Important Planning Commission Meeting

----- Forwarded Message -----

From: Paul Tonelli
To: "athertonians@yahoogroups.com"
Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2012 9:25 PM
Subject: [Athertonians] Important Planning Commission Meeting

I am hoping that you all received the recent mailer regarding the Planning Commission meeting June 27 to discuss proposed changes/expansion of the baseball field at HPP.  For the record, I am against any such expansion.  Whether you are in favor of, or opposed to this proposal I am merely sending this out as a note of encouragement for all concerned to attend the June Planning Commission meeting.  I would hate to see any situation that is similar to our current library debacle where many residents find out long after the process has been started.

I was a member of the Parks Commission when the Little League field was approved by the town council.   The Park Commission recommendation was for the council not to approve the field.  The council went ahead with the approval under certain conditions.  Before any consideration is made for any improvement or expansion it should be determined if Little League has upheld their end of the agreement over the last 11 years.

To refresh your memory: http://www.almanacnews.com/morgue/2000/2000_05_24.alittle.html   This is the Almanac report of the approval.  It merely highlights the points of the agreement, and it brings up several other pertinent issues.  Of special interest is the fact that M-A Little League redistricted itself which prohibited it from using 3 other fields in Menlo Park and ultimately necessitated the move to HPP.   I believe the original  agreement must be studied.  One area where Little League has fallen short is with the seasonal removal and set up of the backstop and dugout fencing.  After the 3rd or 4th season Little League claimed that the wear and tear of the seasonal removal and set up was shortening the life span of the fencing.   Somewhere, somehow it was agreed to leave it up all year.  With that one issue Little League has fallen short of their commitment.

Why would we need seating for up to 200 spectators?  On my many walks through HPP I would be hard pressed to say I have ever seen anything close to 200 spectators at a Little League game at HPP.  We have restrooms across the way near the children's playground and at Jennings Pavilion.  I personally see no need to construct additional facilities.  A scoreboard is yet another permanent fixture on a field where originally only the dirt infield, the grass, and home plate were to be "permanent."  Most importantly we must consider the effect any expansion would have on our neighbors in Felton Gables.

Atherton library and AB 438

[Posted by Moderator]

From: Sherman Hall III
Date: May 29, 2012 8:16:55 AM PDT
To: bwidmer@ci.atherton.ca.us, elewis@ci.atherton.ca.us, jcarlson@ci.atherton.ca.us,  jdobbie@ci.atherton.ca.us, kmckeithen@ci.atherton.ca.us
Subject: Atherton library and AB 438

Dear Atherton Council Members,

I am writing you to express my disappointment and objection to the decision to proceed with choosing Holbrook Palmer Park as the site for the Library/Community Center with a 3-2 vote of the Council. I believe this decision should have been a matter brought before the residents of the town to decide and I still do.

I have lived in Atherton for 45 years and never before have I witnessed the blatant usurpation of the democratic process by the town government over a major issue. This also has been accomplish with the use of a biased steering committee to champion the Park location using taxpayer money. It is just wrong.  

One of the arguments I have heard is that the Library funds available are for Atherton residents with the JPA library system just operating the library and yet the JPA has established the requirements for a large non-resident community under their "needs" study.

One council member has repeatedly argued that the new building remains the property of the Town. I guess the projected revenue stream is attractive to the Town as a source of ongoing income and drives the decision for some council members. Not mentioned in any of the material put forward is the projected staffing for a larger and expanded library and the Town's responsibilty for this additional burden for non-resident use. Apparently new services are to be offerred and usage is projected to increase and quite obviously there will be the need for increase staffing by the JPA administrators. I presume the funds are available through the JPA for additional payroll but what happens in the event they are not at some point? Does the JPA come to Atherton for more money?

Atherton recently embarked on an aggressive program to outsource services to produce exactly the opposite result. Should the day come that the library usage and need to downsize become a necessity or require the town to operate the library on its own the options available have been reduce under AB 438 as other communities have discovered. You need to be aware that AB 438 basically prevents the ability to reduce staff or payroll and not to formally recognize and plan for this is a possible violation of your fiduciary responsibly. This is not a comfortable position for the Town to be in, and it seems you would be setting the stage to forever assume the responsibility for operating a library this size.
This is another reason not to build a library of this size when it is not needed and unforeseen costs not part of the decision making process.

Sherman R Hall III
46 Lilac Dr

The actual language of the bill: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/11-12/bill/asm/ab_0401-0450/ab_438_bill_20110404_amended_asm_v96.pdf   

California Governor Signs Bill Imposing Stringent Requirements on Privatizing of Library Services
EmailPrint |Reprint/License | Oct 10, 2011

California Gov. Jerry Brown signed a bill on Saturday that will impose much more stringent requirements on private contractors seeking to manage the operations of a public library.

The measure clearly targets the business of Library Systems & Services LLC (LSSI), a Maryland-based outsourcing firm. LSSI, which testified against the measure, operates libraries in Camarillo, Moorpark, Redding/Shasta county, and Riverside county.

The measure, AB438, which Brown signed into law, imposes until January 1, 2019 specific requirements if the legislative body of a city or the board of trustees of a library district intends to withdraw from a county free library system and use a private contractor that will employ library staff to achieve cost savings.

