January 18, 2007

Sparring continues on Leland stadium lights process

Community meeting features plethora of concerns raised by opponents;
Superintendent Iglesias favors installation of permanent lights

By Diego Abeloos
Sports Editor

The debate over the possible installation of permanent stadium lights at Leland High School’s football stadium continued on Jan. 16 as supporters and detractors of the proposed plan met with San Jose Unified School District at the school for the second of three planned community meetings.

A schematic of San Jose High Academy's stadium lights, which was on display at the meeting, shows how the permanent lights flood the field of play to give residents an example of what they can expect at Leland. According to SJUSD Director of School Construction Ty Williams, the intensity of light on the field, measured in foot-candles, is 55, and lessens to zero foot-candles 200 feet away from the stadium. Schematic courtesy of SJUSD.

The meeting, which took place at Leland’s cafeteria, is part of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) process being conducted by the district in studying and collecting a variety of factors, both negative and positive, caused by the lights, including the notation of concerns by nearby neighbors on issues such as noise, light, traffic and litter impacts on the surrounding neighborhoods.

Among those in attendance for the meeting were SJUSD Superintendent Don Iglesias and Leland Principal Bob Setterlund, who said the community meeting process, as part of the CEQA, is moving along about as well as he had hoped. “The process is moving along surprisingly smoothly for people who have very divergent opinions about how this will affect the school and the community,” Setterlund said following the meeting. “About this time, with the second meeting, I think we’ve heard just about everything that has to be said about what the affects are going to be. It’s now going to be a challenge to address the concerns that are out there.”

One chief concern that caused a stir among detractors of the lights plan was a statement by Iglesias to the gathered crowd at the start of the meeting that he was personally in favor of moving ahead with the installation of the lights.

“I don’t think it’s appropriate that a staff member should advocate a position before the community has an opportunity to engage and express their concerns and opinions,” said Charles Tate, an opponent of the stadium lights plan who attended the meeting and lives nearby on Burnside Drive.

The statement, Tate said, left those opposed to the plan with little opportunity to have their concerns heard and counted for.

“I think it’s a ‘fait accompli’ given that the superintendent has expressed an opinion on this and advocating that before all these community meetings [have been held],” Tate added.

Those sentiments were echoed by Victor Peltz, another opponent of the lights plan who attended the meeting with his wife, Mary. Peltz, who lives on Eldridge Drive, located on the opposite side of the school’s stadium off Via Valiente, has been an Almaden resident since 1994.

“It appears that it is a done deal,” said Peltz. “Furthermore, they did not answer the question of, intrinsically, what is the benefit of having these night games? I know that there’s a strong community feeling of it, but I didn’t hear anybody put forth any kind of real substantive reasons why night games would contribute any more to the community cohesiveness or spirit than Saturday afternoon games.”

Iglesias defended his position however, stating that the installation of permanent lights is a positive development not only for the school, but for the community at large.

“For me, the reason I’m supportive of the lights is that I think it brings a sense of community and school spirit,” Iglesias said following the meeting. “It’s a healthy, positive activity for kids to do on a Friday night. Our experience is that, when we do evening games, there really are minimal incidents. Kids are, for the most part, appropriate in their behavior. And, it’s an opportunity for parents who work to be able to see their kids’ games.”

Setterlund added that lights would help boost revenue for the athletic programs, citing an average of 300 to 400 spectators for day football games, compared to 1,000 to 2,000 spectators at night. He added that the cost of repairing football helmets alone, in order to comply with safety standards, run at approximately $5,000 at the end of each season. “That’s revenue that we need as sources of revenue, in terms of fund-raising, taken away from us for different reasons,” Setterlund said. “We need everything we can get. We have seen revenues at a night game upward of $7,000, and that’s money the athletic department does need.”

Should the lights installation be approved by the SJUSD Board of Trustees, with a vote likely to happen sometime in March, the process of installing the lights would occur during August, in order to have the facility ready for fall sports, Setterlund said.

The CEQA process
Much of the early portion of the meeting was spent on explaining the CEQA process. As part of the proposed installation of lights, the district is required to go through the process in studying the various impacts the lights will have on the surrounding community.

Caroleen Toyama of Shaw Environmental, Inc., which is helping to conduct the CEQA process, said she expects the CEQA draft on Leland to be declared a mitigated negative declaration, typically done after an initial study has been prepared. A mitigated negative declaration, according to Toyama, determines that there will be no significant environmental impacts after appropriate mitigating measures are taken, such as rules outlining appropriate volume levels for the school’s public address system, for example.

To that end, Iglesias said the district will strictly employ a rule of no more than 10 night events per school year, roughly one event per month, for football, soccer, track & field and lacrosse games. Furthermore, Iglesias said the district will only allow school use of the stadium lights; outside organizations will not be permitted use. All standards and proposed rules will be written into the CEQA report as a binding agreement, said Ty Williams, the district’s director of school construction, to the crowd at hand.

