|
|
|
Uploaded: Saturday, February 2, 2013, 1:42 PM
Updated: Monday, February 4, 2013, 8:03 AM
Palo Alto's 2013 priorities: infrastructure, downtown, technology
City Council overhauls its list of priorities, along with its entire priority-setting process
|
|
by Gennady Sheyner
Palo Alto Weekly Staff
Photo
 | Casting aside years of broad, vague and feel-good "priorities," Palo Alto officials on Saturday selected infrastructure repairs, technological improvements and the myriad issues surrounding downtown development as the official priorities that will dominate the city's attention in 2013.
In a first-of-its-kind retreat in the Palo Alto Art Center, the City Council broke away from the recent practice of including such things as city finances and environmental sustainability on the list. These two standby "priorities" are now likely to be included on the city's official list of "core values," which the council plans to adopt in the spring.
In a series of votes unsurprising to anyone who has watched a recent council meeting, council members quickly agreed to focus their 2013 workload on two hot-button items that topped the agenda for much of 2012: the city's aged infrastructure and the recent flurry of community complaints about parking and traffic problems caused by downtown developments. Council members agreed unanimously that these two areas deserve special attention in the coming year.
They then added the third priority, "technology and the connected city," with numerous council members expressing enthusiasm about harnessing technology to deliver services more efficiently and to encourage greater citizen engagement.
The process at Saturday's retreat was more structured than in years past, when council members brainstormed about possible priorities in an ad hoc fashion, made a list of ideas and voted on adopted priorities by placing colorful stickers next to their choices. The goal this year was to adopt priorities that would be more concrete and timely than those in the past.
The new definition of "priority" now refers to a topic that will "receive particular, unusual and significant attention during the year." Mayor Greg Scharff said each priority would also now be "achievable within three years."
When it comes to city repairs, the council specifically adopted as its priority "infrastructure strategy and funding," the wording suggested by Councilman Pat Burt. The issue has been a topic of much debate since 2011, when the Infrastructure Blue Ribbon Commission completed a report analyzing the city's infrastructure needs and proposed ways to pay for the items on the list.
The citizen commission had identified a $41.5 million "deferred maintenance" backlog; recommended that the city raise its capital spending by $2.2 million annually; and concluded that the city's police building and two of its fire stations are in need of urgent replacement.
Councilman Marc Berman, who had served on the commission, said the group's report created a good "road map" for the city to follow on the complex topic. This year, staff and consultants will be conducting polls, holding focus groups and taking other steps to set the stage for a possible 2014 bond measure that would fund some of the infrastructure items. With each council member citing infrastructure as a priority on his or her own list prior the retreat, its inclusion on the council's official priority list was a foregone conclusion.
In terms of downtown parking and traffic issues, the council agreed to make "future of downtown and California Avenue" a 2013 priority. Councilman Larry Klein noted the community had sent a strong message last year that this is something the city should focus on and said the council should respond to residents' concerns. Newly elected Councilwoman Liz Kniss said downtown parking was one issue she heard about more than anything other when on the campaign trail last year.
The only disagreement was over semantics, with Burt and Klein opting for the broader "future of downtown and California Avenue" and Councilwomen Gail Price and Kniss favoring the more targeted "downtown districts: urban design and transportation." The council ultimately opted for the broader wording Burt suggested and agreed to list the specific issues of "transportation, urban design, parking and livability" as a subtitle.
Every council member also said he or she strongly supports making technology a priority, though opinions ranged about what this means. At a minimum, it includes taking another look at whether the city should use its expand its "dark fiber" ring to become a citywide "fiber to the premises" system that would bring high-speed Internet to every residence. Last year, the Utilities Advisory Commission, acting on a staff recommendation, voted 4-3 to terminate the effort, which the city has explored for more than a decade.
But council members said Saturday that they remain open to re-examining the fiber-optics project. Kniss noted that Kansas City, Mo., and Chattanooga, Tenn., offer their residents citywide high-speed Internet and recommended that the city explore those projects.
