Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout20191014plCC 701-32 DOCUMENTS IN THIS PACKET INCLUDE: LETTERS FROM CITIZENS TO THE MAYOR OR CITY COUNCIL RESPONSES FROM STAFF TO LETTERS FROM CITIZENS ITEMS FROM MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS ITEMS FROM OTHER COMMITTEES AND AGENCIES ITEMS FROM CITY, COUNTY, STATE, AND REGIONAL AGENCIES Prepared for: 10/14/2019 Document dates: 09/25/2019 – 10/02/2019 Set 1 Note: Documents for every category may not have been received for packet reproduction in a given week. 1 CENTER FOR CONTINUING STUDY OF THE CALIFORNIA ECONOMY 385 HOMER AVENUE • PALO ALTO • CALIFORNIA • 94301 TELEPHONE: (650) 321-8550 FAX: (650) 321-5451 www.ccsce.com DATE: September 30, 2019 TO: Finance Committee and Staff FROM: Stephen Levy SUBJECT: Data and Policy Issues I raise the data issues as they along with committee and council policy choices are foundational to developing credible revenue estimates. Procuring Data on Head Count All data sources that I know of are self reported including EDD (firms self report their employees) and Business Journal and city lists. I do not raise this as a problem but to clarify that there is no other magic source. The first challenge for Palo Alto is to compile/obtain a good list of employers. I have asked staff to have the consultant find out how the cities using head count obtained a list to work off of. I assume that the committee and council want to know the number of people working on site whether they are employees or contract workers. On site workers contribute to the traffic issues while workers who are really off site (out of the area) do not. So I think the question might be “how many workers work at this site”, which will be more than their employees they report on tax forms. One policy decision for the committee and council is how to treat, say, single person “firms” whether they have an office or work from home. What are the administrative challenges and how do they compare to the potential revenue, which will depend on the tax/fee levied on a single person entity. I would have staff ask the consultant to find out how the cities that use head count (most cities) handle these issues. They must have resolved them so learning how will help the committee and council. Procuring Data on Square Footage I am interested in learning how the city can get square footage data by taxable entity. I can see how this would be possible for large single tenant buildings. 2 I see a couple of issues in using square footage as the tax base. What does the city do if the building has a mix of exempt and non exempt entities—either because the industry sector is exempt or many tenants are single person part time tenants and the committee and council wishes to exempt them? What does the city do if the tenant is not the building owner? I assume the intent is to levy the tax on the property owner. But the property owner is not employing people. If, say, Google owns the building they are using I can see how taxing the building is taxing Google. But what is Google is renting (think Stanford Research Park), how is that supposed to work as a tax on the companies whose workers are creating the traffic Do the Average Employee Wages Matter? The EDD data show wide variations in average wages by industry. The average wage in hospitality, residential care facilities, social assistance and retail are 5 to 8 times lower than the average wages in Information and Professional Services. This will affect the average tax in relation to wages but does it matter to the committee and council. Targeting to Get a High (3+) % of Revenue from a Business Tax will Push Palo Alto Rates Higher than Neighboring Cities That is the implication I get from reading the existing consultant study. Public comments have already raised this point. How can the committee and council get independent advice on how tax rates that are higher than in neighboring cities will affect economic activity in Palo Alto? The council has asked for more information on business taxes in East Palo Alto and San Francisco. I recommend to staff that they get similar information on a broader range of cities including San Jose (which has been struggling to find a mix of taxes that creates the right incentives) and, perhaps Redwood City, Mountain View and Sunnyvale. October 1, 2019 Members of the City Council Finance Committee City of Palo Alto 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 Re: Questions related to proposed business tax Dear Members of the Finance Committee: We encourage the City to take the time to engage with the Stanford Research Park (SRP) business community on any proposed business tax. It is reasonable to assume Stanford Research Park businesses would be the single largest contributor of business tax revenues to the City of Palo Alto coffers. We request that the City provide the information requested below, as this is needed to fully understand and consider a position on the proposed tax. We believe many of these requests are equally relevant to other businesses throughout the City. Would the proposed tax be a general tax or a special tax? How would the City ensure the most responsible use of the funds? Stanford Research Park employers would encourage the City to consider how to structure a business tax to facilitate transparency and oversight by the public, and to demonstrate the expected, effective return on investment to the community, especially for the businesses that would bear the tax obligation. What would be the amount of Palo Alto’s proposed tax? Will the structure and dollar amount be comparable to nearby cities’ business tax? We would encourage the City to assess the long-term consequences of levying a business tax that exceeds the immediately adjacent municipalities’ tax structures and dollar thresholds. Demand for space in the Research Park is elastic. Businesses, large and small, weigh cost of doing business – and how business friendly a city is or is not – before making decisions about location or point of sale. Moving towards a business tax is a significant decision that should be based on accurate information and the context of the competitive landscape. Would the proposed tax discourage start-ups from locating in Palo Alto, especially those who have point of sale to offer? Would the proposed tax disadvantage certain industry sectors, such as life science? We encourage the City to base its structure on sound policy and solid research. Our research indicates that life science start-ups produce higher sales and use tax revenues to cities than other industry sectors produce, despite the fact that life science companies tend to not earn profits for many years in their stages of development. When a company is not profitable, yet has to pay a gross receipts, square footage or headcount taxes from gross revenues, this significantly impairs the prospect of success of the company. Thus, tax policies that favor larger companies over start-ups risk closing the door to future emerging industries, all but ensuring the decline of the economic vitality of Palo Alto over the long run. Yet tax policies that favor small start-ups at the expense of established businesses may unintentionally encourage the larger-scale, stable businesses to shift away from Palo Alto, putting existing tax revenues at risk. Therefore, tax structures and policies need to be carefully considered. October 1, 2019 Page 2 How would the proposed business tax affect current companies’ decisions to retain point of sale in Palo Alto? Stanford Research Park generates tremendous value to the community and City from property taxes and point of sale tax revenues. Specific SRP companies have elected to attribute sales to Palo Alto, to the City’s advantage. In 2017 (the most recent year for which we have comprehensive data), Stanford Research Park generated roughly $36 million in combined tax revenues to Palo Alto and Palo Alto Unified School District combined. Of the $17 million provided to the Palo Alto general fund, roughly $4 million per year resulted from SRP companies that have chosen to locate their point of sale in Palo Alto. Last year, your consultant, MuniServices, explained to Council how this is one of Palo Alto’s unique advantages compared to other nearby cities. How would SRP businesses receive credit for the TDM programs we privately fund? Stanford University offers a plethora of SRP-wide transportation programs through the SRP Transportation Management Association, and many employers offer single-employer programs – all privately funded. We believe it is necessary to include a mechanism through which there will be a credit for private investment in transportation programs deducted from any annual business tax, thus preserving the incentive to continue our efforts. We are concerned that the proposed business tax would undermine the SRP-wide TDM efforts by diluting the sources of funds – and enthusiasm – for our privately funded TDM programs. We all know that meaningful reduction in the reliance on single-occupancy vehicles takes time and requires behavioral change, as well as reliable alternate commute options. Going forward, we will need the SRP businesses to sustain its private funding of the SRP-wide TDM effort and not have a business tax create a disincentive to these efforts. Thank you for your consideration of our questions and concerns. Respectfully submitted, Tiffany Griego Managing Director Stanford Research Park Stanford Real Estate FINANCE COMMITTEE MEETING #1 _10/1/2019__ [X] Placed Before Meeting [ ] Received at Meeting City of Palo Alto M E M O R A N D U M TO:Finance Committee DATE: October 1, 2019 SUBJECT: Approve Revised Workplan to Address the City Council Direction for Further Consideration of a Ballot Measure – Polling Results from 2016 and 2018 (CMR ID # 10712) The above referenced staff report outlines a revised workplan for a potential revenue generating ballot measure. The revised workplan includes directing staff to engage with polling and outreach consultants to develop and implement a polling and outreach strategy. The work plan assumes that polling and outreach will begin later this month and continue through Spring 2020 as needed. The staff report references the most recently completed polling executed in 2016 and 2018. Attached to this report are excerpts from the staff reports that previously transmitted the results of these polls. The 2016 poll focused on a transportation tax measure while the 2018 initial round of polling focused on voter views on infrastructure funding. Below are the links to the full reports for the most recent three polls completed by the city and attached are the specific results from the first two: 2016 Polling CMR #7118: Funding Transportation Improvements – Key Findings from a Citywide Voter Survey April 14­20, 2016 www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/53000 2018 Polling (initial) CMR #9107: Palo Alto Voter Views on Infrastructure Funding – Key Findings of a Survey of Palo Alto Voters Conducted March 23­April 2, 2018 www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/64561 2018 Polling (refined polling) CMR #9322: Palo Alto Voter of Potential Ballot Measures – Key Findings of a Survey of Palo Alto Voters Conducted May 12­23, 2018 www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/65319 1 Key Findings from a Citywide Voter Survey Conducted April 14-20, 2016 1 3 2 3Q8. Split Sample I'd like to read you some problems facing the City of Palo Alto that other people have mentioned. Please tell me whether you think it is an extremely serious problem, a very serious problem, somewhat serious problem, or a not too serious problem in Palo Alto. 4 4 Q8. I'd like to read you some problems facing the City of Palo Alto that other people have mentioned. Please tell me whether youthink it is an extremely serious problem, a very serious problem, somewhat serious problem, or a not too serious problem in PaloAlto. Split Sample 5Q1. How would you rate the overall job being done by Palo Alto city government in providing services to the City’s residents? 5 6Q2. I am going to read you a list of specific aspects of the City of Palo Alto’s work in managing City government. Please tell me whether you generally approve or disapprove of the job the City is doing in that area. 7 Q2. I am going to read you a list of specific aspects of the City of Palo Alto’s work in managing City government. Please tell mewhether you generally approve or disapprove of the job the City is doing in that area. 6 8Q3. How would you rate the City of Palo Alto’s need for additional funding? 9 7 10Q4. Do you think you would vote “yes” in favor of this measure or “no” to oppose it? 11Q5. Do you think you would vote yes or no on such a measure? 8 12Q6. In that case, do you think you would vote yes or no on such a measure? 13 Mechanism Vote by Party and Ethnicity Q6. In that case, do you think you would vote yes or no on such a measure? 9 14 Mechanism Vote by Gender and Age Q6. In that case, do you think you would vote yes or no on such a measure? 15 Mechanism Vote by Household Income Q6. In that case, do you think you would vote yes or no on such a measure? 10 1 Brettle, Jessica From:John Lattimore <jlscinsurance@gmail.com> Sent:Wednesday, September 25, 2019 2:22 PM To:Filseth, Eric (Internal); Council, City Cc:Shikada, Ed Subject:911 Sham CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Palo Alto Mayor Eric Filseth    Mayor Filseth,     I am writing to you concerning your comments in PaloAltoOnline  about the negligent and callous treatment that a  Palo Alto Resident couple received from your police department and city staff.  Regarding the incident, you state, "There are still a number of unanswered questions," Filseth said, such as "why there  is not camera footage from the sergeant (Adrienne Moore)."  Mayor Filseth you are an electrical engineer with an MBA who has worked as an executive for a number of companies  and who currently sits on the board of Silicon Frontline Inc.; a company that produces several electronic products.  You have been aware of the incident since July and Sgt. Moore’s missing videos for at least a month.  If you had employees at Silicon Frontline whose job was to spend a day creating video footage for Silicon Frontline and they  came back at the end of the day and had no video; how long would it take you to find out why they had no video?  These employees wasted a day and thousands of dollars of your company’s money; are you not going to find out why?  A competent owner of a business, and executive in charge, would find out in a day as to whether there was a malfunction of  the video camera or whether the employees decided not to do the work they were tasked with or whether the employees  deleted the video.  Would you continue to employ employees who deliberately refuse to do the job they are paid to do?  Or employees who  are so incompetent they cannot perform the duties assigned to them?  Or employees who cover up their mistakes by  destroying the evidence?  There is absolutely no excuse for you not knowing and then informing the public, the owner of the business, as to why there is  no video.  Palo Alto is not some back country town of settlers; Palo Alto is a town of highly educated and knowledgeable professionals  who know a sham when they see one.  Right now you’re pulling a sham.  But then again your City Manager Ed Shikada helped hire Robert Jonsen who was forced to leave the Los Angeles Sheriff’s  department because of his persistent practice of violating the Constitutional rights of minorities according to a Department of  Justice investigation.  No wonder your city staff conducted the hiring process behind closed doors to avoid public scrutiny.  2   https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/crt/legacy/2013/06/28/antelope_findings_6‐28‐13.pdf  https://www.scpr.org/news/2013/06/28/37967/doj‐deputies‐at‐la‐county‐sheriff‐s‐stations‐in‐la/  http://www.publiccounsel.org/press_releases?id=0022      https://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2018/03/30/robert‐jonsen‐sworn‐in‐as‐palo‐alto‐police‐chief    3 I guess that’s why you support your officers using racial epithets to describe African Americans:    https://padailypost.com/2019/05/22/cops‐use‐of‐n‐word‐led‐to‐investigation‐that‐never‐became‐public/     City Attorney Molly Stump first stated there was video and then later says there is not video.  Why would she state there was  video if there was none?    Mayor Filseth, additionally you stated, "Overall, it looks pretty much to me like the emergency responders  (police) were trying to diagnose and respond" to the woman, he said, adding that he is not an expert on  such matters.  The two officers, Clausen and Moore were falsely asserting that the woman was having a physiological episode at the  same time paramedics were loading her into the ambulance and treating her for a physical seizure due to a brain tumor. Seriously?  Then you have Ofc. Clausen illegally searched the woman’s home and divulged private information about the woman to  the public; violations of city policy.    Mayor Filseth your deliberate negligence is just adding to the punitive damages of the inevitable lawsuit that will be  coming.    1 Brettle, Jessica From:Rice, Danille Sent:Tuesday, October 1, 2019 9:07 AM To:Council, City Cc:Shikada, Ed; Minor, Beth; leConge Ziesenhenne, Monique; Kamhi, Philip; Gaines, Chantal Subject:Caltrain Business Plan_Adoption of Long Range Service Vision Letter Attachments:Caltrain Business Plan_Adoption of Long Range Service Vision.pdf Good morning Mayor and Council Members,   On behalf of City Manager Ed Shikada, I would like to inform you that the attached letter was sent to the Peninsula  Corridor Joint Powers Board (Caltrain) Chair, Gillian Gillett regarding the City’s comments to the proposed adoption of  the Caltrain Business Plan – Long Range Service Vision scheduled for review at the October 3, 2019 Joint Powers Board  meeting.       