Editorial: Promises come too close to manipulation

A TRUE GIFT is one that's freely given. And surely anyone who has heard about the collaboration of Stanford and Palo Alto officials in leasing land for the endangered Jewish Community Center would agree.

However, some gifts, like this one, come with strings attached. Very long, costly strings.

Palo Alto needs the land the center now sits on. The existing middle schools in the district are busting at the seams and are expecting more growth for the next 10 years. In order to relieve overcrowding, the district would like to take back the facility they gave to the center after shutting down Terman Middle School in 1982.

To allow both programs to continue, Stanford would lease six acres of prime University land at the intersection of El Camino Real and Page Mill Road for the community center. Stanford will charge the city $1 a year for 51 years.

But on Friday, the University announced that it would graciously offer the soon-to-be displaced community center land in exchange for entitlement to further develop the Stanford Research Park over the next 25 years. The arrangement reeks of back-room politics.

Stanford's offer is contingent upon approval of the General Use Permit and Community Plan it submitted to Santa Clara County. The plan will determine the University's growth over the next decade.

At a press conference on Friday, University President John Hennessy said that the agreement was made under the assumption that the GUP would be approved. If the county does not approve of the GUP or litigation concerning the deal is not settled by May 31st, 2001, Stanford can withdraw its offer.

Not many gifts come with conditions like that.

While no one in the community wants to see the center homeless, Palo Alto residents should also be concerned that Stanford is using the community center as a bargaining chip in land negotiations.

The move has been touted as the first step in a new age of community-University relationships. If this is the way all of the collaborations will work in the future, Palo Alto has more to worry about than losing the center.

Fragile matters such as the relocation of a religious and community fixture should not be used in furthering the goals of the University.

We applaud Stanford's decision to lease the land in order to help save a vital part of the community. But the University's motives can't be ignored. In order for the University to facilitate truly open and honest relationships with the surrounding community, conditions such as those that came attached to this plan should be avoided. Answers may not come as quickly and easily but they will be fair and open.

The needs of the community and Stanford can both be met without resorting to the manipulation apparent in this "gift." We urge Palo Alto citizens to consider the repercussions of this agreement and future negotiations that involve such costly concessions.