Will this be like Cal Ave, where, by the end, all the retail is decimated? Why not in reverse, where by the end, the company trying to take over downtown is gone?

Which brings me to the point: I would rather spend the funds buying space for youth activities and community meeting space, new dog runs so that scarce parks won't become battlegrounds against City Hall, and other community assets -- on the south end of town more adjacent and walkable for residents. Downtown is already nice enough and I'm not interested in paying for more when as a resident I never get to go there anymore because of the resident-unfriendly development, but we have lost our retail and have nothing like the golf course, Lucie Stern and Children's Theaters, Jr Museum, airport, bowling green, Gamble Gardens, Art Center and Main Library with community gardens, Rinconada swimming pool, children's swimming pool, children's library and secret garden, history museum, etc, etc on the other side of town.

In fact, I would much rather see us put money into a fund to eventually buy the Frys site so it can remain a retail and community asset site, which would be a start.

If Council wants to do anything downtown, let them ask their developer friends who paid for their campaigns, and the companies who have taken over downtown as their personal domain.

I remember going to a community meeting similar to this several years ago. I found that I was unable to give my opinion as they had their own agenda and anything the public appeared to agree on was eventually ignored.

I think this is just a PR job to make it appear that we have some say, but really it won't make any difference at all.

Calling a government meeting to promote their plans an "Open House" arouses suspicions. Manipulating the language makes it sound untrustworthy.
Looks like the City Manager's PR staff is doing his bidding.

This is only going to anger residents, no matter the intentions.

Best not to do it, or an uproar will ensue.

Cancel it now, because there is nothing open or honest about what is being done to our Downtown!

Why not start by enforcing the "walk your bike" on the sidewalk law. The last time I visited downtown Palo Alto, two punks rode their bikes side by side on the busy downtown Univ. sidewalk and purposely swerved towards people, playing "chicken" with the pedestrians. No law enforcement was in site, as usual. I told the kids it was against the law to ride their bikes on the sidewalk but it didn't deter them. What good are all these "improvements" if pedestrians can't walk safely down the sidewalk? I remember when every attempt at riding your bike on the sidewalk was met with a reprimand from the police, usually from their patrol car.