"Other cities are making this work," Kniss said. "I think an important thing for us to do as a city is to learn from other cities."
Klein talked about the city's potential to harness technology to promote economic growth without increasing traffic congestion and further worsening downtown's parking problems. He advocated making the city "as technologically advanced as possible."
"The more this has been focused on, the more enthusiastic I get about it," Klein said. "We had a variety of technology things going on, but we never really brought them together and considered them in an organized and coherent way."
Councilwoman Karen Holman lobbied her colleagues to include "health city/healthy community" as a fourth priority. The concept of a "healthy city," as expressed by the World Health Organization in 1986, refers to a "one that is continually creating and improving those physical and social environments and expanding those community resources that enable people to mutually support each other in performing all the functions of life and in developing to their maximum potential." Making this a priority, Holman said, would commit the city to implement specific programs to promote a healthy community.
But Holman proposal fell one vote short of adoption, with only Price, Berman and Greg Schmid joining supporting making "healthy city" a priority.
The Saturday decisions mark the first time in recent history that all priorities are brand new. The two perennial items -- "city finances" and "environmental sustainability" -- are finally off the list, though members stressed that they are no less important than in the past.
In April, the council plans to adopt "core values" that are expected to include those two items along with "youth well-being" and "emergency preparedness" -- two other 2012 priorities that are not on the new priority list. Another past priority that could now be redefined as a "core value" is "civic engagement" -- a subject that the council views as important but difficult to measure.Are you receiving Express, our free daily e-mail edition? See a sample and sign-up for Express.
|
|
| Comments
|
Posted by Terry, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Feb 2, 2013 at 9:03 pm I propose a general plan to improve the effectiveness of city government based on two observations:
1) City employees receive pension benefits after they retire.
2) The impact of key city leaders (like city managers, etc) lingers on after they retire.
So the suggestion is to issue performance evaluations periodically after retirement, and to cut pension benefits based on the results of poor planning and operation.
If this were the case, the last two city managers would loose their pensions.
|
|
Posted by Jeff, a resident of the College Terrace neighborhood, on Feb 2, 2013 at 9:11 pm Are you kidding me? A bond issue to pay for infrastructure repairs? I would have liked to think this was the basic kind of things that should always be a priority of the city. If we need a bond measure to pass to be able to afford infrastructure repairs, something is wrong with the city budget process.
|
|
Posted by Taxed Enough Already, a resident of the University South neighborhood, on Feb 2, 2013 at 9:20 pm If the property taxes I already pay don't cover infrastructure "items" then what do they cover?
|
|
Posted by We are all happy!, a resident of the Greendell/Walnut Grove neighborhood, on Feb 2, 2013 at 10:29 pm @Taxed enough - The property tax you pay is enough to cover staff salary and retirement costs. Not much is left for current operations and forget about infrastructure.
But wait, the recent survey says that we are all happy!
|
|
Posted by Taxpayer, a resident of the Barron Park neighborhood, on Feb 2, 2013 at 11:15 pm No bond measure support here. Not when we pay our average union city worker over 150K in total compensation to do jobs with zero accountability.
|
|
Posted by Embarrassed, a resident of the Old Palo Alto neighborhood, on Feb 3, 2013 at 3:19 pm Here's hoping infrastructure is at the top, because it is an ongoing source of embarrassment when visitors see our bumpy, pot-holed roads and then find out how much it actually costs to live here. The two don't jive, and we all wonder where the money goes.
|
|
Posted by frank, a resident of the Evergreen Park neighborhood, on Feb 3, 2013 at 8:43 pm because the city has a structural deficit-its pension and medical obligations are not funded-any bond issue will cost more in terms of interest than if these issues were addressed. most cities address infrastructure improvements and maintenance annually through a capital improvement plan which is funded from the general fund. we should do the same in palo alto-NOT by bond issue.
|
|
Posted by Tax payer, a resident of the Old Palo Alto neighborhood, on Feb 4, 2013 at 10:10 am I'm not happy with the city "services" so I'm not sure who was surveyed. It's pretty astonishing to see the mediocrity and inefficiency of the various administrative departments. Add to that the embarrassing condition of our local streets and it makes me wonder where the money goes.
