LETTER TO THE EDITOR: Response to Peter Rozo
Mr. Rozo's recent post on the view debate is full of misinformation and half-truths.
What do demographics and per capita income have to do with adopting a strong view ordinance? Nothing. Again, Peter Rozo and his “Friends” attempt to convince the public that this is a class issue when it is obviously not. You would think that “hill dwellers” are spoiled trust fund babies, when in fact we are hard-working individuals trying to make a living like everyone else in this city. I have spoken to people who live in the hills and people who live in the flats and it is clear that Mr. Rozo and his "Friends" are simply on the wrong side of this issue.
Geographically, El Cerrito and Tiburon are similar as we are blessed with hillsides facing spectacular vistas of the bay and San Francisco.
Mr. Rozo is totally uninformed about local view ordinances. He says we should look to the cities closer to us for our inspiration. Should El Cerrito adopt Oakland’s ordinance, he would find that it is even more view-friendly than Tiburon’s. Albany does not currently have an ordinance but is looking at Tiburon’s. Kensington relies on the county’s view ordinance and Richmond doesn’t even have one. Berkeley's ordinance is not a view ordinance, but a tree ordinance that hasn't been tested in court; certainly not the best possible choice.
Despite what Mr. Rozo says, adoption of the Tiburon Ordinance will not “result in a flood of legal action” because it has already withstood a withering legally challenge in the State Appeals Court - that is why so many communities in the Bay Area look to it as the gold standard. Hopefully, tree owners will take advantage of the opportunities for mediation and arbitration offered by the ordinance.
The current discussion over views in El Cerrito has gone well past the level of misinformation offered by Mr. Rozo.
A little research can go a long way. I urge him to do his homework before further misinforming the public.
Run dates: 2004-02-03 - 2004-02-17