Thank you,   Danille         Danille Rice  Executive Assistant to the City Manager  250 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, CA  94301  (650) 329‐2105 | Danille.Rice@cityofpaloalto.org          City of Palo Alto Office of the Mayor and City Council September 30,2019 Honorable Chair Gillian Gillett Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board (Caltrain) 1250 San Carlos Avenue —P.O.Box 3006 San Carlos,CA 94070-1306 RE:CALTRAIN BUSINESS PLAN -ADOPTION OF LONG RANGE SERVICE VISION Dear Chair Gillett: The City of Palo Alto appreciates the opportunity to share with you its comments regarding the proposed adoption of the Caltrain Business Plan -Long Range Service Vision scheduled for review at the October 3,2019 Joint Powers Board meeting.Producing a long range vision is a difficult endeavor,and we want to thank Caltrain staff for the high caliber work in preparing this document.As you proceed with reviewing adoption of this and other Caltrain Business Plan documents,we request that you consider the following issues: 1.Grade separations:Grade separations are essential to providing safe and reliable service, especially considering the increases in service frequency envisioned in the Long Range Service Vision.The Long Range Service Vision acknowledges that it is dependent on grade separations but does not commit to addressing grade separations prior to the adoption of the Long Range Service Vision.Due to the criticality of grade crossings to an enhanced service vision,we request that a commitment to address these issues be included with the adoption of this document. 2.A coordinated approach to funding and construction:As Caltrain moves forward with the remaining components of the Business Plan,it is necessary for Caltrain to consider incorporating options for a corridor-wide approach to grade crossing design criteria,funding,and timely implementation/construction.We support the revised staff recommendations which provides enhanced language towards “Completing the Caltrain Business Plan including additional analyses of issues related to funding,connectivity and access,and equity as well as the identification of a detailed implementation program of next steps and follow on work.”As Caltrain conducts additional analyses of funding,we would request that Caltrain also investigates its ability to participate in grade separation bond financing. P.O.Box 10250 Palo Alto,CA 94303 650.329.2477 650.328.3631 fax RE:CALTRAIN BUSINESS PLAN —ADOPTION 012 LONG RANGE SERVICE VISION September 30,2019 Page 2 3.Evolving the organization and governance:The continued development of the business plan represents an opportunity to think broadly and expansively about Caltrain’s governance model for the delivery of rail service on the Peninsula.As such,the City supports the revised staff recommendation which recommends “evolving Caltrain in a manner that best prepares the railroad to deliver the service vision by deliberately and transparently addressing the issues of service delivery,internal organization and governance.”We look forward to seeing a robust inter agency engagement process for future discussions surrounding this issue. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the adoption of Caltrain’s Long Range Service Vision. Sincerely, Eric Filseth,Mayor City of Palo Alto cc:Jim Hartnett,Caltrain Executive Director Sebastien Petty,Caltrain Director of Policy Development Casey FCasey Fromson,Caltrain Government and Community Affairs Director Jeannie Bruins,JPB Board Member,representing a city in Santa Clara County Cindy Chavez,JPB Board Vice Chair,representing Santa Clara Board of Supervisors Palo Alto City Council Ed Shikada,Palo Alto City Manager Chantal Gaines,Assistant to the City Manager Philip Kamhi,Chief Transportation Official 1 Brettle, Jessica From:Alice Holmes <AHolmes@renault-handley.com> Sent:Thursday, September 26, 2019 5:40 PM To:Filseth, Eric (Internal); Council, City Cc:Jeanne Fleming (jfleming@metricus.net) Subject:Cell Towers Attachments:IMG_4657.jpg CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Dear Mayor Filseth: I have written regarding this issue before. And this isn’t because these horrific things are being installed right outside my front door, in my neighborhood – at least for now. But I care about Palo Alto and the health of our community. I was surprised to learn that after Palo Alto firefighters expressed concerns about the proximity of a cell tower to the now‐under‐construction firehouse at Embarcadero and Newell—City Council approved the funds to build a radiation‐inhibiting wall between the new firehouse and the cell tower. Do you only care about the firefighters and not the residents? I am glad you and the council care about the health of the firefighters, don’t get me wrong, but what about the taxpaying, voting people of Palo Alto? WOW. Just wow. In April, you and Councilmembers Cormack, Fine and Kniss—overruling Councilmembers DuBois, Kou and Tanaka—voted to allow Staff up to a year to revise the city’s Wireless Ordinance so that it would at last include basic protections for residents, protections such as disfavoring cell towers in residential areas and establishing a minimum distance between cell towers. That was a good move on your part. So what happened between April and now? Can you explain why you and your three colleagues were immediately responsive to the firefighters’ concerns and approved the funds to build them a radiation‐inhibiting wall, no less, but have failed to show a comparable sense of urgency with respect to the concerns of Palo Altans regarding, for example, the siting of cell towers only a few short feet from their homes? I guess the firefighters have a union to protect them, but residents only have City Council members to protect them from health hazards. OH. Wow again. I am sure that I am not the only voting person in Palo Alto who would love to hear your explanation. Please request City Staff to do the following: 1) immediately revise Palo Alto’s Wireless Ordinance so that it includes the essential new guidelines Council endorsed now over five months ago; and 2 2) neither approve, permit nor allow the installation of any new cell tower that does not comply with the revised Ordinance. And just in case you haven’t seen it yet, the attached photo is of one of the new cell towers being installed in Midtown right now. Not a pretty sight, and not something I would want to see throughout Palo Alto. As always, I appreciate your service to our City and look forward to hearing your explanations. Thank you, Alice Holmes 1 Brettle, Jessica From:Susan Sanchez <susansanchezgardner@gmail.com> Sent:Saturday, September 28, 2019 6:56 AM To:Filseth, Eric (Internal) Cc: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,    I’m appalled that the city of Palo Alto is allowing 11 cell towers to be placed on existing utility poles in front of homes. Its  not only hideous, for a city that prides itself on natural beauty, but there’s not enough research to prove it is safe to  permanently install a device which constantly emits radiation so close to private homes. Please take a hint from the  cities of Hillsborough and San Bruno and do not allow these cell towers to be installed. A growing group of scientists,  medical experts, and citizens are not for these devices. Thank you for your service.    Sincerely,  Susan & Tom Gardner      1 Brettle, Jessica From:Jose Joseph <jprjoseph@yahoo.com> Sent:Sunday, September 29, 2019 3:32 PM To:Filseth, Eric (Internal); 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, I recently learned that—after Palo Alto firefighters expressed concerns about the proximity of a cell tower to the now‐under‐construction firehouse at Embarcadero and Newell—City Council approved the funds to build a radiation‐inhibiting wall between the new firehouse and the cell tower. I am shocked. In April, you and Councilmembers Cormack, Fine and Kniss—overruling Councilmembers DuBois, Kou and Tanaka—voted to allow Staff up to a year to revise the city’s Wireless Ordinance so that it would at last include basic protections for residents, protections such as disfavoring cell towers in residential areas and establishing a minimum distance between cell towers. I would appreciate it if you would explain why you and your three colleagues were immediately responsive to the firefighters’ concerns and approved the funds to build them a radiation‐inhibiting wall, no less, but have failed to show a comparable sense of urgency with respect to the concerns of Palo Altans regarding, for example, the siting of cell towers only a few short feet from their homes. Respectfully, I ask that you right this wrong and direct City Staff: 1) to immediately revise Palo Alto’s Wireless Ordinance so that it includes the essential new guidelines Council endorsed now over five months ago; and 2) to neither approve, permit nor allow the installation of any new cell tower that does not comply with the revised Ordinance. Yours truly, Jose P. Joseph {REDACTED} 1 Brettle, Jessica From:Barbara Kelly <bmkelly@hotmail.com> on behalf of Barbara Kelly <barbara.kelly@gmail.com> Sent:Wednesday, September 25, 2019 3:49 PM To:Filseth, Eric (Internal) Cc: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,    I recently learned that—after Palo Alto firefighters expressed concerns about the proximity of a cell tower to the now-under-construction firehouse at Embarcadero and Newell—City Council approved the funds to build a radiation-inhibiting wall between the new firehouse and the cell tower.     In April, you and Councilmembers Cormack, Fine and Kniss—overruling Councilmembers DuBois, Kou and Tanaka—voted to allow Staff up to a year to revise the city’s Wireless Ordinance so that it would, at last, include basic protections for residents, protections such as disfavoring cell towers in residential areas and establishing a minimum distance between cell towers.    I would appreciate it if you would explain why you and your three colleagues were immediately responsive to the firefighters’ concerns and approved the funds to build them a radiation-inhibiting wall, no less, but have failed to show a comparable sense of urgency with respect to the concerns of Palo Altans regarding, for example, the siting of cell towers only a few short feet from their homes.    Respectfully, I ask that you right this wrong and direct City Staff:     1) to immediately revise Palo Alto’s Wireless Ordinance so that it includes the essential new guidelines Council endorsed now over five months ago;     2) to neither approve, permit nor allow the installation of any new cell tower that does not comply with the revised Ordinance.     Sincerely,    Barbara Kelly  1 Brettle, Jessica From:Ken <lowdown1@comcast.net> Sent:Thursday, September 26, 2019 6:41 PM To:Council, City Subject:Chaucer Bridge CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on  links.  ________________________________    I had the opportunity to attend the meeting today. I feel that everyone involved has done and excellent job of research  and planning.    I would like to respond to some of the public comments:    As a former employee of the Alameda Flood Control District, I learned that:         temporary inconveniences, though difficult to live through, but undue delays can only bring permanent regrets         trees can grow back even more beautifully    During my second career as a physician, I was asked by a patient when they should get preventative treatment for a  condition that they could lose their vision at any moment, my reply was:         Yesterday!    I commend you for realizing that 30 years is long enough and we should eliminate the risk ASAP.    Sincerely,    Kenneth C. Low    ‐‐    1 Brettle, Jessica From:Yahoo Mail.® <honkystar@yahoo.com> Sent:Thursday, September 26, 2019 5:08 AM To:Frank Agamemnon Subject:9/11 Bombshell: CNBC Anchor Says Building 7 a 'Controlled Implosion' CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  9/11 Bombshell: CNBC Anchor Says Building 7 a 'Controlled Implosion' https://youtu.be/-oFLzXLyeUU ----- The quintessential 9-11 video to watch... and share. The best i've seen... under four minutes.. But notice how they do... the newscaster's name is Insana, hmmm... kind of hints at insane, doesn't it? https://grizzom.blogspot.com/2019/09/911-bombshell-cnbc-anchor-says-building.html Zeebra said... https://twitter.com/AE911Truth/status/1177009825105858560 Bombshell: CNBC Anchor Ron Insana says World Trade Center Building 7 a 'Controlled Implosion' on the 18th anniversary of 9/11 Read: https://www.ae911truth.org/news/570-cnbc-s-ron-insana-building-7-a-controlled-implosion September 26, 2019 at 2:33 AM __._,_.___ Posted by: smacko9@comcast.net Reply via web post • Reply to sender • Reply to group •Start a New Topic •Messages in this topic (1) VISIT YOUR GROUP 1 Brettle, Jessica From:Mark Cox <markdarrellcox@icloud.com> Sent:Tuesday, October 1, 2019 12:36 PM To:jd@howardstern.com Subject:Defective Spelling CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on  links.  ________________________________    The Whole of Hebrew Scripture is Contaminated with Defective Spelling even where the Meaning of the Passage is  Retained. Hence the the Prospects of Being Healed by His Unscorged Stripes is Problematic. Good Luck on that. Better  Keep Your Wheelchair.    1 Brettle, Jessica From:Mark Cox <markdarrellcox@icloud.com> Sent:Tuesday, October 1, 2019 9:56 PM To:jd@howardstern.com Subject:Don Lemon CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on  links.  ________________________________    Don Lemon wants to ask Trump "What's Wrong with Him." That's the Wrong Question. We have the Rise in America of  the Recalcitrant Liar Donald Trump to the Office of Presidency. The Real Question is What is Wrong with America? Why  is Lying so Pervasive? Angelina Jolie? The Woman is a Liar. Sergy Brin? The Guy is a Liar. Mark Zuckerberg? The Guy is a  Slimey Liar. Steve Jobs? The Guy was Nothing but a Liar. "Laurene Powell Jobs" Kelly Jean Leary? She's Leary Scum Lying  Whore Bitch Ass Mind Fuck. She's the Head Flip Slimeball who fucked "Steve Jobs" Jeff Laird for His Money AND His  Company. Love had Nothing to do with it. Let Kelly's Lecherous Twat be Grossly Infected with Cancer. Stanford  University can be Trusted? The Place is Swamp Land Mega Whore University. Our First Black President is from Mafia  Infested Chicago and All that Guy could Really Do is Say "Yes We Can." How much Canola Oil can you sell? Now we have  a President from Mafia Infested Chicago with a Son‐in‐Law who is Genetic Kin to the Leary Jewish Black Hand Mafia.  Jared is a Black Opie Taylor with a Connected Grandfather "Let's Recognize Jerusalem so we can Kill More Jews. Make  Sure they Know they have to Pay so that we can Mix their Blood with their Sacrifices."  1 Brettle, Jessica From:Joel Davidson <joelscottd@gmail.com> Sent:Monday, September 30, 2019 4:48 PM To:Council, City Subject:El Camino Real in Palo Alto Is a driving nightmare CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on  links.  ________________________________  City Council Members,  Please do something about a significantly rough drive on El Camino Real in Palo Alto.  For over 2 years many sections of  El Camino Real has significant pot holes.  The south Palo Alto area is especially full of potholes caused by significant  construction trucks traveling to Stanford University building construction.  The curbsides have all sorts of detritus all  along the El Camino Real in Palo Alto.  These issues need attention last year but nothing is being done.  Potholes as well as the detritus do damage to cars, vans, buses, bikes, etc.  Thank you for looking into this blight to our community.  Joel Davidson  {REDACTED} Palo Alto, 94306  1 Brettle, Jessica From:Arlene Goetze <photowrite67@yahoo.com> Sent:Tuesday, October 1, 2019 12:30 PM To:Sam Liccardo Subject:$200 M to study Failed FLU Shots (9% in 2018) CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  $200 million to improve one unsafe vaccine!!! The flu vaccine is now being investigated! US Govt in past has paid $4 billion in a decade to people injured by vaccines... most money went to adults damaged by the flu vaccine. It still has mercury in it and is the least effective of vaccines. (Shot admitted not effective over age 65.) Reagan gave vaccine companies immunity so many are poorly tested. Five vaccines in 1960 before kindergarten are now almost 50 vaccines or no kindergarten, public or private. (why is anti-freeze or flame retardant in them?) Sent by Arlene Goetze, No Toxins for Children, photowrite67@yahoo.com. -------Executive Order Creates Influenza Vaccine Task Force to Promote "National Security and Public Health"---------- Published Sept. 25, 2019 by National Vaccine Information Center * Flu vaccine only 9% effective last year during second half of flu season. . . it may get the eggs out!!! On Sept. 19, 2019, President Donald Trump signed an Executive Order, “Modernizing Influenza Vaccines in the United State to Promote National Security and Public Health.” Describing mass use of influenza vaccines “to combat seasonal flu” and influenza pandemics as “strengthening our Nation’s public health and security,” he announced the establishment of a National Influenza Vaccine Task Force. The Task Force will develop a five-year national plan to reduce “reliance on egg-based influenza vaccine production” in the United States and increase the country’s “capacity of alternative methods” for producing influenza vaccines that “allow more agile and rapid responses to emerging influenza viruses.”1 On Sept. 20, the U.S. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases awarded the University of Maryland’s Center for Vaccine Development and Global Health in Baltimore a $200 million grant to develop more effective influenza vaccines and, ultimately a “universal” influenza vaccine.2 During the second half of last year’s “flu season,” the influenza vaccine was estimated to be only nine percent effective.3 The Executive Order also directs the Task Force to:  “advance the development of new, broadly protective vaccine candidates that provide more effective and longer lasting immunities;” 2  support the “promotion of increased influenza vaccine immunization” among “populations recommended” by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC); and  improve “public understanding of influenza risk and informed influenza vaccine decision-making.”1 The Task Force is specifically directed to look at ways to work through the director of the CDC to “increase influenza vaccine use through enhanced communication and by removing barriers to vaccination.”1 The Task Force will consist of a senior official from each of the following departments, agencies and offices: Department of Defense; Department of Justice; Department of Agriculture; Department of Veterans Affairs; Department of Homeland Security; Food and Drug Administration; CDC; National Institutes of Health; Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority. The Executive Order directs the Task Force to submit a report on its plan to the President within 120 days.1 On Sept. 20, the U.S. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases awarded the University of Maryland’s Center for Vaccine Development and Global Health in Baltimore a $200 million grant to develop more effective influenza vaccines and, ultimately a “universal” influenza vaccine.2 During the second half of last year’s “flu season,” the influenza vaccine was estimated to be only nine percent effective.3 Read more on National Vaccine Information Center, NVIC How many other vaccines are unsafe??? Forwarded by Arlene Goetze, MA, writer/editor, No Toxins for Children 89 issues of her newspaper on women's spirituality and 2 books are now in Archives of Santa Clara University for education and in the libraries of Harvard U, U of Notre Dame, and U of Dayton. Her book Wisdom on the Way is also in Harvard U. library. photowrite67@yahoo.com 1 Brettle, Jessica From:Victoria Velkoff <vmvelkoff@gmail.com> Sent:Monday, September 30, 2019 8:11 AM To:Filseth, Eric (Internal) Cc:Council, City Subject:Fire Station Radiation Barrier CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Dear Mayor Filseth, Recently a neighbor informed me that the Palo Alto city council voted to approve funds to construct a radiation-shielding barrier between a nearby cell tower and the new fire station. Thank you! Thank you for recognizing the dangers of these cell towers and the need to safeguard the health of the firefighters. So, what is the plan to provide similar shielding for all of the other cell towers being deployed throughout Palo Alto? I imagine that the AT&T towers that were recently erected in front of Midtown residences will be first to get these shields. How soon will the city begin this project? I am eager to start informing my Palo Alto neighbors and friends, so would appreciate any information that you can provide. I look forward to hearing from you. Sincerely, Victoria Velkoff  1 Brettle, Jessica From:Dave Shen <dshenster@gmail.com> Sent:Thursday, September 26, 2019 5:09 PM To:Shikada, Ed; Gaines, Chantal; Apex Strategies; Mercurio, Etty Cc:dshenster@gmail.com; Council, City Subject:Fwd: Follow Up: Matrix Comparing Churchill Options Attachments:IMG_1962.HEIC CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Hi all,     I'd like to reiterate Jason's points below. We should take some time to make all the matrix boxes more consistent and an  accurate reflection of what they represent.  I assume what we see in the colored matrix is the consultants' first stab at  rankings or has this gone through some kind of review with city staff also? Regardless, I'd like to make this a priority as  well as making sure all the other matrices used at the other intersections are accurate and consistent with their labeling.   Thanks, Dave  ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Forwarded message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐  From: Jason Matlof <jmatlof@gmail.com>  Date: Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 3:42 PM  Subject: Follow Up: Matrix Comparing Churchill Options  To: Greg Brail <greg@brail.org>, Barbara Best <bbest@pausd.org>, <philburton.pagradecrossings@gmail.com>, Tony  Carrasco <tony@carrasco.com>, Inyoung Cho <inyoungcho0@gmail.com>, <mkanneXCAP@gmail.com>,  <Lklein40@gmail.com>, <Judy@paloaltochamber.com>, Patricia Lau <patlau2010@gmail.com>,  <adina.levin@friendsofcaltrain.com>, Nadia Naik <nadianaik@gmail.com>, Keith Reckdahl <reckdahl@yahoo.com>,  <dshen.nopa@gmail.com>, <wriggs@usfca.edu>, Shikada, Ed <Ed.Shikada@cityofpaloalto.org>, Gaines, Chantal  <Chantal.Gaines@cityofpaloalto.org>, <cari@caritempleton.com>, Apex Strategies <apexstr@pacbell.net>  Cc: Jason Matlof <jrm@halfdomecap.com>    Dear XCAP, City Staff and Eileen,     As a follow up from yesterday's XCAP meeting, I wanted to reiterate the concern that the primary summary graphic that  will be used to explain to the public the pros/cons of the two options at Churchill is fundamentally flawed. Please correct  this graphic before presenting it to Council and the Public. [See attached matrix from the packaged distributed  yesterday.] Specifically, the "Closure" option paradoxically represents some elements of a literal closure of Churchill only AND also some elements of the entire scope of the Council‐approved closure option, which includes not only a Churchill  Closure but also + Bike/Ped Underpass + Mitigations at Embarcadero. So, the graphic that is probably the most  important chart for the vast majority of citizens that have no background in grade separation is presently very  misleading.    Specifically, here are the problems with the matrix representation of the "Closure" option:  1) The "Closure" option approved by CC has always included a Bike/Ped Underpass at Churchill to improve safety and  circulation for Bikes/Peds + Options for Traffic Mitigations at Embarcadero Road;  2) The budget of $50‐65 represented in the matrix, as attested by Etty yesterday after questioning, already includes all  the above (underpass, new traffic signals at Embarcadero, reconfigurations of Oregon and Embarcadero intersections,  etc)  2 3) Paradoxically, however, the colored matrix "criteria" reflect only the results of the closure of Churchill. Specifically,  here are the problems:           (a) "Improve East/West Connectivity": The reddish color implies nearly the worst possible traffic implications of  "Closure" on E‐W connectivity, which would be true if only Churchill was closed. But, according to the traffic engineers  at AECOM, the proposed mitigations will offload the lost E‐W capacity to the Embarcadero and Oregon Expressway  arterial corridors. (They have promised to deliver the exact numbers at the Nov. XCAP.) In other words, the graphic  implies a closure‐only and not the proposals of AECOM that we've reviewed at the last 3 meetings. Similarly, the blue  color for a Churchill Viaduct implies the best possible outcome for E‐W connectivity, despite the fact that it will do  nothing to fix the fundamental E‐W connectivity problem, which is traffic congestion at Embarcadero Rd that gets re‐ routed elsewhere ‐ primarily Churchill. (This was confirmed by the 2019 AECOM traffic study and source/destination  mapping.)           (b) "Maintain or Improve Local Access": While it's true that micro‐access will be lost for some Southgate residents,  the broader Palo Alto community will have much better local access because they will be able to more directly cross the  railway at the preferred arterial road locations. Per the traffic study data, it clearly shows that the majority of traffic that  currently traverses the Churchill intersection originates and destines at or northward of Embarcadero Road, which  means that improved access and throughput at Embarcadero road will be better for local access, not much worse as the  red color indicates. We should be thinking about the greater benefits for Palo Alto, not a few residents in Southgate.  Clearly and objectively, that means getting more out of Embarcadero Road.          (c) "Minimize Right of Way Acquisition": This might be most egregious. The matrix suggests that a Viaduct would  have least impact to "right of way", which most people would interpret as eminent domain and impact to residential  homes (the biggest hot point of right‐of‐way acquisition discussions historically). While viaduct might not "take" homes,  as we discussed last night, there are some homes' property lines that might be within 2 feet of the edge of the viaduct  structure, as AECOM asserted yesterday! So, while it might technically be true that no "acquisition" is necessary, I expect  outrage and potential legal threats if we proceed without compensating these homeowners. So "right of way" is  nowhere near "ideal", as implied in this matrix. Meanwhile, the "Closure" option is illustrated to have the worst impact  to right of way, which is ridiculous by comparison. I live in one of the houses that would lose the "precious" 3‐4 street  parking spots, and can attest that it's a very, very small cost to solve the child safety concern that we face today. That's a  benefit not a detraction! And, the supposed "lost land" at Paly H.S. is a few feet of dirt that lies outside of the school's  currently used area. I expect PAUSD would happily trade safety for the kids (ie, bike/ped underpass) for a few feet of  dirt. Let's ask the member of XCAP from PAUSD! We either need to change this "Criteria" name to "Minimize Property  Impacts" or expand the definition to represent the actual consequences.    Thank you for your consideration.      Jason Matlof  1 Brettle, Jessica From:Ed Yao <edyao8@gmail.com> Sent:Saturday, September 28, 2019 6:22 PM To:Filseth, Eric (Internal) Cc:Council, City Subject:Is the city investigating the latest technologies for city wide emergency cell service? And for a truly distributed 5g mesh network? CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Eric,     Since you were an engineer, you might find this interesting:)    My understanding is that a key rationale for expanding the cell tower network is for city‐wide emergency  communication if power gets knocked out.  I think every resident agrees that this is critically important.  I recently came  across this very cost‐effective "off‐grid" technology, which seems like a perfect implementation that avoids all the cell‐ tower controversy (https://gotennamesh.com/).  With such a solution (and there are likely many others), emergency  communication rationale falls away.    I also sent an email last year highlighting the unfairness for homeowners with adjacent cell‐towers to suffer from (much)  lower home values while providing for the "greater good" of better cell‐service for all, and emergency services for  all.   Frankly, the only equitable solution is to maximize the number of cell‐sites that are individually much less powerful.  With this, they distribute the economic cost and alleviate health concerns, a clear win‐win.  Taken to the extreme,  putting a mini cell‐site in each home seems like the ideal mesh network, and upgrading (5g, 6g, etc.) is as simple as  sending everyone a new box to connect to their ISP.  Is the city investigating these small cell solutions?  Maybe this is a  starting point (https://www.qualcomm.com/solutions/networking/carrier‐networks/small‐cells).    Please let me know.    Thank you, Ed    1 Brettle, Jessica From:Fryhouse <fryhouse@earthlink.net> Sent:Monday, September 30, 2019 9:57 AM To:Council, City; manager@cupertino.org; planning@cupertino.org; 'Roger Lee' Subject:Los Altos Hills sends letter to county about Lehigh plan Attachments:Leigh Reclamation Plan Amendment May 2019.pdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Los Altos Hills sends letter to county about Lehigh plan  See attached.  1 Brettle, Jessica From:John Aaronson <jar1cda@hotmail.com> Sent:Thursday, September 26, 2019 9:07 PM To:Filseth, Eric (Internal); Council, City; Shikada, Ed; HRC Subject:Palo Alto Mayor Filseth Responds 2 CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.    Eric Filseth  Palo Alto Mayor    https://corruptpaloaltopolice.weebly.com/911.html  To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.   911 On June 3, 2019 a Palo Alto resident, 54 year old woman, calls for an ambulance because she believes she is suffering from a stroke. Instead the police arrive, late, and deny her medical treatment... corruptpaloaltopolice.weebly.com   Mayor Filseth,  you have had another full business day in addition to at least two months to pick up the phone  and call Charles Cullen the Director of Technical Services to find out why Sgt. Moore's recordings were not  uploaded to the secure and tamper proof server.  Have you done it?  If not why not?   You have a lawful and  Constitutional duty to act on behalf of the people of Palo Alto your failure to act demonstrates your  culpability.  https://www.upcounsel.com/failure‐to‐act‐definition  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misfeasance  2         3       4   https://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2019/09/20/12‐questions‐the‐city‐wont‐ answer?utm_campaign=magnet&utm_source=article_page&utm_medium=related_articles      5   https://www.mercurynews.com/2016/02/24/palo‐alto‐police‐officers‐to‐start‐phasing‐in‐use‐of‐body‐worn‐ cameras/    6     7       8       9     Very interesting how the City of Palo Alto refused to provide the software to analyse whether or not the  videos had been tampered with and then when the judge ordered the City to turn over the  to the plaintiff the  city settles the case.  https://michaelgennacooir.weebly.com/harney.html        So Charlie we already have multiple malfunctions, incidents where the batteries failed and the officers failing  to turn on the cameras, what is the excuse going to be this time?    https://corruptpaloaltopolice.weebly.com/missing‐videos.html        10       https://corruptpaloaltopolice.weebly.com/chief‐jonsen.html  To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.   chief Jonsen Palo Alto City Manager James Keene, (on the left), hires Robert Jonsen, (on the right), as Palo Alto's Police Chief -- November 11, 2017/March 30, 2018 corruptpaloaltopolice.weebly.com   https://padailypost.com/2019/05/22/cops‐use‐of‐n‐word‐led‐to‐investigation‐that‐never‐became‐public/  To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.   Cop's use of n-word led to investigation that never became public - Palo Alto Daily Post BY ALLISON LEVITSKY Daily Post Staff Writer. Palo Alto police Capt. Zach Perron was investigated for using a racial slur while speaking to a black officer — and the probe wasn’t shown to the city’s independent police auditor, keeping it out of the public eye. 1 Brettle, Jessica From:Cathy Berwaldt <cberwaldt@hotmail.com> Sent:Friday, September 27, 2019 2:20 PM To:Filseth, Eric (Internal) Cc:Council, City; Cathy Berwaldt Subject:Midtown cell towers, ARB & the new Firehouse CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Mayor Filseth,  I recently learned that—after Palo Alto firefighters expressed concerns about the proximity of a cell tower to the now-under-construction firehouse at Embarcadero and Newell—City Council approved the funds to build a radiation-inhibiting wall between the new firehouse and the cell tower.   I am shocked. In April, you and Councilmembers Cormack, Fine and Kniss—overruling Councilmembers DuBois, Kou and Tanaka—voted to allow Staff up to a year to revise the city’s Wireless Ordinance so that it would at last include basic protections for residents, protections such as disfavoring cell towers in residential areas and establishing a minimum distance between cell towers. I would appreciate it if you would explain why you and your three colleagues were immediately responsive to the firefighters’ concerns and approved the funds to build them a radiation-inhibiting wall, no less, but have failed to show a comparable sense of urgency with respect to the concerns of Palo Altans regarding, for example, the siting of cell towers only a few short feet from their homes.  Respectfully, I ask that you right this wrong and direct City Staff: 1) to immediately revise Palo Alto’s Wireless Ordinance so that it includes the essential new guidelines Council endorsed now over five months ago; and 2) to neither approve, permit nor allow the installation of any new cell tower that does not comply with the revised Ordinance.   Yours truly,  Cathy Berwaldt  {REDACTED}  midtown voter  1 Brettle, Jessica From:Agata Barczynska <agata.maslanka@gmail.com> Sent:Thursday, September 26, 2019 8:23 PM To:Filseth, Eric (Internal) Cc:Council, City Subject:midtown cell towers CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Dear Mayor Filseth, I recently learned that—after Palo Alto firefighters expressed concerns about the proximity of a cell tower to the now-under-construction firehouse at Embarcadero and Newell—City Council approved the funds to build a radiation-inhibiting wall between the new firehouse and the cell tower. I am shocked. In April, you and Councilmembers Cormack, Fine and Kniss—overruling Councilmembers DuBois, Kou and Tanaka—voted to allow Staff up to a year to revise the city’s Wireless Ordinance so that it would at last include basic protections for residents, protections such as disfavoring cell towers in residential areas and establishing a minimum distance between cell towers. I would appreciate it if you would explain why you and your three colleagues were immediately responsive to the firefighters’ concerns and approved the funds to build them a radiation-inhibiting wall, no less, but have failed to show a comparable sense of urgency with respect to the concerns of Palo Altans regarding, for example, the siting of cell towers only a few short feet from their homes. Respectfully, I ask that you right this wrong and direct City Staff: 1) to immediately revise Palo Alto’s Wireless Ordinance so that it includes the essential new guidelines Council endorsed now over five months ago; and 2) to neither approve, permit nor allow the installation of any new cell tower that does not comply with the revised Ordinance. Yours truly, Agata Barczynska 1 Brettle, Jessica From:Naida Sperling <naidasperling@sbcglobal.net> Sent:Thursday, September 26, 2019 5:40 PM To:Filseth, Eric (Internal) Cc:Council, City Subject:Midtown Palo Alto Cell Towers CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Mayor Filseth,  I recently learned that—after Palo Alto firefighters expressed concerns about the proximity of a cell tower to the now-under-construction firehouse at Embarcadero and Newell—City Council approved the funds to build a radiation-inhibiting wall between the new firehouse and the cell tower.  