text:
With America's
first major-party presidential ticket led by an
African-American, pundits, strategists, and politicians have
become fixated on this racial group as a bloc of
voters. Meanwhile, blacks have also become the focus
of the fight over whether California will
continue to recognize same-sex marriage.
percent of African-American voters in California say they
oppose same-sex marriage, according to a Survey USA poll
released October 17. Thirty-eight percent support gay
marriage, and 4% are undecided. Black voters -- who
make up 6% of the California electorate -- have the
largest divide of any racial group between supporters and
opponents of Proposition 8, the ballot
measure that would amend the state constitution
to rescind marriage equality.
Polls indicate
that the spread has actually increased in recent weeks. An
earlier Survey USA poll, released October 6, found that
52% of African-Americans supported the measure, with
34% opposing it and 14% undecided.
Asian voters,
according to the more recent survey, are the only
racial group in in which supporters of gay
marriage outnumber opponents (48% versus 42%).
Organizers of the
fight against Proposition 8 gathered across the state
on Tuesday in an attempt to garner more votes from
African-Americans. Five black leaders, including three
clergy members, converged in the Leimert Park
neighborhood of Los Angeles as part of a No on 8 press
conference. They talked about dispelling the notion that all
black people vote the same and have the same beliefs.
"People tend to
look at the black community the way they look at any
community -- they make a sort of sweeping brushstroke
of who we are and what we are," actor Doug Spearman
told The Advocate at the event. Spearman said he is
not convinced that high voter turnout among
African-Americans will have a large impact on
Proposition 8.
In statewide
referendums on same-sex marriage in 2004, a majority of
African-Americans voted to ban such unions. In Mississippi,
where blacks make up 32% of the electorate, 77% voted
for a ban, according to CNN exit polls. In Georgia,
80% supported a ban.
Efforts to win
African-American votes have popped up on television, the
Internet, and the radio. Blogs that cater to largely black
audiences -- like Young Black & Fabulous, and Rob
2.0 -- and feature advertisements have seen growth in
ads for and against Proposition 8. The African
American Ministers Leadership Council, a project of the
People for the American Way Foundation, bought airtime
for three radio commercials, each urging voters to
oppose Proposition 8.
"A lot of us are
struggling to make ends meet," an announcer says in
one spot. "Soaring gas prices, foreclosures, outsourcing of
our jobs. Politicians make bad decisions that we all
pay for. But some people are trying to tell us the
real threat to our families comes from gay couples
trying to get married. Who are they kidding? Not me. It's
wrong to support discrimination of any kind."
Earlier this
year, in the same-sex marriage case that led to the
state supreme court's ruling legalizing such unions, the
California chapter of the National Association for the
Advancement of Colored People cosigned a
friend-of-the-court brief in favor of legalization.
California NAACP official Joy Atkinson said the
organization's executive board is publicly opposed to
rescinding marriage equality and is urging
members to vote against Prop. 8. Alice Huffman, president of
the state chapter, has been campaigning against the
ban since it was proposed this summer, Atkinson added.
"She has spent
the better half of the year trying to make people
understand that this is a scare tactic and that this is a
civil rights issue," Atkinson told The
Advocate. "It stirs up passion in people in the
African-American community, especially because so many
people are part of their churches."
Jasper Hendricks
of the National Black Justice Coalition said he grew up
attending a church where his pastor never said anything
negative about gays and lesbians. "But there are
African-Americans who sit in churches and listen to
these negative messages and don't question it," he
said. "They can still play influential roles in the
church, like being a deacon or a minister, but they still
sit and listen to their pastor."
The Reverend
Vanessa Mackenzie of the Church of the Advent in the Adams
neighborhood of Los Angeles also spoke at the press
conference Tuesday. She has been discussing the ballot
measure with congregants who insist they're not
homophobic but don't believe gays and lesbians should have
marriage rights.
"In my own
congregation I have been having conversations about the
high rate of divorce and the high rate of cohabitation --
because if we talk about threats to marriage, [those
are threats too]," she said.
Same-sex marriage
opponents have also been reaching out to churches and
waging media and grassroots campaigns to try to win
over more blacks. Derek McCoy, Yes on 8's
director of African-American outreach, says the
concentration on black churches is reflective of the
civil rights movement of the 1950s and '60s.
"Black churches
embodied not just a religious side of things but also
social activism," he said. "Our civil rights movement was a
response coming from the black church. I would say it's a
new civil rights movement. We have to continue to push
forward on social issues."
McCoy said much
of the campaign focuses on quoting Democratic
presidential nominee Barack Obama's statement that he does
not endorse same-sex marriage. Obama does, however,
support civil unions and domestic partnerships, which
McCoy said is acceptable.
"It's just,
people say, 'They're infringing on our civil rights,' and
I say they're not infringing on your civil rights," he said.
"Civil rights are inherent rights. They're things you cannot
change, they're infallible, that's just how you were
born. And one thing you can change is [your
homosexuality] ... the research shows there are plenty of
people who change lifestyles. I've never met anyone who was
black and changed their blackness."
The issue at the
root of the Yes on 8 campaign, McCoy said, is the
stability of African-American families. With the advent of
same-sex marriage, people will question why marriage
is necessary, and the number of fatherless households
will increase, he said. "We're already facing
epidemics where when the father's not in the household,
children don't do well socially, they don't do well
economically, they don't do well educationally, you
get increased increased poverty rates, increased crime
rates, things in our community, that we don't need to
destabilize homes any more," McCoy said.
From the other
side, the National Black Justice Coalition's Hendricks
said the effort to persuade more black voters to
support same-sex marriage is, all in all, a
matter of winning their "hearts and minds," a battle
that will take more time than the five months
allotted for the Proposition 8 campaign. Through town
hall-type meetings and educational efforts, groups
like the justice coalition and the NAACP are
attempting to teach people about the nature of measures like
Proposition 8.
"The fact is that
right now it's 60-40," Atkinson said of the
divide among black voters. "A while ago it was probably 75
[in favor], so it's probably come down quite a bit."