According to a summary by the California Library Association, these requirements:

...would include, but not be limited to, publishing notice of the contemplated action in a specified manner, clearly demonstrating that the contract will result in actual overall cost savings to the city or library district for the duration of the entire contract, prohibiting the contract from causing current city or library district employees to incur a loss of employment or specified benefits or an involuntary transfer, and imposing specified requirements on contracts for library services in excess of $100,000 annually.
"Having the ability to scrutinize privatization contracts before they are signed, as Assembly Bill 438 dictates, will allow Californians a voice in ensuring that they are receiving the best library services possible at a fair cost," said Marci Merola, the director of the American Library Association's Office for Library Advocacy. "California has spoken loudly and clearly about the need for public libraries to remain in the control of the public. It sets a precedent that many states can emulate," she said.

The law does not preclude a city, library district, or local government from adopting more restrictive rules regarding the contracting of public services.

Brad King, LSSI's CEO, said he was disappointed by Brown's action.

"Assembly Bill 438 is a thinly-veiled ban on contracting out which will take away responsible options for cities just as state and local budgets are being slashed," King said. "As a result of Governor Brown signing Assembly Bill 438, more communities will be forced to close libraries, library hours will be reduced, and library workers will lose their jobs," he said. King said that the new law was "bad public policy masquerading as 'open government' and 'transparency.' "

The measure was backed by the Service Employees International Union, which represents many California library employees, the Ventura Readers' Book Group, the California Labor Federal, the AFL-CIO and others.

The bill reflects "the same kind of contracting out protections that are currently in the Education Code for schools, such as a fair cost analysis, competitive bidding, identifying the savings to the taxpayers, no job displacement, etc.," the bill's sponsor, Assemblyman Das Williams, D-Santa Barbara, said back in June, according to the California Library Association's blog.

The League of California Cities also testified against the measure, arguing that it interferes with decisions that are best handled by local governments and works against city officials attempting to get the best services for the best price. The Chamber of Commerce, Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, and some individual cities also opposed the measure.

"LSSI remains steadfast to our mission of helping local governments serve the public throughout California to provide the best public libraries for their communities," King of LSSI said.

Merola noted that ALA has created a checklist for "communities considering privatization."

"The bigger task at hand is educating Californians on what good library service means. As more and more public services are threatened with privatization, the library community as a whole -- of which LSSI is a part, I'd like to add -- has a responsibility to educate its publics," she said.

Atherton library in the park

[Posted by Moderator]

From:     Paul Tonelli

Subject:     [Athertonians] Atherton library in the park

Date:     May 28, 2012 9:22:16 PM PDT

To:     bwidmer@ci.atherton.ca.us

Cc:     athertonians@yahoogroups.com

Dear Mayor Widmer,

I had the pleasure last fall of engaging in a lengthy phone conversation with you about about the future of the Atherton library.  At that time you gave me the impression (we talked for about 40 minutes) that while you were "on the fence" regarding the Atherton library being relocated in Holbrook-Palmer Park that you initially voted in favor of it pending further investigation.  At that time you gave me hope that you would eventually see the folly of Council members of McKeithen and Dobbie.  In fact, after writing to all of the council members I was impressed that only you, along with council member Carlson, were the only two to respond to my communique.  To say I was disappointed NOT to hear from McKeithen, Dobbie and Lewis is an understatement.  Added to that, the fact that you followed up your response with a personal phone call led me to believe that you are in tune with the residents of Atherton.

Since you seem to be in touch, and in tune, with the residents I implore you to lend an ear to what the residents are saying about relocating Atherton's library in Holbrook-Palmer Park!  The relocation, to me, seems to satisfy a minority of residents.  To be frank, and brutally candid, I feel this issue is being forced down the throats of residents at the behest of a few.

I sincerely ask you to please point out the benefits of a new location in respect to the impact on the park.   Is a library in the park worth the expense, and worth the impact on the park and the people who use the park?  Why can't the funds specifically targeted for the library simply be put to use renovating, retrofitting, and expanding the library in its current location?  I understand the charter of the park is expired, but does that mean we simply toss it out the window?  Does that mean that we disregard the wishes for a bucolic, arboretum type atmosphere as stated in the original charter?  Is it really in our stead to make that determination?

In looking at the Environmental Impact Report it became clear to me that the "new" library would not simply fit the foot print of the current main house in the park.  In fact, the EIR shows the foot print of the new library to replace the entire grounds of the main house including the front "yard" area that had been most recently used for wedding ceremonies.  

Mr. Widmer, are you ready to make a decision that would impact the lifestyle of Atherton residents for generations to come?  This is not a decision to be taken lightly.  I ask you to please explain why a library in the park is clearly a better and more effective idea than retrofitting, and rebuilding a library in its current location.  A location that would be central in a new town center.   The increased foot traffic and auto traffic on Watkins and near the railroad crossing at Station Lane, and the increased traffic in the park in light of the pre-school and so many youth activities just does not make sense.

