Letters

Don’t push a ‘blank check’ on votersEditor’s note: The following letter was addressed to the Morgan Hill City Council regarding an agenda item at the July 20 council meeting, to consider a “resolution of necessity” for $38 million in bonds for city street repairs and maintenance—a precursor to placing the bond measure on the November ballot. The council approved the resolution unanimously, and will discuss a possible bond measure at the July 27 meeting. While this resolution is only a step allowing the council to preserve the option of placing a bond measure on the ballot, it is a step in a direction away from another issue that needs to be addressed. Issuing a bond doesn't resolve the problem of city leaders not being more attentive to their fiscal responsibility. These funding gaps have been a known issue for Morgan Hill for years, particularly with respect to street maintenance. Every budget available on the city's website, from 2008 to the present, has identified funding for street maintenance and repair as insufficient. Those same budgets continually noted increases in street maintenance backlogs.Yet other than minor attempts to reduce costs, such as the LED streetlight conversion, it's only been recently that the city has purposefully addressed the funding gaps through contracted analysis.I have heard many excuses for the decrease in infrastructure funding: economic downturn, elimination of the Redevelopment Agency, decline in gas tax revenue, lowest per capita tax level among cities in Santa Clara County. While all may be valid contributors to this deficit, there has been little mention of proactive steps to address projected funding shortfalls.Maintenance has continued to be deferred, maintenance backlogs have increased, and the funding gaps have grown larger. The response by the city has been to publicly advertise community engagement and use designed surveys as crutches to excuse their decisions as to what the community has voiced as its needs and priorities.What the city has not done is publicly advertise their responsibility for this fiscal problem.As the City of Morgan Hill has continued to grow, so has the infrastructure funding gap. It seems apparent the city cannot continue to grow at the rate proposed and add to an infrastructure it cannot already support. During the period of updating the General Plan and Residential Development Control System, the city council had the opportunity to make adjustments to the city's long-range plans that could have helped narrow these funding gaps. One of those adjustments should have included slowing Morgan Hill’s growth rate in order to lessen the burden of demands on city services and the associated costs. That the city council and planning commission continued their insistence on maintaining a similar level of growth that contributed to increases in these funding issues is irresponsible.The "quality of life" categories presented through the Godbe survey and the city's own attempts at community outreach are not things to be voted on or prioritized or subject to being questioned about their importance to the community. These are services expected to be provided by the city and managed accordingly. Paying off this debt with more debt is not a financial plan; it's a reaction.As the city has somehow been able to determine the amount of this potential bond at $38 million, officials should be prepared to explain to the community how the number was arrived at and explain the spending plan that comes with it.I will not support a "General Obligation" bond that does not detail where, how or for what my money is being spent. I will not support a blank check.Chris MonackMorgan Hill

On Tuesday morning, June 21, Morgan Hill firefighters and police officers stood watch on each of the U.S. 101 overpasses in our city in a moving and poignant tribute to show support for the memorial services for San Jose Police Officer Michael Katherman.

Graduation brings back memories

Dear Superintendent Betando and the Morgan Hill Unified School District,I implore you to rethink your high school graduation schedules. At the 2 p.m. June 3 graduation ceremony for Live Oak, the heat was so intense at least five people fainted. My 80-year-old parents were there to see their one and only grandchild graduate; they would not have missed it for the world. Unfortunately, despite sitting in the back row so that they could stay under umbrellas for shade and constantly spraying themselves with water, my father could only make it halfway through the ceremony. He became shaky and had to retreat to the car for air conditioning. My mother, whose heart is not functioning well, could barely make it back to the car after the ceremony.It was not just the spectators suffering. The entire front row of students was facing the sun in their full-length gowns. The teachers were in black gowns with no shade. The heat was so intense it was difficult to listen to the speakers. Those kids worked long and hard on their speeches, yet it was impossible to concentrate on what they were saying.After four years of supporting our children and their school, why would you subject us to sitting for hours in 100 degree temperatures on blazing hot artificial turf? June in Morgan Hill is often very hot and this is not the only year the temperature has been unbearable during graduation. Are you going to wait until someone actually dies in the heat before making changes?Please consider a morning or evening time for future graduation ceremonies.Becky WallingfordProud (but overheated) parent of a Live Oak graduate