For all the talk about promoting green living by riding a bike or walking, it's downright hazardous to do that in my neighborhood. The pavements are so broken up that it's more of an obstacle course to find a safe path for bike tires. No safe routes to school at all. It's a basic govt service to maintain the local roads and you're telling me they want a bond measure to do that?!?!
|
|
Posted by JS, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Feb 4, 2013 at 10:18 am How about giving the completion of the Mitchell Park Library a "priority" status so it will be accomplished in three year period established for "priorities"?
|
|
Posted by Member, a resident of the Palo Verde neighborhood, on Feb 4, 2013 at 10:42 am Concerning the topic of Technology and the current wish to include China in the sister-city group: Outgoing Sec of State Clinton on CSPAN Sunday provided an overview of international issues addressed during her term in office - there are many outstanding issues concerning the US dealings with China including Intellectual Property. The picture in the Weekly of the delegation going to China included the Mayor of Oakland. Oakland has an on-going relationship with China through the Port of Oakland, as well as an active Chinese market area. Oakland has unused land that can be re-purposed to include a Chinese trade center. In this way the issues of Commerce can be addressed. It also has the benefit of
re-casting Oakland's outlook today which appears to center on commercial marijuana farms in the local wharehouses. So how is that working out? More crime in process, more kids dropping out of school.
The PA Council members may have a wish for international engagement but the funding for those wishes needs to come from some source other than the city budget. And that is not part of the job description for the city council members. Hopefully the council members will stick to the agenda they were voted in to do - manage the problems in Palo Alto on the budget provided.It is not the city's job to function in areas that are already being addressed at a higher level.
|
|
Posted by resident, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Feb 4, 2013 at 11:19 am To Taxed Enough Already:
Of the property taxes you pay to Santa Clara County, about 9 cents comes back to the City of Palo Alto. The rest goes to the school district, the county and the state.
|
|
Posted by NotEnough, a resident of the Community Center neighborhood, on Feb 4, 2013 at 12:00 pm To me, the city is like a young teenager asking for more money to spend.
|
|
Posted by Dan, a resident of the Southgate neighborhood, on Feb 4, 2013 at 1:09 pm How about paying for infrastructure repairs out of the General Budget and doing a Bond Referendum on City Leaders' trips to China.
|
|
Posted by Curious, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Feb 4, 2013 at 2:10 pm 1)How much money is being held at Palo Alto's own Utilities Dept?
2)How many Palo Alto retirees that did not work on our infrastructure are back at work in Palo Alto, as consultants in their own former positions, or working in nearby communities, full time or part time, and double-dipping? Why don't reporters ask hard questions, so citizen-taxpayers won't be in the dark?
|
|
Posted by jm, a resident of the Evergreen Park neighborhood, on Feb 4, 2013 at 2:45 pm Millions for a bike bridge that will be used by so few people that each ride over the bridge was calculated by one person to cost us tax payers $25.
The $1.5 million budget for beautifying California has gone over $4m, and anyone who takes the time to learn will know that every project the city is involved in goes well over budget.
Just two examples above of where the city puts $.
I'm not voting for a bond measure after years of watching the majority of council members, city managers, and our city staff, being such irresponsible stewards of the budget. Glitz over substance. Burnishes resumes and makes the council feel good.
A bond measure would be just a waste of money when no one can be held accountable in five years time.
Also, given how many of the lower wage city employees (janitors, gardeners) have been let go in favor of outsourcing, I'm wondering if the count of city employees reflects this. Or has the city employee count not gone down because these low paid workers have been replaced by higher paid workers?
|
|
Posted by Wayne Martin, a resident of the Fairmeadow neighborhood, on Feb 4, 2013 at 4:08 pm What does making "technology" a priority to this Council? The City/Council has never shown any interest in creating a technology plan that would at least outline the City's vision of what technology the City would use (that it is already not using).