text:
YouTube - Raw: The Host of WrestleMania XXVII is revealed
C'mon, I can't be the only wrestling fan here who marked out like crazy. I'm a pretty jaded wrestling fan these days but I got goosebumps seeing the guy I watched as WWF Champion when I was 10 triumphantly return.
Also I'm not someone who particularly cares that WWE is rated PG (like the product was so great the last few years before the change) but it was nice to see Rock be himself and not a neutered or censored version.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Read the full story here Web Link
Town Square
Foothills Park access-for-$$ plan opposed
Original post made on Jul 12, 2007
Read the full story here Web Link
Comments (72)
a resident of Los Altos Hills
on Jul 12, 2007 at 7:35 am
Be careful, our 8,000 residents might overwhelm your 60,000 residents in the park. $100,000 per year for firefighters might not be worth it.
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jul 12, 2007 at 7:52 am
I think it's great that at last Los Altos Hills is offering to pay for their access to Foothill Park. As a 13 year resident of Black Mountain Road in LAH I used Foothill Park all the time. I walked my dog in the Foothill Park, my children played with their friends in Foothill Park, we hiked all over the hills in Foothill Park. If you want to keep LAH residents out of Foothill Park you will have to put a 12ft chain link fence around it. At last LAH is offering to pay for something they already have and use, easy access to Foothill Park.
a resident of Barron Park
on Jul 12, 2007 at 8:10 am
I'm glad there is some creative thinking going on about this.
My personal view is that having a "private" public park is probably wrong - it is out of step with what virutally any other communities do. I have seen it written that this is the only "residents only" park in California - anyone know of others? Googling around, I did see a couple others (one in Ohio) and references to parks that require permits which are available to anyone (kind of like how anyone can get a library card, regardless of residency, but you need a card to borrow).
I like FHP a lot and go there often; but I do not like the feel of PA exceptionalism.
a resident of Stanford
on Jul 12, 2007 at 8:15 am
The Foothill park situation is the reason why Stanford needs to close off all access to the Dish area
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jul 12, 2007 at 9:50 am
First, how is it elistist to claim exclusive access to something that local residents bought and paid for, and continue to maintain, with hard-earned tax dollars? That's what one Council member is claiming.
To suggest otherwise - that non-residents should be admitted for free - is to imply a broader claim that certaiin kinds of private property should not be private, and that those who maintain private property have an obligation to share it. Using that as a premise, where does the line get drawn? Think about it. That this suggestion comes from Council member Cordell, who was a sitting judge - someone who dealt with property issues on a daily basis - is surprising.
It's a good thing to share, but doing so by attributing the undesirable qualities of stinginess and elistism to those who 'have' isn't the most effective way to make one's argument.
I'm with Peter Drekmeier on this one. We might consider letting in a quota of non-residents in - for a fee. We can use that fee to help maintain fire safety. This way we control numbers, maintain the quality of the ecosystem, and can turn off our decison to admit non-residents at any time, for any reason.
Certainly, $50-100K per year is too cheap to sell overall access to the treasure we know as Foothills Park. That's only $4-$12 per Los Altos resident, per year. Why does the Mayor want to sell access to this treasure so cheaply? How does ths square with the Mayor claiming to be a fiscal conservative? And, why would any agreement to share park access be designed to live in perpetuity? The latter would be a grave mistake.
What boggles is that the Mayor would float such a gargantuan politcal football over a measly $50-100K per year. How is it that we can't find a way to generate those dollars from another source, one that would be far less controversial, and not threaten bad feelings between communities (if the idea fails, which it very well would) and intra-community cohesion? (this is a very "hot potato" issue that could dilute community focus needed for more important matters)
The Mayor needs to rethink this idea, or dump it altogether. In a time of dear resources, it's not wise to leverage away great treasure for a pittance.
a resident of The Greenhouse
on Jul 12, 2007 at 9:51 am
Stanford resident,
Would you mind explaining what you mean?
a resident of another community
on Jul 12, 2007 at 11:06 am
I use Shoreline for biking and walking trails and they are all free to me. Mtn View doesn't discriminate and there's plenty of room for us people from "other" cities & towns.
I miss the Dish since the fires...I have a feeling I will soon miss it forever.
Stanford & PA are not too friendly to their neighbors. Can't we all just share! Maybe the town council is made up of only children.
a resident of Stanford
on Jul 12, 2007 at 11:46 am
Ollie--PA refuses to allow non-residents to use Foothill Park, however they are constantly demanding from Stanford access to the Dish area and even trying to usurp Stanford's private property rights.
They are being hypocrites by demanding access to one property while denying access to another
a resident of Duveneck/St. Francis
on Jul 12, 2007 at 12:49 pm
Stanford students and residents can use Palo Alto's libraries, Baylands, all parks, tennis courts, Children's Museum and Zoo all FREE. They can also use Palo Alto's golf course and swimming pool for a fee. Heaven help any Palo Alto resident without a student or faculty/staff card who sets foot on or in Stanford's golf course, tennis courts, swimming pool, driving range, or libraries. The Book Store is OK, but bring money. Buying a computer there? No way.
As for Foothill Park? To Mayor Kishimoto. Drop this idea and don't start another broohaha.
We've been that route and we don't need anymore uproar. You've already pushed through a new position for $181K a year incl benefits - for the first year -for an 'Environmental Coordiantor" with no set guidelines or job descrtiption - and it is a senior staff position that no doubt will have a lot of 'senior staff perks'. Staff? Acar allowance? Travel allowance? Maybe housing allowance??? And that doesn't include the 'staff' that this person will need. And the Council just approved going forward with this broadband idea as part of Utilities despite a strong warning from the City Auditor that it is very risky. and the company is risky. Stop fittering away money then keeping Fire Station 8 is a no brainer.
a resident of College Terrace
on Jul 12, 2007 at 1:15 pm
Palo Alto practically begged nearby towns to help buy that land (now Foothill Park). No takers. They were warned that it would be PA only. Still no takers. This is one case where Palo Alto NEEDS to be selfish. We paid for it, and continue to pay for it. It is OURS, and I don't think we should budge one inch. It is our treasure...let's keep it that way.
a resident of Barron Park
on Jul 12, 2007 at 2:37 pm
Interesting views.
For those that oppose letting others in because "we paid for it," does the fact that other towns/counties/states/countries do not limit access to their facilities influence your thinking? If we were barred from Shoreline in MV; Wunderlich or Huddart Parks; Golden Gate Park; Central Park in New York; or getting extreme, state parks and monuments in other states - would that be a better system?
It just feels like we are being a free-rider on a system that allows equal (though not always free) access to government run facilities, regardless of residence. Every town/county/state incurs the extra "burden" of use by out-of-towners, including crowding, trash, parking, etc. But that is just the way the system works. If too many people come, you can charge fees for parking, access, etc. - but generally all pay the same rate.
It seems that we would want a system where all towns give equal access to their parklands; or all towns restrict access to just residents. I'm not sure what the argument is that OUR town has a park that should be restricted, while others do not.
Please let me know if I am missing something about how the system works, for instance if there are many other residence-only parks elsewhere - I am just going off my general experience.
a resident of Meadow Park
on Jul 12, 2007 at 2:52 pm
Fred, there has been a rumor floating around that I have heard since I was a lot younger, that the reason it is a private park is that it was purchased and donated to the City with the covenant that it would be only for Palo alto residents. A conditioned gift needs to be used in accordance with the conditions, otherwise it is lost. I can't figure out if this is a true rumor or not. But if it is, then Palo Alto is not being selfish by keeping it exclusively for Palo Altans, it is keeping faith with the donor.
And for those who say covenants can be overridden, it's my impression that only illegal covenants (containing covenants requiring racist exclusions in naighborhoods etc.) can be voided.
a resident of Barron Park
on Jul 12, 2007 at 3:43 pm
Thank you Natasha. I did a bit of Googling and found this from a PA Weekly article in Oct '05:
"Entry to Foothills Park has been restricted since it first opened in 1965. The reason historically given for keeping the park closed to nonresidents was that other cities had refused Palo Alto's offer to help pay for the park, which cost the city $1.29 million."
So it seems (though not definitive) that the restriction is a choice, not a requirement.
a resident of College Terrace
on Jul 12, 2007 at 4:08 pm
Palo Alto has MANY parks and other facilities open to the general public, just like other cities. Foothills Park is a special case. When we needed help, for what should have a been a regional park, there were no takers. We dug deep, and made the sacrifice. It is ours.
Hold the line. It is a selfish thing that is fully justified. I think it send a positive warning to the REALLY selfish people who want a freebie.
a resident of Barron Park
on Jul 12, 2007 at 4:57 pm
Thanks John, and yes, it is certainly true that Palo Alto has many parks open to all. But I'm not sure why Foothill is a special case.
Presumably we residents paid of all our parks and facilities at some point (either by buying from private owners or declining to sell already public land); and of course so did every other town and government pay for theirs. I'm not familiar with the particulars of the FH purchase, but I'm also not sure if they are so important, almost 50 years later.
Also, what if Los Altos Hills had come in on purchasing Foothill with us, these many decades back. Would we simply be allowing only PA and LAH residents in? That's still the same question as now - what about people from Woodside? Or San Jose? Or Boston?
I'm still not sure why FH is such a different circumstance from all the other parks in California that we should keep it private, while others make theirs open to all comers. Does anyone know if there are other "restricted access" parks like Foothill?
a resident of College Terrace
on Jul 12, 2007 at 5:19 pm
I think you are missing something. The land that would become FH was offered, by Dr. Lee (I believe) for sale, at a reasonasble price, to be conserved as a natural park. Palo Alto had no obligation to purchase it. There was no particular pressure to preserve foothills lands in those days. Nevertheless, PA tried to enlist other nearby cities to help out on this conservation project. They all refused.
This piece of land SHOULD have been a regional park, but only PA stepped up to the plate. It was a controversial issue, and only put over the top by the argument that it would be OUR park.
If you are now saying that such sacrifices mean nothing, then you are also saying that such future sacrifices mean nothing. There will be many acres lost to development, if towns like Palo Alto are not alllowed to claim what they paid for in the name of conservation, especially when other offered no help.
Think about it, Fred.
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jul 12, 2007 at 5:51 pm
Fred and John
I agree that you both have valid points. However, I feel sure that on something like this there is a statue of limitations either in fact or in ethics.
The fact that this purchase was so long ago means that the conditions have been met. For many of us, we were not around here at that stage and so the controversy was something we were not involved in. I am sure that there have been many purchases of land somewhere along the development of the US whereby certain stipulations were put into effect and are no longer valid.
My own personal feelings is that a compromise should be invoked. Something along the lines of free for PA residents and all others should pay a nominal fee plus only allowing say 100 (or some such number) cars in per day.
I think that it is right to follow conditions of the agreement to the extent that the prime use is for Palo Altans. But, to the degree that we are such a small part of a bigger whole, and the fact that all open space should be available to all peoples while also keeping the tranquility of a private park, there is a prudency to keeping the flavor of the conditions if not the exact conditions.
There are many parks in European cities which are for the local residents only since they do not have a backyard. These parks are kept up by a residents upkeep charge (something like a condo association) and the local residents have access by a key. I do think there are times when privacy is acceptable, but not in this case.
a resident of College Terrace
on Jul 12, 2007 at 6:27 pm
"I feel sure that on something like this there is a statue of limitations"
Really? Where?
Is that how you are going argue about the next conservation buy, especially if it require a major expenditure or a bond issue?
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jul 12, 2007 at 7:04 pm
You did not read what I said. I am not stating an actual statute (sorry I just realised my typo) but a grandiose ideal ethic. I am no legal expert, just someone trying to find middle ground, a peacekeeper. No harm in trying.
a resident of Barron Park
on Jul 12, 2007 at 7:21 pm
I will think about it some more John. But not sure that our situation is that different from any other town that decides to spend money on a park. Again, if LAH had chipped in 50 years ago, would we be keeping all the others out anyway? What do you think?
I also agree with the "statute of limitations" notion that Resident raises. I don't think we'd care much if this happened 200 years ago. So is 40-50 enough?
I've seen others say that FHP needs to be protected from the masses that might come if it were open to the public. But if others had chipped in when we bought it, would we have made it open to all? If so, the issue of "too many people" would be moot.
I suspect that the main reason we keep FHP private is that we like it. Who wouldn't? It is a little like belonging to a private club. But it doesn't seem right that we have our private enclave, while everyone else shares theirs.
a resident of Meadow Park
on Jul 12, 2007 at 8:05 pm
In the town of Ross, in Marin County, there is a lovely little children's park and you can only get a key if you are a resident. I have no idea if it is public or private. In Larkspur, you can only get a library card if you are a resident of Larkspur, Corte Madera library you have to be from there. And local libraries often limit them selves to serving patrons of their city. Should they not do that too? I am not saying that to be confrontational, but just to point out that yes, we DO in fact limit access to some resources to the people who have paid for them.
a resident of College Terrace
on Jul 12, 2007 at 8:18 pm
I agree with you that there are a variety of ways to look at it. I think I fairly presented the way it was presented to us (Palo Alto voters) back then. I also do not think that a contract should be broken, without a consent from those covered by the contract.
If current Palo Alto voters are allowed to take up the issue, that is fine with me. I would vote "no", but I am just one voter. However, I would strongly object to a whimsical vote by a current City Council. This is a big deal, in certain ways, and I think it deserve a vote of PA citizens.
I would also mention that many realtors "sell" Palo Alto on the basis of good schools AND Foothills Park. Exclusive, elitist and earned... and legal and just.
a resident of Barron Park
on Jul 12, 2007 at 10:02 pm
John, of course you are absolutely right, that many in PA feel entitled to FHP and would feel bad if their exclusivity were taken away.
I don't know if it calls for a popular vote or Council vote; probably a matter of how the Charter reads. But sometimes we have to do the right thing because it is right, even if it is not in our narrow self-interest.
a resident of Duveneck/St. Francis
on Jul 12, 2007 at 10:17 pm
I have mixed emotions about this. I agree it is elitest and feels wrong. However, the parks in Palo Alto are SOOOO busy and crowded -people from all over come to use them. It is nice to have just one park that isn't crowded.
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jul 12, 2007 at 10:52 pm
Fred, Why is the 'right thing' you suggest right, and why do you label the interests of those who want to keep what they paid for as 'narrow' interests? It's often true that keeping an asset close DOES serve a population optimally. In this case, it also serves the land optimally. Look at what unlimited attendance has done to some of our once-heralded national parks. They've become garbage heaps.
The entire FHP debate is driven mostly by guilt, an emotion to which there is no end - only constant self-flagellation. It's disingenuous for anyone to try to use the "guilt" chip for this debate.
