Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout20171016plCC701-32 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: 10/16/2017 Document dates: 9/27/2017 – 10/4/2017 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 | 9/28/2017 3:48 PM 1 Carnahan, David From:Howard Barry Kleckner <howardkleckner@aol.com> Sent:Thursday, September 28, 2017 3:45 PM To:Council, City Cc:Cassie Ray Subject:Tobacco Retailers Ordinance The linked image cannot be displayed. The file may have been mov ed, renamed, or deleted. Verify that the link points to the correct file and location. September 28, 2017 The Honorable Gregory Scharff Palo Alto City Councilmembers 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 Dear Mayor Scharff and Palo Alto City Councilmembers: As a citizen of Palo Alto, a member of American Cancer Society and medical oncologist who deals nearly daily with preventable illnesses directly caused by tobacco products, I commend City Council for its forth coming discussion and vote on on the Tobacco Retail Permit ordinance. I understand this bill will: prohibit tobacco sales at pharmacies; set distance requirements between tobacco retailers and schools (current businesses are excluded from this requirement until the business transfers ownership); prohibit sales of flavored tobacco products; limit storefront advertising; prohibit vending machine sales of tobacco products. All of these provisions in addition to other recent ordinances passed by Council will go far in preventing our young people from ever starting to smoke. I strongly recommend you put these recommendations into law. My and the medical community's deepest thanks, Howard B. Kleckner, MD 1875 Guinda St. Palo Alto, Ca 94303 Sent from my iPad City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/29/2017 8:22 AM 1 Carnahan, David From:Cassie Ray <cassie.ray@cancer.org> Sent:Thursday, September 28, 2017 4:45 PM To:Council, City Subject:Message from the City Council Home Page Attachments:palo alto trl w flavors.docx Dear Mayor Scharff and Members of the Palo Alto City Council:    Thank you for your leadership in voting to pass a strong tobacco retail license.  I have attached a letter supporting the  ordinance and urge you to again vote for passage of this policy that will help reduce youth access to tobacco  products.  Reducing youth access can help to create a generation free from a costly and deadly addiction.    Cassie Ray | Northern California Government Relations Director American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network, Inc. 700 Main Street Suite 102 Suisun City, CA 94585 Phone: 707.290.0003 | Mobile: 707.290.0003 | Fax: 916.447.6931 acscan.org This message (including any attachments) is intended exclusively for the individual to whom it is addressed and may contain proprietary, protected, or confidential information. If you are not the named addressee, you are not authorized to read, print, copy, or disseminate this message or any part of it. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately.  American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network 700 Main Street, Suite 102  Fairfield CA 94533  707.290.0003 September 28, 2017 The Honorable Gregory Scharff Palo Alto City Councilmembers 250 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94301 Dear Mayor Scharff and Palo Alto City Councilmembers: The American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network (ACS CAN) is committed to protecting the health and well-being of the residents of Palo Alto through evidence-based policy and legislative solutions designed to eliminate cancer as a major health problem. ACS CAN supports efforts to reduce youth tobacco use, and we appreciate the leadership demonstrated by this council in passing the first vote of a comprehensive tobacco retail license, that includes flavors—including menthol cigarettes. We are writing to encourage final approval of this ordinance. Tobacco retail licensing (TRL) in which there is an adequate fee to fund enforcement, as well as meaningful penalties that include the permanent revocation of the license for repeat offenders, is an important policy component to effectively reduce youth access to tobacco products. Additionally, limiting access to tobacco products can reduce the appeal of these products to beginning smokers and encourage others to quit. Smoking remains the leading preventable cause of death in the U.S. The 2014 U.S. Surgeon General’s report found that more than 43 million Americans still smoke, and tobacco use will cause an estimated 480,000 deaths this year in the U.S. Both opponents of smoking and purveyors of cigarettes have long recognized the significance of adolescence as the period during which smoking behaviors are typically developed. National data show that about 95% percent of adult tobacco users begin smoking before the age of 21. Adolescents are still going through critical periods of brain growth and development and are especially vulnerable to the toxic effects of nicotine. Postponing youth experimentation and initiation can help reduce the number of youth who will ever begin smoking. In 2009, Congress, prohibited the sale of cigarettes with flavors other than tobacco or menthol. Tobacco companies responded by expanding the types of non-cigarette tobacco products they American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network 700 Main Street, Suite 102  Fairfield CA 94533  707.290.0003 offer, and now make most of those products available in a growing array of kid-friendly flavors. Little cigars, smokeless tobacco, hookah, and e-cigarettes, are marketed in a wide array of sweet flavors and colorful packaging that appeals to youth. In 2014, for the first time, use of e- cigarettes by California teens surpassed use of traditional cigarettes. Additionally, menthol has long been used to attract new and young smokers, as well as marketed heavily to the African American population. Consequently, more than 85% of African American who smoke, now smoke menthol, and African American men have the highest death rate from lung cancer when compared to other demographic groups. A growing body of research demonstrates that youth and young adults are particularly cost sensitive. Many flavored single cigars or small packs of little cigars are available at very low costs—some for as little as $1.00. Youth are also location sensitive, and they are more likely to experiment with tobacco products when retailers are located near schools, playgrounds, libraries, or other youth sensitive areas. Additionally, the density of tobacco retailers has also been associated with smoking rates. The ordinance being considered also calls for prohibiting licenses for pharmacies. Pharmacies are in the business of improving health, and it is a contradiction to be a facilitator of health and wellness, while selling tobacco products alongside over-the-counter medications and prescription drugs. Selling these products side-by-side helps to normalize tobacco use, and serves to further obscure the deadliness of these products, and the cancer they cause. ACS CAN supports the ordinance being considered, and we urge your final approval. Sincerely, Cassie Ray Government Relations Director, Northern California American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/2/2017 4:02 PM 1 Carnahan, David From:Benjamin Cintz <bcintz@gmail.com> Sent:Monday, October 02, 2017 4:00 PM To:Council, City Subject:Agenda Item No. 9 Dear Mayor, Vice Mayor and Council Members, I am writing to you regarding Agenda Item No. 9. I am a long time residence of Palo Alto. My business office is also in Palo Alto. I believe the primary purpose of building permits is to protect the public safety and that the increase in building permit fees under consideration will result in an increase in unpermitted work. I also believe that the increase in building permit fees under consideration will place an undue burden on small residential and commercial property owners and business owners. Thank you for considering my concerns. Ben Cintz City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/29/2017 11:00 AM 1 Carnahan, David From:Svendsen, Janice Sent:Friday, September 29, 2017 10:59 AM To:Council Members; Council Agenda Email; ORG - Clerk's Office Cc:Keene, James; Shikada, Ed; De Geus, Robert; Flaherty, Michelle; Eggleston, Brad; Sartor, Mike; Gitelman, Hillary; Castelino, Peter; Alaee, Khashayar; Whitley, Katie; Magliocco, Gina; Mello, Joshuah Subject:10/2 Council Questions for Agenda Item 6: SB1 Street Maintenance, Item 7: SP Plus Valet and Item 9: Development Services Costs Please note corrected Agenda Item numbers.  No other changes made.           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 October 2, 2017 council meeting.    Item 6:  SB1 Street Maintenance – CM Tanaka  Item 7:  SP Plus for Valet Parking Services – CM Tanaka  Item 9:  Development Service Costs – CM Tanaka    Item 6:  SB1 Street Maintenance    Q.1. My question relates to the sentiment above about where the figure $385,376  came from. Is $385,376 enough to pave all the roads listed in the bill? If it isn’t,  will we still pave all of the listed roads (by adding additional money to the  expenditure), or will we repave the worse roads (low PCIs) until the $385,376 runs  out?    A.1. The $385,376 SB1 funding estimate was provided by the League of California  Cities based on State Department of Finance statewide revenue projections and  Palo Alto’s proportion of the state population.  SB1 requires that cities provide  a list of streets that the funding will be used on.  The streets listed in the staff  report are anticipated to be included in the FY 2018 Asphalt Overlay Project,  which is one of several projects to be funded by CIP Project PE‐86070 Street  Maintenance in FY 2018.  The $385,376 is not enough to pave the list of roads,  as this work is estimated to cost approximately $4 million.  The SB1 funding will  be used to supplement the $6 million construction funding for CIP Project PE‐ 86070 Street Maintenance for FY 2018.       Item 7:  SP Plus for Valet Parking Services  City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/29/2017 11:00 AM 2 Q.1. How much does the City pay for SP Plus for stationing attendants at the  parking garage?   A.1. On June 29, 2015 the Palo Alto City Council approved a total contract  amount not to exceed $997,652 over a three‐year period. Over the past year, the  average monthly cost for this service is $20,000. This agenda item involves a  contract for a time only extension and does not request any additional funding.  Q.2. What is the current annual rate for parking permits in downtown Palo Alto?  A.2. Permits to park in downtown garages and lots are currently $730 per year.  Q.3. Why weren’t there other companies considered in this report?  A.3. As explained in the staff report, staff is preparing an RFP to seek a vendor  to provide enhanced services and to add options to expand the valet program, if  desired. This time‐only amendment will prevent a gap in service while we  undertake this procurement, and ensure no impact to existing permit holders.  Q.4. How much does it cost per car to have the valet park a car?  A.4. Customers do not pay valets to park cars; this is a free service to permit  holders.  In terms of the City’s costs, as we’ve noted above, the monthly cost is  about $20,000.  The valets are currently parking about 45‐70 cars per day on  average (with Friday’s consistently being the lowest).  This equates to about $14‐ $22 per car, however this calculation ($20,000 ¸ 20 weekdays ¸ 45 to 70 cars =  $14‐$22 per car) does not account for the additional revenue available to the  City because the valet service generally allows the City to sell more garage  permits (i.e. to reduce the waiting list for permits).       Item 9:  Development Service Costs     Q.1. What is the likelihood of an uncertain financial situation that will lead to the  need to use the reserve?     A.1. Currently economic indicators look healthy as noted by the Bureau of Labor  Statics (https://www.bls.gov/regions/west/ca_sanjose_msa.htm) and other  research institutions such as the Center for Continuing Study of the California  Economy (http://www.ccsce.com/PDF/Numbers‐Sept‐2017‐CA‐Regional‐ Economy‐Rankings‐2016.pdf).  Looking at the historical trend, it is anticipated  that another recession will occur sometime over the next five years, considering  the last recession (Great Recession) happened almost a decade ago.     During the Great Recession, the General Fund subsidized the operational costs  for functions currently performed by the Development Services Department  (DSD) by approximately $7 million over a three year period.  More recently, over  the last three fiscal years, there were funding gaps that needed to be filled  through the General Fund subsidy after adjusting for deferred revenues.  With  adjusted fee rates based on the completed Cost of Study Analysis, it is  City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/29/2017 11:00 AM 3 anticipated that the General Fund subsidy will no longer be necessary in any  normal year.  However, if what happened during the Great Recession is an  indicator, there will likely be a need to use the reserve during the next economic  downturn.    On December 6, 2016, in preparation for the Fiscal Year 2018 budget hearings,  staff advanced a Fiscal Year 2018 General Fund Financial Status and Budget  Development Guidelines: http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/  documents/55067. This report provides an update on economic indicators as  well near and long term pressures on the General Fund. These include capital  infrastructure, new programs such as traffic mitigation and housing, labor  agreements, pension contribution, and health care.     Q.2. Within what time frame about will this reserve be used up?     