Letters: Teenagers and spray paint, a dangerous combination?

Dear Editor. On Friday and Saturday, a local artist will be
coming to the Morgan Hill Library. This artist, by the name of
Scape Martinez has been hired by the Santa Clara County Libraries
to paint a mural on a wall in the Morgan Hill Library.
Teenagers and spray paint, a dangerous combination?

Dear Editor.

On Friday and Saturday, a local artist will be coming to the Morgan Hill Library. This artist, by the name of Scape Martinez has been hired by the Santa Clara County Libraries to paint a mural on a wall in the Morgan Hill Library.

In addition to this, Martinez will be giving two art classes to local teens, ages 12 and older. This all seems like a grand affair, except for one thing, Scape Martinez is a street artist and his primary medium of choice is spray paint. Don’t get me wrong. I have a great appreciation for art, and I even have an appreciation for “street art.” Of course I only appreciate street art when it’s done on a canvas or if in a public place, by the permission of the owner. It also doesn’t bother me that the library hired a well-known local street artist to paint a mural. I’ve been shown some of Martinez’s work and it is very good. He appears to be a great artist and the mural will be a fantastic addition to the library, but as a “street artist,” I’m sure he’s not immune to controversy.

I am not bothered by street art, but what does worry me is impulsive teens. As a middle school teacher by day, and a Morgan Hill Arts Commissioner by night, I feel that I have a good understanding of both teens and art.

Yet, somehow I’m not getting excited about an art class that puts spray paint in the hands of children. As much as I’d like to say that they would recognize the distinction between art and vandalism, in my experience this will not be the case. There will likely be at least a few children who will get intrigued by the class, borrow a can of spray paint from their parents’ garage and sneak out at night in order to hone their newfound skills. When I brought this up to the library officials present at my last commission meeting, they looked at me like I was crazy and told me that Martinez stresses that street art is not the same as graffiti and encourages teens to obey the law. Although this may be what they are told during a class, it is my experience that what a teenager is told and what they wind up doing are often two separate things.

Furthermore, I can’t say that I’m not comforted by the fact that our public works department is vigilant about cleaning up graffiti. I see it everywhere, including on two stops signs on my street, in an affluent area of town nonetheless. My wife and I have been calling for a month asking the city to come clean it and guess what … it’s still there. Hence the problem with government, they can’t deal with the problems they have; yet they enact policies that may make them worse. They appear not to have the time or tax dollars to deal with the existing graffiti problem, but they do have the tax dollars available to put on a graffiti art class, teaching kids how to use spray paint. Does anyone else see the problem here, or am I crazy? If you feel the way I do please make your voice heard to City Council, the Morgan Hill Library, or the Santa Clara County Library administrative office.

Jonathan A. Brusco, a local middle school history teacher, member of Morgan Hill’s Library, Culture and Arts Commission, and a Morgan Hill resident

Longtime resident totally against building mosque in San Martin

Dear Editor,

I have been a resident of San Martin for 44 years and am totally opposed to the building of the mosque facility proposed on the 16-acre hillside on the west side of Monterey Road adjoining the Llagas Creek.

In 1995, Santa Clara County adopted the San Martin Integrated Design Plan for nonresidential buildings to keep the rural, country feel. Structures can be no more than two stories high with pitched roofs. A picture of the proposed mosque facility appeared in South Valley Newspapers in December, 2010. It was huge. It doesn’t comply with the Design Plan and it does not fit in the rural community of San Martin.

The residents of San Martin have not been notified, let alone the immediate residents of this proposed project by county officials. The county has not complied by it’s own rules.

A Baptist pastor met with county staff with a proposal on the adjoining property for a church and a school. The staff denied this proposal stating that the water level was too high and the percolation test would fail (percolation tests have been performed on the proposed property and have all failed). Also, the building could not be more than 10,000 square feet. How can one church and school be denied and yet the county is allowing another church (mosque), school, convalescent home and a cemetery to be built?

Because of the proposed cemetery, there is a potential for bacterial and viral contamination in our drinking water. The proposed project requires 1,500 gallons per minute of water. West San Martin Water Works can not provide that amount. So is the county going to let that requirement slide by so this project can go through?

This facility plans to serve people from south San Jose through San Benito County. Have county officials conducted any impact study for the traffic this project will create ?

With the low funding of tax monies coming into the county, how can the public fire and police services for this project be met when no tax revenue can be taken from a tax exempt facility?

County supervisor Mike Wasserman is in favor of this project. He has been endorsed by the Arab American Congress. Isn’t this a conflict of interest? (Is he another Don Gage who did not represent the South County residents?) Could it be he wants to enhance his political career, but has no respect for our rural community? If he wants that, then he had better start listening to our legitimate concerns because he will not get my vote.

With all that said, can county officials answer these questions for the community of San Martin? If there is to be a church (mosque), school, convalescent home, and a cemetery, why would it be built in the middle of rural San Martin? I have chosen to live in a rural area. If I wanted to live where there is more traffic, noise, large buildings, more people, then I would live in a city.

Janis Jud, San Martin

Liberal columnist’s tirade against former President Bush is getting old

Dear Editor,

Again your columnist Lisa (Pampuch) shows her one-sided liberal thinking (Around the Water Cooler Sept. 9) with her typical answer “it is all George Bush’s fault.” Is this what they teach in liberal journalism 101, blame the other guy?

I agree with some of the things she said, but to say “it is all Bush’s fault” is another half truth, which is why her writings are high school level at best. She needs to recognize that Obama has kept many of Bush policies intact. Also her point of Bush invading a country that did not attack us: I do not recall when Afghanistan, where Obama – our Nobel Peace Prize Winning President has escalated our military actions, ever attacked us. How about all the missiles (at 5 million dollars plus a day) that we have dropped daily, for the last how many months on Libya. When did they attack us? What about a president that says “I will close Gitmo in one year” and almost three years later it is still open. Do you honestly think these things are making the terrorists happy?     

Mark D. Reuter, Morgan Hill

Urge the City Council to reject rezoning proposal

Dear Editor,

When a buyer or investment group purchases property on the speculation that they will be able to flip the property, the public is not obligated to bail out the individual or entity when the speculation fails. And so it is the case with the Evergreen Investment Group on 18 acres near Condit Road. Converting commercial to residential by a zoning change constitutes a bailout, and we are tired of public bailouts. If we allow the precedent, City Hall would be overwhelmed with similar requests and compelled to approve.

Changing zoning so that the entity can post a profit cannot enter into the decision process, but long term community planning and compatibility must. Our General Plan cannot be subject to major revision on a parcel by parcel basis. I have served on a General Plan Commission and it is an intensive multi-year process, an extensive review of community growth and change, addressing not only land use but public safety, parks, transportation, water, streets, waste and other components in a review of the community as a whole. Therefore, such changes should be considered during a revision of the General Plan which occurs every 10 years.

Such efforts cannot be subject to indiscriminate change. The public has a right to feel secure in that the future follows an open community-approved plan and they will not be subject to the whims of financial self-interests that can place them at risk – period. I and others cannot be at every meeting where such changes are proposed and therefore trust our elected officials to uphold the plan except for extraordinary needs – not wants.

Therefore, I ask our council to reject the requested change and reserve such actions to the scheduled review process of the General Plan where such considerations are appropriate. 

Mark Grzan, Morgan Hill