Send this story Print this story

Adjust text size

Uploaded: Friday, June 26, 2009, 9:11 AM

Few repairs likely for Palo Alto roads, buildings
With revenues dipping, city is uncertain over how to fund street repairs, facility improvements

by Gennady Sheyner
Palo Alto Weekly Staff

Posted by Dean, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Jun 26, 2009 at 10:30 am

Interesting. I called Mountain View public works to report a sidewalk with large cracks in it on Tuesday, the supervisor went out to check it that afternoon, and the very next morning a crew of 5 workers were out repairing the cracks.

Posted by David, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Jun 26, 2009 at 10:32 am

A contractor has been replacing portions of sidewalks in our neighborhood. While some of the replacements have obviously been necessary, others were for trivial problems such as cracks with no vertical separation, or for very minor separation where grinding or asphalt filling would have worked just fine. A change in sidewalk repair policy would save a bit, to be used for more crucial infrastructure maintenance.

Posted by Paul, a resident of the Barron Park neighborhood, on Jun 26, 2009 at 10:42 am

Here is $6.2M that could be applied for essential work:

"Staff estimates that streetscape and safety improvements along the entire corridor will cost about $6.2 million. The striping plan for Arastradero Road would cost about $80,000."

Too bad that they couldn't get the funds back for sidewalks on Page Mill Rd. that has been holding up traffic for several days. We can't repair dangerous roads, but we can build new sidewalks?

Posted by Mike, a resident of the Crescent Park neighborhood, on Jun 26, 2009 at 10:42 am

A small sacrifice to make. We need to keep all of our available funds to pay for compensation and pensions for our entire staff of city workers.

That's why we are all here. That is our mission.

Posted by resident, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Jun 26, 2009 at 10:53 am

The county is paying for the sidewalks on Oregon Expressway - it's their road.

Posted by CACE, a resident of the Evergreen Park neighborhood, on Jun 26, 2009 at 11:17 am

Our street is under major construction to replace the main gas line now. Workers are digging up the street pavement everywhere.Am I hearing that the city is not going to repave the street and leave it as it is? It will be very dangerous for bikers.

Posted by Marvin, a resident of the Charleston Gardens neighborhood, on Jun 26, 2009 at 11:19 am

Don't forget that we also need money to give to the Children's Theatre.

according to Jack Morton:

""Asking us to defer for two years the money we need for seniors, for children, for the Children's Theatre -- this isn't going to go down well in the community.""

Web Link

Posted by M. Sloan, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Jun 26, 2009 at 11:51 am

Over the years I've seen Palo Alto repave streets only to tear them up a year or two later to do necessary maintenance on utilities, or install "new and improved" sidewalks. I wonder how much money we could save if all the city departments could actually coordinate with each other?

Posted by Richard Otte, a resident of Los Altos Hills, on Jun 26, 2009 at 12:05 pm

As a business operator, I'd note that infrastructure has to exist for business to function. If we want local high tech and other business, we need infrastructure. Maybe it's time to look at reducing pay rates and benefits for government employees that provide the infrastureture just as many businesses have done during the current downturn. Many businesses are off 30% with corresponding reductions in employee compensation.

Posted by mj, a resident of the College Terrace neighborhood, on Jun 26, 2009 at 12:10 pm

Heard that there are going to be quite a few sudden staff retirements to lock in the underfunded benefits that we have so kindly and generously felt was necessary to

hire city staff. Remember before the dot com boom all that staff grumbling about how underpaid they were compared to the private sector. After all, it wasn't "fair." Look who's laughing all the way to the bank now.

Posted by RS, a resident of the Duveneck/St. Francis neighborhood, on Jun 26, 2009 at 12:27 pm

Doesn't this article presume that prior to this repairs were being done? Deferring maintaince in favor of social programs and one time events has been the norm even in boom times hasn't it?

Posted by Bernard Leitner, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Jun 26, 2009 at 12:34 pm

The condition of the streets discourages biking, which means more driving and pollution.

Posted by anonymous, a resident of the Duveneck/St. Francis neighborhood, on Jun 26, 2009 at 12:40 pm

In light of what is written in this article, the 1 million dollars per year subsidy to Palo Alto Children's Theatre is an outrage and needs to be stopped.

Posted by Etaion Shrdlu, a resident of another community, on Jun 26, 2009 at 1:13 pm

Silver lining: No more bollards and traffic circles.

