Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2026-08-17 City Council Emails
DOCUMENTS 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: 08/17/2026 Document dates: 8/10/26 – 8/17/26 Note: Documents for every category may not have been received for packet reproduction in a given week. From:Helene Grossman To:Council, City; City Mgr; Lo, Ria; City Attorney Subject:After a cyclist is killed or seriously injured, what does Palo Alto change? Date:Monday, August 17, 2026 10:42:23 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Mayor Veenker, City Council Members, City Manager Shikada, Chief Lo, and Attorney Jensen, I am writing after learning the heartbreaking news that Zaeem Johnson, a former Harker student, died following the devastating injuries he suffered when he was hit by a car while bicycling on East Meadow Drive. Zaeem's collision occurred on September 14, 2023, at East Meadow Drive and South Court. According to reporting, the driver passed another vehicle in the bike lane while Zaeem was turning left, causing the collision. Zaeem suffered a traumatic brain injury from which he never recovered. What makes this tragedy even harder to accept is this: Nearly three years after Zaeem was struck, what has Palo Alto physically changed at this location to prevent the same thing from happening to another child? As far as I can determine, the answer is nothing. When I drive on East Meadow, I still see cars illegally passing other vehicles in the bike lane. This is a heavily traveled school commute corridor used by hundreds of children biking to Fairmeadow, JLS, Gunn and other schools. The danger is not obscure. Residents have specifically identified East Meadow near South Court as unsafe, and the City has studied protected bicycle infrastructure on East Meadow for years. Yet children riding there today remain exposed to the same conditions. And this is part of a deeply troubling pattern. On February 19, 2024, 28-year-old cyclist Sarah Muller was struck and killed at Embarcadero and Newell. More than two years later, the City's 2026 bicycle plan still speaks of exploring safety improvements there. At Greer and Thomas, a cyclist suffered a traumatic brain injury at an unusual two-way stop where traffic on Greer -- the major street -- stops, while vehicles from the much smaller Thomas Drive do not. Despite poor visibility, its location on a school route, and the serious injury, the City has left the configuration unchanged. And on July 2, 2026, Jennifer Smith was catastrophically injured while bicycling at Middlefield and San Antonio -- an intersection the City already knows is hazardous for cyclists. Yet meaningful safety improvements remain plans for the future. How many deaths and catastrophic injuries should it take before a dangerous location triggers an immediate safety response? Other cities demonstrate that this does not have to be normal. When a four-year-old girl was killed in a San Francisco crosswalk at Fourth and King in 2023, city leaders announced safety changes within a week; San Francisco subsequently removed a turn lane and installed a traffic signal. When a two-year-old girl was killed at Fourth and Channel this February, crews were out within 24 hours repainting crosswalks and repairing lighting, followed by additional safety work. That is what urgency looks like. Palo Alto frequently speaks about Vision Zero, Safe Routes to School, and prioritizing vulnerable road users. But Vision Zero cannot simply be a planning document or a list of capital projects years in the future. Its central premise must be that deaths and serious injuries are unacceptable -- and that when they expose a danger, we act. A child biking to school tomorrow cannot be protected by an improvement that has not yet been built. So I would like to ask Council and the City Manager a broader question: What is Palo Alto's protocol after a fatal or serious bicycle or pedestrian collision? Does every such collision automatically trigger an immediate engineering safety review? Does staff consider inexpensive interim measures that could prevent another crash? Is there a deadline for doing so? And most importantly: After each of the serious and fatal crashes above, what did the City actually change to make that location safer? I respectfully ask the City Manager to provide Council and the public with that answer. If the answer, in case after case, is nothing, then we need to ask what is going wrong. Thank you. Sincerely, Helene Grossman Your support defends democracyand empowers voters! From:LWV of Palo Alto To:Council, City Subject:Together, we can empower voters and defend democracy! Add YOUR voice today! Date:Monday, August 17, 2026 9:37:27 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious ofopening attachments and clicking on links. August 17, 2026 Dear City Council members, At a moment when our 250-year old democracy is under incredible strain, the work of protecting voting rights and strengthening civic participation has never been more urgent. The League of Women Voters of Palo Alto is on the front lines of this effort—defending the right to vote, fighting for fair and equitable access to elections, and empowering people with the trusted information they need to participate fully in our democracy. For more than 105 years, the League has remained steadfastly nonpartisan, never supporting or opposing candidates or political parties. But nonpartisan does not mean neutral. The League takes a stand on many critical issues. But the time is now to focus on what matters most: protecting voters and safeguarding a strong, inclusive democracy. At a time when billionaires, corporations, and political organizations are spending millions to influence public opinion, the League remains one of the few trusted, unbiased sources of voter information. People turn to us because they know our work is grounded in facts, fairness, and service to the community—not politics. But this work cannot continue without supporters like you. Your generosity allows us to reach deeply into our community to ensure every eligible voter has access to reliable information - and a meaningful voice in our democracy. In the past year alone, your support helped us to: Expand voter access by registering voters throughout our community—especially young people, voters with disabilities, individuals facing language barriers, and people in custody. Inform and engage voters through 11 candidate and issue forums and the publication of unbiased voter guides that helped residents make informed decisions. Advocate for a stronger community by advancing League positions on affordable housing, climate protection, campaign finance reform, and gun safety—all through a strictly nonpartisan lens. Because we are entirely volunteer-run, every dollar you give goes directly toward this vital work: public forums, voter registration drives, educational materials, outreach efforts, and the infrastructure that keeps our League working on the front lines of democracy. And this year, the stakes couldn’t be higher. Attacks on voting access, growing misinformation, and increasing public distrust make our mission more urgent than ever before. From candidate forums to the analysis needed to help voters understand ballot measures, your local league is already hard at work preparing for a busy fall. We are seeking resources now—not later—to meet the growing need for trusted voter education and civic engagement in our community. With so much critical work ahead of us, our goal is to raise $10,000 by November 1 to sustain and expand this work before the next election cycle. We cannot do it without you. With your help, we will continue to: Protect and expand access to voting Provide trusted, nonpartisan voter education Advocate for policies that strengthen our community and democracy We hope you will make a generous gift today to sustain this essential work. You can: Make a gift of general support directly through our website, or Make a tax-deductible donation to our local impact fund through the League of Women Voters of California Education Fund However you choose to give, your contribution will have immediate local impact—and will be deeply appreciated. If you have any questions, please contact Mary Nemerov, our Fundraising Chair at mabunem@gmail.com. Thank you for standing with us at this critical moment for our democracy. Sincerely, Lisa Ratner President, League of Women Voters of Palo Alto P.S. Have a few hours to get involved? The League is for everyone 16 or older, of any gender! We need volunteers to help with Voter Services, including organizing candidates, tabling at community events - and much more! Learn more at contact@lwvpaloalto.org or take our survey to tell us a little more about what your interests. Stay Informed! Sign Up for LWV California & LWVUS News & Alerts: Click here to sign up for LWVC Newsletter and LWVC Action Alerts Click here to sign up for LWVUS Email News (at bottom) and LWVUS Action Alerts Facebook Website Instagram Copyright © 2026 League of Women Voters Palo Alto, All rights reserved. From Voter Recipient List Email us at lwvpaoffice@gmail.com Our mailing address is: League of Women Voters Palo Alto 3921 E Bayshore Rd Ste 209 Palo Alto, CA 94303-4303 Add us to your address book Want to change how you receive these emails? You can update your preferences or unsubscribe from this list. Questions? Please contact communications@lwvpaloalto.org. From:Oksana Selavri To:Council, City; Lauing, Ed; julie.lythcott-haimes@cityofpaloalto.org; Stone, Greer; vicki.venker@cityofpaloalto.org; Lu, George; Burt, Patrick; Shikada, Ed Subject:strong objection to Phase 2 Date:Monday, August 17, 2026 8:44:03 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Good morning Mayor Veenker, Members of the City Council and City Manager, I absolutely agree with Martin and strongly object to the current Phase 2 proposal. I am a resident of Echelon Community and Fabian Way and East Meadow Circle is my immediate neighborhood. We have suffered long enough (for 6 years now) from this problem and are asking for a better solution which involves banning RVs in areas such as ours which are residential and adjacent industrial/commercial areas. These vehicles do not belong on our streets. In fact the currently implemented biweekly street cleaning showed minimal improvement and did not fix the problem at all. We used to have 55 back to back RVs on East Meadow and now have about 35 RVs that continue to stay. And to make the matters worse the street cleaning flushes them out and they now park right in front of our complex and run their motors overnight creating noise and pollution. Please use the current $800K plus budget to either move these people into Motels and truly help them get off the streets or identify a lot for these 130 plus vehicles that are not disturbing tax paying Palo Alto residents. I see it as a waste of money with no result. Respectfully, Oksana Selavri This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. Mark Safe Report From:hallows.vaulter_5c@icloud.com To:Council, City Subject:August 24th Council Addressing Oversized Vehicle Impacts Date:Monday, August 17, 2026 8:08:04 AM Attachments:image001.png image002.png CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i All, I understand that the City Council will meet on August 24 to discuss proposed oversized- vehicle (OSV) pilot programs. As you consider these proposals, I strongly urge the City Council to enact a comprehensive ban on RV and oversized-vehicle parking throughout the City. The rights and interests of property owners, residents, and local businesses deserve stronger protection than those of transient oversized vehicles. As you are aware, OSVs used for habitation can create significant challenges, including sanitation concerns, obstruction of public spaces, reduced visibility, decreased on-street parking availability, impacts on neighborhoods and businesses, and ongoing demands on City resources and operations. Rather than spending taxpayer dollars on pilot programs that may only delay meaningful results, the City should focus on enforcing the municipal code already in place. Section 90.09 prohibits individuals from using vehicles for lodging on public streets and property between the hours of 9:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. Enforcing this existing regulation would provide an immediate and straightforward way to address overnight habitation in vehicles without creating additional programs or expenses. Residents and business owners expect the City to enforce its existing laws and maintain the cleanliness, safety, accessibility, and character of our neighborhoods. Resources should be directed toward enforcement and solutions that benefit the community as a whole—not toward programs that normalize or expand OSV habitation. If the City Council nevertheless decides to proceed with an OSV pilot program and allocate taxpayer resources to it, I would suggest an alternative: limit OSV parking exclusively to the city blocks where City Council members and the City Manager reside. If these programs are truly in the best interests of the community, City leadership should be willing to experience 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 their impact firsthand. A comprehensive ban on RV and oversized-vehicle parking is reasonable, necessary, and preferable to spending additional public resources on pilot programs when existing municipal regulations can and should be enforced. Best, GMH Begin forwarded message: From: "McDonough, Melissa" <Melissa.McDonough@paloalto.gov> Subject: Staff Report Available for August 24th Addressing Oversized Vehicle Impacts Date: August 13, 2026 at 6:08:36 PM PDT As I mentioned earlier this week, Council will be discussing oversized vehicle (OSV) impacts at its August 24th meeting, tentatively scheduled as Item 10, from 8:40 - 10:40 PM. Ahead of the meeting, if you’re interested, you can read the staff report online, which describes two pilot programs: 1. OSV Parking Permit Pilot. Allowing OSVs to park on two designated street segments (Coyote Hill Road and Embarcadero Road), while actively engaged in pursuing permanent stable housing. This would also include case management services, access to portable toilets, and trash removal. 2. OSV Parking Prohibited Alternating Side Pilot. On impacted streets, prohibiting parking on one-side of each street, on an alternating 6-month basis. This would also include painting red tips at driveways and intersections, and adding signage to allow enforcement of no OSV overnight parking alongside city parks near these streets. Best regards, Melissa Melissa McDonough, MPP Assistant to the City Manager pronouns: she/her 650.329.2533 (desk) | 650.586.1557 (mobile) c www.PaloAlto.gov From:Aram James To:Sean Allen; Richard Konda; Raj Jayadev; Council, City; Raymond Goins; Human Relations Commission; Carla Torres; Susan Hayase; Jose Valle; Damon Silver; Rodriguez, Miguel; <michael.gennaco@oirgroup.com>; Stephen Connolly; julie.ruhlin@oirgroup.con; Robert. Jonsen; Afanasiev, Alex; Goodell, Erin; Alaniz, John; Roberta Ahlquist; Freddie.Quintana@sen.ca.gov; frances.Rothschild@jud.ca.gov; Lewis james; HRW Silicon Valley; Pat M; mike braxton; Ruth Silver Taube Subject:Inmate killing exposed jail flaws Date:Monday, August 17, 2026 7:29:09 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Inmate killing exposed jail flaws https://edition.pagesuite.com/popovers/dynamic_article_popover.aspx? guid=2a55d118-8af1-43fe-86c2-64a8fe99f2ee&appcode=SAN252&eguid=6a453d4b- 82b5-40cc-a6d0-9d05e1a1b211&pnum=30# For more great content like this subscribe to the The Mercury News e-edition app here: From:Joshua Fielden To:Charla Garcia; Client Experience Cc:Deepti Warrier; Lindsy Paine; Leon Smith; Halle Gelman; Maria Prato; Veenker, Vicki; Council, City; Supervisor Margaret Abe-Koga District 5; Jason Galisatus; Kathryn KJ Kaminski Office of Supportive Housing; Joyce Chu; Riley Cooke; Gennady Sheyner Subject:Formal grievance: repeated food shortages and inaccessible grievance process at Homekey Palo Alto Date:Monday, August 17, 2026 7:25:29 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. LifeMoves staff, City and County officials: Please treat this email as a formal grievance and an urgent request for corrective action regarding repeated food shortages at Homekey Palo Alto, LifeMoves' prohibition on basic cooking appliances, and a grievance process that residents are repeatedly told to use but cannot reliably access. This is not an isolated missed meal. On Sunday, August 16, the site again ran out of food with no meaningful recourse. All three meals were sparse. Breakfast consisted of cold cereal bowls and a handful of instant-oatmeal packets for the entire site. The attached photograph shows what was put out for breakfast on Monday, August 17—after LifeMoves had already been notified in writing that the site ran out of food over the weekend. This was the breakfast offering for an 88-unit facility housing more than 100 people: a single bin containing assorted cereal cups and yogurt, with one small carton of milk visible. Nothing meaningful was added to compensate for the weekend shortage; the failure was simply allowed to continue into the next morning. This follows other recurring food problems already documented in the email record: • The site has run out of food on weekends and holidays before. • LifeMoves' nutrition representative told residents that food would improve and that two meals each week would be brought in as "special" meals. Those meals began after a delay, continued briefly, and then stopped without a clear explanation or restart date. • There are days when all three meals contain pork, leaving residents who do not eat pork without an adequate alternative. • Residents have at times been prevented from taking more than one meal, limiting the ability to save an acceptable alternative for later. • Food has not always been fresh, varied, or adequate for the number of people being served. Residents are also prevented from solving these failures for ourselves. LifeMoves does not allow rice cookers, crockpots, or similar appliances in our rooms. The equipment that is allowed does not meet basic self-cooking needs. The provided microwave is only 700 watts and is barely large enough to hold a four-cup measuring cup used to boil water. The small freezer space can hold approximately one prepared entrée. That forces residents to rely on expensive, individually packaged prepared foods. In my own case, my EBT benefits no longer last the month, even though the same amount of money could purchase rice, beans, and other staples sufficient for many meals if safe, ordinary cooking appliances were allowed. The grievance process is directly connected to this food problem. When food runs out or other services fail, residents are told that the path to correction is to submit a grievance. Approximately one month ago, I asked for 30 grievance forms so that residents could complete them when these failures occurred. After repeated requests and roughly a month of waiting, LifeMoves delivered only two forms. This is part of a documented pattern going back at least seven months in which residents are directed to file grievances but the forms are not made readily available. LifeMoves has also stated that a paper form is not required to advance a grievance. Accordingly, this email itself must be accepted, logged, and processed as a formal grievance. Please provide the grievance or complaint tracking number in your response. The County's published grievance requirements state that programs must maintain written grievance policies and procedures, post them somewhere conspicuous and accessible to clients, and provide each client a copy. They also require an opportunity for third-party advocacy and presentation to a neutral decision-maker: https://files.santaclaracounty.gov/migrated/CoC%20-%20Grievance%20Procedures%20- %20English.pdf I am requesting the following concrete actions: 1. Within 24 hours, confirm that Homekey Palo Alto has enough food for every current resident at every meal, including an appropriate alternative for dietary and religious restrictions, and identify the weekend and holiday contingency procedure when supplies run short. 2. By Friday, August 21, provide a written corrective-action plan identifying the accountable manager, meal-count assumptions, inventory and reorder standards, emergency replenishment procedure, dietary-alternative standard, and the date on which the promised special meals will resume. 3. Immediately place an adequate supply of grievance forms and the complete grievance policy in a conspicuous, continuously accessible common area. Provide an electronic form or email submission option, written confirmation of receipt, a tracking number, and published response and appeal deadlines. No staff gatekeeper should be required merely to obtain a form. 4. Within seven days, review and report on the documented requests for grievance forms during the past seven months, including why a request for 30 forms resulted in only two being delivered approximately a month later. 5. Within seven days, either revise the appliance policy to permit safe, commercially manufactured rice cookers, crockpots, and comparable low-risk cooking devices subject to reasonable fire-safety rules, or provide residents access to an adequately equipped communal kitchen. If LifeMoves refuses, provide the specific written safety or code basis for the prohibition and explain what equivalent means residents are being given to prepare affordable food. 6. Preserve all relevant records, including menus, vendor orders, meal and resident counts, inventory and shortage logs, weekend incident reports, dietary-alternative records, appliance-policy documents, grievance-form requests, submitted grievances, and related staff communications. This should not be answered with a general statement that staff are doing their best. Residents need adequate food now, a functioning remedy when the system fails, named accountability, concrete dates, and checkpoints that can be verified. Please also confirm that residents may raise these concerns and participate in the grievance process without retaliation or any adverse effect on housing or services. I am asking LifeMoves to respond to the operational items above and the City of Palo Alto and County of Santa Clara oversight recipients to confirm what review, monitoring, or corrective action they will undertake concerning a publicly funded, city-owned facility operated by LifeMoves. Sincerely, Joshua Fielden Resident, Homekey Palo Alto 1237 San Antonio Road, F114 Palo Alto, CA From:Aram James To:<michael.gennaco@oirgroup.com>; Stephen Connolly; julie.ruhlin@oirgroup.con; Reifschneider, James; Jessica Speiser, Educational Leader for California Democratic Delegate, Assembly District 23; assemblymember.berman@assembly.ca.gov; Josh Becker; CityCouncil; city.council@gilroy.org; Council, City; dcombs@menlopark.gov; Nash, Betsy; cromero@cityofepa.org; rabrica@cityofepa.org; Anne Cribbs; Ann Ravel; Gerry Gras; Dave Price; Human Relations Commission; Roberta Ahlquist; WILPF Peninsula Palo Alto; Palo Alto Renters" Association; city.council@menlopark.gov; citycouncil@mountainview.gov; Perron, Zachary; Emily Mibach; Gennady Sheyner; EPA Today; Brandon Pho; Braden Cartwright; planning.commission@cityofpaloalto.0rg Cc:Burt, Patrick; Lauing, Ed; Reckdahl, Keith; Raymond Goins; Vicki Veenker; Stone, Greer; DuJuan Green; Lythcott- Haims, Julie; Shikada, Ed; board@pausd.org; Board of Directors; Jay Boyarsky; sam.liccardo@gmail.com Subject:WHO’S BEHIND THE CAMERAS? Date:Monday, August 17, 2026 7:22:24 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. I WHO’S BEHIND THE CAMERAS? https://edition.pagesuite.com/popovers/dynamic_article_popover.aspx? guid=2913a9df-6d40-425e-b649- a88b14a19f27&appcode=SAN252&eguid=6a453d4b-82b5-40cc-a6d0- 9d05e1a1b211&pnum=1# For more great content like this subscribe to the The Mercury News e-edition app here: From:Annette Ross To:Council, City; City Mgr; Burt, Patrick; Lauing, Ed; Veenker, Vicki; Reckdahl, Keith; Lu, George; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Stone, Greer Cc:Annette Ross Subject:OSV Date:Monday, August 17, 2026 6:41:08 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Below is a picture from Palo Alto Online that is indeed worth a thousand words. Is this type of parking even legal? Are you ticketing cars that park like this? If not, you should be. At least 2 of the vehicles exceed the allowable size of the parking space. Also, whoever owns the black truck in this photo cannot possibly get out of that space - and it looks like others are in the same predicament. This issue isn’t going away. Please, put on your thinking caps! From:Nariaki Sawamura To:Council, City; Planning Commission Subject:332 Forest Ave - Please Oppose Demolition/Redevelopment Application Date:Monday, August 17, 2026 1:08:12 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Hi, my name is Nariaki Sawamura, I am a Palo Alto resident and constituent. I am writing to oppose the project proposal for 332 Forest Ave. Please oppose this project and support the historical integrity, diversity, and culture of Palo Alto's tenants. Thank you for your kind understanding and support. Sincerely, Nariaki Sawamura 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:Amie Ashton To:Council, City Subject:Support for ADUs Date:Monday, August 17, 2026 12:28:11 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Honorable Council, As someone who was able to enter the property market 20 years ago ONLY as a result of an initial investment in a small condo, I very much support new opportunities for new homeowners (and renters) in our community. I support ordinance changes to make ADUs independently sellable, more affordable, larger, and faster to build. Why? - They can provide ownership opportunities for a similar price as a condo. - They provide opportunities for intergenerational families to live together but in their own spaces. - They can provide emergency and temporary housing for friends and family members who desperately need it. - They provide needed missing-middle housing opportunities with gentle density. As we all know, the real estate market is not currently providing ownership condos due to a host of reasons, but for-sale ADUs are incredible solution to this embedded problem. - They allow homeowners to diversify a weighted property investment without selling, allow older adults to age in place, and provide young families a path to ownership in our community. I am aware that no one solution is going to solve our housing crisis, especially given the low number of ADUs built annually in Palo Alto. We need 100 solutions - and I truly believe this could be a very important one. Thank you, Amie Ashton From:Gary Johnson To:Council, City Cc:Raybould, Claire; Dobkevicius, Kristina; Mark Johnson; Matt Hengehold; Chris Lee Subject:762 San Antonio Rd-Request for Revisions to COAs Date:Sunday, August 16, 2026 10:37:08 PM Attachments:image001.png 762 SAR-Acclaim Letter 2.0.pdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear Mayor and Councilmembers, On behalf of Acclaim Companies and property owner Globe Investments LLC, I am submitting the attached letter that requests revisions to a limited number of the Conditions of Approval for the 762 San Antonio Rd project. Sincerely, Gary Johnson 125 Willow Road Menlo Park, CA 94025 650.622.2107 www.acclaimcompanies.com This message needs your attention This is their first mail to some recipients. Mark Safe Report August 15, 2026 City Council of the City of Palo Alto 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 RE: Applicant Acclaim Companies’ Request for Revisions to Conditions of Approval – 762 San Antonio Road Dear Mayor and Councilmembers, On behalf of ourselves and property owner Globe Investments LLC, we provide the following comments regarding the Conditions of Approval included in the Draft Record of Land Use Approval for the 762 San Antonio Road project (the “Project”), which is before you as Agenda Item 7 on August 17. First, we are incredibly grateful for City staff’s hard work in processing this Project, and for the revisions to Condition 99 that staff has thus far proposed to include in its presentation and read into the record. We also greatly appreciate the City’s strong understanding of this Project’s state law protections, inclusive of its status as a “housing development project” subject to the protections of the Housing Accountability Act (the “HAA”) including the “Builder’s Remedy” and Senate Bill (“SB”) 330. However, there are two items in the Record of Land Use Approval that we feel exceed the bounds of what can be required of the Project by law, and that make a material difference in the Project’s feasibility. Accordingly, we request that Council consider the following, specific text edits. We have provided the text of each item with proposed revisions shown in red underline for additions, and red strikethrough for deletions. The basis for each request follows the text. Requests for Revisions • COA #99: The applicant is responsible for installing and upgrading existing utility mains, services, and laterals as needed to accommodate needs attributable to the development anticipated peak loads, including fire flow requirements determined by the City of Palo Alto Fire Department. This responsibility includes covering all costs related to the design and construction support services of these installations or upgrades resulting from the development. The developer’s financial obligation for construction costs of utility main and service/lateral upgrades whose new capacity exceeds the impacts of the development will be limited to the developer’s fair share contribution as reasonably determined by the City of Palo Alto Utility Department. Specifically, the developer shall not be responsible for any marginal increase in cost associated with a limited and reasonable amount of excess capacity requested by the City, with construction limited to within and adjacent to the project site to the greatest extent feasible. • SECTION 5. Term of Approval. Architectural Review Application. In the event actual construction of the project is not commenced within two years of the Effective Date, the approval shall expire and be of no further force or effect. An extension may be granted in accordance with the allowances set forth in the municipal code and state law. To the extent this time period is inconsistent with the Project’s SB 330 Vesting (construction must be commenced within two and one half years from “final approval” as that term is defined in California Government Code Section 65589.5(o)(2)(D)), this approval shall be automatically extended consistent with the SB 330 Vesting time period. Basis for Revisions • COA 99 With regard to COA 99, our requested changes harmonize the condition with the matching condition recently imposed on the Builder’s Remedy