Atherton: A Government or a Business?

[Re-posted from Almanac blog]
Atherton, posted by please stop, a resident of the Atherton: other neighborhood
This Wednesday a very important vote on employee’s compensation/benefits will be made by the Council to chart the course of Atherton’s employees and managers for the future. This will be a last ditch effort by a group of Councilmembers who see Atherton as a business where the mission is to deliver the product at the lowest possible cost using the fewest and cheapest employees one can find. Given the wording of the pending resolution the rational is built on “savings”. Likely the business backgrounds of the various personalities involved see their duty as business managers. They see the need for this hurried vote as they realize change is coming. The new moderate mixture of council members will likely see Atherton as a small town government serving the residents and responding to their needs for safety, roads and infrastructure.

The last ten years of Atherton’s governance is not pretty. It has been marked by a toxic mixture of various Council members who are at war with each other, with multiple departures of key employees, and costly lawsuits. There is no vision to replace decrepit town buildings. The recent effort at placing a library in the Park was a total disaster in that the will and appeals of the majority of the residents was totally ignored from the beginning and then when using the ballot box was overwhelming slapped down.

While it appears that the resolution on compensation and benefits will probably be passed unless it is immediately pulled as an agenda item. The timing is just wrong in that a new council will not be allowed to consider the matter. The old Council has no business making long term decisions in the final minutes of their term that a new Council will have to live with over a long period of time. The voters have indicated they want a change in the nature of Atherton’s government. The remuneration issue has not been explained in terms of fiscal need or discussed in public meetings. The resulting effect will be not being able to attract the best employees available. What this vote will produce is more employee turnover, less effective employees and in the end more expense for the taxpayers of Atherton.

This vote will have consequences in upcoming contract negations with the sworn police officers. It would not be a surprise if many are planning to leave right now as they see what the future holds in Atherton. Many communities are seeking trained police officers from adjacent communities (lateral transfers) and enhancing benefits. For instance Antioch, California is considering making benefits more attractive as they find training and experience are costly items.

http://www.contracostatimes.com/ci_22055565/antioch-looks-at-ways-entice-veteran-police-officers

The need for a renew of the Parcel Tax is obvious but the intent of this vote is to do away with it having “saved” costly employee expense. The private funding effort of a new Town Center which residents endorsed will likely stall in absence of a long-term vision for the Atherton Police Department and other town service employees. As a new library or remodeled one is mixed into Town Center concept it likely too will stall.

While the result of the Wednesday vote can possibly be undone in the months ahead, it will be a reflection of today’s dysfunctional Council for a long time. Atherton residents should demand a responsive government and are tired of the last ten years of poor governance. Atherton is not a business but an organization to serve the needs and reflect the will of the residents. The lame duck council should not vote on anything of a long term nature right now but take their victory lap, have their party and get out of the way.

November 2012 Council Agenda

 

To read any of the council reports associated with these agenda items, go to the Town website (http://www.ci.atherton.ca.us/city-council/index.html) and click the link to download the .pdf packet that corresponds with the agenda Item No. that you want to read.

Measure M

From: Paul Tonelli  Date: Wed Nov 7, 2012 3:19 pm Subject: Measure M

 

I think the voters have clearly voiced their opinions in regards to the Atherton measures on the ballot yesterday.  With regards to Measure M, it is my understanding that the vote shows the town approves the Little League proposal to improve/expand the baseball field at Holbrook-Palmer Park.  It is also my understanding that the proposal must still go through the proper approvals with the Park and Recreation Commission and the Town Council.   Is this correct??  IF this is correct, then is is possible for the Park Commission or the Town Council to modify the proposal as was suggested by Elizabeth Lewis during the Little League proposal to council earlier this year.  Before this issue was put on the ballot, it seemed the council would be willing to consider the proposal piece meal in order to determine which improvements/expansions suit the park. 

 

It is my humble opinion that parts of the Little League proposal are necessary and some are unnecessary.  Yes, the field needs to be improved.  Yes, bathrooms in that part of the park would be welcome not only to Little League supporters, but by tennis participants as well.  No, we do not need a permanent scoreboard.  No, we do not need permanent foul poles, and we most certainly do not need a permanent 200-seat capacity grandstand.  I truly think that we can satisfy the basic needs of Little League while keeping the baseball field a low-key, fitting addition to the park.  Details on fencing, dugouts, and the backstop would have to be worked out.  I would once again remind interested parties that 10 years ago Little League agreed to maintain the existing backstop and fencing, and they have fallen short of their promise.

 

I think we have an opportunity for a compromise here that would satisfy both Little League and residents who are proponents of a more bucolic, botanical environment.  I believe Little League should be amenable to scaling back their proposal to an extent, while others should recognize the need for improvements in the field and limited expansion of facilities.  Full scale development of the Little League proposal would add permanent structures (grandstand, scoreboard, dugouts, foul poles) that would be used for only one-quarter of the year.

 

However you stand on this issue I would encourage you to keep track of the progress of the proposal.  I would also encourage you to participate in the discussion when the issue comes before the Park Commission and the Town Council. 

