The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2022-04-18 City Council EmailsFrom:slevy@ccsce.com To:Steve Levy Subject:Bay Area Economic Update Date:Monday, April 18, 2022 10:41:03 AM Attachments:April 18, 2022 Economic Update.docx CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Bay Area Economic Update and Outlook—April 15, 2022—Slower Job Growth in March and Some Good News in the Report The Bay Area added 13,100 payroll jobs in March down from 22,100 in February but is still outpacing the nation in job growth over the past 12 months after the sharp job losses in 2020. The highlights: Bay Area jobs increased by 6.2% between March 2021 and 2022 compared to a 4.5% increase in the nation and 6.4% gain in California. The Bay Area unemployment rate in March 2022 was 2.9% compared to 2.7% in the pre-pandemic low. More workers returned to the workforce in March and non-traditional job growth continues to outpace payroll job growth drawing workers back to the labor force and pushing unemployment levels down. April 2022 brings major crosscurrents to the global, national and regional economy with the Russian invasion of Ukraine, rising interest rates amidst continuing high inflation and the ongoing Bay Area challenges of housing, transportation and competitiveness. Bay Area jurisdictions have been given large increases in their housing goals for the next eight years as a result of state legislation and policy to reduce overcrowding and increase affordability. Each jurisdiction is in the process of updating their Housing Elements in 2022 to meet state and regional policy goals and requirements. Steve 650-814-8553 1 Bay Area Economic Update and Outlook—April 15, 2022—Slower Job Growth in March and Some Good News in the Report The Bay Area added 13,100 payroll jobs in March down from 22,100 in February but is still outpacing the nation in job growth over the past 12 months after the sharp job losses in 2020. The highlights: • Bay Area jobs increased by 6.2% between March 2021 and 2022 compared to a 4.5% increase in the nation and 6.4% gain in California. • The Bay Area unemployment rate in March 2022 was 2.9% compared to 2.7% in the pre-pandemic low. • More workers returned to the workforce in March and non-traditional job growth continues to outpace payroll job growth drawing workers back to the labor force and pushing unemployment levels down. • April 2022 brings major crosscurrents to the global, national and regional economy with the Russian invasion of Ukraine, rising interest rates amidst continuing high inflation and the ongoing Bay Area challenges of housing, transportation and competitiveness. • Bay Area jurisdictions have been given large increases in their housing goals for the next eight years as a result of state legislation and policy to reduce overcrowding and increase affordability. Each jurisdiction is in the process of updating their Housing Elements in 2022 to meet state and regional policy goals and requirements. The Bay Area Outpaced the Nation in Recent Job Growth 4.5% 6.4%6.2% 0.0% 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 4.0% 5.0% 6.0% 7.0% 8.0% 9.0% U.S.California Bay Area Job Growth March 2021--March 2022 2 Bay Area payroll jobs increased by 6.2% between March 2021 and March 2022 outpacing the U.S. 4.5% growth rate. The region still lags the nation and state in the % of jobs recovered since April 2020 as a result of the large job losses in 2020. By March 2022 the region had recovered 77.8% of the jobs lost between February and April 2020. This is a lower recovery rate than the state and nation, though the region has closed the gap in recent months. The Bay Area added 231,600 jobs in the past year led by a gain of 93,000 in the San Francisco metro area though SF has recovered just 73.8% of the jobs lost between February and April 2020. The San Jose metro area added 59,200 jobs and by March 2022 had recovered 82.4% of the jobs lost between February and April 2020. The Oakland metro area added 55,300 jobs. Metro Area Job Trends (Thousands) Metro Area Feb 20 Apr 20 Mar 21 Mar 22 % Recovered Oakland 1,201.9 1,003.6 1,109.1 1,164.4 81.1% San Francisco 1,204.7 1,017.9 1,062.8 1,155.8 73.8% San Jose 1,172.5 1,011.4 1,084.9 1,144.1 82.4% Santa Rosa 211.1 171.9 191.2 201.9 76.5% Napa 75.3 57.3 66.3 71.2 77.2% Vallejo 143.3 121.5 130.8 136.3 67.9% San Rafael 117.2 91.8 104.7 107.7 62.6% Bay Area 4,126.0 3,475.4 3,749.8 3,981.4 77.8% Source: EDD, non-farm wage & salary jobs seasonally adjusted 90.7%87.2%75.8% 0.0% 20.0% 40.0% 60.0% 80.0% 100.0% U.S.California Bay Area Jobs Recoverd by February 2022 as % of Losses 3 While the region has recovered just 77.8% of the non-farm wage & salary jobs lost between February and April 2020, it has recovered 86.9% of the decline in the number of residents with jobs. The explanation for the gap between the two measures is an increase in self-employment jobs, most likely gig work jobs. Unemployment Rates Fell to 2.9% in the Region in March 2022 from 6.5% in March 2021. The lowest rates were in the San Rafael and San Francisco metro areas (2.4%) followed by the San Jose metro areas (2.5%) in March 2022. Unemployment Rates Metro Area Feb 20 Apr 20 Mar 21 Mar 22 Oakland 3.0% 14.6% 7.3% 3.3% San Francisco 2.2% 12.5% 5.8% 2.4% San Jose 2.6% 12.4% 5.8% 2.5% Santa Rosa 2.8% 15.4% 6.7% 3.0% Napa 3.2% 17.8% 7.3% 3.2% Vallejo 3.9% 15.7% 8.7% 4.6% San Rafael 2.4% 12.1% 5.4% 2.4% Bay Area 2.7% 13.7% 6.5% 2.9% Source: EDD 77.8% 86.9% 70.0% 75.0% 80.0% 85.0% 90.0% Non-Farm Wage & Salary Jobs Employed Residents % Recovery Since April 2020 4 The number of unemployed residents has fallen sharply from the April 2020 high and from March 2021 to 120,500 in February 2022 close to the pre-pandemic low in February. But 58,700 Workers Have Not Rejoined the Workforce Since February 2020 Residents who are not in the labor force are not counted as unemployed. As a result, the number of unemployed residents can decline while some are still prevented by choice or lack of child care or work in industries that have not fully recovered. However, more workers are now returning to the workforce with an addition of 24,800 in March and 170,800 over the past 12 months. Metro Area Labor Force (Thousands) Metro Area Feb 20 Apr 20 Mar 21 Mar 22 Oakland 1,402.2 1,332.2 1,344.8 1,389.5 San Francisco 1,043.3 978.0 961.8 1,024.6 San Jose 1,087.7 1,039.8 1,036.3 1,080.5 Santa Rosa 256.0 241.0 240.7 249.1 Napa 72.5 66.3 67.6 70.1 Vallejo 207.5 200.4 198.3 202.6 San Rafael 137.9 123.5 128.1 132.0 Bay Area 4,207.1 3,981.2 3,977.6 4,148.4 Source: EDD Industries Were Affected Differently 114.5 543.5 258.4 120.5 0.0 100.0 200.0 300.0 400.0 500.0 600.0 Feb 20 Apr 20 Mar 21 Mar 22 Bay Area Unemployment (Thousabds) 5 Four sectors—Manufacturing, Transportation and Warehousing, Information and Professional and Business Services—exceeded pre-pandemic job levels in March 2022 and Construction and Education and Health Care Services were close to full recovery. On the other hand, the Leisure and Hospitality sector recovered only 66.8% of lost jobs by March 2022 though travel and tourism are now picking up again. The Government sector still has fewer jobs now than in April 2020. San Francisco Bay Area Non-Farm Wage & Salary Jobs Apr20-Mar 22 Feb 20 April 20 Mar 21 Mar 22 Job Change % Of Feb-Apr Loss Construction 215,600 152,300 203,100 210,200 57,900 91.5% Manufacturing 364,500 339,600 358,300 371,500 31,900 128.1% Wholesale Trade 115,500 103,800 105,300 106,900 3,100 26.5% Retail Trade 330,800 258,800 303,900 313,900 55,100 76.5% Transp. & Wareh. 112,100 99,500 109,400 115,600 16,100 127.8% Information 242,400 238,800 245,600 255,600 16,800 466.7% Financial Activities 201,900 190,800 190,400 193,100 2,300 20.7% Prof& Bus Serv. 798,300 740,600 759,300 803,500 62,900 109.0% Educ & Health Serv. 636,400 563,600 606,700 628,700 65,100 89.4% Leisure & Hosp. 441,200 208,500 272,800 363,900 155,400 66.8% Government 488,500 471,800 454,700 468,400 -3,400 -20.4% Total Non-Farm 4,093,000 3,468,700 3,725,800 3,964,300 495,600 79.4% Source: EDD not seasonally adjusted Housing Permits Rebound to 2019 Levels in 2021 Housing permit levels were up 35.5% in 2021 over 2020 levels and equaled permit levels in 2019. In the first two months of 2022, permit levels were slightly above comparable 2021 months. There are positive and negative trends going forward. On the one hand, each week brings new large housing proposals and approvals. At the same time mortgage rates and prices and rents are surging. This year all Bay Area cities are required to update their Housing Elements to meet greatly increased regional and local jurisdiction housing goals. Below is a link to a report released on March 18th that I prepared at the request of the Silicon Valley Community Foundation to help residents understand and engage in their city’s Housing Element update process. Although the report focuses on 6 five Midpeninsula cities—Cupertino, Menlo Park, Mountain View, Palo Alto and Sunnyvale—it has broad applicability for other communities. The report is part of an engagement effort led by SV@Home with local partners. https://www.siliconvalleycf.org/sites/default/files/publications/Housing_Report_20 22.pdf Residential Building Permits Thru February Alameda 2019 730 Contra Costa 2019 662 2021 472 2021 810 2022 833 2022 468 Marin 2019 89 Napa 2019 34 2021 34 2021 37 2022 60 2022 54 San Francisco 2019 831 San Mateo 2019 290 2021 541 2021 138 2022 378 2022 326 Santa Clara 2019 1095 Solano 2019 89 2021 382 2021 258 2022 490 2022 527 Sonoma 2019 415 Bay Area 2019 5839 2021 282 2021 4693 2022 445 2022 5158 % Change 22 vs 21 9.9% 22 vs 19 -11.7% Source: CHF and CIRB From:Katie Hansen To:Council, City Subject:CRA Letter Re: Agenda Item 3 Date:Monday, April 18, 2022 10:26:13 AM Attachments:image001.png Palo Alto CRA Comment Letter.pdf Some people who received this message don't often get email from khansen@calrest.org. Learnwhy this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Greetings, On behalf of the California Restaurant Association I would like to submit a comment letter regarding Item 3 on this evening’s City Council meeting agenda. Please feel free to let me know if you have any questions. Thank you, Katie Hansen Katie Hansen Senior Legislative Director California Restaurant Association 621 Capitol Mall, Suite 2000 Sacramento, CA 95814 T: 800.765.4842/ 916.431.2773 F: 916.447.6182 E: khansen@calrest.org www.calrest.org We’re here for you. Visit our website for all you need to know about COVID-19. While all information released by the California Restaurant Association (CRA) is intended to provide accurate information on the subject covered, the CRA does not provide legal advice and any information provided by the CRA shall not constitute legal advice. You are encouraged to consult your attorney, accountant, or other appropriate professional, as needed. Confidentiality note: This electronic message transmission contains information from the California Restaurant Association which may April 18, 2022 Mayor Burt and City Councilmembers Palo Alto City Council 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 Re: Item 3: Adoption of an Ordinance Amending Existing Palo Alto Municipal Code Chapter 5.30 Dear Mayor Burt and City Councilmembers, I write today appreciating the spirit in which you are considering policies to reduce single-use food service waste. The California Restaurant Association (CRA) worked with Assemblymember Wendy Carrillo to create AB 1276, a statewide model to ensure single use accessories are not automatically distributed to guests. This model creates an “opt in” requirement for guests to receive single- use food accessories from restaurants or third-party delivery platforms. Compliance options include self-service receptacles, direct guest request or upon offer by the restaurant in drive thru settings only. AB 1276 has been signed by the Governor and is now part of California law. We recommend aligning the proposal before you with AB 1276, to ensure ease in compliance and provide a uniform framework for restaurants as well as customers. In the spirit of what you are trying to do, reduce needless waste, we would like to suggest a few modifications to help food facilities comply with the “upon request” portion of the ordinance. Key elements of a workable “upon request” model include the ability of food facility employees to verbally offer straws, lids, cutlery, and to-go condiment packages to customer or for customers to self-select these items from a receptacle, so as not to disrupt restaurant operations, while creating consumer awareness of unnecessary use of certain single-use products. We suggest including these elements in the definition of “upon request” for drive thru settings to align with AB 1276. We appreciate the proposal before you including a written notice of warning to the food facilities for violations. However, we would recommend reducing the fine from $100 to $25 per violation and to not exceed $300 in total to be consistent with AB 1276. It does seem a little excessive to fine a food facility for accidentally handing out a package of ketchup to a customer who does not request one. Thank you for your consideration of our concerns regarding the proposed ordinance. Sincerely, Katie Hansen Senior Legislative Director California Restaurant Association be confidential or privileged. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient, be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information is prohibited. If you have received this electronic transmission in error, please immediately notify us by telephone at 800.765.4842. From:Alan Cooper To:Planning Commission Cc:Council, City; Alan Home Subject:Castilleja: 3 Requests: Activities, Enrollment, Compliance Date:Monday, April 18, 2022 9:32:07 AM Attachments:Cooper letter to PTC April 18, 2022.pdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. To: Planning and Transportation Commission April 18, 2022 From: Alan Cooper, 270 Kellogg Ave, akcooper@pacbell.net Subject: Castilleja: 3 Requests: Activities, Enrollment, Compliance Dear PTC members, I live across the street from Castilleja. I’ve written many times with many concerns. These three requests are essential compromises to help preserve our R-1 neighborhood quality of life: 1. NO school activity is to be allowed on Sunday and on other days before 7 am and after 10 pm. An activity is a gathering of 2 or more people. Any such activity would be a CUP violation and would count as one of the school’s allotted 70(?) “events”. 2. Enrollment-growth evaluations, done via neighborhood-TDM rules (i.e. allowing growth of 25 students/yr), would begin when classes commence in the newly constructed buildings. Today, it is NOT clear if the TDM plan is adequate (i.e. cannot be circumvented by the school). The TDM plan cannot be evaluated accurately during construction times. 3. Compliance with each item in the CUP would be assured with PTC requiring concise monitoring, enforcement and penalty steps. Castilleja has a documented history of violating and/or abusing CUP guidelines at the inconvenience of neighbors. Thank you for your consideration of, and help with implementing, these requests. To: Planning and Transportation Commission April 18, 2022 From: Alan Cooper, 270 Kellogg Ave, akcooper@pacbell.net Subject: Castilleja: 3 Requests: Activities, Enrollment, Compliance Dear PTC members, I live across the street from Castilleja. I’ve written many times with many concerns. These three requests are essential compromises to help preserve our R-1 neighborhood quality of life: 1. NO school activity is to be allowed on Sunday and on other days before 7 am and after 10 pm. An activity is a gathering of 2 or more people. Any such activity would be a CUP violation and would count as one of the school’s allotted 70(?) “events”. 2. Enrollment-growth evaluations, done via neighborhood-TDM rules (i.e. allowing growth of 25 students/yr), would begin when classes commence in the newly constructed buildings. Today, it is NOT clear if the TDM plan is adequate (i.e. cannot be circumvented by the school). The TDM plan cannot be evaluated accurately during construction times. 3. Compliance with each item in the CUP would be assured with PTC requiring concise monitoring, enforcement and penalty steps. Castilleja has a documented history of violating and/or abusing CUP guidelines at the inconvenience of neighbors. Thank you for your consideration of, and help with implementing, these requests. From:Chris Hall To:Council, City Subject:Housing Element Update - ADU Implementation Date:Monday, April 18, 2022 9:23:04 AM Attachments:Palo Alto Housing Element Update - ADU Implementation.pdf Some people who received this message don't often get email from chris@abodu.com. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Hello, We are reaching out as an Accessory Dwelling Unit developer working in the Bay Area with experience in local jurisdictions throughout California and Washington. We are very excited to be partnering with Cities and Counties to help create low-impact, non-intrusive housing that count towards RHNA targets. We understand that providing a greater range of housing is a crucial mission, as is Abodu's, and we would like to work together to make that happen. Abodu has had experience working with cities and counties through California to bring solutions to staff and homeowners to save time for everyone during project reviews. Please see our attached letter including ideas for the upcoming Housing Element Updates. We'd be happy to discuss further and look forward to your partnership. Best, Chris Hall Planning Associate www.Abodu.com (408) 410 7638 Abodu, Inc. 2424 El Camino Real Redwood City, California 94063 April 18th, 2022 City Council : Oﬃce of the City Clerk: City Hall,7th Floor 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 9430,City.Council@cityofpaloalto.org Via: Email RE: ADU Implementation Plan - Housing Element Update 2022 Dear Palo Alto City Council, As you know, the State’s housing production is not keeping up with demand. At Abodu, we share the same goal of prioritizing housing by making it easier to build, less expensive, and more accessible. We want to add housing units quicker, and we think Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU) are an excellent tool in the toolbox to do just that. Abodu, the ADU company, was founded in 2018 in large part because of the California State Laws that were passed to ease restrictions and reduce barriers to creating Accessory Dwelling Units. Several years into business and Government Code section 65852.2 being passed into law, we understand cities are still getting up to speed and becoming familiar with these newer regulations. We also understand cities are inundated with projects, staﬃng shortages, and an ongoing pandemic. However, given the straightforward nature of these projects and by partnering closely together, we think Palo Alto can review and approve ADU projects in less than 30 days - allowing for housing units to be on the ground in less than two months. We have experiences that show this is possible. For example, in our close partnership with the City of San Jose, CA, the City now reviews most projects within one week over a series of one or two virtual one-hour appointments. This program was established due to plan sets that have been approved by the State HCD, straightforward site plans and structural sets, and receiving a primer from each department for what they need in order to review and approve a project. The success of this program means that Abodu (or any company!) can receive a building permit for a new housing unit in less than a week, and, in Abodu’s case, install that unit another two weeks later. All while counting this unit towards the City’s Regional Housing Needs Assessment targets and reducing time that reviewers spend looking at individual projects. In the last year, Abodu has had over three dozen projects alone in San Jose, helping to make a dent in the City’s housing goals. We are asking you to help lead Palo Alto by taking these ADU laws one step further and creating an implementation review & approval plan for ADUs. (Not just for Abodu, but all ADU project applications). Integrating an implementation plan into the 2022 Housing Element update is one way to ensure these aspirations and policies are taken to the next step. California is facing a severe housing crisis and ADUs are a valuable form of housing that meets the needs of tenants, students, families aging in place, and many others. They are essential, and they can be created quickly and easily, especially with a strong partnership from the City. Please feel free to reach out to discuss speciﬁcs or learn more about some of the best practices we have seen throughout California & Washington. We appreciate your leadership, and we look forward to working with you. Sincerely, Abodu’s Planning Team Anne Brask Planning Manager, Abodu Inc. anne@abodu.com Christopher Hall Planning Associate, Abodu Inc. chris@abodu.com Billy Shondy Planning Associate, Abodu Inc. billy@abodu.com From:Dilma Coleman To:Fire; ajansen@pubdef.lacounty.gov Cc:asmith@oaklandca.gov; city.attorney@mountainview.gov Subject:Fwd: Find Mark Furhman Date:Sunday, April 17, 2022 11:45:11 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Dilma Coleman <dhappinessforever@gmail.com> Date: Sun, Apr 17, 2022, 11:41 PM Subject: Find Mark Furhman To: Erik Rueppel <erueppel@smcgov.org>, Stanford Community Law Clinic <sclc.mlc@gmail.com> Cc: <SAC@lvmpd.com>, <dao@co.santa-cruz.ca.us> If ur a honest guy who tried to make it appear that Oakwood apartments in San Jose CA is Santa Clara county fairgrounds..hub for drug abuse,drug sales and it's obvious that the use of private charter planes and then go buy Dilma Coleman several pairs of different shoes and pay for it whatever she wants cause she had done her homework. Go find Mark Furhman...it's not that I don't know what to do with I don't have purses. I have one bra and it's ok bubble gum scare on it. I need access to making posters for inmates who are trying to gain city council positions government positions. Yes. I want an interview with several Santa Rita Jail inmates and other inmates. Pay Dilma as a lawyer or something like that AG/U.S Speaker. Best regards Dilma Coleman aka Diva Lee MD JD From:Dan Kostenbauder To:Council, City Subject:Submission related to the business tax measure being considered by the City Council Date:Sunday, April 17, 2022 5:54:25 PM Attachments:2022 04 17 Memo to Mayor Burt and City Council.pdf Some people who received this message don't often get email from dkostenbauder@svlg.org. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Mayor Burt and Members Attached is a submission related to a recent conversation with Mayor Burt about the business tax measure that the Council is considering for the November 2022 ballot. Best regards, Dan Kostenbauder Dan Kostenbauder Vice President, Tax Policy Silicon Valley Leadership Group 2001 Gateway Place, Suite 101E San Jose, CA 95110 Phone: 650 . 454 . 7708 dkostenbauder@svlg.org To: Mayor Burt cc: City Council From: Dan Kostenbauder, VP Tax Policy, Silicon Valley Leadership Group Re: Recent conversation Date: 17 April 2022 In a recent conversation with me and Charlie Weidanz of the Palo Alto Chamber of Commerce you stated that the mailer and website of the Palo Alto Business and Community Alliance were “deceptive” and “misrepresent the revenue” that might be raised by the proposed business tax because they referred to it as a “$60 million annual blank check to City Council.” You also objected to the use of the term “blank check” and strongly suggested that our efforts were in violation of the California Fair Political Practices Commission rules. I would like to take this opportunity to respond. $60 Million. The Council conducted a poll of Palo Alto voters about the proposed business tax from March 8 to 14. In that poll one of the questions was “Would a measure that increased monthly business rent by roughly ___ per square foot be an acceptable or unacceptable amount?” The blank had different amounts from $.05 to $.20. Earlier staff analysis estimated that a tax of $.20 would raise $58.7 million. We rounded up to $60 million. You seemed confident that the Council would place a measure on the ballot that would raise about $43 million. Even if you are correct, it is not inappropriate to suggest that the Council could choose to put a much larger measure on the ballot as long as the Council is asking polling questions about such a larger measure. Our concerns about the ultimate proposal from the Council have been raised because so far, the Council has disregarded your own polling results that showed a tax of $.15 per sq ft/month was considered “acceptable” or “somewhat acceptable” by only 42% and a tax of $.20 per sq ft/month was considered acceptable or somewhat acceptable by only 33%, while at $.20 per sq ft/month the “very unacceptable” rating alone was 38%. Further, the focus groups expressed serious concerns about a CPI escalator, yet the current proposal effectively has a CPI escalator, although structed with an annual cap of 6% with a carryover. You said that we should have a debate on the merits of the proposal, but the estimated size of the tax is a major part of the debate on the merits. We agree, and so as the process moves forward, the Palo Alto Community and Business Alliance will refer to possible amounts of tax based on the revenue estimates of the specific, complete proposals that the Council has directed staff to work on. Blank Check. You also objected to the use of the term “blank check.” The Council has made it very clear that any business tax would be a general tax, which means by law the revenue cannot have a specific purpose and would flow to the general fund. The City Council can spend general funds in any legal way that the Council decides. A common meaning of “blank check” is an unlimited freedom of action. The Council has not been willing to make the tax a special tax, which would legally bind future Councils to spend the business tax revenue for specific purposes. This situation is exactly what “blank check” means—freedom to spend as you wish. You suggested that some statement of intent or an advisory ballot measure by the current Council of intended uses of business tax revenue would be politically binding, if not legally binding. Such actions still do not alter the fact that such statements of intention would not be legally binding. In addition, two current Council members are termed out this year, two others are “termed out” in 2024, and one could be re-elected this November. This means that five out of seven members of the current Council who might vote to place a business tax on the ballot, but later vote to use the business tax revenue for purposes other than those promised, would not risk losing a future Council election. California Fair Political Practices Commission. Since our conversations, the Palo Alto Community and Business Alliance has confirmed previous legal advice that until the City Council votes to place a measure on the ballot, there is no requirement for groups trying to educate local citizens about the negative consequences of a possible ballot measure to form a formal campaign committee and comply with reporting and other requirements of the FPPC. City of Palo Alto Planning & Development Services Department Page 11 Academic Year Maximum Enrollment Allowed Increase Compared to Prior Year Reporting Period Compliance Reports 2021-2022 422 -4 NA 2022-2023 418 varies NA 2023-2024 450 varies January 2024 September 2023 May 2023 2024-2025 475 25 January 2025 September 2024 May 2024 2025-2026 500 25 January 2026 September 2025 May 2025 2026-2027 525 25 January 2027 September 2026 May 2026 2027-2028 540 15 January 2028 September 2027 May 2027 2028-2029 540 0 January 2029 September 2028 May 2028 With this approach, compliance with vehicle trip performance metrics is based on two reports, using the previous academic year’s lower enrollment data (September and May), and one report using the current, higher enrollment data (January). For example, in academic year 2026 - 2027 with an enrollment of 525 students, the ability to increase 25 students in the next academic year (2027-2028) depends on meeting the trip target requirements in two performance reports based on the prior academic year’s enrollment level (May 2026 and September 2026, both at 500 students) and one current academic year performance report (January 2027 at 525 students). The performance reports will document Castilleja’s compliance meeting the AM Peak limit of 383 trips and the ADT target of 1198 average tips. This data will be averaged over the reporting period. As traffic is variable, there may be some days where AM Peak or ADT is exceeded, but these data points, when averaged together, must be at or below the target thresholds in order to demonstrate compliance. Three times a year these reports will be reviewed for compliance. As an alternative to the above, the PTC could consider phasing enrollment. The Co uncil indicated 450 students could begin upon adoption of the CUP and scale up to 540 students over time. After an initial increase to 450 students, another increase could begin following 2 Packet Pg. 18 From:Martin J Sommer To:Council, City Cc:Clerk, City Subject:Rail Committee Meeting, April 20, Oral Communications Date:Saturday, April 16, 2022 12:54:57 PM Attachments:Pole_Color_Issue_Rail_Committee.pdf Some people who received this message don't often get email from martin@sommer.net. Learnwhy this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Palo Alto Rail Committee, I would like to speak during the Oral Communications portion, of your upcoming April 20 Rail Committee Meeting. Attached is my Pole Color Issue document, that I request you read before the meeting. Thank you, Martin -- Martin Sommer650-346-5307martin@sommer.netwww.linkedin.com/in/martinsommer "Turn technical vision into reality." March 21, 2022 Page 1 of 7 Martin J Sommer, Palo Alto, CA, martin@sommer.net, 650-346-5307 Dear Palo Alto City Council Thank you for taking time to listen, and read this document. Summary On January 10, 2019, the ARB gave their recommendation for pole colors to Caltrain, for the University Ave. Station. I am writing to request that you revisit this item, and ask Caltrain to repaint the 11 poles to the City standard color of Marine Green. The following, is my reasoning: 1) City of Palo Alto (City), Jonathan Lait, November 15, 2018, "The goal is for the ARB to provide feedback on the color selection, with the intent that the poles can better blend or fade into the background." 2) Brent Tietjen, Caltrain, Jan 10, 2019, “Center poles, are in the 35 foot range”. Neither of these two stated objectives were met. 1) The beige poles do not “blend” into the natural green environment of University Station, and 2) the installed 45 foot poles, are 25% higher than presented to the ARB, and should have been brought back to the City for review. Every day mistakes are made, and ultimately corrected. I am proposing that this was simply a mistake, and should be corrected before the Caltrain line is electrified. Below, is a description of what occurred, its impact, and what can be done. The Promise Figure 1. The future of University Ave Station. March 21, 2022 Page 2 of 7 Martin J Sommer, Palo Alto, CA, martin@sommer.net, 650-346-5307 Shown above in Figure 1, is the most publicly distributed picture of what an electrified Caltrain would look like at the Palo Alto University Ave Station. Notice the: 1) dark colored poles, 2) pole-height equal to the top of the rail contact wires, and 3) symmetrical north/south design. Figures 2 and 3, Proposed vs delivered Figures 2 and 3 above, shows what was proposed, vs delivered. Notice the: 1) light colored poles, 3) pole-height 30% higher than the top of the rail contact wires, and 3) unsymmetrical north/south design. This is a catastrophe, to any esthetic designer. What happened? One of the issues contributing to this result, was the idea of matching the station “building”, vs the station “surrounding area”. Given the actual station building is only a small part of the surrounding area, pole color matched to the building, is completely out of sync with its surrounding area. What we have now, are huge poles that project above the tree tops, Figure 4, and tall poles conflicting with the surrounding natural environment, figure 5. An intentionally good decision, resulted in an environmental disaster. March 21, 2022 Page 3 of 7 Martin J Sommer, Palo Alto, CA, martin@sommer.net, 650-346-5307 Figure 4, Pole projecting above the tree tops. Figure 5, Poles conflicting with nature, and all other surrounding poles. March 21, 2022 Page 4 of 7 Martin J Sommer, Palo Alto, CA, martin@sommer.net, 650-346-5307 In essence: • Poles were painted beige to match the “building”, vs the standard City marine green to match (blend in with) the surrounding “environment”. It’s worth noting, that the other 2 Palo Alto stations both have dark poles, even though California Ave Station shown in Figure 6, has a beige building. • Caltrain installed 45 foot center poles, which are 10 feet taller than the 35 foot poles presented to the City ARB. A 25% increase in height (30% above the rail contact wires), should have been passed back to the City for review. Ref Figures 2, 3, and 4 above. • Caltrain installed a taller center pole configuration, where individual poles on the north and south bound platforms could have reduced the required height. Shorter individual poles, were used on both California Ave and Stan Antonia Stations, Figures 6 and 7. California Ave Station: Figure 6, dark poles and beige building, and Figure 7, short pole, platform mounted. How is this impacting the neighbors? The taller beige poles sticking over tree tops and against side trees, Figures 4, 5, and 8, are creating a tremendous eye sore, generating a more stressful environment, and lowering property values for downtown Palo Alto residents. If you think about the amount of time, March 21, 2022 Page 5 of 7 Martin J Sommer, Palo Alto, CA, martin@sommer.net, 650-346-5307 effort, and money that is put into blending cell-towers into our town, there is no way that this would be accepted. The question, is why are City officials accepting it here? This decision to place beige poles to blend in with the station “buildings”, completely missed the perspective of homeowners living above street level, and office dwellers gazing outdoors, for a clear perspective. As a matter of fact, you look closely at figures 1 and 5, the beige poles do not even match the grey light poles, already in place. Figure 8, Neighborhood blight. What can be done? So, at this point, what can be done? A number of things: 1) Replace the taller beige poles, with the originally proposed shorter beige poles. 