Vote for experienceThe Voters within the Morgan Hill Unified School District will have a clear-cut choice to make in the election on June 7. Candidate Pamela Torrisi is a former paraeducator who worked for the district for over 30 years. She has proven leadership skills from several years as head of the classified employees union.Pam has been a member of our community for many years and is accepting campaign donations only from the local community. Her opponent Thomas Arnett has received $7,000 in campaign contributions from a group in Washington, D.C., called Leadership for Educational Equity. This is a pro-charter political action committee. He works as a researcher at an educational think tank that promotes disruptive innovation, yet he has limited experience as an educator in Teach for America and holds an MBA, but not a regular teaching credential.Voters must ask themselves what future they wish to see for our school district. Will it be a locally controlled free public education for all of our students, or a collection of for-profit corporate charter schools which could be controlled from anywhere in the country and selectively admit students to make their test scores look better and turn public tax dollars into profits for investors?Steven SpencerMorgan HillEditor’s note: See related news story on this website, in which Arnett says he is “not in favor of charter schools that are just trying to enroll students to make money.”Election should be about the issuesThe June 7 election is fast approaching, and as the national election gets more and more contentious, I’ve noticed that certain negative campaigning tactics have encroached upon the school board election here in Morgan Hill. I personally don’t feel that these methods have any place in a local election that involves two local Morgan Hill residents who both obviously have a deep dedication to education and to our school district.With that in mind, I’m writing to explain why, without cutting down the merits and reputation of Pam Torrisi, as a longtime Morgan Hill resident and alum of Live Oak High School, my family and I are supporting Tom Arnett in his run for MHUSD School Board. I’ve known Tom for over 15 years, my husband even longer, and graduated with him from Live Oak. At Live Oak, Tom was well known by other students, particularly in the music program in which we participated, for being a truly honest, caring person. It was no surprise to any of us when he was chosen to be the drum major of the Emerald Regime our senior year, and I wasn’t surprised either to see him pursue a career in education as his leadership skills were obvious even as teenagers.It seems like in the discussions I’ve seen on social media and in various local media outlets, there have been questions about Tom’s trustworthiness, even suggestions that he’s somehow shady or accepting money from nefarious sources who are seeking to, in the six-month time frame that Tom would be on the board, drastically change our school district in some way. Anyone who personally knows or has had a conversation with Tom would find these assertions almost comical, but I think it speaks to a bigger question of distrust in anyone running for political office. I often have those same misgivings where politics are concerned, but, fortunately, the decision to elect Tom or Pam does not need to be one based on who is corrupt or not.My family and I support Tom because we know he is dedicated to our district, we are interested in having someone with young children like we have with a voice on the board, and we are excited by Tom’s research and knowledge about innovative education methods.This election should be about the issues and policies that the candidates will be facing in the next six months. I urge you to make your decision in this election based upon which candidate best represents your interests and addresses your concerns.Sincerely,Hylary LocsinGilroy

On June 7, 2016 voters will once again have an opportunity to demonstrate their support for the acquisition, development, and operation of regional parks for everyone in Santa Clara County. With approval, Measure A will continue the Park Charter Fund, ensuring a critical local, stable funding source for Santa Clara County Parks until 2032.Measure A is NOT a new or additional tax— it simply dedicates a small portion of existing property tax revenue for County Parks. The Park Charter Fund equates to about 1 percent of the county’s total budget, and includes a mandate to acquire more parkland and develop new park facilities. The measure has been endorsed by scores of regional leaders, including all five county supervisors.Since 1972, Santa Clara County’s Park Charter Fund has acquired over 50,000 acres, including 29 parks, which provide a diverse range of recreational opportunities to residents and visitors alike. From kayaking on the bay to camping in the redwoods to learning about the history of agriculture in Silicon Valley, our regional parks provide enjoyment and inspiration for residents and visitors throughout the county.Santa Clara County is one of the fastest growing and most diverse regions in the country. Regional parks offer a multitude of ways for communities to connect and refresh.Upon the passage of Measure A this June, the county can use Park Charter Fund to ensure safe and well-maintained parks, open more lands to public use, enhance visitor experience, fund the regional trails network and complete the connected system of regional parks. In addition, Measure A will allow the parks department to continue to protect and preserve the natural beauty and biodiversity of our parks so current and future generations can enjoy all that nature has to offer.Larry Ames, former Santa Clara County Parks & Recreation Commissioner, said, “The county has done a remarkable job of acquiring and preserving land both for environmental protection and for future public enjoyment. But the county currently can’t open nearly a quarter of the land to the public yet; the lands need to be made safe and accessible. For example, old mine shafts need to be fenced off and old wells capped, and then amenities such as parking lots and sensitively sited hiking trails are needed so that the public can safely enjoy the lands they have helped preserve.”Yes on Parks! is leading the campaign to secure the next 15 years of park funding in Santa Clara County. For more information, visit YesOnParks.com.We are proud that our endorsers include: Honorable Zoe Lofgren, US Congress; Honorable Evan Low, CA State Assembly; Gustav Larson, Vice Mayor, Sunnyvale; Don Rocha, Councilmember, San Jose; Carl Guardino, President & CEO Silicon Valley Leadership Group; Peninsula Open Space Trust; Sempervirens Fund; SPUR San Jose; Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition San Jose? Parks Foundation.Garnetta AnnableChair, Yes On Parks