The term "e-government" has been in the literature for over a decade, and yet--it does not appear anywhere in this list of "priorities", or in anything the City has done with technology, to date.
The following two lists of ideas about technology use was submitted to the Council, and it would appear that no one on the Council read them--based on a complete lack of acknowledgment of the submissions--
Technology Ideas For City of Palo Alto:
Web Link
Web Link
There has to be a multi-year, concerted effort, to find situations where "technology" can be used to provide services--with the assumption that, over time, there were be cost reductions based on the need for fewer people pushing paper.
The are so many possibilities for simple Smartphone Apps that could be used to identify problems in/around the City, but so far--no such APP has been developed.
This seems to be more of the same, rather than anything meaningful.
|
|
Posted by resident, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Feb 4, 2013 at 5:09 pm I'm glad to hear that infrastructure repair and downtown development issues are receiving priority over the usual flaky ideas. However, what exactly does prioritizing technology mean? The City of Palo Alto website is atrocious, is that where we are going to start? Let's be concrete and cut the buzzwords.
|
|
Posted by Resident, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Feb 4, 2013 at 6:55 pm Hopefully or maybe, the technology could be to display empty spaces in parking structures on entering together with some pay per hour machines.
A parking app could work too!
Technology is as vague a term as wellbeing or connectedness.
|
|
Posted by I love Palo Alto!, a resident of the Barron Park neighborhood, on Feb 4, 2013 at 8:28 pm Lets have paperless pa utilities bills! All this info could be emailed at large savings.
I love the new paving on the park avenue bike path! We need more of this for bikers on major thoroughfares! Way to go city!
|
|
Posted by NotNeeded, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Feb 4, 2013 at 10:05 pm I agree re: tax is not needed. Save the money for other good uses.
|
|
Posted by resident, a resident of the Crescent Park neighborhood, on Feb 5, 2013 at 12:04 am Forget about government efficiency and "technology and the connected city".
#1. Fix the traffic safety issue everyday everywhere around the town.
#2. Fix the city of palo alto webpage for god's sake. It is full of outdated pages and dead links.
We need to start giving score cards to the council members so that they will take some responsibility for their actions.
|
|
Posted by Unbelievable, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Feb 5, 2013 at 9:22 am It is unbelievable that the city spends millions on projects that are mismanaged (Mitchell Park Library, California Ave) or on things that are absolute white elephants of benefit to only a few (bike bridge over 101), wastes money on gold plated pensions and benefits to city employees but continues to ask residents for more and more money to provide basic services! I guess if you are so rich then none of this matters. However for the rest of us who are not rich but are average working folks living here, this is one more sign that maybe the day is not far when we can no longer afford to be here.
|
|
Posted by Think and Analyse, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood, on Feb 5, 2013 at 12:02 pm It is quite likely a bond measure would pass for infrastructure because there are so many voters in PA who follow the advice of others blindly.
An example of how gullible PA voters are is the vote to remove 10 acres of Bixby Park to build an Arobic Digester. The City is going ahead with this on the understanding they have the voter's approval. It will hugely increase everyones sewer and refuse bills, and it's all experimental.
Also Palo Altan's voted in favor of High Speed Rail and Jerry Brown's tax increase, so Council will be able to sell them on the Infrastructure Bond. I plan to vote against it because I'm capable of thinking for myself and analyzing the pros and cons.
|
|
Posted by Matt, a resident of the Downtown North neighborhood, on Feb 7, 2013 at 8:32 am "Palo Alto!, a resident of the Barron Park neighborhood, on Feb 4, 2013 at 8:28 pm
Lets have paperless pa utilities bills! All this info could be emailed at large savings."
I've been paying my utilities account online since June 2009.
Web Link
|
|
|
| |
Best Website
First Place
2009-2012
|
Send this story
Print this story