I LIKE the fact that I can go to FHP pand not have it overrun by loud, radio-toting, cigarette-smoking, running-around-half-naked-in-an-inebriated-state groups who have no respect for the peace and quiet of others in a pastoral setting. Anyone calling this impulse elitist is someone I want to have me invite over to their next sedate evening dinner party with my turntable and some hot vinyl.
What I would love to know is how many people claiming FHP exclusivity is elitist even USE FHP on a regular basis. Grandstanding on the guilt card is getting really, really, really old.
a resident of Barron Park
on Jul 12, 2007 at 11:00 pm
Local, I don't know if you would like any park suggestions, but some uncrowded nearby venues we enjoy:
- Windy Hill (off Alpine or Portola or Skyline) - fantastic hiking, one of my favorites, we've walked for miles with our kids and seen just one or two folks
- Arestradero Preserve - a huge, lovely landscape of rolling hills, and a new small nature center to boot
- Bol Park - in beautiful Barron Park (sorry, I'm a booster), one of the least utilized kid playgrounds around, and also lots of space for walking, sitting, playing - the path goes back all the way to Gunn/Arestradero. We have picnics there, it is quite serene.
a resident of Midtown
on Jul 12, 2007 at 11:20 pm
Many valid points have been raised on both sides. But none of them are more than opinions of how things should be. I get a sense that most are seeking a compromise - except John?
Let's accept the LAH $100,000 and charge LAH residents a fee each time they use the park. Consider this as helping to pay the $1M annual cost as well as catching up for not being part of the original purchase.
I note that an early poster said they and other LAH residents use(d) the park frequently since there are no real barriers to prevent them.
This doesn't sound like a contractual problem between the residents and our City Council since it can make changes without residents' approval per Gary Blum.
a resident of Barron Park
on Jul 12, 2007 at 11:26 pm
John M., that is quite a post and I'll try to respond.
I personally haven't called our FHP policy elitist and I tend to agree, that's a loaded term (some have said our policy is racist in the past, and I don't think that's called for either). I have pointed out instead that our policy is simply different from just about everybody else's in terms of access to public parks. And I wonder what the justification is.
And I'm not trying to "guilt" you or anyone (I didn't see other doing it either, though I'm sure others have in the past). I apologize if it seems so. It's more that it seems curious that we have this policy - if everybody did what we do (keep our best public parks private), it seems the world would be a poorer place. Since that seems odd, I wonder if there is a good reason for it. I said opening access was the "right" thing because it seemed like the fair thing, and because I haven't heard any compelling reasons against it.
Finally, I'm not sure about your description of the undesireables - are those the people of Los Altos Hills you are describing? They seem to be one of the principal groups we want to keep out, since they would not contribute to the purchase price! Personally I haven't seen groups like that in Windy Hill, Huddart, Arestradero Preserve, Montebello, Wunderlich, Bol Park, etc., despite their being open to all. Though I am sure big noisy groups do happen (even among residents of Palo Alto!).
And, fwiw, I am in FHP probably ~2-3 times a week, often on my bike. I really like the place, one of my favorite spots anywhere.
a resident of Los Altos Hills
on Jul 12, 2007 at 11:35 pm
Did Los Altos Hills et al screw up 40-some years ago by not finding a way to make Foothill into a regional park? Obviously.
Thankfully, we haven't repeated this mistake and now benefit from a fantastic collection of parks and open space areas that are open to all. I particularly encourage my Palo Alto neighbors to come visit the beautiful Byrne Open Space preserve and Westwind Barn located a short distance from Foothills Park in LAH.
It is time to move on from the mistakes of the past and find fair and constructive solutions for the future. Let's work together as neighbors to remedy the chronic underfunding of our park facilities. Let's work together to provide dearly needed fire protection. Let's work to interconnect our open space areas and expand the recreational opportunities available to both of our communities.
There is plenty of conflict in the world - lets settle this old feud! There is lots of good work we should be doing together.
a resident of Barron Park
on Jul 13, 2007 at 12:00 am
Richard, thank you for the invitation. I had no idea that barn/area on Altamont was open space!
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jul 13, 2007 at 2:00 am
The strangest thing about all of the people opposed to considering Los Altos Hills offer don't want to pay for a regular fire station in the park like other fire stations throuout Palo Alto.
Also it is open to Portola Valley residents. They just have to hike into it from the side that adjoins their city.
I question the high figure for people using it. How many parking spaces are in the park? Are there 100? 52 weeks x 100 = 5200x 4 per car =20800people. Are about 8 times this number really using the park? Who counts the people anyway? There are usually on week days no rangers around.
I read the city had $75,000 for play equipment in the new little city park, but has no money to staff the fire station that would help protect about 4000 acres of public owned lands in the hills and most of these lands are open to anyone to use 24/7 all year long.
a resident of Barron Park
on Jul 13, 2007 at 2:07 am
Under freedom of expression protections by the First Amendment, citizens are allowed to freely gather and conduct activities such as political debate and recreation. A "tradition public forum" is a place where the government customarily allows assembly and free debate of ideas, and includes areas such as streets and parks where the government holds title to the land but allows these areas to be used by its citizens.
A municipality could regulate and limit, on a first come, first served basis, the number of persons allowed in the park at any one time in the interest of safety but for a non-resident to be denied entrance there would have to be some peculiar evil attributable to nonresidents.
a resident of another community
on Jul 13, 2007 at 6:42 am
Wow, where did you guys get your Mayor? FHP has always been one of the crown jewels of Palo Alto. One of the perks of living there. I can not understand how or why you guys would even consider opening it up to people from another city.
Why not just put it on the ballot? Yes vote to open it up to Los Altos. and a No vote to keep it closed and fund the firestation through a $10.00 a year tax or something.
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jul 13, 2007 at 10:22 am
One other point about the idea of an ethical statute of limitations.
I for one wasn't around when the park opened. I feel sure that many of the people who are so adamantly firm in keeping it PA only, didn't live here then either. It wasn't my money or taxes that bought the park and it wasn't most of the local residents of other cities whose money didn't pay for the park. Yes, we have had the luxury of having a park for x number of years. But, we didn't make the rules, our predecessors did. Yes we are following the conditions, but for how long do those conditions have to exist. Never is not going to be forever. At some stage, it is only ethically right to look again at the rules and judge them accordingly.
When my children got new toys and they were very special to them perhaps because they had saved up their allowance to pay for it or waited a long time for a birthday, I allowed them to put them away when my friends came over so that their kids would not spoil the new toys. However, as new toys got older and they got more new toys, the previous old toys were then up for grabs to any child who may visit us. This is probably not the exact analogy, but the premise is the same. When something is new and special, been bought by those who use it by their own hard work, it is worth preserving. Years down the road, it may still be something special, but the right to keeping it to oneself is no longer as valid.
a resident of Midtown
on Jul 13, 2007 at 3:34 pm
So I can no longer take paid tours to the park? Dang!
a resident of East Palo Alto
on Jul 13, 2007 at 7:57 pm
I am surprised to see the opposition to opening the park to Los Altos Hills residents. They are mostly affluent whites and Asians, and they will fit right in. It's not as if you'd be allowing the hoi polloi or undesirable minorities to pollute your pristine park.
a resident of Barron Park
on Jul 13, 2007 at 8:03 pm
Ouch! I guess in our defense, Puzzled, we discriminate against all equally ;-)
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jul 13, 2007 at 11:42 pm
Fred, Riff-raff know no economic boundaries.
a resident of another community
on Jul 14, 2007 at 1:19 am
With all due respect, Fred, since you are a newbie in these parts it might be a better idea to read for a while, before jumping in to issues that have long and emotional histories. The thread gets long and boring when used to educate one person. I hope this doesn't sound harsh, but this thread has become uninteresting because of its repetitiveness and length and posters have started joking around.
a resident of Barron Park
on Jul 14, 2007 at 8:17 am
GB, sorry that I have bored you. I have to admit, I ask the questions, primarily to get other people to think about them and to see what people say. Also, it is a respectful way of pointing out that someone else has asserted something that doesn't stand up. I could go the "Jane, you ignorant slut" route, but as Sun Tsu put it, "It is best to win without fighting."
I find when people say "this issue is too complicated for a newbie" what they usually mean is "the arguments on this are emotional, not rational, and we don't want to find out we're wrong."
a resident of Mountain View
on Jul 14, 2007 at 11:55 am
I think that MV should impose a fee on PA residents for use of Shoreline Park, our well-funded libraries, etc, etc...
a resident of South of Midtown
on Jul 14, 2007 at 12:43 pm
If MV libraries do not charge out of town fees, then it is a foolish policy. I think every town should decide on how they want run their parks (they paid for them). Go ahead and charge for Shoreline. Palo Alto can also charge for Bixby, should they choose.
Palo Alto is VERY generous with its parks. Many MV soccer players enjoy our new soccer field, for instance. Palo Alto has one park that is really a conservation zone, that it keeps for itself. We paid for it, as a conservation zone, and nobody else would help us.
It is a crown jewel, and I want to keep it that way.
a resident of another community
on Jul 14, 2007 at 1:04 pm
Fred said " find when people say "this issue is too complicated for a newbie" what they usually mean is "the arguments on this are emotional, not rational, and we don't want to find out we're wrong."
Wrong. I did Not say it is too complicated, I said it has a long and emotional history. I suggested reading for a bit before asking what now turn out to be questions with an agenda. As though we haven't thought about many of the things you bring up. It's a question of bandwith and how much any one person should add to it. There are a lot of smart people, just wait till they write.
a resident of Barron Park
on Jul 14, 2007 at 1:28 pm
Hmm, that "Gotcha!" posting style seems familiar, maybe I've seen it under other names ;-)
Well, you are quite right of course, GB, you said "long and emotional history" not "complicated." Of course, I didn't say you had said "complicated" - I merely refered to "when people do." But who cares - this is minutae.
I am glad you have thought of the questions (and hopefully the answers!), and I would appreciate your thoughts. Why should PA keep its best park private while all others make their parks public? Aren't we a free rider on the public park concept? Others could do as we do - but would the world be a better place?
a resident of another community
on Jul 14, 2007 at 1:53 pm
There's no stopping you Fred. More and more pseudo questions. Here are a few answers.
-Other communities use all our other parks, libraries (alot!) and facilities.
-the history of payment for Foothills Park
-our park ordinance which requires a vote of the people before making changes
-the Trojan Horse offered by Los Altos Hills. If they wanted to contribute to the cost of the fire station, that would be neighborly and appreciated. They want something valuable for their "donation" which means it not a donation at all.
a resident of Barron Park
on Jul 14, 2007 at 2:09 pm
Thank you GB, I appreciate your sharing.
As I've mentioned above, of course everyone uses everybody else's parks, libraries, etc. (so PA is not different there); and everyone paid for their own parks either by buying them or by not selling off public land (so PA is not different there). So are we really so different? Maybe our park is especially expensive to maintain (I saw $1M/year - not sure how that compares to other parks, does anyone know?)?
On the ordinace, I did see this in a PA Weekly article: "Opening Foothills Park to non-residents would not need to go on the ballot, City Attorney Gary Baum said via an attorney's office staff member." Do you have any additional info on the ordinance you mention?
Any thoughts?
a resident of College Terrace
on Jul 14, 2007 at 2:14 pm
Getting bored,
Yes, Fred seems to have defined his role as a modulator of the tone of these threads. That's OK, because we can choose to accept or reject his style. However, when he accuses those who oppose his views of using several different handles, then he needs to provide the evidence.
Fred, you say: " maybe I've seen it under other names ". Please, Fred, here is your chance to be honest. Name those names. Then defend your evidence.
I think there is a tendency by Fred, and some others, to assume that multiple opposing views, to their own, simply cannot exist in Palo Alto. It must just be one person, spewing forth with multiple handles. Guess what, Fred: WRONG! It reminds me of that old reporter from one of the back east newpapers (Mary McGory?)saying , "How could that man (Reagan) get elected? I don't know a single friend who voted for him!"
Fred, I suggest that you put the FHP issue to a vote. I think you might find that the secret ballot box will be filled with people who do not share your guilt.
a resident of Barron Park
on Jul 14, 2007 at 2:36 pm
John - that is fair, and I agree that it is hard to recognize styles. But having gotten the same "wrong" the other day on another thread from an other name, it did catch my attention. And of course, ultimately it doesn't matter (much) if someone uses multiple names (so long as the person is not just agreeing with himself or something). Below are two posts (I don't know how to link directly to the post, but both are from a recent thread on the Libray Audit), we can judge for ourselves:
Post #1:
"pat says (about return on library investment) " it's not a return on investment as one would calculate in a business."
Wrong. In fact, corporations all over the world calculate ROI line items like "good will", which often derive from benefit arrays
Posted by Broccoli, a resident of the Charleston Gardens neighborhood, on Jul 6, 2007 at 6:12 pm
Post #2:
You're wrong. Where does the auditors's report say that the library system is badly managed? Where did the auditor's report conclude that as a general finding?
Posted by Broccoli, a resident of the Charleston Gardens neighborhood, on Jul 9, 2007 at 11:19 am
On guilt - I don't feel guilty at all John; I just don't like free-riders (be it me or someone else).
a resident of College Terrace
on Jul 14, 2007 at 2:52 pm
Let me first say that I appreciate your efforts on this site. You are giving it your best. We don't agree won FHP, but I like a good debate.
I thought you were saying something about multiple opponents to your views on FHP. Sounded like it to me, but sometimes I am tone deaf.
"On guilt - I don't feel guilty at all John; I just don't like free-riders (be it me or someone else)."
I don't like free-riders, either Fred, especially on this issue of FHP. It is a conservation park that we paid for, and I want to keep it that way. It IS selfish, and elitist...and the right thing to do. Why do people have problems with "exclusive". Palo Alto is very inclusive, in general, just not on this one. Do you think I should feel guilty about that, Fred (I don't, just asking your opinion)?
Fred, I hope you would support a vote of the Palo Alto citizens on this one. It would clear the air, even if it is not required by the opinion of the City Attorney.
a resident of Barron Park
on Jul 14, 2007 at 3:24 pm
Thank you John, I like a good debate too. I apologize if my post above was a bit cryptic.
What's the concept of a "conservation park?" I'm not familiar with it. Are there others around here? It may be that different norms apply, I am just not familiar with the concept. In general, there don't seem to be other "exclusive public parks" around.
On guilt - I don't feel guilty, I'm not sure why anyone should. The policy just doesn't make much sense to me, given what everybody else does. I don't think it is elitist or racist - I just think it doesn't make good sense.
Sometimes controversial issues should go to a general ballot, sometimes not. Generally I think it makes sense for the entity that has the authority to make the decision. There are problems that can arise when a body flinches from making controversial decisions it is elected to make. But usually practice is based on precedent - do you know of any precedents that might apply here?
a resident of College Terrace
on Jul 14, 2007 at 3:42 pm
I would ask you to do your homework on this one. Dr. Lee sold his land to Palo Alto with the understanding that it be held as a nature preserve. This has always been interpreted as a small footprint of human activity.
