Browse archives: 2007 | 2006 | 2005 | 2004 | 2003 | 2002 | 2001 | 2000 | 1999 | 1998 | 1997 | 1996 | 1995

Published on 04/07/1999 All articles from this issue

Compromise still lacking in the Hills

printer friendly version

Site development reviews continue to spur divisiveness in Los Altos Hills. Some of the exchanges of the last two council meetings are particularly disappointing, considering the spirit of compromise in the air at a January study session on this very issue.

Councilwoman Toni Casey, re-elected last November with the housing review issue at the center of her campaign platform, has been right in the middle of the latest debates. At the March 4 meeting, she appealed an application that had been settled at the planning commission level. She has asserted that the commission should be bypassed altogether in the site development review process.

A long public hearing intended for resident input had Casey and councilman cohort Steve Finn coming across like cross-examining prosecutors when addressing people with whom they differed - at least that's the way it sounded to us when we heard tapes of the March 4 meeting. While reports of council members' "attacks" were exaggerated, the record shows Casey complaining that one speaker's photo of the property in question insulted her intelligence.

Ironically, at the next meeting, March 18, Casey called for a civility code, citing it was the residents who got on her. We don't believe this is the way it was.

Mayor Bob Johnson is in a particularly difficult position as the alleged "swing" vote in this highly charged issue. He is being pressured by members of the Casey-Finn-allied Los Altos Hills Civic Association to uphold the majority of voters who elected Casey-Finn. This is unfair, considering it was Johnson who forged a fine compromise proposal for a fast-track development process that would send "clean" projects directly to council. Johnson's proposal, made at that January study session, incorporated Casey-Finn desires while respecting the wishes of those who wanted continued planning commission input.

Johnson has handled his role with grace thus far, but the fact that he is looked at as a swing vote belies the problem. Ideally, any one council member should be a swing vote, because he or she should be voting independently on each separate application. What you see now is a line drawn in the sand, with Johnson being the most flexible. Council members Bill Siegel and Elayne Dauber appear to vote toward more restrictions on site development issues, while Casey and Finn are consistently less restrictive.

For this council to be effective, all members must compromise. They must put aside political rhetoric, take a hard look at both sides, and vote their conscience. Consider all the affected residents, including, but not limited to, the applicants.

We don't doubt for a minute that all members of the town council agree wholeheartedly with the above.

If only council members could only put these basic philosophies into practice.