The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My Public Portal About20190107plCC 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: 01/07/2019 Document dates: 12/19/2018 – 12/26/2018 Set 1 Note: Documents for every category may not have been received for packet reproduction in a given week. 1 Carnahan, David From:Eggleston, Brad Sent:Friday, December 21, 2018 3:19 PM To:Council, City Cc:Keene, James; Shikada, Ed; De Geus, Robert Subject:Caltrain Electrification Agreement (PCEP) concerns Dear Councilmembers, On behalf of City Manager Jim Keene, I am writing to provide some information on three concerns that have been raised by Californians Advocating Responsible Rail Design about the Caltrain Peninsula Corridor Electrification Project. 1. Staging Areas There is a concern that trees and shrubs in the designated staging areas in Caltrain’s right‐of‐way may be removed, and that storage of materials in these areas may be permanent. Caltrain staff have stated that there are no current plans to remove trees or shrubs in the staging areas, and that all staging areas are temporary. 2. Historic Bridge Over San Francisquito Creek The EIR includes a mitigation measure that prescribes the method for suspending and grounding power cables within the bridge. No part of the structure may be removed, and the brackets must be removable with no permanent modifications. Drilling for grounding bracket attachments is limited to eight 5/8‐inch holes. Caltrain staff have confirmed that the design is following this mitigation measure. 3. Pole Types and Pole Placement Palo Alto staff have asked Caltrain for information about the feasibility and costs of using single center poles, rather than dual outside poles. Caltrain staff have committed to provide this information in the coming weeks, but have also stated that the City would be responsible for additional costs of this approach. I hope this information is helpful. Per the discussion about the consent calendar item at Monday’s Council meeting, please send me any comments you may have. Best regards, and Happy Holidays. Brad Brad Eggleston | Director of Public Works 250 Hamilton Avenue | Palo Alto, CA 94301 D: 650.329.2636 | E: Brad.Eggleston@cityofpaloalto.org 1 Carnahan, David From:Chris Robell <chris_robell@yahoo.com> Sent:Wednesday, December 19, 2018 2:25 PM To:Architectural Review Board Cc:Council, City; Clerk, City Subject:Cell tower equipment installation location Dear ARB, I understand that Verizon is trying to convince you and perhaps others that citizens desire to have ancillary cell tower equipment installed on telephone or utility poles as opposed to under grounding. I don’t know how they would ever come to that conclusion, but I can tell you that our city is beautiful and we should be doing everything possible to keep it that way and therefore DENY any request to attach equipment to poles. I am sure there is a way that Verizon can install equipment underground in a way that is safer, quiet, and adhering to the aesthetics. Please do not let the camel’s nose under the tent and allow Verizon to install above ground equipment just so they can save money and execute their strategy in the cheapest way possible. And by all means, I hope that the city would not trust Verizon or its “experts”. This is a precedent setting decision that paves the way for all telecom companies who will undoubtedly want to do the same thing. Send a message to all of them that our residents expect and deserve better. Aside from people who are conflicted with some sort of direct or indirect economic interest with the telecom industry, no resident I know of or can even think of would EVER agree that above ground equipment is the way to go. Thank you for all