Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout20210308plCC701-32 DOCUMENTS IN THIS PACKET INCLUDE: LETTERS FROM CITIZENS TO THE MAYOR OR CITY COUNCIL RESPONSES FROM STAFF TO LETTERS FROM CITIZENS ITEMS FROM MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS ITEMS FROM OTHER COMMITTEES AND AGENCIES ITEMS FROM CITY, COUNTY, STATE, AND REGIONAL AGENCIES Prepared for: 3/8/ 2021 Document dates: 2/17/2021 – 2/24/2021 Set 1 Note: Documents for every category may not have been received for packet reproduction in a given week. 1 Baumb, Nelly From:Rob Schreiber <r_schreiber_98@yahoo.com> Sent:Monday, February 22, 2021 9:29 AM To:Council, City Subject:Foothills CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Dear Councilors, My wife and I have been frequent visitors to the park since 1979. And we go often still but only on weekdays. We have a dog. In our recent visits we have seen more cars in the parking areas than previously, but that is an impression. I have no real data. We have seen zero evidence of any problem. As a long time soccer referee (starting in AYSO in Palo Alto) I soon realized that what people (spectators, parents) say they saw reflects for the most part what they expected they would see rather than what actually happened. In this instance, I would not believe any of the arguments that begin with a claim that the new open door policy is leading to damage, the disappearance of wildlife, whatever. Trust data collected in an objective, quantitative way, by unbiased observers. I am an applied mathematician and I have a mathematical model of degradation. If the number of visitors is V then the degradation D is likely to be D = X problems per visit times V. AFAIK the value of X is about zero, based on few if any reports about how many problems we Palo Altans created ourselves. So if V has doubled or tripled, then we would have two or three times nearly zero problems. So -- do we have any data? The claims I hear seem to be arguing that Palo Altans like us are better stewards of nature than those lowlifes from Stanford, Atherton, Los Altos, and heaven forbid, Redwood City, and so for them the rate X of problems is certainly higher. Show me the numbers. Of course, nature itself makes all sorts of mischief. Trails erode, wood weathers, poison ivy grows. So we have maintenance costs that are independent of visitors. What fraction of the cost of maintaining the park do these visit independent costs represent? Can't the incremental costs of additional visits be offset by usage fees and tax revenue? There is no reason to assume that there will be any net degradation of the park. As to wildlife, gimme a break. My brother, a Manhattanite, tells me that coyotes, not content any longer with life in the outer boroughs, have crossed over the Harlem Riven and are now taking up residence in Central Park. I think the animals are a lot smarter than people, where parks are concerned in any case. We did see two deer on our last midweek visit; if some people haven't seen them then perhaps this was by chance. Or they didn't want to. Don't change the name. If you do, then next you'll be trying to raise money by selling naming rights. Monster Park, anyone? It will still be Foothill(s) Park to most of us, just as Sixth Avenue in Manhattan remained Sixth Avenue long after they changed the signs, and the Alpine Inn is Zott's. The notion that it isn't a park but rather a nature preserve is too absurd for discussion. Rob Schreiber 2 Baumb, Nelly From:Deborah Goldeen <palamino@pacbell.net> Sent:Thursday, February 18, 2021 9:02 PM To:Council, City Subject:Foothills/Nonette Hanko Preserve CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on  links.  ________________________________    I finally got up the nerve to visit Foothills Park today. There were ten to fifteen times as many people there as would  have been on a weekday afternoon prior to the opening. But it didn’t feel crowded and people seemed to be enjoying  themselves. However, there was no wildlife to be seen. None what so ever. This has never happened before.    Would the council maybe consider closing the park to everybody one or two days a week? Even with a limit on visitors,  you are going to get orders of magnitude more visitors per day than in past. Closing park would give the wildlife a break.    Also, since the park is going to be renamed, how about renaming it entirely. It would be a good opportunity to honor  Nonette Hanko.    Deb Goldeen, 2130 Birch, 94306, 321‐7375  3 Baumb, Nelly From:Don McDougall <mcdougall.don@gmail.com> Sent:Thursday, February 18, 2021 2:13 PM To:Council, City Subject:Foothills Fees and Visitors Attachments:Foothills Fees and Visitos Council.pdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Mr. Mayor, Council Members,     Please find attached comments re Foothills Fees and Visitor Limits, Feb 22 Agenda, Item 8.      Don  650 815 1455                 Mr. Mayor, Council Members and Staff, Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed Foothills Park fee structure and visitor limits. My comments are made in the context of past Chair of the Palo Alto Parks and Recreation Commission and currently a non-resident of Palo Alto. I am writing in support of the PRC recommendations if fee structure and visitor limits. The fee structure recommendation is comprehensive, fair and likely easy to administer. COMMENTS I also support the suggested visitor increase to 650 with one addition. If there is management discretion to lower the number to 300 or 400, there should also be management discretion to raise the number to 750 or 850. My reasoning is that as COVID restlessness decreases, as Foothills becomes less of a novelty, as a few simple actions like visitor created footpath barriers are reminders a la Byxbee Park visitor activity will return to normal and Foothills will be able to support numbers closer to the original 1000. Foothills is a physical and mental health resource that Palo Alto should share! See WSJ article below. In establishing fees and visitor limits there are many possible considerations: COVID health risks, visitor safety, nature preservation, limiting non-Palo Alto visitors, maintenance costs, and city revenue, Certainly whatever the considerations, forecasting or modeling the income should be the first step, with an agreement for the destination and use of the revenue generated. CONCLUSION The PRC has created a reasonable proposal for the fee structure and visitor limitation. Some degree of upward and downward flexibility for visitor limits should be considered, no matter how narrow the band. And a forecast of model and agreement on the use of funds generated should be documented. And ongoing collection and reporting of attendance and impact data must be a priority. Thank you for listening. Respectfully, Don McDougall Burlingame CA, 650 815 1455 BACKGROUND COVID Health Risks In fact, the COVID crisis has made being outdoors in nature more important, more valued and more rewarding. People are safer in the outdoors, can distance more easily and enjoy being with family and nature. Rules and signage reminding visitors to wear masks have proven to be effective to keep visitors safe in other parks. COVID health care concerns are not a reason for a park fee. Visitor Safety Other parks and reserves have responded to the crowds they have recently experienced with temporary access restrictions, regulation and rule communication campaigns, improved traffic and parking signage, staffing flexibility and volunteer engagement. Palo Alto has all these options available. Visitor safety is not a reason for a park fee. Park Preservation Simple wire “fences”, parking and regulation communication, staff presence and volunteer activity would likely be sufficient for park preservation. Most of the risk to the park has always been in the front 100 acres, most of which is hardly “natural”. The lake is artificial, the meadow was created for farming, the creek was straightened from its natural meanderings. Over and over, discussions have confirmed the other 1,300 acres are not at risk even from the maximum 1000 visitors previously allowed. 400 visitors means 4 acres per person. 400 visitors means 160 cars when there is parking for 375. Preservation is not a reason for a park fee. Limiting Visitors Reducing the visitor count to 400 essentially limits non-Palo Alto visitors. Not many visitors who have to drive a distance will risk that the park is closed by the time they get there. Palo Alto citizens will likewise get the message the park is not inviting with the reduced visitor count. Limiting visitors is not a reason for a park fee. Cost Recovery With the reduced visitor count, any and all costs should be reduced. Capital costs should be reduced or at least less urgent with fewer visitors and variable costs for items such as restroom supplies will be reduced. Cost recovery is not a reason for a park fee. Increased Revenue If the problem being solved in increased revenue for major capital items, maybe this is a reason for a park fee. In which case why limit the number of visitors which limits the revenue? Maybe increased revenue is a reason for park fees? REFERENCE Wall Street Journal Feb 14, 2021 (First few paragraphs) For Better Health During the Pandemic, Is Two Hours Outdoors the New 10,000 Steps? The physical and mental damage inflicted by Covid has doctors, researchers and others racing to tap into nature’s therapeutic effects Will two hours in the park become the next 10,000 steps? As people spend more time indoors, a mountain of scientific research says spending time in nature is critical to health and increases longevity. That means being in fresh air, under trees and away from cars and concrete—on a regular basis. And, no, the Peloton doesn’t count. “There’s an urgent need emerging in science and at the gut level to increase the nature experience. This field is just exploding,” says Gretchen Daily, a professor of environmental science at Stanford University. The benefits have been clear to scientists for some time, but the pandemic has made the matter more urgent. The physical and emotional toll the virus has taken, especially in urban areas with little green space, has galvanized doctors, researchers and others to tap into nature’s therapeutic effects. Spending time in the woods—a practice the Japanese call “forest bathing”—is strongly linked to lower blood pressure, heart rate and stress hormones and decreased anxiety, depression and fatigue. https://www.wsj.com/articles/for-better-health-during-the-pandemic-is-two-hours-outdoors-the- new-10-000-steps-11613304002?reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink 4 Baumb, Nelly From:mark weiss <earwopa@yahoo.com> Sent:Thursday, February 18, 2021 12:35 AM To:Council, City Subject:Foothill park or Tesla tax CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on  links.  ________________________________    Rather than charging poor and Black people from East Palo Alto and Redwood City $6 per car load to enter Foothill Park,  why don’t we use an emergency ordinance to tax the Palo Alto car manufacturer Tesla $760 Billion and give every man,  woman and child in the world $100 for Covid relief?    Mark Weiss  In Palo Alto      Sent from my iPhone  1 Baumb, Nelly From:mark weiss <earwopa@yahoo.com> Sent:Monday, February 15, 2021 10:52 AM To:Council, City Cc:Tom DuBois tom.dubois@gmail.com; Holman, Karen (external); Drekmeier, Peter; Greg Schmid (external); Summa, Doria; ParkRec Commission; Reckdahl, Keith Subject:Items 8 and 9, Feb 22, 1921 meeting CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on  links.  ________________________________    Rather than charging Black people six dollars per carload to enter foothill Park or preserve, why don’t we have them  enter through a separate but equal new entrance from Los Trancos Road?  And we could use the surveillance technology license plate readers from item 9 to enforce this.  Have them nut on our butt as Cardi B might say.  Mark Weiss  No Plessy no messy or the new Brown deal    Sent from my iPhone  2 Baumb, Nelly From:Bette Kiernan <betteuk@aol.com> Sent:Wednesday, February 17, 2021 11:26 AM To:Council, City; City Mgr Subject:Bravo!!! Foothills Nature Preserve CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.      Honorable City Council Members:       I am beyond relieved and happy with the solutions you arrived at re: Foothills. So right for the seven  generations to come.    This is by far the best possible resolution.    Congratulations on your sensitive foresight and evident caring that went into your ultimate decision. It was  well worth journeying through the emotional “dark forest” to arrive at this right place         Sincerely       Bette Kiernan MFT   Palo Alto    1 Baumb, Nelly From:bhusan gupta <bhusan.gupta@gmail.com> Sent:Monday, February 22, 2021 11:55 AM To:Council, City Subject:(A)LPR Surveillance - please approve CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Dear City Council,    Please approve the use of the (A)LPR technology to better enforce the RPP restrictions. While the pandemic has altered  the enforcement priorities in Palo Alto, I, for one, would appreciate a technology‐based approach to parking  management when the appropriate enforcement actions are to be re‐started.     +R   ‐Bhusan    2 Baumb, Nelly From:Wolfgang Dueregger <wolfgang.dueregger@alumni.stanford.edu> Sent:Sunday, February 21, 2021 8:24 PM To:Council, City Cc:Mike Eager; Chris Robell; Paul Machado; Neilson Buchanan; Wolfgang Dueregger; John Guislin; Allen Akin; Carol Scott; Christian Pease; Wolfgang Dueregger Subject:LPRs in neighborhoods CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Dear City Council,     deployings LPRs per se is a sign of the times to use the "latest" technology to be more efficient and cost effective.    2 questions:    ‐1: have you worked out the details how to preserve privacy of the collected data? The city has access to those data and  responsibility to keep them safe from misuse. So what happens if those data get hacked? (State and federal  governments get hacked all the time and so are  all branches of government and major industry.) Who controls who gets  access to those data, and who decides when and if these data get destroyed once these data are deemed no longer to  be useful?    ‐2: why are you deploying these LPRs in neighborhoods only and not first and foremost in commercial core areas and  public parking garages?    I find it quite intrusive that my insurance company, my employer, my doctor and our government know exactly how  often and when and for how long I either left or came back to my home?    technology optimization is good, but just up to a certain point.    Remember this: We live in a nice town where we elected you since we trust you to represent the interests of the  residents ‐ where residents ask you essentially for one thing: to live in peace in a safe, quiet and stress‐free (no crazy cut  through traffic or competition with overflow parkers from the commercial cores) environment where not every of my  steps is being watched or analyzed by a drone, a machine or computer.    Neighborhoods are different from commercial core and office building areas. Please try your best to keep it that way.  Because in the end (assuming you all live in Palo Alto) your own personal life is affected by this as much as everybody  else's.    Wolfgang    3 Baumb, Nelly From:Carol Scott <cscott@crossfieldllc.com> Sent:Sunday, February 21, 2021 6:06 PM To:Chris Robell Cc:Council, City Subject:Re: LPR Technology CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  so gentle you are.      On Sun, Feb 21, 2021 at 6:04 PM Chris Robell <chris_robell@yahoo.com> wrote:  Dear City Council,    First off, I am very glad the Office of Transportation has been focused on ways to reduce cost, and technology is  certainly a great way to help with this important goal.  Nonetheless, I hope you will push back on the LPR technology  proposal as drafted and scheduled for tomorrow night’s City Council meeting, for the following reasons:    1) Why isn’t this technology being adopted in city parking lots/garages first? This seems to be the ideal pilot  application, given we hopefully all agree our (expensive) garages should be optimized and managed to ensure we get  non‐resident parking out of neighborhoods which was the rationale for building the garages in the first place.    2) Privacy concerns need to be of the utmost concern. I don’t think any residents (or at least RPP leaders) have seen  this technology, and I’m not sure you have either. I think it needs to be really understood exactly what is saved, who an  access it, and for what purpose. Any other purposes should be explicitly precluded.     3) Please make it clear that an inappropriate purpose would be to determine capacity utilization in neighborhoods for  determining how many more business permits can be sold to reach some capacity utilization goal. I think residential  parking should be for residents and not as overflow for underparked office spaces.  Furthermore, residential street  parking is increasingly going to be needed for the new residents of the future, given the push for new housing projects  and ADUs.    It really seems backwards to be pushing this technology in residential neighborhoods and not public parking  lots/garages.     Thank you,  Chris Robell      ‐‐   Carol Scott  4 Baumb, Nelly From:Chris Robell <chris_robell@yahoo.com> Sent:Sunday, February 21, 2021 6:04 PM To:Council, City Subject:LPR Technology CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on  links.  ________________________________    Dear City Council,    First off, I am very glad the Office of Transportation has been focused on ways to reduce cost, and technology is certainly  a great way to help with this important goal.  Nonetheless, I hope you will push back on the LPR technology proposal as  drafted and scheduled for tomorrow night’s City Council meeting, for the following reasons:    1) Why isn’t this technology being adopted in city parking lots/garages first? This seems to be the ideal pilot application,  given we hopefully all agree our (expensive) garages should be optimized and managed to ensure we get non‐resident  parking out of neighborhoods which was the rationale for building the garages in the first place.    2) Privacy concerns need to be of the utmost concern. I don’t think any residents (or at least RPP leaders) have seen this  technology, and I’m not sure you have either. I think it needs to be really understood exactly what is saved, who an  access it, and for what purpose. Any other purposes should be explicitly precluded.    3) Please make it clear that an inappropriate purpose would be to determine capacity utilization in neighborhoods for  determining how many more business permits can be sold to reach some capacity utilization goal. I think residential  parking should be for residents and not as overflow for underparked office spaces.  Furthermore, residential street  parking is increasingly going to be needed for the new residents of the future, given the push for new housing projects  and ADUs.    It really seems backwards to be pushing this technology in residential neighborhoods and not public parking  lots/garages.    Thank you,  Chris Robell  5 Baumb, Nelly From:John Guislin <jguislin@gmail.com> Sent:Sunday, February 21, 2021 5:11 PM To:Council, City Subject:PLease reject staff report and proposal to use ALPR in neighborhoods CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Staff Report #11492 recommends that Council approve License Plate Reader surveillance of  RPP  neighborhoods in Palo Alto. I urge you to deny this request for the following reasons:     1. If Palo Alto wants to experiment with surveillance technology then it should start in the business core where  commercial parking should be directed and where we have municipal garages and parking lots that would  benefit from improved capacity management. Surveillance technology use is acceptable in commercial areas  because people have a lower expectation of privacy when engaged in commercial transactions. Surveillance  technology is not acceptable in residential neighborhoods where families have a right to privacy.     2. On Page 4 the report states:  "ALPR data will only be used...to communicate parking availability, and to  quantify parking occupancy rates." These goals are appropriate to commercial parking in municipal garages  and lots but not in residential neighborhoods.  RPPs were implemented to reduce an overwhelming burden of all‐day commercial parking in residential  neighborhoods that resulted from failed city policies that did not mandate sufficient parking for commercial  development. "Quantifying parking occupancy" is an appropriate metric for commercial lots but not for  neighborhoods. It implies an ROI analysis that commercial garages employ and that is not valid in residential  neighborhoods.  The fact that staff fails to understand this distinction is very disturbing and shows a  fundamental lack of knowledge of the reasons RPPs were implemented.     3. Again on page 4:  "The intent of utilizing LPR technology is to improve parking management strategies and  customer satisfaction...." Staff repeatedly uses terminology appropriate for commercial parking garages when  referencing neighborhood RPPs. The "customer" they should be focusing on are the residents of these  neighborhoods who have engaged with the City for decades to see some progress on removing commercial  parking from residential neighborhoods. Residents want to see commercial parking redirected out of  neighborhoods to the commercial core, not managed to the satisfaction of commercial permit buyers.      As presented, this proposal is a major step backward in protecting residential quality of life. Please send the  report back to Staff and require them to engage with residents who have been engaged in RPP development  for more than a decade on a report revision.     Sincerely,  John Guislin  1 Baumb, Nelly From:Kim <ksuz1981@yahoo.com> Sent:Sunday, February 21, 2021 4:51 PM To:Council, City Subject:Input about RPPP program changes CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on  links.  ________________________________    Council,    I would like to express my concern about the proposed changes to the RPPP.    If you are considering eliminating guest permit hang tags this might be a great burden on residents.    If I understand it, each individual visitor would need a separate permit for each individual day. The way to get those  would be online.    That involves work and expense every individual day, possibly several times a day for people with more than one visitor  in a given day. Think about caregivers who work shifts that change during the day.    If you need to purchase the visitor permit using the person’s license plate sometimes they won’t be able to tell you in  advance which car they will end up using on a given day until they arrive.    For people with daily visitors it might end up costing more than we are paying for an annual hang tag.    Please talk with the citizens before you invest in a new system. The way I learned about this was from a neighbor. I  wrote the parking department with my concerns and they said they hadn’t decided how the system will work yet and  said it might be different for individual neighborhoods.    I need the RPPP program. I’m in College Terrace. I live in a 1920’s rental house with an ADU. The house has a single car,  unimproved, Model‐T garage that isn’t suitable for a modern car. We have four cars for our address. Our street is very  narrow and there is limited room to park on the block.    Thanks for your assistance,  Kim Lemmer  2282 Amherst St  2 Baumb, Nelly From:Christian Pease <cgpease2016@gmail.com> Sent:Sunday, February 21, 2021 5:43 PM To:Council, City Cc:Jocelyn Dong; Mike Eager; Chris Robell; Paul Machado; Neilson Buchanan; Wolfgang Dueregger; John Guislin; Allen Akin; Carol Scott; Christian Pease Subject:Please think carefully before putting surveillance technology in our neighborhoods CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Dear City Council Members,     I write in response to City Manager Shikada’s decision to direct his Office of Transportation to seek your  authorization to purchase and deploy vehicle license plate recognition surveillance technology into our  neighborhoods on a selective basis.     And astonishingly, to have the surveilled residents in those neighborhoods pay for it.*     As you know, this is the last item listed on this Monday’s council agenda – one packed with other critical items  and likely to run late into the night – thus likely ensuring minimum public observation and participation.     This surveillance technology proposal raises first and foremost important privacy issues. But it also raises  important questions regarding traffic and parking mitigation priorities and the competent stewardship of  taxpayer monies.     First, the question of privacy.     To this, the staff report applies a palliative of many, many words. But boil them all down and you get this:  “Trust us.”     They say trust us because only we, the city staff, will have access to the data collected – which will in any case  be anonymized – as well as the tools use to analyze and apply analytical results to formulate and make so‐ called “data‐driven” recommendations and decisions (the report is notably silent on the question of city  contractors and consultants).     This is not sufficient.     Privacy is indeed key, but so are the other two legs of the stool good governance rests upon: Oversight and  transparency.     As to oversight, please consider the question of institutionalizing an oversight board to monitor and enforce  the ethical, equitable, and lawful use of this technology before making any decision regarding its purchase or  deployment.     3 Such a board should be composed of residents living in surveilled neighborhoods and excluding other so‐called  non‐resident “stakeholders.”     As to transparency, please consider making all surveillance data and all the tools used to analyze it available to  the public. While this may seem in conflict with the protection of privacy, it is not, that is if the data is in fact  anonymized, as advertised by City Manager’s staff.     But what is far more important is this: Just assuming that the stated “data driven” objective means this  technology will be used solely to arrive at objective facts is, to be blunt, a fool’s errand.     The fact is any data set of any real scale can be cherry picked in support of preconceived outcomes and then  masqueraded as objective fact.     And the most equitable and effective way to counter this is to open it all up and make it public, this so that  residents and non‐resident stakeholders alike can test staff recommendations and conclusions.     Doing so would also empower our community to more knowledgeably contribute to the formulation of better  approaches and solutions to many of very real traffic and parking problems that collectively impact all of us.     Lastly, with respect to the stewardship of taxpayer money, the proposed notion that the first deployment of  this surveillance technology should be into selected residential neighborhoods makes no sense.     A better, more effective and higher‐return application of this technology would be to first implement and test  in and around one of our city‐owned parking garages located in the heart of Palo Alto’s only real “downtown”  situated on or immediately near University Avenue.     Why? Because this is where commuter employee intensive operations, as well as in and out arrivals of retail  and restaurant customers, are much more interspersed with all types of housing; from standalone homes, to  condominiums and apartment buildings, than virtually anywhere else in the entire city of Palo Alto.     Just think of it: If the new California Avenue garage cost on order of $60 million dollars to build, what then is  the total capital investment across all of our city‐owned garages, inclusive of improvements? It must be  something on the order of $200 million or more. And how much do we spend on top of that every year just to  maintain those structures?     Yet there they have numerous investigations on effective rates of utilization in city‐owned parking garages,  mostly conducted by serious‐minded residents. These have consistently revealed a bounty of empty stalls,  even during peak demand daytime hours.     So, if we really want to get a handle on the question of better managing our traffic and parking, then why not  start first by getting the most out of our biggest long‐term investments in the mitigation of traffic and  parking’s most troublesome effects?     Thank you for your consideration in this matter.     Sincerely,  Christian Pease      4    * By “reopening” RPP permit enforcement on a flimsy and so‐called “soft” basis (warning notes; no citations)  in order to collect a new round parking permit fees from residents. All this, while there is little or no indication  that enforcement is yet needed, given that parking demand remains at pandemic lows.     5 Baumb, Nelly From:Hamilton Hitchings <hitchingsh@yahoo.com> Sent:Saturday, February 20, 2021 9:36 AM To:Council, City Cc:Shikada, Ed; Jonsen, Robert Subject:License Plate Readers CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  I support the use of license plate readers for parking enforcement since it will reduce costs and increase effectiveness, especially for 2 hour spot hoppers, which have been a big problem downtown. I also propose considering the use of license plate readers on police vehicles for traffic stops. By increasing the dependence on license plate readers to flag cars where the driver has an outstanding warrant, it can reduce racial bias in car stops (a challenging problem to solve) and also increase patrol officer efficiency. It can also increase officer safety so for example, if it flags the car as being owned by a wanted violent felon, the officer can take additional steps to increase their safety and those immediately in the area. The downside is of course privacy. The best way to address this is with a very short data retention policy for vehicles not stopped. Hamilton Hitchings 1 Baumb, Nelly From:Winter Dellenbach <wintergery@earthlink.net> Sent:Tuesday, February 23, 2021 5:23 PM To:Shikada, Ed; Council, City Subject:Independent Police Auditor - Need to Amend Scope of Services CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Dear City Manager Shikada, Mayor DuBois, Vice Mayor Burt, and Council Members ‐   Here are the motions passed on November 16, 2020 that directly concern our Independent Police Auditor (IPA),  taken from the city council meeting website.  I haven’t heard anything about his (Michael Gennaco) Scope of  Services being amended to incorporate this significant expansion of his duties made by you last November. I  include them here (in black) and my comments (in blue).   When asked, City Attorney Molly Stump, reassured council that the IPA’s Scope of Services can be amended when  needed. This needs to get done right away. The IPA can’t begin to carry out the tasks you intend him to do unless  the Scope of Services in his contract is changed and signed, with all that goes with that.  You did very good work on November 16, 2020. Now let’s get your good ideas working for improved public safety!  Winter Dellenbach  P.S.Tomorrow I will send you the other motions you passed that night. There is more be activated on other  subjects.       1. Direct Staff to amend and expand the current Independent Police  Auditor’s (IPA) scope of services to include all administrative use of  force reports where a baton, chemical agent, TASER, less‐lethal  projectile, canine, or a firearm is used, and all cases where the  subject’s injuries necessitate any treatment beyond minor medical  treatment in the field;   The items above are to be included in the Independent Police Auditor’s (IPA) oversight and reporting.   The IPAs Scope of Services should be dated to include June 1, 2020 to capture the relevant information and incidents  in order to fulfill the intent of the city council as reflected in its June 8, 2020 BLM Resolution (attached below, read last  section). A glaring example is needed IPA oversight of the June 25, 2020 PAPD canine incident in Mountain View.       2 2. Direct Staff to include use of force information to the regular  Supplemental Report submitted to the City Council as a cover  memorandum to each IPA report;   Self‐explanatory.    3. Direct Staff to maintain an every six (6) months schedule for IPA  reports to City Council containing reviews ready at the time of the  report; and for the IPA to provide an audit workplan to the City Council  for approval;   A January to June half‐year Report deadline for release to the city council (and public) should be July 31. For the  July ‐ December Report, a deadline of January 31 the following year.   The only corrections/changes made, if any, are to be factual only, not changes to content. This should not take much  time and cannot justify missing release deadline.      IPA needs to catch up with the 2019 and 2020 Report releases to the city council and public in 2021, and the 2921  Report.    If a rare single case includes evidence withheld from release temporarily under a SB748 exemption due to an ongoing  investigation by the PAPD, this should not delay release of an entire IPA Report, only the single case (which must  be reported ASAP in a subsequent IPA Report).    This section also requires the IPA to draft an Audit Work Plan for CC approval. Tempus Fugit.       4. Amend the contract to require the Independent Police Auditor (IPA) to  meet with the City Council in open session twice a year with each  report;  The Report deadline needs to be coordinated with this twice a year city council meeting date. Note it is to be public.        5. Refer to the Policy and Services Committee consideration of the  Independent Police Auditor (IPA) oversight of internal complaints  3 regarding misconduct related to harassment, discrimination, or  retaliation resulting in city investigation of uniformed officers.  Refine IPA getting back oversight in these internal, officer to officer complaints from HR in Dec. 2019.  Agendize for P&S. Return to CC for discussion and vote? What is the process after P&S?   