My wife is a genealogist.  She spends much time doing research in libraries in the area.  She is of the opinion that the outstanding libraries in Redwood City and Menlo Park are sufficient in serving the needs of our neighboring areas.  Being familiar with the amount of time she spends in libraries, I am convinced that a larger library in Holbrook-Palmer Park is NOT essential in satisfying the needs of our neighbors in San Mateo County.

Mr. Widmer,  it is impossible for me to use strong enough words when I ask you to think, and think again about your stance on this issue.   Please do not treat it lightly.  You are making a decision for generations.  I am asking you in the strongest sense  that if you have the slightest inkling of doubt to please consider a vote NOT to relocate the  library in the park.  In the very least I would ask that you request a stay on this issue in order to get a sense of what the residents truly want.  You are here to represent us, and I would hope that you would listen to us.

I do NOT agree with the council's decision to relocate the library in the park.  I do believe that the residents should be able to vote on the issue of relocating the library in the park.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Sincerely,

Paul Tonelli

Urgent: Your Quick Reply Required

[Posted by Moderator]

From: Didi Fisher <didifisher@comcast.net>
To: 'Athertonians Moderator' <athertonians_moderator@yahoo.com>
Sent: Monday, May 28, 2012 3:50 PM
Subject: Urgent: Your Quick Reply Required

Dear Friends and Neighbors,

Before we all go off for the summer to our retreats and vacations, we wanted to give you a quick update on the response to our earlier message. You should know that hundreds of Atherton residents responded to our earlier message to express their support for the right of residents to vote on whether or not to move the library.

Unfortunately, at this time, three council members—Kathy McKeithen, Jim Dobbie and Mayor Widmer—continue to appear determined to make that final decision themselves, over the objections of fellow council members Carlson and Lewis and hundreds of residents!

Distilled down, one single swing vote will enable the Library group to assert its preference over that of the town. Alternatively, a fair-minded swing vote could recognize the appropriateness of permitting residents (who have consistently expressed concerns with the problematic process used to come to this decision) to have a vote on the location issue. If this were to happen, we could resolve all the controversy and engage in a formal, democratic process to make an informed decision as a community that everyone can live with.

We believe only Mayor Widmer is likely to be open-minded at this time. Thus, we are hoping to collect clear responses from nearly all Atherton residents and present these to him personally. Therefore, everyone, please take 30 seconds to respond to this message by clicking "Reply" above and then writing in your responses to the following two questions:

1. Do you agree with the council's decision to move the library to the park? (Yes or No)

2. Do you think residents should be able to vote on whether or not to move the library to the park? (Yes or No)

Optional: Add any comments that you would like to share with us or Mayor Widmer.

Name(s):

Address:

Please Reply by Friday, June 1st. Also, if you know of other residents who are not on email, include their name and address in your reply and we will mail them this message as a letter.

Thank you very much!

Didi Fisher

California Dreamin': A Nightmare of Collapse

California Dreamin': A Nightmare of Collapse

By Jim Mahoney

There was a time when the California dream conjured visions of sun, endless summers, hot love, cool breezes, and muscle cars. The California economy, once the world's 7th largest, supported these dreams -- carrying us into the future on its brawny young shoulders. Innovation in aviation, computers, and countless other industries, compounded by the creative forces of free people innovating daily in a manufacturing economy, spurred the growth that produced the greatest bounty for more people than any other place on the planet.

Today many of those industries are long gone. Today's California dream is more likely to take the form of a waddling, overweight, bureaucrat devising new schemes to hang on to her lavish lifestyle and cushy retirement. The California economy today resembles a sick and wounded old elephant carrying an impossible load of ticks and fleas each calculating how much more blood he can extract before it all comes crashing down.

How did this happen?

My home county has been clobbered by the recession. Taking the unemployment numbers at face value, the March 2012 rate was 11.1%. Next month the county will vote on a measure that promises to keep our libraries open. The implied threat is if voters don't extend the 1/8% sales tax they approved in 1998, libraries will close. Since the measure extends an existing tax, its prime selling point is that it doesn't raise taxes.

I have personal experience with my local library. In 1982, a friend got elected to the City Council and quickly discovered he had to find people willing to serve on various City boards and commissions. He asked me to sit on the library board. The library at that time was a relic of our city's impoverished past, squeezed into less than 4,000 square feet on a narrow residential street. The town had tripled in size since it was built, and a generation of yuppies was discovering both the charms and drawbacks of small town California life. The library was an outdated carbuncle.

By 1984 we hired the city's first professional librarian. She assumed a heavy load, reorganizing the existing library and laying the groundwork for the construction of a new building all while meeting the demands of an upscale population. She did a masterful job, and she earned a princely salary in the mid $30K range.

By the time the new library was built in 1993, she had moved on. Today, the building is a beautiful structure, well designed and well used. What can possibly be wrong with all that?

Our world is vastly different than when the 1/8% sales tax first passed. In 1998, the internet was a novelty. We were just entering the dot com bubble, and growth and prosperity were givens, as enduring a part of the California landscape as redwoods and increasing property values.

Today when I want something from the library I go online to check availability. When I pick it up, I check it out myself using a bar code reader. While the library building is a beautiful space to sit and read, I've never had the time or inclination to use it that way. In the last ten years, I may have spoken to a library employee twice beyond exchanging pleasantries. On the other hand, young people use the library and that has value.

