Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout20210215plCC701-32 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: 2/15/ 2021 Document dates: 1/20/2021 – 2/3/2021 Set 1 of 2 Note: Documents for every category may not have been received for packet reproduction in a given week. 1 Baumb, Nelly From:Cathy Sirois <cathy.sirois@gmail.com> Sent:Friday, January 29, 2021 9:56 PM To:Council, City Subject:Public comment for 1/30 City Council meeting CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  To whom it may concern:      I'm writing as a resident of Stanford/Palo Alto regarding the first agenda item for tomorrow's City Council meeting. As  the Council considers and selects its 2021 priorities, I would strongly encourage you to consider diverting funds away  from the Police Department and towards services that can support the well‐being of residents without the threat of  punitive enforcement.     In particular, I am asking that the City Council make both traffic/parking violations and mental health/wellness checks a  civilian rather than a police department responsibility. 2019 data on calls for service to the police department show that  nearly 30% of calls were for traffic/parking violations, and roughly 15% were related to health and community outreach.  These are calls that could be handled by civilian response teams, without the coercive threat sometimes posed by police  officers. Diverting funds away from the police department would make more resources available to less punitive  options, such as civilian traffic enforcement and response teams of mental health professionals.    Many thanks for your consideration.    Catherine Sirois  PhD Candidate, Stanford University  Stanford, CA 94305  2 Baumb, Nelly From:Emily Lacroix <elacroix92@gmail.com> Sent:Friday, January 29, 2021 10:23 PM To:Council, City Subject:City Priorities - Public Comment CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Hello Palo Alto city council,      I wrote a few weeks ago, but I wanted to write again. I recognize that the city council is doing its priority setting  tomorrow, January 30, and I am writing to submit public comment to advocate for two priorities:    1) It is my sincerest wish that Palo Alto civilianize traffic enforcement. Please make traffic enforcement (i.e. tickets,  conducting traffic stops, etc.) a city responsibility, rather than being enforced by the Palo Alto police department. This  would be a model similar to that recently adopted in Berkeley (i.e., BerkDOT). Almost 30% of PA police calls for service in  2019 were related to traffic and parking (see city data for 2019, also PDF attachment in previous correspondence).  Funding can be diverted from the police department to fund this new traffic enforcement agency.      2) I also hope that Palo Alto will make wellness and mental health checks a city responsibility. In this scenario, mental  health professionals employed by the city of Palo Alto would answer wellness checks. In 2019, call types like "Medical Call,” “Welfare Check,” and “Transient Complaint" made up ~14% of calls for police service. These calls do not need to be handled by police. This model would be similar to CAHOOTS (Eugene, OR metro area) and could improve city mental health and connect civilians to needed resources and care. Sending police officers to these calls for service is not appropriate (even in the company of a police officer).     Thank you kindly for your consideration,  Emily Lacroix        3 Baumb, Nelly From:David Coale <david@evcl.com> Sent:Friday, January 29, 2021 9:03 PM To:Council, City Subject:City Priorities for 2021 CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Dear City Council,  I am writing to give input on the city priorities.  For me this would be, in order of importance:  Climate Change   Transportation   Housing  Climate change has been a top priority for the last two years.  That said, except for the Reach Code passed in late 2019,  the City’s emissions have been flat lined for the past 8 years as shown in the graph below with no new plans in  place.  Last year, even though staff has spent a lot of time on climate change, a top priority, there are no new programs  to address this and the time line for any action has slipped until later this year.  4 I think that council needs to take a more proactive approach to solutions to this problem, but so far, council seems to be  OK with just leaving it up to staff and has not really pushed for anything, anything at all, that will really move the needle  on emissions reductions.  Climate change is the pandemic that was happening before covid‐19 came along and it will be here long after we have  dealt with covid‐19.  Unlike covid‐19 there is no vaccine for climate change.  It is a long haul proposition that we can’t  delay any longer.  To quote President Biden;  “We can’t wait any longer.  We see with our own eyes.  We know it in our bones.  It is time to act.”  5    The fires of last year along with continued drought are proof of this.    I implore you to take real action this year.  Use the momentum of the new administration and let’s make a difference  this year!  Transportation is up next for me as this is the largest part of Palo Alto’s GHG emissions.  Covid‐19 has shown that we can  act quickly to solve problems.  Working from home was just one example.  Palo Alto should figure out how to keep this  going, as it is part of the solution to climate change, transportation, congestion, parking and housing all rolled into  one.  We can do this!  The other important item is the updating of the 2012 bike/ped plan.  This is over due and we have  been stalled out on bike/ped plans since the Ross Rd issues.  Fix the problems and move on.  While we are finally getting  some projects approved now, we really need more to make Palo Alto the first class bike friendly community that is  should be.  On housing, I know you will be working on this no matter what, along with economic recovery from the pandemic, but in  looking at where the city spent money, I see we spent more then $40 million to house 636 cars!  Not people, but  cars.  Really, the City can do better than this.  To take another queue from the new administration, they will be looking  at everything they do through the lens of climate change, and I think this would serve the City as well in setting this  year’s priorities.  Sincerely,  David Coale  Barron Park  6 Baumb, Nelly From:Dixie A Blumenshine <Dixie.Blumenshine@humboldt.edu> Sent:Friday, January 29, 2021 6:05 PM To:Council, City Subject:City Council Priority Setting Meeting Comment Attachments:PAPD One Pager.pdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Dear City Councilmembers,     Thank you for taking the time to hear the opinions and asks of myself and other community members. I work in Palo  Alto and live in the immediate area. I am writing to you on behalf of myself and with the support of the Silicon Valley  chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America to urge you to civilianize the traffic and mental wellness check duties of  the Palo Alto Police Department. In more detail, this would mean rearranging funds going to PAPD for these tasks  towards appropriate city departments or offices overseeing city employees who would be responsible instead. For  civilianization of traffic duties, you can look to BerkDOT in Berkeley, CA, where traffic patrol is being redirected to a new  office of city employees who issue traffic tickets, fix‐it tickets, and more. This would bring down instances of citizens  having to interact with police officers, who you have heard over the past 8 months and very recently in the Human  Rights Commission meeting on 1/19 can act with unnecessary force towards people of color, profile them, or intimidate  them. Civilianization of mental wellness checks would replace police officers visiting citizens potentially in non‐violent  crisis with a trained mental health professional in the employment of the city, eliminating potential scenarios where  citizens are murdered unnecessarily at the hands of police, which occurs all too frequently in this country despite efforts  to prevent it.    I encourage you to read through the attached document at your convenience, which provides further examples of  civilianization and a breakdown of PAPD duties and how they might be changed. I look forward to speaking with you  more in the future on these ideas.    Thank you and best wishes,    Dixie   Civilianization of the PAPD Thi​s document is intended to provide a basic analysis of police department activity in Palo Alto. It uses publicly available information to identify the most common situations that PAPD officers are involved in, group those situation types into thematic categories, and identify categories that can be alternatively served by civilian service providers. Calls for Service In 2019, PAPD handled 51,417 calls for service . An analysis of all the call types reveals three categories of calls that can be 1 handled by civilians more effectively and at a lower cost. In 2019, these three categories comprised 47.6% of all calls to the PAPD​2​. ●Traffic/Parking (14,497 calls) ○This includes call types related to vehicle accidents, traffic violations, and parking violations ○Solution: Respond with civilian traffic enforcement agents separate from the police department, only permitted to write traffic citations and take reports. ●Health/Community Outreach (7,139 calls) ○This includes call types like “Medical Call,” “Welfare Check,” and “Transient Complaint.” ○Solution: Respond to behavioral health issues with community-based behavioral health professionals. Divert these calls to a civilian emergency response service. ●Nuisance Complaints (2,816 calls) ○This category is primarily comprised of noise complaints ○Solution: Respond with civilians trained in de-escalation and mediation, permitted to issue citations as a last resort. Of the remaining 26,965 calls, there are at least two additional categories that deserve scrutiny: ●Patrol Calls (7,160) ○These calls are not responding to a report of a crime, but are used to establish a presence in an area. These calls are disproportionately dispatched to communities of color and foster the over-policing of Black and Brown communities​3​. ●Suspicious Person/Vehicle (2,011 calls) ○These calls disproportionately target people of color and are often justified by little more than racial profiling Conclusion The categories above are just a subset of the possible opportunities for the civilianization of police tasks typically handled by sworn officers. By diverting these nearly 25,000 calls away from sworn officers and the police department, we can reduce PAPD personnel costs and improve outcomes for all involved. 1 Police Department Calls for Service: ​https://data.cityofpaloalto.org/dataviews/256726/calls-for-service-palo-alto-police-department-2019/ 2​ Call categorization: ​https://drive.google.com/file/d/1r_NDZGzbs37W4LVsTgufJTXXBtgW9ZIa/view?usp=sharing 3​ Robin Smyton, “How Racial Segregation and Policing Intersect in America,” ​Tufts Now​, June 17, 2017, https://now.tufts.edu/articles/how-racial-segregation-and-policing-intersect-america Appendix A: Community Policing Alternatives BerkDOT Berkeley, CA In July of 2020, the City of Berkeley City Council voted to create the ​Berkeley Department of Transportation​ (BerkDOT). This department will take over traffic enforcement from the city police department. Traffic laws will be enforced by unarmed DOT employees instead of armed police officers. The creation of this department and other reforms will involve a “substantial community engagement process to develop a new model for policing in Berkeley.” ​Additional info CAHOOTS Eugene, OR The ​Crisis Assistance Helping Out On The Streets​ (CAHOOTS) program is a mobile crisis intervention program staffed by a local non-profit using City of Eugene vehicles. CAHOOTS personnel often provide initial contact and transport for 911 calls relating to substance use and mental health. This program has been in place for approximately 30 years. ​Additional info SCRT San Francisco, CA The ​San Francisco Street Crisis Response Team​ (SCRT) is a newly created system whereby teams of medical and behavioral health professionals will begin responding to 911 and 311 calls for behavioral health crises. The team is a partnership of the department of public health, department of emergency management, fire department, and police department. ​Additional info SMART San Mateo County, CA The ​San Mateo Assessment and Referral Team​ (SMART) is a system of paramedics sent by county dispatchers when requested by police in nonviolent situations. This program was created in 2005. ​Additional info STAR Denver, CO The ​Support Team Assistance Response​ (STAR) program is a mobile crisis intervention in which a van carrying a mental health clinician and a paramedic is dispatched to provide free medical care and mental health support for a broad range of non-criminal emergencies. The STAR service is dispatched through Denver’s 911 communications center, and it is intended to divert these types of calls away from police officers and toward mental health and medical professionals. ​Additional info 3 Baumb, Nelly From:Jeffrey Lu <jeffreylu6@gmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, January 26, 2021 5:44 PM To:Council, City Subject:feedback on city council priorities for 2021 CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Hi,    I'm writing to submit public comment on the city council's priorities for 2021, which will be selected during this  Saturday's retreat meeting.     I hope the city council will continue working hard on last year's priorities: Housing, Sustainability, and Mobility for all.    All three priorities are closely intertwined, and making headways in one area complements the other areas too. In  particular, I urge greater focus on mobility for all, with an eye toward non‐car transport. Transportation is Palo Alto's  (and California's!) leading source of both climate‐harming carbon emissions, as well as air‐polluting NOx and particulate  matter. Transport emissions have been trending upward statewide since 2012, even as many of us have switched to zero  emission vehicles. Additionally, speeding car traffic is more prevalent than ever; in 2020 our roads were noisier, less  safe, and less pleasant. There is much work to be done to improve mobility for all.    While Palo Alto has a commendable existing biking network, many gaps remain. I still can't get to Happy Donuts on El  Camino on a bike without riding on the sidewalk or mixing with high speed vehicular traffic. Access to shops on  Middlefield in Midtown remains difficult on a bike, and vehicles rarely abide by the 25MPH speed limit in that area. Palo  Alto's encouraging bike boulevard plan appears to be on hold, and many of us are still waiting for previously cleared  road safety improvements to materialize. Further, demand for recreational pedestrian and bike trails is at  unprecedented levels, as evidenced by overflowing lots at the Baylands, Pearson‐Arastradero, and Foothills park.    Palo Alto is where I learned to bike and love biking. I hope you will continue making strides to ensure that our streets are  safe for all road users.    Thanks,    ‐‐   Jeffrey Lu  Midtown    1 Baumb, Nelly From:Alice Smith <alice.smith@gmail.com> Sent:Wednesday, January 27, 2021 7:00 AM To:Council, City Subject:Fwd: Foothills Park's Evolution CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  I received this this morning.   I think these comments are worthy of consideration.      Alice Smith  850 Webster Street  Palo Alto, CA 94301  650 283 2822  ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐     Hi, nature lovers:  I recommend you take the time to read every one of the readers' comments below this story!...  https://www.paloaltoonline.com/square/index.php?utm_source=express‐2021‐01‐ 26&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=express&i=3&d=&t=50076  La Doris Cordell will surely regret having served Palo Alto with this lawsuit, without a section that proposed a fix that actually solved  the problem(s) she saw!  Now her reputation is tarnished by having done only harm, and no good, for the wild land & its living  creatures...while providing no help for the populations she had hoped to represent!  Cannot Palo Alto rename its preserve a Preserve?  Sheeesh!  ‐‐   xxx one of many former residents 2 Baumb, Nelly From:Bette Kiernan <betteuk@aol.com> Sent:Tuesday, January 26, 2021 5:58 PM To:Council, City Subject:APPLAUSE!! CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Dear Mr. Shikedo: The plan to reduce the park visitors to 400 is ideal. That assures continuation of Foothiils as a wildlife refuge, preserves the environment and shares with all the beauty of quiet and solitude in nature. There are many other parks but Foothills is unique. I am ecstatic you found the way to sustain it . Brilliant! Bette Kiernan 5 Baumb, Nelly From:Jane Moss <jgm0ss@gmail.com> Sent:Monday, January 25, 2021 1:00 PM To:ParkRec Commission; Council, City Subject:Suggestions for Foothills Nature Preserve Reservation System CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  To the Honorable City Council members and Parks and Recreation Commissioners,  I submitted comments to the Palo Alto City Council meeting last Tuesday evening on the topic of Foothills Park. I spoke  out about the various standards I thought would improve the situation. I listened to the entire discussion, and one thing  disturbed me. I thought I heard  reluctance to embrace an online reservation system. In my opinion that is the only  method that can solve many problems seamlessly. It provides access to a restricted resource in a way many of us have  come to expect where the demand exceeds the supply. To the argument that some people don't have access to or  choose not to use the internet for this kind of purchase, there is an easy answer. The park doesn't need to offer a  capacity‐filling number of reservations each day. If several spaces are "removed", these set‐asides can be offered as  same‐day entries, first come first serve, until gone. This is very similar to how wilderness permits are distributed for  popular trail systems. Having an online calendar and reservation system allows management to (partially) black out  dates that are not 100% available to the public for a variety of needs: summer camp days, tour days, education and  school group field trip dates, free access days, etc. My personal preference is always to have an advance reservation. It is  a known thing. Then you are not gambling with your family's time and committing to something that might not happen.  Of course there will be reservations that go unredeemed. That is perfectly fine. The on‐site manager can decide to let  the park "rest" and the current occupants enjoy a less crowded day, or it can be opened up with ad hoc, additional  same‐day permits. Thank you for your consideration.  Sincerely,  Jane Moss, Palo Alto resident  6 Baumb, Nelly From:M. Gallagher <writing2win@gmail.com> Sent:Saturday, January 23, 2021 12:10 AM To:Mary Gallagher; Council, City Subject:Foothill Park Admission Fee CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Dear City Council Members: May someone explain publicly why a reservation system with maximum hourly visitor limits was not considered a better solution than charging visitors a fee to limit visitors at Foothills Park? I wholly disapprove of this fee. The fee sends a divisive message: those with bucks can visit the park. Those who don't have bucks won't. I think the park, the people, and the planet would be best served if folks wishing to visit the park also considered themselves to be stewards of the park. As stewards individuals, families, and groups could be assigned an area or a suitable task to maintain the park in exchange for the privilege of visiting the park. Thank you for listening to my view of the access fee. Respectfully, Mary Gallagher Mary Gallagher, B.Sc.   Content Strategist  650-683-7102  Copyright 2020 Security Alert Notice 7 The information contained in this e-mail is confidential information, presumed to be virus free, and intended only for use by the individual or entity named above. Virus protection is the responsibility of the recipient. If the reader of this email is not the intended recipient, dissemination or distribution is prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please delete the material from your computer. Thank you.  8 Baumb, Nelly From:rogersac@aol.com Sent:Friday, January 22, 2021 1:19 PM To:Council, City Subject:Comments on latest developments on the subject of Foothills Park. CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  I am writing to you further with comments on how things are developing. 1. All the yellow caution tape is dangerous for all the animals in the park. The deer could easily get caught up and have the tape wrapped around their legs. They will want to continue access to their deer trails and the red tape will either cause them to jump over it or run through it. Likewise other larger animals. Even the turkeys may not be able to go under it and once the tape is broken it could get wound up around animal causing it to be trapped. If it starts breaking down it will probably be digested by them or enter the creeks. This yellow tape is a hazard to the environment for the habitat and should be moved. For similar reasons, no permanent structure should replace the tape. The deer trails, rabbit holes, are where the animals live. Putting up any type of barricade to keep out humans is not going to keep them safe. 2. Since it seems likely that you will endorse an entrance fee, thought must be put into how that fee is collected. At present we are in the middle of a pandemic and nobody is handling cash. Even without the pandemic the least number of bank notes of one denomination without change is ideal. $6 means at least two bank notes and possibly means change. The amount of handling of cash is not a good idea and the $6 fee is very inconvenient in a society which so rarely uses cash anymore. I myself would probably have to stop at an atm to pay and then I would need change. None of this is ideal. A much better system must be worked out that does not involve cash at the gate. Online payment system with an online pass makes most sense to me. Likewise, there should be annual pass particularly for Palo Alto residents with a mirror hanger, not a sticker. Cars should not be putting lots of stickers on windows as that is against DMV rules. Online reservations and an app that shows whether there is space before we leave home is also necessary. 3. When it comes to bikes and pedestrians, it will cause more problems unless they are counted. Los Altos Hills residents can walk in quite easily and cars can park on their roads and walk (or bike) in. Having LAH residents allowed to enter when PA residents cannot is not going to be anything equitable. Those residents should not have a privilege that they are not paying towards. Pedestrian and bikes should be counted and have to pay like any vehicle. I am sorry we are in the mess we are. The pilot was a good solution. This is not. The cat is among the pidgeons and have the chickens have come home to roost. You must sort this situation out equitably for Palo Alto residents as well as anyone else. We are the ones who have been treated abysmally through all this and you must rectify the situation that this has caused. Thank you for your time. Carol Rogers, Stockton Place. 9 Baumb, Nelly From:Richard Placone <rcplacone@sbcglobal.net> Sent:Thursday, January 21, 2021 1:33 PM To:Council, City Subject:Foothill Park Fee CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Council Members: Thanks to your newly imposed Foothill Park entrance fee of $10, my wife and I will never again visit this park. There were other more reasonable ways to limit park attendance. The City certainly doesn't need the extra income, given the way it already spends our tax dollars on often exorbitant administrative and police salaries, and the continued over staffing of employees compared to most other cites in our area. You took the easy way out, thinking that all residents in Palo Alto have unlimited funds and so this high fee will be readily accepted. Richard C. Placone Chimalus Drive Palo Alto/Barron Park 10 Baumb, Nelly From:Rojas, Gonzo (NBCUniversal) <gonzo.rojas@nbcuni.com> Sent:Wednesday, January 20, 2021 4:27 PM To:Council, City Cc:Meghan Taylor (meghan.taylor@cityofpaloalto.org) Subject:NBC Bay Area Request CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Good Afternoon,  I’m looking for clarification that Palo Alto’s City Council has voted to start charging a vehicle fee and cap attendance at  Foothills Park.  Is there a press release on the decision?      Gonzalo Rojas  Assignment Manager  D: 408‐432‐4780  C: 619‐277‐3364  gonzo.rojas@nbcuni.com          11 Baumb, Nelly From:L Lapier <lslapier@gmail.com> Sent:Wednesday, January 20, 2021 4:00 PM To:Council, City Subject:Foothills restrictions CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  City Council,     I know you will be hearing from the usual vocal minority demanding restrictions on access to Foothills Park.  I would like  to point out that ALL parks in the Bay Area were busy last weekend ‐ the weather was great, it was a 3 day weekend, and  many folks were eager to get outside and away from their work and computers.  I was at the Baylands and it was very  busy, with lots of hikers and bikers.  On the local news, there were stories about how  busy parks were in Marin County  and San Francisco, for the same reasons.      Restricting access to Foothills Park because it's "too popular" is very short sighted and does not recognize that ALL parks  are busy on weekends.  I encourage you to do some due diligence and visit other parks on weekends to get some  context, before giving in to demands on restrictions on Foothill Park.  Otherwise, do we restrict access to the  Baylands?  Rinconada Park? Mitchell Park? And so on, if we follow the logic of "restrict access to Foothills!"    Please also realize that there is a population of over 60,000 people in Palo Alto, and seek out other voices  Do some due  diligence and think about the broader community.    Thank you,  L Lapier    12 Baumb, Nelly From:Mashhood Rassam <mrassam@gmail.com> Sent:Wednesday, January 20, 2021 2:58 PM To:Council, City Subject:Thank you! CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Dear City Council,      Thank you for responding to residents and moving quickly to curb capacity at Foothills Park.  The Park has not been safe  for my family the last few weeks, with many cars circling at high speeds to find parking while I struggle to make sure my  young children are kept out of harm's way. I hope your quick action makes the Park safe for all.     Thank you!  Mashhood Rassam   4 Baumb, Nelly From:Mary Ann Peters <maryann@maryannpeters.com> Sent:Monday, January 25, 2021 9:49 PM To:Council, City Subject:Foothill Park Concerns Attachments:Foothill Park Jan 24, 2021 #2.doc; Foothill Park 1102021.doc CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  To: Members of City Council From: Mary Ann Peters Date: Jan 24, 2021 MARY ANN PETERS, PH.D. (650) 321-8788 2834 KIPLING STREET PALO ALTO, CALIFORNIA 94306 maryann@maryannpeters.com January 24, 2021 Subject: Foothill Park TO: Palo Alto City Council cc: A. Anderson, C. Bourquin By way of introduction, I am a very, long time resident of Palo Alto who, with friends, have hiked, walked, accompanied children on nature talks, and have enjoyed taking photos of nature’s wonderful creatures over some 45 years I am shocked and dismayed by what I have seen and experienced since the City of Palo Alto opened Foothill Park; apparently without thought, planning, and a strategy; a terrible decision. This Sanctuary, located in a geography populated by millions should be cherished and protected not destroyed by careless decision. My thoughts: 1.0 Parks in Palo Alto – I believe there are 36 open to all Why rush to open Foothill Park without a strategy? 2.0 Politics or Environment Stewardship (Conservation)- Foothill Park, a jewel, has been an oasis for animals to live in peace and native flora to grow and flourish. Why rush to open Foothill Park to masses of humanity without a strategy and put the animal at risk? Was the rush based on some political correctness versus environmental stewardship? 3.0 Animal population – animals do not have the resources to defend themselves and hire lawyers. We few caring humans need to speak for them (for they cannot speak for themselves) as others endeavor to destroy their habitats. 4.0 Bikes and Mountain Bikes- why allow bikes and, certainly not mountain bikes, on the trails. We know mountain bikes erode fragile habitats. As a friend reported, ‘I was yelled at as I walked on a trail for, I was interfering with a biker’s progress.’ 5.0 Budget -where is money to hire two or more rangers to manage the onslaught? Where is the money to build more restrooms? Page 2 Jan 24, 2021 Foothill Park Where is money to create signage like NO MOUNTAIN BIKES allowed on hiking trails? How will you deal with conflict between slower walkers and determined bikers on the hiking trails? Where is the money to enforce the rules and regulations? 6.0 Fees – Yosemite and other parks charge more than $6. Disneyland charges more than $6. What decision matrix was used to arrive at $6; an inadequate amount? 7.0 Funding - discriminatory; yes discriminatory! – As a Palo Alto resident my taxes help to fund Foothill Park. Currently you are asking us to a) fund the park through our property taxes b) pay an entrance fee AND c) run into the possibility of being turned away at the entrance due to excessive visitor ship. Double taxation without representation. . This is DISCRIMINATORY 8.0 Deportment – who will enforce proper manners in the Park? Who will admonish children for throwing sticks and rocks at the deer? Who will admonish visitors for throwing objects at the ducks on the lake? 9.0 Fishing – who will require and enforce fishing licenses? Who will limit the numbers at the lake so the animal population can access to their ‘watering hole?’ In conclusion, I and my 9 +/- walking friends ages 70-94 feel we can no longer visit Foothill Park for we are afraid for our safety and health due to lack of masks, presence of garbage, rude bicyclists, too many cars driving too fast, too many people, and the disrespect for the Park and its inhabitants Foothill Park is not Mitchell or Hoover Park; rather it is environmental preserve. Each of us is sadden by the degradation of this Special Place; why destroy the essence of this Sanctuary? Sincerely MA Peters 1 Attachment; letter sent to the City Manager describing our experience MARY ANN PETERS, PH.D. (650)650 799-3353 2834 KIPLING STREET PALO ALTO, CALIFORNIA 94306 January 10, 2021 TO: City Manager Ed Shikada cc: Sara Cody, MD SUBJECT: Foothill Park 1.0 Introduction Foothill Park and nature preserve was given to our City in the 1969; a jewel for we residents to enjoy. We have been hiking, walking, attending nature presentations, and observing the animal population accompanying generations of children for over 45 years. 2.0 My Experience since opening our Park I am afraid for my health and safety to return to the Park; why? 2.1 too many cars driving too fast 2.2 as many as 31 unmasked people gathering at picnic area (note they were not eating) 2.3 observed men spitting more than once 2.4 noticed a blue latex glove near mountains of garbage 2.5 observed condoms in tree area near picnic tables 2.6 TOO many fishing; assault on the water shed and preventing our animal population access to water 3.0 Questions – please answer 3.1 who made the decision to open without a strategy? 3.2 who pays for the wonderful rangers and upkeep? 3.3 are we residents of Palo Alto responsible for the additional garbage and maintenance due to the assault on the Park? 3.4 who is responsible for protecting the fragile and unique ecosystem with this onslaught of humanity? 3.5 why aren’t people responsible for holding a fishing license? 3.6 why isn’t the City limiting the number who enter as well as fish? We are treating the animal population in a cruel uncaring manner by opening the Park without a strategy and protective processes 1 Baumb, Nelly From:Richard P Gooch <richandtoni@sbcglobal.net> Sent:Saturday, January 30, 2021 12:54 PM To:Council, City Subject:Foothill Park Access Fees CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  As long‐time Palo Alto residents and frequent visitors to Foothill Park, we ask that you please add an annual pass option  to your fee structure.   We bought an annual FHP pass for every year that it was offered back in the early 80’s and would  continue to do so, when it is offered in the future.      Some advantages of annual pass include:  1. Less work for rangers at the gate and associated reduction in staff costs  2. Reduced waiting times and traffic at the entrance gate  3. Provides a good source of predictable annual revenue for park maintenance and improvements  4. Makes it easier to implement a tiered fee structure such as reduced rates for residence, seniors, etc.  5. Happier city residents      Rich and Toni Gooch  Barron Park    2 Baumb, Nelly From:Mashhood Rassam <mrassam@gmail.com> Sent:Monday, February 1, 2021 9:56 AM To:Council, City Subject:Foothills Park CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Dear City Council,     I am writing to urge you to implement the new capacity restrictions you have already passed at Foothills Park as soon as  possible. I took my family to the Park on Sunday, January 31, and what I saw was troubling.     First, the amount of litter has increased significantly since last November.     Second, there are many, many cars in the park, some of which are traveling at high speeds. Not only is this bad for the  eco‐system, but the combination of cars speeding and many more pedestrians creates an obvious safety hazard.     Third, visitors now bring dogs into the park. I saw two dogs in the park on Sunday, and they were not designated service  dogs.     Fourth, visitors are still going off trail, causing erosion and trampling sensitive habitats.    Please move forward as quickly as possible with implementing capacity restrictions so that we can start to see some  improvement regarding the issues listed above.     Thank you!  Mashhood Rassam  1 Baumb, Nelly From:Robert Beacom <robertbeacom@me.com> Sent:Wednesday, January 27, 2021 11:29 AM To:Council, City Subject:Support for a new Public Safety Building CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on  links.  ________________________________    Dear Council ‐    My name is Bob Beacom and I retired from the Palo Alto Police Department in 2016 as the Assistant Police Chief after 27  years of service.  I felt compelled to share with you a few thoughts in regard to approving a new Public Safety Building.    When I started in 1990, I was told that the Police Department would be moving in to a new building very soon and not  get too comfortable where we were…obviously that never happened.  The current building is woefully outdated, unsafe  for police functions and would be utterly unable to handle any natural disasters that may occur in the Bay Area.  When it  rains, several areas on the “A” level flood causing significant disruptions to briefings and communications.  The current  building is just no longer a viable option.    I would say one last thing about the hiring and retention of good officers.  Every department in the Bay Area is  competing for the same small pool of qualified candidates.  The best candidates want competitive wages, a great  community and a good environment in which to work.  I have spoken to enough candidates to confidently say that a  new Public Safety Building matters to young officers when they are making their choice of where to work.    If you have any questions at all, please feel free to reach out.  Thank you for your time.    Bob Beacom  1 Baumb, Nelly From:Dixie A Blumenshine <Dixie.Blumenshine@humboldt.edu> Sent:Wednesday, January 27, 2021 3:39 PM To:Council, City Subject:Request for further public discussion on policing in Palo Alto CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Dear Palo Alto City Councilmembers,     My name is Dixie Blumenshine, and I work in Palo Alto. As you have heard many times recently, the current model of  policing is no longer (and never was) our best option for public safety given the dangers it brings to marginalized  members of our communities, especially Black people and other people of color. Myself and a group of other citizens are  interested in sharing ideas on potential changes and solutions with you. We are requesting a special meeting or agenda  item so that citizens may share their requests and ideas with you, so that some actual change can be made after  repeated but fruitless discussion. I think that it is important to redirect many responsibilities traditionally held by police  officers to civilian service providers. In redirecting these tasks, we can address the abuse of power that has been  historically used against communities of color. In doing so, it is also possible to potentially reduce costs associated with  the Palo Alto Police Department.    I hope to hear back from you, or to soon continue the discussion on changes to policing and civilianization of some  police duties in an upcoming city council meeting.    Thank you and best wishes  Dixie Blumenshine  2 Baumb, Nelly From:iris korol <iriskorol@gmail.com> Sent:Thursday, January 28, 2021 4:44 PM To:Council, City Subject:New Public Safety Building CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Hi All,   I hope that you'll support the construction of a new Public Safety Building.  It will provide the Community with opportunities for more modern services and use of updated technology.  This is not about Bricks and  Mortar but about Service and Safety.  I'm not in favor of Capital Expenditures in these difficult times but this is different.  This is about Protecting our Palo Alto Citizens....a number one Priority.  Thank you for your consideration.  Iris Korol  5 Baumb, Nelly From:M H <mh11281@gmail.com> Sent:Thursday, January 28, 2021 5:10 PM To:Council, City Subject:Vote in PS Building CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on  links.  ________________________________    Greetings,    I hope all is well City Council. Given the pandemic and the current state of economics in Palo Alto City revenue, I’m  hopeful you will vote to defer construction on the public safety building until a later time in order to focus on more  pressing issues.    As a law enforcement officer, I understand the importance of an up to date public safety building, but not at the  expense of more important matters impacting the community and fellow PA citizens and businesses.    I’m confident you will cast your vote accordingly and revisit the public safety construction building at a later time.    Best,    Mark (PA Resident)    Sent from my iPhone  6 Baumb, Nelly From:ckdurkin1037@comcast.net Sent:Sunday, January 31, 2021 4:42 PM To:Council, City Subject:New Public Safety Building CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  7   8 Baumb, Nelly From:Evan Reade <evanreade@aol.com> Sent:Sunday, January 31, 2021 9:50 PM To:Council, City Cc:Shikada, Ed; Jonsen, Robert Subject:Public Safety Building: Now is the time to finally approve it! CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  To the members of the Palo Alto City Council: Dear Council Members: I am writing to strongly urge that, at your February 1, 2021 meeting, you vote in favor of funding and moving forward with the Public Safety Building project. NOW is the time to finally approve this project which has been discussed and debated not for weeks or months or years, but for DECADES! The staff report on this agenda item and the City of Palo Alto At-Places Memorandum dated January 29, 2021 both provide compelling reasons why this project should be approved NOW. Namely, that this project - which is badly needed - has been put off for far too long, and that waiting longer will only make it more expensive in the long run to complete. And finally, the fine women and men who serve as our first responders need and deserve Council's support. City Council has neglected to take action on this for far too long: The City of Palo Alto At- Places Memorandum dated January 29, 2021, clearly documents that this project has been in the works and on the Council's agenda since at least the mid-1990s. The first study referenced in the Memorandum is dated in 1999, and points out that in 1997 the City completed a preliminary needs analysis to determine if a new public safety building should be pursued. That report, in 1997, concluded that, "the current building does not meet the [Police] Department's programmatic needs, is operationally and technologically deficient, and does not conform to many codes and standards." 1997! That's almost 25 years ago, a quarter century! This has got to be Exhibit A for the case against the "Palo Alto Process!". (Never mind that Appendix A to the Memorandum lists almost 90 staff or other reports on this subject, which has been studied to death!) I believe that a real argument can be made that the Council has been negligent in providing for the public safety of this community, never mind a safe and legally compliant workplace for the women and men who risk their lives daily to protect us. And now the Council is considering postponing this yet again!?! To do so would be unconscionable. Proceeding now also makes financial sense: The 25-year delay noted above has already resulted in a cost increase of over $60 million, basically doubling the cost. At the time of the 1997 report, four options were being considered which ranged in estimated cost from approximately $51 million to $66 million. The project now is estimated to cost in the neighborhood of $120 million. The At-Places Memorandum also clearly indicates that a further delay will result in additional cost increases. Paragraph 10.a, "Costs of Financing," states that if interest rates return to their historic averages from the lows they are today that the cost of borrowing the funds needed for this project will increase by over $57 million! And paragraph 10.b, "Cost of Project," notes that a delay of an additional two to four years will increase the cost of construction by $3.7 million to $7.5 9 million! Council Member Tanaka: I voted for you because I respect your fiscally conservative approach to City spending; with these conclusions I really cannot understand how you can be against moving forward with this project now. Everyone agrees the current police facility is out of date and must be replaced. It must eventually be built! Delay now will cost the City millions of dollars later. Our public safety employees need and deserve the Council's support: I am a lifelong resident of Palo Alto and am proud to say that I have been affiliated with the Palo Alto Police Department in some way, shape or form since 1972, when I joined the Department's Explorer Post 61 as a 14-year-old eager to learn more about careers in public service and law enforcement. I have since had the honor and privilege of serving my community as both a Police Officer and, once I embarked upon a career as an attorney, as a Reserve Police Officer for a number of years until I left the area to serve my country abroad in the Foreign Service. I have since returned and am now pleased to still be affiliated with the Department as a member of the Chief's Advisory Group. From my nearly 50 years of experience dealing with the men and women of this fine department, I can testify that the people of Palo Alto are fortunate to have one of the best, most progressively-minded, and professional police forces in this region, if not in the state and country. And this remains true despite continual funding cuts that have downsized the Department even as the population of this community has grown significantly. Our police officers and dispatchers and other civilian employees who serve with them deserve the support to the City Council. They need a safe, efficient, legally compliant workplace. And for the Department to continue to compete for the top talent it hopes to recruit in order to maintain its high standards, its members - both today's and tomorrow's - must know that this community supports them. I respectfully urge you to vote in favor of building a new Public Safety Building that the City can be proud of and that will serve this community for the rest of the 21st Century. Sincerely, Evan G. Reade 890 Sharon Court 10 Baumb, Nelly From:Veronica Tincher <verntin@gmail.com> Sent:Monday, February 1, 2021 8:35 AM To:Council, City Cc:Shikada, Ed Subject:Public Safety Building - Agenda Items # 4 & 5 CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Dear Council Members:  I strongly urge your approval of the proposed Public Safety Building and its financing. As a long-time citizen of Palo Alto, I served on the 2006 Blue Ribbon Task Force that reported the need and details for a new public safety building in Palo Alto. This group of citizens spent many hours delving into the many, major shortcomings of the present facility, studying alternatives and proposing an efficient and right-size new facility for Palo Alto. I will list a few of the many major problems, identified by the Task Force:  ꞏ Response to Disasters:   ꞏ Major earthquake—the big one is sure to come! The current facility is not up to seismic code would greatly impair to the necessary coordination by dispatch staff, as well as risk the safety of staff working in the building,  ꞏ Other natural disasters, particularly arising out of climate change – flooding, major fire, all require quick and efficient response by dispatch staff, housed in an unsafe building. Here, I add other types of major disruptions brought on by out-of-control riots.  ꞏ Transporting and Holding of Detainees:   ꞏ The lack of a “Sally Port” to bring prisoners into building, poses a serious security risk,   ꞏ Inadequate short-term holding cells that are also a security risk and in addition to shortcomings connected to separation of juveniles and adults.  ꞏ Storage of Evidence for Judicial Procedures:  ꞏ Lack of space for adequate storage and organization of evidence that has been brought by police, results in misplacing valuable material or actually, losing it.   Finally, I hope you will recognize that this long-identified need for Palo Alto should not be postponed again. Now is the time to move forward.  Sincerely,    Veronica Tincher  899 E. Charleston Road G404  Palo Alto, CA 943030  11 Baumb, Nelly From:Nick Marinaro <njmarinaro@gmail.com> Sent:Monday, February 1, 2021 11:00 AM To:Council, City Subject:New Public Safety Building on Tonight's Agenda CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Honorable Members of the Council:     I request your support for a new Public Safety Building at this evening's Council meeting. The needs for such a building  were first identified nearly 40 years ago (1985). Multiple conducted studies in the interim, including the Council‐directed  Blue Ribbon Task Force of 2006, Blue Ribbon Commission of 2011, and the 2014 City Infrastructure Plan verified and  validated such a need. The current facility does not allow for necessary expansion and is inadequate to meet the current  needs, particularly of the Police Department, on a multitude of levels. This includes space for personnel, equipment,  evidence processing, members of the public,and individuals being processed through the system. It does not meet State  guidelines for an essential services building for seismic safety and continuity or Federal guidelines for adult holding cells.    A new Public Safety Building will not only resolve the myriad of issues but would provide for a needed consolidation of  multiple City services; including Palo Alto and Stanford police and fire services, City emergency preparedness services,  Public Works, Utilities, and Animal Control. It would accommodate current staff and needs, meet State guidelines, and  provide a community meeting space for the public and other organizations. It would allow for expansion to meet any   foreseeable future needs in the years to come.    For these many reasons, I urge you to support the approval for a new Public Safety Building.    Respectfully yours,  Nicholas J. Marinaro  Palo Alto Fire Chief (Retired 2010)  12 Baumb, Nelly From:Kevin Ma <kevinma.sd@gmail.com> Sent:Monday, February 1, 2021 11:12 AM To:Council, City Subject:Oppose Agenda Item 4, 5 (Public Safety Building Project) CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Dear City Council,    I am writing to oppose the contract to construct the PSB at this time. In the face of continuing fiscal uncertainty, the city  must be careful to use its limited funds to make sure the city makes out of this unique situation in good shape.    Instead, the council should examine what priorities community members really desire, what can make Palo Alto better.  There are projects in our 2012 Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan that have not been touched. There remains a  continued need for city financing of affordable housing projects. The upcoming updates to the Sustainability and Climate  Action Plan and implementation will require dedicated resources and funding. Grade separation will need to be done  soon, as Caltrain finishes its electrification. And there's the revived push for expanding the city's fiber service to  residences. And you've heard these and many others in public comment.    All in all, there are many projects of which funding is sorely needed, and how money is spent is the ultimate statement  of values for any organization. We need to be sure these are decisions we can live with if things go off track afterward.  (Think of the current, somewhat empty parking garage on California Avenue, where Rinconada Library was used as  collateral).    Sincerely,  Kevin Ma  Ventura resident  13 Baumb, Nelly From:Annette Glanckopf <annette_g@att.net> Sent:Monday, February 1, 2021 1:11 PM To:Council, City; City Mgr; Clerk, City Subject:Public Safety Building CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Dear CM, VOTE YES to approve staff recommendations. Let's get this done now. My comments below. Thanks for considering these comments. Annette ----------------------- Dear Council Members, WE NEED A NEW PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING NOW. Please vote tonight to approve the staff report and recommendations. Timing will never be better. Don’t delay. Rising interest rates, labor, and material costs, will cause a considerable increase in needed funding. The staff was able to lower the annual Public Safety Building (PSB) bond repayment by $1.7 million per year for the 30 year duration. The city manager acted on the council’s guidance and delayed starting repayment for an additional year till fiscal year 2023. There is no cost for the PSB before fiscal year 2023. We all have seen the devastation of fires, floods and earthquakes. We all know the clock is ticking on the big one. But for many, these disasters seem far away. I have seen, close at hand, the inability of a community to response with the loss of or diminishment of Public Safety. If a major earthquake occurs, besides the loss of the Police Station & the EOC (Emergency Operations Center), we would lose the 911 communication center, many police cars (housed in garage), plus many other valuable assets. The existing facility is unsafe and inadequate. The need for an improved Public Safety Building was recognized in 1985. That was 35 YEARS AGO! I realize that there is a lot of competition for other needs as city services, but the City will never get a better deal than the staff recommendations. Additionally, Public Works has a good team to make this happen on time and within budget. Currently due to lack of space, the city rents out facilities to hold things as evidence. It is time to protect our city and 14 build a proper modern facility for Public Safety, as our surrounding cities have done. We can do it. We built the new parking garage and the fire station recently. Per the staff report, the PSB and the parking garage were considered as a single project. Let’s finish the project! VOTE YES to approve the staff recommendations on the Proposed PSB for the continued delivery of public safety services. Build now, before any disaster. We are years behind the ball on this one. Thank you for doing this to keep our community safe. Annette Glanckopf 15 Baumb, Nelly From:Gail Price <gail.price3@gmail.com> Sent:Monday, February 1, 2021 2:25 PM To:Council, City Subject:Public Safety Building. Item No 1. 2/1/21 CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Public Safety Building, Action Item No. 1 February 1, 2021 Dear Mayor DuBois and Palo Alto City Council Members, I strongly support the Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing the Delivery and Sale of Certificates of Participation and all related recommendations outlined in the staff report for the Public Safety Building. I am sure you will be impressed and moved by the comments about the Public Safety Building made by Police Chief Jonsen and former Palo Alto Police Chiefs and staff in support of the COP process and related actions. I do believe the active participation by numerous and distinguished Chiefs and public safety personnel is powerful and persuasive. They have been dedicated to public service. They know what is needed and they care about Palo Alto. The long standing need for this building was identified by an internal study in 1986 and at least 5 subsequent studies have occurred, including the stellar and comprehensive work of the Public Safety Building Blue Ribbon Task Force and the Infrastructure Blue Ribbon Commission. Over the decades, all results have identified the urgent needs and limitations to the current building. The needs have become even more acute. The staff report is clear and detailed. I do not need to reiterate the points. To me, one of the most compelling statements is as follows: Due to the growth of public safety services and changes in regulations, the existing building no longer meets current seismic, accessibility, or regulatory code requirements that are required to meet the Essential Services Buildings Seismic Safety Act (ESBSSA). The new PSB is approximately 56,000 square feet and will house the Police Department, 911 Emergency Dispatch Center, the Emergency Operations Center, the Office of Emergency Services, the administration needs of the Fire Department and include external support spaces in the basement and operational yard. Our times alone underscore why the Public Safety Building is critical to the delivery of public safety services. We have been experiencing enduring pandemic, economic challenges, social tensions related to inequities, cybersecurity, growing needs for crisis intervention, and many climate change impacts illustrated by fires, dangerous air pollution, and drought (to name a few). All expects recognize that these outcomes could be enduring and periodic. We need to be prepared and flexible with the finest training, resources, and facilities. Frankly, the significant staff and consultants’ work and the innumerable hours many Councils have spent on the Public Safety Building should be acknowledged and built upon. These efforts and actions underscore its vital value to the community. This is your chance to make a legacy decision to further secure the health and safety of our community both now and in the future. Gail A. Price Barron Park Resident Former Palo Alto City Council Member   3 Baumb, Nelly From:The Ojakian <ojakian@comcast.net> Sent:Thursday, January 28, 2021 4:49 PM To:Council, City Cc:Shikada, Ed; Wagner, April; Jonsen, Robert Subject:Public Safety Building Attachments:June 19 finalbrtfreportrev1.doc; PaloAltoSpaceAssessment.pdf; Public Safety Building 6-26-06 V3.ppt; Blue Ribbon Committee Candidates Bio 2021.docx CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Dear City Councilmembers,  In 2005, while still a Palo Alto City Councilmember, my City Council colleagues requested I head up a Blue Ribbon Task  Force (BRTF) to review the Palo Alto Police Building. Because I was dealing with a personal loss and doing work  throughout California and beyond, I agreed with some caveats. (One was there would be a finished report within six  months for a decision)  A work plan was developed that included all aspects of this work.   A Public Safety Building (PSB) Blue Ribbon Task Force was convened in early 2006. (A list of BRTF committee members is  attached) This group met regularly, did most of its own research, did field trips to other Bay Area public safety facilities,  etc. All BRTF meetings were opened to the public and a draft report was reviewed for comments at a public meeting. On  June 19 2006 a report was submitted to the City Council and approved. What happened in the intervening fifteen years I  will skip to come to today.   I listened to some of Monday night’s Palo Alto City Council discussion on agenda item #7: Update on the Status of  Capital Improvement Fund and Potential Direction on Prioritization of Projects for the Fiscal Year (FY) 2022 Budget and  2022‐2026 Capital Improvement Plan. I thought it may be useful to provide some observations and clarifications in a  point by point format. At the end I will explain or reinforce why my involvement and concern.   Point #1: Public safety is not only a community service, but a critical community service.   Point #2: The proposed Public Safety Building is meant to facilitate and enhance that community service. For me, though  I know this may not be true for others, this facility is in essence like equipment, not important in and of itself, but  important to aid the service being performed.   Point #3:  A PSB is expensive to build for a good reason. This is not an ordinary facility. It has to be built to “Essential  Services” standards to ensure certain critical services are always available/functioning. More on this later.    Point #4: The PSB design was right sized. A BRTF subcommittee did an independent needs analysis and their own  research. They developed a building floor plan through careful analysis that was then vetted and approved by the entire  BRTF and, eventually, by the City Council.   Point #5: The current building is the worst public safety facility in the South Bay Area. As part of the BRTF, the  committee, the co‐chairs, or I personally visited ten local public safety buildings. Not only was the Palo Alto Police  Building the least functional facility with the poorest working conditions, some of the other jurisdictions were working  on replace their existing buildings.   Point #6: The inadequate current facility could lead to employee retention issues. The personnel from the previously  mentioned visits were aware of the Palo Alto police building. Some of these personnel snickered about our situation and  4 at one location an HR person alluded to knowing his department could entice Palo Alto personnel with a better  environment.   My belief is this has not happened in mass because police work is more than a building. There is camaraderie not  necessarily present in other professions. Could there be retention problems in the future? It will depend on work  circumstances, including the adequacy of the facility.   Point #7: Any reevaluation of Palo Alto capitol project priorities should still include the PSB as a high priority. If a key  measurement is to minimize risk to the community, and it should be, the PSB proposal should be acted on. The work of  2006 has stood the test of time. If anything, the current building is in far worst condition than 16 years ago.   Point #8: The current building has so many flaws I am not sure if there is value in listing them. One key concern is  properly securing evidence from criminal activities.   Point #9: It was stated that the issue of services versus capital projects was vetted in the recent election. I think that was  good and a useful discussion. My question is how were the deficiencies of the current police building explained? Was  the public informed that the emergency call center (SCC) and emergency operation center (EOC) availability could be in  jeopardy because of seismic or other reasons? For me it is a false dichotomy to have a capital versus service debate. The  issue is what are critical functions and services and how should they be prioritized.   Finally, why my involvement and concern?  For those who don’t know, the ECC responds to all 9‐1‐1 service calls for  Palo Alto and Stanford and responds to all Public Works and Utilities service calls. The existing facility is susceptible to a  disaster, either natural or man‐made.  Though the main concern is damage from an earthquake, other causes could  render the ECC or EOC inoperable.  The community cannot risk having the ECC and/or the EOC disabled. This would be  catastrophic in the midst of a disaster. It was my key concern when I agreed to co‐lead the BRTF and it is still my  concern.   Attached are the BRTF report to the Palo Alto City Council, dated June 19, 2006, and the diagram of the PSB floor plan  produced by the BRTF building subcommittee. I am again forwarding the June 2006 BRTF presentation to the City  Council.   The PSB needs to be approved and completed.   Respectfully submitted,   Victor Ojakian     PALO ALTO CITY COUNCIL BLUE RIBBON COMMITTEE FOR POLICE BUILDING Ray Bacchetti: former PAUSD Board member, DeAnza Foothill Community College Board, Palo Altans for Government Effectiveness (Co-Chair) Loren Brown: President, Vance Brown Builders (since a property he and family members owned was a considered site, he resigned from the BRTF) Jay Boyarsky: Supervising Deputy District Attorney for North County and the Deputy- in-Charge for Hate Crimes; Harold Boyd: retire Stanford administrator Paula Collins: PTSA Gunn member (parliamentarian), YMCA Board member (recipient of Distinguished Service Award), assists Palo Alto Hispanic community Margo Dutton: Palo Alto Community Child Care Executive Director John King : Palo Alto Chamber of Commerce (Chair), Alhouse-King Realtors, prior member of Police Advisory Building Committee Denise Lee: Santa Clara County Public Defenders’ Office John Northway: Stoecker and Northway Architects, former Planning Commissioner, Individual Design Review Committee (Co-Chair) Peter Stone: retired Santa Clara County Superior Court judge, former Palo Alto City Attorney, JAMS mediators and arbitrators Veronica Tincher: Palo Alto League of Women Voters (Chair), Santa Clara County Mental Health Board, SCC Mental Services Act Leadership Committee Karen White: Duveneck/St. Francis Neighborhood Association (President), YMCA Board of Directors (immediate past chair), PTA Council (Executive VP) Co-Chairs: Vic Ojakian, Lanie Wheeler Council Liaison: LaDoris Cordell BLUE RIBBON TASK FORCE Report to the Palo Alto City Council On the PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING PROJECT June 19, 2006 BRTF Final Report June 19, 2006 Page 2 The Blue Ribbon Task Force (BRTF) respectfully submits this report to the City Council in answer to its charge that we make an independent study of the need for a Public Safety Building (PSB) and potential responses to that need. The Task Force has sought to represent the interests of Palo Alto’s residents, business community, police, and other public safety officials and staff by reviewing the case for a new or renovated building to replace the one now housing the Police Department, the City’s Emergency Operations Center (EOC), and the 911 Emergency Dispatch Center. The Task Force placed primary emphasis on emergency preparedness, preserving public safety, safeguarding justice, and stewardship of taxpayers’ funds. This report is comprised of five sections: need, size, location, cost, and financing. Appendices are attached that provide useful detail. Executive Summary The Task Force recommends in the strongest possible terms that the City proceed expeditiously to build a new Public Safety Building. Until it does, Palo Alto cannot be assured of an effective response to major natural or man-made emergencies. Moreover, its public safety functions, with emphasis on police services, the EOC, and all 911 calls, are compromised by a facility whose inadequacies have become increasingly manifest over the nearly forty years since it was designed. Among the current building’s more serious deficiencies are limitations on its technical capacity to handle hi-tech crime, ability to assure the integrity of the chain of custody of evidence, and capability to provide for the security of those who work there. Such deficiencies threaten community security and employee safety and expose the City to liability in several areas. Though most Palo Altans are unlikely to deal directly with the police, all Palo Altans are indirectly dependent on the ability of the City to maintain safety, good order, and emergency response capacity. Therefore, while no single Palo Altan knows whether or when they may end up needing police services, the well-being of every citizen depends on a functional Public Safety Building. Need The current facility strains to provide a working environment that is at best only marginally adequate for the critical people and functions it houses: the Police Department, the Emergency Operations Center, and the Emergency 911 Communications Center that serves the City and Stanford, Palo Alto and Stanford Police Departments, Stanford Fire, Palo Alto Public Works, and Utilities. It was built before current earthquake building codes were set and it no longer meets the standards established for buildings that provide “essential services.” (The “essential services” designation requires such facilities to be constructed in a manner that substantially increases the probability that they will be able to function after a major earthquake.) The current facility’s serious limitations risk the safety of officers and staff, security of evidence, protection of equipment, and relationships of trust and respect with the community. Employee morale suffers as a result of the rundown and crowded conditions within which such demanding BRTF Final Report June 19, 2006 Page 3 work must be carried out. The City lags several neighboring communities in regard to working conditions, operational capacity, and the message the building conveys to the current officers and those who enter the recruiting pool. The building’s inadequacies represent an ongoing, negative signal regarding the place of public safety, police and emergency preparedness in the daily life, security, and welfare of Palo Alto. Building Size To assure the prudent and economical use of public funds for a PSB project, the Task Force examined in great detail the initially proposed staffing and space needs. The Task Force reviewed each space as to its function, priority, size, code and other technical requirements it must meet. That list of needs was identified in 2000 through an assessment process implemented by the City, the Police Department, and RossDrulisCusenbery, Architecture Inc. (RDC). That space needs assessment resulted in a proposed building of approximately 58,076 total square feet compared to the current building’s size of 24,190 square feet. A subcommittee of the Task Force, and eventually the Task Force itself, re-examined the initial proposal on a room-by-room, space-by- space basis. As a result of this questioning and a careful reassessment by staff, the size was reduced to 49,600 square feet. This process resulted in a reduction of 15 percent of the proposed building area from the initially proposed space needs. This number represents the smallest possible size Public Safety Building consistent with present and longer term functional need. Site Location Identifying a site for the new Public Safety Building in an essentially built-out city continues to be a challenge. The Task Force initially reviewed twenty-eight sites and site variations provided by City staff. These sites were preliminarily evaluated against criteria established by the Task Force, including size, location, neighborhood compatibility, and cost. Twenty-four sites were eliminated on various grounds summarized in the body of this report. The remaining four sites were ranked from most to least desirable as follows: 1) Park Boulevard; 2) Gilman Street; 3) California Avenue; and 4) renovation and expansion of the existing site. All four sites can accommodate a building of the proposed size and the parking that would accompany it. The Park Boulevard site is the unanimous first choice of the Task Force. It is centrally located and close to arterials, is the least physically complex and encumbered, is large enough to accommodate a significant proportion of the required parking in surface lots, and would enable the most rapid construction schedule. The second- and third-ranked sites, though each has some positive attributes, are substantially less desirable. Reworking and expanding the current site, the fourth-ranked and least desirable alternative, is likely to be the most expensive, complex, and protracted option. The BRTF strongly recommends the Park Boulevard site. Project Cost City staff, working with Michael Ross of RDC, provided the Task Force with estimated cost ranges of three options to enable us to compare the relative project expense but not BRTF Final Report June 19, 2006 Page 4 to calculate probable project budget numbers. These options are: 1) for a building on vacant privately owned land; 2) for a building on a publicly owned parking lot; and 3) for reconstruction and expansion of the current facility. Project budgets cannot reliably be estimated at this stage because of the large number of unknowns (such as site characteristics, environmental impact mitigations, construction costs, possible site acquisition costs, etc.). Using general cost factors and the recommended size of 49,600 square feet, the building on the most favorable site with the least impediments during design and construction (the Park Blvd. site) would not likely cost less than $38 million. The most difficult site (renovation and expansion of the current building) would not likely cost more than $55 million. (These estimates do not include financing costs.) The Task Force, in presenting these numbers to denote an approximate cost range, at the same time recommends that, at the appropriate time, the City Council convene an expert panel to perform a peer review and evaluation of the project documents and estimates. Financing The Task Force defers to the City Council regarding financing alternatives. Because the PSB is one of a number of Palo Alto municipal infrastructure needs, the method chosen to fund it would necessarily be part of an overall financial strategy developed by the City to address infrastructure projects. The Task Force reviewed financing issues and options, in a general manner and presents those findings in the body of the report. Conclusion An adequate and well-functioning PSB is a community asset whose vital importance cannot be overestimated. The Task Force has respected Palo Altans’ expectation to be safe and secure in normal times and well protected and responded to in abnormal times. We understand and also respect the public’s equal expectation that expenditures made for the common good should be prudent and make the best use possible of tax revenues. We believe a new Public Safety Building based on the findings of this Task Force is an essential long-term investment for the safety, good order, and well being of Palo Alto. Continued reliance on the existing, seriously substandard facility unnecessarily, unwisely, and inexcusably places at risk the professionals who work there and those who depend on them. I The Need for a New or Renovated Building The current facility at 275 Forest Avenue was designed nearly forty years ago (1967) as part of the City Center complex. As early as 1985, overcrowding was evident, and a needs assessment was completed as were two more between then and 1998. (CMR 349.05, August 8, 2005, p. 1.) The third study followed the 1997 Council direction to staff “to initiate the formal process needed for site selection and construction of a new public safety building.” That action was informed by a report by Ekona Architecture and Planning that had identified “numerous deficiencies with the current police facility.” Among them were failure to conform to current State legal standards and state and local building codes; programmatic needs relating to property and evidence, detention, facility BRTF Final Report June 19, 2006 Page 5 support and warehouse functions; and deficiencies in prisoner processing, evidence processing, handling, and storage. (City Manager’s Report 498:04, December 6, 2004) A May 24, 2004 report by the Santa Clara County Grand Jury focusing on evidence and property handling confirmed the previously identified deficiencies. As time passed, conditions incrementally and steadily worsened. The continued decline of the building’s adequacy led to a renewed sense of urgency and the charge to the BRTF for this study. At 24,190 square feet, the current building is roughly half the size of police or public safety buildings in several neighboring communities. Since the building was first occupied in 1970, a number of things have changed that explain the worsening situation:  A higher risk of catastrophic events caused by nature (e.g., earthquake, flood), disease (e.g., avian flu), or terrorists. (We note this first not because such events are highly probable but because, should they occur, they affect the greatest numbers of citizens and make maximum demands on response capacity.)  New or newly recognized types of criminal activity, most notably computer fraud and identity theft, which afflicts Palo Altans in greater numbers than surrounding communities’ and national averages; and also sexual predators using the Internet and elder abuse.  New law enforcement obligations including safeguarding of DNA evidence (for crime fighting and assuring justice for the innocent) requiring special facilities and equipment; longer periods in which evidence must be retained in a secure manner; a timed parking system in the downtown area (requiring a staff of seven officers and vehicles); and additional paperwork requirements.  New health and safety regulations and recommendations pertaining to such things as fume hoods for working with chemicals, separate air circulation systems (where pathogens may be associated with evidence or chemical fumes may be present), and secure facilities related to terrorism threats (such as secure mailrooms in case biological agents are introduced into the building through a mailed package).  The upgrading of building codes, including earthquake codes, leaving the current building deficient in key respects.  The growth of the City by 10 percent. The resident population was 56,040 in 1970, and is approximately 61,700 now. The additional daytime population of the City (people who work, study, and shop here but live elsewhere), a statistic of significant relevance when calculating the need for police protection, traffic monitoring, and related matters, comes to another 47,000 in 2006. (Data not available for 1970.)  The overall staffing of the Palo Alto Police Department (PAPD) housed in the building has increased 28 percent since the current facility was built. The authorized staffing levels of the Police Department (including the 911 Dispatch Center) grew from 119 in 1969-70 to 152.5 in 2006-07. Sworn staffing levels increased from 88 to 93 while civilian staffing increased from 31 to 59.5. Civilian staff has increased as a result of the transfer of the parking enforcement BRTF Final Report June 19, 2006 Page 6 function from another department and the additional work load requirements associated with property and evidence, community policing, and technology. In addition, the Department now includes more than 40 volunteers compared to none in 1969-70. From these facts and the prior needs assessments, we knew that the record was long and the confirmation of need was amply documented in that record. But confirmation in the record, while clearly important, was not what we looked at first. We needed to be convinced by our own assessment, so we undertook our own study. It included:  A close examination of the current building and probing conversations with those who work in it.  Highly informative comparison tours of four neighboring police or public safety buildings (Redwood City, Mountain View, Fremont, and Santa Clara). These were built between the late 1970s and 2000.  Presentations by public safety officials, city staff, and the architect, Michael Ross, who is consulting with the city on this project.  Research in City documents and on the Internet, and comparative statistical analyses.  Comparisons of the current facility with general standards for such facilities. It is the combination of all of these that led us to our recommendation that the city needs to act without delay on a building that will make Palo Alto safer on a day-by-day basis and in the case of a large scale or catastrophic event. (See Appendix 1, the Problem Statement that has been placed on the BRTF Web site for public perusal since April 7, 2006; and Appendix 9, Fact Sheet, prepared for the public meeting of May 25th.) We surveyed 2004 crime statistics in order to compare relative law enforcement activity. (Data are available on the Web from “Area Connect” and are based on 2004 FBI data.) We looked at the numbers for eight nearby communities: Cupertino, East Palo Alto, Fremont, Menlo Park, Mountain View, Redwood City, Santa Clara, and San Jose. The crime categories were murder, forcible rape, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, larceny theft, and auto theft. The data were normalized per 100,000 population. To keep the data from becoming distorted by unusually high numbers, we excluded the largest value in each crime category before calculating averages. The results were as follows:  In one category Palo Alto was considerably above average, at 140 percent of average for larceny theft (computer crime, fraud, identity theft, etc.); in another it was somewhat above average, at 125 percent of average for murder.  For two categories, Palo Alto was considerably below average, at one-third the average for aggravated assault and two-thirds the average for auto theft.  For the remaining three categories, Palo Alto numbers were within 13 percent of the average, twice on the low side (forcible rape and robbery), once on the high side (burglary). BRTF Final Report June 19, 2006 Page 7 Data such as these have multiple explanations, and we are not attempting to draw any conclusions from them, save one: that the PAPD is, on average, equivalently stressed by criminal activity as are neighboring cities and needs to be as well equipped and prepared as they to prevent and fight crime. (See Appendix 7 for additional comparative crime statistics.) Since 1970, the scope of the public safety responsibilities of the PAPD has increased.  The substantial growth in Palo Alto as a destination (for people visiting Stanford, the Stanford Shopping Center, neighborhood commercial centers, restaurants, and businesses) has brought more traffic, parking issues, and other activity obliging increased patrols and responses to calls requesting or requiring a police response.  The growing number of restaurants in and around University Avenue and California Avenue tend to generate alcohol-related police activity.  Homelessness is likewise a relatively new phenomenon in the City.  Increased commercial activity increases shoplifting arrests.  Palo Alto residents expect a high level of service from the PAPD, and calls for service to the police average 146 per day, 365 days per year. This equates to roughly 0.86 police calls for service per year per resident. Comparable numbers are: Redwood City at 0.80, Santa Clara at 0.58, and Fremont at 0.28. These several factors place demands on the Department that in turn put pressure on space, such as hiring more officers and staff, acquiring and parking more police vehicles, and the increased record keeping that goes with these rising levels of activity. When designed, the current building did not include spaces and features that are now considered essential, such as a secure Sallyport (an enclosure in which a prisoner can be taken from a police vehicle into the building safely); reasonably sized, re-assuring, and “soft” spaces providing a humane environment for interviewing victims or witnesses who have been injured, frightened, or otherwise traumatized; access for the disabled; certain high-tech equipment used in detective work and in departmental operations and an electrical system capable of supporting such technology; a sufficient number of holding cells to assure safety for officers and enable the separation of juveniles and adults, as required by law (so that the juvenile cannot later be recognized by the adult and perhaps drawn into further difficulty); and equivalent locker, shower, and toilet facilities for female officers (there were no female officers in 1970). Sleeping space for officers coming off night duty and scheduled for court appearances a few hours later is improvised and inadequate. Segregated storage space for firearms seized in evidence does not exist. Crowding has consequences in addition to those noted so far. After a period of increasing crowding, operational inefficiencies began to grow, such as locating people and functions in available space rather than in relation to other units with which they regularly work; jeopardizing the integrity of evidence when it must be stored in suboptimal locations; placing lockers in hallways, thus depriving those who must use BRTF Final Report June 19, 2006 Page 8 them of privacy; storing records in under-secured spaces; holding conversations or interviews between employees or with the public in lobbies, shared offices, or other open space in general use, thus compromising confidentiality; having to use spaces distant from the facility for police functions, e.g., the Citizens Police Academy; etc. [Note: the Department maintains some offsite storage space and may in the future; in most cases, this is desirable since it allows use of lower-cost facilities.] When surrounding jurisdictions form task forces to work on regional crime trends, different police departments must take turns housing such efforts for their duration. Palo Alto has difficulty meeting its obligations; when it can meet them, it is only at the cost of short-changing the regular functions that must be temporarily displaced. When the PAPD hosts meetings of regional associations and invites professional working groups such as high-tech investigators, county police chiefs, robbery/homicide detectives to collaborate on regional issues appropriate space must on occasion be rented because of lack of suitable space in its own building. Several surrounding communities have, since the late 1970s, built new public safety or police buildings incorporating up-to-date technologies, responding to the changes in legal, building code, and environmental safety requirements, growth in their communities, changes in the nature of criminal activity, and other relevant factors. The four nearby facilities visited ranged in size from 44,000 to 70,000 square feet. The best police men and women and civilian staff—the kind we want in Palo Alto—have their pick of where to work. New or upgraded facilities advantage other cities in recruitment for new officers and retention of already trained and experienced officers. (See Appendix 7 for comparable data on facility size, community census, and number of officers and other staff.) Very little has occurred that would diminish space needs, though the future holds more promise for that than the past provided. Compressible shelving can make better use of evidence storage and file storage space (but cannot be retrofitted into the current building); information technology will in the future require less space for storage of records; appropriate remote storage in less costly facilities releases pressure on the main facility; some functions can be outsourced to commercial, county, or regional facilities (though much of this has already been done); etc. These factors are taken into account in the assessment of building size discussed in the next section. II Necessary Size The starting point for turning functions and needs into square footage was the study by the firm of RDC from 2000, which proposed the needed overall size to be 58,076 square feet (compared to its existing 24,190 square feet). Other estimates since that time include the Keenan proposal for a turnkey building, at 59,000 square feet for comparable public safety needs, and a staff estimate from February of this year that came to 56,646 square feet. The initial study (from 2000) intended to cover needs through the year 2020. Its BRTF Final Report June 19, 2006 Page 9 conclusion was consistent with standards for such facilities. The BRTF reviewed this study, raised a number of questions about justification, and undertook an exacting examination through a subcommittee with the goal of assuring the prudent and economical use of public funds for a PSB project. It examined in great detail the initially proposed space needs, questioning each space as to its function, priority, size, and the code and other technical requirements it must meet. The period under consideration was extended to 2026 to provide limited flexibility into the future. That subcommittee worked with Chief Johnson and other members of the City staff, raising questions such as these: 1. Where could needs be merged and spaces be used for multiple purposes (e.g., using the Emergency Operations Center, which must be at all times equipped and ready but is activated only as needed, for tactical weapons training, departmental meetings, and other large group functions)? 2. Where could less-than-standard square foot allocations be tolerable even if not optimal? 3. How many needs could be warehoused and relocated to alternative, less costly space, such as records storage, property not involved in open cases, and the like (as long as these remained under departmental control)? 4. Where could program elements be efficiently located in relation to each other to minimize circulation, storage, and other potentially duplicative spaces and thus their size implications? These questions and the results they produced challenged the initial proposal room-by- room and space-by-space. As a result of this examination by the subcommittee and ultimately by the Task Force itself, and thanks to the candid and forthcoming responses by staff, the size was reduced to 49,600 square feet, a reduction of 15 percent from the initially proposed space needs (See Appendix 2, Space Needs Assessment.) Note should also be taken of the core/satellite relationship (Appendix 8) showing which core functions must be housed within the same building as the Police Department and which might be located differently. Some (e.g., multi-purpose room, some portion of evidence storage) must be close but would not necessarily be governed by the same “essential services” code requirements. Other functions (EOC and Emergency 911 Communications) do require an “essential services” level construction and so should be within the PSB. Roughly 1,500 square feet could be in cheaper-to-build warehouse space not necessarily in or near the principal building. Paring size to the minimum required for the present and 20 years beyond was a key—but not only—task. In addition we noted that at 49,600 square feet the building would also need to be flexible enough to respond not only to growth but also to shifts in functions and internal relationships. If size were wound too tight, so to speak, flexibility would be a certain casualty. Within the total, we provide an allowance for “Green Building” attributes, especially in light of their potential to repay this allowance in operating savings and building characteristics that enhance its quality as a place to work. BRTF Final Report June 19, 2006 Page 10 As a final test of whether the PSB would be neither smaller nor larger than necessary, we subjected the resulting number to the discipline of asking what would be the first space to be eliminated, if square feet had to be reduced, or added, if the square feet could be increased. The proposed multi-purpose room would be the one next to be cut, and the Task Force considered such a move to be a serious loss to the building. Such a space, with its many potential uses, would provide a space for the community to come together in the presence of uniformed police to enhance the positive and defuse the negative connotations of law enforcement, particularly for minority residents; permit school classes to learn about public safety issues; provide community briefings; provide space for the Citizens’ Police Academy and PANDA training; enable Palo Alto to play its role in regional public safety and law enforcement issues by hosting meetings with neighboring jurisdictions; use as sleeping quarters for police, public works, and utilities staff who will be first responders in a major disaster; and the like. (Moreover, if this space should be eliminated, other conference room spaces in the building would need to be enlarged to serve some of the functions that a multi-purpose room would have served.) First to be added back would be slightly increasing the size of the interior spaces, an option that would greatly improve the building’s flexibility. As a result of this hypothetical cut-and-add analysis, we believe that the proposed size of 49,600 square feet optimally meets the objective of prudent size and effective function. In addition to the building itself, 192 secured police and unsecured staff parking spaces (for staff and visitor vehicles) must be provided, requiring approximately 91,000 square feet. How this is to be done will depend on the site. In some cases, parking structures not now contemplated may be needed, adding to project cost. III Site Finding a suitable location for a vital building in our essentially built-out city continues to be a challenge. Beginning with twenty-eight sites and site variations provided by City staff, the Task Force reviewed them against the following criteria: 1. Site is of adequate size to provide for building and associated parking for official vehicles, staff autos, and visitor convenience; 2. Site should not be subject to ground instability (e.g., liquefaction) or flooding; 3. Site provides access on at least two sides; 4. Site is in proximity to related public safety functions enabling possible joint use (e.g., County courthouse, City Hall, etc.); 5. Site is centrally located to enhance ability to serve entire community; 6. Site does not place an excessive burden on surrounding neighborhoods— residential and commercial; and 7. Site does not unduly add to the costs of construction, parking, environmental mitigations, or operations. BRTF Final Report June 19, 2006 Page 11 Criteria 1-3 had to be satisfied. Criteria 4-7 lay in a judgment zone and were weighed in a holistic assessment of any particular site. In applying these criteria, we also considered the cost of new construction vs. the cost of renovating existing structures; the cost of land (we do not believe possible sites should be limited to those already publicly owned); the cost of replacement parking, where applicable; and the cost of temporary relocation if a renovation of the current Police Department were to be considered. We also discussed whether existing vacant buildings might be considered for purchase. Since buildings developed for commercial use are not built to “essential service” code standards and retrofitting would not be cost effective, they would not meet our requirements. We eliminated this as an option. Applying the above criteria to the twenty-eight options, we eliminated twenty-four on various grounds. (See Appendix 3 for a list of the sites and, where applicable, the reason for elimination.) The BRTF gave particularly careful attention to two initially plausible sites before eliminating them. One was the site of the downtown library, a site that we were ultimately convinced should remain as a library. The other focused on two parking lots on Emerson, between University and Lytton. Use of these sites would substantially impact a crowded section of the main business district, remove parking from a place where it is needed, and oblige a split building. The combination of problematic factors seemed to us to constitute more than sufficient grounds for elimination. The BRTF then ranked the remaining four from most to least desirable as follows: 1) Park Boulevard; 2) Gilman Street; 3) California Avenue; and 4) renovation and expansion of existing site. All four sites can accommodate a building of the proposed size (including provision for limited expansion if and when needed) and the parking that would accompany it. (See Appendix 5 for Architectural Stacking Diagrams of these four sites.) The Park Boulevard site is centrally located and close to arterials, is the least physically complex and encumbered, places the least burden on the surrounding community, could provide surface lots for much of the required on-site parking, and would enable the most rapid construction schedule. Reworking and expanding the current site is likely to be the most expensive, complex, and protracted option requiring a duplication of facilities during construction to keep all functions fully operational at a cost of several millions of dollars that would provide no long-term benefit to the City. Each of the other two sites has substantial pros and cons. Both are on public land but both are primarily current parking lots and would thus incur the cost of replacement parking. Both are well located but complex sites that would cause considerable disruption during construction. The California Avenue site in particular is in a commercial zone that is a destination for customers, i.e., most come there deliberately rather than in connection with other errands or business. Impediments such as construction disruption could, the merchants fear, cause these customers to go elsewhere, establish other shopping patterns, and then not return when construction is completed. BRTF Final Report June 19, 2006 Page 12 IV Cost Though the Task Force was acutely aware of the significance of cost and, therefore, of the need to keep it as low as possible, our main contribution in that respect was in assuring that the size of the building was adequate but no larger than necessary for the present and approximately twenty years into the future. Cost is difficult to estimate at this stage because of the large number of unknowns (such as site characteristics, environmental impact mitigations, construction costs, possible site acquisition costs, etc.). The City’s consulting architect on this project, Michael Ross, provided the Task Force with industry estimates of cost ranges for different project elements and contingency factors for a building that meets the “essential servicesfacility” regulations. Covered by this requirement are functions that are most essential to a community in a major emergency: fire departments, hospitals, police, and the EOC and 911 communications functions currently housed in the Palo Alto Police Department building. An essential services building requires specialized, design, engineering, construction and inspection processes. Such buildings are designed to remain operational following an earthquake or other natural disaster.;; They also require more robust design and construction for both structural and nonstructural components including, but not limited to, structural systems, communications systems, main transformers and switching equipment, and emergency backup systems. These systems are essential to facility operations and require adequate consideration during the design and construction process to assure, insofar as practical, continued operation of the building after a disaster. All of these factors increase construction cost well above those for standard commercial construction. These cost-raising requirements increase substantially the capacity of a building to resist a major earthquake and remain functional. Using these and the recommended size of 49,600 square feet, rough cost ranges were calculated for three different situations. These estimates include building construction, associated parking, and land costs, if any, but do not include financing costs. They are as follows:  For a building on vacant private land: $38 to $45 million  For a building on a publicly owned parking lot $45 to $50 million  For reconstruction and additions to current facility $50 to $55 million The range runs from the Park Boulevard site, where project costs would not likely run less than $38 million, to the most difficult building to build (renovation and expansion of the current building) that would not likely cost more than $55 million. The middle category applies to the Gilman Street and California Avenue sites. (See Appendix 4, Preliminary Project Relative Cost Comparisons.) These cost ranges are estimated based on anticipated costs for beginning construction as of May 2009. We recommend, at some point during the design and when building drawings are developed, the convening of an expert panel of architects, contractors, project managers, and possibly others to advise on the probable cost of any specific project. BRTF Final Report June 19, 2006 Page 13 V Financing As one among other Palo Alto needs, the PSB must necessarily be part of the financing strategy the City adopts to respond now and over time to the City’s infrastructure priorities. The Task Force, therefore, defers to the City Council in determining the most appropriate approach to financing a new PSB. The Task Force reviewed two of the most common means of using debt in the financing of public needs. General Obligation (GO) bonds are the most secure and straightforward funding mechanism for major projects. They are tax exempt and are repaid through an ad valorem tax against real property, two characteristics that cause them to be favorably viewed by the bond market and that result in lower interest costs compared to other options. GO bonds can be used only for the acquisition and improvement of real property. In this case, that would exclude furniture, fixtures, and equipment (FF&E), an expense estimated at between $1.3 and $2.0 million. GO bonds require a two-thirds favorable vote. As a consequence of Proposition 13, an ad valorem tax will cause the tax burden of a GO bond to be distributed unevenly depending on when a taxpayer acquired his or her property. Certificates of Participation (COP) are a vehicle well known in the investment community that can cover acquisition, construction, and FF&E expenses. They do not require voter approval; neither do they raise a new revenue source for payments to holders. This obliges the City through its budgeting process to designate the sources from which payments to Certificate holders can be made over the Certificates’ life. By City Council policy, such sources must be available within a balanced budget. Any new tax revenues raised to cover COP expenses would be a “special tax” and, therefore, would require a two-thirds favorable vote. A Parcel Tax, for example, could generate revenue to pay COP expenses through a flat levy on each property or parcel within the City. Parcel tax revenue also can be used for FF&E and operating expenses, though in the present case we do not anticipate any action regarding operating expenses. Parcel taxes typically have a sunset provision, after which they expire unless reauthorized by the voters. As a pro forma exercise, we asked City staff to calculate repayment costs over a thirty- year period based on the high end of the range of our three cost comparisons calculations, namely, $45, $50, and $55 million. These are the approximate numbers:  With GO bonds, the range of annual debt retirement cost would range from roughly $3.0 to $3.7 million depending on project costs.  