It appears the residents of Midtown lost the argument about installation of towers while revised regulations are in review. Insult on top of injury is that we were not considered worthy of the same health considerations given to the employees of the fire department building under construction.  I am really disappointed with the City Council. In April, you and Councilmembers Cormack, Fine and Kniss—overruling Councilmembers DuBois, Kou and Tanaka—voted to allow Staff up to a year to revise the city’s Wireless Ordinance so that it would at last include basic protections for residents, protections such as disfavoring cell towers in residential areas and establishing a minimum distance between cell towers.  I would appreciate it if you would explain why you and your three colleagues were immediately responsive to the firefighters’ concerns and approved the funds to build them a radiation-inhibiting wall, no less, but have failed to show a comparable sense of urgency with respect to the concerns of Palo Altans regarding, for example, the siting of cell towers only a few short feet from their homes.  Respectfully, I ask that you right this wrong and direct City Staff: 1) to immediately revise Palo Alto’s Wireless Ordinance so that it includes the essential new guidelines Council endorsed now over five months ago; and 2) to neither approve, permit nor allow the installation of any new cell tower that does not comply with the revised Ordinance.   Yours truly,  Naida Sperling  {REDACTED} Palo Alto,CA 94303  1 Brettle, Jessica From:Jeffrey S. Glenn <jsglenn@stanford.edu> Sent:Thursday, September 26, 2019 6:30 PM To:Filseth, Eric (Internal) Cc:Council, City Subject:New cell towers CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Dear Mayor Filseth,     I recently learned that—after Palo Alto firefighters expressed concerns about the proximity of a cell tower to the now‐ under‐construction firehouse at Embarcadero and Newell—City Council approved the funds to build a radiation‐ inhibiting wall between the new firehouse and the cell tower.      I am shocked.  In April, you and Councilmembers Cormack, Fine and Kniss—overruling Councilmembers DuBois, Kou and  Tanaka—voted to allow Staff up to a year to revise the city’s Wireless Ordinance so that it would at last include basic  protections for residents, protections such as disfavoring cell towers in residential areas and establishing a minimum  distance between cell towers.     I would appreciate it if you would explain why you and your three colleagues were immediately responsive to the  firefighters’ concerns and approved the funds to build them a radiation‐inhibiting wall, no less, but have failed to show a  comparable sense of urgency with respect to the concerns of Palo Altans regarding, for example, the siting of cell towers  only a few short feet from their homes.     Respectfully, I ask that you right this wrong and direct City Staff: 1) to immediately revise Palo Alto’s Wireless Ordinance  so that it includes the essential new  guidelines Council endorsed now over five months ago;  and 2) to neither approve,  permit nor allow the installation of any new cell tower that does not comply with the revised Ordinance.     Sincerely,    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  2   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:Lynn Hollyn <lynn.hollyn@gmail.com> Sent:Saturday, September 28, 2019 4:53 PM To:Council, City; Filseth, Eric (Internal) Subject:No cell towers in our beautiful neighborhood as agreed CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.    Dear Mayor Filseth,    I am quite upset that —after Palo Alto firefighters expressed concerns about the proximity of a cell tower to the now-under-construction firehouse at Embarcadero and Newell—City Council approved the funds to build a radiation-inhibiting wall between the new firehouse and the cell tower.     I am actually shocked that you would go against the decision to revise your plans. In April, you and Councilmembers Cormack, Fine and Kniss—overruling Councilmembers DuBois, Kou and Tanaka— voted to allow Staff up to a year to revise the city’s Wireless Ordinance so that it would at last include basic protections for residents, protections such as disfavoring cell towers in residential areas and establishing a minimum distance between cell towers.    I would appreciate it if you would explain why you and your three colleagues were immediately responsive to the firefighters’ concerns and approved the funds to build them a radiation-inhibiting wall, no less, but have failed to show a comparable sense of urgency with respect to the concerns of Palo Altans regarding, for example, the siting of cell towers only a few short feet from their homes.    Respectfully, I ask that you right this wrong and direct City Staff: 1) to immediately revise Palo Alto’s Wireless Ordinance so that it includes the essential new guidelines Council endorsed now over five months ago; and 2) to neither approve, permit nor allow the installation of any new cell tower that does not comply with the revised Ordinance.       Lynn Hollyn  1 Brettle, Jessica From:Francesca <dfkautz@pacbell.net> Sent:Thursday, September 26, 2019 11:57 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,    I recently learned that???after Palo Alto firefighters expressed concerns about the proximity of a cell tower to the now-under-construction firehouse at Embarcadero and Newell???City Council approved the funds to build a radiation-inhibiting wall between the new firehouse and the cell tower.    I am shocked. In April, you and Councilmembers Cormack, Fine and Kniss???overruling Councilmembers DuBois, Kou and Tanaka???voted to allow Staff up to a year to revise the city???s Wireless Ordinance so that it would at last include basic protections for residents, protections such as disfavoring cell towers in residential areas and establishing a minimum distance between cell towers.  I would appreciate it if you would explain why you and your three colleagues were immediately responsive to the firefighters??? concerns and approved the funds to build them a radiation-inhibiting wall, no less, but have failed to show a comparable sense of urgency with respect to the concerns of Palo Altans regarding, for example, the siting of cell towers only a few short feet from their homes.   Respectfully, I ask that you right this wrong an d direct City Staff: 1) to immediately revise Palo Alto???s Wireless Ordinance so that it includes the essential new guidelines Council endorsed now over five months ago; and 2) to neither approve, permit nor allow the installation of any new cell tower that does not comply with the revised Ordinance.    Sincerely,    Francesca Kautz    Sent from my T‐Mobile 4G LTE device  1 Brettle, Jessica From:Kelly L. Rodriguez <klr@jsmf.com> Sent:Monday, September 30, 2019 1:07 PM To:SAhsing@m-group.us Cc:tedohanlon@gmail.com; yhan@goldengatehomes.us; Council, City; Leigh F. Prince; Planning Commission Subject:Notice of Preparation Comments - 788-796 San Antonio Road Mixed Use Project Attachments:2019-09-30 LFP NOP Comment Letter.pdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Pursuant to Ms. Prince’s request, please find attached her letter of today’s date.      Regards,  Kelly Rodriguez Assistant to Leigh F. Prince, Esq. JORGENSON, SIEGEL, McCLURE & FLEGEL, LLP 1100 Alma Street, Suite 210 Menlo Park, CA 94025 Phone: (650) 324-9300 Fax: (650) 324-0227 1 Brettle, Jessica From:Peter Ivanoff <pivanoff@seanet.com> Sent:Friday, September 27, 2019 7:29 AM To:Filseth, Eric (Internal) Cc:Council, City Subject:Palo Alto-Radiation central CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.    Dear Mayor Filseth,    It is not only an outrage, but in my opinion a dereliction of duty not to protect the public from   the roll‐out of 11 new Verizon cell towers in Midtown next week.  I remind you many progressive cities locally, nationally and internationally have enacted common sense   restrictions concerning this dangerous threat to public safety. I also remind you that Verizon has not complied   with basic permit requirements including equipment specifications and radiation emission safety requirement reports.  Why is the Palo Alto city council, sadly negligent regarding demanding compliance by cell phone companies?    Please think hard about this. Would you want to be one of the unlucky chosen to have a cell tower on or near your  home or your child's school?  The people of  Palo Alto elected you to protect the interests of it's citizens not lay welcome mat for corporate profits at  any price.  In the words of the mayor of Brussels, Belgium (a city in which 5g was banned), "I don't want my citizens to become  Guinea pigs".  What happened to the protections that the council unanimously voted to add to the Wireless Ordinance last April?  Have they not been enacted?     I recently learned thatafter Palo Alto firefighters expressed concerns about the proximity of a cell tower to the   now‐under‐construction firehouse at Embarcadero and NewellCity Council approved the funds to build a   radiation‐inhibiting wall between the new firehouse and the cell tower.     I am not shocked, but rather saddened by your lack of     common decency in pandering to corporate interest at the expense of public safety.    In April, you and Councilmembers, Cormack, Fine and Knissoverruling Councilmembers DuBois,   Kou and Tanakavoted to allow Staff up to a year to revise the city’s Wireless Ordinance so that it would at last   include basic protections for residents, protections such as disfavoring cell towers in residential areas and establishing   a minimum distance between cell towers.     I would appreciate it if you would explain why you and your three colleagues were immediately   responsive to the firefighters’ concerns and approved the funds to build them a radiation‐inhibiting wall,   no less, but have failed to show a comparable sense of urgency with respect to the concerns of Palo Altans   regarding, for example, the siting of cell towers only a few short feet from their homes.    Palo Alto is a unique and beautiful city. This is largely because of Palo Alto's numerous trees.   Telephone, utility poles and wires in Palo Alto are already an unsightly blight. One side of many streets in our city  are lined with "Y" shaped trees that were initially planted to grow under utility lines.  Let's not delude ourselves about "aesthetics". Mounting cell nodes  2 on top of existing poles with ugly and noisy ancillary equipment strapped to the bases of poles  certainly does not enhance the beauty of Palo Alto.     Respectfully, I ask that you right this wrong and direct City Staff: 1) to immediately revise Palo Alto’s   Wireless Ordinance so that it includes the essential new  guidelines Council endorsed now over five months ago;  and 2)  to neither approve, permit nor allow the installation of any new cell tower that does not comply with the revised  Ordinance.     sincerely,      Peter Ivanoff            1 Brettle, Jessica From:Jan Dollard Dollard <wordpress@castillejamasterplan.com> Sent:Thursday, September 26, 2019 10:05 AM To:Planning Commission; Council, City; Castilleja Expansion Subject:Please Support Castilleja CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on  links.  ________________________________    Dear Mayor Filseth and members of City Council,    My name is <label>[text* your‐name‐first placeholder "Your first name"] </label> <label>[text* your‐name‐last  placeholder "Your last name"] </label> and I live in <label>[text* city placeholder "Your City"]</label>, <label>[text*  state placeholder "Your State"]</label>. I am writing to express my support for Castilleja School’s new Master Plan and  Conditional Use Permit application.    I am very happy that the DEIR found Castilleja’s proposal to be 100% compliant with Palo Alto’s Comprehensive Plan.  The school and the City predate all of us and have a rich history together. Through this proposal, we hope to create the  best possible future for the school, the neighborhood, and the City.    The DEIR supports Castilleja’s project in many important and exciting ways, including a new campus design that is more  compatible with the surrounding residential neighborhood; LEED Platinum Environmental measures that surpass Palo  Alto’s sustainability goals; a Traffic Demand Management Program that could allow for increased enrollment without  increasing daily trips to campus; and an underground garage that is preferred over surface parking.    Castilleja was founded 112 years ago to equalize educational opportunities for women. I support Castilleja because  <label>[textarea* textarea‐96 placeholder "Personal Message"]</label>.    I hope you will support Castilleja as it seeks to modernize its campus and gradually increase high school enrollment while  minimizing its impact on the neighborhood.    Sincerely,    [text* your‐name‐first placeholder "Your first name"]    1 Brettle, Jessica From:Nadia Naik <nadianaik@gmail.com> Sent:Friday, September 27, 2019 5:19 PM To:Gaines, Chantal; Goodwin Eileen; Kamhi, Philip; Litzinger, Millette; Mercurio, Etty; Shikada, Ed Cc:Council, City Subject:Question about the tunnel options for South PA CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Hi All,    I’m catching up on the video of the XCAP meeting I missed.     At one point, Etty describes that both tunnel options for South PA are 2%.    Can you clarify why a more aggressive grade was not used for the Caltrain only tunnel where freight sits on the surface?   I understand Caltrain’s criteria today is 1%, but that’s due to freight. HSR uses much more aggressive grades and I’m  wondering why those weren’t considered.     And did Caltrain provide criteria for Caltrain only tunnels? I know they’re working on them for the eventual TransBay  section, but I’m wondering if they were finished and applied here.    Thanks,  Nadia    On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 10:04 PM Gaines, Chantal <Chantal.Gaines@cityofpaloalto.org> wrote:  Nadia asked for this so I am sending it to everyone who missed today’s meeting.     I gave out two small handouts for the last agenda item (organization item) that I will make sure we upload online.     Thanks   Chantal     Sent from my mobile device. Please excuse brevity and typos.               Chantal C. Gaines | Assistant to the City Manager 250 Hamilton Avenue | Palo Alto, CA 94301  D: 650.329.2572 | E:Chantal.Gaines@cityofpaloalto.org    1 Brettle, Jessica From:Jeanne Fleming <jfleming@metricus.net> Sent:Tuesday, October 1, 2019 3:41 PM To:French, Amy Cc:Council, City; Clerk, City; Shikada, Ed; Lait, Jonathan; Architectural Review Board; Planning Commission; UAC; board@pausd.org Subject:RE: Sept. 25, 2019 Request for Wireless Update - Response CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Dear Ms. French, Thank you for this helpful update on the existing cell tower applications in Palo Alto. I believe I understood Jonathan Lait to say yesterday (when I saw him about something else) that from now on you would routinely keep me informed about cell tower matters (e.g., application submissions, resubmissions, reviews, approvals, permits, installations, compliance reports, tolling agreements, shot clock extensions and the like). That is, what I understood him to say was that it would be no longer be necessary for me to write to you weekly to ask for this information, that you would simply provide it. I would appreciate it if you would tell me if that is correct, or if I misunderstood Jonathan. As always, thank you for your help. Sincerely, Jeanne Fleming Jeanne Fleming JFleming@Metricus.net 650-325-5151   From: French, Amy <Amy.French@CityofPaloAlto.org>   Sent: Monday, September 30, 2019 7:39 AM  To: Jeanne Fleming <jfleming@metricus.net>  Cc: Cervantes, Yolanda <Yolanda.Cervantes@CityofPaloAlto.org>; Atkinson, Rebecca  <Rebecca.Atkinson@CityofPaloAlto.org>  Subject: Sept. 25, 2019 Request for Wireless Update ‐ Response  Importance: High    Below is a response to your request for an update on Wireless matters.    2 Amy French| Chief Planning Official 250 Hamilton Avenue | Palo Alto, CA 94301 D: 650.329.2336| E: amy.french@cityofpaloalto.org Please think of the environment before printing this email –Thank you!     Wireless application updates for WCF nodes proposed for the public right of way:     1. Vinculums – as of 09/27/19    Cluster 3 (17PLN‐00228): Project status ‐ incomplete/under review. No resubmittal received. There is no tolling  agreement in place, as the application is incomplete.    Cluster 1 (17PLN‐00169): Public Works previously issued streetwork and encroachment permits. Make‐ready and other  installation work commenced in September.   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 recently issued streetwork and encroachment permits on the below five nodes.  