Back to the Table of Contents Page

Back to the Weekly Home Page

Classifieds

Palo Alto Online

Letters

Editor,

I have seen stories about the Greenmeadow rabbit "problem," but not one from a Greenmeadow resident. Many of us do not see the bunnies as a problem, but instead see them as a joy.

Every evening at dusk, my daughter and I take our scooters around the block and look for bunnies. We usually can find a couple just sitting on someone's lawn, enjoying the evening air. Once we saw four! That was so wonderful that whenever we have a really good day we say, "It was a four-bunny day!"

On July 11 you printed an article about animal control's struggle to contain the problem. They claim that "eventually the bunnies will get run over by cars, or eaten by cats or hawks." So they catch them and euthanize (a nice word for kill) them.

OK, it is sad to see a dead bunny that has been hit by a car. So far I have seen only one. But the bunnies are fast and rarely get caught by cats. Cats often catch birds, but I see no one proposing that we should therefore round up all the birds and euthanize them! And why should we deny the hawk a square meal?

If animal control really wants to rid Greenmeadow of animal pests, let them catch the rats! I bet there are at least 10 rats to every bunny. Grace Pariante Ben Lomand Drive Palo Alto
For children everywhere

Editor,

Measure D (parcel tax increase to fund teachers' salaries) has been passed, and it is confession time.

I took the exclusion open to all seniors, even the very wealthy. Why exclude oneself from supporting our teachers? Don't "our" children deserve the very best? Yes and no.

Yes, all children deserve the best support, nutrition, education, etc., but no select group (i.e. Palo Alto children) should get the best while the overwhelming percentage of others struggle with outdated leftovers and just plain neglect on many levels.

Our methods of funding education are grossly unfair to most children and must be leveled (and increased) to include excellence for all, even those living in impoverished areas.

To preach affirmative action "after the barn has collapsed" is self delusion. Let's put the concern and resources where such can truly be effective, such as at early childhood, and continue forward. Just as we need single-payer health insurance, we need some form of single-payer-funded education with equality across the board.

In the meantime, I will be sending my $246 per year to one of the lowest-funded districts, perhaps even outside of California. Gilwee Walker Price Court Palo Alto
IKEA and air pollution

Editor,

My concern about IKEA is not just traffic congestion, but air pollution caused by an additional 7,402 cars on the freeway each Saturday, and an extra 2,307 on weekdays.

I live in Palo Alto, four blocks from Highway 101, in between Oregon Expressway and Embarcadero. The air quality in my neighborhood is already less than acceptable. We should take this as an opportunity to say no to such a massive store because nobody wants gridlock when it can so easily be avoided, and most importantly, the air pollution that goes with it.

I've lived in Los Angeles before, and I don't want to live like that here. Judith Jauhal North California Avenue Palo Alto
Calm discussion?

Editor,

I was glad to see that Mr. Alexander has added libraries and parks to his list of basic needs for Palo Alto in his most recent hit piece. This doubtlessly reflects feedback he has received from his flyers and mailers.

I must say, though, that his flyers -- to me at least -- are extremely offensive. They are well written, and they have highlighted some important issues in city government, but even when I think that his position is probably right I dislike his means of expression so much that I want to fly to the defense of our city staff and council.

When he first started writing these pieces, I assumed he would be running for City Council. Lately, it has seemed that he is trying to encourage others to run. In any case, I would not vote for him for any office anywhere, and I doubt I would vote for any candidate he would support.

Perhaps I am alone in my feelings, but I think Mr. Alexander should consider toning down his diatribes. It is always appropriate to question what is being done by our government, but, as my mother used to say to me, "Please keep a civil tongue in your head." (Or in your flyers.) Bandying around such words as "irresponsible" does not lend itself to the calm discussion of issues. Sue Kemp Seale Avenue Palo Alto
Privacy in Tevis Place

Editor,

I couldn't help but feel very sorry for Jane Reber and her neighbors regarding the new house on Tevis Place.

I wrote a letter to you when the original house, built by the Herbert Browne family, was torn down. At that time I felt it was a real loss to the city to get rid of such a lovely, hand-made house. Since the lot was scraped two years ago, I have not been able to look at what has happened to it, and after reading Ms. Reber's letter, I am glad I have refrained from seeing the new monstrosity.

The City Council and Planning Commission seem to care so little for the rights of its current citizens, I am surprised anyone has the courage to buy a home here, especially a one-story home. There is just no justice for homeowners if the laws are so lax or so blatantly un-enforced that this sort of thing can happen, and it happens everywhere.

I see quite a bit of Palo Alto when I am out running, walking or driving, and hardly a single street has been spared from new ugly houses that don't fit in with the neighborhood. I wish there were a way for all the injured parties to instigate a class-action suit against the city for issuing the permits, and the architects and builders who put up these structures, but the problem seems to be that there are no laws to protect us from this sort of invasion, so there is no way to gain restitution.