BLM Resolution, Passed June 8, 2020: Read last section  4 Baumb, Nelly From:Kou, Lydia Sent:Tuesday, February 23, 2021 3:11 PM To:Richard Placone Cc:Council, City Subject:Re: Palo Alto Opens ‘Safe Parking Site’ For Homeless Thank you Richard. This was quite a hurdle but we got it going, however, I fear this will not clear up the parking along El Camino Real or in other places. The "safe parking" program does have rules and commitments, some of the RV dwellers will not want to follow. Kindest regards, ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐  Lydia Kou ‐ Council Member  Contact Info:  https://goo.gl/BcgCQS  From: Richard Placone <rcplacone@sbcglobal.net>  Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2021 12:40 PM  To: Kou, Lydia <Lydia.Kou@CityofPaloAlto.org>; Tom DuBois <tomforcouncil@gmail.com>  Cc: Council, City <city.council@cityofpaloalto.org>  Subject: Fw: Palo Alto Opens ‘Safe Parking Site’ For Homeless   CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Re The article below: Congratulations to the both of you and thank you for taking this action. It has been over a year ago that I wrote to the Council to consider establishing such a place on available space at our owned property at the Baylands. If a dump could be there (now closed) why can't such a safe park be established to get rid of the dangerous and unsanitary parking all along El Camino Real. I personally hold the entire Council responsible for not taking appropriate action to correct this situation that has lingered for years. There are humane and safe ways for the city to do so, if only council members would focus on some of the humane issues that face our city as opposed to constantly bowing to the property developers. Richard Placone Chimalus Drive. Palo Alto ----- Forwarded Message ----- From: Palo Alto Patch <noreply@patch.com> To: "rcplacone@sbcglobal.net" <rcplacone@sbcglobal.net> Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2021, 6:04:40 AM PST Subject: Palo Alto Opens ‘Safe Parking Site’ For Homeless The 12-car lot Joe Simitian at city-owned site at 2000 Geng Road in Palo Alto will be Palo Alto’s first such safe parking lot. Newsletter Palo Alto Tue, Feb 23 Partly cloudy throughout the day.High 73º Low 44º   ADVERTISEMENT 16 Baumb, Nelly From:Charlie Weidanz <charlie@paloaltochamber.com> Sent:Tuesday, February 23, 2021 2:42 PM To:Charlie Weidanz; Kleinberg, Judy Subject:PALO ALTO CHAMBER OF COMMERCE ANNOUNCES JUDY KLEINBERG RETIREMENT CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. PRESS RELEASE   For immediate release  Contact Matt Dolan, Board Chair  Matt.dolan@hilton.com  650.383.9005  Charlie Weidanz, CEO  charlie@paloaltochamber.com  650.324.3125  Palo Alto Chamber of Commerce Announces   Judy Kleinberg Retirement   It is with regret but great appreciation for her work with the Palo Alto Chamber of Commerce that the Board of Directors announces that Judy Kleinberg, current President, and former CEO, will be retiring from the Chamber at the end of March. Charlie Weidanz, currently CEO, will assume the additional role of President for which Judy has been responsible since Charlie stepped down as Chamber Board Chair to join Judy as a co-executive in July 2019. As an attorney, seasoned business executive and former Palo Alto mayor, Judy brought a unique set of skills and experience when she joined the Chamber in 2014, reinvigorating existing programs and introducing innovative new ones, as well as jumpstarting the Chamber’s advocacy work at the city and regional levels on behalf of the entire business community. In 2015, she spearheaded the creation of the Chamber Foundation that focuses on building community engagement and collaboration across all sectors, as well as providing special educational programs, such as Leadership Palo Alto. 17 “Judy’s leadership on behalf of the business sector has strengthened its ability to have a positive impact on our community’s vitality and quality of life, and her leadership in supporting our business community during the past year of economic hardship due to the pandemic has been invaluable,” stated Matt Dolan, Chamber Board chair. “And we’re delighted that Judy will continue as a director of the Chamber Foundation, lending her background in philanthropy and social innovation to supporting this important community asset.” “It has been a highlight of my long professional career to have worked with the Board, staff, community leaders and especially the members of the Palo Alto Chamber over the past 6 1/2 years,” said Judy Kleinberg. “As I leave the Chamber to concentrate on my business law practice and have more time to support area nonprofits, I’m confident that Charlie’s superb talents and management skills will lead the Chamber to new levels of success.”     Charlie   Charlie Weidanz  CEO  355 Alma Street  | Palo Alto, CA. 94301  Tel: 650‐324‐3125 | Cell: 650‐773‐6414      www.paloaltochamber.com  Palo Alto Business Directory & Community Guide          18 Baumb, Nelly From:Clerk, City Sent:Monday, February 22, 2021 6:18 PM To:Neilson Buchanan; Clerk, City; Stump, Molly; Shikada, Ed; Council, City Cc:Gennady Sheyner; Dave Price Subject:RE: council process tonight Hi Neilson,      At this point the item will be heard tonight, we are removing the Conditional Use item and moving that to another  date.  If this gets continued to another date and council has heard from the public, the Mayor has the choice to hear  new speakers next time or close the public comment tonight all together.  I think their hope is to get through it tonight.    Thanks and stay healthy.      BETH MINOR  City Clerk  (650)329‐2379 | Beth.Minor@cityofpaloalto.org   www.cityofpaloalto.org                         From: Neilson Buchanan <cnsbuchanan@yahoo.com>   Sent: Monday, February 22, 2021 6:10 PM  To: Clerk, City <city.clerk@cityofpaloalto.org>; Stump, Molly <Molly.Stump@CityofPaloAlto.org>; Shikada, Ed  <Ed.Shikada@CityofPaloAlto.org>; Council, City <city.council@cityofpaloalto.org>  Cc: Gennady Sheyner <gsheyner@paweekly.com>; Dave Price <price@padailypost.com>  Subject: council process tonight    CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  I am getting lots of advice that the LPR agenda items tonight might be moved forward tonight. I also hear that Council may decide to defer decisionx for a week or more. I understand why deferral may be appropriate. But I do not understand the process related to public comments. When public comments are opened by the mayor, will tonight be the last opportunity for public to speak to the issues? My concern is that the staff report does not address major issues important to RPP neighborhoods. I am very concerned that many of experienced RPP resident leaders have strong opinions about the content and intent of the staff report. One major issue is the lack of committing the LPT technology to the two commercial cores where technology is needed the most. Inability of Office of Transportation to optimize public 19 parking assets in the commercial cores is the root problem which created the need for RPPs to protect residential neighborhoods from spillover commercial parking. This issue and several other related issues are likely to retard balanced parking solutions as we commence covid recovery for Palo Alto's commercial cores. This is an avoidable risk. Neilson Buchanan 155 Bryant Street Palo Alto, CA 94301 650 329-0484 650 537-9611 cell cnsbuchanan@yahoo.com 20 Baumb, Nelly From:Nancy Mueller <nmueller10@mac.com> Sent:Monday, February 22, 2021 3:52 PM To:Council, City Cc:Nancy Mueller Subject:CASTILLEJA CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  To the Palo Alto City Council,  Castilleja is a treasured resource in Palo Alto. I was impressed to learn that the daughter of the  Vietnamese lady who runs my nail salon is now at Castilleja. What a boost for this young woman  to have such a rich opportunity. It made me even prouder of Castilleja.  The School has been working for many years to find a solution to traffic, enrollment and enriching  the footprint of the current campus. They have now been able to find a solution that can be  agreed upon. The underground parking will reduce parking on Palo Alto's residential streets.  Enrollment will gradually grow within the same campus footprint without reducing educational or  impact value to students while reducing impact on neighbors.  All this is being managed at a significant cost burden not before encountered. And, they are up to  the challenge and will manage it.  The beauty of the property in a high value residential neighborhood will be maintained and where  necessary, enhanced. Their master plan will be even more comprehensive than the 2030 Palo Alto  S/CAP goals. This is huge! They are way ahead of many larger institutions in our area in managing  for our future.  I see no reason why Palo Alto City Council would have any argument with these plans as brought  forth.  Please make the right decision for our city and approve this proposal.     ___________  Nancy Mueller  2110 Waverley Street  Palo Alto, CA 94301  22 Baumb, Nelly From:Yahoo Mail.® <honkystar@yahoo.com> Sent:Saturday, February 20, 2021 11:42 AM To:Honky Subject:"Toons" Talk about a NATIONAL TREASURE THIS SURE BE IT LOL CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Subject: JOBS From: Gerald Bowman From: bruce Doran 42 Baumb, Nelly From:Yahoo Mail.® <honkystar@yahoo.com> Sent:Saturday, February 20, 2021 11:36 AM To:Honky Subject:who? what? when? TAXATION IS THEFT CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.    To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.Image     February 19, 2021  Dear Friend,     House Democrat leadership and the Biden Administration continue to pursue their $1.9  trillion plus spending package that contains a host of bailouts for liberal interest groups,  particularly for Democrat states and cities that have been plagued for years with  financial mismanagement.  The hot topic of the Democrat conference now seems be  focused in on an increase in the minimum wage, which the Congressional Budget Office  said last week would cost 1.4 million jobs , and whether it can be included in the  package under the Senate’s procedural rules for budget reconciliation.    43 From: Don Pearce Now you will know why Republicans are blocking this 2.2 trillion-dollar congressional bill! Hard to believe but look it up on the Congressional website for HR 748 from 116th Congress. Here’s the direct link: https://www.congress.go v/bill/116th-congress/house- bill/748 American population: 330,483,530 Stimulus bill: $2,000,000,000,000 ($2 Trillion) Dividing the cost by every American is $6,051.74 The government could have given every person over $6,000, but instead will give $1,200 to each adult under a certain income. Want to know where the missing 96% of your tax dollars went? Here you go. . . 1. $300,000,000 for Migrant and Refugee Assistance pg.. 147 2. $10,000 per person for student loan bailout 3. $100,000,000 to NASA, because, who knows why. 4. $20,000,000,000 to the USPS, because why the hell not 44 5. $300,000,000 to the Endowment for the Arts - because of it 6. $300,000,000 for the Endowment for the Humanities/ because no one even knew that was a thing 7. $15,000,000 for Veterans Employment Training / for when the GI Bill isn't enough. 8. $435,000,000 for mental health support 9. $30,000,000,000 for the Department of Education stabilization fund/ because that will keep people employed (all those zeros can be confusing, that’s $30 BILLION) 10. $200,000,000 to Safe Schools Emergency Response to Violence Program 11. $300,000,000 to Public Broadcasting / NPR has to be bought by the Democrats. 12. $500,000,000 to Museums and Libraries / Who the hell knows how we are going to use it. 13. $720,000,000 to Social Security Admin / but get this only 200,000,000 is to help people. The rest is for admin costs. 14. $25,000,000 for Cleaning supplies for the Capitol Building / I kid you not it's on page 136. 15. $7,500,000 to the Smithsonian for additional salaries 16. $35,000,000 to the JFK Center for Performing Arts 45 17. $25,000,000 for additional salary for House of Representatives 18. $3,000,000,000 upgrade to the IT department at the VA 19. $315,000,000 for State Department Diplomatic Programs 20. $95,000,000 for the Agency of International Development 21. $300,000,000 for International Disaster Assistance 22. $90,000,000 for the Peace Corp pg. 148 23. $13,000,000 to Howard University pg. 121 24. $9,000,000 Misc. Senate Expenses pg. 134 25. $100,000,000 to Essential Air carriers pg. 162. This of note because the Airlines are going to need billions in loans to keep them afloat ($100,000,000 is chump change.) 26. $40,000,000,000 goes to the Take Responsibility to Workers and Families Act This sounds like it's direct payments for workers pg. 164. 27. $1,000,000,000 Airlines Recycle and Save Program pg. 163 28. $25,000,000 to the FAA for administrative costs pg. 165 29. $492,000,000 to National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) pg. 167 30. $526,000,000 Grants to Amtrak to remain available if needed through 2021 pg. 168 (what are the odds that doesn't go unused) Hidden on page 174 46 the Secretary has 7 days to allocate the funds & notify Congress. 31. $25,000,000,000 for Transit Infrastructure pg. 169 32. $3,000,000 Maritime Administration pg. 172 33. $5,000,000 Salaries and Expensive Office of the Inspector General pg. 172 34. $2,500,000 Public and Indian Housing pg. 175 35. $5,000,000 Community Planning and Development pg. 175 36 . $2,500,000 Office of Housing What DOES ALL of this have to do with the Virus???? From: Jane Bansal Michael: Anti-American CEO's are chomping at the bit to return to China to restart their manufacturing. They hated Pres. Trump because he was forcing them to leave the slave labor setup in China that helps their bottom line and increases their wealth via increases in stock valuations. Greed is at the heart of the takedown of America and China knows how to buy them easily. Traitors! TIME Magazine Exposé Admits “Conspiracy” to Steal Election, Activists Told to “Stand Down” Posted: 15 Feb 2021 09:00 PM PST In a recent exposé, TIME Magazine admitted that the 2020 election was rigged to favor Joe Biden, while attempting to justify it. “They were not rigging the election; they were fortifying it,” says reporter Molly Ball. “It’s massively important for the country to understand that it didn’t happen accidentally.” 47 CONFIRMED! Dominion Voting Machines in Michigan County CHANGED VOTES From Trump to Biden — NOT BY HUMAN ERROR! From: helenl Sent: Thu, Feb 18, 2021 12:46 pm From : wolfeyes00 Subject : JOIN THE DOMINION CLASS ACTION NOW! -- Carl F. Worden https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/02/group-vote-matters-suing-facebook-dominion- mark-zuckerberg- bsk1> wrote: Michigan Removed 177,000 Voters from Voter Rolls in January After Certifying Biden Won Michigan by 154,000 Votes in November Michigan now admits after ‘certifying’ the 2020 Presidential election, that more voters should be removed from their voter rolls than there were votes won by Joe Biden in the race. Mixed with other suspected fraud, (like 141,000 ballot drops at 6am the day after the election) all the ballots in this state should be forensically audited to determine the full extent of the election fraud. There was so much fraud in Michigan in the 2020 election it is difficult to know where to start. There were late-night ballot dumps in Michigan like other states: https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/02/michigan-removed-177000-voters-voter-rolls- january-certifying-biden-won-michigan-154000-votes- november/?utm_source=Email&utm_medium=the-gateway- pundit&utm_campaign=dailyam&utm_content=daily From: Joseph Ames MBA, MS https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/02/virginia‐voter‐identified‐1‐7‐million‐vote‐difference‐state‐report‐externally‐reported‐ data‐couldnt‐find‐anyone‐address‐concerns/ Virginia Voter Identified 1.7 Million Vote Difference Between State Report and Externally Reported Data But Then Couldn’t Find Anyone to Address His Concerns 48 By Joe Hoft Published February 18, 2021 at 7:52pm 517 Comments A voter in Virginia shared with us that he read an article that indicated voter fraud in Virginia in the 2020 Presidential election. The article published at the American Thinker in November was similar to the one we posted a week earlier regarding the late-night dumps in Virginia on election night: The voter found the source data for the analysis at the New York Times – Edison news feed released after the election. This data is what was used by TGP in its analysis right after the election as well. The Virginia voter noticed like we did that there were huge 300,000 ballot drops for Joe Biden in Virginia that were reversed after being posted twice and then entered a third time and left alone. The likelihood of this happening in the real world is nil but errors might have occurred accounting for adjustments that perhaps were addressed by the state.... Due to the non-response from Virginia politicians and state employees, and based on the huge ballot entries, there are now additional concerns that the election was stolen in that state. From: Bernard Cane https://www.theepochtimes.com/doj-tweaks-legal-position-in-arizona-voting- case_3702650.html?utm_source=newsnoe&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=breaking- 2021-02-18-3 Mitt Romney isn’t going to like this...he is one of those rich oligarch Americans who puts globalist interests first. BREAKING NEWS! Poll: Most Americans Still Believe Trump Won WND "Stop calling yourself a 'devout Catholic" by Art Moore (Christianity Today magazine.) February 16, 2021  49   President Biden regards himself as a "DEVOUT CATHOLIC," but the archbishop who chairs the U.S.Conference of Catholic Bishops pro-life committee begs to differ.    Archbishop Joseph Naumann of Kansas City contends the president needs to be honest, "stop defining himself as a devout Catholic" and admit that his support for the KILLING of the unborn VIOLATES the church's unequivocal stance on the sanctity of life.    He said it would be "MORE HONEST" for Biden to say "he DISAGREED with his church on this important issue and that he was acting CONTRARY to church teaching."    "When he says he is a devout Catholic, we bishops have the responsibility to CORRECT him," said Naumann. "Although people have given this president power and authority, he cannot DEFINE what it is to be a Catholic and what Catholic moral teaching is."           From: Cranford <cranford19>  Subject: Mass Murderer Andrew Cuomo; NY Dems Move To End Cuomo Emergency Powers As FBI Launches Probe; Lawmaker Says Gov Threatened To “Destroy” Him From: Cranford Subject: Mass Murderer Andrew Cuomo; 15,000 died in Nursing Homes under Andrew Cuomo. Add Gretchen Whitmer too, killing people in Nursing Homes. Democrats just doing the Global 2,000 thing! NY Dems Move To End Cuomo Emergency Powers As FBI Launches Probe; Lawmaker Says Gov Threatened To “Destroy” Him    BREAKING: Cuomo Is OUT – Democrats Deliver Criminal Announcement   From: Jordan Sekulow, 50 To help prprivacy, Mprevented download from the InACLJ       Take Action  |  Contribute         Share      f  Share Petition to Facebook       m,  Bombshell emails have just been uncovered showing just how deceptive fired FBI Director Comey and former Director of National Intelligence (DNI) Clapper were in the whole Russia Hoax.  Comey approved a FISA application to spy on an American the SAME DAY that he admitted to Clapper that the FBI was not able to “sufficiently corroborate” the dossier that the FISA warrant was based on.    It’s a smoking gun exposing the Deep State’s utter corruption.  I discussed this situation on our broadcast this week with our own Special Advisor for National Security and Foreign Policy, Ric Grenell – who was also a former acting DNI. He knows just how bad this was.  But we’re not just talking about these issues. We’re filing lawsuits against the Deep State FBI, NSA, Office of the Director of National Intelligence, and other Biden agencies. We’re taking Biden’s Deep State bureaucracies to court. We won’t let Comey, Clapper, and the rest get away with this.        From: Alan Telecky It Was A Coup! By Shari Goodman February 9, 2021 "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." (John Adams) The defeat of Nazi Germany and Japan in 1945 led to the rise of America’s superpower status and its superior military force. 51 Thereafter, our enemies understood that defeating America by military might was not an option, but decided a clandestine operation from within might be achievable. Throughout the 20th century and until today, the infiltration of Communists within our midst, along with domestic operatives willing to aid the enemy for the right price or through the use of blackmail, undermined our foundation and founding principles upon which this country was built. The United States, the land of liberty and rule of law, provided its citizens and foreign guests the benefit of living in the land of the free. In the spirit of détente, however, initiated by Henry Kissinger and the Nixon administration, America opened its doors to Communist China. Beginning with the exchange of students, many Chinese with membership in the CCP began to arrive at our universities. Currently, we have 369,000 Chinese students attending American universities. The Chinese Ministry of State Security operates a global intelligence network on our shore through a variety of business and industry officials and the Chinese Scholar Associations. Additionally, China operates Confucius Institutes at 67 of our college campuses and 17 K- 12 public schools where they indoctrinate and gather intelligence by staffed Intelligence operators. American administrations saw in China a large open market for American goods; thus the push for China to become a member of the World Trade Organization in the early ’90s became a reality. Joe Biden, along with Bill Clinton, sold America a Psy-Op by advancing a false narrative suggestive of an America benefiting from the cost of cheap labor and cheap goods. Our complicit, obedient media followed along without any investigative reports to the contrary. Within a span of thirty years, we saw the rise of China and the deterioration of the United States. While China with its newfound riches began to build skyscrapers, bridges, and new highways, the United States infrastructure was falling apart. Roads and highways needed updating, bridges were crumbling, and our sidewalks and streets in major urban areas were substandard. During these years, China invested heavily in all areas of American society—from American entertainment companies, real estate, banking, and financial institutions, American newspapers, the media, Hollywood, and American brands such as Nike—and made contributions of over a billion dollars to American universities, where Chinese spies often were planted with the task of stealing intellectual property. By the time China unleashed the Wuhan virus (whether deliberately or accidentally), they were very well-positioned to influence public opinion. As a sign of China's newfound influence, America’s media refused to refer to the Wuhan virus by its name. The Wuhan virus became COVID-19, lest Americans be reminded of who was responsible for the pandemic. Hollywood, on cue, rolled out their spokesmen to denounce anyone, especially President Trump, who placed the onus squarely where it belonged – on China! As the election neared, China was well ensconced in every facet of American lives. China had gobbled up many of our resources and much of American ingenuity. From farmland in 52 the Midwest and South to American ports and large segments of American industries, they could not have done it without the help of unscrupulous American legislators in our halls of Congress and the White House. There were no investigative reporters willing to ask if there were kickbacks for Maxine Waters, Mitch McConnell, Feinstein, Schumer, Pelosi, Obama, and the Clintons for their support of sweet deals on behalf of China. Hunter Biden received a $1.5 billion contract with Red China while his father was Vice-President. His mission was to acquire interests in companies that supply our U.S. Military and Industrial Complex for the purpose of improving Communist China’s defense industry. Surprisingly, neither the media, the FBI, CIA, or the Justice Department launched an investigation into the Bidens' shady deals with a Communist foe. For two years we've waited for the Durham report, a report that never materialized. As of today, no one has faced the consequences of the Russian collusion hoax. The beginning of last summer brought forth a sea of riots and violence in dozens of cities throughout the United States as Black Lives Matter and Antifa, two Marxist funded and trained groups, took to the streets. President Trump, predicted to win the November election by a landslide, was suddenly faced with a two-pronged attack: a pandemic with its origin in Red China, and domestic upheaval by Marxists here at home. Nevertheless, support for President Trump was high. Not only did he manage to keep his base, but he made significant inroads into the Black and Hispanic communities. His rallies drew tens of thousands, while Biden could only gather a few dozen whenever he managed to leave what the media termed “his basement.” As November 3 approached, regardless of what the biased mainstream media predicted, the eyes of America told a different story. It appeared President Trump was on his way to a second term. Americans were unaware the Dominion voting machines with ties to China and originally manufactured to rig the election for Hugo Chavez in Venezuela were used to tally our ballots. The same Dominion machines were designated to be used in six swing states to tilt the election for Joe Biden. At midnight on Nov. 3, Americans went to bed with the knowledge that President Trump was winning by a landslide, only to wake up the next morning to see Joe Biden declared by the media and Big Tech as the President-Elect of the United States. Apparently, while America slept, the vote count simultaneously stopped in all swing states, only to be resumed in the middle of the night with no oversight. And because Dominion could be plugged into the internet, the Red Chinese (along with Iran and Russia) were most likely, to their delight, seeing the tallies change in real-time (see here, here, and here). The CCP’s influence in the United States could not have occurred without the introduction of Cultural Marxism, which began with the withdrawal of religion and God from our daily lives. Beginning decades ago, we saw the Left and their proxies in the press, the world of 53 entertainment, and our universities ridicule religion and espouse the virtues of Secularism. The decline of mores and norms, the earmarks of Western Civilization, took its toll. Ideals such as honor, nobility, honesty, civility, self-reliance, and self-respect were tossed into the waste bin of history. What took its place was vulgarity in speech and action, lack of self- restraint, and an emphasis on feelings instead of knowledge and virtue. It is that uncivilized and immoral culture that produced scoundrels we see in public office today. There is a direct correlation between America’s unraveling and the rise of Joe Biden, Bill and Hillary Clinton, Chuck Schumer, and Nancy Pelosi to positions of leadership. Today, with Biden fully ensconced in the White House, surrounded by barbed wire and thousands of troops, D.C. is now more reminiscent of a Third World Banana Republic where elections are determined not by voters, but by who counts the vote. As in all countries seized by Communism, the Great Purge has begun. Trump supporters are censored and de-platformed by Big Tech. Many are blacklisted from employment opportunities or fired from jobs they once held, and men like Mike Lindell, My Pillow guy, can no longer sell his pillows at Bed, Bath, and Beyond, Kohls, or Wayfair. Lin Wood, a brilliant, righteous prominent defamation attorney whose quest for justice is legendary— and a Trump supporter—is threatened by the Georgia Bar with having his license revoked unless he undergoes a mental health examination; the First Amendment be damned. The Communist objective is to destroy the opposition by silencing the influencers, remove them from public life, and instill fear in the rest of America. In his first week in office, Biden canceled the Keystone Pipeline and the 70,000 jobs that went with it. Additionally, he has outlawed fracking. Both the Keystone Pipeline and fracking were instrumental in keeping us energy independent. Now, once again, we will be dependent on foreign oil. Gas prices have already risen 15%. With a nod to Big Pharma, he has increased the price of insulin by halting President Trump’s HHS freeze on it. Our borders are again wide open, and he has ordered the border wall to come to a halt. Caravans from Central America have already formed, and Biden has ordered ICE to halt deportations for all, including illegal criminals. While millions of Americans are out of work, he has earmarked $4 billion to Central America. He has restored economic aid to the Palestinians and has agreed to let their offices be reopened in New York while committing himself once again to the failed two- state solution. He has re-entered the Paris Climate Accord, a move that will hurt American companies and increase the loss of jobs. There is talk of the Biden administration rejoining the Iranian Nuclear Deal. While legislating from the Oval Office with the stroke of a pen is not in keeping with our Constitution—where the power to legislate is granted to Congress— Biden, in his first day in office, egregiously erased President Trump’s 1776 Commission, a pro-America promotion of America’s founding principles, in favor of a continuation of the 1619 Project, an anti-American program that favors tribalism and critical race theory. The actions undertaken by Biden are not the earmarks of policies designed to benefit Americans. They are the policies of domestic proxies acting on behalf of foreign enemies. We, the American people, did not vote for the above policies. Instead, we are being governed without the consent of the governed. Hundreds of sworn affidavits of 54 irregularities, unconstitutional changes in state laws, and demonstrations of voting machines accessible to hacking suggest there was foreign interference. Biden’s cozy relationship and sweetheart deals with Red China on behalf of his son, along with a billionaire oligarchy bent on a One World Order, through the use of cyber warfare conducted a coup upon the United States on November 3. 75% of Republican voters believe the election was stolen. Eighty million Americans will not sit idly by without redress. 55 Baumb, Nelly From:Lori Khoury <khoury7eleven@sbcglobal.net> Sent:Saturday, February 20, 2021 10:58 AM To:Council, City Subject:Mac's Smoke Shop Spotlight CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Dear Council, It's with great pride we wanted to share with a recently published article about Mac's. We have reached out to many times asking for Council to reconsider our request to sell flavored tobacco and exempt us as an adult-only store. Look at the history of our business - it is what Palo Alto craves, that small town feel where people still know each others' names. Again, we are NOT asking about vape. We are trying so hard to stay afloat in these turbulent times. We have tried to appeal to you with with logic, but the last email I sent didn't even generate anything other than an auto reply. Now we are asking for mercy and compassion from the Council to help us stay in business. We tried to pivot our model, but it didn't come close to making up for what we've lost in revenue. We really would like to speak to someone about reconsidering us to sell flavored tobacco to adults only!!!! It would be great to have a phone call and talk this through. As you are trying to do for other businesses in the City, please help us too. Thank you, Mac's Smoke Shop Neil and Lori Khoury 56 2020 PALO ALTO HISTORICAL ASSOCIATION BOARD OF DIRECTORS Georgie Glelm,President Rich Green, Vice President Molly Tinney, Coffespondence Secretory Bo Crane, Re<ordlng S&erory Robert Strohecker, Treasurer Darla Secor, Historian Steve Staiger, Historian Colleen Braff Amanda Brown Jeff Day Anita Delaney Dennis Garda Brian George Betty Gerard catherlne Hamrick-Down Lisa Krieger Leslle Miiis Heather Pang Jerry Tinney Melissa Verber The Palo Alto Historic.al Associatio11, a 501 (c)(3) ciraritab/e no11-projit organization, was established in 1948 as StlCC,f.S.SOf to an earlier organization founded in 19 lJ. Its tnain objutive.s are: • Collect, organize., and pre.serve 'naterials pertaining to Hre his- tory and lreritage of Palo Alto. • Spread informatio11 about Palo Alto's history• b.)11ne,ans of pro- granis, displays, and publications. • Re.cognize and preserve historic sites a11d strr1cfl~re.s. Tire Guy Miller Arclri•ts of tlrt Palo Alto Historiatl Association are stored at Cubberley• Cotnmunity Ce11ter, K-7. Altlro11glr PAHA co11- ti11ues to operat-e during the COV- ID-19 pande1nic, d.,e. to the cttrrent restrictions, theArc.liive is only open for prearranged appointme11ts. To rn1'fnrt tJ1p A,.rJiittP nr tn n111l'P nn Ye Olde Shoppe: Spotlight on 1011 family businesses in Palo Alt Mac's Smoke Shop #4 in a series by PAHA Board member, Les If you grew up in Palo Alto, you know of Mac's Smoke Shop. It's been around for 87 years! Mac's derived its name from its follllders, Glenn and Ruth McMan us-Mac for short. Glenn Mac'sSmokeShop was 39, and Ruth, 37 when they opened the business in 1934. A little known fact is that the original store was actually located across tile street from its current location, in half the space occupied by the TI1aiphoon restaurant today. Around 1939, Mac's moved to the current location at 534 Emerson Street. Cigars and pipe tobacco were Mac's specialty. TI1e storefront signage originally advertised Optimo cigars, po pularized by Babe Rutl1. Tobacco smoking increased from 1940 to 1970, mostly d ue to the glamorization of cigarette smoking by Hollywood, and reached a peak in 1954, when 45 percent of U.S. adults smoked tobacco. Mac's became the connoisseur shop for loose-leaf tobacco and, in fact, they created their own secret blend that has been passed on to each of the three ownerships over the years. The store was also known for its newspaper assortment, carrying publications from all over the world, as well as paperback books and one of tl1e best the pen insula. It's no wonder the shop was very popular among r r toss tlleir coin payment 1985, the city tried to 1 sign removed (no neo due to public outcry th for as long as the busin• Ruth and Glenn ran the Alfred, purchased the sometime after his rE service d uring WWII. I Depew in 1944, and the Diana and Beverly. Di< was very yo ung, her jc coins on tile floor in tt off-hours newspaper s: father never came up years! Her fath er worl said. "The store open• closed at 10 PM, sevE most of my childhood, 1 one of those hours", Di Original owners, Glenn and Ruth t\tcAtanu.s inside Mac•s Smoke Shop. '4 sold it to Tom Del Sarto and Kathleen later move< -•••• .t.L .! •• .J ••• _,L ...... ""~··· 58 Baumb, Nelly From:Roy Lobo <roy_lobo@comcast.net> Sent:Thursday, February 18, 2021 7:51 AM To:Minor, Beth; Clerk, City; Council, City; Administrative Services; Administrative Services Cc:Baumb, Nelly; Brettle, Jessica; Kang, Danielle Subject:RE: Access to Historical Finance Committee meetings Thank you From: Minor, Beth [mailto:Beth.Minor@CityofPaloAlto.org]   Sent: Thursday, February 18, 2021 7:16 AM  To: Roy Lobo <roy_lobo@comcast.net>; Clerk, City <city.clerk@cityofpaloalto.org>; Council, City  <city.council@cityofpaloalto.org>; Administrative Services <AdminSvcs@CityofPaloAlto.org>; Administrative Services  <AdminSvcs@CityofPaloAlto.org>  Cc: Baumb, Nelly <Nelly.Baumb@CityofPaloAlto.org>; Brettle, Jessica <Jessica.Brettle@CityofPaloAlto.org>; Kang,  Danielle <Danielle.Kang@CityofPaloAlto.org>  Subject: RE: Access to Historical Finance Committee meetings  Good morning,      Yes, it is possible.  