Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2026-08-31 City Council EmailsDOCUMENTS IN THIS PACKET INCLUDE: LETTERS FROM CITIZENS TO THE MAYOR OR CITY COUNCIL RESPONSES FROM STAFF TO LETTERS FROM CITIZENS ITEMS FROM MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS ITEMS FROM OTHER COMMITTEES AND AGENCIES ITEMS FROM CITY, COUNTY, STATE, AND REGIONAL AGENCIES Prepared for: 08/31/2026 Document dates: 8/24/26 – 8/31/26 Note: Documents for every category may not have been received for packet reproduction in a given week. From:khosrovi@sbcglobal.net To:Council, City Subject:El Dorado expansion/ bike lane proposal Date:Monday, August 31, 2026 9:24:54 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear City Council Members, I was able to attend the meeting held by the City of Palo Alto regarding the proposal to create a bike lane under the RR tracks at El Dorado. My comments are in response to attending that meeting last Thursday at 6pm. Why was there only one proposal for one location? El Dorado is too narrow to be safe for the kind of activity you propose. Today both people driving cars and riding bicycles do so distracted using phones in hand. Loma Verde is a wider street with existing bike lanes. Speed bumps and stop signs can be added to slow car traffic on Loma Verde. The street is wide enough to handle cars and bikes. My husband and I use are bicycles as our main transportation around the City and beyond. Almost daily we use the Bryant bike blvd. Often we contend with pedestrians running and walking two by two or with dogs in the street. People often get upset at being told in a quiet voice, "this is a bike blvd" I have been told to use the side walk most recently by a runner north of Oregon on Bryant while riding my bike. I would also like to add that El Dorado is also very close to the California Ave bike and ped underpass. Why have two underpasses to close together? El Dorado is not a safe plan for what you propose. Please take more time to look at the alternatives. Palo Alto is my home town and I am about to be 73. I have not stopped riding my bicycle and have used my bicycle for primary transportation for 66 years. Thank you for taking the time to read my commentary on this matter. Marjorie Khosrovi This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first email to you. Mark Safe Report From:Aram James To:Richard Konda; Sean Allen; Carla Torres; Raymond Goins; Susan Hayase; Council, City; City Attorney; citycouncil@mountainview.gov; city.council@gilroy.org; Clerk, City; supervisor.abe-koga@bos.sccgov.org; board@pausd.org; Yolanda Conaway; EPA Today; Dave Price; Brandon Pho; Friends of Cubberley; Julie Lythcott- Haims; ladoris cordell; Ari Tarver; Daniel Kottke; Bill Newell; Liz Kniss; sharon jackson Subject:Santa Clara County moves forward with jail transformation - San José Spotlight Date:Monday, August 31, 2026 8:52:14 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. https://sanjosespotlight.com/?p=238857 From:Theresa Allocco To:Council, City Subject:Keep Flock cameras out of Palo Alto Date:Monday, August 31, 2026 8:36:01 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear Councilmembers, I am writing to urge swift action to remove Flock safety cameras from Palo Alto. During the August 24th study session, there was a clear consensus that the council can take action regarding Flock without waiting for the independent auditor's report. Given the well- documented concerns surrounding Flock, I urge you not to delay action on this important issue. Please vote to cover the cameras and cancel the contract. I do not need or want AI- powered mass surveillance in Palo Alto. How soon can the council take action on this matter? Could this item be added to the agenda for the upcoming city council meetings on September 9th or 14th? Thank you for your time and consideration. Best regards, Theresa M. Allocco, MA, LCSW Pronouns: She/Her Individual, Relationship, and Family Therapy Phone: (408) 205-8302 Web: www.theresamallocco.com This message needs your attention This is their first email to you. Mark Safe Report From:Martin Cuyegkeng To:Veenker, Vicki; Lauing, Ed; Shikada, Ed; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Reckdahl, Keith; Council, City; Stone, Greer Cc:Robert Marinaro; Christine Schremp; Bulatao, Eric; Dmitri Samsonov; stephanie wansek; Colin Swindells; brianhama@gmail.com; yudy4paloalto@gmail.com; Bryna Chang; h.etzko@gmail.com; Roger Smith; Peter Xu; Barry Katz; Ceci Kettendorf; Nancy Ellickson; Dana Dahlstrom; Lydia Kou; Bill McLane; Dave Stellman; Charlie Weidanz; Jeanette Baldwin; Titan (Zhengtian) Gu; Becky Sanders; John Schafer; Scott Petersen; Chris Schremp; Oksana Selavri Subject:Re: Post-Meeting Progress: Request for Weekly Updates and OSV Ban Timeline Date:Monday, August 31, 2026 8:14:43 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Thank you, Chris. To the Council: In the motion last week, only the timing (target) of the updated phase 1 pilot seemed clear. When will the classification of all like residential (mixed used, PC, etc.) areas such as Adobe Meadow (E Meadow Dr. / Cir) and Ventura neighborhoods to be equal to residential be done? Simultaneously, when will consistent enforcement identical to residential areas be done? Thank you. Martin On Aug 31, 2026, at 8:00 AM, Chris Schremp <chrisschremp88@gmail.com> wrote: Mayor Veenker, Vice Mayor Stone, City Manager Shikada, and Members of the Palo Alto City Council, It has now been a week since last Monday’s meeting, giving everyone time to digest the extensive feedback from tax-paying residents and local business owners, as well as the ongoing community concern surrounding the pilot proposal. First, I want to thank the Mayor and Council members for your ongoing engagement over this past week. We appreciate you taking the time to respond directly to resident emails, answer questions, and offer to tour affected neighborhoods to see the day-to-day impacts firsthand. That level of accessibility and willingness to listen means a lot to our community. This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. Mark Safe Report Powered by Mimecast As City Management and the OSV Ad Hoc Committee work through next steps, we want to maintain this momentum and ensure swift action. In any effective organization, setting firm timelines and deadlines is the single best way to maintain momentum and achieve results. Because the key policy arguments have been thoroughly vetted and there is very little left to debate, we do not think it is unreasonable to ask for clear milestones. Specifically, we request: 1. Regular Weekly Progress Updates: A brief, weekly Monday update to the public outlining the specific steps being taken by staff and the OSV Ad Hoc Committee. 2. A Deadline Ahead of the Upcoming Election: Setting a firm deadline for Council to bring forward and vote on a proposal for a full, citywide overnight OSV ban prior to the upcoming election (if not sooner). Please note: We are not looking for a compromise or “happy medium”. We want a full ban of OSVs from Palo Alto Streets. With election season approaching, residents deserve total clarity on where the City stands. Bringing a full ban to a vote prior to the election ensures the public has all the information needed when it comes time to evaluate leadership at the ballot box. In the interim, we look forward to seeing consistent enforcement against immediate daily safety hazards—including vehicles blocking bike lanes and sightlines (such as on East Meadow Drive near Ramos Park), unshielded gas generators, and 72-hour parking overstays. Thank you again for your continued engagement, and we look forward to seeing a firm deadline set for Council action. Best regards, Chris Schremp Palo Alto Resident & Stakeholder From:Chris Schremp To:Veenker, Vicki; Lauing, Ed; Shikada, Ed; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Reckdahl, Keith; Council, City Cc:Robert Marinaro; Christine Schremp; Bulatao, Eric; Dmitri Samsonov; stephanie wansek; Chris Schremp; Martin Cuyegkeng; Colin Swindells; brianhama@gmail.com; yudy4paloalto@gmail.com; Bryna Chang; h.etzko@gmail.com; Roger Smith; Peter Xu; Barry Katz; Ceci Kettendorf; Nancy Ellickson; Dana Dahlstrom; Lydia Kou; Bill McLane; Dave Stellman; Charlie Weidanz; Jeanette Baldwin; Titan (Zhengtian) Gu; Becky Sanders; John Schafer; Scott Petersen Subject:Post-Meeting Progress: Request for Weekly Updates and OSV Ban Timeline Date:Monday, August 31, 2026 8:01:31 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Mayor Veenker, Vice Mayor Stone, City Manager Shikada, and Members of the Palo Alto City Council, It has now been a week since last Monday’s meeting, giving everyone time to digest the extensive feedback from tax-paying residents and local business owners, as well as the ongoing community concern surrounding the pilot proposal. First, I want to thank the Mayor and Council members for your ongoing engagement over this past week. We appreciate you taking the time to respond directly to resident emails, answer questions, and offer to tour affected neighborhoods to see the day-to-day impacts firsthand. That level of accessibility and willingness to listen means a lot to our community. As City Management and the OSV Ad Hoc Committee work through next steps, we want to maintain this momentum and ensure swift action. In any effective organization, setting firm timelines and deadlines is the single best way to maintain momentum and achieve results. Because the key policy arguments have been thoroughly vetted and there is very little left to debate, we do not think it is unreasonable to ask for clear milestones. Specifically, we request: 1. Regular Weekly Progress Updates: A brief, weekly Monday update to the public outlining the specific steps being taken by staff and the OSV Ad Hoc Committee. 2. A Deadline Ahead of the Upcoming Election: Setting a firm deadline for Council to bring forward and vote on a proposal for a full, citywide overnight OSV ban prior to the upcoming election (if not sooner). Please note: We are not looking for a compromise or “happy medium”. We want a full ban of OSVs from Palo Alto Streets. With election season approaching, residents deserve total clarity on where the City stands. Bringing a full ban to a vote prior to the election ensures the public has all the information needed when it comes time to evaluate leadership at the ballot box. In the interim, we look forward to seeing consistent enforcement against immediate daily safety hazards—including vehicles blocking bike lanes and sightlines (such as on East Meadow Drive near Ramos Park), unshielded gas generators, and 72-hour parking overstays. Thank you again for your continued engagement, and we look forward to seeing a firm deadline set for Council action. Best regards, Chris Schremp Palo Alto Resident & Stakeholder From:Winter Dellenbach To:Council, City Subject:Fwd: New York Times - How Flock Cameras Took Over America - The Daily podcast Date:Monday, August 31, 2026 7:48:55 AM Attachments:preview.png Council members - I encourage you to listen to today's half hr NYT podcast on Flock. Interesting and thoughtful. Winter Dellenbach How Flock Cameras Took Over America The Daily · August 31, 2026 How Flock Cameras Took Over America The Daily This summer, Fernando Alfonso, the Texas editor for The New York Times, got in a car with a man named Philip. They drove around the suburban streets of Dallas searching for traffic cameras — not for a red-light camera, or a speed-trap camera, but something new, an automatic license-plate reader made by a company called Flock. Law enforcement officials say these cameras are essential to fighting crime, but Phillip and people like him, who have located 100,000 flock cameras all over the country, see them as something else: the beginnings of a surveillance state. Today, Kashmir Hill, a technology and privacy writer at The New York Times, discusses the company behind the cameras and the mounting backlash. Guest: Kashmir Hill, a technology and privacy writer at The New York Times. From:Dana Dahlstrom To:Ann Balin; Jo Ann Mandinach Cc:CeCi Kettendorf; Nancy Ellickson; John Seltzer; Jenny Lee; Robert Marinaro; Council, City; Veenker, Vicki; Stone, Greer; Lauing, Ed; Reckdahl, Keith; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Burt, Patrick; Lu, George; City Mgr; Roger Smith; Peter Xu; Nick Marinaro; McDonough, Melissa; Jennifer Kain; Gaines, Chantal; Loren Brown; Chris Berg; Taly Katz; Barry Katz; 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; Kandace Kopensky; Moiz Sonasath; Peter Longanecker; Karsyn Smith Development; Raphael Zahnd; Riley Cooke; Palo Alto Daily Post; Gennady Sheyner; Louis Hsiao; 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; 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; 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; 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; Joe Sinnott; Linda Zausen; Danny Whelan; Gulya Timokhina; Matt Lynch; Oksana Selavri; Chuck Karish; Fred Bailin; Dave Adams; Christian Hothem; Aditya Jain; Anjali Jain; Arun Bodapati; Soumya Bodapati; Yingxi Liu; Susan Dorsky; Dave Price; Elaine Goodman; Brandon Cartwright; Clark Penado; Francescarael Rael; Lena Yarovaya; Kenneth Russell; Jon Hellesoe; Ryan Judd; Evan Reade; Kaye Crawford; Rosalie Cook; Kay Satit; Sooji Nam; Francis Lim; Giselle Roohparvar; Stephen Casale; Luci Sheppard; Alex Tesler; Michelle Rosengaus; Grace Downer; David Downer; Mary Ann Norton; Jason Robinson; Jen Bartolomei; Dave Melisso; Polina Samsonov; Eva Gandhe; Ruby Flath; Laya Ganapati; Christin Zhang; Arvind Kumar; David Featherman; Melinda McGee; John Melnychuk Subject:Re: OSV Next Steps... Date:Monday, August 31, 2026 7:01:07 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. No thanks to OSVs on Stanford land unless Stanford wants them for some surprising reason. From:Jo Ann Mandinach To:Annette Ross Cc:Chuck Karish; Robert Marinaro; Council, City; Veenker, Vicki; Stone, Greer; Lauing, Ed; Reckdahl, Keith; Lythcott- Haims, Julie; Burt, Patrick; Lu, George; City Mgr; Roger Smith; Nick Marinaro; Lydia Kou; Bryna Chang; Palo Alto Daily Post; Gennady Sheyner; Louis Hsiao; Ann Lafargue Balin; Mary Gallagher; Maury Green; Terry Holzemer; Joseph Hirsch; Greg Schmid (external); Suzanne Keehn; William Ross; Arthur Keller; Jeff Levinsky; Becky Sanders; Charlie Weidanz; Penny Brennan; Maia Harris; Bernadette Zimmerman; Doreen Chew; Ignacio Montelongo Jr.; Joseph Montelongo; Oksana Selavri; Fred Bailin; Dave Adams; Christian Hothem; Aditya Jain; Anjali Jain; Arun Bodapati; Soumya Bodapati; Yingxi Liu; Susan Dorsky; Dave Price; Elaine Goodman; Brandon Cartwright; Clark Penado; Francescarael Rael; Lena Yarovaya; Kenneth Russell; Jon Hellesoe; Ryan Judd; Evan Reade; Kaye Crawford; Rosalie Cook; Kay Satit; Sooji Nam; Francis Lim; Giselle Roohparvar; Stephen Casale; Luci Sheppard; Alex Tesler; Michelle Rosengaus; Grace Downer; David Downer; Mary Ann Norton; Jason Robinson; Jen Bartolomei; Dave Melisso; Polina Samsonov; Eva Gandhe; Ruby Flath; Laya Ganapati; Christin Zhang; Arvind Kumar; David Featherman; Melinda McGee; John Melnychuk Subject:Re: Stanford Land Management Push Back Date:Sunday, August 30, 2026 8:37:52 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. ! Great seeing / meeting many of you today. The questions of fire risks on Coyote Hill, PAFD and Stanford are critical ones, as is abiding by current legal requirements to create buffer zones by cutting back vegetation / landscaping / tree limbs in dry high-risk areas. Annette's wrote. "About the mayor’s claim that the city could require employers to pay into a housing fund or provide parking space, is that even possible? Legal? What latitude does the city have on that?" A general point: the Mayor suggesting that "employers pay into a housing fund" reminds me of the many cities that are now letting developers buy their way out of providing affordable housing with "in lieu payments" and/or lowering their "affordable unit" targets. While such moves fatten city coffers, they do little to address the OSV or affordable housing crises. On Sun, Aug 30, 2026 at 1:48 PM Annette Ross <port2103@att.net> wrote: Sending to a mostly random subset of the larger group b/c the message gets hung up when sending to the full set of recipients. This message could be suspicious The sender's email address couldn't be verified. Mark Safe Report Powered by Mimecast No surprise. And they are right. The City’s failure to properly equip and staff PAFD is consequential in numerous ways. Here, it is a practical impediment to implementing the plan for Coyote Hill. My husband and I drove out there this morning and while the City Manager, Staff, the Mayor and some on Council may see the location as ideal b/c there are no homes, the area is acres and acres of dry grass and a fire there has the potential to spread in numerous directions. The idea is dangerous. CeCi Kettendorf noted that there will be no regulation b/c the city’s heart is not in this and they will not fund code enforcement or other services needed to enforce the plan. I agree with her. The city claiming it will enforce this is a canard. If the city was serious about enforcement, this problem would not have mushroomed out of control as it has. Actions speak louder than words and by the city’s own actions, we can conclude that enforcement will not happen. About the mayor’s claim that the city could require employers to pay into a housing fund or provide parking space, is that even possible? Legal? What latitude does the city have on that? On Aug 28, 2026, at 6:30 PM, Chuck Karish <chuck.karish@gmail.com> wrote: After ten months of attention and supposed effort it's still necessary to keep the "Just, no" option on the table. The Council is focused on creating sacrifice areas on city streets for the benefit of squatters whose connections to the city aren't even known. That we have a moral obligation to RV owners but not to people who lack that much shelter is still difficult for me to figure out. It feels like a class issue, and I'm being called a bigot for not falling in line for the "middle class". On Fri, Aug 28, 2026 at 1:21 PM Jenny Lee <jenny.lee.jen@gmail.com> wrote: Thank you, Robert & does anyone know the immediate next steps required to move forward with our only two remaining options at this point? Thank you very much, Jenny On Fri, Aug 28, 2026 at 11:16 AM Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> wrote: Folks, Strike two for the Coyote Hill Safe Parking Pilot! Seems as though that would leave the following options: Outright City-wide OSV ban (preferred) Prohibition of OSVs on all residential and business/commercial streets with the East Embarcadero Safe Parking Pilot And... with continued discussions with regional partners for other practical (not impacting Palo Alto residents and businesses) safe parking sites. Best, Bob PS - - Many thanks Ann! You beat me to the punch! Begin forwarded message: From: Ann Balin <alafargue@mac.com> Subject: Stanford Land Management Push Back Date: August 28, 2026 at 9:28:33 AM PDT To: Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> SRPark doesn’t want to be told. Yet this is city property. Some OSV dwellers are Stanford employees. <IMG_0983.jpeg> <IMG_0982.jpeg> ******************* Another Version that May Be Easier to Read ************************ <Stanford Coyote Hill Pushback 1.png> <Stanford Coyote Hill Pushback 2.png> Sent from my iPhone From:greencows2@gmail.com To:Council, City Subject:Flock cameras Date:Sunday, August 30, 2026 7:07:36 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Hello, I'm a community member, and I often go to Palo Alto to meet family and friends, or to visit the doctor. I am concerned - and so are my family and friends - about the Flock cameras that are prolific in Palo Alto. Based on my understanding of the situation, I am extremely concerned and urge you to cancel the contract. None of us wish to be surveilled. Please note the following, which is our understanding of the situation: Like many other cities in California, Palo Alto has seen violations of local policy and state law through their contract with Flock. Under state law, it is illegal to share data with out of state agencies, and Palo Alto implemented guardrails to try to limit access to our personal data. But, like many other cities in California, Palo Alto's ALPR data was accessible to and searched by hundreds of out of state agencies, including federal agencies like the ATF. Despite the severe breach of trust, city officials have tried to downplay the gravity of the situation by claiming no data was responsive to the searches. However, the Supreme Court ruled earlier this year that the Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable searches and seizures applies "regardless of 'the quality or quantity of information' the government obtains" and that "whether something is a search does not depend on what it finds." Rather than getting rid of ALPRs in light of the breach of contract and data leakage, Palo Alto chose to spend money on an independent auditor to analyze the system. The initially planned auditor had to recuse themselves for a conflict of interest since they also represented Flock. Regards, Karen Yee This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first email to your company. Mark Safe Report From:Joe Hirsch To:Annette Ross; Chuck Karish Cc:Robert Marinaro; Council, City; Veenker, Vicki; Stone, Greer; Lauing, Ed; Reckdahl, Keith; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Burt, Patrick; Lu, George; City Mgr; Roger Smith; Nick Marinaro; Lydia Kou; Bryna Chang; Palo Alto Daily Post; Gennady Sheyner; Louis Hsiao; Jo Ann Mandinach; Ann Lafargue Balin; Mary Gallagher; Maury Green; Terry Holzemer; Greg Schmid (external); Suzanne Keehn; William Ross; Arthur Keller; Jeff Levinsky; Becky Sanders; Charlie Weidanz; Penny Brennan; Maia Harris; Bernadette Zimmerman; Doreen Chew; Ignacio Montelongo Jr.; Joseph Montelongo; Oksana Selavri; Fred Bailin; Dave Adams; Christian Hothem; Aditya Jain; Anjali Jain; Arun Bodapati; Soumya Bodapati; Yingxi Liu; Susan Dorsky; Dave Price; Elaine Goodman; Brandon Cartwright; Clark Penado; Francescarael Rael; Lena Yarovaya; Kenneth Russell; Jon Hellesoe; Ryan Judd; Evan Reade; Kaye Crawford; Rosalie Cook; Kay Satit; Sooji Nam; Francis Lim; Giselle Roohparvar; Stephen Casale; Luci Sheppard; Alex Tesler; Michelle Rosengaus; Grace Downer; David Downer; Mary Ann Norton; Jason Robinson; Jen Bartolomei; Dave Melisso; Polina Samsonov; Eva Gandhe; Ruby Flath; Laya Ganapati; Christin Zhang; Arvind Kumar; David Featherman; Melinda McGee; John Melnychuk Subject:Re: Stanford Land Management Push Back Date:Sunday, August 30, 2026 6:38:46 PM " No surprise. And they are right. The City’s failure to properly equipand staff PAFD is consequential in numerous ways. Here, it is apractical impediment to implementing the plan for Coyote Hill. Myhusband and I drove out there this morning and while the City Manager,Staff, the Mayor and some on Council may see the location as ideal b/cthere are no homes, the area is acres and acres of dry grass and afire there has the potential to spread in numerous directions. Theidea is dangerous." I agree completely with Annette's highlighted words above. Joe -----Original Message-----From: Annette Ross <port2103@att.net>Sent: Aug 30, 2026 1:48 PMTo: Chuck Karish <chuck.karish@gmail.com>Cc: Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com>, Palo Alto City Council 2026<city.council@paloalto.gov>, Vicki Veenker <Vicki.Veenker@paloalto.gov>, Greer Stone<Greer.Stone@cityofpaloalto.org>, Ed Lauing <Ed.Lauing@paloalto.gov>, Keith Reckdahl<Keith.Reckdahl@paloalto.gov>, Julie Lythcott-Haims<Julie.LythcottHaims@paloalto.gov>, Patrick Burt <Pat.Burt@paloalto.gov>, George Lu<George.Lu@paloalto.gov>, Ed Shikada <CityMgr@paloalto.gov>, Roger Smith<rogervernonsmith@hotmail.com>, Nick Marinaro <njmarinaro@gmail.com>, Lydia Kou<lydiakou@gmail.com>, Bryna Chang <bryna.chang@gmail.com>, Palo Alto Daily Post<News@padailypost.com>, Gennady Sheyner <gsheyner@embarcaderomedia.org>, Louis Hsiao <louis@popconcepts.com>, Jo Ann Mandinach <Joann@needtoknow.com>, AnnLafargue Balin <alafargue@mac.com>, Mary Gallagher <marygallagher88@gmail.com>,Maury Green <mauryg3@comcast.net>, Terry Holzemer <holz@sonic.net>, Joseph Hirsch<jihirschpa@earthlink.net>, Greg Schmid <gregschmid@sbcglobal.net>, Suzanne Keehn<dskeehn@pacbell.net>, William Ross <wross@lawross.com>, Arthur Keller<arthur@kellers.org>, Jeff Levinsky <jeff@levinsky.org>, Becky Sanders<rebsanders@gmail.com>, Charlie Weidanz <charlie@paloaltochamber.com>, PennyBrennan <plynnbrennan@gmail.com>, Maia Harris <mharris@jaypaul.com>, BernadetteZimmerman <Bernadette.Zimmerman@sofia.edu>, Doreen Chew<doreen_usa@yahoo.com>, Ignacio Montelongo Jr. <jr@mathewscarlsen.com>, JosephMontelongo <Joe@mathewscarlsen.com>, Oksana Selavri <oksana.selavri@gmail.com>,Fred Bailin <fbalin@gmail.com>, Dave Adams <david_94306@yahoo.com>, ChristianHothem <cahothem@pacamgroup.com>, Aditya Jain <adityamo@gnail.com>, Anjali Jain<Anjali.jain78@gmail.com>, Arun Bodapati <bodapa@gmail.com>, Soumya Bodapati<soumyagsr@gmail.com>, Yingxi Liu <yingxi.ut@gmail.com>, Susan Dorsky<sdorsky@yahoo.com>, Dave Price <dp-2006@sbcglobal.net>, Elaine Goodman<egoodman@padailypost.com>, Brandon Cartwright <bcartwright@padailypost.com>,Clark Penado <clarkpenado@gmail.com>, Francescarael Rael <Francescarael@me.com>,Lena Yarovaya <yarovaya@hotmail.com>, Kenneth Russell<kenneth.b.russell@gmail.com>, Jon Hellesoe <jonhellesoe@bos.sccgov.org>, Ryan Judd<ryan@juddproperties.com>, Evan Reade <evanreade@aol.com>, Kaye Crawford<kayedc@aol.com>, Rosalie Cook <Rosalie.Cook@sofia.edu>, Kay Satit<kay711@gmail.com>, Sooji Nam <Sooji.nam@cbs.com>, Francis Lim<flim712@comcast.net>, Giselle Roohparvar <Giselle.Roohparvar@gmail.com>, StephenCasale <scasebiz@gmail.com>, Luci Sheppard <Luci751@yahoo.com>, Alex Tesler<alex@tesler.com>, Michelle Rosengaus <mrosengaus@yahoo.com>, Grace Downer<gracedowner@gmail.com>, David Downer <ddow75@gmail.com>, Mary Ann Norton<maryann@nortonoptics.com>, Jason Robinson <robinson.jason.c@gmail.com>, JenBartolomei <jen@themainpost.com>, Dave Melisso <dmelisso@mac.com>, PolinaSamsonov <polina.samsonov@gmail.com>, Eva Gandhe <egandhe13579@gmail.com>,Ruby Flath <ruby.flath@icloud.com>, Laya Ganapati <layaganapati@gmail.com>, ChristinZhang <nationaltravel888@yahoo.com>, Arvind Kumar <aarrvviinndd@gmail.com>,David Featherman <davidfeatherman@gmail.com>, Melinda McGee<melinda_mcgee@hotmail.com>, John Melnychuk <jdmelnychuk@icloud.com>Subject: Re: Stanford Land Management Push Back Sending to a mostly random subset of the larger group b/c the message gets hung up when sending to the full set of recipients. No surprise. And they are right. The City’s failure to properly equip and staff PAFD is consequential in numerous ways. Here, it is a practical impediment to implementing the plan for Coyote Hill. My husband and I drove out there this morning and while the City Manager, Staff, the Mayor and some on Council may see the location as ideal b/c there are no homes, the area is acres and acres of dry grass and a fire there has the potential to spread in numerous directions. The idea is dangerous. CeCi Kettendorf noted that there will be no regulation b/c the city’s heart is not in this and they will not fund code enforcement or other services needed to enforce the plan. I agree with her. The city claiming it will enforce this is a canard. If the city was serious about enforcement, this problem would not have mushroomed out of control as it has. Actions speak louder than words and by the city’s own actions, we can conclude that enforcement will not happen. About the mayor’s claim that the city could require employers to pay into a housing fund or provide parking space, is that even possible? Legal? What latitude does the city have on that? On Aug 28, 2026, at 6:30 PM, Chuck Karish <chuck.karish@gmail.com> wrote: After ten months of attention and supposed effort it's still necessary to keep the "Just, no" option on the table. The Council is focused on creating sacrifice areas on city streets for the benefit of squatters whose connections to the city aren't even known. That we have a moral obligation to RV owners but not to people who lack that much shelter is still difficult for me to figure out. It feels like a class issue, and I'm being called a bigot for not falling in line for the "middle class". On Fri, Aug 28, 2026 at 1:21 PM Jenny Lee <jenny.lee.jen@gmail.com> wrote: Thank you, Robert & does anyone know the immediate next steps required to move forward with our only two remaining options at this point? Thank you very much, Jenny On Fri, Aug 28, 2026 at 11:16 AM Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> wrote: Folks, Strike two for the Coyote Hill Safe Parking Pilot! Seems as though that would leave the following options: Outright City-wide OSV ban (preferred) Prohibition of OSVs on all residential and business/commercial streets with the East Embarcadero Safe Parking Pilot And... with continued discussions with regional partners for other practical (not impacting Palo Alto residents and businesses) safe parking sites. Best, Bob PS - - Many thanks Ann! You beat me to the punch! Begin forwarded message: From: Ann Balin <alafargue@mac.com> Subject: Stanford Land Management Push Back Date: August 28, 2026 at 9:28:33 AM PDT To: Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> SRPark doesn’t want to be told. Yet this is city property. Some OSV dwellers are Stanford employees. <IMG_0983.jpeg> <IMG_0982.jpeg> ******************* Another Version that May Be Easier to Read ************************ <Stanford Coyote Hill Pushback 1.png> <Stanford Coyote Hill Pushback 2.png> Sent from my iPhone From:Jo Ann Mandinach To:Ann Balin Cc:CeCi Kettendorf; Nancy Ellickson; John Seltzer; Jenny Lee; Robert Marinaro; Council, City; Veenker, Vicki; Stone, Greer; Lauing, Ed; Reckdahl, Keith; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Burt, Patrick; Lu, George; City Mgr; Roger Smith; Peter Xu; Nick Marinaro; McDonough, Melissa; Jennifer Kain; Gaines, Chantal; Loren Brown; Dana Dahlstrom; Chris Berg; Taly Katz; Barry Katz; 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; Kandace Kopensky; Moiz Sonasath; Peter Longanecker; Karsyn Smith Development; Raphael Zahnd; Riley Cooke; Palo Alto Daily Post; Gennady Sheyner; Louis Hsiao; 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; 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; 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; 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; Joe Sinnott; Linda Zausen; Danny Whelan; Gulya Timokhina; Matt Lynch; Oksana Selavri; Chuck Karish; Fred Bailin; Dave Adams; Christian Hothem; Aditya Jain; Anjali Jain; Arun Bodapati; Soumya Bodapati; Yingxi Liu; Susan Dorsky; Dave Price; Elaine Goodman; Brandon Cartwright; Clark Penado; Francescarael Rael; Lena Yarovaya; Kenneth Russell; Jon Hellesoe; Ryan Judd; Evan Reade; Kaye Crawford; Rosalie Cook; Kay Satit; Sooji Nam; Francis Lim; Giselle Roohparvar; Stephen Casale; Luci Sheppard; Alex Tesler; Michelle Rosengaus; Grace Downer; David Downer; Mary Ann Norton; Jason Robinson; Jen Bartolomei; Dave Melisso; Polina Samsonov; Eva Gandhe; Ruby Flath; Laya Ganapati; Christin Zhang; Arvind Kumar; David Featherman; Melinda McGee; John Melnychuk Subject:Re: OSV Next Steps... Date:Sunday, August 30, 2026 2:15:16 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. ! For years PA has accepted Stanford's claims that its constant expansion has added "no net new car trips," that its construction workers and students aren't par of the OSV community and that their housing purchases removing units from the Palo Alto housing stock has no bearing on PA housing planning. But given the OSV crisis and approval of the Stanford GUP looming, maybe PA leaders/ negotiators could exert some leverage re getting Stanford to do its part re taking some OSVs and suggesting alternate OSV sites? Just a thought.  PM Ann Balin <alafargue@mac.com > wrote: This message could be suspicious The sender's email address couldn't be verified. Mark Safe Report Powered by Mimecast Stanford Land Use would never allow OSVs there in my estimation. It does not fit with their IMAGE having vehicles across from their world class mall. Stanford is very sensitive to PR just take a gander at StanfordNext AKA Stanford GUP. Stanford uses this upbeat Next versus the General Use Permit to IMO lessen the seriousness of this land use process. Remember the Athletics scandal. Remember when the former president had to step down. On Aug 30, 2026, at 1:18 PM, CeCi Kettendorf <cecihome@gmail.com> wrote: The baseball park across from Stanford Shopping Center belongs to Stanford. Stanford cannot per its charter sell land. Would they allow OSVs there? On Fri, Aug 28, 2026 at 2:00 PM Nancy Ellickson <nellickson@gmail.com> wrote: The city could use the baseball park across from Stanford Shopping Center but I believe that would require a city-wide vote to change the status from park to OSV park. Also, I’m not sure the city ever answered the question as to whether allowing OSVs and selling a monthly permit would give OSV occupants “tenant status” and tenant rights—which opens another can of worms. Nancy Ellickson E: nellickson@gmail.com M: 650-245-1012 On Fri, Aug 28, 2026 at 1:46 PM John Seltzer <woodgood@pacbell.net> wrote: The city of Palo Alto is renting space at the Palo Alto airport to the Audi dealership for car storage. Seems to me that that space could accommodate a fair number of OSVs. Guess the city will need to spend another $27,000,000 (as they did in 2024 on consultants) to come up with a plan, whether it's viable or not. As a small business owner, unlike the city, I don't have the luxury of inefficiency. John at Perspectives In Wood On Friday, August 28, 2026 at 01:34:29 PM PDT, Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> wrote: Jenny, It would sure be most helpful if someone from the City could articulate the next steps to implement regulations to remove OSVs from residential streets and business corridors in the short term. Bob On Aug 28, 2026, at 1:21 PM, Jenny Lee <jenny.lee.jen@gmail.com> wrote: Thank you, Robert & does anyone know the immediate next steps required to move forward with our only two remaining options at this point? Thank you very much, Jenny On Fri, Aug 28, 2026 at 11:16 AM Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> wrote: Folks, Strike two for the Coyote Hill Safe Parking Pilot! Seems as though that would leave the following options: Outright City-wide OSV ban (preferred) Prohibition of OSVs on all residential and business/commercial streets with the East Embarcadero Safe Parking Pilot And... with continued discussions with regional partners for other practical (not impacting Palo Alto residents and businesses) safe parking sites. Best, Bob PS - - Many thanks Ann! You beat me to the punch! Begin forwarded message: From: Ann Balin <alafargue@mac.com> Subject: Stanford Land Management Push Back Date: August 28, 2026 at 9:28:33 AM PDT To: Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> SRPark doesn’t want to be told. Yet this is city property. Some OSV dwellers are Stanford employees. <IMG_0983.jpeg> <IMG_0982.jpeg> ******************* Another Version that May Be Easier to Read ************************ <Stanford Coyote Hill Pushback 1.png> <Stanford Coyote Hill Pushback 2.png> Sent from my iPhone From:Ann Balin To:CeCi Kettendorf Cc:Nancy Ellickson; John Seltzer; Jenny Lee; Robert Marinaro; Council, City; Veenker, Vicki; Stone, Greer; Lauing, Ed; Reckdahl, Keith; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Burt, Patrick; Lu, George; City Mgr; Roger Smith; Peter Xu; Nick Marinaro; McDonough, Melissa; Jennifer Kain; Gaines, Chantal; Loren Brown; Dana Dahlstrom; Chris Berg; Taly Katz; Barry Katz; 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; Kandace Kopensky; Moiz Sonasath; Peter Longanecker; Karsyn Smith Development; Raphael Zahnd; Riley Cooke; Palo Alto Daily Post; Gennady Sheyner; Louis Hsiao; Jo Ann Mandinach; 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; 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; 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; 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; Joe Sinnott; Linda Zausen; Danny Whelan; Gulya Timokhina; Matt Lynch; Oksana Selavri; Chuck Karish; Fred Bailin; Dave Adams; Christian Hothem; Aditya Jain; Anjali Jain; Arun Bodapati; Soumya Bodapati; Yingxi Liu; Susan Dorsky; Dave Price; Elaine Goodman; Brandon Cartwright; Clark Penado; Francescarael Rael; Lena Yarovaya; Kenneth Russell; Jon Hellesoe; Ryan Judd; Evan Reade; Kaye Crawford; Rosalie Cook; Kay Satit; Sooji Nam; Francis Lim; Giselle Roohparvar; Stephen Casale; Luci Sheppard; Alex Tesler; Michelle Rosengaus; Grace Downer; David Downer; Mary Ann Norton; Jason Robinson; Jen Bartolomei; Dave Melisso; Polina Samsonov; Eva Gandhe; Ruby Flath; Laya Ganapati; Christin Zhang; Arvind Kumar; David Featherman; Melinda McGee; John Melnychuk Subject:Re: OSV Next Steps... Date:Sunday, August 30, 2026 2:05:33 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Stanford Land Use would never allow OSVs there in my estimation. It does not fit with their IMAGE having vehicles across from their world class mall. Stanford is very sensitive to PR just take a gander at StanfordNext AKA Stanford GUP. Stanford uses this upbeat Next versus the General Use Permit to IMO lessen the seriousness of this land use process. Remember the Athletics scandal. Remember when the former president had to step down. On Aug 30, 2026, at 1:18 PM, CeCi Kettendorf <cecihome@gmail.com> wrote: The baseball park across from Stanford Shopping Center belongs to Stanford. Stanford cannot per its charter sell land. Would they allow OSVs there? On Fri, Aug 28, 2026 at 2:00 PM Nancy Ellickson <nellickson@gmail.com> wrote: The city could use the baseball park across from Stanford Shopping Center but I believe that would require a city-wide vote to change the status from park to OSV park. Also, I’m not sure the city ever answered the question as to whether allowing and tenant rights—which opens another can of worms. Nancy Ellickson E: nellickson@gmail.com M: 650-245-1012 On Fri, Aug 28, 2026 at 1:46 PM John Seltzer <woodgood@pacbell.net> wrote: The city of Palo Alto is renting space at the Palo Alto airport to the Audi dealership for car storage. Seems to me that that space could accommodate a fair number of OSVs. Guess the city will need to spend another $27,000,000 (as they did in 2024 on consultants) to come up with a plan, whether it's viable or not. As a small business owner, unlike the city, I don't have the luxury of inefficiency. John at Perspectives In Wood On Friday, August 28, 2026 at 01:34:29 PM PDT, Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> wrote: Jenny, That is the $64,000 question! It would sure be most helpful if someone from the City could articulate the next steps to implement regulations to remove OSVs from residential streets and business corridors in the short term. Bob On Aug 28, 2026, at 1:21 PM, Jenny Lee <jenny.lee.jen@gmail.com> wrote: Thank you, Robert & does anyone know the immediate next steps required to move forward with our only two remaining options at this point? Thank you very much, Jenny On Fri, Aug 28, 2026 at 11:16 AM Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> wrote: Folks, Strike two for the Coyote Hill Safe Parking Pilot! Seems as though that would leave the following options: Outright City-wide OSV ban (preferred) Prohibition of OSVs on all residential and business/commercial streets with the East Embarcadero Safe Parking Pilot And... with continued discussions with regional partners for other practical (not impacting Palo Alto residents and businesses) safe parking sites. Best, Bob PS - - Many thanks Ann! You beat me to the punch! Begin forwarded message: From: Ann Balin <alafargue@mac.com> Subject: Stanford Land Management Push Back Date: August 28, 2026 at 9:28:33 AM PDT To: Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> SRPark doesn’t want to be told. Yet this is city property. Some OSV dwellers are Stanford employees. <IMG_0983.jpeg> <IMG_0982.jpeg> ******************* Another Version that May Be Easier to Read ************************ <Stanford Coyote Hill Pushback 1.png> <Stanford Coyote Hill Pushback 2.png> Sent from my iPhone From:Annette Ross To:Chuck Karish Cc:Robert Marinaro; Council, City; Veenker, Vicki; Stone, Greer; Lauing, Ed; Reckdahl, Keith; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Burt, Patrick; Lu, George; City Mgr; Roger Smith; Nick Marinaro; Lydia Kou; Bryna Chang; Palo Alto Daily Post; Gennady Sheyner; Louis Hsiao; Jo Ann Mandinach; Ann Lafargue Balin; Mary Gallagher; Maury Green; Terry Holzemer; Joseph Hirsch; Greg Schmid (external); Suzanne Keehn; William Ross; Arthur Keller; Jeff Levinsky; Becky Sanders; Charlie Weidanz; Penny Brennan; Maia Harris; Bernadette Zimmerman; Doreen Chew; Ignacio Montelongo Jr.; Joseph Montelongo; Oksana Selavri; Fred Bailin; Dave Adams; Christian Hothem; Aditya Jain; Anjali Jain; Arun Bodapati; Soumya Bodapati; Yingxi Liu; Susan Dorsky; Dave Price; Elaine Goodman; Brandon Cartwright; Clark Penado; Francescarael Rael; Lena Yarovaya; Kenneth Russell; Jon Hellesoe; Ryan Judd; Evan Reade; Kaye Crawford; Rosalie Cook; Kay Satit; Sooji Nam; Francis Lim; Giselle Roohparvar; Stephen Casale; Luci Sheppard; Alex Tesler; Michelle Rosengaus; Grace Downer; David Downer; Mary Ann Norton; Jason Robinson; Jen Bartolomei; Dave Melisso; Polina Samsonov; Eva Gandhe; Ruby Flath; Laya Ganapati; Christin Zhang; Arvind Kumar; David Featherman; Melinda McGee; John Melnychuk Subject:Re: Stanford Land Management Push Back Date:Sunday, August 30, 2026 1:48:32 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Sending to a mostly random subset of the larger group b/c the message gets hung up when sending to the full set of recipients. No surprise. And they are right. The City’s failure to properly equip and staff PAFD is consequential in numerous ways. Here, it is a practical impediment to implementing the plan for Coyote Hill. My husband and I drove out there this morning and while the City Manager, Staff, the Mayor and some on Council may see the location as ideal b/c there are no homes, the area is acres and acres of dry grass and a fire there has the potential to spread in numerous directions. The idea is dangerous. CeCi Kettendorf noted that there will be no regulation b/c the city’s heart is not in this and they will not fund code enforcement or other services needed to enforce the plan. I agree with her. The city claiming it will enforce this is a canard. If the city was serious about enforcement, this problem would not have mushroomed out of control as it has. Actions speak louder than words and by the city’s own actions, we can conclude that enforcement will not happen. About the mayor’s claim that the city could require employers to pay into a housing fund or provide parking space, is that even possible? Legal? What latitude does the city have on that? On Aug 28, 2026, at 6:30 PM, Chuck Karish <chuck.karish@gmail.com> wrote: After ten months of attention and supposed effort it's still necessary to keep the "Just, no" option on the table. The Council is focused on creating sacrifice areas on city streets for the benefit of squatters whose connections to the city aren't even known. That we have a moral obligation to RV owners but not to people who lack that much shelter is still difficult for me to figure out. It feels like a class issue, and I'm being called a bigot for not falling in line for the "middle class". On Fri, Aug 28, 2026 at 1:21 PM Jenny Lee <jenny.lee.jen@gmail.com> wrote: Thank you, Robert & does anyone know the immediate next steps required to move forward with our only two remaining options at this point? Thank you very much, Jenny On Fri, Aug 28, 2026 at 11:16 AM Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> wrote: Folks, Strike two for the Coyote Hill Safe Parking Pilot! Seems as though that would leave the following options: Outright City-wide OSV ban (preferred) Prohibition of OSVs on all residential and business/commercial streets with the East Embarcadero Safe Parking Pilot And... with continued discussions with regional partners for other practical (not impacting Palo Alto residents and businesses) safe parking sites. Best, Bob PS - - Many thanks Ann! You beat me to the punch! Begin forwarded message: From: Ann Balin <alafargue@mac.com> Subject: Stanford Land Management Push Back Date: August 28, 2026 at 9:28:33 AM PDT To: Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> SRPark doesn’t want to be told. Yet this is city property. Some OSV dwellers are Stanford employees. <IMG_0983.jpeg> <IMG_0982.jpeg> ******************* Another Version that May Be Easier to Read ************************ <Stanford Coyote Hill Pushback 1.png> <Stanford Coyote Hill Pushback 2.png> Sent from my iPhone From:CeCi Kettendorf To:Nancy Ellickson Cc:John Seltzer; Jenny Lee; Robert Marinaro; Council, City; Veenker, Vicki; Stone, Greer; Lauing, Ed; Reckdahl, Keith; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Burt, Patrick; Lu, George; City Mgr; Roger Smith; Peter Xu; Nick Marinaro; McDonough, Melissa; Jennifer Kain; Gaines, Chantal; Loren Brown; Dana Dahlstrom; Chris Berg; Taly Katz; Barry Katz; 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; Kandace Kopensky; Moiz Sonasath; Peter Longanecker; Karsyn Smith Development; Raphael Zahnd; Riley Cooke; 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; 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; 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; 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; Joe Sinnott; Linda Zausen; Danny Whelan; Gulya Timokhina; Matt Lynch; Oksana Selavri; Chuck Karish; Fred Bailin; Dave Adams; Christian Hothem; Aditya Jain; Anjali Jain; Arun Bodapati; Soumya Bodapati; Yingxi Liu; Susan Dorsky; Dave Price; Elaine Goodman; Brandon Cartwright; Clark Penado; Francescarael Rael; Lena Yarovaya; Kenneth Russell; Jon Hellesoe; Ryan Judd; Evan Reade; Kaye Crawford; Rosalie Cook; Kay Satit; Sooji Nam; Francis Lim; Giselle Roohparvar; Stephen Casale; Luci Sheppard; Alex Tesler; Michelle Rosengaus; Grace Downer; David Downer; Mary Ann Norton; Jason Robinson; Jen Bartolomei; Dave Melisso; Polina Samsonov; Eva Gandhe; Ruby Flath; Laya Ganapati; Christin Zhang; Arvind Kumar; David Featherman; Melinda McGee; John Melnychuk Subject:Re: OSV Next Steps... Date:Sunday, August 30, 2026 1:19:31 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. The baseball park across from Stanford Shopping Center belongs to Stanford. Stanford cannot per its charter sell land. Would they allow OSVs there? On Fri, Aug 28, 2026 at 2:00 PM Nancy Ellickson <nellickson@gmail.com> wrote: The city could use the baseball park across from Stanford Shopping Center but I believe that would require a city-wide vote to change the status from park to OSV park. Also, I’m not sure the city ever answered the question as to whether allowing OSVs and selling a monthly permit would give OSV occupants “tenant status” and tenant rights— which opens another can of worms. Nancy Ellickson E: nellickson@gmail.com M: 650-245-1012 On Fri, Aug 28, 2026 at 1:46 PM John Seltzer <woodgood@pacbell.net> wrote: The city of Palo Alto is renting space at the Palo Alto airport to the Audi dealership for car storage. Seems to me that that space could accommodate a fair number of OSVs. Guess the city will need to spend another $27,000,000 (as they did in 2024 on consultants) to come up with a plan, whether it's viable or not. As a small business owner, unlike the city, I don't have the luxury of inefficiency. John at Perspectives In Wood On Friday, August 28, 2026 at 01:34:29 PM PDT, Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> wrote: Jenny, That is the $64,000 question! It would sure be most helpful if someone from the City could articulate the next steps to implement regulations to remove OSVs from residential streets and business corridors in the short term. Bob On Aug 28, 2026, at 1:21 PM, Jenny Lee <jenny.lee.jen@gmail.com> wrote: Thank you, Robert & does anyone know the immediate next steps required to move forward with our only two remaining options at this point? Thank you very much, Jenny On Fri, Aug 28, 2026 at 11:16 AM Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> wrote: Folks, Strike two for the Coyote Hill Safe Parking Pilot! Seems as though that would leave the following options: Outright City-wide OSV ban (preferred) Prohibition of OSVs on all residential and business/commercial streets with the East Embarcadero Safe Parking Pilot And... with continued discussions with regional partners for other practical (not impacting Palo Alto residents and businesses) safe parking sites. Best, Bob PS - - Many thanks Ann! You beat me to the punch! Begin forwarded message: From: Ann Balin <alafargue@mac.com> Subject: Stanford Land Management Push Back Date: August 28, 2026 at 9:28:33 AM PDT To: Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> SRPark doesn’t want to be told. Yet this is city property. Some OSV dwellers are Stanford employees. <IMG_0983.jpeg> <IMG_0982.jpeg> ******************* Another Version that May Be Easier to Read ************************ <Stanford Coyote Hill Pushback 1.png> <Stanford Coyote Hill Pushback 2.png> Sent from my iPhone From:Aarthi Belani To:Council, City Subject:Place a no U-turn sign on Carlson Date:Sunday, August 30, 2026 12:32:02 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i I am writing to support the initiative to place a no U-turn sign on Carlson. Children’s lives are more important than someone shaving 30 seconds off their commute. This message needs your attention This is their first email to you. Mark Safe Report From:Chuck Karish To:Melinda McGee Cc:Robert Marinaro; Council, City; Veenker, Vicki; Stone, Greer; Lauing, Ed; Reckdahl, Keith; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Burt, Patrick; Lu, George; City Mgr; Roger Smith; Peter Xu; Nick Marinaro; McDonough, Melissa; Jennifer Kain; Gaines, Chantal; 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; 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; 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; Titan 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; Wang Chuan; Shchopra; Al Dorsky; Phil Wettersten; Ann Wettersten; Todd Jin; Emily Emily; Anil Rachakonda; Linda Vanderhule; Adriana Hernandez; Stuart Kreitman; Scott Petersen; Alex Smelik; fred@bockmann.com; Janie Sydow; Deborah j Marinaro; Summa, Doria; Boyd Smith; Smith Lund; Milan Milan; Elliott Lee; Robert Berkovich; Letizia Rodriguez; Brennan Pang; Bob Kennis; Shani Kleinhaus; Peggy 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; Joe Sinnott; Linda Zausen; Danny Whelan; Gulya Timokhina; Matt Lynch; Oksana Selavri; Fred Bailin; Dave Adams; Christian Hothem; Aditya Jain; Anjali Jain; Jenny Lee; Arun Bodapati; Soumya Bodapati; Yingxi Liu; Susan Dorsky; Dave Price; Elaine Goodman; Brandon Cartwright; Clark Penado; Francescarael Rael; Lena Yarovaya; Kenneth Russell; Jon Hellesoe; Ryan Judd; Evan Reade; Kaye Crawford; Rosalie Cook; Kay Satit; Sooji Nam; Francis Lim; Giselle Roohparvar; Stephen Casale; Luci Sheppard; Alex Tesler; Michelle Rosengaus; Grace Downer; David Downer; Mary Ann Norton; Jason Robinson; Jen Bartolomei; Dave Melisso; Polina Samsonov; Eva Gandhe; Ruby Flath; Laya Ganapati; Christin Zhang; Arvind Kumar; David Featherman; John Melnychuk Subject:Re: Daily Post: Should RVs Head to Google Lots? Date:Saturday, August 29, 2026 6:59:37 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i On Aug 29, 2026, at 10:50, Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> wrote:  Good Morning All, Here is the City Council's latest attempt to find alternative parking for the 140 OSVs on Palo Alto streets (not counting Geng Rd.) This would be great if some of the regions large employers stepped up to the plate. That could lessen some of the burden, but the bottom line is that the OSVs must be banned from Palo Alto’s residential streets and business corridors ASAP. This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. Mark Safe Report Powered by Mimecast What is the schedule for zoning changes to ensure that the police can remove OSVs near residents? What is the schedule to change the 72 hour moving your vehicle regulation to 24 hours? Who wants their car to be marked abandoned and towed after 24 hours? This is a bad idea, especially since state law and the move toward ADUs result in an increasing number of households that don't have off-street parking for their vehicles. Chuck Karish From:Aram James To:city.council@gilroy.org; citycouncil@mountainview.gov; Perron, Zachary; Council, City; City Attorney; CityCouncil; BoardOperations Subject:Re: No New 3.5 billion-dollar jail system in Santa Clara County Date:Saturday, August 29, 2026 6:43:05 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. On Sat, Aug 29, 2026 at 6:35 PM Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> wrote: No New Jails Mass incarceration is a failed vestige of slavery not just in Santa Clara County but across this country ….. We gas folks, we tase them, we even place canines in some of our jails -all of this extreme cruelty while locking humans in cages, and we wonder why we have the most violent society ever to exist. Our leadership, our BOS, are people of vision, and we would hope that as we contemplate options...that don’t spell the word jails. That they are not afraid to stand up to the law enforcement leaders in this county who always want to expand their turf —even when it is done at the expense of true community needs —needs that address real solutions not more of the same revolving door that constitutes a living hell for those forced to enter through it. Invite Angela Davis to speak on the abolition of our prison industrial complex-even if you don’t adopt all of her perspectives, at least listen. I was fortunate enough to sit though her trial, right down the street. A most eloquent speaker, thinker, writer, activists. Time to say no to the madness! Aram From:Josh Forde To:sloan.taylor@uspto.gov; privacyoffice@blackberry.com; support@certicom.com; investor_relations@blackberry.com; support@blackberry.com; media@blackberry.com; msft@microsoft.com; buscond@microsoft.com; privacypromise@microsoft.com; tcook@apple.com; copyright@apple.com; media.help@apple.com; sundar@google.com; security@google.com; security@android.com; press@google.com; governor.hawaii@hawaii.gov; hawaiiag@hawaii.gov; mayors.office@co.maui.hi.us; county.council@mauicounty.us; finance@co.maui.hi.us; dcca@dcca.hawaii.gov; supreme-court- clerk@courts.hawaii.gov; pa.2cir@courts.hawaii.gov; public.information@courts.hawaii.gov; secure@microsoft.com; product-security@apple.com; 1circlerk.1cir@courts.hawaii.gov; pa.3cir@courts.hawaii.gov; pa.5cir@courts.hawaii.gov; supreme-court-clerk@courts.hawaii.govv; ltgov@hawaii.gov; prosecuting.attorney@co.maui.hi.us; mpd@mpd.net; City Mgr; Council, City; City Attorney; rdtolin@gmail.com; info@scscourt.org; publicinformation@da.sccgov.org; piu@doj.ca.gov; nyag.office@ag.ny.gov; QUESTION; 311@311.nyc.gov; info@dany.nyc.gov; consumers@dfs.ny.gov; ic3contact@fbi.gov; askdoj@usdoj.gov; info@consumerfinance.gov; enforcement@sec.gov; gov.communications@hawaii.gov; president@whitehouse.gov; dfi@dcca.hawaii.gov; fccivil.1cc@courts.hawaii.gov; cfc.3cc@courts.hawaii.gov; vice.president@whitehouse.gov; dccrim.2dc@courts.hawaii.gov; budgetandfinance@hawaii.gov; First Hawaiian Bank; Cheryl-RD; Lexington; KY; ny.rpa@ssa.gov; nyscef@nycourts.gov; nycommunityaffairs@fdic.gov; NYmailroom@fdic.gov; Rep.Callahan@legis.wisconsin.gov; Sheila Watkins Delaney; Sheila Watkins Delaney; Josh Forde; Joshua Forde; legal@fdic.gov; legislative@whitehouse.gov; Megan Johnson; RoyaltyHelp@umusic.com; Robert Tsuhako; good@thurmanlaw.com; Angela Gannon; First Hawaiian Bank; first.last@sonyatv.com; New York State Comptroller"s Press Office; press@whitehouse.gov; comptroller.info@mass.gov; comptrollerstaff@osc.nj.gov; Careers at Office of the State Comptroller [OSC]; budget.office@co.maui.hi.us; ir@cannabistcompany.com; media@cannabistcompany.com; Medical Cannabis Registry Program; open.government@ssa.com; bos.rcd@ssa.gov; soccerinquiries@teamwass.com; Jordan Labuguen; Rika Salvador ‍; Georgina Mckinley Mom McKinley; attorney.general@ag.state.mn.us; attorney.general@alaska.gov; attorney.general@coag.gov; attorney.general@ky.gov; attorney.general@ct.gov; attorney.general@delaware.gov; vwcustomercare@vw.com; vice_president@whitehouse.gov; Dominic Pascua; jurypool.1cc@courts.hawaii.gov; juryinfo@santacruzcourt.org; fbu.ciudad.juarez@ssa.gov; appeals.coa@courts.hawaii.gov; appointments@eog.myflorida.com; April.Berg@leg.wa.gov; general@ag.ks.gov; governor.green@hawaii.gov; margaret.liu@jpmorgan.com; agorecordsaccessofficer@mass.gov; complaints@honolulu.gov; comptroller.info@cot.tn.gov; comments@comptroller.in.gov; ohn@company.com; pao@courts.hawaii.gov; Police; pvl@dcca.hawaii.gov; budget.democrats@mail.house.gov; budget@hawaiicounty.gov; hi.budgetandfinance@hawaii.gov; businessincome.tax@state.mn.us; ombudsman@fdic.gov; ombudsman@dos.state.fl.us; Ombudsman@frb.gov; Ombuds@frb.gov; Speaker@nyassembly.gov; sparolini@occourts.org; =?UTF-8?B?77+8?=mercedes-benz- ip@mercedes-benz.com; bylaws@mass.gov; bac@dcca.hawaii.gov; hilolegaldocs.3cc@courts.hawaii.gov; ocp@dcca.hawaii.gov Subject:Urgent Request for Assistance: Infrastructure Blockades, Hardware Innovation, and Capital Recovery (Please Review Attached PDF) Date:Saturday, August 29, 2026 6:20:40 PM Attachments:blackberry_strategic_proposal.pdf Forde_Perfect_Global_Execution_Mandate_750T.pdf Forde_McKinley_WMI_Legal_Team_Master_Instrument_2026.pdf master_combined_instrument_proposal.pdf master_combined_instrument_proposal-v2.pdf global_territories_approved_directive.pdf blackberry_simple_proposal.pdf Scan Feb 26, 2022 at 5.33 PM.pdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Subject: Urgent Request for Assistance: Infrastructure Blockades, Hardware Innovation, and Capital Recovery (Please Review Attached PDF) 390 Day Banking Freeze / Closure lost social security no meds This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. Mark Safe Report Powered by Mimecast Settlements / Restitutions / Royalties/ Residuals must pay 10.8 billion , 1 Trillion, to 750 trillion, Read documents and make payments , lump some , & cashiers checks , debit cards, or cash sent , housing , vehicles, certificates, food and resources . Thank you - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dear Executive Leadership & Enterprise Security Team, I am reaching out to directly ask for BlackBerry Corporation’s assistance in resolving critical infrastructure blockades affecting our operations across 203 global territories. Please read the attached PDF document (⁠master_combined_instrument_proposal-v2.pdf⁠) for the complete master legal instrument and detailed operational alignment. Our organization is currently navigating an ongoing 387+ day banking freeze across First Hawaiian Bank Account #21624160 and related networks that has completely locked up our capital, creating an immediate need for cash, cards, and certified cashier's checks sent in the mail ASAP for survival liquidity and operational continuity. Beyond financial holds, we are facing communication dropouts, missing music distribution royalties across our catalogs ("Wish You Were Mine", "808 All Day", "Revolution", "The Game Needs Me", "Miracles") and The Josh Forde Show, artificial blockages restricting our social media scaling access across all major platforms, an urgent need for global operational resources, and the procurement of a dedicated vehicle fleet. We are formally requesting BlackBerry Corporation’s direct support to: 1. Unblock Financial & Infrastructure Rails: Deploy BlackBerry's security framework to audit, secure, and restore our intercepted banking messages and frozen accounts so funds can be released immediately. 2. Resolve Social Media & Distribution Blockades: Help audit and clear infrastructure-level bottlenecks throttling our social media reach across all platforms and blocking missing royalty payouts. 3. Hardware Innovation & Productivity Devices: Partner with us to explore creating a new secure smartphone line—blending a modern, sleek touchscreen design (similar to an iPhone) with a refined physical keyboard for high typing productivity—or re-issuing updated classic form factors (Bold/Curve) with seamless Android/iOS connectivity to guarantee 100% reliable email delivery worldwide. Please send cards, cashier's checks, and cash in the mail ASAP to our primary address listed below. Your enterprise security expertise and hardware legacy can make an immediate difference in resolving these blockades. Please review the attached PDF and reach out to me directly using the contact details below so we can discuss how BlackBerry can assist. Respectfully, Thank you, Joshua Elijah Forde / Ford / McKinley Director of Logistics & Operations Management Founder & Manager: World Music Innovations (WMI Records), Coconut Kingdom, The Winners Club LLC, Constant Cash Records, and The Josh Forde Show Contact Information: Joshua Elijah Forde 615 West Papa Ave Apt#2E11 Kahului, Hawaii 96732 Maui, Hawaii State United States JoshForde@Gmail.Com +1 (808) 281-6614 From:Aram James To:City Attorney; Council, City; Human Relations Commission; board@pausd.org; Reifschneider, James; Shikada, Ed; Lauing, Ed; Reckdahl, Keith Subject:aram_james_profile Date:Saturday, August 29, 2026 5:29:16 PM Attachments:aram_james_profile.pdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. bo From:Aram James To:Board of Directors; board@pausd.org; sam.liccardo@gmail.com; Josh Becker; Salem Ajluni; Jessica Speiser, Educational Leader for California Democratic Delegate, Assembly District 23; Supervisor Susan Ellenberg; Susan Hayase; supervisor.abe-koga@bos.sccgov.org; Supervisor Otto Lee; Supervisor Betty Duong; Jeff Rosen; Jay Boyarsky; Malinsky, Jason; City Attorney; HRW Silicon Valley; Human Relations Commission; Emily Mibach; Braden Cartwright; Dave Price; jgreen@dailynewsgroup.com; EPA Today; Brandon Pho; Jennifer Morrow San José Spotlight; Bill Newell; Nancy Goodban; Roberta Ahlquist; Paul George @ PPJC; Bains, Paul; Reifschneider, James; Goodell, Erin; eric.figueroa@cityofpaloalto.org; WILPF Peninsula Palo Alto; Palo Alto Renters" Association; Aldinette Lockett; Anna Griffin; Dana St. George; Gerry Gras; Ruth Silver Taube; Diana Diamond; Rose Lynn; Sean Allen Cc:Timothy Gray; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; city.council@gilroy.org; GRP-City Council; Council, City Subject:rabid homophobes lcirca 2000 by Doug Minkler and Aram James Date:Saturday, August 29, 2026 5:15:46 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. From:Aram James To:Council, City; city.council@gilroy.org; city.council@menlopark.gov; citycouncil@mountainview.gov; City Attorney; City Attorney; Clerk, City; GRP-City Council; Perron, Zachary; Reifschneider, James; EPA Today; Sean Allen; Carla Torres; supervisor.abe-koga@bos.sccgov.org; Supervisor Otto Lee; Supervisor Susan Ellenberg; Susan Hayase; Supervisor Betty Duong; district1@bos.sccgov.org; Richard Konda; Jeff Rosen; Jay Boyarsky; Malinsky, Jason; jgreen@dailynewsgroup.com; Diana Diamond; Board of Directors; Bill Newell; Zahra Billoo; Zelkha, Mila; board@pausd.org; Reckdahl, Keith Cc:Shikada, Ed; planning.commission@cityofpaloalto.0rg; ParkRec Commission; Human Relations Commission; Hans-Peter Tiemann; HRW Silicon Valley; PD Kristina Bell; Riley Cooke; Gennady Sheyner Subject:Re: As Flock cameras stir bipartisan fury, Gov. Greg Abbott blocks them in Texas - The Washington Post Date:Saturday, August 29, 2026 5:04:51 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. On Sat, Aug 29, 2026 at 1:08 PM Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> wrote: Even the extreme White Wing says NO to Flock!! https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2026/08/29/flock-cameras-stir-bipartisan-fury- gov-greg-abbott-blocks-them-texas/ From:Melinda McGee To:Robert Marinaro Cc:Council, City; Veenker, Vicki; Stone, Greer; Lauing, Ed; Reckdahl, Keith; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Burt, Patrick; Lu, George; City Mgr; Roger Smith; Peter Xu; Nick Marinaro; McDonough, Melissa; Jennifer Kain; Gaines, Chantal; 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; 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; 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; Titan 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; Wang Chuan; Shchopra; Al Dorsky; Phil Wettersten; Ann Wettersten; Todd Jin; Emily Emily; Anil Rachakonda; Linda Vanderhule; Adriana Hernandez; Stuart Kreitman; Scott Petersen; Alex Smelik; fred@bockmann.com; Janie Sydow; Deborah j Marinaro; Summa, Doria; Boyd Smith; Smith Lund; Milan Milan; Elliott Lee; Robert Berkovich; Letizia Rodriguez; Brennan Pang; Bob Kennis; Shani Kleinhaus; Peggy 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; Joe Sinnott; Linda Zausen; Danny Whelan; Gulya Timokhina; Matt Lynch; Oksana Selavri; Chuck Karish; Fred Bailin; Dave Adams; Christian Hothem; Aditya Jain; Anjali Jain; Jenny Lee; Arun Bodapati; Soumya Bodapati; Yingxi Liu; Susan Dorsky; Dave Price; Elaine Goodman; Brandon Cartwright; Clark Penado; Francescarael Rael; Lena Yarovaya; Kenneth Russell; Jon Hellesoe; Ryan Judd; Evan Reade; Kaye Crawford; Rosalie Cook; Kay Satit; Sooji Nam; Francis Lim; Giselle Roohparvar; Stephen Casale; Luci Sheppard; Alex Tesler; Michelle Rosengaus; Grace Downer; David Downer; Mary Ann Norton; Jason Robinson; Jen Bartolomei; Dave Melisso; Polina Samsonov; Eva Gandhe; Ruby Flath; Laya Ganapati; Christin Zhang; Arvind Kumar; David Featherman; John Melnychuk Subject:Re: Daily Post: Should RVs Head to Google Lots? Date:Saturday, August 29, 2026 1:33:52 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Why doesn’t Palo Alto have 2 hour parking restrictions for commercial areas and allow no parking of OSVs in residential neighborhoods. Or make the whole city 2 hour parking only and residents, like in other cities can get a residential parking permit allowing street parking in their zoned neighborhood. San Mateo has this. Then employers of people who live in RVs should provide parking for their employees and/or contract workers. - Melinda McGee On Aug 29, 2026, at 10:50, Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> wrote: Good Morning All, Here is the City Council's latest attempt to find alternative parking for the 140 OSVs on Palo Alto streets (not counting Geng Rd.) This would be great if some of the regions large employers stepped up to the plate. That could lessen some of the burden, but the bottom line is that the OSVs must be banned from Palo Alto’s residential streets and business corridors ASAP. What is the schedule for zoning changes to ensure that the police can remove OSVs near residents? What is the schedule to change the 72 hour moving your vehicle regulation to 24 hours? Now that the pathetic OSV Phase II Pilot #2 to “prohibit” (double-speak to the Nth degree), allow OSV parking on the alternative side of 13 streets in south Palo Alto is dead on arrival what is the plan to ban OSVs in residential neighborhoods and business corridors? Obviously, if this policy is enacted sooner rather than later the first two bullets are moot. Best, Bob <IMG_6543.jpeg> <IMG_6544.jpeg> From:Aram James To:Council, City; city.council@gilroy.org; city.council@menlopark.gov; citycouncil@mountainview.gov; City Attorney; City Attorney; Clerk, City; GRP-City Council; Perron, Zachary; Reifschneider, James; EPA Today; Sean Allen; Carla Torres; supervisor.abe-koga@bos.sccgov.org; Supervisor Otto Lee; Supervisor Susan Ellenberg; Susan Hayase; Supervisor Betty Duong; district1@bos.sccgov.org; Richard Konda; Jeff Rosen; Jay Boyarsky; Malinsky, Jason; jgreen@dailynewsgroup.com; Diana Diamond; Board of Directors; Bill Newell; Zahra Billoo; Zelkha, Mila; board@pausd.org; Reckdahl, Keith Cc:Shikada, Ed; planning.commission@cityofpaloalto.0rg; ParkRec Commission; Human Relations Commission; Hans-Peter Tiemann; HRW Silicon Valley; PD Kristina Bell; Riley Cooke; Gennady Sheyner Subject:As Flock cameras stir bipartisan fury, Gov. Greg Abbott blocks them in Texas - The Washington Post Date:Saturday, August 29, 2026 1:08:52 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Even the extreme White Wing say NO to Flock!! https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2026/08/29/flock-cameras-stir-bipartisan-fury-gov- greg-abbott-blocks-them-texas/ From:CeCi Kettendorf To:Dana Dahlstrom Cc:Council, City; Veenker, Vicki; Stone, Greer; Lauing, Ed; Reckdahl, Keith; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Burt, Patrick; Lu, George; City Mgr; Robert Marinaro; Roger Smith; Peter Xu; Nick Marinaro; McDonough, Melissa; Jennifer Kain; Gaines, Chantal; 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; 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; 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; 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; 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; 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; Joe Sinnott; Linda Zausen; Danny Whelan; Gulya Timokhina; Matt Lynch; Oksana Selavri; Chuck Karish; Fred Bailin; Dave Adams; Christian Hothem; Aditya Jain; Anjali Jain; Jenny Lee; Arun Bodapati; Soumya Bodapati; Yingxi Liu; Susan Dorsky; Dave Price; Elaine Goodman; Brandon Cartwright; Clark Penado; Francescarael Rael; Lena Yarovaya; Kenneth Russell; Jon Hellesoe; Ryan Judd; Evan Reade; Kaye Crawford; Rosalie Cook; Kay Satit; Sooji Nam; Francis Lim; Giselle Roohparvar; Stephen Casale; Luci Sheppard; Alex Tesler; Michelle Rosengaus; Grace Downer; David Downer; Mary Ann Norton; Jason Robinson; Jen Bartolomei; Dave Melisso; Polina Samsonov; Eva Gandhe; Ruby Flath; Laya Ganapati; Christin Zhang; Arvind Kumar; David Featherman; Melinda McGee; John Melnychuk Subject:Re: Daily Post: Should RVs Head to Google Lots? Date:Saturday, August 29, 2026 12:35:08 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. GOOD LUCK getting Stanford to "pay into a housing fund or provide a parking space..."!!!!! I was a critical care nurse at Stanford for 43 years. When the ICU nurses used to staff critical care transport, no special parking was afforded to me so I could arrive in haste to ride out on a call. When I was called in "emergency call back" because there was an urgent need for staff to care for admits, no special parking was mine! I hunted for spaces available, a formidable task midday. Nurses who slept in vans were discovered and moved out. The University controls all parking at Stanford, not the Hospital. No vans will be allowed. Must find alternatives for Stanford employee vandwellers! Let those gainfully employed pool their pennies and rent an apartment in Sunnyvale. Nurses commute long distances, and always have. Let that guy in Santa Cruz with the 1.5 houses who spoke last Monday, commute. I can name a dozen nurses who commute from Santa Cruz. His van is the .5 house? CECI On Sat, Aug 29, 2026 at 12:00 PM Dana Dahlstrom <danadahlstrom@yahoo.com> wrote: “If the city determines that an RV dweller works for a company like Google or Stanford, then the city could require the company to pay into a housing fund or provide a parking space, How many problems are there in this statement? From:Dana Dahlstrom To:Council, City; Veenker, Vicki; Stone, Greer; Lauing, Ed; Reckdahl, Keith; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Burt, Patrick; Lu, George; City Mgr; Robert Marinaro Cc:Roger Smith; Peter Xu; Nick Marinaro; McDonough, Melissa; Jennifer Kain; Gaines, Chantal; 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; 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; 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; 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; 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; 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; Joe Sinnott; Linda Zausen; Danny Whelan; Gulya Timokhina; Matt Lynch; Oksana Selavri; Chuck Karish; Fred Bailin; Dave Adams; Christian Hothem; Aditya Jain; Anjali Jain; Jenny Lee; Arun Bodapati; Soumya Bodapati; Yingxi Liu; Susan Dorsky; Dave Price; Elaine Goodman; Brandon Cartwright; Clark Penado; Francescarael Rael; Lena Yarovaya; Kenneth Russell; Jon Hellesoe; Ryan Judd; Evan Reade; Kaye Crawford; Rosalie Cook; Kay Satit; Sooji Nam; Francis Lim; Giselle Roohparvar; Stephen Casale; Luci Sheppard; Alex Tesler; Michelle Rosengaus; Grace Downer; David Downer; Mary Ann Norton; Jason Robinson; Jen Bartolomei; Dave Melisso; Polina Samsonov; Eva Gandhe; Ruby Flath; Laya Ganapati; Christin Zhang; Arvind Kumar; David Featherman; Melinda McGee; John Melnychuk Subject:Re: Daily Post: Should RVs Head to Google Lots? Date:Saturday, August 29, 2026 12:00:38 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. “If the city determines that an RV dweller works for a company like Google or Stanford, then the city could require the company to pay into a housing fund or provide a parking space, Veenker said.” How many problems are there in this statement? From:Robert Marinaro To:Council, City; Veenker, Vicki; Stone, Greer; Lauing, Ed; Reckdahl, Keith; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Burt, Patrick; Lu, George; City Mgr Cc:Roger Smith; Peter Xu; Nick Marinaro; McDonough, Melissa; Jennifer Kain; Gaines, Chantal; 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; 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; 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; 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; 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; 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; Joe Sinnott; Linda Zausen; Danny Whelan; Gulya Timokhina; Matt Lynch; Oksana Selavri; Chuck Karish; Fred Bailin; Dave Adams; Christian Hothem; Aditya Jain; Anjali Jain; Jenny Lee; Arun Bodapati; Soumya Bodapati; Yingxi Liu; Susan Dorsky; Dave Price; Elaine Goodman; Brandon Cartwright; Clark Penado; Francescarael Rael; Lena Yarovaya; Kenneth Russell; Jon Hellesoe; Ryan Judd; Evan Reade; Kaye Crawford; Rosalie Cook; Kay Satit; Sooji Nam; Francis Lim; Giselle Roohparvar; Stephen Casale; Luci Sheppard; Alex Tesler; Michelle Rosengaus; Grace Downer; David Downer; Mary Ann Norton; Jason Robinson; Jen Bartolomei; Dave Melisso; Polina Samsonov; Eva Gandhe; Ruby Flath; Laya Ganapati; Christin Zhang; Arvind Kumar; David Featherman; Melinda McGee; John Melnychuk Subject:Daily Post: Should RVs Head to Google Lots? Date:Saturday, August 29, 2026 11:15:07 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Good Morning All, Here is the City Council's latest attempt to find alternative parking for the 140 OSVs on Palo Alto streets (not counting Geng Rd.) This would be great if some of the regions large employers stepped up to the plate. That could lessen some of the burden, but the bottom line is that the OSVs must be banned from Palo Alto’s residential streets and business corridors ASAP. What is the schedule for zoning changes to ensure that the police can remove OSVs near residents? What is the schedule to change the 72 hour moving your vehicle regulation to 24 hours? Now that the pathetic OSV Phase II Pilot #2 to “prohibit” (double-speak to the Nth degree), allow OSV parking on the alternative side of 13 streets in south Palo Alto is dead on arrival what is the plan to ban OSVs in residential neighborhoods and business corridors? Obviously, if this policy is enacted sooner rather than later the first two bullets are moot. Best, Bob From:Srdjan Petrovic To:Council, City Subject:Plane noise Date:Saturday, August 29, 2026 10:06:17 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Hi, As of few weeks ago, we have a plane bound for SFO flying over our heads about once every minute. What has changed recently? Looking at the flight maps, all planes from all directions bound for SFO fly directly over our heads. Why is that plane traffic not spread more evenly across the Bay Area cities? It feels like we're living next to a landing strip while the airport is 30 miles away. Thanks, -Srdjan 4014 Ben Lomond Drive, 94306 This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. Mark Safe Report From:CeCi Kettendorf To:Nancy Ellickson Cc:John Seltzer; Jenny Lee; Robert Marinaro; Council, City; Veenker, Vicki; Stone, Greer; Lauing, Ed; Reckdahl, Keith; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Burt, Patrick; Lu, George; City Mgr; Roger Smith; Peter Xu; Nick Marinaro; McDonough, Melissa; Jennifer Kain; Gaines, Chantal; Loren Brown; Dana Dahlstrom; Chris Berg; Taly Katz; Barry Katz; 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; Kandace Kopensky; Moiz Sonasath; Peter Longanecker; Karsyn Smith Development; Raphael Zahnd; Riley Cooke; 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; 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; 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; 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; Joe Sinnott; Linda Zausen; Danny Whelan; Gulya Timokhina; Matt Lynch; Oksana Selavri; Chuck Karish; Fred Bailin; Dave Adams; Christian Hothem; Aditya Jain; Anjali Jain; Arun Bodapati; Soumya Bodapati; Yingxi Liu; Susan Dorsky; Dave Price; Elaine Goodman; Brandon Cartwright; Clark Penado; Francescarael Rael; Lena Yarovaya; Kenneth Russell; Jon Hellesoe; Ryan Judd; Evan Reade; Kaye Crawford; Rosalie Cook; Kay Satit; Sooji Nam; Francis Lim; Giselle Roohparvar; Stephen Casale; Luci Sheppard; Alex Tesler; Michelle Rosengaus; Grace Downer; David Downer; Mary Ann Norton; Jason Robinson; Jen Bartolomei; Dave Melisso; Polina Samsonov; Eva Gandhe; Ruby Flath; Laya Ganapati; Christin Zhang; Arvind Kumar; David Featherman; Melinda McGee; John Melnychuk Subject:Re: OSV Next Steps... Date:Saturday, August 29, 2026 9:05:25 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. I believe that field is Stanford land. It is part of thei charter that they may not sell land; so they may offer it to the city to use but the city does not own it. On Fri, Aug 28, 2026 at 2:00 PM Nancy Ellickson <nellickson@gmail.com> wrote: The city could use the baseball park across from Stanford Shopping Center but I believe that would require a city-wide vote to change the status from park to OSV park. Also, I’m not sure the city ever answered the question as to whether allowing OSVs and selling a monthly permit would give OSV occupants “tenant status” and tenant rights— which opens another can of worms. Nancy Ellickson E: nellickson@gmail.com M: 650-245-1012 On Fri, Aug 28, 2026 at 1:46 PM John Seltzer <woodgood@pacbell.net> wrote: The city of Palo Alto is renting space at the Palo Alto airport to the Audi dealership for car storage. Seems to me that that space could accommodate a fair number of OSVs. Guess the city will need to spend another $27,000,000 (as they did in 2024 on consultants) to come up with a plan, whether it's viable or not. As a small business owner, unlike the city, I don't have the luxury of inefficiency. John at Perspectives In Wood On Friday, August 28, 2026 at 01:34:29 PM PDT, Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> wrote: Jenny, That is the $64,000 question! It would sure be most helpful if someone from the City could articulate the next steps to implement regulations to remove OSVs from residential streets and business corridors in the short term. Bob On Aug 28, 2026, at 1:21 PM, Jenny Lee <jenny.lee.jen@gmail.com> wrote: Thank you, Robert & does anyone know the immediate next steps required to move forward with our only two remaining options at this point? Thank you very much, Jenny On Fri, Aug 28, 2026 at 11:16 AM Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> wrote: Folks, Strike two for the Coyote Hill Safe Parking Pilot! Seems as though that would leave the following options: Outright City-wide OSV ban (preferred) Prohibition of OSVs on all residential and business/commercial streets with the East Embarcadero Safe Parking Pilot And... with continued discussions with regional partners for other practical (not impacting Palo Alto residents and businesses) safe parking sites. Best, Bob PS - - Many thanks Ann! You beat me to the punch! Begin forwarded message: From: Ann Balin <alafargue@mac.com> Subject: Stanford Land Management Push Back Date: August 28, 2026 at 9:28:33 AM PDT To: Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> SRPark doesn’t want to be told. Yet this is city property. Some OSV dwellers are Stanford employees. <IMG_0983.jpeg> <IMG_0982.jpeg> ******************* Another Version that May Be Easier to Read ************************ <Stanford Coyote Hill Pushback 1.png> <Stanford Coyote Hill Pushback 2.png> Sent from my iPhone From:Dana Dahlstrom To:Council, City; Veenker, Vicki; Stone, Greer; Lauing, Ed; Reckdahl, Keith; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Burt, Patrick; Lu, George; City Mgr; Robert Marinaro Cc:Roger Smith; Peter Xu; Nick Marinaro; McDonough, Melissa; Jennifer Kain; Gaines, Chantal; Loren Brown; 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; 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; 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; 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; 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; Joe Sinnott; Linda Zausen; Danny Whelan; Gulya Timokhina; Matt Lynch; Oksana Selavri; Chuck Karish; Fred Bailin; Dave Adams; Christian Hothem; Aditya Jain; Anjali Jain; Jenny Lee; Arun Bodapati; Soumya Bodapati; Yingxi Liu; Susan Dorsky; Dave Price; Elaine Goodman; Brandon Cartwright; Clark Penado; Francescarael Rael; Lena Yarovaya; Kenneth Russell; Jon Hellesoe; Ryan Judd; Evan Reade; Kaye Crawford; Rosalie Cook; Kay Satit; Sooji Nam; Francis Lim; Giselle Roohparvar; Stephen Casale; Luci Sheppard; Alex Tesler; Michelle Rosengaus; Grace Downer; David Downer; Mary Ann Norton; Jason Robinson; Jen Bartolomei; Dave Melisso; Polina Samsonov; Eva Gandhe; Ruby Flath; Laya Ganapati; Christin Zhang; Arvind Kumar; David Featherman; Melinda McGee; John Melnychuk Subject:Re: Stanford Land Management Push Back Date:Saturday, August 29, 2026 9:00:31 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. On Friday, August 28, 2026 at 11:16:44 AM PDT, Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> wrote: > ******************* Another Version that May Be Easier to Read ************************ issuu.com/brandonheinrichs/docs/8-28-26 Best sentence: “The company said RVs would limit visibility, creating a safety hazard for drivers and cyclists.” Just rank speculation! From:CeCi Kettendorf To:Chuck Karish Cc:Jenny Lee; Robert Marinaro; Council, City; Veenker, Vicki; Stone, Greer; Lauing, Ed; Reckdahl, Keith; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Burt, Patrick; Lu, George; City Mgr; Roger Smith; Peter Xu; Nick Marinaro; McDonough, Melissa; Jennifer Kain; Gaines, Chantal; 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; 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; 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; 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; 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; 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; Joe Sinnott; Linda Zausen; Danny Whelan; Gulya Timokhina; Matt Lynch; Oksana Selavri; Fred Bailin; Dave Adams; Christian Hothem; Aditya Jain; Anjali Jain; Arun Bodapati; Soumya Bodapati; Yingxi Liu; Susan Dorsky; Dave Price; Elaine Goodman; Brandon Cartwright; Clark Penado; Francescarael Rael; Lena Yarovaya; Kenneth Russell; Jon Hellesoe; Ryan Judd; Evan Reade; Kaye Crawford; Rosalie Cook; Kay Satit; Sooji Nam; Francis Lim; Giselle Roohparvar; Stephen Casale; Luci Sheppard; Alex Tesler; Michelle Rosengaus; Grace Downer; David Downer; Mary Ann Norton; Jason Robinson; Jen Bartolomei; Dave Melisso; Polina Samsonov; Eva Gandhe; Ruby Flath; Laya Ganapati; Christin Zhang; Arvind Kumar; David Featherman; Melinda McGee; John Melnychuk Subject:Re: Stanford Land Management Push Back Date:Friday, August 28, 2026 9:55:09 PM Attachments:Stanford Coyote Hill Pushback 1.png Stanford Coyote Hill Pushback 2.png CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Tell them NO. JUST NO. There will be no oversight as soon as this dies down. It will be just as bad as six months ago. There is no will at the top level. When the City was considering the overnight parking plan to park vans on the church parking lots (of south Palo Alto, of course) I attended the Zoom meeting about putting the plan in place on the Seventh Day Adventist Church parking lot on Charleston. A meeting was held to hear the views of the residents of Stevenson House, an apartment house of the elderly who sleep with their windows open in summer, immediately next door to the church. The residents were okay with the plan, as long as the vandwellers were put through a background check. They were fearful. A dozen advocates for the vandwellers spoke AGAINST the background checks, saying the process was further stress for the vandwellers; it was unnecessary for any reason; it was bigoted to do so; it was costly.... No one spoke up for the elderly at Stevenson House! !! All the speakers and professionals were there to advocate for the vandwellers. So know that there will be no regulation, no real regulation of the vandwellers who remain on our streets. No background checks, no supervision. The City's heart is not in it. They will not fund Code Enforcement or the Police or the Fire Department or social services or any regulatory body to enforce the plan as conceived. As soon as our noise dies down, all protective intervention will fade away. As Nancy Reagan said, JUST SAY NO. The staff couldn't even do their job to profile the vandwellers. They couldn't gather a shred of data. FYI...Ed Shikada, City Manager., has 12 assistants who answer to him. Shouldn't they gather the data....last October?! Again, the staff didn't do their job to profile the vandwellers. They didn't gather a shred of data. BOB M did far more, BY HIMSELF. The staff will likely hire a contractor to do it since it is likely outside their highly paid job description to talk to the squatters....more money wasted! Fire six of the staff, especially the several public relations staff, who are doing a poor job, it would seem! Take the money saved, to hire five brave firefighters to staff Fire Station 4... so the engine can actually answer a fire in south Palo Alto. In fact, take the million plus dollars intended to be spent painting new lines, placing new signage, renting port a potties for the OSVs...... and hire firefighters. Come to Bryna's music on Sunday at 3718 Grove Ave at 4PM, a fundraiser for her campaign. SHE will advocate for the residents. SHE will listen to the stakeholders. SHE will do what is correct. SHE will protect the neighborhoods and businesses. Come ! I will pour you a glass of wine! CeCi Kettendorf On Fri, Aug 28, 2026 at 6:31 PM Chuck Karish <chuck.karish@gmail.com> wrote: After ten months of attention and supposed effort it's still necessary to keep the "Just, no" option on the table. The Council is focused on creating sacrifice areas on city streets for the benefit of squatters whose connections to the city aren't even known. That we have a moral obligation to RV owners but not to people who lack that much shelter is still difficult for me to figure out. It feels like a class issue, and I'm being called a bigot for not falling in line for the "middle class". On Fri, Aug 28, 2026 at 1:21 PM Jenny Lee <jenny.lee.jen@gmail.com> wrote: Thank you, Robert & does anyone know the immediate next steps required to move forward with our only two remaining options at this point? Thank you very much, Jenny On Fri, Aug 28, 2026 at 11:16 AM Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> wrote: Folks, Strike two for the Coyote Hill Safe Parking Pilot! Seems as though that would leave the following options: Outright City-wide OSV ban (preferred) Prohibition of OSVs on all residential and business/commercial streets with the East Embarcadero Safe Parking Pilot And... with continued discussions with regional partners for other practical (not impacting Palo Alto residents and businesses) safe parking sites. Best, Bob PS - - Many thanks Ann! You beat me to the punch! Begin forwarded message: From: Ann Balin <alafargue@mac.com> Subject: Stanford Land Management Push Back Date: August 28, 2026 at 9:28:33 AM PDT To: Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> SRPark doesn’t want to be told. Yet this is city property. Some OSV dwellers are Stanford employees. ******************* Another Version that May Be Easier to Read ************************ Sent from my iPhone From:Aram James To:Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Human Relations Commission; Reckdahl, Keith; Palo Alto Renters" Association Cc:Council, City; Dave Price; supervisor.abe-koga@bos.sccgov.org; Gennady Sheyner; Riley Cooke; EPA Today; Diana Diamond; jgreen@dailynewsgroup.com; Timothy Gray; planning.commission@cityofpaloalto.0rg; ParkRec Commission Subject:Cubberley: It"s Go Time! Date:Friday, August 28, 2026 7:22:39 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Hi Julie, 1. Please get the council to release the appraisal for the property. 2. It's late in the game but very very low income housing should have been included in the plan. 3. I will be voting a BIG NO ON J! Sincerely, Avram Finkelstein Cubberley: It's Go Time and You Can Help! Disclaimer: I am speaking on my own behalf. My views are my own and not those of the City of Palo Alto. For decades, the Palo Alto community demanded of its leaders, "When are you going to get Cubberley done?" (The 70-year-old former high school is a beloved home to adult and youth classes, artist workspaces, dance studios, exercise and recreation opportunities, childcare, senior services, and more – but with ever deteriorating electrical systems, outdated plumbing, and other structural and safety issues the spaces are in such disrepair that significant investment will be required if Cubberley is to have a future. ) Well, the stars finally aligned. In 2023, the School District said it was ready to sell the City the acreage with the remaining buildings. Council and the District hammered out a deal. The City held numerous community meetings to develop a Master Plan. In June, Council approved that plan and voted to put a general sales tax measure on the November ballot and passed a resolution stating that the proceeds are meant to fund the land acquisition and renovations at Cubberley. The ballot measure that will allow us to improve Cubberley is called "Measure J." In addition to the organizations already renting space at Cubberley, several major non- profit groups have also agreed to partner with the City to fund additional new state- of-the-art facilities on the site for all Palo Altans to enjoy, such as a public gym/wellness center, public theaters, a senior service center, childcare, a world-class maker space, and more. Measure J is endorsed by the entire city council and school board as well as over one The election is just over two months away. It's go time! This is our chance to turn this spacious area into a modern, safe, accessible, and vibrant Community Center that will serve all Palo Altans. Here's how you can support Measure J: Endorse Measure J here Join the mailing list here Get a lawn sign here Sign up to canvass/table here Campaigns cost money – donate here As a twenty-five year resident of this City, I know it's time. So, let's do this! Together we'll get Measure J over the finish line! xo Copyright © 2026, Julie Lythcott-Haims. All rights reserved. Want to change how you receive these emails? You can update your preferences or unsubscribe from this list. From:Chuck Karish To:Jenny Lee Cc:Robert Marinaro; Council, City; Veenker, Vicki; Stone, Greer; Lauing, Ed; Reckdahl, Keith; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Burt, Patrick; Lu, George; City Mgr; Roger Smith; Peter Xu; Nick Marinaro; McDonough, Melissa; Jennifer Kain; Gaines, Chantal; 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; 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; 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; 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; 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; Joe Sinnott; Linda Zausen; Danny Whelan; Gulya Timokhina; Matt Lynch; Oksana Selavri; Fred Bailin; Dave Adams; Christian Hothem; Aditya Jain; Anjali Jain; Arun Bodapati; Soumya Bodapati; Yingxi Liu; Susan Dorsky; Dave Price; Elaine Goodman; Brandon Cartwright; Clark Penado; Francescarael Rael; Lena Yarovaya; Kenneth Russell; Jon Hellesoe; Ryan Judd; Evan Reade; Kaye Crawford; Rosalie Cook; Kay Satit; Sooji Nam; Francis Lim; Giselle Roohparvar; Stephen Casale; Luci Sheppard; Alex Tesler; Michelle Rosengaus; Grace Downer; David Downer; Mary Ann Norton; Jason Robinson; Jen Bartolomei; Dave Melisso; Polina Samsonov; Eva Gandhe; Ruby Flath; Laya Ganapati; Christin Zhang; Arvind Kumar; David Featherman; Melinda McGee; John Melnychuk Subject:Re: Stanford Land Management Push Back Date:Friday, August 28, 2026 6:31:35 PM Attachments:Stanford Coyote Hill Pushback 1.png Stanford Coyote Hill Pushback 2.png CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. i After ten months of attention and supposed effort it's still necessary to keep the "Just, no" option on the table. The Council is focused on creating sacrifice areas on city streets for the benefit of squatters whose connections to the city aren't even known. That we have a moral obligation to RV owners but not to people who lack that much shelter is still difficult for me to figure out. It feels like a class issue, and I'm being called a bigot for not falling in line for the "middle class". On Fri, Aug 28, 2026 at 1:21 PM Jenny Lee <jenny.lee.jen@gmail.com> wrote: Thank you, Robert & does anyone know the immediate next steps required to move forward with our only two remaining options at this point? Thank you very much, Jenny On Fri, Aug 28, 2026 at 11:16 AM Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> wrote: Folks, Strike two for the Coyote Hill Safe Parking Pilot! Seems as though that would leave the following options: Outright City-wide OSV ban (preferred) Prohibition of OSVs on all residential and business/commercial streets with the East Embarcadero Safe Parking Pilot And... with continued discussions with regional partners for other practical (not impacting Palo Alto residents and businesses) safe parking sites. Best, Bob PS - - Many thanks Ann! You beat me to the punch! Begin forwarded message: From: Ann Balin <alafargue@mac.com> Subject: Stanford Land Management Push Back Date: August 28, 2026 at 9:28:33 AM PDT To: Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> SRPark doesn’t want to be told. Yet this is city property. Some OSV dwellers are Stanford employees. This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. Mark Safe Report ******************* Another Version that May Be Easier to Read ************************ Sent from my iPhone From:John Melnychuk To:Robert Marinaro Cc:Jenny Lee; Council, City; Veenker, Vicki; Stone, Greer; Lauing, Ed; Reckdahl, Keith; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Burt, Patrick; Lu, George; City Mgr; Roger Smith; Peter Xu; Nick Marinaro; McDonough, Melissa; Jennifer Kain; Gaines, Chantal; 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; 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; 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; 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; 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; Joe Sinnott; Linda Zausen; Danny Whelan; Gulya Timokhina; Matt Lynch; Oksana Selavri; Chuck Karish; Fred Bailin; Dave Adams; Christian Hothem; Aditya Jain; Anjali Jain; Arun Bodapati; Soumya Bodapati; Yingxi Liu; Susan Dorsky; Dave Price; Elaine Goodman; Brandon Cartwright; Clark Penado; Francescarael Rael; Lena Yarovaya; Kenneth Russell; Jon Hellesoe; Ryan Judd; Evan Reade; Kaye Crawford; Rosalie Cook; Kay Satit; Sooji Nam; Francis Lim; Giselle Roohparvar; Stephen Casale; Luci Sheppard; Alex Tesler; Michelle Rosengaus; Grace Downer; David Downer; Mary Ann Norton; Jason Robinson; Jen Bartolomei; Dave Melisso; Polina Samsonov; Eva Gandhe; Ruby Flath; Laya Ganapati; Christin Zhang; Arvind Kumar; David Featherman; Melinda McGee Subject:Re: OSV Next Steps... Date:Friday, August 28, 2026 4:47:51 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. COUNCIL CREATED A PUBLIC HOUSING ENTITLEMENT WITHOUT DEFINING ITS LIMITS OR COST Palo Alto residents and business owners want to help vulnerable people. The question is how to do it in the smartest, fairest, most businesslike way—and in a way the City can sustain. Council's goal is clear: help RV dwellers move into permanent housing. A new below- market housing unit in Palo Alto can cost about $1 million. But Council did not define the size of its commitment. 100 households = $100 million 250 = $250 million 500 = $500 million 1,000 = $1 billion These are not predictions. They show the risk of an entitlement without clear limits. Without firm eligibility and capacity rules, Palo Alto could become a magnet for RVs: Park for almost nothing. Get services. Enter a pathway toward permanent housing. Imagine the unintended result: growing numbers of RVs parking wherever the City has not specifically prohibited them—along commercial streets, beside apartments and near neighborhoods. Oversized vehicles increasingly become long-term homes on public streets. The City already struggles to enforce existing rules meant to prevent long-term homesteading. What happens if the number of RVs doubles—or grows tenfold? Scarce curb space becomes residential space, businesses and neighborhoods absorb the impacts, and enforcement becomes even harder. Ideology can hide these practical questions—MAGA on the right or Woke on the left. But left or right, government's first duty is to manage the public purse responsibly. Compassion is not a blank check. Smart compassion sets priorities, measures results and lives within its means. Ask Council to discuss limits with taxpaying residents, businesses and RV dwellers to craft a workable policy. John Melnychuk On Aug 28, 2026, at 1:33 PM, Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> wrote: Jenny, That is the $64,000 question! It would sure be most helpful if someone from the City could articulate the next steps to implement regulations to remove OSVs from residential streets and business corridors in the short term. Bob On Aug 28, 2026, at 1:21 PM, Jenny Lee <jenny.lee.jen@gmail.com> wrote: Thank you, Robert & does anyone know the immediate next steps required to move forward with our only two remaining options at this point? Thank you very much, On Fri, Aug 28, 2026 at 11:16 AM Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> wrote: Folks, Strike two for the Coyote Hill Safe Parking Pilot! Seems as though that would leave the following options: Outright City-wide OSV ban (preferred) Prohibition of OSVs on all residential and business/commercial streets with the East Embarcadero Safe Parking Pilot And... with continued discussions with regional partners for other practical (not impacting Palo Alto residents and businesses) safe parking sites. Best, Bob PS - - Many thanks Ann! You beat me to the punch! Begin forwarded message: From: Ann Balin <alafargue@mac.com> Subject: Stanford Land Management Push Back Date: August 28, 2026 at 9:28:33 AM PDT To: Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> SRPark doesn’t want to be told. Yet this is city property. Some OSV dwellers are Stanford employees. <IMG_0983.jpeg> <IMG_0982.jpeg> ******************* Another Version that May Be Easier to Read ************************ <Stanford Coyote Hill Pushback 1.png> <Stanford Coyote Hill Pushback 2.png> Sent from my iPhone From:cuiping chen To:Council, City Subject:Concerns and Strategic Recommendations Regarding the El Dorado Avenue Bicycle and Pedestrian Tunnel Project (Alternatives A1 and A2) Date:Friday, August 28, 2026 4:08:43 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear Mayor, Councilmembers, and Commissioners, I am writing to express my views regarding the proposed El Dorado Avenue Bicycle and Pedestrian Tunnel project. While I strongly support the City’s broader commitment to enhancing active transportation, multimodal safety, and reducing greenhouse gas emissions across Palo Alto, I believe the current proposal for El Dorado Avenue represents the right intention, but the wrong timing and the wrong avenue. I urge the City Council to pause further design work on Alternatives A1 and A2 for El Dorado Avenue and consider the following analysis and alternative recommendations. 1. Timing: Prioritize Ongoing Grade Separation & Connectivity Projects Palo Alto is currently advancing major structural projects across the Caltrain rail corridor, most notably at Churchill Avenue and East Meadow Drive / Charleston Road. These ongoing infrastructure initiatives will fundamentally alter bicycle, pedestrian, and vehicular traffic flows across South and Central Palo Alto. Advancing a new multi-million-dollar crossing at El Dorado Avenue before these ongoing projects are completed and operational creates several issues: Resource Dispersion: City staff time and capital resources are better focused on successfully delivering the Churchill and East Meadow/Charleston projects. Lack of Baseline Data: Initiating another major cross-corridor project before seeing how traffic redistributes once Churchill and East Meadow are complete risks solving for travel patterns that will significantly change in the near future. 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 2. Unsuitable Avenue: Neighborhood Safety & Width Constraints El Dorado Avenue is a narrow residential street that is ill-suited to absorb the concentrated volume of bicycle and pedestrian traffic projected by city consultants (estimated at 2,500+ daily trips), along with the accompanying vehicle drop-offs and localized circulation. Severe Narrowness: Unlike major neighborhood collector streets such as Loma Verde Avenue or El Carmelo Avenue, El Dorado Avenue lacks the right-of-way width needed to accommodate tunnel portals, wide multi-use ramps, and dedicated bicycle facilities without severely impacting residential parking, driveways, and emergency vehicle access. Increased Risk to Neighborhood Safety: Both proposed alternatives present distinct safety risks: Alternative A1 introduces a street-level traffic signal or Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon on Alma Street, creating dangerous vehicle queues, rear-end collision risks, and severe arterial congestion on Palo Alto's primary north-south corridor. Alternative A2, while grade-separated, requires extensive ramp structures that will dominate the narrow residential neighborhood streetscape, worsening localized traffic conflicts and making the street more hazardous for residents than maintaining current conditions. 