LETTERS LETTERS (February 18, 2004)

Concern about mayor's comments on donation

Editor:

Your article last week about the February 4 press conference held by Mayor Lee Duboc regarding the recently passed residential zoning ordinance refers to an exchange between the mayor and resident Brielle Johnck.

The residential zoning ordinance is a significant and substantive issue important to all residents. I believe the debate should be on its merits. However, the backing of the council persons supporting the recent amendments is relevant to residents' decisions.

As Brielle Johnck stated at the press conference concerning developer campaign contributions, Mayor Duboc accepted a $1,500 campaign contribution from the California Real Estate Political Action Committee (CREPAC). This information can be found on Page 7 of Ms. Duboc's October 26, 2002, second FPPC filing, available from the Menlo Park city clerk, which shows the $1,500 donation from CREPAC to her campaign received on October 9.

The Almanac's quotes of the mayor's challenge of these statements and Ms. Johnck's credibility ("I never took that money," Ms. Duboc cried. "Tell the truth, Brielle. Tell the truth.") indicates a transparent attempt to divert residents from the truth concerning the ordinance and its supporters.

My hope is that our leaders address the issues on the merits of the ordinance as it affects Menlo Park residents.

George Fisher
Cotton Street, Menlo Park

Story reflected typical Almanac viewpoint

Editor:

In your February 11 edition, your headline: "Whose Road?--Pedestrians and joggers can feel like intruders in the car culture" reflects the Almanac's typical, conservative viewpoint.

The headline and subhead to this article would have been more appropriately written as: "Mean Streets -- pedestrians, joggers and bicyclists are a minority in our suburban car culture."

Stop being so tame. It wouldn't hurt (your advertising) that much, I believe, if you had a slightly different and more real point of view on subjects like this.

Mark Eastman
Palo Alto

The issue of the Mayor's campaign contributions

Editor:

Mayor Lee Duboc pleaded with me to "Tell the truth, Brielle. Tell the truth." (Almanac February 11.) She had the microphone that was denied to me, and yes, a train was arriving with horns blowing and engines rumbling.

The February 4 press conference held by the mayor and City Council member Nicholas Jellins was, as the Almanac described, a messy boisterous affair, one that might have been called "democracy in action" except only one side was allowed to use the microphone.

Here's the truth: Ms. Duboc, Mr. Jellins and City Council member Mickie Winkler, the voting bloc that passed the residential zoning ordinance that is facing the referendum, accepted a large amount of their 2002 campaign money from real estate interests, developers and property management companies.

The contribution that I was specifically referencing was the $1,500 all three took from CREPAC (California Real Estate Political Action Committee).

After Ms. Duboc adamantly denied accepting money from this group and called for the end of the press conference, a woman named Natalie Cardenas, the government affairs director of the Silicon Valley Board of Realtors, approached me. She explained that CREPAC was a political action committee to which local real estate companies donate. In turn CREPAC makes campaign contributions to candidates who support the industry's interests. She asked what I had against the real estate industry.

This question gave me thought. I can't name a real estate agent I dislike. And yet, when I look at the FPPC campaign filings of this new "majority" on the City Council, I feel nervous when I see an abundance of contributions from people who earn their income from the sale of houses in Menlo Park.

Is there an explanation for the mayor voting for an ordinance that removes the basic protections of neighborhood notification accompanied by the right to appeal? Is there an explanation for the council majority voting for a last-minute addition to the ordinance that requires that second-story additions be built 10 feet from the property line? This change will dictate in many renovations a wedding cake design involving expensive engineering and construction work.

As a result, will families be discouraged from renovating and instead choose to scrape or to sell and buy a bigger house? Will more houses be scraped?

These are just a few of the questions that Menlo Park residents are asking. Looking at the 2002 council campaign contributions might be one way to find the motives behind this 3-2 vote. Perhaps with the din of the trains arriving at the station, Ms. Duboc couldn't clearly hear my remarks. Here's her chance. I'm confident that she will tell us the truth.

Brielle Johnck
Central Avenue, Menlo Park

E-mail a friend a link to this story.