If you go on our website to City of Palo Alto Agendas/Minutes all the committees and boards are  listed.  Click on the Finance Committee link and it will take you to their page.  Each meeting for this year is listed in the  grid.  Below that is a link to past Finance Committee meetings.  The video for that meeting has not yet been uploaded  but will be today.    Here is the link to the Finance Committee page.      https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/agendas/finance/default.asp      Thanks and stay healthy.      BETH MINOR  City Clerk  (650)329‐2379 | Beth.Minor@cityofpaloalto.org   www.cityofpaloalto.org                         From: Roy Lobo <roy_lobo@comcast.net>   Sent: Thursday, February 18, 2021 7:06 AM  To: Clerk, City <city.clerk@cityofpaloalto.org>; Council, City <city.council@cityofpaloalto.org>; Administrative Services  <AdminSvcs@CityofPaloAlto.org>; Administrative Services <AdminSvcs@CityofPaloAlto.org>  Subject: Access to Historical Finance Committee meetings  59 CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Hello, There was a Finance Committee meeting held last Tuesday, February 16, 2021. Is it possible for me to listen to that recording of the meeting? And to past Finance Committee meetings? Thanks, Roy 60 Baumb, Nelly From:Dick Gould <dgould@stanford.edu> Sent:Wednesday, February 24, 2021 11:40 AM To:Council, City Cc:Anne Gould Subject:Castilleja School CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  We wish to be on record as being STRONG supporters of the Castilleja School improvements and student  enrollment increase. Castilleja has been incredibly respectful of its neighbors and of the process involved re:  expansion. The current plan addresses essentially all of the concerns raised since Day 1. The underground  parking garage as well as above surface adjustments within the existing footprint certainly mitigate the  enrollment increase.  We must do all we can to protect, preserve and further the mission of this valuable community resource for  our next generation of female leaders. Castilleja has shown how this can be done, while protecting our  neighborhood and environment – the school’s leadership is to be commended for their “listening” and for  their efforts.  Dick and Anne Gould    —  Dick Gould – Home – 620 Sand Hill Road; # 200‐B; Palo Alto, CA 94304  Vice Chairman, TeachAids  516 High Street  Palo Alto, CA 94301  (m) 650 464 0112 | www.TeachAids.org    Emeritus, Men’s Tennis Coach & Director of Tennis  Stanford University | dgould@stanford.edu    61 Baumb, Nelly From:Kelly Traver <kellytraver@gmail.com> Sent:Wednesday, February 24, 2021 11:38 AM To:Council, City Subject:Safe Storage Ordinance CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Dear Mayor and Councilmembers,   Do you know when the safe storage ordinance will be given its first reading? There are quite a few Moms who are  waiting for it and want to be at the meeting (virtually, of course!)  Thanks so much for all that you do for Palo Alto!  Best, Kelly  62 Baumb, Nelly From:alfaro.nancy@gmail.com Sent:Wednesday, February 24, 2021 11:26 AM To:LASERS.services@lacers.org; erb@lacity.org; info@insyde.org.mx; pra@calbar.ca.gov; clientsecurityfund@calbar.ca.gov; manager@cityofberkeley.info; kworthington@cityofberkeley.info; barcomm@calbar.ca.gov; Mayor.Garcetti@lacity.org; Mayor@fresno.gov; Daniel.Zack@fresno.gov; Mark.Standriff@fresno.gov; Esmeralda.Soria@fresno.gov; Paul.Caprioglio@fresno.gov; Robert.Andersen@fresno.gov; Leager@fresnoedc.com; Council, City; Office of the CIO; TomforCouncil@gmail.com; Ng, Judy; LydiaKou@cityofpaloalto.org; Kane@cityofpaloalto.org; Carnahan, David; Stephanie.Douglas@cityofpaloalto.org; Yang, Albert; Patel, Raj; Auzenne, Tom; Assesor@sfgov.org; Arun.Bhatia@sfdwp.org; Board.of.Supervisors@sfgov.org; Commissions.Secretary@sfgov.org; Sotf@sfgov.org; Ethics.Commission@sfgov.org; glambing@fppc.ca.gov; CommAssist@fppc.ca.gov; Advice@fppc.ca.gov; Cpra@fppc.ca.gov; CHackert@fppc.ca.gov; Bridget.Hicks@sfgov.org; JFleming@metricus.net; Jreichental@gmail.com; jreichental@hotmail.com; Treichental@hotmail.com; Complaint@fppc.ca.gov; Hatchact@osc.gov; Lobby@sec.senate.gov; LobbyInfo@mail.house.gov; OIG@fec.gov; Pubrec@fec.gov; StateInfo@state.ca.gov; Secretary.Padilla@sos.ca.gov; WPEAOmbuds@stateoig.gov; DCA@dca.ca.gov; Kimberly.Kirchmeyer@dca.ca.gov; Alexis.Podesta@dca.ca.gov; SIUMailbox@scif.com; Enforcement@cslb.ca.gov; Classifications@cslb.ca.gov; Licensing@cslb.ca.gov; Info@cslb.ca.gov; Sheila.Daniels@cba.ca.gov; Enforcementinfo@cba.ca.gov; ComplianceUnit@cba.ca.gov; CitationsUnit@cba.ca.gov; patti.bowers@cba.ca.gov; deanne.pearce@cba.ca.gov; nooshin.movassaghi@cba.ca.gov; oponline@nysed.gov; OldInetInfo@dos.ny.gov; OPDPLS@nysed.gov; CommitteeMeetings@scif.com; BoardofDirectors@scif.com; FRAUD@insurance.ca.gov; Ombudsman@insurance.ca.gov; CAB-SF- Intake@insurance.ca.gov; ElectronicSubmissionFD-1@insurance.ca.gov; pushpa.uttamchandani@insurance.ca.gov; RECRUITMENT@insurance.ca.gov; RSBCovid19PR@insurance.ca.gov; CustodianofRecords@insurance.ca.gov; StateFarmfireClaims@statefarm.com; Privacy@statefarm.com Subject:Fwd: [February 3-7 2021] Office of Personnel Management - Office of Investigations - Nancy Alfaro | OPM Office of Investigations [NBIB] CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.        Begin forwarded message:  From: "." <alfaro.nancy@gmail.com>  Date: February 24, 2021 at 11:15:08 AM PST  To: sbarragan@aristeguinoticias.com, redaccion@aristeguinoticias.com, careyshenkman@riseup.net,  courage.contact@couragefound.org, transportandoamichoacan@live.com,  periodicooficial@michoacan.gob.mx, buzon@poderjudicialmichoacan.gob.mx,  Comercializacion@telesurtv.net, Albinocm6502@gmail.com, JuanJosedelCastillo@gmail.com,  Borderlinebeat@gmail.com, Charropoliticoenvivo@gmail.com, Conexiononline1@hotmail.com,  wells@wsws.org, autoworkers@wsws.org, sep@socialistequality.com, Norissa@socialism2020.org,  joe@socialism2020.org, Christine.s.Richard@gmail.com, Aaron.Greenspan@plainsite.org,  realitycheck@plainsite.org, VeritasTIPS@protonmail.com, richard.clayton@ctwinvestmentgroup.com,  noe.cruz@eluniversal.com.mx, denuncia@eluniversal.com.mx, contacto@eluniversal.com.mx,  63 atiempomx@gmail.com, indicepolitico@gmail.com, Investigacion@elpais.es, jlsc.ua@gmail.com,  WorldsApart@rttv.ru, charles@russia‐insider.com, moderator@russia‐insider.com,  radio@sputniknews.com, mediapartners@sputniknews.com, advertising@sputniknews.com,  media@sputniknews.com, marketing@sputniknews.com, info@tehrantimes.com,  ads@tehrantimes.com, newsdesk@afr.com, news@thelocal.it, talk@npr.org, tips@zerohedge.com,  Digital@thenation.com, jmyers@thenation.com, Ryan.Gallagher@theintercept.com,  USinfo@theguardian.com, news@sky.com, tips@propublica.org, joaquin.sapien@propublica.org,  Alec.MacGillis@propublica.org, david.mcswane@propublica.org, Robert.Faturechi@propublica.org,  Sebastian.Rotella@propublica.org, pamela.colloff@propublica.org, suggestions@propublica.org,  richard.winton@latimes.com, liam.dillon@latimes.com, melody.gutierrez@latimes.com,  luke.money@latimes.com, alejandra.reyesvelarde@latimes.com, gustavo.arellano@latimes.com,  jack.leonard@latimes.com, ruben.vives@latimes.com, jcain@scng.com, Joseph.Cox@vice.com,  jfcox@jabber.ccc.de, kfsndesk@abc.com, kwalsh@kmaxtv.com, newsdesk@cbs47.tv,  Nina.Trentmann@wsj.com, Paul.Ziobro@wsj.com, Jean.Eaglesham@wsj.com,  Robbie.Whelan@wsj.com, Katherine.Blunt@wsj.com, Alejandro.Lazo@wsj.com,  Jean.Eaglesham@wsj.com, Michael.Rapoport@wsj.com, Mengqi.Sun@wsj.com,  Marcelo.Prince@wsj.com, John.Simons@wsj.com, jeannette.neumann@wsj.com, ryan.tracy@wsj.com,  opinion@elfinanciero.com.mx, EMilligan11@bloomberg.net  Subject: Fwd: [February 3‐7 2021] Office of Personnel Management ‐ Office of Investigations ‐ Nancy  Alfaro | OPM Office of Investigations [NBIB]           State Farm Insurance Claim 55‐B881‐7V6 [On: October 23, 2019]   SEC File #SF‐00832951/FCPA Investigations [On: October 26, 2019 at 7:43 PM]   The Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC")  The Public Accounting Oversight Board ("PCAOB")  The FCPA Act of 1977 ("FCPA")    The Sarbanes‐Oxley Act of 2002 ("SOX")  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarbanes-Oxley_Act  https://pcaobus.org/About/History/Documents/PDFs/Dodd_Frank_Title_IX_.pdf          To the Accounting Firms [a.k.a. The Big Four Transnational Cartels]:     Please refer to the email trail below. Specifically, the list of recipients and dates when this information was sent to each party. This email is part of a series of emails and information that began on July 2019 which have been sabotaged, destroyed and manipulated.    Its been repeated numerous times, I am dealing with organized transnational criminals [the Big Four Cartels, elite lawyers insiside/outside the DOJ/SEC/PCAOB], ratting on each other regarding, Money Laundering, Tax evasion, arms trafficking, etc.   64   The Crime involved is called Genocide, regime change activities and overthrowing governments. In case there are more delusional individuals and entities participating in harassment and retaliatory actions against me/others to interfere and sabotage these email communications refer to the information below.     Where are the stupid criminals, Public Accountants or Public Auditors?       Exchange Act Rule 21F-17 prohibits companies (Google, Apple, Spectrum,Telecoms, etc) from taking any action to impede whistleblowers from reporting possible securities violations” without having to disclose anything else.     The Public Accounting Oversight Board ("PCAOB")  II. Sarbanes‐Oxley Violations, Evidence Spoliation, and Other Discovery Abuses.  The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 states that whoever knowingly alters, destroys, mutilates, conceals, covers up, falsifies, or makes a false entry in any record, document, or tangible object with the intent to impede, obstruct, or influence the investigation or proper administration of any matter within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States or any case filed under title 11, or in relation to or contemplation of any such matter or case, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.    The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, Pub. L. 107-204, § 802, 116 Stat. 745, 800 (2002). Codified at 18 U.S.C. § 1519, this provision applies to private companies and has a broad reach that is not limited to commenced litigation. Section 1519 "covers conduct intended to impede any federal investigation or proceeding including one not even on the verge of commencement." Yates v. United States, - U.S. - - , 135 S.Ct. 1074, 1087 (2015) (emphasis added). Similarly, California Rule of Professional Conduct 5-2320 prohibits members of the bar from suppressing evidence that the member or the member's client has a legal obligation to produce.    The Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC") enforces the FCPA Act of 1977 ("FCPA") and other securities laws through administrative rules such as:   Rule 10 -b5(b), which prohibits untrue statements or omissions of material fact in the sale if securities   Rule 13b-2(1), which prohibits falsification of books, records and accounts subject to federal securities laws Rule 13b-2(2), which prohibits and officer or director from making a materially false or misleading statement or omission to an accountant in connection to an audit or examination, or a submission to the SEC of a filing required by federal securities laws. Exchange Act Rule 21F-4(b)(3) “Independent Analysis” To be considered “analysis,” the Commission’s rule requires that a whistleblower’s examination and evaluation of publicly available information. 65 Exchange Act Rule 21F-17, which prohibits companies from taking any action to impede whistleblowers from reporting possible securities violations” without having to disclose anything else.       Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency  https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR‐2019‐04‐29/pdf/2019‐08797.pdf    <2019‐08797.pdf>    National Security Agency (NSA)  https://en.wikipidea.org/wiki/National_Security_Agency    The National Security Agency (NSA) is a national-level intelligence agency of the United States Department of Defense, under the authority of the Director of National Intelligence. The NSA is responsible for global monitoring, collection, and processing of information and data for foreign and domestic intelligence and counterintelligence purposes, specializing in a discipline known as signals intelligence (SIGINT). The NSA is also tasked with the protection of U.S. communications networks and information systems. The NSA relies on a variety of measures to accomplish its mission, the majority of which are clandestine.    Begin forwarded message:  From: "." <alfaro.nancy@gmail.com>  Date: February 7, 2021 at 12:42:02 AM PST  To: cdhdf@cdhcm.org.mx, quejas@cdhcm.org.mx, cdhm@tlachinollan.org,  ethicsoffice@who.int, urgent‐action@ohchr.org, aclupreferences@aclu.org,  communications@aclusocal.org, ethicsoffice@un.org, contacto@senadomorena.com,  SINDICATO@senado.gob.mx, transparencia@senado.gob.mx,  sindicato1969.transparencia@senado.gob.mx, gobernacion@senado.gob.mx,  anticorrupcion@senado.gob.mx, justicia@senado.gob.mx,  puntosconstitucionales@senado.gob.mx, derechoshumanos@senado.gob.mx,  asuntosindigenas@senado.gob.mx, ninezyadolescencia@senado.gob.mx,  salud@senado.gob.mx, comsegsocial@senado.gob.mx, educacion@senado.gob.mx,  trabajoyprevision@senado.gob.mx, reformaagraria@senado.gob.mx,  agriculturayganaderia@senado.gob.mx, energia@senado.gob.mx,  comunicacionesytransportes@senado.gob.mx, hacienda@senado.gob.mx,  asuntosfronterizos@senado.gob.mx, economia@senado.gob.mx, crpp@senado.gob.mx,  defensanacional@senado.gob.mx, seguridadpublica@senado.gob.mx,  seguridad.nacional@diputados.gob.mx, marina@senado.gob.mx,  webmaster@semar.gob.mx, cni@cni.gob.mx, silvanoaureoles@michoacan.gob.mx,  gobiernodemorelia@morelia.gob.mx, GobiernoMichoacan2.0@gmail.com,  transparenciamorelia@morelia.gob.mx, transparencia@cocotra.michoacan.gob.mx,  Marco.Lagunas@cocotra.michoacan.gob.mx,  manuel.valencia@cocotra.michoacan.gob.mx, FOM.2@hotmail.com,  Fiscal@morelia.fiscaliamichoacan.gob.mx, fiscalgeneral@fiscaliamichoacan.gob.mx,  pgjecomsoc@michoacan.gob.mx, sectec.despacho@michoacan.gob.mx,  denuncia.regulacionsanitaria@edomex.gob.mx, denuncialosaqui@ssedomex.gob.mx,  comisaria.edomex@pfp.gob.mx  Subject: Fwd: Office of Personnel Management ‐ Office of Investigations  66 Ojo Autoridades Fiscales Mexico y Fiscalía ‐   Sigan perdiendo el tiempo jugando a echarse la bolita y entre abogados.     Estimados:    Los refiero al correo al calce.     Los Corporativos Estadounidenses son estructuras militarizadas. [Parte de la Estrategia  Del Pentágono ‐ Pónganse a Leer  los documentos desclasificados en las paginas del DoD  y CIA o las ligas que mande].     Por lo tanto también existe una estructura de comando militar, leyes militares  disfrazadas civiles, etc. Leyes Anticorrupción dentro del Acta "FCPA Act of 1977"   no es lo mismo que leyes de Anticorrupción.     Nadie mando a ningún abogados [DOJ]  andar dando opiniones legales bajo la FCPA  o  sobre asuntos fiscales ‐  Autoridades Fiscales.  ASC 642 =  US GAAP Ley Federales  Sobre Cálculos y Asuntos Fiscales y SOX Audit Laws. Dentro de estructuras globales  militarizadas.     Ejemplo:   US Corporation Walt‐Mart   Tiendotas  physicas de abarrotes =   Que siempre necesitan comprar de largas  parcelas/terrenos sin importar el precio en lugares estratégicos y Bodegas.....     CIA, MI6, Mozzad, FBI agentes, etc.  disfrazados de Seguridad privada los cuales  manejan contratistas privados y Policía Local ‐ [Armas ]  Sus propias redes y estructuras de logistica y transporte [i.e. Trailers/Trucks]     Ademas Adquiriendo Las Costas de Mexico y LatinoAmerica.       ➕    Demandas por Autoridades Fiscales = No es simple Fraude Fiscal o Evasion de  impuestos.       Begin forwarded message:  From: "." <alfaro.nancy@gmail.com>  Date: February 3, 2021 at 5:30:41 PM PST  To: Sebastian Barragan <sbarragan@aristeguinoticias.com>,  redaccion@aristeguinoticias.com  Subject: Office of Personnel Management ‐ Office of Investigations     Sebastian,    Recuerda que borraron mi identidad por completo de todos los sistemas  de gobierno en Mexico después del atentado del 2014.  Hay un rango  militar perdido.     67 Revisa todas las ligas y fechas en las cuales yo menciono que tuvo lugar  algún evento. No me estoy equivocando, ni me faltan tornillos. Están  cambiándome fechas y datos que veo en linea. Aparte de desaparecer  información en Google.  Esperó que no se te haya escapado el hecho de  que todos tenemos acceso a diferentes versiones y paginas de internet  en Google. Es todo lo que te puedo comentar por ahora.     Esta es la estructura de donde estuve en Washington DC. Por ahora solo  te comento que la investigación que existe en Washington DC acerca de  mi incluye entrevistas con a personas, incluidas mis amistades de la  niñez, maestros de secundaria, preparatoria  [EPLER en Uruapan,  Mich.].  Te recuerdo que también me Audito el IRS desde que entre a  PwC como hasta el 2013.  Wells Fargo era la única cuenta de banco que  tenia desde que llegue a USA, aparte de la hipoteca con Bank of America  [se va a volver importante]. La abri en Oxnard, CA, Walmart tambien me  deposito mi nomina en esa cuenta. Ojo! Se que están borrando  evidencia.     También Me investigo el FBI en el 2006‐2007 cuando PwC me puso un  ultimatum y detuvo el sueldo hasta que me dignara a llenar los papeles  para obtener la licencia de Contadora publica o CPA en CA y luego en  NY.  Yo pase los exámenes desde el 2001‐2002. Nunca fue un secreto  para PwC que no me interesaba la sociedad.     En el 2010, me investigo EY. McGladrey me investigo en el 2012.  Deloitte Mexico me investigo desde el 2013 y luego en el 2014.      Curiosamente, la investigación que me hicieron en Febrero del 2016  [Altegrity, a.k.a. HireRight, a.k.a. The work number, a.k.a Workforce  Solutions, LLC, a.k.a. RAI, a.k.a. Duff&Phelps, a.k.a. etc.....], a petición de  KPMG San Francisco, y soltaron los sistemas de Wal‐Mart  se brincaron  todo el periodo que estuve en Washington DC, incluyendo la  Universidad en DC y el colegio de Oxnard, CA. Fue el Colegio de Oxnard  quien me saco de Wal‐Mart y después me mando a Washington, DC.    Herbalife  me investigo por casi dos meses en Junio‐Julio del 2018  [según solo hadta Julio 23, 2018 por ahora].  Tardo mas Herbalife  confesándome que me estaba investigando secretamente [un crimen]  con PwC‐Los Angeles por el periodo 2000‐2008 [illegal] que lo que dure  en renunciar Agosto 13 del 2018.     KPMG y Herbalife no estaban [2018] trabajan por separado. Recuerda  que hubo un enfrentamiento directo [sin Altegrity de por medio] entre  las firmas de KPMG Officina de San Francisco y Deloitte Mexico en  Febrero del 2016 sobre los resultados de la investigación.     [Altegrity esta bajo Oaktree Capital, EverCore, etc.] [encaja al ejecutivo  de Oaktree David Orkin, former PwC Sr. Manager].   Altegrity Inc. = PwC‐Booz Allen    Esta es la estructura de donde estuve en DC.  Quien soy, que se o que  estoy denunciando?   68   Department of Health and Human Services [DHHS]    Office of Personnel Management [OPM]  Office of Investigations    National Background Investigations Bureau (NBIB): The NBIB, as a bureau under OPM, conducted approximately 95% of the background investigations for the Federal Government. Effective on October 1, 2019 this function was transferred to the Department of Defense, to become the Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency.      ࣐࣑࣒PwC‐ Booz Allen          El memorandum que escibi en Febrero del 2014 a la Oficina  nacional de           McGladrey,  LLP encaja aquí.              Acaso parece que PwC me contrato en año 2000 por casualidad  después que                rechaze a la CIA en Washington DC?  Revisa la liga, el reporte y las  fechas al final  del texto al calce y tus emails cuando mencione government  corporations para que           veas cuando la mande.     Office of Investigations  https://www.opm.gov/our‐inspector‐general/organization/office‐of‐ investigations/      Office of Investigations The Office of the Inspector General is considered a Federal law enforcement agency. The Office of Investigations, a component within the OIG, has criminal investigators who have statutory Federal law enforcement authority and perform criminal, civil, and administrative investigations related to allegations of fraud, waste, or abuse affecting any OPM program, as well as gross mismanagement and 69 employee misconduct by OPM employees and contractors. Our criminal investigators pursue criminal prosecution, civil action, and/or administrative penalties when appropriate. They frequently partner with the Department of Justice (DOJ) and other Federal, State, and local law enforcement agencies to investigate cases nationwide. The Office of Investigations operates a fraud hotline for individuals to report allegations of fraud, waste, abuse, or mismanagement and misconduct directly to the OIG. Both the American taxpayers and Federal employees are harmed when OPM programs are defrauded or when misconduct compromises program integrity. Our investigations of allegations of fraud against OPM- administered programs include:  The Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP) is the largest employer-based health care program in the world, covering over 8.2 million current Federal employees, retirees, and their eligible family members. OPM, under Title 5 of the Code of Federal Regulations, is granted the authority to administer the FEHBP, which annually pays in excess of $50 billion for medical and pharmaceutical benefits, administrative fees, and other related costs. The Office of Investigations investigates cases related to false claims submitted by both FEHBP participants, health care providers, and pharmacies; instances of pharmaceutical fraud or drug diversion; and fraud committed by health care insurance carriers contracted to administer benefits on behalf of the FEHBP.  Civil Service Retirement System (CSRS) and the Federal Employees Retirement System (FERS): We investigate cases involving improper retirement annuity payments made to deceased annuitants or their survivors; theft or diversion of annuity payments; and embezzlement from the Civil Service 70 Retirement and Disability Fund. OPM pays approximately $80 billion annually in retirement- related benefits.   National Background Investigations Bureau (NBIB): The NBIB, as a bureau under OPM, conducted approximately 95% of the background investigations for the Federal Government. Effective on October 1, 2019 this function was transferred to the Department of Defense, to become the Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency.   Our Office of Investigations continues to investigate legacy NBIB cases involving allegations of fabrication, i.e., alleged false statements made by NBIB background investigators in their reports, which were referred to our office prior to October 1, 2019.   Combined Federal Campaign (CFC): The CFC is the largest and most successful annual workplace charity campaign. There are almost 200 CFC campaigns throughout the United States and overseas raising millions of dollars each year. In 2018, the CFC raised nearly $93 million in pledges from Federal employees. The Office of Investigations investigates fraud, theft, embezzlement, and gross mismanagement or misconduct related to the donations made to the CFC program.   Other OPM Programs: The Office of Investigations also reviews and may conduct criminal, civil, and/or administrative investigations within the Federal Employees Group Life Insurance (FEGLI) program, Federal Employees Dental and Vision Program (FEDVIP), and the Federal Long Term Care Insurance Program (FLTCIP). 71   OPM employee and Contractor Misconduct: The Office of Investigations conducts criminal and administrative investigations of OPM employee and contractor misconduct, fraud, waste, and abuse. Concerned citizens, OPM employees, and OPM contractors may report suspected fraud, waste, and abuse to the OIG via the OIG Hotline by clicking on the following link: /our- inspector-general/hotline-to-report-fraud-waste-or- abuse/ Coerced Political Activity. An agency official shall not coerce the political activity of any person or retaliate against an employee for refusing to engage in political activity. 5 U.S.C. § 2302(b)(3) 30 de Octubre del 2020 Standards of Procedure for 5 USC § 1213 Referrals https://osc.gov/Documents/Resources/Policies/St andards%20of%20Procedure%20for%205%20US C%20§%201213%20Referrals.pdf Whistleblower Protection Information ‐ Yo puedo revelar la información de acuerdo a estas reglas. https://www.opm.gov/our-inspector- general/whistleblower-protection-information/ 23 de Noviembre 2020 ‐ Arlington Virginia REPORT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS 72 https://www.opm.gov/our-inspector- general/publications/reports/2020/4a-cf-00-20- 024.pdf Revisa las fechas detenidamente y sobre todo las secciones al calce. <4a‐cf‐00‐20‐024.pdf>  Results of our consideration of internal control A deficiency in internal control exists when the design or operation of a control does not allow management or employees, in the normal course of performing their assigned functions, to prevent, or detect and correct, misstatements on a timely basis. A material weakness is a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control, such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of the Agency’s financial statements will not be prevented, or detected and corrected, on a timely basis. A significant deficiency is a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control that is less severe than a material weakness, yet important enough to merit attention by those charged with governance. Our consideration of internal control was for the limited purpose described in the first paragraph of this section and was not designed to identify all deficiencies in internal control that might be material weaknesses or significant deficiencies and therefore, material weaknesses or significant deficiencies may exist that have not been identified. We did identify certain deficiencies in internal control, described in the section titled Material Weakness – Information Systems Control Environment below that we consider to be a material weakness in the Agency’s internal control. 73 Material Weakness – Information Systems Control Environment Security Management 30 de Octubre del 2020 ‐ Arlington Virginia Audit of the Information Technology Security Controls of the U.S. Office of Personnel Management’s Agency Common Controls https://www.opm.gov/our-inspector- general/publications/reports/2020/4a-ci-00-20- 008.pdf <4a‐ci‐00‐20‐008.pdf>  OPM Audit Reports https://www.opm.gov/our-inspector- general/publications/reports/#url=2020 1 de Mayo del 2020 Department of Health and Human Services Office of the Inspector General - Office of Investigations https://osc.gov/Documents/Public%20Files/FY21 /DI-16- 3098/Subject%20Agency%20Report%3b%20DI- 16-3098.pdf <Subject Agency Report; DI‐16‐3098.pdf>    List of Recipients added on  February 6, 2020   sbarragan@aristeguinoticias.com, redaccion@aristeguinoticias.com,  careyshenkman@riseup.net, courage.contact@couragefound.org,  Norissa@socialism2020.org, transportandoamichoacan@live.com,  joe@socialism2020.org, periodicooficial@michoacan.gob.mx,  buzon@poderjudicialmichoacan.gob.mx, newsdesk@afr.com, news@thelocal.it,  88 Baumb, Nelly From:mark weiss <earwopa@yahoo.com> Sent:Wednesday, February 24, 2021 10:00 AM To:Council, City Cc:mark weiss Subject:unicorns spotted in moca and beige CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  325 Lytton, $20m; their tenant you’ve never heard of, $1.3b Posted on February 23, 2021 by markweiss86 To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. Random nobody’s pose in front of the building at 325 Lytton, built by Vance Brown, designed by Tony Carrasco, stones by Haussmann in 2009; the Biz Journal reports that a new tenant there Plume is now worth $1.3b aka a unicorn. To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. Smart-home technology provider Plume Design Inc. joined the Bay Area’s unicorns Tuesday with a $270 million funding round. The Palo Alto company, which has largely flown under the radar despite its technology being used in some 22 millions homes, saw its valuation more than double to $1.35 billion as a result of the financing. The sole investor in the round — Plume’s Series E — was New York-based Insight Partners. Plume plans to use the new funds to develop its technology and to invest in sales, marketing and partnerships, CEO Fahri Diner told the Business Journal in an interview this week. That will mean growing aggressively its workforce of 300, about half of which is based in the U.S. — mostly in Palo Alto. “We had about 180 people at this time last year, and I expect that we will be able to grow to around 600 by the end of this year,” Diner said. “Before the pandemic, I spent about half my time here (in Switzerland) and half in Palo Alto,” he said. “Now it has been mostly here, but our global headquarters is back there, where we leased beautiful new offices on Lytton Avenue at the end of 2019 that most of us have never been to yet. We were supposed to move into them last spring, but the pandemic changed those plans.” Apropos of the assertion, variations of which I’ve proferred since running for council (getting a mere 800 votes) 2009, that the flipside of our success is a challenge to our ability to self-govern as a Democracy: did we cede to special interests? 89 How do we run our $450m civic budget for 60,000 citizens while the billion per year ($50B on the tax rolls) real estate industry feeds its greed? And what is the effect of sharing the commons with the billionaires, those who ride or create in their labs Unicorns? Valid questions — no one in leadership dares asking a follow up, let alone try to answer. Grand Jury Report? Or, read Plastic Alto. mbw Maybe we need a Corton Beige or Moca Creme Counter Revolution. Is this stuff good for kitchens? Share this:  Twitter  Facebook Related Unicorn spotted in Palo AltoIn "filthy lucre" Palo Alto greenlights green lights and signs: $$$$ or #@&^In "media" Jazz time travels or jazzscribe contrafacts: from full faith and credit to fregulia and backIn "ethniceities" To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. About markweiss86 Mark Weiss, founder of Plastic Alto blog, is a concert promoter and artist manager in Palo Alto, as Earthwise Productions, with background as journalist, advertising copywriter, book store returns desk, college radio producer, city council and commissions candidate, high school basketball player; he also sang in local choir, and fronts an Allen Ginsberg tribute Beat Hotel Rm 32 View all posts by markweiss86 → This entry was posted in filthy lucre, Plato's Republic, Uncategorized and tagged 325 lyt 90 Baumb, Nelly From:Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> Sent:Wednesday, February 24, 2021 8:58 AM To:Perron, Zachary; Jonsen, Robert; Human Relations Commission; chuck jagoda; rebecca@winwithrebecca.com; Greer Stone; Binder, Andrew; Jeff Rosen; David Angel; Council, City; Planning Commission; ParkRec Commission; Pat Burt; Stump, Molly; Molly O'Neal; Kaloma Smith; Jeff Moore; Sunita de Tourreil; Raven Malone; wilpf.peninsula.paloalto@gmail.com; Winter Dellenbach; cromero@cityofepa.org; paloaltofreepress@gmail.com; DuBois, Tom; roberta.ahlquist@sjsu.edu; raj@siliconvalleydebug.org; greg@gregtanaka.org; Shikada, Ed Subject:NYTimes: Rochester Officers Will Not Be Charged in Killing of Daniel Prude CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on  links.  ________________________________    Rochester Officers Will Not Be Charged in Killing of Daniel Prude  https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/23/nyregion/daniel‐prude‐rochester‐police.html?referringSource=articleShare      Sent from my iPhone  91 Baumb, Nelly From:Laura <lkforrest@yahoo.com> Sent:Tuesday, February 23, 2021 9:13 PM To:Council, City Subject:I oppose the Welleseley st housing development CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Dear Palo Alto City Council, I’m a longtime homeowner and landlord in College Terrace (27 years). I am all for increasing housing but the Wellesely St. proposal (at College Ave.) is completely wrong for that location. The project does not include enough parking for its tenants and will force them to make use of on-street parking. This will greatly impact the already low parking availability, especially for those going to the College Terrace Library via car.     I’m also concerned for the safety of the neighborhood children, as they walk or cycle to Escondido Elementary School, Cameron Park, and the College Terrace Library. The increase in car congestion and reduced visibility, due to on-street parking, could create dangerous situations. I believe this project would be a better fit along El Camino Real or the old Fry’s location. Thank you, Laura Forrest Yale St.     92 Baumb, Nelly From:Lydia Callaghan <lydiacallaghan2011@gmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, February 23, 2021 9:04 PM To:Council, City Subject:Support for Castilleja CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Dear City Council,    I’m writing today to offer my strong support for Castilleja’s modernization plan given the upcoming March hearings. I  live on Hamilton Avenue in Palo Alto and have no connection to the school. However, I think the deliberations about this  project have dragged on for far too long, and it's time for the project to be approved.     