This is a unique situation for Palo Alto. It is NOT an open public park, becasue it IS a conservation park. Limited use, light footprint, etc. I think Palo Alto has a done agood, job, overall, in keeping with Dr. Lee's original contract with the city. The wildlife like it, even if some humans do not.
PA City Council flinches all the time (same for the School Board). I wouldn't worry about that one, Fred. A public vote would provide political cover for the Council. It would also be transparent. Why not, Fred?
a resident of Barron Park
on Jul 14, 2007 at 4:03 pm
Thanks John, but can you help - is the FHP concept materially different from Arestradero Preserve, Baylands, Shoreline, Wunderlicht, Windy Hill, Byrne Preserve, Huddert, etc.? Seems similar, in that all these are "light footprint" (vs. say Rinconada Park).
You read my mind of course - the flinching you mention is exactly what I had in mind when I said "problems can arise." Precedent would be the most important guide for me - if a public vote is consistent with past practice ("we (almost) always submit controverisal issues like this to a plebiscite"), that's cool; otherwise, a plebiscite might set a bad precedent ("if FHP went to the voters, why not [insert your favorite controversial issue]!?").
a resident of College Terrace
on Jul 14, 2007 at 4:28 pm
I am not aware that the other properities you cite were sold under restrictive covenants, as was FHP. Do you know?
Palo Alto is extremely generous with its parks. Even with the single example, where it is restricted (FHP), a single PA resident can still get in two car loads of non-PA residents. Hardly a draconian restriction.
Some of the parks you mention are county parks, not city parks. I don't think you want to go down road....
I would like to know exactly which major parks LAH and Portolla Valley share with the general public. I am not aware that they have actually invested in major public parks for the public interest.
When Stanford complains, well then open up Stanford to the general public. We would love to use their pools and libraries and playing fields. Anyone ever try to hold a practice on a Stanford playing field?
FHP is one of those special cases that will deserve a special and specific vote.
a resident of Mountain View
on Jul 14, 2007 at 6:09 pm
Gary, thanks for yoir amising post. MV gets less benefit from PA services then the reverse, by leaps and bounds (and good luck charging for access to byxbee...). good thing that those MV soccer players licve in a hospital friendly town to treat their asthma from sucking carbon monoxide fumes at your awful new field (but most of them are playing on MVs abundant well mantained fields along with their PA neighbors anyway)
a resident of Barron Park
on Jul 14, 2007 at 8:10 pm
Thanks John, I will do a little research. Why do you think county parks are different, btw? I would say they are the same - they could choose to limit access to non-county residents.
On the FHP covenant - I have tried Googling for info (looking for FHP covenent, deed restriction, etc.) but no luck. I did find this on the City web site: "The land for Foothills Park was sold to the City of Palo Alto by Dr. Russel Lee, founder of the Palo Alto Medical Clinic, in 1958, on the condition that it be preserved as open space." It doesn't mention resident restrictions; is there more to it?
Wunderlich (a SM County park) says this: The next owner of the property was contractor Martin Wunderlich, who purchased the property from the Folger's in November 1956. In 1974 he graciously tendered it for public recreation by deeding 942 acres to San Mateo County for use as park and open space.
Huddart (a SM County park) says it was deeded on the condition it be developed as a public park.
Byrne Preserve in LAH seems similar to FHP: "In January of 1968 the Town of Los Altos Hills agreed to the purchase of the land subject to the stipulation of Nature Conservancy that it remain in its natural state." They also apparently bought an additional 21 acres to connect Byrne to Hidden Villa (required as part of the initial purchase).
Shoreline and the Baylands appear to have been city owned for a fairly long time (largely before anybody thought marsh land was worth conserving).
Arastradero Preserve was purchased "through an inverse condemnation lawsuit" - wow!
a resident of College Terrace
on Jul 14, 2007 at 9:44 pm
Bottom line: FHP has been exclusive to Palo Altans for a long time. A LOT of people want to keep it that way.
What's ironic about this decision is that there has been a history between most regional municipalites of very little cooperation toward leveraging assets.
So, here we have FHP, a priceless municipal asset, being leveraged for an annual pittance, ESSENTIALLY because we have not been able to come up with the funds to man a fire station.
That fire station would normally protect Los Altos AND Palo Alto citzens shuold there be a fire. Palo Alto has been funding that station, WITHOUT LA Hills help.
The irony: Palo Alto (actually, the Mayor and City Manager, from what I've heard) has chosen to GIVE AWAY part of an inheritance for othe FAVOR (ha!) of LA Hills helping to pay for something that it should have been helping to pay for ANYWAY (the fire station that protects both Los Altos, and Palo Alto). It's absurd.
Given the above, how can anyone legitimately call ths a good deal?
This is WEAK negotiation, and not unlike the wimpy stuff that we have seen in past years between PA and Stanford, where Stanford regularly cleans our clock (which is now being weirdly overcompensated for by oru Cty Council holding Stanford's feet to the fire in an unreasonable way on the upcoming hospital build - pathetic!)
The Mayor calls herself a fiscal conservative - how does this deal show fiscal conservatism? It's more like fiscal 'convenience' spun to look like a win-win.
Right now LAltos officials are jumping up and down with joy; they're looking like heros, when - finally paying for something that they probably could have been compelled to pay for ANYWAY (to help protect their citizens), because the fire station is NEEDED to protect LAltos - they have been given the extra bonus of unlimited LAltos community access to FHP.
And what will PA residents get? More dissension and controversy. Sheesh! Isn't there an executve program on negotiation basics at Stanford? hint, hint...
This is a FAR from optimal deal - some will attempt to spin this as a PA win, because we're getting funds for the fire station. Balderdash!
What will PA get? The firestation it could have EASILY found the money to find ANYWAY - if we'd been able to negotiate from strength, we could have compelled partial payment to man that fire station and possibly opened up FHP to Los Altos residents for a fee, at our leisure. That would give us control over keeping FHP the pristine nature preserve that it is - with the ability to limit access in the future, should we need to.
My objection IS NOT about limiting LA access to FHP; it's more about getting more optimal returns for assets than this far-from-optimal attempt - one that looks more like a kid trying to please peers in a scenario where all the good candy is given away to the smart kids on the block in exchange for for a measly pack of chewing gum.
a resident of another community
on Jul 14, 2007 at 10:19 pm
Thank you John M. The LAH council must be laughing all the way to the bank at the curve ball they tossed at us. You know, in order to raise $135,000 some of the people who live in Los Altos Hills have to work a Whole Day!
Funding fire station 8 is coming up at Monday's council meeting. Maybe this deal will be discussed and hopefully dismissed.
(anticipating still more questions from Fred: the agenda is on page 13 of the Weekly.)
a resident of College Terrace
on Jul 14, 2007 at 10:55 pm
on the lighter side, perhaps Palo Alto should simply annex Los Altos Hills and bring their City Council in to joint sessions on Monday evenings. We could sell Los Altos Hills City Hall, and rent it out for posh LAH/PA parties.
Just imagine the possibilities! We could then simply tax the new 8,000 LAH residents for FHP firestation protection, and give them permanent entry to FHP as bona fide LAH citizens. Now THERE's a deal. I mean, really, does LAH _really_ need a City Council, for 8,000 people, most of whom are in a very privilieged demographic? Do they really need all the duplication of services that our city could provide, probably for less money. C'mon!
LAH citizens, arise! and smell the opportunity. Tell you what, we'll even call the new city "Los Palo Altos Hills" - there are lots of tall trees in FHP. :)
Gosh, kidding aside, this is beginning to sound better and better, especially when one considers the current FHP proposal. Hmmmm.....
a resident of College Terrace
on Jul 15, 2007 at 9:18 am
County parks are paid for by all the citizens of the county. FHP should have been a county or regional park, but we got no help. We begged for help...the answer was "no". Palo Alto then made the case to its own citizens that if they would spend the money, it would be our own park, and only open to PA citizens. We paid the price. It is our park, and it should stay that way, unless a vote of the people says otherwise.
For those who say (words to the effect)'OK, you won't share FHP, then we won't share Huddart and other SM County parks', I would only say: OK, you use SM county parks and stay out of Santa Clara County parks...who would get the worse of that deal? At least that's an apples-to-apples comparison.
BTW, I am not, in principle, against restrictions on county parks that favor county residents. For instance, if the parks are being used to capacity, then county residence should be a filter. Why not? Same applies to city parks.
If Palo Alto and all other peninsula cities restrict their parks to only their residents, it would soon be seen that Palo Alto would be the HUGE winner, and the other cities would be HUGE losers. Why? Because Palo Alto already shares MORE parks/parkland than do the other cities. It is time for Palo Alto to call the bluff of the whiners of LAH, Stanford and other nearby cities.
a resident of Mountain View
on Jul 15, 2007 at 11:10 am
John, you'll need to back that assertion up. I think you are mistaken
a resident of Mountain View
on Jul 15, 2007 at 11:10 am
John, you'll need to back that assertion up. I think you are mistaken
a resident of College Terrace
on Jul 15, 2007 at 2:04 pm
OK, I did a little digging. You can do your own and correct any mistakes I may have made.
Palo Alto lists 30 urban parks. The number of parks do not include dog runs, skate parks, Arastradero or FHP nature preserves, Mayfield soccer fields, airport, golf course, schools facilities (administered by the City for recreational purposes).
Mt. View list 35 parks. However it includes dog runs, sports pavillion, skate parks.
In terms of number of parks, it is about a draw, I would say. However, when Arastradero Preserve is thrown in, it is not even close. Palo Alto wins hands down. Shoreline is great, for those who like sailing, but Byxbee has more in terms of hiking and birdwatching. I don't like either, so I won't argue the point either way. Both Mt. View and Palo Alto have golf courses. Only Palo Alto has an airport, one, BTW which is used by many Mt. View pilots (yes, it is run by the county, but that is coming to an end...and Mt. View refuses to open up Moffet airport to light planes).
BTW, it is not clear to me that Mt. View owns Shoreline Regional Park - or does it just administer it? An honest question, just don't know.
Bottom line: Mt. View, if you want to close off your parks to Palo Alto, please do!
a resident of Old Palo Alto
on Jul 15, 2007 at 11:49 pm
I get a chuckle out of people talking about not allowing folks outside of Mountain View have access to Shoreline park. My god... that park was built on a mountain of trash. FH, on the other hand, was paid for with cold hard cash. Any other park, pool, or golf course in PA is open to folks outside of PA. Aren't we entitled to at least one park to be for the residents only?
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jul 16, 2007 at 11:11 am
Selling FHP for a little funding for Fire Station 8 is uncalled for. Fire Statiion 8 has to been part of the Fire Departments annual budget. Why is it separated out like it is something special. This is just ridiculous every year the City playing this game of maybe you will have a fire station maybe you won't. There is no other fire station that every year they say maybe we will open it or maybe we won't. No other neighborhood has to raise ear marked funds for their Fire Station.
a resident of another community
on Jul 16, 2007 at 12:43 pm
I think CeCe makes a serious point. I've been wondering for several days why this mishmash of issues has been brought forward. But I can't figure out what is going on.
Is there some other unwatched expenditure that we are being distracted from? I agree this firestation is not very expensive if you look at other expenditures.
a resident of Mountain View
on Jul 16, 2007 at 12:59 pm
John, you are largely correct (MV developed Shoreline park, for the record). Comparing Shoreline to Byxbee is silly, however, and the crowds at both prove it. Arastradero Preserve-- nice but you're forgetting about Deer Hollow and Rancho SA (Deer Hollow operated by MV Rec, Airports: MV doesnt control Moffett, nor does PA control theirs. MV also led the way on development of the Stevens Creek Trail.
I'll agree that listing the skate park is a stretch, but the sports pavillions are not-- they have outdoor amenities.
MV also does not list its schools as parks, though they, too are jointly managed.
I would never suggest closing down parks or other public benefits to other communites (and you forgot libraries, and I forgot our performing arts center). I just find PA's attitude on this silly beyond belief
a resident of Mountain View
on Jul 16, 2007 at 1:00 pm
oops. Meant to delete Rancho SA- thats in los altos
a resident of another community
on Jul 16, 2007 at 1:47 pm
Mountain View is a great town with lots of $$$ from the dot com industry.
But it has nothing to do with this subject Station 8. If you want to talk about MV, please begin another thread.
a resident of another community
on Jul 17, 2007 at 3:57 pm
Greetings from the city of Brotherly love,
I write to you from banks of the Schuylkill River amidst the 8000 acres of Philadelphia's Fairmount Park open to all (no fees) . It has been many years since I left Palo Alto and when I visit I too can't get into Foothills Park which I always treasured. Many points of view in this forum have validity seems to me but I haven't seen yet a proposal for Los Altos Hills to buy into the Park.
Let me see:
market value of unbuildable land in the bay area is between $40000 and $50000 per acre,
excluding infrastructures
1400 acres of Foothill Park have a market value of about 56 million dollars (as Unbuildable landand again without the infrastructure value accounted for ).
ratio of PaloAlto residents/Los altos Hills residents is about 7.5
the share that Los Altos Hills wants to buy for 135,000 dollars/year for ever (always a projected decreasing value ) has a value of at least 7. 5 million dollars + share of infrastructure.
That amount when very conservatively invested should provide the Park with about $375,000/year interest + lump sum for infrastrucure.
Why would Palo Altans want to sell FP so cheaply? * Palo Alto already put in and maintained infrastructures at a cost to the City of Palo Alto only for over 5 decades. Why would Palo Altans support Los Altos Hills residents and at an eco-cost billable to residents of the city only?
The argument that all the other communities have all their parks open has valid nuances but as someone pointed out neither libraries nor schools are open to all the other communities without restrictions . If Palo Alto wants to let in residents of LAH without monetary consideration (not the pilfering amount offered) then they should open it to all (including me when I visit), the only consideration being how many people can the Park ecologically tolerate and what the entry fee will be to cover costs. I pay a $4/day/per person beach tag when I set foot on the beautiful New Jersey beaches so that the municipalities can maintain them adequately, I will not berate PA if you charge me for the pleasure of FP. Finally, I wonder if the rangers at the Park ask people for their resident proof when they are on the trails. They should even if you look as if you belong (what does that mean? )
*btw, I have a large bridge here over the Delaware River for sale, good condition, cheap, going fast hurry ...
Society Hill, Philadelphia resident
a resident of another community
on Jul 22, 2007 at 1:16 pm
Why doesn't Palo Alto just charge non-residents a fee, let's say $5 per person? I find it very snobby to reject non-residents access to public lands; I live among the commoners in San Jose, and there is no public place that is off-limits to Palo Altoans. Maybe we should rethink this and charge you a hefty fine or keep you out alltogether.
Ok, seriously, this seems like municipal protectionism and will be about as successful as protectionism in trade.
a resident of Los Altos Hills
on Jul 22, 2007 at 6:17 pm
The subject is off the table. The city council has decided not to open the park access issue, and is funding the fire station.
a resident of College Terrace
on Jul 22, 2007 at 6:49 pm
"The city council has decided not to open the park access issue"
I hope so. That would be a victory for common sense. Maybe the upcoming bond issues will now have a fighting chance.
Burger chain Shake Shack to open in Palo Alto
By Elena Kadvany | 16 comments | 4,264 views
The Cost of Service
By Aldis Petriceks | 1 comment | 975 views
This time we're not lying. HONEST! No, really!
By Douglas Moran | 5 comments | 535 views
Couples: When Wrong Admit It; When Right; Shut Up
By Chandrama Anderson | 0 comments | 461 views
One-on-one time
By Cheryl Bac | 0 comments | 405 views


