HomeMy WebLinkAboutColleague's Memo 2025-02-24CITY OF PALO ALTO
CITY COUNCIL
Special Meeting
Monday, February 24, 2025
Council Chambers & Hybrid
5:30 PM
Agenda Item
8.Colleague’s Memo: Proposed Adoption of a Resolution Underscoring Council’s
Commitment to Sustaining Palo Alto Values and Interests in the Face of Trump
Administration Actions At Places Memos, Public Comment
CITY COUNCIL
Colleague’s Memo
Sponsor(s): Mayor Lauing and Vice Mayor Veenker
Meeting Date: February 24, 2025
TITLE
Colleague’s Memo: Proposed Adoption of a Resolution Underscoring Council’s Commitment to
Sustaining Palo Alto Values and Interests in the Face of Trump Administration Actions
RECOMMENDATION
Mayor Lauing and Vice Mayor Veenker request City Council adopt a Resolution Underscoring
Council’s Commitment to Sustaining Palo Alto Values and Interests in the Face of Trump
Administration Actions.
DISCUSSION
The first few weeks of the Trump Administration have been filled with an unprecedented series
of Executive Orders, many of which impact Palo Alto residents and threaten our city
government’s ability to serve.
City Council has previously adopted values that guide our decision making. This resolution
underscores our commitment to residents that our stated values will continue to guide our
actions, and that we will take future actions consistent with those values as Council determines.
We expressly disassociate Palo Alto from the actions of prominent Silicon Valley technology
executives actively supporting or executing troubling Executive Orders.
To protect the ability of the City to provide necessary services to its residents, from time to
time Palo Alto may wish to file amicus curiae (friend of the court) briefs to inform courts of the
impacts of potential decisions to cities like ours. Additionally, the City may wish to join lawsuits
to protect its rights and those of its residents. We recommend that Council consider efficient
means for considering whether to authorize such action consistent with this resolution.
Accordingly, we urge our colleagues to adopt the attached resolution.
FISCAL/RESOURCE IMPACT
Staff does not anticipate any direct resource impacts with the proposed Resolution. Should
subsequent actions be required following adoption, staff will return for City Council approval,
as needed.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A: Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Denouncing Trump
Administration Threats to Palo Alto Values and Interests
Report #: 2502-4169
NOT YET APPROVED
Resolution No. ________
Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Denouncing
Trump Administration Threats to Palo Alto Values and Interests
R E C I T A L S
A. The Palo Alto City Council has previously adopted values to guide its decision making:
1. Balance revenues and expenses, now and in the future.
2. Are environmentally sustainable, now and in the future.
3. Will integrate equity into our decisions, considering how decisions affect people
differently based on their identity or circumstances.
4. Create a healthy, safe and welcoming community for all.
5. Will safeguard public trust through transparent practices and open communication.
6. Will embrace innovation.
B. The Trump Administration has already issued a relentless stream of Executive Orders,
including those that would dismantle or cripple federal agencies providing services to
Palo Alto, withhold funds upon which Palo Altans rely, are likely illegal, and are in
conflict with our values.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Palo Alto RESOLVES as follows:
SECTION 1. The City Council of the City of Palo Alto, consistent with our statement of
values, hereby
•Supports the rule of law, in contrast to the Administration’s actions ignoring
constitutional and other legal norms; already necessitating the filing of numerous
lawsuits to restrain such behavior.
•Strongly opposes freezing federal grant funding or cancelling federal contracts upon
which the City government or residents rely, such as Community Development Block
Grants for local human services nonprofits, COPS funding, and airport and grade
separation grants. Palo Alto has recently received grants from HUD, DOI, DOJ, DOT,
Treasury, NEH, HHS, and Homeland Security;
•Supports federal workers providing valuable services for the City and its residents, such
as the critical safety services provided by the Federal Aviation Administration; and
denounces attempts to subvert the civil service system with unlawful terminations; and
further denounces disregard for the critical expertise of government workers;
•Denounces reversing climate action and environmental justice policies, such as pulling
out of the Paris Accords and ramping up oil and gas production on federal lands, and
opposes attempts to limit local authority to address climate change;
NOT YET APPROVED
•Supports the safety of sensitive data of the City, our residents, and our businesses, and
objects to improper access to critical information that violates privacy rights and risks
misuse of valuable proprietary information;
•Opposes threatening the safety of Palo Altans by diminishing the ability of the FBI and
CIA to respond to security threats, protect innovation, and prevent domestic terrorism;
•Supports science and denounces replacing experts with lay decision makers on issues of
scientific protocol and funding priorities;
•Strongly objects to any illegal and inhumane immigration enforcement; and
•Supports equity and racial justice and commits to continuing the City’s DEI efforts and
priority to be a place of belonging for all.
SECTION 2. In furtherance of these positions, the City will
•Share this Resolution with our Congressional representatives and offer our support to
advocate for these principles
•Communicate with residents about risks to the City and its residents due to
Administration activity inconsistent with these positions, and about the City’s response;
•Seek Council approval to bring or join lawsuits or file or join in amicus briefs consistent
with these positions, our statement of values, and council-approved legislative
guidelines; and
•Support other cities and counties taking similar actions, and partner with others to build
collective action.
SECTION 3. The Council finds that the adoption of this resolution does not meet the
definition of a project under Public Resources Code Section 21065, thus, no environmental
assessment under the California Environmental Quality Act is required.
INTRODUCED AND PASSED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
NOT YET APPROVED
ATTEST:
__________________________ _____________________________
City Clerk Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED:
__________________________ _____________________________
City Attorney City Manager
From:Celina Tracy
To:Council, City
Subject:oppose exec orders!
Date:Monday, February 24, 2025 10:24:37 AM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links.
Dear Mayor and Members of the Palo Alto City Council,
I am writing to express my strong support for the resolution opposing
recent executive orders from former President Trump, as referenced in the
Palo Alto Online article dated February 14, 2025. I urge you to take a firm
stand in defense of our community’s values of democracy, inclusion, and
human rights.
These executive orders threaten the fundamental freedoms and
protections that make Palo Alto a welcoming and just place for all. Now
more than ever, it is essential that our local government acts decisively to
protect our residents and push back against policies that undermine our
shared values.
I commend the City Council for taking a leadership role in resisting unjust
federal actions and ensuring that Palo Alto remains a city that values
equity, diversity, and the rule of law. Please continue to stand strong in the
face of these challenges and do everything in your power to uphold the
rights and dignity of all members of our community.
Thank you for your commitment to justice and fairness. I respectfully urge
you to pass this resolution and take further steps to shield our city from
harmful federal overreach.
Sincerely,
Celina Tracy
671 Bryson Ave., Palo Alto
From:Andrew Bianco
To:Council, City
Subject:City Council Meeting 2/24 -- Item 8 Comment
Date:Monday, February 24, 2025 12:42:55 AM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links.
Hello, I live in Palo Alto, and I’m writing to express my support for Item 8 on
tomorrow’s agenda, “Resolution Underscoring Council’s Commitment to Sustaining
Palo Alto Values and Interests in the Face of Trump Administration Actions.”