projects at 3606 El Camino Real and 3781 El Camino Real, as we think it is appropriate and fair to treat similarly situated projects the same way. We also want to make clear that we recognize it can be difficult to limit utility-related construction to one site’s frontage, and that a very small upgrade in capacity that’s meant to serve only one project, is not necessarily helpful in the long term. Accordingly, we are requesting limited edits that do recognize the potential that we be required to assist in some upsizing beyond the capacity needed for this Project, but that also reflect that the City’s ability to impose conditions on a development project pursuant to its police power are limited by the concepts of sufficient nexus and proportionality.1 Though the condition as written limits our ultimate financial responsibility to work that is specifically related to accommodating capacity needed for our Project, the condition does not currently provide any limitation on the extent of the construction we can be required to complete on behalf of other projects, which poses material financing issues for the Project due to uncertainty as to the initial cost and time required to comply (even if eventually compensated for cost beyond our fair share). Accordingly, we are requesting that the work be limited to our frontage or immediately adjacent areas “to the greatest extent feasible,” and that if capacity beyond what’s needed for our Project is necessary, it be a “limited and reasonable amount.” • Term of Approval With regard to the 2-year term of approval, we note that allowing for a City entitlement to expire while the Project’s SB 330 vesting continues, defeats the purpose of SB 330’s vesting provisions, which require only that construction commence within 2.5 years of “final approval” as defined in SB 330. Final approval means that “the housing development project has received all necessary approvals to be eligible to apply for, and obtain, a building permit or permits” and either all appeal 1 The "essential nexus" and "rough proportionality" standards for land-use permit conditions and development exactions come from two key U.S. Supreme Court cases: Nollan v. California Coastal Commission (1987) and Dolan v. City of Tigard (1994). These are later expanded by Koontz v. St. Johns River Water Management District (2013) and most recently Sheetz v. County of El Dorado (2024). periods and statutes of limitations have expired, or if a legal challenge is filed, it has been fully resolved in favor of the housing development.2 As currently written, the Project’s Major Architectural Review permit could expire before its SB 330 vesting has expired. Because SB 330 vesting freezes in place (as of the date of the Project’s preliminary application) all City requirements inclusive of processing fees, development impact fees, and all applicable policies and standards, it would be duplicative and wasteful process (not to mention incredibly costly) for the Applicant to need to obtain a new land use approval for the Project. While we conceptually understand local agencies’ concerns around “land banking,” two years to obtain a building permit and “actually commence” construction is an incredibly tight timeline and makes Project financing much more difficult. Even a potential 1-year extension can be insufficient. We have no interest in prolonging development for any longer than is strictly necessary. It is simply the case that the financial environment is incredibly difficult, and any additional bit of certainty we can provide is meaningful and makes the Project more certain to be successful. We also strongly believe that these edits harmonize the City’s entitlement process, with the intended purpose of SB 330 and that imposing a 2 year entitlement timeline exceeds the City’s authorization under state housing law. For all of the above reasons, we request that City Council consider our requested edits. We much appreciate your consideration of this matter. Sincerely, Gary Johnson Acclaim Companies 2 Govt. Code Section 65589.5(o)(2)(D)(ii). From:Robert Marinaro To:Council, City; Veenker, Vicki; Stone, Greer; Lauing, Ed; Reckdahl, Keith; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Burt, Patrick; Lu, George; City Mgr Cc:Josh Becker; Marc Berman; Leslie Bulbuk; Nicole Fernandez; Margaret Abe-Koga; Jensen, Christopher; Bulatao, Eric; Lindsey, Stephen; Nick Marinaro; Jennifer Kain; 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; Theron Bullman; Dave Stellman; Dave Stellman; Steve Wong; Marguerite Poyatos; Manu Kumar; Lydia Kou; Patrick Kelly; Osbaldo Romero; Bryna Chang; Xenia Czisch; Bill McLane; Ramon Moreno; Lester 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; John Seltzer; 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; Arthur Keller; Jeff Levinsky; Becky Sanders; Chip Wytmar; Sharon Elliot; McDonough, Melissa; Janet Hartley; Charlie Weidanz; Kevin Mayer; Boris Folsch; 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; Scott Petersen; Alex Smelik; fred@bockmann.com; Janie Sydow; Deborah j Marinaro; Summa, Doria; Boyd Smith; Lund Smith; Milan Milan; Elliott Lee; Robert Berkovich; Letizia Rodriguez; Brennan Pang; Eggleston, Brad; Rius, Rafael; Lo, Ria; Andrade, Alex; Bob Kennis; Shani Kleinhaus; Peggy (Margaret) Christiansen; Martin Cuyegkeng; Julia Sun; Aki Hirsa; Colin Swindells; Andrew Li; Evan Mathews; Efrain Monttano Velazquez; Ignacio Montelongo Jr.; Joseph Montelongo; Nayirie Tashjian; Fernanda Prado; Dave Rubenstein; Johnny Vo; Priyanka Raghuraman; Andrew Koo; Joseline Sotomayor; Dmitri Samsonov; Gerson Bers; Mike Emrick; Anand Srinivasan; Zohar Gillai; Maria Orlova; Marc Husemann; Niklas Sprungmann; Apple, Kara; Joe Sinnott; Linda Zausen; Danny Whelan; Gulya Timokhina; Matt Lynch; Oksana Selavri; Chuck Karish; Fred Bailin; Dave Adams Subject:A Day in the Life of East Meadow Circle (8/16/26) - - Not So Quiet on the Southern Front! Date:Sunday, August 16, 2026 10:07:47 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. All, I walked East Meadow Circle with my wife tonight at 5:00 pm and recorded the following. While others were enjoying events in the park I was doing my due diligence! At any one time there are between 35-45 OSVs on the 0.5 mile segment of road So as we walked down the middle of the street with my phone in my hand the first guy yells out something, which was inaudible, at us while we were 50 feet past his RV, then the guy who lives in his box truck opened the back door of the truck to see who was coming and actually said Hi when he saw my wife because I was about 20 feet in front of her. I suspect he had a camera rigged to the outside of his truck as many of these RVs do. Then this guy from one of the RVs followed us for about three blocks until we sat on a bench in Ramos Park. He continued to follow us and sat on a bench right next to us as if he was tying to intimidate us. We sat there for a while and then we saw my neighbor playing on the play structure with his two children so we walked over the the play structure and played with the kids for about ten minutes before this guy finally turned around and walked back to East Meadow Circle. I suspect he want to know where I lived. Just so you know, this situation is really getting intolerable and just because it is not in your neighborhood doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist! Bob The Avenue des Champs-Élysées of South Palo Alto Echelon Condos on East Meadow Circle East Meadow Circle - - Is that a boat I see between the vehicles! East Meadow Circle - - Sure, I’ll park anywhere in Palo Alto I please! East Meadow Circle - - The guy who lives in his box truck with two dogs! East Meadow Circle East Meadow Circle East Meadow Circle - - Seeing RV dwellers fixing their motocycles and cars is a common occurrence East Meadow Circle East Meadow Circle East Meadow Circle - - This guy is a fixture here East Meadow Circle East Meadow Circle East Meadow Circle East Meadow Circle - - Seen better days! Sofia University - - Several of you are on my distribution list I sure wish you would speak up! East Meadow Circle - - The Intruder is Everpresent East Meadow Circle - - That tire cover should read “Life is Better on East Meadow Circle!" East Meadow Circle - - The intruder has a nice setup in front of one of the many businesses that reside here East Meadow Circle - - Detached trailer which is illegal under the OSV Phase I Plan so I called it in to the PAPD and got a quick response that it would be investigated Fabian Way - - And one of the unfortunate consequences we see here in South Palo Alto From:Shaoping Lu To:Council, City Subject:over-sized vehicles parking along Fabian way Date:Sunday, August 16, 2026 5:57:16 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i To whom may concern: Thank you for confirming that the 4000 block of Fabian Way east of the bend is eligible for signs allowing enforcement of the oversized vehicle parking restriction under PAMC 10.44.020. This is near the driveway serving 800 Charleston Village. Installing these signs will dramatically improve safety and visibility in the area, especially when we drive a car out of the complex. Could you please share the expected work order and installation dates? PLease reference Palo Alto 311 case 18225728. Thanks Shaoping Lu 800 E Charleston Rd #31 Palo Alto 94303 This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first email to your company. Mark Safe Report From:Aram James To:sam.liccardo@gmail.com Cc:Lauing, Ed; Reckdahl, Keith; Josh Becker; Jessica Speiser, Educational Leader for California Democratic Delegate, Assembly District 23; assemblymember.berman@assembly.ca.gov; Jeff Rosen; Jay Boyarsky; Supervisor Susan Ellenberg; Salem Ajluni; Supervisor Betty Duong; supervisor.abe-koga@bos.sccgov.org; Supervisor Otto Lee; CityCouncil; Nash, Betsy; dcombs@menlopark.gov; Gennady Sheyner; EPA Today; Emily Mibach; jgreen@dailynewsgroup.com; PD Kristina Bell; Reifschneider, James; Goodell, Erin; eric.figueroa@cityofpaloalto.org; julie.ruhlin@oirgroup.con; <michael.gennaco@oirgroup.com>; Stephen Connolly; Steve Wagstaffe; Preminger, Steve; Jay Boyarsky; Council, City;board@pausd.org; Board of Directors; boardfeedback@smcgov.org Subject:Israel"s Ben Gvir advocates killing "30 to 40" people in Gaza nightly while speaking to ex-hostage Date:Sunday, August 16, 2026 3:44:02 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Motherfucking genocidal maniac!! From:Jeremy Levine To:Council, City; Lait, Jonathan; Frick, Coleman; Armer, Jennifer Cc:Scottoneil; Jkelley; Steve Levy; Bryan Baker; Rika Yamamoto; Allan Feldman Subject:Public Comment: Agenda Item 6, promoting ADU starter homes in Palo Alto Date:Sunday, August 16, 2026 3:21:07 PM Attachments:2026.8.16 Public Comment Agenda Item 6 Promoting ADU Starter Homes.pdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. ! Good afternoon Palo Alto City Council (and staff!), On behalf of Palo Alto Forward, please see the attached comment regarding the city's updated ADU ordinance and proposed draft language for separate conveyance of ADUs, or "starter home ADUs." We support the council and staffs' efforts to promote lower-cost home ownership options in Palo Alto. Thank you for your consideration, Jeremy This message could be suspicious The sender's email address couldn't be verified. This is their first mail to some recipients. Mark Safe Report August 16, 2026 Palo Alto City Council 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 RE: Agenda Item 6, ADU ordinance update and 21st century starter homes in Palo Alto Dear Mayor Veenker, Vice Mayor Stone, and Members of the Palo Alto City Council, Palo Alto Forward supports policies to further housing affordability and multi-mobility accessibility in Palo Alto. ADUs have formed an essential part of the City's housing strategy, consistently resulting in the permitting of more than 100 ADUs annually—even higher than the 64 ADUs projected in Palo Alto's housing element. ADUs can become 21st century starter homes in Palo Alto, increasing our community’s economic diversity. With appropriate reforms, ADUs will allow more young families to join our community and more children to attend Palo Alto’s extraordinary schools; create space for multi-generational households; and enable longtime community members to “downsize in place,” thereby freeing up primary dwellings for new families. To further promote ADUs as 21st century starter homes, Palo Alto Forward supports the following policies: ● Amend and adopt staff report attachment C, allowing ADU-condo homes to be sold separately from the main house, using a clean AB 1033 approach rather than a costly and expensive SB 9-inspired approach. City Staff’s proposed ordinance adds unnecessary complications, introducing additional costs and delays that will make ADU homeownership far more expensive. We strongly recommend that the City Council instead: ○ Ask City Staff, and especially the City Attorney, to identify all of the specific sections of attachment C that are not mandated by AB 1033 (see Gov. C. § 66342), some of which should be deleted. Broadly, our principle is that the city’s ordinance will most effectively promote ADU homeownership by implementing what is required by state statute without additional bells and whistles. See our appendix for more exploration of unclear requirements in the draft ordinance. ○ Delete the requirement that applicants seeking to create ADU-condo homes notify homeowners within 600 feet. That's a big and expensive mailer, the cost of which will be passed along to applicants. Furthermore, staff will approve applications for ADU-condo homes ministerially, so notification requirements don’t provide any meaningful information to neighbors and simply waste money. 1 ○ Amend Section 21.09.030(m), which gives the Planning Director discretion to set fees for applications for parcel maps for ADU-condo homes. This creates a subjective, unpredictable, and possibly burdensome fee structure. Palo Alto Forward prefers a predictable and straightforward fee structure. ● Allow 1,400 or preferably 1,600 square foot ADUs in the updated ADU ordinance. While the PTC correctly recommended increasing the maximum size of ADUs in Palo Alto, a 1,200-square-foot limit is insufficient for family-sized 21st century starter homes. Homeowners who have lived for decades in 2,500 sf, 3,000 sf, or larger homes will find it difficult to “downsize in place” even to 1,200 sf ADUs. To create ADUs that are large enough both for small families and downsizing older adults—ADUs that can accommodate 3 bedrooms, 2 bathrooms, living rooms, and reasonable kitchens—a 1,400 square feet would be a minimum. ● Waive all impact fees on ADUs; or at least end the ADU fee cliff. Palo Alto charges no impact fees on scrapes, single-family home teardowns that might change an 1,800 square foot single-family home to a 4,000 square foot one. ADUs should have the same benefits. While Palo Alto Forward prefers a 100% waiver of impact and building fees for ADUs, we would support a compromise proposal that means ADUs start paying impact fees exclusively on project square footage above 750 square feet.1 Right now, ADUs smaller than 750 square feet pay no impact fees; an ADU 750 square feet or larger pays impact fees calculated on its entire square footage. As a result, a homeowner building an ADU might go from paying $0 dollars in impact fees on a 749 square foot ADU to—depending on the size of the main house—paying $13,987.50 in parks impact fees alone on a 750 square foot ADU, or $22,380 on a 1,200 square foot ADU. And that’s just one single fee among many. At most, ADUs should pay impact fees on the marginal square footage above 750 square feet. Treating ADUs as 21st century starter homes — including simple and less expensive ADU-condo procedures — can advance housing affordability in Palo Alto. In San Jose, the first “ADU-condo-home” recently sold for $530,000 — less than 40% of the median home price. We expect significant uptake of ADU-condo homes — which have only been allowed under state law in the last two years — as more and more cities embrace ADUs as 21st century starter homes. Additional study or delay will not affect the merits of the policy; ADU starter homes complement other policies that promote ADUs. Thus far, the success of ADUs in Palo Alto has hinged almost entirely on state laws streamlining ADU production, creating clear standards for building ADUs, and removing fees on smaller ADUs. We hope Palo Alto will continue building on this success with local prerogatives to increase allowable ADU size, promote ADU-condo homes, and eliminate burdensome and unfair fees. 1 SB 1117, a proposed state law likely to pass this year, would also remove the fee cliff by limiting the impact fees cities charge on larger ADUs to the marginal square footage above 750 square feet. We strongly prefer waiving fees entirely, as the city would recoup "lost" revenue through increased property tax revenue generated by more ADUs being built in the first place bringing taxpayers. 2 Thank you for your consideration, Jeremy Levine Executive Director, Palo Alto Forward John Kelley 3 Appendix: Additional Notes on ADU Condo Ordinance Attachment C Several sections of Palo Alto’s proposed ADU condo ordinance appear to have been copied and pasted from San Jose’s ordinance. These sections often (1) create unnecessary uncertainty or ambiguity or (2) contain language that may not apply to Palo Alto or further the ultimate purpose of promoting lower-cost ADU homeownership. Relevant sections include: ● Section 21.09.010 refers to “objective local development standards for condominium subdivisions…” without specifying the portion(s) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code to which such reference is being made. ○ Cf. Gov. C. § 66342(b), “The condominiums shall be created in conformance with all applicable objective requirements of the Subdivision Map Act (Division 2 (commencing with Section 66410)) and all objective requirements of a local subdivision ordinance.” (Emphasis added.) ● Section 21.09.030(b) creates ambiguity regarding which ADUs can be made into ADU-condo homes. The section appears to require that all structures and buildings on a proposed ADU-condo parcel comply with “the building and zoning requirements applicable to the zoning district….” One apparent problem, among others, is that there are different requirements that apply to primary dwellings as opposed to ADUs, and even different requirements that apply to some ADUs and not others. Consequently, such overly broad language risks restricting the ability of almost all ADUs built using state ADU law (the vast majority of ADUs built in Palo Alto) to be converted into condos. (For example, does this proposed language mean that an ADU built in compliance with state law (e.g. Gov. C. Section 66323) in an R-1 property’s rear setback may not become an ADU-condo home?) Palo Alto Forward would appreciate clarity regarding why this section exists in the proposed ordinance and whether it serves any meaningful purpose. ● Section 21.09.030(e) imposes several requirements for a “home or property owners’ association” (HOA) to be created for any new ADU-condo home, including specific provisions concerning “administration, management and maintenance of all common areas including landscaping, drive aisles and parking areas, maintenance of the exterior of all buildings, pool or common roof, the collection of dues, payment of public utilities not billed separately to each unit, and enforcement of standards within the project.” Complex topics in HOAs suitable for large, multi-family projects may not make sense for “one-main-house-one-ADU-condo-home” HOAs. HOAs are also private agreements; the City need not predetermine the agreement between the actual homeowners. ● Section 21.09.030(f)(1) requires city approval of any changes to CC&Rs recorded between a primary dwelling and any ADU-condo home. CC&Rs are private agreements between owners in a condo association; the city need not involve itself in changes to such agreements among private homeowners. ● Section 21.09.030(j)(2) requires that applicants provide information regarding “scenic trees” as part of any application. Palo Alto does not appear to have a clear definition of “scenic trees” in its municipal code; this language should be amended to reflect trees actually described in Palo Alto’s code. 4 From:Aram James To:Carla Torres; Sean Allen; Rose Lynn; Dave Price; Gennady Sheyner; Council, City; Jessica Speiser, Educational Leader for California Democratic Delegate, Assembly District 23; Josh Becker; sam.liccardo@gmail.com Subject:Sawyer Ave, Sunday Afternoon — Invisible Institute Date:Sunday, August 16, 2026 2:23:32 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. https://invisible.institute/sawyer-ave August 2026 In this Issue: Mark your calendar! | President's Message | Advocacy Report | Unite & Rise for Voting Rights Report | Events & Volunteering | Contact your representatives | ICYMI: Video Archive Links From:LWV Palo Alto VOTER To:Council, City Subject:LWVPA August VOTER: "enraging and inspiring" - "so mad I wanted to cry" - highlights from Unite & Rise for Voting Rights Date:Sunday, August 16, 2026 2:20:13 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of openingattachments and clicking on links. Coming up! A U G U S T 21: Member & Friends Coffee 2, 9:30am 25: Board Retreat & Meeting, 3-6PM S E P T E M B E R TBD: LWV Candidate & Issue Forums 15: Defend Democracy Tour, 6-8pm Sept. 24 - Oct. 13: ROV mails county election information guides to all registered voters O C T O B E R 3: LWV TABLING, 12-2PM at the 34th Annual Black College Awareness Fair at College of San Mateo - come help us register young voters! 5: ROV mails vote by mail packets 5 - Nov. 2: Early voting at ROV office 19: Last day to register to vote for Nov. 3 election with regular ballot 20 - Nov. 3: Conditional voter registration at any Vote Center or ROV office 24: Nov. 3: Vote Centers open 27: Last day to request vote-by-mail replacement N O V E M B E R 3: ELECTION DAY! All vote centers open Joinus for coffee and conversation! Curious what you can do? Come find out! Join us to talk about what's up in the League, what's next on our agenda, prepping for the election - and more. Choose the date that works for you! RSVP to lwvpaoffice@gmail.com Friday, August 21 | 9:30 am | Mary Nemerov's home at 305 Emerson, Palo Alto Message from our President COMMUNITY OUTREACH: Our League joined the “Good Trouble Lives On” event on July 18 at the old REI store in Mountain View as community members gathered to honor Congressman John Lewis’ voting rights work. We heard community leaders speak on the importance of informed voting. LWV Palo Alto volunteers Leying Jiang and Micheline Horstmeyer offered voter registration cards. Aline Yu and Lisa Ratner distributed flyers about Prop. 39, the anti-voter Voter ID initiative on the November ballot. We urged people to inform their neighbors and friends about Prop. 39 by holding “What’s on Your Ballot” meetings in late September. HEADING INTO THE LEAGUE'S BUSY SEASON! Voter Services chair Hannah Lu is leading the Voter Services team in preparation for the November 3 election. Our ProCon team (Steve Levy, Nancy Bell, Nancy Neff and Jim Fox) is joining four other Santa Clara County Leagues to write nonpartisan Pro/Con analyses of the 14 state ballot measures. We're assembling League volunteers to make Pro-Con presentations to community groups. Also coming up: city council and school board candidate forums. To volunteer to help with any of these civic engagement efforts, email Hannah at: hannahlu00@gmail.com. We have tasks to fit every schedule! BE A POLL WORKER! The Santa Clara County Registrar of Voters is recruiting for paid positions as a poll worker this election season. This is a great way to serve your community. Information here: https://vote.santaclaracounty.gov/get- involved/work-vote-center. ELECTIONS CALENDAR – Important Dates Sept. 24 - Oct. 13: ROV mails county election information guides to all registered voters Oct. 5: ROV mails vote by mail packets Oct. 5 - Nov. 2: Early voting at ROV office Oct. 19: Last day to register to vote for Nov. 3 election with regular ballot Oct. 20 - Nov. 3: Conditional voter registration at any Vote Center or ROV office. Oct. 24 - Nov. 3: Vote Centers open Oct. 27: Last day to request vote-by-mail replacement Nov. 3: All vote centers open We hope to see you soon! Lisa Ratner President League of Women Voters of Palo Alto Advocacy Report: Lisa Ratner LOCAL ADVOCACY: Immigration In July, LWV Santa Clara County (representing five Leagues in the County) sent a letter to the Board of Supervisors supporting the County and State AG’s lawsuit against the planned opening of an ICE detention center near Gilroy. The lawsuit, as well as objecting that DHS failed to follow environmental and zoning laws – making the location unfit to house detainees – objected to ICE’s record of violence and mistreatment of immigrants in detention centers around the country. STATE ADVOCACY: Voting rights A coalition of voting rights, disability rights, community and labor organizations, including the LWVC, vowed to defeat Prop. 39, an anti-voter proposition on the November ballot. This measure would make it harder for millions of eligible Californians to vote by: Requiring a government-issued ID to vote in person. For mail-in voting, requiring the voter to write the last four digits of a government ID# on the outside of their mail ballot envelope, exposing voters to potential identity theft. Costing taxpayers tens of millions of dollars by requiring election officials to verify citizenship. Creating new obstacles to voting for countless Californians, especially minorities, young voters, seniors, those with disabilities, and naturalized citizens. LWVC-sponsored voting rights legislation moved forward this month as SB 1164 and SB 1360 (Cervantes). These two bills make up the California Voting Rights Act of 2026, SB 1164 targets vote dilution and voter suppression and gives Californians the right to enforce voting rights in court. This bill is a response to the Supreme Court’s Callais decision which gutted federal protections against racial gerrymandering. SB1160 focuses on minority language access for voters. FEDERAL ADVOCACY - Voting Rights The U.S. Citizen and Immigration Services tried to ban nongovernmental organizations from attending naturalization ceremonies to help new citizens register to vote. LWV, local Leagues, and the National Council of Jewish Women won a major early ruling from a federal judge that the ban violated free speech rights, the Administrative Procedures Act, the federal law requiring agencies to follow lawful procedures and give reasoned explanations for major policy changes, and the equal protection clause of the U.S. Constitution. The ruling temporarily reinstates the USCIS policy manual from 2017. Under that policy, qualified nonpartisan nonprofits may provide registration services when state or local election officials cannot attend. In 2024 alone, the League of Women Voters helped register more than 122,000 new voters at naturalization ceremonies. In addition, the LWV denounced Trump’s false claims about the integrity of our elections; read the response here: League of Women Voters response. STAY INFORMED! Follow LWV press releases. PAST EVENT: Thank you, Palo Alto, for a successfulUnite & Rise for Voting Rights! Commemorating the passing of the Voting Rights Act, Unite & Rise 8.5 was the League’s nationwide day of action for voting rights, in coalition with several other national organizations. Over 300 cities across the country participated - including Palo Alto! More than 100 people gathered on August 8 in the social hall at Cong. Etz Chayim for our “Unite & Rise for Voting Rights” event, held in partnership with Rho Delta Omega Chapter of Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority, Inc. Attendees watched After Selma, a documentary exploring what has happened to voting rights since that fateful walk across the Edmund Pettus Bridge, and exposing the voter suppression tactics adopted after the 2013 Supreme Court ruling in Shelby v. Holder. "It was enraging and inspiring, Encouraging and discouraging. It reminded us of the work ahead. We have no other choice." - Jennifer Dibrienza "My 6 friends who came all said they are going to share the movie with their friends... one was so mad she wanted to cry." - Aline Yu Photo: Dr. Carson and colleagues, on the 50th anniversary of the march across the bridge. Used with permission. Featured in the film by Emmy-winning filmmaker and son of a Freedom Rider, Loki Mulholland (“The Uncomfortable Truth”) were civil rights veteran Joanne Blackmon Bland, and New York Times bestselling author, Carol Anderson (White Rage: the Unspoken Truth of Our Racial Divide) who dive into the history of voter suppression, and the need for us to challenge it, in order to preserve our democracy and equality for all. (To see the film, use your library card to watch it for free at kanopy.com/after-selma.) The film clearly spells out how strict voter ID laws, voter purges, changing times and locations of polling places, racially gerrymandered voter maps, and disenfranchisement of people with felony convictions silenced millions of voters in the 2016 election, the first presidential election in 50 years without the 1965 Voting Rights’ Act pre-clearance protections. These voter suppression tactics continue today across the country. Thank you to our amazing speakers: Ilyasha Peete, MBA and principal of Catalyze & Cultivate Consulting, moderated a discussion with our three speakers about what actions we can take today to protect and encourage voting. Dr. Clayborne Carson, retired Stanford University history professor, spoke about the importance of retelling the stories of the people who fought for voting rights. Their brutal treatment on Bloody Sunday at the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma, Alabama in March 1965 galvanized President Johnson and our nation to enact the 1965 Voting Rights Act. The bravery of those marchers has inspired freedom movements around the world, as far away as Zambia, where Dr. Carson was personally thanked for how the movement inspired their country's independence. Lisa Ratner, LWVPA president and advocacy chair, discussed Prop. 39, an initiative on the November ballot. Prop 39 would require voters to show government-issued ID every time they vote – creating privacy risks, barriers for eligible voters, ballot rejections, and targeting communities where fewer people have IDs, including communities of color, seniors, students, low-income voters, and people with disabilities. Mandatory citizenship checks using flawed databases would lead to purges of eligible voters from the rolls. The cost to taxpayers for election officials to run voters through an unnecessary and unreliable citizen data base will be in the tens of millions of dollars. Lisa encouraged