Vinculums has not provided a resubmittal for Node 104 on Suzanne Drive or Node 154 on Barron Ave. There is a tolling  agreement for Node 104 and Node 154 (see attached).   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 09/27/19    Cluster 1 (17PLN‐00416): Project status ‐ incomplete/under review. No resubmittal received. There is no tolling  agreement in place, as the application is incomplete.    Cluster 2 (17PLN‐00433): Tolling agreement in place (already sent), awaiting plans that show conformance with  Council’s Record of Land Use Action.     Cluster 3 (17PLN‐00450): Tolling agreement in place (already sent), awaiting Director’s Decisions on nodes proposed.   3     3. AT&T – as of 09/27/19    Cluster 1 (19PLN‐00191): Project status ‐ incomplete/under review. No resubmittal received. There is no tolling  agreement in place, as the application is incomplete.      4. Other – as of 09/27/19    The city has not received new applications for wireless nodes proposed for the right of way. The most recent application  of this kind was AT&T Cluster 1 (19PLN‐00191).   1 Brettle, Jessica From:Amrutha Kattamuri <vkattamuri@yahoo.com> Sent:Thursday, September 26, 2019 9:14 AM To:Amrutha Kattamuri; Filseth, Eric (Internal) Cc:Council, City Subject:Request to direct the City Staff to update Palo Alto's Wireless Ordinance Attachments:Palo Alto Wireless Project 17PLN 031018.docx; FCC Comments Firefighter Study 2013 (3).pdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Dear Mayor Filseth, I am writing this email to request you to direct the City Staff to: - Immediately update Palo Alto’s Wireless Ordinance so that it includes the essential new guidelines Council endorsed over five months ago and - Neither approve, permit nor allow the installation of any new cell tower that does not comply with the updated Ordinance. I humbly request you to kindly go through the attachments and information links below: 1. . Attached is the letter and FCC filing sent by Susan Foster (Honorary Firefighter, San Diego Fire Department and Medical Writer) to Palo Alto City Council and ARB in March 2018 opposing Wireless Project 17PLN-00169. 2. Oregon Senate Bill (SB 283, on Wireless Radiation And Health In School) was signed into law on August 9, 2019 https://ehtrust.org/first-in-the-nation-oregon-passes-state-bill-on-wireless-radiation-and-health-in-school/ 3. Here is a lot of great info on Cell Towers, City Ordinances, Scientific literature, Policies, Resolutions and Testimonies and much more on Physicians for Safe Tech website. Physicians for Safe Technology | Cell Towers and City Ordinances     Physicians for Safe Technology | Cell Towers and City Ordinances Cities fight the FCC to maintain local control, city revenue and community health by passing 5G and small cell w...      Susan D. Foster _____________________________________________________________________________________________ 15957 Avenida Calma Rancho Santa Fe, California 92091 susan.foster04@gmail.com March 11, 2018 City Council of Palo Alto Re: Strongly Oppose Wireless Project 17PLN-00169 City.Council@cityofpaloalto.org City.Clerk@cityofpaloalto.org arb@cityofpaloalto.org Dear City Council Members: I respectfully oppose Verizon’s proposal for in excess of 90 small cell installations in the public right of way, known as Wireless Project 17PLN-00169 and scheduled for hearings on March 15, 2018. You will have the opportunity to evaluate the potential costs and benefits to the City of Palo Alto and its residents. I have great concern about the health and safety of your residents if this project goes forward. This concern is based on my experience organizing a brain study of firefighters exposed to a 2G cell tower on their station in Central California for over five (5) years. This was a pilot study of six (6) firefighters. We found brain damage in all six firefighters consistent with RF exposure. As a result of this study, as well as adverse neurological symptoms experienced by a number of firefighters throughout the state who have lived and worked in the shadow of cell towers, the firefighters of California were granted an exemption from having these small cells on their fire stations. This exemption was written into both AB 57 and SB 649, bills designed to bypass local control with respect to small cell expansion. SB 649 was vetoed by Gov. Brown on October 15, 2017, amidst growing concern from citizens as well as the League of Cities. BACKGROUND RE. FIREFIGHTER EXEMPTION In 2001 I was asked by San Diego firefighters to write appeals when cell towers were permitted for their stations. I began hearing more and more stories of firefighters who literally could not function in the job that clearly establishes firefighters as the guardians of society. Once cell towers were activated on or adjacent to their stations, the affected firefighters could no longer function without severe headaches, inability to sleep, and foggy thinking. These are not symptoms we wish to see in our First Responders. In 2004 I organized a SPECT brain scan pilot study of firefighters who has been exposed to a cell tower on their station for over five years. As stated above, we found brain abnormalities in all firefighters tested. Attached is my filing with the FCC detailing this study. In 2004 I co-authored Resolution 15 which was passed overwhelmingly by the International Association of Firefighters. Res. 15 urging a moratorium on the placement of cell towers on fire stations in the US and Canada. I then helped the Los Angeles IAFF locals as they aligned with law enforcement unions to fight FirstNET cell towers on their stations. I am currently aware of a brain tumor cluster in a California fire station with a wireless hub next door to their station. There is a solid history of these men and women becoming ill in close proximity to cell towers. There are human and financial costs associated, and the Palo Alto City Council needs to hear their story. The symptoms experienced by the firefighters who participated in the SPECT brain scan study were similar to firefighters in other stations who live in the shadow of cell towers. Yet specific to the men we studied, it is important to note all the men had passed rigorous physical and cognitive exams prior to being hired by the fire department. Their symptoms included: • headaches • extreme fatigue • cognitive impairment • anesthesia-like sleep where the men woke up for 911 calls “as if they were drugged” • inability to sleep • depression • anxiety • unexplained anger • immune-suppression manifest in frequent colds and flu-like symptoms Real life examples of these symptoms are best briefly characterized by: 1) Firefighters got lost on 911 calls in the town they grew up on several occasions. 2) In one instance, four firefighters sat in the rig in a stupor with the alarm sounding in the background, unable to remember how to start the engine. 3) A medic with 20 years of experience who had never made a mistake forgot basic CPR in the midst of resuscitating a coronary victim. The brain scans of these six men revealed both an over-stimulation in some areas of the brain, and a lack of perfusion, or blood flow, in others. The over-stimulation or “hyper-excitability” of the neurons suggested the exposure to RF (microwave) radiation was causing the neurons to continually fire without benefit of rest. When neurons cannot rest, they ultimately die. Alternately, there were other areas of the brain that should have been active, yet there was evidence of diminished blood flow suggesting impaired function. A MESSAGE FROM FIREFIGHTERS FOR LOCALITIES The firefighters’ most important lesson to us may be that if we allow a buildout of small cell aimed at facilitating 5G such that they are as commonplace in front of homes and schools as they are now on fire stations, we may be facing not only an immediate risk of impairment to some degree, but later a tsunami of Alzheimer’s and dementia. The rate of people dying from Alzheimer's disease in the United States rose by 55% over a 15-year period according to new data from the Centers for Disease Control. Clearly the state legislators honored the sacrifice of California’s firefighters and were concerned about the health risks they face from cell towers, having granted an exemption to them from small cells through AB 57 and SB 649. Yet firefighters are the strongest of the strong. What does that imply for the rest of us? The firefighters with their fire station exemption from AB 57 and SB 649 are here to remind us your local decision is not just about cell towers. It is about our future. Are we going to be persuaded by 5G propelled driverless cars and appliances being connected to our smartphones? Please understand this is an immense gamble. 5G has never been tested on humans. Respectfully, /s/ Susan Foster SUSAN FOSTER U.S. Adviser, Radiation Research Trust Honorary Firefighter, San Diego Fire Department Medical Writer Attachment 1 FCC 13-39 Before the Federal Communications Commission Washington, D.C. 20554 In the Matter of ) ) Reassessment of Federal Communications ) ET Docket No. 13-84 Commission Radiofrequency Exposure Limits and ) Policies ) ) Proposed Changes in the Commission’s Rules ) ET Docket No. 03-137 Regarding Human Exposure to Radiofrequency ) Electromagnetic Fields ) ) To: Office of the Secretary Federal Communications Commission Washington, DC 20554 Comment Filed by: Susan D. Foster, MSW 15957 Avenida Calma Rancho Santa Fe, CA 92091 susan.foster04@gmail.com 858 756-3532 September 2, 2013 2 AFFIDAVIT OF Susan D. Foster, MSW State of California ] San Diego County ] I, Susan D. Foster, MSW, attest that my statements are true to the best of my knowledge. Comment round for FCC ET Docket No. 13-84 and ET Docket No. 03-137 1. My name is Susan D. Foster, MSW. My address is 15957 Avenida Calma, Rancho Santa Fe, CA 92091. 2. I am a medical writer and the organizer of a brain study of California firefighters exposed to RF radiation from a cell tower adjacent to their fire station of over 5 years. 3. In 2004 I organized a pilot study of California firefighters who worked up to ninety (90) hours per week in fire stations with cell towers in close proximity to the two (2) stations where the firefighters work, eat, and sleep. The men were experiencing profound neurological symptoms following activation of the towers in 1999. 4. The symptoms experienced by the firefighters, all of whom had passed rigorous physical and cognitive exams prior to being hired by the fire department, included but were not limited to the following: headaches, extreme fatigue, sleep disruption, anesthesia-like sleep where the men woke up for 911 calls “as if they were drugged”, inability to sleep, depression, anxiety, unexplained anger, getting lost on 911 calls in the town they grew up in, a twenty (20) year medic forgetting basic CPR in the midst of resuscitating a coronary victim, immune-suppression manifest in frequent colds and flu-like symptoms. 5. The neurological testing and SPECT scans [single-photon emission computed tomography] of the brain were conducted by Gunnar Heuser, MD, PhD and J. Michael Uszler, MD. All six (6) firefighters were found to have brain abnormalities on SPECT scan. The doctors thought they would find areas of limited function in the brain based on the 3 symptomatology. Instead, they found a pervasive, hyper-excitability of the neurons which suggested the exposure to RF (microwave) radiation was causing the neurons to continually fire, without rest. RF radiation appeared to act as a constant stimulant even when the men were away from the station, and in repose. The SPECT scans were considered abnormal in all 6 firefighters. 6. Cognitive function, reaction time, and impulse control were measured objectively using T.O.V.A. testing [Test of Variables of Attention]. In all six (6) firefighters, impairment was found with cognitive function, reaction time and impulse control. Three (3) of the six (6) firefighters were captains. The captain on each shift is in charge of making life altering decisions for all firefighters and potential victims. They order firefighters into a burning building, and conversely, they order them out before a roof may collapse, for example. Impairment of all three critical functions could cost firefighters and the community they serve either life or limb. 7. The testing was conducted in 2004. The cell towers are in place at the two (2) fire stations where the test subjects work for the duration of a twenty-two (22) year lease. The men we tested have remained at the stations as this is the only work they know in the only community they have ever lived in. One (1) of the six (6) men tested did move to another department after his wife gave birth to to a boy who was diagnosed with Autism at age 2. This was the first live birth experienced by the “firefighter family” at this department since activation of the tower three (3) years earlier. 8. I have followed up with the firefighters who report continued symptoms as described in paragraph 4. Additionally, all firefighters report profound memory loss. 9. Two (2) of the firefighters, men we did not test in the pilot study but men who were exposed to RF radiation from the cell tower since their installation and activation in 1999, have gone out on psychiatric disability. This is almost unheard of among firefighters. The diagnosis was Post Traumatic Stress Disorder for one firefighter; he went out on an emergency run, and simply stopped talking after he returned to the station. The second 4 firefighter suffered an apparent break with reality. This occurred in the fire station when he returned following a short term disability for an unrelated injury. This break with reality was followed by an abrupt collapse and loss of consciousness. Because two (2) women have suffered strokes while in the fire station with the towers fully activated, Vascular Spasm Stroke (VSS) is suspected as a possible cause by Dr. Heuser and myself of having caused not only the strokes, but it is suspected in the potentially inaccurate diagnoses of the two (2) “psychiatric” cases among the firefighters. If not treated with rest and supplemental oxygen, it is possible for some VSS patients to have difficulty regaining speech and full cognitive abilities. This may be a case of misdiagnosis by the treating physicians who were unfamiliar with the potential of cell towers to create thermal effects well under the FCC limit of 1,000 uW/cm2, thus heating blood in the brain and inducing VSS. Further study of these men is imperative. 10. What is particularly germane to the critical decisions the FCC is currently facing regarding RF safety guidelines is the fact the FCC currently allows 1,000 microwatts per centimeter squared (uW/cm2) as an emission standard from cell towers. Yet all the symptoms attributed by the firefighters, as well as measurable brain and central nervous system abnormalities described above, occurred within close proximity to a cell tower measured at between 1 - 2 uW/cm2 by Peter Sierck, BBEC, CEO of Environmental Testing & Technology in Encinitas, CA. Thus the emissions from towers were measured at approximately 1/1000th to 1/500th of the FCC’s allowable limit. “Hot spots” of reflected radiation were measured at 15 and 30 uW/cm2, yet these “hot spots” were still a fraction of what the FCC allows. Therefore, I strongly suggest the FCC is not basing its standards on biological effects by taking into consideration non-thermal effects, but rather physics with respect to the belief only thermal effects can be deleterious. The FCC must recognized the principles of physics do not protect the brains and central nervous systems of the strongest among us, our firefighters. 11. The failure to protect our populations based on biological effects of exposure to RF (microwave) radiation at non-thermal levels is an inherent shortcoming of the current FCC policy with respect to cell tower emissions and cell phone absorption. The adverse biological 5 impact of these exposures are grossly underestimated. The FCC does not have independent science that can justify the massive exposure to RF radiation that currently exists from cell towers and cell phones. The story told by our small pilot study of firefighters in California should be a warning with respect to the current failure to recognize harmful neurological impact of non-thermal levels of RF radiation. 