HomeMy Public PortalAbout20190826plCC701-32
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: 08/26/2019
Document dates: 08/07/2019 – 08/14/2019
Set 1 of 3
Note: Documents for every category may not have been received for packet
reproduction in a given week.
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
CITY OF
PALO
ALTO
HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL
DEAN BATCHELOR, DIRECTOR OF UTILITIES
AUGUST 12, 2019
COUNCIL MEETING ~
August 12, 2019 2 '!!!!IZJ~R-ec_e.;;;.iv-ed ... B'!!"'e""!!'fo .... r-e """"M-ee-t-in-g
SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 2-Approval and Authorization for the City Manager or
his Designee to Execute the Following Energy and Water Platform Contracts in a
Combined Not-to-Exceed Amount of $2,602,763 Over a Five-year Term: A}
WaterSmart Software, Inc., Number C19174648 in an Amount Not-to-Exceed
$537,763; and B} Simple Energy, Inc., Number C20174646 in an Amount Not-to-
Exceed of $1,925,000
Minor clerical errors:
Contract C19174648 with WaterSmart; Attachment A, Packet Page 40:
a} Packet Page 69, Exhibit A, Scope of Services reflects:
a. Section 2.3 Post-Launch Survey
CORRECTION: 2.5 Post-Launch Survey
b} Packet Page 65, Signature Page, list of exhibits reflects:
a. EXHIBIT "F": INFORMATION PRIVACY POLICY and
b. EXHIBIT "G": VENDOR INFORMATION SECURITY ASSESSMENT
CORRECTION: EXHIBIT "F": VENDOR INFORMATION SECURITY ASSESSMENT and
EXHIBIT "G": INFORMATION PRIVACY POLICY
**NOTE** The exhibits themselves are labeled correctly
~ Dean Batchelor
Director of City Manager
Utilities Department
1of1
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:PA Resident <paresident@mail.com>
Sent:Tuesday, August 6, 2019 7:10 AM
To:Council, City
Subject:Please do not approve consent items #2 and #4 on August 12 immediately.
Attachments:PaloAltoUtilitiesContracts.png
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Dear City Council:
I ask Council to deliberate on the following items #2 and #4 from Consent Calendar on August 12th 2019 Council
Agenda before making decisions about those 2 items.
#2 Energy and Water Platform Contracts
Supporting document - https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/72675
#4 Utility Program Services Contracts
Supporting document - https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/72675
After initial reading, my understanding is that both items are some sort of customer programs portals for energy
efficiency. That reminds me of staff presentation of New Online Customer Portal to Utilities Advisory Commission on
March 6th 2019. According to that presentation, customers can view their usages and invoices, as well as pay bills
using the new Customer Online Portal, which was about to be launched as of March 2019.
I want to compare the pricing of those 2 new contracts with Customer Online Portal presented by staff which provides
essential customer self-care functions and reduce staff time. However, I couldn’t find any records from Council Agenda
about Customer Online Portal contract. I would appreciate if someone can help me locate this contract.
I urge City Council to take closer looks at those 2 items. I have to say that the supporting documents for Item #2 and
Item #4 are very confusing. It took me hours to read 2 PDF files back and forth to figure out some basic math:
# of Items presented to Council - 2
# of Vendors - 3
1. Simple Energy
2. Water Smart
3. Direct Technology
# of Contracts - 3
# of Products - 5
1. Energy Insights Portal
2. Market Place
3. Rebate Funding
4. WaterSmart Software
5. Energy Efficiency Collaboration Platform
2
Costs related issues:
1. Is it cost effective to have 4 different portals from 4 different vendors for a small Utilities with about 30,000 customers? Is it cost effective to have portals from 4 vendors, pay 4 hosting fees, with the same customer
data hosted on 4 different sites?
2. All 3 contracts on this Consent Calendar are fixed-price contracts. There are no clear deliverables tied to
project payments. All 3 contracts make project payments by task completion. Tasks from Exhibits A can not
and should be used in lieu of deliverables. I am not sure if City’s PMO office has approved those contracts. If
not, I think City PMO should work on those contract documents and hire external professionals if needed.
3. On page 30 (out of 51 pages) from https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/72676
document, the sum of all numbers under Fiscal Year 2020 is much larger than the calculated total amount
for Fiscal Year. It is very hard to believe this is a calculation error made unintentionally. I am just wondering if
this is a clever way to conceal real project costs.
Date Security
Exhibit E of https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/72676 document is Vendor Cybersecurity
terms and conditions. Unlike the contracts, the vendor (Direct Technology for this contract) does not provide answers
for any data security related questions. Does the vendor have anything to hide? A customer portal vendor should be
able to answer those web security related questions. Also, during the March 6th 2019 UAC meeting on new Customer
Online Portal, someone asked about portal security question. I have not seen any staff response about it yet.
I urge Council not to approve those 2 items before above concerns are addressed. I also ask Council to: 1) have
Utilities Advisory Commission to review the necessity of 4 different portals for utilities customers; and 2) have project
and contract management professionals review the feasibilities of those 3 contracts before committing to about $3
Million dollars of public money.
Thank you,
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Jeanne Fleming <jfleming@metricus.net>
Sent:Thursday, August 1, 2019 6:03 PM
To:Atkinson, Rebecca
Cc:Fleming, Jim; Council, City; Clerk, City; Architectural Review Board; Planning Commission; UAC;
board@pausd.org
Subject:RE: Wireless Communications Facilities Hot Topics Site
Hi Rebecca,
Thank you for this. I am happy to report that I am now signed up for alerts at buldingeye.
I would appreciate it if you would follow up with respect to these points from my July 18th email to you:
I look forward to hearing from Jim Fleming with respect to any plans to install
Vinculums/Verizon Cluster 1 (i.e., the proposed cell towers in Midtown neighborhoods). I trust
he can also tell me exactly for what, and on what date(s), permits were issued for proposed
cell towers in this Cluster, including the two near elementary schools. I would also like to know
if other required permits are still outstanding for these proposed installations.
You have given me a lot to think about, so I will probably have a number of questions. But for
now, I would appreciate it if you would tell me whether I am correct in understanding you to be
saying that, with respect to Vinculums/Verizon Cluster 2 (i.e., the Barron Park neighborhood,
including Barron Park Elementary School), the shot clock has been stopped until the
applicants resubmit plans for these propose cell towers (i.e., no permits have been issued)?
You have explained that Public Works is the lead on street work and encroachment permit
review. May I assume that the Wireless Hot Topics page will be systematically updated to
reflect what Public Works is doing?
On the last point, I see that the Wireless Hot Topics page still has not been updated since April 19th, despite
Council’s June amendments to the Ordinance and despite AT&T’s new application to install fourteen more cell
towers in the University South, Downtown North and Green Acres neighborhoods.
As always, thank you for your help.
Regards to you,
Jeanne
Jeanne Fleming
JFleming@Metricus.net
650-325-5151
From: Atkinson, Rebecca <Rebecca.Atkinson@CityofPaloAlto.org>
Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2019 7:41 PM
To: Jeanne Fleming <jfleming@metricus.net>
2
Cc: Fleming, Jim <Jim.Fleming@CityofPaloAlto.org>; French, Amy <Amy.French@CityofPaloAlto.org>
Subject: RE: Wireless Communications Facilities Hot Topics Site
Hello Jeanne Fleming,
Good evening.
In further follow‐up to your Question 3 from 7/9 below:
Please utilize the following weblink and type in “250 Hamilton” as the search address:
https://paloalto.buildingeye.com/planning. In a sidebar pop‐up screen, you should see all of the planning
applications attributed to this reference address. Note that we use “250 Hamilton” for wireless projects
proposed for the right of way, as there isn’t an actual address for the right of way. You might be interested in
the dates of each review status item for each wireless application. Our Accela permit tracking system updates
these dates when staff enters information into the system, such as when we receive an application resubmittal.
On the topic of alerts, it is my understanding that you can set email notice alerts/frequency for new applications
at specific addresses or within a radius (see snipped image below). I set up a test one for myself (see snipped
image below) back in 2017 and receive alerts when an application comes in for 250 Hamilton. You’d need to sign
up in the system.
Please let me know if you have any further questions.
Regards,
Rebecca
See Alert Icon:
See example Alert Signup Screen:
3
See example Project Status Screenshot for AT&T 19PLN‐00191:
4
See example Project Status Screenshot for Vinculums 17PLN‐00228:
5
From: Jeanne Fleming [mailto:jfleming@metricus.net]
Sent: Thursday, July 18, 2019 6:32 PM
To: Atkinson, Rebecca
6
Cc: Clerk, City; Council, City; Architectural Review Board; Planning Commission; UAC; board@pausd.org; Fleming, Jim
Subject: RE: Wireless Communications Facilities Hot Topics Site
Hi Rebecca,
Thank you for answering my questions. I am most appreciative.
I look forward to hearing from Jim Fleming with respect to any plans to install Vinculums/Verizon
Cluster 1 (i.e., the proposed cell towers in Midtown neighborhoods). I trust he can also tell me exactly
for what, and on what date(s), permits were issued for proposed cell towers in this Cluster, including
the two near elementary schools. I would also like to know if other required permits are still
outstanding for these proposed installations.
You have given me a lot to think about, so I will probably have a number of questions. But for now, I
would appreciate it if you would tell me whether I am correct in understanding you to be saying that,
with respect to Vinculums/Verizon Cluster 2 (i.e., the Barron Park neighborhood, including Barron
Park Elementary School), the shot clock has been stopped until the applicants resubmit plans for
these propose cell towers (i.e., no permits have been issued)?
You have explained that Public Works is the lead on street work and encroachment permit
review. May I assume that the Wireless Hot Topics page will be systematically updated to reflect
what Public Works is doing?
Thank you again for your help, and please do let me know how I can sign up for Accela notification.
Regards to you,
Jeanne
Jeanne Fleming
JFleming@Metricus.net
650-325-5151
From: Atkinson, Rebecca <Rebecca.Atkinson@CityofPaloAlto.org>
Sent: Thursday, July 18, 2019 3:31 PM
To: Jeanne Fleming <jfleming@metricus.net>
Cc: Fleming, Jim <Jim.Fleming@CityofPaloAlto.org>; French, Amy <Amy.French@CityofPaloAlto.org>
Subject: RE: Wireless Communications Facilities Hot Topics Site
Hello Jeanne Fleming.
Good afternoon.
Regarding your four questions below:
1. Where in the process do the Verizon/Vinculums Clusters 1, 2 and 3 stand right now?
2. Where in the process do the Verizon/Crown Castle Clusters stand right now?
7
3. How do I sign up for notification re wireless projects on Accela? (Please assume I know
nothing about how to do this, because I don’t.)
4. How can I see the Wireless Ordinance that was in force in Palo Alto before the adopted-in-
2015 Wireless Ordinance that is in force today? I would appreciate it if you would send me a
link.
1. Vinculums – as of 07/18/19
Cluster 3 (17PLN‐00228) Project status is incomplete/under review. No resubmittal received.
Cluster 1 (17PLN‐00169) – Public Works issued streetwork and encroachment permits quite awhile ago, Electrical knows
more about installation timing on nodes with permits (cc’ing Jim Fleming).
Node Number Address Street Work Permit Encroachment Permit
129 2490 Louis Road 18STR‐00087 18ENC‐00044
130 2802 Louis Road 18STR‐00088 18ENC‐00046
131 891 Elbridge Way 18STR‐00086 18ENC‐00045
133E 949 Loma Verde Ave 18STR‐00089 18ENC‐00047
134 3409 Kenneth Drive 18STR‐00090 18ENC‐00048
135 795 Stone Lane 18STR‐00091 18ENC‐00049
137 3090 Ross Road 18STR‐00093 18ENC‐00051
138 836 Colorado Ave 18STR‐00085 18ENC‐00043
143 419 El Verano Ave 18STR‐00094 18ENC‐00053
144 201 Loma Verde Ave 18STR‐00092 18ENC‐00050
145 737 Loma Verde Ave 18STR‐00095 18ENC‐00052
Cluster 2 (17PLN‐00170) – Public Works is lead on streetwork and encroachment permit review. Vinculums did not
resubmit Node 104 on Suzanne Drive or Node 154 on Barron Ave. Tolling agreement in place for permit review on the
following nodes; awaiting resubmittal of permit plans:
Node Number Address Street Work Permit Encroachment Permit
101 4193 Wilkie Way 18STR‐00258 18ENC‐00159
153 3715 Whitsell Ave 18STR‐00258 18ENC‐00163
155‐F 4013 Amaranta Ave 18STR‐00258 18ENC‐00155
157‐E 904 Los Robles Ave 18STR‐00258 18ENC‐00158
163 180 El Camino Real 18STR‐00258 18ENC‐00160
2. Crown Castle – as of 07/18/19
Cluster 1 (17PLN‐00416) Project status is incomplete/under review. No resubmittal received.
Cluster 2 (17PLN‐00433) – Tolling agreement in place, awaiting plans that show conformance with Council’s Record of
Land Use Action.
Cluster 3 (17PLN‐00450) – Tolling agreement in place, awaiting Director’s Decisions on nodes proposed.
3. I’ll try to write up how to sign up for these alerts. This would be relevant for new applications that are on the horizon.
However, at present, you know of all of the wireless in the right of way applications that we have on file, including the
recent 19PLN‐00191 submitted by AT&T. Planning is lead on entitlement review, but Public Works is lead on streetwork
and encroachment permit review.
4. Please contact the City Clerk for a copy of the ordinance pre‐recent updates. The online version of the code now
reflects the recent wireless ordinance updates.
8
Thank you.
Regards,
Rebecca
From: Jeanne Fleming [mailto:jfleming@metricus.net]
Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2019 4:32 PM
To: Atkinson, Rebecca
Cc: Clerk, City; Council, City; Architectural Review Board; Planning Commission; UAC; board@pausd.org
Subject: FW: Wireless Communications Facilities Hot Topics Site
Hi Rebecca,
I haven’t heard back from you with respect to my July 9, 2019, email, so I’m resending it here to make
sure you’ve received it.
It has been months since Palo Alto’s Wireless hot topics site was updated with respect to the status
of the telecom companies’ many applications to install cell towers here. As you can imagine, we are
concerned that these companies may be forging ahead, and no one is telling us about it.