people to spread the word about how Prop 39 would make voting more difficult and less secure, like having neighborhood gatherings to learn about the ballot, with your family and friends. Gail Slocum, an attorney experienced with the Election Protection Coalition, spoke about her experience observing the polls in Atlanta, Georgia in prior elections. She encouraged people to sign up with the Election Protection Coalition at 866-OUR-VOTE Hotline, including Voteriders, LWV, Common Cause, ACLU, Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, Election Safeguards Response Network, and Democracy Forward. Carson, Ratner, Slocum and Peete After the event, additional material was shared by Dr. Carson: a 21-second video marking the 50th anniversary event in 2015. This event was brought to you by the League of Women Voters of Palo Alto & Rho Delta Omega Chapter of Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority, Inc. in partnership with, and gratitude to, our community colleagues Catalyze & Cultivate Consulting | Latina Coalition of Silicon Valley | National Coalition of 100 Black Women - Silicon Valley Chapter | Spark/Etz Racial Justice Impact Coalition (SERJIC) | The Joan Trumpauer Mulholland Foundation | UAMEZ Church, and a special thank you to Congregation Etz Chayim for rental of their beautiful facility. Democracy doesn't defend itself, people do. On August 8, over 300 communities across the country came together to send a clear message: our democracy belongs to the people. "This Day of Action is more than a single day of events; it's a declaration that voters are organized, energized, and ready to protect the fundamental right that makes all others possible—the freedom to vote.” - Celina Stewart, CEO for the League of Women Voters Events & Volunteering AN INVITATION FROM: Defend Democracy Tour - ACLU of Northern California Throughout 2026, ACLU NorCal executive director Abdi Soltani is touring Northern California to highlight and celebrate the ways people are stepping up to defend democracy in its hour of need. We invite ACLU members, partners, and friends to join us at an event near you. Join us in PALO ALTO on September 15, 6-8pm for a briefing and reception. We look forward to meeting with ACLU supporters in your community to thank you, share updates on the ACLU's work nationwide and locally, and provide opportunities for you to get involved in the work to protect our democracy in 2026 and beyond. Learn more at www.aclunorcal.org/tour. September 15, 6-8pm at Mitchell Park Community Center. For questions about the event, please reach out to events@aclunc.org. REGISTER HERE AN INVITATION FROM RHO DELTA OMEGA CHAPTER OF ALPHA KAPPA ALPHA SORORITY, INC.: Table with us on Oct. 3! We're looking for a few volunteers to help from 12-2pm on OCTOBER 3 as part of the 34th Annual Black College Awareness Fair at College of San Mateo, coordinated by our colleagues in Rho Delta Omega Chapter of Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority, Inc. As well as doing voter registration of young people, we will be informing guests about the propositions on the November ballot. Interested? Please email us at lwvpaoffice@lwvpaloalto.org. More Volunteer Opportunities! Come join our fabulous team of volunteers - everyone 16 and up of all genders is welcome! Learn more about our teams and programs on our website. Our League is gearing up for the November midterms. Make a difference by volunteering! Assist with the CANDIDATE FORUMS in September Join the PRO/CON TEAM which will address the many November ballot propositions Join the ADVOCACY TEAM which will communicate the League’s position on ballot measures through community outreach events. Contact Hannah at hannahloo100@gmail.com Want to put your technical and/or design skills to work to support the League? We would love volunteers to help update our website and help with our online fundraising appeal! Contact Mary Nemerov at mabunem@gmail.com. Use your voice! Contact your Members of Congress and share your thoughts on how they should represent YOU. Reach them at: FEDERAL: US SENATE: Senator ALEX PADILLA | Senator ADAM SCHIFF US HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES: Representative SAM LICCARDO (16th District) | Find your CA state representative CALIFORNIA: State Assembly District 23 (Palo Alto) - Assemblymember MARC BERMAN State Senate District 13 (Palo Alto) - Senator JOSH BECKER Find Your California Representatives ICYMI: Video Archive of Past Events 2.24.26: Immigration, Congress and Common Sense - Can Everyday Americans Move Action Forward in These Times 10.4.25: Fall Kick-off speaker, ERIK JENSEN on the Rule of Law 10.2.25: LWVPA Water Symposium 9.9.25: County League forum on Executive Power, with Stanford Law Professor PAMELA KARLAN and Santa Clara University Law Professor DAVID SLOSS. Stay Informed! Sign Up for LWV California & LWVUSNews & Alerts Click here to sign up for LWVC Newsletter and LWVC Action Alerts Click here to sign up for LWVUS Email News (at bottom) and LWVUS Action Alerts Facebook Website Instagram Copyright © 2026 League of Women Voters Palo Alto, All rights reserved. From Voter Recipient List Email us at lwvpaoffice@gmail.com Our mailing address is: League of Women Voters Palo Alto 3921 E Bayshore Rd Ste 209 Palo Alto, CA 94303-4303 Add us to your address book Want to change how you receive these emails? You can update your preferences or unsubscribe from this list. Questions? Please contact communications@lwvpaloalto.org. From:王苗 To:Council, City Subject:Regarding 332 forest ave Date:Sunday, August 16, 2026 12:58:03 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear city council. I am writing to formally register my opposition to the current project proposal for 332 Forest Ave. As a resident in the community, I have several concerns regarding the potential impact of this development on the surrounding neighborhood, specifically regarding traffic congestion, environmental impact, or zoning compliance. I believe the proposal in its current form does not align with the best interests of the local community. I kindly request that the planning committee take these concerns into consideration and review the potential negative impacts of this project before making a final decision. Thank you for your time, attention, and consideration of this matter. Sincerely, Fiona Wang This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first email to you. This person's name has non-English characters. Mark Safe Report From:Aram James To:sam.liccardo@gmail.com; Bill Newell Cc:Lauing, Ed; Reckdahl, Keith; assemblymember.berman@assembly.ca.gov; Josh Becker; Linda Jolley; Jeff Rosen; Reifschneider, James; Jay Boyarsky; CityCouncil; Council, City; city.council@gilroy.org Subject:FChodesh tov Aram. Date:Sunday, August 16, 2026 12:37:50 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Chodesh tov Aram, I’m Rabbi Jessica Rosenberg, and I am honored to be stepping into the role of Associate Director of Religious and Cultural Organizing at the JVP Leadership and Culture Lab. It’s an honor to step into this work, over a decade and a half after I started organizing in the movement for justice in Palestine. And I’m excited to help grow the JVP Lab, as a part of the growing ecosystem of anti-Zionist Jewish cultural institutions. Let me take a few moments to introduce myself and the JVP Lab. Learn more at our site Resource this work Introducing myself My rabbinate has been shaped by the call to action of the Palestinian struggle for liberation. I became a rabbi to learn our people’s diverse and nuanced histories, and to create spaces, ritual, and organizing that helps transform our relationships to past, present and future. Through this work, we honor our inherited legacies of life-giving community care and resistance to fascism I’ve been honored to work in congregations, communities and campaigns, from organizing and ritual leading to writing and teaching, in the service of growing anti-Zionist Jewish culture and tradition and building a Jewish future that honors all life and land, and uproots Jewish supremacy and all forms of supremacy. I co-authored For Times Such as These: A Radical’s Guide to the Jewish Year with Rabbi Ariana Katz, and I’m a founding member of Signal Fire Radical Jewish Artist Cooperative, an artist owned and operated maker and distributor of art and Judaica. The JVP Lab JVP Lab will expand on JVP’s decades of work fostering anti-Zionist Jewish ritual, cultural, spiritual, and educational organizing. Alongside longtime JVP staff members Melissa Nussbaum Freeman and Shirly Bahar, we’ll: Develop educational and organizing offerings that reflect diverse expressions of Judaism, Jewish life and tradition. Grow the capacity of anti-Zionist Jews to lead in our communities while remaining materially in solidarity with Palestinian movements for justice. Convene anti-Zionist Jewish artists, spiritual leaders, cultural workers, and organizers to experiment with and create new expressions of anti-Zionist Judaism and Jewish culture. Learn more at our site Resource this work Today, as we enter into the month of Elul, the last month of the Jewish year, we begin a season of intense reflection. It is a powerful time to experience the ways in which Jewish traditions can support us to express our highest ideals, live our principles, and renew our commitment to and practice steadfastness in our struggle for justice. I hope you’ll join us in doing some of that practice in the community of JVP and JVP Lab. Anti-Zionist Jewish life is at a tipping point. With the flowering of each new anti- Zionist Jewish community, we are becoming the irresistible and inevitable future of Judaism. May it be a nourishing new month, R. Jessica Rosenberg Associate Director of Religious and Cultural Organizing at JVP Lab P.S. In the coming weeks, we will share with you new and old offerings for this year’s high holidays, an essential time for engaging Jewish communities to reflect on how we are living our values and commit to spiritual and material transformation. If you are hungry for vibrant anti-Zionist Jewish life, I hope you’ll join me in resourcing JVP Lab’s work. JVP Leadership and Culture Lab is a national 501(c)(3) organization that builds programming and resources to support and grow the political education, organizing skills, strategic capacities, and personal practice of anti-Zionist Jewish organizers. Donate to JVP Lab JVP Leadership and Culture Lab PO Box 589, Berkeley, CA 94701 We use email to build our grassroots power – don't hesitate to share your feedback and campaign suggestions. To view or update your contributions, visit our self-service portal. Sent via ActionNetwork.org. To update your email address, change your name or address, or to stop receiving emails from Jewish Voice for Peace Leadership and Culture Lab, please click here. From:slevy@ccsce.com To:Council, City; Lait, Jonathan Subject:Item 6 ADUs Date:Sunday, August 16, 2026 11:54:48 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Mayor Veenker and council members, I see the following benefits and expanded opportunities from the approval of larger ADUs combined with the opportunity to own and sell the units. The major benefit and expanded opportunity is the ability to develop starter homes that are more affordable than the SFHs in Palo Alto and also more affordable than the townhomes recently approved. It is only a starter home if you can own it. The city has a strong goal of making new housing affordable to new and younger families, which passage of attachment 1 and attachment 3 allows. There is a benefit of undetermined magnitude to allow older homeowners to downsize while they remain in the community and maintain an ownership stake. There is a benefit to SFH owners to develop an ADU that can be sole and bring in immediate cash. The ability to sell/own the ADU will reduce the financing costs (and cost) to the SFH owner to build and the new owner to buy. To further reduce costs and a barrier to achieving the numerous benefits, impact fees on the larger units should be eliminated. Impact fees are being reduced in other cities to increase affordability by reducing costs. The way to deal with possible unintended consequences of the new ADU ordinances i NOT by waiting to see what happens in other cities but rather by writing strict and enforceable standards into the ordinances while not interfering with the numerous benefits. Stephen Levy From:Annette Ross To:Council, City; Burt, Patrick; Lauing, Ed; Lu, George; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Reckdahl, Keith; Stone, Greer; Veenker, Vicki Cc:City Mgr; Annette Ross Subject:OSV Proposal Date:Sunday, August 16, 2026 11:19:42 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. I am writing to suggest that the OSV AdHoc Committee scrap the current proposal for dealing with the OSV dilemma, reconvene, and invite Robert Marinaro to the table. If you can figure out who they are, include also Lily and Gary G., who both posted informed comments to Palo Alto Online’s article about your plan. As a tax-paying resident of Palo Alto, I expected Council to come up with a plan that is responsive to the concerns of residents and businesses. Instead, the proposed plan legitimizes something that should not be happening in the first place. And the proposed fee ($15/month) for a permit to park and live in Palo Alto is likely an invitation to grow the problem. One person commented online that if he pulled his RV out of storage in Monterey (@$60/mo) and relocated it here, he’d save money. Your proposal encourages this. Related to this (see Lily G’s comments online) I am baffled by this city’s approach to fire safety. Palo Alto is promoting housing density (including sanctioned RV dwelling) which only and inevitably increases demand on health and safety services. Yet there’s no evidence of a planned increase in services. Or even right-sizing the equipment and staffing at Fire Station 4. This is asking for trouble. If you need confirmation of that you need only call LA’s mayor. Or read about the unnecessary complications of the Altadena and Pacific Palisades fires. You all spent a lot of time and a good amount of money convincing Palo Alto voters that you have the chops to tackle civic issues. This proposal doesn’t come close to proving that. Please, start over. This community deserves better. From:Steve Levy To:Council, City; Lait, Jonathan Subject:762 San Antonio applica Date:Sunday, August 16, 2026 10:48:43 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Mayor Veenker and council members, I support the ARB and staff recommendation to approve this application. 228 units with 30 deed restricted units makes a meaningful contribution to meeting our adopted housing goals and adds to our buffer. The project meets the parking requirement and has made modifications as requested by the ARB. Please approve this application and continue council’s recent set of approvals. Stephen Levy Sent from my iPad From:Veenker, Vicki To:Star Teachout; Council, City Subject:Re: State of the City gathering Date:Sunday, August 16, 2026 10:30:05 AM Attachments:Outlook-yrvr2kjg.png Dear Star, In case it could raise Brown Act concerns, I won't respond substantively here, but I'm happy to speak with you before Wednesday if you'd like. If that's of interest, please email me separately at vicki.veenker@paloalto.gov. I was planning to address timing during the Address, but I could mention it at council Monday if it's easier for you to listen in then. Best regards, Vicki Vicki Veenker Mayor City of Palo Alto Vicki.Veenker@paloalto.gov From: Star Teachout <teachout@sonic.net> Sent: Saturday, August 15, 2026 6:59 PM To: Council, City <city.council@PaloAlto.gov> Subject: State of the City gathering Dear Mayor Veenker and council members, I am curious why our State of the City gathering is happening in August when it is such a busy time for everyone? Mayor Veenker, could you please reply with why this change was made in case I am missing something important? Schools are just returning, many are coming back from vacations, local and national elections require prompt research/attention, and people are generally busy with the end of summer (harvesting gardens, signing up for PA Adult school/Enjoy classes, etc.). From my online search, this important meeting has always been in progress on our larger goals from the newly formed council. It is too late to change the date, but please return to the traditional timing in the future. February and March offer a lull in the busy year, and probably result in a better turnout. Respectfully, Star Teachout State of the City: Next Wednesday, August 19 Join the Mayor of Palo Alto for the 2026 State of the City on Wednesday, August 19 at the Palo Alto High School Performing Arts Center; doors open and public comment at 5:30 p.m. Learn about updates on the implementation of the City Council Priorities, highlight achievements advancing the Council’s Values and celebrate community successes with a reception to follow. Consider walking or biking to help reduce greenhouse gas emissions from vehicles, progressing our goal to reach 80% emissions reduction. RSVP is requested, not required. Your support defends democracyand empowers voters! From:LWV of Palo Alto To:Council, City Subject:Together, we can empower voters and defend democracy! Add YOUR voice today! Date:Sunday, August 16, 2026 10:18:34 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious ofopening attachments and clicking on links. August 2026 Dear [NAME], At a moment when our 250-year old democracy is under incredible strain, the work of protecting voting rights and strengthening civic participation has never been more urgent. The League of Women Voters of Palo Alto is on the front lines of this effort—defending the right to vote, fighting for fair and equitable access to elections, and empowering people with the trusted information they need to participate fully in our democracy. For more than 105 years, the League has remained steadfastly nonpartisan, never supporting or opposing candidates or political parties. But nonpartisan does not mean neutral. The League takes a stand on many critical issues. But the time is now to focus on what matters most: protecting voters and safeguarding a strong, inclusive democracy. At a time when billionaires, corporations, and political organizations are spending millions to influence public opinion, the League remains one of the few trusted, unbiased sources of voter information. People turn to us because they know our work is grounded in facts, fairness, and service to the community—not politics. But this work cannot continue without supporters like you. Your generosity allows us to reach deeply into our community to ensure every eligible voter has access to reliable information - and a meaningful voice in our democracy. In the past year alone, your support helped us to: Expand voter access by registering voters throughout our community—especially young people, voters with disabilities, individuals facing language barriers, and people in custody. Inform and engage voters through 11 candidate and issue forums and the publication of unbiased voter guides that helped residents make informed decisions. Advocate for a stronger community by advancing League positions on affordable housing, climate protection, campaign finance reform, and gun safety—all through a strictly nonpartisan lens. Because we are entirely volunteer-run, every dollar you give goes directly toward this vital work: public forums, voter registration drives, educational materials, outreach efforts, and the infrastructure that keeps our League working on the front lines of democracy. And this year, the stakes couldn’t be higher. Attacks on voting access, growing misinformation, and increasing public distrust make our mission more urgent than ever before. From candidate forums to the analysis needed to help voters understand ballot measures, your local league is already hard at work preparing for a busy fall. We are seeking resources now—not later—to meet the growing need for trusted voter education and civic engagement in our community. With so much critical work ahead of us, our goal is to raise $10,000 by November 1 to sustain and expand this work before the next election cycle. We cannot do it without you. With your help, we will continue to: Protect and expand access to voting Provide trusted, nonpartisan voter education Advocate for policies that strengthen our community and democracy We hope you will make a generous gift today to sustain this essential work. You can: Make a gift of general support directly through our website, or Make a tax-deductible donation to our local impact fund through the League of Women Voters of California Education Fund However you choose to give, your contribution will have immediate local impact—and will be deeply appreciated. If you have any questions, please contact Mary Nemerov, our Fundraising Chair at mabunem@gmail.com. Thank you for standing with us at this critical moment for our democracy. Sincerely, Lisa Ratner President, League of Women Voters of Palo Alto P.S. Have a few hours to get involved? The League is for everyone 16 or older, of any gender! We need volunteers to help with Voter Services, including organizing candidates, tabling at community events - and much more! Learn more at contact@lwvpaloalto.org or take our survey to tell us a little more about what your interests. Stay Informed! Sign Up for LWV California & LWVUS News & Alerts: Click here to sign up for LWVC Newsletter and LWVC Action Alerts Click here to sign up for LWVUS Email News (at bottom) and LWVUS Action Alerts Facebook Website Instagram Copyright © 2026 League of Women Voters Palo Alto, All rights reserved. From Voter Recipient List Email us at lwvpaoffice@gmail.com Our mailing address is: League of Women Voters Palo Alto 3921 E Bayshore Rd Ste 209 Palo Alto, CA 94303-4303 Add us to your address book Want to change how you receive these emails? You can update your preferences or unsubscribe from this list. Questions? Please contact communications@lwvpaloalto.org. From:Aram James To:sam.liccardo@gmail.com; Meg Thomas; Julian Garcia; assemblymember.berman@assembly.ca.gov; Council, City; Jasso, Tamara; Hoyt, George; GRP-City Council; supervisor.abe-koga@bos.sccgov.org; board@pausd.org; Board of Directors; Jay Boyarsky; Supervisor Betty Duong; Supervisor Susan Ellenberg; Supervisor Otto Lee; Josh Becker; dcombs@menlopark.gov; Taylor, Cecilia; PD Kristina Bell; Reifschneider, James; planning.commission@cityofpaloalto.0rg; Shikada, Ed; city.council@gilroy.org; CityCouncil; citycouncil@mountainview.gov; city.council@menlopark.gov Subject:San Leandro-Oakland earthquake: Magnitude 3.8 quake shakes near Oakland Zoo in Alameda County, USGS says | abc7news.com Date:Sunday, August 16, 2026 12:41:59 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. San Leandro-Oakland earthquake: Magnitude 3.8 quake shakes near Oakland Zoo in Alameda County, USGS says | abc7news.com https://share.google/l4BKalvQvxemStuRb Re need for a seismic inspection at the 40-year-old Southwood Apartment Complex at 2850 Middlefield Road, Palo Alto 94306. 100 Unit Complex with no known prior earthquake-seismic evaluation. Political Leaders Congressman Sam Liccardo et al: Please assist in encouraging the owner of this complex to conduct such an evaluation asap From:01 lu To:Council, City Cc:Lauing, Ed; julie.lythcott-haimes@cityofpaloalto.org; Stone, Greer; vicki.venker@cityofpaloalto.org; Lu, George; Burt, Patrick; Shikada, Ed Subject:Unfair burden on the Echelon neighborhood - RV Parking Date:Saturday, August 15, 2026 11:41:47 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, It is fundamentally unjust that the City of Palo Alto has allowed the RV parking issue to beconcentrated almost entirely on the borders of a few specific communities, including ours at EastMeadow Circle. Because our adjacent street is technically zoned non-residential, it has becomethe default dumping ground for this city-wide issue. We expect the council to represent our interests equally. The current proposal, which postponesmeaningful enforcement and safe-parking relocation for years, leaves our neighborhood bearingthe brunt of the impact. I urge you to adopt policies that immediately post "No OversizedVehicle Parking" signs on East Meadow Circle and strictly enforce them. We need a definitivetimeline for the removal of these vehicles from our borders. Sincerely, Lingyi Lu3724 Feather Ln This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. Mark Safe Report Powered by Mimecast From:Yoogo Business Records, operated by 2Global Corporation To:Council, City Subject:Information we hold about Childrens Branch Library Date:Saturday, August 15, 2026 10:38:57 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Hi there, We're writing to let you know that Yoogo, Inc. maintains a business directory, and we hold the following information about your business: Sourced from publicly available business records: Business Name, Location, Industry and services provided, Organization type, Web address. Estimated by third-party business data providers, not sourced from public records: Revenue, Number of employees. This information is used to make your business discoverable to people searching our directory. We have not collected this from you directly, and we are not asking you to take any action. You have the right to review, correct, or request the removal of this information at any time. You can do so here: https://yoogo.com/business-lookup? C24AcZI2ijssE9pbQ, or by replying to this email. For more detail on how we handle data, our full privacy policy is available here: https://www.yoogo.com/legal/privacy-policy. Yoogo, Inc. 2514 Whitney Ave. #185892 Hamden, CT 06518, USA privacy@privacy.yoogo.com From:Lydia Kou 顧錦珍 To:CeCi Kettendorf Cc:Robert Marinaro; Council, City; Veenker, Vicki; Stone, Greer; Lauing, Ed; Reckdahl, Keith; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Burt, Patrick; Lu, George; City Mgr; Josh Becker; Marc Berman; Leslie Bulbuk; Nicole Fernandez; Margaret Abe- Koga; Jensen, Christopher; Bulatao, Eric; Lindsey, Stephen; Nick Marinaro; Jennifer Kain; Roger Smith; Peter Xu; Loren Brown; Dana Dahlstrom; Chris Berg; Taly Katz; Barry Katz; Nancy Ellickson; John Schafer; Jeanette Baldwin; Alina Martinez; Micah Murphy; Danielle Dunne; David Famero; Carly Lake; Sandy Freschi; Theron Bullman; Dave Stellman; Dave Stellman; Steve Wong; Marguerite Poyatos; Manu Kumar; Patrick Kelly; Osbaldo Romero; Bryna Chang; Xenia Czisch; Bill McLane; Ramon Moreno; Lester 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; John Seltzer; 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; Arthur Keller; Jeff Levinsky; Becky Sanders; Chip Wytmar; Sharon Elliot; McDonough, Melissa; Janet Hartley; Charlie Weidanz; Kevin Mayer; Boris Folsch; 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; Scott Petersen; Alex Smelik; fred@bockmann.com; Janie Sydow; Deborah j Marinaro; Summa, Doria; Boyd Smith; Lund Smith; Milan Milan; Elliott Lee; Robert Berkovich; Letizia Rodriguez; Brennan Pang; Eggleston, Brad; Rius, Rafael; Lo, Ria; Andrade, Alex; Bob Kennis; Shani Kleinhaus; Peggy (Margaret) Christiansen; Martin Cuyegkeng; Julia Sun; Aki Hirsa; Colin Swindells; Andrew Li; Evan Mathews; Efrain Monttano Velazquez; Ignacio Montelongo Jr.; Joseph Montelongo; Nayirie Tashjian; Fernanda Prado; Dave Rubenstein; Johnny Vo; Priyanka Raghuraman; Andrew Koo; Joseline Sotomayor; Dmitri Samsonov; Gerson Bers; Mike Emrick; Anand Srinivasan; Zohar Gillai; Maria Orlova; Marc Husemann; Niklas Sprungmann; Apple, Kara; Joe Sinnott; Linda Zausen; Danny Whelan; Gulya Gulya; Matt Lynch; Oksana Selavri Subject:Re: Staff Report Addressing Oversized Vehicle Impacts - - To Be Discussed at Aug 24th City Council Meeting Date:Saturday, August 15, 2026 7:18:31 PM Attachments:City Council Org Chart.png CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Agree with CeCi! Sent from Lydia’s Mobile On Sat, Aug 15, 2026 at 5:33 PM CeCi Kettendorf <cecihome@gmail.com> wrote: Coyote Hill Road backs up to grassland. Lili addresses the fire issue concerns per this location in her respone to the article online. It is not an acceptable spot for garaging of vehicles which use propane tanks. On Sat, Aug 15, 2026 at 2:48 PM Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> wrote: Mayor Veenker, Members of the City Council, and City Manager, I second the motion! Retracting this proposal immediately and coming back with a full solution that does not impact South Palo Alto residents and businesses is the only reasonable solution. This is your opportunity to make it right! It is unfathomable that the City gives more credence and credibility to those intentionally violating health and safety over tax-paying residents and businesses. OSVs from all over the Peninsula will be taking advantage of this! Remember who you represent… And... remember one of the 2026 Council priorities is to “Enhance Business Vibrancy" And for those folks who live or work on or near these streets you should be very concerned: - 4000 Block of Transport Street - 900 Block of Commercial Street - 900 Block of Industrial Avenue - 100 Block of Page Mill Road - 2800-3200 Block of Park Boulevard - 200-400 Block of Olive Avenue - 2900 & 3200 Block of Ash Street - 200-400 Block of Lambert Avenue - 1000 Block of Elwell Court - 1000 Block of Corporation Way - 1000 Block of East Meadow Circle - 2400 Block of Embarcadero Way - 2400 block of Faber Place Regards, Bob Marinaro (Representing an ever growing group of concerned Palo Alto residents and businesses) Begin forwarded message: From: Loren Brown <loren.brown@vancebrown.com> Subject: Re: Staff Report Available for August 24th Addressing Oversized Vehicle Impacts Date: August 15, 2026 at 12:35:17 PM PDT To: "Vicki.Veenker@paloalto.gov" <Vicki.Veenker@paloalto.gov>, Ed Lauing <Ed.Lauing@paloalto.gov>, Julie Lythcott-Haims <Julie.LythcottHaims@paloalto.gov>, Keith Reckdahl <Keith.Reckdahl@paloalto.gov> Cc: Gary Gechlik <garygech@gmail.com>, Chris Schremp <chrisschremp88@gmail.com>, Ed Shikada <Ed.Shikada@paloalto.gov>, Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com>, Christine Schremp <cweske15@gmail.com>, Eric Bulatao <Eric.Bulatao@paloalto.gov>, Bill McLane <Bill@paloaltoglass.com>, "brianhama@gmail.com" <brianhama@gmail.com>, "yudy4paloalto@gmail.com" <yudy4paloalto@gmail.com>, "bryna@changforcitycouncil.com" <bryna@changforcitycouncil.com>, "h.etzko@gmail.com" <h.etzko@gmail.com>, Roger Smith <rogervernonsmith@hotmail.com>, Peter Xu <peterxuvel@gmail.com>, Barry Katz <bmkatz1950@gmail.com>, Ceci Kettendorf <cecihome@gmail.com>, Nancy Ellickson <nellickson@gmail.com>, Dana Dahlstrom <danadahlstrom@yahoo.com>, Lydia Kou <lydiakou@gmail.com>, Dave Stellman <davestellman@gmail.com>, Charlie Weidanz <charlie@paloaltochamber.com>, Jeanette Baldwin <jeanettebaldwin@gmail.com>, Titan Gu <gu_zt@yahoo.com>, Becky Sanders <rebsanders@gmail.com>, John Schafer <JSchafer@andersonhonda.com>, Scott Petersen <scottepetersen@gmail.com>, "gsheyner@embarcaderomedia.org" <gsheyner@embarcaderomedia.org> 8-15-2026 Dear Mayor Veenker and Members of the City Council, This staff proposal is absolutely terrible and a response that is tone deaf to the Palo Alto community. 