2) Paint the top half of the taller beige poles, the standard Palo Alto marine green. 3) Paint all beige poles at University Ave Station marine green, to match the standard City color. March 21, 2022 Page 6 of 7 Martin J Sommer, Palo Alto, CA, martin@sommer.net, 650-346-5307 I am asking the Palo Alto City Council, to propose Option 3 to Caltrain, and ask them to paint all 11 beige poles at University Ave station the standard marine green color, and to paint them before the line is electrified. Doing this before electrification, will minimized costs and schedule impact. It will also fix a bad mistake, and give us a system to be proud of. Other mistakes being fixed? Are there other Caltrain mistakes, and are they being fixed? Yes, there are other mistakes being made with the Caltrain Electrification project, and yes, they are being corrected. Figure 9, for example, is a pole foundation hole cut into the California Ave station north bound platform, that: a) clearly was a mistake, and b) is being ramified, by using a larger pole on the opposite side. The point is, we all make mistakes, and we typically do our best to correct them. The original choice of pole color for the University Ave station, should be no exception. Figure 9, Misdrilled pole foundation hole, in California Ave station northbound platform. March 21, 2022 Page 7 of 7 Martin J Sommer, Palo Alto, CA, martin@sommer.net, 650-346-5307 The ask … I am asking for the Palo Alto City Council and City of Palo Alto, to request Caltrain to paint all beige poles at University Ave Station the standard marine green. This will give a solution we can live with for many years, and a design we can be proud of. Figure 10, show a standard City marine green pole, just outside the University Ave station. Had Caltrain continued through the station with this color, it would have blended quite well. Figure 10, A standard City marine green pole, just north of the University Ave station. If the City Council would like to see in person the physical perspective of the photos in this report, and stay within the Brown Act, I ask the Council to appoint a 2-person ad-hoc committee to visit my home, take notes, and report back. We can also, tour the location of other photos taken. From:Yahoo Mail.® To:Honky Subject:GOD BLESS AMERICA! AT LEAST WE WON’T HAVE TO FIGHT A WAR ON FOREIGN SOIL TO FIGHT THE COMMUNISTS; THEY ARE HEAR! Date:Saturday, April 16, 2022 6:16:54 AM Attachments:A2837301-0107-492E-99DD-15A3924C78D5 (1).mov CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. GOD BLESS AMERICA! AT LEAST WE WON’T HAVE TO FIGHT A WAR ON FOREIGN SOIL TO FIGHT THE COMMUNISTS; THEY ARE HEAR! MUST SEE AND FORWARD ASAP --PLEASE FORWARD From:Mark Leary Cox To:Council, City Subject:Erin Siena Jobs Date:Friday, April 15, 2022 9:01:30 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email frombohemiansaltmines@gmail.com. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Who's been Hiding the Photograph of the True Erin Siena Jobs that was sent from markdarrellcox@icloud.com in the Fall of 2019? Do you have a Mafia Infiltrator who is Redacting the Photographs of the True Erin Siena Jobs? Why are the Other Public Online Photographs of "NOT" Erin Siena Jobs a Set of a Collection Different False Erins? The True Erin Siena Jobs who is in Family Photograph with Steve Jobs in the Steve Jobs Biographer is the True Erin Siena except True Erin Siena Jobs is Italian and is in the Family Tree of Mario Cesario and Dottie Cesario of Redlands CA. Have you ever Heard of Mario Cesario? Mario Cesario made Golf Clubs for President Gerald Ford, Dean Martin, Bob Hope, Jackie Gleason. Supposedly Mario died on February 28, 2021 except Maybe he's Just Too Elated to Know what to Say since he's Connected with Lost Stolen Children from his Family Tree. Cause there's also Michael and Julie who were Working at West Hollywood 24 Hour Fitness before it Closed. Either way, you've Got Someone who's Redacting True Erin Siena Jobs. What? Because she's Italian? How is that her Fault? How did she end up in the household of Steve Jobs in Palo Alto? I don't know, but Steve Jobs is Jeff Laird from Redlands CA so there must be some Mafia Connection to the Switch Out of these Children and who Knows where Steve's Lost Child is at this Juncture. Wanna help? @MahdiCain P.S. Read my Twitter Account under Attack from Elon Musk. From:Dilma Coleman To:adam.roberts@santacruzcounty.us; USEmbassyVatican@state.gov Cc:ramzy@ladahlaw.com; Council, City Subject:Fwd: Stop Catholic clergy with kleptomaniac STD"s. Date:Friday, April 15, 2022 3:31:33 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Dilma Coleman <dhappinessforever@gmail.com> Date: Fri, Apr 15, 2022, 3:29 PM Subject: Stop Catholic clergy with kleptomaniac STD's. To: <office@stpatricksripon.com>, <ben.thienes@sjsu.edu> Cc: <mesereau@mesereaulaw.com>, <diyi.iquinas@dsj.org> Dear God, oh dear Lord Jesus Christ is so much better than Aloha. Does it translate to Latin from English. Best regards Diva Lee MD JD aka Dilma Coleman From:LWV of Palo Alto To:Council, City Subject:Re: April 18 council meeting; Public Comment: Say No to $4900 donation limits Date:Thursday, April 14, 2022 5:04:38 PM Attachments:CFR$500LTRTOCOUNCIL (2).docx CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Mayor Burt, Vice-Mayor Kou, and Honorable City Councilmembers: Please find attached a Public Comment urging the council to adopt $500 donation limits for city council elections and to add this issue to this year's Policy and Services Committee Workplan as proposed by Councilmember Cormack last week. Respectfully, Liz Kniss President League of Women Voters of Palo Alto LWVPalo Alto Local Campaign Finance Task Force -- League of Women Voters of Palo Alto 3921 E. Bayshore Road Palo Alto, CA 94303 Phone: (650) 903-0600 Web: www.lwvpaloalto.org Facebook: www.facebook.com/PaloAltoLeague/ Twitter: www.twitter.com/lwvpaloalto 3921 E. Bayshore Road, Palo Alto CA 94303 (650) 903-0600 www.lwvpaloalto.org April 14, 2022 Palo Alto City Council Re: Public Comment, April 18, Say No to $4900 donation limits Mayor Burt, Vice-Mayor Kou, and Councilmembers: It’s high time Palo Alto adopted reasonable limits on campaign donations. On April 11, Councilmember Alison Cormack made a motion to send to the Policy and Services Committee a recommendation that the city adopt a $500 contribution limit for city council elections. No other councilmember seconded her motion. Our League has previously urged the council to enact a $500 campaign donation limit. We also continue to recommend two other reforms, but the donation limit reform can stand by itself. We wholeheartedly support Councilmember Cormack’s suggestion that the item be added to this year’s Policy and Services Committee workplan, either by motion at the council level, a colleague’s memo, or other process. The current state default donation limit which applies to Palo Alto is $4900. This is nearly ten times the donation limit for a county supervisor election. The City of Burlingame recently faced this exact issue. Its council was on the verge of accepting the state default limits of $4900 when residents of Burlingame spoke up and demanded that the existing level--about $750--not be increased. The council went further and adopted a $350 contribution level (in view of the five smaller district elections it would now hold.) Public comments to the Burlingame council included these observations, which apply equally to Palo Alto: • A $500 donation limit is important because voters don’t want to worry about candidates being bought by large interests. People don’t have time to research a candidate’s contributions. • The $4900 state default limit will enable a small number of wealthy donors to bankroll a campaign. • Donation limits of $500 will keep candidates from raising the already high cost of city elections even higher. • Expensive elections discourage people with good ideas but no access to money from running for council. We urge the Council to enact a $500 campaign donation limit. It’s the right thing to do and the simplest way to accomplish needed reform. Respectfully, Liz Kniss President League of Women Voters of Palo Alto LWV Palo Alto Local Campaign Finance Task Force From:Allan Seid To:Channing House Bulletin Board Subject:Fwd: CHCP visit to Iris Chang Park 4/23/22 Date:Thursday, April 14, 2022 9:30:38 AM Attachments:CHCP VISIT TO IRIS CHANG PARK 4-23-22-V2-SDCAP event.docx CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Allan Seid, Brenda Wong <bjhwong@yahoo.com> Date: Thu, Apr 14, 2022 at 8:53 AM Subject: Visit to Iris Chang Park 4/23/22 Source: CHCP, San Jose Hello Friends, Please see the attachment below if you have an open Saturday, April 23, to celebrate Earth Day and honor Iris Chang. Details of the day, the Park and more about Iris Chang are in the attachment. If unable to attend, the park is accessible 7 days a week as one of the City of SJ's parks. The installations and the inscriptions were inspirin to me.. Happy Easter. Brenda Hee Wong CHCP VISIT TO IRIS CHANG PARK • When April 23, 2022 • 1:00 PM - 3:30 PM • Location Iris Chang Park, 688-694 Epic Way, San Jose, CA CHCP invites you to visit Iris Chang Park to celebrate Earth Day and to honor Iris Chang. Iris Chang was a Chinese American journalist, author of historical books, and political activist. She is best known for her best-selling 1997 account of the Nanking Massacre, The Rape of Nanking, and in 2003, The Chinese in America: A Narrative History. The 2.6-acre park near Montague Expressway and Seely Avenue was inaugurated in 2019 to honor Iris. The park's six installations were very thoughtfully researched and beautifully created to carry on Iris' messages. Special guests at the event will be Iris' parents. Ying Ying Chang, Iris' mom, will speak briefly about Iris and give us a tour of the park. Then we will clean and beautify the park to honor Iris, while also celebrating Earth Day, Women's History Month, and AAPI month. Some yard/landscape maintenance tools will be available, but best if you could bring your own broom, greenery disposal bag, small clippers, sunhat, kneeling pads, gardening gloves, etc. This is a free event with refreshments served after the clean-up session. Please RSVP to CHCP Director Brenda Hee Wong at brenda.wong@chcp.org or 408-946-4015. To learn more about Iris Chang: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iris_Chang From:DOUG BLOYD To:Council, City Cc:DOUG BLOYD Subject:Public Comment Submission For the April 18th Council Meeting Date:Thursday, April 14, 2022 8:59:25 AM Attachments:April 18th Letter.odt Some people who received this message don't often get email from dbloyd@comcast.net. Learnwhy this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Please include my attached letter to the City Council, and it's supporting documents (photos), as a submission to the "Public Comment" agenda segment of the Palo Alto City Council's April 18th meeting. Doug Bloyd 408-396-1963 From:Kamhi, Philip To:carolyn.gonot@vta.org Cc:Council, City; City Mgr; Bhatia, Ripon; Shinn, Jane Subject:Request for Measure B Grade Separation Funding use for advanced planning of Grade Separation Projects Date:Wednesday, April 13, 2022 2:03:25 PM Attachments:20220329 VTA Measure B Grade Sep Funding .pdf image001.png image003.png image011.png image012.png image014.png Dear Chief Executive Officer Gonot, Please see attached letter from City of Palo Alto Mayor Pat Burt, regarding requests to use grade separation Measure B funds for advanced planning work. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions. Sincerely, Philip Kamhi Chief Transportation Official, Office of Transportation City of Palo Alto Phone: 650.329.2520 E-mail: Philip.kamhi@cityofpaloalto.org www.cityofpaloalto.org Use PaloAlto311 to report items you’d like the City to fix!! Download the app or click here to make a service request. P.O. Box 10250 Palo Alto, CA 94303 650.329.2477 650.328.3631 fax Office of the Mayor and City Council March 29, 2022 Carolyn Gonot CEO/General Manager, VTA 3331 N. First Street San Jose, CA 95134 Re: Request for Measure B Grade Separation Funding use for advanced planning of Grade Separation Projects Dear Ms Gonot, We would like to thank the VTA leadership and staff for their efforts in assisting the Cities of Palo Alto, Mountain View, and Sunnyvale towards reaching an interagency agreement for the allocation of Measure B Grade separation funding. As you know, Measure B funding for Grade Separations was approved by voters in 2016 and included funding to improve safety for drivers, bicyclists, and pedestrians, along with reducing congestion at the intersections in the three cities and enabling the expansion of the electrified Caltrain system. The City is considering a holistic approach to achieve grade separations by, in some locations, separating to safe bicycle and pedestrian grade separations from vehicular crossings. In addition, we have concluded that certain grade separated bike and pedestrian crossings need to precede prolonged closure during construction of existing at grade vehicle/bike/pedestrian crossings to maintain safe commute paths, especially for our K-12 students. The City of Palo Alto has been working diligently on planning efforts for the development of grade separation alternatives at the at-grade crossings along our very constrained Caltrain corridor and we have narrowed alternatives to a final set of options for our Charleston Road, East Meadow Drive and Churchill Ave crossings. The City of Palo Alto would like to use a portion of our allocated share of Measure B grade separation funds for studies and advanced planning needed to select our final preferred alternatives, and for creating separate bicycle-pedestrian crossings. The following is a brief narrative of these requests: Additional Studies: The City of Palo Alto is nearing the selection of preferred alternatives at Churchill Avenue, Meadow Drive, and Charleston Road and has spent over $6 million dollars to date in these efforts. The City has narrowed the alternatives for each of these crossings using evaluation criteria and analyzing these alternatives against such criteria. Engineering challenges were identified during this process. A multi-stakeholder Community Advisory Panel was established over the course of two years to review and analyze alternatives including: engineering studies, traffic studies, and context issues, and to provide for extensive public engagement. The City also conducted multiple in-person and virtual town hall meetings. Traffic studies were performed to understand the impacts of various alternatives. However, critical geotechnical data was limited to what was available from nearby projects, necessitating assumptions. The alternatives selected for further review, involve a considerable amount of underground construction with associated costs being significantly dependent upon the site conditions. For the selection of a preferred alternative at each crossing, additional study of the subsurface will be needed. City of Palo Alto DocuSign Envelope ID: 3C0DE46B-AD84-405B-95BC-041A0F95B94D P.O. Box 10250 Palo Alto, CA 94303 650.329.2477 650.328.3631 fax The City needs to conduct additional geotechnical studies for more detailed exploration of subsurface conditions to better understand the water levels and soil conditions that impact the costs. In addition, greater design refinement is required to understand the impacts of current and prospective design standards, right of way constraints, and cost implications for selecting the preferred alternatives. Additional studies will better inform the cost-effectiveness, construction timelines, potential construction methods, and other issues. Bicycle & Pedestrian Crossings: Palo Alto has an exceptionally high number of K-12 students that bike and walk to school and these grade crossings are critical school commutes. In addition, the City experiences heavy bike and pedestrian usage on the east-west connections along the Caltrain corridor given the location of the major employment centers of Stanford Research Park, Stanford University and three major medical centers (Stanford Hospital, Lucile Packard Children’s Hospital and Palo Alto Medical Foundation). The City of Palo Alto is the only city in Santa Clara County that has been awarded the “Gold” standard by “The League of Bicyclists” over the past five years continuously for a bike-friendly community. The bike and pedestrians’ commute connections, school routes, and recreation paths all play a major role in the active transportation, sustainability, safety, health, and wellness of our community residents. The multi-year construction of new grade separations is expected to severely disrupt the pedestrian and bike activities along these connections. As a result, the city is exploring separate and safer bike and pedestrian under crossings as part of the grade separation project which would need to be constructed prior to the vehicular grade separations to ease the impact during construction and for greater safety in the long term. Consequently, the City of Palo Alto requests that VTA allow the use of Measure B Grade Separation funds for these planning efforts. The City understands and remains committed to using allocated funding only for grade separation efforts and ensuring the best use of funds for infrastructure separating bike, pedestrians, and vehicular traffic across the Caltrain corridor. The timely funding of these studies are key for Palo Alto to position itself to qualify a next tranche of MTC funding from the $8 billion of federal Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and Safety Improvements (CRISI) and Railway Crossing elimination Program infrastructure funding. We sincerely appreciate your consideration of this request. Please let us know if you have any questions or concerns. Sincerely, Mayor Pat Burt City of Palo Alto Cc: Ed Shikada, City Manager Philip Kamhi, Chief Transportation Official Ripon Bhatia, Senior Engineer DocuSign Envelope ID: 3C0DE46B-AD84-405B-95BC-041A0F95B94D From:DOUG BLOYD To:Council, City Subject:My Response To the City Council Date:Tuesday, April 12, 2022 5:39:16 AM Attachments:April 12th Letter.odt Some people who received this message don't often get email from dbloyd@comcast.net. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Please forward the attached letter to the CIty Council members. Doug Bloyd 408-396-1963 4-12-2022 Council Members, My name is Doug Bloyd. I am a waterfowl hunter, and a resident of Santa Clara County. I would first like to thank the City Council for your quick response to my April 4th and April 11th letters. A City staff member from the Open Space and Parks department has already reached out to me and was very helpful. However, I believe my letters were forwarded to the wrong department. Both my letters addressed concerns about the need for the public to be better informed about the City's new “No Hunting” laws. Due diligence responsibilities of properly informing the public about City laws should be a job for the City Attorney's office, not the Open Space and Parks department. It was the City Attorney's office, not the Open Space and Parks department that recently upped the ante on the punishments the city will be dishing out to for those who violate the laws. The punishment is now minimally a cumulative fine of over $2000, and because two of the penal codes the City will now be enforcing are “discharge of a firearm” related, there is the potential for a lengthy incarceration. It was the City Attorney's office, not the Open Space and Parks department that decided to take an ideological stance against hunting interests when it created this new expansive “No Hunting Zone” that overrules State laws on all navigable state waters that flood in and ebb out of Palo Alto's city limits. I am requesting today that the City Council forward my April 4th and April 11th letters to the City Attorney's office for a response, the same way my messages were forwarded to the Open Space and Parks department. I am really more interested to hear how the City Attorney's office plans on informing the public about their new “No Hunting Zone”, their new “No Hunting” laws, and the severity of their punishment for violating them. Thank you for your time, and I hope you give my thoughts consideration. Doug Bloyd 408-396-1963 From:Aram James To:Human Relations Commission; Enberg, Nicholas; Greer Stone; Joe Simitian; Council, City; Tannock, Julie; Figueroa, Eric; robert.parham@cityofpaloalto.org; Jay Boyarsky; chuck jagoda; Vara Ramakrishnan; Rebecca Eisenberg; Binder, Andrew; Reifschneider, James; Roberta Ahlquist; EPA Today Subject:Dates for DA debate 5-4 at 7pm-8:30 pm & and the sheriff’s race 5- Date:Saturday, April 16, 2022 9:38:13 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ >> > > > > Sent from my iPhone From:Rob Levitsky To:Council, City; Architectural Review Board; ptc@cityofpaloalto.org Cc:David Hirsch Subject:palo alto school windowsDate:Saturday, April 16, 2022 1:50:56 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. City of Palo Alto ARB, PTC, City Council: In the attached photos are the windows of the school rooms i sat in for Kindergarten thru 12th grade in Palo Alto from 1961 to 1974. All classrooms have 2 rows of openable windows, openable by putting a triangular hook on the window latch. i recall often taking the classroom job of being a “window monitor” There would be no need for such a “window monitor” at the underground school, with 40% of classrooms underground and windowless, proposed by Castilleja, which they call “Modernized”. What a bad design! Is fresh air and sunlight deemed inappropriate for learning by the Castilleja team of teachers??? if 40% of classrooms are underground with no windows, it stands to reason that 40% of classroom time of a typical student would be underground. What was developed 70 years ago in Palo Alto by PAUSD was far superior. But dont just take my word for it -let me quote ARB Vice Chair David Hirsch from the recent March 17 ARB meeting on the Castilleja proposal: “I would like to know how many parents really looked at this and decided ‘I want to send my kid to a school where 23 of 58 of these classrooms are below grade and most of them do not have natural light, and none have natural ventilation in the whole cellar’ I think the Parents would be outraged! “ Stop the underground classroom mistake! At least have some windows, and make some of them openable! Sent from my iPhone From:Gad Petel To:Peck, Korwyn Cc:City Mgr; Clerk, City; Council, City; pdsdirector; lina_mike@yahoo.com; arybak1979@gmail.com; job4mike@gmail.com; Hoyt, George Subject:Re: Building Inspectors Shortage Date:Friday, April 15, 2022 1:29:31 PM Attachments:image001.png image002.png image004.png image005.png image006.png image007.png Some people who received this message don't often get email from gadpetelisl@gmail.com. Learnwhy this is important Hello Korwyn, Thank you for a prompt response. I will relay this information to the homeowners. I am also keeping my fingers crossed that a fast and creative solution is on its way. Kindly keep us posted. Thank you and a have a good weekend, Gad On Fri, Apr 15, 2022 at 1:10 PM Peck, Korwyn <Korwyn.Peck@cityofpaloalto.org> wrote: Gad Petel, Three weeks is unacceptable, and we are simply having a supply and demand problem. We have encountered a shortage of inspectors due to medical and family emergencies, and scheduled time away, while the demand increased. We have reached out to vendors to assist, but they have yet to provide qualified candidates, except one, but they are only available part time. We have also been approved to fill two new positions, but the recruitment process might take several months. To relieve the immediate pressure, we have authorized overtime until we can bring our inspection load to acceptable levels. The concern we have with overtime work is diminished benefits, however, we are implementing this now. All the City personnel you have cc’d in your email are party to these solutions, and the Council, City Manager’s Office, and Planning Director’s Office have all been instrumental in authorizing these measures to take place. We know how difficult it is to manage a project without getting timely inspections, but circumstances have been outside our control. We are working very hard to change that. Meanwhile, schedule the inspections and request to be placed on the Wait List. As cancellations occur, and they do, our inspectors will pick projects off that list. With our providing additional service, and staff returning to work, we should see relief soon. Thank you. Korwyn Peck, BSCM Building Inspection Manager (Senior Master Sargeant, US Air Force, Retired) Planning & Development Services (650) 329-2663 | korwyn.peck@cityofpaloalto.org https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/Departments/Planning- Development-Services From: Gad Petel <gadpetelisl@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, April 15, 2022 10:32 AM To: City Mgr <CityMgr@cityofpaloalto.org>; Clerk, City <city.clerk@cityofpaloalto.org>; Council, City <city.council@cityofpaloalto.org> Cc: Building <Building@CityofPaloAlto.org>; Building Permits <BuildingPermits@CityofPaloAlto.org>; pdsdirector <pdsdirector@CityofPaloAlto.org>; Lina & Mike <lina_mike@yahoo.com>; Polina & Michael Venford <arybak1979@gmail.com>; job4mike@gmail.com Some people who received this message don't often get email from gadpetelisl@gmail.com. Learn why this is important Subject: Building Inspectors Shortage CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. To whom it may concern, We are working on a construction project in the city of Palo Alto. We called today, Friday 4/15/200, for an inspection and we were given a date of 5/9/2022. 3 weeks- this is unacceptable (under any standard). At this rate, our project will a) take more than a year, b) will require many 'stop and go' breaks, c) increase the overhead and the labor cost for the homeowners, d) increase the temporary rent expense the homeowners are paying elsewhere, e) mandate us to take other projects in the meanwhile and then 'try and schedule' return dates whenever possible, f) prolong the hazard and dangerous for the family that lives within a construction site, g) manufacture dissatisfaction with the city to the tax paying homeowners, h) deliver us an overworked/exhausted inspector, etc. etc. Is there any way to fix this major and serious issue/problem? Are we planning to hire more inspectors? When? Are we planning to hire an outside inspections service, as other cities have done due to C19? Please note that in general Citizens do not mind paying higher taxes and Permit Fees as long as services are provided. I have PDS Director Jonathan Lait and Homeowners Polina and Michael Venford hereby CCed. Anxiously waiting for your response. Thank you, -- Gad Petel- Owner Golden State Designs CSLB B Lic #1055272 Gadpetelisl@gmail.com Cell: (408)809-6199 From:Peck, Korwyn To:gadpetelisl@gmail.com Cc:City Mgr; Clerk, City; Council, City; pdsdirector; lina_mike@yahoo.com; arybak1979@gmail.com; job4mike@gmail.com; Hoyt, George Subject:RE: Building Inspectors Shortage Date:Friday, April 15, 2022 1:10:45 PM Attachments:image001.png image002.png image004.png image005.png image006.png image007.png Gad Petel, Three weeks is unacceptable, and we are simply having a supply and demand problem. We have encountered a shortage of inspectors due to medical and family emergencies, and scheduled time away, while the demand increased. We have reached out to vendors to assist, but they have yet to provide qualified candidates, except one, but they are only available part time. We have also been approved to fill two new positions, but the recruitment process might take several months. To relieve the immediate pressure, we have authorized overtime until we can bring our inspection load to acceptable levels. The concern we have with overtime work is diminished benefits, however, we are implementing this now. All the City personnel you have cc’d in your email are party to these solutions, and the Council, City Manager’s Office, and Planning Director’s Office have all been instrumental in authorizing these measures to take place. We know how difficult it is to manage a project without getting timely inspections, but circumstances have been outside our control. We are working very hard to change that. Meanwhile, schedule the inspections and request to be placed on the Wait List. As cancellations occur, and they do, our inspectors will pick projects off that list. With our providing additional service, and staff returning to work, we should see relief soon. Thank you. Korwyn Peck, BSCM Building Inspection Manager (Senior Master Sargeant, US Air Force, Retired) Planning & Development Services (650) 329-2663 | korwyn.peck@cityofpaloalto.org https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/Departments/Planning- Development-Services Some people who received this message don't often get email from gadpetelisl@gmail.com. Learn why this is important From: Gad Petel <gadpetelisl@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, April 15, 2022 10:32 AM To: City Mgr <CityMgr@cityofpaloalto.org>; Clerk, City <city.clerk@cityofpaloalto.org>; Council, City <city.council@cityofpaloalto.org> Cc: Building <Building@CityofPaloAlto.org>; Building Permits <BuildingPermits@CityofPaloAlto.org>; pdsdirector <pdsdirector@CityofPaloAlto.org>; Lina & Mike <lina_mike@yahoo.com>; Polina & Michael Venford <arybak1979@gmail.com>; job4mike@gmail.com Subject: Building Inspectors Shortage CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. To whom it may concern, We are working on a construction project in the city of Palo Alto. We called today, Friday 4/15/200, for an inspection and we were given a date of 5/9/2022. 