LETTERS LETTERS (June 23, 2004)

Child-care facility has side benefits

Editor:

In 2000-2002, our family paid $21,079 to Menlo Children's Center for our son's care.

Working full-time to live here, the peace of mind we enjoyed knowing that he was well cared for was priceless. We are eternally grateful to his teachers, who gave him experiences during a developmentally important period that contributed to his becoming a positive community member.

Contrary to Mary Gilles' June 2 Almanac letter suggesting a cost of $20,000 per student for the $3.6 million renovation, my math shows that if the building is amortized over 20-plus years with 180 students each year, the cost of the building will be $1,000 per student. But beneficiaries include 180 children and families, and parents' employers (child care enables them to work), and businesses they frequent, and neighbors and friends surrounding them -- each year.

Numbers are manipulated to support many directions -- consider all facets, not just those suiting one's ends.

Many parents (including Mayor Lee Duboc) were intensely involved in the passage of Measure T. They didn't hide inclusion of the childcare center. It is insulting to insist voters didn't pay enough attention to what was on the ballot.

High home valuation isn't due solely to longtime residents, but also newcomers looking for a safe, supportive family environment. Should they get a proportionally greater say in spending due to much greater tax assessments? No. But it's short-sighted to demean their contribution and needs.

Reporting in 2003 showed children's programs recovered over 100 percent of costs. Clearly, this issue is about more than dollars, but truly what sort of community we become.

It seems that many program opponents no longer feel responsible for continuing the social contract, as they've already gotten what they wanted, or want to reap benefits of new residents without encouraging them to stay. People talk the talk of fostering a sense of community. It is time to acknowledge that commitment means stepping up to the plate to support programs benefiting us all.

Sharie Kumaishi
Menlo Park

City needs to move on traffic management plan

Editor:

The following letter was addressed to the Menlo Park City Council:

I was one of the many volunteers who gathered information and statistics regarding the cut-through traffic in the Willows. I've also written many times to this council in hopes that you would listen to the residents who live here about what to do for this area.

Now you are turning the tables on the residents again and trying to implement a plan that will not not do anything to curb the traffic congestion here.

The Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan (NTMP) is the result of bad process and will lead to bad policy if enacted. The NTMP reflects the view and will of a small minority (City Council majority Nicholas Jellins, Lee Duboc and Mickie Winkler). It does not represent the sentiment of the majority of residents. Without taking this information to the public, for public input and education, then only the few corrupt will be allowed to make decisions about my neighborhood. That is outrageous.

I believe that if the residents have to, we could do another referendum (like the one on the lousy building regulations that were just repealed). The council's job is to do what the residents ask of it -- not what developers want (or the developers in EPA in the former Whiskey Gulch area). Do we have to have a person killed by cut-through drivers before you will listen to our demands for traffic congestion relief?

There has been very little opportunity for public input and debate on the NTMP, and the feedback and suggestions offered have largely been ignored.

I believe the process was flawed from the outset. The independent consultants hired by the city to develop the NTMP were so constrained by the options they could consider that they essentially were prevented from doing their job. What a waste of Menlo Park funds. Why hire someone if you aren't going to let them do the job without being hog-tied?

As to the meeting, more than a year has passed since the cut-through study was performed. Over 60 residents volunteered several hours of their time to collect data for the study, saving the city thousands of dollars. It has also been over a year since the last Willows neighborhood traffic meeting was held by the city on March 20, 2003. It seems the least the city could do now would be to hold a follow-up meeting to share the results of a study so many residents generously gave time to help produce.

What are you afraid of? That the truth or demands from the Willows residents might be different from what the developers want? Well too bad. They don't live here. I do.

Donnasue Jacobi
Haight Street, Menlo Park

Council majority out of touch on child care

Editor:

Early this month, Menlo Park Mayor Lee Duboc and resident Mary Gilles stepped up their PR campaign to smear the city's courageous support of child care.

In referring to the Burgess pre-school and after-school programs as subsidized child care for the wealthy, the mayor and Ms. Gilles flat-out lied. According to records, the city's Burgess Park child-care programs made a profit of $60,666 in 2003.

The importance and scarcity of high-quality child care is obvious. According to one study, licensed child-care supply meets only 21 percent of the estimated, statewide need in California.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger understands the benefit and has long supported child care through his charity, the After-School All-Stars. So, why does Mayor Duboc want to eliminate an important, profitable, high-quality child-care program?

Sure, the Burgess Park programs require a building, but so do fire departments, senior programs and gymnastics centers. Are these on the mayor's list for elimination? No. One can only speculate on the reason behind the mayor's disdain of city-supported child care. Maybe she is simply vindictive toward people with opinions different from her own? Or, maybe Mayor Duboc has a moral disagreement with dual-income parents and child care outside the home?

Irrespective of her beliefs, the mayor and her supporters should stop hiding behind misinformation and in semi-secret meetings with their special-interest groups.

Mayors and city councils make choices. The choice regarding Menlo Park's role in child care is only one of several recent instances when the City Council voting block of Mayor Duboc, Nicholas Jellins and Mickie Winkler was out of touch. In future elections, Menlo Park voters would do well to break this block and restore empathy and open-mindedness to its City Council.

Gary Waymire
College Avenue, Menlo Park

E-mail a friend a link to this story.