A.2. While an actual time frame would be difficult to estimate as the level of  funding needed would be dependent on multiple factors, the reserve equivalent  to approximately 25% of annual operating budget could be used up in two to  three years during an economic downturn. However, staff will examine the  reserve level as part of the annual budget development process and submit  recommended adjustments.  Should there be a need to use the reserve; staff will  follow Section 5 of the Policy: “Authority to use the DSDRF will remain with the  City Council. The City Manager will submit a request to use the DSDRF to the City  Council. The Director of Development Services Department will prepare the  report identifying the need for access to the DSDRF and confirm that the use is  consistent with the purpose of the reserves as described in this policy.  Determination of need requires analysis of the sufficiency of the current level of  reserve funds, the availability of any other sources of funds before using  reserves, and evaluation of the time period for which the funds will be required  and replenished.”       Q.3.Is the need for a reserve big enough that the existing General Fund will not  cover it?    A.3.During times of economic downturn where the General Fund reserve needs  to be accessed, there will be multiple areas that will require funding to support  the Council’s priorities, as well as for continuous operation to provide the City’s  core services and programs.   During that period the Council will need to  prioritize which funding needs will be addressed, and having a separate DSD  reserve fund will ensure that there are additional resources available in the  General Fund reserve for high priority areas.  As noted in the Finance Committee  meeting, during an economic downturn or due to an unforeseen event, it is not  prudent to place the burden of DSD activities on all citizens. Therefore by  creating dedicate reserve the City Council will have additional flexibility to solve  the City’s challenges.     Q.4.What, specifically, will the money from the DSDRF be used for?    A.4.The DSD Reserve Policy states the following: “the purpose of the  Development Services Department Reserve Fund (DSDRF) is to build and  maintain an adequate level of unrestricted funds available to cover any  City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/29/2017 11:00 AM 4 unforeseen shortfalls that arise outside of the regular budget planning process,  as well as one‐time, nonrecurring expenses that will build long‐term capacity.”    This means the DSDRF may be used to cover operating costs during an economic  downturn or recession or to fund a one‐time initiative that will allow DSD to  enhance the existing services for more seamless operations.  Other examples of  use could be for contracts with inspection and plan check firms or citizens facing  technology projects. It would not be a positive experience for property owners  or permit holders if the City immediately eliminated staff resources or cancelled  online services. Any uses of the DSDRF will need City Council approval.    Q.5. What is the expected effect on businesses and residents?    A.5. While there will be a nominal increase, 5%, in overall costs to businesses  and residents that utilize the services provided by DSD, staff anticipates the  expected effect on businesses and residents will be positive. The DSDRF will  ensure that resources are available to deliver permit issuance, inspection, and  plan check services on time. This is an important factor for property owners,  especially given the value of Palo Alto real estate. Furthermore, DSD is obligated  to provide services once an applicant has paid for permit fees. It is a pay first,  perform later service model. The DSDRF would decrease City Council’s general  fund trade off decision portfolio during tough economic times. Finally, City  Council will review the DSDRF on an annual basis during budget hearings and can  provide further direction to staff.         Thank you,  Janice Svendsen         Janice Svendsen | Executive Assistant to James Keene, City Manager   250 Hamilton Avenue | Palo Alto, CA 94301  D: 650.329.2105 | E: janice.svendsen@cityofpaloalto.org              City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/3/2017 2:32 PM 1 Carnahan, David From:celia chow <celia.cchow@gmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, October 03, 2017 1:02 PM To:Atkinson, Rebecca; Council, City; Architectural Review Board Subject:A formal request in regards to the Small Cell Installations in Palo Alto Hi Rebecca, Please let us know if Verizon has submitted a 4th (or more) set of applications. Are the shot clocks for Cluster 2 & 3 are still stopped? We also appreciate if you can tell us where the AT&T submission stands. And is TMobile submitting anything? Thanks! Celia City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/2/2017 1:31 PM 1 Carnahan, David From:Patrick Toland <ptoland@yahoo.com> Sent:Saturday, September 30, 2017 11:36 AM To:Council, City Subject:Antonio's Nuthouse I am not sure if you are the proper audience but it seems that there are some permitting challenges associated with Antonio's Nuthouse since the owner's death. I appreciate you have better things to do than preserve a local institution that happens to be a bar but I wanted to bring it to your attention. I've read more on Nextdoor here about the events and hope someone will take the time to help. Regards, Patrick Patrick Toland 164 Park Avenue Palo Alto, CA 934306 650.704.6200 City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/3/2017 3:03 PM 1 Carnahan, David From:Christopher K. Cosner <ccosner@stanford.edu> Sent:Tuesday, October 03, 2017 2:57 PM To:Council, City Subject:BMR Program Dear City Council, I wish to draw your attention to a problem with the Below Market Rate Housing program administered by Palo Alto Housing Services. It appears that in an effort to “go green” the administrators have excluded people unfairly from the list. As you may know, the program requires participants to re-register every year. Until 2017 this process was done with forms mailed through the USPS. In 2017 the BMR program switched to email notification apparently without any warning in print. A normal procedure for this sort of transition would involve a notification in print, and would include the option to continue to utilize printed materials. Speaking for myself, I realized in late August that I should have received something and was worried that I had somehow missed the mailing. I searched my desk and every drawer and folder I could think of at home. Then I searched my email, then finally searched my spam folder, and found the notification. I was already too late to re-register. I immediately contacted Lauren Bigelow but was told: “Thank you for reaching out. I really wish that there were something we could do, but we can't take responsibility for how mail is delivered (either via USPS or Google) and I can't accept any late applications at all. If I accepted one, I would have to accept them all. I'm so sorry. I do hope that something works out for you soon.” Ms. Bigelow always responded to my emails, but when I asked whether notification was sent by USPS, she did not respond. The last correspondence I have in print from them is dated August 1, 2016 and says nothing of a policy change. We have been on the list since 2007, carefully filling out the forms each year and paying the renewal fees. To be kicked off the list due to an administrative blunder is dismaying. However, I think it is clear that this likely impacted more people than just my family. Moreover, it makes no sense for them to have handled the transition in this way. No reputable financial institution suddenly imposes a requirement that all communications must be electronic and does so via email without confirming consent. To make this right, I suggest a full audit of the BMR list. Everyone dropped from the list due to failing to register in time this year (2017) should be contacted in writing and given a reasonable time frame to rejoin the list with the waiting list number they had in 2016 (not bumped to the end of the list). The BMR administration should reinstate printed notification for those who wish to receive it. Thank you. Sincerely, Christopher Cosner City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/2/2017 1:34 PM 1 Carnahan, David From:Winter Dellenbach <winterdell@earthlink.net> Sent:Sunday, October 01, 2017 1:17 PM Subject:Buena Vista - More good news! Attachments:Press Rel 9-29-17 HA owns.pdf; BV Homework Club-front-2-announcement.pdf; BV HMWK Club-description.pdf Dear Friends of Buena Vista ~ I have good news for you. The Baton Finally Has Been Passed - The first news is that as of 4PM Friday, September 29th, the Housing Authority of Santa Clara Co. became the legal owner of Buena Vista Mobile Home Park. The last document was signed, sealed and delivered to the County Recorders Office, bring the 31-year ownership by the Jisser family to a close. If this seems like old news to you, it should not - a lot of work by the Housing Authority and the Jisser family has been going on to put in place this vital final piece - subdividing the commercial strip on El Camino from the mobile home park acreage, and more. And as of tomorrow, Monday, Caritas will have an interim property manager living at BV - lifting a burden from residents and the Board who had taken much of the management responsibility on themselves in the last couple of years. Thank you Buena Vista Board of Directors for stepping in and helping to hold things together. And hello Housing Authority and Caritas! We are so happy you are here! Here's the Housing Authority's press release: The Buena Vista Homework Club The other good news is that Buena Vistans continue to inspire people to involve themselves in their community. The latest example is the Homework Club, founded by Deborah Farrington-Padilla. She started it a few weeks ago for the BV elementary school kids and it's already a brilliant success. Caritas immediately stepped in to provide its office at BV as the "club house" and is helping to provide materials. There's been over 100 hours of homework help so far. BV Security Guard Moses helps out with on-the-spot fix-its. Long time Friend of BV, Prof. Amado Padilla sometimes volunteers, along with Stanford Grad School of Education students and a MV high school student (note - no more volunteers are needed at this time). Below are Deborah's snazzy graphics and more information about the Club. As you can see, the beat goes on at Buena Vista. Much more work needs to be done in the next few years but Housing Authority will manage. The anniversary of the 5 year effort to save BV was this September 12th - the date on the notices to residents that the park was to close. I remember when the City Manager notified the City Council that residents would likely be gone by the end of 2013. Wow - that didn't happen. Buena Vista Mobile Home Park is 91 year old this year. Its people remain. It will abide. We did it. You will hear from me again, dear Friends ~ Winter Dellenbach Friends of Buena Vista NEWS For Immediate Release Contact: Katherine Harasz, SCCHA Executive Director, 408-464-2692; katherine.harasz@scchousingauthority.org Gabe Carhart, Office of County Supervisor Joe Simitian, 408-299-5050; gabriel.carhart@bos.sccgov.org Claudia Keith, Chief Communications Officer, Palo Alto, 650-329-2607; claudia.keith@cityofpaloalto.org SANTA CLARA COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY FINALIZES PURCHASE OF BUENA VISTA MOBILE HOME PARK SAN JOSE, Calif. – Sept. 29, 2017 – The Santa Clara County Housing Authority (SCCHA) has finalized the purchase of the Buena Vista Mobile Home Park in Palo Alto, Calif., paving the way for the Housing Authority and the park’s new operator, Caritas Corporation, to begin the design and permitting of infrastructure and other needed improvements to the site. The sale brings to completion the more than two-year effort to preserve the park as affordable housing, while enabling 400 low-income residents to remain in their homes. “We are pleased to have this acquisition completed,” said SCCHA Executive Director Katherine Harasz. “We look forward to the continued partnership to improve the lives of these 400 county residents.” Santa Clara County Supervisor Joe Simitian, who has championed the county’s efforts to preserve the mobile home park since January 2015, said, “From the beginning of this effort we've had three goals: to preserve over 100 units of desperately needed affordable housing; to prevent the eviction of 400 low- income residents, folks who truly have nowhere else to go; and, to ensure that the current property owner receives full and fair market value for the property. We can be proud today that we accomplished all three goals. All of this happened because so many good folks had the grit, the determination, and the decency to make it happen.” “At one level this was a test––a test of whether or not our region remains a place of inclusivity and opportunity,” said Simitian. “In this instance, at least, I'm gratified to say we passed the test.” Palo Alto Mayor Greg Scharff said, “Saving and renovating the Buena Vista Mobile Home Park was an important effort to reinforce our commitment to affordable housing and to preserve a part of our history. This agreement helps Palo Alto continue its tradition of being a great place to live and raise a family.” - more - Page 2 Funding for the park’s purchase and redevelopment comes from a three-way partnership between Santa Clara County, City of Palo Alto and the Housing Authority. The city and county each committed $14.5 million in dedicated affordable housing funds for acquisition and rehabilitation, and the Housing Authority contributed an additional $26 million in federal funding from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. A tri-party regulatory agreement restricts the use of the property for affordable housing for 75 years. The day-to-day park operations will be managed by Caritas Corporation, a nonprofit that specializes in preserving affordable mobile home communities. “Caritas Corporation is honored to work hand in hand with Santa Clara County Housing Authority, City