Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My Public Portal
About
20211206plCC
From:Amanda Zeitlin To:Council, City Subject:Castilleja support Date:Monday, December 6, 2021 7:12:32 AM Some people who received this message don't often get email from abzeitlin@gmail.com. Learnwhy this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Commissioners, I am writing to you as a concerned citizen of Palo Alto, someone who cares about: The the environment in our city and the climate crisis The infrastructure and schools The work we should be doing to build a better community and world The Environment You are once again considering Castilleja’s proposal for an underground garage, I’d like to affirm my strong support for the proposed parking facility. As has been repeatedly stated at previous ARB, PTC, and Council hearings, the underground garage is allowed by city code for a school, it preserves green space above ground, eliminates the noise and visual impact of parked cars at grade, and per the Environmental Impact Report, it causes no negative impacts on the neighborhood. The school needs to update the campus to become sustainable. Infrastructure and Schools Castilleja has now come before you, at the request of City Council, with a smaller garage that protects trees and addresses concerns of opponents, while still providing the benefits described above. I ask you to recommend the design with 69 spots (vs. 52), because it will better improve the aesthetics of the neighborhood with not one negative impact. I understand your purview is to “promote visual environments which are of high aesthetic quality,” and the Castilleja garage meets this in full. Removing cars from the streets and preserving greenspace by building a garage that blends gently into the landscape meets that objective - while fulfilling the City code’s required number of parking spaces. The garage also further protects trees, an important priority for our city. Allow this improvement to Castilleja’s campus to strengthen the educational opportunities in Palo Alto The Work We Should Be Doing It’s time for you to approve this project for the last time. We need to support education, especially for girls and young women who are seeking the right school setting. There is no need to continue to keep moving this project from one committee to another. Send it forward to City Council with direction to approve. Thank you for taking the time to read my letter. Sincerely, Amanda Zeitlin 90 Jordan Place From:chuck jagoda To:Janet Werkman Cc:MVHJC List; WILPF Peninsula Palo Alto; Aram James; Sandy Perry-HCA; Council, City; Pamela Chesavage; Laurel Smith; Bains, Paul Subject:Re: [MVHousingJustice] Fwd: Date:Sunday, December 5, 2021 6:25:21 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from chuckjagoda1@gmail.com.Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Thanks, Janet. Excellent point. In furtherance thereof, I recall when visiting the Safe Parking Program in Santa Barbara, I learned it is named "Safe" because of the concern you mention. Any program that doesn't build in the kinds of security for parkers you mention is a failure from its beginning. Chuck Jagoda On Sun, Dec 5, 2021 at 4:24 PM Janet Werkman <janetwerkman54@gmail.com> wrote: We're famous in England. And not in a good way! I was interested to see that the safeparking helpline in LA gives RV dwellers the locations where they can safely park, and the locations are often secret. I believe Amigos de Guadalupe in San Jose operates in much thesame way - they have a network of churches across the city that host vehicles for safe parking, but the names and locations of the churches are secret to protect the churches andthe vehicle residents from harassment. This makes a lot of sense to me. Why should very vulnerable people, who often include women who are victims of domestic violence, besubjected to having their locations publicized when this can lead to harassment, threats, and even potential assaults? I think we have it backward - thinking the neighborhood needs to beprotected from the vehicle residents! ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Janet Werkman <janetwerkman54@gmail.com>Date: Thu, Nov 25, 2021 at 3:14 PMeSubject: To: Janet Werkman <janetwerkman54@gmail.com> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6839229/Thousands-California-families-living- RVs-exorbitant-rents-leave-facing-homelessness.html _______________________________________________ MVHousingJustice mailing listMVHousingJustice@lists.sonic.net https://lists.sonic.net/mailman/listinfo/mvhousingjustice -- Chuck From:Steve Bisset To:CPNA; Council, City Subject:phone survey about business tax measure Date:Sunday, December 5, 2021 5:35:08 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from steve@bisset.us. Learn whythis is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Neighbors and Council Members, I just received a survey call about what sounds like one or more upcoming ballot measures to implement a business license tax in Palo Alto, and to continue the 18% transfer of CPAU (Utilities) revenues to the general fund, andpossibly to increase it a further 5%. I took the time to respond in order to get a sense of where this is going. I think the caller said they are with VRI -which seems to be Vision Research Inc, a market research call center. The surveyor declined to state who fundedthe research since "knowing who funded the research could bias the answers given". The questions asked implied(to me) that the City funded the research - does anybody know? As surveys go it was quite well done, with only a medium aspect of push marketing in favor of the new taxes. However, as with every City survey about tax and spending that I have ever seen, they never, ever, acknowledge theelephant in the room, which is that the bulk of our tax revenues go to staff salaries, benefits and pensions, that PaloAlto has a disproportionate number of staff in proportion to the number of residents and the services delivered, andthat we have an excessive number of managers and management layers as compared with similar well-managedcities. So as a voter I'll be left with the usual dilemma (and I acknowledge and respect that my neighbors have a range ofviews on these subjects):- I support taxing businesses more, so that they pay for their fare share of the services they benefit from both directlyand indirectly in Palo Alto. I support the carve-outs that are likely to be in the measure exempting small businesses,especially small retail.- I support spending our tax revenues on the litany of city services that are touted, such as increased librarian hoursand many other fine purposes.- In my time in Palo Alto (a mere 26 years) I have never seen any increased tax revenues actually increase thequantity or quality of city services. School bonds are the exception. Increased revenues have merely maintained thestatus quo for services while enabling the inexorable increase in staff costs. As a voter I've shifted from voting yes to voting no on city tax measures (except for schools), because it just extendsthe problem. To be clear, the problem is not so much that city staff are compensated too much, rather it is that thereare too many of them, and far too many in the management layers. When times are tough we are asked which of ourchildren we prefer to sacrifice, e.g. librarian hours or traffic enforcement (etc etc), but we are never asked if wewould like to reduce the number of managers or management layers. That would be like the elephant politely askingus if we would like them to leave the room. Just sayin' ... Steve Bisset From:Hank Sousa To:Planning Commission; Council, City Subject:Castilleja Expansion Date:Sunday, December 5, 2021 5:10:08 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Hello PTC members: I live nearby Castilleja School (185 feet away) and would like to suggest some alternatives to their expansion plan. First, hold off on any additional enrollment increases- after the 450 suggested by the Council motion. Leave off further increases until we neighbors can assess the impact. Suggest the school stay at that number (450) for ten years. Most of us close in neighbors are into our senior years and do not want to keep pushing back every time the school is granted an increase. Let’s see how they do with this less excessive enrollment bump. Next is the parking discussion. There are currently 86 (per school’s expansion plans) or 89 (per Fehr&Peers report https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/planning-amp- development-services/file-migration/castilleja/2021/13.pdf) parking spots at grade on campus. More than enough to enroll 450 students. And still a good number to continue the successful small school model. Suggest the school no longer allow students to drive themselves. And insist that shuttling will bring the vast majority of students to the campus. Off campus sites would allow parents to drop their kids where they’d board the shuttles for the ride to campus. The idea to move the swimming pool results in the loss of sixty parking spaces. Its current location is fine and will fit in with the new building after a couple of minor tweaks. The idea to excavate a large area to recess the pool is wrongheaded. Leave it where it is and that allows the current parking to stay in its several locations around the campus. No need for deep cut off walls around the pool which interfere with drainage of the watershed. Put sound walls around the pool or a retractable cover like you see in some hotels. These are softer, easier solutions to the proposed rebuild. We neighbors have conveyed these ideas for many years, but don’t get much traction in the city planning offices. Who speaks for us? The planning staff appears to be advocates for the applicant. We have spent money hiring an attorney to advise us but, again, who at the city speaks on behalf of the neighbors who want a less impactful project? We hope some of you commissioners will hear our voices. Thanks, Hank Sousa 100 block Melville From:Loran Harding To:Doug Vagim; David Balakian; Dan Richard; dennisbalakian; Cathy Lewis; Council, City; Daniel Zack; davidpomaville; esmeralda.soria@fresno.gov; eappel@stanford.edu; Chris Field; francis.collins@nih.gov; fredbeyerlein; fmerlo@wildelectric.net; grinellelake@yahoo.com; Gabriel.Ramirez@fresno.gov;George.Rutherford@ucsf.edu; huidentalsanmateo; hennessy; Irv Weissman; jerry ruopoli; Joel Stiner;kwalsh@kmaxtv.com; kfsndesk; lalws4@gmail.com; leager; Leodies Buchanan; margaret-sasaki@live.com;Mayor; Mark Standriff; mthibodeaux@electriclaboratories.com; newsdesk; news@fresnobee.com; nick yovino;russ@topperjewelers.com; Steve Wayte; tsheehan; terry; VT3126782@gmail.com; vallesR1969@att.net Subject:Fwd: San Jose kicks around SB9. Date:Saturday, December 4, 2021 6:32:18 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>Date: Sat, Dec 4, 2021 at 6:20 PM Subject: San Jose kicks around SB9.To: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> Saturday, Dec. 3, 2021 Mr. Doug Vagim, Fresno Doug- I had to dig to find this without having to subscribe to the Merc. The issue is densifying historic neighborhoods. I think the raping of current residents by the armies of newcriminals who will be moving into stable neighborhoods will be a big issue as soon as the densifying starts. People will wonder why they re-elected the son of a bitch Newsom when therape rate soars. Gun sales, and a willingness to use them, will soar too. San Jose Planning Commission looks to shelve Opportunity Housing (sanjosespotlight.com) He doesn't want his wife raped, but it will be acceptable colateral damage for the restof us to get more affordable housing. Let's kick this bastard out in November, 2022. L. William Harding Fresno, Ca. From:herb To:Council, City; Clerk, City Subject:December 6, 2021 Council Meeting Item #10: New Downtown Parking Facilities Date:Saturday, December 4, 2021 5:46:33 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. This letter includes copy editing corrections to my priorletter sent to City Council. Herb BorockP. O. Box 632Palo Alto, CA 94302 December 4, 2021 Palo Alto City Council250 Hamilton AvenuePalo Alto, CA 94301 DECEMBER 6, 2021 CITY COUNCIL MEETING, AGENDA ITEM #10NEW DOWNTOWN PARKING FACILITIES Dear City Council: The Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for a parking garage at375 Hamilton Avenue is no longer valid now that the City isdeveloping a Downtown Coordinated Area Development Plan that issubject to environmental review pursuant to the CaliforniaEnvironmental Quality Act (CEQA). Evaluating the parking garage at 375 Hamilton Avenue separatelyfrom the rest of the Downtown Coordinated Area Plan issegmenting a project in violation of CEQA. There are multiple other sources of funding for the proposedgarage in addition to those mentioned in the staff report (ID#13363). Other parking structures in the Downtown were financed in partby assessment districts. The parking garage proposed for 375Hamilton Avenue can also be financed by a combination of in-lieu fees and a bond paid for over time by an assessmentdistrict. Property owners should pay an in-lieu parking fee for eachstreet parking space used by a parklet. That payment wouldbring in over $9 million. Property owners should also pay an in-lieu parking fee for theadditional demand created by the parklets when the seatingcapacity of the parklets is added to the seating capacityinside the property, at the rate of one in-lieu fee for eachfour additional seated customer spaces. This proposal appears in open session after a lawsuit by ChopKeenan related to the use of in-lieu parking fees. I just don't know whether this proposal was developed before orafter Keenan's lawsuit. Thank you for your consideration of these comments. Sincerely, Herb Borock From:herb To:Council, City Subject:December 6, 2021 Council Meeting, Item #10: New Downtown Parking Facilities Date:Saturday, December 4, 2021 5:16:07 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Herb BorockP. O. Box 632Palo Alto, CA 94302 December 4, 2021 Palo Alto City Council250 Hamilton AvenuePalo Alto, CA 94301 DECEMBER 6, 2021 CITY COUNCIL MEETING, AGENDA ITEM #10NEW DOWNTOWN PARKING FACILITIES Dear City Council: The Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for a parking garage at375 Hamilton Avenue is no longer valid now that the City isdeveloping a Downtown Coordinated Area Development Plant thatis subject to environmental review pursuant to the CaliforniaEnvironmental Quality Act (CEQA). Evaluating the parking garage at 375 Hamilton Avenue separatelyfrom the rest of the Downtown Coordinated Area Plan issegmenting a project in violation of CEQA. There are multiple other sources of funding for the proposedgarage in addition to those mentioned in the staff report (ID#13363). Other parking structures in the Downtown were financed in partby assessment districts. The parking garage proposed for 375Hamilton Avenue can also be financed by a combination of in-lieu fees and a bond paid for over time by an assessmentdistrict. Property owners should an in-lieu parking fee for each streetparking space used by a parklet. That payment would being inover $9 million. Property owners should also pay an in-lieu parking fee for theadditional demand created by the parklets when the seatingcapacity of the parklets is added to the seating capacityinside the property, at the rate of one in-lieu fee for eachadditional seated customer space. This proposal appears in open session after a lawsuit by ChopKeenan related to the use of in-lieu parking fees. I just don't know whether this proposal was developed before orafter Keenan's lawsuit. Herb Borock From:herb To:Council, City; Clerk, City Subject:December 6, 2021 Council Meeting, Item #5: Roth Building Grant Funds and Resolution Date:Saturday, December 4, 2021 4:56:22 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Herb BorockP. O. Box 632Palo Alto, CA 94302 December 4, 2021 Palo Alto City Council250 Hamilton AvenuePalo Alto, CA 94301 DECEMER 6, 2021 CITY COUNCIL MEETING, AGENDA ITEM #5ROTH BUILDING GRANT FUNDS AND RESOLUTION Dear City Council: You are again being asked by staff to represent to Santa ClaraCounty that the Roth Building when used for a History Museumopen to the public will be used for park purposes when you havenot dedicated the site of the Roth Building to park purposes asrequired by the Palo Alto Charter. The proposed use of the Roth Building is an acceptable use fordedicated parkland. Resolution No. 8057 expressed the Council's intention todedicate as parkland the remainder of the 2.41 acres of theformer Palo Alto Medical Foundation property when financingplans or mechanism are approved. You have now approved financing mechanisms and plans includingfunds from park impact fees that can be used only to acquireand develop parkland that must be dedicated by ordinanceaccording to Palo Alto Charter Article VIII. The Palo Alto Charter at Article VIII requires that any landused for park purposes must be dedicated by ordinance for thatpurpose. You are prohibited from approving the proposed resolution untilafter you adopt a park dedication ordinance as required by thePalo Alto Charter: All lands owned or controlled by the city which are or will be used for park, playground, recreation or conservation purposes shall be dedicated for such purposes by ordinance. No land heretofore or hereafter dedicated for such purposes shall be sold or otherwise disposed of, nor shall its use be abandoned or discontinued except pursuant to majority vote of the electorate. Any election and related procedures under Article VIII shall conform to the provisions set forth in general law as it existed January 1,1965, except that the council may call such election by majority vote. No substantial building, construction, reconstruction or development upon or with respect to any lands so dedicated shall be made except pursuant to ordinance subject to referendum. You also are prohibited from setting a termination date for thepark use, because that would be tantamount to removing theproperty from park dedication which is a power reserved to thevoters by the Charter. When the City controls a property through a leasehold with aterm of years, the City is able to include an ending date inthe park dedication due to the fact that when the lease endsthe City neither owns nor controls the land. An example of apark dedication for leased land with an ending date is the parkdedication for the Stanford/Palo Alto Community Playing Fieldsat the intersection of El Camino Real and Page Mill Road. After you dedicate the Roth Building for park purposes, if afuture Council (or the public through the initiative process)wants to remove the property from park dedication in 20 years,then you (or they) can ask the voters to do that, just as thevoters have done for additions to the airport and the sewagetreatment plant, and for a proposed waste to energy facility. For example, the Williams House property was dedicated for parkpurposes when the Council adopted Ordinance No. 4423 in 1997. The first clause of that ordinance reads: "WHEREAS, Article VIII of the Charter of the City of Palo Alto and Section 22.08.004 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code require that if any site, parcel or area of land owned by the City of Palo Alto intended to be used for park purposes shall bereserved for park, playground, recreation or conservation, the Council shall first cause to be prepared an ordinance dedicating such site, parcel or area of land for such purposes;" The Roth Building property needs to be dedicated for parkpurposes, just as the Williams House property was dedicated forpark purposes, before you can approve the proposed resolutionwith Santa Clara County to receive grant funds for the RothBuilding. Thank you for your consideration of these comments. Sincerely, Herb Borock From:Loran Harding To:Loran Harding; dennisbalakian; David Balakian; Doug Vagim; grinellelake@yahoo.com; Mayor; Mark Standriff;huidentalsanmateo; leager; Cathy Lewis; margaret-sasaki@live.com; jerry ruopoli; Steve Wayte; Joel Stiner;alumnipresident@stanford.edu; fred beyerlein; Dan Richard; mthibodeaux@electriclaboratories.com; Council,City; bballpod Subject:Fwd: The Snob Test by Archie Luxury. The answers here to the 25 Qs. Date:Saturday, December 4, 2021 4:43:47 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>Date: Sat, Dec 4, 2021 at 4:26 PM Subject: The Snob Test by Archie Luxury. The answers here to the 25 Qs.To: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> Saturday, December 4, 2021 To all- Archie Luxury developed a self-administered snob test consisting of 25 questions. In thisvideo he gives the answers. Very informative. You cannot hold yourself out as a snob if you don't know most of these answers: ArchieLuxury A degree from Stanford, such as the one I have, becomes almost meaningless, or at least isless impressive, if you don't have these answers on the tip of your brain. L. William Harding Fresno, Ca. From:Fred Balin To:Council, City Subject:Council Campaign Expenditures, Contributions, and Disclosures Date:Saturday, December 4, 2021 2:01:21 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ Comments on Gail Price PA Weekly Guest Opinion -Fred Balin 2385 Columbia Street The concept and proposals in the guest opinion are valid and worthy of the public’s and the city council’s serious consideration … once again. At the top of the list is voluntary expenditure limits. In Mountain View, which has had such an ordinance on the books since 2000, at the time a candidate files nomination papers with the city clerk, she or he is advised of the voluntary limit and files a statement of acceptance or rejection. That choice is made public, and voters can factor it into their own decision-making calculus. It is important to note that the expenditure limit in Mountain View not only includes monetary contributions, but also non-monetary contributions, aka “in-kind” contributions. The latter includes goods and services, which in Palo Alto city council elections span everything from supporters’ “coffee” and event refreshments to professional services (e.g., consulting and design) to picking up the tab for an expensive mailer. Mountain View includes these non-monetary contributions within their voluntary expenditure limit and Palo Alto should as well. Second in importance is a limit on the size of donations from a single outside source. While expenditure limits must be voluntary, contribution limits can be set by a municipality below the absurdly high $4,900 legal ceiling. My personal limit continues to be $250, and I see no reason why a viable candidate (i.e., someone with roots in the community and whose foremost concern is the public good) should need more. Of far greater importance is the sweat equity of resident-to-resident: walking, talking, emailing and distributions; gatherings via virtual meetings at farmer’s markets, in parks, along neighborhood streets and in retail establishments. With regard to independent expenditures, these outlays, often for mailings, from groups not associated with and not coordinating with a candidate, is nothing new and to date we know whom the communications are coming from: unions, political organizations, political action committees, as well fly-by-night group endorsement mailers that can easily be recognized for what they are. There have been some instance of negative campaigning from outside by local union and reginal labor groups, but they have been in relation to the local ballot measures and statewide office involving local candidates. The good thing is they have produced a backlash, and arguably been counterproductive to the goals of those organizations. It certainly is possible that in the upcoming local election we may see independent expenditures from organizations that we do not recognize and therefore increased disclosure requirements could be a helpful new informative measure for the public. In 1996 nearly two-thirds of Californians voted to establish state and local contribution limits. The following year, 1997, the Palo Alto city council passed an ordinance, still on the books, (PAMC 2.40.070) establishing a voluntary expenditure limit of $14,000, but its implementation was suspended due to lawsuit, and later, when they could, our city did not reinstate it. In mid-2007 council members Peter Drekmeier, who set a record for contributions and LaDoris Cordell, who accepted no monetary contribution, called for limitations. Encouraged to pursue this concept, they dutifully returned from the council’s Policy & Services committee with voluntary monetary contribution and expenditure caps: $300 and $30,000 respectively. But with the next campaigns in view, all other council members withdrew support. Hopefully that will not happen this time around. Over the years, I have written two guest opinions on this topic, the most recent in 2017, reviews the “arms race” in2016. https://paloaltoonline.com/news/2017/04/15/guest-opinion-its-time-to-set-campaign-contribution-and-spending-caps ). We as residents need to curb this escalation join the many forward-thinking California municipalities who haveadopted their own local campaign expenditure, contribution and disclosure requirements. Thank you. List with links to specific ordinances at: https://www.fppc.ca.gov/learn/campaign-rules/local-campaign-ordinances.html # From:Teri Llach To:Council, City Subject:Please help us on Churchill Date:Saturday, December 4, 2021 8:01:28 AM Some people who received this message don't often get email from llachteric@gmail.com. Learnwhy this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Hello I have to say that I am totally disgusted by the events of the last few years. The indecision on Churchill pitted neighbor against neighbor. The traffic on Churchill is unsafe, the decision to try for the partial underpass at the Churchill crossing is (frankly) stupid and a waste of money. So a few residents don’t have to drive 5 more minutes and the homes on West Churchill and Alma are destroyed? Wow – guess you don’t care about us at all. We are expendable. So you have decided to destroy our lives, homes, peace to build a partial underpass that is too expensive, not needed and going to be terrible to build if you can even get the train to agree. Fine – try it and see because I would bet in the long run the best option is the simplest one – leave Churchill as is. Leave it open but don’t do any building. Put in stop signs and speed bumps on West Churchill to slow traffic. DONE – That is what you should do – speed bumps and stop signs – right now. STOP the madness. I clicked the cross signal blinker on Churchill last week and was almost killed as a car just ran it. STOP SIGNS and SPEED BUMPS. Please. What do I need to do to get stop signs and speed bumps on West Churchill done ASAP? Please advise Thanks Teri from west Churchill From:Friends of the Palo Alto Junior Museum & ZooTo:Council, CitySubject:Super Family Sundays are Back at the Junior Museum & ZooDate:Saturday, December 4, 2021 8:00:54 AM Some people who received this message don't often get email from info+friendsjmz.org@ccsend.com.Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious ofopening attachments and clicking on links. Happy Homecoming of Super Family Sundays The morning of November 21st was bright and, even with the early hour, filled withsuper excitement. After a 22-month hiatus due to the pandemic, super families werewelcomed back by JMZ staff for a celebration of the first Super Family Sunday in the new facility. And it was super fun! Read on to learn more about this fun event for families with children who havedisabilities. This is the latest installment in our newsletter series with news about thenew Palo Alto Junior Museum & Zoo! A dad and child play with an exhibit at the Palo Alto Junior Museum & Zoo. Super Family Sundays is a free event when the JMZ is open exclusively to familieswith children who have disabilities. Children with all disabilities are welcome, as well asparents, siblings and grandparents. Super Family Sundays are a time when familiescan have a quieter experience in the exhibit gallery and meet zoo animals up-closewith the amazing JMZ keepers. More than 20 families excitedly explored the new exhibits and zoo experiences duringthe hour and a half-long event. Grateful parents and caregivers commented on thebeautiful and soothing design of the building and exhibits. The ball machine wascontinuously rolling with kids and adults turning the cranks, rolling the balls, andengineering their own ball-moving contraptions. Families enjoyed having special timeto talk with zoo keepers and ask questions about the animals. Apu, the peacock,delighted everyone with a stroll around the zoo. Apu the Peacock at the Palo Alto Junior Museum & Zoo. Started in 2010, and generously supported by the Friends of the Junior Museum & Zooover the years, Super Family Sundays have been enjoyed by 2,700 kids and theirgrown ups. Parents have shared that they value Super Family Sunday events becausetheir children learn about science and the natural world in a friendly, uncrowdedenvironment. They appreciate that they can spend time together as a family and theirchildren are allowed more independence to explore. One parent disclosed that theevent led their neurotypical kids to better understand their sibling on the spectrum.Some adults appreciate meeting other families and feel that the event is “low stress.” “Ilove the safe and welcoming space,” shared one parent. Over the years, Super Family Sunday families have helped to make the new facilitydramatically more inclusive. During the JMZ’s Access From the Ground Up project,which aimed to build an accessible new facility, parents and children provided input toinform the development of Access Resources and innovative, permanent scienceexhibits. As a result, the new Museum and Zoo is more accessible to all visitors andmore engaged with the disability community. The Friends of the Palo Alto JuniorMuseum and Zoo is proud to be a partner in this inclusion work by funding SuperFamily Sundays. Mom and child playing with an exhibit at the Palo Alto Junior Museum & Zoo. Upcoming Super Family Sundays will be on:January 9, 2022 – 8:30 to 10 amFebruary 13, 2022 – 8:30 to 10 amMarch 13, 2022 – 5:30 to 7:00 pm All families who have a member with a disability are welcome to join. In order tomaintain a non-crowded environment, spots are limited and reservations are required. If you are interested in being added to the Super Family Sunday email list, pleasecontact Lisa.Eriksen@cityofpaloalto.org. Child crawling through a tunnel at the Palo Alto Junior Museum & Zoo. Friends of the Palo Alto Junior Museum & Zooinfo@friendsjmz.org | www.friendsjmz.org Connect with us Friends of the Palo Alto Junior Museum & Zoo | 1451 Middlefield Road, Palo Alto, CA 94301 Unsubscribe city.council@cityofpaloalto.org Update Profile | Constant Contact Data Notice Sent by info@friendsjmz.org powered by Try email marketing for free today! From:Yahoo Mail.