The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2026-05-26 City Council EmailsDOCUMENTS IN THIS PACKET INCLUDE: LETTERS FROM CITIZENS TO THE MAYOR OR CITY COUNCIL RESPONSES FROM STAFF TO LETTERS FROM CITIZENS ITEMS FROM MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS ITEMS FROM OTHER COMMITTEES AND AGENCIES ITEMS FROM CITY, COUNTY, STATE, AND REGIONAL AGENCIES Prepared for: 5/26/2026 Document dates: 5/18/26 – 5/26/26 Note: Documents for every category ma y not have been received for packet reproduction in a given week. From:Star Teachout To:Council, City Cc:Star-Lack, Sylvia; John King; ron.chun.esq@gmail.com Subject:2024 Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress Map - intersections Date:Tuesday, May 26, 2026 11:32:17 AM Attachments:Screen Shot 2026-03-09 at 11.35.26 AM.png Screen Shot 2026-03-09 at 11.17.41 AM.png CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear council members, (+ Transportation Planning Manager Star-Lack and neighborhood association presidents King and Chun) Here is Palo Alto’s 2024 Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress Map — Intersections which Mayor Veenker had asked for back in April. This information was gathered prior to the protected bikes lane installation on El Camino Real, so that must be considered as you evaluate the specific safety impacts to cyclists and pedestrians on Matadero, Kendall, and downstream roads between Matadero/Kendall to Arastradero in the context of the upcoming Hexagon Traffic Study for 3606 ECR. - Note: ECR between Matadero and Kendall is rated Level 4, the HIGHEST stress level (red). - Note: Matadero, Laguna, and Amaranta are rated Level 3, the next HIGHEST stress level (dark yellow). These are some of the downstream streets impacted by cut-through traffic from 3606 ECR drivers avoiding ECR traffic. - Note: Neighborhood streets between Matadero, Los Robles, el Camino Real, and Laguna are all rated Level 1, the LOWEST/SAFEST stress level conditions (green). This is exactly our goal, to provide safe streets for cycling, especially for commuting students (to 6 schools) and workers. - Note: Project consultants, Kittelson & Associates, July 2024 Appendix H: 3150 Local Transportation Analysis indicated the most frequent type of bicycle collision that occurred in Palo Alto within the five year study period (latest data from 2018-2022) are broadside collisions, constituting 61% (156 collisions; likely true for auto collisions too). This suggests cars turning across bicycle pathways are the main danger, and this is exactly what is exacerbated by having driveways located on a Level 3 street without bike lanes and on-street parking. [Kendall, being such a short, narrow, winding street, has such low-traffic volume that it was probably not measured, and our goal should be to keep it that way due to its specific form.] I hope this information is helpful to you and our planning department to maximize safety for bicycle commuters and pedestrians on impacted corridors. Best Regards, Star Teachout ============================== My other resources if interested: Caltrans Driveway proximity to ECR: North Bay Regional Branch Chief - Public Affairs Santa Clara County/Public Information Officer (510) 290-5116 Victor.Gauthier@dot.ca.gov • City of Palo Alto & Palo Alto Unified Collaboration for Safe Routes to School Maps: Matadero and Kendall Avenues are Safe Routes to Schools which feed 6 schools—nursery (parents bike with their children), elementary, middle, high schools; public and private. Schools + impacted streets Barron Park Elementary, Barron Park PlaySchool [Matadero, Kendall, La Donna] Briones Elementary [Los Robles, Amaranta, Maybell, Georgia, Donald, Coulombe, Arastradero] Fletcher Middle School, Bowman School [Matadero, La Donna, Los Robles, Amaranta, Maybell, Coulombe, Donald, Arastradero] Gunn High School [Matadero, Los Robles, Maybell, Donald, Georgia, Arastradero, maybe Laguna] • City of Palo Alto Matadero Creek Trail [map] is a recognized, planned Class I bicycle and pedestrian trail located in Santa Clara County, specifically within the City of Palo Alto. Classification for roads impacted by 3606 El Camino Real: Matadero [light pink] Class II bike boulevard Los Robles [blue] Class IIa bike lane Laguna [yellow] Class IIIa bike route Maybell [yellow] Class IIIa bike route Arastradero [blue, dk blue, green] Class IIa bike lane, Class IIb buffered bike lane, and Class I shared use path Roads [to Palo Alto High School] impacted by 156 California Ave [Mollie Stones development] Park [blue Class IIa bike lane] and Park (to Serra) [pink Class II bike boulevard] Stanford Ave [yellow Class IIIa bike route] Cal Ave [yellow Class IIIa bike route, blue Class IIa bike lane] • Santa Clara County Bikeways Map Arastradero/Charleston: Class II Bikeway • VTA Bike Map Somewhere I read the city can regulate developments that impact the functioning of major intersections. State & Federal laws related to driveway placements near signaled intersections: In California, recommended distances between commercial driveways and 4-way signalized intersections generally range from 125 to 300+ feet depending on whether they are in urban or suburban settings and if they allow left turns. Palo Alto: driveways must not interfere with intersection functionality. Palo Alto Safety Action Plan: It is consistent with your plan to minimize cut-through traffic which discourages and endangers pedestrian and bicycling as a mode of transportation - Drop the ECR speed limit to 25 or 30 between Page Mill Road and Arastradero [AB 43 Provides flexibility to local jurisdictions to set and be able to enforce context-sensitive speed limits] - Whenever possible, have commercial residential driveways with 11 or more units located on el Camino or major arterial roads and not on small, residential streets. - SB 743 is intended to get people out of their cars whenever possible, and into alternate modes of transportation. Encouraging driveways on side streets allows drivers to bypass el Camino’s heavier traffic, thus undermining the state’s goals for public transportation and safety. Priorities: 1 Reducing traffic fatalities and serious injuries 2 The City will commit to making design, maintenance, and operations decisions that prioritize safety, and will build off of the outreach completed throughout this Plan 3 The City will commit to support areas zoned for increased density and infill development with transportation facilities and improvements to enable safer multi-modal transportation for present and future road users 6 The City will look for opportunities to institutionalize safety into all aspects of policies, planning, programming, design, implementation, and maintenance, with a focus on those efforts that improve safety at the population scale through change to travel patterns, land use conditions, socioeconomic considerations, and built environment provisions From:Rebecca Sanders To:Council, City; Shikada, Ed; Kurotori, Alan; UAC Subject:Subject Line - PAN Supports Accepting the Amendments to the UWMP Date:Tuesday, May 26, 2026 10:43:21 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Mayor Veenker and Councilmembers: At its May 6, 2026 meeting, the Utilities Advisory Commission recommended adoption of the UWMP as drafted by staff. The Commission also voted, 4-1-1, to forward to Council a companion letter from Commissioner Utsav Gupta proposing seven amendments to the plan. PAN urges Council to incorporate those amendements before the UWMP is transmitted to the Department of Water Resources. The UWMP is the document Palo Alto residents will be governed by for the next five years on water rationing triggers, rate-supported alternative water supply (AWS) commitments, and drought-emergency declarations. Three concerns drive PAN's support for the amendments: 1. A single SFPUC modeling scenario should not be presented to residents as if it were settled fact. The draft UWMP states the City "anticipates the need to implement water use reductions of up to 48% in consecutive dry year scenarios." That 48% figure comes from one SFPUC scenario — the 8.5-year "Design Drought" — that is more severe than anything produced by SFPUC's own Long-Term Vulnerability Assessment (100 years of observed data, 1,100 years of tree-ring reconstructions, and ~25,000 simulated runs). Other large California agencies (Valley Water, East Bay Municipal Utilities District [EBMUD]) plan against historical drought sequences--Valley Water's planning sequence is 1988–1992; EBMUD's dates to 1976–1977—rather than a hypothetical 8.5-year design drought, and would not project mandatory rationing under a comparable five-year sequence. Residents are entitled to that comparison in the plan itself. 2. Cost exposure to ratepayers should be disclosed before, not after, commitments are made. PureWater Peninsula, an AWS project being pursued by the SFPUC, is currently budgeted at $747 million for 6 million gallons per day (mgd) of yield. Palo Alto's potential capital exposure, based on standard BAWSCA cost-share assumptions, is on the order of $35 million — plus operating costs. Four of the six SFPUC regional alternative water supply projects identified in February 2024 have already been affected — three deferred and one canceled. The amendments record this exposure in the UWMP itself and tie any future cost-share commitment to a credible, demonstrated supply gap. 3. The 2021–2023 drought response is a recent, concrete lesson we can learn from. SFPUC declared a Water Shortage Emergency in November 2021 when system storage stood at roughly 4.5 years of supply; storage never fell below ~4 years through the entire 2020–2023 drought, yet Palo Alto's 15% voluntary reduction produced a ~$2.5 million revenue shortfall and a ~10% per-account demand reduction that persisted through FY 2025. The amendments add a factual lookback so that future Water Shortage Contingency Plan activations are made with this experience on the record. Thank you for your kind attention, Sincerely, Becky Sanders Sheri Furman Co-Chairs Palo Alto Neighborhoods From:Long Nguyen To:Council, City; park.commission@paloalto.gov Subject:Opposing the proposal to convert two tennis courts at Mitchell Park into eight additional pickleball courts. Date:Tuesday, May 26, 2026 10:39:36 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear Members of the Palo Alto City Council, My name is Long Nguyen, a Palo Alto resident. I am writing to strongly oppose the proposal to convert two tennis courts at Mitchell Park into eight additional pickleball courts. I want to make clear that I support both tennis and pickleball. In fact, I play both sports, and my sons do as well. This is not an anti-pickleball position. Rather, it is a concern about the scale and location of further expansion at Mitchell Park and its growing impact on the surrounding community. If approved, the number of pickleball courts at Mitchell Park would increase from approximately 15 courts to 23 courts. The City must carefully consider the broader impact this would have on Palo Alto residents, nearby schools, children, traffic, parking, noise, security, and overall community quality of life. Mitchell Park already attracts a very large number of pickleball players, including many non-Palo Alto residents from neighboring cities. The current court capacity in Palo Alto is already significantly higher relative to population compared with nearby cities: Palo Alto: 15 pickleball courts, population about 67,000 Mountain View: 9 pickleball courts, population about 82,000 Santa Clara: 16 pickleball courts, population about 130,000 Palo Alto therefore already provides a disproportionately high number of pickleball courts relative to its population. Expanding Mitchell Park further will likely continue attracting increasing numbers of players from outside the city, while Palo Alto residents This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first email to your company. Mark Safe Report bear the resulting impacts on local infrastructure and neighborhood quality of life. At the same time, neighboring cities may have less incentive to invest in developing additional pickleball facilities for their own residents if Palo Alto continues expanding regional capacity on their behalf. The impacts on the surrounding community are already noticeable today. Mitchell Park is not an isolated sports complex. It is directly adjacent to important community facilities, including: Fairmeadow Elementary School Herbert Hoover Elementary School Challenger School JLS Middle School Mitchell Park Library Magical Bridge Playground This area is heavily used by children and families every day. I personally experience these impacts as a parent. Two of my children attend Hoover Elementary School. I regularly bring them to Mitchell Park, the playground, and the library. Unfortunately, parking has already become very difficult, and the constant pickleball noise significantly affects the environment around the park. Pickleball produces repetitive high-pitched impact noise that carries over long distances and can continue for many hours throughout the day. Expanding from two tennis courts to eight pickleball courts would dramatically increase the intensity and duration of this noise near schools, playgrounds, and library spaces intended for children and families. Children need a healthy, safe, and peaceful environment to learn, read, play, and develop. The City should prioritize the long-term interests of families and students over expanding a recreational activity that already has substantial existing capacity at Mitchell Park. Again, I am not opposed to pickleball itself. However, adding more pickleball courts at Mitchell Park is not the right solution or the right location. Instead, the City should consider developing additional pickleball facilities at alternative locations that are more appropriate and less disruptive to schools, libraries, playgrounds, and surrounding residential neighborhoods. I respectfully ask the City Council to reject this proposal and preserve the existing tennis courts at Mitchell Park. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Long Nguyen From:Friends of the Palo Alto Junior Museum & Zoo To:Council, City Subject:Step Inside the Rainbow Tunnel Date:Tuesday, May 26, 2026 8:07:21 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious ofopening attachments and clicking on links. Step Inside the Rainbow Tunnel May 26, 2026 Dear Friends, This month, we’re excited to announce a brand new exhibit at the JMZ! The Rainbow Tunnel, unveiled in April 2026, is an interactive space designed to inspire curiosity through light, sound, and color while creating new opportunities for hands- on learning for visitors of all ages. This new exhibit was fully funded by the Friends, and the design and construction reflects our commitment to creating accessible, engaging science experiences for the entire community. We are also thrilled to introduce the Friends’ new Sponsor an Animal program, which offers the opportunity to celebrate your favorite furry, feathered, or scaly JMZ resident. Sponsorships will support the JMZ’s Animal Care Fund and help ensure exceptional care for more than 50 animal species at the JMZ through nutritious diets, habitat maintenance, veterinary support, enrichment and other specialized care that animals need to thrive. To recognize your commitment, you’ll receive exclusive benefits including JMZ stickers, a magnet, and a personalized birthday card. We invite you to learn more about the animals and their unique needs and become a sponsor today. Summer is just around the corner, and I hope you'll come visit and see what's new at the JMZ! Warmly, Lauren Angelo President, Friends of the Palo Alto Junior Museum & Zoo Come Experience the Rainbow Tunnel Watch a video of Board Member Brittany Brown-Chavez introducing the Rainbow Tunnel. If you’ve visited the JMZ recently, you may have come across the Rainbow Tunnel, a colorful new exhibit designed to spark curiosity and invite visitors to engage with the science of color, light, and sound. Inside the tunnel, mirrored panels reflect the visible spectrum of the rainbow while demonstrating scientific concepts like reflection and refraction. Its unique design — narrow at the entrance and gradually widening toward the exit — encourages visitors to experience sound, perspective, and spatial perception in new and wonderful ways. Your colorful view as you enter the Rainbow Tunnel. JMZ Exhibits Director Brian Weinstein explains, “The initial concept for the Rainbow Tunnel was to design and construct an exhibit within the existing tunnel to immerse visitors in the full spectrum of visible colors. As visitors move through the space, the colors mix visually, creating a vivid kaleidoscopic effect of swirling, blending hues. The tunnel amplifies sound, while colored mirrors scatter reflections in multiple directions. In this environment, sound, color, and light interact to create a complex, immersive experience.” Signage that explains the scientific concepts behind the Rainbow Tunnel. Visitors have already begun interacting with the space by experimenting with echoes, observing shifting reflections, and exploring how light and color change from different viewpoints. JMZ Educator Kat Cook shares, “I have noticed the space is transformed in many ways. People don’t simply pass through to get elsewhere. The vibrant colors and reflections really make visitors of all ages stop and look. A reminder to slow down and notice the colors around us.” Children are excited to explore and interact with the new exhibit. The Rainbow Tunnel also serves as a dynamic teaching tool for JMZ educators. Kat notes, “I like to think that the Rainbow Tunnel is a touchpoint to get kids curious by altering light, color, and sound. Making room for wonder and playfulness is sometimes overlooked as a tool for learning, so creating a place to just explore, especially with physical phenomena that we may take for granted, is valuable.” By transforming an existing passageway into an engaging learning environment, the Rainbow Tunnel demonstrates how science can be woven into everyday experiences in creative and accessible ways. The design and construction of the Rainbow Tunnel were made possible through the generosity of Friends supporters, advancing our mission of making hands-on science education accessible to all. As an admission-free exhibit, the entire community is invited to come experience the Rainbow Tunnel and learn about the science behind it. We invite you to visit the Rainbow Tunnel on your next trip to the JMZ! DONATE TODAY Friends of the Palo Alto Junior Museum & Zoo | 1451 Middlefield Road | Palo Alto, CA 94301 US Unsubscribe | Update Profile | Constant Contact Data Notice From:Jack Farrell To:Council, City; Clerk, City Subject:Public Comment: 6/1/26 Council, Item 17 Date:Tuesday, May 26, 2026 5:30:43 AM Attachments:Palo Alto SB 79 Urgency Ordinance.pdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Good morning, Please find attached YIMBY Law's letter of comment for Item 17 of Palo Alto's June 1st City Council meeting. Sincerely, Jack Farrell he/him Research Attorney 267-218-1147 Check out everything we achieved in 2025! YIMBY Law 2261 Market Street STE 10416 San Francisco, CA 94114 hello@yimbylaw.org 5/26/2026 Palo Alto City Council 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 Re: SB 79 Compliance, Agenda Item 17 To the City Council of Palo Alto, YIMBY L aw is a 501(c)3 non-proﬁt corporation, whose mission is to increase the accessibility and affordability of housing in California. YIMBY Law sues municipalities when they fail to comply with state housing laws, including the Housing Element L aw. Should the City fail to follow the law, YIMBY Law is prepared to ﬁle suit to ensure that the law is enforced. Under the false pretense of an “emergency”, this Council is contemplating illegal urgency ordinances that would immediately susp end SB 79’s transit-oriented development standards from going into effect in Palo Alto. This “emergency” is nothing more than SB 79 going into effect on July 1 and is self-made, as the Council has continued consideration of the items twice this year without any opportunity for public comment. Now that time has run out, the staff are recommending urgency ordinances that are clearly out of compliance with state and even the City’s own law. The City Council should reject the staff ’s recommendation to adopt the urgency ordinances and instead follow the law and use the normal legislative process to consider the ordinances. This will give Palo Alto’s residents the appropriate time to consider and comment on these ordinances, including whether blanket suspension of SB 79 makes sense for the City, as it works towards meeting its state-mandated housing production goals. An urgency ordinances is only allowable where it: contains legislative ﬁndings that there is a current and immediate threat to the public health, safety, or welfare, and that the approval of additional subdivisions, use p ermits, variances, building permits, or any other applicable entitlement for use which is required in order to comply with a zoning ordinance would result in that threat to public health, safety, or welfare. In addition, any interim ordinance adopted pursuant to this section that has the effect of denying approvals needed for the development of projects with a signiﬁcant component of multifamily housing may not be extended except upon written ﬁndings adopted by the legislative body, supported by substantial evidence on the record… CA Gov Code § 65858(c), emphasis added. The urgency ﬁndings contained in the draft ordinances are so sparse and without evidence as to be utterly meaningless. The threat is unnamed, uncertain, and inappropriate to justify obstruction of a state housing law addressing the statewide housing crisis. Stating vaguely that projects that might endanger historic resources or “result in increased demands on public infrastructure” poses no certain threat to public safety. The “threat” cannot be certain or immediate when you don’t know what the threat is, can identify no local regulations that it violates, and will last for an uncertain period. PMC 2.04.270, the only referenced section of local regulation, also calls for speciﬁc explanations of the threat to “the public peace, health or safety.” The draft ordinances identify no speciﬁc threat to the public peace, health, or safety for a reason: there is none. It’s pure speculation to say that historic resources will be impacted at all. Sp eculating that a project might use SB 79 does not present an immediate threat sufﬁcient to authorize an emergency ordinance, according to state law and Palo Alto’s own regulations. Notably if there were actually projects in process, the law grants stricter protections against denying them. Because the draft urgency ordinances would pre-emptively deny all such projects within the affected areas, the protections are likely triggered automatically. California Courts have already weighed against this kind of blatant obstruction. The ﬁndings for urgency ordinances, especially where they would preclude multifamily housing, must cite “speciﬁc signiﬁcant, quantiﬁable, direct, and unavoidable impact upon the public health or safety that would result from continued development approvals, and objective, written public health or safety standards, policies, or conditions on which that impact is based”. Hoffman St., LLC v. City of W. Hollywood, 179 Cal. App. 4th 754, 771 (2009) (internal citations omitted). Speciﬁcally for the Hoffman case, a blatant ﬁnding that affordable housing created a current and immediate threat was rightly dismissed as insufﬁcient justiﬁcation for an urgency ordinance. The prospect of slightly less wealthy people b eing able to afford living in Palo Alto is not the threat you think it is. At least not as far as the law is concerned. SB 79’s passage followed a string of reforms at the state level to address a systemic, ongoing shortage of housing across the state. YIMBY Law has sued to enforce many of those reforms, and remains very well prepared to continue that work. Any section of the alternatives before you which institute urgency ordinances without substantial evidence to the immediacy they sp eak to must be discarded. We urge you to follow the law and adopt an alternative plan or allow SB 79 to come into effect as intended, within the City. Sincerely, Sonja Trauss Executive Director YIMBY L aw From:Peter Giles To:ParkRec Commission; Council, City Subject:Oppose converting more Mitchell Park Tennis Courts to Pickleball Courts Date:Monday, May 25, 2026 9:52:25 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. To council and commission members, I strongly object to the proposal to convert Mitchell Park Tennis Courts 3 & 4 to eight pickleball courts. Currently there is a sustainable balance that well serves the community of tennis and pickleball players at Mitchell Park. Converting an additional two tennis courts to eight pickleball courts will severely impact tennis opportunities, especially on weekends and unfairly disrupt that balance. Respectfully yours, Peter Giles 786 E. Meadow Dr From:Emily Renzel To:Council, City Subject:letter to Parks & Recreation Commission Date:Monday, May 25, 2026 9:10:51 PM Attachments:Letter to PRC.docx CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. I could not find an email address for the Parks and Recreation Commission. Could you please forward this comment letter to them for their meeting tomorrow night? Please copy me. Thank you. Emily Renzel Nellis Freeman, Chair May 26, 2026 Parks & Recreation Commission City of Palo Alto Dear Chair Freeman and Members of the Commission: I understand that you will be reviewing the Flood Basin Tide Gate issues as they relate to the proposed future Santa Clara Valley Water District Levee changes. Pages 77 to 83 of The March 1975 DRAFT EIR for the Palo Alto Refuse Disposal Area which was used to apply retroactively for a permit from the Army Corps of Engineers to fill wetlands for the landfill, discusses landfill mitigation. The mitigation was to re-introduce salt marsh into the Flood Basin. There was extensive discussion of the importance of periods of inundation in the encouragement of salt marsh. The timing of saltwater entering the Flood Basin can be very critical because the volume of water relates to tidal fluctuation out in the Bay. Nesting bird populations can be decimated if water rises too high. Ultimately the City mitigated the loss of 65 acres of wetlands by installing the automated gate which was designed to control those variable factors. The current City Practice does not meet the standards adopted in 1976. The 2008 Baylands Master Plan (pages 130 and 131) discusses the Flood Basin. It says, “In response to mitigation requirements of the 1976 permit to continue operations and expand the footprint of the landfill, the City engaged Water Resources Engineers to study restoring the marsh environment in the Flood Basin. The study, Mathematical Model of the Palo Alto Flood Basin noted that the Flood Basin had been cut off from tidal circulation when the original tide gates were built in 1956.” “Therefore, in 1977, the tide gate was modified to include a two-way gate that allows Bay water into the Basin under controlled conditions. (emphasis mine) In an ongoing effort to maintain the marsh environment, the tide gate was improved in 1993 and again in 2002. The most recent improvement included the addition of a hole through which fish can leave the Basin if conditions are not favorable.” “Today, the Palo Alto Park Ranger controls the tide gate with three primary objectives: 1. Flood Control which requires adequate space for rain flow down Adobe, Matadero, and Barron Creeks . 2. Vector Management which requires the water level to stay below a specified height (to prevent ponding and breeding habitat for mosquitoes). 