However, looking at what that value costs is a case study of how California jumped off the financial cliff.

The building was the product of political connections. Although our town is the wealthiest in the county and could have easily found sponsors in the business and resident communities, we had the "benefit" of a politically connected mayor.

She used her influence in Sacramento to have a friendly State Senator propose a statewide $65 million library construction bond. As I recall, our library got some $5 million of that bond. What could be easier? A state politician proposes a motherhood issue, the saps in the voting booths fall for it, and presto, people who will never even hear the name of my hometown wind up paying principal and interest to buy us something we could have easily bought for ourselves.

Naturally since we used other people's money, we built more than we needed, to the tune of nearly 32,000 square feet. Keep in mind the population of our town today is essentially the same as it was in the 1980s, about 28,000.

Recently, after seeing enough of the campaign signs for the tax measure, I took a look at the library salaries.  From three employees in 1984, the library gave paychecks to more than 50 in 2011. Granted many were part time employees. Nonetheless, today instead of a one professional librarian we now pay a library director $202,052 and two managers $145,555 and $136,816 to oversee a full time staff of 3 librarians, 5 library technicians a literacy supervisor and an administrative secretary to whom we hand out an additional combined $935,909 annually. That's just the full timers. Including the 40 odd part timers supporting them, the total tab exceeded $1.6 million a year in salaries alone.

Considering internet booksellers deliver used books to our doors for less than an overdue fine, a lot of unemployed people are feeding one extravagant dinosaur.

In 1984 we paid a one librarian less than $40K to reorganize and operate an existing library and plan for a new one. In 2011 we paid three people $484,424 to simply manage an ongoing operation in a facility that should have increased productivity. What private investor would spend $5 million on a facility so he could hire 50 people to serve the same population he was serving with three? What private sector job paid $35K in 1984 pays $202K today?

The 2009 per capita income in my town was $41,058. Our Library Director makes almost 5 times that. The lowest paid full timer makes over $78,000. Who is the public servant?

Our library is just one department in one city of 482 municipalities and 58 counties in California. This theme repeats in every department at every level of government and in countless school and other districts throughout California.

Since 2008, local home prices collapsed by 60%, private sector wages tanked, and unemployment approaches hopelessness. Yet there is no organized opposition to extending the sales tax. More than likely voters will go to the polls next month under the usual spell, unable to connect cause and effect and miss another opportunity to confront the tsunami coming our way.

In the end, the California economy will die of self-inflicted wounds.

Tennis Courts at Holbrook Palmer Park

[Posted by Moderator]

From: MARY AWBREY <mawbrey1@att.net>
Date: Tue May 22, 2012 4:21 pm
Subject: Tennis Courts at Holbrook Palmer Park    

To Whom It May Concern:

An alarming aspect of the controversy surrounding the proposed relocation of Atherton's library to Holbrook Palmer Park (hereafter HPP) is the City Council's baffling apparent willingness to fund EIR required mitigation measures for that project related to the impact of increased traffic (to the tune of possibly several hundred thousand dollars), while deferring critical funding for maintenance and repairs to theexisting recreational amenities used daily in the Park.  We refer to the six tennis courts in particular; these courts were built entirely with private funds and were generously GIFTED to the town and are now in need of attention and maintenance.  It is fairly obvious/logical to assume that, should the flawed library in the park project relocate to a more favorable site, necessary funds for said maintenace and repair would take rightfully take precendence.  Such a decision would be a boon to the people of Atherton and surrounding community.

At the meeting on May 16, 2012, City Council members seemed unaware or had forgotten that ALL SIX COURTS were gifts to the town in the early 1970's, including the "Contributors' Court" (plaque now missing) which was paid for with numerous and combined donations by Atherton families, individuals andtennis key holders.  A few of those same contributors still play on the courts today but tennis key sales have fallen off as a result of deferred maintenance and repairs.  Sadly, our devalued tennis courts have become neglected.  Tennis key sales have fallen off as a result of poor maintenance and repair.

For 40 years HPP tennis key holders have been good stewards of the park.  They have volunteered in fundraisers/events/work paarties benefitting improvements and preservation of HPP properties such as the Water Tower and Carriage House.  The Pavillion kitchen remodel under Town Manager Richard Moore was led by a key holder volunteer and an Atherton Dame. In addition to more recent volunteerefforts by horticulturists and landscape architects, a longstanding supporter has been a (key holder) horticulturist who contributed countless hours of hands-on efforts as well as expertise to HPP.  A group of tennis players renovated the Bochner tennis shelter (see attached copy of 2001 letter in "Town Voice").

Key holders have served on Atherton town committees including the Foundation, Park and Rec, Tree
Committee, Atherton Dames, Tennis Committee, etc.

Critical points to consider are:
   
       l.  The town of Atherton accepted the tennis courts as gifts of Atherton residents to enhance the recreational amenities of HPP.
   
       2. In recent years three local schools have expanded infrastructures causing forfeiture of six tennis courts making public courts few and far between.

       3.  There is increasing attention to the nation's alarming obesity epidemic and resulting dire consequences to those afflicted as well as to the escalating cost of health care.  Opportunities to enjoy physical exercise in sunlight and fresh air is key to the health and well being of the community.
 