of Palo Alto and the County of Santa Clara to preserve and improve the Buena Vista community,” said Randy Redwitz, CEO of the Caritas Corporation. ### About SCCHA SCCHA is the largest provider of affordable housing assistance in Santa Clara County, helping make rental housing safe and affordable for low-income families through Section 8 voucher programs and below-market rental properties. Designated a Moving to Work agency by Congress, it has the capacity to assist nearly 18,000 households through innovative policies for the delivery of assisted housing. For more information, visit www.scchousingauthority.org. Buena Vista Homework Club The Buena Vista Homework Club has just been established to support elementary school students living in the Buena Vista Mobile Home Park in south Palo Alto. After receiving eviction notices from their landlord in 2012, the BV community organized a Resident Association, contacted local friends and advocates who could support their cause, and undertook what turned out to be a five-year legal battle to save their homes. In the end, the Santa Clara County Housing Authority, purchased the land, thus preserving this vital affordable housing resource for ~110 families. Within this community of ~400 residents are about 40 children who attend nearby Barron Park Elementary School in the Palo Alto Unified School District. While the school offers its students an excellent education and after school resources, there remains a need to support the young children of Buena Vista. The learn more about the Buena Vista community, visit: https://ed.stanford.edu/news/scholar-activist-advocates-those-losing-out- silicon-valley-s-benefits Deborah Farrington Padilla, Ed.D., a local educator and a supporter of the Buena Vista residents’ activism to save their community, created the Buena Vista Homework Club to celebrate the new-found security felt within the community and to help fill the learning gap for Buena Vista’s youngest residents. The Caritas Corporation, provides new management of the Buena Vista mobile home park, and as expressed in the Caritas mission statement – Caritas endeavors to create vibrant communities where quality of life, resident involvement, and caring are priorities – offers enthusiastic support for the Buena Vista Homework Club. The Buena Vista Homework Club offers a safe, clean space to focus on learning, get much-needed homework help, read good books, get a snack, and create a community of friends. The Buena Vista Homework Club is open TUES & THURS afternoons 4:00-5:30pm and is located at 3980 El Camino Real, Palo Alto, CA 94306 (at the El Camino & Los Robles intersection behind the Valero gas station). Volunteers can contact Deborah at 650-575-5435 or dfarrington@me.com. The Buena Vista Homework Club kids would love to have a few Stanford volunteers spend an afternoon with them! NEW!!! Buena Vista Homework Club Happy new school year! The Buena Vista Homework Club is OPEN! All Kindergarten to 6th grade children living at Buena Vista are welcome to join the Buena Vista Homework Club. We will use the time to help children understand and complete their homework and have lots of good reading books. The club will be a safe & quiet place to focus on LEARNING! ~ FREE ~ The Buena Vista Homework Club will be open every TUESDAY & THURSDAY after school 4:00-5:30pm Thank you to Caritas for providing space for the BV Homework Club in Space #22, which has AC & a bathroom. City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/28/2017 3:49 PM 1 Carnahan, David From:Kirit Dave <kiritdave@gmail.com> Sent:Wednesday, September 27, 2017 1:54 PM To:Council, City; kirit dave Subject:Comprehensive Plan and traffic etc. Dear Sir: I have lived in Palo Alto since late 1970s. I am sad to see how the whole personality of City continues to go against the very reason we came to Palo alto. As City managers I want you to know that our plan needs to be more balanced and that means in today's term less supportive of business developments and more towards residential requirements. Traffic in our area is unmanageable. What used to take me 15 to 20 minutes drive time has almost doubled to tripled. I do not see how so many permits are being assigned without any considerations to traffic on El Camino and surroundings. The drivers are frustrated and have become "uncivilized" and aggressive. These behaviors I had not seen before. Public is reacting to overcrowding. Please restrain new permits and give greater considerations to traffic and noise effect. kirit dave City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/4/2017 8:19 AM 1 Carnahan, David From:Esther Nigenda <enigenda@yahoo.com> Sent:Tuesday, October 03, 2017 5:34 PM To:Friend, Gil; Keene, James Cc:Council, City Subject:Congratulations! "Palo Alto was recognized at the League of California Cities Conference & Expo in Sacramento last week as the first city in California to achieve a Platinum Level Beacon Award – the highest level possible – for its leadership in addressing climate change. Mayor Scharff attended the conference and accepted the honor in recognition of the City’s achievements. The award is a testament to our community’s commitment to sustainability and its place as a core value of our citizens." A proud achievement for our City. However, not to rest on our laurels, better data and "top-down" observations would seem to be a logical next step. “I think currently a lot of the greenhouse gas reporting for cities is bottom-up inventory that doesn’t have independent data that tests how robust the assumptions are,” says Lucy Hutyra, a biogeochemist at Boston University . . . ". Cities Turn to Other Cities for Help Fighting Climate Change. A smaller but significant step would be greater encouragement to stop food waste: "Globally, food waste contributes 8 percent of greenhouse gases annually, roughly the same amount as road transportation emissions. More than 1 billion tons of food is lost or wasted every year, with a cost of $940 billion. That's roughly one-third of the food produced globally." Better Labels, Less Food Waste Thank you for your leadership on this issue, Esther Nigenda, Ph.D. City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/4/2017 8:19 AM 1 Carnahan, David From:Arthur Keller <arthur@kellers.org> Sent:Wednesday, October 04, 2017 7:12 AM To:board.secretary@vta.org; Council, City Subject:FLAWED VTA Proposed Guidelines for Caltrain Grade Separations Agenda Item 6.3 on the Consent Calendar is "ACTION ITEM -1) Adopt a Resolution, establishing the 2016 Measure B Program; and 2) adopt the 2016 Measure B Program Category Guidelines.” These guidelines are on pages 40-41 of http://vtaorgcontent.s3-us-west-1.amazonaws.com/Site_Content/bod_100517_packet.pdf#page=40 as follows: Caltrain Grade Separations Proposed Guidelines This program category will fund grade separations in the cities of Sunnyvale, Mountain View, and Palo Alto. VTA, working in collaboration with the three cities and other partners, is proposing to develop an implementation plan for delivering the eight grade separation projects. Once the implementation plan is complete, funds will be distributed as candidate projects move forward in readiness. The amount of funding in 2016 Measure B will likely not be enough to fully fund all eight projects listed in the Caltrain Grade Separation Program Category. To complete all eight projects, VTA would allocate 2016 Measure B funding to the most cost-effective grade separation alternatives possible. Additionally, VTA anticipates that outside funding sources will need to be secured to complete the program. VTA is also recommending that the grade separation projects apply Complete Streets best practices in order to improve transit, bicycle and pedestrian elements at the intersections. Recommended Funding for FY 2018-19 VTA is recommending $7 million for FY 2018-19 which will be used to fund the implementation plan, as well as any potential design and/or environmental work that cities may be able to advance. I request better language that is fairer to all cities and promotes the best designs, not the cheapest. Instead of the highlighted sentence above, the following language should be used: To complete all eight projects, VTA shall divide the 2016 Measure B funding equally in 2017 dollars among the eight projects listed in the Caltrain Grade Separation Program Category. Designs higher than baseline costs will require additional local and other funding. VTA will work collectively with the cities to secure funds from outside sources to complete the program. Best regards, Arthur Keller City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/29/2017 8:23 AM 1 Carnahan, David From:Norman Beamer <nhbeamer@yahoo.com> Sent:Thursday, September 28, 2017 6:26 PM To:Keene, James Cc:Council, City Subject:FW: [CPNA] Anyone know why the traffic is so backed up? Another Carmagedden  incident throughout Palo Alto due to one traffic light glitch.  Foreshadowing of what will be more  and more common.    ‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐  From: Norman Beamer [mailto:nhbeamer@yahoo.com]   Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2017 6:25 PM  To: 'patricia.knox' <patricia.knox@gmail.com>; 'Crescent Park PA' <crescent‐park‐pa@googlegroups.com>  Subject: RE: [CPNA] Anyone know why the traffic is so backed up?    From: Menlo Park Police Department <menlo‐park‐police‐department@emails.nixle.com>  Subject: Advisory Message: UPDATE ‐ ETA for fix 8:00 PM per PG&E. Bayfront Expry/University Av in Menlo Park Signal  light is out due to a PGE issue.  Date: September 28, 2017 at 6:06:47 PM PDT  To: beth.guislin@gmail.com  Reply‐To: no‐reply@emails.nixle.com    Message sent via Nixle | Go to nixle.com | Unsubscribe       Thursday September 28, 2017, 6:06 PM  Menlo Park Police Department                Advisory: UPDATE ‐ ETA for fix 8:00 PM per PG&E. Bayfront Expry/University Av in Menlo Park Signal light is out due to a  PGE issue.  For full details, view this message on the web.        Sent by Menlo Park Police Department  701 Laurel Street, Menlo Park, CA 94025  To manage your email settings, click here. To update your account settings, login here.  If you prefer not to receive future emails, unsubscribe here.    Powered by  Nixle. © 2017 Everbridge, Inc. All rights reserved.        ‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐  From: crescent‐park‐pa@googlegroups.com [mailto:crescent‐park‐pa@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of patricia.knox  City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/29/2017 8:23 AM 2 Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2017 6:18 PM  To: Crescent Park PA <crescent‐park‐pa@googlegroups.com>  Subject: [CPNA] Anyone know why the traffic is so backed up?    Light out at University. Huge backup.    ‐‐   You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Crescent Park PA" group.  To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to crescent‐park‐ pa+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.  To post to this group, send email to crescent‐park‐pa@googlegroups.com.  Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/crescent‐park‐pa.  For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.      City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/28/2017 3:49 PM 1 Carnahan, David From:Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> Sent:Thursday, September 28, 2017 1:27 PM To:Loran Harding; Paul Dictos; dennisbalakian; David Balakian; Dan Richard; Daniel Zack; Doug Vagim; Mayor; CityManager; Council, City; esmeralda.soria@fresno.gov; paul.caprioglio; Cathy Lewis; kfsndesk; newsdesk; rosenheim@kpix.cbs.com; midge@thebarretts.com; info@superide1.com; robert.andersen; beachrides; bmcewen; Leodies Buchanan; leager; huidentalsanmateo; bballpod; bearwithme1016@att.net; firstvp@fresnopoa.org; Raymond Rivas; fmerlo@wildelectric.net; Steve Wayte; Joel Stiner; steve.brandau; oliver.baines; kclark; mmt4@pge.com; russ@topperjewelers.com; richard.wenzel; thomas.esqueda@fresno.gov; terry; hennessy; Greg.Gatzka; popoff; jboren; david pomaville; johnhutson580; kevin cervantes; lxcastro93@yahoo.com; Tom Lang; Mark Standriff; nick yovino; clinton.olivier; pavenjitdhillon@yahoo.com; parsons@brandman.edu; Mark Waldrep; debra.perrone@stanford.edu Subject:Fwd: Powerful Westlands Water Dist. votes against Brown's twin Delta tunnels ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> Date: Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 11:47 AM Subject: Fwd: Powerful Westlands Water Dist. votes against Brown's twin Delta tunnels To: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> Date: Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 12:04 PM Subject: Fwd: Powerful Westlands Water Dist. votes against Brown's twin Delta tunnels To: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> Date: Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 11:36 AM Subject: Fwd: Powerful Westlands Water Dist. votes against Brown's twin Delta tunnels To: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> Date: Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 1:25 AM Subject: Fwd: Powerful Westlands Water Dist. votes against Brown's twin Delta tunnels To: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/28/2017 3:49 PM 2 ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> Date: Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 1:08 PM Subject: Fwd: Powerful Westlands Water Dist. votes against Brown's twin Delta tunnels To: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> Date: Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 12:54 PM Subject: Fwd: Powerful Westlands Water Dist. votes against Brown's twin Delta tunnels To: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> Date: Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 12:39 PM Subject: Fwd: Powerful Westlands Water Dist. votes against Brown's twin Delta tunnels To: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> Date: Sun, Sep 24, 2017 at 1:18 PM Subject: Fwd: Powerful Westlands Water Dist. votes against Brown's