Dear Editor,
Shame on the Gilroy Dispatch for the headline on Friday’s
paper
”
City Council Approves Layoffs
”
. The truth is that the city council put layoffs as a last
resort after all other considered options are exhausted.
‘City Council approves layoffs’ an absolutely unfair news headline
Dear Editor,
Shame on the Gilroy Dispatch for the headline on Friday’s paper “City Council Approves Layoffs”. The truth is that the city council put layoffs as a last resort after all other considered options are exhausted.
And an answer for Pamela Arbanas Moreno, if you had watched the Wednesday night three-hour meeting, you would have seen the city council direct staff to explore many other options from delaying projects, delaying raises, seeking additional income, reducing staff hours, selling Gilroy Gardens, all before the last option, laying off people.
Just as the Gilroy Dispatch laid off their staff when their revenues declined and reduced their service from five days a week to two days a week, when the money is not there to make payroll, you do what you have to do.
This situation has been building for years but the city staff and former city administrator convinced a majority of council that everything would be all right. For the record, I voted NO for the last three years and warned the council that we cannot continue to borrow from the future to pay today’s bills. Now we are bleeding and will go from $21 million in reserves to $20 million in debt in just three years.
These are tough times for everyone including the City of Gilroy. Services will be cut, staff reduced and the city council must do everything possible to keep Gilroy from bankruptcy. Together, we must find a way to survive through this storm.
Craig Gartman, Gilroy city councilman
A longer look at why Sen. McCain lost the election so handily
Dear Editor,
My sympathy goes to Mr. James Fennell (letter of 11/7), not because his candidate lost the election, but because he seems to be a very unhappy and bitter person who has not considered why Sen. McCain lost. He states that “character, honesty, association” were not seen by the voting public as important.
Sen. McCain’s character and honesty were compromised during his campaign. He said he wouldn’t run a negative campaign – yet he did. He has in the past had a reputation for honesty – yet he spread falsehoods again and again. And his association with the Bush administration was probably at least partially responsible for his loss.
Fennell also states that “charm, fluff and image are all that matters.” In that case, Ms. Sarah Palin should have helped the campaign mightily, because I’ve never heard a commentator use those words to describe Sen. Obama. I have given a lot of thought as to why the McCain/Palin ticket lost. It simply boils down to the fact that his handlers lost the election for him. He had bad advice – about negativity, slinging half-truths, running a campaign based on fear, and repeating platitudes and generalities, and he unfortunately allowed his advisors to prevail. It was also perceived by the public that his choice for VP was just a little too much “outside” the acceptable candidate range.
Again, his advisors had her saying the same exact phraseology he was using. It was apparent that they were rehearsed and not original thoughts. I think that if Sen. McCain had run his campaign as he has acted in the senate, with character and honesty, he might have done better. But the combination of the failing economy and his handlers’ horrible decisions sent his campaign down.
Mr. Fennell’s last sentence in his letter, “for Republicans and conservatives, Tuesday, Nov. 4, 2008 will live as a day in infamy” seems a trifle over the top, since I fail to see the connection between a presidential campaign and the slaughter of so many in the attack on Pearl Harbor. If he considers it, maybe he’ll agree it was not a day of infamy, but was instead a resounding statement by the electorate that we will not be suckered in by negative campaign rhetoric and half-truths as reasons to fear the opponent. Maybe the day of campaigning on the issues is finally here.
Elaine Jelsema, Gilroy
The Golden Quill is awarded occasionally for a well-written letter.
Columnist pays attention to the details and writes courageously
Dear Editor,
I read the Nov. 7th letter from Tony Weiler with interest, then amusement and finally with sadness as his exuberance over the Nov. 4th elections, gave way to a bold rhetorical rage, castigating columnist Cynthia Walker.
I have read many of her columns and its plain to see that she is well read, informed and pays close attention to details – where the devil often resides. She is a person of integrity, discipline and possesses a passion for truth. She clearly is an American citizen who upholds the truths that are evident yet brave enough to speak up where those truths are under assault.
To Walker’s answer of the damaging assaults postulated by liberals and reinforced by the media, Weiler does not debate the issues responding in kind, but rather, typically like one who loses a debate, resorts to assaulting the individual’s character instead. Walker believes many liberal philosophies are an assault, threatening our way of life, much of which have been established by sound traditional doctrines including freedom of speech.