       4.  Tennis is an enjoyable and affordable exercise for physical fitness requiring minimal equipment—balls, racquets and shoes. It  is a great way to meet and get to know people in the community.

       5.  Tennis is a LIFETIME sport for all ages while field sports are largely limited to kids and young adults.

       6.  In recent years the town "general fund" absorbed the once plentiful key holder revenues and spent that money on other things so that there is no longer a "rainy day fund" for the present when it is needed. At one time there was nearly $100,000 in the tennis fund.

The hope here is that our town leaders as well as the general public will realize and appreciate the efforts, time and money private citizens (including tennis key holders) have made to contribute and maintain a valuable resource at HPP for all to enjoy.

Sincerely,

William and Mary Stuart Awbrey (key holders)

Should Atherton become a 'charter' city?

[Posted by Moderator]

From: colleen anderson
Date: Fri May 18, 2012 3:59 pm
Subject: Atherton becoming a charter town

Should Atherton become a 'charter' city?  

By Barbara Wood
Special to the Almanac

Atherton has begun the process of taking more control over its own fate by changing from a general law city, operating under pre-set state conditions, to a charter city, operating under conditions set by the town and approved by voters.

City council members voted unanimously to appoint an ad hoc committee to explore the charter issue at their May 16 meeting. Any charter would have to be approved by town voters before going into effect, Interim City Manager Theresa Della Santa reported to the council.

Council member Jim Dobbie said he has been pushing the idea of a charter for Atherton since before he became a council member. A charter, he said, could allow the town to run more like a business "without all the restrictions that come from Sacramento." One advantage mentioned by Mr. Dobbie and several other council members is that with a charter, a real estate transfer tax could raise a substantial amount of money for the town and could replace the town's current parcel tax.

[To read more of this Almanac article, go to: http://www.almanacnews.com/news/show_story.php?id=11252]

Atherton threatens to sue Menlo Park, Facebook

[Posted by Moderator]

From: colleen anderson
Subject: [awristachatz] Another possible lawsuit. Atherton threatens to sue Menlo Park , Facebook.
Date: May 18, 2012 3:41:31 PM PDT
To: Atherton lunch lunch group

Atherton threatens to sue Menlo Park, Facebook 
By Barbara Wood
Special to the Almanac

Atherton has threatened to sue Menlo Park and Facebook to get Facebook to pay at least part of the cost of widening Marsh Road at Middlefield Road, but some Atherton residents say that if the town does that, they'll join the opposing side to fight their town to keep their street as it is.

The matter came to light at the May 17 Atherton City Council meeting, when former long-time council member Malcolm Dudley urged the council to leave Marsh Road as two lanes. Mr. Dudley said that widening Marsh Road would not only destroy its scenic qualities, but that "widening streets leads to increased volume and traffic speed. Atherton residents successfully fought the battle to preserve two-lane streets 35 years ago, and must remain vigilant," he said, reading from a several-page document he presented to the council.

"I agree with Malcolm that if you build it they will come," said Larry Sweeney, a member of the Atherton transportation committee. He said the widening of Marsh Road has never come before the committee, and that "I strongly support the idea of keeping as much of a rural atmosphere in Atherton as we can."
[To read more of this Almanac story, please click this link to go to the Almanac article: http://www.almanacnews.com/news/show_story.php?id=11260]

Question about Library Traffic Studies

[Posted by Moderator]

Could someone please help me understand how it is "SAFER" and more preferred to have the traffic for the library on Fair Oaks, the street that the Council had monitored several years ago and had five to 7 times more traffic than Watkins.   Of that traffic, there is probably 20 times more big trucks, semis delivering construction materials, tree trimmers, other big trucks than there are on Watkins.  Fair Oaks happens to be very curvy and filled with blind curves.  When one is walking along the road, all there is a find protection is either fences filled with ivy, trees blocking the view or gravel.  THERE ARE NO SIDEWALKS, straight ahead views, etc.  Many people don't monitor their greenery so it adds to the blindness of the pedestrians or cyclists.  SO HOW IS FAIR OAKS SAFER AND A BETTER WAY FOR CHILDREN TO GO.  Please help me understand that because intellectually I cannot accept that.

 

Marylue TImpson

Sudden Athertonians Group Publicity

[Posted by Moderator:  Our Athertonians group has made sudden appearances in both the Daily Post and the Almanac.  We did not seek this publicity.  Someone else with considerably more newspaper clout than we made this happen! Posting these to enable commenting.] 

And from the Almanac (click the links to go to the Almanac's online source):

Athertonians may clash in court 
By Renee Batti
Almanac News Editor

Definition of Athertonians: residents of Atherton, California. Simple, right? Think again.

Athertonians is also the name of a Yahoo email message group that hosts discussions among Atherton residents -- a moderated group whose posters have become increasingly critical of certain City Council members and decisions.

The group, which has a blog at athertonians.blogspot.com, has come under the recent scrutiny of town officials, who say that the group's name is causing too much confusion among Atherton residents. That's because the town has for many years published a newsletter, also available online, called the Athertonian.