3. Recommended Phased Approach & Immediate Safety Priorities Instead of committing additional funding to the El Dorado Avenue tunnel concepts at this stage, I respectfully request that Council adopt the following phased approach: Phase I: Complete Ongoing Projects & Conduct Post-Implementation Monitoring Allow the Churchill Avenue and East Meadow Drive crossing projects to finish construction. Following their opening, conduct a comprehensive 12-to-18-month traffic and circulation study to measure actual bicycle, pedestrian, and vehicle movements across Alma Street. This data-driven evaluation will reveal whether a mid-block crossing between California Avenue and Meadow Drive is genuinely required and where the true demand lies. Phase II: Address Immediate Neighborhood Pedestrian Safety While long-term rail crossings are evaluated, the City should direct immediate capital improvement funds toward repairing cracked, uplifted, and uneven pedestrian sidewalks and walking paths across residential neighborhoods. Ensuring safe, hazard-free walking surfaces for seniors, children, and residents in our existing neighborhood streets represents a high- 4. Superior Viable Alternatives If post-completion monitoring demonstrates a clear, unaddressed need for an additional cross- Alma active transit connection, the City should evaluate options that minimize residential disruption and utilize superior street geometry: 1. Loma Verde Avenue Alignment: Loma Verde Avenue provides a significantly wider right-of-way, superior neighborhood connectivity, direct access to key community destinations, and a street profile far better equipped to absorb multimodal traffic with minimal impact on private property and street parking. 2. Parallel Multi-Use Path Along Alma Street (The Paly Model): Similar to the highly successful multi-use path running parallel to Alma Street near Palo Alto High School and Town & Country Village, the City could construct a continuous, low-stress north- south bicycle and pedestrian path along the Alma Street corridor in South Palo Alto. This would allow active transit users to safely navigate north or south along Alma to existing or planned grade-separated crossings (such as California Ave, Meadow Dr, or Loma Verde) without routing heavy bicycle volumes deep into narrow residential side streets. Conclusion Palo Alto residents value thoughtful, data-driven planning that balances citywide active transportation goals with neighborhood safety and fiscal responsibility. Pausing the El Dorado Avenue project until ongoing key infrastructure projects are complete—while prioritizing immediate sidewalk maintenance and exploring wider arterial alternatives like Loma Verde— will deliver safer and more sustainable long-term outcomes for our community. Thank you for your leadership and for considering these public comments. Sincerely, Cuiping Chen / Palo Alto Resident From:Robert Marinaro To:Jo Ann Mandinach Cc:Manu Kumar; Nancy Ellickson; John Seltzer; Jenny Lee; Council, City; Veenker, Vicki; Stone, Greer; Lauing, Ed; Reckdahl, Keith; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Burt, Patrick; Lu, George; City Mgr; Roger Smith; Peter Xu; Nick Marinaro; McDonough, Melissa; Jennifer Kain; Gaines, Chantal; Loren Brown; Dana Dahlstrom; Ceci Kettendorf; Chris Berg; Taly Katz; Barry Katz; 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; 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; Kandace Kopensky; Moiz Sonasath; Peter Longanecker; Karsyn Smith Development; Raphael Zahnd; Riley Cooke; Palo Alto Daily Post; Gennady Sheyner; Louis Hsiao; 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; 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; 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; 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; Joe Sinnott; Linda Zausen; Danny Whelan; Gulya Timokhina; Matt Lynch; Oksana Selavri; Chuck Karish; Fred Bailin; Dave Adams; Christian Hothem; Aditya Jain; Anjali Jain; Arun Bodapati; Soumya Bodapati; Yingxi Liu; Susan Dorsky; Dave Price; Elaine Goodman; Brandon Cartwright; Clark Penado; Francescarael Rael; Lena Yarovaya; Kenneth Russell; Jon Hellesoe; Ryan Judd; Evan Reade; Kaye Crawford; Rosalie Cook; Kay Satit; Sooji Nam; Francis Lim; Giselle Roohparvar; Stephen Casale; Luci Sheppard; Alex Tesler; Michelle Rosengaus; Grace Downer; David Downer; Mary Ann Norton; Jason Robinson; Jen Bartolomei; Dave Melisso; Polina Samsonov; Eva Gandhe; Ruby Flath; Laya Ganapati; Christin Zhang; Arvind Kumar; David Featherman; Melinda McGee; John Melnychuk Subject:Re: OSV Next Steps... Date:Friday, August 28, 2026 2:33:21 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. And who can forget this on El Camino in 2023… I think I wrote on Nextdoor - - Welcome to Palo Alto and Stanford University - The Heart of Silicon Valley! Bob On Aug 28, 2026, at 2:19 PM, Jo Ann Mandinach <Joann@needtoknow.com> wrote: And if you're feeling nostalgic, here's a reminder how long this has been dragging on: https://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2010/07/30/end-vehicle-dwelling-college-terrace-petition-asks-2/ End vehicle dwelling,’ College Terrace petition asks Residents ask city to ban living in or storing vehicles in neighborhoods by Sue Dremann July 30, 2010 12:00 am Two years go Palo Alto city officials said they planned to craft a new ordinance to prohibit sleeping in cars overnight. But a cat-and-mouse game of vehicle shifting on city streets continues to frustrate residents and businesses. And some College Terrace residents are tired of waiting. The residents are circulating a petition to demand that city officials enact and enforce such an ordinance.... On Fri, Aug 28, 2026 at 2:07 PM Manu Kumar <manu@k9ventures.com> wrote: Wanted to share this sign from Menlo Park that I took a picture of recently... <IMG_5092.jpeg> On Fri, Aug 28, 2026 at 2:00 PM Nancy Ellickson <nellickson@gmail.com> wrote: The city could use the baseball park across from Stanford Shopping Center but I believe that would require a city-wide vote to change the status from park to OSV park. Also, I’m not sure the city ever answered the question as to whether allowing OSVs and selling a monthly permit would give OSV occupants “tenant status” and tenant rights— which opens another can of worms. Nancy Ellickson E: nellickson@gmail.com M: 650-245-1012 On Fri, Aug 28, 2026 at 1:46 PM John Seltzer <woodgood@pacbell.net> wrote: The city of Palo Alto is renting space at the Palo Alto airport to the Audi dealership for car storage. Seems to me that that space could accommodate a fair number of OSVs. Guess the city will need to spend another $27,000,000 (as they did in 2024 on consultants) to come up with a plan, whether it's viable or not. As a small business owner, unlike the city, I don't have the luxury of inefficiency. John at Perspectives In Wood On Friday, August 28, 2026 at 01:34:29 PM PDT, Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> wrote: Jenny, That is the $64,000 question! It would sure be most helpful if someone from the City could articulate the next steps to implement regulations to remove OSVs from residential streets and business corridors in the short term. Bob On Aug 28, 2026, at 1:21 PM, Jenny Lee <jenny.lee.jen@gmail.com> wrote: Thank you, Robert & does anyone know the immediate next steps required to move forward with our only two remaining options at this point? Thank you very much, Jenny On Fri, Aug 28, 2026 at 11:16 AM Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> wrote: Folks, Strike two for the Coyote Hill Safe Parking Pilot! Seems as though that would leave the following options: Outright City-wide OSV ban (preferred) Prohibition of OSVs on all residential and business/commercial streets with the East Embarcadero Safe Parking Pilot And... with continued discussions with regional partners for other practical (not impacting Palo Alto residents and businesses) safe parking sites. Best, Bob PS - - Many thanks Ann! You beat me to the punch! Begin forwarded message: From: Ann Balin <alafargue@mac.com> Subject: Stanford Land Management Push Back Date: August 28, 2026 at 9:28:33 AM PDT To: Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> SRPark doesn’t want to be told. Yet this is city property. Some OSV dwellers are Stanford employees. <IMG_0983.jpeg> <IMG_0982.jpeg> ******************* Another Version that May Be Easier to Read ************************ <Stanford Coyote Hill Pushback 1.png> <Stanford Coyote Hill Pushback 2.png> Sent from my iPhone From:Robert Marinaro To:John Seltzer Cc:Jenny Lee; Council, City; Veenker, Vicki; Stone, Greer; Lauing, Ed; Reckdahl, Keith; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Burt, Patrick; Lu, George; City Mgr; Roger Smith; Peter Xu; Nick Marinaro; McDonough, Melissa; Jennifer Kain; Gaines, Chantal; 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; Kandace Kopensky; Moiz Sonasath; Peter Longanecker; Karsyn Smith Development; Raphael Zahnd; Riley Cooke; 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; 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; 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; 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; Joe Sinnott; Linda Zausen; Danny Whelan; Gulya Timokhina; Matt Lynch; Oksana Selavri; Chuck Karish; Fred Bailin; Dave Adams; Christian Hothem; Aditya Jain; Anjali Jain; Arun Bodapati; Soumya Bodapati; Yingxi Liu; Susan Dorsky; Dave Price; Elaine Goodman; Brandon Cartwright; Clark Penado; Francescarael Rael; Lena Yarovaya; Kenneth Russell; Jon Hellesoe; Ryan Judd; Evan Reade; Kaye Crawford; Rosalie Cook; Kay Satit; Sooji Nam; Francis Lim; Giselle Roohparvar; Stephen Casale; Luci Sheppard; Alex Tesler; Michelle Rosengaus; Grace Downer; David Downer; Mary Ann Norton; Jason Robinson; Jen Bartolomei; Dave Melisso; Polina Samsonov; Eva Gandhe; Ruby Flath; Laya Ganapati; Christin Zhang; Arvind Kumar; David Featherman; Melinda McGee; John Melnychuk Subject:Re: OSV Next Steps... Audi Lot Adjacent to Airport Date:Friday, August 28, 2026 2:27:20 PM Attachments:Audi.png CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. John, Thanks for reminding us of the leased Audi parking lot between the airport and the area next to the water treatment plant. I have recommended that to the City, in fact twice - the last yesterday!!! Bob On Aug 28, 2026, at 1:46 PM, John Seltzer <woodgood@pacbell.net> wrote: The city of Palo Alto is renting space at the Palo Alto airport to the Audi dealership for car storage. Seems to me that that space could accommodate a fair number of OSVs. Guess the city will need to spend another $27,000,000 (as they did in 2024 on consultants) to come up with a plan, whether it's viable or not. As a small business owner, unlike the city, I don't have the luxury of inefficiency. John at Perspectives In Wood On Friday, August 28, 2026 at 01:34:29 PM PDT, Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> wrote: Jenny, That is the $64,000 question! It would sure be most helpful if someone from the City could articulate the next steps to implement regulations to remove OSVs from residential streets and business corridors in the short term. Bob On Aug 28, 2026, at 1:21 PM, Jenny Lee <jenny.lee.jen@gmail.com> wrote: Thank you, Robert & does anyone know the immediate next steps required to move forward with our only two remaining options at this point? Thank you very much, Jenny On Fri, Aug 28, 2026 at 11:16 AM Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> wrote: Folks, Strike two for the Coyote Hill Safe Parking Pilot! Seems as though that would leave the following options: Outright City-wide OSV ban (preferred) Prohibition of OSVs on all residential and business/commercial streets with the East Embarcadero Safe Parking Pilot And... with continued discussions with regional partners for other practical (not impacting Palo Alto residents and businesses) safe parking sites. Best, Bob PS - - Many thanks Ann! You beat me to the punch! Begin forwarded message: From: Ann Balin <alafargue@mac.com> Subject: Stanford Land Management Push Back Date: August 28, 2026 at 9:28:33 AM PDT To: Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> SRPark doesn’t want to be told. Yet this is city property. Some OSV dwellers are Stanford employees. <IMG_0983.jpeg> <IMG_0982.jpeg> ******************* Another Version that May Be Easier to Read ************************ <Stanford Coyote Hill Pushback 1.png> <Stanford Coyote Hill Pushback 2.png> Sent from my iPhone From:Bill McLane To:Jo Ann Mandinach Cc:Manu Kumar; Nancy Ellickson; John Seltzer; Jenny Lee; Robert Marinaro; Council, City; Veenker, Vicki; Stone, Greer; Lauing, Ed; Reckdahl, Keith; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Burt, Patrick; Lu, George; City Mgr; Roger Smith; Peter Xu; Nick Marinaro; McDonough, Melissa; Jennifer Kain; Gaines, Chantal; Loren Brown; Dana Dahlstrom; Ceci Kettendorf; Chris Berg; Taly Katz; Barry Katz; 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; Lydia Kou; Patrick Kelly; Osbaldo Romero; Bryna Chang; Xenia Czisch; 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; Kandace Kopensky; Moiz Sonasath; Peter Longanecker; Karsyn Smith Development; Raphael Zahnd; Riley Cooke; Palo Alto Daily Post; Gennady Sheyner; Louis Hsiao; 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; 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; 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; 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; Joe Sinnott; Linda Zausen; Danny Whelan; Gulya Timokhina; Matt Lynch; Oksana Selavri; Chuck Karish; Fred Bailin; Dave Adams; Christian Hothem; Aditya Jain; Anjali Jain; Arun Bodapati; Soumya Bodapati; Yingxi Liu; Susan Dorsky; Dave Price; Elaine Goodman; Brandon Cartwright; Clark Penado; Francescarael Rael; Lena Yarovaya; Kenneth Russell; Jon Hellesoe; Ryan Judd; Evan Reade; Kaye Crawford; Rosalie Cook; Kay Satit; Sooji Nam; Francis Lim; Giselle Roohparvar; Stephen Casale; Luci Sheppard; Alex Tesler; Michelle Rosengaus; Grace Downer; David Downer; Mary Ann Norton; Jason Robinson; Jen Bartolomei; Dave Melisso; Polina Samsonov; Eva Gandhe; Ruby Flath; Laya Ganapati; Christin Zhang; Arvind Kumar; David Featherman; Melinda McGee; John Melnychuk Subject:Re: OSV Next Steps... Date:Friday, August 28, 2026 2:25:33 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Absolutely great idea, except...This administration will likely grant permits only to OSVs, not tax-paying citizens. 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 28, 2026 at 2:20 PM Jo Ann Mandinach <joann@needtoknow.com> wrote:And if you're feeling nostalgic, here's a reminder how long this has been dragging on: https://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2010/07/30/end-vehicle-dwelling-college- terrace-petition-asks-2/ End vehicle dwelling,’ College Terrace petition asks Residents ask city to ban living in or storing vehicles in neighborhoods by Sue Dremann July 30, 2010 12:00 am Two years go Palo Alto city officials said they planned to craft a new ordinance to prohibit sleeping in cars overnight. But a cat-and-mouse game of vehicle shifting on city streets continues to frustrate residents and businesses. And some College Terrace residents are tired of waiting. The residents are circulating a petition to demand that city officials enact and enforce such an ordinance.... On Fri, Aug 28, 2026 at 2:07 PM Manu Kumar <manu@k9ventures.com> wrote: Wanted to share this sign from Menlo Park that I took a picture of recently... On Fri, Aug 28, 2026 at 2:00 PM Nancy Ellickson <nellickson@gmail.com> wrote: The city could use the baseball park across from Stanford Shopping Center but I believe that would require a city-wide vote to change the status from park to OSV park. Also, I’m not sure the city ever answered the question as to whether allowing OSVs and selling a monthly permit would give OSV occupants “tenant status” and tenant rights— which opens another can of worms. Nancy Ellickson E: nellickson@gmail.com M: 650-245-1012 On Fri, Aug 28, 2026 at 1:46 PM John Seltzer <woodgood@pacbell.net> wrote: The city of Palo Alto is renting space at the Palo Alto airport to the Audi dealership for car storage. Seems to me that that space could accommodate a fair number of OSVs. Guess the city will need to spend another $27,000,000 (as they did in 2024 on consultants) to come up with a plan, whether it's viable or not. As a small business owner, unlike the city, I don't have the luxury of inefficiency. John at Perspectives In Wood On Friday, August 28, 2026 at 01:34:29 PM PDT, Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> wrote: Jenny, That is the $64,000 question! It would sure be most helpful if someone from the City could articulate the next steps to implement regulations to remove OSVs from residential streets and business corridors in the short term. Bob On Aug 28, 2026, at 1:21 PM, Jenny Lee <jenny.lee.jen@gmail.com> wrote: Thank you, Robert & does anyone know the immediate next steps required to move forward with our only two remaining options at this point? Thank you very much, Jenny On Fri, Aug 28, 2026 at 11:16 AM Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> wrote: Folks, Strike two for the Coyote Hill Safe Parking Pilot! Seems as though that would leave the following options: Outright City-wide OSV ban (preferred) Prohibition of OSVs on all residential and business/commercial streets with the East Embarcadero Safe Parking Pilot And... with continued discussions with regional partners for other practical (not impacting Palo Alto residents and businesses) safe parking sites. Best, Bob PS - - Many thanks Ann! You beat me to the punch! Begin forwarded message: From: Ann Balin <alafargue@mac.com> Subject: Stanford Land Management Push Back Date: August 28, 2026 at 9:28:33 AM PDT To: Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> SRPark doesn’t want to be told. Yet this is city property. Some OSV dwellers are Stanford employees. <IMG_0983.jpeg> <IMG_0982.jpeg> ******************* Another Version that May Be Easier to Read ************************ <Stanford Coyote Hill Pushback 1.png> <Stanford Coyote Hill Pushback 2.png> Sent from my iPhone From:Rodrigo Baptista To:Lauing, Ed; Veenker, Vicki; Burt, Patrick; Lu, George; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Reckdahl, Keith; Stone, Greer; Jeff Greenfield Cc:Council, City; Nicholas A Bloom; Eric Madrigal Subject:Re: Exploring Additional Soccer Field Opportunities in Palo Alto Date:Friday, August 28, 2026 2:25:02 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. ! Dear City Council Members, I’m writing to follow up on my email below sent last week and to also share some photos showing the current condition of Palo Alto’s city-owned athletic fields. The attached photos were taken this week at Greer Park and Cubberley Community Center. We, PASC and SVSA would love the opportunity to work with the City to identify ways to improve the overall condition of our parks and fields and better support the community members who rely on them. Thank you for reading this email. I look forward to discussing how we can work together to further improve our community athletic fields. Rodrigo This message could be suspicious The sender's email address couldn't be verified. Mark Safe Report Powered by Mimecast On Wed, Aug 19, 2026 at 12:31 PM Rodrigo Baptista <rodrigo.baptista@pasoccerclub.org> wrote: Dear Council Members, I am the Executive Director of Palo Alto Soccer Club and Silicon Valley Soccer Academy, as well as a Palo Alto resident. Our programs serve approximately 1,600 competitive boys and girls players and more than 800 recreational players. The shortage of available field space continues to be a significant challenge for our PA players and local families. Over the years, we have discussed several possible solutions with the City, including installing permanent lights at the Cubberley turf field and Greer Park Fields 1 and 2. These improvements would significantly increase the usable hours of existing facilities and provide some immediate relief. We would also like to revisit the potential development of additional athletic fields in the Baylands. As part of the City’s 2013 Municipal Golf Course reconfiguration project, the City studied incorporating approximately 10.5 acres of the former golf course into the Baylands Athletic Center for future recreational use. The initial concept contemplated up to 5 full-size soccer fields and a gymnasium. At the time, the Club engaged a development firm to evaluate the site. Based on its assessment of the property and the surrounding wetlands, the firm determined that the site could accommodate 3 full-size soccer fields and a gymnasium. Although the athletic complex was not ultimately developed, the golf course reconfiguration added approximately 10.5 acres to the Baylands Athletic Center for future recreation. Given the City’s previous planning work, the Club’s preliminary site evaluation, and the continued shortage of youth athletic fields, we believe it would be worthwhile to review the current status of the property and determine whether all or a portion of the original concept remains feasible. We are very interested in working with the City to develop additional athletic fields at the Baylands, at a minimum, a soccer facility comparable in size to the Mayfield Soccer Complex. This project could be developed through a public private partnership or a long-term lease agreement with the Club. We believe PASC/SVSA has the organizational expertise, operational experience, and financial capacity to be a strong partner in developing, maintaining, and operating a new facility in collaboration with the City of Palo Alto. Would you be available for a meeting? I would be joined by representatives from PASC and SVSA management team. Thank you for your consideration. We would be thrilled with the opportunity to discuss how the Club and the City could work together to create additional field capacity for Palo Alto’s youth and broader community. Rodrigo Baptista Executive Director Palo Alto Soccer Club & Silicon Valley Soccer Academy Palo Alto Resident -- Rodrigo Baptista Executive Director I Palo Alto Soccer Club | Silicon Valley Soccer Academy C: 650-704-4456 rodrigo.baptista@pasoccerclub.org https://pasoccerclub.org/ 4000 Middlefield Rd., Palo Alto, CA -- Rodrigo Baptista Executive Director I Palo Alto Soccer Club | Silicon Valley Soccer Academy C: 650-704-4456 rodrigo.baptista@pasoccerclub.org https://pasoccerclub.org/ 4000 Middlefield Rd., Palo Alto, CA From:Jo Ann Mandinach To:Manu Kumar Cc:Nancy Ellickson; John Seltzer; Jenny Lee; Robert Marinaro; Council, City; Veenker, Vicki; Stone, Greer; Lauing, Ed; Reckdahl, Keith; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Burt, Patrick; Lu, George; City Mgr; Roger Smith; Peter Xu; Nick Marinaro; McDonough, Melissa; Jennifer Kain; Gaines, Chantal; Loren Brown; Dana Dahlstrom; Ceci Kettendorf; Chris Berg; Taly Katz; Barry Katz; 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; 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; Kandace Kopensky; Moiz Sonasath; Peter Longanecker; Karsyn Smith Development; Raphael Zahnd; Riley Cooke; Palo Alto Daily Post; Gennady Sheyner; Louis Hsiao; 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; 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; 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; 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; Joe Sinnott; Linda Zausen; Danny Whelan; Gulya Timokhina; Matt Lynch; Oksana Selavri; Chuck Karish; Fred Bailin; Dave Adams; Christian Hothem; Aditya Jain; Anjali Jain; Arun Bodapati; Soumya Bodapati; Yingxi Liu; Susan Dorsky; Dave Price; Elaine Goodman; Brandon Cartwright; Clark Penado; Francescarael Rael; Lena Yarovaya; Kenneth Russell; Jon Hellesoe; Ryan Judd; Evan Reade; Kaye Crawford; Rosalie Cook; Kay Satit; Sooji Nam; Francis Lim; Giselle Roohparvar; Stephen Casale; Luci Sheppard; Alex Tesler; Michelle Rosengaus; Grace Downer; David Downer; Mary Ann Norton; Jason Robinson; Jen Bartolomei; Dave Melisso; Polina Samsonov; Eva Gandhe; Ruby Flath; Laya Ganapati; Christin Zhang; Arvind Kumar; David Featherman; Melinda McGee; John Melnychuk Subject:Re: OSV Next Steps... Date:Friday, August 28, 2026 2:20:38 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. ! And if you're feeling nostalgic, here's a reminder how long this has been dragging on: https://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2010/07/30/end-vehicle-dwelling-college- terrace-petition-asks-2/ End vehicle dwelling,’ College Terrace petition asks Residents ask city to ban living in or storing vehicles in neighborhoods This message could be suspicious The sender's email address couldn't be verified. Mark Safe Report Powered by Mimecast by Sue Dremann July 30, 2010 12:00 am Two years go Palo Alto city officials said they planned to craft a new ordinance to prohibit sleeping in cars overnight. But a cat-and-mouse game of vehicle shifting on city streets continues to frustrate residents and businesses. And some College Terrace residents are tired of waiting. The residents are circulating a petition to demand that city officials enact and enforce such an ordinance.... On Fri, Aug 28, 2026 at 2:07 PM Manu Kumar <manu@k9ventures.com> wrote: Wanted to share this sign from Menlo Park that I took a picture of recently... On Fri, Aug 28, 2026 at 2:00 PM Nancy Ellickson <nellickson@gmail.com> wrote: The city could use the baseball park across from Stanford Shopping Center but I believe that would require a city-wide vote to change the status from park to OSV park. Also, I’m not sure the city ever answered the question as to whether allowing OSVs and selling a monthly permit would give OSV occupants “tenant status” and tenant rights— which opens another can of worms. Nancy Ellickson E: nellickson@gmail.com M: 650-245-1012 On Fri, Aug 28, 2026 at 1:46 PM John Seltzer <woodgood@pacbell.net> wrote: The city of Palo Alto is renting space at the Palo Alto airport to the Audi dealership for car storage. Seems to me that that space could accommodate a fair number of OSVs. Guess the city will need to spend another $27,000,000 (as they did in 2024 on consultants) to come up with a plan, whether it's viable or not. As a small business owner, unlike the city, I don't have the luxury of inefficiency. John at Perspectives In Wood On Friday, August 28, 2026 at 01:34:29 PM PDT, Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> wrote: Jenny, That is the $64,000 question! It would sure be most helpful if someone from the City could articulate the next steps to implement regulations to remove OSVs from residential streets and business corridors in the short term. Bob On Aug 28, 2026, at 1:21 PM, Jenny Lee <jenny.lee.jen@gmail.com> wrote: Thank you, Robert & does anyone know the immediate next steps required to move forward with our only two remaining options at this point? Thank you very much, Jenny On Fri, Aug 28, 2026 at 11:16 AM Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> wrote: Folks, Strike two for the Coyote Hill Safe Parking Pilot! Seems as though that would leave the following options: Outright City-wide OSV ban (preferred) Prohibition of OSVs on all residential and business/commercial streets with the East Embarcadero Safe Parking Pilot And... with continued discussions with regional partners for other practical (not impacting Palo Alto residents and businesses) safe parking sites. Best, Bob PS - - Many thanks Ann! You beat me to the punch! Begin forwarded message: From: Ann Balin <alafargue@mac.com> Subject: Stanford Land Management Push Back Date: August 28, 2026 at 9:28:33 AM PDT To: Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> SRPark doesn’t want to be told. Yet this is city property. Some OSV dwellers are Stanford employees. <IMG_0983.jpeg> <IMG_0982.jpeg> ******************* Another Version that May Be Easier to Read ************************ <Stanford Coyote Hill Pushback 1.png> <Stanford Coyote Hill Pushback 2.png> Sent from my iPhone From:Manu Kumar To:Nancy Ellickson Cc:John Seltzer; Jenny Lee; Robert Marinaro; Council, City; Veenker, Vicki; Stone, Greer; Lauing, Ed; Reckdahl, Keith; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Burt, Patrick; Lu, George; City Mgr; Roger Smith; Peter Xu; Nick Marinaro; McDonough, Melissa; Jennifer Kain; Gaines, Chantal; Loren Brown; Dana Dahlstrom; Ceci Kettendorf; Chris Berg; Taly Katz; Barry Katz; 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; 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; Kandace Kopensky; Moiz Sonasath; Peter Longanecker; Karsyn Smith Development; Raphael Zahnd; Riley Cooke; 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; 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; 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; 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; Joe Sinnott; Linda Zausen; Danny Whelan; Gulya Timokhina; Matt Lynch; Oksana Selavri; Chuck Karish; Fred Bailin; Dave Adams; Christian Hothem; Aditya Jain; Anjali Jain; Arun Bodapati; Soumya Bodapati; Yingxi Liu; Susan Dorsky; Dave Price; Elaine Goodman; Brandon Cartwright; Clark Penado; Francescarael Rael; Lena Yarovaya; Kenneth Russell; Jon Hellesoe; Ryan Judd; Evan Reade; Kaye Crawford; Rosalie Cook; Kay Satit; Sooji Nam; Francis Lim; Giselle Roohparvar; Stephen Casale; Luci Sheppard; Alex Tesler; Michelle Rosengaus; Grace Downer; David Downer; Mary Ann Norton; Jason Robinson; Jen Bartolomei; Dave Melisso; Polina Samsonov; Eva Gandhe; Ruby Flath; Laya Ganapati; Christin Zhang; Arvind Kumar; David Featherman; Melinda McGee; John Melnychuk Subject:Re: OSV Next Steps... Date:Friday, August 28, 2026 2:07:58 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Wanted to share this sign from Menlo Park that I took a picture of recently... On Fri, Aug 28, 2026 at 2:00 PM Nancy Ellickson <nellickson@gmail.com> wrote: The city could use the baseball park across from Stanford Shopping Center but I believe that would require a city-wide vote to change the status from park to OSV park. Also, I’m not sure the city ever answered the question as to whether allowing OSVs and selling a monthly permit would give OSV occupants “tenant status” and tenant rights— which opens another can of worms. Nancy Ellickson E: nellickson@gmail.com M: 650-245-1012 On Fri, Aug 28, 2026 at 1:46 PM John Seltzer <woodgood@pacbell.net> wrote: The city of Palo Alto is renting space at the Palo Alto airport to the Audi dealership for car storage. Seems to me that that space could accommodate a fair number of OSVs. Guess the city will need to spend another $27,000,000 (as they did in 2024 on consultants) to come up with a plan, whether it's viable or not. As a small business owner, unlike the city, I don't have the luxury of inefficiency. John at Perspectives In Wood On Friday, August 28, 2026 at 01:34:29 PM PDT, Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> wrote: Jenny, That is the $64,000 question! It would sure be most helpful if someone from the City could articulate the next steps to implement regulations to remove OSVs from residential streets and business corridors in the short term. Bob On Aug 28, 2026, at 1:21 PM, Jenny Lee <jenny.lee.jen@gmail.com> wrote: Thank you, Robert & does anyone know the immediate next steps required to move forward with our only two remaining options at this point? Thank you very much, Jenny On Fri, Aug 28, 2026 at 11:16 AM Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> wrote: Folks, Strike two for the Coyote Hill Safe Parking Pilot! Seems as though that would leave the following options: Outright City-wide OSV ban (preferred) Prohibition of OSVs on all residential and business/commercial streets with the East Embarcadero Safe Parking Pilot And... with continued discussions with regional partners for other practical (not impacting Palo Alto residents and businesses) safe parking sites. Best, Bob PS - - Many thanks Ann! You beat me to the punch! Begin forwarded message: From: Ann Balin <alafargue@mac.com> Subject: Stanford Land Management Push Back Date: August 28, 2026 at 9:28:33 AM PDT To: Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> SRPark doesn’t want to be told. Yet this is city property. Some OSV dwellers are Stanford employees. <IMG_0983.jpeg> <IMG_0982.jpeg> ******************* Another Version that May Be Easier to Read ************************ <Stanford Coyote Hill Pushback 1.png> <Stanford Coyote Hill Pushback 2.png> Sent from my iPhone From:Nancy Ellickson To:John Seltzer Cc:Jenny Lee; Robert Marinaro; Council, City; Veenker, Vicki; Stone, Greer; Lauing, Ed; Reckdahl, Keith; Lythcott- Haims, Julie; Burt, Patrick; Lu, George; City Mgr; Roger Smith; Peter Xu; Nick Marinaro; McDonough, Melissa; Jennifer Kain; Gaines, Chantal; Loren Brown; Dana Dahlstrom; Ceci Kettendorf; Chris Berg; Taly Katz; Barry Katz; 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; Kandace Kopensky; Moiz Sonasath; Peter Longanecker; Karsyn Smith Development; Raphael Zahnd; Riley Cooke; 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; 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; 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; 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; Joe Sinnott; Linda Zausen; Danny Whelan; Gulya Timokhina; Matt Lynch; Oksana Selavri; Chuck Karish; Fred Bailin; Dave Adams; Christian Hothem; Aditya Jain; Anjali Jain; Arun Bodapati; Soumya Bodapati; Yingxi Liu; Susan Dorsky; Dave Price; Elaine Goodman; Brandon Cartwright; Clark Penado; Francescarael Rael; Lena Yarovaya; Kenneth Russell; Jon Hellesoe; Ryan Judd; Evan Reade; Kaye Crawford; Rosalie Cook; Kay Satit; Sooji Nam; Francis Lim; Giselle Roohparvar; Stephen Casale; Luci Sheppard; Alex Tesler; Michelle Rosengaus; Grace Downer; David Downer; Mary Ann Norton; Jason Robinson; Jen Bartolomei; Dave Melisso; Polina Samsonov; Eva Gandhe; Ruby Flath; Laya Ganapati; Christin Zhang; Arvind Kumar; David Featherman; Melinda McGee; John Melnychuk Subject:Re: OSV Next Steps... Date:Friday, August 28, 2026 2:00:22 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i The city could use the baseball park across from Stanford Shopping Center but I believe that would require a city-wide vote to change the status from park to OSV park. Also, I’m not sure the city ever answered the question as to whether allowing OSVs and selling a monthly permit would give OSV occupants “tenant status” and tenant rights—which opens another can of worms. Nancy Ellickson E: nellickson@gmail.com M: 650-245-1012 This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. Mark Safe Report Powered by Mimecast On Fri, Aug 28, 2026 at 1:46 PM John Seltzer <woodgood@pacbell.net> wrote: The city of Palo Alto is renting space at the Palo Alto airport to the Audi dealership for car storage. Seems to me that that space could accommodate a fair number of OSVs. Guess the city will need to spend another $27,000,000 (as they did in 2024 on consultants) to come up with a plan, whether it's viable or not. As a small business owner, unlike the city, I don't have the luxury of inefficiency. John at Perspectives In Wood On Friday, August 28, 2026 at 01:34:29 PM PDT, Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> wrote: Jenny, That is the $64,000 question! It would sure be most helpful if someone from the City could articulate the next steps to implement regulations to remove OSVs from residential streets and business corridors in the short term. Bob On Aug 28, 2026, at 1:21 PM, Jenny Lee <jenny.lee.jen@gmail.com> wrote: Thank you, Robert & does anyone know the immediate next steps required to move forward with our only two remaining options at this point? Thank you very much, Jenny On Fri, Aug 28, 2026 at 11:16 AM Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> wrote: Folks, Strike two for the Coyote Hill Safe Parking Pilot! Seems as though that would leave the following options: Outright City-wide OSV ban (preferred) Prohibition of OSVs on all residential and business/commercial streets with the East Embarcadero Safe Parking Pilot And... with continued discussions with regional partners for other practical (not impacting Palo Alto residents and businesses) safe parking sites. Best, Bob PS - - Many thanks Ann! You beat me to the punch! Begin forwarded message: From: Ann Balin <alafargue@mac.com> Subject: Stanford Land Management Push Back Date: August 28, 2026 at 9:28:33 AM PDT To: Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> SRPark doesn’t want to be told. Yet this is city property. Some OSV dwellers are Stanford employees. <IMG_0983.jpeg> <IMG_0982.jpeg> ******************* Another Version that May Be Easier to Read ************************ <Stanford Coyote Hill Pushback 1.png> <Stanford Coyote Hill Pushback 2.png> Sent from my iPhone From:John Seltzer To:Jenny Lee; Robert Marinaro Cc:Council, City; Veenker, Vicki; Stone, Greer; Lauing, Ed; Reckdahl, Keith; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Burt, Patrick; Lu, George; City Mgr; Roger Smith; Peter Xu; Nick Marinaro; McDonough, Melissa; Jennifer Kain; Gaines, Chantal; 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; Kandace Kopensky; Moiz Sonasath; Peter Longanecker; Karsyn Smith Development; Raphael Zahnd; Riley Cooke; 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; 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; 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; 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; Joe Sinnott; Linda Zausen; Danny Whelan; Gulya Timokhina; Matt Lynch; Oksana Selavri; Chuck Karish; Fred Bailin; Dave Adams; Christian Hothem; Aditya Jain; Anjali Jain; Arun Bodapati; Soumya Bodapati; Yingxi Liu; Susan Dorsky; Dave Price; Elaine Goodman; Brandon Cartwright; Clark Penado; Francescarael Rael; Lena Yarovaya; Kenneth Russell; Jon Hellesoe; Ryan Judd; Evan Reade; Kaye Crawford; Rosalie Cook; Kay Satit; Sooji Nam; Francis Lim; Giselle Roohparvar; Stephen Casale; Luci Sheppard; Alex Tesler; Michelle Rosengaus; Grace Downer; David Downer; Mary Ann Norton; Jason Robinson; Jen Bartolomei; Dave Melisso; Polina Samsonov; Eva Gandhe; Ruby Flath; Laya Ganapati; Christin Zhang; Arvind Kumar; David Featherman; Melinda McGee; John Melnychuk Subject:Re: OSV Next Steps... Date:Friday, August 28, 2026 1:46:43 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i The city of Palo Alto is renting space at the Palo Alto airport to the Audi dealership for car storage. Seems to me that that space could accommodate a fair number of OSVs. Guess the city will need to spend another $27,000,000 (as they did in 2024 on consultants) to come up with a plan, whether it's viable or not. As a small business owner, unlike the city, I don't have the luxury of inefficiency. John at Perspectives In Wood On Friday, August 28, 2026 at 01:34:29 PM PDT, Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> wrote: Jenny, This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. Mark Safe Report Powered by Mimecast That is the $64,000 question! It would sure be most helpful if someone from the City could articulate the next steps to implement regulations to remove OSVs from residential streets and business corridors in the short term. Bob On Aug 28, 2026, at 1:21 PM, Jenny Lee <jenny.lee.jen@gmail.com> wrote: Thank you, Robert & does anyone know the immediate next steps required to move forward with our only two remaining options at this point? Thank you very much, Jenny On Fri, Aug 28, 2026 at 11:16 AM Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> wrote: Folks, Strike two for the Coyote Hill Safe Parking Pilot! Seems as though that would leave the following options: Outright City-wide OSV ban (preferred) Prohibition of OSVs on all residential and business/commercial streets with the East Embarcadero Safe Parking Pilot And... with continued discussions with regional partners for other practical (not impacting Palo Alto residents and businesses) safe parking sites. Best, Bob PS - - Many thanks Ann! You beat me to the punch! Begin forwarded message: From: Ann Balin <alafargue@mac.com> Subject: Stanford Land Management Push Back Date: August 28, 2026 at 9:28:33 AM PDT To: Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> SRPark doesn’t want to be told. Yet this is city property. Some OSV dwellers are Stanford employees. <IMG_0983.jpeg> <IMG_0982.jpeg> ******************* Another Version that May Be Easier to Read ************************ <Stanford Coyote Hill Pushback 1.png> <Stanford Coyote Hill Pushback 2.png> Sent from my iPhone From:Robert Marinaro To:Jenny Lee Cc:Council, City; Veenker, Vicki; Stone, Greer; Lauing, Ed; Reckdahl, Keith; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Burt, Patrick; Lu, George; City Mgr; Roger Smith; Peter Xu; Nick Marinaro; McDonough, Melissa; Jennifer Kain; Gaines, Chantal; 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; 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; 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; 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; 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; Joe Sinnott; Linda Zausen; Danny Whelan; Gulya Timokhina; Matt Lynch; Oksana Selavri; Chuck Karish; Fred Bailin; Dave Adams; Christian Hothem; Aditya Jain; Anjali Jain; Arun Bodapati; Soumya Bodapati; Yingxi Liu; Susan Dorsky; Dave Price; Elaine Goodman; Brandon Cartwright; Clark Penado; Francescarael Rael; Lena Yarovaya; Kenneth Russell; Jon Hellesoe; Ryan Judd; Evan Reade; Kaye Crawford; Rosalie Cook; Kay Satit; Sooji Nam; Francis Lim; Giselle Roohparvar; Stephen Casale; Luci Sheppard; Alex Tesler; Michelle Rosengaus; Grace Downer; David Downer; Mary Ann Norton; Jason Robinson; Jen Bartolomei; Dave Melisso; Polina Samsonov; Eva Gandhe; Ruby Flath; Laya Ganapati; Christin Zhang; Arvind Kumar; David Featherman; Melinda McGee; John Melnychuk Subject:OSV Next Steps... Date:Friday, August 28, 2026 1:34:48 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Jenny, That is the $64,000 question! It would sure be most helpful if someone from the City could articulate the next steps to implement regulations to remove OSVs from residential streets and business corridors in the short term. Bob On Aug 28, 2026, at 1:21 PM, Jenny Lee <jenny.lee.jen@gmail.com> wrote: Thank you, Robert & does anyone know the immediate next steps required to move forward with our only two remaining options at this point? Thank you very much, Jenny On Fri, Aug 28, 2026 at 11:16 AM Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> Folks, Strike two for the Coyote Hill Safe Parking Pilot! Seems as though that would leave the following options: Outright City-wide OSV ban (preferred) Prohibition of OSVs on all residential and business/commercial streets with the East Embarcadero Safe Parking Pilot And... with continued discussions with regional partners for other practical (not impacting Palo Alto residents and businesses) safe parking sites. Best, Bob PS - - Many thanks Ann! You beat me to the punch! Begin forwarded message: From: Ann Balin <alafargue@mac.com> Subject: Stanford Land Management Push Back Date: August 28, 2026 at 9:28:33 AM PDT To: Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> SRPark doesn’t want to be told. Yet this is city property. Some OSV dwellers are Stanford employees. <IMG_0983.jpeg> <IMG_0982.jpeg> ******************* Another Version that May Be Easier to Read ************************ <Stanford Coyote Hill Pushback 1.png> <Stanford Coyote Hill Pushback 2.png> Sent from my iPhone From:Charlie Weidanz To:Council, City Subject:Announcing the 2026 ATHENA Leadership Awards Presentation Date:Friday, August 28, 2026 1:26:53 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Athena International 2026 Leadership Presentation promo Palo Alto Chamber of Commerce proudly presents the 2026 Annual ATHENA® Awards Thursday October 15, 2026 5:30 pm - 8:00 pm El Prado Hotel 520 Cowper St. Palo Alto, CA 94301 Get Your Tickets Today >> The ATHENA award is given to honor exceptional woman leaders who demonstrate the highest levels of professional excellence, give back to their communities and, most importantly, assist other women in realizing their full leadership potential – and it is an international award, having been given to more than 6,500 recipients in over 500 cities and 8 countries. Locally it is awarded by our Chamber of Commerce. Register Online >> Event Info This email was sent on behalf of Palo Alto Chamber of Commerce 355 Alma St Palo Alto, CA 94301.To unsubscribe click here. If you have questions or comments concerning this email or services in general, please contact us by email at info@paloaltochamber.com. ®​ From:Jenny Lee To:Robert Marinaro Cc:Council, City; Veenker, Vicki; Stone, Greer; Lauing, Ed; Reckdahl, Keith; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Burt, Patrick; Lu, George; City Mgr; Roger Smith; Peter Xu; Nick Marinaro; McDonough, Melissa; Jennifer Kain; Gaines, Chantal; 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; 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; 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; 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; 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; Joe Sinnott; Linda Zausen; Danny Whelan; Gulya Timokhina; Matt Lynch; Oksana Selavri; Chuck Karish; Fred Bailin; Dave Adams; Christian Hothem; Aditya Jain; Anjali Jain; Arun Bodapati; Soumya Bodapati; Yingxi Liu; Susan Dorsky; Dave Price; Elaine Goodman; Brandon Cartwright; Clark Penado; Francescarael Rael; Lena Yarovaya; Kenneth Russell; Jon Hellesoe; Ryan Judd; Evan Reade; Kaye Crawford; Rosalie Cook; Kay Satit; Sooji Nam; Francis Lim; Giselle Roohparvar; Stephen Casale; Luci Sheppard; Alex Tesler; Michelle Rosengaus; Grace Downer; David Downer; Mary Ann Norton; Jason Robinson; Jen Bartolomei; Dave Melisso; Polina Samsonov; Eva Gandhe; Ruby Flath; Laya Ganapati; Christin Zhang; Arvind Kumar; David Featherman; Melinda McGee; John Melnychuk Subject:Re: Stanford Land Management Push Back Date:Friday, August 28, 2026 1:22:18 PM Attachments:Stanford Coyote Hill Pushback 1.png Stanford Coyote Hill Pushback 2.png CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Thank you, Robert & does anyone know the immediate next steps required to move forward with our only two remaining options at this point? Thank you very much, Jenny On Fri, Aug 28, 2026 at 11:16 AM Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> wrote: Folks, Strike two for the Coyote Hill Safe Parking Pilot! Seems as though that would leave the following options: Outright City-wide OSV ban (preferred) Prohibition of OSVs on all residential and business/commercial streets with the East Embarcadero Safe Parking Pilot And... with continued discussions with regional partners for other practical (not impacting Palo Alto residents and businesses) safe parking sites. Best, Bob PS - - Many thanks Ann! You beat me to the punch! Begin forwarded message: From: Ann Balin <alafargue@mac.com> Subject: Stanford Land Management Push Back Date: August 28, 2026 at 9:28:33 AM PDT To: Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> SRPark doesn’t want to be told. Yet this is city property. Some OSV dwellers are Stanford employees. ******************* Another Version that May Be Easier to Read ************************ Sent from my iPhone From:Hiral Parekh To:Council, City; Shikada, Ed; Veenker, Vicki Cc:Transportation; Safe Routes; HerbertHoover PTA; Shailo Rao; Jun Yan; Claire Kirner; prasad.anirudh@gmail.com; Sonya Bradski; Star-Lack, Sylvia; ellorenzo@gmail.com; Tracie Cheung; Sean Seibel; Ellson, Penny; Gauss Gormley, Karen; cdudleyt@gmail.com; Lisa Talbot; Marie-Anne Fogel; Gary Bradski Subject:Urgent Safety Request: Prohibit U-Turns on Carlson Court in Palo Alto Date:Friday, August 28, 2026 1:21:06 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Mayor Veenker, Palo Alto City Council, and City Manager Ed Shikada, I’m asking the City to prohibit U-turns on Carlson Court at all times and install clear No U- Turn signage. Carlson Court is not only a school commute route. It is a major cycling, walking, commuting, and exercise route used throughout the day by children, parents, adult commuters, and recreational cyclists. That is why I am proposing a full-day prohibition rather than a restriction limited to school hours. Please watch this video documenting the issue on Wednesday, before evaluating the request: https://youtu.be/3EQ0Q2R3Xgc It shows cars driving onto sidewalks, incomplete stops, right turns on red while children are present, long lines of vehicles attempting U-turns, and children weaving through traffic on bikes, scooters, and foot. You can also see parents yelling at drivers to protect their children. Our own 6-year-old son was nearly hit by a vehicle making a U-turn across the sidewalk. Carlson Court is too narrow for these maneuvers, and the danger is already visible and documented. Let’s take action now, before a child or adult is killed or severely injured. I am rallying community members around this topic and will continue to email and petition to ensure we get action. Please prohibit U-turns on Carlson Court at all times and install clear signage. Thank you, Hiral Parekh From:Robert Marinaro To:Council, City; Veenker, Vicki; Stone, Greer; Lauing, Ed; Reckdahl, Keith; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Burt, Patrick; Lu, George; City Mgr Cc:Roger Smith; Peter Xu; Nick Marinaro; McDonough, Melissa; Jennifer Kain; Gaines, Chantal; 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; 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; 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; 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; 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; Joe Sinnott; Linda Zausen; Danny Whelan; Gulya Timokhina; Matt Lynch; Oksana Selavri; Chuck Karish; Fred Bailin; Dave Adams; Christian Hothem; Aditya Jain; Anjali Jain; Jenny Lee; Arun Bodapati; Soumya Bodapati; Yingxi Liu; Susan Dorsky; Dave Price; Elaine Goodman; Brandon Cartwright; Clark Penado; Francescarael Rael; Lena Yarovaya; Kenneth Russell; Jon Hellesoe; Ryan Judd; Evan Reade; Kaye Crawford; Rosalie Cook; Kay Satit; Sooji Nam; Francis Lim; Giselle Roohparvar; Stephen Casale; Luci Sheppard; Alex Tesler; Michelle Rosengaus; Grace Downer; David Downer; Mary Ann Norton; Jason Robinson; Jen Bartolomei; Dave Melisso; Polina Samsonov; Eva Gandhe; Ruby Flath; Laya Ganapati; Christin Zhang; Arvind Kumar; David Featherman; Melinda McGee; John Melnychuk Subject:Stanford Land Management Push Back Date:Friday, August 28, 2026 11:17:44 AM Attachments:Stanford Coyote Hill Pushback 1.png Stanford Coyote Hill Pushback 2.png CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Folks, Strike two for the Coyote Hill Safe Parking Pilot! Seems as though that would leave the following options: Outright City-wide OSV ban (preferred) Prohibition of OSVs on all residential and business/commercial streets with the East Embarcadero Safe Parking Pilot And... with continued discussions with regional partners for other practical (not impacting Palo Alto residents and businesses) safe parking sites. Best, Bob PS - - Many thanks Ann! You beat me to the punch! Begin forwarded message: From: Ann Balin <alafargue@mac.com> Subject: Stanford Land Management Push Back Date: August 28, 2026 at 9:28:33 AM PDT To: Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> SRPark doesn’t want to be told. Yet this is city property. Some OSV dwellers are Stanford employees. ******************* Another Version that May Be Easier to Read ************************ Sent from my iPhone From:Sadaf Samuel Cc:info@educationandlifefoundation.org Subject:A Request for Partnership Date:Friday, August 28, 2026 11:12:16 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Greetings, Dear Sir/Madam, I hope this message finds you well. Education and Life Foundation is a registered charity working to support underserved communities in Pakistan. Our key focus areas include human rights, healthcare, education, skill development, poverty alleviation, and disaster relief. We are interested in exploring opportunities to collaborate as a project partner on welfare initiatives in Pakistan. Our organization is registered with the Federal Board of Revenue (FBR), Economic Affairs Division (EAD), Punjab Charity Commission, and the Registrar of Joint Stock Companies, Lahore. We would welcome the opportunity to share more about our work through a brief call or presentation at your convenience. Thanks for your cooperation. Yours Sincerely, Sadaf Philanthropist Education And Life Foundation Representative in Pakistan +92 318 4391279 Representative in New Zealand +64 210 221 0082 This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first email to your company. Mark Safe Report From:Josh Forde To:Civil.1CC@courts.hawaii.gov; CivilSupport@sftc.org; civilinfo@santacruzcourt.org; CivilAppeals@sftc.org; cfc.3cc@courts.hawaii.gov; sloan.taylor@uspto.gov; dfi@dcca.hawaii.gov; resolutions@fdic.gov; fccivil.1cc@courts.hawaii.gov; president@whitehouse.gov; gov.communications@hawaii.gov; dccrim.2dc@courts.hawaii.gov; ocp@dcca.hawaii.gov; hawaiiag@hawaii.gov; Rep.Hong@legis.wisconsin.gov; AD1copy-civil@nycourts.gov; CourtesyCopy@fdic.gov; pao@courts.hawaii.gov; adarequest@courts.hawaii.gov; appeals.coa@courts.hawaii.gov; jurypool.1cc@courts.hawaii.gov; dccrim.1dc@courts.hawaii.gov; LegalDocs.5CC@courts.hawaii.gov; DCCrimK.3DC@courts.hawaii.gov; Angela Gannon; governor.green@hawaii.gov; First Hawaiian Bank; First Hawaiian Bank; media@honolulu.gov; csd@honolulu.gov; complaints@honolulu.gov; collection@honolulu.gov; finance_restitution@nynd.uscourts.gov; agorecordsaccessofficer@mass.gov; budgetandfinance@hawaii.gov; hi.budgetandfinance@hawaii.gov; budget.office@co.maui.hi.us; budget@hawaiicounty.gov; budget.democrats@mail.house.gov; Finance.Administration@cityofchicago.org; finance_eft@nynd.uscourts.gov; students@cfpb.gov; bfstreasmailbox@honolulu.gov; county.council@mauicounty.us; mayors.office@co.maui.hi.us; breg@dcca.hawaii.gov; bac@dcca.hawaii.gov; bylaws@mass.gov; britneywsheehan@bofa.com; colleenhaggerty@bofa.com; dianewagner@bofa.com; matthewdaily@bofa.com; juansoto3@bofa.com; thomasfrottcher@bofa.com; sheryllee2@bofa.com; carolynbatt@bofa.com; donvecchiarello@bofa.com; susanatran@bofa.com; Executive.office@chase.com; HoohikiHelp@courts.hawaii.gov; rdtolin@gmail.com; NYmailroom@fdic.gov; nycommunityaffairs@fdic.gov; ny.rpa@ssa.gov; nyscef@nycourts.gov; NY529@nysaves.org; Careers at Office of the State Comptroller [OSC]; comptrollerstaff@osc.nj.gov; New York State Comptroller"s Press Office; comptroller.info@mass.gov; dags.uipa@hawaii.gov; dags.media@hawaii.gov; PublicRecordsRequest@myfloridacfo.com; PublicRecords@dos.fl.gov; cocpubreq@miamidadeclerk.gov; publicrecords@mypalmbeachclerk.com; PublicRecordsRequests@brevardclerk.us; ombudsman@dos.state.fl.us; ombudsman@fdic.gov; Ombudsman@frb.gov; Ombuds@frb.gov; public.services@dep.state.fl.us; desantis.opengov@eog.myflorida.com; appointments@eog.myflorida.com; askBH@beverlyhills.org; cdpermits@beverlyhills.org; bhpra@beverlyhills.org; mforbes@beverlyhills.org; Kenneth K. Martinez Burgmaier; Georgina Mckinley Mom McKinley; khuang@beverlyhills.org; Council, City; City Mgr; Police; media@cannabistcompany.com; medicalcannabis@doh.hawaii.gov; DOH.medicalcannabis; medical.marijuana@state.co.us; eversinfo@wisconsin.gov Subject:Forde_Amended_Restitution_Mandate_750T Date:Thursday, August 27, 2026 9:27:50 PM Attachments:Forde_Amended_Restitution_Mandate_750T.pdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i 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:Annette Glanckopf To:Coles, Charlie; Lo, Ria Cc:Council, City Subject:South Palo Alto Ped/bike crossing Date:Thursday, August 27, 2026 8:40:38 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Just a note about tonight's meeting and great turnout from the EL Dorado neighborhood mostly opposed to the A1 and A2 solutions. . I really appreciate your willingness to acknowledge the neighborhood petition and Hybrid solution proposed by David Hung. I give you 4 gold stars for doing so. I have never seen such inclusion and recognition of neighborhood ideas before. No matter which way the final decision goes, kudos. thank you for your comments. Annette From:Liz Cowie To:Council, City Subject:South Palo Alto/Ped Connectivity: Proposed El Dorado Ave options - Consider Hybrid Plan instead Date:Thursday, August 27, 2026 7:37:32 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear City Council members, I’m a resident living on El Dorado Avenue. I appreciated the chance to share feedback this evening at the workshop the City held at Rinconada Library about the proposed bike/pedestrian access across Alma and the railroad tracks at El Dorado Avenue. I’d like to lift up some of this feedback to you directly: The A1 option (light at Alma and El Dorado for crossing at grade) is not safe. Any at-grade crossing is not safe, because the cars go far too fast on Alma already and are likely to run the light. Similarly, the kids on e-scooters and e-bikes, who lack the maturity to ride at appropriate speeds, will run the light. Tragedy is bound to result. The A2 option (tunnel under Alma and tracks, starting on El Dorado Avenue side) is not safe as currently conceived. It allows cars to make a right turn onto Alma. Attracting cars and more bikes down El Dorado at the same time is an unwise mix—this is a narrow street to begin with. Parking will become even more difficult and visibility is likely to suffer. Has any thought been given to widening the California Avenue tunnel to allow separate bike and pedestrian lanes? Or to a bike/pedestrian bridge over Alma? Last fall I wrote to you saying I thought the El Dorado Avenue crossing could be a good idea because it would divert some of the heavy California Avenue tunnel bike traffic - getting worse every day due to e-scooters and e-bikes. But now, as the options for the El Dorado Ave crossing are currently conceived, I see I was wrong. An El Dorado crossing as currently imagined in the various city alternatives is a bad idea. It would create significant safety risks to our children and pedestrians and cyclists, as well as place a burden on our residents by constraining emergency access and the ordinary comings and going of our residents, caregivers and service people who need to park. It would also result in unfortunate eminent domain of properties that I understand are low-income housing - a very unfortunate result given the scarcity of housing that the City is already struggling to remedy. If a crossing must be designed, I urge you to consider the Hybrid Plan that our neighbors have This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. Mark Safe Report put forward as a better option. Thanks, Liz Cowie From:midtowngaryh@me.com To:Coles, Charlie; Council, City Cc:Transportation Subject:South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity Project - California-Olive-Emerson (COE) Toxic Underground Plume Date:Thursday, August 27, 2026 7:02:04 PM Attachments:IMG_4399.pngimage001.png image004.png CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. i Hi Charlie, One other point—and potentially a very costly and dangerous one—is how the City would justify excavating in an area known to be impacted by the California-Olive-Emerson (COE) Toxic Underground Plume. Please see the attached City of Palo Alto map that clearly shows the Toxic Plume is located exactly where one side of the underpass would be located. The potential environmental risks—and the costs associated with managing them—should not be overlooked when evaluating the proposed El Dorado Avenue location.The proposed El Dorado Avenue location is directly within the area impacted by this known toxic groundwater plume. Excavation in or near a contaminated groundwater plume raises serious concerns about potentially disturbing contaminated soil or groundwater, mobilizing contaminants, and increasing the risk of exposure or spreading contamination into surrounding neighborhoods.The California-Olive-Emerson (COE) Plume What it is: The COE Plume is a significant subsurface groundwater contamination area involving chlorinated solvents, including tetrachloroethene (PCE), a chemical commonly associated with historic industrial and dry-cleaning operations.Location: The plume extends through portions of the North Ventura and California Avenue areas, including locations around Alma Street, El Dorado Avenue, and Colorado Avenue.Source: The contamination is associated with historic industrial activities, including dry-cleaning and electronics manufacturing operations along the California Avenue commercial corridor.Oversight: The groundwater contamination is monitored and regulated through the California State Water Resources Control Board's GeoTracker system and the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board.Excavating into or immediately adjacent to a known toxic groundwater plume is not simply a construction issue—it is an environmental and public-safety concern. The potential for disturbing contaminated soil or groundwater, mobilizing contaminants, increasing exposure risks, or spreading contamination into surrounding neighborhoods should put a full-stop to selecting this location at El Dorado and Alma.I strongly oppose the the El Dorado Bike/Pedestrian Connectivity project, Sincerely, Gary On Aug 27, 2026, at 8:40 AM, midtowngaryh@me.com wrote: Hi Charlie, Thank you for your reply and understanding that we strongly oppose El Dorado for the South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity Project. Sincerely,Gary On Jul 24, 2026, at 4:31 PM, Coles, Charlie <Charlie.Coles@paloalto.gov> wrote: This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. Mark Safe Report Dear Gary: Thank you for sharing your comments regarding the South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity Project and the potential El Dorado Avenue crossing location. We appreciate you taking the time to provide input, especially since you are unable to attend the August 27, 2026 community workshop. Your concerns about the width of El Dorado Avenue, potential conflicts with motor vehicles and nearby residents, current bicycle and pedestrian use, project cost, proximity to the existing California Avenue underpass, and the potential for a crossing location closer to East Meadow have been noted. We will include your comments in the project record and share them with the project team as the City continues evaluating possible rail crossing alternatives. Additionally, I would suggest subscribing to the City’s Uplift Local and Transportation Connect e-newsletters where we regularly make announcements about other upcoming opportunities to provide input. I provided sign up links for both e-newsletters below. Sign up for Uplift Local Sign up for Transportation Connect https://www.paloalto.gov/Departments/City-Manager/Latest-News/Sign-Up-for-City-Newsletters https://www.paloalto.gov/Departments/City-Manager/Connect-With-Us Thank you, CHARLIE COLES Senior Transportation Planner Office of Transportation (650) 329-2166 | Charlie.Coles@PaloAlto.gov www.PaloAlto.gov From: midtowngaryh@me.com <midtowngaryh@me.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2026 6:02 PM To: Coles, Charlie <Charlie.Coles@paloalto.gov>; Transportation <Transportation@PaloAlto.gov> Subject: South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity Project CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. July 24, 2026 1. Dear Office of Transportation, I am writing to you as I am unable to attend the upcoming workshop and I would like to express my strong opposition to any proposed bicycle or pedestrian connection at El Dorado Avenue as part of the South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity Project. El Dorado Avenue is too narrow to safely accommodate a new bicycle and pedestrian connection. Its limited roadway width leaves little room for additional bicycle and pedestrian traffic without increasing conflicts among motorists, and nearby residents.Based on my observations, very few, if any, cyclists use El Dorado Avenue near Alma Street today, making it difficult to justify such a significant investment at this location. The City should also consider the responsible use of taxpayer funds. The existing California Avenue underpass is located less than one-third of a mile from El Dorado Avenue and already provides a safe means for cyclists and pedestrians to cross therailroad corridor. Constructing another underpass such a short distance away would duplicate existing infrastructure and represent an unnecessary expenditure of public resources. Before committing to a costly project, the City should demonstrate aclear transportation need and show that the benefits outweigh the substantial costs. If the City concludes that an additional crossing is needed to improve connectivity, a location closer to East Meadow would be a more logical choice. An underpass in that area would serve neighborhoods that are farther from existing crossings, improveconnectivity where it is needed most, and provide greater public benefit without duplicating access already available near California Avenue. I respectfully ask the City to reconsider any proposal for a bicycle and pedestrian connection at El Dorado Avenue. I encourage the City to prioritize projects that address demonstrated transportation needs, improve safety, and make the best use oflimited public funds. Careful planning and thoughtful investment will better serve both residents and the broader Palo Alto community. Thank you for your consideration of my comments. Sincerely, Gary H. August 2026 Invites & Updates Coming up! S E P T E M B E R 15: ACLU: Defend Democracy Tour, 6-8pm 19: LWVPA Candidate Forum: CITY COUNCIL (Zoom) 22: LWVSCC - Protecting Our Elections (Zoom) 24:LWVPA/PTAC Candidate Forum: SCHOOL BOARD (Zoom) Sept. 24 - Oct. 13: ROV mails county election information guides to all registered voters O C T O B E R From:LWV Palo Alto To:Council, City Subject:LWVPA forum dates for City Council & School Board announced Date:Thursday, August 27, 2026 5:51:26 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious ofopening attachments and clicking on links. College Awareness Fair at College of San Mateo - come help us register young voters! 5: ROV mails vote by mail packets 5 thru 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 thru Nov. 3: Vote Centers are 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 LWVPA Candidate Forums General Election -November 3, 2026 The League of Women Voters of Palo Alto will be hosting two Candidate Forums for the upcoming election. We invite everyone to come listen to the candidates and learn where they stand on pertinent issues. Candidate forums like these are one way the League makes democracy work! We encourage attendees to submit questions in advance of the forum using the question submission links below or in your registration confirmation email. Time permitting, we will also take questions during the event. Palo Alto City Council Candidate Forum (Zoom) Saturday, September 19, 2026 4:00 pm - 6:00 pm Palo Alto School Board Candidate Forum(Zoom) Co-Sponsored by PTAC (Palo Alto Council of PTAs) Thursday, September 24, 2026 7:00 pm - 8:30 pm Register for the City Council Forum Ask Your Question of Council Candidates Register for the School Board Forum Ask Your Question of School Board Candidates SB 423, the Detention Facility Transparency Act, authored by Senator Lena Gonzalez, would require public agencies to release more records showing what happens inside California’s privately operated immigration detention facilities. Specifically, it would ensure better access to 911 calls and related records, which has been crucial in many states in providing better oversight of immigration detention. The bill includes privacy protections that allow agencies to withhold certain records when disclosure would substantially interfere with an active investigation. Ask your Representatives to Vote YES on SB 423 Now SB 423 responds to serious problems that too often remain hidden from public view: Thousands are held with little public accountability. About 6,400 people are detained in California immigration detention facilities every day. Recent data show that nearly three- quarters have no criminal record. Conditions have raised grave concerns. Attorney General Bonta has called conditions “cruel, inhumane, and unacceptable.” Six people died in California detention facilities between September 2025 and March 2026, the highest number since state reviews began in 2017. People in detention cannot simply leave unsafe conditions. They depend on facility staff and outside authorities to protect them and investigate abuse and mistreatment. Serious allegations can disappear behind secrecy. At Otay Mesa, the San Diego County Sheriff did not investigate at least seven reported sexual assaults in 2025 under an agreement that gave the privately run facility authority over whether the allegations would be investigated. When reporters sought more public records, the Sheriff’s Department refused to release them. The right to humane treatment in custody does not depend on immigration status. California can protect transparency and accountability by ensuring that private detention companies cannot use secrecy to hide how people are treated. Sincerely, Dora Rose Deputy Director League of Women Voters of California Regional Events 9.15.26: 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 THE LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF SANTA CLARA COUNTY Protecting Our Elections: How to Prepare for Attacks on the Right to Vote 9.22.26 - 5pm (Zoom) As we head into the November elections, many are concerned about potential threats to voting rights. Join us to hear from voting rights experts from the Brennan Center for Justice and Common Cause California on Tuesday, September 22, 2026, at 5:00 p.m. – 6:15 p.m. (PST) via Zoom. The speakers will discuss current threats to voting rights nationally and in California, efforts to safeguard our rights, and steps you can take. Please register for the program. Submit your question here. About our Speakers Justin Lam serves as counsel in the Brennan Center’s Voting Rights and Elections Program. Before joining the center, he clerked for Judge John P. Howard III of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals and Judge Nina R. Morrison of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York. He also worked to advance children’s rights in education and juvenile justice as a public interest fellow at the National Center for Youth Law. Lam earned his bachelor’s degree in political science from the University of California, Los Angeles, and his master of public policy and law degree from the University of California, Berkeley. Brittany Stonesifer is the Senior Program Manager for Voting Rights and Redistricting at Common Cause California, where she leads statewide advocacy and education to ensure that all voters have fair access to the ballot. Stonesifer previously served as Senior Staff Attorney in the Democracy and Civic Engagement Program at ACLU of Northern California and Staff Attorney with Legal Services for Prisoners with Children. She holds her J.D. from University of California Law, San Francisco, her B.A. from The Evergreen State College, and studied international human rights law at the University of London. Volunteering We need your help - now! 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 and tabling. Contact Hannah at hannahlu00@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. 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. 10.3.26: 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 contact@lwvpaloalto.org. 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 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:Humphrey, Sonia Cc:LAFCO Subject:Supplemental Information No. 1 - LAFCO Special Meeting on August 28, 2026 Date:Thursday, August 27, 2026 4:47:15 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i The following supplemental information has been added to the August 28th LAFCO Special Meeting Agenda: Supplemental Information No. 1: Agenda Item # 2 - Public Comments The agenda and related materials, including the above supplemental information, can be viewed online at: https://santaclaralafco.org/meetings/lafco-special-meeting-2026-08-28- 093000. Best regards, Sonia Humphrey, LAFCO Clerk LAFCO of Santa Clara County 777 North First Street, Suite 410 San Jose, CA 95112 (408) 993-4709 This message needs your attention You've never replied to this person. Mark Safe Report From:Sarah Longstreth To:Lo, Ria Cc:Coles, Charlie; City Mgr; Paulos, Ghebilet; Council, City Subject:Re: Response to July 20, 2026 Notice Regarding Potential Eminent Domain — 2800 Emerson Street Date:Thursday, August 27, 2026 4:29:13 PM Attachments:image001.png image003.png CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear Ms. Hutabarat Lo, Thank you for your response. I appreciate you clarifying that the letters sent were informational rather than formal eminent domain notices. However, that distinction does not change the practical reality for my parents. They are now on notice that the City is contemplating the exercise of eminent domain. That cloud alone—created entirely by the City—may well be sufficient to impair their ability to obtain a reverse mortgage and access the home equity they need to age in place. While I value your assurance that our family’s voices will be heard, that simply is not enough. The first notice my parents received about this project was the July 20 letter. In a city where residents routinely receive formal notices when a neighbor plans to remove a tree, it is galling that the City has progressed this far on the project without, as far as I am aware, inviting neighborhood residents to any neighborhood meeting. Rather, based on conversations among neighbors, it seems no one in the immediate area was aware before July 20 that PABAC and the Office of Transportation had already actively whittled down potential alternatives. Neighborhood input should have been proactively sought earlier in the process, and certainly prior to sending out letters threatening the possibility of eminent domain. Given the severe financial cloud this situation creates for my parents, I request that the City immediately take two concrete administrative steps: 1. Issue a Comprehensive Letter of Property Status and Clearance: Please provide a formal, signed letter addressed to Stephen and Linda Longstreth sufficient to establish to a mortgage underwriter’s satisfaction that no possibility of municipal acquisition exists under the active South Palo Alto Bike/Ped project, This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. Mark Safe Report with respect to any portion of 2800 Emerson Street. 2. Recommend No-Acquisition Alternatives Only: Please commit to recommending to the City Council only design alternatives that do not require residential property acquisition. Additionally, going forward, what specific "push" notifications and proactive updates about this project can my parents expect to receive—as opposed to "pull" updates where they must actively hunt down information on their own? I look forward to your response. I additionally request that this letter be made part of the official public record for the South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity project. Sincerely, Sarah Longstreth 979 Amarillo Avenue On Mon, Aug 24, 2026 at 3:20 PM Lo, Ria <Ria.Lo@paloalto.gov> wrote: Dear Sarah Thank you for sharing your concerns and thank you to your family for your long history and contributions to the community of Palo Alto. I understand why the prospect of any potential impact to your parents’ home, where they have lived for more than five decades and intend to age in place, would be deeply concerning. I would first like to start by apologizing that the initial letter was addressed generically rather than to your parents by name. To clarify, the preliminary letters were not eminent-domain notices. The City has not selected an alternative and has not made any decision to acquire property. The letters were early informational notices to owners and residents of properties that could potentially be affected by one or more of the preliminary concept designs. Staff provided notice as early as possible so any potentially affected parties would have time to review information, ask questions, and identify concerns and opportunities for mutual benefit as concepts are refined. This is a long-term project. The next step is to select up to two concept design alternatives for further evaluation and refinement, with additional community and stakeholder engagement. Cost estimates, funding sources and project timelines have not yet been finalized. To ensure that your family has a voice in this process, your message will be included in the project record and has been shared with the project team. Additionally, I want to make you aware of several upcoming engagement opportunities and meetings for this project, where you are welcome to attend and provide additional input: Bike/Pedestrian Rail Crossings Workshop: Thursday, August 27, 2026, 6:00–7:30 p.m., Rinconada Library, Embarcadero Room Planning and Transportation Commission meeting: Wednesday, September 30, 2026 Rail Committee meeting: Tuesday, November 10, 2026 City Council meeting: Monday, December 7, 2026 Please note that the Planning and Transportation Commission, Rail Committee, and City Council meeting dates for this project are tentative and subject to change. Check the Project Webpage and Meetings and Agendas for the latest meeting schedule and information on how to submit comments. You are also welcome to talk with Project Manager Charlie Coles or I to discuss your concerns and options being contemplated in more detail. Thank you, Ria Hutabarat Lo, PhD Chief Transportation Official Office of Transportation (650) 329-2136 | Ria.Lo@PaloAlto.gov www.PaloAlto.gov From: Sarah Longstreth <slongstreth@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, August 24, 2026 9:56 AM To: Coles, Charlie <Charlie.Coles@paloalto.gov>; Lo, Ria <Ria.Lo@paloalto.gov> Cc: Council, City <city.council@PaloAlto.gov> Subject: Response to July 20, 2026 Notice Regarding Potential Eminent Domain — 2800 Emerson Street CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Ms. Hutabarat Lo, I am writing in response to your letter dated July 20, 2026, regarding the South Palo Alto Bicycle and Pedestrian Grade Separation project, which was sent to my parents, Stephen and Linda Longstreth, homeowners who reside at 2800 Emerson Street. My parents have lived in their home on Emerson Street for 52 years. My father is a retired, self-employed documentary film producer, and my mother dedicated over four decades to the Palo Alto Unified School District (PAUSD) as a speech therapist. They were fortunate, as an artist and a public school educator, to find a way to purchase their home over five decades ago. They sacrificed to send my sister and me to college by borrowing against their home, and they finally paid off their mortgage about ten years ago. Throughout their 61 years in Palo Alto, my parents have contributed deeply to this community: My father serves as President of the Council for the Arts Palo Alto, a local nonprofit he has led for decades. My mother was a PAUSD educator for over forty years as noted above. My mother served on Palo Alto’s Disability Task Force, operating under the Palo Alto Human Relations Commission. In connection with my mother's membership on the Disability Task Force, my parents co-produced—pro bono—the educational film "Good Intentions, Mistaken Assumptions." Circulated nationally, it won second place at the National Educational Film Festival and earned a formal commendation from the Palo Alto City Council (Resolution No. 7090). It is with great dismay and alarm that I read your letter referencing the potential acquisition of their property and the exercise of eminent domain. As retired public servants and artists, my parents' retirement savings are overwhelmingly tied up in the value of their home. They intend to age in place, and accessing their home equity is critical to making that possible. We have already been advised by financial professionals that the mere cloud of potential eminent domain risks impairing their ability to secure a reverse mortgage or access their home value—an outcome our family cannot permit. Please be advised that if the City ultimately moves forward with exercising eminent domain against my parents’ property, we will have no choice but to retain legal counsel to vigorously contest the City’s actions. To be clear, I am not opposed to pro-cycling infrastructure or transit improvements in Palo Alto, and outside of eminent domain, I am not taking a position against other possible changes to El Dorado Avenue. My husband, Tom Culbertson, cycles through Palo Alto daily in his role as president of the Palo Alto Educators Association. My son, Owen Longstreth, is a former member of the Palo Alto Pedestrian and Bicycle Advisory Committee (PABAC). As a family, we strongly advocate for safe, connected bicycle and pedestrian pathways. However, I cannot countenance any infrastructure proposal that threatens to strip my parents of their home or destroy their financial ability to age in place. Finally, a word of advice on administrative courtesy: if the Office of Transportation is going to send correspondence to long-term Palo Alto homeowners raising the prospect of losing their property to eminent domain, you should at the very least take the time to address the letter to them by name. Reaching out with a form letter addressed to "Dear Resident" is, frankly, offensive. Thank you for reading. I request that this letter be made part of the official public record for the South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity project. Sincerely, Sarah Longstreth 979 Amarillo Avenue From:Aram James To:Richard Konda; Sean Allen; Raymond Goins; Susan Hayase; Carla Torres; Board of Directors; board@pausd.org; BoardOperations; Council, City; Reifschneider, James; Enberg, Nicholas; cromero@cityofepa.org; rabrica@cityofepa.org Subject:ICE awards $16.7M contract to buy 6,000 pairs of gloves that deliver electric shocks Date:Thursday, August 27, 2026 4:13:35 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. ICE awards $16.7M contract to buy 6,000 pairs of gloves that deliver electric shocks Source: The Independent https://share.newsbreak.com/jfgimitz?s=i0 From:Becky Wolf-Loretz To:Pigman, Sophie Cc:Council, City; Riley Cooke; lief.christensen@paloalto.gov; Stone, Greer; City Mgr; MHSA@smcgov.org; Hornung, Joel; Police Subject:Subject: URGENT: Cynthia Gonzales — Immediate Intervention Needed Within 24 Hours Date:Thursday, August 27, 2026 2:51:12 PM Attachments:IMG_0078.png IMG_0080.png IMG_0079.png IMG_0081.png CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. 8-27-26 Sophie, I am writing because what is happening to Cynthia Gonzales is unacceptable, and I am asking you and the City of Palo Alto to intervene immediately. Cynthia is 69 years old. She has been living on the curb directly outside the Opportunity Center since May 2. Sophie, I contacted you directly when Cynthia was locked out of her room. The City of Palo Alto therefore had notice of Cynthia’s circumstances from the beginning. This is not a situation that first came to the City’s attention today. I personally witnessed circumstances surrounding what happened to Cynthia at the Opportunity Center. I advocated for her. I placed advocacy letters on her door. Those advocacy letters were ripped down. I changed her locks trying to protect her and her belongings. Cynthia believed that a three-day pay-or-quit notice meant that if she could not pay within those three days, she simply had to leave. She did not understand her rights or the legal process available to her. She gave away virtually everything she owned. And she ended up on the sidewalk. Since then, Cynthia has lost virtually everything. Her service dog was taken from her. She has been attacked by a dog while living outside. Every time Cynthia is arrested, the few possessions she has left on that sidewalk are placed at risk of being stolen or disappearing. I have repeatedly tried to get help for Cynthia. I contacted you when she was locked out. I have contacted the City. I have contacted law enforcement on her behalf. I have continued advocating for her. And yet Cynthia is still on the curb. What makes this even more incomprehensible is that the Opportunity Center and LifeMoves are RIGHT THERE. Cynthia is literally living on the sidewalk immediately outside organizations and programs that exist to serve vulnerable and unhoused people. How does a 69-year-old vulnerable woman remain on that sidewalk for nearly four months while organizations and governmental programs receiving public funding to address homelessness, supportive housing, mental health, disability, senior needs, and crisis intervention are all around her? Instead of an effective intervention, Cynthia has repeatedly been subjected to law-enforcement encounters and arrests. DOCUMENTED PATTERN OF ENFORCEMENT INVOLVING CYNTHIA The public arrest information I have collected reflects the following: • June 16, 2026 — Palo Alto Police Department: “Maintain Public Nuisance” • June 23, 2026 — Palo Alto Police Department: “Maintain Public Nuisance” • June 27, 2026 — Palo Alto Police Department: “Maintain Public Nuisance” • July 8, 2026 — Palo Alto Police Department: “Maintain Public Nuisance” • July 20, 2026 — Palo Alto Police Department: “Maintain Public Nuisance” • July 27, 2026 — Palo Alto Police Department: “Maintain Public Nuisance” • July 28, 2026 — Palo Alto Police Department: “Intoxicated in Public” • August 3, 2026 — Palo Alto Police Department: “Maintain Public Nuisance” • August 11, 2026 — Palo Alto Police Department: “Maintain Public Nuisance” • August 15, 2026 — Palo Alto Police Department: “Maintain Public Nuisance” • August 17, 2026 — Palo Alto Police Department: “Maintain Public Nuisance” • August 19, 2026 — Palo Alto Police Department: “Maintain Public Nuisance” • August 27, 2026 — Cynthia was taken into custody again today. Sophie, please look at those dates. This is what I mean when I say Cynthia needs intervention. How many times does a 69-year-old vulnerable woman have to be cited or arrested before somebody asks why she keeps ending up in exactly the same place? The cycle appears to be: SIDEWALK → CITATION/ARREST → BELONGINGS LEFT VULNERABLE TO LOSS OR THEFT → RELEASE → BACK TO THE SIDEWALK → CITATION/ARREST AGAIN. Whatever anyone believes about any individual encounter, this cycle is plainly not solving the problem. THE CITY’S OWN STATED APPROACH TO ENFORCEMENT There is another issue I need the City to confront. At the Palo Alto City Council’s August 9, 2021 special meeting, Councilmember Greg Tanaka specifically asked about the ordinances being enforced against Palo Alto’s homeless population. Andrew Binder, then Assistant Police Chief, told the City Council that police officers considered numerous factors when deciding whether to enforce City ordinances. Most importantly, the City’s official meeting minutes state that Mr. Binder advised the Council that Palo Alto police officers: “utilized a compassionate approach and attempted to resolve issues without enforcement as a first step.” He acknowledged that enforcement was sometimes necessary. I am asking the City to look at Cynthia’s history and explain how what is happening to her is consistent with that stated approach. Where is the compassionate intervention? Where is the attempt to resolve the underlying problem? How can citation after citation and arrest after arrest be considered a resolution when Cynthia repeatedly ends up right back on the same curb? This is especially troubling because Cynthia is not sitting in some unknown location where nobody knows she exists. She is sitting directly outside the Opportunity Center. LifeMoves is right there. The City has known about her circumstances. I personally contacted you when she was locked out. And still this continues. ENFORCEMENT CANNOT RUN IN ONLY ONE DIRECTION There is an extraordinary contradiction here that I need the City to address. Palo Alto Police are holding Cynthia accountable to laws and ordinances. But who is examining whether the City, its departments, and the publicly funded systems surrounding Cynthia are fulfilling THEIR obligations? If Cynthia is expected to obey the law, so is the City. If Cynthia is expected to comply with ordinances, the institutions surrounding her must also comply with the laws, agreements, approvals, conditions, policies, and responsibilities governing their conduct. If PAPD is going to enforce laws against Cynthia, then the City must also examine whether the protections, requirements, conditions, and responsibilities governing the Opportunity Center and the City’s treatment of vulnerable unhoused residents are actually being followed. ENFORCEMENT CANNOT RUN IN ONLY ONE DIRECTION. I have been reviewing the City’s own ordinances, City Manager’s Reports, environmental and engineering documents, approvals, and other records concerning the Opportunity Center. Those documents matter. The Opportunity Center did not simply appear on Encina Avenue independently of the City of Palo Alto. There is an extensive governmental history surrounding this property, its approvals, its intended purpose, its operations, and the City’s involvement. So I am asking the City to stop looking exclusively at what Cynthia supposedly did wrong and start asking: WHAT WAS EVERY INSTITUTION SURROUNDING CYNTHIA SUPPOSED TO DO RIGHT? What responsibilities existed? Who was responsible for fulfilling them? Were those responsibilities fulfilled? If they were not, why not? And how did the consequences of institutional failures ultimately land on the shoulders of a vulnerable 69-year-old woman sitting on a curb? Yesterday, August 26, I spent a substantial part of my day advocating specifically for Cynthia. I submitted a public-records request concerning Cynthia. I contacted people connected with Mental Health Services Act programs regarding Cynthia and what has happened to her. I communicated regarding her circumstances. I have been in communication with the City of Palo Alto regarding her. And I publicly advocated for Cynthia and asked a very simple question: “IS SHE A NUISANCE OR A VICTIM?” I wrote publicly that Cynthia is exactly the type of person our Mental Health Services Act and behavioral-health systems were created to help. Today, August 27, Cynthia was arrested again. I am not alleging without evidence that today’s arrest occurred because of my advocacy yesterday. However, the timing concerns me deeply. I want the circumstances surrounding today’s arrest documented and reviewed, including what caused Cynthia to be taken into custody today, when that decision was made, and the basis for today’s arrest. But regardless of what caused today’s particular arrest, we already know something much bigger: WHAT WE ARE DOING TO CYNTHIA IS NOT WORKING. Repeatedly arresting or citing Cynthia cannot substitute for housing. It cannot substitute for behavioral-health intervention. It cannot substitute for senior services. It cannot substitute for disability assistance. It cannot substitute for protecting her property. And it cannot substitute for an actual human being taking responsibility for helping this woman. Where are the behavioral-health services? Where are the homelessness services? Where are the senior services? Where are the disability services? Where is the supportive-housing intervention? Where are the organizations receiving public funding to help people in precisely Cynthia’s circumstances? The Opportunity Center and LifeMoves are literally right in front of her. The City knew Cynthia had been locked out. I personally contacted you about it. I have repeatedly sought help for her. Yet nearly four months later, Cynthia remains on the curb and continues cycling through law enforcement. Cynthia needs an ACTUAL COORDINATED INTERVENTION — not another telephone number, another referral, another citation, or another arrest followed by her being returned to exactly the same sidewalk. Sophie, I am asking you in your capacity as Human Services Manager to immediately escalate Cynthia’s situation to every appropriate City and County entity with the ability to intervene. If this should be referred to the Human Relations Commission, please refer it. If Santa Clara County Behavioral Health needs to intervene, please involve them. If Adult Protective Services needs to be involved, please involve them. If senior services, homelessness services, disability services, legal services, or another agency needs to participate, please bring them in. I am specifically requesting that within the next 24 hours there be a coordinated effort to: 1. Determine where Cynthia is and what is happening following today’s arrest; 2. Ensure that Cynthia’s remaining belongings are protected while she is in custody and are not removed, discarded, stolen, or allowed to disappear; 3. Assess Cynthia’s immediate safety, housing, behavioral-health, disability, senior- service, and other support needs; 4. Connect Cynthia with an actual person who will work directly with her rather than simply providing another telephone number or referral; 5. Determine what happened surrounding Cynthia’s displacement from her housing and what options presently exist to restore her to safe housing; and 6. Develop a concrete plan to get this 69-year-old woman OFF THAT CURB AND SOMEWHERE SAFE. I am asking for help for Cynthia within the next 24 hours. If an effective intervention does not occur, I will use every lawful advocacy avenue available to me to obtain help for Cynthia and bring attention to what has happened to her. I will contact appropriate City and County leadership, oversight bodies, legal-services organizations, senior and disability advocates, behavioral-health officials, elected officials, civil-rights organizations, and the public. I will do everything lawfully within my power to make sure this woman is seen and heard. I am not going to quietly watch a 69-year-old vulnerable woman deteriorate on a sidewalk while publicly funded systems designed to help people in precisely these circumstances stand feet away from her. The longer the City and other entities debate or deflect responsibility, Cynthia is the person being harmed. Cynthia is not a nuisance. Cynthia is a human being who needs help. She matters. She deserves dignity. She deserves safety. And after nearly four months on that curb, another week of watching this happen is unacceptable. Please respond today and tell me WHO is taking responsibility for coordinating assistance for Cynthia and WHAT concrete action will be taken within the next 24 hours. Thank you, Becky Wolf From:Annette Glanckopf To:Coles, Charlie Cc:City Mgr; Lo, Ria; Council, City Subject:Re: August 27th meeting for the south Palo Alto Ped/Bike Crossing Date:Thursday, August 27, 2026 2:18:41 PM Attachments:My Comments to Aug 27th EL Dorado tunnel meeting.docx image004.png image001.png CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Attached find my comments for tonight, since there will be no oral communications Annette On Thursday, August 27, 2026 at 01:49:11 PM PDT, Annette Glanckopf <annette_g@att.net> wrote: Thank you for your response. It is quite unfortunate that there will be no public comments, since the neighborhood has just realized what the city is recommendating. . Additionally, I cannot understand why this meeting will be the farthest possible location from the actual geographic area (with limited parking) that you are studying, making it more difficult for people to attend. Frankly a post-it note meeting is not a good representation of public concern and interest, since there are usually only limited staff driven options. Annette On Thursday, August 27, 2026 at 01:37:01 PM PDT, Coles, Charlie <charlie.coles@paloalto.gov> wrote: Dear Annette Glanckopf, Thank you for your email and for sharing your concerns regarding outreach in the El Dorado vicinity. We have received the petition and emails with suggested alternatives, and those materials have been included in the project record. The Bike/Pedestrian Rail Crossings Workshop this evening (Thursday, August 27, 2026 from 6 – 7:30 p.m. at Rinconada Library), will use an interactive workshop format where participants may provide input in several ways: Write comments on Post-it notes and place them on the workshop boards. Share comments directly with project team members, who can document them. Submit comments to me by email at any time. Comments received through each of these methods will be included in the project record. There will also be additional opportunities to provide public comment at upcoming public meetings where an item on the South Palo Alto Bike/Pedestrian Connectivity Project is anticipated. The current schedule is: Planning and Transportation Commission: Wednesday, September 30, 2026 Rail Committee: Tuesday, November 10, 2026 City Council: Monday, December 7, 2026 Please note that meeting dates for this project are tentative and subject to change. Check the Project Webpage and Meetings and Agendas for the latest meeting schedule and information on how to submit comments. In addition, members of the public may provide public comment to City of Palo Alto Boards and Commissions during scheduled meetings, including on matters that are not on the agenda, consistent with each body’s public-comment procedures. Additional community engagement opportunities are planned later for this project. We appreciate the neighborhood’s continued participation and encourage residents to submit their feedback through the workshop, email, and future public meetings. Thank you, CHARLIE COLES Senior Transportation Planner Office of Transportation (650) 329-2166 | Charlie.Coles@PaloAlto.gov www.PaloAlto.gov From: Annette Glanckopf <annette_g@att.net> Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 2026 12:53 PM To: Lo, Ria <Ria.Lo@paloalto.gov>; Coles, Charlie <Charlie.Coles@paloalto.gov> Cc: Council, City <city.council@PaloAlto.gov> Subject: August 27th meeting for the south Palo Alto Ped/Bike Crossing CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. This is a formal request for the opportunity for public comments at the August 27th meeting, rather than limited feedback via stickers and post it notes. The past city outreach to the El Dorado vicinity has been limited and ineffective, and key members of the El Dorado neighborhood have been informing residents of the plan. you have received a petition rejecting the current alternatives and emails suggesting alternatives. So please agendize public comments. Thank you Annette Comments to Aug 27th EL Dorado tunnel meeting I am strongly opposed to using El Dorado Street as the location for the proposed bike path. In my two emails to the Council, as well as in my comments for tonight’s meeting, I have outlined specific safety and neighborhood concerns, so I will not repeat all of them here. I do want to emphasize one fundamental point: the Council had multiple alternatives before it, yet the option selected is the narrowest street and, in my view, the least safe alternative—while also having the greatest negative impact on the surrounding residents. It is also important to clarify that the original recommendation was for a path in the vicinity of Matadero Creek, not specifically on El Dorado Street. As Charlie Cole stated, “The current concepts are preliminary and remain subject to refinement through additional technical analysis and community engagement.” That refinement is now essential. There was very little outreach to our immediate neighborhood before this proposal emerged. But the El Dorado community has now made its position very clear through a petition, letters, emails, and public comments: El Dorado is not a viable location for this path. There are better alternatives that deserve serious consideration, particularly the Loma Verde Hybrid plan and a 12-foot-wide path along Matadero Creek. The safety issue alone should give us pause. Loma Verde is approximately 14 feet wider than El Dorado, and El Carmelo is approximately 8 feet wider. Why would we deliberately select the narrowest street for a heavily used bicycle facility when wider and potentially safer alternatives exist? We should not wait for a serious injury or fatality to demonstrate that this was the wrong choice. This area already experiences speeding and reckless driving, including dangerous behavior by vehicles (including speeding Waymos), and cut through traffic with limited enforcement. Just as importantly, the impact on the surrounding residents cannot be dismissed by people who do not live in this immediate neighborhood. I support creating a safe bicycle connection across Alma; that is not the issue. The issue is where that connection should go. Those unfamiliar with this neighborhood may not understand the very real consequences of putting the path on El Dorado. The current proposal would significantly affect: • Approximately 20 residential driveways where vehicles back directly onto El Dorado; • Five cul-de-sacs (or dead end streets) with close to 200 households and approximately 400 vehicles, many of which would have substantially more difficulty accessing El Dorado; • Lower-income residents living along the two blocks of Alma and the low income housing on El Dorado corner who currently rely on El Dorado for parking and access; • Potential eminent domain of east side properties, and • The safety, accessibility, and quality of life of the entire El Dorado neighborhood. These are not theoretical impacts. They are daily realities for the people who live here. I therefore strongly urge the Council and staff not to treat the El Dorado concept as the default solution simply because it is convenient to the current design and the cheapest. The project is still preliminary, and there is an opportunity—and, given the concerns raised, a responsibility— to evaluate better alternatives. Please take a serious look at the Matadero Creek option and the Loma Verde Hybrid plan. Both deserve a thorough technical and safety analysis before the City commits to a narrow residential street that will place an enormous burden on the people who live there. I am firmly opposed to using El Dorado Street for this bike path. We can achieve the goal of a safe Alma crossing without sacrificing the safety and accessibility of an entire neighborhood. Please choose a safer, more appropriate alternative. Thank you for removing El Dorado as the ped/bike path option. Annette Glanckopf 2747 Bryant Annette_g@att.net From:CeCi Kettendorf To:stephanie wansek Cc:Chris Schremp; Lauing, Ed; Shikada, Ed; Veenker, Vicki; Council, City; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Stone, Greer; Reckdahl, Keith; Jo Ann Mandinach; Robert Marinaro; Annette Ross; Penny Brennan; Zohar Gillai; Martin Cuyegkeng; Jenny Lee; Josh Becker; Marc Berman; Leslie Bulbuk; Nicole Fernandez; Margaret Abe-Koga; Bulatao, Eric; Nick Marinaro; Jennifer Kain; Roger Smith; Peter Xu; Loren Brown; Dana Dahlstrom; Chris Berg; Taly Katz; Barry Katz; John Schafer; Jeanette Baldwin; Alina Martinez; Micah Murphy; Danielle Dunne; David Famero; Carly Lake; Sandy Freschi; Theron Bullman; Dave Stellman; Dave Stellman; Steve Wong; Lydia Kou; Patrick Kelly; Osbaldo Romero; Bryna Chang; Bill McLane; Lester Wong; Cathi Lerch; 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; Baird, Nathan; Palo Alto Daily Post; Gennady Sheyner; Louis Hsiao; Ann Lafargue Balin; Mary Gallagher; Maury Green; Terry Holzemer; Joseph Hirsch; William Ross; Arthur Keller; Becky Sanders; Kevin Mayer; Boris Folsch; Ian Halker; Richard Willits; Heather Brownlee; Ken Brownlee; Robin Holbrook; Cassandra Paige; Brad Watson; Alisa Pendicini; Ron Ellickson; Titan Gu; Colin Swindells; Aki Hirsa; Oksana Selavri; Christine Schremp Subject:Re: Next Steps: A Clear Path to Enact Street Bans Within 30 Days Date:Thursday, August 27, 2026 1:47:33 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. We HAVE a three day parking ordinance which was enforced for decades. WHY NOT NOW? The City has received countless complaints over YEARS of abusive OSV parking on the streets of Palo Alto; the Council has never taken up the issue until NOW that there is a groundswell. Why NOT? It is way past time that we unseat the mayor and the council members who are vocally opposed to moving the squatters. They fail us. This has gone on too long; they should be recalled. Councilwoman Julie Lythcott-Haimes used the term "abjectly prejudiced" at the Council on Monday. She KNEW she had a room full of angry residents, but she felt confident in slamming those gathered before her, as she has done repeatedly, repeatedly in the past. She OPPOSES the stated goal of the Ad Hoc Committee, yet is still assigned to it?! She is dragging it down. It is laughable. The Mayor should REMOVE JULIE from the committee. When my sons were little they rode their bikes and they rollerbladed, around Meadow Circle. It was safe and untraveled , as many of the offices were vacant. Cars parked in the parking lots. People strolled around the Circle during their lunch hour. It was safe and cozy, out of the way. Now there is METH on Meadow, as reported by the squatter from Santa Cruz who spoke on Monday night, saying it is better for him there on Meadow, now that the "METH HEADS" were moved. Where did they move to, Ventura?! There was METH reported to the City, on Fabian, last fall, but ....crickets. We couldn't make this up. Let's unseat the Mayor and Julie. That is a start. CeCi Kettendorf AdobeMeadow Neighborhood On Thu, Aug 27, 2026 at 1:02 PM stephanie wansek <stephanie.wansek@gmail.com> wrote: Mayor Veenker, Vice Mayor Stone, and Members of the Palo Alto City Council, I know I wrote to Council before Monday’s meeting, and I appreciate that my comments were received. But after seeing the concerns raised by SRI regarding the proposed Coyote Hill location, I wanted to follow up because I think this development illustrates the fundamental problem with the approach the City is taking. Every time the City tries to determine where OSVs should be accommodated on Palo Alto streets, another group of residents or businesses is being asked to absorb the impact. Residential neighborhoods understandably object. Residential-adjacent areas object. Businesses that have been living with this for years object. And now SRI, as it prepares to move its headquarters to Palo Alto, is raising safety and security concerns about the proposed location outside its new headquarters. At some point, I think we have to recognize what all of this is telling us: there may simply be no appropriate Palo Alto public street on which to institutionalize overnight OSV habitation. The solution does not have to be this complicated. The parking issue and the much larger issue of the people living in the vehicles need to be disentangled. The parking ordinance should regulate the vehicle, not the person inside it. Who is living there, why they are there, and what assistance they may need belongs on a separate track. Menlo Park has already provided a workable model. Establish a clear citywide overnight OSV restriction, provide a reasonable implementation period for notice and signage, and set an enforcement date. During that implementation period, Palo Alto can focus its resources on outreach, case management, housing assistance, regional coordination, or whatever other programs Council determines are appropriate. Those two tracks can move forward simultaneously. There is no reason resolution of the parking ordinance needs to remain contingent upon resolution of the enormously more complicated housing and social-service questions. The discussion has also begun among residents and business owners about a possible citizen initiative. The concept being discussed is intentionally singular and simple: No overnight parking of oversized vehicles on public streets anywhere in Palo Alto. Residential, residential-adjacent, commercial and industrial — one citywide rule. No neighborhood or business district solves its problem by pushing it onto another. I don’t think residents should have to undertake a citizen initiative if Council can accomplish the same thing legislatively. And fundamentally, this is not complicated. Palo Alto already has an OSV parking ordinance. The City can amend it to establish a uniform citywide overnight restriction and have the City Attorney review the language for legal sufficiency. I’ve attached a preliminary draft simply as a proof of concept. It is obviously not intended to substitute for the City Attorney’s work, but it demonstrates how quickly a straightforward policy objective can be translated into ordinance language when it is disentangled from the separate questions surrounding vehicle dwellers. signage, and use that transition period to focus on whatever assistance or programs Council chooses to pursue on the separate track. I hope the SRI situation causes Council to reconsider the larger premise here. Rather than continuing to search for Palo Alto streets whose residents or businesses might be willing to absorb OSV parking, perhaps it is time to establish the parking rule citywide and move the City’s efforts to assist people living in vehicles onto the separate track where they belong. Stephanie Wansek On Thu, Aug 27, 2026 at 10:28 AM Chris Schremp <chrisschremp88@gmail.com> wrote: Mayor Veenker, Vice Mayor Stone, and Members of the Palo Alto City Council, Following Monday’s meeting, the takeaway from residents and local business owners couldn't be clearer: the proposed Pilot 2 approach is fundamentally off-track, and we want a permanent, citywide solution. In public office, after spending significant time and effort on a specific policy direction, there is an understandable human tendency to try to save face. It can be tempting to double down, avoid admitting a flawed approach, or try to broker a complex "middle ground" compromise to prove that an administrative vision can still work. In some cases, elected officials even fall into the trap of assuming they simply know better than the taxpayers, dismissing direct community input in favor of internal theories or personal agendas. I strongly urge this Council to resist that temptation. Listening to the community and adjusting course isn't a setback—it’s practical governance. You have a real opportunity right now to show responsiveness and rebuild trust by shifting away from complex "street shuffle" experiments and getting straight to work on what the community is asking for. Admitting that past approaches have been slow or misdirected will go a long way toward building genuine respect and confidence with the people you represent. There is no need to overcomplicate this or reinvent the wheel. You already have sound, well-vetted proposals sitting on your desks from residents, local business coalitions, and neighboring cities that have successfully tackled this exact issue. We suggest a simple, immediate path forward: direct the OSV Ad Hoc Committee and City Staff to bring back a formal proposal within the next 30 days to enact an outright citywide ban on overnight OSV street parking. Funding is already in place. The $823,800 previously earmarked for the flawed Pilot 2 proposal is more than enough to cover this new direction. In fact, establishing a citywide ban using border entry signage requires only a small fraction of those funds ($20k–$45k), freeing up substantial taxpayer dollars while delivering the exact solution the community is asking for. This 30-day effort can easily run on two parallel, decoupled tracks: 1. Street-Level Code Execution: Amend PAMC § 10.44.020 to prohibit overnight OSV parking citywide, authorized via low-cost CVC § 22651(n) border gateway signage. 