® To:Honky Subject:Lots on Covid legal successes: Vaccine Mandate On Hold Nationwide, Judge orders FDA to release data it based it"s EUA on Date:Friday, December 3, 2021 10:14:19 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Federal Judge Puts Healthcare Worker Vaccine Mandate On Hold Nationwide - CD Media U.S. District Judge Terry Doughty in Monroe, Louisiana, temporarily blocked the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) from enforcing its vaccine mandate for healthcare workers until the court can resolve legal challenges, reported Reuters. Doughty’s ruling applied nationwide, except in 10 states where the CMS was already prevented from enforcing the rule due to a prior order from a federal judge in St. Louis... Federal Judge Rejects DOD Claim That Pfizer EUA and Comirnaty Vaccines Are ‘Interchangeable’ • Children's Health Defense ...the judge’s acknowledgment that “the DOD cannot mandate vaccines that only have an EUA” is significant for two reasons… ...Despite the federal judge’s opinion in Doe et al. v. Austin, no court has yet issued a final, definitive ruling that an institution may not mandate a COVID EUA product... Biden COVID Vaccine Mandates Suffer Two More Legal Setbacks • Children's Health Defense ...The new rulings, combined with previous rulings temporarily suspending mandates for U.S. workers, affect hundreds of millions of Americans who faced mandate deadlines set to begin next week.... Judge Orders Pfizer, FDA to Release Documents – First Doc Dump Says Thousands Killed by Shot in First Month - [your]NEWS As ordered by the courts the FDA must release the data it based it's EUA for the Pfizer shot. The FDA requested the courts to keep this information confidential for no oess than 55 YEARS!! The court returned with an order to release 500 documents a month. 38 pages released - CUMULATIVE ANALYSIS OF POST-AUTHORIZATION ADVERSE EVENT REPORTS https://phmpt.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/5.3.6-postmarketing-experience.pdf ... Summary of Safety Concerns in the US Pharmacovigilance Plan...Review of Adverse Events of Special Interest (AESIs) White House Quietly Delays Vaccine Mandate As Another Federal Judge Objects | ZeroHedge Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Suspends Vaccine Mandate Enforcement March of the Vaccine Dead Protest in Italy 1 min. video Hundreds of protesters holding signs with pictures of loved ones who died after receiving a COVID-19 shot marched in Italy recently. COVID vaccine mandate for Missouri health care workers blocked Mount Sinai South Nassau's Long Beach Emergency Unit Closes After Vaccine Mandate Creates Staff Shortage Greece is NOT Playing Games! Riot Police Get PUMMELED w/ Large Rocks by Crowd 1 min. video Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals BLOCKS San Diego Unified’s student COVID-19 vaccine mandate from going into effect — one day before the school district’s deadline for students to get their first dose. ninth-circuit-decision-re-sdusd-vaccine-mandate.pdf Biden legal defeats rapidly piling up across the nation on broad array of policy fronts | Just The News Court Rulings Drive CMS to Suspend Biden Health Care Worker Vaccine Mandate - The HighWire Belgian court declares COVID vaccine passports illegal - LifeSite Please SIGN and SHARE this petition, directed to the Australian Ambassador to the United States, H.E. Arthur Sinodinos, asking him to: https://lifepetitions.com/petition/help-australians-restore-their-freedom-usa/? utm_source=PT_sos_au_usa End the lockdowns in Australia End police brutality in Australia End mandatory vaccinations in Australia Restore the freedoms of speech, assembly and travel in Australia From:Larry Alton To:Council, City Subject:Developers Pausing, Pulling St. Paul Projects After Rent Control Vote Date:Friday, December 3, 2021 3:27:34 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from lalton@pacbell.net. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachmentsand clicking on links. https://rentalhousingjournal.com/developers-pausing-pulling-st-paul-projects-after-rent- control-vote/?utm_source=Master+Investor%2FOwner%2FProp+Mngr%2FSocial&utm_campaign=f71f0d0f36-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2021_11_24_03_28&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_1df36dfca7-f71f0d0f36-165587997 Larry Alton From:Rice, DanilleTo:Council, City; Council Agenda EmailCc:ORG - Clerk"s Office; Executive Leadership Team Subject:Council Consent Agenda Question for December 6, 2021 Date:Friday, December 3, 2021 3:06:37 PMAttachments:image001.pngimage002.pngimage003.pngimage005.pngimage006.pngimage007.pngimage008.png Dear Mayor and Council Members: On behalf of City Manager Ed Shikada, please find below the staff response to questions from Councilmember Cormack regarding the Monday, December 6 CouncilMeeting consent agenda item: Item 4, Approval of contract with Life Insurance Company of North America (CIGNA) for Underwriting of the City of Palo Alto’s Group Life, Accidental Death and Dismemberment (AD&D), and Long Term Disability Insurance (LTD) Plans for Up to Three Years for a total not to exceed $1,920,000. Item 5, Adoption of a Resolution for the Santa Clara County Historical Heritage Grant Program Authorizing the Application and Receipt of Grant Funds by the City of Palo Alto for the Roth Building (300 Homer Ave) Elevator Restoration Item 7, Amendment Number 1 to Contract Number C19173686 with OpenCities, Inc. to Add to Increase the Scope of Services to Add Additional Website Functionalities such as a Junior Museum Sub-Website, and Increase the Compensation Amount Accordingly, by $167,317 for a New Not-to-Exceed Contract Amount of $434,517 through FY25 Councilmember question and Staff response are below: Item 4, Title: Approval of contract with Life Insurance Company of North America (CIGNA) for Underwriting of the City of Palo Alto’s Group Life, Accidental Death and Dismemberment (AD&D), and Long Term Disability Insurance (LTD) Plans for Up to Three Years for a total not to exceed $1,920,000. 1. Is CIGNA the current provider? Is the proposed price $640,000 a year and is the current price approximately $750,000? Are the proposed benefits and costs to employees any different from the existing plan? Yes, Cigna is the current provider and the proposed price is $640,000 per year. The current price is $750,000 per year with about 50% of this cost funded through employee payroll contributions. There are no changes to the proposed benefits from the existing plan and both employees and the City will realize a cost reduction due to the discounted price of the renewal. Item 5, Adoption of a Resolution for the Santa Clara County Historical Heritage Grant Program Authorizing the Application and Receipt of Grant Funds by the City of Palo Alto for the Roth Building (300 Homer Ave) Elevator Restoration 1. Can these funds be used to replace the elevator or must it be repaired? Do the submitted plans for refurbishing the building include repair or replacement of the elevator? The grant application is to repair the existing Otis elevator. The plans to rehabilitate the Roth Building show that the elevator will be repaired. Specifically, on the permit set sheet A-2.11, “(E) Elevator to be restored and returned to working order. Elevator controls to be updated for current accessibility standards." Does the requirement for the property being open to all Santa Clara County residents on a non-discriminatory basis mean that the History Museum cannot charge visitors for access to the building? The Museum continues to plan to offer free general admission and will charge for special events like weddings. It is believed that the County grant would allow for a non-discriminatory fee to be charged, however, a specific proposal would need to be vetted with the County (this is being confirmed in coordination with the County). As currently submitted in the grant application a fee was not proposed. Item 7, Amendment Number 1 to Contract Number C19173686 with OpenCities, Inc. to Add to Increase the Scope of Services to Add Additional Website Functionalities such as a Junior Museum Sub-Website, and Increase the Compensation Amount Accordingly, by $167,317 for a New Not-to-Exceed Contract Amount of $434,517 through FY25 1. What is a sub website for the Junior Museum and Zoo (e.g., its own domain name without the City of Palo Alto in the address, a different look and feel, additional functionality?)? Are there other entities within the City that would benefit from having this type of sub website? The Palo Alto Junior Museum and Zoo sub-website provides special functionality desired for JMZ visitors that showcases zoo animals and activities, distinct from the City website’s typical service and project-oriented content. This includes a higher level of graphics and animation, and program-oriented content such as hours, programs, events, and exhibits, as well as memberships, volunteering opportunities, and donations. For improved user experience, the subsite will reflect a new domain (paloaltozoo.org) and ability to transition to a admission ticketing system. At the same time, as a subsite the JMZ will follow the City’s standards for content management, which facilitates ongoing staff support and effective cross-training. Currently, the JMZ is the only subsite currently anticipated. Considerations for other subsites in the future include the specific functionality goals, upfront and ongoing costs, and support requirements including staffing resources and training required for managing content. Thank you, Danille Danille Rice Customer Service Coordinator City Manager’s Office (650) 329-2229| danille.rice@cityofpaloalto.org www.cityofpaloalto.org From:Sridevi Zia To:Council, City Subject:El Camino Field - access for Little League players 13-14 yrs old Date:Friday, December 3, 2021 2:22:22 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from sjanumpa@yahoo.com. Learnwhy this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear City Council, I am writing to petition one more weekday for Palo Alto Little League (PALL) Junior Teams. PALL used to get two weekday practices per week but it appears to have changed for this coming spring; the city is allocating one weekday practice for PALL Junior Teams this coming spring at ElCamino Ball Park. (1) "Our" 13-14 years old kids: The teams in PALL are for "children residing in Palo Alto and Stanford OR attending school full-time in Palo Alto or Stanford"(cf., https://www.pabaseball.org/ageresidence-requirements). While other teams (particularly for teams that do not have residence requirements) may also need the field, I feel it is more importantto focus on our residence. We pay a lot of tax dollars to be able to live in Palo Alto and it would be great if the residents could benefit from it. (2) Our "13-14 years old" kids: a well-organized baseball program provide a fun, rewardingexperience to our young generation. While other teams (in particular adult teams) may also need the field, I feel it is more important to focus on the 13-14 years old kids. It will build a positivefoundation for them. The kids have also had to deal with a lot during covid and it would be wonderful to be able to keep them active more often during the spring as we have been able to in the fall. Thank you and let me know how else I can help to convince the city to keep the fields accessibleto our city's children. -Sri From:KaiTo:Council, CitySubject:Taking one for the team!Date:Friday, December 3, 2021 2:21:06 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious ofopening attachments and clicking on links. #ShotsOnly Inviting all ASR friends to celebrate #NationalBartendersDay at our Happy Hour on Friday with hookah, drink specials, cigars, and food. Henny and Casamigo drink specials available! Love to see you there! Check out our NEW Happy Hour menu ! Food and drink specials from 6-8pm. Cigars and Hookah available! Follow @asrcigar on IG Register soon because space is limited. We hope you’re able to join us! Friday, December 3, 2021 6:00 PM ASR presents: Shots Only! #NationalBartenderDay Register Republic Garden ASR Group, LLC 8402 Georgia Ave , Silver Spring , Md 20910 US Unsubscribe | Privacy Policy From:MWarren To:Council, City Subject:Churchill crossing options - keep it open... Date:Friday, December 3, 2021 10:28:14 AM Some people who received this message don't often get email from mwarrenus@gmail.com. Learnwhy this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear City Council members, Please keep the Churchill crossing open in its current configuration or potentially select one ofthe options that retains the roadway while separating it from the train tracks..For better or worse, people love their cars and keeping the Churchill crossing open is the best way topromote unification of Palo Alto's neighborhoods and improve travel through our city. The railroad under crossings at Jefferson Ave. in Redwood City, Ralston Ave. in Belmont and atHolly St. in San Carlos are exemplary. Closing the Churchill crossing to cars will only exacerbate the existing traffic problems on Embarcadero and University Ave. The option for just a bike/pedestrian under crossing willcreate yet another little used tunnel that reeks of urine and divides a community. A quick review of Palo Alto's existing under crossings will provide you with a perspective on whattime and reality does to these tunnels: El Camino Real & Page Mill Undercrossing (2634 El Camino Real): closed due toviolent incidents IIRC. It smelled of urine, was dank, dark, and little used even when open.Palo Alto Transit Center at University Ave: The workers have done a better job keeping these pedestrian under-crossings relatively free of graffiti and have manage to keep theurine smell down in recent years. They're accompanied by vehicle lanes, but are still not welcoming.N. California Ave to California Ave. - this undercrossing is probably the most successful under crossing but still creates a world of difference in the communities oneither end of the tunnel; it is not a unifying force. Its last rehabilitation improved the lighting and cleanliness, but I still see people caution their children before they use thistunnel. There is a distinct divide between the California Ave side (high density housing, business district) and the N. California Ave. side (single family detached residential). The road closure created two separate neighborhoods that the tunnel has not brought together.Benjamin Lefkowitz Palo Alto Adobe Creek pedestrian underpass: Originally closed due to danger and seasonal flooding; replaced by the recently opened, expensivepedestrian overpass after a decade of work. It would have been more efficient to avoid the tunnel in the first place and construct the bridge directly. The under crossing was nota success. Please do not allow yet another under crossing tunnel blight. These tunnels do not createcommunity. Instead, they are plagued by graffiti, urine, and danger after dark. Thank you, Mark Warren Crescent Park neighborhood From:Michael Eager To:Architectural Review Board; Planning Commission; Council, City Subject:Castilleja expansion plans Date:Friday, December 3, 2021 9:42:47 AM [Some people who received this message don't often get email from eager@eagercon.com. Learn why this is important at http://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification.] CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ Commissioners, City Council: I urge you to NOT approve expansion of Castilleja school. Castilleja is in a R-1 residential neighborhood. Expansion of the school, if necessary, should be by relocating to a more suitable appropriately zoned location either within Palo Alto or in neighboring communities, or by opening a satellite campus. Castilleja has exceeded their enrollment limit for decades. Allowing expansion would reward this unethical behavior. Castilleja apologized for exceeding the limit, but only after applying for a 30% increase in enrollment. This gives no assurance that they will comply with future enrollment limits. Castilleja places a burden on the City of Palo Alto and their neighbors which is not balanced by benefit to either. More than 75% of students are not from Palo Alto. The school pays no taxes. Burdens include increased traffic, especially in an area which is likely to be adversely impacted by railway crossing closures. Castilleja requests special treatment which is not supported by the Comprehensive Plan or by existing zoning. Variances should be granted only when there is a compelling argument in its favor and the impacts of the variance are minimal. The argument provided by Castilleja, that they want to grow enrollment, is weak and self-serving. Clearly the impact of the variance, adding an underground garage and increasing the gross floor area, is not minimal. There are many ways to support Castilleja's mission to support education. The expansion plan is the least desirable of the viable alternatives. Please deny Castilleja's expansion plans. -- Michael Eager From:Modular Technology To:Council, City Subject:Seasons Greetings from your friends at Modular Technology Date:Friday, December 3, 2021 7:30:58 AM Some people who received this message don't often get email fromtkissinger+taskmodular.com@ccsend.com. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Modular Technology Friends and Clients, With the holiday season now upon us, what better time to say thank you to all our clients for your continued support. We are truly thankful and wish you a joyous holiday season! If we can assist with any year-end projects or help kick start your 2022 facility initiatives, please let us know by simply replying to this email. Modular Technology is always ready with business to business solutions for Commercial Office Furnitiure and Facilities Management and Maintenance. Warm wishes, Terry Kissinger General Manager (650) 327-1700 Learn more about Commercial Office Furniture Services. Learn more about scheduled Facilities Management and Maintenance Services. Modular Technology | 643 Bair Island Road, Suite 200A, Redwood City, CA 94063 Unsubscribe city.council@cityofpaloalto.org Update Profile | Constant Contact Data Notice Sent by tkissinger@taskmodular.com powered by Try email marketing for free today! From:Loran Harding To:Loran Harding; antonia.tinoco@hsr.ca.gov; alumnipresident@stanford.edu; David Balakian; bballpod; fredbeyerlein; boardmembers; Leodies Buchanan; beachrides; Cathy Lewis; Council, City; Doug Vagim;dennisbalakian; Daniel Zack; Dan Richard; esmeralda.soria@fresno.gov; eappel@stanford.edu;grinellelake@yahoo.com; Gabriel.Ramirez@fresno.gov; huidentalsanmateo; hennessy; jerry ruopoli; Joel Stiner;kwalsh@kmaxtv.com; kfsndesk; lalws4@gmail.com; leager; margaret-sasaki@live.com; Mayor; Mark Standriff;newsdesk; news@fresnobee.com; nick yovino; russ@topperjewelers.com; Steve Wayte; tsheehan;VT3126782@gmail.com; vallesR1969@att.net Subject:Fwd: Starlink mission. 48 satellites in one launch Date:Friday, December 3, 2021 2:32:24 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>Date: Fri, Dec 3, 2021 at 2:15 AM Subject: Fwd: Starlink mission. 48 satellites in one launchTo: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> ---------- Forwarded message ---------From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> Date: Fri, Dec 3, 2021 at 1:09 AMSubject: Starlink mission. 48 satellites in one launch To: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> Thursday, December 2, 2021 To all- Starlink Mission - YouTube This mission placed 48 Starlink satellites in orbit. The launch was tonight from Florida, Thursday, Dec. 2, 2021. And here is information about broadband service from those satellites: Rural or remoteareas not served by broadband now can be. If they have e-, they can have broadband. Starlink L. William Harding Fresno, Ca. From:Loran Harding To:Loran Harding; antonia.tinoco@hsr.ca.gov; alumnipresident@stanford.edu; David Balakian; bballpod; fredbeyerlein; Cathy Lewis; Chris Field; Council, City; Doug Vagim; dennisbalakian; esmeralda.soria@fresno.gov;eappel@stanford.edu; francis.collins@nih.gov; fmerlo@wildelectric.net; grinellelake@yahoo.com;Gabriel.Ramirez@fresno.gov; George.Rutherford@ucsf.edu; huidentalsanmateo; hennessy; Irv Weissman; jerryruopoli; Joel Stiner; kwalsh@kmaxtv.com; kfsndesk; lalws4@gmail.com; mthibodeaux@electriclaboratories.com;Mayor; Mark Standriff; newsdesk; news@fresnobee.com; nick yovino; david pomaville;russ@topperjewelers.com; Dan Richard; Sally Thiessen; Steve Wayte; tsheehan; VT3126782@gmail.com; DanielZack; vallesR1969@att.net Subject:Fwd: A report of exactly how Omicron infection went over ~5 or 6 days from the pt. Date:Thursday, December 2, 2021 3:37:13 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>Date: Thu, Dec 2, 2021 at 3:18 PM Subject: A report of exactly how Omicron infection went over ~5 or 6 days from the pt.To: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> Thursday, Dec. 2, 2021 To all- Here is a good video by a man in South Africa who got Omicron and went through the illness over about five days. He was fully vaccinated before he got infected, apparently. He ismaking the vid while talking to Dr. John Campbell in the UK. This was made today. So this is the first case report from South Africa- a report by the pt. Omicron, first case report from SA - YouTube This is worth seeing. He goes step by step over what happened to him. No wordydigressions. Apparently a lot of the fully vaccinated in the US and elsewhere are going to go through this. If they have not been fully vaccinated when they catch the Omicron variant,presumably their illness will be a lot worse than what this man went through. I had the Moderna booster on Tuesday, Nov. 2, 2021, so my immunity is as good as it gets right now.Perhaps I can avoid being infected with Omicron until we can get the tweaked boosters in ~March, 2022. What he went through was not too horrible. No where near hospitalization, ICU,ventilator and death. But remember, this was an infection that broke through our best vaccines. I'm not sure if he had had the booster shot yet or not. L. William Harding Fresno, Ca. From:d m To:Council, City; Cormack, Alison; Filseth, Eric (Internal); Stone, Greer; Tanaka, Greg; Kou, Lydia; Burt, Patrick;DuBois, Tom; City Mgr; greg@gregtanaka.org; kou.pacc@gmail.com; Hur, Mark; Baird, Nathan;tomforcouncil@gmail.com; Transportation Subject:Fwd: Fw: RPP - Request to postpone changes Date:Thursday, December 2, 2021 12:51:21 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from sagedoudou@gmail.com.Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Subject: RPP - Request to postpone changes Dear Elected and Appointed Officials of the City of Palo Alto Manager, As a spouse of an employee involved in healthcare and personal services in Palo Alto, I find itunconscionable that the City without "due process" is changing the RPP program due topreserving the Quality of Life of its residential neighborhood while disingenuously reducingthe Quality of Life for the surrounding businesses and it's employees that contribute directlyand indirectly to the coffers of Palo Alto. , I urge you to suspend the program for at least 6 months until a proper policy can be reviewedand that has parity and equity for all of those impacted. The fact that only 7 people were on the call last night that seemed rushed at best is strong evidence that a more thorough commentperiod need take place. Surely there are more businesses and employee who were inadequately notified of such a meeting that would have a voice in this matter rather then leaving it in thehands of a few for the betterment of the community. Frankly put, there was no dialog between the businesses and the city when last we visited this issue it was a very positive environmentthat resulted in the hang tags to begin with. The City Council members and appointed officials come and go while we are left to deal with the wake of what can be irrational and/orunreasonable actions. The meeting last night was a complete farce. A showcase for Mr. Baird to point out the obvious that he had no power to curb the process and left us with the defaultanswer on contacting the Transportation Department. A waste of time that went no where. I am also aware that previous conversations with Mr. Mark Hur also were non-productive andthat his tone of voice was "his way or the high way and I am not changing my mind no matter what you say" and is very disheartening and frankly he should be investigated as to why heshould remain in such a position where transparency and fairness is the preferred approach and not left to his own unchecked attitude and devices. I cannot be the first one to point out suchan attitude coming from him or his office. It is frustrating to see and hear what is coming out of Mark Hur's mouth when many in the City Offices take their job serious and recognize thateven one voice matters much less the 7 we had last night. Where was Mr. Hur backing up his signature to let this go through and not consider pausing the roll out for not even a day muchless a week or month or 6 months from now. Only 40 permits to be issued Monday at 8am? Please! That is an insult and any person with common sense would question such a number.Where did it come from? Mr. Baird did not know. He as only been at the job since a year ago. The website will go down, people won't get through, people work at 8am with clients bookedmonths in advance and do not have the luxury of working from home due to the personal service of businesses or don't have assistants to try and apply for a permit to park near their place of employ. You are expecting my wife to walk 6 blocks to the nearest garage and who isto say that garage is not full by the time she gets there. The sidewalks are not exactly flat and without cracks due to neglect or trees that present a tripping hazard that is increased the farthershe has to walk. That would be blood on your hands due to some bureaucracy that even Mr. Baird does not know how to get around. Mr. Baird is unfamiliar with the talks that occurred afew years ago and that fact that a decision maker was not at that meeting shows you how much lip service was paid to the process that by all means has already been decided in spite of theobjections of the qualified parties who were at the meeting. Wouldn't that be a quorum of sorts to pump the brakes on this train wreck and reevaluate the whole process and how it can bebetter implemented and increase awareness. I don't even have to remind all of you of the RV problem the city has - still! After several years in fact. Let's attack the small business becausewe can. Forget the scofflaws that arguably are down on their luck or gaming the system. I would love to live rent fee in a city that I call home because nothing is being done about it. Sohow can we role out such a program if we can even manage the one we have first. Please do not hide behind this Quality of Life charade. While real, we all have to deal with it in anequitable way. Some are better at it then others. This is politics at its finest: those with the deepest pockets or the squeakiest wheel is heard. I dare you, challenge all of you to step up and put this on pause, to prove me wrong, by suspending the effective date of this proposed debacle slated for THIS Monday 8am by 6 months while the entire RPP rework has been socialized. And toinvestigate the narcissistic, mysogynistic tone of Mr. Mark Hur as shown to my staff. Unacceptable. Last we heard from the neighbors is that we have a great relationship with them and that last I checked, ones garage and driveway would suffice for resident parking and not to use the public streets as their additional parking spots thatcould be used by working professionals during normal working hours. I am not going to regurgitate the claims made by the doctors last night as to why this plan stinks in its current form as that has already been presumably recorded by Mr.Baird that I am convince will fall on deaf ears. Again there were only a handful that called in as compared to tens of dozens concerned citizens last we met on this RPP. For all the obvious reasons already stated should be more than enough to review this proposal and soon to be in effect 12/6. Do you have a current place to park at your work? Are you remote? Lucky you. Is your parking paid for? Do you know how stressful it is to drive an hour and then have to worry about where to park and/or to park and walk another 1/2 hour just to get toyour car, in the rain, in the wind, with handbags, on heels, in the dark, as a women, transients around. A recipe for a slips, trips, and fall, suits to the city, disgruntled employees for business that are already struggling with the pandemic fallout. Did we lose site of the humanity factor when you were elected and guaranteed a verygenerous salary for your participation. Where is our equal representation from our district council members. Why were they not on the phone to hear the wrath of concerned citizens??? All of you have some skin in the game yet seems to be turning their head to this problem. Abig problem. Do the right thing. Suspend the process, and let's have a real dialog. With thedecision makers at the table and not someone who has no authority or influence on this matter. Thank you, LF -- 1795 El Camino Real Suite 200 Palo Alto, CA 94306 Tel: (650)321-7100 Fax:(650)323-3220 316 S. Eldorado St. Suite105 San Mateo, CA94401 Tel: (650)340-7200 Fax:(650)340-9514 The materials in this e-mail are private and may contain ProtectedHealth Information. If you are not the intended recipient be advisedthat any unauthorized use, disclosure, copying, distribution or thetaking of any action in reliance on the contents of this informationis strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error,please immediately notify the sender via telephone at 650 321-7100or by return e-mail. This e-mail (including attachments) is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, is confidential and may be legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient,you are hereby notified that any retention, dissemination, distribution,or copying of this communications is strictly prohibited. Please reply to the sender that you have received the message in error, then delete it. Thank You. From:Kathy Croce To:Architectural Review Board; Planning Commission; Council, City Subject:Castilleja Project Date:Thursday, December 2, 2021 11:00:59 AM Some people who received this message don't often get email from kathryncroce@yahoo.com. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments andclicking on links. Hello Board Members, My name is Kathryn Croce and I live across the street from Castilleja, on Emerson Street. Myself and my neighbors all along Emerson across the street from the school are in agreement that the expansion plans are too extensive for this smallarea, with an underground garage exiting right at my corner. Currently, we have excessive traffic and kids being dropped off in front of our house, jamming traffic on an already dangerous corner (Emerson and Melville). I have watched the activity at the school for several years and believe an enrollment increase from 415 to 448 works for both school andneighborhood, if they worked harder at making parents abide by their TDM. Combined with the current 86 surface parking spaces on campus (which are never full) and some additional shuttling, no underground garage is needed. The new proposals for an underground garage provide either no moreparking spaces than the school already has or just a few more (if the school was allowed to increase to 540, which is a huge and unprecedented increase which should definitely be reduced. We don't appreciate the environmentally harmful idea of digging a hole to fill with cement to allow foranother few parking spaces when they already have a sufficient number for a modest increase in enrollment. Please help make this a well functioning school that fits in the neighborhood with minimal impacts. Thank you for hearing our concerns. Regards,Kathryn View this email in your browser We are proud to announce our upcoming Virtual Speaker event featuring: Lori Nishiura MackenzieLead Strategist, Diversity, Equity & Inclusion,Stanford Graduate School of Business Language of Leadership (for all) From:LWV Palo Alto Speaker SeriesTo:Council, CitySubject:Language of Leadership (for all) with Lori Nishiura Mackenzie Dec. 9thDate:Thursday, December 2, 2021 7:44:38 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious ofopening attachments and clicking on links. Thursday, December 9th 12:00 to 1:00 pm Language is a powerful tool. The word choices you make shape the culture in your organization. Sometimes we are intentional in our language use. However, oftentimes our word choices are not intentional or well thought out. In these instances, stereotypes about gender, ethnicity and other characteristics may inadvertently influence the words we choose in ways that can advantage some or disadvantage others on your teams. Learn the language of leadership so that you can be the best advocate for yourself, your peers, and your teammates. Register in advance for this seminar. After registering, you will receive a confirmation email containing information about joining the webinar. Submit your questions for Lori Nishiura Mackenzie in advance here. Please share with others who may be interested. Lori is lead strategist for Diversity, Equity & Inclusion at Stanford Graduate School of Business, and cofounder of the new Stanford VMware Women’s Leadership Innovation Lab, offering her a unique view at the intersection of the two organizations. Under her leadership, the lab launched a corporate affiliates program in 2014, and is now the second largest affiliates program on the Stanford campus. In her work at Stanford GSB, Lori is pioneering “small wins” to make the classroom experience more inclusive, to diversify our Register Now community, and to foster new research in the areas of leadership, inclusion, and diversity. Lori is a keynote speaker to a wide range of audiences, was featured as one of the BBC 100 Women 2017, and was interviewed for the award-winning documentary, Bias, which premiered in 2018. She has an MBA from the Wharton School of Business and a BA in Economics from the University of California, Berkeley. LWVPaloAlto.org Facebook Twitter YouTube LinkedIn Email Email Copyright © 2021 League of Women Voters Palo Alto, All rights reserved. From Voter Recipient List 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. From:Yahoo Mail.® To:Honky Subject:MOON LANDING DECAPITATED IF ALL THE PEOPLE THAT SEE WHEN THEY ARE SHOWN? SHARE WITH THE PEOPLE THAT DON"T SEE ? CHANGE IS INEVITABLE Date:Thursday, December 2, 2021 5:37:07 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. A FUNNY THING HAPPENED ON THE WAY TO THE MOON Moon Landing Fraud - Smoking Gun - MM4 Moon Landing Fraud - Smoking Gun - MM4 From:Susie Hwang To:Council, City Subject:Castilleja Date:Wednesday, December 1, 2021 10:28:37 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from shwang@me.com. Learn whythis is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Council members, We live less than a block from Castilleja. And, from 2009 until this year, we were Castilleja parents who sent our three daughters there for middle and high school. The school and its mission mean a great deal to our entire family, and we’d be thrilled to see Castilleja grow in an appropriate fashion. However, that growth shouldn’t come at the expense of the community and city residents whom you represent. We have followed this long, painful saga from both vantage points. Process-wise, there’s been a disappointing lack of genuine, transparent dialogue and space to generate creative solutions that work for all parties. Substantively, there are solutions that wouldenable Castilleja’s modernization without such adverse impact on the neighborhood and those who use travel on Embarcadero and Bryant Avenues. With modest changes to its architectural and site plans, environmentally friendly shuttles instead of an underground garage, and preservation of its iconic oak tree, Castilleja can achievereasonable expansion while mitigating harm to the surrounding community. We are confident our neighbors would enthusiastically embrace such a plan. Sincerely,Matt Glickman & Susie Hwang 159 Melville Ave From:Rita Vrhel To:Architectural Review Board; Council, City Subject:Castilleja"s expansion plans Date:Wednesday, December 1, 2021 8:00:30 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from ritavrhel@sbcglobal.net. Learnwhy this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Commissioners, Mayor Dubois and City Council members: When will "someone speak truth to power" and say NO to Castilleja School, part of the non- profit Castilleja School Foundation? A Foundation which pays no taxes and, per the Foundation's 2019 tax returns as listed on Charity Navigator, has an estimated value of $123M. It is hard to accept that Castilleja cannot pay for a student shuttle service or purchase land elsewhere for campus expansion. Castilleja's 2000 Conditional Use Permit for 415 students has been exceeded since 2002 or for 19 years. Rather than complying with this CUP, and decreasing enrollment, Castilleja was encouraged by then City Manager Keene to requested a new CUP. Castilleja paid a $265,000.00 fine for 3 years of over enrollment and CUP violations. But rather than coming into compliance, Castilleja continued to enroll extra studentsand collect tuition. All the while, no City official or department assessed additional fines or demanded compliance. As a Castilleja parent, I know that compliance would have been quite easy by immediately reducing enrollment in the incoming 6th grade and in 9th grade classes. It has been calculated this “extra” tuition (from 19 years of CUP non-compliance), equals approximately 12 million dollars! Or a return on investment (the fine) of 4,500 %. So much for a punishment! Has any other non- profit entity or any entity in Palo Alto received such favorabletreatment. Besides 19 years of CUP non- compliance, I understand Castilleja, by applying for a building permit and with only ARB review, increased their allowed 81,00 sq ft. campus (under their 2000 CUP) to 128,000 sq ft. A gain of 47,000 sq. ft. And now the base fortheir current expansion. Associated with this current expansion plan is a request for increased student enrollment to 540 students. As Castilleja boasts a student-teacher ratio of 8-1, the actual campus "population" increase will be much more. Castilleja is now a “big business”, which has outgrown their campus. Their expansion plans will have severe negative impacts on their neighbors. And likely anyone using Embarcadero Rd. Castilleja has 2 distinctive sets of neighbors. One set have homes immediately around the school or down the street from theareas of expansion. These immediate neighbors formed PNQLNow.org to protest aspects of Castilleja’s expansion, primarily the proposed increase in student enrollment, and the underground parking garage. The proposed garage impacts, including noise, concentrated traffic congestion and CO2 production, effects these neighbors directly. These impacts are not necessary as there are currently enoughon-site parking spaces to accommodate a reasonable increase in students The other “neighbors” live blocks away, around Churchill, near Head Nanci Kaufman, and are not immediately impacted by the negative aspects of construction or expansion. These neighbors suggested a garage as one way, but not the only way, toreduce student parking in their neighborhood. Castilleja’s full court press for expansion approval has involved so many parents and students who do not live in Palo Alto. 75% of Castilleja's students do not love in Palo Alto. Why is anyone seriously listening to parents and students who are not Palo Altoresidents. Their opinions and wishes should not be part of the conversation. Do I have the right to be taken seriously when I interject my opinion into San Jose's issues? To me, it appears Planning Department personnel have worked non -stop to supportCastilleja’s expansion plans, which require the breaking, bending, twisting and blatant manipulation of Palo Alto’s Zoning Ordinances, Municipal Codes, Comprehensive Plan and Sustainability Plan. In 1992 Castilleja asked the city to vacate the 200 block of Melville to the school for aplaying field. This area was gifted to the Castilleja. The City also sold, for $1,500.00, a corner piece of property the City owned outside the street. These two actions increased the school's size by .609 acres. This “gift" removed 30 public parking spaces, and made this once public street unavailable to pedestrians, bikers orresidents. The city further allowed Castilleja to merge 5 contiguous residential lots (.75 acres), purchased by Castilleja over the years, into Castilleja School. Why such specialized treatment? This "gifted" 200 block of Melville Ave contains the main sewer line for many nearby homes; even a temporary interruption could cause severe, health threatening damage to the residents of these homes. It also contains the Melville Utility Easement, which Castilleja is requesting changes to as well as permanent encroachments to this UtilityEasement. If granted, this would limit future City use of its own Utility Easement. Castilleja requires the requested Utility Easement for construction of a tunnel leading from their campus to their proposed underground garage. This tunnel will be 3 feet beneath the Melville Sewer Line. I do not believe this requested easement, if granted, holds Castilleja financially responsible for any damage (to the sewer system) caused by their tunnel, underground garage or any of their construction. This despite serious concerns of regional settling and subsidence second to groundwater removal and/ or seismic activity cited in Chapter 12, Geology, Soils, Seismicity and Paleontology of the Castilleja School DEIR, July 2019. Silicon Valley Soil Engineering’s 1/2017 DEIR report was peer reviewed by Cornerstone Engineering in 2/2017. Page 12, of this report, indicated “this project would involve substantial amounts of excavation to construct the below-grade parking structure, below- grade pool, below- grade areas of the new academic building and below-grade loading area. Evacuation of these features would extend approximately15 feet below the existing ground surface. In total, approximately 45,800 cubic yards of material would be excavated and exported off site.” The report also indicated their engineering conclusions were valid for 3 years. Another report would be required after 1/2020. To date an update report, as required, has not been obtained. Nor has the effects of deeper excavation been assessed. The proposed garage and below ground pool are much deeper than the evaluated 15 ft. level as stated in the above report. Why is this important? Because Castilleja is again requesting special concessions, which to my knowledge, have not given to other residents or institutions. These “special concessions" negatively affect not only their neighbors but set dangerous legal precedents whichcould be used to degrade other neighborhoods. Pandora’s box can not be opened without expecting long term consequences. Also proposed is a "text amendment", which allows Castilleja's proposed underground garage sq. footage not to be counted as part of Castilleja's FAR. This form of "spotzoning" is unacceptable. Castilleja provides no public need or benefit. It is a business collecting $47,000 to $52,000.00 per student/year. In 2021, other public and private educational institutions exist which educate girls. The time to stop this special treatment for Castilleja is now. A fair application of Palo Alto’s Ordinances, Plans and Codes is requested, required and must occur. Thank you. Rita Vrhel, Castilleja parent 1125 Channing Ave, PA 94301 650-325-2298 From:RICH STIEBEL To:Filseth, Eric (Internal) Cc:Council, City Subject:Re Ed Shikada’s Tax Survey Problem 120121o Date:Wednesday, December 1, 2021 7:39:21 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Thanks for your note Eric. There are at least four basic problems as I see it. 1. All the good uses of money for which Ed says the city will use the tax are good and needed, such as Fire, Police, homeless, etc. These needs have been with us for years; why hasn’t the council provided for these needs up till now? 2. According to the articles in the Daily Post, the city has a surplus. That means the city has more money coming in than it plans to spend. If all the good uses of the business tax are valid, why isn’t the city using some of this surplusto address those needs? 3. Many small businesses have gone out of business because of the pandemic. The remaining small businesses don’t need another tax to reducetheir bottom line at this time. This is the wrong time for a business tax. 4. You ask: “Most large tech companies, on the other hand, did great during the pandemic. If a tax were focused on them, and not small businesses, would that make a difference?” A valid question, except that the council has failed to make the case that the city needs the extra money. Rich Stiebel840 Talisman Drive Palo Alto, CA 94303-4435 From:Allan Seid To:Allan Seid Subject:Governor appoints sitting assemblyman to judgeship Date:Wednesday, December 1, 2021 4:43:38 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Gov. Newsom appointed Assemblyman ED CHAU, a Democrat from Monterey Park to a Los Angeles County Superior Court Courtship. Allan Seid From:Aram JamesTo:Council, City; Jeff Moore; Stump, Molly; wintergery@earthlink.net; Human Relations Commission; Planning Commission; Binder, Andrew; Jay Boyarsky; Sajid Khan; Raj; Jonsen, Robert; Tannock, Julie; Enberg, Nicholas; robert.parham@cityofpaloalto.org; Perron, Zachary; chuck jagoda; Figueroa, Eric; Joe SimitianSubject:Cop’s nick name ‘The Fuse’Date:Wednesday, December 1, 2021 4:21:35 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.________________________________ Front page of today’s Daily Post (dec 1, 2021). If want the rest of the story pick up the Post. Very troubling article. I understand agent Mullarkey is still with the PAPD. Sent from my iPhone From:Mary Sylvester To:Architectural Review Board Cc:Council, City; French, Amy; Lait, Jonathan; Shikada, Ed; City Attorney Subject:Comments on Castilleja School Project Before ARB 12/2/21 Date:Wednesday, December 1, 2021 3:37:48 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear ARB Board Members, I am writing today as a 44-year neighbor of Castilleja School, living ½ block from theentrance to the school’s Emerson St. parking lot. My key concerns about Castilleja’s proposed project currently before you onDecember 2, 2021 is that it does not meet the ARB's stated responsibility to promote projects that: #5. Enhance the desirability of living conditions upon the immediate site or in adjacent areas. #6. Promote visual environments which are of high aesthetic quality and variety, and which at the same time, are considerate of each other. Introduction Neighbors have long supported modernization and rebuilding of the Castilleja campus and been highly supportive of the school's educational mission. However, since the school filed its new CUP Application and Project Plan on June 30, 2016, neighbors have significant concerns about the scope of the school's plans and how it will impact the immediate neighborhood as well as the Palo Alto community generally. Your actions on December 2nd, 2021 will have an impact on our neighborhood’swelfare and quality of life…either for the better or otherwise. Your recommendations will have bearing on whether a precedent is set by this project for other residential neighborhoods with private facilities that will want similar treatment. Our neighborhood is already being undermined by Castilleja and their proposed project, before the project is even approved, as neighbors have moved and others discuss leaving because what it will do to our neighborhood. It seems unfathomable that a project not serving a vital community need like affordable housing or the bestinterests of the city as a whole could be allowed to threaten the health, visual character and fabric of a neighborhood by: threatening the welfare of protected trees, building a box store type facility that is not in keeping with the size and scale of surrounding homes and allowing the construction and operation of an environmentallypolluting, esthetically unattractive concrete garage. This project if recommended by you represents a commercialization of our residential neighborhood for a private school serving largely affluent students, 75% of whom are from outside Palo Alto. Castilleja's proposed project does NOT meet these two critical responsibilities of the ARB when reviewing projects: #5. Enhance the desirability of living conditions upon the immediate site or in adjacent areas #6. Promoting visual environments which are of high aesthetic quality and variety, and which at the same time, are considerate of each other. Castilleja's proposed expansion project does not meet either the enhancement of neighborhood living conditions and the visual environment for the following reasons: 1. Size and Scale of Project with the Surrounding Neighborhood As Castilleja is a school, operating during business hours, the term "living conditions" is not applicable to them. However, the desirability of living conditions to adjacent residents is highly applicable and relevant. While the ARB at its 2020 meeting in reviewing the Castilleja project recommended changes to the Kellogg St. side of the project, which breaks up the one-block long, solid wall of construction is a definiteimprovement. However, more work is needed to have it blend in more effectively with the character of the Kellogg St. homes . Nevertheless, the size and scope of the proposed facility is not in keeping with the size and scale of largely older bungalows and craftsman-style homes. I urge the ARB to recommend that Castilleja reduce the scale and massing of their proposed facility. 2. Threat to the Community's Tree Canopy Many neighbors look out on the mature, protected oaks and redwoods on the Castilleja campus as well as when they walk by the school. Many of these trees are beautiful and refreshing to look at but also capture CO2 gases. Destroying some of these, while attempting to move others, and threatening the beautiful, iconic neighbors Oak #89 with trenching and nearby transformers, undermines our Tree Protection ordinance, the community's Sustainability Plan goals and the ARB's objective of enhancing the desirability of living conditions in neighborhoods. The newtrees that are being proposed will take years to grow and mature and never replace the character and canopy of the existing mature, protected trees, nor the CO2 capture. I urge the ARB to recommend that no protected tree be destroyed, moved or undermined (#Tree 89) and thereby enforce our Tree Protection Ordinance and stay on course with meeting our Sustainability Goals. 3. Castilleja's "Purported" Parking Issue and The Underground Garage Currently Castilleja has sufficient parking when you consider existing on site parking along with street parking on the school side of the block and at an off-site, underutilized lot at First Prebysterian Church on Cowper St. Thereby the construction and maintenance of a highly polluting underground garage, which will only encourage unnecessary driving because of the free, easy to access parking lot, is NOT necessary and does not enhance the neighborhood's living conditions or Palo Alto'sSustainability Plan goals. I don't believe any Palo Alto resident who has a neighbor that plans to construct an underground garage, with a clanging gate and beeps to alert cars and pedestriansthat cars are exiting the garage, would view this as an enhancement to the desirability of their living conditions or their visual environment. The majority of neighbors adjacent to the school who are not affiliated with Castilleja are opposed to the underground garage, largely because how it adversely impacts neighborhood livingconditions and promotes student and staff driving and thereby greenhouse gas production. There is a very clear cut, manageable solution to many neighbor concerns aboutparking and the garage: maintain the school's existing parking and do not allow students and staff to drive to campus as other Peninsula private schools forbid or severely limit and rely on a robust shuttling program and public transportation system (e.g. Nueva School, Notre Dame de Namur, Harker School) as well as the satelliteparking lot at the currently under-parked First Prebysterian Church on Cowper. For those students and staff that need to drive because of health or other critical need, there would be an abundance of parking choices for them. Thank you, Mary SylvesterMelville Avenue Palo Alto From:David Page To:SunShares; Council, City Cc:Huynh, Leanna Subject:Re: Sources of poly silicon (needed for residential rooftop solar panels) Date:Wednesday, December 1, 2021 3:37:23 PM Thanks Leanna, I apologize, but this response doesn't answer my question. As far as i know, the ban by the feds applies only to onecompany - Hoshine. Sunshares didn't say where I can purchase mono-chrystalline or poly-christalline panels withouthaving CCP/concentration-camp polysilicon as a main ingredient. The WaPo article listed in the response noted that FirstSolar (of the USA) sells panels. This is true, but they only sell 'thin-film' panels - which don't include polysilicon - and areconsidered not the best for residential solar! re: "the best people to talk to about the provenance of the solar panels we offer are the installers themselves. They workclosely on this and can provide more detail on their specific product offerings.” I've already spoken with a few installersand they don't know of any rooftop solar panels (without the damnable forced labor polysilicon) available for purchasehere in the USA. And they are uncomfortable discussing the topic. As a resident of Palo Alto, I don't want my city to support the purchase of solar panels produced in this horrific manner. Thank you again,David Page ps - Stanford Professor Jacobson (WaPo article) suggests the trade off between concentration camp incarceration and liveslost due to pollution should be decided in favor of clean energy. It doesn't have to be an either-or choice. Othercompanies, outside of China, used to make polysilicon. Unfortunately, the Xinjiang product was made so cheaply (thinklabor costs), that the competition went bankrupt. These non-Chinese firms would start up again, if proper internationaltariffs were implemented, like the Biden administration has only begun to move toward. On Wed, Dec 1, 2021 at 2:38 PM SunShares <SunShares@cityofpaloalto.org> wrote: Hi David, Our correspondent from SunShares just responded. Please see her response below: “As David notes, most of the world's polysilicon is produced at least partially in China, and there are well documentedcases of forced labor in this industry. This is unacceptable and over the summer, the Biden administration beganenforcing a policy that banned the import of solar panels with components produced by forced labor. Since theimplementation of that policy, solar manufacturers have had to present evidence that there is no forced labor in theirsupply chain in order to import their products into the United States. Global supply chains are quite convoluted so it's not always possible to rule this out without a shadow of a doubt. Evenpanels that are "American made" are usually assembled out of components manufactured in China and East Asia. Butthis issue is a major focus of the industry and the present administration. With SunShares, the best people to talk to about the provenance of the solar panels we offer are the installersthemselves. They work closely on this and can provide more detail on their specific product offerings.” Infinity Energy, Skytech Solar and Solar Technologies are the installers participating in the SunShares program. Below is a list of products being offered by each installer through SunShares: If you’d like to be contacted by the installers and have the opportunity to ask them about their products in regards to thepolysilicon used, then please sign up for the program so that they can reach out to you. Signing up for SunShares doesnot mean you’re purchasing anything through the program, just that you may be interested and for the installers tocontact you to discuss and answer any questions that you may have. If you need further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you, From: David Page <dalpage5@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, December 1, 2021 12:51 PMTo: SunShares <SunShares@CityofPaloAlto.org>Subject: Re: Sources of poly silicon (needed for residential rooftop solar panels) You don't often get email from dalpage5@gmail.com. Learn why this is important You don't often get email from dalpage5@gmail.com. Learn why this is important Don't hold your breath Connie. Few want to speak about this uncomfortable issue. On Tue, Nov 30, 2021 at 6:14 PM SunShares <SunShares@cityofpaloalto.org> wrote: Hi David, We reached out to a representative in charge of running the Sunshares program regarding your inquiry yesterday.Unfortunately, we haven’t heard back from them. Once I receive a reply, I will follow back up with you. Best regards, From: David Page <dalpage5@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, November 29, 2021 1:29 PMTo: SunShares <SunShares@CityofPaloAlto.org>Subject: Sources of poly silicon (needed for residential rooftop solar panels) CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of openingattachments and clicking on links. Hello Palo Alto Sunshares, It's my understanding that polysilicon is produced using forced labor often in Chinese Communist concentration camps, and that this tragic situation has worsened within the past few years. I cannot, in good conscience, support buying PV solar modules made with polysilicon manufactured in this manner. Do you know of ANY panels - free of the tainted polysilicon - available via this Palo Alto sponsored Sunshares program? I’d like to encourage people to buy renewable energy, but not if (partially) made in a concentration camp. Please help. Thank you very much, David Page dalpage5@gmail.com from the: (November 12, 2021) Subcommittee on Environment and Climate Change and Subcommittee on Energy Members and Staff Committee on Energy and Commerce Staff Hearing on “Securing America’s Future: Supply Chain Solutions for a Clean Energy Economy" " China controls 63 percent of polysilicon production…(20) Although the United States produces some polysilicon, it lacks any capacity to process it. As a result, domestically-sourced polysilicon must be exported to China in order to produce ingots and wafers. (21) " From:Jeanne FlemingTo:Sauls, Garrett Cc:Council, City; Planning Commission; Architectural Review Board; Clerk, City; "Tina Chow"; todd@toddcollins.org; wross@lawross.com; Lait, Jonathan Subject:RE: How many cell towers are there in Palo Alto?Date:Wednesday, December 1, 2021 3:03:18 PM Attachments:image014.pngimage015.pngimage017.pngimage018.pngimage019.pngimage021.pngimage002.pngimage003.pngimage005.pngimage006.pngimage023.png Hi Garrett, Thank you for this most helpful information. As I understand it, you’re sure there are 52-55 macro towers in Palo Alto, but you expect that number to rise as you obtain more information from the carriers. And your count on small cell node cell towers is 116. So for now, the total number cell towers already installed—orapproved and about to be installed—in Palo Alto is between 168-171. I’m glad to know that you will be updating the City’s GIS maps to reflect what you have determined. I would appreciate it if you would send me the addresses of each the 168-171 cell towers you’ve identified, along with a brief description (e.g.,T-Mobile macro tower, Verizon 4G & 5G small cell) of each. Thank you again for your help. My best, Jeanne Jeanne Fleming, PhDJFleming@Metricus.net650-325-5151 From: Sauls, Garrett <Garrett.Sauls@CityofPaloAlto.org> Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2021 8:22 AM To: Jeanne Fleming <jfleming@metricus.net> Cc: 'Tina Chow' <chow_tina@yahoo.com>; todd@toddcollins.org; wross@lawross.com; Lait, Jonathan <Jonathan.Lait@CityofPaloAlto.org> Subject: RE: How many cell towers are there in Palo Alto? Hi Jeanne, I was able to look through everything the day before Thanksgiving but had to run some questions by other staff members yesterday. After filtering through the data that we had from 2000 this is what I came out with: 1. 52-55 Macrosites 2. 