And, as Ms. Reber said, it is too late to resolve the issue for those people whose privacy and peace has already been violated. Deborah Johnston Tasso Street Palo Alto
Swedish tables

Editor,

Don Kazak's July 25 article regarding the proposed IKEA store in East Palo Alto brushes close to the key traffic issues. However, those issues are not adequately defined in the IKEA Environmental Impact Report (EIR).

The traffic-study data in the EIR is derived from two primary sources: actual traffic studies in East Palo Alto to determine the existing background traffic levels and traffic predictions included in a 1998 Draft EIR for the Emeryville IKEA store. The EIR concludes that there will be less traffic in East Palo Alto because some of the people who now shop in Emeryville will come to East Palo Alto. HUH?

Some major questions arise: Why use a draft EIR when one has been finalized for Emeryville? Is there a difference in the findings between the two reports? Why use the Emeryville traffic study at all? Are we to believe that the city of Emeryville allowed the placement of the IKEA there with full knowledge of the traffic problems that it routinely causes? Why not conduct a study of the existing actual traffic situation in Emeryville?

Additionally, the traffic trip generation predictions of the EIR are based on a concept called "regional attraction." What is that? It isn't defined in the EIR, and it's not an accepted traffic engineering concept that is used to gage traffic impacts in EIR reports.

What I believe is happening is that outside consultants are again depending upon the East Palo Alto city staff to be too stupid or simply not interested in putting forth the effort to thoroughly examine the work product of this EIR. IKEA has already received backroom assurances of the project's acceptance from some of the decision-makers.

The trouble is that the citizens of East Palo Alto can read better than city staff, and we are not afraid to openly criticize the poor workmanship of the EIR consultant and city planning staff. In other words, the white folks may have to get their Swedish coffee tables somewhere else. Dennis Scherzer Clarke Avenue East Palo Alto
Keep coroner separate

Editor,

Here we go again. Do we want to eliminate one of the few remaining independent offices in San Mateo County, or do we want to knuckle under to those in power and make the coroner just another adjunct of an already overcrowded sheriff's office?

I strongly oppose the combination of the coroner's with the sheriff's office. I have first-hand knowledge of the entire situation. My late husband, Paul B. Jensen, was the elected coroner of San Mateo County for 37-and-a-half years.

He fought vigorously to keep the office independent and free of political and other influences. Due to his concern, and with the help of an intelligent electorate, this same proposal was defeated at the polls in 1995. Let's do it again!

According to English law, the coroner is the only county official who can arrest the sheriff. It follows that should there be any corruption or cover-up in the sheriff's department, it is essential that the coroner remain independent, behooven only to the electorate. Our government requires checks and balances.

The myth that combining these offices would amount to a huge saving of money is just that -- a myth. Coroner Jensen, in study after study, determined that such merging often results in even greater cost to taxpayers.

The voters of San Mateo County deserve an independent coroner who functions efficiently without the interference of politicians. Vote 'No' when this measure appears on your November ballot. June Jensen Laurel Avenue Menlo Park
Tennis not needed

Editor,

This is regarding the tennis club that the Winter Lodge is proposing. The neighbors are merely objecting to:

1) Adding yet another tennis court, and a "private" one with no residency requirement, while there are already 60 plus under-utilized tennis courts in Palo Alto, and

2) Use of public funds to finance development of such a "private" tennis club, which is prohibited by Measure A. Measure A states that: "Winter Lodge Facility shall continue to be used for community ice skating, so long as no city subsidy is required for its continuance other than the use of the Middlefield Road site or appropriate assistance in securing and making available an alternate site and facility."

One might think that the $1-per-year lease is a sufficient subsidy to the Winter Lodge facility without the additional, and illegal, $50,000 subsidy to build a soundwall. Claiming that the soundwall is for the protection of the neighbors (who do not want the tennis club) is merely disguise, since it would not be needed if the tennis club were not built.

The neighbors are not saying, "Not in my backyard." These are the same neighbors that said, "Let them have their neighborhood skating rink" during Measure A. They did not approve a "sports complex," however.

Contrary to the statement by Mr. Morton (Letters, July 4) that the voters overwhelmingly approved "community accessible recreation," Measure A authorizes only "community ice skating" and nothing more.

Applying Morton's logic, we might as well go ahead and build a bowling alley, basketball courts and maybe a video arcade. Measure A is not silent, however, on the question of funding.

It clearly states that the Winter Lodge could stay "so long as" no city subsidies would be used. Typically, when the voters say no, they don't mean until "we" forget we said no. Usually when voters say no, they mean until we tell you "yes."

If the City Council conveniently ignores Measure A and uses the administrative process to overturn an election result, it is making a conscious decision to violate the will of the voters. Sophia Deng Middlefield Road Palo Alto