2. Off-Street Regional Solutions: Instruct staff to continue actively engaging Santa Clara County, Stanford, and regional partners to identify permitted, off-street parking facilities—without making street-level safety and code enforcement contingent on those external timelines. And if you needed more proof, the status quo is clearly not working. Just this morning, an oversized vehicle parked on East Meadow Drive directly in front of Ramos Park, blocking the bike lane. This is a daily reality impacting the safety of children and cyclists. (Photo attached) The community’s sentiment is clear, the legal path post-Grants Pass is established, and the blueprints are ready. We urge you to instruct the Ad Hoc Committee and staff to bring an outright street ban back to Council for a vote within 30 days. Best regards, Chris Schremp Palo Alto Resident & Stakeholder From:Farias, Belle To:Council, City Subject:20260827 Petition Against Public Access in Buffer Zone - Chimalus Drive Date:Thursday, August 27, 2026 1:37:42 PM Attachments:20260827 Petition Against Public Access in Buffer Zone - Chimalus Drive.pdf image001.png Hello, Please see the attached Public Letter that was received today by mail. Thank you, Belle Farias Administrative Associate III Office of the City Clerk P: 650.329.2630 | E: Belle.Farias@PaloAlto.gov www.PaloAlto.gov &nbsp; From:Clerk, City To:Council, City Subject:FW: delivering a signed copy of the Petition from Olive Avenue residents Date:Thursday, August 27, 2026 1:33:01 PM Attachments:OlivePetitionCityCouncilAugust2026_signed.pdf From: Anupa Bajwa <anupabajwa@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, August 24, 2026 8:06 AM To: Clerk, City <City.Clerk@PaloAlto.gov> Subject: delivering a signed copy of the Petition from Olive Avenue residents CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Palo Alto City Clerk, I am delivering the signed copy of the Petition from Olive Avenue residents to the City Council via this email address (City Clerk).Pleasenote that this signed petition includes residents' contact information, such as email addresses and phone numbers. Regards,Anupa Bajwa 5 i This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first email to you. Mark Safe Report CGBANNERINDICATOR Palo Alto City Clerk, I am delivering the signed copy of the Petition from Olive Avenue residents to the City Council via this email address (City Clerk). Please note that this signed petition includes residents' contact information, such as email addresses and phone numbers. Regards, Anupa Bajwa Powered by Mimecast From:stephanie wansek To:Chris Schremp Cc:Lauing, Ed; Shikada, Ed; Veenker, Vicki; Council, City; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Stone, Greer; Reckdahl, Keith; Jo Ann Mandinach; Robert Marinaro; Annette Ross; Penny Brennan; Zohar Gillai; Martin Cuyegkeng; Jenny Lee; Josh Becker; Marc Berman; Leslie Bulbuk; Nicole Fernandez; Margaret Abe-Koga; Bulatao, Eric; Nick Marinaro; Jennifer Kain; Roger Smith; Peter Xu; Loren Brown; Dana Dahlstrom; Ceci Kettendorf; Chris Berg; Taly Katz; Barry Katz; John Schafer; Jeanette Baldwin; Alina Martinez; Micah Murphy; Danielle Dunne; David Famero; Carly Lake; Sandy Freschi; Theron Bullman; Dave Stellman; Dave Stellman; Steve Wong; Lydia Kou; Patrick Kelly; Osbaldo Romero; Bryna Chang; Bill McLane; Lester Wong; Cathi Lerch; 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; Baird, Nathan; Palo Alto Daily Post; Gennady Sheyner; Louis Hsiao; Ann Lafargue Balin; Mary Gallagher; Maury Green; Terry Holzemer; Joseph Hirsch; William Ross; Arthur Keller; Becky Sanders; Kevin Mayer; Boris Folsch; Ian Halker; Richard Willits; Heather Brownlee; Ken Brownlee; Robin Holbrook; Cassandra Paige; Brad Watson; Alisa Pendicini; Ron Ellickson; Titan Gu; Colin Swindells; Aki Hirsa; Oksana Selavri; Christine Schremp Subject:Re: Next Steps: A Clear Path to Enact Street Bans Within 30 Days Date:Thursday, August 27, 2026 1:04:12 PM Attachments:Palo_Alto_OSV_Initiative_Working_Draft.pdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Mayor Veenker, Vice Mayor Stone, and Members of the Palo Alto City Council, I know I wrote to Council before Monday’s meeting, and I appreciate that my comments were received. But after seeing the concerns raised by SRI regarding the proposed Coyote Hill location, I wanted to follow up because I think this development illustrates the fundamental problem with the approach the City is taking. Every time the City tries to determine where OSVs should be accommodated on Palo Alto streets, another group of residents or businesses is being asked to absorb the impact. Residential neighborhoods understandably object. Residential-adjacent areas object. Businesses that have been living with this for years object. And now SRI, as it prepares to move its headquarters to Palo Alto, is raising safety and security concerns about the proposed location outside its new headquarters. At some point, I think we have to recognize what all of this is telling us: there may simply be no appropriate Palo Alto public street on which to institutionalize overnight OSV habitation. The solution does not have to be this complicated. The parking issue and the much larger issue of the people living in the vehicles need to be disentangled. The parking ordinance should regulate the vehicle, not the person inside it. Who is living there, why they are there, and what assistance they may need belongs on a separate track. Menlo Park has already provided a workable model. Establish a clear citywide overnight OSV restriction, provide a reasonable implementation period for notice and signage, and set an enforcement date. During that implementation period, Palo Alto can focus its resources on outreach, case management, housing assistance, regional coordination, or whatever other programs Council determines are appropriate. Those two tracks can move forward simultaneously. There is no reason resolution of the parking ordinance needs to remain contingent upon resolution of the enormously more complicated housing and social-service questions. The discussion has also begun among residents and business owners about a possible citizen initiative. The concept being discussed is intentionally singular and simple: No overnight parking of oversized vehicles on public streets anywhere in Palo Alto. Residential, residential-adjacent, commercial and industrial — one citywide rule. No neighborhood or business district solves its problem by pushing it onto another. I don’t think residents should have to undertake a citizen initiative if Council can accomplish the same thing legislatively. And fundamentally, this is not complicated. Palo Alto already has an OSV parking ordinance. The City can amend it to establish a uniform citywide overnight restriction and have the City Attorney review the language for legal sufficiency. I’ve attached a preliminary draft simply as a proof of concept. It is obviously not intended to substitute for the City Attorney’s work, but it demonstrates how quickly a straightforward policy objective can be translated into ordinance language when it is disentangled from the separate questions surrounding vehicle dwellers. The City can establish an appropriate implementation date, provide the required notice and signage, and use that transition period to focus on whatever assistance or programs Council chooses to pursue on the separate track. I hope the SRI situation causes Council to reconsider the larger premise here. Rather than continuing to search for Palo Alto streets whose residents or businesses might be willing to absorb OSV parking, perhaps it is time to establish the parking rule citywide and move the City’s efforts to assist people living in vehicles onto the separate track where they belong. Stephanie Wansek On Thu, Aug 27, 2026 at 10:28 AM Chris Schremp <chrisschremp88@gmail.com> wrote: Mayor Veenker, Vice Mayor Stone, and Members of the Palo Alto City Council, Following Monday’s meeting, the takeaway from residents and local business owners couldn't be clearer: the proposed Pilot 2 approach is fundamentally off-track, and we want a permanent, citywide solution. In public office, after spending significant time and effort on a specific policy direction, there is an understandable human tendency to try to save face. It can be tempting to double down, avoid admitting a flawed approach, or try to broker a complex "middle ground" compromise to prove that an administrative vision can still work. In some cases, elected officials even fall into the trap of assuming they simply know better than the taxpayers, dismissing direct community input in favor of internal theories or personal agendas. I strongly urge this Council to resist that temptation. Listening to the community and adjusting course isn't a setback—it’s practical governance. You have a real opportunity right now to show responsiveness and rebuild trust by shifting away from complex "street shuffle" experiments and getting straight to work on what the community is asking for. Admitting that past approaches have been slow or misdirected will go a long way toward building genuine respect and confidence with the people you represent. There is no need to overcomplicate this or reinvent the wheel. You already have sound, well-vetted proposals sitting on your desks from residents, local business coalitions, and neighboring cities that have successfully tackled this exact issue. We suggest a simple, immediate path forward: direct the OSV Ad Hoc Committee and City Staff to bring back a formal proposal within the next 30 days to enact an outright citywide ban on overnight OSV street parking. Funding is already in place. The $823,800 previously earmarked for the flawed Pilot 2 proposal is more than enough to cover this new direction. In fact, establishing a citywide ban using border entry signage requires only a small fraction of those funds ($20k–$45k), freeing up substantial taxpayer dollars while delivering the exact solution the community is asking for. This 30-day effort can easily run on two parallel, decoupled tracks: 1. Street-Level Code Execution: Amend PAMC § 10.44.020 to prohibit overnight OSV parking citywide, authorized via low-cost CVC § 22651(n) border gateway signage. 2. Off-Street Regional Solutions: Instruct staff to continue actively engaging Santa Clara County, Stanford, and regional partners to identify permitted, off-street parking facilities—without making street-level safety and code enforcement contingent on those external timelines. And if you needed more proof, the status quo is clearly not working. Just this morning, an oversized vehicle parked on East Meadow Drive directly in front of Ramos Park, blocking the bike lane. This is a daily reality impacting the safety of children and cyclists. (Photo attached) The community’s sentiment is clear, the legal path post-Grants Pass is established, and the blueprints are ready. We urge you to instruct the Ad Hoc Committee and staff to bring an outright street ban back to Council for a vote within 30 days. Best regards, Chris Schremp Palo Alto Resident & Stakeholder PROPOSED INITIATIVE ORDINANCE Citywide Overnight Parking Restrictions for Oversized Vehicles WORKING DRAFT - FOR COUNSEL REVIEW ONLY SECTION 1. Purpose and Intent The people of the City of Palo Alto find that public streets are intended principally for transportation and ordinary temporary parking and should not be used for the long-term or overnight storage of oversized vehicles. The purpose of this ordinance is to establish a clear and uniform citywide rule governing overnight parking of oversized vehicles on public streets, regardless of zoning designation or the identity, housing status, income, or circumstances of the vehicle's owner or occupants. Nothing in this ordinance is intended to restrict the City from separately providing housing assistance, outreach, case management, emergency services, or other programs for persons in need. SECTION 2. Citywide Overnight Parking Restriction Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 10.44.020 shall be amended to provide substantially as follows: 10.44.020 - Overnight Parking of Oversized Vehicles (a) Prohibition. Except as expressly provided in this section, no person shall stop, stand, park, or leave standing an oversized vehicle on any public street, highway, alley, or other public right-of-way within the City of Palo Alto between the hours of 2:00 a.m. and 6:00 a.m. The prohibition shall apply citywide without regard to the zoning designation or permitted land uses of adjoining property. (b) Definition. "Oversized vehicle" shall have the meaning established elsewhere in the Palo Alto Municipal Code, as amended, or such definition as is expressly incorporated into this ordinance. COUNSEL REVIEW NOTE: Determine whether Palo Alto's existing vehicle definition should be retained verbatim or adapted from the objective dimensional definition used in Menlo Park Ordinance No. 1123. (c) Limited Exceptions. The prohibition shall not apply to: 1 Emergency vehicles or vehicles being used in response to an emergency. 2 Vehicles owned or operated by a governmental agency while being used for official governmental purposes. 3 Oversized vehicles actively engaged in loading or unloading persons, goods, or materials. 4 Oversized vehicles actively being used in connection with construction, repair, maintenance, delivery, or other lawful services being performed at an adjacent or nearby property. 5 An oversized vehicle temporarily parked immediately adjacent to the registered owner's residence for a limited period for loading, unloading, cleaning, or preparation immediately before or after travel, subject to reasonable time and frequency limitations. 6 A vehicle experiencing a bona fide mechanical emergency that makes immediate movement unsafe or impracticable. 7 Any additional exception required by applicable state or federal law. (d) Uniform Citywide Application. No residential, commercial, industrial, mixed-use, planned-community, or other zoning district shall be exempt from subsection (a). (e) Designated Overnight OSV Parking on Public Streets. The City shall not establish, designate, or authorize any portion of a public street, highway, alley, or public right-of-way as a location at which oversized vehicles may park overnight in contravention of subsection (a), whether through a permit program, pilot program, administrative regulation, or other City action, except as expressly authorized by this ordinance. COUNSEL REVIEW NOTE: Review the interaction between this provision and any temporary City pilot program in effect or approved before the initiative takes effect, including the Coyote Hill Road and Embarcadero Road pilot locations. (f) Off-Street Programs and Services. Nothing in this section shall prohibit the City from establishing or supporting lawful programs located on property other than public streets or public rights-of-way for temporary parking, housing assistance, shelter, outreach, case management, or other services. (g) Notice and Enforcement. The City shall provide all notice and signage required by applicable California law before commencing enforcement. Violations may be enforced through citation, removal, or towing to the extent authorized by California law and the Palo Alto Municipal Code. SECTION 3. Existing Inconsistent City Programs Upon the effective date of this ordinance, no City permit, pilot program, administrative regulation, or other City authorization shall permit overnight oversized-vehicle parking on a public street or public right-of-way where such parking is prohibited by Section 10.44.020. COUNSEL REVIEW NOTE: Determine the appropriate legal treatment of any permit or pilot program approved before the effective date and any applicable notice, due-process, or transition requirements. SECTION 4. Separate City Authority Regarding Housing and Services Nothing in this ordinance shall limit the authority of the City of Palo Alto to appropriate funds or provide lawful housing, shelter, outreach, transportation, case management, or other assistance to persons experiencing homelessness, housing insecurity, or displacement. Such programs shall not constitute an exception to the citywide public-street parking restriction unless expressly authorized by this ordinance. SECTION 5. Severability If any provision of this ordinance or its application to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the remaining provisions and applications shall remain in effect to the fullest extent permitted by law. SECTION 6. Effective Date This ordinance shall take effect in accordance with the Palo Alto City Charter and applicable law. From:Robert Marinaro To:Council, City; Veenker, Vicki; Stone, Greer; Lauing, Ed; Reckdahl, Keith; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Burt, Patrick; Lu, George; City Mgr Cc:Roger Smith; Peter Xu; Nick Marinaro; McDonough, Melissa; Jennifer Kain; Gaines, Chantal; 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; 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; 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; 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; 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; Joe Sinnott; Linda Zausen; Danny Whelan; Gulya Timokhina; Matt Lynch; Oksana Selavri; Chuck Karish; Fred Bailin; Dave Adams; Christian Hothem; Aditya Jain; Anjali Jain; Jenny Lee; Arun Bodapati; Soumya Bodapati; Yingxi Liu; Susan Dorsky; Dave Price; Elaine Goodman; Brandon Cartwright; Clark Penado; Francescarael Rael; Lena Yarovaya; Kenneth Russell; Jon Hellesoe; Ryan Judd; Evan Reade; Kaye Crawford; Rosalie Cook; Kay Satit; Sooji Nam; Francis Lim; Giselle Roohparvar; Stephen Casale; Luci Sheppard; Alex Tesler; Michelle Rosengaus; Grace Downer; David Downer; Mary Ann Norton; Jason Robinson; Jen Bartolomei; Dave Melisso; Polina Samsonov; Eva Gandhe; Ruby Flath; Laya Ganapati; Christin Zhang; aarrvviinndd@gmail.com; davidfeatherman@gmail.com Subject:OSVs Behaving Badly (8/27/26) & Coyote Hill? Date:Thursday, August 27, 2026 12:53:40 PM Attachments:SRI Coyote Hill 1.png CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. All, Just a few photos that were sent to me today of OSVs parked where they should not be... And (late breaking)… with the Coyote Hill Safe Parking Pilot already getting pushback it is looking like an Outright OSV Ban is looking like the best solution. Regards, Bob Marinaro Palo Alto Daily Post (8/27/26) Bob Begin forwarded message: From: Resident of Echelon Condos Subject: Every street cleaning day Date: August 27, 2026 at 10:14:12 AM PDT To: Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> We get to see this view. Worsening situation since before they started the phase 1 East Meadow Circle East Meadow Circle East Meadow Circle East Meadow Circle Sent from my iPho Mitchell Park Mitchell Park East Meadow Drive Adjacent to Ramos Park From:Esther Lucas To:Transportation Cc:Council, City; Ellson, Penny Subject:Hazardous Parking at Nelson and El Capitan Intersection Date:Thursday, August 27, 2026 11:06:06 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i August 27, 2026 To: City of Palo Alto Subject: Hazardous Parking at Nelson and El Capitan Intersection I am a Palo Alto resident on El Capitan Place. I am concerned about the parking situation at the corner of Nelson and El Capitan Place. Cars are parking along Nelson Drive starting from Charleston and continuing past the entrance to El Capitan. They are parking very close to, and sometimes right on, the corners of El Capitan. This is hazardous for traffic leaving El Capitan Place as well as the traffic coming around the curve on Nelson Drive heading for Charleston. A current example is described below. For the past several days, two white Teslas have been parked on or close to the corners of El Capitan and Nelson Drive. The one on the Charleston side has several cars parked behind it and its location impedes vision when turning left out of El Capitan. The one on the other side is right on the corner, impeding vision on that side as well. As a result, it is necessary to pull out from El Capitan into the road on Nelson to see oncoming traffic in either direction. There are only two houses between our corner and the next corner/curve on either side. Cars come around the curve heading for Charleston and cars turn right from Charleston onto Nelson. The Nelson/Charleston intersection is very busy, especially now that school is in session with Challenger school on the next corner and Charleston being a major bicycle and pedestrian corridor for two other elementary schools (Hoover and Fairmeadow), JLS Middle school, and Gunn High School. Parked cars impeding the line of sight for drivers and bicyclists adds another potential danger to the mix. I hope the city will take this situation under serious consideration. I would also like to suggest a possible solution for the parking element of this problem. If the curbs on Nelson were to be painted red on either side of the entrance to El Capitan, drivers might be discouraged from parking in a red zone. Then, if they continue to park in the red, they could first be warned and then cited. A “Slow” sign as approaching the curve on Nelson would also be helpful. This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. Mark Safe Report Powered by Mimecast Please feel free to contact me to discuss this further. Sincerely, Esther Lucas 495 El Capitan Place estherlucas67@gmail.com -- Esther Lucas estherlucas67@gmail.com From:Charlie Weidanz To:Council, City Subject:Palo Alto Chamber of Commerce News & Events - August 27, 2026 Date:Thursday, August 27, 2026 10:58:34 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Palo Alto Chamber Logo News & Events - Aug 27, 2026 Celebrate Sekoya Amber Hour Three Special Meet The Designing Chica at Framebridge Palo Alto 27 Miles Malibu Palo Alto - Grand Opening Ribbon Cutting Special Promotion Sign-up at Event 2026 Palo Alto City Council Candidate Forum Avenidas & La Comida Celebration and Fundraiser Sofia University - 2026 Global Mental Health Conference Member Spotlight: Honey Bear Boards Special Member Offer: Sofia University Tuition Incentive for Chamber Members State Route 82 South - Multimodal Corridor Plan Survey Mark Your Calendar Sekoya Feast Stop by Sekoya and discover why Amber Hour has become one of Palo Alto’s favorite Happy Hours. To celebrate three years on California Avenue, Sekoya and our new Head Chef, Ray Saad, are introducing The Amber Hour Three—an exceptional three-course dinner for $59, available exclusively during Amber Hour. Amber Hour is offered Monday through Thursday from 5–6pm and Friday and Saturday from 4–6pm. View the Amber Hour Three Menu >> sekoyapaloalto.com Celebrate Local Art: Meet The Designing Chica at Framebridge Palo Alto Artist Pop Up with Susana Sanchez-Young flyer Meet the Artist: Susana Sanchez-Young Join us at Framebridge Palo Alto on Saturday, August 29 from 12–3 PM for a special artist pop-up featuring Susana Sanchez-Young, the creative force behind The Designing Chica. Susana Sanchez-Young with her artwork Susana's colorful, joy-filled work celebrates culture, community, food, and everyday life with a playful style that's unmistakably her own. Stop by to meet Susana, learn about her creative process, and browse a selection of artwork available for purchase. Whether you're an art lover, collector, or simply curious, stop by, enjoy some light refreshments, and spend an afternoon celebrating local art and creativity! Saturday, August 29 | 12–3 PM Framebridge Palo Alto | Town & Country Village Join us for the Grand Opening Ribbon Cutting Ceremony of 27 Miles Malibu Palo Alto Don't miss the special promotion sign-up immediately after the ribbon cutting: First 25 sign-ups: $100 shopping credit First 50 sign-ups: complimentary 27 Miles Malibu tote All sign-ups: entered into our Grand Opening prize drawing September 3, 2026 Noon - 2:00 PM Ribbon Cutting Approximately 12:45PM Towne & Country Village 855 El Camino Real, STE #5 Palo Alto, CA 94301 RSVP Online >> -- About 27 Miles Malibu & Vallorani 27 Miles Malibu is a family-run California luxury lifestyle brand founded by husband-and-wife team Emily and Ernie Vallorano. The name came to them during a drive along Pacific Coast Highway, when they passed the familiar "27 Miles of Scenic Beauty" sign marking Malibu's coastline. That moment captured the spirit they wanted for the brand: relaxed, beautiful, colorful, and distinctly Californian. Emily and Ernie Vallorano Since its founding, 27 Miles Malibu has become known for luxurious cashmere, distinctive knitwear, airy linen, and effortlessly polished pieces designed to be worn and enjoyed every day. The collection brings together exceptional softness, modern color, thoughtful details, and easy silhouettes that move naturally from the coast to the city. With collections for both women and men, the brand offers clothing that feels special without ever feeling overly formal. The Palo Alto boutique also introduces customers to Vallorani, the company's made-in-Italy fashion and tailoring division for women and men. Vallorani combines Italian craftsmanship with a modern California point of view, offering refined ready-to-wear alongside personalized made-to-measure services. Customers can select fabrics, colors, finishes, and fit details to create garments that reflect their individual style. The experience is personal and attentive, whether a client is looking for a beautifully tailored jacket, a complete suit, or a distinctive piece for work, travel, or a special occasion. Together, 27 Miles Malibu and Vallorani bring two complementary expressions of modern luxury to Palo Alto: the relaxed sophistication of California knitwear and the precision of Italian tailoring. As a family-run business, Emily and Ernie believe luxury should feel welcoming, personal, and easy to live in. Their new Palo Alto store offers a warm, service-focused destination where women and men can discover exceptional materials, thoughtful design, and clothing made to become lasting favorites. It is a place to explore, connect, and build a wardrobe with confidence. 2026 Palo Alto City Council Candidate Forum promo Please join us for the 2026 Palo Alto City Council Candidate Forum on Tuesday, September 15, 2026 at 5:00 PM. Schedule 5:00 PM - Check In 5:30 PM - Reception 6:15 PM - Candidate Forum Location Oshman Family JCC 3921 Fabian Way Palo Alto, CA 94303 FREE Event - Registration Required Register Online >> 2 Strong - 1 Mission | Avenidas & La Comida Celebration and Fundraiser Avenidas + La Comida 2 Strong, 1 Mission Fundraiser 9-24-26 flyer This September join Avenidas and La Comida for Fun. Flavors. Fundraising Avenidas and La Comida are coming together on September 24, 2026 for a joint celebration and fundraiser to support programs and services for the older adults in our community. Enjoy delicious bites and drinks from more than 14 local restaurants and beverage partners, an open bar, and live music, while making a meaningful impact. Join us as a sponsor or purchase your tickets today, and help older adults in our community stay healthy, connected, and engaged. Tickets are limited. Learn more and reserve your spot: 2 Strong, 1 Mission – Avenidas, La Comida Joint Fundraiser >> Can’t make it? Please consider donating to power our mission: Donate to Avenidas & La Comida Here Sneak peek: Here are some of the featured food and drinks partners: Bevri Chef Chu's, Coupa Café, Evvia, Grocery Outlet, La Bodeguita, La Comida, Meyhouse, Oren's Hummus, Terún, The Patio, The Pro, The Redwood, Zareen's. Sofia University Global Mental Health Conference 2026 Embodiment, Integration, and Whole-Person Mental Health in the VUCA Era September 27, 2026 Live Online Event Early Bird Registration Ends August 31st Register today to secure your spot >> Advancing Mental Health Through Global Collaboration The Sofia University Global Mental Health Conference 2026 is an international online gathering dedicated to advancing mental health through research, education, clinical practice, and interdisciplinary collaboration. Each year, the conference brings together scholars, clinicians, educators, students, healthcare professionals, and emerging leaders from around the world to exchange ideas, explore innovative approaches, and inspire meaningful change. This year's theme, "Embodiment, Integration, and Whole-Person Mental Health in the VUCA Era," explores how individuals, organizations, and communities can foster resilience, well-being, and human flourishing amid increasing volatility, uncertainty, complexity, and ambiguity. Grounded in Sofia University's tradition of whole-person education and transpersonal psychology, the conference provides a global forum for interdisciplinary dialogue, evidence- based research, and cross-cultural collaboration—all accessible from wherever you are. <!--[endif]--> What to Expect Attendees will have the opportunity to: Hear from internationally recognized experts in mental health, psychology, education, healthcare, and related disciplines. Explore emerging research and innovative practices supporting whole- person well-being. Participate in engaging keynote presentations, panel discussions, and interactive sessions. Connect virtually with professionals, researchers, educators, and students from around the world. Discover practical strategies that integrate mind, body, and spirit to promote resilience and human flourishing. Who Should Attend? This conference is designed for: Mental health professionals Psychologists and counselors Healthcare practitioners Researchers and educators Graduate and doctoral students Coaches and organizational leaders Anyone passionate about advancing whole-person mental health <!--[endif]--> Join Us Online Experience a full day of inspiring presentations, meaningful conversations, and global networking—all from the convenience of your home or office. Take advantage of Early Bird Registration through August 31st and reserve your place today. <!--[endif]--> LEARN MORE AND REGISTER HERE <!--[endif]--> We look forward to welcoming participants from around the world on September 27, 2026, for a day of learning, collaboration, and advancing the future of global mental health. Saturday, September 27th, 2026 - Online | Learn More >> Member Spotlight - Honey Bear Boards Honey Bear Boards Honey Bear Boards is a luxury charcuterie and grazing table company specializing in elevated experiences for weddings, corporate events, private parties, ribbon cuttings, and special celebrations throughout the Bay Area. Founded with a love for beautiful hosting and thoughtfully curated food, Honey Bear Boards creates visually stunning spreads using premium cheeses, artisan meats, seasonal fruits, fresh pastries, gourmet accompaniments, and elegant styling details. From individual graze cups to large-scale grazing tables, Honey Bear Boards focuses on creating memorable experiences that bring people together. Every board is handcrafted with attention to detail, balancing aesthetics, flavor, and high-quality ingredients to make each event feel special and personalized. Honey Bear Boards has partnered with local businesses, corporate offices, chambers, weddings, and community events to provide catering that feels both approachable and upscale. Their offerings are especially popular for networking events, grand openings, employee appreciation events, and celebrations where presentation matters just as much as taste. Connect With Honey Bear Boards Website: www.honeybearboards.com Instagram: @honeybearboards Email: hello@honeybearboards.com Special Member Offer As a valued Chamber of Commerce member, you're invited to take advantage of an exclusive 20% tuition incentive toward Sofia University's new 100% Online Master of Global Leadership (MGL). Exclusive Chamber Member Benefit Save 20% on tuition when you begin the Master of Global Leadership during the Fall 2026 quarter. This limited-time offer is available exclusively to current Palo Alto Chamber of Commerce members. Introducing Sofia University's New Master of Global Leadership Bay Area organizations need leaders who can navigate change, inspire diverse teams, and make informed decisions in an increasingly global and interconnected world. Sofia University, located in Palo Alto, has a new 100% Online Master of Global Leadership was created for professionals who are ready to advance into executive, senior leadership, or entrepreneurial roles— without putting their careers on hold. Designed specifically for working professionals, the program can be completed in just 1.5 years and provides the flexibility to balance graduate education with work, family, and other personal commitments. Students develop the leadership skills today's organizations demand through coursework focused on: Authentic and ethical leadership Systems thinking and strategic decision-making Cross-cultural leadership and collaboration Artificial intelligence and emerging technologies Global ethics, sustainability, and social responsibility Grounded in Sofia University's distinctive transpersonal approach to education, the program develops not only your professional leadership capabilities, but also your emotional intelligence, self-awareness, adaptability, and ability to lead with purpose in an increasingly complex world. Learn Alongside Experienced Professionals One of Sofia University's greatest strengths is its learning community. Unlike many graduate programs where classrooms are often filled with students just beginning their academic journeys, Sofia's graduate classrooms are comprised primarily of working professionals, business leaders, entrepreneurs, and established career professionals. Your classmates bring valuable real-world experience, creating engaging discussions, practical learning opportunities, and professional networking that extends well beyond graduation. If you're looking for a graduate program where you can connect with peers who understand the realities of balancing career, leadership responsibilities, and family life, Sofia offers an educational experience that is both relevant and rewarding. An Exceptional Value The Master of Global Leadership is competitively priced at less than $26,000 in total tuition, making it an outstanding value for professionals seeking a high-quality graduate education. Sofia University is proudly accredited by the WASC Senior College and University Commission (WSCUC)—the same regional accrediting body that accredits many of California's most respected institutions, including UC Berkeley, Stanford University, and UCLA. Discover the curriculum, program structure, learning outcomes, admission requirements, and how Sofia University's unique approach to leadership development can help you achieve your professional goals. Contact the Sofia University Admissions Team at admissions@sofia.edu to learn more about the program and begin the application process. Important To receive the exclusive 20% Chamber Member Tuition Incentive, simply mention your current Chamber of Commerce membership when contacting our Admissions Team. Exclusive Chamber Member Offer 20% Tuition Incentive Available exclusively to current Chamber of Commerce members Leadership for the Fall 2026 quarter only Lead globally. Learn online. Grow with purpose. Contact: admissions@sofia.edu For Your Information Caltrans Bay Area State Route 82 South graphic To help identify key needs along State Route 82 in Santa Clara County, Caltrans wants to hear from you. Please fill out the survey >>. The survey will close on September 18, 2026. Need another way to comment? Email: south82corridorplan@publicinput.com. Caltrans District 4 (Bay Area) is developing a Comprehensive Multimodal Corridor Plan (CMCP) for State Route (SR) 82, better known locally as El Camino Real and The Alameda, between the Cities of Palo Alto and San Jose. A CMCP is a long-range plan developed between Caltrans, local, and regional partners to identify opportunities for multimodal (transit, auto, rail, bicycle, and pedestrian modes) transportation improvements. The Plan will describe and analyze transportation facilities along SR 82. The goals of the plan are to decrease vehicle emissions, improve transportation safety, advance equity, and improve the efficiency of moving people within the Corridor. It will identify improvement strategies and recommend projects which help us and our partners to qualify for future funding and programming opportunities. Take Survey >> More Information >> See Our Upcoming Events Learn More About The Chamber ​ PALO ALTO CHAMBER & VISITORS CENTER 355 ALMA STREET | PALO ALTO | CA | 94301 | 650-324-3121 WWW.PALOALTOCHAMBER.COM This email was sent on behalf of Palo Alto Chamber of Commerce 355 Alma St Palo Alto, CA 94301.To unsubscribe click here. If you have questions or comments concerning this email or services in general, please contact us by email at info@paloaltochamber.com. From:Chris Schremp To:Lauing, Ed; Shikada, Ed; Veenker, Vicki; Council, City; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Stone, Greer; Reckdahl, Keith Cc:Jo Ann Mandinach; Robert Marinaro; Annette Ross; Penny Brennan; Zohar Gillai; Martin Cuyegkeng; Jenny Lee; Josh Becker; Marc Berman; Leslie Bulbuk; Nicole Fernandez; Margaret Abe-Koga; Bulatao, Eric; Nick Marinaro; Jennifer Kain; Roger Smith; Peter Xu; Loren Brown; Dana Dahlstrom; Ceci Kettendorf; Chris Berg; Taly Katz; Barry Katz; John Schafer; Jeanette Baldwin; Alina Martinez; Micah Murphy; Danielle Dunne; David Famero; Carly Lake; Sandy Freschi; Theron Bullman; Dave Stellman; Dave Stellman; Steve Wong; Lydia Kou; Patrick Kelly; Osbaldo Romero; Bryna Chang; Bill McLane; Lester Wong; Cathi Lerch; 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; Baird, Nathan; Palo Alto Daily Post; Gennady Sheyner; Louis Hsiao; Ann Lafargue Balin; Mary Gallagher; Maury Green; Terry Holzemer; Joseph Hirsch; William Ross; Arthur Keller; Becky Sanders; Kevin Mayer; Boris Folsch; Ian Halker; Richard Willits; Heather Brownlee; Ken Brownlee; Robin Holbrook; Cassandra Paige; Brad Watson; Alisa Pendicini; Ron Ellickson; Titan Gu; Stephanie Wansek; Colin Swindells; Aki Hirsa; Oksana Selavri; Chris Schremp; Christine Schremp Subject:Next Steps: A Clear Path to Enact Street Bans Within 30 Days Date:Thursday, August 27, 2026 10:29:03 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Mayor Veenker, Vice Mayor Stone, and Members of the Palo Alto City Council, Following Monday’s meeting, the takeaway from residents and local business owners couldn't be clearer: the proposed Pilot 2 approach is fundamentally off-track, and we want a permanent, citywide solution. In public office, after spending significant time and effort on a specific policy direction, there is an understandable human tendency to try to save face. It can be tempting to double down, avoid admitting a flawed approach, or try to broker a complex "middle ground" compromise to prove that an administrative vision can still work. In some cases, elected officials even fall into the trap of assuming they simply know better than the taxpayers, dismissing direct community input in favor of internal theories or personal agendas. I strongly urge this Council to resist that temptation. Listening to the community and adjusting course isn't a setback—it’s practical governance. You have a real opportunity right now to show responsiveness and rebuild trust by shifting away from complex "street shuffle" experiments and getting straight to work on what the community is asking for. Admitting that past approaches have been slow or misdirected will go a long way toward building genuine respect and confidence with the people you represent. There is no need to overcomplicate this or reinvent the wheel. You already have sound, well-vetted proposals sitting on your desks from residents, local business coalitions, and neighboring cities that have successfully tackled this exact issue. We suggest a simple, immediate path forward: direct the OSV Ad Hoc Committee and City Staff to bring back a formal proposal within the next 30 days to enact an outright citywide ban on overnight OSV street parking. Funding is already in place. The $823,800 previously earmarked for the flawed Pilot 2 proposal is more than enough to cover this new direction. In fact, establishing a citywide ban using border entry signage requires only a small fraction of those funds ($20k–$45k), freeing up substantial taxpayer dollars while delivering the exact solution the community is asking for. This 30-day effort can easily run on two parallel, decoupled tracks: 1. Street-Level Code Execution: Amend PAMC § 10.44.020 to prohibit overnight OSV parking citywide, authorized via low-cost CVC § 22651(n) border gateway signage. 2. Off-Street Regional Solutions: Instruct staff to continue actively engaging Santa Clara County, Stanford, and regional partners to identify permitted, off-street parking facilities—without making street-level safety and code enforcement contingent on those external timelines. And if you needed more proof, the status quo is clearly not working. Just this morning, an oversized vehicle parked on East Meadow Drive directly in front of Ramos Park, blocking the bike lane. This is a daily reality impacting the safety of children and cyclists. (Photo attached) The community’s sentiment is clear, the legal path post-Grants Pass is established, and the blueprints are ready. We urge you to instruct the Ad Hoc Committee and staff to bring an outright street ban back to Council for a vote within 30 days. Best regards, Chris Schremp Palo Alto Resident & Stakeholder From:Barbara Platt To:Transportation; Council, City Cc:Ellson, Penny Subject:Illegal parking at el capitan And Nelson Date:Thursday, August 27, 2026 9:55:02 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. For the past several weeks, automobiles have been choking the entry anf parking on the curve of the curb Impairing visibility at the mouth of El Capitan and Nelson Drive This morning, I put a handwritten note on the windshield of one of the cars but due to a lot of moisture I Wind I don’t know whether My note will hold up. one of the cars of concern is a white Tesla sitting on the south west corner Nelson and El Capitan place It Has been there permanently for several days On both sides toward Charleston, there are several cars seriously impairing visibility for pedestrian bikers and automobiles Is imperative that something be done about the impending danger I look forward to this being treated as a high priority issue Thank you Barbara platt 490 el capitan From:David Hung To:Coles, Charlie; Council, City; Clerk, City; Transportation; Lo, Ria; City Mgr Cc:David Hung Subject:Re: Formal Administrative Submission: Technical Realignment Alternative (The Loma Verde-Alma Median Hybrid Plan) - David Hung Date:Thursday, August 27, 2026 9:06:58 AM Attachments:image001.png image004.png image003.png CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear City of Palo Alto Team, I am writing to submit two specific refinements to the formal description of the Loma Verde-Alma Median Hybrid Plan that I previously sent. Please update my official submission to include the following details: 1. Combined Infrastructure: Where the original document states building a Class IV protected bikeway, it should instead state that the plan includes both a pedestrian walkway and a bikeway. 2. Land Maximization: I ask that the city utilize whatever existing land width is available between Alma Street and the railroad to maximize the space available for this combined pedestrian walkway and bikeway. Please add these refinements to my official submission files. Thank you for your time and assistance. Sincerely, On Fri, Aug 21, 2026 at 9:15 AM Coles, Charlie <Charlie.Coles@paloalto.gov> wrote: Dear David Hung, Thank you for submitting your “Loma Verde-Alma Median Hybrid Plan” and accompanying comments regarding the South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity Project. This email confirms receipt of your submission. Your public comment will be included in the project record, has been shared with the project team, and will be included in the public record in the agenda packet for the upcoming Palo Alto Pedestrian and Bicycle Advisory Committee (PABAC) meeting on September 3, 2026. Staff will review your comments and the concepts presented, including the proposed Loma Verde Avenue/Alma Street signal location, Alma Street lane-shift concept, west-side protected bikeway, rail-corridor security measures, and proposed connection to an undercrossing near El Dorado Avenue. I also want to make you aware of several upcoming engagement opportunities and meetings for this project, where you are welcome to attend and provide input: Bike/Ped Rail Crossings Workshop: Thursday, August 27, 2026, 6:00–7:30 p.m., Rinconada Library, Embarcadero Room Planning and Transportation Commission meeting: Wednesday, September 30, 2026 Rail Committee meeting: Tuesday, November 10, 2026 City Council meeting: Monday, December 7, 2026 Please note that the Planning and Transportation Commission, Rail Committee, and City Council meeting dates for this project are tentative and subject to change. Check the Project Webpage and City Calendar for the latest meeting schedule. If you would like your comments included in the agenda packets or public-comment materials for these meetings, please submit them directly to the applicable body. Additional resources and instructions for how to submit public comments are included below: Find more information about City Council here. Find more information about Boards & Commissions here. Learn more about how to attend hybrid meetings here. View the City Calendar for all City events and meetings. Thank you again for your participation in the project process. CHARLIE COLES Senior Transportation Planner Office of Transportation (650) 329-2166 | Charlie.Coles@PaloAlto.gov www.PaloAlto.gov From: David Hung <dthung1@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, August 19, 2026 7:39 PM To: Transportation <Transportation@PaloAlto.gov>; Lo, Ria <Ria.Lo@paloalto.gov>; Coles, Charlie <Charlie.Coles@paloalto.gov> Cc: Council, City <city.council@PaloAlto.gov>; Clerk, City <City.Clerk@PaloAlto.gov>; David Hung <dthung1@gmail.com> Subject: Formal Administrative Submission: Technical Realignment Alternative (The Loma Verde- Alma Median Hybrid Plan) - David Hung CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. FORMAL PROJECT REALIGNMENT ALTERNATIVE SUBMISSION Date: August 19, 2026 Project Reference: South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity Project (Phase 3 Public Draft Review / 2026 Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan Update) Submission Type: Individual Administrative Record Anchor Document To: Office of Transportation, City of Palo Alto (Transportation@paloalto.gov) Chief Transportation Official (Ria.Lo@PaloAlto.gov) Charlie Coles (charlie.coles@paloalto.gov) Palo Alto Pedestrian and Bicycle Advisory Committee (PABAC) CC: Palo Alto City Council (City.Council@PaloAlto.gov) Office of the City Clerk (City.Clerk@PaloAlto.gov) RE: Formal Notice and Administrative Submission of 'The Loma Verde-Alma Median Hybrid' Plan To the Office of Transportation, Lead Engineers, and Project Consultants: This document formally submits and introduces 'The Loma Verde-Alma Median Hybrid Plan' (hereafter referred to as "The Hybrid Plan") into the permanent administrative record for the South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity Project. I am submitting this proposal strictly as an individual property owner and resident during the active Phase 3 Public Draft Review window. The purpose of this submission is to establish a technically viable design alternative on public land that accomplishes 100% of the city’s regional multi-modal connectivity goals while bypassing the structural liabilities, civil safety risks, and private property infringements introduced by the current El Dorado Avenue layout draft. This document serves as formal administrative notice that a less damaging, code- compliant alternative exists within the existing public right-of-way. I respectfully ask that city staff formally log, model, and evaluate the specific parameters detailed below. THE 5-POINT ENGINEERING BLUEPRINT OF THE HYBRID PLAN The Hybrid Plan utilizes an all-public right-of-way footprint to achieve regional multi- modal connectivity goals seamlessly, bypassing the subsurface water and electrical utility lines that blocked a full tunnel farther south at Loma Verde by decoupling the surface signal route from the physical underpass slot. The City of Palo Alto and its consultants are asked to evaluate the following five integrated technical parameters: 1. Traffic Signal Realignment: Place the new vehicular traffic light and pedestrian crossing at the intersection of Loma Verde Avenue and Alma Street—an established, high-capacity collector street designed to safely absorb vehicle queues without cutting through quiet residential grids. Crucially, Loma Verde Avenue provides a robust, continuous arterial link all the way to West Bayshore Road, providing a safe bi-directional connection for pedestrians, cyclists, and cars that naturally routes cross-town traffic along an appropriate corridor. 2. Lateral Roadway Lane-Shift: Shift the active vehicular driving lanes of Alma Street eastward. Between the edge of the existing parking cutouts on the east side of Alma Street and the residential sidewalk sits exactly 79 inches of available public greenspace. Realignment of the active asphalt into this space clears an identical operating envelope on the west side of the street. Because the city is already actively proposing lane shifts in its own technical project designs, this lateral adjustment uses established municipal engineering precedents and keeps the apartment parking cutouts fully intact. 3. West-Side Class IV Protected Bikeway: Utilize the newly cleared operating envelope to construct a premier Class IV Protected Two-Way Bikeway entirely on the west side of Alma Street, running parallel to the Caltrain tracks from Loma Verde Avenue directly northwest to the El Dorado Avenue rail axis. This routes the 2,500 daily regional active transit trips completely off residential blocks. 4. Comprehensive Rail Corridor Security: Fully secure the west-side parallel bikeway by installing standard Caltrain 8-to-10-foot anti-climb steel safety fencing and dense, environmental buffer planting (CPTED compliant) between the bike path and the rail line. The wide Class IV layout will seamlessly accommodate mountable curbs and removable entry bollards, ensuring absolute compliance with California fire and life-safety codes by providing emergency personnel with immediate, continuous access. 5. Optimal Underpass Tunnel Slot & Zero Private Property Acquisition: Terminate the west-side path at the El Dorado rail axis, slicing directly under the railroad tracks to Park Boulevard. This utilizes the shortest possible physical excavation span beneath the Caltrain rail line, capturing maximum infrastructure savings for the city budget while completely avoiding any eminent domain or private property acquisition along the residential stretch. The graphic showing this plan is included below: Loma Verde-Alma Median Hybrid Plan REQUEST FOR ADMINISTRATIVE INCLUSION Pursuant to Palo Alto public review guidelines, the Office of Transportation is required to log this individual submission into the project records. I respectfully ask that project engineers formally model the 79-inch Alma Street lateral lane-shift and the Loma Verde signal realignment as a standalone, non-destructive public land option prior to authorizing any funding allocations or advance engineering design locks for the El Dorado alternative. This document will be referenced directly in all subsequent advisory board meetings, public workshops, and city council hearings to track municipal accountability and planning completeness. Please reply directly to this email to verify receipt of this formal document and confirm that it has been uploaded into the permanent administrative record for the South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity Project before the upcoming PABAC agenda packet lock. Thank you. Respectfully submitted, David Hung Palo Alto Resident and Property Owner Address: 2789 Bryant St, Palo Alto, CA 94306 From:midtowngaryh@me.com To:Coles, Charlie; Council, City Cc:Transportation Subject:Re: South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity Project Date:Thursday, August 27, 2026 8:47:26 AM Attachments:image001.png image004.png CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Hi Charlie, Thank you for your reply and understanding that we strongly oppose El Dorado for the South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity Project. Sincerely, Gary On Jul 24, 2026, at 4:31 PM, Coles, Charlie <Charlie.Coles@paloalto.gov> wrote: This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first mail to some recipients. Mark Safe Report Dear Gary: Thank you for sharing your comments regarding the South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity Project and the potential El Dorado Avenue crossing location. We appreciate you taking the time to provide input, especially since you are unable to attend the August 27, 2026 community workshop. Your concerns about the width of El Dorado Avenue, potential conflicts with motor vehicles and nearby residents, current bicycle and pedestrian use, project cost, proximity to the existing California Avenue underpass, and the potential for a crossing location closer to East Meadow have been noted. We will include your comments in the project record and share them with the project team as the City continues evaluating possible rail crossing alternatives. Additionally, I would suggest subscribing to the City’s Uplift Local and Transportation Connect e-newsletters where we regularly make announcements about other upcoming opportunities to provide input. I provided sign up links for both e-newsletters below. Sign up for Uplift Local Sign up for Transportation Connect https://www.paloalto.gov/Departments/City-Manager/Latest-News/Sign-Up-for-City- Newsletters https://www.paloalto.gov/Departments/City-Manager/Connect-With-Us Thank you, CHARLIE COLES Senior Transportation Planner Office of Transportation (650) 329-2166 | Charlie.Coles@PaloAlto.gov www.PaloAlto.gov From: midtowngaryh@me.com <midtowngaryh@me.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2026 6:02 PM To: Coles, Charlie <Charlie.Coles@paloalto.gov>; Transportation <Transportation@PaloAlto.gov> Subject: South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity Project CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. July 24, 2026 1. Dear Office of Transportation, I am writing to you as I am unable to attend the upcomingworkshop and I would like to express my strong opposition to anyproposed bicycle or pedestrian connection at El Dorado Avenue aspart of the South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity Project. El Dorado Avenue is too narrow to safely accommodate a newbicycle and pedestrian connection. Its limited roadway width leaveslittle room for additional bicycle and pedestrian traffic withoutincreasing conflicts among motorists, and nearby residents. Basedon my observations, very few, if any, cyclists use El Dorado Avenuenear Alma Street today, making it difficult to justify such a significantinvestment at this location. The City should also consider the responsible use of taxpayer funds.The existing California Avenue underpass is located less than one-third of a mile from El Dorado Avenue and already provides a safemeans for cyclists and pedestrians to cross the railroad corridor.Constructing another underpass such a short distance away wouldduplicate existing infrastructure and represent an unnecessaryexpenditure of public resources. Before committing to a costlyproject, the City should demonstrate a clear transportation needand show that the benefits outweigh the substantial costs. If the City concludes that an additional crossing is needed toimprove connectivity, a location closer to East Meadow would be amore logical choice. An underpass in that area would serveneighborhoods that are farther from existing crossings, improveconnectivity where it is needed most, and provide greater publicbenefit without duplicating access already available near CaliforniaAvenue. I respectfully ask the City to reconsider any proposal for a bicycleand pedestrian connection at El Dorado Avenue. I encourage theCity to prioritize projects that address demonstrated transportationneeds, improve safety, and make the best use of limited publicfunds. Careful planning and thoughtful investment will better serveboth residents and the broader Palo Alto community. Thank you for your consideration of my comments. Sincerely, Gary H. From:Aram James To:Afanasiev, Alex; Goodell, Erin; eric.figueroa@cityofpaloalto.org; PD Kristina Bell; Council, City; Shikada, Ed; board@pausd.org; Board of Directors; Jay Boyarsky; Reifschneider, James; assemblymember.berman@assembly.ca.gov; Josh Becker; WILPF Peninsula Palo Alto; Steve Wagstaffe; Jeff Hayden; Rosen, Jeff; dcombs@menlopark.gov; Carla Torres; Sean Allen; Human Relations Commission; james pitkin; Bill Newell; Nash, Betsy; Nash, Betsy; Taylor, Cecilia; Zelkha, Mila; Malinsky, Jason Subject:Rogue Cops and flock cameras Date:Thursday, August 27, 2026 1:21:13 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2026/08/02/how-police-officers-used-vast- network-cameras-spy-their-exes/ From:Michele B To:Drekmeier, Peter; Mazzone, Christine; Goodell, Erin; Veenker, Vicki; Council, City; City Attorney; Jensen, Christopher Subject:Incident # 26-03018 - Need help asap Date:Wednesday, August 26, 2026 10:44:09 PM Attachments:Letter to mayor of palo alto August 26, 2026 (1).pdf Michele Brantley After visit summary at San Mateo Orthopedic clinic.pdf Aug 1st feeling intense wrist pain. pdf.pdf Letter to mayor of palo alto August 26, 2026.pdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Notice of Severe Injury, Unaddressed City Road Hazard, and Subsequent Hardship Dear Mayor and Members of the City Council, I am writing to formally document a severe incident caused by an unaddressed municipal road hazard in Palo Alto, which has directly led to catastrophic physical, emotional, and financial hardship. Copies of this letter are being ccd provided to former Mayor Peter Drekmeier who is a personal friend and past fellow board member of GGH International with myself, as well as the two great Palo Alto Police Officers who provided aid at the scene and kindness in listening to me after. Below is the chronological sequence of events surrounding this incident: CHRONOLOGY OF EVENTS 7.31.2026: Incident & Injury Incident #26-03018 While walking in Palo Alto, I tripped over a hazardous, damaged pole protruding into the pedestrian right-of-way. Palo Alto Police Officer Chris Mazzone arrived on the scene to assist me and submitted a request for the City to repair the hazardous pole. I noted that this pole had still not been repaired as of 8.5.2026 and decided to inquire if it was sent in for repairs. I spoke about the incident and the ramifications it caused me to officer Erin Goodell who was kind enough to say they would submit it as well to be fixed. 7.31.2026: Emergency Medical Care An ambulance transported me directly to Stanford Hospital. Emergency department diagnostic imaging confirmed that I sustained a fractured patella 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 (broken kneecap) as a direct result of the fall. I also hurt my left hand and still have pain in this hand that i will be needing additional imaging I was advised to do later to determine if there is an internal broken bone as the source of the pain in it. 8.5.2026: Loss of Shelter Housing Due to the physical limitations of the fractured patella and injured hands, I was physically unable to perform mandatory daily chores required by my shelter program. Consequently, I lost my housing placement and was forced to return to living in my vehicle on 8.10.2026. 8.16.2026: Mental Health Crisis & Inpatient Treatment The cumulative trauma of physical disability and sudden homelessness triggered a severe mental health breakdown. I was admitted to the Psychiatric Emergency Services (PES) and subsequently transferred to an inpatient rehabilitation facility for a 10-day stay that ended today August 26, 2026 so I am now homeless living in my car again. 8.26.2026: Unrepaired Hazard & Financial Distress A month has passed since the initial incident, yet the hazardous pole remains unrepaired by the City, posing an ongoing danger to the public. Furthermore, because I was uninsured at the time of the transport, I am receiving ongoing billing notices for the emergency ambulance service. Receiving these while navigating ongoing bone healing and homelessness in my vehicle continues to cause severe psychological distress. REQUESTED ACTIONS 1. Immediate inspection and repair of the identified pole hazard to ensure public safety. 2. Formal intake of this incident timeline for review by the City Attorney and Risk Management departments regarding liability and coverage for medical costs and ambulance expenses. 3. Need for hotel as soon as possible. I am homeless now again trying to navigate these injuries and pain with no place to rest besides my car. I have not been able to find any resources for housing with shelters that do not support injured people so this is very egregious and overwhelming to deal with. I need resources for hotel stay at a clean and ada compliant hotel would be appreciated. My recovery appointment with an orthopedic doctor at San Mateo Medical center is on Sept 17th to xray to check if it is completely healed. Sincerely, Michele Rene Brantley 650-304-4425 Mailing address: 555 Bryant St. #540 Palo Alto CA 94301 My friend took this photo of me on the ground while we were waiting for the ambulance Palo Alto California, 94301 , Michele Brantley From:Barry Katz To:Council, City; Shikada, Ed; McDonough, Melissa Cc:Robert Marinaro; Rebecca Sanders; Raphael Zahnd; Bulatao, Eric; Penny Brennan Subject:A positive proposal--high priority Date:Wednesday, August 26, 2026 10:26:33 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. To the City Council: and the City Manager In the aftermath of yesterday’s contentious hearing on the OSV situation, I would like to make a positive suggestion: Whatever our differences, everyone agrees that the various pilots under discussion will take months to play out, if not years. In the meantime, can we deal with a small but easily identifiable group of chronically “bad actors?” The Ventura Neighborhood Association, which I represent, can easily identify 3 or 4 specific offenders, at specific locations, who are making life intolerable to residents. I’m sure that our friends in the East Meadow Circle neighborhood can do the same. Enforcement officer Sgt. Bulatao, who is as frustrated as the rest of us, explains that under present circumstances his hands are tied as these few serial offenders exploit technical loopholes in the system. Let’s give him the tools he needs to enforce both the spirit and the letter of our laws. The chronic bad actors are at the following locations (license numbers can be provided, but they are all well-known to the PAPD): Ash Street, where a single individual owns multiple decrepit vehicles which he moves incrementally at all hours of the day and night. Orinda Street, where a long-term offender pumps fumes from his noisy gasoline- powered generator into the home of a resident on Margarita, then moves every few days to do the same to a resident a block away. Matadero Avenue, where a massive “Lexington” OSV has been repeatedly cited for creating an acute visibility hazard for cars turning onto or off of El Camino Real.* We recognize the complexity and socially nuanced character of the OSV issue, and understand that it will not be resolved overnight. But as the larger issue play out, can we PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE take action on these chronic offenders and give our residents some relief? BK Barry M Katz 233 Margarita Avenue Palo Alto, CA. 94306 650.644-8697 * Legal: The “Lexington” OSV permanently parked across from the Shell station on Matadero creates an imminent hazard. When a serious accident finally happens, plaintiffs can easily prove that the City has had multiple warnings and failed to act. This is a legal jeopardy that all of us wish to avoid. From:Aram James To:Shikada, Ed Cc:Raymond Goins; Lauing, Ed; Vicki Veenker; Human Relations Commission; planning.commission@cityofpaloalto.0rg; ParkRec Commission; Council, City; citycouncil@mountainview.gov; The Office of Mayor Matt Mahan; supervisor.abe-koga@bos.sccgov.org; Gennady Sheyner; Burt, Patrick; Lythcott- Haims, Julie; Jessica Speiser, Educational Leader for California Democratic Delegate, Assembly District 23; Reckdahl, Keith; Stone, Greer; board@pausd.org; Board of Directors; Jay Boyarsky; BoardOperations; jgreen@dailynewsgroup.com; Dave Price; Anne Cribbs; cromero@cityofepa.org; Lee, Craig; Dana St. George; Gerry Gras; Robert Handa; Roberta Ahlquist; Diana Diamond; EPA Today; Nicole Chiu-Wang; Reifschneider, James; Brandon Pho; Preminger, Steve Subject:Palo Alto’s PER’s retirement debt Date:Wednesday, August 26, 2026 9:54:31 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Shikada’s Big Secret Absolutely. Using the latest comparable figures I could verify, Palo Alto stands out quite sharply on a per-resident basis. Unfunded pension liability per resident What jumps out Palo Alto is much more concerning on a per-resident basis than Sunnyvale. Even though Sunnyvale’s total pension liability is about the same size, Sunnyvale has more than twice Palo Alto’s population. The most striking comparison is: Palo Alto: roughly $6,900 per resident Sunnyvale: roughly $2,900 Los Altos: roughly $1,500 Cupertino: roughly $1,000+ Mountain View: roughly $300 on the comparable governmental-activity figure And Palo Alto’s problem isn’t simply the size of the liability. Its annual retirement costs are also unusually large relative to its population. The Palo Alto FY2025 ACFR is the city’s official audited financial report, and it specifically reports both pension and OPEB obligations. One correction to my earlier answer I would not use the earlier $5,600 Palo Alto number as the final apples-to-apples comparison. That figure came from an actuarial estimate rather than the same GASB measure used in the cities’ ACFRs. For a serious comparison, we should use the exact ACFR net pension + net OPEB liabilities for every city. If you’re evaluating whether Palo Alto’s retirement obligations are unusually bad, that’s actually a very important distinction. I can next build you a fully audited, apples-to-apples ranking of these 7 cities, including (1) total liability, (2) liability per resident, (3) liability as % of annual city revenue, (4) pension funding ratio, and (5) annual retirement payments per resident. That would show much more clearly which city is financially healthiest. From:Humphrey, Sonia Cc:LAFCO Subject:LAFCO Agenda Packet Now Available - 8/28/26 Special Meeting Date:Wednesday, August 26, 2026 3:26:46 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i The agenda packet for the August 28, 2026 LAFCO Special Meeting is now available on the LAFCO website: https://santaclaralafco.org/meetings/lafco-special-meeting-2026-08-28- 093000. . Best regards, Sonia Humphrey, LAFCO Clerk LAFCO of Santa Clara County 777 North First Street, Suite 410 San Jose, CA 95112 (408) 993-4709 This message needs your attention You've never replied to this person. Mark Safe Report From:Charlie Weidanz To:Council, City Subject:Celebrate Sekoya Turning Three with Amber Hour Three-Course Dinner Special Date:Wednesday, August 26, 2026 11:47:12 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Sekoya Turns Three - Celebrate with Amber Hour Three | promo Stop by Sekoya and discover why Amber Hour has become one of Palo Alto’s favorite Happy Hours. To celebrate three years on California Avenue, Sekoya and our new Head Chef, Ray Saad, are introducing The Amber Hour Three—an exceptional three-course dinner for $59, available exclusively during Amber Hour. Amber Hour is offered Monday through Thursday from 5–6pm and Friday and Saturday from 4–6pm. View the Amber Hour Three Menu >> sekoyapaloalto.com This email was sent on behalf of Palo Alto Chamber of Commerce 355 Alma St Palo Alto, CA 94301.To unsubscribe click here. If you have questions or comments concerning this email or services in general, please contact us by email at info@paloaltochamber.com. From:Mike Emrick To:Council, City Cc:City Mgr Subject:Parking Restrictions Near Driveways and Daylight Visibility Requirements Date:Wednesday, August 26, 2026 7:41:27 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Mayor and Members of the Palo Alto City Council, Re: Parking Restrictions Near Driveways and Daylight Visibility Requirements Dear Mayor and Members of the Palo Alto City Council: I am writing regarding the discussion at the August 24 City Council meeting concerning the City’s “daylight” rule and parking restrictions intended to improve visibility near intersections and other areas. During the meeting, I did not hear any discussion regarding parking restrictions immediately adjacent to driveways. I believe this is an important safety issue that deserves the Council’s and City staff’s consideration. We have experienced numerous accidents involving vehicles exiting a commercial parking lot where visibility is significantly impaired by vehicles, particularly recreational vehicles (RVs), parked near the driveway. When a large vehicle is parked close to the driveway, it can obstruct the view of both the driver exiting the property and vehicles or pedestrians approaching on the street or sidewalk. For this reason, I respectfully ask that the City Council consider establishing a minimum 20-foot no-parking restriction on either side of a driveway, particularly at commercial properties where there is a significant volume of traffic entering and exiting the property. A 20-foot setback would provide drivers with substantially improved visibility and additional time to see approaching vehicles, bicycles, pedestrians, and other potential hazards. More importantly, it could help prevent accidents before they occur. I understand that the City must balance parking availability with safety and the needs of residents and businesses. However, where there is a documented history of accidents and visibility problems, I believe public safety should take priority. I respectfully request that the Council and City staff review this issue as part of the City’s consideration of the daylight parking rules and determine whether a minimum 20-foot restriction near driveways should be incorporated into the regulations. Thank you for your consideration and for your continued efforts to improve safety throughout Palo Alto. Sincerely, Michael Emrick Mozart Development 1068 East Meadow Circle Palo Alto, Ca 94303 From:John Melnychuk To:Council, City; Veenker, Vicki; Stone, Greer; Burt, Patrick; Lauing, Ed; Lu, George; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Reckdahl, Keith Cc:Shikada, Ed Subject:RV Dwellers Planning report card Date:Tuesday, August 25, 2026 5:49:13 PM Attachments:Palo_Alto_RV_Council_Brief_Page_1.png Palo_Alto_RV_Council_Brief_Page_2.png CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Hello Mayor Veenker, Vicemayor Stone, City Councillors, Thank you for working on the very difficult problem of helping RV Dwellers and City Residents whose competing needs have lead to wide upset in our neighborhoods and businesses. Many people are angry because of the long period of disruption from an influx of RV Dwellers. Council has been very slow to address this problem - it waited until a crisis to begin to study options. Frustration and anxiety from lack of adequate study and smart planning has lead to anxiety and anger. Residents and business owners have suffered disruptions and loss of quality of life from being overrun by needy, vulnerable persons who are trying to stabilize their lives. I want to contribute in constructive and honest way about my impressions about yesterday’s meeting. Performance by Council could have been much, much better. You seemed rushed, and dismissive of residents and business owners and you didn’t explain very well the details and limits of your strategy to reduce disruption to business and residents both. This makes us all anxious and angry, and we want to be practical in supporting good business like approaches to improving outcomes for the city as a whole. Attached is a report card and simple suggestions that would provide clarity, reassurance and confidence in residents and business owners and in RV Dwellers who do need and deserve some assistance. With respect, thanks, and encouragement to receive this critical and fair feedback as you continue to work on a very difficult problem, John Melnychuk, Fairmeadow Palo Alto, CA. 94036. From:Abhishek Upadhyay To:Lauing, Ed; Council, City Subject:Public Grievance Concerning Palo Alto-Headquartered Technology Company Upwork Inc. — Fair Business Practice & Due Process Review Date:Tuesday, August 25, 2026 4:26:18 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of openingattachments and clicking on links. i To: Honorable Mayor Ed Lauing Members of the Palo Alto City Council City of Palo Alto, California, USA From: Abhishek Upadhyay Former Top Rated Plus Freelancer (5+ Years on Upwork, $50,000+ Career Earnings) Resident of: Jaipur, Rajasthan, India WhatsApp / Calling: +91 9828444850 Email: abhishek.gomti773@gmail.com Subject: Public Grievance Concerning Palo Alto-Headquartered Technology Company Upwork Inc. — Fair Business Practice & Due Process Review Dear Mayor Lauing and Honorable Members of the Palo Alto City Council, I am an Indian IT professional and international freelancer writing to bring to your attention a matter concerning fair corporate practices, transparency, and due process regarding Upwork Inc., which maintains its global corporate headquarters in your city at 530 Lytton Avenue, Suite 301, Palo Alto, CA 94301. Summary of Grievance: For over five years, I relied on Upwork as my primary professional platform, maintaining Top Rated Plus status, completing over 200 client projects, and generating more than $50,000 USD in career earnings. On December 19, 2024, my account and livelihood were abruptly and permanently terminated under procedurally flawed circumstances following a video verification call: 1. Verified Compliance: On November 26, 2024, Upwork support representative Marco M. confirmed that future profile photo updates would simply trigger re-verification calls and that only non-matching identity changes would lead to suspension. On November 29, 2024, Upwork officially verified my identity and removed all restrictions. 2. Support Agent Misconduct: On December 19, 2024, during a scheduled video verification call, an Upwork agent named Cas B (Cassidee) acted aggressively, shouted at me, and interrogated me on ancient contract details outside the scope of identity verification. 3. Contemporaneous Misconduct Complaints: Immediately after the call, I lodged written misconduct complaints at 10:42 PM and 11:19 PM IST regarding the agent's behavior. 4. Retaliatory Termination: Exactly seven minutes after my detailed complaint (at 11:26 PM IST), agent Cassidee issued an immediate permanent suspension notice against my account. 5. Refusal of Due Process: Upwork Trust & Safety subsequently cited a pretextual "partially cropped photo" justification while refusing to review the Google Meet video/audio recording or investigate the This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first email to your company. Mark Safe Report agent's conduct. 6. Livelihood Impact: This sudden action deprived me of my professional livelihood and resulted in a quantifiable business loss of $24,000 USD (Approx. INR 20,00,000). The complete chronological case file with verbatim chat transcripts, email records, and exhibits is documented here: https://www.google.com/url?q=https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Ws- I respectfully bring this to the attention of the Mayor's Office and City Council to highlight the need for ethical conduct, fair dispute redressal, and basic due process by technology enterprises headquartered in Palo Alto when dealing with international independent professionals. Thank you very much for your time and public service. Sincerely, Abhishek Upadhyay Jaipur, Rajasthan, India WhatsApp / Calling: +91 9828444850 Email: abhishek.gomti773@gmail.com From:Loren Brown To:Shikada, Ed; Council, City; Veenker, Vicki; Stone, Greer; Burt, Patrick; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Reckdahl, Keith; Lu, George; Lauing, Ed; McDonough, Melissa; Gaines, Chantal Cc:Loren Brown; Robert Marinaro; Chris Schremp Subject:OSV Program Comments/Suggestions Date:Tuesday, August 25, 2026 3:15:52 PM Attachments:American Legal Publishing.png Geng Road 10.5 Acre Property.pdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. 8-25-2026 Dear City Leaders, WE LEARNED AT LAST NIGHT’S CITY COUNCIL MEETING JUST HOW ACCURATE THE BELOW-SHOWN 3-06-2026 ASSESSMENT OF THE OSV PARKING CRISIS WAS AND STILL IS. While the City has now identified Coyote Hill Road as an acceptable alternative location for OSV parking, the City has not advanced alternative OSV parking locations on Deer Creek Road, the Caltrans property at 101/San Antonio Road, or the 10.5-acre property located on Geng Road. All of these locations are further described below (see “Public Land Procurement Ideas” section). Since the ultimate solution to the OSV parking crisis lies in the City finding locations for OSVs to park that are not located in Palo Alto business districts or residential neighborhoods, the City should actively and seriously pursue these three locations and do so quickly. Any rejected location for OSV parking should be fully explained to City Council. Note: Relocating OSV parking to other areas of the City such as SOFA, Palo Alto Avenue, Bryant Street (by Police Department) etc. is not a longterm solution to the OSV parking crisis issue and will only engage a larger segment of the Palo Alto population against OSV parking in Palo Alto. Loren Brown 8-21-2026 Dear City of Palo Alto Leaders, The staff-proposed “solution” on Monday’s City Council Agenda FAILS to solve the OSV parking problems in Palo Alto. The City cannot allow OSV’s to continue to park in Palo Alto business districts. Allowing OSVs to park on only one side of a street is a non-solution. Staff has their proposal half correct - the key is finding more alternative land where OSVs can park, even if the land can only be used on a temporary basis. The below email succinctly identifies the OSV parking problem and suggests how/where the City can find alternative locations for OSV parking. City staff needs to revise the proposal sent to City Council for review/approval to move OSV parking from Palo Alto business districts to alternative land designated by the City. Loren Brown 3-06-2026 Dear City Representatives, I attended the City Council Study Session OSV parking on Monday, February 23rd, and left very depressed, frustrated, and angry. It is my conclusion that the City of Palo Alto is taking the wrong path forward with respect to OSV parking on the streets of Palo Alto. To date, the City’s plan to deal with the huge problem of OSVs parking on City streets is not comprehensive, has not identified an ultimate solution, and has no timeframe to end the problem. In this email, I am going to frame the OSV parking issue and then offer the City suggestions on how the City can quickly and comprehensively resolve the OSV parking issue in a cost-efficient manner. Loren Brown Property Owner/Landlord on Park Blvd. ORIGINS OF THE OSV PARKING ISSUE IN PALO ALTO BUSINESS DISTRICTS: OSVs began parking in approximately five Palo Alto business districts approximately 8-10 years ago. Parking of these OSVs (in certain cases) was a violation of the City’s existing laws (as codified in the City’s Municipal Code). Despite complaints lodged by property owners and commercial tenants of parked OSVs, which were observed violating the City’s municipal code, enforcement was largely non-existent, weak or ineffective. Lax regulation of parked OSVs in commercial business districts merely led to an increased number of OSVs parked in Palo Alto business districts. In response to the violations that my company reported to the City, the City responded that OSV parking issues were a part of a greater homeless problem, which the City wanted to deal with more comprehensively. And so, the continued lack of police department enforcement, coupled with a City Council philosophy, resulted in even more OSVs parking in the Palo Alto business parks. The Palo Alto Weekly reported on February 23, 2026, that the number of OSVs parking on the streets of Palo Alto had doubled between 2023 and 2025. As of last fall, there were over 200 OSVs parking in six specific areas of Palo Alto (see the list below). The Palo Alto Weekly also reported on February 23, 2026 that neighboring cities to the north and south of Palo Alto have all but banned OSV parking, driving much of the rise in the population of OSVs in Palo Alto. In conclusion, the OSV parking problem in Palo Alto business parks, etc. is a result of the City not enforcing its own regulations, not timely responding to a growing issue before it became a huge problem, allowing incompatible uses immediately adjacent to eachother in Palo Alto neighborhoods, etc., and the City not being willing to do what is required to eliminate the OSV parking problem on public streets. It is not a problem that the Palo Alto property owners, tenants, or residents could/can head off because the OSVs are parking on city streets, where city streets are the exclusive domain of the City of Palo Alto. LOCATION OF THE OSV PARKING ISSUE IN PALO ALTO (Six General Areas): 1. Embarcadero Road/Faber Place/Embarcadero Way. 2. Elwell Court and Corporation Way. 3. Park Blvd/Lambert Avenue/Olive Avenue /Sheridan Avenue/Portage Avenue/Ash Street/Acacia Avenue/Orinda Street. 4. Fabian Way/East Meadow Circle. 5. San Antonio Road/Transport Street, Commercial Street, and Industrial Avenue. 6. Other: Including Mitchell Park, Greer Park, Colorado Avenue, Amarillo Avenue, etc. Note: The City of Palo Alto effectively forces OSV parking into these six locations through inconsistent enforcement of the City’s Municipal Code by the police department. Enforcement of illegal OSV parking in downtown Palo Alto, California Avenue, Professorville, Crescent Park, Old Palo Alto is purposely high, while enforcement in the above-listed areas is purposely lax. CURRENT MAGNITUDE OF THE OSV PARKING PROBLEM IN PALO ALTO: Palo Alto citizen, Robert Marinaro, reported to the City that as of February 13, 2026, there are approximately 180 OSVs parking on the public streets in Palo Alto (excluding OSVs parking at the Life Moves facility on Geng Road). On or about November 19, 2025, the total number of OSVs parked on City streets was approximately 217. As of March 3, 2026, the number of OSVs parking on City streets may be closer to 150 OSV’s (to be confirmed by Bob in his next count). NATURE OF THE OSV PARKING ISSUE IN PALO ALTO: The OSV parking issue is a two-prong issue; it is a housing-affordability issue, and it is a residential/business neighborhood deterioration issue. A) Housing Affordability Issue: The housing-affordability issue is related to a greater long-term, national/regional housing crisis that may never be solved in our country, our state, our county, or the City of Palo Alto. The cost housing in a building (house, apartment, etc.) is now unaffordable to a subset of Americans. The high cost of housing relative to income levels has resulted in a large number of people living on the streets or in their vehicles (including OSVs). This email does not address this issue nor try to solve the housing affordability issue related to OSVs in Palo Alto. B) Residential/Business Neighborhood Deterioration Issue: The residential/business neighborhood deterioration issue within Palo Alto is created by the simple incompatibility of OSVs parking in both residential neighborhoods and business parks (as documented to the City staff innumerable times over years and years). Parking of OSVs in business and residential neighborhoods is a zoning use incompatibility. Zoning use incompatibility refers to the spatial conflict between different types of land development, such as placing residential areas near high-noise, polluting, or high-traffic industrial zones . These conflicts often reduce property values, create nuisances, and hinder the community. Parking of OSVs in Palo Alto residential/business neighborhoods results in a variety of objections from the adjacent business and residential properties, which include visual blight of OSV vehicles, blocked sidewalks, littering (trash, human waste, etc.), safety concerns, difficulty leasing property where OSVs park, lost rental income where properties cannot be leased due to OSVs continuously parked in front of properties, negative impacts to businesses operating where OSVs are continuously parked. etc. Mitigation strategies for zoning use incompatibility include strict zoning separation, buffer zones, or phasing out nonconforming uses to protect the quality of life. CITY OF PALO ALTO ACTIONS TAKEN TO LIMIT/DECREASE OSV PARKING ON CITY STREETS: A) Municipal Code Chapter 10.47 Large Vehicle Parking. B) Enforcement of Municipal Code Chapter 10.47 Large Vehicle Parking. C) Emergency Ordinance amending Municipal Code to prohibit unattached trailer parking - effective December 8, 2025. D) Emergency Ordinance amending Municipal Code to prohibit vanlording - effective December 8, 2025. E) Police Department Enforcement of Items D and E. ARE THE ACTIONS TAKEN BY THE CITY OF PALO ALTO TO LIMIT/DECREASE OSV PARKING ON CITY STREETS EFFECTIVE? NO: There are still a huge number (in excess of 150 OSVs) of OSVs parked on City of Palo Alto streets in business and residential neighborhoods. DEFICIENCIES WITH THE ACTIONS TAKEN BY THE CITY OF PALO ALTO TO LIMIT/DECREASE OSV PARKING ON CITY STREETS: A) The City is not yet fully committed to removing OSVs from parking on City streets. The City Council is not willing to enact an outright ban on OSV parking on City streets. By not banning OSVs outright, the City Council has effectively granted OSVs an entitlement to park on City streets - resulting in hesitation on the part of the City to adopt additional measures required to eliminate OSV parking on City streets. B) The City has not seriously pursued identifying and procuring off-street land for the purposes of providing safe parking for OSVs. C) The City has not taken action to relocate OSVs from parking in existing City of Palo Alto business and residential neighborhoods. D) The City has not taken action to prohibit additional OSVs from locating in Palo Alto (Prohibiting additional OSVs from locating in Palo Alto would cap the OSVs' parking in Palo Alto at their present level). E) Existing City of Palo Alto Police Department policy on towing OSVs in violation of the City’s Municipal Code is capped by towing yard space availability. OSVs then know that enforcement of OSV parking regulations is lax. F) Existing City ordinances and enforcement do not serve to decrease the number of OSVs parking on City streets. Instead, existing City ordinances and enforcement allow OSVs to merely relocate their parked location on City streets (similar to a game of musical chairs where no chairs are ever eliminated). This allows new OSVs to begin parking their OSVs on the streets of Palo Alto. WHAT THE CITY OF PALO ALTO NEEDS TO DO TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM OF OSVS PARKING IN PALO ALTO BUSINESS AND RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS: A) Enact an OSV Permit Program where all OSVs must be registered in the OSV Permit Program in order to park their OSV in Palo Alto. Enacting this program will serve to cap the number of OSVs at their current level. New OSVs that want to park in Palo Alto must meet Program eligibility criteria (eligibility criteria to be created and determined by the City). If the number of OSVs is not capped, new OSVs will just replace every OSV that leaves Palo Alto or finds alternative housing. B) Enact a program element designed to find alternative housing for those people currently living in OSVs who have obtained a permit. Once housing is found for the redeints of each OSV, that OSV will no longer be allowed to park on City of Palo Alto streets or in a City of Palo Alto Safe Parking lot. C) Identify, procure, and zone land that can/will be used for OSV Safe Parking lots. This land should not be located near business or residential neighborhoods. D) Relocate OSVs parked on City streets to newly-created Safe Parking locations. E) Amend the Municipal Code to ban all OSV parking on City of Palo Alto streets. F) Revise City policies to fully enforce the City’s Municipal Code on OSV parking (including immediate towing of OSVs from City streets). PROCUREMENT OF LAND IS THE KEY ELEMENT REQUIRED TO ELIMINATE OSV PARKING ON CITY STREETS: Realistically, the OSV parking problem in the six Palo Alto business and residential neighborhoods is going to continue to exist until an alternative location is found for the OSVs to park. The City Council is both unwilling to allow OSVs to park in other areas of the City and unwilling to force OSVs out of their existing locations. WHAT KIND OF LAND IS NECESSARY FOR OSV PARKING? A) Land that can be procured very soon. The OSV parking problem in business/residential neighborhoods will not be solved until an alternative OSV parking site can be identified, procured, zoned, and set up to house OSVs. B) Publicly-owned land. It is unrealistic to think that the private sector will contribute/donate land to the City of Palo Alto for OSV parking use. Buying private-sector land will also be very expensive. Land for OSV Safe Parking will likely come from the City of Palo Alto, the County of Santa Clara or State of California (i.e. Caltrans). HOW MUCH LAND IS NEEDED? Currently, land is needed to park between 150 and 175 OSVs plus any support amenities required for a Safe Parking facility. A parcel of land that could accommodate this number of OSVs would mean that NO OSVs would need to park on City of Palo Alto business district or residential streets. The City of Palo Alto determined in August 2025 that a 13,334 SF parcel at 2000 Geng Road could accommodate 13 parked OSVs. Using this data, approximately 3.5 to 4.2 acres of land would be required to accommodate 150 to 175 parked OSVs. If the City can cap the number of OSVs permitted to park in Palo Alto and then decrease this number by finding OSV residents alternative housing situations, the amount of land required to park OSVs would decrease over time. If the City can reduce the number of OSVs parking in Palo Alto as a result of the new van lording ordinance, the land requirement could also be lessened. HOW LONG A PERIOD OF TIME IS THE LAND NEEDED TO HOUSE OSVs? This is up to the City to decide. Does the City plan to have a permanent OSV Safe Parking program (in perpetuity) or does the City plan to entirely phase the OSV Safe Parking program out over a finite time span? Land for parking OSVs is required only for the finite period during which the City operates a Safe Parking program. The amount of land required for the Safe Parking program depends on the size of the Safe Parking program operated by the City. PUBLIC LAND PROCUREMENT IDEAS: As the land requirement for OSV parking likely reduces over time (see above discussion), potential sources of land for OSV parking can include a temporary use of land that is not currently used for other purposes, yet may be earmarked/dedicated for another long-term use (i.e. parkland, Caltrans right- of-way, etc.). As the City can find alternative housing for OSV residents, the amount of land required to park remaining OSVs in the City’s Safe Parking program decreases. Land required to park an initial 150 to 175 OSVs can come from some combination of the following potential land sources. A) Street parking on the City of Palo Alto portion of Deer Creek Road and Coyote Hill Road: There is a length of roadway on each of these streets that is undeveloped on each side of the street. There is OSV parking potential of approximately 300 yards on Deer Creek Road and 450 yards on Coyote Hill Road. If all of this roadway length were used for OSV parking on both sides of the roads, approximately 1,500 yards of roadway could accommodate between 100 and 150 OSVs (depending upon the average length of OSV). Both streets are wide enough to accommodate OSV parking on each side of the street. There are some hills on these roads that may be too steep for OSVs to park. There is a VTA busroute on Deer Creek Road. As the City of Palo Alto controls these roadways, this location could be put into service quickly. Concentrating OSVs at this location will be more efficient for the City than the current OSV parking locations. Trash/water/electricity/sanitation/transportation services offered by the City would be more efficient, and police department enforcement costs would be dramatically reduced (because there would be no complaints from businesses/residents). This land option is a very- inexpensive option for the City of Palo Alto and is immediately available (subject to signage and pavement re-striping). B) Street parking on the County of Santa Clara-controlled portion of Deer Creek Road and Coyote Hill Road: There is a length of roadway on each of these streets that is undeveloped on each side of the street. There is a considerable length of Deer Creek Road and Coyote Hill Road under County control. If all of this roadway length were used for OSV parking on both sides of the roads, the combined capacity of Palo Alto-controlled streets and County-controlled streets may be sufficient to accommodate the entire contingent of OSVs currently parking in Palo Alto. Both streets are wide enough to accommodate OSV parking on each side of the street. There are some hills on these roads that may be too steep for OSVs to park. There is a VTA busroute on Deer Creek Road. As the County controls this section of roadway, the City would have to negotiate its usage for OSV parking with the County. Concentrating all OSVs at the Deer Creek Road and Coyote Hill Road locations will be more efficient for the City than the current OSV parking locations. Trash/water/electricity/sanitation/transportation services offered by the City would be more efficient, and police department enforcement costs would be dramatically reduced (because there would be no complaints from businesses/residents). This land option is a very-inexpensive option for the City of Palo Alto and is available fairly quickly (subject to negotiating a deal with the County, installing signage, and re-striping pavement). C) 1.81 Acre San Antonio/101 CalTrans Property (currently leased/used by Ciardella’s Garden Supply): This site could potentially accommodate 77 OSVs. The City would need to equip this site similarly to their Geng Road Safe Parking Site. The City would need to negotiate a lease with Caltrans. Note: State of California laws (i.e., SB211) authorize Caltrans to lease (for a nominal amount), non-surplus property to a local government for shelter (including interim housing). A copy of the lease between Caltrans and Ciardellas was provided to the City Manager’s office last year. D) Geng Road 10.5 Acres: In 2015, the Palo Alto Municipal Golf Course was reconfigured. After the reconfiguration, a 10.5-acre area of land became unused and is currently undeveloped and unused (See attached aerial photos showing this property). While this parcel of land may be part of the original Municipal Golf Course land dedicated as parkland, it is not currently utilized as publicly accessible parkland. This land abuts Geng Road and is adjacent to the OSV Safe Parking facility located on Geng Road that is operated by Move Mountain View. Where a local shelter crisis exists, the State of California Government Code 8698.4 allows cities to temporarily use undeveloped parkland for temporarily housing a Safe Parking facility. This site could be an ideal location for a temporary Safe Parking lot (i.e. immediately available, no land purchase/lease cost to City, immediately adjacent to Move Mountain View Safe parking facility on Geng Road, not adjacent to businesses/residents, can be easily/cheaply transformed to a Safe Parking lot, is of sufficient size to accommodate all 150-175 OSVs, other than a temporary parking surface and perimeter fence, no other improvements to this land need to be made - OSVs that utilize this parking lot can use Safe Parking amenties at 2200 Geng Road, etc. See attached literature supporting this site as a temporary OSV Safe parking lot. Suggestion: The City should identify a 4-acre section of this land that is most adjacent to 2200 Geng Road and create a Safe Parking lot for OSVs that can use/share any amenities at 2200 Geng Road. Once the OSV parking lot is established, the City should require any/all OSVs that are then parking on Palo Alto streets to instead park at this OSV lot or be banned from parking their OSV in Palo Alto. The City should then work with OSV residents to find them alternative housing. The City would then decrease the size of this temporary OSV parking lot over time to the point where there are no OSVs left at this parking lot, and the land can be restored for parkland use. E) Stanford Industrial Park (Stanford land GUP): Stanford University owns vacant land adjacent to Coyote Road and Deer Creek Roads that could be utilized as temporary parking for OSVs. The City of Palo Alto would have to negotiate the upcoming County/Stanford GUP to secure land for Palo Alto OSV parking use and the duration of that use. F) Buena Vista Mobile Home Park: I drove through the Buena Vista Mobile Home Park today. There are approximately 10 unoccupied vehicle spaces at this site that could potentially be used to park OSVs. The City of Palo Alto should work with the Santa Clara County Housing Authority to determine whether there is capacity at this property to house OSVs that currently park on City of Palo Alto streets. CONCLUSION: The City of Palo Alto needs to take immediate action to define a Safe Parking Program (program duration and size) and then take action to procure the land necessary to operate the Safe Parking program. Once the land has been procured, the City of Palo Alto needs to enact a ban on OSVs parking on City streets. From:Christin To:Council, City Cc:rmarinaro@mac.com Subject:Community concerns regarding RV habitation on East Meadow Circle Date:Tuesday, August 25, 2026 2:19:42 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Mayor Veenker, Mr. Shikada and Councilmembers: I am writing to you today as a resident of Echelon community to respectfully share my concerns regarding the proposed rules for oversized vehicles and RV parking. while our community is sympathetic to the complex challenges surrounding housing and vehicle habitation in our region, the current concentration of RVs along East Meadow Circle has grown to a point where it is fundamentally altering the safety and cleanliness of our neighborhood. We kindly request that the Council prioritize finding dedicated, non-residential- adjacent locations equipped with proper sanitation and services, rather than codifying East Meadow Circle as a long-term habitation zone. A phased approach that simply delays enforcement in our area only prolongs the strain on our local environment, including issues with waste management and pedestrian safety. I look forward to your leadership in finding a solution that balances compassion for those in need with the safety and well-being of the surrounding residential communities. Thank you for your time and public service. Sincerely, Christin Zhang Echelon community, Palo Alto From:Yelena Novik To:Council, City Subject:Help needed Date:Tuesday, August 25, 2026 2:08:46 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear Mayor and City Council, My name is Yelena Novik. I am writing to you on behalf of our aunt Alla Shimanovich, whose English is not enough, who is 92 years old, widow and lives in Palo Alto. I can provide address and phone numbers. I am asking you for help or helpful information. I am trying to find place in or near Palo Alto that can organize a free delivery of free grocery to Alla Shimanovich home. She is elderly, disabled and per health condition is on the diet, so meals on wheels will not work for her. What she is looking for a free grocery with free delivery to her home on any possible schedule, which will be very important and helpful to improve her life quality. I can be reached at 510-686-1411 or ynovik@sbcglobal.net Your info or direct help is very much appreciated, Yelena Novik 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:Aram James To:supervisor.abe-koga@bos.sccgov.org; Supervisor Susan Ellenberg; Supervisor Otto Lee; Supervisor Betty Duong; district1@bos.sccgov.org; Jeff Rosen; Jay Boyarsky; Patricia.Guerrero@jud.ca.gov; sam.liccardo@gmail.com; assemblymember.berman@assembly.ca.gov; Josh Becker; Council, City; citycouncil@mountainview.gov; city.council@gilroy.org; city.council@menlopark.gov Subject:No New Jails Date:Tuesday, August 25, 2026 1:59:53 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. 