Why are you running for the Palo Alto City Council?
I decided to run for City Council in order to help create a majority at City Hall that would take a more thoughtful and deliberative approach to discussion and decision making so that we could preserve quality of life by protecting the public interest. I feel that this can be done with fewer words, greater honesty, and more respect for the wants and needs of the citizens. Even if unsuccessful in getting elected, I thought that, given my experience and education, I could help to define the contours of the discussion and help produce a more favorable outcome.
What are the top three issues facing Palo Alto today?
The top three issues facing all communities on the planet, not just Palo Alto, are the following:
These are highly related and interactive and span the gamut of issues from climate change, GMO’s, and oil shale to income inequality, poverty in the developing world, and the exploitation and subjugation of women and children. I expect these issues to be around for some time.
However, for the purposes of the general election here in Palo Alto on November 4th, 2014, I’m going to go with Managing Local Government, Housing, and Traffic.
What innovative and creative solutions will you bring to guide Palo Alto’s policy choices in housing, development, parking and/or transportation?
My earlier statements on other sites have adequately expounded my positions on these issues. What I believe stands out within my approach is not only a more specific program but a strategic willingness to take tactical action in the areas that will slow down negative impacts and prioritize positive new directions. The power of City Council to slow, alter and disrupt unwanted trends has scarcely been used.
We can encourage smaller cottages that fill in on larger lots in order to distribute housing more evenly throughout town rather than just going with consolidated lots of 3/4th acre with multi units. In those instances, the goals of zoning changes pursuant to the revision of the Comprehensive Plan will need to be clearly stated and the era of office build out and Stanford hegemony will need to be ratcheted back. The cumulative impact of the last 30 years is destroying the environment that had made the North County such a wonderful place. It’s time to hit the brakes and focus more on human needs.
We should not pander to the automobile by investing in graded interchanges to mitigate F grade intersections but work to connect the entire Bay area in a rail loop; if need be, and we cannot implement a single system, BART in the East Bay and CalTrain down the Peninsula. If we cannot end High Speed Rail over the fact that the system that is in its embryonic form is not one as specified in the original ballot initiative, it will need to stop in San Jose at a transfer depot. I don’t see an alternative other than under-grounding on the Peninsula.
As for parking, which is an inseparable part of traffic, we can go with a rolling start. Immediately give property owners on the Northside and South of Forrest a placard for one space in front of their homes and see what remains. Then park up all the current lots, through subsidies if necessary, and determine if more structures are needed. Another structure is already needed in the California Avenue area if we are to take the movers and shakers at their word that they want a ‘Second Downtown.’ I’m cool with just one on that matter.
How can Palo Alto engage its citizens to bring in new voices and perspectives to the public dialogue?
In every case, honest discussion and transparency will produce a better outcome than dissembling and manipulation. The ways by which we encourage citizen engagement are rooted in respect, open dialogue, and measured action rather than haste. We have moved too rapidly toward a vision of the future that does not enjoy the support of the majority of the voters. However, if the voters wish to change that dynamic, they will need to elect the alternative to Busyness As Usual
Check out these Palo Alto Pulse articles to learn more….