1. How could you allow City Staff to release this report to City Council and the community without pre-vetting it with the impacted community (i.e., Palo Alto businesses, business property owners, and residential owners/tenants)? Why isn’t the City open to hearing public comment and incorporating public feedback into the City’s plan/strategy for dealing with this issue? 2. The ONLY positive aspect of the proposal is allowing parking on Coyote Hill Road and Embarcadero Road (where there are no existing businesses or residences). Everything else in the Staff recommendations is a disaster and just allows a continuation of the existing and long-standing OSV parking problem. Do you seriously think that if OSVs are parked on the opposite side of the street from our residences and businesses, it is OK?????? OSV parking and business/residential neighborhoods are not compatible. The City cannot allow OSVs to park in any existing Palo Alto business district or residential neighborhood - PERIOD; NO ifs, NO ands, and NO buts. NO OSV PARKING SHOULD BE ALLOWED IN ANY PALO ALTO BUSINESS OR RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD. 3. As I have explained to the City Staff (and City Council) on numerous occasions, the OSV issue in Palo Alto is both a housing issue and a business district issue (two separate issues). The housing issue is related to a long- term chronic national housing-shortage problem (that isn’t likely going to be solved by anyone soon). The City cannot allow the housing problem (people living in parked OSVs) to impact its business districts (or residential neighborhoods) on a long-term basis. The business district/OSV parking incompatibility problem can be immediately solved by finding alternative parking locations for OSVs in Palo Alto - Ed Shikada has agreed that the key is to find alternative OSV parking locations. Coyote Hill Road and Embarcadero Road OSV parking is absolutely the right idea!! Move all OSV parking to locations where there is no adjacency problem between OSVs and business districts and/or residential neighborhoods. The shortcoming of the Coyote Hill Road and Embarcadero Road OSV parking locations is that there is still not enough parking capacity to accommodate all of the OSVs currently parked in Palo Alto. MORE OSV parking is required. We should not have to tell you this - you have and receive (thank you Robert Marinaro) the monthly counts of parked OSVs in each neighborhood. In prior correspondence provided to the City, I have provided possible locations for alternative OSV parking locations, including Coyote Hill Road, Deer Creek Road, surplus Caltrans property at Highway 101 and San Antonio Road, City of Palo Alto undeveloped land accessible from Geng Road, etc. The City needs to expand the amount of OSV parking it allows onto one or more of these locations in order to provide enough OSV parking capacity such that the City can BAN all OSV parking from existing Palo Alto business districts and residential neighborhoods. 4. The fact that the Staff proposal includes locating OSV parking on Coyote Hill Road and portions of Embarcadero Road where there are no businesses or residential neighbors is a complete admission that the solution to the OSV parking incompatibility problem is to separate OSV parking from Palo Alto businesses and residential neighborhoods. At the August 24, 2026 City Council meeting, I suggest that City Council direct City Staff to immediately go find additional OSV parking locations that can be added to Coyote Hill Road and Embarcadero Road OSV parking within 6 months time. In six months, City Council would then take formal action to approve those added OSV parking locations and forever ban all OSVs from parking in business districts and in residential neighborhoods. 5. Please retract this proposal immediately and come back with a FULL solution to the OSV parking problem. Because this staff report/recommendation falls flat on its face to properly address the OSV parking problem in Palo Alto, the City will face a huge backlash from Palo Alto businesses and residents at the August 24, 2026 meeting and the issue will escalate into a City Council campaign issue this fall. Loren Brown (Representing two commercial properties on Park Blvd., Palo Alto that have suffered from OSV parking negative effects for almost 10 years) Sent from my iPad On Aug 15, 2026, at 4:33 AM, Bill McLane <Bill@paloaltoglass.com> wrote: Mayor Veenker, Mr. Shikada, and Members of the City Council, To everyone on this list responsible for this proposal: let's start with your streets. Right in front of your homes, your businesses, your places of work. It's time to practice what you preach. If you want to change the world, start at your own doorstep. Under this proposal, you'll need to allow oversized vehicles to park indefinitely outside your house too — tapping into your water and power, dumping their waste tanks and trash in your front yard, and parking wherever they please. Only then could you honestly say you're part of the solution you're proposing for the rest of us. As a Palo Alto taxpayer, I did not sign up to subsidize this. My taxes pay for street maintenance, sanitation, and code enforcement — not to have my neighborhood turned into an unregulated RV lot while the people voting on this go home to streets that will never see a single OSV. If this policy is good enough for my block, it's good enough for yours. Put it to that test before you vote on it. I expect a response explaining how this proposal will be enforced fairly and equally in every neighborhood in this city, especially your own. If you wouldn't mind, please also respond with your home address. This way, I can let the OSV parked outside of my building know where to go. Bill McLane PALO ALTO GLASS, INC. 4085 Transport Street Palo Alto, CA 94303 650-494-7000 www.paloaltoglass.com Privilege Disclaimer: The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. On Fri, Aug 14, 2026 at 3:20 PM Gary Gechlik <garygech@gmail.com> wrote: Let’s call it what it is, RV Squatting. You either believe in squatter rights or you don’t. I’m self sufficient and I play by the rules like most people. I don’t agree with letting RV’s park in town at night at will. We accommodate new residents through zoned construction under the law. Normal families have reasonable fears. I stand with reasonable families that work two jobs just to afford state college. A safe community is a well regulated community with transparent enforcement. That’s just how I feel on the issue, Gary From:Star Teachout To:Council, City Subject:State of the City gathering Date:Saturday, August 15, 2026 7:00:04 PM Dear Mayor Veenker and council members, I am curious why our State of the City gathering is happening in August when it is such a busy time for everyone? Mayor Veenker, could you please reply with why this change was made in case I am missing something important? Schools are just returning, many are coming back from vacations, local and national elections require prompt research/attention, and people are generally busy with the end of summer (harvesting gardens, signing up for PA Adult school/Enjoy classes, etc.). From my online search, this important meeting has always been in late February or March, after elections of new council members and updates can include progress on our larger goals from the newly formed council. It is too late to change the date, but please return to the traditional timing in the future. February and March offer a lull in the busy year, and probably result in a better turnout. Respectfully, Star Teachout State of the City: Next Wednesday, August 19 Join the Mayor of Palo Alto for the 2026 State of the City on Wednesday, August 19 at the Palo Alto High School Performing Arts Center; doors open and public comment at 5:30 p.m. Learn about updates on the implementation of the City Council Priorities, highlight achievements advancing the Council’s Values and celebrate community successes with a reception to follow. Consider walking or biking to help reduce greenhouse gas emissions from vehicles, progressing our goal to reach 80% emissions reduction. RSVP is requested, not required. From:Pamela Mayerfeld To:Council, City Subject:Please don’t allow ADUs to get even bigger in Palo Alto Date:Saturday, August 15, 2026 5:04:30 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear City Council, Some of the ADU‘s which are already being built in Palo Alto are huge monstrosities. Take a look at this one in our neighborhood which was recently installed (it was dropped into the property vs being built here). It encroaches horribly on the next-door neighbor and the light in their house. I can’t imagine what this homeowner would’ve installed if they would have been allowed an even larger structure. I’m not against ADUs in principle, but please have some consideration of the character of Palo Alto (and why we chose to live here) when allowing them. Thank you, Pam Mayerfeld Sent from my iPhone From:Jenny Lee To:Council, City; Shikada, Ed Cc:Lauing, Ed; julie.lythcott-haimes@cityofpaloalto.org; Stone, Greer; vicki.venker@cityofpaloalto.org; Lu, George; Burt, Patrick Subject:OSV Phase II Proposed Plan Date:Saturday, August 15, 2026 4:30:23 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 and City Manager Shikada, I am writing as a resident of the Echelon community to respectfully share my concerns about the proposed rules for oversized vehicle and RV parking. While we recognize the complex challenges surrounding housing and vehicle habitation, the growing concentration of RVs along East Meadow Circle is significantly affecting the safety & cleanliness of our neighborhood. We respectfully ask the Council to prioritize dedicated, non-residential locations with appropriate sanitation and services rather than allowing East Meadow Circle to become a long-term habitation area. A phased approach that delays enforcement would only prolong concerns related to waste management and resident safety. I hope you will pursue a solution that balances compassion for those in need with the safety & well-being of surrounding residential communities. Thank you for your time and public service. Sincerely, Jenny Lee This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. Mark Safe Report Powered by Mimecast From:Francesca Rael To:Lauing, Ed; julie.lythcott-haimes@cityofpaloalto.org; Stone, Greer; vicki.venker@cityofpaloalto.org; Lu, George; Burt, Patrick; Shikada, Ed; Council, City Subject:OSV Phase II Pilot Program Date:Saturday, August 15, 2026 2:54:06 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 writing as a Palo Alto resident who lives very close to East Meadow Circle to strongly oppose the proposed OSV Phase II Pilot Program as it applies to East Meadow. I want to be clear that I am not opposed to people living in oversized vehicles, nor am I opposed to allowing OSV parking on East Meadow. I would support a structured permit program. What I do not support is an approach that fails to meaningfully control who is using these streets for long-term vehicle residency and simply shifts parking from one side of the street to the other. If East Meadow is going to serve as a location for OSV parking, the City should implement a permit system with clear eligibility requirements and accountability. Permits should prioritize people who are genuinely low-income and have a meaningful connection to Palo Alto, for example, people who work here, have children attending Palo Alto schools, care for an elderly parent or family member here, or have another established community connection. Participants should also be connected with case management and services aimed at achieving stable housing similar to the participants in the proposed permit program on Embracadero and Coyote Hill. Residents living near East Meadow should not be expected to accept oversized vehicles without reasonable limits, oversight, sanitation standards, or a clear understanding of who the program is intended to serve. Alternating which side of the street permits parking every six months does not adequately address those concerns. A structured permit program would be both more compassionate and more responsible. It would allow Palo Alto to provide a safe place for community members experiencing housing instability while establishing clear expectations and protecting the surrounding neighborhood. In my opinion, a structured permit program should be the only way that OSVs should be allowed on our streets. I urge the Council not to move forward with the alternating-side pilot on East Meadow in its current form and instead develop a controlled, accountable permit program for this street. This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first mail to some recipients. Mark Safe Report Thank you for taking the concerns of residents seriously. Best, Francesca From:LAKIBA PITTMAN To:Council, City Subject:Public Comment Letter on Oversized Vehicle Parking Pilot Programs Date:Saturday, August 15, 2026 1:50:54 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Date: August 15, 2026 To: Palo Alto City Council From: Resident of Olive Avenue, Ventura Neighborhood Subject: Public Comment on Item 10: Oversized Vehicle (OSV) Impact Pilot Programs (August 24, 2026 Meeting) Dear Mayor and Members of the City Council, I am writing as a resident of Olive Avenue in the Ventura neighborhood to share my feedback and serious concerns regarding the proposed Oversized Vehicle (OSV) pilot programs on the agenda for the August 24, 2026 meeting. Living on Olive Avenue, my neighbors and I witness the daily impacts of vehicle habitation firsthand. While there are existing parking restrictions on our street, consistent enforcement remains a persistent challenge. Currently, oversized vehicles frequently park at the end of Olive Avenue, directly near the intersection with Park Boulevard. This clustering has created significant safety and quality-of-life concerns for our neighborhood. Specifically, the presence of these long-term campers has resulted in accumulated garbage left out on our public right-of-way. More importantly, it has directly impacted our sense of safety. Ventura is a vibrant neighborhood filled with children playing and residents walking their dogs. However, due to the lack of visibility and the activity concentrated around these vehicles near Park Boulevard, I no longer feel entirely safe walking my dog in that direction during dusk or the early evening hours. Regarding the proposed pilot programs, I want to emphasize that residential streets like Olive Avenue and Ash Street must be proactively protected. While I understand the "OSV Parking Prohibited Alternating Side Pilot" is intended to restrict long-term encampments by shifting parking availability every six months, I am deeply concerned that it may inadvertently signal that oversized parking is permitted on residential blocks during those intervals if enforcement is not immediate, rigorous, and continuous.Therefore, I urge the Council to prioritize the following actions within any This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first email to your company. Mark Safe Report adopted plan: 1. Strict Protection of Residential Zones: Ensure that the OSV Parking Permit Pilot successfully redirects vehicle dwellers to the non-residential areas designated on Coyote Hill Road and Embarcadero Road, completely removing the burden from residential streets in Ventura. 2. Immediate Safety Infrastructure: Accelerate the painting of red tips at driveways and critical intersections, particularly at the corner of Olive Avenue and Park Boulevard, to restore pedestrian visibility and traffic safety. 3. Dedicated Sanitation Monitoring: Provide immediate mitigation for illegal dumping, littering, and public health concerns on our residential blocks while these programs are evaluated. The Ventura neighborhood has historically taken on a significant share of high-density zoning and urban impacts. We ask the City Council to ensure that this program strictly protects our residential peace, safety, and cleanliness. Thank you for your time, consideration, and service to our community. Sincerely, Lakiba Pittman Olive Avenue Resident Palo Alto, CA From:Aram James To:Carla Torres; Sean Allen; Rose Lynn; Ruth Silver Taube; Richard Konda; mike braxton; Yusra Hussain; Seher Awan; Susan Hayase; julie.ruhlin@oirgroup.con; <michael.gennaco@oirgroup.com>; Stephen Connolly; Shikada, Ed; Council, City; dcombs@menlopark.gov; Taylor, Cecilia; PD Kristina Bell Subject:CA Prisons Fail To Stop Guards From Sexually Abusing Women, Justice Department Finds | Across California, CA Patch Date:Saturday, August 15, 2026 11:42:30 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. https://patch.com/california/across-ca/ca-prisons-fail-stop-guards-sexually-abusing-women- justice-department-finds From:Marzieh Masroori To:Council, City; Planning Commission Subject:332 Forest Ave - Please Oppose Demolition/Redevelopment Application Date:Saturday, August 15, 2026 11:41:45 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Hi, my name is Marzi Masroori, I am a Palo Alto resident and constituent. I am writing to oppose the project proposal for 332 Forest Ave. Please oppose this project and support the historical integrity, diversity, and culture of Palo Alto's tenants. Thank you, ____ Sent from my iPhone From:Yingxi Liu To:Council, City; Lauing, Ed; julie.lythcott-haimes@cityofpaloalto.org; Stone, Greer; vicki.venker@cityofpaloalto.org; Lu, George; Burt, Patrick; Shikada, Ed Subject:URGENT DEMAND: Reject Proposed RV Rules on East Meadow Circle Date:Saturday, August 15, 2026 11:03:04 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Members of the Palo Alto City Council and City Manager Shikada, I am writing to express my absolute opposition to the new proposed rules regarding RV parking and habitation, specifically any plan that designates East Meadow Circle or other residential-adjacent streets as long-term RV parking zones. The current situation has become completely unacceptable. We have documented continuous street obstructions, generator noise, exhaust fumes, and severe health and safety hazards. The neighborhood has collected numerous pieces of concrete evidence detailing these ongoing violations and the city's consistent failure to enforce the 72-hour parking laws. If the city council decides to push these new rules forward at the expense of our neighborhood's safety and property rights, please be advised that we are fully prepared to sue the city and pursue formal legal action. Furthermore, any council members who support this detrimental proposal will be publicly documented and put on the shame wall of Palo Alto for abandoning their constituents. This is a formal demand to restrict oversized and RV parking on East Meadow Circle immediately. We expect a complete rejection of the proposed rules that allow continued RV habitation in our area. Sincerely, Yingxi Liu From:carloinehoustoun To:Veenker, Vicki; Council, City Subject:Fw: Can you arrest a punjabi family from India who kow her and send all her details to Davandra Jagtap working at sriveri restaurant,Pleasanton,CA, Kindly arrest Pune Police commissioner and Nagpur police. can you talk to this white american female tha... Date:Saturday, August 15, 2026 1:17:48 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of openingattachments and clicking on links. i Can you break ties with Indian govt and shoot this feamle dead if she is married post june-aug 2025 Sent with Proton Mail secure email. ------- Forwarded Message ------- From: carloinehoustoun <carloinehoustoun@proton.me> Date: On Saturday, August 15th, 2026 at 1:14 AM Subject: Fw: Can you arrest a punjabi family from India who kow her and send all her details to Davandra Jagtap working at sriveri restaurant,Pleasanton,CA, Kindly arrest Pune Police commissioner and Nagpur police. can you talk to this white american female that her DNA will be modified in enar future To: mayor@london.gov.uk <mayor@london.gov.uk> Can you send her an internaltioanl arrest warrant without fear Sent with Proton Mail secure email. ------- Forwarded Message ------- From: carloinehoustoun <carloinehoustoun@proton.me> Date: On Saturday, August 15th, 2026 at 1:13 AM Subject: Can you arrest a punjabi family from India who kow her and send all her details to Davandra Jagtap working at sriveri restaurant,Pleasanton,CA, Kindly arrest Pune Police commissioner and Nagpur police. can you talk to this white american female that her DNA will be modified in enar future To: mayor.watson@austintexas.gov <mayor.watson@austintexas.gov> This white amerian female should be arrested if she is married post june-aug 2025 Several Indian families knew her post jne-aug 2025 If she is married she has to bear prison time Can you tell her Davandra Jagtap works at sriveri restaurant Pleasanton ca Can you give her court date Mumbai,Thane ,Bangalore,Pune,Jalgaon,chennai,andhra Pradesh and 70+ police officers and Indian congress and BJP leaders to be arrested Maharshtra Police deliberately informed her Davandra Jagtap wants to meet her now where there complaints are made can you let her know she has been defamed and called a slut by Indian police please help Davandra Jagtap to meet her at her place This message needs your attention This is their first email to your company. Mark Safe Report Davandra Jagtap and this white American female was married in 2015 and in nov 2017 Davandra Jagtap was beaten inside Indian embassy Houstoun,TX as soon as she left Austin,TX in 2025 Davandra had broken lip and he also contacted 911 where Houstoun Police were pre informed Can you arrest Prasahnt sona,indian embassy Houstoun,TX and Indian embassy san francisoc,CA community service officer Davandra Jagtap has been betrayed by Satya Bathula and Karteek Mudi ,Jobs n profiles LLC so he can be made a worker and can be defamed and Several Indian police and Politicians can enjoy his harassment Davandra Jagtap has been made to jabber and murmer and people living with him currently are all bought by Indian govt These people come to know what is Davandra Jagtap going to do Davandra Jagtap Brain has been troutrued and someone keeps talking to him to his brain These technologies are all used by US politicians who listen to Indian Govt Davandra has lost faith in US police and several Complaints made by his freinds were taken not seriously by US police Indian police read all these emails , specially Indian oil and Mukesh ambani,Reliance industry has to be arrested Can you revoke US visas of several Telugu police and Politicains who all know her post Davandra Jagtap went inside Indian embassy Houstoun,TX in 2020 only Davandra Jagtap can tell you what she did in Pune,India and where did they got married in evening in nov 2017 and in 2015 if you use qwerty keypad and the world has no sense about how important it is to use a mike and a language translator which will make life easy instead of typing,you need to use Davandra Jagtap help in understanding , Davandra and she loved each other so much Can you arrest Rishank Puram visa inc,Austin,TX who got to know her from manideep mandadhi a goon working for visa inc Austin,TX Several Gujrati,Telugu,Pujjbai fuckers to be US visas revoked can you make sure this female can meet Davandra Jagtap in person within a week where he is in US If he leaves US he can be shot dead in India by Indian politiciasn specially Mumbai and Chennai ,Jalgaon,banagalore,New dellihi politicaisn and police Hi, Can you talk to this white American female to talk to US embassy Mumbai as soon as possible about assassination attempt on Davandra Jagtap her husband while he was in India He has been shot attempted near Lucky restaurant,Mumbai,India He has threat to his life in Mumbai and India can you arrest this white American female if she has married anyone post june-nov 2025 She recently met Davandra Jagtap Milpitas,CA and she was single can you tell her Davandra Jagtap best friend is augusta who is from New Mexico and currently stays at san jose,CA can you give her true details about Davandra Jagatp friends named swapnil sonawane,sagar shinde and Kevin Thanks These are her details: Her Details: She has traveled alone from SFO to Pune in 2017 21-26 years was her age during travel to India in 2017 Travel 1-11 nov 2017 SFO to Pune,India 6ft,black hair , black eyes she has Indian visa stamped on her US passport she is a white American citizen She lives in SF bay area Several Indian embassy officials to be arrested as soon as possible can you help pushpa Jagtap living in Australia to escape torture by Indian Police Indian Police are after Davandra Jagtap so he cannot meet her and has been tortured during his school and work sites here in US Several Indian police flew from India to US so they can enjoy his defamation and his harassment Speically and several sanpada and Navi Mumbai police and several Idnian Politicains are involved in this can you help Davandra Jagtap to get asylum in USA can you arrest Nashik Police more than 100+ of them are involved and Nagpur,Thane,Vijaywada,Visharbha area and Saudi police and Sevral US police are being contacted with help of Mumbai and Denver police wherever these emails are going Indian emabssies in that juridisction are trying to prove they were trying to help but Indian police wanted her to meet and marry someone else So a ring has been formed here in US with help of Federal Givernemtn where they gove hint where and what to say to other people Can you arrest Several BJP,VHP and RSS and Tamil Nadu Police operating with help of Korean and japenese police and also several Indian females are involved whoe are US and non US citizens who doesn't want her to meet Davandra Jagtap They tried to defame Davandra Jagtap in front of UK and Turkish autihroties can you arrest Pune,Baramati and Bangalore and new delhi agenst operating in Gurgaon and new delhi areas can you prevent assassination of Davandra Jagtap in India by supporting him to meet this white amerinca female who has been betrayed once again with help of ICE and Indian federal agensts This is a time sensitive issue and US embassies have been controlled by US congressmen can you send this entire email to a white nationalist and a good female who can contact her to get her divorced with anyone else post June 2025 Can you call Indian congress leaders and BJP politicains 'BHENCOD AND MADARCHOD' Sent with Proton Mail secure email. From:Aram James To:sam.liccardo@gmail.com; Meg Thomas; assemblymember.berman@assembly.ca.gov; Josh Becker; Julian Garcia; Council, City; Hoyt, George; Jasso, Tamara; Gennady Sheyner; Braden Cartwright; Lauing, Ed; Shikada, Ed; Reckdahl, Keith; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Vicki Veenker; Lu, George; Malinsky, Jason; Jay Boyarsky; Jeff Rosen; supervisor.abe-koga@bos.sccgov.org; citycouncil@mountainview.gov; dcombs@menlopark.gov; board@pausd.org; Nash, Betsy; planning.commission@cityofpaloalto.0rg; Taylor, Cecilia; PD Kristina Bell; Reifschneider, James; Goodell, Erin; eric.figueroa@cityofpaloalto.org; Jensen, Eric; Dave Price; Diana Diamond; Human Relations Commission; Palo Alto Renters" Association; Board of Directors; Friends of Cubberley Subject:Twenty dead after Indonesia"s magnitude-7.7 earthquake, rescuers say — Reuters Date:Saturday, August 15, 2026 12:49:27 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Twenty dead after Indonesia's magnitude-7.7 earthquake, rescuers say - Reuters https://apple.news/Al_yRcs3PSQilsdM3aQJj8g 8-15-2026 FYI: Re need for a seismic inspection at the 40-year-old Southwood Apartment Complex at 2850 Middlefield Road, Palo Alto 94306. 100 Unit Complex with no known prior earthquake-seismic evaluation. Political Leaders Congressman Sam Liccardo et al: Please assist in encouraging the owner of this complex to conduct such an evaluation asap From:Gang Liu To:Switzer, Steven; Council, City Cc:Lait, Jonathan; PlannerOnDuty; Building Subject:2497 High Street [26PLN-00180]— Administrative Comments Relevant to Review of the SB 79 Preliminary Application Date:Friday, August 14, 2026 4:23:15 PM Attachments:2497_High_Street_Letter_2_Preliminary_Review_08142026.docx.pdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. 08/14/2026City of Palo Alto Planning and Development Services250 Hamilton AvenuePalo Alto, California 94301Re: 2497 High Street [26PLN-00180]— Administrative Comments Relevant to Review of the SB 79 Preliminary ApplicationA pdf version of this letter is attached in this email. Dear Steven and Planning Staff:This letter supplements our earlier comments concerning the City’s threshold statutory review of the SB 79 Preliminary Application for the proposed residential development at 2497 High Street.Whereas that letter focuses on statutory eligibility, preliminary-application accuracy, and the sufficiency of the administrative record, this letter identifies additional project-specific considerations that we respectfully ask the City to consider now, while its review of the Preliminary Application remains pending. The environmental, fire and life-safety, public-infrastructure, solid-waste, and construction-related issues discussed below may bear on the assumptions, feasibility, completeness, and practical implications of the preliminary proposal and therefore may provide useful context for the City's threshold review, even though some of the detailed technical studies or requirements would ordinarily be completed at later stages.This letter supplements, and does not replace, the matters raised in our earlier comments. Nothing here should be taken as conceding that the statutory prerequisites relied upon by the application have been satisfied, or that the project is entitled to the protections it claims. Those threshold questions remain open. We respectfully ask the City to consider the issues below as part of the information available to it before reaching its determination on the Preliminary Application.The comments below are therefore not presented only as future conditions in the event of approval. They are raised now because they may help the City evaluate the preliminary proposal before making its threshold determination. We do not contend that any one issue independently requires disapproval, and we recognize that many details may appropriately be resolved through later engineering review, conditions of approval, or construction-management requirements. Our request is that the City consider whether any of these issues materially affects the assumptions or determinations being made at the preliminary stage, and identify what information should be established now versus deferred to later review.We recognize that the project design may evolve as environmental, fire/life-safety, infrastructure, and technical investigations are completed. Some concerns may prove unnecessary; others may require refinement. We raise them now so they form part of the record before the Preliminary Application determination is finalized, so the City can consider whether they have any bearing on that determination, and so that any later technical work can be directed toward the issues the City considers material. OverviewThe considerations below draw on issues ordinarily addressed through coordinated technical review and, where appropriate, later conditions of approval for constrained infill development. Some may prove unnecessary as the design and technical studies develop; others may require refinement. Raising them while the Preliminary Application is still under review allows the City to consider whether any of these matters bears on the preliminary proposal or the threshold determination, while also identifying issues that should be carried forward into any subsequent formal application and departmental review. 