twin Delta tunnels To: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> Date: Sat, Sep 23, 2017 at 4:19 PM Subject: Fwd: Powerful Westlands Water Dist. votes against Brown's twin Delta tunnels To: Doug Vagim <dvagim@gmail.com>, Steve Wayte <steve4liberty@gmail.com>, dennisbalakian <dennisbalakian@sbcglobal.net>, David Balakian <davidbalakian@sbcglobal.net> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> Date: Sat, Sep 23, 2017 at 4:07 PM Subject: Fwd: Powerful Westlands Water Dist. votes against Brown's twin Delta tunnels To: Paul Dictos <paul@dictos.com> City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/28/2017 3:49 PM 3 ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> Date: Sat, Sep 23, 2017 at 3:23 PM Subject: Fwd: Powerful Westlands Water Dist. votes against Brown's twin Delta tunnels To: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> Sat. Sept. 23, 2017 Paul- Thank you for the kind words. I'll keep the emails coming. The more I think about Temperance Flat Dam, the scarier it becomes. It would have the capacity of Hoover Dam, but Hoover was built in Black Canyon on the Colorado, as you know. They did a big survey of the Colorado, sent experts down it, looking for a good site, and they found Black Canyon. PBS did a one-hour show on Hoover Dam, and I have it on DVD. I have to wonder if we have something like Black Canyon on the San Joaquin R., just above Friant Dam and its Millerton Lake. If we do have, one wonders why they did not build a bigger dam like Hoover there in 1940, instead of Friant Dam where it is. Notice too that you don't have a city the size of Fresno, or ANY city, just below Hoover Dam. If Hoover were to fail, I'm not sure what damage it would do. There are some tiny habitations south of Hoover Dam on the Colorado R. To see that, go to Google Maps and see Las Vegas and Hoover Dam. Las Vegas lies to the NW of Hoover Dam, not south and down-river from it. Lake Mead behind Hoover holds approximately one million acre feet of water, as would the new lake behind Temperance Flat Dam. For some reason, almost NO human habitation has developed south of, and down-river from, Hoover Dam. The City of Fresno is planning for this city's population to grow from the current 520,000 to 775,000 by 2035. At that rate, Fresno would have a million people by 2055. And the decision on whether or not to build Temperance Flat Dam above Friant Dam is set to be made next year, in 2018. So the real decision to be made next year is whether or not to build a one million acre-foot dam just upriver from an existing one-half million acre-foot dam, all of it just upriver from what will be a million people. If the decision is made to build Temperance Flat Dam, it will be a crime. The next big quake in the Cascadia Subduction Zone is coming, ~2100 if the recurrence intervals are correct. Up there, the Juan de Fuca plate is subducting to the east under the N. American plate. What happened in 1700 is that it caught and pulled the western edge of the N. American plate down with it as it sub-ducted. Down and down, all of this under the ocean, just off the coast. Finally, the N. American plate snapped loose, sprang upward, and moved enormous amounts of water as it did so. Huge earthquake in Washington- Oregon. There were few or no Europeans there in 1700 to note it, but the Japanese noted the arrival of the resulting tsunami in Japan. With their records, we can pinpoint the quake almost to the minute. It was in January, 1700. We know the day and the hour. Interestingly, the identical process was at work on March 11, 2011 when Fukushima happened. (The Tohoku earthquake and tsunami). On that side of the Pacific, the Pacific plate was subducting to the west, caught the eastern edge of a plate on which Japan sits, pulled that plate down and down, and, when it snapped loose, you had the quake that produced the tsunami that flooded Fukushima and its nuclear plant. Buildings swayed in Tokyo. It was a huge, 9.0 quake. City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/28/2017 3:49 PM 4 https://www.earthmagazine.org/article/japans-megaquake-and-killer-tsunami-how-did-happen So Geology works on a scale of thousands of miles and miles under the earth. Subduction has halted along California. Instead, we have lateral movement with the Pacific Plate moving north along the N. American Plate. Los Angeles is on the Pacific Plate and San Francisco and the Central Valley are on the N. American Plate. The San Andreas Fault separates the two plates as far north as Cape Mendocino. Los Angeles will pull even with San Francisco at some point. The subduction that did happen at one point along all of the west coast of N. American threw up the Rocky Mountains (!). Where did California come from? There were, at one point, islands just off the coast of the N. American plate and these, and a lot else, got pushed east and scraped off the subducting plate, producing California. That is what Craig Poole, my Geology instructor at Fresno City College, told me in Spring, 2002. He used the words "scraped off" to describe the origin of California. Geology works on stupendous scales. North-bound India slammed into Asia and threw up the Himalayas. I hope you will suggest to the powers that be that Temperance Flat Dam could amount to a gun pointed at the head of Fresno if it were subject to failure in an earthquake, including the really big one coming in the Cascadia Subduction Zone. Since it will produce enormous shaking in Fresno, I think that quake is the one they must reckon with in considering Temperance Flat Dam. There is a fault to the east of Fresno, and it could be trouble for T.F. Dam, but if they say they can make it to withstand activity on that fault, they must also tell how T.F Dam will withstand the Cascadia Subduction Zone quake. Notice from the Stanford MAR study that you get lots of evaporation from surface water storage, such as with a lake behind a dam. T.F Dam will impound one million acre-feet of water. We could make even more water than that available with the MAR plan. The MAR study says that we could put not just Sierra run-off into the aquifer with their plan, but also put treated wastewater and storm water runoff into the aquifer, and avoid a lot of evaporation. The MAR study was done by researchers Debra Perrone and Melissa Rohde at Stanford. Knowing Fresno as I do, I suspect there are some water-ski shop owners and motor-boat shop owners, and some construction companies and developers, who are well connected politically, and they are pulling for T.F. Dam. I have noticed that "Temperance Flat Dam" has become something of a mantra in the San Joaquin Valley. There are huge numbers of uneducated people here, people who got kicked out of Fresno State for being drunks, e.g., if they ever got in. If you don't know much about a subject, adopt a mantra, things like "All the way with LBJ", and "Sieg Heil". These drunks even have a leader. This person reads the news sometimes on a broadcast station I can pick up here. We need the people with the big-gun educations and vast experience with California water issues to step up at this point and apply science and engineering to make the case against Temperance Flat Dam and for the MAR plan and the Golden Gate Dam. But their silence is deafening. Zero news about any of this. If Debra Perrone and Melissa Rohde at Stanford are getting lots of inquiries, or ANY inquiries, from State and Federal water officials about their MAR proposal, I hope they will tell me. If their plan is practical, we can avoid blowing $2 billion on the dangerous Temperance Flat Dam and start to recover the Central Valley aquifer. Let's hear from Gov. Brown about this. The MAR study has been out for more than a year, but I have not heard one word about it being studied by the water experts in California. One wonders why not. Most likely, it is because the political fix is in for Temperance Flat Dam. Too many corrupt, greasy Republicans in the San Joaquin Valley will just make too much money from it to give it up. L. William Harding Fresno City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/28/2017 3:49 PM 5 ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Paul Dictos <paul@dictos.com> Date: Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 9:35 AM Subject: RE: Powerful Westlands Water Dist. votes against Brown's twin Delta tunnels To: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> I like  your e‐mails very informative and to the point   From: Loran Harding [mailto:loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org] Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2017 1:43 PM To: Doug Vagim; dennisbalakian; David Balakian; Mayor; CityManager; paul.caprioglio; esmeralda.soria@fresno.gov; oliver.baines; clinton.olivier; steve.brandau; Mark Standriff; Paul Dictos; pavenjitdhillon@yahoo.com; david pomaville; parsons@brandman.edu; Dan Richard; Daniel Zack; kfsndesk; newsdesk; rosenheim@kpix.cbs.com; lxcastro93@yahoo.com; Leodies Buchanan; leager; Cathy Lewis; huidentalsanmateo; johnhutson580; robert.andersen; beachrides; bmcewen; bballpod; bearwithme1016@att.net; firstvp@fresnopoa.org; Raymond Rivas; fmerlo@wildelectric.net; Greg.Gatzka; steve.hogg; hennessy; info@superide1.com; jboren; Joel Stiner; Jason Tarvin; kclark; Tom Lang; midge@thebarretts.com; mmt4@pge.com; russ@topperjewelers.com; richard.wenzel; Steve Wayte; terry; thomas.esqueda@fresno.gov Subject: Fwd: Powerful Westlands Water Dist. votes against Brown's twin Delta tunnels ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Debra Perrone <dperrone@stanford.edu> Date: Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 12:49 PM Subject: Re: Powerful Westlands Water Dist. votes against Brown's twin Delta tunnels To: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> Cc: Melissa Rohde <melissa.rohde@tnc.org> Dear Loran (CC Melissa),   Thank you for referencing the work that Melissa and I published on MAR. We are excited to see that our work  is useful in informing how folks in California think about water resources and water management.    Sincerely, Deb     City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/28/2017 3:49 PM 6 From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>  Sent: Thursday, September 21, 2017 12:40:38 PM  To: debra.perrone@stanford.edu   Subject: Fwd: Powerful Westlands Water Dist. votes against Brown's twin Delta tunnels ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> Date: Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 12:18 PM Subject: Fwd: Powerful Westlands Water Dist. votes against Brown's twin Delta tunnels To: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> Date: Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 4:04 PM Subject: Fwd: Powerful Westlands Water Dist. votes against Brown's twin Delta tunnels To: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org>, Doug Vagim <dvagim@gmail.com>, dennisbalakian <dennisbalakian@sbcglobal.net>, David Balakian <davidbalakian@sbcglobal.net>, Mayor <mayor@fresno.gov>, CityManager <citymanager@fresno.gov>, "city.council" <city.council@cityofpaloalto.org>, esmeralda.soria@fresno.gov, "paul.caprioglio" <paul.caprioglio@fresno.gov>, Paul Dictos <paul@dictos.com>, kfsndesk <kfsndesk@abc.com>, newsdesk <newsdesk@cbs47.tv>, rosenheim@kpix.cbs.com, Dan Richard <danrichard@mac.com>, Daniel Zack <daniel.zack@fresno.gov>, Cathy Lewis <catllewis@gmail.com>, midge@thebarretts.com, info@superide1.com, "robert.andersen" <robert.andersen@fresno.gov>, beachrides <beachrides@sbcglobal.net>, bearwithme1016@att.net, Leodies Buchanan <leodiesbuchanan@yahoo.com>, bballpod <bballpod@aol.com>, firstvp@fresnopoa.org, Raymond Rivas <financialadvisor007@gmail.com>, fmerlo@wildelectric.net, "Greg.Gatzka" <Greg.Gatzka@co.kings.ca.us>, huidentalsanmateo <huidentalsanmateo@gmail.com>, "steve.hogg" <steve.hogg@fresno.gov>, hennessy <hennessy@stanford.edu>, jboren <jboren@fresnobee.com>, Joel Stiner <jastiner@gmail.com>, johnhutson580 <johnhutson580@msn.com>, Mark Kreutzer <mlkreutzer@yahoo.com>, kclark <kclark@westlandswater.org>, kevin cervantes <kevincervantes10@hotmail.com>, leager <leager@fresnoedc.com>, lxcastro93@yahoo.com, Tom Lang <tlang@aquariusaquarium.org>, Mark Standriff <mark.standriff@fresno.gov>, mmt4@pge.com, Mark Waldrep <mwaldrep@aixmediagroup.com>, nick yovino <npyovino@gmail.com>, nmelosh@stanford.edu, "oliver.baines" <oliver.baines@fresno.gov>, popoff <popoff@pbworld.com>, parsons@brandman.edu, russ@topperjewelers.com, "richard.wenzel" <richard.wenzel@aecom.com>, Steve Wayte <steve4liberty@gmail.com>, "steve.brandau" <steve.brandau@fresno.gov>, terry <terry@terrynagel.com>, thomas.esqueda@fresno.gov City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/28/2017 3:49 PM 7 ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> Date: Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 3:13 PM Subject: Fwd: Powerful Westlands Water Dist. votes against Brown's twin Delta tunnels To: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> Date: Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 3:01 PM Subject: Fwd: Powerful Westlands Water Dist. votes against Brown's twin Delta tunnels To: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> Date: Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 2:40 PM Subject: Fwd: Powerful Westlands Water Dist. votes against Brown's twin Delta tunnels To: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> Date: Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 2:20 PM Subject: Powerful Westlands Water Dist. votes against Brown's twin Delta tunnels To: Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> Wednesday, Sept. 20, 2017 To all- Westlands Water District on the west side of California's San Joaquin Valley voted yesterday not to help pay for Gov. Brown's twin tunnels under the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, meant to deliver more water to the big pumps that move Delta water south. Westlands was going to be on the hook for $3 billion of the $17 billion cost of the twin tunnels and they said that the tunnels will