I am a Morgan Hill resident and have a question about the warning signs posted at Paradise park regarding Glyphosate (trade name: Roundup) spraying.Many people, including myself, walk this path everyday. There are kids being walked through the park to Paradise Valley Elementary School, people walking their dogs, squirrels, cats and other wildlife. Lots of ball games on the grounds, too. All that chemical poison and pollutant is going right into the groundwater and creek.Why is the city spraying with something so unhealthy when there are better alternatives? Not to mention the fact that we're enjoying seeing green after four years of drought!There’s an abundance of research on the dangers of Glyphosate.Experts at National Institutes of Health, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, World Health Organization and many countries are banning this based on medical evidence. WHO calls it "likely carcinogenic.”  There are a number of cities in the San Francisco Bay Area and beyond this state that are going green. Integrated Pest Management, which substantially reduces the use of pesticides, has been implemented in San Jose, San Francisco, Boulder, Davis, Santa Monica, Isla Vista and other cities. Some of the so-called “inert” ingredients in Roundup appear not to be so in Argentina, where the miscarriage rate is 100 times the norm. Thirty thousand physicians there have asked to ban it.Given all the foot traffic in the park, especially the little ones, I would respectfully request that the city investigate healthier “green” alternatives, especially with the drought situation.Sincerely,Marilyn HawkeMorgan Hill

I recommend and endorse Pam Torrisi for election to the Morgan Hill Unified School District Board of Education on June 7, 2016. Pam is the one candidate to bring back civility, honest and open dialogue and good governance principles to our school board.Pam's service to our community and school district has been long and commendable. She came to Morgan Hill as a young girl, attended middle school and graduated from Live Oak High School in 1969. She took a position with our district as a Teacher's Aide working with Special Needs students, retiring 30-plus years later with the highest of accolades. During her long tenure she was recognized by her peers and elected President of the Classified Employees bargaining unit, serving more than 10 years in that position.I am a founding member of Community for Positive Governance (CFPG), a grassroots organization formed a few months ago in response to the resignation of Amy Porter Jensen from our Board of Education. Ms. Porter Jensen resigned because she was bullied and harassed by some members of the community and at least one board member. It was apparent to CFPG that there was a high degree of dysfunction on the BOE. We adopted a goal of reestablishing Positive Governance in the BOE through the election of candidates that adhere to the principles and philosophy of Positive Governance. The June 7 election (to fill the Porter Jensen vacancy) will be our first chance to make that happen.Pam also lives in the new district that the board voted to adopt and will run again for the full term in November. We request your support in that endeavor.Please consider Pam Torrisi for MHUSD BOE.Respectfully,Roger C. KnopfMorgan Hill

Fellow Army veteran remembers KennedyMay I add to the chorus of praise for former Mayor Dennis Kennedy, to touch on another of his contributions.Fifty-two years ago, in 1964, Dennis and I served as fellow 1st Lieutenants on a mud-steeped old Luftwaffe air base near the West German-East German border outside Kassel, Germany. Dennis was the Executive Officer of our HAWK Missile Battery, which was armed with 110 men and 36 air defense missiles pointed east.Dennis was a superb officer, a tireless worker with the painstaking precision of the engineer that he was. I still have the mental image of him laboring at his desk, always the last officer to leave other than the night's duty officer.He was exceedingly generous to me, lending me not only his sports car once to drive the many kilometers to Group Headquarters in Kaiserslautern but also his tan summer dress uniform when I took a few days leave to see my parents in Cincinnati. The uniform still hangs in my attic closet.Dennis and I bonded immediately, in part because two of his friends back in California—Norm Matteoni and Bob Saxe—had been law school classmates of mine at Notre Dame.While no one was shooting at us in those mid-60s Cold War days, the duty was long and arduous. We officers pulled 24-hour duty several days a week, in addition to regular 10-hour days, often in the worst weather Northern Germany could throw at us. Through it all, Dennis Kennedy served his country admirably, always bearing that upbeat smile and a high sense of duty.When Dennis rotated back to the states for his Army discharge, I succeeded him as Battery Exec. To the surprise of none of you who knew him, the transition was seamless. Everything was in perfect order. It was an incredible privilege to serve with him and I cherish the memory.Edmund AdamsCincinnati, OhioSV Flex issues approach resolutionA recent Morgan Hill Times article, “Silicon Valley Flex Academy charter in danger?” (April 1 edition) was misleading and used out-of-date information.First, there is no adversarial relationship between the Santa Clara County Office of Education (SCCOE) and Silicon Valley Flex Academy. We are two educationally minded entities working together to find solutions to temporary complications.Second, the information in the Times’ article was outdated as it was based on information almost 30 days old. The staff of both SCCOE and Silicon Valley Flex have been communicating extensively since then and meeting to resolve all issues, a fact confirmed by both Silicon Valley Flex and the SCCOE staff. All issues have been resolved or are in the process of being resolved.Finally, it is important to note that the school’s educational practices and results were not called into question and the school was recently approved by the SCCOE board for a new term of five years.We have visitors from all over the world come to see our model. With every visit, we are celebrated for sharing this extraordinary model and the successes it has brought our students academically. As we continue to work with our colleagues at the SCCOE in resolving both the issues presented and their genesis, we will focus on continuing the provision of an outstanding education for the students, families and local community.Caroline WoodHead of School, Silicon Valley Flex AcademyEditor’s note: Full videos of the March 2, 2016 and Nov. 4, 2015 county board of education meetings—where the discussion of operations and finances at SV Flex took place—can be viewed on the SCCOE website sccoe.org.

