Post a New Topic
Original post made
on Apr 18, 2008
While we are at it - I recommend we pay for the road in front of our houses.
Palo Alto Suckers !!!
Benest is leaving right ? !
I also want to pay for the planes flying overhead as well. Benest will figure out how.
If I pay for the sidewalk in front of my home, then I determine who uses it....
We seem to have slipped into panic mode.
If the City can fund Destination Palo Alto, among other extravagencies, and can't afford to keep up its sidewalks then there is something intrinsically wrong. In my home, we pay for the essentials before wondering if there is something fun to do, the City must do the same.
This is a tax increase and so, I assume, requires a 2/3 vote.
Sharing sidewalk costs will generate $600,000; here's some spending that could also generate $600,000:
Destination Palo Alto - $240,000, environmental coordinator-$181,000, city council trips, website-$250,000,city manager communication-$250,000.
$10 million are spent on consultants.
There are 10.5 full time equivalents in the City Manager's office!
[Post removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]
BEAR IN MIND,
The City owns the trees on my street. I will not pay anything to repair a sidewalk that is destroyed by City Trees.
If the City wants to save money, Don't replace the 4 or 5 senior City Managers and Directors who are retiring soon......
It is a bad idea. Especially for those of us who own a house on a corner where we have a lot more sidewalk than others.
We are already paying for this. It is included in our property taxes. It is a charge that is equally calculated into every individual property tax. What is being proposed is an extra charge disproportionate to some. I doubt very much that those who live on flag lots would get a discount, therefore some would pay disproportionately more than others. Ridiculous.
The city-owned camphor trees have uplifted the walkway into my home and seriously cracked the driveway. The city owns approx. 4 feet of the property line beyond the sidewalk. It is the city's tree, but I have to foot the repairs! Big money for pavers or whatever. And the city wants to buy a $180K new statue for California Avene and $250K for this ridiculous Destination Palo Alto?? How many of the locals bother to go downtown now? We go to Los Altos and Mt. View and Menlo Park to shop. Much more peaceful.
I want to pay very low property taxes.
I want the city to pay for everything that benefits me.
The city budget can be slashed by cutting all services that do not directly benefit me.
Councilman John Barton said the proposal made him "squirm." Council members Yoriko Kishimoto and Pat Burt said they also oppose the idea.
The current city-pay-all system is "embedded in the Palo Alto culture," Mayor Larry Klein said.
He's been getting calls about the proposal.
"I've been telling people who use extreme language that this wasn't a crazy idea submitted by the city manager because most communities do it this way, but that doesn't mean we should do it," Klein said.
Maybe the Council Members who voted for the 2007-09 Adopted Capital Budget have forgotten that they approved the Sidewalk Repairs capital project which reduced $250,000 from contract construction by permitting the City to only replace sidewalk damaged by tree roots, and make property owners responsible for paying to replace sidewalks not caused by root damage. At the time staff failed to mention that property owners would have legal liability if they did not replace the damaged sidewalk they are responsible for. See page 94 of the capital budget, or page 126 of 354 at Web Link.
The link wouldn't work for me, but if what you say is true; that the City passed a new law in the guise of a budget, and that liability issues were set, in the guise of a budget, then this issue needs to be re-visited by the Council immediately.
I suggest every homeowner put up a sign on their portion of the side walk saying:
"This portion of sidewalk can be hazardous to your health, walk at your own RISK"
I am sure this kind of legislature will be picked up by some "National Newspaper" and it will be put to rest for good - additionally putting the people who suggested it to shame.
To be a member of the CITY COUNCIL, CITY STAFF, or to be City Manager, City Attorney or other high positions in the City of Palo Alto
You first must prove that you have no shame....
Would you ask the people who gave you 1.4 million in perks, at one time. 8 years ago for more money? After the type performance he has give or condition the City will be in once that person is gone, for real.?
Remember for now he has only promised to leave?? And we know how good a promise from him is????
SEE NO SHAME!!!!
Herb, thank you for the link to the capital budget. I see the shift of costs from City to property owners, but I don't see any mention of liability. How is a property owner liable for accidents on a City-owned sidewalk on City-owned property. I own neither the sidewalk, nor the property on which it sits, nor the City tree that is causing the damage.
I'm a law school drop-out from years back, but this would have made for good classroom discussion in torts.
If the property owner becomes responsible for sidewalk repairs and there was a slip and fall case surrounding the sidewalk, would the homeowner then be liable for damages? Would the city? Both.
And to give this "case" more facts, say the city notified the houseowner that repairs needed to be made, but the homeowner waited 2 months to have the repairs done because they didn't have enough funds at the time of notification. In between that time is when the plaintiff suffered damages because of the faulty sidewalk.