 

I'd also like to thank everyone who took the time to vote in this election.  It was certainly one of the most spirted and active elections in the 15 years my wife and I have lived in Atherton.  Agree or disagree with the results, residents had the time and the available information to inform themselves of the issues/candidates and to make the decision they thought was best for the town.   I think the town and the process come out on top this time around.

 

Sincerely,

Paul Tonelli

Atherton Election Results

From: "Didi Fisher"
Date: November 7, 2012 8:22:41 AM PST
To: "Athertonians Athertonians"
Subject: [Athertonians] election


Good morning,

Congratulations to Elizabeth Lewis and Cary Wiest! They won last night and will be the new city council members.

No on measure F won with 68.94% of the vote.

Thank you all for the interest and help! Hopefully now the Town will have a master plan phase that will engage many residents .

Thank you.  Didi Fisher

                                                           __________________

From: "WRWidmer"
Date: November 7, 2012 9:10:07 AM PST
To: Athertonians@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Athertonians] Election Results

Atherton Residents:

The people have spoken on the Library, Ballpark and New Town Center. During the development of the ballot measures I insisted these be binding meaning your vote sets firm parameters for the Council to follow. This is why I wanted votes on all three of these key issues. This provides us all with a clear direction moving forward.

My vote of support on the Library measure was inline with my 2010 campaign platform. It is clear that my position misread the community. Please rest assured I will ensure my actions are inline with the voter mandates on this issue as well as on the other two.

I congratulate Elizabeth on her re-election and our new Council member, Cary, whom I am looking forward to working with.

Bill Widmer
                                                           __________________

Have Secret Sacramento Union Funds Entered Atherton Politics?

 From: Colleen Anderson
Date: Fri Nov 2, 2012 4:17 pm
Subject: Fwd: Have Secret Sacramento Union Funds Entered Atherton Politics? 

Begin forwarded message:

From: Save Our Park <saveathertonspark@gmail.com>

Subject: Have Secret Sacramento Union Funds Entered Atherton Politics?

Date: November 2, 2012 4:10:12 PM PDT

To: lovemypaws@yahoo.com

Reply-To: saveathertonspark@gmail.com

Having trouble viewing this email? Click here

Is the SEIU, a public employee union, secretly funding the KUPPERMAN and the YES on F Campaigns to win itself fully-protected library jobs in an over-sized library in our park?  WHAT WE KNOW:   The YES on F and KUPPERMAN Campaigns have produced a blizzard of campaign materials, blanketing Atherton with dozens of mailings per household.  The barrage of political consultant-style mailings have raised considerable alarm among those fighting to protect the park and keep the library appropriate for Atherton. CONCERNS:    With campaigns "valued" at well over $35,000 each, where could the funding for all these materials be coming from!  Could YES on F or KUPPERMAN be using reserved JPA Library Tax Funds? WHAT WE KNOW:   From the recent disclosures, YES on F reported nearly $23,000 in expenses and total contributions of $6,875 (less than 30% of what they've spent), yet they have paid only $33, less than .15% of their costs!  The KUPPERMAN Campaign (with all the same materials and maybe more) reported less than $3,000 in total expenses and contributions of $6,500, and one payment of $857! CONCERNS:   Who would extend these groups so much credit?  How can KUPPERMAN's costs be $20,000 less than those of YES?  Why weren't those costs reported by Kupperman and who is going to pay all these huge campaign costs? WHAT WE KNOW:  The KUPPERMAN Campaign: 1)  paid for ads in the Almanac, 2) hired a Sacramento-based accountant, and 3) borrowed money from her husband to pay for beverages, office supplies and postage.  Yes on F Campaign: 1) got Almanac ads, 2) hired Duffy & Capitolo, a Sacramento-based political consultant and 3) hired Lowercase Productions, a graphic designer but paid nothing for any of these services!  That is virtually all that is reported! CONCERNS:   The reports leave big gaps in required information: clearly more is going on with the professional campaign materials evident from both groups. Could funding somehow be coming from the San Mateo Co. Library staff who worked so closely with Kupperman on the Atherton Library Building Steering Committee? WHAT WE KNOW:  It turns out that San Mateo Co. Library professionals are members of a public employee union, called the Service Employees International Union, or SEIU, based in Sacramento.  We learned that Duffy & Capitolo does work for the SEIU, including the SEIU's campaign on AB 438.  The purpose of AB 438 is described as follows: to make it as painful as possible for localities to withdraw from a county library system in favor of more cost-effective private management. The bill lets a city contract for library-management services only if no city or library employees would be "displaced." Librarians couldn't even be transferred from one library branch to another, much less laid off. Another provision would mandate that the private operator provide compensation that does not "undercut city or library district pay rates." This controversial bill was passed after a year of intense lobbying effort by the SEIU, starting in 2010.  The San Mateo Co. branch of the SEIU had their own campaign called "Our Libraries Are Not for Sale" to fight privatization.  Atherton is one of only a few towns in San Mateo County with excess library funds.  2010 is when the Atherton Council initially rejected the Library JPA staff's (and therefore SEIU's) recommendation to triple the size of our library and move it to the Park. CONCERNS:   San Mateo Co. Library staff's recommendation that Atherton build a larger library than what the town itself needs constitutes a conflict of interest and deserved vetting that it hasn't gotten. Residents raised concerns and complaints about being excluded from the decision-making, so why didn't our informed council member McKeithen and committee Chair, Denise Kupperman, try to help them? Why were residents attacked instead?  Did the San Mateo Library Staff get the SEIU to secretly put its financial weight behind KUPPERMAN and YES on F to finish the job that the Library JPA staff started, without disclosing their conflicted roles in the whole process?  Is this why Kupperman fails to mention the library issue and hides her central role on the committee in her materials and only talks about keeping Atherton "Safe and Beautiful?"  WHAT WE KNOW:  Denise Kupperman and Kathy McKeithen have fought the right of residents to make the decisions about their own library. McKeithen vacates her majority seat this term.  If elected, Kupperman will inherit that majority on a council divided between those who would force a library into the park and those who care to represent residents. If residents want to determine what library services they fund, be it school libraries or digital technology before they go ahead and build another big structure and fill it with books and librarians, we need representatives who are not allied with the SEIU.  Combined with AB 438, YES on F and Kupperman will checkmate the ability of Atherton residents to bring rationality to the ever increasing amount of funding used for the library even as budget shortages force us to outsource all other town services-including our Police. CONCERNS:  We pulled these facts together so late but if you haven't voted yet, please VOTE NO ON F and NO to KUPPERMAN. Our library, our park and our town depend on it!