For COPs, the range of annual payments would range from roughly $3.5 to $4.3 million, also depending on project costs. (See Appendix 6, Public Safety Building Financing Options Analysis.) BRTF Final Report June 19, 2006 Page 14 The Task Force recommends to Council that any rent savings generated by City staff moving into vacated police space be dedicated to refurbishing existing police space and to offsetting debt service on a new police building. Candidates for such a move include Information Technology staff located at 300 Hamilton Avenue and Utility staff located at Elwell Court. In addition, the Task Force recommends that Council direct staff to begin discussions with Stanford University for an appropriate contribution to offset the capital costs associated with the Communications Center in the PSB. Stanford contracts with the City for dispatch services, and language in this agreement discusses both operating and capital payments. To discourage the too-early concretizing of broad and general estimates, we reiterate that all of the above numbers are based on comparative costs and assumptions and should be treated as very early and rough approximations. For the reason noted above, we do not make a recommendation on financing. List of Appendices 1. Problem Statement as it or earlier drafts appeared on PSB Web page since April 7, 2006 2. Final Space Needs Assessment Report dated June 8, 2006 3. Inventory of Potential Sites dated June 8, 2006 4. Preliminary Project Relative Cost Comparisons dated June 8, 2006 5. Preliminary Program Stacking Diagrams by Michael Ross, dated June 12, 2006 6. Public Safety Building Financing Options Analysis by Joe Saccio, dated June 13, 2006 7. Comparable police data/stats on building size, crime – comparing Palo Alto with Redwood City, Santa Clara, Fremont, Mountain View, and San Mateo dated June 13, 2006 8. Core and Satellite Functions by Michael Ross dated May 25, 2006 9. Fact Sheet dated May 25, 2006 10. Summary of BRTF’s process and copies of all meeting notes   Administration - E Patrol - E Records - ECommunity Room Facility 2,775 GSF EOC 3,601 GSF E Detention - E Property Evidence Program Vehicle SallyPort Seized Vehicle Processing Secure Parking - E Building Support Areas - E Investigations - E Patrol Support- E Traffic Warehouse 3,272 GSF Property Evidence Storage 2,400 GSF Emergency Communications 3,668 GSF - E PALO ALTO POLICE BUILDING - Core & Satellite Functions CO-LOCATED CORE PROGRAM AREAS 33,040 GSF Co-Located Core Program Areas 33,040 GSF ‘Satellite’ Functional Areas 15,716 GSF Total Gross Building Area 48,756 GSF* E= Essential Facility * Assumes all satellite and core program areas include their pro rata share of total required building support area. Should some satellite functions be located separately from the main police building, the actual amount of Building Support Area associated with that relocation may vary depending on the location and type of facility they are associated with. PALO ALTO POLICE BUILDING SPACE NEEDS ASSESSMENT FEBRUARY 27, 2006 1 CITY OF PALO ALTO PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING PREPARED BY: Public Safety Building Project Blue Ribbon Task Force http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/publicsafetybuilding/ Keeping Palo Alto Safe Today and Tomorrow 2 Background/Blue Ribbon Task Force (BRTF) Vic Ojakian Need Lanie Wheeler Size Assessment Vic Ojakian Site Assessment/Cost Lanie Wheeler Next Steps & Staff Recommendations Vic Ojakian Questions and Answers Vic Ojakian OVERVIEW 3 BACKGROUND/BRTF •Authorization: •A December 12, 2005 City Council decision to authorize formation of the BRTF with a cross section of community volunteers. •2006: City Council identifies a Public Safety Building as a Top Priority. •Schedule: from Jan –June 06: BRTF visited public safety buildings, used subcommittees, conducted meetings and held two public meetings. •Goal: produce a report by June 2006. 4 NEED •As a public safety building, current facility houses 911 emergency communications center and Emergency Operations Center. Does not meet “essential services” codes. Higher risk of catastrophic events. •Overcrowding recognized as early as 1985. Crowding continued incrementally and steadily. Simply cleaning up the building will not address overcrowding. •Three needs assessments done between then and 1998. Current one is fourth since building opened 36 years ago. 5 •New health and safety regulations adopted since 1970 creates higher risk for the public and employees •Growth in new and newly recognized types of criminal activity and law enforcement obligations •Growth in Palo Alto population and of the City as a destination center •Building’s working conditions compare unfavorably with several surrounding communities, with negative effects on recruiting new and retaining experienced officers NEED 6 There is no room to interview victims or civilian witnesses in a safe, secure, private and comfortable area. Currently they are interviewed in the public lobby of the Police Department. SAFETY INADEQUACIES Police Dept. Lobby 7 There is no secure way to transfer prisoners from vehicles into the building, or to keep juvenile and adult offenders separate at certain stages of the booking process, which is required by law. SAFETY INADEQUACIES Holding Cell #1 Holding Cell #2 8 SAFETY INADEQUACIES Facility is overcrowded and operational layout poorly organized for modern crime fighting. Cramped facility makes recruitment and retention of officers problematic. 9 •A size comparison performed with: •Other local public safety buildings •Prior reports and calculations •Architect specializing in public safety facilities •BRTF also did the following: •Closely analyzed the current building and its functionality •Carefully reviewed staff space recommendations •Evaluated space needs on a room by room basis identifying shared and multi-use areas SIZE ASSESSMENT 10 •The building is optimally sized for current needs, while providing the opportunity for potential future expansion •BRTF recommendation: Approx. 49,600 square feet •BRTF recommendation significantly reduces size by 15%from earlier estimates •Why increase from approximately 25,000sf to 49,000sf •New legal mandates and regulations •Recruitment and retention of officers •Functional space increase is inadequate, particularly Detention and Property/Evidence SIZE ASSESSMENT 11 •Site evaluation based on agreed criteria •Adequate size to accommodate core program •Access for officers and civilians •Not subject to ground instability •Proximity to related public safety functions •Neighborhood impact •Possible joint-use •Relative cost, including land, parking, environmental mitigation and temporary housing of current SITE ASSESSMENT 12 •28 sites evaluated and reduced to the following four sites: •Preferred Site •Park Blvd., privately-owned vacant land (BRTF’s unanimous top choice) •Alternative Sites •Existing public parking lots on either Gilman Ave or California Ave •Renovate and expand the existing building SITE ASSESSMENT 13 •Concept: Construction of a new building costs less when compared to renovation of existing building •Construction of replacement parking structure on publicly owned parking lot likely costs more than land acquisition •Rough cost ESTIMATED ranges: •On vacant private land:$38M to $45M •On publicly owned parking lot: $45M to $50M •At current facility:$50M to $55M COST ANALYSIS 14 NEXT STEPS •Property Acquisition •City Attorney to begin preliminary discussions for preferred site • Financing •Options to Council December 2006 –January 2007 •Resolution of Intent •Contract Amendment RossDrulisCusenbery 15 Top 3 Priority Schedule BRTF presents recommendations June 06 Contract Amendment with RDC Sept. 06 Council determines appropriate financing Jan. 07 EIR Notice of Preparation (NOP) issued Feb. 07 Voter poll to test measure (s)April 07 Complete public safety building (PSB) 35% design July 07 Design review of PSB by boards and commissions Oct. 07 Voter poll to fine-tune measure Nov. 07 Complete EIR Jan. 08 Council approves resolution for ballot measure March 08 Election June 08 16 Staff Recommendations •Accept and approve the June 19, 2006 Mayor’s Public Safety Building Blue Ribbon Task Force Report recommendations. •Direct City Attorney to begin preliminary discussions for property acquisition of the preferred site for the proposed public safety building. •Direct staff to bring back financing options for the project in December 2006 or January 2007. 17 Staff Recommendations •Direct staff to return to Council with a Resolution of Intent to recover costs incurred prior to any debt issuance. •Direct staff to negotiate a contract amendment with RossDrulisCusenbery, Architects to proceed with an Environmental Assessment and Schematic Design for the Public Safety Building Project PE-98020. 18 Keeping Palo Alto Safe Today and Tomorrow The BLUE RIBBON TASK FORCE WOULD LIKE TO THANK: Public Works:Elizabeth Ames, Staff Liaison -Glenn Roberts -Mike Sartor -Hung Nguyen -Sharon Macway Police Department:Lynne Johnson, Chief of Police -Pete Hazarian - Barbara Teixeira Administrative Services:Carl Yeats -Joe Saccio -Tarun Narayan -Bill Fellman Assistant City Manager:Emily Harrison Planning:Steve Emslie -Clare Campbell -Roland Rivera City Attorney:Gary Baum -Don Larkin Public Safety Building Consultant: Michael Ross 19 Keeping Palo Alto Safe Today and Tomorrow PUBLIC SAFETY BUILDING BLUE RIBBON TASK FORCE http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/publicsafetybuilding/ Co-Chairs: Victor Ojakian and Lanie Wheeler Ray Bacchetti Jay Boyarsky Harold Boyd Paula Collins Margo Dutton Dan Dykwel John King Denise Lee John Northway Dave Ross Peter Stone Veronica Tincher Karen White 1 Baumb, Nelly From:Hamilton Hitchings <hitchingsh@yahoo.com> Sent:Thursday, January 28, 2021 11:42 AM To:Council, City Cc:Shikada, Ed; Jonsen, Robert; Eggleston, Brad Subject:Delaying the PSB could add $51+ million in interest costs CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Dear council, The staff was able to lower the annual PSB bond repayment by $1.7 million per year for the 30 year duration. This results in a total savings of $51+ million. However, if the project were delayed until long-term interest rates rise back up to staff's previous estimate then that would increase the cost by $51+ million total over the next 30 years. In addition, staff acted on the council’s guidance and delayed starting repayment for an additional year till fiscal year 2023. Thus there is no cost for the PSB before fiscal year 2023 and thus no savings in fiscal year 2021 or 2022 by delaying this project further. Staff’s analysis is that construction rates have stabilized and will not go lower. Staff believes that labor and material costs will rise during 2021. This project is stimulative and borrowing money is best done during times of uncertainty when interest rates are low. Once 300 million vaccine doses have been delivered by the end of the summer and confidence in the economy starts to recover then long term interest rates will likely rise. To mitigate risk, you could defer some of the capital infrastructure maintenance projects like the Rinconada park (as suggested by Pat Burt), which are not debt financed and will have an immediate savings to the infrastructure fund and reduce the short-term need for general fund transfers while waiting for the TOT to recover. Hamilton Hitchings 1 Baumb, Nelly From:LYNNE JOHNSON <lej16@comcast.net> Sent:Sunday, January 31, 2021 5:17 PM To:Council, City Subject:Police Department Building Attachments:Untitled.pages CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Attached please find letter regarding the need for a new Police building. 2 Baumb, Nelly From:Douglas Keith <dwkeith7@gmail.com> Sent:Sunday, January 31, 2021 9:01 PM To:Council, City Subject:Fwd: Support for new Police Building CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.    Greetings to all of the Palo Alto City Council members.     My name is Doug Keith.  I was hoping to speak in person, but I work a swing shift and was unable to get coverage for my  position.  So, an email will have to suffice.    I was born and raised in Palo Alto.  My Dad was a Police Officer with Palo Alto from 1962‐1978.  I remember when PAPD  moved from 450 Bryant into 275 Forest.  I was hired as a Police Officer with Palo Alto in 1984 and retired as a Lieutenant  in 2011.  I remember, I believe it was in 1985, we began looking at the possibility of a new building.  I don't remember at  what point the plan was rejected.  During my career, I worked under five different Chiefs.  Each one invested countless  staff hours in looking at different possibilities of either expanding into the mezzanine, or moving to a different site.  Each  Chief was confident that "this was going to be the City Council" that approved it.  Each time we seemed to be closer and  closer.  Each time the answer was "no."  Even though I didn't have the opportunity to work under Chief Jonsen, I  followed the progress of the latest study.  I was ecstatic when I learned that a site had actually been picked out and  approved!      I was saddened when I heard the building had been put on hold.  I still live in Palo Alto, with my wife and daughters.  I  ride my bike to work almost every day at Stanford University.  I pass by the new parking structure and the site which has  been chosen to be the new police department.     The residents deserve a new police department, central in the city.  The men and women of the Palo Alto Police  Department deserve a new department.  The current police department is cramped, dilapidated, outdated and unable  to be cleaned or spruced up any further.     I'm not sure where the current lieutenants reside, but my last assignment in 2009‐2011, I shared an office...and I'm not  joking or exaggerating...in a converted  janitorial closet.      I lived through the Loma Prieta earthquake, and the extensive renovations which  occured in the subsequent  months.  Our dispatch and emergency operations center are, basically in the basement of the Police Department.  No  one knows when, but we all know we are overdue for another major earthquake.  I shudder to think of what might  happen to our first responders, dispatchers and Emergency Operations Center.    15 years ago, two prior council members said a new police department was their primary focus, and "it will get built  before we leave the Council."  It didn't happen...it was just kicked down the road for another Council to deal with.    I could go on and on.  Please don't let this opportunity pass.  We may never see it again.    Build the new Police Department.  Please.      Sincerely,    3 Doug Keith (and family)  Palo Alto Resident       1 Baumb, Nelly From:dennis burns <dennis.r.burns@gmail.com> Sent:Monday, February 1, 2021 9:11 AM To:Council, City Subject:Comments for Council Attachments:Dear Mayor Dubois and members of the City Palo Alto Council.docx; City of Palo Alto.docx CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Hello Beth,     Can you please forward these attachments to the City Council?  thanks, Dennis Burns  City of Palo Alto Public Safety Building Based on needs, verified and validated by multiple studies including but limited to the Blue Ribbon Infrastructure Taskforce 2006, Infrastructure Blue Ribbon Commission 2011, and the 2014 City Council Infrastructure Plan Deficiencies: Current building has significant safety and security deficiencies that have not been addressed. Does not meet current essential services building standard. The need for a building is well documented and was first identified in 1985 Lacks sufficient and appropriate space for evidence storage and processing. Adult holding cells do not meet DOJ guidelines The Sallyport (enclosure in which a prisoner can be taken from a police vehicle into the building safety) lacks significant security features There is a lack of a holding area for juveniles who are detained Locker rooms are small, cramped and do not allow officers to store their equipment. The police garage is cramped and does not allow all of the department’s patrol cars to be parked. There is no secure parking area for vehicles towed as evidence. There is no work area for processing evidence. The women’s locker room, showers, and toilets are small, cramped and do not accommodate the number of female officers that the Department currently employs. Lack of adequate interview rooms for suspects as well as victims Current building is built-out and does not allow for any further growth Advantages of the new public safety building: The tenants of the Public Safety Building would be: 911 Dispatch Center (that receives calls for and dispatches for PA Police, Stanford Department of Public Safety, PA fire, Stanford Fire, Public Works, Utilities, Animal Services and Animal Services for neighboring agencies) Palo Alto Police Department Palo Alto Fire Administration City of Palo Alto Emergency Operation Center The City of Palo alto Office of Emergency Services The PSB would be designed and built to meet the Essential Services Building Seismic Safety Act standard and allow for the immediate occupancy post-earthquake. The building would have redundancies built into it to ensure the continuity of operations for PD, FD, OES, Dispatch and EOC. Would accommodate the current staff with some room for expansion Would offer staff a safe, secure and welcoming workspace which would facilitate recruitment and retention. Would include a community room where neighborhood groups, clubs and other organizations could meet to discuss local issues. Would be designed with a focus on safety and security but would be open and inviting for the public. Would resolve deficiencies and safety issues identified above. February 1, 2021 Dear Mayor Dubois and members of the City Palo Alto Council, Thank you for the opportunity to address the City Council regarding the construction contract and funding of the Public Safety Building. My name is Dennis Burns and I worked at the Palo Alto Police Department from 1982-2017. I served as the police chief from 2009-2017 and served as the interim fire chief from 2010-2013. I have to admit I am a little overwhelmed trying to summarize the numerous City Council reports, Public Safety Building meetings, tours of the existing building and the reports that have been written on the Public Safety Building project. Literally, where do you begin? I did some research that revealed there have been five separate studies to address the problems and possible solutions for the public safety building. These studies have been conducted at the direction of city councils and have included a cross section of the community. So many people have served on these task forces, former Mayor Larry Klein famously said that, “It is easier to identify community members who have not been involved on these commissions than it is to identify those who have served on them”. What is striking about these reports is they all identify the same deficiencies. So, in the interest of time, I won’t itemize each and every deficiency that has been raised. I will share the 2011 Infrastructure Blue Ribbon Commission summarizes the following shortcomings in the existing building. *Failure to meet the Essential Services Building and OSHA standards *Insufficient, poorly designed space for evidence processing, evidence storage, locker rooms, holding cells, material storage, meeting rooms, vehicle parking, prisoner transfer, supplies and tactical vehicles. *An inadequate, poorly designed Emergency Operations Center. *A windowless 911 dispatch center in the basement of the current building (vulnerable to earthquake or blast) *No blast protection on the building sides and beneath (city parking garage). The 2011 Infrastructure Blue Ribbon Commission report makes the following recommendation: Build a new Public Safety Building (PSB) as soon as possible on a new site, incorporating the Police Department, the Fire Department administration, the Communications Center, the Emergency Operations Center and the Office of Emergency Services. The report continues: Public Safety should be a top priority for any city, but that priority has been dangerously deferred in Palo Alto. An initial action should be site acquisition, preferably the Park Avenue (or equivalent) site previously identified by the 2006 Task Force. The Commission reviewed rebuilding at the present site, splitting public safety into multiple facilities and exploring further interagency collaborations. None of these compared favorably. The first line of the 2006 Blue Ribbon Task Force on the Public Safety Building Executive Summary states in bold letters: The Task Force recommends in the strongest possible terms that the City proceed expeditiously to build a new Public Safety Building. This project is not a case of public safety building envy or keeping up with the neighboring public safety agency. These deficiencies are real and hinder everyday operations and could lead to an inability to respond to and recover from a major incident. Palo Alto Police Chiefs going back to 1971 support this project. You will hear from Chief Lynne Johnson (2003-2008) and Chief Pat Dwyer (1998-2003) tonight who support the project. Chief Chris Durkin (1988-1998) has written the council a letter in support of the project. Chief Jim Zurcher (1971-1988) may submit a letter to council but voiced his support he gave me permission to quote him saying “Its déjà vu all over again. These are the exact same issues that were discussed in the last 10 years of my service in Palo Alto” when I shared with him the shortcomings of the building. He said that he “supports the project and added that the health and welfare of the most valuable part of the organization, its men and women is not based only on salary and benefits.” This project doesn’t benefit just one entity: public safety or the community, it benefits both. *The community will receive a facility that meets essential services standards and can be assured to withstand a major earthquake. This building will remain operable post incident and will increase community resiliency. *The community will enjoy a visitor-friendly design that incorporates safety as a priority. *A community room will give the department an opportunity to improve police/community relationships. *Employees of the department will work in a safe, secure facility which will increase recruitment and retention. I want to acknowledge that this matter has been around a long time and actually it is a little unfair that you are having to deal with this issue. However, it is not going away and it is not getting any cheaper. The City of Palo Alto has a track record of electing highly motivated, principled, intelligent council members like yourselves who make difficult decisions. I urge you to take decisive action and vote to enter into a construction contract and fund the project through certificates of participation. Respectfully Submitted, Dennis Burns 1 Baumb, Nelly From:Palo Alto Forward <palo.alto.fwd@gmail.com> Sent:Friday, January 29, 2021 4:47 PM To:Council, City; DuBois, Tom; Cormack, Alison; Kou, Lydia; Filseth, Eric (Internal); Tanaka, Greg; Stone, Greer; Burt, Patrick Cc:Wong, Tim Subject:RE: Agenda Item #7 Housing Element Working Group Attachments:Housing Element CAC.pdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Dear City Council and Planning Staff,    Thank you for beginning the 2023-2030 Housing Element cycle process. During the COVID-19 pandemic it has become more clear that safe, affordable housing is out of reach for many in the region and that unless Palo Alto prioritizes building new homes at all income levels, we will leave our low and middle income residents behind. Incomes in the region have not kept pace with housing costs and families with elementary and middle school aged children are leaving. Our current median age is about 10% higher than neighboring communities and is expected to exceed that of Florida’s if we don’t begin to make space for future generations. In the current cycle we only permitted for about one-third of the 1,988 affordable homes allocated to Palo Alto, which has only increased the housing prices. While we may not always agree on the solution, we cannot ignore that our failure to act is impacting the community as a whole.     As you begin to identify and appoint Housing Element Working Group members, it’s crucial that you select residents who will create a productive and equitable process. The primary commitment for Working Group members must be to identify sites and policies to meet our regional housing goals. In addition, they must help demonstrate our commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion in leadership and decision-making. We urge City Council to be attentive in the appointment process for this Working Group. When considering the composition for this panel, please encourage recruitment for residents who bring positive energy, commitment and expertise and also include the perspective of renters, residents under age 40, affordable housing residents and waitlisted BMR applicants. We failed to do this in the last cycle but we don’t need to make that mistake again.     The Housing Element process is about planning for Palo Alto’s future - for new families and neighbors - and the working group should be composed of members fundamentally committed to that goal. Thank you for keeping this in mind as you identify potential appointees to this committee.     Sincerely, Palo Alto Forward Board      February 1, 2021 RE: Agenda Item #7 Housing Element Working Group Dear City Council and Planning Staff, Thank you for beginning the 2023-2030 Housing Element cycle process. During the COVID-19 pandemic it has become more clear that safe, affordable housing is out of reach for many in the region and that unless Palo Alto prioritizes building new homes at all income levels, we will leave our low and middle income residents behind. Incomes in the region have not kept pace with housing costs and families with elementary and middle school aged children are leaving. Our current median age is about 10% higher than neighboring communities and is expected to exceed that of Florida’s if we don’t begin to make space for future generations.​ In the current cycle we only permitted for about one-third of the 1,988 affordable homes allocated to Palo Alto, which has only increased the housing prices. While we may not always agree on the solution, we cannot ignore that our failure to act is impacting the community as a whole. As you begin to identify and appoint Housing Element Working Group members, it’s crucial that you select residents who will create a productive and equitable process. The primary commitment for Working Group members must be to identify sites and policies to meet our regional housing goals. In addition, they must help demonstrate our commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion in leadership and decision-making. We urge City Council to be attentive in the appointment process for this Working Group. When considering the composition for this panel, please encourage recruitment for residents who bring positive energy, commitment and expertise and also include the perspective of ​renters, residents under age 40, affordable housing residents and waitlisted BMR applicants.​ We failed to do this in the last cycle but we don’t need to make that mistake again. The Housing Element process is about planning for Palo Alto’s future - for new families and neighbors - and the working group should be composed of members fundamentally committed to that goal. Thank you for keeping this in mind as you identify potential appointees to this committee. Sincerely, Palo Alto Forward Board 1 Baumb, Nelly From:Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, February 2, 2021 12:15 PM To:Jeff Rosen Cc:Raj; Richard Konda; Jeff Moore; Jonsen, Robert; Roberta Ahlquist; chuck jagoda; Winter Dellenbach; wilpf.peninsula.paloalto@gmail.com; Pat Burt; Council, City; Binder, Andrew; Anna Griffin; Kaloma Smith; Joe Simitian; supervisor.ellenberg@bos.sccgov.org; cindy.chavez@bos.sccgov.org; Molly O'Neal Subject:Dog Attack coverup, Daily Post, Feb 1, 2021 by aram james CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on  links.  ________________________________    Hi Jeff, ( Santa Clara County District Attorney Jeff Rosen):    I would greatly appreciate your office looking into the allegations referred to in my short piece. I have not seen any body  camera footage, medical records, police reports, witness accounts, the alleged victim’s statements to the police,  etc....obviously you have access to this information not me. I look forward to any information you are allowed to share  with the public re this matter.    Best regards,    Aram James    415‐370‐5056  2 i OcirlY Post Monday, t-eb ruary 1 . 20 21 Dog attack cov~rup Dear Editor: Yo ur artt cle Thursday, " g "Police dog attacks innocent man, su - gests that the Palo Alto police are, yet again , up to more violence, targeting another person of color. Here are a few questions I would like to ask our police chief Robert "Mr. Transparency" Jonsen: 1. When will the body camera foot- age of tills incident be rel~ased? 2 . Why is the first time the public is ·told about the June 25, 2020, incident when the Daily Post reports it? 3. Why has our district attorney, Jeff Rosen, not yet filed felony assault with a deadly weapon charges against the officer or officers who released their dog on Mr. Joel Domingo Alejo? After last year's brutal police exe- cution of George Floyd, witnessed by the entire world, there were widespread calls to defund police departments and abandon the current police culture in this conntrv altosYether. Manv onno~P.n 3 Baumb, Nelly From:Boatwright, Tabatha Sent:Monday, February 1, 2021 11:23 AM To:Council, City; hitchingsh@yahoo.com Cc:Numoto, Darren; leConge Ziesenhenne, Monique; Batchelor, Dean; City Mgr; Velasquez, Ingrid Subject:RE: Unclear on Why We Need City Fiber Given AT&T's Excellent Fiber Offering? Mr. Hitchings,    The City has been exploring the option of offering a citywide fiber optics service to all business and residential customers  for many years. As you may be aware, the City has provided a dark fiber optic backbone service to commercial  customers since 1996. The topics of Fiber to the Premise (FTTP) or Fiber to the Home (FTTH) services have been debated  extensively among community members, commissions, and City Council for decades.    As you point out, AT&T provides fiber optic service at a generally affordable rate in certain areas of its service territory.  It is important to note that AT&T does not provide fiber optic service in all parts of Palo Alto or the Bay Area, so this  service is not available to every member of the public. There are other companies on the market that may provide such  a service, and at which rate, we will not speculate.    Most recently, the City Council has considered FTTH/P one of its priority initiatives in response to the COVID‐19  pandemic, as detailed in the Community & Economic Recovery Workplan:  https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/80000       Council approved Phase 1 of the fiber network expansion project on June 1, 2020 (Staff Report # 11368). The City  awarded all four phases to third‐party Magellan; however, agreements covering each phase must be approved, with the  work completed and accepted by the Council before the City decides whether to proceed with the next phase. Staff have  been working with Magellan through phase 1 to evaluate the FTTH business case and fiber expansion plan. This includes  high‐level design and cost estimate, planning and high‐level design for advanced metering infrastructure (AMI), wireless,  etc. In addition, Magellan will be conducting a broadband market assessment which may provide more insight of how  many customers are in the service territory of AT&T, Comcast and/or other providers.    Staff are tentatively scheduled to present the FTTP business case and financial models at the April Utilities Advisory  Commission (UAC) meeting.  You can find the schedule of UAC meetings, agendas, minutes and videos from past  meetings at this link: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/boards/uac/default.asp      Ultimately, City Council will need to vote on a resolution to implement a policy or program to begin offering any sort of  municipal service for FTTP or other model for the Palo Alto community. The UAC and City Council are public forums  where community members can provide input regarding issues including FTTP    City Council members will likely be discussing this along with other issues at their annual retreat this Saturday, January  30.  As a Palo Alto resident, you can vote for the top Palo Alto priorities for 2021.  https://www.opentownhall.com/portals/5/Issue_10189/survey_responses/new?cookies=required     Thank you for your input.    Sincerely,                                   4   DEAN BATCHELOR  Director of Utilities  City of Palo Alto  Phone: 650.496.6981  E‐mail:  Dean.Batchelor@cityofpaloalto.org   www.cityofpaloalto.org                                                     From: Hamilton Hitchings <hitchingsh@yahoo.com>   Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 2021 5:26 PM  To: Council, City <city.council@cityofpaloalto.org>  Cc: Shikada, Ed <Ed.Shikada@CityofPaloAlto.org>  Subject: Unclear on Why We Need City Fiber Given AT&T's Excellent Fiber Offering?    CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  I recently upgraded to the relatively new AT&T Fiber to my home and its fantastic! Given its fast speeds and good pricing I am unclear why the City needs to create a competing service? Can the city really provide cheaper pricing and better service? I currently pay $70 per month all in including taxes for 1000Mbps downstream and upstream and get HBO Max thrown in. After a year that will go to $80 per month. The latency is very low (and much lower than Comcast) and the service is quite reliable. Video quality is great. I have the most expensive service. There is a $15 a month cheaper AT&T Fiber level that includes 300 Mbps upstream and down speeds which should be suitable for most families. While normally I would not mind the city doing this, if its competing for dollars with other infrastructure projects, it seems like the city Fiber project would be a good one to defer given the excellent service offered by AT&T unless you can confirm significant portions of the city are not covered by it. Hamilton Hitchings 5 Baumb, Nelly From:Clerk, City Sent:Monday, February 1, 2021 7:05 AM To:herb; Council, City; Clerk, City Subject:RE: Recruitment for Vacancy on Planning and Transportation Commission Good morning Herb,    We are running another recruitment for Mr. Riggs’ position, and those that did not get picked in this first round will be  included in the one for Mr.   Riggs’ position.    Thanks and stay healthy.      BETH MINOR  City Clerk  (650)329‐2379 | Beth.Minor@cityofpaloalto.org   www.cityofpaloalto.org                         From: herb <herb_borock@hotmail.com>   Sent: Sunday, January 31, 2021 5:05 PM  To: Council, City <city.council@cityofpaloalto.org>; Clerk, City <city.clerk@cityofpaloalto.org>  Subject: Recruitment for Vacancy on Planning and Transportation Commission     CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Herb Borock  P. O. Box 632  Palo Alto, CA 94302    January 31, 2021    Palo Alto City Council  250 Hamilton Avenue  Palo Alto, CA 94301      RECRUITMENT FOR VACANCY ON PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION      Dear City Council,    6 The January 22, 2021 Palo Alto Weekly reported that William Riggs has resigned from the Planning and Transportation Commission while the City Clerk was processing the recruitment for the Commission seats of Doria Summa and Ed Lauing who have both reapplied for their positions.    Please ensure that anyone who did not apply to replace Commissioners Lauing and Summa has the opportunity to apply for the vacant seat previously occupied by Commissioner Riggs.    Thank you.    Sincerely,    Herb Borock   7 Baumb, Nelly From:Shikada, Ed Sent:Saturday, January 30, 2021 11:50 AM To:Council, City Cc:Executive Leadership Team; Mary Egan; John Nalbandian (nalband@ku.edu) Subject:IAP2 Spectrum Here’s the spectrum (also the website) John referred to: Spectrum_8.5x11_Print (ymaws.com)  Core Values, Ethics, Spectrum – The 3 Pillars of Public Participation ‐ International Association for Public Participation  (iap2.org)  Also, note that we trained 40‐60 staff on this last year.  Respectfully,  ‐‐Ed    Ed Shikada  City Manager  250 Hamilton Avenue  Palo Alto, CA 94301  (650) 329‐2280  ed.shikada@cityofpaloalto.org           8 Baumb, Nelly From:Boatwright, Tabatha Sent:Thursday, January 28, 2021 3:56 PM To:steve@maestro.io Cc:Shikada, Ed; UAC; Council, City; City Mgr Subject:re: What's the status of municipal fiber in Barron Park? Family working from home Mr. Anderson,    Thank you for your inquiries regarding fiber. Your questions have been reviewed by staff and the replies are below.     1. Fiber has been available for commercial usage for decades through the dark fiber program. However, even  though Palo Alto is in the heart of Silicon Valley and the incubator for billion dollar companies like Facebook and  Nest, FTTP is still in the planning stages. What is the Council and the Mayor's office doing to prioritize FTTP and  making it a reality?    a. FTTP is one of the City’s priority initiatives under the Community and Economy Recovery Strategy (City  Manager Report # 11967).  As you noted, staff have contracted with a third‐party (Magellan) to evaluate  the FTTH business case and fiber expansion plan in Oct 2020 (City Manager's Report #11580). The  amendment includes development of a business case and high‐level design for FTTH, a local broadband  market assessment, exploration of public private partnership business models, and community surveys.  The business case and network design are scheduled to be completed by the second quarter of calendar  year 2021. Afterwards, the preliminary findings and recommendations will be presented to the Utilities  Advisory Commission and City Council for next steps.     2. When can we realistically expect FTTP available in Barron Park? 1 year? 5 years? 10 years?    a. Until the FTTP business case and high‐level network design are completed, reviewed, and advanced by  the Utilities Advisory Commission (UAC) and City Council, we cannot speculate on a timeline.    3. As a citizen, what can I do to ensure that FTTP doesn't end up getting postponed again?    a. The UAC and City Council are public forums where community members can provide input regarding  issues including FTTP.  Staff are tentatively scheduled to present the FTTP business case and financial  models at the April UAC meeting.  You can find the schedule of UAC meetings, agendas, minutes and  videos from past meetings at this link: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/boards/uac/default.asp    4. When will phase 4 (planning FTTP) start? When will it complete?      .  a.    Phase 4 seeks a full detailed engineering design, cost estimate and a phased deployment approach for  FTTP. Each individual phase must be completed and approved by City Council before the decision is made to  proceed with the next phase. The last time staff went to council it recommended a contract amendment,  staff recommends  advancing some FTTP analysis and tasks from Phase 3 to Phase 1 so they can be  completed concurrently. The new approach will enable staff to bring forward preliminary findings of FTTP  business case analysis in conjunction with the findings and recommendations of Phase 1 within six  months.  Staff is planning to go to council April/May to discuss the high level design and estimated cost from  phases 1 & 3. Staff will be asking the council to move forward with the approval to move forward to start  the work on phase (4). If council agrees it will take approximately 6 month from the day of approval from  council to complete.       9   TABATHA BOATWRIGHT  Administrative Assistant   City of Palo Alto Utilities Department  250 Hamilton Ave | Palo Alto, CA  94301  O: 650.329.2326    M: 408.966.0838  E‐mail: Tabatha.Boatwright@cityofpaloalto.org   www.cityofpaloalto.org                          From: Steve Anderson <steve@maestro.io>   Sent: Wednesday, January 20, 2021 4:47 PM  To: Council, City <city.council@cityofpaloalto.org>; UAC <UAC@cityofpaloalto.org>  Cc: DuBois, Tom <Tom.DuBois@CityofPaloAlto.org>  Subject: What's the status of municipal fiber in Barron Park? Family working from home.    CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Dear Mayor DuBois, the City Council, and the UAC,    I'm sending this note today to inquire about the timeline of when municipal fiber will be offered in Barron Park.    My name is Steven Anderson. I grew up on 756 Chimalus Dr. in Barron Park. I graduated Gunn High School in 2006, UC  San Diego in 2011, and moved to LA to build a career as a software engineer. My younger sister, Erica Anderson, became  a licensed marriage and family therapist for Kaiser Permanente in the East Bay.    In response to COVID, both of our employers allowed us to work remote full time. So to decrease the chances of getting  COVID and save money, we moved back into our childhood home with our elderly parents (I'm 32 and my sister is 30,  both parents are in their late 60s). My sister's partner also moved in and he's working remote as well.    Within our first week back, we had multiple internet outages on our block from our Comcast internet. We can't afford to  have unreliable internet as my sister spends her day providing treatment to mental health patients while my continued  employment depends on the ability to communicate with my colleagues and upload large amounts of work.    Not one to sit idle, I've done everything on my part to modernize the networking infrastructure in my parents home. I  personally spent New Years weekend crawling around cobweb‐filled crawlspaces and attics running over 1,000 ft of  ethernet building my parents a respectable home network so my sister and her patients wouldn't have another dropped  connection.    Then I looked into fiber, and was surprised to see that Palo Alto doesn't have a residential offering yet, and after going  through years of news articles and council agendas going back to when my sister was at Barron Park Elementary, it  would seem like the latest development was in October, when the Council approved a budget increase for the fiber  expansion plan with Magellan Advisors.     However, I still have questions and as a returning constituent of Palo Alto (I have updated my voter registration!), I feel it  most appropriate to ask my elected representatives.    10 1. Fiber has been available for commercial usage for decades through the dark fiber program. However, even though  Palo Alto is in the heart of Silicon Valley and the incubator for billion dollar companies like Facebook and Nest, FTTP is  still in the planning stages. What is the Council and the Mayor's office doing to prioritize FTTP and making it a reality?   2. When can we realistically expect FTTP available in Barron Park? 1 year? 5 years? 10 years?  3. As a citizen, what can I do to ensure that FTTP doesn't end up getting postponed again?  4. When will phase 4 (planning FTTP) start? When will it complete?    Thank you for your time,  Steven Anderson  11 Baumb, Nelly From:Anna Bigelow <abigelow@stanford.edu> Sent:Wednesday, February 3, 2021 10:43 AM 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.  greetings ,    As a resident of College Terrace, and an immediate neighbor to the proposed project, I write in opposition to the current  form of the planned unit at Wellesley and College in College Terrace. my reasons to object are below:  1‐ no other three story apartment buildings exist in the neighborhood. A two story structure would be far less  objectionable. There are many two story apartment buildings throughout College Terrace, including two that are on the  other side of Wellesley from the proposed building.   2‐ the building would introduce substantial traffic to a particularly awkward location with the College Terrace Library,  Pre‐School, and park that lies in the middle of the block between College and Stanford. This has limited space to turn  around, a very narrow pass‐through around the playground, and inevitably a high number of children in the area.  Increasing the car traffic through this particular block is extremely risky.   3‐ the plans submitted by the Cato group are misleading as they erase the surrounding buildings. Indeed the satellite  image of the property was taken at a time when it appears there is an adjacent empty lot on College between Wellesley  and Williams. There are now two single‐story houses on that lot that will be completely shadowed by the structure and  the house between the proposed building and the park would be completely blocked in by the structure and the cars.   4‐ Most days this block is already parked up completely by residents of the two story apartments that are already  located across the street on Wellesley. This block in particular does not have adequate space to accommodate such a  structure.     regards,    Anna Bigelow, PhD (she/her)  Department of Religious Studies  450 Jane Stanford Way, Building 70  Stanford University  Stanford, CA 94305    abigelow@stanford.edu    I recognize that Stanford University occupies the traditional and unceded lands of the Muwekma Ohlone.    12 Baumb, Nelly From:Arlene Goetze <photowrite67@yahoo.com> Sent:Wednesday, February 3, 2021 10:14 AM To:Senator.Hill@senate.ca.gov Subject:FAUCI gets RICH w/Moderna Shot CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.    Little Known News  ** Pfizer sees $15 billion in 2021 sales from Covid-19 Vaccine they said Feb 2,-- about a quarter of its total revenue this year for sale of the vaccine made with German partner bioNTech. ** Merck stopped making a vaccine, saying people are better off getting the virus than the vaccine. ** Temporary approval of a vaccine does not allow employers or schools to insist students or employees get the vaccine, according to federal law. ** Moderna says it doesn't have a vaccine...it has genetic mutation technology * Dr FAuci makes $417,000 from US as NIAID director (more than Biden earns) Fauci is partner on Moderna's 'vaccine patent' which started before the virus in US. He sends large funds from NIH to Wuhan China lab. See below....... --------------------------- New York Times Explains the HOW but not Why of Covid Treatment By Lyn Redwood, RN, MSN in The Defender, childrenshealthdefense.org An excerpt below: In an interview March 16 MSNBC between Rachel Maddow with Dr. Ian Lipkin, director of the Center for Infection and Immunity at Columbia School of Public Health, Lipkin acknowledged that our national priorities for tackling the pandemic were being driven by a desire to create new patents and in turn, new profits.   “We are not investing as much in tried/true classical sort of methods ($8 billion), repurposing drugs and strategies shown to work. Most of our $18.5 billion investment is in things which are sexy, new and patentable.” Dr Ian Lipkin Indeed, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), 13 in partnership with Moderna, began developing a new vaccine BEFORE a single COVID case had appeared in the U.S. The first batch of the Moderna vaccine was completed within 42 days of the company obtaining genetic information on the coronavirus. NIAID, under the National Institute of Health (NIH) is directed by Dr. Anthony   Fauci, who is a joint patent holder with Moderna  on its COVID vaccine. Through royalties, Fauci’s agency and employees stand to profit immensely. In December 2020, the U.S Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved Moderna and Pfizer COVID vaccines for emergency use in the U.S. The secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services then made the official emergency use declarations for the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines. Members of CDC own 30 or more vaccine patents!! The government is in the Vaccine business!!! Condensed and forwarded by Arlene at No Toxins for Children 14 Baumb, Nelly From:Martin J Sommer <martin@sommer.net> Sent:Wednesday, February 3, 2021 9:47 AM To:CalMod@caltrain.com Cc:Board (@caltrain.com); Council, City; Pat Burt Subject:Re: University Ave Beige Pole Color CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Hi Brent, How are you doing with this request? Were you able to put a number on repainting the top half of one or more poles at the University Ave station? If it is easier, the whole poles could be repainted. I have noticed that the other two stations in Palo Alto, are either black or the standard forest green. Martin On 1/15/21 8:48 AM, CalMod@caltrain.com wrote: Hi Martin,    Thank you for the call on Wednesday morning. It was helpful to get a better understanding of your  concerns. As I committed on the call, I will bring your request to my management team for  consideration. I aim to get you a response by the end of next week.    