Leslie Lodestro, LANN President

If you asked me today how I plan to vote on Measure H, the parcel tax for elementary and middle schools, I would say ‘yes’.

My yes vote comes with some caveats, however.

The caveats that are attached, fasten themselves by the district’s ability to follow through on a commitment to revamp the way that money is spent for our education. For me, fiscal change is a prerequisite for my vote. I don’t want to dig deep for more parcel tax money past November. I want to know that our district will not fall ‘victim’ to the state’s inadequate funding ever again. I want to feel secure in knowing that our program is solid and properly funded for many years to come.

Last April when I was so critical of the campaign I was relying on my instincts to guide my vote. Because I could not cozy to the passion of a campaign that demanded money or else, I voted no. I was ignorant and annoyed.

I know more now. I’ve read budgets, attended meetings and asked questions. I can make a decision based on knowledge, not instincts. My husband and I have taken the time to understand the problem and we are trying to be part of the solution. A small, but critical part of that solution lies in the passage of Measure H. The large and lasting answer to the problem rests with hard choices and responsible spending from here on out.

The formation by the district of a subcommittee comprised of financial savvy residents is a step in the right direction. If the district and the subcommittee can demonstrate real progress towards developing and embracing a long range fiscal plan, then Measure H will get my vote come November. The cognitive shift that is necessary for the district to break a cycle of spending which has been fostered by ever increasing parcel taxes will not happen overnight.

The Measure H campaign has not yet communicated obvious signs of the work being done to reconstruct a budget that lives within our District’s means. It is my hope that by the time you receive this edition they will have gone community-wide with the good news.

I do not share the unequivocal passion for the Measure H that some do. I do not believe that the sky will fall if it does not pass, but I do know that our class sizes will balloon and I think it is better to avoid that. Program choices and changes will have to be made and I think that our current scholastic program is truly excellent. I would prefer not to impact that excellence.

A wise friend of mine likened the changing of district spending behavior to the turning of a battleship. It takes time, planning and the right people at the controls. As the district ship begins the turn, I feel the stranglehold of my yes-vote strings loosening. As the turn continues the district and KLASS campaign should communicate their progress from the bow in the loudest possible way. Good news should be shared so that trust and hope can be renewed among skeptical voters.

The Springer number represents a 50% increase over a 2001 journey to school survey. Springer has a slight advantage in that its "camp school" is located within Springer's boundary, facilitating the commute for many of the students. All Almond students must cross San Antonio Road. Many Springer students must cross Springer Road. Both schools have reassigned their existing crossing guards and added new ones to supplement the new commute routes.

There is a lot of speculation on how the walking and biking numbers will hold up once the rainy season begins?

A group of Almond parents tried to arrange with the Mountain View School District for a bus pickup and drop-off service. The bus service was being contracted for independently of either the Almond PTA or the Los Altos School District. The cost was to be $360 per student for the year based upon 70 students signing up for the service. The group fell short of the required minimum number of students prior to the start of school. Since the start of school, the group has secured the required number of students but the Mountain View School District no longer has an available bus driver for the route. The parents are still hoping to find another affordable bus service.

When the LANN board crafted the Strategic Goals that were adopted into our bylaws last spring, we agreed as a board that we would support rather than endorse candidates and ballot measures. It sounds like just semantics, but it really has more teeth than that. To us, an endorsement represents unconditional approval by our entire membership. Once our name is added to an endorsement list it will be there no matter what happens or what direction a campaign or candidate takes. While we are also looking for ways to increase LANN's visibility, having our name tied to an endorsement list is not part of our Strategic Goals.

We prefer instead to 'support' a ballot measure or candidate and the difference is that we become intimately and personally involved through avenues such as newsletter articles, one-on-one input on the issues and/or volunteer support by board members. We work to develop a deep understanding of the issue or person and assess how it or they align with our own mission and goals. LANN support is far more valuable than a simple endorsement, but the support must be earned.

To the LANN board an endorsement means blanket approval and could be misconstrued as representing the opinion of our whole membership. The board does not feel it has the right to make such a representation. The LANN board is anxious to inform our members about issues and candidates that are important to our community in keeping with our mission that is to preserve the small town character of Los Altos neighborhood.

We hope that most of you are aware that LANN has a website: "lannonline.org." It has useful links to other resources of interest to our membership. It also contains back issues of the LANN newsletter. So if you've recycled the newsletter, but then later remember that there was an article that is interesting to you now, you can find the newsletter online. We even have an index (beginning with the January 2002 newsletter,) to help you. Next time you're surfing the net, point your browser to lannonline.org and check it out.

I am going on record supporting Measure H. As many of you know I have been an active

volunteer in the Santa Rita, Egan and Los Altos High schools for the past 8 years. Measure H

is absolutely needed to bridge a funding gap for our schools.

The Measure H funding will help keep class sizes smaller, avoid or delay school closings and maintain the quality of education Los Altos has come to expect.

These are complex issues that as a community we must deal with. Until recently I had no idea that some 40+% of the Los Altos real estate parcels are valued at $200,000 or less. Of course, this is a direct result of Prop 13. Along similar lines, because of how the Los Altos Schools are funded per state statute (revenue limit vs. basic aid), we have over $2,000 less per pupil to spend on our schools than Palo Altos for example. We must take the time to address the right issues and not penalize our students by withholding the interim funding required.

A "yes" vote for Measure H is a vote for additional funding for Los Altos Schools as well as recognition of the extraordinary results of our teachers and administrators.

I understand that Measure H would not solve 100% of the intermediate funding required. There will no doubt be tough decisions that we as a community will need to make and have the discipline to implement. Like you, I expect the District to develop a balanced budget. I believe that the recent actions taken by the Board and CAFC (Citizens Advisory Finance Committee) will ensure that a balanced budget is developed.

Please join me in voting "YES" for Measure H in an effort to preserve the high quality of our schools.

The new applications for housing this month include four new two-story homes while

another neighborhood seeks the protection afforded by the single-story overlay. These applications are scheduled for a hearing before either the Architectural and Site Committee or the Planning Commission. Please call the Planning Department at 948-2790 for details.

3. 02-SC -41--Duxbury Architects/ Kay Townsend--176 Osage Avenue: Consideration of design review for a new two-story home. Project planner: Rondash
4. 02-SC-42--C. Parvini--211 Mountain View Avenue: Consideration of design review for a new two-story home. Project Planner:  Connolly
5. 02-Z-04--M. Lerner--Azalea Way Neighborhood: Consideration of a Single -Story Overlay Zone for 18 properties located on Azalea Way and a portion of E. Edith Avenue. Project Planner: Kornfield

President Leslie Lodestro

Vice President Ken Lorell

Treasurer Dianne Edmonds

Secretary Kathy Wright

Editor Vickie Clements

Housing Chair Kathy Putman

Traffic Chair Bill Crook

Schools Chair Bill Cooper

Contributor Karen Greguras

Webmaster Jerry Wright

Advisors Mike Abrams

Lou Becker

David Casas

Kate Disney

Attention current LANN members. If you have a particular interest, concern or a question, please feel free to send a letter to the editor! We welcome your feedback about LANN, your concerns about our community as well as your ideas regarding a current issue the city is facing. We will make every attempt to address your concern either in an upcoming issue of the newsletter or via our web site. This ongoing feedback will also enable us to reflect your concerns in what is covered in this newsletter.