Thank you Lydia for letting residents know of the lawsuit. Why should this not be public knowledge? Like so many other "closed sessions" much happens which is hidden from residents who have a right to know what is going on. How can what we now know was a decision to settle a lawsuit result in "no reportable action"? what happened to transparency?

And the boy Mayor should not rebuke anyone; his role in this fiasco is well know with his protesting to open the Preserve, saying civil rights should never be put to a vote and not scheduling the 2nd reading of democratically decided City Council decision on the plan to open Foothills Preserve.
Guess democracy is also under attack in Palo Alto. Don't get what you want so sue!

The mayor should follow Lydia's lead and try polling the residents / taxpayers here on OUR priorities like she did here AND on budget priorities instead of reflexively trashing and dismissing anyone with the temerity to disagree with his authoritarian views.

Lydia's polls and surveys SHOULD lead to MORE informed actions by the CC. Good for her for picking up the ball on what should be a city and/or council action.

But then they've never been known for their outreach and I'm still fuming about their failed "survey" on the RR crossings that didn't even work!

[Post removed due to deletion of referenced comment.]

We're out of line when he insults and dismisses everyone else?

Did you miss his recent interview in the SJ Mercury on the new CC candidates where he said Web Link

" In an interview, Fine said he chose not to run again because “there is no one I would like to serve with”, pointing to his past years of experience with council colleagues and the slate of candidates seeking open seats. "

How immature, ungracious and disrespectful of your son to dismiss the people with whom he serves and the people running just as he's routinely dismissed residents and our opinions.

Yup, rudeness is embarrassing and ungracious.

Adrian Fine's first allegation was that attendance at a close session is confidential.
1. Factually wrong. It is part of the public record -- see the Action Minutes for that meeting that documents Fine's arrival to 5:22pm and departure at 7:45pm: Web Link
2. Lydia Kou's supposed breach of confidentiality was in an email sent 27 minutes *before* the scheduled start of the Council meeting, so it could *not* have come from the closed session.

Adrian Fine's second allegation was Lydia Kou breached confidentiality by revealing that Council had voted in closed session to settle the lawsuit. This supposedly occurred in an email of Wednesday 28 October at 7:05pm to her supporters. However, this action had been revealed implicitly by the Staff Report published the afternoon of Thursday 22 October 22 - 6 days before. The Staff Report was for a public vote by Council to settle and included a detailed presentation of changes to the existing ordinance -- something that would not have been so specific without a vote of Council in the closed session. I published this trivial inference 39 hours before Kou's email in my blog (Web Link

Disclosure: I am a member of Lydia Kou's campaign team.
Disclaimer: This is a personal statement based on my knowledge of the facts. It is not a statement from the Kou campaign, nor has it been influenced, nor even seen by other members of the Kou campaign.

" In an interview, Fine said he chose not to run again because “there is no one I would like to serve with”

Given the city council is elected by and represents a majority of Palo Alto residents, the statement speaks for itself.

When council member Kou asked mayor Fine to make public his accusations, I gasped when he said he had already sent that information out to the media.

Mayor Fine's sudden and unprofessional attempt to publicly rebuke and humiliate council member Kou and his response uttered with apparent smug satisfaction that he had already gone behind her back to pass on the information to the media was a jaw-dropping demonstration of animosity and childish backstabbing that should be beneath the mayor of Palo Alto.

[Post removed.]

Help me understand why the decision to open Foothill Preserve, an issue with far reaching, community changing ramifications, was claimed by city leadership without a general consensus from Palo Altans? Please know that I have read everything published about this. Lydia Kou's survey should have been sent by city council to every citizen of Palo Alto, or, better still, put up for a vote by Palo Altans. This is a hugely important issue which should have called for exhaustive citizen input. Instead, we had arrogant CC members who made incredible remarks and carried onward, uncaring for and disregarding the sentiment of the vast majority of Palo Altans. Yet again, the use of Palo Alto land has been taken away from control by Palo Altans, who pay the price in every way.

[Post removed.]

I am very tired of seeing Mayor Fine' disrespectful attritude and behavior toward Council Member Kou. He has been at this for quite a while -- multiple eye rolls when she speaks and nasty comments and tone of voice consistently over the past couple of years.

Mayor Find should remember that Council Member Kou was elected by the people of Palo Alto and is deserving of respect. Hopefully everyone recognizes that his behavior reflects on Mayor Fine's immaturity and disrepectul attitude toward someone who consistently represents the residents of Palto, and does not reflect on Council Member Kou. Lydia Kou has been a constant voice for the residents of Palo Alto, and she has taken a lot of grief and nastiness from other because of it. I am hoping that Lydia Kou will be on the Council for the next term -- and thankful that Mayor Fine will not be. We deserve better than this mayor.

