Editor, Manteca Bulletin,
I have only followed bits and pieces of the water tower controversy. My only question regarding this issue is “what constitutes a landmark?” I think of a landmark, not as a structure, but of the people that first erected that structure – their struggles, their hearts, their faith, their values and their principles. Therefore, I believe that a true landmark should be a tribute to those people and a continuation of what they were.
I, for one, remember Manteca when it had one stop light, when a hand shake represented an agreement, when there was no need to lock your house, and cars were parked in the driveway with the keys inside. But, unfortunately, society has changed through the years and those days are long gone.
I, too, miss seeing the old Manteca High tower. However, because of the mess of today’s educational system, would that tower have represented a tribute to the people that first erected it and a true landmark or just an old structure?
My father’s only request of us was, “don’t dirty my name.” Therefore, anything less than the fulfillment of that request would have been no tribute to his memory. Today, the City leaders are faced with the dilemma of choosing between spending our money for the rehabilitation of an old structure and the hiring of additional police officers for the protection of people and property. Being what the state of affairs is today, will the saving of the water tower be a true landmark as a tribute to the people that first erected it and a continuation of what they were or just an old structure? It’s too bad that we put more energy into the saving of old structures instead of the salvation of society and what it used to be.
May 13, 2012