San Jose Unified School District Director of School Construction Ty Williams (left, standing) and district Superintendent Don Iglesias (right, standing) listen to comments by residents at a community meeting held on Jan. 17 at Leland High School.

Still, opponents of the plan voiced concern of enforcement of those rules. To that end, Iglesias said, it’s up to the district to enforce those rules, and that neighborhood policing itself is also helpful. Any permanent changes to the proposed rules, such as increasing the 10 event per year limit, Iglesias said, would require the district to start a new CEQA process from scratch.

“It’s helpful when the neighbors inform us when there’s issues,” Iglesias said. “That is good neighbor policy for us with them, and we need to be responsive. …It’s my responsibility—the superintendent’s responsibility—to make sure that whatever we commit to as part of the CEQA process and the board approval, that we enforce those rules. The rule of 10 nights, and not to exceed that, we will enforce that.”

Another area of concern for residents opposed to lights was the possibility, raised at the meeting, of some night practices.

“I think that we’re already seeing an expansion of scope here,” Tate said. “We heard that it was going to be only 10 events per year, and right away, we have an infinite amount on top of that, given the statement that practices will be on the field under the lights. I’m disappointed. It seems that the news is getting worse.”

Iglesias said night practices will be necessary in some cases, especially during the winter months, when darkness falls at around 5 p.m. He added that the district would study an appropriate timeframe for use of the lights in the early evenings, giving a 7 p.m. cutoff time as an example. Iglesias also said night practices provide a far different impact to the neighborhood than night games.

“The impact of practices are significantly different because there aren’t spectators, there isn’t volume from people, it’s really the players and it’s a small number (of people) typically, so I think the impact would be minimal,” Iglesias said. “But we have to be good neighbors and we would set a timeframe when those lights are out.”

All told, Iglesias said, a CEQA draft would be ready by the final community meeting, scheduled for Feb. 6 at 7 p.m. at the Leland cafeteria. At that point, he said, the public will have a 30-day period to review the document and provide comments and additional concerns to the district.

Light flooding and other concerns
Among the other concerns voiced at the meeting was the impact of the lights on the neighborhood, in terms of flooding excess light onto homes. Williams presented the crowd with schematics of San Jose High Academy’s football field, which had a recent light installation. Williams said permanent lights are different from the temporary lights the school has used for the past three years in “pilot” games. In short, Williams said permanent lights are perched atop 80-foot poles and are designed to direct light downward onto the field of play, whereas temporary lights reach only 20 feet in height and are designed to flood light straight ahead, not downward.

To further illustrate this point, Williams said the lights at San Jose High Academy measure in strength of 55 foot-candles directly on the field, and reduce in strength beyond the field, including a measurement of 0-foot-candles from 200 feet beyond the football field. Williams invited neighbors to San Jose High on the evening of Jan. 31 to show them how the lights prevent flooding beyond the playing field, in order to alleviate some concerns.

For some however, lights were of little concern, compared to the noise levels produced by the P.A. system at the stadium.

“With the lights, you can close all the drapes, you can close the plantation shutters, you can find an inside room and close yourself in and knock out the lights,” said Bill Bernard, another opponent of the lights plan who attended the meeting. “But the noise, even with double-pane windows, is extreme. I’ve gone over and complained about the noise even during daytime (events) and it’s turned down from 300 percent to 250 percent of what’s needed. Forget this thing about the noise of the (temporary) lights; they don’t have lights during the daytime and the sound is still very, very loud.”

Williams offered to test the P.A. system at Leland along with concerned neighbors, in order to find an acceptable volume level to meet the needs of both the neighborhood and the school.

“We will do some sound tests, some decibel tests, out from the school sites, and really look at what we need to do,” Iglesias said. “I think we need to monitor sound and put some monitors on the speaker systems so you can’t exceed a certain level of noise because that’s being respectful to the neighborhood.”

Other concerns raised were traffic, and speeding down Via Valiente and Camden Avenue specifically. Setterlund said the school hires four to six officers to patrol inside the stadium grounds and help with parking-related issues for each night game. Those officers, he said, also communicate with traffic beat officers in the area to quell potential speeding issues. Setterlund added that speeding can also take place just as often, if not more, on non-event nights.

“Speeding takes place probably more often on nights when there’s nobody around than on nights when there’s 1,000 people to watch you,” Setterlund said.

Iglesias added that the school, or district, can also request additional police presence outside school grounds during night games to help discourage speeding by spectators before and after each game.

“We would work closely with San Jose P.D.,” Iglesias said, “ and I know at Gunderson, for example, where we’ve had officers from San Jose P.D. in the neighborhood for some of the night games, [they help] with traffic issues.”

And while some of those opposed to the lights felt that ultimately permanent lights would be installed, they also vowed to keep up their fight. “I’m still disappointed and discouraged somewhat,” said Bernard, “but I’m going to keep complaining.”

The final community meeting on the football field lights issue is scheduled for Feb. 6 at 7 p.m. in the Leland cafeteria.