Outsourcing Police - Transparency in Governance

November 1, 2012

 

Dear Athertonians,

October 31 we received a letter dated October 18 from "The Mayor" (no name) of Atherton.

We believe the mailing to be a misuse of taxpayer dollars for political purposes.  If the Mayor does not like the people (Elizabeth Lewis and Cary Wiest) the APOA endorsed for council, he should have to use his own campaign funds to promulgate his beliefs just as the Atherton Police Officers Association did. The Mayor needs to be a statesman. Referring to our police as people who issue unspecified "misleading statements" is not statesmanship.

What can be his agenda?  Is it to go into negotiations next year in hostility so that he can walk from the talk and justify outsourcing? Is it to get his candidates elected?

Among other questions my wife and I would like to see answered publicly:

1. The letter was unsigned. Is the Mayor representing the entire Council? Did the whole council approve his message?
2. How about informal or sub-committee discussions on local policing? I just do not believe there have been no communications with APOA.
3. Incomplete budget information was given regarding our police force - how about comparing staffing and response rates to last year, not to half a decade ago?

And we could go on....

 

We moved here from 30+ years in Palo Alto several years ago. In Palo Alto I served on the school board for eight years. I believed then - and I believe today - that honesty and transparency are absolute requisites of community leaders, and I am troubled that the Atherton council may not be living up to these essential attributes of effective representatives. I have a strong position on the Atherton Police Department - KEEP IT!  However, it is true that defined benefit retirement plan funding is an issue for all employers, especially public ones, and it is an issue that must be faced and addressed in a reasoned, public, and cooperative fashion. It seems to me, without being privy to all the communications, formal and informal, that the APOA has been willing to do this but has been stonewalled by the current council majority, one reason why we have contributed to the APOA-PAC.

A two-tier police retirement plan would be a good first step although the devil always is in the details. Of course we should have a School Resource Officer - duh! Of course we should support renewal of the parcel tax; it's not like our friends and neighbors cannot afford it. As to agendizing items for public council discussion, I had no idea it apparently takes a majority; that's nonsense. Any one elected council member should have that right. Here in Atherton we all have our own little private enclaves, and we like it that way. Unfortunately, that leads to a disregard for - and disinterest in - local governance. Our council does not represent the talent that resides in this town because most of us do not care enough to be involved. We need more who do. 

 - Don Way, 124 Patricia Drive , Atherton 

Comments on Atherton Press Release Regarding APOA-PAC Activities

Dear Friends and Neighbors,

 

Over the weekend I was asked to send out a letter and recruit other co-signers to respond to a Press Release of the Town which is a letter from Mayor Widmer regarding the APOA-PAC.

 

During my eight years on the council, I worked with the Atherton Police on numerous issues including Home Emergency Diaster Response, Citizens Diaster Training, School Safety, and Drug Prevention programs. I respect their work. However Pension Reform is a must and the APOA web site  states they have put Pension Reform on the table.  I started working with the California League of Cities in 2006 on the need for Pension Reform-for more information on either of these topics visit http://www.charlesmarsala.com/. 

 

Please advise me if you are interested in co-signing this request to council as there is an interest to do printed version of the letter. You can also forward the request to the city manager. 

 

The Mayor was authorized to write a "High Level" letter to residents by the council responding to a recent letter the Atherton Police PAC have sent out regarding the possible Outsourcing of the Police by the Council and the APOA-PAC endorsement of Elizabeth Lewis and Cary Wiest for City Council. Council Members Widmer, McKeithen, and Dobbie are supporting Denise Kupperman and Greg Conlon.

 

The Mayor's letter was not reviewed by the full council, nor was the funding of the mailing discussed. A review by the full council might have resulted in a different letter. 

 

Residents have emailed me that the Mayor's letter does not accurately portray the situation and clarifying response is warranted. Perhaps I was asked to write the response as the most recent former council member, my position that both sides work together to solve the defined benefit pension problem, someone who has worked with the four candidates for years and believes all four candidates will work hard for Atherton, and someone familiar with the issues.