Have a great weekend,    Brent Tietjen, Government and Community Relations Officer SamTrans | Caltrain | TA 1250 San Carlos Ave. San Carlos, CA 94070-1306 tietjenb@samtrans.com     From: Martin J Sommer [mailto:martin@sommer.net]   Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2021 9:59 AM  To: CalMod@caltrain.com  Cc: Board (@caltrain.com) <BoardCaltrain@samtrans.com>; city.council@cityofpaloalto.org; Pat Burt  <pat@patburt.org>  Subject: Re: University Ave Beige Pole Color Hi Brent, Thanks for talking this morning. Yes, please try to put a number on repainting the top half of one or more poles at the University Ave station. Once we have this number, I will reach out to the City Of Palo Alto, for potential funding sources. Best regards, 15 Martin On 12/22/20 7:49 PM, Martin J Sommer wrote: +cc: Pat Bert Brent, please take a look at the attached photo. I don't think this is what the City, nor the design engineers, had in mind. Please tell me, how I can help correct this situation. Thank you, Martin On 11/25/20 10:05 AM, martin@sommer.net wrote: Hi Brent, Perhaps your new funding source obtained on Nov 3rd can help this situation. Can you please look into this, and let me know? The visual impacts you are creating, are not good. Thank you, Martin -- Martin Sommer 650-346-5307 martin@sommer.net http://www.linkedin.com/in/martinsommer "Turn technical vision into reality." On 2020-11-25 09:50, CalMod@caltrain.com wrote: Hi Martin,   Unfortunately, the project budget does not accommodate camouflaging  of the poles. Caltrain worked with Cities and regulatory agencies to  mitigate the impacts of the infrastructure through the Project's  Environmental Impact Report in 2014.     Thanks, 16   Brent Tietjen, Government and Community Relations Officer SamTrans | Caltrain | TA 1250 San Carlos Ave. San Carlos, CA 94070-1306 tietjenb@samtrans.com       From: martin@sommer.net [mailto:martin@sommer.net]   Sent: Friday, November 13, 2020 1:55 PM  To: CalMod@caltrain.com  Cc: Board (@caltrain.com) <BoardCaltrain@samtrans.com>;  city.council@cityofpaloalto.org  Subject: Re: University Ave Beige Pole Color Thanks Brent, What about the idea of camouflaging the upper part of the poles, similar to what is done with cell towers? For some reason, these poles have been created with an extremely hard industrial look. This is nothing like, the esthetics put into other electrified rails systems throughout the world. Martin -- Martin Sommer 650-346-5307 martin@sommer.net http://www.linkedin.com/in/martinsommer "Turn technical vision into reality." On 2020-11-13 10:09, CalMod@caltrain.com wrote: Hi Martin,   Thank you again for contacting Caltrain on this question. As Jim  previously mentioned, the selection of the pole color was done in  coordination with the City of Palo Alto and the Historic Resources Board  and Architectural Review Board in 2019. These color selections are final  and poles cannot be replaced or painted a different color after  installation.    Thanks,   Brent Tietjen, Government and Community Relations Officer SamTrans | Caltrain | TA 1250 San Carlos Ave. 17 San Carlos, CA 94070-1306 tietjenb@samtrans.com     From: martin@sommer.net [mailto:martin@sommer.net]   Sent: Friday, November 6, 2020 10:20 AM  To: CalMod@caltrain.com; Board (@caltrain.com)  <BoardCaltrain@samtrans.com>  Cc: city.council@cityofpaloalto.org  Subject: Re: University Ave Beige Pole Color Dear Caltrain Board, The more beige poles that go up at University Ave station, the more unsightly it becomes. At ground level, you might think the beige color matches the station, but from the view of local buildings, you are completely destroying the view of our Santa Cruz Mountains, and local green vegetation on Stanford campus. Can you please look into a way to fix this? Perhaps, painting any height above 10 feet, to be the standard forest green? Telecom poles can be camouflaged, the same applies here. Please look in to it, and let me know some options. Thank you, Martin -- Martin Sommer 650-346-5307 martin@sommer.net http://www.linkedin.com/in/martinsommer "Turn technical vision into reality." On 2020-09-30 12:05, calmod@caltrain.com wrote: Dear Martin, Thank you for contacting Caltrain Electrification. The selection of the beige color was done in coordination with the City of Palo Alto and is a common color for poles located near stations. Most poles are a neutral chrome color along the project area but in some cases, such as near stations, Caltrain staff worked with local cities to identify pole colors that aligned with certain station areas. Once the poles have been procured and placed, we are not able to change the colors of those poles. 18 Thank you again for reaching out to us. Best, The Caltrain Team On 2020-09-25T10:17:50-07:00, Martin J Sommer <martin@sommer.net> wrote: Good morning, Please see the attached picture, of a beige pole placed last night. This creates a real eye sore!! Questions: 1) Why are you using a beige color vs the std forest green (that blends with the trees), and 2) can these beige poles please be painted forest green, before electrification occurs? I know that this is a "big ask". Thank you, Martin -- Martin Sommer 650-346-5307 martin@sommer.net <mailto:martin@sommer.net>www.linkedin.com/in/martins ommer <http://www.linkedin.com/in/martinsommer> "Turn technical vision into reality." -- Martin Sommer 650-346-5307 martin@sommer.net www.linkedin.com/in/martinsommer "Turn technical vision into reality." -- Martin Sommer 650-346-5307 martin@sommer.net 19 www.linkedin.com/in/martinsommer "Turn technical vision into reality." ATTENTION: This email came from an external source.  Do not open attachments or click on links from unknown senders.      -- Martin Sommer 650-346-5307 martin@sommer.net www.linkedin.com/in/martinsommer "Turn technical vision into reality." 20 Baumb, Nelly From:David White <davidwhite27064@yahoo.com> Sent:Wednesday, February 3, 2021 9:26 AM To:dcombs@menlopark.org; bnash@menlopark.org; jwolosin@menlopark.org; RDMueller@menlopark.org; cttaylor@menlopark.org; Council, City; DuBois, Tom; tomforcouncil@gmail.com; Cormack, Alison; Filseth, Eric (Internal); Kou, Lydia; kou.pacc@gmail.com; Tanaka, Greg; greg@gregtanaka.org; city.council@menlopark.org Subject:Facebook Concerns CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  To Whom It May Concern: I am a concerned Facebook user in Houston, Texas, and here is my problem with the platform. I am not sure if you are able to help, but this actually involves all Facebook users across America! I am writing on behalf of ALL Facebook users in the United States of America! I have noticed that there are a lot of strange things going on at Facebook. One, in particular, that irritates me is the fact that they are allowing pedophile groups on the platform. Yes, we all know that pedophilia is highly illegal, but what concerns me is that Facebook doesn’t give a hoot about protecting the public from harm. This really bothers me that Facebook is allowing pedophiles to find and capture innocent children. I have been thinking that Mark Zuckerberg and the whole twisted crew are pedophiles, themselves. If Facebook gets shut down, I think we might be a little safer in the long run. Also they allow theriocide, which is the killing of animals and pedicide, meaning the killing of children. We need to put a stop to this garbage. I have started a petition to shut Facebook down, and I would like for you to help spread the word and protect all children and animals from a disastrous fate! Thank you! #SaveOurChildren Link to the petition: petition: DEMAND Mark Zuckerberg Be Put In Prison For His Criminal Behavior (thepetitionsite.com)     Sign Petition: DEMAND Mark Zuckerberg Be Put In Prison For His Criminal ...   21 I hate Facebook so much! They don't give a bleep about people! I was on a 30 day ban for something I did not do ...    Regards, David White 22 Baumb, Nelly From:Menachem Mevashir <mevashir@aol.com> Sent:Wednesday, February 3, 2021 8:41 AM To:riverprincess7@gmail.com; tirzahfirestone@gmail.com; susanmiller1228@gmail.com; vicky@vickyflint.com Cc:CityLeaders@fcgov.com; Council, City; letters@nytimes.com; letters@washingtonpost.com Subject:RE: Christian Fascism CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  We may well be headed to open civil war in America. One could argue that the first Civil War was actually a struggle  between Christians and Jews versus secular humanists and atheists. The historical record will confirm that most  churches and synagogues supported slavery and sympathized with the Confederacy. Many of the strongest abolitionists  would be called secular humanists today.  I think this schism goes back to the very founding of America. The Puritans who came here were religious extremists  seeking freedom to practice their faith and to persecute unbelievers Indians blacks and women. America is deeply  rooted in prejudice supremacism and paternalistic arrogance. So perhaps it is time for this original sin to come out into  the open and to be fought over. The problem is that today's religious extremists and fundamentalists are heavily armed.  They are quite different from the time of Christ when Jesus told his followers that two swords would be enough for all of  them. Today every Christian family in this country has at least two firearms and lots of ammunition. So they clearly are in  a good position to violently overthrow the established order.  The claim that is so often trumpeted in fundamentalist churches throughout the country that the American founders  were Evangelical Christians is as sad joke. In my reading of American history the founders were Freemasons Deists and  even Atheists. Of course some of them were committed Christians but certainly not all of them. This brazen revisionism  of American history would put the old Soviet and Nazi propagandists to shame.  I would like to add this final thought. Roman writers record that the early Christians made a very favorable impression  on the people if the Empire. Romans were impressed with the love meekness charity generosity and lack of violence in  the Christian community. The early Christians did not serve in the Roman military and did not engage in violence on  behalf of the Empire.   None of this is true in today's America. American Christians are virtually indistinguishable from non‐Christian‐Americans.  They go to the same sporting events, gambling casinos, the same kinds of entertainment movies and vacations. They  have a similar divorce rate and a similar proclivity to watching internet porn and engaging in spousal and child abuse.  Most non‐Christian Americans look at the Christian community is just another power‐seeking partisan block. They do not  discern anything especially spiritual or gentle in the American Christian community. They are particularly noted for their  love of the military and what they call redemptive violence, which is why they are so heavily armed and such  enthusiastic followers of the NRA.  If they succeed in a violent takeover of our society I propose this as their new Pledge of allegiance:  I pledge allegiance to the flag   Of the Unconscious States of Awareness  And to the banana republic   23 For which it stands   One plantation   Under gold   Individual   With tyranny and Injustice for All.  May God show Mercy to our dark arrogant self‐righteous contentious society. Amen      On Wednesday, February 3, 2021 Menachem Mevashir <mevashir@aol.com> wrote:    https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/28/opinion/christian‐nationalists‐capitol‐attack.html  https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/03/opinion/qanon‐conspiracy‐theories.html  These articles by Professor Thomas Edsall at the New York Times confirm would I have observed for many years: That  Christians are fundamentally hostile to democracy and yearn for an autocratic ruler who will impose their values on  society as a whole, someone like a Constantine the Great.  When Christians have to share power between Baptist Methodists and Catholics, then they sing praises of democracy.  But they are completely unwilling to respect Democratic norms with non‐Christian elements of society.  None of this is surprising. The Bible itself is an inherently autocratic text constantly seeking to ingratiate believers into  the good favor of monarchs emperors and despots. There is no democratic principle in the Bible at all.  The crucial point that Edsall makes is that American Christians have despaired of persuading individuals to accept their  belief system via the free marketplace of ideas and now desperately turn to the instruments of government power to  impose their unwanted values on the non‐religious majority of the country.  24 Baumb, Nelly From:Yahoo Mail.® <honkystar@yahoo.com> Sent:Wednesday, February 3, 2021 12:21 AM To:Honky Subject:Banned.Video CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  ? One of my GOALS for 2021 is to POST ALL BANNED VIDEOS on certain venues to ALL OTHER VENUES that do NOT ban ANYTHING To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. Banned.Video The most banned videos on the internet. 25 Baumb, Nelly From:Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, February 2, 2021 8:44 PM To:Rebecca Eisenberg Cc:City Mgr; Council, City; Planning Commission; chuck jagoda; Roberta Ahlquist; ParkRec Commission; Human Relations Commission; chuck jagoda Subject:It’s Marjorie Taylor Greene’s Party Now —by Michele Goldberg NYT’s -Feb 2 CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on  links.  ________________________________    Hi Rebecca,    You’ve probably already seen this piece, quite scary to say the least. At least one very interesting turn of phrase. In any  event I look forward to discussing the article when your time permits.  Best, aram    P.S. Will share with the HRC, Parks & Recreation, PTC, and city council in hopes of generating some conversation around  the subject matter of the letter.      26 Baumb, Nelly From:Jo Ann Mandinach <joann@needtoknow.com> Sent:Tuesday, February 2, 2021 6:15 PM To:Lydia Kou; City Mgr; Council, City Subject:City Manager's Priority Survey Extension -- STILL doesn't Work-- and PA wants to provide fiber to the home??!! CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Dear Ms Kou et al, Thanks for responding to my recent complaint about the City Manager's Priority survey having no password reset and taking the time to inform your Facebook followers the survey deadline has been extended to 2/10. Given the amount of time we're all wasting on the Great Vaccine Chase with Sutter/Palo Alto Medical, it was nice to see some responsiveness and good news. I dutifully went to the new survey, hit PASSWORD RESET and waited for the promised email instructions -- a process that's normally instantaneous because requests are automatically generated. No reset email after 45 minutes. Two other options were offered: log in with your Facebook or Google account so I persevered and tried those. Facebook wanted to reset all my privacy options so I signed in with my Google account. Success! Finally! I entered my zip code 94301 as prompted for the correct survey.   POICO, the survey provider, has NOTHING for Palo Alto. 27 2+ hours later I still haven't gotten the password reset email!! Several points/priorities 1) Test-driving citizen outreach BEFORE reaching out is recommended. We've got a huge Communications Staff. 1a) Monitor your contractors performance. We're paying for the POICO survey! MY PRIORITIES: MANAGEMENT ACCOUNTABILITY, GOVERNMENT WASTE, PERFORMANCE. 2) If the city can't administer a simple survey, how can it possibly hope to compete in the Fiber arena and why is it wasting money on this again since it failed miserably on delivering internet to the home decades ago! MY PRIORITY: COMMON SENSE, ENDING THE CONSULTANT GRAVY TRAIN, GOVERNMENT WASTE, ACCOUNTABILITY. FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT During a Dowturn. One would like to think our Citizen Priorities matter at a time when city satisfaction has been declining for years. Best regards, Jo Ann Mandinach Middlefield Road Palo Alto, CA 94301   28 Baumb, Nelly From:Stephen Rock <ser84@caa.columbia.edu> Sent:Tuesday, February 2, 2021 5:28 PM To:Council, City Subject:DANGEROUS INTERSECTION AT ROSS AND MEADOW CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  There is a dangerous design flaw in the current stop sign configuration at Ross and Meadow.    History:  Originally it was a 4 way stop.    A couple of years ago it was converted to a roundabout (yield signs on entry, priority to vehicles in the roundabout).   Due to complaints by some people there was a recent change with STOP signs put on Ross.      Now vehicles from Ross (no stop sign) are in conflict with vehicles making a left turn from the opposite direction on  Ross. When the left turning vehicles pass Ross after going around 180 deg, it is not clear if the vehicle in the circle has  the right of way or the vehicle entering the circle.    This morning, I was forced to yield before entering the circle when a car in the circle arrived at the intersection at  almost exactly the same time and didn't even slow down.        This is an engineered danger.  The designs should prevent conflict, not foster them.    The best solution is to restore the intersection to a regular roundabout. Another, less satisfactory solution is to add  yield signs on Ross (slightly confusing since  vehicles on Meadow have a stop sign, so do Ross vehicles yield to the  vehicles at the stop sign?      The entire purpose of the project was to speed up traffic at the intersection and made it better for cyclist. The current  configuration creates a great danger by using a very unusual intersection, perhaps in violation of state rules.      ‐‐   Stephen Rock   3872 Nathan Way, Palo Alto, CA 94303    29 Baumb, Nelly From:Yahoo Mail.® <honkystar@yahoo.com> Sent:Tuesday, February 2, 2021 2:07 PM To:Honky Subject:One Great Work Network launching today! CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.    View this email in your browser      To help prprivacy, Mprevented download from the In       Mark Passio & What On Earth Is Happening Present: ONE GREAT WORK NETWORK 02-02-2021   Hello Friends, I have gathered together this amazing group of conscious Content Creators and invited them to a platform to support and feature their work: One Great Work Network.   To help prprivacy, Mprevented download from the In   One Great Work Network is a privately-organized collective of Conscious Individuals, who each create dynamic content for the purpose of spreading the message of Natural Law, Truth, and Freedom to a worldwide audience. This is a four-year vision in the making and I am so grateful for everyone’s 30   contributions. Together, this group of Freedom Advocates and Spiritual Warriors will continue to fight in the ongoing war against the Dark Occult Ruling Class.   To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.   One Great Work Network features individual profiles where you can review and study the videos, articles and blogs of these hard working researchers and donate to them individually to support their work.     The new website also features a 24/7 Livestream player presenting rotating content from all of our contributors in addition to Livestream (coming soon).   One Great Work Network is open to the public and live now!   I decided to make this website free to the world. My work at WhatOnEarthIsHappening.com has been so generously funded by my supporters, I chose to employ the same model for the new network. No paywall. Please donate to help fund the Network.   To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.   To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.   To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.   To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.   To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.   To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.   To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented autoof this picture from the Internet.   To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented autoof this picture from the Internet.   To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented autoof this picture from the Internet.   To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented autoof this picture from the Internet.   To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented autoof this picture from the Internet.        Thank You! 31   To help prprivacy, Mprevented download from the In   Join us now! One Great Work Network Website is LIVE! Thank you for your kind support, Mark Passio & The WhatOnEarthIsHappening Team Coming soon: One Great Work Network Livestream Shows!     To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.       Unsubscribe from the WOEIH Newsletter        32 Baumb, Nelly From:Martha Hauser <marthahauser@sbcglobal.net> Sent:Tuesday, February 2, 2021 12:05 PM To:Council, City Subject:24-unit apartment in College Terrace CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Dear City Council; I am a College Terrace home owner and resident of 65 years. I work hard to check myself about NIMBY thoughts and feelings. All Palo Alto residents share in building and maintaining a community fabric that ensures equality and diversity. However, Palo Alto is not affordable, and is unlikely to ever be affordable, even with moderate income housing. It is not just housing that makes the cost of living here high. We can however support housing development, and I wholly support building along the El Camino corridor and where their is access to public transportation. College Terrace is eclectic, but the character is older cottages and single family homes. Because of Stanford, there has always been a high rate of rental property, but for single families. Remodels by new owners who will live in their homes have kept the look and feel of this unique neighborhood in Palo Alto. Over the past 15 years of so our narrow strip of a neighborhood has not only been surrounded by Stanford housing but infiltrated. Stanford is buying most of the homes that come on the market. A few do get renovated to keep their character, but many are now being torn down and replaced with modern homes that fill the lots. These are homes that can only be owned or rented by Stanford affiliated people and are controlled by Stanford who will do what they choose with the property in the long run. Stanford has done a wonderful job with the homes along Olmstead and Stanford West. They maintain the properties and have worked to keep traffic from filtering through College Terrace. I am very appreciative and thankful for this. I will just go on record, however, that I do not like Stanford buying up College Terrace homes for their exclusive use. Thank you for listening to my thoughts so far. Now about the proposed 24-unit apartments near the library. This is an absurd proposal. Industrial, out of place design, 3-story and not enough parking. (Many of us already have to pay for parking permits to park on the street by our homes! ) The developers clearly have no concern for the community. Had the proposal been for 10-12 units or townhomes, 2-story, with 1.25 or 1.5 parking spaces per unit, attractive unobtrusive design, there might have been something to talk about. What are the developers plans? Ultimately sell it to Stanford? Please recall the fiasco development of JJ&F Market block. We proceeded in good faith, and then just gave in and gave up. The market moved to the inaccessible corner with creepy underground parking and the developers put in a full cafeteria on the top floor of the building for occupants. It is ugly and upsetting and we gave in. Is the City Council giving up on College Terrace? Let Stanford do as they want and allow developers to drive their own agendas in our neighborhood? Is there not enough property along El Camino that can be developed for housing? I would support landscaping and having our City create a development plan along El Camino. Palo Alto is not an affordable place to live. The Bay Area is not an affordable place to live. Talking about affordable living is ridiculous. I encourage our City Council to focus on developing planned, diverse housing options in our community and to stop talking about affordability and giving developers free rein. Thanks for hearing my views, Martha Hauser 34 Baumb, Nelly From:Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> Sent:Tuesday, February 2, 2021 1:53 AM To:Loran Harding; alumnipresident@stanford.edu; antonia.tinoco@hsr.ca.gov; David Balakian; fred beyerlein; beachrides; bballpod; 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; kwalsh@kmaxtv.com; kfsndesk; Mark Kreutzer; lalws4@gmail.com; leager; 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: Fri. Jan. 29, 2021. Dr. Campbell. Big news on Novavax and J&J vaccines. When? 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: Tue, Feb 2, 2021 at 1:09 AM  Subject: Fwd: Fri. Jan. 29, 2021. Dr. Campbell. Big news on Novavax and J&J vaccines. When?  To: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>      ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐  From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>  Date: Tue, Feb 2, 2021 at 1:03 AM  Subject: Fwd: Fri. Jan. 29, 2021. Dr. Campbell. Big news on Novavax and J&J vaccines. When?  To: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>      ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐  From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>  Date: Mon, Feb 1, 2021 at 5:14 PM  Subject: Fwd: Fri. Jan. 29, 2021. Dr. Campbell. Big news on Novavax and J&J vaccines. When?  To: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>      ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐  From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>  Date: Mon, Feb 1, 2021 at 3:47 AM  35 Subject: Fwd: Fri. Jan. 29, 2021. Dr. Campbell. Big news on Novavax and J&J vaccines. When?  To: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>      ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐  From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>  Date: Mon, Feb 1, 2021 at 2:04 AM  Subject: Fwd: Fri. Jan. 29, 2021. Dr. Campbell. Big news on Novavax and J&J vaccines. When?  To: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>      ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐  From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>  Date: Sat, Jan 30, 2021 at 4:50 PM  Subject: Fwd: Fri. Jan. 29, 2021. Dr. Campbell. Big news on Novavax and J&J vaccines. When?  To: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>      ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐  From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>  Date: Sat, Jan 30, 2021 at 3:53 PM  Subject: Fwd: Fri. Jan. 29, 2021. Dr. Campbell. Big news on Novavax and J&J vaccines. When?  To: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>      ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐  From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>  Date: Sat, Jan 30, 2021 at 3:49 PM  Subject: Fwd: Fri. Jan. 29, 2021. Dr. Campbell. Big news on Novavax and J&J vaccines. When?  To: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>      ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐  From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>  Date: Sat, Jan 30, 2021 at 4:36 AM  Subject: Fwd: Fri. Jan. 29, 2021. Dr. Campbell. Big news on Novavax and J&J vaccines. When?  To: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>      ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐  From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>  Date: Sat, Jan 30, 2021 at 4:28 AM  36 Subject: Fwd: Fri. Jan. 29, 2021. Dr. Campbell. Big news on Novavax and J&J vaccines. When?  To: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>      ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐  From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>  Date: Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 9:55 PM  Subject: Fri. Jan. 29, 2021. Dr. Campbell. Big news on Novavax and J&J vaccines. When?  To: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>                        Tuesday, Feb. 2, 2021                 Dr. Campbell of UK discusses the phase three trial results announced Friday in the UK for the J&J one‐shot  vaccine and the Novavax vaccine.              LH‐  Some items first:  1) The Kent variant is now in 33 States. It was in 24 States a few days ago. KCBS said this AM  that Stanford has detected both it and the Brazil variant in the SF Bay Area. I think the Kent was in So. Calif. days ago.  Surprised it took this long to be found in the Bay Area. Kent is 55% more transmissible than the original Covid virus and  maybe more lethal. The CDC forecasts that it will be the dominant strain in the U.S. by mid‐March. Cases in the U.S.  could then quadruple in April. It is now a race between the Kent variant and the vaccines. We desperately need the  Oxford vaccine now. The only way that the UK and Ireland could rein in the explosion of new cases when the Kent  variant became dominant there was to impose a strict lockdown, still in effect.                          2) KCBS analyzed why the schools are still closed in most of Calif. despite Gov. Newsom's efforts to open  them. The California Teacher's Union is fighting it unless the teachers are all vaccinated first, there is adequate PPE in  the schools, they are properly cleaned, students are kept distant, etc. The legislature and the Teacher's Union are at  loggerheads here. The Leg. wants to open the schools.  Cannot blame the teachers, especially those over 55. See Item  #3.                    3). Dr. Campbell has said repeatedly that immunity builds rather slowly from the Covid vaccines. RE the first  shot of the Oxford vaccine, now having been used for four weeks in the UK, he says that for younger people, immunity is  fairly good after two weeks. For older people, it takes three weeks. At that point, you can stll get sick, but you won't  wind up in a hospital with serious illness. And the second shot gives you real immunity after some additional weeks. SO,  if the teachers win on the demand that they be vaccinated before they return to schools, it will then be weeks before  they have enough immunity to be safe. That is a big point, and they should make demands accordingly.                    4)  Dr. Campbell has said repeadedly that one should not take anti‐pyretics after being vaccinated.  Acetamenophen, Ibuprofen. If one avoids these for weeks after being vaccinated, he will have better immunity.  I got a  fact sheet when I got my first Moderna shot at Kaiser, 4 pp., and it says nothing about this. It does say that if you have  reactions to the vaccine, contact your doctor. I suppose the doctor might then say to avoid anti‐pyretics if you have  muscle aches and headaches.                 5)  The European Medicines Agency approved the Astrazeneca‐Oxford vaccine Friday, Jan. 29, 2021. So now 27  countries in Europe, the four countries of the UK, plus India and Argentina have all approved it. It has been used for four  weeks in the UK as of Monday, Feb. 1, 2021. And the FDA still holds it up for use in the U.S., costing lives. President  Biden and Congress should step in and insist that the FDA grant an EUA for the Oxford vaccine. To get the Pfizer vaccine  an EUA, the WH Chief of Staff had to get the Director of the FDA into the back seat of a car and tell him to approve it  that day or be fired at the end of the day. The FDA Director denied the account, but he did approve the Pfizer vaccine  that day.       37                  Now here is Dr. John Campbell in the UK for Friday, Jan. 29, 2014:                Update ‐ YouTube                      He says, "The Novavax vaccine has 89.3% efficacy (i.e., it prevents symptoms)  and it also prevents severe  disease.                     J&J on Friday, Jan. 29, 2021 published phase 3 data. It overall efficacy is 66% but after 28 days it provides  complete protection against severe disease.                  Back to Novavax vaccine: Only a small amount of the vaccine is needed, facilitating mass production. It can be  kept at normal refrigerator temps. It shows efficacy against both the South African and the UK (Kent) variant. It protects  against severe disease from the Kent variant. Dr. Campbell hopes that it will be approved for use in the UK in weeks  rather than in months. He thinks that mid‐March for approval is likely in the UK.                Re the South Africa variant, the Novavax vaccine shows 60% efficacy against the South Africa variant. Novavax is  working on a vaccine targeted at the South Africa variant, so 60% efficacy will become 90% efficacy.               The Novavax U.S. and Mexico trial is in phase 3. "Will the U.S. regulators accept the European data for a EUA in  the U.S."   At 16:56.  "They should, but I suspect that they may not". "The situation in the U.S. and Mexico could turn  dramatically worse due to the UK variant spreading there at the moment."           Re. the J&J vaccine, at 20:30:  "It requires one dose, can be kept at fridge temperatures, and is reasonably priced. So  it is cheaper than the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines, but more than the Oxford vaccine, but not by much"‐ Dr. Campbell.                                      NBC Nightly News Friday, Jan. 29, 2021   J&J reveals results of phase 3 trial and will seek EUA from FDA next  week.  "The FDA could approve it in a matter of weeks".    I wouldn't count on it!  The EU regulators, the European  Medicines Agency,  approved the Oxford vaccine today, Friday, January 29, 2021, for 27 countries. The UK has been  injecting the Oxford vaccine for four weeks as of Monday, 2‐1‐21, with no ill effects. The Germans are saying that  persons over 65 should not get the Oxford vaccine. You see Boris Johnson refuting that in a vid below‐  BBC News on  Friday AM, 1‐29‐21. If the Germans are right, no problem. Approve it and give it to those under 55 and give the Pfizer  and Moderna vaccines that that frees up to those over 65.  But with all of that, the FDA still will not authorize the  desperately needed Oxford vaccine for use in the U.S. The Brits and now the European regulators are all liars and  morons. The Oxford vaccine has been approved for use in India, with 1.3 billion people, and in Argentina. Their medical  regulators are all liars and morons too. We need to keep studying the Oxford vaccine for months, maybe years, says the  FDA. President Biden and Congress should intervene. Have the FDA testify before Congress as to what the hold‐up is. Ask  the UK regulators to testify as to why they felt safe in approving it for use there in December, 2020. Ask them to address  the FDA's reservations about the Oxford vaccine and have them do that with the FDA experts sitting there  listening. Invite the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, the MHRA, to testify before Congress  about the Oxford vaccine. The FDA is just killing people now with their intransigence.               Johnson & Johnson Covid Vaccine 72 Percent Effective In U.S. | NBC Nightly News ‐ YouTube           Covid‐19: Novavax vaccine shows 89% efficacy in UK trials එඒ @BBC News live ‐ BBC ‐ YouTube                 The FDA has all of the data that the UK regulators had when they approved the Oxford vaccine. It is safe and  effective. It is a national scandal that the FDA will not grant an EUA for the Astrazeneca‐Oxford vaccine. Doing so now  would save thousands of lives.                     Dr. Fauci was on the news tonight. He did not say one syllable about the following two items:  38                    1). The fact that Dr. Campbell last Saturday, Jan. 23, 2021 issued a strong warning to the U.S. Dr. Campbell  showed charts for the new cases in Ireland and Portugal when the Kent variant became dominant. The CDC forecasts  that it will become dominant in the U.S. in mid‐march. See the email I sent out including his video of Jan. 23. I provide it  again below.  When that happened in Ireland, to get the number of new cases back down dramatically, they had to  impose a total and severe lockdown. Portugal will have to do so too. The new cases in Portugal have soared with the  arrival of the Kent variant. Denmark is in a serious lockdown already. They sequence 100% of new Covid cases, so they  know how many new cases they have of the Kent variant. It has become known as "the new variant".  The U.S.  sequences 0.3% of new cases, so we detect the Kent variant now in 33 States, but we do not know how prevalent it is.  Denmark forecasts that the Kent variant will become dominant there by mid‐February and that the number of new cases  there could quadruple by the beginning of April. As that starts to happen, Denmark will have to go to an even more  severe, total lockdown. The Kent variant is already dominant in the four countries  of the UK and  they are in a severe  lockdown. Germany is in a serious lockdown. But consider again the Danish case: the UK variant will be dominant by  mid‐February, new cases will explode by early April, and so a severe lockdown will need to be imposed sometime in  March. Dr. Campbell said he was using Denmark as an analogy for the U.S. If we have the Kent variant as the dominant  one in mid‐March, as the CDC forecasts, the U.S, will have to impose a severe lockdown as the new cases soar in mid‐ April. Dr. Campbell said it is now a race between vaccinations and the spread of the Kent variant. It is 55% more  transmissible than the original Covid virus and it may be 30% more lethal. He said that the thought of that happening in  a country like the U.S. is frightening and that he hopes he is wrong. But "mum's" the word in official Washington about  all of this.                 Vid by Dr. John Campbell in the UK on Saturday, Jan. 23, 2021 warning the U.S.: I urge President Biden, all 50  governors, and every member of Congress to watch this.  News media:  Please forward this email to all of them.                         New variant dangers ‐ YouTube                  The U.S. government is using the DPA to get supplies out faster, and trying to get more vaccines out to the  States. Having FEMA build 100 vaccination sites. FEMA is asking for 10,000 troops to help with the job. California is  centralizing the distribution of vaccines instead of giving them out to 58 county health departments. Improving the  scheduling system for vaccinations. So efforts are undeway to get more people vaccinated faster, but with only the  Pfizer and Moderna vaccines approved for use in this country, it is a struggle. Approving the Oxford vaccine now would  boost the number of those vaccinated. It has been approved for production in Maryland and in Phoenix, Dr. Campbell  said in one video. Approving the J&J vaccine sooner rather than later would also help. Same for the Novavax vaccine.  Dr.  Campbell has said of the Europeans and of the U.S. regulators, "What part of 'emergency' don't they understand?"                   2)  The fact that the FDA, having all of the information that the British Medicines and Healthcare Products  Regulatory Agency, the MHRA, had when they approved the use of the Oxford vaccine there, still will not grant an EUA  for the Oxford vaccine here. Again, on Monday, Feb. 1, 2021, the British wlll have been injecting the Oxford vaccine for  four weeks. Isn't that a huge trial in itself? STILL, the FDA will not budge. In Ireland, the number of new cases quadrupled  when the Kent variant became dominant. If that happens in the U.S., we will see a disaster unfolding in our hospitals, as  if we don't see one already in Los Angeles County, in parts of Texas, and elsewhere. The decline in the number of new  cases, hospitalizations and deaths that we've seen in recent days in the U.S. could be the calm before the storm. If cases  quadruple here, the President and Congress will have to impose a total and severe lockdown, I would think enforced by  the military.  The business community will be in court suing to stop it.                 The federal government recently imposed travel restrictions from many European countries. Those should not just  require a negative Covid test within three days of departure. Dr. Campbell said that three days is plenty of time to get  infected. And we can't impose "self‐isolation" on people arriving from those countries. The Australians impose isolation  on arrivals and guard them to be sure they stay isolated. They have zero new cases.                    Our government has imposed travel restrictions on South Africa and Brazil. The British imposed those weeks  ago AND imposed them on countries in southern Africa and on countries around Brazil, and on Portugal. The U.S.  39 government should do that too.  I heard on the news that U.S. citizens can return from South Africa, but that non‐U.S.  citizens arriving from South Africa will be deported. Any U.S. citizens returning from South Africa should undergo a two  week quarantine, with police guarding them to be sure they do not break quarantine.                      The rule announced by the U.S. is that anyone traveling "from or through South Africa" will be subject to these  rules. What is wrong with the people in Washington, D.C.? Big, rich Nazi "affirmative action" jobs filled by peiople who  don't know squat?  The Republic of South Africa is something of an economic powerhouse. People, usually men, travel  to and from there from other countries in southern Africa in large numbers to work, usually by train. Therefore, any  flights from any country in southern Africa should be subject to the above rules. U.S. citizens only should be allowed to  come in from those countries and be quarantined, and non‐U.S. citizens from any countries in southern African should  get deported immediately. Check with the British to see which countries in southern Africa they have applied this to.                 Announcement by U.S. Embassy in Mozambique re travel to U.S.:               Travel Alert: Flight Availability Warning and COVID‐19 Update for Mozambique | U.S. Embassy in Mozambique                          Early January, 2021‐  UK extends travel ban of entry into the UK to eleven countries in southern Africa:                    UK extends England entry ban to travellers from 11 African countries for COVID variant | Reuters                                    The same rules should  apply to countries around Brazil. That is what the British have imposed.  You can't just  control the entry of citizens of Brazil. Persons residing in countries around Brazil have to be prevented from entering the  U.S. as well.              The news said that wearing three masks is better than one, and I am doing that now on my rare forays out. I have  also cut way back on my use of Acetamenophen and Ibuprophen.                Also, the Treasury Department should announce that the deadline for filing TY2020 tax returns will be July 15,  2021. That was done in 2020 and the pandemic is worse in the U.S. this year than last year. It could become MUCH  worse here by mid‐April.                      L. William Harding              Fresno, Ca.  40 Baumb, Nelly From:Rebecca Eisenberg <rebecca@winwithrebecca.com> Sent:Monday, February 1, 2021 10:33 PM To:Council, City; Greg Tanaka; Filseth, Eric (Internal); Tom DuBois; Pat Burt; Alison Cormack; Shikada, Ed Subject:How about the FRENCH conviction of JC Decaux for corruption? CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  https://www.marketingweek.com/decaux‐sentenced‐in‐corruption‐scandal‐2/    Jean-Claude Decaux, owner and chairman of outdoor advertising giant JC Decaux, has been sentenced for his part in a French corruption scandal. Decaux has been fined FF100,000 (£10,000) and given a six-month suspended sentence for collusion after being awarded a contract by a corrupt politician. He plans to appeal against the conviction. Decaux’s co-defendant Jacques Verlade, vice-president of the RPR party in the French senate and former president of the Aquitane Regional Council, received a similar penalty for bribery. The court heard Verlade awarded a public works contract to a Decaux subsidiary without inviting other bids. The FF39.8m (£3.9m) contract was awarded to Direct Info Municipale for the rental and maintenance of clocks in the Aquitane region’s 204 secondary schools. Decaux was charged with “favouritism” under French procure-ment law. ADVERTISING The Bordeaux Criminal Court heard the case’s “pre-contractual negotiations contravened the rules of the public works contract code”. Decaux Group chief executive Jean-Francois Decaux says his father, Jean-Claude, is confident of winning his appeal. “This is not a case of bribery and corruption. It is a breach of procurement law,” he says. “He was charged with favouritism ,which does not exist under English law. It is a new law and we hope the Court of Appeal will make a very clear statement that this kind of sentence is completely out of proportion to the facts. He adds: “I don’t think the case will affect JC Decaux’s reputation.” Last year, the Decaux Group wrestled control of the £3m Glasgow city bus shelter contract from arch-rival Adshel – part of Clear Channel Communications. A legal appeal by Adshel 41 was later thrown out. JC Decaux also bought rival outdoor contractor Avenir, owner of Mills &amp; Allen, for £650m.       Rebecca L. Eisenberg Esq.  www.linkedin.com/in/eisenberg  www.winwithrebecca.com  rebecca@winwithrebecca.com  415-235-8078      On Mon, Feb 1, 2021 at 10:28 PM Rebecca Eisenberg <rebecca@winwithrebecca.com> wrote:  JC Decaux is known as providing "one of the nation's worst" toilet contracts. Apparently JCD wined & dined SF city  staff.  Did that happen in Palo Alto? Why would your staff recommend such a known fraud?     Why not put this contract up for bid?     https://missionlocal.org/2020/02/san‐franciscos‐toilet‐and‐kiosk‐contract‐with‐jcdecaux‐under‐investigation‐in‐wake‐ of‐public‐works‐boss‐mohammed‐nurus‐arrest/     San Francisco’s toilet and kiosk contract with JCDecaux under investigation in wake of Public Works boss Mohammed Nuru’s arrest To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. by JOE ESKENAZIFEBRUARY 3, 2020 To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.JC Decaux tru ck JCDecaux cleaning up at the 16th Street BART Plaza. Photo by Lydia Chávez December 7, 2019   Multiple sources have confirmed to Mission Local that a long‐running toilet and kiosk contract with JCDecaux  — lamented by city officials as one of the nation’s worst — is under review by the City Attorney and controller in the  wake of Public Works boss Mohammed Nuru’s arrest last month on fraud charges.   The Public Works contract involves the ubiquitous army‐green toilets located throughout the city. A pact with French  transnational JCDecaux for self‐cleaning toilets sporting ads was sealed all the way back in 1995 under Mayor Frank  45 Baumb, Nelly From:Rebecca Eisenberg <rebecca@winwithrebecca.com> Sent:Monday, February 1, 2021 10:29 PM To:Council, City; Greg Tanaka; Filseth, Eric (Internal); Tom DuBois; Pat Burt; Alison Cormack; Shikada, Ed Subject:Claims against JC Decaux for fraud in SF CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  JC Decaux is known as providing "one of the nation's worst" toilet contracts. Apparently JCD wined & dined SF city  staff.  Did that happen in Palo Alto? Why would your staff recommend such a known fraud?     Why not put this contract up for bid?     https://missionlocal.org/2020/02/san‐franciscos‐toilet‐and‐kiosk‐contract‐with‐jcdecaux‐under‐investigation‐in‐wake‐ of‐public‐works‐boss‐mohammed‐nurus‐arrest/     San Francisco’s toilet and kiosk contract with JCDecaux under investigation in wake of Public Works boss Mohammed Nuru’s arrest To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. by JOE ESKENAZIFEBRUARY 3, 2020 To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.JC Decaux tru ck JCDecaux cleaning up at the 16th Street BART Plaza. Photo by Lydia Chávez December 7, 2019   Multiple sources have confirmed to Mission Local that a long‐running toilet and kiosk contract with JCDecaux  — lamented by city officials as one of the nation’s worst — is under review by the City Attorney and controller in the  wake of Public Works boss Mohammed Nuru’s arrest last month on fraud charges.   The Public Works contract involves the ubiquitous army‐green toilets located throughout the city. A pact with French  transnational JCDecaux for self‐cleaning toilets sporting ads was sealed all the way back in 1995 under Mayor Frank  Jordan. Willie Brown decried it as a “giveaway” during his subsequent campaign vs. Jordan, but later sang its praises,  46 expanded it and locked it in place for decades — after visiting JCDecaux officials in ’96 for a decadent French jaunt in  which he was lavished with a helicopter ride.  JCDecaux is a company with quite a knack for, quite literally, wining and dining its public clients. Mission Local wrote last  year about the elegant waterfront farmhouse in the bucolic Parisian suburb of Plaisir at which the company receives  dignitaries; Brown visited, as did Gavin Newsom — and, we’re told, Nuru was a guest as well.    Data that Public Works sent to Mission Local last year reveals that JCDecaux amassed some $125 million in ad revenue  between 1997 and 2017 — but, per the terms of its contract, only paid 5.8 percent of that to the city ($7.3 million). To  put that in context, the outdoor advertising deal the city signed with Clear Channel for Muni shelters requires the  company to hand over 55 percent of its ad revenue. The deal the city inked with Titan Outdoor for Muni vehicles  mandates the city receive 65 percent of the ad revenue.   “There is no question that JCDecaux took the city of San Francisco on a long walk off a short pier,” Supervisor Aaron  Peskin told us last year. “The bottom line is, there is no city in America, or the world, that got such a bad deal as we did  with JCDecaux 20 years ago.”  And yet, when Public Works in recent years put up this contract for renewal, nobody even bothered to bid on it but  JCDecaux. How does that figure?   Well, an initial 2015 Request for Proposal shared with JCDecaux’s would‐be competitors offered them the de‐facto  impossible timeline of 120 days to individually permit and install dozens of free‐standing outdoor toilets.  