Saratoga News

LETTERS

Officials have stuck to the original plan

As a lifelong resident of this community, interested in its welfare, development and history, I must express my concern about and opposition to Measure G on the Saratoga ballot this month.

In the years since incorporation, the elected officials governing Saratoga have followed the original criteria of a low-density, very desirable community to live in, rural by comparison to nearby municipalities. It is no way rural by the standards we had when my brothers and I were growing up here. But if it were, where would our present neighbors be?

Maintaining this desirable environment has been accomplished by the dedication and actions of thoughtful, concerned elected officials who have accepted their responsibilities, taking lots of heat or receiving accolades upon occasion. Democratic government is based on compromise.

The board of the League of Women Voters has put it best:

"Representative government is the cornerstone of our American system, and Measure G would remove some of the most important decisions on legislation of elective officials and substitute a lengthy, cumbersome process of citywide elections every time such an issue arises.

I urge Saratoga voters to consider this when they cast their ballots.

Louise Garrod Cooper

Saratoga Citizen of the Year 1989,
Former member, Los Gatos- Saratoga High School
District Board of Trustees

Passing Measure G won't solve problems

It may help save some open space in the short term if we vote yes, but the answer to our problems isn't passing Measure G. If there is a problem with the decisions made by the city, then maybe people should stop complaining and think a little more carefully come the next City Council election. If G is passed, average citizens would be voting on some pretty technical proposals, and things would be passed more slowly. Some of these items are pages and pages long. The job of councilmembers is to review these things. Most average people won't be able to make an educated decision and probably wouldn't have the time to look into technicalities.

The No on G campaign is too overhyped, and I don't completely agree with their campaign for a "no," but their ideals are correct. Citizens have the right to complain when they don't agree with a council decision, but people often aren't considering their votes carefully enough during elections for officials.

Wayne Kao

Howen Drive, via Internet

Koppel the best for county supervisor

I am endorsing Barbara Koppel for the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors Fifth District race. As a member of Saratoga's City Council, I have had the privilege of working with Barbara on a number of issues over the past four years. I am consistently impressed with her ability to articulate and address the important regional issues that confront our county.

In particular, Barbara chaired the 1994 campaign to return our libraries to full staffing and materials budgets. Voters in this county overwhelmingly supported Measure A. I worked closely with her on that effort and know that her dedication and enthusiasm were a large part of the success of that campaign.

During her eight years on Cupertino's council, she led the effort for hillside preservation in that community. Her leadership brought Cupertino into the Highway 85 noise mitigation issue so important to Saratogans. Barbara also served as president of the Santa Clara County Cities Association, an organization of councilmembers from all cities in our county. She was uniquely able to focus on the need for regional cooperation and consensus so important to us all; she recognized that, as elected officials, we must work together for the benefit of all.

Barbara is a professional, well-informed woman who can make solid, unbiased decisions in our behalf. She is the best candidate for county supervisor. Please join me in voting for Barbara Koppel on Tuesday, March 26.

Ann Marie Burger

Saratoga City Council member

Seniors weren't told the complete truth

I am a very senior, senior citizen and therefore, like many other seniors, wonder why the Saratoga Area Senior Coordinating Council has chosen to oppose Measure G.

This apparently was done by the board without participation of the members. Certainly the members were not told that Measure G would protect the value of their homes, which for many of them is their major financial asset.

They doubtless were not told that it would preserve their environment, which they should be able to enjoy for their remaining time in Saratoga. No point was made that if Measure G fails, our streets will become even more congested, safety in neighborhoods will decrease, and the city soon will have little of the open space still remaining.

Seniors were told that they would be deprived of senior housing in Saratoga. This is not true. They made a major point of the International Order of Odd Fellows being denied the right to expand, thus denying them access.

The IOOF project has been accepted by the city. It is no longer an issue. The seniors probably were not told that the obligation of the IOOF is first and foremost to its members. If a vacancy were available, a mere 30-day window would be opened to Saratogans. How many people could sell their homes and move in a 30-day period? The approval with the IOOF is not cast in concrete and could conceivably be changed in the future, excluding all nonmembers.

Why then did the board take a negative stand? Could it be that some members of the board also have affiliations with other political organizations in Saratoga, such as the Good Government Group, the League of Women Voters, and the Board of Realtors, whose stand on this issue is motivated more by control than by senior benevolence?