3. Habitat Management which requires a daily flush of tidal water to bring in necessary nutrients and aquatic life.” There is no mention of the original mitigation of replacing the illegally filled wetlands that was the genesis of this project. The Refuse Fund charged residents $100,000/acre/year rent for FIFTY YEARS (!!!!!) beyond the original landfill closure date for the 126-acre landfill. Surely the Refuse Fund can find the funds to properly repair the one required automated tidegate to protect the salt marsh in the Flood Basin. Thank you for doing what you can to protect this important habitat. Emily Renzel Planning Commissioner 1973-1979 Councilmember 1979-91 From:Curtis Gleason To:Council, City Subject:Mitchell Park Tennis Courts Date:Monday, May 25, 2026 4:21:51 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i To whom it my concern, I play tennis (with 3 or 4 others from the neighborhood)) at Mitchell Park every Saturday morning. We arrive by 7:30 and Courts 3 and 4 are already occupied. Fortunately, we have been able to get on Court 1, sometimes Court 2 is occupied. But at 8:00 an instructor (authorized) takes Court 2 and at 9:00 another instructor (authorized) takes Court 1. Thus, only Courts 3 and 4 are available for the general public. It would be most cruel to take Courts 3 and 4 away from the tennis players. The Cubberley tennis Courts are not an option for displaced Mitchell Saturday morning tennis players. The Palo Alto Tennis Club uses Courts 1, 2, and 3 starting at 9:00. Many of those players start coming to warm up at 8:30. Courts 4, 5, and 6 are usually occupied, one or two of them by instructors of questionable authenticity. Ergo, Mitchell Courts 1, 2, 3, and 4 must be kept for tennis (at least for Saturday mornings). Is not there some land available East of Bayshore that can be used for a pickleball facility where the noise would not be a problem? They could also build an indoor facility to contain the noise (so any wild life is not disturbed) and be weather independent. By having their own facility, Mitchell Park pickleball Courts near the Magical Bridge playground could be returned to tennis Courts and the playground users could again enjoy peace and quiet (well quiet except for the noise of laughter that happy children generate). PLEASE, leave Mitchell Park Courts 3 and 4 for tennis (Courts 1 and 2 also). Thank you. Respectfully yours, Curtis Gleason 721 Charleston Ct. This message needs your attention This is their first email to you. Mark Safe Report From:Erich Sonnberger To:Council, City Subject:Oppose Conversion of Mitchell Park Tennis Courts 3 & 4 to Pickleball Courts Date:Monday, May 25, 2026 3:39:06 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Members of the Parks & Recreation Commission and City Council, I am writing to strongly oppose the Palo Alto Pickleball Club's proposal to convert Mitchell Park Tennis Courts 3 & 4 into eight pickleball courts. This conversion would leave Mitchell Park with only two tennis courts for community play and programs, making it significantly harder for families, students, and recreational players to access court time. It would also increase pressure on Rinconada Park and other facilities as displaced players seek alternatives. I understand the desire to expand pickleball in our community, and I support finding solutions that serve all residents. However, eliminating half of Mitchell Park's tennis courts is not the answer. I urge the Commission to explore alternative locations that do not come at the expense of existing tennis infrastructure. I ask that you vote against this proposal and work collaboratively with both tennis and pickleball communities to find a solution that supports all park users. Thank you for your time and service to our community. Sincerely, Erich Sonnberger erich66@gmail.com Erich Sonnberger Intero Real Estate Services A Berkshire Hathaway Affiliate Realtor/Makler Immobilienverkäufe 650-505-9802 DRE#01435799 Don't wait to buy real estate, buy real estate then wait :) Reminder: email is not secure or confidential. Intero Real Estate Services will never request that you send funds or nonpublic personal information, such as credit card or debit card numbers or bank account and/or routing numbers, by email. If you receive an email message concerning any transaction involving Intero Real Estate Services and the email requests that you send funds or provide nonpublic personal information, do not respond to the email and immediately contact Intero Real Estate Services To notify Intero Real Estate Services of suspected email fraud, contact: Intero Client Services at 866 334 7356 and/or clientservices@interorealestate.com. From:Bryan Martin To:Council, City Subject:We could really use some help Date:Sunday, May 24, 2026 11:49:50 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear Members of the Palo Alto City Council, My name is Bryan Martin, and I am a resident of 33 Encina Ave in Palo Alto. I have reached out to all the resources that have been recommended to me including most local tenant attorneys, Bay Area legal aid, and Palo Alto mediation, project sentinel and others. I am aware this may be a personal struggle but I am hoping to reach anyone that can help to better the situation my family has been struggling with. I am writing to respectfully request urgent attention regarding the serious habitability conditions affecting this property and the immediate impact these conditions are having on my household, particularly my fiancée, who is currently eight months pregnant. The City of Palo Alto has already issued a Notice of Violation regarding dangerous and substandard conditions affecting occupied units at this property, including mold, water intrusion, sanitation concerns, and building-wide infestation issues. The City’s findings confirmed that tenants did not cause these conditions and referenced relocation protections and benefits for affected residents under California law. Despite these findings, my household continues living under unsafe and unstable conditions while uncertainty remains regarding relocation assistance and temporary housing. We have endured these conditions for This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first email to your company. Mark Safe Report years, including a persistent German cockroach infestation and mold concerns inside our unit. Management is fully aware of these issues and also aware of my fiancée’s pregnancy. At this point, our primary concern is the health and safety of our unborn child and securing safe temporary housing before childbirth occurs. Regardless of any ongoing appeal process concerning relocation determinations, the underlying facts remain unchanged: the City found these violations to exist, determined the conditions affect occupied units, and acknowledged that tenants may be entitled to relocation protections. I have also spent more than three years waiting on an approved reasonable accommodation request for a larger unit due to my household’s circumstances. Despite that approval, no meaningful housing solution has been provided. At the same time, I have encountered additional barriers involving my housing voucher and efforts to obtain a Housing Choice Voucher transfer that would allow my family greater flexibility in locating safe housing. The current situation has become extremely stressful and destabilizing during an already critical time for my family. Continued exposure to mold, infestation conditions, remediation uncertainty, and prolonged housing instability are not appropriate conditions for a late-stage pregnancy or a newborn child. I understand that City staff and code enforcement are actively involved, and I appreciate the work already done to investigate these conditions. However, I respectfully ask the City Council to review this situation and help ensure that affected residents — especially vulnerable households — are not left living in unsafe conditions while administrative processes continue. The language in the notice of violation is very clear about the property owners responsibility to pay relocation benefits to tenants of the affected units. There are others going thru a similar struggle at the opportunity center but considering my fiance is 8 months pregnant and we are crammed into a 150 sq ft studio infested with roaches, I believe my unique situation demands any possible assistance or atleast some attention. I have gotten cellulitis twice since living here. My fiance contracted ecoli once last year. We are both experiencing respiratory difficulties that appear to be getting worse. The list goes on and on, and the mold and roaches are very likely to be responsible for all kinds of health issues. I don’t want to wait until more damage happens. Presence of mold and roaches negatively affect the health of an unborn baby and any help to have my voucher transferred to a house choice voucher and also obtain the relocation benefits the city of Palo Alto determined we are entitled to are my main goals At this time, my family urgently needs a safe temporary relocation solution while remediation and housing issues are addressed. Thank you for your time, attention, and service to the community. Respectfully, Bryan Martin Unit #212 33 Encina Ave Palo Alto, CA 94301 650-509-0775 Sent from my iPhone From:Leny Tan To:ParkRec Commission; Council, City; papc.secretary@gmail.com Subject:A Fairmeadow Resident"s Concern: Pickleball Noise at Mitchell Park Date:Sunday, May 24, 2026 7:59:26 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear Members of the Parks & Recreation Commission and City Council, My name is Leny Tan. My husband, Stephen and I have 2 kids go to JLS and Gunn. We live on Fair Meadow Circle in the Fairmeadow neighborhood. I am writing to object to the proposal to convert Mitchell Park Tennis Courts 3 and 4 into eight pickleball courts. I'll be honest — I don't live right next to the park. But on a typical afternoon and evening, I can already hear sounds drifting from Mitchell Park into my home. That alone tells you something about how close we are. Fairmeadow is just one street crossing away. Sound travels. Now picture eight pickleball courts running at full capacity. Pickleball noise is not just louder — it is a fundamentally different kind of noise. The sharp, repetitive popping sound hits at a frequency of around 1,000 Hz, which happens to be the pitch the human brain is most alert to. It is not background noise you can tune out. Research from acoustic professionals describes it as similar to a dripping faucet — the kind of sound that keeps pulling your attention back no matter what you are doing. The numbers back this up: - 4x louder than tennis in perceived volume - Up to 30,000 pops per day from just four courts — double that for eight - Studies confirm people do not habituate to it; it tends to get more annoying over time, not less I am not against pickleball. But placing eight courts in a park bordered by a quiet residential neighborhood — where residents can already hear today's activity — is simply the wrong location for this expansion. I respectfully ask that you reject this proposal and commit to finding a site that does not come at the expense of the people who live nearby. Thank you for your time. This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. Mark Safe Report Stephen Cia and Leny Tan 93 Roosevelt Cir, Palo Alto, CA 94306 From:Leny Tan To:ParkRec Commission; Council, City; papc.secretary@gmail.com Subject:Oppose Conversion of Mitchell Park Tennis Courts 3 & 4 Date:Sunday, May 24, 2026 7:26:14 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear Members of the Parks & Recreation Commission and City Council, I am writing to oppose the Palo Alto Pickleball Club's proposal to convert Mitchell Park Tennis Courts 3 and 4 into pickleball courts. Mitchell Park currently serves a large number of tennis players — families, students, and community members who depend on these courts. Converting two of the four courts would leave only two tennis courts for community use, creating serious access issues and pushing overflow to already-strained facilities like Rinconada Park. I am not opposed to expanding pickleball in Palo Alto. However, doing so at the direct expense of existing tennis infrastructure is the wrong approach. There are other locations in the city that should be evaluated before reducing tennis access at Mitchell Park. I urge you to reject this proposal and instead explore alternative sites that can accommodate both communities without taking away from what already exists. Thank you for your time and consideration. Regards, Leny Tan 93 Roosevelt Cir, Palo Alto, CA 94306 This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first mail to some recipients. Mark Safe Report From:Diane Wang To:ParkRec Commission; Council, City Subject:Support New Pickle Ball Court Date:Sunday, May 24, 2026 5:26:50 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i To whom it may concern, I strongly support the project (converting tennis court into pickle ball courts) because more and more local residents involved in playing pickle balls than tennis ball which does not fit majority needs. Pickle ball has both official USA and world governing bodies.I'm very glad that Palo Alto Michell Park become pioneer pickle ball courts in Bay Area to meet the increase trend of local residents popular activities. Promote local people health in all kinds of ages. That's awesome! Please ignore one opposer who is against Mountain View pickle ball players to go to Michell Park, but this opposer often goes to Mountain View Senior Center for her activities. There is no cutoff line among surrounding cities. Also, pickle ball will not create any significant noises for library or closer residents. Noises need official measurement, not by the opposer rambling on. Sincerely, Diane D. Wang Cell: 650-796-2838 This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first email to your company. Mark Safe Report From:Stuart Bernstein To:Council, City Subject:City employee makes over $500,000 — 2025 payroll totals are out, salaries listed here – Palo Alto Daily Post Date:Sunday, May 24, 2026 3:42:55 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. To: City Council Members I very much appreciate Palo Alto and understand the high cost of living in the region, but I am interested in how closely these compensation levels are evaluated over time. At first glance, some of the compensation figures appear elevated relative to comparable private-sector roles, particularly for positions that do not require highly specialized skills. At the same time, overtime appears to represent a significant incremental driver of total compensation, which raises questions about whether the underlying staffing and scheduling model is efficient or structurally dependent on premium pay. I am also interested in how the longer-term obligations associated with pensions and benefits factor into current decision-making. While annual payroll levels are one consideration, the more consequential issue may be the compounding effect of pensionable earnings and benefit commitments over time, and how that ultimately affects the city’s ability to sustain existing service levels. I would be interested in any analysis or context you may have on how these dynamics are being assessed and managed within the city’s budgeting process. Best regards, Stuart https://padailypost.com/2026/05/23/40600/ From:Marc Anker To:Council, City Subject:I support the construction of additional Pickleball courts Date:Sunday, May 24, 2026 3:31:48 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear members of the Palo Alto Parks & Rec Commission and City Council: I live in Palo Alto, and am writing in support of creating eight additional pickleball courts at Mitchell Park.I have been playing Pickleball at Mitchell Park for 8 years and appreciate the improvements that the City of Palo Alto has made in the past to accommodate the growth and needs of those of us who love and play Pickleball at the park. It is now apparent that more courts are needed for the growing demand. I hope the City of Palo Alto will recognize the present need for the additional courts and act accordingly. Thank you for your attention to this, Marc Anker Sent from my iPhone This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. Mark Safe Report From:Robert Marinaro To:Council, City; Veenker, Vicki; Stone, Greer; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Lauing, Ed; Reckdahl, Keith; Burt, Patrick; Lu, George; City Mgr Cc:Bulatao, Eric; Roger Smith; Peter Xu; Loren Brown; Dana Dahlstrom; Ceci Kettendorf; Chris Berg; Taly Katz; Barry Katz; Nancy Ellickson; John Schafer; Jeanette Baldwin; Alina Martinez; Micah Murphy; Danielle Dunne; David Famero; Carly Lake; Sandy Freschi; T Bullman; Dave Stellman; Dave Stellman; Steve Wong; Marguerite Poyatos; Manu Kumar; Lydia Kou; Patrick Kelly; Osbaldo Romero; Xenia Czisch; Bill McLane; Ramon Moreno; L Wong; Cathi Lerch; Maor Greenberg; Moffatt, Pete; Jacob Hakmo; David Perez; Nancy Powers; Dan McKinley; John Lerch; Stacey Tomson; CMEI Wong; DMA Wong; Jin Wong; Maggie Madlangbayan; K Norris; Elidia Tafoya; Scott Hayes; Victor Sloan; woodgood@pacbell.net; Kandace Kopensky; Moiz Sonasath; Peter Longanecker; Karsyn Smith Development; Raphael Zahnd; Riley Cooke; Pigman, Sophie; Baird, Nathan; Palo Alto Daily Post; Gennady Sheyner; Louis Hsiao; Jo Ann Mandinach; Ann Lafargue Balin; Annette Ross; Mary Gallagher; Maury Green; Terry Holzemer; Joseph Hirsch; Ben Lerner; Greg Schmid (external); Suzanne Keehn; William Ross; Ron Chun; Rita Vrhel; Arthur Keller; Jeff Levinsky; Becky Sanders; Douglas Moran; Chip Wytmar; Sharon Elliot; McDonough, Melissa; Janet Hartley; Charlie Weidanz; Kevin Mayer; Boris Folsch; Margaret Abe-Koga; Ian Halker; Richard Willits; Heather Brownlee; Ken Brownlee; Robin Holbrook; Cassandra Paige; Brad Watson; Alisa Pendicini; Ron Ellickson; Gaines, Chantal; Titan (Zhengtian) Gu; Stephanie Wansek; Penny Brennan; Taryn Sanford; Maia Harris; Sayuri Kabutogi; Bernadette Zimmerman; Doreen Chew; Kshama Jirage; Jenni Simon; Subadhra Arunasalam; Robert Russell; Doug Bacon; Chuan Wang; Shchopra; Al Dorsky; Phil Wettersten; Ann Wettersten; Todd Jin; Emily Emily; Daryl Savage; Anil Rachakonda; Linda Vanderhule; Adriana Hernandez; Stuart Kreitman; Charleston Village HOA; Alex Smelik; fred@bockmann.com; geoff.wong@usa.net; Jsydow@comcast.net; Deborah j Marinaro Subject:Palo Alto"s Ongoing OSV Situation - - Bob"s OSV Count (5/22/26) Date:Saturday, May 23, 2026 8:51:50 PM Attachments:Impacts to the Community_23May26.docx RV Inventory_22May26.xlsx CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Palo Alto City Council, City Employees, and Concerned Residents and Businesses, Hope you all are enjoying your Memorial Day Holiday especially those in northern Palo Alto that do not have to deal with the 138 OSVs that currently adorn our streets. Please find attached my latest OSV count along with an updated list of OSV impacts to the community. As I mentioned in my earlier e-mail from several weeks ago the numbers of OSVs bottomed out at the end of March and now the numbers are gradually increasing. The City has made incremental changes such as banning Vanlords and detached traitors, but has not taken the needed bold actions to remove these vehicles from our streets. In my quest to talk with concerned residents and businesses I hear the stories and encourage each and every one of them to send their comments to the City Council. We all provide our input but we are not hearing any substantive short-term actions to remedy the situation. The HomeKey facility will soon be open with its 88 units, but it sounds like many of those units will be filled by families and individuals that are temporarily housed at a motel in Sunnyvale. It seems like faulty logic that the individuals in these OSVs will need to housed by government-funded interim housing before they can be removed from our streets. And what about the many of them who have no interest in interim housing and just like the independence of their home on wheels with no rent, no utility payments, and no consequences. As time marches on I have seen many of these OSV dwellers become more emboldened and brazen and it needs to be stopped before this situation really gets out of hand! And what about these OSVs that are starting to infiltrate our south Palo Alto neighborhoods? And what about these OSVs that park in front of south Palo Alto condominium developments (Charleston Village, Acacia Condominiums, and Echelon Townhomes) taking up parking, leaving garbage in the streets, running their noisy generators until all hours, and generally infringing on the sensibilities of all of us! So what are the next steps? What happened to the “Next Steps” that used to be on the Council’s calendar? We are tired of this politically-correct soft-heartded approach. We need bold leadership and we need it now not in 2027, 2028, 2029! Kicking the can down the road is not going to cut it! Regards, Bob Marinaro Guy living in his box truck on E. Meadow Circle Welcome to E. Meadow Circle - - Where 40 OSVs reside! Fabian Way - - Where 15 OSVs currently reside (both segments from E. Meadow Drive to San Antonio Rd.) Fabian Way in front of the Charleston Village Condos much to the dismay of residents and Home Owners Association Fabian Way in front of the Charleston Village Condos much to the dismay of residents and Home Owners Association Lower San Antonio Rd. (between Charleston & Transport St.) Lower San Antonio Rd. (between Charleston & Transport St.) - - Detached trailers no longer allowed Lower San Antonio Rd. (between Charleston & Transport St.) - - Currently 7 OSVs on this street segment Transport St. - - Bad Actor #3 (how can this be street legal) still allowed on our streets much to the chagrin of area businesses Elwell Court - - OSVs adorning City offices Faber Place (off of E. Embarcadero Rd.) - - Currently 18 OSVs on the short road If only it was enforced!!! Do as I do (or not do) - not what I say! Colorado Ave. adjacent to Greer Park - - Come watch a soccer game and watch RV dwellers working on their rigs! And what about those slide-outs? Ames Ave (at the corner of Ross Rd) - - This is the newest addition to our neighborhood! Mitchell Park - - Please, please get these vehicles out of our parks! Orinda St. - - A new fixture in the heart of the Ventura Neighborhood! Matadero Ave. - - Another OSV that has neighbors clamoring for removal! Palo Alto On Street OSV Count Street Segment OSVs OSVs OSVs OSVs OSVs OSVs OSVs OSVs OSVs OSVs OSVs OSVs OSVs OSVs OSVs #########################12/3/2025 ################1/28/2026 ############################4/9/2026 #######5/8/2026 ####### & 10/22/25 & 11/11 & 11/20 & 12/21 & 1/29 & 4/11 1 2 3 4 1 2 1 2 2 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 14 15 16 17 3 4 2 2 4 1 2 2 2 2 18 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 19 1 200 188 197 195 180 170 165 168 138 136 119 120 120 123 123 20 21 22 (2 segments)Between Oregon Expressway & Portage Ave.1 2 0 0 2 1 3 2 1 3 3 2 3 3 3 23 24 25 26 27 28 3 2 4 4 4 5 4 5 29 1 0 0 0 20 20 20 20 19 11 13 12 11 15 12 12 13 13 15 Total:220 208 217 215 199 181 178 180 149 151 131 132 133 136 138 Palo Alto City Council: City.Council@PaloAlto.gov Bob Marinaro: E:Mail: rmarinaro@mac.com, Cell: 650-269-5936 Abandon Vehicle Hotline: 650-329-2258 Ventura Area RV Inventory_22May26 5/26/2026 12:27 PM OSV IMPACTS TO THE COMMUNITY 5/23/26 6:46 PM • Steal water • Steal electricity • Dump trash in street • Dump trash is business dumpsters including large items (mattresses, etc.) • Dump waste in sewers and in bushes • Obstructing egress to the point of several reported accidents (on E. Meadow Circle) • Preventing deliveries to back loading docks • General safety concerns especially for women • Blocking traﬃc such as when vans double park for waste removal • Take up needed parking spaces for businesses and other facilities – they also reserve parking spaces adjacent to their OSVs using chairs, cones, etc. • Intimidate business/institution customers & students • Noticeable increase in crime in OSV dense neighborhoods • Liability issues associated with children playing on private property adjacent to OSVs • OSV slide-outs blocking bike lanes and impeding traﬃc ﬂow • Inhibits business owners and property managers from leasing vacant properties • Decreases property values which in turn decreases property taxes and revenue to the city • Discourages property development • General blight and reduction of quality of life for tax-paying residents and businesses • Services such as food trucks that once came by for lunch no longer stop by (E. Meadow Circle) • Financial - - Additional costs incurred by businesses: o Additional utility costs o Installation of locks on dumpsters o Installation of cameras and security monitoring systems o Installation of barriers (bollards with chains across driveways, gates, etc.) o Installation of audio systems to inconvenience OSV dwellers (Faber Place) o Additional trash pickup costs and additional burden to business owners who have to properly sort out trash from recycled materials File: Impacts to the Community_23May26.docx From:Pamela Mayerfeld To:ParkRec Commission; Council, City; PlayingFields; Howard, Adam Subject:Please, don"t replace tennis courts at Mitchell Park with Pickleball courts Date:Saturday, May 23, 2026 3:23:51 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear City Council & Parks & Rec, Please do not replace any more tennis courts at Mitchell Park with pickleball courts. I am an avid tennis player, playing ~6 times a week since I am now retired. However, I never play at Mitchell as it is already too congested & noisy. I often go to Ada's and the library and the parking is insane, mostly due to the pickleball players who traveled to come play at Mitchell Park. I can't imagine how horrible the environment would be at the park, library & Ada's if additional courts were placed there. Families enjoy Mitchell Park & the pickleball noise is presently somewhat muffled as most of the courts are slightly removed from the grassy area, this separation would not be the case if more courts were added at the Northern end of the park. Note that this is not the case near the Magical Bridge playground -- it is very loud there! I appreciate that Pickleball is a growing sport, but tennis is also. The loss of all the school courts was a severe blow, please don't take more tennis courts away from the Palo Alto community. And PLEASE don't make Mitchell Park even noisier and more crowded than it already is. (Requiring USTA teams to have 25% PA residents to reserve PA courts was a huge help in having courts open for drop-in play as well as reservations by legitimate PA teams. Thank you for that change.) Thank you, Pam Mayerfeld From:Steve Pierce To:Council, City Cc:Lait, Jonathan; Krishnan, Vishnu Subject:SB 79 Emergency Ordinance Date:Saturday, May 23, 2026 2:36:11 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. ! Dear Members of the Council, Currently under consideration is an emergency ordinance that would exclude “ALL sites containing historic resources” from SB 79 development. (a) However, SB 79 limits the exclusion of historic resources to "10% of the eligible area of any transit oriented development zone”(b), and in downtown the area comprised of historic properties greatly exceeds this amount at 22.5%.(c) Ultimately, the historic properties excluded from SB 79 in the downtown area will need to be reduced to conform to the 10% provision. The historic sites that should be SB 79 eligible are those that will be most compatible with neighborhood context, namely where there are commercial and multifamily structures and zoning (e.g., R-2, RM-20, 30, and 40). Allowing SB 79 development in such areas would allow historic homes on R-1 zoned sites to be protected. As described in my letter to the Council (May 1, 2026), further protection could be provided by requiring that historic structures be retained in SB 79 projects. There are many examples of historic and early 20th century homes on sites with multifamily structures built at a later date. This is not an uncommon land use pattern as exemplified in the exhibit to the May 1 letter. Clearly it is a challenge to balance the preservation of historic resources with the edicts of SB 79. The heterogeneous land use patterns found in and around the downtown call for a more nuanced approach than blanket exclusions. This message could be suspicious The sender's email address couldn't be verified. Mark Safe Report Further, all ordinances and regulations spawn unintended consequences, and given the number of unique situations it is best there be an exception process to allow SB 79 development on sites that comply with the intent, but not the letter of City regulations. Respectfully, Steve References: (a) Staff Report for May 4, 2026 Council meeting. (b) “Sites with a local historical resource designated on a local register [may be exempted from the 50% reduction] so long as the sites excluded from the density requirement of this paragraph on that basis do not exceed 10 percent of the eligible area of any transit-oriented development zone”. [65912.161(a)(2)(C)](c)Vishnu Krishnan, Senior Planner, "Senate Bill (SB) 70 and Downtown Housing Plan Considerations”, slide deck prepared for staff presentation at 5/4/26 Council meeting From:NTB To:Council, City Subject:Regarding approval of the housing project at Arastradero and Old Trace Road Date:Saturday, May 23, 2026 2:34:15 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear Mayor Veenker and City Council Members, The housing project you recently approved, slated to be built on the corner of Arastradero and Old Trace Road, sets up conditions as existed in the Oakland Hills firestorm of 1991. In that fire, emergency vehicles were hindered by narrow winding roads that had cars parked along the curbs, making already narrow roads even narrower. On top of that, terrified residents were trying to flee on those same narrow, winding roads. Twenty-five people died in that fire, .......one was even a former Palo Alto resident. Should a wildfire start in Esther Clark Park, with strong winds blowing it rapidly toward Arastradero, residents up in that neighborhood will be trying to flee toward their one point of egress, Old Trace Road. Meanwhile, our brave firefighters will be trying to access the park through the one point of ingress, that same Old Trace Road. If the overflow of residents or their guests in the new development have cars parked on one or both sides of Old Trace Road, making the narrow road even narrower, .......well then, how many people will die in that firestorm? With concern, Nina Bell GreenAcres 1 This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. Mark Safe Report From:Lee Christel To:ParkRec Commission; Council, City Subject:No Pickelball Expansion at Mitchell Park Date:Saturday, May 23, 2026 10:55:54 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear City Council and Members of the Parks Commission, I strongly oppose any further expansion or conversion of tennis courts for pickleball at Mitchell Park. Mitchell Park has reached its absolute carrying capacity. It is a vital, multi-use neighborhood hub anchored by the Mitchell Park Library, the Magical Bridge Playground, and surrounding residential communities. Unchecked pickleball expansion is actively dismantling the core functions of these essential civic spaces. We are currently facing three critical crises that the City must address before any further infrastructure decisions are made: 1. Severe Parking Deprivation for Families & Seniors: The parking lots at Mitchell Park are chronically gridlocked. Families with toddlers wanting to visit the playground and seniors attempting to access the library are routinely forced to turn away because parking spaces are overwhelmed by high- turnover pickleball traffic. 2. The Regional Subsidy Disparity: Data indicates that a vast majority of the current pickleball influx consists of non-residents coming from surrounding Bay Area cities that have rightfully restricted pickleball growth. Palo Alto taxpayers should not sacrifice their local peace and tax dollars to absorb the regional demand of other municipalities. 3. Unmitigated Noise Pollution: The constant, high- frequency impact sound of pickleball is fundamentally different from tennis and creates an unlivable environment for adjacent residents and quiet library users. We applaud the Council's past inclinations to halt expansion, but we need permanent, legally binding policy protections. I would like the City to: * Enact an immediate, permanent moratorium on any new pickleball court construction or tennis court conversion at Mitchell Park. * Mandate a "Palo Alto Resident Priority" system using a zip-code verified reservation portal, allocating at least 70% of peak-hour slots exclusively to local residents. * Implement strict operational restrictions, including limiting play hours from 9:00 AM to 7:00 PM, enforcing the use of certified "quiet gear" (paddles and balls), and conducting independent, third-party noise and parking impact audits. Our public parks must serve the broad public good of Palo Alto's families, children, and seniors, not the aggressive expansion goals of a single sports club. I urge you to stand firmly with your local constituents and protect the integrity of Mitchell Park. Thank you, Lee Christel Midtown PA From:Jake Hsen To:ParkRec Commission; Council, City; papc.secretary@gmail.com Subject:Concern Regarding Proposed Pickleball Court Expansion at Mitchell Park Date:Saturday, May 23, 2026 10:01:55 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear Parks and Recreation Commission Members, I am writing to express my concern regarding the proposal to convert Tennis Courts 3 and 4 at Mitchell Park into additional pickleball courts. Mitchell Park currently has 15 pickleball courts and only 4 tennis courts. Converting two of the remaining tennis courts into six or eight additional pickleball courts would significantly reduce public access to tennis at this location and would essentially eliminate Mitchell Park as a viable place for community tennis play. While Courts 1 and 2 may still be available for lessons and classes, the loss of Courts 3 and 4 would have a major impact on local tennis players who rely on Mitchell Park for recreational play. This would also place additional pressure on other tennis facilities, such as Rinconada Park, as displaced Mitchell Park players would need to find alternative courts. As a result, court availability for the broader tennis community would become even more limited. I understand and respect the growing popularity of pickleball, but I believe it is important to maintain a fair balance between the needs of pickleball players and tennis players. Tennis continues to serve many community members of all ages, including students, families, recreational players, and those participating in lessons and organized programs. I respectfully ask the Commission to carefully consider the impact this proposed conversion would have on the tennis community before making any decision. Preserving adequate tennis court access at Mitchell Park is important for maintaining balanced recreational opportunities for all Palo Alto residents. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Jake This message needs your attention This is their first email to your company. Mark Safe Report From:Xinran Liu To:ParkRec Commission; Council, City; papc.secretary@gmail.com Subject:Save Our Tennis Courts at Mitchell Park Date:Friday, May 22, 2026 8:02:38 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear Council Members, We urge the Parks Commission to vote No for the pickleball expansion proposal. We support expanding pickleball—just not at the expense of our existing tennis courts. There are other locations that can and should be considered. Passing the proposal would result in Mitchell Park being left twitch ONLY 2 tennis courts for community play and programs It being much harder for families, students, and players to find court time Rinconada Park will be further impacted as Mitchell Park players are forced to look elsewhere Thank you for your time and consideration. Best, Xinran Liu This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first mail to some recipients. Mark Safe Report From:christine seto To:ParkRec Commission; Council, City Subject:Opposition to Proposed Pickleball Conversion at Mitchell Park Tennis Courts Date:Friday, May 22, 2026 5:26:02 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear Members of the Parks and Recreation Commission and Palo Alto City Council, I am a Palo Alto resident writing to express my strong opposition to the proposal to convert Mitchell Park tennis courts #3 and #4 into pickleball courts. While I support the growth of pickleball in our city, it should not come at the expense of our active and established tennis community—especially our youth. Mitchell Park’s courts are a vital asset for local families. My own children use these courts on a weekly basis. Because the park is within safe biking distance from our house, they are able to independently meet up with friends to play, while enjoying the facilities of Mitchell Park. Thanks to having this local access, they have successfully developed their skills over the years and now play for the JLS and Gunn tennis teams. Tennis is a lifetime sport for them. Losing these two courts would be devastating to the local tennis community. Even now, finding an open court in Palo Alto is a frequent challenge. Removing 2 more courts from Mitchell Park's tennis capacity will severely bottleneck access for everyone, leaving only 2 open courts that are frequently utilized by the City of Palo Alto for lessons. Tennis has a rich, long-standing history in Palo Alto, supporting youth programs, school teams, and amateur leagues. If you spend time at Mitchell Park, you will see a vibrant, diverse community: Competitive leagues holding match play, friends meeting up for casual weekend games, parents teaching their young children the basics, and families like mine playing "King of the Court" together. I urge the city to evaluate alternative options or locations for dedicated pickleball courts so that both sports can thrive without forcing one community to sacrifice for the other. Thank you for your time, consideration, and dedication to keeping Palo Alto’s recreational spaces balanced and accessible. Regards, Christine Seto Palo Alto resident This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first mail to some recipients. Mark Safe Report From:Farias, Belle To:Council, City Subject:Informational Letter - Application for Alcoholic Beverage License Date:Friday, May 22, 2026 2:43:56 PM Attachments:image001.png Application for Alcoholic Beverage License - Coral Lotus.pdf Dear Councilmembers, Please see the attached copy of an Application for Alcoholic Beverage License. Application copies are sent to the City Council by the State for informational purposes, to inform the Council of new licenses coming into the City. No action is needed. Thank you, Belle Farias Administrative Associate III Office of the City Clerk P: 650.329.2630 | E: Belle.Farias@PaloAlto.gov www.PaloAlto.gov From:Hien Nguyen To:Council, City; ParkRec Commission; papc.secrectary@gmail.com Subject:Fewer courts, fewer tennis opportunities! Date:Friday, May 22, 2026 1:15:18 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear City Council Members, I am a Palo Alto parent writing to ask you to please reconsider the proposal to convert the tennis courts at Mitchell Park into pickleball courts. My children, my husband, friends and many other kids in our community use these courts regularly for lessons, practice, and matches. Mitchell Park is one of the few places where young players can consistently learn and grow in the sport. Tennis has been such a positive part of our children’s lives. It teaches discipline, focus, confidence, resilience, and respect. More importantly, it gives kids a healthy activity, friendships, and a sense of community. I understand that pickleball is growing quickly, and I respect that many people enjoy it. But I hope the city can find a solution that supports pickleball without taking away important spaces that youth tennis players already depend on. Please keep Mitchell Park tennis courts available for our children and families. Once these courts are gone, it will be very difficult to replace the opportunities they provide for youth in our community. One more thing I’ve noticed is that it’s already sometimes difficult to find available tennis courts because so many people actively use them for tennis. Reducing the number of courts would make access even harder for kids, families, and community programs. If more tennis courts are converted into pickleball courts, many Palo Alto residents — especially kids and families who play tennis regularly — may have fewer opportunities to play tennis. At the same time, many people from nearby cities can already access pickleball courts in other locations. I hope the city will consider preserving enough tennis courts for the local community and youth programs that already depend on them. Thank you for listening and for supporting the future of youth sports in Palo Alto. Sincerely,  Hien Nguyen Ms Nguyen Thanh Hien This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first mail to some recipients. Mark Safe Report Reporter of international Division, VOV1 41-43 Ba Trieu- Ha Noi Tel: 04.39364183 Mobile: 0983827482 Email: Nguyenthanhhienvov@gmail.com From:Eric Chan To:Council, City; ParkRec Commission Subject:Urgent: Please Preserve the Remaining Tennis Courts at Mitchell Park Date:Friday, May 22, 2026 11:17:54 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i To Members of the City Council: As a resident of Palo Alto, I am writing to formally request that the City Council reconsider the proposal to convert the remaining tennis courts at Mitchell Park into pickleball courts. While I appreciate the city’s efforts to accommodate new recreational trends, it is vital that we maintain a balanced approach. I urge you to keep these courts dedicated to tennis for the following reasons: 1. Supporting Local Youth and Sustainable Transit Unlike pickleball, which currently attracts a large demographic of adults who often drive in from other neighborhoods, our tennis courts are a primary resource for local children and school-aged players. These young residents typically travel to the park by bicycle or on foot. By removing these courts, you are forcing our youth—who have limited transportation options—to seek facilities much further away. We should be prioritizing the needs of our local children over creating a regional hub for adult commuters. 2. Preservation of Sporting Diversity Many tennis courts in Mitchell Park have already been converted. To ensure fairness and diversity, the remaining courts must be preserved. Tennis remains a vital outlet for physical activity; removing the remaining courts at Mitchell Park would effectively displace a dedicated community of players. 3. Mitigating Traffic and Parking Congestion Pickleball is a high-density sport that attracts a high volume of players per square foot. Converting these courts will transform our local park into a "regional pickleball hub," bringing in significant traffic from neighboring cities. Our park’s This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. Mark Safe Report infrastructure, which serves the city library, baseball field, and playground, cannot handle this additional parking demand. 4. Maintaining a Well-Rounded Community Hub Mitchell Park should remain a multi-use space that serves everyone. With limited parking already stretched between library patrons and families using the playground, we must avoid allowing a single sport to dominate the public facility. A "well-rounded" community (Library, Baseball, Tennis, and Pickleball) is far more valuable than a specialized site that crowds out other residents. 5. Investing in Future Generations Tennis is a lifelong sport with a deep heritage. We have a responsibility to ensure that our children have the opportunity to learn and enjoy tennis in their own neighborhood. Not everyone wants to play pickleball, and we must protect the variety of sports available to the next generation. I ask the Council to value the long-term balance of our park and the accessibility needs of our local youth. Please keep the remaining tennis courts at Mitchell Park as they are. Thank you for your time and for your dedication to our community. Sincerely, Ming Chan From:Minh Nguyen To:Council, City Subject:PAPC tennis courts conversion argument Date:Thursday, May 21, 2026 9:15:41 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. ! Hello, my name is Minh, and I am currently 11 years old. I am writing this email to counter and argue for the PAPC request to convert Mitchell Park’s tennis courts. People in favor of converting these courts may argue that because two tennis courts holding 8 people can be converted to hold 32 pickleball players, it helps use the park’s space efficiently—let's check the reality of that logic. This is only true if there were an extremely tiny number of tennis players, which there is not. Your calculation is only measuring the amount of pickleball players using the space, not the tennis players who are being displaced. How is that using the park’s space efficiently? It is simply taking space away from us tennis players. Other people may also argue that there are more active pickleball players than tennis players in the area. Let’s analyze this more carefully. Pickleball might look more crowded at Mitchell Park because players from all over the region drive to Palo Alto to play. This isn’t a sign of pickleball having a larger overall population; it is just the pickleball population This message could be suspicious Similar name as someone in your company. This is a personal email address. This is their first email to your company. Mark Safe Report condensing into one single area. Tennis players are spread out across all the various courts in Palo Alto, and they also have many players waiting for their turn. This brings me to my third argument: the kids who play tennis. While kids who play pickleball aren’t less important than kids who play tennis, kids who play tennis have to make massive commitments. Tennis takes years to get good at, whereas pickleball can be learned in a matter of months. Converting these tennis courts will leave fewer spaces for youth tennis players to fulfill their long-term commitments to the sport and overcome the hardships of training. Finally, Palo Alto has become a destination for many pickleball players who are not even Palo Alto residents. Why does Palo Alto have to sacrifice its own tennis courts rather than neighboring cities like Mountain View, Cupertino, or San Jose? You have accommodated not only our local pickleball population, but non-residents as well. I strongly respect that, but I believe that in order to primarily serve Palo Alto’s own community, you should not convert these courts. In fact, 42% of PAPC members aren’t even Palo Alto residents! They come here because their own cities refuse to build pickleball hubs since Palo Alto already has a strong one. If you don’t convert the Mitchell Park’s courts, then other cities will be forced to accommodate for their own citizens. Sincerely, Minh From:Bay, Kenneth To:Council, City Cc:ElecEngEstimators Subject:Potential office space consolidation Date:Thursday, May 21, 2026 11:39:55 AM Attachments:Screenshot 2026-05-21 113007.png RE_ Potential office space consolidation - Bay, Kenneth - Outlook.pdf Screenshot 2026-05-21 113214.png Screenshot 2026-05-21 113152.png Screenshot 2026-05-21 113115.png Hello Council Members! My name is Ken and I work in Electric Engineering. I heard that Utilities Engineering may be moved to the old Police Station at City Hall because our lease will up in August 2027. Attached, is a pdf of my justification that I sent out for a location on East Bayshore as well as snips in case you cannot view the images correctly. I just want to present another option which is preferable to most of my group. Please, disregard the comments about parking. I viewed the garage on a different day and there seems to be a lot of parking. Please, consider this location. Best, Kenneth Bay Electric Engineering Estimator Lead !"# $!"#%&'(%)* + , -./0./1/2 03/4 (, 5 67 8""# $8""#%67&%)*9 :# ,#;;< $,#;;<%:#&%)* = >7 ?# $?#%>7&%)*9 @A; B<CA $B<CA%@A;&%)*9 DEC"7 F"EE7 $F"EE7%DEC"7&%)* GHIJJK L MINO HPQNRLKSTLUSJLJIQVPWNXLSTYLQNZLYQRWNXLYW[ILYSL\PQJILKSTJLWZIQ\LJIXQJZWNXLSUUWVIL\]QVI^LHPIL_`LaQVWbWYWI\LQNZL[QNQXI[INYLUJS[LcbdIbbLQNZLefg `h`LQNZLcbIVYJWVLQJILVTJJINYbKLbSSRWNXLQYLQbbLQiQWbQjbILS]YWSN\LQ\LdILIiQbTQYILUTYTJILUQVWbWYKLNIIZ\^LHPW\LWNVbTZI\L]SYINYWQbLJIbSVQYWSN\LSULIkW\YWNX dSJRLXJST]\LQYLYPILefgLQNZLcbdIbbLYSLQbbSdLUSJLQL]SJYWSNLSULSTJLINXWNIIJWNXLYIQ[\LYSLjILPIQZlTQJYIJIZLQYLefg^LHPW\LW\L\YWbbLmT\YLSNILSULYPILVSNVI]Y\ jIWNXLdSJRIZLYPJSTXP^LnSdIiIJOLjIUSJILdILVQNLZIYIJ[WNILYPILjI\YLT\ILUSJLopqpLc^LrQK\PSJILdILNIIZLYSL[QRIL\S[ILjQ\WVLW[]JSiI[INY\LdPWbI I\YW[QYWNXLVS\Y\LUSJLYPILHstu\LNIVI\\QJKLUSJLYPILUWNQbL]bQNNIZLT\I^L`ILdWbbL\PQJILQZZWYWSNQbLZIYQWb\LQ\L\SSNLQ\L]JIbW[WNQJKLUWNZWNX\LQJILQiQWbQjbIOLjTY ]bIQ\ILZSLVSNYWNTILYSL]JSiWZILUIIZjQVR^ L vIRPQ L wxyz{|}~~{€ ‚{ ƒ\\W\YQNYL„WJIVYSJLSULcNXWNIIJWNXL…L†]IJQYWSN\ `QYIJLhQ\L`Q\YIdQYIJ ‡ˆp‰ŠL‹Œˆ p‰ŒŽ vIRPQ^t]]QXTNYQ ]QbSQbYS^XSi ddd^]QbSQbYS^XSi L L L ‘’“”•–—˜™•š›œœ›šž•Ÿš›œœ›šž –—˜¡¢—£¤—£š¤ ¥¤¦§ ¨©ª«”•¬ž®¯°—˜™•±¢®²£•³´™•³µ³¶•´·´´•¸¹ º’”•»¢¢—¥œš—™•¼›½ž—•Ÿ¼›½ž— »¢¢—¥œš—¡¸—£¤±£š¤ ¥¤¦§¾•¿—À—ž™•¹¤ž—ÁÁ—°•Ÿ¹¤ž—ÁÁ—° ¿—À—ž¡¢—£¤—£š¤ ¥¤¦§ ÂÃ”•Ä¥˜™•Å¤žœ•ŸÅ¤žœ Ä¥˜¡¢—£¤—£š¤ ¥¤¦§¾•Æ²Á¢—¤™•Ç°È²¥•ŸÇ°È²¥ Æ²Á¢—¤¡¢—£¤—£š¤ ¥¤¦§ ¨ÉÊË©Ã«”•¼›·•¸¤š›œÌ—£•¤ÍÎ›•¯¢—Î›•Î¤œ¯¤£²°—Ì¤œ L nWLvIRPQO L LtLPIQJZLYPQYLKSTL\INYLKSTJLXJST]LQLNSYWVILYPQYLYPILbIQ\ILSULSTJLjTWbZWNXLdSTbZLjILT]LQNZLVTJJINYbKLIk]bSJWNXL]S\\WjWbWYWI\^ tLQb\SLPIQJZLYPW\LUJS[L[KL\WZILQNZLtLdSTbZLbWRILYSL\PQJILSTJLNIdbKLQVlTWJIZLjTWbZWNXLQNZL]JSiWZIL[KLmT\YWUWVQYWSNLYPQYLWYLdSTbZLjILjIYYIJLYPQNLYPILSbZ _SbWVILfYQYWSNLWNL„SdNYSdN^ `ILmT\YL]TJVPQ\IZLopqpLcLrQK\PSJILvZOL_QbSLƒbYSOLgƒLŒ‹Ï‰ÏLNSYLYSSLbSNXLQXSLQNZLSTJLNIdbKLPWJIZLcNXWNIIJOLÐS\I]PLrJTÑÑSNIOLW\LWNLVPQJXILSULWY^ L LÐS\I]PLPQZLYSLXIYL[IQ\TJI[INY\LUSJLYPILZSSJ\LQNZLQLVST]bILSULT\LdINYLQbSNXLYSLiWIdLYPIL]JS]IJYK^ tLYPWNRLYPQYLYPW\LPQ\L]SYINYWQbLUSJL`h`LQNZLcÒcgHvtgsatrcv^ L L _JS\Ó Ô^LgbS\ILYSLefgLQNZL†]IJQYWSN\LiIJ\T\LPQiWNXLYSLÑWXÑQXLYPJSTXPLYPILgWYKLYSLXIYLYSLefgLUSJL[IIYWNX\^ !"#$!%&'$& #$&'%()*+",#%- +. ///0102345260475202899023589:006;<70=>?<30?0::023570@AB@ABC@CD159/// ///253E8:><18<138F06530F51134<9653589:48GFFFH253E8:><18<138H84I38FFFH><18<138HI8789<>451J3;K C@CLH/// ///GE253E8:><18<1380G<51F51134<9653589:48G09903;H<EM253E8:><18<138H84I3809903;H<EM><18<138HI87 <>451J3;KC@CLH/// % N%+*%O(O+P%+Q+$+R %",%( #Q %*P%!,**O&$"P%R "S &%TUV%",%WXWYZV[%V,&.+P%",%\]O#(.+P%+&.%+" #&+)&'%^#$.+P(_ % ///<33093589/// 40I<4?59I><EG093 ` =51?59I;<660><4<30:00a6:48G0102345209I5900459IH b 30G>>8F04C@@<84106656=6=<11EcAAJ@H<9E3;59IG840F511900?0635G<3589H d >04G<9093>8F04e63<9?<4?:006093:84G863C@@<>48f0236g?5640I<4?hiLj k >04G<9093>8F04l<?7<920:006093:84G863h@@<m>48f02363863<430635G<3589H n >04G<9093>8F04e:59<1:00F51106093<:3040635G<35895628G>1030H o 3;09E8=40635G<30564010<60?38E8=<9?8>04<35896H 40I<4?59IG<5901023452><9016p ` G<5901023452><901I=33046<40983<118F0?H b ><9012=36;0036K659I101590?4<F59I<9?18<?2<126<40900?0?3828G>10300635G<30:844065?0935<1h@@<mH5:3;0E<409836=G5330?K3;0E F5119830F840?89H d >4015G59<4E>1<940750F<>>487<16<40983:59<1Hh@@<m>48f0236F511900?3800635G<30?<9?3;0:59<15963<11F5110I8908704E =9?04I48=9?596>023846?=459I3;0>40289634=23589G00359IH3;0010234520635G<30628>08:F84F5116=>0420?0>1<940750F6H 40I<4?59I6;=3?8F96p ` 5F511900?63<43?<30m63<4335G0<9?09??<30m09?35G0:48G<>>152<93H b 010234520635G<384F511240<303;00635G<30m5978520H d 0635G<30m5978520I03648=30?:84593049<1<>>487<16H k E8=F51103093<35701E62;0?=10?hlDF0068=3<:3045978520;<6009210<40?H n 010234528>04<35896F51140205700635G<30<9?F511289:54G?<30H o 0635G<30F51104010<60?8920289:54G0?H q ?<3056=>?<30?75<6;<40>8593<9?<??0?388>04<358962<109?<4H ///09?/// 3rs>tuvwxxsvsvrwyvz{wvxsvlss|w}~ttx{rw€yp Aj>vlss|w}~tp ] ‚(XƒƒSSS_‚+,+",_',Qƒ„ (ƒ+(( "(ƒ‚OR$!ƒ. Q ,‚* &"…( #Q$! (ƒRO$.$&'…‚ #*$"(ƒY_…RO$.$&'…‚ #*$"…(OR*$ +…†,#*(ƒRO$.$&'…+‚‚$!+),&‡YˆY‰ŠYŠY_‚.† Cj3rs>tuv<ss|w}~tp !" #$%&'()'*+$,-$%.'/012$('3(4(+5'6+()1$4,7 8 9:; :;9<:; : ::; ;:8: =::; ;: = > #$%&'()'?)@'()'ABB,C'D)1'EF,$(C'301G$H0I'J0@'K)%%0HF)%')1'EB.14-05'()'EF,$F057 ";9LM MLM M:N; :N=OP:Q M : ;:L;: :LM M > #$%&'()'EF,$(C'301G$H0'ABB,$H4F)%'R)125'S'T+$-0,$%057 ";9LM MLM M:N; :N=OP:Q M : ;:L;: :LM MU M :V ;9:W8 > #$%&'()'X,0H(1$H'X%.$%001$%.'3(4%-41-5YZ0[+$1020%(57 ";9LM MLM M:N; :N=O\;::];M \ ;:N; :^_8;9 ' #$%&'()'E1`4%'R)105(1C'D)1'#$%0'K,041$%.'$%D)124F)%7 ";9a8 :b ;a8 :N; a :U :L;:V ;a; ;9:= ;:a; :c;d:Q ;:a; ;9 > #$%&'()'/e'$%5(4,,4F)%5'B1)H055'@$(f'EF,$F05'4%-'*+$,-$%.'g0B41(20%(7 ";9a :" 9:N; " 9:N; U O:= ;::a;9U O:= ;::^M :N ;Uaa:a;9 > h%,$%0'/012$('301G$H057 9i; i i;9<i; > AHH0,4'K$Fj0%'/)1(4,'k#).$%I'Z0.$5(01'D)1'AHH)+%(I'l%5B0HF)%'3Hf0-+,$%.I'/012$('R00'/4C20%(m7 9 "=8 > R)1'AKA'B)1(4,',).$%'$55+057 B-5-4(4nB4,)4,()o.)G kpqrm'stuvtwwx y > R1)27>^Oz>{;O>W;>|{;OW;^O} ~ 30%(7>c8;Oz>U; >€z> >€ >a{ 6)7> Oz>‚>|‚ O} ~ KH7>\ \\M9 ;>|\ \\M9 ;} ~ 3+`ƒ0H(7>V>a M > „>> M > …†‡ y ˆ‰Š‹Œ ‰Ž ‘Š’ “ ”•–—˜™–•š›˜œ•š•— žŸŽ Ÿ‰‰ ŸŽŒ¡‰¢£Ÿ ¢ ŸŒ¤¤¤ ¥¦¥Œ§‹ ¨ ‹ ‰ŠŒžŸŽ Ÿ‰‰ ŸŽ ©ª«¬Œ®¯ª°ª¯ª«“±Œ² ³¦ ¢‰´ Š ³µ¶ ¨· ¨‹·´Ž·¸ ¹¹¹´¶ ¨· ¨‹·´Ž·¸ “ “ “ R1)27>!8z>^>|^!8}a U ~ 30%(7>{ Oz>{;>€z> >€>a{ 6)7>]^W>:>Lcd>b:W:b>\;>|bWb\;}a U ~ KH7>Q; Oz>c;;O>|c;;OQ; O} ~º>{z>U O>|U O{} ~º>W; z>d >|d W; } ~º>b;z>Q » |Q »b;} ~ 3+`ƒ0H(7>a M > „>> M y ¡‰ ¼’ ¤Œ¹ Ÿ‹‰‘Œ‹·ŒŠ£ ‰ŒŠ·¼‰Œ‰ ¨³ŒŠ‹ Ž‰Œ½¶‘ ‹‰ŠŒ ‰Ž ‘ ŸŽŒ·½ Œ¹· ¾ŒŠ¶ ¢‰Œ ‹Œž¨¹‰¨¨´Œ¿½ Œ¨‰ Š‰Œ ŠŒŠ‰‹Œ‹·Œ‰À¶ ‰Œ ŸŒÁ½Ž½Š‹ŒÂ¬ÂÃ’Œ Ÿ‘Œ ŠŒ¶ ‹Œ·ÄŒ‹£‰ŒÅ · ‘‰ Œ¢ ‹³°¹ ‘‰ ‰ÄÄ· ‹Œ‹·Œ¢·ŸŠ·¨ ‘ ‹‰Œ¨‰ Š‰‘ŒŠ¶ ¢‰Š’Œ‘ Š¢½ŠŠ ·ŸŠŒ ‰Œ¢½ ‰Ÿ‹¨³Œ½Ÿ‘‰ ¹ ³Œ ‰Ž ‘ ŸŽŒ Œ¶·‹‰Ÿ‹ ¨Œ ‰¨·¢ ‹ ·ŸŒ·ÄŒ‹£‰Œ¥¦¥Œ Ÿ‘Œž¨‰¢‹ ¢Œ‰ŸŽ Ÿ‰‰ ŸŽŒ‹‰ ¼ŠŒÄ ·¼ ž¨¹‰¨¨Œ¨·¢ ‹ ·Ÿ´Œ¥£ ¨‰Œ¹‰Œ ‰ŒŠ‹ ¨¨Œ ŸŒ‹£‰Œ‰À¶¨· ‹· ³Œ¶£ Š‰Œ·ÄŒŠ¶ ¢‰Œ¶¨ ŸŸ ŸŽ’“Œ·Ÿ‰Œ·ÄŒ‹£‰Œ¶ ¼ ³Œ·¶‹ ·ŸŠŒÅ‰ ŸŽŒ¢·ŸŠ ‘‰ ‰‘Œ ŠŒ Œ¼·¸‰Œ‹·ŒÆ ‹³ŒÇ ¨¨´ŒÁŠŒ¼· ‰ ¢·Ÿ¢ ‰‹‰Œ‘‰‹ ¨ŠŒ ‰Ž ‘ ŸŽŒ‹ ¼ ŸŽŒ Ÿ‘ŒŠ¶‰¢ Ä ¢Œ¨·¢ ‹ ·ŸŠŒÅ‰¢·¼‰Œ ¸ ¨ Å¨‰’Œ¤Œ¹ ¨¨Œ¶ ·¸ ‘‰Œ ‰Ž½¨ Œ½¶‘ ‹‰Š´ ! "#$%&'())&*+,-& . / 012 3 456789:5;67:< ! = > From:Steve Young To:Council, City Cc:Steve Young Subject:Fwd: Cubberly Date:Wednesday, May 20, 2026 10:52:53 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Steve Young <syoung94043@gmail.com> Date: Wed, May 20, 2026 at 1:34 AM Subject: Cubberly To: <phil@mastfamily.com> Dear Phil, the Pavilion Friday Night Dancers, and the Palo Alto City Council, Following the approval of the Cubberly Master Plan on Monday, May 18, 2026, I would like to propose considering the Auditorium as a potential space for TheatreWorks instead of the Pavilion. The Auditorium's dimensions are approximately 75' by 150' with high ceilings, and it has successfully hosted a variety of occupants, including the Mitchell Park Library and the Palo Alto Junior Museum. Historically, the space was used for Friday Night Dancers during Pavilion renovations; while the current vinyl-on-concrete flooring was a challenge for dancing, the sound quality was superior to Gyms A and B. It may even be possible to convert the existing structure into two separate theaters. Currently, the Auditorium is occupied by the Imagination Lab School and is owned by PAUSD, which may be why it does not appear on the standard list of rentable spaces. While discussions with TheatreWorks would likely need to wait until the property sale is finalized, I believe this venue is a viable alternative that could be converted relatively easily. Best regards, Steve Young This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. Mark Safe Report Powered by Mimecast From:Walter Murray To:Council, City Subject:Tennis courts at Mitchell Date:Wednesday, May 20, 2026 7:29:59 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Council Members: I find it annoying that greed can be rewarded by I and many others will have to waste my time attending a Council meeting to stop once more the Pickleball players plundering Mitchell Park tennis courts. People in Northen part of the City would never have to do that. Perhaps I’ll start a movement to have the Little League ground turned into Pickleball courts. A much bigger space and far less used. No consideration to the noise level the children using the Magic Roundabout , some of whom have issues with excessive noise, when the first set of courts were taken. Some of the messages on this issue supporting the plundering of the courts are from Mountain View. When I asked why they did not lobby for more courts in Mountain View their response was Mitchell is a Public park. This greed should never have been rewarded other than a cursory consideration and then turned down. Walter Murray PS Bounced off Mitchell courts last Friday when the court I was on was used for teaching kids a tennis lesson. I bike to the courts. From:Linda Wang To:ParkRec Commission; Council, City Subject:Protect Mitchell Park: no more Pickleball Court Expansion Date:Wednesday, May 20, 2026 6:33:55 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i As a resident, taxpayer, and voter in Palo Alto, I express my strong opposition to any further expansion or conversion of tennis courts for pickleball at Mitchell Park. While I support diverse recreational activities, Mitchell Park has reached its absolute carrying capacity. It is a vital, multi-use neighborhood hub anchored by the Mitchell Park Library, the Magical Bridge Playground, and surrounding residential communities. Unchecked pickleball expansion is actively dismantling the core functions of these essential civic spaces. We are currently facing the following critical crises that the City must address before any further infrastructure decisions are made: 1. Severe Parking Deprivation for Families & Seniors: The parking lots at Mitchell Park are chronically gridlocked. Families with toddlers wanting to visit the playground and seniors attempting to access the library are routinely forced to turn away because parking spaces are overwhelmed by high-turnover pickleball traffic. 2. The Regional Subsidy Disparity: Data indicates that a vast majority of the current pickleball influx consists of non-residents coming from surrounding Bay Area cities that have rightfully restricted pickleball growth. Palo Alto taxpayers should not sacrifice their local peace and tax dollars to absorb the regional demand of other municipalities. 3. Unmitigated Noise Pollution: The constant, high-frequency impact sound of pickleball is fundamentally different from tennis and creates an unlivable environment for adjacent residents and quiet library users. We applaud the Council's past inclinations to halt expansion, but we need permanent, legally binding policy protections. We respectfully demand that the City: Enact an immediate, permanent moratorium on any new pickleball court construction or tennis court conversion at Mitchell Park. Mandate a "Palo Alto Resident Priority" system using a zip-code verified reservation portal, allocating at least 70% of peak-hour slots exclusively to local residents. Implement strict operational restrictions, including limiting play hours from 9:00 AM to 7:00 PM, enforcing the use of certified "quiet gear" (paddles and balls), and conducting independent, third-party noise and parking impact audits. Our public parks must serve the broad public good of Palo Alto's families, children, and This message needs your attention No employee in your company has ever replied to this person. This is a personal email address. Mark Safe Report seniors, not the aggressive expansion goals of a single sports club. I urge you to stand firmly with your local constituents and protect the integrity of Mitchell Park. Thank you, Linda From:Ye Ding To:Council, City Subject:Objection to Mitchell Park pickleball court expansion Date:Wednesday, May 20, 2026 1:40:03 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear city officials, As PA resident whose family frequent Mitchell park, I and my family strongly object any further extension of pickleball courts at Mitchell Park. It brings large traffics from non residents and is noisy in the park. We are a family that enjoys tennis and not pickleball. There should be a rule on upper limits of pickleball spaces vs tennis courts and other areas in the park to meet all the PA residents needs. We often found it hard to get tennis courts on weekends and evenings already, and end up waiting for others to finish using the courts. The pickball users are coming from non PA neighborhoods and using facilities that we pay high tax on each year, while we as residents don’t get access to our own sports needs. This is not about being fair to tax paying residents that live in the neighborhood in Palo Alto, not about playing nice for a specific group of advocates that invites non residents (which will only grow without control measures). Sincerely Ye 334x Louis Rd Sent from my iPhone From:Yanqing Guan To:ParkRec Commission; Council, City; Howard, Adam; PlayingFields Subject:URGENT: Protect Mitchell Park – Oppose Further Pickleball Expansion and Prioritize Palo Alto Residents Date:Wednesday, May 20, 2026 1:10:49 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear Mayor, Council members, and Members of the Parks and Recreation Commission, As a resident, taxpayer, and voter in Palo Alto, I am writing to express my strong opposition to any further expansion or conversion of tennis courts for pickleball at Mitchell Park. While I support diverse recreational activities, Mitchell Park has reached its absolute carrying capacity. It is a vital, multi-use neighborhood hub anchored by the Mitchell Park Library, the Magical Bridge Playground, and surrounding residential communities. Unchecked pickleball expansion is actively dismantling the core functions of these essential civic spaces. We are currently facing three critical crises that the City must address before any further infrastructure decisions are made: 1. Severe Parking Deprivation for Families & Seniors: The parking lots at Mitchell Park are chronically gridlocked. Families with toddlers wanting to visit the playground and seniors attempting to access the library are routinely forced to turn away because parking spaces are overwhelmed by high-turnover pickleball traffic. 2. The Regional Subsidy Disparity: Data indicates that a vast majority of the current pickleball influx consists of non-residents coming from surrounding Bay Area cities that have rightfully restricted pickleball growth. Palo Alto taxpayers should not sacrifice their local peace and tax dollars to absorb the regional demand of other municipalities. 