3 weeks- this is unacceptable (under any standard). At this rate, our project will a) take more than a year, b) will require many 'stop and go' breaks, c) increase the overhead and the labor cost for the homeowners, d) increase the temporary rent expense the homeowners are paying elsewhere, e) mandate us to take other projects in the meanwhile and then 'try and schedule' return dates whenever possible, f) prolong the hazard and dangerous for the family that lives within a construction site, g) manufacture dissatisfaction with the city to the tax paying homeowners, h) deliver us an overworked/exhausted inspector, etc. etc. Is there any way to fix this major and serious issue/problem? Are we planning to hire more inspectors? When? Are we planning to hire an outside inspections service, as other cities have done due to C19? Please note that in general Citizens do not mind paying higher taxes and Permit Fees as long as services are provided. I have PDS Director Jonathan Lait and Homeowners Polina and Michael Venford hereby CCed. Anxiously waiting for your response. Thank you, -- Gad Petel- Owner Golden State Designs CSLB B Lic #1055272 Gadpetelisl@gmail.com Cell: (408)809-6199 From:Allan Seid To:Channing House Bulletin Board Subject:Fwd: What Archaeologists Are Learning About the Lives of the Chinese Immigrants Who Built the Transcontinental Railroad | History | Smithsonian Magazine Date:Thursday, April 14, 2022 5:52:44 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. From: Allan Seid , Ian Aitchison. chi Date: Thu, Apr 14, 2022 at 12:09 AM Subject: What Archaeologists Are Learning About the Lives of the Chinese Immigrants Who Built the Transcontinental Railroad | History | Smithsonian Magazine Source:Smithsonian Magazine https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/archaeologists-learning-lives-chinese- immigrants-transcontinental-railroad-180979786/ What Archaeologists Are Learning About the Lives of the Chinese Immigrants Who Built the Transcontinental Railroad In the sparse Utah desert, the vital contributions of these 19th-century laborers are finally coming to light Photographs and Text by Matt Stirn The desert of far northwestern Utah stretches 60 miles from the arid border of Nevada to the saline-crusted shores of the Great Salt Lake. The terrain is exceedingly flat, punctuated only by the intermittent dry arroyo, rocky hill or volcanic cinder cone. Horned lizards and jack rabbits dart between thorny shrubs and scrawny box elder trees. Apart from the occasional cattle ranch or sheep-herding camp, the landscape appears desolate and lonely, forgotten in the expanse of geologic time. But in a place called Terrace, identified today by little more than a single, bullet-ridden informational sign staked into the desert soil, a close look reveals a colorful story camouflaged in the sand. Scattered among dunes and tumbleweeds are small glass bottles, ceramic jars and abandoned wooden railroad ties, clues to a surprising history. A winter green-style Chinese teacup and opium tin. Matt Stirn From outside a small excavation pit, Karen Kwan and Margaret Yee watch as a researcher carefully extracts a scrap of linen clothing from the buried ruins of a house. A few yards away, another researcher brushes dirt from a ceramic bowl intricately painted with bamboo and floral motifs. Terrace was established by Chinese railroad workers in 1869, when construction crews were racing to connect the eastward and westward tracks of the railroad 70 miles from here at Promontory Summit. Eventually, simple wood structures rose on both sides of Main Street, housing hotels, clothing stores, restaurants, railroad machine shops, even a 1,000-volume library specializing in science, history and travel literature. Because water was scarce, engineers constructed an aqueduct from hollowed-out timber, funneling water from mountain springs that were miles away. At its peak, the town was home to some 500 residents, and it welcomed hundreds more each year, mostly rail and wagon-train travelers. The leather sole of a child’s shoe. The arid climate has preserved numerous organic artifacts, including canvas and silk fabrics and even food scraps. Matt Stirn In 1903, Terrace burned in a fire, and after the railroad was rerouted 50 miles south—straight across the Great Salt Lake—the following year, the town was abandoned. But researchers have returned, seeing the ghost town as an ideal site to learn not only about the workings of a remote railroad town but especially about the immigrant community that thrived here. “Terrace had all the different activities that you would expect in a frontier town,” says Michael Sheehan, an archaeologist with the U.S. Bureau of Land Management. “But it wasn’t just a railroad town. It was a microcosm that offers a glimpse into class, ethnicity, even international relations.” For descendants of Chinese railroad workers, such as Kwan and Yee, the research also allows them to recover a part of their heritage that was thought lost to history. “Archaeology like this is important,” Kwan says, “because it puts the individual back into the picture.” The dream of a single, continuous railroad that would unite America’s east and west coasts dates back to the 1830s, not long after the introduction of the country’s first steam locomotive. A transcontinental railroad would shrink a dangerous, cross-country wagon-train journey of six months or more to less than a week, and it would open vast stretches of the West to new settlement. But it wasn’t until 1862, in the midst of the Civil War, that Abraham Lincoln signed into law the Pacific Railway Act, which finally undertook to make that dream a reality. “There is nothing more important before the nation,” he’d once said, “than the building of the railroad to the Pacific.” Karen Kwan, Utah’s first Chinese American state representative, is a leading advocate of conducting excavations at Terrace. Matt Stirn Margaret Yee prepares for an ancestor remembrance ceremony. Her great-grandfather worked as a cook on a railroad crew. Matt Stirn The legislation granted huge swaths of federal land and substantial funds to the Central Pacific and Union Pacific railroad companies to connect Sacramento to the nation’s existing rail network terminus in Nebraska. Both railroad companies held ceremonial groundbreakings in 1863, complete with crowds, bands and parades, but the war prevented real construction from getting underway until 1865. That spring, James Strobridge, the Central Pacific’s construction supervisor, put an ad in the Sacramento Union seeking 5,000 skilled laborers to begin blasting a path through the High Sierra. Given the job’s punishing conditions, no more than a few hundred people even replied, most of them, Strobridge later said, “unsteady men” who “would stay a few days . . . until pay-day, get a little money, get drunk, and clear out.” The remains of a house for Chinese workers in Terrace—the first that archaeologists have fully excavated. The original floorboards are visible beneath the sand. Matt Stirn Faced with a herculean project and no workforce, a railroad official named E.B. Crocker proposed a controversial plan to bring on a 50- person crew of Chinese workers who’d immigrated to California to mine for gold. According to Chris Merritt, an archaeologist and Utah state preservation official, most railroad officials believed the Chinese workers were “unskilled” and “too feminine for hard labor,” but the crew swiftly set records for rail laying. So the railroad dispatched recruitment emissaries to China’s rural Guangdong Province, which was then plagued by a civil war. “Southern China was in turmoil,” says Gordon Chang, a historian at Stanford University and the author of 2019’s Ghosts of Gold Mountain: The Epic Story of the Chinese Who Built the Transcontinental Railroad. “Wars, ethnic conflicts and economic insecurity were scourges, and young people were leaving to seek work and support their families from afar.” Altogether, the Central Pacific Railroad hired an estimated 12,000 Chinese workers, some as young as 12. The Chinese workers, at that time the largest industrial workforce in American history, made up 90 percent of the Central Pacific’s total labor force. (The Union Pacific, by contrast, did not employ Chinese laborers.) But when Chang started looking into the subject as a young historian, in the 1970s, he was shocked to discover that he could find scarcely any information about them. Nearly all of the scholarship about the railroad’s construction centered on the European and American workforces. Chang has devoted much of his career to piecing together their history, and in 2012 he co-founded the Chinese Railroad Workers in North America Project, which now includes the most comprehensive collection of historical documents and oral histories on the subject. “Without employing Chinese workers, the meeting at Promontory Summit would have never happened.” A critical section of the transcontinental railroad is shown in red. Chinese crews, many based in Terrace, laid Central Pacific track heading east, reaching the Union Pacific line at Promontory in May 1869 and linking the coasts for the first time. Guilbert Gates The Chinese workers carried out an exceptional feat. After blasting and cutting through granite in the Sierra Nevada, they expediently laid track across the Great Basin. Chang and other historians attribute their success in part to the diversity of their training. Before migrating to the United States, many Chinese workers were architects, blacksmiths, woodworkers, cooks, doctors and farmers. Their varied skill sets allowed crews to function as miniature communities, capable of tackling complex problems encountered along the railroad grade—not only problems of engineering, such as building railroad trestles, but also maintaining large field camps in the remote desert. It also enabled crews to acquire much-needed supplies, such as cookware, medicine and even food, often imported from China at a cheaper price than could be obtained by the railroad company or in nearby towns, which gouged prices for immigrant workers. This communal cooperation was critical, because Chinese crews were routinely marginalized, subjected to poor treatment, racist oversight and negligible support from their employers. According to the Central Pacific’s own disclosures, white workers earned $35 a month on top of full room, board and equipment. Chinese workers, by contrast, earned a salary of $30 and nothing else. “Not only were they paid less than their white counterparts,” Chang says. “They also had to pay for their food, supplies and medicine, all of which the railroad company provided to white workers.” What little money the Chinese workers saved, they sent back to their families. Despite these challenges, Chinese crews completed 690 miles of track to meet the Union Pacific builders at Promontory, Utah, in May 1869. “Without employing Chinese workers, the meeting at Promontory Summit would have never happened—period,” Merritt says. Yet not a single Chinese employee was welcomed at the Promontory ceremony. At the western boundary of Terrace, an aerial view reveals the traces of a turntable, used to change a locomotive’s direction. Matt Stirn After the railroad was completed, thousands of Chinese workers stayed on as employees of the railroad. They were forced to live on the edges of railroad towns and larger cities. White mobs repeatedly attacked Chinese neighborhoods. In Rock Springs, Wyoming, 28 Chinese coal miners (all former railroad workers) were killed in an attack that drove hundreds more from town. In Los Angeles, 18 Chinese residents were lynched in a single day, including at least one child. Reno, Nevada’s Chinatown was burned to the ground twice in 30 years. “Almost every Chinese community in the western United States in the 19th century suffered destruction,” says Chang. “Fire and forced expulsion was their lot.” In formal censuses, the U.S. government often recorded Chinese immigrants living in railroad towns simply as “Chinaman” or “Chinawoman” in place of their names. They were barred from obtaining citizenship, and the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 prohibited further immigration, which prevented many railroad workers from reconnecting with their families. Archaeologists Michael Sheehan, left, and Chris Merritt near the newly discovered remains of a Chinese business on Main Street. While Chinese workers lived on the edge of town, the discovery suggests Terrace was more integrated than previously thought. Matt Stirn Those who returned to China faced challenges of their own, sometimes preferring not to speak about their experiences. In time, personal histories recorded in diaries or letters home were lost, or were likely destroyed during the Chinese Cultural Revolution, in 1966, when such documents could have been branded as anti- nationalist and disloyal to the Communist government. Between the community’s exclusion in the United States and the upheaval it faced in China, its history slowly vanished. Of the 12,000 Chinese workers employed by the railroad, researchers have identified the names of just a few dozen. Still, their impact on establishing Chinese communities across the American West is unmistakable. Shortly before the start of the railroad project, census records estimated that there were 34,933 Chinese immigrants living in the country. By the time the railroad was completed, the population had nearly doubled, as family members joined relatives in places like Terrace or in other newly formed Chinese communities. By 1880, 105,465 Chinese immigrants had settled in the United States, forming anchors for many of the modern-day Chinatowns found today across the West. Chris Merritt was walking through the remains of Terrace a few years ago, doing a general archaeological survey of Utah’s railroad towns, when he saw what looked like a dense concentration of Chinese artifacts eroding out of a log-lined depression in the ground. Located at the edge of town, these finds strongly indicated that he’d found Terrace’s Chinese neighborhood. After Merritt and Ken Cannon, an archaeologist whose team specializes in remote sensing, confirmed several buried structures using ground-penetrating radar, Merritt and Sheehan, of the Bureau of Land Management, spoke with local descendants of railroad workers in Salt Lake City, including Karen Kwan, president of the Chinese Railroad Workers Descendants Association and Utah’s first Chinese American state representative, about a collaborative project to assist the descendant community in rekindling a connection to their past. Terrace c. 1880, about 11 years after it was established. At its peak, it was home to about 500 people, and welcomed hundreds of visitors each year. Courtesy of Utah State Historical Society In the fall of 2020, researchers, preservation officials and several volunteers, including descendants of Chinese workers, returned to Terrace. Instead of focusing on the most obvious architectural features around the site—heaps of bricks and earthen depressions marking the foundations and basements of Main Street—the archaeologists would focus on the Chinese neighborhood. In particular, they planned to conduct the first ever complete excavation of a house for Chinese workers along the railroad line. Within moments of breaking ground, the team was astonished by the artifacts they encountered, which were remarkably well preserved in the arid climate. Broken rice bowls depicting intricate bamboo leaf paintings (a type known as bamboo style, made in the Pearl River Delta in southern China) connected the occupants to their original home province. The handle of a traditional Chinese soupspoon indicated that rather than using readily available pewter cutlery, the workers took extreme care in transporting fragile implements across the globe. “The items that are there, my ancestor, my great-great- great-grandfather may have touched, may have owned,” Kwan said. “To me it feels personal.” The archaeologists also found glass gaming pieces from Go, the Chinese strategy game, which had been lost underneath the house’s floorboards, as well as silk fabric from a torn garment, the leather sole of a child’s shoe, an apparent Buddhist altar built from a wooden crate, and an inkstone used for drafting correspondence. The inkstone left a particular impression on Merritt. “This one piece transcends the objective world we often build in archaeology,” he told me. “It was owned by a literate man who left home, and he sat in Terrace and wrote letters to his family, who he maybe never saw again. I sit here and wonder, ‘Did his letters ever make it home?’” Sifting the soil, the researchers also discovered melon seeds, peanut shells, desiccated dates and fish bones, some of which appear to come from China. With the help of recent funding from the Register of Professional Archaeologists, Cannon will continue to study the food and resource connections between Terrace and mainland China by analyzing animal bones, charred seeds and plant pollen from the site—all part of a larger project to understand how Chinese workers supported themselves through trade that stretched across the Pacific. By examining connections between the Terrace workers and their home villages, the archaeologists hope to shed light on the reciprocal support that must have helped sustain both communities through difficult circumstances. A 19th-century soupspoon with a floral motif tracing it to Guangdong. Matt Stirn A glass bottle found along the railroad grade, probably used for medicine or food flavoring. Matt Stirn The lid of an opium tin with a maker’s mark identifying the shop in China where it was manufactured. Matt Stirn One of the most surprising discoveries was made not in the Chinese district but on Main Street. While cataloging glass bottles, the team uncovered pieces of soy sauce containers, rice wine bottles and Chinese teacups near the remains of an unidentified building. Given the density of Chinese-specific food-related objects, Merritt and Sheehan believe they stumbled across a Chinese business, possibly a restaurant, laundry or grocery store that was never mentioned in official Terrace records. This exciting discovery suggests that while much of the Chinese population in Terrace lived on the periphery, they were also more involved in the central community than previously thought. “While we know there was a clear segregation between the two populations,” says Sheehan, “this business in the middle of Main Street shows us that the two communities must have been more integrated on a deeper level.” But not everything they found was cause for celebration. The researchers noticed shovel holes dug into building foundations and carefully sorted piles of broken artifacts on the ground—signs that amateur collectors and treasure hunters have scoured the ghost town for valuables. Sheehan bemoaned the crucial pieces of history that could be lost. “When people take an artifact out of context and put it on a mantel, it ends up in a landfill someday,” he said. For Kwan, the lack of protective oversight was personal. “It feels as if the government has allowed somebody to come into my property to take something from me.” Ultimately, the archaeologists and descendant community hope to better protect the site from amateur collectors. The Bureau of Land Management recently constructed a fence around a portion of the site, and in January Kwan introduced legislation in the statehouse to protect archaeological sites and prioritize public education about cultural heritage and conservation. But the researchers acknowledge that, even if the bill is passed, there is only so much formal regulation can do. “Until people can see an artifact as being a rare key to a community’s lost past, and not just a pretty object, they will continue to be taken,” Merritt says. In 1904, a section of the railroad was moved south, bypassing Terrace, which was eventually abandoned. Some original wooden ties are still evident. Matt Stirn On the last day of the field season, as researchers prepared the workers’ house for final measurements and photographs before they would refill it with dirt to preserve the structure, several descendants lit incense, which wafted in thick clouds over heaps of fruit, sweets and mandarin cake stacked on a table next to the excavation pits. The descendants bowed one by one over the structure, in respect and remembrance for their relatives and the sacrifices they made while working in this remote town. Margaret Yee, who owns Utah’s oldest operating Chinese restaurant, had prepared a lunch of fried rice, noodles, wontons and short ribs as a gesture of thanks to the researchers who are helping her community reconnect with its heritage. Yee’s family has worked as cooks since they first arrived to help construct the railroad. Unpacking a container of rice as dust- covered researchers lined up at her cook tent, she smiled and said, “I feel connected to my family today. Together, we are continuing their story.” Recommended Videos A Breathtaking 110-Mile Alaskan Railroad Built in Two Years Built during the Klondike Gold Rush in 1898, the Yukon and White Pass Railway is a stunning sight. Given its speedy, two-year construction, this narrow gauge railroad, with its sky-high beams, is quite the marvel. From:Aram James To:paloaltofreepress@gmail.com; Linda Jolley; Reifschneider, James; Council, City; Greer Stone; chuck jagoda; Jay Boyarsky; Roberta Ahlquist Subject:Fwd: DA and Sheriff"s forums Date:Thursday, April 14, 2022 12:13:38 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. From:Aram James To:Tannock, Julie; robert.parham@cityofpaloalto.org; Figueroa, Eric; Enberg, Nicholas; Perron, Zachary; chuck jagoda; Sajid Khan; Jethroe Moore; Jeff Rosen; Jonsen, Robert; paloaltofreepress@gmail.com; Council, City; Jay Boyarsky; Joe Simitian; Roberta Ahlquist; Rebecca Eisenberg; Alison Cormack; Winter Dellenbach; City Mgr; Binder, Andrew; Shikada, Ed; Raj Subject:These cops make me sick!! Some sick …..yah you got it!!! Date:Wednesday, April 13, 2022 5:42:14 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.________________________________ Sent from my iPhone From:Amy Christel To:Council, City Subject:Tree protection Date:Tuesday, April 12, 2022 3:24:41 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ Dear Council Members, Our city’s tree canopy needs stronger protections. The process to protect oaks and redwoods should be extended to other mature trees, including that are located in private yards. Removing a healthy tree to further develop properties is far too easy. Our rear neighbor recently chose to remove this gorgeous, old camphor and neighbors had no warning or recourse to challenge this decision. The rear yard tree was healthy, and in no way imperiled structures or utility lines. As far as we know, no building permit has been sought. Yet. Regardless of the owner’s intent, or “reasoning”, removal of this tree affects the wider neighborhood and our environment. There needs to be a permitting process for tree removal that allows for comment by those impacted by an owner’s removal of a tree. These mature trees provide so many benefits to the ecosystem, carbon sequestration, and neighborhood character. Please approve strict requirements to protect trees greater than 18” diameter which have no health issues and pose no hazards. These limits should include large tree removal for the purpose of expanding the structure or adding an ADU. By eliminating a tree and replacing it with a structure, the character of a neighborhood is diminished for the financial benefit of only the owner/developer. This practice should be limited by the permit and review process, with opportunities for neighbors to challenge the tree removal. The pictures below should speak for themselves. But the loss of this majestic Moreno Av. Camphor tree, during bird nesting season no less, has caused neighbors heartbreak and shock. The late day sun now bakes our homes and yards. The noise from Oregon Expressway is less muted, and vistas are forever ruined. April 8, 2022 was the day this beautiful giant was lost to us—no appeals were heard, no permit was required. This is a travesty in a City that purports to be climate change aware, and tree canopy friendly. Please act to protect other large trees in this community! Sincerely, Amy and Lee Christel Rosewood Dr Palo Alto, CA Before…a healthy gorgeous, tree. After…a hole in our hearts and wires. Sent from my iPad From:Stacy Ferratti To:Council, City Subject:I"m Voting to Keep Parklets & Ramona St Closed Date:Monday, April 18, 2022 7:24:35 AM [Some people who received this message don't often get email from stacy@stacyferratti.com. Learn why this is important at http://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification.] CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ Dear City Council of Palo Alto, As a person who comes to Palo Alto both on business and as a destination to meet friends for lunch and dinner, I am asking you to keep Ramona Street Closed and continue to allow parklets. I like dining outdoors and the European feeling on Ramona Street with the half closure, so please count my vote for keeping parklets & Ramona Street CLOSED for safe outdoor dining. Thanks! Stacy Ferratti Sent from my iPhone From:Aram James To:Sajid Khan; Jeff Rosen; citycouncil@mountainview.gov; Council, City; Joe Simitian; Jay Boyarsky; chuck jagoda; Winter Dellenbach; Planning Commission; ParkRec Commission; Shikada, Ed; Human Relations Commission Subject:When General Grant Banned the Jews Date:Sunday, April 17, 2022 11:34:44 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. From:.Chuck Jagoda to others:: Very interesting history. Shalom, Yall! My Passover present to you on Easter is this true story that is largely unknown. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mkuqLxS9iM After you read it, it will be less unknown! Happy Passover! Rabbi Chaim From:Aram James To:Joe Simitian; chuck jagoda; Roberta Ahlquist; Greer Stone; Pat Burt; Rebecca Eisenberg; Vara Ramakrishnan; Angie Evans; Binder, Andrew; Council, City; Sajid Khan; Jeff Rosen; Jeff Moore; Dennis Upton; Jay Boyarsky; Winter Dellenbach; wilpfpeninsulapaloalto@gmail.com; Cindy Chavez; supervisor.ellenberg@bos.sccgov.org; supervisor.lee@bos.sccgov.org; mark weiss Subject:Can hefty homeless goals be reached? Date:Sunday, April 17, 2022 12:57:04 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ . Can hefty homeless goals be reached? https://enewspaper.mercurynews.com/?publink=3a372dda2_1348425 Sent from my iPhone From:mamelok@pacbell.net To:Planning Commission Cc:Council, City Subject:Castilleja Date:Sunday, April 17, 2022 12:30:36 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from mamelok@pacbell.net. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. The Planning Commission should deny approval for the Castilleja expansion project for the following reasons: 1. The expansion is not consistent with long term goals of Palo Alto a. It will increase traffic (why is a large garage needed if car traffic is not increased. At the moment street parking accommodates parking just fine b. It will increase traffic along a bike boulevard 2. Casti pays no taxes to maintain infrastructure around the school 3. The large majority of Casti students do not live in Palo Alto 4. None of its programs, lectures etc are open to the public (contrast this to Stanford). 5. Casti has shown itself to be an inconsiderate and secretive neighbor in an R 1 neighborhood. It is only out for its own interests. 6. This process has gone on long enough and should end now with disapproval of the project Thank you for your consideration. Richard D Mamelok and Midori Aogaichi 364 Churchill Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 Mobile: ++1 650 924 0347 From:Akshita Agarwal To:Council, City Subject:Public spaces should be a public matter! Date:Saturday, April 16, 2022 5:26:14 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from akshiagarwal@gmail.com.Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear City Council of the City of Palo Alto, In anticipation of your meeting on February 28th, we implore you to put the matter of streets and parklet usage to a wider public vote. The decision of how City property should be used — and how it can benefit the broadest possible group of residents — should be decided by members of our community. It should not be subject to a subset of influential few. After two years of increased public engagement on the social and health benefits of our streets, we urge you to consider this as a unique opportunity to further a sense of collective agency over our public spaces. A concerned citizen of our community, [ your name] -- Akshi From:Leannah Hunt To:Council, City Subject:The Business Tax is a BAD IDEA Date:Saturday, April 16, 2022 8:52:41 AM [Some people who received this message don't often get email from lhunt@sereno.com. Learn why this is important at http://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification.] CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ Mayor Burt and Members of the Council, I am writing today to urge you to reconsider the proposed business tax. Now is the wrong time to raise taxes on local businesses after two years of a crippling pandemic and record-high inflation. Until the City performs an economic impact analysis, removes the automatic cost increase, adds a sunset to the measure and can guarantee how the money will be spent, I will continue to oppose this plan. Small businesses are hurting. Now is not the time. Leannah Hunt Byron st. Palo Alto Sent from my iPhoneLeannah Hunt From:Dilma Coleman To:fairfaxpd@fairfaxpd.org; mrobbins@smcgov.org Cc:kleincouncil@sunnyvale.ca.gov; Reuben.Shortnacy@corcoranpd.com Subject:Fwd: Let"s pause. Fires on Stevens Creek Blvd near De Anza College near the Whole Foods in Cupertino CA. Who is the arsonist organizer? Jermaine Hendley aka former rapper Papoose who has a professional career as a Fiber Optic installer and Kleptomaniac... Date:Friday, April 15, 2022 11:53:45 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Dilma Coleman <dhappinessforever@gmail.com> Date: Fri, Apr 15, 2022, 11:47 PM Subject: Let's pause. Fires on Stevens Creek Blvd near De Anza College near the Whole Foods in Cupertino CA. Who is the arsonist organizer? Jermaine Hendley aka former rapper Papoose who has a professional career as a Fiber Optic installer and Kleptomaniac sorcerer's behaviors mimicking patterns of SF Ozzy Williams and former California Governor Gavin Newsom. Fires and homicides in Santa Clara county or unlock buildings. The past. To: <jchase@dao.sccgov.org>, <dao@co.santa-cruz.ca.us> Cc: <ATFTips@atf.gov>, <office@stpatricksripon.com> Did Jeremaine Hendley's crew selects young boys club whereas them men are ages 19-21 now..yes .they are organized habitual canvassing their premeditated thoughts on burns..hot water burns including the geographic locations for sewer water or water flows to bay. These individuals on the fairgrounds at 11:34pm in the catina recognize them one of em maybe all of them positive with one negative involvement as a arsonist rapists. Count around De Anza College add Steven Creek not Steven Carrillo EPS EMT rides over there on the RedCross Blue. Yeah them again with San Jose CA Conservatory charter school corp their own Habitual behaviors mimicking ISIS leader Abu Ibrahim Al Hashimi Al Qurashi who knows maybe it's Actor Will Smith do dew it. Topic is about Arsonists whom are not doing bartering systems yes they are organized habitual canvassing their own thru Modesto Stanislaus college and Napa College, Merced College studying with It. Oh dear more name calling. Go ahead with who can describe the killer on the exterior and interior of the Santa Clara Sheriffs buildings, exterior and interior of the Sunnyvale CA Police department count on the old Santa Clara CA old police building. Name and give the descriptions of the victims whom were killed or body's abandoned dead around the Santa Clara county police departments. Do not use a highlighter..neon hair extensions so much as a tennis ball. The black labradors cry louder and are not afraid of hair weaves or one braid under the elephant foot. Back to shoes. Best regards Diva Lee MD JD aka Dilma Coleman From:Ellen Deering Wallau To:Council, City Subject:Now is the Wrong Time for a Business Tax Date:Friday, April 15, 2022 9:44:09 PM [Some people who received this message don't often get email from ellendeering@gmail.com. Learn why this is important at http://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification.] CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ Please don’t crush small business this is not the time to increase taxes it will ruin our downtowns and community just when we are trying To come back from the pandemic. Sent from my iPhone From:Jeff Hoel To:UAC; Council, City Cc:Hoel, Jeff (external) Subject:California’s Annual PUC Broadband Workshop Is Next Tuesday Date:Friday, April 15, 2022 6:16:11 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Commissioners and Council members, Here's an opportunity to attend a workshop that includes a discussion of federal and state funding of broadband. 04-15-22: "California’s Annual PUC Broadband Workshop Is Next Tuesday" https://muninetworks.org/content/californias-annual-puc-broadband-workshop Jeff From:Jeff Hoel To:UAC; Council, City Cc:Hoel, Jeff (external) Subject:TRANSCRIPT & COMMENTS -- 04-06-22 UAC meeting -- Item VII.2 -- FTTP Date:Friday, April 15, 2022 5:48:09 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious ofopening attachments and clicking on links. Commissioners and Council members, At its 04-06-22 meeting, UAC considered an Item VII.2 about FTTP. Agenda -- with staff report, including presentation slides, at PDF pages 25-42 (i.e., packet pg. 22-38) https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/agendas-minutes-reports/agendas-minutes/utilities-advisory- commission/archived-agenda-and-minutes/agendas-and-minutes-2022/04-06-2022/04-06-2022-agenda-and- packet.pdf Video (0:14:43-1:42:14) https://midpenmedia.org/utilities-advisory-commission-31-462022/ Here (below the "######" line) is a transcript of that item, with my comments (paragraphs in red beginning with "###"). First, some high-level comments: 1. The staff report was minimal, so UAC didn't have much to study before the meeting. 2. The item was a discussion item, so UAC couldn't vote on what advice to give Council. 3. I continue to support citywide municipal FTTP for Palo Alto. Thanks. Jeff ------------------- Jeff Hoel 731 Colorado Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94303 ------------------- ######################################################################################## TRANSCRIPT: Item VII.2 0:14:43: Chair Forssell: Next item is a "Discussion of the Status Update and Preliminary Financial Business Models for Palo Alto Fiber." And let's start by seeing if there are any members of the public wishing to speak on this topic. 