Seniors should be given the facts, not fabrications. Then let them make their own decisions. The seniors can think for themselves.

It is unfair to politicize the SASCC to win these votes by fear and intimidation. It would also appear to be an unwise policy with an organization which utilizes facilities belonging to all Saratogans, staffed in part by city employees and partially subsidized by Saratoga taxpayer funds.

F.L. Stutzman

Park Drive

Why do we listen to these people?

It wasn't much of a surprise when City Attorney Michael Riback teamed up with the City Council to oppose Measure G. What is surprising is that anyone (especially the City Council) would listen to him! The city attorney's office nodded while the council ignored pollution guidelines for Saratoga Creek.

The council has been repeatedly sued for flaunting the Williamson Act, and Riback's office was mute on the subject of imposing a utilities tax without voter approval. (Cautiously, the council is backing down on the utilities tax.) By disregarding the law, the council keeps piling up legal bills, creating more work for Mr. Riback, and when it gets sued, members blame the voters.

Is the council any more reliable when it comes to property rights? When I read it, Measure G clearly stated that it does not "affect the city's existing regulations that authorize the creation of second dwelling units." It said nothing about changing the way remodeling projects are reviewed and approved.

It seems to add an important property right: to keep the kind of neighborhood a property owner and his family liked so much when they spent their good money to move here. The right is not secure as long as the council can rezone adjacent property for high-density developments. Measure G is not about additions to homes. It is about zoning, and that is what the council does not want Saratogans to understand.

George Kirk

La Paloma Avenue

Chalk up another Scotland Drive crash

Well, it happened, again! A three-car accident at the intersection of Saratoga Avenue and Scotland Drive yesterday around 8 a.m. Just as one of your letters to the editor predicted. I don't know the extent of injuries to the drivers, but judging from the condition of the crushed cars, I'm sure that someone must have been seriously hurt.

In order to turn left onto Saratoga Avenue from Scotland Drive, you have to cross three lanes of southbound traffic. Two lanes are left-turn lanes for Fruitvale Avenue, and one lane is a through lane for traffic continuing on Saratoga Avenue. Cars in the left-turn lanes may be stopped while the light is red, keeping the intersection clear; however, cars in the through lane have a green light and speed through. A car stopped on Scotland Drive cannot see all three lanes.

Now that the 16 homes on Lisa Marie Court are nearing completion, there will be additional cars crossing Saratoga Avenue to go down Scotland Drive. This means that there could be as many as five cars in that intersection at the same time.

What is the city of Saratoga waiting for? A fatality? Do they know that this is a heavily traveled route for school children going to Argonaut Elementary and Redwood Middle School?

I avoid the Scotland Drive-Saratoga Avenue intersection when possible because I do not want to be the next statistic, either injured or killed.

This is no longer an accident waiting to happen. It is much more serious. Is someone going to do something about this before it is too late?

Robert A. DeNike

BOB626GOLF@aol.com

SASCC doesn't speak for us

This letter was sent to the president and board of directors of the Saratoga Area Senior Coordinating Council, which last week published a column in its newsletter stating that the organization is officially opposed to Measure G. --Editor

You and your board of directors should be ashamed of politicizing this senior organization. We suspect this self-serving action was taken without the full consensus of the membership.

Seniors also happen to be neighbors and have other priorities such as preserving the residential quality of our Saratoga neighborhoods. Perhaps you and your board don't care if a Home Depot, motel or other high-density project is built in our neighborhoods, but we do!

Please cancel our membership and remove our names from your mailing list!

At our March homeowners' meeting, I plan to address your ill-advised action and encourage our members to withdraw financial support from your organization.

Dan Hanley Bartlett

Kosich Drive

Why League skipped Measure G debate

I am appalled that SONIC [Save Our Neighborhoods Initiative Committee] would advertise my participation in a forum before I even received an invitation. The letter asking me to participate was dated Feb. 28, which was coincidentally also the deadline for the March 6 issue of the Saratoga News.

I received the letter March 1 and immediately called Jim Shaw to ask for details of the forum, which I received by letter March 4. The League is unwilling to participate because, as outlined by Jim Shaw's letter dated March 3, the proponents of Measure G had unilaterally chosen the time, date, format, proponent-biased moderator and specific opposition speakers.

