September 2, 2004

ValleyViewpoints

Don’t our children deserve sports fields?

Editor,
I am writing to you regarding the proposed sports complex on McKean Road. My family lives in Almaden Valley. We have three children ages 11, 9, and 6. I think it is very sad that we spent a lot of money to live in this area because it has a lot to offer our family, good schools, nice parks and hiking trails, yet the one thing it definitely lacks is sports fields for the many children involved in sports in our community. It is very pathetic that these children have to use borrowed fields such as parks and schools fields that are really not intended to be used as sports fields.

Have you ever seen the sports complex in Pleasanton? The city provides beautiful soccer and baseball fields for their children. Don’t our children deserve that? We need to do it now while there is still a space available! I don’t think you should worry about pedestrians and bicyclists too much, because the reality is everybody will be driving their kids to the sports fields.

It is a shame that a small group of neighbors have made this project so difficult. I hope for the sake of our children in Almaden Valley, you will vote yes on the McKean sports complex!

Janet Paulson
McAbee Road

Why is San Jose planning to spend millions of
dollars on a temporary site?

Editor,
The most recent draft EIR and the first draft EIR patently display the intent of these documents is to attempt to convince us that this project should go forward. Even though the results are not what were desired by the proponents, the drafters of this document have put a spin on it, that is very clear to any rational person. They want this project approved at any cost. My comments regarding the draft EIR will be sent to the city within the specified public review period.

The intent of this letter is to clarify a couple of issues that have not been sufficiently explored and scrutinized. The proponents of this project have used very strategic methods to get where they are today. For those who are not aware of these methods, I will try to clarify how they have succeeded to get to this point.

The word “interim” as it is related to this project is very important and appears to have been ignored for far too long. In order to get favorable response from the city, this proposed project could not be considered a permanent facility on “public properties’ without the proper and additional public services. Since the required public services are not planned for the immediate future, the proponents wisely added the word “interim” to the General Plan Text Amendment. After reviewing several dictionaries, the description of “temporary” is used to define the word “interim.” If this project is a temporary project, why is the city of San Jose planning to spend millions of taxpayers’ dollars on a temporary (interim) site? They have no intention of the use of this proposed project to be temporary (interim).

The next strategic method epitomizes the manner in which our political system can be manipulated to accomplish a specific outcome. In order to eliminate the county of Santa Clara from the process, the city of San Jose has taken this initially, proposed private project and turned it into a “public project.” This proposed project is not a “public project” and Pat Dando and her fellow proponents should be honest and forthcoming in this process. I have searched the city Web site and attempted to call the city offices for a clear definition of what is required and mandated to qualify as a “city project”, constructed with taxpayers’ money. I have not found the answer to this question and I am hopefully awaiting clarification in some future publication. I would also like to know why the county of Santa Clara so easily agreed to the city of San Jose designating this as a public project.

Doug Turk
Hunters Hill Road

Sports fields: Time to step up to the plate and drown out the negativity

Editor,
Have we had enough negative comments in our public statements about the youth sports facility being worked on by the Almaden Youth Association and the city of San Jose? Can we move on and get positive?

I hope so. I hope for a few other things too. First and foremost, I hope that at heart we all have the best interests of our kids and not just our own. I hope, secondly, that we all can give the best interests of our community as a whole enough consideration that we can endure some small sacrifice on our part to support it. I hope that we honestly care for and respect our neighbors. I hope that we can be mature enough to listen to other opinions, communicate accurately and seek reasonable compromise. I hope that we can be examples of good citizenship and not an embarrassment to the same.

I hope we can be honest. I’ll be honest. Of late, my faith in my community has been, let’s say, somewhat less than strong and I’ve been downright angry with some people. I can understand all the B.S. with respect to national politics. But Almaden? Over fields for youth sports? Come on! We are better than that.

If at the community level, the Almaden level, we can’t figure out how to work together to do the right thing to take care of our kids and our neighbors then everything I was ever taught in school, by my coaches and on Sunday morning and which I came to believe in, love and try to teach in turn was just a big lie. I can’t accept that. So, I hope that some of you who have been sitting on the sideline watching others sacrifice, not for their kids, but for yours, will somehow step up to the plate. I hope that you will give people like Dan Kennedy and Dan Smyth (whose kids are now in college) a pat on the back for all their effort. I hope that SAVRA will accept the long standing AYA invitation to talk. I hope that we can all filter through the negativity, form our own opinions based on objective facts and then do something about it.

It is not too late to make this project that which it was meant to be—something positive.

Brad Bosomworth
Shadow Brook Drive

Airport doesn’t need frivolous art

Editor,
As longtime San Jose residents, we obviously want our public facilities to be nice looking, cheerful, inviting places, and we realize that the right artwork can add a lot to that experience. As concerned taxpayers, however, we are very concerned about the amounts of money being spent on frivolous and/or non-sensible items for city projects.

For example, we have seen how foolishly money has been spent on art such as the more than $500,000 for the Quetzacoatl (an uninspiring pile of composite cement resembling a giant elephant dropping) and the $1 million spent just for the design of equally uninspiring swatches of color around the Convention Center main entrance.