not produce enough extra water to be worth that cost. http://www.fresnobee.com/news/local/article174229771.html City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/28/2017 3:49 PM 8 Great news since there is a far better solution, I think. I have, numerous times now, sent out mails about Stanford's MAR ("Managed Aquifer Recharge") proposal for California's Central Valley. I believe, and I do not pretend to know all of the ins and outs of the Delta and Sierra and west side ag and CV city and industry and Southern California water supply issues, but I believe that the Stanford proposal deserves serious consideration. Here is the Stanford MAR plan: http://news.stanford.edu/2016/07/21/cost-effective-path-drought-resiliency/ Basically, the MAR plan would put Sierra runoff (trillions of gallons of it in a wet year) out into the Central Valley, on the land, and let it perc into the aquifer. In some places, the water would have to be injected into the aquifer. When I refer to "the Central Valley", I think of both the Sacramento and San Joaquin Valleys. The wasteful, corrupt, even dangerous Temperance Flat Dam proposed for the San Joaquin River, above the current Friant Dam and its Millerton Lake NE of Fresno, would be and should be cancelled. Millerton has a capacity of only one-half million acre feet, and so trillions of gallons of precious fresh water were sent down the San Joaquin River in the winter just passed, 2016-2017. Once in the Delta, most of it flowed into San Francisco Bay and out to the Pacific. And then the local water officials, like the ones in Fresno, cried that the water table here continues to fall, and, with it, the sky. The only solution, they propose, is to gouge residential water customers like me. We have over-pumped the aquifer (it was actually ag that did much that), and the suckers in a town like Fresno have to pay up. Note- On Tues. Sept. 26, 2017, KCBS in San Francisco is saying that the aquifer under Santa Clara County has now fully recovered from the 60-foot drop it suffered during California's four-year drought. Three things account for that: 1) the rainy winter we got last winter, 2) the severe water restrictions that were imposed and 3), efforts to recharge the aquifer there. The report added that this is not the case in the Central Valley where over-pumping of the aquifer has dropped it 80 to 100 feet over many years. I say "the dangerous Temperance Flat Dam" because it will impound one million acre-feet of water, twice the capacity of Millerton Lake. So then Fresno would have, in a wet year, 1.5 million acre-feet of water City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/28/2017 3:49 PM 9 impounded upstream from it on the San Joaquin River. Temperance Flat Dam would have the capacity of Hoover Dam. When I was studying where the San Andreas Fault runs about 10 years ago, (it runs NW to SE in the coast range about 65 miles west of Fresno) I read about a serious fault that lies off to the east of Fresno. Any local geologist here would know all about it. I wonder where it runs relative to the site of the proposed T. F. Dam. Need I spell out my concern? A big quake causes T.F. Dam to fail, its water and millions of tons of rocks, mud and trees rush down to Millerton Lake, it either over-flows disastrously, or, even more disastrously, Friant Dam also fails. Good-bye Fresno and a lot of other towns if either happens. That would be a disaster of historic proportions, all to further enrich some developers in Fresno, some construction companies, some water-ski shop owners, and the politicians they control. We need political leadership at this point, not the current silence from people who should be studying and talking about this. Fresno, being 65 miles from the nearest part of the San Andreas Fault, is fairly safe from a big quake there, one like the Ft. Tajon quake in ~1868. It had an epicenter near Parkfield but broke the fault clear south as far as Ft.Tajon in the Tahachipis. But the impact on Fresno was slight, if we can believe reports of the time. But the potential of the fault lying east of Fresno should be studied carefully wrt to the safety of T.F. Dam. BUT, what will for certain be very bad for Fresno, and catastrophic for Washington and Oregon, will be the next big quake off the coast of Washington- Oregon, in the Cascadia Subduction Zone. The last big quake there was in 1700, and geologists think that may have a 400-year recurrence interval. Estimates are that it would have measured 9.0. We are due for a repeat. I have heard estimates that the shaking in Fresno when it happens will be as bad as the shaking that occurred in downtown San Francisco in the 1906 quake. So what that might do to a dam the size of Hoover Dam on the San Joaquin R. just above Fresno is also something calling for careful study. The Stanford proposal points out that you get a lot of evaporation from a reservoir, and probably none from the aquifer. You'd have some from the impounded water on the land, of course. The water which currently flows to the Delta to hold back salt water intrusion from San Francisco Bay (San Pablo Bay at its north end, connected to the Delta through the Carquinez Strait) could instead be put on the land and perced into the aquifer under the San Joaquin and Sacramento Valleys. So then, if you put huge new amounts of Sierra run-off on the land in the Central Valley to perc in, what do you do to hold back the relentlessly rising salt water pushing into the Delta from San Pablo Bay? Read on. You save the entire San Francisco Bay area AND the Delta from sea level rise by merely building a big dam right across the Golden Gate, just inside the Golden Gate Bridge. Go to YouTube and find "The Earth Under Water", a documentary about climate change and sea level rise produced by the BBC. About midway through the 45 minute program, you see how the dam across the Golden Gate could be built. City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/28/2017 3:49 PM 10 Here is "The Earth Under Water" by the BBC. See the proposal for a Golden Gate Dam about mid-way through: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lqdLD31FkW4 I think both would have to be done. If you put huge additional Sierra run-off onto the land in the CV to perc, you have to do something to stop what would then be huge additional salt water intrusion into the Delta. So the Stanford MAR plan and the Golden Gate Dam should probably be considered as one package. BTW, notice at the 3-minute mark in "The Earth Under Water" a depiction of how N. America would look if all of the ice on the planet melted. Florida and Louisiana are gone, and a large inland sea develops far north and south of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta in California. It appears to reach south as far as Bakersfield. It is conceivable that damming the Golden Gate could generate one or more lawsuits, but I believe that it will have to be done due to sea level rise, already under way. Both of these proposals may appear crazy because they go against conventional thinking, but they should be evaluated by the big-gun experts of California water, local, State and Federal. The last number I heard for the Golden Gate Dam was $2.5 billion. If correct, it and implementation of the MAR plan might come in well below the estimated $17 billion cost of the twin tunnels under the Delta. I believe that the crazy, dangerous Temperance Flat Dam is estimated to cost $2 billion. If we cancel it, that money would almost pay to build the Golden Gate Dam, and that is what should happen. Then, regarding the MAR plan, Stanford researchers Debra Perrone and Melissa Rohde say in their report that "the median cost of MAR projects is $410 per acre-foot per year. By comparison, the median cost of surface water projects is five-times more expensive- $2,100 per acre-foot". City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/3/2017 2:31 PM 1 Carnahan, David From:Esther Nigenda <enigenda@yahoo.com> Sent:Monday, October 02, 2017 2:25 PM To:Council, City Cc:Bobel, Phil; Keene, James; Friend, Gil; Keith Bennett Subject:FYI: New Flood map "Rhode Island-based commercial insurance company FM Global recently released a forward-looking Global Flood Map that highlights moderate and high-hazard flood zones around the world. The company’s goal is to help its clients, ranging from Fortune 500 companies to smaller enterprises, more responsibly site their facilities and build resilience into their operations and supply chains." Following Hurricane Devastation, Calls to Bring Back the Federal Flood Standards Get Louder Flood Map Flood Map Flood Map City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/4/2017 8:19 AM 1 Carnahan, David From:Jim Colton <james.colton10@gmail.com> Sent:Wednesday, October 04, 2017 7:50 AM To:board.secretary@vta.org Cc:Council, City Subject:Grade Separation Funding To the VTA Board, I am concerned about the funds allocated to grade separations in Palo Alto, Mountain View and Sunnyvale. Specifically, I believe the funds should be allocated equally among the eight crossings in these cities. I support changing the following language To complete all eight projects, VTA would allocate 2016 Measure B funding to the most cost-effective grade separation alternatives possible to the following: To complete all eight projects, VTA shall divide the 2016 Measure B funding equally in 2017 dollars among the eight projects listed in the Caltrain Grade Separation Program Category. Designs higher than baseline costs will require additional local and other funding. VTA will work with collectively with the cities to secure funds from outside sources to complete the program. Jim Colton Palo Alto City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/2/2017 1:31 PM 1 Carnahan, David From:Brian Christman <brianlchristman@gmail.com> Sent:Sunday, October 01, 2017 11:31 AM To:Council, City Subject:I Support Antonio's Nut House and the Outdoor Seating Area Greetings, I wanted to state my support of Antonio's Nut House as great Palo Alto establishment and a unique alternative to the other bars and restaurants on California Avenue. It is a long standing and beloved institution, and should be allowed to server alcohol outside and even expand the outdoor seating area if they choose. As a long time resident and tax payer, I believe the city should be doing more to support local businesses with roots in the community, instead of working in favor of outside chain stores and developers. Best Regards, Brian Christman Professorville Neighborhood City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/2/2017 1:36 PM 1 Carnahan, David From:Arlene Goetze <photowrite67@yahoo.com> Sent:Monday, October 02, 2017 1:15 PM To:Dave Cortese; Joe Simitian Subject:Is childhood vaccine schedule SAFE? An educational email from Arlene Goetze, No Toxins for Children, photowrite67@yahoo.com From: National Vaccine Information Center -- www.nvic.org By Barbara Loe Fisher, Posted 10/1/2017 6:19P57 PM Is the childhood vaccine schedule safe? 1 In 1953, health officials at the U.S. Centers for Disease Control told doctors to give children 16 doses of four vaccines by age six. 2 In 1983, it was 23 doses of 7 vaccines by age six. 3 In 2013, it was 69 doses of 16 vaccines by age 18, with 50 doses given by age six. 4 With infants and children in America getting four times as many vaccinations as their grandparents got, how healthy are they? Today, 1 child in 6 is learning disabled. 5 In 1976, it was 1 child in 30. 6 Today, 1 child in 9 has asthma. 7 In 1980, it was 1 child in 27.8 9 Today, 1 child in 50 develops autism. 10 In the 1990s, it was 1 child in 555. 11 12 Today, 1 child in 500 has diabetes. 13 In 2001, it was 1 child in 400. 14 On top of that, millions of children suffer with seizures, inflammatory bowel syndrome, rheumatoid arthritis, thyroid disease, multiple sclerosis, life-threatening allergies, anxiety, depression and behavior disorders. 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 In 2013, a physician committee at the Institute of Medicine reported that there were fewer than 40 studies examining the safety of the government’s vaccine schedule for children under age six. 25 Only 40 studies. Vaccine safety science has so many knowledge gaps 26 27 28 that the Institute of Medicine could not determine whether the timing and numbers of vaccinations given to babies and young children is or is not responsible for the development of learning disabilities – asthma – autoimmunity – autism – developmental and behavior disorders – seizures – and other kinds of brain and immune system problems. 