It would be better IMO if the city focused on how to honor the United Farm Workers and Juneteenth in a broad and meaningful way, rather than two more paid holidays (which honor and benefit no one) for city employees only. The latter seems like a narrow special-interest benefit, under the veneer of an honorable cause.

I see that they included East Palo Alto (to the right) of them, as an afterthought. They say that they want to create certain days to be inclusive. So they decided that they might include the largest minority community in their self-righteous plans. How about giving back all the acreage that Palo Alto took by fraud? And did not include the citizens of East Palo Alto and get rid of the Airport that flies over the city. There is a proposal to charge Palo Alto a service-toll Fee for the Air space. Another show of goodwill would include an exit off of the Dumbarton Bridge, hooked up directly into Highway 101. This would relieve East Palo Alto from cut-through traffic that Palo Alto has contributed to. They don't need any stinking holiday recognition. Just do what is right by those Citizens. And when you get around to building onto that Newell Bridge. NO THROUGH TRAFFIC WELCOME.

Can we have a debate about how many paid holidays the City should have?

Can we have a debate about how many work days the City should have?

At some stage the increase in paid holidays must translate into fewer days for workers to do the work that needs to be done. It has nothing to do with what the holiday is for, but it does have plenty to do with how essential work gets completed when there are more and more paid non-work days for City employees.

Given a choice I wonder which of the following would directly benefit those who are most in need of a benefit.

1. Reduce rents (rent control). Raise wages .

Or

Give a paid holiday to the same ones that serve up the disparities and slave’wagery for our grape growers and our African Americans and so many more trapped in poverty.

It’s all so backwards.

Not a mention of the rapidly growing unfunded pension liability reported two days ago and now at $553,000,000.

Web Link

Instead of additional holidays, 'Online Name' hit the major issue the Palo Alto city council should be working on - the $553M unfunded pension liability. Each successive PA city council and elected officials push the unfunded pension liability down the road to the next group of elected officials.

I do suggest those writing about and interested in these subjects should learn the history as to why Major General Granger sailed to Galveston after the ending of the Civil War. And the roles Cesar Chavez and his brother played in controlling illegal immigration.

"Palo Alto's elected leaders all agree that the city should create more holidays as part of an effort to spread awareness about cultural diversity, demonstrate inclusiveness and combat hate crimes."

What's next? Chinese New Year? Ramadan? Dewali? Orthodox Christmas?

I'm sure giving city employees more time to rest is a great way to advance DEI. It is so logical and so obvious.

What happened to the unaffiliated Day of Reflection that was being proposed as the 3d unpaid holiday? Jokes were made about what staff could contemplate during yet another paid vacation day.

Another paid holiday to get those darn SFH remodel projects done while getting paid time off. Two’fer.

Oh and to hire and watch over low pay hourly labor to complete the job .

I was never one to oppose holidays. Of course, the end of slavery and rights for Latinx farm workers are major parts of our history on par with other federal holidays. Other than selling detractors, creating a holiday is not a sustained effort, it is a nice gesture.

Sustained effort is something that is not always attractive to politicians, especially when the struggle is not really their struggle. I had a close friend once suggest that PAUSD hold at least one or two board meetings a year in EPA as a symbol of commitment to and unity with that community that sends the district a significant number of students. The principal of Greene at the time called it a great idea. That is about how far it got. Apparently, the folks at 25 Churchill and the Board did not find it such a great idea since no effort along those lines has been made.

How hard can it be to contact a community organization in EPA, even a well-known church, and propose such an idea? Too hard for 25 Churchill one must assume. Remember to separate talk (or Promises) from actions. Lots of equity talk at 25 Churchill, actions are harder to pinpoint.