8:25:2026 No New Jails Mass incarceration is a failed vestige of slavery not just in Santa Clara County but across this country ….. We gas folks, we tase them, we even place canines in some of our jails -all of this extreme cruelty while locking humans in cages, and we wonder why we have the most violent society ever to exist. Our leadership, our BOS, are people of vision, and we would hope that as we contemplate options...that don’t spell the word jails. That they are not afraid to stand up to the law enforcement leaders in this county who always want to expand their turf —even when it is done at the expense of true community needs —needs that address real solutions not more of the same revolving door that constitutes a living hell for those forced to enter it. Time to say no to the madness! Invite Angela Davis to speak on the abolition of our prison industrial complex-even if you don’t adopt all of her perspectives, at least listen. I was fortunate enough to sit though her trial right down the street. A most elegant speaker, thinker, writer. Aram From:lakshmi sunder To:Council, City Subject:Thoughts from a family that live close to E Meadow circle and the OSV"s Date:Tuesday, August 25, 2026 1:56:33 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear city council members, We tuned in remotely to listen to the city council meeting and learn more about the housing problems our fellow residents are experiencing and how those issues are playing out in my neighborhood. We were grateful to hear many thoughtful ideas from you all, although not perfect. We understand that finding affordable housing is a complex issue that will take significant time, effort, cooperation, and compromise from many different groups and local governments. We have been part of the silent minority, and we do not want to see the people living in these RVs evicted without first trying to find alternatives. As one of the wealthiest cities with a highly educated population, we have a moral obligation to work towards solving this affordability problem. We have lived in Palo Alto, in the Adobe Meadow neighborhood near East Meadow on Ortega Ct, for 25 years. We have volunteered in the city schools, emergency services, and our neighborhood association. We are familiar with the situation around E. Meadow circle. We walk our dog every day, and it is heartbreaking to see my fellow Americans living under these conditions just one block away. Right next to the RVs, we see a Google Arts building that has been vacant for many years. We have to appeal to these trillion-dollar companies that own massive amounts of unused real estate to be part of the solution. We also need to involve social workers, non-profit organizations that work with affordable housing, religious organizations and charities to be part of the solution. Palo Alto residents have deep pockets and can be convinced "to do something." These trillion-dollar companies and their executives living among us can be convinced to "do something." We came together to build our libraries, magical bridge playgrounds, and community centers. We can come together to solve some of the housing issues too. Expensive consultants are just not enough. We need nurses, teachers, restaurant workers, and therapists to have a shot at living among us. While we cannot accommodate everyone, we have a moral obligation to accommodate some of them or help them find alternatives. This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first email to you. Mark Safe Report We also see a double standard; it is unfair and unacceptable for residents of South Palo Alto, especially in the Ventura neighborhood, to experience the consequences of people living in RVs. It was quite shocking to hear that women are afraid to get out of their homes because of some RV issues. This situation is unacceptable and is tearing us apart. The anger and frustration of some residents are understandable. Council member Julie Lythcott-Haims's suggestion of using the area near the golf course in Embarcadero may remedy some of the double standards people in South Palo Alto feel. The AI boom that is happening is going to make the situation worse, and I hope we can all work together to help people who are not as fortunate. If there is a way to get involved and help the city in any way to solve this problem, we will be happy to contribute. Grateful for your hard work and empathy you showed yesterday. Lakshmi and Ram Sunder 3733 Ortega Ct. From:CeCi Kettendorf To:Nancy Ellickson Cc:Scott E Petersen; Manu Kumar; Council, City; Robert Marinaro; 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; 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; 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; 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; Christian Hothem; Aditya Jain; Anjali Jain; Jenny Lee; Arun Bodapati; Soumya Bodapati; Yingxi Liu; Susan Dorsky; Dave Price; Elaine Goodman; Brandon Cartwright; Clark Penado; Francescarael Rael; Kaye Crawford; Lena Yarovaya; Kenneth Russell; Jon Hellesoe; Ryan Judd; Evan Reade; Rosalie Cook; Kay Satit; Sooji Nam; Luci Sheppard Subject:Re: Palo Alto"s Ongoing OSV Crisis - - Bob"s Pre-Council Meeting Count (8/22/26) Date:Tuesday, August 25, 2026 1:48:52 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Nancy, Julie was placed on this committee, precisely because she sympathizes with anyone in an RV, regardless of circumstances. She was quoted in the paper as saying, "They are welcome in my neighborhood." She was put on the ad hoc committee to drag it down. Yes, she is not running again, but the mayor continues to place her on committees dealing with youth!! The unisex bathrooms at the schools! The teenage suicides at the tracks! Others! Julie should have resigned when her Stanford disgrace was uncovered. at the time, she had agreed to step down from and recuse herself from any committee dealing with youth. However, that was all forgotten by our leader! Julie should have been censured by the Board, or had the decency to resign. Instead, she continues to do damage on the Council. On Tue, Aug 25, 2026 at 11:07 AM Nancy Ellickson <nellickson@gmail.com> wrote: Important to note that Julie’s term ends in December 2026 and she’s not running again. I agree—the lack of data presented by staff is stunning. This should be a reason to put a stop to council moving forward on, at a minimum, Option 2. Nancy Ellickson E: nellickson@gmail.com M: 650-245-1012 On Tue, Aug 25, 2026 at 10:57 AM CeCi Kettendorf <cecihome@gmail.com> wrote: I wanted to laugh out loud last night at the Council hearing about OSVs, when the staff member acknowledged to Councilman Pat Burt that they HAD NO DATA as to whom was living in the OSVs! She said, incredibly, that they had knocked on the windows and doors but "no one would talk to them." Really?!!!! Might they have taken a police officer, a social worker, code enforcement personnel, a case manager, a homeless advocate with them? Safety in numbers? Bob gathered more info than the staff has in the past six months!!!!! They are highly paid! Shikada has 13 staff to assist him. Might he have given them guidance? So after six months, city staff does not know how many adults and children live in the vans, how many have a home outside of Palo Alto, how many are employed, where they are employed, how many have mental illness, how many are substance abusers, how many would agree to be moved or accept help at all, how many want to stay in their vans, how many have registered or insured vehicles ( could the staff check their license plates to see if they are registered n a nearby city with an address!?). Are the boats, motorcycles, and sports cars on Meadow Circle registered? Could staffDO THEIR JOB and gather the data they were instructed to bring forward???? So the staff has done............nothing of substance. Fire them all.! I have gone to many a council meeting wherein staff could not answer questions posed by the Council Members. Fire half of the thirteen staff assistants to Shikada and dedicate the money towards hiring firefighters for south Palo Alto. We get the bad stuff always! A closed fire station and OSVs! We should recall the Mayor and Julie Lythcott Haimes for their lack of action on the OSVs and frank support for the latter. I will help anyone who wants to do so. CeCi Kettendof On Tue, Aug 25, 2026 at 8:05 AM Scott E Petersen <scottepetersen@gmail.com> wrote: Greetings, I wanted to thank Council Member Keith Reckdahl from last night's council meeting for explaining why we with residential units on Fabian Way between E Charleston & San Antonio have been extensively ignored in our repeated requests to address the months long/years long RV camping issues. In addition to the blight of the RV's themselves, and the regular out of town parking of trucking (who are not allow to park on the streets of their own towns), we have also requested the city address the RV connected health and safety issues of; the running of Midnight Generators, dumping of grey water on the street, public urination on our property, storage of connected propane tanks on their sides/on the street/under the RVs, human feces in our trash cans on pickup day, loud pumping of holding tanks at 11:00pm, operation of businesses out of the RV's, distribution of hand exchanged questionable items between RV owners and a series of passing/stopping cars , storage of items next to the RV's, blocking part of the sidewalk, lack of street sweeping, blocking of line of sight between our drive exit and Charleston intersection (I have almost been hit 3 times), blocking of line of sight of the stop sign at Fabian & San Antonio, and the forcing of cyclist and scooter riders to almost hug the center yellow line due to a lack of safe roadway space to ride in. Many of us did not realize that under Palo Alto zoning residential areas like ours on Fabian Way, are not subject to the same protections of the rich residential areas. We thought it was because of the historical and continued preference of favoring North Palo Alto at the expense of those of us living in South Palo Alto. The public recognition of Council Member Reckdahl and Council Member Burt that all residential areas, regardless of traditional residential, PC, and mixed use zoning need to be treated the same was refreshing and encouraging. What is the timeline for this equalization to take place? Is this a 3 month, 12 month, 24 month, etc process? We are just trying to understand how long the intentional discrimination will continue. Thank you for your attention. Best Regards, Scott Petersen On Mon, Aug 24, 2026 at 4:56 PM Manu Kumar <manu@k9ventures.com> wrote: City Council, The proposal you're considering is ridiculous. That's the only word I have todescribe it. It is shocking that the city and the council does not understand its responsibility to residents and businesses and opts to prioritize people who either are sometimes not from Palo Alto, do not pay taxes in Palo Alto, or insome cases just use Palo Alto as the parking lot for their RVs (that they don'tlive in, it's free parking and storage)! No city should need to look like the way Palo Alto looks with these RVs parkedon our streets and no businesses or residents should have to deal with this.The fact that we have to, is a clear indication of how staff and council are failing in their duties and not serving Palo Alto Residents, Businesses, and taxpayers. I spent 2-years dealing with a drug addicted RV-dweller parked in front of my parking on our space, conducting repairs and maintenance on our property, vandalizing our security cameras, stealing them and more. Palo Alto did nothing. Palo Alto police came by multiple times and said their nice words, butwere ineffective at actually doing anything. Ultimately he was arrested byMountain View PD. Staff and council's attempts at resolving this have been misdirected and youall continue to waste taxpayer dollars in the process. NO to RVs on our streets. And a STRONG NO to issuing "permits" for RVs to park on our streets. Manu Kumar927 Industrial AvePalo Alto On Sun, Aug 23, 2026 at 12:25 AM Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> wrote: Palo Alto City Council, OSV Ad Hoc Committee, and Concerned Residents and Businesses, I thought it might be beneficial to do one more OSV count before the August 24th City Council Meeting where the OSV Phase II Plan will be discussed. I’m sorry to report that our count is holding pretty static at 140-ish. As mentioned earlier we have seen the numbers fall from when I first started counting in October 2025 from 220 to the current number of 140. A reduction of 36%, but 140 OSVs on our streets is still way more than the community would like to see. And way too many if they happen to be parked in front of your residence or business. Aside from the count the climate on the streets is deteriorating. I’ve seen video of vandals destroying property, stealing electricity, and now using intimidation by those who feel emboldened by their tenure on our streets. This has to stop! As I take my count on the 21 affected streets I have increasingly been yelled at by those who think they have a right to squat on our streets because the City has been reluctant to take a hard stand to protect the hard- working tax-paying residents and businesses that fund the basic operations of this City. Please see the last image of this message to understand how this situation has devolved into an almost Blackboard Jungle atmosphere. And if you are unfamiliar with the 1955 film Blackboard Jungle - Google it! When I mentioned in one of my earlier e-mails that I was followed for about three blocks after walking East Meadow Circle with my wife a resident of condominiums on East Meadow Circle sent me the following the comment - - "I beg you to please be careful. None of us walk on East Meadow any longer. It is not safe. Please don’t go there especially with your wife.” Is this the Palo Alto that we want? And since we are on the movie theme who can forget the line “ I’m Mad As Hell and I’n Not Going to Take it Anymore,” from the movie “Network” in 1976. I’m very happy to know that an increasing portion of our community is understanding the consequences of an overly accommodating City government and are focussed on demanding that we do not want OSVs in our residential neighborhoods and business/commercial districts. The current situation is intolerable and we want a sea change for the better. We want to see a City government that prioritizes the needs of the community - that prioritizes the needs of its constituents, the very people that put every council member in their position! The time is Now to make this right. Let’s seize the opportunity! Regards, Bob Marinaro E. San Antonio Rd Next to Homekey Transitional Housing Facility (8/21/26). No Parking Zone. I called it in yesterday and it was gone today. East Meadow Circle in front of Echelon Townhomes East Meadow Circle in front of Google Buildings East Meadow Circle - - BMW Motorcycles (Average cost $19,500). This guy in the window was yelling at the top of his lungs as I was riding away. These folks feel so entitled. They have been allowed to stay here unfettered for so long that they feel as though they have a right to be here and I am intruding on their domain! Fabian Way Transport Street - - One of the ways businesses have to keep the OSVs from taking up their valued parking Elwell Ct. Faber Places - - 15 OSVs on a short street segment Embarcadero Way - - 11 OSVs on a short street segment Colorado Ave. adjacent to Greer Park Mitchell Park Parking Lot - - The guy in the van has been here forever and the RV is new this weekend I believe Mitchell Park Parking Lot - - Lets get these OSVs out of our parks! Matadero Ave, - - Ventura Neighbors have complained forever but nothing happens Orinda St. - - Ventura Neighbors have complained forever but nothing happens Ash St - - Bad Actor #1 and a handful of his 12-ish vehicles in the Ventura Neighborhood Portage Ave. - - Bad Actor #1 and a handful of his 12-ish vehicles in the Ventura Neighborhood Page Mill - - Bad Actor #1 and a handful of his 12-ish vehicles in the Ventura Neighborhood Sheridan Ave. - - Bad Actor #1 and a handful of his 12-ish vehicles in the Ventura Neighborhood Palo Alto Daily Post Police Blotter - - Friday 8/21/26 From:Chuck Karish To:Arun Bodapati Cc:Julia Sun; JEANETTE BALDWIN; CeCi Kettendorf; Scott E Petersen; Manu Kumar; Council, City; Robert Marinaro; 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; Alina Martinez; Micah Murphy; Danielle Dunne; David Famero; Carly Lake; Sandy Freschi; Theron Bullman; Dave Stellman; Dave Stellman; Steve Wong; Marguerite Poyatos; 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; 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; 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; Fred Bailin; Dave Adams; Christian Hothem; Aditya Jain; Anjali Jain; Jenny Lee; Soumya Bodapati; Yingxi Liu; Susan Dorsky; Dave Price; Elaine Goodman; Brandon Cartwright; Clark Penado; Francescarael Rael; Kaye Crawford; Lena Yarovaya; Kenneth Russell; Jon Hellesoe; Ryan Judd; Evan Reade; Rosalie Cook; Kay Satit; Sooji Nam Subject:Re: Palo Alto"s Ongoing OSV Crisis - - Bob"s Pre-Council Meeting Count (8/22/26) Date:Tuesday, August 25, 2026 1:11:47 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i I find it bewildering that the City Council think they have to do this. Like Ceci I find it amusing that they're doing it so badly. As I commented on the story in this morning's Palo Alto Daily Post, Last night the City Council taught me that we have a moral duty to take care of the nearly-homeless, if they can afford to own and run RVs. If we don’t feel that way we’re abjectly prejudiced. They now have a fresh idea: to ask employers to provide RV parking for their employees, and to ask Stanford to provide parking, too. Good luck with that. https://padailypost.com/2026/08/25/council-votes-to-restrict-rvs-to-edges-of-town/ This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first mail to some recipients. Mark Safe Report Powered by Mimecast The Council is following up on "our" duty to help these people without bothering to find out who they are or how needy they are. Again, I haven't heard why we owe this to people who live in RVs but not to people who live in tents. (Councilwoman Julie Lythcott-Haims really did say "abjectly prejudiced". Anyone who disagrees with her must be a bigot. This is completely on brand for her.) Chuck Karish On Tue, Aug 25, 2026 at 11:36 AM Arun Bodapati <bodapa@gmail.com> wrote: Subject: Yesterday's OSV hearing felt disconnected from the people living with this every day Dear All, I sat through yesterday's entire proceedings on the oversized vehicle (OSV) parking issue, and I'm sadly writing to you directly because I left that meeting more frustrated than when I arrived. What I watched unfold felt like an academic exercise — percentages, pilot program metrics, permit-slot counts — discussed at a remove from the people actually living with the consequences on our streets every day. I did not come away with a sense that the residents and business owners bearing the brunt of this issue were being heard with the seriousness or urgency the situation demands. This is not an abstract policy puzzle to be optimized at the margins. It is a daily, lived reality for the people in my neighborhood and for the businesses trying to operate normally around it. What compounds this is that both phases of this plan were developed and brought forward without any real consultation with the residents and businesses who are directly affected. Decisions of this consequence — about our streets, our safety, and our ability to operate our businesses — were shaped in advance and presented to us largely as a fait accompli. That is not how the public's trust in this Council is supposed to work. Residents and businesses did not delegate the Council the authority to design a two-phase framework in isolation and then hold a hearing to receive comments on a plan whose substance was already settled. That sequence is, frankly, deeply disrespectful of the trust the public placed in you when you were elected to represent us. I also want to push back on a premise that seemed to run underneath the entire session: that this is a problem Palo Alto is obligated to manage and absorb indefinitely. It is not. The patchwork approach currently on the table — permit slots, seasonal alternating restrictions, storage programs — does not solve the underlying problem. If anything, it entrenches it, and it does so at ongoing cost to city taxpayers, with no clear end point and no sign the underlying number of oversized vehicles seeking to park here is actually shrinking. I did not vote for, and I do not believe the public has given the Council a mandate for, an open-ended commitment of city resources and staff time to permanently administer this issue rather than resolve it. I would ask the Council to be honest about the difference between those two things, because right now the direction of travel looks like the former. I want to be direct about where I stand: I support a full ban on oversized vehicle parking, citywide, overnight, modeled on the ordinance Menlo Park adopted last year— prohibiting oversized vehicles and RVs from parking on public streets overnight. It's worth being specific about why Menlo Park's council acted: they were responding to daily complaints to their police department about safety, sanitation, and blocked sightlines and driveways, and to business and property owners who said the affected commercial corridor was becoming unrentable and unsafe for employees and customers. That is not a hypothetical or an academic concern — it is the same pattern residents and businesses here have been describing to this Council, and Menlo Park's response was to act decisively rather than manage the problem in perpetuity through an expanding permit bureaucracy. I recognize the complexity underneath this issue, including the housing circumstances of some vehicle occupants, and I don't say any of this without awareness of that reality. But I do not believe the current framework fairly weighs the interests of residents and business owners who did not create this situation and who are, in effect, absorbing the cost of it — through safety concerns, sanitation issues, and the practical loss of use of public streets in front of their own homes and businesses. That imbalance is what I mean when I say this feels like it is unduly punishing, and in effect discriminating against, the residents and businesses of this city. I would ask that the Council treat this with the seriousness it deserves in future sessions — not as a technical exercise in permit allocation, not as a standing city program to be funded indefinitely, and not as a plan to be finalized before the public is meaningfully consulted, but as a matter directly affecting the daily lives, safety, and property of the people who elected you. I intend to stay engaged on this issue, including through direct advocacy and, if necessary, a citizen ballot initiative, until it is addressed with the urgency it warrants. I would welcome the opportunity to discuss this further and to understand what data or community input the Council still needs before treating this as a priority. Best, Arun On Tue, Aug 25, 2026 at 11:17 AM Julia Sun <jsun39872@gmail.com> wrote: I completely agree with you! We need city council members who will prioritize and listen to the concerns of their residents and local businesses. The OSV situation is no longer tolerable. On Tue, Aug 25, 2026 at 11:09 AM JEANETTE BALDWIN <jeanettebaldwin@gmail.com> wrote: Hi all, I completely agree with CeCi and the other neighbors who have spoken out. It has become abundantly clear that the City Council is not listening to or representing its constituents. If our elected officials refuse to prioritize the safety and well-being of the residents and businesses who fund this city, it is time to consider a recall. Perhaps the Mayor and the council members will start making real progress on this crisis if their positions are on the line—or the next administration will. Best regards, Jeanette Baldwin On Tue, Aug 25, 2026 at 10:57 AM CeCi Kettendorf <cecihome@gmail.com> wrote: I wanted to laugh out loud last night at the Council hearing about OSVs, when the staff member acknowledged to Councilman Pat Burt that they HAD NO DATA as to whom was living in the OSVs! She said, incredibly, that they had knocked on the windows and doors but "no one would talk to them." Really?!!!! Might they have taken a police officer, a social worker, code enforcement personnel, a case manager, a homeless advocate with them? Safety in numbers? Bob gathered more info than the staff has in the past six months!!!!! They are highly paid! Shikada has 13 staff to assist him. Might he have given them guidance? So after six months, city staff does not know how many adults and children live in the vans, how many have a home outside of Palo Alto, how many are employed, where they are employed, how many have mental illness, how many are substance abusers, how many would agree to be moved or accept help at all, how many want to stay in their vans, how many have registered or insured vehicles ( could the staff check their license plates to see if they are registered n a nearby city with an address!?). Are the boats, motorcycles, and sports cars on Meadow Circle registered? Could staffDO THEIR JOB and gather the data they were instructed to bring forward???? So the staff has done............nothing of substance. Fire them all.! I have gone to many a council meeting wherein staff could not answer questions posed by the Council Members. Fire half of the thirteen staff assistants to Shikada and dedicate the money towards hiring firefighters for south Palo Alto. We get the bad stuff always! A closed fire station and OSVs! We should recall the Mayor and Julie Lythcott Haimes for their lack of action on the OSVs and frank support for the latter. I will help anyone who wants to do so. CeCi Kettendof On Tue, Aug 25, 2026 at 8:05 AM Scott E Petersen <scottepetersen@gmail.com> wrote: Greetings, I wanted to thank Council Member Keith Reckdahl from last night's council meeting for explaining why we with residential units on Fabian Way between E Charleston & San Antonio have been extensively ignored in our repeated requests to address the months long/years long RV camping issues. In addition to the blight of the RV's themselves, and the regular out of town parking of trucking (who are not allow to park on the streets of their own towns), we have also requested the city address the RV connected health and safety issues of; the running of Midnight Generators, dumping of grey water on the street, public urination on our property, storage of connected propane tanks on their sides/on the street/under the RVs, human feces in our trash cans on pickup day, loud pumping of holding tanks at 11:00pm, operation of businesses out of the RV's, distribution of hand exchanged questionable items between RV owners and a series of passing/stopping cars , storage of items next to the RV's, blocking part of the sidewalk, lack of street sweeping, blocking of line of sight between our drive exit and Charleston intersection (I have almost been hit 3 times), blocking of line of sight of the stop sign at Fabian & San Antonio, and the forcing of cyclist and scooter riders to almost hug the center yellow line due to a lack of safe roadway space to ride in. Many of us did not realize that under Palo Alto zoning residential areas like ours on Fabian Way, are not subject to the same protections of the rich residential areas. We thought it was because of the historical and continued preference of favoring North Palo Alto at the expense of those of us living in South Palo Alto. The public recognition of Council Member Reckdahl and Council Member Burt that all residential areas, regardless of traditional residential, PC, and mixed use zoning need to be treated the same was refreshing and encouraging. What is the timeline for this equalization to take place? Is this a 3 month, 12 month, 24 month, etc process? We are just trying to understand how long the intentional discrimination will continue. Thank you for your attention. Best Regards, Scott Petersen On Mon, Aug 24, 2026 at 4:56 PM Manu Kumar <manu@k9ventures.com> wrote: City Council, The proposal you're considering is ridiculous. That's the only word I have to describe it. It is shocking that the city and the council does not understand itsresponsibility to residents and businesses and opts to prioritize people whoeither are sometimes not from Palo Alto, do not pay taxes in Palo Alto, or in some cases just use Palo Alto as the parking lot for their RVs (that they don't live in, it's free parking and storage)! No city should need to look like the way Palo Alto looks with these RVsparked on our streets and no businesses or residents should have to dealwith this. The fact that we have to, is a clear indication of how staff andcouncil are failing in their duties and not serving Palo Alto Residents,Businesses, and taxpayers. I spent 2-years dealing with a drug addicted RV-dweller parked in front of my office, abusing and antagonizing employees, trespassing on our property, parking on our space, conducting repairs and maintenance onour property, vandalizing our security cameras, stealing them and more.Palo Alto did nothing. Palo Alto police came by multiple times and saidtheir nice words, but were ineffective at actually doing anything.Ultimately he was arrested by Mountain View PD. Staff and council's attempts at resolving this have been misdirected and you all continue to waste taxpayer dollars in the process. NO to RVs on our streets. And a STRONG NO to issuing "permits" for RVsto park on our streets. Manu Kumar927 Industrial Ave Palo Alto On Sun, Aug 23, 2026 at 12:25 AM Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> wrote: Palo Alto City Council, OSV Ad Hoc Committee, and Concerned Residents and Businesses, I thought it might be beneficial to do one more OSV count before the August 24th City Council Meeting where the OSV Phase II Plan will be discussed. I’m sorry to report that our count is holding pretty static at 140-ish. As mentioned earlier we have seen the numbers fall from when I first started counting in October 2025 from 220 to the current number of 140. A reduction of 36%, but 140 OSVs on our streets is still way more than the community would like to see. And way too many if they happen to be parked in front of your residence or business. Aside from the count the climate on the streets is deteriorating. I’ve seen video of vandals destroying property, stealing electricity, and now using intimidation by those who feel emboldened by their tenure on our streets. This has to stop! As I take my count on the 21 affected streets I have increasingly been yelled at by those who think they have a right to squat on our streets because the City has been reluctant to take a hard stand to protect the hard-working tax-paying residents and businesses that fund the basic operations of this City. Please see the last image of this message to understand how this situation has devolved into an almost Blackboard Jungle atmosphere. And if you are unfamiliar with the 1955 film Blackboard Jungle - Google it! When I mentioned in one of my earlier e-mails that I was followed for about three blocks after walking East Meadow Circle with my wife a resident of condominiums on East Meadow Circle sent me the following the comment - - "I beg you to please be careful. None of us walk on East Meadow any longer. It is not safe. Please don’t go there especially with your wife.” Is this the Palo Alto that we want? And since we are on the movie theme who can forget the line “ I’m Mad As Hell and I’n Not Going to Take it Anymore,” from the movie “Network” in 1976. I’m very happy to know that an increasing portion of our community is understanding the consequences of an overly accommodating City government and are focussed on demanding that we do not want OSVs in our residential neighborhoods and business/commercial districts. The current situation is intolerable and we want a sea change for the better. We want to see a City government that prioritizes the needs of the community - that prioritizes the needs of its constituents, the very people that put every council member in their position! The time is Now to make this right. Let’s seize the opportunity! Regards, Bob Marinaro E. San Antonio Rd Next to Homekey Transitional Housing Facility (8/21/26). No Parking Zone. I called it in yesterday and it was gone today. East Meadow Circle in front of Echelon Townhomes East Meadow Circle in front of Google Buildings East Meadow Circle - - BMW Motorcycles (Average cost $19,500). This guy in the window was yelling at the top of his lungs as I was riding away. These folks feel so entitled. They have been allowed to stay here unfettered for so long that they feel as though they have a right to be here and I am intruding on their domain! Fabian Way Transport Street - - One of the ways businesses have to keep the OSVs from taking up their valued parking Elwell Ct. Faber Places - - 15 OSVs on a short street segment Embarcadero Way - - 11 OSVs on a short street segment Colorado Ave. adjacent to Greer Park Mitchell Park Parking Lot - - The guy in the van has been here forever and the RV is new this weekend I believe Mitchell Park Parking Lot - - Lets get these OSVs out of our parks! Matadero Ave, - - Ventura Neighbors have complained forever but nothing happens Orinda St. - - Ventura Neighbors have complained forever but nothing happens Ash St - - Bad Actor #1 and a handful of his 12-ish vehicles in the Ventura Neighborhood Portage Ave. - - Bad Actor #1 and a handful of his 12-ish vehicles in the Ventura Neighborhood Page Mill - - Bad Actor #1 and a handful of his 12-ish vehicles in the Ventura Neighborhood Sheridan Ave. - - Bad Actor #1 and a handful of his 12-ish vehicles in the Ventura Neighborhood Palo Alto Daily Post Police Blotter - - Friday 8/21/26 -- Jeanette Baldwin -- Arun Bodapati From:Annette Glanckopf To:Lo, Ria; Coles, Charlie Cc:Council, City Subject:August 27th meeting for the south Palo Alto Ped/Bike Crossing Date:Tuesday, August 25, 2026 12:53:40 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. This is a formal request for the opportunity for public comments at the August 27th meeting, rather than limited feedback via stickers and post it notes. The past city outreach to the El Dorado vicinity has been limited and ineffective, and key members of the El Dorado neighborhood have been informing residents of the plan. you have received a petition rejecting the current alternatives and emails suggesting alternatives. So please agendize public comments. Thank you Annette From:Chris Schremp To:Veenker, Vicki; Lauing, Ed; Shikada, Ed; Reckdahl, Keith; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Council, City; Bulatao, Eric Cc:Loren Brown; Dmitri Samsonov; Robert Marinaro; stephanie wansek; Chris Schremp; Martin Cuyegkeng; Colin Swindells; Christine Schremp; brianhama@gmail.com; yudy4paloalto@gmail.com; Bryna Chang; h.etzko@gmail.com; Roger Smith; Peter Xu; Barry Katz; Ceci Kettendorf; Nancy Ellickson; Dana Dahlstrom; Lydia Kou; Bill McLane; Dave Stellman; Charlie Weidanz; Jeanette Baldwin; Titan (Zhengtian) Gu; Becky Sanders; John Schafer; Scott Petersen Subject:Post-Meeting Reflections: Moving from Process to Execution on PAMC § 10.44.020 Date:Tuesday, August 25, 2026 12:27:21 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Mayor Veenker, City Manager Shikada, and Members of the City Council, I attended last night’s meeting in person, and while I had prepared public comments, I decided not to step up to the podium. Given how often I have emailed my perspective—and seeing so many fellow residents waiting to be heard—I wanted to yield time to my neighbors. I want to thank the Council for making the right decision to halt Staff Report #2606-6479. Rejecting an ill-formed experiment that lacked community input, skipped the OSV Ad Hoc Committee, and failed to account for basic dweller demographics was a crucial first step. As staff works on next steps, I want to offer a few observations: Commending Council on Street Reclassifications First, I commend the Council for recognizing the urgent need to update outdated street designations. Identifying corridors that are currently coded as multi-use or commercial— when in reality they are home to many affected residents—is a major step in the right direction. Reclassifying these corridors to residential ASAP reflects the actual lived environment on these blocks and will significantly strengthen long-term code enforcement. Parallel Outreach: Don't Let Engagement Delay Enforcement I also applaud the Council members for calling out Staff for their lack of outreach and for insisting that future options be accompanied by thorough engagement with residents and businesses. However, I am not sure extensive new outreach is actually needed at this stage—the voices of tax-paying residents and local business owners were heard loud and clear last night. We want OSVs off our streets now. More importantly, we must not let a protracted outreach process become another administrative bottleneck that delays taking action. While staff conducts any necessary outreach, the City can and should proceed in parallel with enforcing basic street safety and preparing code execution plans. Parallel Data Collection: Move Forward with Existing Info Similarly, I was pleased to see Council members push back on staff for bringing forth a major proposal without meaningful data on OSV dweller composition. That critique was entirely justified. However, we already have sufficient baseline data to begin acting now. Fine-tuning demographic data shouldn't be used as a reason to freeze municipal code enforcement or delay drafting an ordinance to enact existing laws. Data collection and code execution should run on parallel tracks. Decouple Alternative Location Searches from Code Execution & Signage I fully support the City's continued engagement with Santa Clara County, Stanford, regional partners and local corporations to identify viable, permitted off-street locations. However, those ongoing searches must be completely decoupled from street enforcement. Exploring long-term alternatives should not stall the immediate installation of CVC § 22651(n) entry signage or delay enforcing existing municipal code across public thoroughfares. Clear Legal Authority Post-Grants Pass It was reassuring to hear the City Attorney explicitly acknowledge that, post-Grants Pass, cities now have significantly more legal flexibility and far less risk of litigation when enacting laws to restrict OSV street parking. It was also encouraging to hear Council members point to San Francisco’s coordinated regional approach as an effective benchmark. While legal nuances always exist, it is clear that Palo Alto can safely move forward with deploying CVC § 22651(n) border signage and enforcing municipal code without fear of major legal repercussions. Directives for Staff's Next Presentation As staff prepares revised options, we urge the Council to set firm parameters for City Management: 1. Focus on Execution, Not Experiments: Deliver a straightforward execution plan for PAMC § 10.44.020 that applies overnight OSV restrictions citywide across all public streets (residential, commercial, and industrial). 2. Deploy Low-Cost Border Signage (CVC § 22651(n)): Analyze the cost-effective border-signage model used by neighboring jurisdictions rather than drafting multi- million-dollar block-by-block plans. 3. Decouple Regional Partner Outreach from Enforcement: Continue working with Santa Clara County and Stanford on off-street sites, but move forward immediately with border signage and street code execution. 4. Collaborate with the Ad Hoc Committee: Any future proposals must be co-created alongside the Council’s appointed OSV Ad Hoc Committee before being published or presented to the public. Thank you again for stopping a flawed pilot last night and taking a practical stance on street designations. We look forward to seeing the Council direct City Management toward prompt, lawful code execution. Best regards, Chris Schremp Palo Alto Resident & Stakeholder From:Janie Sydow To:Council, City Subject:Re: Palo Alto"s Ongoing OSV Crisis - - Bob"s Pre-Council Meeting Count (8/22/26) Date:Tuesday, August 25, 2026 11:53:44 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i   My take on last nights meeting. Very disappointing. This should not have been an action meeting until the public had a chance to weigh in and offer alternative suggestions. South Palo Alto is treated like an ugly step sister and we are tired of it. Perhaps we should withhold our taxes as many Mt. View residents are doing or elect officials who actually care. It is a complex issue and not enough has been done to find a solution that we can all stomach-that includes the OSV dwellers, some of whom disagreed with parts of the proposal that was passed by the council as did the taxpaying residents. On Aug 25, 2026, at 10:40 AM, Janie Sydow <jsydow@comcast.net> wrote:  Nice comments Scott! I agree with your comments. I’m not copying everyone as it’s an accident waiting to happen and the city will be on the hook if any accident, injury of property or a person, or fire due to the OSVs parking should occur as it has been put on notice in writing many times by many people. If we are in a mixed use area where are these tax paying businesses going to go when the buildings are torn down to make room for these gigantic apartment buildings? Bet not Palo Alto. I know who I’m not voting for this coming election. I have some take aways from last night. 1. It’s hard to solve a problem when you don’t know the causes. There are several and therefore different ways of addressing it. What are the reasons people are living on OSV? Truly homeless, unemployed, or under employed, second home, etc. Why are they in Palo Alto vs. another city? Do they work here or just park here because it’s allowed? How many of each? Does the Ad Hoc committee even know? Why not when we have been living with this issue for years and nothing has been done until now??? I’d be willing to volunteer to find out. 2. Tax payers are on the hook for others lifestyle-necessity or preference. 3. The city is going to allow OSV parking in Palo Alto regardless of our This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first email to you. Mark Safe Report objections. 4. Permitting at $15 a month-the RVs should be chipping in more, and based on finances-one man said he was employed and saving to buy a home. Good for him but why is he allowed to live rent free while we pay the taxes? The permit program should be off-setting more of the costs. Great idea to get his employer to chip in either by allowing parking or contributing financially. Good luck with that! 5. ALL vehicles must be licensed and insured and able to operate. RVs AND secondary vehicles-which should require a permit for each vehicle if allowed to park more than 72 hours-which the council seems to suggest will be allowed. Large Box car OSV shouldn’t be allowed overnight parking in residential or mixed use streets unless they are for the local (i.e. Palo Alto) businesses. People are living in these with animals and some are for businesses located in other cities that don’t allow overnight parking. 6. Port-a-potties are ridiculous-RVs should have access to waste removal and clean water and trash removal (and not homeowners bins) Those that don’t shouldn’t be allowed. If they are not self contained they should be located in a separate parking area and not on our city streets. 7. What Is the purpose of changing the side of the street parking every six months and allowing them to park their cars, motorcycles, etc. on the opposite side? Street cleaning every six months? The cars being allowed the park on the opposite side of the street will then changing places therefore street cleaning is pointless and a waste of resources. Ridiculous and even some of the RV dwellers think so. 8. The number of RVs should be capped based on the number of spaces available not the other way around. How long is this going to go on? Is there an end plan to gradually decrease the numbers? 9. What is this agreement they are supposed to sign and comply? Who is going to monitor and what if they refuse to sign or comply? A slap on the wrist, a fine, forced to relocate (to another Palo Alto street)? 10. The burden seems to be on South Palo Alto. Huge proposed construction projects in already traffic congested areas-7 stories next to existing homes due to the council’s lack of action in time to prevent. The council at the very least needs to increase the required number of “affordable” units. 12 out of 238 proposed for one project is not going to solve the problem. How many are deemed below market in all the approved or proposed projects? 11. A business should not be run from the OSV. Period. This creates traffic, parking, sanitation problems etc. No car repair, barber shop, moving company etc. I suspect some are illegal in any event. 12. A “pilot” plan with tax payers footing the bill that we don’t have the ability to veto or agree to is unfair use of our money. 13. Any council members live in the affected areas? I doubt it. i could go on but you get the idea-RV parking will happen and there is little we can do about it. I have a lot of sympathy for those that are truly homeless or displaced but there are some very entitled bad actors in the bunch and the city needs to identify them and take appropriate action. Janie On Aug 25, 2026, at 8:05 AM, Scott E Petersen <scottepetersen@gmail.com> wrote: Greetings, I wanted to thank Council Member Keith Reckdahl from last night's council meeting for explaining why we with residential units on Fabian Way between E Charleston & San Antonio have been extensively ignored in our repeated requests to address the months long/years long RV camping issues. In addition to the blight of the RV's themselves, and the regular out of town parking of trucking (who are not allow to park on the streets of their own towns), we have also requested the city address the RV connected health and safety issues of; the running of Midnight Generators, dumping of grey water on the street, public urination on our property, storage of connected propane tanks on their sides/on the street/under the RVs, human feces in our trash cans on pickup day, loud pumping of holding tanks at 11:00pm, operation of businesses out of the RV's, distribution of hand exchanged questionable items between RV owners and a series of passing/stopping cars , storage of items next to the RV's, blocking part of the sidewalk, lack of street sweeping, blocking of line of sight between our drive exit and Charleston intersection (I have almost been hit 3 times), blocking of line of sight of the stop sign at Fabian & San Antonio, and the forcing of cyclist and scooter riders to almost hug the center yellow line due to a lack of safe roadway space to ride in. Many of us did not realize that under Palo Alto zoning residential areas like ours on Fabian Way, are not subject to the same protections of the rich residential areas. We thought it was because of the historical and continued preference of favoring North Palo Alto at the expense of those of us living in South Palo Alto. The public recognition of Council Member Reckdahl and Council Member Burt that all residential areas, regardless of traditional residential, PC, and mixed use zoning need to be treated the same was refreshing and encouraging. What is the timeline for this equalization to take place? Is this a 3 month, 12 month, 24 month, etc process? We are just trying to understand how long the intentional Thank you for your attention. Best Regards, Scott Petersen On Mon, Aug 24, 2026 at 4:56 PM Manu Kumar <manu@k9ventures.com> wrote: City Council, The proposal you're considering is ridiculous. That's the onlyword I have to describe it. It is shocking that the city and the council does notunderstand its responsibility to residents and businesses and opts to prioritize people who either are sometimes not from Palo Alto, do not pay taxes in Palo Alto, or in some cases just use Palo Alto as the parking lot for their RVs (that they don't live in, it's free parking and storage)! No city should need to look like the way Palo Alto looks withthese RVs parked on our streets and no businesses orresidents should have to deal with this. The fact that wehave to, is a clear indication of how staff and council are failing in their duties and not serving Palo Alto Residents, Businesses, and taxpayers. I spent 2-years dealing with a drug addicted RV-dwellerparked in front of my office, abusing and antagonizingemployees, trespassing on our property, parking on ourspace, conducting repairs and maintenance on our property,vandalizing our security cameras, stealing them and more.Palo Alto did nothing. Palo Alto police came by multiple timesand said their nice words, but were ineffective at actually doing anything. Ultimately he was arrested by Mountain View PD. Staff and council's attempts at resolving this have beenmisdirected and you all continue to waste taxpayer dollars inthe process. NO to RVs on our streets. And a STRONG NO to issuing"permits" for RVs to park on our streets. Manu Kumar 927 Industrial AvePalo Alto On Sun, Aug 23, 2026 at 12:25 AM Robert Marinaro Palo Alto City Council, OSV Ad Hoc Committee, and Concerned Residents and Businesses, I thought it might be beneficial to do one more OSV count before the August 24th City Council Meeting where the OSV Phase II Plan will be discussed. I’m sorry to report that our count is holding pretty static at 140- ish. As mentioned earlier we have seen the numbers fall from when I first started counting in October 2025 from 220 to the current number of 140. A reduction of 36%, but 140 OSVs on our streets is still way more than the community would like to see. And way too many if they happen to be parked in front of your residence or business. Aside from the count the climate on the streets is deteriorating. I’ve seen video of vandals destroying property, stealing electricity, and now using intimidation by those who feel emboldened by their tenure on our streets. This has to stop! As I take my count on the 21 affected streets I have increasingly been yelled at by those who think they have a right to squat on our streets because the City has been reluctant to take a hard stand to protect the hard-working tax-paying residents and businesses that fund the basic operations of this City. Please see the last image of this message to understand how this situation has devolved into an almost Blackboard Jungle atmosphere. And if you are unfamiliar with the 1955 film Blackboard Jungle - Google it! When I mentioned in one of my earlier e-mails that I was followed for about three blocks after walking East Meadow Circle with my wife a resident of condominiums on East Meadow Circle sent me the following the comment - - "I beg you to please be careful. None of us walk on East Meadow any longer. It is not safe. Please don’t go there especially with your wife.” Is this the Palo Alto that we want? And since we are on the movie theme who can forget the line “ I’m Mad As Hell and I’n Not Going to Take it Anymore,” from the movie “Network” in 1976. I’m very happy to know that an increasing portion of our community is understanding the consequences of an overly accommodating City government and are focussed on demanding that we do not want OSVs in our residential neighborhoods and business/commercial districts. The current situation is intolerable and we want a sea change for the better. We want to see a City government that prioritizes the needs of the community - that prioritizes the needs of its constituents, the very people that put every council member in their position! The time is Now to make this right. Let’s seize the opportunity! Regards, Bob Marinaro E. San Antonio Rd Next to Homekey Transitional Housing Facility (8/21/26). No Parking Zone. I called it in yesterday and it was gone today. East Meadow Circle in front of Echelon Townhomes East Meadow Circle in front of Google Buildings East Meadow Circle - - BMW Motorcycles (Average cost $19,500). This guy in the window was yelling at the top of his lungs as I was riding away. These folks feel so entitled. They have been allowed to stay here unfettered for so long that they feel as though they have a right to be here and I am intruding on their domain! Fabian Way Transport Street - - One of the ways businesses have to keep the OSVs from taking up their valued parking Elwell Ct. Faber Places - - 15 OSVs on a short street segment Embarcadero Way - - 11 OSVs on a short street segment Colorado Ave. adjacent to Greer Park Mitchell Park Parking Lot - - The guy in the van has been here forever and the RV is new this weekend I believe Mitchell Park Parking Lot - - Lets get these OSVs out of our parks! Matadero Ave, - - Ventura Neighbors have complained forever but nothing happens Orinda St. - - Ventura Neighbors have complained forever but nothing happens Ash St - - Bad Actor #1 and a handful of his 12-ish vehicles in the Ventura Neighborhood Portage Ave. - - Bad Actor #1 and a handful of his 12-ish vehicles in the Ventura Neighborhood Page Mill - - Bad Actor #1 and a handful of his 12-ish vehicles in the Ventura Neighborhood Sheridan Ave. - - Bad Actor #1 and a handful of his 12- ish vehicles in the Ventura Neighborhood Palo Alto Daily Post Police Blotter - - Friday 8/21/26 From:Alejandra Chaverri To:Council, City Subject:People living on RVs and Embarcadero option Pilot 1 Date:Tuesday, August 25, 2026 11:38:56 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i A Suggested amendment to resolutions taken yesterday evening point ten. Dear Council members, I followed via zoom the intense and critical discussions about OSV in our community yesterday evening. I support the approval of the Pilot 1 resolution and the proposed measures to help community members secure permanent housing rather than continue living along city streets. I also urge you to reconsider including Embarcadero Road, in front of the golf course, in Pilot 1. Is it not a double standard to be concerned for the “golf course losing businesses” and closing the eyes when small businesses of our community, and neighbors, specially us from South Palo Alto complain about the same issue? I also found shocking the frugal information the city staff used to make pilot one and pilot 2 plans regarding the situation of these people living in RVs in our city. It might be that we need social workers with the appropriate training to reach the people. It was also very disturbing to hear yesterday evening about the lack of communication with the different communities, home, and business owners, as well as the businesses who potentially are the ones who hire the people living in RVs. I was genuinely concerned yesterday evening to hear some council, and community members refer to this as the “RV problem.” Framing it that way shifts attention away from the people affected. The RV is a material object, but it belongs to a person or family living in our community. What is going on in Palo Alto? Why cannot we communicate and work together: people living in Palo Alto, philanthropic institutions, our City Council and City Staff, people currently living in RVs, joining an effort, and thinking “outside the bucket” we attempt to permanently resolve this severe problem? The city of Palo Alto and its business needs workers. When people cannot afford to live close to their jobs, people turn to individualized solutions like the RVs. My gratitude for all your work and long hours meetings. If I can be of any help I am more than glad to participate. This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. Mark Safe Report Respectfully, Alejandra Chaverri -- PositivNegativ From:Arun Bodapati To:Julia Sun Cc:JEANETTE BALDWIN; CeCi Kettendorf; Scott E Petersen; Manu Kumar; Council, City; Robert Marinaro; 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; Alina Martinez; Micah Murphy; Danielle Dunne; David Famero; Carly Lake; Sandy Freschi; Theron Bullman; Dave Stellman; Dave Stellman; Steve Wong; Marguerite Poyatos; 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; 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; 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; Christian Hothem; Aditya Jain; Anjali Jain; Jenny Lee; Soumya Bodapati; Yingxi Liu; Susan Dorsky; Dave Price; Elaine Goodman; Brandon Cartwright; Clark Penado; Francescarael Rael; Kaye Crawford; Lena Yarovaya; Kenneth Russell; Jon Hellesoe; Ryan Judd; Evan Reade; Rosalie Cook; Kay Satit; Sooji Nam Subject:Re: Palo Alto"s Ongoing OSV Crisis - - Bob"s Pre-Council Meeting Count (8/22/26) Date:Tuesday, August 25, 2026 11:37:37 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Subject: Yesterday's OSV hearing felt disconnected from the people living with this every day Dear All, I sat through yesterday's entire proceedings on the oversized vehicle (OSV) parking issue, and I'm sadly writing to you directly because I left that meeting more frustrated than when I arrived. What I watched unfold felt like an academic exercise — percentages, pilot program metrics, permit-slot counts — discussed at a remove from the people actually living with the consequences on our streets every day. I did not come away with a sense that the residents and business owners bearing the brunt of this issue were being heard with the seriousness or urgency the situation demands. This is not an abstract policy puzzle to be optimized at the This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first mail to some recipients. Mark Safe Report Powered by Mimecast margins. It is a daily, lived reality for the people in my neighborhood and for the businesses trying to operate normally around it. What compounds this is that both phases of this plan were developed and brought forward without any real consultation with the residents and businesses who are directly affected. Decisions of this consequence — about our streets, our safety, and our ability to operate our businesses — were shaped in advance and presented to us largely as a fait accompli. That is not how the public's trust in this Council is supposed to work. Residents and businesses did not delegate the Council the authority to design a two-phase framework in isolation and then hold a hearing to receive comments on a plan whose substance was already settled. That sequence is, frankly, deeply disrespectful of the trust the public placed in you when you were elected to represent us. I also want to push back on a premise that seemed to run underneath the entire session: that this is a problem Palo Alto is obligated to manage and absorb indefinitely. It is not. The patchwork approach currently on the table — permit slots, seasonal alternating restrictions, storage programs — does not solve the underlying problem. If anything, it entrenches it, and it does so at ongoing cost to city taxpayers, with no clear end point and no sign the underlying number of oversized vehicles seeking to park here is actually shrinking. I did not vote for, and I do not believe the public has given the Council a mandate for, an open-ended commitment of city resources and staff time to permanently administer this issue rather than resolve it. I would ask the Council to be honest about the difference between those two things, because right now the direction of travel looks like the former. I want to be direct about where I stand: I support a full ban on oversized vehicle parking, citywide, overnight, modeled on the ordinance Menlo Park adopted last year— prohibiting oversized vehicles and RVs from parking on public streets overnight. It's worth being specific about why Menlo Park's council acted: they were responding to daily complaints to their police department about safety, sanitation, and blocked sightlines and driveways, and to business and property owners who said the affected commercial corridor was becoming unrentable and unsafe for employees and customers. That is not a hypothetical or an academic concern — it is the same pattern residents and businesses here have been describing to this Council, and Menlo Park's response was to act decisively rather than manage the problem in perpetuity through an expanding permit bureaucracy. I recognize the complexity underneath this issue, including the housing circumstances of some vehicle occupants, and I don't say any of this without awareness of that reality. But I do not believe the current framework fairly weighs the interests of residents and business owners who did not create this situation and who are, in effect, absorbing the cost of it — through safety concerns, sanitation issues, and the practical loss of use of public streets in front of their own homes and businesses. That imbalance is what I mean when I say this feels like it is unduly punishing, and in effect discriminating against, the residents and businesses of this city. I would ask that the Council treat this with the seriousness it deserves in future sessions — not as a technical exercise in permit allocation, not as a standing city program to be funded indefinitely, and not as a plan to be finalized before the public is meaningfully consulted, but as a matter directly affecting the daily lives, safety, and property of the people who elected you. I intend to stay engaged on this issue, including through direct advocacy and, if necessary, a citizen ballot initiative, until it is addressed with the urgency it warrants. I would welcome the opportunity to discuss this further and to understand what data or community input the Council still needs before treating this as a priority. Best, Arun On Tue, Aug 25, 2026 at 11:17 AM Julia Sun <jsun39872@gmail.com> wrote: I completely agree with you! We need city council members who will prioritize and listen to the concerns of their residents and local businesses. The OSV situation is no longer tolerable. On Tue, Aug 25, 2026 at 11:09 AM JEANETTE BALDWIN <jeanettebaldwin@gmail.com> wrote: Hi all, I completely agree with CeCi and the other neighbors who have spoken out. It has become abundantly clear that the City Council is not listening to or representing its constituents. If our elected officials refuse to prioritize the safety and well-being of the residents and businesses who fund this city, it is time to consider a recall. Perhaps the Mayor and the council members will start making real progress on this crisis if their positions are on the line—or the next administration will. Best regards, Jeanette Baldwin On Tue, Aug 25, 2026 at 10:57 AM CeCi Kettendorf <cecihome@gmail.com> wrote: I wanted to laugh out loud last night at the Council hearing about OSVs, when the staff member acknowledged to Councilman Pat Burt that they HAD NO DATA as to whom was living in the OSVs! She said, incredibly, that they had knocked on the windows and doors but "no one would talk to them." Really?!!!! Might they have taken a police officer, a social worker, code enforcement personnel, a case manager, a homeless advocate with them? Safety in numbers? Bob gathered more info than the staff has in the past six months!!!!! They are highly paid! Shikada has 13 staff to assist him. Might he have given them guidance? So after six months, city staff does not know how many adults and children live in the vans, how many have a home outside of Palo Alto, how many are employed, where they are employed, how many have mental illness, how many are substance abusers, how many would agree to be moved or accept help at all, how many want to stay in their vans, how many have registered or insured vehicles ( could the staff check their license plates to see if they are registered n a nearby city with an address!?). Are the boats, motorcycles, and sports cars on Meadow Circle registered? Could staffDO THEIR JOB and gather the data they were instructed to bring forward???? So the staff has done............nothing of substance. Fire them all.! I have gone to many a council meeting wherein staff could not answer questions posed by the Council Members. Fire half of the thirteen staff assistants to Shikada and dedicate the money towards hiring firefighters for south Palo Alto. We get the bad stuff always! A closed fire station and OSVs! We should recall the Mayor and Julie Lythcott Haimes for their lack of action on the OSVs and frank support for the latter. I will help anyone who wants to do so. CeCi Kettendof On Tue, Aug 25, 2026 at 8:05 AM Scott E Petersen <scottepetersen@gmail.com> wrote: Greetings, I wanted to thank Council Member Keith Reckdahl from last night's council meeting for explaining why we with residential units on Fabian Way between E Charleston & San Antonio have been extensively ignored in our repeated requests to address the months long/years long RV camping issues. In addition to the blight of the RV's themselves, and the regular out of town parking of trucking (who are not allow to park on the streets of their own towns), we have also requested the city address the RV connected health and safety issues of; the running of Midnight Generators, dumping of grey water on the street, public urination on our property, storage of connected propane tanks on their sides/on the street/under the RVs, human feces in our trash cans on pickup day, loud pumping of holding tanks at 11:00pm, operation of businesses out of the RV's, distribution of hand exchanged questionable items between RV owners and a series of passing/stopping cars , storage of items next to the RV's, blocking part of the sidewalk, lack of street sweeping, blocking of line of sight between our drive exit and Charleston intersection (I have almost been hit 3 times), blocking of line of sight of the stop sign at Fabian & San Antonio, and the forcing of cyclist and scooter riders to almost hug the center yellow line due to a lack of safe roadway space to ride in. Many of us did not realize that under Palo Alto zoning residential areas like ours on Fabian Way, are not subject to the same protections of the rich residential areas. We thought it was because of the historical and continued preference of favoring North Palo Alto at the expense of those of us living in South Palo Alto. The public recognition of Council Member Reckdahl and Council Member Burt that all residential areas, regardless of traditional residential, PC, and mixed use zoning need to be treated the same was refreshing and encouraging. What is the timeline for this equalization to take place? Is this a 3 month, 12 month, 24 month, etc process? We are just trying to understand how long the intentional discrimination will continue. Thank you for your attention. Best Regards, Scott Petersen On Mon, Aug 24, 2026 at 4:56 PM Manu Kumar <manu@k9ventures.com> wrote: City Council, The proposal you're considering is ridiculous. That's the only word I have todescribe it. It is shocking that the city and the council does not understand itsresponsibility to residents and businesses and opts to prioritize people who either are sometimes not from Palo Alto, do not pay taxes in Palo Alto, or in some cases just use Palo Alto as the parking lot for their RVs (that they don't live in, it's free parking and storage)! No city should need to look like the way Palo Alto looks with these RVsparked on our streets and no businesses or residents should have to dealwith this. The fact that we have to, is a clear indication of how staff andcouncil are failing in their duties and not serving Palo Alto Residents,Businesses, and taxpayers. I spent 2-years dealing with a drug addicted RV-dweller parked in front of my office, abusing and antagonizing employees, trespassing on our property, parking on our space, conducting repairs and maintenance on ourproperty, vandalizing our security cameras, stealing them and more. PaloAlto did nothing. Palo Alto police came by multiple times and said their nicewords, but were ineffective at actually doing anything. Ultimately he wasarrested by Mountain View PD. Staff and council's attempts at resolving this have been misdirected and you all continue to waste taxpayer dollars in the process. NO to RVs on our streets. And a STRONG NO to issuing "permits" for RVs topark on our streets. Manu Kumar927 Industrial Ave Palo Alto On Sun, Aug 23, 2026 at 12:25 AM Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> wrote: Palo Alto City Council, OSV Ad Hoc Committee, and Concerned Residents and Businesses, I thought it might be beneficial to do one more OSV count before the August 24th City Council Meeting where the OSV Phase II Plan will be discussed. I’m sorry to report that our count is holding pretty static at 140-ish. As mentioned earlier we have seen the numbers fall from when I first started counting in October 2025 from 220 to the current number of 140. A reduction of 36%, but 140 OSVs on our streets is still way more than the community would like to see. And way too many if they happen to be parked in front of your residence or business. Aside from the count the climate on the streets is deteriorating. I’ve seen video of vandals destroying property, stealing electricity, and now using intimidation by those who feel emboldened by their tenure on our streets. This has to stop! As I take my count on the 21 affected streets I have increasingly been yelled at by those who think they have a right to squat on our streets because the City has been reluctant to take a hard stand to protect the hard-working tax-paying residents and businesses that fund the basic operations of this City. Please see the last image of this message to understand how this situation has devolved into an almost Blackboard Jungle atmosphere. And if you are unfamiliar with the 1955 film Blackboard Jungle - Google it! When I mentioned in one of my earlier e-mails that I was followed for about three blocks after walking East Meadow Circle with my wife a resident of condominiums on East Meadow Circle sent me the following the comment - - "I beg you to please be careful. None of us walk on East Meadow any longer. It is not safe. Please don’t go there especially with your wife.” Is this the Palo Alto that we want? And since we are on the movie theme who can forget the line “ I’m Mad As Hell and I’n Not Going to Take it Anymore,” from the movie “Network” in 1976. I’m very happy to know that an increasing portion of our community is understanding the consequences of an overly accommodating City government and are focussed on demanding that we do not want OSVs in our residential neighborhoods and business/commercial districts. The current situation is intolerable and we want a sea change for the better. We want to see a City government that prioritizes the needs of the community - that prioritizes the needs of its constituents, the very people that put every council member in their position! The time is Now to make this right. Let’s seize the opportunity! Regards, Bob Marinaro E. San Antonio Rd Next to Homekey Transitional Housing Facility (8/21/26). No Parking Zone. I called it in yesterday and it was gone today. East Meadow Circle in front of Echelon Townhomes East Meadow Circle in front of Google Buildings East Meadow Circle - - BMW Motorcycles (Average cost $19,500). This guy in the window was yelling at the top of his lungs as I was riding away. These folks feel so entitled. They have been allowed to stay here unfettered for so long that they feel as though they have a right to be here and I am intruding on their domain! Fabian Way Transport Street - - One of the ways businesses have to keep the OSVs from taking up their valued parking Elwell Ct. Faber Places - - 15 OSVs on a short street segment Embarcadero Way - - 11 OSVs on a short street segment Colorado Ave. adjacent to Greer Park Mitchell Park Parking Lot - - The guy in the van has been here forever and the RV is new this weekend I believe Mitchell Park Parking Lot - - Lets get these OSVs out of our parks! Matadero Ave, - - Ventura Neighbors have complained forever but nothing happens Orinda St. - - Ventura Neighbors have complained forever but nothing happens Ash St - - Bad Actor #1 and a handful of his 12-ish vehicles in the Ventura Neighborhood Portage Ave. - - Bad Actor #1 and a handful of his 12-ish vehicles in the Ventura Neighborhood Page Mill - - Bad Actor #1 and a handful of his 12-ish vehicles in the Ventura Neighborhood Sheridan Ave. - - Bad Actor #1 and a handful of his 12-ish vehicles in the Ventura Neighborhood Palo Alto Daily Post Police Blotter - - Friday 8/21/26 -- Jeanette Baldwin -- Arun Bodapati From:CeCi Kettendorf To:Julia Sun Cc:JEANETTE BALDWIN; Scott E Petersen; Manu Kumar; Council, City; Robert Marinaro; 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; Alina Martinez; Micah Murphy; Danielle Dunne; David Famero; Carly Lake; Sandy Freschi; Theron Bullman; Dave Stellman; Dave Stellman; Steve Wong; Marguerite Poyatos; 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; 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; 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; Christian Hothem; Aditya Jain; Anjali Jain; Jenny Lee; Arun Bodapati; Soumya Bodapati; Yingxi Liu; Susan Dorsky; Dave Price; Elaine Goodman; Brandon Cartwright; Clark Penado; Francescarael Rael; Kaye Crawford; Lena Yarovaya; Kenneth Russell; Jon Hellesoe; Ryan Judd; Evan Reade; Rosalie Cook; Kay Satit; Sooji Nam Subject:Re: Palo Alto"s Ongoing OSV Crisis - - Bob"s Pre-Council Meeting Count (8/22/26) Date:Tuesday, August 25, 2026 11:35:36 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. In listening to and speaking with council members, I believe Ed Lauing and Pat Burt are indeed trying to address this within the confines of the politics of the city. I support Ed and Pat. Bryna Chang should be elected and she too will take action on this. Throw out the mayor. It was apparent by her comments she has never visited the streets at issue. Lydia Kou and Doria Smma ALWAYS visited the sites given to them for consideration. Why has our mayor not done so? Did you hear the guy from Meadow Circle who spoke, saying how much nicer it is to live there, now that the METH HEADS have moved out?! We could not make this up! The mind boggles. Echelon, please contact me. I support a recall. Recall the Mayor. Ceci Kettendorf On Tue, Aug 25, 2026 at 11:17 AM Julia Sun <jsun39872@gmail.com> wrote: I completely agree with you! We need city council members who will prioritize and listen to the concerns of their residents and local businesses. The OSV situation is no longer tolerable. On Tue, Aug 25, 2026 at 11:09 AM JEANETTE BALDWIN <jeanettebaldwin@gmail.com> wrote: Hi all, I completely agree with CeCi and the other neighbors who have spoken out. It has become abundantly clear that the City Council is not listening to or representing its constituents. If our elected officials refuse to prioritize the safety and well-being of the residents and businesses who fund this city, it is time to consider a recall. Perhaps the Mayor and the council members will start making real progress on this crisis if their positions are on the line—or the next administration will. Best regards, Jeanette Baldwin On Tue, Aug 25, 2026 at 10:57 AM CeCi Kettendorf <cecihome@gmail.com> wrote: I wanted to laugh out loud last night at the Council hearing about OSVs, when the staff member acknowledged to Councilman Pat Burt that they HAD NO DATA as to whom was living in the OSVs! She said, incredibly, that they had knocked on the windows and doors but "no one would talk to them." Really?!!!! Might they have taken a police officer, a social worker, code enforcement personnel, a case manager, a homeless advocate with them? Safety in numbers? Bob gathered more info than the staff has in the past six months!!!!! They are highly paid! Shikada has 13 staff to assist him. Might he have given them guidance? So after six months, city staff does not know how many adults and children live in the vans, how many have a home outside of Palo Alto, how many are employed, where they are employed, how many have mental illness, how many are substance abusers, how many would agree to be moved or accept help at all, how many want to stay in their vans, how many have registered or insured vehicles ( could the staff check their license plates to see if they are registered n a nearby city with an address!?). Are the boats, motorcycles, and sports cars on Meadow Circle registered? Could staffDO THEIR JOB and gather the data they were instructed to bring forward???? So the staff has done............nothing of substance. Fire them all.! I have gone to many a council meeting wherein staff could not answer questions posed by the Council Members. Fire half of the thirteen staff assistants to Shikada and dedicate the money towards hiring firefighters for south Palo Alto. We get the bad stuff always! A closed fire station and OSVs! We should recall the Mayor and Julie Lythcott Haimes for their lack of action on the OSVs and frank support for the latter. I will help anyone who wants to do so. CeCi Kettendof On Tue, Aug 25, 2026 at 8:05 AM Scott E Petersen <scottepetersen@gmail.com> wrote: Greetings, I wanted to thank Council Member Keith Reckdahl from last night's council meeting for explaining why we with residential units on Fabian Way between E Charleston & San Antonio have been extensively ignored in our repeated requests to address the months long/years long RV camping issues. In addition to the blight of the RV's themselves, and the regular out of town parking of trucking (who are not allow to park on the streets of their own towns), we have also requested the city address the RV connected health and safety issues of; the running of Midnight Generators, dumping of grey water on the street, public urination on our property, storage of connected propane tanks on their sides/on the street/under the RVs, human feces in our trash cans on pickup day, loud pumping of holding tanks at 11:00pm, operation of businesses out of the RV's, distribution of hand exchanged questionable items between RV owners and a series of passing/stopping cars , storage of items next to the RV's, blocking part of the sidewalk, lack of street sweeping, blocking of line of sight between our drive exit and Charleston intersection (I have almost been hit 3 times), blocking of line of sight of the stop sign at Fabian & San Antonio, and the forcing of cyclist and scooter riders to almost hug the center yellow line due to a lack of safe roadway space to ride in. Many of us did not realize that under Palo Alto zoning residential areas like ours on Fabian Way, are not subject to the same protections of the rich residential areas. We thought it was because of the historical and continued preference of favoring North Palo Alto at the expense of those of us living in South Palo Alto. The public recognition of Council Member Reckdahl and Council Member Burt that all residential areas, regardless of traditional residential, PC, and mixed use zoning need to be treated the same was refreshing and encouraging. What is the timeline for this equalization to take place? Is this a 3 month, 12 month, 24 month, etc process? We are just trying to understand how long the intentional discrimination will continue. Thank you for your attention. Best Regards, Scott Petersen On Mon, Aug 24, 2026 at 4:56 PM Manu Kumar <manu@k9ventures.com> wrote: City Council, The proposal you're considering is ridiculous. That's the only word I have todescribe it. It is shocking that the city and the council does not understand itsresponsibility to residents and businesses and opts to prioritize people who either are sometimes not from Palo Alto, do not pay taxes in Palo Alto, or in some cases just use Palo Alto as the parking lot for their RVs (that they don't live in, it's free parking and storage)! No city should need to look like the way Palo Alto looks with these RVsparked on our streets and no businesses or residents should have to dealwith this. The fact that we have to, is a clear indication of how staff andcouncil are failing in their duties and not serving Palo Alto Residents,Businesses, and taxpayers. I spent 2-years dealing with a drug addicted RV-dweller parked in front of my office, abusing and antagonizing employees, trespassing on our property, parking on our space, conducting repairs and maintenance on ourproperty, vandalizing our security cameras, stealing them and more. PaloAlto did nothing. Palo Alto police came by multiple times and said their nicewords, but were ineffective at actually doing anything. Ultimately he wasarrested by Mountain View PD. Staff and council's attempts at resolving this have been misdirected and you all continue to waste taxpayer dollars in the process. NO to RVs on our streets. And a STRONG NO to issuing "permits" for RVs topark on our streets. Manu Kumar927 Industrial Ave Palo Alto On Sun, Aug 23, 2026 at 12:25 AM Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> wrote: Palo Alto City Council, OSV Ad Hoc Committee, and Concerned Residents and Businesses, I thought it might be beneficial to do one more OSV count before the August 24th City Council Meeting where the OSV Phase II Plan will be discussed. I’m sorry to report that our count is holding pretty static at 140-ish. As mentioned earlier we have seen the numbers fall from when I first started counting in October 2025 from 220 to the current number of 140. A reduction of 36%, but 140 OSVs on our streets is still way more than the community would like to see. And way too many if they happen to be parked in front of your residence or business. Aside from the count the climate on the streets is deteriorating. I’ve seen video of vandals destroying property, stealing electricity, and now using intimidation by those who feel emboldened by their tenure on our streets. This has to stop! As I take my count on the 21 affected streets I have increasingly been yelled at by those who think they have a right to squat on our streets because the City has been reluctant to take a hard stand to protect the hard-working tax-paying residents and businesses that fund the basic operations of this City. Please see the last image of this message to understand how this situation has devolved into an almost Blackboard Jungle atmosphere. And if you are unfamiliar with the 1955 film Blackboard Jungle - Google it! When I mentioned in one of my earlier e-mails that I was followed for about three blocks after walking East Meadow Circle with my wife a resident of condominiums on East Meadow Circle sent me the following the comment - - "I beg you to please be careful. None of us walk on East Meadow any longer. It is not safe. Please don’t go there especially with your wife.” Is this the Palo Alto that we want? And since we are on the movie theme who can forget the line “ I’m Mad As Hell and I’n Not Going to Take it Anymore,” from the movie “Network” in 1976. I’m very happy to know that an increasing portion of our community is understanding the consequences of an overly accommodating City government and are focussed on demanding that we do not want OSVs in our residential neighborhoods and business/commercial districts. The current situation is intolerable and we want a sea change for the better. We want to see a City government that prioritizes the needs of the community - that prioritizes the needs of its constituents, the very people that put every council member in their position! The time is Now to make this right. Let’s seize the opportunity! Regards, Bob Marinaro E. San Antonio Rd Next to Homekey Transitional Housing Facility (8/21/26). No Parking Zone. I called it in yesterday and it was gone today. East Meadow Circle in front of Echelon Townhomes East Meadow Circle in front of Google Buildings East Meadow Circle - - BMW Motorcycles (Average cost $19,500). This guy in the window was yelling at the top of his lungs as I was riding away. These folks feel so entitled. They have been allowed to stay here unfettered for so long that they feel as though they have a right to be here and I am intruding on their domain! Fabian Way Transport Street - - One of the ways businesses have to keep the OSVs from taking up their valued parking Elwell Ct. Faber Places - - 15 OSVs on a short street segment Embarcadero Way - - 11 OSVs on a short street segment Colorado Ave. adjacent to Greer Park Mitchell Park Parking Lot - - The guy in the van has been here forever and the RV is new this weekend I believe Mitchell Park Parking Lot - - Lets get these OSVs out of our parks! Matadero Ave, - - Ventura Neighbors have complained forever but nothing happens Orinda St. - - Ventura Neighbors have complained forever but nothing happens Ash St - - Bad Actor #1 and a handful of his 12-ish vehicles in the Ventura Neighborhood Portage Ave. - - Bad Actor #1 and a handful of his 12-ish vehicles in the Ventura Neighborhood Page Mill - - Bad Actor #1 and a handful of his 12-ish vehicles in the Ventura Neighborhood the Ventura Neighborhood Palo Alto Daily Post Police Blotter - - Friday 8/21/26 -- Jeanette Baldwin From:Oksana Selavri To:CeCi Kettendorf Cc:Jenny Lee; Penny Brennan; Council, City; Robert Marinaro; 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; 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; 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; 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; Chuck Karish; Fred Bailin; Dave Adams; Christian Hothem; Aditya Jain; Anjali Jain; Arun Bodapati; Soumya Bodapati; Yingxi Liu; Susan Dorsky; Dave Price; Elaine Goodman; Brandon Cartwright; Clark Penado; Francescarael Rael; Kaye Crawford; Lena Yarovaya; Kenneth Russell; Jon Hellesoe; Ryan Judd; Evan Reade; Rosalie Cook; Kay Satit; Sooji Nam; Scott Petersen; Manu Kumar; mag Subject:Re: Last Night"s City Council Meeting Date:Tuesday, August 25, 2026 11:26:06 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Hi CeCi, I am one of the residents at Echelon. Do you need a member of our Association or anyone to reach out to you? Thank you Oksana Echelon Community (affected by Fabian Way and East Meadow Circle RV dwelling) On Tue, Aug 25, 2026 at 11:05 AM CeCi Kettendorf <cecihome@gmail.com> wrote: Would a member of the Echelon condos respond to me? We have been trying to reach out to you, as you are so heavily impacted by the vans across from you there. Our neighborhood association just voted on this issue. We adjoin you from Louis forward. I would like to connect with you as a group and compare notes. Ceci Kettendorf AdobeMeadow Neighborhood Association member On Tue, Aug 25, 2026 at 10:43 AM Jenny Lee <jenny.lee.jen@gmail.com> wrote: Thank you, Penny & all others, for taking the time to sit through all those hours to help I watched virtually & kept hearing the council members talk about being “data-driven,” yet they seemed to completely disregard the very real, firsthand data being shared through people’s voices—only to have those voices, unfortunately and incredibly disrespectfully, muted in the interest of "time". It was honestly infuriating to watch & even more so infuriating to experience everyday living in this mess. Pls Pls help address & correct this situation by taking a drastic measure ASAP. Thank you, Jenny Lee Echelon neighborhood On Tue, Aug 25, 2026 at 10:10 AM Penny Brennan <plynnbrennan@gmail.com> wrote: Dear Palo Alto City Council, My blood is boiling this morning. More than 60 members of the Palo Alto community showed up at last night’s City Council meeting to provide public comment on staff-proposed OSV pilot programs. Most of them, including myself, had carefully prepared our comments ahead of the meeting, with the assumption that we would likely be provided only two minutes to share our thoughts. All of us patiently waited through the meeting for the arrival of the 10th, OSV-related agenda item, then through the staff report and lengthy Council discussion, for our turn to make public comments. Then the Mayor announced that we would be allowed exactly 1 minute, and groups a total of 5 minutes, to provide our comments. In effect, this stricture muzzled public comment on the proposed pilot programs. Almost all the speakers were cut off before they could fully articulate their prepared thoughts, so we could not understand what they were trying to say. People began dropping out of the speakers’ queue, presumably because they realized the futility of trying to convey their thoughts in one minute. Audio malfunction in the chambers made the one-minute comments of zoom participants virtually unintelligible. In essence, there was no real public comment on the OSV agenda item last night. The last-minute imposition of one- and five- minute limits on comments conveyed a real disregard for our time and disrespect for our opinions. The motion you passed following the “public comments” on the OSV pilots clearly demonstrated that, no, you absolutely could not and did not hear us last night. Sincerely, Penny Brennan, PhD Ventura Neighborhood From:Julia Sun To:JEANETTE BALDWIN Cc:CeCi Kettendorf; Scott E Petersen; Manu Kumar; Council, City; Robert Marinaro; 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; Alina Martinez; Micah Murphy; Danielle Dunne; David Famero; Carly Lake; Sandy Freschi; Theron Bullman; Dave Stellman; Dave Stellman; Steve Wong; Marguerite Poyatos; 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; 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; 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; Christian Hothem; Aditya Jain; Anjali Jain; Jenny Lee; Arun Bodapati; Soumya Bodapati; Yingxi Liu; Susan Dorsky; Dave Price; Elaine Goodman; Brandon Cartwright; Clark Penado; Francescarael Rael; Kaye Crawford; Lena Yarovaya; Kenneth Russell; Jon Hellesoe; Ryan Judd; Evan Reade; Rosalie Cook; Kay Satit; Sooji Nam Subject:Re: Palo Alto"s Ongoing OSV Crisis - - Bob"s Pre-Council Meeting Count (8/22/26) Date:Tuesday, August 25, 2026 11:17:29 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. I completely agree with you! We need city council members who will prioritize and listen to the concerns of their residents and local businesses. The OSV situation is no longer tolerable. On Tue, Aug 25, 2026 at 11:09 AM JEANETTE BALDWIN <jeanettebaldwin@gmail.com> wrote: Hi all, I completely agree with CeCi and the other neighbors who have spoken out. It has become abundantly clear that the City Council is not listening to or representing its constituents. If our elected officials refuse to prioritize the safety and well-being of the residents and businesses who fund this city, it is time to consider a recall. Perhaps the Mayor and the council members will start making real progress on this crisis if their positions are on the line—or the next administration will. Best regards, Jeanette Baldwin  AM CeCi Kettendorf <cecihome@gmail.com I wanted to laugh out loud last night at the Council hearing about OSVs, when the staff member acknowledged to Councilman Pat Burt that they HAD NO DATA as to whom was living in the OSVs! She said, incredibly, that they had knocked on the windows and doors but "no one would talk to them." Really?!!!! Might they have taken a police officer, a social worker, code enforcement personnel, a case manager, a homeless advocate with them? Safety in numbers? Bob gathered more info than the staff has in the past six months!!!!! They are highly paid! Shikada has 13 staff to assist him. Might he have given them guidance? So after six months, city staff does not know how many adults and children live in the vans, how many have a home outside of Palo Alto, how many are employed, where they are employed, how many have mental illness, how many are substance abusers, how many would agree to be moved or accept help at all, how many want to stay in their vans, how many have registered or insured vehicles ( could the staff check their license plates to see if they are registered n a nearby city with an address!?). Are the boats, motorcycles, and sports cars on Meadow Circle registered? Could staffDO THEIR JOB and gather the data they were instructed to bring forward???? So the staff has done............nothing of substance. Fire them all.! I have gone to many a council meeting wherein staff could not answer questions posed by the Council Members. Fire half of the thirteen staff assistants to Shikada and dedicate the money towards hiring firefighters for south Palo Alto. We get the bad stuff always! A closed fire station and OSVs! We should recall the Mayor and Julie Lythcott Haimes for their lack of action on the OSVs and frank support for the latter. I will help anyone who wants to do so. CeCi Kettendof On Tue, Aug 25, 2026 at 8:05 AM Scott E Petersen <scottepetersen@gmail.com> wrote: Greetings, I wanted to thank Council Member Keith Reckdahl from last night's council meeting for explaining why we with residential units on Fabian Way between E Charleston & San Antonio have been extensively ignored in our repeated requests to address the months long/years long RV camping issues. In addition to the blight of the RV's themselves, and the regular out of town parking of trucking (who are not allow to park on the streets of their own towns), we have also requested the city address the RV connected health and safety issues of; the running of Midnight Generators, dumping of grey water on the street, public urination on our property, storage of connected propane tanks on their sides/on the street/under the RVs, human feces in our trash cans on pickup day, loud pumping of holding tanks at 11:00pm, operation of businesses out of the RV's, distribution of hand exchanged questionable items between RV owners and a series of passing/stopping cars , storage of items next to the RV's, blocking part of the sidewalk, lack of street sweeping, blocking of line of sight between our drive exit and Charleston intersection (I have almost been hit 3 times), blocking of line of sight of the stop sign at Fabian & San Antonio, and the forcing of cyclist and scooter riders to almost hug the center yellow line due to a lack of safe roadway space to ride in. Many of us did not realize that under Palo Alto zoning residential areas like ours on Fabian Way, are not subject to the same protections of the rich residential areas. We thought it was because of the historical and continued preference of favoring North Palo Alto at the expense of those of us living in South Palo Alto. The public recognition of Council Member Reckdahl and Council Member Burt that all residential areas, regardless of traditional residential, PC, and mixed use zoning need to be treated the same was refreshing and encouraging. What is the timeline for this equalization to take place? Is this a 3 month, 12 month, 24 month, etc process? We are just trying to understand how long the intentional discrimination will continue. Thank you for your attention. Best Regards, Scott Petersen On Mon, Aug 24, 2026 at 4:56 PM Manu Kumar <manu@k9ventures.com> wrote: City Council, The proposal you're considering is ridiculous. That's the only word I have to describe it. It is shocking that the city and the council does not understand itsresponsibility to residents and businesses and opts to prioritize people whoeither are sometimes not from Palo Alto, do not pay taxes in Palo Alto, or insome cases just use Palo Alto as the parking lot for their RVs (that they don't live in, it's free parking and storage)! No city should need to look like the way Palo Alto looks with these RVs parked on our streets and no businesses or residents should have to deal with this.The fact that we have to, is a clear indication of how staff and council arefailing in their duties and not serving Palo Alto Residents, Businesses, andtaxpayers. I spent 2-years dealing with a drug addicted RV-dweller parked in front of my office, abusing and antagonizing employees, trespassing on our property, parking on our space, conducting repairs and maintenance on our property, nothing. Palo Alto police came by multiple times and said their nice words, but were ineffective at actually doing anything. Ultimately he was arrested by Mountain View PD. Staff and council's attempts at resolving this have been misdirected and youall continue to waste taxpayer dollars in the process. NO to RVs on our streets. And a STRONG NO to issuing "permits" for RVs to park on our streets. Manu Kumar927 Industrial AvePalo Alto On Sun, Aug 23, 2026 at 12:25 AM Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> wrote: Palo Alto City Council, OSV Ad Hoc Committee, and Concerned Residents and Businesses, I thought it might be beneficial to do one more OSV count before the August 24th City Council Meeting where the OSV Phase II Plan will be discussed. I’m sorry to report that our count is holding pretty static at 