29 An unprecedented number of children are born healthy, get vaccinated and are never healthy again. It is a public health crisis that cannot be ignored. Before you take a risk, find out what it is. Read and view references for this message from the National Vaccine Information Center by expanding the link to view refernces below. It’s your health. Your family. Your choice. Click to View and Access References Posted: 10/1/2017 6:19:57 PM | with Is the Childhood Vaccine Schedule Safe? - NVIC Newsletter Report and Share Your Vaccine Experiences On our website you can make a report to NVIC's 35-year old Vaccine Reaction Registry and/or publicly post a vaccine reaction report with a photo or video on the Memorial for Vaccine Victims. On the Vaccine Failure Wall, you can describe your experience if a vaccine failed to protect you or your child from disease. If you were bullied, threatened or punished City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/2/2017 1:36 PM 2 by a doctor, government official or employer for making an independent vaccine choice for yourself or your child, you can post a report on the Cry for Vaccine Freedom Wallhttp://r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp? Is the Childhood Vaccine Schedule Safe? - NVIC Newsletter An unprecedented number of children are born healthy, get vaccinated and are never healthy again. It is a public... City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/2/2017 1:31 PM 1 Carnahan, David From:Loran Harding <loran.harding@stanfordalumni.org> Sent:Saturday, September 30, 2017 12:06 PM To:bballpod; Loran Harding; Irv Weissman; Doug Vagim; Dan Richard; dennisbalakian; David Balakian; Daniel Zack; Paul Dictos; david pomaville; kfsndesk; newsdesk; rosenheim@kpix.cbs.com; jboren; terry; Mayor; CityManager; Council, City; esmeralda.soria@fresno.gov; paul.caprioglio; Mark Standriff; Joel Stiner; Steve Wayte; steve.hogg; beachrides; steve.brandau; Cathy Lewis; mmt4@pge.com; midge@thebarretts.com; info@superide1.com; debra.perrone@stanford.edu; firstvp@fresnopoa.org; robert.andersen; Leodies Buchanan; Raymond Rivas; fmerlo@wildelectric.net; Steven Feinstein; Greg.Gatzka; huidentalsanmateo; hennessy; igorstrav .; kclark; Mark Kreutzer; leager; nick yovino; oliver.baines; clinton.olivier; pavenjitdhillon@yahoo.com; popoff; russ@topperjewelers.com; thomas.esqueda@fresno.gov; richard.wenzel; yicui@stanford.edu Subject:KCBS says Sat. 9-30-17: Many drug Co. have ops in P.R. C/B shortages at hosps. etc. Sat. morning, 9-30-17 Dr. Burns- KCBS reported in the past hour that many drug Cos. and medical device makers have operations in Puerto Rico. Without power, some, at least, are not operating and that could lead to shortages at hospitals, clinics etc. They mentioned c. drugs, immuno- suppressing drugs for transplant pts., and supplies used by diabetics. If the Trump Admin. cannot or will not get help to P.R., the medical community and its pts. could feel this. They said that the fed. government encouraged the drug cos. etc. to set up ops in P.R. to help the economy there. Please spread the word throughout Kaiser. Copy going to Dr. Irv Weissman at Stanford. Please spread the alarm. I looked at one device I use, and it says "Made in the USA". Sounds great, but then P.R. is in the USA. Thank you. L. William Harding Fresno City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/3/2017 2:31 PM 1 Carnahan, David From:Geri <geri@thegrid.net> Sent:Monday, October 02, 2017 9:34 PM To:Council, City Subject:KUDOS to Ms. YARKIN   Best meeting ideas I've heard.  Clear speaking is appreciated.    Geri Mcgilvray    Sent from my iPhone    City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/29/2017 8:23 AM 1 Carnahan, David From:Neilson Buchanan <cnsbuchanan@yahoo.com> Sent:Thursday, September 28, 2017 9:12 PM To:Council, City; Planning Commission Subject:Learning Opportunity from Google and Mt. View Attachments:170928 Mt View and Google in a Spat Silicone Valley Business Journal Sept 28 2017.pdf More than a spat has arisen between Mt. View and Google. See attached Silicon Valley Biz Journal article. Mt. View has created a learning opportunity for all cities on the Peninsula. Reality has suddenly blossomed in Mt View's backyard and may move to our region's front yards. The impact of Google development is on the table for the world to see. Who pays for development impact has moved into open debate. What burden will Google assume for its impact upon its host city and schools? It is clear to me that neither Mt View and its school systems by themselves have the capacity to ramp up their services at the rate Google will create jobs. Why is Mt. View important? Palo Alto, one of the wealthiest communities in the nation, lacks the financial capacity and basic management resources to manage its future growth. Conflict can be resolved. Solutions evolve...... and we all should eager to learn how Google and Mt. View come to terms with each other for mutual benefit. Council: North Bayshore development must support schools City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/29/2017 8:23 AM 2 Council: North Bayshore development must support schools By Kevin Forestieri Mountain View City Council members agreed Tuesday night that development plans need to include a clear strategy ... Neilson Buchanan 155 Bryant Street Palo Alto, CA 94301 650 329-0484 650 537-9611 cell cnsbuchanan@yahoo.com Ml FOR THE EXCLUSIVE USE OF CNSBUCHANAN@YAHOO.COM From the Silicon Valley Business Journal: https://www.bizjournals.com/sanjose/news/2017/09/28/google-mountain-view-north-bayshore- housing.html Q .I. Google and Mountain View are in a spat over North Bayshore. Now what? Sep 28, 2017, 3:03pm PDT Updated: Sep 28, 2017, 3:44pm PDT Subscriber-Only Article Preview I For full site access: Subscribe Now Bay Area city council meetings are known for their impassioned public hearings, followed by long debates as elected officials hammer out difficult details on housing, jobs, traffic and homelessness. But few meetings end on as dramatic a twist as Mountain View's meeting Tuesday. City Council members and the city's largest employer, Google, both drew lines in the sand at different places during a meeting about Mountain View's North Bayshore Area Precise Plan that stretched into the early morning hours. The meeting ended at an impasse over whether the tech giant would be allowed to add additional office in the area where its headquarters sits in exchange for the housing that residents and the city have been advocating for in recent years. 111TH AERIAL & ARCHITECTURAL PHOTOGRAPHY & VIDEO Mountain View's North Bayshore, home to Google, Linkedln, Intuit and Microsoft. The precise plan, which is expected to be finalized and approved before the end of the year, is slated to allow for 9,850 new residential units in the North Bayshore area, where Google is the largest land owner by far. In order to meet that goal -or even get close -the tech behemoth will need to play a major part. But on Tuesday, Joe Van Belleghem, Google's senior director of design and construction, told the city in no uncertain terms that if it doesn't give the tech giant a way to add 800,000 square feet of office to its existing plans, the company won't be helping in the housing effort. "The rea lity is no new office, no residential," Van Belleghem said. "I just want to be upfront with everyone because we cannot invest the kind of money that is necessary to create residential at 20 percent affordable housing, the kind of placemaking you want, the kind of environmental objectives you want. We can't do it and we won't do it." For most in the room that statement was news, especially after Google has long-supported adding the full 9,850 new units in the precise plan. But Van Belleghem said it shouldn't be a surprise to City Council members. "We've made it very clear all along we needed an extra office to make this work," he said. Ultimately, Google was seeking to adjust the current version of the North Bayshore Precise plan to create a defined pathway whereby it could increase its office supply above current size limits. That process is called a "gatekeeper" process, where the company would ask for a special consideration of its plans and do additional environmental work to prove that its project wouldn't have an adverse impact on the area. Google has five separate Mountain View sites where it is working to c reate new office, retail and residential space. The company got rights to develop millions of square feet of office space after a historic land swap with Linkedln last year. The company hasn't submitted master plans for many of its parcels, but Van Belleghem said those would come by early next year. Even so, several councilmembers seemed to hedge that Google wasn't serious in its threat. Four out of seven council members voted against including a section in the precise plan that would outline a gatekeeper process in the North Bayshore area. "We are still enormously out of balance, so adding more office space to me doesn't make any sense at all," Vice Mayor Lenny Siegel said Tuesday, referring to the city's jobs-to-housing ratio. "I think once Google re- locks at this they'll understand that they need the 10,000 housing units to even add a portion of the new offices there that they want." Others, weren't so sure. "I think that we have to keep all of our options open," Mayor Ken Rosenberg said during the same meeting. "The thing about a gatekeeper process is that it comes with what can be significant community benefits and we don't know what they are. The developer or applicant could say, 'We want to donate a school.' Would you want to turn that down? I don't know what they would offer, but that's something we should keep on the table." When the meeting ended Tuesday, the city and Google, which is based in Mountain View, but has recently been investing millions of dollars into real estate in nearby cities, remained at an impasse over who would benefit more from new housing in the North Bayshore. Communtiy Development Director Randy Tsuda on Thursday said in an interview that even if the special gatekeeper section doesn't end up in the precise plan, the door isn't closed for Google to expand in the city. Mountain View has a larger gatekeeper process by which anyone can apply to build a development throughout the city that isn't completely in line with the city's general plan or specific area plans. Not including that process in the North Bayshore precise plan doesn't prohibit Google from using that process, he added. "The majority of the council is not interested in doing that," he said, referring to adding a special gatekeeper process in the North Bayshore plan. "But frankly, Google always has a pathway." Janice Bitters Commercial Real Estate Reporter Silicon Valley Business Journal City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/29/2017 8:25 AM 1 Carnahan, David From:Aram James <abjpd1@gmail.com> Sent:Friday, September 29, 2017 12:16 AM To:chuck jagoda; stb_discussion@googlegroups.com; Kniss, Liz (internal); Council, City; citycouncil@menlopark.org; Council-John Seybert; council@redwoodcity.org; bos@smcgov.org; myraw@smcba.org; swagstaffe@smcgov.org; dprice@padailypost.com; Greg Schaefer + Subject:New poll shows two-thirds favor more housing --but huge racial difference in who favors more and who doesn't ..... http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/09/27/housing‐survey/amp/      Sent from my iPhone    City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 9/28/2017 3:49 PM 1 Carnahan, David From:ron ito <wsrfr418@yahoo.com> Sent:Thursday, September 28, 2017 1:11 AM To:Council, City Subject:no overnight parking on Encina Ave? (same block as Opportunity Center) I guess council did not want people sleeping in their cars parked on the street? City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/3/2017 2:30 PM 1 Carnahan, David From:herb <herb_borock@hotmail.com> Sent:Sunday, October 01, 2017 12:23 PM To:Council, City; Clerk, City Subject:October 2, 2017, Council Meeting, Agenda Changes, Additions, and Deletions Herb Borock  P. O. Box 632  Palo Alto, CA 94302    October 1, 2017    Palo Alto City Council  250 Hamilton Avenue  Palo Alto, CA 94301      OCTOBER 2, 2017, CITY COUNCIL MEETING  AGENDA CHANGES, ADDITIONS, AND DELETIONS    RE: OCTOBER 5, 2017, PENINSULA CORRIDOR JOINT POWERS BOARD MEETING  CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM #5(h)  ADDENDUM #2 TO THE 2015 PENINSULA CORRIDOR ELECTRIFICATION PROJECT  FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT    Dear City Council:    On April 11, 2017, the City Council unanimously adopted an Updated Rail Committee Charter and Guiding Principles.    Guiding Principle 5 says "Palo Alto has long had concerns about the potential impacts of High Speed Rail and believes that the project should be terminated."    On October 5, 2017, the Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board (JPB) Meeting will consider adopting Addendum #2 to the Peninsula Corridor Electrification Project (PCEP) Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the purpose of implementing adjustments to the PCEP Overhead Contact System "to accommodate anticipated CHSRA realignment of certain track segments".    The realignments are not need for the PCEP. The realignments are needed only for the High Speed Rail project    I urge you to take action at your October 2, 2017, regular meeting to submit comments to the JPB prior to its October 5, 2017, meeting that the proposed Addendum #2 violates the California Environmental Quality Act City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/3/2017 2:30 PM 2 because it would approve a part of the High Speed Rail (HSR) project that is not needed for the PCEP project prior to the circulation and adoption of the HSR EIR for the San Francisco to San Jose segment of HSR.  The Ralph M. Brown Act at Government Code Section 54954.2(b)(2) permits you to add an action item to your regular agenda when the need for the action came to your attention subsequent to the posting of the agenda for your regular meeting:  GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54954.2 54954.2. (a) (1) At least 72 hours before a regular meeting, the legislative body of the local agency, or its designee, shall post an agenda containing a brief general description of each item of business to be transacted or discussed at the meeting, including items to be discussed in closed session. ... ... (b) Notwithstanding subdivision (a), the legislative body may take action on items of business not appearing on the posted agenda under any of the conditions stated below. Prior to discussing any item pursuant to this subdivision, the legislative body shall publicly identify the item. ... (2) Upon a determination by a two-thirds vote of the members of the legislative body present at the meeting, or, if less than two-thirds of the members are present, a unanimous vote of those members present, that there is a need to take immediate action and that the need for action came to the attention of the local agency subsequent to the agenda being posted as specified in subdivision (a). The agenda packet for the JPB board meeting is at http://www.caltrain.com/Assets/__Agendas+and+Minutes/JPB/Board+of+Director s/Agendas/2017/2017.10.05+-+JPB+Agenda+packet.pdf Agenda Item #5(h) is at PDF pages 35-61, with the staff report at pages 35-43 and the impacts to Palo Alto at pages 55-56. Thank you for your consideration of these comments. Sincerely, Herb Borock City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/4/2017 12:56 PM 1 Carnahan, David From:Deborah Goldeen <palamino@pacbell.net> Sent:Wednesday, October 04, 2017 10:38 AM To:Council, City Subject:Parking at Peers Park I was taking my dog for his morning walk at Peers Park and was passing the tennis courts right about ten o’clock. One of  the players looked down at his watch and said, “It’s almost ten.  