Posted by Walter_E_Wallis, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Jun 26, 2009 at 1:25 pm
Walter_E_Wallis is a member (registered user) of Palo Alto Online

Even when the city was flush they didn't waste money of prosaic infrastructure repairs. With so many wonderful things to do, only an old fuddy duddy would blow away the dream dust.

Posted by dave, a resident of the Downtown North neighborhood, on Jun 26, 2009 at 4:06 pm

"The $148 million list of future infrastructure 'future needs'..." did not include the Public Safety Building which Mr. Keene said earlier was a necessity. Is it off the table? When will the need to replace the present sub-standard quarters for dispatch, the EOC, and police be acknowledged?

It's a shame that the council will support less needed improvements over public safety. And why won't citizens support the police until they suffer actual injury or loss? We are lucky to still attract bright young men to become officers when San Carlos and Menlo Park have brand new facilities that make Palo Alto's present building look so shabby.

Posted by pat, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Jun 26, 2009 at 4:48 pm

Interesting that “Councilman Larry Klein questioned the need for an infrastructure reserve, which he said only complicated budget matters,” whereas Keene says the reserve is “a tool to promote stability and consistency.”

By contrast, Los Altos city staff “recommended four reserve policies, including consolidating two existing reserves into one fund, raising the city’s reserve from 12 percent to 20 percent of the general fund budget over the next six years, paying down interest-bearing city employee retirement obligations and creating a special fund in anticipation of state raids on the city coffers.”

Web Link

Posted by Dangerous Roadbed, a resident of the Charleston Gardens neighborhood, on Jun 26, 2009 at 5:02 pm

Thank goodness the City has removed and repaired the tree roots breaking up the roadbed on San Antonio between Charleston and Central Expressway. The City was forced into spending money on San Antonio due to the dangerous condition of the roadbed and the accidents that occurred.

We now have similar uplifting and breaks in the roadbed caused by tree roots between Charleston and Leghorn. These will cause more burst tires and accidents if the City does not repair that section. So, the City will be forced to spend money on street repairs whether they like it or not.

Posted by Kate, a resident of the Duveneck/St. Francis neighborhood, on Jun 26, 2009 at 7:37 pm

They haven't enough money to make a lot of necessary repairs? Will we notice the difference from the last ten years? So what is new?

Posted by Gus, a resident of the Duveneck/St. Francis neighborhood, on Jun 26, 2009 at 8:34 pm

No more taxpayer money wasted by Palo Alto City Hall departments on bogus investigations, unneeded consultants, and unearned management bonuses!Spend that money on filling potholes instead!!

Posted by Jake, a resident of another community, on Jun 28, 2009 at 1:35 am

What a complete and sad example of poor leadership from the City Managers office and the City Council. For years and years, way before the boom and bust cycles have repeated over and over. The powers at be have neglected to put funding into infrastructure. Instead many City Departments added staff and managers. Mangers who managed nobody or one or two people. Many departments burst at the seams with new positions and fancy titles.

And now we get those same responsible people trying to blame the current situation on a few employee groups. Like the firefighters, that department is much smaller than it was in the early seventies. Even though they are responding to thousands of more emergency calls each year now than they were then.

Less people, less fire engines and trucks but more calls. Many of the stations are almost falling down. Look at other Cities? the fire stations here are not anywhere near the condition.

The City Council has also put the blame on the Firefighters for overtime when the fact of the matter is the City Council mandated that an ambulance and a fire engine be staffed with overtime firefighters 365 days a year. Instead of staffing properly the Council mandated the program, never properly staffed it, then directed the Fire Chief to staff it with overtime firefighters all year long. And when you pick up the paper or listen to the City Council they blame the firefighters or cite their overtime wages. Many many times the firefighters are forced (oredered) to work that overtime. They are forced because the Council mandated the program and never authorized to staff it!! for over 20+ years this has been going on!

Posted by Brian Wilson, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Jun 28, 2009 at 1:45 pm

you gotta love palo altans! Always afix the blame and never fix the problem! I love the guy who blames city employees who are leaving in droves either by retirement or frustation out of lack of leadership within the city. First y'all want them to leave and then you bemoan the fact that their leaving. The fact is most palo altans are unable to form a consise opinion on how to fix the everyday problems of city affairs and thus elect council members who reflect voter indecision. Try not to formulate or base your decisions on what the print media wants you to focus your or their attention on and don't accept online opinion as fact.