Town Square

Post a New Topic

Deadline for city's Internet cut-off rescinded

Original post made on Apr 4, 2011

An Internet service provider that last week threatened to pull the plug on the City of Palo Alto's Internet connection has agreed to keep the city hooked up until a formal agreement is reached.

Read the full story here Web Link posted Monday, April 4, 2011, 5:39 PM

Comments (18)

Posted by Maggie, a resident of Monroe Park
on Apr 4, 2011 at 6:54 pm

Stephen Stuart has been a valued Palo Alto community volunteer for two decades, helping design and build the successful Palo Alto dark fiber network. He was instrumental in developing the Palo Alto Internet Exchange (PAIX) where over 70 Internet providers peer. He is a long time volunteer to the Media Center and helped design the I-Net which Comcast acquired to serve municipal buildings, schools in four districts, and the Media Center. Unbeknownst to most, Mr. Stuart also helped establish a non-profit which donated the equipment and services to interconnect Palo Alto municipal buildings and services to the Internet.

He did so without payment or public thanks for nearly two decades. This is a good citizen, any way you look at it.

Unfortunately, other city actions frustrated Mr. Stuart enough to reduce his passion for continuing his significant contributions to the city's Internet connection.

It can happen to any one of us who feel passionately about community issues. It is gratifying to see a more moderate approach is being taken to resolve this challenging situation.


Posted by thug, a resident of Adobe-Meadows
on Apr 4, 2011 at 7:33 pm

[Post removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]


Posted by More-PA-Incompetence, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Apr 4, 2011 at 7:52 pm

> He did so without payment or public thanks for nearly two decades.

This represents a huge failure on the part of the City Management. It sounds like the City owes possibly $1M-$2M for unpaid Internet bills.

Sad .. really sad ..


Posted by Wondering, a resident of Charleston Meadows
on Apr 4, 2011 at 8:03 pm

Wondering what caused this change of plans. Perhaps the ISC did not want stuart speaking for them or maybe they realized their tax exempt status may be in danger or maybe they, like me, found stuarts actions childish and reprehensible. Either way the city should sever all ties with the ISC quickly. Mr stuarts attempts to bully the city have failed. Good.


Posted by Howard, a resident of Crescent Park
on Apr 4, 2011 at 8:10 pm

"Stephen Stuart has been a valued Palo Alto community volunteer for two decades"

Maybe so, but his recent behavior wiped out any good will owed to him.

No "Tall Tree" award for him.

Maybe the "Stilted poison oak."


Posted by Bruce L., a resident of Barron Park
on Apr 4, 2011 at 8:25 pm

Well, it's good to know that once the crying towel dried out rational thinking prevailed!


Posted by Bikes2work, a resident of Santa Rita (Los Altos)
on Apr 4, 2011 at 8:27 pm

Please can we just get a new cell tower at the Church? I'm tired of not having a signal at Lucie Stern Community Center.


Posted by henry, a resident of Community Center
on Apr 4, 2011 at 11:57 pm

Mr. Stuart, Thank you for 17 years of internet service to the City. I hope things will work out for you at the end of this fiasco. There must be a commercial or city property where AT&T can locate a cell tower. The tremendous profit from rent in the amount of thousands of dollar should not go to a non-profit organization. If it is making this much of money, then it should pay tax and contribute to our government like the other companies and common citizen like us.


Posted by trudy, a resident of Crescent Park
on Apr 5, 2011 at 6:34 am

The city owes Stuart a lot. If I were him and that monstrosity appeared in my neighborhood, I would have given the city two weeks notice and pulled the plug.


Posted by Lois, a resident of South of Midtown
on Apr 5, 2011 at 7:44 am

"Stephen Stuart has been a valued Palo Alto community volunteer for two decades".

So what, there are many fine citizens of Palo Alto who have worked for the City in a volunteer capacity for 20 years and longer. Stephen Stuart is not unique.


Posted by asdf, a resident of Adobe-Meadows
on Apr 5, 2011 at 9:14 am

"Stephen Stuart has been a valued Palo Alto community volunteer for two decades"

Guess what he'll be remembered for. He wiped out all that good work in a single moment of spite.