the work you to do keep our city safe and beautiful. Chris Robell Old Palo Alto resident (650) 245‐7395 1 Carnahan, David From:Paul Minsker <minskerpaul@gmail.com> Sent:Sunday, December 23, 2018 7:28 AM To:Council, City Subject:Challenger Memorial Grove Dear sir / madam‐‐ Before anything further, please allow for me to take a moment to thank your members for hearing me out recently via an email in which I expressed concerns about the El Palo Alto tree and the recent run‐ins with litter and issues of the sort. It means a lot to me that my observations of the tree that gave the city its name were valued and considered. That stated, as a second suggestion to your city, though, if I may, regarding not El Palo Alto Park but Peers Park instead, there is a stand of Redwood trees in the rear section of the park known as the Challenger Memorial Grove that I hope many are aware of, and the plaque beside these trees decreeing their significance is so highly faded, weathered, and barely readable that I might find it a possibility for the city to consider replacing it at some soon future time. Doing such, as far as I can tell, might help to increase awareness of their history and of the city's history as relates to the country and the world. Thank you for your time. Be well. ‐Paul Minsker 1 Carnahan, David From:j <judd2003-1@yahoo.com> Sent:Sunday, December 23, 2018 12:32 AM To:Council, City Subject:childcare during holidays for 1 year old and 3 year old Both children are in childcare, at different establishments, and the establishments go on holidays regularly, and offer no care. What is available in or near Redwood city to bridge the holiday time for such children please Many thanks, Judith 1 Carnahan, David From:Daniel Martin <danleemartin@gmail.com> Sent:Monday, December 24, 2018 4:05 PM To:Council, City Cc:Tim Sheeper; LeBlanc, Jazmin; customerservice@menloswim.com; Douglas, Stephanie; Eva, Sharon Subject:Contractor providing Rinconada swim services City council: This is a complaint regarding services provided by the swimming contractor. 1. The published schedule is not updated Today 12/24/2018 the pool is listed on schedule as open for lap swim Mon/Wed/Fri 10:30am – 3:30pm & 6:30pm – 8:30pm I went at 3:05, and the staff tells me that it is closed at 3, and not open in the evening hours. It is understandable that Christmas Eve hours are different, but this should be listed on the schedule. It is not posted anywhere on the website. Please require the contractor post accurate pool hours. This should be a prerequisite of having the pool contract. 2. On the website there is no way to email the contractor. This should be listed on the website and schedule. The email addresses used above are from years‐old communications. The main purpose of the pool is still to serve the interests of the Palo Alto residents, not the serve the convenience of the contractor. Daniel Martin 1157 Harker Ave danleemartin@gmail.com 650 867 0367 1 Carnahan, David From:Mark Cox <markdarrellcox@outlook.com> Sent:Monday, December 24, 2018 9:20 PM To:Council, City Subject:Exposé This is Erin Sienna Jobs [:;] Howard Stern is the brother of Steve Jobs. Their real names in 1972 were Mike Laird and Jeff Laird of Pamela Crest, Redlands California. Do you see Howard dying of cancer? Yet the claim is that cancer ravages the lineage of Jeff (Steve). This is a joke. They don’t even know his real age. Jeff skipped out on 10th Grade in 1976 to form Apple Computer. These guys were my neighbors and I would spend the night at their house. I was in the Second Grade in 1972 and was held back, so the age difference between Jeff and myself weren’t as extreme as you would assume. We rode bikes together, and ate a neghbors pomegranates. 