As a product of single‐sex high school education, I can attest to how important this is for girls. I strongly believe more  young women in our community should have the opportunity to attend a school like Castilleja. Therefore I think it's  critical that the school's enrollment be increased. Similarly, I believe the underground parking should be approved as it  will improve traffic flow.  Finally, in order not to disadvantage young girls, I believe the school's current footprint should  be maintained.    After such robust community discussions and the number of project evolutions, the resulting project is one that the  neighborhood ‐ and Palo Alto ‐ can be proud of. That’s why I encourage you to vote in favor of the requested conditions  of approval later this month.      Thank you for your time,    Lydia Callaghan      ‐‐  Lydia Callaghan  917/887‐3995    Founder,  Bouclier    http://www.boucliervisors.com  93 Baumb, Nelly From:joe_lee@yahoo.com Sent:Tuesday, February 23, 2021 5:26 PM To:Council, City Subject:Strong objection to rezoning College Terrace property lots CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  I'm very dismayed by the proposal to replace two homes in College Terrace with 24 apartments! Especially in an area  with single family houses on either side, small apartments of three or four units across the street and the library nearby.     Please consider carefully the objections of Palo Alto residents like me who strongly object to reclassifying neighborhood  property lots originally zoned for one single family home ‐‐ surrounded by properties with the same zoning ‐‐ into such a  massive complex.     I believe going from the current zoning designation of R‐1 to the equivalent of R‐12 is outrageous, misplaced and  inappropriate.    Joe Lee  Oberlin Street  Palo Alto, CA     94 Baumb, Nelly From:Sherry Listgarten <sherry@listgarten.com> Sent:Tuesday, February 23, 2021 5:20 PM To:Council, City; Abendschein, Jonathan; Luong, Christine; Eggleston, Brad Subject:Feedback on S/CAP discussion CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Dear City Council and City Staff members:     Thank you for the thoughtful discussion on the S/CAP process. Here are a few thoughts of my own.    1. Transparency. Several council members (e.g., Filseth and Kuo) and UAC commissioners (e.g., Scharff and Smith) have  expressed impatience and/or concern about transparency, reinforcing the need to let the public know what we are  asking of them, how much, what it will cost, when it will happen, how long it will take, etc. That is important. We cannot  have trust without that.    I would add that it is important to be transparent not only about what we are asking but why. Without context the  asks may well seem outlandish. Within context, less so. Either way, the S/CAP is not an easy pill to swallow. Our job is to  help people swallow the pill, not to pretend we don't need the pill or to cut the pill in half.    2. Hope. Transparency, or "ruthlessness" as one of you put it, is the easy part of this. A mediocre leader can provide  ruthless facts in a time like this. They are a dime a dozen. The best leaders provide hope during a time like this. How do  we give people hope that we can change our emissions trajectory, and lay out clear and simple steps that all of us can  take to make a meaningful difference within our own constraints (financial, time, etc).    3. Communication. As Jonathan and many of you have pointed out, the way we communicate about the S/CAP,  especially at the start and as a group of leaders, is going to determine momentum from the get‐go. The City needs a  clear and compelling communications strategy. It's not clear to me who owns this or how it's being evaluated. But it is  critical.    4. Neighbors to Neighbors. Several of you emphasized the impact of neighbors talking with neighbors. I agree, and hope  that we have a strategy for that. Much of this is about demystifying existing solutions.    5. Cost. This is expensive, for the City and for its residents. Maximum effort must be on (a) finding ways to reduce costs  and (b) allocating costs fairly. I know that staff has this top of mind, as do all Councilmembers, so just doubling down on  this obvious but critical point. There is no dancing around this, but communicating the awareness and the work that's  gone into (a) and (b) will help.    Those are my main points. A few minor points:   Transportation options. When you consider transportation options, please make sure to account for  convenience. In my experience, public transportation is egregiously slow, and far too expensive to make fast. So  I tend to agree with Tanaka, Dubois, and others that electric bikes and scooters, with safe lanes for them, are  likely to have a much bigger impact than shuttles (except for work shuttles).   Level 1 charging. I think we discount Level 1 charging more than we should. Talk with PCE. It is much cheaper  and almost as effective, plus has good benefits for the grid. Save the beefy chargers for the daytime, as Dubois  suggested. It will save us money (we can sell our more valuable evening power).  95  More engagement with experts and leaders. I appreciated that many on Council want to see more of this, and  involve more community experts and leaders. I hope that Staff will find ways to do that when they are ready.  Again, thank you for prioritizing this and for spending a good amount of time and attention on how we can reduce our  climate impact and at the same time help our city and its residents adapt to the changing climate.    ‐‐ Sherry Listgarten        96 Baumb, Nelly From:Chris Robell <chris_robell@yahoo.com> Sent:Tuesday, February 23, 2021 3:50 PM To:Council, City; Shikada, Ed; Eggleston, Brad Subject:Help w/ EV Adoption CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Dear Council, Ed and Brad,     As follow up to last night’s discussion regarding initiatives to help with climate change, I thought I’d pass along  something I just learned while doing my taxes.    Most people are aware of the various federal and state tax credits/rebates available when purchasing an electric vehicle.  But I suspect not as many people are aware there is also a federal tax credit for installation of an EV charger at home or  business (and the credit is retroactive as well).    Residents get a federal tax credit up to $1000 for 30% of the cost of labor+materials for home EV charger installations:    https://www.evconnect.com/blog/ev‐infrastructure‐tax‐credits‐incentives    Might be good to ensure you list this as you try to encourage people to adopt electric vehicles. Every little bit helps.    Best regards,  Chris Robell  97 Baumb, Nelly From:Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, February 23, 2021 3:17 PM To:DuBois, Tom Cc:<michael.gennaco@oirgroup.com>; Council, City; Dave Price; Emily Mibach; city.council@menlopark.org; Human Relations Commission; Palo Alto Free Press; WILPF Peninsula Palo Alto; Planning Commission; ParkRec Commission; Richard Konda; Jeff Moore; Raj Jayadev; Lewis james; Kaloma Smith; Sunita de Tourreil; Nash, Betsy; chuck jagoda; cindy.chavez@bos.sccgov.org; Joe Simitian; Anna Griffin; Roberta Ahlquist; Jonsen, Robert; Binder, Andrew; Perron, Zachary; james pitkin; Rebecca Eisenberg; mark weiss; Raven Malone; Minor, Beth; Pat Burt; Bains, Paul; Greer Stone; Greg Tanaka; Patrice Ventresca; Kou, Lydia; O'Neal, Molly; Stump, Molly; Rodriguez, Miguel; Rosen, Jeff; Winter Dellenbach Subject:Re: Epidemic of police sponsored canine attacks CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  2/23/21 Hi Tom, (Mayor Tom DuBois) At last night’s city council meeting I had hoped, during oral communication, to briefly review some of the key issues raised by my letter and CPRA request below. My fault but I was having technical difficulties with accessing zoom. In any event, when your time permits, and I know you are very busy right now, including preparation for your upcoming state of the city speech, I would appreciate if you would review my letter, and more importantly the linked articles re the epidemic of police sponsored canine attacks on people of color and other vulnerable individuals across this country. In addition, I have included, also in a link, the (CMR) City Manager Report reviewing the status of the PAPD canine unit back in 2005. I am not aware of any subsequent review of the PAPD canine unit, since that time, although there may have been a more recent review that I am unaware of. In my concluding comments, below, I suggest that the city council consider expanding the scope of the IPA’s (Independent Police Auditor) duties to include a review of the current status of the PAPD canine unit and, going forward, including complaints involving the canine unit in the twice a year reports issued by our IPA. Please let me know your thoughts. Best regards Aram 2/21/21 CPRA request and cover letter re the current status of the Palo Alto Police Department’s Canine unit. Dear City Council members, members of the Palo Alto Community, and the local press: I am very concerned that as a community we are not as fully informed regarding the current status of the PAPD canine unit, as we should be. I’m requesting that we all do 98 our part to obtain a full picture of the risks these canines potentially pose to the health and safety of community members attacked by these vicious dogs. My most recent concern was raised after reading a Daily Post piece, Jan, 28, 2021, “Police dog attacks innocent man,” an incident where a Palo Alto police dog was released on an innocent Mt. View resident, Mr. Joel Domingo Alejo, who subsequently filed a $20 million claim against the city of Palo Alto for injuries suffered in the attack. In addition, I have attached two recent articles, see links below, that suggest the weaponization of police dogs targeting particularly African Americans is an under recognized form of police terror and brutality resulting in life threatening injuries, life changing injuries and even death. The first article: When Police Violence Is a Dog Bite (First published on 10/2/2020) gives a harrowing perspective on the fact that police dogs bite thousands of Americans every year and that few ever obtain justice. https://www.themarshallproject.org/2020/10/02/when-police-violence-is-a-dog- bite?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=share-tools&utm_source=email&utm_content=post-top The second piece, published Feb 12, 2021 is titled: The City Where Police Unleash Dogs On Black Teens (In Baton Rouge, police dogs bit a teenager 17 or younger every three weeks, on average) is an equally disturbing must read. https://www.themarshallproject.org/2021/02/12/the-city-where-police-unleash-dogs-on- black-teens?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=share-tools&utm_source=email&utm_content=post- top In addition I have attached the Palo Alto City Manager report from 2005 titled: REVIEW OF THE POLICE CANINE PROGRAM -- a report that was responsive to a CPDA request 1 filed on 9/5/2004 to then Palo Alto Police Chief Lynne Johnson. Said CPRA request is available should you wish to read it. Here is the link to a 2005 CMR, Palo Alto city manager report, providing a detailed review of the Palo Alto Canine Unit, as it existed in 2005. The report looks at a 36- month time frame and also breaks down the 13 dog bites, reported during the 36-month time frame in question, based on race. Of the 13 bites, analyzed, four involved whites, five involved African-Americans, three involved Hispanics and one involved a Pacific Islander. (http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/cityagenda/publish/cmrs/4091.pdf ) Conclusion During the course of 2020 and now in 2021 there have been discussions by the Palo Alto City Council regarding expanding the scope of the duties of the Palo Alto Independent Police Auditor. According to the CMR (City Manager Report) REVIEW OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT’S CANINE PROGRAM, dated January 10, 2005, CMR: 113:05, the Palo Alto canine program was developed in 1982, nearly forty years ago. During this time frame, our Independent Police Auditor (established 2006) has to my knowledge, never reviewed complaints filed by community members, regarding allegations of use of excessive force by the PAPD canine team. It is my understanding that the canine unit is primarily used during nighttime shifts under cover of darkness and most often outside of public view. Given the current national epidemic of the thousands of Americans bitten by police dogs every year it is past time Palo Alto considers adding review of dog bite incidents, perpetrated by our canine unit, to the list of police complaints reviewed by our police auditor. Sincerely, Aram James 99 California Public Records Act Request Re: Palo Alto Police Department’s Canine Unit (filed Feb 20, 2021) 1. Any and all City of Palo Alto and Palo Alto Police Department documents and related information re the numbers of police dogs currently in the PAPD canine unit. 2. Any and all documents related to the purchase, training, and cost of maintaining the current canine unit. 3. Any and all documents and related information re the annual cost of maintaining the Palo Alto’s Canine unit. (The total annual canine budget for the Palo Alto Police Department) 4. Any and all documents re the number of times the canine unit has deployed their dogs during the last 36 months against a person. (# of times the canines have been deployed as a weapon as a opposed to the use of the canine in a search and rescue mission.) 5. Any and all documents reflecting the race of those who were attacked by dogs in the PAPD canine unit- during the last 36 months —from today’s date back 36 months. 6. While redacting the name of the individuals for privacy purposes —the number of individuals injured by the canine unit and the extent of said injuries...and all related documents redacted for privacy concerns. Including photos of the injuries. 7. Access to viewing all body worn camera footage of canine attacks going back 36 months. 8. A list of all complaints and lawsuits growing out of attacks by dogs on the canine unit going back 36 months from receipt of this CPRA request. 9. Any and all documents, name and type of artificial teeth, —and the material used to create these artificial teeth, that are made for each dog. For example teeth made of titanium. 10. Any and all documents, and related information, regarding the vendor used by the PAPD to make teeth for each canine on the team. 11. Any and all documents, or related information, re the annual budget to pay for replacement of artificial teeth for the canine unit? Food budget? Medical budget? 12. All documents and information re the certification process each dog member of the canine unit must go through. 13. Documentation or related information re whether the necessary documentation/certification for each canine is current. 14. The name of each officer assigned to the canine unit. 15. Any and all documents related to the training officers must undergo to qualify for membership to the canine unit. 100 16. Any and all documents and related information re the certification process members of the canine unit (police officers) must undergo to qualify for the unit. 17. Any and all current information and documentation related to re whether each police officer currently assigned to the canine unit has up to date certification? Is not currently certified? 18. Any and all documentation re the number of times a non police officer who has been bitten/attacked by a Palo Alto police dog has been required to obtain medical treatment during the last 36 months. Dating back 36 months from receipt of this request. 19. Number of times the victim of a Palo Alto Police dog bite or attack has been required to be hospitalized. Time frame going back 36 months from the receipt of this CPRA request. 20. Area or areas of the city of Palo Alto where police have released their canines most frequently. 21. Any and all information and documentation re the frequency (the number of times) the Palo Alto Police use their canine unit to assist the East Palo Alto Police during the last 36 months? 22. To assist the Mountain View Police Department during the last 36 months? 23. The Menlo Park Police Department during the last 36 months? 24. To assist the Santa Clara County Sheriff’s office? 25. The San Mateo County Sheriff’s Office? 26. Monies spent on training either a police officer member of the canine unit or a dog member of the unit for out of the Palo Alto training? 27. Any and all emails, memos, written policies, and other documentation re the need to use the canine to keep or intimidate residents of East Palo Alto from traveling to Palo Alto. (last 36 months) 28. Any and all text messages (or similar electronic communications) between members of the canine unit and other members of the Palo Alto Police department, or other local law enforcement agencies reflecting racial bias, towards African Americans or other racial minorities. (Last 36 months). 28. Name of the canine supervisor and length of time that officer has occupied that role. 29. The name of the canine team manager and the length of time that officer has held this position. 30. Any and all documents or information re the number of times victims of canine bits, by the PAPD canine unit, have been transported to the Stanford Hospital or any other local hospital facility for injuries. (Last 36 months) 101 31. Cost of all hospital visits for canine bits inflicted by the PAPD canine unit (last 36 months)? 32. Any additional documents and information re the canine unit I have not specifically asked for but that are relevant to my current CPDA request for the current status of the PAPD canine unit. 33. Current Palo Alto Police Department policy or policies regarding the function, structure, and deployment of canines etc. 34. Name of the current computer system, i.e., Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) used to track all activity of the Palo Alto Police Department Canine Unit? 102 Baumb, Nelly From:JIM POPPY <jcpoppy55@comcast.net> Sent:Tuesday, February 23, 2021 2:47 PM To:Council, City Subject:RE: Sustainability Priorities - Just say NO to Castilleja underground garage CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Dear City Council, Thank you for taking global warming seriously. I enjoyed watching your conversation last night about how best to act to preserve our planet. I especially admired Mayor DuBois's comments about becoming more action-oriented, not just conducting study sessions. Please do not make an exception for Castilleja to build an underground garage. Concrete production accounts for 7% of all GHGs. The garage would afford the school 22 additional spaces! Not worth the damage to the environment. 75% of Castilleja students do not live in Palo Alto, and there is no benefit to the community to allow them to expand beyond a reasonable, smaller, increase in enrollment. Besides the impact on the environment, the underground garage entrance would be on the Bryant Bike Boulevard and exit into the neighborhood. The Bike Boulevard would be permanently compromised and would impact how citizens can safely and effectively commute through Palo Alto. Another of your stated goals is to preserve and enhance alternative modes of transportation, so the proposed garage would be doubly injurious to the community. JUST SAY NO TO THE GARAGE! Thank you, Jim Poppy Melville Ave. 103 Baumb, Nelly From:nllwang@yahoo.com Sent:Tuesday, February 23, 2021 2:33 PM To:DuBois, Tom; Council, City Subject:Palo Alto foothill park entrance fee to Palo Alto Residents CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Dear Palo Alto mayor and city council members: I'm very concerned with the rapid changing situation of the Foothill Park. I've been a resident of Palo Alto since 1995, and enjoy the park with family and invited friends. We hiked there and I also biked there. I'm forced to retire during this economic downturn under the covid 19. Last year I biked to FootHill park from my midtown home regularly under the covid 19 SIP. But my wife doesn't have such physical capability; later in the fall we drove there to hike, as we did in the last 25 years. Now with the latest rule, we have to pay each time, this add up to a significant amount for a forced-retirement. This is a fundamental breach of the basic respect to the property right in my opinion. We know Palo Alto city acquired the park years ago and pays for the maintenance cost. I don't mind sharing with other visitors. It's like I welcome my neighbors to my yard under my invitation. Now it's like my yard is turned into a public land while I have to pay to maintain it plus property tax AND also I have to pay entrance fee into my own yard! What makes sense to me is simple: all the Palo Alto residents can enter for free, same as the last decades, as we already pay through our property tax. Other non-resident visitors are welcomed with a fee, when the capacity allows. I haven't visited the park since last November due to the rampant covid 19. I heard the environment was badly impacted. It's a shame that people don't respect the nature. We should do the right thing, respect the basic property right; of course we also share with our neighbors. But if the neighbors ruin my yard, how can I continue sharing? Sincerely, Larry Wang 6502608817 104 Baumb, Nelly From:runlong zhou <runlongz@yahoo.com> Sent:Tuesday, February 23, 2021 2:18 PM To:Sharon Elliot; lakshmi sunder Cc:Jensen, Peter; Council, City; pwecips; Public Works Public Services; CSD; ParkRec Commission; Lisette Micek; Camille Tripp; Ana Maria Arjona; Satomi Rogers; Taly Katz; Sue Freeman; Rick Hallsted; Nate Case; John Jacobs; Corkie Freeman; Ram Sunder; Kathy Fei; Pam Mayerfeld; Tim Rogers; David Cheng; Jo Vitanye; Margaret Cheng; Eliezer Rosengaus; George Greenwald; Yan Jing; Michelle Rosengaus; Olga Rubchinskaya; Amanda Case; Grant Elliot; Margie Greenwald; Sung and Jenny Ryu; Brian and Maggie Szabo; Campbell Linda & Bob; Will Shen; Lisa Zhang >; Arthur Keller; liora gerzberg; Kevin Mayer; adele@acm.org; Teddie Guenzer; Chip Wytmar; Mary Ann Norton; CeCi Kettendorf; Robin Holbrook; Koo Darice; Paul Koo; Runlong Zhou Subject:Re: Ramos Park/Dog Park CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Dear City Council, Parks and Recreation Staff, We are dog owners and have lived on Ortega court since 2006. Even though our backyard isn't next to the park, we stand firmly with our neighbors to strongly oppose the idea/proposal of a fenced dog park at Ramos Park. It is not only about majority's benefit at minority cost, it is about JUSTICE! In addition to all the reasons provided by our fellow neighbors why we should not build a dog park in Ramos, we would like to emphasize and remind you that many people's life quality and asset value will be negatively impacted dramatically. Can you imagine your feeling and reaction that you can never open your window due to noise and smell outside? Can you imagine your feeling and reaction when you lose a big chuck of your lifetime asset overnight because of a local government project? It would be a disaster if it ever happens to a single person, not mentioning a whole family and the entire neighborhood. If this proposal has been dropped/discarded by the city, please accept our sincere appreciation. Otherwise we hold our trust in you and expect you to use your justice, integrity and principle to make the right decision --- "No Dog Pork in Ramos Park". Respectfully yours, Runlong Zhou & Yan Jing 3737 Ortega Court. 111 Baumb, Nelly From:Rita Vrhel <ritavrhel@sbcglobal.net> Sent:Tuesday, February 23, 2021 12:39 PM To:ptc@cityofpaloalto.org; Council, City Subject:ADU basements CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Hello PTC Commissioners: A discussion of whether to allow Basements under ADUs will occur at your 2/24 meeting. As a member of Save Palo Alto's Groundwater, I am concerned about additional groundwater being pumped and dumped during underground construction. Palo Alto currently does not have sufficient groundwater pumping regulations to protect our community groundwater from being depleted or wasted. Current regulations allow for excessive pumping and dumping with minimal fines as punishment. Keith Bennett, also of Save Palo Alto's Groundwater, will provide (you) a presentation which discusses groundwater extraction, impact to nearby homes and sea level-groundwater level rise. Save Palo Alto's Groundwater will be meeting with Phil Bobel of Public Works to discuss additional ways to strengthen PA's groundwater extraction regulations. Once again we are facing a possible drought. It does not make sense for MOST residents to conserve water while a few Developers are allowed to pump as much as they want when constructing underground. This valuable community groundwater may soon be needed as a source of drinking or emergency water. In many sections of Palo Alto, dewatering is not required for underground construction. But where it is, ADU basements will only add to the problem of wasted groundwater. In fact, because of the size and location of ADU's on the primary property, the use of groundwater saving cut- off walls may not be possible. This would leave only "broad-based" dewatering. The location of an ADU to adjacent property also could increase potential subsidence or vegetation/ tree loss. The issues are very complex. Each basement serves as a concrete dam. Add enough dams and in areas of high groundwater and the result may be sheet flooding in times of heavy rain and/ or sea level rise. The storm drains become overwhelmed and property is damaged. Because precipitation absorbing soil is removed during underground construction, not only does underground construction act as a "dam"; it also reduces the amount of soil available to handle rain. So a double negative effect occurs. ADUs were promoted as a "granny" unit or a "nanny" unit or a rental for a limited number of people. When you start adding basements, you re distorting the original purpose of an ADU and turning it into a much large home. Able to handle families rather than individuals. A GREAT way to turn R-1 neighborhoods into duplexes. 112 I strongly urge NOT approving basements under ADUs. Also basement square footage can no longer be a freebie; but must start being counted as part of the FAR. Mayor DuBois asked what Palo Altans can do to reduce our carbon footprint. A great step in that direction would be to count all or at least 50% of basement/ underground construction sq. footage as part of the FAR. Thank you. Rita C. Vrhel Phone: 650-325-2298 113 Baumb, Nelly From:lakshmi sunder <lakshmi3733@gmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, February 23, 2021 8:07 AM To:Sharon Elliot Cc:Jensen, Peter; Council, City; pwecips; Public Works Public Services; CSD; ParkRec Commission; Lisette Micek; Camille Tripp; Ana Maria Arjona; Satomi Rogers; Taly Katz; Sue Freeman; Rick Hallsted; Nate Case; John Jacobs; Corkie Freeman; Ram Sunder; Kathy Fei; Pam Mayerfeld; Tim Rogers; David Cheng; Jo Vitanye; Margaret Cheng; Eliezer Rosengaus; George Greenwald; Yan Jing; Michelle Rosengaus; runlong Zhou; Olga Rubchinskaya; Amanda Case; Grant Elliot; Margie Greenwald; Sung and Jenny Ryu; Brian and Maggie Szabo; Campbell Linda & Bob; Will Shen; Lisa Zhang >; Arthur Keller; liora gerzberg; Kevin Mayer; adele@acm.org; Teddie Guenzer; Chip Wytmar; Mary Ann Norton; CeCi Kettendorf; Robin Holbrook; Koo Darice; Paul Koo Subject:Re: Ramos Park/Dog Park CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.      Dear City Council and Parks and Recreation Staff,     We are dog owners and have lived on Ortega court for twenty years.    We agree with Sharon Elliot’s summary of why a fenced dog park in Ramos park is a bad idea.    Dog owners and non dog owners overwhelmingly feel that dog parks are ugly, dirty, and a nuisance. A fenced dog park that will be popular with everyone requires a lot of land and investment. This article is about the second largest dog park that opened recently in San francisco.  https://www.sfgate.com/local/article/Sf-largest-dog-park-golden-gate-park-15957708.php    Ramos park does not have the room for a successful fenced dog park.    We had attended a Parks and Recreation meeting more than a year ago and advocated for the regulated off leash hours based on the https://www.brooklinema.gov/752/Green-Dog-Program . This program has been extremely successful and has built a happier community.    If this program is implemented in all the Palo Alto parks, it will creatively address how we share our limited public spaces in Palo Alto.     Thank you for taking the time to listen to our concerns.    Lakshmi and Ram Sunder  3733 Ortega Court.        114 On Thu, Feb 18, 2021 at 3:23 PM Sharon Elliot <saelliot7@gmail.com> wrote:  Dear City Council and Parks and Recreation Staff,     We are writing in opposition to the proposed fenced dog park in Ramos Park. Out of all the comments we have heard during the zoom meetings, we’d like to reiterate three:    1) Ramos Park is not an appropriate size or shape for a dog park. From the research shared, most cities consider  the minimum acceptable buffer around a dog park to be 100 ‐ 200 feet.  This is obviously impossible at Ramos. The projected plan with a 10 foot buffer for nearby homes is completely untenable and the distance from the picnic/bbq area is inadequate.    2)  Looking at the Parks and Rec Commission's website, we saw that the Master Plan calls for six dog parks:  Three in  South PA and three in North PA.  South PA already has three — Hoover, Mitchell and Greer.  On further investigation,  we saw that Ramos Park wasn’t even on the list of appropriate sites.    3)  The off‐leash dog issue will not be solved by a dog park.  The City needs to address this problem more directly and  creatively — as other cities have.  For information on a successful program in Brookline, Massachusetts, see  https://www.brooklinema.gov/752/Green‐Dog‐Program.  Ramos Park neighbors already gather for “off‐leash hours” at  Ramos.  The City needs to make this choice legal, organized and regulated.  Thank you for your consideration, Sharon and Grant Elliot 3712 Ortega Ct Palo Alto, CA We're all in this together                        115 Baumb, Nelly From:Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> Sent:Monday, February 22, 2021 9:38 PM To:Rebecca Eisenberg Cc:Council, City; ParkRec Commission; City Mgr; Stump, Molly Subject:Re: Court Judgment regarding Foothills Park CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Hi Rebecca,   I agree with your interpretation of the language in the injunction ....discrimination of any sort between residents and  non residents is prohibited. aram    Sent from my iPhone      On Feb 22, 2021, at 9:29 PM, Rebecca Eisenberg <rebecca@winwithrebecca.com> wrote:     All:     For your attention, the very short court order and permanent injunction issued by the United States  District Court regarding Foothills Park is attached. The requirements of the injunction are listed on page  4. As you will read, it is a breach of the settlement and a violation of court order if Palo Alto puts in place  a policy that charges residents more than non‐residents for entry into Foothills Park.     I brought this up twice with the Park & Rec Commission, and emailed City Council, PRC, and the City  Attorney's Office twice about this issue, but never heard back. I do not think there is an alternate  interpretation of these words below; do you?     "2. Defendant City of Palo Alto, as well as its officers, employees, attorneys, and agents, are immediately and permanently enjoined from discriminating between Palo Alto residents and non-residents as to access to Foothills Park."    "4. Defendant City of Palo Alto, as well as its officers, employees, attorneys, and agents, are immediately and permanently enjoined from enacting or imposing any law, ordinance, rule, regulation, policy, or practice that prohibits or restricts access by non-residents of Palo Alto into Foothills Park, or otherwise discriminates between Palo Alto residents and non-residents as to access to Foothills Park. "    Given how clear these words are, and given that it would have been exceedingly easy to modify the  proposal so that residents and non‐residents are charged the same (e.g. for annual passes), query why  the PRC and the City Attorney's Office is not concerned by the potentially $10 million consequence of  breaching the Court Order and violating the Permanent Injunction?      Given the easy fix available, it is malpractice for the City Attorney's Office not to point out the potential  issue, and to recommend a fee structure that treats residents and non‐residents equally.  I urge the City  Council to consider this when evaluating the quality of service that comes from the City Attorney's  Office, and whether it might be time to consider putting that essential city function under new  leadership. The best way to reduce legal expenses is to behave in ways that don't incite others to sue  you.     116 Best,     Rebecca   Rebecca L. Eisenberg Esq.  www.linkedin.com/in/eisenberg  www.winwithrebecca.com  rebecca@winwithrebecca.com  415-235-8078  <Foothills Permanent Injunction.pdf>  117 Baumb, Nelly From:Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> Sent:Monday, February 22, 2021 9:25 PM To:Loran Harding; alumnipresident@stanford.edu; antonia.tinoco@hsr.ca.gov; David Balakian; fred beyerlein; beachrides; bballpod; Leodies Buchanan; boardmembers; bearwithme1016@att.net; Council, City; Chris Field; Cathy Lewis; Doug Vagim; dennisbalakian; Dan Richard; Daniel Zack; david pomaville; esmeralda.soria@fresno.gov; eappel@stanford.edu; Steven Feinstein; francis.collins@nih.gov; fmerlo@wildelectric.net; grinellelake@yahoo.com; George.Rutherford@ucsf.edu; Gabriel.Ramirez@fresno.gov; huidentalsanmateo; hennessy; Irv Weissman; Joel Stiner; jerry ruopoli; kwalsh@kmaxtv.com; kfsndesk; Mark Kreutzer; leager; lalws4 @gmail.com; Mayor; margaret-sasaki@live.com; Mark Standriff; newsdesk; news@fresnobee.com; nick yovino; russ@topperjewelers.com; tsheehan; terry; vallesR1969@att.net Subject:Fwd: Dr. Campbell on restictions in UK. ONE Oxford shot gives 94%% reduct. in severe illness CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.    ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐  From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>  Date: Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 9:07 PM  Subject: Fwd: Dr. Campbell on restictions in UK. ONE Oxford shot gives 94%% reduct. in severe illness  To: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>      ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐  From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>  Date: Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 8:48 PM  Subject: Dr. Campbell on restictions in UK. ONE Oxford shot gives 94%% reduct. in severe illness  To: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>               Today, Monday, Feb. 22, 2021                Dr. John Campbell reacting to the easing of restrictions in the UK. Interviewed by DW.               