 |
|
|
|
|
Letters
Eucalyptus trees pose a danger to students
I am writing to express my concern about the safety of my two sons who are students at Saratoga School on Oak Street. As your paper reported, recently a large eucalyptus tree toppled at the school. One of our sons is in kindergarten, and his class is within feet of the fallen tree. If he had been in the classroom when the tree fell and if the tree had fallen on the classroom, I am sure that the result would have been catastrophic.
Large eucalyptus trees remain on or adjacent to the school grounds. If any one of them were to fall, children could be seriously harmed or killed. For the safety of the children, the trees should be cut down.
I have heard that topping has been suggested as an alternative. This would be inadequate. It does not take an arborist to understand that these massive trees, with their shallow root systems, are vulnerable to falling, no matter how well-trimmed they are. The slope of the land the trees are on, the effect of construction on the integrity of the trees' root systems, the softness of the ground from rain or underground water, the movement of the earth in an earthquake-prone region, the movement of the air-- even a gentle breeze --and the immensity of the trees could all conspire to cause a catastrophe.
The eucalyptus trees in question are accidents-- disasters --waiting to happen! I am as much in favor of preserving nature as those on the other side of this debate, but not when it means gambling with children's lives.
I ask for the support of the community in urging the school district to move forward with having the trees cut down. Saratoga School is on Oak Street: What about planting oak trees in their place?
JoAnne Goldsmith
Oak Street
The school board voted to remove the tree. See story.
School district's report left many things out
In the mail delivered on Nov. 29 came a "Report to the Community" from the Saratoga Union School District on the progress of its Measure D modernization project. The district reported how proud it is of what it has accomplished with Measure D funds and hoped we will share its pride.
The district did disclose, however, that the taxpayers will have to provide additional funds to complete the project. Perhaps we taxpayers should take a moment to consider just how proud those involved with this project deserve to be.
The voters who approved Measure D in a special election in June 1997 based their approval upon comprehensive itemizations of just how the funds would be spent. The district distributed these lists during the election campaign and also included a list in the voters information pamphlet, providing necessary amplification of the brief wording permitted in the measure itself. These lists unambiguously restricted the use of Measure D funds to renovating and modernizing existing facilities and building new classrooms. With that in mind, let us consider the following questions:
* Hasn't the district used Measure D funds to build new administration buildings and new cafeteria/assembly buildings and to relocate daycare facilities even though the voters clearly did not authorize that Measure D funds could be used for these expensive items?
* Didn't the district fail to disclose to the voters before the election that, as has been discovered from its master plan documents and has subsequently been publicly admitted, the district had planned to use Measure D funds for these purposes all along?
* Did the district, as has long been rumored, choose not to disclose these intentions before the election for fear the voters would not approve the bond measure if they knew that these costly items with such little educational value were to be included?
* Didn't the district start these unauthorized construction activities at Argonaut and Foothill well after becoming aware that it would not have sufficient funds to accomplish what the voters had authorized unless it dropped this unauthorized construction, which it apparently chose not to do?
* Didn't the district demolish an entirely serviceable cafeteria/assembly building at Argonaut knowing full well that it did not have the funds to replace it without sacrificing items the voters had authorized, which it apparently has chosen to do?
* Has the district chosen to sacrifice items the voters had authorized in favor of unauthorized ones because it thinks the voters are more apt to approve a new bond measure to complete those items than one to build new administration buildings and new cafeteria/assembly buildings and to relocate daycare facilities?
* Hasn't the bond oversight committee, which was formed by the district purportedly to assure that Measure D funds are being spent as the voters had authorized, failed to acknowledge and prevent these unauthorized expenditures even though they were repeatedly brought to the attention of the committee?
* Doesn't it stand to reason that it is mostly because of these large unauthorized expenditures that the district does not have sufficient funds to complete the modernization project that was authorized by the voters?
* Wouldn't it be just a simple matter of comparing the amount of unauthorized expenditures to the amount needed to complete the authorized project if the district or an auditor would make the numbers available?
* Isn't it apparent that the district, having already used taxpayer funds to poll voter acceptance, is now planning to submit a new bond measure to the voters for funds to overcome a shortage that it appears the district itself has created, in major part, by unauthorized expenditures?
Who would condone actions such as these, much less take pride in them? Certainly not this taxpayer.
Wesley I. Ferguson
Chateau Drive
Flag proposal not really controversial
It is surprising that the proposal to place the American flag in the classroom of the West Valley-Mission Community College District has become a controversy.
Trustees Chris Constantin and Frank Jewett, at the board meeting at which the proposal was made, correctly pointed out that the American flag facilitates civics education for our students. It reflects liberty and values that Americans cherish.
Whose values? And what values, you might ask. Let's start with those values found in the document that each elected trustee raised his or her right hand and avowed to uphold--the values contained in the Constitution of the United States.