Regards to you,
Jeanne
Jeanne Fleming
JFleming@Metricus.net
650-325-5151
From: Jeanne Fleming <jfleming@metricus.net>
Sent: Tuesday, July 9, 2019 5:43 PM
To: 'Atkinson, Rebecca' <Rebecca.Atkinson@CityofPaloAlto.org>
Cc: 'Clerk, City' <city.clerk@cityofpaloalto.org>
Subject: RE: Wireless Communications Facilities Hot Topics Site
Hi Rebecca,
Thank you for this helpful update. I look forward to seeing the hot topics site for cell towers return
under your stewardship.
I have a few questions I would appreciate your answering now:
1. Where in the process do the Verizon/Vinculums Clusters 1, 2 and 3 stand right now?
2. Where in the process do the Verizon/Crown Castle Clusters stand right now?
3. How do I sign up for notification re wireless projects on Accela? (Please assume I know
nothing about how to do this, because I don’t.)
9
4. How can I see the Wireless Ordinance that was in force in Palo Alto before the adopted-in-
2015 Wireless Ordinance that is in force today? I would appreciate it if you would send me a
link.
Many thanks for your help,
Jeanne
Jeanne Fleming
JFleming@Metricus.net
650-325-5151
From: Atkinson, Rebecca <Rebecca.Atkinson@CityofPaloAlto.org>
Sent: Tuesday, July 9, 2019 11:07 AM
To: Jeanne Fleming <jfleming@metricus.net>
Cc: Clerk, City <city.clerk@cityofpaloalto.org>; French, Amy <Amy.French@CityofPaloAlto.org>
Subject: RE: Wireless Communications Facilities Hot Topics Site
Hello Jeanne Fleming,
Good morning.
Thank you for your email.
You mention helpful items. I haven’t sent out a City Manager hot topic page update notification email blast yet, but that
task is now assigned to me and I will be doing the next one ‐ I will be on the lookout to see if there are any tech
glitches.
We received a formal application 19PLN‐00191 from AT&T for some of the WCF nodes that they showed in their
Preliminary Architectural Review application 17PLN‐00398. The notice cards to owners/residents within the mailing
radius went out and all of the notice boards are installed on the proposed streetlight poles. The electronic files are on
Accela accessed via citizen portal and you can also find the basic project description and project plans on the project
webpage here: https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/news/displaynews.asp?NewsID=4626&TargetID=319. The webpage
indicates “under review” and we anticipate a resubmittal at some point (possibly later in July or in early August). We did
the rapid 10 days all Departments to review for completeness FCC order deadline process and deemed the application
incomplete. Consequently, when the application is resubmitted, we will get the full 60 days back on the shot clock. I
anticipate a lot of changes from what the initial project plans show now, so it will be another complicated technical
review ahead. Are you signed up via Accela citizen portal for email announcements for when a wireless project comes in
under the default address 250 Hamilton?
Regards,
Rebecca
Rebecca Atkinson, PMP, AICP, LEED Green Associate | Planner | P&CE Department
250 Hamilton Avenue | Palo Alto, CA 94301
T: 650.329.2596 | F: 650.329.2154 |E: rebecca.atkinson@cityofpaloalto.org
Online Parcel Report | Palo Alto Municipal Code
Planning Forms & Handouts | Planning Applications Mapped
From: Jeanne Fleming [mailto:jfleming@metricus.net]
Sent: Monday, July 08, 2019 3:59 PM
To: Atkinson, Rebecca
10
Cc: Clerk, City
Subject: Wireless Communications Facilities Hot Topics Site
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Hi Rebecca,
Belated Happy Fourth of July to you.
I would appreciate it if you would tell me if the Wireless Communication Facilities page is up-to-date.
Of course, I can see that it isn’t up-to-date with respect to modifications to the Wireless Ordinance
and Resolution. But I would like to know if it is up-to-date with respect to cell tower applications,
approvals, permits and so on. If it isn’t, I would appreciate it if you would let me and everyone else
know what’s new. And if there have been no changes, I would like to know that, too.
Finally, although I am signed up for email alerts when this page is updated, I didn’t receive one of
those alerts with the most recent up-date. Hence I am letting you know that there’s a problem.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Thanks and best,
Jeanne
Jeanne Fleming
JFleming@Metricus.net
650-325-5151
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Ann Protter <ann.protter@gmail.com>
Sent:Tuesday, August 6, 2019 6:13 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Wireless Ordinance
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Dear Mayor Filseth, Vice-Mayor Fine, Ms. Cormack, Mr. DuBois, Ms. Kniss, Ms. Kou and Mr. Tanaka,
In Los Altos, it only took a month to draft and pass a Wireless Ordinance with strong protections for
the quality of life in their community. Their Ordinance includes many of the sensible provisions Palo
Alto residents have long been asking for—provisions such as disfavoring cell towers in residential
neighborhoods, establishing minimum distances between cell towers, requiring annual safety
inspections of equipment and more.
Please finish the job you started on April 15th. Please immediately revise our Wireless Ordinance so
that Palo Alto stops allowing telecommunications companies to install ugly, noisy, potentially
hazardous and least-expensive-for-them cell tower equipment anywhere they want in our beautiful,
quiet, safe neighborhoods.
The residents of Palo Alto are counting on you to put us—not Verizon or AT&T--first.
Thank you,
Ann Protter
185 N California Ave
Palo Alto
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Leland Wiesner <lwiesner@gmail.com>
Sent:Tuesday, August 6, 2019 6:15 PM
To:Council, City
Cc:Jeanne Fleming
Subject:Why can't City Council do their job and protect Palo Alto and the Citizens from corp greed like other
cities
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Dear Mayor Filseth, Vice-Mayor Fine, Ms. Cormack, Mr. DuBois, Ms. Kniss, Ms. Kou and Mr. Tanaka,
Why is the City of Palo Alto dragging its feet in updating our Wireless Ordinance?
It took only a month, start to finish, for Los Altos to draft and pass a Wireless Ordinance with strong
protections for the quality of life in their community. Their Ordinance includes many of the sensible
provisions Palo Alto residents have long been asking for—provisions such as disfavoring cell towers
in residential neighborhoods, establishing minimum distances between cell towers, requiring annual
safety inspections of equipment and more.
Please finish the job you started on April 15th. Please immediately revise our Wireless Ordinance so
that Palo Alto stops allowing telecommunications companies to install ugly, noisy, potentially
hazardous and least-expensive-for-them cell tower equipment anywhere they want in our beautiful,
quiet, safe neighborhoods.
The residents of Palo Alto are counting on you to put us—not Verizon or AT&T--first.
Thank you,
Leland Wiesner
1144 Fife Ave Palo Alto Ca 94301
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Nancy <nstein@sonic.net>
Sent:Tuesday, August 6, 2019 6:56 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Cell Phone Towers
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Dear Mayor Filseth, Vice‐Mayor Fine, Ms. Cormack, Mr. DuBois, Ms. Kniss, Ms. Kou and Mr. Tanaka,
It is baffling to find out that residents of Los Altos had no difficulty in convincing their city council that the cell phone companies are
pushing through practices that are detrimental to residents. Los Altos residents were able to hold onto local control. Allowing big
business to push their way around our cities is beneficial to them at health and safety costs to residents. Why is the Palo Alto City
Council dragging their feet?
The Los Altos Ordinance includes many of the sensible provisions Palo Alto residents have long been asking for—provisions such as
disfavoring cell towers in residential neighborhoods, establishing minimum distances between cell towers, requiring annual safety
inspections of equipment and more.
Please finish the job you started on April 15th. Please immediately revise our Wireless Ordinance so that Palo Alto stops
allowing telecommunications companies to install ugly, noisy, potentially hazardous and least‐expensive‐for‐them cell tower
equipment anywhere they want in our beautiful, quiet, safe neighborhoods.
Sincerely,
Nancy Steinbach
4267 Pomona Ave.
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Nancy <nstein@sonic.net>
Sent:Tuesday, August 6, 2019 6:56 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Cell Phone Towers
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Dear Mayor Filseth, Vice‐Mayor Fine, Ms. Cormack, Mr. DuBois, Ms. Kniss, Ms. Kou and Mr. Tanaka,
It is baffling to find out that residents of Los Altos had no difficulty in convincing their city council that the cell phone companies are
pushing through practices that are detrimental to residents. Los Altos residents were able to hold onto local control. Allowing big
business to push their way around our cities is beneficial to them at health and safety costs to residents. Why is the Palo Alto City
Council dragging their feet?
The Los Altos Ordinance includes many of the sensible provisions Palo Alto residents have long been asking for—provisions such as
disfavoring cell towers in residential neighborhoods, establishing minimum distances between cell towers, requiring annual safety
inspections of equipment and more.
Please finish the job you started on April 15th. Please immediately revise our Wireless Ordinance so that Palo Alto stops
allowing telecommunications companies to install ugly, noisy, potentially hazardous and least‐expensive‐for‐them cell tower
equipment anywhere they want in our beautiful, quiet, safe neighborhoods.
Sincerely,
Nancy Steinbach
4267 Pomona Ave.
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Peggy Phelan <pphelan@stanford.edu>
Sent:Tuesday, August 6, 2019 6:58 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:get on it please
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
City Council Members:
I have written to you far too many times ‐‐ without receiving one single reply from any of you ‐‐ to have much
faith in you. But I urge you once more to "solve" the problem of the cell tower mess stemming from the greed
and recklessness of Verizon's land grab. A wireless policy that protects Palo Alto citizens is long overdue. Step
up and do your jobs. If you are unsure of how to proceed, call your colleagues in Los Altos. It took them a
month to work this out. I have been writing to you for what feels like forever.
Thank you,
Professor Phelan
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Annette Rahn <annetterahn@gmail.com>
Sent:Tuesday, August 6, 2019 7:45 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Cell Towers: A Big Win for Residents in Los Altos
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Dear Mayor Filseth, Vice-Mayor Fine, Ms. Cormack, Mr. DuBois, Ms. Kniss, Ms. Kou and Mr. Tanaka,
Why is the City of Palo Alto dragging its feet in updating our Wireless Ordinance?
It took only a month, start to finish, for Los Altos to draft and pass a Wireless Ordinance
with strong protections for the quality of life in their community. Their Ordinance
includes many of the sensible provisions Palo Alto residents have long been asking
for—provisions such as disfavoring cell towers in residential neighborhoods,
establishing minimum distances between cell towers, requiring annual safety
inspections of equipment and more.
Please finish the job you started on April 15th. Please immediately revise our Wireless
Ordinance so that Palo Alto stops allowing telecommunications companies to install
ugly, noisy, potentially hazardous and least-expensive-for-them cell tower equipment
anywhere they want in our beautiful, quiet, safe neighborhoods.
The residents of Palo Alto are counting on you to put us—not Verizon or AT&T--first.
Thank you,
Annette Rahn
Palo Alto
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Kelly Chang <kellyc319@gmail.com>
Sent:Tuesday, August 6, 2019 7:52 PM
To:Council, City; Colby
Subject:Concerned Resident - Cell Tower Setback for residential homes needed!!
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Dear Mayor Filseth, Vice-Mayor Fine, Ms. Cormack, Mr. DuBois, Ms. Kniss, Ms. Kou and Mr. Tanaka,
I appreciate that during the last Council meeting our members voted in favor of having school setbacks, which i
thought was a responsible decision to protect our children. However, there hasn't been the same ruling done
for residential homes. In fact, it was brought to my attention that most, if not all, of you have voted to remove
the provision that prohibits the telecom companies from installing 5G towers in full view of residents' homes. I
am very confused by the logic behind this. Presumably the setback for schools is to protect our children from
potentially harmful long term exposure to EMF radiation. So why wouldn't we have similar setbacks for our
children's' homes where they actually spend the MAJORITY of their time?
In my home, we have a 4 year old and 7 month old baby. Both my boys' rooms are on the second floor and
literally ~20 feet from a telephone pole that is currently being considered for 5G installation. If nothing
is done, my kids would be exposed to these EMFs (in dangerously close proximity) for the next 14-18 years of
their lives. Our homes must remain our sanctuaries. We currently have the option to turn our cell phones and wireless
off at night, or to not use it at all. There is no "off switch" with a 5G cell tower ~20 feet from my kids' bedrooms. It will
be a constant source of radio frequency unlike a cell phone, microwave, laptop, or even WI‐FI that can all be turned off.
In addition, yesterday I heard cell towers are only permitted in residential zones in Los Altos by exception
only! Other higher end neighborhoods have also done similar things. Why is Palo Alto dragging its feet and
can't get a proper residential set back ruling in order? It took only a month, start to finish, for Los Altos to draft
and pass a Wireless Ordinance with strong protections for the quality of life in their community. Their
Ordinance includes many of the sensible provisions Palo Alto residents have long been asking for—provisions
such as disfavoring cell towers in residential neighborhoods, establishing minimum distances between cell
towers, requiring annual safety inspections of equipment and more.
Please immediately revise our Wireless Ordinance so that Palo Alto stops allowing telecommunications
companies to install ugly, noisy, and potentially hazardous cell tower equipment anywhere they want in our
beautiful, quiet, safe neighborhoods.
As a resident of Palo Alto, I am counting on you to put us—not Verizon or AT&T--first. Please do the right thing
and fight the good fight for your residents!
2
Thank you,
Kelly and Colby Ranger
{REDACTED}
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Jyotsna Nimkar <jnimkar@gmail.com>
Sent:Tuesday, August 6, 2019 8:17 PM
To:Council, City
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Dear Mayor Filseth, Vice-Mayor Fine, Ms. Cormack, Mr. DuBois, Ms. Kniss, Ms. Kou and Mr. Tanaka,
Why is the City of Palo Alto dragging its feet in updating our Wireless Ordinance?
It took only a month, start to finish, for Los Altos to draft and pass a Wireless Ordinance with strong
protections for the quality of life in their community. Their Ordinance includes many of the sensible
provisions Palo Alto residents have long been asking for—provisions such as disfavoring cell towers
in residential neighborhoods, establishing minimum distances between cell towers, requiring annual
safety inspections of equipment and more.
Please finish the job you started on April 15th. Please immediately revise our Wireless Ordinance so
that Palo Alto stops allowing telecommunications companies to install ugly, noisy, potentially
hazardous and least-expensive-for-them cell tower equipment anywhere they want in our beautiful,
quiet, safe neighborhoods.