2 Jeff married my cousin, Kelly Jean Leary. Kelly played the same game on Jeff that Jeff played on the world. She convinced Jeff she is older. Kelly was born February 19th 1973 in California. Her brother Jon C Leary didn’t really die April 6th 1977 of 26 stab wounds in Redlands. This “murder” was staged and faked even though I was the pall bearer to a closed casket at the age of 13. Jonny is Brian Schrier of Task Rabbit and Jonny is the brother of Lauren Powell Jobs and Brad Powell who is really Noel Leary, the younger brother of Jonny. Remember Timothy Leary? Where did the ‘O’ go? O, some members of lineage tore it off in the Chicago area as they altered their minds in the Chicago area high on the addictive influence of membership to organized an crime group which are always cultic. How bad can Cults be? Look no further than Organized Crime Groups. The “Professionals” are full fledged cults. So Turn On, Tune In, and Drop “In” if you want to begin to use perception. Ron Tomczak of El Cajon is Jon Leary, father to Jonny (Brian), Noel (Brad), Kelly (Lauren), and the Grandfather to Reed Jobs and Eve Jobs. Erin Jobs is likely the cousin to Reed and Eve. This would mean Erin is the daughter of the cousin Max Travis Leary, born to Mike Leary the Brother of Jon Leary and the Uncle of Kelly Jean Leary aka Lauren Powell Jobs, and Max Travis Leary is currently a Registered Sex Offender in Illinois whose victim was Three Years Old yet Travis has been working as Father Dean at the Church of Assumption a Greek Orthodox Church in Seattle on 13th Avenue for Twelve Years. Yet neither the Greek Orthodox Church, the Seattle Police, nor the Seattle Sheriff’s Office has the slightest concern about this. The mother of Travis is Rachel who was/is of Greek Descent and maybe it’s through her father that Travis inherited his genetic hairloss. Jonny at 14 is very close in appearance to Kelly (Lauren) today than Jonny does today as Brian Schrier of Task Rabbit because the Y chromosome upon maturity differentiated Jonny to look more like his father and you can see this same affect by degree upon Reed as Reed matures. Of course, you would have to know what Erin Sienna Jobs looks like to access what I’m saying, so therefore I’m including her photo here. As to potential hair loss of her children, this would depend on the pattern of hair retention of the father of whomever her mother is. Erin and Eve have similar apparence through their Great Grandmother Emma Hibbard the mother of Cynthia Leary Sproul, Jon Leary, Mike Leary. Emma married Max Leary after abandoning my father in Liverpool and her death as Julie was staged and faked. Mimi raised my father while Emma returned to the US and gave birth to Cyntha Leary who later gave birth to “Sunshine” Chris Sproul who grew up to become “Sunny” Adrienne Sudweeks. Max Leary died in 1996 and Sunny was strangled in 1997 on February 23 at the age of 26 while expecting money. The Costa Mesa Police in 2017 released two photos of one suspect of the murderer of Sunny but their story is false. These two photos are of two different people and the photo of the older person in the bluish cast is a former coworker of mine who was later crippled and was physically unable to kill anyone, much less stop Sunny from bellowing for Sunny knew who to yelled at me as often enough to know Sunny knew how to make herself heard. Reed Jobs, Erin Sienna Jobs, and Eve Jobs are my Half Cousin’s Once Removed, and we share Emma Hibbard in our lineage. Lauren Powell Jobs is my Half Cousin born as Kelly Jean Leary, as is her literal brother Brad Powell born Noel Leary. They are members of the Irish Mafia whose taproot is reaching deep through American society in preparation for the Second Dip of the Double Dip to take place in AD 2026. 