By Send letters to editor Bruce Barton at the Town Crier, 138 Main St., Los Altos 94022, or e-mail:
Decisions cause
dangerous driving
Who’s paying attention? Assemblyman Joe Simitian’s bill (AB 45) would have you believe that using a hand-held cell phone while driving “causes” accidents, and that a hands-free model “prevents” collisions. Neither is true. Not concentrating on the task of driving is the culprit.
I’ve observed flagrantly inattentive drivers reading a paperback propped on the steering wheel, or applying makeup or shaving while staring into the rearview mirror at 70 mph.
Perhaps the “there ought to be a law” crowd who make recommendations to Simitian, as he requests constituents to do on his Web site, should include other potential driver “violations” as well: drinking coffee, eating lunch, changing CDs, looking too long at the baby in the back seat, or heatedly debating with a passenger — any of which could also trigger a stop by the police and result in a $20 fine for the first infraction, $50 thereafter, plus court costs, as AB 45 prescribes.
If AB 45 passes, no doubt there will be arguing over whether the device you were speaking into while behind the wheel was actually your cell phone or just your mini-tape recorder.
Frankly, this potential 1,000-word addition to the Vehicle Code wastes money and law enforcement effort. Today’s limited budgets dictate that law enforcement’s emphasis should be on more vital matters, as should be Simitian’s focus. We need to defeat proposed laws that purport to address a serious issue but can’t solve the problem.
Instead, all drivers need to be frequently reminded to pay more attention while driving and to drive defensively to avoid collisions with those who don’t!
Jon C. “Chris” Watters
Los Altos
EIR for Rosita pools
also will be flawed
The Rosita Pool debacle continues with a court appeal process being directed by council.
The community should not feel comfortable that a more robust Environmental Impact Report is required. The original EIR, which was severely flawed, is being used as the basis for the next report. The original EIR did not adequately take into account feeder streets. This assures that any future EIR will be severely flawed as well.
The traffic impact is not just on Rosita. It will also affect Campbell, South Clark, Covington, Arboleda, Cuesta and Berry, including the infamous Berry/Springer intersection.
Los Altos has been unable to resolve current traffic issues. Some efforts are being made. However, why would we want to significantly increase traffic volumes when current traffic issues are far from being resolved?
If traffic weren’t enough, the facility “would operate 16 hours a day, seven days a week (and) would feature lighting, sound systems, private parties and some recreational swimming.” I wonder if any of the councilmembers could honestly say they would like to live near this proposed facility.
One might also ask why SPASH is not being required to pay a traffic impact fee for all traffic calming on all the streets previously noted.
The bottom line is that the council is bending under pressure from a special interest group. It is time for the council to ask themselves if this is truly the best long-term direction for Los Altos. If the community really wants a local pool for residents the land between the youth center, library and city hall remains available and unused.
Kurt Ayers
Los Altos
Charter folks: Where’s
the ‘win-win’?
When I learned that the controversial Bullis Charter School wouldn’t simply “go away,” one of my latest mantras came to mind: “Approach tough issues in a spirit of open-minded inquiry. Listen, learn, and be willing to change your mind.”
So I listened attentively as a charter proponent told me why this would be a “win-win.” Los Altos Hills residents pay property taxes, contribute to the Los Altos Educational Foundation, used to have three public elementary schools. Now they’ll have none and the board hasn’t invested in their school. Hmmm. Nothing about improving education. Nothing about the impact on other students and schools in the district.
Clearly, I needed to learn more and so I did. Bottom line: I learned that the effects of this charter school would be far-reaching and damaging.
The estimated net cost to the Los Altos School District would be approximately $275,000 the first year (for 150 students), $555,000 the second year (for 300 students) and escalating in subsequent years, as reported by the district’s independent Citizens Advisory Committee for Finance (CACF) at the board meeting on April 7.
The situation gets worse in 2005-2006, when Los Altos plans to become a Basic Aid district (a term that means it will be funded almost entirely by local property taxes). At that point, the district will receive no revenue for students attending the charter school from another Basic Aid district (Palo Alto) and only partial funding for students attending from other districts.
Due to significant state budget cutbacks, the board decided in February to close a district school. Los Altos projected the cost savings of closing Bullis to be $550,000 to $600,000, a savings that would be negated by a Bullis Charter School. If this charter school were opened, the vast majority of the district’s students would once again face increased class sizes, loss of electives in the middle schools, and worst of all, the closure of yet another elementary school.
Still embracing a willingness to change my mind, I headed off to the public hearing on March 31. After so much talk of a “win-win-win,” I was hoping to hear something spectacular. But it just wasn’t there.
What the charter proponents outlined was “LASD Lite” at best! Costly “academic” programs were presented without corresponding financials. And, the lead presenter left before parent input even commenced, which indicated a blatant disregard for the community.
In the end, I was forced to conclude that the Bullis Charter School is a “lose, lose, lose” proposition, at a time when our community can least afford it. Which brings to mind another favorite mantra: “Just because you can, doesn’t mean you should.”
Deb Gatta
Los Altos