The residents of Palo Alto are counting on you to put us—not Verizon or AT&T--first.
Thank you,
Jyotsna Nimkar
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Barbara Lilley <Myjuno91@Sonic.net>
Sent:Tuesday, August 6, 2019 8:36 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Los Altos Wireless Ordinance
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on
links.
________________________________
Dear Mayor Filseth, Vice‐Mayor Fine, Ms Cormack, Mr. Du Bois, Ms.Kniss, Ms.Kou and Mr.Tanaka,
Please take prompt action to update our Wireless Ordinance as Los Altos has done. We need the protections more than
ever.
Sincerely, Barbara Lilley
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Bryan Chan <chan_bk@yahoo.com>
Sent:Tuesday, August 6, 2019 9:10 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Palo Alto needs minimum distances between cell towers and all schools
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Dear Mayor Filseth, Vice-Mayor Fine, Ms. Cormack, Mr. DuBois, Ms. Kniss, Ms. Kou and Mr. Tanaka,
Why is the City of Palo Alto dragging its feet in updating our Wireless Ordinance?
It took only a month, start to finish, for Los Altos to draft and pass a Wireless Ordinance with strong
protections for the quality of life in their community. Their Ordinance includes many of the sensible
provisions Palo Alto residents have long been asking for—provisions such as disfavoring cell towers
in residential neighborhoods, establishing minimum distances between cell towers, requiring annual
safety inspections of equipment and more.
Specifically, there should be minimum distances of 1500 feet from any cell tower and any school
(public or private). In addition, this setback should be applied RETROACTIVELY to any towers that
already exist.
Please finish the job you started on April 15th. Please immediately revise our Wireless Ordinance so
that Palo Alto stops allowing telecommunications companies to install ugly, noisy, potentially
hazardous and least-expensive-for-them cell tower equipment anywhere they want in our beautiful,
quiet, safe neighborhoods.
The residents of Palo Alto are counting on you to put us—not Verizon or AT&T--first.
Thank you for your time and consideration,
Bryan
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Jeffrey S. Glenn <jsglenn@stanford.edu>
Sent:Tuesday, August 6, 2019 10:29 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Smart cell towers ordinance
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Dear Mayor Filseth, Vice‐Mayor Fine, Ms. Cormack, Mr. DuBois, Ms. Kniss, Ms. Kou and Mr. Tanaka,
Why is the City of Palo Alto dragging its feet in updating our Wireless Ordinance?
It took only a month, start to finish, for Los Altos to draft and pass a Wireless Ordinance with strong protections for the
quality of life in their community. Their Ordinance includes many of the sensible provisions Palo Alto residents have
long been asking for—provisions such as disfavoring cell towers in residential neighborhoods, establishing minimum
distances between cell towers, requiring annual safety inspections of equipment and more.
Please finish the job you started on April 15th. Please immediately revise our Wireless Ordinance so that Palo Alto stops
allowing telecommunications companies to install ugly, noisy, potentially hazardous and least‐expensive‐for‐them cell
tower equipment anywhere they want in our beautiful, quiet, safe neighborhoods.
The residents of Palo Alto are counting on you to put us—not Verizon or AT&T‐‐first.
I appreciate and thank you in advance for your efforts in satisfactorily resolving this important issue.
Jeffrey
Jeffrey S. Glenn, M.D., Ph.D.
Professor of Medicine and Microbiology & Immunology
Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology
Director, Center for Hepatitis and Liver Tissue Engineering
Stanford University School of Medicine
CCSR Building, Rm. 3115A
269 Campus Drive
Stanford, CA 94305-5171
U.S.A.
email:jeffrey.glenn@stanford.edu
tel (office): (650)725-3373
tel (lab): (650)498-7419
fax: (650)723-3032
pager: (650)723-8222; ID# 23080
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Francesca Kautz <dfkautz@pacbell.net>
Sent:Tuesday, August 6, 2019 10:34 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Palo Alto City Council should be more like Los Altos
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Dear Mayor Filseth, Vice-Mayor Fine, Ms. Cormack, Mr. DuBois, Ms. Kniss, Ms. Kou and Mr. Tanaka,
Why is the City of Palo Alto dragging its feet in updating our Wireless Ordinance?
It took only a month, start to finish, for Los Altos to draft and pass a Wireless Ordinance with strong
protections for the quality of life in their community. Their Ordinance includes many of the sensible
provisions Palo Alto residents have long been asking for—provisions such as disfavoring cell towers
in residential neighborhoods, establishing minimum distances between cell towers, requiring annual
safety inspections of equipment and more.
Please finish the job you started on April 15th. Please immediately revise our Wireless Ordinance so
that Palo Alto stops allowing telecommunications companies to install ugly, noisy, potentially
hazardous and least-expensive-for-them cell tower equipment anywhere they want in our beautiful,
quiet, safe neighborhoods.
The residents of Palo Alto are counting on you to put us—not Verizon or AT&T--first.
Thank you,
Francesca Kautz
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Leah Schoolnik <leahjsch@yahoo.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 9:07 AM
To:Council, City
Subject:Wireless Ordinance
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Dear City Council Members (of Palo Alto),
I'm curious to know why the city of Los Altos so quickly passed a Wireless Ordinance, but
Palo Alto continues to delay. You were elected to represent and act for city residents.
Please do so.
Sincerely,
Leah Schoolnik
{REDACTED}
Palo Alto, CA 94303
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Magic <magic@ecomagic.org>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 10:16 AM
To:Council, City
Subject:Wireless provider equipment regulation
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Dear Councilmembers,
Los Altos has shown the way to protect residents from wireless providers who ignore our interests.
Rather than re‐invent the wheel at considerable expense, let's substitute "Palo Alto" for "Los Altos" in the Los Altos
ordinance and move on.
Thanks for considering this suggestion.
With appreciation,
David Schrom
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Jeanne Fleming <jfleming@metricus.net>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 1:23 PM
To:Council, City
Cc:Clerk, City; Architectural Review Board; Planning Commission; UAC
Subject:Why is Palo Alto dragging its feet?
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Dear Mayor Filseth, Vice-Mayor Fine, Ms. Cormack, Mr. DuBois, Ms. Kniss, Ms. Kou and Mr. Tanaka,
Why is the City of Palo Alto dragging its feet in updating our Wireless Ordinance?
It took only a month, start to finish, for Los Altos to draft and pass a Wireless Ordinance with strong
protections for the quality of life in their community. Their Ordinance includes many of the sensible
provisions Palo Alto residents have long been asking for—provisions such as disfavoring cell towers
in residential neighborhoods, establishing minimum distances between cell towers, requiring annual
safety inspections of equipment and more.
Please finish the job you started on April 15th. Please immediately revise our Wireless Ordinance so
that Palo Alto stops allowing telecommunications companies to install ugly, noisy, potentially
hazardous and least-expensive-for-them cell tower equipment anywhere they want in our beautiful,
quiet, safe neighborhoods.
The residents of Palo Alto are counting on you to put us—not Verizon or AT&T--first.
Thank you,
Jeanne Fleming
Jeanne Fleming, PhD
JFleming@Metricus.net
650-325-5151
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Agata Barczynska <agata.maslanka@gmail.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 1:51 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Cell towers
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Dear Mayor Filseth, Vice-Mayor Fine, Ms. Cormack, Mr. DuBois, Ms. Kniss, Ms. Kou and Mr. Tanaka,
Why is the City of Palo Alto dragging its feet in updating our Wireless Ordinance?
It took only a month, start to finish, for Los Altos to draft and pass a Wireless Ordinance with strong protections
for the quality of life in their community. Their Ordinance includes many of the sensible provisions Palo Alto
residents have long been asking for—provisions such as disfavoring cell towers in residential neighborhoods,
establishing minimum distances between cell towers, requiring annual safety inspections of equipment and
more.
Please finish the job you started on April 15th. Please immediately revise our Wireless Ordinance so that Palo
Alto stops allowing telecommunications companies to install ugly, noisy, potentially hazardous and least-
expensive-for-them cell tower equipment anywhere they want in our beautiful, quiet, safe neighborhoods.
The residents of Palo Alto are counting on you to put us—not Verizon or AT&T--first.
Thank you,
Agata Barczynska
‐‐
null
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Tish Hoehl <totish2@gmail.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 3:28 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Cell Towers
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Dear Mayor Filseth, Vice-Mayor Fine, Ms. Cormack, Mr. DuBois, Ms. Kniss, Ms. Kou
and Mr. Tanaka,
Why is the City of Palo Alto dragging its feet in updating our Wireless Ordinance?
It took only a month, start to finish, for Los Altos to draft and pass a Wireless Ordinance
with strong protections for the quality of life in their community. Their Ordinance
includes many of the sensible provisions Palo Alto residents have long been asking
for—provisions such as disfavoring cell towers in residential neighborhoods,
establishing minimum distances between cell towers, requiring annual safety
inspections of equipment and more.
Please finish the job you started on April 15th. Please immediately revise our Wireless
Ordinance so that Palo Alto stops allowing telecommunications companies to install
ugly, noisy, potentially hazardous and least-expensive-for-them cell tower equipment
anywhere they want in our beautiful, quiet, safe neighborhoods.
The residents of Palo Alto are counting on you to put us—not Verizon or AT&T--first.
Thank you,
Tish Hoehl
{REDACTED}
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Leonard Schwarz <lschwarz@right-thing.net>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 5:55 PM
To:Council, City
Cc:Clerk, City; Architectural Review Board; Planning Commission; UAC
Subject:Revising Palo Alto's Wireless Ordinance
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Dear Mayor Filseth, Vice‐Mayor Fine, Ms. Cormack, Mr. DuBois, Ms. Kniss, Ms. Kou and Mr. Tanaka:
As I feel confident you know, it took our neighbor, the City of Los Altos, only one month to draft and pass a
Wireless Ordinance that protects the quality of life in that community. The Los Altos ordinance includes many
of the provisions Palo Alto residents have long been asking for—provisions such as disfavoring cell towers in
residential neighborhoods, establishing minimum distances between cell towers and requiring annual safety
inspections of equipment.
I am writing to ask that you finish the job you began on April 15th. Please immediately revise our Wireless
Ordinance so that Palo Alto stops allowing telecommunications companies to install ugly, noisy, potentially
hazardous and least‐expensive‐for‐them cell tower equipment anywhere they want in our beautiful, quiet,
safe neighborhoods.
The residents of Palo Alto are counting on you to put us—not Verizon and AT&T—first.
Thank you,
Leonard Schwarz
lschwarz@right‐thing.net
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Mary Thomas <mj_thomas_2000@yahoo.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 8:20 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Palo Alto Wireless Ordinance
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Dear Mayor Filseth, Vice-Mayor Fine, Ms. Cormack, Mr. DuBois, Ms. Kniss, Ms. Kou and Mr. Tanaka,
I am amazed that the City of Palo Alto is still unresolved in updating our Wireless Ordinance. It has taken the city of Los
Altos only a month from start to finish to draft and pass a Wireless Ordinance which strongly protects the quality of life in
their community. We Palo Alto residents have long been asking for the provisions that the Los Altos Ordinance includes
(disfavoring cell towers in residential neighborhoods, establishing minimum distances between cell towers, requiring
annual safety inspections of equipment, etc.).
I request that you please finish the job you started on April 15th. Please revise our Wireless Ordinance so that Palo Alto
stops allowing telecommunications companies to install these ugly, noisy, potentially hazardous and least-expensive-for-
them cell tower equipment anywhere they want in our beautiful neighborhoods.
Please put your Palo Alto residents ahead of Verizon or AT&T - we count on you to listen to us.
Sincerely,
Mary Thomas
{REDACTED}
Palo Alto 94301
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Tina Chow <chow_tina@yahoo.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 9:46 PM
To:Council, City
Cc:Architectural Review Board; Planning Commission; UAC; Clerk, City
Subject:News re: cell towers - Los Altos did it, and so can we!
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Dear City Council,
I hope you’ve all had a wonderful summer. I’m writing to you with what I think is exciting news
regarding small cell towers: Los Altos City Council just passed an ordinance (on 8/5/19) that does
many of the exact things that residents want to see done in Palo Alto. We now have another excellent
and very nearby example to follow, which should make the process easier and faster for our City
Staff.
I do think it’s urgent to act quickly on this, as another 14 applications for small cells have been filed
with the City in just the last few weeks.
Some key points from Los Altos’ new ordinance are listed below, and they address all our major
concerns. And, these key points are pretty much what you voted to direct City Staff to add to our own
ordinance.
We’d like to see these provisions added to our wireless ordinance now to similarly protect residents in
Palo Alto. It doesn’t make sense to wait as long as a year, while in the meantime dozens more cell
towers are approved right next to people’s homes. Plus now we have all the language we need and
can do this fast. Los Altos updated its ordinance in just a few weeks. Palo Alto voted on April 15 to do
this, so let’s do it now, please.
Would you please help us get this done?
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Tina Chow
Barron Park
Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering, UC Berkeley
Key Points from Los Altos’ new wireless ordinance:
* Cell towers allowed in residential zones only by exception. Please note that this doesn’t mean that
small cell nodes are prohibited in residential neighborhoods. It just means that before installing a cell
tower in a residential neighborhood, the applicant must show that there are no other ways it can
deliver needed service.
2
* 500 ft setback from schools
* 1,500 ft separation between small cell nodes
* Annual RF testing of cell tower equipment
* 500 ft setback for multi-family residences in commercial districts
You can find the Los Altos Staff report with the draft ordinance here:
https://www.losaltosca.gov/sites/default/files/fileattachments/city_council/meeting/48451/1._wireless_f
acilities_regulations.pdf
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Janet Gu <janetlipingding1120@gmail.com>
Sent:Thursday, August 8, 2019 3:12 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:not Verizon or AT&T--first.
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Dear Mayor Filseth, Vice-Mayor Fine, Ms. Cormack, Mr. DuBois, Ms. Kniss, Ms. Kou and Mr. Tanaka,
Why is the City of Palo Alto dragging its feet in updating our Wireless Ordinance?
It took only a month, start to finish, for Los Altos to draft and pass a Wireless Ordinance with strong
protections for the quality of life in their community. Their Ordinance includes many of the sensible
provisions Palo Alto residents have long been asking for—provisions such as disfavoring cell towers
in residential neighborhoods, establishing minimum distances between cell towers, requiring annual
safety inspections of equipment and more.
