‘Smoke-filled’ decisions over St. William site
The vitriolic attack upon Councilman Bob Gray by Chip Lion in
his letter to the editor (May 8) concerning the City purchase
of the St. William School property is inaccurate and intemperate.
The proposal before the City Council is not at all like the one
proposed by city staff last summer which envisioned purchase of
a portion of the property and upgrading the existing multi-purpose
building to a substandard gymnasium. That, Councilman Gray and
the majority of the council opposed. At that time residents were
also opposed to staff’s proposal and the council voted to discontinue
further acquisition efforts.
Following the November council election, the new majority reopened
the issue and support began to build for the purchase of the entire
5.7 acre parcel to be kept as open space. I observed that Bob
Gray supported open space for the entire site.
Acquisition of the site was on the agenda for the April 23 council
meeting, so there was nothing illegal about Gray’s motion. It
was on the agenda.
There is a valid contract for the purchase of the property by
Bob Taylor Homes for nearly $6 million, thus establishing the
market value of the site. I believe Gray moved to consider a purchase
of this magnitude in open session rather than in the smoke- filled
room atmosphere of the closed session, so the public would be
informed.
Later, the majority made the decision in the back room to pursue
acquisition.
The $6 million price range for the land, removal of the old buildings
and financing costs could well put the project over the $8 million
range. That is equivalent to over one-half of the city’s annual
operating budget of $15 million. A purchase of this magnitude
should be decided by the voters. A bond issue could finance it
and the cost to the average taxpayer would be a small amount each
year. Does the cost of an election seem significant when compared
to $8 million? Whose is the hypocrisy Mr. Lion?
Casto and La Poll received the most votes in last November’s election,
a bit over 4,000 each. There are over 19,000 registered voters
in Los Altos. Should three council people make a purchase decision
of this size when they represent only 21 percent of the registered
voters? That, I believe to be Councilman Gray’s point.
Bob Norton
Los Altos
Members represent voter backing of purchase
A few things about the issue raised by Bob Gray in the April 23City Council meeting:
1. When Gray made his motion to put the St. William issue on theNovember ballot as a binding vote, not only was he breaking therule that says a motion can’t be brought up for vote unless it’sbeen previously placed on the meeting’s agenda (it hadn’t), buthe was also shirking his duty as our elected representative, attemptingto foist off on the public a decision which council members areelected to make.
2. Francis La Poll and Kris Casto were the two top vote-gettersin November’s council election, and both ran on platforms forwhich acquisition of the St. William site for open space parkand recreation purposes was a strong plank. So we’ve already heardthe voice of the voters on this issue.
3. This issue could only be put on the November ballot as an advisoryreferendum, not a binding vote. Yet putting it on the ballot wouldengender extra expenses to the City. Knowing all that, why don’twe save all the fuss and let our Council do the job we electedit to do?
John A. Reed
Los Altos
Go to: [This Week’s Stories][Search All Issues][LA Online]
© Copyright 1996. Select Communications, Inc. All rightsreserved.