It's important to take an early stand against tyranny and remember to not comply in
advance. There are real people in our community that are at risk of being impacted by
flagrant and illegal abuses of power by the Trump Administration.
Thank you,
- Andrew Bianco
From:Annette Glanckopf
To:Council, City; Clerk, City
Subject:Item 8 on tomorrow council agenda - colleague memo.
Date:Sunday, February 23, 2025 8:11:19 PM
Attachments:Memo to Palo Alto City Council Regards Colleague Memo item 8.docx
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links.
Please read my comments attached.
I feel the memo, in its present form, will do more harm than good.
Please do not approve.....
Annette Glanckopf
Memo to Palo Alto City Council Regards Colleague Memo item 8
February 24, 2025
Dear Mayor Lauing and Council,
I am very concerned about the colleagues memo and suggest not approving it or a more
positive rewrite.
Although I agree with the sentiments, I don’t think there are imminent actions that will
directly effect Palo Alto on the table now that require a memo? I feel that the tone is
confrontational and hostile. Trump has his eye on California and Silicon Valley. Do we
really want to put a “bulls eye” on our city.
Yes we do need to make sure that Palo Alto is protected, but is this the best route and best
timing? Council needs to consider the timing and ask what funding could we possibly not
get – I suggest that Public Safety funding is vulnerable especially for fire ?
I am not sure what this memo hopes to achieve, and I fear reprisals.
I ask you to reject this memo – or consider a rewrite with a more positive tone.
Annette Glanckopf
From:Sheri Furman
To:Council, City
Subject:Re: Item 8 Colleagues Memo
Date:Sunday, February 23, 2025 7:25:52 PM
Some people who received this message don't often get email from sheri11@earthlink.net. Learn why this isimportant
Dear Mayor Lauing and Council Members,
Sorry to be so blunt, but this action is totally unnecessary and simply smacks ofvirtual signaling.
We have enough issues to focus on rather than wasting your and staff’s time.
Please don’t proceed with this.
Respectfully,
Sheri Furman
From:Kat Snyder
To:Council, City
Subject:Public Comment: Item 8 Resolution
Date:Sunday, February 23, 2025 6:19:18 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links.
Dear City Council,
I appreciate you for crafting this resolution. I particularly appreciate the data privacy section.
Things have been moving very quickly on a national scale. We now know ICE is not justarresting and deporting criminals, but often folks that are just easy to locate via surveillance
technology (e.g. folks wearing ankle monitors as they wait for asylum hearings). So, I'd askfor more emphasis on the surveillance technology part of our Surveillance and Privacy
Protection Ordinance within this resolution.
In my December 2nd public comment on the Police Department's Flock contract, I think someof my concerns may have seemed hypothetical. I'm copying that email below for reference,
because I find those concerns even more pressing today.
Thanks for your time,~Kat Snyder
Palo Alto Resident
--------------------I have concerns about expanding our use of Flock cameras, particularly in the current political
climate. When the Trump administration takes over, we will have more surveillance aroundwomen's doctor appointments and around immigrants living their lives. As a Sanctuary city
and county, I worry that setting up the infrastructure for this surveillance can easily lead to itbeing used for purposes we didn't choose.
The ACLU warns against using Flock cameras - they note that the default use of Flock sets up
a nationwide surveillance network that can be accessed by more than just law enforcement - infact, private entities can make their own "hot lists." Flock wants to become the default
surveillance system for law enforcement across the country and sharing data with theircustomers all across the country is part of their competitive advantage.
I'm grateful that we chose much more stringent data management than the default but I'm
worried that it clashes with Flock's bottom line. How do we know that, when it comes down toit, they will respect our data privacy? I say this because a few years ago Palantir swore that
their products were not used by ICE when, in fact, they were behind the largest immigrationenforcement workplace raid in US history.
What verification systems do we have set up to make sure Flock is doing what they say? Once
the cameras are in place, do we have a way to verify that the data they collect (license plate,make/model, color, bumper stickers) cannot expand beyond that to, for example, facial
recognition? The company plans to enter into facial recognition and other AI/ML spaces, sothis is not just an idle question.
There are many more concerns about Flock but in the interest of keeping this brief, I will justdrop a link to the ACLU's white paper on Flock in case it is of interest:
https://www.aclu.org/wp-content/uploads/publications/flock_1.pdf
Take care,~Kat Snyder
Palo Alto Resident
P.S. According to an article that just came out 2 hours ago, Flock says they "don't entertainhypotheticals" when asked whether they would engage in a contract pertaining to mass
deportations.
From:Nichole Boaz
To:Council, City
Subject:City Council Meeting 2/24 -- Item 8 Comment
Date:Sunday, February 23, 2025 3:19:47 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links.
Hello,
I live in Palo Alto, and I’m writing to express my support for Item 8 on tomorrow’s agenda,
“Resolution Underscoring Council’s Commitment to Sustaining Palo Alto Values and Interests in
the Face of Trump Administration Actions.”
While this resolution is mostly symbolic, rather than substantive, it is still important. I am worried
about my neighbors who have already been directly impacted by the Trump Administration’s
illegal overreaches: federal workers; undocumented immigrants; and the myriad of industries that
rely on federal grants for funding. It’s important for people who are living in fear to know that their
local elected officials will do their best to support and protect them.
I understand that some people may think this resolution is a bad idea because it will only serve to
draw the negative attention of Trump administration officials. I think the opposite: it is now more
important than ever to make it clear what we Palo Altans stand for, and what lines we will not
cross. I would encourage you to think of a phrase I’ve been seeing a lot lately: “do not comply in
advance.”
This does not mean it will be easy to stand up to the Trump administration. There is a real risk of
federal backlash to this kind of resolution. But that risk should not stop you from doing the right
thing.
In the future, I hope to see even more substantive action from the city council. In particular, I am
concerned about Elon Musk and his “DOGE” task force, which has illegally gained unprecedent
access to financial records. While this is a federal issue, the fact that Tesla’s engineering HQ is
located in Palo Alto makes this a local issue as well. Elon Musk is an unelected official who is in
charge of an illegal government takeover, and he should not be allowed to operate his businesses
in our city.
Thank you.
-Nichole Boaz
From:a_m_mason@yahoo.com
To:Council, City
Subject:Strong Support for Resolution Opposing Trump’s Executive Orders
Date:Sunday, February 23, 2025 1:45:42 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking
on links.
Dear Mayor Lauing and Members of the Palo Alto City Council,
I am writing to express my strong support for the resolution opposing recent executive orders from former President
Trump, as referenced in the Palo Alto Online article dated February 14, 2025. I urge you to take a firm stand in
defense of our community’s values of democracy, inclusion, and human rights.
These executive orders threaten the fundamental freedoms and protections that make Palo Alto a welcoming and just
place for all. Now more than ever, it is essential that our local government acts decisively to protect our residents
and push back against policies that undermine our shared values.
I commend the City Council for taking a leadership role in resisting unjust federal actions and ensuring that Palo
Alto remains a city that values equity, diversity, and the rule of law. Please continue to stand strong in the face of
these challenges and do everything in your power to uphold the rights and dignity of all members of our community.
Thank you for your commitment to justice and fairness. I respectfully urge you to pass this resolution and take
further steps to shield our city from harmful federal overreach.
