HomeMy Public PortalAbout20171002plCC701-32
DOCUMENTS IN THIS PACKET INCLUDE:
LETTERS FROM CITIZENS TO THE
MAYOR OR CITY COUNCIL
RESPONSES FROM STAFF TO LETTERS FROM CITIZENS
ITEMS FROM MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
ITEMS FROM OTHER COMMITTEES AND AGENCIES
ITEMS FROM CITY, COUNTY, STATE, AND REGIONAL AGENCIES
Prepared for: 10/2/2017
Document dates: 9/13/2017 – 9/20/2017
Set 1
Note: Documents for every category may not have been received for packet
reproduction in a given week.
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/18/2017 12:47 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Don Tran <dtran@svlg.org>
Sent:Friday, September 15, 2017 11:23 AM
To:Council, City; Clerk, City
Subject:9/18/17 Palo Alto City Council Meeting - TRL Ordinance
Attachments:SVLG - Palo Alto TRL Ordinance.pdf
Good morning Mayor Scharff and Council Members,
My name is Don Tran and I am the Senior Associate for Health, Housing, and Community Development Policy
at the Silicon Valley Leadership Group. On behalf of the Leadership Group, please find attached a support letter regarding the City of Palo Alto's
Tobacco Retailer Permit program.
Thank you for the consideration of our support and input. Best,
Don Tran
-- Don Tran, MPH
Senior Associate of Health, Housing & Community Development Silicon Valley Leadership Group
Phone: (408) 501-7854
***Join us on Friday, October 13th****
Click on the image for more details!
September 15, 2017
Palo Alto City Hall
250 Hamilton Avenue
Palo Alto, CA 94301
RE: Silicon Valley Leadership Group Support for Tobacco Retail Licensing Ordinance Dear Mayor Scharff and Council Members,
I am writing on behalf of the Silicon Valley Leadership Group to express the organization’s
support for a Tobacco Retail License (TRL) program to be adopted within the City of Palo
Alto. The Silicon Valley Leadership Group, founded in 1978 by David Packard of Hewlett-Packard,
represents nearly 375 of Silicon Valley’s most respected employers in issues, programs and campaigns that affect the quality of life in Silicon Valley, including energy, transportation,
education, housing, health care, tax policies, economic vitality and the environment. Leadership
Group members provide nearly one out of every three private sector jobs in Silicon Valley.
The Leadership Group is deeply committed to advocating for public health issues that promote
greater health outcomes and health equity. With cigarette smoking being the leading cause of preventable disease and death in the United States, TRLs can be used to reduce the rate of
negative health outcomes associated with tobacco usage, especially among today’s youth. By
requiring retailers to possess a TRL, local jurisdictions will be able to monitor sales and determine penalties for retailers who do not follow the law. TRLs are a tool to encourage
responsible retail practices and to reduce illegal tobacco sales to those under the age of 21. The Leadership Group commends the City of Palo Alto for their commitment and dedication
towards ensuring the health and quality of life for their residents. We are also encouraged by the partnership established between the City of Palo Alto and Santa Clara County to ensure that the TRL program is successfully implemented. Thank you for your leadership and the
consideration of our comments. Sincerely,
Carl Guardino President & CEO
Silicon Valley Leadership Group
2001 Gateway Place, Suite 101E
San Jose, California 95110
(408)501-7864 svlg.org
CARL GUARDINO
President & CEO Board Officers: GREG BECKER, Chair SVB Financial Group KEN KANNAPPAN, Vice Chair Plantronics JOHN ADAMS, Secretary/Treasurer
Wells Fargo Bank
TOM WERNER, Former Chair
SunPower AART DE GEUS, Former Chair Synopsys STEVE BERGLUND, Former Chair Trimble Navigation
Board Members: MARTIN ANSTICE Lam Research
SHELLYE ARCHAMBEAU
MetricStream, Inc.
ANDY BALL Suffolk Construction GEORGE BLUMENTHAL University of California, Santa Cruz JOHN BOLAND KQED CHRIS BOYD
Kaiser Permanente
BRADLEY J. BULLINGTON Bridgelux HELEN BURT Pacific Gas & Electric DAVID CUSH Virgin America CLAUDE DARTIGUELONGUE BD Biosciences
CHRISTOPHER DAWES
Lucile Packard Children’s Hospital
MICHAEL ENGH, S.J. Santa Clara University TOM FALLON Infinera Corporation BRANT FISH Chevron Corporation
HANK FORE
Comcast
TOM GEORGENS NetApp, Inc KEN GOLDMAN Yahoo! RAQUEL GONZALEZ Bank of America DOUG GRAHAM
Lockheed Martin Space Systems
LAURA GUIO
IBM JAMES GUTIERREZ Insikt JEFFREY M. JOHNSON San Francisco Chronicle GARY LAUER eHealth
ENRIQUE LORES
HP MATT MAHAN Brigade TARKAN MANER Nexenta KEN MCNEELY AT&T
STEVEN MILLIGAN
Western Digital Corporation
KEVIN MURAI Synnex JES PEDERSON Webcor KIM POLESE ClearStreet MO QAYOUMI
San Jose State University
VIVEK RANADIVÉ
TIBCO STEVEN ROSSI Bay Area News Group ALAN SALZMAN VantagePoint Capital Partners RON SEGE Echelon Corporation
ROSEMARY TURNER
UPS
RICK WALLACE KLA-Tencor JED YORK San Francisco 49ers Established in 1978 by DAVID PACKARD
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/18/2017 12:59 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Amar Johal <amarjohal@gmail.com>
Sent:Saturday, September 16, 2017 7:40 AM
To:Council, City
Subject:Tobacco Ordinance - My Thoughts
Hello,
Hope everyone is having a wonderful weekend, unfortunatly I will be out of town attending my sister's medical school white coat ceremony on the day of the vote. But I will try and see if I can make it somehow.
I'm Amar Johal, both myself and my wife Raman Johal are franchisee's at the 7-Eleven located at 401 Waverley
St, Palo Alto.
I've been informing my customer base regarding the upcoming bans on flavored tobacco and they haven't been
to pleased. This will be driving away my core adult consumer to other cities and even online marketplaces.
Where will the age verification be then? In someone else's hands?
Even if you drive them to 21+ up establishments, have you seen their rates of failed verifications? They lead in selling these products to minors, just because it's a 21+ establishment we should not be fooled into thinking that
this will help the overall cause.
I invite you all to our store, come see our process, how we card, how we go about conducting day to day
business.
This is an interesting discussion, some other Santa Clara County cities such as Gilroy and Saratoga have
adopted a very fair grandfathered system where they've protected their current tobacco retailers. Without this
grandfathering, it's an attack on independently owned stores such as ours, the value of our business deminshes.
There are a few areas that I don't mind, the permit process, I'm fine with that. 7-eleven's have very strict age
verification processes, IDs need to be scanned in order for a purchase to go through and we pay monthly for a
mystery shop service that verifies we check proper ID, I'm proud to say that this year we are 5 for 5 on passing
this mystery shop!
I'm not asking for a complete overhaul of the ordinance, but just the grandfathering of current tobacco retailers when it comes to the flavor ban. Just like many of your sister cities have already done within
Santa Clara county.
Thank you,
Amar Johal
925-699-3399
amarjohal@gmail.com
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/18/2017 1:12 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:kyle takaki <ktakaki70@gmail.com>
Sent:Monday, September 18, 2017 10:58 AM
To:Council, City
Subject:Proposed Tobacco Ordinance
To the Mayor and Council members,
My name is Kyle Takaki the owner of Palo Alto Shell at 2200 El Camino. I'm writing to you "again" to voice my thoughts
about the new ordinance you all will be voting on tonight. I have included some handed out script that the APCA gave me
that they say may help with the issues I have with this ordinance.
I would also like to convey my own thoughts to you as a business owner in the City of Palo Alto. I currently operate a small
C-store that does very well for it's size and at least 60% of the sales inside are tobacco sales. Many of theses sales are
flavored tobacco in different forms. As noted below the city already prohibits certain sale items within a gas station. Which
by the way you all know is an old needed to be abolished ordinance. This old ordinance and this new tobacco ordinance will
have a future affect on my business moving forward.
I am all for tighter more stringent laws and sting operations to prevent under age sales. As well as permit cost to offset the
cost to maintain these inspections and operations. But this banning of flavored tobacco will do nothing to prevent children
from trying to buy and use tobacco products. They will either try plain tobacco or go to Mountain View or Menlo Park to
obtain these flavored tobacco products. This ban would definitely affect the sales of my C-store along with my gas sales
which is the lively hood of my business.
Please vote NO on this ordinance but make provisions to re-vote increase to the cost of the permits to offset new operations
to prevent under age sales.
Thank you,
Kyle Takaki
• Banning flavors is unnecessary and will drive away my adult consumers who enjoy flavored cigars and flavored e-
cigarette products. A ban on these products will force these customers to stores outside the City or online where there is no
way to verify the age of customers.
• Other cities in Santa Clara County (Gilroy and Saratoga) have grandfathered existing tobacco retailer locations in
perpetuity and Palo Alto should too. Without a grandfather provision, the City Council will destroy the value of independently
owned convenience stores and gas stations. If we are unable to sell our business with the right to sell tobacco, the overall
value of our business will be greatly diminished.
• Gas stations in Palo Alto are already prohibited from selling many grocery items in their stores, leaving tobacco
products as one of the few items that can be sold in their stores.
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/18/2017 1:13 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Tobacco-Free Coalition of Santa Clara County <coalitionscc@gmail.com>
Sent:Monday, September 18, 2017 12:07 PM
To:Council, City; Clerk, City
Subject:Palo Alto City Council Meeting 9/18 - Tobacco Retail Permit
Attachments:Tobacco-Free Coalition of Santa Clara County - Palo Alto Tobacco Retailer Permit.pdf
Good afternoon Mayor Scharff and Council Members,
On behalf of the Tobacco-Free Coalition of Santa Clara County, please find attached a letter of support
regarding the City of Palo Alto's Tobacco Retailer Permit Ordinance. We appreciate your ongoing leadership towards tobacco prevention efforts and dedication to helping
communities thrive in best health.
Respectfully, Dr. Roger Kennedy and Don Tran
Co-Chairs
Tobacco-Free Coalition of Santa Clara County
Tobacco Free Coalition of Santa Clara County
Sobrato Center for Nonprofits - San José
1400 Parkmoor Avenue, Suite 120-B
San José, CA 95126
(408) 793-2700
Dear Honorable Members of the Palo Alto City Council,
On behalf of the Tobacco Free Coalition of Santa Clara County, we are writing to endorse efforts to establish a Tobacco
Retail Licensing Ordinance program which provides a mechanism to prevent youth access and exposure to tobacco
products by prohibiting new tobacco retailers from operating within 1,000 feet of a school and 500 feet of existing
tobacco retailers; place restrictions on the sale of flavored tobacco products, including menthol cigarettes, as well as
mint, candy, and fruit flavored electronic smoking devices or vapor products; and prohibit pharmacies from selling
tobacco products in the City of Palo Alto.
The Tobacco Free Coalition of Santa Clara was formed in 1990 to change the community attitudes on tobacco use and to
be an advocate for legislative change at the local and state levels on tobacco use issues. The coalition is comprised of a
diverse group of community leaders, health care professionals, educators, and advocates from more than 24 Santa Clara
County based organizations and provides advisory direction to the efforts of the Santa Clara County Public Health
Department’s Tobacco-Free Communities program on tobacco control issues.
Despite steep declines in the use of cigarettes among Santa Clara County youth, there has been a rapid increase in the
use of other tobacco products, including electronic smoking devices. Eighty percent (80%) of current teen smokers
started with a flavored tobacco product. The availability and use of flavored tobacco and nicotine products has
skyrocketed in recent years. In fact, a recent survey found that in Santa Clara County, of stores located within 1,000 ft. of
schools that sell Swisher Sweets, the most popular brand of cigarillo which comes in a wide variety of flavors, 90% sell
them for less than $1.00 which is cheaper than a bottle of water. In addition to flavored tobacco, density of tobacco
establishments also has an impact on youth tobacco use. It increases access to tobacco products and tobacco
advertising, and renormalizes smoking behavior. Additionally, higher density of tobacco retailers is associated with
higher smoking rates and reduced smoking cessation over time.
As Californians, we are expressing our concerns about the Tobacco Industry’s deliberate marketing of tobacco and
nicotine products to youth and young adults. We believe we need to stop youth tobacco starter products that can lead
to a lifetime of nicotine addiction. We need to act now to prevent the onset of serious chronic illnesses such as heart
disease, cancer, diabetes, and asthma.
Strong, local tobacco retail licensing laws are the best way to prevent youth from purchasing tobacco products
themselves and prevent them from being exposed tobacco marketing. We urge the Palo Alto City Council to establish a
Tobacco Retail Licensing to prevent youth access and exposure to harmful tobacco products.
Again, a deeply appreciative that you to the ongoing leadership of the Palo Alto City Council towards tobacco prevention
efforts and dedication to helping communities thrive in best health.
We appreciate your partnership and shared goals.
Sincerely,
Roger Kennedy, MD Don Tran, MPH
Tobacco-Free Coalition Co-Chair Tobacco-Free Coalition Co-Chair
Retired MD Silicon Valley Leadership Group
Create healthy environments where you can live, work, play, and be…tobacco free!
Tobacco Free Coalition of Santa Clara County
Sobrato Center for Nonprofits - San José
1400 Parkmoor Avenue, Suite 120-B
San José, CA 95126
(408) 793-2700
Endorsements (Partial List)
More than 500 endorsements of support were collected from individuals across Santa Clara County. Below is a sample of some of
the Community Organizations and Community Leaders that have signed letters of support that endorse the goal of preventing youth
access and exposure to tobacco products through a tobacco retail license including restricting the sale of flavored tobacco products,
including menthol cigarettes and flavorings in electronic smoking devices, across the county:
Organizations:
xBreathe California
xJoyner/Payne Youth Service Agency
xKorean American Community Services
xViet Voters
xRoots Community Health Center xProject Ohana in the Bay
Individuals:
xReverend Jeff Moore, III, President, Silicon Valley (SV) NAACP
xAnna Griffin, Member, Juneteenth Planning Committee
xJacqueline Rabouin, Member, Disparities Task Force, Regional Developmental Disabilities Board
xRobin Braxton, Board Member, S. J. African American Community Services Agency (AACSA)
xElizabeth Turner-Nichols, Vice Chair, and Founding President, SV Chapter of Blacks In Government (BIG)
xCarolyn G. Ellzey, Member, Garden City Women’s Club
xMelody Hames, Akoma Arts (Multicultural Arts organization)
xKeith Hames, Akoma Arts (Multicultural Arts organization)
xGene Brown, Member, Golden State Gay Rodeo Association Bay Area Chapter
xEmily Carhart, Staff, LGBTQ Youth Space
xRodrigo Garcia-Reyes, Colectivo ALD Teatro Vision (Latino Arts group)
xRachel Munoz, Staff, Gilroy City Police Department staff
xRobert Smart, Advocate, HIV/AIDS civil rights health care
xL. Marchelle Watkins, Staff, Greenacre Homes
xWayne Morgan, Staff, The Hub (a LGBTQ support group)
xLoretta Shank, Volunteer, Kaiser
xAngelica Burns, Health Educator, Planned Parenthood
xD. Renee Manuel, Staff, La Mesa Verde UC Master Gardeners
xFabiana Coleman, Community Member
xMembers of the SV Black Chamber of Commerce
o Aimbrell Shanks, Business Development Director
o Karl Welch, Member
xMembers of the SV Chapter of the National Coalition of 100 Black Women
o Viera Whye, Chair
o Angela Dibono, Membership Chair
o Coy Garrett, Member
xVarious members of the Ethiopian Community
o Misrak Dubale
o Amha Habteyes
o Nebi Alemu, CLEA
o Addis Zewdon
o Melaku Aynalem
o Mohammed Ali
x19 high school students from the following schools:
o Andrew Hill High School
o Gilroy High School
o Gunderson High School
o Homestead High School
o James Lick High School
o Lincoln High School
o Monte Vista High School
o Mount Pleasant High School
o Mountain View High School
o Overfelt High School
o Pioneer High School
o San Jose High School
o Summit Rainier Charter High School
o Wilcox High School
x10 college students from the following colleges and universities:
o Evergreen Community College
o San Jose City College
o San Jose State University
1
Brettle, Jessica
From:Svendsen, Janice
Sent:Thursday, September 14, 2017 11:39 AM
To:Council Members; ORG - Clerk's Office; Council Agenda Email
Cc:Sartor, Mike; Keene, James; Shikada, Ed; Flaherty, Michelle; De Geus, Robert; Bobel, Phil;
Weiss, Julie; North, Karin; Eggleston, Brad
Subject:9/18 Council Questions for Agenda Item 6: 4157 El Camino Way & Item 7: Ordinance
for Tobacco Retailers
Attachments:Palo Alto_Proximity Measurements_Final.pdf; APCA letter Palo Alto Sept 2017.pdf
Dear Mayor and Council Members:
On behalf of City Manager Jim Keene, please find below in bold staff responses to inquiries
by Council Member Tanaka regarding the September 18, 2017 council meeting.