1. Environmental Information, Groundwater, Excavation, and Dewatering Issue PresentedWhether the record contains enough current, project-specific environmental information to support any preliminary environmental representation and to define the studies required before excavation, shoring, foundation work, or dewatering. Current Administrative RecordThe existing 2497 draft identifies a publicly available City map depicting the property outside but relatively near the mapped California–Olive–Emerson groundwater plume boundary and notes that the map appears to date from 2019. The draft does not assert that the plume extends beneath the property. It requests current environmental due diligence before substantial below-grade work. Applicable FrameworkGovernment Code section 65941.1, subdivision (a)(6), requires disclosure of proposed point sources of air or water pollutants; subdivision (a)(8) requires disclosure of whether any portion of the property lies within specified environmental hazard areas, including listed hazardous-waste sites; and subdivision (a)(16) requires mapping of specified streams or resources and an aerial photograph of regulated environmental features. Public Resources Code section 21080.66 provides a CEQA exemption only where every statutory criterion is met. Whether that exemption applies is a determination for the City based upon a supported record; the exemption does not eliminate compliance with other environmental, hazardous-material, water-quality, building, or worker-safety requirements. DiscussionA historical generalized plume map neither proves contamination at the site nor establishes that present conditions are benign. The relevant question is what current, qualified information supports the City's understanding of soil, groundwater, soil-gas, and vapor conditions.Because the proposal contemplates a six-story building and may involve excavation, shoring, foundations, utility work, and possible dewatering, a current Phase I Environmental Site Assessment is an appropriate starting point. If the Phase I recommends further investigation, the applicant should complete the recommended Phase II work before the City authorizes activities that could encounter or mobilize contamination.If dewatering is contemplated, the review should address groundwater elevation and flow, discharge or treatment requirements, the potential radius of influence, and whether pumping could affect neighboring properties or alter contaminant migration. These are not reasons to prejudge the project; they are reasons to define the technical record before intrusive work.Requested Considerations1. Identify the environmental information on which the City presently relies. 2. Require a current Phase I Environmental Site Assessment prepared by a qualified professional and any Phase II investigation recommended by that assessment. 3. Require review of the most recent available plume, monitoring-well, groundwater-flow, soil-gas, and vapor-intrusion information relevant to the vicinity. 4. Require a current map showing the site in relation to the best available plume information. 5. addressing expected elevations, pumping, treatment or disposal, discharge permits, contaminant migration, and effects upon adjoining property. 6. Place environmental studies and the City's written environmental determination in the administrative record. 2. Fire and Life Safety — Future Residents, Emergency Egress, and Fire Department AccessIssue PresentedWhether the formal application will demonstrate that a six-story multifamily building can provide safe evacuation, effective fire suppression, and reliable Fire Department access for future residents, while also confirming—through actual field measurements—that High Street and the adjoining Colorado Avenue frontage provide the clear width, turning geometry, apparatus positioning, and overhead clearance required by the applicable California Fire Code and Palo Alto Fire Department standards.Why This MattersThe proposed project is materially taller and more complex than the existing three-unit residential building. Fire and life-safety review therefore should not be treated as a purely internal building-permit issue if the required apparatus access, aerial access, hydrant or fire-flow improvements, Fire Department connection, emergency egress, or access route could affect the site plan, frontage, utility layout, landscaping, or street operations. The requested review is not an assertion that the project cannot satisfy the California Fire Code or Building Code; it is a request that the formal entitlement record identify the life-safety assumptions on which the design depends.The recent August 2026 fire at the Sea Spray Lane condominium complex in Foster City is a timely reminder of the potential consequences of a serious multifamily residential fire. Contemporary reporting described extensive structural damage, displacement of residents, injuries to four firefighters, and red-tagging of the building because of collapse risk. The incident is not offered as evidence that 2497 High Street presents the same conditions, nor as a basis to prejudge code compliance. It is cited only as a concrete reminder that, for a new six-story residential building, fire compartmentation, automatic suppression, emergency egress, firefighter access, available fire flow and water pressure, and the ability of responding apparatus to operate on the actual surrounding streets should be resolved carefully before the final site configuration is fixed. (See San Francisco Chronicle, Aug. 3, 2026, reporting on the 815 Sea Spray Lane fire.)Requested Considerations Prior to approval of the final site and life-safety design, a project-specific Fire Department review addressing the requirements applicable to a six-story multifamily building, including fire apparatus access, aerial apparatus access if required, firefighter access to the building perimeter, Fire Department connection location, standpipes, automatic sprinklers, fire alarm and communication systems, fire pump requirements, emergency power, smoke-control or stair-pressurization systems if applicable, and rooftop access or occupancy. A measured street-access analysis for High Street and the adjoining Colorado Avenue frontage showing actual curb-to-curb width, usable unobstructed clear width under typical on-street parking conditions, turning radii, intersection geometry, overhead utility and tree clearances, and any parking restrictions or curb controls necessary to maintain compliant emergency access. The analysis should compare the measured conditions directly with the applicable Fire Code and Palo Alto Fire Department access requirements rather than relying on nominal map or right-of-way dimensions. Confirmation that the required fire apparatus can reach, position, and operate adjacent to the building without relying on assumptions inconsistent with actual street width, parked vehicles, utility poles, trees, or other fixed obstructions. Confirmation of hydrant locations and available fire flow and water pressure for the building, together with identification of any public-main, hydrant, service, booster-pump, or other improvement required to meet fire-flow demand. A complete means-of-egress analysis for future residents, including occupant load, number and remoteness of exits, exit access travel distance, exit discharge, accessible means of egress, emergency lighting, and the ability of occupants on upper floors to evacuate safely during a fire or other emergency. A construction-phase fire-safety and emergency-access plan maintaining Fire Department access, temporary fire protection, safe hot-work procedures, and access to adjoining properties throughout demolition and construction. 3. Public Infrastructure, Utilities, Water, Sewer, and Stormwater CapacityIssue PresentedWhether existing neighborhood infrastructure can serve the proposed increase from three occupied units to nineteen units without unexamined impacts on sanitary sewer, storm drainage, domestic water and fire flow, electrical distribution and transformer capacity, and related public facilities, and what project-specific upgrades will be required if existing capacity is insufficient. DiscussionThis request does not assume that any existing City system is inadequate. It recognizes that the proposal would increase the site from three occupied units to nineteen units in a six-story building and therefore may impose a materially greater demand on neighborhood sanitary sewer, storm drainage, domestic water and fire-flow systems, electrical distribution and transformer capacity, and related public facilities. The complete/formal application should not simply assume that existing neighborhood systems can absorb the additional demand. It should identify existing capacity, projected project demand, and any project-specific upgrade required to accommodate that demand. If a public main, transformer, hydrant, service, drainage facility, or other utility component requires improvement, the record should identify the needed work, the responsible agency, the timing, and who will bear the lawfully attributable cost. Sewer and water connections affect excavation and frontage work; transformer and electrical-vault locations affect fire separation, access, trees, and sidewalks; stormwater design affects grading and discharge; and fire-flow requirements may affect water infrastructure. These disciplines should therefore be evaluated as one coordinated system rather than deferred in isolation.Requested Considerations A sanitary-sewer capacity and connection analysis identifying projected wastewater demand, the condition and capacity of the serving main and lateral, any required upsizing or public improvements, backflow protection, and the location and method of all sewer work in the right-of-way. A domestic-water and fire-flow analysis identifying projected demand, available static and residual pressure, meter and service size, hydrant capacity, backflow prevention, and any public-main or service improvements required for both ordinary domestic demand and fire protection. A coordinated electrical-load study addressing dwelling loads, common areas, elevators, mechanical equipment, fire/life-safety systems, EV infrastructure if any, and emergency systems, together with written coordination with City of Palo Alto Utilities regarding feeder capacity, transformer size and location, vaults, undergrounding, easements, ventilation, noise, fire separation, and maintenance access. A grading, drainage, and stormwater-management plan identifying existing and proposed impervious area, roof drainage, treatment measures, detention or retention, discharge points, emergency overflow routing, and whether the project is a Regulated Project under Provision C.3 of the Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit. Identification of project-specific public-facility and utility upgrades, including who will design, fund, construct, own, and maintain them. To the extent permitted by law and supported by applicable nexus and proportionality requirements, project-specific infrastructure costs should be allocated to the project rather than shifted without analysis to adjoining owners, existing utility customers, or the public generally. A coordinated utility plan integrating water, sanitary sewer, storm drainage, electricity, telecommunications, fire service, and any other utilities with the structural, landscape, tree-protection, frontage, and construction plans. 4. Solid Waste, Recycling, Organics, and Collection AccessIssue PresentedWhether the formal design provides a workable, safe, and sanitary system for refuse, recycling, and organics generated by nineteen dwelling units, including the specific location and dimensions of the garbage/recycling facilities, how residents will access them, how containers will be moved to collection, and whether collection vehicles have sufficient approach, stopping, turning, and loading space without creating conflicts with emergency access, pedestrians, neighboring driveways, or High Street and Colorado Avenue.Requested Considerations A solid-waste and recycling plan prepared for the proposed unit count identifying expected waste streams, container number and size, recycling and organics requirements, and the frequency of collection. A clearly identified and code-compliant refuse/recycling room or enclosure with adequate dimensions, ventilation, fire separation, wash-down or drainage provisions where required, pest and odor control, screening, and convenient resident access. A collection-operations plan showing the entire path from storage to pickup, including container movement, staging location, grade and door clearances, truck approach, stopping location, turning movements, and confirmation that collection can occur without blocking required fire access, sidewalks, intersections, or neighboring driveways. Evaluation by the appropriate City solid-waste/public-works staff of whether collection can be performed from High Street, Colorado Avenue, or another approved location, and whether curb modifications, loading restrictions, or on-site accommodations are required. Reasonable limitations on collection hours and measures addressing noise, odor, leakage, and visual impacts on adjoining residences. If the project proceeds as condominiums, incorporation of long-term refuse, recycling, organics, and common-area maintenance obligations into the governing documents or homeowners-association responsibilities. 5. Construction Safety, Excavation, and Protection of Adjoining StructuresIssue PresentedWhether construction of a six-story building on a constrained infill parcel, where the applicant's preliminary materials depict portions of the proposed building only approximately three feet from an adjoining property line (subject to confirmation by the final survey and dimensioned formal plans), can proceed without unacceptable risk to neighboring foundations, occupants, workers, or property.DiscussionThe present record contains no final construction drawings or shoring design, and this letter does not assume what those future documents will show. The concern arises from the preliminary site relationship itself. Excavation and foundation work only a few feet from neighboring homes can alter soil support, surcharge conditions, groundwater behavior, and settlement at adjoining structures. Without project-specific engineering, shoring, sequencing, and monitoring, loss of ground or foundation movement can cause severe structural damage and, in an extreme case, partial or total collapse. Vertical construction creates a different but equally foreseeable risk: lumber, plywood or sheet material, metal components, fasteners, tools, temporary fencing, roofing or façade materials, and construction debris can fall from height or become windborne during strong gusts. Materials leaving a six-story site can cause serious or potentially fatal injury and substantial damage to neighboring roofs, yards, windows, and vehicles. Construction-phase fire risk also requires project-specific planning because hot work, temporary electrical systems, accumulated combustible materials, incomplete permanent fire-protection systems, and constrained emergency access can create hazards that do not exist after occupancy. These are foreseeable consequences of the preliminary design and should be expressly addressed in the complete/formal project application, with implementation details carried through into the later construction-safety and construction-management plans rather than left solely to informal field practice.Requested Considerations As part of the complete/formal application — before demolition, grading, excavation, or vertical construction is authorized — a project-specific construction-safety narrative identifying how work in the approximately three-foot setback condition shown in the preliminary materials will be made safe. The narrative should address demolition, excavation, foundation support, temporary shoring, protection of adjoining foundations, vertical construction, scaffolding, cranes and hoisting, material storage, falling-object containment, high-wind protocols, temporary fire protection, emergency response, and work immediately adjacent to occupied neighboring property. It should identify the responsible licensed professionals and the later stamped technical plans that will implement each measure. A dimensioned site plan and licensed-surveyor confirmation identifying the exact setback from the proposed six-story building, foundations, shoring, balconies, scaffolding, and other construction zones to each adjoining property line and neighboring structure. The approximately three-foot condition depicted in the preliminary materials should be confirmed before the City relies on it for construction-safety review. Prior to grading or excavation, a project-specific geotechnical investigation evaluating impacts on each potentially affected adjoining structure, including soil conditions, excavation depth, surcharge loads, groundwater, temporary and permanent retaining systems, and the relative elevations and types of neighboring foundations. A shoring and excavation-support plan prepared and stamped by appropriately licensed professionals, with calculations demonstrating protection against settlement, lateral movement, loss of ground, and foundation undermining. A documented preconstruction condition survey of adjoining properties, including photographs, floor elevations, visible cracking, and other relevant conditions, with copies made available to affected owners. Settlement, vibration, and crack monitoring with project-specific thresholds, real-time or frequent reporting during critical excavation and foundation phases, and a written stop-work/corrective-action protocol when thresholds are exceeded. A falling-object and wind-safety plan requiring appropriate overhead protection, debris netting or containment where warranted, guardrails and toe boards, secured storage of loose materials, controlled hoisting zones, daily housekeeping, and suspension or modification of crane, hoisting, roofing, façade, or material-handling operations when wind conditions exceed applicable safety limits. Prohibition on unsecured stockpiling of lumber, sheet goods, metal components, fasteners, tools, or debris near property lines or upper-level edges where materials could fall or become airborne onto neighboring property. A site-specific emergency-response plan, construction-phase fire-prevention plan, and maintained emergency access throughout construction. A phased construction fire-safety plan addressing combustible-material storage, temporary standpipes or water supply where required, hot-work controls, temporary electrical systems, smoking and ignition controls, fire-watch procedures, emergency communication, and the timing at which permanent fire-protection systems become operational. Reasonable advance written notice to adjoining owners of demolition, excavation, shoring, foundation work, major crane/hoisting operations, and utility shutdowns, together with proof of insurance and clear responsibility for investigation and repair of construction-related damage. Where temporary access to adjoining property is necessary for shoring, monitoring, protection, or restoration, reasonable advance notice, written access arrangements, insurance, and restoration obligations. 6. Coordination of Technical ReviewThe requested studies should be reviewed as a coordinated set. Fire-apparatus access should be coordinated with actual street width, on-street parking, utilities, trees, and refuse operations; water-pressure analysis should be coordinated with fire-flow requirements; electrical transformer and utility routing should be coordinated with setbacks, fire separation, tree protection, and frontage design; sewer and stormwater work should be coordinated with excavation and neighboring foundations; and construction sequencing should reflect all of those constraints. Integrated review is more likely to produce a compliant project while preventing foreseeable impacts from being transferred from one discipline to another.Requested Considerations A coordinated interdepartmental review involving Planning, Building, Fire, Public Works, City Utilities, and the appropriate solid-waste/environmental-services staff before final entitlement conditions are established. A consolidated infrastructure and life-safety matrix identifying each required study, responsible professional, reviewing City department, required approval stage, and any resulting design change or condition of approval. A requirement that material recommendations from one discipline be reflected in the related plans rather than remaining isolated in separate technical reports. Consolidated Requested ConsiderationsThe following administrative requests summarize the considerations raised above for the City's review at the preliminary stage and, where applicable, for any later project review.7. Consider, before finalizing the Preliminary Application determination, whether the proposed building's fire and life-safety assumptions—including future-resident egress, fire suppression, fire flow, and emergency apparatus access on High Street and Colorado Avenue—raise issues material to the preliminary proposal; if the project advances, require the corresponding project-specific analysis during subsequent review. 8. Require coordinated capacity and connection studies for sanitary sewer, domestic water and fire flow, stormwater, and electrical service/transformer needs, and identify any project-specific upgrades before final entitlement or construction approval. 9. Require a solid-waste, recycling, and organics plan identifying storage, container movement, collection-truck access, staging, noise, odor, and conflicts with public and emergency access. 10. Require the formal application and subsequent permit record to include project-specific geotechnical, shoring, neighboring-structure protection, falling-object/wind safety, construction-phase fire safety, and construction-management plans before demolition, grading, excavation, or vertical construction, with particular attention to portions of the site where work occurs only a few feet from adjoining homes. 11. Require current environmental due diligence and groundwater/dewatering planning before intrusive work is authorized. ConclusionThis letter supplements our earlier comments regarding the City's threshold statutory review. Unlike a letter directed only to future conditions after a threshold determination, these comments are submitted while the Preliminary Application remains pending. We respectfully ask the City to consider whether the environmental, fire and life-safety, infrastructure, solid-waste, and construction-related issues identified here bear on the assumptions, feasibility, completeness, or practical implications of the preliminary proposal and therefore should inform the City's threshold review.These comments are submitted without prejudice to the statutory questions raised in our earlier letter. They are not intended to suggest that later technical review can substitute for any showing required at the preliminary stage, nor that every technical detail must be resolved before the City acts. Rather, we ask the City to distinguish between matters that can properly be deferred and matters that should be understood now because they may be relevant to the pending Preliminary Application determination.The foreseeable implications of a six-story, nineteen-unit building on this constrained corner site—including environmental and groundwater conditions, fire and life safety for future residents, actual emergency-access conditions on High Street and Colorado Avenue, water pressure and fire flow, sewer and stormwater capacity, electrical and transformer needs, solid-waste collection, and construction-phase protection of immediately adjoining homes—are relevant not only to later permit implementation. At a minimum, they provide context for evaluating the preliminary proposal and identifying whether its basic assumptions depend on substantial unresolved site, access, infrastructure, or safety constraints.Many of these matters are routinely considered for projects on constrained urban infill sites, and some may ultimately prove unnecessary as further investigation is completed. By identifying them before the Preliminary Application determination is finalized, we hope they assist City staff in evaluating the current record and in determining what, if anything, should be clarified or established at this stage. If the project later advances, the same issues can then inform a complete and coordinated formal review.Thank you again for your consideration. We would be pleased to provide additional information or technical materials as they become available.Respectfully submitted,Gang LiuColorado Ave Neighbors EXHIBIT A — REQUESTED CONDITIONS MATRIXEnvironmental and groundwater: current Phase I (and any recommended Phase II) Environmental Site Assessment, review of the most recent plume, monitoring-well, groundwater-flow, soil-gas, and vapor-intrusion information, and a groundwater/dewatering plan before excavation or dewatering. Fire and life safety: resident egress, sprinklers/standpipes, fire flow, hydrants, apparatus access, aerial access if required, High Street/Colorado Avenue measured clear width, emergency power, and construction-phase fire protection. Infrastructure and utilities: sanitary sewer capacity, domestic water pressure, fire flow, stormwater/C.3, electrical load, transformer/vault capacity, easements, and project-specific upgrades. Solid waste: refuse/recycling/organics storage, container movement, collection vehicle access, staging, hours, odor, noise, and emergency-access conflicts. Construction safety: confirm the approximately three-foot preliminary setback condition; require dimensioned formal plans, geotechnical/shoring analysis, neighboring foundation protection, preconstruction surveys, settlement/vibration/crack monitoring, stop-work thresholds, falling-object and high-wind containment, hoisting controls, temporary fire protection, and a coordinated construction-management plan. Technical coordination: integrated review by Planning, Building, Fire, Public Works, Utilities, and solid-waste/environmental-services staff, with material recommendations incorporated into the project plans. From:annie griffin To:Council, City Subject:Fwd: RV LIFESTYLES Date:Friday, August 14, 2026 12:25:40 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 writing to express my deep concern regarding the recent article about Palo Alto resident Bob Mariano spending months documenting RVs parked throughout the city and sharing his findings with city officials. Sounds a bit like the Gestapo to me. It is not a crime to choose a nomadic lifestyle. Thousands of well-educated, civilized people choose to live this way. In Europe, this lifestyle is not looked down upon; in fact, nobody seems to notice. Yet, in America, there seems to be a widespread pettiness that unless you live in a traditional home, you are a lesser human being. This mentality needs to stop, and framing this man as a hero for monitoring these residents is deeply disheartening. For many, an RV is a last resort after losing their homes to disasters like fires, or due to insurance delays leading to foreclosure. I wish Mr. Mariano would instead interview these individuals to share their lifestyles and adventures. Furthermore, many adult children are moving back with their parents because the high cost of living has made it nearly impossible to afford a decent apartment on a standard wage. You seem to be bent on making sure everyone lives in a house when not everyone wants to. This policing of Our Lives infringes on our individual freedom of choice. Who knows one day you might want to live in an RV. And by law you won't be able to because there will be nowhere to park. Please rethink what you're doing as though we're happening to you. Living an RV lifestyle can be so much fun good for our health and gets us out of the drudgery of sameness. Thank you for considering my comments sincerely Annie Griffin 831-582-1705 Sincerely, Annie Griffin 831-582-1705 911 Bryant St. Palo Alto, CA 94301 This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first email to your company. Mark Safe Report From:Aram James To:sam.liccardo@gmail.com; Rebecca Eisenberg; Reifschneider, James; Council, City; Ruth Silver Taube (rsilvertaube@scu.edu); Lauing, Ed Subject:Re: ICE"s plan to give officers electric shock gloves draws outrage and fears of misuse Date:Friday, August 14, 2026 8:33:37 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. On Thu, Aug 13, 2026 at 11:01 PM Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> wrote: Sam “ I love Tasers “ Liccardo” ICE's plan to give officers electric shock gloves draws outrage and fears of misuse | PBS News https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/ices-plan-to-give-officers-electric-shock- gloves-draws-outrage-and-fears-of-misuse From:Aram James To:Reckdahl, Keith; sam.liccardo@gmail.com; assemblymember.berman@assembly.ca.gov; Josh Becker; Jessica Speiser, Educational Leader for California Democratic Delegate, Assembly District 23; Jeff Rosen; Lauing, Ed; Jay Boyarsky Cc:city.council@menlopark.gov; dcombs@menlopark.gov; Nash, Betsy; Taylor, Cecilia; Gennady Sheyner; Dave Price; Enberg, Nicholas; Goodell, Erin; Reifschneider, James; Shikada, Ed; citycouncil@mountainview.gov; CityCouncil; Council, City; Sean Allen; Lewis james; WILPF Peninsula Palo Alto; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Linda Jolley Subject:Israel evicts settlers; hours later they return Date:Friday, August 14, 2026 8:10:49 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. I saw this The Mercury News e-edition article on the The Mercury News e-edition app and thought you’d be interested. Israel evicts settlers; hours later they return https://edition.pagesuite.com/popovers/dynamic_article_popover.aspx?guid=8063533b-7280- 4319-900f-728fedc726d5&appcode=SAN252&eguid=813b0346-05a6-4544-8f91- 999ee6e1b6ee&pnum=4# For more great content like this subscribe to the The Mercury News e-edition app here: From:Aram James To:sam.liccardo@gmail.com Cc:assemblymember.berman@assembly.ca.gov; Jeff Rosen; Roberta Ahlquist; Sean Allen; Human Relations Commission; Yusra Hussain; Carla Torres; Diana Diamond; DuJuan Green; planning.commission@cityofpaloalto.0rg; city.council@menlopark.gov; Council, City; GRP-City Council; board@pausd.org; Board of Directors; boardfeedback@smcgov.org; bos@smcgov.org; Friends of Cubberley; Lauing, Ed; Shikada, Ed; Reifschneider, James; Salem Ajluni; Baker, Rob; Braden Cartwright; Emily Mibach; EPA Today; cromero@cityofepa.org; Lee, Craig; <michael.gennaco@oirgroup.com>; Steve Wagstaffe; Stephen Connolly; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Vicki Veenker; dcombs@menlopark.gov; PD Kristina Bell; Bill Newell; Zahra Billoo; Zelkha, Mila; Malinsky, Jason; eric.figueroa@cityofpaloalto.org; Goodell, Erin; Jessica Speiser, Educational Leader for California Democratic Delegate, Assembly District 23; Supervisor Susan Ellenberg; Supervisor Otto Lee; District5@bos.sccgov.org; district1@bos.sccgov.org; Josh Becker; Nash, Betsy Subject:ICE"s plan to give officers electric shock gloves draws outrage and fears of misuse Date:Thursday, August 13, 2026 11:02:33 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Sam “ I love Tasers “ Liccardo” ICE's plan to give officers electric shock gloves draws outrage and fears of misuse | PBS News https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/ices-plan-to-give-officers-electric-shock-gloves-draws- outrage-and-fears-of-misuse From:Aerin Young To:Council, City Subject:332 forest - we are opposing the demolition Date:Thursday, August 13, 2026 10:22:00 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, My name is Aerin Kim, and I am a resident and constituent of Palo Alto. I am writing to formally express my opposition to the proposed development at 332 Forest Ave. While I understand the need for increased density in our city, I believe this specific proposal is inappropriate for this site for the following reasons: Scale and Character: The proposed high-rise is vastly out of scale with the surrounding buildings. It disrupts the historical integrity and the established architectural character of the neighborhood. Public Safety and Infrastructure: The current layout of this site and its immediate surroundings cannot safely accommodate a high-rise. I am concerned about the impact on traffic, pedestrian safety, and the overall density of this specific micro-neighborhood. Urban Planning: I believe high-rise developments should be reserved for areas specifically zoned for high-density transit corridors. This small, residential-scale site is not a suitable location for such a significant vertical increase. I urge you to reject this proposal and instead support development that respects the diversity, culture, and historical fabric of Palo Alto. