Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My Public Portal
About
April 3, 2023 City Council Emails
701-32 DOCUMENTS IN THIS PACKET INCLUDE: LETTERS FROM CITIZENS TO THE MAYOR OR CITY COUNCIL RESPONSES FROM STAFF TO LETTERS FROM CITIZENS ITEMS FROM MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS ITEMS FROM OTHER COMMITTEES AND AGENCIES ITEMS FROM CITY, COUNTY, STATE, AND REGIONAL AGENCIES Prepared for: 4/3/2023 Document dates: 3/27/2023 – 4/3/2023 Note: Documents for every category may not have been received for packet reproduction in a given week. From:Kat Snyder To:Council, City Subject:public comment: opposition to the ALPR program Date:Monday, April 3, 2023 11:37:43 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear City Council, I am writing to express my concern and opposition to the proposed Automatic License PlateReader program for the police department. While I understand the desire to improve public safety, expanded surveillance does not improve public safety, and often leads to violations ofprivacy and civil liberties. History has shown us that once personal information is collected, it can be used for purposes beyond its original intention, often to the detriment of vulnerablepopulations. If you choose to move forward with this project, I ask that you send it for policy considerationto the HRC to best protect our most vulnerable folks from the harms of surveillance. Take care,~Kat Snyder From:Aram James To:Sean Allen; Jethroe Moore; Bains, Paul; Kevin Jensen; dennis burns; Josh Becker; Binder, Andrew; Reifschneider,James; Wagner, April; Human Relations Commission; Jeff Rosen; Council, City; Shikada, Ed; Stump, Molly; RobBaker; Cecilia Taylor; Tony Dixon; Joe Simitian; Michael Gennaco; Rebecca Eisenberg; chuck jagoda; JayBoyarsky; Enberg, Nicholas; Shana Segal; DuJuan Green; Angie Evans; Perron, Zachary; Supervisor SusanEllenberg; Greer Stone; dcombs@menlopark.org; ladoris cordell; Javier Ortega; Cindy Chavez; Shikada, Ed; DavePrice Subject:Cops CAUGHT Lying About Knocking Out Black Woman Date:Monday, April 3, 2023 11:01:27 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ https://youtu.be/k96CFxrewsc Sent from my iPhone From:Audre Bley To:Council, City Subject:bills/philz cafes Date:Monday, April 3, 2023 9:43:40 AM [Some people who received this message don't often get email from audrebley@gmail.com. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ keep these wonderful community businesses going! thank you. audre bley menlo park Sent from my iPad From:Ken Novak To:Council, City Subject:Don"t close options on the Measure E site Date:Monday, April 3, 2023 12:43:36 AM Some people who received this message don't often get email from krnovak@gmail.com. Learn why this isimportant CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. I have lived in Palo Alto for 33 years and raised a family in our house near Duveneck school. I have always been proud of Palo Alto's sustainability efforts. We have always been better than average, and willing to innovate when needed. As a result I was excited when Measure E was conceived in 2010, and passed with a solid65% majority in 2011. It would be far better to process our own wastes locally, while cutting emissions. The site's small 10-acre footprint, which is already impacted by use as a landfill,would be the best site for this. Waste conversion technologies are evolving quickly, with Silicon Valley Clean Water in Redwood City using pyrolysis for this purpose. This has theadvantage of eliminating PFAS, which will likely restrict the ways we can dispose of our wastes in future. Instead we have a proposal from a divided Parks Commission to permanently rededicate theMeasure E site as parkland. Instead we should keep our options open. At a minimum, we should not rush this decision until our Utilities and Transportation commissions are able toevaluate this. I hope you'll give this the consideration it deserves, and keep Palo Alto's options open for its future sustainability needs. Thanks, Ken Novakkrnovak@gmail.com 1644 Channing Ave.Palo Alto, CA 94303 From:Lindy Austin To:Kou, Lydia; Tanaka, Greg; Council, City; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Veenker, Vicki; Lauing, Ed Subject:Please keep 10 acre Baylands parcel dedicated for waste to energy facility Date:Sunday, April 2, 2023 9:26:33 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from lindy@crammond.name. Learn why this isimportant CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Council Members As a resident of Palo Alto for 29 ½ years, I am sending this email as a request to the meeting on April 3, 2023. Please keep the 10-acre Baylands parcel dedicated for waste to energy facility as it was approved by voters in Measure E 10 years ago. And then please press ahead with win-win proposals to use it as a benefit not just to the Palo Alto community, but to reduce carbon emissions from trucks/driving distance/landfilling a resource at a distance, and getting an energy benefit. There is surely a beneficial effect for the flora, fauna and bird life not just in Palo Alto but en-route to and at those sites, and, globally. Please do NOT re-dedicate it as park land. I run/walk/bike through Byxbee and the other Baylands parks on the (south end of) the Bay Trail on a regular basis. And reducing emissions, reusing resources in the 10- acre area in the context of the 126 acres which until recently was a landfill is a good thing in the local and global context. Thank you. Lindy K. Austin +1 408 839 2116 From:Aram James To:Jethroe Moore; Sean Allen; Binder, Andrew; Reifschneider, James; Wagner, April; Perron, Zachary; Stump, Molly;Josh Becker; bryan.gobin@uncbusiness.net; Joe Simitian; Council, City; Stump, Molly; DuJuan Green; Jeff Rosen;Human Relations Commission; dennis burns; DuJuan Green; Kevin Jensen; Shikada, Ed; Figueroa, Eric; MichaelGennaco; Foley, Michael; chuck jagoda; Rebecca Eisenberg Subject:License plate readers -quotes from- BRENNAN CENTER Report Date:Sunday, April 2, 2023 9:02:58 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links.Such surveillance — whether it involves the locations of multiple cars that appear together in the same place, or of a single car at places like a mosque, synagogue, or rally — has a chilling effect on Americans’ First Amendment rights to freedoms of association, religion, and speech. An investigation into an NYPD program that monitored mosque visitors’ license plates found that this surveillance “chilled constitutionally protected rights — curtailing religious practice, censoring speech and stunting political organizing.” The International Association of Chiefs of Police has noted that ALPRs can cause people to “become more cautious in the exercise of their protected rights of expression, protest, association, and political participation because they consider themselves under constant surveillance.” And there is always the specter of more flagrant abuse, such as putting a political opponent’s license plate on a hot list and using it to keep track of that person’s whereabouts. Impact on protected First Amendment rights: Law enforcement agencies have a history of misusing license plate surveillance to monitor First Amendment–protected activity. During the 2008 presidential election, the Virginia State Police recorded the license plate numbers of attendees at political rallies for Barack Obama and Sarah Palin — and subsequently at President Obama’s inauguration — and kept the data for more than three years until it was purged following an opinion from the Virginia Attorney General warning that ongoing retention would violate the state’s Government Data Collection and Dissemination Practices Act. Similarly, police in Denver spied on anti-logging activists and shared license plate information with the FBI’s Joint Terrorism Task Force when the activists held a training on nonviolence. 100 101 102 103 104 Brennan Center for Justice | Home brennancenter.org Sent from my iPhone From:Aram James To:Council, City; Shikada, Ed; Jethroe Moore; Sean Allen; Josh Becker; Joe Simitian; Binder, Andrew; Reifschneider,James; Wagner, April; Kevin Jensen; DuJuan Green; dennis burns; Jeff Rosen; Human Relations Commission;ladoris cordell; Rebecca Eisenberg; chuck jagoda; Michael Gennaco; Jay Boyarsky; Enberg, Nicholas; ShanaSegal; Angie Evans; Perron, Zachary; Cecilia Taylor; Stump, Molly; Shikada, Ed Subject:Automatic License Plate Readers: Legal Status and Policy Recommendations for Law Enforcement Use | Brennan Center for Justice Date:Sunday, April 2, 2023 8:53:22 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/automatic-license-plate-readers-legal-status-and-policy- recommendations Sent from my iPhone From:Aram James To:Council, City Cc:Human Relations Commission; Binder, Andrew; Reifschneider, James; Wagner, April; Stump, Molly; Bryan Gobin; Shikada, Ed; Jethroe Moore; Sean Allen; DuJuan Green; Kevin Jensen; Foley, Michael; Michael Gennaco Subject:License plate readers Date:Sunday, April 2, 2023 8:49:56 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links.In the wake of nationwide protests that followed the police killings of George Floyd and Breonna Taylor, public attention has increasingly focused on the ongoing instances of police brutality and racial bias in policing. However, there is a risk that police departments and legislators may incorrectly propose surveillance as a neutral alternative. Surveillance that disproportionately targets communities of color carries a distinct and cognizable equal protection harm: branding them with a badge of inferiority. As one appellate court wrote, “Our nation’s history teaches the uncomfortable lesson that those not on discrimination’s receiving end can all too easily gloss over the ‘badge of inferiority’ inflicted by unequal treatment itself. Closing our eyes to the real and ascertainable harms of discrimination inevitably leads to morning-after regret.” Quote from: Automatic License Plate Readers: Legal Status and Policy Recommendations for Law Enforcement Use The proliferation of ALPR technology raises serious civilSUMMARY: Sent from my iPhone rights and civil liberties concerns. Courts, lawmakers, and technology vendors must take action. Ángel Díaz Rachel Levinson-Waldman From:Aram James To:Perron, Zachary; Wagner, April; Reifschneider, James; Binder, Andrew; Foley, Michael; Michael Gennaco; SeanAllen; Jethroe Moore; Julie Lythcott-Haims; Council, City; Shikada, Ed; Stump, Molly; Jeff Rosen; Josh Becker;Human Relations Commission; ladoris cordell; Rebecca Eisenberg; Jay Boyarsky; Enberg, Nicholas; Shana Segal;Angie Evans; chuck jagoda; Javier Ortega; Cecilia Taylor; Greer Stone; Supervisor Susan Ellenberg; Tony Dixon;Bains, Paul; Cindy Chavez; Dave Price; dennis burns; DuJuan Green; KEVIN JENSEN; Rob Baker Subject:Black Woman BLINDED By Cop During Protest Awarded $10M Settlement Date:Sunday, April 2, 2023 6:25:53 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ https://youtu.be/7QwXhGSyF9U Sent from my iPhone From:herb To:Council, City; Clerk, City Subject:August 3, 2023 Council Meeting, Item #12: Measure E Park Dedication Ordinance Date:Sunday, April 2, 2023 5:52:03 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Herb BorockP. O. Box 632Palo Alto, CA 94302 August 2, 2023 Palo Alto City Council250 Hamilton AvenuePalo Alto, CA 94301 AUGUST 3, 2023 CITY COUNCIL MEETING, AGENDA ITEM #12MEASURE E PARK DEDICATION ORDINANCE Dear City Council: I support the recommendation of the Parks and RecreationCommission to dedicate as parkland the 10-acre site that wasremoved from park dedication when Measure E was adopted by thevoters in November 2011. Everybody who signed the initiative petition for that measureand everybody who voted for that ballot measure was responsiblefor the measure including the language; "Ten years from thepassage of this Initiative, the City Council may rededicate anyportion of the Property not utilized for the purposes of thisInitiative to parkland." Those who are opposed to the Council having the power now torededicate the property as parkland, but who signed theinitiative petition and/or voted for the ballot measure becausethey did not read the measure, but simply relied on thearguments of the measure's proponents, will have learned thelesson that they should read a proposed initiative orreferendum petition instead of relying on the proponentsarguments, especially if those proponents are one or more ofthe proponents of Measure E. The park dedication provisions were added to the Palo AltoCharter by an affirmative vote of over 85% of the electorate, The Charter permits the voters to remove a property from parkdedication, and in the past the voters have approved a numberof removals when presented with an actual project or anactivity that existed before the park dedication Charterprovisions were adopted. Measure E was the first time parkland was removed from parkdedication without a proposed project, but instead had aprovision that the proponents could seek an acceptable projectfor ten years, at which time the Council would have the power to rededicate the property as parkland. Peter Drekmeier, one of the three proponents of the initiativemeasure, now proposes in his Palo Alto Weekly guest opinion ofMarch 31, 2023, to reverse the Charter concept of parkdedication by giving the opponents of park dedication of the10-acre site the power to prevent park dedication by variousmeans until the opponents of park dedication say the site canreturn to being parkland for as long as it takes the opponentsof park dedication to investigate possible projects and to gettheir supporters on Boards and Commissions to vote differentlyon the issue of park dedication than the Commission that hasjurisdiction to advise the Council on the issue and has alreadyvoted in favor of park dedication. For example, another Measure E proponent Bob Wenzlau is acandidate for appointment to the Utilities Advisory Commissionat the beginning of tonight's agenda. Wenzlau's candidacy for a Commission where he is a knownadvocate for certain subjects in the Commission's purview istypical of some recent Board and Commission appointments wherethose who are seeking appointed do so because they want to votea certain way, rather than provide unbiased advice to theCouncil. Wenzlau is also the person responsible for the fact thelanguage of Measure E in the official voters pamphlet is notthe same as the language of the measure than the Council votedto place on the ballot. After the City Attorney's impartial analysis, and theproponents and opponents arguments and rebuttals were madeavailable for public inspection, the City Clerk sent thatmaterial to the Registrar of Voters, but the Registrar needed acomputer readable graphic and asked to City Clerk to providethat graphic. The City Clerk asked the ballot proponent toprovide the graphic to the Registrar. Wenzlau sent both the graphic and also initiative language thatwas the same but similar to the initiative language the Councilvoted to place on the ballot. The Registrar then asked theCity Clerk if the Registrar could use the language Wenzlauprovided and the Clerk agreed. Apparently neither theRegistrar nor the City Clerk made an effort to see whether thetwo versions of the language were the same or different. The third initiative proponent, Walter Hays, at a meeting heldat Lucie Stern Community Center in early October 2019 on thesubject of Valley Water's Advanced Water Purification Facilitysaid that the facility for transferring purified water shouldbe placed on the Measure E site, and that proponents of Measurewould circulate another initiative measure to remove theMeasure E site from park dedication to house the Valley Waterproject site. Apparently, Hays was not aware of Drekmeier's opposition to theValley Water project as described in Drekmeier's Palo AltoWeekly guest opinion of May 13, 2019, which brings me back theMarch 31, 2023 guest opinion where Drekmeier advocates pyrolysis that requires water that is then evaporated insteadof being purified and sent to Valley Water. The Council has already decided to send to Valley Water thewater removed from sewage sludge, but if that sewage sludge isthen used in a pyrolysis facility to produce energy, waterneeds to be added back to the sewage sludge from someplace. Silicon Valley Clean Water facility removes 70% of the waterbefore beginning the pyrolysis with 30% of the water. Does the Council want to change its agreement with Valley Wateror does the Council want to truck in the water needed for theproposed pyrolysis energy plant from someplace else? Also, the pyrolysis facility, like an anaerobic facility,creates a smell that interferes with the peaceful enjoyment ofthe baylands. I urge you to adopt the recommendation of the Parks andRecreation Commission to dedicate the Measure E site toparkland. Whenever, the Council is presented with a viable proposal touse the Measure E site for something else, rather than to juststudy an idea, and that proposal is subject to environmentalreview, then it would be appropriate to consider placing a newmeasure on the ballot. Thank you for your consideration of these comments. Sincerely, Herb Borock From:Carol To:Council, City Subject:Philz, Bills, AJs, etc. Date:Sunday, April 2, 2023 5:36:34 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from rogersac@aol.com. Learn why this isimportant CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear City Council. I have lived off Loma Verde since 1990. Since our first week living here, I have valued the above venue, in former and present businesses. In the past 30+ years it has been a pleasant lunch spot, coffee spot,sitting with friends spot, getting laundry done when I have had washer problems spot, dry cleaning spot,sending the visiting inlaws out for a while spot, escaping young children spot, whiling away an hour in theafternoon with a book on summer weekends spot, and probably more. It has always been vibrant, I haveoften bumped into neighbors or teachers. I attend church on Middlefield Road and on Sundays many ofthe church members buy coffee before church or go to brunch after church. I have had meetings withPTA members, or church discussion meetings, and I know business meetings have taken place here. Ihave taken out of town guests who have been charmed by sitting under the vine and imaginingthemselves in the south of France or Italy because of its charm. As you can tell by my above comments, I have enjoyed this community space as well as the businesses. Ilove that I can walk there and back. I know that others feel the same who live in this neighbourhood. Iknow that my fellow church members have enjoyed the fact that they can walk down from church. I havealways seen the businesses busy and vibrant. This is a neighbourhood amenity, walkable to a largenumber of people, and the fact that they are no longer there is producing a very large gap in our pleasantneighbourhood. Please do all in your power to return this lovely corner neighbourhood amenity to its former useful, vibrantdestination. We want to be able to sit in the peace of the patio, drinking a coffee while waiting for laundry,or the school bell. It is a great loss and we would like it returned to its former glory, not filled with aconcrete replacement of first floor retail without character and no ability to relax and escape the bustle oflife. Thanking you for the time in reading this. Carol Rogers, Stockton Place. From:Aram James To:Binder, Andrew; Barberini, Christopher; Michael Gennaco; Foley, Michael; Cecilia Taylor; Tony Dixon; Wagner,April; Reifschneider, James; Jethroe Moore; Sean Allen; Perron, Zachary; Council, City; Joe Simitian; Josh Becker;Shikada, Ed; Jeff Rosen; Molly; Stump, Molly; ladoris cordell; Human Relations Commission; chuck jagoda; JayBoyarsky; Enberg, Nicholas; Shana Segal; Rebecca Eisenberg; Angie Evans; Supervisor Susan Ellenberg; GreerStone; Javier Ortega; Cindy Chavez; Bains, Paul; Dave Price; dennis burns; DuJuan Green; KEVIN JENSEN; RobBaker; Diana Diamond Subject:Huge settlements for police brutality during protests against police violence in 2020 ( protesters receive millions) Date:Sunday, April 2, 2023 5:36:23 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. https://theintercept.com/2023/03/31/philadelphia-nypd-police-brutality-settlement/ Shared via the Google app Sent from my iPhone From:Aram James To:Lauing, Ed; Shikada, Ed; Josh Becker; Jethroe Moore; Jeff Rosen; Jay Boyarsky; Sean Allen; Julie Lythcott-Haims; Joe Simitian; Supervisor Cindy Chavez; Supervisor Susan Ellenberg; Supervisor Otto Lee; Javier Ortega;Council, City; Reifschneider, James; Binder, Andrew; Wagner, April; Perron, Zachary; Jay Boyarsky; Betsy Nash;Cecilia Taylor; Tony Dixon Subject:Israelis Protest Authoritarianism but Apartheid Is Unchallenged Date:Sunday, April 2, 2023 5:08:36 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ https://theintercept.com/2023/04/01/israel-palestine-apartheid-settlements/ Sent from my iPhone From:hedden To:Council, City Subject:Measure E site, Agenda item 12, April 3, 2023 Date:Sunday, April 2, 2023 4:33:14 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from patgaryh@gmail.com. Learn why this isimportant CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Honored Council, I am speaking as a Los Altos resident. We send our wastewater to the Palo Alto treatmentfacility so we in Los Altos have an interest in the discussion about the use of the Measure E site. As a Board member of GreenTown Los Altos, and Past President, I have a keen interest in afuture where we live sustainably. Waste conversion technology will be a part of that future and as much as we love parkland, please take that into consideration as you discuss the future ofthe Measure E site. Thank you, Gary HeddenLos Altos From:elizabeth weal To:Council, City Subject:Measure E site should not be returned to parkland Date:Sunday, April 2, 2023 4:06:16 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from elizabethweal@tenaya.com. Learn why this isimportant CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear City Council member, I am writing to request that Council consider other alternatives before returning the Measure E site to parkland. Based on my knowledge of this issue, this land could potentially help us meet our Sustainability and Climate Action goals. Much has changed in terms of sustainability sewage treatment options since Measure E was passed. I would urge the Council to consider all of these options before making a decision. Warmly, Elizabeth Weal Palo Alto resident From:Bruce Hodge To:Council, City Cc:Hodge, Bruce Subject:Measure E Site should be used for environmentally responsible processing of our sewage waste Date:Sunday, April 2, 2023 3:59:15 PM [Some people who received this message don't often get email from hodge@tenaya.com. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clickingon links.________________________________ Honorable Councilmembers, The Measure E site was preserved for the environmentally responsible processing of sewage and other organic wastestreams through a concerted effort by a large group of citizen activists with a progressive vision for the future. Thecitizens of Palo Alto agreed with their vision and voted by a significant margin to retain this small piece of landadjacent to the RWQCP plant to enable a future solution. Although the City has improved its processing of sewage in the interim, there is significant room for improvement -by adopting technologies that generate negative greenhouse gas emissions and eliminate dangerous PFASchemicals. Unfortunately the PFAS chemicals are currently being foisted upon the farm workers and agriculturallands of the Central Valley. This is not an environmentally or socially just outcome. Fortunately, technology has progressed in the 10 years since the original passage of Measure E, and the best optionfor Palo Alto now is to process our sewage waste locally using net-zero energy- producing carbon negativeemissions and biochar. This is not a fantasy - it’s already being done very successfully in Redwood City. Processing our wastes by trucking them elsewhere is not the best solution. Such a local facility can likely be built on about half of the Measure E site, and the rest left as is. The idea thatsomehow the site is a lynchpin for restoration of wetlands is disingenuous at best. The wetlands of the SanFrancisco Bay will not change in any appreciable way if this site is returned to parkland status. In fact it is highlylikely that a levee will need to be constructed that protects both the RWQCP and the mound of the formerly landfillfrom sea level rise. The mound of the former landfill - which constitutes a significant portion of Byxbee Park, mustbe actively controlled and monitored. Its continued emissions of methane and other hazardous pollutants must becaptured and disposed of. There’s room for improvement in these processes as well - underscoring the stillindustrial nature of the landfill and the challenges associated with responsible disposal of our waste products. In short, the Measure E site is the only viable option for responsible local processing of our sewage waste. Weshouldn’t enter into a Faustian bargain that ignores the climate crisis and allows dangerous PFAS chemicals tobioaccumulate for decades and threaten the health of citizens elsewhere in California. It’s time to take responsibilityand direct the City of Palo Alto to finally take steps to realize the original vision of our farsighted environmentalactivists. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Sincerely, Bruce HodgeFounder, Carbon Free Palo Alto From:Jeanne Fleming To:Council, City Cc:Clerk, City Subject:Principled surveillance use policy for Automated License Plate Recognition technology Date:Sunday, April 2, 2023 3:29:39 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Mayor Kou, Vice-Mayor Stone and Councilmembers Burt, Lauing, Lythcott- Haims, Tanaka and Veenker, I am writing to urge you to take steps to ensure that Palo Alto’s use of Automated License Plate Recognition (ALPR) technology respects residents’ rights. Specifically, I urge to you to incorporate the following types of protections in the city’s ALPR surveillance use policy: 1. The Palo Alto Police Department will not provide direct online access, or bulk data transfer, to any other government agencies, or to private entities other than Flock Safety, for the license plate data it collects; 2. Only a small number of Palo Alto Police Department personnel will bepermitted to access the online ALPR System, and those who have been permitted access a) must be designated by name, and b) may only access the ALPR System for official purposes and in accordance with Palo Alto Police Departmentpolicies. 3. After one week, the license plate information of citizens who are not on the state or city’s vehicle stop list, or who are not currently under investigation, must be permanently destroyed. 4. The license plate information of citizens who are not on the state or city’s vehicle stop list, or who are not currently under investigation, may not be shared with other government agencies, or with private entities other than Flock Safety. 5. Flock Safety may not share any information collected in Palo Alto withany entity except the Palo Alto Police Department. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Jeanne Fleming Jeanne Fleming, PhDJFleming@Metricus.net650-325-5151 From:Shuchi Sarkar To:Council, City Subject:Preserve Bills and Philz Date:Sunday, April 2, 2023 3:01:21 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from shuchisarkar1108@gmail.com. Learn why thisis important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Writing as a concerned Palo Altman. Please do help preserve Bills and Philz and not redone tohousing. It’s such an important community landmark Thanks Shuchi Sarkar From:Ed Hillard To:Council, City Subject:There"s a New Authority in the City of Palo Alto Date:Sunday, April 2, 2023 2:23:38 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from edhillard@gmail.com. Learn why this isimportant CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Members of the City Council, City of Palo Alto: There's a new government in town. It's called the Parks and Recreation Department. Theyseem to be the new authority in the City. Twice in recent days there have been alarming news accounts of actions by the Parks and Rec people, staff and commissioners, that indicate the City or part of it is being run by them andnot by the citizens. First, I have learned that the Parks & Rec people want to put a gymnasium in Greer Park. Greer Park is one of our serene spaces. You can find quiet there, space to walk, a dark nightsky to view the stars and planets. Its many undisturbed acres allow for multiple soccer or baseball games at once while families converge on its picnic tables for their picnics, and othersjust walk in its acres. (Its gardens until recently were beautifully maintained.) Imagine a gym, open at all hours, its hulk taking up what was once picnic space or walking routes or just plaindarkness and the night sky. Its users come and go, mostly by cars, their cars adding to the overall traffic in the area. Those who like to think a park offers quiet and open spaces willhave to go elsewhere. The citizens of the City other than those working out in the gym will have lost a vital resource forever. Second, it seems that Parks and Rec staff have decided on their own that ten years is enoughtime to give the Measure E provision, passed by 65% of City voters, setting aside ten acres to develop a responsible, properly-engineered way to deal with City waste. They have decidedthat what the City needs in that space adjacent to the waste processing plant is a park. \ Redwood City has managed to do what Palo Alto has failed to do, convert sewage sludge torenewable biogas and char, while Palo Alto's best effort is to ship dewatered sludge to the Central Valley. As Redwood City once claimed, they are Palo Alto without the attitude. Onemight add, they are the city with actual achievements for environmentally sensitive, long term waste management solutions. Meanwhile a staff committee of an unrelated City departmentappears to hold sway over long term, critical decisions about how the City moves into the new century. And, it seems that it was City staff who in the first place, after Measure E passed,decided it didn't pencil and perhaps they could just wait out the clock for ten years for this silly idea to pass. A park gets designed and built and improved for use by ordinary people and you think thingsare going to be good. A ballot measure passes with a 65% majority and you think maybe now something will happen. Meanwhile, City staff and select citizenry have other ideas. They willsit and wait and take your park from you. They will just not do anything and the clock will run out on the ballot measure. Is this the best we in Palo Alto can expect from our City and itsgovernment? Respectfully submitted, Ed HillardGreer Road, Palo Alto From:Pamela Fry To:Council, City Subject:RE: Phils and Bills and Spirits and AJ"s and more... Date:Sunday, April 2, 2023 1:32:10 PM [Some people who received this message don't often get email from pamfry@pacbell.net. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ Greetings Council! We moved to Palo Alto 45 years ago and specially to our Ross Rd home. We need the community to stay a community for the following reasons: A place to gather for: Neighbors to meet each other A close place to walk for laundry Place to sit or have coffee while doing laundry A place to walk for breakfast/lunch to meet others A local place to take laundry when yours doesn’t work Local for dry cleaning Deli goods And what about the success of Bill’s??? All this leads to a wonderful local community feeling, which is so very hard to find these days. There are so many reasons to rebuild our local businesses and keep the neighborhood spirit alive. Thank you.. Pam From:David Bubenik To:Council, City Subject:Restore Byxbee Park. Do not use it to generate extremely carbon-dirty energy Date:Sunday, April 2, 2023 11:47:30 AM [Some people who received this message don't often get email from dbubenik@earthlink.net. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ Dear Mayor Kou, Vice Mayor Stone, and Palo Alto City Council Members, You may not be aware that electric energy generated using biogas is EXTREMELY CARBON-DIRTY. “Garbage to Energy” is not green energy. Its carbon emissions are 140% of the emissions of a coal-fired generator. See www.dirtydioxide.com for the full story. I'm sure you'll agree that our Baylands are much better used as parkland than as a global warming super-contributor. I am a Palo Alto resident who cares deeply about our treasured baylands. Please adopt the Parks and Recreation Commission’s recommendation to rededicate the 10-acre Measure E site as parkland.I am grateful to city leaders who have protected our baylands for generations, maintaining beautiful natural landscapes, creating outstanding recreational opportunities and supporting critically important biodiversity to the benefit of our community. The Measure E site is situated on the only flat land connecting the Renzel Marsh to the Baylands and provides a critical wildlife corridor for local species. Although degraded in the years since Measure E passed, the trees and vegetation on the flatlands screen the wastewater plant and provide important habitat for birds and wildlife; such plantings are not possible on the hilly portion of the site because of state landfill regulations. As our city has grown, undeveloped land has become increasingly spare. But restoring the landfill to natural open space has been a 60 years repeatedly affirmed city goal. We’ve lost critical time to fulfill it. Please rededicate the Measure E site as parkland and undertake overdue investment in the quality of this important habitat corridor and recreation linkage in our baylands. Thank you! David Bubenik 420 Homer Ave Palo Alto From:Sharon Perl To:Council, City Subject:Bill"s/Philz site Date:Sunday, April 2, 2023 10:37:53 AM Some people who received this message don't often get email from sharon.perl@gmail.com. Learn why this isimportant CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Hi, I'm a resident and home owner in the neighborhood where Bill's Cafe and Philz Coffee used tobe, on the corner of Loma Verde and Middlefield Rd. I just wanted to add my voice to the chorus of local residents who mourn the loss of those businesses and hope that we can onceagain have a coffee shop and cafe on that site once the dust settles with insurance settlements or whatever needs to be done to remodel/rebuild. I particularly valued those businesses andwas a frequent customer of both. I also valued the vibrant, friendly, inviting neighborhood feel of the outdoor seating areas outside the businesses. It was wonderful to have that within easywalking distance of my house. Sincerely, Sharon Perl839 Richardson Ct From:Sharleen Fiddaman To:Council, City Subject:Bills/Philz Date:Sunday, April 2, 2023 8:31:06 AM [Some people who received this message don't often get email from sharleenfiddaman@yahoo.com. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ The restaurant, coffee shop and patio are treasures- keep them. Sharleen From:Aram James To:Lauing, Ed; Shikada, Ed; Council, City; Julie Lythcott-Haims; Sean Allen; Jethroe Moore; Josh Becker; Council,City; Cecilia Taylor; Joe Simitian; Binder, Andrew; Reifschneider, James; Jeff Rosen; Wagner, April; RebeccaEisenberg; Human Relations Commission; chuck jagoda; ladoris cordell; Michael Gennaco; Jay Boyarsky; ShanaSegal; Angie Evans; Perron, Zachary; dcombs@menlopark.org Subject:Black homeownership declines across Bay Area Date:Sunday, April 2, 2023 7:53:03 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ I saw this The Mercury News e-edition article on the The Mercury News e-edition app and thought you’d be interested. Black homeownership declines across Bay Area https://edition.pagesuite.com/popovers/dynamic_article_popover.aspx?guid=c661929e-303d-42ef-8610- a2158025f10e&appcode=SAN252&eguid=0778f916-8b65-4261-ad9f-bb99a7753e1c&pnum=2# For more great content like this subscribe to the The Mercury News e-edition app here: Sent from my iPhone From:Wendy Fong To:Council, City Subject:Bill"s/Philz concerns Date:Saturday, April 1, 2023 10:09:46 PM [Some people who received this message don't often get email from wendafong@gmail.com. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ Bill’s has been our go to location to meet up with family and friends for breakfast/brunch. We think that Bill’s, and Philz, provide a valuable place for residents to gather and socialize. The businesses in that small strip are visited often and a lot, which is evidenced by how hard it is to find a parking spot. Please allow the return of the current businesses to their original locations on Middlefield. Thank you. Wendy Fong (Palo Alto resident since 1949) From:Alice Smith To:Council, City Subject:Please preserve the Measure E site for future opportunities, Date:Saturday, April 1, 2023 9:41:48 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from alice.smith@gmail.com. Learn why this isimportant CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. To the Palo Alto City Council, Please preserve the Measure E property so that the City can realistically protect the environment without losing the one suitable location for converting our sludge and other waste into biogas and biochar. This will help us to be carbon-neutral by 2030, a responsible goal. Thank you, Alice Schaffer Smith 850 Webster Street #520 Palo Alto, CA 94301 Why should my Zip Code determine how I exercise my vote? We need one federal law that governs voting for every American. Pass the Freedom to Vote: John R Lewis Act now! www.nationalvotercorps.org From:Elizabeth Lee To:Council, City Subject:Midtown Date:Saturday, April 1, 2023 8:47:55 PM [Some people who received this message don't often get email from liz@funghi.com. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ Dear Honorable City Council, I’m writing to ask that the Midtown area of the fire be kept with community services and gathering spots, preferably the same ones as before, if they want to return. AJ’s was our faithful dry cleaners, and they also did good mending for reasonable prices. The liquor store had wines I liked, and the garden seating area was beautiful. Please bring them back! Thank you. Elizabeth Lee, LMFT 650 346-4071 liz@funghi.com Author of The House at 844 1/2 http://goo.gl/BauAk From:slevy@ccsce.com To:Council, City Cc:Shikada, Ed; Guagliardo, Steven Subject:remote work trends Date:Saturday, April 1, 2023 4:20:27 PM Attachments:brs1.pdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Mayor Kou and council members, At the ED strategy study session, councilmember Burt commented that he thought work from home (WFH) would decrease from current levels. That was true for the nation in the 3rd Q of 2022 (latest data, attached) and I suspect the trend continued after that. While the direction is for a decrease in WFH, I am less certain of the magnitude and impactin Palo Alto. The BLS data do show that the highest WFH is for Information and Professional Services where tech/high paid jobs are located and constitute the likely largest losses in downtown. While employers want more days in the office, the outcome of their is unclear--probably some increase in office days but not a tremendous amount. A question for staff: What are the trends for city employees working downtown and how many are there? The BLS data did not track government employees. The staff I deal with regularly are in planning positions can and do continue WFH 2 or 3 days a week. But I have no knowledge of the trends or numbers for direct service staff. It is also true that while some WFH residents now spend $ here rather than where theyworked like in Sf, the much larger number of WFH are now spending $ where they live andnot in PA. While every worker who returns to downtown whether tech or more restaurant/hotel activity is welcome for our local businesses, I think the general conclusion of the consultant that WFH will continue to be a drain on downtown spending is correct. Stephen Levy From:Gary Hedden To:Council, City Subject:Measure E site, Agenda item 12, April 3, 2023 Date:Saturday, April 1, 2023 4:04:08 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from gary@greentownlosaltos.org. Learn why thisis important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Honored Council, I am speaking as a Los Altos resident. We send our wastewater to the Palo Alto treatmentfacility so we in Los Altos have an interest in the discussion about the use of the Measure E site. As a Board member of GreenTown Los Altos, and Past President, I have a keen interest in afuture where we live sustainably. Waste conversion technology will be a part of that future and as much as we love parkland, please take that into consideration as you discuss the future ofthe Measure E site. Thank you, Gary HeddenLos Altos From:Sven Thesen To:Council, City Subject:City Council: Preserve Measure E! Please Include Haulage Criteria & GHG emissions Date:Saturday, April 1, 2023 2:40:29 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from sventhesen@gmail.com. Learn why this isimportant CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Good People at City Council, Please continue to preserve our options at the landfill/ wastewater treatment center! Please do not be hasty in your decision. At the very least take a tour with both those on the pro/ con side. As a Palo Alto resident, chemical engineer, dad, man-of-faith and business owner, my opinion is that you on the city council should take more time to study this issue. Everything we do has an impact. The question is the magnitude. We are currently trucking our waste to both the central valley and Gilroy in diesel trucks. Has anyone calculated the carbon footprint of the haulage? In addition to the greenhouse gas emissions, there are low level criteria pollutants including carcinogens from the diesel exhaust that we are "dumping" on the communities along the route. And these communities have no say in this. Again, has anyone quantified these emissions? When we compare magnitude, the above should be included. I strongly believe that using the land to address our own wastes over additional parkland will net the least environmental impact. Thank you for volunteering your time to serve the residents of Palo Alto, Sven Thesen is being that the urrently, ou r dewatered sewage sludge is trucked to the Central Valley, where it is applied to agricultural land as a soil amendment. -- Sven Thesen, 415-225-7645 EV Consultant & Founder, ProjectGreenHome.org and BeniSolSolar.com; Wonder Junkie__________________________________________________ How California Is Keeping Electric Vehicles Out Of Reach For Apartment-Dwellers From:Eileen Mclaughlin To:Kou, Lydia; Stone, Greer; Burt, Patrick; Lauing, Ed; Lythcott-Haims, Julie; Tanaka, Greg; Veenker, Vicki Cc:kou.pacc@gmail.com; greg@gregtanaka.org; City Clerk"s Office; howardhigh1@comcast.net; glraabe@sbcglobal.net; LaRiviere, Florence; cityCouncil@CityofPaloAlto.org Subject:Comments, 04/03/2023, Item 12, PR&C Recommendation to dedicate the Measure E site Date:Saturday, April 1, 2023 2:00:46 PM Attachments:CCCR Comments to PACC re 04032023 Item 12_Measure E park dedication .pdf You don't often get email from wildlifestewards@aol.com. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Mayor Kou, Vice Mayor Stone and Members of City Council: Please consider comments in the attached letter for consideration regarding Item 12, the Parks & Recreation Commission Recommendation to dedicate the lands of Measure E asparkland.. Thank you. Eileen McLaughlin Citizens Committee to Complete the Refuge.408-257-7599408-230-0054 cell P.O. Box 23957 San Jose, CA 95153 650‐493‐5540 cccrrefuge@gmail.com www.BayRefuge.org April 1, 2023 Mayor Lydia Kou Vice Mayor Greer Stone Members of City Council City of Palo Alto Submitted by email RE: 4/03/2023 Item 12, PR&C Recommendation, Adopt a Park Dedication Ordinance for the 10‐acre Measure E site Dear Mayor Kou, Vice Mayor Stone and Members of Council: Citizens Committee to Complete the Refuge appreciates this opportunity to support the Parks & Recreation Commission’s recommendation to dedicate the entire 10‐acre Measure E site as parkland. Volunteer, wetland and wildlife advocates of Citizens Committee have roots in the Palo Alto Baylands. Founder Florence LaRiviere, City resident and our Chair Emeritus, fondly recalls early evenings more than 50 years ago when her family would enjoy picnic dinners set amidst the wetland diversity of the Baylands. The actions of City advocates and leaders to ensure protection of the Baylands and Byxbee Park were inspiring. Conversely the wetland destruction and encroachment from the landfill, water treatment plant, golf course and airport laid out the threats. Together these factors provided impetus to citizen advocacy that produced the Don Edwards San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge. That same inspiration and decades of emerging science are the basis of this letter: We urge the City Council to dedicate the 10 acres of Measure E, returning them to Byxbee Park. The location and varied elevations of the Measure E lands have unique climate change, wetland, wildlife and public access values, These values were abandoned in 2011, leaving these lands lying fallow and unmanaged once they were undedicated. We believe that now is the time to end and reverse those losses, reviving and recovering the lands’ values. 1. Climate change impacts are ever more evident making the carbon capture value of vegetation, particularly wetlands, of increasing importance. Importantly, and as is now well understood, healthy salt marshes serve to reduce sea level rise risk to developed areas. Approximately a third of the Measure E lands are lowlands, a strip that provides a corridor for passage of people and wildlife between Harbor Marsh and the Emily Renzel Wetlands. Meanwhile, beneath the corridor, a large pipeline transports salt water from the Bay, ensuring the ecological health of the Emily Renzel Wetlands and its habitat for the federally endangered salt marsh harvest mouse. With the exception of a pump station, the balance of the Measure E lands provide a Baylands‐ integrated corridor for shoreline wildlife. Unfortunately, lacking Parks management since 2011, E. McLaughlin/CCCR, Letter to Palo Alto City Council, 04/01/2023 Item 12, PR&C Recommendation, Dedicate Measure E lands Citizens Committee to Complete the Refuge Page 2 the vegetation conditions of both lowland and slope degraded, reducing the corridor’s roosting, foraging, and nesting habitat values and the carbon capture that even these lands could provide. 2. Rising groundwater produced by sea level rise will change lowlands whether or not they sit behind flood control levees. Groundwater impacts on development are already familiar in Palo Alto, even west of Highway 101, for projects adding basements. Emergent or near‐surface groundwater is already evident in wetlands found throughout the golf course. As the seas gradually rise, the increasing weight of that water will produce forces that push more salt water into the pervious layers within alluvial plains, such as lie below the Palo Alto shoreline. Overtime, groundwater rise will alter surface conditions, coming closer to or even emergent at the surface.1 Rising groundwater can be expected to gradually and steadily change ground conditions in the ~1/3 of Measure E lands that are lowlands. This change will encourage eruption of wetlands, fitting for a location that serves as a wetlands link. Wildlife adaptive to those changes will surely benefit. At the same time rising groundwater raises major risks if any kind of development were considered there, such as: 2 Salt‐water corrosion of underground infrastructure, Dispersal of known or unknown buried contaminants, Seepage and infiltration to structures either below ground and on the surface, Saturated soils aggravating storm event flood conditions, and Increased seismic liquefaction risk. 3. Speculative proposals used to undedicate the Measure E parcel in 2011, or to prevent rededication now, offer the City only the certainty that the lands will not be managed as parkland nor utilized as sustainable natural infrastructure to protect Palo Alto against sea level rise. Dedication of the lands as parkland regains those possibilities, including revitalization of habitat conditions and vegetated carbon‐capture. The “bird in hand” is dedicating these 10 acres as parkland. Consideration of “the two in the bush” can be brought forward at any future time through the standard process comprised of feasibility studies, project design, and performing an environmental review. Such actions would need to evaluate alternative sites as the Measure E site is substantially inappropriate. Finally, we echo others who have described lessons learned from Measure E. The measure produced no composting project but had used its vague concept to entice voter support. It did include a fail‐safe of a 10‐year time frame to implement a project….and, if not achieved, rededicate it as parkland. The measure’s clock has run out and its premise failed. We strongly urge the Council to use the fail‐safe and dedicate Measure E lands, returning them to Byxbee Park and City Parks Management. 