Letters to the editor – April 22, 2016

Deviations busted Prop U, not Alpine school

Re: “Schoolyard fight” [Volume 5, Issue 11 or bit.ly/1qbUZG4]

How is it that in all the planning that went into two updated Long Range Master Facilities Plans (LMRFP) respectfully associated with each board bond resolution calling for two bonds to be placed on the ballot, [they] somehow didn’t take these arts program facilities into account?

But they did. There were many facility needs on every campus throughout the district and a need to finally build a high school in Alpine.

This need was addressed in Prop U in 2008, and Multi-Purpose Facilities (MPFs) was what was agreed to by all campuses. Budgets were developed per site’s desire and districtwide needs. After the bond passed, came all the “gimme” changes. Now that the voters approved the issuance of bonds, everyone thought they could go after larger scopes and specs and campus project teams wanted the best for their campus, too. So, one deviation and then all campuses would impose the “me too” attitude. This has busted the program.

Do people think that when the LRMFP was designed it didn’t have a purpose? It was a plan to get as much done as possible with taxpayer dollars. They were not short-sighted in their planning. Read what the voters approved. For Grossmont, that campus agreed to a $5 million budget to convert the 70-year-old gym — not a $15 million events center. This plan would have helped to eliminate the deferred maintenance backlog as well.

This is why the essential needs across the district are not being met, not because of Alpine, as much as everyone wants to blame it on them. These deviations from what was told and approved by the voters is illegal and the court of appeals has supported that opinion.

—GUHSD Trusteee Priscilla Schreiber, Santee

Depot Springs ‘makes no sense’

Re: “Depot Springs answers critics” [Volume 6, Issue 3 or bit.ly/1qbXdVW]

As a longtime resident of La Mesa and a retired educator, I am shocked that the City of La Mesa would approve a project like this.

Depot Springs is described as a large brewery where children can be entertained while their parents drink, and which will conduct live outdoor music until midnight, daily — the latter, according to literature passed out by the owners.

This large brewery is located across the street from a sizable middle school, where children pour out onto the city streets and cross the fast-paced Fletcher Parkway in a dangerous crosswalk where at least one student was killed by a speeding driver who ran the light. Adding more people who drink and drive to the immediate neighborhood is a bad idea.

Last, but not least, it is bound to impact property values in a negative manner. Who would want to be subjected to a business with live music until midnight, daily?

No one notified neighbors across Fletcher Parkway where I live, and all are shocked to hear of this project. Apparently, the new Mayor and City Council are ready to rubber-stamp anything the Planning Commission presents, no matter how negative.

I encourage anyone within the city limits (and from outside it) to call the City of La Mesa to express their opinions on all of the above.

Depot Springs, in this residential neighborhood makes no sense for the residents and should be located elsewhere, no matter how many meetings have been held. This is a bad idea for children and those who wish to have safe streets and quiet nights.

My future voting will be impacted for the new Mayor and current City Council, as they were elected to represent residents, not businesses.

—Susan Brinchman, La Mesa