Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2022-10-24 City Council EmailsFrom:Steven Rouman To:Council, City Subject:Palo Alto Parklet Program Date:Monday, October 24, 2022 4:00:05 PM Attachments:image001.png RH Letter re Parklet (01218718xA4507)[3].pdf Some people who received this message don't often get email from srouman@rh.com. Learn whythis is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear City of Palo Alto – Please find the attached for your consideration. Regards – Steve STEVE ROUMAN SVP, REAL ESTATE C 312.636.2893 October 24, 2022 VIA EMAIL Palo Alto City Council 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, California 94301 RE: Removal of Parklet Encroaching in Front of 281 University Dear Palo Alto City Council: We write to request the immediate removal of the temporary parklet that was erected and encroaches in front of the Restoration Hardware (“RH”) store located at 281 University Avenue, Palo Alto. The parklet was meant to be temporary, initially erected by 271 Local Union to address the extremely unusual circumstances prompted by the COVID-19 pandemic, which had a significant impact on in-store dining and patronage. The Parklet Standards and Requirements provide that “The temporary parklet program allows Palo Altans to more safely enjoy local establishments in an environment that, due to being outdoors, decreases the risk of spreading COVID-19. The parklets also provide an amenity for businesses that may help them continue operations.” The impact of the pandemic on business operations in Palo Alto, specifically, the University Avenue neighborhood, has settled, if not completely resolved, and while the need for the temporary parklets can continue outside of their own facility at the discretion of the dining outlet, there is no justification for any of the parklet to encroach on neighboring businesses, which have also been impacted, and make it worse for them. The parklet clearly impacts RH’s business as the parklet extends in front of the RH street side windows, restricting and blocking the view of the storefront, which displays furniture and other merchandise to customers. Further, the parklet occupies two parking spots located directly in front of the store, which also impacts the ability of customers to patronize the store. With the holiday season approaching, it is essential that RH be able to display merchandise and advertise to the general public. Any prior permission granted by RH to erect the parklet was given under the clear premise that this was a temporary measure, designed to assist eating and drinking businesses such as cafes, restaurants, and retail food establishments through a crisis that no longer exists. RH cooperated with the temporary parklet program and has been a good neighbor to the University Avenue community and consented to the temporary parklet program to assist its fellow commercial neighbors. RH now requests that the portion of the parklet that encroaches in front of the 281 University Avenue location, including the parking spaces, be removed. Thank you for your attention to this request. Very truly yours, Steve Rouman Senior Vice President, Real Estate CC: Steve Sinchek From:Neilson Buchanan To:Architectural Review Board; Eggleston, Brad Cc:Council, City; Shikada, Ed; Kamhi, Philip Subject:Plywood Gourmet and Modern Architecture Date:Monday, October 24, 2022 3:00:02 PM Attachments:Parklets VS Sheds Curbed Oct 24 2022.pdf University Avenue Palo Alto Signage Oct 2022.pdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. I am intrigued by your professional leadership for Palo Alto architecture. I don't envy your role for civil engineering, health/safety and whatever parklet appendage will be attractive, enduring and coherent with the streetscape. I am skeptical that ARB's traditional aspirations will flow harmoniously with the next sprouting and maintenance of parkets. The new signage and large overhang of Avocado adds to my concerns. See attached photo. Neilson Buchanan 155 Bryant Street Palo Alto, CA 94301 650 329-0484 650 537-9611 cell cnsbuchanan@yahoo.com From:Aram James To:Dave Price; Emily Mibach; Braden Cartwright; Raj; Sean Allen; Jethroe Moore; Winter Dellenbach; Council, City; Planning Commission; Julie Lythcott-Haims; Bill Johnson; Jeff Rosen; Jay Boyarsky; Josh Becker; Shikada, Ed; Julie Lythcott-Haims; Vicki Veenker; Doria Summa; Shana Segal; Joe Simitian; Supervisor Susan Ellenberg; Stump, Molly; Greg Tanaka; ParkRec Commission; Binder, Andrew Subject:"Free Speech Issue”: Meet the Arkansas Publisher & Lawyer Asking SCOTUS ... Date:Monday, October 24, 2022 2:50:52 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ Boycott Israel! https://youtu.be/4PUVYzPpYvo Sent from my iPhone From:Kim Harvey To:Council, City Subject:Measure E land Date:Monday, October 24, 2022 2:50:41 PM [Some people who received this message don't often get email from kimharvey916@yahoo.com. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ Dear City Council Members, I was discouraged to hear that you would even consider using the 10 acres near the wastewater treatment plant for anything other than a purpose that will help us meet our environmental goals. We voted for this several years back. We do not need more parkland near the Baylands and we desperately need to move faster towards avoiding further climate disaster. We need an organic waste conversion plant. We need to work towards water recycling. Respectfully, Kim Harvey From:Nancy Coupal To:Council, City; Shikada, Ed; Guagliardo, Steven Subject:Permanent Parklet Program Critical Issue Date:Monday, October 24, 2022 2:49:09 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from nancy@coupacafe.com. Learnwhy this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. To our Honorable Mayor, Vice Mayor and Members of the City Council: As a small business owner for the last 19 years in Palo Alto with multiple locations, I am writing to you today to direct your attention to a critical component of the Permanent Parklet Program. PALO ALTO PERMANENT PARKLETS PROGRAM (pg 192 of packet) In the process of developing a permanent Parklet Program for the City ofPalo Alto, it is stated: “The City of Palo Alto has developed a PermanentParklet Program that will allow for parklet installations in eligible areas ofPalo Alto. The program is designed for eating establishments with theintended purpose of supporting the vibrancy of the public realm andenhancing the civic experience of diners, pedestrians, motorists, andcyclists”. This is and should be the premise on which any Parklet program isdesigned and implemented in order to accomplish the goals set out. We all know the reason that Parklets were established during the pandemicand I believe it is clear that our lives and our community have changed as aresult of the pandemic. Parklets and pedestrian friendly streets havebecome a mainstay of many communities and welcomed in our changedworld. Finally, outdoor dining in our City is possible and greatly appreciatedby all. The City Council is to decide again on the rules for Parklets in the City Council meeting on the October 24th agenda. Of utmost concern is thefollowing from page 192 of the Agenda Packet: “Parklet Neighbor Consent Letter": "During the current pilot parklet program, the City has received complaints from some in the community that parkletsimpede the visibility or perceived access to neighboring commercialspaces. This has created some conflicts between a parklet owner’sdesire to have a more expansive parklet and an adjacent tenant’sinterest in maintaining visual access to potential customers. Based onstaff research of other jurisdictions’ parklet programs, there are a variety ofapproaches that can be used to receive consent (or not) from adjacent neighboring businesses. Generally, there are four approaches": 1) City requires a letter of consent for all parklets, 2) City requires a letter of consent if the parklet extends over a neighboringstorefront, 3) City does not require a letter of consent, or 4) City does not allow the parklet to encroach over the neighboringstorefront. Whether or not visibility or perceived access to neighboring commercialspaces can be determined on a case-by-case basis, and in fact a parkedcar can also block visibility or perceived access. Nevertheless, The City ofPalo Alto is the sole owner of the Sidewalk and the Street, and the Cityof Palo Alto intends to charge a fee for the Parklets. This fee is to increaseCity revenue, and the use of Parklets will also increase Sales Tax for theCity by increased sales through the outdoor seating provided on theParklets. The City of Palo Alto is the sole owner/keeper of sidewalks and streets andno private parties may claim the rights over this area. No private propertyowners nor businesses take over maintenance or repair of the sidewalksand streets.“Requiring or even Allowing” the possibility of a “letter ofconsent from adjacent neighboring businesses” may lead to undesirableattempts at Coercion or even Extortion in the process of trying to obtainsaid letter of consent in some cases. What is to stop a neighbor fromdemanding financial reward for providing a letter of consent, or preventneighboring landlords from manipulation of an adjacent business fromproviding a letter of consent? There are no safeguards and they would be very difficult to implement. I urge you to go with option 3) City does not require a letter of consent (pg192) This option #3, is the only safeguard against misuse of opportunity and alsofulfills the purpose of the Parklet Program: supporting the vibrancy of thepublic realm and enhancing the civic experience of diners,pedestrians, motorists, and cyclists”. I hope you recognize that the majority of Parklets in Palo Alto are alreadybuilt and those Parklets were established to accomplish the goals of theprogram. The City should be clear that “only the City” should make decisions on permits and fees to benefit the City and its citizens. Consent from neighboring businesses should NOT be a part of the rules established for permanent parklets. Please completely eliminate #12 from: VI. PERMIT APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS 12. Letter(s) of Support – A parklet applicant must get a letter of support from the neighboring ground-floor tenant(s) and 18building owner(s) if more than half of a marked parking space is not in front of the applicant’s storefront, or if any part of an unmarked parking space is not in front of the applicant’s storefront (see Figure 9). [Note to City: Draft template to be provided, still being drafted by staff]. a. If the tenancy and/or ownership of the neighboring property changes, Public Works may require the parklet sponsor to submit an updated letter of support to continue utilizing any space extending into a neighboring frontage regardless of the status of the parklet license at the time of change of ownership/tenancy. b. Consent to occupy neighboring space as part of a parklet permit is revocable by nature; and, if such support is revoked, or if parklet occupancy is not in accordance with the terms of any applicable law, these regulations, and/or any permit requirement, the parklet sponsor is responsible for the removal of any structure placed in the right of way under the parklet permit, including any applicable portion of the parklet permit extending into a neighboring frontage. c. Parklet sponsor must obtain an up-to-date letter of support for any future license renewals as requested by Public Works during future permit renewal processes. Contrary to what some landlords may say, Parklets have definitelycontributed to the livelihood and continued existence of restaurants, whichare the primary businesses keeping Palo Alto as a destination for visitors. Retail has suffered as times have changed, and frankly, withoutrestaurants/eating establishments, Palo Alto would not attract visitors to thedowntown or Cal Ave area. Finally, I urge you to extend the date for establishing the incorporation ofpermanent parklets from June 30, 2023 to be in conjunction with on-streetand parking lot dining and retail programs to December 31, 2023 for greatercoherence and coordination of goal oriented City programs. Thank you for your time and attention to this matter. Best wishes, Nancy Coupal, Founder and CEO Coupa Cafe From:Carol Scott To:Council, City; Shikada, Ed Subject:Plans for North Venture Development Date:Monday, October 24, 2022 2:38:40 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Council Members and City Manager, I urge you to listen carefully to the concerns expressed by Palo Alto Neighborhoods (PAN) in their communications to you. The members of this organization know this area better than anyone. They are not NIMBYS who want no additional housing in their neighborhood. Instead, they welcome appropriate development that will not destroy their community. If you have ever traveled through the streets of this area, you know how incredibly tight they are -- as narrow as those in Southgate -- and how packed with cars parking on both sides of the street they are. You know that there are limited streets providing a way in and out of the neighborhood. Putting a massive development there with no plant for traffic and no plan for the cars that will be there is not wise. While hopefully people will make fewer trips in their cars, they will own cars (necessary for many trips because of our poor mass transit opportunities) and they have to go somewhere. People in this neighborhood need sunlight and open space just as the rest of Palo Alto. We do not need more office space. Please consider the proposed agreed with Sobrato carefully. Work toward an adaptation that will work well for the community as well as for Sobrato. This one of the last "affordable" neighborhoods in Palo Alto. Please do not turn it into a jumbled mess. Thank you. Carol Scott Evergreen Park -- Carol Scott From:Aram James To:Binder, Andrew; Shana Segal; Sean Allen; Jethroe Moore; Winter Dellenbach; Jeff Rosen; Jay Boyarsky; Shikada, Ed; Council, City; Julie Lythcott-Haims; vicki@vickiforcouncil.com; Rebecca Eisenberg; Josh Becker; Doria Summa; ladoris cordell; Richard Konda; Karen Holman; Greg Tanaka; Joe Simitian; Greer Stone; Roberta Ahlquist; Raj; Rob Baker; Council, City; chuck jagoda; Human Relations Commission; Wagner, April; Reifschneider, James; Enberg, Nicholas; Perron, Zachary; Vara Ramakrishnan Subject:Police Dogs Return ( Today’s Daily Post) Monday Oct 24, 22 by Aram James Date:Monday, October 24, 2022 2:34:18 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.________________________________ Sent from my iPhone From:Jenny Kugizaki To:Council, City Subject:Ramona St, Warby Parker Date:Monday, October 24, 2022 2:22:12 PM Attachments:Palo Alto City Council Letter (2).pdf Some people who received this message don't often get email from jenny.kugizaki@warbyparker.com. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Members of the City Council, I hope this email finds you well, my name is Jennifer Kugizaki and I am the District Leader that oversees the Warby PArker located on Ramona Street in downtown Palo Alto . I wanted to share previous correspondence with you, ahead of the city council meeting this evening, for your further consideration for the future of Ramona Street. Feel free to reach out if you have any questions. Best, -- Jenny Kugizaki WARBY PARKER We’ve got your eyes covered. Follow us: Instagram, Twitter, Facebook October 24th, 2022 Palo Alto City Council 250 Hamilton Ave Palo Alto, CA 94301 Members of the City Council, I am writing in opposition of, and asking you to vote against, the upcoming city proposal to permanently close Ramona Street. I am writing on the behalf of Warby Parker located at 555 Ramona Street in Palo Alto. As a local business, we ask you to support the business community on Ramona Street by reopening the street to parking, traffic and business visibility. The past two years we understand there has been a need for outdoor spaces and outdoor dining to support both our local communities safety and the economic interests of local restaurants. Those needs have now changed with indoor dining being allowed, Santa Clara vaccination rates above 85% and indoor mask mandates ending in California on February 15th, 2022. We urge the council to begin the process of reopening our city streets, as you did with University Avenue, and begin the process of returning Palo Alto to its former city plan. As an essential business that serves the Palo Alto community in their eyecare and vision needs, it is critical that our customers have the greatest opportunity to find and easily access our business. With the closure of Ramona Street, we have seen a negative impact in customer traffic, difficulty in finding our location and navigating disruptive behavior outside our doors from the parklets. While we have continued to hold consistent open hours as a retail business, we have not seen this same consistency in the neighboring dining establishments operating hours. This has created negative traffic on Ramona Street and empty parklets. We are always in support of the needs of the Palo Alto community. In reviewing all of the community written requests in the City agenda, it is clear that there is an overwhelming support in the continuation of closure on California Ave. Those same comments did not include Ramona Street with the same support and in fact, there was other opposition from other Ramona Street local business owners. With this in mind, we ask you consider these nuances in your voting and reopen Ramona Street for free navigation and traffic. Thank you for your consideration in taking our economic need as a local business in voting for this important issue that impacts all business owners on Ramona Street. Sincerely, Dustin Underwood, Warby Parker Regional Director Jennifer Kugizaki, Warby Parker District Leader From:Roberta Ahlquist To:Aram James Cc:Kristen and Leo Johnson; Karen Holman; Julie Lythcott-Haims; Vicki Veenker; Doria Summa; Shana Segal; Alison Cormack; Filseth, Eric (Internal); Greg Tanaka; Winter Dellenbach; Jethroe Moore; Greer Stone; Sean Allen; Shikada, Ed; Jay Boyarsky; Rebecca Eisenberg; wilpf.peninsula.paloalto@gmail.com; Jay Boyarsky; Peter Drekmeier; Bill Johnson; Diana Diamond; Gennady Sheyner; Lydia Kou; Lewis. james; ladoris cordell; Council, City; Human Relations Commission; Planning Commission; ParkRec Commission; citycouncil@mountainview.gov; EPA Today; Joe Simitian Subject:Re: Please join me in voting for Julie Lythcott Haims,Vicki Veenker & Doria Summa ( all extraordinary candidates) Time for three strong additional women on our city council) Date:Monday, October 24, 2022 2:14:58 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. VOTE FOR MAJOR CHANGE! JULIE, LISA AND VICKI STOP CARVING UP THE FRY R ZONED PROPERTY AND BUILD MIXED HOUSING ON THE 14 ACRES! Roberta Ahlquist PA Senior low-income Housing Committe On Sun, Oct 23, 2022 at 10:07 PM Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> wrote: Hi Kristen, Of course I should change the title. You are absolutely correct! I’m a little slow and getting slower lol. Julie is as you say beyond AWESOME!! My entire family is voting for Julie —and not only did she spend at least an hour discussing her campaign in a visit to our home she took the time to visit my son Lewis at his apartment here in town. Vicki and Doria did the same. All three candidates went out of the way for me and my son Lewis. All three when elected will be fantastic for our city. Best, aram Sent from my iPhone On Oct 23, 2022, at 9:15 PM, Kristen Johnson <graffikdezine@comcast.net> wrote: Hi Aram! You should change the title on your email! It reads vote Summa, Veenker and Lauing! Shouldn’t you change Lauing to Lythcott- Haims? Julie is AWESOME!! I’m voting for her, Vicki, and Forsell. Cheers, Kristen. Sent from my iPhone On Oct 23, 2022, at 8:16 PM, Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> wrote:  Hi Karen, I’m voting Vicky, Doria, and Julie. Time for 3 strong women on the council. Julie brilliant off the wall so. Ed far from my piece of cake. Time for a very strong black woman on council . We have had no strong brilliant black women on council since LaDoris and Hillary. Karen, I have to say I’m beyond shocked you would vote for Ed Lauing over Julie Lythcott Haims. What’s up with that? Really time to rethink your choice here, aram On Oct 23, 2022, at 6:22 PM, Karen Holman <rsvp.paloalto.2022@gmail.com> wrote: Who we elect to City Council is serious business. We can live with the results of Council decisions for years. Some decisions are literally irreversible even when negative results have been recognized. The responsibility, and it is that, of selecting Council members is one of the most important things any of us do as residents or business owners in our cities and towns. When it comes to deciding what candidates to support for Palo Alto City Council, a lot of things come into consideration for me. It’s a long list, but I hope you find it helpful in making your choices: • Is the candidate experienced, is the candidate intelligent, is the candidate analytical? • What are the candidate’s positions on the things that matter to me personally and that I think will make Palo Alto a better place in the future? • Is the candidate knowledgeable about the issues as well as the likely impacts of how decisions are going to play out on the ground? • Are they respectful of others? • Can they express disagreement without being disagreeable? • Has the person demonstrated good integrity? • Will the candidate be a collaborator with others on the Council? • Will the candidate listen to the public’s ideas and concerns? • Will the candidate meaningfully consider others’ opinions? • Does the candidate look broadly at the environmental issues that human beings face and that plants and animals are telling us are in critical need of action? • Do candidates speak about climate change with an understanding that converting to electric, while important, is only one piece of a much larger picture that we must address? • Can the candidate speak beyond vision statements and address specifics including recognizing the need for funding? • Does the candidate have knowledge of the value of Economic Development? • Does the candidate understand the scope and limitations of the job of a Council member? • Do they understand how the City works? • Have been involved in meaningful ways in the community, especially civically? • Can the candidate think creatively about problem solving? • Do they have the courage to make difficult decisions even when not the most popular? • Does the candidate respect the need for process to provide transparency, public participation, predictability and orderly outcomes? • Does the candidate express good design sensibilities? This is especially important given Council approves many development projects and appoint both Architectural Review Board and Art Commission members. • Does the candidate support the need for code enforcement so everyone has to equally work within Palo Alto’s rules? There is a saying that the most difficult politics is local politics. I can attest to that. It requires the intelligence, temperament, patience and open mind that can view issues within context and with sleeves rolled up. We have good reason to be grateful that Doria Summa, Vicki Veenker, and Ed Lauing, three very capable candidates, have stepped forward to serve the public. These three I’ve found to satisfy all the numerous criteria listed. Doria Summa * Community service, 15 years * Planning Commission, 6 yrs, current Vice Chair * Affordable housing advocate * Neighborhood leader * Experience and expertise on City and State laws * Broad environmental knowledge Vicki Veenker * Consensus builder, State law on healthcare cost * Mediator for federal courts, 16 years * Founder, Sibling Cities USA * Law Foundation Board, 20 years, bringing justice to underserved communities * Patent attorney, 35 years * Volunteer Hotel de Zink and Food Closet Ed Lauing * Planning Commission, 6 years, 2 times Chair * Parks and Recreation Commission, 7 years, 2 times Chair * Housing Element Working Group * Collegial collaborator toward sensible solutions * Decades of business experience incl. startups I strongly recommend Summa, Veenker and Lauing to you for City Council. Please join me in supporting these candidates who will bring the breadth of experience and abilities as well as their essential human qualities to the dais. We need leaders like these. You can read more about each of these excellent candidates on their websites. https://www.vickiforcouncil.com https://doriasumma.com https://www.edlauing.com Be well, be safe, be happy. Karen Holman Former Palo Alto Mayor From:Roberta Ahlquist To:Aram James Cc:Karen Holman; Julie Lythcott-Haims; vicki@vickiforcouncil.com; Doria Summa; Planning Commission; Jethroe Moore; Winter Dellenbach; Binder, Andrew; Sean Allen; Shikada, Ed; Council, City; Greer Stone; Jay Boyarsky; Rebecca Eisenberg; Joe Simitian; Josh Becker; chuck jagoda; Human Relations Commission Subject:Re: Please join me in voting for Summa, Veenker and Lauing for City Council. Date:Monday, October 24, 2022 2:08:47 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Please vote for CHANGE. WE desperately need service sector and senior housing for low- and moderate income residents, workers.USE FREY'S , CUBBERLEY, THE TRANSIT CENTER, not fragmented parcels out near the freeway. vote for JULIE, LISA AND VICKI. Roberta Ahlquis with PA Senior Low-income Husig Committee! On Sun, Oct 23, 2022 at 7:53 PM Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> wrote: Hi Karen, I’m voting Vicky, Doria, and Julie. Time for 3 strong women on the council. Julie brilliant off the wall so. Ed not far from my piece of cake. Time for a very strong black woman on council . We have had no strong brilliant black women on council since LaDoris and Hillary. Karen, I have to say I’m beyond shocked you would vote for Ed Lauing over Julie Lythcott Haims. What’s up with that? Really time to rethink your choice here, aram On Oct 23, 2022, at 6:22 PM, Karen Holman <rsvp.paloalto.2022@gmail.com> wrote: Who we elect to City Council is serious business. We can live with the results of Council decisions for years. Some decisions are literally irreversible even when negative results have been recognized. The responsibility, and it is that, of selecting Council members is one of the most important things any of us do as residents or business owners in our cities and towns. When it comes to deciding what candidates to support for Palo Alto City Council, a lot of things come into consideration for me. It’s a long list, but I hope you find it helpful in making your choices: • Is the candidate experienced, is the candidate intelligent, is the candidate analytical? • What are the candidate’s positions on the things that matter to me personally and that I think will make Palo Alto a better place in the future? • Is the candidate knowledgeable about the issues as well as the likely impacts of how decisions are going to play out on the ground? • Are they respectful of others? • Can they express disagreement without being disagreeable? • Has the person demonstrated good integrity? • Will the candidate be a collaborator with others on the Council? • Will the candidate listen to the public’s ideas and concerns? • Will the candidate meaningfully consider others’ opinions? • Does the candidate look broadly at the environmental issues that human beings face and that plants and animals are telling us are in critical need of action? • Do candidates speak about climate change with an understanding that converting to electric, while important, is only one piece of a much larger picture that we must address? • Can the candidate speak beyond vision statements and address specifics including recognizing the need for funding? • Does the candidate have knowledge of the value of Economic Development? • Does the candidate understand the scope and limitations of the job of a Council member? • Do they understand how the City works? • Have been involved in meaningful ways in the community, especially civically? • Can the candidate think creatively about problem solving? • Do they have the courage to make difficult decisions even when not the most popular? • Does the candidate respect the need for process to provide transparency, public participation, predictability and orderly outcomes? • Does the candidate express good design sensibilities? This is especially important given Council approves many development projects and appoint both Architectural Review Board and Art Commission members. • Does the candidate support the need for code enforcement so everyone has to equally work within Palo Alto’s rules? There is a saying that the most difficult politics is local politics. I can attest to that. It requires the intelligence, temperament, patience and open mind that can view issues within context and with sleeves rolled up. We have good reason to be grateful that Doria Summa, Vicki Veenker, and Ed Lauing, three very capable candidates, have stepped forward to serve the public. These three I’ve found to satisfy all the numerous criteria listed. Doria Summa * Community service, 15 years * Planning Commission, 6 yrs, current Vice Chair * Affordable housing advocate * Neighborhood leader * Experience and expertise on City and State laws * Broad environmental knowledge Vicki Veenker * Consensus builder, State law on healthcare cost * Mediator for federal courts, 16 years * Founder, Sibling Cities USA * Law Foundation Board, 20 years, bringing justice to underserved communities * Patent attorney, 35 years * Volunteer Hotel de Zink and Food Closet Ed Lauing * Planning Commission, 6 years, 2 times Chair * Parks and Recreation Commission, 7 years, 2 times Chair * Housing Element Working Group * Collegial collaborator toward sensible solutions * Decades of business experience incl. startups I strongly recommend Summa, Veenker and Lauing to you for City Council. Please join me in supporting these candidates who will bring the breadth of experience and abilities as well as their essential human qualities to the dais. We need leaders like these. You can read more about each of these excellent candidates on their websites. https://www.vickiforcouncil.com https://doriasumma.com https://www.edlauing.com Be well, be safe, be happy. Karen Holman Former Palo Alto Mayor From:Lauren Weston To:Council, City; Burt, Patrick; Kou, Lydia; Stone, Greer; Filseth, Eric (Internal); DuBois, Tom; Cormack, Alison; Tanaka, Greg Subject:Support: Moving to electric heat pumps Date:Monday, October 24, 2022 1:28:44 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from lauren.weston@acterra.org.Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Hello, I am Lauren Weston, Executive Director of Acterra: Action for a Healthy Planet, one of Environmental non- profit tenants of the Peninsula Conservation Center (PCC) in southwestern Palo Alto. We are proud to be the first Palo Alto non-residential building to be in the permitting process to replace roof top gas heaters with electric Heat Pumps! Thank you and congratulations on your recent adoption of new, aggressive Climate Goals, Key Actions and the new residential Hot Water Heater program. And thank you for highlighting the need to move quickly on space heating, an even larger source of Greenhouse gasses. Your direction to have the Committee review prospective commercial space heating programs makes sense. It will mean a focus on converting roof-top gas fired heaters with Heat Pumps; exactly what we at the PCC are doing. The PCC board (on which I sit) and PCC staff have been working with City Staff on a Building Permit to convert 8 Roof- top Gas-fired Heaters to Electric Heat Pumps. City staff have been helpful; we have learned a lot and have 3 basic suggestions to help others go through the permit process, specific to space heating Heat Pumps. 1) is not resource intensive and the PCC would like to help work on it now. Relatively small actors with mid- sized buildings like ours need a short written guide to navigate us thru the permit process, specifically for Space Heating Heat Pump conversions. Based on what we’ve learned during permitting we think can help create a 3-6 page guide to speed up conversions. Public Works and the Building Division have discussed this briefly and all seem to think it is a good idea. 2) is related, and the PCC can also help. It is to gather certain info on Heat Pumps so that not everyone going through permitting has to reinvent the wheels that we have struggled with. Again, not resource intensive, and will save time and money for both the City and applicants. 3) Is the biggest lift: The City’s visibility municipal code requirements need to be modified to allow Staff to approve good looking alternatives to screens for Heat Pumps in appropriate locations. We urge you make to this needed Code revision a part of the Committee’s considerations as soon as practical. Again, thank you for all your work and actions on our Climate crises !! The PCC looks forward to getting our Building Permit and inviting you to our Heat Pump installation celebration. We could not do our work with the dedication of your team and our elected officials. Lauren Weston Executive Director Acterra: Action for a Healthy Planet 530.219.2813 From:Agrishow Experience To:Council, City Subject:Produtor de cana, tenho uma novidade Date:Monday, October 24, 2022 12:24:00 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from agrishow@informa.com. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious ofopening attachments and clicking on links. Em caso de dificuldades para ler este e-mail, leia a versão online Agrishow Experience Olá, funny_hardcore_sex Mit Não é segredo que se você busca conteúdo de qualidade sobre o agro, você tem que participar da Agrishow Experience. Na próxima segunda vamos falar sobre a cana e a programação está imperdível! Não esquece: dia 31 de outubro a partir das 19h. Você já conhece o Painel Tecnologia? O painel “Tecnologias para potencializar a produtividade, rentabilidade e sustentabilidade” reúne o diretor do Centro de Cana do IAC, Marcos Landell, o professor titular do Departamento de Genética da ESALQ/USP, Carlos Alberto Labate e o diretor de Desenvolvimento Agronômico da Raízen, Carlos Daniel Berro, que dão um panorama sobre as principais inovações tecnológicas que estão em desenvolvimento e as disponíveis ao mercado para o setor, com uma visão da pesquisa e da indústria. PARTICIPE! Você já pode salvar o lembrete na sua agenda para garantir a participação! CLIQUE E SALVE NA SUA AGENDA! E TEM MAIS! A Agrishow Experience tem várias atrações para você aproveitar! Confira cada uma delas: Webinars com temas relacionados ao agronegócio; Papo com Especialistas: conheça produtos e soluções para o agronegócio; Por Aqui Deu Certo: confira cases e histórias de sucesso de produtores rurais que conseguiram bons resultados em seu negócio; Agrishow Pra Elas: encontro entre as mulheres do agro para compartilharem suas histórias inspiradoras e experiências no setor; Direto ao Ponto: vídeos com temas relevantes que visam agregar valor ao dia a dia dos produtores. APROVEITE A AGRISHOW EXPERIENCE TRANSMISSÃO AO VIVO E COM TRADUÇÃO EM LIBRAS Assim como todos os nossos eventos digitais deste ano, a Agrishow Experience também conta com a tradução em libras. Queremos ampliar o acesso ao conhecimento e a conteúdos de qualidade a cada vez mais pessoas. Comunidade Agro Futurecom Patrocínio Master ZF Patrocínio Premium Furukawa Electric Informação boa a gente compartilha! Clique para convidar seus amigos. Acompanhe todas as novidades da feira também em nossas redes sociais. Agrishow 2023 Este e-mail foi enviado a você pela divisão de mercados da Informa PLC (Política de privacidade). A sede da Informa PLC fica em 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registrada na Inglaterra e País de Gales. Número 8860726. Caso não queira receber mais informações enviadas por nós, clique aqui. Uma alternativa é entrar em contato com nossa equipe de serviços de dados para atualizar os detalhes e as preferências; para isso, envie um e-mail para imdatateam@informa.com. From:Jason Villarreal To:Council, City Cc:Guagliardo, Steven Subject:Permanent Parklet Program Discussion & Direction: Owner Feedback for Today"s Meeting Date:Monday, October 24, 2022 10:53:25 AM Attachments:image001.png image002.png Some people who received this message don't often get email from jvillarreal@shpco.com. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Hello and good morning, City Council Members: My name is Jason Villarreal and I just started with Sand Hill Properties Company working directly for Peter Pau serving as the COO and Head of Asset Management, Residential. I wanted to introduce myself and get to know the City of Palo Alto team as I’m sure we’ll be working and collaborating together and often. I am reaching out to share owner feedback and concern on the Permanent Parklet Program Discussion and Direction from an ownership perspective in regard to our retail building at 281 University Avenue which houses the Restoration Hardware store. As shown in the picture below, it reflects that the restaurants next door have extended into the parking spots in front of our building where retail customers cannot park reasonably in front of the store to shop nor load items purchased into their car within proximity to the store. In addition, it reduces significant visibility of the store especially when the roll shades on the parklet are rolled down. I understand that during the pandemic outside dining and social distancing was very much needed; however, with the pandemic on the mend it doesn’t seem needed as much as most people aren’t wearing masks and have been fully vaccinated with boosters. I wanted to connect to see how we can have the restaurants next door retract their outdoor dining space to the end of their building allowing the area in front of our building to go back to parking spots especially with the retail holiday season on the horizon. We agree that requiring a neighbor consent letter is much needed from property owners similar to San Francisco, San Diego, Pleasanton, and Los Altos parklet program. Thank you for your time and consideration in this matter. Jason Villarreal Chief Operating Officer & Head of Asset Management, Residential 2600 El Camino Real, Suite 410 Palo Alto, CA 94306 T:(650) 772-4049 F:(650) 344-0652 JVillarreal@SHPCO.com From:Charlie Weidanz To:Council, City Subject:Palo Alto Chamber of Commerce - Board of Directors opportunities Date:Monday, October 24, 2022 10:20:17 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. The Palo Alto Chamber of Commerce is seeking nominations to serve on the Palo Alto Chamber Board of Directors. Board terms are for three-years beginning January 2023. Palo Alto Chamber Board members engage with chamber staff to ensure that the Chamber meets its mission and stated goals, and they act as ambassadors in our community to create a positive business climate. The Board represents a broad cross section of business and professional leaders in Palo Alto. Board members are asked to help build a vibrant business community, while providing expertise and sound business skills for a successful chamber. For more information contact Charlie Weidanz at charlie@paloaltochamber.com This email was sent on behalf of Palo Alto Chamber of Commerce 355 Alma St Palo Alto, CA 94301.To unsubscribe click here. If you have questions or comments concerning this email or services in general, please contact us by email at info@paloaltochamber.com. From:rick barry To:Council, City Subject:parklets Date:Monday, October 24, 2022 9:44:11 AM Some people who received this message don't often get email from rick@barryrealestate.net.Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. I am glad you are extending the parklets to permanent status. I am also very pleased you are addressing some of the people that extend their seating 100 feet past their storefront like local union on university. They are blocking off vacant spaces next to them making it very hard for them to rent out the space. Their business could not be seen from the street and they have their heaters and extra chairs completely blocking off their storefront. thanks, rick barry From:HeUpdate To:Ian Faucher; Burt, Patrick; HeUpdate; Council, City; Planning Commission Cc:Lait, Jonathan; Campbell, Clare; Yang, Albert; HousingElements@hcd.ca.gov Subject:RE: Feedback on Palo Alto Housing Element Programs - Palo Alto Forward Date:Monday, October 24, 2022 9:24:21 AM Attachments:image001.png image002.png image004.png image005.png image006.png image007.png Dear Mr. Fulcher, Thank you for your comments. Just to let you know, the City will be releasing the Public Review draft of the Housing Element on November 7. The public has 30 days to review and comment on the draft. After the close of the 30 day review, the City has 10 business days to respond to all public comments received during that time. We will incorporate your submitted comments as part of the City’s response. I wanted to also let you know that as part of the 30 day review period, the City will hold a virtual Community Meeting on November 16, 6 pm, about the public review draft. In addition, the City Council will hold a joint meeting with the Planning and Transportation Commission on November 28 to also review the Public Review draft. For more information, please go to www.paloaltohousinglement.com. Any other questions, please let me know. Tim Tim Wong Senior Planner Planning and Development Services (650) 329-2493 | tim.wong@cityofpaloalto.org www.cityofpaloalto.org From: Ian Faucher <ifaucher@stanford.edu> Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2022 12:36 PM To: Burt, Patrick <Pat.Burt@CityofPaloAlto.org>; HeUpdate <HeUpdate@CityofPaloAlto.org>; Council, City <city.council@cityofpaloalto.org>; Planning Commission <Planning.Commission@cityofpaloalto.org> Some people who received this message don't often get email from ifaucher@stanford.edu. Learn why this is important Cc: Lait, Jonathan <Jonathan.Lait@CityofPaloAlto.org>; Wong, Tim <Tim.Wong@CityofPaloAlto.org>; Campbell, Clare <clare.campbell@cityofpaloalto.org>; Yang, Albert <Albert.Yang@CityofPaloAlto.org>; HousingElements@hcd.ca.gov Subject: Feedback on Palo Alto Housing Element Programs - Palo Alto Forward CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Mayor Burt, Palo Alto City Council, Palo Alto City Council Candidates, Palo Alto Planning and Transportation Commission, Palo Alto Housing Element Working Group, and Palo Alto City Staff, Please find attached a letter providing feedback on the programs proposed in Palo Alto's 6th Cycle Housing Element. Palo Alto Forward would welcome the chance to discuss this analysis with City staff and officials. Sincerely, Ian Faucher, on behalf of the Board of Palo Alto Forward From:Charlie Weidanz To:Council, City Subject:Women of Wine: Napa Valley Tasting Event Date:Monday, October 24, 2022 9:00:28 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. This exclusive wine tasting event will feature women-owned wine brands from the Napa Valley. Taste through each portfolio of wines as you talk with the winemakers and vintners of each brand. Join the owners & winemakers of Goosecross Cellars, Fontanella Family Wines, Olet’te Vineyards, Tribe & Arrow Napa Valley, Duhig, Red Thread Wines, Stellareese Wines and McKahn Family Cellars for an evening of sipping and giving. 10% of wine sales will go to Second Harvest of Silicon Valley. Join us in the South Bay on November 3rd at the el Prado Hotel from 6 - 8 PM. We will be pouring our new releases along with select library & future offerings. RSVP: https://womenofwines.com/ Location: el Prado Hotel 520 Cowper Street Palo Alto, CA This email was sent on behalf of Palo Alto Chamber of Commerce 355 Alma St Palo Alto, CA 94301.To unsubscribe click here. If you have questions or comments concerning this email or services in general, please contact us by email at info@paloaltochamber.com. From:John Shenk To:Council, City Cc:Shikada, Ed; Lait, Jonathan; Guagliardo, Steven Subject:Re: Next Steps on Parklets Date:Monday, October 24, 2022 8:50:22 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Council and Staff, We renew our plea that you not allocate any more staff time nor money for consultants to study and work on parklets that are temporary no matter the design. Please work toward a truly first class downtown, wait for the economic study to be complete, and refocus on a comprehensive plan - we all want and deserve that. We shared a rendering with you 2 years ago that showed a redesigned University Avenue with wide sidewalks to allow the downtown to use the expanded public spaces for dining, retailing, landscaping, seating/gathering spaces, similarly to how Burlingame had the foresight years ago to reimagine its Avenue into what is now a vibrant retail success enjoyed by residents and guests as well. Palo Alto needs a big strong move and not a used band-aid. The best game plan to support our retailers, attract the best new retailers, and create the best downtown and a vibrancy our residents and guests will enjoy requires the filling in order of importance: 1) Safety is critical. Allocate additional police resources to increase automobile patrols add the walking and bicycle police as we had years ago in addition. 2) Cleanliness is critical. Allocate resources to regularly clean the streets and sidewalks (steam clean) in a way to remove the grease and grime that exists. 3) Existing infrastructure (e.g. sidewalks and curbs are heaved and cracked) needs repair, existing landscaping needs improvement, etc. 4) Retail Zoning Ordinance needs to be updated after studying which blocks are good for retail and being more inclusive of retail that wants to be in Palo Alto as we are very restrictive now. 5) Full design and funding identified for a “new downtown”. All the above should be acted upon now and retailers will experience the benefits immediately. Comments on the current “program”: But before sharing our comments on this Program, please pause and consider what is really needed to aid the return of vibrancy to our downtown. Retailers are still not doing well, brokers know our processes to be the most costly in terms of time and money, safety is a huge concern, and our public infrastructure is old, broken, and dirty. Pursuing this program will only further burden retailers with substantial costs and processes and the outcome will not be better. I read the staff report and sadly see many of the issues raised previously during outreach meetings with the public still exist. More cheap individually designed unharmonious wood decks, walls, roofs, lights, heaters, and colors on top of our old sidewalks and sloped pavement that block the flow of water (since the fine mesh clogs regularly) in the gutters and make great homes for rats are not what we need. The last thing the City needs is to have to hire more and more staff to manage this program, enforce the rules, and deal with violations, liabilities, and the numerous unforeseen issues and costs that will arise when public land is covered with wood decking. Will the Building Code be enforced? Will restrooms be added by retailers to maintain required ratios of seats/customers to sanitation facilities? Will all electric be upgraded even if building panels must be upgraded. The $2-3k in annual fee for cleaning per parklet area is insufficient. Does this include the regular (daily) clearing of each parklet 1/4” grate to allow stormwater, cleaning water, and irrigation water to not puddle at each parklet? Where did that budget amount come from? $3k to remove and restore area and hold private property? Can’t imagine that is a sufficient amount and would mean City assumes additional financial liabilities. Who is going to do that? Must be done fast as it will be an eyesore and detrimental to neighbors. The cost of the last parking spaces must be accounted for. The City should pay the in lieu fee to reduce the retail areas parking stock and to then rent it to retailers. The parking should be replaced with a new parking structure. What about the added cost of additional PW staff to oversee this program? How is that paid for? Neighbor consent. Consent must be from property owner since the tenants can change during the use term of the parklet. And from whom on a tenant retailer would you accept “permission”? What happens when that person is no longer with that retailer? What happens when retailer sublets? This is a mess of an issue and will consume a lot of staff time making other processes too slow to attract business. Results of City code enforcement has been non-existent in the last 2 years. Why should the public think the future will be any different? Staff has tried but many restauranteurs just do what they want. What happened to the fire safety concerns expressed by the Fire Chief on Ramona Street? Why have the improvements not been completed and the design guidelines implemented? Please limit how many parklets can exist contiguously and what % of a block can be parklets? There must be public street parking available on each block sufficient to support the non- restaurant retailers and handicap customers as well. Who wrote this: "program remains a part of Palo Alto’s vibrancy through ongoing attention”? The program is not a part of our “vibrancy”. Parklets were critical when it was illegal to sit indoors and seating spacing was substantial. The need does not exist any longer. Parklets started during the Covid shutdown and we have not experienced any retail vibrancy since then. Unless and until we all see the redesign and physical improvement of our downtown, the City will wallow in spending, misallocated resources, and delays to the desired outcome. On the recommended “plan" details: Not clear what happens if street has more than 5% slope. The inability to clean under the parklet is a huge problem in the long run. Rats will abound. First class cities are building them out of concrete or using extended sidewalks. Given the setback constraints, someone should analyze how much seating is possible when ADA guidelines are enforced for the parklet seating area. And if alcohol is to be served and fencing is required all around the parklet. What distance between tables/chairs should be clear for access at all times? Retailers need to know what is likely. Given few retailers have 40’ of frontage, how many will have 2 parallel parking spaces to use as parklets without impacting the neighboring retailers? Since new seating increases the useable area (and the City will collect rent for) don’t new parking spaces and parking facilities need to be added to comply with the City’s zoning? If a new parklet needs existing restricted parking or infrastructure to be relocated, in addition to the City analysis, the property owner and other retailer adjacent to the new location must also approve the relocation. Construction details: what happens when the existing curb is not level, is full of divots and voids, is not tall enough for brackets and framing per the plan? Will city be providing the corrections? Signage: each retailer behind a parklet should be allowed the same signage on the parklet. "Example of Street Furniture" shows parklets that would not comply with the proposed regulations. Roof over sidewalk, more than 20’ contiguous without fire safety zone, chairs on sidewalk. Examples of what is being discussed should be used. Amplified sound - who will patrol? Impacts are on customers and neighbors and if violated will leave negative impression on shoppers. This should not be allowed. Item 12: Letters of Support - Can not allow a parklet to infringe upon any part of a retailers frontage without support from the retailer and property owner. A parking space is 20’ or more and to extend in front of a neighbors business 10’ could be +40% of that retailer’s frontage. In this scenario add bike parking or some other neighborhood benefit. Page 216 - Failure to Maintain - The impacts of such failures are significant. Guests of our downtown are right to expect high quality, clean, and safe streets and sidewalks. Violations of City standards to maintain clean and safe parklets are significant and lasting. The impact is on all retailers of downtown. The need for enforcement and significant fines is critical. This of course means there must be enough budget to staff meaningful code enforcement at all hours of the week. The City’s limited resources should directed at SAFETY and CLEANLINESS not at continued consultants and staff time studying and then implementing and administering a parcel program that results in the lowest quality environment of the entire Peninsula. Use of Parklets must be limited to the retailer directly adjacent to it and not to any other subtenant or assignee of retailer or to any other business or entity to protect the retailer in the adjacent space. We welcome more participation and hope the community will be allowed to not only answer questions over a call but to be a part of a team that can lead us to a far better “program” resulting in a class A vibrant downtown for decades to come. Respectfully, John John R. Shenk C.E.O. Thoits Bros., Inc. 629 Emerson Street Palo Alto, CA 94301 650.323.4868 On Oct 21, 2022, at 4:57 PM, Guagliardo, Steven <Steven.Guagliardo@CityofPaloAlto.org> wrote: Hello business partners, I wanted to provide an update on the next steps related to parklets since I know many people are interested. This Monday, October 24 staff will seek policy input and direction from the City Council on key policy areas related to the implementation of a permanent parklet program. The staff recommendation is included in the image below, and the full report can be found on packet page 184 of the link here:https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/agendas-minutes- reports/agendas-minutes/city-council-agendas- minutes/2022/20221024/20221024pccsm-amended.pdf <image008.png> The discussion related to Parklets is Item #10 on the agenda; the time posted on the agenda is 9 PM but it may be before that or later depending on the discussion time spent on earlier agenda items. This discussion is to provide feedback, direction, and input to City Staff as a permanent parklet program is developed. The formal adoption of a permanent parklet program will take place at a subsequent meeting through an ordinance. If you would like to share your thoughts on Monday night’s discussion, you have a few options: You can show up in person for public comment at City Council chambers at City Hall You can participate in public comment remotely through Zoom by using the “Raise hand” feature during public commenthttps://cityofpaloalto.zoom.us/j/362027238 You can write the City Council in advance through e-mail at city.council@cityofpaloalto.org Thank you, <image001.png>Steve Guagliardo, MPA Assistant to the City Manager – Economic Development Office of the City Manager (650) 329-2261 (o) | (650) 468-0974 (c) steven.guagliardo@cityofpaloalto.org | www.cityofpaloalto.org <image002.png><image003.jpg><image004.png><image005.png><image006.png>  <image007.png> From:David Adams To:Council, City Subject:NVCAP review 10/24/2022 Date:Monday, October 24, 2022 8:45:31 AM Attachments:preferredPlan.png packet.png Some people who received this message don't often get email from david_94306@yahoo.com. Learn why this isimportant CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Honourable members of the council, I have a comparison of the draft NVCAP plan preferred by council on 01/10/22 and the plan in staff report for 10/24/2022. Draft preferred plan: Staff report 10/24/2022: It's interesting to note that the heights along El Camino and Oregon have increased even beyond the city wide 50ft height limit. I've been following NVCAP since the beginning and I cannot recall council directing staff to do this. It seems quite unfair to Ventura in general, and the occupants of the houses adjacent to these buildings in particular, that NVCA should have a higher limit than the rest of the city. I would appreciate if the council would direct staff to bring all heights in NVCA into conformance with the 50ft height limit for the rest of the city. No exceptions. Thanks and regards David Adams Olive Ave From:Kat Snyder To:Council, City Cc:Human Relations Commission Subject:Public Comment: Automated License Plate Readers study session Date:Sunday, October 23, 2022 10:35:30 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear City Council, As the police report mentioned, there are some privacy and surveillance concerns around Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs). I want to bring up one particular point of concern - for us to truly be a Sanctuary City for immigrant communities, we need to shield everyone from ICE surveillance. Vigilant Solutions, for example, is a third party ALPR vendor who sells their data to ICE. In 2020, a large coalition of immigrant activists and privacy advocates lobbied for and passed an ordinance in many cities around the Bay Area - including San Jose - to be sure that their city would not contract with any third party contractors that contract with ICE - Vigilant Solutions in particular. I would like to know how our police department would be sure that the third party vendor they chose would not sell their data to ICE. The report also states that the fixed ALPR locations will be "strategic." There is well- documented disproportionate surveillance of BIPOC communities, immigrant communities, and low-income communities by police departments across this country - often while describing the surveilled areas as "high crime areas." This report declares that crime statistics will be one factor in choosing fixed ALPR locations. What will PAPD do to make sure the strategic choice of where to place ALPRs in Palo Alto will not result in disproportionate surveillance of the above groups? I saw that the Police Department was hoping to discuss privacy issues with the ACLU but had trouble getting through. Another great group, specifically around privacy, is the Electronic Frontier Foundation, if you can get them. Alternatively, a large number of the aforementioned immigrant advocacy groups who got their cities to stop contracting with Vigilant Solutions could also provide you useful insights on this topic. Secure Justice, which was instrumental in writing the language used in the Sanctuary City Contracting Ordinance, took a brief look at the October 24th study session item and mentioned that the max 30-day-retention policy was very good and can mitigate some of the harm of ALPR. I hope to chat more with them soon to get a fuller sense of what harms may still need to be mitigated. My last question is, will this really be "cost effective" as the report states it will be? I would love to see some empirical data behind the report's claim that ALPRs deter crime. George Mason University's Center for Evidence-Based Crime Policy found, in a 2010 set of studies, that "the use of LPR in autotheft hotspots does not appear to result in a reduction of crime generally, or autotheft specifically." I'm not aware of empirical research demonstrating positive crime deterrence effects of ALPRs and, before spending city money on it, it would be good to see the data. Take care, ~Kat Snyder References: 2010 Center for Evidence-Based Crime Policy report on LPRs - https://cebcp.org/wp- content/evidence-based-policing/LPR_FINAL.pdf Download Attachment Available until Nov 22, 2022 From:Aram James To:Karen Holman; Kristen and Leo Johnson; Julie Lythcott-Haims; vicki@vickiforcouncil.com; Winter Dellenbach; Jethroe Moore; Binder, Andrew; Council, City; Sean Allen; Jay Boyarsky; Shikada, Ed; Joe Simitian; KP14him@aol.com; ladoris cordell; Rebecca Eisenberg; Josh Becker; Greer Stone; Jeff Rosen; Human Relations Commission; EPA Today; chuck jagoda; Wagner, April; Enberg, Nicholas Cc:Perron, Zachary Subject:Here is what my fence looks like as of today today —my favorite candidates for office all big time winners come Nov 8 Date:Sunday, October 23, 2022 10:21:14 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Click to Download IMG_3509.MOV 0 bytes Sent from my iPhone From:Aram James To:Kristen and Leo Johnson; Karen Holman; Julie Lythcott-Haims; Vicki Veenker; Doria Summa; Shana Segal; Alison Cormack; Filseth, Eric (Internal); Greg Tanaka; Winter Dellenbach; Jethroe Moore; Greer Stone; Sean Allen; Shikada, Ed; Jay Boyarsky; Rebecca Eisenberg; Roberta Ahlquist; wilpf.peninsula.paloalto@gmail.com; Jay Boyarsky; Peter Drekmeier; Bill Johnson; Diana Diamond; Gennady Sheyner; Lydia Kou; Lewis. james; Jay Boyarsky Cc:ladoris cordell; Council, City; Human Relations Commission; Planning Commission; ParkRec Commission; citycouncil@mountainview.gov; Council, City; EPA Today; Joe Simitian Subject:Please join me in voting for Julie Lythcott Haims,Vicki Veenker & Doria Summa ( all extraordinary candidates) Time for three strong additional women on our city council) Date:Sunday, October 23, 2022 10:08:00 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Hi Kristen, Of course I should change the title. You are absolutely correct! I’m a little slow and getting slower lol. Julie is as you say beyond AWESOME!! My entire family is voting for Julie —and not only did she spend at least an hour discussing her campaign in a visit to our home she took the time to visit my son Lewis at his apartment here in town. Vicki and Doria did the same. All three candidates went out of the way for me and my son Lewis. All three when elected will be fantastic for our city. Best, aram Sent from my iPhone On Oct 23, 2022, at 9:15 PM, Kristen Johnson <graffikdezine@comcast.net> wrote: Hi Aram! You should change the title on your email! It reads vote Summa, Veenker and Lauing! Shouldn’t you change Lauing to Lythcott- Haims? Julie is AWESOME!! I’m voting for her, Vicki, and Forsell. Cheers, Kristen. Sent from my iPhone On Oct 23, 2022, at 8:16 PM, Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> wrote: Hi Karen, I’m voting Vicky, Doria, and Julie. Time for 3 strong women on the council. Julie brilliant off the wall so. Ed far from my piece of cake. Time for a very strong black woman on council . We have had no strong brilliant black women on council since LaDoris and Hillary. Karen, I have to say I’m beyond shocked you would vote for Ed Lauing over Julie Lythcott Haims. What’s up with that? Really time to rethink your choice here, aram On Oct 23, 2022, at 6:22 PM, Karen Holman <rsvp.paloalto.2022@gmail.com> wrote: Who we elect to City Council is serious business. We can live with the results of Council decisions for years. Some decisions are literally irreversible even when negative results have been recognized. The responsibility, and it is that, of selecting Council members is one of the most important things any of us do as residents or business owners in our cities and towns. When it comes to deciding what candidates to support for Palo Alto City Council, a lot of things come into consideration for me. It’s a long list, but I hope you find it helpful in making your choices: • Is the candidate experienced, is the candidate intelligent, is the candidate analytical? • What are the candidate’s positions on the things that matter to me personally and that I think will make Palo Alto a better place in the future? • Is the candidate knowledgeable about the issues as well as the likely impacts of how decisions are going to play out on the ground? • Are they respectful of others? • Can they express disagreement without being disagreeable? • Has the person demonstrated good integrity? • Will the candidate be a collaborator with others on the Council? • Will the candidate listen to the public’s ideas and concerns? • Will the candidate meaningfully consider others’ opinions? • Does the candidate look broadly at the environmental issues that human beings face and that plants and animals are telling us are in critical need of action? • Do candidates speak about climate change with an understanding that converting to electric, while important, is only one piece of a much larger picture that we must address? • Can the candidate speak beyond vision statements and address specifics including recognizing the need for funding? • Does the candidate have knowledge of the value of Economic Development? • Does the candidate understand the scope and limitations of the job of a Council member? • Do they understand how the City works? • Have been involved in meaningful ways in the community, especially civically? • Can the candidate think creatively about problem solving? • Do they have the courage to make difficult decisions even when not the most popular? • Does the candidate respect the need for process to provide transparency, public participation, predictability and orderly outcomes? • Does the candidate express good design sensibilities? This is especially important given Council approves many development projects and appoint both Architectural Review Board and Art Commission members. • Does the candidate support the need for code enforcement so everyone has to equally work within Palo Alto’s rules? There is a saying that the most difficult politics is local politics. I can attest to that. It requires the intelligence, temperament, patience and open mind that can view issues within context and with sleeves rolled up. We have good reason to be grateful that Doria Summa, Vicki Veenker, and Ed Lauing, three very capable candidates, have stepped forward to serve the public. These three I’ve found to satisfy all the numerous criteria listed. Doria Summa * Community service, 15 years * Planning Commission, 6 yrs, current Vice Chair * Affordable housing advocate * Neighborhood leader * Experience and expertise on City and State laws * Broad environmental knowledge Vicki Veenker * Consensus builder, State law on healthcare cost * Mediator for federal courts, 16 years * Founder, Sibling Cities USA * Law Foundation Board, 20 years, bringing justice to underserved communities * Patent attorney, 35 years * Volunteer Hotel de Zink and Food Closet Ed Lauing * Planning Commission, 6 years, 2 times Chair * Parks and Recreation Commission, 7 years, 2 times Chair * Housing Element Working Group * Collegial collaborator toward sensible solutions * Decades of business experience incl. startups I strongly recommend Summa, Veenker and Lauing to you for City Council. Please join me in supporting these candidates who will bring the breadth of experience and abilities as well as their essential human qualities to the dais. We need leaders like these. You can read more about each of these excellent candidates on their websites. https://www.vickiforcouncil.com https://doriasumma.com https://www.edlauing.com Be well, be safe, be happy. Karen Holman Former Palo Alto Mayor From:Aram James To:Karen Holman; Julie Lythcott-Haims; vicki@vickiforcouncil.com; Doria Summa; Planning Commission; Jethroe Moore; Winter Dellenbach; Binder, Andrew; Sean Allen; Shikada, Ed; Council, City; Greer Stone; Jay Boyarsky; Rebecca Eisenberg; Joe Simitian; Josh Becker; chuck jagoda; Human Relations Commission; Roberta Ahlquist; Jay Boyarsky Subject:Re: Please join me in voting for Summa, Veenker and Lauing for City Council. Date:Sunday, October 23, 2022 7:53:12 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Hi Karen, I’m voting Vicky, Doria, and Julie. Time for 3 strong women on the council. Julie brilliant off the wall so. Ed not far from my piece of cake. Time for a very strong black woman on council . We have had no strong brilliant black women on council since LaDoris and Hillary. Karen, I have to say I’m beyond shocked you would vote for Ed Lauing over Julie Lythcott Haims. What’s up with that? Really time to rethink your choice here, aram On Oct 23, 2022, at 6:22 PM, Karen Holman <rsvp.paloalto.2022@gmail.com> wrote: Who we elect to City Council is serious business. We can live with the results of Council decisions for years. Some decisions are literally irreversible even when negative results have been recognized. The responsibility, and it is that, of selecting Council members is one of the