Item 6: 4157 El Camino Way: Hearing Request for CUP – CM Tanaka
Item 7: Ordinance Establishing Permitting Program for Tobacco Retailers – CM Tanaka
Item 6: 4157 El Camino Way: Hearing Request for CUP
Q. 1. Could a decision on this set a precedent for multi‐party properties?
A.1. The answer is no. This is a multi‐tenant mixed use development with
condominium ownership and a unique site history. The challenge we face with
the subject property is that we are dealing with multiple owners at the ground
floor level and a lack of City records demonstrating which space(s) were
approved as retail. In fact, even if all of the spaces were owned by a single
person, it would be difficult to ascertain what was intended when the project
was approved based on the lack of records. If there are other similar commercial
condominium projects, their site conditions and records of approval and
occupancy would determine their allowable uses. While staff and Council may
find any action on this project to be informative in a similar situation, we do not
believe it is precedent setting.
Item 7: Ordinance Establishing Permitting Program for Tobacco Retailers
Q.1. Why is the distance between tobacco retailers and schools only going to be
1,000 feet?
A.1. The Santa Clara County Department of Health reports that the use of 1,000
foot distance (“buffer zones”) is based on successful models seen used in other
jurisdictions such as the County of Santa Clara, Gilroy, Los Gatos, Saratoga, Santa
Cruz and a few dozen other cities across California. The model demonstrated
2
that this distance resulted in the greatest reduction in tobacco density over time,
therefore reducing exposure to tobacco access and marketing for youth.
Q.2. Does this 1,000 feet rule also apply to elementary schools and pre‐schools?
A.2. Yes.
Q.3.Right now can tobacco retailers be within 1,000 feet of schools? If so, how
many are within a 1,000 foot radius of a school?
A.3. Yes. Seventeen tobacco retailers are located within 1,000 feet of a
school. See attached to this email a list which also includes distance between
retailers. Existing tobacco retailers located within 1,000 feet of schools would be
grandfathered in until the business is sold.
Q.4. How will all of this regulation affect small businesses?
A.4. Businesses have expressed concern about lost revenue because of
prohibited sales of tobacco and reduced value for when the business is sold. See
attached letter from APCA. There is also a permit fee.
Q.5. How much will enforcement cost?
A.5. Enforcement costs will be provided by Santa Clara County and are funded
by the $425 annual Tobacco Retail Permit fee paid by each tobacco retailer. See
December 5, 2016 staff report #7371 for additional information. Therefore, for
the 30 tobacco retailers in Palo Alto, the total cost to the County to provide
enforcement is $12,750 per year, based on the current fee schedule which again
is recouped by the Permit fee.
Palo Alto Police Department will provide annual “Youth Decoy” (undercover)
site checks to ensure tobacco sales are not made to anyone under the age of 21.
Public Works and Palo Alto Police Department can accommodate the small
additional costs related to enforcement.
Q.6. Do the neighboring cities have these same regulations?
A.6. Yes. The Town of Los Gatos recently entered into the same model
agreement with Santa Clara County Health Department to enforce their Tobacco
Retail Permit Ordinance. This is the same model that the City of Palo Alto is
considering on September 18, 2017.
In addition, currently 133 towns, cities, and counties within California have
adopted local TRP ordinances including Campbell, County of Santa Clara, Gilroy,
Los Gatos, Morgan Hill, San Jose, and Saratoga.
Thank you,
Janice Svendsen
Janice Svendsen | Executive Assistant to James Keene, City Manager
3
250 Hamilton Avenue | Palo Alto, CA 94301
D: 650.329.2105 | E: janice.svendsen@cityofpaloalto.org
Retailer Name Street Address Zip Code 500 Feet of Retailers 1,000 Feet of Schools
1 7-Eleven Store #2366-18584E 401 Waverley St 94301 Walgreens (University) (614 ft.),
Hemingway (449 ft.)None
2 7-Eleven Store #2234-14315G 708 Colorado Ave 94303 Safeway (Middlefield) (0 ft.), Walgreens (Middlefield) (702 ft.)Keys Family Day School (Elementary) (507 ft.)
3 Antonio's Nut House 321 S California Ave 94306 Cigar House (222 ft.)Living Wisdom School (904 ft.)
4 B & P Florist & Plants 3880 El Camino Real 94306
Palo Alto Chevron (119 ft.), Ernie's Liquor (65 ft.),
Jim Davis Valero (406 ft.),
Smokes & More (91 ft.)
Keys Family Day School (Middle) (624 ft.)
5 Barron Park Shell 3601 El Camino Real 94306 Driftwood Deli & Market (369 ft.),
Smokes & Vapes (356 ft.)None
6 Cigar House 393 S California Ave 94306 La Bogeduita Del Medio (435 ft.), Antonio's Nut House (222 ft.)Living Wisdom School (768 ft.)
7 Driftwood Deli & Market, Inc.3450 El Camino Real 94306 Smokes & Vapes (128 ft.),
Barron Park Shell (356 ft.)None
8 Embarcadero Shell 1161 Embarcadero Rd 94303 None Fusion Academy Palo Alto (1208 ft.)
9 Ernies Liquor 3870 El Camino Real 94306
Jim Davis Valero (516 ft.),
B&P Florist & Plants (65 ft.), Smokes & More (202 ft.), Palo Alto Chevron (133 ft.)
Keys Family Day School (Middle) (740 ft.)
10 Hemingway 480 University Ave 94301 7-11 (Waverley) (449 ft.)None
11 Jim David Valero 3972 El Camino Real 94306
Palo Alto Chevron (367 ft.), Smokes & More (312 ft.), B&P Florist & Plants (406 ft.),
Ernie's Liquor (516 ft.)
Keymokes Family Day School (Middle) (160 ft.)
12 La Bodeguita Del Medio 463 S California Ave 94306 Palo Alto Shell (563 ft.), Cigar House (435 ft.)Living Wisdom School (720 ft.)
13 Mac's Smoke Shop 534 Emerson St 94301 Red Brick Café (431 ft.), Walgreens (University) (628 ft.)None
14 Palo Alto Arco 699 San Antonio Rd 94306 Valero Corner Store (83 ft.)Greendell School (297 ft.), Gideon Hausner Jewish Day School (759 ft.)
15 Palo Alto Chevron 3897 El Camino Real 94306
Ernie's Liquor (133 ft.)B&P Florist & Plants (119 ft.)Smokes & More (164 ft.)
Jim Davis Valero (367 ft.)
Keys Family Day School (Middle) (544 ft.)
16 Palo Alto Fine Wine and Spirits 3163 Middlefield Rd 94306 None Our Lady of the Rosary (523 ft.), International School of the Peninsula (979 ft.), Keys Family Day School (Elementary) (1081 ft.)
17 Palo Alto Hills Gold and Country Club 3000 Alexis Dr 94304 None None
18 Palo Alto Shell 2200 El Camino Real 94306 La Bogeduita Del Medio (563 ft.)Living Wisdom School (270 ft.)
19 Palo Alto Unocal 835 San Antonio Rd 94303 Smog Pros Arco (129 ft.)Kehilah Jewish High School (1032 ft.), Meira Academy (159 ft.)
20 Red Brick Café 235 University Ave 94301 Walgreens (University)(365ft.),
Mac's Smoke Shop (431 ft.)None
21 Smog Pros Arco 840 San Antonio Rd 94303 Palo Alto Unocal (129 ft.)Meira Academy (350 ft.)
22 Smokes & More 3896 El Camino Real 94306
Ernie's Liquor (202 ft.), Palo Alto Chevron (164 ft.),
Jim Davis Valero (312 ft.), B&P Florist & Plants (91 ft.)
Keys Family Day School (Middle) (553 ft.
23 Smokes & Vapes 3491 El Camino Real 94306 Driftwood Deli & Market (128 ft.), Barron Park Shell (369 ft.)None
24 Valero Corner Store #3804 705 San Antonio Rd 94303 Palo Alto Arco (83 ft.)Greendell School (484 ft.);
Gideon Hausner Jewish Day School (965 ft.)
25 Valero of Palo Alto 1963 El Camino Real 94306 None Living Wisdom School (576 ft.)
Pharmacy Name Street Address Zip Code 500 ft. of retailers 1,000 ft. of schools
1 Safeway Store #1682 2811 Middlefield Rd 94306 7-11 (Colorado Ave.) (0 ft.), Walgreens (Middlefield) (702 ft.)Keys Family Day School (Elementary) (308 ft.)
2 Walgreens #03344 4170 El Camino Real 94306 None None
3 Walgreens #06869 2605 Middlefield Rd 94306 7-11 (Colorado Ave.) (683 ft.), Safeway (Middlefield) (702 ft.)None
4 Walgreens #13596 300 University Ave 94301 Red Brick Café (365 ft.), Mac's Smoke Shop (628 ft.), 7-11 (Waverley) (614 ft.)None
The proposed Tobacco Retail Permit Ordinance would prohibit the sale of tobacco products at all pharmacies and require all tobacco retailers to have a Tobacco Retail Permit effective July 1, 2018. See
table below for a list of current pharmacies included. All other ordinance requirements would go into effect January 1, 2019. Tobacco retail establishments would be required to maintain a distance of 500 feet from other tobacco retailers and a distance of 1,000 feet from schools, parks and playgrounds. Most existing businesses that are in operation before the effective date of the ordinance would be exempt from these distance
requirements until there is a change in ownership at which time the new owner would be subject to all Tobacco Retail Permit proximity requirements. For more information visit cityofpaloalto.org/smokingordinance.
Palo Alto Tobacco Retailer List
Location Proximity to Schools and Other Existing Tobacco Retailers (Mapped July 2017)
September 11, 2107
The Honorable Greg Scharff
Mayor
250 Hamilton Avenue
Palo Alto, CA 94301
Re: September 18, 2017 City Council Agenda
Item re: Tobacco Retail License Ordinance
Dear Mayor Scharff:
I write on behalf of the American Petroleum and Convenience Store Association
(APCA), a grassroots organization of independent gasoline and convenience store
owners located throughout the state of California to express our concerns and
recommend amendments to the draft ordinance that would establish a Tobacco
Retail License requirement in the City of Palo Alto.
Let me begin by stating that APCA does not object to local tobacco licensing
ordinances so long as they do not impose unreasonably high license fees and do not
contain sales restrictions that create unnecessary regulatory burdens on our
members. The ordinance before the City Council includes provisions that will harm
the law-abiding retailers in Palo Alto and in some cases, cause great economic harm
and even business failure.
That is why we respectfully request that the City Council make the following
amendments to the ordinance:
1. Delete the flavored tobacco ban (Sec. 4.64.030(h))
2. Amend Sec. 4.64.030(j) to comply with California state law that exempts
active duty military from Age 21; and
3. And add a grandfather provision under Sec. 4.64.030 that will allow existing
tobacco retailers within 500 feet of another retailer or 1,000 feet from a
school to sell, through an arm’s length transaction, to a new owner.
We believe the sales restrictions in the draft ordinance go too far, especially given
the state laws enacted last year related to tobacco including raising the minimum
age to purchase tobacco products to age 21 and regulating e-cigarettes as tobacco
products and existing city regulations governing gas stations.
Your municipal code already prohibits automobile service stations from selling food
or grocery items or alcoholic beverages except for prepackaged soft drinks,
cigarettes and snack foods either from automatic vending machines or in shelves
occupying a floor area not to exceed forty square feet.
Banning the sale of all flavored tobacco products would further diminish the already
limited number of items that service stations can sell. We have spoken to retailers
in the unincorporated area of Santa Clara County about the impact the flavor ban
has had on their business. These businesses have reported a decline in overall sales
as their adult customers, who can no longer purchase the tobacco products they
desire, have taken their business to stores outside the County where there are no
flavor bans. We also know that the County’s TRL ordinance has depressed the
overall value of businesses when owners have sold their businesses to a new owner.
Retailers operate on thin profit margins and the loss of important products can
mean going out of business. Should Palo Alto adopt the County tobacco retail license
ordinance, it will create an uneven playing field for existing businesses in the City as
customers can easily go to retailers in neighboring cities to purchase tobacco. It will
also give the smoke shops in Palo Alto a competitive advantage over gas stations,
corner markets and convenience stores. We find this particularly troublesome
given the fact that the California Department of Public Health has noted that smoke
shops have the highest rate of sales to minors. Last year, these stores had an illegal
sales rate of 31.8%.
We urge the Council to amend the TRL ordinance to protect small businesses in Palo
Alto.
Sincerely,
Manraj Natt
Chairman
cc: City Council
City Attorney
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/18/2017 12:44 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:celia chow <celia.cchow@gmail.com>
Sent:Friday, September 15, 2017 10:04 AM
To:Atkinson, Rebecca
Cc:Council, City; Gitelman, Hillary; Stump, Molly; Architectural Review Board
Subject:A formal request for information regarding Verizon's applications
Hi Rebecca,
This is Celia Chow. I wrote to you on July 24 in regards to the proposed project file #17PLN-00228.
With my current understanding, there are 3 Verizon applications and I would like to know where the
shot clock stands on each of cluster of Verizon’s applications to install small cell sites in Palo Also. If
there are more than three clusters now, I would like to get the shot clock information on all of
them. And if other cell companies have now filed applications, I would like the same information for
those applications.
Thank you for your attention to my formal request.
Celia Chow
celia.cchow@gmail.com
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/18/2017 1:05 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Palo Alto Free Press <paloaltofreepress@gmail.com>
Sent:Saturday, September 16, 2017 6:26 PM
To:Brian Welch; Watson, Ron; Council, City; Reifschneider, James; Keene, James; Perron,
Zachary; Wagner, April; jrosen@da.sccgov.org; Jay Boyarsky; Scharff, Greg; Kniss, Liz
(external)
Subject:Daniel C. Okonhwo
Attachments:Daniel C. Okonhwo.pdf
What evidence presented? What was the evidence? Explain the statement "No charges will be filed at this time" When did you figure or believe the time would come? Brian! Your an attorney..... Would you like me to tell you based on a recorded statement from former police chief Lynne Johnson when that time would come? Brian! Speak up! Don't be a coward.... Like the others Brian... Be a man!
Mark Petersen-Perez Sent from my iPad
Counfy of Santa Clara
Office of the District Attorney
270 Grant Avenue
Palo Alto. California 94306
(650) 324-6400
w\ /vv.santaclara-da. org
George w. Kennedy
District Attorney
Mr. Mark Scott Peterson
434 Addison Ave
Palo Alto, ca 94301
Re: PAPD #04-182-0110
Dear Mr. Peterson,
Based on the evidence presented to our office up to this point, no charges will be filed at
this time.
;"1,ff"(/
Daniel C. Okonhwo
Deputy District AttorneY
cc. Palo Alto Police
t/tvl ,lo, I'V
C r.ruFt deucr+ (
Department
e
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/18/2017 2:59 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Palo Alto Free Press <paloaltofreepress@gmail.com>
Sent:Friday, September 15, 2017 12:04 PM
To:Council, City; Scharff, Greg; Kniss, Liz (external)
Cc:darylsavage@gmail.com; Watson, Ron; Keene, James; Reifschneider, James; Keith,
Claudia
Subject:Daryl Savage - Policy Against Arbitrary Discrimination
Attachments:ORD 4795.pdf
Ms. Savage:
How many times did I address HRC concerning our unfair discriminatory treatment of non-equal media access as a minority latino start-up news reporting agency? http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/20270
You ignored the very city policy YOU helped create.