England plans for lifting restrictions ‐ YouTube              Today, on DW, Dr. Campbell reacts to the easing of restrictions in the UK.  NOTE  that data from Scotland proves  that ONE shot of the Oxford Astrazeneca vaccine cuts severe illness by 94%. (For the Pfizer vaccine, it is 84%).  He gives  the numbers. No doubt about the results. Then you wait for 12 weeks to give the second shot.  That is what they have  been doing in the UK and what Dr. Fauci is on record as opposing. He says to give the second shot 4 weeks after the  first.  The whole idea of ONE shot and then a gap of 12 weeks is to get as many people as possible protected from  SEVERE ILLNESS. They might get sick, but they won't get severe illness. That will stop the over‐running of the hospitals.  118 AND OF COURSE, ALL RECIPIENTS KNOW THAT THE FDA IS STILL REFUSING TO RELEASE THE OXFORD VACCINE FOR USE  IN THE U.S.               So what the above is saying  is that IF IF  Biden took action to compel the FDA to release the Oxford vaccine, and if  Dr. Fauci saw sense and recommended that we give people ONE shot of it, we could cut the hospitalization rate for that  group by 94%. Hospitalization which leads to ICU which leads to ventilation which, often, leads to death. They'd get the  second shot after 12 weeks, and data shows that they would then have even better immunity than they do with a 4  week gap between injections. But that one shot would keep a lot of people from dying!!! The FDA is just killing people by  withholding the Oxford vaccine. They don't have a leg to stand on. It has been used on millions of people in the UK over  the past seven weeks, it has been used for three weeks in the 27 countries of the EU, it is approved for use in India and  Argentina, it is about to be used on millions of Australians.             Yesterday, he included a  short vid from a doctor in Australia. Note there the millions of Oxford Astrazeneca vaccine  injections they are about to give. Mass suicide, I guess.               L. William Harding            Fresno, Ca.                 119 Baumb, Nelly From:Ryan Carrigan <rcarrigan@silvar.org> Sent:Monday, February 22, 2021 4:38 PM To:Council, City Subject:Study Session - S/CAP: Point of Sale Requirements for Electrification CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.    Mayor Dubois and Council,    Tonight, as you discuss the Sustainability and Climate Action Plan, I ask that you keep in mind some of the  impacts the proposed requirements would have on homeowners. Point of sale mandates all too often are  another hurdle, delay, and extra cost during the home sale process. Given our current pandemic, and the high  cost of housing affordability in Palo Alto, these are all challenges that SILVAR believes should be avoided.    In the past, we have worked with nearby cities to address energy upgrades by supporting incentive programs  and phased approaches to upgrading existing structures. Taking one of these approaches often creates greater  demand for improvements and allows existing owners to build equity in their property, rather than impacting  homes only when they go to market.    Real estate transactions can already be a lengthy process requiring several inspections. Further construction,  requiring the hiring of contractors, getting permits, and inspecting work done to a property before a sale  would not just be inconvenient, but would increase the cost to buyers and be a significant cost and delay to  sellers.     Last year only 446 homes were sold in Palo Alto out of 18,000 single family residences total. At that rate it  would take 40 years for a point‐of‐sale mandate to electrify existing homes, and the reality is that there are  many homes that turnover at a much slower rate. A well‐executed incentive program would better target  homes most in need of energy improvements and convert properties to electrification much sooner rather  than further slow sales and increase the cost of housing.    Additionally, eliminating energy choices for existing homes could be tricky given the increasingly unpredictable  power outages in California. While we certainly don't expect this to be a big issue in Palo Alto, many  homeowners throughout the Bay Area, and Peninsula, regularly lose power due to weather or unpredictable  events. Homes that weren't originally designed for full electrification could severely be impacted without  incredibly expensive upgrades.      With this in mind, I simply ask that staff to further develop options to improve energy efficiency in existing  homes. SILVAR would look forward to partnering with the city to provide outreach and education for  homeowners to take advantage of any energy efficient programs the city may offer or explore other ways we  can encourage retrofits in single family residences.  If I can provide any additional information, please let me  know.  120     Thank you,      Ryan Carrigan  Government Affairs Director  Silicon Valley Association of REALTORS            121 Baumb, Nelly From:Carol Scott <cscott@crossfieldllc.com> Sent:Monday, February 22, 2021 3:25 PM To:Council, City; Shikada, Ed; Kamhi, Philip; Baird, Nathan Cc:alisoncormack@gmail.com; Tom DuBois; Filseth, Eric (external); Pat Burt; Lydia Kou; Greer Stone; Greg Tanaka Subject:Proposed Staff Recommendation on the Purchase AND Use of License Plate Data CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Dear Council Members,    I write to request that you reject Staff's current recommendation to increase its budget in order to purchase  Automated License Plate Technology (LPR).  Please direct the Staff to take t 6 months to work out critical,  unaddressed issues and to create a new proposal that is transparent and makes sense for residents as well as  the City.    The current Staff report is deceptive, does not address the key reason why the City needs to have this  technology, and leaves far too many objectives and rationales unsaid.  It is about as transparent as mud.    First, the Staff is positioning the need for this RIGHT NOW as a necessary cost reduction for enforcement of  RPPs.  But that isn't the sole use being requested.  Instead, the "ALPR data will only be utilitzed f or . . . parking  enforcement efforts, to log parking stay information, and data, to communicate parking availability, and to  quantify parking occupancy rates." (p. 4).   Who is the Staff expecting to communicate parking availability in  residential neighborhoods to, and why?  Why does the Staff need to quantify parking occupancy rates in  residential neighborhoods?  And, the question of savings is not at all clear.    Second, no Council Member of Staff has yet been able to provide any answer to the question of why this  technology is not first deployed in the public garages and lots ‐‐and perhaps in the uniquely configured  Downtown North RPP area.  This is an obvious question with no answer.  The real problem is that of efficient  and effective management of the enormous investment we have made in commercial districts in terms of  garages and parking lots.  Until those assets are well managed, there is no need to monitor occupancy rates in  neighborhoods with the exception perhaps of  the uniquely‐configured Downtown area as a pilot.  We need to  solve the considerable number of problems there now before commuters begin to return to offices.  es.      Third, there is the issue of the database to be created.  Enforcement doesn't require the creation of a massive  database of residents' personal information, the inevitable hiring of an expensive manager to oversee if and  any staff that manager may require.  There is absolutely NO REASON to create the proposed residential  database now.  Such a data base is needed for the garages and lots and perhaps again the Downtown North  RPP area.    Let's assume that Staff have agood reason for deploying LPR in the residential areas and for creating this database  containing surveillance data on Palo Alto residents who happen to live in certain areas and their guests.  The question  then becomes what oversight of the database is required to protect the residents not just from hackers or the leaking of  information, but also from abuse by the City.  If only the City has access to the anonymized information and analysis  tools, then the City will be free to cherry pick the data and manipulate the data in any way that suits its interests ‐‐ and  122 residents of Palo Alto will have no way to challenge their "data‐driven" decisions.  In other words, there will be a  complete lack of transparency, which is not good governance and should not be tolerated.      There must be an Oversight Commission composed of residents that ensures that residents have the ability to counter  this power on the part of the City and to ensure that residents have a seat at the table in determining the  appropriateness of the City's use of the data.  This commission must have access to the anonymized data and to the  tools necessary to analyze it.    Next, there is the question of why enforcement of RPPS should be started in the neighborhoods now, when  there has been no enforcement for a year.  Could this be delayed six months while a better proposal is  developed? Nothing is going to change in six months except that residents' parking permits will expire on  March 31, 2021.  As one Staff member told a community group focused on Uplift Local, the City has to start  enforcement if they want residents to pay for new permits, i.e., they need the money.  When asked if there  had been any increase in intrusion of non‐resident parking in the RPP areas, this Staff person there had been  on some selected, but unspecified streets.  Where?      Actually, no real enforcement is being started.  The Staff member said that there would be 'soft  enforcement."  That means that no tickets will be issued, only notices saying that someday there will be  enforcement.  So, we actually get no enforcement.      Finally, the City has never settled the issue of getting the non‐resident permits out of the Evergreen Park RPP  so that it would have equal treatment with the other two neighborhoods that are adjacent to the California  Ave business district.  We supported the construction of the garage just for this very purpose, and we can  point you to comments in the Council meeting at which the decision to fund the garage that show that Council  members had that in mind. Yet, a City staff person told a community group that the City planned to once again  start selling permits in the Evergreen Park/Mayfield RPP.  Again, where is the plan?  Why should the City sell  non‐resident permits when there we are awash in parking capacity in the commercial areas.  Those businesses  along El Camino Real have 40+ spaces on El Camino dedicated to their use.      In sum, this proposal needs to be scrapped.  The City needs to come clean about what it is trying to do and  why.  The City must work with residents to come up with a mutually agreed upon plan if it wants the residents  to pay for this effort and be the guinea pigs for it.    Thank you for considering my concerns.    Carol Scott  Evergreen Park resident          ‐‐   Carol Scott  123 Baumb, Nelly From:Brian Szabo <b.szabo@comcast.net> Sent:Monday, February 22, 2021 1:18 PM To:ParkRec Commission; Jensen, Peter; Council, City; pwecips; Public Works Public Services; CSD; 'Sharon Elliot' Subject:Ramos Park/Dog Park CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Dear Palo Alto Parks & Rec Commission,    I’d like to add our voice to the large and growing number of my neighbors’ who are very strongly opposed to the  creation of a dog park in Ramos Park.  This proposal would take away a third of the green space in this small  neighborhood park!    We’re original owners of our home on Ortega Court, have lived here for 35 years, raised our kids here, and hope to  enjoy our retirement here as well.  Ramos Park has been an integral part of our decision to move and live here all these  years.  A dog park crammed into such a small and beautiful green sanctuary would be a great loss to us and our  neighborhood.  And it’s totally unnecessary, since there is a wonderful dog park minutes away at Mitchell Park.    Please read all the comments and letters on this subject and help cancel this plan for a Ramos Park dog park.    Thank you,    Brian & Maggie Szabo  3738 Ortega Court  124 Baumb, Nelly From:Arlene Goetze <photowrite67@yahoo.com> Sent:Monday, February 22, 2021 12:51 PM To:cindy chavez Subject:Herd Immunity by April; CDC: 929 die w/Shots CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  1. We'll have Herd Immunity by April by Marty Makary, M.D. in Wall Street Journal, FEb. 19 Prof. at John Hopkins School of Medicine & Bloomberg Public School of Health In Brief: * Dr. Makary writes that the pandemic will be over by April since Herd Immunity by his statistics, will have occurred. He does say that Herd Immunity comes from the number of people who have had the virus....a natural immunity and that those who had the virus do not need the vaccine. They have an immunity. * Cases have now dropped by 77%--a fact experts should tell the public. * He was cautioned by associates not to tell people because they would stop precautions. * 99% of people have survived the virus. * 1 in 600 have died of the virus for a .015% rate * The infection rate is .023% which means 2/3 of the population have had the virus. * Only Natural Immunity can explain these rates. *. Dr Makary bases his information on laboratory data, mathematical data, published information, and conversations with experts as well as how hard testing has been, especially in low-income areas. For the complete story, look up the headline above. in WSJ Feb. 19 _______________________________________________________________________ 2. One-Third of Deaths Reported to CDC After COVID Vaccines Occurred Within 48 Hours of Vaccination The numbers reflect the latest data available as of Feb. 12 from the CDC’s Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) website. Of the 929 reported deaths, about one-third occurred within 48 hours. By Children's Health Defense Team Feb. 12,: 15,923 adverse reactions (injuries) to COVID vaccines, including 929 deaths reported to the CCD and VAERS ) since Dec. 14, 2020. 799 deaths were in U.S. 1/3 were within 48 hours of injection with 21% cardiac related. (which can be caused by the vaccine) 52% men, 45% women; ages 77 to 23 yrs 58% from Pfizer; 41% from Moderna CAlif. 71, FL 50, OH 38, NY 31, Kentucky 41, MI 31, TX 31 Of th most recent 3,126 injuries: 34 miscarriages or pre-term birth; 917 anaphylactic reactions, 70% from Pfizer, Moderna 30% and Bell's Palsy: Pfizer 75%, Moderna 25%. About 1/3 of Caregivers and 1/3 of military have refused the vaccine. 125 Condensed from The Defender, childrenshealthdefense.org. Feb. 19, 2021. Forwarded by Arlene Goetze, MA, Editor/writer, No Toxins for Children photowrite67@yahoo.com ---------------------------------------------------------- 41% of women police, 1/3 of caregivers and 1/3 of military have all refused the vaccines, but Natural (Herd) Immunity can save us from vaccine and virus deaths!!!! (These estimates have been from Mercury News on different days). Where to Report Injuries: Children's Health Defense CHD asks that anyone who suspects they have suffered any kind of adverse side effect, from any vaccine, do all three of the following: 1. For U.S. residents, first file your report with the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), the official site of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). 2. Go to VaxxTracker.com to file a report. This is an outside source vs. government. 3. Using this page on the CHD website, share the information you reported to VaxxTracker and VAERS, including the reaction you suffered and the vaccine you received. VAERS is a voluntary system, not well known or advertised, so the totals of injury or deaths reported are likely much higher than known. Please share with all your emails! 701-32 DOCUMENTS IN THIS PACKET INCLUDE: LETTERS FROM CITIZENS TO THE MAYOR OR CITY COUNCIL RESPONSES FROM STAFF TO LETTERS FROM CITIZENS ITEMS FROM MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS ITEMS FROM OTHER COMMITTEES AND AGENCIES ITEMS FROM CITY, COUNTY, STATE, AND REGIONAL AGENCIES Prepared for: 3/8/ 2021 Document dates: 2/17/2021 – 2/24/2021 Set 2 Note: Documents for every category may not have been received for packet reproduction in a given week. 126 Baumb, Nelly From:Deborah Kerwin <dbrhkrwn@gmail.com> Sent:Monday, February 22, 2021 9:33 AM To:Council, City Subject:Use of Roundup (city and residential) CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  What is city policy re use of Roundup to control weeds? I'm asking b/c the topic sometimes comes up with neighbors  and I'd like to make sure I have the facts.    I've heard the city uses it; I assume there are no restrictions on residential use. But I could be wrong ....    Thank you!    Best, Debbie    Deborah Kerwin‐Peck  940 Loma Verde Ave.  Palo Alto CA  94303    dbrhkrwn@gmail.com     (650) 856-8519 home (same day + voicemail)  (650) 248-4142 cell (same day + text message)  127 Baumb, Nelly From:Glenn Fisher <gfisher@mac.com> Sent:Monday, February 22, 2021 9:01 AM To:Council, City Cc:City Mgr Subject:MidPen Wildfire Management Plan response CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  City of Palo Alto:     The MidPen Regional Open Space District has posted a wildfire management plan EIR with comments open until March  1, 2021.  Since the City of Palo Alto has substantial border with MidPen preserves, I strongly suggest the City read and  respond to the EIR.    The EIR can be found here:  Wildland Fire Resiliency Program    As a 30‐year resident of Palo Alto and frequent hiker in MidPen preserves, I’m extremely concerned about the buildup of  fuel from dead and downed trees and bushes.  Last summer showed us that wildfire could be a serious threat in the Bay  Area.  We were lucky that the fire was on the West side of the Coast Range, but next time it could be on the East side,  where there is much more adjacent habitation to woodlands and MidPen preserves where a fire out of control would  burn into Palo Alto city property with substantial loss of property and possibly life.    I strongly encoruage you to read and respond that the City of Palo Alto strongly supports aggressive action to reduce the  fuel on MidPen lands and provide a safer, reduced wildfire risk for the city.    Glenn Fisher  Palo Alto  128 Baumb, Nelly From:Yahoo Mail.® <honkystar@yahoo.com> Sent:Monday, February 22, 2021 8:30 AM To:Honky Subject:TO ALL DEMOCRATS AND THOSE SWAMP REPUBLICAN TURNCOATS "WHO YOU GONNA FIGHT" LMAO CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  ALL DEMOCRATS AND SWAMP REPUBLICAN TURNCOATS TAKE YOUR ELECTION AND ALL YOUR INSURECTION LIES AND ALL OF YOUR HYPOCRITICAL IMPEACHMENT NONSENSE>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> AND SHOVE IT UP YOUR ASS. TRY TO DEBUNK THIS LOL FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT ...................................................... FIGHT LOL BOOM___________________________________________BOOM BOOM___________________________________________BOOM LMAO LMAO Trump’s lawyer plays a video of Democrats and celebrities advocating violence at impeachment trial     To help prprivacy, Mprevented download from the In Trump’s lawyer plays a video of Democrats and celebrities advocating vio...      129 Baumb, Nelly From:Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> Sent:Sunday, February 21, 2021 8:57 PM To:michael.gennaco@oirgroup.com Cc:Council, City; Human Relations Commission; chuck jagoda; Dave Price; Winter Dellenbach Subject:CPRA request & cover letter regarding the current status of the Palo AltoPolice Department’s Canine unit. CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.         2/21/21 CPRA request & cover letter regarding the current status of the Palo Alto Police Department’s Canine unit. Submitted by Aram James Dear City Council members, members of the Palo Alto Community, and the local press: I am very concerned that as a community we are not as fully informed regarding the current status of the PAPD canine unit as we should be. I’m requesting that we all do our part to obtain a full picture of the risks these canines potentially pose to the health and safety of community members attacked by these vicious dogs. My most recent concern was raised after reading a Daily Post piece, Jan, 28, 2021, “Police dog attacks innocent man,” an incident where a Palo Alto police dog was released against an innocent Mt. View resident, Mr. Joel Domingo Alejo who subsequently filed a $20 million claim against the city of Palo Alto for injuries suffered in the attack. In addition, I have attached two recent articles, see links below, that suggest the weaponization of police dogs targeting particularly African Americans is an under recognized form of police terror and brutality resulting in life threatening injuries, life changing injuries and even death. The first article: When Police Violence Is a Dog Bite ( First published on 10/2/2020) gives a harrowing perspective on the fact that thousands of American are bitten by police dogs every year and that few ever obtain justice. https://www.themarshallproject.org/2020/10/02/when-police- violence-is-a-dog-bite?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=share- tools&utm_source=email&utm_content=post-top The second piece, published Feb 12, 2021 is titled: The City Where Police Unleash Dogs On Black Teens (In Baton Rouge, police dogs bit a teenager 17 or younger every three weeks, on average ) is an equally disturbing must read. https://www.themarshallproject.org/2021/02/12/the-city-where- police-unleash-dogs-on-black- 130 teens?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=share- tools&utm_source=email&utm_content=post-top In addition I have attached the Palo Alto City Manager report from 2005 titled: REVIEW OF THE POLICE CANINE PROGRAM -- a report that was responsive to a CPDA request 1 made on 9/5/2004 to then Palo Alto Police Chief Lynne Johnson. Said CPRA request is available should you wish to read it. Here is the link to a 2005 CMR, Palo Alto city manager report providing a detailed review of the Palo Alto Canine Unit as it existed in 2005. The report looks at a 36-month time frame and also breaks down the 13 dog bites, reported during the 36-month time frame in question, based on race. Of the 13 bites, analyzed, four involved whites, five involved African-Americans, three involved Hispanics and one involved a Pacific Islander. (http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/cityagenda/publish/cmrs/4091.pdf ) Conc lusion During the course of 2020 and now in 2021 there have been discussions by the Palo Alto City Council regarding expanding the scope of the duties of the Palo Alto Independent Police Auditor. According to the CMR ( City Manager Report ) REVIEW OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT’S CANINE PROGRAM, dated January 10, 2005, CMR:113:05, the Palo Alto canine program was developed in 1982, nearly forty years ago. During this time frame, our Independent Police Auditor ( established 2006) has to my knowledge, never reviewed complaints filed by community members, regarding allegations of the use of excessive force by the PAPD canine team. It is my understanding that the canine unit is primarily used during nighttime shifts under cover of darkness and most often outside of public view. Given the current national epidemic of the thousands of Americans bitten by police dogs every year it is past time Palo Alto considers adding review of dog bite incidents, perpetrated by our canine unit, to the list of police complaints reviewed by our independent police auditor. ( see re this epidemic of police sponsored canine terroism above : (When Police Violence Is a Dog Bite) Sincerely, Aram James California Public Records Act Request Re: Palo Alto Police Department’s Canine Unit ( filed Feb 20, 2021) 1. Any and all City of Palo Alto and Palo Alto Police Department documents and related information regarding the 131 numbers of police dogs currently in the PAPD canine unit. 2. Any and all documents related to the purchase, training, and cost of maintaining the current canine unit. (last 36 months) 3. Any and all documents and related information regarding the annual cost of maintaining the Palo Alto’s Canine unit. ( The total annual canine budget for the Palo Alto Police Department) 4. Any and all documents regarding the number of times the canine unit has deployed their dogs during the last 36 months against a person. ( # of times the canines have been deployed as a weapon as a opposed to the use of the canine in a search and rescue mission.) (last 36 months) 5. Any and all documents reflecting the race of those who were attacked by dogs in the PAPD canine unit during the last 36 months —from today’s date back 36 months. (last 36 months) 6. While redacting the name of the individuals for privacy purposes —the number of individuals injured by the canine unit and the extent of said injuries...and all related documents redacted for privacy concerns. Including photos of the injuries. 7. Access to viewing all body worn camera footage of canine attacks going back 36 months. 8. A list of all complaints and lawsuits growing out of attacks by dogs on the canine unit going back 36 months from receipt of this CPRA request. (last 36 months) 9. Any and all documents, name and type of artificial teeth, —and the material used to create these artificial teeth, that are made for each dog. For example teeth made of titanium. 10. Any and all documents, and related information re the vendor used by the PAPD to make teeth for each canine on the team. 11. Any and all documents, or related information, re the annual budget to pay for replacement of artificial teeth for the canine unit? Food budget? Medical budget? (last 36 months) 12. All documents and information regarding the certification process each canine member must go through to obtain all appropriate certifications. 13. Documentation or related information re whether the necessary documentation/certification for each canine is current. 132 14. The name of each officer assigned to the canine unit. 15. Any and all documents related to the training officers must undergo to qualify for membership to the canine unit. 16. Any and all documents and related information regarding the certification process members of the canine unit (police officers) must undergo to qualify for the unit. 17. Any and all current information and documentation related to re whether each police officer currently assigned to the canine unit has up to date certification? Is not currently certified? 18. Any and all documentation re the number of times a non police officer who has been bitten/attacked by a Palo Alto police dog has been required to obtain medical treatment during the last 36 months. Dating back 36 months from receipt of this request. 19. Number of times the victim of a Palo Alto Police dog bite or attack has been required to be hospitalized. Time frame going back 36 months from the receipt of this CPRA request. 20. Area or areas of the city of Palo Alto where police have released their canines most frequently. 21. Any and all information and documentation re the frequency ( the number of times) the Palo Alto Police have used their canine unit to assist the East Palo Alto Police during the last 36 months? 22. To assist the Mountain View Police Department during the last 36 months? 23. The Menlo Park Police Department during the last 36 months? 24. To assist the Santa Clara County Sheriff’s office? (last 36 months) 25. The San Mateo County Sheriff’s Office? (last 36 months) 26. Monies spent on training either a police officer member of the canine unit or a dog member of the unit for out of the Palo Alto training? (last 36 months_ 27. Any and all emails, memos, written policies, and other documentation regarding the need to use the canine unit to keep or intimidate residents of East Palo Alto from traveling to Palo Alto. (last 36 months) 28. Any and all text messages ( or similar electronic communications) between members of the canine unit and 133 other members of the Palo Alto Police department, or other local law enforcement agencies reflecting racial bias, towards African Americans or other racial minorities. (last 36 months) 28. Name of the canine supervisor and length of time that officer has been in that role. 29. The name of the canine team manger and the length of time that officer has held this position. 30. Any and all documents or information re the number of times victims of canine bits, by the PAPD canine unit, have been transported to the Stanford Hospital or any other local hospital facility for injuries. (last 36 months) 31. Cost of all hospital visits for canine bits inflicted by the PAPD canine unit (last 36 months) 32. Any additional documents and information regarding the canine unit that I have not specifically asked for but are relevant to my current CPDA request to establish the current status of the PAPD canine unit. 33. Current Palo Alto Police Department policy or policies regarding the function, structure deployment of canines etc. 34. Name of the current computer system, i.e., Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) system used to track all active of the Palo Alto Police Department Canine Unit? 134 Baumb, Nelly From:Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> Sent:Sunday, February 21, 2021 9:02 PM To:Minor, Beth; Stump, Molly; Shikada, Ed; Scheff, Lisa; Baumb, Nelly Cc:Council, City; city.council@menlopark.org; Cary Andrew Crittenden; Jonsen, Robert; Chuck Jagoda; Rosen, Jeff; Jeff Moore; Raj Jayadev; Raven Malone; Rev. Lorrie Owens; Perron, Zachary; Binder, Andrew; Dave Price; Greer Stone; Greg Tanaka; alisa mallari tu; Asian Law Alliance; Lewis james; Cormack, Alison; DuBois, Tom; Filseth, Eric (Internal); Angel, David; Bill Johnson; Gennady Sheyner; Planning Commission; ParkRec Commission; Joe Simitian; Anna Griffin; supervisor.ellenberg@bos.sccgov.org; Human Relations Commission; Sunita de Tourreil; Kaloma Smith; Taylor, Cecilia; Emily Mibach; Sara Tabin; Palo Alto Free Press; Pat Burt; Bains, Paul; O'Neal, Molly; Nash, Betsy; WILPF Peninsula Palo Alto; chuck jagoda; Dennis Upton; Doug Fort; Cari Templeton; GRP-City Council Subject:Fwd: CPRA request & cover letter regarding the current status of the Palo AltoPolice Department’s Canine unit. CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.    ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐  From: Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com>  Date: Sun, Feb 21, 2021 at 8:24 PM  Subject: CPRA request & cover letter regarding the current status of the Palo Alto Police Department’s Canine unit.  To: aram james <abjpd1@gmail.com>             2/21/21 CPRA request & cover letter regarding the current status of the Palo Alto Police Department’s Canine unit. Submitted by Aram James Dear City Council members, members of the Palo Alto Community, and the local press: I am very concerned that as a community we are not as fully informed regarding the current status of the PAPD canine unit as we should be. I’m requesting that we all do our part to obtain a full picture of the risks these canines potentially pose to the health and safety of community members attacked by these vicious dogs. My most recent concern was raised after reading a Daily Post piece, Jan, 28, 2021, “Police dog attacks innocent man,” an incident where a Palo Alto police dog was released against an innocent Mt. View resident, Mr. Joel Domingo Alejo who subsequently filed a $20 million claim against the city of Palo Alto for injuries suffered in the attack. In addition, I have attached two recent articles, see links below, that suggest the weaponization of police dogs targeting particularly African 139 Baumb, Nelly From:Patrick Toland <ptoland@gmail.com> Sent:Sunday, February 21, 2021 6:59 PM To:Council, City Subject:Objection to Proposed Cato Investment Development in College Terrace CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  City Councilmembers,    I read this story (https://www.paloaltoonline.com/print/story/2021/02/12/housing‐plan‐stirs‐opposition‐in‐college‐ terrace) and was alarmed at what was being contemplated.    I am strongly opposed to the proposed development near the College Terrace Library on Wellesley Street.  Although I  appreciate there continues to be a housing crisis in Palo Alto, I do not support variances whereby you modify R‐1 lots to  accommodate more dense housing, as well as bypass the height, setback, daylight plane and sightline limits.  I feel this  modification is especially egregious when considering it in the midst of a community of R‐1 lots.    Regards,    Patrick      Patrick Toland  Palo Alto Resident/Voter  650.704.6200  ptoland@gmail.com  140 Baumb, Nelly From:Kate Feinstein <katefei@gmail.com> Sent:Sunday, February 21, 2021 6:50 PM To:Council, City Subject:In favor of Castilleja's conditional Use Permit CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Members of the Palo Alto City Council:     We are 45‐year residents of Old Palo Alto writing to urge you to support Castilleja School's application for its Conditional  Use permit.     We support Castilleja's increased enrollment within the agreements they have made. We have admired Castilleja's efforts to meet and satisfy concerns of their neighbors, as demonstrated by its successful traffic management plan over several years. In addition, they have made modifications to their plans reducing the size of the underground garage, reorienting access, and lowering the annual number of school events.     We are impressed with their efforts to rebuild the school in a way that will make it a modern and integrated asset to the  City and to our neighborhood. Underground parking allows open space, both preserving and adding many trees, while  the new buildings above ground permit updated academic facilities while not visibly enlarging the school's overall  footprint. The new structures promise to be environmentally sensitive replacements for the older ones.     Thank you for voting to support the Conditional Use Permit for Castilleja School.    Sincerely,    Kate and Marvin Feinstein  1600 Bryant Street              ‐‐   Kate Feinstein  650‐796‐5772  141 Baumb, Nelly From:Brian Szabo <b.szabo@comcast.net> Sent:Sunday, February 21, 2021 5:43 PM To:Jensen, Peter; pwecips; Council, City; DuBois, Tom; tomforcouncil@gmail.com; Cormack, Alison; Filseth, Eric (Internal); Kou, Lydia; kou.pacc@gmail.com; Tanaka, Greg; greg@gregtanaka.org; Public Works Public Services; CSD; ParkRec Commission; 'Michelle Rosengaus' Subject:Ramos Park/Dog Park CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Dear Palo Alto Parks & Rec Commission,    I’d like to add our voice to the large and growing number of my neighbors’ who are very strongly opposed to the  creation of a dog park in Ramos Park.  