text:
Aurors and Hit Wizards will have to have some kind of special identification. Magic makes impersonating other people absurdly easy, so there has to be some foolproof way of doing it. If not a badge, then some equivalent object or parchment that only ministry officials know how to make, that sort of thing.Originally Posted by OliveOil_Med
The Death Eaters had a pretty effective way of identifying themselves and proving status as Death Eaters through the Dark Mark. I doubt Aurors would go so far as to brand themselves, though.
Tim the Enchanter


text:
DM3-Plus-TonePrint von Sweetwater
It's hard to beat analog delay if you're going for a great subtle echo to add a bit of life and space to your tone. The original Boss DM-3 is considered a classic among many tone gurus for its warm, sweet-sounding repeats that never get in the way of your playing. The DM-3 Plus TonePrint gives you the tone and response of the original DM-3 but lets you crank the delay time beyond the slightly limiting 300ms of the original DM-3 to a more practical 500ms. A final word of warning: just like the original DM-3 the delay time gets longer when turning the delay time knob counter-clockwise!
Holen Sie sich jetzt diesen TonePrint
Have an iOS or Android device? Use the TonePrint AppDownload the TonePrint EditorDM3-Plus-TonePrint von Sweetwater
<iframe width="920" height="518" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/jqIHbaBD3XA?rel=0&wmode=transparent"></iframe>
Andere TonePrints von Sweetwater
Sweetwater Editorial Director Mitch Gallagher was introduced to recording when the manager of the rock band he was in loaned him a 4-track cassette recorder. He studied electrical engineering and computer science at North Dakota State University, eventually earning a Bachelor of Arts degree in music from Moorhead State University (now Minnesota State University - Moorhead). His graduate studies at the University of Missouri in Kansas City included music composition and classical guitar.
He toured as a lead guitarist/vocalist in rock and country bands, and has played with big bands, fusion and experimental music groups, and as a classical and steel-string guitar soloist. As a classical guitarist, he studied with Michael Coates and Douglas Niedt, and currently studies with Jason Vieaux and Denis Azabagic. He has performed in master classes with William Kanengiser of the Los Angeles Guitar Quartet and Lorenzo Micheli of Italy's SoloDuo.
As a music technology specialist, he has taught college courses, lectured, given clinics, consulted with pro audio manufacturers, and spoken at festivals, conventions, and conferences around the world. Publications such as the Washington Post consult him as a technology expert. He is a respected recording, live sound, and mastering engineer, and operates his own recording studio and production company, MagMedia Productions.
As a composer, he studied with Henry Gwiazda, Gerald Kemner, and James Mobberley. His compositions cover genres from classical to experimental to heavy metal. "Prophecy #1: At First Glance," an experimental percussion ensemble/synthesizer work based on the Fibonacci number series, received a 1991 NARAS (Grammy) award in the Best New Music/New Classical category. He was a featured artist at the 1994 International Computer Arts Festival in Sofia, Bulgaria, where he lectured on his Prophecy series of electronic music compositions.
The former senior technical editor of Keyboard magazine and former editor-in-chief of EQ magazine, Gallagher has published well over 1,000 articles in magazines such as Performing Songwriter, Acoustic Guitar, EQ, EQ en Espanol, Keyboard, Pro Sound News, Guitar Player, Government Video, Extreme Groove, Music Technology Buyer's Guide, Videography, Strings, and Microphones & Monitors. He is also the former editor of Church Sound magazine, and served as associate editor at Live Sound magazine.
His books include Make Music Now! (2001, Backbeat Books), Pro Tools Clinic (2005, Music Sales/Schirmer Trade Books), The Studio Business Book, 3rd Edition (2006, Course Technology/Cengage), Acoustic Design For The Home Studio (2006, Course Technology/Cengage), Mastering Music at Home (2007, Course Technology/Cengage), and The Music Tech Dictionary (2008, Course Technology/Cengage). Project Studio Mastering (2008, Multi-Platinum Pro Tools) is his first instructional DVD. His latest book is Guitar Tone: Pursuing the Ultimate Guitar Sound (2011, Course Technology/Cengage), and he will be releasing a book on building, customizing, and modifying guitars in 2012.
Gallagher is the author of "Guitar Tracks," a monthly column in Premier Guitar magazine, and regularly contributes as a freelance author to many music publications. He operates MAG Media Productions and the Sound Sauna Studio, teaches audio recording and music business as associate faculty for Purdue University/Indiana University, and performs with The Mitch Gallagher Band.Lesen Sie mehr über Sweetwater