 

The mayor's letter opens that the APOA-PAC made several assertions that misrepresent the facts but does not list them.  I do not see how this statement will lead to both sides working together.

   

The Mayor's letter states:

"The City Council has not, held any discussions at any Council meeting regarding plans or potential plans to outsource our police department services. Police officers have not been laid off from the Atherton Police Department. The current 5-year contract expires on September 30, 2013. Formal negotiations on that contract have not yet begun.

 

The Mayor has also released a You Tube Video stating he wants to Sunset the Parcel Tax in 2014. He does not state how the $1.8M in lost funding will be replaced. 

 

I did some research and found the APOA-PAC web site:  www.athertonpolice.com/Pac has a differing opinion of the current situation and supports its position with video tapes of Finance Committee meetings, charts, and other evidence.  For instance the APOA-PAC states that concessions -including a two tier retirement plan- have been offered to the council with no response; that officers have retired but new officers have not been recruited - thus overall staffing has been reduced.  The School Resource Officer position is now not filled.

  

When I campaigned for city council in 2000, it was to fill the School Resource Officer position which not filled due to budget  cuts in 2000 after the defeat of the Parcel Tax. The SRO position is a proactive means to reduce crime in the schools.

 

Here are some of the "High Level" issues and clarifying questions we believe the council and individual council members should address in a press release.  

 

Dear Mayor and/or  Council members separately,

 

Please provide us with a high level Press Release of the following:

 

The finances of Atherton. Is the budget balanced?

 

Advise us of how much unfunded pension debt Atherton has and the plan to pay for it.

If you plan as a council or as individuals to sunset the Parcel Tax in 2014 please advise us.

 

How will you fund Police Services in the future?

 

Do you plan to advocate switching to a Charter City and having Real Estate Transfer Taxes?

 

When do you foresee placing outsourcing the police to a public vote?

  

In the future would you reduce to either 2 or 1 the number of council members required to place an item on the agenda, this will give the residents greater ability to express their view points.

 

Has the Atherton Police offered any salary and benefit concessions "formally or informally" to any council member or committee or to the council  in closed sessions?

 

Has Police staffing been reduced from other methods besides layoffs, such as retirement?

 

Please respect the right to Freedom of Speech of the APOA-PAC and the Athertonians Yahoo Users Group. Rather then seek to discredit these groups by claiming they make "False and Misleading" Statements,--- create agenda items in the evening for residents to advise you how they feel, have dialog on the controversial topics, and work together to resolve the challenges and opportunities Atherton faces. 

 

It has been stated that the Library in the Park will be built without any additional taxpayer dollars, yet funds for a traffic light on Middlefield and a turn lane on El Camino Real will be needed. Are there other expenses that have yet to be reported to the residents?  The Library fund has $5M and the Library is expected to cost more than $6M, will additional taxpayer dollars be needed to complete the project?

Accidents Waiting to Happen

Measure F will be on the ballot this November for Atherton residents to vote for approval or not for the construction of a 13,000 square foot building in Holbrook Park to house a new library and community center building. Of concern is the traffic produced by an estimated 9,000 additional users from outside Atherton.

The Environmental Impact Report report stated, "Even with the implementation of the mitigations measure recommended in Section IV.D Transportation, Circulation, Parking the proposed project would result in significant and unavoidable impact to the total operation of the El Camino Real/ Watkins Avenue intersection."

During the review process over the location of the library in the Park the Town Council refused to allow the Transportation Committee to review the proposed plan. Various proponents of the project have indicated that this is not an Atherton problem as the Town has no control over El Camino Real as this is a State controlled roadway.

From the County Almanac April 3, 2012

John Ruggeiro, a Transportation Committee member, said he has long been concerned with traffic impacts resulting from a library in Holbrook-Palmer Park, and committee members have requested that the matter be put on the Transportation Committee agenda. That request has been denied by the town, he said.

The record of accidents at this intersection

The Atherton Police Department records for the past four and half years (2008 to present) indicate there have been a total of eleven vehicle, bicycle, pedestrian (or combination of) accidents at or near this intersection. Nine of these have involved personal injury accidents and there has been one fatality.

Several accidents have been detailed in Country Almanac articles: http://www.almanacnews.com/news/show_story.php?id=7557 http://www.almanacnews.com/story.php?story_id=4578

A new problem--- 1906 El Camino Real Building

The building at 1906 El Camino (site of the old Acorn Restaurant) although completed on 2010 has been vacant for some time. It was permitted by Menlo Park as a medical/dental office building and has 45 parking spaces. It appears the building will soon be occupied and considerably add to the traffic volume and congestion either on El Camino Real or Watkins as typically these office visits will be of short duration. When proposed the traffic produced by this building was well documented and considered but Menlo Park went ahead. Other developments to the south of Watkins along El Camino Real planned in the near future will also add to the traffic volume as noted in this article. http://www.almanacnews.com/story.php?story_id=5490

The Town Council is ignoring their responsibility for this dangerous intersection and to intentionally add more traffic and congestion over an intersection that cannot be fixed is morally wrong and a violation of their civic responsibility. While the law and territorial boundaries might allow the Town Council to avoid direct legal responsibility either individually or as a group they are knowingly putting people at risk for injury or death in their desire to build the library in the park. This is wrong.