Mark Petersen-Perez
Sent from my iPhone
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/18/2017 1:07 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Palo Alto Free Press <paloaltofreepress@gmail.com>
Sent:Sunday, September 17, 2017 6:49 AM
To:Scharff, Greg; Kniss, Liz (external); Council, City; Watson, Ron; Bonilla, Robert; David
Angel; Ryan, Dan; Reifschneider, James; jrosen@da.sccgov.org; Lum, Patty; Keith,
Claudia; Jay Boyarsky; Bullerjahn, Rich; Philip, Brian; stephen.connolly@oirgroup.com;
michael.gennaco@oirgroup.com; Perron, Zachary; Press strong; James Aram
Subject:Dismantle PAPD - Tweet by Palo Alto Free Press on Twitter
Palo Alto Free Press (@PAFreePress)
9/17/17, 7:45 AM
Tom Nolan TOP #PaloAlto criminal defense attorney speaks out against @PaloAltoPolice PAPD should be
dismantled IPA @MGennaco fired twitter.com/pafreepress/st…
Download the Twitter app
Sent from my iPhone
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/18/2017 1:06 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com>
Sent:Sunday, September 17, 2017 12:08 AM
To:chuck jagoda; bhushans@aol.com; Kniss, Liz (internal); Council, City;
citycouncil@menlopark.org; dcbertini@menlopark.org; RJonsen@menlopark.org;
council@redwoodcity.org
Subject:Donald Trump Is the First White President - The Atlantic
https://www.theatlantic.com/amp/article/537909/
Sent from my iPhone
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/20/2017 11:03 AM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Palo Alto Free Press <paloaltofreepress@gmail.com>
Sent:Tuesday, September 19, 2017 7:00 PM
To:Lum, Patty
Cc:Watson, Ron; Keene, James; Council, City; Perron, Zachary; Reifschneider, James; Jay
Boyarsky; jrosen@da.sccgov.org; Brian Welch; Philip, Brian; James Aram
Subject:Elder Abuse - Record should reflect over 6k
We reset total. This will remained pinned until your gone! I'll be back to picket the streets of a Palo Alto Lump of human flesh
Sent from my iPhone
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/18/2017 1:13 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Palo Alto Free Press <paloaltofreepress@gmail.com>
Sent:Monday, September 18, 2017 11:58 AM
To:Lum, Patty
Cc:Council, City; Watson, Ron; Perron, Zachary; Keith, Claudia; Cullen, Charles;
council@redwoodcity.org; Jay Boyarsky; Philip, Brian; Brian Welch;
jrosen@da.sccgov.org; Reifschneider, James; HRC
Subject:Elder abuse a new Twitter Record > 4000k
turn in your badge and weapon ms lump or human flesh
mark
Sent from my iPhone
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/18/2017 1:03 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Palo Alto Free Press <paloaltofreepress@gmail.com>
Sent:Saturday, September 16, 2017 10:55 AM
To:Lum, Patty
Cc:Council, City; Scharff, Greg; Kniss, Liz (external); Watson, Ron; Perron, Zachary;
Reifschneider, James; Keene, James; Philip, Brian; Brian Welch; David Angel;
DOkonkwo@da.sccgov.org; jrosen@da.sccgov.org; Jay Boyarsky
Subject:Elder Abuser - Resign Turn In Your Weapon and Badge
No room for you in any law enforcement agency. As an elder abuser...And you should be decertified
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/18/2017 1:03 PM
2
Sent from my iPad
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/18/2017 12:39 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Roberta Ahlquist <roberta.ahlquist@sjsu.edu>
Sent:Wednesday, September 13, 2017 4:43 PM
To:Council, City; cityofpaloalto@cityofpaloalto.org
Subject:Fwd: Are we keeping a focus on Mtn. View housing issues?
Dear Council People and City Manager
From: WILPF Peninsula Palo Alto <wilpf.peninsula.paloalto@gmail.com> Date: Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 1:30 PM
Subject: we keeping a focus on Mtn. View housing issues
This city is implementing rent control. Why is Palo Alto dragging its feet?
Roberta Ahlquist
: https://www.mv-voice.com/news/2017/09/05/rental-committee-sets-system-for-super-cheap-housing
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/18/2017 1:02 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>
Sent:Saturday, September 16, 2017 5:30 PM
To:Dan Richard; Daniel Zack; robert.andersen; David Balakian; beachrides; bballpod;
bmcewen; bearwithme1016@att.net; dennisbalakian; Doug Vagim; Paul Dictos; Cathy
Lewis; CityManager; paul.caprioglio; Council, City; esmeralda.soria@fresno.gov;
firstvp@fresnopoa.org; Raymond Rivas; fmerlo@wildelectric.net; Steven Feinstein;
Greg.Gatzka; huidentalsanmateo; steve.hogg; hennessy; info@superide1.com; Irv
Weissman; jboren; johnhutson580; Jason Tarvin; Joel Stiner; kfsndesk; kclark; leager;
Mark Kreutzer; Mayor; midge@thebarretts.com; Mark Standriff; mmt4@pge.com;
newsdesk; nick yovino; newsdesk; clinton.olivier; oliver.baines; steve.brandau;
pavenjitdhillon@yahoo.com; popoff; rosenheim@kpix.cbs.com;
russ@topperjewelers.com; richard.wenzel; Steve Wayte; terry;
thomas.esqueda@fresno.gov
Subject:Fwd: Six bills passed by Assembly last nite gut local zoning laws- want criminals near
you?
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> Date: Sat, Sep 16, 2017 at 5:07 PM
Subject: Fwd: Six bills passed by Assembly last nite gut local zoning laws- want criminals near you?
To: Doug Vagim <dvagim@gmail.com>
Sat. 9-16-2017
Doug- Before the sun goes down today, let me suggest this too. Governor Brown and the State of California
should be sued in federal court over this attempt to abrogate the right of local citizens through their local city and county governments to control growth per se and the character of the growth that occurs in our communities. We do that through zoning, and it is a fundamental tool for protecting ourselves and our property.
It is a fundamental right.
For the State legislature and Governor of California, probably at the behest of corrupt, bribe-paying developers, to sweep away the protections which millions of Californians have enacted through the zoning and planning processes, is an injurious, high-handed assault on the home owners of California. Whether they can do
this, in the dead of night, and at the behest of a bribe-paying coterie of developers, is a proposition which should
be tested in the light of the protections which we enjoy under the constitutions of the State of California and of
the United States. Let us defeat SB 3 when it appears on the state-wide ballot in 2018, and let us insist on corruption
investigations with respect to the votes on the bills that just passed the legislature regarding "affordable
housing". But before then, let us initiate a lawsuit in federal court to test the constitutionality of what the
legislature did this past week in the name of "affordable housing", especially the constitutionality of the State of California weakening, which means defeating, the zoning process of local governments in California. We have
protections to our lives and properties in our state and Federal constitutions, and the close votes in the
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/18/2017 1:02 PM
2
legislature, probably lubricated by substantial bribes, must pass muster with regard to those protections. A
lawsuit in federal court is the way to see if they do.
L. William Harding
Fresno, Ca.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>
Date: Sat, Sep 16, 2017 at 10:50 AM
Subject: Fwd: Six bills passed by Assembly last nite gut local zoning laws- want criminals near you?
To: dennisbalakian <dennisbalakian@sbcglobal.net>, David Balakian <davidbalakian@sbcglobal.net>
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>
Date: Sat, Sep 16, 2017 at 10:48 AM Subject: Fwd: Six bills passed by Assembly last nite gut local zoning laws- want criminals near you?
To: kfsndesk <kfsndesk@abc.com>, newsdesk <newsdesk@cbs47.tv>, rosenheim@kpix.cbs.com, Raymond
Rivas <financialadvisor007@gmail.com>, beachrides <beachrides@sbcglobal.net>, bmcewen
<bmcewen@fresnobee.com>, bballpod <bballpod@aol.com>, Cathy Lewis <catllewis@gmail.com>,
"city.council" <city.council@cityofpaloalto.org>, fmerlo@wildelectric.net, Steven Feinstein <steven.feinstein@ionicmaterials.com>, "Greg.Gatzka" <Greg.Gatzka@co.kings.ca.us>, "steve.hogg"
<steve.hogg@fresno.gov>, hennessy <hennessy@stanford.edu>, info@superide1.com, Irv Weissman
<irv@stanford.edu>, Joel Stiner <jastiner@gmail.com>, jboren <jboren@fresnobee.com>, johnhutson580
<johnhutson580@msn.com>, kclark <kclark@westlandswater.org>, midge@thebarretts.com, mmt4@pge.com,
pavenjitdhillon@yahoo.com, russ@topperjewelers.com, "richard.wenzel" <richard.wenzel@aecom.com>, terry <terry@terrynagel.com>, Steve Wayte <steve4liberty@gmail.com>, Doug Vagim <dvagim@gmail.com>,
Mayor <mayor@fresno.gov>, CityManager <citymanager@fresno.gov>, "paul.caprioglio"
<paul.caprioglio@fresno.gov>, esmeralda.soria@fresno.gov, Mark Standriff <mark.standriff@fresno.gov>,
leager <leager@fresnoedc.com>, firstvp@fresnopoa.org
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>
Date: Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 11:58 PM
Subject: Fwd: Six bills passed by Assembly last nite gut local zoning laws- want criminals near you? To: Doug Vagim <dvagim@gmail.com>, Mayor <mayor@fresno.gov>, CityManager
<citymanager@fresno.gov>, "paul.caprioglio" <paul.caprioglio@fresno.gov>, esmeralda.soria@fresno.gov,
Mark Standriff <mark.standriff@fresno.gov>, Mark Kreutzer <mlkreutzer@yahoo.com>, huidentalsanmateo
<huidentalsanmateo@gmail.com>, Dan Richard <danrichard@mac.com>, Daniel Zack
<daniel.zack@fresno.gov>, terry <terry@terrynagel.com>, Paul Dictos <paul@dictos.com>, nick yovino <npyovino@gmail.com>, "robert.andersen" <robert.andersen@fresno.gov>, Steve Wayte
<steve4liberty@gmail.com>, dennisbalakian <dennisbalakian@sbcglobal.net>, David Balakian
<davidbalakian@sbcglobal.net>
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/18/2017 1:02 PM
3
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> Date: Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 10:59 PM
Subject: Fwd: Six bills passed by Assembly last nite gut local zoning laws- want criminals near you?
Want your neighborhood ruined? Well, your state legislature just voted to arrange it. Utter corruption by a
bunch of scum. Is this N.J. or Massachusetts? One might think it is. Maybe even Maryland.
To: Doug Vagim <dvagim@gmail.com>
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>
Date: Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 10:53 PM
Subject: Fwd: Six bills passed by Assembly last nite gut local zoning laws- want criminals near you?
To: Doug Vagim <dvagim@gmail.com>
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>
Date: Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 10:50 PM Subject: Fwd: Six bills passed by Assembly last nite gut local zoning laws- want criminals near you?
To: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>
Date: Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 10:45 PM
Subject: Fwd: Six bills passed by Assembly last nite gut local zoning laws- want criminals near you?
To: Doug Vagim <dvagim@gmail.com>
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>
Date: Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 10:43 PM
Subject: Fwd: Six bills passed by Assembly last nite gut local zoning laws- want criminals near you? To: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> Date: Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 10:41 PM
Subject: Fwd: Six bills passed by Assembly last nite gut local zoning laws- want criminals near you?
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/18/2017 1:02 PM
4
To: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>
Doug- See below for analysis of what the state senate passed today.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>
Date: Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 10:34 PM Subject: Fwd: Six bills passed by Assembly last nite gut local zoning laws- want criminals near you? To: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>
Date: Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 10:11 PM
Subject: Fwd: Six bills passed by Assembly last nite gut local zoning laws- want criminals near you?
To: terry <terry@terrynagel.com>, firstvp@fresnopoa.org, Raymond Rivas <financialadvisor007@gmail.com>,
Cathy Lewis <catllewis@gmail.com>, Paul Dictos <paul@dictos.com>, info@superide1.com, leager <leager@fresnoedc.com>, nick yovino <npyovino@gmail.com>, pavenjitdhillon@yahoo.com,
russ@topperjewelers.com, thomas.esqueda@fresno.gov, Mayor <mayor@fresno.gov>, CityManager
<citymanager@fresno.gov>, Doug Vagim <dvagim@gmail.com>, Dan Richard <danrichard@mac.com>,
Daniel Zack <daniel.zack@fresno.gov>, esmeralda.soria@fresno.gov, "paul.caprioglio"
<paul.caprioglio@fresno.gov>, Mark Standriff <mark.standriff@fresno.gov>, Mark Kreutzer <mlkreutzer@yahoo.com>
Friday night, Sept 15, 2017
To all- It is not clear as yet what these bills will do and how they will impact neighborhoods zoned for single family homes. We will, no doubt, hear a LOT in the news about this, especially if the Governor signs it
all into law. We just won't hear about it on the local TV stations in Fresno, owned by the developers,
apparently. Last night, not one word about it there.
If this stuff is going to sweep away our zoning laws to allow developers to ruin our neighborhoods with lots of profitable affordable housing, we, the victims, can mount a no-nonsense drive to remove the scum who
passed this in Sacramento and install people who will repeal it all forthwith.
But a caveat: I am funny about my home. People for miles around in Fresno know that.
But let us not let this pass, if it does damage our neighborhoods. Let's seek corruption trials for the bastards
who voted for this and for the bastard developers who bribed them to do so. Even with prison over-crowding,
there is still room in California prisons for a few dozen members of the legislature and the scumbags who
bribed them.
Doug- Click here on "Senate Floor Analysis of 9-15-2017:
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billAnalysisClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180SB35
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/18/2017 1:02 PM
5
Then, scroll down to "Background" and see the middle of Item 1 This passage sets out existing law!! "in
addition, before building new housing,....." It talks about complying with zoning laws.
BUT then see item 2, about THIS bill. "Creating streamlined approval process for infill projects" !!! Here is the new law, what the scumbag developers paid big bribes to get passed.
Doug- Did you realize that the California Statehouse is a whorehouse?
Johnson murdered 33,000 young American men. Nixon then murdered 25,000 more. That was a litmus test:
"If the people will stand for that, we can do anything to them". Neither one of them ever tried to murder me,
though. Maybe I had a reputation even then. I can be a complete son of a bitch. I'm a Dane, and they are famous
for their tempers, so I REALLY keep mine in check, and that deceives people.
LWH Fresno, Ca.
On Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 11:34 AM, Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> wrote:
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>
Date: Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 11:31 AM
Subject: Fwd: Six bills passed by Assembly last nite gut local zoning laws- want criminals near you? To: "city.council" <city.council@cityofpaloalto.org>
Friday, Sept. 15, 2017
Palo Alto City Council-
Here is something which does impact Palo Alto and which is something the Palo Alto City Council can do
something about, if only to urge the Governor to veto these bills or promise to oppose any member of the
legislature who votes for them.
If all of this passes, I think you'll be hearing from angry Palo Altoans wanting to know what you did to
protect their homes.
This sure has a "dead of night" flavor about it.
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/18/2017 1:02 PM
6
I notice that Palo Alto is not on the list of cities that opposed this. People are funny about their homes, so I
think all of you on the Council will wish you had opposed it, especially when Palo Alto homeowners find out
you did not oppose this and make you former councilmen. The Mayor should be fired too, and will be. Mt. View opposed this. Be prepared for a firestorm of opposition in Palo Alto when home owners there find out
what has happened here, with your blessing, or at least acquiescence.
L. William Harding
Fresno, Ca.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>
Date: Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 11:04 AM Subject: Fwd: Six bills passed by Assembly last nite gut local zoning laws- want criminals near you?
To: Doug Vagim <dvagim@gmail.com>, dennisbalakian <dennisbalakian@sbcglobal.net>, David Balakian
<davidbalakian@sbcglobal.net>, Dan Richard <danrichard@mac.com>, Daniel Zack
<daniel.zack@fresno.gov>, esmeralda.soria@fresno.gov, "paul.caprioglio" <paul.caprioglio@fresno.gov>,
Mayor <mayor@fresno.gov>, CityManager <citymanager@fresno.gov>, "robert.andersen" <robert.andersen@fresno.gov>, Mark Standriff <mark.standriff@fresno.gov>, Joel Stiner
<jastiner@gmail.com>, Steve Wayte <steve4liberty@gmail.com>, "steve.hogg" <steve.hogg@fresno.gov>,
Mark Kreutzer <mlkreutzer@yahoo.com>, huidentalsanmateo <huidentalsanmateo@gmail.com>, kfsndesk
<kfsndesk@abc.com>, newsdesk <newsdesk@cbs47.tv>, rosenheim@kpix.cbs.com, beachrides
<beachrides@sbcglobal.net>
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>
Date: Fri, Sep 15, 2017 at 10:51 AM Subject: Six bills passed by Assembly last nite gut local zoning laws- want criminals near you?