Sincerely,
A. Mason
a_m_mason@ieee.org
From:Tasha Souter
To:Council, City
Subject:Strong support for resolution opposing trumps’s executive orders
Date:Sunday, February 23, 2025 1:26:50 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking
on links.
Dear Mayor Lauing and Members of the City Council,
I am writing to express my strong support for the resolution opposing recent executive orders from president Trump.
I urge you to take a firm stand in defense of our community’s values grounded in democracy, inclusion, and human
rights.
These executive orders threaten the fundamental freedoms and protections that make Palo Alto a welcoming and just
place for all. Now, more than ever, it is vital that our local government act decisively to protect our residents and
push back against policies that harm our community and undermine our shared values.
I commend the City Council for showing moral leadership for resisting unjust federal actions and taking steps to
ensure that Palo Alto remains a place that values equity, diversity, and the rule of law. Please continue to stand
strong in the face of these challenges and to do everything in your power to uphold the rights and dignity of all
members of our community and to resist the current trend toward fascism, oligarchy, elitism, discrimination and
greed.
I respectfully urge you to pass this resolution and take further steps to protect our community and our values.
Sincerely,
Tasha Souter
Baker Avenue, Palo Alto
souter9000@gmail.com
From:Cindy Nelson
To:Council, City
Subject:I support the anti-authoritarian resolution
Date:Sunday, February 23, 2025 8:46:20 AM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links.
Palo Alto City Council:
As a 40 year citizen of Palo Alto, and a believer in resurrecting democratic America, I emphaticallysupport The City of Palo Alto's resolution to publicly state and engage in support for the rule of law andvalues that keep our city safe, peaceful, and in line with the United States Constitution.
In the bay area, we have several billionaire elitists who seem to have concluded that it's okay to use theirfortune, forgetting that it was mostly earned off the back of many others' work, to dominate others whodisagree with them. They unfairly grab power, money and influence for their own extravagant whims,ignoring their responsibility to now work even harder to further the ideals and laws of the United Statesof America, to preserve and improve the democratic system that allowed them to invent products andbring them to market, and therefore become extraordinarily wealthy.
It has become clear that absolute power, money, and fame corrupts absolutely. Once-principled techbillionaires, with no one willing to question or resist their strange and hostile ideas and actions, often fallinto a society-damaging addiction to "more money, fame and power" at all costs, and a belief of one'sown superiority that justifies illegal and immoral decision-making.
The current explicitly corrupt administration is led by a self-proclaimed "king," and a billionaire hackerwho wants to remove safety and environmental regulations that get in the way of his own companies'and his personal profits. The hacker, who at one time invented a revolutionizing car that offeredhuge potential benefits to the earth, has turned his back on democratic America that (in retrospectdangerously) allowed his accumulation of billions.
Dismantling Democracy, Pretending to Save MoneyThis administration is illegally attempting to dismantle the US government without any oversight, and isdamaging our democratic system irreparably. They pretend to cut "waste," misrepresenting millions asbillions to lie to the public. Make no mistake, they instead are plotting to slash taxes as early as March 14on the wealthiest Americans, including themselves, so that they can become richer. Two yachts areclearly better than one, while the less-privileged masses work for pittance wages and try to keep theirchildren fed.
This dominance by morally corrupt and money-addicted billionaires is exactly what our Founding Fatherswarned us against: they referred to it as tyranny.
Advancing White Supremacist AgendasDonald Trump, Elon Musk, and his White-Nationalist packed cabinet and staff of Project 2025 architects,led by Russell Voght, Stephen Miller, and most recently, Darren Beattie, are attempting to destroy theAmerican ideal of liberty, equality, and freedom. They are supporting the firing of not just important andnecessary civil servants, like the FAA staff, the Nuclear Energy safety staff, but are now explicitly goingafter women and people of color who hold positions of power.
Using Money to Win is Un-AmericanThey are not only dismantling important democratic voting laws in order to allow their minorityperspectives to dominate our country on an ongoing basis, they are holding Republican senators hostageto their demands for 100% alignment with the would-be king, and financing both existential and politicalprimary threats using an un-elected billionaire's cash donations. Colluding with them are severalcorrupted and dishonored, but still acting Supreme Court Justices who have proven themselves complicitin their attempts to steal democratic elections.
The list of unlawful executive actions add up to an obvious attempt to curtail the balancing influence of
the United States voting population, the House of Representatives, the Senate, and the Judiciary that wasso carefully crafted JUST to avoid the the selfish and society-killing unilateral governance of King George,
and any who might try to follow in his footsteps.
It is time to stand up and resist this regime with every bit of energy and commitment we can muster.
Cynthia Nelson
SECTION 1. The City Council of the City of Palo Alto, consistent with our statement of values, hereby •Supports the rule of law, in contrast to the Administration’s actions ignoring constitutional and other legalnorms; already necessitating the filing of numerous lawsuits to restrain such behavior. • Strongly opposesfreezing federal grant funding or cancelling federal contracts upon which the City government orresidents rely, such as Community Development Block Grants for local human services nonprofits, COPSfunding, and airport and grade separation grants. Palo Alto has recently received grants from HUD, DOI,DOJ, DOT, Treasury, NEH, HHS, and Homeland Security; • Supports federal workers providing valuableservices for the City and its residents, such as the critical safety services provided by the Federal AviationAdministration; and denounces attempts to subvert the civil service system with unlawful terminations;and further denounces disregard for the critical expertise of government workers; • Denounces reversingclimate action and environmental justice policies, such as pulling out of the Paris Accords and ramping upoil and gas production on federal lands, and opposes attempts to limit local authority to address climatechange; NOT YET APPROVED • Supports the safety of sensitive data of the City, our residents, and ourbusinesses, and objects to improper access to critical information that violates privacy rights and risksmisuse of valuable proprietary information; • Opposes threatening the safety of Palo Altans bydiminishing the ability of the FBI and CIA to respond to security threats, protect innovation, and preventdomestic terrorism; • Supports science and denounces replacing experts with lay decision makers onissues of scientific protocol and funding priorities; • Strongly objects to any illegal and inhumaneimmigration enforcement; and • Supports equity and racial justice and commits to continuing the City’sDEI efforts and priority to be a place of belonging for all. SECTION 2. In furtherance of these positions,the City will • Share this Resolution with our Congressional representatives and offer our support toadvocate for these principles • Communicate with residents about risks to the City and its residents dueto Administration activity inconsistent with these positions, and about the City’s response; • Seek Councilapproval to bring or join lawsuits or file or join in amicus briefs consistent with these positions, ourstatement of values, and council-approved legislative guidelines; and • Support other cities and countiestaking similar actions, and partner with others to build collective action.
From:Douglas Moran
To:Council, City
Subject:RE: Colleague"s Memo, Item #8 on the 2025-02-25 City Council Agenda,
Date:Sunday, February 23, 2025 5:21:35 AM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links.
Honorable City Council members: RE: Colleague's Memo, Item #8 on the 2025-02-25 City Council Agenda
I strongly urge you to vote down the proposed resolution: It is entirely inappropriate to beendorsed as representing the City of Palo Alto and its residents. It is blatantly a partisan
document, the sort that candidates issue as a reaffirmation of fealty to their national Party'sagenda and dogma.