1 Carnahan, David From:Heidi Yauman <heidi.yauman@icloud.com> Sent:Thursday, December 20, 2018 5:45 PM To:Council, City dear city council my I am heidi yauman and i live in Palo Alto I used to live in San Jose in the terrible markham plaza attacks google me to learn about me i cant change what happened to me but maybe I can stop it from happening to someon e else and you can too because someday you might be on the state legislature and you can make laws to protect people from fraud when bobby was murdered and if you make a law please call it Heidi’s law named after me and i hope you have a merry Christmas and happy new year from Heidi Yauman 1 Carnahan, David From:Herc Kwan <herc.kwan@gmail.com> Sent:Wednesday, December 19, 2018 5:48 PM To:Architectural Review Board Cc:Council, City; Clerk, City Subject:No ancillary cell-tower equipment mounted on poles Dear Chair Furth, Vice‐Chair Baltay, Mr. Gooyer, Mr. Lew & Ms. Thompson, I hope you have been doing well. As a resident of Palo Alto who lives right next to a pole that is scheduled to have some ugly cell tower equipment forcibly and unreasonably installed in the near future and as someone who has objected to this idea before, I am writing to urge the ARB to realize that we DO NOT want pole‐mounted ancillary cell‐tower equipment in Palo Alto. My wife, two young daughters, and I attended all the hearings for Cluster 1 before and will continue to object to installation of these ugly and noisy equipment on poles across Palo Alto. We should NOT let these telecom companies get away with their subtle plans at the expense of city aesthetics and neighborhood beauty and harmony. We urge you to reject pole‐mounted ancillary cell‐tower equipment suggested by the telecom industry. Thank you for your attention. Herc Kwan, Ph.D. Residents, 2490 Louis Rd Home: (650) 843‐0852 1 Carnahan, David From:Stump, Molly Sent:Thursday, December 20, 2018 1:53 PM To:Jeanne Fleming Cc:Council, City; Clerk, City; 'James Sutton' Subject:RE: Demand for Reconsideration of City Council Vote on Verizon Cell Tower Applications Hello Dr. Fleming, Thank you for your correspondence. Reconsideration of the May 2018 decisions is not appropriate or available for the following reasons. First, the request for reconsideration is based on an allegation that former CIO Jonathan Reichental influenced the City’s decisions in violation of the Political Reform Act. In fact, Mr. Reichental did not participate in the City’s decision making on these matters. Second, the City’s approval of the wireless applications has vested, which means that the City no longer has the authority to modify or reverse its determinations. Please confer with your attorney (copied on this thread) regarding any further questions or concerns. Respectfully, Molly Stump Molly Stump | City Attorney City Attorney’s Office 250 Hamilton Avenue | Palo Alto, CA 94301 D: 650.329.2171 | E:molly.stump@cityofpaloalto.org Please think of the environment before printing this email – Thank you. This message contains information that may be confidential and privileged. Unless you are the addressee, you may not use, copy or disclose the message or any information contained in the message. If you received the message in error, please notify the sender and delete the message. From: Jeanne Fleming <jfleming@metricus.net> Sent: Monday, December 10, 2018 9:37 AM To: Stump, Molly <Molly.Stump@CityofPaloAlto.org> Cc: Council, City <city.council@cityofpaloalto.org>; Clerk, City <city.clerk@cityofpaloalto.org>; 'James Sutton' <jsutton@campaignlawyers.com> Subject: Demand for Reconsideration of City Council Vote on Verizon Cell Tower Applications Via Email Correspondence 2 Molly