Willow Glen Resident

Letters & Opinions

Speak Out

Ames doesn't advocate any kind of boycott

I'd like to make a correction to the article on sycamore trees in the Jan. 26 edition of The Willow Glen Resident: I did not say a thing about a boycott, nor do I advocate one.

I definitely do not condone any reprisal against anyone, landowner or building contractor. On the morning of the Jan. 13, with the chainsaws buzzing, I walked over to the landowner, introduced myself, said "welcome to the neighborhood," shook hands, and only then did we engage in a discussion about trees. As far as I can recall, there were no discussions about the building contractor, either in person or later on the eList, until after the placement of the rather large banners on the site. (And even then the discussion was more about the size of the banners, and the cluelessness of the person displaying them than of the company itself.)

The J. Barnes Company appears to have done an excellent job this past year at transforming a rather strange building on the next-door property into a handsome house. I hope, once all the permits are straightened out, that it will construct a suitable house on the "sycamore tree lot" as well, and that it will be appropriately sized for the lot and will fit into the character of the neighborhood. And I hope whoever eventually lives in that house will feel welcomed into the community.

Nonetheless, 'someone' arranged to have the trees removed, and apparently that person knew to do it on a Saturday when code enforcement was not available. We should leave it to code enforcement, the city attorney and the San Jose Police to determine who did what, and what the appropriate follow-up measures should be.

Developers and tree-removal companies have for a long time apparently viewed tree preservation rules and the permit process as just minor inconveniences, and that needs to change. It's true that not every tree is worth saving and not every development is bad. But not every tree is expendable in the name of development, either. There is a process, called "planning" that balances trees and buildings and property rights vs. community impact. The planning process often can find solutions that benefit all parties, and, if not, then there is an appeals process up to the city council, which has final say. The removal of those sycamore trees served as a wake-up call, pointing out holes in the code enforcement process: a Saturday morning chainsaw can bypass planning, code enforcement, the welfare of the community, and the city council. With the proposed new ordinances and updated police response policies, hopefully now the process will be improved.

Lawrence Ames

Willow Street

Kudos to San Jose
on its budget forum

On Jan. 20, I attended a meeting about neighborhood budget priorities at San Jose City Hall ("City inaugural budget forum gets bigger public draw than expected, Jan. 26").

In attendance were Mayor Chuck Reed and about 100 leaders from community associations across the city. We were subjected to about four hours of intense brain- storming by a high-energy facilitator accompanied by two scribes, who recorded everything that was said on flip charts.

The subjects were, "What is right about San Jose?" "What is wrong with San Jose?" and "Identify the three year goals for the city." Participants were asked to vote on the five most important goals and then state the actions to reach these goals.

I thought bringing together 100 community leaders from across the city was brilliant. What better group to hear from than the people who are aware and concerned about their local community problems. I heard things that we usually are not concerned with in San Jose, such as rats and roaches, abandoned cars, gangs, violence, lack of police protection, lack of jobs and lack of neighborhood retail stores.

It was interesting that the No. 1 complaint was lack of code enforcement, which was a problem for about one-third of the participants. The other four most important goals were: increase the number of jobs in the city; provide full funding for parks, community centers and libraries.; improve community policing and improve General Fund revenue.

On Feb. 13, a hearing on this subject will be held by the city council. On Feb. 20, the mayor, city council and key staff members will retreat to consider a course of action toward meeting these goals.

Bob Boydston

San Jose

Trees, trees, trees:
Stop all the insanity

Can we have some sanity about the city and trees? I have seen so many letters about trees. I have become inundated. We have "too many trees," "not enough trees," "the city should pay us to plant trees," etc.

This frenzy is right up there with the "Hewlett Packard frenzy" and the "Mountain View squirrel controversy."

I will admit that I, too, have had grief with the city over trees, both on my property and in the parkways.

The fact is the city cannot afford to maintain the trees under its jurisdiction at this time. Let's give the Chuck Reed administration a chance to straighten out the financial situation at city hall before we start asking for more trees.

Keith C. De Filippis

Miriam Court