This proposed resolution seems little more than a regurgitation of Democratic Party talkingpoints.
The source is not credible. Do you want to put the City adjacent to that reputation.Talking points are designed to be persuasive and can be expected to have a little
sloppiness with facts. However, that's not what I hear: It's smears and too manystatements ranging from disingenuous to deceptive to ones long proven to be false (aka
lies). Eventually the admonition kicks in: "Assume they are lying. It saves time."
I don't see thought given to what message will be received by people "outside the filterbubble"/"true believers". Basic PR training is that it can easily be contrary to what was
intended.I don't see positions that have been adapted to the news in the first month of the Trump
administration.Some of the bullet points display rank hypocrisy beyond partisanship into cluelessness.
The details (below) are very long and I have negligible expectation that Council members willhave time to read them. A goal is to have in the public record a sense of what was known at
the time this resolution was debated.
The tone of this letter is intentionally mocking, to illustrate a likely category of responses
should this become an official resolution.
Warning: The Republican Party is irrelevant to my discussion here. Nothing I say or don't say
should be interpreted as flowing from my attitude toward that Party.
Details related to the bullet points in Section
1
Bullet 1: "Supports the rule of law, in contrast to the Administration’s actions ignoringconstitutional and other legal norms; already necessitating the filing of numerous lawsuits to
restrain such behavior."Message:
Don't waste time reading the resolution! If you are interested in this topic, you willalmost certainly heard versions of the bullet points many times already.
— OR —"Everything's been said, but not everybody has said it." - Congressman Morris "Mo"
Udall (D-AZ, 1961-1991).Message: This is intended only as propaganda.
Contrary to the desired inference, the filing of a lawsuit is not evidence that anaction was illegal/improper. Some of these lawsuits are being dismissed as frivolous.
Is it credible that an entity that for years has engaged in non-stop lawfare as asubstitute for persuasion wouldn't continue to do so?
It's so easy to go "judge shopping", that is, find a "friendly" judge — so much easier
than winning elections.What is the credible basis for the claim that Trump has ignored the US Constitution?
A partisan claiming a violation is hardly enough: It could be a smear or a display ofwillful ignorance.
"Supports the rule of law" is rank hypocrisy. Where were the resolutions in response tothe many of the Biden administration? (crickets)
An appendix lists some of the low-lights.
Bullet 2: Opposes freezing grants or contracts. The initial examinations are finding massive
fraud, with grants and contracts being used like shell corporations in classic money launderingschemes.
Ask yourselves: "Just how are the reformers going to quickly distinguish the legitimateoperations from ones that are part of the frauds??" Examples:
The US Treasury has thwarted oversight for decades by having incomplete andinadequate records of payments.
US Agency for International Development (U.S.A.I.D. or USAID but not US AID) wascreated to primarily provide coordinated covers for covert and some overt activities by
the CIA, State Department, Defense Department, ... This has not been a secret fordecades, but the lure of money intended to corrupt important people in target countries
can be too much for those people to resist.
It has large networks of "Non-Government Organizations" (NGO) whoseinterrelationships are similar to those in sophisticated money-laundering scheme.
Funding does not simply go through a chain of pass-throughs. Money flows to thepass-throughs from multiple sources and is sent on to multiple other pass-throughs
where it is intermingled with funds from other pass-throughs and sources.USAID has defied and thwarted attempts at Congressional oversight for years.
Where there is that much money — $40 billion annually — sloshing around in suchcircumstances, is it only an invitation or an outright inducement for frauds, be they
massive or more modest.USAID has funded media outlets in other countries as part of influence operations
and as part of efforts to create events leading to regime change. As a result of thefreeze, it became public that USAID was the crucial funder for most media outlets in
Ukraine.
Also discovered was how much USAID was running "influence operations" in theUS. Politico and the NY Times are prominently mentioned as receiving moneys
through channels in addition to grants. Question for City Council members: What if you discovered that City Staff
diverting public moneys to support the election campaigns of opponents??The new head of the US EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) just announced finding
a $2 Billion grant to Stacy Abrams, a prominent Democratic Party politician. That $2Bwas to be passed through to other groups. The EPA head claimed that the contracts with
those secondary recipients were written to impede/prevent oversight of where the moneythen went and how that money was used.
A long-time complaint has been that no matter how much money is spent on socialwelfare programs, the problem just keeps getting worse.
No surprise: Such programs are designed with incentives to achieve these negativeresults. The programs are suppose to fail, but not so badly that they are terminated. This
enables fat salaries and benefits for the CEO and staff as well as benefits to associates.Take a lesson from Mark Zuckerberg's attempt to improve the public schools in Newark
NJ. He contributed $100M and raised another $100M. The assessment was that it madelittle difference, with virtually none of that $200M made it down to the level of the
students.Message: Fiduciary Responsibilities/Duties are implicitly rejected.
The Democratic Party talking point in response to a report of a discovery of $20B fraud was"It's only 1% of the budget."
Being dismissive of this report strongly implies that there are many more multi-billiondollar instances of fraud, abuse and waste to come.
The dismissive attitude underlying such excuses are not to be condone, regardless of thepercentage involved.
The talking point is disingenuous, if not outright deceptive. The budget is dominated bynon-discretionary items: entitlements, interest payments, … Then remove defense
spending from the calculation and the percentage becomes significant.Why "implicit"? It was licensed by the relationship/entwinement with other Democratic Party
talking points included in this resolution.
Bullet 3: Support federal workers: Again, unwarranted assumptions.
The Democratic Party supports the primacy of professional staff/bureaucrats over electedofficials and by extension, the citizenry. Office holders can become hostages to the need for
staff to make them look good at a cost of not pushing accountability from theprofessional/permanent staff.
The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is cited explicitly. The recent mid-air collisionover Washington DC killed 67 people. A nation-wide shortage of air traffic controllers was
tentatively cited as a contributing cause. What caused that shortage? The Obamaadministration changed the application process to promote diversity. Having experience as an
air traffic controller in the military or being a pilot no longer mattered. What did? Playingmultiple sports in high school, for example. The discrimination lawsuit is still working its way
through the courts.
Bullet 9: Support for continuing DEI.
A viral moment during the LA fires came when a woman complained about firefighters thatlacked the strength to carry her husband out of a burning building. The Deputy Chief heading
the Equity and Human Resources Bureau flippant reply was "He got himself in the wrongplace if I have to carry him out of a fire." Message: Did the bullet point give any hint of awareness of the major problems with DEI?The first step to solving a problem is to recognize what it is.
I am personally appalled by the current version and practice of DEI: At its core is thesubordination of the individual to the identity group. However, I recognize that this area elects
officials that campaign on these policies. Joe Biden was elected promising to revoke Trump's
Executive Order #13950 "Executive Order on Combating Race and Sex Stereotyping" and hedid so on his first day in office.