Then there are also the personal values as expressed by the actions of genuine American heroes. Nicole Miller is a courageous example of such valor. Nicole, a West Valley College student, perished with her fellow passengers when hijacked Flight 93 crashed in Pennsylvania on Sept. 11. The values of these brave people motivated them to confront their captors, almost certainly saving the lives of countless others. To honor Nicole would be reason enough to post the American flag in every classroom of our two colleges.
Here's the rub. Liberty is not self-sustaining. It will only prevail if a citizenry, educated as to its benefits and obligations, can pass on these concepts to the next generation of free citizens. It has been my observation, working within our college system, that we have a lot of catching up to do. The demonstration at our college board meeting opposing the hanging of the American flag in our classrooms should confirm our resolve for the need to have it there.
Jefferson said that the understanding of liberty, the espousal of liberty, is not a private matter; that the discussion of it belongs in the public square. What better public square than our public college classrooms? Our emblem, the American flag, is integral to that process.
Many of our students are Saratoga residents. Please urge the members of the board of trustees of the West Valley and Mission College District to approve the placement and maintenance of the American flag in the classrooms of the district. We are community colleges, and I ask the folks in the community of Saratoga to help us improve education and foster civic understanding for an America that will have a future that is free.
Don Wolfe
Trustee, West Valley-Mission College District
The fire station debacle could have been avoided
The letter in the Oct. 31 issue of the Saratoga News from former Saratoga Fire District Commissioner Henry Clarke makes it clear how he and other SFD officials blew hundreds of thousands of dollars and 18 months in producing a fire station design that can never be built because it is grossly out of compliance with the city's zoning ordinance.
Mr. Clarke said, "As I understand our current building codes, the replacement of one facility with another of the same kind--i.e., fire station replacing fire station--particularly in this case, does not require variances." Mr. Clarke's "understanding" has no basis in fact or law. Does Mr. Clarke believe there are no zoning regulations for new home construction as long as it is house replacing house? SFD is subject to the same regulations as everyone else--as anyone can readily verify by checking the city's zoning ordinance, or by asking any of the senior members of the city's planning staff. At the initial meeting of the "oversight committee" for Measure F, the first question that I asked Fire Chief Kraule and SFD Commissioner Geddes was whether or not their design would require any variances, and they assured me extensively that it would not. It did not occur to me at that time that they might not be telling the truth. It was not until more than a year later, late in the city's design review process, that I learned that the design actually required an array of extreme variances.
Shortly after the bond measure passed, Mr. Kraule and SFD Commissioners Egan and Geddes began telling city officials and the public that SFD was exempt from the city's authority--and that they were voluntarily submitting their design to the city only as a courtesy. Once again, it did not initially occur to me or apparently to anyone else that SFD officials might not be telling the truth on a matter of such importance. As a result city officials were very accommodating to SFD, believing that if they were to ask SFD to make design changes that they didn't want to make then SFD could simply ignore the city and do as they wished. However, about a year later an authoritative legal analysis by the city attorney proved that there was no basis for SFD's claim of exemption. Late in the design review process Mr. Kraule and Mr. Egan made an additional series of false statements to city officials.
I don't question that Mr. Clarke believed Mr. Kraule's "no variances" and "we're exempt" stories. Only Mr. Kraule, Mr. Geddes and Mr. Egan know whether the stories were false when they began propagating them. It is inescapably true, however, that all of the SFD officials involved had a duty to take all reasonable measures to assure that what they were saying was true--and they didn't do that. If SFD officials had been truthful and if they had allowed actual citizen oversight--as required by Measure F--then the fire station debacle would never have occurred.
Don Whetstone
Vickery Avenue
History museum needs docents to help a bit
How uncommonly rewarding, this once-a-month pastime! And what an eminently satisfying three afternoon hours spent volunteering as a docent at the Saratoga Historical Foundation Museum. Not to mention, too, how helpful and community-oriented an activity.
All of this being so, I find it's surprising--and, to boot, a bit disturbing--that an insufficient number of Saratogans appear to be aware of (or respondent to) this need.
Thus this letter: a call for all in our community who can spare three hours, 1 to 4 p.m. on any one Friday, Saturday or Sunday roughly every four or five weeks "docenting" at the museum. Or, for that matter, perhaps helping out in our computerizing research-and-filing projects. Or maybe simply helping us out with this or that task (helping, for instance, to arrange exhibits--or simply sweeping the floor).
I, along with a dozen or so others, have been doing just this for some years. Collectively and individually, we have relished these activities. So, too, I guarantee, would you. It is an effortless task--greeting visitors (many of them children), distributing literature, explaining our sizeable collection of exhibits and perhaps running our short video presentation.
Tentatively interested? Please phone the museum at 408.867.4311.
Hal Hodges
Board of Directors
Saratoga Historical Foundation
|
|
|
|
Saratoga, California Since 1955