3. Unmitigated Noise Pollution: The constant, high-frequency impact sound of pickleball is fundamentally different from tennis and creates an unlivable environment for adjacent residents and quiet library users. We applaud the Council's past inclinations to halt expansion, but we need permanent, legally binding policy protections. We respectfully demand that the City: * Enact an immediate, permanent moratorium on any new pickleball court construction or tennis court conversion at Mitchell Park. * Mandate a "Palo Alto Resident Priority" system using a zip-code verified reservation portal, allocating at least 70% of peak-hour slots exclusively to local residents. This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first mail to some recipients. Mark Safe Report * Implement strict operational restrictions, including limiting play hours from 9:00 AM to 7:00 PM, enforcing the use of certified "quiet gear" (paddles and balls), and conducting independent, third-party noise and parking impact audits. Our public parks must serve the broad public good of Palo Alto's families, children, and seniors, not the aggressive expansion goals of a single sports club. I urge you to stand firmly with your local constituents and protect the integrity of Mitchell Park. Thank you for your time, leadership, and dedication to our community. Sincerely, Yanqing 887 Colorado ave From:Wong, Mike To:buck.alex@gmail.com Cc:PWD; Council, City; City Mgr Subject:RE: Early Morning Wood Chipper Use – 1200 Block of University Ave Date:Wednesday, May 20, 2026 1:10:44 PM Attachments:image009.png Good afternoon Mr. Buck, Thank you for your email regarding the noise from our City tree crew working early this morning on University Avenue. I understand how disruptive that can be, and I appreciate you taking the time to let us know. In this case, the work was not planned maintenance but an unplanned emergency response. Early this morning, a truck struck a tree on University Avenue, causing a large limb to fall and block almost the entire roadway. Because University Avenue is a major route for both vehicles and bicycles, clearing the obstruction quickly was a safety priority. Given the safety concerns and traffic impacts, the crew made the decision to chip the material immediately. Thank you again for bringing this to our attention and for your understanding. If you have any further questions or concerns, please feel free to reach out. Thanks, MIKE WONG Assistant Director of Public Works, Public Services Public Works Department (650) 496-6989 | michael.wong@paloalto.gov www.paloalto.gov From: Keith Buck <buck.alex@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2026 9:48 AM To: PWD <pwd@PaloAlto.gov>; Council, City <city.council@PaloAlto.gov> Subject: Early Morning Wood Chipper Use – 1200 Block of University Ave CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Hi Councilmembers and Public Works team, I was woken at 5:50am this morning (May 20) by a city crew operating a wood chipper on the 1200 block of University Ave. While I understand the city's need to work around traffic and appreciate the effort crews put into keeping maintenance on schedule, I& This message needs your attention   i This is a personal email address. This is their first mail to some recipients. Mark Safe Report CGBANNERINDICATOR Hi Councilmembers and Public Works team, I was woken at 5:50am this morning (May 20) by a city crew operating a wood chipper on the 1200 block of University Ave. While I understand the city's need to work around traffic and appreciate the effort crews put into keeping maintenance on schedule, I'd ask that heavy machinery — particularly noise-intensive equipment like wood chippers — be limited to after 8am except in emergencies. One practical option: crews could stage un-chipped material beforehand and hold off on running the chipper until 8am, when noise is less likely to be disruptive. Thank you for looking into this. Keith Powered by Mimecast From:Leland To:officeofthemayor@oaklandca.gov; cityclerk@cityofepa.org; Council, City Cc:gardenkitsorc@yahoo.com Subject:UNGM947141, 1st PROTOTYPE Date:Wednesday, May 20, 2026 11:46:13 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i D-T-L Wed. May 20, 11:30am, EPA Lib. TO: MidPeninsula Municipal Administrators; Mayors, Council's and Staff City of Palo Alto City of East Palo Alto City of Oakland RE: UNGM947141 Prjt. update REF: FYI from original, May 11th, online briefing and recipient's of hardcopy PSA. PRIOR MEMO'S Our UNOakland volunteer teams was tasked with request to provide needed and timely delivered news-events co- vering the original dates (June 2023) of our receipt of UN procurement reg. item UNGM947141 and, up to this moment in time, our produced product has gained the attention of hundreds of internal UN leaders. On a brief historic note, our partnering business affiliate, Ravenswood Garden- kit's Product's can take full credit for the innovation of office items destined to help generate supplemental UN's Global This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. Mark Safe Report Powered by Mimecast Mission funding. With reference to the following printed and circulated online PSA's, initial market- ing of this 5 piece, desk-top furniture item has a specific user and application geo- graphy within this mid-Peninsula region, Palo Alto's Centennial/MLKjr UN Plaza and from within the 2050 Cooley Ave known as the original Community Center in Ravenswood When our NGO, UNOakland set-out to support our UN several dozen years ago. this product was already in design and initial UN Dept. of Procurement did not hesitate to further inquire however, Our UNOakland group was already in position to initiate this public information task. It is of no reservation among most mid- peninsula dwellers to claim ownership of pre and post 1945 UN era archives and taking into. account the historic role Oakland, (E) Palo Alto, and then named Old Ravens- wood played in today's municipal history. The history of the UN (here) remains somewhat invisible and reasons for this disappearance from our schools classroom has everything to do with societies classification of people and the UN's 80 years at trying to dismantle this formidable human trait among the UN's 193 member countries. This small contributions suggesting greater UN internal funding has taken the first step and on Monday, May 11th our 1st prototype model of our HOUSE PLANT was shared electronically with our UN Secretary General and simultaneously with our UNHABITAT, Director General. It is with this attached photograph our UNOakland group of volunteers will travel up the peninsula to San Francisco municipalities in search of this Bay Area United Nations archives and the real identities of our past UN hero's Please extend your your support to: RAVENSWOOD HISTORY SURVEY RAVENSWOOD GARDENKITS PRODUCTS P.O. BOX 51524, 1991 BAY ROAD RAVENSWOOD INDUSTRIAL PRK. CAL. 94303-1524 U.S.A. 650 461 0276 gardenkitsorc@yahoo.com Our next PRESS RELEASE...tba; The UM947141 Project reflects what the UN ASSOCIATION from Oakland has designed and gifted to our UNHABITAT PRGM in NAIROBI. The photo was taken in Centennial Plaza & Martin Luther King Jr. Plaza and intended to share what our Old Ravenswood Community did for the UN in 1945. This UNBLUE DESK ITEMS ARE AVAILABLE from our POS, Distribution point, 2050 Cooley Ave, daily and located between market and bank from building 1733. Items can also be acquired by way of special dedicated acct. being setup for EFT. Please telephone 650 461 0276 for additional info. (emergency alt # 650 518 4029) press key #2 to expedite quick messaging and leave best contact info. Please frwd to attention of Secretary General Antonio Gutierrez during his visit to Kenya and also frwd to Habitat Director General ASAP and other supporting interest. SIGN ...LELAND D/T/L 05 11, 1445 hrs/gmt, 250 Hamilton P/A (Recipient please note the author of this FYI may not be readily available due to other emergency communication priorities with KI6AWN, Mtn View in such case place incoming priority calls on standby) From:Keith Buck To:PWD; Council, City Subject:Early Morning Wood Chipper Use – 1200 Block of University Ave Date:Wednesday, May 20, 2026 9:49:36 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Hi Councilmembers and Public Works team, I was woken at 5:50am this morning (May 20) by a city crew operating a wood chipper on the 1200 block of University Ave. While I understand the city's need to work around traffic and appreciate the effort crews put into keeping maintenance on schedule, I'd ask that heavy machinery — particularly noise-intensive equipment like wood chippers — be limited to after 8am except in emergencies. One practical option: crews could stage un-chipped material beforehand and hold off on running the chipper until 8am, when noise is less likely to be disruptive. Thank you for looking into this. Keith This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first mail to some recipients. Mark Safe Report From:hello@belvid.com To:Council, City Subject:No more pickleball Courts in Mitchell Park Date:Wednesday, May 20, 2026 8:48:33 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Hi, I’m writing because as a Palo Alto Tax payer and user of all Mitchell Park grounds (playgrounds, park, library, picnic areas) I do NOT SUPPORT the pickleball courts that are being proposed. Please take on account this petition. Anabel V. Diaz Arias Visual Artist (650) 954 0473 This message needs your attention This is their first email to you. Mark Safe Report From:Hongbo Yang To:ParkRec Commission; Council, City; Howard, Adam; PlayingFields Subject:URGENT: Protect Mitchell Park – Oppose Further Pickleball Expansion and Prioritize Palo Alto Residents Date:Tuesday, May 19, 2026 11:02:26 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear Mayor, Council members, and Members of the Parks and Recreation Commission, As a resident, taxpayer, and voter in Palo Alto, I am writing to express my strong opposition to any further expansion or conversion of tennis courts for pickleball at Mitchell Park. While I support diverse recreational activities, Mitchell Park has reached its absolute carrying capacity. It is a vital, multi-use neighborhood hub anchored by the Mitchell Park Library, the Magical Bridge Playground, and surrounding residential communities. Unchecked pickleball expansion is actively dismantling the core functions of these essential civic spaces. We are currently facing three critical crises that the City must address before any further infrastructure decisions are made: 1. Severe Parking Deprivation for Families & Seniors: The parking lots at Mitchell Park are chronically gridlocked. Families with toddlers wanting to visit the playground and seniors attempting to access the library are routinely forced to turn away because parking spaces are overwhelmed by high-turnover pickleball traffic. 2. The Regional Subsidy Disparity: Data indicates that a vast majority of the current pickleball influx consists of non-residents coming from surrounding Bay Area cities that have rightfully restricted pickleball growth. Palo Alto taxpayers should not sacrifice their local peace and tax dollars to absorb the regional demand of other municipalities. 3. Unmitigated Noise Pollution: The constant, high-frequency impact sound of pickleball is fundamentally different from tennis and creates an unlivable environment for adjacent residents and quiet library users. We applaud the Council's past inclinations to halt expansion, but we need permanent, legally binding policy protections. We respectfully demand that the City: * Enact an immediate, permanent moratorium on any new pickleball court construction or tennis court conversion at Mitchell Park. * Mandate a "Palo Alto Resident Priority" system using a zip-code verified reservation portal, allocating at least 70% of peak-hour slots exclusively to local residents. This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first mail to some recipients. Mark Safe Report * Implement strict operational restrictions, including limiting play hours from 9:00 AM to 7:00 PM, enforcing the use of certified "quiet gear" (paddles and balls), and conducting independent, third-party noise and parking impact audits. Our public parks must serve the broad public good of Palo Alto's families, children, and seniors, not the aggressive expansion goals of a single sports club. I urge you to stand firmly with your local constituents and protect the integrity of Mitchell Park. Thank you for your time, leadership, and dedication to our community. Sincerely, Hongbo 887 Colorado ave From:Gracie Sheng To:Parks.Commission@cityofpaloalto.org; Council, City Subject:URGENT: Protect Mitchell Park – Oppose Further Pickleball Expansion and Prioritize Palo Alto Residents Date:Tuesday, May 19, 2026 9:44:38 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear Mayor, Councilmembers, and Members of the Parks and Recreation Commission, I play pickleball regularly at Mitchell park, however, as a resident, taxpayer, and voter in Palo Alto, I am writing to express my strong opposition to any further expansion or conversion of tennis courts for pickleball at Mitchell Park. While I love pickleball, I recognize that Mitchell Park has reached its absolute carrying capacity. It is a vital, multi-use neighborhood hub anchored by the Mitchell Park Library, Community center, the Magical Bridge Playground, and various weekend activities, as well as the surrounding residential communities. Unchecked pickleball expansion is actively dismantling the core functions of these essential civic spaces. We are currently facing three critical crises that the City must address before any further infrastructure decisions are made: 1. Severe Parking Deprivation for Families & Seniors: The parking lots at Mitchell Park are chronically gridlocked. Families with toddlers wanting to visit the playground and seniors attempting to access the library are routinely forced to turn away because parking spaces are overwhelmed by high-turnover pickleball traffic. 2. The Regional Subsidy Disparity: Data indicates that a vast majority of the current pickleball influx consists of non-residents coming from surrounding Bay Area cities that have rightfully restricted pickleball growth. I have many neighbors wanting to play pickleball but turned away when waiting line at the court could be as long as 30 min. While I love to be able to make friends with players from other cities, Palo Alto taxpayers should not sacrifice their local peace and tax dollars to absorb the regional demand of other municipalities. 3. Unmitigated Noise Pollution: I also recognize the constant, high-frequency impact sound of pickleball is fundamentally different from tennis and creates an unlivable environment for adjacent residents and quiet library users. I applaud the Council's past inclinations to halt expansion, but we need permanent, legally binding policy protections. Therefore I respectfully demand that the City: * Enact an immediate, permanent moratorium on any new pickleball court construction or tennis court conversion at Mitchell Park. * Mandate a "Palo Alto Resident Priority" system using a zip-code verified reservation portal, allocating at least 70% of peak-hour slots exclusively to local residents. * Enforcing the use of certified "quiet gear" (paddles and balls), and conducting independent, third-party noise and parking impact audits. This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first mail to some recipients. Mark Safe Report Our public parks must serve the broad public good of Palo Alto's families, children, and seniors, not the aggressive expansion goals of a single sports club. I urge you to stand firmly with your local constituents and protect the integrity of Mitchell Park. Thank you for your time, leadership, and dedication to our community. Sincerely, Gracie Sheng From:Rohan Kadakia To:ParkRec Commission; Council, City; papc.secretary@gmail.com Subject:Mitchell Park Tennis Courts #3 and 4 Date:Tuesday, May 19, 2026 9:41:42 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear Parks and Recreation Commission, I am a long time Palo Alto resident. I have heard that the Palo Alto Pickleball Club is pushing a proposal to convert tennis courts #3 and 4 at Mitchell Park into pickleball courts. I am writing to you in opposition to this proposal. Mitchell already has 15 pickleball courts to just 4 tennis courts. 2 of the 4 tennis courts are used for city lessons, leaving only 2 exclusively for community play. Also, the tennis courts at Mitchell are lighted, which makes them especially valuable to keep as is; losing two lighted tennis courts would leave only Rinconada for community play at a Palo Alto public park in the evenings. There is plenty of open space at Mitchell (and elsewhere) in which to build new pickleball courts without sacrificing the precious remaining tennis courts. I will not be able to attend next week's meeting at City Council Chambers in person since I will be enjoying my tennis lesson at Mitchell that same evening, hence I am writing to you in this way. Tennis has already lost courts at Mitchell to pickleball; please decide against any further conversion of tennis courts. Thanks for your consideration. Best, Rohan Kadakia This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first mail to some recipients. Mark Safe Report From:midtowngary@me.com To:Council, City; concertinfo@stanford.edu Cc:robert.salisbury@pln.sccgov.org Subject:BTS concert noise impact to neighborhoods in Palo Alto May 19, 2026 Date:Tuesday, May 19, 2026 8:02:09 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. All, The BTS concerts at Stanford Stadium have created a major and ongoing disturbance for residents throughout the surrounding neighborhoods. The volume from these events is excessive, with sound carrying far beyond the stadium and into nearby homes late into the night. For many residents, the noise is impossible to ignore — windows rattle, outdoor activities become unbearable, and the constant bass reverberates across entire communities. People should be able to enjoy peace and quiet in their own homes without being subjected to repeated nights of overwhelming noise pollution. In addition to the sound impacts, these massive concerts create serious quality-of-life concerns for local residents. Traffic congestion becomes severe, neighborhood streets are overwhelmed with vehicles, and access for residents and emergency services can become more difficult because of the crowds. The disruption extends well beyond the stadium itself and affects thousands of people who receive none of the benefits from these events. Stanford Stadium was intended primarily for university and athletic activities, not for recurring large-scale concerts that significantly disrupt residential communities. Continuing to approve events of this magnitude sends the message that commercial entertainment interests are being prioritized over the well-being of the people who live nearby year-round. Families with young children, seniors, students, and working professionals are all negatively impacted by the excessive noise, traffic, and late-night disturbances. There needs to be stricter enforcement of noise limits, stronger protections for surrounding neighborhoods, and a serious reevaluation of whether concerts of this scale are appropriate in a residential area. The current situation places an unfair burden on local residents and diminishes the quality of life for the broader community. PLEASE stop the madness of allowing concerts at Stanford Stadium and start prioritizing the health, peace, and well-being of the residents who call these neighborhoods home. Sincerely, Gary Palo Alto resident living near the corner of Colorado avenue and Bryant. Begin forwarded message: From: midtown_gary@me.com Subject: Fwd: BTS concert noise impact to neighborhoods in Palo Alto May 17, 2026 Date: May 17, 2026 at 11:32:38 AM PDT To: robert.salisbury@pln.sccgov.org FYI see attached Begin forwarded message: From: midtown_gary@me.com Subject: BTS concert noise impact to neighborhoods in Palo Alto Date: May 17, 2026 at 11:25:45 AM PDT To: concertinfo@stanford.edu Dear Stanford Events Administration, I am writing to express my strong concern regarding the extremely loud concert held at the stadium last night. Despite having all of our windows and doors closed, the noise level inside our home was overwhelming. The sound was so disruptive that we were unable to carry on normal activities, we essentially had no choice but to wait for the concert to end. The volume and reach of this event had a significant negative impact on surrounding residents. I strongly urge Stanford to reconsider hosting large live music concerts at the stadium going forward. The surrounding community should not have to endure this level of disruption in their own homes. Thank you for your attention to this matter. I hope Stanford will take neighborhood concerns seriously when planning future events. Sincerely, Gary Palo Alto resident living near the corner of Colorado avenue and Bryant. From:America SCORES Bay Area To:Council, City Subject:The Magic Continues Beyond the Gala Date:Tuesday, May 19, 2026 7:35:08 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of openingattachments and clicking on links. i Our Soccer Legacy Gala was a night to remember! This message needs your attention This is their first email to you. Mark Safe Report Thank you to everyone who joined us for this incredible and impactful evening. We felt the love in the room as storytelling, celebration, and community came together in a truly magical way. We’re excited to share photos from the event. View the full photo gallery Thank you again to Terry Fisher, our Honorary Event Chair, Coca- Cola and Airbnb as our Presenting and Legacy Sponsors, and to our supporting sponsors, table hosts, committee members, and board for making the evening so special. The Legacy Celebration continued on May 13 with Airbnb, Mayor Daniel Lurie, and two-time Women's World Cup Champion Megan Rapinoe as we unveiled a new mini-pitch at Harvey Milk Civil Rights Academy! Watch this NBC segment to learn more. There’s so much more excitement ahead as we approach the FIFA World Cup 2026™, and we’d love for you to be part of it. If you’re feeling inspired, we invite you to stay involved by volunteering or making a gift to support SCORES programming. Thank you for being part of our community. With appreciation, Colin Schmidt, CEO; and the Gala Committee America SCORES Bay Area | 530 Divisadero Street, PMB #741 | San Francisco, CA 94117 US Unsubscribe | Update Profile | Constant Contact Data Notice Constant Contact From:M S To:Council, City; ParkRec Commission Subject:Opposition to Further Tennis Court Conversion at Mitchell Park - Balancing Multi-Use Infrastructure Date:Tuesday, May 19, 2026 5:52:02 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Members of the City Council and the Parks and Recreation Commission, As a resident, taxpayer, and voter in Palo Alto, I am writing to express my strong opposition to any further conversion or expansion of tennis courts for pickleball at Mitchell Park. While I deeply value Palo Alto’s welcoming and open nature and support diverse recreational options, Mitchell Park has reached its absolute physical carrying capacity. Further expansion threatens to completely eliminate vital tennis infrastructure that serves our local community. Mitchell Park originally had 7 tennis courts. Of those, 3 have already been converted into pickleball courts. Additionally, the park's footprint was expanded by the size of another entire tennis court to add 4 more pickleball courts, leaving only 4 tennis courts remaining. Of these 4 remaining courts, 2 are regularly reserved for city coaches who get preference, meaning residents must vacate them. This leaves the general public with only 2 unreserved courts. Furthermore, the Mitchell Park courts represent one of only two sets of public tennis courts in the entire city that are lighted, which is absolutely critical for early morning and evening play, especially during the winter. Tennis players simply have nowhere else to go, whereas pickleball has already absorbed the majority of the footprint. The current concentration of sports traffic at this single location has created severe logistical challenges: 1. Chronic Weekend Parking Gridlock: The parking lots at Mitchell Park are routinely overwhelmed, particularly on weekends. Families with toddlers wanting to visit the Magical Bridge Playground and seniors attempting to access the Mitchell Park Library are frequently forced to turn away because parking spaces are entirely consumed by high- turnover sports traffic. 2. Regional Demand vs. Local Capacity: Because Mitchell Park has become a premier destination, it is currently absorbing a massive influx of players from surrounding Bay Area cities that have restricted pickleball growth. While we pride ourselves on being an open community, our neighborhood parks are physically constrained and cannot act as a regional buffer without dismantling the multi-use harmony of the space. 3. Environmental and Noise Impacts: The constant, high-frequency impact sound of pickleball creates a challenging environment for adjacent residents and quiet library users, requiring careful operational boundaries. With Palo Alto's population density, balancing public space is essential. At Mitchell Park, the ratio is heavily skewed: 16 pickleball courts compared to just 4 tennis courts (and effectively only 2 fully open to the public during coaching hours). This leaves an unsustainable metric of roughly 17,000 residents per tennis court compared to about 4,250 residents per pickleball court at this facility. I respectfully request that the City: - Enact a permanent moratorium on any new pickleball court construction or tennis court conversion at Mitchell Park to protect the remaining tennis infrastructure. - Implement a balanced reservation system that ensures local Palo Alto residents, families, and taxpayers who fund these parks have dependable, equitable access to courts during peak weekend and evening hours. - Establish strict operational guidelines, including clear play hours, the requirement of certified "quiet gear" (paddles and balls), and independent parking and noise impact audits. Our public parks must serve the broad public good of all users—families, children, seniors, and athletes alike. I urge you to protect the multi-use integrity of Mitchell Park. Sincerely, Maithreyan Srinivasan From:Star Teachout To:Council, City Subject:3606 ECR: poor Planning process regarding safety Date:Tuesday, May 19, 2026 4:41:23 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear council members, I’d like to address the disappointing approval process for the 3606 ECR development, with hopes of clarifying and improving it through the following suggestions: 1. Require Planning and Transportation to evaluate all applications for human safety: I am requesting that our Planning and Transportation departments evaluate EVERY project for the safety of pedestrians, cyclists, children, and other drivers—including any remaining applications submitted before our HE was approved on August 20, 2024. Naturally there will be some acceleration of schedules and reduction of scope per the laws (due to the minimums established for height, FAR, parking etc). In the responses to my 5 emails related to driveway placements, Planning never once acknowledged safety as an important standard to meet or investigate. It was generally stated they have no authority over these development plans due to AB 1893, DBL, AB 130, etc. This was a very premature—and in my mind, faulty— assumption. Safety is actually the one area identified in most state laws related to the HA act. The context of this application should have been evaluated, and a transportation study presented before approval. Instead, Transportation—who did not even attend the PTC review meeting—sent me a rather circular response—paraphrasing, “...in typical projects a transportation analysis is conducted, but since this was a BR and not typical, it was not done." And yet, the condition of approval was a traffic analysis! Who decides on this convoluted process which just further delays and possibly eliminates city oversight on a project? 2. Let ARB and PTC do their jobs: Give our very effective ARB and PTC commissioners proper packages—albeit truncated if Builder’s Remedy—to evaluate. There was time to do that, but it was not seen as a priority. Planning claimed the project had a strict approval timeline and only provided PTC with a 1-page parcel map! This was still a 4-hour meeting. Without including safety, this project timeline was mismanaged, and should have been a priority from its May 31, 2024 application submission through the April 13, 2026 approval meeting. When our ARB and PTC are allowed to do their jobs, the results are usually consistent with our desires as a city—buildings are safe, architecture is interesting, landscaping gorgeous, and traffic safety concerns identified within the context of adjacent commercial properties and shared patterns of transportation for its residents. 3. Improve communication with impacted residents: Towards improving public representation, better outreach, more safety-focused details included for public consideration, more concern communicated for the welfare of residents, and if possible a Transportation Study done before the approval. We residents encourage you to readjust your safety perspectives as that project moves forward—this should not be a rubber stamp process. We are hoping the Town Hall meeting will provide an overview of development impacts due to the current 9 projects between Page Mill and Arastradero. 