To understand my perspective, and probably that of many others, consider what was soimportant and urgent for Democrats to reinstate:
Revoke Trump's ban on teaching "one race or sex is inherently superior to another racerace or sex."Revoke the ban on promoting within the Federal Government "divisive concepts" such as"an individual should be discriminated against or receive adverse treatment solely
or partly because of his or her race or sex";"an individual, by virtue of his or her race or sex, bears responsibility for actions
committed in the past by other members of the same race or sex";"meritocracy or traits such as a hard work ethic are racist or sexist, or were created
by a particular race to oppress another race".I blogged about this after it was a topic in the first Presidential Debate (2020-09-29):
https://www.paloaltoonline.com/blogs/p/2020/10/01/the-most-important-question-and-biggest-lie-of-the-presidential-debate--relevance-to-palo-alto
Bullet 8: Immigration enforcement Solid majorities of Democrats in both houses of Congress and repeatedly voted against the
Laken Riley Act — Laken Riley was the Georgia nursing student raped and murdered by anillegal alien (official legal term) who had previously been arrested. After horrific crimes by
illegal aliens, some leaders of the Democratic can be expected to be all over the mediapronouncing the crime to be an isolated incident that shouldn't affect immigration policy.
Since the current enforcement is directed at violent illegal aliens, the message of this bullet point is to leave these people roaming the US. Implicit is that the lives
of their victims count for nothing.
"How you spend your money reveals your priorities."
Remember that the Biden administration paid to have these illegal aliens brought into the US— how many known violent criminals were among them? Remember that Latin American
countries used this as an opportunity to empty their jails.
Similarly FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) sent millions to New York City
to house illegal aliens in a hotel. Who else needed that support? The victims of HurricaneHelene (2024-09-27) who are still struggling with basics, such as inadequate shelter.
Bullet 6: "Opposes … diminishing the ability of the FBI and CIA to respond to securitythreats, … and prevent domestic terrorism"
This clause is simultaneously outrageous and an embarrassment. It falsely implies acontroversy will ignoring what they actually are. For me, this crosses the line out of being
disingenuous to being deceptive.Both the FBI and CIA have interfered in US elections, most notably the Presidential
elections of 2016 and 2020 and some in 2024.The Hunter Biden laptop: The FBI had it in their custody for eleven months and
revealed nothing. The CIA successfully discredited the story, but the super-expediting the approval of the letter from 51 former and current high-level officials.
Polling after the election estimated that enough people would have changed theirvotes to have reversed the result.
August 2022 raid on Trump's Mar-a-Lago home: The FBI planted evidence — "TopSecret" cover sheets and rearranged the documents and document boxes for a photo-
op.Shortly before the 2020 election, the FBI announced it had thwarted a plot to kidnap
Michigan Governor Whitmer. A local reporter sensed that something wasn't right:The 12 who had played significant roles were not indicted. Among the 6 who were
was the purported leader who was dubbed "Captain Autism" and spent most of histime smoking pot in the basement of a sewing machine shop out of the generosity of
the owner. Digging further, the 12 were found to be FBI assets and 2 FBI agents. Lesson: It's easy to break up a criminal operation if you (law enforcement) are its
leaders, funders, recruiters, trainers, planners, reconnaissance, …In the past 10 years, the FBI has been actively interfering with Trump, both as a
candidate and as President.The FBI is a major participant in suppressing dissent by everyday Americans. The
scariest of these is the FBI adopting tactics used by the secret police in authoritarianregimes. (see appendix).Bullet 7: "Supports science and denounces replacing experts with lay decision makers onissues of scientific protocol and funding priorities"
Were you not paying attention during Covid and to the many revelations coming from FOIA
and elsewhere. The "experts" turned out to be frequently wrong, or making pronouncements offact when there was not evidence and tout junk science over proper science. They rejected
important discoveries from elsewhere such as Israel and Denmark. They sabotaged datacollection by incentivizing both over-reporting and under-reporting. And rejecting evidence
that didn't fit their narrative. A biologist-commentator observed that the experts were soconsistently wrong that it being by accident was implausible.
The history of science is so littered with instances of a field's establishment suppressing resultsand analysis that undermined their theories.
"Science advances/progresses funeral by funeral" (many variations). It was outsiders — your "lay decision maker" who "got it right". It was statisticians,
embalmers, scientists in related fields who read pre-prints from all over the world. It waseveryday people researching their medical problems and quickly discovering many others with
similar issues that the experts were ignoring or dismissing figments of their imagination andsuch. In some cases, it was non-US reporters noticing that something didn't make sense and
pursuing it.
But the resolution advocates returning the decision-making to those who have financial,
professional, reputational interest, who are driven by ego, and whose decisions are driven byfactors other than science.
The US NIH circumvented the US ban on gain-of-function research and funded it at theWuhan lab that had been built to be BSL level 4 (BioSafety Level) but was operating only at
BSL 2, which is roughly equivalent to your local dentist's office. Inspectors from the US StateDepartment reported this problem, but as far was what is public, nothing was done.
Science requires observing, questioning and debating. "Established science" and "consensus"are politics, not science.
The concentration of funding to a very small group has a distorting effect. In medicine, it isthe triumvirate of NIH (National Institutes of Health), Bill Gates (Bill and Melinda Gates
Foundation) and the Wellcome Trust (Britain).
The experts in virology and their funders conspired — by telephone and email — to suppress
the likely origins of the COVID-19 virus and thereby hindering research into its creation andevolution. The cooperated in blocking effective treatments. And …
The resolution advocates returning to a funding structure that failed so catastrophically,resulting in the deaths of millions.
Appendix: Some highlights of the lawlessness of the Biden
administration
Biden issued and tried to execute multiple Executive Orders (EO) that he acknowledgedwere un-Constitutional.
No adherence to equality before the law on political and ideological matters.Rejection of the social covenant in which the individual cedes to the state the
administration of justice in exchange for the state's protection. Example: In the run-up to the overturning of Roe v. Wade demonstrators gather outside
the homes of Supreme Court justices expected to vote to overturn. This was explicitlyillegal, intended to isolate justices from intimidation and other forms of influence. There
was no attempt to enforce the law or even push back the demonstrators. One potentialassassin was persuaded by a family member (sister?) to surrender himself.
Biden attempted to arrogate to himself the ability to amend to the Constitution.Suppression of free speech by pressuring social media to ban or de-rank opinions and
discussions contrary to the Biden administration's own narrative.Hostility to religion both in worship and in rejecting religious-based exemptions that had
been commonly granted.Biden was re-elected on the (fulfilled) promise to re-instate the policies of Obama's
"Dear Colleagues" letter to colleges on the handling of sexual assault claims. MultipleFederal judges had denounced the process as an abomination.
no right to be informed of charges against you.no right to confront witnesses against you.
no right to bring your own witnesses.no right to counsel.
no right to trial by jury, much less an impartial jury, or anything faintly resemblingthat. The investigator, prosecutor and judge could be the same person.
no remedy to exclusion of exculpatory evidence.no presumption of innocence.
The Obama-Biden process was variously acknowledged to be designed to produce"convictions, not justice." Innocent people lost careers and had their lives ruined, but
those are sacrifices that ideologues don't hesitate to inflict on others to advance theirbeliefs.
