Original point was lost in noise, editor's translation
My letter on Moffett Field use (The Sun, Feb. 7) obviously touched on a sore nerve for Ms. Lois Long (The Sun, Feb. 14) and probably a few others. I say "obviously," because I was called crazy, and accused of being hearing impaired, working for the city of San Jose or smoking something funny.
Unfortunately, she could not read the letter I originally sent to The Sun, because the one printed had been edited.
My original letter referenced a letter printed in the San Jose Mercury News from a Sunnyvale resident advocating the use of Moffett for cargo aircraft. The tone of my letter is a little different when presented without the editing.
Be that as it may, my main point is lost in the noise (no pun intended) of rhetoric and anger. I have worked in and with the federal government. The government (NASA included) as an entity rarely, if ever, takes a community concern to heart in deciding the use of their property. Ms. Long found this out in her dealings with a Moffett community affairs officer some years ago.
I am not sure, nor do I think our Sunnyvale City Council knows, just who/what agency will make the final decision on Moffett; whether it stays as is, is totally closed or gets more air traffic. If we are only going to speak out against the use of Moffett to solve air traffic problems, we may get lost in some shuffle. I cannot argue with Ms. Long about all the things she learned about noise and air traffic over the last 22 years.
My basic point is still that we, as a city, must be proactive and produce a battle plan, if you will, on what we can do and what we might do under certain circumstances. In my opinion, allowing limited cargo flights into Moffett represents the camel's nose in the tent, with much more to follow. Perhaps my premise that the government will not just give Moffett away, or that whoever gets it will not tear up the runways, is flawed.
Unfortunately, those runways are just too inviting. Thus, we ought to have some backup strategies/plans. The international terminal idea is/was just that--an idea that ought to be looked at among others. I believe that the field will continue to have air traffic; it is just a question of whose and how much, and what is the good and bad of each alternative (if we have any).
J. Creighton Bricker
Lennox Court
Mr. Bricker's original letter was edited for length and to avoid confusing readers. We regret if our attempts backfired. --Editor
This article appeared in the Sunnyvale Sun, February 28, 1996.
©1996 Metro Publishing, Inc. All rights reserved.