And on the San Jose Public Art Web site (www.sanjoseculture.org/pub_art/ about_neighborhood), we see items that should also raise eyebrows, such as: $200,000 for additional purchase of additional artworks for Hayes Mansion, $360,000 for a media-based artwork for Adobe Tower II, $182,000 for cat/dog artwork at the Animal Shelter, $414,349 for art at the new Almaden Community Center/Library, $425,000 for various things at the existing Airport Terminal, etc.

Getting back to the airport, we feel that visual aspects outside the airport terminal buildings should be limited to well presented permanent marking and nice looking landscaping, and that electronic displays on external surfaces of buildings would not only be frivolous but would be distracting to drivers.

We are also very concerned about long-term maintenance costs and short-term technology obsolescence of computer-driven electronic displays within the terminal. We would much prefer to have nicely done permanent artwork and displays that are appropriate and have historical significance to the area’s history and heritage.

And our feeling is that interactive games and displays (such as the CONNECTIVE or CONTEMPLATIVE examples on page 19 at http://www.sanjoseculture.org/pub_art/documents/AirportDraftMasterPlan8-18-04_000.pdf ) are entertainment, NOT art, and thus should NOT be included as art in projects of this nature. Games and animated entertainment, and if included, should be set up in the airport as revenue producers.

From the Web site http://www.sanjoseculture.org/pub_art/documents/AirportDraftMasterPlan8-18-04_000.pdf, it appears that the draft copy of the Public Art Master Plan for the Airport was put together by the Rome group. How much did we pay them for that report? And how much have we paid them so far for their involvement in this project?

As we have voiced to the City Council, we are also very concerned that the 2 percent mandate provision of Title 22 does not promote creativity within the Public Arts department; i.e., with large mandated amounts of money to spend, it is too easy to hire outside consultants to do the work that should and could be done more efficiently by the arts staff and “local” experts.

Could you give us the total amount that has already been spent on outside consultants for art on the airport project? As part of these costs, how much did it cost to have outside art experts flown in a while back for a multi-day day seminar? And assuming the total cost for the airport project is $3 billion, what is the total you would expect to spend for art? Is it $60 million (2 percent), $30 million, $20 million? We would like to know the total projected amount for art now, BEFORE the major expenditures for the airport project begin.

Al and Jan Day
Mount Pakron Drive

Don’t forget the SaberCats!

Editor,
In your article on the possible departure of the San Jose Earthquakes (Aug 20-Aug 26), the team is lauded for giving San Jose its “most successful professional sports organization and the only championship trophy.”

Allow me to set the record straight. The San Jose SaberCats of the Arena Football League (AFL) have won two league championships in the past three years. The team has completed a decade of successful competition, has a great fan base, and a solid financial foundation. The AFL is 50 percent owned by the NFL and has a national TV broadcast contract with NBC. Several SaberCats players have gone on to play in the NFL, including Brian Johnson who last week signed with the 49ers.

Professional soccer has never been sustainable in San Jose. Thirty years ago, when the first of several pro soccer teams started in San Jose, soccer was projected to be the sport of the future. Some things never change. It always has been the sport of the future, and always will be.

Tobin Gilman
Mt. Carmel Drive

People are in the coyote’s habitat

Editor,
The “coyote issue” is actually a “people issue:” People are in the coyote’s habitat, and people continue to push them around and out; irresponsible people behavior with regard to children, pets, refuse, is a made-to-order enticement for any predator; too many people are willing to embrace a social hysteria devoid of content.

Starting with hysteria, the headline of your lead article in the Aug. 20-Aug.26 issue is inflammatory: “No-trapping ordinance poses coyote danger to residents.” It should read, “People jump to questionable conclusions about coyote behavior”.

I would be surprised if the supposed coyote-stalking story, upon scrutiny, would hold up. Something else must have been going on because coyotes are timid and non-provocative toward humans.

We can live comfortably with the coyote: Respect this animal; act responsibly with pets and kids; and, understand that, because of the coyote’s nature, he is probably the victim in this story.

We should all hope that, for the sake of the coyote, the bureaucratic haggling will never end, so as to allow this animal to continue to enjoy the adaptive lifestyle that seems (thankfully) to be impervious to the attempted eradications heaped upon him.

Marvin Snowbarger
Cinnabar Hills Road

Humans create coyote problem

Editor,
We live on a small court. A coyote has been spotted on our street twice. We have been missing our cat for two weeks. I don’t know what the solution is other than to stop building in the hills and to find a way to stop the coyotes from coming down. I am completely against leg traps even if they are padded. It is a cruel, slow, painful death. It would be more humane to eliminate them with treated food or a quick alternative method.

I have seen deer on Kennedy Road just two blocks from Los Gatos Blvd in the afternoon. We also hear of mountain lions coming into people’s yards. Joggers who feel they must jog in the hills don’t realize they are running or biking in the animals’ home. The animals don’t know we are human. They just see us as prey for dinner.

It seems when humans create a problem with the animals, the animals must always pay the consequences.

Please inform people that building, jogging and biking in the hills have created dangerous situations. We cannot continue to create these problems. Humans can’t have it both ways. I am scared for my family and my pets and
I’m also sad for the animals since we have created this problem.

Janet Haver
Big Talk Court

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