[To read the rest of this article, please go to the Almanac Online posting at this link: http://www.almanacnews.com/news/show_story.php?id=11242]

Library Environmental Review

[Posted by Moderator]

Dear Fellow Athertonians,
The posted agenda for the Wednesday, Wednesday 5-16, Atherton City Council meeting includes information that the Council will vote on whether the Planning Commission should review the final environment impact report before it appears before the Council itself.  Could someone clarify for me, please, how this is right and proper procedure since my understanding has been, as someone unfamiliar with EIR rules and regulations, that the comments on the DEIR made by the public during the  comment period ending May 7th, I believe, could be addressed  again to the Planning Commission's determination on the completed EIR (stated in a town notice from Atherton Planning Commission dated March 23, 2012 - signed by Neal Martin, Town Planner).  After the determination by the Planning Commission, wouldn't the public commenters have the right to respond to their formerly addressed concerns before the City Council interjects itself into the process? 

Many thanks,
Stuart Awbrey

Atherton General Plan Committee disbanded

FROM: david@davidhenig.com
DATE: Wed, 9 May 2012 16:55:00 -0400
SUBJECT: Atherton General Plan Committee disbanded 

[New message approved for the group list and reposted for commenting purposes]

I just received notification from the Interim City Manager
thanking me for my service to our community and informing me
that "Council voted to dismiss the General Plan Committee
and assign the duties and powers to the Planning
Commission."

David Henig  
59 Sutherland Drive 
Atherton, CA 94027
M 415.205.3900 H 650.234.8375

Atherton traffic alleviation/meeting tonight of Transportation Committee

[Reposted by Moderator]

Dear Fellow Athertonians,

I am sorry that I did not know of this list sooner and am sorry about the late notice for tonight's meeting.

As some of you know, one of the things that I think about more than your average venture capitalist is ways that our traffic congestion can be alleviated w/o large expenditures. In that spirit, I got Atherton to repaint the lane markings at the intersection of El Camino & Atherton Ave. & Fair Oaks to enable right turn lanes from the latter 2 streets. Not rocket science & easy decision.

I have set my sights slightly higher to try to alleviate one of Atherton's worst traffic jams: the daily queue that forms at Atherton Ave. & Alameda. This can be accomplished with a roundabout — or more precisely, a "mini-roundabout," which is smaller and less expensive. I am giving a presentation on this tonight, Tuesday, May 8th, to the Atherton Transportation Committee in the town chambers at 94 Ashfield Rd. The meeting starts at 6PM. If you are available to show up to voice your support for this, that would be great. When I raised this topic with them 15 months ago, one of the comments was that they have not received complaints about the traffic. Now that there's an alternative to the traffic jam, it would be good to convey what you think. Attached is a summary of the logic for doing the roundabout. If you can't come, but like the idea, please reply to this & say so and I'll convey it to them. Please also copy: transportation@ci.atherton.ca.us, which is new and may be working. If any of you are inclined to be negative on this, please at least read the attached and the links that pertain to whatever issue you might have with it prior to deciding. Note: I may not have a chance to respond to all mail prior to the meeting.

Feel free to pass this on to others who might be interested.

Thanks,

-Gary Lauder

This attachment can also be downloaded from http://athertonroundabout.com which is quite minimalist so far.

Questions for Athertonians

Defense of Free Speech by the Athertonians Email List and Group Moderators

Athertonians is a an electronic (email) message group started in 2004 to facilitate communication by and between residents of Atherton. We send residents email on important or time-sensitive matters and events pertaining to our town neighborhoods and community. We are not affiliated with or controlled by any specific town group or Atherton town staff and have always been clear about that.  As a resident-run email list that is privately organized and managed by Atherton residents, we owe the existence of this group to the volunteer efforts of its Moderators. 

While this email list is moderated to be non-partisan with respect to town issues, we are aware that the town's political climate is extremely unhealthy.  Rather than a town council that listens to and openly addresses concerns raised by residents, the council majority (Widmer, McKeithen and Dobbie) has ignored expressions of concerns from both fellow council members (Carlson, Lewis) and residents and suppressed requests by residents and council for opportunities to vet these concerns.  This is particularly acute regarding the rather broad-based unhappiness with the proposed Library Project, which is being pushed through, despite much opposition, by council member McKeithen, who is also an author of the plan. 

There have been a number of surprisingly aggressive actions taken recently to attack individual residents, council members and even town committees, related to the Library Project.  Unfortunately, the lack of a permanent Town Manager, the revolving door of City Attorneys, and a staff that is comprised of nearly all contract temporary consultants, provides little ballast against inappropriate actions taken by entrenched council members.

With this as the backdrop, Athertonians has begun to embrace an additional mission—which is to serve the important rights of Atherton residents to have a channel of truthful and reliable information, to balance town-supported sources deemed unreliable, and to allow residents to air concerns and points of view that are dismissed by their elected representatives.  We reserve the right to not send messages deemed misleading or disrespectful, no matter who they are from.  Currently, in what seems like a direct effort to counter Athertonians' efforts to inform Atherton residents about what their leadership is doing, council member McKeithen has now threatened the Athertonians group directly with legal action from the town. 