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Aerin Kim From:Richard Stolee To:Council, City Subject:Annual College Terrace Block Party Date:Thursday, August 13, 2026 8:41:44 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Mayor and Members of the Palo Alto City Council, On behalf of the College Terrace Residents Association, I’d like to invite you to our annual College Terrace Neighborhood Picnic on Saturday, September 12, from 4:00–7:00 p.m. at the College Terrace Library. The picnic has been a neighborhood tradition for years and is simply a fun afternoon for neighbors and families to get together. We’ll have food, a magician, live music, and the library will be open throughout the event. We’d love to have you stop by, enjoy the afternoon, and spend some time with College Terrace residents. It’s also a great, informal opportunity for neighbors to meet their Councilmembers and share what’s happening in the neighborhood and what’s on their minds. Please feel free to drop in anytime between 4:00 and 7:00 p.m. We hope to see you there! Best, Richard Stolee President College Terrace Residents Association From:Elvira To:Council, City; Veenker, Vicki; Stone, Greer; Burt, Patrick; Lauing, Ed; Lu, George; julie.lythcott- haims@paloalto.gov; Reckdahl, Keith Cc:Tiega@varlacklegal.com Subject:Invitation to NCBW SVC 30th Anniversary Sparkles & Sneakers Fundraising Gala Date:Thursday, August 13, 2026 7:29:17 PM Attachments:NCBW gala flyer with Goapele.png NCBW SVC 30th Gala event flyer.png NCBW SVC Sparkles and Sneakers Invitation Sponsorship Letter_Palo Alto.docx CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear Councilmembers, On behalf of the National Coalition of 100 Black Women, Inc., Silicon Valley Chapter, I am pleased to invite you to our 30th Anniversary “Sparkles & Sneakers” Fundraising Gala on Saturday, August 22, 2026, at Santa Clara University. We would be honored to have you join us as a distinguished guest and invite you to consider supporting this milestone celebration through a sponsorship or table purchase. Please see the attached invitation for event details and sponsorship information. We look forward to celebrating 30 years of advocacy, leadership, and community impact with you. With much appreciation, Tiega-Noel Varlack, Esq. 1260 B Street, Suite 350 Hayward, CA 94541 Ph: (510) 397-2008 Cell: (510) 954-6172 Fax: (510) 397-2997 tiega@varlacklegal.com -------------------------------- Sincerely, Elvira D. Jubay This message needs your attention This is their first email to your company. Mark Safe Report Legal Assistant Varlack Legal Services elvira@varlacklegal.com (510) 397-2008 NATIONAL COALITION OF 100 BLACK WOMEN, INC. Silicon Valley Chapter National Coalition of 100 Black Women-SVC Tax ID: 501(c)(3) 77-0454956 Website: ncbw-svc.org Mailing: P.O. Box 730907, San Jose, CA 95173-9998 Email: Info@NCBW-SVC.org 30th Anniversary • Sparkles & Sneakers Fundraising Gala 13 August 2026 Palo Alto City Council 7th Floor, 250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94301 RE: Invitation and Sponsorship Opportunity — 30th Anniversary Sparkles & Sneakers Fundraising Gala Dear Councilmembers: On behalf of the National Coalition of 100 Black Women, Inc., Silicon Valley Chapter (NCBW-SVC), it is our pleasure to invite you to join us for our 30th Anniversary Sparkles & Sneakers Fundraising Gala—an evening celebrating three decades of advocacy, leadership, excellence, and community impact. For 30 years, NCBW-SVC has advanced opportunities for Black women and girls through advocacy and programs focused on health, education, economic empowerment, public policy, and leadership development. Through partnerships with public officials, educational institutions, businesses, healthcare leaders, nonprofit organizations, and community advocates, we work to address disparities, strengthen families, cultivate future leaders, and create meaningful pathways to opportunity. We would be honored to welcome you as an esteemed guest and invite you to support this milestone celebration as a sponsor. Your sponsorship helps sustain programs and advocacy that educate, empower, and expand opportunities for women, girls, youth, and families throughout Silicon Valley and beyond. EVENT DETAILS Event Fundraising Gala Date Doors Open Program Location NATIONAL COALITION OF 100 BLACK WOMEN, INC. Silicon Valley Chapter National Coalition of 100 Black Women-SVC Tax ID: 501(c)(3) 77-0454956 Website: ncbw-svc.org Mailing: P.O. Box 730907, San Jose, CA 95173-9998 Email: Info@NCBW-SVC.org Address 95053 Live Entertainment Tickets $175 Table Sponsorship presentation slide and verbal recognition during the program To purchase tickets or reserve a sponsored table, please visit the official gala registration page. We encourage early reservations as space is limited. SPONSORSHIP & TICKETS: https://www.zeffy.com/en-US/ticketing/sparkles-and-sneakers-fundraising-gala As a public and community leader, your presence would be especially meaningful to our members and guests. We also welcome proclamations, certificates, resolutions, or other forms of recognition commemorating the Silicon Valley Chapter’s 30th anniversary and three decades of advocacy and service. Whether you join us as a sponsor, distinguished guest, or community partner, we hope you will celebrate this extraordinary milestone with us as we honor our legacy and invest in the next generation of advocacy, leadership, and impact. With appreciation, Sabrina-Moné Lamontagne President National Coalition of 100 Black Women, Inc. Silicon Valley Chapter SPARKLE. STEP FORWARD. MAKE AN IMPACT. You don't often get email from arthur@kellers.org. Learn why this is important From:TIP Info To:Arthur Keller; Lo, Ria Cc:City Mgr; Council, City; Supervisor Margaret Abe-Koga Subject:RE: Questions about the TIP Date:Thursday, August 13, 2026 3:51:28 PM Attachments:image001.png CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious ofopening attachments and clicking on links. i Thank you for your comment on MTC’s Draft 2027 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and Draft Air Quality Conformity Analysis. This email confirms that your comment has been received. Comments received during the public comment period, along with staff responses, will be provided to the MTC Commission for consideration and included in the final 2027 TIP and Air Quality Conformity Analysis documentation. Thank you, Mallory BAY AREA METRO | BayAreaMetro.gov Association of Bay Area Governments Metropolitan Transportation Commission Bay Area Metro Center | 375 Beale Street | Suite 800 San Francisco, CA 94105 From: Arthur Keller <arthur@kellers.org> Sent: Sunday, July 26, 2026 1:25 PM To: ria.lo <ria.lo@paloalto.gov>; TIP Info <tipinfo@bayareametro.gov> Cc: City Mgr <CityMgr@paloalto.gov>; city.council@paloalto.gov; Supervisor Margaret Abe-Koga <district5@bos.sccgov.org> Subject: Re: Questions about the TIP *External Email* This message needs your attention Some Recipients have never replied to this person. Mark Safe Report Powered by Mimecast Thanks, Ria, for your comments. The timeline https://www.vta.gov/projects/us-101- interchanges-improvement-project-san-antonio-rd-charleston-rdrengstorff-ave showed design and engineering from July 2026 to June 2028, with construction from 2028-2031. That was delayed since 2024 document when it showed design completion by December 2027 and project construction in 2028. Now funding is zero through at least June 2030. How many more accidents at the 101 Charleston interchange will occur while funding is delayed for this rebuild? It needs to start being funded during this period. Best regards, Arthur On Jul 22, 2026, at 5:48 PM, Arthur Keller <arthur@kellers.org> wrote: Thanks, Ria, for your quick response. Future years could be anytime. Can we push for it to be in the next batch of projects? Best regards, Arthur On Jul 22, 2026, at 9:55 AM, Lo, Ria <Ria.Lo@paloalto.gov> wrote: Hello Arthur Thank you for your email and your interest in regional transportation planning. I am responding on behalf of the City Manager. The project that you are referencing can be found on page 178 of volume 2 of the draft regional Transportation Improvement Program (snipped below). This project is initiated by VTA, who has provided additional information at their project website: US 101 Interchanges Improvement Project: San Antonio Rd to Charleston Rd/Rengstorff Ave | VTA. <image001.png> Hope that helps. Cheers <image002.png>Ria Hutabarat Lo, PhD Chief Transportation Official Office of Transportation (650) 329-2136 | Ria.Lo@PaloAlto.gov www.PaloAlto.gov<image005.png> -----Original Message----- From: Arthur Keller <arthur@kellers.org> Sent: Monday, July 20, 2026 9:45 PM To: TIPinfo@bayareametro.gov Cc: Council, City <city.council@PaloAlto.gov>; Supervisor Margaret Abe-Koga <district5@bos.sccgov.org> Subject: Questions about the TIP Why wasn’t the project to build an offramp on southbound US-101 at San Antonio Road in Palo Alto connected to an onramp at Rengstorff in Mountain View via an auxiliary lane not included in the 2027 TIP? Statistics show the current onramp at Charleston in Mountain View as having the highest accident rate on US-101 from San Mateo/Santa Clara county line to CA-85? Best regards, Arthur Keller From:Robert Marinaro To:Veenker, Vicki Cc:Council, City; Stone, Greer; Lauing, Ed; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Reckdahl, Keith; Burt, Patrick; Lu, George; City Mgr; Josh Becker; Marc Berman; Leslie Bulbuk; Nicole Fernandez; Margaret Abe-Koga; Jensen, Christopher; Bulatao, Eric; Lindsey, Stephen; Nick Marinaro; Jennifer Kain; 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; Bryna Chang; Xenia Czisch; Bill McLane; Ramon Moreno; Lester 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; John Seltzer; 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; Arthur Keller; Jeff Levinsky; Becky Sanders; Chip Wytmar; Sharon Elliot; McDonough, Melissa; Janet Hartley; Charlie Weidanz; Kevin Mayer; Boris Folsch; 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; Scott Petersen; Alex Smelik; fred@bockmann.com; Janie Sydow; Deborah j Marinaro; Summa, Doria; Boyd Smith; Lund Smith; Milan Milan; Elliott Lee; Robert Berkovich; Letizia Rodriguez; Brennan Pang; Eggleston, Brad; Rius, Rafael; Lo, Ria; Andrade, Alex; Bob Kennis; Shani Kleinhaus; Peggy (Margaret) Christiansen; Martin Cuyegkeng; Julia Sun; Aki Hirsa; Colin Swindells; Andrew Li; Evan Mathews; Efrain Monttano Velazquez; Ignacio Montelongo Jr.; Joseph Montelongo; Nayirie Tashjian; Fernanda Prado; Dave Rubenstein; Johnny Vo; Priyanka Raghuraman; Andrew Koo; Joseline Sotomayor; Dmitri Samsonov; Gerson Bers; Mike Emrick; Anand Srinivasan; Zohar Gillai; Maria Orlova; Marc Husemann; Niklas Sprungmann; Apple, Kara; Joe Sinnott; Linda Zausen Subject:Fabian Way - - Thursday August 13, 2026 Date:Thursday, August 13, 2026 3:27:48 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Ms. Mayor, I would like to bring to your attention the worsening OSV situation in South Palo Alto and ask you to address it. These photos represent the situation today that was brought to my attention by several residents of the Charleston Village Condominiums on the corner of E. Charleston and Fabian Way. This segment of Fabian Way between E. Charleston and San Antonio Rd. is lined with back to back OSVs and the residents and businesses here are fed up and want action from the City. You can clearly see this fifth wheel trailer dangerously jutting out in to bend in the road obstructing the roadway and sightings. I drove down here several times today and it is extremely dangerous. Can the City have this vehicle towed away immediately. Please be on notice that this situation has been brought to the City’s attention in the event that there is an accident and someone is injured. We have been dealing with this situation for far too long and we are near the breaking point. A year has gone by and the incremental measures implemented by the City in this past year have only marginally fixed the problem. This particular section of Fabian Way is a disaster and it is not fair to the residents and businesses here. We would like for you to tell us how this situation will be fixed in the very near term! As the mayor you are the one who has the power, in addition to your fellow council members, to make the necessary decisions to fix this problem. Let me add, one more time, the City Council works for the Palo Alto Residents! Regards, Bob Marinaro Fabian Way between E. Charleston & San Antonio Rd. Charleston Village Condominiums in the background Fabian Way between E. Charleston & San Antonio Rd. Fabian Way between E. Charleston & San Antonio Rd. Fabian Way between E. Charleston & San Antonio Rd. Fabian Way between E. Charleston & San Antonio Rd. Fabian Way between E. Charleston & San Antonio Rd. Fabian Way between E. Charleston & San Antonio Rd. From:Office of Rep. Sam Liccardo To:Council, City Subject:Restricting ICE Detention Center Construction in Our Community Date:Thursday, August 13, 2026 1:46:04 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious ofopening attachments and clicking on links. Dear City, ICE DETENTION CENTERS Should our local cities and counties use their zoning laws to restrict construction of ICE detention centers in our community? Yes No Taking this survey will sign you up for future news and updates from our office. Personally, I won’t lose any sleep if local zoning and permitting laws keep large detention centers out of the Bay Area. Many believe that the Bay Area has avoided the worst of the massively disruptive, large-scale Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids (e.g., as in Minneapolis, Los Angeles, and Memphis) precisely because of ICE’s inability to incarcerate large numbers of people here. Accordingly, high stakes surround the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) site development proposals in Gilroy and Dublin, as litigation is being led by Santa Clara County and other partners to prevent construction. Given the delays and uncertainty, DHS will likely keep searching for other sites for potential detention facilities in other towns and cities. We need to be ready. Last week, regional partners – including San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan, San Mateo County President Noelia Corso and Supervisor Ray Mueller, Santa Clara County Supervisors Betty Duong and Margaret Abe-Koga and U.S. Rep. Jimmy Panetta – joined me in announcing a unified effort to deploy land use regulations to restrict the development of ICE detention centers in our Bay Area communities. While cities and counties cannot prohibit detention centers or federal activity, they do have the authority, under the 10th Amendment, to prohibit unsafe facilities, to limit where they can be sited, and to impose conditions on a facility to protect public health and safety of the occupants and surrounding community. Our office has provided partners with a toolkit to leverage local zoning to limit development of such facilities, and the city of San José and San Mateo County are advancing such ordinances. We’ll start with these leaders, and hope to scale our efforts to other communities across the Bay Area. Video Belinda Arriaga, CEO of Ayudando Latinos A Soñar (ALAS), joined me for a Sip with Sam and explained what regional cooperation can accomplish as we work on this ordinance: Video ICYMI: Holding Public Servants Accountable You may have seen recent reports detailing allegations of domestic abuse against Ohio Congressman Max Miller. Congress can never serve as a safe harbor for abusers, and I am the first member of Congress to call for an immediate Ethics Committee investigation into his conduct. It’s long overdue, but I’m glad the committee is finally taking action. I’ll keep demanding accountability and working for a Congress worthy of the people we serve. Video Photo Finish The best mornings start with fresh produce and conversations with our community. Thanks to everyone who stopped by our Campbell’s Farmers Market Office Hours to say hello, share concerns, and ask questions. Subscribe to this newsletter and follow us on social media to learn about future opportunities to meet up one- on-one. See you around the district! Make sure you follow us on Facebook, Instagram, X, Bluesky, TikTok, and YouTube for the latest. Onward! Sam U.S. Representative for California's 16th Congressional District Get Future Updates from Washington Unsubscribe from future messages. From:Aram James To:sam.liccardo@gmail.com; assemblymember.berman@assembly.ca.gov; Josh Becker; Jasso, Tamara; Shikada, Ed; Hoyt, George; Council, City; board@pausd.org; BoardOperations; Jay Boyarsky; Jeff Rosen; Meg Thomas; Julian Garcia; EPA Today; Emily Mibach; Gennady Sheyner; Gerry Gras; Raymond Goins; PD Kristina Bell; Reifschneider, James; Jasso, Tamara Cc:Burt, Patrick; Reckdahl, Keith; jgreen@dailynewsgroup.com; Dave Price; Braden Cartwright; Friends of Cubberley; Human Relations Commission Subject:News Alert: Magnitude 3.9 earthquake shakes Bay Area Date:Thursday, August 13, 2026 9:15:56 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. 8-13-2026 FYI: Re need for a seismic inspection at the 40-year-old Southwood Apartment Complex at 2850 Middlefield Road, Palo Alto 94306. 100 Unit Complex with no known prior earthquake-seismic evaluation. Political Leaders Congressman Sam Liccardo et al: Please assist in encouraging the owner of this complex to conduct such an evaluation asap. Bay Area News Group News Alert Magnitude 3.9 earthquake shakes Bay Area The quake hit about 8:30 a.m. and was centered near San Leandro. READ STORY Bay Area News Group © Copyright 2026 Bay Area News Group. All rights reserved. 75 E. Santa Clara Street, Suite 1100 | San Jose, CA 95113 Unsubscribe From:Aram James To:<michael.gennaco@oirgroup.com>; Stephen Connolly Cc:Reifschneider, James; PD Kristina Bell; Goodell, Erin; Raymond Goins; Council, City; Jeff Rosen; Jay Boyarsky; Reckdahl, Keith; Burt, Patrick; Yusra Hussain; Richard Konda; White, Dwight; Gennady Sheyner; Gerry Gras; citycouncil@mountainview.gov; Perron, Zachary; city.council@gilroy.org; CityCouncil; board@pausd.org; BoardOperations; Bill Newell; Nancy Goodban; Malinsky, Jason; Angel, David; Dave Price; Braden Cartwright; Gennady Sheyner; EPA Today; cromero@cityofepa.org; rabrica@cityofepa.org; Human Relations Commission; Friends of Cubberley; Brandon Pho; Diana Diamond; DuJuan Green; Daniel A. Opoku; Dominic Damoah Subject:Mike —& Stephen —-just say NO to Flock Date:Thursday, August 13, 2026 9:04:27 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. https://substack.com/@rawstory/note/c-313381713? r=fjmzt&utm_medium=ios&utm_source=notes-share-action From:Aram James To:sam.liccardo@gmail.com; Raymond Goins Cc:<michael.gennaco@oirgroup.com>; Stephen Connolly; Council, City; Reifschneider, James; Goodell, Erin; city.council@menlopark.gov; GRP-City Council; citycouncil@mountainview.gov; board@pausd.org; Jeff Rosen; Jay Boyarsky; Jennifer Morrow San José Spotlight; PD Kristina Bell; boardfeedback@smcgov.org Subject:Surveillance company Flock moves to increase oversight after police misuse Date:Thursday, August 13, 2026 7:49:38 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Surveillance company Flock moves to increase oversight after police misuse https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/security/flock-safety-police-abuse-oversight-data-retention- rcna592217 From:Jim Grove To:Council, City Subject:Palo Alto Police Department Date:Thursday, August 13, 2026 5:37:08 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear council members, I'm emailing you to consider investing the Palo Alto Police Department for their negligence with the Kyle Shanahan car collision. It seems the police did everything they could to hide the facts and conceal evidence. No one even knows how badly hurt the young woman is who was hit head on by Kyle Shanahan. His story has changed three different times and his story doesn't match with what the Palo Alto Police have said. The public needs and deserves answers because this looks like police corruption! Thanks, James Grove grovejw86@gmail.com This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first email to your company. Mark Safe Report From:Rick Corcoran To:Council, City Subject:Shanahan investigation Date:Thursday, August 13, 2026 5:27:03 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Please have the auditor take a much closer look at the Kyle Shanahan traffic accident report as there is what seems to be a cover-up taking place of the facts of the story that has shifted several times. To have confidence in the Police, they need to be held to a high standard. Hold them to that. Richard Corcoran This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first email to your company. Mark Safe Report From:tony farmer To:Council, City Subject:Palo Alto PD investigation Date:Thursday, August 13, 2026 12:10:02 AM Attachments:Screen Shot 2026-08-13 at 12.00.43 AM.png CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Greetings, My name is Tony Farmer, I'm an independent investigative journalist. I'm emailing you because I believe that Palo Alto PD is involved in a coverup related to a car accident involving 49ers head coach Kyle Shanahan that took place in mid July. I'm asking you to consider a vote to compel the independent police auditor to conduct a review of this accident. Attached you'll find my latest communication from Palo Alto PD which will not even disclose how many bodycams were rolling that day, nevermind the actual bodycam footage. The public doesn't even know which officers responded to the scene and access to 911 audio and the accident report has been denied. Citizens and media personalities believe there is a coverup involved in this incident. Here is a petition I recently started and plan to put effort into to get more signatures (https://www.change.org/p/demand-the- release-of-footage-and-report-on-kyle-shanahan-s-accident). Given Palo Alto PD's track record regarding transparency and the fact that they are already claiming a "clerical error" in this case, the public is concerned about preferential treatment and that other crimes may have been covered up. I would love to talk to you on the phone about this situation in depth (512.902.2889) so you understand my concern, if you have the time as I don't want to burden you with a long email. Tony Farmer 512.902.2889 This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first email to you. Mark Safe Report Powered by Mimecast From:Aram James To:Reckdahl, Keith Cc:Jessica Speiser, Educational Leader for California Democratic Delegate, Assembly District 23; assemblymember.berman@assembly.ca.gov; Josh Becker; Lauing, Ed; Supervisor Susan Ellenberg; board@pausd.org; Board of Directors; boardfeedback@smcgov.org; Gennady Sheyner; Dave Price; Emily Mibach; Council, City; CityCouncil; city.council@menlopark.gov; Taylor, Cecilia; Bill Newell; PD Kristina Bell; Nash, Betsy; dcombs@menlopark.gov; sam.liccardo@gmail.com; Donna Wallach; Human Relations Commission; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Sean Allen; WILPF Peninsula Palo Alto; Enberg, Nicholas; eric.figueroa@cityofpaloalto.org; Goodell, Erin; Jeff Hayden; Susan Hayase; Stone, Greer; Gerry Gras; Daniel A. Opoku; jgreen@dailynewsgroup.com; Vicki Veenker; Vicki Veenker; Friends of Cubberley; Jeff Rosen; Jay Boyarsky; Malinsky, Jason; HRW Silicon Valley; Patricia.Guerrero@jud.ca.gov; Pat M; Brandon Pho; Diana Diamond; EPA Today; Braden Cartwright; Zelkha, Mila; planning.commission@cityofpaloalto.0rg; DuJuan Green; Steve Wagstaffe; Nicole Chiu-Wang; Van Le; Ruth Silver Taube; Yusra Hussain; Yolanda Conaway; Damon Silver Subject:Gaza Tribunal Co-Chairs MP Jeremy Corbyn, Neve Gordon & Shahd Hammouri on U.K. Complicity in Genocide Date:Wednesday, August 12, 2026 9:26:41 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. https://www.democracynow.org/2026/8/12/gaza_tribunal_uk From:Jeff Rich To:Council, City; Planning Commission Subject:332 Forest Ave - Please Oppose Demolition/Redevelopment Application Date:Wednesday, August 12, 2026 9:19:27 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Hi, my name is Jeffrey Rich, I am a Palo Alto resident and constituent of many years, along with my wife, Molly Foy Rich, and our three children who have all grown up in the Palo Alto School District. I am writing to oppose the project proposal for 332 Forest Ave. Please oppose this project and support the historical integrity, diversity, and culture of Palo Alto's tenants. It is precisely the historical background and the respectful culture of Palo Alto towards its history that make the city such an amazing place. So much of the beauty and charm of this city seems to be torn down and taken away each year, I sincerely hope you will do the right thing now, and help us preserve the unique character and legacy of this wondrous place. Thank you, Jeffrey Rich This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first mail to some recipients. Mark Safe Report From:Lama Mattar To:Council, City; Planning Commission Subject:332 Forest Ave - Please Oppose Demolition/Redevelopment Application Date:Wednesday, August 12, 2026 7:19:27 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Hi, my name is Michel Khoury, I am a Palo Alto resident and constituent. I am writing to oppose the project proposal for 332 Forest Ave. Please oppose this project and support the historical integrity, diversity, and culture of Palo Alto's tenants. Thank you, From:Cesar Martinez To:Council, City; Planning Commission Subject:Resident Opposition to Project Proposal Date:Wednesday, August 12, 2026 7:02:02 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Hi, my name is Cesar Martinez, I am a Palo Alto resident and constituent. I am writing to oppose the project proposal for 332 Forest Ave. Please oppose this project and support the historical integrity, diversity, and culture of Palo Alto's tenants. Best, Cesar Martinez Cesar A. Martinez, MD, MS (he/him) PGY-1, Department of Emergency Medicine University of California, San Francisco - Fresno Campus cesar.martinez@ucsf.edu Get Outlook for iOS This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first email to your company. Mark Safe Report From:Hae-Ok Miller To:Council, City; Planning Commission Subject:332 Forest Ave - Please Oppose Demolition/Redevelopment Application Date:Wednesday, August 12, 2026 7:00:36 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Hi, my name is Hae-Ok Miller, I am a Palo Alto resident and constituent. I am writing to oppose the project proposal for 332 Forest Ave. Please oppose this project and support the historical integrity, diversity, and culture of Palo Alto's tenants. We appreciate your time. Thank you, Hae-Ok Miller From:Dayeon Lim To:Stone, Greer; Council, City Subject:Certificate of Recognition Request for Bridges in Music Date:Wednesday, August 12, 2026 5:42:50 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear Mr.Stone, My name is Dayeon Lim, and I’m the Vice President of Bridges in Music, a student-led music volunteer organization. Since 2022, we’ve had the privilege of performing about twice a month at Palo Alto Commons Senior Center and the Magical Bridge Foundation playground, sharing music with seniors, children, and families in the community. I’m reaching out to ask whether the City of Palo Alto might be able to provide a Certificate of Recognition for Bridges in Music, or for individual members who have contributed a significant number of volunteer hours or performances. We believe this would be a meaningful way to recognize our members’ service and encourage them to continue giving back to the community. Please let me know if this might be possible or if there is a process we should follow. Thank you so much for your time and consideration! Our instagram: https://www.instagram.com/bridgesinmusic/ Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/@bridgesinmusic1519 Best, Dayeon Lim Vice President, Bridges in Music 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:Moya Mapps To:Council, City; Planning Commission Subject:332 Forest Ave - Please Oppose Demolition/Redevelopment Application Date:Wednesday, August 12, 2026 5:41:41 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Hi, my name is Moya. I’m a Palo Alto resident and constituent. I am writing to oppose the project proposal for 332 Forest Ave. Please oppose this project and support the historical integrity, diversity, and culture of Palo Alto’s tenants. Thank you, Moya Mapps From:Mirian Krystel De Siqueira To:Council, City; Planning Commission Subject:332 Forest Ave - Please Oppose Demolition/Redevelopment Application Date:Wednesday, August 12, 2026 5:10:34 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Hi, my name is Mirian Krystel , I am a Palo Alto resident and constituent. I am writing to oppose the project proposal for 332 Forest Ave. Please oppose this project and support the historical integrity, diversity, and culture of Palo Alto's tenants. Thank you, M. Sincerely, Mirian Krystel De Siqueira, PhD Postdoctoral Fellow Department of Genetics Stanford University This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first email to your company. Mark Safe Report From:Ariana To:Planning Commission Cc:Council, City; Alexander Joseph Almeida Subject:Opposition for 332 Forest Planning Project Date:Wednesday, August 12, 2026 5:02:39 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'm writing regarding 332 Forest Ave, filed as the "Forest Commons" proposal under Senate Bill 79. This project was one of the last applications filed during a brief two-week window in early July when SB 79's full height and density allowances applied in Palo Alto, before the city's own local restrictions took effect on July 16, restrictions that specifically exempt historic properties from SB 79's added density. 