Appendix: FBI suppressing Dissent by Everyday
Americans: Some Examples
Suppression on Social Media:
The Twitter Files revealed the depth and range of topics that the Biden administrationwanted social media companies to suppress, deleting and de-ranking individual posts and
banning people. Among the many US departments and agencies making such
request/demands, the FBI was prolific.Intimidation in real life:
The FBI visiting your neighbors, your employer, your friends and others createssuspicions no matter how innocuous the questions. The message received is that you did
something significantly wrong enough for the FBI to conduct those visits. Your employermay fire you, wanting to protect himself and the company from whatever it is you might
be involved in.The FBI staged middle-of-the-night raids on some dissenters, a terror tactic used by
secret police in authoritarian regimes. A justification is that it is timed to when the targetwill be disoriented when awoken, and thus more safely managed. News coverage
periodically covers how such can go very wrong: The target and/or family members maybe killed, and occasionally someone in neighboring apartments when bullets go through
walls or floors. As the number of officers in the raiding party increases, so too does therisk of sympathetic/contagious gunfire. Some psychological reaction causes other officers
to join in the shooting, sometimes shooting at the same person or just shooting atwhatever.
You might think that this risk would cause the FBI to use this tactic only in extremecircumstances. And you would be wrong.
Several people found out they were being investigated and their lawyers went to the FBIoffering to bring their client into the FBI office to surrender and be officially arrested.
The FBI ignored the offers and raided the suspects' homes with 20-30 officers in theraiding parties.
What were their crimes? Social media posting that the FBI classified as threats ofviolence. Nothing I saw crossed the long-establish line between free speech and
actionable threats. Sometimes the raids come with extras:
One family was handcuffed and sat on the curb outside their house. However,despite the parent's pleadings, their infant was left unattended in the house.
Is it unreasonable to think the FBI wanted the parents to become increasingly franticto the point where they could be charged with assaulting an officer, or violence
could be used to "subdue" them??
Another family was similarly forced to sit on the curb handcuffed, but this time infreezing temperatures. The woman miscarried the next day.
It seems to be standard practice for local police to put detained persons in one oftheir cars. The FBI raiding party had more than enough cars and officers to do this.
So why didn't they?The FBI raided the home of a local police officer working undercover. Somehow he
had enough time and presence of mind to recognize that this wasn't a hit squadcoming to kill him and butcher his family.
You too can be investigated as a "potential domestic terrorist". How? In late summer 2021 there were multiple highly emotional issues such as whether
to re-open the public schools and how/whether various social issues would be taught.By speaking at a school board meeting during the public comment period and
continuing after your allotted time had been exhausted, orYou might be a father whose daughter had been raped in a school bathroom and you
spoke up when the School Superintendent told the Board that there were no suchincidents.
When the public comment period was abbreviated with many parents still waiting tospeak, you, along with others, might shout at the Board.
In late summer 2021 there were multiple highly emotional issues such as whether to re-
open the public schools and how/whether various social issues would be taught. In unacknowledged cooperation with the White House, the leadership of the National
School Boards Association (NSBA) sent a letter to Biden and the US Justice Departmentasking for federal help to protect teachers and administrators from violence. However, the
list of incidents attached to this letter didn't support any such need. The attachment was alist of links to media articles and online videos. My judgment was that there wasn't
anything requiring more than a few local police officers, and the mere presence of a fewofficers might have sufficed.
Nonetheless, over the weekend Attorney General Garland whipped out a directive to theFBI with the attachment from the NSBA seemingly meant to provide examples of what
was to be regarded as "terrorism". Aftermath: Many school boards cancel their NBSA memberships and about half the states
were critical of the AG Garland directive.
From:LWV of Palo Alto
To:Council, City
Subject:Re: City Council meeting, Feb. 24, action item 8, Resolution opposing executive orders
Date:Friday, February 21, 2025 10:38:29 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links.
To: Mayor Lauing and City Council members
Re: Council meeting Feb. 24, 2025, action item 8, Resolution on executive orders The League of Women Voters of Palo Alto supports Councilmember Veenker and Lauing’sResolution dissociating the city from support of Trump’s recent executive orders freezingfederal funding already appropriated by Congress or threats to freeze such funding to
pressure states and localities to comply with policy goals that violate state or local laws.The Resolution also opposes the firing of federal workers without due process anddismantling efforts to increase representation of women and minorities in the workforce.The League agrees.
The Resolution reserves the city’s right to join as amicus curiae in lawsuits against theorders to inform the courts of impacts the unlawful orders have on cities like ours, or to joinlawsuits to protect the rights of our city and its citizens.
The freezing of already appropriated federal funds would cause great harm to the publichealth, safety and welfare of our city and residents, as set out in the Resolution. The League believes that executive orders freezing funds undermine democracy byviolating the separation of powers in our Constitution. Once Congress decides to spendmoney, the president cannot unilaterally substitute his judgment for that of Congress. TheLeague opposes the freezing of federal funds to cities and states that have elected to limitlocal officials' role in federal immigration enforcement, including the sharing of personalinformation. Limiting entanglement in federal immigration enforcement conserves localresources and avoids a deterioration of trust in public institutions like public schools and thepolice. Collaboration with ICE is associated with housing instability, student absenteeism,and negative child well-being. The executive orders would arbitrarily cut off funding forstates and localities simply for adopting reasonable policies which enhance public safetyand community well-being. Palo Alto depends on this funding for essential services that benefit all residents. Blockingthese funds would undermine residents’ access to critical services including Department ofEducation grants, School Lunch programs, Emergency Medicaid, Emergency FoodAssistance programs, nutrition programs that support food banks, Emergency SolutionsGrants which provide funds to prevent people from becoming homeless and help peopleexperiencing homelessness; Department of Transportation grants, and Violence AgainstWomen grants supporting violence crisis centers.
Sincerely,League of Women Voters of Palo AltoKaren Kalinsky and Lisa RatnerCo-Presidents
--
League of Women Voters of Palo Alto
3921 E. Bayshore Road
Palo Alto, CA 94303
Phone: (650) 903-0600
Web: www.lwvpaloalto.org
Facebook: www.facebook.com/PaloAltoLeague/
Twitter: www.twitter.com/lwvpaloalto
From:Jim Kozelka
To:Council, City
Cc:Jim Kozelka
Subject:VOTE YES TO OPPOSE TRUMP"S EOs
Date:Friday, February 21, 2025 9:18:24 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links.
Dear Mayor Lauing, Vice Mayor Veenker and Members of the Palo Alto City Council,
As this country hurtles towards autocratic tyranny, I am writing to express my strong supportfor the resolution opposing recent executive orders from former President Trump, as
referenced in the Palo Alto Online article dated February 14, 2025. I urge you to take a firmstand in defense of our community’s values of truth, justice, equity and human rights.
These executive orders threaten the fundamental freedoms and protections that make Palo Alto
a welcoming and just place for all. It is now more important than ever that our localgovernment acts decisively to protect our residents and push back against policies that
undermine our shared values.
I commend the City Council for taking a leadership role in resisting unjust federal actions andensuring that Palo Alto remains a city that values equity, diversity, and the rule of law. Please
continue to stand strong in the face of these challenges and do everything in your power touphold the rights and dignity of all members of our community.