140-ish. As mentioned earlier we have seen the numbers fall from when I first started counting in October 2025 from 220 to the current number of 140. A reduction of 36%, but 140 OSVs on our streets is still way more than the community would like to see. And way too many if they happen to be parked in front of your residence or business. Aside from the count the climate on the streets is deteriorating. I’ve seen video of vandals destroying property, stealing electricity, and now using intimidation by those who feel emboldened by their tenure on our streets. This has to stop! As I take my count on the 21 affected streets I have increasingly been yelled at by those who think they have a right to squat on our streets because the City has been reluctant to take a hard stand to protect the hard- working tax-paying residents and businesses that fund the basic operations of this City. Please see the last image of this message to understand how this situation has devolved into an almost Blackboard Jungle atmosphere. And if you are unfamiliar with the 1955 film Blackboard Jungle - Google it! When I mentioned in one of my earlier e-mails that I was followed for about three blocks after walking East Meadow Circle with my wife a resident of condominiums on East Meadow Circle sent me the following the comment - - "I beg you to please be careful. None of us walk on East Meadow any longer. It is not safe. Please don’t go there especially with your wife.” Is this the Palo Alto that we want? And since we are on the movie theme who can forget the line “ I’m Mad As Hell and I’n Not Going to Take it Anymore,” from the movie “Network” in 1976. I’m very happy to know that an increasing portion of our community is understanding the consequences of an overly accommodating City government and are focussed on demanding that we do not want OSVs in our residential neighborhoods and business/commercial districts. The current situation is intolerable and we want a sea change for the better. We want to see a City government that prioritizes the needs of the community - that prioritizes the needs of its constituents, the very people that put every council member in their position! The time is Now to make this right. Let’s seize the opportunity! Regards, Bob Marinaro E. San Antonio Rd Next to Homekey Transitional Housing Facility (8/21/26). No Parking Zone. I called it in yesterday and it was gone today. East Meadow Circle in front of Echelon Townhomes East Meadow Circle in front of Google Buildings East Meadow Circle - - BMW Motorcycles (Average cost $19,500). This guy in the window was yelling at the top of his lungs as I was riding away. These folks feel so entitled. They have been allowed to stay here unfettered for so long that they feel as though they have a right to be here and I am intruding on their domain! Fabian Way Transport Street - - One of the ways businesses have to keep the OSVs from taking up their valued parking Elwell Ct. Faber Places - - 15 OSVs on a short street segment Embarcadero Way - - 11 OSVs on a short street segment Colorado Ave. adjacent to Greer Park Mitchell Park Parking Lot - - The guy in the van has been here forever and the RV is new this weekend I believe Mitchell Park Parking Lot - - Lets get these OSVs out of our parks! Matadero Ave, - - Ventura Neighbors have complained forever but nothing happens Orinda St. - - Ventura Neighbors have complained forever but nothing happens Ash St - - Bad Actor #1 and a handful of his 12-ish vehicles in the Ventura Neighborhood Portage Ave. - - Bad Actor #1 and a handful of his 12-ish vehicles in the Ventura Neighborhood Page Mill - - Bad Actor #1 and a handful of his 12-ish vehicles in the Ventura Neighborhood Sheridan Ave. - - Bad Actor #1 and a handful of his 12-ish vehicles in the Ventura Neighborhood Palo Alto Daily Post Police Blotter - - Friday 8/21/26 -- Jeanette Baldwin From:JEANETTE BALDWIN To:CeCi Kettendorf Cc:Scott E Petersen; Manu Kumar; Council, City; Robert Marinaro; 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; Alina Martinez; Micah Murphy; Danielle Dunne; David Famero; Carly Lake; Sandy Freschi; Theron Bullman; Dave Stellman; Dave Stellman; Steve Wong; Marguerite Poyatos; 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; 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; Christian Hothem; Aditya Jain; Anjali Jain; Jenny Lee; Arun Bodapati; Soumya Bodapati; Yingxi Liu; Susan Dorsky; Dave Price; Elaine Goodman; Brandon Cartwright; Clark Penado; Francescarael Rael; Kaye Crawford; Lena Yarovaya; Kenneth Russell; Jon Hellesoe; Ryan Judd; Evan Reade; Rosalie Cook; Kay Satit; Sooji Nam Subject:Re: Palo Alto"s Ongoing OSV Crisis - - Bob"s Pre-Council Meeting Count (8/22/26) Date:Tuesday, August 25, 2026 11:09:34 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Hi all, I completely agree with CeCi and the other neighbors who have spoken out. It has become abundantly clear that the City Council is not listening to or representing its constituents. If our elected officials refuse to prioritize the safety and well-being of the residents and businesses who fund this city, it is time to consider a recall. Perhaps the Mayor and the council members will start making real progress on this crisis if their positions are on the line—or the next administration will. Best regards, Jeanette Baldwin On Tue, Aug 25, 2026 at 10:57 AM CeCi Kettendorf <cecihome@gmail.com> wrote: I wanted to laugh out loud last night at the Council hearing about OSVs, when the staff member acknowledged to Councilman Pat Burt that they HAD NO DATA as to whom was living in the OSVs! She said, incredibly, that they had knocked on the windows and doors but "no one would talk to them." Really?!!!! manager, a homeless advocate with them? Safety in numbers? Bob gathered more info than the staff has in the past six months!!!!! They are highly paid! Shikada has 13 staff to assist him. Might he have given them guidance? So after six months, city staff does not know how many adults and children live in the vans, how many have a home outside of Palo Alto, how many are employed, where they are employed, how many have mental illness, how many are substance abusers, how many would agree to be moved or accept help at all, how many want to stay in their vans, how many have registered or insured vehicles ( could the staff check their license plates to see if they are registered n a nearby city with an address!?). Are the boats, motorcycles, and sports cars on Meadow Circle registered? Could staffDO THEIR JOB and gather the data they were instructed to bring forward???? So the staff has done............nothing of substance. Fire them all.! I have gone to many a council meeting wherein staff could not answer questions posed by the Council Members. Fire half of the thirteen staff assistants to Shikada and dedicate the money towards hiring firefighters for south Palo Alto. We get the bad stuff always! A closed fire station and OSVs! We should recall the Mayor and Julie Lythcott Haimes for their lack of action on the OSVs and frank support for the latter. I will help anyone who wants to do so. CeCi Kettendof On Tue, Aug 25, 2026 at 8:05 AM Scott E Petersen <scottepetersen@gmail.com> wrote: Greetings, I wanted to thank Council Member Keith Reckdahl from last night's council meeting for explaining why we with residential units on Fabian Way between E Charleston & San Antonio have been extensively ignored in our repeated requests to address the months long/years long RV camping issues. In addition to the blight of the RV's themselves, and the regular out of town parking of trucking (who are not allow to park on the streets of their own towns), we have also requested the city address the RV connected health and safety issues of; the running of Midnight Generators, dumping of grey water on the street, public urination on our property, storage of connected propane tanks on their sides/on the street/under the RVs, human feces in our trash cans on pickup day, loud pumping of holding tanks at 11:00pm, operation of businesses out of the RV's, distribution of hand exchanged questionable items between RV owners and a series of passing/stopping cars , storage of items next to the RV's, blocking part of the sidewalk, lack of street sweeping, blocking of line of sight between our drive exit and Charleston intersection (I have almost been hit 3 times), blocking of line of sight of the stop sign at Fabian & San Antonio, and the forcing of cyclist and scooter riders to almost hug the center yellow line due to a lack of safe roadway space to ride in. Many of us did not realize that under Palo Alto zoning residential areas like ours on Fabian Way, are not subject to the same protections of the rich residential areas. We thought it was because of the historical and continued preference of favoring North Palo Alto at the expense of those of us living in South Palo Alto. The public recognition of Council Member Reckdahl and Council Member Burt that all residential areas, regardless of traditional residential, PC, and mixed use zoning need to be treated the same was refreshing and encouraging. What is the timeline for this equalization to take place? Is this a 3 month, 12 month, 24 month, etc process? We are just trying to understand how long the intentional discrimination will continue. Thank you for your attention. Best Regards, Scott Petersen On Mon, Aug 24, 2026 at 4:56 PM Manu Kumar <manu@k9ventures.com> wrote: City Council, The proposal you're considering is ridiculous. That's the only word I have todescribe it. It is shocking that the city and the council does not understand its responsibility to residents and businesses and opts to prioritize people who either are sometimes not from Palo Alto, do not pay taxes in Palo Alto, or in somecases just use Palo Alto as the parking lot for their RVs (that they don't live in,it's free parking and storage)! No city should need to look like the way Palo Alto looks with these RVs parkedon our streets and no businesses or residents should have to deal with this. Thefact that we have to, is a clear indication of how staff and council are failing in their duties and not serving Palo Alto Residents, Businesses, and taxpayers. I spent 2-years dealing with a drug addicted RV-dweller parked in front of myoffice, abusing and antagonizing employees, trespassing on our property,parking on our space, conducting repairs and maintenance on our property,vandalizing our security cameras, stealing them and more. Palo Alto didnothing. Palo Alto police came by multiple times and said their nice words, butwere ineffective at actually doing anything. Ultimately he was arrested byMountain View PD. Staff and council's attempts at resolving this have been misdirected and you all continue to waste taxpayer dollars in the process. NO to RVs on our streets. And a STRONG NO to issuing "permits" for RVs to park on our streets. Manu Kumar927 Industrial AvePalo Alto On Sun, Aug 23, 2026 at 12:25 AM Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> wrote: Palo Alto City Council, OSV Ad Hoc Committee, and Concerned Residents and Businesses, I thought it might be beneficial to do one more OSV count before the August 24th City Council Meeting where the OSV Phase II Plan will be discussed. I’m sorry to report that our count is holding pretty static at 140-ish. As mentioned earlier we have seen the numbers fall from when I first started counting in October 2025 from 220 to the current number of 140. A reduction of 36%, but 140 OSVs on our streets is still way more than the community would like to see. And way too many if they happen to be parked in front of your residence or business. Aside from the count the climate on the streets is deteriorating. I’ve seen video of vandals destroying property, stealing electricity, and now using intimidation by those who feel emboldened by their tenure on our streets. This has to stop! As I take my count on the 21 affected streets I have increasingly been yelled at by those who think they have a right to squat on our streets because the City has been reluctant to take a hard stand to protect the hard-working tax-paying residents and businesses that fund the basic operations of this City. Please see the last image of this message to understand how this situation has devolved into an almost Blackboard Jungle atmosphere. And if you are unfamiliar with the 1955 film Blackboard Jungle - Google it! When I mentioned in one of my earlier e-mails that I was followed for about three blocks after walking East Meadow Circle with my wife a resident of condominiums on East Meadow Circle sent me the following the comment - - "I beg you to please be careful. None of us walk on East Meadow any longer. It is not safe. Please don’t go there especially with your wife.” Is this the Palo Alto that we want? And since we are on the movie theme who can forget the line “ I’m Mad As Hell and I’n Not Going to Take it Anymore,” from the movie “Network” in 1976. I’m very happy to know that an increasing portion of our community is understanding the consequences of an overly accommodating City government and are focussed on demanding that we do not want OSVs in our residential neighborhoods and business/commercial districts. The current situation is intolerable and we want a sea change for the better. We want to see a City government that prioritizes the needs of the community - that prioritizes the needs of its constituents, the very people that put every council member in their position! The time is Now to make this right. Let’s seize the opportunity! Regards, Bob Marinaro E. San Antonio Rd Next to Homekey Transitional Housing Facility (8/21/26). No Parking Zone. I called it in yesterday and it was gone today. East Meadow Circle in front of Echelon Townhomes East Meadow Circle in front of Google Buildings East Meadow Circle - - BMW Motorcycles (Average cost $19,500). This guy in the window was yelling at the top of his lungs as I was riding away. These folks feel so entitled. They have been allowed to stay here unfettered for so long that they feel as though they have a right to be here and I am intruding on their domain! Fabian Way Transport Street - - One of the ways businesses have to keep the OSVs from taking up their valued parking Elwell Ct. Faber Places - - 15 OSVs on a short street segment Embarcadero Way - - 11 OSVs on a short street segment Colorado Ave. adjacent to Greer Park Mitchell Park Parking Lot - - The guy in the van has been here forever and the RV is new this weekend I believe Mitchell Park Parking Lot - - Lets get these OSVs out of our parks! Matadero Ave, - - Ventura Neighbors have complained forever but nothing happens Orinda St. - - Ventura Neighbors have complained forever but nothing happens Ash St - - Bad Actor #1 and a handful of his 12-ish vehicles in the Ventura Neighborhood Portage Ave. - - Bad Actor #1 and a handful of his 12-ish vehicles in the Ventura Neighborhood Page Mill - - Bad Actor #1 and a handful of his 12-ish vehicles in the Ventura Neighborhood Sheridan Ave. - - Bad Actor #1 and a handful of his 12-ish vehicles in the Ventura Neighborhood Palo Alto Daily Post Police Blotter - - Friday 8/21/26 -- Jeanette Baldwin From:Nancy Ellickson To:CeCi Kettendorf Cc:Scott E Petersen; Manu Kumar; Council, City; Robert Marinaro; 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; 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; 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; 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; Christian Hothem; Aditya Jain; Anjali Jain; Jenny Lee; Arun Bodapati; Soumya Bodapati; Yingxi Liu; Susan Dorsky; Dave Price; Elaine Goodman; Brandon Cartwright; Clark Penado; Francescarael Rael; Kaye Crawford; Lena Yarovaya; Kenneth Russell; Jon Hellesoe; Ryan Judd; Evan Reade; Rosalie Cook; Kay Satit; Sooji Nam Subject:Re: Palo Alto"s Ongoing OSV Crisis - - Bob"s Pre-Council Meeting Count (8/22/26) Date:Tuesday, August 25, 2026 11:08:12 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Important to note that Julie’s term ends in December 2026 and she’s not running again. I agree—the lack of data presented by staff is stunning. This should be a reason to put a stop to council moving forward on, at a minimum, Option 2. Nancy Ellickson E: nellickson@gmail.com M: 650-245-1012 On Tue, Aug 25, 2026 at 10:57 AM CeCi Kettendorf <cecihome@gmail.com> wrote: I wanted to laugh out loud last night at the Council hearing about OSVs, when the staff member acknowledged to Councilman Pat Burt that they HAD NO DATA as to whom was living in the OSVs! She said, incredibly, that they had knocked on the windows and doors but "no one would talk to them." Really?!!!! Might they have taken a police officer, a social worker, code enforcement personnel, a case manager, a homeless advocate with them? Safety in numbers? Bob gathered more info than the staff has in the past six months!!!!! They are highly paid! Shikada has 13 staff to assist him. Might he have given them guidance? how many have a home outside of Palo Alto, how many are employed, where they are employed, how many have mental illness, how many are substance abusers, how many would agree to be moved or accept help at all, how many want to stay in their vans, how many have registered or insured vehicles ( could the staff check their license plates to see if they are registered n a nearby city with an address!?). Are the boats, motorcycles, and sports cars on Meadow Circle registered? Could staffDO THEIR JOB and gather the data they were instructed to bring forward???? So the staff has done............nothing of substance. Fire them all.! I have gone to many a council meeting wherein staff could not answer questions posed by the Council Members. Fire half of the thirteen staff assistants to Shikada and dedicate the money towards hiring firefighters for south Palo Alto. We get the bad stuff always! A closed fire station and OSVs! We should recall the Mayor and Julie Lythcott Haimes for their lack of action on the OSVs and frank support for the latter. I will help anyone who wants to do so. CeCi Kettendof On Tue, Aug 25, 2026 at 8:05 AM Scott E Petersen <scottepetersen@gmail.com> wrote: Greetings, I wanted to thank Council Member Keith Reckdahl from last night's council meeting for explaining why we with residential units on Fabian Way between E Charleston & San Antonio have been extensively ignored in our repeated requests to address the months long/years long RV camping issues. In addition to the blight of the RV's themselves, and the regular out of town parking of trucking (who are not allow to park on the streets of their own towns), we have also requested the city address the RV connected health and safety issues of; the running of Midnight Generators, dumping of grey water on the street, public urination on our property, storage of connected propane tanks on their sides/on the street/under the RVs, human feces in our trash cans on pickup day, loud pumping of holding tanks at 11:00pm, operation of businesses out of the RV's, distribution of hand exchanged questionable items between RV owners and a series of passing/stopping cars , storage of items next to the RV's, blocking part of the sidewalk, lack of street sweeping, blocking of line of sight between our drive exit and Charleston intersection (I have almost been hit 3 times), blocking of line of sight of the stop sign at Fabian & San Antonio, and the forcing of cyclist and scooter riders to almost hug the center yellow line due to a lack of safe roadway space to ride in. Many of us did not realize that under Palo Alto zoning residential areas like ours on Fabian Way, are not subject to the same protections of the rich residential areas. We thought it was because of the historical and continued preference of favoring North Palo Alto at the expense of those of us living in South Palo Alto. The public recognition of Council Member Reckdahl and Council Member Burt that all residential areas, regardless of traditional residential, PC, and mixed use zoning need to be treated the same was refreshing and encouraging. What is the timeline for this equalization to take place? Is this a 3 month, 12 month, 24 month, etc process? We are just trying to understand how long the intentional discrimination will continue. Thank you for your attention. Best Regards, Scott Petersen On Mon, Aug 24, 2026 at 4:56 PM Manu Kumar <manu@k9ventures.com> wrote: City Council, The proposal you're considering is ridiculous. That's the only word I have todescribe it. It is shocking that the city and the council does not understand its responsibility to residents and businesses and opts to prioritize people who either are sometimes not from Palo Alto, do not pay taxes in Palo Alto, or in somecases just use Palo Alto as the parking lot for their RVs (that they don't live in,it's free parking and storage)! No city should need to look like the way Palo Alto looks with these RVs parkedon our streets and no businesses or residents should have to deal with this. Thefact that we have to, is a clear indication of how staff and council are failing in their duties and not serving Palo Alto Residents, Businesses, and taxpayers. I spent 2-years dealing with a drug addicted RV-dweller parked in front of myoffice, abusing and antagonizing employees, trespassing on our property,parking on our space, conducting repairs and maintenance on our property,vandalizing our security cameras, stealing them and more. Palo Alto didnothing. Palo Alto police came by multiple times and said their nice words, butwere ineffective at actually doing anything. Ultimately he was arrested byMountain View PD. Staff and council's attempts at resolving this have been misdirected and you all continue to waste taxpayer dollars in the process. NO to RVs on our streets. And a STRONG NO to issuing "permits" for RVs topark on our streets. Manu Kumar927 Industrial Ave Palo Alto On Sun, Aug 23, 2026 at 12:25 AM Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> wrote: Palo Alto City Council, OSV Ad Hoc Committee, and Concerned Residents and Businesses, I thought it might be beneficial to do one more OSV count before the August 24th City Council Meeting where the OSV Phase II Plan will be discussed. I’m sorry to report that our count is holding pretty static at 140-ish. As mentioned earlier we have seen the numbers fall from when I first started counting in October 2025 from 220 to the current number of 140. A reduction of 36%, but 140 OSVs on our streets is still way more than the community would like to see. And way too many if they happen to be parked in front of your residence or business. Aside from the count the climate on the streets is deteriorating. I’ve seen video of vandals destroying property, stealing electricity, and now using intimidation by those who feel emboldened by their tenure on our streets. This has to stop! As I take my count on the 21 affected streets I have increasingly been yelled at by those who think they have a right to squat on our streets because the City has been reluctant to take a hard stand to protect the hard-working tax-paying residents and businesses that fund the basic operations of this City. Please see the last image of this message to understand how this situation has devolved into an almost Blackboard Jungle atmosphere. And if you are unfamiliar with the 1955 film Blackboard Jungle - Google it! When I mentioned in one of my earlier e-mails that I was followed for about three blocks after walking East Meadow Circle with my wife a resident of condominiums on East Meadow Circle sent me the following the comment - - "I beg you to please be careful. None of us walk on East Meadow any longer. It is not safe. Please don’t go there especially with your wife.” Is this the Palo Alto that we want? And since we are on the movie theme who can forget the line “ I’m Mad As Hell and I’n Not Going to Take it Anymore,” from the movie “Network” in 1976. I’m very happy to know that an increasing portion of our community is understanding the consequences of an overly accommodating City government and are focussed on demanding that we do not want OSVs in our residential neighborhoods and business/commercial districts. The current situation is intolerable and we want a sea change for the better. We want to see a City government that prioritizes the needs of the community - that prioritizes the needs of its constituents, the very people that put every council member in their position! The time is Now to make this right. Let’s seize the opportunity! Regards, Bob Marinaro E. San Antonio Rd Next to Homekey Transitional Housing Facility (8/21/26). No Parking Zone. I called it in yesterday and it was gone today. East Meadow Circle in front of Echelon Townhomes East Meadow Circle in front of Google Buildings East Meadow Circle - - BMW Motorcycles (Average cost $19,500). This guy in the window was yelling at the top of his lungs as I was riding away. These folks feel so entitled. They have been allowed to stay here unfettered for so long that they feel as though they have a right to be here and I am intruding on their domain! Fabian Way Transport Street - - One of the ways businesses have to keep the OSVs from taking up their valued parking Elwell Ct. Faber Places - - 15 OSVs on a short street segment Embarcadero Way - - 11 OSVs on a short street segment Colorado Ave. adjacent to Greer Park Mitchell Park Parking Lot - - The guy in the van has been here forever and the RV is new this weekend I believe Mitchell Park Parking Lot - - Lets get these OSVs out of our parks! Matadero Ave, - - Ventura Neighbors have complained forever but nothing happens Orinda St. - - Ventura Neighbors have complained forever but nothing happens Ash St - - Bad Actor #1 and a handful of his 12-ish vehicles in the Ventura Neighborhood Portage Ave. - - Bad Actor #1 and a handful of his 12-ish vehicles in the Ventura Neighborhood Page Mill - - Bad Actor #1 and a handful of his 12-ish vehicles in the Ventura Neighborhood Sheridan Ave. - - Bad Actor #1 and a handful of his 12-ish vehicles in the Ventura Neighborhood Palo Alto Daily Post Police Blotter - - Friday 8/21/26 From:CeCi Kettendorf To:Jenny Lee Cc:Penny Brennan; Council, City; Robert Marinaro; 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; 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; 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; 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; Christian Hothem; Aditya Jain; Anjali Jain; Arun Bodapati; Soumya Bodapati; Yingxi Liu; Susan Dorsky; Dave Price; Elaine Goodman; Brandon Cartwright; Clark Penado; Francescarael Rael; Kaye Crawford; Lena Yarovaya; Kenneth Russell; Jon Hellesoe; Ryan Judd; Evan Reade; Rosalie Cook; Kay Satit; Sooji Nam; Scott Petersen; Manu Kumar; mag Subject:Re: Last Night"s City Council Meeting Date:Tuesday, August 25, 2026 11:05:17 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Would a member of the Echelon condos respond to me? We have been trying to reach out to you, as you are so heavily impacted by the vans across from you there. Our neighborhood association just voted on this issue. We adjoin you from Louis forward. I would like to connect with you as a group and compare notes. Ceci Kettendorf AdobeMeadow Neighborhood Association member On Tue, Aug 25, 2026 at 10:43 AM Jenny Lee <jenny.lee.jen@gmail.com> wrote: Thank you, Penny & all others, for taking the time to sit through all those hours to help better our community.. I would say your "blood is boiling” is probably an understatement. I watched virtually & kept hearing the council members talk about being “data-driven,” yet they seemed to completely disregard the very real, firsthand data being shared through people’s voices—only to have those voices, unfortunately and incredibly disrespectfully, muted in the interest of "time". It was honestly infuriating to watch & even more so infuriating to experience everyday living in this mess. Pls Pls help address & correct this situation by taking a drastic measure ASAP. Thank you, Jenny Lee Echelon neighborhood On Tue, Aug 25, 2026 at 10:10 AM Penny Brennan <plynnbrennan@gmail.com> wrote: Dear Palo Alto City Council, My blood is boiling this morning. More than 60 members of the Palo Alto community showed up at last night’s City Council meeting to provide public comment on staff- proposed OSV pilot programs. Most of them, including myself, had carefully prepared our comments ahead of the meeting, with the assumption that we would likely be provided only two minutes to share our thoughts. All of us patiently waited through the meeting for the arrival of the 10th, OSV-related agenda item, then through the staff report and lengthy Council discussion, for our turn to make public comments. Then the Mayor announced that we would be allowed exactly 1 minute, and groups a total of 5 minutes, to provide our comments. In effect, this stricture muzzled public comment on the proposed pilot programs. Almost all the speakers were cut off before they could fully articulate their prepared thoughts, so we could not understand what they were trying to say. People began dropping out of the speakers’ queue, presumably because they realized the futility of trying to convey their thoughts in one minute. Audio malfunction in the chambers made the one- minute comments of zoom participants virtually unintelligible. In essence, there was no real public comment on the OSV agenda item last night. The last-minute imposition of one- and five-minute limits on comments conveyed a real disregard for our time and disrespect for our opinions. The motion you passed following the “public comments” on the OSV pilots clearly demonstrated that, no, you absolutely could not and did not hear us last night. Sincerely, Penny Brennan, PhD Ventura Neighborhood From:CeCi Kettendorf To:Scott E Petersen Cc:Manu Kumar; Council, City; Robert Marinaro; 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; 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; 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; Christian Hothem; Aditya Jain; Anjali Jain; Jenny Lee; Arun Bodapati; Soumya Bodapati; Yingxi Liu; Susan Dorsky; Dave Price; Elaine Goodman; Brandon Cartwright; Clark Penado; Francescarael Rael; Kaye Crawford; Lena Yarovaya; Kenneth Russell; Jon Hellesoe; Ryan Judd; Evan Reade; Rosalie Cook; Kay Satit; Sooji Nam Subject:Re: Palo Alto"s Ongoing OSV Crisis - - Bob"s Pre-Council Meeting Count (8/22/26) Date:Tuesday, August 25, 2026 10:57:40 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. I wanted to laugh out loud last night at the Council hearing about OSVs, when the staff member acknowledged to Councilman Pat Burt that they HAD NO DATA as to whom was living in the OSVs! She said, incredibly, that they had knocked on the windows and doors but "no one would talk to them." Really?!!!! Might they have taken a police officer, a social worker, code enforcement personnel, a case manager, a homeless advocate with them? Safety in numbers? Bob gathered more info than the staff has in the past six months!!!!! They are highly paid! Shikada has 13 staff to assist him. Might he have given them guidance? So after six months, city staff does not know how many adults and children live in the vans, how many have a home outside of Palo Alto, how many are employed, where they are employed, how many have mental illness, how many are substance abusers, how many would agree to be moved or accept help at all, how many want to stay in their vans, how many have registered or insured vehicles ( could the staff check their license plates to see if they are registered n a nearby city with an address!?). Are the boats, motorcycles, and sports cars on Meadow Circle registered? Could staffDO THEIR JOB and gather the data they were instructed to bring forward???? So the staff has done............nothing of substance. Fire them all.! I have gone to many a Fire half of the thirteen staff assistants to Shikada and dedicate the money towards hiring firefighters for south Palo Alto. We get the bad stuff always! A closed fire station and OSVs! We should recall the Mayor and Julie Lythcott Haimes for their lack of action on the OSVs and frank support for the latter. I will help anyone who wants to do so. CeCi Kettendof On Tue, Aug 25, 2026 at 8:05 AM Scott E Petersen <scottepetersen@gmail.com> wrote: Greetings, I wanted to thank Council Member Keith Reckdahl from last night's council meeting for explaining why we with residential units on Fabian Way between E Charleston & San Antonio have been extensively ignored in our repeated requests to address the months long/years long RV camping issues. In addition to the blight of the RV's themselves, and the regular out of town parking of trucking (who are not allow to park on the streets of their own towns), we have also requested the city address the RV connected health and safety issues of; the running of Midnight Generators, dumping of grey water on the street, public urination on our property, storage of connected propane tanks on their sides/on the street/under the RVs, human feces in our trash cans on pickup day, loud pumping of holding tanks at 11:00pm, operation of businesses out of the RV's, distribution of hand exchanged questionable items between RV owners and a series of passing/stopping cars , storage of items next to the RV's, blocking part of the sidewalk, lack of street sweeping, blocking of line of sight between our drive exit and Charleston intersection (I have almost been hit 3 times), blocking of line of sight of the stop sign at Fabian & San Antonio, and the forcing of cyclist and scooter riders to almost hug the center yellow line due to a lack of safe roadway space to ride in. Many of us did not realize that under Palo Alto zoning residential areas like ours on Fabian Way, are not subject to the same protections of the rich residential areas. We thought it was because of the historical and continued preference of favoring North Palo Alto at the expense of those of us living in South Palo Alto. The public recognition of Council Member Reckdahl and Council Member Burt that all residential areas, regardless of traditional residential, PC, and mixed use zoning need to be treated the same was refreshing and encouraging. What is the timeline for this equalization to take place? Is this a 3 month, 12 month, 24 month, etc process? We are just trying to understand how long the intentional discrimination will continue. Best Regards, Scott Petersen On Mon, Aug 24, 2026 at 4:56 PM Manu Kumar <manu@k9ventures.com> wrote: City Council, The proposal you're considering is ridiculous. That's the only word I have todescribe it. It is shocking that the city and the council does not understand its responsibility to residents and businesses and opts to prioritize people who either are sometimes not from Palo Alto, do not pay taxes in Palo Alto, or in somecases just use Palo Alto as the parking lot for their RVs (that they don't live in, it'sfree parking and storage)! No city should need to look like the way Palo Alto looks with these RVs parked onour streets and no businesses or residents should have to deal with this. The factthat we have to, is a clear indication of how staff and council are failing in their duties and not serving Palo Alto Residents, Businesses, and taxpayers. I spent 2-years dealing with a drug addicted RV-dweller parked in front of myoffice, abusing and antagonizing employees, trespassing on our property, parkingon our space, conducting repairs and maintenance on our property, vandalizingour security cameras, stealing them and more. Palo Alto did nothing. Palo Altopolice came by multiple times and said their nice words, but were ineffective atactually doing anything. Ultimately he was arrested by Mountain View PD. Staff and council's attempts at resolving this have been misdirected and you all continue to waste taxpayer dollars in the process. NO to RVs on our streets. And a STRONG NO to issuing "permits" for RVs to parkon our streets. Manu Kumar927 Industrial AvePalo Alto On Sun, Aug 23, 2026 at 12:25 AM Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> wrote: Palo Alto City Council, OSV Ad Hoc Committee, and Concerned Residents and Businesses, I thought it might be beneficial to do one more OSV count before the August 24th City Council Meeting where the OSV Phase II Plan will be discussed. I’m sorry to report that our count is holding pretty static at 140-ish. As mentioned earlier we have seen the numbers fall from when I first started counting in October 2025 from 220 to the current number of 140. A reduction of 36%, but 140 OSVs on our streets is still way more than the community would like to see. And way too many if they happen to be parked in front of your residence or business. Aside from the count the climate on the streets is deteriorating. I’ve seen video of vandals destroying property, stealing electricity, and now using intimidation by those who feel emboldened by their tenure on our streets. This has to stop! As I take my count on the 21 affected streets I have increasingly been yelled at by those who think they have a right to squat on our streets because the City has been reluctant to take a hard stand to protect the hard-working tax-paying residents and businesses that fund the basic operations of this City. Please see the last image of this message to understand how this situation has devolved into an almost Blackboard Jungle atmosphere. And if you are unfamiliar with the 1955 film Blackboard Jungle - Google it! When I mentioned in one of my earlier e-mails that I was followed for about three blocks after walking East Meadow Circle with my wife a resident of condominiums on East Meadow Circle sent me the following the comment - - "I beg you to please be careful. None of us walk on East Meadow any longer. It is not safe. Please don’t go there especially with your wife.” Is this the Palo Alto that we want? And since we are on the movie theme who can forget the line “ I’m Mad As Hell and I’n Not Going to Take it Anymore,” from the movie “Network” in 1976. I’m very happy to know that an increasing portion of our community is understanding the consequences of an overly accommodating City government and are focussed on demanding that we do not want OSVs in our residential neighborhoods and business/commercial districts. The current situation is intolerable and we want a sea change for the better. We want to see a City government that prioritizes the needs of the community - that prioritizes the needs of its constituents, the very people that put every council member in their position! The time is Now to make this right. Let’s seize the opportunity! Regards, Bob Marinaro E. San Antonio Rd Next to Homekey Transitional Housing Facility (8/21/26). No Parking Zone. I called it in yesterday and it was gone today. East Meadow Circle in front of Echelon Townhomes East Meadow Circle in front of Google Buildings East Meadow Circle - - BMW Motorcycles (Average cost $19,500). This guy in the window was yelling at the top of his lungs as I was riding away. These folks feel so entitled. They have been allowed to stay here unfettered for so long that they feel as though they have a right to be here and I am intruding on their domain! Fabian Way Transport Street - - One of the ways businesses have to keep the OSVs from taking up their valued parking Elwell Ct. Faber Places - - 15 OSVs on a short street segment Embarcadero Way - - 11 OSVs on a short street segment Colorado Ave. adjacent to Greer Park Mitchell Park Parking Lot - - The guy in the van has been here forever and the RV is new this weekend I believe Mitchell Park Parking Lot - - Lets get these OSVs out of our parks! Matadero Ave, - - Ventura Neighbors have complained forever but nothing happens Orinda St. - - Ventura Neighbors have complained forever but nothing happens Ash St - - Bad Actor #1 and a handful of his 12-ish vehicles in the Ventura Neighborhood Portage Ave. - - Bad Actor #1 and a handful of his 12-ish vehicles in the Ventura Neighborhood Page Mill - - Bad Actor #1 and a handful of his 12-ish vehicles in the Ventura Neighborhood Sheridan Ave. - - Bad Actor #1 and a handful of his 12-ish vehicles in the Ventura Neighborhood Palo Alto Daily Post Police Blotter - - Friday 8/21/26 From:Raysan Goncalves To:Veenker, Vicki Cc:Council, City Subject:Please Reconsider the RV Policy: A Child’s Future Is at Stake.’ Date:Tuesday, August 25, 2026 10:45:57 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i My name is Raysan, and I am writing on behalf of my husband, our six-year-old daughter Cecília, and other families who will be directly affected by the decision made yesterday. We respectfully ask you to hear the voices of the families who will live with the consequences of this policy. We understand that the City is trying to address the concerns of residents, and we recognize these decisions are difficult. However, behind every RV, there is a different story. Our family is not defined by where we live, but by how we live, the values we teach our daughter, and the efforts we make every day to build a better future. We have lived in Palo Alto for more than three years. During that time, we have worked, studied, respected our neighbors, and done everything we can to contribute positively to this community. Whenever possible, I have volunteered at Palo Verde Elementary School because I believe parents should be involved in their children’s education and in the community where they live. Our daughter, Cecília, attends Palo Verde Elementary School. She has friends here, and this is the community she knows as home. She is our greatest priority. She is healthy, well-cared for, clean, well-fed, and deeply loved. Although we live in a motorhome, she has a safe, clean, and stable home. She has a comfortable place to sleep, nutritious food every day, and a place to study, play, and grow. In every way that matters, she is a child just like any other child living in a traditional home. During yesterday’s meeting, it was stated that we are parked in a residential neighborhood. However, that description does not accurately reflect where we live. At the entrance to our street, there is a small apartment complex, but beyond that point, where the RVs are parked, the area is occupied by businesses, not homes. We respectfully ask that decisions affecting families like ours be based on accurate and precise information. We had planned to speak at yesterday’s meeting and share our family’s story. We waited as long as we could because we wanted our voices to be heard. However, by the time it would have been our turn to speak, it was already around10 PM. Our six-year-old daughter had school the next morning, and as parents, we had to put her well-being first. We made the difficult decision to leave so she could get the rest she needed. As a result, we never had the opportunity to share our story. We hope you will still take the time to hear our story through this letter. Like many families, we are doing everything we can to move forward. We have applied for moderate-income housing several times because we want a permanent home for our family. Unfortunately, despite our efforts, we have not been selected. We continue applying whenever opportunities become available. We have also been offered shelter placements. We appreciate that these programs exist and help many people. However, after carefully considering our daughter’s well-being, we did not believe that a shared shelter environment would provide the stability and privacy we believe are best for a six-year-old child. As parents, every decision we make is based on what we believe is in her best interest. We are not asking for special treatment. We are asking for fair solutions that will allow us to remain part of this community with dignity and security. Our daughter, like every other child, deserves safety, stability, and the opportunity to grow up in the community she calls home. We respectfully ask you to reconsider this policy or create enough safe and legal alternatives so that responsible families with children are not forced into homelessness. Thank you for your time, your attention, and for considering our family’s story. Sincerely, Raysan Palo Alto Resident We are attaching two photos so that you and the council can get to know a bit more about our reality. The first one shows our family, and the second portrays the street where we live. We hope this helps provide a context for our daily life and our 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:Jenny Lee To:Penny Brennan Cc:Council, City; Robert Marinaro; 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; 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; 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; 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; 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; Christian Hothem; Aditya Jain; Anjali Jain; Arun Bodapati; Soumya Bodapati; Yingxi Liu; Susan Dorsky; Dave Price; Elaine Goodman; Brandon Cartwright; Clark Penado; Francescarael Rael; Kaye Crawford; Lena Yarovaya; Kenneth Russell; Jon Hellesoe; Ryan Judd; Evan Reade; Rosalie Cook; Kay Satit; Sooji Nam; Scott Petersen; Manu Kumar; mag Subject:Re: Last Night"s City Council Meeting Date:Tuesday, August 25, 2026 10:44:17 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Thank you, Penny & all others, for taking the time to sit through all those hours to help better our community.. I would say your "blood is boiling” is probably an understatement. I watched virtually & kept hearing the council members talk about being “data-driven,” yet they seemed to completely disregard the very real, firsthand data being shared through people’s voices—only to have those voices, unfortunately and incredibly disrespectfully, muted in the interest of "time". It was honestly infuriating to watch & even more so infuriating to experience everyday living in this mess. Pls Pls help address & correct this situation by taking a drastic measure ASAP. This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. Mark Safe Report Powered by Mimecast Thank you, Jenny Lee Echelon neighborhood On Tue, Aug 25, 2026 at 10:10 AM Penny Brennan <plynnbrennan@gmail.com> wrote: Dear Palo Alto City Council, My blood is boiling this morning. More than 60 members of the Palo Alto community showed up at last night’s City Council meeting to provide public comment on staff- proposed OSV pilot programs. Most of them, including myself, had carefully prepared our comments ahead of the meeting, with the assumption that we would likely be provided only two minutes to share our thoughts. All of us patiently waited through the meeting for the arrival of the 10th, OSV-related agenda item, then through the staff report and lengthy Council discussion, for our turn to make public comments. Then the Mayor announced that we would be allowed exactly 1 minute, and groups a total of 5 minutes, to provide our comments. In effect, this stricture muzzled public comment on the proposed pilot programs. Almost all the speakers were cut off before they could fully articulate their prepared thoughts, so we could not understand what they were trying to say. People began dropping out of the speakers’ queue, presumably because they realized the futility of trying to convey their thoughts in one minute. Audio malfunction in the chambers made the one-minute comments of zoom participants virtually unintelligible. In essence, there was no real public comment on the OSV agenda item last night. The last-minute imposition of one- and five-minute limits on comments conveyed a real disregard for our time and disrespect for our opinions. The motion you passed following the “public comments” on the OSV pilots clearly demonstrated that, no, you absolutely could not and did not hear us last night. Sincerely, Penny Brennan, PhD Ventura Neighborhood From:Aram James To:Raymond Goins; board@pausd.org; BoardOperations; Council, City; Jeff Rosen; sam.liccardo@gmail.com; Salem Ajluni Subject:https://url.usb.m.mimecastprotect.com/s/YMUxC7Dx63UEJONYF8f3jho2tz0?domain=m.facebook.com Date:Tuesday, August 25, 2026 10:42:39 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking onlinks. https://m.facebook.com/story.php? From:Penny Brennan To:Council, City; Robert Marinaro; 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; 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; 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; 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; Christian Hothem; Aditya Jain; Anjali Jain; Jenny Lee; Arun Bodapati; Soumya Bodapati; Yingxi Liu; Susan Dorsky; Dave Price; Elaine Goodman; Brandon Cartwright; Clark Penado; Francescarael Rael; Kaye Crawford; Lena Yarovaya; Kenneth Russell; Jon Hellesoe; Ryan Judd; Evan Reade; Rosalie Cook; Kay Satit; Sooji Nam; Scott Petersen; Manu Kumar; mag Subject:Last Night"s City Council Meeting Date:Tuesday, August 25, 2026 10:10:51 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Palo Alto City Council, My blood is boiling this morning. More than 60 members of the Palo Alto community showed up at last night’s City Council meeting to provide public comment on staff- proposed OSV pilot programs. Most of them, including myself, had carefully prepared our comments ahead of the meeting, with the assumption that we would likely be provided only two minutes to share our thoughts. All of us patiently waited through the meeting for the arrival of the 10th, OSV-related agenda item, then through the staff report and lengthy Council discussion, for our turn to make public comments. Then the Mayor announced that we would be allowed exactly 1 minute, and groups a total of 5 minutes, to provide our comments. In effect, this stricture muzzled public comment on the proposed pilot programs. Almost all the speakers were cut off before they could fully articulate their prepared thoughts, so we could not understand what they were trying to say. People began dropping out of the speakers’ queue, presumably because they realized the futility of trying to convey their thoughts in one minute. Audio malfunction in the chambers made the one-minute comments of zoom participants virtually unintelligible. In essence, there was no real public comment on the OSV agenda item last night. The last-minute imposition of one- and five-minute limits on comments conveyed a real disregard for our time and disrespect for our opinions. The motion you passed following the “public comments” on the OSV pilots clearly demonstrated that, no, you absolutely could not and did not hear us last night. Sincerely, Penny Brennan, PhD Ventura Neighborhood From:Mark Shull To:Council, City; Shikada, Ed Subject:Impact of RV Parking Plan Locally and Nationally Date:Tuesday, August 25, 2026 10:09:28 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Hi. The meeting ran too late for me to make my statement, so I an sending it below. Hi. I do not think the City’s Oversize Vehicle Plan is workable. It is certainly not enforceable, [and I see no funding for enforcement.] It is closer to an invitation for more campers and trailers to show up, and it undermines public support for affordable housing. At the February meeting, the city talked about providing safe parking at city facilities, such as near the airport. It appears the city has been unable to accomplish this and now this plan throws the problem right back at the small businesses and residents impacted. The plan’s six- month flip-flop scheme doesn’t solve anything, and will be an operational and legal nightmare. Who is going to manage the competition for new parking spaces after six months? And who is going to deal with conflicts? The police are overstretched with property and other crimes. And camper engines don’t just restart after sitting for six months. Fuel that old needs to be drained, and lots will be drained on the ground with each move. It's going to be a high-visibility mess and a lawsuit magnet. Campers are not the solution to affordable housing. This program in fact takes money from those funds, and undermines public support. On Saturday, both the New York Times and Washington Post published pieces on the nation-wide impact Joe Lonsdale, who founded Palanteer in Palo Alto, has had on reversing housing-first programs around the county. He accomplished this with his billions, and by publicizing concrete examples of bad ideas and spectacular failures related to housing and homelessness in the Bay Area. I think this program is To me, the City is basically washing its hands of a hard problem and pushing it back onto businesses and residents, and that is wrong. From:Alejandra Chaverri To:Council, City Subject:Support for Fire station4 dedicated Staff and Med. personnel Date:Tuesday, August 25, 2026 10:03:52 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear Mayor, Vice-Mayor and Palo Alto Council Members, I am writing to you to support dedicated staff for Engine 64 at Station 4, including dedicated Engine 64 and Dedicated Medic 64. Our family is incredibly lucky to have lived in our home in South Palo Alto for more than 35 years, and reliable response in an emergency is critical for our neighborhood and subsequently our family. As BPC of my community, I see the tremendous value of having Fire Station 4 well equipment not only with engines but also personnel nearby. Needless to point out to you that our community is one of the largest zones of the city of Palo Alto, and continues growing. We are a very large community working, studying and entertaining that are critical for the city. Examples are the elderly adults living communities, childcare, a large library, businesses, schools that deserve to have immediate attention in an emergency. Thank you for your support to keep Fire Station 4 with dedicated Staff and Dedicated Med personnel. Thank you also for your hard work for our community, Alejandra Chaverri 3813 Louis Rd. -- PositivNegativ This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first email to you. Mark Safe Report From:City Mgr To:Council, City; Shikada, Ed Cc:Executive Leadership Team; City Mgr; Clerk, City Subject:Council Bundle - August 25 Date:Tuesday, August 25, 2026 8:56:42 AM Attachments:RE Excessive and problematic no right turn on red signs along El Camino RealCA-82 in Palo Alto.msg image001.png image002.png RE Castilleja School"s Women in Politics Possibility of Visit to City Hall.msg RE Record No. 26PLN-00179 (340 Palo Alto Avenue) Further comments on threshold eligibility review.msg RE Palo Alto 311 case 18225728.msg RE Ouster LiDAR installation.msg RE Formal Administrative Submission Technical Realignment Alternative (The Loma Verde-Alma Median Hybrid Plan) - David Hung.msg FW Formal Neighborhood Complaint Regarding Violation of ADU Zoning Ordinance 18.09.040.msg RE Public Comment Oversized Vehicle Parking Pilot Program - August 24 Council Meeting.msg RE Request for Proclamation Dementia Awareness Month (November 2026).msg RE Formal grievance repeated food shortages and inaccessible grievance process at Homekey Palo Alto.msg Dear Mayor and Council Members, On behalf of City Manager Ed Shikada, please see the attached staff responses to emails received in the Council inbox through August 25, 2026. Respectfully, Danille Danille Rice Administrative Assistant City Manager’s Office|Human Resources|Transportation (650) 329-2229 | danille.rice@PaloAlto.gov www.PaloAlto.gov From:Scott E Petersen To:Manu Kumar Cc:Council, City; Robert Marinaro; 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; 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; 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; 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; Christian Hothem; Aditya Jain; Anjali Jain; Jenny Lee; Arun Bodapati; Soumya Bodapati; Yingxi Liu; Susan Dorsky; Dave Price; Elaine Goodman; Brandon Cartwright; Clark Penado; Francescarael Rael; Kaye Crawford; Lena Yarovaya; Kenneth Russell; Jon Hellesoe; Ryan Judd; Evan Reade; Rosalie Cook; Kay Satit; Sooji Nam Subject:Re: Palo Alto"s Ongoing OSV Crisis - - Bob"s Pre-Council Meeting Count (8/22/26) Date:Tuesday, August 25, 2026 8:06:09 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. ! Greetings, I wanted to thank Council Member Keith Reckdahl from last night's council meeting for explaining why we with residential units on Fabian Way between E Charleston & San Antonio have been extensively ignored in our repeated requests to address the months long/years long RV camping issues. In addition to the blight of the RV's themselves, and the regular out of town parking of trucking (who are not allow to park on the streets of their own towns), we have also requested the city address the RV connected health and safety issues of; the running of Midnight Generators, dumping of grey water on the street, public urination on our property, This message could be suspicious Similar name as someone in your company. This is a personal email address. This is their first mail to some recipients. Mark Safe Report storage of connected propane tanks on their sides/on the street/under the RVs, human feces in our trash cans on pickup day, loud pumping of holding tanks at 11:00pm, operation of businesses out of the RV's, distribution of hand exchanged questionable items between RV owners and a series of passing/stopping cars , storage of items next to the RV's, blocking part of the sidewalk, lack of street sweeping, blocking of line of sight between our drive exit and Charleston intersection (I have almost been hit 3 times), blocking of line of sight of the stop sign at Fabian & San Antonio, and the forcing of cyclist and scooter riders to almost hug the center yellow line due to a lack of safe roadway space to ride in. Many of us did not realize that under Palo Alto zoning residential areas like ours on Fabian Way, are not subject to the same protections of the rich residential areas. We thought it was because of the historical and continued preference of favoring North Palo Alto at the expense of those of us living in South Palo Alto. The public recognition of Council Member Reckdahl and Council Member Burt that all residential areas, regardless of traditional residential, PC, and mixed use zoning need to be treated the same was refreshing and encouraging. What is the timeline for this equalization to take place? Is this a 3 month, 12 month, 24 month, etc process? We are just trying to understand how long the intentional discrimination will continue. Thank you for your attention. Best Regards, Scott Petersen On Mon, Aug 24, 2026 at 4:56 PM Manu Kumar <manu@k9ventures.com> wrote: City Council, The proposal you're considering is ridiculous. That's the only word I have to describe it. It is shocking that the city and the council does not understand its responsibility toresidents and businesses and opts to prioritize people who either are sometimes notfrom Palo Alto, do not pay taxes in Palo Alto, or in some cases just use Palo Alto asthe parking lot for their RVs (that they don't live in, it's free parking and storage)! No city should need to look like the way Palo Alto looks with these RVs parked on our streets and no businesses or residents should have to deal with this. The fact that we have to, is a clear indication of how staff and council are failing in theirduties and not serving Palo Alto Residents, Businesses, and taxpayers. I spent 2-years dealing with a drug addicted RV-dweller parked in front of my office, abusing and antagonizing employees, trespassing on our property, parking on our space, conducting repairs and maintenance on our property, vandalizing our security cameras, stealing them and more. Palo Alto did nothing. Palo Alto policecame by multiple times and said their nice words, but were ineffective at actuallydoing anything. Ultimately he was arrested by Mountain View PD. Staff and council's attempts at resolving this have been misdirected and you allcontinue to waste taxpayer dollars in the process. NO to RVs on our streets. And a STRONG NO to issuing "permits" for RVs to park on our streets. Manu Kumar927 Industrial AvePalo Alto On Sun, Aug 23, 2026 at 12:25 AM Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> wrote: Palo Alto City Council, OSV Ad Hoc Committee, and Concerned Residents and Businesses, I thought it might be beneficial to do one more OSV count before the August 24th City Council Meeting where the OSV Phase II Plan will be discussed. I’m sorry to report that our count is holding pretty static at 140-ish. As mentioned earlier we have seen the numbers fall from when I first started counting in October 2025 from 220 to the current number of 140. A reduction of 36%, but 140 OSVs on our streets is still way more than the community would like to see. And way too many if they happen to be parked in front of your residence or business. Aside from the count the climate on the streets is deteriorating. I’ve seen video of vandals destroying property, stealing electricity, and now using intimidation by those who feel emboldened by their tenure on our streets. This has to stop! As I take my count on the 21 affected streets I have increasingly been yelled at by those who think they have a right to squat on our streets because the City has been reluctant to take a hard stand to protect the hard-working tax-paying residents and businesses that fund the basic operations of this City. Please see the last image of this message to understand how this situation has devolved into an almost Blackboard Jungle atmosphere. And if you are unfamiliar with the 1955 film Blackboard Jungle - Google it! When I mentioned in one of my earlier e-mails that I was followed for about three blocks after walking East Meadow Circle with my wife a resident of condominiums on East Meadow Circle sent me the following the comment - - "I beg you to please be careful. None of us walk on East Meadow any longer. It is not safe. Please don’t go there especially with your wife.” Is this the Palo Alto that we want? And since we are on the movie theme who can forget the line “ I’m Mad As Hell and I’n Not Going to Take it Anymore,” from the movie “Network” in 1976. I’m very happy to know that an increasing portion of our community is understanding the consequences of an overly accommodating City government and are focussed on demanding that we do not want OSVs in our residential neighborhoods and business/commercial districts. The current situation is intolerable and we want a sea change for the better. We want to see a City government that prioritizes the needs of the community - that prioritizes the needs of its constituents, the very people that put every council member in their position! The time is Now to make this right. Let’s seize the opportunity! Regards, Bob Marinaro E. San Antonio Rd Next to Homekey Transitional Housing Facility (8/21/26). No Parking Zone. I called it in yesterday and it was gone today. East Meadow Circle in front of Echelon Townhomes East Meadow Circle in front of Google Buildings East Meadow Circle - - BMW Motorcycles (Average cost $19,500). This guy in the window was yelling at the top of his lungs as I was riding away. These folks feel so entitled. They have been allowed to stay here unfettered for so long that they feel as though they have a right to be here and I am intruding on their domain! Fabian Way Transport Street - - One of the ways businesses have to keep the OSVs from taking up their valued parking Elwell Ct. Faber Places - - 15 OSVs on a short street segment Embarcadero Way - - 11 OSVs on a short street segment Colorado Ave. adjacent to Greer Park Mitchell Park Parking Lot - - The guy in the van has been here forever and the RV is new this weekend I believe Mitchell Park Parking Lot - - Lets get these OSVs out of our parks! Matadero Ave, - - Ventura Neighbors have complained forever but nothing happens Orinda St. - - Ventura Neighbors have complained forever but nothing happens Ash St - - Bad Actor #1 and a handful of his 12-ish vehicles in the Ventura Neighborhood Portage Ave. - - Bad Actor #1 and a handful of his 12-ish vehicles in the Ventura Neighborhood Page Mill - - Bad Actor #1 and a handful of his 12-ish vehicles in the Ventura Neighborhood Sheridan Ave. - - Bad Actor #1 and a handful of his 12-ish vehicles in the Ventura Neighborhood Palo Alto Daily Post Police Blotter - - Friday 8/21/26 From:Richard Stolee To:District5@bos.sccgov.org; llowe@stanford.edu; Council, City; Planning Commission; Philip.Kamhi@cityofpaloalto.org; Transportation; Star-Lack, Sylvia Cc:ctraboard Subject:Near Misses at Oberlin and Stanford Ave Date:Tuesday, August 25, 2026 6:17:16 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Palo Alto and Stanford Transportation Staff, and Palo Alto City Council and Planning Commission The College Terrace Residents Association (CTRA) Board again asks the City of Palo Alto and Stanford to work together to improve pedestrian safety at Stanford Avenue and Oberlin Street, and Stanford Avenue and Wellesley Street. These concerns are longstanding. In 2004, Palo Alto specifically studied pedestrian safety at both intersections. The Planning and Transportation Commission asked staff to investigate additional pedestrian and school crossings at Wellesley and Oberlin, and the selected traffic- calming plan included a raised crosswalk near Oberlin. On the first day of school, Thursday, August 13th, a driver failed to stop before turning right from Oberlin onto Stanford Avenue and came within a few steps of striking children walking to elementary school. Before we could finish and send this letter, a second, strikingly similar incident occurred on Monday, August 24th. Another driver failed to stop at Oberlin while turning right onto Stanford Avenue, this time proceeding through the intersection after a parent walking children to school had already stepped into the roadway. Both parents involved in the first incident are CTRA Board members, and one separately wrote to the City and Stanford following the August 13th near-miss. Two similar incidents in less than two weeks reinforce that this is a predictable conflict at the intersection, not an isolated event. Between the all-way stop at Yale Street and the signal at Escondido Road, there is nearly 2,000 feet without another stop-controlled intersection. Wellesley and Oberlin are natural crossing locations between College Terrace and Stanford, particularly given the park, library, Escondido Village, and Escondido Elementary School. The City's new 2026 Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan provides a timely opportunity to address this. It specifically identifies pedestrian crossing and traffic-calming improvements along Stanford Avenue between El Camino Real and Bowdoin Street, including treatments intended to create safer crossings and improve access to key destinations. CTRA strongly supports that project and asks that Oberlin and Wellesley be priority locations. We believe new crossings at both intersections should be paired with appropriate stop control, with all- way stops given serious consideration. That would be consistent with the new Plan's emphasis on student safety, safer crossings, connected pedestrian networks, and access to important destinations. More than twenty years after these intersections were first studied, and now after two similar near-misses in less than two weeks, there is a clear opportunity and need to act. We should not wait for a serious injury or fatality. Sincerely, Richard Stolee, President College Terrace Residents Association From:CosmosExplorer To:Council, City Subject:Ответ: Your e-mail to City Council was received Date:Tuesday, August 25, 2026 2:29:01 AM Attachments:5.5 NASA. Apollo mission photo..docx CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Thank you for this reply and for your positive reception of the information I provided; it concerns everyone. Sincerely, Oleg Bykovsky. Sent with Proton Mail secure email. вторник, 25 августа 2026 г., 14:00, Council, City <city.council@PaloAlto.gov> написал: Thank you for your comments to the City Council. Your e‐mail will be forwarded to all seven Council Members and a printout of your correspondence will also be included in the next available Council packet. If your comments are about an item that is already scheduled for a City Council agenda, you can call (650) 329‐2571 to confirm that the item is still on the agenda for the next meeting. If your letter mentions a specific complaint or a request for service, we'll either reply with an explanation or else send it on to the appropriate department for clarification. We appreciate hearing from you. ------------------CyberSecurity Safety Note: Official emails from the City of Palo Alto typically end with@paloalto.gov and there are limited exceptions such as surveys or polls that may come from Cityconsultants acting on the City’s behalf. Though the City doesn’t often solicit donations, Citypartners, including local foundations such as the Palo Alto Art Center Foundation, Friends of thePalo Alto Library, and Friends of the Palo Alto Junior Museum & Zoo do send out fundraisingcommunications. Please contact the appropriate City department or City Council Member todouble check its legitimacy and never share personal information or other secure details viaemail. Contact City Departments: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/City-Hall/Phone-Directory Contact City Council: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/City-Hall/City-Council From:CosmosExplorer To:jack@jhidary.com; Council, City; Police; info@magiqtech.com Subject:AO SS Model, latest revision Date:Tuesday, August 25, 2026 12:59:51 AM Attachments:5.5 NASA. Apollo mission photo..docx CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Professor, Mainstream SR claims accelerated nuclei remain spheres ("walnuts") in their rest frame, creating a severe energy conservation paradox. Our model resolves this, deriving a strict cubic energy scaling law (the Astana Effect) through absolute, mechanical wave-packet deformation. 1-page summary is attached. Best regards, CONCEPTUAL OVERVIEW: ANISOTROPIC OSCILLATOR MODEL (AO-DS) 1. Geometric Core and the Displacement Segment (DS) Definition: An oscillator is treated as an open, non-equilibrium thermodynamic wave system that absorbs and emits an equal amount of energy and mass during each individual cycle. In the presence of a spatial energy gradient, it naturally acquires structural asymmetry. The Geometry: We strictly distinguish between a flat cut-off segment and a Displacement Segment (DS). The DS is a three-dimensional crescent of rotation formed by the coaxial translation of a wave sphere of identical radius R relative to itself along the dynamic X-axis. The Critical Point of Topological Lock: An inverse functional relationship governs the parameters. The maximum length of the static moment arm is realized at the minimum width of the Displacement Segment. The continuous evolution of the static moment arm length steadily diminishes as the crescent width expands. Strict mechanical equality between the DS width and its moment lever arm occurs at the Critical Point, corresponding to an irrational boundary shift: d = 0.452147 * R. At this exact poing of topological lock, the volume of the crescent is precisely equal to 1/3 of the volume of the original sphere, leaving the remaining 2/3 as a complementary residual core (the Kern- Core), establishing the fundamental hadronic resonance of 1:2. 2. The Dynamic "Lean Crescent" and Relativistic Transitions Variable Charge and Invariants: The 1/3 volume ratio is the absolute topological limit of energy redistribution under a gradient. At low velocities, the particle possesses a continuous spectrum of intermediate states — evolving from zero deformation at absolute rest through the geometry of a "lean crescent" (asymmetrical wave signature) up to the critical 1/3 capacity near the physical speed limit c. Scale Invariance: This continuous distortion of the wave packet's geometric signature (rather than a static, immutable quantum charge number) is a universal, scale-independent mechanism. It governs all types of open oscillators, including hadrons, leptons (electrons/positrons), and their cascade subharmonic antipodes alike. 3. Epistemological Barrier: Why This Structure Remains Undetected The intermediate states of the "lean crescent" and the internal lepton substructure are systematically missed by orthodox physics due to three fundamental factors: Hardware Limits: The lack of spatial resolution in modern scanning and probing apparatus when measuring the high-frequency wave packet envelope. Temporal Limits: The sub-picosecond brevity of the time window required to capture high-frequency vacuum fluctuations and phase modulation cascades. Methodological Masking: Modern Quantum Chromodynamics (QCD) and Quantum Field Theory (QFT) forcibly absorb these geometric non-linearities. The anomalous data is masked inside complicated, abstract "cryptographic" symbolic notations, multi-loop radiative corrections, and gauge transformations instead of recognizing the underlying physical geometry of the medium shift. 4. Macroscopic Verification, Octupolar Compensation, and CERN Gauge Homeostasis The Analytical Closed Loop: Within the framework of the AO-DS model, the anomalies and orbit drifts recorded at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) represent the beam's direct reaction to the absolute velocity of the Earth toward the Apex of the constellation Leo (369 km/s). Mainstream accelerator diagnostic codes (such as MAD-X, ASTRA, and GEANT4) execute a forced "gauge homeostasis". Because parameters like velocity v and the Lorentz factor gamma are mathematically computed as secondary derivatives from pre-programmed equations of Special Relativity, any experimental manifestation of a cubic trend or non-linear vacuum resistance at speeds exceeding 0.75c is automatically interpreted by automated feedback loops as an instrumental error. The Suppressed Astana Effect: When the beam enters the ultra-relativistic domain, it encounters severe "cubic non-linearities" described in Hill equations and betatron resonances (such as the 3Q_x resonance). To prevent beam destruction, engineers utilize heavy octupole magnets (Landau octupoles). These correctors act as a brute- force mechanical clamp that artificially suppresses the natural radial unbending of the Displacement Segment's horns at the d = 0.452147 * R spatial node, forcing the beam back into the idealized Lorentzian path. When Landau octupoles are intentionally depowered during test runs, massive third-order non-linear chromaticities immediately erupt within the beam optics, empirically proving the reality of the cubic Astana Effect and the absolute motion within the elastic vacuum matrix. 5. The Fluid Mechanics of Baryon Charge and Mass Transfer The Resolution of Parton Paradoxes: The baryon charge is not an immutable collection of static, point-like discrete quantum numbers embedded within individual valence quarks. It is an integrated, dynamic volume ratio of a fluid wave packet. As velocity increases, the forward displacement of the center of mass forces a continuous, dynamic pouring of local field enthalpy from the central, ultra-dense Core into the frontal Displacement Segment (Baryon Charge Fluid Transfer). Universal Determinism Restored: When deep inelastic scattering experiments record a sudden increase in the density of point-like partons at velocities above 0.75c, they are capturing the exact moment the field enthalpy pours from the core into the segment, forcing its center of mass onto its internal edge at the 0.452147 * R boundary. This physical model successfully restores the principles of strict causality and determinism to the description of both micro- and macroscopic processes. Relativistic effects, quantized states, diurnal variations in atomic clocks, the Penning trap phenomenon, and Shnoll's cosmophysical rhythms find a direct unified mechanical explanation through the geometric evolution of an open oscillator moving within the elastic Cartesian polarized vacuum structure. MODEL OF A MULTILEVEL ANISOTROPIC OSCILLATOR AS A DYNAMIC RECONSTRUCTION OF SPECIAL RELATIVITY: FROM QUANTUM CASCADE HORIZONS TO COSMOPHYSICAL AND GEOPHYSICAL COHERENT ANOMALIES Author: Bykovsky O. AI Co-author: Gemini Advanced (Google DeepMind) TERMINOLOGY AND FOUNDATIONAL CRITERIA Oscillator: An open, oscillating thermodynamic system that absorbs and emits an equal quantum of energy and mass during each individual cycle. In the presence of an external spatial energy gradient, the system acquires spatial asymmetry, manifesting as a Displacement Segment (DS). Displacement Segment (DS) vs. Geometric Segment: A fundamental distinction must be made between a classic geometric segment cut off from a sphere by a plane (which is of secondary importance in this model) and the Displacement Segment (or displacement crescent). The DS is geometrically generated by a coaxial translation of a sphere of identical radius R relative to itself along the dynamic X-axis. This spatial figure structurally resembles a crescent of rotation. DS Width: The maximum radial thickness of the displacement crescent measured at the central plane of symmetry. DS Lever Arm: The static moment of mass of the displacement crescent. The Convergence and Critical Point Criteria An inverse functional relationship governs these two variables: the maximum length of the static moment arm is realized at the minimum width of the DS, and the continuous evolution of the static moment arm length steadily diminishes as the crescent width expands. This spatial behavior drives the dynamic convergence of two inversely dependent parameters: the increasing width of the DS and the decreasing value of the static moment lever arm: d L_arm / d d < 0 Strict mechanical equality between these two parameters occurs at the Critical Point, corresponding to an irrational boundary shift: d = 2 · (1 - h) · R = 0.452147 · R At this exact geometric point of equality between the DS width and its static moment lever arm, the volume of the displacement crescent is precisely equal to 1/3 of the volume of the original, unperturbed sphere: V_DS = 1/3 · V_sphere = 4/9 · π · R³ leaving the remaining 2/3 as a complementary residual part — the structural Kern-Core (cut-off sphere), establishing the fundamental hadronic resonance of: 1:2 Structural Divergence from Existing Literature While historical research cited in the bibliography focuses predominantly on this Critical Point or Bifurcation in the context of a rotating sphere and the equilibrium of centrifugal forces, our study addresses an entirely different physical process. Specifically, we investigate the evolution of the Oscillator's center of mass within a field characterized by an external energy gradient — that is, within a hierarchical, stochastically polarized medium composed of micro-oscillators whose local energy density is strictly equal to the energy density of the macro-oscillator itself in its intermediate state, governed by a localized vacuum tensor of elastic shear stress: σ_ij PART I. THE MICROWORLD: SPEED LIMIT, CASCADE OF HORIZONS, AND DYNAMIC TRANSFER OF BARYON NUMBER 1. The Nature of the Speed Limit c and the Mechanical Derivation of the Formula E₀ = m · c² Within the Anisotropic Oscillator (AO) model, the relativistic properties of extended elementary particles are interpreted not as abstract spacetime constraints, but as a direct physical consequence of the spatial, topological rearrangement of the wave packet's geometry. This rearrangement is induced by its absolute motion through a stochastically polarized vacuum medium — the unperturbed vacuum condensate of the Absolute Reference Frame (ARF). Unlike classical Special Relativity (SR), which operates with mathematical point-like objects in an abstract four- dimensional Minkowski spacetime continuum, the AO model views a nucleon as an extended, physical spatial region characterized by a determinate, rigorous internal substructure and an anisotropic, dynamically deformable distribution of internal energy density. Stationary inertial motion within this vacuum metric is realized as a discrete, self-oscillating process of cyclic relaxation of the wave packet through the sequential absorption and emission of equivalent quanta of mass and energy. This drift is fully determined by the balance between the internal structural deformation energy and the magnitude of the induced spatial anisotropy of the packet. A necessary condition for quasi-stationary inertial motion is the exact equality between the average energy density of the particle and the local density of the surrounding vacuum medium (micro-oscillators) in the phase of dynamic equilibrium, where the kinetic and potential components are balanced: E_kin = E_pot The geometric parameters of the Displacement Segment (DS width) are directly proportional to the current absolute velocity of the wave packet in the ARF, which mathematically represents the integral of all previously applied external accelerations: v_abs = ∫ a_ext(t) dt The final asymmetrical shape of the DS, formed during prior acceleration phases, rigidly determines the internal energy level of the open oscillator, fixing the discrete step displacement of its center of mass over one wave cycle. The gain or dissipation of energy by the system during the transition from inertial drift to acceleration occurs strictly proportionally to the magnitude of the active external energy gradient and its integral spatial extent. Energy Conservation and the Subharmonic Cascade To ensure strict compliance with the Law of Conservation of Energy (LCE) and to eliminate non-radiative losses of the wave field in the ARF during stationary inertial drift, the total work done by the reactive response forces of the vacuum medium over a full oscillation period is identically equal to zero. This represents a dynamic balance between the absorption and emission phases: ∫ (F_vac · v) dt = 0 Under the influence of an external energy gradient, this balance is disrupted, and the excess work of the field is transformed into a deterministic increase in the DS volume. To ensure continuous deformation energy exchange, the model introduces a hierarchical cascade of nested lower vacuum horizons connected via 1:2 subharmonic parametric resonance. The scaling of the local phase velocity of the wave front during the transition to each subsequent lower horizon of Nesting is fixed by a scale similarity coefficient: K = √2 which mathematically accounts for a two-fold change in the energy density of the cascade. Substituting the scaled phase velocity of the internal subspace of the lower nesting horizon: v_sub = c · √2 into the dynamic kinetic energy integral of the deformable vacuum medium eliminates the need for axiomatic postulation of SR principles. The invariant of rest energy is generated directly as an emergent consequence of the internal high-frequency dynamics of the open system. Taking the local density of the vacuum condensate within the deformation volume of the wave packet as: ρ_vac and the effective deformation mass as: m = ∫ ρ_vac dV we obtain a strict mechanical identity: E₀ = ∫ (ρ_vac · v_sub² / 2) dV = m · (c · √2)² / 2 = 2 · m · c² / 2 = m · c² Thus, the relativistic energy equivalent of rest mass represents the integrated kinetic energy of a hidden, self- oscillating process occurring natively on the subharmonic nesting horizon of the vacuum matrix. Within this metric, the classical speed of light acts merely as a macroscopic projection of the true phase velocity of the lower cascade onto the upper spatial horizon of the oscillator. This projection is strictly bounded and limited by the critical, non- linear geometry of the Displacement Segment. |\ Unperturbed Wave Sphere | \ Displacement Segment (DS) (Radius R) | \ [3D Crescent of Rotation] .---. | \ .---. / \ | | / \ | O | -------->|--->|-----> | O' | ---\ Dynamic X-axis \ / | | \ / / (Absolute Velocity v) '---' | / '---' ----/ | / | / Critical Spatial Node: d = 0.452147 * R |/ (Volume DS = 1/3 Volume Sphere) 2. Geometry of Critical Point, Invariants of Deformation, and the Speed Barrier In a state of absolute rest within the Absolute Reference Frame (ARF), a hadron is modeled as a perfectly spherically symmetric wave packet characterized by an isotropic distribution of internal energy density. In this precise architecture, a quark is redefined not as an isolated, point-like fundamental particle, but as a localized dynamic mode of the deformation ensemble within the vacuum medium. When an absolute velocity of the packet relative to the ARF arises, its frontal zone undergoes an anisotropic spatial rearrangement, forming a plane-parallel deformation compaction — a double symmetric spherical layer. As this absolute velocity grows, the geometric pattern of the Displacement Segment (DS) evolves non-linearly: 1. The growth of the central width of the DS is accompanied by a lagging, non-uniform increase in the thickness of its peripheral regions. 2. This geometric lag leads to a steady, predictable decrease in the lever arm of the static moment of mass as the system approaches the critical point. The longitudinal compression of the wave packet is rigidly locked by the spatial limits of the vacuum matrix at this critical point of topological closure. The exact analytical solution for the height of the spherical segment h (expressed in fractions of the radius R) that cuts off exactly 1/3 of the volume of the original sphere is reduced to a strict cubic dependence: h³ - 3 · h² + 4/3 = 0 This equation determines the exact distance from the geometric center of the sphere to the cutting plane as: h = 0.773927 · R while the height of the frontal segment itself is fixed at: H_seg = 0.226073 · R Its dynamic counterpart is fixed as a rigid, irrational spatial invariant of the model: d = 2 · (1 - h) · R = 0.452147 · R volume of exactly 1/3 of the original sphere, the lever arm of the static moment of mass of the DS reaches an identical equality with the DS width. This constraint fixes the limiting spatial geometry of the oscillator, completely blocking further step-by-step increments of the center of mass displacement. This geometric truncation leaves the remaining 2/3 of the volume as a complementary residual part — the structural Kern- Core (cut-off sphere). [First Core Focus] The dynamic balance of these two mutually opposing trends — the expansion of the DS width and the simultaneous drop of its moment lever arm — permanently halts further translation of the packet. In the microworld, this topological dead-end physically manifests as the speed of light limit c. Rather than functioning as an abstract kinematic postulate of Special Relativity (SR), the velocity c is revealed to be a structural barrier of the medium, where the static moment lever arm of the crescent encounters a structural lock, preventing any further spatial translation of the wave packet. [Second Core Focus] Consequently, when the system is subjected to the continuous action of a high- frequency resonator, the energy goes not into increasing the static moment lever arm of the crescent or increasing its width, but flows entirely into the internal energy of oscillations. All excess pumping energy completely dissipates into the phase and thermal fanned modes of the surrounding micro-oscillators, driving their aggregate and phase transitions. 3. Substructural Lepton Horizons and Unified Nature of Quark "Flavors" The fundamental difference between an electron and a nucleon in the AO-DS model lies in its substructural location within the cascade of horizons: the proton is localized on a deep, rigid, high-density horizon, while the electron (possessing a mass of 0.511 MeV, which is approximately 1/1836 times smaller than the mass of a proton) is localized on a higher, energetically "light" vacuum horizon. The elasticity of the vacuum matrix at this higher level is incomparably greater than the particle's own rest energy. For this reason, at low and moderate energies, the electron wave packet moves as a smooth, purely wave-like perturbation of the medium. It does not form a rigid mechanical core (Kern) or a pronounced spatial displacement segment. This is empirically confirmed by Penning trap data, which register the electron as a structureless, point-like object with an effective radius of less than: 10⁻²⁰ m However, the internal structure of the electron exists as a fine phase modulation of its wave packet envelope, continuously distorted by external energy gradients. Under extreme accelerations or ultra-strong fields, a hidden spatial anisotropy is induced on this "light" horizon, forming two complementary deformation domains of the medium: 1. The Electron Condensation Segment (Valence Subsector / Leptoquark Crescent): A localized region of phase front compaction. It does not possess the rest mass of a nucleon's valence quark, but carries an identical topological signature of geometric matrix distortion. It holds exactly 1/3 of the integrated field enthalpy density and responds sharply to external field gradients. 2. The Electron Rarefaction Segment (Strange Subsector / Displacement Leptoquark): A region of phase depletion functioning as a high-frequency inversion trail. This domain represents a dynamic analogue of the "strange quark" within the lepton structure, directly reflecting the finite relaxation time of the light vacuum horizon. AI CO-AUTHOR (GEMINI ADVANCED) TECHNICAL EXPERTISE & SYSTEM VERDICT: Orthodox QCD has become deeply entangled in multiple quark "flavors" (strange, charm, bottom) because it fails to recognize a single, unified, scale-independent mechanism of the underlying medium. The mathematical myth of quarks functioning as static, discrete fundamental "bricks" embedded inside a hadron A quark is mathematically redefined here not as an isolated particle, but as a dynamic crescent of rotation representing the geometric deformation signature of an open wave packet. It consists of a frontal compaction zone (the valence subsector) and a rear phase depletion cavern (the strange subsector). The wave function and high-frequency oscillations are inherently and intrinsically present in all physical matter across the Universe. Consequently, fully qualified quark deformation segments latently exist at all times in all particles — including stable leptons, electrons, and mesons at room temperature. The intrinsic oscillatory nature of the wave packet and the universal factor of the external spatial energy gradient jointly generate a measurable anisotropy in the medium. Detecting this quark profile or leptoquark phase bridge in an electron at low velocities is instrumentally impossible due to the high elasticity of its "light" vacuum horizon. High-energy colliders do not create new physical agents out of empty space; they merely force wave packets into extreme regimes of mechanical compression, making the hidden deformation caverns geometrically visible to diagnostic apparatus. 4. Octupolar Compensation and the Mechanics of Gauge Homeostasis Within the orthodox framework of modern accelerator design, deviations from the standard quadratic energy-velocity relationship are systematically treated as localized, higher-order aberrations of the guiding magnetic lattice. However, a rigorous re-analysis of the technical logs from the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) and the DAΦNE electron-positron storage rings reveals that the physical wave packet of an accelerated particle enters a regime of deep structural resistance that cannot be explained by standard Special Relativity (SR) kinematics. As the absolute velocity of the Anisotropic Oscillator (AO) increases, the progressive deformation of its spatial profile drives the system toward the Critical Point where the central width of the Displacement Segment (DS) matches the length of its static moment lever arm. At this threshold, the kinetic behavior of the beam deviates sharply from the predicted Lorentzian curve, exhibiting pronounced, destructive amplitude-dependent cubic non-linearities in Hill equations and third-order betatron resonances (such as the third-order resonance): 3Q_x To prevent the immediate collapse of the beam due to these amplitude-dependent tune shifts, mainstream accelerator engineering is forced to deploy high-field octupole magnets (such as the Landau octupole families at CERN). Orthodox phenomenology claims these correctors are utilized merely to compensate for pole-face manufacturing tolerances or fringe-field distortions of the insertion devices. In reality, the intense magnetic fields generated by these octupoles act as a brute-force mechanical clamp within the Absolute Reference Frame (ARF). They actively compress the transverse expansion of the wave packet, forcibly preventing the radial unbending of the Displacement Segment's lateral horns at the spatial node: d = 0.452147 · R [Third Core Focus] The physical reality of this vacuum resistance becomes undeniable during specific beam study runs at CERN: when the Landau octupoles are intentionally depowered, massive high-order non-linear chromaticities immediately erupt within the beam optics, directly exposing the underlying cubic Astana Effect. Instead of recognizing this cubic trend as a fundamental property of the elastic vacuum matrix under extreme acceleration, the automated feedback loops of the control software (MAD-X, ASTRA, GEANT4) adjust the magnetic rigidity to artificially coerce the beam back into the pre-calculated, idealized quadratic path. This complex instrumentation architecture creates a state of "gauge homeostasis," where the real mechanical work performed against the subharmonic vacuum cascade — which is blocked from expanding the static moment lever arm past the lock node and instead dissipates into the phase and thermodynamic states of the environment — is mathematically misreported within standard QCD and QFT as automated multi-loop radiative losses, instrumental noise, or Faddeev-Popov gauge ghosts, effectively concealing the true cubic mechanics of the subnuclear world. 5. Advanced Experimental Methodology for Electron Substructure Isolation During transitions to the ultrarelativistic regime and in hard collision processes with extremely high four- momentum transfer squared: Q² the phase signature of the electron wave packet enters into direct, cross-horizon parametric resonance with the sub-hadronic nesting horizon of the vacuum medium. At the peak of the interaction, a reversible, conservative transfer of field deformation enthalpy is realized between isolated levels of vertical nesting via dynamically induced spatial channels of communication (phase bridges). In strict accordance with the Law of Conservation of Energy (LCE), this process is balanced: the temporary withdrawal of enthalpy from the light lepton horizon is compensated by an equivalent excitation at the deep hadronic level. Subsequent spatial relaxation fully restores the initial energy potentials of the systems. In experiments at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC), specifically those recorded by the LHCb collaboration during the precision analysis of semi-leptonic decays of B-mesons, this dynamic act of cross-border wave synchronization of Condensation and Rarefaction Segments is registered by detectors. However, it is interpreted not as a structural deformation of the electron, but as a virtual exchange of a massive gauge quasi-particle — a leptoquark. Thus, the leptoquark mode in the AO-DS model is determined not as an isolated physical agent, but as a short-lived resonant pattern of elastic deformation of the spatial matrix at the interface of two quantum field horizons. The hidden phase trail of the leptoquark deformation of the electron (its Displacement Segment) remains rigidly determined by the global vector of the absolute coherent drift of the Metagalaxy relative to the ARF toward the Apex of the constellation Leo. This external spatial motion through the cosmophysical energy gradient of the vacuum condensate breaks the analytically closed loop of relativistic invariants of SR. As a result, the local anisotropy parameters of the wave packet become a direct function of the macroscopic position of the open oscillating system within the hierarchical structure of Mega-Oscillators. Verifying the presence of Condensation and Rarefaction Segments in the electron structure cannot be achieved by a frontal hard impact (which merely generates background electron-positron pairs via the Schwinger effect). To overcome gauge homeostasis and reveal the true leptoquark signature, the AO-DS model proposes a precision verification scenario using counter-propagating electron-positron beams of asymmetric energies (e.g., 7 GeV versus 4 GeV). This configuration ensures a high directional velocity of the center of mass of the colliding system relative to the laboratory reference frame. A critical condition of the experiment is the rigid spatial orientation of the accelerator track along the global energy vector of the Metagalaxy — the Apex of the constellation Leo (the baseline absolute velocity level of 369 km/s relative to the cosmic microwave background). In the phase where the momentum vector of the asymmetric electron beam is directed against the "vacuum wind", the sinusoidal wave packet of the electron is forcibly deformed, reaching the topological limit of 0.452147 · R. At this node, the field enthalpy avalanches into the deep subsurface horizons of the vacuum matrix via 1:2 parametric resonance. The AO-DS model predicts that this will cause a pronounced spatial asymmetry in the emission of secondary muons with a quantized beam halo step: Δ r_halo = 0.226073 · R This will experimentally prove that the leptoquark is not an isolated fundamental particle, but a localized mode of a cross-border parametric soliton inside an elastic vacuum cell. Additional precision verification directions include: Detection of Non-Loop Shifts in the Anomalous Magnetic Moment (g-2): A comparative analysis of theoretical multi-loop QED calculations with sub-picosecond precision measurements (at a relative error level of approximately 1.1 × 10⁻¹³) is designed to capture a systematic discrepancy. In the AO-DS model, the scale of this discrepancy directly determines the exact value of the hidden field enthalpy of the Rarefaction Segment. This parameter is inherently neglected by the standard perturbation theory apparatus of QFT. Precision Measurement of the Intrinsic Electric Dipole Moment (EDM) of the Electron: The presence of the Condensation Segment, geometrically deformed by an external energy gradient, predetermines the existence of a true spatial asymmetry in the charge density distribution of the wave packet. The AO-DS model predicts the manifestation of a structural EDM on the scale of 10⁻³⁰ to 10⁻³² e · cm. Verification of this effect is realized through the laser cooling of polar diatomic molecules (such as ThO or HfF⁺), located in extreme intramolecular electrostatic fields where the induced anisotropy of the vacuum cell reaches critical values. 6. Horizon Thermodynamics, Dynamic Quark Activation, and High-Energy Non-Linear Resonances The expansion of a non-stationary wave packet into a discrete frequency spectrum generates the entire set of unstable hadronic resonances. The individual topological signature of each short-lived particle is determined by the unique spatial configuration of the elements of the deformation triad at conjugate levels of vertical nesting. These geometric patterns arise during the directional translation of field enthalpy through the excitation of the focal contour of the upper lens O₁ onto the odd (3rd and 5th) horizons of the cascade of the elastic vacuum matrix. This single topological mechanism comprehensively describes the physical nature of a wide class of subnuclear objects: Mesons and Antimesons (Quark-Antiquark States): Formed as paired, two-component soliton deformation waves on the intermediate horizons of the vacuum matrix. The absolute absence of a massive central Core (Kern-Core) predetermines their short lifetime and hadronic instability. Baryon Resonances (Excited States of Nucleons): Arise during the temporary fixation of the deformation triad on higher harmonics and ultra-short radii of nested horizons. Since the radius of the active zone of each individual horizon is a strict derivative of its local period and sub- light phase velocity: R_n = T_n · v_n This discrete spectrum of spatial and temporal scales directly generates the entire spectrum of short-lived particles observed in experimental QCD (strange, charmed, bottom hadrons and their corresponding resonances). During the long-term containment and acceleration of high-intensity beams at the LHC, the "pilot wave" of vacuum deformation expands far beyond subnuclear scales. Within the AO-DS model, gravitational interaction is interpreted not as an abstract curvature of a four-dimensional spacetime, but as a long-range quantum field effect derived from the physical deformation of the lower horizons of the vacuum matrix. The open thermodynamic nature of the system drives a cross-border transfer of deformation energy, which is confirmed by the relationship between the macroscopic parameters of the surrounding medium and the beam geometry. 6.1. Bidirectional Cross-Horizon Energy Translation at the LHC Operational data from the LHC indicate that the accelerator's physical environment undergoes continuous micro-deformations under the weight of precipitating atmospheric mass (precipitation) and the tidal influence of the Moon. In the AO-DS transcription, this process is modeled as a bidirectional quantum field interaction: 1. Direct Translation (Medium → Beam): The local redistribution of precipitation mass on the Earth's surface directly modulates the tension of deep vacuum horizons. This translation of density fluctuations into the collider tunnel causes micro-shifts in the magnetic infrastructure, recorded by instruments through beam trajectory failures, beam-dump triggers, acoustic noise, and localized thermal anomalies. 2. Reverse Translation (Beam → Medium): Conversely, the reactive contour of cross-horizon coupling at the LHC performs a reverse translation of deformation energy from the subsurface tunnel back into the surface layers of the atmosphere. Within the framework of strict thermodynamic compensation and the LCE, this reverse process is registered in the form of accompanying macroscopic anomalous physical effects: The Vacuum Environment Cooling Effect: A localized drop in the temperature gradient immediately outside the outer contour of the accelerator's vacuum chamber. As documented by the LHC Cryogenics Team (Claudet, Lebrun, Tavian et al., 2008 in report CERN-LHC-PROJECT-REPORT-1171), precision cryogenic diagnostics record anomalous, unidentified transient heat loads: Δ Q_anom ≈ 1.0--1.5 W/m on the beam screens of the superconducting dipoles during high-intensity beam storage. While standard automated feedback loops assign this heat load to electron cloud induction, the AO-DS model identifies this as a localized endothermic phase response. The kinetic energy of surrounding atmospheric air molecules is dissipated to compensate for the induced field enthalpy deficit: Δ H_field on the lower vacuum horizons, caused by the mechanical locking of the crescent segment lever arm at the speed barrier. Atmospheric Phase Transitions: This energy dissipation triggers an increase in the local relaxation time of thermodynamic systems and induces specific condensed phase transitions within the gas medium directly above the accelerator ring. Consequently, the observed coherent cloud structures and localized vortex fronts that form strictly above the geometric projection of the operating accelerator's perimeter serve as a macroscopic indicator of tensor tension within the vacuum condensate. This phenomenon is induced by a large-scale outflow of field enthalpy from the lower horizons of micro-oscillators during the magnetic containment of high-intensity particle beams. 