By F. L. Stutzman
In response to Peter Hero's clarification of facts relating to the Nelson Gardens acquisition by the Community Foundation (Jan. 1, Saratoga News), some reclarification is important.
Frank Nelson originally wanted his 5.1-acre orchard to remain as a park and to have it dedicated to his wife. This was the situation at the time that it was transferred to the California Nature Conservancy. His wife passed away, and he remarried. The second Mrs. Nelson wanted none of this to come about, and prior to the message taped to the City Council in January of 1988, in which he stated his desire to sell the property to increase charitable contributions, Frank Nelson had been declared legally incompetent by his family.
A visit to San Francisco by members of the Saratoga City Council was made in 1988, but Mrs. Nelson refused to permit them to see or visit with Frank Nelson.
Mr. Hero also stated that there was an extensive and open public process, including public hearings and the opportunity for other interested parties to make an offer on the land. This is indeed new and interesting information, as the first awareness of these proceedings made known to the Friends of the Nelson Garden Foundation, a most interested party, was the announcement that a deal had been arranged between the City Council and the Community Foundation (in closed session) for the city to cancel the Williamson Act in exchange for a lump sum payment of $560,000 to the city. The only term that comes to mind for such an act is an act of bribery. The City Council accepted.
A very minimal benefit will ever be realized by Saratoga for the loss of this potential park. The money contributed by the Foundation is, in reality, minimal, and will soon dissipate, leaving Saratoga with nine more unaesthetic large houses on what could have remained a beautiful hillside.
The legal aspect of this drama also was interesting. When heard by the court and with an opinion rendered three months after the hearing, thus giving the builders more than adequate time to destroy the orchard, no consideration was given to the valid arguments presented by the legal counsel representing the Friends of Nelson Gardens.
The Community Foundation has assets of $57 million, and when it presented its case before the presiding judge, the board of 23 members included the president of the Santa Clara County Bar Association and two other prominent attorneys, plus numerous officers of prestigious local corporations. The presiding judge had been employed by the city of San Jose prior to his judicial appointment, at a time when the city of San Jose was very pro-development.
When one of the attorneys acting on behalf of the Community Foundation was later questioned about this case, he commented, knowing nothing of the background of the Nelson Gardens, explaining that he was a "hired gun."
Our present system of justice is better than determining guilt or innocence by walking over a bed of hot coals, but it still has a long way to go.
Appealing this ruling was an option, but it would have required posting a $100,000 bond, plus other potentially significant costs--money which the Friends of Nelson Gardens did not have. Justice in this case came at too high a price.
This has been a costly, time-consuming eight-year effort. It has been a learning experience and has made me realize that all so-called charitable institutions have their own definition of charity. I'm certainly aware that I shall never leave any part of my estate to the Santa Clara Community Foundation.
They may be interested in dispensing funds to multiple organizations, but their interest in the environment would seem minimal. This is reminiscent of the philosophy that the only value a tree has is its conversion into lumber.
Dr. Stutzman is a former Saratoga City Council member, serving 1988-92.
This article appeared in the Saratoga News, January 8, 1997.
©1997 Metro Publishing, Inc. All rights reserved.