We need to stop now or we will get ticketed.”  They quit  their game and left the park. The fact that they had to quit their game at some random, arbitrary time was mean and  rude.      Evergreen Park now has the only park in Palo Alto that other Palo Altans can’t use.  If you arrive by car with two little  kids, you have to get them and all the gear out of the car, to the playground, then back into the car in under two hours.  It’s just not possible!  It’s called, “Sure you can play in the water, just don’t get wet.”    Then there’s Martina’s preschool, Little Explorers.  Martina in one of my fellow mom friends and we have both lived in  Everygreen Park for more than twenty‐five years.  The preschool she runs, a preschool started by the city to use  underutilized public space, is only marginally profitable.  Martina is a gem.  The preschool is darling and of enormous  benefit to the community.  But she can’t keep it going unless the permit hours are expanded at the park.  That, or she  needs a pile of hang tags.    Fix this!    Thank you.    Deb Goldeen  2130 Birch St.  94306, 321‐7375    PS ‐ This email will be copied to city staff once I manage to tease out that information from the obtuse burearocracy that  runs this city and doesn’t seem to have a clue what service means.  City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/4/2017 10:14 AM 1 Carnahan, David From:Venky Karnam <venkateshkr@gmail.com> Sent:Wednesday, October 04, 2017 8:36 AM To:board.secretary@vta.org Cc:Council, City Subject:Please change VTA proposed guidelines for caltrain grade seperations Can you please change the wording as follows? The existing wording will be very unfair to all the cities involved and might prove short-sighted. ================ Program Category. To complete all eight projects, VTA would allocate 2016 Measure B funding to the most cost-effective grade separation alternatives possible. Instead of the highlighted sentence above, the following language should be used: To complete all eight projects, VTA shall divide the 2016 Measure B funding equally in 2017 dollars among the eight projects listed in the Caltrain Grade Separation Program Category. Designs higher than baseline costs will require additional local and other funding. VTA will work with collectively with the cities to secure funds from outside sources to complete the program. ===================== Thanks, Venkatesh City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/4/2017 8:19 AM 1 Carnahan, David From:RICH <w6apz@comcast.net> Sent:Tuesday, October 03, 2017 7:23 PM To:Council, City Subject:Railroad Tracks 100217o Since I did not get a response from this message sent yesterday, I'm resending it today. Perhaps my address for the council was not correct. Rich Stiebel From: "RICH" <w6apz@comcast.net> To: council@cityofpaloalto.org Sent: Monday, October 2, 2017 11:48:35 AM Subject: Railroad Tracks 100217o Tom DuBois published a well-written article in last Friday’s Weekly. I have not been able to attend the previous meetings and unfortunately will miss the next meeting as well. I did want to provide some feedback and support from “the silent majority.” I echo his concern: what we decide to do with the tracks affects not only us but future generations of Palo Altans. This is not just a Palo Alto Problem. We need to engage all the cities up and down the peninsula and work toward a unified solution. This will be most cost-effective, IF we can get cooperation and agreement on a plan. I feel strongly that the best decision for Palo Alto and probably the whole peninsula is to completely underground the tracks; essentially a subway. Total undergrounding is going to be expensive. It will probably be less expensive per city if we ALL decide to tunnel. Since this project benefits not only us, but future generations, it seems reasonable that while we have to pay for the project now, it should be financed by some long-term debt instrument such as bonds which would be paid off over the next 30+ years. I leave the best method to the financial experts. We have examples of subways being built under existing cities with minimal disruption on the surface. We need to investigate those situations and learn their best practices and brainstorm on how we can minimize the negatives that they experienced. For those who nay-say that it can’t be done, I remember not that long ago we did not have the Trans-bay tube under the bay connecting San Francisco with the East Bay. Yet it was built. What can we improve upon that they learned doing that project? City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/4/2017 8:19 AM 2 Another recent example is the Tom Lantos Tunnels, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Lantos_Tunnels for the full story. Are there lessons that we can learn from that tunneling experience? The longer we wait to begin this project the more the costs will rise. We need to instill a sense of urgency while carefully doing our homework to ensure the best value for the dollar spent and the best long-term approach for all. I urge the Rail Committee to keep up the good work, and to continue to keep the citizens informed. Alice & Rich Stiebel, 840 Talisman Drive, Palo Alto, Ca Email: W6APZ@comcast.net City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/2/2017 1:33 PM 1 Carnahan, David From:Minor, Beth Sent:Sunday, October 01, 2017 12:12 PM To:Hoel, Jeff (external) Cc:Council, City; UAC Subject:Re: study session with UAC Hi Jeff, the study session is scheduled for 10/30 at this time Sent from my iPhone On Oct 1, 2017, at 12:07 PM, Jeff Hoel <jeff_hoel@yahoo.com> wrote: Council members and UAC commissioners, The most recently posted Tentative Agendas document: http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/59645 says that on Tuesday, 10-10-17, Council will have a study session with UAC. However, this 10-09-17 cancellation notice says that the next Council meeting (after 10-09-17) will be 10- 16-17. http://cityofpaloalto.org/civicax/filebank/documents/59715 And this cancellation notice doesn't have a pointer to a Tentative Agendas document. When will Council's study session with UAC be? As I understand, these study sessions are suppose to be "annual," but the last one was 04-20-15, about two and a half years ago. None of the current commissioners have attended even one such study session. Thanks. Jeff ------------------- Jeff Hoel 731 Colorado Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94303 ------------------- City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/3/2017 2:31 PM 1 Carnahan, David From:KATHRYN HOLEYFIELD <choleyfield@icloud.com> Sent:Monday, October 02, 2017 9:43 PM To:Council, City Subject:Stanford Hospital Parking Dear Council Members.    As a resident of Palo Alto and a Stanford University Hospital employee I am fed up with the lack of available parking near  my workplace. I actually live near my place of employment yet have to pay $1200/year for an “A” parking sticker that  allows me to park only within a 20 min walk from my office! This is all because Palo Alto refuses to let Stanford build  appropriate parking structures. Palo Alto benefits from having Stanford on it’s doorstep and having a word class Hospital  as well. The capacity of both Stanford Hospital and LPCH has doubled yet the parking has worsened. This makes things  frustrating for both patients trying to make appointments and for employees trying to be their for their appointments.   Why does it take me nearly the same amount of time to drive to Kaiser Walnut creek from my home in Palo Alto as it  does to get to my worksite at Stanford Hospital? Let Stanford build parking near where paying customers (patient’s) and  hard working employees (hospital MD’s, RN’s and support staff) work. We work long unpredictable hours. If there was  adequate public transportation then, yes, limit parking to what is already available. But since public transportation is  laughable at best. Give us what we need to do our jobs in a timely manner.      KC Holeyfield MD  774 E. Charleston Road  Palo Alto, CA 94303  City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/2/2017 1:31 PM 1 Carnahan, David From:kemp650@aol.com Sent:Friday, September 29, 2017 7:08 PM To:Council, City Subject:Support for Renewal of Liquor License for Antonio's Nut House I am writing in support of Antonio's Nut House on California Ave for them to receive the permit that allows them to serve alcohol to their outdoor diners. I appreciate this alternative to newer, more expensive establishments on Cal Ave. Please advise who I should contact if you aren't the appropriate public decision maker. Thanks, Susan Kemp City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/2/2017 1:36 PM 1 Carnahan, David From:Sharleen Fiddaman <sf@sharleenfiddaman.com> Sent:Sunday, October 01, 2017 3:12 PM To:CityCouncil@CityofPaloAlto.org; Council, City Subject:train tracks Hello Tom, I thought your Guest Opinion article was excellent. Although I haven’t attended the community meetings, I do have my preference…trench! Please share this letter with the rest of Council. Since ’64 (I came in ’59 after graduation to teach school here) I have owned a house in Palo Alto. Back then, and in subsequent years probably through mid ‘70’s, Palo Alto was a small, efficient, charming town in which to live. In the years since Silicon Valley exploded, it has continually been eroded by mega homes replacing charming original ones, convenient stores and services being squeezed out, an explosion of restaurants (thanks to repeal of dry limit), hotels, and condos and apartments which are being forced upon us by ABAG and frightful traffic! (I’m sandwiched between Oregon and Embarcadero, so have limited times out of my neighborhood.) Our open areas are being consumed! Years ago, while as a Realtor, I saw a presentation of train options. The high overhead wires above elevated tracks were ugly. Moving roadways under the tracks was equally unappealing. What really impressed me was the vision of the open green space above the trenched train tracks! We need that. It is short-sided to not trench…and the future will depend upon it and thank this decision. Palo Alto is now home to many billionaires…tap them to help with the financing. Show photos of the proposed green parks, etc. that could be above the trench so more people know what could be! Thanks. Your supporter, Sharleen Fiddaman 2255 Webster Street, Palo Alto City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/2/2017 1:30 PM 1 Carnahan, David From:Sea <paloaltolife@gmail.com> Sent:Friday, September 29, 2017 11:08 AM Subject:Tweet by Se Reddy on College Terrace Market & Bank 2100 El Camino Real Sea-Seelam Reddy (@SealamReddy) 9/29/17, 11:03 A bank+market. Brilliant! Free parking under; Italian Coffee $2 Salads macaroni squash quinoa salads.1/2way Stanford & Cal Ave 2100 EC Real pic.twitter.com/e3O1vrewun Download the Twitter app Sent from my iPhone City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/4/2017 8:19 AM 1 Carnahan, David From:Sea <paloaltolife@gmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, October 03, 2017 3:30 PM To:Carnahan, David; Council, City; gsheyner@paweekly.com; vinnyraylarkin@yahoo.com; jdong@paweekly.com; bwarchangelmichael@gmail.com; Greg Schmid (external); letters@paweekly.com; lkou@apr.com; earwopa@yahoo.com; williamfok86 @gmail.com; Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority; jspradling@yahoo.com Subject:Tweet by Sea-Seelam Reddy on Twitter Sea-Seelam Reddy (@SealamReddy) 10/3/17, 14:51 2280 ECReal Pot hole. SC County needs to fix this pothole. Possible damage to tires suspension systems, a fall could hurt1 @cityofpaloalto pic.twitter.com/PETmbzZJvb Download the Twi tter app Sent from my iPhone City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/2/2017 1:30 PM 1 Carnahan, David From:Sea <paloaltolife@gmail.com> Sent:Friday, September 29, 2017 12:24 PM Subject:Tweet by Sea-Seelam Reddy on Twitter Sea-Seelam Reddy (@SealamReddy) 9/29/17, 12:02 Hold your head high Dr. McGee. Palo Alto will miss you. Message - Sept. 29, 2017 | Palo Alto Unified School District pausd.org/explore-pausd/… Download the Twitter app Sent from my iPhone City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/3/2017 2:32 PM 1 Carnahan, David From:Ofer Bruhis <ofer.bruhis@gmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, October 03, 2017 8:54 AM To:Council, City Subject:Verizon towers Hi there,    I have been e‐mailing with Rebecca Atkinson, and not sure if this e‐mail will also reach her, but I want to emphasize that  we are totally against installing the Verizon cell towers in our area (midtown).  I have lived in Palo Alto since 1985 and  expected a quite and relaxed living.  Two years ago the air traffic from SFO started flying over our house, and now the  plan to install these ugly cell towers all over the city.    If there is any action required from our side, please let us know.    