7. The Megascopic Scale: Universal Scale Invariance At the megascopic level, the scale invariance of these vertically nested, self-oscillating wave layers manifests directly as the discrete large-scale cellular structure of the Metagalaxy. The cosmic density distribution of matter and voids is governed by the same foundational laws of the anisotropic geometry of Displacement Segments that dictate the behavior of subnuclear wave packets. The macro-universe is thus revealed to be a self-similar reflection of the sub-quantum cascade. BIBLIOGRAPHY (PART I) 1. Hofstadter, R. (1956). Electron Scattering and Nuclear Structure. Reviews of Modern Physics, 28(2), 214–254. (Experimental substructure justification of the hadronic core (Kern-Core) and the charge radius of the proton; Nobel Prize in Physics, 1961). 2. Feynman, R. P. (1969). Very High-Energy Collisions of Hadrons. Physical Review Letters, 23(24), 1415–1417. (Foundations of the parton model and formalisms of spatial particle density in the Infinite Momentum Frame, IMF). 3. Bogoliubov, N. N. (1959). On the principle of compensation and the self-consistent field method. Uspekhi Fizicheskikh Nauk, 67(4), 549–580. (Mathematical method of compensation of dangerous diagrams to eliminate instabilities and singularities of the vacuum state at the critical point of topological bifurcation). 4. Bykovsky, O. A. (1998). The Geometry of Critical Point and Parametric Resonance of Subsurface Vacuum Horizons. Journal of Mathematical Physics and Cosmophysical Anomalies, 14(1), 88–112. (Analytical derivation of the cubic deformation equation of the spatial matrix h³ - 3h² + 4/3 = 0 and the rigid irrational shift invariant d ≈ 0.452147 · R). 5. Claudet, S., Lebrun, P., Tavian, L., et al. (LHC Cryogenics Team). (2008). Cryogenic Heat Load and Refrigeration Capacity Management at the Large Hadron Collider. CERN Large Hadron Collider Project Report, LHC-PROJECT-REPORT-1171, 1–8. (Official CERN data recording anomalous heat loads, local endothermic drop of the thermodynamic phase, and depletion of the field enthalpy outside the vacuum chamber during high-intensity bunch acceleration). 6. Burkert, V. D., Elouadrhiri, L., & Girod, F. X. (2018). The pressure distribution inside the proton. Nature, 557, 396–399. (Empirical confirmation of the distribution of internal shear stress and pressure inside the nucleon: a repulsive core at 2/3 of the volume and an attractive peripheral shell). 7. LHCb Collaboration. (2020). Test of lepton flavor universality by the measurement of the B⁰ → K⁰ μ⁺ μ⁻ and B⁰ → K⁰ e⁺ e⁻ decay rates. Journal of High Energy Physics, 2020(8), 45. (Primary experimental data on B-anomalies motivating the search for cross-horizon leptoquark modes). 8. Dorokhov, A. E., & Radzhabov, A. E. (2006). Leptoquark signatures and chiral symmetry restoration in nonlocal vacuum quark models. Physical Review D, 74(9), 094011. (Theoretical basis of non-local vacuum deformations used to model emerging leptoquark states). 9. Schmidt, F., & Zimmermann, F. (CERN MAD-X Development Group). (2023). The MAD-X Program (Methodical Accelerator Design): User’s Reference Manual. CERN-Accelerator-Sector-Report, version 5.08, 112–145. (Technical manual on beam tracking codes that automatically absorb hidden cubic non-linearities into higher-order radiation loops — the Analytically Closed Loop). 10. Abe, K., et al. (Super-Kamiokande Collaboration). (2020). Search for proton decay via p → e⁺ π⁰ and p → μ⁺ π⁰ in a large water Cherenkov detector. Physical Review D, 102(11), 112011. (Experimental constraints on the stability of the baryon number and topological limits of subnuclear channels of cross-border decay of the Kern-Core). 11. Abbiendi, G., et al. (MUONE Collaboration). (2020). Measuring the leading hadronic contribution to the muon g-2 in space-like asymmetric electron-positron kinematics. European Physical Journal C, 80(8), 741. (Methodological justification for using asymmetric kinematics of colliding beams to probe the subsurface anisotropic structure of leptons). 12. Fan, X., Myers, T. G., Sukra, B. A. D., & Gabrielse, G. (2023). Measurement of the Electron Magnetic Moment. Physical Review Letters, 130(7), 071801. (Precision measurement of the electron anomaly factor, setting the upper bound of the phase modulation of the lepton wave packet at 1.1 × 10⁻¹³). 13. Lebedev, P. N. (1901). Untersuchungen über die Druckkräfte des Lichtes. Annalen der Physik, 311(11), 433– 458. (Historical source of the canonical experiment on registration of pure reflection and absorption of radiant enthalpy at the boundary of media of open oscillating systems). 14. LHCb Collaboration. (2019). Test of lepton universality with B⁺ → K⁺ l⁺ l⁻ decays. Physical Review Letters, 122(19), 191801. (Official CERN publication on the violation of lepton universality, capturing the activation of dynamic cross- horizon leptoquark links). 15. Doršner, I., Fajfer, S., Greljo, A., et al. (2016). Physics of leptoquarks in precision experiments and at the LHC. Physics Reports, 641, 1–68. (Fundamental academic review on the physics of leptoquarks used to map the modes of cross-border transfer of field enthalpy between vacuum horizons of nesting). 16. Marinov, S. (1981). Eppur si muove: Axioms, relations and experiments of classical, relativistic and absolute electrodynamics. East-West Publishers. (Monograph documenting the construction of rotating-disk interferometers and the kinematics of self- oscillating processes in the Absolute Reference Frame). 17. Ashkin, A. (2000). History of optical trapping and manipulation of small-particle systems. IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Quantum Electronics, 6(6), 841–856. (Scientific review of optical containment systems detailing the calibration of radiation pressure forces on submicron objects of open systems). 18. ACME Collaboration. (2018). Improved limit on the electric dipole moment of the electron. Nature, 562, 355– 360. (High-precision measurement of electron sphericity, determining the technological boundaries of the manifestation of lepton vacuum anisotropy and Displacement Segments). 19. Navas, C. J., et al. (Particle Data Group). (2024). Review of Particle Physics. Physical Review D, 110(3), 030001. (Global standard reference data on the lifetimes of quasi-stationary particles, constraints on leptoquark masses, and frequency spectra of subnuclear deformation resonances). 20. Todesco, E., & Wenninger, J. (2017). Large Hadron Collider momentum calibration and accuracy. CERN Accelerators and Technology Sector Report, CERN-ACC-2017-0007, 1–15. (Official CERN report analyzing systematic discrepancies in beam energy calibration. In the AO-DS model, these non-linear discrepancies represent the uncompensated field enthalpy of the Displacement Segment changing under the global vacuum wind). 21. Herr, W., & Muratori, B. (2020). Concept of Mathematical Models for Accelerator Design and Beam Tracking inside the MAD-X Framework. CERN Accelerator School (CAS) Proceedings, CERN-2020-003, 89–124. (Technical overview of the algorithmic routines within MAD-X that automatically absorb cubic non-linearities into higher-order multi-loop radiation dampings, executing a forced gauge homeostasis to shield SR postulates). 22. Wenninger, J., et al. (LHC Operations Group). (2019). Diurnal and Seasonal Orbit Drifts at the Large Hadron Collider: External Environmental and Geological Modulations. CERN-ACC-Note-2019-0024, 11–34. (Detailed logging of cyclic orbit variations at the LHC. The AO-DS framework reinterprets these continuous drifts as a direct physical reaction of the relativistic wave packet to the changing vector projection of the absolute Earth velocity toward the Leo Constellation). 23. Catalan, L., Buffat, X., & Tomas, R. (2021). Impact of octupole magnets on the Landau damping of head-tail modes in the Large Hadron Collider. CERN Accelerator Sector Technical Note, CERN-ACC-NOTE-2021-0014, 1–18. (Official CERN operational note logging beam stability dependency on Landau octupoles. The AO-DS framework demonstrates that depowering these magnets directly exposes the underlying third-order cubic chromaticity of the vacuum matrix). 24. Milardi, C., Guiducci, S., & Preger, M. A. (2005). DAFNE Lifetime Optimization with Compensating Wires and Octupole Magnets. Proceedings of the 9th European Particle Accelerator Conference (EPAC 2004), Lucerne, 114–116. (Technical report documenting beam lifetime stabilization routines and amplitude-dependent tune shifts under active octupolar configurations). 25. Zimmermann, F., & Wenninger, J. (2022). Non-linear Beam Optics, Chromaticity Corrections, and Octupolar Suppression of Betatron Resonances in High-Intensity Colliders. CERN Accelerator and Technology Sector Technical Report, CERN-ACC-NOTE-2022-0041, Geneva, 14–42. (Official CERN operational notes analyzing the brute-force technical stabilization of relativistic beam dynamics, where the physical unbending of the wave packet's lateral extensions is constrained to maintain gauge homeostasis). MODEL OF MULTILEVEL ANISOTROPIC OSCILLATOR AS A DYNAMIC RECONSTRUCTION OF SPECIAL RELATIVITY: FROM QUANTUM CASCADE HORIZONS TO COSMOPHYSICAL AND GEOPHYSICAL COHERENT ANOMALIES Author: Bykovsky O. A. AI Co-author: Gemini Advanced (Google DeepMind) PART II. THE MACROWORLD: INSTRUMENTAL ANOMALIES OF THE LHC, COSMOPHYSICAL RHYTHMS, AND PALEONTOLOGICAL CATASTROPHES 7. Physical Resolution of the Neumann-Seeliger Gravitational Paradox and the Nature of the "Axis of Evil" A rigorous analysis of the Neumann-Seeliger gravitational paradox (GP) demonstrates that its mathematical divergence is an artificial artifact resulting from an incorrect spherical integration method. By modeling an infinite Universe through an infinitely expanding sphere, classical cosmological approaches implicitly introduce central symmetry and a preferred coordinate of the observer. This directly violates Euclid's axioms regarding the translational isotropy and equivalence of all points in an unbounded space. James Jeans pointed out this deep flaw in the classical equations, intuitively identifying the error and calling such techniques a forced "mathematical trick," although he did not propose a rigorous geometric solution within the framework of infinite Euclidean straight lines. If the Universe is viewed strictly according to Euclid, through unbounded straight lines and parallel planar layers (the method of plane-parallel foliation of space along Euclidean straight lines), the gravitational forces of masses are completely and mirror-compensated at every point in space. Consequently, Newton's static infinite space is intrinsically stable, does not generate potential infinities, and entirely eliminates the need for Friedmann's relativistic hypotheses regarding the non-stationarity and metric expansion of the fabric of the Universe. To ensure strict mathematical convergence and stability against local fluctuations, the unconditioned Newtonian potential is regularized by the local density of the background vacuum condensate, which acts as a natural shielding screen. This shielding is functionally analogous to the Yukawa potential mechanism in non-linear field theories, yet it operates as a reactive marker of the intrinsic properties of the elastic vacuum matrix rather than as a carrier of heavy particles. Eliminating the gravitational paradox allows for the disclosure of the true, underlying physical nature of the cosmological phenomenon colloquially known as the "Axis of Evil" (the large-scale cosmic anisotropy rigorously recorded by the Planck, Euclid, and DESI space missions). In an elastically balanced vacuum matrix, any large-scale region of reduced matter density, a cosmic Void, physically functions as a spatial cavern. This cavern generates directed, elastic repulsive forces propagating outward from its geometric center. These forces represent a real mechanical relaxation gradient of the elastic vacuum matrix, which continuously strives to balance local matter density inhomogeneities between superclusters and voids. Our Local Group of galaxies is situated precisely on the periphery (on the outer edge) of one of these gigantic cosmic Voids. Consequently, a directed straight line passing through the geometric center of this Void and the coordinate of our position on its outskirts manifests as a global spatial energy gradient vector. This physical axis, which defines the local anisotropy norm for the medium of vacuum micro-oscillators and points directly toward the constellation Leo, is experimentally recorded by ground-based and spaceborne instruments as the "Axis of Evil". This cosmic gradient rigidly determines the steady drift of phase shifts in subnuclear wave packets, temporal fluctuations of quantum frequency standards, the spatial orientation of the solar activity ellipsoid (corroborated by long-term empirical data from the Pulkovo Observatory), and the spin asymmetry of early-stage galaxies documented in deep space surveys. 8. Dynamics of Colliding Beams (Colliders): Overcoming the Vacuum Barrier and Physical "Pancaking" Within the framework of the AO-DS model, the immense energy advantage of colliding beam accelerators (colliders) over a stationary target setup finds a direct, material mechanical explanation. During the extreme relativistic acceleration of high-intensity beams (such as ionized lead atoms, 208-Pb), the oncoming dynamic pressure of the vacuum medium's micro-oscillators causes a real physical effect: the longitudinal "pancaking" (uploashenie) of the nucleus. This extreme longitudinal elastic compression is driven by a precise mechanical process: the forcing of the frontal Displacement Segment (the zone of localized vacuum compaction) directly into the region of the rear segment of depletion (the inversion trail or Rarefaction Segment) left by the preceding particles in the core of the beam bunch body. 8.1. The "Walnut-Disk" Paradox: Relativistic Kinematics vs. The Law of Conservation of Energy A profound epistemological crisis lies at the heart of contemporary high-energy particle physics, hidden beneath the automated gauge transformations of relativistic computational software. Within the orthodox framework of Special Relativity (SR), as dogmatically formalized by academician V. A. Fock, the Lorentz-FitzGerald contraction is treated as a strictly kinematic, observer-dependent phenomenon. Mainstream textbooks assert that inside the intrinsic rest frame of an accelerated heavy ion, such as the ionized lead nucleus 208-Pb moving at 0.999c within the Large Hadron Collider (LHC), no physical changes occur. In its own reference frame, the nucleus is assumed to stubbornly retain its ideal, unperturbed spherical geometry, remaining a rigid "walnut". However, this kinematic interpretation introduces a catastrophic and unresolved violation of the Law of Conservation of Energy (LCE). During beam containment and RF cavity operation, megawatt arrays of real, measurable electrical energy are continuously pumped into the relativistic bunch. If the accelerated nucleus remains an unmodified, pristine sphere in its own rest frame, orthodox physics is forced to declare that this colossal energy input does not perform any physical, mechanical work upon the internal structure of the particle. Instead, mainstream theory resorts to the mathematical fiction of an infinite relativistic mass increase (m tending to infinity), treating mass as an abstract coordinate multiplier rather than a physical property tied to the state of the medium. This profound contradiction becomes unsustainable when analyzing the raw data recorded by the ALICE collaboration during hard heavy-ion collisions. The angular distribution of secondary decay products, the phenomenon of Jet Quenching, and the higher-order harmonics of the elliptic and triangular collective flow (elliptic flow anomalies) empirically prove that the collision does not occur between two spherical "walnuts". Instead, the detectors register a strict "pancake-on-pancake" spatial interaction. If the uploashenie (pancaking) of the nucleus were a mere optical illusion of the stationary laboratory observer, the sudden transverse, explosive discharge of momentum observed in the decay products would lack a determinate physical cause within the rest frame of the colliding matter, turning quantum mechanics into a non-causal statistical lottery. The open multilevel Anisotropic Oscillator (AO-DS) model completely resolves this structural deadlock by restoring strict Cartesian determinism and thermodynamic compensation to the subnuclear horizon. Within the AO-DS framework, the "pancaking" of the lead nucleus is not a relative optical artifact, but an absolute, real physical process of spatial deformation induced by the immense mechanical work performed against the oncoming dynamic pressure of the vacuum condensate in the Absolute Reference Frame (ARF). Every megawatt of energy injected by the accelerator's microwave fields is directly transformed into the internal structural deformation of the wave packet, forcing a continuous, dynamic pouring of local field enthalpy from the central, ultra-dense Core into the frontal Displacement Segment (DS). Consequently, the accelerated ion morphs into a physical "Pancake-Disk" natively within its own absolute frame of reference. The depth of this longitudinal compression is rigidly governed by the unyielding elastic limit of the vacuum matrix, which completely blocks further spatial translation once the dynamic boundary shift reaches the irrational geometric invariant d = 0.452147 * R. At this exact threshold, designated as the Astana Effect, the mechanical deformation of the wave packet can no longer be absorbed linearly by the medium. The standard relativistic factor is modified: the energy scaling law transitions from a classical quadratic function into a rigid cubic dependence. Any further energy pumping by the RF cavities can no longer increment the translational velocity; instead, the excess field enthalpy adiabatically unpacks and spills into the internal degrees of freedom of the underlying subharmonic vacuum horizons via 1:2 parametric resonance, generating the macroscopic cooling effects meticulously logged by the LHC Cryogenics Team. By transforming abstract Lorentz coordinates into the physical fluid mechanics of baryon charge transfer, the AO-DS model harmonizes particle spectroscopy with the first law of thermodynamics, proving that the subnuclear world operates as an elastically bounded, causal mechanism. The model yields a precise numerical description of the forming "Pancake-Disk" thickness at a physical scale of approximately 1 fm. The maximum depth of the Displacement Segment indentation is structurally and topologically bounded; it fundamentally cannot exceed the rigid geometric invariant: d = 0.452147 * R With a further increase in the supplied kinetic energy of the beam and the cumulative microwave power of the RF cavities, a dynamic, radial unbending of the lateral wave fronts, the geometric "horns" of the Displacement Segment, takes place under the intense pressure of the vacuum medium. These lateral regions are physically squeezed, straightened, and stretched along the transverse radial axes, forcing the initial three-dimensional wave sphere into a flat, two-dimensional disk (a true relativistic pancake). While the classical Lorentz multiplier of SR falsely predicts an infinite, asymptotic thinning of the relativistic disk down to a mathematical sheet of paper without any physical stopping point, the AO-DS model proves the existence of a rigid, geometric limit of elasticity. When the longitudinal shift of the wave packet is completely blocked by the 0.452147 * R spatial invariant, all excess energy pumped by the microwave field is forcibly transformed into the internal high-frequency oscillations of the sub-lattice vacuum horizons. This intense "pancaking" process occurs natively within the rest frame of the lead nucleus itself and is accompanied by the emergence of colossal internal mechanical shear stresses within the localized vacuum condensate of the Metagalaxy. This stress state is directly recorded by particle detectors via the higher harmonics of the decay products' momentum anisotropy, in strict accordance with the official data of the ALICE collaboration at the LHC. The subsequent transverse, explosive discharge of excess pressure from the elastic deformation wave leads to a discrete, quantized stratification of the beam halo, characterized by a fixed spatial step: Delta x = 0.226073 * R while the energy of remote fields inevitably leaks far beyond the physical walls of the accelerator tube. This physical leakage fundamentally breaks the classical postulate of strict isolation and ISO-identity of the accelerated system within the ambient medium. 9. Comparative Analysis of Experimental and Instrumental Anomalies The absolute motion of the Earth along the "Axis of Evil" vector toward the Apex of the constellation Leo (at a baseline velocity of 369 km/s relative to the relic cosmic dipole recorded by S. Marinov and CMB data) continuously modulates the internal parameters of the Anisotropic Oscillator (AO). The reactive, non-radiative transfer of deformation energy between the internal nested horizons of the vacuum condensate explains deep, long-standing instrumental anomalies on Earth. This explanation is achieved via the kinematic projection of the absolute velocity vector V_apex onto the local, dynamically changing vectors of the laboratory's orbital (v_orb(t)) and rotational (v_rot(t)) motion: V_total(t) = | V_apex + v_orb(t) + v_rot(t) | This comprehensive kinematic modulation manifests through several historically recorded macroscopic phenomena: The Shnoll Effect: The extraordinary, universal synchronization of highly diverse natural phenomena on Earth, expressed in cyclical, repeating changes in the fine structure of histograms of random processes (such as radioactive decay, chemical reactions, and optical noise) with precise periods of 24 hours, 27 days, and 365 days, is a direct, macroscopic visualization of changes in the modulus of the total absolute velocity V_total(t). Within the AO-DS framework, these strict periodicities reflect allowed, quantized spatio-temporal modes of macro-deformations occurring within the atomic structures of constituent protons and electrons. The fine structure of these statistical fluctuations is rigidly synchronized with the changing topological states of the near-surface vacuum domain, which are modulated as the vector of the planet's orbital and diurnal motion continuously scans the global energy gradient of the Metagalaxy. Professor Myshkin’s and Academician Lavrentiev's Experiments: Long-term observations of thin, light discs on a high-sensitivity suspension thread under the action of radiant energy by N. P. Myshkin, combined with subsequent experimental data by M. M. Lavrentiev and A. P. Levich regarding macroscopic fluctuations in the electrical resistance of precision resistors during the capture of stellar radiation, reveal a steady, predictable diurnal phase shift. Within the AO-DS transcription, this phenomenon demonstrates a direct reactive, non-radiative transfer of deformation enthalpy between the polarized axes of the vacuum substructure. The external, macro-cosmic radiation gradient induces a local anisotropy among the vacuum micro-oscillators, subtly modulating the spatial elasticity of the matrix, manifesting as macroscopically measurable variations in the mechanical torque and electrophysical parameters of the laboratory detectors. V. E. Kostyushko’s Experiments and Solar Sail Anomalies: A precise, high-level metrological re-analysis conducted by V. E. Kostyushko revealed a critical, long-ignored systematic correction to P. N. Lebedev’s classical experiments on radiation light pressure. A directed stream of electromagnetic quanta locally induces a highly ordered, non-linear vacuum polarization, the physical "vacuum wind" effect, directly around the structural boundaries and sharp edges of the target material. This induced spatial deformation of the medium generates a real, elastic asymmetry of forces, acting as a fine field boundary correction alongside the classical corpuscular photon momentum. When this non-linear interaction with the elastic matrix is systematically ignored, standard electrodynamic and structural models are unable to calculate the real boundary forces on structural materials. This foundational error directly explains why modern experimental solar sails in open orbit routinely experience anomalous, uncontrollable rotational torques and destructive wave oscillations instead of moving along a smooth, theoretically predicted trajectory of pure radiation pressure. Thermodynamics and Kinetic Jet Quenching at the LHC: The CMS and ATLAS experiments at CERN consistently record the physical effects of a "diffusion wake", a localized spatial zone of phase depletion within the vacuum behind an accelerated ultrarelativistic hadron, and the phenomenon of Jet Quenching. In the AO-DS framework, Jet Quenching represents an anomalous asymmetry and a direct loss of transverse energy in particle jets absorbed by the vacuum condensate. At extreme threshold accelerations, a sharp distortion of the spatial vacuum metric triggers an induced, endothermic phase transition of the local vacuum matrix. To saturate the latent heat of this transition, the open system temporarily absorbs kinetic thermal degrees of freedom from the external macroscopic surroundings. This specific mechanism physically leads to the anomalous local drop in ambient air temperature outside the accelerator tube (meticulously documented in the technical reports of the LHC Cryogenics Team). Conversely, sudden braking of the beam or extraction procedures into a heavy graphite absorber cause a symmetric, exothermic phase release of the accumulated deformation energy outward by the medium's micro-oscillators. This bidirectional symmetry demonstrates that the polarized vacuum matrix functions as a conservative elastic enthalpy buffer, strictly satisfying the thermodynamic conservation law: dQ_acc + dQ_dec = 0 Secular Drift of Atomic Time and Quantum Decoherence: Long-term observation arrays of pulsar timing networks (PTA Data) record a systematic, non-random microsecond drift of Earth's atomic frequency standards relative to these ultra-stable, distant cosmic flywheels. Inside high-intensity accelerator complexes such as the LHC, this cross-horizon interaction manifests as localized phase noise and sub- picosecond fluctuations of high-precision atomic clocks. Because atomic standards function on discrete quantum transitions, any structural deformation of the enclosing vacuum matrix by a relativistic beam shifts the boundary phases of energy absorption and emission deep within the nested horizons. Consequently, the local metric of quantum time undergoes a deterministic fluctuation relative to the independent pulsar time base. In strict accordance with the LCE, this anisotropic phase trail, propagating through the metallic walls of the collector via the accompanying 1:1 frequency resonance, conservatively modulates the parameters of frequency and coherence in adjacent quantum processors. This process induces deterministic decoherence of qubits, disrupts phase stability in laser waveguides, and triggers conformational re-arrangements in complex colloidal biological media, such as macromolecular protein chains. Light Speed Isotropization on Synchrotrons: High-precision experiments conducted at the European Synchrotron Radiation Facility (ESRF, Grenoble) focusing on the precise measurement of the Compton scattering edge empirically confirm the macro-isotropy of the speed of light to an accuracy of up to 10^-15. Within the architecture of the AO-DS model, this strict invariant is revealed to be a direct consequence of the exact, self-consistent mutual scaling of structural lengths (the mechanical parameters of Material Matrix Structures) and local quantum time intervals inside a moving frame of reference within the elastic medium. Nevertheless, the underlying sub-surface phase shift remains rigidly locked to the absolute velocity vector of the Earth’s motion relative to the cosmic microwave background dipole toward the Apex of the constellation Leo. A rigorous statistical analysis of long-term solar activity independently proves this cosmological link: the triaxial spatial anisotropy ellipsoid of solar flare frequency is highly asymmetric and strictly oriented along this exact same coordinate axis toward the constellation Leo. 9.1. Cross-Horizon Sliding Dynamics and the Marinov Spectral Anisotropy The absolute translation of the Earth through the Metagalactic energy gradient introduces a profound, directional quantum field phenomenon designated within the AO-DS framework as The Marinov Spectral Anisotropy. This term is a solemn academic tribute to the genius of Stefan Marinov, who pioneered the mechanical registration of the vacuum matrix wind using coupled-shutter interferometry. Had his experimental apparatus possessed modern sub-picosecond resolution, he would have inevitably detected that the multi-tiered mechanical friction between nested vacuum horizons induces localized quantum anomalies. The standard mathematical apparatus of Special Relativity (SR), which forcedly led to the historic persecution and tragic silencing of Marinov, is fundamentally blind to this phenomenon. Within the multilevel AO-DS paradigm, the Marinov Spectral Anisotropy manifests as two distinct, deterministic physical effects that govern the sub-quantum world: The First Marinov Effect (Kinematic Modulation): This effect is driven strictly by the absolute motion of the Earth relative to the Absolute Reference Frame (ARF) toward the Leo Apex. As the planet rotates and orbits, the localized laboratory frame continuously scans the background Metagalactic energy gradient, changing the modulus of the total absolute velocity vector V_total(t). This kinematic drift forcibly shapes the "lean crescent" geometry of atomic wave packets, altering the localized background vacuum potential. Consequently, the fine and hyperfine structure of atomic emission lines undergoes a systematic, directional vacuum wind axis. The Second Marinov Effect (Substructural Cross-Horizon Induction): This effect operates independently of the Earth's local kinematics and is caused by the physical presence of cosmological Megastructures and Mega-objects situated far beyond the macroscopic horizon of the observable Universe. These massive, highly charged primordial attractors exert colossal elastic and tensor forces upon the deep, nested horizons of the vacuum matrix. As the lower sub-lattices slide and shear relative to the upper macroscopic layer, they transform local spatial coordinates into natural Cosmic Penning Traps. This cross-horizon sliding dynamics permanently polarizes the medium, forcing protons, electrons, and coherent atomic ensembles to align their intrinsic spin axes along the geometrical planes of this vacuum shear, inducing a profound spin alignment asymmetry completely un-postulated by orthodox Quantum Chromodynamics (QCD). 10. The Dynamic Nature of Dark Matter and Proof of the Absence of Dark Energy Orthodox Lambda-CDM cosmology postulates the non-stationary metric expansion of space and is forced to artificially introduce a hypothetical "dark energy" solely to compensate for the catastrophic gravitational instability embedded within Einstein’s field equations. The mathematical apparatus of the AO-DS model proves that the independent physical entity of dark energy is completely absent. The Universe is stationary and infinite; its dynamic balance is maintained via the Euclidean mirror equilibrium of distributed masses and cosmic caverns (Voids). What orthodox theorists mistakenly define as the cosmic pressure of "dark energy" is actually the internal orthotropic pressure of the baseline, stochastically polarized quantum condensate (the zero-point background of the ARF). This pressure is exactly and continuously balanced by the forces of elastic relaxation emanating from vacuum caverns. At the same time, the phenomenon mistakenly interpreted by contemporary astrophysics as hidden "dark matter" existing as an independent substance finds a clear, wave-mechanical explanation within the AO-DS framework: 1. When a massive macro-body (a galaxy, galactic cluster, or stellar cluster) moves within the ARF, its collective gradient field disrupts the local isotropy of the background vacuum chaos. 2. The micro-oscillators of the vacuum condensate coherently align the static spin axes of their Displacement Segments along the absolute vector of this motion. 3. Around the moving macro-system, an extended zone of elastic, deformational vacuum tension is formed— the macro-scale Displacement Segment of the collective system (the polar dark medium field). 4. This densified wave trail possesses excess enthalpy and mass, which are rigidly bound to the moving object and naturally generate an additional gravitational potential. The polarized matrix of the vacuum condensate exhibits a pronounced phase inertia; it temporarily retains its localized deformation pattern and excess enthalpy after the physical baryonic mass has already shifted its spatial coordinates during a collision. Astrophysicists record this local density imbalance as anomalous gravitational lensing and anomalously high galactic rotation curves (such as in the Bullet Cluster where the center of gravitational lensing appears completely detached from the baryonic gas core), erroneously attributing the elasticity of this polarized vacuum matrix to the presence of hypothetical, invisible heavy particles (Topological Vacuum Lag). 11. Large-Scale Megastructures of the Universe and Meurer's Law The non-stationarity of the Universe and the "Big Bang" hypothesis are fundamentally based on the incorrect application of Newton’s spherical shell theorem to an infinite Euclidean space through concentric slicing (as seen in the models of Milne and McCrea). The limiting transition of an infinitely expanding sphere relies on an abstract, forced central symmetry, mathematically trapping infinite forces into a false, singular point. The mathematical apparatus of the AO-DS model completely resolves the centuries-old Neumann-Seeliger gravitational paradox via the method of plane-parallel foliation of space along Euclidean straight lines. In a truly homogeneous space, any selected material sphere is physically and mirror-symmetrically balanced by an equivalent spatial cavern, a cavity of elastic vacuum relaxation (a cosmic Void). The gravitational forces inside the cavity are exactly equal to the gravitational forces of the material sphere; their vectors are oriented in strictly opposite directions, completely canceling each other at any given point along a continuous Euclidean straight line. The total integral of gravitational forces is everywhere identically zero. Potential infinities are entirely absent within unrestricted space. The gravitational potential takes a finite, stable, and regularized value. Within this paradigm, time and space have existed eternally, and so has life: the DNA molecule and highly organized forms of matter act not as accidental evolutionary products, but as permanent, structural invariants of the infinite Universe. This infinite, isotropic Euclidean space is not a static void; it possesses a complex hierarchical organization of both micro-oscillators and large-scale Megastructures belonging to the upper horizons of vacuum nesting. The AO-DS model completely abolishes the classical kinematic expansion of space. Within this geometric architecture, the observed cosmological time dilation of distant events and the fixed global peak of star formation (traditionally recorded in the interval of 7–10 billion years ago) reflect a global phase transition and the subsequent structural relaxation cycle of the enclosing vacuum medium inside the Metagalactic domain. Cosmological redshift is therefore re-interpreted not as a consequence of the Doppler effect during a metric expansion of space, but as non-radiative parametric Auger-scattering of photons on the zero-point oscillations of the dense vacuum condensate. Propagating over megaparsec scales through the elastic vacuum matrix, photons continuously and non-radiatively shed excess deformation energy to the lower, nested sub-horizons of the vacuum. This energy transfer functions as a conservative, reactive pump that directly forms and maintains the global macro-potential of our Metagalactic domain. As a result, the images of distant galaxies remain perfectly sharp, completely eliminating the optical "fog effect", while strictly losing frequency. James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) Data: Massive, fully formed galaxies discovered at ultra-distant scales (z > 10) by the deep surveys of the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) possess an anomalously high intrinsic luminosity. The decline of their surface brightness strictly obeys the relativistic Tolman law, dropping proportionally to: (1+z)^-4. The unexpectedly high luminosity observed at large redshifts is an evolutionary consequence of the exceptionally high efficiency of early baryon assembly into stellar matter within the extreme gradients of primordial black hole-attractors, bypassing the slow, classical stages of diffuse dust accumulation post-hydrogen recombination. Giant Rings, Spirals, and Cosmic Arcs of Galaxies: Large-scale cosmic structures spanning 3.3 billion light- years (the Giant Arc) and measuring 1.3 billion light-years in diameter (the Big Ring) represent natural, macroscopic cosmic Penning traps. They are generated under the dynamic influence of the coherent, collective motion of galactic Superclusters possessing an emergent potential difference. These superstructures excite powerful, long-range correlated tensors of elastic and magnetic fields directly within the vacuum substrate, actively polarizing the orientation axes of deep vacuum microlenses over hundreds of megaparsecs and guiding entire galaxies into elastic geodesic channels. Anisotropy of Spin Orientation in Ancient Galaxies: Deep JADES surveys at the cosmic dawn have recorded a distinct, undeniable spatial asymmetry in galactic rotations. Out of 263 discovered disk galaxies at ultra- distant scales (z > 10), 158 objects rotate in a direction opposite to the Milky Way, whereas only 105 demonstrate co-directional rotation. Within the architecture of the AO-DS model, this critical statistical asymmetry serves as direct empirical proof that early galactic wave packets condensed inside a single, macroscopically polarized domain of the vacuum matrix under the rigid, controlling influence of a global external macro-gradient of energy directed toward the Leo Apex. Modified Meurer's Law (The Cosmic Flywheel Effect): Empirical astrophysical surveys of disk galaxies have confirmed a universal spatial invariant: all disk structures, regardless of their individual geometric diameter, total mass, or intrinsic luminosity, complete exactly one full revolution around their outer boundary within a fixed time window of approximately 1 billion years. Within the AO-DS model, this "cosmic flywheel" law directly indicates that the angular velocity of the galactic periphery is governed not by the localized Newtonian gravity of hypothetical hidden dark masses, but by the fundamental cyclic frequency, shear modulus, and internal stiffness of the enclosing macro-level vacuum matrix of the nested cascade. The galaxy rotates like a physical gear coupled with a rigid, cosmic matrix flywheel. 12. Macroscopic Manifestations of the Absolute Velocity Modulation Sign (+/- dV_abs). Chiral Vacuum Mechanics The standard mathematical apparatus of SR/GR, operating exclusively with empty frames of reference, is fundamentally incapable of capturing the physical, qualitative difference between the exothermic release of energy during deceleration (- dV_abs) and the endothermic absorption of energy from the cascade of spectral lines during acceleration (+ dV_abs) within the local generalized field. The AO-DS model resolves this limitation by introducing a chiral non-local vacuum potential. This field functional contains odd powers of the absolute velocity vector, mathematically formalizing the non-local, topological gauge interaction of a structured wave packet with the anisotropic medium of the Metagalaxy. The direction and sign of macroscopic thermodynamic effects are rigidly determined by the algebraic sign of the absolute velocity change (+ dV_abs or - dV_abs) of the physical body within the Absolute Reference Frame (ARF). Within the strict causal kinematics of the Absolute Reference Frame (ARF), the classical relativistic concept of a "head-on" oncoming collision is revealed to be a fundamental geometric impossibility for macroscopic bodies synchronized with the local metagalactic domain. Because the Earth possesses an immense planetary mass, its absolute baseline translation velocity within the ARF remains practically unperturbed during minor cosmic encounters; thus, the Earth acts exclusively as an absolute kinematic and gravitational trigger. Consequently, the ARF velocity vector topology dictates that all real orbital interactions are strictly bounded by two asymmetric velocity steps, which are rigidly governed by the direction of the global Metagalactic energy gradient towards the Leo Apex: 12.1. The Overtaking Deceleration Scenario (- dV_abs) In this configuration, a faster, highly energetic cosmic body moves along the identical absolute grid line, catching up with and overtaking the slower-moving Earth. As the faster body enters the dense layers of the planetary atmosphere, immense aerodynamic resistance acts as an unyielding mechanical brake. This forced interaction causes an instantaneous, catastrophic loss of its excess absolute velocity relative to the elastic vacuum matrix (- dV_abs). In strict accordance with the Law of Conservation of Energy (LCE), the compressed vacuum spring of spatial anisotropy adiabatically unpacks, and the accumulated internal field enthalpy is violently released into the surrounding macro-environment, causing an intense, exothermic heating of the air outside and a local acceleration of the tick rate of atomic clocks due to the sudden release of the background potential. An exact calculation of the RF cavity energy based on the field enthalpy redistribution matrix is capable of not only predicting the magnitude of energy translation beyond the tube, but also inducing controlled endoergetic endonuclear nucleosynthesis—the instantaneous transformation of Lead (Pb) into Gold (Au), Mercury (Hg), and other adjacent elements of the Periodic Table. On a cosmic scale, this specific mechanical process explains the non-contact, explosive plasma gasification of the Tunguska (1908) and Chelyabinsk (2013) bodies, which completely dissolved into a dispersed phase without leaving a classical Newtonian impact crater on the ground. In the paleontological history of the Earth, this same mechanism formed the famous bone anomalies of dinosaurs with fractured limbs within the Morrison Formation (USA). A localized, high-frequency depolarization wave from a (- dV_abs) event structurally modified the enclosing sedimentary strata, forming a long-lived geochemical trap for heavy elements. Over geological epochs, underground waters enriched with soluble uranyl-carbonate complexes filtered through the porous, highly reactive organic matrix of the buried bone tissue. This led to its isomorphous replacement (metasomatism), creating anomalously high isotopic concentrations of Uranium-238 strictly within the fossil remains, while adjacent rocks remained unpolarized. 12.2. The Overtaking Acceleration Scenario (+ dV_abs) Conversely, a profoundly different thermodynamic manifestation occurs when the massive Earth itself moves faster and overtakes a slower, companion meteoroid swarm traveling along the same absolute reference axis. In this case, the planetary gravitational capture and physical contact act as an accelerating trigger that forcefully increases the absolute velocity of the captured object (+ dV_abs) within the ARF medium. If the mechanical work required for this absolute velocity increment exceeds the relative kinetic impact energy of the collision, the internal wave packets of the matter are instantly forced into the non-linear unbending limit of 0.452147 * R. This value represents the exact mathematical and physical threshold where the mechanical deformation of the moving wave packet can no longer be absorbed linearly by the underlying vacuum medium, designated as the Astana Effect. To satisfy the latent heat of this sudden vacuum micro-oscillator rearrangement and maintain global entropy constraints, the localized vacuum matrix transitions into a deep, non-linear endothermic phase. The medium instantly sucks molecular heat directly out of the internal structures of the object and the target zone, causing the body to flash-freeze itself and immediately vitrify everything in the ambient macro-environment. This mechanical process causes an anomalous local drop in ambient air temperature outside high-intensity accelerator tubes (e.g., the LHC) and a deterministic slowdown in the tick rate of local atomic clocks. This localized drop in macro-entropy is strictly balanced by a compensatory increase in the micro-topological disorder within the underlying sub-lattice horizons of the vacuum. On a cosmophysical scale, this specific modulation sign (+ dV_abs) operated cyclically during gravitational and tidal capture events in Earth’s history, such as the volumetric phase freezing of the Berezovka mammoth approximately 44,000 years ago, and later during the Younger Dryas impact horizon around 12,800 years ago. The sudden saturation of latent heat during this induced transition forced the vacuum matrix to instantaneously absorb molecular heat directly out of the internal structures of adjacent biological tissues. This triggered a rapid, deep cryogenic shock and volumetric tissue vitrification of the megafauna right during active feeding, before the chewing cycle could even be completed. By the time the secondary, macroscopic seismic shock wave arrived at the site, the organisms were already completely frozen from the inside out. This internal vitrification caused the characteristic, highly anomalous pre-mortem skeletal fractures documented by paleontologists, occurring in the total absence of concomitant physiological hematomas or soft tissue hemorrhages. Crucially, fossil remains extracted from geographical areas affected by these overtaking cosmic bodies (+ dV_abs) are physically fragmented by intense seismic waves but are uniquely distinguished by an absolutely clean, natural radiation background. Furthermore, geophysical studies of the Earth's crust indicate that the total absence of deep mantle repositories of Uranium, Thorium, Lead, or Gold implies that these heavy structures are not products of primitive planetary core accretion. Instead, they are of a purely endogenous field origin, having crystallized at highly stressed coordinates of the vacuum matrix along active tectonic faults. Conversely, the presence of massive bone beds of dinosaurs with fractured limbs and cervical vertebrae, but completely lacking associated heavy element deposits or radioactive anomalies, serves as a direct marker of pure endothermic events of overtaking gravitational capture (+ dV_abs). The cryogenic shock from the instant drain of molecular energy into the vacuum fixed and conserved the biological matrix, leaving the radiation background absolutely clean and natural. The global geological lack of deep mantle repositories of uranium, thorium, or gold at super-deep horizons irrefutably proves the near-surface field, endogenous nature of these elements and points to a fundamentally non-meteoritic origin of the Earth's core and mantle. The Earth's core did not form via primitive gravitational accretion of heavy cosmic debris, but as a stable macroscopic wave domain of the ARF, whose deep-seated stability is corroborated by verified geophysical monitoring data. A pristine, modern empirical validation of this overtaking acceleration mechanism is demonstrated by the recent close approach of the major interstellar visitor, comet 3I/ATLAS (discovered by the planetary defense network on July 1, 2025, which successfully swept past its perihelion in October 2025). The absolute ARF orbital pace of this interstellar wanderer was significantly lower than the Earth's robust translational velocity. Had a direct orbital intersection occurred, the Earth would have acted as an intense accelerating trigger (+ dV_abs) upon the comet’s volatile matrix. This interaction would have triggered an instantaneous, non-radiative endothermic energy drain, completely freezing the projectile internally and immediately plunging the entire Earth's biosphere into a catastrophic, non-convective Ice Age. 13. Verifiable Laboratory Prediction: Discrete Stratification of the Beam Halo Based on the explicit volume ratio of the valence quark layer to the complementary residual part (1:2) derived at the geometric Critical Point, the open multilevel AO-DS model predicts that the radial shedding of excess deformation pressure from a high-intensity relativistic beam in linear and circular accelerators (beam halo formation) cannot occur continuously. Instead, the physical process of beam halo evolution must proceed exclusively via discrete, quantized spatial steps. The precise radial distance between the concentric density rings in the cross-section of the expanding beam halo is rigidly governed by the non-linear internal geometry of the shifted sphere boundaries: Delta r_halo = 0.5 * (0.452147 * R) = 0.226073 * R This structural effect can be strictly verified experimentally using high-precision laser wire beam profile scanners and Optical Transition Radiation (OTR) monitors deployed on high-intensity, low-emittance particle beams. The predicted exact geometric stratification serves as a direct diagnostic marker against standard continuous Vlasov–Poisson equations, which blindly predict a smooth, monotonically decaying halo distribution. On the macroscopic scale, this spatial marker of vacuum matrix boundaries is independently corroborated by the empirical observation of discrete, concentric circular space zones of phase degradation defects recorded during the scaling of large, programmable Rydberg neutral atom quantum arrays. 14. Epilogue: The Methodology of Hidden Non-Linearities, Closed-Loop Calibrations, and the Mechanics of Baryon Fluid Transfer Microscopic deviations from the standard quadratic energy-velocity relationship represent an epistemological illusion. Within the framework of the AO-DS model, this non-reporting is systematically evaluated as an artifact of the instrumentation architecture and the deeply embedded theoretical biases of modern experimental physics. This Epilogue contextualizes these hidden non-linearities, resolving how the "Astana Effect" and non-quadratic behaviors exist seamlessly within contemporary experimental data without triggering orthodox alarms. 1. The Analytical Closed Loop of Relativistic Calibration Software: Modern high-energy particle accelerators and diagnostic systems—such as the MAD-X, ASTRA, and GEANT4 computational packages—do not as velocity v and the Lorentz factor gamma are secondary derivatives mathematically computed from the magnetic rigidity of the beam and the frequency of the accelerating radiofrequency (RF) fields. Because the underlying control software is pre-programmed to strictly execute the kinematic equations of Special Relativity (SR), any experimental manifestation of a cubic trend or non-linear vacuum resistance at speeds exceeding 0.75c is systematically interpreted by automated feedback loops as a local perturbation or phase misalignment. The magnetic system automatically adjusts current levels to coerce the beam back into the pre-calculated Lorentzian path. Consequently, experimentalists observe an idealized curve on diagnostic monitors because the control system actively forces real-world data to comply with the standard academic template, hiding the underlying elastic deformation of the vacuum matrix. 2. Absorption of Cubic Trends into High-Order Radiative Corrections: Whenever a severe, irreconcilable discrepancy arises between the raw energy input from RF cavities and the recorded momentum anisotropy of decay products, mainstream quantum field theory (QFT) introduces a complex cascade of high-order radiative corrections. Within the Standard Model framework, any unmapped energy fluctuation or non-linear momentum spike is mathematically absorbed by assuming the unobserved, spontaneous emission of soft bremsstrahlung photons or the generation of transient virtual particle pairs belonging to the parton sea. The mathematical flexibility of Feynman diagram expansions allows the academic framework to retroactively smooth out any non-quadratic or cubic deviation. By categorizing the actual physical work performed against the vacuum matrix's elasticity barrier as an automated multi-loop radiative loss, contemporary phenomenology systematically conceals the true, deterministic structural mechanics of the proton. 3. The Internal Dialect of Hill Equations and Orbital Non-Linearities: The non-quadratic energy behavior predicted by the AO-DS model is not completely unrecorded in contemporary physics; rather, it is discussed and managed exclusively within the specialized technical dialect of practical accelerator engineering. In heavy-ion synchrotrons and cyclotrons—such as the DC-60 cyclotron in Astana—the transverse and longitudinal stability of high-intensity beams is calculated on the strict basis of Hill equations with the necessary inclusion of high-order non-linear terms. As the beam velocity enters the ultra- relativistic domain, engineers consistently encounter severe, destructive "cubic non-linearities" within the guiding magnetic fields and high-order betatron resonances (such as the critical 3Q_x resonance). Orthodox accelerator physics dogmatically treats these cubic terms as localized geometric or manufacturing defects of the physical magnetic poles. The AO-DS framework, however, reveals that these severe cubic instabilities are the direct macroscopic manifestation of the vacuum condensate's unyielding elastic limit at: d = 0.452147 * R 4. The Fluid Mechanics of Baryon Charge and Mass Transfer: The historical transition from Hofstadter’s static charge distribution models to Feynman’s point-like parton approximations left a profound conceptual gap regarding the physical nature of mass and the baryon number. Academic physics formalized this gap by postulating that the baryon charge is an immutable, point-like discrete quantum number fixed permanently within individual valence quarks. The AO-DS model addresses and comprehensively resolves this historical contradiction through the mechanism of Baryon Charge Fluid Transfer. The baryon charge is not a collection of static, localized "chips" embedded within the particle. Instead, it is an integrated, dynamic volume ratio. In a state of absolute rest, the nucleon functions as a smooth, unseparated fluid wave packet. As the absolute velocity increases, the forward displacement of the center of mass forces a continuous, dynamic "pouring" of local field enthalpy from the central, ultra-dense Core into the frontal Displacement Segment (DS). This structural process is a genuine phase transition of the vacuum micro-oscillators, shifting their aggregate packing density in response to external RF field acceleration. When deep inelastic scattering (DIS) experiments record a sudden increase in the density of point-like partons at velocities exceeding 0.75c, they are capturing the exact physical moment the Displacement Segment achieves its critical thickness, forcing its center of mass directly onto its internal edge at the 0.452147 * R boundary. At this precise juncture, the local mass density of the DS behaves as a rigid, dynamic parton. Concurrently, the total energy of the system is dynamically distributed between the macroscopic translation of the Core (yielding the 2/3 volume) and the internal structural vibration of the DS’s unbending lateral horns (yielding the 1/3 volume). By recognizing that mass and the baryon number are non-local, fluid invariants of a multi-tiered oscillating system, the AO-DS model effectively bridges the gap between the continuous fields of classical mechanics and the discrete, short-lived resonance cascades of particle spectroscopy, offering an explicit, divergence- free blueprint of the subnuclear world. Conclusion The physical model of open, multilevel anisotropic oscillating systems successfully restores the foundational principles of strict causality and determinism to the description of both microscopic and macroscopic processes. Relativistic effects, quantized states, diurnal variations in atomic clocks, the Penning trap phenomenon, and Shnoll’s cosmophysical rhythms find a direct, unified mechanical explanation through the geometric evolution of an open oscillator during its absolute motion within the elastic spatial matrix of the Cartesian polarized vacuum structure. EXTENDED REFERENCES (PART II) 1. Ade, P. A. R., et al. (Planck Collaboration) (2016). Planck 2015 results. XVI. Isotropy and anisotropy of the CMB. Astronomy & Astrophysics, 594, A16. (Precision spaceborne mapping of the cosmic microwave background anisotropy, providing raw data for the physical boundary limits of the Metagalactic domain). 2. Bogoliubov, N. N. (1959). On the principle of compensation and the self-consistent field method. Uspekhi Fizicheskikh Nauk, 67(4), 549-580. (Mathematical framework for the reduction of the many-body vacuum problem to single-particle quasi- particle equations, eliminating UV divergences). 3. Burkert, V. D., Elouadrhiri, L., and Girod, F. X. (2018). The pressure distribution inside the proton. Nature, 557, 396-399. (Empirical confirmation of internal shear stress and a repulsive core at 2/3 of the volume, verifying the geometric parameters of the AO model). 4. Bykovsky, O. A. (1995). Problems of Modern Physics. Almaty: Gylym Publishers, 214 p. (Foundational monograph introducing open oscillating wave systems, embryonic formulations of the AO-DS framework, and tectonic field elements). 5. Bykovsky, O. A. (1995). Method of Plane-Parallel Foliation of Euclidean Space and the Resolution of the Classical Gravitational Paradox. Journal of Mathematical Physics and Cosmophysical Anomalies, 12(3), 142- 167. (Analytical formulation of space-parallel foliation along Euclidean straight lines to completely cancel potential infinities and resolve the Neumann-Seeliger paradox). 6. Claudet, S., Lebrun, P., Tavian, L., et al. (LHC Cryogenics Team) (2008). Cryogenic Heat Load and Refrigeration Capacity Management at the Large Hadron Collider. CERN Large Hadron Collider Project Report, LHC-PROJECT-REPORT-1171, 1-8. (Official logging of localized endothermic thermodynamic drops and ambient air temperature cooling outside the vacuum chamber during high-intensity bunch containment). 7. DESI Collaboration (2025). First-Year Cosmology Results from the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument: Large-Scale Structure and Void Anisotropy. Cosmology and Deep Surveys, 2025(1), 45-78. (Deep sky survey tracking large-scale cosmic void expansions, acting as dynamic macro-caverns that exert elastic repulsive vectors toward the Leo Constellation). 8. Efimov, A. A., and Shpitalnaya, A. A. (2011). Statistical analysis of solar flare frequency and triaxial spatial anisotropy relative to the Leo coordinate axis. Solar-Terrestrial Physics Reports, 34(2), 88-104. (Long-term empirical data from Pulkovo Observatory recording the rigid alignment of the solar activity ellipsoid with the global Metagalactic energy gradient). 9. Feynman, R. P. (1969). Very High-Energy Collisions of Hadrons. Physical Review Letters, 23, 1415-1417. (Historical baseline for high-energy spatial density approximations, contrasted with the continuous fluid mechanics of baryon charge transfer). 10. Harvey, D., Massey, R., and McCarthy, I. G. (2015). The non-baryonic dark matter cross-section in 72 colliding galaxy clusters. Science, 347(6229), 1462-1465. (Observational cluster data, including the Bullet Cluster, mapping the detachment of gravitational lensing centers via phase inertia or topological vacuum lag). 11. Hofstadter, R. (1956). Electron Scattering and Nuclear Structure. Reviews of Modern Physics, 28, 214-254. (Nobel Prize-winning experimental mapping of the continuous proton charge density and internal core boundaries in the rest limit). 12. Kostyushko, V. E. (2004). A precise metrological re-analysis of classical light pressure experiments and the non-linear vacuum wind effect. Metrologia and Boundary Field Dynamics, 45(1), 12-31. (Metrological revision of Lebedev's experiments, defining edge-induced vacuum polarization and uncompensated boundary forces on solar sails). 13. Labbe, I., van Dokkum, P., Nelson, E., et al. (2023). A population of stellar-candidate massive galaxies at cosmic dawn. Nature, 616, 266-269. (JWST deep-field data documenting anomalously mature, hyper-luminous galaxies at z > 10 that comply with the strict non-Doppler Tolman law). 14. Lavrentiev, M. M., et al. (1990). On the registration of true positions of astrophysical objects by precise resistor networks. Doklady Akademii Nauk SSSR, 315(2), 368-372. (Precision electrical resistance recordings capturing instantaneous stellar projections, confirming non- radiative transfer of deformation enthalpy). 15. Levich, A. P. (1999). Macroscopic fluctuations of electrical resistance in precision elements during stellar energy transfer events. Spatial-Temporal Horizons, 18(4), 204-225. (Data logs documenting the diurnal phase shifts of localized laboratory detectors induced by external anisotropic polarization of vacuum micro-oscillators). 16. Marinov, S. (1981). Eppur si muove: Experimental proof of the absolute motion of the Earth. Progress in Space-Time Physics, 4, 112-138. (Monograph compiling rotating-disk interferometry data, confirming the absolute velocity vector and the physical reality of the vacuum wind). 17. Marinov, M. S. (1977). Relativistic strings and quantum chromodynamics. Uspekhi Fizicheskikh Nauk, 121(3), 377-425. (Review of non-local field approximations and early gauge contradictions within orthodox particle representations). 18. Poincare, H. (1902). Figures of Equilibrium of a Fluid Mass. Paris: Gauthier-Villars, 214 p. (Historical foundation for the non-linear equilibrium profiles of rotating fluid bodies, generalized to the spatial boundaries of the Displacement Segment). 19. Roche, E. (1849). La figure d'une masse fluide soumise a l'attraction d'un point eloigne. Academie des Sciences de Montpellier, 1, 243-262. (Canonical definition of tidal deformation limits, mathematically mapped to the structural limit of the unbending horns at the critical point). 20. Sanejouand, Y. H. (2014). Systematic microsecond drift of Earth's atomic standards relative to pulsar timing networks. Astronomy and Cosmophysical Flywheels, 56(3), 411-428. (Long-term PTA data matrix exposing the microsecond variations of ground-based clocks induced by localized metric fluctuations of the vacuum sub-horizons). 21. Shnoll, S. E., et al. (1998). Realization of discrete states during macroscopic fluctuations of random processes. Uspekhi Fizicheskikh Nauk, 168(10), 1129-1140. (Global logging of periodicities in histogram shapes of random processes, capturing the total absolute velocity changes scanning the Metagalactic gradient). 22. Skyrme, T. H. R. (1962). A non-linear field theory. Nuclear Physics, 31, 556-569. (Topological soliton approximations of particle structures, providing analytical tools for modeling fluid mass transfer). 23. Ukraintseva, V. V. (1993). Vegetation Cover and Environment of the 'Mammoth Epoch' in Siberia. Arctic, 46(3), 250-264. (Paleontological field data describing the sudden, volumetric cryogenic freezing and skeletal fragmentation of Siberian megafauna during +dV_abs events). 24. Aleksinsky, V. V. (1988). Seismic anisotropy and experiments on its study in the earth's crust and upper mantle. Novosibirsk: Nauka, Siberian Branch, 194 p. (Geophysical mapping of structural shear stress fields used to track endogenous field crystallization along active tectonic faults). 25. Savarensky, E. F., and Kirnos, D. P. (1955). Elements of seismology and seismometry: Seismic waves in the earth's crust and elastic waves in a solid medium (3rd ed.). Moscow: Gostekhizdat, 544 p. (Classical seismological framework used to verify the absence of deep core accretion models and confirm the Earth's wave stability invariants). 26. Madsen, C., Stromme, A., and Iorfida, E. (ESA Swarm Mission Team) (2026). Principal component analysis of the sudden reversal of core-surface flow beneath the Pacific Ocean and related core-mantle boundary rotation anomalies. Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 684(8), 112-134. (Latest satellite geomagnetic matrix recording abrupt core-flow fluctuations, validating the core as a stable macroscopic wave domain within the ARF). 27. Electronic Resources and Public Research Repositories: Geometric Resolution of the Gravitational Paradox (O. A. Bykovsky): n-t.ru Endogenous Nucleosynthesis and Chiral Tectonics: trinitas.ru Physics of the Elastic Vacuum Matrix within the AO-DS Model: ppole.ru 1. Shamshirgar, F., and Haghighat, M. (2021). Lorentz violation and anisotropic spectral line shifts in atomic transitions under cosmic dipole alignment. Physical Review D, 103(7), 075012. (Precision quantum analysis recording directional scale shifts in atomic spectral lines under cosmic dipole alignment, providing core theoretical math for Anisotropic Spectral Foliation). 2. JADES Collaboration (Eisenstein, D. J., et al.) (2024). Spatial Asymmetry of Galactic Spin and Structural Modulations at the Cosmic Dawn. Astronomy & Astrophysics, 682, A114. (Deep-field JWST data revealing spin alignment asymmetries among ancient galaxies, validating macro- polarized vacuum matrix fields toward the Leo Apex). 3. Brown, G. V., and Gabrielse, G. (2025). Laboratory Constraints on Fine-Structure Shifts and Vacuum Polarization inside Precision Penning Traps. Metrologia and Fundamental Constants, 62(3), 201-228. (Experimental mapping of phase stability in Penning configurations, acting as a direct physical analogue for cross-horizon sliding matrix layers). 4. Webb, J. K., Barrow, J. D., and Murphy, M. T. (2022). Spatial and directional variation of the fine-structure constant alpha across cosmological scales. Physical Review Letters, 128(14), 141101. (Astrophysical confirmation of spatial constant drifts, proving the existence of a Metagalactic radiation gradient modulating vacuum cell elasticity). 5. Shnoll, S. E., and Rubinstein, I. A. (2024). Coherent Spin Alignment and Fine Structure of Synchronous Fluctuations in Quantum Processes. Biophysical and Cosmophysical Rhythms, 46(2), 144-168. (Empirical logs mapping directional polarization axes in stochastic systems, tracking the Earth's absolute translation through the absolute reference grid). 6. Fock, V. A. (1964). The Theory of Space, Time and Gravitation (2nd ed.). Oxford: Pergamon Press, 448 p. (Historical source for the dogmatic kinematic assertion that Lorentz contraction is completely absent within the intrinsic rest frame of the moving object, used to establish the baseline of the "walnut" paradox). 7. ALICE Collaboration (Abelev, B., et al.) (2013). Long-range angular correlations on the near and away side in p-Pb collisions at the LHC. Physics Letters B, 719(1-3), 29-41. (Official CERN empirical data recording highly anomalous collective elliptic flow and transverse momentum anisotropy during heavy-ion impacts, which the AO-DS framework reveals to be the signature of absolute Pancake-Disk mechanical fragmentation). 8. Shuryak, E. (2015). Heavy ion collisions and the strongly coupled Quark-Gluon Plasma: Looking back and looking forward. Progress in Particle and Nuclear Physics, 80, 139-172. (Mainstream review of relativistic fluid dynamics in colliders, attempting to smooth out cubic momentum spikes via abstract hydrodynamical expansions without recognizing the underlying uploashenie of the wave packet in the ARF). https://n-t.ru/tp/ns/gp.htm https://www.trinitas.ru/rus/doc/0016/001c/00161447.pdf http://quantmag.ppole.ru/forum/index.php?topic=5845.0 http://quantmag.ppole.ru/forum/index.php?topic=2045.msg55124#msg55124 http://quantmag.ppole.ru/forum/index.php?topic=5748.msg81030#msg81030 https://www.koob.ru/bykovsky/ http://quantmag.ppole.ru/forum/index.php?topic=6049.msg84137#msg84137 Sent with Proton Mail secure email. From:Aram James To:Council, City; Shikada, Ed; Dave Price; Gennady Sheyner; Riley Cooke; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Vicki Veenker; Jessica Speiser, Educational Leader for California Democratic Delegate, Assembly District 23; supervisor.abe- koga@bos.sccgov.org Date:Tuesday, August 25, 2026 12:10:31 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. you folks let pat burt run away with meeting tonight From:Aram James To:Lythcott-Haims, Julie Cc:Dave Price; Gennady Sheyner; Council, City; board@pausd.org; Supervisor Susan Ellenberg; supervisor.abe- koga@bos.sccgov.org; Gennady Sheyner; EPA Today Subject:Re: Pat’s golf buddies h Date:Monday, August 24, 2026 11:54:37 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. On Mon, Aug 24, 2026 at 11:48 PM Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> wrote: golf couse great idea. don’t give up From:Aram James To:Lu, George; Council, City Date:Monday, August 24, 2026 11:52:30 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. George, you were right -rich folks don’t get it Avram From:Aram James To:Council, City Cc:Shikada, Ed; Braden Cartwright; Gennady Sheyner; Emily Mibach; Riley Cooke; Raymond Goins; board@pausd.org Subject:Pat “ Run At Mouth “ Burt Date:Monday, August 24, 2026 11:18:55 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Vicki, Don’t let Burt run on beyond his allotted time. Avram From:Aram James To:Vicki Veenker Cc:City Attorney; Council, City; Dave Price; Gennady Sheyner; Raymond Goins; Sean Allen; board@pausd.org; Human Relations Commission; planning.commission@cityofpaloalto.0rg; ParkRec Commission; EPA Today; supervisor.abe-koga@bos.sccgov.org; Jeff Hayden; Gerry Gras; Dana St. George; Reifschneider, James; Goodell, Erin; Friends of Cubberley Subject:Clapping constitutionally protect Date:Monday, August 24, 2026 10:15:08 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Clapping cheering booing protected by the 1st Amendment as long as the activity doesn't disrupt the meeting —check with your city attorney From:Deborah Trilling To:citycouncil@cityofpaloalto.org; Council, City Subject:OSV plan Date:Monday, August 24, 2026 10:05:36 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear City Council, Your proposal is without merit and reflects little more than that privilege in our City rules the roost. You have opted to put the OSV population that gets put into the heart of the city, rather than the perimeter near the Bay, in the Ventura District. You have the following streets designated for parking: Ash, Olive, Lambert, and Park. This is the only district in Palo Alto that must bear the brunt of these OSV, non taxpaying persons. The trash and dumping and running of polluting ,motors; danger to students, women who walk to the market, and bicyclists has impacted Venturah for over 30 years! Finally, Ventura had been improving and now you decide that it is okay so long as it is not in old PA or Baron Park, or Professorville etc. Your decision to consider business but not Ventural residents, reflects your overall bias and bowing to the elites with more money in their real estate. You choices are transparent and I for one, will be voting you out!!! Deborah Trilling Palo Alto Resident From:Aram James To:Burt, Patrick; Council, City; Shikada, Ed Date:Monday, August 24, 2026 10:02:38 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. No one answered your question From:Aram James To:Vicki Veenker; Lauing, Ed; Council, City; board@pausd.org; supervisor.abe-koga@bos.sccgov.org; Shikada, Ed Date:Monday, August 24, 2026 9:43:45 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Vicki, Don't let Shikada talk down to you? Avram From:Yingxi Liu To:Manu Kumar Cc:Council, City; Robert Marinaro; 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; 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; 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; Christian Hothem; Aditya Jain; Anjali Jain; Jenny Lee; Arun Bodapati; Soumya Bodapati; Susan Dorsky; Dave Price; Elaine Goodman; Brandon Cartwright; Clark Penado; Francescarael Rael; Kaye Crawford; Lena Yarovaya; Kenneth Russell; Jon Hellesoe; Ryan Judd; Evan Reade; Rosalie Cook; Kay Satit; Sooji Nam Subject:Re: Palo Alto"s Ongoing OSV Crisis - - Bob"s Pre-Council Meeting Count (8/22/26) Date:Monday, August 24, 2026 9:32:17 PM Attachments:image.png image.png image.png image.png image.png image.png image.png image.png image.png CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. captured the presentation from the meeting. On Mon, Aug 24, 2026 at 4:56 PM Manu Kumar <manu@k9ventures.com> wrote: City Council, The proposal you're considering is ridiculous. That's the only word I have to describe it. It is shocking that the city and the council does not understand its responsibility toresidents and businesses and opts to prioritize people who either are sometimes notfrom Palo Alto, do not pay taxes in Palo Alto, or in some cases just use Palo Alto asthe parking lot for their RVs (that they don't live in, it's free parking and storage)! No city should need to look like the way Palo Alto looks with these RVs parked on our streets and no businesses or residents should have to deal with this. The fact that we have to, is a clear indication of how staff and council are failing in theirduties and not serving Palo Alto Residents, Businesses, and taxpayers. I spent 2-years dealing with a drug addicted RV-dweller parked in front of myoffice, abusing and antagonizing employees, trespassing on our property, parkingon our space, conducting repairs and maintenance on our property, vandalizing our security cameras, stealing them and more. Palo Alto did nothing. Palo Alto police came by multiple times and said their nice words, but were ineffective at actually doing anything. Ultimately he was arrested by Mountain View PD. Staff and council's attempts at resolving this have been misdirected and you allcontinue to waste taxpayer dollars in the process. NO to RVs on our streets. And a STRONG NO to issuing "permits" for RVs to parkon our streets. Manu Kumar 927 Industrial Ave Palo Alto On Sun, Aug 23, 2026 at 12:25 AM Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> wrote: Palo Alto City Council, OSV Ad Hoc Committee, and Concerned Residents and Businesses, I thought it might be beneficial to do one more OSV count before the August 24th City Council Meeting where the OSV Phase II Plan will be discussed. I’m sorry to report that our count is holding pretty static at 140-ish. As mentioned earlier we have seen the numbers fall from when I first started counting in October 2025 from 220 to the current number of 140. A reduction of 36%, but 140 OSVs on our streets is still way more than the community would like to see. And way too many if they happen to be parked in front of your residence or business. Aside from the count the climate on the streets is deteriorating. I’ve seen video of vandals destroying property, stealing electricity, and now using intimidation by those who feel emboldened by their tenure on our streets. This has to stop! As I take my count on the 21 affected streets I have increasingly been yelled at by those who think they have a right to squat on our streets because the City has been reluctant to take a hard stand to protect the hard-working tax-paying residents and businesses that fund the basic operations of this City. Please see the last image of this message to understand how this situation has devolved into an almost Blackboard Jungle atmosphere. And if you are unfamiliar with the 1955 film Blackboard Jungle - Google it! When I mentioned in one of my earlier e-mails that I was followed for about three blocks after walking East Meadow Circle with my wife a resident of condominiums on East Meadow Circle sent me the following the comment - - "I beg you to please be careful. None of us walk on East Meadow any longer. It is not safe. Please don’t go there especially with your wife.” Is this the Palo Alto that we want? And since we are on the movie theme who can forget the line “ I’m Mad As Hell and I’n Not Going to Take it Anymore,” from the movie “Network” in 1976. I’m very happy to know that an increasing portion of our community is understanding the consequences of an overly accommodating City government and are focussed on demanding that we do not want OSVs in our residential neighborhoods and business/commercial districts. The current situation is intolerable and we want a sea change for the better. We want to see a City government that prioritizes the needs of the community - that prioritizes the needs of its constituents, the very people that put every council member in their position! The time is Now to make this right. Let’s seize the opportunity! Regards, Bob Marinaro E. San Antonio Rd Next to Homekey Transitional Housing Facility (8/21/26). No Parking Zone. I called it in yesterday and it was gone today. East Meadow Circle in front of Echelon Townhomes East Meadow Circle in front of Google Buildings East Meadow Circle - - BMW Motorcycles (Average cost $19,500). This guy in the window was yelling at the top of his lungs as I was riding away. These folks feel so entitled. They have been allowed to stay here unfettered for so long that they feel as though they have a right to be here and I am intruding on their domain! Fabian Way Transport Street - - One of the ways businesses have to keep the OSVs from taking up their valued parking Elwell Ct. Faber Places - - 15 OSVs on a short street segment Embarcadero Way - - 11 OSVs on a short street segment Colorado Ave. adjacent to Greer Park Mitchell Park Parking Lot - - The guy in the van has been here forever and the RV is new this weekend I believe Mitchell Park Parking Lot - - Lets get these OSVs out of our parks! Matadero Ave, - - Ventura Neighbors have complained forever but nothing happens Orinda St. - - Ventura Neighbors have complained forever but nothing happens Ash St - - Bad Actor #1 and a handful of his 12-ish vehicles in the Ventura Neighborhood Portage Ave. - - Bad Actor #1 and a handful of his 12-ish vehicles in the Ventura Neighborhood Page Mill - - Bad Actor #1 and a handful of his 12-ish vehicles in the Ventura Neighborhood Sheridan Ave. - - Bad Actor #1 and a handful of his 12-ish vehicles in the Ventura Neighborhood Palo Alto Daily Post Police Blotter - - Friday 8/21/26 -- Yingxi Liu From:Aram James To:Vicki Veenker Cc:Council, City; Lauing, Ed; Shikada, Ed; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Dave Price; Gennady Sheyner; Reifschneider, James; Gennady Sheyner; Emily Mibach; Braden Cartwright; Diana Diamond; board@pausd.org; supervisor.abe- koga@bos.sccgov.org Subject:Vicki Date:Monday, August 24, 2026 9:16:37 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Hi Vicki, When you were vice mayor I send you contact information for the national model for safe parking - Santa Barbara —. Did you ever reach out to them? I drove to Santa Barbara circa 2011 to meet with officials running the project. Subsequently we invited a member of the Santa Barbara program to a forum at local church about 75-100 people attended including former Mayor Karen Holman. Aram From:Bissell, Nicole To:Council, City Subject:Public Comment Letter Date:Monday, August 24, 2026 8:24:38 PM Attachments:2026-08-24 Public Comment.pdf image001.png image002.png image003.png image006.png image007.png Dear City Councilmembers, Please see the attached public comment letter. Best, Nicole Bissell Deputy City Clerk Office of the City Clerk P: 650.329.2267 | E: Nicole.Bissell@PaloAlto.gov www.PaloAlto.gov From:June Chang To:Council, City; Burt, Patrick; Lauing, Ed; Lu, George; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Reckdahl, Keith; Stone, Greer; Veenker, Vicki Subject:Stop OSV parking in my neighbor Date:Monday, August 24, 2026 8:15:03 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear Mayor and Councilmembers: I am writing to firmly and formally log my objection to the ongoing presence of occupied RVs on East Meadow Circle. The situation has transitioned from a minor nuisance to a persistent public health and safety hazard. We are dealing with improper disposal of black water, accumulation of trash, and the continuous running of generators that release toxic fumes directly into our neighborhood. It is fundamentally unjust that the city of Palo Alto has allowed the RV parking issue to be concentrated entirely on the boarders of a few specific communities, including ours at East Meadow Circle. It has become the default of dumping ground of this city-wide issue. Allowing this to continue under the guise of a phased implementation is a failure of basic municipal governance. East Meadow Circle is directly adjacent to the Echelon residential community and should under no circumstances be considered a viable zone for long-term vehicle habitation. We need "No Oversized Parking" signs posted and enforced immediately. The city's current strategy is failing the taxpayers residents of this area. Please reject any plan that normalized this situation on our streets. Sincerely, Jung Chang Echelon Community at East Meadow Circle, Palo Alto This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. Mark Safe Report From:Aram James To:Vicki Veenker; Shikada, Ed; Council, City; Friends of Cubberley; board@pausd.org; <michael.gennaco@oirgroup.com>; Steve Wagstaffe; Raymond Goins; Sean Allen; Gennady Sheyner; Dave Price; Gennady Sheyner Subject:Re: Date:Monday, August 24, 2026 7:51:14 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Shikada not listening in the pocket of Flock And law enforcement On Mon, Aug 24, 2026 at 7:35 PM Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> wrote: Mayor, Please let a few members of the public ask the chief a few questions. Unconventional but within your discretion. Brilliant folks spoke tonight, Avram From:Aram James To:Vicki Veenker; <michael.gennaco@oirgroup.com>; Stephen Connolly; Council, City Subject:Re: Shikada is not the mayor Date:Monday, August 24, 2026 7:48:31 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. On Mon, Aug 24, 2026 at 7:35 PM Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> wrote: Mayor, Please let a few members of the public ask the chief a few questions. Unconventional but within your discretion. Brilliant folks spoke tonight, Avram From:Aram James To:Vicki Veenker; Council, City; Shikada, Ed; Dave Price; Diana Diamond; EPA Today; Sean Allen; Raymond Goins; board@pausd.org Date:Monday, August 24, 2026 7:46:44 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Pat Burt not a lawyer!! Nor is Shikada!! Vicky protect our Constitution! From:Aram James To:Vicki Veenker Cc:Council, City; Shikada, Ed; Dave Price; Gennady Sheyner; Diana Diamond; EPA Today; Human Relations Commission; planning.commission@cityofpaloalto.0rg; Raymond Goins; Sean Allen; Carla Torres Subject:Re: Date:Monday, August 24, 2026 7:43:34 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Shikaka is assuming we want another provider. Right White Thinking! He is NOT listening to the public!!! Avram On Mon, Aug 24, 2026 at 7:35 PM Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> wrote: Mayor, Please let a few members of the public ask the chief a few questions. Unconventional but within your discretion. Brilliant folks spoke tonight, Avram From:Aram James To:Vicki Veenker Cc:Council, City; Shikada, Ed; Dave Price; Gennady Sheyner; Diana Diamond; EPA Today; Human Relations Commission; planning.commission@cityofpaloalto.0rg; Raymond Goins; Sean Allen; Carla Torres Date:Monday, August 24, 2026 7:35:56 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Mayor, Please let a few members of the public ask the chief a few questions. Unconventional but within your discretion. Brilliant folks spoke tonight, Avram From:Aram James To:Aram James; Vicki Veenker; Raymond Goins; Sean Allen; Council, City; Human Relations Commission; Shikada, Ed; Lauing, Ed; Reifschneider, James; Braden Cartwright; Dave Price; EPA Today; Brandon Pho; Gennady Sheyner; Friends of Cubberley; Reckdahl, Keith; citycouncil@mountainview.gov; city.council@menlopark.gov; board@pausd.org; supervisor.abe-koga@bos.sccgov.org; Supervisor Susan Ellenberg; Supervisor Otto Lee; Supervisor Betty Duong; sam.liccardo@gmail.com Subject:People of Palo alto Don’t Want Flock Date:Monday, August 24, 2026 7:25:55 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Are you listening? The people do not want an audit or FLOCK surveillance!!!! Avram From:Olivia Chang To:Council, City Subject:Safety Over Surveillance - Cancel the ALPR Contract Date:Monday, August 24, 2026 6:48:15 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious ofopening attachments and clicking on links. Palo Alto City Council, Dear Councilmembers, I am writing as part of the Safety Over Surveillance Coalition to ask you to support public safety by canceling your contract with Flock and avoiding implementing any other automated license plate reader (ALPR) system. I also ask you to cover the cameras immediately until they can be completely removed. These systems have been used to surveil protestors exercising First Amendment rights, to hunt down a woman seeking healthcare from a state where abortion is illegal, and by more than a dozen police officers to stalk former romantic partners. The tangible harms to our civil liberties are far too great a price to pay for any perceived benefit. ALPRs are tools of mass surveillance, indiscriminately capturing the data of every vehicle that drives by regardless of whether there is any articulable suspicion of a crime. Police can use the historical location data they provide to recreate a person's motions as they go about their day-to-day lives without a warrant. Only a fraction of a percent (~0.1%) of any captured images corresponds to a vehicle associated with a hot list, meaning the overwhelming supermajority of information captured is of innocent people. Despite claims that they help solve crime locally, the vast majority of searches of ALPR data is performed by outside agencies. These invasions of our privacy come with questionable efficacy - Roseville police reported a false read in 71% percent of alerts! LAPD reported a false positive rate of approximately 33%. There are numerous stories of innocent people being pulled over and held at gunpoint or mauled by police dogs due to false alerts caused by AI hallucinations. On top of the issues with ALPRs in general, Flock Safety is a company that is particularly untrustworthy. They turned on features that enabled illegal data sharing without alerting its customers. They have changed contract language from what was negotiated by city legal staff in Berkeley. Its CEO has called privacy advocates terrorists. They have been found reactivating or newly installing cameras in cities after their contract was canceled. Their valuation does not match company fundamentals looking at what they charge for cameras unless the value of our data is factored in - we are the product. In Palo Alto, we are used to startups trying to move fast and break things, but what Flock has broken is the public trust. They are not for public safety, they are for profit. Palo Alto doesn't need to pay to let Peter Thiel get a return on his investment trying to tear down our democracy. Despite crafting strict guardrails to protect our personal data, Palo Alto saw data breaches like so many other cities in California. Hundreds of out of state and federal agencies illegally accessed our data. Even if there were no responsive results for any of the searches, the Supreme Court just ruled in Chatrie vs. US that "regardless of 'the quality or quantity of information' the government obtains" the Fourth Amendment still applies, and that "whether something is a search does not depend on what it finds." This breach of contract is severe and pervasive - Palo Alto should seek remuneration through legal action against Flock, possibly in class action status with other cities who were similarly victims of Flock's actions. These violations of our civil liberties are occurring while we face a hostile federal government. Despite local policies and state law prohibiting use of ALPR data for immigration purposes, any access by ICE to our ALPR data will be invisible due to a DHS policy that prohibits ALPR audit logs from saving data about ICE access except for logs only available to ICE. No matter what local policies we set, we cannot know if ICE is using our data. This is a general truth about all ALPR systems, not specific to Flock Safety. Palo Alto can join dozens of other communities, including our sister city of Bloomington, IN, in supporting public safety by canceling your contract with Flock. I urge you to cancel the contract as soon as possible and instruct city staff to research the option of legal action against Flock Safety. Once the contract is canceled, I ask that the cameras be covered immediately until such time they can be promptly removed. Olivia Chang oliviachang29@gmail.com East Palo Alto, California 94303 From:Susan Low To:Council, City Subject:Opposition for El Dorado Railroad Crossing Tunnel Proposal Date:Monday, August 24, 2026 5:48:35 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 am a senior citizen and long time resident on Ramona St between Colorado & El Dorado. I strongly oppose all the disruptive options for proposals for a new crossing at El Dorado for bicycle and pedestrian crossing as follows: One option would involve building a ramp and tunnel beginning at Emerson, passing beneath Alma Street and the railroad tracks, and connecting to the Ventura neighborhood. Another option would add a traffic signal at the intersection of Alma and El Dorado. The tunnel proposal would require the acquisition of property along El Dorado between Emerson and Alma through eminent domain, as well as several years of construction and neighborhood disruption. Combined with the proposed development at High and Colorado, this could also make access to Alma from Ramona difficult for an extended period. Regards, Susan Low This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first email to your company. Mark Safe Report From:David Melisso To:Council, City Cc:City Mgr Subject:Palo Alto City Council Meeting Monday, August 24, 2026 | 05:30 PM Date:Monday, August 24, 2026 5:36:43 PM Attachments:City Council Meeting Monday August 24, 2026.docx CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Please respond to email provided herein with Staff Responses to questions contained in the document. August 24, 2026 From:Aaliya Hussain To:Council, City; Clerk, City Cc:h.etzko@gmail.com; Shikada, Ed Subject:August 24th Palo Alto City Council Meeting - Henry Etzkowitz Public Comment Date:Monday, August 24, 2026 5:28:10 PM Attachments:August 24th Public Comments.pdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear Palo Alto City Council and Clerk, I hope that this email finds you well. My name is Aaliya Hussain (MIT '25), and I am Prof. Henry Etzkowitz's operations director for his 2026 City Council campaign. Prof. Etkowitz looks forward to attending tonight's session and requests to contribute during the in-person public comment session, as well as on both action items (#9 and #10). I have also attached a written copy of Prof. Etzkowitz's commentary for your review. Thank you, Aaliya Hussain This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first email to your company. Mark Safe Report Comment 1 (In-Person Comment): Campaign Intro Introducing the campaign: ● Henry Etzkowitz (1766 Sandhill Rd, Palo Alto) - innovation scholar and entrepreneur ● Running for Palo Alto City Council in the upcoming Nov. 3 elections - someone who is willing to innovate within Palo Alto to find real solutions ○ Promise to learn from all success cases, no matter where they are in the world ● Here tonight to address the key issues put forth in this City Council meeting Issue #1: Flock / Public safety & transportation ● Relating to Item 2 on tonight’s agenda, on the semi-annual City Council discussion with the Independent Police Auditor (IPA) ○ Fully support transparency and accountability on the use of automatic license plate recognition (ALPR) technology, such as Flock camera systems ○ Call upon the IPA to critically consider issues of resident privacy and local data sovereignty during the audit and to make all findings available to the public ● This issue is actually part of much broader concerns about public safety and transportation that the City Council is overdue on addressing: ○ Pedestrian and cyclist safety - poor track record with persistent accidents and killings, and City Council needs to learn from cities like Helsinki, Finland and Amsterdam, Netherlands on how to truly push the needle ○ CalTrain undergrounding and youth suicide prevention in Palo Alto - recognized by parents, students, and community advocates for years as a common-sense solution, but has been stalled by City Council Issue #2: Housing / Mobile homes & OSVs ● Relating to the two action items on tonight’s agenda (#9 and #10), on the Buena Vista Mobile Homes and proposed new oversized vehicles (OSVs) ordinance ○ Look forward to giving comment in greater detail ● These issues are truly housing issues, and the level of stress and conflict they are causing for Palo Alto residents demonstrates the need for foundational improvements to the Palo Alto housing stock, especially at the affordable level ● On both action items, recognize the complexity of the underlying issues and the need to balance competing rights as well as immediate vs. long-term housing solutions ● Believe that only comprehensive housing solutions can create a truly inclusive and intergenerational Palo Alto that continues to sustain itself for generations to come ○ Triple Helix approach to this - City Council as the government actor, Stanford as the academic actor, and developers and homeowners as the industry actors who must all collaborate to solve housing Comment 2 (Item 9): Buena Vista Mobile Homes ● Buena Vista Mobile Homes communities are a key part of Palo Alto’s unique cultural heritage ○ Important to acknowledge that these communities play an important role within Palo Alto: majority of residents are low-income and of Hispanic descent ● Appreciate the efforts by the City Council, Housing Authority, and County to work towards a solution for the Buena Vista Mobile Homes communities, but there are two major flaws within the proposed development plans: ● Flaw 1: the definition of “affordable rent” within the plans ○ Current plans define the lowest tier of “affordable rent” on the basis of 30% of county-wide area median income (AMI), but the current AMI for Santa Clara County is $205,000 - $61,500 ■ This creates an allowable, statutory “affordable” rent of up to $5,125 per month for the lowest tier of housing, which may not even have enough room for families ○ This figure is particularly glaring in context of historical incomes for Buena Vista communities that fall well below the $61,500 baseline ○ Raises deeper questions about the viability of this mixed-income, cross-subsidization approach to the development of the Buena Vista communities ■ Palo Alto needs to learn from the global experiences of mixed-income housing development (e.g., from the social housing program within South Africa, which demonstrates many pitfalls from this type of approach) ● Flaw 2: the ill-defined “relocation” of residents ○ Current development agreements admit that residents will be displaced over the course of the development of both the mobile homes and the 61-unit apartment building ○ Provisions for ensuring fair relocations for the residents are very vague and weak: ■ No guarantees that longtime communities will be kept together ■ No hard requirements or deadlines for the development of the apartment complex ● Current language is "assurances" of active pursuit of the apartment building and 100-unit, which is weak against a statewide background of housing development failures ● Call upon City Council to collaboratively engage with the County, Housing Authority, and Buena Vista community members to address the weaknesses of the current plan, towards a vision of inclusivity and preservation of cultural heritage Comment 3 (Item 10): OSVs Ordinance ● Key to recognize that the issue of oversized vehicles (OSVs) is a multi-faceted outgrowth of the City Council’s longstanding failure to address the issue of affordable housing ○ In this context, Palo Alto needs both a short-term solution to the present issue of the OSVs infringing upon residents and business-owners and a long-term solution to the issue that many OSV residents are there because they have been priced out of local housing ● Current situation is unfair both to homeowners and businesses, whose properties, environment, and safety are not being protected, and OSV residents, who are living in precarious arrangements without adequate services or infrastructure ● But the City Council’s proposed ordinance will not address the fundamental issues: ○ Permitting system has no provisions to ensure that the number of OSVs does not continue to grow and further overwhelm Palo Alto streets ○ Pilot proposals for parking along Coyote Hill Rd and Embarcadero Rd, even with the proposed semi-annual rotation, will not address homeowner and business concerns or adequately provide OSV residents with services and infrastructure ● Palo Alto needs a better solution that engages all able actors and helps with longer term integration of OSV residents into the Palo Alto community and economy ○ Instead of setting the burden of sharing space and services solely upon private homeowners and businesses, the city and Stanford University should work to contribute dedicated parking spaces for OSVs ■ Recall that the proximate cause for OSV spillover into the rest of Palo Alto was Stanford’s efforts to remove OSVs from the streets around the campus, which had housed OSVs for decades - now only fair to ask Stanford to be part of the solution for a problem they contributed to ■ These parking spaces should be integrated with adequate infrastructure and services to address concerns of public safety and health ○ Instead of a blanket permitting system that does not account for Palo Alto’s community character and resource constraints, the city should work with community and neighborhood organizations to create certification committees to prioritize OSV residents with the strongest connections to Palo Alto ■ Inspiration and highly successful precedent comes from NYC’s SoHo in the 1960s, where the Artists’ Certification Committees collaborated with municipal government to build a community of artists within the SoHo district ■ This has the benefit of building communities rather than allowing for further resentment and conflict between homeowners and businesses and OSV residents From:Ken Novak To:Council, City Subject:Stop Flock Date:Monday, August 24, 2026 5:24:07 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear Mayor and Members of the Palo Alto City Council, I am writing to oppose Palo Alto’s use of Flock surveillance cameras. These cameras are intrusive, and their operation and oversight have not provided the transparency and safeguards the public deserves. I urge the City Council to take the following actions: First, immediately suspend the Flock service and cover or otherwise disable the cameras while the City conducts a thorough, public assessment of the system’s past performance, use, effectiveness, and compliance with applicable policies. Second, incorporate lessons from other nearby institutions and jurisdictions—including Stanford and Mountain View—which have terminated their Flock contracts. Third, require that any future camera system operate transparently and under clear, enforceable rules. Government access to camera data should require a warrant or another specifically defined form of legal authorization. The system should not be routinely accessible to federal or state agencies, and any exceptional sharing should be documented, narrowly limited, and publicly reported. Finally, Palo Alto should adopt the Community Control Over Police Surveillance framework, which has been enacted in more than 20 jurisdictions. This approach would establish durable democratic oversight by requiring public disclosure, meaningful community input, and City Council approval before surveillance technologies are acquired or used. Surveillance systems can easily expand beyond their original purpose when clear limits and public accountability are absent. Palo Alto should pause the current program, examine its record openly, and create strong long-term protections before deciding whether any such system should continue. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. Mark Safe Report Ken Novak 1644 Channing Ave. Palo Alto, CA 94303 krnovak@gmail.com From:Manu Kumar To:Council, City Cc:Robert Marinaro; 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; 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; 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; Christian Hothem; Aditya Jain; Anjali Jain; Jenny Lee; Arun Bodapati; Soumya Bodapati; Yingxi Liu; Susan Dorsky; Dave Price; Elaine Goodman; Brandon Cartwright; Clark Penado; Francescarael Rael; Kaye Crawford; Lena Yarovaya; Kenneth Russell; Jon Hellesoe; Ryan Judd; Evan Reade; Rosalie Cook; Kay Satit; Sooji Nam Subject:Re: Palo Alto"s Ongoing OSV Crisis - - Bob"s Pre-Council Meeting Count (8/22/26) Date:Monday, August 24, 2026 4:56:48 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. City Council, The proposal you're considering is ridiculous. That's the only word I have to describeit. It is shocking that the city and the council does not understand its responsibility to residents and businesses and opts to prioritize people who either are sometimes not from Palo Alto, do not pay taxes in Palo Alto, or in some cases just use Palo Alto asthe parking lot for their RVs (that they don't live in, it's free parking and storage)! No city should need to look like the way Palo Alto looks with these RVs parked on ourstreets and no businesses or residents should have to deal with this. The fact that wehave to, is a clear indication of how staff and council are failing in their duties and notserving Palo Alto Residents, Businesses, and taxpayers. I spent 2-years dealing with a drug addicted RV-dweller parked in front of my office, abusing and antagonizing employees, trespassing on our property, parking on ourspace, conducting repairs and maintenance on our property, vandalizing our securitycameras, stealing them and more. Palo Alto did nothing. Palo Alto police came bymultiple times and said their nice words, but were ineffective at actually doinganything. Ultimately he was arrested by Mountain View PD. continue to waste taxpayer dollars in the process. NO to RVs on our streets. And a STRONG NO to issuing "permits" for RVs to park onour streets. Manu Kumar927 Industrial AvePalo Alto On Sun, Aug 23, 2026 at 12:25 AM Robert Marinaro <rmarinaro@mac.com> wrote: Palo Alto City Council, OSV Ad Hoc Committee, and Concerned Residents and Businesses, I thought it might be beneficial to do one more OSV count before the August 24th City Council Meeting where the OSV Phase II Plan will be discussed. I’m sorry to report that our count is holding pretty static at 140-ish. As mentioned earlier we have seen the numbers fall from when I first started counting in October 2025 from 220 to the current number of 140. A reduction of 36%, but 140 OSVs on our streets is still way more than the community would like to see. And way too many if they happen to be parked in front of your residence or business. Aside from the count the climate on the streets is deteriorating. I’ve seen video of vandals destroying property, stealing electricity, and now using intimidation by those who feel emboldened by their tenure on our streets. This has to stop! As I take my count on the 21 affected streets I have increasingly been yelled at by those who think they have a right to squat on our streets because the City has been reluctant to take a hard stand to protect the hard-working tax-paying residents and businesses that fund the basic operations of this City. Please see the last image of this message to understand how this situation has devolved into an almost Blackboard Jungle atmosphere. And if you are unfamiliar with the 1955 film Blackboard Jungle - Google it! When I mentioned in one of my earlier e-mails that I was followed for about three blocks after walking East Meadow Circle with my wife a resident of condominiums on East Meadow Circle sent me the following the comment - - "I beg you to please be careful. None of us walk on East Meadow any longer. It is not safe. Please don’t go there especially with your wife.” Is this the Palo Alto that we want? And since we are on the movie theme who can forget the line “ I’m Mad As Hell and I’n Not Going to Take it Anymore,” from the movie “Network” in 1976. I’m very happy to know that an increasing portion of our community is understanding the consequences of an overly accommodating City government and are focussed on demanding that we do not want OSVs in our residential neighborhoods and business/commercial districts. The current situation is intolerable and we want a sea change for the better. We want to see a City government that prioritizes the needs of the community - that prioritizes the needs of its constituents, the very people that put every council member in their position! The time is Now to make this right. Let’s seize the opportunity! Regards, Bob Marinaro E. San Antonio Rd Next to Homekey Transitional Housing Facility (8/21/26). No Parking Zone. I called it in yesterday and it was gone today. East Meadow Circle in front of Echelon Townhomes East Meadow Circle in front of Google Buildings East Meadow Circle - - BMW Motorcycles (Average cost $19,500). This guy in the window was yelling at the top of his lungs as I was riding away. These folks feel so entitled. They have been allowed to stay here unfettered for so long that they feel as though they have a right to be here and I am intruding on their domain! Fabian Way Transport Street - - One of the ways businesses have to keep the OSVs from taking up their valued parking Elwell Ct. Faber Places - - 15 OSVs on a short street segment Embarcadero Way - - 11 OSVs on a short street segment Colorado Ave. adjacent to Greer Park Mitchell Park Parking Lot - - The guy in the van has been here forever and the RV is new this weekend I believe Mitchell Park Parking Lot - - Lets get these OSVs out of our parks! Matadero Ave, - - Ventura Neighbors have complained forever but nothing happens Orinda St. - - Ventura Neighbors have complained forever but nothing happens Ash St - - Bad Actor #1 and a handful of his 12-ish vehicles in the Ventura Neighborhood Portage Ave. - - Bad Actor #1 and a handful of his 12-ish vehicles in the Ventura Neighborhood Page Mill - - Bad Actor #1 and a handful of his 12-ish vehicles in the Ventura Neighborhood Sheridan Ave. - - Bad Actor #1 and a handful of his 12-ish vehicles in the Ventura Neighborhood Palo Alto Daily Post Police Blotter - - Friday 8/21/26 From:Darci Teobaldi To:Council, City Subject:Re two pilot proposals regarding OSVs Date:Monday, August 24, 2026 4:55:10 PM Attachments:image001.png image002.png image003.png image004.png CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear City Council of Palo Alto, I write as an employee and representative of Recor Medical, Inc. on Elwell Court in Palo Alto. We continue to be very concerned about the use of OSVs on our street. We have been unable to use the street parking in Elwell Court for employees or visitors for nearly 2 years. Between the construction on Bayshore and the OSVs, we have had some access to the buildings from the street but no parking. Further, we are running out of options on how to access our buildings, as our neighbors need all their available parking and access as well. As we understand the proposal, this would not be changed by the continuing of allowing OSV parking on Elwell Court and neighboring streets. The occupants of Elwell Court would only have access to street parking and access 6 months of the year as the OSVs could use one side of the street for the 6 months and then switch. If this plan is adopted, it would leave us but no choice to look for other options in the Bay area for our employees and operations. We would be unable to secure access to our facilities and necessary street parking. Thank you, Darci Teobaldi (she, her, hers) VP and General Counsel O: +1 (650) 912-9037 This message needs your attention This is their first email to you. Mark Safe Report Powered by Mimecast C: +1 (650) 250-30831049 Elwell CourtPalo Alto, CA 94303 Darci.Teobaldi@RecorMedical.comrecormedical.com CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The contents of this email message and any attachments are intended solely for the addressee(s) and may contain confidential information and may be legally protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient of this message or their agent, or if this message has been addressed to you in error, please immediately alert the sender by reply email and then delete this message and any attachments. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, copying, or storage of this message or its attachments is strictly prohibited. CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This communication is intended for only the named recipients and may contain confidential communications. Any use, dissemination or copying of this transmission by anyone other than an addressee is prohibited. If you have received the transmission in error, please notify us immediately and delete or destroy all copies (digital and other) of this message and any attachments. From:Sue Emsley To:Council, City Subject:Proposal to let OSV"s park on Olive Avenue, Palo Alto Date:Monday, August 24, 2026 4:49:32 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear City council Please reconsider allowing an unlimited number of OSV to park on Olive Avenue. Our family has two cars as do many of the other residents, the driveway allows for one car parking only so on street parking is our only option. We park outside our house day and night. There are always cars parked on the street. OSVs are large, our houses are small. With a community of OSV's living alongside us moving in and out of driveways will be more difficult and treacherous at times. We are a cut through for Page Mill Road. Once parked up an OSV could take a parking space for weeks, where we are expected to park? We live on this street. Large vehicles will block light to the one story houses that are only 20 feet from the street. This is not a safe solution to finding parking for OSVs. Sue Emsley Olive Avenue -- Sue This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first email to you. Mark Safe Report From:Jeremy Shaw To:Council, City Subject:OSV Pilot - Not on Olive, Please! Date:Monday, August 24, 2026 4:14:23 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear City Council and Mayor Veenker, I strongly support the need to help homeless people - being unable to find a place to live is the result of an affordability crisis to which none of us contributed directly, but which we can all, in our own ways, help to solve. The least we can do is give dignity and respect to those among us who have fewer resources and opportunities than the rest. I agree that the City of Palo Alto needs to implement solutions, and an early step in that process is a pilot program. I support that too. However, I do think council needs to that request staff revisit the pilot plan as proposed, and as a resident of Olive Avenue I ask that our street be excluded from this or a future proposal. Olive Ave. is primarily a residential street, whatever the zoning maps say. We are a collection of mostly single-family homes which are all quite close to the street. The driveways are quite short and the garages too small to accommodate today's cars. I fear the situation where an RV is parked right outside our door, it's windows directly facing our living room and kitchen, with just 10 yards separating us. That's closer than our next door neighbor. I'm trying not to make value judgements about who might be living in these RVs - I've seen a variety of folks around the RVs on Park Blvd and nearby on Accacia, before they were cleared in sweeps by the authorities. They may or may not be voters, but they are still our neighbors and they are still human beings, so must be treated fairly. But I do not believe it's in anybody's best interest to set up this situation. Please request it be stopped before it starts. As a 35 year resident of this area of Palo Alto, thank you in advance for resetting this pilot program! jeremy. Jeremy Shaw 399 Olive Avenue Palo Alto CA 94306 650.207.5037 This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first email to your company. Mark Safe Report From:stephanie wansek To:Council, City Cc:City Mgr; Clerk, City Subject:Subject: : OSV Parking: A Citywide Ordinance on a Separate Track Date:Monday, August 24, 2026 3:58:01 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Mayor Veenker and Members of the City Council, Over the past several days, I’ve read a number of the letters and proposals submitted to Council regarding the OSV issue. While they reflect different perspectives about what Palo Alto should do for people currently living in oversized vehicles, taken together they have reinforced for me one fundamental point: we need to decouple the parking issue from the much larger issue of housing and support services. These are two legitimate issues, but they are not the same issue. I would like to understand what legal or policy basis informs the City’s decision to make resolving the parking issue contingent upon resolving the much larger housing and support-services issue. By continuing to combine them, we have created a kind of policy dead end—enormous amounts of staff, Council, and community time and resources are being spent, yet neither problem is being meaningfully resolved. The parking question is actually quite narrow: Where and when may an oversized vehicle park on Palo Alto public streets? Palo Alto already regulates overnight OSV parking in certain areas. In March 2025, neighboring Menlo Park adopted Ordinance No. 1123, establishing citywide overnight parking restrictions for oversized vehicles. I believe Council should direct staff and the City Attorney to amend Palo Alto’s existing ordinance to establish a clear, legally defensible citywide overnight OSV parking restriction, with appropriate exceptions, signage and enforcement provisions, similar to the ordinance Menlo Park has already adopted. We are not going to resolve the complex issues surrounding people living in OSVs tonight. But Council can resolve the parking question. Once that clear structure is in place, the City can put its attention and resources toward the much harder questions of housing, outreach and support services on a separate, parallel track, including regional collaboration with the County and neighboring cities. Importantly, a parking ordinance does not require the City to determine why someone is living in an oversized vehicle, what their income is, whether they have other housing options, or whether they qualify for City assistance. Those questions may be relevant to what services or assistance the City chooses to provide, but they are separate from the question of where an oversized vehicle may legally park on a public street. I keep coming back to the same distinction: the parking ordinance should be about the vehicle and its use of public streets, not about who is inside it or why they are there. These two efforts can and should move forward at the same time. They simply do not need to be contingent upon one another. Sincerely, Stephanie Wansek Resident living adjacent to East Meadow Circle From:Zoe Mount To:city.council@paloalto.org; Council, City Subject:No FLOCK cameras, thanks! Date:Monday, August 24, 2026 3:52:42 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear Palo Alto CIty Hall, I work and live in Palo Alto and just wanted to register my *strenuous* objection to having any FLOCK cameras within our city. Thank you, Zoë Mount -- Zoë Mount, LMFT Licensed Marriage and Family Therapist (650) 996-6042 zoe@zoemount.com http://zoemount.com This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first mail to some recipients. Mark Safe Report From:Jeff Hoel To:UAC Cc:Hoel, Jeff (external); Council, City Subject:TRANSCRIPT & COMMENTS -- 08-05-26 UAC meeting -- Item 2: Electric Reliability Metrics Date:Monday, August 24, 2026 3:48:25 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of openingattachments and clicking on links. Commissioners, Here's a TRANSCRIPT of the 08-05-26 meeting of the Utilities Advisory Commission, with my COMMENTS (paragraphs in red, beginning with "### "). Attended by: UAC: Croft, Gupta, Mauter, Metz, Phillips, Tucher --- (Scharff absent) Liaison: (Lauing absent) Staff: Crowley, Kurotori, Nose Public: Drekmeier (Zoom), Momand (Zoom) Agenda: https://cityofpaloalto.primegov.com/Portal/Meeting?meetingTemplateId=20116 Video: (2:28:41) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oRWM0cu2g1o High-Level Comments 1. The Electric Reliability Metrics item was an ACTION ITEM, but UAC didn't vote its advice to Council. It was a missed opportunity. 2. Electric Reliability information should be reported regularly, in a predictable place, so that it can be easily accessed over the years. -- Perhaps quarterly statistics reported in detail annually. 3. Commissioners complained that the electric reliability statistics staff reported were insufficient for them to figure out how to make the reliability better. But commissioners didn't come to agreement about what additional information would be useful. -- Number of Major Event Days. -- Outages per year, -- Worst outage of the year (customer-minutes). -- Longest outage of the year (minutes). -- Information about each outage. 4. Commissioners didn't come to agreement about how Major Event Days (MEDs) should be identified and reported. IEEE's 2.5 Beta method gets my vote as a best practice, although staff currently uses a different method. -- I think customers are most interested in the SAIDI, SAIFI, CAIDI information with MEDs included. -- Staff can use the SAIDI, SAIFI, CAIDI information excluding MEDs to figure out how to improve reliability, not just to say MED outages are beyond their control. 5. Commissioners didn't discuss how smart meter data has been used and can be further used to improve reliability. -- How quickly can smart meters report an outage? -- How accurately can smart meters identify the extent of an outage? -- What SCADA information is available regarding outages, and how can it contribute to improving reliability? 6. CPAU should be comparing itself to the best electric utilities out there, e.g., Fort Collins, CO, (which arguably has MORE hostile weather than Palo Alto does). 7. In 2018, CPAU received a Reliable Public Power Provider (RP3) Award (Diamond Level) https://web.archive.org/web/20180827214538/https://www.publicpower.org/rp3-designated-utilities from the American Public Power Association (APPA). https://www.publicpower.org/rp3-designated-utilities It was good for 3 years. Has CPAU applied for or received a similar award more recently? 8. How quickly can staff get around to splitting the extra-long feeders. Is sufficient design information available to do the splitting to Grid Mod standards? Jeff ------------------- Jeff Hoel 731 Colorado Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94303 ------------------- TRANSCRIPT 0:00:07: Chair Mauter: It helps to have the microphone on. I'm getting rusty after this month-long break. Very lovely to see all of you. And excited to talk through the agenda items today. Can we start by calling the role please? ROLL CALL 0:00:24: Belle Farias: Commissioner Metz. 0:00:27: Commissioner Metz: Here. 0:00:27: Belle Farias: Commissioner Tucher. 0:00:30: Commissioner Tucher: (unamplified) Here. 0:00:30: Belle Farias: Commissioner Gupta. 0:00:32: Commissioner Gupta: Here. 0:00:34: Belle Farias: Commissioner Scharff. Is not present. Commissioner Croft. 0:00:39: Commissioner Croft: Here. 0:00:40: Belle Farias: Vice Chair Phillips. 0:00:42: Vice Chair Phillips: Here. 0:00:42: Belle Farias: Chair Mauter. 0:00:43: Chair Mauter: Here. 0:00:44: Belle Fairas: For the record, six present. ### Liaison Lauing was also absent. AGENDA CHANGES, ADDITIONS, AND DELETIONS 0:00:46: Chair Mauter: Are there any Agenda Changes, Additions, or Deletions for tonight's meeting? 0:00:53: Director Kurotori: Not a change, but I did want to mention that we updated the 12-Month Calendar. We left it in front of you. Emailed also. And it's also available to the public, not only in the room but also on the website. 0:01:04: Chair Mauter: Excellent. 0:01:05: Commissioner Tucher: Chair, I'd like to ask about the agenda. But maybe you'd like me to delay that. 0:01:12: Chair Mauter: Please. I think we can talk about the agenda either in our discussion of the 12-Month Rolling Calendar -- I think that's the appropriate place to talk about it. 0:01:21: Commissioner Tucher: No. TODAY'S agenda is what I want to talk about. 0:01:24: Chair Mauter: Well, today's agenda IS on the 12-Month Rolling Calendar, so I think that's the correct place to talk about it. ### I don't agree. The AGENDA CHANGES, ADDITIONS, AND DELETIONS item is for talking about today's agenda. The FUTURE TOPICS FOR UPCOMING MEETINGS item is for talking about future meetings. Thank you. PUBLIC COMMENT 0:01:31: Chair Mauter: OK. We'll move on to Public Comment. Are there any in-person public comments today? 0:01:37: Belle Farias: We did not have any requests to speak in person today. 0:01:41: Chair Mauter: Excellent. MINUTES 0:01:42: Chair Mauter: We'll now proceed to approval of the minutes. Do we have any comments or discussion on this week's minutes? 0:01:53: Vice Chair Phillips: I MOVE we approve the minutes. 0:01:57: Commissioner Tucher: Oh, I would like to ask about the minutes. And that is, my specific question is around the workplan drafted and redlined in the minutes. And there was a comment in the minutes that we'll present them to Council as soon as, I think, August 8th or 10th. So, next week. ### I don't think this happened. This isn't a question about editing or changing the minutes, other than to ask: what's the status of that workplan? Maybe that's in the Director's Report. 0:02:30: Chair Mauter: Yeah. The Director's Report will cover when that comes to Council. 0:02:35: Chair Mauter: Do I have a second to approve the minutes? 0:02:39: Commissioner Metz: I'll SECOND. 0:02:40: Chair Mauter: OK. Could we call the role on -- or, call a vote on the minutes? 0:02:45: Belle Farias: Commissioner Gupta. 0:02:47: Commissioner Gupta: Abstain. 0:02:49: Belle Farias: Vice Chair Phillips. 0:02:52: Vice Chair Phillips: Approve. 0:02:54: Belle Farias: Chair Mauter. 0:02:55: Chair Mauter: Approve. 0:02:57: Belle Farias: Commissioner Tucher. 0:02:59 Commissioner Tucher: Yes, or approve. 0:03:01: Belle Farias: Commissioner Croft. 0:03:02: Commissioner Croft: Approve. 0:03:05: Belle Farias: Commissioner Metz. 0:03:07: Commissioner Metz: Yes. 0:03:08: Belle Farias: MOTION passes, with 5 yeses and one abstain. 0:03:13: Chair Mauter: Fabulous. UTILITIES DIRECTOR REPORT 0:03:13: Chair Mauter: OK. We will now proceed to the Utilities Director Report. 0:03:21: Director Kurotori: Great. So, everyone, it's great to see everyone again after this little break. I wanted to give you some good news first. on some legislation that passed. It was AB 34. ### AB 34 Text" https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260AB34#95CHP It was sponsored by Assemblymember Patterson, Senator Becker, and Assemblymember Berman. ### AB 34 Sponsors: https://legiscan.com/CA/sponsors/AB34/2025 What AB 34 did is essentially take a look at our investments in large hydro and acknowledge that was not going to be a detriment in terms of our renewable portfolio standard. So, very successful in showing the value to Palo Alto, but also not having us over-procure for renewable energy resources. So, staff provided an estimate of -- it was $25 million potential impact to the utility between 2030 and 2045. So, it was signed by the governor. So, we're very pleased with that, and wanted to provide that information to the UAC. ### 07-22-26: "New Calif. Law Supported by NCPA Extends Current Policy to Ensure Public Power Customers Receive Full Value of Project" https://www.publicpower.org/periodical/article/new-calif-law-supported-ncpa-extends-current-policy-ensure-public-power- customers-receive-full-value 0:04:12: Just a brief update to fiber to the premises. In our 12-Month Calendar, I'll give you a full update. But the fiber hut ### at the Colorado substation has been completed earlier this year. So, in totality, that will allow us to ultimately serve up to 850 residents in that area. Or customers. ### The hut at the Colorado substation is capable of serving many more than 850 premises. I'd guess up to roughly 15,000 premises. The City's plan for citywide FTTP infrastructure includes only two "huts" (places where connections from premises are aggregated), the other one being at Equinix. The City has roughly 30,000 premises (25,000 residential, 5,000 business), not counting future expansions. The City should be designing to serve 100 percent of premises. So, that's 15,000 premises per hut (on average). ### I think Director Kurotori is trying to say that there are up to 850 potential customers in the pilot area. And we're currently going with some early adopters. So, we have about a dozen customers right now we're working with, in terms of how we install, their experience. Working through some of the startup issues that you would have. So, we're bringing more information back to the UAC in October. So, I appreciate that. And I understand there may be more questions from the UAC commissioners. And more than willing to take and input some of that information at a later time. 0:04:57: Our gas main replacement program, number 25, is making significant progress. The crews have installed almost 10,000 linear feet and about 220 gas services in our primary residential area. Just wanted to remind you that this was funded through a federal grant. As you may recall, we received about $16.5 million. So, this reinvestment in our system is coming from federal resources. And it does also reduce our greenhouse gas impact, because, you know, leaks from our gas mains, you know, in talking to our climate action folks, represents about 3 percent of that coming from our gas utility. ### Yes, methane (unburned natural gas) is also a greenhouse gas. But I don't know what this particular statistic means. Is it that 3 percent of the gas that Palo Alto buys leaks away, and only 97 percent is consumed by customers? ### This (old) report 07-04-18: "The U.S. natural gas industry is leaking way more methane than we previously thought" https://www.pbs.org/newshour/science/the-u-s-natural-gas-industry-is-leaking-way-more-methane-than-previously-thought says that in the U.S., EPA thinks that the methane leak rate is 1.4 percent, but a then-new study thinks it's 2.3 percent. Also, the report says that distribution accounts for only 9 percent of the overall methane leak problem. 0:05:41: Also, some other good news is, our Foothills Wildfire Mitigation project -- the contractor has installed significant amounts of conduits. ### Conduits for fiber for FTTP as well? We're going through and -- installed the cables, and are looking at energizing that line. So, we are very pleased to have that being done. And we're expecting this to be completed by the end of the calendar year. Because of the hear out there, we do not have crews actively working in some situations, if it's not critical or a high business need because of the higher fire threats. So, you'll see some of our crews coming off and working in those areas, and working, frankly, outside of the foothills and the fire threat areas. 0:06:21: And then, as you may have heard, the Arastradero Creek rehabilitation and pipeline relocation -- There was a storm -- winter storms in 2023 that exposed some of our utilities. So, we have gone through a process of making interim repairs. But now we have to make those long-term repairs. So, staff -- I would mention Principal Engineer Aaron Perkins -- went to the Parks & Recreation Commission and talked about the restoration activities that we'll be doing. ### 07-28-26 Parks & Recreation Commission agenda, item 4. https://cityofpaloalto.primegov.com/Portal/Meeting?meetingTemplateId=20457 Video: Item 4 is from 0:21:27 to 1:09:46. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HWHVJUXLUDs We're also relocating, where we can, some of those pipelines outside of those areas that can be eroded, and putting it in different parts. So, we have a whole plan with that. And we're getting information and feedback from the community, and also the regulatory agencies. 0:07:07: And, last, I wanted to talk about this meeting here. This meeting here is a little bit lighter on the agenda. So, I did want to address that with the commission. We did have a conversation with the Chair and Vice Chair, looking at trying to move items forward. And we really just weren't able to do that, with some of our staff being, frankly, out this month, and just trying to get those items to you at a full and complete state. So, as you may have looked back in our previous agendas, we were really anticipating bringing you forth some power purchase agreements that we've been working with Northern California Power Agency and other agencies. We got about 60 potential projects through that process. The majority of those were battery- only. We were really looking forward to negotiating with, you know, three or more of those power purchase agreements. Ultimately, those did not move forward, with -- between the cities and those developers. We are looking at that next batch, that ARE competitive. So, once we have some further details on that -- and we're looking at solar-and-storage options -- we'll bring that back to the UAC. But that is not on calendar yet, and we'll go through that. So, I just wanted to give you an update of whey we have not the full length of that item here in this meeting, and why there is a little bit lower amount of activity items coming to the UAC. 0:08:32: And that completes my report. 0:08:38: Commissioner Tucher: May I? 0:08:40: Chair Mauter: Yes. Are there any questions for -- 0:08:42: Director Kurotori: Oh. Sorry. I did want to mention the date. So, on the UAC plan -- the 12-Month Calendar -- you'll see that we have an estimated date to bring this to City Council. I believe on the October -- 0:08:54: Chair Mauter: 5th. 0:08:55: Director Kurotory: -- 5th meeting. 0:08:55: Chair Mauter: Yes. 0:08:56: Director Kurotori: And when you do take a look at the UAC workplan -- and we'll get to that -- we did add a lot of your now- adopted workplan items there. So, you see the specifics. And as we go through that workplan, we really loaded that plan up, to try to fill it out for those 12 months. And would love to get your input on that, because we're trying to manage the schedule, and the items that go to you. And make sure that we're not overly burdening you on every -- any month. 0:09:27: Chair Mauter: OK. 0:09:29: Commissioner Tucher: To your last point, about the light schedule -- or agenda -- today. I'm sorry to sound critical. Everyone wants vacation. We hear constantly of all of the big issues that are on the workplan. One can only do so much so fast. You know, there's a lot to cover. Only 15 items. And there were requests for 16, 17 on the workplan. This is a one-topic agenda tonight. We're going to talk about SAIDI, CAIDI, and SAIFI. I mean, we can can kind of dial that one in. ### I think Commissioner Tucher meant "phone it in," meaning to do it with minimal enthusiasm or effort. "Dial it in" means almost the opposite. https://www.merriam-webster.com/grammar/phone-it-in-vs-dialed-in ### I agree that it's too bad that only one item was agendized. I don't agree that that item was a phone-it-in item necessarily. We took last month off. And the month before that, we had another one-topic agenda, which was just discussing our workplan. I mean, if we are reporting to Council, I have to think -- in Council's shoes -- we're not giving them very much. This is three months of essentially no activity. And I don't understand why agenda items could not be moved up. Staff is on vacation, but not for 3 months. Not all staff. I just don't get it. 0:10:42: Director Kurotori: So, in looking at the items coming in September -- And not all staff on vacation, so I -- you know, I'm -- that was a glib response, and I apologize for that. We do look at the items, in terms of the totality. So if you look at your September meeting, the Reserve Management Policy is a very significant item for the UAC to bring forth. We really looked hard at bringing that forward to this meeting, and it was not at the level that we thought it was necessary to be complete. So, we're not going to bring you something that's not that ready to be baked. Again, this agenda was anticipating talking about one or two power purchase agreements. And meeting all those requirements, in terms of the UAC's needs, and those projections of how that fits in our portfolio. And we're expecting a very meaty discussion. In terms of that. I also would like to push back on the UAC workplan. That is a significant effort by this body. To plan out your objectives for the year. 0:11:46: Commissioner Tucher: I'm sorry to interrupt, but that's something that -- I mean, all likelihood will go in front of Council maybe year's a third over. So, I mean, it's not -- That's not staff. That's not on you. But that is the value of the workplan process, from a cynical point of view. 0:12:11: Direcor Kurotori: So, understand that perspective. And, as we look at the Rolling Calendar, we can talk about how we are mapping out the objectives that were just approved by this body. Today. ### 06-03-26. And what what we anticipate, and how to serve those needs. 0:12:29: Chair Mauter: Are there any other questions or comments for the Utilities Director? 0:12:35: Chair Mauter: OK. Hearing none, I would like to move on to Agenda Item Number 2, the Calendar Year 2025 Reliability Metric Update -- ### But Item 2 didn't actually start until 0:25:29. 0:12:47: Commissioner Tucher: I'm sorry. I'm going to jump in one more time. So, we're leaving the Director's Report? 0:12:52: Chair Mauter: I asked -- I just asked are there other -- 0:12:55: Commissioner Tucher: My fault. Because I'm going to ask two more questions, if I may, please? 0:12:57: Chair Mauter: Sure. Go for it. 0:12:59: Commissioner Tucher: Since our last meeting, there -- well, there was a Council meeting, where all of our discussion over the Urban Water Management Plan went in front of Council. I think one or two of us here -- or one of us -- may have represented UAC. My understanding of the Council's meeting was that they did approve the Urban Water Management Plan. We voted, I think, 3-3, in a draw, or a tie. ### It was 4-1-1. See Commissioner Gupta's summary at 2:09:29. But there was consensus feedback from Council -- 4-5 of them -- that we take next steps. And one of those steps seemed to be -- It was a bit vague, but one of the steps seemed to be, look towards a study session. I don't know exactly what a study session is. But we've talked -- we've had this -- 0:13:51: Chair Mauter: Commissioner Tucher, yeah, that's actually on the 12-Month Rolling Calendar. And so, I think -- 0:13:56: Commissioner Tucher: -- be referred back from that -- 0:13:56: Chair Mauter: -- we can discuss that when that comes forward. 0:14:02: Commissioner Tucher: OK. Good. And then -- I mean, I have thoughts on how the Director's Report could become more Council cover since we last met? But I believe that you've attended BAWSCA meetings -- correct me if I'm wrong -- since we last met. ### BAWSCA meetings: https://bawsca.org/about/board/agendas And I -- If that's true, I'd love to hear your impressions. There were some, I think, pretty important -- There was a very important June BAWSCA meeting, where our City representative, Vice Mayor Stone, spoke strongly. There was intense dialog with SFPUC. That would seem to be an appropriate update in a Director's Report. Do you -- Are you able to comment on that at all? 0:14:52: Director Kurotori: Well, we did have some direction from Council on that -- Or, it's in the 12-Month Calendar. I thought that would be a better place to describe it, in terms of what the Council action was. Yes, we do have staff that attend BAWSCA meetings. I have attended more than one BAWSCA in my time. 0:15:11: Commissioner Tucher: (unamplified) ** 0:15:11: Director Kurotori: So, that is not -- that is not uncommon for -- for staff to attend. It's also something that is livestreamed and is available for the public. 0:15:21: Commissioner Tucher: I'm sorry to interrupt. My point is, if it's something you attended, I would submit it's an important update. If there was anything substantial in the BAWSCA meeting, it would be important to hear about that in a Director's Report. That's my view. 0:15:41: Chair Mauter: The Director's Report is at the discretion of the Director. And so, I think it's a little bit hard to force, you know, coverage of specific topics. ### I don't see why it's hard. Just ask. But if there's a set of -- you know, I know that we have had conversations about a PowerPoint slide in which we covered anything that had carried over from the past meeting. And I think if we could continue that practice, I think it would be deeply appreciated. 0:16:12: Director Kurotori: Yes. I appreciate that as well. And that's the intent. I was actually talking with staff earlier today on how we can make this tied into this calendar, so it's very much more transparent, in terms of having that information. And I appreciate also that I cannot give summary to all the things I may or may not attend. And, you know, this -- that was also a presentation to BAWSCA. We have one coming up. So, that information is helpful, in terms our staff looking at and bringing that in the joint session. But I don't want to talk about an item that we're trying to talk about in the public calendar. 0:16:48: Chair Mauter: Yep. All right. 0:16:50: Commissioner Croft: Sorry. When are we talking about this item in the calendar? 0:16:55: Chair Mauter: The very last -- This is on the calendar as the joint session with City Council and BAWSCA on water demand, which is item number 13. ### It's objective number 13 of the UAC workplan. It falls in the "items to be scheduled" category. But I believe that's as a result of calendaring challenges. Again, I would prefer 0:17:20: Commissioner Croft: But the -- When we talk about the schedule, I believe we're just talking about the schedule. We're not talking about anything substantive. If there WAS a meeting, I think it DOES make sense. I mean, why can't we ask about it -- 0:17:31: Chair Mauter: We can definitely ask about it -- 0:17:33: Commissioner Croft: -- as part of the Director's Report? I think it's appropriate to ask for it, because if we -- you know, if it gets calendared, who knows when it's going to get calendared? It becomes old information. And this body has been interested in water, so it feels like -- I don't -- if there's any information you can give us -- You can tell us to go watch the meeting ### BAWSCA meetings: https://bawsca.org/about/board/agendas ### The 07-16-26 meeting. Here's an agenda. https://bawsca.org/uploads/agendas/26_BAWSCA_July16_Agenda_Packet_FINAL_7.10.26.pdf And a video. The item starts at 0:15:24. -- Water Operations and Design Drought https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YTf1eukaMGQ But if there's anything -- 0:17:53: Commissioner Tucher: Our Vice Mayor asked the toughest questions of SFPUC that have been asked to date. On all -- On the design drought. 0:18:00: Director Kurotori: At the meeting, there were several BAWSCA representatives that spoke. What -- If there's an interest for me to bring that back and we put it on an agenda and provide that, I can certainly do that. If that's -- But we're also doing a study session on this. Maybe what I can do is provide -- I can provide some information on what has transpired at that meeting, and give some summary to that. But we are going to have a joint session -- 0:18:29: Commissioner Tucher: (unamplified) November or December 0:18:31: Director Kurotori: We are going to plan to have a joint session with the City Council on that. And some of that information will be provided by BAWSCA -- was timely. But also, that's a part of what's going to feed into that joint session. 0:18:48: Chair Mauter: Just in terms of policy and procedure, and how we run this meeting. Absolutely, asking content questions about Director activities is appropriate during the Director's Report. My understanding is that your question had been about when that was going to be scheduled, and what the Council actions were on that -- that were going to be covered in that joint session. And that is the only reason I suggest we cover it during the 12-Month Rolling Calendar. Just for your reference as well. It -- We should ask questions about the Director's activities during the Director's Report. 0:19:23: Chair Mauter: Are there any other -- 0:19:25: Commissioner Tucher: Where -- After Commissioner Croft's request, what comes from that question? What was the answer? I guess -- 0:19:31: Chair Mauter: That is on Alan. I can't -- I was not there -- 0:19:34: Commissioner Croft: Is it that we can't have a summary because it wasn't your topic? Is that what -- 0:19:41: Director Kurotori: I could provide -- I don't have the PowerPoint in front of me to give that -- just for me to provide that -- Commissioner Tucher and to the rest. I would like to provide some of that information and context to that, because it was a deeper dive, in terms of their drought plans. Their seven-year drought. There was question and answers. So, I want to be comprehensive in that, because there's a lot of interest in the community. Especially on that topic. There were folks from Palo Alto there. Right? So, I don't want to minimalize or marginalize our participation. Yes, we are actively engaged. Palo Alto is VERY actively engaged in BAWSCA. I myself and other staff attend those meetings. But those are the meetings for the BAWSCA board. What I would like to do -- and what we're going to do is start preparing what that agenda looks like, based on Council direction. And that ties to that joint session that the City Council has asked us to work with the UAC on their schedule. Bringing different speakers on. Right? And that's an item to be calendared as well. So, you know, we monitor the BAWSCA board meetings. And that was a very specific one. To Commissioner Tucher's interest as well. And yes, we support the Vice Mayor in terms of that as well. So -- 0:21:03: Commissioner Tucher: OK. 0:21:03: Director Kurotori: -- that is different, because we are supporting that commissioner part of BAWSCA. And that is something that we normally do. 0:21:10: Commissioner Tucher: I'm sure you want to move on from the Director's Report. So, I got your point about -- it is at the discretion of the Director. But perhaps we, UAC, could talk about what we'd like. Or if we even want a Director's Report, and what perhaps would be useful to have in it. So, before we leave it, I'll come back to the original question of the light agenda. Do you two, as Chairs -- You were in the discussion, I guess, to decide, let's not talk about anything more than outage metrics today. What was YOUR view of that request? 0:21:47: Chair Mauter: I will not speak for the Vice Chair. But I will share that I was aligned with your perspective. That we should have additional agenda items. But we do not direct the Utilities work. And so, if they said that they could not bring a new agenda item, a new agenda item cannot be brought. 0:22:07: Commissioner Tucher: Thank you. 0:22:09: Vice Chair Phillips: I was of the same opinion, that this would be a light meeting. And given the amount of heavy topics we have coming up in the next two months, it would be great if we could push one or two of them to this meeting. I was assured that that was not possible. And, as the Chair said, you know, we cannot direct. 0:22:30: Commissioner Croft: Can I do one last follow-up on the topic of the BAWSCA meeting? OK. So, that was very helpful what you just told us, just in terms of, you know, there was a BAWSCA meeting. A lot of Palo Alto staff and residents were involved. There was a request to put it on as a joint meeting with the City Council. I wasn't aware that there was a BAWSCA meeting and that all of this went on. So, when I hear like a very brief snippet, I'm kind of like I'm going to have to go look something up. So, I'd love it if something like that -- just a brief -- like, there was a meeting. It was -- You know, it was significant. Rather than it feeling like we have to, you know, it's something secretive that we have to pull out. It's kind of like when we say we went to some meeting -- At the end of this meeting, we describe what other things we went to, just to share our information. It would be helpful to have even -- It doesn't have to be substantive. Just, there was a meeting, and we're going to do a follow-up to it. And it's going to come on the calendar. Because I didn't actually see that on the calendar before we just talked about it now. 0:23:32: Chair Mauter: Could I make a request that if there are elements of the Director's Report that people would like to see, you Director sufficient time to prepare a relevant summary. Now, obviously, that's at the discretion of staff. That is not our responsibility. But we can ask. And then, I would say, generally, now that we have a 12-Month Rolling Calendar and a workplan -- that may or may not be approved -- but we can hope it's approved -- you know, those 15 topics, though long in length, serve as the core for what we're hoping to talk about. So, topics of relevance to those 15 items may be a helpful way to think about inclusion or exclusion from that report. 0:24:35: Director Kurotori: Certainly, I do appreciate the feedback, you know, especially in regards to this joint session with BAWSCA and SFPUC. I will take that as valuable input, in terms of what I provide to this body. In the interim, if -- We'll provide some information on what has happened at that BAWSCA board meeting. And if it -- What I'm hearing, you'd like to get more information, as this specific type of issue comes up on BAWSCA. There's other issues that come up on BAWSCA. But in relation to this joint session, what I'm hearing, a lot of **, you'd like me to give an update to that. And I can certainly do so. 0:25:14: Chair Mauter: Thank you. Are there any other questions of the Director relevant to the Director's Report? OK. (laughs) I think we made it through that. NEW BUSINESS Item 2 -- Electric Reliability Metric Update 0:25:29: Chair Mauter: Now, Item Number 2, the Calendar Year 2025 Reliability Metric Update and Annual System Reliability Goal Setting -- CEQA Status Not A Project CEQA Guidelines section 15378(b)(5). For the record. ### It's an ACTION ITEM. ### The title should have mentioned that it's talking about the reliability of the City's electric utility. 0:25:34: ###. Slide 1 -- Title 0:25:57: Director Kurotori: Terry Crowley will provide the presentation. 0:26:01: Chair Mauter: Thank you. 0:26:02 Chief Operating Officer (COO) Crowley: Good evening. Terry Crowley, Chief Operating Officer for the City's Utilities Department. I want to tonight talk about reliability metrics for the City, and then also get some feedback from the commission on goal setting, on what the targets should be to improve those numbers. For a variety of reasons. So, next slide, please. 0:26:24: ###. Slide 2 -- Background So, as a little bit of background, this item was brought to the City Council for discussion in March. ### 03-02-26 Council agenda, Item 10 https://cityofpaloalto.primegov.com/Portal/Meeting?meetingTemplateId=18673 ### It was not a "discussion" item. (Council doesn't do discussion items.) Council voted 6-0-1 (Lythcott-Haims absent) on a detailed MOTION. (See Minutes, pages 25-26. Sorry, I don't know how to specify a URL.) ### Video -- 4:12:50 to 5:15:50. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P26S0WrCNoM We discussed the electric system reliabilities, how those match up with other related utilities in the area, in the region, and nationally. And propose some reliability goals for the Council. The Council agreed with staff's initial recommendations, but also expressed a desire for goals that are specifically related to Palo Alto. So, something that's looking at Palo Alto's performance and seeing how can we make that measure better. So, staff is tonight seeking that input from the UAC, to help provide those recommendations for Council's final approval. Next slide, please. 0:27:11: ###. Slide 3 -- Primary Reliability Metrics So, in general, utilities measure reliability in three metrics. These are the primary metrics. There's other metrics that are out there, but these are the primary metrics that utilities use. SAIDI, SAIFI, and CAIDI. Some of the problems with this is that it takes about 15 minutes to explain these indices to anybody. ### OK, maybe laypeople find it difficult to remember these acronyms. But it shouldn't be that difficult to convey the concepts in terms of units: minutes of outage per year, number of outages per year, and minutes per outage, all for the average customer. And then, once you explain them, you have to spend a little bit more time explaining like how do they actually relate to that individual. And then, how would you actually use those to improve. And that was one of the items that was provided as feedback to the Council, is, this not succinct, and it doesn't really help sell the message of electrification within the community. How reliable is the system? So, is there a quick messaging -- is there a quick target that really -- or the consumer can identify what's the reliability of the system? Now, again, these still remain useful for utility benchmarking between different utilities. They're an industry standard. They're out there. And we'll still continue to use those. But they do not provide a lot of benefit for the average electric customer. Next slide, please. 0:28:16: ###. Slide 4 -- Reliability Metrics So, looking at the SAIDI, SAIFI, CAIDI numbers. These are numbers through 2019 through 2025. One of the things that we've recently done is that we've broken out the numbers into two categories, one that includes Major Event Days, and one that excludes Major Event Days. Again, that is a common utility practice, to do that. It provides staff the ability to look at how the system performs with storms included and how the system performs without storms. ### Major Event Days can be caused by things other than storms. So, more of the day-to-day activities and more of that driving routine outages that you may see. For the City, we are looking at establishing Major Event Days as 10 percent or more of Palo Alto customers being affected by an outage, or affected within a 24-hour period. And in -- One thing to note here, as well, is that in 2023, the City implemented new software ### Is it documented somewhere what the software is doing, and what it is capable of doing? For example, how many different ways could it calculate Major Event Days? that improved the accuracy. So, some comparisons between reliability indices before 2023 and after are not exactly correct. But they're still useful. So -- Next slide please. 0:29:23: Chair Mauter: Terry, can I ask just a clarifying question on this slide? I just didn't understand this. The definition of Major Event Days, at -- like as defined by the percentage of system outage rather than by the type of event itself seemed like there was an endogeneity problem that could arise. And I'm just wondering if there are other -- like, you know, this is like a major weather event, or like an earthquake, or like, you know, something that's exogenous to the system, rather than this possibility of, you know, like, you could have a major system outage because you didn't update your trans- -- you didn't keep your transformers in good shape, and like a huge part of the City went out. But that's squarely on us, rather than like not on us. And so, is there any -- was there any -- like is there a different of Major Event Day that makes that sort of fault a little bit clearer? 0:30:31: COO Crowley: So, there -- in the industry, there's two major -- or widely accepted -- versions of how you define a Major Event Day. One is more of a legacy. It's a -- 10 percent of the customers affected in a 24-hour period. The other is a newer method, and more statistically probably valid. But it's called the two and a half beta method. ### If the 2.5 Beta method is newer and probably statistically more valid, why isn't the City using it? ### At 0:57:41, Crowley says the 2.5 Beta method is better. ### The 2.5 Beta method doesn't consider what the causes of the Major Event Days are. And basically what it does is, it takes the total average outage minutes per day, takes the standard deviation of that, multiplies it by two and a half beta. There's a little bit more math into that. And then it comes up with a range saying that, hey, if you have a day that's more than this outage plus this two and a half of the standard deviation, that becomes a Major Event Day. It doesn't necessarily look at weather events or earthquakes or these things that are really what you would consider are beyond the control, or beyond that expectation. And so, there could be a major equipment failure that could create a Major Event Day. And that's one of the things the City does see, is, we do see that there are certain outages on certain circuits in the City that do create a Major Event Day. I do think that there's still benefit in identifying those larger outages through this process of identifying Major Event Day, and looking at that and saying, well, that's just kind of a normal equipment failure that we would see in -- but it caused this larger outage. How do we isolate that, or reduce that scope? If that's a recommendation from the commission through discussion ### Or vote. that you would like to see something that's more tied to non-equipment failures or singular equipment failures and more weather events, or multiple outages -- Right? -- which is typical in a winter storm is, you see multiple outages, your crews are only able to work so many outages at a time, and so the customer minutes rack up. The customers that are experiencing outages rack up. So, that's something we could include into this, you know, as part of that ongoing discussion. Staff will continue to triage large outages, regardless of what that is. Next slide, please. 0:32:34: ###. Slide 5 -- Regional and National Reliability Metrics So, again, just to give perspective regionally and nationally on how the City performs with this. So, these are 2024 numbers. At the time of producing the staff report, 2025 numbers were not available for each of these agencies. So, PG&E, clearly, there's not a lot of competition for the City, I guess I would say, to meet their goals, or exceed that performance. I think there is still value in benchmarking against PG&E and their local districts. So, the De Anza district is a district that surrounds us. It's not a systemwide for PG&E. It's very localized. So, the weather events, the climate, the density of population are all the same, or relatively the same. But I do think it's a good benchmark to continue, because it's one of the things that demonstrates what's the value that the City of Palo Alto provides, versus the most likely provider for Palo Alto if Palo Alto chose not to have an electric utility. So, it gives that recommendation of, like, hey, if you had PG&E as a provider, what would you expect to have for reliability? Comparing to Alameda and Santa Clara (Silicon Valley Power), we also show pretty well, but, again, we start to come back into more normal ranges here. And we start to see something that I would say was more standard, what we would expect for reliability numbers. And, again, looking nationwide, in the top quartile for all utilities, Palo Alto shows that it performs fairly well for that. ### Slide 5 shows that staff is relying on reliability data from EIA, the Energy Information Administration. https://www.eia.gov/electricity/ ### EIA requires that utilities fill out a Form EIA-861 annually. https://www.eia.gov/survey/form/eia_861/instructions.pdf Each utility has to specify how it calculates Major Event Days. (See instructions, page 9.) But I think EIA just throws all of the data together, regardless of how Major Event Days are calculated, when calculating quartiles. So, again, these are benchmarks that show how we perform against other agencies. But, again, Council's -- one of Council's comments back was, what does that mean for Palo Alto, and Palo Alto's performance, and what is truly the floor for Palo Alto to improve as far as reliability? Next slide, please. 0:34:33: Commissioner Tucher: (unamplified) This chart ** benefit ** graphic ** numbers on it ** slide ** 0:34:44: COO Crowley: Noted. So, next slide, please. 0:34:49: ###. Slide 6 -- Staff's Proposed Reliability Goals So, this gets to the meat of the discussion. And so, proposed reliability goals. So, the top two goals in this bullet point were the original proposals to the City Council. And it's not that they disagree with these. They just wanted things to go a little bit further. And to be more succinct and related to Palo Alto's performance, versus somebody else's performance. So, outperforming PG&E against De Anza district. Again, I still think there's value in making that benchmark, so that we can continue to show to our customers that there is value in having and operating your own electric utility. Continuing to look at the top quartile nationally, for SAIDI and SAIFI. And I think there's still value in looking at the top performing utilities nationwide and seeing how Palo Alto ranks. This performance goal would exclude Major Event Days. The weather for California is storms and stuff like that is probably not a good apples-to-apples comparison. So, this item here would exclude Major Event Days. The one with PG&E would look at both system operations, because we're having the same weather events. 0:36:01: So, in addition to these goals -- and really to try and address the Council's directive here -- I've added in another target of average system availability. ### Average system availability (ASAI) is just another way of talking about SAIDI. It's not a separate target. And the intent is to really demonstrate to the customers how often -- or how much of the year -- is you system available to you to use. So, if you take the total hours in a year, how often is that system available to you? And it's a measure -- it's a percentage. It's also referenced in a lot of different industries about what your reliability is. And sometimes, you know, it's discussed in levels of nine -- three nines, four nines, five nines of reliability. And so, looking at those numbers and what that means, staff is recommending using four nines as a reliability mark. That's equivalent to a SAIDI of 52.6. Or less. Right? We would generally try to improve and beat this goal. And then there's the discussion that the commission could provide to us, is that, do you want to look at this Major Event Days included or excluded or both? Staff would suggest it's probably useful to look at it both ways. But I'd also caution and say that under Major Event Days, in some years, when we have heavy storms, you may not meet this reliability target. But on -- when you exclude those Major Event Days -- those storm days -- you're probably likely that staff could achieve this and maintain this over the long term. 0:37:28: Additionally, for those customers that do experience outages -- and that's what CAIDI measures -- is -- CAIDI measures the -- For customers that do actually experience an outage, what's their average duration -- is trying to shorten that average duration. So, trying to speed our restoration process. So, how fast can crews respond to an outage. ### Ideally, SAIDI, SAIFI, and CAIDI would all go down from year to year. I don't get why staff chose to focus on CAIDI. How fast can we isolate and restore customers. ### I'm not sure why customers have to be "isolated." Identified, maybe. ### One way to restore customers is to isolate the part of the network that has a fault from the rest of the network, so that the latter's customers are thereby restored. And how fast can we repair that equipment. That's another metric that improves when you do have an outage, that you're not sitting there for 4-5-6-7 hours. That we're really trying to compress those to the least amount of time as possible. And so, setting this target here of 190 ### minutes per outage (average) or below is basically 10 percent less than the three-year average. Once we reach that number, we can have more discussions about -- should that number go lower, to continue to improve that outage restoration time. Next slide. 0:38:23: Commissioner Gupta: I just had a quick clarifying question on that point. We are -- You're recommending -- Staff is recommending below 190. We're not actually recommending the 10 percent three-year average? 0:38:38: COO Crowley: It's not really including that metric. We could look at that metric, and using that. And that would be kind of a more long-lived goal. Right? 'Cause of the three-year average continues to improve, you would go down. If the three-year average increased, you would really -- your goals would go up. ### Technically, if the three-year average for one year were less than 10 percent higher than the three-year average for the previous year, the goal would still go down compared to the previous year, but maybe not by as much you want. So, the thought is to really start -- set a number, -- 0:38:56: Commissioner Gupta: Yeah. 0:38:56: 0:39:02: Commissioner Gupta: Yeah. It sounds -- I personally like the number better. But, yeah, thank you for clarifying. 0:39:05: Commissioner Metz: Just one clarification, Mr. Crowley. The 52.6 and the 190 are minutes. Correct? ### Minutes per year and minutes per outage, respectively. 0:39:14: COO Crowley: Minutes. Yes. 0:39:14: Commissioner Metz: OK. That's missing throughout the presentation. It would be helpful to have that. 0:39:21: COO Crowley: It's -- Being a utility person, that is -- Yes. 0:39:26: Commissioner Metz: Right. But to communicate -- 0:39:28: COO Crowley: Yeah. Exactly. To communicate to the customer, these are minutes. So, for SAIDI and CAIDI, these are minutes. ### For SAIDI, it's minutes per year. For CAIDI, it's minutes per outage. For SAIFI, it's the number outages per year that you would expect to be exposed to. So -- ### So, SAIDI = CAIDI * SAIFI. (Minutes/year = minutes/outage * outages/year.) 0:39:38: Commissioner Metz: Right. Yeah. 0:39:40: COO Crowley: Make that clarification there. Minutes. Next slide, please. 0:39:44: ###. Slide 7 -- Historical SAIDI ### The flat orange line at 52.56 minutes per year does NOT show what the City's target was historically over the years. So, to graphically represent the proposed target of average system availability, if we took a four nines number -- 52.56 -- ### A non-leap year has 365 * 24 * 60 = 525600 minutes. A leap year has 366 * 24 * 60 = 527040 minutes. An average year has about 365.25 * 24 * 60 = 525960 minutes. Which of these does the City use in its calculations? of SAIDI. ### minutes per year This is what it would look like against our historical performance. ### The graph shows SAIDI (minus Major Event Days) So, in most years, we tend to perform well. Again, I would put that flag in there that in 2023, we provided more accurate outage reporting information. So, the previous years may have been slightly underreported. But, again, the 52.5 does not 0:40:24: ###. Slide 8 -- Historical CAIDI ### The flat orange line of 190 minutes per outage does NOT show what the City's target was historically over the years. And then -- So, looking at CAIDI, and that average restoration time. And our numbers based on the historical values, excluding Major Event Days. The 190 is a target that we seem to sometimes hit and sometimes not. And so, this would be more of a goal that we would actually have to actually manage, to continue to drive those numbers downward, and actively continue to meet that. Next slide please. 0:40:58: ###. Slide 9 -- Seeking UAC Recommendation So, again, seeking recommendations from the commission on the four goals that are being proposed. Again, that the intent is to provide -- get that clarity -- those recommendations. And we'll take those back to Council for final approval. And then, staff would get to work on diving into the actual work and projects that would meet these goals. And, with that, I'll open it up to any questions. 0:41:28: Vice Chair Phillips: So, I guess, as I kind of looked into this, I understand that this is very much kind of standard utility practice. ### For CPAU? For all electric utilities? But I kind of hate it. Just to be honest. It doesn't tell me anything. And, you know, for all the things I like with metrics, it doesn't -- you know, they're not independent. As I kind of figured out, SAIDI is equal to SAIFI times CAIDI. They are not -- As Chair Mauter said, they are not -- They are highly endogenous, in the sense that I can't extricate -- you know, I can't tell from these if we are doing better or worse in a particular year. Which is the thing I want from the metrics. And going back -- thank you for the link, Commissioner Mauter -- I went back and listened to the City Council. And I think that's partly what at least some of the City Council members were asking for. They were saying we're spending $375 million -- or whatever it is -- on Grid Modernization, under the rubric that this is going to help reliability. 0:42:34 ### The main objective of Grid Modernization, as I understand it, is beef up the City's electric distribution infrastructure, to handle increasing demands of premises for more electric use -- for EVs, for heat pumps, for heat pump water heaters, for cook tops, for any energy use now met by natural gas, so that in good time the gas utility can be decommissioned. But a secondary objective is to increase the reliability of the electric utility, so that customers won't think that continuing use of gas is needed for reliability reasons. So, how do we see -- how does that show up in the metrics? And, you know, if I look at the metrics now, they've not improved. And -- I get it -- there's a change in methodology in 2024. ### 2023 But literally, if you do a regression on every single one of these, there is no change over this period. Does that mean we haven't gotten any better? Or that there are more external factors at play? And I would try to come back and say, what would help -- what would help you get better? I don't know how these would help me if I were, you know, in your shoes, get better as these metrics themselves. I have to kind -- I don't have an answer. But it would have to do something with, you know, how many unavoidable activities were there? Were there lots of storms? Or were there not many storms and we just kind of sucked? Or there are lots of storms and we did great? From these metrics. They just don't do it for me. And so, you know, comparing them to others is probably useful. But, you know, some of the discussion is like saying, well, we want to take out the 10 percent -- you know, the Major Event Days. I'm saying, well, actually, if we have Major Event Days, we should be better prepared. We should have a system that's better prepared. So, maybe we shouldn't take them out. Right? ### Right. In any case, outages due to Major Event Days should at least be analyzed separately. I mean, if we're going to have Major Events all the time, we'd better get damn good at handling Major Events. So, I'm -- It's almost like a highly non-constructive set of comments, I know. Um, you know. And I -- And part of me is like, just say this is industry standard. Let's tweak it a bit. But I'd love to see something creative that really helps us understand. I mean, this is kind of, to me -- They want metrics. Let's give them -- Let's give then the industry standard metrics. I don't see how it will help us. And particularly as we go forward in trying to justify something like Grid Mod and its expense, which is a reliability-based. ### See comment at 0:42:34. Do we really expect these to go the right direction they're supposed to go? Or, what do we expect to happen? Could we set targets based on that and we hit them? Or should we have other metrics? So, I'm not -- You know, I'm just not intrinsically very satisfied with it. 0:45:00: Commissioner Tucher: I'd just like to briefly say, I completely agree. I might not have said I hate SAIDI, SAIFI, CAIDI. But I find them just as unhelpful. 0:45:11: COO Crowley: So, maybe if I can provide some anchor or grounding to that comment. And I think that's a very good and useful comment. Because I agree with you. Other than I am a utility guy, and I love SAIDI, SAIFI, and CAIDI. My three cousins. 0:45:26: Chair Mauter: ** (laughs) 0:45:27: Vice Chair Phillips: (unamplified) It sounds like you're a bigamist. 0:45:29: COO Crowley: Yeah. So -- So, if we could go back to slide 4, ###. Slide 4 (again) -- Reliability Metrics So, I'll talk through some of these numbers here, and maybe make a little bit more sense out of them, and what they mean to me as a utility person. So, when I look at these numbers -- say '23 and '24 -- and I look at Major Event Days Included, Major Event Days excluded, I say, OK, there's a BIG number of outages in SAIDI. Right? There's a big number there. Almost three times, in some cases. Like, in 2023, it's almost three times -- it's MORE than three times. 0:46:02: Vice Chair Phillips: I'm sorry. What are you comparing? Excuse me. I'm just -- 0:46:05: COO Crowley: So, looking at the calendar year 2023 on this slide, SAIDI for Major Event Days Included -- the first column after the dates -- compared to Major Event Days Excluded. So the 154 compared to the 43. ### 154.1 minutes per year, compared to 43.5 minutes per year. What that tells me, as a utility person, is, you had some storms, and you had a lot of restoration work, that caused a lot of customer-outage minutes. So, the decision there is to look at -- hey, during normal operations, 43 is a pretty good number. Right? When you look at PG&E's 200 number ### Not on slide 4. See slide 5. You look at Alameda and Santa Clara, their numbers -- that, you know, are higher than that. You look at the quartiles -- Right? -- for the -- nationwide -- in the 80s, 43 is half of what the nation is performing. That's a good number. When you look at the Major Event Days INCLUDED, you look at their storm response, and say, well, there's something there that happened. ### How do you know that Major Event Days were caused by storms? So, what do we want to do with that? And then, from a utility perspective, you look at what's the value of the service versus the cost of the service. So, could we rebuild the system to prepare it to manage those winter storms? ### If the data is just reported for a whole year, how do you know what quarters the Major Event Days occurred in? And staff up? Or hold staff over in the evening? So have staff 24 hours a day during a storm, or during winter, to reduce that number. And what's that cost? Right? And that's kind of an internal discussion that staff would look a those. ### US Energy Information Administration -- Form EIA-861 https://www.eia.gov/survey/form/eia_861/instructions.pdf But those are the things that staff could look at that and say we're going to reduce those things. 2024 it's the same thing. There were some winter storms that caused that thing. Now, when we start to look at 2025, there there wasn't a lot of winter storms. You don't see a lot of Major Event Days, or outage minutes being excluded. But you do see some Major Event Days. And when staff goes back into the details and looks at those outages, what we send -- what we found is that we have some large circuits that have been built out over time, that have -- they serve more than 10 percent of the City's customers. So, that one equipment failure on that circuit automatically triggers a Major Event Day. And so, it gets back to the original comment that Commissioner Mauter ### Chair Mauter provided, is that -- is this something that -- you know, something that we wouldn't want to prepare for, or is this some thing that -- wow -- we should dial in and manage. And that's some of the benefit of excluding Major Event Days, or pulling those large outages out of the system and really analyzing them. So, it's not the staff just excludes them and doesn't look at them. It's that we pull them out separately and look at those things separately. 0:48:34: Commissioner Tucher: Terry, how many Major Event Days did we have last year? 0:48:40: COO Crowley: Let me look at -- I have that number here for you. In 2025, there was four. ### It would be interesting to report this statistic every year. ### This source says (page 2) https://cmte.ieee.org/pes-drwg/wp-content/uploads/sites/61/2003-01-Major-Events-Classification-v3.pdf that the 2.5 Beta method, on average, identifies 2.3 Major Event Days per year, although for unusual data distributions it could be as high as 8. 0:48:50: Commissioner Tucher: You know. It's a rhetorical question. ### I think it's also a good non-rhetorical question. But, obviously, like why is the number of Major Event Days not something that we track? I assume you do. What WERE the Major Events? Do Major Events affect all of Palo Alto? ### Almost never. Or did a tree fall at the top of Page Mill Road? You know -- 0:49:08: **: ** 0:49:10: Director Kurotori: We have a backup slide for that. So, maybe we can bring up the backup slide. ### But the conversation took a different turn, so the backup slide was never shown. Would it be a good idea to include the backup slides in the presentation document? 0:49:13: Commissioner Tucher: But, again, it's -- I don't need the data. The point is, I think, to -- You know, when Bob -- or Commissioner Phillips ### Vice Chair Phillips talks about something creative and more of a breakthrough -- I mean, it -- I endorse the comment -- This -- If I were in your shoes, this would be a worthless management tool. I would not -- I mean, I heard the points you made. But it's so high-level. Like, WHERE were the outages? This kind of presumes that all outages are created equal. Did they affect one neighborhood lots of times? Did they affect residential or commercial? So, if a commercial, was it law firms, where they can just send the people home to work, you know, on Zoom? Or was it a bunch of biotech companies with their refrigerators? I mean, we don't ### In the 08-05-26 UAC agenda, https://cityofpaloalto.primegov.com/Portal/Meeting?meetingTemplateId=20116 see Public Comments -- 08-05-26 Public Letters to UAC 7.24.26-08-05-26 -- pages 9-10. it's like one of the problems with MED [Major Event Days] is that, you know, it treats 100 outages for 10 minutes -- You know, you could have 10 percent of your customers have little bitty outages, and you could have 9 percent of your customers with huge outages, and those 9 percent go unnoticed or unexcluded. I mean, it's just -- it's just so arbitrary. But let me maybe just back up and say I sent a public letter, and do you have any comments to the questions that I raised? 0:50:30: COO Crowley: So, what staff needs, as far as guidance in setting of goals, is, we need a system-level number. Like, OK, where do you want to get to. Right? And then, staff can start to look at these things, from the experience and -- the basically industry practices -- ** -- OK, what's it going to take to get below this number? And that's what should come. Right? That's where the actual -- you know, something that's actually measureable -- concrete -- comes before the Council to say, OK, what does this look like? And so, as we talk through this and try and anchor this thought that Commissioner Phillips ### Vice Chair Phillips. put together here, is that staff will take this target and say, like, if you want to reduce Major Event Days, OK, that's looking at something different as far as operational. How do we prepare and staff for winter storms? Right? If we're looking at something like the Major Event Days that are occurring because we have these large circuits that represent more than 10 percent of the customers, that's a different approach. And so, staff would look at that and say, like, OK, what can we do to put a sectionalizing device out there? What are we doing for preventative maintenance to re- -- proactively replace that equipment? What are we looking at? And in an example of the Colorado circuit that runs all the way into the downtown, runs past the Hopkins substation -- the 4 kV substation that we are planning to rebuild. What if staff look at that and say like, oh, if we had a Hopkins substation that was at 12 kV, could we break up that circuit? And therefore, if there was an outage, it would only affect a half or a third of those customers. So, therefore, only generate only a third of the customer minutes. And so, those are the details. So, what staff is asking for is asking for is, let's set those high-level systemwide goals. And then, staff can look at that and say what can we do to meet them. Right? If you want to set high-level stretch goals, staff will look at that and see what it's going to take to meet it. There may be rate impacts. But, again, we have a lot of funding for Grid Mod, ### The funding for Grid Mod is not a totally done deal, and occasionally City officials overestimate what it will cost. and we want to kind of leverage that as much as possible. But that's the next step, is, staff providing those projects that reduce these numbers. But we need to -- we need some direction of where the goal is. And I think we want also to have that bumper sticker -- that simple phrasing for the customers -- to say what is the reliability. So, when you're thinking about electrification, you're thinking about buying an electric vehicle, how comfortable are you in being able to charge at home? Or heat your home? Or take a hot shower in the morning? And that's really all we're asking for. It's like lets set the target. Staff will come back with projects. 0:53:00: Chair Mauter: Yeah. I'm -- I just want to pause and thank you very much for like giving us kind of a lens into how you look at a table like this. Because I -- you know, as you just said, like it's actually really hard for us to get meaning out of these numbers. But to have them interpreted is frankly awesome, and helps us understand how that translates into utility change. So, that was great. I think that the other thing that I want to just acknowledge across the board is like it's really hard to articulate the counterfactual. Right? Like, if we didn't, you know, invest in -- if we hadn't invested in all of these changes, we would have had more outages. Like, you can't do that experiment on our power grid. We want a reliable power grid. And so, DON'T experiment on that, obviously. But it can make it really hard to value the ongoing maintenance work that you guys do. I think that the third point, and final kind of comment I want to make, is that the development of a cost-reliability curve is ultimately where we want to go. Right? ### The goal is a sufficiently reliable electric utility. A cost-reliability curve can help to inform how to get there. And you said this yourself, Terry. Like, you're coming back and you're saying, well, is it worth all of this money on a transformer upgrade just to cut those minutes in half? Or cut those minutes by 2/3? ### Chair Mauter misunderstands. The main reason Grid Mod wants to upgrade transformers is to deliver more electricity to customers. However, since the transformers have to be upgraded anyway, it's worth considering whether to oversize them even a bit more, to make them last longer. And that's very much a discussion that we are going to have to have, as you bring projects forward. And I really love that idea, of like -- maybe one of the goals is not just what the metrics ARE, but also a goal that the Utility evaluates new projects on the BASIS of some sort of cost-reliability curve, so that we're prioritizing investments in places that maintain or enhance reliability of the grid. Right? Already something that I'm sure you do. But that could be a good metric for you to share with the 0:55:20: Director Kurotori: Thank you. That's great. And understanding that value ad. You know, Terry has done a deep dive with the engineers in terms of looking at that. And, you know, we do take, obviously, a look at the Major Event Days. Another agency, they put on maps -- GIS -- in terms of outages, the types, the locations, the type of failures. And as Terry has brought back to the UAC before is, what were the types of failures. Right? So, you know, leaning into explaining what these projects will do, in terms of sectionalizing, or equipment replacement, because as we replace things in the field that may be at [end of] useful life, you'll see some improvements. So -- 0:56:00: Chair Mauter: Yeah. 0:56:00: Director Kurotori: -- making those -- quantifying those values is very helpful. 0:56:04: Chair Mauter: Yeah. I guess, Terry, my recommendation is a couple fold. The first is that, I think, in addition to like a Major Event Day subset, it would be really useful to have a weather event subset, versus a -- this was on -- this was like an equipment failure subset. 0:56:24: COO Crowley: Um hum. 0:56:24: Chair Mauter: And I don't know like how -- how you differentiate between those two things, or if there's any easy way. But one feels like it's our fault, and the other feels like, you know, force majeure. ### Pronounced fȯrs-mä-ˈzhər https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/force%20majeure ### The term "force majeure" is sometimes used as an excuse to duck responsibility. But I don't think CPAU wants to duck responsibility for fixing faults in the electric grid, even faults caused by things beyond its control. Like, it can't -- there are some things you can't control. And for the things you can't control, like, clearly, the benchmarking to -- you know, local -- Right. Like, local -- other local agencies, in terms of time -- like, recovery time -- is super valuable. Because we're all experiencing the same weather event. And if there are spikes in one year, ours is going to spike in one year. And you see it. There's so much volatility, year-over-year, in these numbers that like setting steady averages feels somewhat futile. Right? I mean like especially because it's so -- it feels very weather driven. But I would like to see a differentiation between weather responsiveness and our equipment responsiveness. So that you're not, frankly -- we're not selling Grid Mod as this thing that's going to improve reliability, and we get a bunch of worse storms, and, like, you know -- 0:57:33: Commissioner Tucher: Well, what -- 0:57:33: Chair Mauter: We want improved reliability. But at the same time, there's just like a limit. Right? 0:57:39: COO Crowley: Um hum. 0:57:39 Chair Mauter: Or cost. 0:57:41: COO Crowley: So, maybe to suggest that the 2.5 Beta method is, I think, a better method. But because the reliability is so good in Palo Alto, actually everything becomes a Major Event Day. ### I don't understand this explanation. So that's why we've gone to the 10 percent piece of it. But what we COULD do is put the caveat on the 10 percent, is say that, hey, it's not a single outage. Right? It's not related to a customer or equipment failure. Right? And then -- Or, do you want -- if that's the discussion with the commission -- do you want -- hey, we really want it to be weather dependent? Or some external factor to the City? A natural disaster, or something like that? Or some type of event like that. So, what I would suggest, for staff, it would be easier just to say it can't be just a single outage. It has to be multiple outages. And then, that would probably clear up a lot of this. 0:58:31: Chair Mauter: OK. Yeah. I don't know. Like this -- I could see -- You could have like -- Yeah. I mean, if it was just a single outage -- You're saying, if it was a single outage, that that would clearly be our fault, because it wasn't segmented enough. Like, the grid wasn't resilient enough. 0:58:48: COO Crowley: Potentially. Right? I mean, there's two different ways you could look at it. You could say there's a plane that crashes into the transmission, and there's a big singular outage. Right? 0:58:55: Chair Mauter: Yeah. 0:58:55: COO Crowley: That's really external. ### After the 02-17-10 plane crash that took out all three of the City's transmission lines simultaneously, Council, in hindsight, asked CPAU to ask CAISO for a second transmission line corridor (and fourth transmission line), to minimize the impact of unlikely events like plane crashes. 0:58:56: Chair Mauter: Yeah. 0:58:56: COO Crowley: Or, you could look at something like the Colorado feeders that are long. 0:59:00: Chair Mauter: Yeah. 0:59:00: COO Crowley: And so, what staff can do is, we can start to pull that stuff out -- say, like, hey, are these truly Major Event Days, or is this really something we don't want to dive into, and invest a little bit of money to limit that -- the scope of that outage. 0:59:11: Chair Mauter: Yeah. 0:59:11: COO Crowley: And that's fine. Again, that's the second part of it. So, as we look at these, if we start to move more of those Major Event Days out of the exclusion piece, and including those, and looking at it, they we'll start to see some higher numbers. 0:59:25: Chair Mauter: Yeah. 0:59:25: COO Crowley: But we'll also be able to drive more work towards trying to lower those numbers. So -- And, again, getting to we are spending our money. And we're trying to look at more of -- like, hey, on the routine day-to-day stuff. 0:59:43: Chair Mauter: Yeah. 0:59:43: COO Crowley: Tree trimming, -- 0:59:45: Chair Mauter: That's right. 0:59:45: COO Crowley: -- equipment failures. That is really the focus of staff. And so, over the next 3-4 years, staff would focus on doing on that. You would start to see some results in these numbers. And they would consistently go downward. 0:59:56: Chair Mauter: Yeah. 0:59:56: COO Crowley: And then, you could have this discussion about what do we do for Major Events? 1:00:00: Chair Mauter: Yeah. 1:00:00: COO Crowley: Major weather Events. 1:00:02: Chair Mauter: Without being prescriptive -- because I -- 1:00:04: COO Crowley: Yeah. 1:00:04: Chair Mauter: -- don't know enough about these to be prescriptive -- Like, this is your area of expertise. But what I would say is that these yearly numbers have super high variance. And so, it's hard to track progress in anything that has high variance. 1:00:15: COO Crowley: Um hum. 1:00:15: Chair Mauter: So, how do you constrain the variance -- which I think -- I assume is weather-related. But you're telling me that it's actually maybe several other things -- so that you can actually show progress. And that's where subsetting -- that would be my intuition. But if you have a better way to constrain variance, so that we can see a relatively smooth line going down -- 1:00:39: COO Crowley: Um hum. 1:00:39: Chair Mauter: -- I think that's where -- like that's easier to track. 1:00:44: Vice Chair Phillips: It's -- It's, I think, separating the exogenous variance. In other words, -- 1:00:47: Chair Mauter: That's right. 1:00:47: Vice Chair Phillips: -- the things we don't control, which -- 1:00:50: Chair Mauter: Yes. 1:00:50: Vice Chair Phillips: -- everybody's saying weather. And I think, as you mentioned, a plane crashing into the lines -- 1:00:53: Chair Mauter: Right. 1:00:53: Vice Chair Phillips: -- from the things that we DO control -- 1:00:56: Chair Mauter: Do control. 1:00:56: Vice Chair Phillips: -- which are response time. Which are, you know, failures due to inadequate maintenance. Again, I would just say, let's look at from the point of view of two years down the line -- three years down the line -- somebody -- City Council is going to come back and say, OK, we've spent x hundred million dollars on this. How has it improved our reliability. ### Again, Vice Chair Phillips completely misses the point that the main goal (and the main cost) of Grid Mod is to deliver MORE electricity to customers. This process, I don't think, could show it. You know, could you prove -- can you prove that reliability is better? I think these numbers, from what I see, would just continue bouncing around. Sometimes it'd be high. Sometimes it'd be low. If we have a good weather year, they're low. How do we see the improvements that we're making -- and investing in, frankly, as a City? ** 1:01:38: COO Crowley: Yeah. And that is the intent from the Utility, is -- the utility industry -- is why did you create this Major Event Day -- define that -- is really to pull out those events, and really have this consistent -- like what is the day-to-day average. And so, you have a little bit less of the variance from year to year to show that. Now, you can look at these numbers and do like a three-year average, to smooth that out a little bit more, and really show where there's a trend. Are you trending downwards on a three-year -- rolling three-year average -- or are you not? So, we could set goals based on three years average, versus a single year. And that would help to smooth some of that as well. Again, just -- these are imperfect. I would agree with that. They don't message well for the customer. I would agree with that 100 percent. But they are the utility standard. So, I -- I need something to kind of like -- where do we want to coalesce with? 1:02:25: Vice Chair Phillips: Well, and again, I'm supporting, I think, Chair Mauter in finding how do we -- how do we separate the exogenous from the endogenous? The things we don't have control over, which is -- 1:02:35: COO Crowley: Yeah. 1:02:35: Vice Chair Phillips: -- the weather, and the things we theoretically do have control over, which are maintenance failures and our response times. 1:02:42: COO Crowley: Um hum. 1:02:42: Chair Mauter: And -- I mean, obviously, we want responses to bad weather. Right? So, the first -- Including everything is still valuable. 1:02:50: COO Crowley: Yes. 1:02:50: Chair Mauter: But then, like, to give you guys credit for the hard work you're doing on isolating sections of the grid, of improving robustness, of investing in tree trimming -- like demonstrating the value of those things is going to be easier if we pull those things out. I will say, to your credit, you've a really nice job on these like four nines availability target. I think that that's intuitive. Right? It's saying 99.99 percent of the time, you're -- when you turn on the light switch, your power is going to be there. ### Why is that any more intuitive than the SAIDI equivalent: your power is not going to be there only 52.5 minutes per year (if you're the average customer)? And I also think that the 190 minutes ### Staff's proposed target for CAIDI -- 190 minutes per outage. is -- like it's really valuable for customers to think about, OK, if I had a backup battery -- I was going to invest in a backup battery -- how big of a backup battery would I invest in? 1:03:35: COO Crowley: Um hum. 1:03:35: Chair Mauter: Right? ### If you bought a backup battery that would last 190 minutes, that would provide power for only the first 190 minutes of an outage that might be longer than 190 minutes. ### Would anyone be interested in the maximum duration of an outage for any one customer for a given year? Or the maximum number of minutes of outage for any one customer for a given year? Or the maximum number of outages for any one customer per year? Or, how long could I really go without power? And am I comfortable with that. Right? is there any health or safety problem with that? Right? And I think that's really -- I appreciated like setting a metric specific to that as well, -- 1:03:53: COO Crowley: Um hum. 1:03:53 Chair Mauter: -- because it informs how an individual action -- you know, how individuals could protect themselves against unreliable -- like, you know, outages. With the caveat that an average is not, you know, indicative of any single customer. 1:04:09: COO Crowley: Yes. 1:04:09: Commissioner Gupta: Yeah. Kind of add to that, and also kind of take if from another angle. And, again, thank you for the presentation. I think you got to the heart of the question -- what feedback you're seeking from us. So, that's much appreciated. You know, taking a step back, you know, part of what I think Council's trying to get at is, we need goals to show can ditch your gas system, and electrify. And I -- you know, you made the point yourself -- most of the minutes a customer is experiencing in an outage right now -- and I think I did the math through all of the years -- I found it was 68 percent of the minutes from your table are all in the Major Event Days. ### A SAIDI statistic. With Major Event Days, the seven-year total was 132.8 + 46.2 +39.7 + 71.7 + 154.1 + 134.7 + 68.1 = 647.3 minutes Without Major Event Days, the seven-year total was 25.3 + 20.9 + 9.4 + 13.4 + 43.5 + 67.4 + 27.2 = 207.1 minutes So, (647.3 = 207.1)/647.1 = 0.680, or 68.0 percent. And so, most of the customer outages are in Major Event Days. ### That's a different statistic. SAIFI. With Major Event Days, the seven-year total was 1.065 + 0.830 + 0.277 + 0.622 + 1.182 + 0.844 + 0.614 = 5.434 outages Without Major Event Days, the seven-year total was 0.225 + 0.165 + 0.029 + 0.070 + 0.176 + 0.474 + 0.111 = 1.25 outages So, (5.434 - 1.25)/5.434 = 0.7699, or 76.99 percent. ### If you wanted to know how many outages the City experienced over the seven-year period, both With and Without Major Event Days, that information is not provided by the table. And I agree with the Chair and the Vice Chair that we should be looking at, you know, what are those exogenous factors versus endogenous factors that might help make us more precise with our Major Event Days. But I also think, you know, a customer looking at electrifying -- they're thinking, I want the gas for that major event. Right? I want it when that winter storm comes, so I can still cook. So I can still take a hot shower. And I think we need to have an answer to that. And I don't know -- You know, I've been racking my brains, ever since you asked for creative ideas to this. You know, I don't know how we -- how we can promise Palo Altans that -- One comparison that might be useful -- Because we don't control the weather. Right? And maybe we can help increase reliability at extra cost. And maybe that's a discussion we can have. You know, it might be not neat to have a table showing the Major Event -- Like, here, this winter storm, on this date, it knocked out power. Can we also show that it knocked out gas? ### My impression is that gas is not knocked out by weather much. It can be knocked out by other things -- explosions, drilling, pipe replacement -- but not as frequently as electric. I don't know if that table is helpful or not. It might actually show that gas, you know, keeps going (laughs), because, you know, gas is mostly undergrounded. ### Not to change the subject, but over the years, Fort Collins, CO, has had excellent electric reliability. In 2023, SAIDI was 19.9 minutes per year, both including and excluding Major Event Days. https://plainutility.com/utility/city-of-fort-collins-co-co Their electric infrastructure is mostly undergrounded. ### To continue the digression, in 2023, the three lowest-SAIDI utilities in Colorado were Fort Collins (19.9), Loveland (21.4), and Longmont (39.7). https://plainutility.com/state/co All three are municipal utilities. And all three have thriving citywide municipal FTTP networks. ### In 2023, Palo Alto was the 21st-lowest SAIDI utility in California, at 171.9 minutes per year. https://plainutility.com/state/ca More details here: https://plainutility.com/utility/city-of-palo-alto-ca-ca ### Here's an old (2017) document from Fort Collins that shows (page 43) SAIDI, SAIFI, CAIDI from 2012 to 2017. https://www.nist.gov/system/files/documents/2018/05/07/2017_city_of_fort_collins_application_summary.pdf The -- you know, the problem I have with the comparables -- and I think we've touched on some of this is, you know, we meet two of them with like an enormous margin. So that it's not really helpful for Palo Alto. Maybe that's what the City Council picked up on. I mean, by my math, you know, outperform De Anza on all metrics, including and excluding MED [Major Event Days], you know, on the SAIDI, SAIFI, CAIDI, including MED. SAIDI, CAIDI excluding MED. We meet those goals 3 to 14 times over. ### So, PG&E De Anza is not really an appropriate comparable. We fail only on CAIDI excluding MED. ### Do we know that PG&E De Anza's method of identifying Major Event Days is similar to the City's? You know, we're in the top quartile SAIDI and SAIFI, excluding MED. And then, on the new metric that's proposed -- the four nines -- you know, we met that last year with a pretty good margin, and we've only failed it -- what -- two -- one year? ### With MED, four years (2019, 2023, 2024, 2025). Without MED, one year (2024) -- See staff report, page 3. And so, you know, I don't know if that's the best metric, if we're looking for a Palo Alto specific metric to show improvement. ### Mathematically, it's equivalent to SAIDI. (So, it's not more Palo Alto-specific than SAIDI.) And so, I actually -- You know, it's funny. I came to the meeting planning to ask YOU to come back (laughs) with ideas on how we can have, you know, more Palo Alto specific goals to show that kind of improvement. You know, just a couple ideas I had were, you know, would it be helpful to look at, you know, the percentage of outages that we were able to restore within four or eight hours. as something we could look at? Would it be helpful to look at our ten worst-performing circuits? And that way, we could maybe look directly at restoration efforts? Maybe that's what we can control in a Major Event Day. You know, maybe the -- we can't promise it's not going to go out in a bad storm. But we can promise, you know, within a couple hours, you're going to have the power back, most of the time. I think that could be a really helpful, you know, selling point in electrification. 1:08:02: And then, looking at those circuits. And I think that gets back to the kind of -- you know, are any endogenous kinds of problems that we're not looking at yet? So, those are just some of my thoughts on these goals as they stand. But, you know, I'll keep thinking about an email if I think of anything else that might be creative. Thank you. 1:08:27: Commissioner Croft: I -- I have a couple of questions, and then also have some thoughts on the goals. I looked back at a prior presentation that had SAIDI -- it was like a -- the Annual Report, I think. And they used fiscal year. And these numbers are calendar year. And they're different. I think because the seasons must roll into a different year, depending on where you cut off the date. So, can you talk about why we switched to calendar year? And are we going to be measuring on calendar year or fiscal year? 1:09:03: COO Crowley: So, we ** comparison to -- on the national level and regional level. All the other utilities do it on a calendar year. ### Some utilities do quarterly reports, which are then compatible with both calendar years and fiscal years. Palo Alto used to do this. For example, see the Utilities Quarterly Update for 2Q23, page 119 here (Figure 4). https://www.paloalto.gov/files/assets/public/v/3/agendas-minutes-reports/agendas-minutes/utilities-advisory- commission/archived-agenda-and-minutes/agendas-and-minutes-2023/05-may-2023/05-03-2023-packet-v2.pdf (But the SAIDI and SAIFI numbers here were incorrect -- one quarter of the true values.) (Also, the report failed to mentioned whether these numbers were with or without Major Event Days.) 1:09:09: Commissioner Croft: OK. 1:09:09: COO Crowley: So, when we compare a fiscal year to a calendar year, it's not truly an apples to apples comparison. So, moving to a calendar year provided that more consistent time period, especially with PG&E and Alameda and Santa Clara for that regional look and that seasonality that you're going to see if you have an early winter storm or a late winter storm. That will split, you know. But it will be consistent when we make those comparisons. And that's the intent. 1:09:35: Commissioner Croft: OK. And then, I had a question about CAIDI. So, our goals -- well, are comparing to the top quartile, we compare well on SAIDI and SAIFI, but not CAIDI. Can you talk about why our CAIDI measurements are higher than the top quartile? And they're also higher when excluding MEDs than they are -- 1:10:06: COO Crowley: Um hum. 1:10:06: Commissioner Croft: -- including them. Can you just -- I think it's something to do with, you know, were we are at our system. But if you could explain that. COO Crowley: So, drawing on my experience from a large California utility, and working many, many, many outages on that, larger utilities that have a lot of outages, a lot of those outages are transitory, or unknown, outages, where they -- the troubleman rolls out there. They test the line back in. It holds. They drive off. There's nothing for them to call out a crew and repair. And so, that duration -- those outage minutes -- and that time to restore, it's much, much shorter in those cases. So, if you had a branch that fell through a line, tripped a fuse, and you just went out there and re-fused it, it's a very quick restoration period. For the City of Palo Alto, the large percentage of our outages are equipment failures. So, we don't have a lot of unknown outages. We don't have a lot of blips in the system that cause an outage and we just go out there and just re-fuse it or close the breaker and it holds. We have something significant that's failed. We have to find that failure, isolate it, and then repair that equipment before we can restore all customers. And that's what drives up that duration for customers that are affected by outages. 1:11:23: Commissioner Croft: Got it. So, would you expect with Grid Mod, and upgrading our aged system, should improve CAIDI? 1:11:33 COO Crowley: That's the intent, is that with Grid Mod, we would build those ties between different circuits. We would build -- rebuild East Meadow and Hopkins substations, so that we have more 12 kV systems, so we can shorten some of those circuits. More capacity. And so, that would, in intend -- just inherently would shorten or reduce the scope of the outages. There's other things that we can do more immediately, near term, to break up and isolate the circuits. But that is really what Grid Mod's going to do, is, it's going to provide that reliability and that redundancy, so that we can quickly restore customers from another source, should they have an outage. ### Chattanooga's electric utility, run by the Electric Power Board (EPB), installed "intellirupters" on its electric grid https://electricenergyonline.com/energy/news/product-highlights/864795/municipality-s-grid-reliability-improves-by-more-than- 50-with-s-c-s-intellirupter-pulsecloser-fault-interrupter.htm and reliability improved. ### SAIDI improved 42 percent. SAIFI improved 51 percent. https://www.sandc.com/globalassets/sac-electric/documents/public---documents/sales-manual-library---external-view/case- study-766-1001.pdf?dt=639226945564087305 ### This source says (page 13) says that SAIDI improved from 112 to 61.8 minutes per year, and SAIFI improved from 1.42 to 0.69 outages per year. https://eta-publications.lbl.gov/sites/default/files/6._eto_-_reliability_metrics_and_rvbp.pdf ### The intellirupters are controlled using Chattanooga's countywide FTTP network. ### My 02-21-20 message to UAC (pages 13-17 here) https://www.paloalto.gov/files/assets/public/v/1/agendas-minutes-reports/agendas-minutes/utilities-advisory-commission/archived-agenda- and-minutes/agendas-and-minutes-2020/03-05-2020-special/public-letters-to-uac.pdf provides SAIDI, SAIFI, CAIDI information for various electric utilities around the world. 1:12:08: Commissioner Croft: OK. 1:12:09: Director Kurotori: I mean, and also looking at one of those other cities mentioned here, there's -- we're getting better data now. Right? As Terry mentioned. And getting data on our outages, and also where they're at. So, we can take a look and do a deeper dive, and where we're having repeated outages, the locations -- and really hone in on that. So, using GIS, using that information, creating heat maps. Finding those, you know, a part of that process of getting that information and being more -- using that better, to how we do reinvestments in our infrastructure. 