Stump, Esq. City of Palo Alto City Attorney 250 Hamilton Ave. Palo Alto, CA 94301 RE: Demand for Reconsideration of City Council Vote on Verizon Cell Tower Applications Dear Ms. Stump: This letter demands that the City Council reconsider its May 21, 2018 decision to deny my appeal of the Planning Department’s prior approval of eleven permits to install Verizon cellular telephone towers in residential neighborhoods (see 5/21/18 Council Agenda Item #6) because this City decision may have been tainted by a conflict of interest and illegal “gifts.” As you certainly are aware, CTO Jonathan Reichental has come under severe scrutiny recently for accepting free trips and fees from the telecommunications industry and for not properly disclosing those “gifts” and this income on his annual financial disclosure statements (FPPC Form 700). After accepting these over-the-limit gifts and undisclosed fees from the telecommunications industry, he then evidently used his official position as Palo Alto’s CTO to influence City decisions on telecommunications issues on behalf of telecommunications companies – most likely including the decision of the Planning Department and City Council to approve Vinculums/Verizon’s first round of applications to install in residential neighborhoods cell towers with hundreds of pounds of ancillary equipment located aboveground. In fact, the California Fair Political Practices Commission (“FPPC”) is currently investigating whether Mr. Reichental violated the disclosure and disqualification provisions of the ethics laws. If found in violation of these laws, he could face fines of thousands of dollars. 3 As the City’s Chief Technology Officer, Mr. Reichental is clearly aware of, and involved in, all City decisions involving wireless communications, cellular telephone towers, etc. In particular, Mr. Reichental leads the multi-department Connected Cities working group. This group continually oversees telecommunications projects in the City, including—according to the Connected Cities meeting agendas and minutes—overseeing Verizon’s applications to install cell towers. In fact, one of Mr. Reichental’s juniors on his Connected Cities group—the Utilities Department’s Jim Fleming (no relation to me)—advised City Council regarding the Verizon applications at the May 21, 2018, appeals hearing. Moreover, Mr. Reichental sits on the Joint Venture Silicon Valley Wireless Communications Initiative Committee, which submitted a brief opposing my appeal of the Planning Department’s decision. (Joint Venture Silicon Valley receives financial support from AT&T, Crown Castle and Verizon, all of whom have submitted applications to the City of Palo Alto to install cell towers.) It is therefore very likely that Mr. Reichental “used his official position to influence” the decision, in violation of the law. (See Cal. Govt. Code section 87103.) Reconsidering the decision and giving the public and the City Council the opportunity to discuss whether Mr. Reichental’s transgressions warrant a change in the decision is clearly appropriate under these circumstances. In fact, a new hearing on the appeal is warranted in order to protect my due process rights as an appellant. (See Clark v. City of Hermosa Beach (1996) 48 Cal. App. 4th 1152 [party was deprived a fair hearing because city official was unable to exercise “disinterested skill, zeal and diligence” due to his personal interest in decision].) Moreover, the law clearly states that a City Council decision can be overturned based on the improper involvement of a City employee who hid his personal financial interest in the decision. (Cal. Govt. Code section 91003(b).) 