This proposal would take away a third of the green space in this small  neighborhood park!    We’re original owners of our home on Ortega Court, have lived here for 35 years, raised our kids here, and hope to  enjoy our retirement here as well.  Ramos Park has been an integral part of our decision to move and live here all these  years.  A dog park crammed into such a small and beautiful green sanctuary would be a great loss to us and our  neighborhood.  And it’s totally unnecessary, since there is a wonderful dog park minutes away at Mitchell Park.    Please read all the comments and letters on this subject and help cancel this plan for a Ramos Park dog park.    Thank you,    Brian & Maggie Szabo  3738 Ortega Court  142 Baumb, Nelly From:Jeny Smith <jeny@sereno.com> Sent:Sunday, February 21, 2021 3:32 PM To:Council, City Subject:In Support of Castilleja CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  To whom it may concern:   Our family fully supports Castilleja in their efforts to improve their school, a true asset for the community. I just wish they could double the number of girls served! I strongly support their plans for the underground parking facility, for maintaining the school's current footprint, and for the proposed enrollment increase. Thank you for your time and consideration!  Jeny        Jeny Smith   Broker Associate   To help protect your priv acy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.     t. 415.640.8011   w. JenySmith.com    DRE 01357827            To help protect your priv acy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.       143 Baumb, Nelly From:hoochkun@yahoo.com Sent:Sunday, February 21, 2021 2:22 PM To:Council, City Subject:Wellesley Housing Project CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on  links.  ________________________________    Dear City Council Members,    We are residents of College Terrace, 2 blocks away from the proposed Wellesley Housing Project.    We moved here in 2006 and have loved the charming neighborhood. People are friendly, kids have local school friends,  and the homes are typically modest looking. To suddenly see a 3 story, 24 unit apartment building in the middle of  College will be disturbing in so many ways. We believe that there are zoning rules for a reason, and to provide  exemptions for a project that optically sounds good, but behind the scenes, is only for money‐making purposes make no  sense. When we remodeled our house in 2009, we complied with all the city requirements and expect others to do the  same for their neighbors.    Please do not ruin our neighborhood with this!    Sherri Fujieda and James Stutz  925 Stanford Avenue  Palo Alto, CA 94306  144 Baumb, Nelly From:Anne Avis <aavis@mac.com> Sent:Sunday, February 21, 2021 11:39 AM To:Council, City Subject:Approve Casti plans! CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Dear City Council,   As a close neighbor, former parent and concerned citizen, I am writing to express my support for Castilleja’s Conditional  Use Permit. The underground garage address access and parking. The plan utilizes appropriately the school’s current  footprint. And the enrollment proposed will allow Casti to pursue its mission to educate girls and sustain the institution.     Thank you for all your diligence in working with Castilleja on this well‐considered plan. Thank you for approving it!!    Anne Avis  1545 Waverley St. Palo Alto  Anne Avis aavis@mac.com 650-387-7085   145 Baumb, Nelly From:Yahoo Mail.® <honkystar@yahoo.com> Sent:Sunday, February 21, 2021 11:20 AM To:Honky Subject:THE GOVERNMENT HAS CREATED WEATHER TAMPERING TECHNIQUES THE CHEMTRAIL NAYSERS HAVE BEEN QUIET FOR YEARS WOKE YET? CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  This aerosol spraying of the skies is now big business being done also by defense contractors. They are poisoning the earth. There is climate change, but the cause is not natural. The skies look like something out of the movie Blade Runner. Was a kid in the 50s and 60s. We were taught 5 cloud types in grade school. In South Texas in 2010, I saw my first blatant spraying. Called my brother in Austin and he said, yeah they doing it here too. People called into the news in numbers. The story made the news. All the stations reported the military was just doing exercises-not to worry. But it never stopped changing our skies forever. And the nexrads are all over. All this nonsense about livestock, poultry, etc. is complete nonsense. Good report. Texas Was Planned Target! - Must Video | Weather | Before It's News     Texas Was Planned Target! - Must Video | Weather | Before It's News This aerosol spraying of the skies is now big business being done also by defense contractors. They are poisonin...      146 Baumb, Nelly From:Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> Sent:Sunday, February 21, 2021 1:32 AM To:Loran Harding; alumnipresident@stanford.edu; antonia.tinoco@hsr.ca.gov; fred beyerlein; David Balakian; bballpod; beachrides; boardmembers; Leodies Buchanan; bearwithme1016@att.net; Council, City; Chris Field; Cathy Lewis; dennisbalakian; Doug Vagim; Dan Richard; Daniel Zack; david pomaville; esmeralda.soria@fresno.gov; eappel@stanford.edu; Steven Feinstein; francis.collins@nih.gov; fmerlo@wildelectric.net; grinellelake@yahoo.com; George.Rutherford@ucsf.edu; Gabriel.Ramirez@fresno.gov; huidentalsanmateo; hennessy; Irv Weissman; Joel Stiner; jerry ruopoli; kwalsh@kmaxtv.com; kfsndesk; Mark Kreutzer; leager; lalws4 @gmail.com; margaret-sasaki@live.com; Mayor; Mark Standriff; mthibodeaux@electriclaboratories.com; newsdesk; news@fresnobee.com; nick yovino; russ@topperjewelers.com; Steve Wayte; tsheehan; terry; vallesR1969@att.net; midge@thebarretts.com Subject:Fwd: Calcifediol is Rx only in the U.S. See study here how it prevents death in hospl CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.            This is an extremely important email. Media, please forward it to Congress, the WH, and to all 50 Governors.  Also,  please report on this.                        Thank you.   ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐  From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>  Date: Sun, Feb 21, 2021 at 12:24 AM  Subject: Fwd: Calcifediol is Rx only in the U.S. See study here how it prevents death in hospl  To: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>      ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐  From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>  Date: Sat, Feb 20, 2021 at 3:19 PM  Subject: Fwd: Calcifediol is Rx only in the U.S. See study here how it prevents death in hospl  To: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>      ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐  From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>  Date: Sat, Feb 20, 2021 at 1:20 AM  Subject: Fwd: Calcifediol is Rx only in the U.S. See study here how it prevents death in hospl  To: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>      147 ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐  From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>  Date: Sat, Feb 20, 2021 at 12:19 AM  Subject: Fwd: Calcifediol is Rx only in the U.S. See study here how it prevents death in hospl  To: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>      ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐  From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>  Date: Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 2:40 AM  Subject: Fwd: Calcifediol is Rx only in the U.S. See study here how it prevents death in hospl  To: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>      ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐  From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>  Date: Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 2:35 AM  Subject: Calcifediol is Rx only in the U.S. See study here how it prevents death in hospl  To: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>                   Late Saturday night, February 20, 2021               To all‐             In this video of Saturday, Feb. 13, 2021, the day I got the second Moderna shot, Dr. Campbell talks about a study in  Spain proving that Calcifediol vastly improves the chances of survival of those admitted to the hospital with Covid19.  Notice that word "proving". It is a Rx item in the U.S. It seems not to be one in the UK. It is dirt cheap. Don't anyone run  out and buy vitamin D due to this study. Calcifediol is related, a derivative, but not just plain vitamin D. If you are like  me, you leave the house for food, gasoline or to go to the bank. That lack of exposure to sunlight might be giving you a  vitamin D deficiency and for that reason you maybe should take a supplement. Check with your doctor. In the comments  to this video, one person said he had had skin c. and was told to stay out of the sun. He was taking a vit. D supplement  for that reason. Since I've had it four times, I suppose I should be doing that. However, my opthalmologist told me one  time to "Stop taking vitamins".            Calcifediol (Oral Route) Description and Brand Names ‐ Mayo Clinic    Shows that it is a Rx item in the U.S.                 Here is Dr. John Campbell, Ph.D, in the UK discussing the important, well done and conclusive study done in  Barcelona on calcifediol: I urge all of the top people in the U.S. medical establishment, regulators especially, involved in  any way with the Covid19 pandemic to see this video and read the research report. Dr. Campbell gives the URLs to read  the report.                            Spain, convincing therapeutic evidence ‐ YouTube                     IMPORTANT:  At 1:18 into the video, Dr. Campbell says the following:   "If national regulators and people  who decide clinical policy around the world don't start listening to this data now, I think they're in breach of their  duty of care".     148               LWH‐  And if they don't, I'll be calling for the ones in the U.S. to be fired and prosecuted, as I have been doing wrt  the people at the FDA who are holding up the Oxford‐Astrazeneca vaccine in the U.S.  It has now been used in the four  countries of the UK for seven weeks come Monday.   Its use there began on Monday, January 4, 2021. The UK has the Oxford and the Pfizer vaccines only.  It was approved  for use in the 27 countries of the EU about three weeks ago. It has been approved for use in India and Argentina. It is  safe and effective. Congress and Biden should demand to know why the FDA is holding it up in the U.S.               Dr. Campbell in the vid talks about an earlier study of calcifediol done in Cordoba, in Andalusia, in October, 2020. It  has now been peer‐reviewed. The Barcelona study has not been yet, but he feels certain that it soon will be. The  Cordoba study was a pilot study that only involved 76 pts. Of 50 pts who got calcifediol, one went into the ICU and there  were no deaths. Of the 26 pts who did not receive calcifediol, 13 went to the ICU and two died. It was a seminal paper,  Dr. Campbell says. It was the first clinical trial data available, it stimulated a lot of interest in Spain and a dozen centers  started researching it. The new study is in Lancet pre‐print so it is not yet peer reviewed, but it soon will be, he believes.              Notice that Dr. Campbell is convinced that the study proves that Calcifediol saves lives. It must be administered  right when a pt. is admitted to the hospital. If any later, the alveoli start to fill with fluid so that O2 cannot get out and  CO2 cannot get in. He does not say that the researchers in Spain suspect that calcifediol saves lives. They have the  numbers to prove it and he shows those. Famous medical institutions in the U.S. should start to use this molecule on  newly admitted Covid pts. or tell the world why they are not. Did its use require prior approval by the regulators in  Spain? He doesn't say, but the report they produced probably does say. Maybe calcifediol requires approval by the FDA  before it a can be used on Covid pts. in the U.S. Or, maybe calcifediol is like aspirin: it is so benign, so that it can be used  on Covid pts. without regulatory approval first. But if big‐gun medical institutions do not begin using it to save the lives  of pts admitted with Covid19, they should tell the world why they are not doing so.               I can see how a tort lawyer could sue a medical institution, a hospital, for wrongful death if his clients were not  given calcifediol upon being admitted and subsequently die. I suppose that the defendants there could argue that the  drug was not approved for this use, if it needs that approval. In that case, with the conclusive evidence we now have,  suits for wrongful death might succeed against the regulators, such as the FDA.  The FDA should be sued and prosecuted  now for withholding the Astrazeneca Oxford vaccine in the U.S. In both cases, the Oxford vaccine and calcifediol, the  legalities might escalate, and should escalate, to charges of murder. Since the U.S. regulators serve at the pleasure of  President Biden, if this willful killing of Americans continues, it should result in his being impeached for murder.                   I would like to hear Dr. Fauci opine upon this study of calcifediol as a treatment for Covid19.  I don't see how he  can ignore it. If he does not comment upon it, it is because he has not read it, or, if he has read it, his lack of comment  might be because he thinks if is inconclusive or fabricated. If he does think that, he should say why publicly. Maybe he  thinks that calcifediol would be dangerous for some pts. The new report discussed above indicated NO side effects from  its use in Spain.  The top people at the CDC and FDA should comment upon it too and say why it is of no value, if that is  what they think. I'll be waiting to hear their comments.  If they will not comment, this will be as big a scandal as is the  withholding of the Oxford vaccine by the FDA.            L. William Harding         Fresno, Ca.  149 Baumb, Nelly From:Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> Sent:Saturday, February 20, 2021 3:58 PM To:Joe Simitian; Kou, Lydia; DuBois, Tom Cc:Council, City; Human Relations Commission; chuck jagoda; Winter Dellenbach; Rebecca Eisenberg; Greg Tanaka; Greer Stone; city.council@menlopark.org; City Mgr; Binder, Andrew; Cary Andrew Crittenden; Jonsen, Robert; Perron, Zachary; Kaloma Smith; Sunita de Tourreil; Jeff Moore; citycouncil@mountainview.gov; O'Neal, Molly; Rosen, Jeff; mark weiss; Palo Alto Free Press; WILPF Peninsula Palo Alto; Roberta Ahlquist; Planning Commission; ParkRec Commission; Tanner, Rachael; Constantino, Mary; Van Der Zwaag, Minka; GRP-City Council Subject:Opening of Palo Alto's 1st formal RV Park ( Congratulations) CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  2/20/21 Re: Today’s Daily Post piece: Local RV parking lot now open Dear Mayor Tom DuBois, Councilwoman Lydia Kou, and Santa Clara County Supervisor Joe Simitian: Congratulations to each of you for your part in making the official opening ( yesterday Nov 19, 2021 ) of Palo Alto’s first 24-hour safe parking program, for up to twelve vehicle, at 2000 Geng Road, on property owned by the city of Palo Alto, happen. I understand that Santa Clara County will be footing the bill for the services provided at the site, to include clean water, bathrooms and free showers as well as staff to assist members of the vehicle dwellers community to access additional services and eventually the ability to move from vehicle dweller status into permanent housing. Now that each of you have gotten the ball rolling, I am hopeful the City of Palo Alto can duplicate the County’s effort. Mayor DeBois, from my perspective, it would be a great legacy for your last year on the council if Palo Alto could provide at least one more piece of Palo Alto property for an additional at least 12 vehicle dwellers ( in 2021) with services that match or exceed the services now being provided at the 2000 Geng Road site. Please let me know if there is anything I can do to assist you with this mission. Again, congratulations to each of you for this outstanding effort to assist some of the most vulnerable members of our community. Best regards, Aram James P. S. (Trivia for Joe Simitian) I missed the first portion of the Feb 10 city council meeting except for a few of Supervisor Simitian closing comments re his current Palo Alto office located at 270 Grant Street.  My first lawyer assignment as a Deputy Public Defender ( circa 1978) was at the 270 Grant office building where the North County Branch of the Public Defenders Office was then located 150  Supervisor Simitian here is a trivia question re the 270 Grant complex: Other then yourself, who is the most famous person to ever occupy a portion of the 270 Grant Complex? What is that person currently doing. 151 Baumb, Nelly From:Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> Sent:Saturday, February 20, 2021 3:06 PM To:Perron, Zachary; Jonsen, Robert; Binder, Andrew; Human Relations Commission; chuck jagoda; Council, City; Greer Stone; Betsy Nash; Cecilia Taylor; roberta.ahlquist@sjsu.edu; Raven Malone; DuBois, Tom; rebecca@winwithrebecca.com; Kaloma Smith; paloaltofreepress@gmail.com; Planning Commission; Jeff Moore; ParkRec Commission; wintergery@earthlink.net; wilpf.peninsula.paloalto@gmail.com; Joe Simitian; Jeff Rosen; raj@siliconvalleydebug.org Subject:Amy Cooper's charges were dismissed. But white privilege isn't restorative justice. CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on  links.  ________________________________    https://www.nbcnews.com/think/amp/ncna1258413      Sent from my iPhone  152 Baumb, Nelly From:Dena Seki <denaseki@yahoo.com> Sent:Saturday, February 20, 2021 1:25 PM To:Council, City Cc:editor@paweekly.com Subject:911 Nightmare by Sue Dremann CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Dear City Council, There was much excellent coverage over a year ago by Palo Alto Weekly about the absolute failures of the Palo Alto Police and Officer Yolanda Franco-Clausen and dispatcher Brina Elmore to aid a 54 year female resident having a seizure. The city council was going to provide answers. There was discussion in changes of protocol as well as failure of the city to comply with California Public Records Act. Why have we heard nothing of this? As a 53 year old resident, I want to know what the city has done to change the failed policies and procedures of the Palo Alto police department and dispatch, as well as the absolute failure of Police Officer Yolanda Franco-Clausen who failed to respond promptly, failed to turn on her body camera and illegally searched the family home and more. Has she been disciplined for that or just for exchanging text messages? As a resident, I am looking for answers and accountability. It is not the job of the police to diagnose medical conditions. They are absolutely unqualified as proven by this interaction. It is almost 2 years after the initial incident, please don't say discussion are still ongoing. There are so many remaining unanswered questions. This is also a failure of City Manager Ed Shikada and City Attorney Molly Stump to comply with investigations, and answer the questions of Palo Alto Weekly. They are not elected by the residents yet somehow make decisions on behalf of them without city council really questioning them. We did not elect the City Manager, we elected you to represent us. The council is the employer; the city manager and staff are the employees. He should not run the city without your firm control and demand for accountability. Please hold everyone accountable for the endangerment of this resident's life and tell us, the voting public, what you have done to solve this problem. Thank you, Dena Seki 1028 High St Palo Alto, CA 94301 153 Baumb, Nelly From:Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> Sent:Saturday, February 20, 2021 12:29 PM To:Rebecca Eisenberg; Planning Commission; chuck jagoda; Human Relations Commission; ParkRec Commission; roberta.ahlquist@sjsu.edu; Council, City; wilpf.peninsula.paloalto@gmail.com; Raven Malone; Winter Dellenbach; Kaloma Smith; Greer Stone; Sunita de Tourreil; Greg Tanaka; Pat Burt; DuBois, Tom; Filseth, Eric (Internal); Kou, Lydia Subject:Podcast explains zoning rules in housing...San Jose’s online initiative, ‘Dwellings, ’ dissects complex policies and proposals CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on  links.  ________________________________    >  > FYI: Today’s Mercury News: ( interesting idea) see link to the article belie  >  > Rebecca, maybe you could create a similar podcast for Palo Alto? Other experts?  >  >  > Follow the link below to view the article.  > https://mercurynews‐ca‐app.newsmemory.com/?publink=183ec498c_1345c50  >  >  > Sent from my iPhone  154 Baumb, Nelly From:Yahoo Mail.® <honkystar@yahoo.com> Sent:Saturday, February 20, 2021 11:26 AM To:Honky Subject:To "Reduce" 3 Billion People for 2050, THE COMMITTEE OF 300 - AWAKENING CHANNEL CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  To "Reduce" 3 Billion People for 2050, THE COMMITTEE OF 300 - AWAKENING CHANNEL     To "Reduce" 3 Billion People for 2050, THE COMMITTEE OF 300 - AWAKENING ... The NWO (New World Order)      155 Baumb, Nelly From:Hamilton Hitchings <hitchingsh@yahoo.com> Sent:Saturday, February 20, 2021 9:28 AM To:Council, City Cc:Shikada, Ed; Abendschein, Jonathan; Dueker, Kenneth Subject:Climate Change Plan - Electric Grid Reliability Improvements Needed CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Dear city council, Thank you for making climate change a priority for 2021. As a strong supporter of city goal of 80/30 I want to call your attention to a bullet items in staff's report on this topic. "Preserve and enhance electric reliability and resiliency" As we move our households from two sources of power (gas & electricity) to just electricity, it's more important our city's electric grid be resilient against failure. Unfortunately, the Palo Alto electric grid has a single geographic point of failure. While expensive, we need a second electric line into the city at a different location. Unexpected extended outages can be caused by events such as: earthquakes, extreme weather events, very large solar flares, physical property terrorism (like what happened in a San Jose substation), cyber hacking, accidents and equipment failures. While all of these are low probability and very infrequent at best, the impacts can be extreme including loss of power to the city, and in the worst case scenario for months. In terms of undergrounding our power lines, its important to remember that there are also drawbacks to doing so. In the Christchurch, New Zealand earthquake, several hundred kilometers of underground power lines were damaged vs. only a few kilometers of overhead power lines. Underground powerlines are also susceptible to flooding, of which effects 1/3 of Palo Alto. It's also harder to maintain underground lines since problems are harder to find and require earth moving equipment to fix. I don't think staff should take another look at these considerations and update their plans. In terms of ideas to reduce our carbon footprint they include: * Add smart meters (we still have people checking meters by hand). Provides real time usage to residents. * Designating more parking spots for electric vehicles only including spots without a charger at both garages and private parking at businesses larger than X employees. * Partner with the school district to power our schools (and local businesses) via solar installation, possibly through a financing program. * Rebates for conversion from gas heating, gas water heater and gas stoves to electricity. E.g. mini heat pumps. Many houses built in Palo Alto in the late 40s and 50s still use gas. It's unbelievable that the city does not offer these rebates for switching from these: 156 https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/depts/utl/residents/save_energy_n_water/rebates/default.asp Also notice no city rebates for solar. * Rebates for backup power (Telsa Powerwall), this also increases neighborhood robustness. * Rebates for insulation * Rebates to rental properties (which make up over 40% of Palo Alto residents).for going green * Increase green building codes for businesses, multi family and new homes. While our city's electric supply is 100% green, a lot of the power comes from hydro which other folks could be using if we had more solar. Thus the assertion that because our energy is 100% clean so no longer need to incentivize solar only reduces our clean green impact. Hamilton 157 Baumb, Nelly From:Chandrasekar Gnanasambandam <chandrasambandam@yahoo.com> Sent:Friday, February 19, 2021 10:22 AM To:Council, City Subject:Castilleja modernization support CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Dear Council, I am a current parent of a middle schooler in Castilleja and I am pleased to write to you today in support of Castilleja’s master plan. I ask that you approve their CUP and the project’s inclusion of an underground parking facility. Castilleja’s project has gone through several iterations and feedback from the community, and the underground parking facility is now 28% smaller and has 30 fewer parking spaces than earlier versions. The FEIR found that a no-garage alternative is not environmentally feasible, and the report found the version of the project before you is the most environmentally friendly alternative. Castilleja has designed an underground parking facility that is thoughtfully landscaped and increases the number of trees and open space on the campus. Look closely you don't want a whole lot of cars up on top and making the area look commercial . The underground parking really will keep the look of the area as close to a residential as possible. A whole bunch of cars above the ground will make it look ugly and industrial. Please think about that when you vote. Development of a project that is environmentally sustainable while also meeting the needs of the school and our community is an impressive feat. I thank the city council for their continued support of sustainable projects, and I hope that Palo Alto can continue to be a leader in this space. Sincerely, Chandra Gnanasambandam 158 Baumb, Nelly From:Stepheny McGraw <stepheny@earthlink.net> Sent:Friday, February 19, 2021 8:40 AM To:Council, City Subject:Keep Natural Gas CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  The debacle in Texas, where too many were dependent on too little electric resources and backup, should not happen in  Palo Alto — if we continue to keep our natural gas for cooking and heating.  We are not yet in a place to go entirely  electric.     Please take note and plan accordingly.  Thank you.  Stepheny McGraw  3303 Thomas Drive  159 Baumb, Nelly From:CeCi Kettendorf <cecihome@gmail.com> Sent:Friday, February 19, 2021 8:35 AM To:Sharon Elliot Cc:Jensen, Peter; Council, City; pwecips; Public Works Public Services; CSD; ParkRec Commission; Lisette Micek; Camille Tripp; Ana Maria Arjona; Satomi Rogers; Taly Katz; Sue Freeman; Rick Hallsted; Nate Case; John Jacobs; Corkie Freeman; Ram Sunder; Kathy Fei; Pam Mayerfeld; Tim Rogers; David Cheng; Jo Vitanye; Margaret Cheng; Eliezer Rosengaus; George Greenwald; Yan Jing; Michelle Rosengaus; runlong Zhou; Olga Rubchinskaya; Amanda Case; Grant Elliot; Margie Greenwald; Sung and Jenny Ryu; Brian and Maggie Szabo; Campbell Linda & Bob; Will Shen; Lakshmi Sunder; Lisa Zhang >; Arthur Keller; lioraphoto@hotmail.com; Kevin Mayer; adele@acm.org; Teddie Guenzer; Chip Wytmar; Mary Ann Norton; Robin Holbrook; Koo Darice; Paul Koo Subject:Re: Ramos Park/Dog Park CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  GREAT letter!   Fabulous research!   Thank you so much!  CeCi    On Thu, Feb 18, 2021 at 3:23 PM Sharon Elliot <saelliot7@gmail.com> wrote:  Dear City Council and Parks and Recreation Staff,     We are writing in opposition to the proposed fenced dog park in Ramos Park. Out of all the comments we have heard during the zoom meetings, we’d like to reiterate three:    1) Ramos Park is not an appropriate size or shape for a dog park. From the research shared, most cities consider  the minimum acceptable buffer around a dog park to be 100 ‐ 200 feet.  This is obviously impossible at Ramos. The projected plan with a 10 foot buffer for nearby homes is completely untenable and the distance from the picnic/bbq area is inadequate.    2)  Looking at the Parks and Rec Commission's website, we saw that the Master Plan calls for six dog parks:  Three in  South PA and three in North PA.  South PA already has three — Hoover, Mitchell and Greer.  On further investigation,  we saw that Ramos Park wasn’t even on the list of appropriate sites.    3)  The off‐leash dog issue will not be solved by a dog park.  The City needs to address this problem more directly and  creatively — as other cities have.  For information on a successful program in Brookline, Massachusetts, see  https://www.brooklinema.gov/752/Green‐Dog‐Program.  Ramos Park neighbors already gather for “off‐leash hours” at  Ramos.  The City needs to make this choice legal, organized and regulated.  Thank you for your consideration, Sharon and Grant Elliot 3712 Ortega Ct Palo Alto, CA We're all in this together    161 Baumb, Nelly From:Yahoo Mail.® <honkystar@yahoo.com> Sent:Friday, February 19, 2021 12:00 AM To:Honky Subject:WATCH! EP. 2407B-THE PANDEMIC WAS THE COVER,MI & NO SUCH AGENCY ARE THE KEY,POTUS & PATRIOTS ARE THE STONE February 18, 2021 (X22Report) CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Ep. 2407b-The Pandemic Was The Cover,MI & No Such Agency Are The Key,POTUS & Patriots Are The Stone   Ep. 2407b-The Pandemic Was The Cover,MI & No Such Agency Are The Key,POT... ✅ Enjoy The Healthy Aging Support of Collagen � � Get 51% Off ࿸࿹࿺ Here http://www.healthwithx22.com/ This is...      162 Baumb, Nelly From:Yahoo Mail.® <honkystar@yahoo.com> Sent:Thursday, February 18, 2021 11:34 PM To:Honky Subject: Exposing attorney general designate Judge M Garland’s cover-up of judges’ interception of emails and mail, financial fraud, etc.; and demanding the release of the FBI’s secret judicial vetting reports CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  NOTE: I would be grateful if you would acknowledge receipt of this email. You are encouraged to share and post it to social media as widely as possible in your own interest and that of the rest of We the People; e.g., click "Reply All" and send. To subscribe to articles similar to the one hereunder go to http://www.Judicial- Discipline-Reform.org <left panel ↓Register or + New or Users >Add New How you can benefit from exposing attorney general designate Judge Merrick Garland’s cover-up of judges’ interception of emails and mail; financial fraud; dismissal of 100% of complaints against him and his fellow judges; etc.; and demanding the release of the FBI’s secret judicial vetting reports as President Biden forms his commission to reform the judicial system Setting in motion a generalized media investigation into the judiciary http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero_media_exposing_judges.pdf By Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq. Ph.D., University of Cambridge, England M.B.A., University of Michigan Business School D.E.A., La Sorbonne, Paris Judicial Discipline Reform New York City http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@verizon.net , DrRCordero@Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org , CorderoRic@yahoo.com Senior editor Joe Patrice Above the Law 163 Co-host of Thinking Like a Lawyer joepatrice@abovethelaw.com Dear Mr. Patrice, journalists, academics, lawyers, and Advocates of Honest Judiciaries, I read with interest your article, Mr. Patrice, Favorite Stories Of 2020: Corruption, Courts,…, published by Above the Law on December 28, 2020. A. Charting a future for yourself and your publication with a scoop on judges’ abuse of power and crimes 1. One of your 10 favorite stories “discusses the role the Chief Justice could have played (and might still play) in charting the future of the Supreme Court”. 2. Your story opens the way to discussing the role that a legal news editor like you and a publication like Above the Law “might still have” by scooping the proposed exposure by U.S. Judge Robert Pratt of the Southern District of Iowa and Associated Press (AP) reporter Ryan Foley of federal judges’ crimes as opposed to Trump’s, to which Judge Pratt referred. 3. It can reasonably be expected that the scoop would ‘play a role in charting the future’ of not merely the Supreme Court, but rather of the system of justice: It can significantly influence the composition and agenda of the commission for the reform of the system of justice that Then-presidential candidate Joe Biden, while interviewing with CBS newsanchor Norah O’Donnell on October 22, 2020, announced that he would form if he became president. 4. The articles discussed and mentioned herein deal with federal judges. However, those judges are the models of their state counterparts. So, what the former allow themselves to do, the latter copy gleefully and add to it shamelessly. On state judges’ abuse of power and crimes, see: a. Thomson Reuters, a major news organization with more than 2,500 reporters and over 600 photojournalists, published the first of its three-part report “The Teflon Robe”, which found “hardwired judicial corruption”, on June 30, 2020; b. Boston Globe, the main newspaper in Massachusetts and a reputable one, published on September 30, 2018, its report “Inside our secret courts”, in whose “private criminal hearings [conducted even by clerks with no law degree], who you are –and who you know– may be just as important as right and wrong”. 164 1. Judges’ interception of people’s emails and mail 5. In this vein, consider the publication of an initial article on the interception by federal judges of people’s emails and mail to detect and suppress those of their critics and thereby cover up their crimes and other forms of abuse of power and disregard for ethical standards. 6. The exposure of such interception by judges will cause national outrage because it affects the national public and deprives Americans of their most cherished rights, namely, those guaranteed by the 1st Amendment to the Constitution to “freedom of speech, of the press, the right of the people peaceably to assemble [through the Internet and on social media too], and to petition the Government [of which judges are the third branch] for a redress of grievances [including compensation of abusees by judges and their judiciaries]”. 