Posted Oct. 2 at 7:54 a.m. by A Children Library Supporter, a resident of the Old Palo Alto neighborhood:
"No way will I support a $50 million bond issue for Mitchell Park Library. And I will not support $45 million for a new police headquarters. I don't believe these cost estimates and I don't think the city will fall apart if we don't do these upgrades. I have grown weary of the 'let's put a bond on the ballot' storyline.
And yet the City Council just keeps spending money on architects' fees for these projects that will never be approved."
Time to focus
Posted Oct. 2 at 8:06 a.m. by Marvin, a resident of the Charleston Gardens neighborhood:
"If the city plans to keep all the library branches open, then I will not vote for the library bond. As far as the police bond, I do not trust our City Council — it wastes too much money on consultants, architects, useless Web sites and 'boutique' commissioners that the city does not need.
Kishimoto and company need to start focusing on the city's real problems. Maybe then I will vote for something that they propose."
Posted Oct. 2 at 8:37 a.m. by Natasha, a resident of the Meadow Park neighborhood:
"Interesting that Palo Altans are called 'cynical and unaware' and that the consultants claim the information is not 'penetrating' our stupid, thick skulls. I would hardly call Palo Altans unaware. The problem is that we are all too aware of what goes on — irresponsible spending, refusal to take responsibility or accountability (can you say 'unworkable, overpriced Web site' and 'expensive, unnecessary green consultant'? If you took the cost of those two things alone you'd have about $500,000 or so).
It is even more irritating to see the spin pathetically being launched at the awareness of the Palo Alto citizenry. Give me a break. Conservative, sound, long-term fiscal policy — that's the ticket.
If we saw even an inkling of that we would no doubt be much more willing to take on those bonds. But no one likes to be taken for a ride, let alone asked to ignore the facts and just write a check. Palo Altans may be cynical, but the council is presumptuous."
A 'cynical doubter'
Posted Oct. 2 at 9:23 a.m. by Bebe Purcell, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood:
"Add me to the list of cynical doubters. For too long the Palo Alto establishment, along with the management and employees unions, has run the city as a private club. They only pay attention to the majority of us non-members when they need money.
Compare Palo Alto to any other city on the Peninsula: We're rolling in money. We spend double the money per capita as most other cities. For this we're told that we have better services and amenities than those other benighted cities.
Do we? Mountain View built a brand new state-of-the-art library without a bond or new taxes. They have around half the number of employees we do and they spend around half as much per resident. Their streets are in good repair compared to ours. Recently one of their public works managers, asked to describe Mountain View's procedure for street maintenance, said: "Well, we try to anticipate our needs in advance and then make room in the budget for them." Imagine that — they actually budget for maintenance and repairs.
Of course there are downsides to living in Mountain View. For example, their mayor has had not one photo-op publicizing the city's global-warming policy.
The last time we voted to give the grifters at City Hall more of our money was to fix the storm drains. Guess what: They made a mistake and now they can't fix everything they told us was direly needed with the money we gave them. In fact they can't even fix half of these urgent needs. So far they haven't had the guts to come out and ask for more money. I guess the 'needs' weren't so urgent after all.
So now we 'urgently' need a police station and a library, according to the consultants at City Hall hired to manipulate us into voting to lavish more money on our overlords.
Fool me once…."