4. Do not ignore safety featured in state and local laws: - The State of CA supports safety. I could find no state laws promoting diminished safety—we reduce scale, we lower speed limits, and we add raised crosswalks around schools and areas with heavy pedestrian foot-traffic. Few builder’s remedy projects present safety risks, but including safety in the process will identify those which do. [ref AB 1893, DBL, AB3177]. - Our Palo Alto Municipal Code and policies support safety: Palo Alto Municipal Code 18.24.030 Site Access, Palo Alto Municipal Code 21.28.250 Other improvements, and the Palo Alto 2030 Comprehensive Plan Chap 3: Transportation explicitly refer to it. [Programs will include alternative and innovate transportation processes, and the adverse impacts of automobile traffic on the environment in general and residential streets in particular will be reduced] Note: AB3177 does allow for a land dedication to provide a frontage road separating pedestrians and cyclists from egress traffic to the housing development. This is a safety feature, not a traffic mitigation! We in Barron Park hope you keep that on the bargaining table. [It may be necessary to carve out a small access lane only for residents within the housing development, bypassing the No Right Turn on Red limitation.] Respectfully, Star Teachout =========================== Resources for my reference and yours if helpful. AB 1893: SEC. 2. Section 65589.5 d(2) The housing development project... as proposed would have a specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety, and there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact without rendering the development unaffordable to low- and moderate-income household .. financially infeasible. As used in this paragraph, a “specific, adverse impact” means a significant, quantifiable, direct, and unavoidable impact, based on objective, identified written public health or safety standards, policies, or conditions as they existed on the date the application was deemed complete. Density Bonus Law: A city or county is not required to grant a waiver that causes a "specific, adverse impact upon public health, safety, or the environment”. AB3177 SECTION 66005.1 (c) (1) ...a land dedication cannot be imposed simply to "mitigate vehicular traffic impacts, achieving an adopted traffic level of service related to vehicular traffic, or achieving a desired roadway width." However, in (2) B "Discretionarily impose a land dedication requirement as a condition of approval of a specific housing development project for traffic safety features if the local agency makes a finding, specific to the housing development project and supported by substantial evidence, that the land dedication requirement is necessary to preserve the health, safety, and welfare of the public, including pedestrians, cyclists, and children." [Note: Is wasn’t clear the planner knew about AB 3177, which does allow land dedications to preserve the safety of pedestrians, cyclists, and children. The PTC did an amazing job trying to make sense of what amounted to a “black box” without the information needed to assess its suitability.] Palo Alto Municipal Code 18.24.030 Site Access (a) Contextual Design Criteria To provide facilities and accommodations for pedestrians, vehicles, cyclists, and transit users to safely and efficiently access and circulate both within individual sites and in the site’s surrounding context. Site access should include the following elements: (1) Site circulation and access that presents a clear hierarchy and connectivity pattern both within a project and to adjacent sidewalks and transit stops. This hierarchy should prioritize pedestrians, bikes, vehicles, and utility/loading access in the order listed. This hierarchy may provide separate access for vehicles and other modes, or demonstrate how all modes are accommodated in shared access points. Palo Alto Municipal Code 21.28.250 Other improvements. Other improvements necessary or convenient to insure conformity to or implementation of the comprehensive plan or other local ordinances and to insure the public health, safety and welfare, shall be required. In addition, improvements outside of the subdivision may be required where such improvements are required for the general health, safety and welfare, and where conditions necessitating such improvements are caused or aggravated by the subdivision. (Ord. 3157 § 1 (part), 1979) Palo Alto 2030 Comprehensive Plan Chap 3: Transportation VISION: Palo Alto will build and maintain a sustainable network of safe, accessible and efficient transportation and parking solutions for all users and modes, while protecting and enhancing the quality of life in Palo Alto. Programs will include alternative and innovate transportation processes, and the adverse impacts of automobile traffic on the environment in general and residential streets in particular will be reduced. Streets will be safe, attractive and designed to enhance the quality and aesthetics of Palo Alto neighborhoods. Palo Alto recognizes the regional nature of its transportation system, and will be a leader in seeking regional transportation solutions, prioritizing Caltrain service improvements and railroad grade separations. INTRODUCTION This Element addresses transportation and mobility issues comprehensively and acknowledges that the future will be different than the present and the past. Recognizing changing demographics and travel preferences, new technologies and new opportunities, the Element provides a policy framework which includes solutions for implementation today in order to lay the groundwork for the future. Together with investments in infrastructure, the policy framework seeks to reduce reliance on single-occupant vehicles, address congestion and reduce through traffic and non-resident parking in Palo Alto neighborhoods, leading to an integrated transportation system that serves local, regional and intercity travel. This Element meets the State requirement for a Circulation Element, addressing the various aspects of circulation, including complete streets, expressways and freeways, transit, walking, bicycling, parking and special transportation needs. Palo Alto Safety Action Plan: It is consistent with your plan to minimize cut-through traffic which discourages and endangers pedestrian and bicycling as a mode of transportation 1 Reducing traffic fatalities and serious injuries 2 The City will commit to making design, maintenance, and operations decisions that prioritize safety, and will build off of the outreach completed throughout this Plan 3 The City will commit to support areas zoned for increased density and infill development with transportation facilities and improvements to enable safer multi-modal transportation for present and future road users 6 The City will look for opportunities to institutionalize safety into all aspects of policies, planning, programming, design, implementation, and maintenance, with a focus on those efforts that improve safety at the population scale through change to travel patterns, land use conditions, socioeconomic considerations, and built environment provisions From:SamTrans To:Council, City Subject:SamTrans Headquarters Relocation – New Location Effective June 1, 2026 Date:Tuesday, May 19, 2026 4:26:15 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious ofopening attachments and clicking on links. View this email in your browser We’ve Moved — New Headquarters Location We’ve Moved — New Headquarters Location The San Mateo County Transit District, serving Caltrain, SamTrans, and the Transportation Authority, has relocated its headquarters to Gateway at Millbrae Station. Effective June 1, 2026 166 N. Rollins Road Millbrae, CA 94030 Customer Service and Ticket Sales Customer service and the ticket office are available at this location. Monday–Friday, 7 a.m. – 7 p.m. Weekends and holidays, 8 a.m. – 5 p.m. 1-800-660-4287 TTY: 650-508-6448 Thank you for your continued support. We look forward to serving you from our new location. Learn More Copyright (C) 2026 San Mateo County Transportation Authority. All rights reserved. 2025 Call for Projects Our mailing address is: 166 N Rollins Rd., Millbrae, CA 94030 Want to change how you receive these emails? You can update your preferences or unsubscribe From:Star Teachout To:Council, City Subject:Bicycle safety at 156 Cal Ave + Objective Standards comment Date:Tuesday, May 19, 2026 4:04:26 PM Dear Council Members, 156 California Ave project I was unable to unmute and join the conversation on the 156 Cal Ave application, and w ithout diminishing the valid resident complaints I wanted to join others in applauding the efforts of the working group and applicant for crafting the 2.0 project. [It would be very appreciated for the completed 3606 ECR traffic report to be followed by this same type of negotiation for pedestrian/cyclist safety.] Council member Burt's comment on difficulties achieving the overall high percentage of required BMR units is not trivial. My main reason for speaking on this item was to address what Sharron C also mentioned— keeping an eye on bicycle safety in this very active transportation zone. Palo Alto High School, Green Middle School, and possibly Escondido Spanish immersion are all funneled through Park and California Avenue. Commuters to Stanford and Stanford Research Park are also heavy users, as are those traveling to Peers Park, and even Ventura/Barron Park cyclists to Town & Country and downtown Palo Alto. The Park Avenue x Oregon Expressway on- ramp will also see a large increase in traffic not only from this proposed development, but also from the Fry’s housing expansion. Please enlist Transportation to actively review the traffic patterns for this high-development area with a mind for bicycle safety. 4103 Old Trace Rd project Council member Burt and Lauing - Thank you both for [what I think I heard] your recommending we establish a clear policy about what satisfies the “objective standard” (found in AB 1893: SEC. 2. Section 65589.5 d(2) clause). Relevant to all Builder’s Remedy projects, this not only requires clarification of objective standard, but also the full list of standards, policies, or conditions: ...The housing development project... as proposed would have a specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety, and there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact without rendering the development unaffordable to low- and moderate-income household .. financially infeasible. As used in this paragraph, a “specific, adverse impact” means a significant, quantifiable, direct, and unavoidable impact, based on objective, identified written public health or safety standards, policies, or conditions as they existed on the date the application was deemed complete. I would remind you that at a prior council meeting I brought up AB3177 (2) B (which amends SECTION 66005.1 (c) (1)). This prevents a city from requiring a road widening just to mitigate traffic, but it does allow a city to "Discretionarily impose a land dedication requirement as a condition of approval of a specific housing development project for traffic safety features if the local agency makes a finding, specific to the housing development project and supported by substantial evidence, that the land dedication requirement is necessary to preserve the health, safety, and welfare of the public, including pedestrians, cyclists, and children.” It may be necessary at 3606 ECR to provide a dedicated “frontage” road within their property to make egress safer than existing conditions. It is disappointing that the 4103 Old Trace Rd project was evaluated by Transportation but the 3606 ECR project was not. I will be writing to you about how the Planning process was very insufficient, with recommendations to prioritize safety. Respectfully, Star Teachout From:Karinna Hurley To:ParkRec Commission; Council, City; papc.secretary@gmail.com Subject:To Save the Palo Alto Tennis Courts Date:Tuesday, May 19, 2026 3:53:33 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear City Council Members of Palo Alto, this is Stella Rae Rocca. I am in 5th grade at El Carmelo and enjoy and appreciate playing in the tennis courts of the City of Palo Alto. If you remove some of the tennis courts just so the pickleball players will have to wait a second less to get a court, the other tennis courts along the city will get crowded and full. As a result, people will have to wait longer to get a tennis court and how long one can play will decrease. Furthermore, tennis is my favorite sport and how I get most of my exercise. Albeit, please DO NOT REMOVE THE PALO ALTO TENNIS COURTS. Sincerely, Stella Rae Rocca From:Satyajeet Salgar To:ParkRec Commission; Council, City; papc.secretary@gmail.com Subject:Opposition to converting Mitchell Park tennis courts Date:Tuesday, May 19, 2026 2:31:26 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Parks and Recreation Commission, City Council, and Palo Alto Pickleball Club, I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed conversion of Tennis Courts 3 and 4 at Mitchell Park into additional pickleball courts. While I understand the growing popularity of pickleball, expanding these facilities at the expense of our existing tennis courts is detrimental to the local tennis community. It is already quite difficult to find available tennis courts for community play in the area. Removing these courts at Mitchell Park will only exacerbate the problem, displacing players and making court time even harder to secure at both Mitchell Park and Rinconada Park. Given that there are currently 15 pickleball courts and only 4 tennis courts at Mitchell Park, removing half of the remaining tennis courts would severely impact local tennis players. I kindly urge you to consider alternative locations for pickleball expansion that do not eliminate our existing tennis infrastructure. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Satyajeet Salgar From:Hui Cen To:ParkRec Commission; Council, City; Howard, Adam; PlayingFields Subject:Fwd: URGENT: Protect Mitchell Park – Oppose Further Pickleball Expansion and Prioritize Palo Alto Residents Date:Tuesday, May 19, 2026 12:55:17 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Subject: URGENT: Protect Mitchell Park – Oppose Further Pickleball Expansion and Prioritize Palo Alto Residents Dear Mayor, Councilmen, and Members of the Parks and Recreation Commission, As a resident, taxpayer, and voter in Palo Alto, I am writing to express my strong opposition to any further expansion or conversion of tennis courts for pickleball at Mitchell Park. While I support diverse recreational activities, Mitchell Park has reached its absolute carrying capacity. It is a vital, multi-use neighborhood hub anchored by the Mitchell Park Library, the Magical Bridge Playground, and surrounding residential communities. Unchecked pickleball expansion is actively dismantling the core functions of these essential civic spaces. We are currently facing three critical crises that the City must address before any further infrastructure decisions are made: 1. Severe Parking Deprivation for Families & Seniors: The parking lots at Mitchell Park are chronically gridlocked. Families with toddlers wanting to visit the playground and seniors attempting to access the library are routinely forced to turn away because parking spaces are overwhelmed by high-turnover pickleball traffic. 2. The Regional Subsidy Disparity: Data indicates that a vast majority of the current pickleball influx consists of non-residents coming from surrounding Bay Area cities that have rightfully restricted pickleball growth. Palo Alto taxpayers should not sacrifice their local peace and tax dollars to absorb the regional demand of other municipalities. 3. Unmitigated Noise Pollution: The constant, high-frequency impact sound of pickleball is fundamentally different from tennis and creates an unlivable environment for adjacent residents and quiet library users. This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. Mark Safe Report We applaud the Council's past inclinations to halt expansion, but we need permanent, legally binding policy protections. We respectfully demand that the City: * Enact an immediate, permanent moratorium on any new pickleball court construction or tennis court conversion at Mitchell Park. * Mandate a "Palo Alto Resident Priority" system using a zip-code verified reservation portal, allocating at least 70% of peak-hour slots exclusively to local residents. * Implement strict operational restrictions, including limiting play hours from 9:00 AM to 7:00 PM, enforcing the use of certified "quiet gear" (paddles and balls), and conducting independent, third-party noise and parking impact audits. Our public parks must serve the broad public good of Palo Alto's families, children, and seniors, not the aggressive expansion goals of a single sports club. I urge you to stand firmly with your local constituents and protect the integrity of Mitchell Park. Thank you for your time, leadership, and dedication to our community. Sincerely, Debra Cen 502 Lowell Ave. Palo Alto Sent from my iPhone From:Becky Wolf-Loretz To:Vargas-Aguilera, Elisa; lief.christensen@paloalto.gov; City Mgr; Pigman, Sophie; Council, City; Stone, Greer; Veenker, Vicki Cc:barr@stanford.edu; ladoris cordell; Viji Sundaram; bcartwright@padailypost.com; Maeve Brown; Julia M. Adams; Vacca, Elizabeth; nathanial.r.hill@hud.gov; Mino Ngo Subject:Re: Another death at the opportunity center. Date:Tuesday, May 19, 2026 11:28:35 AM Attachments:IMG_9865.png CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking onlinks. To the City of Palo Alto and Elected Officials, This is a supplement to my message sent a few moments ago because it suddenly struck me how many deaths have occurred within such a small proximity inside this building in such a short period of time. Last week, John Kincaid of Room 313 died. In January, Debbie of Room 315 died. In December, Cynthia Carney of Room 215 passed away. Now Sheldon M. Jackson of Room 418 has collapsed and died in front of the Opportunity Center at only 37 years old. At the same time, residents throughout the building continue experiencing repeated emergency room visits, respiratory illness, severe physical decline, neurological complaints, and worsening medical conditions in rooms connected to documented concerns involving mold, water intrusion, and unpermitted work. This is an emergency. This needs to be investigated immediately. I am asking the City and elected officials to stop treating these incidents as isolated events and begin looking seriously at the broader pattern occurring inside this building. There are too many people becoming severely ill in too small of an area for this to continue being ignored. I hope you know what a slap in the face it was to show a ribbon-cutting ceremony for a $37.2 million supportive housing plan when you can’t even manage your own backyard of the opportunity center. Residence are dying and no one is doing a thing. Those you who work at the city of Palo Alto, it is your job to intervene and stop this. And the elected officials that I am including, you serve the entire city, not just the wealthy ones. This is a disgrace. This demands action. Rebecca Wolf Opportunity Center Resident Palo Alto On Tue, May 19, 2026 at 11:18 AM Becky Wolf-Loretz <beckywolfloretz@gmail.com> wrote: To the City of Palo Alto, Another resident of the Opportunity Center is dead. Sheldon M. Jackson, 37 years old, collapsed in front of the building on Sunday. Emergency responders administered Narcan and CPR, but he did not survive. His body remained outside the Opportunity Center for hours while residents walked past in shock and grief. On April 28, 2026, the City issued a Notice of Violation involving mold, water intrusion, and unpermitted work at this building. Then the City stepped away. During that time, residents have continued getting sick, continued being displaced, and continued receiving eviction notices instead of meaningful protection. The Notice of Violation was immediately removed from public visibility. Residents were not properly informed of their rights. I informed the City of this and nothing was done. Cynthia Gonzalez, a 69-year-old disabled resident, lost her housing. I received an eviction notice despite my own room being identified in the City findings. Tracy in Unit 213 goes to the hospital multiple times a week. Brian and Aaliyah, who live near units connected to repeated health complaints and deaths, have spent much of a pregnancy surrounded by remediation and instability that no expecting mother should have been forced to endure. I myself cannot get out of bed right now. I cannot properly use my right hand. I have repeatedly reported severe health decline while living in this environment. I warned agencies repeatedly that vulnerable residents were deteriorating. I warned that emergency calls here were becoming routine. I warned that conditions inside this building were dangerous. No one took it seriously enough. Now another person has died — collapsing directly in front of the building. So I am asking plainly: How many more medical emergencies, collapses, hospitalizations, and deaths will occur before meaningful intervention finally happens? Sincerely, Rebecca Wolf Opportunity Center Resident Palo Alto https://www.linkedin.com/posts/becky-wolf-loretz-8a8bb7273_silenceisnotsurvivable-abode-cityofpaloalto-activity-7461165842936983552- ctAe? From:Becky Wolf-Loretz To:Vargas-Aguilera, Elisa; lief.christensen@paloalto.gov; City Mgr; Pigman, Sophie; Council, City; Stone, Greer; Veenker, Vicki Subject:Another death at the opportunity center. Date:Tuesday, May 19, 2026 11:19:24 AM Attachments:IMG_9865.png IMG_9873.png IMG_9875.png IMG_9874.png CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking onlinks. To the City of Palo Alto, Another resident of the Opportunity Center is dead. Sheldon M. Jackson, 37 years old, collapsed in front of the building on Sunday. Emergency responders administered Narcan and CPR, but he did not survive. His body remained outside the Opportunity Center for hours while residents walked past in shock and grief. On April 28, 2026, the City issued a Notice of Violation involving mold, water intrusion, and unpermitted work at this building. Then the City stepped away. During that time, residents have continued getting sick, continued being displaced, and continued receiving eviction notices instead of meaningful protection. The Notice of Violation was immediately removed from public visibility. Residents were not properly informed of their rights. I informed the City of this and nothing was done. Cynthia Gonzalez, a 69-year-old disabled resident, lost her housing. I received an eviction notice despite my own room being identified in the City findings. Tracy in Unit 213 goes to the hospital multiple times a week. Brian and Aaliyah, who live near units connected to repeated health complaints and deaths, have spent much of a pregnancy surrounded by remediation and instability that no expecting mother should have been forced to endure. I myself cannot get out of bed right now. I cannot properly use my right hand. I have repeatedly reported severe health decline while living in this environment. I warned agencies repeatedly that vulnerable residents were deteriorating. I warned that emergency calls here were becoming routine. I warned that conditions inside this building were dangerous. No one took it seriously enough. Now another person has died — collapsing directly in front of the building. So I am asking plainly: How many more medical emergencies, collapses, hospitalizations, and deaths will occur before meaningful intervention finally happens? Sincerely, Rebecca Wolf Opportunity Center Resident Palo Alto https://www.linkedin.com/posts/becky-wolf-loretz-8a8bb7273_silenceisnotsurvivable-abode-cityofpaloalto-activity-7461165842936983552- ctAe? From:Christopher E Stein Subject:FREE migratory bird project for your community members and YOU. More Date:Tuesday, May 19, 2026 11:06:22 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments andclicking on links. i To: CA mayors and administrators Subject: FREE project for everyone As , you undoubtedly know, the landscapes our migratory birds rely on are becoming increasingly fragmented. To help bridge these gaps, Rotary International’s Earth Network Rotary Club has launched Project SkyBridge—a free, inclusive, grassroots initiative designed to protect migratory species by establishing "habitat stepping stones" across the globe. Already there are more than 100 names on the SkyBridge map (from three continents). What is Project SkyBridge? Project SkyBridge focuses on designating and mapping habitat stepping stones from balconies, to backyards, corporate campuses, agricultural lands, ranch lands, and public community spaces. We recognize that impactful conservation doesn't always require purchasing large tracts of wilderness. By empowering individuals, schools, and municipalities to designate even small patches of land—incorporating native plants and reliable water sources (when possible)—we can collectively protect continuous, safe flyways. This initiative is entirely free, and everyone—whether a Rotarian or not—is invited to participate. Why Partner with Your Community? Powered by Rotary International's global network, Project SkyBridge offers a unique bridge to civic leaders, local businesses, and volunteers who want to support environmental work but need local ecological expertise. We would love to collaborate with your community members to: Engage Your Citizens: Give your citizens a tangible, actionable way to register their own properties as official stepping stones. Expand Community Outreach: Connect your community with local Rotary clubs to co-host habitat workshops, native planting days, and educational events. Map the Impact: Help us track and visualize the creation of these interconnected habitat corridors across your region. How to Get Involved Putting your habitat spot on the map takes just 3–5 minutes. Please share this invitation with your community and have them register their habitat space here: SPANISH This message needs your attention No employee in your company has ever replied to this person. Mark Safe Report https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSdcWfO_nfTsWRx4ND9CKn- QCAAWfgV4PCB4LJ2mvHD06i6Tnw/viewform ENGLISH Please help us build a bridge in the sky by protecting the earth spots that migrators need to make a successful journey. Thank you for your thoughtful consideration to protecting birds and the places they need, today and tomorrow. THANK YOU...and please share. This is an inclusive project meant for everyone. Respectfully, The Project SkyBridge Team Earth Network Rotary Club | https://earthnetworkrotary.org/Page/project-skybridge Laurie Zuckerman (Idaho, USA) Karin Tome (Pennsylvania, USA) Elsabe Falkson (Ontario, Canada) Neeraj Bhatnagar (India) Joshua Cespedes Campos (Costa Rica) Chris Stein (Minnesota, USA) Christopher E. Stein, Program Manager National Heritage Areas and Community Conservation Partnerships National Park Service, Interior Regions 3, 4, and 5 (Midwest) (402) 881-1387 From:Raymond Goins To:Council, City; hrc@cityofpaloalto.or; nning.Commission@paloalto.gov Subject:33 Encina Ave-Opportunity Center Mold Date:Tuesday, May 19, 2026 11:04:46 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. i Good morning, council members, My name is Raymond Goins. I am a resident who is housed within the Opportunity Center. https://padailypost.newsbank.com/doc/news/1A8320821C1452F0? 05-15 I filed a complaint with code enforcement, Ms. Vargas, about the flooding and mold in my housing unit. This report indicates that 22 of the apartments have tested positive for mold. I would like to know what the city is doing to ensure its residents are getting the attention and care this requires. We have residents who are on breathing machines and have lung problems; this prolonged exposure could put our residents at further health risk. I ask that the city put CO2 readers and air filters in every unit to ensure that everybody can breathe free healthy air. Just because we are marginalized and can't afford certain things that wealthier residents can, we should not have to pay with our health and lives. I ask that you all address this problem and inform all the residents who have mold about their findings. I have spoken with the associate of Vargas at code enforcement, and I was told that it would not be resolved until at least next week. This is not acceptable, as community members' health is at risk. Thank you for your time. Raymond Goins This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. Mark Safe Report From:Richard Sachs To:Council, City Subject:Cubberley Community Center Date:Tuesday, May 19, 2026 9:41:36 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear Council Members, As a longtime Palo Alto homeowner who has lived and worked in this city for most of my adult life, I want to express my strong support for the Cubberley Community Center and urge you to move forward with the ballot measure for its improvement and maintenance. The CCC has been an invaluable resource and a genuine source of joy for our community. I live near the center and see firsthand how much my neighbors — families with children, adults, and pet owners alike — cherish its offerings: Open Studios, the playing fields, the library facilities, and more. It is a gathering place that brings our neighborhood together in meaningful ways. A community asset of this caliber deserves sustained investment. I strongly encourage the Council to place the general tax measure on the ballot so Palo Alto residents can vote to secure the CCC's future. Thank you for your continued service to our city. Respectfully, Richard Sachs This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first email to your company. Mark Safe Report From:Gilbert Wong To:ParkRec Commission; Council, City; papc.secretary@gmail.com Subject:Support for Additional Palo Alto Pickleball Courts at Mitchell Park Date:Tuesday, May 19, 2026 8:50:40 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear members of the Palo Alto Parks & Rec Commission and City Council: I live in Palo Alto, and am writing in support of creating eight additional pickleball courts at Mitchell Park. Pickleball has been hugely impactful on my life and health. As I have entered my more senior age, I was looking for a structured activity to provide benefits on health and social interactions. This unique sport has provided this positive effect beyond my expectations as I now play approximately 5 times a week for about 3 hours a session (15+ hours per week) at Mitchell Park. I also play when travelling to other states (Hawaii, Arizona, other) but Mitchell Park is truly unique with the level of friendliness and camaraderie. Since beginning a year ago, Mitchell Park pickleball patrons have grown significantly in number and in real need of additional court space to extend these positive benefits to many others. Thank you very much for your consideration. Sincerely yours, Gilbert Wong, M.D. 940 Elsinore Dr, Palo Alto, CA 94303 This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first email to your company. Mark Safe Report From:Yong Guo To:Council, City Subject:Save tennis courts at Mitchell Park Date:Tuesday, May 19, 2026 8:24:36 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. To whom it may concern: I have been living in Palo Alto for almost 20 years. I am writing to strongly object further expansion of pickleball courts onto tennis courts #3 and #4 at Mitchell Park. First of all, Mitchell Park is a multipurpose park which serves many different sports and events. It should not become a pickleball center of the Bay Area. Secondly, Mitchell Park is already suffering from overcrowding in terms of parking, as a result of which people’s normal activities, such as going to the library, playing in the park, attending events, get affected. Adding more pickleball courts will make it much worse. Thirdly, when making the expansion request, the Palo Alto Pickleball Club(PAPC) always uses misleading information to support their claims. They always say that tennis court outnumbers pickleball court by 51 to 17. However, they ignore the fact that nearly half of the tennis courts belong to the school district. Not only these courts are not always available to the public, but also many of these courts are in very poor conditions and are not playable. As for lighted courts, the number is actually 17 to 17. For normal working people, they need lighted courts to play after work. Fourthly , Mitchell Park is the only park to the south of Oregon Expressway that has lighted tennis courts. With court 1 and 2 occupied by city tennis programs most of the evening time , court 3 and 4 are the only two courts that are open to the public in south Palo Alto in the evening. Converting these two courts into pickleball courts will make it very inconvenient for the local players. One argument from the PAPC is that they want the convenience for their players so they want to have all courts at Mitchell Park. Have they thought about the inconvenience for other people? So I strongly object further pickleball expansion at Mitchell Park. I am not against the growth of pickleball. I just don’t think it’s right to let pickleball take over Mitchell Park. Regards, Yong Guo From:Yong Guo To:Council, City Subject:Save tennis courts at Mitchell Park Date:Tuesday, May 19, 2026 8:24:19 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. To whom it may concern: I have been living in Palo Alto for almost 20 years. I am writing to strongly object further expansion of pickleball courts onto tennis courts #3 and #4 at Mitchell Park. First of all, Mitchell Park is a multipurpose park which serves many different sports and events. It should not become a pickleball center of the Bay Area. Secondly, Mitchell Park is already suffering from overcrowding in terms of parking, as a result of which people’s normal activities, such as going to the library, playing in the park, attending events, get affected. Adding more pickleball courts will make it much worse. Thirdly, when making the expansion request, the Palo Alto Pickleball Club(PAPC) always uses misleading information to support their claims. They always say that tennis court outnumbers pickleball court by 51 to 17. However, they