0:15:03: Kevin Enderby: Is there anyone from the public that would like to make a comment? Please raise your hand, or press *9. [pause] No speakers or hands raised. Thank you. 0:15:17: Chair Forssell: All right. Then, looks like we do indeed have a staff presentation. So, let's go straight to that. 0:15:23: Director Batchelor: **, Chair Forssell. Good evening. So, we are going to make a short presentation tonight. Dave Yuan, our Strategic Business Manager, and John Honker, from Magellan, will be giving a presentation tonight. So, I'm going to turn it over to Dave Yuan. 0:15:40: David Yuan: Good evening, commissioners, and Council Member Cormack. I think we came here about a year ago, in April of 2021. At that time, we presented two business models for fiber to the premise. The first model was a City-owned ISP, or internet service provider. And the second model was a partnership model, for the City and a partner, with an ISP provider to provide the internet services. There are both advantages and disadvantages to both models. Under the City ISP model, the City would have total control of the service offering -- price would be higher under this model, because we would be on the hook for the full construction costs, and we also would have to hire staff to fulfill all the operations and the maintenance of the network. ### To be clear, Yuan is talking about what it would cost the City to build the network, not what price subscribers would pay for network services. Under the partnership model, we would reduce some of the -- save the City some costs, because the partner may contribute to some of the construction costs. And they also would provide staff to fulfill some of the core functions, both technical and operationally. However, then the City would have to relinquish some of the control of the service offering. Again, quality-of-service, pricing, and so forth. And we also would have to share revenues with the partner under that model. So, we came to the UAC, and the UAC recommended that we pursue only the ISP model, because if we wanted to keep control of the service and the offering, and also the pricing. And also, in the long term, I think, under the City model, we would be financially better off, because we wouldn't have to share revenues with the partner. 0:17:15: So, tonight, we bring to you two ISP models -- City ISP models. One is 100 percent in-house staffing, where the City would be responsible for everything from the technical and operational side of it. And the second model is a half -- a hybrid, I guess -- half -- well, it wouldn't be half -- but a combination of insourcing and also finding some strategic partners to outsource some of the core functions, where we don't have in-house expertise right now. And also where we may need during full deployment. So, tonight, we have John Honker, from Magellan. He will be presenting both of these models to you. Let me turn it over to John. 0:17:56: John Honker: Great. Thanks, Dave. And good evening, commissioners. 0:18:00 ### Slide 2 -- Agenda It's a pleasure to be in front of you again this evening. And providing, really, a status update. And, really, this is more of an informational update about, really, the progress that's been happening behind the scenes, as Magellan and the City staff have been working through -- as Dave had mentioned -- the business models. Really starting to fine-tune those, and understand what the best mix of, you know, utilizing existing City resources, where we see opportunity, but also, you know, leveraging specific, you know, strategic vendors that can potentially take some of the heavy lift away from the City in the early days of the network. But then, also, work with the City, where they're more cost-effective in circumstances to manage certain parts of the network. So, David mentioned sort of this insource versus insource/outsource model. We'll be talking about that, and kind of bringing you up to speed on what we've found, as we've been looking at those two, and some of our, you know, core recommendations on that. 0:19:07 Just a quick agenda. We'll try to keep the presentation relatively short, tonight, because we want to open it up to Q&A. And please feel free to interrupt me at any time, as we're going through this, as well. But we'll talk a little bit about status update. On the -- If you remember, phases 2 and 4, which are the engineering design and the business planning, as well as the community engagement. We'll give you a quick update on that. And the progress complete. We'll talk about that business planning process, and the alternatives that we're working through, and the pros and cons of those. And we'll show you what those costs look like today, in today's world, for operating the network. And we're really focusing, at this point, in looking at the staffing plan. You know, we're pulling together full pro-forma financial plans for these different scenarios, which are in the process. But what's important tonight is to really focus more of your attention on, really, just the concepts of insourcing of some staff versus outsourcing staff. And using, potentially, a blended model that gives the City the best of both worlds. We'll also go though some of those numbers. And, most importantly, an updated -- what we call bill of materials. And the capital costs for fiber to the home. And then talk about the next steps. 0:20:34 ### Slide 3 -- Status Update So, just a quick update on the three sort of components of the fiber expansion project currently. So, the engineering design for the fiber backbone and for fiber to the home is past 60 percent completion. We're moving on to what we're calling the 90 percent completion phase, where we are truing up all of the construction methods. You know, the sequencing of construction, and working with the City's team to determine the best ways to build, and build the quickest and most efficiently, with minimal community impact. On the business planning side, we're about 75 percent complete. We've really gone through a full analysis of staffing, a full analysis of insourced versus outsourced costs, as well as some -- a lot of those operational costs. AND we're diving into, really, governance structure now. And looking at things like, you know, how would a broadband utility be managed? You know, how would the board be governed? How would the departments be governed? And how would they operate? Specifically in the competitive environment, which is going to be different than, you know, the electric environment, or the City's -- the general sort of -- the General Fund. So, you know, in looking at those nuances between, you know, how the City does business today and, in a competitive market, how it will need to potentially adjust some of those controls, to be a little more flexible. And then, of course, the engagement and outreach. We can talk through that. We're about 50 percent complete with that. The survey is effectively almost ready. We have not set a specific date for launch. But we're looking at sort of that second week of May right now. But plenty of runway if we need to move those -- that date out a little bit further, if possible. So, -- 0:22:33: ### Slide 4 -- Business Planning Chair Forssell: Mr. Honker, just a quick question. "Engineering design 60 percent complete." Does Magellan do the engineering design? Or does Magellan contract that out to another engineering firm? 0:22:45: John Honker: No. We do all that in-house. 0:22:46: Chair Forssell: OK. 0:22:46: John Honker: Yup. So, we've got a team of about six engineers in our, you know, brick-and-mortar office, that are working on Palo Alto non-stop. And then, we have, in the field, for all the what we call constructability analysis, we have have a team of about four field engineers, who are walking all of the routes, and really looking at conditions in the community. Looking at the poles. Assessing, you know, how the network can actually be constructed, really, one foot at at time. So, you've got a team of about ten, just dedicated to the Palo Alto project, just working through the engineering now, Chair Forssell. 0:23:27: Chair Forssell: Thanks. Good to know. 0:23:31: John Honker: So, on the business planning, again -- we talked a little bit about this, but where we've finished our analysis, really, and looking at these different business models -- really on the business operations. Management, Customer Service, Billing & Finance, Sales & Marketing, Network Operations, Tech Support, and Engineering. Right? How all of those core functions of the broadband network can be managed by the City. And then identifying both the internal resources -- new staff -- or, potentially, outsourced vendors to be able to manage each of those functions. We use -- You know, one of the key things that we looked at, as we dug into this, was, you know, Palo Alto's existing salary bands and your labor overhead. Right? Which are considera- -- are high. We know that. There -- that's -- most munis in California are high. And similar to what we see in Palo Alto. But how does that then compare -- How does that work financially, as we bring these numbers together in the pro-formas? And looking at those, we did find opportunities where, you know, some strategic vendors can fulfill a role for a lower cost in Palo Alto. And we'll go through those in a few minutes. 0:24:55: Regulatory review. So, we're actually going through all the state requirements and federal requirements that the City would need to meet becoming an ISP -- an Internet Service Provider. And we'll be getting together with Legal and HR this coming week, to review those requirements. And make sure there's a good plan going forward. Make sure your internal teams understand what those are, from each one of the state and federal agencies. And also what resources it's going to take to manage those, on an ongoing basis, for Palo Alto Fiber. 0:25:31: The third item is a pretty important one. Right? The governance model around broadband. And I think this something we'll also tackle on the -- you know, starting on April 13th with this first meeting. You know, what does the actual management tier of Palo Alto Fiber look like? Like I mentioned before, we need to make sure that the -- um -- the business is agile enough to be able to move in a competitive environment. And that may mean making some changes to how the City typically does business around procurement, around policies, around salaries, around hiring. So, we're really working through those different, you know, business functions, to 1) determine how Palo Alto does it today, and 2) does that work in a broadband business, or does that potentially need to be adjusted? Some of the other items are Policies, Procurement, and Rate- Setting. Right? How do rates change? Right? is it a formal process? Are there more levers that can be pulled, at a quicker pace than the traditional rate-setting process that you have in, for example, utility -- the regulated electric utility? Broadband is not a regulated environment. So, there's more flexibility. But, you know, we still need to work through that, I think, with the City, to determine what the right governance model is. 0:27:01: The preliminary pro-formas and financial plans is really the crux of the business planning that we're effectively complete with the first draft of your pro-forma financial plan. Right now, it's a draft. And the numbers are going to change over the next 30 days, depending on, really, a couple of things. 1) how the governance models enter into that, and financing enters into that. How will the City potentially finance this project? And what the best structure for that financing will look like, to match the financial requirements of Palo Alto Fiber. So, in the next meeting, we're going to be going through a more detailed review -- financial review of the full pro-formas. What we'll be showing you tonight is really a preliminary assessment of some of the areas in the pro-formas. And then, finally, the final pro-formas, where we'll have a fully-baked financial model, that could be potentially taken to the markets to get funding, you know, whether that's bonding -- revenue bonding, or GO-bonds, or other forms of financing. COPs, etc. 0:28:17: ### Slide 5 -- Business Planning (Part 2) You know, and as we look at the business planning, -- Like I mentioned before, one of the key aspects of the business planning is trying to identify where you have existing resources. Right? So we don't necessarily have to have new hires in every department for broadband. And the existing resources that are out there today -- You have Finance and Accounting. Right? That -- There's some financing and accounting work that's going to have to happen to run the broadband business. Right? In terms of billing. In terms of account management. Keeping separate books from the electric utility. And, you know, the General Fund. And, as well as just general management. So, we do see some overlap there, where some of the City's existing resources -- both human and system resources -- can be utilized. For example, the billing system. Can we utilize the existing electric billing system for broadband? More than likely, there's some opportunities to do that. Will it still take some investment? Yeah. Typically, it does. But we see most utilities that are -- Or, most cities that are building -- utilizing some portion of their existing financing and accounting systems. 0:29:33: So, Customer Service, we also worked through that with the CPAU team, to identify some existing customer service reps and supervisors that could be used to carry some of the broadband call load, as that's happening. And then some Legal as well. Where do you have new hires? Sales and Marketing is a brand new department. That's going to be something that is really core to Palo Alto Fiber. Right? As in any business, if we don't have a sales & marketing team, it's going to be difficult to be successful. We think that that needs to be an organic department, meaning that the City should hire for that, because it's so core to the organization, and everything that is going to be Palo Alto Fiber. Almost every broadband city -- or, a city that's offering broadband -- has their own internal sales & marketing department. Now -- and that doesn't have to be large. Typically, that's 2-3 people. You know, a sales & marketing manager, a commercial account manager, that handles mostly the larger business accounts, and then a residential account manager. 0:30:47: Where else do we have new hires? We think an operations management ... 0:30:51: Chair Forssell: You said it was OK to interrupt as we go. Can I interrupt quickly? 0:30:55: John Honker: Please. Yeah. Absolutely. 0:30:56: Chair Forssell: How is a commercial account manager for the fiber going to be different than what we already have for our existing fiber ring? 0:31:04: John Honker: Sure. So, ... 0:31:05: Chair Forssell: if that's a whole extra hire? 0:31:07: John Honker: It's -- And it may not be. It -- This could be, actually -- It's a great point. Because you possibly could utilize existing resources for that. Or it could be -- You could actually, potentially, have a joint residential and commercial sales manager. Or sales account manager. Because, you know, what you guys have right now, for your sales in the Palo Alto Fiber business, is really like kind of a large account manager. Right? They're selling to mostly larger businesses. Dark fiber. Right? To, you know, Stanford. And to other entities that are out there. That -- It's a different kind of a sale. This is going to be more like a small and medium business service -- that you're providing internet service to. 0:31:51: Chair Forssell: Got it. 0:31:51: So it's a different function. It may be a full, but ... 0:31:55: Chair Forssell: Got it. 0:31:58: John Honker: But great question. Thank you. The other areas. Field Services. Again, field services really is tasked with managing the outside plant. Just like your electric linemen and your outside plant maintenance folks are managing the electric infrastructure, you're going to want to have folks managing the fiber infrastructure. There is a little bit of overlap there, but these are also dedicated resources. It's hard to get a lineman to be doing both fiber and electric at the same time, on two different critical infrastructures. So, we would expect some hiring there. Also, in Customer Service, because the typical, you know, load on a customer service agent from broadband is much higher than electric. So, for example, they take, you know, four times as many calls an hour than an electric CSR does, you're going to want to bolster your existing customer service pool with some new agents. And then, Service Quality Control. Really, as we look at, you know, the overall services being provided to the residents and the businesses, ensuring that you're meeting service level agreements. And also, that the network is delivering what it promised. And what Palo Alto Fiber's promised to the community. That's really a core function that is just pure quality control. 0:33:19: Now, on the strategic vendor side, let's think about some of those commodity services. Right? Where there's a commodity service, such as tech support. Some of these can be outsourced. Right? And in these cases, tech support, overnight customer service, network design. These three are really technical services. And they are incremental in nature. They're variable in nature. Meaning that you can -- You don't need a fixed service all of the time. So, we can use, for example, a strategic vendor for overnight customer service. Right? For call overflow during the third shift, between 8 pm and 8 am, we can definitely bring in a vendor to be able to manage that. You know, at a much lower cost than Palo Alto can staff that currently. Network Design and Tech Support very similar. Technical services that can be potentially outsourced. Construction. We always, you know, recommend that construction is outsourced. Right? The large construction contract. Palo Alto wouldn't hire for its own construction needs. But also, Construction Management & Inspections. This is a really important part. As you're building what will be eventually a $100 million network, you need eyes and ears on the ground, to make sure that construction vendor is doing what they're supposed to do. And the network is being built to the standards. Just as if you're building a new substation, or you're building new electric plant, someone needs to have eyes on the construction contractor, to make sure they're doing their job. And, you know, when those invoices come in, those are actually being charged for work that's been done. And it's been done, you know, with good craftsmanship, and good quality. So, these are all opportunities to outsource. 0:35:14: ### Slide 6 -- Pros and Cons of Outsourcing So, the pros and the cons of some of this outsourcing, we should think about this in terms of the end result to the customer. Right? The pros are, in most cases, are in achieving lower costs, where private-sector overheads may be lower than Palo Alto's existing overheads. Or where a vendor can share a pool of resources to provide services to Palo Alto. The con in that is, you know, a risk of -- You're losing some control. Right? You're contracting with a vendor. And the ven- -- there's very qualified vendors that do this every day. But, in some cases, you're losing some control, because it's not an internal function, you know, that you're managing day in and day out. We can mitigate some of those with strong service level agreements with the vendors. So, for example, let's talk about the tech support. Right? So, let's say we've outsourced some of the residential tech support. The more -- Let's say, the more technical -- the higher value, and the more technical aspects of customer service. Well, we would expect, you know, -- We would expect the customer to be contacted right away. We would expect that, you know, they would stay in contact. We would expect that you'd have resolution within 4 hours on general technical problems. So, there's going to be a certain level of service that has to be maintained with those vendors. And that can be built into the contract, so there's penalties for non-performance. But we always have to be managing those vendors. Right? Because that really will -- If we don't, it will impede service to the network, and to the customers, at the end of the day. So, we want to really look at what covenants we can put into our contracts with some strategic vendors, to be able to provide the same level of service that Palo Alto would be providing if it was providing -- you know, sourcing those staff members directly. 0:37:18: Commissioner Johnston: Mr. Honker, can I interrupt for one second, and ask a question? 0:37:21: John Honker: Yup. Please, Commissioner Johnston. 0:37:22: Commissioner Johnston: So, have you kind of evaluated -- Well, you're evaluating the pros and cons of outsourcing. Are you also looking at kind of the speed with which the system can get up and running and be fully functional? 0:38:39: John Honker: We are. So, that's one of the things that we do think is an oppor- -- actually, an opportunity on the front-end. And we see a lot of cities will do this, as they're building their networks. You know, rather than trying to insource everything from Day 1, you know, they'll use strategic vendors during the implementation phase, to build the network, to, you know, integrate, to data test customers, to bring on the first customers. Typically for the first year or two. You know. Because they've done it before. They've been through it. It's very -- I don't want to say it's cookie-cutter. But there's a lot of lessons learned along the way. That vendors who have done it understand it. Right? They know how to fix problems. And they know how to avoid a lot of the roadblocks. But that gets handed over to the City after a certain amount of time. Right? So, during the really critical phase, the first couple of years, where you have to ensure success, those vendors just provide a crutch, to help the City, as you're growing. Because, you know, you're going to be building this massive network. Right? Massive construction project. And, at the same time, you're going to be building and connecting customers, and making sure those customers are happy. Because you're not going to build the network all at once, and then connect customers. You'll be in construction, and you'll be connecting customers, you know, after the first, say, twelve months of the network's being built. So, as we're -- It becomes, really, a well- -- has to be a well-oiled machine. And those vendors kind of help grease the wheels, to make sure that happens. 0:39:15: Commissioner Johnston: I think that makes a lot of sense to me. Because I think it's critical here that, you know, as we start to roll out the service, it's going to be very important that it be high-quality from Day 1. Or we're not going to get people to sign up. So, I think having experienced people -- presumably from outside vendors -- experienced people, to help get the whole ball rolling I think makes a lot of sense. And will ultimately make the project more successful. 0:39:52: ### Slide 7 -- Insource org chart John Honker: Yup. We would definitely agree with that. And here's what that may look like, from an org chart perspective. So, this is really what the draft org chart looks like today for Palo Alto Fiber. We've spent a lot of time with Director Batchelor and Dave's team, working through this and identifying the resources that would be needed. So, I'm going to review this with you, just for a couple minutes, so you understand kind of the layers. And then we'll talk about how this org chart could change, you know, utilizing those strategic vendors that Commissioner Johnston was mentioning. 0:40:36: So, at the top, we have an Assistant Director of Palo Alto Fiber, who's sort of an assistant GM for the fiber business. Under that resource, there's a tier of management: Sales & Marketing Manager. And, under that, like we were saying, Chair Forssell, is the Res & Biz Account Manager. (Residential and Business Account Manager.) So, that really is the sales team. That could grow over time a bit, but we think, you know, given the size of the network, we think that, you know, a two-person team would be sufficient to cover the Palo Alto market. The Engineering & Operations Manager. The -- really responsible for ensuring the network is built and maintained. And that services are provided, based on, you know, the quality that Palo Alto's going to guarantee. So, under that, we have network engineering and design. We have then the folks that are actually going to be operating and managing the system, and making sure service is delivered to residents and businesses. You have network engineers. And you have what we call network operations center techs, or technicians. Those are the folks behind the scene that are managing all of the equipment, and making sure services stay up. Within that operations team, we also keep the Customer Service Supervisor. And then, customer service reps. And there's some opportunity here where there are existing resources in the customers -- in the call center pool, that could be utilized for that tier 1 sort of account management, first-call resolution support. But we think three new reps are going to be necessary to be able to manage the volume of customers over time. And also, some of those higher-level, you know, internet-specific functions. Right? How to deal with internet customers, and how to troubleshoot issues. 0:42:44: Separate from the Engineering & Operations, the Field Services Manager is really responsible for all outside plant operations and maintenance. Anything that's on the poles, in terms of fiber, or underground. Under that resource, we would have two maintenance techs and three installation and service techs, who are responsible for plant maintenance and also customer installations. And in that area, you'll probably have some additional outsourced vendors here. Just -- Almost every city that deploys broadband uses a vendor to supplement their internal staff for installations. But this is a very high-touch function. This is the tech that's actually going inside the house, working with the customer. Right? Putting the booties on, to make sure that the carpet doesn't get dirty. You know, helping them set up their new internet service. Troubleshooting their old internet service. Getting the remote controls working. So, it's a really high-touch function. Which is important, because you want to have some of those people in-house. They just need to be Palo Alto Fiber ambassadors. You want to have, you know, strong, strong representation there, inside the home. But there's also a number of firms out there that do this for a living. And they're very, very good at it. So, we think it's a combination of existing -- or, of some new some new hires -- like three installation and service techs -- and then some vendor -- um -- FTEs that will supplement what the hires are doing. 0:44:29: And then, on financial side, we have the Revenue & Accounting Manager. And a billing tech, under that, just responsible for billing questions, pro-rates, discounts, managing the billing system effectively. And there's some opportunity to share resources with existing utilities. So, on this side, the goal would be to allocate 25 percent of these costs to the broadband side, and then keep the 75 percent of the costs on the electric side. 0:45:02: So, this is really your fully insourced platform. We're looking at a total of about 24 full-time equivalents. 24 new hires. At the end of Year 5. And, again, that may -- could shift a little bit forward, or it could shift a little bit back, depending on how quickly the network is built. Right? The quicker it's built, the more customers we can get on, the faster these hires will have to come on board. If it's a slower roll-out, then, you know, maybe it buys us a year and a bit slower staffing plan. 0:45:37: The outsourced version of this -- So, we'll focus down here, mainly, in the engineering & operations. Because this is where we see the most opportunity to reduce staff, if we're going to use strategic vendors. 0:45:49: ### Slide 8 -- Outsource org chart. So, you can see the green boxes, where we are adjusting the FTEs, and outsourcing some of these functions. So, we talked about network design. Your network operations center folks. And some of your customer service reps. So, we're able to basically pull about 5 people out of the engineering & operations division, and be able to outsource that. Or, actually, 6. And then, potentially, one out of revenue & accounting. And billing. So the opportunity we see is about -- you know, versus 24 in the insourced model, we're looking at about 17 in a hybrid model. One difference between these two also is, we can start with this model, potentially, and then migrate into a fully insourced model down the road. This is what Commissioner Johnston was mentioning before. You know, start with a strategic vendor where we have some, you know, insourced staff. But, you know, a lot of those functions are taken care of by a strategic vendor, as Palo Alto is learning the trade. And then, those new folks can be hired over time, to replace that vendor, after the first couple of years. Or, I think you also have the flexibility to just maintain that strategic vendor if they're doing a good job for you. Because, in most cases, if they can come in at a lower cost, and the quality is acceptable, you know, the savings is pretty significant. And I'll show you what that looks like in just a minute. 0:47:35: Commissioner Smith: Sorry, John. Can I interrupt you there for a minute? 0:47:37: John Honker: Sure thing, Commissioner Smith. 0:47:41: Commissioner Smith: Can you help us interpret these two charts? I think what you're saying is, between insource and outsource, we're going to need 24 total people, ... 0:47:53: John Honker: Correct. 0:47:53: Commissioner Smith: ... in order to run the entire operation. But if we adopt more of an outsourcing model -- perhaps we'll adopt an outsourcing model in the initial years -- we can start with a lower population. I think that's what you're saying. But, in total, we're going to need 24 people. 0:48:15: John Honker: Yeah. Effectively. So, in this -- In the outsource model, effectively, you know, we're not saying how many people that vendor's going to have, specifically. Because they're going to staff it a little bit differently. They're staffing more of a shared pool of resources, than dedicated individuals. 0:48:33: Commissioner Smith: Yup. 0:48:33: John Honker: But in terms of FTEs, you're exactly right. We're looking at, you know, 17 if we outsource -- 17 folks that are employed by Palo Alto Fiber, if we use these strategic vendors. If Palo Alto Fiber is going to hire it all, we're looking at 24. 0:48:54: Commissioner Smith: Understood. And, as I look at the outsourced model, one of the changes is odd. The Customer Service Supervisor would NOT be necessary? That would be -- Who would -- Who would own customer service? If we followed the outsource -- 0:49:17: John Honker: So, this was -- As we understood, this would be shared with Electric. Meaning that the customer service supervisor would take ... 0:49:26: Commissioner Smith: I see. 0:49:26: John Honker: ... the management of the vendor. So, for example, that supervisor would manage your outsource customer service firm. And then, you would just have two internal CSRs, to complement what they're doing. 0:49:44: Commissioner Smith: OK. Thank you. 0:49:46: John Honker: And those numbers can change a little bit. Right? There's a lot of different variations. This is kind of just one iteration of it. But the idea would be, wherever you have an outsourcing opportunity, instead of that staff doing the work -- like the management staff above those resources -- that staff is now managing a contract. Right? With that vendor. So, for example, the Engineering & Operations Manager is managing an overall contract that's supplying customer service, network engineering, network design, and just general operations. Right? Managing the contract with that strategic vendor. Or, it could be more than one. It could be two vendors. 