text:
Was $995.00 NOW $795.00
Grant Mulvey wore this jersey during the 1981-82 NHL season.
The jersey exhibits black marks, paint transfer, and board burns.
As was common practice in this era, this jersey was recycled for use with the Portland Winterhawks. The Winterhawks were a Major Junior team playing in the Western Hockey League. They Played at the Memorial Coliseum in Portland, OR.
Tye Cameron wore this jersey while playing for the Winterhawks in the mid 1980's his nameplate remains on the jersey.


text:
Notation basée sur
13 Avis
5 sur octobre 03, 2013
I was in the area for business for only one night. This inn was perfect for beauty, charm, calm, cleanliness, and service. It also offers high speed internet, plenty of TV channels, an excellent breakfast, and responsive ownership.
5 sur août 26, 2012
Enjoyed my stay, relaxed atmosphere, down to earth people. Breakfasts were delicious. Clean rooms.
5 sur août 13, 2012
A wonderful place to stay!
5 sur mars 05, 2012
Very clean. Extremely friendly people. Excellent service. I would recommend this inn to anybody (everybody). Really enjoyed my stay there.
5 sur mai 06, 2011
I was in town for a wedding and my daughter who is at time a handful came along. Luc, the innkeeper was so patient and guided us on activities such as the hiking trail, ben and jerry ice cream factory, and the icelanic horse riding (that my daughter just absolutley loved). We had a great time and truely enjoyed our first bed and breakfast experience. Luc as I found out from locals in town is the breakfast king....His breakfast are unique and very tasty. But as some of you can relate.... my picky daughter ....was simply pleased with Cherrios or fryed eggs which he was so kind to make for her. Thank you for a great experience and will return to visit.
4,6 sur avril 20, 2010
A lovely Victorian Inn, a delightful innkeeper and exceptional gourmet 3-course breakfast!! We will return!
5 sur février 21, 2010
My wife and I just returned from another excellent ski vacation in VT! This was our third time staying at the Mad River Inn and we could not be happier with our experience. Luc and his wife Karen were excellent hosts and made everyone feel at home. Luc is a superb cook and made a different breakfast every morning, you will never leave the breakfast table hungry. When we came back from skiing or snowshoeing there was hot tea and an assortment of fresh cookies waiting for us. The Inn is very well kept.... our room and bathroom were very clean and the bed was very comfortable with high quality sheets that made us look forward to getting into bed. There is a place to relax downstairs with a pool table and TV. The living room on the main floor has very comfortable couches and a great fireplace. The hot tub was the perfect way to relax after a long day on the slopes. Luc always has great suggestions for places to go for dinner. We cant wait to go back and try a guided horse ride from Karen at her Icelandic Horse Farm!
5 sur février 19, 2010
This was our second time staying at the Mad River Inn. Luc was so friendly and the breakfasts were exceptional. The rooms were spotless and the beds comfortable. We enjoyed tea and cookies in front of the fireplace after long days of skiing. The inn is warm and friendly. We highly recommend it!
4,4 sur août 19, 2009
From a full-course, delicious breakfast served tastefully on the scenic porch to a good night's sleep in a comfortable Victorian setting, we felt so at home while enjoying Vermont.
5 sur juillet 24, 2009
It has been my pleasure to stay at the Mad River Inn on many occasions. The rooms are spotless, the breakfasts delicious and the owner could not be more gracious or friendly. An added treat is to ride at the Vermont Icelandic Horse Farm which is owned by the innkeeper's wife.
5 sur juillet 21, 2009
The quiet beauty and serenity were an added bonus to a lovely inn with great rooms and a fantastic breakfast served by the innkeeper. And very affordable, on top of that!
4,6 sur novembre 18, 2008
The husband was a wonderful cook!! We were so pleased. The bed was so comfortable. I remember waking up and looking out our room and thinking " Wow !..we are in heaven" I live in Texas...Wished I lived in Vermont!!
5 sur septembre 02, 2008
Friendly and hospitable staff, beautiful gardens and views, awesome 3 course gourmet breakfast and comfortable, elegant, clean rooms!! Hands down best value!!


text:
Mount Meru and Kili's Southern Icefield
|[ Sizes: Orig | Med | Small | Thumb ]
Yet another photo of Mount Meru from the crater rim of Kilimanjaro. Dawn, January 2005.
The cliffs of the Southern Icefield illuminated with the day's first light.
Rate This Image
Current Score: 99.99%
Log In To Vote
[ View 242 Votes | Post Comment ]
Mount Meru (Mountain/Rock)
Nelson's Image Gallery
Marangu Route (Route)
Top 100 Photos and Best Photographers on SP (Album)
Famous 4000ers (Album)
African Mountains (Album)
Great mountains of Africa (Album)
Image Data
Image ID: 94103
Hits: 22627
Lat/Lon: 3.2167°S / 36.66670°E
Object Title: Mount Meru and Kili's Southern Icefield


text:
Love this! I still use the pink stuff for stamps that have more positive space, since broad areas of...
Date Added: 08/09/2015 by Cary Pryor
OZ Kut - 6 x 8 inch
I'm loving this stuff. It's firmer than Speedball's pink stuff, but easier to cut through than a sof...
Date Added: 08/08/2015 by Stephany Keller
Stampeaz Product Descriptions
Firm Kut - I do find this a very hard material to carve with my preferred method of a knife. Lifting...
Date Added: 07/11/2013 by Paul Hopkinson
OZ Kut - 4 x 6 inch
I've experimented with at least half a dozen different carving blocks, and this one is definitely my...
Date Added: 06/16/2013 by Silvia Stalzer
OZ Kut - 6 x 8 inch
As a former PZ devotee, I've been waiting for this new material with great anticipation.
OZ Kut i...
Date Added: 06/05/2012 by Valerie Smith
OZ Kut - 6 x 8 inch
Wonderful new material! Compared to Speedy Carve material (pink stuff), it's slightly firmer and is ...
Date Added: 05/24/2012 by Christine Borgfeld
OZ Kut - 6 x 8 inch
I've been boxing since 2008 and had the joys of the infamous White PZ cut. I've tried NZ,MZ,Firm cut...
Date Added: 05/24/2012 by jay stellrecht
OZ Kut - 6 x 8 inch
I've been through the entire array of carving materials, and like most, found PZ to be the best of ...
Date Added: 05/23/2012 by Judy Smith
Wood Carving Tool Set - 5 piece
This product is good but if you want to carve something really detailed you will have to get more to...
Date Added: 09/02/2009 by Paul Ruger
Dew Drop Pigment Ink Pad - Graphite Black
Dew Drops are the best! The Graphite Black is truly black, much darker than cheaper black ink pads t...
Date Added: 09/15/2008 by Kirby Palm
Your IP Address is: 184.108.40.206
Copyright © 2018 Stampeaz.com. Powered by Zen Cart