most important things any of us do as residents or business owners in our cities and towns. When it comes to deciding what candidates to support for Palo Alto City Council, a lot of things come into consideration for me. It’s a long list, but I hope you find it helpful in making your choices: • Is the candidate experienced, is the candidate intelligent, is the candidate analytical? • What are the candidate’s positions on the things that matter to me personally and that I think will make Palo Alto a better place in the future? • Is the candidate knowledgeable about the issues as well as the likely impacts of how decisions are going to play out on the ground? • Are they respectful of others? • Can they express disagreement without being disagreeable? • Has the person demonstrated good integrity? • Will the candidate be a collaborator with others on the Council? • Will the candidate listen to the public’s ideas and concerns? • Will the candidate meaningfully consider others’ opinions? • Does the candidate look broadly at the environmental issues that human beings face and that plants and animals are telling us are in critical need of action? • Do candidates speak about climate change with an understanding that converting to electric, while important, is only one piece of a much larger picture that we must address? • Can the candidate speak beyond vision statements and address specifics including recognizing the need for funding? • Does the candidate have knowledge of the value of Economic Development? • Does the candidate understand the scope and limitations of the job of a Council member? • Do they understand how the City works? • Have been involved in meaningful ways in the community, especially civically? • Can the candidate think creatively about problem solving? • Do they have the courage to make difficult decisions even when not the most popular? • Does the candidate respect the need for process to provide transparency, public participation, predictability and orderly outcomes? • Does the candidate express good design sensibilities? This is especially important given Council approves many development projects and appoint both Architectural Review Board and Art Commission members. • Does the candidate support the need for code enforcement so everyone has to equally work within Palo Alto’s rules? There is a saying that the most difficult politics is local politics. I can attest to that. It requires the intelligence, temperament, patience and open mind that can view issues within context and with sleeves rolled up. We have good reason to be grateful that Doria Summa, Vicki Veenker, and Ed Lauing, three very capable candidates, have stepped forward to serve the public. These three I’ve found to satisfy all the numerous criteria listed. Doria Summa * Community service, 15 years * Planning Commission, 6 yrs, current Vice Chair * Affordable housing advocate * Neighborhood leader * Experience and expertise on City and State laws * Broad environmental knowledge Vicki Veenker * Consensus builder, State law on healthcare cost * Mediator for federal courts, 16 years * Founder, Sibling Cities USA * Law Foundation Board, 20 years, bringing justice to underserved communities * Patent attorney, 35 years * Volunteer Hotel de Zink and Food Closet Ed Lauing * Planning Commission, 6 years, 2 times Chair * Parks and Recreation Commission, 7 years, 2 times Chair * Housing Element Working Group * Collegial collaborator toward sensible solutions * Decades of business experience incl. startups I strongly recommend Summa, Veenker and Lauing to you for City Council. Please join me in supporting these candidates who will bring the breadth of experience and abilities as well as their essential human qualities to the dais. We need leaders like these. You can read more about each of these excellent candidates on their websites. https://www.vickiforcouncil.com https://doriasumma.com https://www.edlauing.com Be well, be safe, be happy. Karen Holman Former Palo Alto Mayor From:Loran Harding To:Loran Harding; alumnipresident@stanford.edu; antonia.tinoco@hsr.ca.gov; David Balakian; bballpod; bearwithme1016@att.net; beachrides; fred beyerlein; Leodies Buchanan; Council, City; Cathy Lewis; Chris Field; Doug Vagim; Dan Richard; dallen1212@gmail.com; Daniel Zack; eappel@stanford.edu; Scott Wilkinson; Gabriel.Ramirez@fresno.gov; George.Rutherford@ucsf.edu; huidentalsanmateo; hennessy; Irv Weissman; Sally Thiessen; jerry ruopoli; Joel Stiner; kfsndesk; karkazianjewelers@gmail.com; krystalromero13@gmail.com; leager; Mayor; Mark Standriff; margaret-sasaki@live.com; merazroofinginc@att.net; newsdesk; news@fresnobee.com; nick yovino; russ@topperjewelers.com; tsheehan; terry; VT3126782@gmail.com; Steve Wayte; vallesR1969@att.net Subject:Fwd: Google San Jose Transit Village demo begins Date:Sunday, October 23, 2022 6:31:53 PM 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: Sat, Oct 22, 2022 at 8:39 PM Subject: Fwd: Google San Jose Transit Village demo begins To: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> Date: Sat, Oct 22, 2022 at 8:24 PM Subject: Fwd: Google San Jose Transit Village demo begins To: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> Date: Sat, Oct 22, 2022 at 8:07 PM Subject: Google San Jose Transit Village demo begins To: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> Sunday, Oct. 23, 2022 To all- Hope this opens. The Merc wants you to subscribe. Find it on Google if it won't open. I suspect that Google will have it up(!) Article below updated Oct. 20, 2022 Thurs. THIS is the demolition work starting for the Google Downtown West transit village in San Jose around Diridon Station, to which HSR from Fresno to San Jose will go in one hour. "Google breaks ground on the mixed-use San Jose neighborhood, Downtown West, in 2023. Google will employ 25,000 workers there". It will only cover 80 acres, exactly the size of the farm upon which my father was raised near Abeline, Kansas. Dry land farming. This will transform Fresno. The highly educated tech. workers who work there will buy homes in Fresno, some of them. I suspect that some SV (Silicon Valley) tech giants will then locate facilities in Fresno since their managers will be able to get down here in one hour when issues arise. Some Fresnans will ride for one hour on HSR to get to jobs in San Jose that pay twice or more what they earn here now. If nothing else, it will be fun for Fresnans to get from here to this transit village in San Jose in one hour. If they wish, they could walk across the platform at Diridon, board Caltrain, and be in San Francisco in another hour. But planning is well under way to push HSR north from Diridon to SF, and then it will be a one HSR train ride Fresno to SF. The electrification of Caltrain is well under way on the Peninsula and HSR is electric. Caltrain is buying electric trains to take advantage of that. All Caltrains locos now are polluting diesels. Caltrain runs SF to Gilroy. CHSRA needs around $13 billion to build Merced to Gilroy to Diridon Station in San Jose, connecting the Central Valley with the Bay Area. I'll keep urging the Feds to find that money- money from California taxpayers. That money should have been in the Infrastructure bill, but Shumer got some of it side-tracked to the NE corridor. "To hell with California!" Godless hippies. In the fiscsal year which began on October 1, 2022, the US government will spend $811 billion on "defense". By that, they mean the defense of the US, all of Europe, Japan, S. Korea, Taiwan, and a lot more. We defend Saudi Arabia. But we can't get $13 billion out of Washington to complete California HSR from Merced to Gilroy to San Jose. That is just harsh, punitive punishment of California doled out by members of Congress in the East. I'll not say here what I think of them. Google starts San Jose village excavation and interior building tasks (mercurynews.com) L. William Harding Fresno, Ca. From:Allan Seid To:Channing House Bulletin Board Subject:Fwd: Your friend has shared a Datebook | San Francisco Arts Date:Sunday, October 23, 2022 11:18:18 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. From: Allan Seid <allanseid734@gmail.com> Date: Sun, Oct 23, 2022 at 11:01 AM Subject: Your friend has shared a Datebook | San Francisco Arts Source: S.F. Chronicle, Datebook, S,F. ART Kularts honor and celebrate Filipinos on the frontline of the pandemic in ‘Nursing These Wounds’ https://datebook.sfchronicle.com/dance/kularts-honor-and-celebrate-filipinos-on-the-frontline- of-the-pandemic-in-nursing-these-wounds From:Aram James To:Binder, Andrew; Sean Allen; Jethroe Moore; Perron, Zachary; Figueroa, Eric; Foley, Michael; Tannock, Julie; Michael Gennaco; Council, City; Jeff Rosen; Winter Dellenbach; Shikada, Ed; Enberg, Nicholas; Jay Boyarsky; Joe Simitian; chuck jagoda; Rebecca Eisenberg; Julie Lythcott-Haims; Vicki Veenker; Summa, Doria; Greer Stone; Wagner, April; Human Relations Commission; ladoris cordell Subject:How Kansas City Police Ignored Warnings a Killer Targeted Black Women, U... Date:Saturday, October 22, 2022 7:47:33 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ Anti-Black racism in the Kanas City Police Departments is it a national pandemic in police departments across this country? We must all standup against against anti- black racism in policing. https://youtu.be/aJg2KXJmJzw Sent from my iPhone From:Jennifer Landesmann To:Council, City Subject:East Hampton Airport News - relevance to lack of due process with the SFO GBAS project Date:Saturday, October 22, 2022 5:45:28 PM Attachments:602799_2022_East_End_Hangars_Inc_v_East_End_Hangars_Inc__DECISION___ORDER_ON_441, 4880-2625- 6698.pdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Hello Council, This NY Times article delivers some interesting news about yet another "win" by the aviation community using the courts against the public. While there are two main arguments in the attached decision by a NY Supreme Court judge (to prevent EHA from closing), one that regards the federal law ANCA; the other about New York's version of CEQUA, the quote below speaks to the issue of taking "retrospective" looks at environmental impacts. NY Times In addition, the town had justified its decision to close the public airport based on a plan to conduct a comprehensive environmental review — after it was closed. In his ruling, Justice Baisley said such a retrospective look defeated the point of an environmental assessment. In proposing it, the town “acted both beyond its legal abilities and in an arbitrary and capricious manner.” This sounds exactly like the SFO GBAS process, promises to look after-the-fact. The ruling mentions other lessons, including the relevance of who stands to be affected (In this case, the court assumes that even if you aren't by the airport, an action that cascades with effects to another community also has standing) and the issue of using real measurements vs predictive analysis. NY Judge EIS are documents that rely on forward-looking predictive models for traffic, noise and various other environmental impacts. Court review ofSEQRA compliance "insures that the agencies will honor their mandate regarding environmental protection by complying strictly with the prescribed procedures and giving reasoned consideration to all pertinent issues revealed in the process" (Jackson v. New York State Urban Dev. Corp.,67 NY2d 400, 417 , 503 NYS2d 298, 494NE2d429,503NYS2d298, 17EnfiI.L.Rep.20,362[1986]). This is what I was referring to in my October 11 email - that actual noise measurements have no due process with federal or actually even local NEPA provisions. The SFO GBAS "community engagement" effectively uses everything that is against the laws of environmental considerations of noise and air traffic. I'm not an attorney but my observation is that the FAA, and aviation are amazing at using laws of the land to fight communities, while few use the same laws effectively to protect citizens. The protocol that PACC voted on in 2019 was meant to help you do this. It took a lot of work to get it in place, so it's really important to please update residents about what the 2019 protocol is or is not, and what the SFO GBAS community engagement is and is not. I'm sure the Town of East Hampton will continue their fight, and I wish it didn't have to cause so much suffering to the people who worked hard to follow all the rules, including working with the FAA to address EHA's impacts while the FAA and Congress charged to lead on this, just let everyone fight it out. Thank you, Jennifer On Tue, Oct 11, 2022 at 5:22 PM Jennifer Landesmann <jlandesmann@gmail.com> wrote: Dear Members of the Policy & Services Committee, For a very brief background, Palo Alto residents have provided consistent input to Council, to challenge FAA actions which can cause harm to the city. In at least two large PACC meetings pre-Covid, residents asked the City to engage the FAA when the MENLO waypoint (which used to be at the Menlo Park/Palo Alto border) was replaced with a new waypoint deep in Palo Alto neighborhoods - named SIDBY. This pertains to traffic from SFO Southern Arrivals. There was a PACC closed session to address SIDBY (SERFR amendment). The Mayor at the time said that Council did not see a case to challenge the SERFR/SIDBY but it was decided that the City needed to have a process to evaluate legal recourse opportunities and specifically to not miss 60 day statutes of limitations. I worked with the City's staff on airplane noise at the time and with other residents to develop the attached "Fast Track" protocol. Former Assistant City Manager Michelle Flaherty led the coordination and also worked with City Attorney Molly Stump. PACC voted to approve the attached "Fast Track" protocol which was in place ahead of the PIRAT changes. The following is the staff packet on the subject. City of Palo Alto PACC Meeting Date: 5/20/2019 Summary Title: Discussion of Airplane Noise and Community Impacts; Direction to Staff Regarding the Star Pirat two Procedure Announced by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on April 25, 2019 The protocol was followed for PIRAT. In closed session, PACC voted against pursuing legal action for PIRAT, and there is documentation to trace what happened. I'm here to address that the City protocol was not followed for the GBAS overlays published earlier this year. Please note that I am not referring to the pros and cons of why the City should or shouldn't have legally challenged the GBAS overlays, but to point out that the attached City protocol that PACC voted on is not being followed which has many implications for future and impending FAA changes. At Council's recent study session on airplane noise, the protocol was raised only at the end when the City Manager said they are following the protocol which does not square with the protocol that PACC voted. It would be very helpful for your committee to please review the protocol that PACC voted on and give residents an update as a follow up to the study session. The review should please consider the following: 1) The City protocol that Council voted on relates to National Environmental Policy laws which are applicable to all federal airspace highways (which is what the GBAS overlays are). In the City Manager 's comment at the study session, it sounded like the protocol is being followed as regards SFO but the engagement with SFO carries no NEPA or other rules of engagement. In fact, when the FAA decided to give SFO a fast track on the GBAS overlays, the only way to address that problem was with a challenge to the FAA on their publications, not with SFO. 2) The City has written to SFO about lack of community input on the first round of GBAS "Innovatives" but again SFO's outreach is merely a courtesy - SFO is operating outside the NEPA realm and without any rules of engagement. If anything, the City's language in the letter to SFO about the Innovatives is misleading because the City previously did not express any problems with the "loose" SFO build-a-new-highway process that offers zero protections to citizens. The City knows that the SFO Roundtable voted for both the overlays and the first Innovatives ignoring NEPA and the FAA's faulty practices. 3) City staff has been inviting SFO to meetings in Palo Alto as part of a "community" effort when SFO's activities are 100% unilateral and made up. For example, SFO is using noise values which are inconsistent with the law of measuring cumulative impacts. And involving ground noise measurements which the FAA does not consider. Of course noise measurements are useful information but It's like auditing a class for no credit. You can learn all the material about noise but the FAA does not work with ground noise measurements data and certainly not when it's after a publication. When the FAA makes future changes on top of the GBAS overlays and causes more harm, the FAA can say -what nice noise reports? we (FAA) don't work with ground noise measurements and we already did an environmental review of GBAS and it showed that we have nothing to bother with. As for the story that SFO will turn off GBAS based on their unilaterally set noise values for the definition of harm, this is inexplicable. It's standards for "no harm" which are arbitrary by the polluter and do not actually help reduce noise - the so called purpose of the project. Before inviting SFO to more rounds of "community input" it is only fair for the City or SFO to explain what the SFO process is and isn't. As far as the Group 2 proposals, and the first round of Innovatives, please use the attached protocol to object to anything that has not received actual community input. While not perfect, the Select Committee process was more comprehensive and serious than what is currently passing for community input. The SC's unanimous recommendations include among many other recommendations - addressing NIGHT time noise, BDEGA rebalancing to 50-50, and building a route to use the full length of the Bay and which ensures to not "simply shift noise" - anything outside these parameters would be egregious to propose without actual community input. And anything that interferes with making progress on the SC recommendations should also be challenged. Thank you, Jennifer Shon Form Order SUPREME COURT. STATE OF NEW YORK I.A.S. PART XXXVI SUFFOLK COUNTY ACTION I:x INnE NO.: 602799 t2022 PRESENT: HON. PAUL J. BAISLEY, JR., J.S.C. EAST END HANGARS, INC., HAMPTON HANGARS, INC., a/k/a HAMPTON HANGERS, INC., THOMAS BOGDAN, JOSEPH DRYER, SUSE LOWENSTEIN, LYNDEN RESTREPO ANd LOUISE SASSO, Petitioners, For a Judgment Under Article 78 of the CPLR -agarnst- TOWN OF EAST HAMPTON, NEW YORK, Respondent. In the Matter of the APPlication of THE COALITION TO KEEP EAST HAMPTON AIRPORT OPEN LTD., ANDREW SABIN, MICHAEL MANCUSO, EDMOND CHAKMAKIAN, KELLY BLOSS, JENNIFER FAGA, ROBERT ASPENLEITER, THOMAS GzuFFIN, DOUGLAS DONALDSON, HARRY ELLIS AND DR. GEORGE DEMPSEY, -against- TOWN OF EAST HAMPTON, NEW YORK, Respondents. MOTION SEQ. NO.: MOTION SEQ. NO.: MOTION SEQ. NO.: MOTION SEQ. NO.: MOTION SEQ. NO.: MOTION SEQ. NO.: OO2 MG OO5 MD 006 MD OO7 MG OO9 MG 012 MD PETITIONERS' ATTORNEYS: Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman, LLP 31 West 52"d Street New York, New York 10019-61 18 Eckert Seamans Cherin & Mellott, LLC 10 Bank Street, #700 White Plains, New York 10606 RESPONDENT'S ATTORNEYS IN ACTIONS 1,2 and 3: Cooley LLP 55 Hudson Yards New York, New York 10001 Whiteman Osterman & Hanna, LLP One Commerce Plaza, lgth Floor Albany, New York 12260 Rigano LLC 538 Broadhollow Road Melville, New York I 1747Petitioners. For a Judgment Pursuant to Article 78 of the CPLR ACTION 2: I N O.:60280112022 MOTTON SEQ. NO.: MOTION SEQ. NO.: MOTION SEQ. NO.: MOTION SEQ. NO.: MOTION SEQ. NO.: OO1 MG OO4 MD OO5 MD OO7 MG OO9 MD PETITIONERS' ATTORNEYS: Greenberg Traurig, LLP 23 17 Montauk HighwaY Bridgehampton, New York 11932-4000 X In the Matter olthe Application of FILED: SUFFOLK COUNTY CLERK 10/19/2022 04:12 PM INDEX NO. 602799/2022 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 441 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/19/2022 1 of 7 .--------------------------x ACTION3: In the Matter olthe Application of BLADE AIR MOBILITY, INC., BONNIE BRADY, THOMAS DEAN, JASON DELAND, LISA DEVEGLIO, MICHAEL DONNELLY, RUSSELL MLINSON and ALICIA WHITAKER, Petitioners, For an Order and Judgment Pursuant to CPLR ARTICLE 78 -against- TOWN OF EAST HAMPTON, TOWN BOARD OF THE TOWN OF EAST HAMPTON and PETER VAN SCOYOC, in his official capacity as EAST HAMPTON TOWN SUPERVISOR, Respondents. INDEX NO.: 6 02802t2022 MOTION SEQ. NO.: 001 MG MOTION SEQ. NO.: 004 MD MOTION SEQ. NO.:005 MD MOTION SEQ. NO.: 007 MG MOTION SEQ. NO.: 009 MD PETITIONER'S ATTORNEYS: Gibson Dunn & Crutcher, LLP 200 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10166-0005 Margolin Besunder LLP 3750 Express Drive South, Suite 200 Islandia, NY 1 1749 INTERVENOR'S ATTORNEYS IN ACTIONS 1,2 and 3: Law Offices of Paul A. Lange 80 Ferry Blvd Stratford, CT 06615X ORDEREDthatpetitionerEastEndHangars,Inc.,HamptonHangars,lnc',alWa Hampton Hangers, Inc., ihomas Bogdan, Joseph Dryer, Suse Lowenstein, Lynden Restrepo, and Louise sasso,Jnotice ofpetition and petition (sequence no. 002) and amended petition and the respondent Town of EasiHampton, New York's motion (sequence no. 006) to dismiss the petition, and Sound Aircraft Services, Inc.'s motion (sequences no. 012, 009, and 009) served by order to show cause (BAISLEY, J.) to intervene, and petitioner The coalition to Keep East Hampton Airport open, Ltd., Andrew sabin, Michael Mancuso, Edmond chakmakian, Kelly Bloss, Jennifer Faga, Robert Aspenleiter, Thomas Griffin, Douglas Donaldson, Harry Ellis, and Dr. George Dempsey,s notice oapetition and amended petition (sequence no. 001) and the Town of East Hkpton, NLw York's motion (sequence no. 005) to dismiss and petitioner Blade Air Mobility, Inc., Bonnie Brady, Thomas Dean, Jason Deland, Lisa Deveglio, Michael Donnelly, Russell Munson, and Alicia Whitaker's motion (sequence no. 001) served by order to show cause (SANTORELLI, J.) for a preliminary injunction and petitioner Blade Air Mobility, Inc., Bonnie irady, Thomas Dean, Jason Deland, Lisa Deveglio, Michael Donnelly, Russell Munson, and AIic; Whitaker's petition amended petition (001 for a judgment granting relief under Article 78 ofthe cPLR, and respondent Town ofEast Hampton, Town Board fo the Town East Hampton, and peter Van Scoyoi, in his offrcial capacity as East Hampton Town Supervisor's motion (sequence no 005)io dismiss the petition, and petitioners' motions (007, 009, 007 and 007) for a ir.ii*inury injunction enjoining ihe Town from deactivating or closing HTO Airport on May 17, 2 FILED: SUFFOLK COUNTY CLERK 10/19/2022 04:12 PM INDEX NO. 602799/2022 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 441 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/19/2022 2 of 7 East End Hangers, et al. v Town of East HqmPton The Coalition to Keep Easl Hdmpton Airport Open, et al. v Town of East Hqmpton Blade Air Mobility, et al. V Town of East Hampton, et al. Index No Index No Index No 602799/2022 602801/2022 602802/2022 2022 or any date thereafter pending a determination on petitioners' motion for a preliminary injunction, and the petitioners' motions (005, 004,004) for expedited discovery, are consolidated for the purposes ofthis determination, and as so consolidated, it is further ORDERED, ADJIIDGED, AND DECREED that Sound Aircraft Services, Inc''s motions to intervene (motion seq. nos.: 012, 009 and 009) are denied; and it is further ,RDERED, ADJIIDGED, AND DECREED that the motions to dismiss the petitioners' petitions (motion seq. nos.: 006,005 and 005) are denied; and it is further ,RDERED,ADIUDGED,ANDDECREEDthatpetitioners,petitions(motionseq. nos.: 002, 007 and 009; 001 and 007; and 001 and 007) are granted and the Town is enjoined from deactivating or closing HTO Airport; and it is further ,RDERED, AD|I]DGED, AND DECREED lhat petitioners, motions for expedited discovery (motion seq. nos.: 005,004 and 004) are denied as moot' The Town of East Hampton Airport ("HTO Airport") has operated as a public use airport servicing the East End ofLong Island for eighty-four years. Petitioners contend that the Town of East Ha;pton (,'The Town") has made an arbitrary, capricious, and reckless decision to close the HTO Airport and reopen it as a private use airport. Petitioners furthel contend that the Town's actions constitute a cLar violation of the State Environmental Quality Review Act ("SEQRA") and an attempt to circumvent the Airport Noise and capacity Act of 1990 C'ANCA). Petitioners move for ajudgment finding that (1) respondent's actions were in excess ofjurisdiction under CpLR $ 7S-03(r);.espo.rdent's actions were arbitrary and capricious in violation of CPLR $ 7803(3j; (3) respondent's actions were arbitrary and capricious for failure to abide by the ."quii"."nl ofsEena in violation ofCPLR g 7303(3); (4) respondent's actions were in violation ofthe la"\f,il procedures ofANCA under CPLR $ 7803(3)' HTO Airport is located at 200 Daniels Hole Road in Wainscott and serves fixed wing and rotary commerciul *d nor-"orn-ercial aircraft. HTO Airport was constructed in 1936 with fedeial funds from the works Progress Administration and opened in 1938 as one of the federal public works projects ofthe New Deal era. The airport compromises 610 acres and has two active runways. Ii contains 62 hangars for parking, storage, and maintenance ofaircraft, as well as a conEol ttwer. Approximately 30,000 take-offs and landings occur at HTO Airport annually, with the majority of G traffic taking place between May and September. The FAA has identified the HTO Airport as important to national air transportation and included HTO Airport in its National Plan of Integrated Airport systems. HTO has enjoyed significant federal supqo-rt, inctuding funds used for capitai improvements to the HTO Airport's infrastructure and facilities' 3 FILED: SUFFOLK COUNTY CLERK 10/19/2022 04:12 PM INDEX NO. 602799/2022 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 441 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/19/2022 3 of 7 East End Hongers, et al. v Town of Easl Hqmplon The Coalition to Keep East Hampton Airport Open, et al v Town of East Hqmpton Blade Air Mobility, el al. V Town of East Hampton, et al. lndex No lndex No 602799/2022 60280 t/2022 602802/2022 In 1982 Congress pitssed a law allowing federal grants to be issued for airport improvements. The HTO Airport received these gants, assuring the federal govemment in retum thit it would continue to operate the airport consistent with its history, making HTO Airport available for pubtic use on reasonable terms and without unjust discrimination by the Town with respect to any type, kind and class of aeronautical activities. In 2001, the Town received an airport improvement grant of$1,410,000.00. under this program and gave the federal government its standa.d u.r*un"". Under the Congressional g.rant program, the Town had to commit to make HTO Airport available for public use on reasonable terms for a period of20 years. Three additional assurances did not expire at the end of the twenty-year period and include exclusive rights, airport revenue, and civil rights. On September 26, 2021, when the twenty year period atia"O, tt " Town created a plan to exercise greater control over the airport. Petitioners contend that the plan expropriated the use of approximately 10 million dollals in surplus grant funds, ai.port rlrenuei and user fees, and attempted to extinguish the three remaining grant assurances' on Ja.ruary 20,2022, the Town voted to deactivate HTO Airport to the public, effective on February i8, 2022. Under the Town's plan, HTO Airport would remain closed for a period of three days and then reopen as a new and private airport on March 4,2022. On February 18,2022, the Town confirmed that it would not be undertaking deactivation or closure ofHTO prior to May 17, 2022. OnMay 16, 2022 the court (BAISLEY, J.) ordered, inter alia, that the Town is proilibited and prevenied from deactivating HTO "on or before May 17,2022, or any date thereafter." As a preliminary matter, sound Aircraft Services, Inc's application to intervene is denied. The determination to allow other interested persons to intervene is addressed to the sound discretion ofthe court (E Deane Leonartl y. Plan. Bd. OfTown of Union Vale, 136 AD3d 866, 25 NYS3d 319 [2il Dept. 2016]). Here, the intervenor failed to include a proposed pleading delineating the "lui.r o. defenies upon which it seeks to intervene as required by CPLR $1014, and accordingly, the motion to intervene is denied. Petitioners contend that the Town's plan does not comply with the procedural requirements of ANCA, and that it violates the specific notice requirement in the FAA',s rejulations goveming the deactivation and activation ofairports. Specifically, if the Town were toieactivatJ the UtO Airport and then activate a new airport, it would need to provide the FAA with a 90 day notice beforl the deactivation ofHTO and an additional 90 day notice before the activation oithe new airport. Petitioners further contend that the Town perceives the temporary closure as a way to avoid ANCA's mandate while also permitting the Town to retain the approximate ten million dollars in federal grant money. Petitioners also assert that the FAA has indicated that once the airport is deactivated that it may take approximately two years to restore the current capability to the airport. Petitioners further note Town ofEast Hampton Supervisor Peter Van Scoyoc's January I 8, 2022 press release which states that "the impact of the 4 FILED: SUFFOLK COUNTY CLERK 10/19/2022 04:12 PM INDEX NO. 602799/2022 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 441 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/19/2022 4 of 7 East End Hangers, e! al. v Town of East Hqmpton The Coalition to Keep Eqst Hampton Airport Open, et al. v Town ofEasl Hampton Blade Air Mobility, et al. V Town of Easl Hampton, et al lndex No lndex No 602799/2022 602801/2022 602802/2022 operational restrictions would be tracked and assessed during the upcoming season as part ofan environrnental impact statement under the New York State Environmental Quality Review (SEQRA)." Petitioners contend that the Town's plan to act on closing and re-opening the airport and then conducting the SEQRA review afterward, is improper. The respondent Town moves to dismiss the petitions pursuant to CPLR 321 l, contending that in November 2020, rhe FAA told the Town that it could close HTo and open a new, private- use airport upon expiration ofthe applicable grant assurance obligations in September 2021 . Respondent asserts that it did, in fact, adopt the approach suggested by the FAA letter dated November 6, 2020. Specifically, the Town chose "option 2" set forth in the FAA letter, which would allow the Town to open a new airport as a private-use airport that would require "prior permission", i.e., that the Town has the federal right to set limitations on the number and/or type ofoperations at the new airport. Under the Town's proposed prior permission required framework, all operators would be able to use the airport subject to a reasonable curfew and one round-trip per day per aircraft limits. "option 4" in the FAA letter would permit HTO to remain open and the Town not have any more control over the operations than it has had in the past *hi.h th" Town contends is inconsistent with the community's goals and desires. The Town further contends that the FAA letter does not indicate that the Town must comply with ANCA should the Town choose "option 2," rather, the Town would only need to comply with ANCA if it chose "option 1 ." Moreover, the Town asserts that the FAA made clear that if the Town takes its suggestion to close HTO and open a new airport ("option 2") that the Town can close the ui.poiLa use the remaining funds in the airport account as it desires. On January 20,2022,;he Town formally notified the FAA of its plan to close HTO and open a new airport by filing two FAA Form 74801s. The Town submits that the Town and FAA's agreed upon date for deactivation was May 17,2022 arld the agreed upon date for activation was May 19,2022. on a motion to dismiss pursuant to CPLR R 3211, the movant has the burden to demonstrate that, based upon the four comers of the complaint, that the pleading states no legally cognizable cause of action (.Leon v. Martinez, 84 NY2d 83, 638 NE2d 511, 614 NYS2d 972 1ti9+1y. tuoreover, ,'the court must accept the facts as alleged in the complaint as true, accord ituirtiiftt " u.nefit ofevery possible favorable inference and determine only whether the facts as alteged fit within any cognizible legal theory" (Morone v. Morone,50 NY2d 481, 484,413 NErd 1154,429 NyS2d 592 [1980]). However, "vague and conclusory allegations" or "bare legal conclusions" are insufficient to meet this standard (Goel v Ramachandran, l1l AD3d 783, 7el-s2.975 NYS2d 428 [2"d Dept 20131). In order to establish standing under SEQRA, a palty must show that they have suffered an ..injury-in-fact,,' and that such injury fatls within the "zone of interests" which SEQRA seeks to priteitlSoc'y o/'plastics Indus., Inc. v. Cnty ofSuffolk,TT NY2d761,573 NE2d 1034, 570 5 FILED: SUFFOLK COUNTY CLERK 10/19/2022 04:12 PM INDEX NO. 602799/2022 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 441 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/19/2022 5 of 7 Eqst End Hangers, et al. v Town of East Hamplon The Coalition to Keep Eqst Hqmpton Airport Open, et al. v Town of East Hqmpton Blade Air Mobilily, et al. V Town of East Hampton, et dl. Index No Index No lndex No 602799/2022 602801/2022 602802/2022 NYS2d 778,21 Envtl. L. Rep. 21 [1991]). The Town asserts that petitioners have failed to satisfu the injury-in-fact requirements because they do not live near HTO airport, and therefore, cannot establish that they will suffer direct harm in some way different from that of the public at large. Petitioners assert that they live in close proximity to other area airports and/or their flight paths and that changing HTO to a private use airport will create diversions that will result in significant adverse impacts to the petitioners. Here, the affidavits submitted by petitioner Jennifer Faga, Harry Ellis, Thomas Griffin establish that they live near the flight path of Montauk Airport and that they can often hear aircraft taking offand landing near their properties and have concems about the increased noise that will result from the closing of East Hampton Airport. Similarly, the affidavit of Michael Mancuso establishes that he lives in the flight path of Gabreski Airport in Westhampton and has concems about increased environmental impacts due to increased diversions to that airport. Petitioners have established that they live in geographic areas which will be affected by the closing of HTO and will be impacted in a different way from the public at large, and their proximity establishes a special interest that thereby confers standing (Society of Plastics, supra; McGrath v. Town Bd. of N. Greenbush, 254 AD2d 614, 678 NYS2d 834 [3'd Dept. 1998]. Moreover, the petitioners adequately establish organizational standing. An organizational petitioner has standing to sue where (1) any one or more of its individuat members have standing, (2) the association is protecting an interest gerrnane to its purposes, and (3) the association can appropriately act as representative without the need for the individual members to participate (Society of Plastics, supra, at715). As local residents and business owners in East Hampton and Montauk, petitioners are members of a group presumptively affected by the change on the neighboring property. 