Please vote NO on Measure F.

Police service impact at the proposed Park Library location

From: "chev46"

Date: October 24, 2012 5:51:39 AM PDT

To: Athertonians@yahoogroups.com

Subject: [Athertonians] Police service impact at the proposed Park Library location

Measure F will be on the ballot this November for Atherton residents to vote for approval or not for the construction of a 13,000 square foot building in Holbrook Park to house a new library and community center building. Of concern is the traffic produced by an estimated 9,000 additional users from outside Atherton.

The EIR accepted and approved by the Town Council reached the conclusion regarding the impact on police services that the project would have a Less Than Significant (LTS) impact on the Police Department.

The conclusion stated the 20% increase in calls for service could be expected and accommodated without impact to the Atherton Police Department. We believe this conclusion is flawed and incorrect.

The EIR states: It could be conservatively assumed that with an increase in size from 6,038 to 13,500 square feet, average increases in calls for service at the new library could double or even triple, for an increase from 1 to 2 per month to 2 to 6 per month, increasing overall calls to the park from an average of 21 month to about 27 per month (or a 20 percent increase). – Appendix B, Page 66

This study acknowledges that the majority of calls to Holbrook Palmer Park are "security checks". These checks are merely log entries to ensure Officers are checking the Park. They consist, generally, of an Officer driving through the Park. These calls require minimal resources.

Service calls to the library can require considerably more resources including multiple Officers and, possibly, investigative resources. Bundling these types of calls into "security checks" and concluding the impact would be minimal is misleading. The conclusion doesn't adequately capture the possible additional demand on finite law enforcement resources, which could very well be significant.

Moreover, the report only measures the impact on "Priority 1" call response times. While these response times might not suffer, the impact on other calls is less obvious. Lower priority calls, such as proactive traffic enforcement, traffic complaints, neighborhood patrols, house checks, and even suspicious person calls could all take a lesser priority to a library related call.

Anecdotal information from other communities suggests that public libraries do impact law enforcement resources. Aside from the Redwood City library information included in the DEIR, the Mountain View Public Library and Police Department published a presentation on 12-22-11 that documented their library related law enforcement problems.

Mountain View has a 30,000 square foot library that generates 3,000 behavior incidents a year. (Using that ratio, Atherton's 13,500 square foot library would have 1,350 such incidents.) Mountain View Police hired uniformed "Police Assistants" to help with public security concerns. These Assistants help with the following calls: lost children, behavior policy issues, pornography, angry customers, and theft deterrence.

It is apparent that the EIR should have made a more realistic assessment of the increased demand upon the service calls for the Atherton Police Department. If the Police Department budget needs to be adjusted to accommodate these mitigation steps that information should be recognized as Measure F is considered by Atherton voters.

The unknown part of the library in the park is exactly how much costs are going to be assumed by the Joint Power Authority. That part including additional police services as well as various park overhead and maintenance items have not been disclosed and the JPA when questioned by Councilmember Carlson repeatedly responded:

Q: To what extent will the JPA reimbursing the town for extra security and traffic enforcement, traffic lights and other out-of-pocket costs associated with having a park library?

The Library JPA Agreement states the following, "excess funds shall be spent on library related Activities within that member city library (hereinafter, "Donor City") including, but not limited to Facility maintenance, facility remodeling, or expansion, increased service hours, or increased book purchases, as mutually agreed by the Library JPA and the city council."

In absence of the complete disclosure of how much additional the Library in the Park location is going to cost Atherton it would seem prudent to demand this information be furnished before voters decide by vote. If it is not disclosed please vote: NO ON MEASURE F

Framing Atherton's Issues

Atherton residents have the chance to vote on four important issues—3 ballot measures dealing with proposed town projects and the future composition of the council.  Below is some guidance that should help those residents who are not familiar with these issues or the underlying disputes that frame the issues.

Ballot Measures

    1)  Ballpark - Measure M  This one is easy.  The local Little League is proposing to pay for and make needed improvements to the Little League Field and adjacent tennis courts, to be funded by Little League.  Exactly what will be done will still have to be vetted and approved by council. Very straightforward. 

    2)  Town Center Funding - Measure L   A confusing and confused ballot measure asking:  Should the Town "primarily use private donations to construct and design a new Town Center?"  Contrary to what some think, this does not ask voters to approve a decision to build a new town center. There is a fairly robust consensus that a Town Center needs to be built.  There is also no way that a Town Center could be built without private donations. This measure seeking voter approval to limit the town to private donations however is akin to the council saying, "Tell us we can't decide to use any of our existing tax revenues to help build the Town Center." Council dysfunction could not be clearer. 

     3)  Library in the Park - Measure F   Many will see this measure and wonder why there's suddenly discussion about building a new library.  There's no record of residents being unhappy with Atherton's library or its failure to meet our community needs.  It's not a stretch to say that the proposed library is not a solution to the community's problem with the town's library.  Rather, the new library is a solution to "fiscal" problems — namely, the library has too much town money and the park too little!