Thank you for your commitment to justice and fairness. I respectfully urge you to pass this
resolution and take further steps to shield our city from harmful federal overreach.
Sincerely,Jim Kozelka
Proud PA resident for 45 years
--jk not jk
"Be truthful, gentle and fearless."
- Gandhi
From:Linda Baker
To:Council, City
Subject:Strong support for resolution opposing executive orders
Date:Friday, February 21, 2025 7:38:53 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links.
Dear Mayor Lauing and Members of the Palo Alto City Council,
I strongly support the resolution opposing recent executive orders from former President Trump, as
referenced in the Palo Alto Online article on February 14, 2025. I commend the resolution and urge
you to take a firm stand in defense of our community’s values of democracy, inclusion, and human
rights.
These executive orders threaten the fundamental freedoms and protections that make Palo Alto a
welcoming and just place for all. It is so important for our local government to act decisively to
protect our residents and push back against policies that undermine our shared values.
I commend the City Council for taking a leadership role in resisting unjust federal actions and
ensuring that Palo Alto remains a city that values equity, diversity, and the rule of law.
Please stand strong in the face of these challenges and do everything in your power to uphold the
rights and dignity of all members of our community. You are setting a powerful example for other
cities on how to do what is right, and I hope that your example inspires others across the region and
the country.
I am grateful to you for your commitment to justice and fairness. I respectfully urge you to pass this
resolution and take further steps to shield our city from harmful federal overreach.
Sincerely,
Linda Baker
From:Stephanie Compton
To:Council, City
Subject:Please pass resolution opposing Trump Exec Orders
Date:Friday, February 21, 2025 5:50:27 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking
on links.
Dear Mayor and Members of the Palo Alto City Council,
I am writing to express my strong support for the resolution opposing recent executive orders from former President
Trump, as referenced in the Palo Alto Online article dated February 14, 2025. I urge you to take a firm stand in
defense of our community’s values of democracy, inclusion, and human rights.
These executive orders threaten the fundamental freedoms and protections that make Palo Alto a welcoming and just
place for all. Now more than ever, it is essential that our local government acts decisively to protect our residents
and push back against policies that undermine our shared values.
I commend the City Council for taking a leadership role in resisting unjust federal actions and ensuring that Palo
Alto remains a city that values equity, diversity, and the rule of law. Please continue to stand strong in the face of
these challenges and do everything in your power to uphold the rights and dignity of all members of our community.
Thank you for your commitment to justice and fairness. I respectfully urge you to pass this resolution and take
further steps to shield our city from harmful federal overreach.
Sincerely,
Stephanie Compton
Sent from my iPhone
From:Lisa Heitman
To:Council, City
Subject:I support resolution opposing Trump"s executive orders
Date:Friday, February 21, 2025 3:30:19 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links.
Dear Mayor Lauing et al - I heartily support the resolution opposing Trump's executive orders
and the purging of the US government by DOGE. Please put up the good fight and do whatyou can/must to Trump-proof Palo Alto! Thank you.
Lisa Heitman
2869 Bryant St.
From:Gabi Koehler
To:Council, City
Subject:Strong Support for Resolution Opposing Trump"s Executive orders
Date:Friday, February 21, 2025 2:33:43 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links.
Dear Mayor Lauing and Members of the Palo Alto City Council,
I would like to express my strong support for the resolution opposing recent executive orders
from President Trump, as referenced in the Palo Alto Weekly article on February 14, 2025. Iurge you to take a firm stand in defense of our community's values of democracy, inclusion,
and human rights.
These executive orders threaten the fundamental freedoms and protections that make Palo Altoa welcoming and just place for all. I think it is essential more now than ever that our local
government stands firm in protecting our residents and pushing back against policies thatundermine our shared values.
I commend the City Council for taking a leadership role in resisting unjust federal actions and
ensuring that Palo Alto remains a city that values diversity, equity, inclusion, and the rule oflaw. Please continue to stand strong in the face of our current and upcoming challenges and do
everything in your power to protect the rights and dignity of all members of our community.
Thank you for your commitment to justice and fairness. I respectfully urge you to pass thisresolution and take necessary steps to shield our city from harmful federal overreach.
Sincerely,
Gabi Koehler(177 Monroe Drive, Palo Alto)
From:Julaine Rosner
To:Council, City
Subject:Support for Colleague"s Memo (Item #8 on Monday"s agenda)
Date:Friday, February 21, 2025 12:02:08 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links.
Dear Palo Alto City Council,
I support the resolution standing up to Trump's policies regarding federal employees, federal grants, ICE,
and more. The Council should commit to sustaining Palo Alto's values and interests in the face of the
Trump administration actions.
Thank you!
Sincerely,
Julaine Rosner
786 Matadero Ave.
Palo Alto, CA 94306
From:Linda Frommer
To:Council, City
Subject:Support for Proposed Adoption of Resolution
Date:Friday, February 21, 2025 11:33:14 AM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links.
City Council Members,
I am writing to express my support for the "Proposed Adoption of a Resolution UnderscoringCouncil's Commitment to Sustaining Palo Alto Values & Interests in the Face of Trump
Administration Actions". Unfortunately, I will be out of town for the Council discussion thisMonday, otherwise I would have attended in person. As a retired Federal employee (at VA
Palo Alto Health Care System), I very much appreciate the City Council adopting thisresolution and stating its commitment to such important values for our community.
Sincerely, Linda Frommer
1525 Walnut Dr Palo Alto, 94303
From:Ken Joye
To:Council, City
Subject:Sustaining Palo Alto Values
Date:Friday, February 21, 2025 10:14:50 AM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking
on links.
I see that Mayor Lauing and Vice-Mayor Veenker have authored a colleague’s memo for your consideration at the
council’s 24 February 2025 meeting (agenda item #8).
I am heartened to read the sentiments articulated in the draft resolution and ask that you support it.
thank you for your service,
Ken Joye
Ventura neighborhood, Palo Alto
From:Jo Ann Mandinach
To:Council, City; City Mgr
Cc:Dave Price
Subject:Instead of a memo of protest, why not take CONCRETE Action and...
Date:Wednesday, February 19, 2025 1:30:23 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links.
Dear Mayor, City Council Members and City Manager,
I read your Colleague's Memo re the Trump Administration's actions and know it
will fall on the same deaf ears as the many other similar letters, lawsuits and
protests. Instead, since they're so concerned about money, why not hit them whereit hurts: in their wallet.
If you REALLY wanted to send a message, how about taking CONCRETE
ACTION and cancelling Tesla's contract to run the PA Link shuttles and rescindpermission to use our streets as a testing ground for Tesla's autonomous cabs?
You'll note the Tesla folks have been using the Palo Alto partnerships for bragging
rights as the first of many partnerships across Silicon Valley,
Is this the type of leadership for which Palo Alto wants to be known? I'd hope
not! And I'd hope that in cancelling future dealings you'd stress the reasons why.