332 Forest Ave is a 1925 building situated beside the Palo Alto Historical Association. The timing of this filing, immediately ahead of a rule that would have applied historic-property protections, raises real questions about whether this application was designed to bypass protections that would otherwise have applied to this building. I'd also ask the Commission to look closely at how this project is being characterized to the public. Of the 69 proposed units, 9 are designated affordable, a standard density-bonus set- aside, not a low-income housing project. Presenting this project as serving low-income residents, while it in fact displaces 16 currently-occupied units to build primarily market-rate housing, is misleading and should not be the basis on which this Commission evaluates community benefit. I ask the Commission to weigh both the timing of this application and its actual affordability profit, not its marketing, when considering whether it should be approved. As a Palo Alto resident, I ask you to hear my concerns and oppose this project proposal that will damage the community and displaces hard-working families and residents. From -- Concerned Constituent This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. Mark Safe Report Powered by Mimecast From:a.christina.buchmann@gmail.com To:Council, City; Planning Commission Subject:332 Forest Ave - Please Oppose Demolition/Redevelopment Application Date:Wednesday, August 12, 2026 4:07:45 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Hi, my name is ä Anna Büchmann; I am a Palo Alto resident and constituent. I also live nextdoor to 332 Forest and admire it and its trees every day. They make a valuable contribution to the neighborhood. I am writing to oppose the project proposal for 332 Forest Ave. Please oppose this project and support the historical integrity, diversity, and culture of Palo Alto's tenants. Thank you, Anna Büchmann Sent from my iPhone From:Andrew Kowell To:PlannerOnDuty; Council, City; Dinh, Joey; Lait, Jonathan Cc:masha Subject:Objection to Proposed 4-Story SB 79 Condo Project at 340 Palo Alto Ave Date:Wednesday, August 12, 2026 3:57:47 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear City Planner, City Council, and Officials/Representatives, My wife (Masha Kowell; cc'd here) and I are writing as homeowners on Palo Alto Ave to object to the proposed 3 or 4-story SB 79 condominium project at 340 Palo Alto Ave. Our concerns are as follows: 1. Flood risk: The site sits adjacent to the creek, and a project of this scale raises serious concerns about exacerbating flood risk for neighboring properties. We ask that the city require a full hydrology and flood- impact study before any approval. 2. Height and orientation: At 4 stories, the building's height and orientation would loom over adjacent homes, creating significant privacy and light/shadow impacts on neighbors. The design should be reviewed for setback and orientation adjustments that reduce this intrusion. 3. Affordability: The project does not appear to deliver meaningful affordable housing, undermining the stated intent of SB 79 to increase access to affordable housing near transit. Thank you for considering our objection. We would appreciate confirmation that this comment has been entered into the public record for this project. Please let us know if you have any questions. Best regards, Andrew Kowell (202-306-4221) & Masha Kowell (202-306-4310) From:Krishna Venkatraman To:Dinh, Joey; PlannerOnDuty; Council, City; Lait, Jonathan Subject:Re: The Luxury Condo Project at 340 Palo Alto Avenue Date:Wednesday, August 12, 2026 3:05:58 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear all: I am a resident and owner of two condos at 320 Palo Alto Ave. Recently I heard, with great concern, about a possible luxury condo project at 340 Palo Alto Avenue, on a lot adjacent to our building. I wanted to register my strong opposition to this project on the grounds of affordability, flooding risks, neighborhood traffic intensity, pedestrian and bicycle safety, among others. I also believe the construction will have severe adverse impacts on the trees and general habitat in the neighborhood, both of which are integral to what makes this area uniquely attractive and desirable as a place to live. Thank you for your consideration, Krishna Venkatraman This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first email to your company. Mark Safe Report From:Robert Marinaro To:Council, City; Veenker, Vicki; Stone, Greer; Lauing, Ed; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Reckdahl, Keith; Burt, Patrick; Lu, George Cc:Becky Sanders; Bulatao, Eric; Janie Sydow; Alex Smelik; Nancy Ellickson; Roger Smith; McDonough, Melissa; Scott Petersen; Chris Schremp; Apple, Kara; City Mgr; Barry Katz; Peter Xu; Loren Brown; Jo Ann Mandinach; Penny Brennan Subject:Oh and About the Lexington OSV on Matadero/Charleston Village Date:Wednesday, August 12, 2026 2:13:41 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Palo Alto City Council Members and OSV Ad Hoc Committee, Please read this interaction below between a resident of the Ventura neighborhood and the Palo Alto Police Department. This situation is going on all over South Palo Alto, day after day, and the Police Department can only do so much based on the current regulations. We need concrete more stringent regulations to prevent these situations NOW, not in Q4, 2027, or NEVER. The tax-paying residents of Palo Alto are really, really tired of the minimal efforts the City has taken to remove these OSVs. I was just notified of a RV that has moved back in from of the Charleston Village Condos on Fabian Way. Two RVs were camped out there for months and somehow they were gone for a month until yesterday. While they were gone the residents would coordinate parking their cars there so the RVs could not move back. Since that is very difficult to coordinate amongst the residents, there was a small opening and the RV moved back. This is absolutely insane and unfortunateI As you can read below the police do not have the tools to take the needed actions to remove these RVs. We are getting very tired on this and the police on the streets are getting very tired of this! It sounds like we are going to hear about two pilot proposals at the August 24th Council Meeting. Based on the Council’s proclivity to not be punitive and to not make decisions based on the common sense needs of their constituents we sure hope there will be short-term actions to remove these RVs from the streets of South Palo Alto. Regards, Bob Marinaro Matadero Ave. Fabian Way & East Charleston From: Rebecca Sanders <rebsanders@gmail.com> Subject: Re: Oh and about the Lexington OSV on Matadero Date: August 11, 2026 at 12:54:42 PM PDT To: "Bulatao, Eric" <Eric.Bulatao@paloalto.gov> Cc: Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> Hi Sgt. Eric: Thank you for responding. Please see my responses in-line.Thank you. Becky On Mon, Aug 3, 2026 at 5:20 PM Bulatao, Eric <Eric.Bulatao@paloalto.gov> wrote: Hi Becky, Thank you for bringing your concerns to our attention. We are familiar with the RV parked along Matadero and understand the many complaints we have received regarding it. We have tagged the vehicle numerous times, and each time we have rechecked it, there has been an indication that it was moved. Would you define 'indication' in this case? I drive by or walk by the Lexington everyday and it's always on that section. The guy also owns a black SUV that he tools around in and is careful to keep his head down and not make eye contact. The Lexington may have moved 10 feet in either direction, but it is always there. Honest to God. Under the municipal code, the vehicle is not required to leave the area entirely; it only needs to move at least one-half mile. I will eat my hat if that OSV has moved 1/2 mile away in the last few months. As a result, the RV can legally drive around the block and return to the same location. Regarding the hazard you mentioned, we measured the distance from the front of the RV to the intersection several times. Each measurement showed that the RV was more than 20 feet from the intersection. Since it is parked beyond the required 20-foot distance, it is not in violation of the applicable vehicle code governing parking near intersections. Additionally, because the curb is not marked as a red zone or contains No Parking signs, the vehicle may legally park there. We will continue to monitor the situation, but I wanted to address the two concerns you raised. If you believe the area should be designated as a No Parking zone due to visibility or the proximity of oncoming traffic, I recommend contacting the Office of Transportation to request that they evaluate the location and determine whether a parking restriction is warranted. Hey Eric, I just want you all to enforce the laws on the books. I live at xxxxxxx and we just recently were relieved of a dilapidated eyesore that resided on Orinda outside our fenceafter years, the poor fellows living there left garbage and human waste for us to clean up. We now have new neighbors in a different OSV. They are outside our fence most days. They do move up to the next block on Orinda regularly and then return. They run their generator quite a bit and exhaust wafts into our windows every day they stay outside my fence. They are not moving 1/2 mile away, by the way. Also Eric, answer me honestly, if these OSVs were moving in on North Palo Alto where the more tony homes are, wouldn't you all chase them out of there so fast? Honestly. We are very frustrated over here. We are second class neighborhoods down here in South Palo Alto as evidenced by your office's lack of will to enforce the laws on the books. One more question -- Who is your boss and what do you need to hear from them to get you to act on our behalf. Thank you. Becky Respectfully Sergeant Eric Bulatao Palo Alto Police Department Special Problems Detail 275 Forest Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 Office: (650) 838-2866 From: Rebecca Sanders <rebsanders@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, July 1, 2026 10:52 AM To: Bulatao, Eric <Eric.Bulatao@paloalto.gov> Subject: Oh and about the Lexington OSV on Matadero CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Sgt. Bulatao: We continue to be amazed at the lack of line of sight caused by the trailer and the safety hazard it creates when drivers in the alley and on Matadero cannot see around its hulk. Even if you nose your car forward, you might get hit by someone who is driving at speed who doesn't see you. Why doesn't that OSV on Matadero at El Camino ever have to move? Aren't we supposed to warn and tag them and tow them if they don't move? Is there someone living there that needs to be there for some reason, whose interests outweigh those of the neighbors. Thank you for your kind attention. Becky From:Dede Moreno To:Council, City; Planning Commission Subject:332 Forest Ave - Please Oppose Demolition/Redevelopment Application Date:Wednesday, August 12, 2026 1:41:36 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Hi, my name is __Denise Moreno__, I am a Palo Alto resident and constituent. I am writing to oppose the project proposal for 332 Forest Ave. Please oppose this project and support the historical integrity, diversity, and culture of Palo Alto's tenants. Thank you, ___denise Moreno_ Sent from my iPhone From:Saina Priyadarshi To:Council, City Cc:Ella Cohen Subject:Castilleja School"s Women in Politics: Possibility of Visit to City Hall Date:Wednesday, August 12, 2026 12:20:11 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Hi there, My name is Saina Priyadarshi, and I'm a lead of the Women in Politics club at my school, and I'm also a member of the Palo Alto Youth Council. We were hoping to do something special for International Women's Day, as we have a meeting on March 11th. We would really love to potentially bring our group to City Hall for about an hour. Our goal is to expose our members to local government, and if possible meet with some of the council members or any other women involved in city governance. There would be around 12-15 students attending, and we're curious what you think might be possible. I am more than happy to chat over Zoom sometime soon to discuss more possibilities if that would be helpful! Could you let us know if a visit like this would be feasible, or direct us to the appropriate coordinator? We are very flexible and happy to adapt to the city’s availability. Best, Saina Priyadarshi & Ella Cohen Leads, Women in Politics at Castilleja This message needs your attention This is their first mail to some recipients. Mark Safe Report Powered by Mimecast From:Maria Chavez To:Council, City Subject:Opposition to Demolition/Redevelopment Application: 332 Forest Avenue Date:Wednesday, August 12, 2026 8:12:36 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i City of Palo Alto, To support the housing project application for 332 Forest Ave is to support gentrification and wage a war on Palo Alto's history and its working class. I am writing to oppose the pending application to demolish 332 Forest Avenue, a 16-unit multifamily building constructed in 1925, located a short distance from the Palo Alto Historical Association and once featured on the show Silicon Valley. Today, all sixteen units remain occupied by children making their core memories and hard-working families who call it home. The application describes its intent to "develop this vacant parcel." This building is not vacant. It is fully occupied by sixteen households, including children and working families, many of whom are already stretching to afford this year's rent increases, in a neighborhood that sits beside the city's own historical association. Describing an occupied, century-old apartment building as a "vacant parcel" misrepresents the project's true impact on real people. To tenants, this application reads as an opportunity to make the rich richer, not to serve the community it displaces, a mission the City of Palo Alto should not want its approval associated with. Tenants report windows that do not close properly and must be propped open to meet fire- safety function. Meanwhile, tenants see their landlord on the property regularly, not to make repairs, but to drop off and store his personal vehicles, including a new Ferrari, other sports cars, and his boat. Families and students working hard to cover rent are left to wonder how a landlord who invests in sports cars but not in working windows, and who now proposes building expensive new housing in their place, can credibly claim this project serves Palo Alto's history, culture, or its low-income tenants rather than simply his own bottom line. This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first email to you. Mark Safe Report Nearly a year after tenants first learned demolition was under consideration, there is currently no posted notice on the property, no written communication of plans or timeline, and tenants who have contacted the leasing office directly have been turned away and told information will be provided "when available." No notice or communication at all falls short of the transparency tenants deserve to advocate for themselves, have their voices be heard, and participate meaningfully in this process. It will be a tremendous loss to the community and the history of Palo Alto to see its representatives support gentrification rather than ethical housing creation. We should not need to displace hard-working families and historic architecture to create more expensive, fancy housing opportunities. I ask the City of Palo Alto to oppose this application and to weigh the loss of a historic, occupied multifamily building and the displacement of existing tenants as a significant adverse impact in its review. Please oppose this project and support the historical integrity, diversity, and culture of Palo Alto's tenants, and ethical housing development. I ask you, as our appointed representatives entrusted with these decisions, to stand with the residents and tenants of Palo Alto. From:Jack Farrell To:Council, City Subject:Letter of Support for 762 San Antonio Date:Wednesday, August 12, 2026 7:37:08 AM Attachments:762 San Antonio Letter of Support.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 7 of the August 17th Council agenda. 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 1 August 12, 2026 City of Palo Alto City Council 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 Re: Item 7, 762 San Antonio Road [24PLN-00120] Dear City Council of Palo Alto, YIMBY Law 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 Crisis Act of 2019 (SB-330). This Council has an obligation to abide by all relevant state housing laws when evaluating the above captioned proposal, including the HA A. When complete, the proposed development at 762 San Antonio Road will consist of an 8-story development with 228 residential units. 30 units will be deed-restricted affordable to low-income households. We urge the Council to adopt the EIR addendum and grant all Density Bonus waivers to which the project is entitled. As your staff have already informed you, denials of Builder’s Remedy projects are limited to circumstances where the hearing body can cite specific, adverse impacts based on prewritten health and safety standards. It may not be denied based on inconsistency with Zoning designations or the Comprehensive Plan, and is subject only to ordinances or standards in place when its SB 330 pre-application was submitted. The SB 330 pre-application vested on January 9, 2024. Palo Alto’s Housing Element was not certified as substantially compliant until August 20, 2024. The Project proposal is consistent with the provisions of the Builders’ Remedy; therefore, you must approve the application, or else make findings to the effect that the proposed project would have an adverse impact on public health and safety, as described above. A Density Bonus was being sought in order for the Project proponent to be granted waivers to which they are entitled under California state Density Bonus Law, California Government Code § YIMBY L aw, 2261 Market Street STE 10416, San Francisco, CA 94114 1 YIMBY Law 2261 Market Street STE 10416 San Francisco, CA 94114 hello@yimbylaw.org 2 65915(e), so long as there are no specific, adverse impacts, upon health, safety, or the physical environment, and there are no feasible methods to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific adverse impacts. The HAA, § 65589.5 (j)(3) specifies that the receipt of a density bonus does not constitute a valid basis on which to find a proposed housing development project is inconsistent, not in compliance, or not in conformity, with an applicable plan, program, policy, ordinance, standard, requirement, or other similar provision. With the requested concessions and/or waivers available under State Density Bonus Law, the above-captioned project is zoning and general plan compliant. Should Palo Alto fail to comply with the law, YIMBY Law will not hesitate to take legal action to ensure that the law is enforced. I am signing this letter both in my capacity as the Executive Director of YIMBY L aw, and as a resident of California who is affected by the shortage of housing in our state. Sincerely, Sonja Trauss Executive Director YIMBY Law YIMBY L aw, 2261 Market Street STE 10416, San Francisco, CA 94114 2 From:trmattretro To:Burt, Patrick; Lauing, Ed; Lu, George; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Reckdahl, Keith; Stone, Greer; Veenker, Vicki; Council, City Subject:cops violating constituional rights of citizens Date:Tuesday, August 11, 2026 8:45:19 PM Attachments:image.png CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i city council palo alto, please instruct your officers to stop violating the constitution by using public safety as a justification: example below https://x.com/PoliceThePolic1/status/2086881263407825092 This message needs your attention No employee in your company has ever replied to this person. Mark Safe Report Powered by Mimecast tr mattretro From:Henry Childs To:Council, City Subject:Upcoming Council Discussion on August 24th Addressing Oversized Vehicle Impacts Date:Tuesday, August 11, 2026 6:05:37 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Mayor and Members of the Palo Alto City Council, Thank you for providing notice of the August 24 discussion regarding oversized vehicles used for habitation. I previously contacted the City regarding the growing number of oversized vehicles parked along East Meadow Drive and near neighborhood parks, and I appreciate the opportunity to provide additional public comment. I want to be clear about my position. My principal concern is not simply that people are living in vehicles. My concern is that Palo Alto is allowing large vehicles being used as residences to occupy public residential streets for extended periods of time in a manner that creates significant safety, parking, neighborhood, and land-use impacts. There are three issues that I believe the Council should address directly. First, this is a public-safety issue. Oversized vehicles routinely park adjacent to neighborhood parks and other areas heavily used by children and families. Large vehicles create substantial visual obstructions for drivers, pedestrians, and cyclists and reduce sightlines near areas where children are crossing streets, entering parks, and playing. Whatever policy the City ultimately adopts, overnight or prolonged parking of oversized vehicles near parks and other child-centered public spaces should be prohibited. Second, this is a neighborhood and property-value issue. Residential streets are shared public assets. Allowing oversized vehicles to function as long-term residences along those streets changes the character and use of the surrounding neighborhood and can create the appearance of blight. Residents should not be expected to absorb the consequences of effectively converting portions of residential streets into informal residential sites without any of the zoning, sanitation, parking, fire-safety, or land-use requirements that would apply to a conventional residential development. Third, the current time-based parking restrictions are plainly inadequate. The practical problem is that an oversized vehicle can leave a location briefly, park elsewhere, and then return. I have personally observed what appears to be this type of rotation on East Meadow. Moving a vehicle for a short period and then returning it to substantially the same location may satisfy a technical interpretation of a parking restriction, but it defeats the purpose of preventing public streets from becoming long-term residential This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. Mark Safe Report parking locations. The Council should therefore consider the functional use of these vehicles, not merely whether they are capable of moving. In practical terms, an oversized RV that remains within the same neighborhood and is continuously used as a residence has many of the same land-use characteristics as a unit in a trailer or mobile-home park. The fact that it has wheels does not eliminate the neighborhood impacts associated with residential occupancy. The critical distinction is that a lawful mobile-home or RV park operates on property specifically designated for that purpose and is subject to applicable infrastructure, sanitation, safety, density, and land-use requirements. A public residential street is not. For that reason, I urge the Council to adopt a policy that prevents residential streets from becoming de facto mobile-home parks while simultaneously creating a structured alternative for individuals currently living in oversized vehicles. At minimum, I encourage the Council to consider: 1. Prohibiting overnight parking of oversized vehicles adjacent to parks, playgrounds, schools, and other areas heavily used by children. 2. Establishing meaningful geographic restrictions on oversized-vehicle parking in residential neighborhoods, rather than relying exclusively on a rule that can be circumvented by briefly moving a vehicle. 3. Creating an enforcement standard that addresses repeated rotation within the same street or neighborhood so that temporary relocation does not indefinitely reset the parking clock. 4. Continuing aggressive enforcement of Palo Alto's vanlording ordinance where individuals or businesses are effectively renting vehicles as unregulated residential units. 5. Providing designated locations, where appropriate, for individuals who legitimately need temporary vehicle habitation, rather than placing the entire burden of that policy on residential neighborhoods and public streets. A humane policy and a strong neighborhood-protection policy are not mutually exclusive. Palo Alto can provide reasonable alternatives for people living in vehicles without accepting the permanent conversion of residential streets and park frontage into unregulated residential areas. I encourage the Council to use the August 24 discussion to move beyond a system that merely causes oversized vehicles to rotate from block to block. The objective should be a policy that actually addresses the underlying land-use, public-safety, parking, and neighborhood impacts. Thank you for considering my comments. From:Jan Boynton To:PlannerOnDuty Cc:Council, City Subject:Proposed SB79 luxury condominium project for 340 Palo Alto Ave CA Date:Tuesday, August 11, 2026 3:15:56 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Hello, I am a resident of Downtown North, and chose this area to live in because of its diversity of architectural styles & variety of available housing. And, because of all the Many & Large trees throughout the neighborhood & all of the diverse but extensive plantings surrounding each residence. And, because the vibe in this neighborhood encourages Many walkers & bikers, including Many backs/forths (bikes & peoples)over that Pedestrian Bridge between PA & MP (one lot down the street from this proposed New building). Am writing you today because this current proposal at/for “340 Palo Alto Ave, Palo Alto, CA” does NOT fit in with the character of this neighborhood & I strongly oppose it, as currently proposed, for the following reasons: 1) it is Too Big, in both Footprint & Height; it’s Massive scale will tower over the nearby houses, and even over the next door condominium building (bec of Bare Minimum setbacks) with a “Very Long & 4 story High (plus whatever is needed on the roof) basically Blank Wall” shoved up almost against the property line with the condominium building next door (to west of this lot). 2) It’s Footprint is Too Big for that lot, both Visually & Actually…visually Looming over any walkers/bikers on the street (bec of Barely any setbacks from the street)…will Not Visually add to the impression of a safe & inviting neighborhood. 3) It’s Footprint is Too Big for that lot Actually, bec the foundations needed for such a building will disturb/impact the geographical integrity of the Creek bed (literally right across the street)…and that’s important because possible flooding from this creek (and we love our creek) is always a concern with/when Big rains. 4) It’s Footprint is Too Big for that lot bec the foundations needed for that size/height of building will require extensively damaging/even removing All the roots (on the west side) of the Huge California Oak tree (in the adjacent lot to east) & will require extensively damaging/even removing All the roots (on their northern side) of the 2 Very Tall Sequoia Trees (in the lot behind this property)…resulting in All 3 Gorgeous & Very Old trees becoming unstable & dangerous, especially in any windy storms. 5) It’s Footprint & Height is Too Big for that lot bec the Entire Canopy (on tree’s western side) of that Huge California Oak tree (in the adjacent lot to the east) will need to be cut off, to accommodate the size & height of this proposed structure…resulting in either Too Much structural damage to that Beautiful tree, or it will just fall over in a storm. 