2. Judges’ dismissal of 100% of complaints against them 7. This is the subject of the article outlined below, whose point of departure is the statement by Judge Pratt made in an interview with Associated Press (AP) reporter Foley, who quoted him in his article “Federal judge in Iowa ridicules Trump's pardons”, published on December 30, 2020. 8. My article asks both Judge Pratt ( https://www.iasd.uscourts.gov/contact ) and reporter Foley ( joepatrice@abovethelaw.com) to denounce federal judges’ preemptive reciprocal ‘pardons’: They dismiss 100% of complaints filed against them under the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act (the Act; 28 U.S. Code §§351-364), and deny 100% of petitions to review those dismissals. 9. Judges grant their pardons before there has been any investigation of the complained-about judge, never mind a trial and a criminal conviction or even a finding of civil liability. That is how judges self-ensure their unaccountability, thus opening the way to their riskless commission of “bad Behaviour” (Constitution, Article III, Section 1), i.e., crimes, abuses of power, unethical conduct, and other “improprieties and even the appearance of impropriety” prohibited by Canon 2 of the Code of Conduct for U.S. Judges . 10. By comparison with Trump’s pardons of his cronies and family, federal judges’ preemptive reciprocal pardons are so much more harmful to the integrity of the 165 judicial system and the national public subject to their national jurisdiction. Their denunciation by Judge Pratt and AP reporter Foley –and yours too- can be similar to Emile Zola’s famous “I accuse!” open letter to the President of the French Republic to denounce an anti-Semitic conspiracy of the military against Lt. Alfred Dreyfus. 3. The vetting and disqualifying of attorney general designate Judge Merrick Garland 11. Another article can deal with the nomination by President Biden of Judge Merrick Garland to be the next attorney general: 12. The official statistics of Judge Garland’s court, to wit, the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (DCC), show that he participated in the dismissal of 100% of the 478 complaints about him and his peers, colleagues, and friends in DCC, and the denial of 100% of the petitions to review of such dismissals during at least the 1oct06-30sep17 11-year period. 13. By so doing, he too arrogated to himself -and during his tenure as chief circuit judge even led his peers and colleagues in arrogating to themselves- the power to abrogate in effect the Act with reckless disregard for the detriment to complainants and the rest of the public left uncompensated and at the mercy of unaccountable judges risklessly committing “bad Behaviour”. 14. It follows that Judge Garland has a conflict of interests that prevents him from being an impartial and fair attorney general, much less an effective and honest overseer or even member of the yet-to-be-formed Biden commission to reform the judicial system: 15. If as attorney general Judge Garland allowed the investigation of complaints against judges filed with the Department of Justice Office of Professional Responsibility or brought to the attention of the Biden commission, he would end up incriminated for both his abrogation in effect of the Act and his cover-up of the “bad Behaviour” underlying the complaints and committed for his own and the other judges’ gain and convenience. 16. To survive, Judge Garland must ‘pardon’ himself and his peers and colleagues, thus making all of them yet another time Judges Above the Law, the harm to the system of justice and We the People notwithstanding. Preventing Judge Garland's self-pardon calls for a generalized media investigation into his and his fellow judges' “bad Behaviour”. 4. The demand for the release of the FBI's secret judicial vetting reports 166 17. The above article can set in motion a generalized media investigation of both Judge Garland and federal judges because “scandal sells”. 18. Moreover, it can provide the basis for you and the rest of the media to make a bold demand for President Biden to prove that his professed interest in judicial reform is expressed in good faith that has no fear of, and is pursued through, transparency and Equal exposure to investigation Under Law: 19. Demand that Then-President Biden and even President Trump release all the secret FBI vetting reports on judicial candidates and nominees, which contain information obtained by the FBI exercising its power of subpoena, search and seizure, and contempt, which the media lack. 20. The release of those secret reports will show the unfitness for office of many justices and judges due to their “bad Behaviour” before they began their service; and the connivance between the politicians and the candidates whom they recommend, endorse, nominate, and confirm for judgeships and justiceships, and thereafter protect as ‘our men and women on the bench’ no matter what they do, are complained about doing, or the harm that they cause the public. 21. Judges who break the law for their personal and collective gain and convenience have no qualms about breaking it for their friends or for their biases. “Power corrupts and” when it can be exercised risklessly for any reason and no reason it becomes “absolute power[, which] corrupts absolutely”. 22. Let President Biden show that he honestly believes in the tenet inscribed on the outside wall of the building housing the Office of Public Responsibility: Justice in the life and conduct of the state is possible only as first it resides in the hearts and souls of the citizens. 23. Does justice reside in President Biden’s heart and soul? If so, he must show it by the concrete and visible act of opening the FBI's secret reports on judicial candidates and nominees so that transparency brings forth truth, which is indispensable for doing justice. 24. If not, let President Biden publicly admit that in his heart and soul there is a secret place for protecting his own interest, not in ‘the Blessings secured for We the People through Freedom from Injustice’ (Constitution, Preamble), but rather in implementing his agenda by not antagonizing the judges. The latter can breach their oath of office (28 U.S.C.§453) ‘to uphold the Constitution and the laws thereunder’ and disregard the will of voters in order to retaliate in their self-interest against him by holding the laws implementing his agenda unconstitutional or reading them so narrowly, expansively, or hindering them with so many restrictions that they are rendered ineffective. 167 5. Thinking strategically to cause judicial resignations, pack the Judiciary, and secure the agenda, judicial reform, and legacy 25. President Biden can release the FBI's secret reports and encourage the official and media investigation of judges. The findings of unaccountable judges risklessly committing crimes and abuse of power as their institutionalized modus operandi will so intensely outrage the national public and deprive judges of so much public trust as to force them to resign individually and even collectively. 26. There is precedent for this in: a. Justice Abe Fortas, who resigned from the U.S. Supreme Court on May 14, 1969, for ‘improprieties’ in taking outside source money and benefiting from relations with a former client; b. Former Ninth Circuit Chief Judge Alex Kozinski, who resigned on December 18, 2017, to avoid an investigation of sexual harassment referred to the Second Circuit by Chief Justice John Roberts, Jr.; and c. Circuit Judge Maryanne Trump Barry, the sister of President Donald Trump, who resigned on February 11, 2019, upon learning 10 days earlier that she was being investigated for her participation in her father’s distribution of his assets to his children through a fraud scheme involving shell companies to evade inheritance tax. 27. Hence, the resignations can begin with one justice, several of them, or even the whole Supreme Court for the crimes and abuse that they committed as lower court judges and are committing now as principals; and the crimes and abuse of current lower court judges and of former peers that they are covering up as circuit justices (28 U.S.C. §42) allotted as supervisors to the several circuits. This will shake trust in the Federal Judiciary so profoundly that the public could demand its replacement. 28. As a result, the unimaginable could happen: President Biden could not only “pack the Court”, but rather pack the whole Judiciary, thereby not only ensuring that his agenda is upheld by the judges that he nominates, but more importantly, also establishing a long-standing basis for his legacy. 29. President Biden could even push through constitutional amendments that recognize the role that We the People, the masters of all public servants, must have in holding even judicial public servants accountable for their performance and liable to compensate the victims of their abuse so that they can protect themselves from politicians and their appointed judges conniving to grab gain and convenience at the expense of the system of justice and the People. 168 B. The foundation of the articles in a study and a website 30. The articles pitched above are available for review by you, and I can shorten, split, update, and otherwise edit them as required. 31. But time is of the essence, for they should be published before President Biden forms the commission and Judge Garland is vetted and confirmed by the Senate, which on Monday, February 22, will begin to hold confirmation hearings on him. 32. There is ample justification for considering the above-mentioned articles and others that I have written, which exemplify what I can write on commission. They form part of my three-volume study of judges and their judiciaries, titled and downloadable thus: Exposing Judges' Unaccountability and Consequent Riskless Abuse of Power: Pioneering the news and publishing field of judicial unaccountability reporting* † * Volume 1: http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL/DrRCordero- Honest_Jud_Advocates.pdf † Volume 2: http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero- Honest_Jud_Advocates2.pdf ‡ Volume 3: http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL3/DrRCordero- Honest_Jud_Advocates3.pdf i. Open the downloaded files using Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is available for free. 33. I have posted some of my articles to my website Judicial Discipline Reform at http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org. Countless webvisitors have read and appreciated them so much that as of this writing 37,264 and counting have subscribed to my website(Appendix 3). How many law firms, never mind lawyers, do you know who have a website with so many subscribers? You can subscribe for free to its articles, such as this one, thus: go to http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org <left panel ↓Register or + New or Users >Add New. 34. My video and its slides present my study and my website in general. My proposed series of webinars present my articles in greater detail. 169 C. Proposed action 35. Therefore, I respectfully propose that you, with a view to making yourself this generation’s equivalent of Washington Post editor Benjamin Bradlee of Watergate fame: a. publish upon payment to me one or a series of my articles on judges’ crimes and abuse of power; compensation of abusees; and reform of the judicial system, including those described in the article below, section C. Sources of evidence and examples of federal judges’ criminality; e.g.: 1) their abusive enrichment denounced by Sen. Elizabeth Warren 2) their fraudulent filing and approval of financial disclosure reports 3) their bankruptcy fraud scheme 4) their failure to read the overwhelming majority of briefs b. embark in a joint investigation with me and others of judges’ crimes and abuse of power, which will be focused and cost-effective thanks to the abundance of leads that I have gathered; c. i. make with me a joint I accuse! presentation, via video conference and/or in person, whose agenda includes judicial abuse of power, compensation of abusees, and reform, at: 1) a press conference; and 2) a tour of law (OL:197§G), journalism, business, and Information Technology schools and think tanks upon contacting the student officers of the class, the deans, and the professors whose courses are germane to the subject of our presentation; c. ii. to assess my capacity to make such presentation, watch my video and follow it on its slides; d. promote the holding of unprecedented citizens hearings on judges’ “bad Behaviour”, to be conducted by multidisciplinary panels of journalists, professors, and experts; at media stations and university auditoriums; where the victims of, and witnesses to, judges’ “bad Behaviour” can tell their story to the national public; and do so mostly through interactive video conference to reduce travel expenses; reach the largest life audience possible; and receive their feedback in real time; 170 e. encourage the formation of local chapters of parties who have appeared before the same ‘badly behaving’ judge or in the same court that covers up for them, to demand collectively compensation for the abuse and waste that they have suffered; f. organize together with other media outlets, academics, and me the first- ever, and national conference on judges’ “bad Behaviour”, where the report of the citizens hearings will be presented; g. participate in a multidisciplinary academic and business venture, described in my business plan, that will turn the website of Judicial Discipline Reform from an informational platform into: 1) a clearinghouse for complaints against judges uploaded by anybody; 2) a research center for fee-paying clients auditing judges’ decisions and searching many other writings from many sources that through computer-assisted statistical, linguistic, and literary analysis can reveal the most persuasive type of evidence: judges’ patterns, trends, and schemes of “bad Behaviour”; and 3) the digital portal of the venture and the precursor to the creation attached to a top university or think tank of the institute of judicial unaccountability reporting and reform advocacy; h. sponsor my proposed series of webinars or offer them as part of your Continued Legal Education program. i. See paragraph 57 in the below article for other proposed actions. D. My offer to present this article and related proposals 36. I offer to make a presentation of this article and related proposals to you and your guests followed by a Q&A session. The presentation can take place via video conference on short notice. To set its terms and scheduling you may use my contact information below. 37. To decide whether to organize the presentation you may watch my video and follow it on its slides. 171 38. To consult with others on this article and/or interest potential guests in attending this presentation you may widely share this article and post it to social media, such as: Facebook Youtube WhatsApp LinkedIn Instagram Google plus Pinterest Reddit Snapchat Twitter: Pitching a scoop on exposing AG nominee Judge Merrick Garland’s cover-up of judges’ interception of emails and mail, financial fraud, etc.; and the release of the secret FBI’s judicial vetting reports; http://Judicial- Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero_media_exposing_judges.pdf E. Every meaningful cause needs resources for its advancement; none can be continued, let alone advanced, without money Put your money where your outrage at abuse and passion for justice are. DONATE to Judicial Discipline Reform through Paypal https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s- xclick&hosted_button_id=HBFP5252TB5YJ by making a deposit or an online transfer to Citi Bank, routing number 021 000 089, account 4977 59 2001 or by mailing a check to the address below. Dare trigger history!...and you may enter it. I look forward to hearing from you. Sincerely, 172 Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq. Judicial Discipline Reform 2165 Bruckner Blvd. Bronx, NY 10472-6506 tel. (718)827-9521 https://www.linkedin.com/in/dr-richard-cordero-esq-0508ba4b Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@verizon.net, DrRCordero@Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org, CorderoRic@yahoo.com NOTE: Given the interference with Dr. Cordero’s email and e-cloud storage accounts described at *>ggl:1 et seq. and †>OL2:1114§G, when emailing him, copy the above bloc of his email addresses and paste it in the To: line of your email so as to enhance the chances of your email reaching him at least at one of those addresses. ********************************** An appeal to U.S. Judge Robert Pratt and Associated Press reporter Ryan Foley to dare expose judges’ criminality, not only President Trump’s; and promote the holding of unprecedented citizens hearings on judges’ unaccountability and consequent riskless crimes, abuse of power, and disregard for ethical standards http://Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org/OL2/DrRCordero-JudgeRPratt.pdf By Dr. Richard Cordero, Esq. Ph.D., University of Cambridge, England M.B.A., University of Michigan Business School D.E.A., La Sorbonne, Paris Judicial Discipline Reform New York City http://www.Judicial-Discipline-Reform.org Dr.Richard.Cordero_Esq@verizon.net , DrRCordero@Judicial-Discipline- Reform.org , CorderoRic@yahoo.com U.S. Senior District Judge Robert W. Pratt U.S. District for the Southern District of Iowa 173 https://www.iasd.uscourts.gov/content/senior-district-judge- robert-w-pratt https://www.iasd.uscourts.gov/contact Mr. Michael Messina Judicial Assistant tel. (515)284-6254 Mr. Ryan Foley, reporter; and Mr. Ron Nixon, international investigations editor Associated Press tel. +1(202) 281-8604; +1(202) 641-9000 https://www.ap.org/contact-us/contact-newsroom Info@AP.org Dear Judge Pratt, Mr. Foley, Mr. Messina, Mr. Nixon, and Advocates of Honest Judiciaries, 1. You, Judge Pratt, made your views on the pardons granted by President Trump in December 2020 known to Associated Press (AP) reporter Ryan J. Foley, who wrote the article referring to you and titled “Federal judge in Iowa ridicules Trump's pardons”, published on December 30. 2. AP reporter Foley explained that “Pratt made the remarks when asked for comment on pardons granted to two former top aides for Ron Paul’s 2012 presidential campaign, who were convicted in a corruption scheme related to the Iowa caucuses”. 3. AP Foley quoted you as saying, “It’s not surprising that a criminal like Trump pardons other criminals”. 174 4. This is an appeal for you to be consistent and honest by applying to yourself and your fellow judges that very same principle to expose judges’ pardons of each other. Doing that requires more integrity and therefore is riskier than being flippant in ‘ridiculing Trump’s pardons’. However, you can do that on the solid basis of the facts discussed hereunder, which are known to you given that you have dealt as an insider of the judicial class for the more than your 20 years on the bench. 5. By exposing judges’ reciprocal pardons, you can set off in the administration of justice, not only by the Federal Judiciary, but also by its state counterparts, transformative change: what goes into the process of change comes out transformed into a different system of justice, one where judges are held accountable for their conduct and liable to compensate their victims. 6. If you can muster the necessary consistency, honesty, and integrity, you can exit the judiciary into retirement, not as yet another judge among thousands. Rather, you can bring down, not merely a top official and all his aides, as occurred in the Watergate scandal, which forced President Nixon to resign on August 8, 1974, and sent all his White House men to prison, but a whole branch of government that judges, rendered unaccountable through preemptive reciprocal pardons, risklessly run, as shown below, as a criminal enterprise. 7. That is how instead of ridicule as a hypocrite, you can earn praise as the main character of the bestseller and protagonist of the blockbuster movie/documentary ‘All the judges’ exposer’. A. Federal judges pardon each other by dismissing 100% of complaints against them 175 B. Federal judges pardon each other preemptively, sparing each other any conviction C. Sources of evidence and examples of judges’ criminality 1. Abusive self-enrichment 2. Fraudulent filing and approval of financial disclosure reports 3. Judges’ bankruptcy fraud scheme 4. Interception of emails and mail 5. Failure to read the overwhelming majority of briefs 6. Sham hearings on the Rules for Processing Complaints D. Proposed plan of concrete, reasonable, and feasible actions for exposing judges’ crimes E. My offer to present this article and related proposals F. Every meaningful cause needs resources for its advancement; none can be continued, let alone advanced, without money *********************************************** 176 Baumb, Nelly From:Chris Cummings <ccummings7@gmail.com> Sent:Thursday, February 18, 2021 6:36 PM To:Council, City Subject:NO CATO ILL-ADVISED housing project CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Dear council members.     This is another call to reconsider the CATO Housing effort in College Terrace. Nice intent, nice try, but yet another  governmental miss despite well‐intended efforts.    Projects such as this need to maintain the integrity of the neighborhoods. No one, not the council or those who  developed and advocated for the zoning, foresaw this execution on that zoning.    As for me, I live across town, so this isn't the prototypical NIMBY email. I am simply a long‐time resident in search of  common sense, which this proposed project simply does not make.    Thanks and I trust you will reach the right decision.    Chris Cummings   870 Sharon Court  Palo Alto      177 Baumb, Nelly From:Robin Holbrook <robineholbrook@gmail.com> Sent:Thursday, February 18, 2021 4:48 PM To:Jensen, Peter; Council, City; pwecips; Public Works Public Services; CSD; ParkRec Commission Subject:Re: Ramos Park/Dog Park CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Dear City Council and Parks and Recreation Staff,    I would like to second the very cogent email sent by Sharon and Grant Elliot.  Ramos Park is the nearest small park to me  and my son and he or I walk there daily.  I am greatly in favor of adding a bathroom to the park and the other proposed  improvements EXCEPT for the dog park.  I would not object to a SMALL fenced area for dogs to be off leash, but the  proposed area is much too big and too close to the picnic area (and neighbors) for such a tiny park.  If you look at the  percentage of the park that would be devoted to the dog park (it looks like ~20% from the plans I have seen), that is  WAY too much for such a small park.  The percentage of the park space devoted to a fenced dog area at the other  nearby parks (Mitchell, Greer and Hoover) is dramatically less.  I think Ramos Park is just too small to accommodate such  a large dog park.      In addition, the grassy area proposed for the fenced dog park is the only part of the park that isn’t already designated for  some particular use (the larger central grassy area is used extensively for T‐ball and soccer) and is a lovely area for many  varied activities.  I have seen it used for additional picnic spillover from the picnic table area, for badminton, for croquet  (my favorite), for flying kites and it is a lovely, restful green area that adds immeasurably to the overall ambience of the  park.    I sympathize with dog‐owners who want a place to let their dogs go off leash, but Mitchell Park’s fenced dog park is  nearby and surely there is another, larger park (Rinconada?) that can spare space for this rather than our tiny pocket  park!    Sincerely, Robin Holbrook  3797 Nathan Way  Palo Alto, CA 94303    Dear City Council and Parks and Recreation Staff,     We are writing in opposition to the proposed fenced dog park in Ramos Park. Out of all the comments we have heard during the zoom meetings, we’d like to reiterate three:    1) Ramos Park is not an appropriate size or shape for a dog park. From the research shared, most  cities consider the minimum acceptable buffer around a dog park to be 100 ‐ 200 feet.  This is  obviously impossible at Ramos. The projected plan with a 10 foot buffer for nearby homes is completely untenable and the distance from the picnic/bbq area is inadequate.    2)  Looking at the Parks and Rec Commission's website, we saw that the Master Plan calls for six dog  parks:  Three in South PA and three in North PA.  South PA already has three — Hoover, Mitchell and  Greer.  On further investigation, we saw that Ramos Park wasn’t even on the list of appropriate sites.    178 3)  The off‐leash dog issue will not be solved by a dog park.  The City needs to address this problem more  directly and creatively — as other cities have.  For information on a successful program in Brookline,  Massachusetts, see https://www.brooklinema.gov/752/Green‐Dog‐Program.  Ramos Park neighbors  already gather for “off‐leash hours” at Ramos.  The City needs to make this choice legal, organized and  regulated.  Thank you for your consideration, Sharon and Grant Elliot 3712 Ortega Ct Palo Alto, CA We're all in this together                        179 Baumb, Nelly From:Douglas Adams <doadams.mail@gmail.com> Sent:Thursday, February 18, 2021 4:22 PM To:Council, City; UAC Subject:Municipal Fiber CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.     I am writing to voice my strong support for a municipal fiber program in Palo Alto. We have already centralized the  other utilities to great effect‐‐our cost for electricity is much lower than is provided by PG&E, isn't it time to do the same  thing for our internet?      There are so many reasons why providing an upgraded home internet in Palo Alto is the right thing to do. Just to name  a few:    1) Improved ability to work from home in a post‐covid world    2) The major internet providers (AT&T and Comcast) have repeatedly shown that they would rather increase their  profits than increase their performance (and with their defacto monopolies I as a consumer have no real recourse)    3) It has been implemented to extreme success in places like Chattanooga TN, where the city was able to drastically  improve quality of service while at the same time drastically reducing cost‐‐in fact this example also shows that Comcast  was able to match the municipal service both in cost and performance, which without the municipal option they had no  incentive to do.      Palo Alto has been a technology leader for over a generation and reaped the benefits of that growth. Isn't it time we  invest in our future as well?    Douglas Adams  3986 Bibbits Dr  Palo Alto, 94303  180 Baumb, Nelly From:Hank Sousa <thomashenrysousa@gmail.com> Sent:Thursday, February 18, 2021 1:12 PM To:DuBois, Tom; Burt, Patrick; Kou, Lydia; Cormack, Alison; Tanaka, Greg; Filseth, Eric (Internal); Stone, Greer; Council, City Subject:Castilleja--A win win for both sides CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  The aim of this email is to have City Council members start to think about the project that will be coming before you  soon. The several areas of concern to the neighbors are addressed in a fashion that should be acceptable to both sides.  In a nutshell if the project is scaled back somewhat the neighbors can live with it and the school can remain a gem in its  urban setting.    enrollment‐   ‐The 2000 CUP called for an enrollment of 415 students. The school stayed at this number less than two years and  climbed to 450. The 415 # was an increase of 8% over the previous CUP's enrollment # of 385.   We suggest the city grant them an 8% increase in the new 2021 CUP which would bring the school to 448 students.  Win for neighbors: It keeps the school in the small category  Win for the school: lets it grow with the proviso they obey the enrollment cap for x  number of years; they can earn  more students when Castilleja adds more shuttling and decreases traffic    events‐  ‐To allow the interpretation of the word "several" to refer to 95 events is not honorable or fair (to the neighbors).   Win for neighbors: we suggest 20 to 40 weeknight and weekend events per year and if the school wants additional  nights/ weekend ones   they must be held at off campus venues.   Win for school: the adherence to " 5 large and several additional events" keeps the school as a good neighbor. We are  ok with the daytime events‐ it is the nights and weekends where we need respite.    shuttling‐  ‐There are about 220 single car drop offs each morning and 200 plus afternoon pickups (with some student drivers  parking for the day). We suggest the school mandate the large majority of these students arrive by shuttle and  that the  city enforce this mandate.  Win for neighbors: fewer cars in the neighborhood; traffic is a huge issue as it is  Win for the school: they will be seen as "green" (let students coordinate this effort for credit). The school touts its Leed  Platinum certified proposed building project but pairs that with a CO2 emitting proposed underground garage; many  private schools in R‐1 have strict controls on driving to campus and parking.    parking‐  A proposed underground parking structure is not necessary to fully park the school's needs.  With Castilleja's 86 current at grade parking spaces the school can fully park an enrollment up to 448 students. There are  also 50 public parking spots on Castilleja's "side" of the three streets ringing the school. Per a long standing gentlemen's  agreement we neighbors do not use their side of the streets (Bryant, Kellogg & Emerson) for parking.  Win for the school: an unhealthy excavation and construction phase is eliminated and the project is completed 15  months sooner.  Win for neighbors: fewer cars coming into neighborhood and no giant commercial underground parking garage would  be constructed.    181 The neighbors have never had authentic input into this project.  The school says they met with neighbors 50 times;  certainly not us, and certainly not with any intention of listening and using our input.  The school is required to meet  with neighbors twice a year, but they tell us they are waiting for the City to decide whether they can build their project  or not.  Deflecting and distracting and not providing the neighbors with anyone who can answer our questions is how  those meetings work.  The school has had many meetings around Palo Alto selling their project, but not to gather input.      We feel a modest enrollment increase and some revisions to the proposed plans can work for the neighbors. Please  keep the neighbors' concerns at the top of your minds as you consider this project.      Regards,  Hank Sousa  185 feet from Castilleja (100 block of Melville Ave.)  182 Baumb, Nelly From:Danielle Grimsby <danigrimsby@gmail.com> Sent:Thursday, February 18, 2021 12:51 PM To:Council, City Subject:Highway 101 Debris CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Good afternoon council members,   My name is Danielle Grimsby and I am a resident of San Mateo County. I am writing to you today to express my  unhappiness with the state that our roadways and highways are currently in. Specifically the area of highway 101  between the cities of San Carlos and Palo Alto. Both the northbound and southbound lanes are covered in trash, debris,  and homeless encampments. To say that this is unacceptable is an understatement.   This highway is right next to the bay marshlands and has several creeks and other drainage that lead to the bay. This  drainage is no doubt resulting in the freeway trash flowing directly into our bay and polluting it.   Another issue relating to the garbage is the increase in homeless encampments on the sides of the 101 freeway. I have  noticed that the encampments are increasing in size and also in the amount of garbage they are producing. Many of  these camps are so close to the freeway that someone would most certainly be seriously injured or killed if a motorist  lost control of their vehicle.   Ultimately this lack of maintenance is a public and environmental health issue that needs to be addressed. I am shocked  and saddened that I even need to write a letter to you since it would seem that keeping the highways cleaner is a no  brainer.     The city of Palo Alto prides itself on being one of the best places to live and to work in the country but right now all  people see is a trash filled mess. I am demanding that something be done immediately to rectify this unfortunate  situation.   Respectfully,  Danielle Grimsby  183 Baumb, Nelly From:Wei Chen <wchen@acmeschool.com> Sent:Thursday, February 18, 2021 9:18 AM To:Council, City Subject:Cubberley Community Center rent CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear City Council members, I am the owner of Acme Education Group, Inc, a tenant at Cubberley Community Center. As COVID-19 has impacted many businesses, including the ones at Cubberley, I am wondering if City Council will come up rent relief measures to help small business like ours. Looking forward to hearing from you. Regards, -- Wei Chen Acme Education Group, Inc. 184 Baumb, Nelly From:Yahoo Mail.® <honkystar@yahoo.com> Sent:Thursday, February 18, 2021 9:15 AM To:Honky Subject:Every American needs to watch this short video to understand the harm that the mainstream media has done to America. it is not just what is reported, but it is also how it is reported and what is omitted. CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Every American needs to watch this short video to understand the harm that the mainstream media has done to America. it is not just what is reported, but it is also how it is reported and what is omitted. Michael van der Veen destroys the entire media after questioning from CBSN anchor.     To help prprivacy, Mprevented download from the In Michael van der Veen destroys the entire media after questioning from CB...      185 Baumb, Nelly From:Yahoo Mail.