4 In sum, Mr. Reichental’s possible acceptance of over-the-limit gifts and undisclosed fees from the telecommunications industry may have tainted the City’s review of the Vinculums/Verizon applications and therefore warrants reconsideration by the City Council. Thank you for your prompt response to this request. Sincerely, Jeanne Fleming cc: James R. Sutton, Esq. Sutton Law Firm Jeanne Fleming, PhD JFleming@Metricus.net 650-325-5151 Post Office Box 60399 Palo Alto, CA 94306 &DUQDKDQ'DYLG )URP,TEDO6HUDQJLTEDOVHUDQJ#JPDLOFRP! 6HQW)ULGD\'HFHPEHU30 7R&RXQFLO&LW\ &FLTEDOVHUDQJDUFKLWHFW#JPDLOFRP(PDLONDRNDUHQ#JPDLOFRP.DWMD6HUDQJMHII#OHYLQVN\RUJ 6XEMHFW5HTXHVWIURP'HQQLV%DFNOXQGDQG,TEDO6HUDQJWHQDQWVVWLOODW+RWHO3UHVLGHQW$SWV'HF $WWDFKPHQWV,0*BBB%8567MSJ ,ĞůůŽDĂǇŽƌ<ŶŝƐƐĂŶĚŽƵŶĐŝůŵĞŵďĞƌƐ͖/ĂŵĨŽƌǁĂƌĚŝŶŐƚŚŝƐƵƌŐĞŶƚƌĞƋƵĞƐƚůĞƚƚĞƌƚŽǇŽƵĂůůĂƐǁƌŝƚƚĞŶďǇĞŶŶŝƐ ĂĐŬůƵŶĚĂŶĚŵǇƐĞůĨ͕ƚŽƚƌǇĂŶĚŐĞƚĂŶĞǆƚĞŶƐŝŽŶďĞǇŽŶĚƚŚĞ:ĂŶƵĂƌǇϯϭƐƚĚĞĂĚůŝŶĞƚŽǀĂĐĂƚĞΗdŚĞ,ŽƚĞůWƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƚ͕ΗƚŽ ĂƚůĞĂƐƚƚŚĞĞŶĚŽĨ:ƵŶĞϯϬƚŚ͕ĨƌŽŵ:ĂƉŝƚĂůĂƐŝƚƐƚĂŶĚƐƚŽĚĂǇ͘ ^ŽƚŚĂƚǁĞƌĞŵĂŝŶŝŶŐƌĞŶƚĞƌƐ͕ĂŶĚƐŽŵĞƐĞŶŝŽƌƐĂŶĚƐŝŶŐůĞƉĂƌĞŶƚƐǁŚŽĂƌĞůĞĨƚ͕ĐĂŶĨŝŶĚĂĚĞƋƵĂƚĞƐƵďƐƚŝƚƵƚĞůŽĚŐŝŶŐŝŶ WĂůŽůƚŽ͕ǁŚŝůĞ:ΖƐƉƌŽƐƉĞĐƚƐĨŽƌĂŶĞǁĂŶĚƌĞĚĞƐŝŐŶĞĚƉƌŽũĞĐƚŐŽĞƐƚŚƌŽƵŐŚƚŚĞĐŝƚǇƉĞƌŵŝƚĂƉƉƌŽǀĂůƐƉƌŽĐĞƐƐ͘dŚĞ :ƵŶĞĚĂƚĞǁĂƐĚŝƐĐƵƐƐĞĚĂŶĚĂŐƌĞĞĚƚŽĂƚŽŶĞƉŽŝŶƚ͕ďƵƚŚĂƐďĞĞŶǁŝƚŚĚƌĂǁŶŶŽǁĚƵĞƚŽƵŶĞǆƉůĂŝŶĞĚĐŝƌĐƵŵƐƚĂŶĐĞƐ͘ tĞďĞůŝĞǀĞƚŚĞ:ƵŶĞĚĂƚĞǁĂƐĐƌƵĐŝĂůďĞĐĂƵƐĞŽĨƚŚĞĞǆŝƐƚŝŶŐWDKƌĚŝŶĂŶĐĞƌĞƋƵŝƌŝŶŐĂŽŶĞǇĞĂƌůĞĂƐĞŶĞĞĚĞĚƚŽďĞ ŽĨĨĞƌĞĚƚŽĂůůƚĞŶĂŶƚƐĂƐĂŶŽƉƚŝŽŶĂůĂƉƉƌŽĂĐŚƚŽƚŚĞĐƵƌƌĞŶƚŵŽŶƚŚůǇƌĞŶƚĂůĂƌƌĂŶŐŵĞŶƚƐ͕ĂƐǁĞǁĞƌĞŵŝƐƚĂŬĞŶůǇŐŝǀĞŶ ƚŽĨŽůůŽǁ͘ dŚĞƌĞĨŽƌĞ͕ǁĞŝŵŵĞŶƐĞůǇĂƉƉƌĞĐŝĂƚĞǇŽƵƌƌĞĂĚŝŶŐŽĨƚŚĞĂƚƚĂĐŚĞĚůĞƚƚĞƌ͕ĂŶĚĂůůǇŽƵƌĂƚƚĞŵƉƚƐĂƚŚĞůƉŝŶŐƵƐ͕ ĚĞƐƉĞƌĂƚĞůǇŶĞĞĚǇĐŝƚŝǌĞŶƐŽĨWĂůŽůƚŽ͕ĂŶĚůŽŶŐƐƚĂŶĚŝŶŐƚĞŶĂŶƚƐŽĨƚŚĞ,ŝƐƚŽƌŝĐ,ŽƚĞůWƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƚƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚƐ͘ dŚĂŶŬzŽƵ^ŝŶĐĞƌĞůǇ͕ ĞŶŶŝƐĂĐŬůƵŶĚ͕ĂŶĚ /ƋďĂů^ĞƌĂŶŐ͘ 1 Carnahan, David From:Jeffrey Peters <jeffreypeters@sbcglobal.net> Sent:Wednesday, December 19, 2018 2:49 PM To:Atkinson, Rebecca Cc:Council, City; Architectural Review Board Subject:Support for Wireless on Dec 20th Dear ARB Members, I support improved wireless coverage in Palo Alto and the items on the Dec 20th ARB Agenda as proposed with equipment mounted on polls. Please approve!!! Vaulting requires violating the City's noise ordinance with fans and pumps, removing trees and landscaping and digging up the streets which causes traffic interruptions, dust, and more noise nuisance. I would like to add that I am writing this message from a friend’s house, in a forest in Chilean Patagonia. They have neighbors, but the neighbors live far enough away that I can’t see their houses, or any other man‐made structure, from the porch I am sitting on. Yet I have better cellular service here than I currently do at my home in Palo Alto. That’s ridiculous! Please help bring first‐world cellular service to Palo Alto. Thanks, Jeffrey Peters & Viviana Mur 990 Loma Verde Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94303 1 Carnahan, David From:JIM POPPY <jamespoppy@comcast.net> Sent:Thursday, December 20, 2018 11:07 AM To:Council, City Subject:Thank you for your service Hello City Council, Happy holidays, and thank you very much for all your hard work. While I don't always agree with your decisions, I am very grateful for your service and dedication With the reduction of the council to 7 members, it will probably be more work for you. You should explore allowing citizens to fill liaison roles for you when possible, as has been suggested. Regards, Jim Poppy 135 Melville Avenue Carnahan, David From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Amy Kacher <amyewardwell@yahoo.com> Thursday, December 20, 2018 4:09 PM Council, City oliqer.christy@qene.com; crescent-park-pa@qooqleqroups.com Traffic. Thursday 12/20/18 4pm crescent