6) This building, as proposed, will Not be affordable housing. Please Reject this proposal; it is too Big, in Both Footprint & Height, for this lot. Sincerely, Ms Jan Boynton Sent from my iPhone From:MS To:Council, City Cc:hersh k; Carias, Ruth; Shikada, Ed Subject:Follow-Up: Resolving the Ownership Status of Cypress Lane (Barron Park) Date:Tuesday, August 11, 2026 12:47:04 PM Attachments:City-GIS-map.png County-surveyor-map.png Staff Report 14459.pdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear Mayor, Council Members, and City Manager's Office, I am writing to follow up on the public comment I made at the Aug 10th City Council meeting regarding Cypress Lane in Barron Park, a 20-foot-wide lane whose "private" designation has caused persistent confusion for residents and inconsistent city responses for decades. As I noted in my comment, this is not a new problem. Palo Alto Online covered neighbors raising this same issue in 1993 and 2002, and again in coverage from 2008 and 2010 (links below). In 2022, the Council's own Finance Committee directed staff to research Cypress Lane's ownership as part of the FY 2023 budget process (Staff Report #14459, see attached). Staff proposed a three-step plan to determine ownership, establish a path for the city to take it over, and repair and maintain the lane. That plan was never carried through. The inconsistency is not just historical, and it is not hypothetical. A truck with 2009 registration has been parked in the same spot on Cypress Lane for over three years and cannot be towed because the lane is marked private — while on a public city street, a vehicle can be flagged and towed as abandoned after three days. This is just one of many ways that living next to Cypress Lane means going without the regular city services that other residents take for granted. Meanwhile, the city's own GIS maps designate the lane as private, Santa Clara County's maps do not, the lane appears on no property tax roll, and the city has issued a conditional use permit to Happy Donut that directs public traffic through Cypress lane 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, all year round. The city is, in effect, treating the lane as public enough to route business traffic through continuously, yet private enough to deny residents basic services. I did not mention this in my public comment out of courtesy, but I have also received contradicting accounts from different City departments regarding the ownership and legal status of Cypress Lane. Ruth Carias, with the City Manager's office, is aware of this discrepancy and has been working with City staff to help resolve it. I am grateful for her engagement on this issue and am scheduled to meet with her tomorrow to discuss it further. This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. Mark Safe Report I am asking the Council to direct staff to finally resolve Cypress Lane's ownership status, and to provide residents with a clear, consistent answer about what services and protections they can expect on this street. This issue has gone unresolved for over three decades, through multiple Councils and multiple staff studies. I hope this Council will be the one to put it to rest. Thank you for your time and attention to this matter. I am happy to provide any additional information or documentation that would be helpful. Sincerely, Manpreet Singh 513 Military Way, Palo Alto 4083904285 For reference: - Palo Alto Online, "Unclaimed Barron Park alley causing anxiety" (2008): https://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2008/09/09/unclaimed-barron-park-alley-causing- anxiety/ - Palo Alto Online, "Enforcing the code" (2010): https://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2010/05/07/enforcing-the-code/ From:340neighborhood To:Dinh, Joey; PlannerOnDuty; Council, City Subject:Re: Public Comments from 10 Nearby Households – SB 79 Preliminary Application for 340 Palo Alto Ave (Record 26PLN-00179) Date:Tuesday, August 11, 2026 11:39:46 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Hi all, The list of the households are not correct: Please see the corrected version: The participating households include: 364 Poe St 260 Palo Alto Ave 250 Palo Alto Ave 354 Poe St 125 Bryant St 115 Waverley St 165 Bryant St 474 Everett Ave 119 Bryant St 154 Bryant St Sorry again! 340 Palo Alto Neighborhood On Tue, Aug 11, 2026 at 11:35 AM 340neighborhood <340neighborhood@gmail.com> wrote: Dear Mr. Dinh, Planning Staff, Mayor, and Members of the City Council, This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. Mark Safe Report Please accept the attached neighborhood comment letter and signature pages regarding the SB 79 Preliminary Application for 340 Palo Alto Avenue (Record 26PLN-00179). The attached signatures represent 10 nearby households that have reviewed the proposal and wish to submit these comments for consideration as part of the City's review process. The participating households include: 320 Palo Alto Avenue 322 Palo Alto Avenue 324 Palo Alto Avenue 326 Palo Alto Avenue 328 Palo Alto Avenue 330 Palo Alto Avenue 346 Palo Alto Avenue 350 Palo Alto Avenue 374 Palo Alto Avenue [Last address] We respectfully request that the attached comments and signature pages be included in the official record for Record 26PLN-00179 and considered during the City's review of this application. Additional nearby households may submit supplemental comments or signatures separately as they become available. Thank you for your time and consideration. 340 Palo Alto Neighborhood From:340neighborhood To:Dinh, Joey; PlannerOnDuty; Council, City Subject:Public Comments from 10 Nearby Households – SB 79 Preliminary Application for 340 Palo Alto Ave (Record 26PLN-00179) Date:Tuesday, August 11, 2026 11:37:50 AM Attachments:340_Palo_Alto_Ave.pdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear Mr. Dinh, Planning Staff, Mayor, and Members of the City Council, Please accept the attached neighborhood comment letter and signature pages regarding the SB 79 Preliminary Application for 340 Palo Alto Avenue (Record 26PLN-00179). The attached signatures represent 10 nearby households that have reviewed the proposal and wish to submit these comments for consideration as part of the City's review process. The participating households include: 320 Palo Alto Avenue 322 Palo Alto Avenue 324 Palo Alto Avenue 326 Palo Alto Avenue 328 Palo Alto Avenue 330 Palo Alto Avenue 346 Palo Alto Avenue 350 Palo Alto Avenue 374 Palo Alto Avenue [Last address] We respectfully request that the attached comments and signature pages be included in the official record for Record 26PLN-00179 and considered during the City's review of this application. Additional nearby households may submit supplemental comments or signatures separately as 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 they become available. Thank you for your time and consideration. 340 Palo Alto Neighborhood From:340neighborhood To:Dinh, Joey; PlannerOnDuty; Council, City Subject:Public Comments from 10 Nearby Households - SB 79 Preliminary Application for 340 Palo Alto Ave (Record 26PLN-00179) Date:Tuesday, August 11, 2026 11:37:07 AM Attachments:340_Palo_Alto_Ave.pdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear Mr. Dinh, Planning Staff, Member of the City Council, Please accept the attached neighborhood comment letter and signatures regarding the SB79 Preliminary Application for 340 Palo Alto Ave (Record 26PLN-00179). The attached signatures represent 10 nearby households that have reviewed the proposal and wish to submit these comments for consideration as part of the City's review process. The participating households include: 364 Poe St 260 Palo Alto Ave 250 Palo Alto Ave 354 Poe St 125 Bryant St 115 Waverley St 165 Bryant St 474 Everett Ave 119 Bryant St 154 Bryant St We respectfully request that the attached comments and signatures be included in the official record for 340 Palo Alto Ave (Record 26PLN-00179) and considered during the City's review of the application. Additional nearby households may submit supplemental comments separately as they become available. Thank you for your time and consideration. 340 Palo Alto Neighborhood 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:Ignacio de Mingo To:Planning Commission Cc:Council, City; Switzer, Steven Subject:Strong Opposition to Application # 26PLN-00043 – 332, 350, and 360 Forest Avenue Date:Tuesday, August 11, 2026 11:29:32 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Re: Strong Opposition to Application # 26PLN-00043 – 332, 350, and 360 Forest Avenue (Agenda item #2 on 8/12/2026 meeting) Dear Members of the Planning and Transportation Commission, I write as a resident in downtown Palo Alto with my wife and three young children and as a 707 Bryant HOA board member to formally oppose the proposed development at 332, 350, & 360 Forest Avenue adjacent to our lot. I attended and spoke at the prescreening meeting on August 11th 2025 and, while I support thoughtful growth that aligns with our city’s values, this project as currently proposed remains incompatible with our zoning standards, neighborhood character, and the long-term health of our community. No feedback from the prescreening meeting has been incorporated into it. While I recognize the ongoing discussions regarding housing needs in our city, this specific proposal represents a drastic and inappropriate departure from the established scale, character, and infrastructural capacity of the immediate neighborhood. Approving a zoning change of this magnitude sets a concerning precedent for the downtown area and the surrounding residential blocks. I urge the Commission to recommend the denial of this application based on the following critical concerns: 1. Incompatible Scale and Neighborhood Character The current RM-40 (Multiple-Family Residence) zoning exists to maintain a balanced, livable density that transitions appropriately within the neighborhood grid. This application is trying to fit a size 10 building into a size 2 lot through: Unprecedented transfer of land from 360 Forest (Casa Real) to the merger This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. Mark Safe Report Powered by Mimecast of 332 and 350 Forest: Application # 26PLN-00043 requests a rezoning from RM-40 to Planned Community/Planned Home Zoning (PHZ) to allow the merging of the lots at 332 and 350 Forest Avenue and transferring land from the adjacent Casa Real property at 360 Forest Avenue for the construction of a new 8-story, 82-unit multi-family residential development Unprecedented Height: An 8-story building is entirely out of proportion with the surrounding structures. It will cast significant shadows, reduce privacy for adjacent properties, and disrupt the visual harmony of the Forest Avenue corridor and intersecting streets. Misuse of PHZ: The Planned Home Zoning designation should not be utilized as a loophole to bypass established zoning limits to this extreme degree. The zoning comparison table identifies major departures from existing standards. Merging these lots and transferring land from one to the other to force a massive, high-density monolith permanently alters the fundamental character of our community without a clear public benefit. 2. Daylight plane, step-back, and transition to neighboring properties This project does not comply with required side and rear daylight planes. It lacks the step-back required when a proposed building is more than 20 feet taller than an adjacent building as the current design does not provide the specified transition. It seems no privacy considerations have been incorporated into this project. This application would mean a total lack of privacy for existing residents as it places the proposed building right next to our property with total disregard of step-backs and transitions. 3. Inadequate Parking Provisions The introduction of 82 new residential units on this specific footprint will create an unsustainable localized density. Proximity to transit reduces the local traffic if public transportation is leveraged but it does not eliminate the need for cars in a household (groceries shopping, kids pick-up and drop-off, doctor appointments, family trips, medium size items shopping, etc…). At 707 Bryant we have two parking spaces per unit and we still struggle with parking for guests and visitors. We need two cars regardless of how close we are to the station. This project removes existing parking spaces at 360 Forest (Casa Real) and it is , existing Casa Real residents (360 Forest), plus visitors and deliveries. This will inevitably result in heavy spillover parking onto surrounding streets that are already heavily impacted. Conclusion and Call to Action Our community relies on the Planning and Transportation Commission to enforce the law and zoning regulations that protect the livability and integrity of our neighborhoods. Application # 26PLN-00043 is an extreme overreach that, against our laws and regulations, prioritizes maximum density over sustainable, community- oriented urban planning. I strongly urge the Commission to reject the requested rezoning to PHZ and require any future development on these parcels to strictly adhere to the existing RM-40 zoning limits. SB 79 was approved since the prescreening meeting. This law is going to open the door to many more opportunities to build more of the required housing in Palo Alto, reducing the need for massive projects like this one that destroy our neighborhoods and impact current residents beyond what is reasonable. Thank you for your time, your service to our city, and your careful consideration of the residents who will be permanently impacted by this decision. Sincerely, Ignacio de Mingo 12+ yrs Downtown Palo Alto Resident, Husband, and Father of 3 children 707 Bryant HOA Board Member From:Aram James To:Meg Thomas; Julian Garcia Cc:sam.liccardo@gmail.com; Shikada, Ed; Jasso, Tamara; Gennady Sheyner; Josh Becker; assemblymember.berman@assembly.ca.gov; Vicki Veenker; Council, City; Seanjames143@yahoo.com; Lewis james; citycouncil@mountainview.gov; planning.commission@cityofpaloalto.0rg Subject:Earthquakes Rattle Northern California Coast | Watsonville, CA Patch Date:Tuesday, August 11, 2026 10:33:09 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Re need for a seismic inspection at the 40-year-old Southwood Apartment Complex at 2850 Middlefield Road, Palo Alto 94306. 100 Unit Complex with no known prior earthquake-seismic evaluation. Political Leaders Congressman Sam Liccardo et al: Please assist in encouraging the owner of this complex to conduct such an evaluation asap. Mmhttps://patch.com/california/watsonville/earthquake-rattles-parts-northern-california-coast From:Aram James To:Meg Thomas; Julian Garcia Cc:Shikada, Ed; Hoyt, George; Vicki Veenker; sam.liccardo@gmail.com; assemblymember.berman@assembly.ca.gov; Palo Alto Renters" Association; Josh Becker; Council, City; Jasso, Tamara; Dave Price; Riley Cooke; Sean Allen; Bains, Paul; Reifschneider, James; Goodell, Erin; james pitkin; Gennady Sheyner; BoardOperations; Braden Cartwright; EPA Today; Brandon Pho; Human Relations Commission; planning.commission@cityofpaloalto.0rg; Roberta Ahlquist; WILPF Peninsula Palo Alto; Emily Mibach; Jeff Rosen; Diana Diamond; Enberg, Nicholas; eric.figueroa@cityofpaloalto.org; Jensen, Eric Subject:Over 160 people killed in Colombia’s strongest earthquake in years Date:Tuesday, August 11, 2026 10:12:30 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Re need for a seismic inspection at the 40-year-old Southwood Apartment Complex at 2850 Middlefield Road, Palo Alto 94306. 100 Unit Complex with no known prior earthquake-seismic evaluation. Political Leaders Congressman Sam Liccardo et al: Please assist in encouraging the owner of this complex to conduct such an evaluation asap. https://www.nbcnews.com/world/latin-america/strong-earthquake-colombia-ecuador-people- evacuating-homes-buildings-rcna591709 From:Star Teachout To:Council, City Subject:Parks Signs, Cubberley, and Communication Date:Monday, August 10, 2026 10:42:00 PM Attachments:Screen Shot 2026-08-10 at 3.22.20 PM.png Screen Shot 2026-08-10 at 3.24.42 PM.png Screen Shot 2026-08-08 at 12.49.54 PM.png Screen Shot 2026-08-08 at 12.51.30 PM.png Screen Shot 2026-08-10 at 2.07.06 PM.png Screen Shot 2026-08-10 at 3.02.13 PM.png To our City Council, I want to thank our Emergency Services for their excellent participation in the recent National Night Out, and for all the neighbors and council reps who attended. It was a great example of how the people and things we interact with on a routine or daily basis can offer a sense of belonging if we are receptive. Recent past survey responses from high school students claim they do not feel as if they matter, and so I encourage families to cultivate a sense of belonging by establishing relationships with people in our local businesses, with our beautiful trees, vegetation, and buildings, by attending local events/classes, and by appreciating the work of our local government, city council, and commissions. For the council, I want to emphasize how important communications are with your constituents, even if they seem insignificant, mundane, or even troublesome. Cultivating a sense of caring for our city is a good thing, and is the foundation for all the good our city does. Our system of communication in Palo Alto may be part of the problem pertaining to your discussion on vacancies on commissions. With all the sources of news, many people simply don’t know what is going on. With so little time, let me touch on 3 things which I’ve been thinking about: 1. Park Signage: I recently received an email about the supposed upgrading of our many unique, beautiful, hand-carved wooden park signs without warning. Bol Park had its sign replaced in the past few years and it is beautiful. We prefer something made by a human, made of real wood, and compatible with its surroundings. Considering our budget issues, are these changes necessary? Will you please put a hold on that process, and communicate why uniformity is essential, why our Parks & Rec commission and neighborhood groups were not informed or consulted. If possible, please return those removed if so desired by the neighbors. 2. The Cubberley Community Center Project: I am strongly supportive of this project, and I’m worried. It is very important our greater community gets a clear message (probably in easy to read bullet points) about what needs this project is hoping to satisfy, whether those are current or projected needs. For some, withholding the appraisal value prior to the Measure J vote is a deal-breaker. People want to know whether the $65.5 million for 7 acres was a good negotiation. Diana Diamond’s Aug 1 article in the PAW merits some consideration. For example, by PAUSD demanding such a high price it is working against the students and families it serves, and also seems ungrateful to the tax payers who contribute 83.7% of their revenue through high property taxes. And since the land sale revenue cannot be used for salaries/ongoing instruction, there is less direct value for students. Is it possible to renegotiate a lower price? [Per Education Code 17462, proceeds from the sale or lease with an option to purchase of district surplus property are used for one-time expenditures and not for ongoing expenditures such as salaries and general operating expenses. (Education Code 17462; 2 CCR. 1700).] 3. Communication: There are opportunities to improve our home web page, including direct notifications of the monthly City Calendar and our city manager’s excellent Uplift Local newsletter. Some suggestions are below. Thank you for your time, and very sorry you had to endure the comments of the second speaker, Star Teachout Barron Park ======================== We need to periodically prioritize, streamline, and promote our communications if we want people to be informed and involved in our community. We have some very well-paid, talented, and socially skilled people on our staff. We also have many positive efforts bringing us events, classes, music, and improvements by our city government. Please have them put their heads together to improve our communications. Here are a few ideas, and I would be happy to contribute to that effort if they wish outside thoughts: A. Please implement an email sign up to receive the City of Palo Alto City Calendar on the first day of each month. This would make it much easier to participate in both local government and community/teen events. Or even better…. B. Consider copying the city of Mountain View’s practice of allowing people to sign up for alerts on very specific things they are interested in (which could include the Calendar of Events and Meetings). See my April 23, 2026 email, Subject: Improving connections/communication between city and residents for more details. C. Palo Alto Home page improvements: - Considering renaming "City Calendar" to “Calendar of City Events & Meetings” to the link, and move it above the graphics on the Palo Alto Home page [see below]. - Add Uplift Local to the News [see below], and create a page with all the archived Uplight Local weekly news shown. The archived page should include the What’s New section with the date linked to the full newsletter, as shown in the example for Aug 6 below. This allows for a quick scan to locate the desired news. What’s happening in Palo Alto? View the City Events & Meeting Calendar News Uplift Local Aug 6, 2026 Uplift Local What’s New • Wellness Month: Resources to Prioritize Self-Care, Wellness and Wellbeing • City Regulations Implementing SB 79 • Construction Status Updates • Council to Consider Next Steps for the Crescent Park Traffic Calming Project • South Palo Alto Rail Crossing Workshop: August 27 • Summer Recess Highlights & Details on Upcoming Council Meetings [See Uplift Local archives here] View More News From:Aram James To:Reckdahl, Keith; Reckdahl, Keith Cc:Vicki Veenker; Lauing, Ed; Burt, Patrick; Stone, Greer; Raymond Goins; Council, City; sam.liccardo@gmail.com; assemblymember.berman@assembly.ca.gov; Josh Becker; Jessica Speiser, Educational Leader for California Democratic Delegate, Assembly District 23; planning.commission@cityofpaloalto.0rg; james pitkin; Roberta Ahlquist; WILPF Peninsula Palo Alto; Reifschneider, James; Jeff Rosen; Jay Boyarsky; Malinsky, Jason; city.council@menlopark.gov; CityCouncil; city.council@gilroy.org; citycouncil@mountainview.gov; GRP-City Council; Bill Newell Subject:Source: Justia Law Date:Monday, August 10, 2026 7:56:02 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Lockheed Nuclear Weapons Necessity Case!! Nuremberg principles Has Keith exposed himself to possible war crimes prosecution given his work for Lockheed? Source: Justia Law In re Weller (1985) https://share.google/Yhhs0UimVOWUXF9dK The Nuremberg Principles are a set of seven legal guidelines for international criminal law. The United Nations International Law Commission created them in 1950 based on the rules used in the post-World War II trials of Nazi leaders in Nuremberg, Germany. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5] Core Legal Rules Individual liability: Any person who breaks international law is responsible and must face punishment [0.6.1.signal]. No local law excuse: If a country's internal laws do not punish a crime against international law, the person is still guilty under international law [0.6.1.signal]. [1] No official immunity: Being a head of state or a government official does not protect a person from punishment [0.6.1.signal]. [1, 2] Superior orders limit: Acting under orders from a government or a boss does not excuse a person, as long as they had a real moral choice [0.6.1.signal]. Right to a fair trial: Anyone charged with an international crime gets a fair trial on the facts and the law [0.6.1.signal]. [1, 2] Complicity: Helping or planning to commit a crime against peace, a war crime, or a crime against humanity is also an international crime [0.6.1.signal]. Punishable International Crimes Crimes against peace: Planning, preparing, starting, or waging an illegal war of aggression. War crimes: Breaking the rules and customs of war (such as murder, abuse, or the destruction of towns) [0.6.1.signal]. Crimes against humanity: Murder, enslavement, mass deportation, or extreme persecution of civilians. [1, 2, 3, 4] Would you like to explore how these principles shaped the modern International Criminal Court, or do you want to learn more about the Nuremberg Code on medical ethics? Nuremberg Academy The Nuremberg Principles: Origins and Impact on Modern ICL The United Nations General Assembly affirmed the principles in 1946. The Nuremberg Principles have had a significant impact on the current substance and procedu... From:Aram James To:Shikada, Ed Cc:Council, City; Vicki Veenker; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Reckdahl, Keith; Dave Price; Gennady Sheyner; Diana Diamond; EPA Today; ParkRec Commission; WILPF Peninsula Palo Alto; board@pausd.org; BoardOperations Subject:Ed “ Drunken Sailor” Shikada Date:Monday, August 10, 2026 6:41:04 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Drunken Sailor Song by The Irish Rovers ‧ 1994 Overview LyricsWhat will we do with a drunken sailor? What will we do with a drunken sailor? What will we do with a drunken sailor? Early in the morning Way hay and up she rises Way hay and up she rises Way hay and up she rises Early in the morning Shave his belly with a rusty razor Shave his belly with a rusty razor Shave his belly with a rusty razor Early in the morning Way hay and up she rises Way hay and up she rises Way hay and up she rises Early in the morning Put him in a long boat till he's sober Put him in a long boat till he's sober Put him in a long boat till he's sober Early in the morning Way hay and up she rises Way hay and up she rises Way hay and up she rises Early in the morning Stick him in a scupper with a hosepipe bottom Stick him in a scupper with a hosepipe bottom Stick him in a scupper with a hosepipe bottom Early in the morning Way hay and up she rises Way hay and up she rises Way hay and up she rises Early in the morning Put him in the bed with the captains daughter Put him in the bed with the captains daughter Put him in the bed with the captains daughter Early in the morning Way hay and up she rises Way hay and up she rises Way hay and up she rises Early in the morning That's what we do with a drunken sailor That's what we do with a drunken sailor That's what we do with a drunken sailor Early in the morning Way hay and up she rises Way hay and up she rises Way hay and up she rises Early in the morning Way hay and up she rises Way hay and up she rises Way hay and up she rises Early in the morning From:Aram James To:Reckdahl, Keith; Reckdahl, Keith; Vicki Veenker; Stone, Greer; Timothy Gray; Donna Wallach; Lu, George; Burt, Patrick; Shikada, Ed; Lauing, Ed; Supervisor Susan Ellenberg; planning.commission@cityofpaloalto.0rg; Council, City; CityCouncil Subject:Re: Keith believes in transparency my a- -! Date:Monday, August 10, 2026 6:30:08 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. On Sat, Aug 8, 2026 at 5:19 PM Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> wrote: 8/8/2026 Keith, Are you in Huntsville, Alabama making more killer missiles for Lockheed to continue the Israeli genocide on the people of Palestine? Are you a citizen of Israel? Is your first loyalty to vile state of Israel? Are you an extremist white-wing Zionist? I have asked you the above questions multiple times and you have refused to answer me. We the the voters are entitled to be fully informed on your opinions/answers on these critical issues. Stop stonewalling the public —Mr. Transparacy! ****** Keith, you claiming to want transparency in local Palo Alto politics is beyond fucking laughable. You want transparency out of planning commissioner Olf Paterson—while for the last two years you have refused to meet with me, one of your constituents. You're about as transparent as a fucking brick wall. You are an embarrassment to all righteous, justice-loving Jews. Avram “Eliminate Israel Now” Finkelstein Aka: one proud Jew—Aram James On Mon, Oct 6, 2025 at 9:54 AM Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> wrote: In her book Eichmann in Jerusalem. It describes how ordinary people, without necessarily being inherently evil, can participate in and contribute to monstrous acts, often by simply conforming to social norms or blindly following orders. Arendt's analysis of Adolf Eichmann =led her to conclude that his actions, while horrific, stemmed from a lack of critical thinking and a failure to consider the consequences of his actions, rather than from deep-seated malevolence. From:Katherine Clark To:Council, City Subject:Agenda Item 20 - Crescent Park traffic calming project Date:Monday, August 10, 2026 6:18:06 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear Council members: Since 1984, my husband and I have owned a home on Center Drive between University and Hamilton, within a block of the proposed roundabout and around the corner from the Bulb Out. 1. Roundabout at Center and Hamilton: As I requested at a previous Council meeting, the signs on the roundabout must be shortened as they are at other PA roundabouts. The current signs and too tall and are an eyesore. 2. Bulb Out at E. Crescent: The temporary curbs should be removed; a stop sign (with stop limit line) should be installed instead along the curb. a. The design is hideous. The Crescent Park subdivision was designed 100 years ago and the streets were laid out in a beautiful way. The proposed bulb out would destroy the original street design by realigning the street. b. Except for flag lot owners, all Palo Alto owners of single family homes have a parking area in front of their homes. The proposed design eliminates the adjacent owners’ parking. c. The initial postcard vote to approve the bulbout should have been addressed only to the owners immediately adjacent to the bulbout, not to the entire neighborhood. I am confident the majority vote would have been NO. Respectfully submitted, Katherine Clark 555 Center Drive This message needs your attention This is their first email to you. Mark Safe Report From:Suneet Dhingra To:Council, City Subject:Sign enforcement for oversized vehicles Date:Monday, August 10, 2026 5:52:05 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Hi, Thank you for confirming that the 4000 block of Fabian Way east of the bend is eligible for signs allowing enforcement of the overnight oversized vehicle parking restriction under PAMC 10.44.020. This location is near the driveway serving 800 Charleston Village. Installing these signs will dramatically improve safety and visibility in the area. Could you please share the expected work order and installation dates? Please reference Palo Alto 311 case 18225728. Thank you! ~Suneet. From:princetonpoetics Cc:fire@fire.org; info@aclu.org Subject:General public comment for the next city council meeting Date:Monday, August 10, 2026 4:32:11 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Good evening to the city council, I am writing to express my disgust and disbelief that this city council some years ago honored the late Gordon Burke (1920-2010) as a so-called pillar of the community. Gordon Burke is known to have beaten his wife Evelyn and raped his daughters Monica and Nancy. He was one of the worst human beings who has ever resided in the State of California. The city council must formally rescind the honor they accorded him and offer a public apology immediately. Shame on all of you. Ronald Finlay From:Aram James To:Reckdahl, Keith Cc:Lauing, Ed; Council, City; Vicki Veenker Subject:largest population cities in alabama Date:Monday, August 10, 2026 1:22:34 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. largest population cities in alabama https://share.google/aimode/CoT0OaVOHcoTCSUEG