text:
Happy Thanksgiving from The Smockity Family!
This week the 4 Moms are sharing a Round Robin Thanksgiving Story arranged/edited by The Headmistress [2]. Start reading with any of the 4 Moms, then follow the link at the bottom for the next segment. When you reach the blog at which you started, you're done!
Before you begin with my portion of the story, I thought you might enjoy a REAL live look at what the day before Thanksgiving looked like at my house.
Mrs. Tim leaned back in her chair thoughtfully as her husband finished his story. The remainders of their Thanksgiving dinner beckoned temptingly, but she turned her attention to the children who waited for her to begin.
"Where did the turkey egg come from," asked an inquisitive child. "Did he ever find out?"
"I heard this story from Grandpa Bob, or Jericho as he'd been called as a child, the first Thanksgiving after I married Tim," she began. "Grandpa Bob and his wife, well, I have never met more hospitable people.
I asked them later what made them so generous with their hospitality and Grandpa Bob told me about the turkey egg.
One evening when he was around 13 or 14 years old as he was strolling along, kicking pebbles along the ground and thinking about how he wished he were a better boy and how hungry he was, he happened to pass by a little house with a nice garden, and a man of about thirty, Grandpa Bob told me, was out working that garden. He looked up and locked eyes with the hungry lad on the road, and something made him offer some food for work. Well, the way he put it was he needed to weed the garden before dark, and he was afraid that was too big a job for one man, and if he didn't get the weeding done quick, the dinner on the stove would be ruined. Jericho Bob agreed, and they began a friendship that led to a bigger friendship- the most important friendship of his life. That man was a Christian, and he shared the gospel with my Tim's Grandpa. He showed a hungry boy the Bread of Life.
Being a Christian changes your perspective on things, or it should, and now Jericho found himself plagued by the memory of a turkey egg he had found and kept long ago. Now realizing he had done wrong to keep it, he thought he'd see if he needed to make something right. You remember that Miss Pritkin was the only person around who raised turkeys. Miss Pritkin was a shy, and somewhat awkward lady who always dressed in black. He'd heard her young man had died shortly before their wedding date many years before, but she and Jericho Bob had never had much to say to each other. When he started going to church he noticed that she was usually there- sitting in the back corner, not saying much to anybody, but singing the words to all the hymns with a gusto that surprised him.
One day there was an announcement that shy Miss Pritkin needed to go to the hospital for a short while, and she needed somebody to care for her turkeys. Jericho Bob volunteered, and he went to her house for instructions. After she'd explained how to care for the turkeys and yard properly, she invited him to sit down for some lemonade. There was a long and uncomfortable silence over that lemon-ade table.
Jericho broke the silence. "Miss Pritkin," he said, "I think I might need to apologize to you. Several years ago when I was a boy, I found a large egg in our chicken coop, not a chicken egg. I learned it was a turkey egg, and it hatched out that same day and a friend and I raised it, intending to eat it for Thanksgiving. That's another story, but now I wonder- could that have been an egg belonging to you, and should I have returned it?"
Another awkward pause ensued. "I'm sorry," he said. "I guess it was yours and I should not have kept it."
Miss Pritkin confessed that she had put the egg there to help him, and also as a sort of test. "I realize now that part was silly, and maybe a little unfair," she said. Miss Pritkin's own little flock of turkeys had started as a gift. Shortly after her fiancée had died, a kind farmer from the church had given her six turkeys and a clutch of eggs to help her get by. When she tried to thank him, he'd said it was nothing, somebody had done him a favor that year, made him a present of enough firewood to get through the winter, and he wanted to pass it on, to do something good for somebody else.
The little flock of turkeys had grown well, and eventually paid well each year, and Miss Pitkin was looking for somewhere to pass on an act of kindness of her own. She had, unbeknownst to him, been watching the fatherless boy who lived up the road, and wanted to help him. She thought she'd leave him one turkey egg, and if did the honest thing and came to ask her about it, she'd give him a small clutch to hatch and raise. But he never came, and she quietly prayed for him, and extended her small acts of charity in other directions (including, he found out later, sometimes buying his mother's eggs even though Miss Pritkin did not really need them).
Because of that small act of courage in finally coming to her and asking about the turkey egg, Miss Pritkin became one of Jericho Bob's friends and supporters. She paid him well for watching over her flock while she was in the hospital, and when she came home, she gave him that clutch to raise. She also invited Jericho Bob, his mother, Julius Fish and Julius's mother, as well as a few other friends to her home for the first Thanksgiving dinner Jericho had ever had."
Mrs. Tim looked earnestly around the room, "Even a child," she said, "Is known by his actions, by whether his deeds be pure and right, and though Miss Pritkin thought she had been a little unfair to Jericho, and I might feel that way a little myself, he didn't. He told me he was glad things worked out the way that they did, and I suppose I am, too. Because if Jericho hadn't been so hungry, he never would have weeded that man's garden for him, and that is how he learned the gospel, and he met his wife at church, if they hadn't met, there would have been no Tim's father, which means there'd have been no Tim! And that is a thought not to be born. I suppose that makes this a Thanksgiving story, doesn't it?"
Mr. and Mrs. Tim exchanged thankful glances as their host cleared his throat and turned to Brother Garcia.


text:
To enter the Model Search email your photos to firstname.lastname@example.com. Please include name, age, hometown, and some info about yourself. Monthly winners get a free bikini from B. Swim, shades from Spy, and an interview in TransWorld SURF Magazine.
Check out all the monthly winners at the Girls Of TransWorld SURF


text:
By way of introduction, hi. I'm Ben. I've been with the Fire since the day they were born, through their first kiss with Stoitchkov, their Toyota Park Bar Mitzvah, up into their pimply stage today. I look at a lot of art and I watch a lot of soccer. I prefer when it works out that both happen at the same time; when they're the same thing.
This space will discuss those moments, those tiny moments that define games. It'll also chronicle what happens when you watch games with people across the art-culture-sports spectrum.
A quick word about Boston. Although it was under horrible circumstances, yesterday showed one of the reasons people come together and sacrifice money and time for something as meaningless as sport. The messages of support from the soccer community were uplifting (all this on top of the day we remember Hillsborough).
The euphoric addiction of following a team is matched in effect perhaps only by the relationships the sport engenders. It's a terrible point to make, but I can think of few better examples of soccer's significance as a cultural entity, which anyway will be the point of this column.
On Sunday, the Fire went to Houston to try to turn the momentum from their first win of the season into a win against a team that's basically unbeatable in their sweltering orange greenhouse of a stadium. Manager Frank Klopas hinted at the strategy going in: "Dealing with the temperature was the one thing we wanted to focus on. We wanted to be better in possession and not make a really high tempo game because that would affect us."
In other words, Klopas wanted to avoid the kind of game that would tire out his players.
How do you control the pace of a game in soccer? In football you can run the ball. Some basketball sets are built to use up more of the shot clock. But soccer's different. You can either sit back and try not to chase, or you can hold the ball as much as possible.
Trying not to chase is a dangerous game, and anyway a team that sits but doesn't want to alienate the world with the worst kind of 0-0 games eventually has to counter attack, which means quick sprints upfield, exposed space behind the sprinters, and a game that can fly open into a reckless track meet.
That actually sounds kind of fun, but it's not a good strategy away to Houston, so Klopas wanted to hold the ball. It's a funny thing: Chasing another team around is exhausting, but you don't get tired when you have the ball even when you're running to receive the ball, create space, etc. It's one of the great psychosomatic mysteries of the game.
But another mystery is attacking confidence. How do you slow down pace without affecting the fearlessness necessary to attack without hesitation?
There was a great moment in the first half on Sunday: The Fire defense collects the ball and Logan Pause gestures to the team to take it easy, to slow down (see the GIF below). It was the captain being the coach's representative on the field (Klopas on Pause's return against New York two weeks ago: "You can just see today my voice is a lot better than it was in previous games because he does a lot of that."), but did it work?
The intangible variances of soccer mean that a team visiting a place like Houston has to find the right balance between controlling pace without losing the pace necessary to attack. It's an extremely delicate use of resources.
Did the anti-fatigue strategy make someone less willing to burst forward to join a counter attack? Or, did it take the kind of attacking risk in the final third that's necessary to create scoring chances but which can also result in an exhausting recovery sprint (like how Houston's Andrew Driver came out after a series of runs in the second half)?
Maybe, maybe not. I'm not sure there's enough evidence that Houston's goals and Fire's lack thereof had anything to do with fatigue, and it's not like the Fire lined up defensively or were perceptibly so afraid to go forward. Pause's gesture was, in the end, a moment in a game that may or may not have made a crucial difference, but it was the kind of moment that gives the game its complexity and its mystery.
Find me on Twitter @bsto or at Cleo's on Chicago.


text:
The fun does not stop there as he also wants to give it a high output version of the TT-RS turbocharged 2.5 liter inline-5 motor, "Were talking about a high-power output here, so I would like it to be a five-cylinder engine. Oh, and dont forget a roll cage in the back."
This all sounds absolutely excellent to a German Automotive performance enthusiast's ears. A 2200 pound curb weight Quattro likely won't happen but a lightweight version in the 2XXX range with the 2.5 TFSI inline-5 would be incredible. Not to mention if the lightweight Quattro concept does not see production this would essentially be practically the same thing.
Very lofty goals at Audi these days with many of them being high performance oriented.


text:
Nashik Overview
You can reach Nashik from Pune by road in about using a cab upon driving using a cab.
Nasik is situated on the banks of River Godavari and is the holy city for Hindus. The World famous Shirdi temple is at Nasik and this place is also believed to be the exile shelter of Lord Ram, his consort Sita and brother Lakshman.
Derived from the Sanskrit word Nasika, it is here that Lakshman cut off Shoorpanaka's nose for trying to seduce Lord Ram. The famous Sita Gufa stands testimony to the epic Ramayan. It is home to the 12 holy Jyotirlingas and hosts the most sacred Kumbh Mela once every 12 years.. Book cabs in Nashik


