I read your editorial in Saturday's R-P. I think you have made a big mistake by supporting the PVUSD's site for a high school in the slough. This may be presumptuous of me but I am not claiming to be holier than thou. I know I've made my share of mistakes over the years. I'd like to think that I am honest enough to acknowledge my errors and do something in the wake of such awareness. Sometimes you cannot undo the errors and hope that you learn the lesson and apply it in the future. But sometimes you can rectify a mistake by taking some sort of corrective action.

I think the latter option is open to you on the issue of the high school site so I'd like to try to persuade you that the site is unsafe. I have the highest regard for your personal integrity and the highest respect for your dedication to the interests of your constituents. I just think that you, like many other honest friends of mine, simply did not know how bad this site was for kids. I'm sure you will agree that health and safety considerations take precedence over environmental and growth issues.

There are many health and safety reasons why a school should not go on that site:earthquake liquifaction, peat bogs,dump dangers, toxics leachings, etc. but overwhelmingly, the proximity of the airport. The standards for siting schools near airports are clearly set forth in official documents and there is no rational way to justify a school which is not only right under the take-off zone but also under airport traffic pattern zones. School sites in both of these zones are specifically prohibited by the Aorport Land Use Planning Handbook . That is why the site was rejected for a school in 1987.

Since 1987 the standards have been tightened so the yellow light awarded in 1992 and rubber-stamped in 1997 is even more difficult to justify. Any reasonable review of that decision will conclude that the approval was politically inspired and in no way can be sustained; the evaluator at Aeronautics, Daniel Gargas practically admits to that. So why is Casey going to such great lengths to try to put a square peg in a round hole? The answer has to be that his agenda is unrelated to the best interests of the kids in the schools he oversees.

I urge you to visit this website : http://www.tellingthetruth.com. Here you will find extensive documentation proving the slough site is unsafe including, but by no means limited to, complete details about the 27 crashes that occured since Jan.22, 1983, 13 of which occured on takeoffs. The 2 fatal crashes involving 3 deaths were takeoff related.

I'm sure that after a short visit to this website you will convince yourself the slough site is unequivocally unsafe and will join us in securing a site that is not only good for kids but will be implementable far faster than Casey's abysmal choice.

Cordially,

Bernie
ftc@cruzio.com