Fortunately, the Supreme Court stands behind our right to Freedom of Speech and our ability to use a name reserved for the denizens of a locale, in our case Athertonians, which is distinct from the name used by the town for its infrequent newsletter, "The Athertonian."  As such, we have no hesitation in assuring you that we are not discontinuing our use of a name we have held for over 8 years.  Furthermore, we will gladly assist those who are discomforted with the type of information that we provide and remove them from the list. 

We value informed civil discourse and its benefits to good governance, which this town is currently not enjoying. When facts and opinions get freely shared, this enables people to discuss such information amongst themselves.  Thus, we welcome messages from residents towards that aim and we occasionally send alerts ourselves.  If we send out information and members have corrections to suggest, we would happily consider such points and issue corrections.  We do not claim either to be infallible or to have no opinions.




From: Renee Batti
To: athertonians_moderator@yahoo.com
Sent: Monday, May 7, 2012 5:06 PM
Subject: Questions for Athertonians

Greetings.

I'm interested in talking with the moderator/moderators of the Athertonians Yahoo group. Could you call me or, at least, respond to this email? I'll be doing an article about the town's interest in shutting the site down if it continues to use the name Athertonians. I'd like to get your comments about that.

Hope to hear from you soon. Thanks, Renee

--
Renee Batti
News Editor
The Almanac
3525 Alameda de las Pulgas
Menlo Park, California 94025
(650) 223-6528

Atherton's Use of Library Tax Funds

Two Items brought to our attention pertaining to the Library JPA:

MEMO for the May 7, 2012 Meeting of the San Mateo County Library JPA Governing Board (Kathy McKeithen representing Atherton)

1.  Donor City: Town of Atherton
Balance of Donor City Library Revenue on June 30, 2011: $5,574,263

The Town of Atherton proposes to utilize SMCL Donor City revenue in an amount estimated at $1,004,950.  Revenue will be used to offset facility costs incurred in Town related general maintenance, utilities, custodial services, landscaping services and associated supplies for the library building.  Included in this amount is also an appropriation estimated at $957,000 to capture costs related to the new library building project.  These activities include project management services, architectural design related activities, town planner services, activities related to the Environmental Impact Report (EIR), and advertising and public notices. [Emphasis Added.]

2.  Recommendation:

Recommend JPA Governing Board approval of the FY 2012-13 Proposed Uses of Donor City Library Funds and that, beginning in FY 2012-13, the Library creates separate Trust Fund accounts for new excess Donor City Library revenue. [This motion means that funds in excess of the amount required to operate a branch will no longer be distributed directly to Atherton to be held in its own separarte library account.]

New Site of Atherton Library

Note from Moderator:  This is an example of the kind of thoughtful and creative ideas for "re-imagining" the Atherton Library that our town truly needs.  We find these ideas worth sharing with the community, however, for such ideas to have any impact on the process at this stage, they MUST be submitted to Lisa Costa Sanders specifically as comments on the Draft EIR by May 7th.  Luckily, comments on the Draft EIR may be submitted by anyone in the broader community and need not be just from current Atherton residents.  

(To comment on this post, click the light colored "comments" link at the bottom, and write your comment into the box.  Then to sign your comment, click on "Comment as" and scroll down to the "Name/URL" option. If you click that, you can enter your name in the Name dialog box.)

From: Nic Dell
To: "lcostasanders@ci.atherton.ca.us" ; "bwidmer@ci.atherton.ca.us" ; "elewis@ci.atherton.ca.us" ; "kmckeithen@ci.atherton.ca.us" ; "jcarlson@ci.atherton.ca.us" ; "jdobbie@ci.atherton.ca.us" ; "meo@rjoster.com"
Sent: Thursday, May 3, 2012 10:48 PM
 
Subject: New Site of Atherton Library

Dear Atherton Town Council and Whom It May Concern,

I believe the Town of Atherton is missing an opportunity to create a great public library if the Town decides to use Holbrook Palmer Park as the new home of the Atherton Library.  The park does have space for library; it’s clear that this is the primary advantage of the park if it is to be used as the new home of the library.  However, there are other locations that may be better mainly because such locations would not necessitate any transformation as significant as the one that has been currently proposed for Holbrook Palmer Park. The park will change drastically if a library is built there, and these changes will harm the park, not help it.  The Town Council and the Atherton Library Building Steering Committee must not allow such unnecessary and avoidable changes to occur.

One location that is potentially better for a new library is the site of the current town administrative offices.  The building that houses these offices could be demolished and replaced with a two or possibly three story library building (one level could be partly or completely underground).  The administrative offices could in turn be moved to the current library building.  If more space is needed for the administrative offices than the current library building can provide, an additional building and/or wing can be erected in the reading park that is adjacent to the current library building.  This idea has some advantages over the current proposal of Holbrook Park as the site of the new library.  First, it would not require demolishing the Main House currently on the grounds of Holbrook Palmer Park, which is of greater historic and architectural value than the building that houses the town’s administrative offices.  Second, if the library is built where the town administrative offices currently stand, Holbrook Palmer Park’s tranquil ambience would be preserved. Third, it could be less expensive to demolish the town administrative offices than the Main House in Holbrook Palmer Park.  Fourth, if the library is built on the site of the administrative offices, the Town of Atherton would have more buildings than if the Main House in the park were demolished and replaced with a library building: the town would still have the Main House in the park, an attractive, practical and well-used park facility; the current library building (which would be converted into offices); and a new library building. In contrast, in the current proposal, the town would lose the Main House at the park and have a library that would potentially be more difficult to get to than in another, more practical location.  Fifth, if the new library building is erected on the current site of the town’s administrative offices, there would be far more parking available than in the park and the library would be more accessible because it would be built on a town street, rather than inside a public park.  This location would completely eliminate the traffic problems associated with the proposed site.