Please finish the job you started on April 15th. Please immediately revise our Wireless Ordinance so
that Palo Alto stops allowing telecommunications companies to install ugly, noisy, potentially
hazardous and least-expensive-for-them cell tower equipment anywhere they want in our beautiful,
quiet, safe neighborhoods.
The residents of Palo Alto are counting on you to put us—not Verizon or AT&T--first.
Thank you,
Janet Ding
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Celia Boyle <swcie@yahoo.com>
Sent:Thursday, August 8, 2019 11:20 PM
To:Council, City
Cc:Jay Hopkins
Subject:Wireless Ordinance
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Per recent news, it took only a month for Los Altos to draft and pass a Wireless Ordinance with strong
protections for the quality of life in their community. Their Ordinance includes many of the sensible
provisions Palo Alto residents have long been asking for—provisions such as disfavoring cell towers
in residential neighborhoods, establishing minimum distances between cell towers, requiring annual
safety inspections of equipment and more.
Please finish the job you started on April 15th. Please immediately revise our Wireless Ordinance so
that Palo Alto stops allowing telecommunications companies to install ugly, noisy, potentially
hazardous and least-expensive-for-them cell tower equipment anywhere they want in our beautiful,
quiet, safe neighborhoods.
We live on Barron Avenue. They already have TWO cell towers on this street and now you are
approving a third directly across from the Elementary School. Please reconsider this.
Thank you,
Celia Boyle and Jay Hopkins
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Leo Povolotsky <leopovolhoa@gmail.com>
Sent:Friday, August 9, 2019 2:20 AM
To:Council, City
Cc:Jeanne Fleming
Subject:Cell Towers: A Big Win for Residents in Los Altos__What about Palo Alto?
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on
links.
________________________________
Dear Mayor Filseth, Vice‐Mayor Fine, Ms. Cormack, Mr. DuBois, Ms. Kniss, Ms. Kou and Mr. Tanaka,
Why is the City of Palo Alto dragging its feet in updating our Wireless Ordinance?
It took only a month, start to finish, for Los Altos to draft and pass a Wireless Ordinance with strong protections for the
quality of life in their community. Their Ordinance includes many of the sensible provisions Palo Alto residents have
long been asking for—provisions such as disfavoring cell towers in residential neighborhoods, establishing minimum
distances between cell towers, requiring annual safety inspections of equipment and more.
Please finish the job you started on April 15th. Please immediately
revise our Wireless Ordinance so that Palo Alto stops allowing telecommunications companies to install ugly, noisy,
potentially hazardous and least‐expensive‐for‐them cell tower equipment anywhere they want in our beautiful, quiet,
safe neighborhoods.
The residents of Palo Alto are counting on you to put us—not Verizon or AT&T‐‐first.
Thank you,
Leo Povolotsky
Long term Palo Alto resident
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:ksabes@aol.com
Sent:Saturday, August 10, 2019 12:04 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Cell Towers Ordinance
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
TO ALL THE CITY COUNCIL OF PALO ALTO
Why did it only take the City of Los Altos only one month to adopt a Wireless Ordinance with strong protections for the
quality of life in their city.
Why are you all dragging your feet in passing a similar Wireless Ordinance. Remember it is for the safety of our
neighborhoods and our school children.
Lets get some action ASAP.
Kay Sabin
{REDACTED}
P.A.
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Jyotsna Nimkar <jnimkar@gmail.com>
Sent:Sunday, August 11, 2019 7:59 PM
To:Filseth, Eric (Internal)
Cc:Council, City; Architectural Review Board; Planning Commission; UAC; board@pausd.org; Clerk, City
Subject:Good News from D.C. re Cell Towers
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Dear Mayor Filseth,
On Friday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit gave municipalities and other local
authorities a significant victory, ruling unanimously that the FCC’s decision to scrap federal
environmental and historical reviews for small cell sites was “arbitrary and capricious.”
The lawsuit against the FCC was brought by the United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians, the
Blackfeet Tribe, and the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC). "Today's decision confirms
that the FCC cannot just scream '5G' to justify ignoring its duties to Tribal Nations and to the
environment," was the comment of tribes’ attorney Andrew Schwartzman.
Nor can Verizon and AT&T just scream “5G” at the City of Palo Alto and demand to locate their ugly,
loud, potentially hazardous equipment anywhere they want in our beautiful, quiet, safe
neighborhoods. Friday’s D.C. Circuit ruling was only the latest in a series of rulings confirming that
local governments have significant authority to control, in particular, the siting and appearance of
small cell node cell towers.
But they have to use it.
Please back up your words in April with action. Please direct City Staff to return to you immediately
with language to update Palo Alto’s Wireless Ordinance so that it includes basic protections for the
quality of life in our city’s neighborhoods.
Residents are counting on you to finish the job you started, finish it before any more small cell nodes
are installed in Palo Alto.
Sincerely,
Jyo Nimkar
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Willy Lai <willyhlai@yahoo.com>
Sent:Sunday, August 11, 2019 9:35 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:URGENT: Updated Palo Alto Wireless Ordinance
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Dear Mayor Filseth, Vice-Mayor Fine, Ms. Cormack, Mr. DuBois, Ms. Kniss, Ms. Kou and Mr. Tanaka,
I'm extremely upset with your lack of progress in regards to updating Palo Alto's wireless
ordinance. Why does this need a year or more to draft? That's simply not acceptable. In the year it's
taking you to draft updates to our wireless ordinance, wireless carriers are flooding our city with cell
towers in highly undesirable locations. Like the vast majority of Palo Alto residents, I DO NOT want
cell towers IN or NEAR residential neighborhoods and schools. You are not doing enough and you
are not moving fast enough to keep this from happening. Must I remind you that you were elected to
office to support the needs of the community, not those of AT&T or Verizon? I am committed to
mobilizing the community to ensure you lose support for remaining in office if swift action is not taken
immediately.
I'm sure you've now been made aware that it took only a month, start to finish, for our neighboring
city, Los Altos, to draft and pass a wireless ordinance with strong protections for the quality of life in
their community. Here is a link to their ordinance: https://los-
altos.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=7&event_id=903&meta_id=59858 Their ordinance was
borrowed from Mill Valley's ordinance and adapted to Los Altos, and it includes many of the sensible
provisions Palo Alto residents have long been asking for— in particular, disfavoring the placement of
cell towers in or near residential neighborhoods and schools. Los Altos's new ordinance requires
carriers to find 5 possible locations before determining the final cell site location, and it also
deprioritizes the placement of cell tower in neighborhoods to the very bottom of the list, which helps to
prevent placement of cell towers in neighborhoods. Los Altos's ordinance also includes a minimum
distance of 500 feet from schools - why is our's only 300 feet? Surely, you must care for our children
as much as the city of Los Altos cares for their's. Our ordinance should set a minimum distance of
500 feet from schools to be on par with Los Altos; better yet, we should be aiming for 1500 feet as the
minimum distance, as that has become the standard in Europe and other progressive countries
who've based their minimum distance on actual studies that have examined the health effects of cell
towers on residents as a function of distance.
Given that Los Altos has moved swiftly, and has drafted and passed their wireless ordinance within a
month, I fully expect that you draft and pass the updated Palo Alto wireless ordinance as well, one
that you started on April 15th this year. If Los Altos is able to draft and pass a wireless ordinance
within a month, there's simply no reason why you can't. Surely, being in the heart of Silicon Valley, I
expect you to be every bit as sharp, efficient, motivated, resourceful, and responsive as Los Altos's
city council.
In closing, on behalf of the Palo Alto community, I demand that you DRAFT and PASS an updated
wireless ordinance for Palo Alto that is AT LEAST AS RESTRICTIVE as Los Altos's ordinance in
2
keeping cell towers away from homes and schools, and to have the ordinance drafted and passed by
September 11, 2019 (one month from today's date).
Thank you,
Willy Lai
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Renee Goumas <neegoumas@yahoo.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 1:01 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Please file Appeal
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
I am writing on behalf of my neighbors to please file a strong appeal about NOT removing the grocery store at
Edgewood plaza. Please make it so under no circumstances will anyone allow any negotiations not requiring an
operating grocery store. There is no more negotiation. Sand Hill needs to pay up.
Am I clear enough in my appeal? Get money owed to city and let it go already. Make Sand Hill accountable.
We require a successful grocery store in that location. Its what we already worked so hard to achieve. Its very
successful. Point proven.
Thank you.
R. Goumas
Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Trish Mulvey <mulvey@ix.netcom.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 1:04 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Support for The Market at Edgewood
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Honorable Mayor Filseth and City Council Members, please add this to your collection of
community support letters insisting the City file a strong appeal and under no circumstances
negotiate away requiring an operating grocery store for our neighborhood. The Market at
Edgewood is a critically important asset that warrants your attention and protection.
Sincerely,
Trish & Jim Mulvey
527 Rhodes Drive, Palo Alto, CA 94303
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Elena Marinelli <elena.marinelli@gmail.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 1:14 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Please don't let Edgewood Market go
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Hello, I'm a resident of Palo Alto who lives about 5 minutes from Edgewood Market. It is a great resource for our
neighborhood with friendly workers and quality products. Please file a strong appeal and under no
circumstances negotiate away requiring an operating grocery store.
Thank you,
Elena Marinelli
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:danielt3@aol.com
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 1:30 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Edgewood Grocery Store
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
To the Palo Alto City Council
We would urge the City Council to aggressively do what you can to save the Edgewood Grocery Store. It is a
neighborhood resource that should be protected.
Daniel Tuerk MD
Janis G. Tuerk MD
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Jane Millman <jane.millman@gmail.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 1:56 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Edgewood Grocery Store
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on
links.
________________________________
Dear Council Members,
Please please do everything you need to do to keep The Market at Edgewood from closing. It adds such value to our
neighborhood, and I cannot imagine not having it there. Both the neighbors and the council worked so hard to get
someone in the grocery space, we must do everything possible to support it. The owners are so accommodating to the
customers ‐ it is a real jewel for Palo Alto, especially this neighborhood.
Thank you!
Jane and Paul Millman
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:V.K. Rajaram <vkrajaram@gmail.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 2:18 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Appeal The 2017 Court Ruling That There Needn’t Be An Operating Grocery Store At Edgewood
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on
links.
________________________________
Hello,
I understand that the council is scheduled to discuss the above. Please consider filing a strong appeal against this ruling.
Not only does the city stand to lose $1.6M in fines levied on the developer but also the neighborhood risks losing an
operating grocery store that is well regarded by its patrons. Thank you.
VK
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:michal shalon <michalshalon@gmail.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 2:27 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Edgewood Grocery Store
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Dear City Council,
I insist that you file a strong appeal and under no circumstances negotiate away requiring an operating grocery store at
Edgewood Plaza. I am so happy to have this amazing grocery store, and after such a long hard fought battle to get one, I
can't believe that we could actually lose this valuable resource again!
I cook for my family every night and at least three times a week I can avoid adding to downtown congestion and go
down the street to pick up necessary items. I also love that we are supporting a family owned small business where the
owners actually know their customers personally, and respond to their requests. This is so timely in the aftermath of
Amazon's takeover of Whole Foods where we lost any personal connection in the grocery shopping experience and
where the quality of produce has declined dramatically.
More importantly, the Duveneck/St.Francis neighborhood sorely needs a grocery store, and the sense of community
around that particular store is refreshing and heartwarming both for the customers and the employees. I have seen first
hand how the employees love working there and love the owners.
Please don't bow to the developers and file the strongest appeal you can to keep a grocery store in the requirements at
Edgewood Plaza.
Thank you,
Michal Shalon
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:ROBERT ROW <rickrow@comcast.net>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 3:01 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Please support our grocery store at Edgewood Plaza by appealing decision against them
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Dear Palo Alto City Council,
As a neighbor of the Edgewood Plaza, I and my family greatly value the Market grocery store. We shop there almost
daily for fresh produce and meat, we walk there, we rely on it. It is a place to meet friends, a place to help build our
community. We no longer have to get in our car and drive miles to alternative shops to the detriment of Palo Alto's
environment.
I understand that on Monday, August 12, the Council will discuss its appeal of a 2017 court ruling saying there needn't
be an operating grocery store at the shopping center.
I encourage you to decide to make a strong appeal and under no circumstances negotiate away requiring an operating
grocery store.
The Market at Edgewood is popular. It won the "Best of 2019" award from Palo Alto Weekly readers, both as a grocery
store and for its produce section (see https://www.paloaltoonline.com/best_of/2019/food‐and‐drink.php) and
NextDoor participants across 15 neighborhoods named it as Neighborhood Favorite
(seehttps://nextdoor.com/pages/the‐market‐at‐edgewood‐palo‐alto‐ca/).
But even popular stores, particularly ones that are relatively new and building business like the Market face financial
challenges in these times and owner‐run, community‐oriented grocery stores are always particularly vulnerable during
their long start‐up phase.
Overturning the 2017 ruling also means the city can collect approximately $1..6 million in penalties that Sand Hill
Properties, the shopping center developer, owes it for when the grocery store space was vacant. Back in 2012, the City
allowed Sand Hill to rebuild the shopping center with a much smaller parking lot and add approximately $30 million in
housing. In exchange, Sand Hill agreed to provide a handful of public benefits, a major one being providing a "viable
grocery store," in its own words.Beginning in 2016, the City fined Sand Hill for not providing a grocery and in 2017, Sand
2
Hill stopped paying penalties and instead sued the City to remove the grocery store requirement. The judicial decision
that undid the requirement that any grocery store actually be "provided," saying in effect that a vacant building is a
meaningful public benefit is nonsense. This decision makes no sense and could well encourage more developer
misbehavior.
Please also remember that the loss of the grocery store will adversely impact all the other shops in the plaza and could
easily result in them going under as well. As well as loss of valuable services to our community, many jobs would be lost
and the plaza could become a more dangerous space frequented by less desirables.
I would also recommend that Palo Alto promote the plaza to people commuting down the freeway as a place to stop for
coffee, lunch, and to pick up groceries etc. There are so few easy‐off, easy‐on places along the 101 that the plaza could
increase its business with this traffic as well. Perhaps, better advertising via Google Maps would help this.