1 E.Plane et al, A Rapid Assessment Method to Identify Potential Groundwater Flooding Hotspots as Sea Level Rises in Coastal Cities, Water/MDPI, October 25, 2019: https://cawaterlibrary.net/document/a‐rapid‐assessment‐ method‐to‐identify‐potential‐groundwater‐flooding‐hotspots‐as‐sea‐levels‐rise‐in‐coastal‐cities/ 2 SFEI, ESA & PCI, Sea‐Level Rise Impacts on Shallow Groundwater in Moffett Park, Prepared for the City of Sunnyvale, November 21, 2021, pp.19‐20: https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5e38a3dd6f9db304821e8e5e/t/61a7b37743ec4b770e11ee73/1638380421 678/Moffett+Park+Specific+Plan+Groundwater+Addendum.pdf E. McLaughlin/CCCR, Letter to Palo Alto City Council, 04/01/2023 Item 12, PR&C Recommendation, Dedicate Measure E lands Citizens Committee to Complete the Refuge Page 3 Citizens Committee to Complete the Refuge is a volunteer‐run, 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization that has its roots in the citizen committee that worked to establish the Don Edwards San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge in 1972. Over the decades since we have worked persistently for protection and enhancement of the Refuge, Bay wetlands and wildlife along the shoreline and lower tributaries. Truly Yours, Eileen McLaughlin Board Member Citizens Committee to Complete the Refuge. CC: Carin High, Co‐Chair, CCCR Gail Raabe, Co‐Chair, CCCR Florence LaRiviere, Board Member, CCCR From:Tera DPS Rescue To:Council, City; Clerk, City Subject:RE: Council meeting regarding the contract renewal for Pets In Need Date:Saturday, April 1, 2023 1:24:45 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from infodpsrescue@gmail.com. Learn why this isimportant CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear esteemed Council members, My name is Tera McCurry and I am the Executive Director of DPS Rescue (aka Doggie Protective Services). Founded in 2001, DPS has been rescuing dogs and cats from throughout the state of CA and beyond for over 20 years. We have rescued over 19,000 animals and placed them in forever homes. Since 2008, we have been holding biweekly adoption events in Northern CA, specifically at Pet Food Express in Palo Alto. The majority of our volunteers and foster families are Palo Alto residents and we are proud to be a part of such an animal-loving community! I listened in on the Zoom meeting held on Monday evening regarding the renewal of the animal shelter contract with Pets In Need (PIN) and I wanted to share my thoughts with you. Several of our volunteers were at one time employed by or volunteered with Pets In Need and I reached out to them to get their thoughts as well. 1. Pets In Need, as an organization, treats their employees with a lack of care, compassion, and respect. As you may have noticed, none of the PIN speakers at the meeting have worked for the organization for more than a year. That is because the employee turnover rate is incredibly high. I bring this to your attention because in contrast, the former Palo Alto Animal Services (PAAS) team was a group of long-term employees who worked well together and were passionate about their work! DPS Rescue always enjoyed our interactions with them. Under PIN’s tenure, rescue spay and neuter has been eliminated completely, in spite of the fact that they have twice as many medical professionals on staff as PAAS did. 2. As community member Virginia Feira pointed out, if Palo Alto citizens wish to adopt dogs and cats, DPS Rescue, along with other Bay Area rescues, provides many options! These dogs and cats live in foster homes until adopted. I think we can all agree that using Palo Alto community resources to bring in large dogs from the Central Valley, only to house them in kennels at the shelter, is less than ideal. Additionally, PIN’s insistence that they need more staff is a result of bringing in these animals from outside the jurisdiction, not a result of caring for the dogs and cats already IN the Palo Alto/Los Altos jurisdictions. 3. In the past 2 years, PIN has terminated one executive director due to poor leadership and until a week ago, has been unable to find and retain a new director. They’ve been through several interim directors and none have signed on to stay. The most recent hire has zero years of animal welfare or animal sheltering experience. One has to wonder why this is. It does not reflect well on the organization! Why would Palo Alto want an organization with that level of upheaval in charge of their shelter? 4. I am sure that you followed the police investigation and charges that resulted from the deaths of 7 puppies during a PIN transport from the Central Valley. While 2 of the 3 employees who were charged resigned from PIN shortly after, the third employee (who was in fact in charge of the transport arrangements) is still employed by PIN as their intake and transport manager! One can only hope that she has since received some additional training and education. 5. PIN claims to have a behavior staff for their dogs. In fact, they do not have a single certified behavior specialist on the team. They previously had several; every single one left the organization due to mismanagement. As a result, animals that come in with behavioral challenges are frequently euthanized or (if they are felines) pushed back into the community via TNR rather than socialized so they can be placed in homes. 6. The new contract stipulates that they will only need to perform 60 surgeries per month. Under the City management, the shelter provided 200 per month with only one vet and one technician. Why, with 3 vets in their organization and a full team of technicians, should PIN be allowed to provide so few? What was the purpose of building a new surgical suite with TWO operating tables, with Palo Alto citizens’ tax dollars, if they won’t provide MORE surgeries than before? Additionally, PIN is refusing to provide rescue surgeries. This has a direct impact on rescue groups like DPS and our adopters in the Palo Alto community. At the very least, the contract should stipulate that local rescue groups can book surgeries in addition to private citizens. DPS Rescue misses our former relationship with PAAS, and we imagine that many of the citizens of Palo Alto feel similarly. We hope that you will strongly consider returning the shelter to an in-house model. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions. Sincerely Tera McCurry Executive Director of DPS Rescue info@dpsrescue.com From:Aram James To:Binder, Andrew; Shikada, Ed; Sean Allen; Jethroe Moore; ladoris cordell; Julie Lythcott-Haims; Josh Becker;Council, City; Wagner, April; Perron, Zachary; Reifschneider, James; Jeff Rosen; Rebecca Eisenberg; JayBoyarsky; chuck jagoda; Human Relations Commission; Michael Gennaco; Foley, Michael; Enberg, Nicholas;Tannock, Julie; Shana Segal; Angie Evans; Tony Dixon; Cecilia Taylor; Betsy Nash Subject:- New report critical of Oakland law enforcement in scandal Date:Saturday, April 1, 2023 1:13:33 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ I saw this The Mercury News e-edition article on the The Mercury News e-edition app and thought you’d be interested. New report critical of Oakland law enforcement in scandal https://edition.pagesuite.com/popovers/dynamic_article_popover.aspx?guid=73b6419a-790a-452e-a903- d4d29f6b6e05&appcode=SAN252&eguid=7b72c783-0a79-47ae-9926-a3fc48c87846&pnum=35# For more great content like this subscribe to the The Mercury News e-edition app here: Sent from my iPhone From:slevy@ccsce.com To:Council, City Subject:no to parkland dedication Date:Saturday, April 1, 2023 12:26:13 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Mayor Kou and council members, I support the original Measure E goals and urge you not to support the Parks and Rec recommendation to dedicate the land now as parkland. The original goals, if met over time with new and emerging technologies, would be a major environmental improvement while 10 mores acres to an already awesome open space area is a drop in the bucket compared to the Measure E goal. Stephen Levy From:Peter Drekmeier To:Council, City Subject:Comment Letter: Item 12 Date:Saturday, April 1, 2023 10:49:50 AM Attachments:Item 12 - Measure E Site.pdf [Some people who received this message don't often get email from pdrekmeier@earthlink.net.Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of openingattachments and clicking on links.________________________________ Dear Mayor Kou and Council: Thank you for considering my attached comments on Item 12 (Measure E site) on your April 3agenda. -Peter -----------------------------------Peter Drekmeierpdrekmeier@earthlink.net(650) 223-3333 April 1, 2023 Re: Item 12: Measure E Site. Dear Mayor Kou and Council: A vote on whether to convert the Measure E site to parkland is premature. Council should understand the full potential for the site to help us meet out Sustainability and Climate Action Plan (S/CAP) goals before eliminating options. Taking options off the table before knowing what they are would be a huge mistake. It’s disappointing that a recommendation on the future of the Measure E site is coming to you solely from the Parks and Recreation Commission (Commission), without any input from the Utilities Advisory Commission, the Planning and Transportation Commission or the S/CAP committee. One would have thought the Measure E proponents would have been consulted by the Commission early in the process. Afterall, we collected more than 6,000 signatures to qualify Measure E for the ballot, and it was approved by 65% of the voters. Yet we were never approached, despite the fact that at least one Commissioner was well aware of our interests, having served as a leader of the No on Measure E committee. We only learned about the Commission’s recommendation the week before the vote, after receiving a phone call from a reporter. The fact that the Parks and Recreation Commission was almost evenly split says a lot. The actual vote was 4-2-1 (the staff report overlooked the abstention, which was essentially a no vote; certainly not a yes vote). Only four out of seven Commissioners voted to recommend that the Measure E site be converted to parkland. Even some of the Commissioners who supported the recommendation had reservations. Many good questions were asked, and comments made, at the Commission meeting that should be considered by Council. Following is the most comprehensive. Commissioner Brown did not think the role of the Commission was to protect parkland at all costs but to advise on planning and policy issues related to parkland. She also felt a more recent study and more work on this issue was important and that it was premature to recommend action at this point one way or the other. She stated what was absent from the conversation is the state legislation related to SB 1383…Every other jurisdiction is trying to deal with the increase in processing of compost. It is not just a Palo Alto problem; it is a regional and statewide challenge. There were comments made that Public Works and Utilities have no plans for the site, but this has not been prioritized or budgeted for. The analysis on the benefits of the parkland conversion is equally incomplete. She felt the issue required more study but it was not the purview of this Commission and would need to be referred to the City Council. She felt it was irresponsible to make a recommendation based on a 2014 study without looking at the technology and legislation requirements. It was clear that the Commissioners understood they were looking at the issue through a very specific lens, and Council would likely take other issues into consideration. The minutes note: Chair Greenfield discussed the role of the Parks and Recreation Commission in considering this action. Assessment of the technical merits of potential future plans and concerns about sea level rise are beyond the scope of the Commission. The City Council will consider things beyond Parks and Recreation's area of expertise. Chair Greenfield asked the last time staff reviewed a potential project for the Measure E site consistent with Measure E. Ms. North replied 2014. Commissioner Cribbs was concerned that the ad hoc did not talk to the Utilities Commission and Committee for Sustainability. Council Member DuBois stated there have not been any recent policy decisions from the Council on Site E. He felt the point about the scope was a good one and that ultimately the Council would have to make a decision based on the different factors. It would be prudent for Council to receive an update on current environmental technologies, which are advancing rapidly, before deciding the fate of the Measure E site. Following are more notes from the Commission meeting. Commissioner Oche wanted to know if a recent study had been done to weigh the pros and cons of rededication or going ahead with a future energy or compost facility. Mr. Anderson responded that there is not a recent study weighing pros and cons of compost versus parkland. Karin North, Assistant Public Works Director for Environmental Services Division, stated the ballot initiative gave direction to look at different technologies. The digester was very expensive, and the Council held off and then decided on a sludge dewatering and haul-out facility while technologies changed and evolved. Since that time, staff has been working to rebuild the liquid side of the wastewater treatment plant and has not been directed to do an analysis on Measure E pros and cons, mostly due to staff constraints. Ms. North stated…In regard to solids, the timing may change based on Council and the Climate Action Plan goals. The current plan is to look at solids processing after the secondary treatment plant process is upgraded, which is a 5-year project. Given Palo Alto’s ambitious S/CAP goals, and Council’s priority to address climate change, resources should be made available to undertake a thorough examination of options to convert organic waste into renewable energy and biochar, which sequesters carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. Here are a few more Commission comments. Ms. Brown agreed that there are competing demands on time and a finite amount of resources. If Council determines that biosolids and hauled food waste and yard trimmings need to be handled on site, then staff would need to reshuffle priorities to do more analysis. Chair Greenfield stated the site has been sitting in limbo for 8 years. He questioned how long it would take to approve a new plan for the site. Ms. North stated if the staff resources were available and it was a direction from Council, a new plan could probably be done in a year or two. With the fate of our planet in question, please give this issue the due diligence it deserves. There’s no rush to make a decision on the Measure E site. A much higher priority should be to stabilize our climate. Thank you for considering my comments. Sincerely, Peter Drekmeier pdrekmeier@earthlink.net 650-223-3333 From:Aram James To:Lait, Jonathan; Shikada, Ed; Lauing, Ed; Rebecca Eisenberg; Josh Becker; Julie Lythcott-Haims; Council, City;Angie Evans; Shana Segal; Sean Allen; Joe Simitian; Jethroe Moore; Cindy Chavez; Supervisor Susan Ellenberg;Otto Lee Subject:- Empty storefronts go far beyond downtowns Date:Saturday, April 1, 2023 10:13:53 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ I saw this The Mercury News e-edition article on the The Mercury News e-edition app and thought you’d be interested. Empty storefronts go far beyond downtowns https://edition.pagesuite.com/popovers/dynamic_article_popover.aspx?guid=de4141a1-1e2a-4517-b6b0- bf4374e798fa&appcode=SAN252&eguid=7b72c783-0a79-47ae-9926-a3fc48c87846&pnum=1# For more great content like this subscribe to the The Mercury News e-edition app here: Sent from my iPhone From:John Eaton To:Council, City Subject:Please keep the Measure E site for beneficial sustainability options Date:Saturday, April 1, 2023 9:46:10 AM Some people who received this message don't often get email from john@etnllc.net. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Council, In 2011, I became convinced we should not move our composting facility to San Jose and truck our green waste long distances. I walked our neighborhood, collected signatures and helped as much as I could to successfully pass Measure E. I was so thrilled my beliefs and hard work had paid off. Then, I was dismayed as the City and Council debated how to proceed and eventually sided with a small contingent of Park advocates and did not convert the site to it’s intended use as suggested by Measure E. What has happened in the 10 years since to this site? Nothing. As I often ride my bike in Byxbee park, when I leave I usually ride by through this site. What I always notice is how bad it can smell as it’s right downwind of the Sewage Treatment plant. This is not ever going to be a nice place to expand the park. 65% of Palo Altans agreed that we should dedicate this small portion of the park to help our city become more sustainable. This piece of land, in close proximity to the sewage treatment facility is the perfect location for some type of environmental facility. Please don’t close our options until we have explored all possibilities for this land and hopefully to honor our citizens’ wishes to utilize this area for a sustainable processing plant. Sincerely, John Eaton Guinda St. Palo Alto From:Lawrence Garwin To:Council, City Subject:Maintain the Measure E Site As Is for Future Use. Date:Friday, March 31, 2023 8:42:03 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links.Palo Alto City Council Members, I understand that you will meet and consider rededicating the 10-acre Measure E site as parkland. This would be a huge set back for our Sustainability and Climate Action Plan (S/CAP) which calls for 80% carbon-free energy by 2030 and carbon neutrality (offsetting remaining carbon emissions through carbon credits and/or carbon sequestration). This is a land use decision that should also be considered by the Planning and Transportation Commission and the Utilities Advisory Commission. Palo Altans are deeply concerned about climate change and committed to sustainability. To reach many of our sustainability goals, we need land for infrastructure. The Measure E site, right next to the wastewater treatment plant, is the perfect location for organic waste conversion and possibly water recycling. Nearly 65% of the Palo Alto electorate voted to make the Measure E site available for organic waste conversion. Voters should have a say in the future of the site. Emerging technologies for organic waste conversion are very promising. For example, right in our backyard Clean Water Silicon Valley is using pyrolysis to convert sewage sludge into biogas and biochar. Biogas is renewable energy and biochar sequesters carbon as an extremely effective soil amendment. Palo Alto currently trucks our dried sewage sludge to the Central Valley. If we lose the Measure E site, all options for local organic waste conversion are off the table. https://svcw.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/SVCW_BFT_DOC.pdf The Measure E site will never make for a good park. It is wedged between the wastewater treatment plant and the former dump (not great for picnicking). You can’t fly kites, because the airport is right next door. People visit the former landfill site for views of the bay, not the wastewater treatment plant. The site cannot be converted to wetlands. With all of Palo Alto's other world class parks (including the 1,940-acre Baylands Nature Preserve), few people would ever chose to spend time at the Measure E site. Thank you for considering my points and maintaining the Measure E site for future organic waste conversion or water recycling. Lawrence Garwin Palo Alto From:Aram James To:Barberini, Christopher; Tannock, Julie; Enberg, Nicholas; Michael Gennaco; Michael Gennaco; Foley, Michael;GRP-City Council; Binder, Andrew; Reifschneider, James; Sean Allen; Wagner, April; Raj; Jethroe Moore; JoshBecker; Joe Simitian; Tony Dixon; Cecilia Taylor; Shana Segal; ladoris cordell; Council, City; Shikada, Ed; JeffRosen; Human Relations Commission; chuck jagoda; Jay Boyarsky; Julie Lythcott-Haims; Perron, Zachary; GreerStone; Supervisor Susan Ellenberg; Javier Ortega; Bains, Paul; dennis burns; Cindy Chavez; Dave Price; DuJuanGreen; KEVIN JENSEN; Rob Baker; Rebecca Eisenberg Subject:"There’s No Place In Police Work For Dogs" Sgt. Sean Allen Date:Friday, March 31, 2023 5:24:20 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ Check out this video on YouTube: https://youtu.be/Be6TS4xKRVc Sent from my iPhone From:Joe Margevicius To:Council, City Subject:Pause on Measure E decision .... Date:Friday, March 31, 2023 5:09:38 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from joe_margevicius@hotmail.com. Learn why thisis important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Hello wonderful council members ! I know you do such great service to our community, and I'm asking you to keep considering options for use of the land identified in Measure E, in using it to process our waste in a sustainable way. This is a long-term decision, and one that, once the land is put back into parks and rec, will be difficult to pull back for projects like Measure E identified. I really would like to see Measure E completed - process our sewerage waste and other organics, in a modern sustainable way. Please, at least pause in deciding on Measure E's fate. Thank you, Joe Margevicius (resident since 1975) From:Joko Siswanto Subject:Inquiry Date:Friday, March 31, 2023 4:04:22 PM [Some people who received this message don't often get email from joko@issproject.com. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clickingon links.________________________________ Dear Counsel, We have a transactional matter and a litigation matter includingIntellectual Property in your state.Please let me know the one you can handle for us to enable me forwardyou further details regarding the legal matter. RegardsJoko Siswanto, President & CEOPT Dwikarya Cipta UtamaJL. Raya Imam Bonjol Km.2 No. 44Karawaci Kota Tangerang 15116Banten, IndonesiaTel: 02155732966Fax: 02155735587joko@ptdwikaryacipta.comwww.dwikaryacipta.com CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail transmission (and/or the attachmentsaccompanying it) may contain confidential information, belonging to thesender, which is protected by PT Dwikarya Cipta Utama.The information is only for the use of the intended recipient. If youare not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that anydisclosure, copying or distribution of any information in thistransmission, or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents ofthis transmission, is strictly prohibited. Any unauthorised interceptionof this transmission is illegal. If you have received this transmissionin error, please promptly notify the sender by reply e-mail, and thendestroy all copies of this transmission. From:Aram James To:Binder, Andrew; Barberini, Christopher; Julie Lythcott-Haims; Jethroe Moore; Council, City; Sean Allen; Shikada,Ed; Wagner, April; Reifschneider, James; Jeff Rosen; Joe Simitian; Supervisor Susan Ellenberg; RebeccaEisenberg; Josh Becker; Human Relations Commission; chuck jagoda; Michael Gennaco; Enberg, Nicholas; ShanaSegal; Angie Evans; Perron, Zachary; Foley, Michael; Jay Boyarsky; Cecilia Taylor Subject:Drug smuggling allegations against police union exec hurts PD"s trust, f... Date:Friday, March 31, 2023 3:22:57 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ https://youtu.be/JfHH-ZBD7Zc Sent from my iPhone From:Pat Kinney To:Council, City Subject:Postponing a decision on the Measure E site Date:Friday, March 31, 2023 2:57:58 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Council Member, I am a long-time Palo Alto resident and environmentalist and enjoy having access to our Baylands. I am concerned that Palo Alto is rushing to make a decision about rededicating the Measure E site as park land, without consulting with all the concerned groups, such as the Utilties Advisory Commission. I don’t feel that there is any rush to open up new park land, especially this particular space, but there is an urgency to act on Climate Change. I urge you to study current technologies, consider effects of sea level rise, and then make an informed decision about the best use of this 10-acre parcel for our city. Thank you, Patricia Kinney 689 Wildwood Lane Palo Alto,CA 94303 From:Dave Warner To:Council, City Subject:Measure E Parkland: Don"t overturn the 65% vote Date:Friday, March 31, 2023 12:36:33 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear City Council, Thank you for your service! Please don't overturn measure E and return the 10 acres to parkland. A 65% majority voting in favor of measure E is a big majority. It seems risky to overturn the will of the voters particularly when there is no urgency. I am an avid environmentalist, nature lover and bird lover and am a member of the California Naturalist community. I've also been a Palo Alto resident for 35 years. While the specific details for how the measure E site was going to be used have not occurred, the spirit of the measure was to improve our sustainability, which still has significance for the site. Sending our sewage sludge back into the food supply in ways that create methane and that don't address such things as PFAS, is not a great practice. Voters decided in 2011 that setting aside a small amount of newly available parkland in order to help sustainability was the right choice. Let's not make a decision to release this small plot until our sustainability concerns are behind us. Best regards, Dave Warner 754 Palo Alto Avenue From:Mike Anderson To:Council, City Subject:Measure E Site Date:Friday, March 31, 2023 11:52:30 AM Some people who received this message don't often get email from andman817@yahoo.com. Learn why this isimportant CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Honorable Mayor and City Council: I have been a resident of Palo Alto for 40 years. Our citizens are very interested in protecting the environment, and the City has