6 In moving forward with the airport closure plan the Town has indicated that it will close the airport and impose significant restrictions on flights at the new airport, and thereafter, complete its Environmental knpact Statement (EIS). However, the purpose of SEQRA is for government agencies to consider the environmental impacts of its actions at the earliest possible time (Mdtter of Gordon v. Rush,299 AD2d20,745 NYS2d 183 [2'd Dept 2002]). EIS are documents that rely on forward-looking predictive models for traffic, noise and various other environmental impacts. Court review ofSEQRA compliance "insures that the agencies will honor their mandate regarding environmental protection by complying strictly with the prescribed procedures and giving reasoned consideration to all pertinent issues revealed in the process" (Jackson v. New York State Urban Dev. Corp.,67 NY2d 400, 417 , 503 NYS2d 298, 494NE2d429,503NYS2d298, 17EnfiI.L.Rep.20,362[1986]). UnderSEQRA,courtsapply the arbitrary and capricious standard ofreview in deciding whether an agency identified the relevant areas of environmental concern, took a hard look at those areas, and made a reasoned elaboration for its decision (Merson v. McNally, 90 NY2d 742,688 NE2d 479, 665 NYS2d 605 [1997]). If an EIS is required, the agency ("the Town") must initiate a public scoping process to determine the content of the EIS, hold a hearing on that draft's scope, and then issue a final FILED: SUFFOLK COUNTY CLERK 10/19/2022 04:12 PM INDEX NO. 602799/2022 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 441 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/19/2022 6 of 7 Easl End Hangers, et al. v Town of Easl Hamplon The Coalition to Keep East Hqmpton Airport Open, et al. t Town of East Hampton Blade Air Mobility, et al. V Town ofEast Hqmpton, et ql. lndex No. Index No Index No 602799/2022 602801/2022 602802/2022 scoping document. Here, by planning on conducting its EIS after the Town closes the airport, the Town has acted both beyond its legal abilities and in an arbitrary and capricious manner by planning on conducting its EIS after it closes the airport, and therefore, the Town is enjoined from closing HTO Airport. The Town further asserts that petitioner's petition should be dismissed because (i) ANCA claims cannot be pursued in state court, (2) ANCA does not apply to airport closures, and (3) ANCA does not apply to private airports. Specifically, the Town asserts that there is no private right oiaction in state court to enforce ANCA's federal statutory obligations. The Town maintains that if it attempted "option i," i.e., negotiating mandatory restrictions for aircraft operations, that it would have to comply, but that no such compliance is required for closing HTO and opening a new airport. The Town further maintains that ANCA only applies to public- use airports and not private-use airports. However, when Congress passed ANCA in 1990, it directed the Secretary of the Department of Transportation to establish a national aviation noise policy, including a national program for reviewing airport noise and access restrictions on all airports (49 U.S.C. $ 47 524(a); l4 C.F.R. $ 161.3[a], [c]). In April 2015, the Town passed three local laws codifuing restrictions on HTO Airport, including (1) a mandatory curt'ew on all aircraft traffic, (2) an extended curfew for certain noisy aircraft, and (3) a weekly one-round-trip limit on noisy aircraft. However, in 2016, the United States Cou( ofAppeals for the Second Circuit rejected the restrictions and permanently enjoined the Town's policymaking attempts due to the Town's failure to comply with ANCA (Frlends of the East Hampton Airport, Inc. v. Town of East Hompton,841 F.3d 133 [2016]). Here, the Town's decision is contrary to federal law, as it fails to comply with ANCA's procedural requirements for adopting noise and access restrictions affecting stage 2 and stage 3 aircrafts. The Town cannot " be 'free to operate as it wishes' because the federal statutory limitations appl[y] regardless of whether an airport is subject to grant assurances." (Friends ofthe East Hampton Airport, Inc. y. Town of East Hampton, supra at 139). ANCA's text unambiguously indicate congress's intent for the procedural mandates to appty to all public airport proprietors regardless oftheir funding eligibility (Friends of the Ertsr Hampton Airport, Inc. v. Town of East Hampton, supra at 149). The Town's decision to close HTO, affecting the operations of stage 2 and stage 3 aircrafts, is a "noise or access restriction" that is subject to ANCA's notice, review, and approval requirements. In light ofthe foregoing, the Town is enjoined from deactivating or closing HTO Airport and the petitioners' petitions are granted in their entirety. Dated: October 19,2022 J C 7 IION. PAUL J. BAISLLY, Jlt. ,1, FILED: SUFFOLK COUNTY CLERK 10/19/2022 04:12 PM INDEX NO. 602799/2022 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 441 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/19/2022 7 of 7 From:Nicole Thom and Friends of Rebecca Eisenberg for Santa Clara Valley Water District To:Council, City Subject:Rebecca needs your help before midnight! Date:Saturday, October 22, 2022 5:40:59 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from info+rebecca4water.com@ccsend.com. Learnwhy this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of openingattachments and clicking on links. Dear City,  Tonight is the last fundraising deadline prior to Election Day November 8, and we need your support to get the word out about the ONLY sustainable choice for District 7 of the Santa Clara Valley Water District! Donate While Rebecca's opponent is self-funding his campaign with $300,000 of his own money, not bothering to involve constituents, Rebecca's campaign is 100% people-powered -- supported entirely by individual donors like us! While Rebecca's opponent tries to buy his way to success with donations, Rebecca knows that voters want to be listened to and heard. That is why Rebecca chose to take ZERO money from PACs, organizations, unions, or businesses. Campaigns say a lot about candidates, including what they value and how they will lead. Rebecca knows that District 7 deserves a leader who will listen to constituents and value what they have to say. Rebecca knows that we are tired of her opponent's years of 15% rate hikes and his plans to destroy ecosystems and sacred Indigenous grounds with a dam that will not create more water. Rebecca knows that we care about climate change, but we also need help making ends meet, which is why her sustainable plan of water recycling, recapture and reuse, will both protect our environment, and also bring us long- awaited savings on our water bills. We need Rebecca's leadership on the Santa Clara Valley Water District Board! If you have not yet donated, please donate today before midnight. If you did already contribute, please consider a second donation. Visit our Website There is much at stake this November 8. Vote for Rebecca Eisenberg for District 7 of the Santa Clara Valley Water District: the ONLY Sustainable Choice! Thank you for your consideration. Best, Nicole Thom Fellow District 7 Resident   Donate THE ONLY CANDIDATE ● Endorsed by every newspaper ● Endorsed by every environmental group ● With a 100% record of integrity and fair treatment of others VOTE BY MAIL OR AT THE POLLS ON NOVEMBER 8TH! Mercury News Endorsement Los Altos Online Endorsement Share This Email Share This Email Share This Email Paid for by Rebecca Eisenberg for Santa Clara Valley Water District 2022 FPPC #1427865 Rebecca Eisenberg for Santa Clara Valley Water District 2022 | 2345 Waverley St., Palo Alto , CA 94301 Unsubscribe city.council@cityofpaloalto.org Update Profile | Constant Contact Data Notice Sent by info@rebecca4water.com in collaboration with Try email marketing for free today! From:Gail Price To:Council, City; Planning Commission Cc:Lait, Jonathan; Wong, Tim; Shikada, Ed Subject:Palo Alto Forward Letter: Agenda Item No. 9. NVCAP Refined Preferred Alternative Date:Saturday, October 22, 2022 4:36:58 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from gail.price3@gmail.com. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. October 24, 2022. Re: Agenda Item No. 9 Review the North Ventura Coordinated Area Plan (NVCAP) Refined Preferred Alternative, Dear Mayor Burt, Palo Alto City Council Members, and Planning and Transportation Commission Members, Palo Alto Forward is a non-profit organization focused on innovating and expanding housing choices and transportation for a vibrant, welcoming, and sustainable Palo Alto. We are a broad coalition with a multi-generational membership, including new and long time residents. We do not support the endorsement of the NVCAP Refined Preferred Alternative. After three years of study and analysis and significant cost, the Refined Preferred Alternative is woefully inadequate. The 60-acre area is a unique opportunity that has now been lost. However, since the process took so long, some property owners and developers have proceeded with projects which will limit a systematic and comprehensive planning approach including the potential use of a specific or precise plan. The proposal before you lacks vision and fails to incorporate innovation and appropriate planning principles to meet current and future housing and social needs. As noted by consultants, staff, and numerous community members these principles/techniques are widely known: a coordinated variety of land uses and assembly incentives, sufficient office and retail and jobs, revised development standards (density, height, and design guidelines), workable incentives and options to create sufficient funding for community benefits for the neighborhood, less vehicle parking to support sustainability and enhance mobility while resulting in a marked increase in affordable and middle-income units. All of which could be included in a precise or specific plan. In the earlier phases of the NVCAP process, Alternative 3B was identified by the consultant and staff as the most financially feasible yet that finding was dismissed by many members of the Working Group and the City Council. It should be recognized that the proposed NVCAP Objectives (Pages 182-3) repeatedly note the importance of financial feasibility and market conditions in Objectives 1 and 5. Alternative 3B would have created or phased in 1800-2200 units throughout the area. Such intensification would have helped finance many more community benefits and made the area cohesive and high functioning. For example, the Preferred Refined Alternative in the staff report notes that NVCAP existing and new housing units will provide a total of only 620 Units (143 of which are currently existing). The design and varied heights of Alternative 3B could have been visually impressive while incorporating the best of new technology and environmental stewardship. And importantly, such an alternative would have enabled us to help meet our RHNA goal while providing needed current and future housing. Our concern is that by not using this opportunity the City’s Housing Element will be seen as out of compliance by the State. Another troubling outcome has been the likely loss of MTC grant opportunities for Transit Oriented Communities (TOC). The proposed development potential of NVCAP Refined Preferred Alternative is not aligned with the MTC TOC policies ( including minimum residential and office densities and residential and commercial parking limits), makes the NVCAP area not eligible for a grant. Alternative 3B would have been more aligned. As the staff report notes, NVCAP is located within a designated Planned Development Area (PDA). Approved legislation AB2097 effective January 1, 2023 will reduce parking requirements in PDA’s located near transit options. This will help us reach our climate action goals. NVCAP could have been an asset to the City because it is adjacent to a commercial/retail corridor and fixed rail and transit and could have been be a model of sustainability. The area could have been a local and subregional hub for housing, jobs, services, art and culture, entertainment, and recreation. With the current Refined Preferred Alternative, that holistic opportunity is lost for generations. It is unfortunate that the City Council did not support a more bold, robust, and ambitious Refined Preferred Alternative for the NVCAP. With all the innovation and future-thinking in Palo Alto, our City deserves more. With this alternative we are looking to the past and not the future. We are disappointed. This is a lost opportunity for our community. Sincerely, Palo Alto Forward Board From:Yahoo Mail.® To:Honky Subject:THE REALl Anthony Fauci SHARE WIDELY and lets be DONE with all this NONSENSE Date:Saturday, October 22, 2022 10:56:42 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. The Real Anthony Fauci - The Movie FULL The Real Anthony Fauci - The Movie FULL From award-winning filmmaker Jeff Hays, in partnership withChildren’s Health Defense (CHD), comes a documentary... From:Aram James To:Sean Allen; Jethroe Moore; Josh Becker; bob nunez; Binder, Andrew; Jeff Rosen; Council, City; Winter Dellenbach; Shikada, Ed; Julie Lythcott-Haims; Vicki Veenker; Rebecca Eisenberg; Shana Segal; Jay Boyarsky; Joe Simitian; Figueroa, Eric; Foley, Michael; Tannock, Julie; Planning Commission; Greer Stone; Wagner, April; chuck jagoda; Human Relations Commission; ladoris cordell; Perron, Zachary; Reifschneider, James; Greg Tanaka; Vara Ramakrishnan; Raj; Roberta Ahlquist; Pat Burt; Cindy Chavez; ParkRec Commission; Richard Konda Subject:"A boogeyman": Why a former candidate is appearing on San Jose attack ads - San José Spotlight Date:Saturday, October 22, 2022 10:50:47 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ Sick Shit!!! https://sanjosespotlight.com/a-boogeyman-why-a-former-candidate-is-appearing-on-san-jose-attack-ads/ Sent from my iPhone From:Annette Glanckopf To:Council, City; City Mgr; Clerk, City Cc:DeMarzo, Elise; Furman, Sheri Subject:Midtown Poetry Wall Date:Saturday, October 22, 2022 9:00:29 AM Attachments:letter re poetry wall 2021_version 2.docx CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear City Council Members, I am appalled at the Nov 20 th decision of the Public Art Commission to remove the unique and beloved Midtown poetry wall mural. This action shows total disregard for community input by commissioners with no knowledge or interest or value in protecting community history. I am attaching a letter I wrote describing the history of the poetry wall and sent it to the June meeting. I had been monitoring the notices for the Public Art Commission agendas to see when the poetry wall was going to be discussed. After the last notice for the Commission meeting was posted, I started to try to access the agenda, which wasn’t there. I tried for several days but still nothing was posted. So I am not sure when the agenda was available on line. I had vacation planned and wasn’t persistent in checking. At the June Commission meeting, the commission voted to decommission the poetry wall with 3 options for the poetry. As an aside, the June packet was filled with a dozen or more letters supporting the poetry wall. Next door also had a long list of positive comments about the wall. Options included" A) Restore the mural as temporary artwork by repainting the mural with an expected lifespan of 7-10 years; B) Reproduce the mural as temporary artwork by reproducing it on adhesive aluminum with an expected lifespan of 2-3 years. C) research if commissioning a new temporary mural after the deaccessioning of the Poetry Wall mural can be an option. Additionally it was moved to direct staff to receive additional community feedback. To this end, I invited Public Art and the Commissioners to host a table at the Midtown Ice Cream social to gain community feedback. This was a very well attended event, and conversation would have been informative. After multiple attempts I was told no one was (staff, commissioners) available, and that public art was represented with the temporary art piece “Cuppa Joe’ and the participation at the event by the artist Amber Smith. BTW, this was the only city department that Midtown Residents Association invited to the social who did not happily participate. There was no other attempt by Public Art or the Commission to gather any Midtown community input. It would be a loss for the community if this piece of Our Midtown history was destroyed. And not addressing or even seeking community input on this topic is disrespectful to our Midtown neighborhood and the poetry wall artists. The message is “ it is easier and more fun to create something new, ie temporary art, rather than fix what we have.” I respectfully ask the council to take action and reverse the decision to remove the poetry wall. Option 1 was what I would have supported. This cost of this 8+ year option ($28,000) is less than the amount that will be spent on the October 19th call for temporary art ($36,000). Thank you in advance for your help in reversing the decision to remove the poetry wall and thank you for providing funding to restore it. Annette Glanckopf, VP Midtown Residents Association To: Public Art Commission CC: Elise De Marzo From: Annette Glanckopf, Vice Chair, Midtown Residents Association I feel very strongly that this unique work of art needs to be restored. There is nothing like it in Palo Alto. It is an important part of Midtown’s art history, and to remove it would negate a significant chapter of our history. We recommend that the wall with water problems be fixed, and the mural repainted, as it looks like there is only a portion of the wall with damage. That being said, we would also welcome working with the Art Commission for an additional mural on the wall by Wells Fargo. A Bit of Background In 1997, the Midtown Residents Association (MRA) started to work with the Public Art Commission to install public art in Midtown. Included below is a historical perspective of the installation of 2 of the 5 pieces of Midtown art. All of the pieces of public art were in close collaboration with the Midtown Residents Association and strongly supported by the neighborhood. In 2000, MRA obtained 2 public art grants – one for the Liz Lada mural (“Inner Life of Teenagers”) on the CVS wall and a second for a poetry wall contest. As you can read from the historical perspective, the future of the Coop Market/Walgreens building was not clear, so this effort was put on hold and the Liz Lada mural was implemented first. The original competition for public art for the now Walgreen’s building was a mural that was done by Peter Bartczak. The objective was “The selected artist will be expected to develop a site-specific mural appropriate for the neighborhood that reflects the character and spirit of Midtown.” Peter’s original drawing was About the time “Inner Life of Teenagers” was installed, Walgreens bought the Coop Market building. As Peter’s mural was considered dated, Brigid Barton, then Chair of the Public Art Commission, came up with the idea of a poetry wall (see more below). There was enormous support from the community and as I remember it, we had over 200 contestants who submitted poetry. To paint over this site, with its unique Midtown history, would be devastating to all the folks who worked on the contest, folks who supported the effort, and most of all the artists themselves. Judy Kleinberg, past Mayor and council member, wrote a piece for our newsletter (see below). I have extracted a sentence “public art -- as a reminder of our shared values, heritage and culture”. Please do not destroy what we worked so hard to implement. It is a reminder of a significant period in the Midtown history. It would be a tragedy to remove it. See more about the poets in Sheri Furman’s email. Annette Glanckopf, Vice Chair Midtown Residents Association Historical Perspective “This mural has been a long time in coming and we are so pleased to be here today!” I was reviewing some of my old emails and noted that Midtown started working on this wall in 1997 with Judith Wasserman - Public Art Commissioner. In April of 1998, the Art Commission approved $5,000 for a mural with matching funds. In 1998 Judith and Brigid Barton (Public Art Commissioners) worked to develop an RFP (request for proposal) for a mural for the south wall of the Coop Market building. According to our timeline, the work was to be completed by January of 2001. On June 3rd, 2000 the Public Art Commission selected 2 finalists. They were so impressed with the entries and the enthusiasm of Midtown residents and business owners that Midtown was granted both murals. Shortly after the award, the Coop Market sold the property. As the fate of the site was unknown, the mural for this wall was put on hold. When plans for the building were finally revealed in mid-2001, Village Properties, the building owner, committed to help fund art for this wall. We appreciate their enthusiasm and support for Public Art and for Midtown. Thank you Walgreens/Village Property for taking a risk…which has turned out to be a great success!!! Once Walgreens and Como Esta began moving ahead with their remodeling, we still needed to select appropriate art for the wall. With unflagging, tireless energy and enthusiasm, in 2002 Brigid Barton led the Public Art Commission Competition for a poetry wall on this site. Unending thanks to the Poetry Committee composed of Brigid Barton, Kathryn Dunlevie, poet MaryLee McNeal, and the MRA team of Sylvia Gartner, Sharon Fox and myself. In January of 2003 we read the 100+ entries and selected 35 for the final selection by master poet Elizabeth Biller Chapman (more about Elizabeth, the winners and their poetry in a bit). About this time Brigid left the Commission, and Laura Deem became our key contact with the Commission as we worked through the logistics of site design and preparation for the celebration. And the rest is history… ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Public Art --- What is it good for? Judy Kleinberg, Palo Alto City Council It must have some benefit because the effort to beautify the more mundane features of the urban and suburban landscape has been around since cave dwellers enhanced their rocky surroundings to tell a story and record their culture. If you Google "public art," you'll be rewarded with 281,000 sites that review public art all over the world, from Western Australia to The Hague in the Netherlands. What is it in the human psychology that motivates us to embellish our public surroundings and to enrich and enliven public areas with works of art and sculpture? Certainly some of it is political, such as statues of leaders, whether loved or loathed. And some of it is historical, to memorialize events or to communicate a sense of place. Still other works are for sheer pleasure and fun, or are intellectually provocative and unsettling. Their common denominator is to provide a backdrop to our more common surroundings, forcing us to engage our own intellects, emotions and memories. As Picasso said, "Art is a lie that helps us realize the truth." Repressive societies always seek to control public art and use it as propaganda for the regime's agenda. Free societies are more permissive of the style and message contained in public art for the reason that, although creativity cannot be extinguished in even the most totalitarian society, it is fairly understood that freedom of expression is the lifeblood of the creative spirit. Whether we are interested in public art or like one piece or another, every piece of public art in our community is evidence of our community's respect for the freedom of creativity manifested by each artist, and the freedom of each person viewing the art to experience and appreciate it in his or her own way. And therein lies one of the most enduring values of public art -- as a reminder of our shared values, heritage and culture within the context of the individual's freedom of thought and expression. From:Aram James To:Council, City; Shikada, Ed; Supervisor Susan Ellenberg; Supervisor Otto Lee; Jeff Rosen; Jeff Moore; KP14him@aol.com; Binder, Andrew; Joe Simitian; Winter Dellenbach; citycouncil@mountainview.gov; Josh Becker; Anna Griffin; Representative Eshoo; Salem Ajluni; Donna Wallach; Shana Segal Subject:Flip side of devastating flyer release by the Kevin Jensen campaign re Robert Jonsen Date:Saturday, October 22, 2022 12:43:27 AM Attachments:IMG_3497.HEIC CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ Sent from my iPhone From:Aram James To:Council, City; Shikada, Ed; Winter Dellenbach; Julie Lythcott-Haims; Vicki Veenker; Doria Summa; Planning Commission; Binder, Andrew; Jethroe Moore; Sean Allen; Jeff Rosen; Supervisor Susan Ellenberg; Joe Simitian; Supervisor Otto Lee; Rebecca Eisenberg; Vara Ramakrishnan; Jay Boyarsky; Josh Becker; chuck jagoda; Greer Stone Subject:Kevin Jensen slams Robert Jonsen in his latest flyer Date:Saturday, October 22, 2022 12:38:53 AM Attachments:IMG_3498.HEIC CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ Sent from my iPhone From:Aram James To:Shana Segal; Greer Stone; Sean Allen; Jethroe Moore; Council, City; Binder, Andrew; Winter Dellenbach; Jeff Rosen; Jay Boyarsky; Rebecca Eisenberg; Vara Ramakrishnan; chuck jagoda; Joe Simitian; Julie Lythcott-Haims; Vicki Veenker; Doria Summa; Cecilia Taylor; Josh Becker; Betsy Nash; bob nunez; ladoris cordell; Human Relations Commission; Figueroa, Eric; Tannock, Julie; Foley, Michael Subject:WATCH: Angry Teacher Calls Student An "F-ing N-Word" Date:Friday, October 21, 2022 11:24:22 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ https://youtu.be/2JNcwiARr3o Sent from my iPhone From:Allen Akin To:Council, City Subject:2022-10-24 Item #10 (Parklets), plus AB 2097 considerations Date:Friday, October 21, 2022 3:28:46 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ Council, The proposed permanent parklet rules seem thorough and thoughtful. I support them. I'm wary of the conversion of public property to private use without meaningful compensation. With respect to the parklet license fee, Staff provided useful information about per square-foot costs, but did Staff investigate per square-foot revenues? I didn't see that in the Staff Report. Unless the license fees are consistent with revenue as well as cost, they might create distorted incentives that could either favor or disfavor parklets. Permanent parklets will reduce parking supply in the Downtown area, thus pushing more parking demand out into the adjacent neighborhoods. New projects developed under the terms of AB 2097 will have similar effects, made more significant by the loss of space to parklets. The current RPP system provides some control over the amount and distribution of commercial parking in the neighborhoods. To my knowledge, there is no similar mechanism to manage the residential parking demand that will be created as a result of AB 2097. I think it would be wise to establish definitively that housing in the Downtown core is *not* eligible for resident permits in the existing Downtown RPP district. Instead, the core should be a separate RPP district that is managed independently. Failing to do this will increase traffic, parking, and safety issues in the neighborhoods; reduce quality-of-life for new Downtown residents; and compromise the sustainability goal of minimizing car ownership by residents of underparked or zero-parked projects allowed Downtown by AB 2097. Doing this proactively will set expectations and provide stability for both current residents and new residents. Regards, Allen Akin From:Rebecca Sanders To:Council, City Cc:Furman, Sheri Subject:NVCAP Proposal Not Responsive to Council and Residents Date:Friday, October 21, 2022 3:04:28 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Mayor Burt and City Council Members: I am sending this letter on behalf of the Palo Alto Neighborhoods (PAN) Executive Committee in response to the staff report concerning the NVCAP Refined Preferred Plan Update on your agenda for this Monday. We believe the staff report does not reflect the NVCAP goals and objectives as outlined on Packet Page 182 and 183, nor deliver on the promises of the NVCAP Working Group's various proposals, all of which called for a livable, bike-able, walkable community with amenities that are a welcome addition to the Ventura neighborhood. In short, the proposal imposes on residents: • significant negative impacts on existing homes • big city housing density at 2.5 times what is allowed in other parts of Palo Alto • worse parking • worse traffic • more offices when fewer were promised • less truly affordable housing than is needed 1. Packet page 170: The proposed Sobrato agreement is not fully explained. In particular, the Sobrato agreement ups the amount of R&D whereas NVCAP's stated goal (packet page 172) is to decrease offices by a considerable amount 2. Packet page 170-171: The Transit Oriented Communities policies in Table 2 are incompatible with our city’s stated goals. For example, a 2.0 FAR for offices would preclude conversion to residential. 4.0 FAR hands us gridlock. Additionally, these FARs are incompatible with our office cap and the need to reduce our jobs/housing imbalance. We urge that Council opt out of the TOC program. 3. Packet page 171: If the housing element proposes to add 348 units to NVCAP, why then does this proposal suggest adding 670 – 142 = 528 units (see packet page 172)? The proposal suggests adding to this site 52% more than the housing element has identified should be built there. Why should so much new housing be concentrated in one neighborhood? 4. Packet page 172: The low-rise greenway looks to be about 2.0 FAR At 107 units per acre (43,560 sq. ft.) and as 25% is for shared hallways, stairs, lobby, utilities, amenities, etc., each unit is about 650 sq. ft. – a bit bigger than a three-car garage. So, this is not family housing, which is what Palo Alto needs. It would be helpful if the typologies described unit sizes, so we ensure we’re getting family and not dormitory housing. 5. Packet page 173: Figure 2 doesn’t seem to reflect the Sobrato agreement or protect residences next to buildings on El Camino. It also doesn’t reflect any phase-out of existing office buildings along Park. 6. Packet page 174: provides for in lieu fees rather than for providing much needed housing for those working in lower-paid jobs. We need housing at low AMIs, not at the 120% “BMR” level. 7. Packet pages 174+ - Height and Massing Near Existing Residential • Why don't we allow tall residential buildings next to the train tracks to encourage offices there to convert to residential? These plans show those buildings as limited to 35 feet, which makes no sense. • The plan shows 45 feet height next to R-1 homes (which it claims as 30 feet in height) behind El Camino. Most of these homes are not 30 feet tall. Most windows in a R-1 home are no more than 15 or so feet above grade. So, putting a 45-foot building next door is catastrophic to privacy, daylight, and enjoyment. • Council already voted recently to retain the 30 foot height limit for this situation, so Council should reject the new proposal to raise it to 45 feet in North Ventura. 8. Page 175 reports that an alley will separate the 45-foot buildings from the residential buildings, but Figure 3 clearly shows the 45-foot buildings next to homes with no alley separation. 9. Packet page 176: Removing parking seems shortsighted at this point, given that much of Ventura is filled with cars at night. 10. Packet page 177: Park Land • The Council motion said to “Develop preferred park locations” (plural) but only one location seems to be offered. • There’s nothing in the staff report about planting more trees and creating a more desirable community. The "woonerf" (living street) doesn’t necessarily provide green space but simply treats the road as a walkway, albeit with cars still going by on it. 11. Packet pages 177-178: Offices • Office zoning and policies are perhaps the most critical aspect as the goal should be to phase these out and replace them with housing. The sooner we begin, the sooner it will happen. • The staff report however does not discuss any amortization schedule. It also does not explain how the Table 3 reductions in office space will be achieved. 