In 2016, the city altered these terms — but imposed new conditions that deeply favored JCDecaux. To wit, it minimized  the singular element any competitor could use to unseat the incumbent — offering the city more money. This was  reduced from 65 percent of the judgment criteria to only 20 percent.   This is perverse on its face: Why wouldn’t the city want more money? Why wouldn’t this, far and away, be the deciding  criteria?    Throughout 2020, the Mission has been the center of the  pandemic in San Francisco.  Mission Local has been here to cover it.  Keep us on the scene.  Your generosity spilled over ‐ we raised 108 percent of our goal!  47 Thank you & here is to a glorious  New Year!  I'm not interested  At the same time, the city increased the importance of the “oral interview” with Public Works bosses — or, in  French, l‘entretien oral — from 5 percent of the judgment criteria to a whopping 40 percent.   In the wake of public corruption allegations against Nuru, it’s worth unpacking the above (and the City Attorney and  controller will do even more than that).   Among other accusations in the lengthy complaint vs. Nuru and his right‐hand man, Nick Bovis, are charges that the  Public Works boss essentially bid‐rigged a bathroom and homeless shelter contract to steer it to Bovis.   When you consider JCDecaux’s mastery of enabling its public clients to live the good life and when you consider  allegations that Public Works boss Nuru could be plied with such offers, it’s little surprise this contract is now being  flagged.   The city’s stated terms in this contract minimized the money or services JCDecaux’s competitors could offer and  maximized the input of Public Works insiders (who may or may not have visited that farmhouse). Those competitors  certainly took the hint at the time; none bothered to put in a bid.   Mission Local is told that an undisclosed number of contracts other than this one are being reviewed by the City  Attorney and controller.   City Attorney spokesman John Coté declined to go into specifics. But he did send us a general statement: “The San  Francisco City Attorney’s Office has begun a thorough investigation. We will follow the facts wherever they lead. This  office’s track record of independence is unparalleled, as is our work investigating abuses of the public trust.”  To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.      TAGGED:crimedepartment of public works   To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.   JOE ESKENAZI Joe was born in San Francisco, raised in the Bay Area, and attended U.C. Berkeley. He never left. “Your humble narrator”  was a writer and columnist for SF Weekly from 2007 to 2015, and a senior... More by Joe Eskenazi  48 Rebecca L. Eisenberg Esq.  www.linkedin.com/in/eisenberg  www.winwithrebecca.com  rebecca@winwithrebecca.com  415-235-8078  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: 2/15/ 2021 Document dates: 1/20/2021 – 2/3/2021 Set 2 of 2 Note: Documents for every category may not have been received for packet reproduction in a given week. 49 Baumb, Nelly From:Jeff Chang <jeff.chang.mit@gmail.com> Sent:Monday, February 1, 2021 9:36 PM To:Council, City Cc:Jeff Chang Subject:Support for Casti CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on  links.  ________________________________    Dear Members of the City Council ‐    I am writing in support of the proposed expansion of the Castilleja campus under consideration by the City Council.    We have lived in Palo Alto for over 20 years, and have grown to really treasure the many amenities this city has to offer.  These include the canopy of trees, the supportive community of parents for our local schools, the architectural heritage,  the spirit of innovation, and many more. Our children have attended Palo Alto Unified, including a graduate of Paly, and  a daughter currently attending Casti.    Castilleja is also one of those long standing institutions to treasure in Palo Alto, focussed on educating a future  generation of women leaders. I believe the school’s proposal, 8+ years in the making, has addressed many of the issues  raised along the way in good faith.    Your vote of approval will allow Casti to thrive for its next 100 years.    Thank you,  Jeff Chang  Palo Alto, California  February 2021          50 Baumb, Nelly From:Ken Joye <kmjoye@gmail.com> Sent:Monday, February 1, 2021 6:22 PM To:Council, City Subject:Boulware Park funding CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on  links.  ________________________________    I was not able to speak during the public comments portion of the 1 February 2021 City Council meeting, but understand  that Jonathan Brown spoke to you about the importance of funding the Boulware Park expansion and renovation.  I  would like to echo his comments and hope that you agree that staff’s proposed plan for Boulware Park is worth your  support.    I can tell you that we spent many hours at that park when our children were small.  It was the site of our son’s first  birthday party. I hope that it is the location of many such celebrations over the years to come.  Perhaps children will  even have the opportunity to go down to splash in Matadero Creek from Boulware Park.  Crossing my fingers...    thank you for your service,  Ken Joye  Ventura neighborhood  51 Baumb, Nelly From:Cybele LoVuolo-Bhushan <cybele88lb@gmail.com> Sent:Monday, February 1, 2021 6:06 PM To:Council, City Subject:Delay the Police Building project CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Dear City Council members, In this time of Budget shortfall, it would be wise to delay the new police station.   Dave Price column in today's Daily Post is right on the money.  It looks bad to spend such a huge amount of money with so much uncertainty about an economic recovery and I urge  you to reconsider starting a project of this magnitude at this juncture in our city's economy.  Thank you,     Sincerely,  Ms. Cybele Lovuolo‐Bhushan     52 Baumb, Nelly From:Brown Jonathan <jbrownie2218@yahoo.com> Sent:Monday, February 1, 2021 5:17 PM To:Council, City Cc:Jensen, Peter Subject:Please Fund Boulware Park Renovations CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Below is text I read during Oral Communications at this evening's City Council meeting. Esteemed Members of the City Council: My name is Jonathan Brown, resident of the Ventura Neighborhood and chair of our Neighborhood Association Parks Committee. I urge the City Council to fully fund the renovation of Boulware Park. This is not an ordinary request for funds to be spent on a local park. There are unique reasons why Boulware Park renovation deserves full funding now even in the face of current budgetary challenges. First, Boulware Park was approved for capital improvement funding back in 2017, but the money was never spent. When the Birch Street property came up for sale as a result of our inquiries, the project was postponed. Although a sacrifice, that was the right decision at the time. It would have been a waste of money to improve facilities in a park that would soon be improved through expansion. But it means that upgrading of Boulware Park is even more overdue now than it was then. Second, the Birch Street property has now been purchased, and expansion of Boulware Park complete with a full design plan that was praised by the Parks and Recs Commssion during last week’s meeting is ripe. To realize the benefit that the City’s investment was intended to provide, the new Boulware Park footprint must now be made into a fully coherent, usable space. That requires the City to re-allocate capital improvement funding that was already approved and provide for the integration of the Birch Street property into the Park. Failure to fund this last step would waste all of the funds and effort expended to date on this multi-year effort. Third, Boulware Park renovation should be prioritized because the Ventura neighborhod has less parkland per resident than other neighborhoods and has been historically underserved. That unfavorable ratio will worsen as more residents are added in the NVCAP development area and nearby office spaces whose workers use the park come back online. Local parks have never been more important to our community than they are now. While the City spends extraordinary amounts of time and resources about issues related to Foothills Park, let us remember the spaces that are closest to us and most likely to be used frequently by people of all ages, incomes, and abilities. Peter Jensen has done a wonderful job designing a fun and thoughtful park space that is much more inclusive for children of differing abilities and adults of varying interests. The City Council should fully fund the renovation of Ventura’s primary park and transform Boulware Park into a legacy that makes us all proud and gets us all outside together. Anything less would be a betrayal of trust upon which Ventura’s children and families sacrificed the previously approved 53 renovations for the hope of an even better park in the future. Ventura deserves better. We can do better. Thank you. Jonathan Brown 54 Baumb, Nelly From:Urban Cummings & Christine Clark Cummings <furryfeet@mindspring.com> Sent:Monday, February 1, 2021 4:37 PM To:Council, City Subject:New Public Safety Building CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  The public safety building and its principal inhabitants – the Palo Alto Police Department are unquestionably  the most important need in all of our fair city. In my humble opinion, that department and our over‐reaching  need for enforcement of our safety is paramount to this city and we inhabitants.    I have been in the basement of City Hall and have seen firsthand how crucial the housing of our law  enforcement and our police is. We residents should not settle for anything less than what is best not only for  our public safety but for the officers who protect us.    There are many things lacking in the current building (for instance the women’s locker room no longer can  accommodate the number of female officers that the Department now employs). The only way to resolve  those issues is to build a new public safety building.     Please consider continuing the construction of this building.    Thank you.    Urban K. Cummings  55 Baumb, Nelly From:LWV Palo Alto VOTER <publicity@lwvpaloalto.org> Sent:Monday, February 1, 2021 2:00 PM To:Council, City Subject:LWVPA February VOTER - What Are Your League Priorities? CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.    View this email in your browser.        To help protect your priv acy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.      FEBRUARY 2021       Visit us on www.lwvpaloalto.org and on our Facebook Page   Subscribe to our Google Calendar       In this Issue  President's Message  Annual Program Planning Meeting  The Reunited States Documentary and Panel Discussion  Board Meeting Highlights  Voter Services 2021  Advocacy Reports  21-Day Racial Equity Challenge  Civil Discourse in Divided Times  Civil Discourse Forum: Equality in Education  Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion 56    Nominating Committee Update     Message from our President The 2021 year has started with a bang and real challenge for the League’s key interest in Making Democracy Work®. In fact, the LWV United States Board of Directors issued an Action Alert for members to contact their US Representatives to demand the removal of then- President Trump for helping to incite the attack on the Capitol building and our representatives on January 6th. This was an unusual request for alarming times—yet vital to securing the future of the American experiment. Their courage made me proud to be part of the League. Because of the challenges faced in our nation, you have received many emails from all Leagues in the past few weeks. When joining the Palo Alto League, you automatically become a member of the LWV United States and LWV California. Advocacy from the national and state Leagues automatically become advocacy for our Palo Alto League. This month the US and California Leagues have been active, emailing all members updates and Action Alerts. As a reminder, members may act in the name of the LWVPA only when authorized to do so by the board of directors. They may act only in conformity with, and not contrary to, a position taken by the LWVPA, the LWVBA, the LWVC, and the LWVUS. Today, our League is working for good governance in the Palo Alto community. We need to hear from you on Saturday, Feb. 6, at our annual Program Planning meeting, where we choose our local priority issues for the 2021-2022 year and make our recommendations to the state League for three priority issues for 2021-2023. From the comfort of your home, please zoom with us at the annual membership priority setting meeting. Directors from our Housing, Natural Resources, Campaign Finance Reform, Civics Education and Gun Safety Teams are preparing video shorts focused on their committees’ To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. 57   accomplishments and expectations. We will also showcase the State’s areas of focus: Redistricting, Climate Change, Housing/Homelessness and Criminal Justice Reform. Bring your ideas, questions, and enthusiasm. Then vote. Register here and stay tuned for more info! More is going on. For those interested in joining our local Board next year, please get in touch with Trina Lovercheck, Chair of the Nominating Committee. This is a great way to invest some of your skills and talents in our League. Take care, and together we can do even more to Defend Democracy! - Nancy Shepherd       Upcoming League Events Annual Program Planning Meeting LWV of Palo Alto Saturday, February 6, 2021 10:00 - 12:00 pm The League is a grassroots organization. Program Planning is an opportunity for members to participate in the selection of focus issues for the state League (2021-23) and local League (2021-22). We will review current local focus issues (Housing, Natural Resources, Campaign Finance Reform, Civics Education, Gun Safety) and LWVC priorities (Redistricting, Climate Change, Housing/Homelessness, Criminal Justice Reform). The planning meeting is our vehicle to set our League's priority issues and make an impact locally and at the state level. Come share your thoughts about issues we should be working on-- this is your opportunity to choose where we spend our time, energy, and money.   Register Now   To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.Image may contain: text that says 'The Program Planning Process Is Your Voice! I ΤΟ WHERE PLAŃ SHOULD YOUR LEAGUE FOCUS TIME ITS ENERGY? We need YOU to help set our priorities for next year! LWV LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS' OF PALO ALTO' 58     To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. The Reunited States Documentary and Panel Discussion LWV of Palo Alto Tuesday, February 16, 2021 7:00 - 8:30 pm Join us for a special interactive panel discussion hosted by LWVPA's PAUSD High School Civic Engagement Committee! Before the February 16 Panel Discussion, attendees will be able to view a compelling and inspiring film, The Reunited States, about mending the political, racial, and cultural divides in our society. The award-winning documentary follows four people on a journey to discover how each can work to heal the divisions that have been created over time. The film urges viewers to consider that everyone has a role to play in reuniting the country. A link will be sent to event registrants on February 11 for a FREE at-home viewing of the documentary between February 11 and February 17. Then join us for an interactive panel discussion on February 16. Contact jennwaghinton@gmail.com for questions. Registration is limited to 100 people. Register early to guarantee your spot!   Register Now     59   LWVPA Board Meeting Highlights The following motions were approved:  The Board will create an exploratory team to meet with the Palo Alto Human Relations Commission (HRC) representative Valerie Stinger, LWVPA’s Liaison to the Palo Alto HRC, to find out how we as a League can work with the HRC to address systemic racism in Palo Alto.  We will support a community discussion of the documentary Reunited States moderated by Jenn Wagstaff Hinton, LWVPA Civics representative.  The Board accepts the proposal for reorganization of filing and archiving of the Board Google Drive.  We will publicize a number of events sponsored by other organizations on topics that align with our goals. Check the Calendar on our website and our Facebook page. Board Discussion and Other Business:  Advocacy Teams will have the opportunity to present brief overviews of their work for viewing on our YouTube channel prior to the 2021-22 Program Planning meeting on Saturday, February 6.  We will be holding legislative interviews with California Senator Josh Becker and California Assembly member Marc Berman on February 4.  Our March Speaker Luncheon event will address the topic of Climate Action. - Sue Hermsen, Secretary     To help protect your priv acy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. 60   Voter Services In 2021 Thank you for joining our Workshop! On January 23rd, 25 Palo Alto League members met to discuss how our Voter Services Team can set a powerful course for this non-election year. Our brainstorm session generated support for three primary activities:  Continuing to engage with youth through our Youth Vote Team as well as the Civics Education work being spearheaded by Jenn Wagstaff Hinton. It will be important to show youth that the 2020 election was abnormal and to give them a solid grounding in how elections work. The Youth Vote Team will next meet by Zoom on February 8th at 7:30 pm.  Launching a new “Beyond Palo Alto” Team. The mission: to work on collaborations with other Leagues on a variety of projects TBD; and to explore how we can promote cross-state/counties effective/best practices.  A new Election Confidence Team that will work on setting up a tour or tours of the Voter Registrar’s office and creating video materials that explain how our votes are counted and why we should trust the results. This team might also help with a Q&A Hotline as the next election nears. To join us in this work, send us a message!     Advocacy Reports To help protect your priv acy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. 61 To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. National Action Alert: Congress Must Pass the For the People Act On Jan 4, 2021, the U.S. House of Representatives introduced H.R. 1, the For the People Act, a sweeping democracy reform bill that was first introduced in 2019. The For the People Act would expand automatic voter registration, online and same day registration, reform complicated voter registration deadlines, prevent wrongful voter purges, limit partisan gerrymandering, change campaign finance laws to reduce the influence of money in politics, and prevent changes to local voting rules which disproportionately impact racial and language minorities. It is the most expansive democracy reform agenda since the Voting Rights Act was passed more than 50 years ago. The bill passed the House but was never brought up for a Senate vote. With the start of the 117th Congress, it is imperative that the For the People Act once more become a top priority. Tell Congress to pass the For the People Act as a first order of business in the new administration. LWVUS and LWV Arizona joined a case before the Supreme Court (Brnovich v. DNC) which seeks to block enforcement of two Arizona election laws that prohibit use of third-party ballot collection and voting outside of one’s precinct. These two practices are used disproportionately by racial minority voters in Arizona, especially, Latinx, Black and Native voters. The Ninth Circuit held that these laws violate Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, which prohibits voting practices that disproportionately harm the voting rights of racial or language minorities in the state. 62   League of Women Voters Joins Voting Rights Supreme Court Case, 1/21/2021. State LWV of California is supporting these bills: AB 37 and SB 29 would require each county election official to mail a ballot to every registered voter for all elections. LWVC supports these bills if amended. Local The Housing and Transportation Committee will be advocating for the adoption of city housing element policies; this will enable the city to reach its Regional Housing Allocation goals for all income levels in the city, based on the State League’s position on Housing and Homeless: Support equal opportunities in housing. Support measures to provide state programs that increase the supply of safe, decent, and adequate housing for all Californians. Support actions at all levels of government for the provision of affordable housing for all Californians. The Responsible Gun Ownership Committee continues advocacy for the city’s safe firearm storage ordinance. Our Natural Resources Committee will comment on the city’s Sustainability and Climate Action Plan (SCAP), urging policies that ease the financial burden on low- and moderate-income households in the conversion from gas infrastructure to all-electric. The Local Campaign Finance Reform Task Force continues to work with Common Cause. - Lisa Ratner, 2nd Vice President and Advocacy Chair     63   To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. Civil Discourse and Community Events 21-Day Racial Equity Challenge PAUSD is offering the community a unique opportunity to participate in a 21-Day Racial Equity Challenge. The 21-Day Challenge is a powerful opportunity for shared learning and growth and invites the Palo Alto Community to develop a deeper understanding of how inequality and racism affect our everyday lives and community. Join the Challenge by registering below, posting #PAEquityChallenge on your preferred social media, and challenging at least two people to join you in this journey to enlightenment. There is no cost to participate, and it is open to anyone who is interested in building a community that is inclusive and accepting of all individuals regardless of their background or the color of their skin.   Register Now     64 To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.Amanda Gorman to Recite Original Poem at Super Bowl - Variety Civil Discourse in Divided Times Poet Amanda Gorman’s eloquent words challenged each of us to ‘be the light’ while recognizing the "hill we must climb." And we know that is one very steep hill! Even though the recent presidential inauguration was conducted peacefully, it took thousands of troops to ensure its safety. How do we move forward in such a sorely divided country? Is simply turning the page an option? We are all called to be part of the solution. Hundreds of good organizations share a common focus to help us address these questions: We do not need to agree with people on the other side of political and social divides, but we do need to engage with them, listen to their stories and share our own. What lived experiences have led us to hold such staggeringly different views? Braver Angels and The Village Square are two of the leading civil discourse organizations. Braver Angels offers 1:1 conversations, workshops, red/blue pairings, alliances, debates and more. Their next Red/Blue Workshop is Saturday, February 6 at 1:00 PM PST. Throughout this spring, The Village Square will host a series of programs called A Citizen’s Guide to Healing America, addressing the fault lines in our democratic system. Two of their February events are: Thursday, February 4 at 4:00 PM PST: A Divided Union: Structural Challenges to Bipartisanship in America – Two former U.S. Congressmen, one Republican and one Democrat, explain ten political and institutional challenges plaguing our government while asserting that bipartisanship is still possible. 65   Thursday, February 25 at 4:00 PM PST: Let Friendship Redeem the Republic - Jefferson and Adams: "You and I ought not to die until we have explained ourselves to each other."       Civil Discourse Forum: Can We Have Equity in Education? Saturday, March 20, 2021 1:00 - 3:00 pm Please join this forum to learn about, and participate in, a civil conversation about providing education equity for students. Sponsored by the Civil Discourse Committee of the LWVs of Santa Clara County.   Register Now       To help protect your priv acy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) in the Nonprofit Sector - Bloomerang Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) For the League of Women Voters, DEI doesn't exist in a bubble somewhere. It is at our core, part of how we function, embedded in our bylaws right alongside the nonpartisanship policy (not supporting or opposing political parties or candidates). On January 21, LWVUS presented a detailed and interactive webinar on the Intersection of DEI and Nonpartisanship. Please keep these DEI Lens questions in mind at our February 6 Program Planning Meeting!     66 To help protect your priv acy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.LACNIC Newsletter | Call for Candidates to Co-Chair the Policy Forum Nominating Committee Updates The Nominating Committee is working hard and talking to members to find the best candidates for our 2021-22 Board (May 2021 - May 2022). If you or anyone you know is interested in learning more about open positions, please do not hesitate to contact anyone on the Nominating Committee. The open positions are:  President  Secretary  Parliamentarian Off-Board positions (can be a board position if there is interest on the part of the candidate):  Education Committee Chair  Membership Chair  Observer Corps  Nominating Committee (3 positions – not on the board): work begins in late October 2021 and ends in May 2022. 2020-2021 Nominating Committee:  Trina Lovercheck, Chair trinalovercheck@mac.com 67    Megan Swezey Fogarty meganfogarty@gmail.com  Elizabeth Gardner lizzy.a.gardner@gmail.com  Lynne Russell lynnerussell1@gmail.com  Louise Valente louise@valentes.net       LWVPA Board Officers & Directors         OFFICERS     Nancy Shepherd President Ellen Forbes 1st Vice President, Webmaster Lisa Ratner 2nd Vice President, Advocacy Chair Sue Hermsen Secretary Theivanai Palaniappan Treasurer     DIRECTORS Kathy Miller Voter Services Ellen Smith Parliamentarian Karen Kalinsky Collaborations & Community Outreach Hannah Lu Communications Lynne Russell Fundraising Co-Chair Myra Lessner Member Programs & Meetings 68   Liz Jensen Voter Services and Census 2020 Lizzy Gardner       LWVPA Off-Board    Budget Team TBD City of PA HRC Liaison Valerie Stinger Civics Janet Wells Jenn Wagstaff Hinton Civil Discourse Liaison Susan Owicki Communications Team Hannah Lu Education Team Chair TBD Facebook/Social Media Admin, Tech Advisor Aisha Piracha-Zakariya Fundraising Abbie Dorosin, Co-Chair Heike Enders, Co-Chair Naturalization Ceremonies Voter Registration Liza Taft Nominating Committee Trina Lovercheck, Chair Louise Valente Megan Swezey Fogarty Lynne Russell Lizzy Gardner Observer Corps Chair TBD Pros & Cons and League Presentations Mary Jo Levy Responsible Gun Ownership Hilary Glann Katie Causey Seeking Racial Justice in Education Jeannie Lythcott 69   Housing & Transportation Steve Levy, Chair Membership Erika Buck, Chair Natural Resources/Climate Team Maureen O'Kicki, Chair     VOTER and E-blast Editors Arati Periyannan, Hannah Lu Voter's Edge David Springer Voting Intently (Active Policy Reflection) Dan Zalles           Stay Informed! Sign Up for LWV California & LWVUS News & Alerts Click here to sign up for LWVC Newsletter and Action Alerts Click here to sign up for Email News and Action Alerts from LWVUS       To help protect your priv acy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.     How to contact your elected officials United States President Joseph R. Biden (202) 456-1414 Senator Dianne Feinstein (415) 393-0707 Senator Alex Padilla 202-224-3553 Rep. Anna Eshoo (650) 323-2984 70   California Governor Gavin Newsom (916) 445-2841 Senator Josh Becker (650) 212-3313 Assemblymember Marc Berman (650) 691-2121 Santa Clara County Supervisor Joe Simitian (650) 965-8737 joe.simitian@bos.sccgov.org Other Areas in California Locate your elected officials by street address For a complete list of ALL your electeds, see here on our website.         JOIN A TEAM       To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.     Learn More About Our Teams and Programs on our Website!             To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.            To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.Facebook   Facebook     To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.Twitter   Twitter     To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office preventedownload of this picture from the Internet.Website   Website          Copyright © 2021 League of Women Voters Palo Alto, All rights reserved. From Voter Recipient List Our mailing address is: League of Women Voters Palo Alto 3921 E Bayshore Rd Ste 209 71   Palo Alto, CA 94303-4303 Add us to your address book Want to change how you receive these emails? You can update your preferences or unsubscribe from this list. To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.Email Marketing Powered by Mailchimp          72 Baumb, Nelly From:Lori Khoury <khoury7eleven@sbcglobal.net> Sent:Monday, February 1, 2021 10:40 AM To:DuBois, Tom Cc:Patrick.Burt@cityofpalo.org; Stone, Greer; Filseth, Eric (Internal); Cormack, Alison; Tanaka, Greg; Kou, Lydia; Council, City Subject:Palo Alto Flavored Tobacco Ban - Reconsideration for Mac's Smoke Shop CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  February 1, 2021 Dear Mayor Du Bois, ”Local stores are an important part of the public space, and not just to provide supplies. You bump into friends and neighbors there. Just seeing each other reinforces a sense of community. Casual interactions can lead to opportunities. The further away the store the less chance to enjoy these encounters.” The above quote is from Council Member Lydia Kou’s website and we could not agree more with these words, which apply with force to Mac’s Smoke Shop - a Palo Alto icon for 86 years. Yet, while the City Council has taken steps to help many small businesses in Palo Alto, even establishing a grant program, the previous Council ignored their staff recommendation that they had requested and enacted a flavored tobacco ordinance that had dire consequences to our business. We are a mom and pop shop who has employees that are like family and customers that we consider our friends. Somewhere along the way the perception of our store got tainted, but not from actual facts. We used to sell premium flavored tobacco products and as an “adult-only” store we took all required precautions to keep these types of products out of the hands of youth. We went beyond what was required and instituted internal policies to ensure youth couldn’t purchase the products. However, in response to the important teen vaping problem, not only did the previous Council ban vape sale , which we absolutely agree with, but they also banned our right to sell premium flavored tobacco. What was especially disheartening to us was that the Council admitted that this ordinance would not address the issue at hand, Youth Vaping, but passed the ordinance knowing the hardship it would cause several local businesses such as ours. On May 18, 2020, during a City Council Meeting, Council Member Alison Cormack (who voted in favor of the New Ordinance) stated, “…this is a tough problem and I’m going to repeat what we said when we began this, which I think is in December, which is this is not going to solve it. Right. Even if we do this, this is not going to solve this problem. But it will send a signal that we just, we want means restrictions. So, thank you Council Member (Lydia) Kou and Council Member (Greg) Tanaka.” To which Council Member Liz Kniss stated, “You are all correct. This will not solve the problem.” Furthermore, the Council in their decision relied on the public comments of Sally Rudd, the mother of a 16 year old who purchased vaping products from Mac’s Smoke Shop (“Mac’s”) on May 11, 2020. Ms. Rudd accused Mac’s employees of not paying attention to how people were purchasing smoking products. However, Mac’s provided screenshots from its security camera to the City showing Mac’s employee checking Ms. Rudd’s daughter’s id. The Council ignored our evidence. Additionally, in an 73 email exchange between Neil Khoury (Owner of Mac’s) and Ms. Rudd, Ms. Rudd admitted that her daughter had a fake id in the past and that her daughter probably had a new one. You know how hard it’s been for small businesses the past 9 months due to COVID-19 and all the shelter-in-place orders. We have exhausted every avenue to try to stay in business. We have applied for PPP loans to keep our employees, we have worked with our landlords, but these are only temporary solutions. We have already seen businesses close. In an article in Palo Alto online, Palo Alto City Councilman Greg Tanaka said he reached out to various businesses just to see if they'll be coming back after the shutdown. His daughter's favorite boba tea store, he said, is among those that have indicated they're done for good. "There's a lot of people like that who are getting wiped out — totally wiped out financially, personally, from this catastrophe," Tanaka said during the council's April 13 meeting. Mac’s Smoke Shop is getting hit twice as hard, the pandemic and the flavor ban. Since the new Palo Alto flavor ban was enacted back in September 2020 we have seen over a 50% decrease in revenue. This is so devastating for our iconic little shop. What started out as an effort to curb teen vaping has spiraled into an all-out restriction on ANY FLAVORED tobacco product. Mac’s has its own special flavored tobacco blend, which after 86 years, we can no longer sell. In an effort to still allow our customers to have access to the propriety blend, we reached out to another shop in a neighboring city without restrictions to ask if they would make the blend. They said it would be too much work. Let’s rewind here. We are NOT asking for the right to sell any vaping products. What we want is the right to sell premium flavored tobacco as an adult-only store like we used to, and be granted an exemption like Los Altos has done for Edwards Pipe & Tobacco – their iconic tobacco shop. We are willing to pay an extra license fee as well as contribute a percentage of flavored tobacco revenue to help toward educating youth about the dangers of tobacco use. We were encouraged when California passed SB793, a law that was entirely focused on teen smoking and that they made carve-outs for high-end cigars and flavored tobacco in licensed “adult- only” establishments. This was a well thought-out and debated law that focused on both the welfare of its citizens, the rights of adults and the welfare of small businesses. We would like to ask you to reconsider the staff recommendations from June 2020 in order to be more in line with SB793 and reinstate the ability to sell flavored tobacco in existing “adult-only” establishments. Sincerely, Neil and Lori Khoury Owners- Mac’s Smoke Shop cc: Patrick Burt (email and US mail) Eric Filseth (email and US mail) Greer Stone (email and US mail) Alison Cormack (email and US mail) Greg Tanaka (email and US mail) Lydia Kou (email and US mail) 74 Baumb, Nelly From:Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> Sent:Monday, February 1, 2021 9:09 AM To:Rosen, Jeff; Jeff Moore; Raj Jayadev; Palo Alto Free Press; Council, City; Jonsen, Robert; Joe Simitian; supervisor.ellenberg@bos.sccgov.org; cindy.chavez@bos.sccgov.org; O'Neal, Molly; Kaloma Smith; Human Relations Commission; Planning Commission; ParkRec Commission; Shikada, Ed; Perron, Zachary; Cary Andrew Crittenden; chuck jagoda; Roberta Ahlquist; Rebecca Eisenberg; mark weiss; Lewis james; Sean James; Gennady Sheyner; Bill Johnson; Winter Dellenbach; Anna Griffin; Patrice Ventresca; Rodriguez, Miguel; Raven Malone; Steven D. Lee; Cecilia Taylor; Tanner, Rachael; Minor, Beth Subject:Dog Attack coverup, in today's Daily Post Feb 1, 2021, by Aram James CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  The below piece titled: Dog attack coverup ( by Aram James) was published by the Daily Post today Feb 1, 2021. See Opinion pages 6-7 Dog attack coverup Dear Editor: Your article of January 28, 2021: “Police Dog attacks innocent man, “suggests that the Palo Alto police are, yet again, up to more violence, targeting another person of color. Here are a few questions I would like to ask our police chief Robert “Mr. Transparency” Jonsen: 1. When will the body camera footage of this incident be released? 2. Why is the first time the public is told about the June 25, 2020 incident when the Daily Post reports it? 3. Why has our District Attorney, Jeff Rosen, not yet filed felony assault with a deadly weapon charges, against the officer or officers who released their dog on Mr. Joel Domingo Alejo? After last year’s brutal police execution of George Floyd, witnessed by the entire world, there were 75 widespread calls to defund police departments and abandon the current police culture in this country altogether. Many opposed such a drastic, defunding of the police remedy, instead calling for reforms not defunding. With the latest 20 million dollar claim filed against the city of Palo Alto combined with at least one other multi-million dollar lawsuit arising from an incident involving multiple members of our police department, it would now appear that our rogue police department is single-handedly attempting to defund our entire city. I think its time to fire “Mr. Transparency” and look for new leadership, ASAP! Aram James Palo Alto, CA 76 Baumb, Nelly From:Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> Sent:Monday, February 1, 2021 7:14 AM To:Jeff Rosen; Jeff Moore; Molly O'Neal; Council, City; Human Relations Commission; Jeff Moore; Steven D. Lee; Greer Stone; ParkRec Commission; Roberta Ahlquist; chuck jagoda; DuBois, Tom; Filseth, Eric (Internal); Planning Commission; paloaltofreepress@gmail.com; Anna Griffin; Winter Dellenbach; wilpf.peninsula.paloalto@gmail.com; Rebecca Eisenberg; mark weiss Subject:Car protest calls for release of prisoners during pandemic— CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on  links.  ________________________________    Follow the link below to view the article.  https://mercurynews‐ca‐app.newsmemory.com/?publink=0454d9f05_1345c3d      Sent from my iPhone  77 Baumb, Nelly From:Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> Sent:Monday, February 1, 2021 7:03 AM To:chuck jagoda; Roberta Ahlquist; Steven D. Lee; Council, City; Raven Malone; Greer Stone; Human Relations Commission; Planning Commission; paloaltofreepress@gmail.com; ParkRec Commission; Jeff Moore; Joe Simitian; supervisor.ellenberg@bos.sccgov.org; Winter Dellenbach; wilpf.peninsula.paloalto@gmail.com Subject:Biden extends and in some cases expands Project Room-Key in the Bay Area CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on  links.  ________________________________    Follow the link below to view the article.  https://mercurynews‐ca‐app.newsmemory.com/?publink=1454d9f05_1345c3d      Sent from my iPhone  78 Baumb, Nelly From:a lee <adrienneleeod@gmail.com> Sent:Sunday, January 31, 2021 11:50 PM To:Council, City Subject:My support for Castilleja school remodeling and updating: CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Dear City Council Members,  I am in support of Castilleja School's updating, garage, and enrollment   update.  The effect of these updates will NOT lesson or lower  my quality of life as I live near Embarcadero Road and  work in the downtown area in my optometric practice. With almost ALL students attending only ONLINE learning in Palo  Alto , it is obvious to me that the true cause of gridlock and traffic on Embarcadero Road at 8 am IS NOT Castilleja  students or staff.   I am astounded at the level of traffic STILL on the roads of our city today. Yet all the kids  and all the  tech workers are at home telecommuting!!       The true eye sores and neighborhood blight around Casti are the 5 huge, neglected and rundown rental homes abuttung  Embarcadero near the softball field.   I would think that the few, misguided neighbors who are clamoring to halt the  Casti building updates would aim their IRE at those unsightly buildings.  Those rundown neighborhood rentals have cars  parked on the lawns and half dead trees with refuse and debri in the yards.      If Casti were allowed to improve their space and also  buy those blighted properties and expand and renovate those  homes, the neighborhood would be more beautiful and pleasant.   I am proud to live in this city of Palo Alto which has  supported excellent private and public schools.      Regards,     Adrienne Lee, OD  50 Morton Way, Palo Alto   and proprietor of   Lee Optometrics Optometry   231 Hamilton Ave  Palo Alto, CA. 94301  79 Baumb, Nelly From:Erik Carlson <elcemail@gmail.com> Sent:Sunday, January 31, 2021 6:42 PM To:Council, City Subject:Support for Castilleja School CUP and Master Plan CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Dear City Council,     I am writing to express my support for the Castilleja CUP application process and building project. Our family has lived in  the College Terrace neighborhood since 2010. We chose this neighborhood, in part, due to its proximity to Castilleja,  which was our first choice school for our daughter after she graduated from Ohlone Elementary. We saw that the  learning environment at Castilleja would be exceptional for our daughters, and were grateful for admission and financial  aid to allow them to attend. One memory is that my older daughter joined forces with the student leaders at Paly to  lead the students of both schools in March for Our Lives in 2018. I am also grateful that both of my daughters were able  to attend the Student Diversity Leadership Conference, and have helped to serve the school as admissions ambassadors  for outreach to black, Latinx, and under resourced communities.    Our family has taken seriously the clear and consistent messaging from the Castilleja administration to participate in the  TDM program. We appreciate being a part of a community that has an immediate goal to encourage more sustainable  transportation modes, and an ongoing goal to be a good neighbor. And we support the long term goal of expanding the  enrollment with a new CUP. More students deserve the opportunities that have been afforded my daughters at  Castilleja. The school has managed its resources so that every student is known and supported and challenged as  scholars and citizens. I have tremendous confidence that if the enrollment were to expand, the students, families, and  community would be enriched by the opportunity.    As a parent at the school since 2011, I have followed the master planning project from its inception.  I appreciate the  school's ambitions to update its facilities to support a pedagogy and environment that is conducive to collaborative,  creative, and innovative learning. I see the need for interdisciplinary spaces and the integration of student wellness and  academic programs. The campus plan is thoughtful. I also have seen Castilleja's responsiveness to community  comments. The latest iteration of designs seems to have addressed directly the concerns raised.    I have seen recent debate about the planned underground parking garage. I understand the concern of the neighbors  who oppose this plan because I had similar concerns when Stanford built a neighborhood of 180 units across the street  from me, with its only outlets flowing past my house. The reality has been that the traffic increase has been barely  noticeable and that there are fewer cars parked daily along our curbside. I appreciate that the Castilleja plan for an  underground garage will relocate parking from street level to below grade.     This project is great for a long time resident of Palo Alto ‐ Castilleja School ‐ and for Palo Alto itself. The educational  spaces in Palo Alto is a source of pride in our community. This beacon to women's education should feature facilities  worthy of Castilleja's crucial mission.    Sincerely,    Erik Carlson  California Ave.  94306  80 Baumb, Nelly From:Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> Sent:Sunday, January 31, 2021 6:40 PM To:Council, City; ParkRec Commission; Planning Commission; Human Relations Commission; Rebecca Eisenberg; mark weiss; Joe Simitian; chuck jagoda; Roberta Ahlquist; Greer Stone; Steven D. Lee; Ed Lauing; Raven Malone; Kaloma Smith; Anna Griffin; Perron, Zachary; Jonsen, Robert; supervisor.ellenberg@bos.sccgov.org; cindy.chavez@bos.sccgov.org; Lewis. james; paloaltofreepress@gmail.com; Winter Dellenbach Subject:Re: Police chief, officer asked to resign following racist video ( BUT Zack Perron still get a free pass in Palo Alto) Come Palo Alto where’s you’re back bone !!!!! CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Sorry for typos. Time for Perron to go!!!   Sent from my iPhone      On Jan 31, 2021, at 6:37 PM, Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> wrote:       To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Offprevented automatic download of this pictufrom the Internet.News Break News Break OVER 10 MILLION PEOPLE USE Open APP   Police chief, officer asked to resign following racist video  The Associated Press   HAMILTON, Ga. (AP) — The police chief in a west Georgia city has resigned and an officer was  terminated after footage from a body camera was discovered that shows the two making racist  comments, a news station reported.  To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.   Click to read the full story    Sent from my iPhone  81 Baumb, Nelly From:oren zeev <oren.zeev@gmail.com> Sent:Sunday, January 31, 2021 6:13 PM To:Fine, Adrian; Filseth, Eric (Internal); DuBois, Tom; Cormack, Alison; Kniss, Liz (internal); Kou, Lydia; Tanaka, Greg; Burt, Patrick; Stone, Greer; Council, City; Shikada, Ed; Kleinberg, Judy Subject:closing University Ave to traffic CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.    Dear Palo Alto leadership team    I apologize for the unsolicited email but I am writing out of concern for Palo Alto.    My name is Oren Zeev and I am a VC with no economic interest in any of the businesses in Palo Alto in general and on  University Avenue in particular.    Before the most recent lockdown University Ave was closed to traffic and provided for a great destination with  occasional live music and great vibe. The restaurants and coffee shops were able to use the street for additional tables.  As a business person I am very skeptical that any business on University Ave that serves food or drinks can break even  without those extra tables. Plus the great vibe of a street closed to traffic is a great attraction for families and  individuals.    I believe you are in a position to help these small businesses survive, and help Palo Altans live a little more normal life  within the current health related constraints.    Thank you for your attention to this,    Oren Zeev  82 Baumb, Nelly From:Virginia Smedberg <virgviolin@hotmail.com> Sent:Sunday, January 31, 2021 5:32 PM To:Council, City Subject:supporting Castilleja's plans CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Dear City Council members,  I am writing because I understand the Castilleja CUP is on the agenda for the next 2 meetings.  I will start by  saying that I am a Casti grad (class of 1963), so one could expect me to be prejudiced in favor of my  school.  But I am also a Palo Alto resident in Old Palo Alto (born, raised, and lived here for all but my 9 years in  NY City going to music school), and have seen all the neighborhood signs, some for and some against the  project.  And I bike the Bryant Bike Blvd frequently.  So I have followed with interest the school's efforts to  mitigate the concerns of those against it.    I am very happy with what the school has done to answer the concerns of residents and the questions of  zoning etc.  There will always be nay‐sayers to any project.  And they tend to be loud.  So I think it is important  to focus on the facts, which I don't need to re‐iterate because you will see them all if you haven't already.    I am fully in favor of all‐girls schooling ‐ it benefited me, as someone with strength in math and science back in  the 60's when everyone knew girls couldn't do math...!  Although that is less an issue these days, there is still a  glass ceiling, and giving girls a safe space to excel is crucial to their willingness to show and to use their  abilities.    I encourage you to say "yes" to this project.    Sincerely,    Virginia Smedberg  Casti class of 1963  441 Washington Ave  Palo Alto CA 94301  83 Baumb, Nelly From:Hargis, Nicholas <Nicholas.Hargis@mail.house.gov> Sent:Sunday, January 31, 2021 4:05 PM To:Council, City; DuBois, Tom; Cormack, Alison; Filseth, Eric (Internal); Kou, Lydia; Tanaka, Greg Subject:Congresswoman Eshoo's newsletter and upcoming Health Subcommittee hearing CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Good afternoon Council,     Happy Sunday, I hope everyone is well. I want to make sure you get a copy of Congresswoman Eshoo’s newsletter. I’d be  happy to sign anyone up for this weekly update, so let me know and I’ll make sure it’s emailed to you directly next week.    On Wednesday at 8 a.m. Pacific, Congresswoman Eshoo will be carrying out a hearing titled: “Road to Recovery:  Ramping Up COVID‐19 Vaccines, Testing, and Medical Supply Chain.” You can listen in here: Livestream.     Don’t hesitate to reach out if you have anything you’d like to relate to Congresswoman Eshoo, or if you just want to  chat. Have a great week!     