116 Small Cell sites (43 Small Wireless Facilities from 2015 onward and 73 AT&T DAS sites prior to that) There were a number of sites that had multiple addresses for the same site, sites that had been approved on buildings recently demolished (so therefore no longer existing), and sites that had been decommissioned. In addition to all of this there are sites that haven’t been decommissioned but also have not been modified for some time. I’m going to reach out to carriers to confirm whether these sites are still active or not so that number will likely change again. I’ll let you know when I have an update for you on this information. Ultimately, once we have that, we’ll be able to update our WCF layer in GIST so that we can have all the facilities mapped properly as some of those haven’t been updated based on what I mentioned above. Let me know if you have any questions. Best regards, Garrett Sauls Associate Planner Planning and Development Services Department (650) 329-2471 | Garrett.Sauls@CityofPaloAlto.org NEW Parcel Report | Palo Alto Municipal Code | Online Permitting System | Planning Forms & Handouts | Planning Applications Mapped From: Jeanne Fleming <jfleming@metricus.net> Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2021 6:20 PM To: Sauls, Garrett <Garrett.Sauls@CityofPaloAlto.org> Cc: Council, City <city.council@cityofpaloalto.org>; Planning Commission <Planning.Commission@cityofpaloalto.org>; Architectural Review Board <arb@cityofpaloalto.org>; Clerk, City <city.clerk@cityofpaloalto.org>; 'Tina Chow' <chow_tina@yahoo.com>; todd@toddcollins.org; wross@lawross.com; Atkinson, Rebecca <Rebecca.Atkinson@CityofPaloAlto.org> Subject: RE: How many cell towers are there in Palo Alto? Hi Garrett, Thank you for your email of last week. I look forward to your final tally of how many small cell nodes, and how many macro towers, have already been installed—or are approved and pending installation—in Palo Alto. One observation: You say in your email that you went back as far as 2015 to count small cell node cell towers. Please be aware that smallcells were installed here earlier than 2015. For example, 75 small cells were approved in 2013. So that alone would take the tally up to: 128 Existing small cell node cell towers 60-70 Existing macro towers I appreciate your help, and, again, I look forward to your final tally. Regards, Jeanne Jeanne Fleming, PhDJFleming@Metricus.net650-325-5151 From: Sauls, Garrett <Garrett.Sauls@CityofPaloAlto.org> Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2021 2:36 PM To: Jeanne Fleming <jfleming@metricus.net> Cc: City Mgr <CityMgr@cityofpaloalto.org>; Lait, Jonathan <Jonathan.Lait@CityofPaloAlto.org> Subject: RE: How many cell towers are there in Palo Alto? Hi Jeanne, I’m not sure why this email didn’t come to my inbox, spam, or junk folder but this was shared with me from Rebecca. I was able to take a preliminary look at the last 20 years of permits that we have received for WCF applications. Overall, there appear to be between 60-70 macro sites and 43 small/micro sites within the City. All of the small/micro sites have been approved since 2015 which are easier to confirm a specific number. This includes Crown Castle’s 19 sites in the Downtown, Verizon Cluster 1’s 11 sites, AT&T Cluster 1’s 10 sites, and Verizon Cluster 4’s three sites. Given the volume of applications for macro sites, I was only able to scan our records but I wanted to get back to you with a rough idea at least before the holiday and my 9/80 day on Friday. I am aware of a couple of sites that have been decommissioned or not approved in the last 20 years so its likely that number will change but I don’t have an accurate assessment right now. I’ll try to get a clearer picture by the end of next week but its probably going to take a whole day to sort through the data outside of the other staff reports I need to get done between then and now. Let me know if you have any questions. Best regards, Garrett Sauls Associate Planner Planning and Development Services Department (650) 329-2471 | Garrett.Sauls@CityofPaloAlto.org NEW Parcel Report | Palo Alto Municipal Code | Online Permitting System | Planning Forms & Handouts | Planning Applications Mapped From: Jeanne Fleming <jfleming@metricus.net> Sent: Friday, November 5, 2021 4:10 PM To: Atkinson, Rebecca <Rebecca.Atkinson@CityofPaloAlto.org> Cc: Council, City <city.council@cityofpaloalto.org>; Planning Commission <Planning.Commission@cityofpaloalto.org>; Architectural Review Board <arb@cityofpaloalto.org>; 'Tina Chow' <chow_tina@yahoo.com>; 'Todd Collins' <todd@toddcollins.org>; 'William Ross' <wross@lawross.com>; Clerk, City <city.clerk@cityofpaloalto.org>; AhSing, Sheldon <Sheldon.AhSing@CityofPaloAlto.org>; Sauls, Garrett <Garrett.Sauls@CityofPaloAlto.org> Subject: FW: How many cell towers are there in Palo Alto? CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Hi Rebecca, Thank you for the heads up to Tina, Todd, Bill and me regarding the “study session” on November 15th, and for letting us know that you areonce more the person at City Hall we should contact first if we need cell tower information. On the latter point, I would appreciate it if you would answer the questions I asked your colleague Garrett Sauls two weeks ago, namely: 1) howmany macro towers have been installed or are pending installation in Palo Alto, and 2) how many small cell node cell towers have beeninstalled or are pending installation here. (My email to Garrett is appended below.) Thanks and best, Jeanne Jeanne Fleming, PhDJFleming@Metricus.net650-325-5151 From: Jeanne Fleming <jfleming@metricus.net> Sent: Friday, October 22, 2021 3:21 PM To: 'Sauls, Garrett' <Garrett.Sauls@CityofPaloAlto.org> Cc: city.council@cityofpaloalto.org; Planning.Commission@CityofPaloAlto.org; 'Architectural Review Board' <arb@cityofpaloalto.org>; 'Tina Chow' <chow_tina@yahoo.com>; 'Todd Collins' <todd@toddcollins.org>; 'William Ross' <wross@lawross.com>; 'Clerk, City' <city.clerk@cityofpaloalto.org> Subject: How many cell towers are there in Palo Alto? Hi Garrett, I would appreciate it if you would tell me: 1) how many macro towers have been installed or are pending installation in Palo Alto, and 2) howmany small cell node cell towers have been installed or are pending installation here. Thank you for your help. Please let me know if you have any questions. Regards, Jeanne Jeanne Fleming, PhDJFleming@Metricus.net650-325-5151 From:Arlene Goetze To:Sara Cody; Britt Ehrhardt; County Public Health Department; george.han@phd.sccgov.org; Michele Seaton Subject:How to Cope w/V-ax; Hearts & Stillbirths Date:Wednesday, December 1, 2021 10:24:10 AM Some people who received this message don't often get email from photowrite67@yahoo.com.Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Please share both articles with vaccinated friends > 2. Sudden Surge in Stillbirths and Menstrual Changes > 1. mRNA Vaccines Put You at Risk for Acute Coronary Syndrome.--How to Cope with effects 1. mRNA Vaccines Put You at Risk for Acute Coronary Syndrome Analysis by Dr. Joseph Mercola Fact Checked. Nov. 30, 2021 What to Do if You got a Jab? (this is last paragraph of long article) If you now wish to lessen your doubled risk of cardiac complications, there a few basic strategies I would advise. 1. Make certain you measure your blood vitamin D level and takeenough vitamin D3 orally (typically about 8,000 units/day for most adults) to make sure your level is 60 to 80 ng/ml (100 to 150 nmol/l). 2. Eliminate all vegetable (seed) oils in your diet, which involves eliminating nearly all processed foods and most meals in restaurants unless you convince the chef to only cook with butter. Avoid any sauces or salad dressings in restaurants as they are loaded with seed oils. Also avoid chicken and pork as they are very high in linoleic acid, the omega-6 fat that is far too high in nearly everyone and contributes to oxidative stress that causes heart disease. ( N.B. Seed oils include corn, soy, canola and other hydrogenated oils.. sometimes safflower, sunflower, fake butter, margarine--USE pure olive oil, coconut, or avocado oils). .3, Consider taking around 500 mg/day of NAC, as it helps prevent bloodclots. and is aprecursor for your body to produce the important antioxidant glutathione. 4. Consider brinolytic enzymes that digest the brin that leads to bloodclots, strokes and pulmonary embolisms. The dose is typically two, twicea day, but must be taken on an empty stomach, either an hour before or two hours after a meal. Otherwise, the enzymes will digest your food and not the brin in the blood clot. 1. STORY AT-A-GLANCE * Using the PULS cardiac test, researchers have found Pzer and Moderna mRNA COVID shots dramatically increase biomarkers associated with thrombosis, cardiomyopathy and other vascular eventsfollowing vaccination * Pre- and post-injection PULS tests for 566 patients were compared. On average, their PULS scores went from an 11% ve-year risk for acute coronary syndrome, to a more than double, 25%, ve-year risk * Those who got the injection for fear that COVID-19 might adversely affect their heart now face the grim reality that they’ve exchanged a potential risk for a more certain one * Another paper details how the mRNA shot can cause thrombocytopenia (low platelet count) through a mechanism that involves the activation of platelets by antibodies against the spike protein (anti-spike antibodies) * A mystery that remains to be solved is why only certain people with antibodies to the spike protein (anti-spike antibodies) go on to develop symptoms of platelet activation and thrombocytopenia. One hypothesis is that only a subset of the anti-spike antibodies formed after vaccination can activate platelets and cause thrombocytopenial. This is very long article Nov. 30,2021 in Mercola Newsletter which is erased 2 days after put on the web. For full article, email photowrite67@yahoo.com Shortened and forwarded by Arlene Goetze, MA, No Toxins for Children ----------------------------- 2. Sudden Surge in Stillbirths and Menstrual Changes Analysis by Dr. Joseph Mercola Fact Checked Nov. 30, 2021 STORY AT-A-GLANCE * At Lions Gate Hospital in North Vancouver, British Columbia, 13babies were allegedly stillborn in a period of 24 hours; all of theirmothers had received a COVID-19 injection * At a rally outside the hospital, doctors launched an ocial complaint with the Royal Canadian Mounted Police against executives at the College of Physicians & Surgeons of BC, alleging conicts of interest inuencing their policies, decisions and statements made to the people of British Columbia * Scotland has also experienced an unusual rise in infant death rates; during September 2021, at least 21 babies under 4 weeks died — a rate of4.9 per 1,000 births, up from an average of 2 per 1,000 births * As of November 12, 2021, there were 2,620 cases of fetal death or stillbirth among women who received a COVID-19 injection reported to the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) * The CDC-sponsored study that was widely used to support the U.S. recommendation for pregnant women to get injected “presents falsely reassuring statistics” * When the risk of miscarriage was recalculated to include all women injected prior to 20 weeks’ gestation, the incidence was seven to eight timeshigher than the original study indicated, with a cumulative incidence of miscarriage ranging from 82% to 91% Bylines: Spike in Newborn Baby Deaths in Scotland 13 babies were stillborn at the hospital in a period of 24 hours. All mothers had received a COVID-19 injection.1 Fetal Deaths, Stillbirths Skyrocket in Injected Women Health officials are adamant that pregnant women get a COVID-19 injection, but the data don't support its safety. Data Used to Support COVID-19 Shot in Pregnant Women Flawed Calls for Immediate Withdrawal of mRNA ShotsVaccine Researcher: Menstrual Changes Related to Shot Janci Chunn Lindsay, Ph.D., a prominent toxicologist and molecular biologist, said"all gene therapy vaccines" to "be halted immediately due to safety concerns on several fronts," including fertility.25 Lindsay warned that anentire generation could be at risk of sterilization if COVID-19 shots aren't stopped until more research is conducted:26 "We simply cannot put these [vaccines] in our children who are at .002% risk for Covid mortality, if infected, or any more of the child-bearing age population without thoroughly investigating this matter. [If we do], we could potentially sterilize an entire generation. Sources and References from Mercola Newsletter, If you wish the whole article, email photowrite67@yahoo.com. Mercola is erased after 2 days. From:Valerie Milligan To:Architectural Review Board; planning.commissin@cityofpaloalto.org; Council, City Subject:Castilleja Date:Wednesday, December 1, 2021 8:37:21 AM Some people who received this message don't often get email from valerie.milligan5@gmail.com.Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. I oppose any variance to existing restrictions for the expansion of Castilleja for many reasons. But, mainly: 1. It is located in a residential zone and should not further negatively impact that neighborhood with non-residential uses. 2. Castilleja only serves maybe 125 Palo Altans, so why modify our current guidelines tobenefit so few? 3. The students at Castilleja are by and large from the most elite families on the peninsula and have multiple high-quality educational options of their choosing without expanding Castilleja. 4. As a 65-year resident of Palo Alto, I am disheartened at the constant degradation of myhome town due to over-development. Respectfully, Valerie Milligan2573 Park Boulevard, U102 Palo Alto, CA 94306 From:JIM POPPY To:Architectural Review Board; Council, City Subject:ARB: Castilleja expansion is not a harmonious development Date:Wednesday, December 1, 2021 8:01:31 AM Some people who received this message don't often get email from jcpoppy55@comcast.net.Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Hello ARB Members, Please look beyond shingle shape and the materials board and evaluate the proposed MASSIVE development of a small 6-acre parcel in an R1 neighborhood. This project does not enhance or improve the neighborhood and the majority of neighbors oppose the project. The school has a large loyal following who are happy to ignore the negative impact of the project. Tree 89, a large heritage oak tree, will be severely threatened by the location of thepool, garage exit, and surrounding buildings. Moving the pool removes parking and will encroach on the underground water table. Details of the depth of the pool excavation are conveniently missing from the plans, and the Tree Protection Zones for all heritage trees are inaccurate and misleading. The underground garage would require a spot zoning text amendment that sets a dangerous precedent and is completely incompatible with the City's goals to reduce greenhouse gases. Please take a larger view of this destructive project. The large building along Kellogg is not compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. This is obvious. Why bend over backward to make this private school happy? They provide no benefit to the localcommunity. Only 25% of students live in Palo Alto. Please take your responsibilities seriously and propose modifications that will keep this project in line with the surrounding community. Neighbors support the school'smodernization efforts, but not at such a large cost to the environment, traffic flow, danger to cyclists on Bryant, etc. Regards,Jim Poppy 100 block of Melville Ave From:Andie Reed To:Architectural Review Board; Planning Commission; Council, City Subject:Castilleja Expansion Date:Wednesday, December 1, 2021 7:12:36 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. ARB Dec 2, 2021 Dear Architectural Review Board Members: Castilleja has proposed for 5 years to build out their 6-acre school site with one large new building in place of 5 older buildings. Neighbors would be pleased to see the school modernized and re-built, butoppose the scope of the expansion. Of the 28 houses directly across the street from the school or nextto it: 17 oppose the scope of the project 6 support it (of which 2 are parents and 2 are owned by theschool) 5 remain neutral, of which 1 is owned by the school. In your review today, please look at the "big picture" versus looking at thisproject in a “piecemeal” fashion. 1. INCREMENTAL review of project: You are being asked to considersite planning, parking, layout and floor area, as a result of suggestionsfrom Council, comparing one iteration you saw a year ago, to the currentiteration, without the context of what is currently existing on campustoday. Please consider an analysis of what change is being proposed. 2. PARKING: There are currently, today, 89 parking spaces on-site,including 4 tandem. As you review the 5 “parking schemes”, it may beconfusing because the schemes indicate “current at grade parkingspaces” are 26 spaces, and that more surface parking would need to beadded. There are already 89 spaces on campus, whicheasily accommodates a reasonable enrollment increase. a. The Fehr + Peers study, dated July 2021 (footnote #5,bottom of Packet Page 13) confirms 89 parking spaces, andfurther, that they have an 80% occupancy rate.b. Additionally, the school has an arrangement for 22 spaces at1140 Cowper, in the First Presbyterian lot, most of whichcurrently go unused.c. The page with all the numbers on it in the plans, G.001, statesthe school proposes to keep basically the same lot coverage, sowe know they have enough parking, since there are 89spaces currently.d . These plans reduce at-grade parking by 60 spaces. Movingthe swimming pool results in losing 50 parking spaces. Theremaining 10 spaces are lost by underground garage ramps. In other words, the big picture is that the school is proposing to remove 60 on-site parking spaces that already exist in order to move their pool to accommodate a very large building and have a reason to dig an underground garage. 3. VARIANCE: Over the years, the school has grown its above- grade square footage without constraints and has around 112,000SFgross floor area (not counting volumetrics). Some buildings were built pre-code and some were built in the 90s and 2000s. Muni code allows 81,300SF GFA, so the school is requesting a variance to replace GFA, claiming that the site is so large that complying withcode would subject the school to hardships or constraints. a. The variance rules specifically state that when you cause your own lot to be large, which the school did in 1992 when they got the city to give them the 200 block of Melville andthey converted 6 residential lots to school property, this reason is expressly excluded from consideration. Therefore, this request for variance doesn't fly. b. Additionally, as is stated in this staff report, an additional20,000SF or so of underground garage that doesn't qualify as basement requires a “text amendment” to get out of counting towards GFA. This gives the school special treatment designed to only apply to Castilleja. c. The school has been successful for 100 years, making it difficult to make the case that NOT granting them 50,000SF in excess of allowable GFA causes them hardship. All of these parts have to be considered at the same time to see the big picture. All of the iterations are based on a huge increase in enrollmentfor a private school in a residential neighborhood that historically does not comply with their Use Permit. As you analyze the project, please consider suggesting Castilleja reduce the scope of their expansion. Neighbors would love to get behind a less massive project with lower enrollment increase demands. Thank you, Andie Reed -- Andie Reed CPAPalo Alto, CA 94301 From:RICH STIEBEL To:Council, City Subject:Ed Shikada’s Tax Survey Problem 113021o Date:Tuesday, November 30, 2021 7:15:58 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from w6apz@comcast.net. Learnwhy this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. The survey is biased toward increasing the business tax. It does NOT provide a place to list opposing views or explain why one is against an increase in taxes. The uses of the money are all good; the problem is: the city charges too much NOW for utilities and transfers that money to pay for other city services. According to the Daily Post, Palo Alto has a record dollar SURPLUS! The pandemic has hurt many small business; many have had to go out of business. This is NOT the time to add more taxes to business. Rich Stiebel 840 Talisman Drive Palo Alto, CA 94303-4435 From:Jo Ann Mandinach To:Architectural Review Board; Planning Commission; Council, City Subject:Casti Expansion: Just say no Date:Tuesday, November 30, 2021 5:24:30 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. I don't understand why the discussion of Casti's expansion continues and why they need a parking garage when their students can shuttle in from the Bay Lands justlike their teachers. Are the girls that entitled that they need a garage for themselves regardless of the costs to the community. How about the trees? Aren't we officially the city of trees? Shame on the school for espousing values like that. Shame on the city planners for not questioning Casti's double standard initially and telling them to park in the Baylands and shuttle in! Think of all the money and aggravation Palo Altotaxpayers could have been saved by some common sense! Please stop this expansion. They've blatantly violated their enrollment cap for years. Why reward them? Are these the values we want for Palo Alto, for impressionablegirls who are their students? Even Casti graduates and/or parents are disgusted. Casti can claim they've limited the proposed increase in enrollment but an increase is still an increase! What's the benefit to Palo Altans when 75% of the girls come from out of town? The pleasure of sitting in traffic so girls and their parents can drive to school 5 days a week and to the events that Casti refuses to limit?? How gracious of them, how considerate to the neighbors and the town hosting them. Perhaps someone should remind Casti that our time is valuable, too! How can the city plan using such outdated transportation demand numbers? What about the mess that will happen if Churchill is closed during the long Casticonstruction? Embarcadero's already a mess, backed up for blocks practically all day! Go look at it at various times of day starting with the morning rush hour. Please bring this travesty to an end. Save the trees. Save the neighbors the financialand emotional costs of hiring their own experts, lawyers, arborists, etc. to fight this long-running mess. Tell Casti enough! Most sincerely, Jo Ann MandinachPalo Alto, 94301 From:Sierra Club Insider To:Council, City Subject:Giving Tuesday: Double Your Impact, Build Back Better Moves to the Senate, How to Reduce Food Waste, BookYour Outing Today, and More Date:Tuesday, November 30, 2021 4:45:05 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Today is Giving Tuesday, and we’re asking you to support the Sierra Club’swork to ensure that everyone can live in a safe and healthy community. A group of passionate Sierra Club supporters are matching every new monthly member's first three months of donations—but this match ends at midnight. We're fighting for bold climate action, the protection of 30 percent of our lands and waters, stronger environmental safeguards, and the end of environmental injustice. This work takes resources, which is why your sustained support is so important. Help us reach our goal of 300 new monthly members. If you sign up today, your donation will have double the impact on the world we love. | Team Sierra | Register today! Photo courtesy of Amelia Tabullo A Special Request We have a special ask for you: Make the planet your cause of choice as a part of our Team Sierra community. Will you join us as more than a donor, and become a fundraiser yourself? Youcan make an even bigger difference by asking your friends and family to get involved too. Create a Team Sierra fundraising page in honor of Giving Tuesday. Take action! Photo by Javier Sierra | Take Action | Build Back Better: Out of theHouse, On to the Senate After months of grassroots advocacy and high-stakes negotiations, the House passed the Build Back Better Act on November 19. With over 130 different investments in climate andenvironmental justice and a improvements to the social safety net, Build Back Better is a transformative step towards a more equitable andlivable world. Now it's headed to the Senate—and your senators need to hear why you support the bill! Send a message, post on social media, or make a call today. | RSVP | What’s Coming Up for theSierra Club in 2022? Join Dan Chu, the Sierra Club's Acting Executive Director, and other Sierra Club leaders for a year-end event on RSVP Today! Photo by iStock.com/DaLiu December 8 at 7:00 PM ET / 4:00 PM PT. We’ll be reflecting on the work we've done together in 2021 and getting a sneak peek of what we'll be working up to in 2022. Register today! Take action! Photo by iStock.com/Leonid Ikan | Take Action | Protect Our Health andClimate From MethanePollution The EPA recently published its oil and gas methane rule, setting off a 60-day comment period. The rule is a good start, but it needs to be strengthened. Methane pollution from fossil fuelsharms our communities’ health, and makes the climate crisis worse. Take two minutes to tell the EPAyour reason for wanting the strongest protections possible. | Sierra Magazine | In a Drying West, Cities TurnSewage Into Drinking Water For the past decade, water officials in San Diego have been testing technology that would provide the city with filtered and disinfected wastewater, turning it into potablewater cleaner than what comes out of Read more! Photo by iStock.com/AdamG1975 most people’s faucets. Learn more about the “final frontier”of water reuse. RSVP Today! Dana Clare Redden, 2021 speaker | Photo courtesy of Women's Earth Alliance | Women's Earth Alliance Event | Virtual Event: Meet FrontlineWomen EnvironmentalLeaders Join Sierra Club and Women's Earth Alliance for a special virtual event honoring the 2021 cohort of the US Grassroots Accelerator for Women Environmental Leaders. You’ll have achance to hear directly from these frontline leaders, learn about their powerful work, and find out how you can support it. RSVP now for the Grassroots Accelerator Community Event on Wednesday, December 1 at 7:00 PMET / 4:00 PM PT! Please note: This is a Women's Earth Alliance event. | Sierra Magazine | How to Reduce Food Waste Perfectly edible food gets trashed Read more! Ilustration by Montse Galbany throughout the food system, from the millions of pounds of vegetables farmers plowed under because restaurants closed during thepandemic, to the broccoli your kid wouldn’t eat at dinner. We can do better. Here are some ways you can get started. Book an Outing today! Photo by Barry Morenz | Sierra Club Outings | Adventure Is Just a ClickAway 2022 is nearly here! Get started on your vacation plans with the hundreds of trips already available. Call now or visit us online to search for trips, learn about our volunteer leaders, read about enhanced safety protocols, or request your free 2022 catalog. And be sure to mark your calendar forFriday, December 10, when we’ll release our remaining trips for the year. See all trips and book your Outingtoday! | Adopt a Wild Animal | Our Biggest Sale of the Year Soft, cuddly, and downright adorable, Adopt a Wild Animals are a perfect gift for the nature lovers in your life. Each purchase supports the Sierra Club's work to protect wild animals and their Shop today! habitats. Pick a lovable black bear, a majestic humpback, or a squeezable gray wolf for you or someone you love. Use code HOLIDAY20 for 20 percent off and free shipping. Shop today before everybody elsescoops up your favorite animal! This email was sent to: city.council@cityofpaloalto.org This email was sent by the Sierra Club 2101 Webster St., Suite 1300, Oakland, CA 94612 Manage Preferences | Unsubscribe | View as Web Page From:Tina Peak To:Council, City Subject:No to Castilleja plans Date:Tuesday, November 30, 2021 4:31:05 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from tmpeak@yahoo.com. Learnwhy this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear City Council, I am very opposed to any expansion at Castilleja. This organization cheated and lied to the people of Palo Alto for 20 years by systematically over-enrolling students at their campus. Now they have the audacity to suggest that we should let them increase the size of their campus and add an additional 30% to student enrollment. They are not to be trusted or rewarded for their past lawlessness. The Castilleja campus adds little benefit to the city of Palo Alto. 75% of Castilleja’sstudents come from outside Palo Alto. The campus sits on just over 6-acres in an R- 1 residential neighborhood upon which they pay no taxes. Their plans call for destruction of the natural environment. They will remove treesand disrupt the soil. Any building material and concrete used produces large amounts of additional CO2 that is added to our environment. Underground garages use large amounts of polluting concrete and adding an underground parking lot is not even allowed in R-1 areas. Trips to the school are also huge green house emitters. Castilleja should get no more special treatment. They have a conditional use permit that they ignored for decades, have been poor neighbors, and add to the noise and pollution of the area. They deserve no special variance for adding more floor area orenrollment. This is an R-1 neighborhood. If Castilleja wants to grow they should find an appropriate piece of real estate and move to an area that will accommodate their desired growth. Please do not allowthem any ability to grow or increase enrollment. Regards, Tina PeakPalo Alto From:Amy Christel To:Architectural Review Board; Planning Commission; Council, City Subject:Castilleja Project Date:Tuesday, November 30, 2021 11:37:43 AM Some people who received this message don't often get email from amymchristel@gmail.com.Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Members of the Architectural Review Board, City Council, and Planning Commission, I am writing to express my feelings with regard to Castilleja’s plan for expansion of their campus. I oppose the plan as currently presented because it does not provide a benefit to Palo Alto and the neighborhood, because the school violated enrollment limits for 20 years and clearly did not operate in good faith, and because the City’s sustainability goals would be undercut by the proposed construction and future expanded operation of that school site. The school is a private institution for students the vast majority of whom are from out of town. For all their burden on roads, infrastructure, and the neighborhood, Castilleja pays no property taxes. They should not be given special variances and should comply with all current zoning rules as they apply to other developers and projects in R1 zones. I am especially opposed to this project after considering its expanded carbon footprint: the truck traffic through our streets carrying excavated dirt for an unnecessary underground garage, the added CO2 from the cement for that same garage, the removal of existing large trees, and the lack of enforcement by the City of holding the school accountable for increased car trips. Please ask Castilleja for a modernization plan that meets the City’s own sustainability goals, current zoning codes for R1, and eliminates the underground garage. Keep enrollment at current levels, and require the school to provide shuttles from public transit for all those out- of-town students! Sincerely, Amy Christel Midtown Palo Alto From:Aram James To:Council, City; Human Relations Commission; Roberta Ahlquist; Jeff Moore; wintergery@earthlink.net; Binder,Andrew; Jay Boyarsky; Sajid Khan; Jeff Rosen; chuck jagoda; Planning Commission; Tannock, Julie; Enberg,Nicholas; robert.parham@cityofpaloalto.org; Perron, Zachary; Jonsen, Robert; EPA Today; rebecca; Raj Subject:Possible nooses found on Stanford campus Date:Tuesday, November 30, 2021 11:37:34 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. https://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2021/11/30/stanford-administrators-uncertain-if- possible-nooses-found-on-campus-were-deliberate Shared via the Google app Sent from my iPhone From:Aram James To:Council, City; Human Relations Commission; wintergery@earthlink.net; Planning Commission; Sajid Khan; JayBoyarsky; Jeff Rosen; chuck jagoda; Roberta Ahlquist; Binder, Andrew; Joe Simitian; Raj; Jeff Moore; CeciliaTaylor; Betsy Nash; chuck jagoda Subject:Safe Parking Program extended til June 2022 Date:Tuesday, November 30, 2021 11:32:45 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. https://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2021/11/29/santa-clara-county-chips-in-funding-to- keep-safe-parking-lots-open-through-june-2022 Shared via the Google app Sent from my iPhone From:Palo Alto Renters To:Council, City Subject:Another eviction Date:Tuesday, November 30, 2021 11:05:49 AM Some people who received this message don't often get email from paloaltorenters@gmail.com.Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear City Councilmembers, We wanted to let you know that received notice of yet another eviction. The family, whopurchased under and LLC, are yet again using renovation as the cause. From:Hank Sousa To:Architectural Review Board; Planning Commission; Council, City Subject:Castilleja Date:Tuesday, November 30, 2021 10:49:12 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Hello Board Members: My name is Hank Sousa and I live in the 100 block of Melville, 185 feet from Castilleja. There are lots of numbers associated with the proposed Castilleja school expansion and my talk will cover two of them (parking spaces and enrollment). Currently there are 86 parking spots on campus per the plans (page G.032). This number of parking spaces allows the school to enroll 448 students. The current enrollment is 426 which is over the enrollment cap. Many of us neighbors feel an enrollment increase of 8 per cent, granted by the city, is acceptable. Why 8 percent? There is historical precedent. When the current CUP was approved in 2000, that was the figure allowed by the city. According to code, the current number of on campus parking spaces is sufficient to park an enrollment of 448 (muni code 18.52.040(c)Table 1). In addition, the head of school has said numerous times that 448 is the optimum pedagogical teaching number. In a letter from head of school to the city dated Aug 15, 2013, when it was made public Castilleja was over enrolled, 448 students was again touted as the perfect enrollment number. There is no need for a garage of any kind, especially one that is underground as its construction raises a whole host of other problems. These problems concern the water table, the removal of thousands of yards of soil and pouring large amounts of CO2-emitting concrete to make a car storage bunker that can never be removed. “No garage” construction allows the project to be completed in three years instead of five. Since many of the close- in residents are well into their senior years, the construction timetable becomes more important. In lieu of several hundred drop offs that now occur daily at the school, please mandate that parents drop their kids off at satellite sites. Castilleja shuttles would then take the girls to school. You may also want to mandate that girls no longer drive themselves or only senior girls be allowed to do so. All these suggestions would help limit the number of cars converging on the neighborhood. This is clearly the environmentally superior alternative despite what the school’s lawyer has been saying about the proposed underground garage. Thank you, Hank Sousa more details » From:Andie Reed To:Council, City Subject:Bloomington City Council Meeting Invite Date:Tuesday, November 30, 2021 10:16:50 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Council Members: Below is the zoom invite for the Bloomington, Indiana city council meeting coming up Wed Dec 1 at 3:30 pm Pacific time. It might be fun to tune in to hear their city officials (and Mayor DuBois) discuss the Resolution to join Palo Alto in the first Sibling City USA relationship. Thanks, Andie Bton City Council Resolution When Wed Dec 1, 2021 3:30pm – 4:30pm Pacific Time - Los Angeles Where https://bloomington.zoom.us/j/84969096750? pwd=M3pGVTFZZExxMnZoNmVHVWR6Q2VBZz09 (map) Joining info Join with Google Meet meet.google.com/eje-mjbk-ygc Join by phone (US) +1 402-852-5086 (PIN: 856645440) More phone numbers Calendar paloalto@siblingcitiesusa.org https://bloomington.zoom.us/j/84969096750? pwd=M3pGVTFZZExxMnZoNmVHVWR6Q2VBZz09 -- Andie Reed CPAPalo Alto, CA 94301 530-401-3809 From:Lisa Tayeri To:Transportation; City Mgr; Planning Commission; Council, City Subject:RRP in Evergreen Date:Tuesday, November 30, 2021 10:14:01 AM Some people who received this message don't often get email from lgtayeri@gmail.com. Learnwhy this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Hello, I have written previously about the stress the residential parking program has put on our medical practice at 1805 El Camino. My husband and I own and work in the building and I am a lifelong Palo Alto resident. We are also smallbusiness owners. The notice we were sent last week was disappointing in many ways. We have a five doctor, seven staff member medical practice. There is never a case when all of the doctors and staffare there at the same time. Only one of our doctors works two days a week in the Palo Alto office, the rest work oneday a week. Our staff rotate, with the maximum being six in office once a week. Since we have never successfully been able to get permits for everyone we have used the hang tags as a way to share a permit among the staff andphysicians, so that someone who only worked one day a week did not have to have their own permit. There seemsto be no possibility of doing this with the new electronic system. What is the incentive to carpool in the new system? Three of our employees carpool and rotate who's car they cometo work in. They used to be able to share a hang tag. We also have two staff who drive different cars to the office,depending on whether they need to pick up their children on the way home from work or not. How do they getpermits for two cars? Three of us are lucky enough to be able to walk or bike to the office, which we frequently do, but cannot alwaysbecause of weather or bringing equipment from office to office that cannot be carried. . Our office was built with a large parking lot but demand for our services and those of our tenants (an endodontistand a dentist) has increased. A sign that we are providing necessary services. If we used our lot just for our doctorsand staffs there would be little parking for our patients. We prefer to reserve the lot parking exclusively for theconvenience of our patients who are often in pain or are elderly. It is also not uncommon for patients to be in ouroffices for over two hours because of dental surgery and glaucoma procedures. Our medical practice has over 2500 patients who live in Palo Alto. I don't think they would like having to park onEl Camino (where it is often dangerous to get in and out of your car) or the neighborhood, or get tickets from theCity of Palo Alto because they were getting medical attention. It also seems that having an employee park in onespot on the street for six hours s safer than having patient cars going in and out frequently Another shock is that the cost of employee permits has almost quadrupled! Isn't that a little extreme? It is unfair to force employees who do not have the privilege of living in Palo Alto to walk to the new garage onCalifornina. At almost a mile away, it is too far from our office. They often have to transport medical equipmentand records with them which are too heavy to walk that far with. It is also unjust to assume they can easily usepublic transportation when our public transportation is so poor in the south Bay. Three of my staff looked to seehow long it would take them to get to the office using public transportation and it was just over two hours, versus a25 minute carpool. Is it fair to take that time from them and their families just so we can have empty spaces on theeast side of El Camino Real? What is most surprising of all is that even before the RRP began, at our end of the Evergreen neighborhood therewas always street parking. Instituting the RRP and excluding all the Stanford students/employees from Evergreen opened up the parking even more. I can count only one new business on our stretch of El Camino Real. All the other businesses have been there for decades (or replaced existing businesses). I cannot believe that there is too much stress on residents to park neartheir homes (if for some reason they are unable to use their garages or driveways). Cities are dynamic, not static. This is not the exact same Palo Alto that my great grandfather settled in in 1901, orthe Palo Alto I grew up in during the 1980s. The positive change is reflected in our housing prices and the vibrancyof Palo Alto. Burdens such as the RRP, added to the difficulty of finding skilled employees, are the reason manybeloved local businesses have closed (The Prolific Oven and Keeble and Shuchat just to name a few). I urge the City Council and the Department of Transportation to consider the needs of essential business andreconsider the employee parking program. Please make an exception for medical practices and the other businesses that are far from California Ave. Thank you, Lisa and Tom Tayeri From:Helene Grossman To:Council, City; Shikada, Ed Subject:Follow-up on leaf blowers Date:Tuesday, November 30, 2021 10:00:49 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear City Council and City Manager Shikada, I had previously sent a petition, signed by hundreds of community members, requesting that City Council enforce the ban on gas leaf blowers. It came to my attention that I had given thewrong link, so I provide it again here: change.org/paloaltoleafblowers Since creating the petition, many many Palo Altans have reached out to me about how gas leaf blowers are impacting their life -- from people working from home whose work is continuallyinterrupted by gas leaf blower noise, to parents of children with asthma that is aggravated by leaf blower pollution, to residents who just want to enjoy their yards and gardens but areforced to go inside due to gas leaf blowers nearby. I am grateful that the Council is considering this issue and hope the Council will soon be able to vote on adding back a code enforcement officer. In addition, I do think that sending warnings or citations via the 311 app, in response topictures/videos submitted by residents, could be an inexpensive way to get traction. For example, in Washington DC, residents can file an affidavit online if they see or hear peopleusing a gas-powered leaf blower, along with the photographic, audio, or video evidence, and this evidence can be used in support of a citation. (reference) We could do something similarin Palo Alto. I'd like to end with a quote that resonated with me: "The idea that leafblowers save time - which is the one and only argument for usingthem - is outrageous, since it implies that the time stolen from the rest of us is worthless." - Dr. Winifred Rosen I look forward to the day when we can enjoy peace and fresh air in our homes and gardens,without the continual intrusion of illegal gas leaf blower noise and pollution. Many thanks! Sincerely, Helene Grossman From:mark weiss To:Council, City Cc:Alison Cormack; Tom DuBois (tom.dubois@gmail.com); Pat Burt; Greer Stone; Jeff LaMere; David Moss; Rebecca Eisenberg; James Aram; AKIRA TANA; hansdelannoy599@gmail.com; Tim Ruff; Don Austin; Camille Townsend; Drekmeier, Peter; Jason Miller; Clay; Summa, Doria; ladoris@judgecordell.com; Holman, Karen (external); Andrew Hargadon; David Dempsey; Jim Yardley; melissa baten caswell; Don; Ed Burns; Nick Peterson; Bo Crane; Curtis Smolar Subject:Presley Pavillion at Cubberley Center Palo Alto Date:Tuesday, November 30, 2021 9:18:21 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Apropos of the recent discussion of building a public sector gym in Palo Alto, I want tosuggest a related but much cheaper idea, to rename the gym at Cubberley "Presley Pavillion at Cubberley Center".Bud Presley was a Cubberley coach and later was successful at Menlo College. He preached a tough type of defense, including a drill wherein players practiced running over each other. Mycoach, Hans Delannoy, Cubberley '70, won two titles at Gunn. (And later inducted into San Ramon of Danville,CA Hall of Fame). See bio below. Elvis Presley of course famous musician. And the Pavillion in recent years is used for dancing.Swing, but Elvis sort of swings. At least between belly button and knees, as Ed Sullivan ironically made immortal. Five for fighting, six for lovin' as we used to say. Leave it ambiguous which Presley takes charge or the charge here. Whole lotta South Palo Alto shakin' going on. Mark Weissmusic and hoops guy -- I was made to chime in here. Or woof like Payton, tired of waitin', feel me?in Palo Alto Can we push Paly to let citizens use their gym more often? Also, Gunn has a new gym. AlsoPinewood Private School has a gym, in nearby LAH but the land is actually owned by PAUSD. My idea might create interest in using the gyms at Cubberley. Let's rename the other gym. There are two. I voted recently at the other gym. Clayborne Carson Gym?Also: somewhat related: I wore a Lew Welch shirt at my interview for Parks. Lew was a track champion at Paly before becoming famous Beat poet -- and Huey Lewis's father. Last: future and past mayor Burt knows that Los Altos High field is named Burt for his father,so this hits him different, I'm sure. Let's discus, I mean discuss. cc: PAUSD but its really COPA The Bud Presley Classic was created to honor the legacy of one of the greatest head coaches to ever roam the sidelines at Menlo College. During his 12-year tenure as head coach, Presley won 266 games and led Menlo to five consecutive Coast Conferencechampionships. Bud Presley came to Menlo College in 1971 and took over a program that had won just 11 games in the previous four seasons. His first season with Menlo, the Oaks posted a 23-3 record and a conference championship and the legacy of Bud Presley had its foundation. In twelve seasons at the helm from 1971-82, Presley guided Menlo to an overall record of266 wins to just 88 losses. Presley-coached teams garnered five Coast Conference championships, three state runner-up finishes and one California Community College StateChampionship (1973-74). Presley's coaching career included successful stints at Cubberly High School in Palo Alto,Santa Ana Community College, Gonzaga University and finally as an assistant at University of Las Vegas under Jerry Tarkanian. From:Allan Seid To:Channing House Bulletin Board Subject:Fwd: As U.S. Hunts for Chinese Spies, University Scientists Warn of Backlash - The New York Times Date:Tuesday, November 30, 2021 7:18:53 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Allan Seid <allanseid734@gmail.com>Date: Tue, Nov 30, 2021 at 4:52 AM Subject: As U.S. Hunts for Chinese Spies, University Scientists Warn of Backlash - The NewYork Times To: Allan Seid <allanseid734@gmail.com> https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/28/world/asia/china-university-spies.html? campaign_id=34&emc=edit_sc_20211130&instance_id=46580&nl=science-times®i_id=153784146&segment_id=75662&te=1&user_id=3a475fdd7467e9 084870aed2962b9a2b As U.S. Hunts for Chinese Spies, University Scientists Warn of Backlash A chilling effect has taken hold on American campuses, contributing to an outflow of academic talent that may hurt the United States while benefiting Beijing. Nov. 28, 2021 The campus of Princeton University, in New Jersey. Chinese and Chinese American scientists working in U.S. universities have been disproportionately targeted by the U.S. government.An Rong Xu for The New York Times The F.B.I. agents spent nearly two years tailing the professor, following him to work, to the grocery store, and even keeping his college-age son under surveillance. They told the university where he held a tenured position that he was a Chinese operative, prompting the school to cooperate with their investigation and later fire him. But the F.B.I. was unable to find evidence of espionage, according to an agent’s testimony in court. Federal prosecutors pressed charges anyway, accusing Anming Hu of concealing his ties with a university in Beijing and defrauding the government in connection with research funds he had received from NASA. The trial ended in a hung jury. One juror called the case “ridiculous.” In September, a judge took the rare step of acquitting the Chinese-born scientist on all counts. “It was the darkest time of my life,” Dr. Hu said in his first in-depth interview since being acquitted. Universities in the United States once welcomed the best and brightest scientific talents from around the world. But government officials have become increasingly suspicious that scientists like Dr. Hu are exploiting the openness of American institutions to steal sensitive taxpayer-funded research at the behest of the Chinese government. It’s had a chilling effect across campuses that scientists and university administrators say has slowed research and contributed to a flow of talent out of the United States that may benefit Beijing. In interviews with several scientists of Chinese descent working in American universities, a picture emerged of a community on edge. Some described being humiliated by mandatory training on foreign interference that featured only examples of ethnic Chinese scientists, and unexplained delays for visa renewals. They were all concerned that seemingly anything — a collaboration with another scientist from China, a slip-up on a disclosure form — could provide an opening for federal investigators to come knocking. The trial of Dr. Hu, who worked at the University of Tennessee at Knoxville, is being held up as a clear example of government overreach. He was under house arrest for 18 months during the investigation with no job or income, reliant on GoFundMe donations for his legal defense fees. Neighbors and church friends delivered groceries and took out his garbage. While the university has since offered to reinstate his job, Dr. Hu, a naturalized Canadian citizen, said his immigration status remains in limbo. “My basic human rights were invaded, my reputation was destroyed, my heart was deeply hurt, my family was hurt,” he said. “This is not fairness.” Anming Hu at home in Knoxville, Tenn. The Chinese-born scientist and professor has spent the last few years fighting accusations that he acted as a spy for China.Shawn Poynter for The New York Times A recent study conducted by the University of Arizona and the Committee of 100, an organization of prominent Chinese Americans, surveyed scientists of both Chinese and non-Chinese descent working at academic institutions in the United States on issues of race and ethnicity in science and research. Around half of the Chinese scientists surveyed — including some American citizens — said they felt they were being surveilled by the U.S. government. Some have blamed a law enforcement program called the China Initiative, which was started during the Trump administration and has continued under President Biden. The program is aimed at preventing the Chinese government’s theft of American trade secrets and other acts of espionage. But scholars, scientists, civil rights groups and lawmakers have asked whether it has gone too far in targeting academics, especially since most research done at universities is unclassified and eventually published. Nearly 2,000 academics at institutions including Stanford University, the University of California, Berkeley and Princeton University have signed open letters to Attorney General Merrick Garland expressing concerns that the initiative disproportionately targets researchers of Chinese descent and urging that the program be terminated. “So much of our intellectual technological power is from immigrants,” said Steven Chu, one of the signers, a Nobel Prize- winning physicist at Stanford University and a former U.S. secretary of energy. “We’re shooting ourselves not in the foot but in something close to the head.” Dr. Hu was the first academic charged under the China Initiative to stand trial. So far the F.B.I. has brought 12 prosecutions at universities or research institutions in three years, but none have involved charges of economic espionage or theft of trade secrets or intellectual property. Most involved allegations like wire fraud, lying to federal investigators and failure to disclose ties with China. Behind the recent scrutiny of academics is a problem years in the making. Over the past two decades, as federal funding for basic scientific research at universities stagnated, scientists sought alternative sources of money. Eager to expand their global footprint, American universities promoted collaborations with international peers, including in China. Beijing, which has set its sights on becoming a science and technology superpower, was happy to oblige. Researchers took advantage of growing opportunities in China, including talent recruitment programs, lucrative consulting contracts, honorary titles and grants. The Chinese government already had a record of stealing or incentivizing the transfer of intellectual property from American companies. As the Trump administration intensified scrutiny of espionage by China, it expanded the dragnet to include academic collaboration as well, prompting federal agencies that provide funding — and some universities — to step up enforcement of policies on the disclosure of foreign ties and conflicts of interest. In recent months, academics have signed open letters to Attorney General Merrick Garland, center, urging that the China Initiative program be terminated.Stefani Reynolds for The New York Times “There’s no room for xenophobia or ethnic profiling,” said Anna Puglisi, a senior fellow at Georgetown University’s Center for Security and Emerging Technology. “But what gets lost in the discussion is the bigger question that we need to be asking, which is: ‘Do we have the system in place to mitigate the behavior and central government policies of a nation state that are specifically set up to target the seams in our system?’” To some, the intensified scrutiny amounted to overreach. Many scientists have expressed frustration over what they say are shifting and overlapping disclosure guidelines from universities and funding agencies that make it hard to avoid getting caught in the F.B.I.’s web. During Dr. Hu’s trial, for example, it emerged that both NASA and the University of Tennessee at Knoxville had provided unclear rules on how he should disclose foreign ties. Understand U.S.-China Relations A tense era in U.S.-China ties. The two powers are profoundly at odds as they jockey for influence beyond their own shores, compete in technology and maneuver for military advantages. Here’s what to know about the main fronts in U.S.-China relations: Pacific dominance. As China has built up its military presence, the U.S. has sought to widen its alliances in the region. A major potential flash point is Taiwan, the democratic island that the Communist Party regards as Chinese territory. Should the U.S. intervene there, it could reshape the regional order. Trade. The trade war started by the Trump administration is technically on pause. But the Biden administration has continued to protest China’s economic policies and impose tariffs on Chinese goods, signaling no thaw in trade relations. Technology. Internet giants have mostly been shut out of China, but plenty of U.S. tech companies still do big business there, raising cybersecurity concerns in Washington. Mr. Xi has said China needs to achieve technological “self-reliance.” “I don’t think anybody doubts the Chinese government and C.C.P. are engaged in economic espionage and other malign behaviors,” said Michael German, a fellow at New York University’s Brennan Center for Justice and a former F.B.I. agent. “So that’s where the U.S. government should focus its resources, instead of trying to grab easy statistical accomplishments by targeting college professors who have nothing to do with Chinese espionage.” A Justice Department spokesman said the department was dedicated to countering Chinese efforts to undermine national security, but that the department also took concerns about discrimination seriously. For now, unease is growing. Yiguang Ju, a professor of mechanical and aerospace engineering at Princeton and a naturalized U.S. citizen, said it had been the honor of a lifetime in 2010 when NASA asked him to help develop a plan for the future of American rocketry. If he were to receive the same invitation today, he would decline, he said. The spotlight on Chinese scientists at academic institutions was too great, and the pride of working with the agency not worth the possible risk to him and his family. “It’s not because I don’t want to serve,” he said. “I’m scared to serve.” “It’s not because I don’t want to serve. I’m scared to serve,” said Yiguang Ju, a professor of mechanical and aerospace engineering at Princeton University who fears that if he were to work with NASA again, he would attract undue scrutiny.An Rong Xu for The New York Times That fear comes as China has started to experience a reverse brain drain. Over the last decade, a growing number of Chinese scientists have been lured back to the country by the promise of ample funding, impressive titles and national pride. More recently, scientists returning to China have cited a hostile environment in the United States as a factor. Westlake University, a research university in the eastern Chinese city of Hangzhou, has recruited an impressive roster of talent, including many who once held faculty positions at top American schools. In August, Westlake announced several new hires, including a tenured professor from Northwestern University and another from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Shi Yigong, a prominent molecular biologist and the president of Westlake University, said colleagues had complained about the atmosphere of suspicion in the United States. “For those who have chosen to relinquish their jobs in the U.S., sometimes I do hear stories of a bitter nature,” Dr. Shi said. “I think some of them, not all of them, have been singled out for what I think was pretty harsh treatment.” At least one person, though, is determined to stay in the United States: Dr. Hu. The son of a factory worker, he grew up in a poor village in the eastern Chinese province of Shandong and said his interest in science began at a young age. In elementary school, he rigged a simple radio by wiring a speaker with scrap mineral and connecting it to a makeshift antenna he hung from a tree. After earning advanced degrees in China, he left the country in 1997 with his wife and worked in several countries before obtaining a second Ph.D. in physics in Canada. Like countless immigrants before him, he moved to the United States in 2013 with hopes for a better life and career. He has sacrificed too much to give it all up now, he said. He would rather stay in the United States to contribute not just to science, his first love, but also to his new passion: promoting justice. “I have no interest in politics and know almost nothing about it,” he said. “But I know that targeting Chinese and Asian Americans — that will not make the United States strong.” Javier C. Hernández and Amy Chang Chien contributed reporting. From:redress.of.grievance@gmail.com To:darylsavage@gmail.com; Dave Price; Human Relations Commission; Council, City; Bill Johnson; Sean Webby;mark weiss; Stump, Molly; James Aram; Gennady Sheyner; jaythor@well.com; Reifschneider, James; Jonsen,Robert; Perron, Zachary; Binder, Andrew; Tony Ciampi; Shikada, Ed; Filseth, Eric (Internal);andrewdrwsk@aol.com Subject:Wicked as all HELL Date:Tuesday, November 30, 2021 3:52:06 AM Some people who received this message don't often get email fromredress.of.grievance@gmail.com. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. https://twitter.com/pafreepress/status/1465646601721065480?s=21 Reporting from Nicaragua Sent from my iPad From:Aram James To:Enberg, Nicholas; Tannock, Julie; robert.parham@cityofpaloalto.org; Binder, Andrew; Jonsen, Robert; Council,City; Human Relations Commission; Winter Dellenbach; chuck jagoda; Shikada, Ed; Council, City; Kou, Lydia;Perron, Zachary; Jay Boyarsky; Planning Commission; michael.gennaco@oirgroup.com; Dave Price; EmilyMibach; Braden Cartwright; Gennady Sheyner Subject:The vegetable peeler - Police shooting of Bich Cau Thi Tran – AsAmNews by Dr. Raymond Chong Date:Monday, November 29, 2021 11:49:40 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ FYI: a case I was involved in circa 2003: https://asamnews.com/2021/11/29/a-grand-jury-cleared-a-san-jose-police-officer-of-any-wrongdoing-for-shooting- a-woman-waving-a-vegetable-peeler/ Sent from my iPhone From:Kenneth Streib To:Council, City Subject:Last nights meeting Date:Monday, November 29, 2021 11:49:40 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Greetings, Regarding last nights city council meeting, I agree that a viaduct is a bad option. It would be ugly and noisy and deface the city. I also agree with Eric Filseth that we STILL don't know the full impact of COVID-19 until we are sure that it is over. For that reason, I STILL think we should wait until it is over before making any final decisions. I also think closing Churchill is a bad idea, the tracks are difficult enough to get over now, it would be worse if we close any crossings. And I am not in favor of anything that would take houses in a city in which house prices are already too high. This seems like the wrong time to do this project. Thanks so much for your time, Ken Streib From:pennyellson12@gmail.com To:Council, City Subject:My comments on tonight"s Safe Routes to School Study Session Date:Monday, November 29, 2021 9:18:03 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Honorable Council Members, Here are my comments from tonight’s Safe Routes to School Study Session. Thank you for you service to our community. –Penny Ellson Good evening. I’m Penny Ellson, a former PAUSD parent who continues to enjoy walking and biking in Palo Alto. I want to thank Council, city staff, PTA leaders and parents, and PAUSD partners who stepped up to support SRTS through this time in many ways – volunteering time, supporting the fast pivot to on-line learning, finding creative ways to keep families walking and biking for health, recreation and transportation through a truly disruptive moment. It’s heartening to see, in tonight’s staff report, that the results have been good in a moment when we feared the challenges of Covid might undo decades of work encouraging alternative commutes. Thank you for steadfastly working as partners to meet the needs of Palo Alto people, especially school-bound children, who walk and bike. As the city begins restoring projects and programs that were cut or reduced due to Covid impacts on city revenues, Safe Routes to School has urgent funding needs to consider, including: 1. A need for additional funding for data collection, especially injury collision data to help us identify safety problems and solutions, and to inform planning and prioritization of short- and long-term projects and programs. 2. Please restore staff funding to help coordinate education and encouragement for older students and youth. Traffic safety learning has been pushed on line, and students have missed critical in-person, on-bike experiences. They need brush-ups on bike handling and safety skills as they move back to riding in greater numbers. 