(Dang, this makes me want to go back to law school.)
Here is how Gilroy's sidewalk program works: Web Link
They do 50/50 cost share. Basically, State law covers this issue and property owners ARE ultimately responsible for maintaining the sidewalk, curb, gutter and park strip along their property frontage. Corner lots get a bad deal, while flag lots get a great deal.
In places where it snows, property owners are also responsible for clearing the sidewalk of ice and snow. My Parents were sued because someone slipped on "their" sidewalk. Their homeowners insurance paid the claim ($50K). The person who slipped was an older woman walking in a housecoat and slippers in a snowstorm.
Palo Alto has a really good deal right now. The cost of the program is partially funded by the utility users tax through an unofficial earmark of the funds. I personally think it is a nice program that keeps property owners from hating the street trees that cause much of the damage.
Hi The Lorax,
Thank you for your post. I had no idea that CA statutes addressed this and that homeowners are indeed responsible. After reading your post, I did some quick research as follows (link is at the bottom) This is from the City of Burlingame:
"A recent survey shows that 10 out of 11 Peninsula cities require that sidewalk repairs to be the responsibility of the adjoining property owner including:
• Daly City
• San Bruno
• San Mateo
• Foster City
• San Carlos
• Redwood City*
• Menlo Park*
*Menlo Park and Redwood City require that property owners pay 50% of the repair costs. South San Francisco does not require the adjoining property owners to be responsible for sidewalk repairs.
Here's the link:
That's incredible. In New England, where I retired to and previously grew up, I have never heard of the homeowner being responsible for sidewalk repairs. Clearing off snow, yes. Anything else, never.
What are there companies you hire to fix sidewalks? This is nuts.
Janet. Welcome to the GOLDEN STATE,, Where upper level Employee's get paid in gold.
Citizens and lower level employee's get the lead for there work..
In New England did the City Manager get 1.4 million in peeks and 200,000.00 + a year to run a city like this... Nice job??? they are doing..
If you believe Frank. And this one of the richest city's in America has so much trouble , How do the little ones ever get bye??? I guess they do not have baby boomers Frank..??
What are they paying taxes for then ? Its each city's own responsibility to maintain thier property .I am shocked how Calif can adopt new things to suit it. Being from the midwest originaly Ive never heard of this going on there.
Wouldn't this leave the city open to a lawsuit for not using thier funds apropiately ,and causing extra burden on people finances.That is what your sales tax goes for to help the city maintain thier roads and property.I could see uping the sales tax to help fund the repairs, But not cost sharing. Is the city going to cost share on your property taxes ?
I am shocked so many citys have this in California
Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.
Post a comment
Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online.
Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information
We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.
Select your neighborhood or school community: * Not sure?
- Barron Park
- Charleston Gardens
- Charleston Meadows
- College Terrace
- Community Center
- Crescent Park
- Downtown North
- Duveneck/St. Francis
- Embarcadero Oaks/Leland
- Esther Clark Park
- Evergreen Park
- Greater Miranda
- Green Acres
- Greendell/Walnut Grove
- Leland Manor/Garland Drive
- Meadow Park
- Monroe Park
- Old Palo Alto
- Palo Alto Hills
- Palo Alto Orchards
- Palo Verde
- South of Midtown
- St. Claire Gardens
- The Greenhouse
- Triple El
- University South
- Woodland Ave. area (East Palo Alto)
- Addison School
- Barron Park School
- Duveneck School
- Egan Middle School (Los Altos)
- El Carmelo School
- Escondido School
- Fairmeadow School
- Gunn High School
- Hoover School
- JLS Middle School
- Jordan Middle School
- Juana Briones School
- Nixon School
- Ohlone School
- Palo Alto High School
- Palo Verde School
- Santa Rita (Los Altos)
- Terman Middle School
- Walter Hays School
- another community
- Another Palo Alto neighborhood
- East Palo Alto
- Los Altos
- Los Altos Hills
- Menlo Park
- Mountain View
- Portola Valley
Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.
Teavana Palo Alto closes
By Elena Kadvany | 6 comments | 4,091 views
What Freshmen Should be Thinking About College
By John Raftrey and Lori McCormick | 17 comments | 3,278 views
Waiting on the Edge of Death
By Chandrama Anderson | 6 comments | 1,757 views
Welcome Back Sugar Addict
By Laura Stec | 3 comments | 1,607 views
Clarifying the Process of Canonization
By Nick Taylor | 1 comment | 1,392 views
Home & Real Estate
Shop Palo Alto
Send News Tips
Circulation & Delivery
Mountain View Voice
© 2015 Palo Alto Online
All rights reserved.