I have been a library employee for over ten years.  I care about public libraries.  Like public parks, they are a priceless resource that must be preserved and cared for.  Although I am no longer a resident of Atherton, I feel very loyal to the town because it is very much a part of my heritage.  Holbrook Park and the library are both very important assets to Atherton.  I urge the Town Council and the Atherton Library Building Steering Committee to take more time to consider other locations for the new library that are more accessible, more practical and that will preserve the character of the town.

Thank you for your time.

Respectfully,

Nick Dellaporta
Former Resident of Atherton
Library Support Specialist, College of San Mateo Library         

List of Residents who oppose the current library plan

[Added by moderator, by request of Jill Fogelsong]

If a list could be created of reasons why this library building should not be built, I would sign it. There are probably other Atherton neighbors who feel the same way, that there are many reasons why this building should not be built. This list of Atherton residents who oppose the library construction could then be presented to the Atherton Town Council. There is probably a majority of Atherton residents who oppose construction of a new library building.

Note: To add your name and your comment to Jill's list, please click on the blue "comments" link right at the bottom of this post and type your  comment in the box. To add your name, click on the "Comment as" button and select "Name/URL" from the drop-down menu.  Enter your name in the Name dialog box.  You do not need to enter a URL but you need to click the "Publish" link.

Residents need to submit Library EIR comments by May 7th

Dear Residents,

The 45-day comment period for the Library EIR ends on Monday, May 7th.  All comments submitted by 5:00 pm on that day have to be answered by the town and the Final EIR must include a copy of your letter and the town's answer.  If the answers provided are not adequate and the city council certifies that they are, then residents have a basis for appealing the council's decision.

Whether you are in favor of the proposed plan to build a much bigger library in Holbrook-Palmer Park (an areas zoned as Open Space) or against this plan, the only way to insure that the final implementation addresses the significant impacts you care about is to read the draft EIR and write your comments.  Any errors, inadequate analyses, misstatements of fact or omissions must be commented on before the 7th, for the town to have to address them.

If you are under the impression that the EIR is being done completely impartially, think again.  A quick glance at the "Contacts (p. 182)" cited by LSA, the consultants working on the EIR, show that the ONLY residents listed are Library Committee members, all of whom somehow knew to write to Neal Martin, Town Planner, between January and March with their thoughts about the project, which have subsequently been cited and factored into the draft EIR. That seems rather skewed and, in fact, the bias of that group is indeed reflected in the draft EIR.

The bad news is that writing an effective EIR Comment Letter takes some time and discipline. Simply complaining about the way the Library Committee handled the community engagement phase won't help change the project at all.  You must comment only on the facts as presented in the EIR, the analysis of the EIR and factual or significant omissions pertaining to significant environmental impacts (which may include: aethetics, biological resources, public services, cultural resources, hydrology, noise, recreation, air quality, land use/planning, population/housing, traffic and a few other areas).  A close and careful reading of the EIR and some critique of the facts and analysis provided there is what is appropriate. 

For a project of this significance to the town, there has been surprisingly little guidance for residents about the overall process or the impacts of the project going ahead as designed. The town has not made any extra hard copies of the EIR, which means that everyone who has an interest in seeing the EIR has to access the electronic version, which has been posted on the Town's website (in five separate .pdfs on the lower right side of the home page) as at: http://www.ci.atherton.ca.us. 

For a quick overview on how to provide effective comments, take a look at How to Comment on an EIR, from Greenbelt Alliance (http://www.greenbelt.org/advocacy/planning-for-change-how-to-comment-on-an-environmental-impact-report/).

For really good detailed and helpful information, go to the PCL Foundations website, and their publications called Get Familiar with CEQA.  There you can acess a number of the key forms that can help you understand the process, write a compelling comment letter, and learn when opportunities exist for public comment.  PCL's Community Guide to CEQA is considered the bible for community members who want to have an impact on how a project is done but it has to be ordered and it is a big volume.

A sample of a professional, hard-hitting EIR comment letter for a different project has been kindly provided to us as an example of the kind of letter that can be effective to force the town to address significant impacts. A letter crafted along this model, delineating each essential comment with supporting facts, can force the town to have to defend their responses at subsequent public hearings. We have attached it to this message for your edification.

After the Final EIR process has been certified, there is very little that can be done by residents to prevent a determined council majority from moving ahead with the project, no matter how unhappy residents are about it, unless those issues have been raised during this comment period.  If you have concerns about this project, you must submit those in the form of an EIR comment letter by Monday for the town to be required to address them.

(Note: The attached EIR Comment Letter has been made available in the Files area of the Athertonians website at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Athertonians, which you may access if you are a member of the Athertonians email list).