Whether or not to abandon the town's quaint facility in town and build a large new structure for the library where the Main House currently is sited is the matter over which community controversy has raged for a full year.  There are two clear camps and their views are very different.  One key area of dispute is over whether or not there has been adequate community process for us to have arrived at a solution that the community is happy with.  There's a big dispute on basic facts.  Those with control over the process, namely the Library Committee and their three council advocates say "Yes," dozens (do I hear hundreds) of meetings.  Those for whom the process was actually intended to make happy, ie residents, emphatically say "No."  If hundreds of residents are really unhappy with the process provided for making this important community decision, can they all really be considered sour grapes?  One can rightly question whether an objective council could view such a process as a success? 

Luckily, regarding government matters, facts relating to public meetings are a matter of public record. A review of the committee's claims for dozens of meetings, finds this claim quite specious. The difference is simply a failure to distinguish between the committee's own quite numerous working meetings (which are public meetings by law but which were uniformly not attended by the general public), and the very few organized community workshops, for which the committee made distinct if modest outreach efforts to inform residents to attend. These few publicized workshops the general public did attend and expressed active interest in the issue. The two most important of these workshops were noticed with a single, glossy mailed postcard and held in mid-summer, 2011.

Luckily, California's Brown Act provides protection from efforts to make important community decisions behind closed doors.  A very thorough review of the available minutes of the public meetings held simply does not support the Committee's claims. There were only 3 community workshops held in which the topic of location was addressed after initial presentations by the committee. The discussions that followed with the community reveal that there were more questions than answers, many objections and no consensus. Three similar meetings did not progress the discussion: these were clearly introductions to the issue, with no carry forward consideration of matters raised at prior meetings.  There was simply no session held for the community which evidence either a vetting process or the culmination of a dialectic process and arrival at a decision with community involvement.  All other meetings that the committee claims to have held were either not public (sub-committee meetings without an agenda), not reported (an early focus group held with a neighborhood association) or did not address the topic of location (the focus groups and four publicized workshops held after the council approved the location decision).

As troubling as these findings are, the real problem is the one resulting from the failure of such a process to adequately address important questions, all of which are still controversial and unanswered. Why, in an era of eBooks and iPads do we need a bigger library?  Can't we use funds to support Atherton's school libraries or implement digital solutions?  What will be the ongoing operating costs of the county library? If it turns out we need traffic lights on Watkins, who pays for those?  How well were increases in traffic from Facebook and the medical office at El Camino considered?  Why wouldn't we want our large "community meeting spaces" in our town center?  Will students even go to libraries in two years, in ten?  If we are bulldozing the Main House and the surrounding mature trees, why can't we put in a swimming pool or a soccer field?  How will the park support its other maintenance costs if we don't have the Main House to rent? How many extra cars are expected to be parked?  How much space will be left for recreational users? How will we address park safety and increased police costs due to vagrants in the park after park hours?  None of these questions have been adequately addressed and all of them have the potential to significantly impact what kind of library the community needs.  We don't really know if we have the right solution to the problem of having so much library tax money to spend. 

It is clear that the Atherton community is not just full of cry babies but actually has smart, thoughtful, concerned residents who care to help sort out these complex issues.  It is also apparent that they believe they have been (and there is no evidence that they haven't been) excluded from what was meant to be a community decision-making process.  When those enlisted to conduct a service on behalf of the public instead abbreviate and mask their process, and then publish deliberately misleading and self-serving information, whether or not you agree with the resulting outcome, the decision should not be validated.  The community deserves much better treatment before committing as much as $8,000,000 in town funds for a massively expensive development project (even though these were previously collected tax funds).  It has demanded a better process to resolve these questions and it is something of a travesty that only in the 11th hour, have residents even been granted only a thumbs-up or thumbs down vote.  Even in Atherton, a one person majority vote can deny a whole community that right! 


Council Composition

Library Politics Dominate.  The current council has pushed the library project through with the help of three openly pro-Library advocates who also believe council alone should decide this issue: McKeithen, Widmer and Dobbie.  Elizabeth Lewis and Jerry Carlson, the two minority council members, have advocated on behalf of having concerns expressed by residents fully aired and addressed by the council and both have declined to voice or assert their personal viewpoints.  This 3-2 division of the council has dominated politics in the last two years. One seat from each of these two groups is open.  Thus, residents have the option of electing new representatives that maintain the majority power in the hands of Pro-Library and Council-Control group or which re-balance the power of the council in support of residents' right to have their voices heard.

Vice Mayor Elizabeth Lewis, the only incumbent, has proven herself to be a staunch supporter of the concept of a representative council, and has spoken out on numerous occasions in council meetings on behalf of resident groups. Lewis has also worked against the tactics of the council majority to denigrade concerns expressed about the Library process by hundreds of residents.  A vote to re-elect Ms. Lewis would clearly create the "tie" vote between those pushing the library and those seeking to maintain a democratic and inclusive community process.  For those who want to do that, this candidate has the track record.