park Traffic backed up a whole block on Crescent out to University. I I I I I I I 1 Carnahan, David From:Francesca Kautz <dfkautz@pacbell.net> Sent:Wednesday, December 19, 2018 1:09 PM To:Architectural Review Board Cc:Council, City; Clerk, City Subject:Verizon letter-writing campaign Dear Chair Furth, Vice‐Chair Baltay, Mr. Gooyer, Mr. Lew and Ms. Thompson, It has just come to my attention that Verizon is orchestrating a letter‐writing campaign claiming that Palo Altans prefer pole‐mounted ancillary equipment. I am writing this letter to express my concern at this last minute attempt to thwart our efforts to keep Verizon’s ugly, noisy and dangerous equipment out of our residential neighborhoods. I think the Verizon equipment should go underground or be located on commercial, industrial, city owned properties or utility substations. This, of course, costs Verizon more money and they don’t want to do it, despite being the second largest multinational telecommunications technology company in the world. I am also in agreement with Council member Lydia Kou who isn’t convinced there is a problem with cell coverage in the city and is concerned about the blight in front of residents’ homes. (Mercury News, December 1, 2018). Verizon is shoving these cell antennas into our neighborhoods for future 5G use, which will allow people driving through our neighborhoods to be even more distracted. This cannot be safe for Palo Alto citizens. Palo Alto should halt the installation of cell towers in residential neighborhoods like Sebastopol did in May of 2018. City council members heard a series of public comments about the possible health effects of the cell towers, with opponents urging the city council to declare a moratorium on telecommunications applications until further research was completed. “The proposed towers would add unsightly equipment, overload poles, devalue property, and increase radio frequency radiation in our neighborhoods” according to the EMF Safety Network. Verizon withdrew its application. Please keep the cell towers out of our residential neighborhoods and support the reversal of the earlier decision to allow 11 cell towers in the Cluster 1 area. Thank you, Francesca Kautz 1 Carnahan, David From:Annette Fazzino <annette.fazzino@gmail.com> Sent:Wednesday, December 19, 2018 4:00 PM To:Architectural Review Board Cc:Council, City; Clerk, City Subject:Yikes! Verizon is at it again! Dear Chair Furth, Vice Chair Baltay, Mr. Gooyer, Mr. Lew, and Ms. Thompson: Verizon will do anything to save their money at Palo Altans expense, so it appears. There's a letter‐writing campaign afoot instigated by them saying that people actually want noisy, heavy, unattractive equipment perched on poles right next to residences! What??? That's just crazy. We all want cell service. We all want it done correctly. No one who lives in our neighborhoods and is close to the situation wants pole mounted equipment when undergrounding it will reduce noise, improve aesthetics, and help maintain our property values. Please be cautious when you review requests from Verizon and their fellow telecoms. They want pole mounted equipment because they save money installing it that way. They don't care about our community. Please support those of us who live in Palo Alto and care about the long‐term effects of our special city. Many communities are standing up to Verizon and the telecoms and requiring undergrounding to preserve the beauty, peace, and property values in their cities. Verizon wants to save money. That is the bottom line. Let's keep Palo Alto beautiful and maintain our quality of life here. Thank you for your consideration. Very truly yours, Annette Evans Fazzino annette.fazzino@gmail.com 650.799.7414