Best    — ofer bruhis  3272 bryant street  palo alto, ca 94306  City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/4/2017 12:55 PM 1 Carnahan, David From:Ron Chun <ron.chun.esq@gmail.com> Sent:Wednesday, October 04, 2017 11:07 AM To:board.secretary@vta.org Cc:Council, City Subject:VTA Meeting (October 4, 2017); a) Objection to Agenda Item 6.3 - Consent Calendar; b) Request for Removal from Consent Calendar and c) Request Modification of Language of Item 6.3 for fairness Dear VTA Board and the Board Secretary: I respectfully request that Agenda Item 6.3 on the Consent Calendar (ACTION ITEM -1) Adopt a Resolution, establishing the 2016 Measure B Program; and 2) adopt the 2016 Measure B Program Category Guidelines.” ) be: a) removed from the Consent Calendar and; b) the language changed for Caltrain Grade Separation so that all available funds are equally divided among all affected grade crossings. The current language provides that funds will be allocated on a first-come-first-serve priority to the cheapest way to get grade separations. I object to this language because this means that efforts in Palo Alto to build a better but more costly grade separations will get lower priority in allocation of the funds. I propose that the following language be used in its place: To complete all eight projects, VTA shall divide the 2016 Measure B funding equally in 2017 dollars among the eight projects listed in the Caltrain Grade Separation Program Category. Designs higher than baseline costs will require additional local and other funding. VTA will work with collectively with the cities to secure funds from outside sources to complete the program. Please confirm receipt of my message. I further ask that this email be distributed to all members of the VTA Board. Very truly yours, Ronald Chun, Esq./ CPA Palo Alto, CA City of Palo Alto | City Clerk's Office | 10/4/2017 12:55 PM 1 Carnahan, David From:Mark Nadim <marknadim@gmail.com> Sent:Wednesday, October 04, 2017 12:00 PM To:board.secretary@vta.org Cc:Council, City Subject:VTA Proposed Guidelines for Caltrain Grade Separations Honorable VTA Board Members, Please remove item 6.3 from the Consent Calendar and change the language for Caltrain Grade Separations  so that funds will be allocated to projects that cost‐effectively utilize Measure B funding. Thank you. Mark Nadim Palo Alto Elaine Meyer meyere@concentric.net October 2, 2017 Good evening Mayor Scharff and Members of the City Council: There have been a number of messages on the Weekly's Town Square, as well as people speaking to you here from this lectern, expressing concern about the conduct of recent Council meetings. As someone who has chaired many meetings, I find these recent events rather unsettling. Just two examples: • Motions are being proposed before there is any discussion, which limits any Council discussion just to the motion. That is improper, and it is not right. • Sometimes the Chairman speaks first, pre-empting the discussion, before allowing Members to speak. That is improper, and it is not right. It is easy to fall back on advocacy skills one has used in another environment. However, chairing a municipal council has different norms, which are described clearly and briefly on the city's website Palo Alto's "Guidelines for Meeting Management" http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/ gov /boards/board_member _and_commissioner _resources/ default. asp see also City Council Procedures and Protocols Handbook and Codes of Conduct for Elected Boards www.ca-ilg.org/CodesOfConduct The Chair's Role (page 2, City "Guidelines for Meeting Management") The chair's role includes: • Helping the group determine whether it has all the information necessary and available to make a decision. • Where there are multiple points of view on what the best decision might be, encouraging decision-makers to share those views. • Actively listening to determine potential points of agreement and testing those points for actual agreement. • Managing any conflicts that may arise during the discussions. • Keeping the discussion on topic. • Ensuring that clear decisions are made. • Sticking to the agenda. • Getting through the agenda items in a timely manner. As a result, the role of the chair can be understood as: ICOUNCJL JEETING /cl/rfl. I 7 ( ] Placed Before Meeting ~ved at Meeting _,_ • • • A team captain who leads by example and helps the group function as a team; • A coach who encourages participants to perform at their best, including as it relates to principles of fair play and sportsmanship; and • A referee who has authority to stop the action and apply the rules of play. For the chair to play the role of referee effectively, the chair needs the group's trust and respect. To earn this trust and respect, the chair needs to conduct the meeting fairly. This means applying the group's agreed upon standards in an impartial manner. If one's colleagues' understand that the chair's goal is to be an impartial facilitator to help the group achieve consensus, the group will be more inclined to act in ways that support the chair's efforts and achieve the meeting's goals. To achieve both the perception and the reality of impartiality, it can be helpful for the chair to hold off expressing his or her views on a matter and not engage in debate. -"2.- The Chair's Role The chair's role includes: Helping the group determine whether it has all the information necessary and available to make a decision. Where there are multiple points of view on what the best decision might be, encouraging decision-makers to share those views. Actively listening to determine potential points of agreement and testing those points for actual agreement. ' Managing any conflicts that may arise during the discussions. ·Keeping the discussion on topic. •Ensuring that clear decisions are made. •Sticking to the agenda. Getting through the agenda items in a timely manner. As a result, the role of the chair can be understood as: A team captain who leads by example and helps the group function as a team; A coach who encourages participants to perform at their best, including as it relates to principles of fair play and sportsmanship; and A referee who has authority to stop the action and apply the rules of play. 1 For the chair to play the role of referee effectively, the chair needs the group's trust and respect. To earn this trust and respect, the chair needs to conduct the meeting fairly. This means applying the group's agreed upon standards in an impartial manner. If one's colleagues' understand that the chair's goal is to be an impartial facilitator to help the group achieve consensus, the group will be more inclined to act in ways that support the chair's efforts and achieve the meeting's goals. To achieve both the perception and the reality of impartiality, it can be helpful for the chair to hold off expressing his or her views on a matter ar:id not engage in debat'COUNql. ~EETING / ;J .A./ /d~J/7 ~£/1V'-( ] Placed Befor; Meeting ~~~ [] ReceivedatMeeting RE: Antonio's Nut House liquor license for seating outside September 29, 2017 Dear City Council, CITY OF PAL O ALTO. CA CITY CLERK 'S OFFICE 17 SEP 3 I PH 9: I 4 I recently found out that Antonio's Nut House was not granted a liquor license for seating outside. Many establishments up and down the block have areas outside where people drink on the sidewalk. Antonio's is beloved to people of all ages in Palo Alto. It's down home, welcoming, warm, friendly, and appealing to so many people. It's a landmark! I've lived in Palo Alto for decades and decades, and it is a very special place 'to every generation. Please, please retook at this permit. I go there to play pool on a weekly basis. My sons, James Franco, Tom Franco, and Dave Franco, go there. People who are younger than me go there. People who are older than me do. Please reconsider and find a way around any hurdles. Palo Alto needs its history, or it loses its character. thank you very much, 7US~ Betsy Franco franco. betsy@gmail.com 2921 Ramona St. Palo Alto, CA 94306 ··w11e11 women thrive, all of society • l1e11efits." -Kofi Annan ·~Castilleja ''When \vomen thrive, all of society benefits." -Kofi Annan ©Castilleja "When women thrive, all of society benefits." -Kofi Annan I support Castilleja's proposal to increase enrollment and modernize its campus because ... 1-f 0u1 a-U vJ r'"'d" U'O IA.A e-~ ;V\(N_C.V~ ~CC&' ); °'-w~rJ _ c,Q._~11 .v:/LiCa£01- ~r. RE~RN ADDRESS: K.llJrN c we_ 7 . I support Castilleja's proposal to increase enrollment and modernize its campus because... Q..J::)v.>..co.Jr;;-.~ J \r\s ~s CN.. '-9 ~ Mo~ \('(\.(Jov\I OJU-~<; VvG. CD.A ~ . ~ ~ OJ-Q._ ~~~ ' ~j~~~, ~~~,-0 ~ ~ ~"--~ .~ \\) ~ cf\JkJ" j(<\~ ~ \{\. ~~~~ ~s\(Mf~· Office of the Clerk Please distribute to all City Council Members 250 Hamilton Avenue, 7th Floor Palo Alto, CA, 94301 D Office of the Clerk Please distribute to all City Council Members 250 Hamilton Avenue, 7th Floor Palo Alto, CA, 94301 RETURN ADDRESS: I support Castilleja's proposal to increase enrollment and modernize its campus because ... fu_ £o~ ~ C-<.~ t1ALI ~/7 n/-14 ~ h//~-R. · e)<./JCUA/J 10A, ~~/7~ VJ ~ ()/>?<__;-Tu "14 C< ~ ~ <ik. /en, ~ PJ.oCU~ ~ D Office of the Clerk Please distribute to all City Council Members 250 Hamilton Avenue, 7th Floor Palo Alto, CA, 94301 ~~~~~--~~~~~~~ C.Jtti-r k!>"fD~ ~J 9tf303 I support Castilleja's proposal to increase enrollment and modernize its campus because ... D Office of the Clerk Please distribute to all City Council Members 250 Hamilton Avenue, 7th Floor Palo Alto, CA, 94301 D Office of the Clerk Please distribute to all City Council Members 250 Hamilton Avenue, 7th Floor Palo Alto, CA, 94301 I support Castilleja's proposal to increase enrollment and moderpi7ie its campus because ... M~ CZ. 51 (15 c}..o ~ (Jlorlcl-d~5 Q J..ttCa:.hbvt / t'l ~w"'r· Si2C.O...U.GJL lvt-ne~ ~e> wo rvten le.a_~-:., l'\o -f ~woe r. (Ast; llejt;._ \ 5 o.. PJo A-<.in ~5u.te o.xJ.-~O&\ '"fu bt *"(7~-ktl '1.5 su.d.. p Caw Sll.l ~ ~ 'j(l).. <LU ~~ M ~y +MJZ_! RETURN ADDRESS: a ro I i11 '--'3 roe he..+- =tzo p;~r...r c t: Palo A I to , Cfi CJ4 303 , I support Castilleja's proposal to increase enrollment and modernize its campus because ... :r: weuJ..J £Ice... ~ ~~ l °''2-s, .A-o be.- a.bee.. fo a:c~ ..k/-s2-. Wo~ JG"'-d.. 86 dz.r:.t~ . .lir:>~ ~H\o..t-(dDh' J'1;·4_ J?'t'b ,,,,.,.d44,J a~ :r: l-.e>pe ~o:I-Pedr:J Alto ~ fvv--~-0~ ;~ D Office of the Clerk Please distribute to all City Council Members 250 Hamilton Avenue, 7th Floor Palo Alto, CA, 94301 D Office of the Clerk Please distribute to all City Council Members 250 Hamilton Avenue, 7th Floor Palo Alto, CA, 94301 (,i.cc_o~ <..J~ p'la.nY\I~ for ~ Ae>d--15 /ear:I · ~re~!~ 1 cA.n:, / ,"r-e .Grae~ I support Castilleja's proposal to increase enrollment and modernize its campus because ... I support Castilleja's proposal to increase enrollment and modernize its campus because ... {v4)! <Jt;.f ~tru-5 it ~°cl ~t4*thl q sd;/ !/a llshm {'f#{ ~,.,,,. ~ak~ tJ/f;r~Nl' avlfld' ~ 1110 Ill r ilJ 1! a-J "oc/ D Office of the Clerk Please distribute to all City Council Members 250 Hamilton Avenue, 7th Floor Palo Alto, CA, 94301 D Office of the Clerk Please distribute to all City Council Members 250 Hamilton Avenue, 7th Floor Palo Alto, CA, 94301 I support Castilleja's proposal to increase enrollment and modernize its campus because ... .:r:: 3u~ tt .its en i Jirl g..i.. to ~u.co k. ~r-l.9-0.u.d ~~ ~OQ.tlk :tw._ SCL..cl..a.IS~ r-Q_~ Q.ualliS' IY'\~ ~ irl S +o IQ.W.~ ..,o.v.-. e'a.u.eo..t1'ou. ~ v..}{JU ~ ~ -t-o ~N-Q.. ~~~- I support Castilleja's proposal to increase enrollment and modernize its D Office of the Clerk Please distribute to all City Council Members 250 Hamilton Avenue, 7th Floor Palo Alto, CA, 94301 Office of the Clerk Please distribute to all City Council Members 250 Hamilton Avenue, 7th Floor Palo Alto, CA, 94301 RETURN ADDRESS: I ooQ'k. I support Castilleja's proposal to increase enrollment and modernize its campus because ... D Office of the Clerk Please distribute to all City Council Members 250 Hamilton Avenue, 7th Floor Palo Alto, CA, 94301 -------------------· ---- I support Castilleja's proposal to increase enrollment and modernize its campus because ... A\\ ~cu~ vv D(V\~V'\ c\ eS<?:f Ve 0--C.. V\o..v--c JL ·\;:'\'\ t 'o tS-\"" e~vC.0-. \~ oY'\. D Office of the Clerk Please distribute to all City Council Members 250 Hamilton Avenue, 7th Floor Palo Alto, CA, 94301 RETURN ADDRESS:\. /,. r ~ N\C~ \i\f\ I support Castilleja's proposal to increase enrollment and modernize its campus because ... \Ni~ ~\S SU~ O\..h~0h cl.e~~ ar-iol CUrrcn4 09+-'2ll"'~~ s~~ .CJ:1st·, 'rP.s -t6 t \Jrr-. ~r") ~ fv°'.0.J\.'"'\ '-jou~. ~l'N?.V) Q:ra~~r-. ~ otn=... \.60U ' v,JoME.l°' Who~~~ 0\. ~ . --ed\~re.V"ec.., \A \-h.lS ~~'n vvor:lol.r w~ \. ectw--'<' \J wt::fV\en ~~ , RETURN ADDRESS: I support Castilleja's proposal to increase enrollment and modernize its campus because ... 'W(; ~*n~tth 'NOwJIV\ ~ ~ l~ ~~~ ~yJlUfaA~~ ~.~~I Yl,Al-J \?!#\ f\"Y'4M"1 r tt;i Pb\\ l,~li(L w ~ t1tt4l.tiV) D Office of the Clerk Please distribute to all City Council Members 250 Hamilton Avenue, 7th Floor Palo Alto, CA, 94301 D Office of the Clerk Please distribute to all City Council Members 250 Hamilton Avenue, 7th Floor Palo Alto, CA, 94301 RETURN ADDRESS: I support Castilleja's proposal to increase enrollment and modernize its campus because ... . ~~ ~\~ 'f\ ot'\11 \ ~ Office of the Clerk Please distribute to all City Council Members 250 Hamilton Avenue, 7th Floor , Palo Alto, CA, 94301 \ YY\ p O'( t--61 Vlf-. 0'f \s ec\IJCOh cJJ>-1 (~ MWlti' 1, alcf t>0{0 Al~ RETURN ADDRESS: I support Castilleja's proposal to increase enrollment and modernize its ;:; b~~· (oJl\ii / M~Lto f l-e1.. t-e S..c.f(/f .. J,, / -. 1+-l.S ~ 11 j (.. L4_S.f-lkftL · .. J -{}f_ c o.M.~l/ ll. -lt ' s~ M ( f ~ tJt. n(t) to [, i,...J c4 ~ w~q a. 'I U ko ()A. ~ 1>"~ j,~" <V\J ~ d~ ~l '-tle-~> Sc ~i&f ~d-1 J -+o ~ ~:s ~~~~¥ ~k~ ¥ 1'-e (,. ,.,.,..., ; \ -~J D ~,~. _:jk I ; " /--h f f.u. Office of the Clerk Please distribute to all City Council Members 250 Hamilton Avenue, 7th Floor Palo Alto, CA, 94301 I support Castilleja's proposal to increase enrollment and modernize its campus because ... vo ~ W;)eM Iv'(} rr Cfa --:p-ea_,,( ~ r<_ ((),(µ._ M-Jon'S~· (Vw~ CJr.rvh S0iu-IJ ~ ~U-fo ~{/)QA/,~ ~ aj Offu-fl-fuw t1~~ I support Castilleja's proposal to increase enrollment and modernize its campus because ... Office of the Clerk Please distribute to all City Council Members 250 Hamilton Avenue, 7th Floor Palo Alto, CA, 94301 D Office of the Clerk Please distribute to all City Council Members 250 Hamilton Avenue, 7th Floor Palo Alto, CA, 94301 I support Castilleja's proposal to increase enrollment and modernize its campus because ... Office of the Clerk Please distribute to all City Council Members 250 Hamilton Avenue, 7th Floor Palo Alto, CA, 94301