The residents of this part of Palo Alto have put up with not having convenient shopping for quite a few years in the
recent past. Please, please do your best to avoid us going back to this situation.
Sincerely,
Robert W. Row
{REDACTED}
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Peggy Stauffer <stauffer.peggy@gmail.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 3:29 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Edgewood Grocery store
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Dear Council members,
How can you think of removing the "Market"! It has meant so much to many people in the area.
Whole Foods just does not provide for all.
Please re‐think this!!
Peggy Stauffer,
Hamilton Avenue
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Bob <lawn432576watering8712@gmail.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 3:34 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Edgewood Plaza public benefit - please appeal
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on
links.
________________________________
Dear Palo Alto City Council members,
My oh my, we really need to stop being so nice to developers. We've been following this Sand Hill developer running
roughshod over the city zoning rules for too many years. It has to stop, we are pay attention to how the city council
votes and how it deals with development issues.
In the case of the Edgewood Plaza, there was a poorly maintained but charming historic structure and this developer just
ran a bulldozer through it and then said to the public (us), "oops my bad". Nothing happened, no penalty at all.
Next they talked the city into trading a bunch of condos on a parcel zoned commercial (making quite a nice profit) in
return for a so‐called public benefit of providing a small market. A side effect of the condos is a congested half‐sized
parking area, making it very difficult to park anytime during the day.
Well we all saw how that turned out. When there was no market, Palo Alto tried to fine the developer on basis of their
not holding up their end of the public benefit. The administrative hearing agreed, but then Sand Hill won an appeal in
superior court. How that went down I have no idea, breaking zoning and getting away with no public benefit seems like
a great way to tell all other developers to just do whatever you want, Palo Alto won't enforce.
This Edgewood situation is a clear test case. Please appeal and keep fighting against abuse of the public benefit rules. I
suspect many will see dropping the case as yet another example of a way‐too‐developer‐friendly Palo Alto City Council.
Another important factor here is the *next* project that Sand Hill decides to do. If Palo Alto doesn't appeal, we are
saying to Sand Hill, go ahead, promise anything, you won't be held to it, so please on August 9, 2019, please vote to
proceed with an appeal and put a stop to this abuse of the city.
Sincerely,
Robert Marinelli
Walnut Drive
Palo Alto
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:brucecrocker <Bruce.c@pitango-us.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 3:38 PM
To:Council, City
Cc:crocker1@pacbell.net
Subject:Keep grocery store requirement at Edgewood Plaza
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
To the City Council: We believe it is extremely important that the city council file a strong appeal of the 2017 court
ruling saying there needn't be an operating grocery store at the Edgewood shopping center and under no
circumstances negotiate away requiring an operating grocery store. Our family has been grateful to have the Market
open and with the high quality service they provide the neighborhood and the city. Please do not create a situation
that makes it easier for Sand Hill Properties to walk away from their responsibility under their original agreement
with the city.
We would also like to see the city collect the contested penalties from Sand Hill in compensation for their foot
dragging approach that ultimately found a good solution.
Thanks you for addressing this issue.
Suzanne and Bruce Crocker
{REDACTED}
Bruce.c@pitango‐us.com
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Colleen Crangle <crangle@stanfordalumni.org>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 3:42 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:A viable grocery store at Edgewood Plaza - the city's responsibility
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Dear City Council:
I write to urge you to file a strong appeal to the absurd 2017 court
ruling that Sand Hill is not required to provide a grocery store at
Edgewood Plaza. The city and its people negotiated in good faith,
allowing Sand Hill to put housing worth millions of dollars at the
site in exchange for a viable grocery store for the people. If the city
fails to mount an appeal, the ongoing presence of a grocery store is
in peril and the city will lose the $1.6 million in penalties levied
against Sand Hill. The city's responsibility is clear: appeal the
decision, providing all necessary resources to do so.
Colleen Crangle
Kirby Place
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Christie Ma <christiema2004@gmail.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 3:48 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Please fight to keep Edgewood Grocery Store!
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Dear City Council,
Please make sure we keep Edgewood Grocery Store in our neighborhood. It's really a wonderful shop. I'm able to find
many vegan ingredients I'm unable to find elsewhere.
Best,
Christie
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Tom Holzer <tom.holzer@gmail.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 3:49 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:The Market
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
I am writing to encourage you to file a strong appeal to the court on behalf of maintaining The Market in Edgewood
Plaza. Also under no circumstance negotiate away the requirement of a market. I live in the adjacent neighborhood and
find the shopping convenience and opportunity to meet and chat with neighbors while shopping and important
contributor to building community. SUPPORT THE MARKET.
Tom Holzer
{REDACTED}
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Dow Wilson <Dow.Wilson@varian.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 3:54 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:The Market
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Dear City Council—
Thank you for listening to this note. I just wanted to write and let you know how strongly we feel about a grocery store
remaining at edgewood plaza. It’s a big deal…and a great community resource. It was part of the original concept, and
at least we wouldn’t have gone along with it if that concept was eliminated at the beginning. Please insist that a strong
appeal be filed and that under no circumstances should the city negotiate away the clause requiring an operating
grocery store.
Thank you.
Dow & Lynne Wilson, Residents
E. Crescent Dr.
Palo Alto
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Bruce Nixon <bnixon25@pacbell.net>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 3:55 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Edgewood market appeal
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on
links.
________________________________
You MUST vote to file an appeal on the Edgewood Shopping center issue. It’s a dream come true for us neighbors!
Sent from my iPhone
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Maria Koretz <mkoretz@comcast.net>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 4:05 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Edgewood GroceryStore
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Ladies/Gentlemen:
This letter is to urge the City Council in the strongest possible terms to reject the appeal of a 2017 court ruling
saying there needn't be an operating grocery store at the shopping center. The grocery store is a
tremendous asset to the community. The owners have done an examplary job in providing a much
needed service to our community. In return, residents of the area have risen to the occasion
and supported the grocery store. We have all come to rely on it.
Furthermore, if the 2017 ruling is overturned, the City of Palo Alto will lose $1.6 million in revenue,
based on the fines the developer has been assessed (for dragging their heels in providing the grocery
store).
So overturning the 2017 ruling is a lose-lose proposition: the City loses significant revenue and the
residents lose an important resource. In fact, the only winner would be Sand Hill Properties.
Thank you for considering the point of view of a resident on this matter.
Sincerely,
Maria Koretz
Palo Alto resident
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Pat Kinney <pkinney@ix.netcom.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 4:19 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Edgewood Plaza
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Dear Council Members,
I am writing you as a homeowner who has lived near the Edgewood Plaza for 42 years. I have
followed the development there quite closely in the last 10 years. I feel that Sand Hill Properties has
repeatedly not acted in the best interest of our neighborhood.
On Monday, August 12, the Council will discuss its appeal of a 2017 court ruling saying
there needn't be an operating grocery store at the shopping center. Please file a strong
appeal and do not negotiate away requiring an operating grocery store.
I have lived here when we have had grocery stores and when we have had none. The
closest grocery stores are a couple of miles away, and we residents had to use a lot of fuel
to shop at them. Now I see people walking by my house all day long to go to The
Market. Having walkable shopping is an important part of our city's sustainability plans.
I understand that running a grocery store is difficult and profit margins are slim, and
without a requirement from the city that there be an operating grocery, it may be too easy
for owners or developers to say that having one just does not "pencil out," and we will be
back to needing to drive to get our groceries
I was fully in favor of imposing fines on San Hill Properties when the grocery store space
sat vacant after The Fresh Market closed. I believe the city has a strong case to collect
those $1..6 million in penalties, and can put them to good use. The City allowed Sand Hill to rebuild
the shopping center with a much smaller parking lot and add approximately $30 million in 10
housing units. In exchange, Sand Hill agreed to provide a handful of public benefits, a major one
being providing a "viable grocery store," in its own words. A vacant store is not a viable one.
I ask you to file an appeal and stand tough on the "viable grocery store" requirement,
Patricia Kinney
Wildwood Lane and Santa Catalina St
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Alexander Starikov <alstarikov@gmail.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 4:26 PM
To:Council, City; isabella starikov; Sydney Chen; David Hu; Dave Liu/Multibeam; Alexander Starikov;
Debby Martin; Tom Martin; elizabeth@elizabethbaum.com; Heidi Baum
Subject:The Market at Edgewood
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Council Members:
Some of my neighbor are circulating an alarming petition, something to suggest that you are about to reverse the flow
of events that had, finally, brought The Market to Edgewood Plaza. While the very notion seems absurd ‐ you/we
wanted a grocery market there, you even penalized the developer earlier for failing to deliver this public benefit
‐ stranger things happened...
My message: I want The Market at Edgewood to stay, serving my neighborhood, indefinitely.
Regards, Alexander
Starikov
{REDACTED}
Palo Alto, CA 94303
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:amsbaugh@gmail.com
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 4:35 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Please appeal the decision removing the requirement for grocery in Edgewood plaza
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
I am a neighbor to Edgewood plaza, living in the Edgewood/Duvenick/Channing neighborhood. I am a
member of the CCR governing the use of Edgewood plaza. I only agreed to the building of homes on the basis
that Sand Hill committed to having a commercial space for a grocery store in their development plan.
I ask that you support your constituents and protect our interests. A grocery is an absolute necessary anchor
tenant that makes the shopping center work. Without it, we will lose other businesses.
Don Amsbaugh
Edgewood neighbor
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Art Bodin <ambodin@hotmail.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 4:54 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:The Market at Edgewood
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Dear CVity Council Members,
Please make sure to keep The Market at Edgewood in a way that
cannot be reversed. It is prized by the nearby neighborhoods and
any actions intended to reneg on what was promised will be
remembered at election time.
Please keep what was promised.
Arthur and Miriam Bodin
{REDACTED}
PaLo Alto, CA 94301
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Deborah S Rose M.D. <drdsrose@stanford.edu>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 4:57 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:The market at Edgewood
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on
links.
________________________________
More and more people are loving the market at Edgewood. It is already a declared winner when it comes to the quality
of its produce. It’s offering more and more unique services for the community. It has a very mixed diverse population of
customers. It is very responsive to our requests.
Please do everything in your power to make sure it continues to be with us.
Deborah Rose MD
Sent from my iPhone
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Peter Forgie <pforgie@gmail.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 4:59 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Edgewood Market
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Council members: I am a resident of Crescent Park, and have been relying on the Edgewood Market for my groceries
since it opened. The owners are great, and very community‐oriented. The location is ideal for us, and our neighbors, and
the store is extremely well run. From the descriptions that I've read of the Superior Court ruling regarding the necessity
of having a market in that center, the ruling appears to be erroneous. Please do whatever is necessary to have that
ruling reversed on appeal, or at the very least, negotiate with the developer for a reduction of the penalty, and a
commitment by the developer to continue to operate a market, particularly the Edgewood Market, in that space. Thank
you, Peter Forgie ({REDACTED}, Palo Alto, Ca. 94301)
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Becky Brewer <b.brewha@gmail.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 5:01 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:The Market
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Please make sure that our grocery store (The Market) is protected. This Market at The Edgewood Plaza is a huge asset
to our neighborhood and should be supported at all costs, including being subsidized if necessary. All of the neighbors
are so grateful and depend on it staying. Thank you. Becky Brewer
{REDACTED}
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Urban Cummings & Christine Clark Cummings <furryfeet@mindspring.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 5:07 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:The Market
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Just wanted you to know that we use The Market at Edgewood Plaza at least once a week. It is a great grocery
store and convenient to where we live. Their produce section (especially organic) is wonderful. The people are
very friendly and helpful.
Please be sure to do all you can to keep this grocery store there.
Thank you.
Chris Clark
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Joseph Keenan <keenanca1@yahoo.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 5:07 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:The Market at Edgewood
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Please vote to insist that The Market at the Edgewood Plaza remain secure in their
operation. This store is a part of the Cresent Park community. I miss the old Lucky
store which provided essential items. When The Fresh Market opened, after many empty
years, I immediately sensed that they were not going to make it. The current owners of
The Market at Edgewood understand the neighborhood and they offer a wonderful
diversity of items, at a fair price, in that small space. No other grocery store is
interested in the small size, and the current owners seem to know how to make the
business a success for them and the community. Please protect and encourage this
operation.
Sincerely,
Joe and Carolina Keenan at {REDACTED}
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:dawilliams@hevanet.com
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 5:11 PM
To:Council, City
Cc:jllaminette@apr.com
Subject:Protect the Edgewood Grocery Store
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Dear City Council
We are writing to ensure you continue to require an operating grocery store at Edgewood Plaza.
On Monday, August 12, I understand that the Council will discuss its appeal of a 2017 court ruling saying there needn't be
an operating grocery store at the shopping center. I urge you to file a strong appeal and under no circumstances
negotiate away requiring an operating grocery store at Edgewood plaza.
The Market at Edgewood is popular and we shop there almost daily. It won the "Best of 2019" award from Palo Alto
Weekly readers, both as a grocery store and for its produce section (see
https://www.paloaltoonline.com/best_of/2019/food-and-drink.php) and NextDoor participants across 15 neighborhoods
named it as Neighborhood Favorite (see https://nextdoor.com/pages/the-market-at-edgewood-palo-alto-ca/). But even
popular stores face financial challenges in these times and owner-run, community-oriented grocery stores are always
particularly vulnerable. To ensure a grocery remains at Edgewood Plaza, the Council must use the very best legal
experts and file a forceful appeal.
Overturning the 2017 ruling will allow the city to collect approximately $1.6 million in penalties that Sand Hill Properties,
the shopping center developer, owes it for when the grocery store space was vacant. Although Sand Hill lost the first
round before an independent administrative hearing official, it won in superior court, where a judge undid the requirement
that any grocery store actually be "provided," saying in effect that a vacant building is a meaningful public benefit. This
makes no sense and could well encourage more developer misbehavior. The analysis of the many errors in the ruling can
be found on page 30 of http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?BlobID=62862.
If the Council decides not to pursue the appeal further, not only will the city lose $1.6 million in penalties but we may find
ourselves down the road with no grocery store as well. We therefore insist that the council file the strongest appeal
possible in this case.