text:
Just Dance 2015 - (NintendoWiiU/Video Games)
By: Ubisoft (Browse our Ubisoft store)
Have one to trade in?
Get £5.27 when you trade in at SellTo.com. Find out more.
There are more than 100 million Just Dance players around the world, and in Just Dance 2015 the community is as important as ever with the introduction of the all-new Community Remix feature. The feature allows players to record themselves dancing to songs from artists like Ellie Goulding, Pharrell Williams, and Calvin Harris and share in the game. The community then votes on their favourites, which the development team will use to create remixed gameplay and ultimately bring fan footage into the game for millions of fans to dance against. Ubisoft is bringing the players into the actual game this year.
Fan-favourite features including the massive multiplayer mode World Dance Floor, video snippet creator Autodance, and sing-along Karaoke feature are all back and revamped for the new game.
With more than 40 tracks, there's quite literally something for everyone. Get "Happy" with Pharrell Williams, "Walk This Way" with Run-DMC and Aerosmith, or try "Holding Out for a Hero" with Bonnie Tyler's 1980s power anthem.
|Release Date:
|24th October 14
|Region Information:
|Music and Dance
|Dangerous Goods:
Please Note: Any images are used for illustrative purposes only, actual products and/or packaging may differ.
Delivery - GameSeek Listings OnlyInformation on our Delivery Options can be found below. As our HQ is based in the United Kingdom we offer a Free Delivery Service to the UK customer base only.
However we do have excellent solutions also for International Delivery. For example; we offer a fast fully tracked solution to most European countries.
For all International deliveries we use Royal Mail Priority Airmail as standard.
UK Delivery
Yes FREE DELIVERY on absolutely everything we sell! We listen to your requests and deliver!
Free UK Delivery is our economy shipping option. We also offer faster delivery services at the checkout for most items. So if your after a speedier delivery, choose a faster delivery speed at the checkout. There will be a small charge for a faster delivery solution.
How do I get FREE Super Saver Delivery?
All orders placed for delivery within the United Kingdom are eligible for Free Super Saver Delivery. This will be automatically selected for you during checkout, and no delivery cost will be incurred for UK deliveries.
Does everything on the site qualify for FREE Super Saver Delivery?
Yes. Super Saver Free UK Delivery is now available for all on site products.
Can I get FREE Super Saver Delivery if I redeem an GameSeek gift voucher?
Yes you can use your gift certificate and receive FREE Super Saver Delivery.
Terms and Conditions for Super Saver Delivery (UK)
» Applies only to orders completed for eligible products at GameSeek.
» Combining orders with purchases made for overseas delivery might affect your order's eligibility for Super Saver Delivery.
» May be used in conjunction with a promotional certificate.
» We reserve the right to change or discontinue FREE Super Saver Delivery at any time.
» Applies only to deliveries to addresses within England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and all BFPO addresses (including the Isle of Man and the Channel Islands).
» A handful of Postcode areas in the United Kingdom will still carry a small delivery fee. As detailed in the UK Postcode Surcharge Table (Below)
|UK Postal Codes With Surcharges
|PA20 up to and including PA78
|PH17 up to and including PH26
|PH30 up to and including PH44
|TR21 up to and including TR25
International Delivery
We are pleased to be able to ship items of upto 2kg of weight to anywhere in the world. Where we can, we will also send items that weight above 2kg. Please note that if you try to buy an item from outside the UK that weighs more than 2kg, then this may be removed from your basket at checkout. It varies from country to country however we can deliver to most European destinations parcels that weigh upto 15kg!
For all International Deliveries we offer Royal Mail Priority Airmail as standard, however for most European destinations we also offer a faster Hermes fully tracked delivery service; so lookout for this option at the checkout!
Typical delivery speeds to Europe and the Rest of the World:
Europe via Hermes Tracked: 2-3 working days
Free UK ReturnsIf your item arrives late, is damaged or has been picked incorrectly... we offer a Free UK Returns Service. Contact our Customer Service Team, let us know what happened and we will be quick to provide you with a solution, free of charge of course!
The only time you need to return the item back to us at your expense, is if you have changed your mind within 14 days from purchase. Full details can be seen below.
International Customers: Unfortunately, the returns option is not free as this is not possible. However, please contact us and we will make the returns process as easy as we can for you.
Our returns policy is in compliance with Electronic Commerce (EC Directive) Regulations, 2002.
Before returning an item to GameSeek, please read our returns policy - clearly stated below.
Within 14 days of Purchase Date:
- You may return any unopened item within 14 days of receiving it for a full refund.
- You have the right to cancel the contract relating to your order at any time up to the end of the 14 working days after you receive the goods. To exercise your right to cancellation, you must give written notice to GameSeek by email - giving details of the goods ordered and date received. Notification by phone is not acceptable. If you exercise your right of cancellation after the goods have been dispatched, you will be responsible for returning the goods to GameSeek at your own expense.
Within 30 days of Purchase Date:
- You may return any faulty/damaged goods within 30 days for a full refund.
You don't get a cooling-off period when buying:
- Something that deteriorates quickly - such as food or flowers
- An item that was personalised or custom-made for you
- A CD, DVD or Software - if you break the seal on the wrapping
Note: Do not return any item(s) before contacting us first.
Our Returns procedure involves customers receiving a Returns Authorisation number before sending the item back. Without this RA number you will not be able to return any item. If you do so, the return will not be dealt with. So please contact us first. If the return is agreed by us then you will need to put the RA number (that we will give you) clearly marked on the outside of the parcel and on a note inside the parcel. This helps us deal with returns more effectively and efficiently. You are advised to package the product adequately as we cannot accept liability for any damage incurred during delivery back to Gameseek. To request a return please Contact Us ensuring you include your order ID, contact information and detailed description of the fault. Please note that we are unable to provide technical support on any of the PC games we supply. Please make sure that the game will run on your machine before ordering as we cannot be responsible for incompatibilities with your system.
Under the Consumer Rights Act you have a legal right to reject goods that are of unsatisfactory quality, unfit for purpose or not as described, and get a full refund - as long as you do this quickly. This right is limited to 30 days from the date you buy your product. After 30 days you will not be legally entitled to a full refund if your item develops a fault, although some sellers may offer you an extended refund period. This right to a refund doesn't apply to purely digital products though - such as music, games or apps that you buy as downloads.
Please note: In compliance with the Distance Selling Regulations, any computer software that has been unsealed cannot be returned. A guide for businesses on distance selling, Page 23, 3.38: Unless you have agreed that they can, your consumers cannot cancel if the order is for: audio or video recordings or computer software that the customer has unsealed. Click here to view this article.
If you would like a returns form, please Contact Us requesting an Returns Authorisation Number.
Community Remix allows players to record themselves for inclusion in the game
Fans vote on their favourite recordings, which are then remixed into gameplay
Fan-favourite features including World Dance Floor and Autodance also return
Contains more than 40 tracks, including Pharrell Williams, Ylvis, and Calvin Harris
This product has an average review of .
Average rating from review(s).
No Reviews Found
Why not be the first to review this product?
{{review.comment_count}} comment(s) View All Comments
{{comment.author}} - Posted: {{comment.comment_date}} - Edited: {{comment.updated}}
{{comments_2.author}} - Posted: {{comments_2.comment_date}} - Edited: {{comments_2.updated}}
{{comments_3.author}} - Posted: {{comments_3.comment_date}} - Edited: {{comments_3.updated}}


text:
An adoption charity is going back to basics is a bid to find more people to look after children.
At present, more than 6,000 children are in care and awaiting adoption. However, there are nowhere near that number of adopters coming forward to offer a child a new family.
St Francis' Children's Society hosts monthly information events which allow prospective adopters to find out more.
And this month they are going back to basics with a region-wide poster campaign.
The posters highlight the overwhelming need for more adoptive families in the UK, and dispel some of the myths about adoption: people who are over 40, single, in a same-sex relationship, an unmarried couple or not on a high income are all eligible to adopt a child.
The Society's CEO, Alison Miller, said: "The recent spate of television documentaries about adoption have really highlighted the desperate need for more new adoptive parents to come forward. Channel 4 led the way with 'Finding Mum & Dad' and '15,000 Kids and Counting', and ITV screened a major 4-part documentary series looking at the entire adoption process called Wanted: A Family of My Own.
"These programmes have certainly raised the profile of adoption at a national level, but we need to build on that and help people realise that the shortfall in adopters is a local problem too.'
St Francis' Children's Society are looking for volunteers to put posters up in their local doctor's surgeries, libraries, community centres, church halls, shops and cafés – anywhere the local community can see them and learn a bit more about the Society.
Communications Officer, Vicky Hunt, said: "We need help to really spread the word about our services and allay any concerns which might be preventing people who could be interested in adoption from coming forward."
The Society welcomes all kinds of adopters for all kinds of children, regardless of age, race, cultural background, religion, marital status or sexual orientation. Although the Society's offices are based in Milton Keynes, they operate across Buckinghamshire, Bedfordshire, Northamptonshire, Hertfordshire and beyond. As long as you feel comfortable with the distance between yourself and Milton Keynes, the Society would be delighted to support you through every step of your adoption journey.
If you would like to help St. Francis' Children's Society to raise awareness, please contact Vicky Hunt on 01908 572700 or firstname.lastname@example.com, who will send you copies of their poster!


text:
Walnut Hills High School Visit - October 4, 2013 - Calendar - Cedarville University
Walnut Hills High School Visit
October 4, 2013 from 11:15 a.m.–11:45 a.m.
Choosing a college is a major decision. Choosing a Christ-centered college is a wise selection!
Come and talk to us in order to learn how you will be challenged academically and spiritually at Cedarville University.
We look forward to meeting you!
3250 Victory Pkwy
Cincinnati, OH 45207-1457 View Map
CU Representatives
Campus Contact Information
Mr. Dan Waits
Admissions Counselor
Send an Email
More Information
Presentation, Admissions


text:
An expression tree........
given: a/b + (c -d)c
what data members would the nodes contain? i'm a little lost. one node would contain a sign but it's direct children may contain a number or another sign, but it is unecessary to contain both.Code:+ /\ / \ '/' \ /\ \ a b * / \ / c - / \ c d
struct node
char sign; //is this where i would use a union?
int value; //...or am i way of completely?
node *parent;
node *son; //son = child on "left" (conceptually)
node *daughter; //daughter child on "right"


text:
Configuration: 8 decks per box. 60 cards per pack.
POKEMON CCG: PLATINUM BOOSTERNew Worlds, New Battles!The Pokémon TCG: PLATINUM expansion puts you in the middle of the action when you face challenges no Trainer has ever encountered before!From incredible Pokémon LV.X like Giratina to the mysterious new Lost Zone, from a newly discovered Pokémon to the villainous Team Galactic, you'll discover worlds you never knew existed and fight battles you never knew were possible.The Pokémon TCG: PLATINUM release is your first step into the next great Pokémon TCG adventure! PLATINUM features 130 new cards and remains compatible with previous releases.- Introduces a never-before-seen secret Pokémon!- Includes all-new Trainer-specific Pokémon SP !- New game play area, the Lost Zone, adds lots of new strategies!- Features two theme decks built around that secret new Pokémon and the Renegade Pokémon Giratina- Exciting holographic parallel set for players and collectors alike- 130 cards in all!
Each Flourish and Rebellion theme deck contains a 60 card Pokemon deck (including a specially selected holographic foil card), 1 metallic coin, 1 rulebook/card list, 1-Player playmat, & damage counters.