home Depot on how to work with electricity was about $10. (I have done wiring work before, but most of it was in my seventh-grade woodshop class while building a lamp.)

I admit I was a little worried about not getting the wires insulated correctly and burning down my house, but by following the instructions, the switch is now correctly installed and works great.

To follow Perkins' advice, I would have had to submit a written description about the project to get a permit. This would halt every weekend home improvement project in the city.

This is how most home-improvemnt projects happen: you think, "You know, the light in this room is too bright sometimes. Things sure would be a lot better if this room had a dimmer switch. I know! I'll run down to the hardware store, buy a dimmer switch and install it."

My sense is, if I had actually brought to the city permit office a written plan to install a dimmer switch, I would have been laughed out of the office.

While most of the information Perkins has offered in his column is worth paying attention to, I am going to pass on this last bit of advice.

But when it's time to build that rec room I've always wanted, maybe I'll actually break down and get a permit.

Wynton Parker

San Jose