It is the second council choice that is difficult, as this one is the seat that tips the scale and choices are among those much less well-known candidates.  Only one of these candidates has any kind of Atherton record to look at.  This is Denise Kupperman, who is the Chair of the Library Committee and who many attribute to being one of the architects of the Library's choice of community process.  Ms. Kupperman has been the public face of the Library Committee, appearing and speaking at all council meetings on behalf of the Library Project and the voice of the committee, with frequent viewpoints published on the project in the Almanac.  She has endorsed "Yes on F" and is considered by many to be a protege to Council member McKeithen, with whom she has worked closely as leaders of the Library Committee.  Ms. Kupperman's record is equally clear and her election would be enough to tip the balance to the Pro-Library/CouncilControl majority on the council. (We note with dismay that Ms. Kupperman has downplayed her role as chair of the Library Committee throughout her campaign and appears to want to distance herself from personal responsibility for the polarizing actions of that committee.)

Two other candidates.  Two other candidates entered the race.  Cary Wiest, who ran for council in 2010 had a very strong showing but was edged out with a third place finish.  Greg Conlon has not run for a council seat in Atherton previously, although he recently ran for U.S Senate this past spring.  Denise Kupperman suggested that he run for Atherton council.  At the League of Women Voter Candidate Debate both Mr. Wiest and Mr. Conlon made the case that they were open-minded about the outcome of the Library project, which will be determined by Measure F.  Mr. Wiest has endorsed the "No on F" and also was endorsed by the Atherton Police Officers' Association (as was Ms. Lewis).

Other Important Town Issues.  Critical upcoming issues include: determining process for drawing up a town-wide Master Plan (if Measure F is defeated), leadership for raising funding for a new Town Center and renewal of the Parcel Tax for continued funding of Public Works and Police Services for Atherton.  (Surprisingly, some members of the council have recommended outsourcing police services to the county sheriff.  This issue is heating up, as negotiations begin this coming spring for a new police contract and decisions have to be made about whether space is in provided for the Police Department in the town center.) Additionally, Atherton has begun to explore whether to change form to become a Charter City and whether to leave the Library JPA, so as to have more control over town approved uses of the Library Tax revenues (now up to 10% of total town revenue and growing) which the Library JPA has recently moved to keep in full.  We also need to wrestle with High Speed Rail issues, improving bike safety on our streets and many other things.

Needless to say, all of these matters require that our council representatives care to hear our voices.

Candidate Forum and Discussion of Town Issues Tonight at 7:00 pm

Atherton Residents,

There will be a Candidate's forum for Atherton City Council candidates TONIGHT at 7:00 pm in Jennings Pavilion in Holbrook-Palmer Park. This event is hosted by the Atherton Civic Interest League and the League of Women Voters and will give the four candidates a chance to answer questions posed by the audience. 

The four candidates include: Vice Mayor, Elizabeth Lewis (the only incumbent running), Cary Wiest (who previously ran for the council in 2010), Greg Conlon (a member of the High Speed Rail Committee) and Denise Kupperman (the Chair of the Library Steering Committee that has advocated for moving the library to the park).

The candidates will make short statements and then residents will have a chance to have questions asked by a moderator.  Discussion will include the town's three ballot measures:

    1) Measure F -  Should we approve using space in Holbrook-Palmer Park for a new Library?
    2) Measure L -  Should we support a donor-funded new Town Center?
    3) Measure M - Should we support Little League-funded improvements to the baseball diamond (and tennis courts) in HPP?

While residents will have the chance to approve or not approve these measures, the subsequent fulfillment of resident choices will continue to be directed by the council.  In addition, there are a number of important issues that Atherton residents should be aware of when considering their choices for City Council, and candidates may be asked to answer questions regarding:

    4) Parcel Tax:  The Parcel Tax (about $750 a year on average) goes to pay for Atherton's Police Force and public works, including road improvements.  Traditionally, council members champion the renewal campaigns and oversee proper expenditures.  Some council members oppose renewal of the parcel tax.

    5) Police Department:  Atherton has long enjoyed the service and support of a dedicated police department. Some council members are apparently not in favor of maintaining the police force.  The APOA has thus endorsed candidates that they feel best support continuity of police services.

    6) Change Atherton's Legal Form:  Atherton is a General Law-type city.  The council has proposed changing to a Charter City and has appointed a committee to look into making this change. 

     7) High Speed Rail:  Whether and how Atherton supports or opposes plans to build High Speed Rail and if we fund continuing litigation against the project.

    8) Traffic and Bike Safety:  Atherton has had numerous injuries and even fatalities by bicyclists and pedestrians over the last several years.  Several of these have resulted in lawsuits against the town. Little has been done to address the safety of Atherton's major crossings at El Camino or to reduce traffic at congested intersections (Marsh Road). Some funding from Facebook is available to be used to address traffic reduction and bike safety planning. 

(Questions about the forum may be directed to the LWV:  Ellen Hope, ellenjhope@aol.com, (650) 839-8647. General discussion on this message should be directed to the Athertonians' blog posting.  Thanks!)

Atherton Town Council: Setting the Table

Atherton Town Council: Setting the Table
Atherton, posted by table setter, a resident of the Atherton: other neighborhood

There must be an election going on. Absentee ballots arrive this week, buckets of campaign literature arrive in the mail, and yard signs sprout like spring tulips. There are four people running for Town Council and three measures largely centered on Holbrook Palmer Park. It is time for Atherton to make decisions.