12. Packet page 179: The notion under Commercial Parking Ratio of exempting the first 1,500 sq. ft. of ground floor commercial area seems imprudent, given that this neighborhood is already underparked. And it creates problems for potential retail tenants; witness the old North Face retail store on Alma that reportedly has difficulty finding new tenants because it is underparked. 13. Packet page 179: The staff report says that the Council’s direction to limit the occupancy of office buildings won’t work and proposes instead to use a TDM (Transportation Demand Management) program to limit single-occupant vehicle trips, relying on “annual reporting to ensure compliance.” But office occupants will have no incentive to be accurate about their vehicle trips and the City will have no way to check if the reporting is honest. So, such reporting will not ensure compliance. We've never heard that the City has ever successfully enforced any TDM. If you can’t restrict the number of people in an office, let’s instead immediately start amortizing away the amount of office space. Considering these concerns, please address these issues in your discussion Monday night and help forge a plan for North Ventura that truly converts it into a livable and pleasant residential community like others in our city, with historical preservation of the cannery, adequate parkland and plantings, and meaningful protections for current residents. Thank you, Sincerely, Becky Sanders Sheri Furman Co-Chairs Palo Alto Neighborhoods From:Charlie Weidanz To:Council, City Subject:Meet Nuro - Our Latest Spotlight Member Date:Friday, October 21, 2022 2:00:17 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Nuro's custom electric autonomous vehicles are designed to bring the things you need—from produce to prescriptions—right to your home. The company's autonomous, goods-focused solution can give you valuable time back and more freedom to do what you love. This convenient, eco-friendly alternative to driving has the potential to make streets safer and cities more livable. Nuro has piloted autonomous local delivery for communities in Texas, Arizona, and California. Check out the video below and visit www.nuro.ai to learn more. Play Video Nuro - 6 Years of Impact Video Meet Nuro - Image of Nuro Founders - Click to learn more. Have questions about Palo Alto Chamber of Commerce Member Nuro's Autonomous Vehicles operating in Palo Alto? Their new webpage www.nuro.ai/about will take you on a journey to understand Nuro's mission, values, technology, and passions. From the development of Nuro vehicles and the autonomy that drives them, to the teams working on safely commercializing the delivery service, this will be an unprecedented look into each area of Nuro's business – and what sets them apart. This email was sent on behalf of Palo Alto Chamber of Commerce 355 Alma St Palo Alto, CA 94301.To unsubscribe click here. If you have questions or comments concerning this email or services in general, please contact us by email at info@paloaltochamber.com. From:agrishow@informa.com To:Council, City Subject:Agrishow - Cadastro Newsletter Date:Friday, October 21, 2022 1:02:35 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from agrishow@informa.com. Learnwhy this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Hi, funny_hardcore_sex xsg.page.link/xpmc# Mit funny_hardcore_sex xsg.page.link/xpmc# Mit We have received your request. Will revert to you shortly. Your Payment Transaction Id is : Your Unique Registration Number is : FAGPPNEWS1666382544336 Agrishow 2023 From, Informa Team ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatic generated message. Please do not reply. From:Tran, Joanna To:Council, City Cc:Executive Leadership Team; ORG - Clerk"s Office; Boyd, Holly; Paras, Christine Subject:Council Consent Questions Item 6 and 7: 10/24/22 Date:Friday, October 21, 2022 1:02:20 PM Attachments:image001.png image003.png image004.png image006.png image007.png image008.png image009.png Dear Mayor and Councilmembers, On behalf of City Manager Ed Shikada, please view the following links below for the amended agenda and staff responses to questions from Councilmember Cormack and Councilmember Tanaka for Monday night’s Council Meeting: October 24 Amended Agenda Staff response to Items 6 and 7 Thank you, Joanna Joanna Tran Executive Assistant to the City Manager Office of the City Manager (650) 329-2105 | joanna.tran@cityofpaloalto.org www.cityofpaloalto.org From:Charlie Weidanz To:Council, City Subject:Donate at Stanford Blood Center in October for chance to win Stanford Football tickets vs. BYU Date:Friday, October 21, 2022 9:00:22 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Stanford Athletics - Stanford Blood Center SBC has once again teamed up with Stanford Athletics to support our community, and this month, donors can Be a Champion for Local Patients! As a special thanks for keeping patients a priority, anyone who donates at any center or mobile drive October 1-31 will receive FOUR free tickets to the Stanford football game vs. BYU (Brigham Young) on Saturday, November 26. SBC currently has a critical need for Type O negative (O-) and Platelets. You can help make a difference for local patients in our community. You can make an appointment by visiting stanfordbloodcenter.org, the SBC mobile app, or by calling 888- 723-7831. Walk-ins are welcome! Learn more at stanfordbloodcenter.org/football. Stanford Blood Center - Give blood for life! This email was sent on behalf of Palo Alto Chamber of Commerce 355 Alma St Palo Alto, CA 94301.To unsubscribe click here. If you have questions or comments concerning this email or services in general, please contact us by email at info@paloaltochamber.com. From:aliya lii To:Council, City Subject:Re: Web Services. Date:Friday, October 21, 2022 1:30:42 AM Some people who received this message don't often get email from aliyalii0@hotmail.com. Learnwhy this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Council, city.council@cityofpaloalto.org (Europe), I am a Business Development manager who works with 120+ experienced IT professionals. Website designing & development, PHP development, E-Commerce solutions &, HTML, Social Media Cover Page Design, UX / UI Design Services, and SEO Thanks & Regards, Aliya Lii Note: - If you are not interested, please mention “Not Interested” in the subject line. I will not mail again. From:MVGal22 To:DuBois, Tom; Council, City Subject:Palo Alto libray - please keep rinconada library open daily Date:Thursday, October 20, 2022 7:21:14 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from mvgal22@protonmail.com.Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Palo Alto library - please keep Rinconada library open daily as many hours as Cupertino library All the best to you Thank you for everything Phone - 510 290 9849 CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE This e-mail and any files accompanying its transmission is intended only for the recipient to whom it is addressed. This transmission may contain information which is legally privileged and confidential. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify the sender by e-mail or telephone to arrange for return of the e-mail and attachments to us. You are hereby notified that you must delete from your system this original e-mail. You are further notified that any disclosure, copying, forwarding, or other distribution of this e-mail, including its attachments, or the taking of any action in reliance upon the information contained in this e-mail or attachments, is strictly prohibited Sent with Proton Mail secure email. From:Deborah Goldeen To:Council, City; City Mgr Subject:Neighbor With Illegal Cannabis Growing Business Date:Thursday, October 20, 2022 4:31:38 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ Dear Council, City Manager - I have a neighbor who runs an illegal pot growing business out of his house. He’s been doing this for more than ten years. In the beginning, illegal activity around the house was much worse - people showing middle of the night, banging on door, door opend, package is handed off, person runs back to car, car speeds off, PAPD partol shows up ten minutes later driving slowly down the street - that kind of nonsense. At that time I had conversation with police sergeant. He was sympathetic but said, “sorry we can’t do anything.” Owner of house is young man’s mother. I threatened civil suit. She moved back in and put the kibash on extreme felonious activity. But, illegal pot business kept on. Recently I read in the Weekly about a grow house that was shut down by PAPD. I’m thinking if they can shut down that grow house, maybe I should see if there is now something that can be done about this particular neighbor. For obvious reasons I felt it unwise to have a patrol vehicle showing up in front of my house with officer stepping out to talk with me. So I went to the station. PAPD is a mess. Understaffing alone can’t account for the inept communication and dysfuntion I encountered. But, can I send email to or get a phone message to the chief of police? Not even. This is not OK. Neither is having to live with an illegal pot growing operation and the assorted low level criminals who patronize it OK. Is there anyone in the city who will take responsibility? I’d really like to know. Deborah Goldeen 2130 Birch St., 94306 (650)799-3652 From:Carl Van Wey To:Council, City Cc:carl.vanwey@gmail.com; carl.vanwey@comcast.net Subject:license plate readers Date:Thursday, October 20, 2022 1:15:31 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from carl.vanwey@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 Council, I cast my vote as strongly in favor of license plate readers throughout the city, as it is a proven method of deterring crime and solving cases. Carl Van Wey 1425 University ave. From:Allan Seid To:DENNIS LEE Subject:Fwd: Affirmative action ban would harm SCU"s mission Date:Thursday, October 20, 2022 11:40:37 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Subject: Affirmative Action in University Admissions. Source: San Jose Mercury, Date: 10/20/2022 From: Allan Seid https://enewspaper.mercurynews.com/infinity/article_popover_share.aspx?guid=57d59f3d- 594a-4f8b-9b25-d1f41eb042a6 From:Charlie Weidanz To:Council, City Subject:BAWPVA"s 11th Annual Golf Tournament Date:Thursday, October 20, 2022 11:00:28 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. The Paralyzed Veterans of America, Bay Area & Western Chapter (BAWPVA), a non-profit veterans service organization in your community, is planning its 11th Annual Golf Tournament at Cinnabar Hills Golf Club on Monday, November 7, 2022. The funds we have raised through this event for our Sports & Recreation and Spinal Cord Injury Research Programs have enabled us to continue our support of wheelchair athletes and helping to find a cure for paralysis. Register Here On behalf of the paralyzed veterans in Northern California, Northern Nevada, and the Pacific Islands, BAWPVA thanks you for your support. Your generosity will help us continue to provide assistance to wheelchair athletes and continue our fight for a cure for paralysis. Our tax ID number is 9-46132553 11th Annual Golf Tournament 2022 Sponsorship Opportunities Event Info This email was sent on behalf of Palo Alto Chamber of Commerce 355 Alma St Palo Alto, CA 94301.To unsubscribe click here. If you have questions or comments concerning this email or services in general, please contact us by email at info@paloaltochamber.com. From:lois fowkes Subject:Discussion Date:Thursday, October 20, 2022 10:47:08 AM Some people who received this message don't often get email from lofow@pacbell.net. Learn whythis is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Greetings from here, How are you doing? I want to know if this email address is still valid to write to you. There is something important I would like to discuss with you. Thank you. From:FEC United To:Council, City Subject:FEC United Commerce Newsletter Date:Thursday, October 20, 2022 9:06:33 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious ofopening attachments and clicking on links.   FEC United Commerce Pillar Newsletter October 20, 2022   "But know this, that if the master of the house had known in what part of the night the thief was coming, he would have stayed awake and would not have let his house be broken into." - Matthew 24:43 Your Civic Duty As an American Business You Can Get Out the Vote We're within three weeks of the election; what can your business do? Remember, by being in business you have customer and vendor contacts beyond what most people have. There is nothing partisan about reminding people to vote! (And don't be afraid to remind opposing parties to vote, either; we need huge turnout all round to uncover ballot identity theft and keep lots of eyes on the process.) Post a flyer at your business, hand flyers out, post them online to remind everyone of the best practices for voting: Vote in person at a polling place on election day, November 8, 2022. Take your mail-in ballot with you and ask for a new generated ballot. Be sure you bring your ID and have your mail-in ballot secured in your possession which will only be used for evidence if needed. If the system says you have already voted, you must escalate by asking to speak to a supervisor to resolve the issue. Produce your unused mail-in ballot, but do not relinquish it. You must escalate to the sheriff's department. Finally, on November 8th, do an Election Day phone call or emailing to your customers to remind them to vote. Ballot Box Watching Organize a ballot box party! Look up a local ballot box. Try for whatever is closest to the cities, and ones which seem easier to reach from the Interstate than from the surrounding neighborhood. Invite your customers to join you there after closing hours; maybe you can provide refreshments, games, singing, or dancing. Best practices for ballot box parties: Have a group of least 7 people (preferably 10). Be unpredictable; show up frequently and at different times of day and night. Especially night. There is no effort too small. Three unpredictable appearances at the ballot box probably do more deterrence than fifty predictable appearances. Don't: talk to voters or engage them in any way (electioneering). wear Trump hats, or clothing with any messages. drink, do drugs, or smoke pot. be on private property. assume the official ballot box camera is even on. hide. You are there to deter crime, so be obvious. If no crime happens, that's a successful shift! Do: bring chairs and warm clothes. stay 50 feet away from the box. bring anything fun that won't distract you from the ballot box (food, games, books, etc.) sing, dance, converse, have fun! (Just be careful about even the perception of electioneering.) (as needed) have someone park where their headlights point at the group and also happen to light up the box. get video of anything you see; you can send it to CleanElectionsUSA's incident reporting form. Be creative; while you're there, depending on your business, you could hold a workout session, a talk on nutrition, investments, historical events, proper fence construction, or graphic design; and certainly you could discuss photography! (Maybe not so much a class on gun-cleaning, though.) Alternatives Needed We might need a patriot company, who doesn't sue everyone in sight for asking good questions, to build software that handles databases for schools, restaurants, hotels, oh, yeah, and election workers. (Let's just have the voting itself on paper, though.) We're getting a clear illustration of how businesses can make or break a nation. Key Takeaways 1. Remind everyone to vote in ways which will get their vote counted. 2. Help others have fun with civic duties of watching elections. 3. America needs trustworthy businesses.   Business and Economic News Last business out of Chicago, please turn out the lights! Merger of two major grocery store chains, Kroger and Albertsons, whose majority stakeholders are Vanguard/Blackrock and Cerberus, respectively, makes food price controls easier. Not saying anything speaks volumes, especially if you are China. What would another historical inflection point mean for investments? Also, what could possibly go right? Building the Parallel Economy Join the People's Chamber of Commerce for local networking and legal resources - one-year free offer going on right now! Stock ticker investing only in made-in-the-USA companies. I Want to Help FEC United! Get Involved! The Commerce Pillar needs your help! Your involvement is vital to support businesses staying open and freely providing products, services, and employment. Support the businesses courageous enough to stand for freedom - stand with them, maybe literally! Contact the Commerce Pillar for more information, or sign up for FEC United emails.   Mailing Address: PO Box 891, Parker, CO 80134 Want to change how you receive these emails? You can an change your email address or unsubscribe from this list. Unsubscribe at https://papp.pidoxa.com/unsub Sent by FEC United PO Box 891 , Parker CO 80134. Copyright 2022 by FEC United or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. From:Aram James To:Council, City; Human Relations Commission; Planning Commission; Winter Dellenbach; Shikada, Ed; Jeff Rosen; Julie Lythcott-Haims; Vicki Veenker; Doria Summa; Greer Stone; Greg Tanaka; Lydia Kou Subject:From The Mercury News e-edition - Bay Area seeing an ‘eviction tsunami’ Date:Thursday, October 20, 2022 6:34:13 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ I saw this The Mercury News e-edition article othe The Mercury News e-edition app and thought you’d be interested. Bay Area seeing an ‘eviction tsunami’ https://edition.pagesuite.com/popovers/dynamic_article_popover.aspx?guid=cfdac78e-12aa-4346-9b17- 3961ff78bedd&appcode=SAN252&eguid=d464c995-3cf7-455d-ab91-70b76037007d&pnum=1# For more great content like this subscribe to the The Mercury News e-edition app here: Sent from my iPhone From:Aram James To:Council, City; Greg Tanaka; Winter Dellenbach; Julie Lythcott-Haims; Vicki Veenker; ParkRec Commission; Planning Commission; Jethroe Moore; Doria Summa; Planning Commission; Lewis. james; Binder, Andrew; Jeff Rosen; Sean Allen; Shikada, Ed; Rebecca Eisenberg; Vara Ramakrishnan; Cecilia Taylor; Jay Boyarsky; Bil Barber; Betsy Nash Subject:Yes to a new skateboard park-Jameel skates Paris Date:Wednesday, October 19, 2022 11:44:13 PM Attachments:IMG_4236.heic CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ FYI: I support item # 8 on the consent calendar for Oct 24. For a New Snakeboarding Park. I will contribute to the cause. Sent from my iPhone From:Aram James To:Jeff Rosen; Jay Boyarsky; Jethroe Moore; Sean Allen; Binder, Andrew; Reifschneider, James; Julie Lythcott- Haims; Vicki Veenker; Doria Summa; Council, City; Shikada, Ed; Winter Dellenbach; Tony Dixon; Cecilia Taylor; Joe Simitian; Rebecca Eisenberg; Vara Ramakrishnan; Planning Commission; ParkRec Commission; Figueroa, Eric; chuck jagoda; Josh Becker; Enberg, Nicholas; Wagner, April; Greer Stone; ladoris cordell; Perron, Zachary; Greg Tanaka Subject:The video of officer Eric Huxley kicking unhoused Jermaine Vaughn in the head is beyond hideous —and the officers who reported Huxley’s conduct allege the department retaliated against them Date:Wednesday, October 19, 2022 11:32:07 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ FYI: The obligation for officers to intervene when a fellow officer engages in excessive force must be mandatory- prosecution of the offending officer must occur-and retaliation against those officers who intervene or report a fellow officer must itself be a crime. Checkout the disgusting video below: https://www.wthr.com/amp/article/news/crime/impd-sergeant-eric-huxley-september-24-2021-use-of-force- excessive-arrest-jermaine-vaughn/531-5c6837c8-2dba-4ef6-940a-bff32e38e091 Sent from my iPhone From:Aram James To:Council, City; citycouncil@mountainview.gov; Shikada, Ed; Binder, Andrew; Winter Dellenbach; Jeff Rosen; Jay Boyarsky; Joe Simitian; Sean Allen; Supervisor Otto Lee; Josh Becker; Rebecca Eisenberg; Julie Lythcott-Haims; Vicki Veenker; Doria Summa; Planning Commission; Jethroe Moore; Greer Stone; chuck jagoda; Wagner, April; ladoris cordell; Perron, Zachary; Greg Tanaka; bryan.gobin@uncbusiness.net; Enberg, Nicholas Subject:Tasers by attorneys Richard Konda & Aram James circa 2018 Date:Wednesday, October 19, 2022 10:17:09 PM Attachments:Aram James (DJ-1-12-18) (00000003).pdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ > > > > Sent from my iPhone LOS ANGELES & SAN FRANCISCO niIg fournaI FRIDAY, JANUARY 12, 2018 PERSPECTIVE There's no excuse for Taser use in our jails By Aram James and Richard Konda Watchdogs across the country are organiz- ing to oppose police practices that run contrary to community values and our con- stitutional rights. In Santa Clara County in the spring of 2017, Sheriff Laurie Smith, a longtime opponent of Tasers, in a surpris- ing shift of policy, announced her plan to introduce Tasers into the Santa Clara County jails. Local civil rights organizations immediately began organizing to resist the sheriff's call for Tasers. One of our first strategies was to ensure that members of the community were as fully in- formed as possible regarding the risks that Tasers pose to human life. We reviewed materials on Tasers and got ourselves cur- rent on the nuances of the issue. Next, we scheduled meetings over a seven -month period with key elected and non -elected of- ficials who we felt could influ- ence the sheriff's decision. This included members of the Santa Clara County Board of Supervi- sors who ultimately will vote to decide whether the sheriff will be allowed to purchase Tasers. We also met with the elected Santa Clara County district at- torney, the Santa Clara County public defender and the county counsel. And most importantly, we met with the sheriff and her staff to open up a dialogue on this critical issue. Here are some of the argu- ments and information we pro- vided much of which came from a recent fivepart series by Reu- ters ("Shock Tactics: Inside the New York Time News service Taser, the Weapon that Trans- formed Policing") and the Bar Association of San Francisco. Taser-Related Deaths and Lit- igation Critically important to con- vincing our sheriff of the inap- propriateness of bringing Tasers to the jails is Reuter's recent finding that the death toll associ- ated with Tasers is substantially more than previously reported by mainstream civil rights organiza- tions like Amnesty Internation- al. Using rigorous journalistic standards, Reuters documented 1,005 deaths related to Taser use by law enforcement. In addition, Reuters complet- ed a thorough examination of the monies paid out by cities across the country in Taser related lit- igation. Reuters identified and reviewed 442 wrongful death lawsuits in which Tasers were a factor that may have caused death. "In 120 of the 442 cases or 27%, the Taser was the only force alleged in the claim; in the remaining 322 cases, the stun guns were alleged to have been part of a broader array of police force. More than three -fifths of the 366 of the concluded law- suits against governments, or 232, resulted in judgments or settlements for the plaintiffs: 220 settlements and 12 judg- ments. Reuters was able to de- termine payouts in 193 cases, totaling $172 million paid by cit- ies and their insurers. That dol- lar figure does not include three dozen cases in which settlements remained confidential or were unavailable" (Emphasis added.) These findings regarding the cost of litigation should trouble any law enforcement agency, city or county contemplating the purchase of Tasers. Taser Warnings Historically the manufactur- er had very few warnings re- garding the safety of its weap- on. Increasingly and in order to shift liability to cities and police departments, Taser now has a 4,500 -word, seven -page warning. The warning advises users not to deploy the Taser in the area of the face, eyes, neck, chest, heart and the genitals. And not to Taser a variety of popula- tions including the frail, mental- ly ill, pregnant women and those with heart problems. By warning police departments regarding the risk of death and serious injury when a Taser is improp- erly used, the manufacturer has effectively shifted liability from itself to police departments and municipalities. Reuters also explored in detail the progression off Taser warn- ings that includes a comprehen- sive interactive guide. The progression of increasing- ly restrictive warnings issued by Taser has led some police agen- cies to either shelve Tasers all together or not to purchase them at all after having reviewed the extensive warnings. Ed Davis, former Boston police chief from 2006-2013, in ultimately declin- ing to purchase Tasers for his department said the following: The warnings "made the weapon impractical to use, and it gave a lot of us the impression that we weren't getting the full story. I didn't want to take the risk. The potential litigation costs abso- lutely were a factor." The tragic death of Everette Howard, a young African -Amer- ican student, is a case examined in the Reuter's series. One Taser blast by University of Cincinna- ti police officer Richard Haas, a certified Taser instructor, result- ed in Everette Howard's death. "Haas fired his stun gun. One electrified dart hit below How- ard's lower left chest, the other near his waist. The 18 year -old collapsed, unconscious, and was pronounced dead at the hospi- tal." Haas subsequently said, "I did not in my wildest dreams ex- pect this kid to die?' As part of his role as a certified Taser trainer, Haas acknowledged that he had studied the Taser safety warnings over a 10 -year period and noted that they had become more complex over the years. Ironically, the Taser blast. that killed Everette Howard was the first time Haas had deployed a Taser in the field. He ultimate- ly concluded, "it seemed like it was getting harder and harder to use the Taser." The University of Cincinnati ultimately settled the Howard's family wrongful death lawsuit for $2 million. Taser was not sued in the matter. In another case explored by Reuters, Linwood Lambert was tasered some 20 times by South Boston, Virginia, police officers. He died. There was substantial evidence that the three officers involved ignored the manufac- turer's warning regarding the risk of repeatedly tasering vic- tims. In addition, the officers ig- nored other warnings issued by the manufacturer. Under oath at a deposition, one of three offi- cers involved, Corporal Tiffany Bratton, acknowledged that she was aware of the manufacturer's warnings. In a chilling statement, she said, "If I read and abided by every single warning ... I would not Taser anyone." Catch -22 More and more attention is being paid by commentators to the fact that the use of Tasers is a Catch -22. Failure by police de- partments to follow closely the ever growing restrictions on the use of Tasers issued by the manu- facturer has resulted in unneces- sary deaths and a huge increase in the costs of litigation borne by municipalities. On the other hand, where police departments are closely complying with the manufacturer's complex warn- ings, they are finding it increas- ingly impractical to use Tasers. The Oakland Police Department has over 700 police officers on their force, all are armed with Tasers. The Bar Association of San Francisco Criminal Jus- tice Task Force, Committee on Tasers contacted the Oakland Police Department to determine how frequently Tasers were de- ployed. "To help answer some of the questions, the BASF also reached out to the Oakland Po- lice Department (OPD) to deter- mine how often Tasers are used, and how often they are effective. It is well known that LAPD re- ports 47% efficacy, but LAPD far exceeds the size of SFPD. The OPD which is closer in size to the SFPD, reported that in 2015 Tasers were deployed on just 37 occasions and 32 times in 2016. Oakland reported for each year, the efficacy was 50%" Other studies have con- firmed that where warnings are complied with the use of Tasers drops dramatically. Similarly, numerous studies have con- firmed that Tasers have an unac- ceptably high failure rate putting both the officers and intended victim at risk. Moreover, Tasers are not effec- tive. Michael Leonesio, a retired Oakland peace officer, provided answers to questions posed by the Bar Association of San Fran- cisco. "Given the warnings is- sued by Taser International, does this diminish the weapon's effi- cacy and/or circumstances other- wise warranting Taser use[?] ... Answer: The latest manufacturer warnings and trainings, as well as the Courts and current case law decisions, have absolutely limited the circumstances when a TASER, can and/or, should be used. Combine this with the fact that the new generation weap- ons are generating only half the electrical output of the previous generations, and I question the current weapons' ability for con- sistent, reliable, subject incapac- itation" Worth the Cost? In June 2017, Taser expert Mi- chael Leonesio, was called as an expert witness before the San Francisco Police Commission on the potential costs of outfitting all members of the SFPD with Tasers. "During his testimony, he estimated the first year in costs to San Francisco at $8,000 to $10,000 per officer which in- cluded the purchase price, main- tenance, training and oversight. Assuming a department size of 2,200 officers, the cost is be- tween $17.6 million and $22 million?' Clearly, the sheriff and the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors need to consider the cost factors raised above before expending millions of tax payer dollars on a weapon that is in- creasingly seen as impractical to use. Final Argument Tasers kill on the average of one person per week in the Unit- ed States. According to the Re- uters series, nine out of 10 who die are unarmed. Tasers are un- safe to use in jails because of the substantial risk of injury or death to both inmates and correction officers. The strongest single piece of evidence of this lack of safety is the 1,005 Taser related deaths reported in the Reuters fivepart series on Tasers. Equally powerful evidence of why Tasers should be banned is the ever growing list of restrictions/warn- ings issued by the manufacturer themselves regarding the serious risks of injury and death related to the use of Tasers. The millions that would be spent in arming the correctional officers in the jails with Tasers would be better spent on hiring more and better trained correc- tional officers. Finally, given the recommendations of the Santa Clara County Blue Ribbon Com- mission on Improving Custody Operations, the purchase and use of Tasers in the jails runs counter to the community's loud and re- peated calls for a more humane approach to incarceration. Call to Action When your community is faced with a questionable police practice be it the use of Tasers, inhumane jail conditions, unconstitutional surveillance tactics, racially dis- criminatory police enforcement; be confident that there is a way to organi ze your community to ef- fectively challenge these issues. Meet early and often with the community and with your local elected officials. Provide them with the necessary information to fully educate them on the is- sues. Call on your local district attorney, who is the chief, law en- forcement officer in every com- munity, to support your efforts to challenge and end police practic- es that diminish public trust for local law enforcement. Remem- ber police practices are not some obscure body of knowledge that we the community need sit back and passively accept. We can in fact make a difference. Aram James is a refired Santa Clara County deputy public de- fender, a member of CJA and a co-founder of the Albert Cobar- rubias Justice Project (ACJP), a grassroots legal advocacy orga- nization located in. San Jose. Richard Ronda is an attor- ney and executive director of the Asian Law Alliance and the Chairperson of the Coalition for Justice and Accountability (CJA). Konda and James have challenged the use of Tasers by law enforcement for more than a decade. Reprinted with permission from the Daily journal. 112018 Daily Journal Corporation. All rights reserved. Reprinted by Reprintpros 949.702-5390. From:Aram James To:Binder, Andrew; Reifschneider, James; Figueroa, Eric; Jeff Rosen; Shikada, Ed; Jay Boyarsky; Jethroe Moore; Sean Allen; Sean Webby; Enberg, Nicholas; Winter Dellenbach; Council, City; Planning Commission; Alison Cormack; Filseth, Eric (Internal); Tom DuBois; Pat Burt; Joe Simitian; Rebecca Eisenberg; Julie Lythcott-Haims; Vicki Veenker; Summa, Doria; Greer Stone; dennis burns; Supervisor Susan Ellenberg Subject:JENSEN, NOT JONSEN - Blog Date:Wednesday, October 19, 2022 10:08:02 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ > >  > https://codyscom.com/SOelection/2022/10/20/jensen-not-jonsen-santa-clara-county-sheriffs-race-dont-mistake- the-names-vote-kevin-jensen-not-bob-jonsen-santa-clara-county-sheriff-election/ > > > Sent from my iPhone From:Aram James To:Council, City; Julie Lythcott-Haims; Vicki Veenker; Winter Dellenbach; Jethroe Moore; Jeff Rosen; Shikada, Ed; citycouncil@mountainview.gov; Council, City; Sean Allen; Jay Boyarsky; Doria Summa; Planning Commission; ParkRec Commission; Binder, Andrew Subject:New report targets Santa Clara Co. sheriff on 2018 inmate"s brain damage case amid corruption trial - YouTube Date:Wednesday, October 19, 2022 9:47:02 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ > >  > https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4FLjPsLnrU8 > > > Sent from my iPhone From:Aram James To:Joe Simitian; Supervisor Otto Lee; Council, City; Binder, Andrew; Supervisor Susan Ellenberg; mike.wasserman@bos.sccgov.org; Michael Gennaco; Cindy Chavez; Supervisor Otto Lee; Vicki Veenker Subject:Mauled: When Police Dogs Are Weapons - Online Journalism Awards Date:Wednesday, October 19, 2022 9:43:31 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links.  