To: Doug Vagim <dvagim@gmail.com>
Friday, Sept. 15, 2017
Doug- KCBS says six bills passed the Assembly last night that would "ease local "regulations" re
housing". The editors at KCBS have never heard of "zoning laws". Regulations, they say. This all seems to
gut our zoning laws so crooked developers can build big apartment buildings in neighborhoods now zoned for
single family housing.
http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-ca-housing-bills-pass-assembly-20170914-
story.html?utm_source=Morning+Roundup&utm_campaign=96938364be-
EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2017_09_15&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_165ffe36b2-96938364be-
78450701&mc_cid=96938364be&mc_eid=7afa3a94f3
If all this passes, and the legislature does adjourn today, when the weather is really fine in the south of
France, I think you can expect lots of new affordable apartment buildings going up near your home, with all of
the added traffic, cars parked on the street, loud parties, shootings, drug dealing, and the big surge in assaults,
robberies, murders, rapes, burglaries, kidnappings, child molestations and arsons that that will bring. BUT,
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/18/2017 1:02 PM
7
your friends the developers will be able to further enrich themselves by ruining your neighborhood, so some
good will come out of this.
If you don't like the cost of housing in California, the Office of Admissions at Stanford opens its mail five
days per week. Apply, get accepted, and get a degree from Stanford at the age of twenty-one, the way I did.
That too leads to affordable housing.
We should see major criminal investigations for bribe offering by developers and bribe taking by members of the California legislature if these bills pass. If they do pass, Governor Brown should veto them.
Local zoning laws are immoral and just wrong, apparently. Home-owners have no rights. Why not pass
some bills that outlaw city planning departments and local planning commissions? Let's just outlaw zoning and
let the developers have at us?
I suspect that the big developer in the sky put California's developers up to this. If these bills fail to pass or
the Governor vetoes them, we can probably expect WH executive orders turning the developers loose on us.
The only good part about this is that it will ruin the neighborhoods of rich Republican scum, as well as the neighborhoods of the rest of us. But, they probably have gentlemen's agreements with the local developers to
put their affordable housing in the neighborhoods of the suckers, the little people who, by all indications, do
not know how to fight back. The little people have produced some stunning surprises down though history,
however.
I think the California legislature just made a serious mistake.
L. William Harding
Fresno, Ca.
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/19/2017 4:30 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Marianne McKissock <mck333@gmail.com>
Sent:Tuesday, September 19, 2017 11:33 AM
To:Keene, James; Mello, Joshuah; Corrao, Christopher; Gitelman, Hillary; Council, City; Kou,
Lydia
Cc:Ruth Satterthwaite; Marianne McKissock; Kathleen M Eisenhardt; evahgal@gmail.com;
Dave Tanaka; James Colton; Tomas Kong; Furman, Sheri; Anne Lumsdaine; Cindy
Ziebelman; jihirschpa@earthlink.net
Subject:Lack of Followup by City Staff
It has been over 3 weeks and I have not heard any answers to the following:
Lydia Kou and my request for a formal meeting/workgroup to find some sensible solutions for the traffic problems and plans to reduce the number of redundant signs and street paint markings that have actually
resulted in less safe conditions.
An answer as to what person or department is responsible for monitoring the traffic cameras in the
neighborhood. Also a summary of what data they have collected and how it is used.
It is time to remove the ugly slime green paint, red painted gutters and minimize both the size and number of
bicycle markings in order to follow the stated city policy of having marking consistent with the character of
residential neighborhoods. This is especially critical since they original actions were taken by bureaucratic and technocratic groups with no notification nor involvement with the neighbors who have to live with this fiasco
24/7.
Many letters/emails have been written to the city council and city staff but I am attaching a couple relating to
this repeated request.
Marianne McKissock
Donald Drive.
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/19/2017 4:30 PM
2
***************************
Copy of Lydia Kou letter of 8/23/2017
On Aug 23, 2017, at 3:09 PM, Lydia Kou <kou.pacc@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Everyone,
I think at this point emailing staff is not going to go anywhere. So, I sent the email below to Jim Keene (City Manager). Everyone
of you should also be writing Council city.council@cityofpaloalto.org . If you have videos and pictures, include it.
Eva, your DAD is actually "tactical urbanism" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tactical_urbanism. They'd like to call it short term
action for long term changes, however it is the method they push forth. It is all DAD and it is a wait and see game of how long
before the opposition backs down. It doesn't matter it deteriorates your quality of life or peace, it is the good for all... in the name
of climate change.
Kind regards,
Lydia
--------
Lydia Kou
My LinkedIn Profile
(650) 996-0028 | Email
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Lydia Kou <lydiakou@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 2:52 PM
Subject: Fwd: Continue issues on Donald due to highly confusing and poorly planned markings on Donald;Proposed Bicycle
Markings on Georgia Avenue between the path to Gunn, past Hiubbartt to Arastradero
To: "Keene, James" <James.Keene@cityofpaloalto.org>
Cc: kou.pacc@gmail.com
Jim,
I think at this point Staff responding by email is not working. These emails have been going on since about 2 weeks before
school started. While it was generous of Chris to offer to meet each person who would like to speak to him when he was out
inspecting the paint job for the bike boxes on Donald Avenue, it also conflicted with many who may not be available. I know I
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/19/2017 4:30 PM
3
couldn't stop by during the time provided because I was at work. Furthermore, the claims of community meetings is true and the
residents inputs were taken back for consideration, however, I don't remember Staff coming back to the community with the final
proposal.
During the second and third day of school, I watched the student bicyclists weave in and out of obstacles (cars, pedestrians and
other bicyclists) and go even onto the wrong side of the road with the possibility of a car making a right turn any minute and not
seeing the bicyclist. As for the parents, they obstruct traffic by doing a drop off near the intersection causing confusion for the
cars and bikes behind them. Then, of course, there are the U-turners.
I would highly recommend a neighbourhood meeting is coordinated to hear what the residents living near all these
"improvement" have to offer since they live with the experiences day in and out.
Please consider.
Kind regards,
Lydia
--------
Lydia Kou
***********************
Copy of M. McKissock letter of 8/29/2017
Copy of letter sent to Palo Alto City Council and Staff
The 41xx block of Donald Drive now has nearly 40 traffic markers including:
13 Signs
17 painted road mark
Plus lane divider marks, green bicycle box, green bicycle path and red gutter
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/19/2017 4:30 PM
4
Also there are 2 traffic cameras plus their signs.
That is excessive for one residential block and has done nothing to improve the traffic, bicycle behavior or safety. In fact is it is much worst now with the blocked visibility and narrowing of lanes near Arastradero.
What department/person is responsible for monitoring the cameras and what have they shown? Is there a summary or report
available?
It is time to stop cluttering up our residential neighborhood by throwing more signs and paint on the problem. Most of this should be removed. This needs to be addressed in a sensible matter, which includes input from the neighborhood instead of just bureaucratic
groups.
Marianne McKissock
Donald Drive
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/18/2017 12:43 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Chris A. Malachowsky <chris@malachowsky.com>
Sent:Thursday, September 14, 2017 7:17 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Letter of Intent with Pets in Need
We are writing to object and raise a red flag over the verbiage in the recently signed letter of intent with Pets‐in‐Need (PIN) to
take over operation of the Palo Alto Animal Services (PAAS). In Attachment D, Section 2, Letter C ‐ PIN and the City will
mutually draft policies and procedures that may limit the intake of animals for the purpose of improving animal care and to
operate the shelter as a “No Kill” shelter, a fundamental principle of PIN.”. This is a direct contradiction to what the
community was assured wouldn’t be the case when the transition was being discussed. Please do not go back on your word.
I urge you to mandate PIN to continue offering all of the services PAAS does and to care for all of the animals presented to
them from with in their jurisdiction. Basically, this means being an open‐door, full‐service animal shelter and accepting all(!)
animals while always maintaining the operation as a “No Kill” shelter.
Sincerely,
Melody and Chris Malachowsky
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/19/2017 4:29 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Ron Celaya <roncelaya@hotmail.com>
Sent:Tuesday, September 19, 2017 11:15 AM
To:Council, City
Subject:Message from the City Council Home Page
Dear PA City Council members:
We have been residents here in PA for almost 22 years. We are certainly aware that there will always be changes in a
small city like ours, especially in the heart of Silicon Valley however the changes over the past five years don’t seem to fit
the spirit of our city. It seems as we have sold the soul of the city to developers and hi‐tech companies that now make
up most of the local culture. Years ago we loved to walk downtown to enjoy our town but we simply don’t do it any
longer. We don’t even mind waiting for a table at a restaurant or coffee shop…it’s the fact that our little city looks like
every other ‘super‐suburb." We never thought of selling and moving out of the state and now we are. The town has
simply lost its charm and has become a vanilla suburb town.
I’m really disappointed that I no longer like my / our town.
The city limits sign should now read:
City of Palo Alto ‐ Sponsored by Palantir (& others)
Bummed resident of PA
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/19/2017 4:28 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:ANDREA B SMITH <andreabsmith@sbcglobal.net>
Sent:Monday, September 18, 2017 8:23 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Message from the City Council Home Page
It is not necessary to be rude, Mr. Mayor, to Karen Holman. She’s right about consistency.
You are showing your biases when you are not consistent. And you have lots of biases.
Andrea Smith
194 Walter hays Drive
Palo Alto
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/18/2017 12:40 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Keene, James
Sent:Wednesday, September 13, 2017 7:00 PM
To:Filseth, Eric (external); 'Penny Ellson'; Council, City; De Geus, Robert
Subject:Re: 2017-18 PAUSD Enrollment Report
Will have to wait and see if that is an ongoing trend.
James Keene | City Manager
250 Hamilton Avenue | Palo Alto, CA 94301
E: james.keene@cityofpaloalto.org
Sent from my Macbook
Please think of the environment before printing this email – Thank you
From: Eric Filseth <efilseth@gmail.com>
Date: Tuesday, September 12, 2017 at 3:37 PM
To: James Keene <James.Keene@CityofPaloAlto.org>, "pellson@pacbell.net" <pellson@pacbell.net>, "Council,
City" <city.council@cityofpaloalto.org>, Robert De Geus <Robert.DeGeus@CityofPaloAlto.org>
Subject: RE: 2017‐18 PAUSD Enrollment Report
Todd tells me K was actually UP slightly this year even though K‐5 was down.
From: Keene, James [mailto:James.Keene@CityofPaloAlto.org]
Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2017 2:50 PM
To: Filseth, Eric (external); 'Penny Ellson'; Council, City; De Geus, Robert
Subject: Re: 2017-18 PAUSD Enrollment Report
Thanks!
James Keene | City Manager
250 Hamilton Avenue | Palo Alto, CA 94301
E: james.keene@cityofpaloalto.org
Sent from my Macbook
Please think of the environment before printing this email – Thank you
From: Eric Filseth <efilseth@gmail.com>
Date: Tuesday, September 12, 2017 at 1:51 PM
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/18/2017 12:40 PM
2
To: "pellson@pacbell.net" <pellson@pacbell.net>, "Council, City" <city.council@cityofpaloalto.org>, James
Keene <James.Keene@CityofPaloAlto.org>, Robert De Geus <Robert.DeGeus@CityofPaloAlto.org>
Subject: RE: 2017‐18 PAUSD Enrollment Report
I hadn’t – thanks. We’re supposed to see it at city‐school mtg next week.
Slight decline in Elementary – is good. Yes an increase in high school, but the Elementary one is most important.
Eric
From: Penny Ellson [mailto:pellson@pacbell.net]
Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2017 11:18 AM
To: 'Council, City'; 'Keene, James'; 'De Geus, Robert'
Subject: 2017-18 PAUSD Enrollment Report
PAUSD has released the 2017-18 14th Day Enrollment Report. See Agenda item 5.B. here.
http://www.boarddocs.com/ca/pausd/Board.nsf/goto?open&id=AQHSHV72A6ED
Given the discussion of PAUSD enrollment needs last night, I thought you might be interested in this
annual update on enrollment trends.
Best,
Penny
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/19/2017 4:29 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Minor, Beth
Sent:Tuesday, September 19, 2017 10:21 AM
To:Palo Alto Free Press; Carnahan, David
Cc:Perez, Lalo; Keene, James; Stump, Molly; Keith, Claudia; Council, City; Scharff, Greg;
Kniss, Liz (external)
Subject:RE: CALPers Funding / General Fund Resolution attached
Mark, I just sent you the response of yes.
Thanks,
B‐
Beth D. Minor | City Clerk | City of Palo Alto
250 Hamilton Avenue| Palo Alto, CA 94301
T: 650‐ 329‐2379 E: beth.minor@cityofpaloalto.org
City Clerks Rock and Rule
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐
From: Palo Alto Free Press [mailto:paloaltofreepress@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2017 7:49 AM
To: Minor, Beth <Beth.Minor@CityofPaloAlto.org>
Cc: Perez, Lalo <Lalo.Perez@CityofPaloAlto.org>; Keene, James <James.Keene@CityofPaloAlto.org>; Stump, Molly
<Molly.Stump@CityofPaloAlto.org>; Keith, Claudia <Claudia.Keith@CityofPaloAlto.org>; Council, City
<city.council@cityofpaloalto.org>; Scharff, Greg <gregscharff@aol.com>; Kniss, Liz (external) <lizkniss@earthlink.net>
Subject: Re: CALPers Funding / General Fund Resolution attached
According to Molly Stump If you require a CPRA request we will comply... Ongoing prohibition of equal media access...
thanks,
mark
Sent from my iPhone
> On Sep 19, 2017, at 8:45 AM, Palo Alto Free Press <paloaltofreepress@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Beth:
>
> Did city council approve this resolution?
>
>
> http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/55487
>
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/19/2017 4:29 PM
2
>
> Sent from my iPhone
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/18/2017 3:00 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Palo Alto Free Press <paloaltofreepress@gmail.com>
Sent:Sunday, September 17, 2017 4:49 AM
To:Scharff, Greg
Cc:Council, City; darylsavage@gmail.com; Watson, Ron; Perron, Zachary; Kniss, Liz
(external); HRC; Press strong; Keene, James; James Aram; Reifschneider, James; Philip,
Brian; Jay Boyarsky; jrosen@da.sccgov.org
Subject:Re: Donald Mendoza -Tweet by Palo Alto Free Press on Twitter
This bogus proclamation touches my very eyeball to the point of watering endlessly...a continuous
irritant. Savage was a police informant OMG...and screened the secret Police Committee Members / candidates and once rejected Palo Alto defense Attorney Tom Nolan
Mark
Sent from my iPad
On Sep 17, 2017, at 5:19 AM, Palo Alto Free Press <paloaltofreepress@gmail.com> wrote:
Have you ever, ever even attended an HRC meeting Mr. Mayor? I attended hundreds Ms. Savage
was expressionless not even a facial twitch on some of the most egregious police
matters...coming before the HRC.
Ms. Savage, Savage wild beast...You were also successful in getting a prominent HRC colleague
and police critic fired Dr. Donald Mendoza NASA
Speak-up Mr. James on this important issue. In this case, act as a prosecutor....and impose a mandatory maximum prison sentence...
Palo Alto Free Press (@PAFreePress)
9/17/17, 4:55 AM Meet @PaloAltoPolice informant. Citizens who came before her on police issues? Ice water running
through her veins bit.ly/2jnmlL2 pic.twitter.com/VzvwtcEAtV
Download the Twitter app
Sent from my iPad
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/18/2017 3:04 PM
3
9.10.060 Special provisions.
The special exceptions listed in this section shall apply, notwithstanding the provisions of Sections 9.10.030 through 9.10.050.
Said exceptions shall apply only to the extent and during the hours specified in each of the
following enumerated exceptions.
