City of Cupertino on Planning for Measurex zone
I attended the Cupertino city planning meeting for the suggested plan for the previous Measurex zone tonight at 01/24/06.
This was the first time I went to any city-related meeting and here is my observation on the four commissioners based on what they analyzed and said:
Taghi Saadati: he said he wasn't greatly concerned about the traffic or the school impact without going into any substantiated details and analysis.
=> Why is this guy, unable to provide critical and believable analysis and arguments on this important case, even in the City of Cupertino office and voting to affect our lives?
Gilbert Wong: he said during his initial vote (I may be paraphrasing a word or so; you can check the recorded video): "It is difficult for me to say no even though the project goes against the principles I just outlined."
=> Gilbert offered a good analysis on his principles and what he believed in. But when the time came for voting and acting, he couldn't act on his principles! My goodness, isn't this dangerous to see that a person affecting the city's -- yours and my -- living quality cannot act on his principles? He talked smoothly and convincingly about his analysis and his principles but then when the time came to act, he acted against his principles!! My goodness; who do we have here?
Lisa Giefer and Marty Miller were the other two commissioners that elaborated, analyzed clearly on their beliefs and principles, and acted accordingly.
Also, one question I raised during the meeting was that: how did the number of people assumption, on which all the planning, analysis and mitigation was based on, be so under-estimated: that 94 three-bedroom and four-bedroom family houses will send only 34 kids to a school in total each year? We all know that when an assumption is wrong, everything else falls apart -- just like one is proving a mathematical theory, and in this case, presenting a case and plan. If such core assumption is so grossly incorrect, how would the staff, in particular, Steve Piasecki, the Community Development Director, even let the plan proceed? This just so glaringly tells people of Cupertino what kind of bias he and the staff possess and what kind of job he is doing for us. What is sad is that when you see into a person's bias, you know the rest regarding a particular case/argument is just his spin on things -- and all that is recorded.
City of Cupertino: there are very capable and wise eyes watching you and rest assured that there will be much more -- as there will be more, much easier and faster information dissemination channels in the years to come.
This was the first time I went to any city-related meeting and here is my observation on the four commissioners based on what they analyzed and said:
Taghi Saadati: he said he wasn't greatly concerned about the traffic or the school impact without going into any substantiated details and analysis.
=> Why is this guy, unable to provide critical and believable analysis and arguments on this important case, even in the City of Cupertino office and voting to affect our lives?
Gilbert Wong: he said during his initial vote (I may be paraphrasing a word or so; you can check the recorded video): "It is difficult for me to say no even though the project goes against the principles I just outlined."
=> Gilbert offered a good analysis on his principles and what he believed in. But when the time came for voting and acting, he couldn't act on his principles! My goodness, isn't this dangerous to see that a person affecting the city's -- yours and my -- living quality cannot act on his principles? He talked smoothly and convincingly about his analysis and his principles but then when the time came to act, he acted against his principles!! My goodness; who do we have here?
Lisa Giefer and Marty Miller were the other two commissioners that elaborated, analyzed clearly on their beliefs and principles, and acted accordingly.
Also, one question I raised during the meeting was that: how did the number of people assumption, on which all the planning, analysis and mitigation was based on, be so under-estimated: that 94 three-bedroom and four-bedroom family houses will send only 34 kids to a school in total each year? We all know that when an assumption is wrong, everything else falls apart -- just like one is proving a mathematical theory, and in this case, presenting a case and plan. If such core assumption is so grossly incorrect, how would the staff, in particular, Steve Piasecki, the Community Development Director, even let the plan proceed? This just so glaringly tells people of Cupertino what kind of bias he and the staff possess and what kind of job he is doing for us. What is sad is that when you see into a person's bias, you know the rest regarding a particular case/argument is just his spin on things -- and all that is recorded.
City of Cupertino: there are very capable and wise eyes watching you and rest assured that there will be much more -- as there will be more, much easier and faster information dissemination channels in the years to come.
posted by Concerned Resident at 12:17 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home