12. Based on the neurological abnormalities Dr. Heuser and I found in the firefighters, including hyper-excitability of the neurons which can results in cell death and consequent neuro-degenerative diseases such as Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s Disease and ALS, I urge the FCC to reflect on the gravity of the decision facing you now, and I implore all Commissioners to reduce the allowable level of RF radiation immediately, and to not only recognize the adverse health effects from non-thermal levels of RF radiation, but to actively and aggressively protect and education the general public through policy change and PSAs. 13. Finally, the FCC is not a health agency, yet it is entrusted with making decisions that impact the health of every American, including the unborn and those who cannot – through inability or lack of knowledge of the issues and dangers at hand – speak for themselves. Many consumers are encouraged through industry advertising to believe that their children will be disadvantaged if they do not have the latest wireless technology. Given the most recent culling of science in the BioInitiative Report 2012, this reckless promotion without any proof of safety puts them and their progeny at risk for neurological, immunological and reproductive harm. Furthermore, the “revolving door”-culture between the FCC and the telecommunications industry works against the best interest of consumers’ health and safety. Both the FCC and the industry reach for a common refrain to hang on to their egregiously high regulatory limits which the FCC tries to pass off as “safety limits”, but clearly they are not. That refrain tells the public time and again that “there is a lack of scientific consensus about the adverse health effects” at exposure levels at or below the existing FCC limits. No, there is not a true lack of consensus. There is a flagrant disregard by the FCC for excellent, peer review science showing adverse health effects at less than 1% of what the FCC allows. Even if this were not the case, when have we determined everyone must be on the same side, the same page, before precautionary approaches are implemented? Did we 6 wait for this 100% accord on the science regarding DDT? No, if we had done that, Dow Chemical would never have agreed their product was dangerous and the world would be a less safe place than it is now. The same argument can be used for tobacco. It is past time for the FCC to lean toward the side of protecting human life rather than telecommunications industry profits. I contend a true Precautionary Approach would be both efficient and practical. It would protect human life, the quality of those lives, prevent disease, enhance the opportunity for human potential by not insidiously eroding our greatest natural resource – the human brain, and it would keep health care costs down. I implore the FCC to recognize that six (6) out of six (6) SPECT brain scans were abnormal for the firefighter subjects, and they are the strongest of the strong among us. Respectfully submitted by Susan D. Foster, MSW 15957 Avenida Calma Rancho Santa Fe, CA 92091 September 2, 2013 Susan D. Foster, MSW (Electronically submitted) 1 Brettle, Jessica From:Rebecca Ward <rebeca.ward@verizon.net> Sent:Tuesday, October 1, 2019 10:11 PM To:ahsha.safai@sfgov.org; edward.mccaffrey@sfgov.org; Ivar.Satero@flysfo.com Cc:MayorLondonBreed@sfgov.org; karen.chapman@mail.house.gov; raquel.girvin@faa.gov; info@sforoundtable.org; jim_lazarus@feinstein.senate.gov; Council, City Subject:Impact of SFO aircraft operations/Palo Alto Roundtable membership CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Dear  Supervisor Safai, Mr. McCaffrey, and Mr. Satero:       At the last SFO Roundtable meeting, I asked the Roundtable to add Palo Alto as a member.  Since you were not at the  meeting, I am writing to you to request your support and advocation of Palo Alto’s inclusion on the SFO Roundtable.      Concentration of SFO traffic in Palo Alto warrants membership on the SFO Roundtable   As Congressman Adam Smith noted in his May 20, 2019 written testimony to the House Transportation and  Infrastructure Committee, “The narrowing of departure and arrival routes has concentrated noise and other impacts  over specific areas and those living under these pathways now bear an increased majority of the noise burden.”  Palo  Alto has three routes of low, SFO traffic overhead. According to the SFO Roundtable Website, “The purpose of the  Roundtable is to provide an on‐going public forum to cooperatively address community noise issues/impacts related to  aircraft operations at SFO.”  For almost five years absolutely nothing has been done by the airport or FAA to address the  relentless jet traffic in Palo Alto.  Palo Alto has been a top reporter of jet traffic complaints, since the implementation of  NextGen, as documented in the Airport Director’s Report.   Palo Alto, is just over the border of the airport funded SFO  Roundtable.   Roundtable requests for route changes and higher altitudes (e.g., PIRAT2) can shift traffic to Palo Alto.  There is no independent oversight to ensure shifting traffic to communities outside the Roundtable does not occur.      The airport largely funds the SFO Roundtable ($220,000/year).  As I mentioned at the last SFO Roundtable meeting, SFO  Roundtable members pay $1500, the City of Palo Alto is paying $33,000 (22 times more) to be on the SCSC Roundtable, a  Roundtable that is nascent and not funded by or the official forum of SFO.  The original SFO Roundtable MOU has been  amended multiple times, including in 1997 when it was amended to allow non‐member cities and towns in San Mateo  County to join.  The steps for adding Palo Alto are straight forward and already  documented.  http://cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/52015      Unabated SFO aircraft operations cause harm to Palo Alto residents   At the last Roundtable meeting, I discussed the impact of SFO aircraft operations on the community of Palo Alto.   A  recent Palo Alto Online article describes the frustration of residents and the impact to the community.  Inundated with  massive jets overhead, an employee of JLS Middle School described that you can’t hear what the children  say https://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2019/06/11/palo‐alto‐veers‐away‐from‐lawsuit‐against‐federal‐aviation‐ administration.   Data presented at the SFO Roundtable indicates that this level of noise is likely impacting children’s  learning (https://sforoundtable.org/wp‐content/uploads/2018/04/20180404_Health‐Effects‐Presentation.pdf, slide  13). While SFO Roundtable members get FLY Quiet at night, Palo Alto residents are bombarded with loud, jumbo jet  traffic as the noise monitoring report documents.  The traffic is  relentless.  https://media.flysfo.com/sfo_PaloAltoNoiseReport_2019‐007.pdf).   2     Airlines fly hundreds of Airbus 319/320 that emit an unhealthy,  high‐pitch during landings into SFO.   A cheap retrofit has been available since 2014.  Six years later, the airlines fly these toxic noisemakers into SFO in  concentration over Palo Alto.    https://www.lawa.org/‐/media/lawa‐web/environment/lax‐community‐noise‐ roundtable/noise_management_presentations/noise_management_presentation/noisert_141112_noise‐from‐a320‐ family‐of‐aircraft.ashx?la=en&hash=DA836652B272BAB1FA2403792594FB344D3E39FF      As an example of the severe concentration, in a span of less than 10 minutes, 6 planes flew over roughly the same area  of Palo Alto ‐ including three massive 777, and two Airbus 320 without retrofit. The second Airbus is at only 3500ft  over  the City of Palo Alto.   Oct 1, 20:37:47 AS1963 (SAN:SFO A320 213k, 3499ft)  Oct 1, 20:35:40 AA2305 (JFK:SFO A321 214k, 4502ft)  Oct 1, 20:34:21 SQ2 (HKG:SFO B77W 201k, 5805ft)  Oct 1, 20:31:59 WN1720 (BUR:SFO B737 217k, 4320ft)  Oct 1, 20:29:58 CA 785 (PEK:SFO B77W 194k, 3715ft)  Oct 1, 20:28:02 AI 183 (DEL:SFO B77L 177k, 3982ft)      Unregulated ultra fine particulate matter is a health risk   Ultrafine particulate (UFP) matter is emitted at high levels by planes. NextGen has severely concentrated jet traffic and  as a result, noise, pollution and the health risks are also concentrated.  “Several years ago, USC researchers identified a  clear pattern of UFP emissions from takeoff and landing aircraft activities at  LAX.”     https://envhealthcenters.usc.edu/2019/02/ultrafine‐particle‐pollution‐lax.html      Congressman Smith’s testimony points out, “In addition to noise impacts from aviation, ultrafine particles (UFPs) in the  atmosphere pose an outsize threat to those living near airports and under flight pathways... According to the FAA’s own  preliminary research, fine and ultrafine particles in the atmosphere are considered a health risk in humans because of  their ability to penetrate deep into the human respiratory system. UFPs may be particularly dangerous as they may  aggravate heart ailments, contribute to lung disease, and cause nervous system  impacts.” https://medium.com/@adamsmithoffice09/smith‐testimony‐highlighting‐effects‐of‐aviation‐noise‐and‐ emissions‐ca383de291f1.        Palo Alto has three routes of SFO traffic concentrated over the community.      Palo Alto has arbitrarily been denied membership on the SFO Roundtable   As I described at the last Roundtable meeting, the city of Palo Alto has tried (since 1995) to gain membership on the SFO  Roundtable. It has repeatedly been denied.  Lack of membership on the SFO Roundtable seems to give the airport and  FAA license to ignore the serious problem of SFO aircraft operations in Palo Alto.  Unfortunately, residents can’t ignore  it. They are forced to live under the rails.  There is no legitimate reason for excluding Palo Alto.      The airport is worsening the situation in Palo Alto  The airport claimed it would not pursue any GBAS procedures that appears to have a negative impact.  (http://sforoundtable.org/wp‐content/uploads/2018/04/20180404_GBAS‐Part‐I.pdf).  That commitment appears to only  apply to Roundtable members.  GBAS is an arrival’s system and will be detrimental to Palo Alto implemented as an  overlay to existing routes.  GBAS will concentrate even more traffic on the NextGen rails.  The airport analysis showed  3 noise and concentration would worsen in Palo Alto.  GBAS should not be deployed until underlying routes and  concentration are addressed by the FAA.        I ask you to  advocate for Palo Alto’s inclusion on the SFO Roundtable, given the documented impact airport operations  have on the community.            Rebecca Ward   Palo Alto, CA    Cc:  Senator Dianne Feinstein via Jim Lazarus    Mayor London Breed  Congresswoman Anna Eshoo via Karen Chapman   Raquel Girvin, Western‐Region Regional Administrator  Palo Alto City Council  The SFO Roundtable   1 Brettle, Jessica From:Judith Schwartz <judith@tothept.com> Sent:Monday, September 30, 2019 4:33 PM To:UAC; Council, City Cc:Abendschein, Jonathan; Batchelor, Dean; Elvert, Catherine; Benatar, Lisa Subject:WE Magazine Fall Issue Features CPAU Attachments:WE-Fall19-24-33.pdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Dear UAC and City Council Members,    An article I wrote was published today by Western Energy Institute. (I’ve also attached the PDF). It features a discussion  of the carbon accounting methodology being proposed by CPAU staff as well as observations on why it is critical to  understand the differences between 100% carbon neutral and zero carbon targets.  I hope this piece will help inform  your respective deliberations in the future.    Best regards,    Judith    Judith Schwartz  To the Point  2330 Bryant St. Suite 2  Palo Alto, CA 94301 USA  http://www.tothept.com      From: WEI <zapun@westernenergy.org>  Reply‐To: "zapun@westernenergy.org" <zapun@westernenergy.org>  Date: Monday, September 30, 2019 at 2:01 PM  To: Judith Schwartz <judith@tothept.com>  Subject: WE Magazine Fall Issue Now Available    Kick off your week with the new issue. Find out what your peers are saying.    To help protect your priv acy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.http://images.e2ma.net/1362677/images/templates/wei3_ts_01.jpg To help protect your priv acy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.WesternEnergy Institute Logo   To help protecMicrosoft Officautomatic dowpicture from thhttp://images.677/images/tem_03.png WE Magazine New Issue Now Available To help protect your priv acy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.http://images.e2ma.net/1362677/images/templates/wei3_ts_05.jpg 2 Fall 2019 Issue   This fall’s issue sets the course for the upcoming year with WEI Chair Booga K. Gilbertson’s announcement of WEI’s 2020 theme. Plus, read how Chelan County Public Utility District teamed with the National Hydropower Association to release a report, “Reinvigorating Hydropower.” As policy makers rush forward to decarbonize, it’s important to educate them on the strategic, clean and affordable benefits of the nation’s hydro resource. Plus, so much more! Click below to read the new issue now.   To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.read new issue now       To help protect your priv acy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.WE Magazine | Fall 2019       What's inside? This issue also includes:  BC Hydro’s innovative approach to siting substations underground in dense urban areas.  How biologists and managers are working to improve anadromous fish survival at Tacoma Public Utilities’ Cushman Hydroelectric Project.  Sustainability consultant Judith Schwartz urges a rational approach to delivering a greener energy future.  Kevin Prouty, of IDC’s Energy Insights, takes a look at security issues in legacy operations technology.  And don’t forget, the WE Crossword and WEI Programs at a Glance.   3 Content Contributors   BC Hydro, Chelan County Public Utility District, IDC, Puget Sound Energy, Tacoma Public Utilities and To the Point     Have a story to tell? Get published.   If you have an idea for a story, we'd love to hear it. Below are two easy ways to share your insights, expertise and accomplishments with WE magazine. 1. Fill out our abstract submission form available on our website. 2. Email Gabrielle Zapun at zapun@westernenergy.org.     Free Mobile App   Download the WE mobile app, available on iPad/iPhone and Android devices, for easy reading on the go.     Want even more news? Check out our News + Resources blog.      QUESTIONS? Gabrielle Zapun Managing Editor zapun@westernenergy.org   To help protect your priv acy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.WE Magazine | Fall 2019 New Issue of WE Magazine Now Available Best practices and case studies published quarterly     4  Share this email: To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.Email To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.Twitter To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.Facebook To help protect yMicrosoft Office automatic downlpicture from the LinkedIn    Manage your preferences | Opt out using TrueRemove™ Got this as a forward? Sign up to receive our future emails. View this email online. 1050 SW Sixth Ave Suite 325 Portland, OR | 97204 United States This email was sent to judith@tothept.com. To continue receiving our emails, add us to your address book.   To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.powered by emma       1 Brettle, Jessica From:Mark Cox <markdarrellcox@icloud.com> Sent:Saturday, September 28, 2019 3:18 PM To:pressoffice@goarch.org Subject:What If : Ten Sounds (ii) CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Given that Non‐Tiberian Maternal Semivowels can take on Consonantal Paternal Behavior and Consonantal Paternal  Final Kaf (ך) can take inclusively carry a Vowel Sound as it's Terminus ((Of an Open Syllable of Single Character  Construction)) then is this an Example Crossing Over in Gender because at Root We are ((Apparently)) Male and Female  though One is Dominant to the Other by the Soul and Not the Body?     [:;]    If the Tetragrammaton (הוהי) is "Yawuøòwah" with Nine Sounds, then Okay; But what if the Tetragrammaton is Actually  in Fact, a Sequence of Ten Sounds? What if (הוהי) is "Yhawuøòwah"? The Thing to Consider is that the Semivowel Abjad's  are Explicitly Rendered Vowels in "Non‐Defective Spelling" Whenever the Semivowel is in a "Non‐Initial Position of the  Word" in a "Singular Occurrence of a Semivowel" meaning the Single Maternal Semivowel is Wrapped by Paternal  Consonants in it's Context ((Though Not Necessarily in the Same Syllable)), Unless the Singular Maternal Semivowel is  the Last Character of the Word Preceeded by Consonant ((Though Functionally [Perhaps, If True] the Abjad of the Next  Word Wraps the Ending Explicitly Rendered Semivowel.)). However, whenever there are Two Maternal Semivowels in  Sequence within a Medial Position ((Meaning these Two Maternal Semivowels are Adjacent One to the Other)), then the  First Maternal Semivowel [[Of Two Paired Maternal Semivowels]] ((Seems to be)) an Explicit Vowel while the Second  Semivowel [[Of Two Paired Maternal Semivowels]] ((Seems to be)) Serving Double Duty in the Double Function of  Opening a Syllable as Consonant while also Providing the Vowel of the Consonant hence the First Semivowel of Two  Semivowels in a Medial Context of a Word will be the Explicit Vowel of the Previous Syllable in What is an Open Syllable  and the Next Semivowel will be the Consonant and the Vowel of the Next Processional Syllable. ((The First Abjad of a  Word is the Rear Guard of the Word in Procession and the Last Character of the Word leads the Forward Charge into the  Next Word.)). Yet, what about when this Sequence of Two Paired Semivowels begins at the Onset of the Word? We  know that the Initial Abjad of Any Given Word will be Consonantal in Function regardless of the Type of Abjad. Despite  this, Would this Second Maternal Semivowel in the Second Position of a Word that begins with a Maternal Semivowel in  Paternal Consonantal Function, Would this Second Position Maternal Semivowel ((Of the Word that begins with a  Semivowel)) Serve the Double Duty Function of Behaving like a Consonant at the Onset of a Syllable while also carrying  the Explicitly Rendered Vowel Sound of the Vowel Sound of the Syllable this Second Semivowel Belongs to?    If My People who are Called by My Name. Judah, Jude, Yod, Ten.  In the Expulsion from Rome under Emperor Claudius  the Apostle Paul and Aquila made Tents. Claudius was the Emperor from 0041 to 0054. Given that Paul is likely Pontus  Pilate who shed his Identity to Avoid Execution by Emperor Tiberius upon Pilate's Recall to Rome in 0036 then if Pilate  came from Pontus, given that Aquila came from Pontus there would be a Natural Linguistic Affinity between Paul and  Aquila. If True, then perhaps the Modern Pontus Dialect of Greek has a Better Preservation of the Lost Greek Koine  Pronounciation of Greek Vowels and therefore the Pairing of Paul and Aquila functions as Double Underscored Pointer  to the Modern Pontus Greek Dialect hence though Paul is Small in his Understanding as Paul who was Blinded by Light  would Teach Male Gentiles to Wrongly Circumvent the Covenant of Avraám in a Fundamental Misunderstanding his  "Smallness" is Nevertheless ((Potentially)) a Vast Significant Contribution towards the Restoration of the Original  Understanding of the Contextually Driven Hebrew Abjad as the True Greek Septuagint Translation functions as a Lens to  See Past the Con. Hence the True Septuagint is the Key to Unlock Aspects of Hebrew Vowel "Grammar Framework" even  allowing for the Unredaction of Historic "Vulgar" Pronounciations whether from the Maternal Intrusion of Tiberius or  Vernacular Usage. This happens by the Way in that the True Greek Septuagint Translation of Matching Words functions  2 to Embed with the Greek Matching Word the Harder to Cipher Hebrew Vowels in their Non‐Defective State of Hebrew  Spelling. Given that a "T" Vowel Character is used in the Tiberian Vowel System and this "T" Vowel carries the Vowel  Sound of ((Or Like)) the First Character of the Latin Alphabet then was this to Suggest that Tiberius is the Double  Breasted God of a New Hybrid Form of Israel even as "Ma" is within "Masoretic" and that were supposed to Drink from  the Milk Provided in Our Crucifiction by the Loving Emperor Caesar Augustus? Well wait, the "T" Vowel Sound is Qamatz  and Supposedly Qamatz is supposed to be /ɔ/ which is an "Open Mid‐Back Rounded Vowel" [[This Keeps Happening.  