Sincerely,
Deborah A Williams
Jean Luc Laminette
{REDACTED}
Palo Alto, CA 94303
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Ellen Smith <ef44smith@gmail.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 5:28 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:The Market at Edgewood
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Dear Members of the Palo Alto City Council:
I urge you to continue the appeal of the 2017 ruling that would remove the
requirement for a functioning grocery store at Edgewood Plaza. Not only
would this forfeit a possible $1.6 million in penalties, but it would go
against the strong efforts and wishes of the neighborhood to have a local
grocery store. Further, it would undercut the city's ability to require public
benefits for future developments if the developers know they can get away
with ignoring them.
Ellen Smith
{REDACTED}
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Stuart Koretz <stukoretz@comcast.net>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 5:37 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:August 12 Council discussion/ The Market at Edgewood
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on
links.
________________________________
Dear Council members,
As a 40‐year resident of Palo Alto I am writing in support of the Council’s appeal of the 2017 court ruling saying that
there need not be an operating grocery store at the Edgewood shopping center. My understanding is that that ruling
contained many errors, and if a strong case can be presented there is some hope that the ruling could be overturned,
resulting in the long‐term presence of a grocery at the shopping center. It is also my understanding that overturning the
ruling could enable the City to collect $1.6 M owed to the City by Sand Hill Properties as a result of the long period of
vacancy of the grocery store site between the prior and present occupants. Needless to say, we are very enthusiastic
about the fact that we now have a convenient, not to mention very high quality, grocery store in Edgewood shopping
center. The store is a major asset to the community, and we hope that the Council will use the best possible attorneys
in order file the strongest possible appeal.
Stuart Koretz
{REDACTED}
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Suepprgm <sueppr@gmail.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 5:38 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Save Edgewood Market!!
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Please file a strong appeal and under no circumstances negotiate away requiring an operating grocery
store. It won the "Best of 2019" award from Palo Alto Weekly readers, both as a grocery store and for its produce
section. It is an owner run business and employees people from our area. It is really important to our community!!
Please protect it!
Thank you!
Sue
Sue Purdy ☮ Pelosi
LinkedIn
650-814-7563
Be kind whenever possible. It is always possible.
Dalai Lama
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Amy Kacher <amyewardwell@yahoo.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 5:59 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Edgewood Plaza Market
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 ask that you stand firm and required Edgewood Market owners to legally have a grocery store in the site.
We really need this valuable community resource.
Thank you
Amy
Sent from my iPhone
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Kurt Taylor <kht2002@gmail.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 6:05 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Edgewood Market
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Council Members:
I am a long time Palo Alto resident and I write to voice my unequivocal support for the Market at Edgewood and my
utter disgust with the dishonest, slimey and disreputable Sand Hill Properties. The Market has revitalized the entire
Edgewood complex and is fantastic family run operation. Exactly the sort of entity that deserves the support of Palo
Alto's community and city council. Sand Hill Properties are, on the other hand, a blight on the landscape and deserve to
be sued into the ground in the most vigorous scorched earth litigation possible. They should be fined and hit with
attorneys' fees and costs and I strongly encourage the City to use all its power to force Sand Hill's unconditional
surrender.
The Market at Edgewood is the best grocer in town, and is a joy to support. I hope that the City Council feels the same
way.
Kurt H. Taylor
{REDACTED}
Palo Alto, CA 94303
‐‐
"It has taken me all my life to learn what not to play."
‐‐ Dizzy Gillespie
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Hap Heer <hapheer@gmail.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 6:11 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Market Grocery Store
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on
links.
________________________________
Hello Council Members,
I live in Palo Alto and love the Market grocery store. It’s an asset for our neighborhood and I would hope you will do
everything in your power to make sure it stays. Trader Joe’s and Whole food parking is very congested and Market
grocery store allows me to safely shop with my kids. Please do not let the developer go back on his words, we need a
grocery store there!!!!
Crescent Park Neighbor
Sent from my iPhone
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Debby Ruskin <debby@ruskingardens.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 6:11 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Our MARKET
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on
links.
________________________________
Without going into my disappointment about the politics of the Edgewood Plaza development, I am writing you
members of the Palo Alto City Council to please do what you can to preserve The Market at Edgewood Plaza.
The years without a grocery store were difficult. With the traffic getting worse daily, driving to Trader Joe’s, Whole
Foods and Safeway especially in the afternoon is a nightmare!
Please preserve our local grocery store, a large contributor to our quality of life which has been slipping away in recent
years. We love the store and it’s helpful impact on our lives.
Debby Ruskin, Palo Alto resident since 1979.
{REDACTED}
Palo Alto
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Bobbi Fox <bobbifox@pobox.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 6:14 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Edgewood Shopping store
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on
links.
________________________________
Please do not do anything but support this store in Any Way
Roberta Fox
Sent from my iPad
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Robert Millavec <robertmillavec@gmail.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 6:15 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Edgewood Grocery
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Please please do all that is necessary to assure that a grocery is maintained as per the original agreement with those
who redeveloped the center. They were given the right to add housing by which they enjoyed considerable monetary
benefit and need to honor their commitments to assure a grocery remains, The current grocery is such a wonderful
positive addition to the neighborhood and the entire city!!!!
Thank you
Robert Millavec {REDACTED}
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:dickdworak@att.net
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 6:44 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Edgewood Frocery Store
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on
links.
________________________________
I believe strongly (as in voting for supporters) that a robust grocery store need be there
Dick Dworak, {REDACTED}
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Steven Hobbs <stevenashleyhobbs@gmail.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 6:48 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Market at Edgewood
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Please continue the subsidy of the Market, which will allow the city to collect 1.6 million from Sand Hill Properties,
sustain a vital and much enjoyed public benefit of an award winning grocery store.
Thank you
Sent from Mail for Windows 10
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Victor Zilinskas <vzilinskas@sbcglobal.net>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 6:50 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:City of Palo Alto Must Keep "The Market at Edgewood", the grocery store at Edgewood Plaza
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Dear Sirs
The Market at Edgewood, the grocery store at Edgewood Plaza is a very important part of our Palo
Alto neighborhood. We had waited for years as the land sat vacant. Now, it is my understanding that
the original development agreement may be changed to no longer require a grocery at that
location. The grocery store just received 1st Place Awards for a Grocery Store in the Palo Alto
Weekly Contest. There are three adult voting members in our household that will be very upset if the
city does not keep The Market at Edgewood.
Thank you in advance for your consideration in keeping The Market in full operation for many years to
come.
Sincerely,
Victor J. Zilinskas
{REDACTED}
Palo Alto, CA 94303
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Lorraine Menuz <lmenuz@yahoo.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 6:59 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Edgewood plaza
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on
links.
________________________________
I urge you to keep your promise to the residents around Edgewood Plaza and keep the grocery store. I will remember
those council members that made promises then reneged on those promises come election time.
Sincerely,
Lorraine Menuz
Sent from my iPhone
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Susan Craft <susancrafty316@gmail.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 7:01 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Please protect the Market at Edgewood
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 to request that you file an appeal to the 2017 court ruling saying there needn't be an operating grocery
store at the Edgewood shopping center.
The Market at Edgewood is an excellent store and of great benefit to our community.
Thank you for reading my letter and taking care of our community.
Susan Craft
{REDACTED}
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Sandra Robles <sjrobles@gmail.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 7:02 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:PROTECT the Edgewood Market Grocery Store please
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Please protect the edgewood market grocery store!
Please file a strong appeal and under no circumstances negotiate away requiring an operating grocery store.
We need this store!
‐‐
Sandra Robles
+1 650 704 8452 (mobile)
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Michael Callahan <mjcmirr@gmail.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 7:26 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:appeal regarding supermarket requirement at Edgewood Plaza
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Dear Council Members,
I'm writing in support of the Market at Edgewood in the recently‐redeveloped Edgewood Plaza.
I understand the council is considering its appeal of the regrettable court decision that would allow the Edgewood Plaza
developer to renege on the commitment to provide a grocery store in the complex. I hope the council will pursue this
appeal to the greatest possible extent. The Market at Edgewood has been a great resource for the community (and a
strong supporter of local groups and events), and the period before it opened the entire complex suffered acutely from
the lack of an anchor tenant and was, in my view, a blight on the community as opposed to the valuable and cherished
complex it has become.
I know we and a number of our neighbors would be very dismayed to lose the Market and hope you will insist that the
developer honor the original commitment to the city and our neighborhoods.
Thanks,
Michael
Michael Callahan
{REDACTED}
cell 917‐445‐4585
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Margaret Feuer <portulaca24@gmail.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 7:36 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:The Market at Edgewood
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Dear Mayor and Council Members,
The Market is a valuable community asset. Please file a strong appeal which does not
negotiate away an operating grocery store. Overturning the 2017 ruling will not only
benefits the residents but also enables the City to collect approximately $1.6 million
in penalties owed by Sand Hill Properties.
Thank you,
Margaret and Michael Feuer
{REDACTED}
P.A., 94301
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Ellen Turbow <emturbow@sbcglobal.net>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 7:37 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:The Market at Edgewood
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on
links.
________________________________
Dear Council Members,
I urge you to use all means at your disposal to appeal the superior court ruling regarding retention of a market at
Edgewood Plaza. Our community has benefited mightily from the presence of the Market at Edgewood. If a vacancy
again occurred we would lose what has become a true community asset.
Please exert all effort to overturn this unfair ruling.
Thank you,
Ellen Turbow
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Lina Crane <lina.crane@gmail.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 8:07 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:edgewood plaza groceery
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Please retain this wonderful grocery store as a public benefit.
‐‐ lina crane
*LFC from lina*
*
*
*
*
*
*
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:ronricorh@aol.com
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 8:23 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Edgewood Grocery
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
I just heard that you are hearing about the possible future of the Market at Edgewood Plaza. I cannot believe after turning
down Albertsons request to expand, and subsequently allowing a developer to use half the parking for private housing,
that you are not following through with a requirement for a grocery store at Edgewood.
Please file a strong appeal and under no circumstances negotiate away
requiring an operating grocery store.
This is a public benefit and necessary part of the fabric of our community.
Ron Hall
{REDACTED}
Palo Alto, Ca.94301
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:jon richards <jcrccr2120@yahoo.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 8:23 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Appeal Edgewood Grocery Ruling
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
I am writing to urge you to appeal the negating of the contract with Sand Hill Properties. The
neighborhood benefits tremendously by having a grocery at Edgewood Plaza. The developers went
into this project with open eyes. I see no reason to allow the agreement to be voided.
Jon Richards
{REDACTED}
Palo Alto
322-5758
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Andrew Yeh <andrewkayyeh@gmail.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 8:28 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Protect The Market at Edgewood
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Hi,
I am a Palo Alto resident who frequents The Market at Edgewood grocery store in the Edgewood Plaza. I recently
became aware that the city council is considering appealing a 2017 court ruling saying that may put The Market at
Edgewood at risk. As a resident and community member, having a nearby, high quality, owner‐run grocery store is
invaluable.
Please protect The Market at Edgewood.
Thanks,
Andrew
‐‐
Andrew Yeh
Mobile: 510.566.1003
Email: andrewkayyeh@gmail.com
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Natalie Zahr <natalie.m.zahr@gmail.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 9:02 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Edgewood Plaza grocery store
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
We need a grocery store at Edgewood plaza.
As a single professional Mom, I cannot bear the idea of having to drive to the closest Safeway, at
least a 15min drive away, every time I need a grocery item.
We had a grocery in the neighborhood when I first purchased my condo in 2013 at 1982 West
Bayshore. When my son was born in late 2015, I had no choice but to make the trek to Safeway
because that grocery had closed down.
Children do not get easier with age. In many ways, my 3.5 year old is more demanding than he was
as an infant.
It's been a relief to have the Market at such close proximity. Please protect this asset for me and
other families in the neighborhood.
Sincerely,
Natalie Zahr, PhD
Director of Translational Imaging
SRI International
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Siu and Al Chang <fivechangs@gmail.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 9:09 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Please Protect the Edgewood Market
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Dear Palo Alto City Council,
As a homeowner in the Duveneck/St. Francis neighborhood, I implore you to please under no circumstances negotiate
away the requirement of an operating grocery store in the Edgewood shopping center. Please file a strong appeal of the
2017 court ruling that says there needn't be an operating grocery store at the shopping center. The Edgewood
Market provides us with local foods and produce served by a thoughtful caring staff. It is a win/win for our
community. After all the hard work by those involved in to bringing this grocer to our neighborhood, please do
not let this gem get away. By overturning the 2017 ruling, the City can collect the approximately $1.6 million in
penalties that Sand Hill Properties owes it for when the grocery store space was vacant.
Respectfully,
Siu Chang
{REDACTED}
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:katie cho <katiecho@hotmail.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 9:21 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:grocery store
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Dear City Council, We waited years for a grocery store where Lucky's used to be on Embarcadero. I wasted a
lot of gas driving to stores I don't like just because there was nothing near my house. Now we finally have the
Market on Edgewood and I love it. Not only is it a great market, within walking distance, but it is also a
community asset. I seldom shop there without meeting friends who also love it.
I understand that Sand Hill is trying to get out of their agreement to have a grocery store there. Way too easy
to back out after they've received all their concessions, like a smaller parking lot, and houses to sell. Please,
please make sure to bind them to the agreement. We have too much to lose!
Katie Cho
{REDACTED}, Palo Alto 94301
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Albert C Fremont <lynnandal@gmail.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 9:26 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Market at Edgewood
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on
links.
________________________________
This Market is extremely popular and is a real asset to the community I urge you to ensure that it continues to provide a
very useful and welcome service to all of us in Palo Alto
Sent from my iPad
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Michelle Azout <michazout@gmail.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 9:35 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:The Market at Edgewood market
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
We insist you file a strong appeal and under no circumstances negotiate away requiring an operating
grocery store.
Please make sure The Market does not go away.
Michelle and Albert Azout
Residents of Palo Alto
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Elizabeth Fraze <bethfrz@gmail.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 9:37 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Edgewood market
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on
links.
________________________________
On August 12th, everyone will be watching you. Please protect Edgewood market. It is one of the things that makes Palo
Alto special. Please fight for it. Elizabeth Fraze,
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:lois shore <loisshore@yahoo.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 9:37 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:The Market
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
City Council please protect The Market at Edgewood, We very much need the grocery store at Edgewood Plaza in our
neighborhood.
Thank you,
Lois Shore
{REDACTED}
Palo Alto
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Jason Oliger <jason.oliger@gmail.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 9:38 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Grocery store at Edgewood
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on
links.