Alert: Why City Council Candidates Must be Concerned About Flesh Eating Police Weaponized Canines Short critical summary of the canine report ( Mauled: when police dogs are weapons) for candidates who are elected to the Palo Alto City Council to confront chief Andrew Binder with to demand that he NOT be allowed to restart a canine unit that permits canines to be used to terrorize, maul, maim and even kill innocent community members. We must over see our new chief. The Presumption of Innocence contrary to rumors to the contrary is still alive and well. Some people don’t want to disturbed by the facts but our elected officials must be. Tell Andrew Binder we are disturbed by facts re weaponized police canines and don’t want then in our community. Best regards, aram https://awards.journalists.org/entries/mauled-when-police-dogs-are- weapons/ Sent from my iPhone From:Barron Park PTA To:Council, City Subject:Barron Park Elementary School // How to submit a letter or talk at City Council Meeting Date:Wednesday, October 19, 2022 7:41:51 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from barronparkpta@gmail.com.Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Hi, I'm the PTA president at the elementary school Barron Park Elementary, PAUSD. I'm a volunteer along with a bunch of other parents at this school. We wanted to submit a letter and/or speak as it relates to the construction plan on 3400 El Camino real. Because we are concerned about the traffic between 7:45-8:15am every morning when kids ride/walk/bike to school on this little street where the one entry/exit point is planned for cars. And there is SRTS (Safe Ride to School) route that goes directly down this street. There's no other way across El Camino that makes sense, this little street is how students are going to cross. Plus the crossing guard at the little street can attest that there's a lot of kids going down this street and last year at least once a kid almost got hit by a car. So there's some serious safety issues here. Can you let me know how I can share our sentiment with CPA at large. My personal background is in construction and 3D visualization. It's a serious concern and we can effectively communicate the danger signs of the proposed design. Thanks! Scott Scott Anderson Barron Park PTA President Twitter | Facebook | PTA Site | School Site | Konstella From:UNAFF To:Council, City Subject:25th UNAFF Opening Night and Weekend Date:Wednesday, October 19, 2022 7:00:32 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious ofopening attachments and clicking on links. OPENING NIGHT 25th ANNUAL UNITED NATIONS ASSOCIATION FILM FESTIVAL (UNAFF) PRESENTS OPENING NIGHT ON OCTOBER 20 WITH THE THEME “REFLECTIONS” SPECIAL GUESTS EXPECTED: PALO ALTO MAYOR PATRICK BURT, FILMMAKERS MARGIE FRIEDMAN & BARBARA MULTER WELLIN UNAFF PRESENTS IN-PERSON SCREENINGS AND PANELS ON OCTOBER 20-30 WITH 60 GROUNDBREAKING DOCUMENTARIES FROM ACROSS THE GLOBE THAT WILL CHANGE YOUR VIEW OF THE WORLD (Palo Alto, CA) The United Nations Association Film Festival (UNAFF) presents its Opening Night for its 25th anniversary on Thursday, October 20, at the Mitchell Park Community Center in Palo Alto, kicking off with a welcome by Palo Alto Mayor Patrick Burt and the PROCLAMATION for UNAFF’s 25th Anniversary. Three films screen on Opening Night, beginning with MALDITA. A LOVE SONG TO SARAJEVO, a poetic portrait of unique Balkan artist Božo Vrećo. Also screening is the inspiring ORCHESTRATING CHANGE, the story of Me2/Orchestra, changing the lives of musicians and audiences with mental illness, with the film’s Directors/Producers Margie Friedman and Barbara Multer-Wellin in person for Q&A. Rounding out Opening Night is the Oscar-nominated WRITING WITH FIRE, a look at India’s only newspaper run by Dalit women journalists. “This year’s theme REFLECTIONS continues UNAFF’s enduring devotion to the principles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, emphasizing the 25th Anniversary milestone and creating an opportunity to reflect on the ways UNAFF, our society, and the world have changed over the last quarter century,” said UNAFF Founder and Executive Director Jasmina Bojic. THURSDAY, October 20th Palo Alto: Mitchell Park Community Center, 3700 Middlefield Road Session 1 5:30 PM Opening Night Reception – sponsored by Flea Street and Judy’s Breadsticks, music by POTENTIAL Jazz Ensemble 6:00 PM Opening words by Palo Alto Mayor Patrick Burt 6:30 PM MALDITA. A LOVE SONG TO SARAJEVO (Bosnia and Herzegovina/Spain, 27 min) 7:10 PM ORCHESTRATING CHANGE (US, 85 min) 8:50 PM WRITING WITH FIRE (India, 93 min) Ticket: $12 per film session (excludes receptions) at https://tickets.stanford.edu For more information: www.unaff.org Press photos are available at www.unaff.org/2022/press.html MALDITA. A LOVE SONG TO SARAJEVO Directors: Amaia Remírez, Raúl de la Fuente Calle Neither the weight of weapons, nor the ravages of history, nor the envy of those who want a “pure” world have managed to put an end to Sarajevo, which today resurfaces with more force than ever. In this film, Božo Vrećo, the most revolutionary of Balkan artists, perfectly embodies the soul of the “innocent city,” and with his unapologetic attitude, he builds bridges between past and present, between men and women, between origins and regions. This film is an ode to life and to the love story between two cities, Sarajevo and Barcelona, who knew how to find each other in difficult times and never have to say goodbye again. ORCHESTRATING CHANGE Directors: Margie Friedman, Barbara Multer-Wellin Orchestrating Change tells the inspiring story of Me2/Orchestra, the only orchestra in the world created by and for people living with mental illness and those who support them. The orchestra’s mission is to erase the stigmatization of people living with mental illness through the creation of beautiful music, community, compassion, and understanding... one concert at a time. Most importantly, it is changing the lives of the musicians and audiences in ways they never imagined. With compelling characters, striking animation, and humor, this film addresses many of the myths about mental illness by showing what living with a mental illness is really like, including both setbacks and accomplishments. WRITING WITH FIRE Directors/Producers: Rintu Thomas, Sushmit Ghosh, Patty Quillin, Hallee Adelman, Anurima Bhargava This Academy Award-nominated film tells the story of courageous Indian women journalists. In the cluttered news landscape dominated by men emerges India’s only newspaper run by Dalit women. Armed with smartphones, Chief Reporter Meera and her journalists break traditions, both on the frontlines of India’s biggest issues and within the confines of their homes, redefining what it means to be powerful. OPENING WEEKEND FRIDAY, October 21st Palo Alto: Mitchell Park Community Center, 3700 Middlefield Road Session 2 4:00 PM AGUAN-SUN BEHIND THE HORIZON (Bangladesh, 9 min) 4:20 PM FLY SO FAR (El Salvador/Sweden, 89 min) Session 3 6:30 PM SANCTUARY (Guatemala/US 13 min) 7:00 PM THE ASSASSINATION OF ANNA. CRIME WITHOUT PUNISHMENT (Russia, 75 min) 8:30 PM APART (US, 86 min) SATURDAY, October 22nd Palo Alto: Mitchell Park Community Center, 3700 Middlefield Road Session 4 UNAFF & Kids Program (FREE Admission) 1:00 PM THE GHOSTS OF THE MOUNTAINS (Mongolia/US, 7 min) 1:20 PM THE 3 CRICKETEERS (US, 9 min) 1:40 PM FOR THE BEES (US/Yemen, 16 min) Session 5 2:30 PM BUTTERFLY, BUTTERFLY (Brazil/India/Indonesia/Kenya/US, 40 min) 3:30 PM THE CHILDREN IN THE PICTURES (Australia/France/US, 86 min) 5:10 PM Panel “How We as a Society Treat Children” (FREE Admission) Session 6 7:00 PM SURVIVING THE SILENCE: THE UNTOLD STORY OF TWO WOMEN IN LOVE WHO HELPED CHANGE MILITARY POLICY (US, 79 min) 8:30 PM CODED BIAS (US, 89 min) SUNDAY, October 23rd Palo Alto: Mitchell Park Community Center, 3700 Middlefield Road Session 7 1:00 PM THIS ADVENTURE CALLED CALIFORNIA (US, 22 min) 1:30 PM A DECENT HOME (US, 86 min) 3:10 PM Panel “Homes and Inequality” (FREE Admission) 4:10 PM FAIR PLAY (US, 88 min) 5:50 PM SAVING MINDS (Canada, 89 min) Session 8 7:30 PM PASANG: IN THE SHADOW OF EVEREST (France/Nepal/US, 71 min) 9:00 PM IMAGINING THE INDIAN (US, 95 min) We hope to see you this week and during the rest of the 25th UNAFF to experience our 60 film screenings, 6 panels, awards ceremony, and closing night reception. Keep up to date by checking out our full program. 25th UNAFF October 20-30, 2022 Palo Alto, East Palo Alto, San Francisco, Stanford University www.unaff.org Your tax-deductible donation is essential for us to continue with all of these valuable programs for our community. Please check https://unaff.wedid.it for more details. By supporting UNAFF, you will have the opportunity to play an active role in upholding human dignity, promoting empathy, and saving the arts. UNAFF | PO Box 19369, Stanford, CA 94309 Unsubscribe city.council@cityofpaloalto.org Update Profile | Constant Contact Data Notice Sent by info@unaff.org powered by Try email marketing for free today! From:Aram James To:Julie Lythcott-Haims; Vicki Veenker; ladoris cordell; Greer Stone; Greg Tanaka; Winter Dellenbach; Sean Allen; Binder, Andrew; Reifschneider, James; Tannock, Julie; Enberg, Nicholas; Figueroa, Eric; Jethroe Moore; Shikada, Ed; Jeff Rosen; chuck jagoda; Jay Boyarsky; bryan.gobin@uncbusiness.net; Joe Simitian; Rebecca Eisenberg; Josh Becker; Council, City; Wagner, April Subject:Police K-9 Attacks Blind, Homeless Man In Church - YouTube Date:Wednesday, October 19, 2022 4:56:44 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ Quote: culture will eat policy every time! > >  > https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Oyoo03SCawA > > > Sent from my iPhone From:Alex James Dakers To:Council, City Subject:Student journalist covering homelessness and healthcare beat Date:Wednesday, October 19, 2022 3:41:18 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from daaakes@stanford.edu. Learnwhy this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Good afternoon, My name is Alex Dakers, and I’m a student journalist with the Peninsula Press and The Stanford Daily, as well as a current M.A. Journalism student at Stanford. I also have a BSc in Biomedical Sciences from the University of Bath. Influenced by my background in the sciences, as well as homelessness being such an ever-present issue locally and state-wide (and of course further afield, too), I’m interested in being able to find ways to reach out to those struggling or who have struggled with homelessness to hear some of their stories, and how their predicaments may have impacted their health and access to healthcare. I’m also interested in hearing from those who work to help them. I attended last week’s Policy and Services Committee meeting where the new HomeKey Palo Alto project was mentioned. I also visited the LifeMoves Opportunity Center on Encina Avenue last week, where I spoke with Andrew Navarro, the Peninsula Healthcare Connection clinic director and outreach manager on-site, who stressed that to continue to do the fantastic and life changing work that they do, increased funding and expanded services and facilities would always be welcome – and is becoming more and more of a need. I wanted to find out (from any city council members who may be able to offer insight on the topic) whether they would back increased funding and support for existing health services such as Peninsula Healthcare Connection that offer varied healthcare support to such an underserved and stigmatized community, as well as what the plans are to offer such coverage at the new HomeKey Palo Alto site. I can be reached at this email address, or via phone at +1(650) 382-9694. I look forward to hearing from you. Kind regards, Alex Dakers From:Arnout Boelens To:Council, City Subject:Rail Committee public comments Date:Wednesday, October 19, 2022 3:02:22 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Rail Committee Members, Unfortunately, I had to sign off due to time constraints, but here are the comments I was planning on making. My name is Arnout Boelens. I am the PTAC Safe Route to School Chairperson but today I am speaking as an individual. Every day nearly six thousand students walk and roll to and from school and many of those students need to cross the train tracks. It is therefore of utmost importance that the City arrives at a grade separation solution that provides safe, coherent, direct, attractive, and comfortable routes to walk and roll to school, both during construction and for the final design. Especially, since the City would like to reduce vehicle miles traveled as part of the Sustainability and Climate Action Plan. One student walking or rolling to school replaces four car trips, two to and from school in the morning for dropoff and another two for pickup in the afternoon. As you could read in the letter from the Paly PTSA. The choice for the partial underpass at Churchill cuts off one of the major direct routes to get to this school, while not providing viable alternatives. A bicycle and pedestrian underpass at Kellogg will have blind corners, which could be especially dangerous at the volumes of pedestrians and bicyclists that are expected to take this route. Although approved in 2016, the city failed to build bicycle infrastructure at Embarcadero, and this route is a safety hazard as well. An underpass at Seale could be a major detour for many students which might result in them driving instead. We’re hoping to do a survey for Paly as well. As you could see in the grade separation survey presented by Shree of the Gunn student bicycle club, the current plans to close Meadow and Charleston at the same time during construction would be a major disruption, even with a possible new underpass near Matadero creek, possibly causing many students to consider driving instead of walking and bicycling. The current high bicycling and walking mode shares of the Palo Alto Safe Routes to School program are unique in the United States and it took decades to achieve. It would be a shame if these numbers took a hit because of setting the wrong priorities in the grade separation decision making process. Both for our children who would miss out on the physical and mental health benefits of an active lifestyle, and for the climate, which is heating up at an unprecedented rate. Thank you for considering my comments. From:Progressivism Madness To:Council, City Subject:Disingenuous Defenses of Critical Race Theory Date:Wednesday, October 19, 2022 1:51:05 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of openingattachments and clicking on links. Can't see this message? View in a browser Disingenuous Defenses of Critical Race Theory In July 2021, The New York Times published an opinion piece by commentators David French, Kmele Foster, Thomas Chatterton Williams and Jason Stanley, who presented themselves as a heroic “cross-partisan group of thinkers.” They derided as “un-American” laws passed by states such as Texas, Florida, Idaho, Oklahoma, Arkansas and New Hampshire that prohibit public schools from promoting the core principles of critical race theory, including race essentialism, collective guilt and state- sanctioned discrimination. These authors imagine themselves the steady hand in a grandiose morality play, defending liberal-democratic freedoms against the threat of illiberalism, wherever it comes from. But in practice, they are enablers of the worst ideologies of the Left and would leave American families defenseless against them. Their three core arguments — that critical race theory restrictions violate “free speech,” that state legislatures should stay out of the “marketplace of ideas,” and that citizens should pursue civil-rights litigation instead — are all hollow to the core. In reality, they would usher in the concrete tyrannies of critical race theory, which explicitly seeks to subvert the principles of individual rights and equal protection under the law. Despite the superficial ideological differences between the four authors, they serve a single function: to prevaricate, stall and run interference for critical race theory’s blitz through American institutions. The Authors’ Primary Error is Framing the Debate as a Question About Free Speech This is bizarre. The First Amendment was designed to protect citizens from the government, not to protect the government from citizens. Public schools, which have the power of compulsion, are pushing toxic racial theories onto children, teaching them that they should be judged on the basis of race and must atone for historical crimes committed by members of their racial group. Critical race theorists, of course, have the right to express their beliefs as individuals, but voters and taxpayers are not obligated to subsidize their speech and include it in the public school curriculum. After all, the public education system is not a “marketplace of ideas”; it is a state-run monopoly with the power of force. Even under the most dogmatic libertarian philosophy, monopoly conditions justify, even require, government intervention. The anti-critical race theory bills do not restrict teaching and inquiry about the history of racism; they restrict indoctrination, abusive pedagogies and state-sanctioned racism. In Idaho, for example, the law tells public schools they cannot “compel students to personally affirm, adopt or adhere to” noxious ideas, such as one race “is inherently superior or inferior” or that an individual “should be adversely treated on the basis of race.” The Times op-ed authors, however, make the case that the public must not interfere directly in public institutions, even those that promote state-sanctioned racism. They argue that anti-critical race theory legislation constitutes a “speech code” and that any such limitations on the public school curriculum “threaten” democracy itself. But Isn’t Some Kind of Speech Restriction Inevitable, Even Obligatory, in Public Schools? Or do state educators have the right to promote any ideology they desire — say, for example, eugenics or gay conversion therapy — immune from legislative restriction? During a recent conversation on the Bari Weiss podcast, I asked co-author David French a simple question to test the implications of his theory: If a public school adopted a Klan- sponsored curriculum that promoted racial superiority theory, would he support or oppose state legislation to ban it? He ducked the question — and, when confronted on social media, Kmele Foster and Thomas Chatterton Williams also refused to answer. But the application of this principle to school curricula still remains, and there seem to be three possible answers: First, they could support a ban, in which case their disagreement on the critical race theory ban would be partisan, not principled; or second, they could oppose a ban, which would be internally consistent, but atrocious on moral and practical grounds — a state should absolutely prohibit public schools from promoting Klan ideology. In the Bari Weiss podcast and in the Times op-ed, French and his colleagues appear to take a third position: They claim that many of the practices of critical race theory are already illegal under federal civil-rights law and, therefore, new legislation is unnecessary. This might be true as a matter of pure legal theory, but in reality, thousands of public schools are already engaging in these abusive practices and most parents do not have the resources to file a federal civil-rights lawsuit at every infraction — and the Biden administration has dropped all enforcement against critical race theory in public education, eliminating another avenue of protection. After They Took Heat on Social Media, They Also Silently Scrubbed Their Entire Headline The premise of the piece was that the authors were brave heterodox truth-tellers—but they caved immediately under pressure. The status quo puts an extreme burden on individual families, while shielding public school from democratic oversight and accountability. This position, presented as a principled third way, is an illusion: It might make for a compelling law-review article, but in practice, it will move the country further down the path of racial abuse in the classroom, affording parents no recourse except for the abstract satisfaction that, in the mind of some intellectuals, these practices are already illegal. The difference between these two approaches — action and nonaction — is significant. With state prohibitions on critical race theory indoctrination, schools have clear guidance about their curricula and families have immediate recourse. If teachers are pushing divisive racial theories in the classroom, parents can point to a clear, specific legal statute and force the school into compliance; if that fails, they can appeal to state attorneys general or state superintendents, who can immediately enforce the law. With the French-Foster-Williams-Stanley approach of maintaining the status quo, schools can continue to promote race essentialism, collective guilt and racial superiority theory, and parents would be obligated to file an expensive, multiyear federal lawsuit to challenge these programs in the courts one by one, with no guarantee of success. In the end, state legislation tilts the playing field in favor of parents; the status quo tilts the playing field in favor of bureaucrats, lawyers, and diversity officers. Is it Possible These Writers Aren’t Aware of the Illiberal Nature of Critical Race Theory? In a word, no. David French, in particular, should know better. In 2012, he denounced critical race theory as a dangerous cult that enforced its orthodoxy with “vicious” harassment on the Harvard University campus; in 2017, he described it as “racial poison” that “leads to sheer cruelty and malice.” In our recent podcast conversation, after I suggested that critical race theory was verging on hegemony within our institutions, he pushed back, arguing that if the critical theorists had truly achieved hegemony, our conversation would not have been possible — it would have been outlawed, censored, banned. This is telling: French understands intuitively that critical race theory is a totalitarian ideology that, if it were to achieve absolute power, would immediately dismantle the liberal system, beginning with the right to free speech. But French and his collaborators refuse to make the obvious connection. If critical race theory is “racial poison,” why allow it to seize control of our schools? If critical race theorists are “magnetic, preacher-like personalities” who seek totalitarian power, why defend them in the name of liberalism? In practice, these writers have turned the Paradox of Tolerance into a farce. They cling to procedural arguments about phantom freedoms, while conceding substantive power to those who explicitly oppose Enlightenment rationalism, equality under the law, and the concept of rights itself. Enabling the Most Intolerant Voices in Our Society With No Capacity for Self-Moderation As a result, they end up enabling the most intolerant voices in our society, who have shown no capacity for self-moderation. At heart, they mistake protecting the status quo with protecting freedom — a lazy, not principled, position. If their ideas were to prevail, they would end up perverting the very values they claim to cherish: public school teachers forcing first-graders to denounce themselves as racists would become “free speech”; school diversity officers forcing students through race reeducation programs would become “academic freedom.” And the ratchet only goes one way: They see no problem with states such as California, Oregon, Washington and Illinois mandating critical race theory in their state curricula and teacher-training programs; but if states such as Texas, Oklahoma, Idaho and New Hampshire prohibit it, all of a sudden, that is an “un-American” threat to “the expression of ideas.” Luckily, the American Public Has Infinitely More Sense Than the New York Times Op-ed Page The revolt against critical race theory has inspired millions of parents to engage in the political process, protest at school board meetings, run for office, file lawsuits, and lobby state legislators to stop the madness through the rightful exercise of democratic power. According to a recent YouGov/Economist poll, 64 percent of Americans now know about critical race theory, of which 58 percent view it unfavorably, including 72 percent of independents who believe including it in school curricula is “bad for America.” These citizens understand implicitly that public schools are being devoured by a hostile ideology that seeks to divide the country by race and undermine the core principle of democratic control. They understand a simple truth, forgotten by the chattering class: In a democracy, voters get to decide how to shape, guide and restrict public institutions, especially those that have power over children. The war against critical race theory is a war worth fighting — and, more importantly, a war worth winning. Naive libertarianism, as always, is a path to demoralization, empty gestures and, ultimately, defeat. This July 9, 2021 article in City Journal is courtesy of Christopher F. Rufo, senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute. Become a SAPIENT Being member Sapient Conservative Textbook (SCT) Program 4533 Temescal Cyn. # 308 Corona CA, 92883 (951) 638-5562 Share on social SAPIENT BEING You've received this email because you are a subscriber of this site. If you feel you received it by mistake or wish to unsubscribe, please click here. From:Angela Dellaporta To:Planning Commission; Council, City Subject:Proposal for 3200 Park/Portage Date:Wednesday, October 19, 2022 1:22:59 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear City Council and PTC Members: As a member of the NVCAP Working Group, I want to be very clear that I strongly support development in the entire NVCAP area, including 3200 Park, 340 Portage and 200 Portage. However, the current proposal for development of the area appears to me to meet none of the needs of this city. The Working Group recognized and supported the continued need for housing in Palo Alto, and envisioned a thriving community including neighborhood serving retail; convivial eating establishments alongside a naturalized creek; cultural events; and housing that would serve residents of many different income levels. The Working Group vision for the North Ventura area has the potential to make it a center of culture and community — a jewel for Palo Alto. While land prices in the Bay Area make it difficult to build here, I believe that if other communities can manage it, Palo Alto can too. In contrast, the proposal made recently features: unneeded office space; a tiny spot of retail; very little housing; and strict segregation of market rate and below-market-rate units. I wish I understood exactly why the council is seriously considering wasting the wonderful potential of the area. While the details of the process have not been transparent, we are under the impression that some council members were afraid that there might be a threat of a lawsuit if certain parties were not allowed to make as much money as they pleased. Is that how the council must make its decisions these days? Are we utterly in the thrall of developers’ profits? Does the council feel so powerless that they are willing not only to sacrifice the quality of life in Palo Alto, but also willing to defer the urgent need for housing and to ignore state mandates? If, on the other hand, the council is not acting out of fear of a lawsuit, perhaps they will clarify exactly what their viable vision for the area is, what the benefits are to the city, and how they might make that vision a reality. Hoping that developers’ bottom lines are not the deciding factor in the growth of Palo Alto, Angela Dellaporta From:Elizabeth Goldstein Alexis To:Council, City Subject:Grade separation traffic report Date:Wednesday, October 19, 2022 10:07:45 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. I am attaching the full report to this email as it is very large - please consider this to be part of my submitted comments. Traffic-Analysis-Report_Churchill-Meadow-and-Ch... From:Elizabeth Goldstein Alexis To:Council, City Subject:Comments for rail committee meeting 10/19/2022 Date:Wednesday, October 19, 2022 10:06:34 AM Attachments:image.png image.png CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Please note: I am submitting these comments as an individual for today's study session on further refinements of alternatives. I am traveling today so it is unlikely I will be able to join the call. As you may know, I proposed a modified underpass solution at Charleston and Meadow in response to concerns I had that the other alternatives would not be good long term solutions for those roads - in terms of both automobiles and cyclists. I felt they would leave in place wide intersections that would attract a lot of induced traffic once there was no train pre- emption, given the deficient turning movements available at other nearby crossings at San Antonio Rd and Oregon Expressway. Already, there is a stretch between Alma and El Camino on Charleston where it is not possible to do traffic calming and bikes are traveling along cars driving very fast. Crossing the road at Park and other unsignalized intersections is a challenge people biking, driving and walking - and will become even more difficult in the future. I also saw the opportunity for some really wonderful improvements in the bike network, providing protected access to Mitchell Park and all the schools there for many people. The traffic study that was done confirmed my concerns - the trench, aerial and hybrid solutions are all predicted to result in a failing intersection where Charleston and Meadow meet Alma - and there is NOTHING that can be done to mitigate this. Roads that are like this provide limited gaps for bicyclists to cross the road, as well as create safety issues when frustrated motorists do unsafe things, like run red lights. The proposed underpass would not be perfect - but would be a substantial improvement. I want to remind the committee that the main motivation for this entire effort is to improve traffic circulation - and the other alternatives simply don't do that and may perversely make the situation worse. I don't believe that the trench or the hybrid solution should be considered viable alternatives. We need to find a way to design the underpass in a way that it is a good solution and not only acceptable to the bike and ped community but actively embraced. The current design process, however, is not helping. It is actively creating opposition to a project that I believe properly designed creates excellent bicycle facilities. There are a number of critical comments about the current underpass design, including from me. I am concerned that the presentation of the proposal at PABAC meetings by the consultants may have created a flurry of concern based upon the way in which it was presented. A bike connection across Alma was shown as a series of 90 degree turns - which is not how it would ever be designed - but committee members were never told this and obviously responded quite negatively. In addition, the design uses a paired couplet of bike/ped paths on one side of Charleston and the other on Meadow. In my concept, a broader rethinking of bike plan in area will limit the number of bicyclists on the wrong side of the road. There will still be some people who need to cross. On the Park blvd side, this would be done with well designed bike bridges over Charleston/Meadow. On the other side on Charleston, you would obviously use the signalized crossing at Carlson Ct. A protected bike lane could take bicyclists to this intersection. At the PABAC meeting, AECOM showed cyclists crossing in front of the roundabout - which is something that is bizarre and unsafe. It was very upsetting to me to see this presented as my name is on this design - but it is not my design at all. In addition, I would raise a concern about a repeated concept in the staff report that many of the project requirements will be "fine tuned" in later design stages. This will be too late - the Frankenstein design that is resulting by maximizing lots of things that would obviously not be maximized in a constrained situation like we have at those intersections generates obvious opposition, which is the opposite of the constructive framework we need. I did think the staff report did a good job of highlighting the conflicts between a number of different requirements. For example, thick bridge designs ("worst case") and excessively high bicycle clearances are in opposition to gentle grades. Unfortunately if we defer all these decisions to a later design phase, there won't be a later design phase because residents will (justifiably) have rejected the alternative. The 5 feet you gain through more norml bicycle tunnel heights and railroad designs like those proposed by Michael Price means a really great bicycle profile vs the current one which is too steep and should be criticized In addition, artificial constraints on use of acquired property (including a property at the corner of Park and Charleston that will need to be acquired because of loss of driveway access) limit the design of safe and attractive bicycle facilities. While today's study session opens up the possibility of council members doing a mini-design charette, I think a better use of time is to consider a process that can produce the best possible version of the underpass, including looking at a larger area for changes to bicycle facilities to incorporate the new crossings that would exist. While the bicycle plan is being worked on separately, there is a need to consider a version where the underpasses are included. This needs to be a more open and collaborative effort with residents, staff and appropriate outside consultants who specialize in bike facilities. There is also a need to reconsider the road designs. Currently they are done to maximize throughput. Is it possible to reconceptualize the traffic circle as a U-turn facility, for example, as I had originally proposed? Again, though, this needs a different type of approach which thinks about how to limit car traffic through that area to the amount that could be handled by such a facility instead of how we are doing this now. I know this has been very frustrating but it is difficult to design something that works for all modes of travel that will stand the test of time. Regards, Elizabeth Alexis From:Arnout Boelens To:Council, City Subject:Re: Gunn bicycle club grade separation survey Date:Wednesday, October 19, 2022 9:58:49 AM Attachments:Gunn bicycle club grade separation survey.pdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Rail Committee members, It looks like I forgot to attach the survey in my previous message. You should find it attached to this email instead. The main conclusions among the survey takers are: Many students cross Alma by bike Closing Meadow and Charleston at the same time for construction would be a major disruption, even with a new underpass near Matadero creek, possibly causing many students to consider driving instead of walking and bicycling. Trench is the preferred option for both students and parents. Options that leave in place the intersections with Alma (Trench and Hybrid) are more popular than the Partial Underpass. Kind regards, Arnout Boelens PTAC SRTS Chairperson On Tue, Oct 18, 2022 at 8:00 PM Arnout Boelens <a.m.p.boelens@gmail.com> wrote: Dear Rail Committee members, Attached, please find the results of the Gunn bicycle club grade separation survey. The main conclusions among the survey takers are: Many students cross Alma by bike Closing Meadow and Charleston at the same time for construction would be a major disruption, even with a new underpass near Matadero creek, possibly causing many students to consider driving instead of walking and bicycling. Trench is the preferred option for both students and parents. Options that leave in place the intersections with Alma (Trench and Hybrid) are more popular than the Partial Underpass. Kind regards, Arnout Boelens PTAC SRTS Chairperson From:Allan Seid To:DENNIS LEE Subject:Fwd: scans Date:Wednesday, October 19, 2022 7:08:37 AM Attachments:20221018175257085.pdf 20221018175310631.pdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Friends and Neighbors, THIS EXCLUSIONARY PRACTICE ALONG WITH SIMILAR RACIAL/SEXIST AND RELIGIOUS ADMISSION POLICIES WERE PERPETRATED AGAINST OTHER MINORITIES INCLUDING ASIAN AMERICANS AND WOMEN FOR DECADES. HOPEFULLY THE APOLOGY BY STANFORD MAY LEAD TO IDENTICAL APOLOGIES FROM OTHER EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS WHICH RESTRICTED ADMISSIONS IN THE PAST AND CURRENTLY TO PRIVILEGED WHITE--ONLY APPLICANTS. Allan From:Vidya Sethuraman Cc:RK Japra Subject:HINDU HERITAGE MONTH PROCLAMATION proposal from FIA/FOG Date:Tuesday, October 18, 2022 9:26:55 PM Attachments:Hindu Heritage month 10182021-1.docx Some people who received this message don't often get email from vidyas@fiaonline.org. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Esteemed Elected officials Several states and cities across the U.S. have declared October as National Hindu Heritage Month, including the city of Fremont in Northern California in 2021 and NEwark, Santa Clara, Foster City, Fremont in 2022. FIA/FOG, a nonprofit organization based in Northern California and has been hosting the iconic Festival of India for the past 30 years is proposing all the Cities in Bay area to issue the HINDU HERITAGE MONTH PROCLAMATION. Hindu Heritage Month is a global movement highlighting Hinduism as a tradition and contributions Hinduism has made to human society. Join us in bringing this national initiative to your local community to pass a resolution honoring our Hindu heritage so that we can build awareness and appreciation about our community. We hope that we can have this proclamation officially granted by your office before the end of October so that our community may share the news with all of our community. Should your office be able to facilitate this request, is it possible to announce this at a public hearing? FIA/FOG board members would appreciate the opportunity to attend a ceremonial presentation of the proclamation. SAMPLE attached Thanks (on behalf of) Dr. Romesh Japra Founder & Convener, FOGsv Festival of Globe, Silicon Valley Chairman, FIA Federation of Indian Association of Northern California A Non-Profit 501(c)(3) Organization #77-0177823 Publisher, India Post Cell: +1 510 593 7844 Vidya Sethuraman Executive Director 510 491 4867 WHEREAS, the City of Fremont is proud to recognize October as Hindu Heritage Month; and WHEREAS, Hindu Americans have greatly enriched California’s education system teaching numerous students about the academic fields of astrophysics, computer science, engineering, law planetary science, psychology, and neuroscience; and WHEREAS Hindu Americans have made significant contributions toward pluralism, non- violence and gender equality and human rights WHEREAS, the Hindu heritage, culture, traditions, and values provide invaluable solutions to many of life’s problems and often serve as a source of inspiration, reflection, and contemplation for millions of individuals who look to the teachings of Hinduism for guidance; and WHEREAS, California is the home of the first Hindu temple in the United States, built in San Francisco, and at the dedication of the temple on January 7, 1906, it was proclaimed the “First Hindu Temple in the Whole Western World”; Fremont, California is also home to one of oldest California Hindu Temple since 1983 and WHEREAS, by proclaiming the month of October as Hindu Heritage Month, the City of Fremont acknowledges the important contributions that Hindu residents have made to our City’s social, economic, political, and cultural fabric; and WHEREAS, Fremont has a vibrant culture highlighted by our diverse community, and invites residents to learn more about the history, culture, and contribution of Hindu Americans, and NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Fremont does hereby proclaim the month of October 2021 as Hindu Heritage Month. Signed by Mayor From:St Thomas Hospital UK Subject:Medical Jobs Date:Tuesday, October 18, 2022 9:17:29 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from alja.podlesnik@os-trnovo.si. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. St. Thomas' Hospital UK REF: HR/MED-0203/069203 St Thomas' Hospital UK is a large NHS teaching hospital in Central London, England. It is one of the institutions that compose the King's Health Partners, an academic health science Center. Administratively part of the Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, together with Guy's Hospital and King's College Hospital, it provides the location of the King's College London GKT School of Medical Education. It is ranked amongst the best Ten (10) hospitals in the United Kingdom with 840 beds. The hospital has provided healthcare freely or under charitable auspices since the 12th century. It is one of London's most famous hospitals, associated with names such as Sir Astley Cooper, William Cheselden, Florence Nightingale, Linda Richards, Edmund Montgomery, Agnes Elizabeth Jones and Sir Harold Ridley. It is a prominent London landmark –largely due to its location on the opposite bank of the River Thames to the Houses of Parliament. The largest not-for-profit health system in the world, we provide high quality, personalized and compassionate care to our patients through our dedication to safety, rigorous self-assessment, performance improvement, corporate integrity and health service management. We are committed to being the per-eminent provider of acute inpatient and outpatient health care services. DESCRIPTION: Following the COVID-19 outbreak, expansion and development in our hospital, we are currently recruiting and employing the services of Medical Professionals (Specialists, Consultants, General Practitioners) with relevant experiences to fill in the following below vacancies in our health care facility in the United Kingdom. AREAS OF VACANCIES: StH1. ALLERGY & IMMUNOLOGY StH2. ANAESTHESIOLOGY StH3. ANGIOLOGY StH4. BREAST SURGERY StH5. CARDIOLOGY StH6. CARDIOTHORACIC SURGERY StH7. CARDIAC SURGERY StH8. CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE StH9. DENTISTS StH10. DIETITIANS StH11. DERMATOLOGY StH12. ENDOCRINOLOGY StH13. EMERGENCY MEDICINE StH14. FORENSIC MEDICINE StH15. GASTROENTEROLOGY StH16. GENERAL PAEDIATRICS StH17. GENERAL MEDICINE StH18. GENERAL SURGERY StH19. HEMATOLOGY StH20. INTERNAL MEDICINE StH21. INFECTOLOGY StH22. MORPHOLOGY StH23. NURSING StH24. NEUROSURGERY StH25. NEONATOLOGY StH26. NEUROPSYCHOLOGY StH27. NEUROLOGY StH28. ONCOLOGY StH29. OBSTETRICS AND GYNAECOLOGY StH30. OPHTHALMOLOGY StH31. ORTHOPAEDICS StH32. ORTHOPAEDIC SURGERY StH33. OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY StH34. ORTHODONTIST StH35. OSTEOPATHS StH36. ORAL AND MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY StH37. PATHOLOGY StH38. PLASTIC & RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY StH39. PNEUMOLOGY StH40. PSYCHIATRIST StH41. PSYCHOLOGIST StH42. PHYSIOTHERAPY StH43. PEDIATRICS StH44. PUBLIC HEALTH StH45. RADIOLOGY StH46. RHEUMATOLOGY StH47. REHABILITATION MEDICINE StH48. RESPIRATORY MEDICINE StH49. THORACIC SURGERY StH50. TRAUMATOLOGY StH51. TRANSFUSION MEDICINE StH52. TRICHOLOGIST StH53. UROLOGY JOB LOCATION: London, United Kingdom JOB COMMENCEMENT: 2022 EMPLOYMENT TYPE: Contract / Full-time EMPLOYMENT BENEFITS: Excellent Salary and Overtime Bonus, Health/life Insurance, Relocation expenses, Research and Educational assistance, Medical, Optical and Dental Care, Family/Single housing accommodation, 24/7 Official Vehicle, Scholarship for employee's dependent within UK schools. Interested applicants are to send their detailed resume via email attachment along with medical graduation certificate(s) specifying position of interest to: E-MAIL: careers@gstt-nhs-uk.org NOTE: APPLICATION IS OPEN TO INTERESTED PERSONS FROM ALL INTERNATIONAL LOCATIONS, ALL SUCCESSFUL APPLICANTS IN OUR RECRUITMENT PROCESS MUST BE WILLING TO RELOCATE TO THE UK FOR WORK. Coronavirus (COVID-19) -Stay at home if you feel unwell. If you have a fever, cough and difficulty breathing, seek medical attention and call-in advance. Follow the directions of your local health authority. Source: World Health Organization Advice for the public on COVID-19 – World Health Organization Simple precautions to reduce your chances of being infected or spreading COVID-19. Sincerely, Agnes Cardella Medical Recruitment Assistant St. Thomas' Hospital Guy's & St. Thomas NHS Foundation Trust Download Attachment Available until Nov 17, 2022 From:Aram James To:Vicki Veenker; Shikada, Ed; Stump, Molly; Council, City; Binder, Andrew; Foley, Michael; Figueroa, Eric; Perron, Zachary; wilpf.peninsula.paloalto@gmail.com; Roberta Ahlquist; EPA Today; Angie Evans; Ann Ravel; mark weiss Subject:Vicki Veenker For City Council Date:Tuesday, October 18, 2022 5:53:33 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links.  Click to Download IMG_3450.MOV 0 bytes Sent from my iPhone Download Attachment Available until Nov 17, 2022 From:Aram James To:Vicki Veenker; Julie Lythcott-Haims; Winter Dellenbach; Council, City; Planning Commission; Shikada, Ed; citycouncil@mountainview.gov; friendsofcubberley94303@gmail.com; Joe Simitian; Roberta Ahlquist; Human Relations Commission; ParkRec Commission Subject:Vicki Veenker For City Council Date:Tuesday, October 18, 2022 5:43:11 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Click to Download IMG_3450.MOV 0 bytes Sent from my iPhone From:Matthieu Bonnard To:Council, City Subject:Leaf blowing - Proposals to improve compliance with city code and reduce nuisance Date:Tuesday, October 18, 2022 5:33:06 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear City Council, As an Old Palo Alto resident, I wanted to first thank the City Council for its commitment to environmental sustainability. I also hope you will consider the proposals below, pertaining to leaf blowing. Problem 1: Most Palo Altans probably do not know, or care, about the gas-powered leaf blower ban Proposal 1: Communicate about the ban to all PA home-owners The city should launch a communication campaign to ensure all Palo Alto home-owners, and residents, know about the ban and its implications. It could be as simple as flyers (using recycled papers) in mailboxes and/or a letter to all residents subject to PA property tax. Proposal 2: Incentivize home-owners to switch Onus of complying with the ban should solely be on home owners, not on the gardeners or renters. After a grace period following the communication campaign (1 or 2 months). Scaling fines ($100 for 1st offense, $200 for 2nd offense, etc) should be issued (the stick). If possible and easy to implement, some form of tax incentive could be considered (the carrot). Problem 2: Whether gas or electric, leaf blowers create noise pollution. In Old Palo Alto, and I suspect in most PA residential neighborhoods, the melody of leaf blowers is pretty much a permanent background noise, Monday to Saturday, 8 or 9 am to 4pm. On Saturdays specifically, quiet moments in my backyard to have breakfast, lunch, a conversation or reading are pretty much always interrupted by a leaf blower blowing somewhere around my block. Form that standpoint, the high-pitched whistle of electric leaf blowers is in my opinion no better than gas blowers, and not exactly music to our ears. Proposal 3: create zoning for use of garden power tools Similar to trash collection, there could be zoning for yard maintenance using power tools. Leaf blowing in a given zone/neighborhood would only happen one or two days a week, as opposed to up to six days per week. Proposal 4: Ban use of blowers on Saturdays Imagine Palo Alto residential areas free of leaf blowing two days in a row, every week... Problem 3: Neighboring towns may not be as advanced as PA Proposal 5: Once leaf blowing policy has been upgraded, share best practices with neighboring towns/cities: Menlo Park, Atherton, etc Ideally, PA policy could even be shared across CA, event the country, if any network or organization of city councils exists. Problem 4: Behavior Many Palo Altans seem to be keen on removing leaves as soon as they touch ground. Could the city encourage Palo Altans to blow leaves less frequently, may be twice a month instead of weekly? Gardeners could instead focus on more silent yard maintenance (tree pruning, etc,…). Proposal 6: Encourage Palo Altans to reduce frequency of yard maintenance requiring power tools, esp. leaf blowing From:Allan Seid To:Channing House Bulletin Board; CHOpinion CHOpinion Subject:Fwd: Fears of Chinese=American scientists Date:Tuesday, October 18, 2022 5:27:23 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. From: Allan Seid, Ian Aitchison Date: Tue, Oct 18, 2022 at 4:42 PM Subject: Fears of Chinese=American scientists Source: Aian American Scholar Forum.org Dear Friends and Neighbors, Here is an interesting webinar yesterday, about the "China Initiative" (now terminated) and the general fears that ethnically Chinese scientists have, of being unfairly suspected of disloyalty to the US, etc. You may already be familiar with a study which has recently been published about the bad effects of this on US science itself, but in case you haven't seen it here is a link: https://aasforum.org/2022/09/23/caught-in-the-crossfire-fears-of-chinese-american-scientists/ Allan and Ian From:Allan Seid To:Channing House Bulletin Board Subject:Fwd: Anna May Wong! Date:Tuesday, October 18, 2022 4:29:53 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Barbara Bowden, Allan Seid Date: Tue, Oct 18, 2022 at 4:09 PM Subject: Anna May Wong! It’s Tuesday. Anna May Wong, an Old Hollywood film star who grew up in Los Angeles’s Chinatown, will soon be on the quarter. Plus, the Elizabeth Holmes case takes on more drama. Anna May Wong in a 1931 publicity photo for “Daughter of the Dragon.”Bettman, via Getty Images LOS ANGELES — As a 14-year-old girl, the daughter of immigrants in this city’s Chinatown, Anna May Wong talked her way into her first role in a movie. Over the decades-long career that followed, she rose to become the first Asian American film star in Hollywood. When Wong died in 1961, The New York Times called the actress, known for her large, expressive eyes and flapper-era styles, “one of the most unforgettable figures of Hollywood’s great days.” Now Wong is gaining another coveted role — on the quarter. Part of a new effort that also put the writer Maya Angelou and the astronaut Sally Ride on currency, the U.S. Mint on Monday will begin producing coins pressed with Wong’s image, a close-up of her face resting on an elegant, manicured hand. The new quarter honors not just Wong’s trailblazing career but also the difficulties she faced trying to secure meaningful roles as an Asian American actress in an era of “yellowface” and anti-miscegenation laws. “Decades before the civil rights-generated category of Asian American existed, Wong grappled with how to be an Asian American actress,” Shirley Jennifer Lim, a Stony Brook University history professor, wrote in her book about Wong’s career. The U.S. Mint is expected to create more than 300 million Wong quarters, and she will become the first Asian American to be on U.S. currency. It’s an honor that feels particularly meaningful given how much Wong struggled to be seen as American, Lim told me. “When you get change,” she said, “she could actually be there in the palm of your hand.” The reverse side of the Anna May Wong quarter, which honors the 20th-century screen icon considered to be the first Chinese American movie star.U.S. Mint Wong was born in 1905 in Chinatown, the daughter of a laundryman who ran a shop on Figueroa Street. Around that time, the movie industry was settling in Los Angeles, and productions were increasingly shot in Wong’s neighborhood. “I would play hookey from school to watch the crews at work, though I knew I would get a whipping from my teacher, and later from my father, for it,” Wong is quoted as saying in the book “Perpetually Cool: The Many Lives of Anna May Wong,” by Anthony Chan. “I would worm my way through the crowd and get as close to the cameras as I dared. I’d stare and stare at these glamorous individuals, directors, cameramen, assistants and actors in greasepaint, who had come down into our section of town to make movies.” Wong decided she wanted to act, and began playing background characters until her first leading role in “The Toll of the Sea” (1922) at age 17. But her career was stymied by the limited number of parts for Asian American actors and the stereotypes they often traded in. (Wong famously said that she had “died a thousand deaths” because she was killed in every film she acted in.) Wong, right, in “My China Film” (1936), which she directed and produced on her only trip to China.UCLA Film & Television Archive Wong was widely considered to be one of the most beautiful women in Hollywood, but often could not play romantic leads because of laws prohibiting actors of different races from kissing each other onscreen. She moved to Europe, where she enjoyed greater opportunities for nonwhite actors, starred in several films and even acted in a play opposite Laurence Olivier. But she continued to bump up against unfair restrictions in Hollywood. When Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer was casting “The Good Earth” in the 1930s, based on the Pearl S. Buck novel about Chinese farmers, Wong was considered a shoo-in for the film’s leading actress role. But a white actor was selected to star in the movie, who would have played Wong’s husband, and she was taken out of the running. (The actress who eventually got the role, Luise Rainer, won an Oscar for her performance.) “Anna May Wong was basically ‘hashtag representation matters’ decades before Twitter was even invented,” said Paula Yoo, a screenwriter in Los Angeles who wrote a children’s book about Wong’s life. “That’s why this quarter is important — because she’s minted, she’s part of Americana, she’s part of American history.” The Wong quarter will be the fifth released this year as part of the American Women Quarters Program, which calls for five new coins each year from 2022 through 2025. Representative Barbara Lee, the California Democrat who sponsored a bill promoting the coins’ creation, said in a statement that she was proud to have led an effort honoring the “phenomenal” women who are often overlooked in American history. Wong, left, in a promotional lobby card for “King of Chinatown” (1939). She received top billing in her role as Dr. Mary Ling.LMPC, via Getty Images Along the Hollywood Walk of Fame on a recent morning, tourists tilted their heads to read the names emblazoned on the sidewalk. At the busy intersection of Hollywood Boulevard and Vine Street was a star highlighting in gold “Anna May Wong,” an honor the actress was awarded in 1960, one year before her death. Next to Wong’s star was one for the actress Lucy Liu, who in 2019 became the second Asian American woman to receive a star on the Walk of Fame. In her speech, Liu thanked Wong for charting a path for her and other actors. “We could actually start our own little Chinatown right here,” she joked, pointing to their neighboring stars. For more: The National Women’s History Museum is hosting a free screening of one of Wong’s films to commemorate the new quarter. Learn more about the Los Angeles event. In January, Maya Angelou became the first Black woman to be depicted on the quarter. PBS published a short documentary on Wong that you can watch here. Barbara Bowden barbara@1035b.com From:Nadia Naik To:Council, City Cc:Kamhi, Philip; Bhatia, Ripon; Shikada, Ed Subject:Rengstorff Grade Separation Project Date:Tuesday, October 18, 2022 4:21:28 PM Attachments:2022-10-19 Agenda Item 9 Rengstorff Grade Separation.pdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. FYI - Attached is the latest presentation for the Rengstorff grade separation project inMountain View with drawings so you can see what it will look like. The plan is for Rengstorff and Central expressway to be depressed (underpass) and the train will remain exactly as it is today. VTA will fund itCaltrain will implement it Nadia Naik From:Randall Parr To:Council, City Subject:Audit Report for the City for FY 2021 Date:Tuesday, October 18, 2022 3:21:36 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from rfparr@outlook.com. Learnwhy this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Why is the City’s FY 2021 audited financial statement not posted on the City’s website, or am I just missing it? Thank you. Randall F. Parr, CPA Sent from Mail for Windows From:Linda M. Saunders To:editor@paweekly.com; news@padailypost.com; editor@almanacnews.com; news@stanforddaily.com; usafetypcore@stanford.edu; Eileen O"Rourke; staffersbusiness@lists.stanford.edu; Jo-Ann Cuevas; cardinalatwork; hrcommunications@stanford.edu; OConnell, M; Police; Clerk, City; City Mgr; Council, City; Dueker, Kenneth; Perron, Zachary; policechief@menlopark.org; police@losaltosca.gov; board@ctra.org; stanfordwestapartments; lucy.wicks@stanford.edu; Cynthea A. Kingsley; Norman W Robinson; Laura Jackson (SHC); Harris, Kathryn; Mark C Lawrence; psa@kzsu.stanford.edu; gm@kzsu.stanford.edu; allison@icrichild.org; ridhima@icrichild.org; enrollment@icrichild.org; ollia@icrichild.org; Nathalie.Larsen@brighthorizons.com; cierra.webb@brighthorizons.com; mickey.alvarado@brighthorizons.com; sarar@icrichild.org; nurten@icrichild.org; susan@ccscparentcoop.org; hope@ccscparentcoop.org; asheward@pausd.org; ltaylor@pausd.org; bkline@pausd.org; Berkson, Jerry; lbutler@pausd.org; eolah@pausd.org; msteingart@pausd.org Subject:FW: 2022 Annual AlertSU Test Notification Date:Tuesday, October 18, 2022 2:27:43 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from linda.saunders@stanford.edu.Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Please distribute widely. Thank you. Stanford Dept. of Public Safety From: Public Safety <publicsafety@lists.stanford.edu> Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2022 10:33 AM To: Linda M. Saunders <linda.saunders@stanford.edu> Subject: 2022 Annual AlertSU Test Notification Dear Stanford Faculty, Staff and Affiliates, On Thursday, October 27, at approximately 12:05 p.m., Stanford University will conduct its annual test of the campus AlertSU system. The notification will be sent via text message and email to the Stanford community. It will also post to the University emergency website, Public Safety website and the Stanford mobile app. The outdoor warning system will be activated. If you are outside, you should expect to hear an audible tone for approximately 30 seconds, followed by a verbal message from each of the 7 sirens at various campus locations. The sirens will be audible throughout the campus and may also be heard in parts of the surrounding communities, including Palo Alto, Menlo Park and Los Altos. Also being tested are Cisco VoIP speaker phones. VoIP speaker phones are found in many of the academic and office buildings throughout campus. If you have a Cisco phone in your area, the AlertSU message will broadcast from the speaker phone and a banner message will appear in the display. Press the exit option to cancel the announcement. In the test message sent to your device, you will be asked to acknowledge the message. This is an important step that will help us monitor the success of this test. If you receive both a text and email, you only need to acknowledge one of the messages. Prior to the test, it is important you verify that your contact information is correct in StanfordYou. Make sure there is an entry in the mobile phone field, as this is the most rapid and direct way of communication with you during an actual emergency. As a reminder: the University requires that employees maintain their directory entry and opt in to AlertSU with their work phone number, email address, and any university-issued or reimbursed cell phone number. Please click here for step by step instructions on how to enter your contact information in StanfordYou or visit https://police.stanford.edu/alert/alertsu-faq.html for more information. Additionally, in order to know you are receiving an official AlertSU message, please program the following information into your mobile phone contacts. Email Address: alertsudps@lists.stanford.edu Phone Number: 650-725-5555 Text Message phone number: 89361 If there were a real emergency, you would be asked to follow the specific instructions in the alert message. Other avenues that might be used to inform the community about critical incidents include: Stanford’s emergency website: http://emergency.stanford.edu Department of Public Safety website: https://police.stanford.edu KZSU 90.1 FM University emergency information hotlines: 650-725-5555 and 844-253-7878 (844- AlertSU) Social Media: Twitter/Instagram @Stanford and Facebook Upon receipt of an AlertSU message, notify others in your immediate vicinity to ensure they are also aware of the situation and the recommended safety precautions. For more information about the AlertSU system, please visit the AlertSU FAQ page at: https://police.stanford.edu/alertsu-faq.html. Evacuation procedures and how to respond to other emergencies can be found on the following resource pages. Evacuation Procedure: https://ehs.stanford.edu/manual/emergency-response- guidelines/evacuation-procedure Fire: https://ehs.stanford.edu/manual/emergency-response-guidelines/fire Earthquake: https://ehs.stanford.edu/manual/emergency-response-guidelines/earthquake Stanford University Emergency Response Guidelines: https://ehs.stanford.edu/manual/emergency-response-guidelines Safety, Security, and Fire Report 2022: https://police.stanford.edu/security-report.html Thank you for your cooperation. Stanford Department of Public Safety From:FEC United To:Council, City Subject:FEC United Education Newsletter Date:Tuesday, October 18, 2022 9:05:20 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious ofopening attachments and clicking on links.   FEC United Education Pillar Newsletter October 18, 2022   Elections Matter on Education Issues In Colorado, ballots drop this week. In other states early voting has already started. If parental rights, education and health freedom matter to you, vote. Remember who had a role in shuttering schools and businesses, forcing shots and DEI, CRT, SEL and other curriculum that go against our American values. Every race, every ballot issue is an opportunity to stand for Freedom and vote against the force of government by changing who is in office. In Colorado this was made abundantly clear last week at the state board of education meeting. Revisions to the State Social studies standards have been a controversial issue since the legislature passed HB-1192, signed into law in 2019. Conservative American Birthright civics program rejected by Colorado State Board of Ed In Colorado the state board of education is the implementer of laws passed in the legislature. It also serves as a judicial role in disputes between charter schools and their authorizers. This week, a charter school lost its appeal to establish a school that had 650 interested children. Why was the school denied? In a word, politics. A liberal local school board and a liberal state board denied a school that they didn't like. Steve Durham Durango School Board Doesn't Care About You Here are the candidates running for state board of education this year: Colorado State Board of Education: who's running and why it has two new seats If we want to stop the horrible ideas being foisted on our children we must fight at the ballot box, and in our local communities. A Plan To Make 'Diversity, Equity, And Inclusion' Die Our schools have failed to provide education. They have become places of indoctrination. Schools failing our children: Students' ACT test scores drop to lowest level in 30 years | Fox News https://www.forbes.com/sites/brianbushard/2022/10/12/act-college-admission- test-scores-drop-to-30-year-low-as-effects-of-covid-era-online-learning-play-out/? sh=3dad75933f7f Here is the data from ACT. 2022 National ACT Profile Report Join Us on Facebook Use the following link to join FEC United Education Pillar FEC United- Education pillar | Facebook Please answer the questions to be approved. _________________________________________________________________ Education Survey We need your help to make an impact. What are your education issues and concerns? How are you willing to step into the gap to give our children a better future? Respond to the survey to help to build better educational opportunities for our children. Click this link to take our survey - https://fecunited.com/education- pillar-survey/ If you run a private or homeschool program, share your information here so that it can be shared with the community. education@fecunited.com If you are willing and able to volunteer now, send an email to education@fecunited.com FEC is continuing to explore how we can change and provide the education parents want for their children. If you are interested in becoming part of the solution and taking back education, email education@fecunited.com I Want to Help FEC United!   Mailing Address: PO Box 891, Parker, CO 80134 Want to change how you receive these emails? You can an change your email address or unsubscribe from this list. Unsubscribe at https://papp.pidoxa.com/unsub Sent by FEC United PO Box 891 , Parker CO 80134. Copyright 2022 by FEC United or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. From:David Coale To:Council, City Cc:Hoyt, George Subject:On the EV ready or installed Date:Monday, October 17, 2022 10:21:44 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ You don’t want to mandate installing the charger. Would you require a Tesla charger or one that charges all the other cars? While there are some adapters, best to let the homeowner choose based on the actual EV they have or get in the future. David From:Aram James To:Council, City; Greg Tanaka; Council, City; Julie Lythcott-Haims; Vicki Veenker; Doria Summa; Winter Dellenbach; Binder, Andrew; Jeff Rosen; Jay Boyarsky; Shikada, Ed; chuck jagoda; Joe Simitian; Josh Becker; Rebecca Eisenberg; Supervisor Susan Ellenberg; citycouncil@mountainview.gov Subject:John Fetterman interview Date:Monday, October 17, 2022 9:53:57 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ https://www.vox.com/platform/amp/science-and-health/2022/10/15/23403699/john-fetterman-pennsylvania-senate- interview-captions-disability-dasha-burns-mehmet-oz Sent from my iPhone From:Aram James To:Greer Stone; Greg Tanaka; Jeff Rosen; Winter Dellenbach; Jay Boyarsky; Pat Burt; Lydia Kou; Council, City; citycouncil@mountainview.gov Subject:Help Us Spread the Word about our Sustainable Water Future! Date:Monday, October 17, 2022 9:40:58 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious ofopening attachments and clicking on links.   Hi Aram!  