ignore the fact that nearly half of the tennis courts belong to the school district. Not only these courts are not always available to the public, but also many of these courts are in very poor conditions and are not playable. As for lighted courts, the number is actually 17 to 17. For normal working people, they need lighted courts to play after work. Fourthly , Mitchell Park is the only park to the south of Oregon Expressway that has lighted tennis courts. With court 1 and 2 occupied by city tennis programs most of the evening time , court 3 and 4 are the only two courts that are open to the public in south Palo Alto in the evening. Converting these two courts into pickleball courts will make it very inconvenient for the local players. One argument from the PAPC is that they want the convenience for their players so they want to have all courts at Mitchell Park. Have they thought about the inconvenience for other people? So I strongly object further pickleball expansion at Mitchell Park. I am not against the growth of pickleball. I just don’t think it’s right to let pickleball take over Mitchell Park. Regards, Yong Guo From:Yong Guo To:Council, City Subject:Save tennis courts at Mitchell Park Date:Tuesday, May 19, 2026 8:24:17 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. To whom it may concern: I have been living in Palo Alto for almost 20 years. I am writing to strongly object further expansion of pickleball courts onto tennis courts #3 and #4 at Mitchell Park. First of all, Mitchell Park is a multipurpose park which serves many different sports and events. It should not become a pickleball center of the Bay Area. Secondly, Mitchell Park is already suffering from overcrowding in terms of parking, as a result of which people’s normal activities, such as going to the library, playing in the park, attending events, get affected. Adding more pickleball courts will make it much worse. Thirdly, when making the expansion request, the Palo Alto Pickleball Club(PAPC) always uses misleading information to support their claims. They always say that tennis court outnumbers pickleball court by 51 to 17. However, they ignore the fact that nearly half of the tennis courts belong to the school district. Not only these courts are not always available to the public, but also many of these courts are in very poor conditions and are not playable. As for lighted courts, the number is actually 17 to 17. For normal working people, they need lighted courts to play after work. Fourthly , Mitchell Park is the only park to the south of Oregon Expressway that has lighted tennis courts. With court 1 and 2 occupied by city tennis programs most of the evening time , court 3 and 4 are the only two courts that are open to the public in south Palo Alto in the evening. Converting these two courts into pickleball courts will make it very inconvenient for the local players. One argument from the PAPC is that they want the convenience for their players so they want to have all courts at Mitchell Park. Have they thought about the inconvenience for other people? So I strongly object further pickleball expansion at Mitchell Park. I am not against the growth of pickleball. I just don’t think it’s right to let pickleball take over Mitchell Park. Regards, Yong Guo From:Karinna Hurley To:ParkRec Commission; Council, City; papc.secretary@gmail.com Subject:Concern Regarding Proposed Reduction of Tennis Courts Date:Tuesday, May 19, 2026 7:30:20 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear City Parks and Recreation Department and City Council Members, I am writing to express my strong concern regarding the proposed reduction of public tennis courts in favor of additional pickleball courts. My family has been actively involved in the city’s tennis programs for several years. My oldest daughter has participated in city-run tennis classes for the past three years, and this year my youngest daughter also began attending. I have also joined the adult tennis lesson program when I am able to secure a spot. Across all age groups, we consistently encounter waitlists. The city’s own programming clearly demonstrates sustained and even unmet demand for tennis. While I recognize and respect the growing popularity of pickleball, reducing existing tennis courts to accommodate it is short-sighted and does not reflect the demonstrated needs of the broader community. Tennis participation in our city is not declining; rather, it is constrained by limited programming capacity. I respectfully urge the city to consider solutions that expand facilities for both sports rather than reallocating existing tennis courts. Preserving balanced access will better serve the community and ensure that long-standing programs are not diminished in response to newer demands. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Karinna Hurley From:Charlene Liao To:ParkRec Commission; Council, City Subject:Stop expansion of pickleball courts in Mitchell Park Date:Tuesday, May 19, 2026 12:19:10 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Park and Recreation staff, Dear City Council Members, As a resident, taxpayer, and voter in Palo Alto, I express my strong opposition to any further expansion or conversion of tennis courts for pickleball at Mitchell Park. While I support diverse recreational activities, Mitchell Park has reached its absolute carrying capacity. It is a vital, multi-use neighborhood hub anchored by the Mitchell Park Library, the Magical Bridge Playground, Ada's Cafe, and tennis courts (yes tennis courts are a feature of Mitchell Park). Many of us use the park for other recreation like tai chi and dance. One sport should not dominate the park and create unpleasant disruptive noise to both park goers and neighbors. Mitchell Park is a shared PALO ALTO resource. I doubt that the people trying to enjoy the park, listen to the birds and watching the stars (or movies in the summer organized by the City) want to hear the persistent and high-intensity noise of pickleball. Please leave the few remaining tennis courts alone. Unchecked pickleball expansion is actively dismantling the core functions of these essential civic spaces. We are currently facing three critical crises that the City must address before any further infrastructure decisions are made related to the expansion of pickleball courts: 1. Severe Parking Deprivation for Families & Seniors: The parking lots at Mitchell Park are chronically gridlocked. Families with toddlers wanting to visit the playground and seniors attempting to access the library are routinely forced to turn away because parking spaces are overwhelmed by high-turnover pickleball traffic. 2. The Regional Subsidy Disparity: Data indicates that a vast majority of the current pickleball influx consists of non-residents coming from surrounding Bay Area cities that have rightfully restricted pickleball growth. Palo Alto taxpayers should not sacrifice their local peace and tax dollars to absorb the regional demand of other municipalities. 3. Unmitigated Noise Pollution: The constant, high-frequency impact sound of pickleball is fundamentally different from tennis and creates an unlivable environment for adjacent residents and quiet library users. We applaud the Council's past inclinations to halt expansion, but we need permanent, legally binding policy protections. We respectfully demand that the City: * Enact an immediate, permanent moratorium on any new pickleball court construction or tennis court conversion at Mitchell Park. The PAPC should have enough funds now to build their own PRIVATE CLUB instead of using City resources to continually support this single sport with many nuisances. * Mandate a "Palo Alto Resident Priority" system using a zip-code verified reservation portal, allocating at least 70% of peak-hour slots exclusively to local residents. * Implement strict operational restrictions, including enforcing the use of certified "quiet gear" (paddles and balls), and conducting independent, third-party noise and parking impact audits. Our public parks must serve the broad public good of Palo Alto's families, children, and seniors, not the aggressive expansion goals of a single sports club. This proposal also hurts tennis players. I urge you to stand firmly with your local constituents and protect the integrity of Mitchell Park. Charlene Liao Middlefield Road Palo Alto, CA 94303 From:Peggy Yao To:ParkRec Commission; Council, City Subject:Stop expansion of pickleball courts at Mitchell Park Date:Tuesday, May 19, 2026 12:07:11 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear Sir/Madam, As a resident, taxpayer, and voter in Palo Alto, I express my strong opposition to any further expansion or conversion of tennis courts for pickleball at Mitchell Park. This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. Mark Safe Report sports club. I urge you to stand firmly with your local constituents and protect the integrity of Mitchell Park. From:Srdjan Kovacevic To:ParkRec Commission; Council, City; Howard, Adam; PlayingFields Cc:PATC Board; thomassarsfield@mac.com; marionparr@gmail.com Subject:Concerns About Tennis-to-Pickleball Court Conversion Date:Monday, May 18, 2026 11:13:28 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear City of Palo Alto Parks and Recreation Department, I am writing on behalf of the Palo Alto Tennis Club (PATC) regarding the City’s consideration of converting existing tennis courts to pickleball courts – specifically, converting Tennis Courts 3 and 4 at Mitchell Park into 6 to 8 pickleball courts. If this conversion proceeds, it would effectively displace all community tennis play from Mitchell Park, as the only two remaining tennis courts are primarily used for City-sanctioned lessons. Tennis players displaced from Mitchell Park or any other converted courts would be forced to find alternative courts elsewhere in the City. Finding an available tennis court is already extremely difficult, if not impossible, during peak hours. This change would only exacerbate the difficulty. Additionally, Tennis Courts 3 and 4 at Mitchell Park are among the very few public courts in the City that are lit for evening and nighttime play. Many working players rely on these courts to play after work. PATC supports community tennis in Palo Alto by organizing drop-in sessions open to the public, as well as junior tournaments. We believe this issue should not pit the tennis and pickleball communities against each other. Instead, we urge the City to explore expanding access to both sports through the construction of new courts rather than converting existing tennis courts, which would diminish valuable and already limited tennis resources. Thank you for considering our concerns. Sincerely, Srdjan Kovacevic This message needs your attention This is their first mail to some recipients. Mark Safe Report Powered by Mimecast President Palo Alto Tennis Club From:Linlin Yang To:ParkRec Commission; Council, City Cc:olenka@magicalbridge.org; harriet@magicalbridge.org Subject:Please Retain Mitchell Park Tennis Courts 3 and 4 - Support for Magical Tennis Date:Monday, May 18, 2026 10:33:36 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Parks and Recreation Commissioners, Magical Tennis for Neurodiverse Participants at Mitchell Park is a wonderful and important program. My child has benefited not only from the exercise and fresh air, but especially from being part of a welcoming community of peers. At Magical Tennis, coaches and participants work together on tennis skills, fun, confidence, and friendship. We meet on Mitchell Park tennis courts 3 and 4, which are ideally located near the Magical Bridge Playground, the library, and Ada’s Cafe — making the experience even more accessible and inclusive for families. Losing this unique program would be a significant loss for the disabled community and the families who rely on it. Please retain Mitchell Park tennis courts 3 and 4. Sincerely, Linlin From:Unmesh Vartak To:Council, City Cc:ParkRec Commission Subject:Strong Opposition to Further Pickleball Expansion at Mitchell Park Date:Monday, May 18, 2026 9:37:57 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear Members of the Palo Alto City Council, As a Palo Alto resident, taxpayer, and voter, I am writing to express my strong opposition to any further expansion or conversion of tennis courts for pickleball at Mitchell Park. While I support diverse recreational activities, Mitchell Park has reached its absolute carrying capacity. It feels as though the park is being taken over by a single sport, which is actively stifling other recreational activities and dismantling the core functions of this essential civic space. Mitchell Park is a vital, multi-use neighborhood hub anchored by the Mitchell Park Library, the Magical Bridge Playground, and surrounding residential communities. We are currently facing three critical crises that the City must address before any further infrastructure decisions are made: • Severe Parking Deprivation for Families & Seniors: This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first mail to some recipients. Mark Safe Report Powered by Mimecast From:Robert Marinaro To:Scott Petersen Cc:Bulatao, Eric; Council, City; City Mgr; Chris Schremp; Chip Wytmar; Sharon Elliot; Ceci Kettendorf; Barry Katz; Arthur Keller; Becky Sanders; Deborah j Marinaro Subject:RVs on the Corner of East Charleston and Fabian Way in Front of Charleston Village Condominiums Date:Monday, May 18, 2026 9:31:39 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Scott, Thank you again for this e-mail. I have passed your Charleston Village Condominiums numerous times and it seems as tough these two RVs are not moving and today there was a total of 11 RVs on this short segment of Fabian Way from E.Charleston to San Antonio Rd. Not only are these RVs in front of your complex but this section of E. Charleston Rd. also severs as the gateway to our south Palo Alto neighborhoods. I hope you don’t mind but I’m going to forward your message to Eric Bulatao, who is the Palo Alto policeman on a special detail to police these RVs, in addition to City Council and several others that need to keep abreast of this ongoing problem. Month after month goes by and the City has not taken the hard actions to remove these RVs from our streets. It is sinful that this situation is allowed to the detriment of Palo Alto residents and businesses. Scott - And rather than submit your concerns to Palo Alto 311 (who knows where that goes) I would encourage you to send them often and directly to Eric and the City Council. Regards, Bob Marinaro Begin forwarded message: From: Scott E Petersen <scottepetersen@gmail.com> Subject: Re: Palo Alto's Ongoing OSV Situation - - Bob's OSV Count (4/24/26) Date: May 9, 2026 at 11:04:59 PM PDT To: Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> Cc: charlestonvillagehoa@gmail.com Greetings Robert, Please add me to your RV mailing list. I have submitted about a dozen Palo Alto 311 reports concerning RV parking adjacent to our Condo Complex on Fabian Way. While some of the RVs have left within a day or two of my posts, others have lingered longer. We are now on at least day 17 (possibly longer) with a current RV who refuses to move despite 2 police postings on their windshield (last posting was on Monday, May 4, 2026. Clearly the illegal overnight RV camping and 72 hour parking laws in Palo Alto are not being enforced despite repeated requests to do so. It is interesting that the RVs appear to have been cleared on Fabian way between E Charleston road and 101. Not sure why the city refuses to do the same on Fabian way between E Charleston and San Antonio. I have not spoken at the city council meetings, but would be willing to attend if I knew which ones would be worthwhile, and I did not have any conflicts. Best Regards, Scott Petersen Charleston Village HOA President From:Robert Marinaro To:Bulatao, Eric; Council, City; City Mgr Cc:Chris Schremp; Christine Schremp; Deborah j Marinaro; McDonough, Melissa; Chip Wytmar; Sharon Elliot; Ceci Kettendorf; Barry Katz; Roger Smith; Peter Xu; Arthur Keller; Becky Sanders Subject:RV on the Corner of Ross & Ames Date:Monday, May 18, 2026 9:30:06 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Eric, Can you please keep an eye on this RV on the corner of Ross & Ames. It has at least been here since Saturday when I first noticed it. I talked with the woman who lives in the corner house on Ross and she said it has become a nuisance for a while and it parks at different locations in and around the YMCA on Ross Rd. in this purely residential neighborhood. It seems as though these lone wolfs are pushing the envelope and increasingly parking in our residential neighborhoods and we do not like it. I’m also going to copy the City Council so that they are aware of this encroachment into our neighborhoods. This needs to be stopped and this cannot continue to be allowed. Regards, Bob Marinaro From:Haeyeon Jeong To:Council, City Subject:Oppose to pickleball court expansion Date:Monday, May 18, 2026 9:27:35 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Hi, I oppose the pickleball court expansion. Thank you. Haeyeon This message needs your attention No employee in your company has ever replied to this person. This is a personal email address. Mark Safe Report From:Cheryl Chen To:ParkRec Commission; Council, City; Howard, Adam; PlayingFields Subject:Re: Mitchell Courts Date:Monday, May 18, 2026 9:18:11 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear City of Palo Alto Parks and Recreation Department, I hear that the City of Palo Alto is again considering converting Tennis Courts 3 and 4 at Mitchell Park into 6 to 8 Pickleball courts. This will only leave 2 tennis courts in all of Mitchell Park and those are used mostly for lessons sanctioned by the City of Palo Alto. I'm very concerned that if the City of Palo Alto goes through with the conversion of Mitchell Park Tennis Courts 3 & 4, there will be many very negative impacts to City of Palo Alto residents. There will also be negative impacts to City of Palo Alto residents if any other Palo Alto tennis courts are converted to Pickleball courts, please instead build new pickleball courts that are located away from currently used facilities. Negative impacts of converting existing tennis courts to pickleball courts includes: Tennis Players will be displaced from Mitchell Park or any other converted courts and need to find other tennis courts in the City to play on. On peak days/times of day it is already nearly impossible to find tennis courts in the City. This will make that even worse. In recent years, the City of Palo Alto has allowed more tennis courts to be used for Kids Summer Camps, making it extremely difficult for adult residents to play tennis for entire weekdays in Palo Alto over a 2+ month period during summer. This makes that issue worse. There are currently 15 pickleball courts in Mitchell Park and so many people come from neighbor communities to use those courts, there is no available parking for Palo Alto residents who want to use the park in other ways --- go to the library, use the playground, attend a summer concert, picnic, play catch etc. More Pickleball courts will mean more even more people come to play Pickleball and an already bad parking problem will be made even worse. This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first email to your company. Mark Safe Report The Magical Bridge Playground is an amazing inclusive area of the park that is used by neurodivergent people and the loud noise created by the pickleballs hitting the racket and large groups of people standing around cycling on & off courts can trigger severe discomfort, distress, and anxiety in neurodivergent people. The new 50-unit housing complex at 525 Charleston is geared towards neurodivergent folks & is only a 6-minute walk from the Mitchell park tennis courts. Given the proximity of this new development, more not fewer people going forward will be going to Mitchell Park who are very sensitive to the kinds of noise that pickleball makes & adding 6-8 more courts to the already 15 will greatly increase an already distressing sound. Neighbors of Mitchell Park gave feedback in 2025 that they could hear the pickleball noise at their homes which could in the long run reduce their property values - and result in lower property tax revenue that the City receives. There is a need, OK, but let's not "rob Peter to pay Paul". Please look instead for a location where pickleball courts could be newly built instead of taking existing services from residents --- tennis courts, parking, library access, park enjoyment for all. Thank you, X. Cheryl Chen Palo Alto resident. From:James Gong To:ParkRec Commission; Council, City Subject:Can you keep the tennis courts at Mitchell Park? Date:Monday, May 18, 2026 9:17:46 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear managers, Can we expand the pickleball courts in places other than the current heavily-used tennis courts? My family like both tennis and pickleball. Tennis courts at Mitchell park is very busy, and it is much harder to build a tennis court than two pickleball courts. Why don't we keep the current tennis courts and build some pickleball courts nearby? Pickleball field is small and the speed of pickleball is much slower, so it is much easier to find suitable locations to build a few courts here and a few there. James This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first email to your company. Mark Safe Report From:ART To:ParkRec Commission; Council, City Cc:olenka@magicalbridge.org; Harriet Stern Subject:Please Retain Mitchell Park Tennis Courts 3 and 4 Date:Monday, May 18, 2026 8:30:25 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. ! Dear Parks and Recreation Commissioners, Magical Tennis for Neurodiverse Participants at Mitchell Park is a wonderful and important program. My child has benefited not only from the exercise and fresh air, but especially from being part of a welcoming community of peers. At Magical Tennis, coaches and participants work together on tennis skills, fun, confidence, and friendship. We meet on Mitchell Park tennis courts 3 and 4, which are ideally located near the Magical Bridge Playground, the library, and Ada’s Cafe — making the experience even more accessible and inclusive for families. My son has been playing tennis there for a few years, and this activity has become part of his routine. We live in Palo Alto, so this location is very convenient for us, and he is familiar and comfortable with the area. Losing this unique program would be a significant loss for the disabled community and the families who rely on it. Please retain Mitchell Park tennis courts 3 and 4. Sincerely, Cherie (Parent of a 15-year-old participant) This message could be suspicious Similar name as someone in your company. This is a personal email address. This is their first email to your company. Mark Safe Report From:Kenneth Streib To:Council, City Subject:Track and book sales Date:Monday, May 18, 2026 8:15:38 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Please keep the track at Cubberley, I run there sometimes. Also please keep the book sales. I love them! Thanks, Ken Streib This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. Mark Safe Report From:Tom Brown To:Council, City Cc:Maria Brown Subject:Remodeling Cubberly Community Center Date:Monday, May 18, 2026 8:05:56 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear City Council Members, I encourage the Council members to move forward with a ballot measure to support remodeling Cubberley Community Center and it should be a priority beneficiary of the general use tax revenue. As a resident of Palo Alto, Cubberley plays a central role for our family, neighbors and the city at large. It’s where people meet, art happens, learning is shared and passions bring people together. There is no other place within the city where this happen at scale everyday. This happens despite the buildings being in disarray. For years residents have asked the city council to take action to renovate the Cubberley campus and, for years it has been neglected by the city. With developments in housing increasing in South Palo Alto, it is important for the city to have sufficient recreation needs met at Cubberley Community Center. Traffic will increase in the city with housing developments which means that a rejuvenated Cubberley Community Center will support this influx of residents. I encourage each member of the council to support this ballot measure by showing that you care about the well being of Palo Alto residents of both the south and north of the city who will utilize this facility. Sincerely, Tom Brown 410 Adobe Pl, Palo Alto, CA 94306 This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first email to your company. Mark Safe Report Powered by Mimecast From:SC To:Council, City Subject:Agenda Item 14, 5-18-26 Council Mtg Date:Monday, May 18, 2026 7:48:48 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Good evening, Mayor and Members of the City Council. I plan to make a few comments at the meeting tonight, here is my full letter: My name is Sharon Chin, I'm a resident of Evergreen Park. We've raised our family of four kids here in Palo Alto. I am here this evening to offer comment on the proposed development agreement for 156 California Avenue and the consideration of adding Lot B (APN 124-28- 003) to the City’s Housing Element Sites Inventory. I want to be clear that I am not here to oppose housing development near transit, and I recognize the city's obligations under state law. My comments tonight focus on three specific concerns regarding the impact on the safety of Park Boulevard for the commuters, residents, families and children who use it daily. I believe these concerns deserve careful attention before this agreement is finalized and ask that you please consider them and encourage the developer to address them. First, Park Boulevard and the safety of our bike corridor. Park Boulevard is a designated City bike boulevard and a documented Safe Route to School used daily by students from elementary through high school age. The California Avenue Caltrain tunnel connects Park Boulevard and Bryant Street, and this corridor carries significant and consistent bicycle and pedestrian traffic throughout the day; used heavily by both students and commuters alike. What protections will be in place during the construction period to mitigate the impact of construction equipment and protect this bike corridor, particularly but not limited to school This message needs your attention No employee in your company has ever replied to this person. This is a personal email address. Mark Safe Report and work commute hours — morning, afternoon, and evening when children are finishing after-school activities and sports? Specifically, Tower 3 on Lot B includes at-grade parking with direct vehicle access on Park Boulevard itself — not on a side street, but on our city's designated bike boulevard, and service and loading access for Tower 3 will route through the intersection of Cambridge Avenue and Park Boulevard. These documented design features will place daily vehicle conflicts at the primary crossing point of our bike boulevard. What infrastructure and safety measures will be put into place at California and Cambridge Avenues to mitigate additional traffic turning onto the bike boulevard? The project plans show 266 total parking stalls for 390 units — approximately 0.68 stalls per unit. The gap between parking provided and parking needed will predictably fall on surrounding neighborhood streets, and including Park Boulevard and California Park, an affordable housing apartment complex directly across the street from this project. Since the developer is not obligated to include parking within these structures, we should assume and plan for more vehicles parked on the nearby streets and consider the impact this will have to safety on Park Blvd with regard to all residents and specifically, school children biking. Second, I believe 2110 Park Boulevard is a Category 2 structure on the City's official Historic Inventory — one of the highest levels of protection the City designates. Built in 1909, it is recognized as architecturally and technologically significant: one of the earliest examples of reinforced concrete residential construction in the region. It sits directly on the same street as the proposed development. What are the city's obligations under its Historic Preservation Ordinance to protect a Category 2 structure such as 2110 Park Boulevard? What will the impact of the construction vibration be to the structure of this historic home which is made of concrete and is down the street from this project? Third, I ask that you and the developer consider the impact this project will have on existing affordable housing residents. Specifically, there is an affordable housing apartment complex managed by Alta Housing directly adjacent to this project site at 2301 Park Boulevard. The height of Redco's buildings will block natural light for the families who live in these apartments, the complex's outdoor spaces, and the homes around it. Parking spillover from this project will directly affect the street parking these residents use and depend on. It is ironic that the affordable housing complex most directly impacted by this project serves the very residents who have historically had the fewest housing options in Palo Alto. Yet as this project moves forward as proposed, it is these same residents — those with the least ability to absorb the impacts — who will experience the greatest effects on their daily quality of life. I ask that the council and the developer consider whether the cumulative impacts of this project on the families of California Park Apartments are in line with our city’s commitment to fairness and equity. While this project in its current proposed state is contextually inconsistent with the historic development pattern of Palo Alto, preserving public safety for all and especially for school-age kids, maintaining quality of life for existing residents, and being mindful to preserve our architectural heritage -- these are all inherent characteristics of Palo Alto that should not be taken away. I urge you to consider these concerns and encourage the developer to make amendments to this project. I recognize that as a resident I may not have full visibility into the legal constraints the city is navigating, and I am not asking the Council to jeopardize the agreement. I am simply asking that these concerns be acknowledged, that the developer be made aware of them, and that this community's commitment to the safety of our children, the wellbeing of all our neighbors, and the preservation of our historic resources be considered and part of the public record as this project moves forward. Thank you for your time and your service to this community. Sharon Chin Evergreen Park From:Dan Garber To:Council, City Cc:Phil Santora