School district cell phone policy needs to be revised
I am a senior at John Burroughs High School. I read your article
about the school district’s cell-phone policy and would like to voice
my thoughts about this matter. I am in favor of a new policy. I
believe that using a cell phone at lunch or nutrition [break] will be
helpful in case you need to call your parents. Not only that, but
taking away cell-phone use is in violation of the 1st Amendment
right to free speech.
I understand that several people do violate the current policy by
using them during class time. But those people should be handled
appropriately. The majority of the people shouldn’t be penalized
because some people feel that they need to talk on their cell phone
The current policy states that we can carry cell phones on campus,
but we are not allowed to use them. What is the point of even taking
them, then? We need to be more practical than that.
If we adopt a new policy, students will know when they can use
their cell phones and when they cannot. I believe more students would
be willing to abide by new cell phone standards. I have a cell phone,
but I do, in fact, follow the policy.
However, I got nine missed calls one day after school when I
turned my cell phone on. Three of them were from my parents regarding
a family emergency. It would be nice if I could have talked to them
to find out what the problem was.
Last time I checked, cell phones are supposed to be used outside
and to call people in case of an emergency. That is one purpose of a
cell phone. We really do need a reform on the current cell phone
Platt is back with
more traffic problems
Five months after being voted down by the Burbank City Council,
Santa Monica-based developer Rick Platt has submitted new plans for
the development of a site in the Media District.
He and his out-of-state financing people have been working for
years to shoehorn a large steel and glass project in the small area
bordered by Alameda and Olive between Lima and the Hollywood Way
offramp of the Ventura (134) Freeway.
One main reason the City Council voted down the Platt Project 5-0
in April was the already massive traffic congestion that would be
further irritated by the 2,400 added cars in the planned seven-story
underground parking facility.
Mr. Platt’s determination to build is confirmed by the very recent
purchase of two more apartment buildings in the 100 block of North
Avon St. He now owns three out of the five apartment buildings and
the small house at the corner of Olive. In addition, he owns the
small two story building next to Dimples on Olive.
Part of the development is a new church to replace the existing
church. In addition to the church building, the Trinity Church owns
the three small houses on that same block of North Avon Street. So
Mr. Platt has ownership or control of well over 50% of the property
within the development area.
He has had two meetings with the neighborhood after ignoring the
neighbors for the past three years. The first official meeting of the
city Planning Department took place last week at Stevenson School
auditorium. There are new traffic studies being done now in the
neighborhood. This potential traffic disaster will affect everyone in
Burbank who wants to get out of the city in the south corner. Have
you driven over Barham to Hollywood lately, or west on Riverside
Drive? This is a citywide problem, not just one for the immediate
Authority president taken to task over renaming airport
My sincerest thanks to Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena Airport Authority
President Charlie Lombardo for his response to my letter regarding
the renaming of the airport.
President Lombardo quickly informs us that the need for public
input on renaming the airport was taken care of when the Airport
Authority placed it on its agenda. President Lombardo has mastered
the art of demonstrating just how things never seem to change at the
What Lombardo fails to mention in his response is the process
through which the authority facilitates public input. While an item
regarding the renaming of our airport indeed appeared on an authority
agenda, Mr. Lombardo didn’t mention that the meeting was held on a
Monday morning at 9 a.m., just to make it convenient for public
Just to set the record straight, I have never specifically stated
my support or opposition to the renaming of the airport. What I have
stated, and will continue to state, is that it should not be done by
a few without public discussion. I thank President Lombardo for
helping to illustrate just how little the airport has done to
facilitate any thought or debate.
With all due respect to Lombardo, I continue to feel that public
discussion is missing in the mad rush to rename our airport. I fail
to see how a call for greater public discussion and input is seen as
living in a cave. However, Lombardo has been on the authority long
enough now that perhaps he has come to believe that an ad hoc
committee and meetings at impossible times for the public to attend
are the right thing to do.