Mr. Weiler, I’m sad to say, apparently wishes to take away the provisions established by our forefathers by removing Cynthia Walker’s opinions from the public. Ironically, there is no place for a letter like Weiler’s, but every place for Walker’s … her views are an asset which lend themselves to a better informed community.
Jim Langdon, Gilroy
Sarah Palin on science … Deja Bush all over again
Dear Editor,
It’s scary. Deja Bush all over again? As we enter the final week of this two-year election run-up, anti-science ideologues reared their heads in smug, sneering delight. Sarah Palin, fundamental creationist and mother of a Down’s Syndrome child, asserted support of George W. Bush’s anti-intellectualism in her first policy speech last week.
The very pork barrel earmarks she was publicly mocking (“… these dollars go to projects that have little or nothing to do with the public good … I kid you not.”), regarding Drosophila fruit fly research, helped discover a neurological protein with implications for autistic children. Who was her audience in her coming out speech? Parents of autistic children. She was totally clueless.
And John McCain? Railing on pork barrel earmarks attributed to Sen. Obama, McCain mocked his opponent’s attempt in obtaining a new “overhead projector for a Chicago planetarium.” What he didn’t know was that it was not your typical $200 classroom overhead projector, but rather a $3 million Zeiss lens, 2-ton, 18-motor planetarium projector to replace the non-serviceable 40-year old projector at the Adler Planetarium. It was not funded, and McCain was totally clueless.
Neither Palin nor McCain knew anything about what they spoke. Does this sound eerily familiar? Accusing their opponent of obtaining wasteful earmarks is as transparent as the anti-science vacuum between their auditory canals.
Can we intellectually and scientifically afford four more years of the same?
Dale Morejón, Gilroy
Hoping for the common good in true Catholic tradition
Dear Editor,
In this election season, references to the common good have papered the public square. In fact, both presidential candidates have infused their speeches with “common good” language. It’s easy to see why this often misunderstood concept has become a “sound bite,” given the many threats to the common good we face.
Relying on the politics of division has accompanied an increasing gap between rich and poor, a terrible economic crisis, and has offered no solution to the millions of people who go without health care coverage. But in the Catholic social tradition, the notion of the common good has specific demands and transcends partisanship.
The government’s role is to serve the common good – not just the interests of a select few. That requires public policies that build a just and stable economy, and that meet basic human needs. America is hurting. I hope that that WHOEVER ends up occupying the oval office will help us move beyond the politics of division and will turn those campaign sound bites into effective policies that build a true culture of the common good.
Mary Silva, Gilroy
Student representative makes case for passing school bond
Dear Editor,
On Nov. 4, the Gilroy Unified Board of Education has asked that voters support Measure P, a $150 million general obligation bond. As a student of Gilroy High School, and a member of the Associated Student Body Government, I would like to ask the people of Gilroy to support the students attending Gilroy Unified School District by providing them a safer, stronger, and cleaner environment for learning. You can do this by voting “yes” on Measure P.
Overcrowding at GHS has led to a weakened learning environment; the connections between students and teachers are no longer as strong, hindering the ability of teachers, many with upwards of 180 total students, from providing individual help to students. As a junior getting ready to apply to college I am beginning to know the stresses of the application process. I watch as many students become overwhelmed and academic counselors struggle to fit in time to meet with all their students. Measure P would help finance the completion of Christopher High School, which would greatly alleviate the problems of overcrowding at GHS.
Modernizing and updating aging buildings and equipment at school sites can have a positive effect on students and their performance in the classroom. A clean, modern look can build student pride in their school and encourage them to attend class with a positive outlook. For example, the new student center at GHS has become a focal point of the school for social, athletic and academic events including dances, award banquets, and the honor roll brunch, as well as daily lunch.
Ascension Solorsano Middle School is also an example of student pride in a safe and clean learning environment. Having been a member of the first class to graduate from Solorsano I know first-hand the positive affect modern and well-maintained classrooms can have on us, the students. It can also be seen in the great ASMS state testing results, in which they scored higher than both South Valley and Brownell. If Measure P passes it would help fund the modernizing of buildings and equipment at the elementary, middle and high school level, in turn helping to provide a safer and cleaner learning environment for every student in the district.