Subject:Item 13 - Cubberley Date:Monday, May 18, 2026 7:48:21 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i There are at least three reasons to move this item forward with confidence tonight. First: partnership. TheatreWorks isn't asking the city to build a theater for them. They are co-investing in the renovation of the Pavilion, bringing tens of millions of private dollars to a publicly-owned facility. Partnerships will play a convincing part in winning in the November campaign. Second: Renovating and adding to the Pavilion is faster, less expensive, and more sustainable than all-new construction. The Pavilion will become something this community will be proud of - adding to its identity for generations. And a permanent TheatreWorks venue means real economic activity - restaurant meals, parking, retail - generated by thousands of attendees each year, right here in Palo Alto rather than in Mountain View. Third: The CEQA is complete, The Master Plan is ready, The LOI is signed, and TheatreWorks leadership is committed. This alignment is fragile, and without your wholehearted support now and as our community leaders, your strong advocacy of the project through to the November vote, the moment will be lost and unlikely to return. TheatreWorks is a nationally acclaimed, Tony Award-winning institution - that This message needs your attention This is their first mail to some recipients. Mark Safe Report Powered by Mimecast with a permanent home can better serve our community. This council can help this happen tonight. Please move this item forward with one voice. Daniel Garber Partner, FAIA he/his/him Fergus Garber Architects www.fg-arch.com o 650.459.3700 d 650.597.6112 m 650.245.7775 81 Encina Ave, Palo Alto CA 94301 From:Anirudh Prasad To:Council, City Subject:Fixing Cubberly Date:Monday, May 18, 2026 7:01:41 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear City Council Members, I encourage the Council members to move forward with a ballot measure to support remodeling Cubberley Community Center and it should be a priority beneficiary of the general use tax revenue. As a member of Greenmeadow, we need a renewed community center for those who live in South Palo Alto, and others from Palo Alto neighborhoods. The conditions of the buildings built in the 60's are in disrepair and in need of renewal. For years we have begged the city council to take action to renovate the Cubberley campus and felt that our needs were being neglected by the city. Our seniors in the South of Palo Alto utilize this Cubberley Community Center . With developments in housing increasing in South Palo Alto, it is important for the city to have sufficient recreation needs met at Cubberley Community Center. Traffic will increase in the city with housing developments which means that a rejuvenated Cubberley Community Center will make it easier for young people and seniors to access Cubberley without having to go to the north part of the city for classes and programs. I encourage each member of the council to enthusiastically support this ballot measure by showing that you care about the well being of Palo Alto residents of both the south and north of the city who will utilize this facility. Sincerely, Anirudh Prasad 352 Pakside Dr. Palo Alto, CA 9306 This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first email to you. Mark Safe Report From:Julie Du To:ParkRec Commission; Council, City Cc:olenka@magicalbridge.org; Stern Harriet Subject:Please retain Mitchell Park tennis courts 3 and 4 Date:Monday, May 18, 2026 6:46:17 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear Parks and Recreation Commissioners, Magical Tennis for Neurodiverse Participants at Mitchell Park is a wonderful and important program. My son James, a 16 years old autistic teen, has participated in this program for two years. He has benefited not only from the exercise and fresh air, but especially from being part of a welcoming community of peers. At Magical Tennis, coaches and participants work together on tennis skills, fun, confidence, and friendship. We meet on Mitchell Park tennis courts 3 and 4, which are ideally located near the Magical Bridge Playground, the library, and Ada’s Cafe — making the experience even more accessible and inclusive for families. Losing this unique program would be a significant loss for the disabled community and the families who rely on it. Please retain Mitchell Park tennis courts 3 and 4. Sincerely, Julie Du Sent from my iPhone This message needs your attention No employee in your company has ever replied to this person. This is a personal email address. Mark Safe Report Powered by Mimecast From:Jennifer Main To:ParkRec Commission; Council, City; papc.secretary@gmail.com Subject:Support for Additional Pickleball Courts at Mitchell Park Date:Monday, May 18, 2026 6:25:25 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear Members of the Palo Alto Parks & Recreation Commission and City Council, I live in Palo Alto and am writing in support of creating eight additional pickleball courts at Mitchell Park. Pickleball has become an important part of my weekly routine, not just for exercise but for the sense of community it fosters. It brings together people of all ages and backgrounds in a way that few other activities do. I’ve seen friendships form, neighbors connect, and new residents feel welcomed through this simple, accessible sport. However, the current demand far exceeds the available court space. Long wait times between games make it difficult for many residents to participate regularly, and it limits the broader community benefits that pickleball offers. Expanding the number of courts would allow more people to stay active, reduce congestion, and make better use of an already popular public space. Investing in additional pickleball courts is a relatively low-cost way to significantly enhance community well-being, promote physical and mental This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. Mark Safe Report health, and strengthen social connections across Palo Alto. Thank you for your consideration. Jennifer Schmidt San Jude, Palo Alto Sent from my iPhone From:Shantha Mohan To:Council, City Subject:Remodeling The Cubberley Community Center Date:Monday, May 18, 2026 6:23:08 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear City Council Members, I urge the Council to move forward with a ballot measure to renovate the Cubberley Community Center and make it a top priority for general-use tax funding. As a Greenmeadow resident, I know how vital Cubberley is to South Palo Alto families, seniors, and residents across the city. The campus buildings, many dating back to the 1960s, are aging, deteriorating, and long overdue for renewal. For years, South Palo Alto residents have asked the City to invest in Cubberley, and too often those requests have not been answered. Cubberley is especially important for seniors and young people in South Palo Alto. As new housing developments bring more residents and more traffic, the need for accessible recreation, classes, and community programs close to home will only grow. A revitalized Cubberley Community Center would give residents a modern, welcoming space without requiring them to travel across the city for services and programs. I encourage every Council member to strongly support this ballot measure and demonstrate a commitment to the well-being of residents in both South and North Palo Alto who rely on and value this community resource. Sincerely, Shantha & VJ Mohan 261 Parkside Drive This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. Mark Safe Report From:Dan Spiegelman To:Council, City Subject:Mollie Stones Date:Monday, May 18, 2026 6:05:30 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear Council, While both of the Mollie Stones proposals are a disaster for the city, and particularly the local area, the new proposal is even worse than the original. The three single height buildings will create even more visual blight, without at least the benefit of architectural interest. Even worse, the reduction in parking will create an even bigger congestion mess in this area. While there may be a handful of occupants that commute by train, they will all own a car (if not two). In addition, the city should use every tool at its disposal to slow this project and review every single aspect possible. Respectfully, Dan Spiegelman Dan Spiegelman dspiegelman@pacbell.net This message needs your attention This is their first email to your company. Mark Safe Report From:Mary Lee To:ParkRec Commission; Council, City Cc:olenka@magicalbridge.org; harriet@magicalbridge.org Subject:Mitchell Park Tennis Courts 3&4 Date:Monday, May 18, 2026 6:04:35 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear Parks and Recreation Commissioners, Magical Tennis for Neurodiverse Participants at Mitchell Park is a wonderful and important program. My child has benefited not only from the exercise and fresh air, but especially from being part of a welcoming community of peers. Growing up in Palo Alto, I always enjoyed all the public spaces Palo Alto offered and now that I no longer live in Palo Alto, I cherish all the opportunities to visit and enjoy the spaces it offers. We now travel from the East Bay so my autistic son can learn tennis from the amazing volunteer coaches at Magical Tennis and also to enjoy the amenities offered at Mitchell Park. At Magical Tennis, coaches and participants work together on tennis skills, fun, confidence, and friendship. We meet on Mitchell Park tennis courts 3 and 4. The proximity of the courts being located near the Magical Bridge Playground, the library, and Ada’s Cafe allows my son and other families to have a well rounded, accessible, and inclusive experiences. Losing this unique program would be a significant loss for the disabled community and the families who rely on it. Please retain Mitchell Park tennis courts 3 and 4. Sincerely, Mary Lee (parent to Benji, 12 year old participant at Magical Tennis) Sent from my iPhone This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first email to your company. Mark Safe Report Powered by Mimecast From:Hong Cong To:ParkRec Commission; Council, City Subject:Please DO NOT convert tennis court into pickleball courts Date:Monday, May 18, 2026 5:27:56 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear Parks and Recreation Commissioners, Magical Tennis for Neurodiverse Participants at Mitchell Park is a wonderful and important program. My child has benefited not only from the exercise and fresh air, but especially from being part of a welcoming community of peers. At Magical Tennis, coaches and participants work together on tennis skills, fun, confidence, and friendship. We meet on Mitchell Park tennis courts 3 and 4, which are ideally located near the Magical Bridge Playground, the library, and Ada’s Cafe — making the experience even more accessible and inclusive for families. Losing this unique program would be a significant loss for the disabled community and the families who rely on it. Please retain Mitchell Park tennis courts 3 and 4. Sincerely, Cindy Cong, Parent of a 17-yr-old participant This message needs your attention No employee in your company has ever replied to this person. This is a personal email address. Mark Safe Report From:Olenka S. Villarreal To:ParkRec Commission; Council, City Subject:Please help make Mitchell Park MAGICAL FOR ALL again! Date:Monday, May 18, 2026 5:05:06 PM CAUTION: This email originated fromoutside of the organization. Becautious of opening attachments andclicking on links. May 18, 2026 Hello Commissioners and Council Member Lythcott-Haims, For over a decade, Magical Bridge has served as a sanctuary—designed intentionally for individuals with autism, sensory sensitivities, and other disabilities. For many families, this playground is more than just a play area—it's the only place where Palo Alto families with a disabled family member come to enjoy community connections, play and a welcoming space. The pickleball courts adjacent to the playground have significantly changed that experience. Pickleball generates a sharp, repetitive sound that carries far beyond the courts. For individuals with sensory sensitivities, this type of noise is not just a nuisance —it is overwhelming, disorienting, and distressing. We are hearing from families who can no longer stay, who are cutting visits short, or who have stopped coming altogether. This is not about being anti-pickleball; we respect the value it brings to the community. However, placement matters. The AbilityPath building closest to the pickleball courts serves disabled adults with the highest needs. My daughter Ava is in one of these programs and the increased car activity moving through this private parking lot is dangerous. Ava and her peers walk (and roll) to Magical Bridge often and the stress of a busy parking lot, coupled with excessive noise, has changed what used to be a magical corridor into the very opposite. Last week, one student was nearly hit by an eager pickleball player in a big hurry to park. This particular pickleball club directly conflicts with a space specifically designed to support vulnerable populations, displacing those who have the fewest alternatives. Magical Bridge was created to fill a critical gap— to ensure that everyone, regardless of ability, has a place to belong. The Mitchell Park pickleball courts have compromised this promise. I respectfully ask the Commission to halt further encroachment of these pickleball courts within the Mitchell Park area and encourage their players to find to a more compatible setting. This is an opportunity to uphold Palo Alto’s leadership in inclusion—not just in intention, but in practice. Thank you for your time, your consideration, and your commitment to all members of our community. Please make that Magical Bridge corridor magical again. It is the only community hub for many of our families. Thank you and see you on the 26th. Olenka S. Villarreal | Founder and Chief Executive Officer Magical Bridge Foundation | a 501(c)3 non-profit 650-380-1557 | magicalbridge.org Enjoy our NEW Magical Bridge Viewbook Please find us on Facebook | Instagram | LinkedIn From:Matthew Nagle To:ParkRec Commission; Council, City; Howard, Adam; PlayingFields Subject:Enhance, do not reduce, our PA tennis courts Date:Monday, May 18, 2026 5:01:58 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Adam, council folks, and parks and rec: Do NOT reduce any further the number of, or condition of, our tennis courts in Palo Alto. If anything, enhance our tennis courts with maintenance, signage, and leadership, something that has been sorely lacking for years in Palo Alto. Though the recent growth of pickleball is compelling, so, too, is the growth of tennis, though it is more subtle. The tennis community is not nearly as vocal, unified, or visible on and off the court, but the reduction of tennis courts in the past few years and squeezed more of us onto fewer courts. There has been marginal relief in kicking out United States Tennis Association league teams, and posting mediocre letter-sized printouts reminding paid tennis instructors that they cannot use our courts without a permit, but at the end of the day, tennis players have to be strategic in attempting to secure a court for an hour of tennis, even though our matches and practices realistically need more time. Local and USTA tennis tournaments add to our community as well, but they stress the availability of courts as well. I play on all city and school courts in Palo Alto, as well as every city in the Bay Area over time, because I participate in USTA tournaments and leagues. We had to abandon our USTA league team at Cubberly this year because we did not have enough Palo Alto players. This rule of Palo Alto-first players, as unseemly as it is, should also be applied to pickleball as it has been reported repeatedly that many, if not most, players do not live, or pay taxes, in Palo Alto. I have brought up my two children on Palo Alto tennis courts, and I still play with young and old tennis players on all the courts, when we can find a free court. Do not forget that city tennis instructors take up two of the four tennis courts at Mitchell Park. They run good programs for our youth, but because the city took away the four tennis courts at the other end of Mitchell Park, many of us head over to Cubberly and other parks. Taking any courts from Mitchell because they might not be as used as pickleball courts would be like taking away the new basketball courts at Boulware Park in order to install new pickleball courts. Those courts are not used that much at all, and there are even lights, but no one would suggest taking over those courts. Except the pickleball community if they find out about them. Matthew Nagle Park Blvd, Palo Alto Former PAUSD Principal Current member of USTA Schools Committee Current member of USTA NorCal Community Program From:fran Shen To:Council, City Subject:URGENT: Protect Mitchell Park – Oppose Further Pickleball Expansion and Prioritize Palo Alto Residents Date:Monday, May 18, 2026 4:57:31 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Sent from my iPhone Email to: City.Council@cityofpaloalto.org, Parks.Commission@cityofpaloalto.org Dear Mayor, Councilmembers, and Members of the Parks and Recreation Commission, As a resident, taxpayer, and voter in Palo Alto, I am writing to express my strong opposition to any further expansion or conversion of tennis courts for pickleball at Mitchell Park. While I support diverse recreational activities, Mitchell Park has reached its absolute carrying capacity. It is a vital, multi-use neighborhood hub anchored by the Mitchell Park Library, the Magical Bridge Playground, and surrounding residential communities. Unchecked pickleball expansion is actively dismantling the core functions of these essential civic spaces. We are currently facing three critical crises that the City must address before any further infrastructure decisions are made: 1. Severe Parking Deprivation for Families & Seniors: The parking lots at Mitchell Park are chronically gridlocked. Families with toddlers wanting to visit the playground and seniors attempting to access the library are routinely forced to turn away because parking spaces are overwhelmed by high-turnover pickleball traffic. 2. The Regional Subsidy Disparity: Data indicates that a vast majority of the current pickleball influx consists of non-residents coming from surrounding Bay Area cities that have rightfully restricted pickleball growth. Palo Alto taxpayers should not sacrifice their local peace and tax dollars to absorb the regional demand of other municipalities. 3. Unmitigated Noise Pollution: The constant, high-frequency impact sound of pickleball is fundamentally different from tennis and creates an unlivable environment for adjacent residents and quiet library users. We applaud the Council's past inclinations to halt expansion, but we need permanent, legally binding policy protections. We respectfully demand that the City: * Enact an immediate, permanent moratorium on any new pickleball court construction or tennis court conversion at Mitchell Park. * Mandate a "Palo Alto Resident Priority" system using a zip-code verified reservation portal, allocating at least 70% of peak-hour slots exclusively to local residents. * Implement strict operational restrictions, including limiting play hours from 9:00 AM to 7:00 PM, enforcing the use of certified "quiet gear" (paddles and balls), and conducting independent, third-party noise and parking impact audits. Our public parks must serve the broad public good of Palo Alto's families, children, and seniors, not the aggressive expansion goals of a single sports club. I urge you to stand firmly with your local constituents and protect the integrity of Mitchell Park. Thank you for your time, leadership, and dedication to our community. Sincerely, From:Jennifer Liu To:Council, City; Parks.Commission@cityofpaloalto.org Subject:Protect Mitchell Park – Oppose Further Pickleball Expansion and Prioritize Palo Alto Residents Date:Monday, May 18, 2026 4:52:31 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Mayor, Council members, and Members of the Parks and Recreation Commission, As a resident, taxpayer, and voter in Palo Alto, I am writing to express my strong opposition to any further expansion or conversion of tennis courts for pickleball at Mitchell Park. While I support diverse recreational activities, Mitchell Park has reached its absolute carrying capacity. It is a vital, multi-use neighborhood hub anchored by the Mitchell Park Library, the Magical Bridge Playground, and surrounding residential communities. Unchecked pickleball expansion is actively dismantling the core functions of these essential civic spaces. We are currently facing three critical crises that the City must address before any further infrastructure decisions are made: 1. Severe Parking Deprivation for Families & Seniors: The parking lots at Mitchell Park are chronically gridlocked. Families with toddlers wanting to visit the playground and seniors attempting to access the library are routinely forced to turn away because parking spaces are overwhelmed by high-turnover pickleball traffic. 2. The Regional Subsidy Disparity: Data indicates that a vast majority of the current pickleball influx consists of non-residents coming from surrounding Bay Area cities that have rightfully restricted pickleball growth. Palo Alto taxpayers should not sacrifice their local peace and tax dollars to absorb the regional demand of other municipalities. 3. Unmitigated Noise Pollution: The constant, high-frequency impact sound of pickleball is fundamentally different from tennis and creates an unlivable environment for adjacent residents and quiet library users. We applaud the Council's past inclinations to halt expansion, but we need permanent, legally binding policy protections. We respectfully demand that the City: * Enact an immediate, permanent moratorium on any new pickleball court construction or tennis court conversion at Mitchell Park. * Mandate a "Palo Alto Resident Priority" system using a zip-code verified reservation portal, allocating at least 70% of peak-hour slots exclusively to local residents. * Implement strict operational restrictions, including limiting play hours from 9:00 AM to 7:00 PM, enforcing the use of certified "quiet gear" (paddles and balls), and conducting independent, third-party noise and parking impact audits. Our public parks must serve the broad public good of Palo Alto's families, children, and seniors, not the aggressive expansion goals of a single sports club. I urge you to stand firmly with your local constituents and protect the integrity of Mitchell Park. Thank you for your time, leadership, and dedication to our community. Sincerely, Jennifer Liu 827 Richardson Ct, Palo Alto From:Ackerman, Jennifer To:Council, City Cc:Shikada, Ed; ORG - Clerk"s Office Subject:Council Consent Agenda Questions for May 18, 2026 Item #6 Date:Monday, May 18, 2026 4:40:25 PM Dear Mayor and Councilmembers: On behalf of City Manager Ed Shikada, please view the following links for the staff responses to questions from Council for tonight’s Council Meeting: May 18, 2026, Agenda https://cityofpaloalto.primegov.com/Portal/Meeting? meetingTemplateId=18721 Staff responds to Consent Items # 6. https://cityofpaloalto.primegov.com/viewer/preview?id=0&type=8&uid=83f36c05-7526- 49bd-91f2-097841603ea9 Thank you, Jennifer Ackerman Executive Assistant to The City Manager (650) 329-2105 | jennifer.ackerman@PaloAlto.gov www.PaloAlto.gov From:Min Zhou To:Council, City; Parks.Commission@cityofpaloalto.org Subject:URGENT: Protect Mitchell Park – Oppose Further Pickleball Expansion and Prioritize Palo Alto Residents Date:Monday, May 18, 2026 4:39:53 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear Mayor, Councilmembers, and Members of the Parks and Recreation Commission, As a resident, taxpayer, and voter in Palo Alto, I am writing to express my strong opposition to any further expansion or conversion of tennis courts for pickleball at Mitchell Park. While I support diverse recreational activities, Mitchell Park has reached its absolute carrying capacity. It is a vital, multi-use neighborhood hub anchored by the Mitchell Park Library, the Magical Bridge Playground, and surrounding residential communities. Unchecked pickleball expansion is actively dismantling the core functions of these essential civic spaces. We are currently facing three critical crises that the City must address before any further infrastructure decisions are made: 1. Severe Parking Deprivation for Families & Seniors: The parking lots at Mitchell Park are chronically gridlocked. Families with toddlers wanting to visit the playground and seniors attempting to access the library are routinely forced to turn away because parking spaces are overwhelmed by high-turnover pickleball traffic. 2. The Regional Subsidy Disparity: Data indicates that a vast majority of the current pickleball influx consists of non-residents coming from surrounding Bay Area cities that have rightfully restricted pickleball growth. Palo Alto taxpayers should not sacrifice their local peace and tax dollars to absorb the regional demand of other municipalities. 3. Unmitigated Noise Pollution: The constant, high-frequency impact sound of pickleball is fundamentally different from tennis and creates an unlivable environment for adjacent residents and quiet library users. We applaud the Council's past inclinations to halt expansion, but we need permanent, legally binding policy protections. We respectfully demand that the City: * Enact an immediate, permanent moratorium on any new pickleball court construction or tennis court conversion at Mitchell Park. * Mandate a "Palo Alto Resident Priority" system using a zip-code verified reservation portal, This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first mail to some recipients. Mark Safe Report allocating at least 70% of peak-hour slots exclusively to local residents. * Implement strict operational restrictions, including limiting play hours from 9:00 AM to 7:00 PM, enforcing the use of certified "quiet gear" (paddles and balls), and conducting independent, third-party noise and parking impact audits. Our public parks must serve the broad public good of Palo Alto's families, children, and seniors, not the aggressive expansion goals of a single sports club. I urge you to stand firmly with your local constituents and protect the integrity of Mitchell Park. Thank you for your time, leadership, and dedication to our community. Sincerely, Min Zhou 859 Rorke Way Palo Alto From:Bret To:Council, City Cc:Parks.Commission@cityofpaloalto.org Subject:URGENT: Project Mitchell Park - Oppose further expansion of Pickelball courts and prioritize Palo Alto residents Date:Monday, May 18, 2026 4:39:53 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Mayor, Councilmembers, and Members of the Parks and Recreation Commission, As a resident, taxpayer, and voter in Palo Alto, I am writing to express my strong opposition to any further expansion or conversion of tennis courts for pickleball at Mitchell Park. While I support diverse recreational activities, Mitchell Park has reached its absolute carrying capacity. It is a vital, multi-use neighborhood hub anchored by the Mitchell Park Library, the Magical Bridge Playground, and surrounding residential communities. Unchecked pickleball expansion is actively dismantling the core functions of these essential civic spaces. We are currently facing three critical crises that the City must address before any further infrastructure decisions are made: 1. Severe Parking Deprivation for Families & Seniors: The parking lots at Mitchell Park are chronically gridlocked. Families with toddlers wanting to visit the playground and seniors attempting to access the library are routinely forced to turn away because parking spaces are overwhelmed by high-turnover pickleball traffic. 2. The Regional Subsidy Disparity: Data indicates that a vast majority of the current pickleball influx consists of non-residents coming from surrounding Bay Area cities that have rightfully restricted pickleball growth. Palo Alto taxpayers should not sacrifice their local peace and tax dollars to absorb the regional demand of other municipalities. 