Best regards,   Nicholas Hargis     Nicholas C. Hargis  Field Representative   Congresswoman Anna Eshoo  News from Representative Eshoo To help protect your priv acy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.Image Friday 29 January 2021   Weekly Report From Your Congresswoman   To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.Image   Dear Friends,   84 I want to begin by extending my fullest gratitude to the first responders who have been  keeping our communities safe during the rain storms this week. On Tuesday 5,000 people in  the Bay Area were asked to evacuate. Over 27,000 people were without power for days at a  time, and downed trees and flooding blocked some roads. Our first responders helped our area  quickly prepare for the storm and recover from the damages, and joint efforts gave evacuees  and their animals safe places to shelter. The resilience of our neighborhoods was on full display  and I thank everyone who played a part in keeping each other safe.   In Washington this week, President Biden took several steps to create a more equitable nation  and set our country on a better path forward. Below are some of his notable actions:   Health Care:    Reopening enrollment for the health care marketplace   Rescinding the global gag rule, which bars international non‐profits that provide  abortion counseling or referrals from receiving U.S. funding  Environment:    Establishing climate change as a national security priority   Conserving at least 30% of federal land and oceans by 2030   Canceling new oil and gas leases on public lands and waters  Equality:    Ending private prisons   Repealing the wrongful and unnecessary transgender military ban   Directing agencies to mitigate racial bias in federal housing policies   Addressing xenophobia and violence against Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders  After four years of harmful and divisive executive actions by the Trump Administration,  President Biden’s orders are a breath of fresh air and signal that his administration is ready to  confront head‐on the major challenges facing our country.   I’m particularly pleased that the President directed CMS to reopen Healthcare.gov to allow  more Americans to sign up for health care coverage during this public health crisis. I repeatedly  called on the Trump Administration last year to take this action, to no avail. With over 10.9  million Americans unemployed and the U.S. surpassing 25.5 million COVID cases, ensuring  access to affordable health care is more important than ever.   On the heels of that announcement, Covered California announced that it would also set up a  special enrollment period from February 1st  through May 15th. This is great news for the 1.2  million Californians who are uninsured but eligible for financial help from Covered California or  through Medi‐Cal. If you need health insurance, visit https://www.coveredca.com/ to find a  health plan.   85 Next week, the House will vote on a budget resolution which will allow the Senate to pass  pandemic relief with a simple majority instead of 60 votes using a process called reconciliation.  This will allow for swifter passage of President Biden’s American Rescue Plan, which includes:    $1,400 checks for individuals and dependents (income eligibility not determined yet)   Extending an additional $400 in weekly federal unemployment benefits through  September   Funding for schools, local governments, and small businesses   Increasing the minimum wage to $15 an hour   $400 billion to contain the virus through increased testing and Personal Protective  Equipment and fund a national vaccination campaign to dramatically speed up the pace  of inoculations  Legislative Action   Public Health Emergency Privacy Act   During this pandemic American innovators, many of whom are in our congressional district,  have built technologies to combat the coronavirus. As these technologies are used they must  be coupled with policies to protect the civil liberties that define who we are as a nation.   This week I introduced the Public Health Emergency Privacy Act, legislation that will prohibit  privacy invasions by preventing misuse of pandemic‐related data for unrelated purposes like  marketing, prohibiting the data from being used in discriminatory ways, and requiring data  security and integrity measures. The bill will give the American people confidence to use  technologies and systems that can aid our efforts to combat the pandemic.   Health Subcommittee Hearing   As Chairwoman of the Energy and Commerce Health Subcommittee, I’ll be holding the  Subcommittee’s first hearing on Wednesday, February 3rd at 8 a.m. (PST), “Road to Recovery:  Ramping Up COVID‐19 Vaccines, Testing, and Medical Supply Chain.” This fully remote hearing  will examine federal COVID‐19 response efforts related to vaccines, testing, and our medical  supply chain. The hearing will be streamed live on the Committee’s website HERE.   Impeachment   This week the House Impeachment Managers delivered the Article of Impeachment to the  Senate against former President Trump for inciting a seditious insurrection. On Tuesday, every  Senator swore “to do impartial justice according to the Constitution and laws” in the  86 impeachment trial which will begin on February 9th. However, all but five Senate Republicans  abandoned that oath and voted to dismiss the impeachment effort.   The House Judiciary Committee released a helpful video explaining why a president can be  impeached and convicted after leaving office and why it’s so important to do so. I encourage  you to watch the video by clicking HERE.   To help protect your priv acy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.Video   To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.Play Button   Expulsion of Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene   This week, I cosponsored a resolution calling for the immediate expulsion of Rep. Marjorie  Taylor Greene from Congress after reports of her shockingly offensive comments encouraging  domestic terrorism and supporting calls for violent attacks on members of Congress and  former President Barack Obama. Such extremism and sedition have no place in the halls of  Congress. She is a threat to our democracy and those who work in the Capitol building.   She also has amplified heinous and dangerous lies that the September 11th attacks were an  inside job and that devastating school shootings were staged. A Representative who spreads  such conspiracy theories should not be allowed in Congress, let alone on the Committee in  charge of our school systems. That is why I have also signed a letter calling for her immediate  removal from the Education and Labor Committee. We cannot give Rep. Greene a stage to  spread her wild delusions and lies.   The Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security on COVID‐19 Vaccination Strategy   It was an honor to be invited to Co‐Chair the Capitol Hill Steering Committee on Pandemic  Preparedness and Health Security, a new bipartisan effort from the Johns Hopkins Center for  87 Health Security to discuss fresh ideas to improve domestic health now and in the future. As Co‐ Chair, I gave opening remarks this week on an expert panel on what Congress and the federal  government can do to quickly vaccinate the communities hit hardest by COVID‐19. The video  of my remarks at the event can be found HERE.   Frequently Asked Questions   Many constituents have asked me whether they can stop masking and social distancing after  getting the COVID vaccinations. The short answer is NO. We must continue masking and  distancing. The following is from the CDC:   Not enough information is currently available to say if or when CDC will stop  recommending that people wear masks and avoid close contact with others to help  prevent the spread of the virus that causes COVID‐19.   Experts need to understand more about the protection that COVID‐19 vaccines provide in  real‐world conditions before making that decision. Other factors, including how many  people get vaccinated and how the virus is spreading in communities, will also affect this  decision. We also don’t yet know whether getting a COVID‐19 vaccine will prevent you  from spreading the virus that causes COVID‐19 to other people, even if you don’t get sick  yourself. CDC will continue to update this page as we learn more.  In the Words of My Constituents   Every week hundreds of my constituents call and write to me to express their concerns, share  their passions, and ask questions regarding legislation and policies. Over 12,240 constituents  have contacted me in 2021. I actually read every communication and every constituent  receives a personal response to their specific questions and comments from me. This week,  1,399 constituents contacted my office about issues including:    177 messages in support of President Biden’s pandemic relief proposal    143 messages in support of H.R. 1, the For the People Act   125 messages opposed to the mistreatment of Armenian prisoners of war by Azerbaijan  Anna's Work in the News   My work is often featured in local and national press outlets and I share them with you here for  your perusal.   “Can Mark Zuckerberg be Trusted to Take Politics out of Facebook?” — Vanity Fair, Eric Lutz   “HEALTH CARE BRIEFING: Eshoo Preps Virus Relief, Vaccine Measures” — Bloomberg  Government, Brandon Lee   88   “Why you should care about data privacy even if you have “nothing to hide”—Recode, Sara  Morrison   Anna's Recommended Reading and Watching    I frequently read articles or see videos that I think my constituents would benefit from. Check  out these articles when you have some time.   “There is perhaps one word above all others that defines Joe Biden's presidency so far” –  New York Times, Frank Bruni   “Yes, ex‐presidents can be impeached” —Washington Post, Editorial Board   “Opinion: Blinken arrives at the State Department — and not a moment too soon” –  Washington Post, Jennifer Rubin   “'Hate Never Disappears. It Just Takes a Break for a While.' Why the U.S. Capitol Attack  Makes Holocaust Remembrance Day More Important Than Ever” – TIME, OLIVIA B.  WAXMAN   ###   As I write this to you after days of rain which we need badly, the sun is peaking through the  clouds outside my windows. It’s a reminder to me of the resilience of our communities and our  country. We’ve all been through so much and we still have storms ahead, but the sun will rise.  May our country begin to regain a sense of its better self in 2021, and begin to heal.   You, my constituents, are a source of great strength to me and it is a humbling honor to  represent you.         Sincerely,   To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.Image   Anna G. Eshoo  Member of Congress   To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office preveautomatic download of this picture from the InternetImage   To help protect your priv acy, Microsoft Office preveautomatic download of this picture from the InternetImage   To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office preveautomatic download of this picture from the InternetImage   To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office preveautomatic download of this picture from the InternetImage   To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office preveautomatic download of this picture from the InternetImage     Unsubscribe | Privacy Click here to open this e-mail in its own browser window Click here to open a plain text version of this email       89 Baumb, Nelly From:Christina Gwin <my1gwinevere@gmail.com> Sent:Sunday, January 31, 2021 4:05 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.  Hello,    I write as a neighbor—Churchill Ave—and supporter of Castilleja School. The school is a nationally renowned institution and delivers girls the unique opportunity to learn in a single-sex environment and benefit from the school's outstanding leadership curriculum. More high school girls from Palo Alto should have this opportunity if they seek it. I hope to see the enrollment grow.    I am impressed that Castilleja has consistently demonstrated respect for the City and neighbors by proposing a solution that allows the school to grow without adversely impacting neighbors. Castilleja has met with neighbors over 50 times and iterated its plans meaningfully in response to the variety of opinions in the neighborhood.     I see absolutely no traffic from the school during non-Covid times and dismiss any claim of traffic as false. I furthermore, do not understand the argument that is lessens the “quality of life.” If people are really concerned about that, they should focus on the many houses that have no occupancy. I can count at least 10 within the few blocks around Castilleja.     Thank you, Christina Gwin            90 Baumb, Nelly From:mark weiss <earwopa@yahoo.com> Sent:Sunday, January 31, 2021 2:05 PM To:Aram James Cc:Council, City; DuBois, Tom; eric.filseth@cityofpaloalto.com; Greer Stone; chuck jagoda; Roberta Ahlquist; Rebecca Eisenberg; Planning Commission; ParkRec Commission; Kaloma Smith; Human Relations Commission; Jeff Moore; Winter Dellenbach; Palo Alto Free Press; Shikada, Ed; Steven D. Lee; Cary Andrew Crittenden; Binder, Andrew; Joe Simitian; Stump, Molly Subject:Re: Aram's 2021 suggested city council priorities--edited version--original version sent 1/30/2021 CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.     I appreciate Mr James’ longstanding advocacy for a betterment of our community.    I don’t argue with this list but the ones that resonate with me most are #s 7 and 10.   If not Ladoris Cordell Park, maybe Al Young Park or Wallace Stegner Big Rock Candy Mountain and Nature Preserve.   It’s interesting that “Sullivan” in this context is synonymous or shorthand for dissent. Its namesake was a racist bastard.   —Mark Weiss      Sent from my iPhone      On Jan 31, 2021, at 11:59 AM, Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> wrote:     1/31/21 Dear Council members: I inadvertently left the city council off my list- when I e-mailed my proposed priorities for the city council for 2021. I did briefly discuss the bulk of these issues- during oral communication- at yesterday’s retreat. Best regards, Aram James P.S. I’ve made some small edits and additions from the original of this e-mail, that was sent out rather hastily yesterday. 91 1. Continue to vigorously pursue the Zack Perron cover up- and in that regard- ask council to make certain internal complaints, one officer’s allegation against another –particularly where racism, sexism, internal police misconduct are alleged, when serious matters are concerned—that the complaints are sent to the IPA (Independent Police Auditor)–not buried in the HR department . 2. Make 2021 the year Palo Alto funds a robust safe parking program—as we move towards more permanent solutions for housing those now forced to live in their vehicles or in the streets of Palo Alto. 3. Don’t let the Downtown Streets Team sexual harassment scandal fall through the cracks. Insist that the full 44-page report/investigation be released – before considering future funding. 4. Model the statewide Reparations Commission (AB3121) by creating a similar reparations commission in Palo Alto. **( The primary author of AB 3121, is the amazing ,Dr. Shirley Weber, who is now California’s first African American Secretary of State) 5. City Council to rein in our current city manager and police chief –emphasizing the importance of transparency and adequate notice on key issues to be made mandatory. The City Council should lead -NOT our city manager—more aggressive questioning of both the police chief and city manager by council members. Remember who the people elected (the city council). 6. Our City Council must more closely scrutinize the consent calendar to make certain critical items are put on the agenda as action items for public debate. 7. LaDoris Cordell Foothills Park Preserve. ( Name change to honor the extraordinary contribution to all causes related to social justice, the civil rights movement, and much more, by the Honorable Judge Ladoris Cordell) 92 8. Put off building a new police station until the budget issues are clarified—consider regional approach to policing, as a viable option to a new police station. 9. Allow more robust participation by community members during oral communications and discussions of agenda items. 10. Read and enforce New York Times Co. V Sullivan (1964) that allows: for vehement, caustic and sometimes unpleasantly sharp attacks on government and public officials…...see also Justice Brennan’s language- in the same decision: “If judges are to be treated as men ( and, I (Aram James) would add women) of fortitude, able to thrive in a hardy climate, surely the same must be true of other government officials, such as elected city commissioners” 93 Baumb, Nelly From:Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> Sent:Sunday, January 31, 2021 7:35 AM To:Council, City Subject:SJ City Council mulls change in housing density CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on  links.  ________________________________    Follow the link below to view the article.  https://mercurynews‐ca‐app.newsmemory.com/?publink=1554b6261_1345bf7      Sent from my iPhone  94 Baumb, Nelly From:Menachem Mevashir <mevashir@aol.com> Sent:Saturday, January 30, 2021 4:50 PM To:Council, City; CityLeaders@fcgov.com; lowell@fas.harvard.edu Subject:The Confederate Church: A Crazy Christian Conspiracy Cult CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.    Perhaps it would help to clarify the gravity of the situation our nation faces by referring to the Southern Trump  supporters as The Confederacy. This will help to make clear their opposition to the values most American take for  granted. Hopefully they can be vanquished without resorting to a war with bullets and bombs. And in that spirit I share  the following:  https://www.timesofisrael.com/jewish‐groups‐blast‐marjorie‐taylor‐greene‐her‐response‐ill‐never‐back‐down/  Check out this article from the Times of Israel. A person with the mentality of Marjorie Taylor Green should be locked up  inside a mental institute in a well secured straight‐jacket. But the internet gives her a platform to broadcast her insane  toxic and anti‐Semitic ideas. This is what the internet has done to our world.  I blame the Christian community for empowering people like Marjorie Taylor Green. I don't know whether to look at  them through eyes of tragedy or contempt. Christians have been whining about being in a post truth world where truth  is relative. They are bitter that their mythological spiritual truth has waned in popularity in our country. And it seems to  me that they now are taking revenge by calling into dispute every form of objective truth.  The sad fact is it is not possible to separate the scientist from the science. If an intellectual comes up with a credible idea  but he has an objectionable racial religious or ethnic status, then many people will reject the idea outright. (Hitler  denounced nuclear physics because so many of its proponents were Jewish scientists.) I don't know how someone like  Aristotle would explain the fragility of human reason and it's tendency to be overwhelmed by emotion. It seems like a  terrible design flaw by the alleged Creator.  The reason emotion is so rampant on the Internet is because it is much easier to commodify and profit from emotion  than from reason. Our whole society has tended in that direction for a long time. Look at the popularity of professional  sports, television, casinos and other form of low‐class entertainment. All of these things exploit people's emotions for  the profit of the distant few. The internet has simply perfected this tendency.  I would go even further and blame the Christian Church for enabling this brutal and exploitative system. By rejecting the  more humane system of socialism and advocating for ruthless jungle capitalism, the church has unleashed all of the  worst forces of crass materialism in our culture.  I believe at root the Church's hostility to socialism stems from the 1917 Fatima Marian Apparition in which the Virgin  Mary warned of the evil to come out of Russia. I don't believe that Russian Bolshevism is an indictment of every form of  socialism, but unfortunately American Catholics and Americans in general tend to categorically denounce every form of  socialism. And thus we are left with a raging cruel cynical commodifying Cancer Capitalist system. Like every other form  of tragedy, ultimately the church is responsible for unleashing this evil.  The televangelists and people like Archbishop Burke will whine complain and foment anger and dissent constantly, but  they will never look into their own hearts and see how the ugly and brutal face of American Christianity has spawned  95 most of these problems. They are like dogs snarling at a stick and not seeing the human hand that wields that stick in  punishment.  And as American society sinks into a toxic swamp of conspiracy mongering, growing misanthropy, and the total  disintegration of the very concept of a social contract and safety net, our Christian leaders will smugly pat themselves on  the back confident that everyone else is to blame except for themselves.  The one consolation I derive from the current darkness is that it firmly exposes the fallacious nature of American  Christianity. One of the few conspiracy theories that happens to be credible, namely the cover‐up of truth about the  9/11 attacks, the American Church rejected out of hand, because the false narrative about 9/11 perfectly dovetails with  the infatuation of the American Church with redemptive violence and the military. Instead the Church latches onto  ridiculous groups like QAnon, with its allegations of satanic cannibalism that echo the medieval anti‐Jewish blood libels.  In my opinion the American Church from the very inception of our country has been drowning in falsehood. Against the  clear Council of the New Testament it advocated violent rebellion against the mother country England and the king God  had placed over us. It supported the chattel slavery system and after the Civil War Jim Crow racialist laws. The KKK is a  Christian organization. The Church  opposed labor unions and necessary reforms in society. The Church craves safety  and stability and will oppose necessary social change until it becomes inevitable. Then it paints on a false mask and tries  to claim credit for the changes that resulted from the hard work of others.  A perfect example of this is the popularity of the hymn Amazing Grace in American churches. At the very time that  Christians in England were laboring to outlaw slavery, American churches were quoting Bible chapter and verse to justify  slavery. But today Christians will sing Amazing Grace ‐‐ about the efforts of Christians in England to abolish slavery ‐‐  utterly oblivious to their own complicity in the slave system. Their pastors work very hard to ensure the ignorance of  their congregations, the better to take their money and to manipulate them politically.)  I am grateful for lunatics like Marjorie Taylor Green who are exposing the violent corruption of the American Church.  Her conspiracy mongering is pulling up the skirts of American Christianity and exposing its bloody underpants to the  whole world. And for that we can all be grateful.  The following is a comment I sent to an American professor about 9/11. I hope you will be courageous enough to read it  and ponder it:  ++++++++++++!+++++!  I am a 9/11 truth advocate. I believe the cover up of this horrific attack that killed so many people so brutally is the root  cause of the explosion of paranoia and conspiracy theories in our country. President Bush wittingly or not contributed to  the total destruction of trust in public institutions in our country.  I was living in South Africa back in those days, and I can still remember seeing on the TV screen in the shopping mall  where I was the planes flying into the buildings in New York. It seemed surreal to me. But almost immediately news  started filtering onto my favored internet news sites about anomalies regarding those horrible attacks on that horrible  day. And pretty much from the get‐go I believed that there was a massive cover‐up.  Consider this. So far as I know not a single military official was ever reprimanded demoted Court martialed or penalized  in any way for the massive security breaches that occurred on that day. How do you explain that? The number of  anomalies is so great that you don't have to be particularly intelligent to discern something rotten in the State of  Denmark. Here is a list of some of the best websites that I have drawn on to inform myself about 9/11:  https://bollyn.com/  https://www.ae911truth.org/  http://www1.ae911truth.org/en/about‐us  https://www.ae911truth.org/NIST  96 http://patriotsquestion911.com/  http://patriotsquestion911.com/military  http://patriotsquestion911.com/pilots.html  https://rense.com/general24/t500.htm  https://rense.com/general94/9911myth.htm  https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2019/09/09/9‐11‐after‐18‐years/  https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2019/09/10/presstitute‐blackout‐of‐9‐11‐study/  Many years ago, back in August of 2006, I was doing a 9/11 truth outreach in Boulder Colorado. There was an  international news presence set up in Boulder for a couple of weeks concerning the arrest of a prominent fugitive from  American Justice living in Thailand. I would circulate every day and hand out my brief one page list of 911 Truth bullet  points. On the third day moving among the television and news journalists from around the world, a burley Fox News  cameraman took me by the wrist and pulled me aside. Expecting the worst, I was shocked when he told me the  following. He said something like this: "Son you're wasting your time here. Everyone in the news media knows there's  been a massive cover‐up of 9/11 truths. But the problem is that the media owners in New York won't allow us to report  about this." How I wish I had a tape recorder and recorded him! I wasn't particularly surprised by his words because they  confirmed what anyway I believed.  I continued my 9/11 truth activities for a couple more years. During that time a student group at CU Boulder brought in a  couple of prominent 9/11 truth proponents to speak on campus. Their talk was well attended and their presentation  was coherent and lucid. But over time 9/11 truth lost traction. We were mocked by the mainstream media, and the  Democrats who could have made hay against President Bush for his complicity in this dastardly attack (or his  incompetence in exposing it) simply rolled over and played dead.  Giuliani, who as mayor of New York at that time played a critical role in ensuring that the truth about 9/11 would never  emerge, I believe has been haunted by his collusion and that at least partly explains why he has promoted such insane  theories on behalf of Trump. Giuliani is frantically trying to atone for his errors around 9/11. Unfortunately 9/11 involved  the mass murder of 3000 Americans, many of them in the most grizzly of manners. Who can forget the horrifying  pictures of people jumping off the World Trade Center? Murder has no statute of limitations, and therefore I believe  9/11 will haunt this country and destroy it if the truth is never allowed to emerge  While I detest the Qanon supporters, and have watched with horror as many of my former friends, particularly in the  Evangelical Christian movement, have signed on with his bogus movement, I do believe in my heart of hearts that these  people understand that there is something fundamentally wrong with our society. They know that the mass media  completely failed to report the truth about 9/11. And therefore they instinctively do not trust it.  During the Obama administration I stopped talking about 9/11 because I saw it went nowhere. The irony is that today  the Republicans are leading the charge against Democrats using all sorts of insane conspiracy theories like QAnon, when  the Republicans were responsible for the original 9/11 cover‐up travesty. The sad thing is that the Democrats back then  lacked the courage to make waves and now they are being victimized by the insanification of the Republican Party. This  simply confirms the biblical adage that a person who is silent in the face of Injustice will eventually be victimized himself  by an even greater form of injustice.  I once hoped and believed that the internet would serve as a powerful means to bring the truth out of the darkness and  save our society. But I no longer believe that. Instead the internet is allowing an explosion of insane and absurd  ideologies to proliferate and shatter consensus in our society. Although I have been a heavy internet user since the  1990s, when I discovered it while I was living in Israel, I no longer believe the internet serves society and indeed  threatens to destroy it.  People like Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer and articulate writers like Paul Krugman, who constantly denounces the  insanification of the Republicans, simply are unable or unwilling to look at the foundational sin of 9/11 that brought all  97 of this ugly political division to the forefront. The more they obfuscate and cover up the more people like QAnon will  respond in rage.  I do believe Justice will be served. The destruction of America will be a form of Justice about 9/11 because as a society  we are collectively responsible for the crime the cover‐up and then the unending assault on innocent Muslims around  the world in the so‐called war on terror. The best form of Justice would be to expose the people responsible prosecute  them imprison them and execute some of them. But apparently that will never happen and instead collectively we will  all pay the price.  It will sadden me to see this country destroyed. I was born here and educated here. I moved to Israel pursuing the  Zionist dream after college, but I returned here in 2006. I remember when the plane landed in New York feeling like I  had descended into a very dark place compared to America in the 1980s when I originally moved away. The darkness  had only intensified over the last 15 years I am sorry to say.  Perhaps you can be a voice of truth. But I know not to harbor unrealistic hopes. People in academia have been terribly  complicit in the cover‐up of 9/11 truth. Their fear of rocking the boat, their hunger for tenure and academic accolades,  makes them completely unwilling and unable to serve as courageous voices of justice and change. So I have learned not  to Hope for much from your colleagues.  Despite all this negativity and gloom, I wish you and your family friends and loved ones a Happy Healthy and Hopeful  New Year 2021.  Sincerely, Michael Korn  98 Baumb, Nelly From:Suzanne Keehn <dskeehn@pacbell.net> Sent:Saturday, January 30, 2021 1:22 PM To:Council, City Subject:Fw: ABAG's regional housing plan is a fantasy CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  From 48Hills in San Francisco. Worthwhile reading. ABAG's regional housing plan is a fantasy | 48 hills     ABAG's regional housing plan is a fantasy | 48 hills The affordable housing won't get built, developers will get rich, and low-income communities will be devastated.   Really important to read. Thanks, Suzanne Keehn 94306   99 Baumb, Nelly From:E Nigenda <enigenda1@gmail.com> Sent:Saturday, January 30, 2021 12:22 PM To:Council, City Subject:Priorities for City Council CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Unfortunately, I missed the cut‐off for comments:     As probably everyone knows, climate change is expected to lead to a greater frequency in pandemics.       I believe the top priorities for the City in the coming year should be economic recovery from the pandemic, social equity  and housing, with reduction of greenhouse gases and the predicted impacts of climate change being foundational to  all our priorities.       We need to plan for increased flooding, possible water scarcity, future pandemics, warmer climate, etc. in our built and  social environment.  Our economic recovery will be short‐term if we don’t.  Additionally, there can be no social equity if  housing, especially low‐income housing is built without planning for rising groundwater, increased flooding and  contaminant migration in some parts of our City.         Careful planning and mitigation should ensure that as we respond to one impact of climate change‐ which is economic  recovery from the pandemic ‐ we do not build tomorrow’s risk today.    Thank you for considering my comments,  Esther Nigenda  100 Baumb, Nelly From:Suzanne Keehn <dskeehn@pacbell.net> Sent:Saturday, January 30, 2021 12:08 PM To:Council, City Subject:Input for the Palo Alto City Retreat CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  1) Building housing for those who truly need it -- BMR, at or below 80% AMI We obviously do not need Market Rate Housing, however, currently it seems the only way to get any to get only a 15% BMR is to let developers build what is not needed to create a few of them. There must be a better way to build for those needing BMR, instead of giving our city over to developers. 2) Importance of maintaining R-1 zoning and preventing the zoning erosion around them. Most people work to own a single family home to raise their children, neighborhoods promote community. Dense apartments, with mostly small units do not. 3) Clearly stating the City's position against the loss of "local control" and state bills, like SB 9 & 10, which seek to destroy it. Encourage the Council to reach out to our state reps and state those viewpoints. Clearly these bills are replacements for S.B 50. Plus 10 takes away the initiatives imitated by citizens that were passed by a vote, if the City Council so decides. 4) Making residents' thoughts/ideas carry more weight in the decision-making process than developers. Those residents qualified, either by proximity to the proposed change, and/or professional qualifications to be fully brought into decisions. Example, the Fry's area, Several people came up with a plan that dealt with the issues of housing, parking, park, that is the best one of which I am aware. 5) Make sure the Council are making the decisions not the Staff, insist to receive their process in a timely manner so YOU can make decisions. 101 Baumb, Nelly From:Athena Ierokomos <athenaierokomos@gmail.com> Sent:Saturday, January 30, 2021 12:01 PM To:Council, City Subject:Public Comment on Consideration and Selection of 2021 Council Priorities CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Hello,     I am a Stanford graduate student and I would like to express my support for prioritizing reallocation of funds from  policing to civilian public safety response teams. In particular, situations such as traffic enforcement, mental health calls,  and nuisance calls are scenarios that could be handled more safely and professionally and for lower cost by civilian  alternatives.     Thank you,   Athena  102 Baumb, Nelly From:Loren Smith (gmail) <loren.m.smith2016@gmail.com> Sent:Saturday, January 30, 2021 11:59 AM To:Council, City Subject:RE: Public Comments - Priorities for 2021 - FTTH CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  I too have a slide deck if we can access / share. https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/14jqVAjd8xlMC2TNb3EKg4gIb78iQ8VBQa_vMLZ-jy2Q/edit?usp=sharing Loren M. Smith Email: Loren.M.Smith2016@gmail.com Mobile: +1.415.215.7420 From: Loren Smith (gmail) <Loren.m.Smith2016@gmail.com>   Sent: Saturday, January 30, 2021 11:47 AM  To: 'city.council@cityofpaloalto.org' <city.council@cityofpaloalto.org>  Subject: Public Comments ‐ Priorities for 2021 ‐ FTTH    I’d like to share one resident’s viewpoint on priorities for 2021, namely encouraging FTTH 103 Baumb, Nelly From:Caleb Zerger <czzerger1@gmail.com> Sent:Saturday, January 30, 2021 11:35 AM To:Council, City Subject:Public Comment on Consideration and Selection of 2021 Council Priorities CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Hello,     I am writing to suggest that the city of Palo Alto prioritize reallocating funds from policing towards civilian responses to  certain situations. Health calls (including welfare check ups) account for about 1 in 7 calls answered by PAPD, and most  of these could be better answered by health/mental health professionals. Parking/traffic enforcement could be done by  civilian employees like BerkDOT in Berkeley.     It is important for police not to be involved in such situations. One reason: for certain community members (especially  those who are people of color, struggle with substance abuse, or have faced police brutality before) the presence of  police can be triggering and needlessly escalate situations. The best thing for the health and safety of our community is  to reallocate funds from policing to other solutions.    Thank you!    Caleb Zerger  104 Baumb, Nelly From:Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> Sent:Saturday, January 30, 2021 11:25 AM To:Rebecca Eisenberg; Roberta Ahlquist; Greer Stone; Council, City; Tanner, Rachael; Binder, Andrew; paloaltofreepress@gmail.com; Dennis Upton; Roberta Ahlquist; Anna Griffin; Minor, Beth; Baumb, Nelly; DuBois, Tom; Filseth, Eric (Internal); mark weiss Subject:Aram James's suggested priorities for the city of Palo Alto 2021 CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.           1. Continue to pursue the Zack Perron cover up and in that regard ask council to make certain internal complaints one officer’s allegation against another –particularly where racism, sexism, internal police misconduct, serious matters are concerned the matters are sent to the IPA –not buried in the HR department . 2. Make 2021 the year Palo Alto funds a robust safe parking program as we move to more permanent solutions for housing those now forced to live in their vehicles or in the streets of Palo Alto. 3. Don’t let the downtown streets team scandal fall through the cracks. 4. Model the statewide Reparations Commission (AB3121) by creating a similar reparations commission in Palo Alto. 5. Ask the city council to rein in our current city manager and police chief – emphasizing the importance of transparency and adequate notice on key issues to be made 105 mandatory. The city counsel should lead -not our city manager—more aggressive questioning of both the police chief and city manager by council members. Remember who the people elected (the city council). 6. Includes more closing scrutinizing the consent calendar to make certain critical items are put on the agenda as action items for public debate. 7. LaDoris Cordell Foothill Preserve. 8. Put off building a new police station until the budget issues clarified—consider regional approach to policing. 9. Allow more robust participation by community members during coral communication and discussion on agenda items. 10. Read and enforce NYT v Sullivan --allows vehement, caustic, and sometimes unpleasantly sharp attacks on government and public officials. 106 Baumb, Nelly From:Deborah Wexler <drkwexler@gmail.com> Sent:Saturday, January 30, 2021 9:16 AM To:Council, City Subject:City Priorities for 2021 CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on  links.  ________________________________    I am sorry that I missed the deadline for the survey for input on 2021 City priorities.  One thing I’d like to comment on is  any future plans to make University Ave a permanent pedestrian walk.  When the street was closed over the summer, I  specifically avoided shopping in the area.  As someone who has intermittent back and hip pain, (not serious enough to  qualify for a parking disability) even walking around the block from the CVS parking lot (when the back entrance of the  store was closed last year) was a challenge.  I stopped shopping on the street or eating at the restaurants or even picking  up take‐out.  I went shopping at stores which had a parking lot.    Please take into your consideration older people or people with physical disabilities. Being able to drive up to stores is  very helpful.    I think the move to close the street in order to help the restaurants with parklets was good and I applaud the council for  pivoting in this way and would support doing it again on a temporary basis.  However, as well‐intentioned as these  parklets were, I still didn't feel safe dining in them.  The tables were too close together, or too close to people walking in  the street or on the sidewalks.  Local Union was the worst offender.  With these parklets in place, the street became  very crowded and people were not respectful about maintaining distance.  With better enforcement, I would still  support this but again, on a temporary basis only.    I urge you to not close off the street.    Deborah Wexler  107 Baumb, Nelly From:Yahoo Mail.® <honkystar@yahoo.com> Sent:Saturday, January 30, 2021 1:39 AM To:Honky Subject:TrumpCo: 'A Lot More Suffering Needs To Happen!' ? CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  A Lot More Suffering Needs To Happen! Situation Update, Jan. 28th, 2021 - The Biden / globalist agenda to DELETE humanity through global extermination https://healthrangerreport.com/situation-update-jan-28th-2021-the-biden-globalist-agenda-to-delete- humanity-through-global-extermination -- People need to suffer more so that they will cry for Trump to be King of Israel to save us from ZioChina? also: Health Ranger warns about 'Death Squads' ----- The Purpose Of The Trump Presidency And Why David Goldberg Had To Die… The Andrew Carrington Hitchcock Show 1437 - 2021.01.26 Click Here To Listen To The Show https://andrewcarringtonhitchcock.com/2021/01/26/ach-1437-this-man-alone-1-the-purpose-of-the- trump-presidency-and-why-david-goldberg-had-to-die/ === Strategy of Tension https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategy_of_tension World Needs Israel as New World Superpower! Top Rabbi: America is Collapsing, Israel must Step Up as new World Superpower https://www.israel365news.com/164050/top-rabbi-america-is-collapsing-israel-must-step-up-as-new- world-superpower/ Fauci Cares ... A Lot! https://youtu.be/D40uHmTSPew ===== 28th January Update https://www.simonparkes.org/post/28th-january-update 108 PRIEST WARNING FROM ROME !!! MUST HEAR BEFORE YOU DIE Jan 3, 2021 https://www.simonparkes.org/post/warning-from-rome-priest Darren Atherton I guess Simon Parkes missed the bit he calls out the likes of Trump. Lol https://youtu.be/Z9ZvscQpo44 ==== Amazing Polly - Jan.27 Secret Service Fail At Capitol Before Inauguration https://www.bitchute.com/video/BYIcmNAp7jNb/ -- SaltGrain Have you seen this most recent Tru News Broadcast, very scary!! China General: PLA Must Kill All Americans With Biological Weapons https://www.trunews.com/stream/china-general-pla-must-kill-all-americans-with-biological-weapons === Biden To Step Down: Trump To Be Sworn In January 20th – Satire Jan 19th 2021 https://www.infowars.com/posts/biden-to-step-down-trump-to-be-sworn-in-january-20th/ RESIDENT ALIEN https://youtu.be/eTTMFnysJTY On 01/27/2021 11:26 AM || <smacko9@comcast.net> wrote: President Biden, QAnon Fails, & a New Dark Era - Know More News LIVE https://www.knowmorenews.org/kmn-videos/president-biden-qanon-fails-amp-a-new-dark-era-know- more-news-live 109 Baumb, Nelly From:Yahoo Mail.® <honkystar@yahoo.com> Sent:Friday, January 29, 2021 2:49 PM To:Honky Subject:Two COVID 'Spike Proteins,' Censorship, and More, Tie this Mutating Bio-Apocalypse to "666" Satanic Science, Vaccine Iatrogenesis, and Evil Influence. CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Is this email not displaying correctly? View it in your browser.   To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.   COVID Science Shows Demonic Influence: Bio-Apocalypse Whistleblower Predicted and Explained Deadlier Coronavirus Mutants Tied to Gene-Altering Vaccines To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. by Dr. Leonard G. Horowitz (MedicalVeritas.org; January 27, 2021) 110 The deadlier more transmissible coronavirus mutants increasingly threatening civilization were accurately predicted and explained by this author repeatedly over the past quarter-century in hundreds of articles, dozens of videos, multiple films, and two bestselling books published to avert this disaster: Emerging Viruses: AIDS & Ebola-- Nature, Accident or Intentional? and Healing Codes for the Biological Apocalypse. All the above went grossly neglected, censored, disparaged, and dismissed. Those serving darkness labeled me a "conspiracy theorist." Many claiming to be my allies refused to share my works and warnings. They deemed me too "radical." Now my righteous and accurate labors of love have exposed their ignorance, negligence, and malice. My admonishments now stand as accurate predictions of biomedical malfeasance and Bible prophesy fulfilled.(1)(2) Contrary to 'skeptics,' pseudoscientists, and athiests, the 'Coronavirus Coup' or 'plandemic' serves Divine justice. CLICK HERE to read the most sobering challenge and greatest spiritual opportunity. _____________ TAKE TIME TO LISTEN AND AWAKEN! 111 To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. and To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. ____________ THE BEST TIMELY PROTECTION AND REMEDIES WE SELL To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. For Stubborn Colds, Flu, Coughs and Bronchitis Wild Crafted Native American Recipe w/ Expectorant MADE WITH A SCIENTIFICALLY-PROVEN CORONAVIRUS KILLER! Scientific research by the world-famous medical botanist, Neal Towers at the University of British Columbia, showed that the two types of Rosaceae plants that Dr. Horowitz added to these formulas were proven to "completely inhibit" cell death from bovine coronavirus infections. The "Extra Strength" tincture uses '528 power' to increase anti-oxidant activity. This also complements "Devil's Club" and other time-tested and effective natural remedies. These include Lomatium root extract that is a sacred remedy for respiratory ailments prescribed by native North American medicine men and women. 112 WARNING: Do not purchase or consume this product if you give credence to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA a.k.a. Fascist Drug Advocates) that threatened to confiscate these products during an armed robbery against our warehouse, and then incarcerate Dr. Horowitz as a criminal for endorsing these non-drugs, and for informing you through this advertisement and his other works about the excellent expected relief you are likely to gain against respiratory ailments when you consume these products as recommended. HAND-CRAFTED SUPPLIES ARE LIMITED, SO ORDER NOW! CLICK HERE to Order "Flu-Free Formula - Extra Strength Herbal Tincture" for Only $90. CLICK HERE to Order "Flu Free Herbal Organic Cough Syrup" for Only $99. ________ Next . . . . You've heard about healing and protective anti-oxidants, such as vitamins C, D and E (d-alpha tocopheral), Zinc, and chlorophyll. They all work like hydroxychloroquine to reduce "oxidative stress" and thereby boost natural immunity against COVID-19. ALL DISEASE PREVENTION DEPENDS ON ANTI-OXIDANT ACTIVITY. SO HERE'S AN UNPRECEDENTED TRIPLE ANTI-OXIDANT . . . 113 OxySilver w/528 To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. There is NOTHING like OxySilver with 528--a triple anti-oxidant. Why? (1) The unique covalently-bonded silver-oxygen molecule developed by NASA Science to keep astronauts healthy generates an "oxygen cloud" around each silver atom. This 'electrocutes' germs, kills them; and (2) "Structured water" dramatically increases "oxidative-reductive potentials" (ORPs) resulting in substantially-increased anti-oxidant activity of the water itself; and (3) The 528Hz frequency alone, programming OxySilver's structured water memory, has been shown in a double-blind science study to increase anti-oxidant activity by 100% and protect nerve damage by 20%. So stock-up on OxySilver NOW! And remember to use it with "prayer 114 power." Why? Listen to Dr. Horowitz explain this on the John Moore radio show linked from the first banner above. The "Holy Spirit" that blesses you in response to your heart-felt loving intention in faithful prayer is comprised of 'negatively charged electrons' that counter damaging oxidative stress and disease reactions. The Holy Spirit's negative charges neutralize positively-charged pathogens--deadly viruses and bacteria. So the Holy Spirit anointing you from prayer, that is the same Holy Spirit that rejuvenates you during sleep, serves as another ANTI- OXIDANT and cure! Wow! Using OxySilver w/528 plus 'prayer power' provides a quadruple anti- oxidant immune booster, anti-viral, antibiotic, life-saver! Therefore, who needs risky vaccinations to fight COVID? To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. Click to view Dr. Horowitz and Sherri Kane's OxySilver Promise! 