set climate protection goals, including becoming carbon neutral by 2030. Wasteconversion technologies are evolving quickly and neighboring cities like Redwood City are using them. The Measure E site, right next to the wastewater treatment plant, is an ideal location for an environmental facility. Land is so hard to come by in Palo Alto; to me, it only makes sense to set this site aside and save it for future use as an environmental facility. Let's keep our options open! Thanks, Mike Anderson From:Sue Luttner To:Council, City Subject:use Measure E site wisely Date:Friday, March 31, 2023 11:11:27 AM Some people who received this message don't often get email from sue.luttner@gmail.com. Learn why this isimportant CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Honorable Council Members, Please do not revert the Measure E property to parkland. Sustainability is a vital priority for our community and beyond. Please respect the commitmentwe voters have already made to use the land for a conversion facility that turns the city’s organic waste into energy and biochar. The task is challenging, but I’m sure our city can do it. Thank you for listening, and for your service on the council. -Susan Luttner ------- Susan Luttner 4035 Orme Street Palo Alto CA 94306 650-387-4102SueLuttner.com From:David Coale To:Council, City; Shikada, Ed; Eggleston, Brad Subject:Keep your options open for the Measure E site. Date:Friday, March 31, 2023 10:00:40 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Mayor, Council members and City Manager, I am writing to urge you to keep your options open regarding the Measure E site adjacent to the waste water treatment plant (WWTP) and to thoroughly study the options and future uses before turning this over to parkland. The original intent of Measure E, passed by 65% of voters, was to look at a more sustainable way to deal with our organic waste and generate green energy. Since then there have been proven methods for doing just that. Pyrolysis, used by our neighbors in Redwood City, turns organic waste into green energy and biochar, which sequesters carbon. This proven process also destroys PFAS, “forever chemicals” that will very likely be regulated soon. Palo Alto currently dumps our sludge, PFAS and all, on agricultural land in the central valley. This does not seem right to me. Palo Alto still needs to do more to reach our SCAP goals of carbon neutrality by 2030. The Pyrolysis plant at Redwood City is carbon neutral and destroys PFASs. This is the next step for Palo Alto’s organic waste. When PFAS become regulated, what will Palo Alto do if we don’t have the land available to treat our waste appropriately? Please have the Staff study the options for this site before returning this to “parkland”. There is no hurry to return this to parkland, which is somewhat of a misnomer as this is right next to the 24/7 operation of the WWTP, not a great place to park. Perhaps the UAC should take up the matter and return to council with a report on what our WWT needs are and will be and how Pyrolysis is working for Redwood city. Please get more information so as to better understand all our options before returning the Measure E site to parkland, which is not a time critical issue. Sincerely, David Coale Carbon Free Palo Alto From:Microsoft Outlook To:Stone, Greer Subject:Undeliverable: A/P Incoming ACH Batch 0013 Pymt on Mar 30,2023 Date:Monday, April 3, 2023 8:08:54 AM Attachments:AP Incoming ACH Batch 0013 Pymt on Mar 302023.msg 格浴 格慥 洼瑥瑨灴攭畱癩∽潃瑮湥 祔数•潣瑮湥 琢硥 瑨汭※档牡敳 獵愭捳楩 敨摡 潢祤ാ 戼 潦瑮挠汯牯∽∶猠穩•慦散∽牁慩≬派 潧杯敬挮浯爠橥捥整潹牵洠獥慳敧琠桴 潦汬睯湩浥楡摡牤獥敳 潦瑮 戯 瀯ാ 潦瑮挠汯牯∽∰猠 穩 ㈢•慦散∽慔潨慭 瀼 牨晥∽慭汩潴 敲牥匮潴敮 瑩潹偦污 瑬 牯≧敲牥匮潴敮 瑩潹偦污 瑬 牯 愯 牢ാ 是湯 昼湯⁴潣 潬 ⌢•楳敺∽∳映捡 楲污 潙牵洠獥慳敧眠獡 ⁴敤楬敶敲敢慣獵 桴 敲楣楰湥 浥楡牰癯摩牥爠橥捥整瑩 牢ാ 是湯 昼 湯⁴潣潬 ⌢•楳敺∽∲映捡 吢桡浯≡牢ാഊ 戼派 潧杯敬挮浯朠癡 桴獩攠牲牯 牢ാ吊楨 敭獳条 慷 汢捯敫敢慣獵 瑩 潣瑮 湥⁴牰獥湥獴愠瀠瑯湥楴污猠捥牵瑩⁹獩畳 倠敬獡 楶楳⁴栠瑴獰 猯灵潰瑲朮潯汧 潣 慭汩 求捯敫 獥慳敧琠敲楶睥漠牵洠獥慳敧挠 湯整瑮愠摮愠瑴捡浨湥⁴潣瑮湥⁴畧摩汥湩獥 湯是 ാ瀯 ാ瀯 戯 ാ牢 灴浳朠ⴠ瑤攰 ㄲ楳ㅢ 换捡 ぢ 敦 愰㈰ ⴲ 敮敇 ാ瀯 戯 獲潴慲瑳楮業摡 潦潩瑡浲潦湩楴獯湧慩 戼 ≡浯桡吢 捡映∲∽敺楳•⌢潬潣⁴湯昼 戼 戼 戼 戼 戼 戼 浥刊ാ牢 潣 汧潯朮硭 戼杲漮潴汁潬慐景祴楃 湯瑓 敥片 ാ瀯 ാ牢 潣 潯汴畯 潲瀮 摲灭慮⸵ㄱ 剐ㅁ匠 敶牥猠杮楴慲 敬倠 畳獩⁹瑩牵捥猠 ㈵ ൬慩瑮整潰瑮敳敲瀠瑮整湯挠獴椠敳畡捥戠摥正潬戠獡眠敧慳獥洠獩桔‰⸷⸵ⴲ摥湲畴敲†牥癲敳 瑯 潣⁴湥浨捡瑴愠摮愠瑮整湯挠敧慳獥洠 ㈵ ൲畯⁷敩癥爠潴 条獳敍摥正潬 瀿 楡洯浯挮敬杯潧 牯灰畳 灴瑨†㈵ ൴楳楶 獡 敓ⵃ剁 牰 ാ瀯 獲敤慥栠敧慳獥洠污湩杩牏 ാ瀯 ാ牢 灴浳朠ⴠ瑤攰 ㄲ楳ㅢ 换捡 ぢ 敦 愰㈰ ⴲ獥湩汥摩畧⁴湥瑮 畧 ㈹呣究汔 橕獃牔㉘却 ㅇ剣潔睐 兊畐 桺 嘰 琱扉 ഻敮潮 挠 潣 景獯牣業 ※牯瑣敬敳捲愽猠 慨猭慳爽愠 ›污 丶 瑴 挹楪 剺楨杈 湇啚 汁塬極洫呐 慒搶 睴 潬扖の 煥硇慭 橂椷歂 兏 慡祺婤刴畦 正 牡乩坄歂 坍睥坐 煍 歵 慏 ㈯卷堸 夶潦橶灚六 穴 卸噗 即 浅摳歎 硁琳 灵 湰全昸田 祅歍楋払 摣穙奊浰癫の 噮祍楍汁 湕楡桏穬 版 潴捥汥獣牡 ഻浯挮瑦潳潲捩洽搠 數慬敲 數慬敲 ※桳ⵡ獲 ※ㄽ椠 牵瑡湧楓ⵥ条獳敍ⵃ剁 兲扱癊 倸牺噴獖捎あ卤 灓楴湁ⵥ杮慨捸 卍ⵘ湵潃歮畨 慴慄敧慳獥 浡灓楴湁ⵥ杮慨捸 卍ⵘ潩獲敖ⵅ数祔 湥瑮潃 敧慳獥 瑣敪扵区整慄 潲 栠 呹樷楴啓稳 晓 欵湙 奋 ഻ 摎 洸敔 戯㉂穗呃橚坓橬呇嘳歲 戠 ⵡ瑡 条獳敍 慰卩瑮 敧湡档硅ⵓ堺 慴慄敧慳獥 浡 畎⬶洵攰 剰浧穕噷 嘹 桃卄湶 畹呦 呢煴智潸 塍浱 ぢ樫啰灖 癧瑨畩 ⭋㉄ 兲 卧昸 杬浖桫祍敁橓祒圹祥偍 湮㉕杂煳 慬 瑱 剴慚焹她 杧 其挵敵報 挹乹こ婹煄 户 獢癮瀸 潪 摏 匵 瀯ㄵ 剔甫 娳づ瑷摏畑 橰 圳ㄴ 塩 扙 猨 獡瀽晰猠 潣 景獯牣業 洠 ›獴汵獥刭湯楴慣楴湥桴畁ⵃ剁 兤塈券 畆 穈 兤 硍 ㅋ瀶眰兇歷偑橣塗 敔剧 桫 ㄶ⸴⸷㈱⸳ ൳椠灩 敤湥 浳灴爮灣瑴摯浯楡 楣祴景慰潬污潴漮杲 猠瑭 慭汩牦浯挽瑩潹灦污慯瑬 牯 搠慭捲瀽獡 瀨焽慵慲瑮湩 灳焽慵慲瑮湩 捰 ⤰愠瑣 潩 潮敮栠慥敤 牦浯挽瑩潹灦污慯瑬 牯 搠楫 潮敮⠠敭獳条 潮൴ 楳湧摥 愠捲渽湯 ഩ ⵍ楓湧瑡牵 瘠ㄽ※獲ⵡ桳 ※敲慬 數 敲慬數 搠挽瑩潹灦污慯瑬 牯 猠猽汥捥潴 ഻ 牆浯 瑡 畓橢捥 敍獳条ⵥ湯整瑮吭灹 嘭牥楳湯堺 ⵓ硅档湡敧匭湥敤 敨 正഻ 桢朽爳 汔卪婗 坔 祢 朶吷 婁乌婤 戠嘽婑 偅戱奢婺 佴灰獨乁瘹牋灙朴佉昱汧穐 ⭶娴 潔 ⭲婁 呕 婕敶噳 扨 歵典海 歨 佅剃 眳 呔硰 潉 潁 偨 剷娰 均ㅤ硉 獌 愯扤婤煱⭩书圵 奎ഽ刊捥楥敶 映潲倰げ ぁ ⸵慮灭 摲 瀮潲 畯汴潯 潣൭ ㈨ ㈺ ㄺっ 祢匠ㅁ剐 ㄱ ⸵慮灭摲 瀮潲 畯汴潯 潣൭ ㈨ 楷桴 捩潲潳瑦匠呍⁐敓癲牥⠠敶獲潩 ㅓ㉟ബ 楣桰牥吽卌 剟 坟呉彈 当 弶 彍 摩 ⸵⸴※牆Ⱪ‱慍൲ ‴ര刊捥楥敶 映潲㈰呆 ⸳潥⵰捧っ⸲牰摯瀮潲整瑣潩 畯汴潯 潣൭ ㈨ち ㄱ つ ㈺ 祢 が剐 漮瑵潬歯漮晦捩 挮浯 ⠠ㄺ戰 挱 ㈺⤵眠瑩楍牣獯景⁴偔匠牥敶 瘨牥楳湯吽卌弱 挠灩敨 当 彅卒 彁 卅㉟ 卟 ⤴椠㈮⸰㈶ ㈮′楶牆湯整摮 吠慲獮潰瑲※牆Ⱪ‱慍 ‴ര 瑵敨瑮捩瑡潩 敒畳瑬 猠晰瀽 獡 猨湥敤 偉椠 ⸳㈱⸷⸴ㄶഩ 浳灴洮楡晬潲 楣祴景慰潬污潴漮杲※此浩渽湯 洨獥慳敧渠瑯猠杩敮⥤栠慥敤 潮敮搻慭捲瀽獡 捡楴 湯渽湯 敨摡牥昮潲 楣祴景慰潬污潴漮杲഻刊捥楥敶ⵤ偓 倠獡 瀨潲整瑣潩 畯汴潯 潣 搠浯楡景挠瑩潹灦污慯瑬 牯൧ 敤楳湧瑡獥㈮ ‱獡瀠牥業瑴摥猠湥敤⥲爠捥楥敶 牰瑯捥楴湯漮瑵潬歯挮浯※汣敩瑮椭 ⸳㈱⸷⸴ㄶ഻ 敨潬猽瑭ㅰ欮条祯 敮 瀠 ്刊捥楥敶 映 潲浳灴⸱慫潧慹渮瑥⠠⸳㈱⸷⸴ㄶ 祢 が ぃ ご 洮楡 牰瑯捥楴湯漮瑵潬歯挮浯⠠⸷⤰眠瑩楍牣獯景⁴偔 匠牥敶 摩 ⸵⸴瘠慩 潲瑮湥牔湡灳牯 楲ㄳ 牡㈠㈰″⬠敒散癩摥›牦浯嬠㈱⸷⸰⸰崱⠠捥ⴲ㈭ㄳ ⴹ⸷灡渭牯桴慥瑳 挮浯異整愮慭潺慮獷挮浯嬠 ㈮ㄳ ⸹崷ഩऊ祢猠 瑭ㅰ欮条祯 敮⁴倨獯晴硩 楷桴 偔 椠㈰ぁㄲരऊ潦 氦 楣祴挮畯据汩捀瑩潹灦污慯瑬 牯 瑧 匠瑡牰㈠㈰″㈳⬠⠠半⥔ⵘ慍ⴴ潎敤›慦獬 潲 唿 儿 瑩潹灦污慯瑬 ㉃ ‽氦 楣祴挮畯据汩捀瑩潹灦污慯瑬 牯 瑧഻吊 挠瑩 潣湵楣 楣祴景慰潬污潴漮杲 畓橢捥 倯 据浯湩⁈慂捴倠浹⁴湯 牡 敍獳条ⵥ›氦 ㈴ ㈭ ⴰㄸ扢愭 ⴲ扥 戱 捀瑩潹灦污慯瑬 牯 瑧഻ 瑡 楲ㄳ 牡㈠㈰″⬠嘭牥楳湯›⸱ര刊瑥牵 慐桴›楣祴挮畯据汩捀瑩潹灦污慯瑬 牯൧堊 偏瑁牴扩瑵摥敍獳条 ⵘ佅呐湥 湡 瑴楲畢整 獥慳敧›愹搶挭 ⵥ㈴ ⴶㅥ 晤摤 ⵘ卍倭扵楬呣慲晦捩祔数›浅楡൬堊 ⵓ牔晡楦呣灹 慩湧獯楴 が ぃ ご 彅卼ㅁ剐 ㄱ ൟ堊 ⵓ晏楦散 ⴵ楆瑬牥湩ⵧ潃牲汥瑡潩 摉›搳 戰ⵢつ挭 ⵢ扤㈳ 摣 ⵘ倭潲散獳摥›愹搶挭 ⵥ㈴ⴶㅥ 晤摤 瑸睆 堊 ⵓ硅档湡敧 灴敍獳条健潲数瑲敩 匠ു 湯整瑮吭灹 洠汵楴慰瑲洯硩摥഻ऊ潢湵慤祲 畱瑯弻 ㅢ ㅤ挭 晦ⴰ㈱戭攰ⴴ扡 ㄷ慥敦 畱瑯഻堊 ⵓ硅档湡敧匭湥敤 敨正›റ堊 ⵓ硅档湡敧 瑮卩慰 敒慬 ⵘ楍牣獯景 湁楴灳浡›ⵘ楍牣獯 景 湁楴灳浡 獥慳敧 普 欉 佊牁 呏商乯兔扸么楌 灱啢 湒歇 堲 倶 歬 癎 橕摷瑊甶 婒呇 呅㉄ 兮 砱 娸 偍 晉 浬牄 湺畚佮乶睆倫搶 奂婧 捑汢 灃椱 瑢琷 婗摄呂摵 灓捺 杦 汢奋券⭫啔灔睊桡敤 牢穰剔硸 楁ㅐ睯 慹兙獍呤刱水敺夵 伵椸慺晒 塣 歡摎婲癑奡猰 佊砱 渲椷啍 夫 さㅏ 湂 剆 奨奒 ⬯搰汅 ⭦兴 刵瑓穅 楆湥振剹倴兡 久 挸 當 湍扔 捴礵呅 夰畃焳眷 偐 敫坓 ご湪 ഽ堊 牯晥潲瑮 瑮獩慰 敒潰瑲ഺऊ⸳㈱⸷⸴ㄶ 剔 偊 乁 湥医 ㄺ医噒 偉 华 猺瑭ㅰ欮条祯 敮 呐 浳灴愭⸳慫潧慹渮瑥 呁为乏 ㈳ ㈰⤸⠩ㄱ ㈰⤱㈨ ㈰⠩⤳⤲⤵㈰⠩⠩⠩㈰⠩ㄳ ㈰⠩⤱⠩㈱ ⠩ㄳ⠩ㄳ ㈰⠩⤴㈰⠩⠩⠩㈱⠩⤱㈶ ⤱㈱ ⠩⤵⤴⠩⤵㈨ ⤳剉伺呕医 偆ㄺ ⵘ硅整湲污敒楣楰湥佴瑵潢湵 湯敮瑣牯 ⵤ散收 ⴰ昭攳昱搸搵摦 堊 瑵ⵯ敒灳湯敳匭灵牰獥 传 畁潴敒 汰൹堊 ⵓ硅档湡敧 牯慷摲湩 潯 敲牥匮潴敮 瑩潹偦污 瑬 牯 愹搶挭 ⵥ㈴ ⴶㅥ 晤摤 ⵘ牏杩湩瑡牯牏 挠瑩潹灦污 慯瑬 牯൧堊 ⵓ硅档湡敧 潲獳敔慮瑮伭楲楧慮 牲癩污楔敭›ㄳ 牡㈠㈰″ഹ 唨 ഩ堊 ⵓ硅档湡敧 潲獳敔慮瑮中瑥潷歲 獥慳 敧 映 戶ⴵ扢 搶ⴰ扣戶 搸 挸 堊 ⵓ硅档湡敧 潲獳敔慮瑮 ⵤ散收 ⴰ昭攳昱搸搵摦 堊 ⵓ硅档湡敧 潲獳敔慮 瑮 瑵卨畯捲 が ぃ ご 攮灯札捣㈰瀮潲 牰瑯捥楴湯漮瑵潬歯挮浯 ⵘ卍 捸慨杮ⵥ牃獯味湥湡 畁桴獁›湁湯浹畯൳堊 ⵓ硅档湡敧 潲 獳敔慮瑮 潲 瑮瑩 慥敤 瑮牥敮൴堊 ⵓ硅档湡敧吭慲獮潰瑲 潲獳敔慮瑮效摡牥即慴灭摥›倱げ ㅂ 牰 潦瑮ാ 戯摯 瑨汭 From:Aram James To:Council, City; Binder, Andrew; Sean Allen; Jethroe Moore; Shikada, Ed; Joe Simitian; Javier Ortega; Wagner,April; Reifschneider, James; Barberini, Christopher; Figueroa, Eric; Tony Dixon; Cecilia Taylor; Tannock, Julie;Josh Becker; Perron, Zachary; Rebecca Eisenberg; Rob Baker; Vara Ramakrishnan; Shana Segal; Angie Evans Subject:Antioch: Eight additional officers on leave for racist and homophobic texts Date:Friday, March 31, 2023 9:14:48 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ https://www.mercurynews.com/2023/03/29/antioch-eight-additional-officers-on-leave-for-racist-and-homophobic- texts Sent from my iPhone From:Microsoft Outlook To:Stone, Greer Subject:Undeliverable: Pending Payment For Mar 2023 Date:Monday, April 3, 2023 8:08:56 AM Attachments:Pending Payment For Mar 2023.msg 格浴 格慥 洼瑥瑨灴攭畱癩∽潃瑮湥 祔数•潣瑮湥 琢硥 瑨汭※档牡敳 獵愭捳楩 敨摡 潢祤ാ 戼 潦瑮挠汯牯∽∶猠穩•慦散∽牁慩≬派 潧杯敬挮浯爠橥捥整潹牵洠獥慳敧琠桴 潦汬睯湩浥楡摡牤獥敳 潦瑮 戯 瀯ാ 潦瑮挠汯牯∽∰猠 穩 ㈢•慦散∽慔潨慭 瀼 牨晥∽慭汩潴 敲牥匮潴敮 瑩潹偦污 瑬 牯≧敲牥匮潴敮 瑩潹偦污 瑬 牯 愯 牢ാ 是湯 昼湯⁴潣 潬 ⌢•楳敺∽∳映捡 楲污 潙牵洠獥慳敧眠獡 ⁴敤楬敶敲敢慣獵 桴 敲楣楰湥 浥楡牰癯摩牥爠橥捥整瑩 牢ാ 是湯 昼 湯⁴潣潬 ⌢•楳敺∽∲映捡 吢桡浯≡牢ാഊ 戼派 潧杯敬挮浯朠癡 桴獩攠牲牯 牢ാ吊楨 敭獳条 慷 汢捯敫敢慣獵 瑩 潣瑮 湥⁴牰獥湥獴愠瀠瑯湥楴污猠捥牵瑩⁹獩畳 倠敬獡 楶楳⁴栠瑴獰 猯灵潰瑲朮潯汧 潣 慭汩 求捯敫 獥慳敧琠敲楶睥漠牵洠獥慳敧挠 湯整瑮愠摮愠瑴捡浨湥⁴潣瑮湥⁴畧摩汥湩獥獧瑭⁰戼 潦′摥㈹㈴ 楳㈶ 攲 ぢ ㈰ 愰㈰ ⴰ 瑮ാ 牢 牢 牢 牢 牢 牢ാ 潦瑮挠汯牯∽∰猠穩 ㈢•慦散∽慔潨慭 瀼 楄条潮瑳捩椠普牯慭楴湯映牯愠浤湩獩牴瑡牯 瀼 湥牥瑡湩敳癲牥›倹げ ⸶慮灭摲 瀮潲 畯汴潯 潣 牢ാ 瀯ാ 片敥 瑓湯 楃祴景慐潬汁潴漮杲戼 硭朮潯汧 潣 牢ാ刊 浥瑯 敳癲牥†敲畴湲摥 ⴲ⸵⸷‰桔獩洠獥慳敧眠獡戠潬正摥戠捥畡敳椠獴挠湯整瑮瀠敲敳瑮 潰整瑮慩൬ ㈵ 猠捥牵瑩⁹獩畳 倠 敬獡 楶楳൴ ㈵ †瑨灴 畳灰牯 潧杯敬挮浯洯楡 瀿 潬正摥敍獳条 潴爠癥敩⁷畯൲ ㈵ 洠獥慳敧挠湯整瑮愠摮愠瑴捡浨 湥⁴潣瑮湥⁴畧摩汥湩獥獧瑭 戼 瀼伾楲楧慮敭獳条 敨摡牥 瀼敲 匭′摥㈹㈴ 楳㈶ 攲 ぢ ㈰ 愰㈰ ⴰ 慥 椠ㄽ※獲ⵡ桳 ※牡獣汥捥潴 搠洽捩潲潳瑦挮浯※癣渽湯 戠丽 琹畡浥 ㄱ 潇收儰 慺 煌 癇硭捭 捐牳桍 数 ㅒ 椲整 佘 煬 瑫 焯祄橍 眷塃橚啤 捷煗 剢 圴穁祁 浅 獮堷摤噡 歁 眫捒 塕 佊㈸灨 獘 則浯 煈浏匱睍 穓 焵煮 佂湬 ⭓獨硊 桧 稫汷扄啍偆ぢ慨晬浉硃体 爲 嘲坓汑嘱獉畐 栱 ㅣ橁栴塩愰 ㈰汰睤 桘 瑧 捅晤汁改 畬祊 浥 捉奴 晚 栳噸漰 癸攱 圵塘 ഽ 獥慳敧匭杩慮畴敲›愠爽慳猭慨 挠爽汥硡摥爯汥硡摥※業牣獯景 潣 猠愽捲敳敬瑣牯഻ 牆浯 瑡 畓橢捥 敍獳条ⵥ湯整瑮吭灹 嘭牥楳湯堺 ⵓ硅档湡敧 瑮卩慰 敍獳条 瑡ⵡ桃湵 畯瑮堺 ⵓ硅档湡敧 瑮卩慰 敍獳 条 瑡ⵡⵘ卍 捸慨杮ⵥ湁楴灓浡 獥慳敧慄慴 ഻ 桢朽橱 睳⭸武 穐 潥穒塰 瑤杮 潧 戠 乎牵慑歬祫 乔潥 捇癫 ㄴ摄ㅐ楂歃儴伱 扴摂瘲 攰浥㈹畐 瑖啫 洷 捘 祃祦氶呶 塄 啌稯欸 甫 歁噑 摕奙療楉 啪塦楘敨 ど ⭆济 啦 坵 捱 癈 瀸昫湷 剐水㉁坹歴 祘 单 睷 倱 汔 奱偰 圴 呅栲啴 瀶ㅲ 佲乵畨⭄嘱楮歵 杋晴 祭偆 啙 档 佥伳ㅖ睊潃側 穖奧坫佳坁婈 睁 丵 敃 ഽ 瑵敨瑮捩瑡潩 敒畳瑬 椠ㄽ※硭洮捩潲潳瑦挮浯 ※灳 慰獳⠠敳摮牥椠⁰獩 ㈠㈰㈮ ㈮⤵猠瑭 捲瑰潴潤慭湩挽瑩潹灦污慯瑬 牯൧ 浳灴洮楡晬潲 楣祴景慰潬污潴漮杲※浤牡 慰獳⠠畱牡湡楴敮猠 畱牡湡楴敮 瀠 瑣ㄽ 捡楴湯渽湯 敨摡牥昮潲 楣祴景慰潬污潴漮杲※此浩渽湯 洨獥慳敧渠瑯 猠杩敮⥤※牡 潮敮⠠⤰匭杩慮畴敲›愠爽慳猭慨 挠 爽汥硡摥爯汥硡摥※楣祴景慰潬污潴漮杲഻ 敳敬瑣牯 栠 潲 慄整区扵敪瑣 獥慳敧 潃瑮湥 祔数 ⵅ敖獲潩 ⵘ卍 捸慨杮ⵥ敓摮 牥 桃捥 戠 照噪猸硷 昷摫灋偈婺夶攷副灺桘 態摃湴 杋 ഻ 樳祐 楎 橱硶杓樳 摵乔 佰獂瑵 卷湐 琸⬱煱汆晩塁癐敡 印 ⭕乥 乨 票 杯兕卨剅汕偊硹 琹 南 し 瀵睤核塷 歭呆湓 婄ㄸ 偷摕 灭 杴礴慑朰末制戸欹 敒散癩摥›牦浯 剐 ㄹ渮浡牰つ⸹牰摯漮瑵潬歯挮浯⠠ㄺ戰 捤 ഩ 祢匠 剐 渮浡牰つ⸹牰摯漮瑵潬歯挮浯⠠ㄺ戰 攱 楷桴 捩潲潳瑦匠呍⁐敓癲牥⠠敶獲潩 ㅓ㉟ബ 楣桰牥吽卌 剟 坟呉彈 当 弶 彍 摩 ⸵⸴※牆Ⱪ‱慍൲ ‶ര刊捥楥敶 映潲㈰呆 ⸵潥⵰捧っ⸲牰摯瀮潲整瑣潩 畯汴潯 潣൭ ㈨ち ㄱ つ ㈺ 祢 剐 ㄹ漮瑵潬歯漮晦捩 挮浯 ⠠ㄺ戰 捤 楷桴 捩潲潳瑦匠呍⁐敓癲牥⠠敶獲潩 ㅓ㉟ബ 楣桰牥吽卌 剟 坟呉彈 当 弶 彍 摩 ⸵⸴㈲瘠慩 潲瑮湥 牔湡灳牯 楲ㄳ 牡㈠㈰″⬠畁桴湥楴慣楴湯刭獥汵獴›灳 慰獳⠠敳摮牥 ⁐獩㈠㈰㈮ ㈮⤵猠 瑭 慭汩牦浯挽瑩潹灦污慯瑬 牯 搠楫 潮敮⠠敭獳条 潮⁴楳湧摥ഩ 敨摡牥搮渽湯 浤牡 慰獳愠瑣潩 潮敮栠慥敤 牦浯挽瑩潹灦污慯 瑬 牯 敒散癩摥匭 ›慐獳⠠牰瑯捥楴湯漮瑵潬歯挮浯›潤慭湩漠楣祴景慰潬污潴漮杲 搠獥杩慮整 ⸲ㄲ⸰⸳愠 数浲瑩整敳摮 牥ഩ 敲散癩牥瀽潲整瑣潩 畯汴潯 潣 挠楬湥 灩㈽㈰㈮ ㈮ 栠汥 桳㈰渮瑥条 灪※牰 敒散癩摥›牦浯猠と⸲敮慴敧樮⁰㈨㈰㈮㈮⤵戠൹ ㈰呆 ⸵慭汩瀮潲整瑣潩 畯汴潯 潣⸰⸰⤶眠瑩楍牣獯景⁴偔 匠牥敶 摩 ⸵⸴瘠慩 潲瑮湥牔湡灳牯 楲ㄳ 牡㈠㈰″⬠敒散癩摥›牦浯嬠㈱⸷⸰⸰崱⠠捥ⴲ⸸灡渭牯桴慥瑳 挮浯異整愮慭潺慮獷挮浯嬠 崸ഩऊ祢 猠と⸲敮慴敧樮⁰倨獯晴硩 楷桴 偔椠ㅆഹऊ潦 氦 楣祴挮畯据汩捀瑩潹灦污慯瑬 牯 瑧 匠瑡牰㈠㈰″⬠⠠半⥔潃瑮湥 祔数›畭瑬灩 牡 業數 戠畯摮牡 焦潵 ⴭ也偭 攷 扢敥ⵢ慐瑲ㅟ焦潵 牆浯›⁈慐浹湥⁴潦 楃祴景慰潬污潴 瑬挻瑩 潣湵楣 楣祴景慰潬污潴漮 杲朦 潔›楣祴挮畯据汩捀瑩潹灦污慯瑬 牯൧匊扵敪瑣›敐摮湩慐浹湥⁴潆 慍 敍獳条ⵥ›氦 晦ㄳㄱ ⵢ搭 ⴰ㈵ 愵ㅤ㈹摦 捀瑩潹灦污慯瑬 牯 瑧഻堊倭楲牯瑩 ⠠楈桧獥⥴ⵘ卍慍汩倭楲牯瑩 杩൨ 灭牯慴据 杩൨ 瑡 楲ㄳ 牡㈠㈰″⬠嘭 牥楳湯›⸱ര刊瑥牵 慐桴›楣祴挮畯据汩捀瑩潹灦污慯瑬 牯൧堊 偏瑁牴扩瑵摥敍獳条 ⵘ佅呐湥湡 瑴楲畢整 獥慳敧›愹搶 挭 ⵥ㈴ ⴶㅥ 晤摤 ⵘ卍倭扵楬呣慲晦捩祔数›浅楡൬堊 ⵓ牔晡楦呣灹 慩湧獯楴 が ぃ ご 彅卼 剐 彅 ⵘ卍伭晦 捩 汩整楲杮 牯敲慬楴湯 晣 ⵥ挱 ⴷ搸 昱摣扦വ堊 ⵄ牐捯獥敳 ⵤ散收 ⴰ昭攳昱搸搵 摦Ɽ硅 摷 ⵘ卍 捸慨杮ⵥ瑁 獥慳敧牐灯牥楴獥›ⵘ卍 捸慨杮ⵥ敓摮牥 桃捥 ⵘ卍 捸慨杮ⵥ湁楴灓浡刭汥祡›ര堊 捩潲潳瑦 瑮獩 慰 ഻堊 捩潲潳瑦 瑮獩慰 敍獳条ⵥ湉潦ഺऊ牗 汷 昳渱煺ご灪橧奩 兔偷啩 海 奧浫煘 瀷稲獕剗 歘 捥煎奊 歰刴 汱硕朷瀶 晅楯⭨兌剂煁畆楹契獣潎剋 坡 癈匯 坄煗 愳偂煉な奖 慕唰汫 噍爰硯 眳 愴 慳瘱 牌癩湤 灤 扭 么獭浒汆 敯灍畸偍摍穬 橵 乤奎杨 愳坌 桹 呫扚 桍搷瑳 剷潳 ⭓坈 楘 汨煱歙 癌 睍煅啹穒湵煄剦 浯乗潰坒 剐昱 婄 扱 挴 ぷ牱灅穯乱 浖扣㈶砫晗 橯 挷摩佣 楖呫匱 樵 歲桮杔癗 ⵘ潆敲牦湯 湁楴灳浡刭灥牯 偉㈺㈰㈮㈮ 呃奒 攺 剓 噐为 医噆为偓 桳㈰渮瑥条 灪倻剔猺と⸲敮慴敧樮 低 医卆⠺⠩⤹ㄵ ㄲ⠩㈱⠩⤵㈱ ⠩⠩⤱⤲㈰⠩⤱⤲㈨ ⠩⠩⤲⤳㈨ ⠩㈷ ⤳⠩⠩⤳⠩⠩⠩ㄳ ㈰⠩⠩⤲㈶ ⤱㈴ ⤲⤴問 ㄱ ഻堊 瑸牥慮剬 捥灩敩瑮畏扴畯摮潃湮捥潴獲›愹搶挭 ⵥ㈴ ⴶㅥ 晤摤 ⵘ畁潴刭獥潰獮ⵥ畓灰敲獳›剄住 瑵副灥祬 ⵘ卍 捸慨杮ⵥ潆睲牡楤 杮潌灯ഺऊ片敥 瑓湯 楃祴景慐潬汁潴漮杲 ⵤ散收 ⴰ昭攳昱搸搵摦 堊伭楲楧慮潴佲杲›楣祴景慰潬污潴漮杲 ⵘ卍 捸慨杮ⵥ牃 獯味湥湡 牏杩湩污牁楲慶呬浩 ‱慍 ⸵⠠呕⥃ⵘ卍 捸慨杮ⵥ牃獯味湥湡 敎睴牯 敍獳条ⵥ摉›挸慦 攸 摣ⴵⴷ扤ㄳ捦晤 ⵘ卍 捸慨杮ⵥ牃獯味湥湡 摉›愹搶挭 ⵥ㈴ ⴶㅥ 晤摤 ⵘ卍 捸慨杮ⵥ牃獯味湥湡 畁桴潓牵散›㈰呆 ⸵潥⵰捧っ⸲牰摯瀮潲整瑣潩 畯汴潯 潣൭堊 ⵓ硅档湡敧 潲獳敔慮瑮 瑵 潮祮潭獵 ⵘ卍 捸慨杮ⵥ牃獯味湥湡 牆浯湅楴祴效摡 牥›湉整湲瑥 ⵘ卍 捸慨杮ⵥ牔湡灳牯 牃獯味湥湡 慥敤獲瑓浡数 匠 剐 牰 潦瑮ാ 戯摯 瑨汭 From:Virginia Tincher To:Council, City Subject:City Council Meeting of April 3 - Comments on Agenda Item 12 - Measure E Site Date:Friday, March 31, 2023 6:30:00 AM Some people who received this message don't often get email from vatincher@gmail.com. Learn why this isimportant CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Palo Alto City Council Members, Thank you for this opportunity to comment on Agenda Item 12 - Parks and RecreationCommission Recommend Adoption of a Park Dedication Ordinance to Dedicate the 10-acre Measure E site as Parkland. My name is Virginia Tincher Van Kuran. I’ve been a resident of Palo Alto for over 60 yearsand lived in Los Altos before that. I’ve watched the Baylands evolve from a dumping ground I avoided to a thriving wetlands I enjoy visiting. The sewage treatment plant is an important part of the area and improves over the years toreduce greenhouse gas emissions. My granddaughter and I attended the opening ceremony and tour of the Dewatering Facility and were impressed with the thoughtfulness that went into theplanning and construction of the facility. Since my retirement I’ve devoted my volunteer time to supporting city, state and national policy solutions that reduce greenhouse gas emissions, preserve and restore our naturalenvironment and reduce waste. I was and remain a supporter of determining the best use of the Measure E site. The best use should be guided by what will produce the fewest or no global warming emissions. If we don’treduce our emissions now it won’t matter whether we are adding 10 acres to a flyway. There will be fewer birds using it or it may no longer be considered a flyway by the birds due to thechanging climate. The latest IPCC Report warns that we must reduce emissions now to avoid the worst impacts Global Warming Palo Alto has ambitious climate protection goals, including becoming carbon neutral by 2030.Sustainable technologies will play a critical role in enabling us to meet our goals. The MeasureE site, right next to the wastewater treatment plant, is an ideal location for an environmentalfacility. Waste conversion technologies are evolving quickly, yet City Council hasn't received anupdate in many years. Silicon Valley Clean Water in Redwood City is using pyrolysis to turnsewage sludge into green energy and biochar, which sequesters carbon dioxide. City Council should direct the Utilities Advisory Commission and/or the Planning andTransportation Commission to weigh in on the Measure E site to get their perspectives on thebest use of the land. PFAS (Polyfluoroalkyl Substances), also known as "forever chemicals," are harmful to people and the environment. PFAS in wastewater and sewage sludge will likely be regulated soon,and Palo Alto might no longer be able to dispose of our sewage sludge on agricultural land in the Central Valley. Pyrolysis is proven to destroy PFAS. It's important for Council to understand all options before making a critical decision on thefuture of the Measure E site. Regards Virginia Tincher Van Kuran879 Garland DrivePalo Alto, CA 94303 From:Aram James To:Council, City Subject:Antioch: Eight additional officers on leave for racist and homophobic texts Date:Thursday, March 30, 2023 11:12:23 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ https://www.mercurynews.com/2023/03/29/antioch-eight-additional-officers-on-leave-for-racist-and-homophobic- texts Sent from my iPhone From:Barbara Kelsey To:Council, City Cc:James Eggers; Jennifer Hetterly Subject:Sierra Club Loma Prieta Chapter comment letter re: April 3 Agenda Item 12, Adoption of a Park DedicationOrdinance to Dedicate the 10-acre Measure E Site as Parkland - Support for PRC Recommendation Date:Thursday, March 30, 2023 10:44:09 PM Attachments:image.png3_31_23 Ltr to PA re_ Rededication of Measure E Site.pdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. March 31, 2023 City of Palo Alto Mayor Kou and Members of the City Council Via email: city.council@cityofpaloalto.org Dear Mayor Kou and Members of the City Council, The Sierra Club Loma Prieta Chapter works to ensure sustainable land use while protecting wetlands, open space, wildlife habitat, and other ecological and natural resources in the Bay Area. Our Bay Alive Campaign advocates locally and regionally to preserve and enhance Bayland ecosystems and build community resilience to sea level rise. We appreciate the City of Palo Alto’s enduring dedication and leadership in preserving and enhancing natural open space for the benefit of current and future generations. We write today to urge you to support the Parks and Recreation Commission’s recommendation to rededicate the 10-acre Measure E site as parkland. Please findour comment letter attached. Thank you for the opportunity to provide these comments. Sincerely, James Eggers Executive DirectorSierra Club Loma Prieta Chapter Jennifer Chang Hetterly Campaign Lead, Bay AliveSierra Club Loma Prieta Chapter sent by: Barbara Kelsey she/her/hers Chapter Coordinator Sierra Club, Loma Prieta Chapter 3921 E. Bayshore Rd, Suite 204 Palo Alto, CA 94303 barbara.kelsey@sierraclub.org sierraclub.org/loma-prieta ~ 3921 East Bayshore Road, Suite 204, Palo Alto, CA 94303 1 SAN MATEO, SANTA CLARA & SAN BENITO COUNTIES March 31, 2023 City of Palo Alto Mayor Kou and Members of the City Council Via email: city.council@cityofpaloalto.org Subject: April 3 Agenda Item 12, Adoption of a Park Dedication Ordinance to Dedicate the 10- acre Measure E Site as Parkland - Support for PRC Recommendation Dear Mayor Kou and Members of the City Council, The Sierra Club Loma Prieta Chapter works to ensure sustainable land use while protecting wetlands, open space, wildlife habitat, and other ecological and natural resources in the Bay Area. Our Bay Alive Campaign advocates locally and regionally to preserve and enhance Bayland ecosystems and build community resilience to sea level rise. We appreciate the City of Palo Alto’s enduring dedication and leadership in preserving and enhancing natural open space for the benefit of current and future generations. We write today to urge you to support the Parks and Recreation Commission’s recommendation to rededicate the 10-acre Measure E site as parkland. Natural open space and thriving ecosystems at Byxbee Park are at the heart of Palo Alto’s Baylands Master Plan Dedicated as parkland almost 60 years ago, the promised transformation of Byxbee Park from a landfill to natural open space has been awaited by Palo Altans for two generations. In fact, that goal was “one of the core reasons for embarking on an integrated master plan for the Baylands.”1 “Seeing that the landfill ultimately becomes an environmental asset and a continuation of the natural open space is one of the most important aspects of the Baylands Master Plan.” Baylands Master Plan, Landfill Area Policy 12 This was not a passing fancy. For decades since, the policies and guidance of Palo Alto’s Baylands Master Plan (BMP) have been repeatedly affirmed throughout the City’s planning documents, including the City’s current Comprehensive Plan.3 Importantly, in the years since the original BMP, the City’s conception of natural open space and its value to the community has evolved well beyond just preserving acreage or providing recreation opportunities. Comprehensive Plan Policy N-1.1 calls for preservation, protection, and enhancement of “open space and ecosystems of Palo Alto from the foothills to the Baylands” and explicitly respects the 1 Baylands Master Plan p. 68 2 Baylands Master Plan p. 88 3 Comprehensive Plan 2030 Policy N-1.5 explicitly incorporates the Baylands Master Plan, as periodically amended, by reference. sierraclub.org/loma-prieta ~ 3921 East Bayshore Road, Suite 204, Palo Alto, CA 94303 2 role that natural and landscaped areas play in a “resilient ecological continuum.”4 For the Baylands specifically, Comprehensive Plan Policy N-1.5 calls for preserving and protecting open space as “functioning habitats, and elements of a larger interconnected wildlife corridor.”5 We’ve lost critical time to restore the important lowland wildlife corridor at the Measure E site The flat portion of the Measure E site (about one-third of the 10-acre site) comprises the only undeveloped lowlands that can be planted and restored to provide a vital habitat link between the Bay and the Emily Renzel Marsh and Wetlands. The trees and vegetation on the flatlands screen the wastewater plant and provide important resources for birds and wildlife. The hillside portion of the site cannot sustain deep-rooted vegetation due to state regulations to protect the cap of the landfill. However, thriving habitat and wildlife corridors require time to establish. Eleven years of delay have degraded the landscape and habitat. We have lost precious time and opportunity to restore habitat and enhance biodiversity. We have also lost opportunities to consider and plan the integration of the site in the Comprehensive Conservation Plan for the Baylands, to build resilience of Bayland ecosystems in the face of climate change. We have lost critical time, savings, and grant opportunities by failing to invest sooner in restoration of this valuable open space. Feasible organic waste solutions have failed to materialize After an extensive process of evaluating bid proposals, City staff concluded that the energy/compost facility that prompted Measure E was prohibitively expensive. In December 2014, City Council directed staff not to pursue the project further. Meanwhile, the City has implemented solutions to the most urgent issues raised in Measure E, food and yard trimmings are now processed with economy of scale in a waste-to-energy facility in San Jose and incineration was replaced with dewatering. Two trucks per day convey the remaining biosolids to the Central Valley. The City again evaluated alternatives for processing biosolids onsite (including pyrolysis) in a 2019 update6 to the City’s Biosolids Facility Plan. Again, staff concluded that the alternatives fell short so the current solutions offer the best benefit/cost ratio. Stay true to voter expectations The 2011 Measure E Initiative sharply divided Palo Alto’s environmental community. Although no environmental review or feasibility study had been completed, Measure E proponents asked voters to trust the vision for an energy/compost facility in that the benefits would be sufficiently high to justify relinquishing parkland that had been fiercely protected for almost 50 years. The Measure E language explicitly allowing rededication as parkland in 10 years (if the waste facility had not yet panned out) was key to garnering the votes of people who supported the idea of the 4 Comprehensive Plan 2030, Policy N-1.1, p. 110 5 Comprehensive Plan 2030, Policy N-1.5, p. 111 6 Regional Water Quality Control Plant Biosolids Facilities Plan Update, October 2019. See Table ES-4, Overall Comparison of Long Term Biosolids Management Options sierraclub.org/loma-prieta ~ 3921 East Bayshore Road, Suite 204, Palo Alto, CA 94303 3 imagined project, but did NOT want the land to be banked indefinitely for uncertain future industrial development. Now that nearly 12 years have passed without a feasible project, calls to indefinitely extend the parkland carve-out feel to many to be a breach of trust regarding Measure E. Voters understood Measure E to be a time-limited test run for a specific, promising solution. It is clear to opponents and proponents alike that there is still no near-term opportunity to realize the Measure E vision. That doesn’t make it a bad vision, but while we wait for its time to come, Council mustn’t continue to handicap the ecological benefits that the Measure E lowlands can provide. Council also should not risk creating a bait-and-switch mentality that could turn the community against any future project that may require a vote of the people. The City should stay true to voter expectations by now returning the 10 acres to parkland and investing in habitat restoration on the site. If a beneficial enviro-tech solution becomes feasible and appropriate for the site in the future, the City can return to the voters with a specific project; Palo Altans have already proven they will rise to the challenge. Thank you for the opportunity to provide these comments. Sincerely, James Eggers Executive Director Sierra Club Loma Prieta Chapter Jennifer Chang Hetterly Campaign Lead, Bay Alive Sierra Club Loma Prieta Chapter View this email in your browser Supporting a diverse and vibrant community. From:Palo Alto Community FundTo:Council, CitySubject:Supporting Transformations in After-School Child CareDate:Thursday, March 30, 2023 3:57:43 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious ofopening attachments and clicking on links. 