3. Unmitigated Noise Pollution: The constant, high-frequency impact sound of pickleball is fundamentally different from tennis and creates an unlivable environment for adjacent residents and quiet library users. We applaud the Council's past inclinations to halt expansion, but we need permanent, legally binding policy protections. We respectfully demand that the City: * Enact an immediate, permanent moratorium on any new pickleball court construction or tennis court conversion at Mitchell Park. * Mandate a "Palo Alto Resident Priority" system using a zip-code verified reservation portal, allocating at least 70% of peak-hour slots exclusively to local residents. * Implement strict operational restrictions, including limiting play hours from 9:00 AM to 7:00 PM, enforcing the use of certified "quiet gear" (paddles and balls), and conducting independent, third-party noise and parking impact audits. Our public parks must serve the broad public good of Palo Alto's families, children, and seniors, not the aggressive expansion goals of a single sports club. I urge you to stand firmly with your local constituents and protect the integrity of Mitchell Park. Thank you for your time, leadership, and dedication to our community. Sincerely, June Wang 480 Nevada Ave, Palo Alto From:Mary E Ryan To:Council, City Subject:Cal. Ave. Tower Concern Date:Monday, May 18, 2026 4:38:10 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i City Council, What is the planned traffic route for the construction vehicles coming to and going from the Cal Ave Tower site? The underground support and parking areas will require the removal of tons of dirt. The laying of the foundation will require untold amounts of cement. . How will the dirt and cement trucks move into and out of the neighborhood? The noise and disruption to the neighborhood will be massive. How can you guarantee that these vehicles, which will be spewing toxic diesel fumes, will not unacceptably foul the air and harm any person living in or passing passing through Park and California Ave. During the construction of the Sherman Street Parking Structure and the Public Safety Building trucks routinely idled at the curbside. There were rules in place addressing this issue but violations were commonplace with no redress. See photo below. These trucks were not there for a few hours, they were there all day. Park Avenue is a major bike route for students going to Palo Alto High School and Stanford. Commuters use the Cal. Ave underpass to get to their jobs and to the train station. How will youngsters and others be able to move safely through the construction area? Please respond to my concerns. Thank you. Mary Ryan 302 Grant Avenue This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first email to you. Mark Safe Report From:LW comcast To:PlayingFields; Howard, Adam; Council, City; ParkRec Commission Subject:NO more pickle ball courts at Mitchell Park Date:Monday, May 18, 2026 4:37:31 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Commission Members, As Palo Alto residents who often visit Mitchell Park, the Mitchell Park Library, and Ada’s Cafe, I oppose the addition of multiple, concentrated pickleball courts at Mitchell Park. The loud, continuous cracking of pickleballs on paddles as well as the voices of crowds waiting to play, is hard on visitors like myself and my disabled son: people who are sensitive to loud noise. Visitors to other facilities in the community center will also face decreased parking space as a result to adding pickleball courts to accommodate out-of- town players as well as residents. In addition, the additional courts are adjacent to the Ability Path Arts Center, Mitchell Park Place, and Magical Bridge Playground—all of which welcome children and adults with developmental disabilities. Having a son with disabilities, I have been active in this community and know that many disabled individuals deal with sensory overload issues, particularly with loud, repetitive noises. The proximity to pickleball courts is a problem for this neighborhood, with the noise of the paddles and balls and the loud calls of participants and those waiting to play. Pickleball may, as proponents say, "deliver more of the much-needed social wellness benefits to the Palo Alto community.” But please be aware of what ill-placed courts might also take away from the social and emotional wellness of residents and guests alike. Linnea Wickstrom Palo Alto This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. Mark Safe Report From:M Carmen Rodwell To:Council, City Subject:Cubberley. Let"s move forward! Date:Monday, May 18, 2026 4:22:08 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear City Council Members, Thanks to all of you and to the city staff for all the work you do to keep our town safe, vibrant and a place we all love to be part of. I want to also thank the Cubberley Ad Hoc Committee for all their efforts in bringing this topic to us today. I have been a resident of Greenmeadow for the last 15 years and through the years I have seen Cubberley deteriorating : fires, water leaks, paint chipping, landscaping dying… all because it was going to be fixed, made nice, and it was not worth it to fix the small things. It is about time we get a nice community center that serves this part of town and that is as vibrant as the residents in the area. We need a Cubberley that serves our children, our families, our aging parents, our youth and we want it to be nice, we want the city to take good care of it, we want the city to take care of us, because we also belong in Palo Alto. South Palo Alto seems to be forgotten, or so say a lot of the residents I have talked to in the last few months. “The city doesn’t care about us, they only care about the rich people in North Palo Alto”…. In my mind I know this is not true, but I cannot tell you how many times I have heard that, and I honestly think we deserve better than what is barely standing today in Cubberley. Dear City council members, you have a great opportunity here to prove that we belong, that you see us and that you are here to serve us too! There are many cities around us like Los Altos and Cambell to name a few, that have fabulous and full of life Community Centers. We want that. We want a beautiful place for our community to gather and grow. We also want to be prepared for the community needs that the new high density housing in San Antonio Road is going to bring to our area. Please agree to have a ballot measure that will help the city buy the remaining This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first email to you. Mark Safe Report buildings from PAUSD and remodel the space. I wanted to briefly touch on polls, I am no expert on the field, but I know a lot of people in Palo Alto and I have been asking all of them if they have been polled about this ballot measure or Cubberley and I just get blank stares. Nobody who really cares about this community has been polled and probably the people that were polled were not clear on what they were asked. So in my humble opinion it would be a better use of city funds to host town hall meetings in neighborhoods where these issues matter to get a sense of what the citizens want, instead of spending tons of money on an agency that does not know the community at hand. Once again thank you for all your work and for your dedication to our city and its citizens. I see your effort and your work and I appreciate you. Best regards, Carmen Rodwell MD Palo Alto/Greenmeadow Resident Co-chair of the GMCA Civic Affairs Committee (speaking as an individual) From:peter maresca To:ParkRec Commission; Council, City; Howard, Adam; PlayingFields Subject:Conversion of Mitchell Park Tennis Courts to Pickleball Date:Monday, May 18, 2026 4:12:25 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i To those concerned - As a 40-year Palo Alto resident and a 25-year tennis player, I am naturally concerned about the loss of tennis courts to pickleball use. But the proposed changes at Mitchell Park affect more than just those who wish to use the park for tennis. There are the noise and parking issues that affect nearby facilities for many Palo Alto residents, as well as those from other communities, who are drawn to what Mitchell Park has to offer. Noise issues are well documented, here I will look at parking. Our family regularly visits the Mitchell Park Library, Magical Bridge, and Ada’s Cafe. It has become increasing difficult to find parking there due in part to the large number of pickleball players. Pickleball, particularly as it is played at Mitchell Park, invites players to gather and wait to rotate into play (something that does not often happen in tennis) which could mean three to four times as many players parking their cars than might be there for tennis. I would side with pickleball players in lobbying the Parks and Recreation Commission for construction of new, dedicated pickleball courts in a suitable location with adequate parking. The city has spent millions on recreational structures that have far less usage than new pickleball courts would receive. In order to best serve all Palo Alto residents, re-purposing existing tennis courts at an already crowded site is not the answer. Peter Maresca Monroe Park Palo Alto This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first mail to some recipients. Mark Safe Report From:pennyellson12@gmail.com To:Council, City Subject:Agenda Item 13: Cubberley Date:Monday, May 18, 2026 4:02:06 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Honorable City Council, For tonight, Agenda Item 13 Good evening. I’m Penny Ellson, a Greenmeadow resident who served on Cubberley Advisory Committees and participated in most of the Cubberley workshops over the years. Thank you for the forward-thinking and important work Council and staff have done in community workshops, planning and polling over many years to get us to this point. We are excited and ready to help! You’ll be glad to know, we already have organized a team of neighborhood residents to support the ballot measure campaign. When you’re ready to go, we are too, trusting that, because this measure was initiated for implementation of Cubberley, new tax revenues from the ½-cent sales tax will be prioritized for Cubberley, possibly through an advisory resolution. Neighbors, local non-profits, arts organizations, musicians, seniors, families, dancers, and athletes and many community groups all helped shape this vision for our sadly dilapidated, but very well-loved community center. Cubberley improvement will come in the nick of time as the city rolls out plans and approvals for thousands of new State-mandated housing units, ensuring that citywide community service facility capacity will not be overwhelmed by increased demand as our population rapidly grows. $65.5million of the funding will go from the city to PAUSD for land purchase, a transfer of assets from one local government agency to another, keeping these funds within Palo Alto to serve our community. Additional funds will be used for badly needed renovation and improvements. I’m heartened to see the strong support of so many valued local non-profit partners: Avenidas, TheatreWorks, Palo Alto Community Child Care, MakerNexus, Friends of Palo Alto Recreation & Wellness Center. Each of these partners shares a mission that fits snuggly with the vision our community has embraced. Thank you for bringing it this far. Now let’s take this project to the next level. Let’s work together to fund it and get it done. Virus-free.www.avg.com From:Tiffany Lin To:ParkRec Commission; Council, City Cc:Olenka S. Villarreal; Harriet Stern Subject:Please keep Mitchell Park tennis courts 3 and 4 for Magical Tennis Date:Monday, May 18, 2026 3:58:50 PM Attachments:image.png CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments andclicking on links. i Dear Parks and Recreation Commissioners, Magical Tennis for Neurodiverse Participants at Mitchell Park is a wonderful and important program. My daughter, Saoirse Hanley, has attended this camp and has benefited not only from the exercise and fresh air, but especially from being part of a welcoming community of peers. Our family travels from Hillsborough to Mitchell Park because this program offers something truly special for neurodiverse children. At Magical Tennis, coaches and participants work together on tennis skills, fun, confidence, and friendship. The program meets on Mitchell Park tennis courts 3 and 4, which are ideally located near the Magical Bridge Playground, the library, and Ada’s Cafe, making the experience even more accessible and inclusive for families. Losing this unique program would be a significant loss for the disabled community and the families who rely on it. Please retain Mitchell Park tennis courts 3 and 4. Sincerely, Tiffany Lin & Patrick Hanley Parent of Saoirse Hanley https://www.facebook.com/tiflhme/posts/pfbid0t93SyJuHFU9zQizUZoarbxLXxKTSCvJPQmKvmdp486twtU42e8ECkHA4FpBM3kQyl This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first email to your company. Mark Safe Report From:Hui Cen To:Council, City; Parks.Commission@cityofpaloalto.org Subject:URGENT: Protect Mitchell Park – Oppose Further Pickleball Expansion and Prioritize Palo Alto Residents Date:Monday, May 18, 2026 3:44:30 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Mayor, Councilmen, and Members of the Parks and Recreation Commission, As a resident, taxpayer, and voter in Palo Alto, I am writing to express my strong opposition to any further expansion or conversion of tennis courts for pickleball at Mitchell Park. While I support diverse recreational activities, Mitchell Park has reached its absolute carrying capacity. It is a vital, multi-use neighborhood hub anchored by the Mitchell Park Library, the Magical Bridge Playground, and surrounding residential communities. Unchecked pickleball expansion is actively dismantling the core functions of these essential civic spaces. We are currently facing three critical crises that the City must address before any further infrastructure decisions are made: 1. Severe Parking Deprivation for Families & Seniors: The parking lots at Mitchell Park are chronically gridlocked. Families with toddlers wanting to visit the playground and seniors attempting to access the library are routinely forced to turn away because parking spaces are overwhelmed by high-turnover pickleball traffic. 2. The Regional Subsidy Disparity: Data indicates that a vast majority of the current pickleball influx consists of non-residents coming from surrounding Bay Area cities that have rightfully restricted pickleball growth. Palo Alto taxpayers should not sacrifice their local peace and tax dollars to absorb the regional demand of other municipalities. 3. Unmitigated Noise Pollution: The constant, high-frequency impact sound of pickleball is fundamentally different from tennis and creates an unlivable environment for adjacent residents and quiet library users. We applaud the Council's past inclinations to halt expansion, but we need permanent, legally binding policy protections. We respectfully demand that the City: * Enact an immediate, permanent moratorium on any new pickleball court construction or tennis court conversion at Mitchell Park. * Mandate a "Palo Alto Resident Priority" system using a zip-code verified reservation portal, allocating at least 70% of peak-hour slots exclusively to local residents. * Implement strict operational restrictions, including limiting play hours from 9:00 AM to 7:00 PM, enforcing the use of certified "quiet gear" (paddles and balls), and conducting independent, third-party noise and parking impact audits. Our public parks must serve the broad public good of Palo Alto's families, children, and seniors, not the aggressive expansion goals of a single sports club. I urge you to stand firmly with your local constituents and protect the integrity of Mitchell Park. Thank you for your time, leadership, and dedication to our community. Sincerely, Debra Cen 502 Lowell Ave. Palo Alto Sent from my iPhone From:Susan Pines To:Council, City Subject:Cubberley Master Plan Date:Monday, May 18, 2026 3:04:30 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Hello, I am writing to voice my support for the Cubberley Master Plan and the proposed half cent sales tax to be used to pay for this project. There is a huge unmet need for community space which the development/ renovation of Cubberley will help address. There are not enough places in South Palo Alto for community groups to meet, and it has been many years since anything other than routine maintenance funds have been spent on this area. I would love to have more drama and arts organizations use the space, but the facilities need to be modernized. Please vote to approve the Master Plan and the half cent sales tax, with the language requiring the funds raised to be used for the Cubberley Masterplan. Regards, Susan and Philip Pines 4109 Donald Dr, Palo Alto, CA 94306 This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first email to you. Mark Safe Report From:Yael Uziyel Naveh To:ParkRec Commission; Council, City Cc:Olenka S. Villarreal; harriet@magicalbridge.org Subject:Tennis courts 3 and 4 Date:Monday, May 18, 2026 2:55:39 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear Parks and Recreation Commissioners, Magical Tennis for Neurodiverse Participants at Mitchell Park is a wonderful and important program. My child has benefited not only from the exercise and fresh air, but especially from being part of a welcoming community of peers. At Magical Tennis, coaches and participants work together on tennis skills, fun, confidence, and friendship. We meet on Mitchell Park tennis courts 3 and 4, which are ideally located near the Magical Bridge Playground, the library, and Ada’s Cafe — making the experience even more accessible and inclusive for families. Losing this unique program would be a significant loss for the disabled community and the families who rely on it. There are very few if none recreational activities specifically tailored for residents with disabilities provided by the city of Palo Alto - beyond those provided by the Magical Bridge team. Please enable them to continue to provide their wonderful programming. My son has really enjoyed the tennis in particular. Please retain Mitchell Park tennis courts 3 and 4. Sincerely, Yael Uziyel Naveh, Palo Alto Resident Parent of a 20 year old participant This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first mail to some recipients. Mark Safe Report Powered by Mimecast From:Humphrey, Sonia Cc:LAFCO Subject:LAFCO’s Community Meetings on Water and Wastewater Services and Survey Date:Monday, May 18, 2026 2:30:46 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Thank you for your interest in Santa Clara LAFCO’s Countywide Water and Wastewater Service Review, a comprehensive review of water, wastewater, and storm water management in Santa Clara County. Public engagement and outreach are very important to Santa Clara LAFCO and are a vital part of the study. LAFCO wants to hear from you and is providing the following opportunities for you to engage and provide input on the study: 1. Community Survey Please take 5 minutes to complete a Community Survey to evaluate water and wastewater services in your community. The survey is available in English and Spanish at https://bit.ly/scc-water-survey. 2. Community Meetings on Water and Wastewater Services (Three to Choose From) You are invited to attend, in-person or by Zoom, one of the three community meetings on water and wastewater services. Each meeting will include similar content but is targeted to communities in a different part of the county. This is an opportunity to: Learn more about the Countywide Water and Wastewater Service Review Provide input on water and sewer service in your community Community Meeting #1 for north Santa Clara County (June 8, 2026 @ 12:00 - 1 PM) Community Meeting #2 for south Santa Clara County (June 8, 2026 @ 6:00 - 7:00 PM) Spanish language interpretation will be available at this meeting. Community Meeting #3 for San Jose and west Santa Clara County (June 9, 2026 @ 6:00 - 7:00 PM) More information on LAFCO is available at SantaClaraLAFCO.org. Best regards, This message needs your attention You've never replied to this person. Mark Safe Report Sonia Humphrey, LAFCO Clerk LAFCO of Santa Clara County 777 North First Street, Suite 410 San Jose, CA 95112 (408) 993-4709 From:Dana Knowles To:Council, City Subject:May 18, 2026 - Item #14 Date:Monday, May 18, 2026 2:26:47 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear Members of the Palo Alto City Council, My husband Michael Knowles and I support affordable housing in Palo Alto but are strongly opposed to the outsized project at 156-164 California Avenue which is so far above Palo Alto's building height limit for our neighborhood. We also have environmental and safety concerns about the project that could be bypassed without an environmental impact review. Specifically, we have questions about the project's impact on the following areas: Utilities - Can the local wastewater, sewer, water and electrical systems handle basically doubling our neighborhood size with this project? Traffic - How will this large project impact access to the Oregon Expressway onramp along Park Boulevard as well as limit traffic flow alternatives to El Camino Real given current traffic conditions which have slowed considerably in recent months. Parking - Where are additional cars going since there aren't nearly enough spots for tenants? Urban Infill - How was the urban infill housing determination made? The specific project lots are not currently abandoned, vacant or underutilized. Bicycle Safety - The project sits in a major corridor for cyclists traveling to/from the Alma/California Avenue tunnel and along Park Blvd. How will safety be addressed during construction and beyond with cars going in and coming out of the project's parking garage? A project half as tall would be more acceptable as well as one which offers more affordable units rather than such a small percentage of the total number (13%). This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first email to you. Mark Safe Report We've lived in the Evergreen Park neighborhood for 35 years, supporting local businesses and services as well as volunteering in and contributing to the local public schools our three children attended. We recognize that our neighborhood and the city of Palo Alto should be flexible in accommodating the needs of changing demographics, economic growth and housing needs, but feel that the City should grow in reasonable and sustainable ways and not ones that overrun and diminish. Thank you for your consideration. Respectfully, Dana (and Michael) Knowles 390 Oxford Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94306 From:Lan Liu To:ParkRec Commission; Council, City; papc.secretary@gmail.com Subject:Concerns About Proposed Tennis Court Conversion at Mitchell Park Date:Monday, May 18, 2026 2:04:30 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear Parks and Recreation Commissioners, I am writing to express concern regarding the proposal to convert Mitchell Park tennis Courts 3 and 4 into additional pickleball courts. My son currently takes tennis lessons at Mitchell Park, and these courts are an important resource for youth sports, recreation, and community activities. Reducing the number of tennis courts would directly impact children and families who rely on this facility for lessons, practice, and regular play. Currently the tennis courts at Mitchell Park are currently fully occupied, making it hard to find an available court. I understand and support the need for recreational opportunities for both tennis and pickleball players. However, Mitchell Park already has significantly more pickleball courts than tennis courts. Eliminating additional tennis courts would make it much harder for young players and community members to access court time and participate in tennis programs. I respectfully ask the Commission to consider alternative locations for pickleball expansion that would not further reduce existing tennis access at Mitchell Park and nearby parks. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Lan, a Palo Alto Resident (951-907-578) This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first email to your company. Mark Safe Report From:Yanling Wang To:ParkRec Commission; Council, City Cc:olenka@magicalbridge.org; harriet@magicalbridge.org Subject:Please keep Mitchell Park tennis courts 3 and 4 for humanity! Date:Monday, May 18, 2026 2:03:19 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear Parks and Recreation Commissioners, I have two teenage boys who live in Palo Alto. While my 15-year old neurotypical boy can easily enjoy many of the great programs in our local community, my 13-year old with special needs has far fewer options. It's almost impossible or very hard for children with special needs to access sports and activities without the right support. Magical Tennis for Neurodiverse Participants at Mitchell Park is one of the very few and an absolutely wonderful program that does that. At Magical Tennis, coaches and participants work together on tennis skills, fun, confidence, and friendship. Mitchell Park tennis courts 3 and 4 are ideally located near the Magical Bridge Playground, the library, and Ada’s Cafe, which makes the experience even more accessible and inclusive for families like ours. Losing this unique program would be a significant loss for the disabled community and the families who rely heavily on it. Please retain Mitchell Park tennis courts 3 and 4 for humanity! Sincerely, Yanling Wang Residence in Barron Park This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first email to your company. Mark Safe Report Powered by Mimecast From:Anne Johnston To:Council, City; Harriet Stern; Olenka Villarreal Subject:Please Retain Mitchell Park Tennis Courts 3 and 4 Date:Monday, May 18, 2026 1:47:44 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear Parks and Recreation Commissioners, My son Axel is 21 years old and has autism. For most of his life, finding community here in Palo Alto — real community, where he feels welcomed and seen — has been one of our family's greatest challenges. Magical Tennis changed that. Through the program at Mitchell Park, Axel has built friendships, grown in confidence, and found something he genuinely looks forward to every week. The coaches understand how to meet participants where they are, and the culture they've created is rare: joyful, patient, and truly inclusive. When Axel comes home from Magical Tennis, our whole family feels it. The program's location matters too. Courts 3 and 4 sit right alongside the Magical Bridge Playground, the library, and Ada's Cafe — a cluster of spaces that already serve our community well. Magical Tennis belongs there. Losing this program would mean losing far more than a tennis class. For families like ours, it would mean losing one of the few places where our kids get to just be kids — connected, capable, and part of something. Please retain Mitchell Park tennis courts 3 and 4. Sincerely, Anne Johnston -- -- Anne Lyons Johnston Creative Executive and Strategist Linkedin | Website This message needs your attention No employee in your company has ever replied to this person. This is a personal email address. Mark Safe Report From:Vivi Chen To:ParkRec Commission; Council, City Cc:olenka@magicalbridge.org; Harriet Stern Subject:Please Retain Mitchell Park Tennis Courts 3 and 4 for Magical Tennis Date:Monday, May 18, 2026 1:47:03 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear Parks and Recreation Commissioners, Magical Tennis for Neurodiverse Participants at Mitchell Park is a truly valuable and important program for our community. My child has benefited not only from the exercise and fresh air, but especially from being part of a welcoming and supportive community of peers. At Magical Tennis, coaches and participants work together to build tennis skills, confidence, friendship, and joy. The program provides a rare opportunity for neurodiverse children and teens to participate in a structured activity where they feel included, understood, and encouraged. The Mitchell Park location is especially important. Courts 3 and 4 are ideally situated near the Magical Bridge Playground, the library, and Ada’s Cafe, making the experience more accessible and inclusive for families. These nearby amenities help create a comfortable environment that supports participants’ needs before, during, and after lessons. My child started in the program barely able to hold a tennis racket. Over time, with patient support from the coaches and volunteers, he has progressed to being able to rally and play small games with others. Just as importantly, he has built meaningful relationships with the coaches, which has helped him develop important social skills and confidence interacting with others. Losing this unique program would be a significant loss for the disabled community and for the many families who rely on it. Please retain Mitchell Park tennis courts 3 and 4 for Magical Tennis. Best Regards, Vivi This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first mail to some recipients. Mark Safe Report Powered by Mimecast Mom of a 10-year-old participant with ASD From:Xuan Li To:ParkRec Commission; Council, City Cc:olenka@magicalbridge.org; harriet@magicalbridge.org Subject:Opposing the conversion of Mitchell Park Tennis Courts 3 & 4 Date:Monday, May 18, 2026 1:44:45 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear Parks and Recreation Commissioners, Magical Tennis for Neurodiverse Participants at Mitchell Park is a wonderful and important program. My child has benefited not only from the exercise and fresh air, but especially from being part of a welcoming community of peers. At Magical Tennis, coaches and participants work together on tennis skills, fun, confidence, and friendship. We meet on Mitchell Park tennis courts 3 and 4, which are ideally located near the Magical Bridge Playground, the library, and Ada’s Cafe — making the experience even more accessible and inclusive for families. Losing this unique program would be a significant loss for the disabled community and the families who rely on it. Please retain Mitchell Park tennis courts 3 and 4. Sincerely, Xuan Parent of a 9-year-old participant This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first mail to some recipients. Mark Safe Report Powered by Mimecast From:Shaila Iyer To:Council, City Subject:Cubberley plans Date:Monday, May 18, 2026 1:28:22 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Hi. I am so excited about the potential remodeling of Cubberley Community Center. I would love to be able to go to shows, events, talks right in my neighborhood rather than drive to Mountain View and Sunnyvale for these. The buildings badly need to be upgraded. Please know you have my vote to move forward with this. I am also happy to help with my time. Thank you. Shaila Iyer 464 Ferne Avenue, Palo Alto This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first email to you. Mark Safe Report From:Sue Duffek To:Council, City; ParkRec Commission; papc.secretary@gmail.com Subject:request for additional pickleball courts Date:Monday, May 18, 2026 12:36:30 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear members of the Palo Alto Parks & Rec Commission and City Council, I began playing pickleball at Mitchell Park in 2021. I truly enjoy participating in the competitive and friendly events, learning opportunities, and social activities that PAPC provides on a regular basis. I love the excitement and look forward to playing pickleball several times a week at Mitchell Park. For my friends, neighbors, and those who I meet off the courts who are unfamiliar with pickleball, I tell them about the accessibility and affordability of pickleball. More so, I let them know that everyone is welcome at Mitchell Park and it’s normal to be hesitant at first. The “beginner courts” and “players without partners” courts were thoughtful additions to Mitchell Park. The many “Getting Started” clinics, all staffed by club volunteers, are a great introduction to pickleball and also provide an opportunity to meet new players of similar skill levels. Interest in pickleball is increasing rapidly in our community. This email is in support of creating eight additional pickleball courts at Mitchell Park. Sincerely yours, Sue Duffek Palo Alto resident Charleston Gardens, South Palo Alto From:Virginia Perry To:Council, City Subject:Item 13: Adopt Cubberley Conceptual Master Plan Date:Monday, May 18, 2026 12:17:41 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i To City Council Members: I am a volunteer with The Friends of the Palo Alto Library, a non- profit organization on the Cubberley campus that has been operating since 1938. Our used book sales allow us to give an annual grant of $150,000 to the Palo Alto City Library for collections and programming. The proposed Phase 1 of the Cubberley Master Plan will displace our Main Room with a Wellness and Recreation Center. If the proposal is accepted, please consider our benefit to the community and reposition our Main, Children’s, and Bargain rooms all together near the entrance to 4000 Middlefield Road. That would allow us to continue sales and make further contributions to the Palo Alto City Library. Respectfully, Virginia Perry 488 W. Charleston Rd. Palo Alto, CA 94306 This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first email to your company. Mark Safe Report