0:50:33: Commissioner Smith: Noted. Thank you. 0:50:35: ### Slide 9 -- Comparing Models John Honker: Sure. So, as we looked at the difference -- This is kind of what we had developed as a comparison between the insourcing and outsourcing on the staff. And, again, we're going to focus mainly -- This is really the hardest part of the business planning, is really to assess the overall staffing costs in these different models. So, we wanted to first baseline the City's existing costs, by looking at, you know, -- um -- the salary band of a similar position. You know, what is an electric employee making today? What is the comparable broadband employee going to make? And then, you know, load your overheads into the model. And this is really what our staffing for insourcing looks like, on an annualized basis, starting in 2023, and going for a ten-year stretch. So, you know, we're starting at around $2 million, and growing to about $7 million -- $6.5 million after the first 5 years. And we consider that sort of the maturity year for the broadband business. Right? After a full 5 years of operation, your staffing costs -- You know, they're still going up, because there's a little bit of a cost-of-living increase happening annually. But they're not growing considerably during the sort of the implementation phase. So, we'll see see those leveling off after the first 5 years. And then growing at about 3 percent -- 4 percent a year. 0:52:10: On the outsource side, we see the opportunity to reduce costs, to be about 20 perc- -- or, 15 to 20 percent, overall. So, the blue lines on the chart show the reduction. And then, in the table, you can see -- We start out at our same -- In 2023, we start out at our same internal costs, because you're going to need to hire the core people for the broadband business, to get the construction started. Right? But then, over time, this is going to diverge. Because, for example, in 2024, we're not hiring as many CSRs, or not technicians, or installers, that we are in -- if we were insourcing. So, there's about a half a million dollars savings in the first year of providing service. And then that continues, you know, year after year, as the network grows in maturity over time. And the way we looked at this was to take some existing contracts that cities are using out there and really break them down into the functions 0:53:23: ### Slide 8 -- Outsourcing org chart -- again that we were able to identify for outsourcing on this graph, and then really look at those, you know, in current dollars, ### Slide 9 -- Comparing Models -- again and then project those forward. So, you know, again, we think the opportunity is to potentially save some on the operating costs. Which is pretty substantial. Right? We're looking at -- You know, after the first 5 years, we're looking at about $700,000 in savings, you know, growing to about $800,000 in perpetuity after the 5- year term. 0:54:00: Commissioner Johnston: Well, Mr. Honker, could I -- Again, a clarification on this chart. When you talk about the line that's the blue bar -- total staffing outsource -- are you -- does that assume that 100 percent of the staffing for the fiber utility is outsourced? Or is that just outsourcing those key functions that you, you know, had in the green boxes on the prior slide? 0:54:28: ### Slide 8 -- Outsourcing org chart -- again John Honker: It does -- Just outsourcing these key functions, that are in the green boxes. 0:54:31: Commissioner Johnston: All right. Thank you. 0:54:34: ### Slide 9 -- Comparing Models -- again Chair Forssell: And, quick follow-up question. How are you accounting for the cost of the contractors and vendors? Is that already incl- -- Like, does the savings -- Is that net of having hired outsource contractors? 0:54:51: John Honker: It is. Yeah. Chair Forssell. So, effectively, the -- This line here, in the total staffing outsourced includes all of the contractors -- or, let's say the strategic vendors -- So, it's effectively this chart. Right? 0:55:08: ### Slide 8 -- Outsourcing org chart -- again So, it's the City's 17 FTEs, plus the outsourced vendors, that are performing the functions that you see in the green boxes. 0:55:17: ### Slide 9 -- Comparing Models -- again That is -- that ** 0:55:19: Chair Forssell: I figured. I just had to double-check. 0:55:21: John Honker: Yeah. No. It's a great question. Thank you. So, I think, you know, the savings is -- We see the savings as an opportunity. We really have to vet vendors, though, to determine overall quality levels, and make sure that top quality isn't compromised by outsourcing. So, as we get closer, here, you know, it's going to be important to really identify some of the vendors, if that's the route the City wants to go, and understand those capabilities, and make sure we do a good job of really doing our due diligence on them, to make sure they're capable. 0:56:04: Chair Forssell: One other question, Mr. Honker. You mentioned that you had sort of estimated the cost savings by looking at existing contracts with other cities that are outsourcing to vendors. What cities are you referring to? 0:56:18: John Honker: Yeah. So, we looked at -- The prime ones that are out there today, doing -- providing outsourcing -- are like the City of Chattanooga. So, Chattanooga EPB is providing outsourced services on a per-subscriber basis. So, meaning, as -- every month, if you want to take -- if you want to utilize outsourced - - or, you want to utilize Chattanooga for customer service, they charge you $10 a sub. Or $8 a subscriber. So, those -- we looked at three cities that are doing that today, and averaged those costs year by year. And that's, again, based on the total number of subscribers. So, ... 0:57.01: Chair Forssell: Sorry. Is Chattanooga the city that's the customer? Or is Chattanooga a vendor, and three cities are using Chattanooga as a vendor? 0:57:11: John Honker: Exactly. So, Chattanooga is the vendor. 0:57:15: Chair Forssell: So, who are the cities that are contracting with Chattanooga? That's my question. 0:57:17: John Honker: So, BrightRidge -- Johnson City, Tennessee -- is contracting with them currently. Newport, Tennessee, is also contracting with them. And there's one more -- I'll have to get the name of. But there were three different cities that we looked at, when they were -- that they were currently **. 0:57:35: Chair Forssell: Are cities in Tennessee, using a Tennessee-based vendor, a good comp for Palo Alto? 0:57:42: John Honker: Well, we put a contingency on there. So, for example, Chattanooga's pricing is about $10 per subscriber for all of the services. We increased that by 30 percent, to account for any of the incre- -- potential increases in California. Again, for those services, if they were providing them out of -- you know, the East Coast -- or anywhere else outside of, let's say, Palo Alto -- you know, there's no direct cost increase. But we realized that you may want to also utilize a vendor that's closer to Palo Alto. They're just aren't a lot of cities that are doing that right now in California, or on the West Coast. So -- We also looked at two sort of comparable ven- -- city vendors that were utilizing Chattanooga. And they were -- I mean, they're all sort of in the East Coast area. So, there's not a significant amount of comps for this type of service. It's not been a - - you know, it's not a -- there aren't a lot of different cities. So, we may also want to look at some of the private vendors that are doing this, in the California area, to just compare their costs as well. 0:58:58: Chair Forssell: Yeah. I'm worried it -- I'm worried there might be a nasty surprise if Palo Alto tried to contract. And, I guess, some of the functions can be done remotely. But you mentioned customer service, or installation reps putting on booties. And I don't think you can pay Tennessee prices for some of those functions. 0:59:16: John Honker: Oh, yeah. This is -- So, Chair Forssell, And that's actually a function that would be done locally. So, for example, the folks that are in the home are -- would be a local vendor. And those have been priced as part of the construction contract, in, you know, California rates. The services that we're looking at here are really mostly virtualized. 0:59:38: Chair Forssell: I see. 0:59:38: John Honker: So, yeah. Most of these are services. This is almost all back office. 0:59:44: Chair Forssell: OK. 0:59:45: John Honker: Which, you know, it could happen in Palo Alto. Or it could happen halfway across the country. 0:59:50: Chair Forssell: Got it. OK. 0:59:59: ### Slide 10 -- Preliminary Build Schedule John Honker: So, just moving on from the -- sort of the staffing piece of this, we're also working through the build schedule for the fiber to the home network. And this is what that build schedule will -- could look like. You know, on a 5-year basis. So, one thing that's really important, as we start developing the final pro- formas, is, of course, the take rate. Which will be teased out of the survey. But also, the build schedule. Right? How many customers we can pass. Or, we can -- they can have access -- in how much time. Right? And we looked at potentially a 3-5 year build schedule. Again, it will depend on the final construction sequencing. You know, one of your -- One of the important goals of this would be to get as many customers connected as quickly as possible. Because that's going to start generating revenue, and help sustain the financial requirements of the network. So, as we're working through the last parts of the engineering design, you know, what we want to be looking at is, how do we front-load construction in areas -- You know, still keeping some of the -- trying to equalize construction across different areas of the City, so we're not just building in one concentrated area. We think that's important for you, just to have sort of equity in how the construction's happening. But we also want to really focus on looking at aerial construction first, because it's much faster than underground. In Palo Alto's case, we're thinking at least 2-3 times the mileage can be completed in aerial construction, versus underground construction, in the same time. So, if we look at this plan here, we will be looking at potentially connecting, you know, about 26,000 residential customers at the end of the fourth year. We averaged the 3-5 years. And about 4,000 business customers. So, in your City, you've got about 30,000 total premises -- residential and business -- that would be connected over the four- year period. And that's going to grow a little bit, as, just, there's a little bit of additional growth in the City. But it's, you know, hitting that 26,000 residential and 4,000 businesses kind of the mature number. That's the last year of construction. 1:02:34: You know, when we forecasted the take rate, we were very conservative. Right? Because we wanted to wait until the survey came out to understand final const- -- final take rates. But this is what it would look like on an annualized basis, with a growing take rate, up to 32 percent. And this actually pretty conservative, because we're reaching that take -- that 32 percent take rate after 5 years. We don't add anything in the first year of construction. We're assuming that that is all just, you know, pure construction, no customer connections. And then you'll start to grow, you know, slowly -- 3 percent take rate in the first year, 10 percent in the second year, up to 19 percent -- Now these are cumulative numbers. 19 percent in the third year. 27 percent. And then 32 [percent]. So, the big years of adding customers would be Years 2, 3, and 4 -- to the network. Which -- You can see down here what it looks in terms of how many customers we're connecting per day. And this is how we come up with the needs of the FTEs that are managing the network. So, for example, ** ... 1:03:47: Commissioner Smith: Sorry, John. Could I interrupt you for a minute? 1:03:50: John Honker: Surely. 1:03:52: Commissioner Smith: These are -- This is -- as I -- They're assumptions. I get that. These are assumptions, that are building the model. And I assume that the reason we were so conservative in this is that if we could make the model essentially break even, or profitable, with very conservative assumptions like this -- Is that the thought process? 1:04:16: John Honker: That's the idea. Yeah. 1:04:18: Commissioner Smith: OK. 1:04:19: John Honker: Yeah. The goal is to really -- Let's ratchet down all of our assumptions to the bare minimum. 1:04:24: Commissioner Smith: Right. 1:04:24: John Honker: If the model works on that basis alone, ... 1:04:29: Commissioner Smith: Then it should work. 1:04:29: John Honker: Exactly. Exactly. What's -- And I think the way we really want to do this is -- you know, for us, it would be valuable to do a low, medium, and a high. Or, let's say, a break-even, a medium, and a high. So, ... 1:04:43: Commissioner Smith: Yeah. 1:04:43: John Honker: ... this would be effectively be your break-even model. 1:04:46: Commissioner Smith: OK. I -- I agree. And I absolutely appreciate that. And I agree with you that doing a - - You could call it low, medium, high. You could call it best-case, worst- 1:05:00: John Honker: Yeah. 1:05:00: Commissioner Smith: case, ideal-case. ### I don't think Commissioner Smith's renaming of cases clarifies anything. (Wouldn't the "best-case" be the "ideal-case"?) The one question that I had -- and this is related to your underlying assumptions. On the "residential customers passed" in Year 1 -- We say 6,500 residential customers are passed in Year 1, and we're not going to turn on a single one. Is there -- In your engineering, have you discovered that the fiber that is currently in place -- would it support any residential customers today? If we simply started offering residential customers today? ### A crisp answer would have been that the existing dark fiber network doesn't "pass" any customers today. 1:05:37: John Honker: It would be -- It would be a bit challenging to do. But I think what we can do -- and this is sort of the -- once we get to the 90 percent design, it's all about phasing construction. So, I think what we've looked at, Commissioner Smith, is -- You know, if we want to get 6,000 customers connected -- or at least be able to start hooking them up -- Right? -- in the first year, let's look for our opportunities to build right around the -- right around the existing fiber. ### This doesn't make sense to me. If he had said let's connect the huts to the central office using existing dark fiber, so we can have functional huts ASAP, that would have made sense. And right around the facilities. Right? Because if we can build right around the huts -- the shelters -- Right? - - that we all looked at, you know, a few months ago, ### Huts were discussed at UAC's 10-06-21 meeting, but nobody knew where they would be, or how many there would be. then we can start connecting those customers right away. ### In order to connect a premises, there has to be a deployed fiber path from the premises to a hut, and from that hut to the central office. That's not necessarily related to how close the premises is to the hut. And, you know, accelerate this whole timeline. So, I mean, if we can really do that in Year 1 -- Even if you have just a few customers -- Right? -- in Year 1 -- and you're beta testing, you're going to get a surge in the second year, as you continue that construction. So, that's really going to be the next phase of the engineering -- is to say, how quickly could we connect customers, given what we've got today? And, you know, bringing the new construction in as quickly as possible. 1:06:51: Commissioner Smith: I would applaud that effort. And, similar to our discussion about having a low, medium, and high -- or best-case, worst-case, ideal-case -- we'd also -- it would be worthwhile, I think, to do that "soft opening" case -- that beta case. Identify those customers that were adjacent to the shelter -- adjacent to the POP -- that you COULD turn up in a relatively quick period of time. But turn them up with the notice and understanding that, look, service level agreements are not going to be in place for the next few years. ### This sounds unduly pessimistic. You know, we're going to have outages. And you just need to be aware that we're using your home, and your premise, as a test case. And we ask you to test it WITH us, and test the service WITH us. But get those customers up. 1:07:42: John Honker: Yeah. 1:07:42: Commissioner Smith: And get them up and operating. Again, to increase the viability of the product (one), but also -- just getting to your point -- getting the neighbors excited. 1:07:54: John Honker: Yeah. Well, -- And a big part of this is just the optics. The optics of -- You know, if you've got people in the neighborhood that are hooked up, even if it's a beta test -- I mean, there are going to be -- People will know about it. That neighborhood will know that there's live customers in there. And then, you know, you can even do things like having a service van go around with a laptop and having people test service, just so they know, hey, it's up and running. ### Would the service van connect to the network via fiber? If so, how? If not, it's not a good demo. You want to test a gig? Bring your phone over and connect to our wireless router. There's your gig. Right? They can speed test it ... 1:08:26: Commissioner Smith: Yeah. 1:08:26: John Honker: ... with their phones. ### The test might be limited in performance by the wireless link. There's lots of little tricks to do, to just speed up the deployment, and really kind of get the neighborhoods kind of moving a lot faster. But I think we would definitely want to do that. And we may want to look at maybe -- You know, there's 3-4 huts that are going to be located in Palo Alto. If we can pick two of those to start. And, you know, think about building out from them. Where you're building the huts, and then everything that's around them immediately gets a connection. You know, we could move -- we could bump this up, and potentially get customers connected, in 2023. 1:09:04: Commissioner Smith: Great. Thank you. 1:09:06: John Honker: Sure. And, again -- you know, this is a conservative schedule. So, you know, you have -- you still have 65-70 percent of the plant that's aerial. So, you know, if we can focus on most of the aerial first, and leave the underground 'til later in the project. So, let's say the first two years are all aerial. And then we'll leave the underground to the next year, or year and a half. It may be able to get most of the aerial done much quicker than the underground. Now, we need to look at where that is. And if there's any sensitivities around, you know, where those deployments are. But it will definitely speed up the construction. And customers getting on the network. Any other questions on this slide? 1:10:01: ### Slide 11 -- Financial Plan So, we wanted to just provide a -- just an overview of what the costs will look like. Where we're at right now. And what this table is really showing is what our original estimates were from early 2021, and where we're at today. Now, you know, a lot -- I think the big -- the elephant in the room is COVID. Has changed two things. The supply chain and the availability of materials. Labor has not inflated to the degree that materials have. But we have projected some additional contingencies in here, because we know that material costs are higher. For example, conduit has gone up about 50 percent. Anything that's petroleum-based has gone up about 50 percent. In broadband networks. Fiber has gone up about 40 percent, as well. And then, there's a lot of smaller materials -- but that are very, very important -- that have gone up quite a bit, or are very difficult to get right now. So what we've done is, we've actually increased -- based on what we're seeing in the market today -- we've increased our construction contingencies from 20 percent, on a lot of those key materials, to 40 percent, to accommodate some of those supply chain issues that we are seeing. So, for example, in the fiber backbone, our original estimate, from, you know, early last year was $22 million. Now we're at about $25.5 million. On the fiber to the home plant, we were at $85 [million]. Now we're about at $98 [million]. So, it's about a $12.5 million increase on the -- Or $13 million increase on the fiber to the home. And about a $3 million increase on the fiber backbone. 1:11:54: What we WERE able to do, as we went -- got deeper into the engineering, was -- We identified some additional cost savings, though, if the networks were built together. So, if you remember, the fiber to the home network and the fiber backbone network -- they overlap in a lot of places. Right? They're going down the same streets. And if they were to be built together, the savings means that we wouldn't have to trench two sides of the road. ### I thought the City has a policy of putting fiber on the same side of the street as electric. Was Magellan thinking about deviating from that policy? We could put everything into a single trench. ### At 1:09:06, Honker says 65-70 percent of the "plant" -- meaning, I think, the FTTP "plant" -- was aerial. So the cost savings of sharing a trench would apply to only 30-35 percent of the FTTP "plant." There might be analogous cost savings for aerial, but that wasn't discussed. Two different cables: one for backbone, one for fiber to the home. ### The proposed dark fiber backbone extension would use one 144-count cable for electric plus one 432- count cable for everything else. If the cable for FTTP is separate from these, that makes three cables in all. ### The cable for FTTP has to "pass" premises, meaning there has to be opportunities to connect to that cable every few premises. So if the dark fiber backbone extension follows the same route, does that mean that there's an opportunity to connect to its cables every few premises as well? And that creates some savings along a lot of these construction routes. So, we WERE at a savings of about $4.5 million. We've actually, now, at this point, found about $8.7 million in savings, if the two projects were completed together. So, that offsets some of the cost increases. But not all of them. We kept the working capital static, at this point, at $12.5 million. And, again, that working capital is really just to get the system up and running operationally, before you have revenue to cover the costs. Right? New hires. Systems. Internet content. Etc. 1:13:14: So, what we're -- And, again, these are projections based on what we're looking at today. Our original costs were about $116 million. We're at about $128 million now. So, the way this would be -- So, the cost increase because of the materials all in is about $12 million total. And, again, that could change. Right? We're -- We constantly watch what the markets are doing. We constantly watch the big suppliers of commodities, and of things like fiber, and the very specific items that we need to build the network. And things are shifting around. You know, we're not seeing any normalization right now in the supply chain on fiber. Twelve months from now, if you were starting to place orders for this, that could change. So, we need to really take a hard look at the timing, and start to hedge our bets against future supply chain disruptions, versus, you know, what may improve in the future. We think we'll start to see some visibility around that in Q3. Which will be sort of about the same time that, you know, we're coming back to you with a fully-baked financial plan. And that, then, will, you know, eventually go to Council. So, I would expect these numbers to change again. I would expect the $128 [million] hopefully to come down. Because I feel like we're still going to find some savings in the construction costs, potentially on the labor side, as we get through this final phase of design. 1:14:56: And, if you remember, the way that this would be funded would be to use the existing Fiber Fund, that's out there, which has a balance of about $32 million, a contribution from the electric backbone of $10 million. Ah - - I'm sorry -- A contribution from electric -- for their use -- or their capital contribution to the electric -- the fiber backbone of $10 million. Which gives us a total balance of $42 million of available funding. And then, our new funding required, under the original estimates, was $73 [million] -- let's say $74 million. Our current estimates are right around $85 million. So, again, about a $12 million increase, based on those materials issues and supply chain issues. 1:15:47: Chair Forssell: Commissioner Bowie, did you want to ask a question? 1:15:48: Commissioner Bowie: I had a question on the funding side. And so, in addition to the supply chain costs and labor costs of COVID, we have also seen large influxes of infrastructure money from the federal and state levels. Are those things that are being considered now? I don't know anything about our eligibility. But, in terms of the financial plan, are they being considered now? And, if so, do they have a -- some sort of timeframe that is going to be quicker than what we're currently looking at? Are we going to miss an opportunity on anything that's out there? 1:16:22: John Honker: Yeah. No. Thank you for the question, Commissioner Bowie. No, you're not going to miss an opportunity. For sure. 'Cause we're tracking that almost daily now. We have our VP of Funding, who's in Washington, on the Hill, that is in every week with the agencies who are working through the funding. So, we're looking at this -- the federal AND the state funding. So, the state of California, as you probably know, came out with a pretty significant infrastructure bill of its own. Partly for rural and partly for urban. Now, the rulemaking isn't complete yet. So, we're watching that every day as well, to see what's coming down out of the CPUC. Because that could determine your eligibility for funding. I believe there's some funding out there. I don't believe it will be a silver bullet for you. But, again, if we can offset some of these costs, even if it's, you know, 20 percent, it really helps. And, again, I think there's money out there -- You know, there's at least a billion dollars out there for urban communities. And we're hoping the broadband threshold, to be eligible for funding, will be 100 megabits [per second]. Right? ### That's 100 Mbps for downloads and 20 Mbps for uploads, right? This is what the FCC might choose as a new definition for "broadband" if it could get a fifth commissioner appointed. And, typically, it's been, you know, less than 25 megabits [per second] in most of the rural communities. ### That's 25 Mbps for downloads and 3 Mbps for uploads. Right? This is the FCC's current definition for "broadband." Meaning if your community doesn't have -- If a community has more than 25 meg internet service, you're not eligible. And, you know, a place like Palo Alto, that's difficult. But when the bar is set higher, at 100 megabits, that changes the game. Because, I think, as we look at some of the customers in Palo Alto, some of your citizens, they're isn't 100 megabit access. ### According to BroadbandNow, Comcast's Xfinity internet service is available to 99 percent of Palo Alto. https://broadbandnow.com/California/Palo-Alto (I think this means that at least one premises in each of 99 percent of Palo Alto's census blocks can get service. The FCC is supposed to working on a data-reporting system that is more accurate than this.) Comcast advertises that its service can provide 1 Gbps downloads and 35 Mbps uploads. And the -- I think the most important part, that the Treasury actually built into this plan, was, they use words like "reliable" and "guaranteed" and "consistent" when they talk about the speeds. So, the traditional broadband funding was based on the access technology. Right? Meaning if it was DSL, well, it was 25 megabits. But that's changing dramatically now, and it's more about -- is the service providing a reliable and consistent 100 megabit? And if you can prove that it's not -- or you have evidence that it's not -- then you're potentially eligible for funding. So we're working on that for you, as that -- as those rules are making their way through the CPUC. We should hear something in early summer. And, based on that, you know, we would get you ready for prime time. Right? Get you ready, so that if that -- when that rulemaking comes down, you're in the best position to move forward and go after that funding as quickly as possible. 1:19:11: Commissioner Bowie: Thank you. 1:19:13: John Honker: You're welcome. Any questions on this slide, before we move on to the final two slides? [pause] 1:19:28: Chair Forssell: Go ahead and move on. 1:19:29: ### Slide 12 -- Financial Plan (Part 2) ### Slide 13 -- Financial Plan (Part 3) John Honker: Great. So, finalizing the financial plan. This has just been an excerpt of where we're at, and a snapshot based on the current level of design. The next step will be, really, finalizing the financial plan. Which we had talked about, you know, looking at the potential financing requirements, final construction costs, final operating costs, the best model. You know, insourced versus sort of a hybrid insource/outsource. And then bringing that back to the UAC in advance of that joint session session in August. So, the goal would be to have those final estimates ready for you, based on the engineering design. What those projections on the materials and labor increases are going to be over the next couple of years, as we benchmark that against some of the existing metrics. You know, we'll inflate those by a CPI, and adjust construction contingencies. You know, can we find some ways to hedge our risk, and hedge those higher commodity costs early, by potentially reserving some materials, even this year? If the project's moving forward. You know, again, the next -- As the survey comes out, we'll be going through that final take rate, and the rate schedules, that would be based on the survey. 1:21:00: One of the things that we've been actually working through, as well, is the -- a potential deposit program for residents and businesses that want to, you know, potentially show their true interest by putting an earnest- money deposit down. So, we're going to be working with the engagement team to look some ways other cities have done that. You know, how much they've asked residents to put down. These, of course, would be refundable deposits. ### Refundable only if the City decided not to move forward? If the City does move forward, might some of the deposit count as payment of monthly service? ### As you know, I think the whole FTTP network should be AE, not PON. But staff seems to think PON is good enough for most premises, although some premises might get AE. Might a subscriber be able to sign up for an AE connection by making a larger deposit? But, you know -- But by doing that, and maybe doing that IN the survey process, or AFTER the survey process, or even BEFORE the survey process, could really help to gauge true interest. And a little bit more skin in the game, in terms of, you know, putting real money down for, you know, sign -- for an early sign-up. So, we're going to come back to you with some -- the options on how that could be done, and what the team decides on, you know -- What the number would be, how much -- How much the deposit would be. And then, how it would be potentially rolled out. We'll work through the final pro-forma income statement. We'll also have you a full borrowing summary, with the schedules. As we meet with Finance here over the coming weeks, we're going to work with them to determine what that optimal financing strategy is. And, again, as Commissioner Bowie said, if the funding is out there, we'll do a secondary model that looks at what the balance of funding would need to be, if we can go after those grants. And then, finally, really, a sensitivity analysis and a business risk analysis. Right? Because forecasts always change. Right? And pro-formas change. So, we'll want to spend time looking at what the most sensitive variables in the business line are. And adjusting those both up and down to determine, really, what the highs and lows are going to be for the financial plan. So, that's a preview of what's to come, as we finish up the design -- engineering design and the business planning. 1:23:21: ### Slide 14 -- Next Steps I think I covered this already. As far as next steps. Finishing the engineering. The additional customer engagement, which is happening now. Estimation of take rates after the survey's been deployed. Finalizing the financial plan. And then, developing the governance and regulatory plan alongside your Legal and HR resources. And, really, getting ready for that next -- that next study session in August. A lot is going to happen between now and then. But that -- really, we would want to spend the next couple of months really vetting out financials, making sure we're -- you're comfortable with them. And then, you know, looking at that final decision. Whether to utilize those strategic partners. And if the grants are available, putting an action plan together to go after that money -- which will come out in late 2022. 1:25:29: That's the last slide in the deck. So, I'd like to open it up to questions from the Commission. 1:25:35: Chair Forssell: Yeah. Thank you, Mr. Honker. Commissioners. Commissioner Bowie, then Commissioner Smith. 1:24:47: Commissioner Bowie: I'm just trying to figure out the way to properly phrase this. But this project is occurring against a wider backdrop of electrification. And major infrastructure changes that would come with that across the City. That seems to me as another place for potential synergy, in terms of planning and potential reduction of costs. Just sort of aligning trenching and project plans a little bit further down the line, if we do end up going that route. Nothing has been set in stone there, but is that something that would be considered in any of these? Or something that could later be factored in, if we were to move in that direction? In a wider electrification plan? ### UAC had a discussion item about electrification on 02-02-22 (see TRANSCRIPT here, pages 175-201). https://midpenmedia.org/utilities-advisory-commission-31-462022/ As I recall, the discussion didn't talk about whether any electric wires would have to upgraded, or, if so, how to do that. (See my comment at 1:05:35 in the transcript.) For aerial electric, I think the electric and fiber wires are just deployed separately, without much synergy (except for making sure the poles are strong enough). For underground, would a trench be necessary, or could the electric wiring just be replaced inside existing conduit? (Currently, Palo Alto has a policy of not putting electric and fiber in the same conduit.) 