Tesla may test ‘Cybercabs' in Palo Alto
By Audrey Asistio • Published October 23, 2024 • Updated on October 23, 2024at 9:33 pm
https://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/tesla-may-test-cybercabs-in-palo-alto/3687122/
Palo Alto Link, the city’s nascent rideshare service, will remain in operation at least
until the end of June after the City Council extended its contract with the contractor
that operates the system and left the door open for Tesla to supplement the small
fleet with its new robotaxis.
https://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2024/11/05/palo-alto-link-gets-a-boost-as-
council-extends-contract/
Palo Alto Link gets a boost as council
extends contract
New deal with Nomad Transportation leaves the door open for future Tesla
partnership
"In unanimously approving Palo Alto Link for eight more months, council membersagreed that the service remains popular and valuable, particularly for seniors,
residents with disabilities and those who don’t have cars.
Very sincerely,
Jo Ann Mandinach
Palo Alto, CA 94301
Item No. 8. Page 1 of 1
City Council
At Places Memo
From: Council Members Burt, Reckdahl, Stone
Meeting Date: February 24, 2025
Item Number: 8
TITLE
Proposed revised resolution submitted by Council Members Burt, Reckdahl, and Stone.
CONTEXT: This Resolution is a draft alternative to the February 24, 2025, Item 8
Colleagues Memo
TITLE
Proposed Resolution Reaffirming Palo Alto’s Commitment to Its Core Values and
Supporting Valued Government Programs
BACKGROUND
The Palo Alto City Council, a non-partisan body under state law, has previously adopted
guiding values, and this resolution reaffirms our steadfastness in upholding these
principles. Protecting the rights of our residents and advancing city interests require
proactive governance. This resolution reaffirms our commitment to these values and
effective advocacy.
FISCAL/RESOURCE IMPACT
Staff does not anticipate any direct resource impacts due to the proposed Resolution.
Should subsequent actions be required following adoption, staff will return for City
Council approval, as needed.
Recitals
A. The Palo Alto City Council has previously adopted a set of values to guide its actions,
which can be summarized as:
1. Ensure the City’s current and future revenues and expenses remain balanced.
2. Ensure environmental sustainability for future generations.
3. Integrate equity into our decisions, recognizing diverse impacts on residents.
4. Maintain a healthy, safe, and welcoming community for all.
5. Safeguard public trust through transparency and open communication.
6. Embrace innovation to improve City services and governance.
B. NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Palo Alto RESOLVES as follows:
SECTION 1. The Council reaffirms its commitments to:
1
• The Constitution of the United States of America, the Constitution of the State
of California, and the Charter of the City of Palo Alto;
• Transparent governance and the rule of law, including respect for court
decisions;
• Protecting federal and state funding that is vital in supporting local services,
including public safety, housing, environmental protection, and infrastructure;
• Collaborating with critical federal and state agencies that support essential
services to Palo Altans;
• Advancing environmental sustainability, ensuring clean water, air quality
protections, and climate resilience. Also ensuring these protections are provided
to all residents regardless of income or demography;
• Safeguarding confidential information and data of residents and businesses;
• Supporting scientific research to guide evidence-based policy decisions and
funding prioritization;
• Protecting the legal rights and human rights of all residents and workers,
regardless of their social status. Ensuring all residents are treated with dignity
and valuing their contributions to our community;
• Ensuring equal opportunities, fostering a diverse and inclusive community, and
striving to be a place of belonging for all;
SECTION 2. In furtherance of these positions, the City will:
• Communicate with residents about changes to government policies or actions
that may impact Palo Alto;
• Ensure current City policies and procedures are consistent with our values;
• Share this Resolution with our State and Congressional representatives and
advocate for policies that align with our city values;
• Collaborate with other cities and counties to advocate for and support policies
that reflect our common values;
• Seek Council approval for policy advocacy or legal actions as needed to protect
the interests of the city, its residents, and workers;
2
● Amend the City Council Procedures and Protocols for a joint request of three
Councilmembers to request a closed session Council meeting for the purpose of
discussing and taking potential action that would authorize the city attorney to
engage in litigation deemed appropriate to safeguard the interests of the City or
the rights of our constituents.
SECTION 3. The Council finds that the adoption of this resolution does not meet the
definition of a project under Public Resources Code Section 21065, thus, no
environmental assessment under the California Environmental Quality Act is required.
3
Item No. 8. Page 1 of 1
City Council
At Places Memo
From: Mayor Lauing and Vice Mayor Veenker
Meeting Date: February 24, 2025
Item Number: 8
TITLE
Proposed revised resolution submitted by Mayor Lauing and Vice Mayor Veenker.
NOT YET APPROVED
20250210 tlr 7161137
Resolution No. ________
Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Underscoring Council’s Commitment to
Sustaining Palo Alto Values and Interests in the Face of Trump Administration Actions
R E C I T A L S
A. The Palo Alto City Council has previously adopted values to guide its decision making:
1. Balance revenues and expenses, now and in the future.
2. Are environmentally sustainable, now and in the future.
3. Will integrate equity into our decisions, considering how decisions affect people
differently based on their identity or circumstances.
4. Create a healthy, safe and welcoming community for all.
5. Will safeguard public trust through transparent practices and open communication.
6. Will embrace innovation.
B. The Trump Administration has already issued an unprecedented number of Executive
Orders, including those that could dismantle or cripple federal agencies providing
services to Palo Alto, withhold funds upon which Palo Altans rely, are likely illegal, and
are in conflict with our stated values.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Palo Alto RESOLVES as follows:
SECTION 1. The City will
• Share this Resolution with our Congressional representatives and offer our support to
advocate for the following principles;
○ Support for the rule of law;
○ Opposition to freezing federal grant funding or cancelling federal contracts upon
which the City government or residents rely;
○ Support for federal workers who deploy critical expertise in providing valuable
services for the City, and oppose unlawful terminations;
○ Opposition to reversing climate action and environmental justice policies, and
attempts to limit local authority to address climate change;
○ Support protecting sensitive data of the City, our residents, and our businesses,
and ensuring that access to critical information and proprietary information is
consistent with privacy and proprietary rights;
○ Support the safety of Palo Altans by supporting the ability of the FBI and CIA to
respond to security threats and prevent domestic terrorism;
○ Support for science and the need for experts to make decisions on issues of
scientific protocol and funding priorities;
○ Oppose illegal and inhumane immigration enforcement; and
○ Support equity and racial justice and continuing the City’s goal to be a place of
belonging for all.
NOT YET APPROVED
20250210 tlr 7161137
• Communicate with residents about risks to the City and its residents due to
Administration activity inconsistent with the above positions, and about the City’s
response;
• Seek Council approval to bring or join lawsuits or file or join in amicus briefs consistent
with the above positions, our statement of values, and council-approved legislative
guidelines, and refer to the Policy and Services Committee for screening such
opportunities via closed session and returning to Council for consideration of
opportunities that are consistent with this resolution and our legislative guidelines, have
minimal budget impact, and are deemed in the best interests of the City; and
• Support other cities and counties taking similar actions as determined by Council.
SECTION 2. The Council finds that the adoption of this resolution does not meet the
definition of a project under Public Resources Code Section 21065, thus, no environmental
assessment under the California Environmental Quality Act is required.
INTRODUCED AND PASSED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
ATTEST:
__________________________ _____________________________
City Clerk Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED:
__________________________ _____________________________
City Attorney City Manager