® <honkystar@yahoo.com> Sent:Thursday, February 18, 2021 8:57 AM To:Honky Subject:COVID-19 and the Agendas to Come—Red-Pilled CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Having trouble reading this email? View it in your browser. To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.AFP Online Store   COVID-19 and the Agendas to Come—Red- Pilled    By James Perloff    In Covid-19, drawing on statements of numerous scholars from around the world—virologists, epidemiologists, immunologists, pathologists, microbiologists, infectious disease specialists, including Nobel Prize winners, as well as front-line ER physicians and family practice MDs—veteran journalist James Perloff asks hard questions about the global response to Covid-19. Are the virus’s health risks greater than those posed by lockdowns? What does the science say about masks and social distancing? Why were no lockdowns imposed for previous pandemics? How accurate are the death numbers? Is the virus natural, or could bio-engineering have played a role? Should the world’s population take a Covid vaccine? Why is Bill Gates formulating health policy, even though he has no medical credentials? How might a “second wave” be different? Is the Covid crisis To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.covid_19_red-pilled.jpg 186 being exploited to push us toward mass surveillance, digital IDs and cashless transactions? Find out for yourself! Softcover, 216 pages, $16  Click here to order online now!  To order by phone using credit card or cryptocurrency, call AFP at 202-544- 5977 or 888-699-6397 toll free Mon.-Thu. 9-5 ET.  Or mail your request with check or money order to: American Free Press Bookstore, 117 LaGrange Avenue, La Plata, MD 20646.    Know someone who might be interested in this or other products from AFP? Please click here to forward this email.   AFP ONLINE STORE 202-544-5977 / toll free 888-699- 6397 bookstore@americanfreepress.net   Return Policy: AFP Bookstore will accept returns on all books/DVDs/CDs within 30 days of purchase for a full refund minus shipping & handling, no questions asked.     To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.Subscribe to AFP today!     Subscribe to American Free Press today and find out the news you need to know. One year of bi-weekly issues of American Free Press in the U.S. is $59—delivered right to your U.S. mailbox. Our AFP Online digital edition is just $25, or free with a full-price print subscription! Every other week you'll be able to log in and view the full digital version of the newspaper online . . . without waiting for mail delivery! Questions? Write subscriptions@americanfreepress.net. 187 Subscribe today, and don't miss another story from America's last real newspaper!  OUR GUARANTEE: If you are ever dissatisfied with your subscription to American Free Press, just drop us a note and we’ll gladly refund the unused portion of your subscription.    American Free Press • 117 LaGrange Avenue, La Plata, MD 20646   202-544-5977 or Toll Free 888-699-6397 • editor@americanfreepress.com    Copyright © 2021 American Free Press. All rights reserved. This email was sent to honkystar@yahoo.com. Click here to unsubscribe.      188 Baumb, Nelly From:Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> Sent:Wednesday, February 17, 2021 5:20 PM To:Loran Harding; alumnipresident@stanford.edu; antonia.tinoco@hsr.ca.gov; David Balakian; bballpod; fred beyerlein; beachrides; boardmembers; Leodies Buchanan; bearwithme1016@att.net; Council, City; Chris Field; Cathy Lewis; dennisbalakian; Doug Vagim; Dan Richard; Daniel Zack; david pomaville; esmeralda.soria@fresno.gov; eappel@stanford.edu; Steven Feinstein; francis.collins@nih.gov; fmerlo@wildelectric.net; grinellelake@yahoo.com; George.Rutherford@ucsf.edu; Gabriel.Ramirez@fresno.gov; huidentalsanmateo; hennessy; Irv Weissman; Joel Stiner; jerry ruopoli; kwalsh@kmaxtv.com; kfsndesk; Mark Kreutzer; leager; lalws4 @gmail.com; margaret-sasaki@live.com; Mayor; Mark Standriff; mthibodeaux@electriclaboratories.com; newsdesk; news@fresnobee.com; nick yovino; russ@topperjewelers.com; Steve Wayte; tsheehan; terry; vallesR1969@att.net Subject:Fwd: Lots about the landing of Perseverance on Mars on Thurs, 2-18-21 CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.    ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐  From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>  Date: Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 3:09 PM  Subject: Fwd: Lots about the landing of Perseverance on Mars on Thurs, 2‐18‐21  To: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>      ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐  From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>  Date: Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 3:07 PM  Subject: Lots about the landing of Perseverance on Mars on Thurs, 2‐18‐21  To: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>         To Mars, tomorrow! ‐ loran.harding@alumni.stanford.edu ‐ Stanford Alumni Mail (google.com)               It will land ~ noon  PT on Thurs.                  LWH             189 Baumb, Nelly From:Amy Keohane <amykeohane@hotmail.com> Sent:Wednesday, February 17, 2021 1:10 PM To:Council, City Subject:Downtown North street sweeping CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Hi All, I forgot to move my car yesterday and got ticketed. This would be ok but I have noticed in the last couple of  months that the street sweepers don’t even come within the 1 hour time slot that they are supposed to anymore since  the city is now using a vendor. On another note they aren’t quite as good as the cities sweeper.  My time is between 9‐ 10. They didn’t come until noon. So if this is what is happening, it is time to take down the street sweeper signs and get  refunds on all the tickets. I wrote to the department who is in charge of the street sweepers and below is there  response. We need the parking patrol to stop coming around and handing tickets out. I for one see no reason to pay this  ticket. Please will someone respond what the next step will be.       Thank you for your email. Unfortunately, we do not require our street sweeping contractor to sweep specific streets at  specific times. We only require that our contractor complete the street sweeping zone between the hours of 7am to  4:30pm. The schedule has been set this way to allow the contractor enough time to complete the entire zone. Often  times the contractor will have to adjust its sweeping route daily to accommodate what is happening in the City making it  difficult to set specific times to specific streets. As a result, we ask the residents to move their cars between the hours of  7am to 4:30pm.     Please let me know if you have any further question   Sent from my iPhone  190 Baumb, Nelly From:Shaila Sadrozinski <sadro@pacbell.net> Sent:Wednesday, February 17, 2021 12:26 PM To:Council, City; Planning Commission; Transportation Subject:changes proposed to the residential parking permit program CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  According to this morning's Daily Post, City Council will soon be discussing changing the existing residential parking permit program to a system that can be managed with license plate readers. Before spending money on buying license plate readers, I hope you will take into account the following concerns about no longer having hang-tags issued to residents for temporary guests: 1. Under the existing system, a hang-tag is not tied to a specific car and can be used as and when needed 2. And the cost for a hang-tag is $50, the same as for a sticker, and valid all year 3. If under the new proposal each temporary guest permit is linked with a specific license plate, then if one had two different guests at different times during the same day, one would have to buy two permits 4.This would be an unacceptable cost, especially for low-income or elderly residents who may have more than one caregiver coming to the house in one day 5. Some seniors are not comfortable with doing things online and may not even have good internet connection. This would be an unnecessary anxiety-causing burden on them 6. If you have an unexpected guest, you would have to remember to go online to acquire a temporary permit 7. If you have out-of-town guests visiting for a few days, would you have to remember to go online daily to renew the temporary permit? I believe this new proposal, while possibly more cost-efficient for the city, would be a financial and bureaucratic burden on residents for whom the RPP program was created in the first place. 191 Shaila Sadrozinski 62 Churchill Ave 1 Baumb, Nelly From:Mike Anderson <andman817@yahoo.com> Sent:Tuesday, February 23, 2021 1:31 PM To:Council, City Subject:Support for Castilleja Attachments:Ltr Supporting Castilleja .pdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Our letter is attached. Please distribute to the City Council. Thank you, Mike Anderson I February 23, 2021 Dear City Council, Michael & Vanessa Anderson 858 Fielding Ct. Palo Alto, CA 94303 Thank you for your service. We are long-time Palo Alto residents, we are writing in support of Castilleja School's proposal to update its campus and increase enrollment in the high school. The facilities at Castilleja are quite dated and in need of replacement and/or upgrade. Several buildings need to be torn down and rebuilt to current safety codes. The proposed architecture is beautiful and blends well into the neighborhood. Underground parking is needed to reduce parking and delivery impacts in the neighborhood. The underground parking will also allow more green space on the campus. Our daughter graduated from Castilleja and is now at a University. However, during her time at Castilleja we witnessed the implementation of a robust traffic mitigation plan. This plan greatly reduced traffic to and from the school. Castilleja has shown that it is serious about traffic mitigation and is committed to that goal. Castilleja is a wonderful school and helps build young, strong, smart, vibrant, and caring young women. These young women help build our community and make it a better place. We fully support the proposed redevelopment of Castilleja. Thank you for considering our perspective, /~l-fl-- Mike Anderson Vanessa Anderson 2 Baumb, Nelly From:Andrew Fetter <andrewfetter@hotmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, February 23, 2021 11:15 AM To:Council, City Cc:Andrew Fetter Subject:Thank you for listening to concerns re 2239 and 2241 Wellesley St project by Cato Investments Attachments:Cato Investments in Palo Alto.pdf; Cato plan summary.pdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Dear City Council Members,    Thank you for listening to my concerns about the proposed project on 2239 and 2241 Wellesley St last night.    This project has been submitted to the Planning Department and I gather is not yet on the council agenda for  Prescreening.    Cato Investment Company is the applicant and they are asking for a rezoning from R1 to PHZ.    The two lots 2239 and 2241 Wellesley St and all surrounding lots are currently R1.    I did want to follow up with some details that I referenced last night.    Cato Investment has spent over $60 Million in the past 5 years on 13 properties in Palo Alto.  9 of these properties are in College Terrace.  See attached for list.    I am concerned that Cato hopes to build a 3 story, 24 unit, 35 foot building on Wellesley St and then do the  same all over College Terrace and other parts of Palo Alto.  See attached for 2 pages of their plan submission  showing their project towering over next door houses.    The parent company of Cato Investment is Baker Street Advisors,  https://www.bakerstreetadvisors.com/    A main goal of Baker Street Advisors is to:    "Seek to maximize after‐fee, after‐tax, risk‐adjusted returns."    I think Cato Investments is hoping for a rezoning as a way to make more money.    I hope the Council carefully reviews Cato Investments application and denies the rezoning request.    I urge the City to have more projects like 231 Grant, which has non profit groups working with multiple key  stake holders to get consensus on such a project.  This is unlike Cato Investments which has not talked to  neighbors, community, nor CTRA (College Terrace Residents Association).    Best,  3   Andrew     APN Owner Full Name Street City State Zip LastSaleDate LastSalePrice 13707036 Cato Investment Co Llc 2057 Amherst St Palo Alto, CA 94306 11/04/2016 $2,300,000 13702068 Cato Investment Company Llc 720 College Ave Palo Alto, CA 94306 07/20/2018 $2,300,000 13705002 Cato Investment Co Llc 2341 Hanover St Palo Alto, CA 94306 10/14/2016 $2,501,000 13239054 Cato Investment Company Llc 468 Margarita Ave Palo Alto, CA 94306 09/26/2018 $2,880,000 13708092 Cato Investment Co Llc 523 Matadero Ave Palo Alto, CA 94306 10/02/2019 $12,010,000 13708091 Cato Investment Co Llc 525 Matadero Ave Palo Alto, CA 94306 10/02/2019 $12,010,000 13708014 Cato Investment Co Llc 529 Matadero Ave Palo Alto, CA 94306 10/02/2019 $12,010,000 13733004 Cato Investment Company Llc 2020 Oberlin St Palo Alto, CA 94306 09/11/2017 $2,130,000 13703015 Cato Investment Company Llc 937 Stanford Ave Palo Alto, CA 94306 05/24/2017 $2,781,000 13703089 Cato Investment Company Llc 943 Stanford Ave Palo Alto, CA 94306 05/24/2017 $2,781,000 13701031 Cato Investment Company Llc 2130 Staunton Ct Palo Alto, CA 94306 05/04/2018 $1,825,000 13702008 Cato Investment Co Llc 2239 Wellesley St Palo Alto, CA 94306 08/14/2019 $2,960,000 13702007 Cato Investment Co 2241 Wellesley St Palo Alto, CA 94306 01/14/2020 $2,900,000 4 Baumb, Nelly From:Velasquez, Ingrid Sent:Tuesday, February 23, 2021 8:37 AM To:Council, City Cc:City Mgr; Shikada, Ed; leConge Ziesenhenne, Monique; Lait, Jonathan; Tanner, Rachael Subject:Messages for City Council - R1 Zoning Attachments:strong opposition to the R1 zoning change regarding 2239 and 2241 Wellesley; Fwd: City of Palo Alto City Council Meeting Agendas/Minutes/Reports Update Good morning City Council,    I have attached two email‐comments that are addressed to City Council but, were sent to the News inbox instead. Both  emails are about R1 zoning.    Thank You,    Ingrid     Ingrid Velásquez  Administrative Assistant, Office of the City Manager  650‐329‐2354 |Ingrid.Velasquez@cityofpaloalto.org  www.cityofpaloalto.org                               1 Baumb, Nelly From:nick-168 <nickliao168@gmail.com> Sent:Monday, February 22, 2021 5:27 PM To:News Subject:strong opposition to the R1 zoning change regarding 2239 and 2241 Wellesley CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Dear city council members,    How are you?  I am sending this email to voice my strong opposition to  the R1 zoning change regarding 2239 and 2241 Wellesley that are  currently zoned for — and occupied by — single‐family homes.    I believe it will be a disaster to change R1 zoning to high density  one.  I believe it will change the character of Palo Alto City towards  a more downtown type. Our city is currently the most desirable place  for college bound students that want to study in Stanford. It is so  much superior than the neighbourhoods around Yale, University of  Chicago and so on.    Please protect Palo Alto city from deterioration. Those advocates that  have the compassion  and money to pour in and develop high density  housing in neighborhoods such as East Palo Alto, or those college  towns that already have high crime rates.    Thank you very much!    Sincerely,  Nick Liao  Resident in Cornell Street of College Terrace  1 Baumb, Nelly From:Lily Huang Liao <lilyhuangliao@gmail.com> Sent:Monday, February 22, 2021 5:21 PM To:News Subject:Fwd: City of Palo Alto City Council Meeting Agendas/Minutes/Reports Update CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on  links.  ________________________________    Dear city council members,    How are you?  I am sending this email to voice my strong opposition to the R1 zoning change regarding 2239 and 2241  Wellesley that are currently zoned for — and occupied by — single‐family homes.    I believe it will be a disaster to change R1 zoning to high density one.  I believe it will change the character of Palo Alto  City towards a more downtown type. Our city is currently the most desirable place for college bound students that want  to study in Stanford. It is so much superior than the neighbourhoods around Yale, University of Chicago and so on.    Please protect Palo Alto city from deterioration. Those advocates that have the compassion  and money to pour in and  develop high density housing in neighborhoods such as East Palo Alto, or those college towns that already have high  crime rates.    Thank you very much!    Sincerely,  Lily Huang  Resident in Cornell Street                On Fri, Feb 19, 2021 at 4:17 PM City of Palo Alto <cityofpaloalto@service.govdelivery.com> wrote:  >  > *****  >  > 2021 State of the City Address with Mayor Tom DuBois  >  > Thursday, March 4, 2021 at 7:00 P.M.  >  > This event will be held via virtual teleconference on Zoom.  >  > Meeting ID: 994‐1640‐2547  >  > Dial‐in: 1 (669) 900‐6833  >  2 >  >  >  >  > *****  >  >  >  > View all Agendas/Minutes/Videos in one location  >  > View the City of Palo Alto Events Calendar online  >  >  >  >  >  > ________________________________  >  > Update your subscriptions, modify your password or e‐mail address, or stop subscriptions at any time on your  Subscriber Preferences Page. You will need to use your email address to log in. If you have questions or problems with  the subscription service, please visit subscriberhelp.govdelivery.com.  >  > This service is provided to you at no charge by City of Palo Alto.  >  > ________________________________  > This email was sent to lilyhuangliao@gmail.com using GovDelivery   > Communications Cloud on behalf of: City of Palo Alto ∙ 250 Hamilton   > Ave ∙ Palo Alto, CA 94301 ∙ 650‐329‐2100  5 Baumb, Nelly From:Rebecca Eisenberg <rebecca@winwithrebecca.com> Sent:Monday, February 22, 2021 9:29 PM To:Council, City; ParkRec Commission; City Mgr; Stump, Molly Subject:Court Judgment regarding Foothills Park Attachments:Foothills Permanent Injunction.pdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  All:     For your attention, the very short court order and permanent injunction issued by the United States District Court  regarding Foothills Park is attached. The requirements of the injunction are listed on page 4. As you will read, it is a  breach of the settlement and a violation of court order if Palo Alto puts in place a policy that charges residents more  than non‐residents for entry into Foothills Park.     I brought this up twice with the Park & Rec Commission, and emailed City Council, PRC, and the City Attorney's Office  twice about this issue, but never heard back. I do not think there is an alternate interpretation of these words below; do  you?     "2. Defendant City of Palo Alto, as well as its officers, employees, attorneys, and agents, are immediately and permanently enjoined from discriminating between Palo Alto residents and non-residents as to access to Foothills Park."    "4. Defendant City of Palo Alto, as well as its officers, employees, attorneys, and agents, are immediately and permanently enjoined from enacting or imposing any law, ordinance, rule, regulation, policy, or practice that prohibits or restricts access by non-residents of Palo Alto into Foothills Park, or otherwise discriminates between Palo Alto residents and non-residents as to access to Foothills Park. "    Given how clear these words are, and given that it would have been exceedingly easy to modify the proposal so that  residents and non‐residents are charged the same (e.g. for annual passes), query why the PRC and the City Attorney's  Office is not concerned by the potentially $10 million consequence of breaching the Court Order and violating the  Permanent Injunction?      Given the easy fix available, it is malpractice for the City Attorney's Office not to point out the potential issue, and to  recommend a fee structure that treats residents and non‐residents equally.  I urge the City Council to consider this when  evaluating the quality of service that comes from the City Attorney's Office, and whether it might be time to consider  putting that essential city function under new leadership. The best way to reduce legal expenses is to behave in ways  that don't incite others to sue you.     Best,     Rebecca   Rebecca L. Eisenberg Esq.  www.linkedin.com/in/eisenberg  www.winwithrebecca.com  rebecca@winwithrebecca.com  415-235-8078  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -1- STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] PERMANENT INJUNCTION CASE NO. 5:20-CV-07251-EJD WILLIAM S. FREEMAN (SBN 82002) wfreeman@aclunc.org AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA 39 Drumm Street San Francisco, CA 94111 ACHYUT J. PHADKE (SBN 261567) achyut.phadke@mto.com GINA F. ELLIOTT (SBN 320093) gina.elliott@mto.com ANDREW R. LEWIS (SBN 329718) andrew.lewis@mto.com LLOYD S. MARSHALL (SBN 331566) lloyd.marshall@mto.com MUNGER, TOLLES & OLSON LLP 560 Mission Street, 27th Floor San Francisco, CA 94105-3089 Attorneys for Plaintiffs National Association for the Advancement of Colored People of San Jose/Silicon Valley, Gwen Gasque, Laura Martinez, Alysa Cisneros, Geoffrey Paulsen, Bridget Grant-Fraser, Donald McDougall, Kimberly Bomar, Iyanu Olukotun, LaDoris Hazzard Cordell, and Sarah Longstreth [Additional counsel on signature page] UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SAN JOSE DIVISION NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COLORED PEOPLE OF SAN JOSE/SILICON VALLEY, GWEN GASQUE, LAURA MARTINEZ, ALYSA CISNEROS, GEOFFREY PAULSEN, BRIDGET GRANT-FRASER, DONALD MCDOUGALL, KIMBERLY BOMAR, IYANU OLUKOTUN, LADORIS HAZZARD CORDELL, and SARAH LONGSTRETH, Plaintiffs v. CITY OF PALO ALTO, CALIFORNIA, Defendant. Case No. 5:20-cv-07251-EJD STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] PERMANENT INJUNCTION Case 5:20-cv-07251-EJD Document 20 Filed 01/25/21 Page 1 of 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -2- STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] PERMANENT INJUNCTION CASE NO. 5:20-CV-07251-EJD Plaintiffs National Association for the Advancement of Colored People of San Jose/Silicon Valley, Gwen Gasque, Laura Martinez, Alysa Cisneros, Geoffrey Paulsen, Bridget Grant-Fraser, Donald McDougall, Kimberly Bomar, Iyanu Olukotun, LaDoris Hazzard Cordell, and Sarah Longstreth (“Plaintiffs”) and Defendant City of Palo Alto (the “City”) stipulate as follows: WHEREAS, Plaintiffs filed their complaint in this action in California Superior Court, County of Santa Clara; WHEREAS, the City answered Plaintiffs’ complaint and removed this action to this Court; WHEREAS, this Court has jurisdiction over Plaintiffs, the City, and this action; WHEREAS, in their complaint, Plaintiffs alleged that former Palo Alto Municipal Code § 22.04.150 (the “Ordinance”), which restricted the ability of non-residents of Palo Alto to enter Foothills Park, located at 3300 Page Mill Road, Los Altos Hills, CA 94022 (“Foothills Park”), violated the rights of non-residents of Palo Alto under the United States Constitution and California Constitution, and the rights of Palo Alto residents under California Code of Civil Procedure Section 526a; WHEREAS, in their complaint, Plaintiffs sought declaratory relief, injunctive relief, attorneys’ fees, and costs; WHEREAS, in its answer, the City generally denied the allegations in Plaintiffs’ complaint and asserted certain affirmative defenses to Plaintiffs’ claims; WHEREAS, Plaintiffs and the City have reached a settlement agreement, which has been filed with the Court, that provides for entry of a stipulated permanent injunction (the “Injunction”), subject to the approval of the Court, on the terms set forth herein; WHEREAS, Plaintiffs and the City consider the settlement agreement and the Injunction to be a just, fair, adequate, and equitable resolution of all claims arising out of this action, and have jointly moved the Court for entry of the Injunction; WHEREAS, Plaintiffs and the City agree that the settlement agreement and the Injunction, taken together, constitute an appropriate resolution this action; Case 5:20-cv-07251-EJD Document 20 Filed 01/25/21 Page 2 of 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -3- STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] PERMANENT INJUNCTION CASE NO. 5:20-CV-07251-EJD NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby stipulated by and between Plaintiffs and the City, subject to the approval of the Court, that the Court should issue a permanent injunction in this matter in the form set forth herein. SO STIPULATED AND AGREED: FOR PLAINTIFFS: DATED: January 22, 2021 AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA By: /s/ William S. Freeman William S. Freeman Attorneys for Plaintiffs DATED: January 22, 2021 MUNGER, TOLLES & OLSON LLP By: /s/ Achyut J. Phadke Achyut J. Phadke Attorneys for Plaintiffs FOR DEFENDANT CITY OF PALO ALTO: DATED: January 22, 2021 NEWDORF LEGAL By: /s/ David B. Newdorf David B. Newdorf Attorney for Defendant City of Palo Alto Pursuant to L.R. 5-1(i)(3), I, Achyut J. Phadke, attest that all other signatories listed and on whose behalf this filing is submitted have authorized this filing and concur in its content. By: /s/ Achyut J. Phadke Achyut J. Phadke Case 5:20-cv-07251-EJD Document 20 Filed 01/25/21 Page 3 of 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -4- STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] PERMANENT INJUNCTION CASE NO. 5:20-CV-07251-EJD [PROPOSED] PERMANENT INJUNCTION Upon the stipulation of the parties, and good cause appearing, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED: 1. Defendant City of Palo Alto, as well as its officers, employees, attorneys, and agents, are immediately and permanently enjoined from restricting or prohibiting access to Foothills Park on the basis of Palo Alto residency. 2. Defendant City of Palo Alto, as well as its officers, employees, attorneys, and agents, are immediately and permanently enjoined from discriminating between Palo Alto residents and non-residents as to access to Foothills Park. This injunction does not apply to access to or use of facilities within Foothills Park. 3. Any and all laws, ordinances, rules, regulations, or policies of Defendant City of Palo Alto that pertain to access to the land that currently makes up Foothills Park shall provide that Foothills Park shall be open to all persons, without regard to Palo Alto residency. 4. Defendant City of Palo Alto, as well as its officers, employees, attorneys, and agents, are immediately and permanently enjoined from enacting or imposing any law, ordinance, rule, regulation, policy, or practice that prohibits or restricts access by non-residents of Palo Alto into Foothills Park, or otherwise discriminates between Palo Alto residents and non-residents as to access to Foothills Park. 5. Defendant City of Palo Alto, as well as its officers, employees, attorneys, and agents, are immediately and permanently enjoined from placing on any future ballot, or sponsoring or officially supporting, any referendum or initiative that has the purpose or effect of prohibiting or restricting access to Foothills Park by non-residents of Palo Alto. 7. This Court will retain jurisdiction for a period of six (6) months from the date hereof to enforce the terms of this permanent injunction. Case 5:20-cv-07251-EJD Document 20 Filed 01/25/21 Page 4 of 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -5- STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] PERMANENT INJUNCTION CASE NO. 5:20-CV-07251-EJD SO ORDERED this _____ day of _________, 2021. Edward J. Davila United States District Judge 25th January Case 5:20-cv-07251-EJD Document 20 Filed 01/25/21 Page 5 of 5 6 Baumb, Nelly From:Zac Zeitlin <zzeitlin@gmail.com> Sent:Monday, February 22, 2021 8:00 AM To:Council, City Subject:Letter of Support Attachments:City Council ZZ March 2021 meetings.pdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Hi - Please see my letter in support of Palo Alto's full approval of Castilleja's master plan attached. Thank you, Zac Zeitlin     February 22, 2021 PALO ALTO CITY COUNCIL PALO ALTO CITY HALL 250 HAMILTON AVENUE PALO ALTO, CA 94301 Dear City Council Members, I am writing to express my full support for the Castilleja Master Plan. We have a daughter (Julia, a Palo Alto Youth Council member) who has had an outstanding experience at Castilleja. I am also a Trustee, so have gained an extra level of appreciation for the school’s vision, values, leadership and operational strength. My support for the CUP comes down to my own judgment about what’s best for Palo Alto, as a resident thinking about the city over the long run. This exciting project has been so thoughtfully planned. A thriving Castilleja with a beautiful, sustainable campus in the heart of Palo Alto will benefit our community in so many ways. Finally, I am energized by Castilleja’s opportunity to expand its enrollment to 540 students, thus offering its remarkable academic program to significantly more students from across the Bay Area. I know that major hearings are coming up in March; I strongly recommend your action to move Castilleja’s plan forward as soon as possible. THANK YOU, ZAC ZEITLIN 7 Baumb, Nelly From:Amanda Zeitlin <abzeitlin@gmail.com> Sent:Sunday, February 21, 2021 9:33 PM To:Council, City Subject:City Council ABZ March 2021 meetings.pdf Attachments:City Council ABZ March 2021 meetings.pdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on  links.  ________________________________  February 21, 2021 PALO ALTO CITY COUNCIL PALO ALTO CITY HALL 250 HAMILTON AVENUE PALO ALTO, CA 94301 Dear City Council Members, I am writing to express my full support for the Castilleja Master Plan. We have a daughter (Julia, a Palo Alto Youth Council member) who has had an outstanding experience at Castilleja. As a Chef and Culinary Instructor, I’ve had the opportunity to teach elective classes at the school and think so highly of the students and faculty. I support the CUP as I think about the growth and development of Palo Alto. A thriving Castilleja with a beautiful, sustainable campus in the heart of the city will benefit our community for years to come. I am particularly excited about the school’s highly responsible plan to grow the school’s enrollment to 540 students. I recommend your action to move Castilleja’s plan forward as soon as possible following the March hearings. Thank you so much for the work you do for Palo Alto. SINCERELY, AMANDA B. ZEITLIN 8 Baumb, Nelly From:Kanth, Gayathri Sent:Thursday, February 18, 2021 6:52 PM To:Council, City Cc:Shikada, Ed Subject:Library reopening Attachments:Library patron email response 2-18-21.docx Good Evening Mayor and Council Members:    We have recently received an email from a community member enquiring about the reopening of our library  facilities.  As the State and County health tier moves back to red and orange levels, you might be getting  similar questions from community members. City Manager Ed Shikada has asked me to share with you the  response that I will be sending to the community member.    Please let me know if you have any questions.    Respectfully,    Gayathri        Gayathri Kanth  Interim Library Services Director  Library Department   (650) 329‐2668 | gayathri.kanth@cityofpaloalto.org   https://library.cityofpaloalto.org                  Dear Ms. Dhall, Thank you for your message regarding reopening libraries in Palo Alto. Our entire community has obviously been impacted by the pandemic, and we appreciate both the frustration caused as well as the complexity created by changes in routine matters that might not be apparent to the public. Although libraries share many similarities to retail businesses, there are also many differences that impact the safe opening of library facilities. Because we must effectively and safely manage the circulation of materials returned by customers and then back out to customers, our Library’s operations encompass many safety-related activities. For example, due to the pandemic, all returned library materials are quarantined 2-4 days before they are shelved or made available to another patron. During normal times, all returned materials are checked in through an automated system, which results in quick shelving of the materials. Now, staff must manually check in all returned materials. In addition, staff are assigned to work in our closed branches in order to manually process material returned to those locations. These are very labor-intensive processes that are challenging, given the significant reduction in staffing this fiscal year due to budget cuts. As the State and County health tier moves back to red and orange levels, we will be focusing on providing safe reopening of our libraries while continuing to offer sidewalk services to our vulnerable population. The state and local health guidance indicates that we need to follow many safety protocols as the library has many high-touch areas that need extra sanitation throughout the day. We have been and will continue to work with our facilities department to procure and install safety features such as protective barriers and air purifiers. We are also looking at procuring a reservation system to monitor the number of patrons permitted in the facility. Fortunately, we are in extensive communication with other regional libraries and health professionals to implement best practices. We appreciate the community’s patience as we navigate this difficult time to re-open physical spaces in Palo Alto. In addition to our popular Sidewalk service, many other services can be accessed virtually through our Library website including access to digital collections, virtual events, and Shelf Made, our book recommendation service. Visit our webpage for the most up- to-date information and changes to services.   Thank you. Sincerely, Gayathri Kanth I am a Palo Alto resident and I am writing to ask you to please open the libraries. I can understand the need to have shut them in the early months of the pandemic but I really don’t understand why they are still closed. If retail stores (including completely non essential luxury stores) and restaurants (albeit outdoors) are open why should libraries be closed? I can understand the need to restrict capacity. We can restrict capacity like the retail stores but still allow people inside. Or if we don’t want people to sit and linger, at least allow people to go in to pick up their books. Right now to borrow a book we have to log into the library account, keep a hold on a book, then we get a link several days later with an appointment scheduling link and then we can schedule an appointment for several days after that. This is just completely unnecessary. You don’t want people to hang around inside a library - I can somewhat understand that. But at least people should be allowed to go in to get books as per their convenience. They can stand in line if there are too many people at one time. People are shopping for handbags and shoes and jewelry and we are being denied the right to read. I believe the restrictions on library usage are too strict and not justified. Masks and social distancing rules can be followed inside the library like in other indoor retail locations. I urge you to please open our libraries. It’s been a year and we really need some access.