________________________________
Dear City Council,
I’ll keep this short. Our community benefits greatly from “The Market” grocery store. They’ve done an absolutely
fabulous job serving the underserved northeast corridor of Palo Alto, and it’s an invaluable resource for thousands of
residents in that corridor. This is also a commitment the developers made to the community (when they were seeking
top‐dollar revenue on their then‐nascent properties).
This is frankly a no‐brainer, and, I believe, part of your job description.
I appeal to you to please fight for us — your constituents and your neighbors.
Thank you,
Jason Oliger
415‐819‐1822
Sent from my iPhone
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:David Hu <davewho01@yahoo.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 9:42 PM
To:Council, City
Cc:isabella starikov; Alexander Starikov; Alexander Starikov
Subject:Re: The Market at Edgewood
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Dear Council Members:
I cannot think of any rational reason to close down the Market. It has been a huge benefit for the nearby neighborhood,
bringing vitality and energy to the community.
Indeed I agree that this petition is, if true, the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard.
Best regards,
David Hu
On Wednesday, August 7, 2019, 04:26:14 PM PDT, Alexander Starikov <alstarikov@gmail.com> wrote:
Council Members:
Some of my neighbor are circulating an alarming petition, something to suggest that you are about to reverse the flow of
events that had, finally, brought The Market to Edgewood Plaza. While the very notion seems absurd - you/we wanted a
grocery market there, you even penalized the developer earlier for failing to deliver this public benefit - stranger things
happened...
My message: I want The Market at Edgewood to stay, serving my neighborhood, indefinitely.
Regards, Alexander
Starikov
{REDACTED}
Palo Alto, CA 94303
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:michael young <mikeyoung83@gmail.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 9:43 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:please keep the market @ edgewood around
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Hello,
I insist that you please file a strong appeal and under no circumstances negotiate away requiring an operating grocery
store. My family visits the market roughly once a week. We enjoy taking a walk there. Staff is friendly and the items are
fairly priced.
Thanks
Michael Young
{REDACTED}
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Sarah French <frenchelmore@yahoo.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 9:47 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Market
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on
links.
________________________________
Please keep the Market at Edgewood open.
Sarah french
{REDACTED}
Palo Alto 94393
650.814.0753
Sent from my iPad
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Surajit Bose <psurajit@aim.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 9:59 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Edgewood Plaza
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on
links.
________________________________
Good evening,
I am writing to urge the council to appeal the 2017 ruling that there need not be a grocery store at Edgewood Plaza. The
ruling is absurd and ignores the plain meaning of the agreement between the developer and the City. If the developer is
allowed to keep a storefront vacant instead of finding an operating grocer to occupy that storefront, it inconveniences
residents, depresses property values, and undermines the spirit of the original agreement.
Thank you,
Surajit
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:ted mill <tm11842@gmail.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 10:02 PM
To:Council, City
Cc:Ted Mill
Subject:The Market at Embacadero
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Council Members
Like so many other Palo Altans, I urge you to defend the need of the market for the shppping center at
Embacadero against the court ruling quashing the requirement for a market there. For the many , many Palo
Altans living in North PA particularly the presence of this store serves a needed source of so many grocery and
fresh produce item not available at the Safeways, the Whole Food or Trader Joes.
We have been subjected to altogether too much mishandling of this market property to now risk losing the
present market.
All of the supporters expect you, as council members, to engage a strong legal team to put and end to this
nonsense once and for all
Sincerely
Theodore Mill
1430 Arcadia Pl
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Ann DeHovitz <rossde@aol.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 10:02 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Edgewood Plaza Grocery Store
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 with deep concern about the possibility of losing The Market at Edgewood. The store has become a
tremendous asset for everyone in the area. Our neighborhood was impacted by Sand Hill's development of housing next
to the Edgewood Plaza and getting a viable grocery story in the plaza was an important mitigating factor to that impact.
We are counting on you to file a strong appeal, hold your ground on this issue and under no circumstances negotiate
away requiring an operating grocery store remain in the plaza. Thank you for your support on this and for all you do for
the city of Palo Alto.
Sincerely,
Ann DeHovitz, {REDACTED}
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Anne Email <amcg55@yahoo.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 10:08 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Please file a strong appeal and under no circumstances negotiate away requiring an operating
grocery store at Edgewood plaza.
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on
links.
________________________________
The grocery store at Edgewood is a valuable part of our neighborhood.
Anne McGee
{REDACTED}
Palo Alto 94301.
Sent from my iPad
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:CHRISTINE MEYER <cjm101@me.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 10:17 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:The Market at Edgewood
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on
links.
________________________________
Dear City Council members,
Our family loves this Market! It adds vitality to the area, anchors the shopping center, brings people together and serves
as a very important resource in our community.
Unlike the last store, this one always seems to be bustling with people. The owners are extremely kind and responsive to
things we want to see in the store.
Please do whatever it takes to keep this as a permanent store in this space, in our neighborhood. Having a safe place
that attracts families, including our teens who like to hang out there, is so valuable.
To take it away after we waited so long for a grocery store would be cruel.
Thank you,
Christine Meyer
Palo Alto resident
Sent from my iPhone
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Chang, Peggy <hi.peggy@gmail.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 10:19 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:keep grocery at Edgewood Plaza
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Dear City Council,
The Market at Edgewood has been a wonderful addition to our Palo Alto neighborhood. We regularly walk over to buy
fresh fruit, produce, meat and bread. The quality is as good as a farmer's market, but with the convenience of being
open 7 days a week.
Please keep the requirement of having a local grocery store at Edgewood Plaza. It encourages heathy eating and is less
expensive than going to fast food or restaurants.
A grocery store is useful to everyone in the community and we don't want to see it go.
Thank you for supporting The Market at Edgewood.
Peggy Chang
{REDACTED}, Palo Alto, CA
94303
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Katherine Wolf <katlatimerwolf@gmail.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 10:24 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Edgewood Grocery Store
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Please file a strong appeal to the court ruling not requiring a grocery store at Edgewood Plaza, and under no
circumstances negotiate away requiring an operating grocery store.
Having a neighborhood grocery store really cuts down on traffic and it is a clean store with healthy food choices. I also
feel it benefits the other tenants of the plaza in that the grocery store draws people into the plaza and makes them
aware of the other vendors located there. It has boosted the feeling of community and reduced the frustration of
fighting traffic when you just need a few essentials.
Thank you for serving our city!
Sincerely,
Katherine Wolf
‐‐
Kat Latimer Wolf
Executive Coach & Strategy Consultant
Katalyst Coaching and Consulting
katlatimerwolf.com
(650) 207-3743
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Sarabeth Marinelli <sam@marinelli.org>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 10:35 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Fight for our right to maintain our public benefit Market at Edgewood
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Dear City Council Members,
I strenuously urge you to mount the strongest appeal effort possible to help our neighborhood retain our local Market at
Edgewood. Interpreting a viable grocery store as one that is not in operation is nonsense and a dishonest interpretation
of plain language.
The Sand Hill developer treated the project disrespectfully from the outset, not only bulldozed the existing, protected
structure but by profiting handsomely by gaining the approval to develop many housing units while diminishing the size
of the market (which made it an unattractive space for most grocers) and lowering the entire center’s parking capacity.
It was years before another grocer was willing to set up business there. I don’t imagine any of the nearby neighbors
appreciate having to accommodate shoppers parking in front of their homes because San Hill negotiated a lopsided
contract.
Entities like Sand Hill Properties should not be rewarded for dishonest arguments and disregard for local
communities. Legal remedies such as penalties and fines should be available to the City of Palo Alto and recouped
rather than abandoned. Sadly we need “sticks” like penalties to keep companies acting as Sand Hill has and simply
taking advantage of our city and residents.
I feel it is completely inadvisable to cede any more benefits to this developer at Edgewood Center or elsewhere in the
city. I walk by the partially rebuilt firehouse station at Newell Road and Embarcadero regularly and lament it’s lack of
progress. Don’t let Sand Hill turn into a debacle like the Mitchell Park Library or the firehouse. Stand up for our
neighborhoods with a forceful appeal with no further giveaways to Sand Hill.
Thank you,
Sarabeth Marinelli
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Carla Carvalho <ccarvalho98@hotmail.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 10:44 PM
To:Council, City; Carla Carvalho
Subject:Edgewood Market
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on
links.
________________________________
Hello City Council Members,
It is hard to believe that it has been nearly 3 years since most of you (Kniss, Kou, Tanaka, Fine) met with residents from
the Crescent Park/Duveneck neighborhood in my backyard as we discussed your candidate positions on the Edgewood
market.
We thought that the opening of a nice market, such as one that is in place now, would end the flare between Sand Hill
Properties and the City of Palo Alto. But alas, Sand Hill decided to sue instead of simply paying the fines implemented by
Council for non‐compliance with the PC.
I believe that the City must use ALL necessary resources to fight for the $1.6 million in fines owed by Sand Hill for
violation of the terms of the PC.
While we are hopeful that the Market at Edgewood is enjoying the success that it deserves, we neighbors will not rest
until we are certain that the City has done its utmost in litigating the case with Sand Hill. The opening of the market does
NOT excuse Sand Hill from prior (and potentially future ) corporate misdeeds, and nor does it preclude the City of Palo
Alto from fighting for what is right for its constituents. We NEED a market at Edgewood. The PC that was crafted
between the City and the developer sought to provide that resource.
We have informed several thousand local neighbors of this situation. We are hopeful that the $1.6mil of fines in
question will be aggressively pursued by a panel of experts appointed by the City.
Sincerely,
Carla M. Carvalho
Edgewood Drive
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Sue Dinwiddie <sued@daise.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 11:13 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:RE: The Market at Edgewood Plaza
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Honorable City Council Members:
We are shocked to learn that our wonderful Market at Edgewood Plaza could be threatened with closure. Our
neighborhood was guaranteed a market as a public resource under the agreement to let Sand Hill
Properties develop the site with single family housing and a smaller parking lot. As you may remember, we had
been without a market for a number of years. Then we were again without a market for a couple of years after
Fresh Market closed. We were overjoyed when The Market at Edgewood opened. It has proved to be even
better than we had hoped. The market won Best Market of the Year in Palo Alto Weekly “Best Of 2019” both
as a grocery store and for its produce and NextDoor participants across 15 neighborhoods named it as
Neighborhood Favorite. Not only would we personally be devastated to lose our market, but it would be a huge
loss not only for the neighborhood but for the entire city of Palo Alto.
We urge you to use the very best legal experts to file a forceful appeal. It is a farce for a judge to contend that
a “vacant building is a meaningful public benefit”. Palo Alto should also collect the approximately $1.6 million
in penalties owed by Sand Hill Properties for the time the grocery store space was empty. It is not right that
they not live up to that obligation.
Please do not give in to the injustice of the appeal, but fight for us to keep our market and not be bulldozed
by developers.
Sincerely,
Sue and Ken Dinwiddie
{REDACTED}
Palo Alto, CA 94303
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Clarissa Shen <clarissa.shen@gmail.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 11:23 PM
To:Council, City; James
Subject:Protect the Edgewood Grocery Store
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Dear City Council,
We write to ask you to protect the public benefit of having the Market at Edgewood and to require a viable grocery
store to anchor Edgewood Plaza. The grocery store not only anchors the plaza but also our community and has brought
new life back to what was once an abandoned corner of our neighborhood.
Please file a strong appeal and under no circumstances negotiate away requiring an operating grocery store in this
location.
Thank you.
‐ Clarissa Shen & James Lin ({REDACTED}residents)
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Patricia Jones <pkjones1000@icloud.com>
Sent:Wednesday, August 7, 2019 11:54 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Edgewood Market
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
I am writing to urge you to file a strong appeal and under no circumstances negotiate away requiring an operating
grocery store where the Edgewood Market currently stands.
Thank you.
Patricia Jones {REDACTED}
Palo Alto, CA 94301
www.pkjones.com
pkjones1000@icloud.com
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Paarth Sharma <paarth.r.sharma@gmail.com>
Sent:Thursday, August 8, 2019 12:35 AM
To:Council, City
Subject:Keep Edgewood Market
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Hi guys,
As a resident of the Edgewood neighborhood, I speak for us all when I ask that you please file a strong appeal to keep
the need of an operating grocery store at Edgewood Plaza and do not negotiate away the requirement of a grocery store
in Edgewood plaza.
Many of use rely on Edgewood plaza not only for our groceries, but also as a community public space, and the removal
of a grocery store would dramatically reduce traffic to the area and negatively impact our community. Having The
Market at Edgewood has brought our neighborhood together and brought more people to the area.
Thanks!
Paarth
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Jeannie Duisenberg <jeannieduis@gmail.com>
Sent:Thursday, August 8, 2019 12:39 AM
To:Council, City
Cc:Richard Hlava
Subject:Edgewood Plaza Grocery
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on
links.
________________________________
Dear City Council,
We are writing to urge your protection of the original agreement with developers to include a public benefit of a grocery
store in exchange for development concessions at Edgewood Plaza.
Re the Superior Court judgment, we strongly disagree that an empty building can be considered a public benefit.
Already public confidence in City/Developer agreements is shaky viz a viz “public benefits” as they have played out in the
past.
It is essential for the city to defend the original Edgewood agreement for both citizen confidence and for the public
good.
We hope we can trust the Council to mount a vigorous campaign to protect this property for a grocery store in
perpetuity—which is a true public benefit.
Thank you very much.
Sincerely,
Jeannie Duisenberg & Rich Hlava
{REDACTED}
Palo Alto
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Cindy Watten <cwatten@gmail.com>
Sent:Thursday, August 8, 2019 5:14 AM
To:Council, City
Subject:The Market at Edgewood
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Palo Alto City Council:
It has come to my attention that on August 12th, you will be discussing a 2017 court ruling that there need not be an
"operating" grocery store at this shopping center. PLEASE MAKE SURE THAT THIS DOES NOT HAPPEN TO OUR
NEIGHBORHOOD. We need a small grocery store in that location to keep our neighborhood family friendly. Developers
will win, not us homeowners. The city of Palo Alto will also loose over a million dollars in fines that have been imposed
on the developer who did not follow the guidelines set forth in the original negations.
The Market at Edgewood is a family run business, serving a family neighborhood. Please help us keep it this way, Please
insist that they keep an operating grocery store at Edgewood Plaza.