3. Please restore engineering staff to support planning and the upcoming Bicycle & Pedestrian Transportation Plan process to insure well-planned outcomes, including on new school routes as PAUSD opens Cubberley and Greendell to elementary schools during bond measure construction. Thank you for your past support of Safe Routes to School and our community’s children. Please help fill these gaps that have emerged during the pandemic due to budget cuts. Virus-free. www.avg.com From:Allan Seid To:Channing House Bulletin Board Subject:Fwd: The vegetable peeler - Police shooting of Bich Cau Thi Tran – AsAmNews Date:Monday, November 29, 2021 8:09:46 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Neighbors and Friends, TAKE HEART AND KEEP THE FAITH.MASS CITIZEN PROTESTS PLUS GREAT LEGAL EFFORT CAN REVERSE INJUSTICE ! Allan Seid From: Allan Seid <allanseid734@gmail.com>Date: Mon, Nov 29, 2021 at 5:15 PM Subject: The vegetable peeler - Police shooting of Bich Cau Thi Tran – AsAmNews https://asamnews.com/2021/11/29/a-grand-jury-cleared-a-san-jose-police-officer- of-any-wrongdoing-for-shooting-a-woman-waving-a-vegetable-peeler/ The vegetable peeler – Police shooting of Bich Cau Thi Tran November 29, 2021 Bich Cau Thi Tran. Courtesy of the family of Bich Cau Thi Tran. By Raymond Douglas Chong, AsAmNews Staff Writer On a warm summer day in San Jose, a distraught woman yelled in Vietnamese. She wildly waved a vegetable peeler at the locked bedroom door. San Jose Police officers responded to an emergency call. Within one minute, a police officer shot Tran at her chest and instantly killed her, in front of her boyfriend and their two sons. Background Born in Vietnam in 1978, Bich Cau Tran immigrated to America in 1997. She had worked at NUMMI, an automobile manufacturing company in Fremont. She and Dang Quang Bui, her boyfriend, lived together, with their two sons, Tony, 4. and Tommy, 2, at a duplex on East Taylor Street in San Jose, in a poor neighborhood. At just 4′ 9″ tall, Tran weighed 98 pounds. She spoke little English. Tran had a serious mental illness. She used psychiatric drugs. The Fremont and San Jose Police Departments have responded in the past to several calls involving Tran. Shooting On Sunday evening, July 13, 2003, Tran accidentally locked herself out of her bedroom. Tran wandered madly through the neighborhood. She had neglected her toddler son. Bui took Tran and their son back to their apartment. She attempted to open her bedroom door using a Vietnamese vegetable peeler called a “dao bao.” While Tran screamed in Vietnamese, Officer Chad Marshall, a White American, and Officer Tom Mun, a Korean American, arrived in separate patrol cars, in response to a domestic violence report. Bui opened the front door for the two officers. Within one minute, Officer Marshall discerned Tran as a threat with a deadly weapon.She waved the dao bao, in the kitchen. He shot Tran through her heart. San Jose Police Department Aftermath The San Jose police department issued a press release that stated a justification for Officer Marshall to shoot Tran. She waved a deadly cleaver. A cleaver is what I had call it. It is not a peeler. Chief Bill Lansdowne ON THE DEFENSIVE: KITCHEN IMPLEMENT AT CENTER OF DISPUTE BETWEEN OFFICERS, WOMAN’S FAMILY, San Jose Mercury News, July 16, 2003 Many Vietnamese Americans in San Jose reacted with shock and outrage. Critics accused Officer Marshall of using excessive force. They protested at San Jose City Hall. They held a vigil for Tran. The tragedy has definitely brought the Vietnamese community together. With the rally that I helped organize, it only took less than 24 hours to get more than two hundred people to show up at City Hall. Madison Nguyen, Little Saigon Flexes New Political Muscles in Rare Unity Pacific News Service, August 1, 2003 Dan Nishigaya, Santa Clara County Deputy District Attorney convened a Santa Clara County criminal grand jury about the case. They met to decide whether to indict Officer Marshall on criminal charges or manslaughter or murder. Bui clearly disputed the Police Department’s account of the incident, but they agreed that Tran had a mental health issue. Officer Mun testified that Officer Marshall warned Tran to drop the knife. She had menacingly raised the knife over her head while screaming. As she moved to throw the knife, Officer Marshall fired. Bui claimed that Tran had tried to open the locked bedroom door with a dao bao as she screamed and cried. When the police officers arrived, an agitated Tran waved the dao bao at the locked bedroom door. Bui contended that Officer Marshall fired immediately when he entered the apartment from the living room. Joy Tamez, a passerby who initially summoned police after finding Tran’s unattended toddler wandering in a busy street, confirmed Bui’s account. Dr. Richard Mason, head pathologist for the Santa Cruz County coroner, testified that Officer Marshall fired at the chest of Tran. His shot pierced her heart and a major artery. Tran died instantly. A police trainer said that a sharpened weapon is more dangerous than a gun. Police officers are trained to use deadly force again a deadly weapon. On October 30, 2003, the criminal grand jury declined to indict Officer Marshall on charges of either manslaughter or murder in Tran’s death. Courtesy: Richard Kondo Richard Konda, a director of the Asian Law Alliance, founded the Coalition for Justice and Accountability (CJA), to seek justice in the Tran case. CJA demanded the San Jose Police Department to be culturally sensitive and adopt nonlethal tactics for subduing mentally disturbed people. CJA had several protests at the San Jose City Hall in November 2003, after the criminal grand jury decision. CJA did not pursue further investigation by the California Attorney General or United States Department of Justice. On November 12, 2003, the Estate of Cau Bich Tran filed a civil lawsuit against the City of San Jose, in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. On November 30, 2005, Tran’s family settled for $1.82 million with the City of San Jose, to avoid more publicity of the incident. Following the incident, there was a lot of distrust of the San Jose Police Department, in particular by the Vietnamese community, The question came up: How could a young mother, less than 5 feet tall, really be a credible threat? How could it end that way? I would hope because of this incident that when officers go out to the scene, they are looking at less lethal ways to de- escalate situations. Richard Konda SAN JOSE / $1.8 million settlement in killing by police officer / 4- foot-9-inch troubled mother fatally shot in kitchen while holding a vegetable peeler, Chronicle Dec. 1, 2005 Courtesy: Aram James Retrospection In a poignant retrospection, after 18 years, Aram James, retired Santa Clara County deputy public defender, and Richard Konda, executive director of the Asian Law Alliance and chair of CJA, spoke to AsAmNews. During the grand jury proceeding my recollection is that there was a tremendous effort by the prosecution to demonize Bic Cau Thi Tran, more so than to vigorously pursue the prosecution of Officer Chad Marshall, the shooter. It seemed to me that the evidence clearly established an intentional homicide with no effort to deescalate. Rather than focus on questions about the homicide, and the quick shooting and killing of the victim, within a very short period of the police entering Tran’s apartment, the officers’ training, or the lack thereof, or of any efforts to deescalate the situation, or to avoid the shooting altogether, the prosecution chose to focus on blaming the victim, her history of mental health issues and prior police contacts. Aram James It was very unusual this circumstance (killing), and I think part of the reason that they opened grand jury process. There was so much public concern and outrage. People were really shocked and outraged They could not understand that a Vietnamese vegetable peeler be consider a deadly weapon. I think that the story when he (Officer Marshall) felt his life in danger, I find it hard to believe. Then the testimony at the grand jury, that the vegetable peeler is a deadly weapon. Richard Konda Legacy In March 2004, San Jose Department distributed 50,000-volt Taser stun guns to its patrol officers, in lieu of a firearm. On August 11, 2015, Governor Jerry Brown signed a California law that banned grand juries from indicting police officers facing charges for lethal shootings. The presiding district attorney must decide to present criminal charges. The San Jose Police Department now has an Asian Community Liaison. Vietnamese Americans are gradually joining the ranks of police officers. CJA continues to advocate for humane policing practices and against police misconduct. They still want to ban the use of Taser stun guns by police officers. Konda and James call for “Every district attorney in this country must develop a robust police crimes team. This team must be fully independent of law enforcement and be given the sole ability to prosecute without political pressure from police unions or elected officials.” San Jose, the largest Vietnamese American community, is actively participating in civic engagement. Voters elected Madison Nguyen in 2011, making her the first Vietnamese council member ever in the city. Tam Nguyen, Manh Nguyen, and Lan Diep subsequently served. Meanwhile Tran’s family remains in San Jose and struggles to survive without her. AsAmNews has Asian America in its heart. We’re an all-volunteer effort of dedicated staff and interns. Check out our new Instagram account. Go to our Twitter feed and Facebook page for more content. Please consider interning, joining our staff, or submitting a story, or making a contribution. From:Allan Seid To:Channing House Bulletin Board Subject:Fwd: Amid Union Square mass thefts, Chinatown small business owner reels from $250,000 burglary Date:Monday, November 29, 2021 7:44:49 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Allan Seid <allanseid734@gmail.com>Date: Mon, Nov 29, 2021 at 7:27 PM Subject: Amid Union Square mass thefts, Chinatown small business owner reels from$250,000 burglary To: Allan Seid <allanseid734@gmail.com> https://www.sfchronicle.com/sf/article/Amid-Union-Square-mass-thefts- Chinatown-small-16654452.php?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=sfc_evening&sid= 5fefc058b042aa734736d79c Amid Union Square mass thefts, Chinatown small business owner reels from $250,000 burglary Mallory Moench Nov. 26, 2021 Updated: Nov. 28, 2021 4:24 p.m. Comments Mallory Moench Nov. 26, 2021 1of2 A display case was shattered and $250,000 worth of merchandise was stolen during a break-in at Long Boat Jewelry on Grant Avenue in Chinatown. Courtesy Rosita Young Someone had broken into her Chinatown jewelry store on Grant Avenue around 4:20 a.m. and, within three minutes, stolen $250,000 worth of goods. Thieves damaged the store’s front gate, door and showcases, police said. To top it off, Young discovered she isn’t able to claim any of her insurance coverage because her policy doesn’t cover thefts at night unless the items were in a safe, she said. “That hurt me so much,” Young said in a phone interview Friday. “I lost a lot.” The theft followed someone breaking a window, but stealing nothing, four days earlier at the store, police said. It’s only the second time in 38 years of business that thieves have plundered Long Boat Jewelry, Young said. The last was three decades ago. The shop’s lease expires at the end of this year, and Young said she and her husband don’t know whether they can keep the business open. The theft happens after nearly two years of economic devastation from the pandemic. “We are a small business retail, not making much money,” she said. “Everybody in Chinatown works so hard. ... Nobody is making money ... A lot of stores closed already.” The plight of the 78-year-old business owner, who immigrated half a century ago, gained attention Friday on Twitter from San Francisco entrepreneur and state Assembly candidate Bilal Mahmood and Nancy Tung, who ran for San Francisco district attorney in 2019. Tung tweeted that she started a GoFundMe fundraiser for Young, with her permission. “Increasing violence against Asian American people and businesses, rising costs, and a downturn in tourism is hurting our community, and people like Rosita and her husband,” Tung wrote in the fundraiser description. “Let’s support this Chinatown business so it can continue to thrive in San Francisco.” A jeweler on Grant Avenue in Chinatown was robbed of $250,000 worth of merchandise amid a retail crime wave. Jessica Christian/The Chronicle The burglary devastated the family-owned jeweler three days before swarms hit Union Square’s Louis Vuitton and other high-end shops in the Bay Area in a wave of coordinated retail thefts that have drawn national media attention, criticism from Gov. Gavin Newsom and felony charges from San Francisco District Attorney Chesa Boudin. At the same time, Young, who owns only one store with her husband, was trying to get restitution. A person who answered the phone for her insurance provider, Bowie Insurance Group, could not provide a comment Friday afternoon. Edward Siu, chairman of the Chinatown Merchants United Association of San Francisco, said burglaries happen infrequently in the neighborhood and he had not heard of another business having Young’s insurance problems. He has urged his group’s estimated 160 members to review their insurance policies and install security cameras, and said he wants more police patrols in Chinatown. Mahmood, who is the son of immigrants and said he knows many small business owners like Young, said the case draws attention to the challenges immigrants can have in navigating insurance and other business policies. It also highlights the disproportionate impact of recent crime sprees on small businesses that don’t have the same resources to recover as bigger businesses do, he said. San Francisco police spokesperson Robert Rueca said both the Nov. 12 vandalism and the Nov. 16 theft are being investigated by police. Police have made no arrests, and the investigations are active. Anyone with information is asked to call the SFPD Tip Line at 415- 575-4444 or text a tip to TIP411 and begin the text message with “SFPD.” You may remain anonymous. Mallory Moench is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. Email: mallory.moench@sfchronicle.com Twitter:@mallorymoench From:Aram James To:Council, City; Human Relations Commission; Jonsen, Robert; Binder, Andrew; Enberg, Nicholas; Tannock, Julie;Winter Dellenbach; Shikada, Ed; Molly Subject:AB 109 Date:Monday, November 29, 2021 6:24:51 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. https://probation.lacounty.gov/ab-109/ Shared via the Google app Sent from my iPhone From:Emily Ramos To:DuBois, Tom; Burt, Patrick; Cormack, Alison; Filseth, Eric (Internal); Kou, Lydia; Stone, Greer; Tanaka, Greg;Council, City Cc:Mathew Reed Subject:RE: Item 10 – Review and Recommend Renter Protection Policies for Development and Implementation(Continued from the November 15, 2021 meeting) Date:Monday, November 29, 2021 5:25:17 PM Attachments:SVH Letter RE Item 10 - Tenant Protections 112921.pdf Some people who received this message don't often get email fromemily@siliconvalleyathome.org. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Please view the letter below on behalf of SV@Home: Dear Mayor DuBois, Vice Mayor Burt, and Councilmembers Cormack, Filseth, Kou, Stone, and Tanaka: In 2019, SV@Home became a community partner in a city-initiated grant from the Partnership for the Bay’s Future (PBF), which provided a Challenge Grant Fellow to give additional staff capacity for the city to explore anti-displacement and tenant protection policies. You will be reviewing these policies tonight after this nearly two-year process that can also trace its origins as early as 2017. These policies have been developed with consideration of some of the major barriers to housing stability, and causes of displacement that have been identified through this research and engagement process. They should be considered a comprehensive package of responses to address the complexity of the challenges faced by renters in Palo Alto. We understand that even relatively simple policies can take time to draft and implement. We believe staff, and the various advisory committees that have reviewed these items, have done a good job of prioritizing the proposed policies, while acknowledging the importance of the package. As part of the partnership grant we shared with the city, there is some additional funding for technical assistance which can be used to draft ordinances. With council direction these funds can be dedicated in the very short term, but will not be available in the future if consideration of specific policies is deferred. We wish to ensure that the city does not leave any opportunities and resources untapped to help Palo Alto residents vulnerable to housing instability and displacement. Thank you for your leadership in exploring these policies. Your action on these ordinances could be a model for other cities throughout the region. Sincerely, Mathew Reed Policy Director -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Emily Ann Ramos Preservation and Protection Associate, SV@Home 650.468.0493 I emily@siliconvalleyathome.org 350 W Julian St. #5, San José, CA 95110 Website Facebook LinkedIn Twitter Become a Member 350 W. Julian Street, Building 5, San José, CA 95110 408.780.8411 • www.svathome.org • info@siliconvalleyathome.org November 29, 2021 Mayor DuBois and Councilmembers City of Palo Alto 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 Dear Mayor DuBois, Vice Mayor Burt, and Councilmembers Cormack, Filseth, Kou, Stone, and Tanaka: RE: Item 10 – Review and Recommend Renter Protection Policies for Development and Implementation (Continued from the November 15, 2021 meeting) In 2019, SV@Home became a community partner in a city-initiated grant from the Partnership for the Bay’s Future (PBF), which provided a Challenge Grant Fellow to give additional staff capacity for the city to explore anti-displacement and tenant protection policies. You will be reviewing these policies tonight after this nearly two-year process that can also trace its origins as early as 2017. These policies have been developed with consideration of some of the major barriers to housing stability, and causes of displacement that have been identified through this research and engagement process. They should be considered a comprehensive package of responses to address the complexity of the challenges faced by renters in Palo Alto. We understand that even relatively simple policies can take time to draft and implement. We believe staff, and the various advisory committees that have reviewed these items, have done a good job of prioritizing the proposed policies, while acknowledging the importance of the package. As part of the partnership grant we shared with the city, there is some additional funding for technical assistance which can be used to draft ordinances. With council direction these funds can be dedicated in the very short term, but will not be available in the future if consideration of specific policies is deferred. We wish to ensure that the city does not leave any opportunities and resources untapped to help Palo Alto residents vulnerable to housing instability and displacement. Thank you for your leadership in exploring these policies. Your action on these ordinances could be a model for other cities throughout the region. Sincerely, Mathew Reed Policy Director Board of Directors Kevin Zwick, Chair United Way Bay Area Gina Dalma, Vice Chair Silicon Valley Community Foundation Candice Gonzalez, Secretary Sand Hill Property Company Andrea Osgood, Treasurer Eden Housing Shiloh Ballard Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition Bob Brownstein Working Partnerships USA Amie Fishman Non-Profit Housing Association of Northern CA Ron Gonzales Hispanic Foundation of Silicon Valley Javier Gonzalez Google Poncho Guevara Sacred Heart Community Service Janice Jensen Habitat for Humanity East Bay/Silicon Valley Janikke Klem Jan LIndenthal MidPen Housing Jennifer Loving Destination: Home Mary Murtagh EAH Housing Chris Neale The Core Companies Kelly Snider Kelly Snider Consulting Jennifer Van Every The Van Every Group STAFF Leslye Corsiglia Executive Director From:Frayda GlassTo:Council, CitySubject:Palo Alto City Council MembersDate:Monday, November 29, 2021 4:50:44 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from fglass1@gmail.com. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking onlinks. Please do not move Churchill Avenue traffic to Embarcadero/Oregon Express. They already have their owntraffic problems. Allow Southgate Neighborhood's and others' easiest connection to both the southern and northern businessareas of Palo Alto to remain. Thank you for reading this! Frayda Glass From:Allan Seid To:Channing House Bulletin Board Subject:Fwd: Have you heard about the Green Tea rewriting of the Asian trope in the Nutcracker Ballet? Date:Monday, November 29, 2021 4:50:01 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. HOORAY ! POSITIVE PORTRAYAL OF ASIANS IN THE ARTS, DANCE and BALLET. From: Allan Seid, Sharon Veach Date: Mon, Nov 29, 2021 at 3:29 PMSubject: Have you heard about the Green Tea rewriting of the Asian trope in the Nutcracker *. Ballet? https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/29/arts/dance/nutcracker-asian-stereotypes-rethinking.html As ‘Nutcracker’ Returns, Companies Rethink Depictions of Asians Ballet companies are reworking the holiday classic partly in response to a wave of anti-Asian hate that has intensified during the pandemic. A new character is featured in the Land of Sweets in Pacific Northwest Ballet’s “Nutcracker” this year: Green Tea Cricket, a springy, superhero-like figure meant to counter stereotypes ofChinese culture. Tulsa Ballet, hoping to dispel outdated portrayals of Asians, is infusing its production withelements of martial arts, choreographed by a Chinese-born dancer. And Boston Ballet is staging a new spectacle: a pas de deux inspired by traditional Chineseribbon dancing. “The Nutcracker,” the classic holiday ballet, is back after the long pandemic shutdown. Butmany dance companies are reworking the show this year partly in response to a wave of anti- Asian hate that intensified during the pandemic, and a broader reckoning over racialdiscrimination. “Everybody learned a lot this year, and I just want to make sure there’s absolutely nothing thatcould ever be considered as insulting to Chinese culture,” said Mikko Nissinen, artistic director of Boston Ballet, who choreographed the ribbon dance. “We look at everythingthrough the lens of diversity, equity and inclusion. That’s the way of the future.” Artistic leaders are jettisoning elements like bamboo hats and pointy finger movements, whichare often on display during the so-called Tea scene in the second act, when dancers perform a short routine introducing tea from China. (It’s one in a series of national dances, including Hot Chocolate from Spain and Coffee from Arabia.) At least one company, the Berlin State Ballet, has decided to forgo “Nutcracker” entirely this year amid growing concern about racist portrayals of Asians. The company said in a statementlast week that it was considering ways to “re-contextualize” the ballet and would eventually bring it back. The changes are the result of a yearslong effort by performers and activists to draw attention to Asian stereotypes in “Nutcracker.” Some renowned groups — including New York City Balletand the Royal Ballet in London — several years ago made adjustments to the Tea scene, eliminating elements like Fu Manchu-type mustaches for male dancers. Editors’ Picks Colton Underwood Comes Out and Comes Clean Virgil Abloh, Ambassador and Infiltrator Meet the Beauty Queens of Al Dhafra The sharp rise in reports of anti-Asian hate crimes during the pandemic, as well as a recentfocus on the legacy of discrimination in dance, opera and classical music, have brought freshurgency to the effort. Performers and activists have called on cultural institutions to feature more prominently Asiansingers, dancers, choreographers and composers. Some opera companies are re-examiningstaples of the repertoire like “Madama Butterfly” and “Turandot,” which contain racistcaricatures. Others, such as Boston Lyric Opera, are hosting public discussions of the worksand their stereotypes. “Folks are finally connecting the dots between the idea that what we put onstage actually hasan impact on the people offstage,” said Phil Chan, an arts administrator and former dancerwho has led the push to rethink “The Nutcracker.” In 2018, Chan began circulating a pledge titled “Final Bow for Yellowface,” which calls foreliminating outdated and offensive stereotypes in ballet. He has gathered about 1,000signatures from dancers, choreographers, educators and administrators. The move to excise racist elements in dance has not been without controversy, especially inEurope. Scottish Ballet this year eliminated caricatures like head-bobbing and ponytails from its“Nutcracker.” The production also breaks with tradition by having both male and female dancers play the role of the magician Drosselmeyer. “We ended up in a place where we can celebrate what we’re putting onstage rather than trying to defend it,” said Christopher Hampson, artistic director of the Scottish Ballet. But some observers were not happy. “In what way is it racist to portray a culture’s most recognizable attributes?” said acommentary about the new production, which aired in November on Russian state television. “In 2021, not even ballet is safe from the P.C. police.” The decision by the Berlin State Ballet to skip “Nutcracker” this year angered some cultural critics, who cited concerns about freedom of expression. “People are not stupid,” Roger Köppel, a former editor of Die Welt, a German newspaper, said in an email. “They can think for themselves and do not have to be shielded and protected fromart that is declared politically incorrect by people who want to force their worldview on all of us.” The stakes are high. For many ballet companies, “The Nutcracker” is the biggest show of the year — a financial lifeline that generates a large percentage of annual ticket sales. Dancers and artistic leaders said that reimagining “Nutcracker” was essential to attracting diverse audiences. But some said there was still room for improvement. KJ Takahashi, a City Ballet dancer who stars in the Tea scene in this year’s “Nutcracker,” which opened the day after Thanksgiving, said he welcomed the changes. Takahashi, who isJapanese American, said the revisions made him feel more included. Still, he said, there was more that could be done, noting that he finds the costumes dated and inauthentic. “The little things make a big difference,” he said. “We can go even deeper into accuracy.” Colorado Ballet staged a “Nutcracker” this month with new costumes, including in the Teascene. The rainbow colors of a dragon that appears onstage were inspired by Asian street food. Some companies are reworking the Tea scene entirely, believing more can be done to make itresonate with modern audiences. Peter Boal, artistic director of Pacific Northwest Ballet in Seattle, has been experimenting withways to tone down Asian stereotypes in its “Nutcracker” since 2015. But as Boal saw the rise of anti-Asian hate this year, he set out to make further changes in time for opening night, onNov. 26. He had long wanted to add a cricket, a symbol of good luck in China, to “Nutcracker.” Hegained permission from the Balanchine Trust, which owns the rights to the version the company performs, just a few weeks ago. (The trust had found early sketches too buglike,Boal said.) During the visit to the Land of Sweets, the cricket now emerges from a box rolled onstage andperforms a series of acrobatic moves, much like the choreography in the original, in which a man dressed in stereotypical Chinese clothes came out of the box. “The importance of change really came home this year,” Boal said, noting the spread of anti-Asian hate. He said he wanted a production that was “in line with our sensibilities today and our respect for other people and audience members and the community.” Smaller dance groups are making changes as well. At Butler University in Indianapolis, professors and students found themselves increasinglyuncomfortable with the national dances, which they felt reduced cultures to caricatures. This year, they have renamed the Tea scene “Dragon Beard Candy,” after a favorite Chinese sweet.The choreography for the scene was partly inspired by the Monkey King, a mythical animal warrior in Chinese classical literature. “There could be a chance that you’re not concerned with these issues because you don’t have to be,” said Ramon Flowers, an assistant professor at Butler who is choreographing parts ofthe production. “But by highlighting and putting this out there as often as possible, we can inspire change.” Dancers and choreographers of Asian descent say the revisions to “Nutcracker” are long overdue. Ma Cong, resident choreographer of Tulsa Ballet, said he was confused when he first saw “Nutcracker” productions featuring exaggerated makeup and stereotypical costumes. Ma, whogrew up in China, recalled thinking, “That is not Chinese.” Tulsa Ballet will premiere a production of “The Nutcracker” on Dec. 10 choreographed by Maand Val Caniparoli. For the Tea scene, Ma is incorporating elements of tai chi and classical Chinese dance. Ma said the rise in anti-Asian violence and the spread of terms like “China virus” had emboldened him to bring more elements of Chinese culture to the production. “It’s one simple word: respect,” he said. “It’s truly important to have respect for all cultures, and to be as authentic as possible.” From:S. Mitchell To:Council, City Subject:Churchill at Alma Intersection Safety Date:Monday, November 29, 2021 4:41:13 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from sumitchell@gmail.com. Learnwhy this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Honorable City Council Members, I want to urge you not to rush into decision to close Churchill at Alma. I agree on the concept and need for grade separation at railroad crossings for traffic safety, especially for pedestrians and bicyclists. However, closing Churchill at Alma would be the wrong way to achieve this goal. Closing this intersection will be the start of isolating our communities, it will disconnect one of our most important east-west connection in north Palo Alto for the next hundred years. Reversing closure in the future is most likely impossible. The Palo Alto Planning and Transportation Commission presented a well thought-out plan to improve this intersection for pedestrian and bicyclist safety. Please consider this plan. The cost is much cheaper than closing the intersection, or any other options, viaduct or partial underpass that are on the table. Most important, the concept is Connect (not Disconnect) Palo Alto. Please Take Closure of Churchill at Alma intersection off the Table. Thank you for your consideration. Susan Mitchell 1112 High StreetPalo Alto, CA 94301 From:Kate McKenzie To:Council, City Subject:Churchill Avenue Issue on Agenda this evening. Please Vote NO to closure. Date:Monday, November 29, 2021 4:20:24 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from kmckpaint@sbcglobal.net.Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. To the Palo Alto City Council, I write to ask that you please not close Churchill Avenue. It simply forces too big a swath of Palo Alto residents to be cut off from the other sections of residents, and forces huge numbers of cars onto streets that are already backed up. Have any of you been stuck on Embarcadero recently? A week ago, it tookme 20 minutes to travel 2 blocks, from Paly High School on El Camino to Trader Joe's on Embarcadero,due to the back up on Embarcadero. And don't forget Stanford Game days, which yet double the traffic onEmbarcadero and Oregon. Let's keep Palo Alto traffic moving and keep all of us connected. Please, donot close Churchill Avenue.Thank you,Sincerely,Kate McKenzie1524 Madrono AvenuePalo Alto, CA. 94306 From:Loren Brown To:Council, City Cc:midtownnews@att.net; info@adobemeadow.org; editor@paweekly.com; news@padailypost.com; local@bayareanewsgroup.com Subject:Palo Alto Tidal Flood Protection Levees Date:Monday, November 29, 2021 3:57:30 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email fromloren.brown@vancebrown.com. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. 