2022 Dave Mitchell Impact GranteeSupporting Transformations in After- School Child Care By Chris Kenrick, PACF Donor and freelance writer California is investing in childcare and education, and one of its primary goals is to serve more children ages three to four years old statewide through high-quality preschool programs. California intends to meet this goal through the implementation of universally available transitional kindergarten (TK), as well as investments in other state-funded programs, including funding to expand the California State Preschool Program (CSPP) and other state-subsidized programs that offer a preschool learning experience. In 2021, educators and California State legislators agreed that every child should have access to TK as a quality learning experience before entering Kindergarten. The recently enacted California Education Code section 48000(c) requires any school district operating a Kindergarten to also provide a TK program for all four-year-old children by the 2025–26 school year. The Palo Alto Community Fund also believes in investing in early childhood education. Last year they awarded a 2022 Dave Mitchell Impact Grant to help Palo Alto Community Child Care (PACCC) reconfigure its programs to align with these new California state requirements governing TK. PACCC, a nonprofit organization, has served local families since 1974, providing high- quality care for infants and children through the fifth grade. Currently, the organization cares for more than 900 infants and children in 19 locations throughout Palo Alto, including an after-school “Kids Club” established on 11 elementary school campuses. Now that the Palo Alto Unified School District is offering TK at five elementary schools (Barron Park, Duveneck, El Carmelo, Palo Verde, and Walter Hays), PACCC must open its after-school Kids Club three hours earlier than they had previously to accommodate this younger group of four- and five-year-olds, who are dismissed from regular classroom instruction at 11:30 am. (Historically, PACCC had served that age group in its five preschools, not on elementary school campuses.) “We’ve had to train staff and develop curriculum at our Kids Clubs to work with what’s traditionally been known as pre-schoolers,” PACCC Executive Director Lee Pfab, said. “The funds from the grant helped our Kids Club teachers, who traditionally work with first- through fifth-graders, to be fully prepared to serve the distinct younger age group of kindergarteners and preschool-age children.” Pfab says that another challenge was serving four-year-olds through fifth-graders all in the same space, as it required a lot of training and leg work to provide a safe and age- appropriate environment for all the children. Additionally, PACCC added new curriculum in response to the school district’s “PAUSD Promise” to support mental health. This involves age-appropriate activities in social- emotional learning, including storytelling and puppets. The changes went into effect for the current school year. “The grant from the Palo Alto Community Fund has really helped us to roll out all of these new programs,” Pfab said. “PACF Dave Mitchell Impact Grants are particularly focused on supporting nonprofit organizations that address key challenges through transformative initiatives that help affect systemic change,” Palo Alto Community Fund Executive Director Lisa Van Dusen, said. Namesake of the grant, Dave Mitchell, passed away in 2018. Mitchell was a lawyer, community volunteer and former PACF board member. You can support future Dave Mitchell grants that have a lasting impact on our community by supporting the Palo Alto Community Fund. Become a Volunteer!All Five Are you interested in lending your skills to benefit children? Our 2022 PACF grantee All Five is an innovative Menlo Park preschool that is empowering all families to choose a high-quality early childhood education for their children. If you are interested in becoming a volunteer with All Five, you can learn more about All Five and submit an inquiry here. Learn more + Saturdays in AprilTIFFAN Workshops 2022 grantee The Institute for Families and Nannies (TIFFAN), develops and supports career pathways for nannies to meet the growing demand for quality care. Childcare providers are invited to join TIFFAN each Saturday in April from 10:30am – 12:00pm for a free workshop series discussing important early childhood education topics. Learn more + You can make a difference in our community. Donate to PACF today! DONATE Copyright © 2023 Palo Alto Community Fund, All rights reserved. Thank you for being a friend of the Palo Alto Community Fund. Our mailing address is: Palo Alto Community Fund PO Box 50634 Palo Alto, CA 94303-0634 Add us to your address book Want to change how you receive these emails? You can update your preferences or unsubscribe from this list. From:pol1@rosenblums.us To:Clerk, City Cc:"Janet Cox" Subject:Comment for Council Meeting of April 3, 2023 Date:Thursday, March 30, 2023 2:07:16 PM Attachments:CAC PA Measure E.pdf You don't often get email from pol1@rosenblums.us. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Mayor Kou and Councilmembers: Please accept the attached comment letter regarding item 12 on the agenda of your Special Meeting on April 3, 2023. We ask that you postpone your decision on the staff recommendation to convert the site to park land. Sincerely, Stephen Rosenblum Santa Rita Ave, Palo Alto For Climate Action California March 30,2023 Mayor Lydia Kou Members of the Palo Alto City Council 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto,CA 94301 Do Not Convert the Measure E Site to Parkland on April 3 Dear Mayor Kou and Members of the City Council: Climate Action California is a statewide organization with over 5000 supporters,many of us located in the Bay Area and Palo Alto.We are dedicated to saving our climate from global warming chaos. We have learned that on April 3,the Council will be asked to decide whether to re-dedicate the 10 acre site (Measure E site)next to the Regional Water Quality Control Plant (RWQCP),which was previously set aside to treat the City’s organic waste (sewage sludge,food scraps,and yard waste).Unfortunately,as you know,efforts to set up a program to do this were not fruitful and these wastes are now trucked out of town for treatment and disposal. When Measure E was passed,nearly 65%of the vote was in favor of developing an organic waste treatment facility—because Palo Altans want to be leaders in protecting our climate. The Council should not take precipitous action to give up on this purpose without consulting the Utilities Advisory Commission and Utilities Department Staff—particularly at the RWQCP—to see if the aims of Measure E and Palo Alto’s waste treatment needs could be better served by using this site for its intended purpose. We are sure you are well aware of Senate Bill 1383 (Lara,2016)and its requirement to reduce emissions of methane 40%below 2013 levels by 2030.Anaerobic decomposition of the organic waste the Measure E site would treat is the source of 24 percent of the methane emissions in California.Methane is 86 times more warming than carbon dioxide over 20 years but only has an atmospheric lifetime of 12 years,compared to hundreds of years for carbon dioxide—so Climate Action California •P.O.Box 20001 •Oakland,CA 94620 methane is low hanging fruit in the climate fight.Developing the Measure E site in accordance with the vote is one way Palo Alto can contribute to the state's reaching its greenhouse gas reduction goal. We ask the Council to honor Palo Alto citizens’demonstrated support for aggressive climate action as you carefully evaluate the use of the Measure E site as a factor in humanity’s struggle to avoid climate armageddon. Sincerely, Stephen Rosenblum Santa Rita Avenue,Palo Alto For Climate Action California From:Charlie Weidanz To:Council, City Subject:Palo Alto Chamber of Commerce News & Updates - March 30, 2023 Date:Thursday, March 30, 2023 2:00:16 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. NEWS & UPDATES - MARCH 30, 2023 Reserve Now: 43rd Annual Tall Tree Awards Business Leadership Luncheon Women in Wine International Women's Month Easter Brunch at Crowne Plaza Cabana In-Person Home Buying Seminar 43rd Annual Tall Tree Awards Reserve your spot at the 43rd Annual Tall Tree Awards April 20, 2023 5:30pm - 8pm Oshman Family JCC Recipients being honored are: OUTSTANDING BUSINESS Coupa Cafe OUTSTANDING PROFESSIONAL Bill Liberatore OUTSTANDING CITIZEN VOLUNTEER Bruce Gee OUTSTANDING NONPROFIT DreamCatchers Reserve Now Join Us Business Leadership Luncheon County Supervisor Joe Simitian Friday, April 14, 2023 Noon - 1:15pm Italico 341 California Ave, Palo Alto Reserve Now Women In Wine March 29, 2023 6pm Hotel Citrine 750 San Antonio Rd, Palo Alto International Women's Month Together We Rise Celebrating International Women’s Month Sponsored in part by City National Bank (a proud chamber member) Sign up and get more details: https://www.eventbrite.com/e/together-we-rise-tickets- 543357144847 Chamber members use the following code for discounts: CNB15 Amount: 15% off Applicable to: General & Sponsor tickets Easter Brunch Easter Brunch Crowne Plaza Cabana Palo Alto 4290 El Camino RealSunday, April 9, 2023 10am - 2pm Reservations: monserrat.montes@cabanapaloalto.com In-Person Home Buying Seminar in the SF Bay Area Home Buying Seminar - April 2, 2023, 11am Join Christina Hood and Keller Williams' team of educators Sunday, April 2, 2023 We will discuss the following & more... Market insights and trends so you make informed decisions Current interest rates and how they impact your home buying power How to get ready for a loan application What to expect in escrow and closing, a.k.a. when do you get your keys? What a $1,000,000 will buy in today's market Register Today! See Our Upcoming Events Learn More About The Chamber PALO ALTO CHAMBER & VISITORS CENTER 355 ALMA STREET | PALO ALTO | CA | 94301 | 650-324-3121 WWW.PALOALTOCHAMBER.COM This email was sent on behalf of Palo Alto Chamber of Commerce 355 Alma St Palo Alto, CA 94301.Tounsubscribe click here. If you have questions or comments concerning this email or services in general,please contact us by email at info@paloaltochamber.com. This email was sent on behalf of Palo Alto Chamber of Commerce 355 Alma St Palo Alto, CA 94301.To unsubscribe clickhere. If you have questions or comments concerning this email or services in general, please contact us by email atinfo@paloaltochamber.com. From:Shannon Rose To:Council, City Subject:Ten Acres Can Make A Difference Date:Thursday, March 30, 2023 1:33:00 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Mayor Kou and Palo Alto City Council Members: In 2011 65% of the voters approved Measure E in order to make our former landfill site available for an organic waste-to-energy conversion facility. We still need to do this. My point in writing today is to urge the City Council to make more time for deeper research on what will be the best use of the 10 acres where the former landfill site was located. Waste conversion technologies have evolved and are evolving quickly, yet the City Council hasn't received an update in many years. Some of the current options may actually be cheaper and more effective than what the City looked at all those years ago. Silicon Valley Clean Water in Redwood City is using pyrolysis to turn sewage sludge into green energy and biochar, which sequesters carbon dioxide. Converting the Measure E site into parkland might not be in the City's best interest -- especially given our ambitious S/CAP goals and our overwhelming responsibility to fight climate change. It is vitally important for Council to understand all options before making a critical decision on the future of the Measure E site. I urge you and the Council to direct the Utilities Advisory Commission and/or the Planning and Transportation Commission to weigh in on the future of the site. There is no urgency to make a decision on this so there is time to gather the latest information and make an informed decision based on today's realities. Another serious and related issue is dealing with PFAS, which will soon be regulated by the state. PFAs and how we handle them should be part of the City's discussion. Many thanks for all you do for Palo Alto. You have my great respect. Sincerely, Shannon Rose McEntee 410 Sheridan Avenue #216 Palo Alto, CA 94306 From:Ronald Felix Subject:Representative For Our Company Date:Thursday, March 30, 2023 11:38:03 AM Some people who received this message don't often get email from rfelix@matthewsauto.com. Learn why this isimportant CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Work from your office or at home as a Representative for our company. This appointment comes with a monthly salary and commission. Ask for details if interested. From:Aram James To:Pat Burt; Lauing, Ed; Shikada, Ed; Julie Lythcott-Haims; Shikada, Ed; Lait, Jonathan; Council, City; Stump, Molly Subject:LifeMoves Mountain View promises to help homeless clients find stable housing in three months. The majority of them don"t | News | Palo Alto Online | Date:Thursday, March 30, 2023 11:23:35 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ https://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2023/03/30/lifemoves-mountain-view-promises-to-help-homeless-clients- find-stable-housing-in-three-months-the-vast-majority-dont?utm_source=express-2023-03- 30&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=express Sent from my iPhone From:Roxy Rapp To:PWD Cc:Council, City; City Mgr; Lait, Jonathan Subject:Partial Removal of Parklet Date:Thursday, March 30, 2023 11:11:38 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Brad, Thank you so much for talking to me about my problem with parklets in front of 375 and 379 University. My next-door neighbor’s (Crepevine Restaurant) parklet intrudes over 60% of the parking stall that is in front of my property. The reason I am so adamant about getting this cleared up ASAP is the tenant has asked to have it removed because it is in front of their window and they are spending over a million dollars on their interior buildout. It is so hard today to get a good retail tenant and this aggravation of trying to get rid of it adds to it. If you or an associate are able to come out I will meet you and we can measure it. I would like to take care of this as soon as possible. Please call me on my cell phone at 650.575.9488 and I will be there with my measuring tape. This has gone on too long and I would like to have it removed immediately. Thank you for your attention above. Roxy Rapp From:Aram James To:Julie Lythcott-Haims; Council, City; Shikada, Ed; Jethroe Moore; Stump, Molly; Sean Allen; Joe Simitian; CindyChavez; Josh Becker; Supervisor Susan Ellenberg; Rebecca Eisenberg Subject:L- Counties pushing for comprehensive homelessness plan Date:Thursday, March 30, 2023 7:36:53 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ I saw this The Mercury News e-edition article on the The Mercury News e-edition app and thought you’d be interested. Counties pushing for comprehensive homelessness plan https://edition.pagesuite.com/popovers/dynamic_article_popover.aspx?guid=10eced41-febb-4686-b1f4- b2dffcdcb911&appcode=SAN252&eguid=550f3664-b87b-4e76-a405-85fd7aa8b20a&pnum=30# For more great content like this subscribe to the The Mercury News e-edition app here: Sent from my iPhone From:Aram James To:Binder, Andrew; Reifschneider, James; Wagner, April; Josh Becker; Sean Allen; Jethroe Moore; Council, City;Michael Gennaco; Enberg, Nicholas; Jeff Rosen; Lee, Craig; Tony Dixon; Tannock, Julie; Julie Lythcott-Haims;GRP-City Council; citycouncil@mountainview.gov; Javier Ortega Subject:- 7 CHP officers charged in 2020 death of man in custody Date:Thursday, March 30, 2023 7:25:20 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ I saw this The Mercury News e-edition article on the The Mercury News e-edition app and thought you’d be interested. 7 CHP officers charged in 2020 death of man in custody https://edition.pagesuite.com/popovers/dynamic_article_popover.aspx?guid=ec35cd15-dd32-40ab-af74- fcd24d38dc26&appcode=SAN252&eguid=550f3664-b87b-4e76-a405-85fd7aa8b20a&pnum=16# For more great content like this subscribe to the The Mercury News e-edition app here: Sent from my iPhone From:Aram James To:Binder, Andrew; Wagner, April; Reifschneider, James; Josh Becker; Jethroe Moore; Sean Allen; Council, City;Julie Lythcott-Haims; Jeff Rosen; Figueroa, Eric; Foley, Michael; Michael Gennaco; chuck jagoda; Barberini,Christopher; Shikada, Ed; Tanaka, Greg; Shana Segal; Rebecca Eisenberg; Human Relations Commission; JayBoyarsky; Rob Baker; Enberg, Nicholas; Perron, Zachary; Cecilia Taylor Subject:California reparations amount, if any, left to politicians | AP News Date:Thursday, March 30, 2023 7:14:51 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ https://apnews.com/article/california-black-reparations-racism-e7377631044ef6325b042ea56456d81b Sent from my iPhone From:Aram James To:Julie Lythcott-Haims; Council, City; Jethroe Moore; Sean Allen; Josh Becker; Shikada, Ed; Binder, Andrew;Reifschneider, James; Wagner, April; ladoris cordell; Rebecca Eisenberg; Barberini, Christopher; Figueroa, Eric;Tannock, Julie; chuck jagoda; Jeff Rosen; Human Relations Commission; Michael Gennaco; Enberg, Nicholas;Shana Segal; Perron, Zachary; Angie Evans; Jay Boyarsky; Cecilia Taylor Subject:Solving racial disparities in policing – Harvard Gazette Date:Wednesday, March 29, 2023 11:33:06 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2021/02/solving-racial-disparities-in-policing/ Sent from my iPhone From:Aram James To:Veenker, Vicki; Council, City; Jethroe Moore; Sean Allen; Julie Lythcott-Haims; Human Relations Commission;Josh Becker; Binder, Andrew; Wagner, April; Reifschneider, James; DuJuan Green; dennis burns; Kevin Jensen;Jeff Rosen; ladoris cordell; Rebecca Eisenberg; chuck jagoda; Jay Boyarsky; Michael Gennaco; Foley, Michael;Shikada, Ed; Shana Segal; Perron, Zachary; Angie Evans; Greer Stone; Cecilia Taylor; Joe Simitian; JavierOrtega; Supervisor Susan Ellenberg; Bains, Paul; Cindy Chavez; Enberg, Nicholas Subject:Black police officers disciplined disproportionately for misconduct, IU research finds: IU News Date:Wednesday, March 29, 2023 10:34:46 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ https://news.iu.edu/live/news/27199-black-police-officers-disciplined Sent from my iPhone From:Aram James To:Human Relations Commission; Binder, Andrew; Jethroe Moore; Josh Becker; Sean Allen; Julie Lythcott-Haims;Council, City; Shikada, Ed; Joe Simitian; Reifschneider, James; Wagner, April; Jeff Rosen; ladoris cordell; chuckjagoda; Jay Boyarsky; Michael Gennaco; Shana Segal; Angie Evans; Perron, Zachary; Greer Stone; Enberg,Nicholas; Bains, Paul; Javier Ortega; Cecilia Taylor; Dave Price; Cindy Chavez; Supervisor Susan Ellenberg Subject:ADVANCING DIVERSITY IN LAW ENFORCEMENT | U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Date:Wednesday, March 29, 2023 8:54:25 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ https://www.eeoc.gov/advancing-diversity-law-enforcement Sent from my iPhone From:Rhoda Kaplan To:Council, City Subject:Philz coffee. There are more than enough housing units in Menlo Park. Just check the traffic Date:Wednesday, March 29, 2023 4:45:36 PM [Some people who received this message don't often get email from rvka77@icloud.com. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ Sent from my iPhone From:Microsoft Outlook To:Stone, Greer Subject:Undeliverable: Incoming ACH Payment Advise Breakdown Mar 27,2023 Date:Monday, April 3, 2023 8:09:02 AM Attachments:Incoming ACH Payment Advise Breakdown Mar 272023.msg 格浴 格慥 洼瑥瑨灴攭畱癩∽潃瑮湥 祔数•潣瑮湥 琢硥 瑨汭※档牡敳 獵愭捳楩 敨摡 潢祤ാ 戼 潦瑮挠汯牯∽∶猠穩•慦散∽牁慩≬派 潧杯敬挮浯爠橥捥整潹牵洠獥慳敧琠桴 潦汬睯湩浥楡摡牤獥敳 潦瑮 戯 瀯ാ 潦瑮挠汯牯∽∰猠 穩 ㈢•慦散∽慔潨慭 瀼 牨晥∽慭汩潴 敲牥匮潴敮 瑩潹偦污 瑬 牯≧敲牥匮潴敮 瑩潹偦污 瑬 牯 愯 牢ാ 是湯 昼湯⁴潣 潬 ⌢•楳敺∽∳映捡 楲污 潙牵洠獥慳敧眠獡 ⁴敤楬敶敲敢慣獵 桴 敲楣楰湥 浥楡牰癯摩牥爠橥捥整瑩 牢ാ 是湯 昼 湯⁴潣潬 ⌢•楳敺∽∲映捡 吢桡浯≡牢ാഊ 戼派 潧杯敬挮浯朠癡 桴獩攠牲牯 牢ാ吊楨 敭獳条 慷 汢捯敫敢慣獵 瑩 潣瑮 湥⁴牰獥湥獴愠瀠瑯湥楴污猠捥牵瑩⁹獩畳 倠敬獡 楶楳⁴栠瑴獰 猯灵潰瑲朮潯汧 潣 慭汩 求捯敫 獥慳敧琠敲楶睥漠牵洠獥慳敧挠 湯整瑮愠摮愠瑴捡浨湥⁴潣瑮湥⁴畧摩汥湩獥獧瑭⁰戼 潦‴橥 ㈰㈳楳 ぢ ㅤ 愰㈰ ⴷㅨ 瑮ാ 牢 牢 牢 牢 牢 牢ാ 潦瑮挠汯牯∽∰猠穩 ㈢•慦散∽慔潨慭 瀼 楄条潮瑳捩椠普牯慭楴湯映牯愠浤湩獩牴瑡牯 瀼 湥牥瑡湩敳癲牥›倶げ ⸰慮灭摲 瀮潲 畯汴潯 潣 牢ാ 瀯ാ 片敥 瑓湯 楃祴景慐潬汁潴漮杲戼 硭朮潯汧 潣 牢ാ刊 浥瑯 敳癲牥†敲畴湲摥 ⴲ⸵⸷‰桔獩洠獥慳敧眠獡戠潬正摥戠捥畡敳椠獴挠湯整瑮瀠敲敳瑮 潰整瑮慩൬ ㈵ 猠捥牵瑩⁹獩畳 倠 敬獡 楶楳൴ ㈵ †瑨灴 畳灰牯 潧杯敬挮浯洯楡 瀿 潬正摥敍獳条 潴爠癥敩⁷畯൲ ㈵ 洠獥慳敧挠湯整瑮愠摮愠瑴捡浨 湥⁴潣瑮湥⁴畧摩汥湩獥獧瑭 戼 瀼伾楲楧慮敭獳条 敨摡牥 瀼敲 匭‴橥 ㈰㈳楳 ぢ ㅤ 愰㈰ ⴷㅨ 慥 椠ㄽ※獲ⵡ桳 ※牡獣汥捥潴 搠洽捩潲潳瑦挮浯※癣渽湯 戠刽眰眸 浄慂ご 湱噫 癪 偌洳 硇 乂案摫摺楚假 婸 伴 套 甸湅档 硕畒慏佌 卆 ㉗克 剘捒ㅴ奂 剌癕卌穇敏祷樶 慄 奇 剏乗 桳 湍癥权洰杵湭偬 呔 癪啗卮做 歕 扏 捺 砷瑃癃伷婡祎楪獋 湍 睖ㅲ止 乂ば灆硋 噹牲慍佪 ㅕㅭ ㅊ卧ㄵ婷危卫奪 攸 晗睺 灙剷 煇畆潳 浃 牑 牥 歂 倳塎 捴坔婋 奈瘹硃扆 ഽ 獥慳敧匭杩慮畴敲›愠爽慳猭慨 挠爽汥硡摥爯汥硡摥※業牣獯景 潣 猠愽捲 敳敬瑣牯 ഻ 牆浯 瑡 畓橢捥 敍獳条ⵥ湯整瑮吭灹 嘭牥楳湯堺 ⵓ硅档湡敧 瑮卩慰 敍獳条 瑡ⵡ桃湵 畯瑮堺 ⵓ硅档湡敧 瑮 卩慰 敍獳条 瑡ⵡⵘ卍 捸慨杮ⵥ湁楴灓浡 獥慳敧慄慴 ഻ 桢匽瑂 偅才欵倰 呐 卮 奁 ⭹扈 晏 戠朽剆硐 ㅚ灄ひ瑦湆 穂 獅祈 塋啣先⭅步湌扸橍夷 晭乆 摐 ぺ樸晨灚奁祘周煕佉ㅧ杷汸塦 ⭕硧摌剐佲歺地し潊瑌 婥獳 瀹猴 潉晊 攳捬睖 灉內楌琳潈 洳癐偐 桎偑硈 汱ㅦず 橧 塧浸瑶礸 渴 ⭡獫 獄 啶圲煱 慓欶祵剷硧地慫卲坃 ぬ 偵塤瘴偶汇朰晍塁獄捘噉改失呤 呂 爷ぴ瘱 瑏 呯 乘獶⬸呣匹 祳契昷硂歚 娴猱じ乺港朰煆佐呉 是祈 婮 ഽ 瑵敨瑮捩瑡潩 敒畳瑬 椠ㄽ※硭洮捩潲潳瑦挮 浯 ※灳 慰獳⠠敳摮牥椠⁰獩 ㈠㈰㈮ 浳灴爮灣瑴摯浯楡 楣祴景慰潬污潴漮杲 猠瑭 慭汩牦浯挽瑩潹灦污慯瑬 牯 搠慭捲瀽獡 瀨焽慵慲瑮湩 灳焽慵慲瑮湩 捰 ⤰愠瑣 潩 潮敮栠慥敤 牦浯挽瑩潹灦污慯瑬 牯 搠楫 潮敮⠠敭獳条 潮൴ 楳湧摥 愠捲渽湯 ഩ ⵍ楓湧瑡牵 瘠ㄽ※獲ⵡ桳 ※敲慬 數 敲慬數 搠挽瑩潹灦污慯瑬 牯 猠猽汥捥潴 ഻ 牆浯 瑡 畓橢捥 敍獳条ⵥ湯整瑮吭灹 嘭牥楳湯堺 ⵓ硅档湡敧匭湥敤 敨 正഻ 桢匽瑂 偅才欵倰 呐 卮 奁 ⭹扈 晏 戠㈽ 積 制 牍 敋慩唲潫灃汑睚 獫稲畹 欳汔晢 発摁慯 汹 偂琳晫 摺獃娶捓 湒汖 ぴ 唹橎摺剭は 止氰牶ㅺ 穬歸 呪坨 ㅍ 婍 党匲⭤橳朷 杊煺睈楖杏畁慗煬⭐洵 ഽ刊捥楥敶 映潲奃倴げ ぁ ⸲慮灭 摲 瀮潲 畯汴潯 潣㈨ 挺 ⤰戠⁹倶げ ⸰慮灭摲 瀮潲 畯汴潯 潣㈨ ㈺挶 ㈱ 楷桴 捩潲潳瑦匠呍⁐敓癲牥⠠敶獲潩 ㅓ㉟ബ 楣桰牥吽卌 剟 坟呉彈 当 弶 彍 摩 ⸵㈲⸲※敗Ɽ㈠‹慍൲ ㈠ ‸ര刊捥楥敶 映潲㈰呆 ⸳潥⵰捧っ⸲牰摯瀮潲整瑣潩 畯汴潯 潣൭ ㈨ち ㄱ つ ㈺ 祢 剐 ㈹漮瑵潬歯漮晦捩 挮浯 ⠠ㄺ戰 楷桴 捩潲潳瑦匠呍⁐敓癲牥⠠敶獲潩 ㅓ㉟ബ 楣桰牥吽卌 剟 坟呉彈 当 弶 彍 摩 ⸵⸴瘠慩 潲瑮湥 牔湡灳牯 圠摥牡㈠㈰″㈲ ⬠畁桴湥楴慣楴湯刭獥汵獴›灳 慰獳⠠敳摮牥 ⁐獩㈠㈰㈮ഩ 浳灴洮楡晬潲 楣祴景慰潬污潴漮杲※此浩渽湯 洨獥慳敧渠瑯猠杩敮⥤栠慥敤 潮敮搻慭捲瀽獡 捡楴湯渽湯 敨摡牥昮潲 楣祴 景慰潬污潴漮杲഻刊捥楥敶ⵤ偓 倠獡 瀨潲整瑣潩 畯汴潯 潣 搠浯楡景挠瑩潹灦污慯瑬 牯൧ 敤楳湧瑡獥㈠㈰㈮ 愠 数浲瑩 整敳摮牥ഩ 敲散癩牥瀽潲整瑣潩 畯汴潯 潣 挠楬湥 灩㈽㈰㈮ ഻ 敨潬愽 ⸳浲楡 灪※牰 敒散癩摥›牦浯愠 ⸳浲 楡 灪⠠⸲㈲⸸⸸⤳戠൹ ㈰呆 ⸳慭汩瀮潲整瑣潩 畯汴潯 潣⸰ 楷桴 捩潲潳瑦匠呍 敓癲牥⠠敶獲潩 ㅓ㉟楣桰牥吽卌 剟 坟呉彈 当 弶 彍 摩 ⸵⸴ㄲ瘠慩 潲瑮湥牔湡灳牯 圠摥牡㈠㈰″㈲ ⬠敒散癩摥›牦浯猠摡爮慭汩渮 灪⠠汲ど⸲牡 浲楡 敮 樮⁰ㅛ⸰⸴⸱㈵⥝戉⁹ㅡ 爮慭汩樮⁰倨獯晴硩 楷桴 偔椠ㄴ റऊ潦 氦 楣祴挮畯据汩捀瑩潹灦污慯瑬 牯 瑧 吠畨牡㈠㈰″⬠⠠半⥔敒散癩摥›牦浯 嬠㈱⸷⸰⸰崱⠠捥ⴲⴵ⸰灡渭牯桴慥瑳 挮浯異整愮慭潺慮獷挮浯嬠 ⸵崰ഩऊ祢猠摡爮慭汩渮 灪⠠潐瑳楦⥸眠瑩卅呍 椠 昉牯 瑬挻瑩 潣湵楣 楣祴景慰潬污潴漮杲朦 ※桔Ⱶ‰慍 ″‰呓ഩ堊 中摯 映污敳 牆浯›呕ⵆ楃祴景慰 潬污潴刭灥牯 ㉃ ഽ 氦 楣祴挮畯据汩捀瑩潹灦污慯瑬 牯 瑧഻吊 挠瑩 潣湵楣 楣祴景慰潬污潴漮杲 畓橢捥 据浯湩⁈慐浹 湥⁴摁楶敳 敲歡潤湷 牡㈠ 敍獳条ⵥ›氦 攲扥愱慢昭 ⴶ敡 攭 ⴸ搳愲 扣 捀瑩潹灦污慯瑬 牯 瑧഻ 瑡 圠摥牡㈠㈰″㈲⬠嘭牥楳湯›⸱ര刊瑥牵 慐桴›楣祴挮畯据汩捀瑩潹灦污慯瑬 牯൧堊 偏瑁牴扩瑵摥敍獳条 ⵘ佅呐湥湡 瑴楲畢整 獥慳敧› 愹搶挭 ⵥ㈴ ⴶㅥ 晤摤 ⵘ卍倭扵楬呣慲晦捩祔数›浅楡൬堊 ⵓ牔晡楦呣灹 慩湧獯楴 ぃ ご 彅 剐 彅 ⵘ卍伭晦捩 汩整楲杮 牯敲慬楴湯 攠 戴㈱ⵡⴰ搸 愰ㄶぢഴ堊 ⵄ牐捯獥敳 ⵤ散收 ⴰ昭攳昱搸搵 摦Ɽ硅 摷 ⵘ卍 捸慨杮ⵥ瑁 獥慳敧牐灯牥楴獥›潃瑮湥 祔数›畭瑬灩牡 業數 戉畯摮牡 焦潵 损晣昸改ⴶ摥慥 ⴱ搹 慢 搲 改っ彤焦潵 ⵘ卍 捸慨杮ⵥ敓摮牥 桃捥 ⵘ卍 捸慨杮ⵥ湁楴灓浡刭汥祡›ര堊 捩潲潳瑦 瑮獩慰 ഻堊 捩潲潳瑦 瑮獩 慰 敍獳条ⵥ湉潦ഺऊ⭦呩 楖 婁 婂契伴 嘹 瀵婖 潶愳啊瘶 婂汯 搶ぬ獊歶昱 硕偪単 塈夫 奣唶 偩 晫 剃 坚挹 獉 偵 杶 汦噳呏千礵 穤楋歉 佺 摹 呂 牃 潋 儱ㅗ祘攵 坡 報 渫 焴 慦 慒捃党硄灰慭污 桅 夶煏攸 敤癚 塗坋挸 啩确照偪摤灖敇塣楘唲 匷坳 牦睇 丵灖さ 畮琵 畖硁佗扒由畂剑匵ず 砶穹畷 捋 卭摕 体 瑣摭 丸儶湱 浪偃楂 扄硑獢呫 慆坤灢 丵兄啪捎晚 楐 愰塚 ⵘ潆敲牦湯 湁楴灳浡刭灥牯 偉㈺㈰㈮ 剔 偊 乁 湥医 ㄺ医 噒 偉 华 愺 ⸳浲楡 灪倻剔愺 ⸳浲楡 灪 呁为乏 ㈳ ㈰⤸⠩ㄱ ㈰⤱⠩⠩⤳⠩⤳㈨ ⠩ㄷ ⤳⤲㈨ㄶ ⠩㈰⠩⠩⤱㈰⠩⤲㈴ ⤲⠩ㄳ ㈰⠩⠩⠩ㄳ㈰⠩㈷ ⤳㈰ ⤱㈶ ⤱⤷㈰⠩⠩⤱⤴㈨ ⤳剉伺呕医偆ㄺ ⵘ硅整湲污敒楣楰湥佴瑵 潢湵 湯敮瑣牯 ⵤ散收 ⴰ昭攳昱搸搵摦 堊 瑵ⵯ敒灳湯敳匭灵牰獥 传 畁潴敒汰൹堊 ⵓ硅档湡敧 牯慷摲湩 潯 敲 牥匮潴敮 瑩潹偦污 瑬 牯 愹搶挭 ⵥ㈴ ⴶㅥ 晤摤 ⵘ牏杩湩瑡牯牏 挠瑩潹灦污慯瑬 牯൧堊 ⵓ硅档湡敧 潲獳敔慮瑮伭楲 楧慮 牲癩污楔敭›牡㈠㈰″㈲ ㄹഴ 唨 ഩ堊 ⵓ硅档湡敧 潲獳敔慮瑮中瑥潷歲 獥慳敧 攠 戴㈱ⵡⴰ 搸 愰ㄶぢഴ堊 ⵓ硅档湡敧 潲獳敔慮瑮 ⵤ散收 ⴰ昭攳昱搸搵摦 堊 ⵓ硅档湡敧 潲獳敔慮瑮 瑵卨畯捲ぃ ご 攮灯札捣㈰瀮潲 牰瑯捥楴湯漮瑵潬歯挮浯 ⵘ卍 捸慨杮ⵥ牃獯味湥湡 畁桴獁›湁湯浹畯൳堊 ⵓ硅档湡敧 潲獳敔慮瑮 潲 瑮 瑩 慥敤 瑮牥敮൴堊 ⵓ硅档湡敧吭慲獮潰瑲 潲獳敔慮瑮效摡牥即慴灭摥›倶げ ര 瀯敲ാ 是湯 潢祤ാ 栯浴 From:Aram James To:Julie Lythcott-Haims; Sean Allen; ladoris cordell; Jethroe Moore; Council, City; Josh Becker; Dave Price; EmilyMibach; Braden Cartwright; Shikada, Ed; Diana Diamond; Joe Simitian; Cindy Chavez; Javier Ortega; SupervisorSusan Ellenberg Subject:California reparations taskforce member is slammed as he Zooms in from Kamala"s tour of Ghana Date:Wednesday, March 29, 2023 2:24:04 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. NewsBreakUsed by over 45 million people Open APP California reparations taskforce member is slammed as he Zooms in from Kamala's tour of Ghana Daily Mail I found this on NewsBreak: California reparations taskforce member is slammed as he Zooms in from Kamala's tour of Ghana Click to read the full story Sent from my iPhone From:julianneasla@sonic.net To:Council, City Subject:Measure E Date:Wednesday, March 29, 2023 1:50:27 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. March 29, 2023 Measure E Site Bay Lands, Palo Alto For the honorable Mayor Lydia Kou and the members of the City of Palo Alto City Council I’ve lived in Palo Alto for 28 years, and I supported Measure E when it came up for vote 10 years ago. Please remember that in 2011 65% of our Palo Alto voters approved Measure E. We worked to set aside the land for a sustainability facility. The need for sustainable facilities to deal with our waste is as important now as it was then. Please do not act to convert this 10 acre site before learning about the latest waste conversion technologies and options that could be constructed at the Measure E site. Please direct the Utilities Advisory Commission and/or the Planning and Transportation Commission to research the Measure E site and get their perspectives on the best use of the land. I love our Baylands park area. I am there often bird watching, walking my dog, enjoying the tidal marshes and the views out to the bay and east bay hills. There are many beautiful areas in the Baylands complex of spaces. The 10 acre Measure E site is heavily impacted, and cannot be reverted back to wetlands. The “greater good” usage for this land is toward helping Palo Alto attain its sustainability goals. I urge the Council not to act before considering all sides of this important issue. Thank you Julianne Adams Frizzell / ASLA 1175 Channing Avenue Palo Alto 94301 . Virus-free.www.avg.com From:Cheryl Branco To:Council, City Subject:Rededication of Byxbee Date:Wednesday, March 29, 2023 12:36:43 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from brancoc@comcast.net. Learn why this isimportant CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. I encourage you to rededicate the Byxbee park's 10acres to remain parkland. It is so important for our community well-being. Thank you, Cheryl Branco St. Francis Dr From:Nancy Neff To:Council, City Subject:Campaign Finance Reform for Palo Alto Date:Wednesday, March 29, 2023 11:59:13 AM Some people who received this message don't often get email from nrneff@sonic.net. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Re: Campaign Finance Reform for Palo Alto Date: 3/29/2023 Dear Mayor Kou, Vice Mayor Stone, and City Councilmembers: As the local coordinator for California Clean Money Campaign and a participant with the Local Campaign Finance Task Force of the LWV of Palo Alto, I am writing in support of the campaign finance reform proposals that were put forward by this Task Force in 2022, with some thoughts about potential adjustments. Many of you have expressed support for: (1) Enhanced disclosure of independent expenditures of over $2500; (2) Donation limits of less than the $4900 state mandated default; and/or (3) Voluntary expenditure limits (VEL) at a level that would allow candidates to get their message out. Voluntary expenditure limits can be made more attractive by allowing candidates accepting VEL to have a higher donation limit. If Council decides to consider donation limits at an amount higher than $500, California Clean Money Campaign could support a two-tiered system with a donation limit as high as $1000 for candidates who accept a voluntary expenditure limit (VEL) between $30,000 and $60,000, and a donation limit of $500 for candidates not accepting a VEL. Even though candidates accepting a VEL may be outspent, they can win if they have enough money to get their messages out. Local cities such as Mountain View and Cupertino are managing their elections with VELs of $30,000 or less. Palo Alto would ideally change its culture of spending over the next few elections to the point where our VELs could be reduced to that level even if they are set higher now. Over 500 Palo Alto residents signed a petition presented to Council in May of 2022 supporting a donation limit of $500. I urge you to work on reforms now so they can be in place for the 2024 election. Sincerely, Nancy Neff Emerson St. Board member and local coordinator, California Clean Money Campaign La version française suit To read or share a version of this on our website, click here. Dear Aram, On Monday, after weeks of mass protests, Israeli PM Benyamin Netanyahu finally announced that he would be pausing his far-right government’s controversial plan to overhaul the country’s From:Aram James To:Lauing, Ed; Greer Stone; Shikada, Ed; Julie Lythcott-Haims; Council, City; Jethroe Moore; Josh Becker; JoeSimitian; Sean Allen; Kaloma Smith; Burt, Patrick; Bains, Paul; peaceandjusticecenter@gmail.com; Javier Ortega;Cindy Chavez; Supervisor Susan Ellenberg Subject:Judicial reform or not, Israel isn"t a democracy Date:Wednesday, March 29, 2023 10:44:09 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. judiciary. In order to get his fascist National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir to agree to the pause, Netanyahu has granted him power to establish a new “national guard”, which would act as his own private militia to terrorize Palestinians. Such a force under thecommand of Ben-Gvir could have disastrous consequences for Palestinians. Some are nevertheless hailing this as a possible victory for Israeli democracy. Let’s be clear – with or without the judicial overhaul, Israel is not a true democracy, and it never has been. A democracy for Jews only is not a democracy – it is apartheid. Netanyahu’s plans to overhaul the High Court no doubt amounted to an anti-democratic coup. Far-right and fascist ministers in theIsraeli government see the court as working against the country’s interests, sometimes standing in the way of Israel stealing more Palestinian land. But the reality is that this court has always marginalized and ruled against Palestinians. This is the court that approved Israel’s Nation State Law in 2018, enshrining Jewish supremacy in Israel and relegating Palestinianswith Israeli passports to second-class citizenship. This is the court that last year approved the ethnic cleansing of the entire Palestinian community of Masafer Yatta. Cases of the High Court’s complicity in apartheid and the ongoing Nakba can go on and on. It is indeed impressive how a massive popular movement can bring an unpopular government plan screeching to a halt. Inparticular, IJV has been inspired by the radical bloc at these protests calling for an end to Israeli apartheid. Some have marveled at how peaceful the protests have been. But as Jewish- American scholar and journalist Peter Beinart reminds us, whenPalestinians protest to affirm their rights like Jewish Israelis are doing right now, they are often beaten, jailed, or worse, killed. Israel is at a historic precipice, and it is unclear what will happen from here. But whether or not Netanyahu goes forward with his judicial reform or not, Israel won’t be a true democracy for all people living under its rule between the river and the sea. Theonly way to bring about that democracy is to end apartheid, and fight for full equality and freedom for all. If you care about this fight as much as we do, join us. The best way to help fuel IJV's anti-apartheid and pro-justice work is by signing up to become a member or supporter today, or by making a donation. In solidarity, Donate to IJV or become a member! Aaron Lakoff, IJV Communications and Media Lead aaron@ijvcanada.org Pour lire ou partager cette déclaration sur notre site-web, cliquez ici. Cher/chère Aram, Lundi, après des semaines de manifestations massives, le premier ministre israélien Benyamin Netanyahou a finalement annoncé qu’il mettait « sur pause » le plan controversé de son gouvernement d’extrême droite pour refondre le systèmejudiciaire du pays. Pour que son ministre fasciste de la sécurité nationale, Itamar BenGvir, accepte cette pause, M. Netanyahou lui a donné le pouvoir d’établir une nouvelle « garde nationale », qui agirait comme sa propre milice privée pour terroriser les Palestiniens. Une telle force sous le commandement de Ben-Gvir pourrait avoir desconséquences désastreuses pour les Palestiniens. Certains y voient néanmoins une possible victoire de la démocratieisraélienne. Mais que les choses soient bien claires : avec ou sans refonte du système judiciaire, Israël n’est pas une authentique démocratie et ne l’a jamais été. Une démocratie réservée à la population juive, c’est un apartheid. Il est indéniable que les plans de refonte de la Cour suprême mis de l’avant par Netanyahou constituent un coup d’Étatantidémocratique. Les ministres fascistes et d’extrême droite du gouvernement israélien considèrent la Cour comme allant à l’encontre des intérêts du pays, entravant parfois même l’accaparement des terres palestiniennes par Israël. Mais le fait estque la Cour a toujours marginalisé et statué contre la population palestinienne. C’est ce tribunal qui a approuvé la Loi Israël – État-nation du peuple juif en 2018, une loi enchâssant la suprématie juive en Israël et reléguant les personnes palestiniennes munies d’un passeport israélien au statut de citoyen·nes de second ordre. C’estce tribunal qui, l’année dernière, a approuvé le nettoyage ethnique de la communauté palestinienne de Masafer Yatta tout entière. Les cas de complicité de la Cour suprême avec l’apartheid et la nakba sont trop nombreux pour qu’on en fasse le décompte. Il est effectivement impressionnant qu’un mouvement populaire de masse soit en mesure de bloquer un plan gouvernementalimpopulaire. VJI est particulièrement inspiré par le bloc radical qui, dans le cadre de ces manifestations, appelle à mettre fin à l’apartheid israélien. Certaines personnes s’étonnent du caractère pacifique de ces manifestations. Mais comme nous le rappelle lejournaliste et universitaire juif américain, Peter Breinart, lorsque la population palestinienne manifeste pour revendiquer ses droits, comme le fait actuellement la population israélienne juive, les manifestant·es sont très souvent battu·es, emprisonné·es ou pire,tué·es. Israël se retrouve au bord d’un précipice historique, et personnene peut prédire ce que réserve l’avenir. Mais que Netanyahou persiste ou non avec sa réforme de la justice, Israël ne sera pas une véritable démocratie pour l’ensemble des personnes vivant sous son autorité entre le fleuve et la mer. La seule façon degarantir une authentique démocratie est de mettre fin à l’apartheid et de lutter pour une véritable égalité et une pleine liberté pour toustes. Si cette lutte vous tient à cœur autant qu’à nous, joignez-vous à Voix juives indépendantes. La meilleure façon d'aider à alimenter le travail anti-apartheid et pro-justice de VJI est de s'inscrire pour devenirmembre aujourd'hui, ou de faire un don. Solidairement, Faire un don ou devenir membre de VJI Aaron Lakoff, Coordonnateur des communications etmédias, VJI aaron@ijvcanada.org PO Box 30087 RPO Woodbine Heights 1500 Woodbine Avenue Toronto, ON M4C 5J2 Canada Unsubscribe from this list View in your browser From:Aram James To:Julie Lythcott-Haims; Tanaka, Greg; Shikada, Ed; Council, City; Stump, Molly; Josh Becker; Joe Simitian; SeanAllen; Jethroe Moore Subject:- Thinking regionally to fund housing Date:Wednesday, March 29, 2023 9:06:10 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ I saw this The Mercury News e-edition article on the The Mercury News e-edition app and thought you’d be interested. Thinking regionally to fund housing https://edition.pagesuite.com/popovers/dynamic_article_popover.aspx?guid=69e4842f-c51b-42e0-a7aa- 07ac72fd099f&appcode=SAN252&eguid=3f26abe9-5f4e-483d-9890-fa76a963cc2a&pnum=3# For more great content like this subscribe to the The Mercury News e-edition app here: Sent from my iPhone From:Fred Balin To:Council, City Subject:Restore Dedication to the 10-Acres of Byxbee Park Date:Tuesday, March 28, 2023 10:03:33 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from fbalin@gmail.com. Learn why this isimportant CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Council Members, Under a normal CEQA process, a concept such as an Energy/Compost facility begins with a feasibility study completed and evaluated by the Council in open public hearings. Then discussions proceed to a project on a specific site chosen via the feasibility study and its own public hearings. And then the city as applicant and lead agency after completing an environmental study with all required notices and public participation, puts the issue on the ballot for voters to decide on removing 10 acres from its status as dedicated parkland. Instead, in 2011 proponents rushed to get signatures for an initiative on the ballot (at a cost to the city of $300K, in an off year election) before the results of the feasibility study were known and before the start of any CEQA study. Three years and additional hundreds of thousands of dollars later, staff concluded that the facility was not cost effective. Seven more years have not brought to the city council a viable alternative for consideration. To fail to rededicate all 10 acres at this point would put the cart even further before the horse than in 2011. Also, it is conceivable that the wording in Measure E limiting use on the site as an Energy/Compost facility may not hold up in court, i.e., it is questionable whether the public can specifically dictate the use of the land. And with a history of decades of delay in opening sections of Byxbee Park since its dedication, the allure of “free land” to rent or develop for another purpose could remain seductive. But that specific sunset wording, which was included by proponents for the purpose of aiding the ballot measure, was an implicit promise that if the concept did not come to fruition, the land would revert to its former status. Do not break that promise. Re-dedicate the entire 10 acres of Byxbee Park. Thank you, Fred Balin Columbia Street From:Hamilton Hitchings To:Council, City Cc:Reifschneider, James; Binder, Andrew Subject:ALPR Policy Input to City Council for the First Action Item on Monday April 3rd Date:Tuesday, March 28, 2023 6:32:48 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from hitchingsh@yahoo.com. Learn why this isimportant CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Council, I appreciate the Police department’s proposals to limit access and retention of Automatic License Plate Reader data beyond what many other departments in the Bay Area are doing and to hold our department to a higher standard. However, because of other California law enforcement agencies' poor ALPR privacy protections and some of them sharing with ICE and the FBI, I would suggest the following amendment to the PAPD’s policy. Proposed Amendment: PAPD will not provide direct online access or bulk data transfer to any other agencies for the license plate data it collects. While I appreciate the PAPD’s idea of MOUs as an additional step in protection, I think other California law enforcement agencies are unlikely to effectively implement the privacy protections required in the MOU and thus it’s a waste of PAPD time. For example, The California State Auditor conducted an audit of ALPR data collected by the Fresno Police Department, Los Angeles Police Department, Marin County Sheriff’s Office, and Sacramento County Sheriff’s Office. The audit found none of the agencies fully implemented the practices required by law since 2016 in Senate Bill 34, which includes training of personnel on use of the system and restrictions on transfer of ALPR data Fresno, Marin and Sacramento all were unable to confirm who has access to the system, who is responsible for oversight, or how to delete ALPR data. LAPD did not even have a usage or privacy policy and the other agencies ones did not implement all the legally mandated requirements Sacramento shares their ALPR data with one thousand agencies. In Marin, a former employee retained access to the ALPR after resigning for over a year. Marin was also forced to settle a lawsuit with three residents who alleged the Sheriff was sharing data with federal, state and local agencies in violation of SB34. In addition: Milpitas does not even keep track of who accesses their ALPR database. Daly City shares its data via an MOU with fusion center and 15 northern california counties with no clear limit on what it can be used for. Pasadena, Long Beach and BART all shared their data with ICE despite all saying they would not. Since only a small subset of the access to the PAPD ALPR database will be audited each year, it is unlikely misuse will be detected. That is why I recommend not giving direct access to our ALPR database to other law enforcement agencies. This will increase accountability and privacy protection of Palo Alto residents, employees and visitors vehicles location and time data. PAPD will still be able to respond to queries from other California law enforcement agencies but it will be PAPD's personnel doing the queries. I thank the PAPD for their proactive approach on privacy and for engaging the community to solicit feedback. Hamilton Hitchings From:Peter Cross To:Council, City Subject:Measure E Site Disposition Date:Tuesday, March 28, 2023 5:27:07 PM [Some people who received this message don't often get email from pcross7@earthlink.net. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ Hi, I am a long time Palo Alto resident who is very concerned about climate and sustainability issues. The Measure E site right next to the wastewater treatment plant is an ideal and rare location for additional environmental facilities. While more parkland is an ongoing objective, this parcel would add only a negligible amount to the the existing Bybee parklands. I respectfully request that Council at least wait to get updated on waste conversion technologies and to hear from relevant agencies (Utilities Advisory Commission, Planning and Transportation Commission before making any final determination on the disposition of the Measure E site. Gratefully, Peter Cross 945 Matadero Ave Palo Alto From:David Page To:Council, City Subject:Byxbee Park Date:Tuesday, March 28, 2023 5:09:16 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from dalpage5@gmail.com. Learn why this isimportant CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Council Members, We are long time residents of Midtown. We’re writing to ask that you vote to process our sewage sluge in a corner of Byxbee Park. We've walked at the park on many occasions, and see no need to ship our our sewage sludge to agricultural land in the Central Valley. Let’s be responsible for the waste we generate, not send it to a poorer area of the state. They already have enough to deal with. Thank you, Stephanie Troyan and David Page From:Elizabeth Wolf To:Council, City Subject:Preserve Measure E Site Options. Date:Tuesday, March 28, 2023 4:32:10 PM [Some people who received this message don't often get email from wolf.elizabethb@gmail.com. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ To the City Council of Palo Alto, I am very much in favor of having you choose to consider the important cause of accepting the plan of The Parks and Recreation Commission of converting the former 10-acre landfill site to an organic waste conversion facility. I hope you will seriously consider the issue at your City Council meeting on April 3rd. The Commission has worked hard to find the very best solution for our community. I have lived in Palo Alto for 48 years and this plan makes a lot of sense to me at this time when we are working hard to make this city a safer place in which to live. Thank you for taking time to seriously consider this issue. Elizabeth B. Wolf 895 Mockingbird Lane Palo Alto, CA 94306 From:Emily Renzel To:Council, City Cc:Pearson, Enid Subject:Please rededicate the Measure E site as parkland Date:Tuesday, March 28, 2023 4:29:37 PM Attachments:final to CC on E.docx [Some people who received this message don't often get email from marshmama2@att.net. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ Dear Mayor Kou and Members of the City Council: Attached are our additional comments regarding the Parks & Rec Commission recommendation to rededicate the Measure E site as parkland. Enid Pearson & Emily Renzel Dear Mayor Kou and Members of the City Council: Palo Alto needs more parks, not less. It’s time to return the entire Measure E site to dedicated parkland. Land in Palo Alto is scarce and expensive, The Measure E site has not been used as promoted for 12 years now. It should not be kept in limbo for some hypothetical future non-park use. Your Parks and Recreation Commission recommends rededication. Landscaping on the site visually screens the Sewage Plant from the Park and provides an important habitat corridor. It also completes a loop trail around Byxbee Park. Our City has just been ordered to provide for thousands more housing units - probably representing at least a 25% population increase. Our Comprehensive Plan Policy L-8.1 says, “Facilitate creation of new parkland to serve Palo Alto's residential neighborhoods, as consistent with the Parks, Trails, Open Space and Recreation Master Plan.” The Parks Master Plan points out that "Meeting the demands of Palo Alto’s growing population without compromising the level of service will require significant investment in park and recreation facilities, …” That suggests we will have to increase our parks and open spaces by 25% just to stay even. Policy L-8.6 says, “Seek potential new sites for art and cultural facilities, public spaces, open space and community gardens.” Other goals and policies adopted in the Palo Alto Parks, Trails, Open Space and Recreation Plan are Goal: “Preserve and integrate nature, natural systems and ecological principles throughout Palo Alto” and Projects Ready in the Short term: “Improve trail connections and access.” Goal 4 states “Protect natural habitat and integrate nature, natural ecosystems and ecological principles throughout Palo Alto.” Policy 4.A states, “In natural open space, ensure activities, projects and programs are compatible with the protection of nature.” The Measure E site — especially the part that has NOT been landfilled — provides trees and shrubs that are critical habitat for wildlife at Byxbee Park. (NO trees can be planted on the certified landfill.) The site also is a key part of the Byxbee Park loop trail and it also has a large diameter pipe under it to allow salt water exchange to Salt Marsh Harvest Mouse habitat in the Renzel Wetlands. We think all of you have, at one time or another, told the public that you want to protect Palo Alto’s Parks and Open Spaces. This is your chance to demonstrate that commitment. This entire site is consistent with the above Goals and Policies and should be rededicated as part of Byxbee Park as recommended by your Parks & Recreation Commission. Please re-dedicate the entire Measure E site as parkland. Sincerely, Enid Pearson. Councilmember 1965-75 1019 Forest Court Palo Alto, CA. 94301 Emily M. Renzel, Councilmember 1979-91 1056 Forest Avenue Palo Alto, CA. 94301 From:Thomas Rindfleisch To:Richard Gu Cc:CPNA; Shikada, Ed; Eggleston, Brad; Rebecca Eisenberg; Margaret Bruce; Murray, Kevin; Council, City; Jeffrey R Koseff; Hamilton Hitchings; Neilson Buchanan; Tess Byler Subject:Re: [CPNA] SFC Flow Prediction for Tue/Wed - Update #1 Date:Tuesday, March 28, 2023 4:06:25 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.________________________________ On 3/28/2023 3:51 PM, Richard Gu wrote:> What is the maximum capacity of the P-C bridge, 5500? Yes, Richard, 5,500 cfs (water surface stage ~24 ft) is the nominalcapacity of P-C. Any significant collection of debris that (evenpartially) blocks the culvert could cause overflow at a lower flow rate.I have to say that the City Public Works staff have done an outstandingjob of proactively clearing debris! Tom R. From:walter sedriksTo:Council, City Subject:Measure E Date:Tuesday, March 28, 2023 4:01:56 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from sedriks@gmail.com. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments andclicking on links. Dear Mayor Kou and City Council: We urge you to deliberate carefully on the future of the Measure E site. Climate change is the gravest challenge of our time. We must do everything in our power to reduce, and eventually eliminate, greenhouse gas emissions. Please explore opportunities to utilize the Measure E site for a sustainability facility to convert sewage sludge (and perhaps other organic waste streams) into renewable energy and biochar to help preserve a livable planet. Thank you, Walter Sedriks 325 Waverley St, Palo Alto, Ca 94301 From:Richard Gu To:Maurice L Druzin Cc:CPNA; Thomas C Rindfleisch; Shikada, Ed; Eggleston, Brad; Rebecca Eisenberg; Margaret Bruce; Murray, Kevin; Council, City; Jeffrey R Koseff; HamiltonHitchings; Neilson Buchanan; Tess Byler Subject:Re: [CPNA] SFC Flow Prediction for Tue/Wed - Update #1 Date:Tuesday, March 28, 2023 3:51:37 PM Attachments:aFGzTKMec7eSxund.pngQoD2CKABS3e071xz.png Some people who received this message don't often get email from rrichardgu@gmail.com. Learn why this is important CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments andclicking on links. Tom, What is the maximum capacity of the P-C bridge, 5500? Couldn't thank you enough to keep us updated with your deepinsight and knowledge. Best,Richard On Tue, Mar 28, 2023 at 3:43 PM Maurice L Druzin <druzin@stanford.edu> wrote:Thanks!Maurice Get Outlook for iOS From: crescent-park-pa@googlegroups.com <crescent-park-pa@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Thomas Rindfleisch <tcr@stanford.edu> Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2023 3:40:18 PM To: CPNA <crescent-park-pa@googlegroups.com> Cc: Ed Shikada <ed.shikada@cityofpaloalto.org>; Brad Eggleston <brad.eggleston@cityofpaloalto.org>; Rebecca Eisenberg <reisenberg@valleywater.org>; Margaret Bruce <mbruce@sfcjpa.org>; Kevin Murray <kmurray@sfcjpa.org>; Palo Alto City Council <city.council@cityofpaloalto.org>; Jeffrey R Koseff <koseff@stanford.edu>; Hamilton Hitchings <hitchingsh@yahoo.com>; Neilson Buchanan <cnsbuchanan@yahoo.com>; Tess Byler <tbyler@sfcjpa.org> Subject: [CPNA] SFC Flow Prediction for Tue/Wed - Update #1 Friends, again this afternoon about 2:30 PM, CNRFC updated their models for San Francisquito Creek for the stormsforecast for Tuesday and Wednesday. They are predicting a peak flow in SFC later this evening (Tuesday) around 8:00PM. The nominal peak is projected to be ~570 cfs (about the same as before) and the >95% maximum is ~830 cfs. Anothernow larger storm is predicted for Wednesday with a peak sometime in the PM (between 2:00 and 7:00 PM). The secondWed PM peak is projected to be about 625 cfs with a >95% maximum up to about 1,630 cfs -- still large uncertainty. Again the usual caveat is that the storm could stall out and park over the watershed producing more rainfall. I'll watch for alater forecast to see if there are any more changes... Tom R. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Crescent Park PA" group.To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to crescent-park-pa+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/crescent-park-pa/594488de-b0e5-e06e-dc2b-c81d92ff5f0c%40stanford.edu. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Crescent Park PA" group.To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to crescent-park-pa+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/crescent-park-pa/SJ0PR02MB74069E43E5ACFDE8D0F7D9C7A9889%40SJ0PR02MB7406.namprd02.prod.outlook.com. From:Maurice L Druzin To:CPNA; Thomas C Rindfleisch Cc:Shikada, Ed; Eggleston, Brad; Rebecca Eisenberg; Margaret Bruce; Murray, Kevin; Council, City; Jeffrey R Koseff; Hamilton Hitchings; Neilson Buchanan;Tess Byler Subject:Re: [CPNA] SFC Flow Prediction for Tue/Wed - Update #1 Date:Tuesday, March 28, 2023 3:43:00 PM Attachments:aFGzTKMec7eSxund.pngQoD2CKABS3e071xz.png CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachmentsand clicking on links. Thanks!Maurice Get Outlook for iOS From: crescent-park-pa@googlegroups.com <crescent-park-pa@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Thomas Rindfleisch <tcr@stanford.edu> Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2023 3:40:18 PM To: CPNA <crescent-park-pa@googlegroups.com> Cc: Ed Shikada <ed.shikada@cityofpaloalto.org>; Brad Eggleston <brad.eggleston@cityofpaloalto.org>; Rebecca Eisenberg <reisenberg@valleywater.org>; Margaret Bruce <mbruce@sfcjpa.org>; Kevin Murray <kmurray@sfcjpa.org>; Palo Alto City Council <city.council@cityofpaloalto.org>; Jeffrey R Koseff <koseff@stanford.edu>; Hamilton Hitchings <hitchingsh@yahoo.com>; Neilson Buchanan <cnsbuchanan@yahoo.com>; Tess Byler <tbyler@sfcjpa.org> Subject: [CPNA] SFC Flow Prediction for Tue/Wed - Update #1 Friends, again this afternoon about 2:30 PM, CNRFC updated their models for San Francisquito Creek for the stormsforecast for Tuesday and Wednesday. They are predicting a peak flow in SFC later this evening (Tuesday) around 8:00PM. The nominal peak is projected to be ~570 cfs (about the same as before) and the >95% maximum is ~830 cfs. Anothernow larger storm is predicted for Wednesday with a peak sometime in the PM (between 2:00 and 7:00 PM). The secondWed PM peak is projected to be about 625 cfs with a >95% maximum up to about 1,630 cfs -- still large uncertainty. Again the usual caveat is that the storm could stall out and park over the watershed producing more rainfall. I'll watch for alater forecast to see if there are any more changes... Tom R. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Crescent Park PA" group.To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to crescent-park-pa+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/crescent-park-pa/594488de-b0e5-e06e-dc2b-c81d92ff5f0c%40stanford.edu. From:Thomas Rindfleisch To:CPNA Cc:Shikada, Ed; Eggleston, Brad; Rebecca Eisenberg; Margaret Bruce; Murray, Kevin; Council, City; Jeffrey R Koseff; Hamilton Hitchings; Neilson Buchanan;Tess Byler Subject:SFC Flow Prediction for Tue/Wed - Update #1 Date:Tuesday, March 28, 2023 3:41:01 PM Attachments:aFGzTKMec7eSxund.pngQoD2CKABS3e071xz.png CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachmentsand clicking on links. Friends, again this afternoon about 2:30 PM, CNRFC updated their models for San Francisquito Creek for the stormsforecast for Tuesday and Wednesday. They are predicting a peak flow in SFC later this evening (Tuesday) around 8:00PM. The nominal peak is projected to be ~570 cfs (about the same as before) and the >95% maximum is ~830 cfs. Anothernow larger storm is predicted for Wednesday with a peak sometime in the PM (between 2:00 and 7:00 PM). The secondWed PM peak is projected to be about 625 cfs with a >95% maximum up to about 1,630 cfs -- still large uncertainty. Again the usual caveat is that the storm could stall out and park over the watershed producing more rainfall. I'll watch for alater forecast to see if there are any more changes... Tom R. From:Roberta Ahlquist To:Joe Simitian; Henry Etzkowitz; Human Relations Commission; Council, City Subject:Fwd: See below:,There’s no place in police work for dogs trained to bite-by my friend sgt Sean Allen Date:Tuesday, March 28, 2023 3:18:17 PM Attachments:orig.pdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Let's rethink the PA Police Department decision. Roberta Ahlquist---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com>Date: Tue, Mar 28, 2023 at 12:57 PM Subject: See below:,There’s no place in police work for dogs trained to bite-by my friend sgtSean Allen To> > > > > Sent from my iPhone From:Diane To:Council, City Subject:California Avenue Date:Tuesday, March 28, 2023 2:32:12 PM [Some people who received this message don't often get email from dianeef@comcast.net. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ Dear Mayor Kou and members of the Council: I was caught off guard to read that the Council is considering designating a two way bicycle lane on California Avenue. This is a major component of the future plans for Cal Ave and ignores the supposed collaborative process between the City and the residents in developing a revitalized, closed venue for the street. Besides being contrary to the City’s Comp Plan, speeding bicycles on Cal Ave are a potential threat to all ambulating on the closed street. The wishes of bike commuters to and from the train should not trump those of pedestrians. There are other, safer bike paths to the train station, And, I was surprised to read that the City’s consultants for the Cal Ave project are recommending that ground floor medical office use be allowed. I attended the first and only community meeting discussing needs and suggestions for the closed street. I can recall no discussion of such a use at the meeting, although many suggestions which would enliven the street and provide useful retail offerings were made. Let us not forget that such use was advocated for Town and Country Village, which the Council wisely rejected. Diane Finkelstein 2049 Dartmouth Street Sent from my iPad From:Angelica Volterra To:Council, City Subject:Support for the Parks and Recreation Commission"s Recommendation to Redicate the 10 Acre Measure E Site as Parkland Date:Tuesday, March 28, 2023 12:31:44 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from avolterra@batnet.com. Learn why this isimportant CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Mayor Kou and Members of the Palo Alto City Council: Please support the Parks and Recreation Commission recommendation to rededicate the 10 acreMeasure E site as parkland. Thank you. Sincerely, Angelica Volterra View this email in your browser We are proud to announce our upcoming Virtual Speaker event featuring: Professor Michelle Oberman Santa Clara University School of Law From:LWV Palo Alto Speaker SeriesTo:Council, CitySubject:The US Abortion War in 2023: A California Perspective April 19thDate:Tuesday, March 28, 2023 11:14:55 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious ofopening attachments and clicking on links. The US Abortion War in 2023: A California Perspective Wednesday, April 19th 12:00 pm to 1:00 pm In addition to the flurry of abortion bans enacted in 2022, the US witnessed the highest number of abortion protections ever passed. Fully one-quarter of these were enacted in California. What does it mean to be an abortion-friendly state in a country where almost half of the states have banned abortion or are likely to do so? Professor Oberman is an international expert on the impact of abortion regulation in countries with widely divergent abortion laws. In this talk, she will share findings from her current research in a state where abortion is banned to explore what changes on the ground when U.S. abortion law changes on the books, and to consider how California’s commitment to reproductive justice does (and does not) alter that landscape. Submit your questions for Professor Oberman in advance here. Please share with others who may be interested. About our Speaker: Professor Oberman is an internationally recognized scholar on a wide range of legal Register Now and ethical issues arising at the intersection of sex, pregnancy, motherhood, and criminal law. For the past decade, she has studied the impact of abortion regulation in countries with widely divergent abortion laws. Her work in El Salvador, along with other countries and a range of US jurisdictions, informs her 2018 book, Her Body, Our Laws: On the Frontlines of the Abortion War from El Salvador to Oklahoma. LWVPaloAlto.org Facebook Twitter YouTube LinkedIn Email Email Copyright © 2023 League of Women Voters Palo Alto, All rights reserved. From Voter Recipient List Our mailing address is: League of Women Voters Palo Alto 3921 E Bayshore Rd Ste 209 Palo Alto, CA 94303-4303 Add us to your address book Want to change how you receive these emails? You can update your preferences or unsubscribe from this list. From:Tom DuBois To:Kou, Lydia; greer.stone@cityofpaloalto.com; Tanaka, Greg; Julie lythcott-Haims; Vicki Veenker; Burt, Patrick; EdLauing Cc:Clerk, City Subject:Item #11 for Aprl 3 Meeting, Automated License Plate readers and surveillance technology policy Date:Tuesday, March 28, 2023 11:06:55 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Council members, Item #11 of the April 3 meeting on Automated License Plate Readers (ALPR) surveillance policy deserves your careful consideration. Please excuse the length of this email on this important topic. As the result of an April 25, 2016 colleagues memo by Council Member Berman, Vice Mayor Scharff, Council Member Schmid, and Council Member Wolbach, the Policy and Services committee had an extensive discussion about surveillance technologies on Dec 14, 2016 (Staff report here, detailed minutes linked here starting on page 53). License plate readers were explicitly discussed in that meeting. Council Member Scharff asked about the potential loss of privacy due to someone searching ALPR data not for a crime but to monitor citizens. In response then City Manager Jim Keene was supportive of the Council having a key oversight role when such invasive technology was adopted saying “I agree with you…I think partly the ordinance is also designed to inject more formality into our …acquisition of technology because I will tell you, I wasn’t aware initially, when…we received a grant…I said well, you know we don’t have a policy for using license plate readers We can’t be using this equipment… this policy would invert all of that sort of thing so that we have a sort of gatekeeper, override from the Council.” You have a key oversight role to play with this surveillance technology. . On Dec 14, 2016 the Palo Alto City Council unanimously adopted ordinance 2.3.640 The Surveillance Privacy Protection Ordinance(link). The County of Santa Clara adopted a similar ordinance just prior to Palo Alto (the county ordinance is linked further down in this letter). Here's the Key provisions from the Palo Alto ordinance "Surveillance Use Policy" means a stand-alone policy or a section in a comprehensive policy that is approved by Council and contains: (1) The intended purpose of the Surveillance Technology. (2) Uses that are authorized, any conditions on uses, and uses that are prohibited. (3) The information that can be collected by the Surveillance Technology. (4) The safeguards that protect information from unauthorized access, including, but not limited to, encryption, access-control, and access- oversight mechanisms. (5) The time period for which information collected by the Surveillance Technology will be routinely retained; the process by which the information is regularly deleted after that period lapses; and conditions and procedures for retaining information beyond that period. (6) If and how non-City entities can access or use the information, including conditions and rationales for sharing information, and any obligations imposed on the recipient of the information. (7) A description of compliance procedures, including functions and roles of City officials, internal recordkeeping, measures to monitor for errors or misuse, and corrective procedures that may apply. Installing twenty(20) Automated License Plate Readers around town is the first major use of this ordinance. In your oversight role, you need to ensure that these seven key provisions are truly addressed. In this case, particularly provisions #4, #5 and #6 should be spelled out in more detail. The intent of the adoption of the ordinance was to protect privacy, protect the city from data misuse and ensure our policies strike the right balance. For item #4, “Ensuring Against Unauthorized Access”, Council should ensure it knows who specifically has access and that it is limited to a strong “need to know” basis. Good privacy management practices would lean towards a limited number of users able to access, with unalterable logging and regular reporting for oversight. Login credentials should be tied to single individuals and not shared. Having a limited number of PAPD officers with access to the system would ensure the city can enforce this policy overall, rather than giving access to the entire police force. Council should consider access restrictions. Please also verify that all data will be encrypted both during transit and at rest, and protections will be in place to prevent a hacker from extracting large volumes of data. For item #5, “The Data Retention Period”, Council should have a policy of “long enough but no longer”. Our residents have an inalienable right to privacy under the California Constitution. In the case of ALPR data, thirty days is an extremely long time period to retain data to search for active crimes. While the proposed policy says for example that data will not be shared with federal immigration enforcement (ICE), the longer the data is retained, the more it is susceptible to unforeseen uses in the future by local, state or federal authorities. If we do not retain it, it can’t be abused. Datamining the travel patterns of residents or visitors who were not apriori suspected of any crime, would violate our right to privacy and enable other potential abuses. Why not start with a 24 or 48 hour data retention policy and see if that is sufficient? The goal should be to resolve crimes as they are happening or soon after. If 90% of the cases can be caught using data retained for 24 hours, then the impact on our privacy rights will be minimized while still achieving a huge benefit in public safety. If the Council thinks about a scale that balances personal privacy with public safety, asking for 30 days is putting a heavy thumb on the public safety side of that scale. While it may be understandable why someone responsible for public safety would want this, it is up to Council to act as a counterweight for privacy rights. For item #6, “If and How Non-City Entities Can Access” an MOU is mentioned with no details on what obligations will be imposed on those non-city entities in order to access the system. Will these entities take liability for any data leaks, legal violations, or any other issues that arise from their use of the data? Will they ensure they comply with all the conditions of our use policy? How will it be enforced? Santa Clara County had an answer with explicit enforcement provisions. Santa Clara County’s Ordinance relating to surveillance technology and community safety (link) is very much worth reading. Page 9 of the ordinance includes a. Monetary fines b. Grounds for discipline of employees c. Misdemeanor charges for misuse of surveillance data. Council should require a Data Sharing Contract - not an MOU - and adopt similar language that applies to Palo Alto staff and to any agency that signs a contract if Council decides that moving forward with data sharing from the start is desirable. For item #7, “Description of Oversight and Compliance”, Council would do well to adopt provisions similar to the County Ordinance as part of its oversight responsibility. Paraphrasing the language in the county ordinance: Council should receive an annual ALPR report in order for council to determine whether the benefits to the impacted department(s) and the community of the surveillance technology outweigh the costs and whether reasonable safeguards exist to address reasonable concerns regarding privacy, civil liberties, and civil rights impacted by deployment of the surveillance technology. If the benefits or reasonably anticipated benefits do not outweigh the costs or civil liberties or civil rights are not reasonably safeguarded, the Council shall consider (1) directing that the use of the surveillance technology cease; (2) requiring modifications to the Surveillance Use Policy that are designed to address the Council's concerns; and/or (3) directing a report-back from the department regarding steps taken to address the Council's concerns. The Council shall hold a public meeting, with Annual Surveillance Reports agendized on the regular (non-consent) calendar. Annual Surveillance Report means a written report concerning ALPR technology that includes all of the following: (l) A description of how the surveillance technology was used, including whether it captured images, sound, or information regarding members of the public who are not suspected of engaging in unlawful conduct; (2) Whether and how often data acquired through the use of the surveillance technology was shared with outside entities, the name of any recipient entity, the type(s) of data disclosed, under what legal standard(s) the information was disclosed, and the justification for the disclosure; (3) A summary of community complaints or concerns about the surveillance technology; (4) The results of any non-privileged internal audits, any information about violations of the Surveillance Use Policy, and any actions taken in response; (5) Whether the surveillance technology has been effective at achieving its identified purpose; (6) Statistics and information about public records act requests; (7) Total annual costs for the surveillance technology, including personnel and other ongoing costs, and what source of funding will fund the technology in the coming year. There is an opportunity to do this well, apprehending more crimes committed with cars within Palo Alto, while at the same time respecting our citizens rights to privacy and protecting the City from a scandal caused by a data leak or the illicit use of surveillance data. Please consider: 1. Limiting access to a few individuals 2. Retaining data for 48 hours (with exceptions for data tied to a crime) 3. Require a strong data sharing Contract with other police agencies before providing access. 4. Require an annual review by Council Thanks for your consideration, Tom DuBois From:Aram James To:Council, City; Binder, Andrew; Jethroe Moore; Josh Becker; Joe Simitian; Javier Ortega; Julie Lythcott-Haims;Wagner, April; Reifschneider, James; Barberini, Christopher; Julie Lythcott-Haims; Cecilia Taylor; Tony Dixon;Supervisor Susan Ellenberg; Cindy Chavez; Human Relations Commission; Kaloma Smith; Jeff Rosen; RebeccaEisenberg; Shikada, Ed; ladoris cordell; Jay Boyarsky; Michael Gennaco; Enberg, Nicholas; Shana Segal; AngieEvans; Perron, Zachary; Greer Stone; Bains, Paul; Dave Price; chuck jagoda; Stump, Molly Subject:There’s no place in police work for dogs trained to bite by SGT Sean Allen - Santa Clara County Sheriff’s Office ( March Tuesday March 28, 2023) Date:Tuesday, March 28, 2023 9:52:55 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ I saw this The Mercury News e-edition article on the The Mercury News e-edition app and thought you’d be interested. There’s no place in police work for dogs trained to bite https://edition.pagesuite.com/popovers/dynamic_article_popover.aspx?guid=1df44a3b-0843-4e86-b50e- 8a5a4c172cf7&appcode=SAN252&eguid=d80fcc05-87ed-48b0-82db-02340851e5ba&pnum=25# For more great content like this subscribe to the The Mercury News e-edition app here: Sent from my iPhone From:Naveena Bereny To:Council, City Subject:Tree Ordinance need to be redefined for the safety of residents/tax payers Date:Tuesday, March 28, 2023 9:48:58 AM Some people who received this message don't often get email from nmbereny@gmail.com. Learn why this isimportant CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Hey City Council, The Palo Alto Tree Ordinance desperately needs to be changed. The current ordinance favorstrees over a homeowner's safety and rights and that is just plain wrong. Trees don't pay taxes, residents do. The recent tree ordinance passed last year with little feedback from the community, alsoexpanded the definition of protected trees and added more restrictions to maintenance of private trees. It also made this process more expensive. Residents have the right to manage the trees on their properties for the safety of their familiesand to protect their property. If the City wants to impose their views and control overprivate trees then it should pay for the maintenance of these private trees and for anydamage caused by them. If it cannot, the City should stay out of the private tree business- heritage or not. The City needs to review the tree ordinance and use more common sense. You need to placethe safety of humans and property over a tree. If someone wants to cut a tree down, ask them to plant 2 trees, ask them to plant trees with Canopy. You will see that Palo Altan loves theirtrees and would gladly plant more appropriate trees. Finally, I can't help thinking that these tree ordinances are veiled attempts at stopping residents from putting up ADUs, Solar etc and slow progress in Palo Alto which violates State goals onhousing and energy efficiency. Sincerely, Naveena(Fairmeadow) From:Neilson Buchanan To:Council, City; Planning Commission Cc:Shikada, Ed; Eggleston, Brad; Josh Orenberg; Kamhi, Philip; Dave Price; Jocelyn Dong Subject:Menlo Park"s The Almanac report on March 24 Caltrain quiet zone meeting Date:Tuesday, March 28, 2023 9:24:47 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Neilson Buchanan 155 Bryant Street Palo Alto, CA 94301 650 329-0484 650 537-9611 cell cnsbuchanan@yahoo.com A DTN neighbor circulated the email below to other Palo Alto neighborhoods. I was not able to attend the community meeting but there is a large amount of community interest especially in Downtown North. I may have missed coverage of community meeting by Daily Post and Palo Alto Weekly. ---------------- Dear Neighbors, Yesterday Menlo Park’s The Almanac published a report about the March 24 quiet zone meeting. Thearticle misses much information that was presented at the meeting, but with the thought that it might be ofinterest to some, I pasted the article below. https://www.almanacnews.com/news/2023/03/27/seeking-a-reprieve-from-loud-horns-menlo-park- residents-push-for-caltrain-quiet-zone Seeking a reprieve from loud horns, Menlo Park residents push for Caltrain quiet zone by Cameron Rebosio / Almanac Uploaded: Mon, Mar 27, 2023, 5:50 pm 3 Time to read: about 2 minutes Because Menlo Park's Caltrain crossings are so close together, the Caltrain horn can blare up to 16 times at a maximum volume of 110 decibels over about a mile each time a train passes through the city. Thenoise is driving residents to urge the City Council to create a 'quiet zone' along the Caltrain corridor withinthe city. Courtesy city of Menlo Park. Menlo Park residents are fed up with blaring train horns waking babies and rattling their nerves. At a March 24 community meeting, they implored city officials to create a quiet zone along the Caltrain tracks to give them some relief. It's a topic that's clearly struck a chord in many people. At the city’s March 18 priority-setting meeting, 41% of the hundreds of written comments from residents asked the city to establish a quiet zone for train noise. “(Train horns) continue to be a quality of life issue that’s been raised for two years now,” resident Daniel Garden wrote. “The horns wake up my infant children from afternoon naps and is a source of stress. There are clearly less intrusive ways to ensure trains can cross the street safely.” Caltrain engineers have to sound the horn four times every time a train gets within a quarter-mile of itsnext crossing with a road. Due to the close proximity of Menlo Park's four rail crossings, the horn canblast up to 16 times over a distance of only about 1.1 miles as each train passes through the city. Thesound of the horn is required to be between 96 to 110 decibels. For context, 110 decibels is as loud as ajackhammer. One resident at the meeting said that he measured a level of 120 decibels in his yard, located 100 feet from the train tracks. Establishing a quiet zone requires that the city introduce new safety measures at railway crossings. City staff at the meeting said that these improvements would require cooperation between Menlo Park, Palo Alto and East Palo Alto. Each crossing has to have gates, flashing lights and warning time devices; the zone must be at least a half-mile long; and it must not have a regular (non-quiet) crossing within a quarterof a mile of the first or last crossing of the zone. With these safety improvements, the engineers would nothave to blow the horns at each crossing and could only blow the horn if they encounter a hazard. A resident at the community meeting who complained about sleepless nights due to train noise said, “So what can we do to get to the next step?” City staff said that there are several steps that the process needs, starting with approval from multiple committees and City Council approval before city staff can start the design process. This is followed by meetings with Caltrans, Caltrain and other agencies, but the design process could be fast-tracked. Atherton created a quiet zone in 2016 by installing quad gates with detection loops, which prevent vehicles from driving around lowered crossing gates. The project got widespread support from the community but pushback from train engineers. Train operators continued to sound horns at crossings until they were threatened with fines from the town. Grade separation projects are currently being considered for all four Menlo Park train crossings, sovehicles and pedestrians would no longer traverse the tracks. The city plans to make the quiet zonesafety improvements in conjunction with these projects. Menlo Park's current plan for grade separation isa hybrid approach in which the roads would be lowered and the train tracks would be raised. From:Stephen Rock To:Council, City Subject:election finance Date:Monday, March 27, 2023 10:20:54 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Rich people should not have more influence on our city government