115 "Never Get Sick Again or Your Money Back!" To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. HELP STOP SUICIDES AND DRUG ADDICTIONS WITH CBD528 'SPIRIT REMEDY.' To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. If you or someone you love is sick and tired of feeling sick and tired, chronically depressed, in pain, addicted to drugs, and not feeling good enough about life in general, or lack a positive attitude to act in accordance with one's best interests and success, then CBD528 homeopathic is for you. CLICK HERE to order now for Only $24.90 __________ Check out these great offers, expiring on February 15, 2021. OxySilver-3 Pack $10.00 off Use Coupon Code: A6PCB21NHI8 OxySilver or Liquid Dentist (single bottle) 10% Off Use Coupon Code; II318194NI92K 116 This coupon is also good for single bottles of: CBD528, Zeolove, 528Rejuvenate and OxySilver For Pets. CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST PACKAGE SPECIAL ___________ For this "Dark Winter" and Your Family's Health: Buy "THE BILL GATES BIOTERRORISM DOOMSDAY PACKAGE SPECIAL" (OxySilver Case of 24) and SAVE! To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. _________ Tell friends to sign up for this free newsletter on HealthyWorldStore.com! _________ KICK CAFFEINE, NICOTINE, COCAINE & METHAMPHETAMINE ADDICTIONS WITH PURE GO! To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. Kick acidifying, poisonous, oxygen-depleting stimulants, and gain natural healthy energy while 117 boosting powerful immunity using anti-oxidant vitamins, minerals, and much more. PureGo is supercharged with the anti-oxidant 528 frequency too. Only $69 for a month supply. CLICK HERE to ORDER NOW! or Buy a PUREGO 3-pack and save 20%; get FREE SHIPPING too! CLICK HERE to Order Your 3-pack. __________ Dental Care Costs and Risks Got You Perplexed? Rely on . . . To help prprivacy, Mprevented download from the In Only $39.95 To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. Latest Testimonial "I must tell you. I had the worst toothache for over a year. I put off going to the dentist, because I knew that I would need a root canal. I decided to do everything possible to get rid of the infection myself. I bought your dental rinse and OxySilver. I rinsed two or three times a day and took the OxySilver internally two or three times a day, as well. In about 3 weeks my tooth was completely healed. I can chew on it now with no pain what- so-ever. Your products saved my tooth and my wallet. I have confidence 118 in your products because they work! Thank you! Chris _________ In Case You Missed Our SPECIAL WARNING REPORT PFIZER/MODERNA COVID VACCINE RISKS and the "Big Picture" To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. 24% of FDA Experts are Awake and Heroic. The Rest are Either Big Pharma’s “Captured” Idiots or Genocidalists Endorsing the Pfizer COVID Vaccine. by Dr. Leonard G. Horowitz (MedicalVeritas.org; Dec. 11, 2020) Las Vegas, NV–The FDA’s expert commission voted 17-to-4 to approve Pfizer’s COVID-19 mRNA “vaccine.” The ruling, in effect, means you have a 24% chance of something terrible happening from taking the “game changing” “Final Solution” to the pandemic imposition, or virtual geopolitical and economic extortion. Substantive omissions to induce damaging actions is FRAUD in law. Add to this fact that in criminal trials wherein murderers “plead the fifth,” “silence is evidence most persuasive.” Pfizer omitted doing genetic safety testing on their “genetic therapy” misrepresented as a COVID-19 vaccine. And the media omitted the intelligence that caused nearly a quarter of the FDA experts to fear authorizing the unsafe “genetic therapy.” 119 To continue reading CLICK HERE. _______________ In Case You Want to Watch Dr. Horowitz Being Interviewed by Laura-Lynn on What You Need to Know to Survive and Even Thrive Through COVID-19, 20, 21, 22 and the "Great Global Reset" Click the Banner Below. To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. _________ Need More Intel on the "Big Picture" of COVID Organized Crimes? To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. ______________ More Former Vitally-Important Articles . . . FORCED VACCINATIONS & COVID-19 MIND- 120 CONTROL WON’T GAIN “HERD IMMUNITY,” and WHY YOU SHOULD SHARE THIS INFORMATION To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. Why “We Are All in This Together” COVID-19 MIND-CONTROL is largely failing because at the time of this writing more than 60% of citizens won’t submit to forced vaccinations nor “contact-tracing” in many communities. As you can tell by the Trump administration's court battles over the “stolen election,” where ‘the-rubber-meets-the-road’ is in courts of law. The same is true for forced vaccinations and social impositions such as contact-tracing and mask-wearing. . . . In vaccination law that is used to advance forced vaccinations, also called “immunization mandates,” “general agreement” about the benefits of vaccines presumes that efficacy and safety is “generally accepted.” Actual science is not necessary. The vaccines need not be sufficiently proven without question. The “SAFETY” of “mandated vaccines” is simply presumed to be in the “public interest” according to general acceptance. That's why you need to integrate and spread this intelligence. Because by awakening the masses about the risks, you are actually helping to establish the new "general agreement" that vaccines are UNSAFE! This, more than anything else, impacts pending court decisions and your freedom to abstain from forced intoxications. This is the 'remedy' for governmental and Big Pharma's efforts to deprive you of your health, safety, faith in God and religious freedom. This is urgent knowledge for you to have and share. CLICK HERE to read more. __________ 121 To help prprivacy, Mprevented download from the In Dr. Leonard Horowitz Files COVID-19 "Vaccine" Lawsuit to Block FDA’s Approval of Pfizer and Moderna’s “Genetic Therapies” Ft Myers, FL (12-3-20; MedicalVeritas.org)—A world leading vaccine risk analyst, Dr. Leonard G. Horowitz, has filed a COVID-19 vaccine lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida to oppose the FDA’s approval of Pfizer and Moderna vaccines until the companies, alleged to have falsely advertised safety, perform tests on the genetic impacts admittedly neglected by the companies. CLICK HERE to read all about this life-saving effort, and share it! _____________ To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. ________ LISTEN TO DR. HOROWITZ BREAK NEWS OF HIS PFIZER/MODERNA LAWSUIT on The John Moore Show and The Carl Nelson Show To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. _______________ PRODUCE INSTANT RELAXATION & STRESS RELIEF 122 For the 'Uptight' and 'Ailing': The 528 Tuning Fork Magnetized Orgone Generator Instant 'Relaxation Response' Set To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. Ideal gift for clinics or home use. Only $120 with free shipping. Click here to Order Now! __________ To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. ONLY $69 Click here to Order Now! ___________ Click The Banners Below to Hear Dr. Horowitz's Additional Radio Interviews: To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. _______ HOME ALONE? TIRED OF THE 'NEWS'? NEED RELIEF? LISTEN FOR FREE ON THERAPEUTIC 528RADIO.com: 123 To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. To help prprivacy, Mprevented download from the In To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. FREQUENCY 528 is "the 'Bliss Zone.'" Please Share Newsletter Far & Wide! https://mailchi.mp/medicalveritas/vaccine-hesitancy-goes-mainstream-politicians-and- drug-companies-go-bonkers        follow on Twitter | friend on Facebook | forward to a friend follow on Twitter | friend on Facebook | forward to a friend info@healthyworldstore.com Links to: 528Radio.com | Healthy World Newsletter Archive | Dr. Leonard Horowitz | Tetrahedron Press Dr. Horowitz's Essays | 528Revolution.com | WarOnWeThePeople | Liquid Dentist | OxySilver with 528 | 528Records.com | | HealthyWorldStore.com unsubscribe from this list | update subscription preferences unsubscribe from this list | update subscription preferences      124 Baumb, Nelly From:Arlene Goetze <photowrite67@yahoo.com> Sent:Friday, January 29, 2021 11:00 AM To:Sara Cody; cindy chavez Subject:Elders--DYING LIKES FIES -Moderna not a vaccine. CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  1. Nursing Home elders dying like flies 2. Molecular Genetic prof tell you why... Moderna is not a vaccine. It is gene mutation therapy. 3. 3 places to report injuries and deaths Here is a view on vaccines for elderly. Open this 1. CNA Nursing Home Whistleblower: Seniors Are https://vaccineimpact.com/2021/cna-nursing-home-whistleblower-seniors- are-dying-like-flies-after-covid-injections-speak-out by Brian Shilhavy Editor, Health Impact News James (he gives his last name in the video) is a CNA (Certified Nursing Assistant), and he recorded this video as a whistleblower because he could not keep silent any longer. James reports that in 2020 very few residents in the nursing home where he works got sick with COVID, and none of them died during the entire year of 2020. In two weeks, and he reports that many others are near death. T The video is long (47 minutes), and it is clear that James is suffering from emotional stress, and that he will probably lose his job for doing so. But he makes it very clear that these were patients he knew, and after being injected with the mRNA shot, residents who used to walk or talk can no longer do so.. And now they are dying. “They’re dropping like flies.” His superiors are explaining the deaths as being caused by a COVID19 “super-spreader.” However, the residents who refused to take the injections, are not sick, according to James. From Citizen Free Press 2. Latent Deaths Predicted Among The Elderly After Immunization With mRNA Vaccine Dr. Dolores Cahill, professor of molecular genetics, School of Medicine at University College Dublin, and chairwoman of Irish Freedom Party, does a video on this subject. Professor of Molecular Genetics issues ‘chilling warning’ on Covid vaccines… Posted by Kane on January 28, 2021 4:25 am This is Partial Transcript--bit and pieces of very long transcript It’s absolutely a dangerous gene therapy. Should not 125 be given to the elderly,” emphasized professor Cahill. From Dr. Dolores Cahill * Then the real adverse events will happen, against whatever is the real mRNA in the vaccines, and when the person vaccinated comes across (this coronavirus) sometime later …. what happened in the animal studies, 20% or 50% or 100% of the animals died. Among people over 80, maybe about 2.5% will experience severe side effects, adverse events where people cannot work or live life normally * Then with the 2nd vaccination it could be 1 in 10 or ten percent. For the over 80-year-olds, I would think that 80% of them would have life-limiting reactions or die when they come across the messenger RNA again. * For others (not elderly) it could be half of the people who could be severely harmed. * What it does is this gene therapy or medical device is setting up an autoimmune disease chronically. * It’s anaphylaxis in the first wave. It’s anaphylaxis +allergic reaction the 2nd wave. * *But the 3rd reaction occurs when you come across whatever the messenger RNA is against (virus), and now you have stimulated your immune system to have a low- grade autoimmune disease, not immunity to yourself per se because the mRNA is expressing a viral protein. * Now you’ve made yourself into a genetically modified organism, and so the immune system that is meant to push the viruses or bacteria out… now the autoimmune reaction is attacking your body low grade. * Now months later when you come across the virus that stimulates the immune system to get rid of the virus and when the immune system sees that you have viral proteins in your own cells and organs, then about a week later (the adaptive immune system kicks in, the mechanism that makes specific long-term memory antibodies against a pathogen) and you go into organ failure. * Because your immune system is killing your own organs. Those patients will present as sepsis initially. Then later you die of organ failure. (Larry King's wife said he died of sepsis.) * If you have one or two co-morbidities, the energy the immune system requires will make the older person very tired and exhausted and they don’t have the capacity to survive if you have underlying conditions. * Normally, because the mRNA is in every cell of their body, it’s almost unstoppable. It destroys the heart, or the spleen, or the lungs, or the liver because the mRNA is expressing the protein in every cell. * Just as a solution, what we urgently need, just as a repository, 1 in 100, or 1 in 200 vaccine vials injected, to be set aside, especially into the elderly in the care homes. They need to be stored in a biorepository of the vaccine vials randomly, so when the people start to die, we can actually see what is in this vaccine. We should be doing this now. * I am concerned that there are maybe multiple mRNAs in this vaccine, not just something for coronavirus. * We urgently need quality control to randomly require doctors to give 1 in 100 vaccine vials to a repository and someone like me could forensically analyze what’s in these vaccines. * So, when the elderly start dying, we will know. We should be knowing now what’s in them. It’s absolutely a dangerous gene therapy. Should not be given to the elderly,” emphasized professor Cahill. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 126 Moderna admits they do not have a vaccine. It is gene therapy technology. --------------------------------------- 3 places to report injuries:] 1. VAERS: Vaccine Averse Event Report System, a program of the CDC who has paid flu vaccine damages ($4 billion worth) but today is not organized well. So far it has recorded 180 vaccine deaths and over 4,000 injuries.. It went temporarily off line this week...swamped with calls. 2. VaxxTracker.com- a group independent of government, Pharmaceuticals, and lobbying groups; in partner with WHO, World Health Org(this website) of attorneys who work to defend folks damaged by toxins in many forms: mercury, aluminum, 5G, vaccines, etc.-- under the direciton of Robert F Kennedy, Jr., Atttorney. Dr FAuci says after his 2nd shot, he was knocked out 24 hours. He makes over $417,000 a year and gives much Health money to WuhaN? in China where the virus may have originated. Forwarded by Arlene Goetze, MA, No Toxins for Children, photowrite67@yahoo.com Please share with others...especially those in nursing homes and the Directors in charge. 127 Baumb, Nelly From:carl van wey <carl.vanwey@gmail.com> Sent:Friday, January 29, 2021 10:28 AM To:Council, City Cc:carl.vanwey@gmail.com; carl.vanwey@comcast.net Subject:University ave. closure CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Dear Council Members,        I and my family would love to see the return of the downtown University ave. closure for  strolling and dinning and shopping without the worry of traffic.  Please consider making it  permanent.    thanks,  Carl Van Wey, MD  Elizabeth Fraze, MD  128 Baumb, Nelly From:Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> Sent:Thursday, January 28, 2021 11:11 PM To:Jonsen, Robert; Greer Stone; Steven D. Lee; chuckjagoda1@gmail.com; Human Relations Commission; Jethroe Moore; Jeff Rosen; Molly O'Neal; Council, City; Planning Commission; Kaloma Smith; Human Relations Commission; Roberta Ahlquist; ParkRec Commission; Binder, Andrew; Raj; Anna Griffin; mark weiss Subject:Stop the attempt to derail D.A. George Gascón’s criminal justice reforms —by Erwin Chemerinsky Dean of the UC Berkeley School law & Miriam Aroni Krinsky executive director of Fair and Just Prosecution. CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on  links.  ________________________________    FYI:  >  > https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2021‐01‐28/george‐gascon‐los‐angeles‐district‐attorney‐lawsuit?_amp=true  >  >  > Sent from my iPhone  129 Baumb, Nelly From:Chris Robell <chris_robell@yahoo.com> Sent:Thursday, January 28, 2021 6:18 PM To:Council, City Subject:Cato Investments Project CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Dear Council Members,  I am concerned about the proposed 24 unit apartment complex on two R‐1 lots being proposed at the corner of  Wellesley and College Ave for two reasons:    1) This is a THREE story complex that seems excessive for an R‐1 neighborhood. I don’t live in this neighborhood, but it is  NOT respectful or appropriate to residents or to set such a precedent. Let’s not allow exceptions to our zoning are  becoming the new norm. If this was on EL Camino or near 101 on a busy road, perhaps.     2) Cato, the applicant, does NOT have a website, a contact, or a phone number. At least we know how to contact  Stanford with any questions. The developer for the project you recently approved on San Antonio seems like a good  firm, reaching out to neighbors and will some way to contact. It doesn’t appear Cato is of the same ilk.  We need to think  about who is going to really care about the community and engender trust.    Chris Robell  Old Palo Alto resident  130 Baumb, Nelly From:slevy@ccsce.com Sent:Thursday, January 28, 2021 3:00 PM To:Steve Levy Subject:Bay Area economic update CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Here is the link to the latest Bay Area economic update published before we moved to purple tier though I would be cautious about how long it will last or how much job impact it will have in the near term, though some added jobs. http://www.bayareaeconomy.org/bay-area-job-watch-52/ The highlights: • The past two months have brought discouraging economic news for the near-term as a result of the virus spread and resulting restrictions on activity in the Bay Area. The region lost 20,900 jobs in Leisure and Hospitality (hotels and restaurants), saw an increase in unemployment of 34,300 with the regional unemployment rate jumping from 5.9% in November to 6.8% in December. • The Bay Area recorded added 17,300 jobs in November down from 32,900 in October. The activity restrictions should limit job growth while they last. • The Bay Area lost 14,300 jobs (seasonally adjusted) in December as other sectors mostly posted small job gains. • Between April and December, the Bay Area recovered 39.5% of the jobs lost between February and April trailing the state and nation. • At the same time, news of vaccine approval and distribution, a possible stimulus package and the Biden administration focus on immigration, infrastructure and job growth point to a better outlook by mid-year 2021. The usual caveats about housing supply and affordability and maintaining a competitive economic environment remain. 131 Baumb, Nelly From:Arthur Keller <arthur@kellers.org> Sent:Thursday, January 28, 2021 2:32 PM To:Council, City Subject:BAWSCA Representation CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Dear Mayor DuBois and City Council,     I encourage you to reaffirm your position in support of the Bay‐Delta Plan.  You should replace the current  representative on BAWSCA if that person does not represent the City position on that board.  City representatives must  uphold policies duly enacted by the City.  This misrepresentation should be considered when evaluating the next Vice  Mayor, and should be disqualifying.    Sincerely,  Arthur Keller  (not in any official capacity)     To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. 132 Baumb, Nelly From:Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> Sent:Thursday, January 28, 2021 2:04 PM To:Jeff Rosen; Molly O'Neal; Jethroe Moore; Raven Malone; Steven D. Lee; Council, City; Greer Stone; Roberta Ahlquist; DuBois, Tom; Rebecca Eisenberg; mark weiss; paloaltofreepress@gmail.com; Jonsen, Robert; Planning Commission; Kaloma Smith; ParkRec Commission; Raj; Anna Griffin Subject:Queens Prosecutors Long Overlooked Misconduct. Can a New D.A. Do Better? CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on  links.  ________________________________    FYI:    https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/27/nyregion/melinda‐katz‐queens.amp.html      Sent from my iPhone  133 Baumb, Nelly From:b. beekman <cranberrysauce23@gmail.com> Sent:Thursday, January 28, 2021 1:30 PM To:Mayor Lily Mei.; D3. Jenny Kassan; D4. Yang Shao; D5. Raj Salwan; D6. Teresa Cox; D2. Rick Jones; D1. Teresa Keng.; Mayor Sam Licarrdo; Mayor's office. Lee Wilcox; Mayor's office. Paul Pereira; C.Mgr. David Sykes; C.Attrny. Nora Frimann; city attorney Shasta Green; cl.d1. Charles "Chappie" Jones; cl.d2. Sergio Jimenez; cl.d3. Raul Peralez; cl.d4. Lan Diep; cl.d5. Magdelena Carrasco; cl.d6. Devora. Davis; cl.d7. Maya Esparza; cl.d8. Sylvia Arenas; cl.d9. Pam Foley; cl.d10. Johnny Khamis; cDoT.Dir.John Ristow; cDOT Laura Wells; c.mgr.Jim Ortbal; C. Manager Angel Rios; OES Director.Ray Riordan; OES.Office of Emergency Services; Police Ofc. Anthony Mata; Police Ofc. David Knopf; Police Lt. Ellen.Washburn -s.op.; Police Lt. Heather Randol; Supervisor Cindy Chavez; Supervisor Otto Lee; Supervisor Joseph Simitian; Supervisor Susan Ellenberg; Supervisor Mike Wasserman; Dana Reed; d.District Attorney; s.PIO; supervisor.carson@acgov.org; Wilma.Chan@acgov.org; Nate.Miley@acgov.org; richard.valle@acgov.org; Scott.Haggerty@acgov.org; David Haubert; amy.shrago@acgov.org; Anika Campbell Belton.; Perkins, Cheryl, CAO; info@alcoda.org; pio@alamedacountysheriff.org; mayor; D1.; D2.; D3.; D4.; D5.; D6.; D7.; D8.; City Clerk.Brkly.; C.Mgr.; attorney@cityofberkeley.info; O.E.S.; planning; Transportation; p.r.c.; berkeley. p.d.; FPD chief. Kim Peterson; John Lindsay-Poland; Sameena Usman; Victor Sin; Roxana Marachi; tessa.darc@gmail.com; council@redwoodcity.org; city.council@menlopark.org; Council, City; cityadministratorsoffice@oaklandca.gov; cityclerk@oaklandnet.com; Craig Dziedzic; Janell Myhre; Phillip White; Corinne Bartshire; Mikyung Kim-Molina; Baker, Ethan (ECD); Lloyd Shand; Maryellen Carroll; Gary Malais; J. George Lippman Subject:Blair Beekman. Thursday. January 28, 2021 ___Project Funding Accountability. CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.      Dear BAUASI,           To follow up, on my letters, since December 2020, below, and my public comments, from the January 2021, approval  authority meeting.      Is it time to consider,  BAUASI, begin to review & study, their current, 1‐3 year financal structuring patterns, for local  Bay Area Approval Authority projects.     As current project accountability, and its financial practices, can confuse, both everyday community & local  government, alike.       To its credit, BAUASI, offers annual reports, to the public, each June, with a list, of BAUASI project approvals, from all of  the Bay Area local hub requests, from the prior January,      BAUASI, also tries to offer, some transparency, in its secondary, regional, Approval Authority projects, wlth these  project appearences, on BAUASI Approval Authority, public meeting agendas.    134  These can be good beginning examples, of accountability & openness, from BAUASI, and the federal level.      It is an important concept of BAUASI, for the public policies, of Approval Authority projects, to try to be addressed,  mostly at the local community level.     And that, current 1‐3 funding practices, can offer, a certain flexibility, to help more easily continue, the financing  projects.      But this continual reshuffling, can also work, to insulate govt. projects, from better scrutiny. And that, can sometimes  fluster a process, to such a degree, it can actually work, to create a danger, instead of safety for projects, and a  community.     The ALPR trailers, for Fremont, beginning in late 2017, is a good example, of this confusion, for both everyday  community and local government, alike.         In creating, your own BAUASI studies & review process, at this time,      You could ask for input, from what should be, much previous thought & study, on this subject, from local govts.,  everyday community, and advocacy.      Community agencies, like SF CARD and CADRE, could also help seek out, important advice, as well.     As the goal should be,  at this time, of more clear, open & accountable, funding structures and patterns, within each, of  the different stages, of approval authority projects, in local communities.     While still respecting, how most, public policy questions, about projects, can still be, for local communities to better  address.     You should also have, my previous letters, on this subject, from 2018‐19. And how to develop, an advisory committee,  public meeting process, for secondary regional planning ideas, like with the most recent, BAUASI interoperability  advisory group.       You should be familiar, with how I think and work, at this point. Don't be afraid, to write back. I hope this can be, good  discussion matter, throughout this year.      I have addressed this letter, to persons, of other local govts. for dialogue & ideas, as needed.      I am asking, at this time, how BAUASI, as a federal agency, can study, review, and help define, a few more, public policy  guidelines, for local Bay Area communities.     And that, can offer a project process, that is more clear. And at the same time, offer a way, to always want to work,  towards, our better public practices, of openness & accountability.          Sincerely,      Blair Beekman        135         _____________________________________________________________________        On Tue, Dec 22, 2020, 8:30 AM b. beekman <cranberrysauce23@gmail.com> wrote:       Dear BAUASI,            As BAUASI, and local Bay Area govts, have developed, well established, funding structures, for local bay Area approval  projects.      It usually tries to work, for policies, approval projects, and its questions, to be handled, at the local level.      But it seems, everyday people, of many Bay Area cities, may be developing, certain questions, over the years, about the  openness & transparency, with the 1‐3 year, financial structuring, of approval authority projects.     To also note, with secondary, regional funding, for local cities ‐ this can allow for, larger Bay Area cities, a second  chance, at projects.     This may also contribute to, an overall confusion, for both everyday community, and local govt.       Again, I understand, there is a responsibility needed, to practice good oversight, at the local community level.      And a thank you, that June, BAUASI public meeting reports, now try to offer, yearly Bay Area projects approvals.       And that secondary, regional approval of projects, can also be, on approval authority, public meeting agendas.      This accountability, at the BAUASI level, is how to begin.       At this time, is it worth considering, for BAUASI, to study ideas, how there financial structuring, in a revolving 1‐3 year  cycles, can possibly be reviewed.       Possibly, with new ideas, of more clear, local accountability, at the different stages, of approval authority projects ‐ in its  finances, and how projects are delivered, to local communities.     You have, my previous years of writing, on the subject, of a public meeting process, for secondary regional planning  ideas, as well.      I hope you can write back, soon. But this is a subject, that can take some time. And that, I hope we can continue  discussion, in the beginning, of the new year.    136   You should be familiar, with how I think and work, at this point. And how I tend to work, in 'rough draft ideas'. Don't be  afraid, to write back      Happy holidays.          Sincerely,      Blair Beekman  137 Baumb, Nelly From:Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> Sent:Thursday, January 28, 2021 11:58 AM To:Greg Tanaka; Kou, Lydia; paloaltofreepress@gmail.com; Greer Stone; Raven Malone; Steven D. Lee; Council, City; Human Relations Commission; Planning Commission; ParkRec Commission; Anna Griffin; Kaloma Smith; chuck jagoda; Roberta Ahlquist; Jethroe Moore Subject:Palo Alto Banned From Reinstituting Exclusionary Ordinance | Palo Alto, CA Patch CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on  links.  ________________________________    FYI: Great News!!!  https://patch.com/california/paloalto/palo‐alto‐banned‐reinstituting‐exclusionary‐ordinance      Sent from my iPhone  138 Baumb, Nelly From:Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> Sent:Wednesday, January 27, 2021 11:08 PM To:Tanner, Rachael Cc:Winter Dellenbach; chuck jagoda; Rebecca Eisenberg; Roberta Ahlquist; Council, City; Shikada, Ed; Jonsen, Robert Subject:Tonight’s PTC meeting, safe parking programs, the future of Castilleja, future HRC meetings etc.....   >   > Hi Ms.Tanner,  >   > I did speak at the city council meeting on Monday and after raising my concern re the stingy and pathetic nature of the  proposal for a safe program, during oral communications, that you presented for the city, both in dec of 2020 and at the  HRC meeting last February ‐both Mayor Tom D and Vice Mayor Pat Burt did suggest just as you describe below, after I  spoke at Monday’s meet.  >   > I met with Tom D., re a safe parking program, after I had traveled to Santa Barbara to study their program( august  2012 visit ( ‐shortly after he was elected for his 1st term. Similarly I spoke with Pat Burt circa 2011‐2012‐2013 when he  attended one of the candidate forums I presided at for STB ( Stop The Ban).   >   > Despite the PTC chair’s concerns that  I was speaking off topic to the quality of life issue ..related to excessive solo car  travel ...I disagreed believing the excessive RV driving necessitated in large part by a lack of a robust Safe Parking  program was exactly on point. Similarly our police often driving around appearing to be in their cars when they could be  walking in our community...was, in my view, also spot on. As I said to the chair during my second talk ....I though it was  extremely tacky for the PTC chair to use you to cut me off from completing my full three minutes ...without even  allowing me the opportunity to explain why my yet to be heard comments were relevant to the agenda item. But that’s  ok ....will see what the future brings with your chair at future PTC meetings.   >   > Ok, so thanks for the heads up that you will NOT be speaking on safe parking at the Feb 2021 HRC meeting. Will you be  speaking on the Safe Parking Program at the March HRC meeting? If so I look forward to attending.   >   > Have any churches yet to be approved by planning and gone through your appeals process...and are actually up and  running? Or are we still at zero churches actually up and running? Please let me know.   >   > Finally, I was apparently under the mistaken impression that the tier 3 program that you say has been approved by the  city is actually being run and funded by Santa Clara County not the City of Palo Alto. Please advise. Am i right or wrong?   Thanks so much!!   >   > Best regards,   >   > Aram James   >   > 415‐360‐5056   > Abjpd1@gmail.com  >   >   >   >   139 >   >   > Sent from my iPhone  >   >> On Jan 27, 2021, at 9:54 PM, Tanner, Rachael <Rachael.Tanner@cityofpaloalto.org> wrote:  >>   >> Hi Mr. James,   >>   >> As you may have seen the Council did direct staff to, "Look at how to allocate additional resources to RV parking,  unhoused, and childcare." Staff will return to Council with that report early this year.   >>   >> I believe the schedule for HRC has been adjusted and I will be at the March HRC meeting.    >>   >> Thank you for your feedback on the regulatory program for congregation‐based safe parking. As the Policy and  Services Committee members noted, the congregation‐based 1 tier of a 3‐tier regulatory framework; one that would  ultimately allow safe parking at congregations, other private lots, and finally city owned property.  The Council did  authorize a tier 3 program at city owned property at Geng Road; this should open in the next few weeks.   >>   >> Please continue to provide that feedback to the City Council, who are the ultimate decision‐makers regarding both  regulatory policy and program funding.   >>   >> Take care,  >> Rachael  >>   >>   >>   >> Rachael A. Tanner, MCP  >> Assistant Director, Planning & Development Services Department  >>   >> 250 Hamilton Ave | Palo Alto, CA 94301  >>   >> D: 650.329.2167   >> E: Rachael.Tanner@cityofpaloalto.org   >>   >> Quality|Courtesy|Efficiency|Integrity|Innovation  >>   >>   >> ‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐  >> From: Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com>   >> Sent: Monday, January 25, 2021 7:10 PM  >> To: Tanner, Rachael <Rachael.Tanner@CityofPaloAlto.org>  >> Cc: Rebecca Eisenberg <rebecca@privateclientlegal.com>  >> Subject: If possible can you address the sad state of the city’s effort to fund( city and county ..not faith community)   >>   >> CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on  links.  >> ________________________________  >>   >> Hi Rachael,  >>   >> If possible can you address the sad state of the city’s effort to fund( city and county) ..not faith community‐a robust  safe parking program? I want the city to have money from the police budget and new police station ( 5% max) to make  140 this happen. In my mind it is an abdication of our responsibility as a city not to reallocate funds for a robust parking  program. Ok, look forward to also speaking with u at the feb HRC meeting. I reread your comments( from the minutes)  from last feb’s presentation, my response, Rev Smith comments etc. In my view the city plan you proposed was sad and  stingy. Is this plan in your hands or dictated from above. With much respect.  >>   >> Thanks so much,  >>   >> Aram James  >>   >>   >>   >>   >> Sent from my iPhone  141 Baumb, Nelly From:farrell@farrellhome.attlocal.net on behalf of Phil Farrell <farrell@stanford.edu> Sent:Wednesday, January 27, 2021 10:17 PM To:Council, City Subject:Please prioritize housing in Palo Alto CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on  links.  ________________________________    Dear Palo Alto City Council,    As you consider your priorities for 2021, please put creation of more housing units at the top of the list!    I am a homeowner who has lived in Palo Alto for 37 years.  I have raised my family here, but am distressed that none of  my adult children can afford to live here now due to the high cost of housing.  We need more housing of all types, but  particularly affordable housing.    One important source of new affordable housing is the creation of Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) on existing  residential lots.  The council has taken action in recent years to liberalize the rules for ADUs to encourage their creation.  I applaud that  action.    But I want to bring to your attention that city departments continue to put up road blocks to the creation of ADUs.  In  particular, I currently want to create an ADU at my home on Loma Verde Ave, but am being stymied by an unnecessary  and illogical internal policy of the Public Works Engineering Division.    My home is in a flood zone.  There are onerous building requirements for new home construction in the flood zone.   These are sensible if you are starting from scratch.  But Public Works wants to categorically apply these same onerous  requirements to any type of ADU on a property in the flood zone.  Yet, at the same time, they exempt remodels and  additions to houses in the flood zone from these requirements as long as they are not "substantial improvements".  This discriminatory restriction on ADUs that does not apply to home additions is illogical and in conflict with both state  law and the city municipal code.  It will create severe impediments to creating ADUs at the thousands of homes in the  flood zone.    Please help keep ADUs as a viable option for addressing our housing shortage by directing Public Works to stop their  discriminatory restrictions on creating ADUs in the flood zones.  I describe the nature and problems of this policy in  more detail in an email I just sent to Public Works.  I forward a copy below.    Sincerely,  Phil Farrell    Date: Wed, 27 Jan 2021 21:46:11 ‐0800 (PST)  From: Phil Farrell <farrell@stanford.edu>  To: Ajay Kumar <Ajay.Kumar@CityofPaloAlto.org>  Cc: pwecips@cityofpaloalto.org  Subject: Please rescind mistaken policy on ADUs in flood zones    Dear Mr. Kumar,  142   You recently corresponded with Jimmie Sandman from Cottage Technologies (a company specializing in managing  design and construction of Accessory Dwelling Units ‐ ADUs) regarding building requirements for ADUs to be constructed  on properties located within special hazard flood zones in Palo Alto.  Jimmie contacted you because he was working with  a homeowner at 883 Loma Verde Ave, which is in the AE10.5 flood zone.  I am that homeowner.    Based on the correspondence between you and Jimmie, which he forwarded to me, you first re‐iterate the policy for  screening building permit applications for additions or remodels to a residence in the flood zone:            "For any additions/remodel to the existing home, yes we do          a flood zone screening. If the valuation of the work exceeds          50% or more of the existing depreciated value of the structure          then flood zone regulations apply for the project. You will          provide the valuation while PW will determine the existing          value of the structure."    You then state that a different policy is followed for applications for building an ADU:            "For any new ADUs flood zone regulations automatically          apply. We do not do a screening to see if the work is          substantial since it is a new ADU. This applies to all our          ADU projects in the flood zone."    Responding to a followup email from Jimmie, you state that the flood zone building requirements will be automatically  applied to all types of proposed ADUs, whether attached, detached, garage conversion, or Junior ADU.  In response to  Jimmie's further question about whether building an attached ADU will automatically require raising the primary  dwelling's floor elevation, you state:            "A new ADU will only require the ADU to adhere to all flood          zone and fema regulations. Keep in mind though flood proofing          the ADU since some walls will be shared may require work          to the home such as flood resistance materials, etc."    I must protest this asserted policy that all proposed ADUs, whether detached, attached, or junior, must categorically  meet the special flood zone standards of construction when the property is located within a special flood hazard zone.   This policy is illogical.  It says that if I make a small addition to my house and re‐arrange some room partitions, maybe  add a new bathroom, that this work could be exempted from the special flood zone building requirements if it is not a  "substantial improvement", but if I make the very same kinds of physical changes to my house and create an attached or  junior ADU in the process, now suddenly all special flood zone building requirements must be met, regardless of how  "substantial"  are the changes.    In my case, the enforcement of the policy you assert will create such onerous requirements that I will not be able to  create any type of ADU.  In particular, the elevation and floodproofing requirements that you assert I must meet for any  type of ADU, but do not necessarily need to meet for a simple addition or alteration of my house, are structurally and  economically prohibitive.  The only sensible ADU for me to create would take a master bedroom and bath at one end of  the house, built on a slab, and add a large room in the back for kitchen/dining/living room.  Judging from new homes  recently built near me (replacing old houses), elevation of two to three feet above ground level is needed in my area to  meet flood zone building standards.  This is simply impossible to do for the existing bedroom on a slab.  Even if elevation  is limited to the addition, that creates a huge split in level that is severely limiting.    143 Your asserted policy is likely to effectively prohibit ADU construction for thousands of older homes in Palo Alto that are  located within special flood hazard zones.    I request that this public works engineering internal policy regarding categorical application of flood zone building  requirements to all ADUs be rescinded.  Instead, the normal screening for "substantial improvements" should be applied  to attached and junior ADUs, just as it would for the exact same construction activity if it were proposed as an alteration  or addition of the primary residence.  I believe my request is supported by state and city law, as I will explain below.  In  fact, both state and city law and policy encourage the construction of ADUs and prohibit the imposition of special  requirements to impede such construction.    Palo Alto Municipal Code Chapter 18.09 governing Accessory Dwelling Units does not even mention flood zone building  requirements.  The only reference to the flood zone is to state that the maximum allowed ADU height may not be  extended in a flood zone.    I reviewed Palo Alto Municipal Code Chapter 16.52 that provides flood hazard regulations at this website, linked to the  City website:    https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/paloalto/latest/paloalto_ca/0‐0‐0‐13064    This code chapter 16.52 does not mention ADUs at all.  In fact, it only refers to "residential structures".  Applicability of  building restrictions and standards is not based upon intended use, but only on physical characteristics.  Is the structure  new or existing?  If existing, are proposed alterations or additions a "substantial improvement" or not?  The code makes  no distinctions based on how the space is divided internally or how it will be used.  It does not distinguish between  single family or multi‐family.  It does not impose any restrictions on number of occupants.  It only deals with  "structures".    Newly constructed detached ADUs, built on their own foundations without converting any existing structure, are clearly  "new construction" under the meaning of this code chapter 16.52, and thus it is appropriate to require that they meet  the special flood zone standards of construction in chapter subsection 16.52.130.    But by any plain reading of this code chapter 16.52, converting space within an existing "residential structure" to be an  attached or junior ADU, or the combination of conversion of existing space plus some addition to the existing structure  in order to create an attached ADU, is not "new construction".  There is nothing in the code that states or implies that  alterations, remodels, or additions to an existing residential structure are suddenly defined as "new construction" just  because those changes will be used to create an ADU.  They are simply changes to the existing residential structure.    There is no support in the Palo Alto Municipal Code for the public works engineering interpretation that all ADUs must  categorically meet the special flood zone standards of construction.  Furthermore, state law clearly is encouraging the  construction of ADUs and prohibiting special restrictions that apply only to ADUs.  Government Code Title 7, Division 1,  Chapter 4, Section 65852.2 sets forth requirements and restrictions for local government agencies to follow when  regulating construction and use of ADUs.  I reviewed it at this official website:    https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/home.xhtml    Government code section 65852.2 has multiple paragraphs that discourage or prohibit special restrictions or  requirements for ADUs versus primary dwellings.  It provides no exceptions for flood zone regulations, and in fact, never  mentions flood zones.  For example:            Paragraph (a)(4) states "An existing ordinance governing          the creation of an accessory dwelling unit by a local agency          or an accessory dwelling ordinance adopted by a local agency          shall provide an approval process that includes only          ministerial provisions for the approval of accessory dwelling          units and shall not include any discretionary processes,  144         provisions, or requirements for those units, except as          otherwise provided in this subdivision.            Paragraph (a)(5) states "No other local ordinance, policy,          or regulation shall be the basis for the delay or denial          of a building permit or a use permit under this subdivision."            Paragraph (a)(6)(A) states "This subdivision establishes          the maximum standards that local agencies shall use to          evaluate a proposed accessory dwelling unit on a lot that          includes a proposed or existing single‐family dwelling. No          additional standards, other than those provided in this          subdivision, shall be used or imposed..."            Paragraph (e)(2) states "A local agency shall not require,          as a condition for ministerial approval of a permit application          for the creation of an accessory dwelling unit or a junior          accessory dwelling unit, the correction of nonconforming          zoning conditions."    Paragraphs (a)(4), (a)(5), and (a)(6)(A) all prohibit the city from applying additional criteria for allowing ADUs besides  those standards in the law, which do not mention flood zones.  More specifically, paragraph (e)(2) clearly means that  you cannot require application of flood zone building requirements (correction of nonconforming zoning conditions) to  any ADU that meets the terms of subsection  (e) (which corresponds to the types of ADUs set forth in Palo Alto municipal code 18.09.030, " Units Exempt from  Generally Applicable Local Regulations").  This includes many types of ADUs, including even some detached ADUs.    Proposed attached and junior ADUs are created by alterations or additions to the existing residential structure.  Thus,  under the municipal code's plain language, and the intention of state law, they are only required to meet the special  flood zone standards of construction if they are "substantial improvements", as defined in chapter subsection 16.52.040,  "Definitions", paragraph (a)(36):            "Substantial improvement" means any reconstruction,          rehabilitation, addition, or other proposed new development          of a structure, the cost of which equals or exceeds fifty          percent of the market value of the structure before the          start of construction of the improvement.    The public works engineering department has a published standard for determining "market value of the structure" and  a procedure for screening proposed residential structure alterations or additions to see if they are in fact "substantial  improvements".  It is illogical and contrary to both the spirit and plain language of state law and the City of Palo Alto  municipal code to assert that attached and junior ADUs are automatically "new construction" or "substantial  improvements", without first applying this established screening procedure to determine their status.    The public works engineering internal policy that categorically applies flood zone building requirements to all ADUs is  clearly in conflict with state and city law and must be rescinded.  Attached and junior ADU proposals, whether entirely  by conversion of existing space or a combination of conversion and addition to an existing structure, must be evaluated  under the same standards as any other remodel, alteration, or addition to a residential structure.  This will allow me,  and many other homeowners, to efficiently create ADUs and help fulfill the extreme need for new housing units in Palo  Alto.    Sincerely,  145 Phil Farrell    P.S.  I see that you responded on the same day to Jimmie's initial email about flood zone regulations for ADUs, that he  sent to the general "pwecips@CityofPaloAlto.org" email address on January 19.  I also sent an email to that address two weeks earlier on January  6 seeking clarification of the valuation rules for substantial improvements.  So far, NO ONE from public works  engineering has responded to my email request!  My questions are still outstanding, so I would appreciate a response!  146 Baumb, Nelly From:Tim MacKenzie <tmackenz@stanford.edu> Sent:Wednesday, January 27, 2021 2:21 PM To:Council, City Subject:Request for Free Period Products in Municipal Bathrooms CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Greetings Councilors, My name is Tim MacKenzie. I am a resident of Mountain View. I wanted to reach out about a recent development in Mountain View that I hope might be of interest to our neighbors to the north. This week, I was informed by city staff that Mountain View will be providing free period products in women's restrooms within the city. I had commented on that topic at council meetings several times over the past year and a half after being inspired by a report in 2019 about the town of Brookline, MA providing period products in all municipal bathrooms. This is a growing movement, as Scotland became the first country to make period products free in November and the Santa Clara County supervisors approved $1M to address period poverty locally. Mountain View has committed to taking a step in this direction, and I was hoping that our neighbors next door might show a similar interest in providing free period products in municipal bathrooms. I would advocate that all municipal bathrooms should have period products as trans men menstruate as well. I wanted to reach out to council to find out if there would be interest in Palo Alto taking a similar step and to learn how I could best help the process. I am more than happy to make a comment at a city council meeting about this topic, but I wanted to reach out earlier to gauge interest on your end. Thank you so much for your time. I look forward to hearing back from you. Tim MacKenzie | he/him/his  Postdoctoral Researcher  SURPAS Advocacy Coordinator  Snyder Lab | Stanford University Department of Genetics  147 Baumb, Nelly From:Amy Keohane <amykeohane@hotmail.com> Sent:Wednesday, January 27, 2021 2:05 PM To:Council, City Subject:RV living in Palo Alto CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Dear Council,  Again, I write to you about all of our RV's along El Camino.  I just read a story on Redwood City's support in RV  living.  They worked with the non profit life moves and moved them all to a lot, or most of them.  Most people  feel safer than on the streets of El Camino or other road sides.  The good news they identify the homeless and  help them get on their feet.  I implore you to take a harder look than completly ignoring the sitution which  right now you guys are doing.  I also think you could look into the motels that aren't being used right now and  house our homeless that are on the streets.  Lets be more proactive      Amy Keohane  650‐346‐5306  1 Baumb, Nelly From:David Coale <david@evcl.com> Sent:Wednesday, February 3, 2021 7:23 AM To:Council, City Subject:SCAP report to the UAC today Attachments:ID 11867 - Item No 2.pdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on  links.  ________________________________    Hi Mayor and Council members,    Here is a report/update on the SCAP to the UAC that will be presented today at their 4:00 pm meeting.  A quick read  shows that there are no real new programs happening this year.  Another year of no emissions reductions. Not good for  one of our top priorities ‐ three years running and very little real progress.    I am hoping this can be speeded up some.  At least we should make sure the bike/ped projects go well and that the  updated bike/ped plan is fully funded.    Sincerely,    David        City of Palo Alto (ID # 11867) Utilities Advisory Commission Staff Report Report Type: New Business Meeting Date: 2/3/2021 City of Palo Alto Page 1 Summary Title: Status of 2020 S/CAP Update Title: Discussion and Status Update on the 2020 Sustainability and Climate Action Plan From: City Manager Lead Department: Utilities Recommendation This is report is intended to support discussion and no action is requested. Executive Summary Palo Alto experienced several rare and challenging events in 2020, events that had impacts throughout California, the United States, and the world. Amidst these challenges, the Council and UAC made it clear to staff that the community continued to support action on climate change and asked for solutions to achieve the City’s adopted and ambitious goal to reduce emissions 80% from 1990 levels by 2030 (the “80x30” goal). Staff has taken this message to heart and has devoted extensive analytical and research effort to developing solutions, even while responding to other challenges. This report is to communicate the status of the 2020 update to the Sustainability and Climate Action Plan (S/CAP). Staff’s intention in this report is to clarify for the UAC and the public the current direction of the S/CAP work effort and the detailed and actionable results staff intends to deliver. Background In April 2016, City Council unanimously adopted the goal of 80 percent greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction by 2030 (the “80x30” goal), calculated utilizing the 1990 baseline1. This ambitious goal is 20 years ahead of the State of California’s 80 percent by 2050 target. In November 2016, Council unanimously adopted the draft Sustainability/Climate Action Plan (S/CAP) Framework2, as the road map for achieving Palo Alto’s sustainability goals3. In December 2017, Council accepted a 2018-2020 Sustainability Implementation Plan4, as a summary of the City’s 1 Staff Report 6754, https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/60861 2 https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/64814 3 Staff Report 7304, https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/60858 4 https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/63141 Staff: Jonathan Abendschein CITY OF PALO ALTO City of Palo Alto Page 2 sustainability work plan5. The intent was for staff to update the S/CAP every five years and develop more granular five-year work plans and short-term programs, rather than attempt to build a detailed 14-year work plan. In early 2020, the City launched an update to the S/CAP to help meet our sustainability goals, including our 80 x 30 goal6. Staff proposed goals and key actions in seven areas: Energy, Mobility, Electric Vehicles, Water, Climate Adaptation and Sea Level Rise, Natural Environment, and Zero Waste. In April 2020, staff presented a proposed process for the 2020 update to the S/CAP7 and in June 2020 Council reviewed the potential goals and key actions that were formulated with community input and directed staff to continue with the S/CAP Update8. Also in June 2020, Staff discussed the potential goals and key actions with the Utility Advisory Commission9, the Planning and Transportation Commission10, and the Parks and Recreation Commission11. Discussion Regular feedback from Council and the UAC have pointed to the need for reasonably detailed information on costs, logistical hurdles, financing, and implementation planning to enable the Council to make a policy decision on how to proceed in meeting the 80x30 goal. While developing updated Goals and Key Actions for Council review in June, staff found that the scope and funding for the S/CAP consultant contract were inadequate for all modeling efforts needed. Staff undertook some additional analysis in-house and tapped into existing consulting budgets for help with other analysis. This has delayed the project to some extent, but the more “hands- on” approach has led to greater engagement by staff and has helped staff develop greater familiarity with the potential challenges involved in the project and how to overcome them. Utilities Department staff has taken a primary role in developing the climate change elements of the S/CAP in partnership with the Office of Transportation, the Office of Sustainability, the Public Works Department, the Department of Planning and Community Environment, and others. As the analysis is progressing, a clear story is developing. First, it’s clear that rapid action is needed to hold global warming to 1.5°C (3.7°F), the average global temperature at which the world begins to experience significant impacts from climate change. The world has already experienced 1°C (2.5°F) of warming. To inform policy decisions, staff is working to identify how 5 Staff Report 8487, https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/62406 6 Staff Report 10941, https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?t=59474.17&BlobID=75032 7 Staff Report 11021, https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?t=53475.02&BlobID=76048 8 Staff Report 11404, https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?t=59513.75&BlobID=77028 9 Staff Report 11403, http://cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/77112 10 Staff Report 11417, https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/77435 11 https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/77463 City of Palo Alto Page 3 Palo Alto’s goals align with global carbon reduction needs to achieve these global warming goals. It is also clear that achieving the emissions reductions needed will be challenging both logistically and financially. Still, early analysis is revealing that the scale of expenditure is such that the community may be able to afford it if there is community will. More work is needed to produce cost estimates that are ready for public presentation, but the scale of spending, if financed over decades, appears likely to be similar to current annual community expenditures on energy. Staff intends to describe how such costs might be financed and distributed in a way that make them most acceptable to the community and will be looking to UAC for recommendations and to Council for direction on these issues. Staff is also finding it necessary to look at impacts to groups with less ability to reduce emissions due to logistical or financial limitations, such as renters, multi-family building owners, small businesses, and lower-income residents. Any plan needs to take these community members’ needs into consideration. In general, this has led staff to adopt the following high-level principles to guide its analysis and the development of the final work product: • Assume extensive education and outreach will be needed in the community to build awareness of the need for action, the urgency of action, and to communicate what individuals can do to make a difference. • Find ways to help early adopters take action. Programs must be comprehensive and easy to participate in. A good customer experience (including in permitting and utility upgrade processes) is critical to create positive stories that will encourage others to participate as well. • Neighborhood-level action should be promoted and rewarded due to the positive cost benefits, and because it is a way to demonstrate how to scale programs up. • Demonstrate care for small businesses, renters, and low-income residents, finding ways to make participation easier, minimizing impacts, and providing financial incentives were needed. • Seek ways to leverage outside funding to expand the City’s impact once momentum builds • Partner with major employers to reduce emissions in ways that align with corporate sustainability goals • Only when the community is ready should these efforts be fully scaled up using mandates, carbon pricing, or other systemic tools that may require voter approval. But the City should act with the intent of making the community ready as soon as possible, preferably in the 2022 to 2024 time period. • To give the community confidence, before going to scale, clear, documented strategies are needed for staffing to handle large numbers of building projects, the utility physical and financial adaptation needed, rate impacts and affordability, resiliency needs, and other indirect impacts. Staff is developing the following work products to enable Council policy decisions: • A policy framework to identify the different ways emissions reductions might proceed City of Palo Alto Page 4 under different implementation plans, how those scenarios relate to the emissions reductions needed to hold global warming to 1.5°C (3.7°F), and the costs associated with achieving the goals in different ways, including the costs of inaction or delayed action. • A detailed assessment by sector of the building and vehicle transformations needed to achieve the goals and the costs of those transformations. Also included are the potential policy tools that could be used to achieve these transformations and the limitations of the tools available to effect change in some sectors. • A preliminary assessment of the various financing tools available for making the costs of the S/CAP more manageable. • An assessment of the co-benefits of the various emissions reductions activities • Preliminary assessments of gas and electric utility impacts, rate impacts, and municipal staffing needs of full-scale implementation • A preliminary first-phase implementation plan, to include elements such as: o Voluntary customer programs to be launched o Communications and engagement plan o Electric system investment plan to preserve reliability o Business process review (e.g. for permitting and utility upgrades) o Preliminary resiliency assessment for an electrified community o Staffing and funding required to implement the above o Development of a strategic plan of scaling up sustainability programs, including the staffing and funding needed, potential ordinances and mandates, ways to raise funds, and a roadmap for voter approval of necessary plan elements. Timeline The current estimated timeline for release of the S/CAP update is as follows: • February/March 2021: Council S/CAP panel discussion. • March 2021: Sustainability Work Plan Council Action Item • April 2021: Earth Day Report with the results of the 2019 greenhouse gas inventory and Business as Usual Forecast • April 2021: Council study session on high-level results of technical analysis of the goals and key actions needed to meet the 80 x 30 goal • April / May 2021: Public engagement begins on topics discussed with Council • Spring 2021: Detailed results of technical analysis completed, including the costs and efficacy of goals and key actions proposed to achieve the 80 x 30 goal. Hearings at boards and commissions will take place along with public outreach events. • Spring 2021: Public engagement continues • Summer 2021: S/CAP presented to Council for acceptance • By December 2021: California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) evaluation completed • By December 2021: S/CAP with CEQA Review presented to Council for approval Resource Impact The additional analysis required for the above S/CAP work plan is estimated to require approximately 2 - 3 FTE of staff time spread across multiple departments and $50,000 to City of Palo Alto Page 5 $75,000 in additional consulting expense. This is being absorbed from existing budgeted resources. However, implementation of the above plan will require additional resources. Policy Implications The 2020 S/CAP Update aligns with two of the top three Council Priorities for CY 2020: “Sustainability, in the context of climate change” and “Improving mobility for all.” The 2020 S/CAP Update implements the policy objectives of the 2016 S/CAP goal to achieve 80% reductions to emissions by 2030 and the Comprehensive Plan Implementation Plan Goals: • Land Use Element o Goal L-2: An enhanced sense of “community” with development designed to foster public life, meet citywide needs and embrace the principles of sustainability o Goal L-4: Inviting pedestrian scale centers that offer a variety of retail and commercial services and provide focal points and community gathering places for the city’s residential neighborhoods and employment districts. • Transportation Element o Goal T-1: Create a sustainable transportation system, complemented by a mix of land uses, that emphasizes walking, bicycling, use of public transportation, and other methods to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and the use of single occupancy motor vehicles. o Goal T-2: Decrease delay, congestion, and vehicle miles travelled with a priority on our worst intersections and our peak commute times, including school traffic o Goal T-3: Maintain an efficient roadway network for all users. o Goal T-5: Encourage attractive, convenient, efficient and innovative parking solutions for all users. o Goal T-6: Provide a safe environment for motorists, pedestrians, and bicyclists on Palo Alto streets. o Goal T-8: Influence the shape and implementation of regional transportation policies and technologies to reduce traffic congestion and greenhouse gas emissions. • Natural Environment o Goal N-2: A thriving urban forest that provides public health, ecological, economic, and aesthetic benefits for Palo Alto. o Goal N-4: Water resources and infrastructure that are managed to sustain plant and animal life, support urban activities, and protect public health and safety. o Goal N-7: A clean, efficient energy supply that makes use of cost-effective renewable resources. o Goal N-8: Actively support regional efforts to reduce our contribution to climate change while adapting to the effects of climate change on land uses and city services. • Safety Element o Goal S-3: An environment free of the damaging effects of human-caused threats and hazardous materials. City of Palo Alto Page 6 Stakeholder Engagement Staff developed, and is implementing, a 2020 S/CAP Update Engagement Plan which identified relevant stakeholders, proposed materials, and desired meeting milestones and outcomes. Key steps to date have been a March 31 – April 14, 2020 Community Engagement Virtual Workshop; Council Study Sessions on an April 13, 2020 and June 16, 2020; a Utilities Advisory Commission Study Session on May 20, 2020; June 2020 Study sessions with the Utilities Advisory Commission, Planning and Transportation Commission, and Parks and Recreation Commission; and a Fall 2020 S/CAP Update Webinar series to highlight various topics addressed in the S/CAP update12. Staff will continue to provide opportunities for on-line engagement to gain a better understanding of the community’s concerns and vision around the S/CAP Update, as well as provide opportunities for community members who can’t attend the meetings to weigh in. Environmental Review This status update is not a project for the purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). However, CEQA review of the S/CAP Update is proceeding and is projected to be completed by Fall 2021. Attachments: • Attachment A: Presentation 12https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/services/sustainability/sustainability_and_climate_action_plan/community_enga gement/default.asp February 3, 2021 www.cityofpaloalto.org Sustainability and Climate Action Plan (S/CAP) Update Utilities Advisory Commission Attachment A Staff: Jonathan Abendschein 2 S/CAP Status Update •Current schedule –Jan-May adoption –need to push back •Several points are becoming clear as work proceeds: •Climate change is urgent, and there are costs to inaction •Costs and logistics of taking action are significant. Staff to provide Council estimates to help determine what community can accept. •And yet, while the cost looks large, it could be manageable given community will –costs could be similar to the cost of the community’s annual spending on energy. •Transitional issues (resiliency, gas rates) and issues specific to business community, low-income, renters are critical What is Needed to Achieve S/CAP Goals •Electrify 100% of single-family residential buildings •Targeted emissions reductions to multi-family and small and medium business emissions in cost-effective areas. •Reduce major facility emissions by 40% •Heavily reduce vehicle travel through increased transit and bicycle use, telecommuting, and the use of small EVs like e-bikes •For households that continue to need to drive, encourage ownership of at least one EV, use it as frequently as possible •Aim for most or all new and used vehicle purchases to be EVs or plug-in hybrids, except for very infrequently used vehicles •Substantial growth in the use of electric vehicles by commuters 3 S/CAP –Principles for Going to Scale •Educate and raise awareness •Activate early adopters and ensure good customer experience to create positive stories •Reward neighborhood-level action (e.g. undergrounding for block-level electrification) •Demonstrate care for small businesses, renters, low-income •Seek ways to increase funding for greater impact prior a ballot measure (e.g. on-bill financing, outside funding) •Partner with major employers to maximize impact •When community is ready, fully scale up with ballot measure 4 Foundational Implementation Activities •Launch high touch, high participation voluntary programs •Extensive awareness campaign •Customer-friendly permitting for electrification •Preserve and enhance electric reliability and resiliency •Develop plan for scaling up programs to achieve emissions reductions goals •Timeline: •Start immediately in 2021 after Council adoption •Aim for clear progress on these items by 2022 •May need until 2024 to show adequate progress 5 Jonathan Abendschein Assistant Director Utilities Resource Management 650-329-2309 Jon.Abendschein@cityofpaloalto.org 2 Baumb, Nelly From:Dimitar Pachov <dpachov@gmail.com> Sent:Sunday, January 31, 2021 7:55 PM To:Fine, Adrian; Filseth, Eric (Internal); DuBois, Tom; Cormack, Alison; Kniss, Liz (internal); Kou, Lydia; Tanaka, Greg; Burt, Patrick; Stone, Greer; Council, City; Shikada, Ed; Kleinberg, Judy Subject:Please close University Ave to traffic Attachments:Café Venetia.Keeping the Streets Closed.Jan28.2021.pdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Dear Mayor and City Councils,     We absolutely support the Cafe Venetia letter (attached) regarding making University Ave pedestrian, especially during a  pandemic.    However, we'll go even further. We believe University Ave has to turn into a pedestrian street permanently! Why:   8 out of 10 times we choose NOT to go to University Ave and support local shops because of its traffic; rather we  choose places that have better pedestrian zones (e.g. Stanford Mall).   As an European who comes from the city with the longest pedestrian street in Europe (Plovdiv, 1.7 kilometers), I  can assure you the economic and health‐social benefits outweigh everything else.   In fact, a city without a well‐defined pedestrian zone that hosts shops, restaurants and cafes altogether is  usually greatly ignored as a good travel destination. Malls do not substitute central pedestrian hubs that define a  city! Palo Alto doesn't have a pedestrian street only.   Cars never matter more than people.   Pedestrian zones are essential for the health of any city and that's why more than 90% of the EU cities do have  at least one pedestrian only zone. More importantly, many cities have recently built or are building such zones  as we speak.  It's somewhat unbelievable that a city with a Californian climate and at the center of California's innovation doesn't offer  well‐defined outdoor spacing areas for pedestrians to eat, shop and socialize. Tables on sidewalks interfering with  pedestrian traffic and next to car traffic is absurd. We do remember what happened with University Cafe ‐ easily  avoidable had University Ave been a pedestrian street.    After living in the area for more than 10 years, we believe it's time for a change ‐ permanently make University Ave a  pedestrian street.    Sincerely,  Dimitar & Valentina    Café Venetia 419 University Ave Palo Alto, California 94301 www.cafevenetia.com Tom duBois, Mayor & City Council Members City of Palo Alto 250 Hamilton Ave Palo Alto, CA 94301 January 28th, 2021 Re: Keeping the streets closed Mayor duBois, and honorable members of the Palo Alto City Council, In May of 2020 we wrote to you with the idea to support a longer-term pedestrianization of University Ave (letter attached). Today, we write to express our sincere hope that the City of Palo Alto makes swift leadership decisions to help ailing businesses in Downtown Palo Alto in the Year 2021 by renewing this decision. It is an imperative for our local businesses to survive this crisis, and it will also improve the quality of life and wellness of our citizenry in the long term. AN ECONOMIC NECESSITY We have all struggled in different ways in the past year. As we all know, local businesses have borne significant losses, despite best efforts by owners and managers. At Cafe Venetia we have remained open for the maximum hours possible, and committed to keep safely serving our customers even during stay-at-home orders. We optimized the use of the outdoors. We got the PPP-government help. We minimized all expenditures. We got help from our landlord who reduced our returns. And still, we lost money. In the best of times, restaurants have a 5 -10% profitability. If the capacity, flow, or opening hours decrease by just 10%, we start losing money. In three out of twelve months in 2020, our revenues decreased by half -- an unsustainable scenario, not to mention the loss of profits which ensure our future prospects. I know from informal conversations with other business owners that our situation is in fact better than most restaurants in Palo Alto. This is a worrying situation for the overall health of our downtown. The closing of University Avenue was the only reason we didn’t lose more money than we did. The reason? Because we were able to use the streets. Thanks to the generous decision of the City to allow for pedestrianization, we have been able to survive. Now it is time to renew this decision as we continue to confront the challenges posed by further waves of the pandemic. To be clear: we are asking that all restaurants in the City of Palo Alto should be granted the option use of the streets the whole Year 2021, if so desired. It will take this whole year to recover (at least). While parklets are semi-solutions, they are not enough space: in our case, the parklet allows for only six tables due to spacing requirements, when we usually have 20 indoors (a 70% loss of potential business). All restaurants are facing these difficult calculations. And, thinking creatively, why not allow retail shops space on the sidewalks also? Beyond this year, the City could then consider charging for the use for this creative use of space. The consequences of not acting quickly enough are dire. No rational business-owner will stay open making zero profits for very long -- and with each empty storefront, our city loses appeal, and makes it harder for remaining businesses to continue to attract customers. EQUITY for SERVICE INDUSTRY WORKERS There is no doubt that low-wage service industry workers have been disproportionately impacted by the pandemic. It makes sense that the City should provide particular help to this population first, and to the businesses that employ them in the greatest numbers-- which happens to be the restaurant industry. By necessity, a restaurant will employ 5 to 10 times more people than a retail shop of the same footprint. By simply allotting more outdoor space for restaurants, the City can create a proportionally greater positive impact on the livelihoods of service industry workers. And of course, this will have an impact on sales tax revenue for the City as well, since the restaurant industry is a large contributor. LEADERSHIP and EQUAL REPRESENTATION It is disconcerting that in the business meetings with the City Manager, restaurants are being pitted against the retail shops to decide whether the streets should close or stay open. Sadly, we also have a handful of property managers dominating the conversation, trying to sway the decision to keep the streets open. They are part of our ecosystem so their voices should be considered, but only when balanced with all stakeholders. This includes the town’s citizens, who have so far not been given the opportunity to voice their opinion. We also need to think more critically about some of the arguments that developers are making, often without any evidence. Their claim that ‘retail shops suffer without cars driving by’ is unfounded. In fact, we are better able to see window displays and more inclined to pop into a store while walking or biking. Also, it is clear that restaurants and retail actually benefit each other, enjoying a cross-over of customers. In addition, we oppose the option to close only one side of the street to traffic, given the safety risk to cyclists and walkers, and pollution and noise nuisance, especially for those dining. Such a scenario would also decrease the attractiveness of the downtown for families with children, who want a secure and relaxed environment. Lastly, the final decision should not rest on a surveymonkey vote, which could be manipulated, but rather should be made by balanced City leadership. And, as mentioned above, swift action is critical. PREPARING for the FUTURE In envisioning the future of Downtown Palo Alto, it is important to note that the future of retail is in great peril because of online retail giants like Amazon, and the fact that the pandemic has likely permanently shifted the way people shop. Retail will need to change to an experience- oriented business to survive in coming years. In response, Downtown Palo Alto will need to enhance our appeal to the local community. Sustainable forms of pedestrianization gives us creative, flexible options to create these opportunities, especially as we develop more activities and events over time. This approach will allow us to compete with other towns and cities nearby that are already thinking along these lines. In closing, we want to stress the need for the City to make rational, fair, and swift decisions to help the ailing local economy. All businesses should be given the option to use the City streets so that we can catch our breath this year, and survive until the situation stabilizes. Keeping the streets bike- and pedestrian-friendly is a quality of life issue that must be considered not just for the Year 2021 but beyond. Sincerely, Café Venetia Café Venetia 419 University Ave Palo Alto, California 94301 www.cafevenetia.com Adrian Fein, Mayor and City Council Members City of Palo Alto 250 Hamilton Ave Palo Alto, CA 94301 May 29, 2020 Re: Making a Pedestrian Public Space in Downtown Palo Alto Mayor Fein, and honorable members of the Palo Alto City Council, We urge you to take this opportunity to remake and redesign the Downtown by closing down University Avenue and lateral streets in order to make a pedestrian public space for business, citizens, and for ALL to benefit. We believe you play an essential role in our hope of transitioning into a ‘new normalcy’ for the next one to two years. AN ECONOMIC NECESSITY To put it bluntly: our revenues are decimated from the demise of the foot-traffic, and our future as a business is in question. We have lost 50% of our customer base, and we need at least 90% of our usual customer base in order to break even. At that rate, it will take 6 to 12 months, if not longer, to break even. To be clear: we have been open since day 1 of the lockdown, and we have kept the flow of the existing customer base as best as we can under the circumstances. Those businesses that shut down entirely due to the public health situation will take even longer to recover. We expect the Santa Clara Health Department will likely allow operations at partial capacity from 25% to 50% to 75% etc, in the future. This is not sufficient to sustain a break-even business and keep the business alive; this applies to all restaurants with high overhead costs and low profitability. Therefore, our hope now is to get permission from the City to expand our operation to the outdoors to make up the difference. To be clear: if this does not happen, many businesses, especially food businesses, will be forced to shutter. Under the current conditions there is no rational reason to run a business that makes no profit (or worse, loses money) for such a long time. The New York Times ran a survey in April 2020 showing that 75% of all restaurants will not return nationwide. The future of all restaurants, not just our cafe, is in question. And yet, if considered from a creative and forward-thinking perspective, we also have an opportunity here that goes beyond the bare necessity of trying to save the current business base: this is your opportunity to improve and increase economic vitality in Palo Alto by closing Downtown streets to traffic. A HEALTH NECESSITY We need a compelling reason for citizens to come back to Downtown. The architecture in Downtown Palo Alto is primarily designed for indoors business, despite our glorious weather. Customers will not feel comfortable in most indoor retail and restaurants for a very long time. They will want significant spacing between tables and on the sidewalks -- in short, a new protocol to feel safe in public spaces. There are very few retail buildings currently that can create outdoor seating, and those that do will have an unfair advantage (although necessary) in the path to recovery. The outdoors is our only solution. The health benefits to such a shift are numerous, and stretch far beyond the current public health crisis: more sunshine to soak up while dining and shopping, a more pleasant atmosphere thanks to a reduction in chemical and noise pollution from cars; not to mention a greater sense of ease and safety for parents with children. TO ENCOURAGE SUSTAINABILITY Despite being at the center of global technological innovation, we still need to catch up from an urban planning perspective to make our Downtown significantly more pedestrian- and bike- friendly. We must encourage our community to bike or walk rather than drive. For those who must drive from further away, we need to: a) Provide better and more timely information to drivers about where there are alternative parking options (other than Downtown streets); b) Organize a shuttle service from public transport hubs and parking garages outside the main Downtown area into the center of town; c) Implement a parking app to inform about available parking. In making these changes, Palo Alto can move towards a more sustainable future and more environmentally-friendly policies -- ideas which enjoy broad support amongst our community. PUBLIC SPACE IS ESSENTIAL For decades the City of Palo Alto has given a free gift to the Stanford Shopping Center through its lack of public planning and design. The Stanford Shopping Center has a real public space where people feel safe walking in a beautiful, open, and welcoming area. People don’t go there simply for shopping -- it is a model for outdoor space, and their tactics should be envied and emulated. Because of its design, thousands of visitors to Palo Alto every year go directly to the Shopping Center, and strong retailers and restaurants as a result pay a premium to be on their premises. In Downtown, businesses pay the same cost without the benefits -- all due to the lack of City planning. Cafe Venetia has been part of the PAD for many years; from first-hand experience we know the PAD accomplishes very little in its current form. The City needs a real planning commission to make things happen. In addition, we urge you to read this New York Times article on the benefits of a safe public space, which provides compelling and relevant arguments to our context here in Palo Alto: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/12/opinion/sunday/cities-public-space-covid.html. There are many examples of these public zones all over Europe and in forward-thinking North American cities. In Barcelona, for example, the pedestrian-only La Rambla became a ‘destination zone’ simply by closing down a major vein and turning it into a public space. In Montréal, the mayor has recently moved to shut down major retail streets to traffic and parking over the summer to encourage more families to get out and patronize local businesses in a safe way. So many public benefits can be had from turning a basic piece of public infrastructure (the street) into a safer and more inviting public space. In conclusion, our citizens and visitors need access to a safe, equitable open space in Downtown that will serve to fuel the recovery of all businesses in Downtown Palo Alto. We know this is logistically possible, since there is a tradition of making this temporary change every year with the closing of University Ave for the Arts Festival in August and for the Children’s Parade in May. Therefore logistics need not act as an impediment for its implementation. We urge you to take action as soon as possible. We are all in this together, and you are our only hope for the continued survival of the business community. Sincerely, CAFE VENETIA, INC 3 Baumb, Nelly From:Arnout Boelens <a.m.p.boelens@gmail.com> Sent:Saturday, January 30, 2021 10:45 AM To:Council, City Subject:Slides for public comments Attachments:Council Retreat 013021.pdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Dear members of the City Council,     We have prepared a small presentation on the benefits of promoting active transportation in Palo Alto for the public  comments section of the retreat today.    Please find our slides attached to this email,    Kind regards,    Arnout Boelens  Elizabeth Greenfield  Ken Joye  Robert Neff  Frank Viggiano  Nicole Zoeller Boelens  Active Transportation For a Future Proof Palo Alto Arnout Boelens, Elizabeth Greenfield, Ken Joye, Robert Neff, Frank Viggiano, Nicole Zoeller Boelens By prioritizing active transportation, we can: ●strengthen our local economy ●reduce our impact on the environment ●alleviate traffic congestion ●decrease housing prices ●improve the health of our citizens ●make our city safer and more accessible for all Palo Alto faces a wide range of challenges right now. Let’s prioritize a solution: ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION the transport of people or goods through non-motorized means. COVID RECOVERY GOAL B-6: Attractive, vibrant retail centers, each with a mix of uses and a distinctive character. People walking and biking spend more money locally which is good for local businesses. Because of the pandemic, people are also spending more time in their communities. Let’s continue supporting this behavior by creating pedestrian friendly areas through programs like UpLift local. European Cyclists’ Federation, Shopping by bike: Best friend of your city centre, 2016 CLIMATE EMERGENCY Palo Alto's goal is to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs) 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2030. 65% of Palo Alto GHGs are from on-road transportation (2015)1 Every 2 miles by bike instead of SOV saves 1 lb CO2 2 We should try to maintain the upward trend in walking and biking since the pandemic. Behavior change is easiest during life transitions such as the pandemic3 1City of Palo Alto Sustainability and Climate Action Plan Framework, Nov. 2016 (p. 7) 2L. Harms and M. Kansen, Cycling Facts, Ministry of Infrastructure and Water Management, 2018 3B. Verplanken and D. Roy, Empowering interventions to promote sustainable lifestyles: Testing the habit discontinuity hypothesis in a field experiment.” Journal of Environmental Psychology 2016:45(127-134). CONGESTION GOAL T-2 Decrease delay, congestion and VMT with a priority on our worst intersections and our peak commute times, including school traffic. T. Koska and F. Rudolph, The Role of Walking and Cycling in Reducing Congestion: A Portfolio of Measures, FLOW Project, 2016 Every person walking or riding is one less car on the road and one more parking space available to those who need to drive. AFFORDABLE HOUSING Policy L 2.5: Support the creation of affordable housing units for middle to lower income level earners, such as City and school district employees, as feasible. Off-street parking on average costs $56,000 per parking spot per unit. Having a walkable and bikeable city would allow us to abandon minimum parking requirements and build housing that is more affordable. Government Accountability Office, LOW-INCOME HOUSING TAX CREDIT, 2018 HEALTHY CITY Policy C-5.1: Demonstrate an ongoing commitment to the health and well-being of the public. Walking and bicycling results in significant physical and mental health benefits. Cycling regularly boosts physical fitness and prolongs life expectancy by 3 to 14 months. H. Nijland, Fietsen leidt tot langer en gezond leven, Planbureau voor de Leefomgeving, 2017 J. J De Hartog, et al., Do the health benefits of cycling outweigh the risks?, Environmental health perspectives, 2010 EQUITY An evolving effort to address systemic racism and bias in Palo Alto. The average vehicle costs $9,576 per year to own and operate. A bicycle costs $350. Bicycling is more affordable than driving a car and allows people to get access to a larger range of job opportunities. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Consumer expenditures report, 2019 ROAD SAFETY GOAL T-6: Provide a safe environment for motorists, pedestrians and bicyclists on Palo Alto streets. In the past year there was the tragic crash on El Camino Real/California Ave and more recently there was another collision on Middlefield Rd. No action is unacceptable. A higher prioritization of road safety is needed. Roads that are safe enough to walk and bike on are safer for everyone. W.E. Marshall, N.N. Ferenchak, Why cities with high bicycling rates are safer for all road users, Journal of Transport & Health, 2019 ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION AS A SOLUTION FOR COVID RECOVERY CLIMATE EMERGENCY CONGESTION AFFORDABLE HOUSING HEALTHY CITY EQUITY ROAD SAFETY And a future proof Palo Alto 4 Baumb, Nelly From:Cafe Venetia <cafevenetia@gmail.com> Sent:Friday, January 29, 2021 1:10 PM To:Fine, Adrian; Filseth, Eric (Internal); DuBois, Tom; Cormack, Alison; Kniss, Liz (internal); Kou, Lydia; Tanaka, Greg; Burt, Patrick; Stone, Greer Cc:Council, City; Shikada, Ed; Kleinberg, Judy Subject:Re: Letter from Cafe Venetia to Mayor and City Council 012921 Attachments:Café Venetia.Keeping the Streets Closed.Jan28.2021.pdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  To help protect your priv acy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. Café Venetia 419 University Ave Palo Alto, California 94301 www.cafevenetia.com   Tom duBois, Mayor & City Council Members  City of Palo Alto  250 Hamilton Ave  Palo Alto, CA 94301    January 28th, 2021    Re: Keeping the streets closed    Mayor duBois, and honorable members of the Palo Alto City Council,    In May of 2020 we wrote to you with the idea to support a longer-term pedestrianization of University Ave (letter attached). Today, we write to express our sincere hope that the City of Palo Alto makes swift leadership decisions to help ailing businesses in Downtown Palo Alto in the Year 2021 by renewing this decision. It is an imperative for our local businesses to survive this crisis, and it will also improve the quality of life and wellness of our citizenry in the long term.    AN ECONOMIC NECESSITY    We have all struggled in different ways in the past year. As we all know, local businesses have borne significant losses, despite best efforts by owners and managers.    At Cafe Venetia we have remained open for the maximum hours possible, and committed to keep safely serving our customers even during stay-at-home orders. We optimized the use of the outdoors. We got the PPP- government help. We minimized all expenditures. We got help from our landlord who reduced our returns.     5 And still, we lost money.     In the best of times, restaurants have a 5 -10% profitability. If the capacity, flow, or opening hours decrease by just 10%, we start losing money. In three out of twelve months in 2020, our revenues decreased by half -- an unsustainable scenario, not to mention the loss of profits which ensure our future prospects. I know from informal conversations with other business owners that our situation is in fact better than most restaurants in Palo Alto. This is a worrying situation for the overall health of our downtown.    The closing of University Avenue was the only reason we didn’t lose more money than we did. The reason? Because we were able to use the streets. Thanks to the generous decision of the City to allow for pedestrianization, we have been able to survive. Now it is time to renew this decision as we continue to confront the challenges posed by further waves of the pandemic.     To be clear: we are asking that all restaurants in the City of Palo Alto should be granted the option use of the streets the whole Year 2021, if so desired. It will take this whole year to recover (at least). While parklets are semi-solutions, they are not enough space : in our case, the parklet allows for only six tables due to spacing requirements, when we usually have 20 indoors (a 70% loss of potential business). All restaurants are facing these difficult calculations.     And, thinking creatively, why not allow retail shops space on the sidewalks also? Beyond this year, the City could then consider charging for the use for this creative use of space.     The consequences of not acting quickly enough are dire. No rational business-owner will stay open making zero profits for very long -- and with each empty storefront, our city loses appeal, and makes it harder for remaining businesses to continue to attract customers.     EQUITY for SERVICE INDUSTRY WORKERS    There is no doubt that low-wage service industry workers have been disproportionately impacted by the pandemic. It makes sense that the City should provide particular help to this population first, and to the businesses that employ them in the greatest numbers-- which happens to be the restaurant industry. By necessity, a restaurant will employ 5 to 10 times more people than a retail shop of the same footprint. By simply allotting more outdoor space for restaurants, the City can create a proportionally greater positive impact on the livelihoods of service industry workers. And of course, this will have an impact on sales tax revenue for the City as well, since the restaurant industry is a large contributor.    LEADERSHIP and EQUAL REPRESENTATION     It is disconcerting that in the business meetings with the City Manager, restaurants are being pitted against the retail shops to decide whether the streets should close or stay open. Sadly, we also have a handful of property managers dominating the conversation, trying to sway the decision to keep the streets open. They are part of our ecosystem so their voices should be considered, but only when balanced with all stakeholders. This includes the town’s citizens, who have so far not been given the opportunity to voice their opinion.     We also need to think more critically about some of the arguments that developers are making, often without any evidence. Their claim that ‘retail shops suffer without cars driving by’ is unfounded. In fact, we are better able to see window displays and more inclined to pop into a store while walking or biking. Also, it is clear that restaurants and retail actually benefit each other, enjoying a cross-over of customers.    6 In addition, we oppose the option to close only one side of the street to traffic, given the safety risk to cyclists and walkers, and pollution and noise nuisance, especially for those dining. Such a scenario would also decrease the attractiveness of the downtown for families with children, who want a secure and relaxed environment.    Lastly, the final decision should not rest on a surveymonkey vote, which could be manipulated, but rather should be made by balanced City leadership. And, as mentioned above, swift action is critical.    PREPARING for the FUTURE    In envisioning the future of Downtown Palo Alto, it is important to note that the future of retail is in great peril because of online retail giants like Amazon, and the fact that the pandemic has likely permanently shifted the way people shop. Retail will need to change to an experience-oriented business to survive in coming years.    In response, Downtown Palo Alto will need to enhance our appeal to the local community. Sustainable forms of pedestrianization gives us creative, flexible options to create these opportunities, especially as we develop more activities and events over time. This approach will allow us to compete with other towns and cities nearby that are already thinking along these lines.    In closing, we want to stress the need for the City to make rational, fair, and swift decisions to help the ailing local economy. All businesses should be given the option to use the City streets so that we can catch our breath this year, and survive until the situation stabilizes. Keeping the streets bike- and pedestrian-friendly is a quality of life issue that must be considered not just for the Year 2021 but beyond.     Sincerely,   Cafe Venetia  Café Venetia 419 University Ave Palo Alto, California 94301 www.cafevenetia.com Tom duBois, Mayor & City Council Members City of Palo Alto 250 Hamilton Ave Palo Alto, CA 94301 January 28th, 2021 Re: Keeping the streets closed Mayor duBois, and honorable members of the Palo Alto City Council, In May of 2020 we wrote to you with the idea to support a longer-term pedestrianization of University Ave (letter attached). Today, we write to express our sincere hope that the City of Palo Alto makes swift leadership decisions to help ailing businesses in Downtown Palo Alto in the Year 2021 by renewing this decision. It is an imperative for our local businesses to survive this crisis, and it will also improve the quality of life and wellness of our citizenry in the long term. AN ECONOMIC NECESSITY We have all struggled in different ways in the past year. As we all know, local businesses have borne significant losses, despite best efforts by owners and managers. At Cafe Venetia we have remained open for the maximum hours possible, and committed to keep safely serving our customers even during stay-at-home orders. We optimized the use of the outdoors. We got the PPP-government help. We minimized all expenditures. We got help from our landlord who reduced our returns. And still, we lost money. In the best of times, restaurants have a 5 -10% profitability. If the capacity, flow, or opening hours decrease by just 10%, we start losing money. In three out of twelve months in 2020, our revenues decreased by half -- an unsustainable scenario, not to mention the loss of profits which ensure our future prospects. I know from informal conversations with other business owners that ALTA HOUSING 2595 E. Bayshore Rd. Ste. 200 Palo Alto, CA 94303 Tel. 660 321 9709 altahouslng.org Fax. 660 321 4341 January 15, 2020 Honorable City Council City of Palo Alto 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 Re: Annual Payment to the City for Market Rate Units at Webster Wood Apartments Mayor Dubois and Members of the Council: We are pleased to inform you that Alta Housing has made Its thlrty·ninth annual payment to the City of Palo Alto pursuant to the Agreement for Sale for the land upon which Webster Wood Apartments is built. The payment is in the amount of $700 and covers the period from January through December 2020. This payment brings the total amount contributed since 1982 to $259,225. N c.... :no z N CD :r,J» :x u::> .. w O' Alto Housing volunteered to make these annual payments to the City, beginning in the fourth year after the close of escrow, in an amount equal to $25 a month for each market rate unit at Webster Wood Apartments. This contribution goes into the City's Housing Reserve Fund to assist with future needs for affordable housing. We are pleased to make this annual payment in recognition of the benefits the City has provided to the low-and moderate-income families who live at Webster Wood Apartments. Sincerely, Randal Tsuda President & CEO cc: Jonathan Lait, Director of Planning and Community Environment Enclosures BUILDING STORIES THAT MATIER ('")~ --1 -I , -<--. 0 r.;.,..., I r;"J :::0 :;r-.. :;:i;:I v;o o> ,,c, ~c n(, f'"T1> Payment# 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 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 WWCityPayments 1-2019 WEBSTER WOOD AP ARTMENJS PAYMENTS TO CITY OF PALO AL TO FOR MARKET-RATE UNITS Year Amount 1982 $3,625 1983 5,575 1984 5,175 1985 6,775 1986 6,600 1987 6,550 1988 6,650 1989 7,325 1990 7,675 1991 9,425 1992 9,600 1993 9,250 1994 8,950 1995 8,650 1996 8,300 1997 8,475 1998 8,900 1999 9,650 2000 8,875 2001 9,525 2002 8,750 2003 8,350 2004 5,850 2005 5,625 2006 6,175 2007 6,000 2008 5,625 2009 5,250 2010 4,475 2011 4,425 2012 5,500 2013 5,450 2014 5,175 2015 5,650 2016 5,875 2017 5,850 2018 6,175 2019 2,775 2020 700 Accumulated Total $3,625 9,200 14,375 21,150 27,750 34,300 40,950 48,275 55,950 65,375 74,975 84,225 93,175 101,825 110,125 118,600 127,500 137,150 146,025 155,550 164,300 172,650 178,500 184,125 190,300 196,300 201,925 207,175 211,650 216,075 221,575 227,025 232,200 237,850 243,725 249,575 255,750- 258,525 259,225