(a) General Daytime Exception. Any noise source which does not produce a noise level
exceeding seventy dBA at a distance of twenty-five feet under its most noisy condition of use shall be exempt from the provisions of Sections 9.10.030(a), 9.10.040 and 9.10.050(a) between
the hours of eight a.m. and eight p.m. Monday through Friday, nine a.m. and eight p.m. on
Saturday, except Sundays and holidays, when the exemption herein shall apply between ten a.m.
and six p.m.
m m m m V
‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
Lydia Kou ‐ Council Member
Contact Info: https://goo.gl/BcgCQS
From: RAS <fogz9000‐1@yahoo.com>
Sent: Wednesday, September 6, 2017 7:31 AM
To: Kou, Lydia; Fine, Adrian; Keene, James
Cc: Planning Enforcement; Penny Ellson; Neilson Buchanan; Jeff Levinsky; Carla Carvalho; Lenore Cymes
Subject: Edgewood Shopping Center delivery problems continue and have gotten worse
Dear Council Members and City Manager,
We wanted to give you a status update on the delivery issues at the Edgewood Shopping Center,
in particular on St. Francis Drive right up near the Channing Ave. intersection. We've been
working with James Stephens in Code Enforcement all year. He arranged to get a 'No Parking Anytime' sign by the stop sign at that intersection but the delivery trucks still park there, often right in front of the sign, blocking the bike lane, sticking out into traffic and ignoring the
sign. We reported probably more than 30 deliveries on St. Francis with pictures on the Palo
Alto 311 site and recently Mr. Stephens wrote us to tell us he was removing all those complaints
and we were now supposed to call the police non-emergency number for enforcement. When we let him know that the police were not showing up, he emailed me "Any illegal street parking, including school busses, should be reported to the Police Department. I cannot speak to the response of
the Police Department. Code Enforcement does not have any authority to deal with the illegal street
parking, we are dealing with it from the business aspect." Well, apparently dealing with it from the
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/18/2017 3:04 PM
4
business aspect has virtually no impact at all. Maybe the city could give code enforcement the authority
it needs to get the job done correctly. The police dispatchers do not even seem to know what I'm talking about, so I have to explain what Jame Stephens told me and they seem unaware that this is supposed to be
enforced.
Let me give you an idea how calling the police works out. This morning, Thursday, 9/6/17, we
were awoken at 4:15AM by a truck's back-up beeper and then banging of a lift gate and hand
truck. It was a U.S. Food truck delivering to the Bagel Shop. We called the police at approximately 4:20AM and the guy continued banging around until 5:02AM when he then drove
away, turning left on Channing Ave. A police car then rolled by not even 5 seconds later and
turned right on Channing; we're surprised they didn't see the truck turning left in front of
them. We phoned in a similar complaint a week or so ago in the early morning hours, again
about a U.S. Food truck. The truck did his deliveries over about 45 minutes, and again, the police did not show up during this period of time. So we basically have no enforcement of
these issues. We were told by the city that all deliveries are to take place in the parking lots
during business hours per the city's agreement with the shopping center developer. This truck
and others choose to use St. Francis' bike lane parking right in front of a 'No Parking Anytime'
sign, and today, as early as 4:15AM in the wee hours of the morning. One day I asked a UPS truck driver why he was blocking this bike lane and he wasn't even working, he was eating
lunch, and he said 'oh, I didn't see the sign' even though he was parked right in front of it. And
he has since parked there every weekday since.
So we basically have no enforcement of this issue. Instead we continue to have deliveries on St.
Francis for the bagel shop and the Orange Fitness shop and the dry cleaner. In the city's
agreement with the developer, this shopping center development was not supposed to have a
negative effect on the surrounding neighborhood. I would say that being awoken at 4:15AM on
a weekday by backup beepers blaring, banging of lift gates and hand trucks and to have it go on for 45 minutes makes for a rough start to a weekday and is indeed having a negative effect on the
neighborhood and on our health and well being. I would say being abruptly awoken hours
earlier than normal is having an overall negative effect on us and our neighbors. One of my
neighbors has a baby and he has been absolutely livid about his wife and baby and himself being
woken up at 11PM to midnight by a big semi truck delivering to Starbucks every night. I'd call that a negative effect too.
Apparently our police dept. is too busy dealing with other issues, and putting the onus on the
citizens to have to even call the police for something that code enforcement should figure out how to solve is problematic. We won't even bother to call the police when city trucks and
school buses park in the 'No Parking Anytime' St. Francis bike lane while they grab
breakfast/lunch/coffee because we know they are not going to even show up, despite what Mr.
Stephens says in his message. In fact, it's becoming apparent that calling the police about these
issues at all is a waste of our time.
So, we are left with no other means to deal with this issue except to vote with our wallets. We
will not do any business at this shopping center that continues to flaunt these delivery issues and
we will let our friends and neighbors and visitors know. And we are disappointed with the city
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/18/2017 3:04 PM
5
not being able to enforce its agreement with the developer. We feel that the many, many hours
we have spent on this issue this year with code enforcement has been a total waste of our time
and energy. The myriad reports we filed on paloalto311 with pictures also appear to have been a waste of time. We're disappointed with our city with all its departments and staff, and it
cannot seem to accomplish some simple things. Each day now, we understand more and more
what people mean when they say 'that's the Palo Alto way.'
So that's our report at this time, after months and months trying to work with code enforcement
on this issue. It's very disheartening. Why have a code enforcement dept. if they cannot
enforce the codes and agreements of the city? Maybe Palo Alto could contract with Mt. View
who has a very rigorous and successful parking/delivery enforcement program.
Apologies if this message is brusque, but ask yourself, how would you feel if your day started
with truck backup beepers and banging around at 4:15AM?
Sincerely,
~~~Rich Skalsky
Longtime Palo Alto resident, but seriously considering moving far away from 'the Palo Alto way'
PRIVATE: This is Not A Public Communication! This private email message, and any
attachment(s) is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521,
and is for the sole use of the intended recipient and contains privileged and/or confidential
information.
Virus-free. www.avast.com
--
Sent from Gmail Mobile
m m m m V
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/18/2017 1:11 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Palo Alto Free Press <paloaltofreepress@gmail.com>
Sent:Monday, September 18, 2017 4:17 AM
To:Council, City
Cc:Scharff, Greg; Kniss, Liz (external); Lum, Patty; James Aram; Reifschneider, James; Keene,
James; Jay Boyarsky; jrosen@da.sccgov.org; Philip, Brian; Brian Welch;
bjohnson@embarcaderomediagroup.com; bjohnson@paweekly.com; Minor, Beth;
Perron, Zachary; Keith, Claudia; Cullen, Charles; Wagner, April; HRC; Watson, Ron
Subject:Re: From the archives on Ron Watson
Mr. Watson, What was I thinking? I failed to exclude you in this distribution... A thousand apologies....You
horses patootie...
Mark
Sent from my iPad
On Sep 18, 2017, at 5:02 AM, Palo Alto Free Press <paloaltofreepress@gmail.com> wrote:
The part I ❤ : To our Critics: Well I’m not sure what I can say or if you will care. I guess
the only thing I can say is that your current level of rhetoric is both destructive and demoralizing
to a far larger group than your intended target.
Your biases are historically predictable, Mr. Watson. As a so called police officer commissioned
to uphold our constitution. I'm not surprised by your comments. Your comments display to the
contrary a destructive approach by not recognizing the paramount right of our 1st
Amendment. You will never be removed from my emails... Got that? Mr. Watson nor any other
government official...
Lastly, Yes, Mr. Watson, I care and I care about your rights too.. But remember this:
New York Times Co. v. Sullivan
376 U.S. 254 (1964)
Thus, we consider this case against the background of a profound national commitment to the
principle that debate on public issues should be uninhibited, robust, and wide-open, and that it
may well include vehement, caustic, and sometimes unpleasantly sharp attacks on government
and public officials. See Terminiello v. Chicago, 337 U. S. 1, 337 U. S. 4; De Jonge v.
Oregon,299 U. S. 353,
Mark Petersen-Perez
Editor: PaloAltoFreePress
Ticuantepe, Nicaragua
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/18/2017 1:11 PM
2
On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 22:44:21 -0800 "Watson, Ron"
<Ron.Watson@CityofPaloAlto.org> writes:
Dear Colleagues, Citizens, Local Politicians, Community Members, and Critics,
Since several folks on this growing email list refuse to remove me from the list, I
thought I would take a moment to respond with some fair and balanced
information on the Palo Alto Police Department.
It appears from these emails and the letters to the editor in the local papers that a
small number of individuals (some who aren’t even residents of Palo Alto) don’t
think very highly of the Palo Alto Police Department. They are certainly entitled
to their opinion. However, with the growing number of individuals on this email
list, I thought some unbiased facts from a recent survey of our citizens was in
order. This survey was completed by the National Research Center in jurisdictions
throughout the country.
Survey results released just last week indicate that 90% of Palo Alto residents rate
police services as good or excellent. This citizen rating places the Palo Alto Police
Department in the 86th Percentile compared with other jurisdictions nationwide.
These numbers represent an increase in satisfaction over last year. So while a
small number of residents and non-residents are not satisfied with police services,
an overwhelming and growing number of residents rate us as good or excellent.
Having said that, there’s always room for improvement. After all, we have ten
percentage points to go to reach a 100% perfect rating from our citizens. I’m not
sure it’s an achievable goal given the nature of police work, but the vast majority
of us come to work every day attempting to do our very best. While most of us
work towards that goal every day, we all need to keep in mind the fact that police
work isn’t always pretty and it isn’t always perfect.
For those who care to read more information on the National Research Center’s
Annual Service Efforts and Accomplishments there’s information outlined below
from the Palo Alto City Auditor with a link to this year's entire survey results
from the National Research Center.
In closing, I would like to briefly address those groups who will receive this
email.
To my colleagues: If you haven’t seen the survey results, please review the
survey and keep in mind that the vast majority of residents rate the service we
provide as good or excellent.
To the Citizens: Thank you for your support and know that we will continue
to work towards the high praise we receive from you.
To the Local Politicians & Community Members: As the drum beat rolls on
and the criticisms continue, please keep in mind that those you don’t hear from
everyday are the 90% of residents that fall into the two categories listed above.
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/18/2017 1:11 PM
3
We all welcome constructive ideas on how to improve police services, most
especially those ideas that represent the views of our citizenry as a whole.
To our Critics: Well I’m not sure what I can say or if you will care.
I guess the only thing I can say is that your current level of rhetoric is both
destructive and demoralizing to a far larger group than your intended target.
Sergeant Ron Watson
Investigative Services Division
Palo Alto Police Department
275 Forest Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94301
ron.watson@cityofpaloalto.org
Sent from my iPad
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/18/2017 12:51 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Jeffrey Lipkin <repjal@att.net>
Sent:Friday, September 15, 2017 1:39 PM
To:Filseth, Eric (external)
Cc:Council, City
Subject:Re: Housing in Palo Alto
I just read in the Palo Alto Weekly that the golf course is still running a loss and that one of the council
proposes to force events into that area to try to break even.
One idea for affordable housing in Palo Alto is to reduce the golf course to 9 holes and contribute the balance of the land to a project (with flood control) to provide below-market housing for teachers and civil servants. That should provide for a lot of units at low rents.
Also, from a recent article it appears that Palo Alto is not attracting policemen, despite the high offered salaries.
Instead of large signing bonuses, try including the police in the project. And for fairness, include the firemen even if they will instead buy farms.
Jeff Lipkin
On Sep 10, 2017, at 12:14 PM, Eric Filseth <efilseth@gmail.com> wrote:
Jeff,
To actually have “affordable” housing, as opposed to “market‐rate” housing, somebody has to pay for
it. That means it takes money.
Normally this money comes from things like impact fees on other kinds of development. The current
council did raise these fees this year, but not as much as the previous council had approved; that is, the
current council partly reversed the previous council’s decision on raising these impact fees. In my (and
Lydia’s) view this was a mistake. I think there is room still to raise these fees to fund more affordable
housing. But a council majority disagreed, at least this year. Maybe next year we’ll do better.
County Measure A which voters approved last November is also supposed to provide money for
affordable housing. Hopefully that will help soon, although none of it has really been released yet. Also
there appears to be some political squabbling over it at the County level between different
“affordability” camps.
Other comments:
Some people believe if you build enough “market‐rate” housing for high‐income professionals such as
software engineers, there will be a “trickle down” to people who earn less. I personally don’t believe
this is likely in Palo Alto – there are just far too many high earners who would like to live here, and
Facebook alone is about to hire several thousand more high earners next door in Menlo Park. But some
people do believe that. Also some developers call loudly for “affordable housing,” when what they
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/18/2017 12:51 PM
2
really want is rezoning for more “market rate housing,” which pays higher rents. Impact fees should
balance this – but see above.
Police and firefighters are very well compensated and earn enough to live in Palo Alto. But they mostly
don’t, because it’s less expensive elsewhere, even Redwood City and Mountain View which are still
close. Firefighters are a special case: because of their work rules, they spend a couple of 24‐hour days
at the fire station, and then are off for a few days. For the price of a condo in Palo Alto, you can buy a
big house and land, even a ranch, somewhere else such as Morgan Hill or Tracy or even Placerville, and
only commute to Palo Alto once a week. Nearly all of our firefighters choose that.
Teachers and civil servants – agree with you 100%. A majority of them earn too much to qualify for
conventional BMR housing, but not enough to afford market‐rate in Palo Alto. Big problem.
Eric
From: repjal@att.net [mailto:repjal@att.net]
Sent: Sunday, September 10, 2017 11:09 AM
To: Lydia Kou
Cc: city.council@cityofpaloalto.org
Subject: Housing in Palo Alto
Has there been any progress on solving the shortage of affordable housing, especially for Palo Alto policemen, teachers, civil servants and firefighters? I see no progress in consolidating lots along El Camino - by contrast, I see a lot of activity along the same road in Mountain View,
including residential and ground floor retail? I also think it hypocritical to have a poorly used
city golf course and airport when there is this unmet need.
Jeff Lipkin Sent from my iPhone
On Sep 10, 2017, at 2:02 AM, Lydia Kou <lydiakou@lydiakou.emailnb.com> wrote:
<~WRD000.jpg>
<image001.jpg>
Jeffrey --
Last night, Mexico experienced an 8.2 magnitude earthquake which was felt more than 500 miles
away and by over 90 million people. There are tsunami warnings for the Hawaiian Islands and Guam. Sadly, there are also casualties. http://www.cnn.com/2017/09/08/americas/mexico-earthquake-live-updates/index.html
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/18/2017 12:51 PM
3
In the last two weeks, there has been Hurricane Harvey which has devastating results in Texas andsome of the nearby states, now Hurricane Irma which is leaving devastation in its pathway. Not far
behind is Hurricane Jose, almost on the same path of Irma. Now, this 8.2mag earthquake in
Mexico.
September is National Preparedness Month and 2017’s overarching theme is “Disasters Don’t Plan Ahead. You Can.” It is more evident than ever we have to take our well-being into our own hands. Let’s take this time to be prepared.
We can depend on our first responders to take care of us, but let’s be realistic. Let’s look at Texas,
the first responders are overwhelmed and many states and cities have sent mutual aid. But, there
will be more need with Irma and Jose. While Palo Alto has a phenomenal police and fire
department, we do have to also rely on ourselves and our neighbors. To do that we ourselves must be self sufficient and prepared. Here is
how http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/services/public_safety/emergency_preparedness/default.asp
Also, sign up for AlertSCC to get alerts from Santa Clara
County http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/services/public_safety/emergency_preparedness/alertscc.asp
Please share/forward this to your neighbor, family and friends.
Thank you!
Lydia Kou http://www.lydiakou.com/
Vote for Lydia Kou · 708 Matadero Ave, Palo Alto, CA 94306, United States This email was sent to repjal@att.net. To stop receiving emails, click here. You can also keep up with Lydia Kou on Twitter or Facebook.
Created with NationBuilder, software for leaders.
<image002.jpg>
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/18/2017 12:41 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:David Coale <david@evcl.com>
Sent:Wednesday, September 13, 2017 8:06 PM
To:City of Palo Alto; Council, City
Cc:Bike Palo Alto Steering Committee
Subject:Re: Message from the Mayor, September 2017
Dear Mayor and City Council,
Thank you for posting the Bike Palo Alto event in your Mayor’s Message. I wanted to make sure all of the
Council and City Staff are “Officially” invited to our 8th Bike Palo Alto event on Sunday October 1st starting at El Carmelo School from 1 to 3. While this will not be exciting as repelling off the Adobe building in San Jose, we hope you will find this event to be fun and enjoyable for the whole family. This year we are partnering with
Friends of Palo Alto Parks as we will be stopping at or riding by 10 Palo Alto parks, so I hope you will join us
for the many treat stops, including blender bike smoothies, as you find the fun ways to bike around Palo Alto.
