August 26, 2004

ValleyViewpoints

A letter from “Lobo”

Dear Almaden Neighbors:
Thank you so much for saving my life on Friday Aug. 20, 2004 when I was hit by a car at the intersection of Almaden Expressway and Redmond Avenue. The driver of the car did not stop, but many, many of you did, and I surely owe my life to you.

I am a 4-year-old tan and white Siberian husky and my family, Cindy Relick and her two children, Jake and Brianna, are very, very happy that you cared enough about me to stop your lives for those crucial moments to get out of your cars and make sure that I got the help I urgently needed in order that I may live and bring joy to my family for many years to come.

Even though you didn’t know me, Cheryl Kik, and Brendon, assisted by Kristine Henry, Amy Sides, Ken and Jan Hathaway, Barbara Bing and many others, wrapped me in a blanket and a large soft cloth and drove me to the Emergency Animal Clinic for immediate care. Thanks also for your supportive calls and other assistance over the past few days.

Amazingly, I do not have any broken bones, however, over the next week or so, I will require extensive surgery to repair my wounds. The cost from the emergency clinic and for this upcoming surgery will be quite a burden upon my family. Anyone wishing to make a tax deductible* donation to the Bay Area Siberian Husky Club will ultimately help my family so much and will be greatly appreciated. If you can, and would like to send a donation, please send it to:

Bay Area Siberian Husky Club
2633 S. Bascom Avenue
Campbell, CA 95008
Label the donation “Lobo”

Finally, please accept my huge heartfelt thanks to my magnificent, concerned and outstanding neighbors. I promise I will come and visit you when I am feeling better.

“Lobo”

*Upon request, by providing your name and address information, you will receive a letter from the Bay Area Siberian Husky Club a 503c nonprofit organization, which will confirm your tax deductible donation.

City nor AYA not interested in protecting SAVUR’s resources

Editor,
In the Almaden Times recent article “Shedding light on the McKean Road sports field project,” Vice Mayor Pat Dando says she wants to clear up misconceptions about the project. Dando then goes on to foster the biggest misconception of all—that this is a positive community project with only a few residents having concerns. This is not true.

The McKean Road sports field actually involves two communities. The first community is District 10, city of San Jose. This is where Dando and the members of the AYA live. They have unlimited city water, wide roadways, city services, and city maintained streets and traffic control. This is the community that wants a large new sports complex.

The second community is the South Almaden Valley Urban Reserve. This community is mostly rural and is located in unincorporated county property. It has a two-lane main road, open fields that carry noise easily, and is dependent on well water from a shallow aquifer. This is the community where Pat Dando and the AYA want to put their sports field.

When Dando says this is a “positive community project” she is referring to District 10, city of San Jose. And why shouldn’t it be positive for them? They get all the benefits while at the same time foisting the pollution, the hassle, the traffic congestion and the risk to resources on another community.

When Dando says there are a “few residents that have concerns,” she is referring to more than a few residents. She is referring to almost all of the residents of the South Almaden Valley Urban Reserve; the second community where she proposes to put the complex. These residents do not have unlimited city water. They are dependent on well water for their life’s blood. Their water comes from a shallow aquifer that if strained too far is at risk of running dry—leaving the residents with no water. This is a community that could see their wells destroyed if the water level falls too low. This is a community that will suffer from the large increase of traffic on its small country road. This is the community that will be plagued with excessive noise almost every day of the week, more so than average, because sounds are magnified and travel further in open rural areas. Not such a positive community project for this second community.

Following my letter you are probably going to see proponents of the sports field say that we are indeed the same community because the South Almaden Valley Urban Reserve is in the geographical sphere of the city of San Jose, District 10. This is bogus and you shouldn’t be fooled by this misdirection. Under LAFCO, City spheres are created to allow cities and counties to plan for future growth when, AND IF, the area is annexed. At the time of annexation the plan usually includes the development of resources to support the infrastructure needed for the growth. Until annexation the South Almaden Valley Urban Reserve does not fall into the legal or political boundaries of the city of San Jose, nor District 10, nor is it open to development by the city of San Jose under the General Plan. And if you need any proof of this ask Dando if the residents of SAVUR can vote for any of the council members or for the mayor of San Jose. More importantly ask Dando if the residents of SAVUR can vote any of the San Jose council members or the mayor out of office for destroying their water resources or their community. The answer to both questions will be resounding NO. The longest standing definition of community in the United States is based on representative government and the two communities do not share the same representative government.