Apple's Seemingly Deliberate Stupidity is to Include an "Undo" Key that Strips Away what you've Written without  Supplying a Means to Restore What this "Easy to Accidentally Hit Key" Unintentionally ((Intentionally)) Strips from your  Writing. It's a Malicious Inclusion and I therefore Formally Request the God give the Order that Kelly Jean Leary ((The  Lying Bitch My Cousin who Falsely Claims the Name of Laurene Powell by a Falsified Birth and Falsified Birthdate so the  Slimey Bitch who is "Pisces of February 19, 1973" and "Not Scorpion of November 6, 1963" could Screw the Mind of Jeff  Stern Laird the Jew who lied to say Jeff was the "Not Jewish Steve Jobs")) to be and Her Criminal Associates are Crucified  Repeatedly in Hell in the Middle of the Flames of Hell. While you might be offended by this, the Continuation of Leary  Mafia and Black Hand Subversion needs to STOP.]] which to my Hearing sounds akin in Pronounciation by Others to an  "A" Sound. What does Qamatz mean literally by Way of Etymology? Is this "Qa" from "Ka" as in "Caesar"? There is the  Medial "Ma" Sound denoting Maternal Mother.  "Mat" is also like "Maternal" and "Caesar" begins with a Hard "K" Sound  while the "S" is said by Some to be "S"‐Like and by Others to be "Z"‐Like and We All Know what a Russian Czar is and  where did Czar come from? So is Qamatz a Self Aggrandized Double Breasted Roman Dictator? Either way, there is also  the Pa'tah Vowel which is the Father God the Creator Deity known to Ancient Egypt as the Patron God of Memphis at  the Juncture of the Nile ((Phishon in the Paradise of Gaia whereafter these Four Rivers were moved along with the  Surrounding Landmasses as the Continental Landmass was Reconfigured to Depict Our Story as a Map as the Story  Unfolds and Maybe Australia is Gaia as a Microcosm in the Rebeginning After the Flood and Maybe the Ark landed in  Eastern Australia and Senaar of Babylon was in the Center of Australia and Senaar is Center and Senaar of the Land  between Two Rivers Mesopatamia is Another Senaar at a Future Date hence the Small Continent is the Small Rebirth via  a Remnant from the Ark is the Baby that is the Future even as Children in Movies are the Future in the Storyline of the  Script.]] And what does an Underscore Beneath the Characters of the Hebrew Abjad denote to render the  Representation of Pa'tah? Does this Convey the Reversal of the Scripture to "Sit at My Right Hand until your Enemies are  made into a Footstool"? A Reversal in What Sense of the Word? To Reduce the Most High Tetragrammaton the Father  God Creator Deity to a Footstool beneath a Book of Defective Spelling and with Revisions that will lead those that would  follow to be led towards a state of unintended error that is Nevertheless Sin even as Abimelech would die for taking  Sarah though Avraám had lied to Abimelech in saying Sarah was a Sister and Not a Wife, and even upon Restoration of  Sarah to Avraám the fuller truth that Sarah had been a Sister‐in‐Law to Avraám before Avraám's Brother died is  concealed from Abimelech. Who exactly is the Entity sitting at the Right Hand? My Lord said to My Lord? Is this the  Messiah or is this Avraám? Why would the Messiah Sit at the Right Hand if the Messiah is Waw (ו) Standing in the  Presence of God between the Two Heh's of the Tetragrammaton, between the Paternal and Maternal of the True  Creator Deity? Stephane said that Stephane saw the Messiah sitting at the Right Hand of God when the Tetragrammaton  is made of Left Profile Schematics of the Mouth Chamber hence Yod "Left Hand", Heh "Left Breast", Waw "Sternum",  Heh "Right Breast", and the "Right Hand" is Unseen thought the Puckers Plosive of the Hieroglyphic of Memphis could  suggest Phoenician Tet/Teth yet to be as the Angels in Heaven is to be like Tav (ת) like Sphinx in the Metaphor of  Abilities. Other Scripture regards the Messiah Sitting at the Right Hand of God? What Scripture? Unadulterated Gospel  Scripture? Errant Letters that are Historic but Inspired though Nevertheless Significant? Rashi is Likewise Significant but  Rashi is Not Inspired Writting. What is Wrong with Rashi is the Diet of Defective Scripture and to Study this as a Malady  of Mankind while recognizing Brilliance and Detecting Error is No Small Thing. What is Wrong with The Letter Writers of  the Epistles? What is the Causation of their Sickness? If they weren't Corrupted by the Masoretic from Tiberius as  apparently they were all possibly reading the Valid Septuagint Translation before it's Corruption yet Neverthelesss by  Degree there is Manifest Corruption in Writings that also have Merit, then what was the Causation of their Downfall to  make Manifest Errors? Were they Merely Reading and Not Also Reciting? Were they Reading the Truth yet Diverging  from the Truth in the Behavior? "Circumcision? Don't Worry Guys. You can Keep your Fashion Foward Foreskins. Cleats  are the New Mod. If you want a Halo make a Donation." So "if" Stephane made a Grave Mistake then Maybe this is the  Mistake that Killed Stephane. I'm not saying that I know the answer to this. But it's Problematic that they wanted  Stephane to be the Master Bread Delivery Boy for the Greeks so the "Hebrew Elite" could all "Study" Scripture. Study?  Did they Mean "Read without Recitation"? Catepillars need to Eat their Leaves and Stephane would have made a  3 Formidable Recitating Opponent in a Wrestling Match of Quoted Words. Who can beat who with the Tongue? Likewise  Some Interactive Community Time would have been Rejuvenative for the "Sit On Their Ass Disciples." To say that  Stephane is Automatically Immaculate is to skip over the Question, was Stephane misreading what Stephane saw? What  did Stephanr see? If the Right Hand is Hidden are these Stars to the Moon the Maternal? Was the Scripture of the  Gospels corrupted by the Rendering of the Reading of Stephane? If the Right Hand is Hidden then to say the Messiah sits  at as in near to the Right Hand to say that the Messiah is Not Central but is Seperate from God but then how could the  Messiah be Emanuel? If the Messiah is to Right of the First Heh (ה) of the Tetragrammaton (הוהי) then the Messiah is  Sitting and Not Standing.     Ecetera? What does this Word mean exactly? Terah? Tera? Ace Master Rippers?     So What Exactly Happened that made the Hebrews in Rome Vulnerable to Expulsion?     Between 1939 and 1914 is a Difference of 0025 and these Two Years are Markers of the Preceeding Set of Third and  Fourth Generations. If 0025 plays Any Significance in the Period under Claudius then given that 0070 minus 0025 equals  0045 could the Year 0045 have been the Year of the Explusion of Rome? Yet, these Two Years would not be the Markers  that begin Third and Fourth Generations as the Second Temple's Near Total Destruction occurs in a War that has an  Earlier Beginning than the Year 0070.     The Great Revolt begins in 0066. To take 0025 from 0066 gives the result of 0041. This is the Year Claudius begins his  Reign as Emperor. The Term Chresto is used to mean "Slave"? Is this the Manifest Reality of those Who Purport to  Follow the Messiah yet Break the Covenant of Male Circumcision? Did the Jews in Rome offer a Longer Resistance to the  Switch to the Masoretic Text than the Latin Christians in Rome hence why under Nerva who becomes Emperor in 0096  there is a Tax Required of Practicing Jews and Christians are Tax Free? Was Rome baiting Jews through Tax Exemption?  Rome has to remove their God and their Book from their Mouth just like Sampson's Mistress had to Cut off Sampson's  Hair. Did anything Immediate begin Claudius? Was this Period's Span of Time between Successive Fourths 74 Years, 87  Years, or Some Other Number? Why is this Obscure in Recorded History? No one studies this?       The Expulsion of Jews from Jerusalem begins in 0135 at the End of the Third Roman‐Jewish War the Bar Kokhba War  which begins in 0132. To take 0087 from 0132 gives the Year of 0045 which could be Year Claudius expulsed Jews from  Rome though others claim this could have happened later in 0051/0052. This Expulsion from Rome isn't the First in  History. In 0139 BC under the Consulship of Calpurnius Piso and Popilius Laenas Jews were expulsed from Rome. This will happen again under Emperor Tiberius in 0019. Then later the Expulsion of Jews from Rome occurs again under Emperor  Claudius circa 0041‐0054 ((Potentially 0045)). Now given that Jews were expulsed Thrice from Rome with the Last Two  of these occur under Roman Emperors within the Roman Pax before the Bar Kokhba Revolt of 0132 will end with  Expulsion of Jews from Jerusalem in 0135 then is it possible that this Experience in Rome fostered a Greater Cleavage of  Hebrews in Rome to the True Non‐Defective Undotted Original Hebrew Scripture than in even Jerusalem and is this why  Rome under Nerva in 0096 would have to entice Jews with a Tax Exemption if Only they would leave their True Book to  become Chresto Christian Slaves whose Book was Covertly Infiltrated? "Come on Guys. This is the New Book. I don't care  what you Mouth Memorized. Try the New Flavor. Huh? Nobody? Don't you know Not to Look a Gift Horse in the Mouth?  What's Wrong with you Guys? You think I make Money Talking to Myself? Take the Bait!"    Ayin (ע) seems to function like a French Liason, in joining Adjacent Medial Syllables where the Gutteral Glottal Stop  Closes the Vowel of the Preceeding Syllable ((Where the Said Vowel is Expressed by the Onset of Ayin)) and the Gutteral  Glottal Stop is Also the Next Consonant ((the Virtual Consonant)) that begins this Next Syllable with the Inclusion of the  Vowel Sound of the Next Processional Syllable by Ayin's Presence.     Final Kaf (ך) seems to have the sound of "CHA" in some Words which would mean the Consonant is serving as a  Consonant plus Semivowel in Some ((Preceeding)) Contexts but the case of Baruch (ךורבּ) Final Kaf (ך) is "CH." So is the  Difference Defined by whether is the Preceeding Second to Last Character is Semivowel in Semivowel Behavior or an  Abjad in Consonantal Behavior? The Reason this is Potentially Confusing is because whenever an Abjad of Consonantal  4 Behavior is in the Final Position of a Word by it's Index of Characters then you expect the Next Preceeding Consontal  Character to be the Opener of a Closed Syllable yet with Kaf (ך) as "CHA" then this is Not the Case.  1 Brettle, Jessica From:Annette Fazzino <annette.fazzino@gmail.com> Sent:Friday, September 27, 2019 9:52 AM To:Filseth, Eric (Internal) Cc:Council, City Subject:What's Good for the Goose is Good for the Gander CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Dear Mayor Filseth:    As you know, I am vehemently opposed to the design and siting of the cell towers. The towers should not be situated  anywhere near our homes and schools, for the many, many reasons that I have named in previous correspondence.     In April, it was agreed that Staff would revise the City's Wireless Ordinance to help protect our communities. Specifically,  it was agreed that setback provisions were to be added to mandate distance between homes and schools and the  towers. An entire year was allowed for Staff to make these amendments. We are nearly 6 months in. Has progress been  made?    What is especially disconcerting is the difference in consideration that you and the Council have given between residents  and the PAFD. Our wonderful Palo Alto Firefighters also expressed concerns about the cell towers. The Council and the  City's response? Install a radiation blocking wall between the Fire Station and the cell tower located nearby! Meanwhile,  in Midtown, 11 new ugly, unsafe, heavy towers are being plopped right next to our residents' homes. This is so very  wrong.    Mayor Filseth, what's good for the goose is good for the gander. Residents are as important as our Firefighters. Do the  right thing by our citizens. I ask that you direct the City Staff to immediately complete the revised ordinance to include  the commitment of the Council in April. And in the meantime, cease all permits, installation, or approval for any more  cell towers until the revision is in place. Anything new MUST comply to the agreement made in April.    Yours truly,  Annette Evans Fazzino  650.799.7414      1 Brettle, Jessica From:ablumen@aol.com Sent:Thursday, September 26, 2019 8:11 PM To:Filseth, Eric (Internal) Cc:Council, City Subject:Where is your concern? CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Dear Mayor Filseth, I recently learned that City Council approved the funds to build a radiation-inhibiting wall between the new firehouse and the cell tower because of the concerns of firefighters. I wonder whether you believe that firefighters are more vulnerable and need more protection than children and other residents? I would appreciate it if you would explain why you and your colleagues were immediately responsive to the firefighters’ concerns and approved the funds to build them a radiation-inhibiting wall, but have failed to show concern for residents regarding the siting of cell towers only a few feet from their homes. I live in midtown and it is amazing to me that you are adding to the mess of utilities dangling over our heads when you should be working toward putting all utilities under ground. Wouldn't it be nice if our streets looked more compatible with our image as a progressive city? At the very least I ask that you direct City Staff to revise ASAP Palo Alto’s Wireless Ordinance so that it includes the new guidelines Council endorsed months ago. And also to neither approve, permit nor allow the installation of any new cell tower that does not comply with the revised Ordinance. Sincerely, A. Bernstein Loma Verde Palo Alto 1 Brettle, Jessica From:Jeanette Bahn <jeanettebahn@gmail.com> Sent:Thursday, September 26, 2019 6:55 PM To:Filseth, Eric (Internal); Council, City Subject:Wireless Ordinance must be revised CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Dear Mayor Filseth,    I recently learned that—after Palo Alto firefighters expressed concerns about the proximity of a cell tower to the now-under-construction firehouse at Embarcadero and Newell—City Council approved the funds to build a radiation-inhibiting wall between the new firehouse and the cell tower.     I am shocked. In April, you and Councilmembers Cormack, Fine and Kniss—overruling Councilmembers DuBois, Kou and Tanaka—voted to allow Staff up to a year to revise the city’s Wireless Ordinance so that it would at last include basic protections for residents, protections such as disfavoring cell towers in residential areas and establishing a minimum distance between cell towers.   I would appreciate it if you would explain why you and your three colleagues were immediately responsive to the firefighters’ concerns and approved the funds to build them a radiation-inhibiting wall, no less, but have failed to show a comparable sense of urgency with respect to the concerns of Palo Altans regarding, for example, the siting of cell towers only a few short feet from their homes.    Respectfully, I ask that you right this wrong and direct City Staff: 1) to immediately revise Palo Alto’s Wireless Ordinance so that it includes the essential new guidelines Council endorsed now over five months ago; and 2) to neither approve, permit nor allow the installation of any new cell tower that does not comply with the revised Ordinance.     Yours truly,  Jeanette Bahn  1 Brettle, Jessica From:Mary Thomas <mj_thomas_2000@yahoo.com> Sent:Wednesday, September 25, 2019 2:37 PM To:Filseth, Eric (Internal) Cc: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, I am writing in disbelief that the Council voted to approve funding to build a protective wall between the new fire house on Embarcadero and Newell to protect the firefighters from potential dangerous emissions from the cell towers and yet nothing has been done to move ahead to place the cell towers in our neighborhoods in places that are further away from our homes! Do not permit the installation of any new cell tower that doesn't comply with the revised Ordinance! Yours truly, Mary Thomas {REDACTED} 94301 1 Brettle, Jessica From:Jeanne Fleming <jfleming@metricus.net> Sent:Wednesday, September 25, 2019 3:53 PM To:French, Amy Cc:Council, City; Clerk, City; Shikada, Ed; Lait, Jonathan; Architectural Review Board; Planning Commission; UAC; board@pausd.org Subject:Sept. 25, 2019 Request for Wireless Update Attachments:Crown Castle Cluster 2 Cluster 3 Tolling Agreement Signed 091619.PDF Dear Ms. French, First, thank you for sending me the tolling agreement/shot clock extension the City of Palo Alto recently entered into with Crown Castle/Verizon. As I understand it: 1. The cluster of Verizon cell towers in the University South neighborhood— which Planning Director Lait approved over the objections of the Architectural Review Board (ARB) in January of this year—has been put on hold until November 18, 2019; 2. The “shot clock” for the cluster of Verizon cell towers in the Downtown North neighborhood—cell towers for which the ARB, in January, 2019, found the design to be unacceptable, and on which Mr. Lait has not yet taken action—has been extended until November 18, 2019. If my understanding is not correct, please tell me.   