More information and pre-registration can be found at www.bikepaloalto.org
Thanks,
David Coale For the Bike Palo Alto Team.
Pedal to Bike Palo Alto
The linked image cannot be displayed. The file may have been moved, renamed, or deleted. Verify that the link points to the correct file and location.The linked image cannot be displayed. The file may have been moved, renamed, or deleted. Verify that the link points to the correct file and location.The linked image cannot be displayed. The file may have been moved, renamed, or deleted. Verify that the link points to the correct file and location.
Connect with us!
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/18/2017 12:41 PM
2
Come explore bike-friendly routes
and find bicycling resources as Bike
Palo Alto returns for a 7th year on
Sunday, Oct. 1 from 1-3 p.m.
The free event starts at El Carmelo
Elementary (Bryant Street & Loma
Verde Avenue), where you can
choose among three marked routes
with shorter and longer options – or
ride them all! Get maps, route and
safety guidance, helmet fitting, a pre-
ride bike check and giveaways too.
Bike Palo Alto encourages bike
safety and also serves as a kickoff for
Walk & Roll events in Palo Alto
schools the first week of October. It’s 100 percent volunteer run, so if you
would like to help, email Robert Neff for more information at:
bpa2017@neffs.net
Rappelling to End Homelessness
Spiderman
sightings were
rampant on Sept. 8-
9 in San Jose as
nearly 100 people
and four South Bay
mayors (myself
included) climbed to
new heights and
attempted heroics
by scaling 16 floors
or 236 feet down
the Adobe
headquarters for a
rappel-a-thon fundraiser to help end homelessness. Called the Downtown
Drop Down, this first ever rappel-a-thon benefited the non-profit Downtown
Streets Team, which operates in several Bay Area cities including Palo
Alto.
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/18/2017 12:41 PM
3
The program helps transition
homeless volunteers into
employment by giving them
work experience and a
pathway to self-sufficiency. It
was an exhilarating way to
support a good cause. To learn
more about the program and
see how you can help,
click here.
Greg Scharff
Mayor
The City has a variety of e-news topics that may be of
interest to you. Join other e-news topics, update your
subscriptions, modify your password or e-mail address, or
stop subscriptions at any time on your Subscriber
Preferences Page. You will need to use your e-mail address
to log in. If you have questions or problems with the
subscription service, please contact
subscriberhelp.govdelivery.com.
This service is provided to you at no charge by the City of
Palo Alto.
This email was sent to david@evcl.com using GovDelivery Communications Cloud on behalf of: City of Palo Alto · 250 Hamilton Ave
· Palo Alto, CA 94301 · 650-329-2100
From:Palo Alto Free Press
To:Aram James
Cc:dcbertini@menlopark.org; RJonsen@menlopark.org; citycouncil@menlopark.org; Council City; chuckjagoda1@gmail.com; council@redwoodcity org; WatsonRon; gsheyner@paweekly com; Scharff Greg; Kniss Liz (external); Perron Zachary; Keith Claudia; michael gennaco@oirgroup.com;stephen connolly@oirgroup.com
Subject:Re: From the archives 2005--Democractic policing anyone?
Date:Monday, September 18, 2017 4:44:04 AM
Thanks for sending this along Aram... Democratic policing? Not in Palo Alto! It's racially motivated...
Ask anyone on the streets as I have.... along with well documented democratic video...
Best,
Mark Petersen-PerezEditor: PaloAltoFreePressTwitter: @PAFreePressTicuantepe, *Nicaragua Central America
*Someone recently asked me if Nicaragua was a African country... lol
Sent from my iPad
On Sep 18, 2017, at 12:44 AM, Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> wrote:
Democratic policing: The concept of human rights as a linchpin orstarting point re all discussions of community policing.
From Aram James: February 2005
To: Jeff Blum and the HRC, City Council, the management and linemembers of the PAPD, and most importantly to members of our diversecommunity here in Palo Alto.
Below you will find a 70 page + document on Police Accountability and Promoting CivilianOversight in the emerging democracy of post Apartheid South Africa. You will find the link to theentire article (below) Policethatwewant.pdf .
The article elevates the limited conversation normally taking place in the US re policing to a new
level by discussing the concept of "Democratic Policing" and the inextricable connection betweenthis concept, "Democratic Policing," and human rights generally.
The article also raises important points about the interplay between internal police oversight andexternal or civilian oversight. There is even mention of giving the power of arrest to a trulyindependent oversight commission. The piece discusses the critical importance of providingadequate resources both to the police as well as the external oversight commission.
In addition to discussing the issue of "Democratic policing" from a citizen's view point, there isextensive discussion of the importance of the same Democratic principals applying to police bothas citizens and police employees.
In any event my first reading of this document raised many intriguing possibilities re how wemight begin to frame the discussion of police oversight and Democratic Policing in our own
community. I recommend that anyone interested in this topic consider reading the piece and
giving your own feedback to this e-group as well as to the discussion to be held on Wednesday
night ( Feb 23) from 7-9 PM at the Palo Alto Unitarian Church.
Sincerely,
Aram James
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/20/2017 11:08 AM
City of Palo Alto I City Clerk's Office I 9/20/2017 11:08 AM
Home
Click Map for south
African and regional
oversight structures
2/20/2005
Dear Nat,
Vision
Dynamic resource to enhance and promote effective,
publicly accountable policing in South Africa
Mission
• promote and strengthen civil society monitoring
of police conduct,
• strengthen state agencies & police,
• highlight ctm·ent debates,
• encom·age networking,
• provide info1mation on police oversight
WHAT'S NEW:
The police that we want: A handbook for oversight
of police in South Africa
Published by the Centre for the Study of Violence
and Reconciliation in association with the Open
Society Foundation for South Africa and the Open
Society Justice Initiative. 2005. The handbook is
intended to be a resom·ce for people involved in police
oversight in South Africa. The aim of the handbook is
to highlight information that infonus the debate
around police and policing. The handbook explores
police oversight and the use of indicators in assessing
policing and holding the police accountable; discusses
the te1m "democratic policing" and identifies five key
areas of concem relating to democratic policing and
relevant to evaluating police agencies; identifies key
measures to evaluate police perfonuance and puts
forward suggestions for improving indicators for
democratic policing in South Africa as well as
indicators to evaluate police services in relation to
each of the key measm·es.
PoliceThatWeWant.pdf (1.4MB)
Author: David Bmce and Racheld Neild
Published Date: 2005
Please
Comment
Conferences
and
Workshops
Join the
Mailing List
Police Accountability: promoting civilian oversight project
a joint project of the Open Society Foundation of South Africa (OSFSA) and
the Open Society Justice Initiative.
I think a lot of Jeff as person and someone who is obviously willing to give a lot of time to the
community, despite his full time work as a practicing family law attorney. That being said is clear
to me he is deluding himself big time re the HRC's credibility with either police management or
the public. His statements to you that the HRC has a great deal of credibility and that their
recommendations will be taken seriously seem incredibly naive, to say nothing of the fact that he
has pointed to zero facts to support such a conclusion. Were his ears closed to the criticism at the
last HRC meeting? Was I listening to a different meeting?
Over and over again it has been my perception that Jeff has been taken in by the PR and outright
prevarication of Chief Johnson. As others have pointed out he often acts and reacts as though he
must be her defender, almost like a child defending a parent without apparent clue that he is
doing so. When I and others have attempted to ask hard questions of the chief, or challenge her
in a strong way, he becomes visibility upset as thought we were personally attacking a member of
his family. It is truly hard to watch.
Jeff has consistently shown a very deep bias in favor of the chief and only in the most superficialand softball manner been willing to ask her anything approaching a hard question. I think Jeff hasa very difficult time standing up to the chief and appears time and again to be extraordinarilydeferential to the chief at the expense of the community and any real change within thedepartment. Given his current track record with the chief I think it is only fair to say he has
allowed the problems to grow rather than done anything of substance to be part of the solution.
He really needs a reality check here.
As just one example let's look at the racial profiling issue: For the last five years the PAPD wasallowed to collect data re racial profiling with no oversight or accountability to an outside agencyor oversight body.
Despite this their own data consistently showed that the PAPD is deeply committed to racial
profiling -- as Ladoris Cordell said their own data doesn't lie. If we had an independent body
responsible for overseeing the collection of data you can bet the results re profiling would have
painted an even uglier picture.
It is incredible to me that the HRC ( Frank Benest and the city council) has allowed the PAPD toget away with this fraud on our community. Why in the world should the agency guilty of theprofiling be allowed to call the shots on what data is going to be collected and equally troublingwhy should there be no outside agency overseeing the collection and interpretation of the data?Again these are the type of questions the HRC has never even asked.
But we continue to allow the chief to do her own thing with no accountability. Now let's look at
what the Chief just pulled on the community while Jeff made the incredible comment in his recent
Op-Ed re what a "breath of fresh air" the chief has been.
As I said in my letter to the editor in the latest Weekly (Feb 18) re a Mr. Bloomberg (see below inblog), would apply to Jeff as well: Why don't you ask Albert Hopkins, Jameel Douglas, JorgeHernandez, et al: how fresh the air has been for them, while Chief Johnson has presided. Jeff’sOp-ed was one of the most condescending and pro police things I have ever read and out of themouth of the chair of our HRC. Very Sad, indeed!! And this is the same Jeff who thinks his HRC
has credibility. Please!!!
In large part because the HRC ( city Council and Frank Benest) has refused to take a critical look
at what was happening re the racial profiling issue they have allowed the chief to distract thecommunity from the true issues and essentially returned us to where we were 5 years ago, beforedata collection began.
Why do I so conclude: After 5 years of irrefutable evidence of racially discriminatory lawenforcement ( racial profiling is just one part) by the PAPD-- instead of moving forward to disciplethe offending officers-- what does the chief do? Incomprehensibly, not only did the chief not move
to step two-- solutions and discipline of the offending officers-- she unilaterally decided to cut
back on the data collection.
In effect she has now won the battle of PR by being a master at distraction. While we fight withthe chief to retain the data collection we have totally ignored or been distracted from the fact thatwe should have moved to step two-- discipline of the offending officers, up to an including thefiring of the worse offending officers.
Because the HRC ( city council and Frank Benest) has been asleep at the wheel they have allowedthe chief to take us back to where we were five years ago. And if she is successful in discontinuing
the very critical collection of data on passengers, we will be worse off on this issue than 5 years
ago. And Jeff believes the HRC has credibility with the chief. Wow, what a leap of faith.
It was not until I pointed out to Adam Atito ( at Feb 10, HRC) that I believed the Chief was stillgoing to cut back on the prior level of data collection, by not collecting data on passengers-- thatthe question was even asked by Adam. Once the question was asked the chief had to admit shewas not intending to continue to collect data on passengers.
This despite many historical and contemporary examples that frequently the reason for a racist
cop to stop a car is because one of the passengers is a white woman seated in the car with
persons of color ( most often a Black man) . Failure to continue to collect data re the passengers
will deprive the community of one of the most important indicators of racial discriminatory law
enforcement (racial profiling).
Jeff and the rest of the HRC acted as though they had no clue re this issue and asked no follow upquestions nor did they insist the chief at least return the data collection to where it was prior toJanuary 1, 2005. To this day it is unclear how much of the pre January 2005 data will continue to
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/20/2017 11:08 AM
be collected.
It would have been a simple thing to ask and to get a direct answer from the chief if someone onthe HRC had even the most basic cross examination skills and were not afraid to upset the chiefwith their questions. Jeff is a nice guy but he has shown no inclination to ask the hard questionsand to follow-up with appropriate questions until the chief is no longer able to hide the ball. Unfortunately, I find Jeff personally very guarded and defensive around me and I doubt seriouslythat he would be willing to sit down to allow me to lay out the problems I see the HRC has, as
currently constituted, in taking on the very complicated task of oversight of a police agency.
Jeff appears almost overly eager to meet with the chief behind closed doors, but how about
meeting with some of the citizens that have worked so hard to bring these issues to the publicattention? It seems that Jeff’s view of his leadership function with the HRC is very one sided: allfor the Chief, the PAPD, Frank Benest etc., and the crumbs for the public. In any event, despite my sense that Jeff is not open to anyone he views as hostile to the policechief or the current practices of the PAPD, I would be delighted to meet with him to give my inputon the issues. I will not, however, bite my tongue re my criticism of the way Jeff has repeatedly
squandered the credibility of the HRC re issues involving the PAPD.
As I have mentioned to you Nat there are at least two major areas of concern and each breaks
down into many nuanced and complex issues. 1) We have to have an ongoing ability to monitorPAPD misconduct as it occurs and the ability to quickly respond to citizen complaints. As it stands if a citizen calls the HRC and says I would like to file a complaint against the PAPD,but not with the PAPD, but an independent body, there is no mechanism currently in place, norany currently contemplated, that would allow the HRC to preserve the complaint and to guide thatperson to an independent body.
During the course of Jameel's case with the PAPD I sent the HRC pages of materials on numerous
occasions re the cover up by the PAPD, the systemic problems with their internal affairs, asked
them to review the tapes etc., and the only one who responded was Lakiba Pittman. The othermembers of the HRC either didn't care, were afraid, or had no idea how to respond withoutguidance. Having such a system (to take and preserve complaints from citizens and act upon them) in placewith adequate resources, staff etc., is a task the HRC is not set up to accomplish.
As I tried to mention, in the very hostile environment Jeff created for the public at the last HRC
meeting (Feb 10), as it currently stands the only viable alternative for a citizen who has a
complaint against the PAPD is for that person to contact someone like myself, an experienced
criminal defense attorney, who can then film and record the persons complaint and then act as aresource and run interference in filing the complaint with an agency other them the PAPD. This would include taking the evidence to the DOJ, the local District attorney, etc. The HRC has noability to act on citizen complaints other then to tell the complaining citizen to go to the lion’s denfor further abuse--the PAPD.
If Jeff is really listening to the input of the community and puts aside his ego (and what appears
to me to be his overly trusting and naive belief that Chief Johnson is willing to engage in
meaningful police oversight without the figurative gun to the head), in this matter the HRC willdecline the offer to act as the oversight body--or should I say decline to act as the pawn of ChiefLynne Johnson. I suggest the HRC demand strong independent oversight with a full time staff, subpoena power,investigative responsibilities etc., and then consider having the HRC act to oversee and insurethat this new oversight body is functioning as it should. In essence the HRC would act to oversee
the new oversight body.
2) The new oversight body needs to be able to review all general orders and to insure that future
police practices are put in place that minimize the likelihood of wrongful convictions. In essencethey would act as an "Innocence Project" that prevents wrongful convictions before they occur asopposed to the haphazard discovery of wrongful convictions 10, 15, or 20 years after they takeplace. The current Innocence Projects that have sprung up around this country as a result of the initialand ongoing work of Barry Scheck, Peter Neufeld et al: are extraordinary. But we, as a
community, can stop these wrongful convictions before they happen if we have the courage,
resources and talent to review and amend the many police practices currently in place in police
departments all over this country, and in Palo Alto, that lead to wrongful convictions. A strong and
well funded oversight body, here is Palo Alto, is where we are best able to start. As you know I have written on this subject ( risk of wrongful convictions) re coerced false
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/20/2017 11:08 AM
confessions and how the current system in Palo Alto can be changed to prevent this from
happening again (Jorge Hernandez case). This is just one small example of how poor police
practices result in thousands of wrongful convictions a year. In order to stop this abuse we need criminal law practitioners, DA's and Defense attorneys etc.,who understand where the system breaks down. This is very complicated and time consumingwork and not something that can or should be left to a group like the HRC. In any event, I hope Jeff will be willing to meet with me (and others from the public) and to allow
input on more then a two minute sound bite basis. In the meantime let's continue to support Jeff
and the HRC in refusing the city's offer for them to act as the oversight body.
Aram P.S. Nat, In addition to it being mandatory that the tapes be allowed to run 24/7, without policemanipulation, there is one additional major issue that must be addressed or the entire thing willbe yet another scam on the public. The public must have access to the tapes and this policy willrequire hard work to hammer out. If we don't do this the only time we will see the tapes is when they support the police version of
the incident. Absent such a policy we will never have access to the tapes (like the Hopkins,
Hernandez and Douglas cases) because the cops will claim some legal privilege or the tired
mantra of ongoing investigation. As I have pointed out before, why do you think the only time we see police abuse on tape is whensome citizen lucks upon the scene with a camcorder? The reason is that damage control re thetapes is already built in by the police. We must fight for this second issue as well or we will bedead in the water re any public credibility on the cameras in the PAPD vehicles before we even get
started on meaningful police oversight.
Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2005 15:18:51 -0800Jeff, ( Jeff Blum chair of Palo Alto HRC) It sounds like policy regarding the cameras, what system to use, is already
made. The bids are out there. The only policy remaining, and an important one, is whether the cameras are on continuously or controlled by the patrol officers. The type of cameras, what they are capable of, is already decided. My point in my previous email was that policy should have come before deciding on which system to purchase and sending out bids. And The HRC was not consulted. The facts, that the HRC was not consulted before the cameras bids went out, that Benest discouraged you from having more than one meeting a month if you do take on the added responsibility of police review, really are not good signs. Be very very wary. You seem to think that if the HRC were to accept the "charge", then you would have more influence with the police - am I reading you correctly? Natalie
Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2005 14:25:37 -0500>>Dear Natalie:>>>I think it is premature to conclude the HRC will not have any input in >setting policies. We have not decided as a body to accept the charge that >we oversee the Police. If we do decide that, we can make recommendations >about the manner in which it will be done. I think we have a great deal of >credibility. Therefore, if we make suggestions, I am confident they will >be given serious consideration.>>Jeff Blum>
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/20/2017 11:08 AM
NEWS RELEASE Open Letter to the President of Google: Dear Mr. President: We believe certain members of the Palo Alto Police department alongwith the Palo Alto City Council are trying to "sabotage" and shut down"Palo Alto Police Victims of Abuse" email service by reporting thisvaluable information to you and our community as "SPAM". This outright threat and "suppression" is believed to be a directviolation of our "Constitutional Rights", the freedom of speech andexpression. As a technological leader in the delivery of emailsworldwide, it is hoped you will consider all facts before you decideto "shut down" this important community service.
Sincerely, Mark Petersen-Perez434 Addition Ave.Palo Alto, Ca 94301650.814.2504 Publication Date: Friday, February 18, 2005ReaderWire
Aram responds
In the Weekly's Feb. 2 letters section, in a piece titled "Pas-de-deux," Mr. Dan Bloomberg becomesso angered over bumper stickers that allegedly outraged his moral sensibilities that he loses whateverability he may have once had to distinguish fact from fiction.
He claims that in the Jan. 26 edition of the Weekly I engaged in a rant against the Palo Alto Police
Department (PAPD).
A careful look at the Weekly of that date will show that my letter to the editor, titled "Shock andAwe," not once referred to the PAPD.
At the end of Mr. Bloomberg's rambling missive he engages in outright fabrication. He claims Iaccused the PAPD of racism when they arrested two African-American juveniles for allegedburglaries near Gunn High School.
I have never written or spoken publicly of that case. I challenge Mr. Bloomberg to show otherwise.As my father used to say: "Some people prefer not to be disturbed by the facts." Mr. Bloombergclearly suffers a severe form of this syndrome.
Finally, Mr. Bloomberg speaks glowingly of the well-mannered PAPD. I wonder if Mr. Bloomberghas asked Albert Hopkins, who was brutality beaten by two of Palo Alto's finest for the crime of"Sitting In His Car While Black," how he feels about the PAPD.
Or what about Jorge Hernandez, who spent several weeks in jail after the PAPD extracted a falseconfession of rape from this young man.
Next time check your facts, Mr. Bloomberg.
Aram James Los Robles Avenue, Palo Alto
Dear Mr. James: We the jury (city council ) find you guilty on ALL of the following charges: COUNT 1. Choosing to exercise your "speech". This "right" is no longervalid under our present form of government.
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/20/2017 11:08 AM
COUNT 2. Inciting and enlisting others to "riot" in council chamberson the night ofFebruary 7, 2005 by your volume, pitch, power, conviction, motivationand your strong desire to change our present form of city governmentwhich is illegal. COUNT 3. Everything and anything you said is being held against youwithout recourse. Therefore, Mr. James you are to proceed directly to Jail for lifeaccompanied by the Chief of Police Ms. Johnson as you know will have aARMED escort and will prevent you from saying anything further andwill exercise lethal forced without provocation. Jury Foreman: Mayor Jim Burch (By, Mark-Peterson-Perez Productions)
NEWS RELEASE Judge James P. Madden ruled against Mark Petersen vs Daniel Ryanwithout giving an opinion. At stake were the allegations that Mr. DanRyan prevented Mr. Petersen-Perez from gaining lawful access to hisapartment on 07/24/2004 after a restraint had expired on 07/15/2004. The order states to the protected person: "If you need protection for
a longer period of time, you must request restraining orders at Family
Court 170 Park Center Plaza, San Jose".
There was no additional restraining order on file at the time Mr.Petersen-Perez was denied access on 07/24/2004. Judge James P. Madden concluded in count testimony that the"presumption of guilt" on the allegations of RAPE would precludefurther restraining. Judge James P. Madded went on further to
recognize the presence of Mr. Dan Ryan in Mr. Petersen-Perez's
apartment as his former wife "packed away" Mr. Petersen-Perez's TV
based on "Family Community Laws". Mr. Petersen-Perez argued with Judge James P. Madden that his formerwife was not entitled to any of his property do to a prenuptialagreement. Therefore, based on family law, we question weather DanRyan and Judge James P. Madden has the legal right or jurisdictionover how community property should be divided.
All decision in smalls claims court are finale with "no rights to
appeal". Mr. Petersen-Perez's comments were; "I believe that Chief
Johnson may have influenced his decision. Nevertheless, I have shownby my small claims actions against the Palo Alto Police, that if youfeel you have been abused by the police, there's recourse and in thiscase, I believe I was victorious". Mark Petersen-Perez
"Dedicated to the prevention of Palo Alto Police Abuse"
2/18/05 Dear David "Junya" Taylor:
Congratulations and thanks for your excellent piece in today's Weekly (Feb 18), Missing equality?
( see attached below), rebutting Lynne Johnson's piece ( "Profiling can occur in both directions") Not only does your article rebut and undercut any credibility her piece had re the myth thatprofiling can be a two way street, thanks also for going after the run of censorship that iscurrently plaguing city government, specifically the: City Council, HRC and the Police Chief.
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/20/2017 11:08 AM
Finally, I hope you can attend this coming Wednesday's ( Feb 23) forum on police practices issuessponsored jointly by the PAPD and HRC. The meeting is scheduled to run from 7 to 9 PM and I amtold, unofficially, that the public will not be subject to another filibuster by City Manager Frank
Benest or Police Chief Lynne Johnson but, instead, will actually be given equal time. Of course,
seeing is believing-- so let's see what actually happens on the 23rd.
Sincerely, Aram James P.S. By the way, you may recognize the author of another letter to the editor just accorss the
coloum from your piece, Just the Facts? Let me know what you think. Missing equality?
The fallacy in Lynne Johnson's Feb. 2 article is right in the title: "'Profiling' can occur in bothdirections...."
"Profiling" means discriminatory policing -- which cannot occur in both directions.
Actions of on-duty police cannot be equated with the public's actions. The Bill of Rights is solelyconcerned with protecting the public from objectionable government actions, like unreasonablesearches and seizures -- not protecting the government from the public's actions.
That's the law of the land, and the city's chief law enforcer must respect its intent.
During the stop and subsequent complaint, as Johnson's hypothetical Palo Alto police officer I waspaid for my time and backed by a powerful union and department, and the general publicpresumption of police propriety. Like any other public service position, complaints come with myjob. Nonetheless, my chief publicly argues that complaints against police are unfair.
Meanwhile, the hypothetical African-American male's lost time during the stop may result in losinghis slim salary, missing a critical meeting or losing an important customer. His embarrassing excuse-- that police mistakenly stopped him at gunpoint -- is received with skepticism, or as yet anotherreason African-American males are undependable employees.
Filing a complaint means losing more time, going in circles. Then there's the acute anxiety thatresurges every time he sees the police and their guns. He watches the Human Relations Commission,City Council and police chief censure legal airing of legitimate grievances against police. Andpeople wonder why he always seems angry.
Where's the equality? David Taylor Ventura Avenue, Palo Alto
Thank you for bring this to our attention. As each person comesforward to request that there email address be removed it is done sopromptly. We question weather or not the persons reportingunsolicited messages is in fact legitimate. We believe strongly that certain individuals may in fact be trying toshut down a legitimate service in reporting violations of police abuseand the expressions of our "First Amendment Rights". Copy of our response to your email is being submitted to our legalstaff and local press. Mark Petersen-Perez Profile of today's corrupt cop;
Does this erosion factor exist within the Palo Alto Police Department?(Mollen report on police corruption New York City) I think it does and the city council is responsible for its continuedexistence namely Mr. Benest!
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/20/2017 11:08 AM
"The crime and drug-ridden conditions that breed corruptionopportunities are often so overwhelming and frustrating that theybreed corrosive changes in attitude and principles even amonginitially dedicated and honest cops. As a result, our findings revealed that the traditional and rathercomforting notion that most corrupt cops "slipped through the cracks"during recruitment and should never have been permitted to join thedepartment is not always true. Some of the most notoriously corrupt cops in the department were idealrecruits on paper: excellent references and employment histories, wellrespected and liked in their communities, and good scores on theirpsychological evaluations. Framed as an issue of "nature versus nurture", we found that the
latter the influence of prescient environments and job culture oftencontrolled. While there is no excuse for succumbing to corruption,regular and constant exposure to certain conditions and opportunitiesin crime-ridden precincts changes the attitudes and behavior of someofficers. This erosion theory of corruption helps explain why so many initiallydedicated cops become corrupt. It further explains why so many honestcops are able to tolerate and overlook corruption among colleagues. We also found that many although not all of these corrupt cops lookedsimilarly "idea" while in the department; many of the 30th precinctofficers, for example, had outstanding performance and awards records. Some had well over a dozen awards and honors for police work. Somecops performed well because despite their corruption they wanted to beeffective cops; others because a stellar police performance served as
a good cover to corruption. No one suspects a "hero cop" is a corrupt cop, as one arrested officerput it. Other corrupt cops, of course, had dismal performance
records: few or no arrests in high-crime precincts poor attendance andsick leave records. They had long ago abandoned their responsibilities as police officers". I believe and allege that the following police officers, LynneJohnson, Dan Ryan, April Chan, Sam Minty, Arin Sunseri and others fitthis profile.Mark Peterson-Perez
Dear Aram,
I have always said that in all groups there are mediocre, excellent, and evil persons.Mr. Eduardo. There is
nothing new, or original, or even remotely not "put me in a coma" to what you regurgitate. The police
department does not have a magic wand that allows them to select and hire only excellent people. Is there
a "stupid" drinking fountain out there that all mothers who give birth to people like you have to drink
from? How about stop deflecting, eliding, glossing over, shining on the TRUTH and back what will finally
berid society of this SHIT. TECHNOLOGICAL MONITORING. We have historically seen bullies hide behind a
badge, and when these same bullies promulgate the ideas that "an officer does not tell on a fellow officer and
you don't cross the blue line" well then we have a lot of horse manure. We have to clean house on a continuous
basisHorse shit, in your vernacular. Technological monitoring, i.e., voice and picture recorder on everyofficer's chest, no turning it off, felony to tamper with the tape. Then we will talk from FACT, and not outof our ASS. , there are lawyers who become clients, and the same applies to copsHorse shit. It is harder to
sue (much less have criminal charges brought against) a cop, than it is to find a proverbial needle in a
large hay stack, or pick fly shit out of black pepper. Example: 50,000 dollars (plus the other side's court
costs if lose) to bring a silly civil case like mine, which took all of 10 minutes to happen, according to the
average civil lawyer I've talked to. Please, your slumber only makes me laugh. . It is unhealthyHey,
someting I can finally agree with you on in this note you've written. Extraordinarily unhealthy. for any
community to refuse to see the reality, that sometimes we give power to people who abuse it. What is wrong
with continuously cleaning the dirty laundry?Refer to the ONLY way it is going to change. Have realbackbone and demand a means to glean FACT and nothing else. If you demand anything less,you're eating right out of their hands (the ones who wish to keep things as they are), unwittingly. Don'tfall for it, as the vast majority of people so easily do, and pat themselves on the back afterward for
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/20/2017 11:08 AM
"knowing" they made the right decision. Boy, talk about being hoodwinked. 2/16/2005
Dear Sgt. Scott Wong:
It was good to see you this morning. As promised I am copying you the ongoing e-mailconversation re the issue of police oversight here in Palo Alto and related police practices issues. As I mentioned, when we spoke briefly at the Starbuck's near my home, I am encouraging anyand all members of the PAPD to join in on the conversation regardless of viewpoint. I think it is
important that we have input on these issues not only from citizens but our public servants as
well.
As you will see, when you scroll down the conversation, Sgt. Ron Watson was gracious andcourageous enough to be the first member of your department to offer his perspective on theissues. I look forward to you, and others in your department, doing the same. Sincerely,
Aram James
Dear Aram,
I have always said that in all groups there are mediocre, excellent, and evil persons. The police department
does not have a magic wand that allows them to select and hire only excellent people. We have historically
seen bullies hide behind a badge, and when these same bullies promulgate the ideas that "an officer does not
tell on a fellow officer and you don't cross the blue line" well then we have a lot of horse manure. We have to
clean house on a continuous basis, there are lawyers who become clients, and the same applies to cops. It is
unhealthy for any community to refuse to see the reality, that sometimes we give power to people who abuse it.
What is wrong with continuously cleaning the dirty laundry?
Eduardo Mr. Minty, If you can think you can intimidate me by rolling down your windowthis morning in your patrol car, so that I can get a good look at youwhile I drove by, will not work. I am not impressed and I will notbe intimated by your stalking me or while riding my bike. Mark Petersen-Perez Dear Hillary: "There are four kinds of Homicide: felonious, excusable, justifiable,and praiseworthy."-- Ambrose Gwinett Bierce (1842-1914), American writer
I will be the first to give praise to those who deserve it and condemnthose who are guilty of wanton and willful blindness. April ChanFrank BenestLynne Johnson Entire HRC StaffNatasha PowersMr. MortonGary BaumDan RyanBrad ZookDennis.BurnsSam MintyArin SunseriGeorge Kennedy
Jay BoyarskyMarc Buller These crimes are no different then homicide and there excuses can no
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/20/2017 11:08 AM
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/18/2017 1:16 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Hope Raymond <mshoperaymond@icloud.com>
Sent:Saturday, September 16, 2017 12:02 AM
To:Council, City
Subject:18 Roosevelt Circle
Dear Members of the City Council,
I am wondering what progress is being made regarding clean‐up of 18 Roosevelt Circle. According to the owner's wife,
Not knowing I had already been in touch with the City Council, she urged me to contact you about
enforcing clean‐up of the home. .
I will appreciate your giving me an update on the clean‐up situation, so I can inform her and, hopefully, relieve her mind
a bit.
With thanks,
Hope Raymond
20 Roosevelt Circle
Sent from my iPhone
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/20/2017 11:01 AM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Sea <paloaltolife@gmail.com>
Sent:Wednesday, September 20, 2017 10:58 AM
Subject:Rosh Hashanah
Sea-Seelam Reddy (@SealamReddy)
9/20/17, 07:58
Happy new year! pic.twitter.com/jGjGfHAIxd
Download the Twitter app
Sent from my iPhone
Sent from my iPhone
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/18/2017 12:43 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Karen White <kwhite.karenl@gmail.com>
Sent:Thursday, September 14, 2017 11:35 AM
To:Council, City
Cc:City Mgr; mellow@cityofpaloalto.org; Neilson Buchanan; jguislin@gmail.com
Subject:RPP Mismanagement-A Proposal for Compensation
Honorable Members of the City Council:
I read a quote from Mr. Mello in a recent Palo Alto Online where he was alerted by a citizen (John Guislin) to the huge over-sale
of employee parking permits in my area (zone 5):
"Despite the glitch, the city did not receive complaints over the summer from residents in the five affected zones, city Chief
Transportation Official Joshuah Mello said. That helped influence the city's response, he said."
Also, from that same article:
"The biggest difference took place in Zone 5, which includes Forest and Homer Avenues, between Ramona and Guinda Streets,
and a small section of Hamilton, between Webster and Guinda. This area was eligible for 162 employee permits. The city sold
259, or 97 above the cap."