Thank you for your help,
Cindy Watten
{REDACTED}
‐‐
Cindy Watten
650.400.5149 cell
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Rhoda Nutik <rhoda.nutik@gmail.com>
Sent:Thursday, August 8, 2019 5:53 AM
To:Council, City
Subject:edgewood plaza grocery
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
PLease file a strong appeal and under no circumstances negotiate away requiring an operating
grocery store. at the Edgewood Plaza. This is an invaluable resource for the neighbourhood, and we
want and need it there. A promise was made years ago by Sand Hill, and we the citizens of Palo Alto
gave them much in return for the promise of this store. Rhoda Nutik
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Anita Krishnakumar <anita.psg@gmail.com>
Sent:Thursday, August 8, 2019 6:19 AM
To:Council, City
Subject:Regarding The Market at Edgewood
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
We live in Crescent Park, and love the grocery store and are regular customers at The Market.
Please file a strong appeal and under no circumstances negotiate away requiring an operating grocery
store at the Edgewood Plaza.
Thank you,
Anita.
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:The Lyons Family <lyonsfamily@ymail.com>
Sent:Thursday, August 8, 2019 6:55 AM
To:Council, City
Subject:Protect the Edgewood Grocery Store
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Hi,
I am a resident of Crescent Park and love the community center we have at Edgewood Plaza: The Market,
Starbucks, House of Bagels, etc. I go there almost every day and love seeing neighbors and having a local
grocer that I feel connected to. Please recognize the value that this brings to our community. Please ensure
that we support and keep The Market in our community. Please do whatever you can to save it for all of us.
Thank you,
Mimi Lyons
Crescent Park
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Judy Rattner <judyrattner@gmail.com>
Sent:Thursday, August 8, 2019 6:33 AM
To:Council, City
Subject:Keep regulation for grocery store
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on
links.
________________________________
Dear city council members,
Please keep requirement for a grocery store at the Edgewood shopping plaza. This is an asset for the neighborhood and
encourages people in the neighborhood to use self powered commuting to get there. We were without a grocery store
for many years in this neighborhood. The landlord has already taken advantage in many respects including tearing down
the shopping center historic buildings that were previously there and not being prompt in fulfillment of their obligation
to have a grocery store there in the first place. Moreover, they did not plan well for exit into and out of the center and
adequate parking.
Please do not take away this requirement as they took advantage of this neighborhood in other ways and should be held
accountable in this important respect and going forward in the future to encourage ecologically sound practices of
driving less to get to stores and enhancing our neighborhood and community by having these resources close by.
Please visit the center and see how it is thriving.
Thank you for your time and attention to this matter and for being the voice of your citizens. We count on you to have
our best interest in mind and action.
Judy Rattner
{REDACTED}
Sent from my iPhone
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Bonnie Street <bonniestreet@sbcglobal.net>
Sent:Thursday, August 8, 2019 7:51 AM
To:Council, City
Subject:The Market at Edgewood
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on
links.
________________________________
Dear City Council,
Please, under no circumstances negotiate away requiring an operating grocery store at the Edgewood Plaza.
This grocery store is a tremendous asset to our neighborhood.
Sincerely,
Bonnie Street
{REDACTED}
Sent from my iPhone
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:whabbott1@aol.com
Sent:Thursday, August 8, 2019 8:24 AM
To:Council, City
Subject:Edgewood Plaza
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Dear Council Members,
Please file a strong appeal of the 2017 court ruling saying that a grocery store is not necessary.
We strongly believe that a grocery store is needed for the Palo Alto community and at the Edgewood Plaza.
The current store is excellent and we are very pleased that they are there!! We would appreciate your
review to strongly support the requirement for a grocery store.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Bill Abbott
Louisa Ct.
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Susan Dennis <susanmdennis@me.com>
Sent:Thursday, August 8, 2019 8:25 AM
To:Council, City
Subject:Edgewood Market
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on
links.
________________________________
Dear City Council, A key provision of approving the development at Edgewood Plaza was the requirement there be a
grocery store. The shopping center owners accepted this requirement and it should not be eliminated now because it
doesn't “pencil out” and the developers aren’t making the profits they desire. We finally have a grocery store that is
gaining traction. Don’t not allow this community necessity to be erased.
Susan Dennis
Pitman Ave.
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:carole/steve eittreim <eittreimcs@gmail.com>
Sent:Thursday, August 8, 2019 8:28 AM
To:Council, City
Subject:Edgewood Plaza Shopping Center
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Dear City Council Members,
We urge you to make a strong appeal to the 2017 court ruling that stated there needn't be an operating grocery store at
the Edgewood Plaza Shopping Center. For ten years the site was a blight on the neighborhood and not an inviting
entrance to Palo Alto from 101. Today, due to the presence of The Market at Edgewood, the site is bustling with activity
and social engagement. We no longer have to drive two miles to Trader Joe's or Safeway for our groceries, lessening
traffic on our congested streets.
In 2012 the city allowed Sand Hill Properties, to build approximately $30 million in housing units. Sand Hill agreed to
provide a viable grocery store; however, this did not happen and the city fined Sand Hill beginning in 2016. Sand Hill
stopped paying penalties in 2017 and sued the city to remove the grocery store requirement. A superior court judge
undid the requirement that a grocery store be provided.
If the city's appeal is successful it can collect approximately $1.6 million in penalties that Sand Hill Properties, the
shopping center developer, owes for when the grocery store space was vacant. If the city loses its appeal we will lose
the best grocery store (as voted in 2019, Palo Alto Weekly) in Palo Alto. What would this say to any business thinking of
starting in Palo Alto?
Sincerely,
Caroleann and Stephen Eittreim
Palo Alto
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Laurie Firestone <sealedposter@aol.com>
Sent:Thursday, August 8, 2019 8:36 AM
To:Council, City
Subject:The Market at Edgewood
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on
links.
________________________________
PLEASE save the Market. Having a local market that the neighborhood can walk to saves the community atmosphere and
civil discourse of our city.
Laurie and Ed Firestone
Sent from my iPhone
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:ginny@hullz.com
Sent:Thursday, August 8, 2019 8:39 AM
To:Council, City
Subject:The Market at Edgewood Plaza
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Please protect The Market at Edgewood. I shop there daily, walking or riding my bike. I would greatly miss this
neighborhood grocery where the staff are helpful and nice, and the owners are responsive to suggestions, and build
community with fun events and tastings.
Best,
Ginny Hull
{REDACTED}
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:pmarks@ix.netcom.com
Sent:Thursday, August 8, 2019 9:02 AM
To:Council, City
Subject:Please protect the Edgewood Plaza grocery store
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on
links.
________________________________
Please appeal the 2017 court ruling which said there need not be an operating grocery store at the shopping center. Do
not negotiate away the requirement for an operating grocery store at the shopping center.
I hope you will use excellent legal experts to file a forceful appeal. As you undoubtedly know, a successful appeal would
allow the city to collect about $1.6 million in penalties from Sand Hill Properties. It would also improve the chances that
the shopping center will remain a vibrant feature of our community.
James P. Marks
{REDACTED}ane, Palo Alto
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Stacey Foster Martz <sfoster@gmail.com>
Sent:Thursday, August 8, 2019 9:09 AM
To:Council, City
Subject:Edgewood Market
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Dear Palo Alto City Council,
As a homeowner in the area, I implore you to PLEASE keep the grocery store in the Edgewood Shopping Center. The
market is very popular and we need it!!!
Sincerely,
Stacey Foster
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Heather Marzano <bradymarzano@gmail.com>
Sent:Thursday, August 8, 2019 9:09 AM
To:Council, City
Subject:Please keep the neighborhood grocery store - Edgewood Market
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
CIty,
The St. Francis / Duveneck neighborhood is in a black hole for getting groceries if you do not retain an operating market
at the Edgewood Plaza.
Please file a strong appeal and under no circumstances negotiate away the requirement to keep an operating grocery
store in that space.
Edgewood Market has become an integral part of the community, winning the best market award for 2019. Please
support this community.
Heather Marzano
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Satrajit Chatterjee <satrajit@gmail.com>
Sent:Thursday, August 8, 2019 9:14 AM
To:Council, City
Cc:Shuchi
Subject:Fwd: [duveneck] nsist Our City Council Protect the Edgewood Grocery Store
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Hello City Council:
We are residents of {REDACTED} and would very much appreciate your support in keeping The Market at Edgewood
Plaza alive and viable. It is a great asset to the community around here since it means that we can walk to a
neighborhood grocery store instead of driving to a far‐away one. I think it is critical that we support endeavors like this.
Please file the strongest appeal you can.
Regards,
Sat and Shuchi
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
From: Shuchi Chatterjee <shuchi.kulkarni@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, Aug 7, 2019 at 7:32 PM
Subject: Fwd: [duveneck] nsist Our City Council Protect the Edgewood Grocery Store
To: Satrajit Chatterjee <satrajit@gmail.com>
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
From: angela wong angwong@gmail.com [duveneck] <duveneck‐noreply@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Wed, Aug 7, 2019 at 5:02 PM
Subject: [duveneck] nsist Our City Council Protect the Edgewood Grocery Store
To: CPNA <crescent‐park‐pa@googlegroups.com>, Duveneck St Francis Group <dsfna@yahoogroups.com>,
crescentpark@yahoogroups.com <crescentpark@yahoogroups.com>, duveneck school <duveneck@yahoogroups.com>
Dear Neighbors: We urgently need your help to ensure our City Council protects The Market at Edgewood, the grocery store
at Edgewood Plaza. On Monday, August 12, the Council will discuss its appeal of a 2017 court ruling saying there needn't be an
operating grocery store at the shopping center. The court's ruling means we could once again have no grocery store at
Edgewood Plaza, because the shopping center owners will have far less incentive to keep and subsidize a grocer if necessary.
Instead, we may hear that a grocery store no longer "pencils out" and we'll lose forever a major neighborhood resource. You
can email the Council right now at city.council@cityofpaloalto.org. Please insist they file a strong appeal and under no
circumstances negotiate away requiring an operating grocery store. Our neighborhood's massive action helped bring back a
grocery store in 2017 and so we need you to again tell the City Council what's important. As you probably know, The Market
at Edgewood is popular. It won the "Best of 2019" award from Palo Alto Weekly readers, both as a grocery store and for its
produce section (see https://www.paloaltoonline.com/best_of/2019/food‐and‐drink.php) and NextDoor participants across
2
15 neighborhoods named it as Neighborhood Favorite (see https://nextdoor.com/pages/the‐market‐at‐edgewood‐palo‐alto‐
ca/). But even popular stores face financial challenges in these times and owner‐run, community‐oriented grocery stores are
always particularly vulnerable. If we want to ensure a grocery remains at Edgewood Plaza, the Council must use the very best
legal experts and file a forceful appeal. Remind the Council that overturning the 2017 ruling also means it can collect
approximately $1.6 million in penalties that Sand Hill Properties, the shopping center developer, owes it for when the grocery
store space was vacant. Back in 2012, the City allowed Sand Hill to rebuild the shopping center with a much smaller parking lot
and add approximately $30 million in housing. In exchange, Sand Hill agreed to provide a handful of public benefits, a major
one being providing a "viable grocery store," in its own words. Beginning in 2016, the City fined Sand Hill for not providing a
grocery and in 2017, Sand Hill stopped paying penalties and instead sued the City to remove the grocery store requirement.
Although Sand Hill lost the first round before an independent administrative hearing official, it won in superior court, where a
judge undid the requirement that any grocery store actually be "provided," saying in effect that a vacant building is a
meaningful public benefit. That makes no sense and could well encourage more developer misbehavior. You'll find our
analysis of the many errors in the ruling on page 30 of
http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?BlobID=62862. By the way, we've finally gotten the City to
restore its Edgewood Plaza web page at https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/gov/topics/archive/edgewood_plaza/default.asp.
However, that page and another it leads to of documents haven't been updated in over two years. The City promised to keep
the public informed, so we will push further on that too.. The City Council's discussion on the 12th will be closed to the public
and we won’t likely learn anything immediately. If the Council decides not to pursue the appeal further, not only will it lose
$1.6 million in penalties but we may find ourselves down the road with no grocery store as well. So please email the Council
right away and insist they file the strongest appeal. Thank you! Carla Carvalho Jeff Levinsky Lenore Cymes
__._,_.___
Posted by: angela wong <angwong@gmail.com>
Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group •Start a New Topic •Messages in this topic (1)
VISIT YOUR GROUP
To help protect your priv acy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.Yahoo! Groups • Privacy • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use
.
__,_._,___
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Craig Taylor <cct25569@hotmail.com>
Sent:Thursday, August 8, 2019 9:27 AM
To:Council, City
Subject:The Market at Edgewood
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
I am writing to support the Market at Edgewood. It is a local resource and appears to be doing better with
each passing week. The market improves the city... more offices with their concentrated traffic patterns or
apartments with the associated impact on traffic, schools, parks, waste infrastructure and water supply will
not improve the city.
We should keep to the present agreement with the land owner.
Craig Taylor
{REDACTED}
Palo Alto
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Susie Richardson <susiebmc@gmail.com>
Sent:Thursday, August 8, 2019 9:27 AM
To:Council, City
Subject:Edgewood Market
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on
links.
________________________________
I would like to add my voice to the neighborhood chorus advocating for the need to hold the developer responsible for a
grocery store at Edgewood. It is critical that you appeal the court ruling. I victory is necessary to validate both past and
future agreements with developers.
Thanks for your work on our behalf.
Susie Richardson
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Jay Chen <jaylchen@hotmail.com>
Sent:Thursday, August 8, 2019 9:57 AM
To:Council, City
Subject:Please City Council Protect the Edgewood Grocery Store
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening
attachments and clicking on links.
Dear Palo Alto City Councils,
My family urge your file a strong appeal and under no circumstances negotiate away requiring an operating grocery
store. Our neighborhood's massive action helped bring back a grocery store in 2017 and so we need you to again tell
the City Council what's important. As you probably know, The Market at Edgewood is popular. It won the "Best of
2019" award from Palo Alto Weekly readers, both as a grocery store and for its produce section.
We need a grocery store in the Palo Alto Edgewood Plaza.
Please voice out our voice on up coming Council Meeting on Monday 8/12.
Chen Family
{REDACTED}
Palo Alto, CA. 94303