than anyone else. The current system of election financing allows richer people to financiallysupport candidates that favor their interests and thus increase the chance they get elected. Are you brave enough to survive on smallish donations and serve the interests of the majority? Last May, I signed a PETITION in support of a $500 Cap on donations to City Councilcandidates. I am disappointed that no action was taken on this issue and hope that the new Council will enact the reforms proposed by the League of Women Voters of PaloAlto. As most of us know, there is too much money in politics. The majority of our neighboring cities have already addressed this problem by passing ordinancessetting $500 or $1000 caps on donations to city council candidates and also setting voluntary limits on campaign expenditures. Palo Alto should do the same. I was pleased that three of the 2022 Council candidates voluntarily limited donationsto less than $1000, but it’s time for this Council to set a cap that is mandatory going forward. These reforms will help to bring down the spiraling cost of running for office in PaloAlto, level the playing field for diverse candidates, and reduce the sense that people with wealth have more sway over our Council members than ordinary citizens. I look forward to seeing you pass an appropriate ordinance well in advance of thenext election. Sincerely, -- Stephen Rock3872 Nathan Way, Palo Alto, CA 94303 From:Walter Murray To:Council, City Subject:Tennis, Phils Date:Monday, March 27, 2023 8:42:47 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from walter@stanford.edu. Learn why this isimportant CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Phils is very popular with our family. It was a convenient venue for my daughters to meet an advisor when applying to college. Also convenient to work when doing so at home has got too hectic. It was quite a unique place. We live on Ross so walkable. Tennis. I have gone more than a month without being able to find a court to play (4 on Fridays). I have given up meeting the fellow I was playing who had a longer journey. We were not helped by the length of time to repair the fence at Cubberley. Pity it was not the Pickleball court since it would have been done immediately. Last time I went we waited 50 mins before giving up. I notice that none of the tennis courts in Northern PA at Rinconada Park have not been converted into Pickleball courts. Why could some of the courts there not have been converted and LESS at Mitchell? I bike to play tennis so that for me is too far. One thing that is apparent is many of the courts (perhaps the majority of) are being used to teach. Not the official people who do it in the afternoon on 2 courts at Mitchell. Long ago there use to be a sign-up board at the courts. If people had not signed up you could bounce them. Also it would be useful to have the rules posted. On one occasion a single person was occupying a court and refused to leave. The best thing you could do is install lights at Cubberly and improve the dreadful surface of the courts at Fairmeadow. You could consider an online booking system and limit it to people who live in PA not the people in the tennis club. Stanford has such a system on their courts and you can book one hour, a week ahead. Disgruntalled Resident Walter Murray ----------------------------------- From:Maurice L Druzin To:CPNA; Thomas C Rindfleisch Cc:Shikada, Ed; Eggleston, Brad; Rebecca Eisenberg; Margaret Bruce; Murray, Kevin; Council, City; Jeffrey R Koseff; Hamilton Hitchings; Neilson Buchanan;Tess Byler Subject:Re: [CPNA] SFC Flow Prediction for Tue/Wed Date:Monday, March 27, 2023 7:55:53 PM Attachments:ZIFPu0QgQoCtlYvy.png CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachmentsand clicking on links. Thanks, Tom, always appreciated!Maurice Get Outlook for iOS From: crescent-park-pa@googlegroups.com <crescent-park-pa@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Thomas Rindfleisch <tcr@stanford.edu> Sent: Monday, March 27, 2023 7:43:32 PM To: CPNA <crescent-park-pa@googlegroups.com> Cc: Ed Shikada <ed.shikada@cityofpaloalto.org>; Brad Eggleston <brad.eggleston@cityofpaloalto.org>; Rebecca Eisenberg <reisenberg@valleywater.org>; Margaret Bruce <mbruce@sfcjpa.org>; Kevin Murray <kmurray@sfcjpa.org>; Palo Alto City Council <city.council@cityofpaloalto.org>; Jeffrey R Koseff <koseff@stanford.edu>; Hamilton Hitchings <hitchingsh@yahoo.com>; Neilson Buchanan <cnsbuchanan@yahoo.com>; Tess Byler <tbyler@sfcjpa.org> Subject: [CPNA] SFC Flow Prediction for Tue/Wed Friends, this afternoon about 2:30 PM, CNRFC ran their models for San Francisquito Creek in light of the storms forecastfor Tuesday and Wednesday this week. Their meteorologists and hydrologists are predicting a peak flow in SFC latishafternoon Tuesday and another smaller peak sometime Wednesday PM. The forecast for Tue PM is a nominal flow ofabout 600 cfs with a >95% ceiling of ~1,000 cfs. The second Wed PM peak is projected to be about 400 cfs with a >95%maximum of about 900 cfs. Again the usual caveat is that the storm could stall out and park over the watershed producing more rainfall. Fortunatelythe time since the last storm has allowed the creek to subside to a normal low spring level -- about 130 cfs at the USGSgauge. I'll watch the forecast tomorrow to see if there is any change... Tom R. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Crescent Park PA" group.To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to crescent-park-pa+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/crescent-park-pa/e535df85-8288-c76a-5da7-3260a9410839%40stanford.edu. From:Thomas Rindfleisch To:CPNA Cc:Shikada, Ed; Eggleston, Brad; Rebecca Eisenberg; Margaret Bruce; Murray, Kevin; Council, City; Jeffrey R Koseff; Hamilton Hitchings; Neilson Buchanan;Tess Byler Subject:SFC Flow Prediction for Tue/Wed Date:Monday, March 27, 2023 7:44:25 PM Attachments:ZIFPu0QgQoCtlYvy.png CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachmentsand clicking on links. Friends, this afternoon about 2:30 PM, CNRFC ran their models for San Francisquito Creek in light of the storms forecastfor Tuesday and Wednesday this week. Their meteorologists and hydrologists are predicting a peak flow in SFC latishafternoon Tuesday and another smaller peak sometime Wednesday PM. The forecast for Tue PM is a nominal flow ofabout 600 cfs with a >95% ceiling of ~1,000 cfs. The second Wed PM peak is projected to be about 400 cfs with a >95%maximum of about 900 cfs. Again the usual caveat is that the storm could stall out and park over the watershed producing more rainfall. Fortunatelythe time since the last storm has allowed the creek to subside to a normal low spring level -- about 130 cfs at the USGSgauge. I'll watch the forecast tomorrow to see if there is any change... Tom R. From:Aram James To:Clerk, City; Council, City Subject:This is out of order on consent calendar Date:Monday, March 27, 2023 7:39:37 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ Sent from my iPhone From:Aram James To:Greer Stone; Council, City; Shikada, Ed Subject:Start 7:30 -7:36 Date:Monday, March 27, 2023 7:37:02 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ After hours Mountain View veterinary care?? How frequently are there cruelty investigations? Corrective action plan -how to enforce non performance by PIN? Non answer by PIN —reduce contract below 5 years? In house model more services revenue plus -what would it cost for in house —and quality of services —why not pensions ?? Shikada gets a great pension Sent from my iPhone From:MYTHILI PENUMARTHY To:Council, City Subject:Philz coffee shop Date:Monday, March 27, 2023 7:36:50 PM [Some people who received this message don't often get email from mythlipen@gmail.com. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ Hello City council members We love our special coffee shop that employs lots of young people & it is unique not like other chains. We appreciate your effort to provide more housing to community. In that little lot how many houses are you going to build? Hope it is not a huge high rise eye sore. Thanks Regards 880 Aspen way resident Sent from my iPhone From:Aram James To:Lauing, Ed; Council, City Subject:Start 7:25 -7:30 5 mins Date:Monday, March 27, 2023 7:30:58 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ 60 surgeries per months ? Min and max 30 per week? Historically data available —out sourcing -maintenance for golf course -Ed likes outsourcing—wonder how city unions feel about Ed’s outsourcing????? Would like less than a 5 year contact??? 40 hours per week versus 27 hours z Sent from my iPhone From:Aram James To:Veenker, Vicki; Council, City Subject:Start 7:17 -7:25 - 8 mins Date:Monday, March 27, 2023 7:25:33 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ Capital not needed if city takes over ? Better housing for animals needed? Audit staff neutral? Scope of services for public From:Aram James To:Kou, Lydia; Council, City Subject:Start 6:56-7:04 -8 mins Date:Monday, March 27, 2023 7:04:37 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ San Jose and Palo Alto under police department ( San Jose Public Works) City cruelty investigation versus PIN? Field operations police at animal shelter? Service fees comparisons -back to city versus PIN? UC Davis? Hours posted? Holiday hours? Release questions? Release trap and neuter From:Aram James To:Tanaka, Greg; Council, City Subject:6:50 start - finish 6:55 5 mins Date:Monday, March 27, 2023 6:56:22 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ Increase all the fees to cover expenses? Non resident fees higher? City proposal versus PIN fees including pension costs From:Aram James To:Julie Lythcott-Haims; Council, City Subject:Start 6:41 -6:44 -3 mins Date:Monday, March 27, 2023 6:44:46 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ Sent from my iPhone From:Aram James To:Lauing, Ed; Council, City Subject:Start 6:35 - 6:41 6mins Date:Monday, March 27, 2023 6:41:47 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ 1. Costs shared with Los Altos & Los Altos Hills Sent from my iPhone From:Aram James To:Veenker, Vicki; Council, City Subject:Start 6:30 - finish 6:35 Date:Monday, March 27, 2023 6:35:45 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ Sent from my iPhone From:Aram James To:Pat Burt; Council, City Subject:Start 6:22 - finish 6:29 -7mins Date:Monday, March 27, 2023 6:29:58 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ Pat taken a back by Pets in Need cost increase proposal. I agree with this concern. From:Ulli To:Council, City Subject:Pilz/ Billy‘s middlefield / Loma Verde Date:Monday, March 27, 2023 5:22:18 PM [Some people who received this message don't often get email from utanurhan@gmail.com. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ Dear City Council, I hope you are well. I just wanted to voice my concern about the business building that served our local community so well. I am concerned, that it might be replaced with a apartment complex and the local businesses are vanishing. How can I most effectively voice my concern? Thank you! Regards, Ulli From:Barbara E. Lichman, Ph.D. To:Council, City Subject:Recent Developments in Aviation/Airport Law and Regulations - March 27, 2023 Date:Monday, March 27, 2023 3:34:42 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of openingattachments and clicking on links. If you're having trouble viewing this email, you may see it online. Share this: Aviation & Airport | Development Law News LATEST NEWS AND ANALYSIS - AIR AND SURFACE TRANSPORTATION, ENERGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT Court Decides That Its Decision in Make UC a Good Neighbor Does Not Unfairly Broaden the Scope of CEQA By Barbara Lichman on March 16, 2023 Since our February 1, 2023 blog, concerning the California Court of Appeals tentative decision in Make UC a Good Neighbor vs. Regents of Univ. of California, et al., that Court has taken the definitive step of confirming its tentative decision, on the critical ground that “UC Berkeley failed to assess potential noise impacts from loud student parties in residential neighborhoods near campus, a long-standing problem that the [environmental review] improperly dismissed as ‘speculative.’” Anyone who has ever been a student at a university, and lived off-campus (probably including the judges), understands the reality of the Court’s conclusion. Nevertheless, the Regents continued to argue, unsuccessfully, that “social noise” is not an impact subject to CEQA. On that basis, the Regents continued to loudly excoriate the Court, saying, among other things, that the Court had armed “the NIMBY neighbors with additional weapons to obstruct development of all new urban housing.” On the contrary, however, the Court’s argument is neither new nor does it “dramatically expand CEQA.” As the Court responded “[t]he regents must analyze the potential noise impacts relating to loud student parties. Their decision to skip the issue, based on the unfounded notion that the impacts are speculative, was a prejudicial abuse of discretion and requires them to now do the analysis that they should have done at the outset.” The Court reached that decision on a plethora of prior judicial decisions such as Keep Our Mountains Quiet v. County of Santa Clara, 236 Cal. App. 4th 714, 734 (2015) [substantial evidence exists that crowd noise might have significant noise impacts on surrounding residents]. In short, despite the Regents loud protests, CEQA has not changed as a result of the Court’s ruling. What may have changed, however, is a strengthening of the will of the legislature to protect its new-found priority on the construction of housing in a State long, and increasingly, deficient in that asset. However, even their victory does not mean that petitioners reject the effort to increase the supply of housing. As stated by Petitioners, “we want UC to build housing, just not in a totally inappropriate location. Based on the publicity already surrounding this decision, that issue is still open. Ninth Circuit Issues Unprecedented Order Against FAA By Barbara Lichman on March 16, 2023 On March 9, 2023, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals granted the “Motion to Enforce Judgment” filed by co-Petitioners Cities of Los Angeles and Culver City (“Cities”) in City of Los Angeles, et.al. v. Stephen Dickson, et.al. The Order found the Federal Aviation Administration (“FAA”) in blatant violation of the National Environmental Policy Act, 42 U.S.C. § 4321, et seq. (“NEPA”), as well as the Court’s prior Order of July 2021, requiring FAA to compensate for its original violation by performing environmental review of the newly established North Downwind Arrivals to Los Angeles International Airport (“LAX”), over heavily populated areas of the Cities. Normally finding FAA immune from judicial intervention on the ground of FAA’s responsibility for “safety and efficiency” of aircraft operations, this time, the Court found FAA’s “recalcitrance” in failing to initiate environmental review for more than five years after implementation of the procedures, and 19 months after the Court’s original Order in July 2021, totally “unreasonable” on the ground that “human health and welfare are at stake.” The Court’s recognition of FAA’s flagrant violations led to the highly unusual step of mandating that FAA: (1) immediately submit to Court a timeline for completion of environmental review; and (2) file a status report on FAA’s progress every 90 days until it has fully complied with the Court’s order. This ruling may give impacted communities some hope that FAA is not immune from judicial oversight, and cannot get away with thumbing its nose at the law and court orders. It should be remembered, however, that, in this case, FAA displayed more than its usual hubris by failing and refusing to do ANY environmental review. The question remains open as to whether the courts will act similarly where FAA performs “inadequate” review rather than none at all. Stay tuned. Washington Takes FAA to Task on Lack of “Safety and Efficiency” in the U.S. Air Traffic System By Barbara Lichman on February 8, 2023 No matter what objection or challenge the United States taxpayers bring in response to Federal Aviation Administration (“FAA”) initiatives, FAA’s defense is always the same: changes are required for “safety and efficiency.” While that may be true in some instances, FAA’s global resort to such an excuse (e.g., justification for changes to flight paths over populated areas without notice or environmental review) is belied by the recent responses of both the United States Congress, and the agency’s ultimate leadership, the Secretary of Transportation. First, the General Accounting Office (“GAO”) criticizes FAA for failing “to develop a comprehensive strategy” to guide the integration of drones into the national airspace system. GAO-23-105189, January 26, 2023. Specifically, the GAO claims that FAA’s plans so far lack the “important elements – such as goals, objectives, and milestones – that would help FAA manage more effectively.” It would appear difficult, if not impossible, to promote and support “safety and efficiency” in a changing system utterly lacking in the critical elements of the system itself. Second, and certainly not less important, also on January 26, 2023, the United States Congress passed the NOTAM Improvement Act of 2023 in response to the unprecedented breakdown of the air traffic system caused by the failure of the Notice to Air Missions (“NOTAM”) component of that system, allegedly resulting from an accidental deletion of a file. The new Act calls for a task force to be appointed by the FAA Administrator to review and reform the system. Although there is the taint of “fox guarding the hen house” in this structure, the task force will also be made of up pilots, airline executives, union officials, air traffic controllers and computer system experts (notably lacking members of the public) to give a broader based view of necessary information to be included in the NOTAM system, as well as the most effective method of transmitting that information to pilots. The question remains, of course, why the FAA’s current structure was unable to effectuate those changes, and thus maintain the “safety and efficiency” and even the operational capacity, of the system. Continue Reading... Barbara E. Lichman, Ph.D., J.D.18400 Von Karman Avenue, Suite 800 Irvine, CA 92614-0514 (949)224-6292 www.aviationairportdevelopmentlaw.com © Barbara E. Lichman, Ph.D., J.D. All Rights Reserved. This email was sent to city.council@cityofpaloalto.org. To ensure that you continue receiving our emails, please add us to your addressbook or safe list. manage your preferences | opt out using TrueRemove®. Got this as a forward? Sign up to receive our future emails. From:Aram James To:Shana Segal; Binder, Andrew; Angie Evans; Jethroe Moore; Barberini, Christopher; Julie Lythcott-Haims;Tannock, Julie; Josh Becker; Joe Simitian; Wagner, April; Reifschneider, James; Perron, Zachary; Pat Burt; Bains,Paul; peaceandjusticecenter@gmail.com; Shikada, Ed; Jeff Rosen; ladoris cordell; Rebecca Eisenberg; chuckjagoda; Human Relations Commission; Jay Boyarsky; Enberg, Nicholas; Michael Gennaco; Perron, Zachary; GreerStone; Javier Ortega; Council, City; Cecilia Taylor Subject:Black Official Steps In Between Man Confronting Child At School Meeting Date:Monday, March 27, 2023 3:24:47 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links. ________________________________ https://youtu.be/UmZeJhbhrqU Sent from my iPhone From:Charlie Weidanz To:Council, City Subject:Palo Alto Street Map & Guide Sponsorship Opportunities Date:Monday, March 27, 2023 3:00:15 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear Chamber Member, The Palo Alto Chamber of Commerce is pleased to be working with the marketing firm of Town Square Publications to produce a brand-new, up-to-date, full-color Palo Alto Street Map & Guide. This publication will be the only official map endorsed and distributed by the Palo Alto Chamber. This accurate, user-friendly map will be the perfect resource for the thousands of visitors to our area annually that we hope will enjoy all that Palo Alto has to offer and who will help our community prosper. There will be multiple options available for your business to advertise on the new map. This is a prime opportunity to promote your business to visitors and to those who are considering relocating their businesses or working remotely in Palo Alto. Don’t miss out on the unique Member Only opportunity to reach potential buyers, new residents, and new partners. Space is limited, and sponsorships are very reasonable, especially considering more than 5,000 maps will be printed and available for the next 2+ years as well as an online counterpart linked from the Chamber’s website. And all advertisers will be hyperlinked to their business URL improving your ROI. Our representative from Town Square Publications is Tom Stroup, and he will be contacting you shortly to review in detail the benefits of participation. Remember, that limited spaces are available and allocated on a first-response basis. Thank you for your continued support of the Palo Alto Chamber of Commerce. Charlie Weidanz President & CEO Palo Alto Chamber of Commerce Charlie@paloaltochamber.com 650.773.6414 This email was sent on behalf of Palo Alto Chamber of Commerce 355 Alma St Palo Alto, CA 94301.To unsubscribe clickhere. If you have questions or comments concerning this email or services in general, please contact us by email atinfo@paloaltochamber.com. From:Denise Salles To:Council, City Subject:Renewal of PIN contract versus returning it to PAPD/city Date:Monday, March 27, 2023 1:58:05 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from denise.salles@gmail.com. Learn why this isimportant CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. Dear PA Council, I am writing to support returning the Palo Alto shelter to PA/PAPD. PIN has not beensuccessful during its three-year run, and I find it really unsettling that the city is now set to negotiate a new contract for more money and fewer services. • PIN's new proposal is that they'll do 60 low-cost spay and neuter surgeries per month -basically two per day, and only in their jurisdiction. This was never the case when the city ran the shelter - they did upwards of 30 per week for the public, in any county, and managed toinclude stays who went up for adoption. • PINs low response to the public's need for spay/neuter surgery is likely due to the number of animals they bring is WELL outside of their jurisdiction. • PIN is not trained or interested in wildlife management - which they agreed to in theiroriginal contract. • The shelter is, or should be, an open-door, municipal shelter. And yet, as a citizen, I can't bring in a kitten trapped in my yard because it may not be "perfect." And we are talking aboutan 8-week-old kitten who may be frightened and need a bit of TLC. Nope, they won't take it. • The propoed TNR program raising "concerns" is a dramatic attempt by Audubon and other folks to imply that the Baylands will be teeming with feral cats and endangering wildlife,which is completely untrue. A responsible TNR program requires people who trap a cat on their property to have it sterilized, vaccinated, and RETURNED to their property with the promise of providing foodand water - any feral cat is returned to the location from which is originated. I have felt for some time that the city has been lazy and hoping for a quick fix - so why NOT PIN? All the reasons above, and many more I won't mention for fear of writing too much. Please strongly consider the outcome for the animals and not the easiest way to make thingsgo away. Return the shelter to the city of Palo Alto. Sincerely, Denise Salles650-269-9494 From:Nathaniel Griffin To:Council, City Subject:Boycott of all palo alto business"s Date:Monday, March 27, 2023 1:54:54 PM Some people who received this message don't often get email from nateggriffin@gmail.com. Learn why this isimportant CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautiousof opening attachments and clicking on links. I have just received a parking ticket that I feel is extremely predatory and unbecoming of acity as affluent as Palo Alto. I have been coming to do work and spend money in your downtown for a while, yet have always had to interrupt myself to run to my car and move itacross your city so I am able to avoid getting a ticket. Which in itself is quite frustrating. Today I got one after being 20 minutes late to move my car, which I find appalling as it is the middle of the afternoon and my car was surrounded by empty parking spots. The amount ofresources your city puts into parking enforcement shows how little interest there is in quality of life for anyone hoping to have a nice afternoon. For this reason, I will be boycotting any and all palo alto business's until you are able to adjustyour policy. I will also be telling all family and friends, as well as anyone else who will listen, to avoid Palo Alto as your main goal is to squeeze every penny from people instead offocusing on creating a welcoming environment. Thank you very much