On Nov. 19, 2015 a major update within the County of Santa Clara's General Plan became effective. The revised local-serving use definition, known as R-LU 57, attempts to set reasonable limits of "size, scale and intensity" of new institutional and commercial uses in the unincorporated areas. The change was initially quite well-received by neighborhoods, but after a short honeymoon of just four weeks, citizens revolted against the new law.I am the appellant in the Canh Thai Temple matter. This temple has become famous as the "bad neighbor Buddhist Temple in San Jose," but at stake are issues of even greater import than code compliance. In a recent open letter to the county supervisors, my neighbors and I urged awareness and action: "The current R-LU 57, ignoring Floor Area Ratio completely, encourages the buying of small lands for establishing institutions; it could even encourage the owner of a 15-acre property to split their land 10 times to create 10 Canh Thai Temples. We urge you to look at the long-term market-driven consequences of disregarding density and the General Plan."This temple is a peculiar case in point. It is on land that San Jose planners and voters designated as greenbelt by saying “Yes” to Measure K in November 2000, by an 80 percent landslide. For San Jose, the greenbelt is to be the green forever, as it is permanently delineated by the 15-percent slope contour. Even if Canh Thai Temple were to be identified as urban in scope—as the neighbors have protested, quite vigorously—there is zero chance of the property ever being annexed by San Jose. Measure K specifically requires any redrawing of the greenline to be approved by the voters.Two recent permit reviews have already eroded the credibility of the new "local-serving use." First was the approval of the VVGC (Hindu Center) on Dec. 17, 2015 by the Planning Commission. At 16,500 square feet, the VVGC will be the largest religious institution ever built in the unincorporated areas. Second is the Canh Thai Temple proposed for Evergreen, heard by the Board of Supervisors Feb. 9. The Canh Thai Temple, situated on a small 1.6-acre property, has more than triple the density of most other unincorporated religious institutions.Additionally, in the pipeline is the 29,000 square foot Cordoba Center. The unincorporated county has been the home of a dozen religious institutions, all under 10,000 square feet. Soon, it could be home to the newest megachurches.Overly dense and intense rural development has been an ongoing point of dispute between San Jose and the County over the years. Rural density is of enormous importance, since it limits the growth-inducing potential of developments that, otherwise, would become hidden future costs to the city—such as heavily used roads and other services.R-LU 57 formerly stated the following, to limit large uses in the rural residential areas: "Commercial, industrial and institutional uses may be established only where they serve the needs of the resident population and result in a net overall reduction of travel demand." To uproot discriminatory language about the origin of patrons, the new R-LU 57 replaces "local" with "local intensity:” New uses are now blind to origin of patrons; the new permits, instead, are compared to existing uses' building size and attendance limits. Furthermore, the size thresholds can be exceeded if developers include "maximal mitigations" of feasible scope, including financial feasibility. This begs the question: If you cannot afford to mitigate your large impacts, how could you afford to create big impacts and large buildings in the first place?The county, once again, is urbanizing. Owing to R-LU 57, it is only a matter of time before developers discover all those pots of gold and start looting. Only one thing can stop this runaway train: Reminding the supervisors that the County's General Plan has an underlying intention of low-density development. That intention should not be undermined by a stealth "small" change that is in fact far-reaching.