The residents of SAVUR are deprived of this representation. They are disenfranchised voters being forced to accept another community’s political and administrative control over their water resources, their roadways, and the quiet enjoyment of their community. And worse still, neither the city of San Jose nor the AYA have any vested interest in protecting this area’s resources. Their vested interest is in land grabbing in another community so that they can build their large, noisy, water guzzling, traffic producing sports complex. But don’t take my word for it.

Read their Draft Environment Impact Report. It says there isn’t enough water; it says that there is a noise problem with no solution; it says that there will be parking for almost 500 cars.

Five hundred more cars daily on a rural two-lane road constitute a traffic and safety problem to me. And to add insult to injury, the mitigation proposed by the Environmental Impact Report to this problem shows a total lack of sensitivity and a huge dose of arrogance on the part of San Jose. The recommended mitigation in the report for the safety issue is that the AYA will sign waivers so that none of the AYA children will ride their bikes in the area so that they will not be at risk of being hit by a car. Knock, Knock—what about the residents? Are we now to stop walking, riding our horses and riding our bikes in order to be safe in our own community? The very fact that the residents’ safety wasn’t a consideration in the mitigation shows the total lack of regard for my community by the proponents of the sports complex project.

Suzy Shields
South Almaden Valley
Urban Reserve

Housing subsidies unfair to taxpayers

Editor,
Leslye Corsiglia, director of Housing, Department of Housing, according to the Almaden Times, “... is committed to helping people.” I laud her passion, but I do not believe taxpayers should support her commitment.

I, for one, resent having to work hard in order to qualify for a market-rate mortgage at the same time my tax dollars are collected by the tax collector, given to a housing agency, which in turn lends money to substandard credit risks. It is bad enough that the government provides a plethora of grants or below-market financing, but it is particularly galling when the Department earmarks the financing to groups the Department deems worthy of taxpayer largesse, such as teachers.

In the case of teachers, we must bear in mind that although they may arguably be underpaid, no one forces them to be teachers or to live here; in fact, such generosity lessens the need for school districts to prioritize limited school revenues to include increased teacher pay, and serves to increase demand for subsidized housing. The last thing the Department of Housing wants is for the supply of “affordable” housing to exceed the demand. When that happens the Department of Housing would be out of work! The Department, will no doubt, make certain that day never arrives by constantly changing the criteria for affordable housing eligibility.

Generally, government sponsored affordable housing increases the cost of living for all. Developers, for example, who build subsidized apartment complexes, frequently must pay “prevailing” wages that exceed market wages for comparable work and charge higher rents on market rate units to cover income loss from the “affordable” units.

Meanwhile housing agency employees, who enjoy generous taxpayer provided benefits and retirement packages, frequently lack incentive to seek operational efficiencies due to labor union rules that serve to protect the status quo.

Jerry Mungai
Fall River Drive

Why no mention of name of terminal at groundbreaking?

Editor,
Well, city officials and other dignitaries finally broke ground for Mineta San Jose International Airport’s new, $289-million North Concourse passenger terminal on Wednesday, Aug. 18. They called it a monster project, the biggest in San Jose’s history.

Yet none of the three speakers at the 40-minute ceremony — the airport director, the city manager, the mayor – mentioned the name of the man the airport’s new terminal is named after: James M. Nissen.

Jim Nissen was a Navy, airline and research test pilot who in 1945 opened a business on land the city had reserved for an airport it never built. He soon was hired by the city and built San Jose Municipal Airport – its runways, its first two terminals, its control tower. By the time he retired in 1975, after 30 years running the airport, Nissen had brought airline service linking San Jose to cities around the country. He laid the foundation for the airport we have today.

As U.S. Secretary of Transportation Norm Mineta, former mayor of San Jose, said at the Aug. 20, 2001 ceremony when the city named the airport after Mineta:

“San Jose Airport has seen dramatic changes in the past fifty years. It began with the vision of a man named James Nissen, a 1,900 ft. runway, one hangar, and a small office building.’’

Last December, the San Jose City Council voted unanimously to name the new terminal after Nissen. The council heeded the advice of historians and the San Jose aviation community, despite the behind-the-scenes opposition of the airport staff for whatever reasons.

So why the snub to Nissen at the groundbreaking? Oversight? Other agendas? Or just old-fashioned sour grapes?

Frank Sweeney
Lalor Drive, San Jose

Have an opinion?

Let the Almaden Times hear from you. In order to be considered, letters must be signed by the author or come with the full name, address, and a phone number (which will not be printed). Send letters to julie@timesmediainc.com, or via mail to:

The Almaden Times Weekly,
1310 Tully Road, Ste. 107,
San Jose, CA 95122