In addition, a new Town Manager is waiting in the wings and the Atherton Police Officers Association is concerned about outsourcing and have been told by council incumbents they face contentious labor negotiations next year.

Kathy McKeithen is not running after a four term stint. Someone has detailed her tenure in a multi-page blog:

Web Link

In 2007 the San Mateo Grand Jury issued a report on government in Atherton with specific recommendations. Apparently these recommendations were not put in place and a dysfunctional town government continues on and on. The report is linked :

Web Link

So Atherton voters are faced with choosing two council members from a field of four. The voters have the opportunity to change the systemic poisonous relationships within the Council and truly returning to a strong city manager form of government with a new town manager.

Denise Kupperman is largely a single issue candidate with strong connections to Mayor Widmer and James Dobbie as chair of the Atherton Library Steering Committee. Both Widmer and Dobbie have been part of the 3-2 majority on the council voting along with McKeithen on most issues. It would be reasonable to assume Kupperman would align with them as a replacement for the like- minded McKeithen. Both Dobbie and Widmer are strongly opinionated micromanagers and will represent a continuing challenge to the new town manager.

Denise has appeared in the Almanac guest opinions several times and her statements on the library park issue are well known

Greg Conlon is relatively unknown to most Atherton voters and is apparently running because he wants to be elected to any public office as evidenced by his candidacy for many elections. He appears to be largely a single issue candidate against High Speed Rail. An appointee to the Finance Committee by the majority of the current council he has expressed strong opinions regarding the salaries and compensation for the Atherton Police Department in public meetings that were inappropriate and not wise in setting the climate for favorable labor negotiations. Statements like “shove it down their throats” have helped poison the well with the APOA.

Cary Wiest is probably one of the most experienced and well qualified of the potential candidates. He would be a fresh face and would not carry the baggage and animosities currently part of the culture of the Council.

Elizabeth Lewis, the incumbent, has proven to be good for the Town as a council member. Running for a second term she has the depth of experience and moderate views to be an effective leader. If tradition persists she would be elected Mayor and would be an excellent choice to work with the new Town Manager. She is often aligned with Jerry Carlson who also is a moderate and offers well thought out opinions and offers the gravitas of experience and gentlemanly behavior.

This election is truly very important for Atherton. It is time to make a major change in leadership and vision as many important issues are facing the town. Increasing traffic and the carnage on El Camino Real as well as bike and pedestrian use around our schools are serious issues. Rebuilding the Atherton Police Department with adequate funding and financial support will be needed as appeals are made to renew the Parcel Tax next year. War cannot be declared on the police department as most residents want the service and security this agency provides. It is reasonable to assume the Town Center project will be approved funded primarily with private funds. Raising money will be a task and cannot be done with leadership in the council that does not have a positive vision for the town. The library in the park project “ram through” was a lesson in poor governance. From the town website the following statement needs to be repeated as we choose our next leaders.

“The Town of Atherton desires, insofar as possible, to preserve its character as a scenic, rural, thickly-wooded, residential area, with abundant open space with streets designed primarily as scenic routes rather than for speed of travel.”

Message From the Atherton Police Officers' Association

[Posted by Athertonians Moderator]

Message From the Atherton Police Officers' Association

By John Mattes October 3, 2012

With the election season upon us, we know Atherton residents have choices when it comes to the election of two members for the Atherton Town Council.

However, your police department could eventually be outsourced to the San Mateo County Sheriff's Department depending on the current and future actions of your Town Council.

The Atherton Police Officers' Association has reviewed the questionnaires that were sent to all Atherton Town Council candidates. The men and women of the Atherton Police Officers' Association are supporting current Town Council Member Elizabeth Lewis for re-election, and Town Council Candidate Cary Wiest for election.

We believe these candidates will act in Atherton residents’ best interests, the best interestsof the Town of Atherton, and the best interests of the Atherton Police Department. Please join us in supporting Elizabeth Lewis and Cary Wiest for election to the Atherton Town Council.

There is a Council meeting on October 17, 2012. It is expected the Town Council will be discussing, and making arguments against, the information we earlier provided to all residents. The Atherton Police Officers’ Association will have a response posted on our website after the meeting.

John Mattes is the Vice President of the Atherton Police Officers Association.

Measure F (Library Location)

 

MEASURE F - Should the Town of Atherton construct a new library in Holbrook-Palmer Park using funds dedicated for Library purposes only, by replacing the Main House and some surrounding patios and walkways?	YES
	NO

Here is the City Attorney's impartial analysis for this measure.  Please feel free to comment below by clicking on the "comments" link, writing your comment in the box and then signing your name by going to the Comment as menu and selecting "Name/url" and then writing your name in the space.  (You do not need to enter a url.)

Measure L (Town Center)

Should the Town of Atherton primarily use private donations to construct and design a new Town Center? Other funding sources might include funds derived from Building fees or future grant money, but would not use general fund or parcel tax money.	Yes
	No

Here is the City Attorney's impartial analysis for this measure.  Please feel free to comment below by clicking on the "comments" link, writing your comment in the box and then signing your name by going to the Comment as menu and selecting "Name/url" and then writing your name in the space.  (You do not need to enter a url.)