More great news from the campaign front. Volunteers distributed our print campaign last weekend, and the result was overwhelmingly positive. Here is what we distributed:   Donate We have the messages locked and loaded to go with print campaigns, but need your help funding. As you may know, my opponent is self-funding his campaign with hundreds of thousands of dollars of his own money, but we are 100% grassroots. We have taken Zero money from any organization, business, or PACs, so we rely on donations from people like you – people who recognize that if we hope for a sustainable water future in Santa Clara County, there is only ONE candidate who will bring us there. Can you please chip in at one of these levels to support our advertising campaigns? $50, $100, $200 = internet advertising $500 = one time print ad placement $1260 = four placements $1980 = eight placements $2565 = 12 placements $4950 (the maximum contribution size)= 32 placements Visit our Website Mailers, meanwhile, cost $40,000 to $60,000 (can you believe that?) but we hope to send at least one! Every single dollar you contribute will go directly to helping us spread the word. With your financial support, we WILL win. Please give what you can, to help us ensure a sustainable water future for current and future generations. Thank you so much for believing in us, and for fighting to ensure that clean affordable water will be available to all people, in current and future generations, for our parents, siblings, children, and the grandchildren of our grandchildren. Best, Rebecca Donate THE ONLY CANDIDATE ● Endorsed by every newspaper ● Endorsed by every environmental group ● With a 100% record of integrity and fair treatment of others VOTE BY MAIL OR AT THE POLLS ON NOVEMBER 8TH! Share This Email Share This Email Share This Email Paid for by Rebecca Eisenberg for Santa Clara Valley Water District 2022 FPPC #1427865 Rebecca Eisenberg for Santa Clara Valley Water District 2022 | 2345 Waverley St., Palo Alto , CA 94301 Unsubscribe abjpd1@gmail.com Update Profile | Constant Contact Data Notice Sent by info@rebecca4water.com in collaboration with Try email marketing for free today! From:Kellie Stafford To:Council, City; Shikada, Ed Subject:Thank you Date:Monday, October 17, 2022 8:33:43 PM Attachments:City Council Speach.docx Some people who received this message don't often get email from kkstafford72@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 Mayor, Vice Mayor, Manager, Council and Members of tonight's session: Thank you very much for your time this evening to hear not only my concerns regarding the development, but my hopes for how the City Council can truly step up to the plate and lift up Barron Park and Palo Alto. As I mentioned, we all owe it to our citizens who put their everything into making our city what it is. I hope you keep that thought close to heart during your continuous evaluation of the Creekside Inn development and other future developments. I appreciate the comments by City Council to have the developer consider a hotel/apartment complex. I have seen that concept in many cities and it is very successful. There are so many possibilities the developers could consider to find that middle ground to make all parties happier than we are. I also hope that no matter what happens in the future, that the City moves Barron Park to residential permit parking. I currently live on the next block from the existing apartments on Matadero. I have people parking in my front yard for hours on end. If I have people already parking in front of my house now, it will be a nightmare not just for me but all homes on Matadero, Josina, Tapawingo and Whitsell. If there is anything I can do to volunteer my time to help move Barron Park forward, please let me know. We can all work together to do what is in the best interest of our neighborhood and community. And apologies for leaving before all comments were made. I drove my family this evening and my parents were ready to get home for dinner. Thank you, Kellie Stafford (650) 847-7067 Hello My name is Kellie Stafford. I am a 4th generation Palo Alto Resident. I reside on Matadero Avenue, two blocks down from the Creekside Inn. As a child, I attended Barron Park Elementary School, Juana Briones Elementary, and Gunn High School. I am very fortunate to be able to live in the house I grew up in. I rent it from my parents. Without this opportunity, I would not be able to live in Palo Alto, let alone the Bay Area. I understand the city, like others is under immense pressure to build housing. I appreciate that the State and Cities are going to do something, but the Creekside Inn development is not going about this the correct way. You have all received, and hopefully read my letter regarding this issue. I am proud to say that I was also a part of the team that wrote the letter from the Barron Park Association regarding the concerns we have as well. You have read, heard, and will continue to hear from others, why almost everything proposed by the Oxford Group is a bad idea and I’m going to tell you right now; I second that. But I want to tell you why we need to look closely at this project and start to look outside the box when it comes to housing in general. Yes, we need housing, but we need to be better and do better than just allowing another developer, from out of town, to put up another building. As we all know, Palo Alto is home to a recognized VA hospital, Stanford Hospital, Stanford University and Shopping Center. It’s home to the birthplace of Hewlett Packard, to top schools, to actors and actresses, sports figures, and Nobel prize winners. We are the town that is “on the map” for a beautiful place to live, perfect weather, safe streets, and most importantly, good people. We need to do better with building housing because the history of Palo Alto demands us to do better. Our little town has evolved from fruit orchards to companies like Apple computer. We take care of our environment, our neighbors, our seniors, and our local business. This housing development will not. We need to do better. We need to house families, seniors, teachers, law enforcement, firemen and women, other first responders, people with disabilities, blue-collar workers, and the dot com-ers. We need to get families out of the RVs on the side of the street into homes. We can only do this by not only acknowledging the State’s request to build “units” but to do one better by holding developers to higher standards to build “homes”. We don’t need studio’s and 1- bedroom units, we need 2- and 3-bedrooms homes, so families move here, raise their families here and be a part of this community. We need affordable housing to keep our small business operating, to keep our city workers in the city they represent, to keep teachers close to the schools they teach at and keep seniors in the only town they may have called home. The Oxford Group is asking the City of Palo Alto to go against th eir beliefs and principals by approving a development that will impose on our neighbors right to privacy, tear down heritage trees, close local businesses, take away a much-needed hotel, increase traffic at an already crowded intersection, not support the housing needs of the residents who need it, and not support family living. You are our city council. You were put into your office to support the needs of the people from Palo Alto. You are trusted, by us, to uphold the standards, beliefs, and values we as individuals and the city holds. We rely on you to make good decisions that will lift up our city. We rely on you to protect our city. We rely on you to put our community first, take care of our neighbors and protect our city from corporations looking to take advantage of it. If the current Creekside development proposal were to pass, at a 75% occupancy rate with tenants paying an average of $3500/month, The Oxford Group would bring in a rough estimate of over 12 million dollars in the first year of operating. We don’t need to loosen restrictions on zoning laws, we need to tighten them. If the Oxford Group or any other developer wants to build in our town, make money from our citizens, then they need to meet our standards. We need to require that developers offer housing for those most in need and those we need most. I had the pleasure of meeting the new Police Chief last week. While I wasn’t surprised, I was saddened by the fact that he, along with on his force do not live in Palo Alto. These men and women live 1-2 hours away. They spend 4+/- hours on the road, four to five days a week, to come to Palo Alto, to work 10+ hour day to protect us. Yet we can’t support them with a place to call home. While I am sure the same scenario applies to other first responders, I know it applies to our restaurant, retail, and shop workers because I have been one of them. I am proud to be from Palo Alto. I love my home but this project and many like it our going against everything that makes Barron Park the community that it is and Palo Alto the city I’m proud to live in. Please preserve our neighborhood. Send this proposal back to the developer and tell them to start over. Thank you for your time. From:Kenneth Streib To:Council, City Subject:Matadero Project Date:Monday, October 17, 2022 7:52:06 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. I saw the presentation on the Matadero housing project this evening. I was disappointed that they expect to have paid optional parking for a project like that. Many renters will try to save money by not buying a space, and parking in the neighborhood. On Curtner where I live many apartments are occupied by couples who work a separate jobs and have cars, and even families with three cars. This leaves no parking for people who live on this street. New projects need to have AT LEAST two spaces per unit. Thanks so much for your time, Ken Streib From:Bill Cane To:Council, City Subject:rent control and just cause eviction Date:Monday, October 17, 2022 5:35:35 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from b_cane@yahoo.com. Learnwhy this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Please give serious consideration to passing ordinances that would regulate rent increases and require cause to evict. Renters should not be at the mercy of landlords who push rents to what ever the market will bear. The rental market in Palo Alto has been out of control for far too long, forcing moderate and low income renters to locate elsewhere, leading to long commutes and increased climate warming emissions. Because of the inelasticity of the housing market in Palo Alto, market forces alone cannot meet the housing needs of the general population, thereby creating an unhealthy socio-economic imbalance within the city. It is incumbent upon the City Council to implement policies that will address this imbalance and begin the process of restoring Palo Alto to a place that has room for a full distribution of income levels. Sincerely. William Cane 832 Kipling St. From:Diane Bailey To:Council, City Cc:Luong, Christine; Eggleston, Brad Subject:Support for a Comprehensive Reach Code to phase out gas from both New and Existing Buildings (Agenda Items 7-8 and 7-9) Date:Monday, October 17, 2022 3:26:46 PM Attachments:image001.png FFBSV Support Letter to Palo Alto for a Strong Existing Building Reach Code.pdf Some people who received this message don't often get email from diane@menlospark.org. Learnwhy this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Mayor Burt and Council Members, On behalf of the Campaign for Fossil Free Buildings in Silicon Valley (FFBSV) and the many undersigned, please find our comments attached in support of the staff proposed Energy Reach Code and Green Building Ordinance including all-electric new construction requirements, provisions to address electrification in remodels, and EV Charging Infrastructure requirements. In addition we urge you to consider adding an extremely important and high carbon impact provision for heat pump heating and cooling systems where feasible. It is essential that Palo Alto, a longtime leader on green building, consider all reasonable measures to prevent new uses of gas and facilitate the necessary transition from fossil gas at the speed and scale called for by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, as well as to address the air quality, health, and safety impacts of current fossil gas use in our homes and other buildings. The staff proposal as well as our proposed improvement to it contain ample safeguards to ensure no hardship for any home-owners and to avoid or cap additional costs. The proposal is not only a cost- effective action to reduce local pollution, it will reduce exposure to harmful chemicals and pollution for many residents. Sincerely, Diane Bailey Diane Bailey (she/her), Climate Change Professional (CC-P) | Executive Director MENLO SPARK diane@menlospark.org | 650-281-7073 Visit us: www.MenloSpark.org & www.FossilFreeBuildings.org Find us on Facebook Follow us on Twitter Climate Neutral for a Healthy, Prosperous Menlo Park EV, PV & Fossil Free: Guides for Electric Cars, solar & Fossil Free Homes at: http://menlospark.org/what-we-do/ “Half of humanity is in the danger zone from floods, droughts, extreme storms and wildfires." António Guterres, UN Secretary General July 18, 2022 The Campaign for Fossil Free Buildings in Silicon Valley 350 Silicon Valley, Acterra, Bay Area for Clean Environment, Carbon Free Silicon Valley, Carbon Free Palo Alto, Carbon Free Mountain View, Cinnamon Energy Systems, Citizens’ Climate Lobby San Mateo County, Citizens Environmental Council of Burlingame, Clean Coalition, Climate Reality Project: Santa Clara County, Coltura, Cool Block, Drawdown Bay Area, Earthy B, Electrify Now, emeraldECO, Fossil Free Mid-Peninsula, GreenTown Los Altos, Indivisible Ross Valley, Kitchens of Life, Menlo Spark, Menlo Together, Mothers Out Front Silicon Valley, npc Solar, Pacifica Climate Committee, Peninsula Interfaith Climate Action, Project Green Home, Redwood Energy, SIDCO Homes, San Carlos Green, San Francisco Bay Physicians for Social Responsibility, San Mateo Climate Action Team, Sierra Club Loma Prieta Chapter, Sustainable San Mateo County, Sustainable Silicon Valley, Sunnyvale Cool, Silicon Valley Youth Climate Action, and Silicon Valley Youth Climate Strike October 17, 2022 City of Palo Alto 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 Via email: city.council@cityofpaloalto.org RE: Support for a Comprehensive Reach Code to phase out gas from both New and Existing Buildings (Agenda Items 7-8 and 7-9) Dear Mayor Burt and Council Members, We, the undersigned, on behalf of the Campaign for Fossil Free Buildings in Silicon Valley (FFBSV), write in support of the staff proposed Energy Reach Code and Green Building Ordinance including all-electric new construction requirements, provisions to address electrification in existing buildings, water efficiency, embodied carbon content limits, and EV Charging Infrastructure requirements. This is the most comprehensive “Reach Code” of any city. However, we urge you to consider adding an extremely important and high carbon impact provision for heat pump heating and cooling systems where feasible, as explained further below. It is essential that Palo Alto, a longtime leader on green building, consider all reasonable measures to prevent new uses of gas and facilitate the necessary transition from fossil gas at the speed and scale called for by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, as well as to address the air quality, health, and safety impacts of current fossil gas use in our homes and other buildings. FFBSV includes the 39 organizations listed above, working together to support an accelerated phase out of fossil fuels in homes and buildings.1 A rapid transition away from fossil fuel use is critical to avoid the very worst and irreversible impacts of climate change. Preventing the continued use of fossil fuels, including “natural gas” (which is comprised of methane), creates more affordable, cleaner, healthier, and more resilient housing and buildings for communities throughout San Mateo and Santa Clara Counties. We appreciate the extensive efforts of city staff, the Green Building Advisory Group, and the Sustainability and Climate Action Plan Ad Hoc Committee, from which emerged the innovative heat pump water heater pilot program. In particular, the proposed additions to the electric reach code that were well vetted and constitute excellent improvements include:2 1. Require covers for new pools and spas; 2. Require that new cooling towers minimize water use; 3. Include low-carbon concrete standards for new construction; 4. Include ADUs in all-electric new construction requirements; 5. Require new commercial construction to be all-electric; 6. Require heat pump water heaters upon replacements, when part of a residential addition and/or alterations 7. Prohibit new gas infrastructure for outdoor equipment such as pools, spas, and grills for existing homes 8. Expand EV charging infrastructure requirements for new construction above the State minimum 9. Incorporate remodels of 50% or more into new construction standards including all-electric We very much support the above list of items. However, furnaces, which are the most carbon intense and long-lasting of gas appliances, are left out of the current proposal for existing buildings. We urge you to add a provision preventing the installation of gas furnaces in remodels to avoid perpetuating this large gas use for 20 more years or longer. Specifically, we request that Heat pump HVAC Systems in Single family homes and duplexes would be required during addition and alteration projects that include a gas furnace or a central air conditioner. This is a very moderate and reasonable step, given the significant funding from the Inflation Reduction Act. For low- to moderate income families, the cost difference between a heat pump and a gas furnace is erased. For the highest income bracket, $2000 in tax credits are available to offset costs.3 Further, the electrification ordinance adopted by Denver, which requires with electric heating & appliances required at the time of replacement (with a permit) Heat Pump Required upon Replacement when cost-effective.4 This cost-effective provision limits the cost to “Near Cost Parity”, meaning that “the cost of a replacement of a natural gas space or water heating system to a partially electric heat pump system, including all incentives, that is within 5-15% of a like-for- like natural gas system replacement, including the social cost of carbon dioxide of the gas system over its lifetime.” The policy in Denver also includes an Economic Hardship Exemption. Both of these items could be used by Palo Alto to alleviate cost concerns while staying on course to meet climate commitments. Regarding a concern expressed about the capacity of the electric power grid at a local level to handle the load of heat pump HVAC systems (heating and cooling), the number of heat pump installations each year are fairly low. This moderate and gradual increase in heat pump HVAC system installations is unlikely to strain individual transformers or power grid components. New heat pump HVAC systems are highly efficient, and may be as few as 100 per year spread throughout the city. Building Electrification is an Urgent Climate Action Although the devastating increase in catastrophic wildfires throughout California has raised public awareness of climate change, the depth of the climate crisis is even worse than is commonly understood and demands urgent action. A recent report from California’s nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office detailed how we are already experiencing the impacts of Climate Change.5 In 2021, California experienced its hottest average summer temperatures, its second largest wildfire, and its third driest year (based on precipitation) on record, and we can expect extreme weather to intensify as the climate continues to change. The LAO report estimates that $8 to $10 billion of existing property in California is likely to be underwater by 2050; extreme heat is projected to cause more deaths per year than from car accidents; and at least 13,000 existing housing units in the Bay Area alone, “will no longer be usable” because of sea rise over the next 40 to 100 years.6 Levels of CO2 in the atmosphere reached 420 parts per million (ppm) last month, which is well above the 280-350 ppm scientists say is ideal for human life.7 This measurement has been certified as the highest level ever recorded, and it’s estimated to be the highest in the last 4.5 million years. A sobering series of reports from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) released from August 2021 through April 2022 have found that humans have had an “unequivocal” influence on climate change and warn that this decade is humanity’s last chance to limit warming.8 While the IPCC report revealed that sadly, a 1.5°C rise in planetary temperature is now unavoidable, the potential to limit warming to below 2°C— and avoid even more catastrophic climate impacts—is still possible if the world can achieve net-zero carbon emissions by 2050.9 That means we need to begin phasing out fossil fuels right away, including methane gas used to heat and cook with. Phasing out gas use provides many benefits to community health, safety, and a stable climate future. Extending these benefits to existing homes and buildings is now urgently needed. ● All-Electric homes and buildings are more efficient. According to the California Energy Commission, a modern high-efficiency heat pump electric water heater (available at all major retailers) costs roughly one-third less on utility bills to operate than the most efficient gas water heater.10 In addition, electric heat pump heating also provides air-conditioning, resulting in less equipment, reduced maintenance costs, and greater climate resilience. ● Public Safety: Methane gas is highly flammable. In the past 10 years, 9,000 gas explosions in the U.S have killed more than 500 people, and gas leaks have displaced and sickened thousands of people.11 Methane gas also caused half the fires after two major California earthquakes.12 ● Health: Gas stoves release smog-forming compounds such as nitrogen dioxide, unburnt hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide pollution that doubles risks for heart and lung disease and triples the use of asthma medications.13 In fact, studies have shown that children living in homes using gas for cooking have a more than 40% higher risk of having asthma.14 Further, improperly vented gas appliances lead to carbon monoxide poisoning that results in thousands of emergency room visits and several hundred deaths every year.15 ● Climate: All-electric buildings are a highly visible and practical step forward to address the climate crisis, by breaking the cycle of fossil fuel dependency in buildings. This is the single biggest step that cities can take to address climate this year. ● Resilience: Switching from gas to electric at the time of remodel or replacement helps avoid a complex, costly and likely inevitable switch to all-electric heating and appliances in the future, since gas prices are expected to rise sharply, and California is planning to eventually end gas distribution. The California Public Utilities Commission estimates that natural gas rates will increase at twice the rate of electricity through the next 10 years.16 Converting to all-electric now will help future-proof Palo Alto. In keeping with the latest science, we must actively begin a swift transition from polluting and unhealthy fossil fuels like methane gas. That means preventing new fossil fuel devices from committing to decades more use. We must rise to that challenge and apply our valuable resources of money and time to avoid the worst impacts of the climate crisis. Current and future generations deserve and depend on our best and boldest collaborative efforts. Thank you for considering our comments. We would be pleased to provide additional information or respond to any questions that might arise. Sincerely, Lauren Weston, Executive Director, Acterra: Action for a Healthy Planet Hoi Poon, Co-Founder, Advisor, Silicon Valley Youth Climate Action Bruce Hodge, Founder, Carbon Free Palo Alto Bruce Naegel, Sustainable Silicon Valley Ellyn Dooley, Citizens’ Climate Lobby Connie Miller, GreenTown Tom Kabat, Retired Palo Alto Utilities Senior Resource Originator Linh Dan Do, 350 Silicon Valley Menlo Park Climate Team John McKenna, 350 Silicon Valley Menlo Park Climate Team Kathy Battat, Sierra Club, Loma Prieta Chapter, Environmental Legislative Action committee Sven THesen, BeniSol, LLC Kathleen Kramer, MD, Project Green Home Diane Bailey, Executive Director, Menlo Spark Ole Agesen, Menlo Park 1 https://fossilfreebuildings.org 2 https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/City-Hall/Sustainability/Proposed-2022-Green-Building-and-Local-Energy-Code-Update 3 https://www.rewiringamerica.org/IRAguide 4 https://denvergov.org/Government/Agencies-Departments-Offices/Agencies-Departments-Offices-Directory/Climate-Action- Sustainability-Resiliency/High-Performance-Buildings-and-Homes/Energize-Denver-Hub/Regulation-Basics/Electrification- Requirements 5 https://lao.ca.gov/Publications/Series/1 6 https://calmatters.org/environment/2022/04/california-climate-change-report-legislature/ 7 https://keelingcurve.ucsd.edu https://www.axios.com/2022/05/04/april-sets-record-highest-co2-levels 8 https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg3/ https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2021-08-09/ipcc-report-human-caused-climate-change-unequivocal 9 https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/09/climate/climate-change-report-ipcc-un.html?te=1&nl=climate- fwd:&emc=edit_clim_20210812 10 Rider, Ken, Email correspondence, ken.rider@energy.ca.gov. March 2020. 11 Joseph, George. “30 Years of Oil and Gas Pipeline Accidents, Mapped.” Citylab. November 30, 2016 Sellers, F., Weintraub, K. and Wootson, C. (2018). “Thousands of residents still out of their homes after gas explosions trigger deadly chaos in Massachusetts.” Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/thousands-of-residents-still- out-of-their-homes-after-gas-explosions-trigger-deadly-chaos-in-massachusetts/2018/09/14/802ff690-b830-11e8-94eb- 3bd52dfe917b_story.html 12 Los Angeles in 1994 and San Francisco in 1989, according to the California Seismic Safety Commission. (2002). “Improving Natural Gas Safety in Earthquakes.” SSC-02-03 Taylor, Ann. “The Northridge Earthquake: 20 Years Ago Today.” The Atlantic. January 17, 2014. 13 Jarvis et al. (1996) “Evaluation of asthma prescription measures and health system performance based on emergency department utilization.” https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8618483 14 Lin, W., Brunekreef, B. & Gehring, U. Meta-analysis of the effects of indoor nitrogen dioxide and gas cooking on asthma and wheeze in children. Int. J. Epidemiol. 42, 1724–1737 (2013). 15 USDN, Methane Math, https://sfenvironment.org/sites/default/files/fliers/files/methane-math_natural-gas-report_final.pdf 16 “California’s Gas System in Transition | Equitable, Affordable, Decarbonized and Smaller.” Gridworks, September 29, 2019. https://gridworks.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/GW_Calif-Gas-System-report-1.pdf. CPUC Rate Analysis: https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/-/media/cpuc-website/divisions/energy-division/documents/en-banc/feb-2021- utility-costs-and-affordability-of-the-grid-of-the-future.pdf From:Gail Price To:Council, City Cc:Gail Price Subject:3400 El Camino Real -- Pre-Screening. (10/17/22) Date:Monday, October 17, 2022 2:59:53 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. October 17, 2022 Study Session : Pre-screening (ID #147796) Re: 3400 El Camino Real Dear Mayor Burt and the Palo Alto City Council, Upon review of the proposed 3400 El Camino Project, I believe it is a needed project and meets criteria for new housing with access to services, transit, shuttle, and retail in the immediate area. It is very important as a new source of needed housing, including affordable housing. I concur with comments made in general support of the project. I do have some concerns, however, which I think need to be addressed by the applicant. 1. Overall Design and Site Plan : I believe the buildings lack sufficient articulation and stepped back design in order to make the overall project less massive. I believe additional articulation and orientation concerns, including smaller buildings would be an asset (smaller footprints on the parcel or reduction of one floor). The buildings could be sited on diagonal lines rather than the current plan where the buildings dominate street view from both Matadero and El Camino. The modification of the building locations could also increase privacy for some of the neighbors (and add visual interest). 2. The FAR: The parcel is quite large but I think the overall proposed FAR is very high and the current design does not adequately reduce the mass of the two buildings. I think the FAR range of 2.5-2.6 is more workable (and more aligned with other approvals on El Camino). 3. Setbacks: While building to the front lot line brings the building forward how would this work with requirements for a pedestrian-friendly sidewalk width? I think the side yard setbacks should also be increased so more buffer landscaping is possible. 4. Traffic Circulation and Parking: I have serious concerns about the ability of Matadero to handle the traffic circulation for the project and the Matadero access/egress point is quite close to the rear property line. By adjusting the footprints and location of the buildings would be an opportunity to relocate the current access/egress. All efforts should be made to have the El Camino Real driveways handle the vast majority of the trips. As I have noted earlier, consideration of one level of podium parking in some sections might reduce the number of underground parking levels needed. 5. TDM: I support the TDM Plan; there should be locations for ZipCars, Lyft pickup, and EV charges. Monitoring of the plan is critical. 6. Bike and Pedestrian: Safety should be the utmost consideration. The number of bike spaces is impressive. It is ironic that some comments have noted there are no sidewalks for safety on Matadero and it is also known that the Barron Park tradition has not supported sidewalks (in general). 7. EIR: Should address all concerns about Matadero Creek and will ensure that a mitigation plan is created and monitored. The tree protection plan is required. 8. Small business/retail protection: The applicant has noted the importance of securing space for some of the businesses now operating. Every effort should be made to create a transition plan to help the Driftwood Market and Deli stay in business. Certainly, there are models where this has been done. 9. Housing: I support the proposed mix of unit sizes and the significant number of affordable housing units. Unless there are some design modifications to the buildings, I believe that a total number of units on site should be closer to 320 and would result in a more attractive and functioning projects. Every effort should be made to have very abundant landscaping and amenities for the tenants and small business owners. 10. I am not in favor of major reductions in the impact fees. Sincerely, Gail Price Barron Park Palo Alto From:David Coale To:Council, City; Shikada, Ed; Hoyt, George; Abendschein, Jonathan; Batchelor, Dean; UAC; Lait, Jonathan; Luong, Christine; Tam, Christine; Swaminathan, Shiva; Kelty, Hiromi; Marshall, Tomm Subject:Reach code for residential heat pump HVAC replacement Date:Monday, October 17, 2022 1:40:50 PM Attachments:JosieG Load Calcs.png Panel Capacity (HEA).png PeakAmps all meters.png CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Hi Mayor, Councilmembers and staff, I support the reach code and thank staff for their work on this. Just as the code calls for heat pump water heaters when larger remodels occur, and the gas water heater is replace, this should be expanded to home space-heating when the gas furnace is replaced. Since this will only affect about 100 homes as stated in the staff report, this will not be a big impact on the grid as staff has stated. Also, it is possible that these remodel projects could choose to replace the old furnace with a heat pump based unit anyway with no restrictions. In fact, if they are trying to do electrification and save money, as the city is promoting, it is very likely that all of the remodels would choose to do this; again with no restrictions. So this should just be required in the first place. As I understand it, the utilities are worried about the extra load for home heating. Any large remodel would also be upgrading the insolation as well such that the heating load will be less than a name-plate calculation would otherwise indicate. There is also greater cooling of the transformers during the heating season, which will lessen the impact on the grid. Commercial projects should also require the replacement of Gas-pack HVAC units with heat-pump based HVAC units when large remodels are done. The following graphs show that electrification will use much less energy than NEC calculations indicate, based on actual energy usage. Studies show that homes use much less energy than the rated panel size would first indicate. See graphs below. Again, this should be welcome news for Palo Alto’s electrification and grid upgrade efforts. From:Cecilia Willer To:Council, City Subject:Fw: Green Collaborative Save the Date 11.16.22 Date:Monday, October 17, 2022 12:59:29 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. I am wondering if Palo Alto has something similar to Wellesley, MA. You can see in the attached, the link for their current climate change plan. Does Palo Alto have such a plan and is it possible to so something similar to what Wellesley is doing, unless it is happening and I am just not getting any messages like this from the Palo Alto team. Thanks so much. Cecilia Willer 1270 Byron Street ----- Forwarded Message ----- From: Town of Wellesley <listserv@civicplus.com> To: "cecilia_willer@yahoo.com" <cecilia_willer@yahoo.com> Sent: Monday, October 17, 2022, 12:22:30 PM PDT Subject: Green Collaborative Save the Date 11.16.22 climate action logo Save the Date! Green Collaborative November 16, 2022 9-11am Great Hall, Town Hall ( Zoom participation also available) Wellesley Climate Action is Heating Up! What's in it for YOU? Reconnect at our first in-person meeting since January 2020! The Town hit the ground running with its Climate Action Plan (2022). Learn about our newest programs and how YOU can be part of the action to save money, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and build a healthier and more resilient community. Details coming soon! To read more about the Green Collaborative click here . Questions? Contact Wellesley Sustainability Director, Marybeth Martello, mmartello@wellesleyma.gov Copyright © Town of Wellesley. All Rights Reserved. 525 Washington Street, Wellesley, MA 02482 If you no longer wish to receive emails from us, you may Unsubscribe . Powered by Email not displaying correctly? View it in your browser .