Second, please send me the shot clock extension agreement for the Vinculums/Verizon cluster of cell towers known as Cluster 3 (i.e., group of cell towers in the Old Palo Alto neighborhood), as well as the currently in force agreements for all other cell tower applications to install cell towers in other neighborhoods of the City of Palo Alto.  Finally, I am writing to ask you what, if anything, has occurred with respect to small cell node wireless installations in Palo Alto since you last answered that question on September 13th, 2019. As always, please consider this a formal request.   To be clear, I am asking specifically for information about cell tower application submissions, resubmissions, reviews, approvals, permits, installations, compliance reports, tolling agreements, shot clock extensions and the like. Thank you for your help. And, of course, please let me know if you have any questions   Sincerely,    Jeanne Fleming For United Neighbors    Jeanne Fleming, PhD  JFleming@Metricus.net  650-325-5151    2       From: Jeanne Fleming <jfleming@metricus.net>   Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2019 1:39 PM  To: 'French, Amy' <Amy.French@CityofPaloAlto.org>  Cc: 'City'' <city.council@cityofpaloalto.org>; 'City'' <city.clerk@cityofpaloalto.org>; 'Shikada, Ed'  <Ed.Shikada@CityofPaloAlto.org>; 'Lait, Jonathan' <Jonathan.Lait@CityofPaloAlto.org>; 'Architectural Review Board'  <arb@cityofpaloalto.org>; Planning.Commission@cityofpaloalto.org; UAC@cityofpaloalto.org; board@pausd.org  Subject: RE: Please provide update on Wireless    Dear Ms. French,    Thank you for offering to send me the tolling agreement.    When you do, I would appreciate it if you would also tell me, in brief, the length(s) of the shot clock extension(s) and to what cell tower applications they apply. (I have no experience with tolling agreements, and I wouldn’t want to draw the wrong conclusions from what I read.)   Again, thank you for your help.    Sincerely,    Jeanne Fleming     Jeanne Fleming, PhD  JFleming@Metricus.net  650-325-5151        From: French, Amy <Amy.French@CityofPaloAlto.org>   Sent: Monday, September 16, 2019 9:38 PM  To: Jeanne Fleming <jfleming@metricus.net>  Subject: Re: Please provide update on Wireless    Would you like to see the shot clock extension? I received a copy today. It is a public record so I can send to you.   Sent from my iPad    On Sep 16, 2019, at 4:40 PM, Jeanne Fleming <jfleming@metricus.net> wrote:  Dear Ms. French,   Thank you for your prompt response.    I would appreciate it if you would explain the following sentence in your email: “The city anticipated a tolling agreement filing this week to extend the City’s decision(s).”   Specifically, to which “decision(s)” on which cell tower applications are you referring?    3 As always, thank you for your help.   Sincerely,    Jeanne Fleming     Jeanne Fleming, PhD  JFleming@Metricus.net  650-325-5151       From: French, Amy <Amy.French@CityofPaloAlto.org>   Sent: Friday, September 13, 2019 5:49 PM  To: Jeanne Fleming <jfleming@metricus.net>  Cc: Lait, Jonathan <Jonathan.Lait@CityofPaloAlto.org>  Subject: RE: Please provide update on Wireless     This is the extent of my knowledge about recent events:   I sent you an email September 12 alerting you updates were made to the Wireless page.   At least one neighbor in midtown received a proposed wireless installation in midtown, citing  work to begin September 17.  I saw the letter on Sunday. Such notice is required is per the City’s  Master License Agreement (MLA) requiring that applicants send a 10‐day in advance notification  of construction work.   No decision has been made yet on the Crown Castle Cluster 3 (17PLN‐00450) Downtown North  application.     The city anticipated a tolling agreement filing this week to extend the City’s decision(s).  I believe  the City did receive the agreement but I have not seen the agreement.  You can check back next  week on that.     <image001.png>   Amy French| Chief Planning Official  250 Hamilton Avenue | Palo Alto, CA 94301 D: 650.329.2336| E: amy.french@cityofpaloalto.org Please think of the environment before printing this email –Thank you!    From: Jeanne Fleming [mailto:jfleming@metricus.net] Sent: Friday, September 13, 2019 4:11 PM To: French, Amy Cc: Council, City; Clerk, City; Shikada, Ed; Lait, Jonathan; Architectural Review Board; Planning Commission; UAC; board@pausd.org Subject: Please provide update on Wireless     CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.  Dear Ms. French,   On behalf of United Neighbors, I am writing to ask you what, if anything, has occurred with respect to small cell node wireless installations in Palo Alto since I contacted you on September 6, 2019. Please consider this a formal request.    4 To be clear, I am asking specifically for information about cell tower application submissions, resubmissions, reviews, approvals, permits, installations, compliance reports and the like. The City Manager’s Wireless Hot Topics webpage update yesterday did not include this information.    I am assuming that, since you have not contacted me with new application information since I wrote to you last Friday, nothing has occurred related to cell tower applications between July 17th, 2019, when Rebecca Atkinson provided an update at my request, and September 6, 2019.     If my assumption is not correct, please let me know. And, of course, please let me know if you have any questions.     Sincerely,    Jeanne Fleming     Jeanne Fleming, PhD  JFleming@Metricus.net  650-325-5151       1 Brettle, Jessica From:Mark Cox <markdarrellcox@icloud.com> Sent:Saturday, September 28, 2019 8:29 PM To:jd@howardstern.com Subject:Yes We Can CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on  links.  ________________________________    Chicago can indeed join Canada. Meanwhile Walmart gets Free Advertising. Why don't they just build a Road? Interstate  "New 10." Tanks could drive up and down. Send the Message. As with Ivanka's UN Free Milk Session, both Avraám  (ΑΒΡΑΆΜ) [[םהרבא)]] and Sarras (ΣΑΡΡΑΣ, Σαρρας) [[הרש]] formerly being Avram (AΒΡΑΜ, Αβραμ) [[םרבא]] and Sara  (ΣΑΡΑ, Σαρα) [[ירש]] means that they each receive a New Single Heh (ה) in their New Form except what if [[הרש]] is  Defective Spelling? How would you know? What if the True Form is [[הררש]] or else [[הררהש]]? This Defective Spelling is  a Fucking Nightmare. It leaves you unable to know if you're even entering into your own home.    To Chew the Cud. To Ponder the Possibility of Coulds. I'm Eating the Wrong Grass? Valuations of ((300, 200, 005 = 505)),  ((300, 200, 200, 005 = 705)), ((300, 005, 200, 200, 005 = 710)) for the Three Tenative Spellings of Sarras. Do you want a  Five or a Ten on your Sabbath Day? "Honey? Can I ask you a Small Favor? Try to Keep a Kosher Diet."    What's the Truth Here? We can Trust the Trojan Horse Tiberian Masoretic Text? STOP. Look in the Mouth. Do you see all  those Missing Teeth? "Or that was Father Nu Colt." Did you see the Guy Breathing in the Holocaust? In the Inquisition?  On 9/11? Huh? Hello? "The Lines Dead." "Oh it must be my New Girlfriend, 'Stoppa Kallingme'."  1 Brettle, Jessica From:miss p f <misspf70@gmail.com> Sent:Thursday, September 26, 2019 3:45 AM Subject:YOU HAVE BEEN CHEATED CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on  links.  ________________________________    ATTENTION BONAFIDE FUND OWNER,    If You Do Not Take Any Message From Nigeria Serious, I Will Advise You  To Take This Message Very Serious Otherwise  Other People Will Earn All  That You Have Been Suffering For Years.     From My Investigation Today, Some People Have Cleared All Your Debt To  The Federal Government Of Nigeria In  Respect To Your fund Transaction.   Your Nominated Bank Account Has Been Changed From Your Account To  Another  Account  In  Lebanon , You No  Longer  Stand  As  The  Beneficiary To The Payment You Have Been Struggling For Years.     They Have Made A Lot Of Changes In The fund Documents.  This Is  Further Backed‐up With A High Court Affidavit.   From The Documents I  Saw  Today, You  Have  Already  Cleared  The Entire Financial  Obligation Required, While They  Only Paid For  Some Token That You  Could Not Pay.     I Know That Some Officers Here In Nigeria Planned This Against You.   Some Officers Here In Nigeria Had Succeeded  In  Frustrating  And  Made You Believe That You Can  Never Get Paid So  That You Will Abandon  Your  Payment For Them.  But You Can Stop The Payment If You  Are  Smart  And  Fast.  If  You   Succeed In Stopping The  Payment, It Means  They Have Cleared Your Debt For You And They Must  Not  Go On   Punished.     The  Foreign  Debt  Management  And Payment  Had  Already Been  Instructed To  Effect  The Transfer, The Foreign   Debt  Management And    Payment  Is Only Waiting For The Final Approval From The Foreign  Exchange Allocation Board, Which They Might  Get  Any Time From Now.   Once The Get The Approval, Your Funds Will Be Sent To Lebanon .     In Other To Stop This Payment, Contact The Chairman Foreign Debt  Management And Payment , MR FRANCIS JOHNSEN  , As Soon As Possible.   Tell Him What  Is Going  On  And  Tell  Him That  You  Have  Also  Reported The Matter To The Interpol, Which Means  That The Funds Will  Be Stopped On Its Way To Lebanon .       You will only need to obtain a high COURT SEAL ORDER of payment from  the federal capital, Abuja to nulify the       Yours Faithfully,     MR FRANCIS JOHNSEN     INVESTIGATION OFFICER  Dear Palo Alto city council members, J I am writing to you with a concern I have about our changing climate. Climate change is horrible for he earth, some places will get hot and dry others will get more rain and hurricanes. This not only effect humans but it also effects animals. Animals live in areas that work with their adaptations and bodies. In the north pole polar bears are experiencing quite a change with their environment. Glaciers are melting and turning to water. What once was one of the coldest places on earth is now turning warm. Global warming makes trees dryer which increases the amount of forest fires. It also causes droughts in some places wile sea levels are rising in others. Not everyone knows it but climate change is caused by us. Companies and businesses are burning fossil fuels which cause pollution. So, if we got ourselves into this mess why can't we get out? Kids are already saving electricity and planting trees, they are starting movements and speaking up. But kids can't do it all, we need help from adults. Adults can change the way their businesses work, instead of burning fossil fuels they can use solar epzr9! ~R plR~ ~10 power things. If everyone helps a little the world will be a much happier and helthe1r enVrl'~nm\ffi~.J.J D Sincerely, Zaya Prabhakar 5th grader at Addison Elementary 3:J,1.:l.:l0 SJW31J All:J V:J OllV Ol'v'd :JO AllJ CITY OF PALO ALTO. CA Dear Palo Alto City Council, c1lY CLERK'S OFFICE I am writing because I am concerned abou~~railwU! aril doing on global warming. I have heard many things about global warming but never really understood what is was · until we watched this video on it. Now I am ready to do whatever it takes to stop global warming because I know that if this keeps up than my grandchildren might not be able to see green fields of grass or not have beach days because the polar caps have melted. We also need to be able to pass laws to save energy not burn as much gas save fossil fuel and no more nuclear plants. Maybe we can have people plant trees not use their cars as much or use electric cars. I hope that this letter has persuaded you to try really really hard to do your best and tell other people to do their best to not use as much gas maybe plant a tree and stop global warming. Sincerely, Mack Reller Dear Palo Alto city council members, I am writing to you today to share with you my concern I have about the planet and how it is changing. This week a global climate strike is taking place. Climate change is important to limit because it will get unbearably hot and there will be a higher risk of skin cancer. Climate change is important to me because in the past 20 years the temperature has raised two degrees, that may not sound like a lot but in 1,000 years the temperature will have raised 100 degrees, Imagine hot summer days that would usually be about 100 degrees that would be way too hot to go outside and even on the coldest days of winter there won't be snow. I think politicians should pass laws that helps protect the environment. In the north pole ice is melting and the polar bear's habitat.is being destroyed and some of them are dying. Climate change makes droughts more severe and it causes droughts And Makes forest fires worse because it makes trees dryer so there easier to catch on fire, right now the Amazon rainforest is on fire. The amazon forest is one of the biggest photosynthesize rs on the planet. Businesses are burning fossil fuel to make money. Please stop this tragedy. Sincerely, Magnolia Crady 5th grade Addison elementary \D <.n ..,, -0 N .... :r=-:c ~ N n2 ---( -1-< -< ("')~ r rri-o ;T.l J> :;ii:;r c.no ..... O"' -nS ~o n· 1""1("'") ::t> /lf\fAY :r:.-J s1s.oi POIC\01~i'if Some... ~uoo~~,·ons ~() vtow r-o ~l~ c:Jr G-Lo~t voirvn1(Lf) ,-oi <9U r (beviuhPcJl V1. t--j ot nJ \t{'o r1 J '. 0 h 'tvrv \J h'/ A;of-\v.e.. oo ffW odl rv~ ~t. (Jvo ~c;e.,). !) 0 TOf c,vtt;~ d"w n \--ree6 \ Tr'eeB precluc,e, >v''"' · · (!") '< YfJ ef) 1 Whiif"I tn-en Rdac e& fu'e..e>e-£la?g e..-ae&~. Zl &IDP ei<poiodi~ Oowr1 Tow0 P°'Lo A-lefOt fh.v tV\fJ re-'lll\ Q,\0111:!-s ~ 'vJtJ rsi y -r-; ~ -1-e ()Vfl ~ v1mwrrwnt DI fl4 TV'&" IW 00 e-1-e:ctr1 c,i J-y b'I I l(j ht Cl6etU)V\'J ,oh 's kY:i.dJ · fV\O\Y'~ \\Iv \b<J&erb ,-n P01t~ ~l-tf> Ron MtreJ ~reqyeefJfly! ~ 11ioy ,lid \hen 1vi.erv petopte-~(')Ulcl _d@;ve, •'Y) tnor:e., {faf:S \fZbS wJ_ tei \<et \}"£/ 6Qs / so fheri ~ ()(le/ bcis vnGwiA G~ ov *!•J'I, or-eovrs · l-es& ~ ~ :~· _f ~6'~C:.': L\)L,eSS fh;i,f{'tcl Pl~ Tt) 1-o I/Jn~ C9oi-DJLOf-o{.'l \Y'Otf'l\u, 't, Y(hfA) yr-(S HfllfJ loJ~ J:.-1· Wdi\ b~ w"rth _it. The--fW(b ~t\c 1hv ~.en~ vl0_;}1Qq \,J;th th~ 9J<11b ~11 '1n; ng Dli14 ~ o I\ 1'.S RePJ 11Y ~ I_ \{o~ ~6U \-J; II TcAKe.- Sofl19/ Cf ~1 S,u85es\--i o~. Pt~0'. ~1n~ly, 6lscn PO\rKo,rd.CrrcA~ ~. qq~lO. I Dear city council members, 01T Y @F fl>ALO ALTO C . CITY CLERK'S OFF/CEA 19 SEP 2 4 AH 6: 2 I I think that we should be more aware about the things that are happening to our planet. I want to ask if the city of Palo Alto could be more aware of what is happening. In the 55 years our oil supply will run out and that might start a quarrel between countries that's still have oil in their possession and those that don't. Also climate change will have a big effect on human health. I know that you have done a lot of great things in Palo Alto. I'm asking if you could also help other cities do the same thing. Sincerely, Ethan S. (j\{}..~ l>o Vl t' I ' v\.H1 'fJCAlr!)I ( l '"'l'Cr.<l / / ) ( / I<-·-\ !,:'." r ? '/ I r I ' / f -1ff7 ; , I \ {._ ii ....... f • CITY OF PALO ALTG. eiA CITY CL ERK 'S 0Ff I Cl( ..~)"\; {' ;-! /", _c )~ . (If-~ry' '-" .._...., ;> V I f:_.i ' I Ch66 ( Jc ~ eo 10 all-CJ l a-P cesurre) Dear Palo Alto city council, CIT't' OF PALO ALTO. CA CIT Y CLERK 'S OFFI CE l 9 SEP 2 4 Al1 6: 2 \ Global warming is wrecking our planet earth. It's getting hotter every single day. It's like a heat wave every day and sometimes I feel like passing out. Global warming is also wrecking our vegetation, farmers are struggling to grow crops and food. Global warming is also hurting animals because it disrupts habitats including the ocean. I think you should stop all of this madness at once because it's hurting our planet and earth is at stake now so we need to protect it. Oh I forgot to introduce you to my worst enemy: First name: global Last name: warming Si hCefe\v c~rJY r. u \ (l<CJ'-'\ '?"3 ~ J1'}t "'°vVI '<ii\ 3 vo31f'f'°V i'f1 ..)'d\l'eY~ V\-'\ Cj oYlJ ')y\ &\-re~ ~ \'VJff)Ll\) ~ (;? CITY OF PALO ALTO. CA CITY CLERK'S OFFICE 19 SEP 2l+ AH 6• 21 -f l..>i'e'J -\>\'Y>f'e '-"e MOU\ '7\ -:\? L)JIJ't\-' I ~-1-1. \-el"efJ <J>?-m-f~ 0--YJ d4 5 l/Ct'J '\' l "\ "\' ,o )"(!(J~ VV 1, :t l -~YI -o-\ Qooo ~v(d ?rJ'e'--"\ ... "'1 <Jr{) ..-\' Y'O, ~LA 1-'1 s."' I 0 J 2J o.J '\) °V\ dooJ j .f0 -h""'V _ LA~ • d--JU ?.l~ -J-\''( \?, U "")\ 1J vvl 0-':_ !(,a"' J!n )..\; ~ 1 pt.A "f f\ O SW~ -1;); -17".>"'1 r ~ 1. '1 '-:'"Q, C,\ S 1 V\J.. , .u ~ w 0 LA.Al_ iYlOV\ ~ o'* 'A 1 . S'S),, , "€ °' o \ 9.o "', .'"'" v , ,,, ---n f JlU J cJ-vi<;, o-'( -Yl oVi S fiJ ;}\), ~ IV"'"' WI.A} OJ )--0 (J O-\ 1 '\) Q \ '"61.:l -JO s.Jtry(?d \ --M..\: S'/ • 3 ..n tfd-'\S "(I.A "Q ei-t ' \"€0 ~ ~ .. 'ti,,,,) ..-1-~ s 1. xo "'"€\0 )--no '{f)lfj-f 0-\: "'""''~ S(< l... · ?vl!.lc:S O\ -tlA~ -\LUo~ 3. °?'J";/ •Jl'"B'" OS <;'G ..1110\ . . sfJC'l ~ ~ u , -'I 1J ~ <; , ,0.lu 1 tAftJ 'l'f'J I t/ ~ c,:}\l'.J '()(() s "t '21 . 'SJ' °l"''ov) l '.'J u-flOJ !\-i l/) 0-\ i"</-0t-i~ fl'(j Dear City Council members, CITY OF PALO A CIT Y CLER11•5 LTO. CA n Off/C( 19SEP 24 AM 6: ZI I think City Council should slow down global warming in Palo Alto by: 1. Tax businesses that pollute to help pay for renewable energy in homes 2. Ban non reusable plastic water bottles 3. Make parking more expensive so more people walk, bike more 4. Recycle building materials to use for other buildings 5. Require solar panels on all of Palo Alto's new buildings 6. Make it easy for everyone to get a kitchen compost bin so fewer things go to the landfill I hope you will use some of my ideas to slow down global warming in Palo Alto. Sincerely, Ramona Fifth Grader at Addison Elementary