I posted this elsewhere, but I think it bears repeating, as I SO see the similarities:
I recently returned from Marshfield, Massachusetts, a blue collar fishing town south of Boston on open ocean, home to my grandparents. I walk the beach two miles north to the town beach, which fronts a parking lot posted for RESIDENTS ONLY.
Anyone can walk the beach, but nonresidents may not park. The public can access many a beach up and down the coast for a fee.
Baby sea turtles have recently been found on the town beach, to everyone's joy. The hope is the once thriving Cape Cod turtle population may recover. There is talk of designating the beach as..... a preserve.
I told my friends there all about the lawsuit against Palo Alto over opening Foothill to the public. They clearly saw the parallels between access limited to residents to Foothill Preserve and access limited to residents to Marshfield Town Beach. To a person those Yankees rolled their eyes and laughed, saying "...ONLY, ONLY in California!" Some asked incredulously if I was kidding, suspicious that I must have my facts wrong.
I'm assuming the ACLU, whom I admire, will continue their effort by suing any township, across the country, which maintains private access to anything. However, I know the leaders in those communities will actually feel a responsibility to those who have elected them, to those who call their town HOME. I believe their attorneys will be brave enough to actually represent the citizens, to fight to protect preserves, and to use their legal expertise, as they should, to defend against frivolous claims.

I appreciate that Foothills park will be more accessible. I am grateful that I and others will be able to enjoy this beautiful place, whether we are Palo Alto residents or not. I am grateful that the park rangers will continue to manage the health of the park's natural habitat. I have also enjoyed all the mid-pen open space that is open to all. I hope we move on, and respectfully visit these preserves, rather than debating them.

CeCi,
Thank you for your post.

We were sold out by our elected representatives yet one more time, except Kou and Tanaka (whom I appreciate more now). What a surprise.
The park is important but more important is how things are done here in PA. And you are right. There are towns where councils stand up for their people. This is not that kind of town. These are ready to sell us out to the highest bidder and fold when frowned upon by lawyers.
That is, by the way, while paying exorbitant salaries to all kinds of counsels because they need to hire "the best and brightest", you see. This is what we are paying those salaries for.

You are right. Now anyone knows that if ACLU goes after this town they will get whatever they want with no pushback. Get in line.

Fine accusing Kou of unprofessional conduct that is also "likely illegal and does enormous disservice to the community and to the public good," is highly ironic. This is the same guy who used City letterhead to write a personal letter endorsing SB50. And the same guy who, in a recent interview, showed tremendous disrespect for his colleagues and council candidates by saying that he chose to not run for reelection b/c there's no one he with whom he wants to serve. How is that not a disservice to the community and the public good?

I think our mayor's words say more about him than they do his target.

Adrian Fine's behavior towards Lydia Kou was atrocious and remains a true embarrassment to the City. The words and tone of his public accusations constituted classic disrespectful, sexist and abusive behavior. Thank u Lydia for serving as our Council member despite this disgraceful exhibit of misogyny. We appreciate your strong backbone and hard work on our behalf. You are exemplary of an elected representative who tries to fairly represent your constituency. Sadly, the Council needs to pass behavioral standards for discourse between Council members.

I can't wait for this current City Council to transition to the newly elected members. I personally do not even like to watch the PACC meetings because "the mayor" is so rude and offensive. He originates from South Africa. What is it about people who come here and then think they are colonizing the US?

During the discussion on FHP they stated that the headcount would be "limited" to 1,000 per day. Who thinks this type of stuff up? How many cars does that represent going up and down Page Mill? It is like people focused on an end result with no recognition as to how you implement the end result.

The road going up and down is part of the calculation.

All of the animals that are now chased out of the park are part of the calculation. A lot of those animals will be on Page Mill Road using it as a transition road from the park to elsewhere.

It is like we now have a "Disneyland" mentality associated with the park? Who is in charge of this mess? Someone is making a huge mess. We are surrounded by incompetence.

FYI. As a frequent walker of the FHP trail system, I am aware that many trails are quite narrow, even slippery when damp. Should 1000 hikers/day arrive in FHP, the trails could become almost impassable, let alone Covid-safe. What are the number of cars that will be permitted in the park? I don't think that 1000 people/4 per car would have enough parking spaces. No parking is allowed along Page Mill.

It’s a cap of 1000 persons at any one time, not per day.
And parking allowed for that number is 337 cars (it’s 300 something - I think 37 but open to correction as stated at council meeting).

337 cars going up and down Page Mill Road per day for FHP? Did you forget that there are residents who live there off that road? Did you forget that there are public services for trash pick-up that occur weekly? How about school buses for children? How about all of the animals that have been driven out of the park by people with children who are busy chasing what ever deer there are eating on the greens? How about the people who are busy training for the tri-marathons that are using that road as their training place? How about all of the blind-curves and sheer drop-offs onto people's roofs? Where is the local fire department that is going to pick up all of the casualties? You did not forget - you simply don't care.

People keep making decisions regarding the use of space with no regard for the other elements that use that space. FHP is unique in that it is isolated by location and the method of how you access it. And now the city has opened itself to litigation because it has not determined the risk associated with all of the things that can go wrong. All the city cares about is being sued and avoid getting publicity of an ugly nature. That has already happened. We have a SJM "Opinion" writer Alex Toledo who is dedicated to pursuing this topic.

Alex - are you related to the Toledo's in San Diego?

The city and it's organizations are single focused on getting the onus off themselves. Our legal department is again not doing their job. The residents may sue you - thought of that one?