Well, here is a complaint from a homeowner who was and is currently subject to a significant impact. We attended a half dozen meetings on the subject over the past few years, noting a continual resistance to an RPP program by some city staff who did not want to be bothered with managing the program (which was, as usual, contracted out). Agenda items regarding an RPP program would often appear at the end of the Council agenda, after all but the most hardy locals had left the chambers. We certainly have noticed the lack of parking in our neighborhood. We discussed it with Neilson Buchanan on several occasions, and with some of his neighbors at a social event this summer. The parking situation on Ramona is simple - there is none for residents except on weekends, early morning and a brief period on weekdays around 5:00 PM. Add those 97 permits to the number of parking spaces that were to
be left for residents in our zone and I would bet, given the number of employees who do the two-hour car shuffle, that there are few if any
spots left for residents during the day.
So, why did the city receive "no complaints from [Zone 5] residents"? First most have jobs and have little time to find their way through the
city's bureaucracy or to attend lengthy meetings on this subject. Second, we have grown numb battling the strong resistance from some city staff and the constant push from developers, who have a lot more time and money to address these issues. So, what are the possible remedies for this major blunder (and the subsquent silence*) by city staff and the contractor? How about free hang tags next period for street parking for our guests in the zones like number 5 for those of us who bought tags who were often unable to find a space to park on our streets? A free tag will not fully compensate for the considerable inconvenience due to our loss of parking, but it is compensation somewhat proportionate to the loss, and aimed at those residents who bought tags for zones that were significantly oversold.
Respectfully,
Karen White
Ramone Street Homeowner for 30+ years
*While city planning staff caught the error in early summer, it wasn't publicly disclosed until Aug. 28, when City Manager James
Keene alluded to it while announcing the upcoming Sept. 30 ...
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/18/2017 12:43 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Gregory McShea <mgjpolicyvoice@gmail.com>
Sent:Thursday, September 14, 2017 10:39 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:RVs and trailers on El Camino Real
Hello,
I read in the Palo Alto weekly on Jun 23rd of this year that the city was to begin cracking down on the
many recreational vehicles and trailers constantly parked on El Camino Real near the Stanford
campus. Now nealry 3 months later, I would like to know the status of this enforcement push as in my
eyes it has either not started yet or has been ineffective.
I drive or jog by this area multiple times each week. There are still dozens (30+) of these vehicles
regularly parked on El Camino between the Palo Alto Medical Foundation driveway and Stanford
Avenue. Some of the vehicles there are just trailers with no tow car/truck attached, many others have
indications that they have been there for some time and will not be moving soon such as: vehicle
being up on leveling blocks or jacks, bump out section of the RV is extended, generators and other
personal belongings surrounding the RV, tarps or other coverings permanently fixed over windows.
It is clear to me that the owners of these vehicles are taking advantage of the lax enforcement by the
City of Palo Alto. The public parking is meant for all to use and not for private usage of the RV
owners. I am also surprised that the city has knowingly allowed this itinerant & unidentified population
to develop right across the street from one of our city's high schools which seems could pose a safety
risk given that the campus is openly accessible.
I would really like to see the city to regularly & strongly enforce the parking restrictions in this area
with the goal of getting these RVs owners to move their vehicles to a proper location such as an RV
park or private property where they have permission/rights to park their vehicle.
Thanks,
Greg
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/19/2017 4:29 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Palo Alto Free Press <paloaltofreepress@gmail.com>
Sent:Tuesday, September 19, 2017 3:56 AM
To:Jay Boyarsky
Cc:swebby@da.sccgov.org; jrosen@da.sccgov.org; csumida@da.sccgov.org;
dangel@dao.sccgov.org; DOkonkwo@da.sccgov.org; Brian Welch; Council, City; HRC
Subject:Santa Clara DA Censorship ? - Tweet by Palo Alto Free Press on Twitter
Did you pressure the Weekly into censoring posts Mr. Boyarsky
Palo Alto Free Press (@PAFreePress)
9/18/17, 11:24 AM @SantaClaraDA #PaloAlto Read what was censored Despicable behavior @PaloAltoPolice @cityofpaloalto
@paloaltoweekly @PaloAltoCityMgr pic.twitter.com/TOGM2pxCVz
Download the Twitter app
Sent from my iPad
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/18/2017 1:07 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Dhruv Khanna <dhruvkhanna2002@yahoo.com>
Sent:Sunday, September 17, 2017 1:43 PM
To:Council, City
Cc:Gary Kremen
Subject:Sod versus astroturf
Dear Honorable City Council Members of the City of Palo Alto:
I write to express my concerns about the decimation of sod, real turf grass ("Sod"), and its
replacement by artificial petroleum products-based astro-turf ("Artificial Turf") in our playing fields,
front and backyards. This replacement has been brought about in large part by extremist,
insufficiently thought-through and overly broad water rate price hikes in recent years. There is
increasing public realization that Artificial Turf is environmentally destructive while Sod provides
numerous ecosystem benefits such as slowing run off, flood control, bio-filtering run-off,
increasing percolation and being dog-friendly (collectively "Ecosystem Benefits"). For example,
while Sod acts like sponge in soaking up water when it rains, Artificial Turf causes rain water to drain
entirely into the City's storm water system or onto streets and neighboring properties.
I urgently draw your attention to
https://www.sccgov.org/sites/ag/news/Documents/AG_Economic_Report_WEB_Final.pdf, a study
commissioned by the Santa Clara County Agricultural Commissioner. Page 17 of this report,
prepared by the firm of ERA Economics, describes and quantifies the economic value of the
Ecosystem Benefits of farming/farm production and farmland. In our City of Palo Alto, agriculture has
been decimated and the only meaningful acreage in our City being managed equivalent to farmland
are the local golf courses and city parks.
Overly reviled for their water-consumption, golf courses and city parks which have meaningful
acreages of Sod provide Ecosystem Benefits that the City of Palo Alto should recognize and
preserve. In years when the San Francisquito Creek has come very close to flooding, it is
almost certain that one or more of the two golf courses upstream have played a decisive role
in averting actual flooding of one or more downstream creeks. At all times, it is beyond dispute
that these golf courses mitigate the risk of flooding and provide Ecosystem Benefits that of substantial
real value to Palo Alto in addition to providing aesthetic value for walkers in the Arastradero and Dish
areas, and food for the local deer and turkey populations.
The Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD) has recognized that farming, including sod farming,
provides the Ecosystem Benefits noted above. In recognition of such benefits which reduce the costs
of handling excess storm water run off, and reduce the costs associated with the greater risks of
flooding etc., the SCVWD provides reduced water rates for farming including sod farming that
are no greater (in fact substantially lower) than 25% of the Municipal and Industrial water rate.
Accordingly, I respectfully urge you to:
Read and require your staff to read the study cited above, at least in relevant part;
Require your staff understand the water rate policies of the SCVWD cited above;
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/18/2017 1:07 PM
2
Require your staff to assess the Ecosystem Benefits provided by the golf courses and city
parks and school district playgrounds that use Sod within the jurisdiction of the City of Palo
Alto;
Require your staff to substantially reduce the water rates for all water users such as the golf
courses within the City of Palo Alto that provide Ecosystem Benefits and/or other cost savings
or benefits to the City (e.g. reduced storm water run off).
Thank you.
Respectfully submitted,
Dhruv Khanna, 742 Alester Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94303
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/18/2017 3:01 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Palo Alto Free Press <paloaltofreepress@gmail.com>
Sent:Monday, September 18, 2017 8:04 AM
To:darylsavage@gmail.com; Scharff, Greg; Kniss, Liz (external); Council, City; Watson, Ron;
Perron, Zachary; Philip, Brian; Brian Welch; Reifschneider, James; Keene, James; Jay
Boyarsky; jrosen@da.sccgov.org; Keith, Claudia; Lum, Patty; pressstrong@gmail.com;
dangel@dao.sccgov.org; michael.gennaco@oirgroup.com;
stephen.connolly@oirgroup.com; HRC
Cc:James Aram; HRC
Subject:Tweet by Palo Alto Free Press on Twitter
I'm temped to fly back from Nicarauga just so I can address the fraud. This disgusting person was a police
informant. Remember Dr. Mendoza? (HRC)
As you no we are both precluded from discussing the issues related to Dr. Mendoza but Savage was instrument in his demise...
This women is
Mark Petersen-Perez
Palo Alto Free Press (@PAFreePress)
9/17/17, 4:55 AM
Meet @PaloAltoPolice informant. Citizens who came before her on police issues? Ice water running through her veins bit.ly/2jnmlL2 pic.twitter.com/VzvwtcEAtV
Download the Twitter app
Sent from my iPhone
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/18/2017 12:44 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Sea <paloaltolife@gmail.com>
Sent:Friday, September 15, 2017 7:56 AM
Subject:Tweet by Sea-Seelam Reddy on Twitter
Sea-Seelam Reddy (@SealamReddy)
9/15/17, 07:53
Dr. Max McGee pic.twitter.com/Za5qv4rcbL
Download the Twitter app
Sent from my iPhone
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/18/2017 12:52 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Palo Alto Free Press <paloaltofreepress@gmail.com>
Sent:Friday, September 15, 2017 7:59 PM
To:Jay Boyarsky; Council, City; Watson, Ron; Reifschneider, James;
gsheyner@paweekly.com; Sue Dremann; jrosen@da.sccgov.org;
jnowell@padailypost.com; Dave Price; David Angel; Scharff, Greg; Kniss, Liz (external);
Lum, Patty; Wagner, April; Ryan, Dan; Bonilla, Robert;
bjohnson@embarcaderomediagroup.com; bjohnson@paweekly.com
Again, sorry I wont be able to make it... Saludo, Mark Petersen-Perez
Ps. Waiting for the removal or censoring of all my posts..
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/18/2017 12:52 PM
2
Sent from my iPad
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/19/2017 4:31 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Nick Forlenza <forlenza1@me.com>
Sent:Tuesday, September 19, 2017 2:15 PM
To:Council, City
Subject:Verizon Cell Phone Towers
Dear City Council,
It has come to my attention that Verizon is planning to blanket Old Palo Alto with cell phone towers. I urge you to stop
this from happening. Right now, we have a beautiful neighborhood with many treelined streets. The towers will
definitely take away from this beauty. I am also very concerned about the radiation that will be emitted from these
towers. No one really knows the long‐term effect from this additional radiation.
Thank you for taking the time to read this.
Sharon Forlenza
Old Palo Alto
City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/18/2017 12:42 PM
1
Carnahan, David
From:Maureen Tri <maisietri@gmail.com>
Sent:Wednesday, September 13, 2017 8:41 PM
To:Council, City
Cc:Architectural Review Board; Gitelman, Hillary; Stump, Molly; Keene, James
Subject:Verizon Towers
To City Council:
I am extremely concerned about the proposed plan to install cell towers in our neighborhood. It is troubling for
a number of reasons but most importantly for the health risk. I respectfully urge you to watch the trailer for this informative video:
http://generationzapped.com
Hopefully it will interest you enough to want to host a screening. The decisions you make today will have a lasting impact on the health of our citizens, I urge you to consider your choices very carefully. Additionally I question the need for the towers which from what I understand, will predominately benefit commuters into Palo
Alto. Promoting better cell reception for commuters who should be concentrating on driving versus cell phone
activity, further confounds me as to the wisdom of such a decision.
Thank you for your consideration.
Maureen Tri
C/1 Y OF PALO ;\LTO. CA . CITY CLERK'S OFFICE Joel R. Bergquist
2085 Emerson Street 7 SEP I 5 PH f2: I f
Palo Alto, California 94301
12 September 2017
To the members of the Palo Alto City Council:
I am writing to express my dismay and alarm about the installation of Verizon cell phone
relays on telephone poles in Palo Alto. There is a notice on a phone pole outside our
house that is just 24 feet from two bedrooms in our house at 2085 Emerson Street.
Verizon plans to put one of their relays there. My wife and I have walked down to the
Verizon cell relay next to the Jobs house near the intersection of Waverley and Santa
Rita. People had told us that the VCT's (Verizon cell towers) were noisy, but we were
rudely surprised at the volume of noise emitted. The sound is like a constant whooshing,
and is noticeable from more than 30 feet away. This noise is produced 24/7 -it is a
ceaseless and unremitting nuisance. We often think of electrical installations as emitting
a low hum only audible at a very short distance, measured in inches. But the VCT's are
disturbingly noisy and audible from a distance of more than 30 feet in all directions.
Our house will be severely impacted, as will numerous others in Palo Alto. The noise
will be audible in our bedrooms, morning, noon, and night! This is a first class
disturbance that will deprive our family of the full use of our house. There will be no
escape from the noise. And the presence of the VCT and its projected sound will
adversely affect the value of our home. Other residents will also find the values of their
homes diminished.
The City Council of Palo Alto can stop this intrusion into our community. Our city
government is established to protect Palo Alto residents and their property. Palo Alto is
not, nor should it be, beholden to multi-national corporations like Verizon that don't give
a damn about how they affect people. Their only motivation is profit. And if Verizon
gets its way, the people of Palo Alto will be casualties. Palo Alto is an enlightened,
progressive community and we shouldn't be bending to the will of large corporations.
I have heard that Berkeley, Palos Verdes and other California cities have prohibited
installations such as that planned by Verizon. Palo Alto must do the same. City Council
needs to hold hearings, get the community involved, and do its job of protecting Palo
Alto and its people.
We urge every member of the City Council to go to the Jobs relay to hear for yourselves
the noise it emits.
Sincerely,
Joel R. Bergquist
Mayor Greogy Scharff
Vice-Mayor Liz Kniss
Councilmember Tom DuBois
Councilmember Eric Filseth
Councilmember Adrian Fine
Councilmember Karen Holman
Councilmember Lydia Kou
Councilmember Greg Tanaka
Councilmember Cory Wolbach
* NATO
September 18, 2017
lcou
[ ] Pla Be£ re Meeting
eceived at Meeting .
Dear Mayor Scharff, Vice-Mayor Kniss and Members of the City Council:
I am writing on behalf of the National Association of Tobacco Outlets (NATO), a national retail
trade association, and the retail stores located in Palo Alto that are members of NATO. We urge
you not to enact the proposed tobacco ordinance and recommend amendments to the draft
ordinance that would establish a Tobacco Retail License requirement in the City of Palo Alto.
NATO does not object to local tobacco licensing ordinances as long as they do not impose
unreasonably high license fees and do not contain sales restrictions that create unnecessary
regulatory burdens on our members. The ordinance before the City Council includes provisions
that will harm the law-abiding retailers in Palo Alto and in some cases, cause great economic
harm and even closure of businesses.
We respectfully request that the City Council make the following amendments to the ordinance:
1. Delete the flavored tobacco ban (Sec. 4.64.030(h))
2. Amend Sec. 4.4.0300) to comply with the California state law that exempts active duty
military from age 21 ; and
3. Add a grandfather provision under Sec. 4.64.030 that will allow existing tobacco retailers
within 500 feet of another retailer or 1,000 feet from a school to sell, through an arm's
length transaction, to a new owner.
NATO believes the sales restrictions in the draft ordinance go too far, especially given the state
laws enacted last year related to tobacco including raising the minimum age to purchase tobacco
products to age 21, regulating e-cigarettes as tobacco products and the 2017 increase of the
cigarette tax by $2.00 per pack.
Prohibiting the sale of all flavored tobacco products would impose an additional, significant
burden on Palo Alto retailers. NATO has spoken to retailers in the unincorporated areas of Santa
Clara County about the impact the county's existing flavor ban has had on their businesses.
These businesses have reported a decline in overall sales as their adult customers, who can no
longer purchase the tobacco products they desire, have taken their business to stores outside the
county where there are no flavor bans. Additionally, the county's TRL ordinance can be a
negative factor for retailers in the valuation of their businesses when they decide to sell.
Retailers' profit margins are under constant pressure and the added burden of a ban on the sale of
flavored tobacco products can lead to some retailers going out of business. Should Palo Alto
adopt the Santa Clara County tobacco retail license ordinance, it will create an uneven playing
field for existing businesses in the city as customers can easily go to retailers in adjacent
neighboring cities to purchase tobacco products. Government should not be in the business of
picking winners and losers in the marketplace.
We urge the Council to pull the TRL ordinance from the consent agenda for the September 18th
meeting and allow tobacco retailers an opportunity express their concerns.
Sincerely,
Thomas Briant
NATO Executive Director and Legal Counsel