The only thing not decided is the outcome, although I may read that in the March 13 issue of the Saratoga News.

By contrast, when the League is sponsoring a forum, we follow guidelines that maintain impartiality for the benefit of both sides. We provide a moderator with an impartial background who lives outside the area affected by the debate. Both sides are contacted before the announcement to assure that appropriate representatives of their own choosing can be available at an agreed-to date and time. None of these simple steps were taken, and as a result, an appropriate speaker for the League was not available. I advised Mr. Shaw accordingly by letter on March 5.

Candace Pratt

Co-president, League of
Women Voters of Los Gatos-
Saratoga-Monte Sereno

Measure G foes resort to 'big lie'

Mayor Jacobs and the people against Measure G are resorting to a time-honored political strategy: the big lie. They believe that if they repeat something often enough and loud enough, people will lose sight of the fact that it is untrue.

In this case, the big lie is their repeated assertion that Measure G will change current city procedures for approving home additions, swimming pools, remodeling or similar projects. That is of course absurd! Nothing in Measure G would change or affect the way in which the city has been handling home additions, pools, patios or remodeling projects. Measure G even provides [section 1.D] that it will "not affect the city's existing regulations that authorize the creation of second dwelling (granny) units."

I hope that Saratogans will examine the facts and not be swayed by what is, after all, just a lie, no matter how often or how loudly it is repeated.

Willem Kohler

Former mayor,
Via Regina

Saratogans too smart to be hoodwinked

I hadn't intended to write re the upcoming election. The rhetoric that appeared in the Letters section last week, however, reminded me of comments about Measure G I'd like to share with you and your readers.

One of my neighbors was as thoroughly shocked as Julie O'Connor ("Endorsement list not to be trusted," March 6) when she, too, learned her name had appeared in the No on G ad. "I didn't give my permission to do that!" she said.

I mentioned to another neighbor that one of the main arguments being used against the measure was that we should trust our City Council, since they had promised to preserve our neighborhoods. We live on a relatively steep hill, and I was afraid he might lose his balance, because he was laughing so hard.

The very most interesting comment came from my next-door neighbor when I asked him to sign the initiative petition. He said, "I just have a couple of questions, but the primary one is, 'Why have you limited the duration to 30 years?' "

I truly feel that most Saratogans, especially those who have seen the unfortunate changes in the city, are much too intelligent to be hoodwinked by the pap that has been circulated. I think most of us will ask ourselves just why we moved here--and find that Measure G will restore adherence to a sensible growth policy.

Dora Grens

Old Oak Way

Support seniors: vote no on G

As a member of the advisory board to the Santa Clara County Council on Aging and the Santa Clara County Senior Care Commission, I have become more aware of the many problems and needs of the elderly.

Failing health and possibly limited financial resources may result in fewer choices for seniors when making changes in their living arrangements.

This is expected to become an increasing problem with the projected high percent increase in the senior population each year. Seniors may have difficulty finding affordable housing which provides security as well as adequate facilities for special health needs.

The plans for expansion of the Odd Fellows Home will give Saratoga seniors another option for housing. A no vote on Measure G will allow some guarantee this choice will be available when and if it is needed and wanted by a senior citizen.

Norma Weizel

Saratoga liaison, Council on Aging

Initiative is not a political vendetta

The Commentary "Look at who's behind Measure G," by Ronald E. Cali, which appeared in the March 6 edition of the Saratoga News, zeroes in on three or four individual supporters of Measure G, attributing to them a "back door power grab" by "people acting like spoiled children who have not gotten their way."

Please, let's keep in mind the thousands of Saratogans who committed to put Measure G on the ballot and who enthusiastically support the concept of direct citizen oversight of the city's most precious resources, our low-density residential areas and the remaining outdoor recreation land.

Measure G is not a political vendetta. Measure G springs from a desire to provide strong guidance and help to this City Council, as well as future councils. It reduces to one question: whether the voters of Saratoga want this council and future councils to validate proposed increases in land-use density by a vote of the people.

I can only hope the grassroots support for the idea behind Measure G remains steadfast as bombast fills the air.

James Shaw

Kosich Drive
JIMBOSHAW@aol.com