Those opposed to the bond may say, “Now is not the time for yet another bond” and believe that the district has been frivolous in its handling of money. But GUSD has suffered equally from the drastic and unforeseeable turn in the economy, which has caused land prices to drop and construction prices to rise, complicating the possibility of selling land owned by the district to fund necessary projects and forcing the district go forth with Christopher High at a price tag much higher then previously anticipated.
These new realities make Measure P a necessary and proper bond in order to retain and improve public education in Gilroy. Despite opposition that says, “We and our future generations cannot afford it”, the more costly expense would be to not approve the bond and have future generations grow up in the ruins of the public education system.
Now more than ever we need well-educated students. What future generations cannot afford is to be thrust into an ultra-competitive global market without the best possible education.
As a student who sees firsthand everyday the negative impact of overcrowding and buildings in need of repair, I ask you to support Measure P. As a student who knows the benefits of having schools to be proud of, I ask you to support Measure P. I ask you to provide for the education of and to empower the youth of our community, my friends, teammates, and classmates, by providing them with the best possible educational facilities. Vote “yes” on Measure P and make an investment in the students and the future of our great town of Gilroy.
Mark A. Foley, Gilroy,
student representative to the school board
Gilroy Chamber advice: Pass $840 million Valley Med bond
Dear Editor,
The Gilroy Chamber of Commerce studied the details of Measure A carefully and our Board of Directors voted unanimously to support the seismic rebuild of Valley Medical Center Hospital. As local business and property owners, we believe strongly that supporting Measure A is good for the health of our families, our neighbors, our employees, and our businesses.
Valley Medical Center in San Jose is the closest Level One trauma center and burn center to Gilroy. It also provides the highly specialized neo-natal trauma, brain trauma, and spinal cord rehabilitation services. In 2007 it is estimated that more than 7,000 Gilroy residents visited the center for treatment – nearly 20 percent of our population. Without our YES votes for Measure A, Valley Medical Center will be forced to close its trauma and burn units and eliminate 272 hospital beds. That will leave Gilroy residents that much farther away from these trauma services.
Now is the right time to invest. Measure A requires strict accountability provisions, including required independent audits, oversight by a citizens’ committee, and full and complete public disclosure of all spending from the measure. By law, no money can be spent on administrators’ salaries.
Measure A is vital for all of us and it makes good business sense. Without the necessary healthcare infrastructure in Santa Clara County, we lose our competitive edge. We encourage everyone to learn more about Measure A by visiting www.VMCmatters.com.
Susan Valenta, president/chief executive officer,
Gilroy Chamber of Commerce
Valley Medical bond critical to health care in the entire area
Dear Editor,
I want to express my disappointment in The Dispatch’s opposition to Measure A, which would provide the funding for Valley Medical Center to bring its buildings into compliance with mandatory seismic safety standards.
In the current economy, it is understandable that voters are hesitant to vote for any new costs, no matter how nominal. However, if Measure A fails, the costs could easily be catastrophic. Most South County residents likely receive their health care close to home.
Valley Medical Center is not the hospital South County residents typically plan to go to, but many find themselves there in life-and-death situations. As the closest Level One trauma center, burn trauma center, and pediatric trauma center, Valley Medical is an essential resource for South County, with our local hospital and medical providers relying on it to provide trauma care for which they are not equipped. South County victims of serious accidents, fires, spinal cord injuries, and neo-natal emergencies are often taken there to get the care they need and deserve. Without Measure A, Valley Medical Center will be forced to close its trauma and burn units and eliminate 272 beds, leaving South County residents further from essential medical care in situations where additional time and distance can have tragic consequences.
With people struggling in this economy, I understand that it is difficult to think about paying for something that may or may not happen to them or someone they know. However, we can’t afford not to. As a local nonprofit service provider, I see firsthand the devastating impact that unforeseen circumstances can have on the lives of individuals and families.
Valley Medical Center is valuable and necessary resource for South County. I am proud to join Morgan Hill and Gilroy City Councils, every hospital in Santa Clara County, Supervisor Don Gage, more than 80 nonprofit providers, and many others in supporting Measure A.
Erin O’Brien, president and CEO, Community Solutions