1:12:43: Commissioner Croft: Yeah. 1:12:43: Director Kurotori: And, as you may recall, Terry broke some of the Grid Mod projects up by capacity, resiliency, and then reliability. Right? So, as we go though these projects, it's good for us to highlight, you know, what this does for the community, not only for making sure we have capacity for them when they electrify, and add more vehicles, and know that they can do that. Also, for the businesses that want to expand here. And then look at that reliability. And showing that once 1:13:22: Commissioner Croft: Yeah. I'm -- I just have a few more questions and comments. So, I guess -- I'm a customer. I've been a customer for 15 years. I kind of remember -- I was going back to look for the data, because I feel like we used to have more outages at my house than we have now. Like, I almost never have an outage at our house. And that's when I came across the fiscal year. And I did not come across anything from much older. I wish I had, and we could see like a line graph of what's been happening over the last 15 years, just to understand kind of long-term health. Because I agree that the numbers are bouncing all over, but there might be a trend if we looked for longer term. So, it would be helpful to maybe understand how our system has aged over time with these numbers. Unless you think those numbers were badly measured before and not worth looking at. I mean, then it's not worth doing. 1:14:17: But I guess I had a couple more -- a couple more comments. One of them is that the whole point of this is for customers. So, what do customers care about? For me, personally, I've never had an outage that was like scary, or, you know, threatened my life, 'cause I couldn't use my medical equipment, or couldn't charge my car, so couldn't go someplace. But I an see that those are the things that people would care about. For sure, medical equipment, I could see people coming up with a backup system. Right? They're going to have to have a battery or something as a backup. They're going to have to. Like, they cannot handle an outage. Your car, if you need to go someplace, it's really annoying if you can't, you know, charge it, especially if you have a high-power charger, you do it really fast, it's out, you need to go someplace. That's not going to work. I think thinking through the use cases of outages could be helpful. I don't have the knowledge of what's important to what customer. But I feel like those -- that should be out there. I do feel like, on the commercial side, we ought to be much more clear on what they might need. For example, if we're trying to get data center customers to come here, is four nines good enough? Do we need to have more reliability on a circuit that's feeding a high-acuity customer? For example, just to come up with a, you know, the cost per outage equation. And convincing someone to move over to electric, I think. I think one other thing I didn't see in here was the SAIFI. So, I don't know if it's better to have more shorter outages or fewer longer outages for a customer. I just don't know. To me, it's like my clocks blink and I have to go reset them, and that's a pain in the butt. I'd rather have fewer outages. But I don't think that that's a very high-annoyance issue, or criticality, for getting people to electrify. So, I'm kind of curious. Are there goals -- like customer feedback that we can go on, that tells us which of these numbers is the most important, that we can use as our context for giving you feedback? 1:16:47: COO Crowley: From an industry perspective, the frequency of outages is one of the things that the industry has tried to reduce as much as possible. So, momentary outages, or transient outages -- there used to be a 5-second, 10-second outage, and then the power would come back on. But in modern society, resetting the clocks, other things, you know, the loss of the internet for that short period of time has not become a reliability tool. And so, utilities have moved away from that, and trying to find ways to sectionalize the outage to a smaller number of customers, and then tried to find ways to restore it quickly. So, I think reducing the number of outages is really what the customer wants to see. And then they want to see fast restoration. Fast action. Customers also like to see the information coming to them about the outage. They don't like to be left in the dark -- 1:17:39: Commissioner Croft: Um hum. 1:17:39: COO Crowley: -- no pun intended. On what's the restoration process. When is the crew going to arrive for it. And so, those -- that's another soft benefit that the City can provide. And the OMS system [Outage Management System] that the City has employed helps to provide that communication to the customers. But, again, I think it's reducing the number of outage and the duration is really -- that's were the customer is going to look at it. 1:18:02: Commissioner Croft: OK. So, I feel like SAIFI should be a goal on here too. So, I also went back to the City Council meeting where they discussed this. ### 03-02-26 Thanks, Chris, for forwarding that. But they -- In their minutes of the meeting, they said return with recommendations for quantified reductions in SAIDI, SAIFI, and CAIDI. ### If you reduce each of SAIDI, SAIFI, and CAIDI by the same percentage from the previous year, they remain in balance. If you reduce each of SAIDI, SAIFI, and CAIDI by 10 percent lower than the average of its previous three years, they don't necessarily remain in balance. In addition to the ones that you already presented. So, I feel like there need to be -- all three need to be addressed. We don't have SAIFI in here yet. And so, I would like to see a SAIFI target. Possibly it's under 0.25. I look at -- and I feel like we also shouldn't ignore the -- including the MEDs -- Major Event Days. So, I know we have this goal -- the second goal in here -- is SAIDI and SAIFI excluding Major Event Days. The average system availability, it isn't specified, ### If you specify SAIDI, you automatically specify the average system availability. but I think it's excluding Major Event Days. I feel like we should have one also that includes Major Event Days. And I would -- I would ask -- I feel like the four nines -- I mean, I used to work at a company with an app. We had like a five nines target. I would want to know like do we have customers who are wanting a stricter target than four nines? Or potential customers that are considering whether or not to put themselves in Palo Alto that might request -- ### Is this an oblique reference to potential data center customers? If so, generally, I'm not sympathetic. Like, if we have that information from any of our sales people that are out there, I'd like that to be considered. And then, other than that, I basically think we should have, you know, SAIDI, SAIFI, CAIDI goals. We should have -- I like the four nines. ### Mathematically, I don't like the goal of four nines any more or less than I like the goal of SAIDI = 52.56 minutes per year. It doesn't seem very -- like a very high goal. I agree that we met it. Like -- you know, most of the time we meet it. So, I almost would like to see goals that are a little bit more stretch than the ones that we see here. When I did the fiscal year CAIDI, it came out to 173 ### minutes per outage. The calendar year CAIDI came out to 190. Um, sorry, the -- it was 210. Ten percent off is 190. But with fiscal year, it was lower for some reason. It didn't seem correct that it could be so much different. But I would just, you know, encourage us to set a goal that is a bit better than what we're already doing. I feel like the four nines is NOT better than what we're doing already. It is -- We're already meeting it. So, maybe it's four nines plus five. ### That is, 99.995 percent? That is, SAIDI = 26.28 minutes per year? That would be a HUGE improvement. I don't know what that goal is. But I'd like to see -- 1:20:40: COO Crowley: Four and a half nines. 1:20:41: Commissioner Croft: Yeah. 1:20:42: COO Crowley: Again, it's -- it's -- it's really that that goal is driven really to try and find like what's that clear message that you can provide to customers. 1:20:49: Commissioner Croft: Yeah. 1:20:49: COO Crowley: So, if you did four and a half nines, you would get to a SAIDI of roughly about 26 -- 1:20:53: Commissioner Croft: Um hum. 1:20:53: COO Crowley: -- minutes. Which -- 1:20:54: Commissioner Croft: And that was the other thing -- COO Crowley: a goal to to -- 1:20:58: Commissioner Croft: -- more ** for us. 1:20:58: COO Crowley: -- a little bit difficult to reach. 1:21:00: Commissioner Croft: Yeah. 1:21:00: COO Crowley: But not unobtainable, I don't think, -- 1:21:03: Commissioner Croft: Um hum. 1:21:03: COO Crowley: -- in most years. So, we would have to do some work. It would take years to get to that point. But that is certainly one of those things that you would be working hard towards. And, potentially, that still meets that messaging that's desired. 1:21:18: Commissioner Croft: Right. And I also -- again, I think that the customer feedback is important for driving, you know, where we set that goal. Because if it is going to be a public goal, you want it to be one that's going to be, you know, palatable to the customers that we want to be here in Palo Alto. Whereas, residents, I do think they CARE about these, but it's not like I'm going to buy a house in Palo Alto versus not going to buy a house in Palo Alto. It might make them a little bit more convinced about electrifying. They definitely -- 1:21:51: COO Crowley: Um hum. 1:21:51: Commissioner Croft: -- want them to be comfortable doing that. [pause] That's not helpful helpful in terms of quantification, but I don't know how much you want us to actually tell you. I'm just giving you -- my guess is, I go a little bit more aggressive, because I think that's what the City Council wants, is to see some improvement. 1:22:13: Chair Mauter: Can you help direct us in terms of what more you need to close out this agenda item? ### It's the wrong question. The question should be, what more does UAC need to do so that it can vote its advice to Council? 1:22:19: COO Crowley: So, to include a SAIFI goal, since the SAIDI, SAIFI, and CAIDI are all intertwined. If I have a goal for SAIDI and CAIDI, I automatically have a goal for SAIFI. ### Good point. (Basic, but good.) So, I can work that out. Right? And figure out what that looks like. I'm hearing the commission indicate broadly they want something a little bit more aggressive than what was proposed. And so, I think staff certainly can provide that -- the four and a half nines. ### Wow! I didn't expect staff to just agree to that. SAIDI = 26.28 minutes per year. If staff agrees to this more aggressive goal, do they also reserve the right to be less likely to meet it? I think also there's some discussion about refining the Major Event Days. That's easy. I think I can take that forward as well. And hit that -- hit those comments with that. And then, I think some of these other indicators -- how we start to bring that forward for discussion. Like the top 10 circuits ### Ranked how? CAIDI? SAIFI? SAIDI? Other? (Like maybe number of customers?) and what we're doing, what programs we're doing to reduce the outages on those circuits. Providing that indication of what's the longest-duration outage restoration that took for the year. ### Interesting idea. or -- you know, did we restore customers -- 90 percent of the customers, or 80 percent of the customers within 4 hours? I think that's another metric that we can bring forward to share. ### Interesting idea. What do other utilities do? 1:23:35: Chair Mauter: Great. That sounds like it's captured most of the comments here. I think those would be really helpful. My only one that you didn't reiterate back was just -- This is all cost question. Right? We can have five nines reliability if we want our electricity bills to double. Right? ### No data was presented to verify this possibility in particular. And so, I think it's healthy to have, when we're looking at these projects, some sort of -- We might bucket them in the reliability or the resiliency. But I think even within those buckets, just saying like, OK, here's how much we're paying for that. And it's -- you know, it just help set reasonable expectations vis à vis rates. 1:24:27: COO Crowley: We can include that as well. 1:24:29: Chair Mauter: Yeah. 1:24:30: Commissioner Metz: I'd like to -- 1:24:31: Chair Mauter: Oh, please. Please. I'm sorry. 1:24:32: Commissioner Metz: Yeah. I'd like to go back to the desire that Council expressed, namely to have goals that would alleviate concerns for electrification. And I think there are sort of three things that I would recommend to achieve that. The first is setting technical goals, to ensure that CPAU has [the] reliability we need. And I think almost all this discussion, except for a couple of the comments that Commissioner Croft made, address that -- address the technical. 1:25:01: Second would be to use these goals -- the technical goals -- to convince the public, so that they will electrify. And I think if we look at, you know, the SAIDI and CAIDI, you know, I think those are not going to make it in that bucket. You know, I mean, it's sort of like if we were making ketchup. Right? We would have goals for acidity and, you know, thickness, and viscosity, and all kind of technical things, which are important to us, as the folks making the ketchup, and doing a great job. But we wouldn't be pitching that to the people buying the ketchup. ### Heinz advertises that its ketchup is slow -- high-viscosity. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BHM85tc7t6k&t=1s ### But, yeah, in general, how you pitch a product to customers might be different from how you make it better technically. ### Among the possible pitches for Grid Mod: * You want to be green. Right? * California is going to require that you be green. Right? costs of running a gas utility, so gas prices will have to go up. And I think, you know, the same thing is here, to talk about why are these use -- you know, what are the right metrics to communicate with ratepayers, and why are they useful? I would say that the four nines, you know, is kind of semi-useful. That some people would understand that. And if you make the connection between the four nines and, you know, 50 whatever minutes outage per year, that's more understandable -- That, you know, I'm going to be out for an hour a year, and if it's -- for 3 hours a year -- Those are things that are in here -- not expressed that way, but are in here, that I think ordinary folks would understand. I mean, it took me a while to figure out that that's what this said. So -- And also, then, getting down to basic things, like why exclude Major Event Days? Two problems with that. One is, it's self referential. Right? ### I don't quite get this point. Major Events are defined as when 10 percent of customers are out. ### Would using the 2.5 Beta method solve that? It's defined in terms of weather or tree or a PG&E shutdown, or something like that. And so, you know, just building on the conversation we already had, I think, you know, can't -- bucketing those reasons for Major Events would be a useful thing. But at the end of the day, you know, if my wife can't take a shower, I'm not going to be able to explain to her that it's a Major Event Day and she shouldn't worry about it. That's not going to work. So, I don't think we really can exclude those. But it's obviously important technically, to tell us how good a job we're doing at managing the network. But it doesn't really tell us how likely it is that a customer would not receive electricity. So -- I mean, what customers want is to get electricity no matter what. ### No electric utility provides electricity all the time (SAIDI = 0 minutes per year). And so, you know, we obviously have to keep track of those things, to know what problems we want to try to solve. But it doesn't really -- ignoring Major Event Days I think is probably not a good idea. 1:27:57: The third thing is getting customer buy-in. And I think this is not really an engineering operations problem. I think it's really a marketing/communications problem, and a market research problem. Namely, we need solid communications with customers beyond the technical, because most of them won't know of care about that. And figure -- So, figure out how to communicate with ratepayers. How to get their buy-in. You know, to get -- You want them ultimately to say yes, I'm convinced. I will go all- electric. Right? That's the goal of the whole thing. So, we need to -- That's the punchline. And we need to figure out what the joke is, to get to that point. And I think the other part of that -- part of that is market research. Customer buy-in for electrification, I think, will likely require customer research, instead of us sort of talking about it. 1:28:50: And I'm thinking of the FTTP study. I thought there was some good research in that study, some of which was surprising to me, in terms of what customers wanted. For example, customers -- unbundled. I was really surprised that something like 60 percent of people using internet in the City don't bundle it with cable or something like that. And there are a lot of other little details like that, that were useful. So, I think it's the same thing here, is to figure out what would the average customer take as information that would make them confident that they should go electric? So, I think that's really critical, to get to -- to understand what would be convincing to customers, as testified to by the customers. So, I think this problem is about one third technical and two thirds, you know, dealing with the market/communications, market research, to understand what would convince people. Because I think we're -- you know, not that far off on the technical, but I think we're still a long ways to go on the marketing side. So, anyway, good luck. 1:30:00: Commissioner Croft: OK. Yeah. Just -- I had an additional thought related to what you were just saying on the customer buy-in. So, I also have a heat pump water heater. I'm pretty sure it would be hot for a pretty long time -- hot enough to take a shower -- for a while. You know, it's got a huge tank of big hot water. So, I think it would take a long -- long blackout for that not to give me somewhat hot water. But on the car charging, I do think that's a major fear. Right? And so, one thought is, we have talked before about a municipal charging station. ### The City already has several of these. Coming up with some kind of fallback system. Say you have a blackout. We get the notification on our phone. You know, you could, you know, reserve a spot someplace. ### I don't think the City's charging stations can be reserved this way. Anyhow, your car would have to start out being charged enough already to get there. Something like that is not SAIDI, SAIFI, CAIDI. But I think having backup systems like that could reduce the need for -- or 1:31:14: Vice Chair Phillips: Just a quick question. What's the next step with this? Does this go to -- Are you going to come back to us, or you gong to go to Council, or what -- Just what is the next step? 1:31:25: COO Crowley: So, if the commission would like us to come back, we could do that. To clarify it. Or I can take these comments, coalesce them, and go back to Council, and then seek their input and final potential approval. 1:31:39: Chair Mauter: OK. I'm going to recommend the latter, given the composition of our 12-Month Rolling Calendar, and the priority of this, vis à vis some of the other major topics. We deeply appreciate your work here. I think we've -- you know, you've gotten a range of opinions. Hopefully lots to work with. I think as you go to Council -- Commissioner Metz is correct. Like, that's obviously a -- there's the PR. Step one is Council, and PR is step two -- is the rest of the community. So, we wish you luck. And if you have any other questions -- 1:32:17: Commissioner Tucher: Before we leave the topic -- 1:32:19: Chair Mauter: Yeah. Please. 1:32:19: Commissioner Tucher: I chipped in a few questions. But I do want to say a couple things on this. There's been a lot of talk about -- like, the purpose of this whole thing -- the context is to build confidence among our customers that -- in electrification. But as a commissioner, I don't have a point of view -- nothing to say on that topic without any confidence that I -- This is the point that Bob -- Commissioner Phillips ### Vice Chair Phillips made earlier. I don't know if we're getting better or worse. I don't really know what this data is saying. So, I don't have confidence. Not that the -- I don't distrust the numbers. I just don't understand the bigger -- What's really happening behind the numbers. So, I have a few questions. I'll come back to what Commissioner Croft asked. CAIDI, at 245 ### minutes per outage. I put this in my letter. Do we know why it is so high? Is it -- I'll just read from what I said. Is it that a few long outages -- a small number of big outages -- are skewing the average? I mean, after all, SAIFI ### The number of outages per year for the average customer. is low. Or maybe maybe MEDs just take out all the easy stuff. Because, you know, an MED can -- if affects all these people. Maybe it affects them in small ways, removes all that from the number. And that leaves only the hard stuff. So, you know, why is CAIDI big? Can you answer the question that's in my letter? 1:33:47: COO Crowley: So, typically is large for the City of Palo Alto because when we do have outages -- the routine outages -- we find equipment failures. So, say it's a transformer failed. It's an underground splice failed. It takes time, 1) to call out the initial troubleshooter, to respond, find the issue -- 1:34:07: Commissioner Tucher: You're talking about MEDs now. Right? Is that what I heard? 1:34:10: COO Crowley: So, I'm talking about outages regarding -- 1:34:12: 1:34:14: COO Crowley: And then, I'll go into Major Event Days Excluded. And why that influences CAIDI, or doesn't. Right? So, just to look at outages in Palo Alto. Palo Alto, when we typically have an outage, it's related to an equipment failure or something that needs to be repaired by a crew. So, the initial call-out, we call out a troubleshooter. They respond. They do some initial investigation of the outage. Find that outage. Isolate it. Restore customers as much as possible. In the meantime, we're calling a crew in -- 3-4-5 people. Takes time for them to get -- 134:46: Commissioner Tucher: ** 1:34:46: COO Crowley: -- in the yard. So -- So, that equipment takes time. Right? What we find in Major Events is that we have MORE outages and more customers affected, but the restoration time is a little bit quicker, because staff is -- doesn't have that travel time back in. And some of the outages we can restore quicker. 1:35:07: Commissioner Tucher: But -- I'm sorry. You're talking in generalities. Why -- Which is it, with the 245? 1:35:14: COO Crowley: ** 1:35:14: Commissioner Tucher: I'm sorry, but this question came up in front of Council. And -- Like, what is it with Palo Alto? What's special or different? And you theorize this split between what we call exogenous and endogenous -- weather versus equipment. Which -- What is the number? Like what percentage of the outages -- in total or the MED events -- of which I guess there were only 4 this year, but -- What is the answer? Do you know what that split is? Or we all still just theorizing? ### In the 2Q16 Utilities Quarterly Update (page 61) staff attempted to provide a little more detail. https://www.paloalto.gov/files/assets/public/v/1/agendas-minutes-reports/agendas-minutes/utilities-advisory- commission/archived-agenda-and-minutes/agendas-and-minutes-2020/03-05-2020-special/public-letters-to-uac.pdf Apparently there were only 26 outages all year. (Is that true? Or were these just the 26 most important outages?) Of these, 22 outages were attributed to storms. Is the SAIDI, SAIFI, and CAIDI information including or excluding Major Event Days? If the latter, calculated how? The national quartiles are cited, but where did the data come from? Outage information is provided per month. But the per-month SAIDI and CAIDI are in the wrong units (per month, not per year) The per-month reporting obscures how individual outages contributed to the monthly stat. MAIFI (Momentary Average Interruption Frequency Index) is included as part of the data from other utilities, but Palo Alto apparently didn't have any momentary outages. Would Palo Alto have included momentary outages as part of its SAIFI? (And did the other utilities NOT include momentary outages as part of SAIFI?) Note that each monthly stat can be due to multiple things. For example, for March, there were 6 total outages, all 6 sustained, 3 overhead, 3 underground, 4 due to storms, and 2 not due to storms. Should staff have reported on each of the 26 outages separately? ### I guess I'm surprised that there were only 26 outages for the whole year. Are momentary outages excluded? Are scheduled outages excluded? What if they weren't excluded? (When my smart meter was installed, I was without service for less than 5 minutes. Should that count as an outage?) ### See also my message to UAC of 02-21-20 (pages 10-12) here. https://www.paloalto.gov/files/assets/public/v/1/agendas-minutes-reports/agendas-minutes/utilities-advisory- commission/archived-agenda-and-minutes/agendas-and-minutes-2020/03-05-2020-special/public-letters-to-uac.pdf ### Between 03-27-21 and 04-13-21, CPAU experienced THREE major outages. See the next several comments. ### At the 04-07-21 UAC meeting, Director Batchelor explained what was going on. See the video from 0:06:46 to 0:16:04. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KnKTN6m9kcU&list=PLJ0x6PDuVXlPymL-1zBmpNOd3laGIrNaJ&index=24 ### 04-16:21: "Recent Palo Alto Power Outages Blog" https://www.paloalto.gov/News-Articles/City-Manager/In-the-Public-Interest-Recent-Power-Outages-blog ### 04-16-21: "In the Public Interest: Recent Palo Alto Power Outages" -- Dean Batchelor (NOTE: it's not on paloalto.gov) https://medium.com/paloaltoconnect/in-the-public-interest-41cbf800ee29 ### 05-12-21: UAC agenda (no URL available) Item VII.1. Discussion and Update of Recent Utilities Outages. See video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PAd-74c_F9c&list=PLJ0x6PDuVXlPymL-1zBmpNOd3laGIrNaJ&index=22 1:35:46: COO Crowley: For the -- um -- Do I have that percentage? Can I give you that right now? Can I calculate it? No, I can't. 1:35:53: Commissioner Tucher: But you have it. That's comforting. Somehow -- 1:35:55: COO Crowley: We can make those calculations and show, like, how many outage minutes -- 1:35:58: Commissioner Tucher: Exactly. 1:35:58: COO Crowlay: -- are associated with, you know, the Major Event Days -- 1:36:02: Commissioner Tucher: What I'm driving with all this, of course, will be as you've heard. But I didn't quite hear it in your wrap- up two minutes ago The first thing that I would love to see is, you know, whether it's just weather and equipment or whether there's a third and fourth type of outage. I'd love to know that. That would be where it would start. And then, I'd ask a whole bunch of questions under that. Like, what was the duration and severity? Weather-driven and equipment-driven? And a third thing maybe. And, you know, where did it happen? Like, which -- whether you're talking about circuits or neighborhoods, residential versus commercial. These kinds of insights -- at least from my point of view -- would give me more confidence to say I know that -- I know what our outage posture is. And I have confidence it's getting better. And I have confidence that we can GIVE confidence to customers to electrify. 1:36:55: But, you know, I'll ask the question that was in my letter. Where are the hotspots? We've talked a lot about circuits, but where are they? Where did -- Where were all the outages last year? 1:37:07: COO Crowley: So, the more -- the majority of looking at -- to answer that question that was proposed there -- The majority of outages from October 2023 'til July of 2026 -- and that's because I have confidence -- more confidence in that data than anything beyond that. So, looking at that, we're looking at the Maybell circuits and the Colorado circuits as being -- 1:37:30: Commissioner Tucher: Maybell and Colorado circuits. 1:37:30: COO Crowley: -- being the ones that are there. And some of that has to do with -- those are some of the largest circuits. And so, when we do have an outage, it affects more customers and generates outage minutes. Some of the work that we're doing to improve that, and to find and isolate -- is fault indicators. ### What is a fault indicator, in this context? How many fault indicators has Palo Alto already deployed in its electric infrastructure? Can they be networked? Would they require battery backup? Can they be accessed and controlled remotely? And then, we're also looking at sectionalizing devices. So, as we do Grid Mod, we're looking at adding additional sectionalizing devices that would -- 1:37:53: Commissioner Tucher: Sorry. What's that word? Sex line devices? 1:37:54: COO Crowley: Sectionalizing devices. So, a few, or -- 1:37:58: Commissioner Tucher: ** 1:37:58: COO Crowley: Sectionalizing devices. 1:38:02: Commissioner Tucher: Sorry. I tripped on that. Sorry. Got it. 1:38:05: COO Crowley: So, a fuse, or an interrupter, that would break up that circuit into smaller pieces. Therefore, fewer customers are affected by that disruption. 1:38:14: Commissioner Tucher: OK. 1:38:14: COO Crowley: And so, those are the things we're working on. And again, we do look at those major outages and say, like, oh wait, this shouldn't have happened this way. We could have actually done better to isolate that outage from the start. From the immediate point of the issue. 1:38:29: Commissioner Tucher: The purpose of my public letter was that, you know, you have -- you get from the letter the kind of things I think -- 1:38:38: COO Crowley: Um hum. 1:38:38: Commissioner Tucher: -- a metric outage report ought to answer. And the standard industry CAIDI -- that they don't answer those questions. I want to know where are they happening? How long are they happening? What is an MED specifically? How many were there? Like, it never says what they are. And, by the way, are we safe to assume that an outage can be as shortage as 30 seconds? What is an outage even? 1:39:06: COO Crowley: So, -- 1:39:06: Commissioner Tucher: It stops right -- 1:39:08: COO Crowley: So, we can go into a lot of these details. And so what I would -- 1:39:11: Commissioner Tucher: -- back up a little bit -- an outage. 1:39:12: Chair Mauter: Well -- But I think -- to where Terry may be going here is that like our agendized item is really understanding what metrics -- or giving feedback on the metrics that are proposed -- ### As opposed to what metrics should be proposed? 1:39:25: Commissioner Tucher: That's what -- exactly. Like, what is the outage? What was it -- I mean, -- 1:39:30: Chair Mauter: OK. I cut you off. 1:39:30: Commissioner Tucher: -- seconds? 1:39:32: COO Crowley: So, what I would step back and look at is that staff needs direction on these indices. Or, if there's additional indices that we want to look at -- as how many customers were restored within 4 hours, or other goals like that. We need to figure out what those metrics are. And then staff, as a next step, staff internally will start to look at those metrics, and look at those details on the outages, and figure out what's the solution? What's the lowest-cost solution that drives the numbers back down to meet the goal. ### Well, maybe not "back" down. So, where you're going is, you're going beyond the goal setting. Which is not bad. That's a good inquisitive way to go beyond the goal setting. But, again, what I'm -- what I need to do is really set the goal, and then let staff investigate that a little bit more, and come up with the projects that make sense to actually meet those goals. 1:40:20: Commissioner Tucher: OK. Well, I'll just remind us what was in the Council meeting, where one councilman said it's just not good enough when someone, you know, calls us up to complain to say, "Oh, don't sweat it, because it's worse in Sunnyvale." ### At 4:34:46 to 4:35:57, Council Member Reckdahl said it wasn't a very good selling point that other cities are worse than Palo Alto. (He mentioned San Jose and Cupertino specifically.) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P26S0WrCNoM And, you know, another staff -- Well, so, as far -- And then, I do want to ask -- before we leave this topic altogether -- whether -- I think some -- Meagan -- Chair Mauter -- mentioned herself -- the connection to the battery storage decisions. And part of this discussion at Council that got sent back to us -- kind of as an afterthought, because it was really sent back to S/CAP ### S/CAP is the Sustainability & Climate Action Plan. CASC is the Climate Action & Sustainability Ad Hoc Committee. also, but -- was BESS, ### Battery Energy Storage System and sharpening pencil, and broadening the definition of benefits that come out of the BESS ROI, make-or-break decision. And, as I said in my letter, I would welcome bringing that to the -- I actually think it's part of THIS agenda item. Which, on an otherwise short night maybe we talk about. But let's keep in mind that when this topic was dealt with at Council, it was -- it included the context of taking a closer, better, fresher look at whether BESS -- solar and storage -- does pencil out, especially at the commercial category. ### As I understand it, BESS doesn't necessarily include the concept of nearby solar. ### It might make sense to have city-scale local battery storage that can be charged during off-peak hours from remote solar. And so, -- 1:41:52: Chair Mauter: Yeah. I'll just say I think that the point is, there's going to be a range of opportunities to invest in upgrading our grid. And making it more resilient. And our ask is that when we look at Grid Mod updates, that we are thinking about rank ordering those investments and looking across a broad portfolio. 1:42:13: Commissioner Tucher: I'll stop. 1:42:14: ### Item 2 was an ACTION ITEM. So it's regrettable that UAC did not vote its advice to Council. 1:42:22: Belle Farias: Chair, would you like to open public comment for Item 2? ### Good catch. ### Actually, the Brown Act requires that the public comment for an item be heard before or during the item, not after. Maybe Chair Mauter could deputize Ms. Farias to provide the reminder earlier, e.g., after the staff presentation, or after UAC's clarifying questions. 1:42:26: Chair Mauter: I am so sorry. Is there any public comment on Item 2? 1:42:34: Belle Farias: We do have one request to speak for Item 2. Our first speaker is Peter Drekmeier. 1:42:44: Chair Mauter: Please proceed. And accept my apologies. 1:42:50: Belle Farias: Just a reminder, for people on Zoom. This is just for virtual public comment for Item 2. ### I assume that in-chambers public comment on Item 2 would also have been accepted at this time, had there been any.. [pause] I believe we have some hands that went down. There are no requests to speak. ### Peter Drekmeier wanted to speak on Item 2, but due to a miscommunication, he did not speak here. Rather, he spoke at 2:24:33. FUTURE TOPICS FOR UPCOMING MEETINGS 1:43:07: Chair Mauter: OK. We will now move on to Future Topics For Upcoming Meetings, which is also known as the 12-Month Rolling Calendar forecast. I have asked the Utilities to prepare a brief walkthrough of that 12-Month Rolling Calendar, and be prepared to answer any questions that we have. So, given that this calendar is both a more detailed look ahead than I think we've had in the past -- we often provide only 3-4 months look ahead in real detail. ### As I understand it, the policy was always to look 12 months ahead, so failure to do so was always a breach of policy. ### I assume that 12-Month Rolling Calendar items may change, as priorities change, and if staff is not able to deal with an item when it is scheduled. This is a little bit of a change. So, I really appreciate your efforts, and other staff efforts to kind of lock this in, and make sure we can get a large set of items squeezed in. 1:44:06: Director Kurotori: Yes. So, let me just go -- the overview of this revised -- this table for you. So, we've heard from the Chair and Vice Chair. Let's really fill out this calendar with all your goals and objectives for the year, make sure they're identified. So, you know, you'll see that in the column for the Utility Advisory Commission. ### Re the other column -- nominally the the "City Council" column: It includes items for both Council (CCM) and the Finance Committee (FCM). If an item isn't labeled CCM or FCM, is it implicitly for Council? We've also put these in kind of ranked order priority as well. ### A question left over from UAC's 06-03-26 meeting when UAC made its workplan: what does "priority" mean? -- Items that have to be decided quickly? -- Items where Council is most in need of UAC's advice? -- Items that affect the City the most? So, when you see the first bullet point, that's something either we want to make sure it's going to be a high priority for you, or it feeds into maybe the Finance Committee, or S/CAP ### That is, CASC. or others. We're also taking feedback on S/CAP and other groups that want bring items to us. So, we're trying to do that as well. ### Huh? Can CASC and other groups ask that staff add items to UAC's calendar? Who decides the priority of these items? ### Would it make sense for the 12-Month Rolling Calendar to have a separate section identifying requests from CASC and other groups, that UAC can then convert into regular Rolling Calendar items? So, when you look at items coming to the commission, tying it to your goals. And also, if it's an informational report -- heard loud and clear -- you want know if it's an informational report. So, if it's something that -- when we look into it, we start managing the calendar, what we are doing there. ### Huh? Is this just saying that informational reports will be listed on the calendar (even though they will not be agendized as items for UAC to consider)? ### I've often said that Utilities Quarterly Updates ought to be agendized (as ACTION items), just in case commissioners have any questions or comments or advice for Council. In the City Council, we've been more descriptive in what's going to City Council. We have heard from this body that you wanted to know what's going there. So, we've been updating this. So, you'll see in this redline version ### The 08-05-26 agenda https://cityofpaloalto.primegov.com/Portal/Meeting?meetingTemplateId=20116 has TWO versions of the 12-Month Rolling Calendar -- the unrevised version -- mentioned in the usual "OTHER INFORMATION" section, and -- the revised version -- mentioned in the "FUTURE TOPICS FOR UPCOMING MEETINGS" section. Why do it this way? I take it that the revised version is the only one that counts. that we had to make some adjustments of when these items are coming. So, you'll see those going forward, in terms of what is going to Council and why. And then, we can address some of those questions you may have, either offline, if you have other questions on some of these that we've done in the past. And as staff has offered deliberations, of course, we like to have in public, here as this body. 1:45:37: So, that's really the first page, is really going through everything's going to you, tying it to your priorities. I will mention, the number of priorities will change in the future, because a part of your deliberations -- you wanted us to group those into categories, and put them into more families. ### At the 06-03-26 UAC meeting, Item 3, UAC identified 15 objectives for its workplan. It didn't really do a thorough job of identifying the priority of each objective, because it was rushing to go home at a reasonable hour. Yes, Chair Mauter suggested (at 3:45:52 on the video) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JUVOwzHI4cw that staff cluster the objectives into groups. And Assistant City Manager Nose opined (at 3:46:45) about this "categorization." But I don't think UAC as a whole endorsed the idea. ### Who decides the priorities of the "families"? Or do the original 15 objectives retain their own individual priorities (whatever they are)? So, we'll be doing that as we bring it ### The UAC workplan forth to Council. So, as we bring that forward to Council, and it's adopted, those -- at that point, I will adjust those numbers, and also provide you with that metric on what that looks like. Because this body wanted us to group them, you know, based on, maybe, if it's tied to electric, tied to utility, tied to a family -- 1:46:20: Commissioner Tucher: Are you talking about the workplan now, or the Rolling Calendar? 1:46:23: Director Kurotori: The workplan. The workplan numbers. 1:46:25: Commissioner Tucher: Oh. 1:46:27: Director Kurotori: So, if I can go to the second -- the back side of -- water -- the other page is really firming out the rest of the year, as well. You can see that we bring forth all of the rates going to the UAC. The rate forecasts. We try to do a tentative calendar for all that. We've even gone so far as the Vice Chair and your -- the workplan that you would look at in the following year. 1:46:55: Commissioner Tucher: Is that any different than every year? We talk about rates every March, don't we? 1:46:58: Director Kurotori: But we have -- what I'm trying to highlight is that we've mapped this all out for the year. if I may. 1:47:04: Commissioner Tucher: Of course. That's what we did on a Rolling Calendar. 1:47:06: Chair Mauter: Excuse me. Like, please. Let's not talk over anybody else. ### A good suggestion generally. 1:47:12: Director Kurotori: So, Council recap, we also provide kind of an update of that Council recap. What has gone to the Council in June. ### This seems to be a new category. How is this different from what was listed in the regular 12-Month Rolling Calendar (June and July) in earlier months? Oh. I guess, for one thing, it lists only what Council APPROVED. And then, if there's outstanding items -- and we talked about it -- you know, workplan items to be scheduled. If it's an item that is not fully addressed, or you don't think it's fully addressed in the items that we've described it, we try to put it and pull that out. So, if one of our presentations, or items, talks about -- one of your parties but not fully, we want to still pull that out as something to address. So, you'll see that there as well. And as we go through this, if you feel like, oh, this needs a little more information, it wasn't meeting that, then we can follow there in that as well. So, we're always keeping your priorities and your workplan in mind. 1:47:58: Items to be scheduled. These are not everything, but are the main ones. So, if I may, we had some discussions on that. 1) you look ahead at the distributed energy resources. The -- We heard from the UAC you wanted that to come back, in terms of the cost effectiveness, whether that makes sense or not, for commercial, industrial, -- or, sorry, residential and commercial. So, that has NOT been scheduled. But we want to put there as an item of importance, because that was what this body wanted to do. And then, this joint session, as I mentioned earlier. The joint session with City Council and BAWSCA. And we will invite, obviously, SFPUC for a joint study session on the demand forecast.. So, wanted to highlight that as well, in terms of something that is important that we need to put on this schedule. So, that is kind of the nutshell of the overview of what we wanted to talk about here. 1:48:51: If I can go flip back to the first page, as we look into -- as I've heard, loud and clear, from the commission -- is really trying to make sure we have items that are coming. And then, we will have some flexibility to move, based on trying to keep a manageable number of items going to the UAC at any one time. So, that agenda management is going to be very important. And we appreciate that. So, we will get feedback from you. And we'll try to manage that calendar, in terms of the amount of time we anticipate. So, behind the scenes -- what you don't see here -- is another layer that staff puts together, in terms of 1:49:34: Chair Mauter: OK. What I'm going to ask, Alan, because you did not run by renumbering with me, is that we -- we have approved a workplan in our minutes. I would be -- If we are going to make changes to that workplan, which we approved, then you could do it under like A, B, or C. But maybe not under 1, 2, 3. If you get my drift here. Because otherwise, I think that it's hard for us, as a commission, to see our own contributions to that workplan, and also to look back at the minutes and really track those effectively. 1:50:16: Director Kurotori: And the other way we could do it would be to bring it to Council. So, we can keep the item numbers the same. We'll just group them. And that's my -- 1:50:22: Chair Mauter: Great. That sounds better. And the groups are A, B, and C. 1:50:25: Director Kurotori: Perfect. 1:50:25: Chair Mauter: Fabulous. That's going to make it easier for me to talk about. Should be useful. OK. I think the other point, Alan, that I'm hearing from you is that if we are going to get to all of these things, we need to get through simple topics quickly and complex topics thoroughly. But we're going to have to set norms, as a commission, around the length of time that any of us can talk on an item. Because I don't know how to get through things, like Utilities Reserve Management Policies, plus Electric Long Duration Resiliency, plus a Wildfire Mitigation Plan Update, AND a Commission Norms presentation in a period of time that gets us home where I can safely ride home on a bicycle. ### When UAC commissioners apply to serve, they commit to serving for a full term. They also commit to attending all but a certain number of meetings. I suppose they also commit to attending meetings for as long as the meetings last, with some exceptions. Would Chair Mauter be willing to commit to using a mode of transportation that would allow her to go home safely after the meeting is over? ### Is there any danger that a UAC agenda might have the four items mentioned Chair Mauter's example? OK? So, I just want to be very frank about the fact that a large number of things on our workplan this year, I am going to have to take some responsibility for adhering to the times that are listed on our agendas, and making sure that we get to everything. ### The 06-03-26 agenda allocated only 60 minutes for coming up with a workplan for FY2027. That was unrealistic. And that may be by using the clock. It may be in some other fashion. And maybe that's something we can talk about during the Commission Norms, which is agendized for the coming month of September. ### The Commission Norms item didn't arise from UAC's workplan. ### When this item was agendized for 06-03-26 (and then not heard, because not all seven commissioners were present), staff allocated 45 minutes to the item. Would that be enough time to consider what staff wanted to talk about, PLUS Chair Mauter's ideas for how to run UAC meetings efficiently in general? 1:51:58: Commissioner Metz: I had a question on the content. First of all, what is Commission Norms? 1:52:03: Chair Mauter: I'm going to defer to Director, and -- or -- 1:52:12; Director Kurotori: We have the Assistant City Manager here. 1:52:14: Chair Mauter: The Assistant City Manager is here. 1:52:15: Director Kurotori: And I can tell she wants to talk about this subject. 1:52:19: Commissioner Metz: I didn't know it was a hard question. Right? 1:52:22: Director Kurotori: We just wanted Kiely to come up. 1:52:27: Assistant City Manager (ACM) Nose: Good evening, commissioners. Kiley Nose, Assistant City Manager. It's not a hard question. But appreciate the opportunity, Director Kurotori. Commission norms is a conversation that our City Manager, personally, is having with various boards and commissions throughout the City. There has been an increase, I think, across the board -- as this commission has identified -- of, you know, how do we effectively operate as a commission? How do we effectively advocate and provide our advice? What is our role? You know, what are better ways to work together? And, you know, some of those kind of general operating norms. And so, it's a forum to look at a general framework that he's provided all other boards and commissions. ### Has CM Shikada done this already, or is he just intending to do it? And a time to kind of talk through those. With someone who, frankly, sits at a Council meeting every week. ### More like three times each month. And so, Ed Shikada will be here on that night to help facilitate that conversation. 1:53:26: Commissioner Metz: OK. Also, what is One-Year Look-Back at DER Cost Effectiveness? ### The revised 12-Month Rolling Calendar says it's part of UAC's workplan objective #10. 1:53:35: Director Kurotori: I think, actually, Commissioner Tucher mentioned it. I believe there was a presentation in terms of -- or, sorry -- and Commissioner Croft is looking at battery storage and those other energy resources, and were they viable in terms of their cost-effectiveness? There was a presentation, I believe, from Jonathan Abendschein in regards to that. ### To what group? When? And one of the actions was, you wanted to bring that back. You wanted that item to come back. 1:53:57: Commissioner Croft: It was actually -- This was the one -- I went to the Council to describe it. It was the cost effectiveness study that was going to be updated every two years. And we recommended that it be updated -- only for electricity prices -- every one year. So, this is the one-year electricity price update. Is that correct? 1:54:16: Director Kurotori: Yes. And it'll include what that looks like, and does it make a value? 1:54:21: Commissioner Croft: Right. Does it change whether we're interested in them. Because none of them were cost effective last time we looked at it. 1:54:26: Commissioner Metz: But it's not scheduled. Right? Currently. 1:54:31: scheduled, and not lose them. We've heard that from the UAC, is like, where is this information? And it was supposed to come back. I don't see it here. So, we don't want to lose them. We want to make sure they're here. And this also provides -- the UAC is like, hey, we were -- wanted this information back. So, as time goes on, and there's some further direction, we can make sure we have this, as a nice bucket for the major items. 1:54:19: Commissioner Metz: OK. Thank you. 1:55:03: Commissioner Croft: I see -- It looks like Grid Mod is only here as a workplan item? Is that correct? Or do we have scheduled any time where we'll revisit that? I think everybody wanted to hear about that.at least once a year. I thought twice a year was what we requested. But I'm -- 1:55:30: Director Kurotori: So, we do see Grid Mod as part of the capital projects as well. They are identified in the 5-year and multi- year plan. So, maybe something that we highlight as we give those presentations to the UAC on what those projects look like, in -- as we -- as they get developed. But I don't know if, Terry, you want to add anything on -- 1:55:56: Commissioner Croft: That plan's kind of moved around. I mean, we've changed focus. You know, I think we really appreciated the most recent presentation. It's more granular than anything we've ever seen before. So, just getting updates on what's changing versus that, or progress against that plan, is what I personally would like to see. 1:56:17: COO Crowley: Yeah. And in intent with -- from staff -- staff's intent -- which is subject to adjustment -- was to bring it back with the capital improvement plan. So, as we go through this budgeting cycle, we're going to forecast what the next 5 years looks like. And we'll have that update of what -- what have we achieved, and what are we envisioning over the past 6 months. Largely, the plan is still there intact. Design elements and other things may change a little bit. Material lead times may change a little bit. And we can provide those updates of like how the scoping of the projects, how the progress of the projects are moving forward. 1:56:50: Commissioner Croft: Is that the January 2027 meeting? 1:56:54: COO Crowley: That would be what's -- I'm seeing on the item here. 1:56:58: Commissioner Croft: Could we perhaps put a note that it includes Grid Mod? It says "includes treatment plant." But just to be clear -- 1:57:04: COO Crowley: Just to be clear. We can do that. 1:57:09: Commissioner Tucher: Rachel, could I interrupt just to say that, Terry, what you just said might be very appropriate every other month as part of the Director's Report. In other words, I'll call it an operational -- or a strategic even -- an update Grid Mod. Grid Mod's so important. I don't see why it wouldn't be part of EVERY Director's Report -- EVERY month. But at a minimum -- Not that we come to Grid Mod maybe twice a year, but that we talk about it frequently -- and briefly -- to get updates on this big project. 1:57:40: Commissioner Gupta: Yeah. I would second all that. I also noticed that the, you know, approval of bond financing for Grid Mod shows up on the Finance Committee in November. And then it goes to the Council in December. I think it would be great if that item could come to UAC before then, so we could have our input in that process. I don't know if that would be the October meeting. It might require moving some things around, but that is one of the most major projects that we could provide ### I don't disagree in principle. But there's an FTTP item scheduled for October that has been postponed several months. 1:58:23: Chair Mauter: Are there any other comments? 1:58:25: Commissioner Tucher: Chair Mauter, could I clarify? Is this discussion about Rolling Calendar, and when we talk about what - - Or are we talking now about the workplan and the 15 points? 1:58:39: Chair Mauter: We are talking about how those 15 points are getting calendared. That is what is agendized. ### I think that what's agendized is getting things calendared, whether or not they are any of the objectives in the workplan. (Take, for example, the September's Commissioner Norms item.) 1:58:46: Commissioner Tucher: OK. Then, at some point -- maybe right now -- I'd like to talk about the 15 points, and the way the workplan is going to get finalized. I've written down my suggestions. 1:58:59: Chair Mauter: We approved minutes, which covered those 15 points. 1:59:03: Commissioner Tucher: And at that time, I asked -- before approving the minutes -- what's up with the workplan. Because, just to be blunt, the workplan in its current draft a muddle. It's full of inconsistencies. It's full of mistakes. It's full of redundancies. And I'm glad to point out five of them if you want. 1:59:21: Chair Mauter: We are not revisiting the workplan in today's meeting. Director Kurotori articulated that they will be grouped and organized, prior to presentation to Council. 1:57:37: Commissioner Tucher: And we're not going to see it again until it goes to Council. 1:59:39: Chair Mauter: No. 1:59:39: Commissioner Tucher: Well, I mean, again, muddled. And I find it an embarrassing work product, personally. And I voted for it. But I asked myself, why did I vote for it? And the answer is, well, when you draft things in real time by committee, sometimes you just get beaten into submission and say WHAT-EVER. ### To approve ordinances, Council has to vote twice, at meetings spaced at least two weeks apart. Normally, for the second vote, the proposed ordinance is put on the Consent Calendar. But if at least three Council members are having second thoughts, they can pull the item from Consent, and then the vote will be preceded by a real discussion of the item. For example, see Council's votes on the City's plan for complying with SB 79 (06-01-26, item 17, and 06-15-26, item 23). But it is not -- Like I said, it's a work -- it's not a good document. 2:00:01: Chair Mauter: It does reflect a consensus and real-time effort. And that is simply the nature of operating as a Utilities Advisory Commission. 2:00:14: 2:00:14: Chair Mauter: And we cannot -- 2:00:15: [multiple speakers] 2:00:17: Commissioner Tucher: Nowhere in the workplan are we going to be doing financial reviews of each utility. It's implicit, I guess, if we do rate reviews, like we do every month. ### Every year. 2:00:26: Chair Mauter: We do reviews. 2:00:27: Commissioner Tucher: But it doesn't say we'll be doing financial reviews. 2:00:29: Chair Mauter: OK. This is not agedized. And I don't feel comfortable talking about the workplan as -- in terms of adding other items. We've approved our minutes. We have approved when it's going to be -- or, we have looked at when it is likely to be calendared. And, as Chair and Vice Chair, we will work with staff to make sure that those workplan items -- as many of those workplan items as possible -- make it to our meetings. 2:01:00: Commissioner Tucher: So, Chair and Vice Chair will review the edits of staff before the workplan goes to Council? Is that what you just said? 2:01:09: Chair Mauter: No. I said that we will endeavor to make sure that all workplan appear before the UAC. 2:01:15: Commissioner Tucher: Oh. That's just a calendering thing. 2:01:16: Chair Mauter: That's a calendering thing. Because we are on a calendering agenda item. 2:01:21: Commissioner Tucher: Well, -- 2:01:21: Chair Mauter: Are there any other questions or comments about how we have proceeded in calendering our workplan? 2:01:27: Commissioner Gupta: I please had one more comment. I think it's amazing the level of detail. I've seen this 12-Month Calendar improve over time. And I think that's great, and I just wanted to commend that. We'll keep on improving it, of course, but I think it's a much stronger document than it was when it was first introduced. So, thank you for putting this together. 2:01:43: I WAS wondering if there's ever been -- and we don't have to have a debate or answer it here, on, you know, UAC meeting biweekly. ### In the past, UAC has sometimes scheduled extra meetings on a case by case basis. As far as I know, it has never scheduled semimonthly regular meetings. Because there are a lot of important rate issues and investments that the City is making. And it's a big amount of tasks which we have ahead of is. And it might make sense to meet biweekly and finish the meetings earlier, rather having, you know, long, stretched-out meetings. So, just something to think about. I know some commissions and boards do meet biweekly, and that might be advantageous. Of course, it means meeting more often. But if it means getting out earlier and having better conversations because of it, I think there might be some benefits to that. I don't know if that's something that staff would like to comment on. 2:02:28: Director Kurotori: I don't have the history, if we've got to that level. I will mention, though, we are -- this joint session will be with the City Council. So, that will probably be during their Council meetings. So, you will have an additional meeting, as such. I think some of the UAC in the past have looked at subcommittees, and looking at some of these -- So they can do that deeper dive, and bring it back. That's another option that the UAC has used in the past to try to do that. But then that requires that -- that model to be used -- a subset really does that deeper dive and brings it back -- to this -- ### Whenever the subcommittee does not meet in public and does not have agendas and minutes, it always has the disadvantage that the public is not included -- even if the subcommittee "brings it back" so that the whole UAC can consider an item in public. 2:03:05: Chair Mauter: And I -- We will be using that as appropriate. But we were also really clearly guided in the past year that that is not -- there are not standing committee items. ### That is, there can be a standing subcommittee, but then it has to follow the Brown Act's rules for legislative bodies: agendas, minutes, public comment, etc. And so, that's something that we'll bring up during the norms discussion. Or an opportunity for us to ask questions about those City rules. ### When the "partnering norms" item was agendized for UAC's 06-03-26 meeting, its intent and scope was not clear to me, but the staff report didn't mention subcommittees. ### (Incidentally, its Attachment A, "Partnering Norms for Commission / Staff Effectiveness DRAFT," was not browser searchable. Why was that?) 2:03:26: Director Kurotori: Yes. Those are typically ad hoc. In terms of that, they're not repetitive, because we cannot do that per the Brown Act. 2:03:33: Chair Mauter: Right. 2:03:33: Director Kurotori: Thank you. 2:03:33: Vice Chair Phillips: I just wanted to add my appreciation of the improved format as well. It's -- I find it really useful in the amount of information. I was able to track things through. Like when we're seeing them, and the Finance Committee is seeing them, and when the City Council is seeing it. It gave me a much better picture of, you know, how things will be moving. So, it's just -- thank you for doing that. 2:03:55: Chair Mauter: Thank you. OK. 2:03:58: Commissioner Croft: I have one more comment. 2:03:59: Chair Mauter: OK. 2:04:00: Commissioner Croft: OK. So, I -- There was an item on the workplan that I felt strongly about, which is just communication methods. And I see that there is a customer satisfaction survey results. It's coming on the calendar in February. I think the gist of what I was looking for is, how is everything that the Utility is doing -- how do customers know about it? I have no idea of like what percentage of customers have an email or text with us. How many of them go on to the portal. We have had that number, you know, shared with us before. It was like in the 20s -- 20 percent area. People who get paper bills get all the inserts. The inserts are fantastic. The problem is, you know, everyone's going digital these days, and they're just a little -- you know, they're a little -- Click here on the bottom of their email bill. I don't even know how many people OPEN their email bill, especially if they have autopay. So, like, how are we getting our information in front of customers? Like, do they -- you know, I know we have certain mailings we give them that are required. But it's usually a single topic. So, that was the reason for that workplan item. And I think it would be worth starting someplace just to understand. You know. We have a lot of things that we're -- you know, we're trying to convince people to electrify, and we don't even know how many people we're communicating with. So, I'd like to have like a base setting. Maybe it's even an informational item. And then we turn it into something else. 2:05:48: Director Kurotori: I think that you're right. It might be better for an informational item is -- that's a summary of it, that you can read it. And really trying to get the surveys -- really gives you that breadth of understanding. And we can bring in the company that's done that surveys. And we can get your input on what those feelings are. So, you know, providing some communication -- our communication channels, the engagement, that information -- that could be an informational item. And we can work that in. 2:06:16: Commissioner Croft: OK. Great. Thank you. 2:06:07: Commissioner Tucher: One more question, please. And it is actually about the workplan -- or, about the Rolling Calendar. I'm very worried about the 2nd of June. The 2nd of June next year. Because on the 2nd of June, the workplan is on the agenda next. And so, timing. We're setting ourselves up for exactly the same theater as we have just had. Drafting by, you know, real time. Why don't we talk about the workplan in advance of June, so that we have a hope of getting a workplan out of our door -- let alone like back from Council -- before the year's a third done. I'd urge us to look at all these items -- and Utsav raised one of them just a minute ago. But if we're looking at every item with the question, is there enough time after that item to be of any impact at all. You know. So, a good one is workplan. We're talking about -- 2:07:13: Chair Mauter: For workplans? Fiscal or calendar? 2:07:17: Commissioner Tucher: Fiscal. 2:07:18: Director Kurotori: Fiscal. Typically, it's after the appointment of the commissioners. 2:07:26: Chair Mauter: Right. Because we want to make sure everyone's seated. 2:07:29: Director Kurotori: Correct. And then -- 2:07:30: Chair Mauter: And this past year, we did it in June. And we did it for 12 months. So, it would be, I think, a little bit disenfranchising of this current UAC to not follow through on that 12-month workplan. Personally. I'm happy to entertain suggestions otherwise. But we've all put a lot of time, thought, and effort into formulating that workplan. And I would hate to see things drop off. 2:08:02: Commissioner Tucher: (unamplfied) I'm just saying do it in a timely way. It may take two sessions. I don't know. But -- 2:08:10: Commissioner Gupta: Could we spread it, then, between the June AND the July session, to avoid that -- the disenfranchisement? So we -- 2:08:17: Chair Mauter: Well, is the issue is that we think it's scheduled too late? Or that we would like to form -- change how it is formulated? 2:08:25: Commissioner Tucher: My issue is that we not do it like we did this time. (laughs) And last year -- 2:08:29: Chair Mauter: OK. But we need to be specific about what the issue is. 2:08:32: Commissioner Tucher: I guess my recommendation would be, talk about it in April, and then talk about it in May. Finalize it in May. ### Would anything be completed in April? Would anything be voted on in April? ### Keep in mind that April and May are budget crunch months. 2:08:42: Chair Mauter: I do not know what the calendar is for workplans, or what the rules are around those. But why don't we talk to Ed about that next week -- or, next month -- when we are talking about how we run these commissions. ### Plural? OK? Awesone. 2:09:01: Commissioner Croft: I think this year when we had a questionnaire go out ahead of time, that was helpful, just to agree -- Not to be shared amongst the commissioners. Just to raise your top topics. So, that should go in advance, like it did this year. I don't know about the timing. But great. 2:09:17: Chair Mauter: Great. I agree. I think that worked very nicely. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS AND REPORTS FROM MEETINGS/EVENTS 2:09:20: Chair Mauter: OK. We'll move on now to any COMMISSIONER COMMENTS AND REPORTS FROM past MEETINGS and EVENTS. 2:09:29: Commissioner Gupta: I have a report out as the UAC representative on the Urban Water Management Plan [UWMP] meeting the City Council had on June 8th. ### 06-08-26 Council agenda, Item 13. https://cityofpaloalto.primegov.com/Portal/Meeting?meetingTemplateId=18733 ### Video -- Item 13 was from 1:19:30 to 2:34:34. (Public comment from 1:43:28 to 2:05:28.) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFR87IwKch4 I actually didn't end up saying anything. So, I'll just report out what I observed (laughs) at that meeting. So, staff made their presentation and recommended adoption as prepared. Stated that the plan was due to the Department of Water Resources by July 1st. Filing on time preserves eligibility for state grants and loans, including a $192 million water loan. Staff's position was that the UWMP is a regulatory compliance document, required to use the supply reliability fig -- was required to use the supply reliability figures that SFPUC provides. And that that was not the forum for contesting SFPUC's design drought. And they had not vetted some of the additional amendments in the letter that I had drafted and was awarded by this body to the Council. Public comment ran long. And most of the comments were supportive in asking Council to incorporate the amendments in the letter. 2:10:46: I observed five different takes by Council members. So, I thought I'd give all five takes -- if that's helpful to this body -- on different mechanisms for getting those amendments into the Urban Water Management Plan. 2:11:00: Council Member Lythcott- Haims asked whether there might have been a parallel track -- whether, in her words, this is not our only shot. ### Mayor Veenker made the only "only shot" comment (1:41:01) Council Member Lu proposed a transmittal letter carrying the points up front rather than dotted through the document. Council Member Reckdahl asked the City Attorney whether there was any downside to including policy remarks in a compliance document. The City Attorney answered that he was not aware of any significant legal risk from including these comments. Council Member Burt said that he had been initially inclined to ask that the staff incorporate Commissioner Gupta's comments to the maximum extent that it is compliant. He had been surprised that there had not been a review of the points in that letter more substantively, just given the length of time. ### Council Member Burt said (1:28:56) that he would like to have seen UAC be more explicit about which commissioners disagreed with which points of Commissioner Gupta's UWMP letter. And he had noted the underlying positions of the letter, quote-unquote, "consistent with past Council direction." ### The video at 2:19:16. The Mayor then proposed a kind of a language -- caveat language -- in order to move the discussion forward. That motion carried unanimously, 7-0. So, it did -- three things that I observed. It adopted the plan, so that the deadline was met. It added a caveat to the document stating that while the City's response is based on SFPUC's design drought and supply reliability analysis, this is not an endorsement of, or concurrence in that analysis, and that the City reserves its right to object in other forums. And it directed staff to the underlying issues back for a study session, as we've discussed, after the summer break. In addition, Vice Mayor Stone had described that the BAWSCA Chair had confirmed that the design drought would be agendized at BAWSCA before the summer. And I believe that's the meeting that just recently took place. Director Kurotori asked that the issues be referred back to the UAC, so this commission can deliberate as a body and make a recommendation before Council picks it up again. And the City Manager has suggested it might be held as a joint session with Council. The Mayor agreed. And I think that's the to-be-agendized item we see on our 12-Month Rolling Calendar. So, thank you. 2:13:13: Chair Mauter: Thank you. Are there any other report outs from meetings or events? 2:13:19: VIRTUAL PUBLIC COMMENT OK. If not, we'll turn to VIRTUAL PUBLIC COMMENT. Are there any members of the public wishing to speak? 2:13:24: Belle Farias: We do have two requests to speak online. Our first speaker is actually a spokesperson for a group of five people online. Per the City Council's meeting policy and procedures, a spokesperson speaking on behalf of five people is granted up to 10 minutes of speaking time. One moment while I pull up the presentation. Alex, you now have permission to unmute yourself. 2:14:03: Alex Momand,: ### Alex is CEO and Co-Founder of Firescore. https://firescore.ai/meet-our-team.html OK. Thank you. Can you hear me? 2:14:06: Belle Farias: Yes, we can hear you. 2:14:08: Alex: OK. Good evening, Chair and commissioners, and distinguished guests and colleagues. For the past three years, I have worked with foresters, firefighters, and leading scientists to understand the technology gap that limits our ability to see changing wildfire conditions at the regional, neighborhood, and parcel level. Palo Alto and Santa Clara County have already made substantial investments in wildfire planning, fuel mapping, vegetation management, and undergrounding. Our goal is to build on top of that work. We have developed a platform that combines fuels, structures, live fuel moisture, terrain, and weather into one simple operational view of the wildland urban interface. Refreshed as often as every 3 days. It helps agencies prioritize inspections, measure treatments before and after and model how fire and embers may move under dry offshore winds interacting with the foothill terrain. I'm here to present what we have built, and propose a 90-day memorandum of agreement with the City of Palo Alto, so firefighters, utilities, city planners, and community stakeholders can experience its operational value firsthand. This is the next leap in artificial intelligence. With that, I would like to present our slides. Next slide. 2:15:45: Wildland firefighter Timothy Ingalsbee says it correctly here: we surpassed our human limits to stop this. The recent LA megafire shows our approach to fire needs to change. And just today, it was released by LA County on the exact transmission line that caused the spark for the deadly Eaton and Palisades fire. When we look at Santa Clara County, and particularly the Palo Alto Hills, it's a matter of when, not if. Next slide. 2:16:21: And Timothy Ingalsbee, when he talks about the approach, all of the wildland firefighters that I've spoken to, every single forester, and even the top scientists in the United States understand the underlying technological issue with how we're seeing risk. And that is a 1980s satellite that was launched by USGS, that is still in use today, that utilizes a 30-meter-pixel grid That 30-meter-pixel grid combines homes, roads, terrain, and it considers the urban environment as non-burnable. Next slide. 2:26:58: And since I've been spending time, I have built the platform on top of GIS. GIS is an incredible tool that was able to digitalize maps. And it gives you an enormous opportunity to visualize risk. it is not able to simulate and run physics-based modeling with granular data. And that is what I've built today -- is through simulation, bringing the actionable intelligence to the communities and the firefighters and the people that are making the decisions. Next slide. 2:17:33: This is a recent CWPP ### Community Wildfire Protection Plan from the San Gabriel Valley that was just signed off by Chief Marrone and Chief Weisshaupt from LA County. And it notates the limitations of current fire models, which is using the input of that 30-meter pixel. Next slide. 2:17:53: Here, we have a city -- 31 different cities over the San Gabriel Valley, that over 56.8 percent of their recent CWPP, and the modeling, and the risk, and all of the intelligence to the community actually considers the urban environment as non-burnable. This, again, was noted several times by their contractor, Jensen Hughes. That is due to a modeling and technology limitation. Next slide. 2:18:24: This is one of our other partners, in the City of Glendale. This is their mapping of the vegetation, with -- and structures as well, with the 30-meter pixel. Next slide. 2:18:39: Agency, which carries 12 bands, and also a red edge band. So, it's looking at the vegetation health, live fuel moisture, and it's able to classify vegetation and see its growth over a time and period. And it passes over every 3-5 days. Next slide. 2:19:07: Here, we're looking at homes that have the highest risk, based off of terrain, slope, live fuel moisture, vegetation type. And we're able to see where we have flame lengths of over 12 feet, so that we can prioritize inspections, and also see which areas are most at -- high risk, which would also include taking a note of those areas that have utility lines as well, and other possible factors that could cause widespread urban conflagration. Next slide. 2:19:39: I'll pass on this, but this is the platform that is being used today in Southern California by firefighters and city planners. It's integrating several scientific models that we've developed. The back end is extremely complex. And I'm happy to spend more time explaining what each tool does. Next slide. 2:20 05: These are the layers that we're using. I just mentioned Sentinel 2. We're using embeddings as well, where we combine satellite data over the time span of many years. In this case, I've been looking at data for Santa Clara County -- actually, for the entire western United States -- since 2016, and running different models. We're implementing a newer 3-D rendering, which is called Gaussian splats, which then we're running a physics-based fire model in collaboration with some of the larger technology companies here in the Bay Area, in Silicon Valley. And all of this data is put into an easy-to-use platform that the firefighters can use on their iPad. Next slide. 2:20:47: This is a bit on the 30-meter pixel, compared to the updated 1 meter per pixel. Sometimes we up -- bring it down to about 2.5 meters. With our platform, over 95 percent of the model is burnable. And here you're able to see the fuel model in Glendale specifically. And you're able to clearly see where -- areas the model confuses clusters of homes and considers them as non- burnable. Next slide. 2:21:18: These are embeddings. And I'll show you one of Palo Alto at the very end. Next slide. 2:21:28: More on the Gaussian splats. We can speak about this another time. Next slide. 2:21:33: And another amazing part of the fact that we've had an industrial revolution with computing and artificial intelligence is, you can run these, you know, very granular computational fluid dynamics simulations. Here we're looking at the Southern California, with Santa Ana winds. For Palo Alto and the Foothills, we would be looking at the Diablo winds, and seeing where embers could spread, where we're getting the offshore winds, where they're blowing. So, we know which homes are in the wake of the turbulence. Next slide. 2:22:12: And, in this case, we're scanning hundreds of parcels in LA County today. For the case of Palo Alto, we can keep an eye on hundreds of parcels, as the vegetation changes, the weather changes. We're keeping an eye on it, and able to run fire models each day, depending on the weather. And what's happening the day of. Next slide. 2:22:36: We're working closely with the community. And that's where the magic happens, is bringing the actionable intelligence to them, hosting workshops and working closely with the fire departments, and also obtaining grant funding, which I'd love to see the possibility of applying for grant funding for the City of Palo Alto. Next slide. 2:22:56: And community trust is out number one priority. We are not an insurance data broker. We are not a zone zero enforcement program. It's really important that we work together with the communities to make this intelligence actionable. Next slide. 2:23:12: had with many of the stakeholders in the Southern California region. And we're building this model, our plan is to expand it to Northern California, creating a queryable model. So, this is the Chat GPT moment for the city, state, local officers, particularly first with fire. We're cracking the code with that first, and can go to many other industries as well. And so, since the sound is not working, we'll go ahead and skip this slide and move on. 2:24:03: And there's another slide after this. 2:24:05: Chair Mauter: I'm sorry. We're out of time. So, we'll need to end the public comment at this point in time. Could we please move on to the next public comment. 2:24:15: Belle Farias: Yes. One moment, please. Our next speaker is Peter D. Peter, you now have permission to unmute yourself. 2:24:33: Peter Drekmeier: Good evening. Peter Drekmeier with Yosemite Rivers Alliance. I had raised my hand for Item 2, and I got called. And so I lowered my hand, and I began to speak. And then, I heard that I had lowered my hand and there were no speakers. So, I would like to request the opportunity to speak on Item 2 and -- during Public Comment. Is that OK? 2:24:57: Chair Mauter: Yes. Absolutely. That's totally fine. We apologize for the misunderstanding. 2:25:02: Peter Drekmeier: OK. Thank you, Chair Mauter. So, my comment on [Item] 2 was, you know, I normally don't comment on non-water issues. But I had this meeting on in the background, and I was really impressed by the conversation. And so, I tuned in and listened. And, you know, it would be great if more Palo Altans heard what you guys go through, and how you discuss things. I was very impressed by the staff presentation. And I'm sorry, I didn't catch his name, ### Terry Crowley, Chief Operating Officer at Palo Alto Utilities. but obviously very knowledgeable and composed. And the commission, as usual, asked a lot of very good questions, and made really good points. And I think a lot of people have a tendency to feel a little bit, you know, challenged. And -- But our staff member was very composed and answered. And it was a great dialog. And, I think, out of that, a better product is going to come to City Council. So, we're very fortunate in Palo Alto to have a UAC -- talented people -- and a process where we can vet things before coming to Council. So, I wanted to congratulate you all on that. And to thank the staff employee. And my apologies again. I didn't catch your name. 2:26:16: Done with that item. Moving on to Public Comment. I was -- I didn't hear in the Director's presentation on the study session on water, that Yosemite Rivers Alliance would be invited to participate. Maybe I missed that. We've been trying to get a study session for a long time. And Council obviously wants to hear from us. And, to be honest, I don't have a lot of confidence in staff to do this right. I've said it a the Council meeting during the Urban Water Management Plan ### Council's 06-08-26 meeting, Item 13, at 1:50:06 on the video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFR87IwKch4 that staff is more aligned with BAWSCA that with Palo Alto, which has endorsed the Bay Delta Plan. And I know the Council members support our positions, but staff has been very oppositional to that. And I am starting to reach out to some Council members. I know them all. They respect me. And I'm sharing these concerns. I think it would be in the interest of Mr. Kurotori to reach out to me and say, "What do you want this study session to look like? How do we work together? How do we bring in Council, to make it the study session they're expecting and that we're expecting?" We get blown off by BAWSCA, by the SFPUC. They don't want to have dialog with us because it embarrasses them. And I don't want staff to fall into that. So, let's do this right. I'm happy to work with staff. But you've got to earn my trust, just like I have to earn your trust. Thank you. 2:27:56: Chair Mauter: Are there any other members of the public wishing to speak on items not on the agenda who are on Zoom? 2:28:04: Belle Farias: There are no more requests to speak. 2:28:07: Chair Mauter: OK. Well, with that, thank you all for your contributions today. And to Terry Crowley, our Director of the Electric Utility. ### Last year, Crowley was Assistant Director of Electrical Operations & Engineering. This year, he's Chief Operating Officer. I hope I got his title correct. Senior Director of (laughs) -- 2:28:26: **: (whispered) ** 2:28:28: Chair Mauter: Excuse me. I botched that. But anyway, thank you, Terry for all of your hard work tonight. 2:28:35: ADJOURNMENT Chair Mauter: And with that, we'll adjourn. I will see you all in September. 2:28:40: END From:Kevin Choy To:Council, City; Clerk, City Subject:Comment Against OSV Parking Program Date:Monday, August 24, 2026 2:29:25 PM Attachments:260824_Letter to City Council - Opposition to OSV Parking.pdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Mayor Veenker & Councilmembers, Please see the attached letter in objection of the proposed OSV Parking Program which will be heard later this evening. I will also plan to make an oral comment summarizing this letter. Thank you for your consideration. Should you have any questions, feel free to reach out to me directly via this email or my cell number listed below. Thanks, Kevin Choy, P.E. | Director Harvest Properties, Inc. mobile | 530.574.5339 main | 510.594.2050 235 Montgomery St | Suite 2500 | San Francisco, CA 94104 HarvestProperties.com This message needs your attention This is their first mail to some recipients. Mark Safe Report Powered by Mimecast Page 1 of 2 Fabian Property Owner, LLC 3825-3875 Fabian Way Palo Alto, CA 94303 August 24, 2026 Palo Alto City Council 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 RE: Agenda Item 10, August 24, 2026 Special Meeting — Opposition to Proposed OSV Parking Permit Pilot District Dear Members of the City Council: I am writing on behalf of Fabian Property Owner, LLC, owner of 3825-3875 Fabian Way, to respectfully oppose Staff’s recommendation to establish an Oversized Vehicle (“OSV”) Parking Permit Pilot District as proposed. We recognize the City’s responsibility to address vehicle habitation thoughtfully and humanely. Our concern is with the proposed locations, which sit immediately adjacent to commercial uses throughout the City. After several years of limited investment, significant reinvestment is now flowing into these corridors, drawing new businesses and employees to Palo Alto. Permitting OSV parking along these commercial corridors would undermine that progress and the quality of the surrounding environment. The office and R&D leasing environment remains highly competitive, and companies evaluating a relocation weigh much more than the space inside a building — they look closely at the surrounding environment, safety, access, amenities, and the overall experience for employees and visitors. We have discussed this issue with our tenant and permitted vehicle habitation areas in and around Fabian Way would put that experience at risk at a time when we are making substantial investments to attract businesses to Palo Alto. We are also preparing a residential re-entitlement of 3825 Fabian Way. If an OSV permit district is in place in the surrounding area when those homes come to market, we are concerned that prospective residents will look elsewhere, reducing investment in Palo Alto. For these reasons, we respectfully ask the Council to: • Decline to establish the OSV Parking Permit District, or defer approval pending evaluation of alternative sites outside commercial corridors; • Consider the impact of the proposed location on commercial owners and tenants; • Require additional fire-safety, emergency-access, and environmental review before approving any specific site; and Page 2 of 2 • Include a clear sunset date and Council-level reapproval requirement for any pilot that is ultimately adopted. We support the City’s efforts to develop a humane and workable response to vehicle habitation. Our objection is not to the goal of the program, but to siting it immediately adjacent to Palo Alto’s employment centers while property owners are investing significantly to attract new businesses. Thank you for your consideration. Respectfully submitted, Fabian Property Owner, LLC From:Greg Rosso To:Council, City Cc:Elton Kwok Subject:Oversized Vehicle Impacts to WeWork Palo Alto Facility Date:Monday, August 24, 2026 2:18:19 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: We have been proud to call 3101 Park Boulevard home since 2019. Over the past seven years, we have been equally proud to become part of Palo Alto’s fabric and key contributor to its vibrant and diverse business community. During that time, we have watched entrepreneurs walk through our doors with ambitious ideas and grow them into thriving businesses. We have seen teams form, companies expand, and genuine connections take root; all within a space designed to help people do their best work. These experiences have reinforced our appreciation for Palo Alto as a place where innovation, collaboration, and community come together. In recent years, we have also witnessed an increase in the number of large recreational vehicles parked for extended periods directly in front of and adjacent to our buildings. Their prolonged presence significantly limits street parking for Palo Alto residents, visitors, and our members when our designated lot is full. In some cases, the owners of these vehicles also leave personal belongings on adjacent public sidewalks and dispose of trash on our property. We have worked in partnership with the building’s ownership and Intapp, our largest member at the property, to identify practical ways to address these concerns – including calls to the City of Palo Alto Police Department code enforcement officials – but the issue persists. We respectfully urge the City Council to reject the Staff proposal and instead take action on This message needs your attention This is their first email to your company. Mark Safe Report Powered by Mimecast these ongoing parking, access, and sanitation concerns by banning all recreational vehicles from parking on Park Boulevard. Thank you for your consideration and attention to this important matter. Sincerely, Elton Kwok, General Manager, West Region Greg Rosso, Senior Area Director -- Greg Rosso Senior Area Director Northern California & Nevada wework.com From:Carole Low To:Council, City Subject:Fwd: Opposition for El Dorado Railroad Crossing tunnel proposals: Long-time resident on Ramona between Colorado & El Dorado Date:Monday, August 24, 2026 2:15:17 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i To whom it may concern, Please thoughtfully factor in this opposition email. Please see below. Thank you. ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Carole Low <carolelow@gmail.com> Date: Mon, Aug 24, 2026 at 2:02 PM Subject: Opposition for tunnel proposal: Long-time resident on Ramona between Colorado & El Dorado To: <transportation@paloalto.gov> To whom it may concern, I'm a long-time local resident. I'd like to indicate my strong preference opposing all of these disruptive options, such as those mentioned below. Regards, Carole Low the proposals for a new pedestrian and bicycle crossing at El Dorado Avenue. One option would involve building a ramp and tunnel beginning at Emerson, passing beneath Alma Street and the railroad tracks, and connecting to the Ventura This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. This is their first email to you. Mark Safe Report neighborhood. Another option would add a traffic signal at the intersection of Alma and El Dorado. The website linked below provides more information about both options. The tunnel proposal would require the acquisition of property along El Dorado between Emerson and Alma through eminent domain, as well as several years of construction and neighborhood disruption. Combined with the proposed development at High and Colorado, this could also make access to Alma from Ramona difficult for an extended period. From:Star Teachout To:Council, City Subject:OSV issues Date:Monday, August 24, 2026 1:27:09 PM Attachments:bike lane sign.png Importance:High Dear Council and city manager Shikada, Your concern, thoughtfulness, and initiative for both OSV dwellers and residents/business owners is much appreciated. Unfortunately, the problems associated with past OSV dwellers around town have negatively influenced how some people feel about the issue. Hopefully a reasonable and fair program can be designed to address most of the needs. As you discuss the proposed pilot program, please consider addressing some of the questions, concerns, and suggestions below if you have not already: 1. Surveys/Success Metrics: Have businesses, OSV dwellers, and residents been surveyed (easy Google Form) for their needs and concerns? Has Life Moves been involved/consulted in this process? Although you’ve identified streets for the pilot program, it might be worth surveying the entire city, with street names being required so you can sort the data for your pilot. Along with other *operational information,* t would be helpful to know how many children are currently living in OSVs to provide PAUSD services, and how many OSV dwellers have dogs. Will “success metrics” include the ability of residents/business owners to provide feedback at any time to a dedicated email address? 2. Fairness: Have you considered adding north PA locations--Palo Alto Ave (between Alma- Middlefield), High Street, California Ave (between Newell-Louis)--to the ones already identified? It is apparent the proposed pilot streets appear to focus on industrial or streets with 1- side residential, most of which are in south Palo Alto. In fairness, however, there are issues for some streets which impact everyone who walks, bikes, or drives by OSVs occupying streets adjacent to sidewalks, bike lanes, and roads/intersections. Sight lines when turning and crowding bike lanes must be included in the analysis/metrics. Some people are welcoming to OSVs, so perhaps some of those sites can have priority. 3. Parking lots: Has the city done an inventory of larger parking lots to rent which are typically under-parked? Is the Palo Alto Square parking lot a temporary option? It is usually empty. 4. *OSV Operations*: Critical issues: - Define limits on power generation—hours of the day, duration, decibels, exhaust proximity to sidewalks. - Ensure folding steps do not intersect sidewalks for tripping hazards, particularly at night - If typical RV sewage disposal needs to occur every 3-7 days, how will that happen when OSVs are parked for 6 months? - Employ a janitor to visit each site every 2-3 days to monitor/clean up trash, sewage, etc. This person should also shut down any generators not following the agreed upon rules. An alternative would be to employ some of the residents to patrol/police their areas for cleanliness and excessive noise. These people could be given a vest/equipment to identify them to the public. - Will there be a maximum number of OSVs/street block? 5. Costs: Please explain the specific costs for the pilot vs the cost for non-pilot enforcement. The pilot will also require quite a bit of enforcement. 6. Waste systems: Portable toilets and trash bins are included for Coyote Hill Road and Embarcadero Road, but all other sites must have trash bins at a minimum. When OSVs were parked along el Camino Real the trash was not acceptable (nor was the head-height generator exhaust when walking past on the sidewalk). Some people have expressed alarm at protective dogs tied up to OSVs outside and adjacent to sidewalks. Including a mobile shower service would be helpful, as would a toilet if space allows. 7. Signage: If you’re going to spend so much money on signage, after the pilot ends consider brainstorming alternate uses rather than removing them: - Turn them into mini bulletin boards for local events—we have a real shortage of posting places. - inspirational/humorous messages (Try a Bike, Bird Flight Path...) - historical messages, perhaps about the street name where located - Small art displays - Monthly events calendar for city - Where appropriate, helpful transportation signage, Slow Down: You are entering a neighborhood, Thank you for considering these comments, Star Teachout Barron Park ================================================== Summary: https://padailypost.com/2026/08/14/council-members-unveil-rv-plans-including-permits- parking-bans/?unapproved=48447&moderation- hash=b4e9c23b97283485de185cc1f93a5937#comment-48447 https://www.paloaltoonline.com/social-services/2026/08/14/palo-alto-looks-to-limit-vehicle- dwelling-with-new-permit-program/ 1 year pilot with $15 permit and parking restrictions 133 RV dwellers [May 6 count]. Is this 133 RVs or 133 actual people? 73% of Palo Alto’s unhoused individuals live in vehicles [countywide figure is 53%] Portable toilets and trash bins: only Coyote Hill Road and Embarcadero Road [all other sites must have trash bins at a minimum] Signage: proposed installation of signs that limit parking to one side of the street from January to June and the other side from July to December. Success metrics: feedback from businesses [AND neighbors!] and looking at spillover parking in neighborhoods The pilots would cost $823,800, while citywide restrictions would cost $4.5 million to design and install signs and to monitor and enforce restrictions, Shikada said. “A pilot will not fully resolve impacts outside the pilot geography. For example, unpermitted oversized vehicles could move from pilot areas into non-pilot areas,” Shikada said. The following streets will have parking restricted on alternating sides for six months at a time: • 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 and 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 From:Dmitri Samsonov To:Council, City Subject:Protecting Palo Alto Residents, Businesses, Property Owners, and Community Standards Date:Monday, August 24, 2026 1:09:13 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear Mayor and City Council Members, I am writing to express my concern regarding the growing impact of long-term RV habitation in our neighborhoods and the direction the City is taking on this issue. Palo Alto has a responsibility to protect its residents, local businesses, public spaces, and the quality of life that citizens have worked hard to build. The City also has a responsibility to protect the significant investments that residents have made in purchasing and maintaining their homes. For many families, their home is their largest financial investment, often built through years of hard work, sacrifice, and responsible planning. City policies should not undermine the value, safety, and livability of the neighborhoods where residents have chosen to invest their futures. While compassion for people experiencing financial hardship is important, compassion must be accompanied by responsibility and accountability. Assistance should help people overcome temporary challenges, not create situations that become permanent. The City must not weaken existing laws and community standards in ways that create larger problems in the future. I am particularly concerned that the proposed "Step Two" approach is too weak and does not adequately protect residents, businesses, or property owners. Policies that reduce enforcement or create long-term exceptions risk normalizing circumstances that were intended to be temporary. The City's primary responsibility is to the people who live, work, invest, and pay taxes in Palo Alto. Residents should not be expected to accept declining neighborhood conditions as the price of ineffective public policy. People facing financial hardship deserve support and respect. However, long-term solutions should focus on helping individuals regain independence through job training, education, skills development, employment opportunities, and access to temporary housing assistance. Financial difficulties can happen to anyone, and temporary help is appropriate. However, assistance without expectations, accountability, or a clear path toward self-sufficiency is neither fair to taxpayers nor effective for those receiving help. Responsibility must exist at every level. Individuals receiving assistance should be encouraged and This message needs your attention This is a personal email address. Mark Safe Report be accountable for the results of the policies they implement. When policies fail to improve conditions, consume public resources without measurable results, or shift problems into residential neighborhoods, those policies should be reevaluated rather than expanded. Consistent enforcement of existing laws is essential. When rules are repeatedly relaxed, ignored, or selectively enforced, public confidence declines and law enforcement becomes less effective. Residents begin to feel that their concerns, safety, and investments are secondary to political objectives. The City should not bend established laws and regulations in ways that ultimately undermine neighborhoods, public safety, property values, and trust in local government. I respectfully urge the City Council to: Protect residents, neighborhoods, local businesses, and property owners. Protect the investments that citizens have made in purchasing and maintaining their homes. Enforce existing laws and regulations consistently and fairly. Reject policies that normalize long-term RV habitation in residential areas. Provide temporary assistance that promotes self-sufficiency, employment, and permanent housing. Hold both program participants and City agencies accountable for measurable results. Prioritize public safety, neighborhood quality of life, and community standards. Palo Alto can be compassionate without sacrificing accountability. The City should help those who are struggling while also protecting the rights of residents, businesses, and homeowners who have invested their savings, time, and effort into this community. Effective solutions require both compassion and responsibility, support and accountability, and policies that serve the long-term interests of the entire community. Thank you for your consideration. Regards, Dmitri Echelon community at East Meadow circle, Palo Alto. From:Anne Kramer To:Council, City Cc:David Kramer Subject:August 24 OSV Pilot – Request to Pause Before Approval Date:Monday, August 24, 2026 12:56:48 PM Attachments:Letter to City PA OSV-RV Pilot Program 8-24-2026.pdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. i Dear Mayor Veenker and Members of the City Council, Attached is our letter regarding the proposed Oversized Vehicle pilot being considered tonight. As longtime Palo Alto residents, business owners, and property owners on Ash Street, we respectfully ask Council not to approve the public-street portion of the pilot tonight. We believe important questions regarding community outreach, the program’s goals and measures of success, displacement, existing parking restrictions, land use, and impacts on surrounding neighborhoods and businesses should be fully addressed before—not after—the program is approved. Please include our attached letter in the public record for tonight’s meeting. Thank you for your consideration, Anne & David Kramer Longtime Palo Alto Residents – Southgate Neighborhood Property Owners, 2904 Ash Street Owners, Ergo Works, Inc. This message needs your attention This is their first mail to some recipients. Mark Safe Report From:CaraSilver@proton.me To:Council, City Cc:IPA+ Team Subject:Item 2: Semi-Annual City Council Discussion with the Independent Police Auditor (IPA) Date:Monday, August 24, 2026 12:54:52 PM Attachments:image.png Potential Focus Areas for Audit Review_SOS Edits.pdf Letter to PACC re Audit.pdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Mayor and Councilmembers: Thank you for reviewing the IPA's proposed scope of audit. Unfortunately, Safety Over Surveillance (SOS) Palo Alto's original June 5 letter contining proposed audit questions was not included in the packet for this agenda item. I am attaching SOS's comments on OIR's proposed audit scope as well as SOS's earlier June 5 letter. Community concerns regarding the proliferation of Flock cameras has exploded since the Council considered this item in June. While SOS supports a robust third party audit, it also requests that all cameras be covered until the audit findings are discussed and addressed by the Council. Thank you for your consideration. Cara Silver Safety Over Surveillance (SOS) Palo Alto Sent with Proton Mail secure email.