1:25:34: John Honker: I think it does. We looked at some of that already, Commissioner Bowie. And we found some opportunities. But as we get through the final engineering, you know, we're going to have, you know, road by road fiber routes for all the underground. Which, if there's opportunities to get into those projects while they're happening, and the timing works, that's great. That's perfect. Because we all know how expensive it is for underground construction in Palo Alto. So, every foot that we save in underground is, you know, $100 - - effectively -- that we save on the project. And that adds up quickly. So, I would really, -- You know, we want to encourage sort of a collaboration with the City, as we look at those undergrounding districts. The key is coordination. And we're dealing with this in Boulder right now, where, you know, we found a great opportunity to build in this North Broadway corridor, which is, like, 3 or 4 miles of underground construction, but it's like solid rock. So, it's very expensive. Just like we have in Palo Alto. And we're able to build there. But the challenge is the timing of the projects. Right? So, the city's project is moving very slow. The broadband project is moving very fast. And the construction contractor was delayed, because the city was not ready for the fiber to come in yet. So, I think what we really have to do is -- It's got to be almost a two- way collaboration with electric, so that there's good synergy when the construction's happening, and the timing, and there's no dependencies. That's really what we need to kind of focus our efforts on. 1:27:17: Director Batchelor: Yeah. If I may, John, if I could just add a little bit onto that, Commissioner Bowie, I think John is right. I mean, the biggest thing that we're thinking about right now is the coordination between these two major projects. And I'm not sure. We are in the process right now of working with a contractor on the electrification aspect, to take a high-level look at the areas that we'll need to identify and work on first. And where we're going to electrify might not be in the same exact location of where this aerial work may be, you know, underground circuits may be needed more than some of these overheads. But I think the thing is, rest assured that we are going to look at the detailed engineering work that John's team is doing, and overlay that over the top of where we need to look for electrification. So, where there is synergy, that we can look at boring extra trench lines, we're going to take advantage of that as much as we can. So that we are not ripping street up 2 and 3, 4 different times. Out there. ### The Upgrade Downtown project on University Avenue was an example of how NOT to share costs among the utilities. On 01-22-18, Council approved this project, which charged the Fiber Fund $2,140,404 for about half a mile of conduit for fiber. https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/agendas-minutes-reports/reports/city-manager-reports- cmrs/year-archive/2018/final-staff-report-id-8517_upgrade-downtown.pdf There was no identified use for this conduit for fiber. Someone just decided to add it while the trench was open. See this TRANSCRIPT (pages 2-30 here). https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/agendas-minutes-reports/agendas-minutes/utilities-advisory- commission/archived-agenda-and-minutes/agendas-and-minutes-2018/02-07-2018-meeting/public-letters-to- the-uac.pdf The main problem was that someone decided that the fair way to share trenching costs was to divide them equally among the water, gas, and fiber utilities, even though most of the actual cost was due to the water and gas infrastructures. On 04-09-18, Council halved the cost allocated to the Fiber Fund -- to $1,070,202, which was still outrageous -- but didn't say how costs should be shared on future projects. Maybe Magellan could comment on that. 1:28:30: Commissioner Bowie: Thank you. 1:28:34: Chair Forssell: Commissioner Smith. 1:28:36: Commissioner Smith: Thank you, Chair. I think my question is for Dave. Dave, do we have an updated number of individual residents that have signed up through the fiber hub? With expression of interest? 1:28:51: David Yuan: I DON'T have that number, unfortunately. Meghan and -- um -- Amanda probably has that figure. But I could get an update for you. And send ... 1:29:01: Commissioner Smith: Please. 1:29:01: David Yuan: Sure. 1:29:02: Commissioner Smith: Thank you. [pause] ### As of 04-06-22, 239 people had pinned themselves on the map. See further discussion at 2:35:02. 1:29:10: Chair Forssell: Commissioner Metz, did I see your hand in the air? 1:29:13: Commissioner Metz: Yes. 1:29:14: Chair Forssell: Go ahead. 1:29:15: Commissioner Metz: Thank you. Mr. Yuan, Mr. Honker, thank you very much for your presentation. Since it's stated as a business plan which is 75 percent complete, there were some -- at least to me -- some missing ingredients that I would like to ask about. Specifically, three questions. 1:29:36: I think the first thing is, where is the competitive assessment? Particularly, what will be our response to competitors? My number one concern is that there's a risk of retaliation by the incumbent broadband service providers. I think this is a big risk, which I don't see as having been addressed. And also, more recently, I'm seeing new competitors entering this space, with different forms of technology. So, I think it's really important that they be an ingredient in the business plan. 1:30:14: You talked -- My second question addressed market assessment. I think you have touched on that. I think my main concern is the take rate of 32 percent, which you described as "very conservative." To me, that seems, actually, aggressive. To be taking a third of the market against two large, entrenched competitors, doesn't -- you know, doesn't strike me as conservative. ### Longmont, CO: NextLight's network achieved a take rate of 54 percent within 5 years, against "entrenched" incumbents Comcast and CenturyLink. https://muninetworks.org/content/more-half-longmonters-choose-nextlight-fiber-because-nextlight-fiber ### Chattanooga, TN: EPB's network achieved a take rate of 58 percent residential (and 30 percent commercial) within 12 years or so, against Comcast and AT&T. https://assets.epb.com/media/Lobo%20- %20Ten%20Years%20of%20Fiber%20Infrastructure%20in%20Hamilton%20County%20TN_Published.pdf ### Fort Collins, CO: Connexion's network achieved a take rate of 31 percent within 4 years -- they're still building out -- against Comcast and CenturyLink. https://www.govtech.com/network/fort-collins-gets-city-owned-broadband-network-off-the-ground ### Loveland, CO: Pulse's network achieved a take rate of 22 percent within 1 year -- they're still building out -- against Comcast and CenturyLink. They think a 42 percent take rate is "well within reach." https://www.lovelandpulse.com/pulse-take-rate-progress-towards-the-ultimate-goal/ ### Wilson, NC: Greenlight's network achieved a take rate of 45 percent within 10 years, against TWC, AT&T, and CenturyLink. https://ilsr.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Wilson-Case-Study-12-07-2020.pdf I guess we'll have to get the data, to see what turns out. But I think that's the key thing: to get the data about what services customers want want, and what they'll pay for them. 1:30:54: I think the third question I had, in terms of a business plan, is -- are -- where's the technology assessment? Especially, what are we doing to address risk of technology obsolescence? I'm particularly concerned about the obsolescence of the curb-to-house fiber drops. ### A fiber drop won't become "obsolete" in the sense that the subscriber will have to switch to something else to get the required performance or lower operating costs. A fiber drop might turn out to cost more than a wireless alternative capable of lesser but adequate performance will cost in a few years. This represents a very large fraction of the costs of the overall project. And I've explored this with communications experts, with folks who have worked for me in the past. ### If Commissioner Metz would like to name some of these people and the companies they work for, I'd be interested. And it sounds like, you know, 5G wireless could be financially and functionally very competitive with what we're proposing. ### I rely on Doug Dawson, who runs CCG, a telecom consulting company, https://potsandpansbyccg.com/aboutccg/ to keep wireless discussions real. Here he debunks 5G hype: 04-08-22: "The Death of Millimeter Wave Cellular" https://potsandpansbyccg.com/2022/04/08/the-death-of-millimeter-wave-cellular/ ### Dawson wrote a series of articles on what he called "Fiber-to-the-Curb." https://potsandpansbyccg.com/tag/fiber-to-the-curb/ And, actually, functionally superior, because it allows somebody to connect their -- a resident to connect their internet with a cellular network. ### Commissioner Metz seems to suggest that a wireless signal could go from a tower outside the home directly to a subscriber's device inside the home. That's problematic, especially at high speed. ### If a subscriber to FTTP, provided by Palo Alto Fiber, would like devices inside his home to connect to the network wirelessly, the City can provide a suite of wireless "routers" inside the home that can make those connections. (The subscriber should pay extra for this capability.) This works because the wireless connections are short and don't have to pass through walls. So, you know, as you indicated, I'd expect to see all these answers as feeding into a financial pro-forma. And I assume that will be at least, like, a ten-year pro-forma, with P&L and cash flow. But I would hope it would incorporate these other issues around competitive response technology. So, you know, with due respect to the work that's been done, which I feel is strongest on the operational side, I would like to see the business plan addressing these three key questions: competition, market -- market details, and technology. And I'd be happy to discuss any details. 1:32:26: John Honker: No, thank you, Commissioner Metz. And those are all going to be included in the final plan. The reason we don't have the first two -- you know, really, the competitive assessment and the market assessment, kind of what those take rates are now, is -- we usually like to bring those up to leadership once the survey's been done. Because it gives you a much better sense of what the existing marketplace looks like. Both on what existing services are out there and available and at what prices, but then, what are the behaviors of citizens and businesses? Who's subscribing to them? What prices are they paying? How satisfied are they with them? And, most importantly, what are the -- what is the preference in terms of brand, speed, and price -- among those providers that are out there, versus Palo Alto. Right? That's really what the guts of our survey will do -- is tell -- it'll inform the market analysis of what are they paying today, and what are they getting? But also, what is their affinity for the different providers? Right? And we can actually -- we are actually introducing in the survey Palo Alto as the other brand, so we can test the brand equity of the City. And then also be able to measure both speeds and prices. Right? And measure for preference. So, what you'll see when that survey is done is really a matrix of existing providers that are out there today, what they're offering, and what market share each provider has, in those different speed tiers. You know, 500 megabits [per second], 300 megabits [per second], 100 megabits [per second]. And then, what Palo Alto should be setting its rates at -- and its speeds at -- to be able to capture as much market share as possible. That's really the guts of the conjoint analysis -- We call -- we use a choice-based conjoint analysis to tease out that information. So, that will be coming to you in the next run of the final business plan. 1:34:34: On the technology assessment, it's important. Right? I mean, we see Verizon in Sacramento doing their 5G trials. And their wireless to the home. Or, Wireless Last Mile they call it. ### This 04-13-22 article talks about Verizon's 5G Home Internet product, https://www.cnet.com/home/internet/verizon-5g-home-internet-review/? mc_cid=4bc39b2d3a&mc_eid=99443c82f8#ftag=CAD590a51e which it says features downloads that might be as fast as 980 Mbps, but are more likely 300 Mbps on average, and uploads of more like 50 Mbps. To me, that's not competitive with FTTP, which can do 10 Gbps symmetric today, and faster in the future. There are still a lot of challenges with it. But it's a competitive opportunity for another technology to potentially come in the place of fiber. Now, what we do see is that, at least in the current, you know, versions of that, you need a fiber to every other home, or every third home. So, it still takes a lot of fiber to have those last-mile wireless solutions deployed. Which means, you know, it still a lot of fiber that's being deployed. What's also important is, if another emerging technology comes about while Palo Alto's deploying, there's no reason that you wouldn't switch over to that. That's -- You're not buying everything off the shell from day 1. So, if there is another emerging technology, I think what the business plan has to focus on is -- OK, let's define what those are. Let's watch for the evolution and the adoption of those technologies. And, as Palo Alto is building out, make sure that you're on top of the game, so that you can start deploying those, and be as competitive -- or MORE competitive -- because you're an entrenched provider, to be able to deploy those, you know, faster, quicker, and cheaper. 1:36:10: Commissioner Metz: OK. Thank you. I look forward to seeing the discussion on those three topics. 1:36:16: David Yuan: I also want to add that we have been contacted by some local home startups and ISP providers. And they're also interested in partnering or seeing if there's any kind of strategic synergies. We haven't reached out to them yet. We're still finishing our business case. So, there will be opportunities to engage with these other new technologies and providers, as well. 1:36:41: Chair Forssell: Commissioner Bowie. 1:36:42: Commissioner Bowie: Yes. I was also just going to reiterate a point that we discussed before, about brand differentiation based on privacy, data handling, local control. Just kind of the way the internet is handled. That may be something that is attractive to customers. in Palo Alto in particular. 1:37:07: David Yuan: In the survey, we will be asking some of those questions. What's more important to the Palo Alto residents and businesses. And local control, privacy are part of those survey questions. So, we'll be gauging the importance of that. How we differentiate ourselves. 1:37:28: Chair Forssell: Are there any other commissioner questions or comments? I think my own have been covered by other commissioners. You know, I share Commissioner Metz's concern for uptake rates. I just don't know how many -- how many people out there -- residents and commercial customers -- It would be great to have more data on what services they have available, what they're using, and whether they're satisfied with it. I'm generally wary of surveys. I mean, I guess you'll do your best to ask good questions. But I continue to be worried that people will dash off some responses, and -- You mentioned potentially doing a deposit. Or, taking deposits, to indicate real interest in participating in Palo Alto Fiber. I thought that was a great idea. And I think it's worth mentioning -- since it seemed to be early in the presentation -- one of the key questions -- the sort of hybrid outsourced model -- it made sense to me. Especially hearing that most of the outsourced activities were things -- are things that don't need to be local, and are entirely virtual. Feels like a decent opportunity for some cost savings. Although time will tell. And I guess, Council Member Cormack, did you want to say anything? 1:39:07: Council Member Cormack: Yes, please. Thank you, Chair Forssell. 1:39:10: Chair Forssell: Go ahead. 1:39:10: Council Member Cormack: So, understanding that this will -- you all will be making a recommendation that will come to Council, I just wanted to add a few thoughts, questions. As I recall, part of the reason for us considering this was to have customer service potentially be a differentiator, not just cheaper. So, I encourage you all to incorporate that into your thinking. And if that's not going to happen, we should at least address it. 1:39:38: I don't understand who will make this outsourcing decision that you've described. Is that a Council decision? Or will that be made by whatever "governance" is put in place? 1:39:50: David Yuan: I think it will be discussed at the governance level, and then it will be brought to Council for approval. So, we ... 1:39:56: Council Member Cormack: OK. So, when you say "governance," let's just be clear on -- Are we going to have a board that runs this? 1:40:03: David Yuan: We haven't figured that out yet, unfortunately. We're going to be meeting with Legal, ASD, and ... 1:40:05: Council Member Cormack: David, it's a little hard for me to hear you. Maybe they can hear you better. 1:40:12: David Yuan: Oh. Yes. Oh, sorry. So, we'll be meeting with Legal, HR, and also Finance, in the next week or so, to start these discussions. So, we'll bring up some of these models. Hopefully, at the joint meeting. 1:40:23: Council Member Cormack: OK. 1:40:23: David Yuan: Maybe even sooner, if possible. 1:40:25: Council Member Cormack: And then, my quick, back-of-the-envelope math -- because if I don't do it, Council Member Fliseth will, when it comes to Council -- is that if it's $700k a year in cost-savings, and you average that out over 10,000 customers, that's $70 a year, which is about $6 a month. So, anything -- When this comes forward, anything you can do to show those costs -- the same way we do with utilities in general -- I think will help all the decision makers better understand the tradeoffs. 1:40:57: And then, finally, could someone refresh my memory on the potential source of the $86 million funding gap? Are we planning to bond that? Certainly, we won't get all of it from other federal -- or, other governmental entities. 1:41:12: David Yuan: Yeah. We haven't figured that out. But we are looking at all the different options. Bond financing. Borrowing from other utilities, if possible. We had the -- We also looked into the Electric Special Projects Reserve -- if we can borrow from there. And then we'll see how much more revenue that the Fiber Fund could generate in the next few years as well. 1:41:32: Council Member Cormack: Ah. Between now and then. OK. All right. So, again, we have about a third of the money already available. OK. Thank you so much. 1:41:43: Chair Forssell: All right. I think that concludes our discussion of this topic. Thank you very much, Mr. Honker, Mr. Yuan. Why don't we -- Let me see, we usually take a short break about half way through, and I think we're at that point. Why don't we go ahead and take a 10-minute break and return at 7:50 to do the rest of the agenda. See you all back in ten minutes. 1:42:14: ######################################################################################## Excerpts from Item IX: Future Topics for Upcoming Meetings 2:32:28: Chair Forssell: Future Topics for Upcoming Meetings. Commissioner Johnston. 2:32:35: Commissioner Johnston: So, I had two questions on the Rolling Forecast. One was: I see the reference to a joint UAC / City Council Study Session on Fiber in August. And there was some reference to that in the Magellan report. Has a date been set for that? August being a month when a lot of people tend to take time off. I think it would be helpful to get a date set for that. 2:33:04: Director Batchelor. Commissioner Johnston, that date IS set. It's for August 8th. 2:33:08: Commissioner Johnston: August 8th. OK. Thank you. ######################################################################## 2:35:02: Chair Forssell: Commissioner Smith. 2:35:04: Commissioner Smith: Thank you. Sorry. Any other topics that -- I hope I'm not ahead of the curve here. Any other topics that we want to talk about. Is it possible -- Periodically, could we just have regular updates with respect to the counts on the fiber hub? It is our -- if you will, our outreach to the public. It's important that we understand exactly how much of the public is interested in fiber to the home. On a month-by-month basis. And make certain that we are penetrating our neighbors. And if we're not, that's equally telling. It just means that more work is necessary. It would be great, though, to have regular updates on the count. 2:35:50: David Yuan: Sure, we can do that. And, courtesy of Mr. Hoel, the count, currently is 239 on the fiber hub. 2:35:57: Commissioner Smith: Brilliant. Thank you. 2:35:59: Chair Forssell: Yeah, I think we've talked before about -- when we're talking about topics for upcoming meetings, to flag if it needs to be a discussion item, or an agenda item, or if it's just informational. And I think, Commissioner Smith, you're just asking for an informational -- like, you just want the data. On a regular basis. 2:36:18: Commissioner Smith: Yeah. If anything -- I mean, we can all do this. It doesn't need to be charted. I just want to know what the number is. Right? But, as we track on a month-to-month basis, if we show increasing, that's good. If we show decreasing, or flat -- you know, we have a potential issue, considering the fact that it remains possible that Council will review this as a "go/no-go" decision in August. ### So, the request is for the total number of pins to be reported at each UAC meeting. There are three such meetings before the joint study session between Council and UAC on 08-08-22. (See 2:33:04.) Anyone interested in trends will have to consider data from multiple meetings. 2:36:46: Director Batchelor: So, Commissioner Smith, what I can do is, if you'd like to do this on a monthly basis, so that we're just not writing just an informational report, I could give that in my GM update, if you would prefer. 2:36:57: Commissioner Smith: That would be great. Yeah, that would be great. Thank you, Dean. Yeah. 2:37:03: Chair Forssell: That's a great idea. ### After the meeting, I suggested to David Yuan that the map itself could display the number of pins. https://fiber-palo-alto.hub.arcgis.com/pages/get-involved David said he thought that was a great idea, and he'd check with the implementation team about doing that. But that doesn't mean it will actually happen. From:Clark Akatiff To:Council, City Subject:Who owns the housing stock in our town Date:Friday, April 15, 2022 5:30:20 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from cakatiff@yahoo.com. Learnwhy this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. I worry that global dark money infiltrates our area by purchasing Palo Alto properties. I would like to know what percentage of our homes, in particular, are owned by actual people,who live in them, and what percentage are in a murkier status of ownership.Is there an aswer to this. From:Wileta Burch To:Architectural Review Board; Planning Commission Cc:Council, City Subject:Castilleja Project Date:Friday, April 15, 2022 4:26:04 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from wiletaburch@gmail.com. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear City Council, ARB, and PTC Members, I am a longtime resident of Palo Alto, and I am writing in support of Castilleja School. I recognize that you are at a very important point in this process, and I want to highlight one important fact. As someone who has been a close observer of the city process for decades now, I think we all have to acknowledge that the school has been put through round after round of review and revision. After all of these years, the plan before you now needs to be sent to the council for approval for several reasons. 1. It is an outstanding improvement to the neighborhood. 2. It is a welcome investment in the educational infrastructure of Palo Alto. 3. It is built from meaningful compromise from the school leadership. 4. It is permissible within the city code and supported by the Comprehensive Plan. 5. It is time to offer educational opportunity to more girls without creating more traffic. I realize that your vote was split over the garage the last time you weighed in on the garage. I hope in the intervening time, you have been able to review the application, plans, and conditions of approval for the underground parking that was easily permitted at Kol Emeth. It really would be a terrible mistake to veer away from established precedent to treat Castilleja unfairly. I thank you for the time that you devote to the citizens of Palo Alto, and I look forward to your fair and unbiased recommendation to approve this proposal—including the parking garage— to the city council. Sincerely, Wileta Burch From:Jim Poppy To:Council, City; Planning Commission Cc:Burt, Patrick; Kou, Lydia; Stone, Greer; DuBois, Tom; Filseth, Eric (Internal); Cormack, Alison; Tanaka, Greg Subject:No blank check for Castilleja. Please protect our neighborhood. Date:Friday, April 15, 2022 10:47:07 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ PTC and City Council, Please do not give Castilleja a blank check to do whatever they want without any oversight or enforcement. There are many outstanding issues that remain unresolved. Unfortunately, the planning department is an advocate for the school and has compromised the entire process with a lack of transparency. 1. Variance. The school is asking for a variance to allow a huge increase in GFA. 41,000 sq ft above what is allowed. Do not approve this! Why should the school get such a massive exemption? Do not let the planning department continue to evade the magnitude of this! 2. Enrollment. City Council gave PTC instructions to review how enrollment increases could happen beyond the recommended starting point of 450 students. The planning department assumes that an increase to 540 is already part of the proposal. Enrollment must stay at 450 until construction is done and a proper and accountable measurement of traffic can be instituted. A TDM is a theory, not a guarantee. Total traffic must be measured, not just student traffic at peak times. And the TDM committee must include at least two neighbors who are not sympathetic with the school. 3. CUP. The CUP was devised by the school and planning department without any regard to neighbors. And the City has never been able to enforce the Castilleja CUP, which has allowed illegal enrollment for over 15 years. Please put some teeth into the CUP with severe penalties and neighborhood oversight. 4. Trust. Why would you trust the school after they have threatened you with letters from lawyers trying to concoct bogus comparisons? The head of school lied to the ARB recently about tree protection, saying the plans had been approved by urban forestry. And the school has pocketed millions of dollars illegally with over-enrollment. The school claims that the TDM will “guarantee” compliance, which is also bogus. Do not trust the school administrators! They are making you look bad. Please provide neighbors and the broader community with carefully worded and enforceable guidelines. A blank check is not a form of governance. Thank you, Jim Poppy Melville Avenue From:Andy Lichtblau To:Council, City; Architectural Review Board; Planning Commission Subject:Letter to City Date:Friday, April 15, 2022 10:41:12 AM Some people who received this message don't often get email from alichtblau130@gmail.com.Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear City Leaders, I have lived on Lowell Ave for over a decade. My home is just a few blocks away from Castilleja and we, like many of my neighbors, have also gone through a recent home remodeling project. Construction and renovation is never fun, but the end result always makes the process worth it. I understand the patience, energy, privilege, and time it takes to see a project through to completion, but I have to ask: are we really on year SIX of evaluating Castilleja’s proposal? In that time, I have seen more than a dozen new homes built or major remodels within 3 blocks of where I live. I haven’t heard my neighbors complain about those projects. I haven’t heard complaints about square footage accuracy for these huge single family homes. In fact, it appears like a third of the homes in Old Palo Alto, where Castilleja is located, aren't even occupied!! When we talk about a housing shortage, let’s call it what it is: the privilege of owning a home in Palo Alto AND leaving it unoccupied. I’m tired of hearing people talk about privileged students at Castilleja when they themselves don’t enter the conversation recognizing their own privilege of owning and living in a home in Palo Alto. This is a community with a lot of resources, but not every individual who attends Castilleja–or other schools in our area, for that matter–comes from a traditionally privileged upbringing. Education is a factor in leveling out the privilege that runs deep in communities like Palo Alto. Castilleja is one of many private schools in the area that offers opportunities to students from ALL backgrounds to thrive. On year six, I ask you to think about how many students have been denied the opportunity to thrive because of the endemic privileged voices that are creating obstacle after obstacle to stall approval of a solid, well-researched, and sustainable proposal. We can do better. We NEED to do better. Approve Castilleja’s project. Sincerely, Andy Lichtblau Home Owner 130 Lowell Ave, Palo Alto, CA 94301 From:Gad Petel To:City Mgr; Clerk, City; Council, City Cc:Building; Building Permits; pdsdirector; Lina & Mike; Polina & Michael Venford; job4mike@gmail.com Subject:Building Inspectors Shortage Date:Friday, April 15, 2022 10:32:37 AM Some people who received this message don't often get email from gadpetelisl@gmail.com. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. To whom it may concern, We are working on a construction project in the city of Palo Alto. We called today, Friday 4/15/200, for an inspection and we were given a date of 5/9/2022. 3 weeks- this is unacceptable (under any standard). At this rate, our project will a) take more than a year, b) will require many 'stop and go' breaks, c) increase the overhead and the labor cost for the homeowners, d) increase the temporary rent expense the homeowners are paying elsewhere, e) mandate us to take other projects in the meanwhile and then 'try and schedule' return dates whenever possible, f) prolong the hazard and dangerous for the family that lives within a construction site, g) manufacture dissatisfaction with the city to the tax paying homeowners, h) deliver us an overworked/exhausted inspector, etc. etc. Is there any way to fix this major and serious issue/problem? Are we planning to hire more inspectors? When? Are we planning to hire an outside inspections service, as other cities have done due to C19? Please note that in general Citizens do not mind paying higher taxes and Permit Fees as long as services are provided. I have PDS Director Jonathan Lait and Homeowners Polina and Michael Venford hereby CCed. Anxiously waiting for your response. Thank you, -- Gad Petel- Owner Golden State Designs CSLB B Lic #1055272 Gadpetelisl@gmail.com Cell: (408)809-6199 From:Public Records Request Tracking System To:PAPD Public Records Center Cc:Jonsen, Robert; Stump, Molly; Shikada, Ed; Council, City; James Aram Subject:Re: [Palo Alto Police Department Records Center] Public Records Request :: R000455-041122 Date:Friday, April 15, 2022 10:05:57 AM Some people who received this message don't often get email from public.records.request.tracking@gmail.com.Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of openingattachments and clicking on links. Please provide Evidence. Screenshot of his account…. Sent from my iPad On Apr 14, 2022, at 6:50 PM, PAPD Public Records Center <papd@govqa.us> wrote: --- Please respond above this line --- RE: PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST of April 06, 2022, Reference # R000455-041122 Dear Mark Petersen Perez, The Palo Alto Police Department received a public information request from you on April 06, 2022. Your request mentioned: “Total number of Twitter accounts muted or blocked by Chief Robert Jonsen Must be received by: April 15th 2022, 6255 of the Government code Total number of twitter accounts muted or blocked See generally: California Public Records Act (Govt C && 6250-6268). The California Public Records Act was enacted in 1968 to protect public access to information about the conduct of state business by government officials. See: Government Code & 6253 re time limits for said disclosure pursuant to the California Public Records Act. See: Writings as defined in California Public Records Section 6252(f) and Evidence Code & 250. If you believe I am not entitled to the requested records I am requesting that you justify your refusal within (ten) days in writing under & 6255 of the Government code. You may only refuse to give me these records if there is an express law prohibiting you from giving them to me. In the case of California State University of Fresno Assn, Inc. V Superior Court McClatchy Co. (2001) 90 Cal App.4th 810, the court held that "The burden of proof is on the proponent of nondisclosure, who must demonstrate "clear overbalance" on the side of confidentiality." Please provide any additional legal authority you would like me to be aware of re this request . Please feel free to contact me to discuss this request if you have any questions or concerns.” __________________________________________________________________________________ Chief Jonsen does not mute or block anyone from his Twitter Account. Thank you, Lisa Scheff Public Safety Program Manger/Records Police (650) 329-2406 To monitor the progress or update this request please log into the Public Records Center From:John Kelley To:Council, City Subject:FYI: NYTimes.com: Cities Try to Turn the Tide on Police Traffic Stops Date:Friday, April 15, 2022 9:20:31 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ From The New York Times: Cities Try to Turn the Tide on Police Traffic Stops Chiefs, prosecutors and lawmakers are rethinking the value, and the harm, of minor traffic stops like the one that ended in a man’s death in Grand Rapids. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/15/us/police-traffic-stops.html?smid=em-share Thank you very much, John John Kelley jkelley@399innovation.com 650-444-2237 (c) From:Mayma Raphael To:Council, City; Architectural Review Board; Planning Commission Subject:Letter to PTC in Support of Castilleja Date:Thursday, April 14, 2022 3:58:53 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from maymaraphael@yahoo.com.Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear PTC Commissioners, I am writing to express my support for Castilleja’s project. I am a Palo Alto resident and am writing to ask for your support for the 69-car underground garage that Castilleja has submitted. To me, it is just incredible how long this review process has taken with the City, and now Castilleja has again submitted modifications with further compromise. Their goals are so straightforward: modernize their dated campus (and in so doing, improve neighborhood aesthetics); increase enrollment so more students can benefit from their program; move parked cars below grade so that green space can be preserved; preserve trees. They have reduced the size of their academic buildings, reduced the size of the underground garage, preserved more trees, and continued to enforce a vigorous Traffic Demand Management (TDM) program so that neighborhood traffic is minimized. After years and years of compromise, you now have before you a project that meets the school’s goals while best serving the immediate surroundings. On March 17, the ARB confirmed that goal and unanimously approved the project. The experts have weighed in, and we should respectfully listen. As a current parent at Castilleja, I can attest to the TDM expectations of the school. Palo Alto students are expected to arrive by bicycle, while students from neighboring communities arrive by train, carpool, or one of the many bus routes available. The school has reduced traffic by ~ 30% in recent years, and I understand their new CUP will add additional TDM measures. Fundamentally, Castilleja should be able to modernize like other Palo Alto schools without being handcuffed by unreasonable limitations. I implore you to vote to recommend approval of the new garage and the smaller academic building so that this process can move expeditiously to City Council. With gratitude, Mayma Raphael 571 Military Way Thats Great News Call Us 888-239-5731 That's Great News is not affiliated with PALO ALTO WEEKLY From:Kelly Nolan To:Council, City Subject:Last chance to get your plaque for article: Avenidas honors seven with ‘Lifetimes of Achievement’ awards. LaDoris Hazzard Cordell Date:Thursday, April 14, 2022 7:45:20 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of openingattachments and clicking on links. ‌ ‌ ‌ No images shown? View online Free inspection ends today Avenidas honors seven with ‘Lifetimes of Achievement’ awards. LaDoris Hazzard Cordell Dear Ladoris Its already been a few weeks since you had the satisfaction of being featured in the PALO ALTO WEEKLY and a plaque is a great way to keep the feeling of success alive, which is why last week I offered you a free 30 day inspection period for your plaque. I'm sure if you had the actual plaque in your hands you'll want to keep it, so I'd like to send it to you now , with no purchase obligation. If I'm wrong and you don't love it, the risk is all mine, you won't pay a cent and we pay for return of the plaque. However, to ensure you don't miss this offer you need to act today. Enlarge Plaque Image Select Plaque If you're short on time today, just reply to this email and confirm you would like us to send out the plaque for a free no obligation 30 day free inspection and we'll get it dispatched to: 250 Hamilton Ave, Palo Alto, 94301 Article Avenidas honors seven with ‘Lifetimes of Achievement’ awards. LaDoris Hazzard Cordell Featured Ladoris Cordell, Palo Alto City Council Publication PALO ALTO WEEKLY Published Mar 04, 2022 UNCONDITIONAL 100% MONEY BACK GUARANTEE ON ALL PLAQUES A full refund if you don’t like the plaque. 4.8 Overall Satisfaction Rating Shopper Approved Reviews “It's been wonderful working with the company. They have helped us create a beautiful "Wall of Fame" in our office that gets lots of compliments.” Michael E "I had one of my three plaques damaged during shipping and the customer service that I received to replace the damage plaque was exceptional. The quality of the product was excellent as well. Five stars across the board is not an exaggeration." Paula W "I have been working with Candace for years on many plaques. She is wonderful." Lester M "They were just what I was looking for." Daddy O'Brien's Irish Ice Cream "I've bought over 20 plaques. Excellent pricing and service." Ron See your news on a Plaque That's Great News is not affiliated with PALO ALTO WEEKLY That’s Great News, 900 Northrop Rd., Wallingford, CT 06492. All Rights Reserved. Call Us: 888-239-5731 and reference Customer ID (11775674) Free Inspection T&Cs i) Available on plaque purchases under $400 ii) All orders shipped to Canada must be paid with Credit Card. All Prices are in USD If you don’t want an alert when you’re featured in the press or our offers please unsubscribe to avoid us contacting you again. View email online. {"iid":"34694565","cid":"11775674","oid":"6508535135"} From:Aram James To:Roberta Ahlquist Cc:Tannock, Julie; robert.parham@cityofpaloalto.org; Figueroa, Eric; Enberg, Nicholas; Perron, Zachary; chuck jagoda; Sajid Khan; Jethroe Moore; Jeff Rosen; Jonsen, Robert; paloaltofreepress@gmail.com; Council, City; Jay Boyarsky; Joe Simitian; Rebecca Eisenberg; Alison Cormack; Winter Dellenbach; City Mgr; Binder, Andrew; Shikada, Ed; Raj; ladoris cordell Subject:Re: These cops make me sick!! Some sick …..yah you got it!!! Date:Wednesday, April 13, 2022 8:00:36 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Hi Roberta, Thanks for your well reasoned comments! aram Sent from my iPhone On Apr 13, 2022, at 5:47 PM, Roberta Ahlquist <roberta.ahlquist@sjsu.edu> wrote: Unbelievable response from police who supposedly have been trained to be open- minded and unbiased. They sound like privileged children rather than responsible adults. Roberta Ahlquist. On Wed, Apr 13, 2022 at 5:42 PM Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> wrote: Sent from my iPhone From:Roberta Ahlquist To:Aram James Cc:Tannock, Julie; robert.parham@cityofpaloalto.org; Figueroa, Eric; Enberg, Nicholas; Perron, Zachary; chuck jagoda; Sajid Khan; Jethroe Moore; Jeff Rosen; Jonsen, Robert; paloaltofreepress@gmail.com; Council, City; Jay Boyarsky; Joe Simitian; Rebecca Eisenberg; Alison Cormack; Winter Dellenbach; City Mgr; Binder, Andrew; Shikada, Ed; Raj Subject:Re: These cops make me sick!! Some sick …..yah you got it!!! Date:Wednesday, April 13, 2022 5:47:41 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Unbelievable response from police who supposedly have been trained to be open-minded and unbiased. They sound like privileged children rather than responsible adults. Roberta Ahlquist. On Wed, Apr 13, 2022 at 5:42 PM Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> wrote: Sent from my iPhone Blog | COVID-19 | Racial Justice From:Silicon Valley Community Foundation To:Council, City Subject:Investing in early childhood and welcoming new leadership Date:Wednesday, April 13, 2022 2:01:30 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious ofopening attachments and clicking on links. 650.450.5400 @ info@siliconvalleycf.org Small fraction of donors give to early care and learning Despite the pandemic putting a spotlight on the importance of childcare and educational support systems, only 15 percent of Silicon Valley donors give to early childhood development. Based on SVCF's new report "Big Gifts for Little Learners," increased awareness may be the key to unlocking more philanthropic dollars for this sector. Welcoming new leadership The California Black Freedom Fund is pleased to announce Marc Philpart as its first executive director. Philpart will oversee a five-year, $100 million initiative to ensure that Black power-building and movement- based organizations have the support they need to eradicate systemic racism. A strong partner and grantee Center for Excellence in Nonprofits' work is an ideal example of what SVCF's Capacity-Building and Leadership Investment Program seeks to fund. Staff Spotlight: Leticia Gonzales, project manager for Movement- and Power-building "I hope for more affordable housing and for all to have livable wages." Successful first Community Conversation! Nearly 200 people joined SVCF's Community Conversation event about the housing crisis. Read more and view the recording. Understanding race and equity through implicit bias exploration Learn how to create a more diverse, equitable and inclusive organization in this free online training. Register here. Address 2440 West El Camino Real Suite 300 Mountain View, CA 94040 About Silicon Valley Community Foundation is a community catalyst for change. Copyright © 2022 Silicon Valley Community Foundation View in browser | Unsubscribe From:Laure de Marcellus Lampe To:Council, City Subject:keep Ramona street closed to traffic Date:Wednesday, April 13, 2022 10:29:50 AM Some people who received this message don't often get email from lauredemar@yahoo.com.Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear members of the council, If one good thing happened in the last two years, is cities becoming nicer because restaurants expanded onto the streets! Please keep it closed Thank you, Laure Lampe From:Typing.com To:Council, City Subject:Free typing program for your citizens to excel online Date:Wednesday, April 13, 2022 8:00:57 AM Some people who received this message don't often get email from hello@hello.typing.com. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious ofopening attachments and clicking on links. Visit typing.com Dear Tom , My name is Athena from Teaching.com. We have a 20-year history of building free educational products, like Typing.com to help children and adults learn to type. COVID19 taught us that many people weren’t able to thrive online. We’d like to help. As a leader in your community, we thought you might like to share some free educational content that quickly explains why typing matters, how to quickly assess digital skills, and ways to easily improve them. Here’s just a few of our most popular articles: 1. Top Jobs for Fast Typists 2. Test Your Typing Speed 3. Increase Your Speed with Typing lessons Let me know if you would like to talk more about upskilling your employees with typing or providing typing programs to your locality! Kindest regards, Athena 2022 Teaching.com PO Box 9241, San Juan, PR 00909 This email was sent to city.council@cityofpaloalto.org. To no longer receive these emails, unsubscribe here. From:Kelly Nolan To:Council, City Subject:Ends tomorrow, 30 day free press plaque inspection Date:Wednesday, April 13, 2022 7:45:11 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of openingattachments and clicking on links. Hello Ladoris I'd like to send you your press plaque for a free 30 day inspection so you can hold it before you make your mind up whether to pay for it. There is no obligation. If you'd like to take advantage of this free inspection offer then check and confirm these details. This offer is guaranteed available until the end of tomorrow. Prefer to talk to someone? Then call us on 888-239-5731 Celebrating your great news, Kind regards, Kelly Nolan Account Manager That’s Great News PS. Short on time today? Just reply to this email and confirm you'd like us to send you the plaque, for a 30 day free inspection. UNCONDITIONAL 100% MONEY BACK GUARANTEE ON ALL PLAQUES A full refund if you don’t like the plaque. 4.8 Overall Satisfaction Rating That's Great News is not affiliated with PALO ALTO WEEKLY Article Avenidas honors seven with ‘Lifetimes of Achievement’ awards. LaDoris Hazzard Cordell Featured Ladoris Cordell, Palo Alto City Council Published Mar 04, 2022 View my plaque That’s Great News, 900 Northrop Rd., Wallingford, CT 06492. All Rights Reserved. Call Us: 888-239-5731 and reference Customer ID (11775674) Free Inspection T&Cs i) Available on plaque purchases under $400 ii) All orders shipped to Canada must be paid with Credit Card. All Prices are in USD If you don’t want an alert when you’re featured in the press or our offers please unsubscribe to avoid us contacting you again. View email online. {"iid":"34694565","cid":"11775674","oid":"6508535135"} FINAL REMINDER: TPUSA EVENT TONIGHT! EDUCATE DON’T MANDATE TOUR AT UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA - BERKELEY ( PHOTO 1 ) We are so excited to see you TONIGHT for TPUSA's EDUCATE DON’T MANDATE TOUR with Charlie Kirk! A few important details about tonight: EVENT LOCATION: The event will be at the University of California Berkeley ASUC Student Union; Pauley Ballroom 2495 Bancroft Way, Berkeley, CA 94720 EVENT TIME: April 13, 2022 | 7:00pm - 8:30pm Doors open at 6:30pm, we highly recommend arriving early to ensure seating. Bags and Backpacks are prohibited, as well as no re-entry allowed. From:Turning Point USA To:Council, City Subject:IMPORTANT INFO: Educate Don"t Mandate Tour at UC Berkeley Date:Wednesday, April 13, 2022 7:09:06 AM Some people who received this message don't often get email from noreply@event.eventbrite.com. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious ofopening attachments and clicking on links. Eventbrite Attendees mus show a form of ID that matches their information on the ticket. We look forward to seeing you soon! TPUSA at University of California Berkeley Educate Don't Mandate Tour at University of California - Berkeley Wednesday, April 13, 2022 from 7:00 PM to 8:30 PM (PDT) Pauley Ballroom 2495 Bancroft Way Berkeley, CA 94720 Download Tickets Organized by Turning Point USA Quesions about the event? Contact the organizer This email was sent to city.council@cityofpaloalto.org Eventbrite Eventbrite | 535 Mission Street, 8th Floor | San Francisco, CA 94105 Copyright © 2022 Eventbrite. All rights reserved. Privacy Policy From:Aram James To:chuck jagoda; Dave Price; Emily Mibach; Braden Cartwright; Bill Johnson; Gennady Sheyner; EPA Today Cc:Rebecca Eisenberg; Council, City; Joe Simitian; Lydia Kou; Benjamin Fay; Roberta Ahlquist; Greer Stone; Alison Cormack; Figueroa, Eric; eric.filseth@cityofpaloalto.com; Tannock, Julie; Sajid Khan; Jeff Rosen; Perron, Zachary; Reifschneider, James; Palo Alto Free Press; Chris Robell; Jonsen, Robert; Winter Dellenbach; Jay Boyarsky; Enberg, Nicholas; Raj; Shikada, Ed Subject:The problem with the Palo Alto City Council and the PAPD…… Date:Tuesday, April 12, 2022 11:16:44 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments andclicking on links. Hi Chuck, Just a quick comment to thank you for your spot on comments re our city council and our police department. I might add that it is critical that our city council and the voices of the community …..demand of our city manager, Ed Shikada, that he introduce the three finalist for our new police chief to the community and the city council….. so both can complete an extensive vetting and background investigation of all three finalists before a new police chief is hired. Thus far I have repeatedly demanded that Ed Shikada reveal the process he intends to use in selecting our next police chief. He has remained absolutely silent and unwilling to disclose his plans in this regard. He is acting in total disregard for his own false claims and promises of being a transparent city leader and a leader who stands for community input on all critical issues. The city council has thus far also shown a reluctance to demand of our city manager that the next police chief be hired after, and only after, the community and council has been allowed to vet the final three candidates for police chief. Please insist that we the community not be shut out from the process designed to hire our next police chief. Democracy demands no less. Sincerely, Aram James On Apr 12, 2022, at 12:44 PM, chuck jagoda <chuckjagoda1@gmail.com> wrote: In the long-standing matter of police on civilian violence, there is a distinct lack of City Council, discussion, or comment. If the present City Council continues to say nothing, do nothing, and act like they hear nothing, they are making a very loud but silent vote to endorse the present status of police continuing to work out aggression on the bodies of unarmed overwhelmed citizens without restriction or penalty. At a minimum the PACC should hold a public discussion. Making believe there’s nothing to discuss is irresponsible and won’t put clothes on the naked crime. April 12, 2022 The Palo Alto City Council has choices: 1. It can continue to ignore the repeated incidents of white police on citizens of color violence. 2. The PACC can announce specific steps to reduce the amount of violence. E.g. Self indemnification of all new police hires, meaningful retraining of present police. By its repeated and consistent inaction-- even to have a public discussion of the pattern of repeated cross-color, police-perpetrated violence, the Palo Alto City Council has chosen tacit approval of the status quo, including huge taxpayer funded penalties. Palo Alto must be a very rich city indeed. Chuck Jagoda, Member WILPF Housing/Homeless Committee Member Chuck Jagoda WILPF, Peninsula Branch On Mon, Mar 28, 2022 at 7:44 PM Rebecca Eisenberg <rebecca@winwithrebecca.com> wrote: Lydia, THANK YOU so much for listening to me! What a relief it is to be heard rather than ignored. That said, Ben Fay, who answered your questions (and thus is cc'd here along with the rest of those cc'd) misstates the constitutional issue (he never addresses the necessity of nexus) and also factually misrepresents the Cupertino tax. As to Constitutionality, Fay's insistence that whether tenant or landlord is tax lacks any consitutional relevance is false. First, the constitutionality of a tenant-based-square-footage tax is uncertain at best, given that there is no existing tax in California that taxes business tenants rather than their landlords - not even Cupertino - so the Constitutionaly never has been tested. Additionally, as Fay should know, the constitutionality of a tax depends on an adequate nexus, and although there may be a relationship between square-footage-occupancy in some local jurisdictions, there is none here. In fact, nowhere in the proposed materials is there an attempt to justify how and why square footage of tenant occupy has a nexus to any problem sought to be solved through taxation. Molly Stump's answers also are typically incorrect. Stump refers to East Palo Alto's tax as a precedent for your proposed tax, but EPA's tax is a parcel tax rather than a tax on business tenants, and serves to tax the asset holder rather than the lessor. Additionally, if Molly Stump were to point to Cupertino, she would be incorrect to use Cupertino as a precedent as well because Cupertino's tax is based on Business Type rather than on square footage. The nature of Cupertino's business tax is not up for debate and can be proven by looking at Cupertino's tax schedule here: https://www.cupertino.org/home/showpublisheddocument/3542/637453652200270000 In Cupertinos's tax schedule, which taxes businesses based on business type, ONLY ONE category mentions size, and in that case it uses ACRES and views acreage size as a surcharge, not as the basic foundation of the tax rate. Specifically, Cupertino's tax on "Lumberyard, Building Material Yard, Junkyard, Plant Nurseries" includes a (minimal) charge of "$10.40 per year per acre of space owned, leased or rented." Describing this tax as one based on square footage misrepresents the facts, which are visible for all to see: link: https://www.cupertino.org/home/showpublisheddocument/3542/637453652200270000 Additionally, on top of the business license fee, you will see that Cupertino has a range of fees that it charges businesses, in addition to the business license fee: https://www.cupertino.org/our-city/departments/finance/forms-fees. -- again proving that Cupertino does not tax businesses based on square footage the business occupies. No other examples of purported square-footage-of-occupant-based taxes are provided by Fay, Stump, or the City, and no examples of such a tax exist. It is extremely frustrating to spend so much time showing City Council the indisputable facts, just to see a consultant (or unfortunately, city staff) contradict my comments with deceptions or misrepresentations. Per my email below, there is AMPLE precedent for taxes that passed in similar communities by a landslide. Those taxes include: parcel taxes on commercial landlords, headcount taxes, and the most common and effective options: PAYROLL and RECEIPTS tax, which even Ben Fay admitted, despite his material errors in describing Cupertino's tax structure and his unfounded assurance on a tenant square footage's tax's constitutionality. Please feel free to contact me with questions. I promise to provide URLs to back every statement I make, unlike Molly Stump, Ben Fay, and Palo Alto City Staff. So you don't have to take my word for these truths. You can see for yourself. Best, Rebecca 415-235-8078 ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Rebecca Eisenberg <rebecca@winwithrebecca.com> Date: Mon, Mar 28, 2022 at 5:47 PM Subject: Re: Palo Alto's Regressive and Unconstitutional "Business" Tax Proposal To: chuck jagoda <chuckjagoda1@gmail.com>, City Council <city.council@cityofpaloalto.org>, Joe Simitian <joe.simitian@bos.sccgov.org>, City Mgr <citymgr@cityofpaloalto.org> Cc: Roberta Ahlquist <roberta.ahlquist@sjsu.edu>, Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com>, Greer Stone <gstone22@gmail.com>, Alison Cormack <alisonlcormack@gmail.com>, <eric.figueroa@cityofpaloalto.org>, <eric.filseth@cityofpaloalto.com>, <julie.tannock@cityofpaloalto.org>, Sajid Khan <Sajid@votesajid.com>, Jeff Rosen <JRosen@dao.sccgov.org>, Zachary Perron <zachary.perron@cityofpaloalto.org>, James Reifschneider <james.reifschneider@cityofpaloalto.org>, Palo Alto Free Press <paloaltofreepress@gmail.com>, Chris Robell <chris_robell@yahoo.com>, Robert Jonsen <Robert.Jonsen@cityofpaloalto.org>, Winter Dellenbach <wintergery@earthlink.net>, Jay Boyarsky <jboyarsky@dao.sccgov.org>, Nicholas Enberg <nicholas.enberg@cityofpaloalto.org>, Chavez, Cindy <cindy.chavez@bos.sccgov.org>, Raj <raj@siliconvalleydebug.org> Reference to the EPA tax was omitted below. I inserted it and post it here as well, along with MV's and SJ's tax propositions: East Palo Alto: https://ballotpedia.org/East_Palo_Alto,_California,_Measure_HH,_Commercial_Office_Space_Parcel_Tax_(November_2018) Mountain View: https://ballotpedia.org/Mountain_View,_California,_Measure_P,_Per-Employee_Business_Tax_(November_2018) San Jose: https://www.sanjoseca.gov/your-government/departments/finance/business-tax-registration/business-tax-rates On Mon, Mar 28, 2022 at 5:37 PM Rebecca Eisenberg <rebecca@winwithrebecca.com> wrote: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/agendas-minutes-reports/agendas-minutes/finance-committee/2022/20220328/20220328pfcs- report-added.pdf https://cityofpaloalto.zoom.us/j/99227307235#success *THIS MEETING HAS STARTED BUT THIS ISSUE IS NOT UP YET - WILL SOON BE* Tonight, Palo Alto City Council will discuss a proposed business tax that is so regressive and so nonsensical, that no other City in California ever proposed it before. Palo Alto seeks to tax businesses according to how big their offices are, regardless of how many employees they have, how much revenue and profit is generated in Palo Alto, or how much valuable property they rent out to others. This is a tax of first impression because it is so profoundly ludicrous. In proposing this square footage tax, Palo Alto City leadership attempts to compare this proposed tax with the highly successful tax measure passed in East Palo Alto in 2018. But East Palo Alto’s tax did not tax the *tenant*. Rather, the EPA business tax was a parcel tax levied against the *owner* of the building and the landlord of the office space. This is an entirely different matter than taxing the tenant. In East Palo Alto, like in other cities with a similar business-based parcel tax, a tenant only pays the parcel tax when it owns the office building, as is the case of Amazon.com . In this way, all other cities with square footage taxes focus on the landlord, not the tenant. https://ballotpedia.org/East_Palo_Alto,_California,_Measure_HH,_Commercial_Office_Space_Parcel_Tax_(November_2018) This proposed PA tax turns this matter on its head. Instead of taxing the landlord, which is the entity that owns the income-generating asset, the tax goes against the TENANT, for whom the leases it pays are an EXPENSE not income! This would be as if the IRS taxed a family based on the amount of money they spent on groceries and rent, rather on the income the family generated. It is UNHEARD of. Only billionaire landlords like John Schenk would back a tax like this, where taxes are based on costs rather than income. Relying on public opinion for such a tax is nonsensical. You already know what happens when taxes against owners of commercial property are proposed — those taxes win big at the polls, such as the EPA ballot measure - the commercial developer parcel tax, which won by a whopping 80%. That margin is so wide that it is a waste of money to do more research. Similarly, the Mountain View business tax - https://ballotpedia.org/Mountain_View,_California,_Measure_P,_Per- Employee_Business_Tax_(November_2018) - which taxes based on headcount, targeting businesses with more than 5000 employees in order to tax Google but not tax small businesses, restaurants, or retail - passed by more than 70%. In both cases, no party even formally opposed the tax legislation. San Jose combines both a landlord tax, with the tax rate increasing as the number of units rented increases, along with an employee headcount tax, where also the tax rate rises along with the size of the business. In both cases, larger and more profitable businesses pay higher tax rates. https://www.sanjoseca.gov/your-government/departments/finance/business-tax-registration/business-tax-rates . There is literally ZERO precedent for a city that taxes businesses based on the size of the often they rent. Every other city taxes businesses on receipts (revenues), profits, payroll, headcount, assets (for example, real estate owned and rented to businesses or residents), differences between highest paid and median employees, or a combination of the above. No city taxes based on the size of office it occupies, regardless of ownership of that office. From coast to coast, size of office is used a a deduction, but never as something taxed. Office size for businesses that rent their offices cannot possibly be taxed because they are expenses, not assets or income. Accounting 101. If Palo Alto followed the existing playbook, it would have FANTASTIC success with a business tax. Our City could propose a parcel tax against landlords who rent out more than 50,000 square feet of commercial property (in order to target the big landlords like John Schenk, while sparing the mom and pop landlords), accompanied by a per-employee tax levied against any employer with more than 5000 employees. In the best case scenario, they also should propose a tax that targets companies that have more than, say, $100 million in revenue, along with a baseline of profitability, as well as an “Overpaid executive” tax similar to the tax passed by a landslide in San Francisco, to capture the externalities created by businesses that pay their top executives more than 100 times what they pay their median worker, with higher tax rates depending on how many multiples more they pay their CEOs than the median employee. Imagine that tax levied on Tesla — it could pay for all of our affordable housing needs, plus more. Palo Alto could propose all of these taxes, and if it did, it almost certainly would succeed at the polls. The city’s own paid consultants themselves have confirmed that voters are as likely, if not more, to pass a tax proposal with multiple elements as they are a tax package with just one element, as the PACC propose now. ONLY in Palo Alto does the leadership conclude that it knows more than any and every other city. This current proposal — despite what Molly Stump may claim - as she knows herself that there has been no similar tax ever reviewed by a California court — is unconstitutional, nonsensical, regressive, and preposterous. Could it be that City leadership really does not intend to tax businesses, perhaps wanting to protect and reward some of their largest campaign contributors, many of whom work for Palo Alto’s largest and most profitable employers and commercial landowners? If that is not their intention, it certainly is the consequence of their proposed ballot measures. Rebecca L. Eisenberg Esq. www.linkedin.com/in/eisenberg www.winwithrebecca.com rebecca@winwithrebecca.com 415-235-8078 On Sun, Mar 27, 2022 at 8:44 AM chuck jagoda <chuckjagoda1@gmail.com> wrote: To Rebecca et. al: The negligent tradition of Palo Alto city government to tolerate, cover up, and encourage the "service" of violent cops is not new, not right, not legal, and VERY expensive. I've recommended self indemnification in the past. If each new hire had to present evidence of insuring against lawsuits for misbehavior, the City and taxpayers wouldn't have to pay for their violence, anger, and injury of citizens; the Police Department wouldn't have to spend so much time covering up for violent, miscreant behavior; and citizens could feel safer on the street. I'm distressed to see no proposed solutions for reform or fixing the long standing current problem. AND doing nothing-- as is the firmly entrenched and long standing tradtion of Palo Alto-- there will be more expenses, more embarrassment, and more beaten, bitten, and beleaguered citizens. Chuck Jagoda, Member Housing/Homelessness Committee Women's International League for Peace and Freedom On Sun, Mar 27, 2022 at 3:48 AM Rebecca Eisenberg <rebecca@winwithrebecca.com> wrote: Individuals who behave with such profound indifference to the sanctity of human life cannot be trained. How do you teach an adult to have compassion, empathy, common sense, and a desire to protect rather than to injure? Criminal defendants accused of these types of actions are locked up for lifetimes, and in some cases, killed. Rehabilitation is not an offer on the table. Given this context, it is literally the smallest expectation that these officers be fired. In the private sphere - where I have worked as an employment lawyer for almost 30 years - it is no question that jobs would be lost. Only the police enjoy the privilege of virtually unrestrained violence and unquestioned bias, all without transparency and accountability. Palo Alto City Council has 100% authority to direct the police force to hand over employment records and demand the terminations of officers who harmed community members. Its inaction - supported by the recommendations of its self-serving City manager & staff - constitutes collaboration and complicity. When true justice ultimately arrives in Palo Alto, it will take down not just the violently unhinged armed officers and the white supremacist systems that enabled them, but also the city leaders that empowered and encouraged them. It may be too late for these officers to be redeemed, but I can't believe it is too late for our local leaders to change course and take the brave, high integrity actions needed to protect our communities. Best, Rebecca On Sat, Mar 26, 2022 at 2:55 PM Roberta Ahlquist <roberta.ahlquist@sjsu.edu> wrote: Why can't these offices calm the person down, and not shoot to kill!??? One mentally ill man, and 3+ cops w/ guns! They all need better training, including the value of lives, mentaly ill or not. roberta ahlquist On Sat, Mar 26, 2022 at 2:20 PM Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> wrote: FYI: Rosen