11-29-2021 Dear Palo Alto City Council Members, I would like to call an important but long-overlooked issue to your immediate attention. A significant area of the City of Palo Alto is located in a FEMA-designated flood zone and has been in a flood zone for decades and decades. This includes approximately 6,000 parcels inPalo Alto and represents almost one-third of all parcels of land located in Palo Alto. The majority of properties that are in flood zones in Palo Alto are in tidal flood zones (at risk offlooding from SF Bay) located between Middlefield Road and the SF Bay). IF A MAJOR TIDAL FLOOD WERE TO OCCUR IN PALO ALTO, FLOOD DAMAGE COSTS ATTHESE PROPERTIES COULD BE AS HIGH AS HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS. Even without a flood event, these parcels are subject to significant annual costrequirements for flood insurance and they are subject to significant extra costs when contemplating improvements made to their properties (i.e. flood proofing or elevating theirstructures above the base flood elevation, etc.). The cummulative impact of all of the added flood-zone associated costs for these 6,000 parcels incurred over decades and decades of timeis a huge, huge $ number for Palo Alto property owners and residents. In 2016, the flood insurance premiums for 3,319 Palo Alto parcels of land totaled $3.95 Million (From Bay AreaNews Group Article dated April 19, 2017). JUST THINK ABOUT HOW MUCH MONEY THIS GROUP OF PALO ALTO RESIDENTS AND PROPERTY OWNERS HAS PAIDFOR FLOOD INSURANCE AND FLOOD IMPROVEMENTS OVER THE PAST 40 YEARS. To date, the City has taken a fairly passive approach to the flood zone situation (i.e. just enforce FEMA flood proofing regulations, etc.). Targeted efforts by the City and Valley Water District to upgrade creek flooding risks have been made, however, no significant improvements to the tidal flood protection levees have been made in thepast 40 years. Let’s contrast this situation with actions taken recently by the City of Foster City. In 2015, FEMA informed the City of Foster City that approximately 85% of the City’s 8 milesof flood protection levees were deficient. Portions of the flood protection levees werebetween two feet and four feet too low (similar to Palo Alto). Rather than allow FEMA torevise Foster City from a Zone X where no flood insurance was required to a Special FloodHazard Area (like Palo Alto), the City of Foster City acted swiftly to upgrade their levees. THE CITY OF FOSTER CITY GOVERNMENT IMMEDIATELY ACTED ON THEOBVIOUS SOLUTION. Foster City voters passed Measure P in 2018 (which authorized theCity to issue a $90 Million general obligation bond), and the City is nearing constructioncompletion of the entire project this year. Back in Palo Alto, the Santa Clara Valley Water District is moving at a snail’s pace on a SouthBay levee improvement project. See link for a 2017 Santa Clara Valley Water District reportdiscussing this long-term project… https://www.valleywater.org/sites/default/files/E7_Final_Evaluation_Report_022117.pdf The Water District has identified 14.33 miles of levees between Alviso and Palo Alto thatrequire raising in order to eliminate risk of flooding. They have identified various segments ofthe total 14.33 miles of levee improvements (between Alviso and Palo Alto). Between SanFrancisquito Creek in East Palo Alto and Permanente Creek in Mountain View, they haveidentified 2 segments (EIA 1 and EIA 2) of the levee totaling 3.8 miles that need to beupgraded. Upgrading existing levees at these two segments would take 6,000 Palo Altoparcels entirely out of the flood plain. The 2017 report identified a cost of approximately $22Million in construction costs to upgrade the levees at these two segments. This report alsoidentifies favorable Benefit-Cost rations for the Palo Alto segments. The Water District, et al has sought/received funding for one segment of the leveeimprovements (Segment EIA 10) in Alviso. That project is currently ongoing. There are noother sections of the 14.33 miles of levee improvements with either funding secured, designcompleted or a definitive/reliable project schedule issued. Tentative design schedule for allsegments of the 14.33 miles shows a 2028 date (if one can believe it). No constructionschedule has been shown for any segment except the Alviso segment (EIA 10). PS: A 7-yearduration to design a levee-improvement project is a ridiculously long time - sepecially whenthe stakes are so high to so many Palo Alto properties. DESIGNING AND CONSTRUCTING THE PALO ALTO SEGMENTS OF THIS PROJECTRIGHT NOW IS A NO BRAINER - The work to improve the levees to eliminate potentialflooding of 6,000 Palo Alto parcels is not dependent upon the other 10 miles of leveeprotection work in Santa Clara County. IMMEDIATELY figure out how to move the PaloAlto work forward to a completion ASAP. If costs can be shared with other jurisdictions, thenget these other jurisdictions to participate - but not if it means slowing the progress of thisproject down. Use Infrastructure funds coming to Palo Alto, pass a bond measure, issue thebonds and get the levee work designed and constructed ASAP. At worst, it is only a $20+Million dollar measure. Don’t let this sit another 10 to 30 years just because you want to waitfor federal funding. Why is this flood protection so critical for Foster City but not even on theradar screen in Palo Alto? Why are other Palo Alto infrastructure projects more importantthan this one? Loren Brown334 Kingsley AvenuePalo Alto, CA From:Rachel Croft To:Council, City Cc:Javier Gonzalez Subject:Churchill grade separation - eliminate the viaduct tonight Date:Monday, November 29, 2021 3:56:43 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from croftr@gmail.com. Learn whythis is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Palo Alto City Council, I have written and commented in City Council and XCAP meetings many times over the yearsas this project has progressed, but I have not yet had the opportunity to address your specific group of council members. My reason for writing is to urge you to eliminate the viaduct as an option for theChurchill crossing. The reasons to reject the viaduct, for me, are both personal as well as for the community: Community is Against the Viaduct For the community, there has been near universal disdain for this option as one that raises the visibility of the train through Palo Alto, creating visualand auditory blight by putting ugly, loud and frighteningly large infrastructure up in the air when most would prefer to not see or hear it. Some compare the tracks to BART's - but thereare huge differences - Caltrain's electricity is provided through wires on 50 foot poles vs BART's being invisible at track level, and Caltrain tracks carry freight trains which require amuch larger and stronger viaduct structure compared to BART. Many have also pointed out that putting huge transportation infrastructure up on raised tracks seems the opposite tomodern urban planning - where cities are literally taking down such structures - to beautify and rejuvenate areas - like the Embarcadero freeway in SF. In XCAP meetings, the viaduct was formally struck as an option early on, as nobody believedit would garner community acceptance. I don't believe this fact was reflected in the XCAP final report, but it was voted down early and I believe it should be eliminated by the CityCouncil now. Personal Plea to Strike the Viaduct I live on Mariposa Avenue in Southgate, with our back yard against the Caltrain right of way. The right of way between Churchill and Peers Park isone of the narrowest sections of right of way along the entire Caltrain corridor. Because of this, the viaduct would need to be very close to our property lines, as close as 2" in some ofthe plans. The viaduct itself is 20 feet tall, and the train is another 15 feet above that, with the poles rising 50 feet from the track level (70 feet in total). As you can imagine, having 100+trains per day passing along and above our back fence, a few feet from our yard, would be alarming. Then imagine three freight trains each carrying thousands of tons of freight passingup there - I can't even imagine how scary this would be. This is not to mention the noise from such trains, or the loss of privacy from passengers riding 30 feet up, way above the reach ofany fence or barrier to block their views straight into our back yard and into our house. It is time to put this option out of the running. I appreciate your work on this project and thank you for your consideration. Sincerely,Rachel Croft From:Mary To:Council, City Subject:Take Churchill Closure off as Option Date:Monday, November 29, 2021 3:46:33 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from mary@mac-archcon.com.Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear City Council, We live at 1148 High Street , next to the Accessory road to Alma. Please remove the closure of Churchill from the list of viable options. Connect (not Disconnect) Palo Alto and Take Closure off the Table. Closure is not the only option that addresses safe passage for bikes and peds. Thank you! Mary Chacon. 650-862-9972 Sent from my iPhone From:Carl Dowds To:Council, City Subject:Traffic Amelioration for Palo Alto Date:Monday, November 29, 2021 3:18:55 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from ca.dowds@yahoo.com. Learnwhy this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear City Council Members I’d like to respectfully voice my opinion on how to move forward on a traffic solution, including removing from consideration the closing of Churchill, and giving more consideration of thoughtful alternatives suchas the Partial Underpass. Closing Churchill downsides:Closing Churchill is a disconnecting option and creates a cul-de-sac for a small number of residents whileleading to increased traffic for the city and wider area. Increased traffic congestion (7000+ additionalvehicle per day) from Churchill Closure will lead to increased noise and air pollution throughout the area.Closing Churchill will benefit a small number of residents living on Churchill at the expense of a largenumber of residents throughout the city, but especially along the Embarcadero Corridor and adjacentstreets. Community Stakeholders:Among community stakeholders, not only residents but also the PAUSD have indicated their oppositionto the Churchill Closure option.More institutional stakeholders such as Town and Country, California Avenue business district, andStanford should be engaged before decisions are made, and the public should be able to follow andcomment on the process. Bicyclist and Pedestrian Safety:Safe bicycle and pedestrian routes are essential, and the Traffic Study did not take these movements intoaccount, and the Churchill Closure option puts them at even greater risk.Safe options for bicyclists and pedestrians including tunnels to Play high are doable with the other non-Churchill Closure traffic options, including Partial Underpass. Connecting Palo Alto and Grade Separation options:Grade separation gives much more flexibility and possibility. The Partial Underpass design that hasstrong support from members of the community yet has received limited time and resources in itsdevelopment. First hand accounts indicate that the City Manager obstructed the development process and seemed tobe looking for any reason to eliminate this option from consideration. In closing, please support investigation of widely-supported and connecting options such as the PartialUnderpass, and if narrowing of options is needed, please strongly consider removing the ChurchillClosure option for the solutions to our car, bike, and pedestrian traffic plans. Thank you for your consideration,Dr. Carl Dowds1111 High StreetPalo Alto, CA 94301 From:Lisa Nissim To:Council, City Subject:Connecting Palo Alto via the Churchill Crossing Date:Monday, November 29, 2021 3:07:03 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from lisa.nissim@nissimspace.com.Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Honorable Council Members, Please take the closure of Churchill Avenue off the table tonight when you consider options for the Churchill crossing. Please support the current connectivity Churchill affords all Palo Alto residents and businesses. There are many alternatives available to improving safety at this intersection for everyone without closing this road to cars. While I endorse any option that does not close Churchill to cars, pedestrians and bikes, my favorite option is to implement the safety measures currently under discussion for the existing configuration and installing as many bike and pedestrian crossings under Alma as possible, maintaining the current east/west auto access. It’s surprising to me this simple, straightforward solution is not being studied. Most importantly, please remove the closure of Churchill Avenue as an option for this important road connecting east and west Palo Alto. Thank you for the time you have taken to study Churchill as a critical link in Palo Alto’s infrastructure. Now that you understand the ramifications of closing this road, please act to assure Churchill Avenue continues to connect Palo Alto and doesn’t tear it apart. Best, Lisa Nissim 1645 Escobita Avenue From:Shaila Sadrozinski To:Council, City Cc:Hartmut Sadrozinski; Carol Anderson; Gerald Berry; Frederique Passot; Julien Boeuf Subject:Re: Support for Closure of Churchill at Caltrain crossing -- Agenda Item #11, for November 29, 2021 Date:Monday, November 29, 2021 2:44:36 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from sadro@pacbell.net. Learn whythis is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. To members of the City Council, We, too, are Southgate residents and strongly support closure of Churchill to vehicular traffic, while improving safety for bikes and pedestrians crossing Alma and Churchill to get to Palo Alto High School. We agree with all the reasons mentioned in Art Small's message below. Shaila and Hartmut Sadrozinski, 62 Churchill Ave On Monday, November 29, 2021, 11:28:21 AM PST, Art Small <art.small@gmail.com> wrote: To the City Council: As you consider options for grade separation at Caltrain crossings, please be aware that many residents strongly prefer closure of Churchill. I am a Southgate resident. I believe that automobile traffic on Churchill is already dangerous and overburdened, and will only become much worse as train traffic increases. For hours each day, Churchill is completely filled with cars, making it difficult for pedestrians to cross, difficult for residents to leave the neighborhood, and forcing drivers to use alternate routes. Closure would also give the City the opportunity to improve bicycle and pedestrian safety, especially for Palo Alto High students crossing Alma and the tracks and for commuters using the bicycle boulevard. Thank you for your consideration! Art Small 1515 Castilleja Ave, Palo Alto, CA 94306 From:Tran, JoannaTo:Council, CityCc:Executive Leadership Team; ORG - Clerk"s Office Subject:Council Consent Agenda Question for November 29: Item 6 Date:Monday, November 29, 2021 12:03:28 PMAttachments:image001.pngimage009.pngimage011.pngimage012.pngimage014.pngimage015.pngimage017.pngimage018.pngimage019.pngimage021.pngimage022.pngimage023.pngimage002.png Dear Mayor and Council Members: On behalf of City Manager Ed Shikada, please find below the staff response to an additional question from Vice Mayor Burt regarding the Monday, November 29 CouncilMeeting consent agenda item: Item 6, Approval of Amendment Number 2 to Contract Number C19173514 With SP Plus to Add Two Years to the Term for the Valet Parking Program for University Avenue and California Avenue Parking Facilities Vice Mayor question and Staff response are below: Item 6, Approval of Amendment Number 2 to Contract Number C19173514 With SP Plus to Add Two Years to the Term for the Valet Parking Program for University Avenue and California Avenue Parking Facilities 1. The staff report states that valet operations are currently suspended. Does that mean that the city is not currently incurring any costs associated with the valet contract and that we will only incur costs as long as the services remain de-activated? Answer: The city does not incur costs for this service unless it is in operation. 2. The report states that Cal Ave merchants “have indicated that their business is down” since the parking garage construction impacts began and that temporary valet services for Cal Ave were initiated as a result. That statement appears to have been imported from a 2019 report but is no longer applicable since the Cal Ave garage that added a net ~300 spaces has been completed for a year and is currently very underutilized. Is there a reason that the contract extension includes Cal Ave? Answer: The contract was amended to provide construction mitigation during the Cal Ave parking garage construction. That said, valet services could provide mitigation for any future need for enhanced parking capacity in the Cal Ave district. Valet services would only be utilized when parking impacts are occurring/anticipated. Thank you, Joanna Joanna Tran Executive Assistant to the City Manager Office of the City Manager (650) 329-2105 | joanna.tran@cityofpaloalto.org www.cityofpaloalto.org From: Rice, Danille <Danille.Rice@CityofPaloAlto.org> Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2021 1:35 PM To: Council, City <city.council@cityofpaloalto.org> Cc: Executive Leadership Team <ExecutiveLeadershipTeam@cityofpaloalto.org>; ORG - Clerk's Office <ClerksOffice@cityofpaloalto.org> Subject: Council Consent Agenda Question for November 29: Item 6 and 7 Dear Mayor and Council Members: On behalf of City Manager Ed Shikada, please find below the staff response to a question from Councilmember Cormack regarding the Monday, November 29 CouncilMeeting consent agenda item: Item 6, Approval of Amendment Number 2 to Contract Number C19173514 With SP Plus to Add Two Years to the Term for the Valet Parking Program for University Avenue and California Avenue Parking Facilities Item 7, Approval of the Office of the City Auditor's IT Risk Management Assessment Report as Recommended by the Policy and Services Committee Councilmember question and Staff response are below: Item 6, Approval of Amendment Number 2 to Contract Number C19173514 With SP Plus to Add Two Years to the Term for the Valet Parking Program for University Avenue and California Avenue Parking Facilities 1. What will happen if the Council does not approve this amendment? Answer: In the event contract extension is not approved, the City will not be able to support or offer valet services to meet the parking needs in the commercial core areas as the City recovers from the impacts of the pandemic. The contract extension, which only extends the time period of the contract, provides the flexibility to the City to continue providing such services as needed when the parking garages reach capacity. Valet is an essential part of short-term parking plans. In addition to parking operations, valet ambassadors provide security enhancement at these facilities. Therefore, if the contract expires, the City will have to re-initiate the procurement process for acquiring such services. The procurement of a new contract could cause a gap in the services and may also increase costs for providing these services. Item 7, Approval of the Office of the City Auditor's IT Risk Management Assessment Report as Recommended by the Policy and Services Committee 1. Does Council need to pull this item in order to direct staff to initiate a solicitation to develop a Risk Management Framework? Answer: Pulling the item to direct staff to develop a Risk Management Framework is not required. If the item is approved, staff will develop a work plan to address the actions documented in the report, which includes creating a Risk Management Framework. Thank you. Danille Rice Customer Service Coordinator City Manager’s Office (650) 329-2229| danille.rice@cityofpaloalto.org www.cityofpaloalto.org From:tom tomvlasic.com To:Council, City Cc:City Mgr; Rachel Croft; linda VLASIC Subject:Comments on Rail Crossing Alternatives for Churchill Avenue -- Request for Information Date:Monday, November 29, 2021 11:30:56 AM Attachments:5-14-18 Rail Xing Email to PACC.pdf Some people who received this message don't often get email from tom@tomvlasic.com. Learnwhy this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Good morning, Three weeks ago I sent this email to the city council and hoped that the cost impact data would be available for consideration at the next council discussion on the rail crossings. I see the matter is on your agenda for tonight, but there is nothing new in the staff materials for the meeting relative to my cost request. Perhaps I missed it. If so please let me know, otherwise please advise me as to if/when this information will be available. Thank you, Tom Vlasic From: tom tomvlasic.com <tom@tomvlasic.com> Sent: Sunday, November 7, 2021 11:04 AM To: city.council@cityofpaloalto.org <city.council@cityofpaloalto.org> Cc: Rachel Croft <croftr@gmail.com>; John Monroe <monroe.jw@gmail.com>; Anne Kramer <akramer@askergoworks.com>; linda VLASIC <h2op@aol.com> Subject: Fw: Draft Comments on Rail Crossing Alternatives for Churchill Avenue Honorable Mayor and City Council members, Last Monday you considered and heard from a number of residents about the options for the rail crossing at Churchill Avenue. You have been considering the matter of rail crossings for a number of years and we are sure you are as frustrated as the rest of the residents of Palo Alto's neighborhoods about how long this process is taking. We are not sure where the blame really comes to rest, but the damage the process is doing to the community is significant. And that damage is pulling the community apart not "connecting" it. (And, please also see our attached 5-14-18 email to you that underscores many of the comments that follow, and as Yogi Berra famously said, "déjà vu all over again!!!") We offer our comments on our preferred "closure" option below, but first we respectfully ask for a full disclosure "for the record" of the City's costs to date on the analysis and deliberations over the crossings issue. We also offer some perspective on the matter of "connectivity" that is a bit different from those presented at your last meeting. Costs of the rail crossing process. This is a formal request for a full accounting of all City costs to date on the analysis and deliberations associated with the rail crossing matter, not just for Churchill but for all of the crossing locations in Palo Alto. We are sure your staff has a complete record of the costs and there are likely others beyond those listed below. The residents of the City and the City Council must have a full and clear understand of how much this process has cost the community to date. This will help inform all of us on what continuing the matter indefinitely really means in terms of financial burdens to the community. Please provide all costs not limited to, but including the following: -- All Consultant costs. -- Staff costs for all work associated with the process including that of the City Attorney, e,g., managing the consultant process and consultants, review of consultant products, preparation of reports for all meetings--council, planning commission, XCAP, public sessions, follow-up to meetings, etc. --Administrative costs associated notices and record keeping, etc. for all public meetings. --Costs for considering and responding to citizens requests, including study of the Churchill under crossing option. Connectivity. Those arguing that Churchill closure goes against the goal of east-west connectivity, seem to suggest that driving, typically too fast, through our neighborhoods is positive connectivity. Bike and foot connectivity is far more important than vehicle east west connectivity in terms of uniting the community. We should be doing all we can to get people out of their cars and at one time the City actually supported this goal. Maximizing traffic flow is not directed at getting people out of their cars or slowing car traffic through our neighborhoods. We put the burden on Stanford and other uses and businesses to seek traffic management options that reduce number the of trips and vehicles. Closing Churchill certainly will further push toward mass transit solutions and these become far more critical as Palo Alto continues to intensify development along the rail line and elsewhere throughout the City. As stated above, our preferred and the only really viable option at this point is closure of Churchill. The XCAP analysis and recommendations are sound and based on "tons" of study of the options. The visual, practical and emotional impacts of either the vehicle underpass or viaduct options will destroy any opportunity for community "connectivity." (Remember the Embarcadero Freeway and the fact it was not replaced after the 1989 earthquake.) A well designed bike and pedestrian connection will help calm the connectivity. This works at the underpass adjacent to the PAMF at Homer Avenue and can work just as well at Churchill. Yes, there are traffic issues that need to be resolved, and these have been studied with good mitigations offered, but in the long term, getting people out their cars is far more "sustainable" than maximizing vehicle traffic flow. Closing Churchill will result in inconvenience for us but we would rather see what money there will be available spent for "connectivity" grade separations at southern locations in the City wherer they are needed not on the North side where there are already three such grade separated crossings and, in any case, money also needs to be spent to upgrade the three existing North side grade separations. Connectivity needs to be viewed for the entire City not just the North side!!! The sooner the City makes a decision the sooner it will control the impacts on Palo Alto and its citizens. The longer it takes for the Council to make a decision, there is certainty that the outside factors will control Palo Alto. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this matter. Tom and Linda Vlasic Southgate Neighborhood tom tomvlasic.com Mon 5/14/2018 12:18 PM To: Council City <city.council@cityofpaloalto.org> Cc: dshenster@gmail.com; Home <h2op@aol.com>; Jim McFall jim@mcfallarch.com +1 other Dear Mayor and City Council Members, Unfortunately, my wife and I are traveling and can't attend this evening's council meeting relative to the Rail program options. We did, however, want to share our concerns with respect to the options the committee has suggested be studied for the Churchill Avenue crossing. As residents of Southgate since 1972, we have watched the conditions associated with the rail corridor and the Churchill Avenue crossing for a very long time. We have considered the realities associated with the Rail corridor, high speed rail and Cal Train plans. We strongly believe that the only reasonable option for Churchill that should be studied is closure, i.e., CAX as identified in the staff report. We take this position for the following reasons: 1. There are already three grade separated crossings in North PA. These serve the northern community and can be modified or adjusted with minimum community impact to serve increased rail traffic. If any money is to be spent on another grade separation it should be for the South part of the City. This is the only fair alternative. 2. There is limited land for any grade separated crossing at Churchill. The community impacts with taking of land/houses and construction of any grade separated crossing, either above or below as described in the staff report, would destroy the quality of life in the community, including that around Paly. More land is available in the possible crossing areas in the South part of the City and the benefits to improved circulation in that part of the City seem to off set the impacts far more than would be the case for the north part of town. 3. The time frame needed for completion of Cal Trains electrification and having more trains in service to serve and mitigate (i.e., get people out of cars) growth along the corridor means that any realistic options must minimize construction cost and time. Thus, it is not practical to think we can achieve (or study) a large number new grade separated crossings, or for that matter, tunnels, trenches, etc. and have them actually constructed within the required time frame. 4. The City has indicated its preferred policy for traffic management as getting people out of cars. It appears that the measures that have been taken are increasingly effective in frustrating traffic movement (and drivers) in Palo Alto. Closing Churchill would be consistent with this policy and certainly be consistent with forcing drivers to consider other ways to get in, around and through the City. Again, we request that the only option for Churchill that should be considered or studied is the closure option. Studying the others would be a waste of time and money and, overall, impractical. Thank you for consideration of our comments and service to Palo Alto. Best regards, Tom and Linda Vlasic Mariposa Avenue From:Art Small To:Council, City Cc:Rachel Croft; Sharon Small; Shaila Sadrozinski Subject:Support for Closure of Churchill at Caltrain crossing -- Agenda Item #11, for November 29, 2021 Date:Monday, November 29, 2021 11:28:22 AM Some people who received this message don't often get email from art.small@gmail.com. Learnwhy this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. To the City Council: As you consider options for grade separation at Caltrain crossings, please be awarethat many residents strongly prefer closure of Churchill. I am a Southgate resident. I believe that automobile traffic on Churchill is already dangerous and overburdened, and will only become much worse as train traffic increases. For hours each day, Churchill is completely filled with cars, making itdifficult for pedestrians to cross, difficult for residents to leave the neighborhood,and forcing drivers to use alternate routes. Closure would also give the City the opportunity to improve bicycle and pedestrian safety, especially for Palo Alto High students crossing Alma and the tracks and forcommuters using the bicycle boulevard. Thank you for your consideration! Art Small 1515 Castilleja Ave, Palo Alto, CA 94306 From:Carol C. Friedman To:Council, City Subject:Castilleja Reimagined project! Date:Monday, November 29, 2021 10:15:35 AM Some people who received this message don't often get email fromcarolcfriedman465@gmail.com. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Mayor DuBois and members of The City Council, I am a nearby neighbor of Castilleja School, and I enthusiastically support the Castilleja Reimagined project! I know that a vocal group of neighbors oppose the project. I think everyone in Palo Alto knows about them by now with their aggressive signs and their inability to: 1. Live in the present and realize that Palo Alto is more dense than decades ago, and that change is not caused by Castilleja. Just observe the increase in traffic to Stanford University or the greater number of construction workers. 