complicit???? And of course Perron still with the PAPD and the IPA report on alleged use of the N word has yet to be released. Is Ed Shikada and Molly Stump complicit in the on going perron scandel https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2016/01/26/palo-alto-officer-who-used-taser-during-christmas-day- shooting-is-identified-2/ Shared via the Google app Sent from my iPhone -- Chuck From:Joanne Lin To:Planning Commission; Council, City Subject:Castilleja Date:Tuesday, April 12, 2022 3:56:19 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from jklin2011@gmail.com. Learnwhy this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Commissioners: Please have Castilleja School more thoroughly describe the alert system for exiting the proposed underground garage. We neighbors need to understand what the plans are for pedestrian and bike safety and how this proposed commercial garage will affect us. We live across the street from the proposed exit, and although neighbors have asked this question for years, the school has never provided an answer. Just recently, at the March 17, 2022 Architectural Review Board meeting, the school's attorney stated that there will be both audio and visual alerts when a vehicle exits the proposed underground garage. Are there flashing lights and beeping bells every time a car exits? How loud are the audio alerts and how long will they be in duration? Does the gate clang shut? It is very important that these details be completely explained to the neighbors impacted. This is a residential neighborhood and cars exiting an underground garage exit will face Melville Street. Melville, which dead ends into Emerson, is already a difficult and dangerous corner to make a left or right turn onto Emerson. Please require that the school keep the existing surface parking. It is not environmentally sound to build an underground garage in order to end up with the same number of parking spaces that are already available. We've also become aware that moving the swimming pool puts it approximately 50 feet from residents' properties on Emerson. Why hasn't this very important information been brought to the attention of the neighbors? Apparently, some of the bleachers will be at-grade (ARB staff report, pg 51-52). Please explain how this could be compatible and not detrimental for our residential neighborhood with large crowds and cheering fans right outside our front doors. Would this be acceptable in any other neighborhood? J. Lin K. Edwards From:Liz Gardner To:Council, City Subject:“Looks are not Everything” is what I said. Please Correct, Council-member Kuo Date:Tuesday, April 12, 2022 1:24:06 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear City Council, Mayor Burt and Vice Mayor Kuo, For the written record I am forced to correct Councilmember Lydia Kuo on my public comment re: Agenda Item 11 and in regards to multi-family developments and design. She misrepresented my observation about looks. I said "looks are not everything" for the design of an outside of a multi-family complex. She misquoted by saying, "I don't agree with the public commenter who said that looks don't matter". Perhaps if she were not so distracted on her non-sanctioned electronic device's at the Dias and was more present, she would have heard exactly what I did and did not say. This is especially troubling that she did not listen or hear my voice in such critical public forums and civic engagement -- a responsibility she was elected to fulfill. Again.These are much needed homes where human beings live inside -- a home that is supposed to yield that of safety, egress, and quality of life. Like having enough floor plan for families, elderly, differently abled to live, thrive, mature, gather with loved ones to celebrate traditions of all types, faiths and even to pray together. Case in point . Having a design that provides plenty of square footage from the inside for both dining, and living areas to do such. Perhaps if Ms. Kuo were not so protective of R1 encroachment on a single home resident, she would slow her roll on responding with such a bias sounding: anti housing, anti cultural diversity, anti family inclusion and anti income equality for all. I will wait for her apology for misrepresenting my public engagement on the very obvious dire need for housing designs for homes with enough interior space for all income levels and abilities to live, grow, thrive. Afterall, I did cast my vote for Ms. Kuo and her council seat. Gratefully the nature of a public body in these council meetings are recorded and archived containing my real and true to my heart comments last night. "Looks [from the outside] are not everything." Sincerely, Liz Gardner 2500 El Camino Real #301 Palo Alto, Ca 94306 650-223-3024 Liz Gardner Palo Alto From:chuck jagoda To:Rebecca Eisenberg Cc:Council, City; Joe Simitian; City Mgr; Kou, Lydia; Lydia Kou; Benjamin Fay; Roberta Ahlquist; Aram James; Greer Stone; Alison Cormack; Figueroa, Eric; eric.filseth@cityofpaloalto.com; Tannock, Julie; Sajid Khan; Jeff Rosen; Perron, Zachary; Reifschneider, James; Palo Alto Free Press; Chris Robell; Jonsen, Robert; Winter Dellenbach; Jay Boyarsky; Enberg, Nicholas; Chavez, Cindy; Raj Subject:Re: Response to Lydia Kou"s questions to consultant Ben Fay, given his deceptive and inaccurate responses. Date:Tuesday, April 12, 2022 12:44:56 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments andclicking on links. In the long-standing matter of police on civilian violence, there is a distinct lack of City Council, discussion, or comment. If the present City Council continues to say nothing, do nothing, and act like they hear nothing, they are making a very loud but silent vote to endorse the present status of police continuing to work out aggression on the bodies of unarmed overwhelmed citizens without restriction or penalty. At a minimum the PACC should hold a public discussion. Making believe there’s nothing to discuss is irresponsible and won’t put clothes on the naked crime. April 12, 2022 The Palo Alto City Council has choices: 1. It can continue to ignore the repeated incidents of white police on citizens of color violence. 2. The PACC can announce specific steps to reduce the amount of violence. E.g. Self indemnification of all new police hires, meaningful retraining of present police. By its repeated and consistent inaction-- even to have a public discussion of the pattern of repeated cross-color, police-perpetrated violence, the Palo Alto City Council has chosen tacit approval of the status quo, including huge taxpayer funded penalties. Palo Alto must be a very rich city indeed. Chuck Jagoda, Member WILPF Housing/Homeless Committee Member Chuck Jagoda WILPF, Peninsula Branch On Mon, Mar 28, 2022 at 7:44 PM Rebecca Eisenberg <rebecca@winwithrebecca.com> wrote: Lydia, THANK YOU so much for listening to me! What a relief it is to be heard rather than ignored. That said, Ben Fay, who answered your questions (and thus is cc'd here along with the rest of those cc'd) misstates the constitutional issue (he never addresses the necessity of nexus) and also factually misrepresents the Cupertino tax. As to Constitutionality, Fay's insistence that whether tenant or landlord is tax lacks any consitutional relevance is false. First, the constitutionality of a tenant-based-square-footage tax is uncertain at best, given that there is no existing tax in California that taxes business tenants rather than their landlords - not even Cupertino - so the Constitutionaly never has been tested. Additionally, as Fay should know, the constitutionality of a tax depends on an adequate nexus, and although there may be a relationship between square-footage-occupancy in some local jurisdictions, there is none here. In fact, nowhere in the proposed materials is there an attempt to justify how and why square footage of tenant occupy has a nexus to any problem sought to be solved through taxation. Molly Stump's answers also are typically incorrect. Stump refers to East Palo Alto's tax as a precedent for your proposed tax, but EPA's tax is a parcel tax rather than a tax on business tenants, and serves to tax the asset holder rather than the lessor. Additionally, if Molly Stump were to point to Cupertino, she would be incorrect to use Cupertino as a precedent as well because Cupertino's tax is based on Business Type rather than on square footage. The nature of Cupertino's business tax is not up for debate and can be proven by looking at Cupertino's tax schedule here: https://www.cupertino.org/home/showpublisheddocument/3542/637453652200270000 In Cupertinos's tax schedule, which taxes businesses based on business type, ONLY ONE category mentions size, and in that case it uses ACRES and views acreage size as a surcharge, not as the basic foundation of the tax rate. Specifically, Cupertino's tax on "Lumberyard, Building Material Yard, Junkyard, Plant Nurseries" includes a (minimal) charge of "$10.40 per year per acre of space owned, leased or rented." Describing this tax as one based on square footage misrepresents the facts, which are visible for all to see: link: https://www.cupertino.org/home/showpublisheddocument/3542/637453652200270000 Additionally, on top of the business license fee, you will see that Cupertino has a range of fees that it charges businesses, in addition to the business license fee: https://www.cupertino.org/our-city/departments/finance/forms-fees. -- again proving that Cupertino does not tax businesses based on square footage the business occupies. No other examples of purported square-footage-of-occupant-based taxes are provided by Fay, Stump, or the City, and no examples of such a tax exist. It is extremely frustrating to spend so much time showing City Council the indisputable facts, just to see a consultant (or unfortunately, city staff) contradict my comments with deceptions or misrepresentations. Per my email below, there is AMPLE precedent for taxes that passed in similar communities by a landslide. Those taxes include: parcel taxes on commercial landlords, headcount taxes, and the most common and effective options: PAYROLL and RECEIPTS tax, which even Ben Fay admitted, despite his material errors in describing Cupertino's tax structure and his unfounded assurance on a tenant square footage's tax's constitutionality. Please feel free to contact me with questions. I promise to provide URLs to back every statement I make, unlike Molly Stump, Ben Fay, and Palo Alto City Staff. So you don't have to take my word for these truths. You can see for yourself. Best, Rebecca 415-235-8078 ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Rebecca Eisenberg <rebecca@winwithrebecca.com> Date: Mon, Mar 28, 2022 at 5:47 PM Subject: Re: Palo Alto's Regressive and Unconstitutional "Business" Tax Proposal To: chuck jagoda <chuckjagoda1@gmail.com>, City Council <city.council@cityofpaloalto.org>, Joe Simitian <joe.simitian@bos.sccgov.org>, City Mgr <citymgr@cityofpaloalto.org> Cc: Roberta Ahlquist <roberta.ahlquist@sjsu.edu>, Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com>, Greer Stone <gstone22@gmail.com>, Alison Cormack <alisonlcormack@gmail.com>, <eric.figueroa@cityofpaloalto.org>, <eric.filseth@cityofpaloalto.com>, <julie.tannock@cityofpaloalto.org>, Sajid Khan <Sajid@votesajid.com>, Jeff Rosen <JRosen@dao.sccgov.org>, Zachary Perron <zachary.perron@cityofpaloalto.org>, James Reifschneider <james.reifschneider@cityofpaloalto.org>, Palo Alto Free Press <paloaltofreepress@gmail.com>, Chris Robell <chris_robell@yahoo.com>, Robert Jonsen <Robert.Jonsen@cityofpaloalto.org>, Winter Dellenbach <wintergery@earthlink.net>, Jay Boyarsky <jboyarsky@dao.sccgov.org>, Nicholas Enberg <nicholas.enberg@cityofpaloalto.org>, Chavez, Cindy <cindy.chavez@bos.sccgov.org>, Raj <raj@siliconvalleydebug.org> Reference to the EPA tax was omitted below. I inserted it and post it here as well, along with MV's and SJ's tax propositions: East Palo Alto: https://ballotpedia.org/East_Palo_Alto,_California,_Measure_HH,_Commercial_Office_Space_Parcel_Tax_(November_2018) Mountain View: https://ballotpedia.org/Mountain_View,_California,_Measure_P,_Per-Employee_Business_Tax_(November_2018) San Jose: https://www.sanjoseca.gov/your-government/departments/finance/business-tax-registration/business-tax-rates On Mon, Mar 28, 2022 at 5:37 PM Rebecca Eisenberg <rebecca@winwithrebecca.com> wrote: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/agendas-minutes-reports/agendas-minutes/finance-committee/2022/20220328/20220328pfcs-report- added.pdf https://cityofpaloalto.zoom.us/j/99227307235#success *THIS MEETING HAS STARTED BUT THIS ISSUE IS NOT UP YET - WILL SOON BE* Tonight, Palo Alto City Council will discuss a proposed business tax that is so regressive and so nonsensical, that no other City in California ever proposed it before. Palo Alto seeks to tax businesses according to how big their offices are, regardless of how many employees they have, how much revenue and profit is generated in Palo Alto, or how much valuable property they rent out to others. This is a tax of first impression because it is so profoundly ludicrous. In proposing this square footage tax, Palo Alto City leadership attempts to compare this proposed tax with the highly successful tax measure passed in East Palo Alto in 2018. But East Palo Alto’s tax did not tax the *tenant*. Rather, the EPA business tax was a parcel tax levied against the *owner* of the building and the landlord of the office space. This is an entirely different matter than taxing the tenant. In East Palo Alto, like in other cities with a similar business-based parcel tax, a tenant only pays the parcel tax when it owns the office building, as is the case of Amazon.com . In this way, all other cities with square footage taxes focus on the landlord, not the tenant. https://ballotpedia.org/East_Palo_Alto,_California,_Measure_HH,_Commercial_Office_Space_Parcel_Tax_(November_2018) This proposed PA tax turns this matter on its head. Instead of taxing the landlord, which is the entity that owns the income-generating asset, the tax goes against the TENANT, for whom the leases it pays are an EXPENSE not income! This would be as if the IRS taxed a family based on the amount of money they spent on groceries and rent, rather on the income the family generated. It is UNHEARD of. Only billionaire landlords like John Schenk would back a tax like this, where taxes are based on costs rather than income. Relying on public opinion for such a tax is nonsensical. You already know what happens when taxes against owners of commercial property are proposed — those taxes win big at the polls, such as the EPA ballot measure - the commercial developer parcel tax, which won by a whopping 80%. That margin is so wide that it is a waste of money to do more research. Similarly, the Mountain View business tax - https://ballotpedia.org/Mountain_View,_California,_Measure_P,_Per- Employee_Business_Tax_(November_2018) - which taxes based on headcount, targeting businesses with more than 5000 employees in order to tax Google but not tax small businesses, restaurants, or retail - passed by more than 70%. In both cases, no party even formally opposed the tax legislation. San Jose combines both a landlord tax, with the tax rate increasing as the number of units rented increases, along with an employee headcount tax, where also the tax rate rises along with the size of the business. In both cases, larger and more profitable businesses pay higher tax rates. https://www.sanjoseca.gov/your-government/departments/finance/business-tax-registration/business-tax-rates . There is literally ZERO precedent for a city that taxes businesses based on the size of the often they rent. Every other city taxes businesses on receipts (revenues), profits, payroll, headcount, assets (for example, real estate owned and rented to businesses or residents), differences between highest paid and median employees, or a combination of the above. No city taxes based on the size of office it occupies, regardless of ownership of that office. From coast to coast, size of office is used a a deduction, but never as something taxed. Office size for businesses that rent their offices cannot possibly be taxed because they are expenses, not assets or income. Accounting 101. If Palo Alto followed the existing playbook, it would have FANTASTIC success with a business tax. Our City could propose a parcel tax against landlords who rent out more than 50,000 square feet of commercial property (in order to target the big landlords like John Schenk, while sparing the mom and pop landlords), accompanied by a per-employee tax levied against any employer with more than 5000 employees. In the best case scenario, they also should propose a tax that targets companies that have more than, say, $100 million in revenue, along with a baseline of profitability, as well as an “Overpaid executive” tax similar to the tax passed by a landslide in San Francisco, to capture the externalities created by businesses that pay their top executives more than 100 times what they pay their median worker, with higher tax rates depending on how many multiples more they pay their CEOs than the median employee. Imagine that tax levied on Tesla — it could pay for all of our affordable housing needs, plus more. Palo Alto could propose all of these taxes, and if it did, it almost certainly would succeed at the polls. The city’s own paid consultants themselves have confirmed that voters are as likely, if not more, to pass a tax proposal with multiple elements as they are a tax package with just one element, as the PACC propose now. ONLY in Palo Alto does the leadership conclude that it knows more than any and every other city. This current proposal — despite what Molly Stump may claim - as she knows herself that there has been no similar tax ever reviewed by a California court — is unconstitutional, nonsensical, regressive, and preposterous. Could it be that City leadership really does not intend to tax businesses, perhaps wanting to protect and reward some of their largest campaign contributors, many of whom work for Palo Alto’s largest and most profitable employers and commercial landowners? If that is not their intention, it certainly is the consequence of their proposed ballot measures. Rebecca L. Eisenberg Esq. www.linkedin.com/in/eisenberg www.winwithrebecca.com rebecca@winwithrebecca.com 415-235-8078 On Sun, Mar 27, 2022 at 8:44 AM chuck jagoda <chuckjagoda1@gmail.com> wrote: To Rebecca et. al: The negligent tradition of Palo Alto city government to tolerate, cover up, and encourage the "service" of violent cops is not new, not right, not legal, and VERY expensive. I've recommended self indemnification in the past. If each new hire had to present evidence of insuring against lawsuits for misbehavior, the City and taxpayers wouldn't have to pay for their violence, anger, and injury of citizens; the Police Department wouldn't have to spend so much time covering up for violent, miscreant behavior; and citizens could feel safer on the street. I'm distressed to see no proposed solutions for reform or fixing the long standing current problem. AND doing nothing-- as is the firmly entrenched and long standing tradtion of Palo Alto-- there will be more expenses, more embarrassment, and more beaten, bitten, and beleaguered citizens. Chuck Jagoda, Member Housing/Homelessness Committee Women's International League for Peace and Freedom On Sun, Mar 27, 2022 at 3:48 AM Rebecca Eisenberg <rebecca@winwithrebecca.com> wrote: Individuals who behave with such profound indifference to the sanctity of human life cannot be trained. How do you teach an adult to have compassion, empathy, common sense, and a desire to protect rather than to injure? Criminal defendants accused of these types of actions are locked up for lifetimes, and in some cases, killed. Rehabilitation is not an offer on the table. Given this context, it is literally the smallest expectation that these officers be fired. In the private sphere - where I have worked as an employment lawyer for almost 30 years - it is no question that jobs would be lost. Only the police enjoy the privilege of virtually unrestrained violence and unquestioned bias, all without transparency and accountability. Palo Alto City Council has 100% authority to direct the police force to hand over employment records and demand the terminations of officers who harmed community members. Its inaction - supported by the recommendations of its self- serving City manager & staff - constitutes collaboration and complicity. When true justice ultimately arrives in Palo Alto, it will take down not just the violently unhinged armed officers and the white supremacist systems that enabled them, but also the city leaders that empowered and encouraged them. It may be too late for these officers to be redeemed, but I can't believe it is too late for our local leaders to change course and take the brave, high integrity actions needed to protect our communities. Best, Rebecca On Sat, Mar 26, 2022 at 2:55 PM Roberta Ahlquist <roberta.ahlquist@sjsu.edu> wrote: Why can't these offices calm the person down, and not shoot to kill!??? One mentally ill man, and 3+ cops w/ guns! They all need better training, including the value of lives, mentaly ill or not. roberta ahlquist On Sat, Mar 26, 2022 at 2:20 PM Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> wrote: FYI: Rosen complicit???? And of course Perron still with the PAPD and the IPA report on alleged use of the N word has yet to be released. Is Ed Shikada and Molly Stump complicit in the on going perron scandel https://www.santacruzsentinel.com/2016/01/26/palo-alto-officer-who-used-taser-during-christmas-day-shooting-is- identified-2/ Shared via the Google app Sent from my iPhone -- Chuck From:Social Media Attorney Mark Fiedelholtz To:Council, City Subject:New federal laws render your social media policy and training invalid. Date:Tuesday, April 12, 2022 11:50:12 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of openingattachments and clicking on links. Questions? Call Us: (954) 748-7698 Visit My Website LEGAL ALERT! NEW FEDERAL LAWS RENDER YOUR CURRENT SOCIAL MEDIA POLICY AND EMPLOYEE TRAINING INVALID Do Not Fire Or Discipline An Employee For Social Media Violations Unless An Outside Red Flag Warning.png Social Media Attorney Updated Your Policy And Training To Comply With The New Federal Standards. Questions? Call Me At 954-748-7698 The Federal Courts Have Spoken: Social Media Is NOT A PIO Issue, It's A "High Liability" Human Resource Topic. Governments Who Use Cookie-Cutter Social Media Policies And Superficial Training Are Losing The Public Trust, Millions In Legal Fees, And Are Open To Personal Liability. Petersburg Settles 4.6 Million Dollar Over Defective Social Media Policy, Police Chief Held Personally Liable Court Rules Palm Beach County Fire Dept. Social Media Policy Too Broad. Firefighters Can Continue Lawsuit Two Cost-Effective Compliance Solutions How To Eliminate Employee Social Media Mistakes That Destroy The Public Trust Policy Manual.png How To Make Sure Your Social Media Policy Complies With New Federal Standards Learn More Learn More Visit My Websites Specialized Training: www.avoidsocialmediamistakes.com Customizzed Policy Drafting: www.socialmediapolicy.info SOCIAL MEDAI LIABILITY TRAINING INSTITUTE Address: 13506 Summerport Village Pkwy Windermere, FL 34786 Phone: (954) 748-7698 Contact Me Today Effective Communications Inc. | 13506 Summerport Village Pkwy,, Windermere, FL 34786 Unsubscribe city.council@cityofpaloalto.org Update Profile | About Constant Contact Sent by mark@newsocialmedialaw.com From:christina pahl To:Council, City Subject:Fw: Parking Permits for Residential Parking and Duncan Solutions Date:Tuesday, April 12, 2022 9:18:33 AM Some people who received this message don't often get email from cpfinearts@yahoo.com. Learnwhy this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear City of Palo Alto, I was disappointed to find out that I now need to pay for parking on the street where I live. Like many other Palo Alto residents, I pay hefty real estate taxes that should cover residential parking. In addition, the company the city has contracted with, Duncan Solutions, has software that has is problematic. After 10 emails and several phone calls, I am still not able to purchase a parking permit. The dissatisfaction with the city's dicision is shared by many of my neighbors as well as the difficulty obtaining the permits through Duncan Solutions. Sincerely, Christina Pahl From:Douglas Charles Kerr To:Council, City Subject:Castilleja School Neighbor Date:Tuesday, April 12, 2022 8:02:20 AM Some people who received this message don't often get email from douglask@stanford.edu. Learnwhy this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Hello, I write as a neighbor—Churchill Ave—and supporter of Castilleja School. The school is a nationally renowned institution and delivers girls the unique opportunity to learn in a single- sex environment and benefit from the school's outstanding leadership curriculum. More high school girls from Palo Alto should have this opportunity if they seek it. I hope to see the enrollment grow. I am impressed that Castilleja has consistently demonstrated respect for the City and neighbors by proposing a solution that allows the school to grow without adversely impacting neighbors. Castilleja has met with neighbors over 50 times and iterated its plans meaningfully in response to the variety of opinions in the neighborhood. It’s time to finally move forward. I see absolutely no traffic from the school during non-Covid times and dismiss any claim of traffic as false. I furthermore, do not understand the argument that it lessens the “quality of life.” If people are really concerned about that, they should focus on the many houses that have no occupancy. I can count at least 10 within the few blocks around Castilleja. Best, Douglas Kerr From:Loran Harding To:Loran Harding; Mayor; Mark Standriff; Gabriel.Ramirez@fresno.gov; bballpod; David Balakian; bearwithme1016@att.net; beachrides; fred beyerlein; Cathy Lewis; Chris Field; Council, City; Doug Vagim; dennisbalakian; Daniel Zack; esmeralda.soria@fresno.gov; George.Rutherford@ucsf.edu; huidentalsanmateo; hennessy; Irv Weissman; jerry ruopoli; Joel Stiner; kfsndesk; karkazianjewelers@gmail.com; lalws4@gmail.com; mthibodeaux@electriclaboratories.com; newsdesk; news@fresnobee.com; nick yovino; russ@topperjewelers.com; Sally Thiessen; Scott Wilkinson; tsheehan; terry; VT3126782@gmail.com; vallesR1969@att.net; Steve Wayte; dallen1212@gmail.com; margaret-sasaki@live.com Subject:Fwd: Pres. Biden cracks down on ghost guns. Date:Tuesday, April 12, 2022 3:11:24 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> Date: Tue, Apr 12, 2022 at 2:57 AM Subject: Pres. Biden cracks down on ghost guns. To: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> Monday, April 11, 2022: At the WH: Biden acts against ghost guns. He also introduces his nominee to be the new head of the ATF. Impressive guy. I like that racketeering charge he brought agaist a gang as U.S. Attorney. That was used in Calif. a few years ago, I think. Use the slider to get to the 15 min. mark where it really starts. Super important topic. I can hardly believe that they are acting. Congress, in fact, will not! Live: Biden announces new actions to fight gun crime - YouTube About 40 min. of actual content. Very important topic and action. Sounds bouring? Just watch it! L. William Harding Fresno, Ca. From:Christina Gwin To:Council, City; Architectural Review Board; Planning Commission Subject:support for Castilleja Date:Monday, April 11, 2022 8:11:48 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from my1gwinevere@gmail.com.Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Commissioners, I support Castilleja’s project. I am a near neighbor who is increasingly growing frustrated by many in the community who are refusing to compromise. Castilleja’s plan has been independently vetted and publicly scrutinized. It has been revised over and over and over. The School has proven that it is capable of listening, modifying, complying, and delivering. I understand the perspective of many nearby homeowners who purchased their homes when the school primarily served boarders (the school had also already been around for several decades). Life was different then. We are fortunate to live in a vibrant community with access to phenomenal resources–both public and private. But let’s face it, Palo Alto and our surrounding neighborhoods have become more vibrant because life in Silicon Valley has changed dramatically, even in the last 15 years. I fear that in an attempt to hold on to the past, the future of our community is being compromised. The future is about providing a strong foundation for children. Education is a means to that end, and Castilleja simply wishes to grant more children-girls–the opportunity to learn in the only non-sectarian girls school in Northern California. Yes, we have fantastic schools around us, but Castilleja is the only of its kind for hundreds of miles. And yet, a girls’ school is being told it is “too ambitious.” The irony of this statement is not lost on me. Those facts aside, Castilleja’s modernization proposal is strong on its merits. An underground garage will move cars off the street, preserve greenspace, and improve the Bryant Bike Boulevard. The academic buildings have been designed keeping student wellbeing top of mind. Plus, the building footprint is a reduction of what is currently on campus. Everything about the proposal has been under review for years. Neighbors have shared their opinion. Experts have weighed in. The School has updated the plans to integrate all these voices. The plans are ready. Please, keep the FACTS at the forefront of your deliberations as you work towards finding a path to approve Castilleja’s project. Thank you, Christina Gwin Churchill Ave From:Pete and Laura Zappas To:Council, City Subject:In Support of Castilleja Date:Monday, April 11, 2022 7:04:01 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from lpzappas@gmail.com. Learnwhy this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Commissioners, I am writing to express my support for the Castilleja School project. The School’s plans have several features that will significantly improve the neighborhood aesthetic: reduced square footage, less massing, lower rooflines, great setbacks from the street, and still present a beautiful design. Castilleja’s modernization plan has taken into account years of neighborhood comments and years of compromise. It’s time to approve their incredibly thorough and thoughtful project. I see many mutually beneficial aspects of the project: Enrollment increases are contingent upon keeping car trips capped at current levels. Incentives to comply are already built into the plan, and there are many incentives. An underground parking garage removes cars from the street and makes Bryant’s bike boulevard safer. The option of a 69 car garage maximizes this benefit. More than 100 new trees will be planted; the latest design of the pool and parking garage actually saves additional trees. The facade on Kellogg integrates design elements that reflect the character of the neighborhood. The entire plan has a square footage that is less than the current above ground square footage. It is a reduction, NOT an expansion. I hope you also agree that Castilleja’s project has enumerable merits. It’s environmentally sound and exceeds the goals set forth by Palo Alto’s master plan. The school has worked tirelessly to present credible options that improve traffic patterns, aesthetics, and quality of life for everyone without harming trees. Aren’t we all in agreement that the entire community will benefit from the aforementioned? Please consider these points and approve Castilleja’s plan. It’s time to forge ahead, support the only secular all-girls school in the Bay Area, and rebuild our community. When we focus on the education of our children, all of society will benefit. Sincerely, Pete Zappas From:Nigel To:City Mgr; Council, City Subject:Twilight Concert Series this year????? Date:Monday, April 11, 2022 2:57:38 PM [Some people who received this message don't often get email from nigeltufnel11@comcast.net. Learn why this is important at http://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification.] CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ Hello, The twilight concerts each summer have been a highlight for many families for 35 years or more. People of all ages enjoy the variety of music in our beautiful parks in a safe, socially distanced environment. I urge you to bring back a full schedule of concerts this year. Please assign this series of events to a team of people who care about getting families outside with a wide variety of music styles In particular, it seems that there are many potential corporate sponsors in the city who can help make them fun again. The last few years of the series seem to be managed as an afterthought. My children are now in their thirties but they remember the concerts in the parks from their youth and they still enjoy attending with their children (my Grandkids). The City of Menlo Park is bringing back their music program this year. Los Altos has live music downtown quite often. Why not Palo Alto? Regards, Sent from my iPad