2. Move beyond the over-enrollment issue, which the school self-reported and has worked to remedy by meeting every City-mandated reduction since 3. Admit that Castilleja is a SMALL project with lower FAR and no significant traffic impacts The small group of people who oppose this project have been very effective at making their voices heard. They never acknowledge the rest of us, the many families and individuals in our neighborhood who treasure Castilleja as a good neighbor and an asset in our community. It has been a skewed conversation led by negativity. I am very enthusiastic about the school, and as a voter, I will be extremely disappointed and frustrated if Castilleja is not granted permission to modernize and accept more girls without creating traffic. Finally, I want to assert that I am an advocate for slowing growth in Palo Alto and for thinking carefully about the future of our City. As such, I want to point out that this project is thoughtful and is NOT AN EXPANSION. The building footprints will be smaller than what Castilleja has now. The visual improvement is long overdue. The buildings that currently line Kellogg, Bryant, and Emerson are dated from the 1960's and unappealing. On top of that, I want to assert that this is a thoughtful update with no significant impacts. Please place the underground parking below ground. Maintain Speaker Field for fitness and sports for girls and preserve the beauty of the campus along the Embarcadero for my Old Palo Alto neighborhood, Residentialist leaders should support this project as a role model in our community, a way to modernize and create sustainable spaces without increasing FAR or creating traffic impacts. After eight long years, five variations of this Castilleja Reimagined project and hundreds of meetings, it is time to make a decision to allow Castilleja to provide a modern school environment for the girls. I ask you to be bold in supporting this extraordinary project for the education of girls in our great community. I hope you will see me among “the neighbors” who support education for girls in an updated, modern setting and address my concerns fairly in this review process. Thank you, Carol C. Friedman 465 Lowell Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 View this email in your browser. Visit us on www.lwvpaloalto.org, Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter December VOTER November 29, 2021 In this Issue Message from our President LWVPA Virtual Speaker Event LWVPA Community Event LWVPA Program Planning Meeting November 2021 Board Meeting Highlights Advocacy Reports Celebration of Life From:LWV Palo Alto VOTERTo:Council, CitySubject:LWVPA December VOTER - Your League in ActionDate:Monday, November 29, 2021 9:51:11 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious ofopening attachments and clicking on links. Subscribe to our Google Calendar Events by Other Leagues LWV Bay Area Brown Bag Lunch Dialogue on Environmental Justice LWV 100th Anniversary Celebration Announcements LWVPA Observer Corps Needs Volunteers Redistricting Updates Bay Area Monitor Notes Happy Holidays Message from our President Hello to all, and I wish everyone a happy holiday season. We continue to highlight priorities at our Board meetings. In November we heard from Mary O'Kicki and Hilary Glann, Co-Chairs of the Natural Resources Committee, who summarized the committee’s work on climate change, in particular with electrification and food waste. League members are urged to get involved so we can all be part of the solution at tackling such critical issues. Our next Virtual Speaker event is just around the corner! Don’t forget to sign up for Lori Nishiura Mackenzie’s presentation on “Language of Leadership” on Thursday, December 9. This promises to be a very exciting and relevant presentation. Thanks to Myra Lessner and the Events Team for leading this effort. Voter Services Co-Chair Liz Jensen and member Lizzy Gardener did in- person voter registration and education presentations for Middle College students at Foothill College in October and pre-registered/registered 37 students. They will go back in mid-December. It is so important to have young people involved early in the voting process. As we look ahead, on Wednesday, January 26, the League is hosting a community conversation on housing. Housing continues to be a long-term issue in Palo Alto and we invite all of you to join us and partake in this critical discussion. The League’s annual Program Planning meeting, where League priorities for the coming year are voted on, will take place on Saturday, February 12. Lisa Ratner, Advocacy Chair, will lead this important meeting and we urge all members to join us and let us know your top priority issues for the League. Looking back to last January, when we were deep in the throes of the coronavirus, it is wonderful to have the last year behind us! Let’s look forward to a healthier and safer 2022! Happy and healthy holidays to all! Liz LWVPA Virtual Speaker Event We are proud to announce our next webinar event featuring: Lori Nishiura Mackenzie Lead Strategist, Diversity, Equity & Inclusion, Stanford Graduate School of Business Thursday, December 9, 2021 12:00 pm - 1:00 pm Language of Leadership (for all) Language is a powerful tool. The word choices you make shape the culture in your organization. Sometimes we are intentional in our language use. However, oftentimes our word choices are not intentional or well thought out. In these instances, stereotypes about gender, ethnicity and other characteristics may inadvertently influence the words we choose in ways that can advantage some or disadvantage others on your teams. Learn the language of leadership so that you can be the best advocate for yourself, your peers, and your teammates. About the Speaker: Lori is the lead strategist for Diversity, Equity & Inclusion at Stanford Graduate School of Business, and cofounder of the new Stanford VMware Women’s Leadership Innovation Lab, offering her a unique view at the intersection of the two organizations. Under her leadership, the lab launched a corporate affiliates program in 2014, and is now the second largest affiliates program on the Stanford campus. In her work at Stanford GSB, Lori is pioneering “small wins” to make the classroom experience more inclusive, to diversify our community, and to foster new research in the areas of leadership, inclusion, and diversity. Lori is a keynote speaker to a wide range of audiences, was featured as one of the BBC 100 Women 2017, and was interviewed for the award-winning documentary, Bias, which premiered in 2018. She has an MBA from the Wharton School of Business and a BA in Economics from the University of California, Berkeley. LWVPA Community Event Register Now Housing for all – HOW? A community conversation on housing in Palo Alto Wednesday, January 26 7:00 pm - 8:30 pm Palo Alto must comply with state mandates for additional housing that is affordable for residents in a wide range of income levels. But how can we meet our mandate? We have been struggling with this challenge for years. Join a community conversation on housing, hosted by LWV of Palo Alto and Alta Housing to learn about and discuss the options. We will hear from community members who struggle with housing costs and discuss what we can do to increase our housing stock in addition to helping renters and future owners. We will also hear from housing experts who will describe what neighboring communities are doing to meet their housing targets. Breakout group discussions will follow and participants will express their thoughts on the best ways forward. Though the program is focused on Palo Alto, people from neighboring communities are warmly invited to participate. Join us for this lively discussion! LWVPA Program Planning Meeting LWV of Palo Alto Program Planning Meeting will be held on Saturday, February 12, 2022. Please mark your calendar and stay tuned for more details. November 2021 Board Meeting Highlights The Board heard a detailed report from the Natural Resources Committee on their work to tackle climate change, a League program priority. They are looking for additional volunteers for this ambitious work. We also need new volunteers for our Observer Corps. Please email lwvpaoffice@gmail.com if you’d like to help. The following motions were approved: 1. Accept A through C on Consent Calendar, including minutes and confirmation of the Board's Emergency Action Committee (EAC) letter to the City Council in support of renter protection. 2. Send a letter to PAUSD to request actions on responsible gun ownership Register Now following city ordinance and in keeping with local districts’ practices. 3. Plan a Civics Education program for March 2022. 4. Extend the expiration date of the remaining seven unrenewed members from 2020 to December 31, 2021 to support conversion to ClubExpress. Our next Board Meeting is on Tuesday, January 25, 7 - 9 pm. All members are invited! Please use our Zoom meeting link to join. - Megan Swezey Fogarty, Secretary Advocacy Reports Local Housing & Transportation: LWV Palo Alto Board sent a letter to the City Council supporting the renter protection reforms recommended by the Human Relations Commission, which would extend state caps on rent increases to most of the rental housing in Palo Alto. The Board also recommended two additional rental housing preservation policies to be studied by the city staff: 1) a Community Opportunity to Purchase (COPA) ordinance which would give qualified nonprofits the right of first refusal to purchase non-subsidized private housing in order to preserve affordability of the units, and 2) use of the CalCHA (California Community Housing Agency) joint power authority to purchase existing private non-subsidized housing with housing revenue bonds to create additional subsidized workforce and low-income housing. Responsible Gun Ownership: The Board also approved a letter to the PAUSD urging it to annually notify students, parents, and guardians of the obligation to avoid negligent storage of guns at home. A new Palo Alto ordinance requires firearms at home to be stored unloaded, using a trigger lock or locked safe. Both Mountain View-Whisman and Sequoia Union High School districts have agreed to similar annual notifications for families. These safe storage requirements have been shown to dramatically decrease the number of accidental or intentional shooting deaths of teens and children. Natural Resources: The Board also heard from our Natural Resources Committee Co-Chairs Mary O’Kicki and Hilary Glann, who described the committee’s focus on climate change by studying the city’s Sustainability and Climate Action Plan (S/CAP), particularly electrification and food waste. The co- chairs emphasized that any member who wants to take action on climate change is welcome to join the committee and that there are many issues to track, such as sea level rise and reducing emissions from vehicles by locating housing close to jobs. Personal actions can make a difference, such as making sure your home is ready for electrification or replacing one meal of beef with a plant-based food. The committee is particularly focused on making sure transition to electrification in Palo Alto is equitable for renters and people living in older multi-family housing. The city’s S/CAP goal is to transition to all-electric buildings by 2030. Because replacing appliances and upgrading panels is expensive and beyond the reach of many people living in older buildings, the committee will be tracking Palo Alto’s plans to offset these costs for residents who need help. State Bills recently supported by LWVC on elections, campaign finance, and planning and zoning include: SB 503 (exact signature is not required for election official to determine if the signature on a ballot is valid); SB 686 (would require LLCs which qualify as a committee under the Political Reform Act to file a statement of members with the Secretary of State and a list of members who made at least a $10,000 contribution to the LLC); SB 1401 (a two-year bill which would eliminate minimum parking requirements for many buildings located close to public transit, with a carve-out to encourage support for EVs and ride-sharing options); and SB 1445 (requires regional housing plans and housing allocations to include emergency evacuation routes due to wildfires and sea level rise in the list of climate impacts considered). National LWVUS statement on the guilty verdict in the murder of Ahmaud Arbery said: “While a verdict cannot bring back Ahmaud Arbery, truth prevailed….” The League’s joint statement with LWV of Wisconsin on the acquittal of Kyle Rittenhouse said: “Today justice was not served ... our national obsession with firearms is out of control [and] sets a dangerous precedent that armed civilians can take to the streets to incite violence.” - Lisa Ratner, 2nd Vice President and Advocacy Chair Celebration of Life Joyce Tavrow (1930 - 2021) Joyce Tavrow, a LWV Life Member who joined in 1958 and was a member of the LWV of Palo Alto since 2009, passed away after a short illness. She was best known within the LWVPA as an active and informed presenter for our Speakers Bureau, where she led training sessions, made Pros & Cons presentations, and did other League-related speaking engagements. Before her membership in the LWVPA, Joyce was active with the LWV of South San Mateo County and LWV of San Diego, and she served as state League president in Colorado. Joyce had strong opinions and was not shy about expressing them except when she was leading Pros & Cons, where she was careful to represent the League and remained nonpartisan. For many League Board and Off-Board members, Joyce was the go-to person for all things League-related, whether it was information on League positions and studies, the Voter Guide, or the Program Planning meeting agendas. Long-time LWVPA member Mary Jo Levy remembers Joyce fondly: I really got to know Joyce when I began coordinating presentations of the Pros & Cons of California and local ballot measures for the Palo Alto League in the early 2000’s. Joyce was always the first to (gladly) sign up to represent our League in the community and the most vocal about being nonpartisan whenever members spoke publicly on election issues. A mentor for everyone participating because of her years of experience, her preparation was phenomenal. She read the full text of measures, followed commentaries, news articles and editorials, read all ballot documents, and noted supporters and naysayers before honing down the facts for her presentations. I especially remember her sending along each election year the work of a Californian who writes haikus distilling the content of key ballot measures. Nothing slipped by Joyce. I’d call her a Leaguer’s Leaguer. This lady, with an infectious smile, will be missed for her contributions to the LWV and her kind friendship. Joyce was an important and respected League leader who was informed, active, and outspoken until the end. She will be missed, and we offer our condolences to her husband Hillard and her family. The family of Joyce Tavrow is hosting a virtual "Celebration of Life" event on Sunday, December 5th, from 4 to 5 PM Pacific time. Please use the Zoom link to join. Joyce's obituary can be found here. Memorial donations may be made to the League of Women Voters of California. - Lynne Russell, Board Member, with assistance from former Board President Veronica Tincher Events by Other Leagues LWV Bay Area Brown Bag Lunch Dialogue on Environmental Justice Tuesday, November 30, 2021 12:00 pm - 1:00 pm Join us to discuss Environmental Justice with APEN (Asian Pacific Environmental Network) Executive Director Vivian Huang and BARHII (Bay Area Regional Health Inequities Initiative) Executive Director Melissa Jones. They will be covering the unjust and unavoidable disparities that impact communities of color; the elderly; children; and those unable to afford food, quality shelter, fuels for cooling, transportation, or alternatives to contaminated drinking water. They will explore solutions and methods in which League members can advocate in their communities. This is the first of a series of Community Conversations LWVBA will host throughout the program year 2021-2022. For more information, please contact: lwvbayarea@gmail.com. Register Now LWV 100th Anniversary Celebration New Date: Sunday, February 27, 2022. 2:00 pm - 4:00 pm Location: 70 W. Hedding, San Jose – Board of Supervisors Chambers Have you registered for our celebration of over 100 years of serving democracy? The excitement is building – few organizations make it 100 years. We’ve accomplished a lot and there is so much more we can do. Come connect with people who care about good government and want to collaborate on this. Register Now Announcements LWVPA Observer Corps Needs Volunteers! Two of our League Observers of the City Council meetings, Leslie Fish and Kevin Ma, are moving on, though Observer Jeannie Lythcott will continue to observe School Board meetings. Leslie Fish describes her two-year stint as "an education." She says: “As Observers, we not only support our local League but also gain a deeper understanding of the complex issues facing Palo Alto and beyond.” Observers attend local agency or commission meetings, noting what actions were taken, whether the public was adequately notified of these actions, and whether issues that arose need follow-up by our League. Training will be provided. Email us at lwvpaoffice@gmail.com. We’d love to hear from you! Redistricting Updates Find redistricting info and ways to participate on our LWVPA website. Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors Redistricting The Board of Supervisors voted to advance three maps for further consideration. They will meet on December 7 and final boundaries must be adopted by December 15. Find information here. Citizens Redistricting Commission (CRC) for redrawing Congressional, State Senate, Assembly, and Board of Equalization District lines On November 12, the 2020 CRC released draft maps for these districts. Draft maps can be found here. Public can provide feedback using this form. MidPeninsula Regional Open Space Staff prepared three draft redistricting scenario maps for input from the Board and general public. Provide feedback here before December 10. Valley Water Map and drafting meeting is on December 1; map review is on January 12, 2022; and Board review and actions are in February, 2022. Foothill-De Anza Community College First public hearing on draft maps is scheduled for December 13 at 7 pm. - Liz Jensen, Voter Services Co-Chair Bay Area Monitor Notes Mindful Thanksgiving Community Discussion Resilience Playbook Seizing the Drought Opt Outside Happy Holidays from all of us! LWVPA Board Officers & Directors OFFICERS Liz KnissPresident Nancy Shepherd1st Vice President, Immediate Past President Lisa Ratner 2nd Vice President, Advocacy DIRECTORS Ellen Forbes Webmaster Liz Jensen Voter Services Karen Kalinsky Collaborations & Community Outreach Megan Swezey Fogarty Secretary Theivanai Palaniappan Treasurer Myra Lessner Events Hannah Lu Communications Jeannie Lythcott At-Large DEI Kathy Miller Voter Services Sigrid Pinksy Parliamentarian Lynne Russell Fundraising Co-Chair Cari Templeton Membership LWVPA Off-Board Budget Kathy Miller, Chair Civics Education Jenn Wagstaff Hinton Civil Discourse Liaison Susan Owicki Education Team Chair TBD Equal Justice Chair TBD Fundraising Co-Chairs Abbie Dorosin Heike Enders Natural Resources Mary O'Kicki Hilary Glann Nominating Committee Chair, Terry Godfrey Cari Templeton Dawn Billman Melissa Baten Caswell Observer Corps Kevin Ma Pros & Cons and League Presentations Mary Jo Levy Responsible Gun Ownership Housing & Transportation Steve Levy, Chair LWVPA Board Folder Task Force Ellen Smith Hannah Lu Hilary Glann Stacey Ashlund Social Media Admin Aisha Piracha-Zakariya Rachel Kellerman Bella Daly VOTER and E-Blast Editors Hannah Lu Arati Periyannan Voter's Edge David Springer Stay Informed! Sign Up for LWV California & LWVUS News & Alerts Click here to sign up for LWVC Newsletter and Action Alerts Click here to sign up for Email News and Action Alerts from LWVUS How to contact your elected officials United States President Joseph R. Biden (202) 456-1414 Senator Dianne Feinstein (415) 393-0707 Senator Alex Padilla 202-224-3553 Rep. Anna Eshoo (650) 323-2984 California Governor Gavin Newsom (916) 445-2841 Senator Josh Becker (650) 212-3313 Assemblymember Marc Berman (650) 691-2121 Santa Clara County Supervisor Joe Simitian (650) 965-8737 joe.simitian@bos.sccgov.org Other Areas in California Locate your elected officials by street address For a complete list of ALL your electeds, see here on our website. JOIN A TEAM Learn More About Our Teams and Programs on our Website! Facebook Twitter Website Copyright © 2021 League of Women Voters Palo Alto, All rights reserved. From Voter Recipient List 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. From:Kimberley Wong To:Architectural Review Board Cc:Council, City; French, Amy; Lait, Jonathan; Shikada, Ed; Council, City Subject:Comments for the December 2, 2021 ARB meeting re: Castilleja with previous Comments of FEIR review for ARBAug 20,2020 meeting attached Date:Monday, November 29, 2021 9:50:34 AM Attachments:Screen Shot 2020-08-19 at 10.54.43 AM.PNGIMG_4911.PNG Some people who received this message don't often get email from sheepgirl1@yahoo.com. Learnwhy this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear ARB Board members, Castilleja responded on May 25, 2021 to the March 29 Palo Alto City Council meeting. In summary: 1. Parking Reduction: Reduce the underground parking facility to ensure preservation of heritage trees. 2. Tree protection: Take further measures to protect heritage trees and reduce the loss of protected trees 3. Reduce Gross Floor area: Reconsider massing and compatibility of design My question to the Architectural Review Board is, do the new revised plans satisfy these requirements? Have more trees been protected by the encroaching buildings that Castilleja proposes to build? Will reducing the garage scope reduce the massive presence on the campus in the eyes of the residences surrounding the campus? The breaks in the building to reduce the massing on Bryant, Kellogg and Emerson are slightly less jarring, but the resulting buildings are still much larger than any singlefamily home. The trees that will take years to grow will not mask large structures incompatible with the neighboring single family residences in our lifetime. Although this the Architectural Review Board is to analyze the appearance but not thefunctionality of the garage to the neighborhood, this does not negate the fact that cars will encroach a Major Bike Boulevard to enter an underground ground built dangerously close to homes, trees and utility lines. For a school lauding its LEED buildings, the garage certainly cannot be considered an LEED structure. It will in factbe just the opposite and cause tremendous releases of greenhouse gasses with digging and transporting thousands soil as well as pouring tons of CO2 emitting concrete into the area. The resultant garage will be just as hazardous. Just recently I saw this sign on an OPEN garage at the Stanford Shopping Center at Arboretum andQuarry Road in Palo Alto. It was quite alarming.. And the effect of this would much more hazardous for an UNDERGROUND garage open to students and staff driving into the garage and walking up through the passageways breathing these dangerous fumes. Please, I urge you to consider to take closer look at the plans without the smoke and mirrors of immature tree plantings and treatment of sidings, etc to understand that the scale of the proposed Castilleja buildings that are inconsistent with the neighboring single family homes in the residential area in which the campus is nestled. Castilleja should take this opportunity to reduce the massive structures that exist presently with something more to scale with the neighboring residences. Secondly, I urge that theArchitectural Review Board not approve the garage plans. Building an underground garage even with half the spaces still requires almost as much digging and will NOT take 1/2 the time to build. Even if it is structurally sound, the construction and use of it it will cause countless safety and health hazards the neighboring community for nowand future generations. Thank you for your consideration on these matters. Kimberley Wong Dear ARB board members, My name is Kimberley Wong and my husband Nelson and I have lived directly across from the Lockey house for 24 years. With the construction of the gym in 2007 our roads and livability were affected by noise, dust, and the constant dewatering for months. The project Castilleja is proposing is monstrous in comparison. Even the newest alternative fails aesthetically and negatively on living conditions due to its size and scale. The Palo Alto Municipal Code sec 18.76.020 ARB requirement is that a project "enhances the living conditions on the site... and in adjacent residential areas". These refer to the 34 homes surrounding the school. It also says that projects should "promote visual environments which are of high aesthetic quality and variety and which, at the same time, are considerate of each other." The newly proposed Castileja buildings are also not keeping with the scale and character of buildings on the campus or surrounding neighborhood of homes in Professorville and Old Palo Alto. And the proposed project does NOT take into consideration that the surrounding neighborhood needs to bear the brunt of trafficbrought on by this massive project. The beeps, whistles and car traffic will carry into the neighborhood. And cars traveling in and out of the proposed underground garage and multiple drop off sites will compete with bicyclists on the Bike Safety Boulevard and around the campus. In terms of a4, of “promoting visual environments of high aesthetic quality” The proposed 3/4 of a block long building fails to blend in with the classic homes such as tudors, craftsman, colonial revival on Kellogg. It is also incompatible with theCraftsman style Administration building and Chapel on campus as well as the Lockey house, a charming home which retains much of it’s old character. Neither does this building blend in with the other classic homes on the other 3 sides of the campus. Gustave Laumeister, son-in-law of Henry Seale, who sold Miss Lockey the property tobuild her campus, was well known for developing the Administration building as well as many homes in Professorville, just north of the campus. Photos of the the surrounding homes are attached. As for size and massing: Please look at these two aerial photos. To the left is Target which is 600 ft long and Castilleja which currently is 200 feet long. Though the scale is different, the relative mass in relation to the street length is the same. At least the view towards Target on Ortega Drive is shielded by three separate buildings whereasthe residents on Kellogg are looking at one huge mass. Making this building any longer will be even more overbearing than it is now. And the style as we see below is not compatible with any of the classic homes across the street. Here are the samplings of Kellogg Homes. The homes on the other 3 surrounding streets are attached below to give you a full view of the styles of homes which Castilleja should strive to be compatible with to maintain consistency within their city block. The size and scale of this new proposed building is out of line with no pass-throughs as the present building . Take a look at the original plans as Laumeister arranged the buildings to reduce the scale and size of any one building to aesthetically blend into the single family neighborhood on the 6 acre land that the campus was zoned for. It is understandable with the growing student population that more buildings had to be built. But extending the present facade beyond what exists now into a longer monolithic building in the most recent proposal is overwhelming and unacceptable and inconsistent to this residential neighborhood. This goes against Policy L-6 ofmixed-use areas. Policy L-6: Where possible, avoid abrupt changes in scale and density between residential and non-residential areas and between residential areas of differentdensities. To promote compatibility and gradual transitions between land uses, place zoning district boundaries at mid-block locations rather than along streets wherever possible. With regard to bike safety, I and many of my friends have seen countless incidents of near misses of bicyclist being hit at the corner of Embarcadero and Bryant. I am shocked to see that in the FEIR this was reported: Bryant Street Collision Analysis The collision history for the segment of Bryant Street between Embarcadero Road and Kellogg Avenue was reviewed to determine the number of collisions during a recent three-year period and to potentially identify trends based on the collisionhistory. This information is based on records available from the California Highway Patrol as published in their Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS) reports from March 30, 2015 to March 31, 2018. A single non-injury collision occurred along the study segment during this period. This collision occurred between a vehicle and a fixed object and did not involve a bicycle. Finding – Given the relatively small number of documented crashes and the lack of any crashes involving bicycles along the segment of Bryant Street betweenEmbarcadero Road and Kellogg Avenue, a safety concern involving bicycles along the study segment has not been demonstrated. On February 13, 2018 this accident happened and was written about in the news: https://paloaltoonline.com/news/2018/02/13/injury-collision-blocks-embarcadero-road As stated here, two men were injured and sent to the hospital. One was a teacher who was hospitalized for several days. His injuries were severe enough that he was not able to return to teach for quite a while. It is surprising that this major incident was completely overlooked. This begs the question how many other incidents from 2015- 2018 were not included in the FEIR. As I remember, the traffic was redirected through Emerson past my house and around to Kellogg to avoid the area. Just one incident can impact the neighborhood's living condition due to the fact that Castilleja is embedded deeply into a residential neighborhood and its narrow streets cannot handle this type of emergency traffic.Think of what could happen if there was a emergency on campus. Is this campus with a proposed garage equipped to bring in emergency vehicles onto the property in a timely manner especially if the roads are backed up? This is only one example of how our living conditions can be severely impacted by safety issues around the school.This will be exacerbated by the construction and traffic flow into and out of an underground garage on a major Bike Safety Boulevard. And with administrators, teachers, parents and children coming to the campus via 3 drop offs and a proposed underground garage entering onto the Bicycle Safety Boulevard the extra traffic will also introduce congestion, pollution as well as safety hazards on all sides of the campus. These issues are severe impacts to ensuring livable conditions which the ARB strives in accordance with the Comprehensive plan. Underground garages are not allowed to be in R1 zoned neighborhoods and for good reason. They cause disruption in traffic, are not aesthetically pleasing even if you lace it up with greenery, and are not consistent with a Single Family zoned neighborhood. I suggest that a no garage option be returned to the table and studied to provide amore sensible, less impactful alternative more consistent with a Single Family Neighborhood. And the major structures to be rebuilt on Bryant and Kellogg should be redesignedwith more pass through views of greenery and open space and be built in a style more compatible to the Administration and Chapel buildings in the manner which Gustave Laumeister first envisioned when he created the campus for Ms Mary Lockey more than 100 years ago. Thank you, Kimberley Wong at 1260 Emerson Street, Palo Alto