Posted by JA3+, a resident of Crescent Park
on Apr 5, 2011 at 9:35 am

On a related matter, I respectfully urge the City to deny the appeal filed over the approval of the new cell antenna on Channing.

Adequate or robust cell coverage is a critical public utility in today's world.

It's unfortunate Mr. Stuart has put his interests above those of so many others; it's unfortunate, too, that Mr. Stuart's appeal overlooks key data not 'in sync' with his desires here.


Posted by Thankful, a resident of Greenmeadow
on Apr 5, 2011 at 10:45 am

Stephen Stuart has done a LOT both for the city and for PAUSD. I am thankful for his help and glad to see this story.


Posted by Concerned Citizen, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Apr 5, 2011 at 11:25 am

There should be no one citizen or entity, given power to control the whole city to the point that decisions are requested that are not in the best interest of ALL citizens.

I'm glad this was brought to public attention, albeit through Mr. Stuart's attitude of sour grapes. I attended the meeting held at the Church, and felt the officials, and the citizens that spoke that were educated in the towers field, spoke wisely and they used FACTS.

Whereas, I felt the cell phone tower people were just not being heard by the cell phone foes; they were rudely treated & accusations that were totally unfounded were hurdled against the church then, &
later, and by a handfull of irate bullies.

Twenty years of his service ought to be recognized and applauded. But a lot of citizens have given twenty years and even more than that, to Palo Alto, all for no thanks and for no recognition.

Having an "in" at the city ought not imply that he (or others like him) can bully the city into doing whatever they wish. All decisions must be made with accurate data, and in the best interest of the whole community.

There needs to be transparency, accountability, communication, and trust among all the parties at the City, Council and the general public. Who knew "civic engagement" was being done like this, 17 years ago.

The City should be paying its own bills, and not become beholden to any one person, in the event he/she gets into a snit, takes their marbles and goes home, like what happened now.

That's no way to run a city. It should serve as an example of what NOT to do- putting all the city's eggs in one basket, and being at the mercy of one person: not a wise move. Live & learn.

Congratulations to all the parties that got together quickly, and to resolve this equitably; so far, sanity has prevailed.


Posted by happy ending, a resident of Duveneck/St. Francis
on Apr 5, 2011 at 11:46 am

This is wonderful news all around in my opinion:

-The City becomes someone's contractually paying customer for services provided(hopefully ISC's if it works for them, with appreciation for past services rendered gratis, over the Evil AT&T near-monopoly)

-AT&T, after a protracted battle, gets to serve its paying customers after a transparent and open regulatory process in which science and respect for the Commons triumphed

-Anyone who lent any marbles out gets them back to squirrel away in their toybox.

Questions: Since true "free stuff" is rare without strings, especially when it must cost to provide, and apparently no one wrote anything down, was the "free service" some quid pro quo for other issues (test bed for a new technology?) at the time this started?


Posted by JT, a resident of Crescent Park
on Apr 5, 2011 at 3:37 pm

It's suspicious to me how Stuart, who says he's just a "volunteer" at ISC, can make a decision like this on behalf of ISC. Isn't there a board of directors or an executive director? ISC's website is vague. The newspapers say the ISC people won't return reporters' calls.

And what justification does a nonprofit have in making a decision simply because one of its volunteers is worried the real estate value of his home might be reduced? It seems Stuart is using the nonprofit for his own personal purposes. I'm going to contact the IRS and see if a nonprofit can keep its tax exempt status when it is used for personal purposes like this.


Posted by Forget about it, a resident of Duveneck/St. Francis
on Apr 5, 2011 at 7:09 pm

Stuart claims his home value will decrease, but does her provide prof proof? Claiming home price will decline its a tried and true scare tactic. The real question is does the city have the obligation to protect the home value for an owner. If something done for the public good leads to decreased property values, should the project be abandoned in order that the home owner maintains his investment. On another note there are many questions raised by ISC and stuarts actions that need answering.


Posted by paly observer, a resident of Crescent Park
on Aug 15, 2012 at 12:34 am

Stephen Stuart and Tru Love are self serving and manipulative. They took a good thing they were doing as community service and spit all over the concept of 'service'. Community service is about giving without taking back. By expecting a quid pro quo roll-over from the city on their ill conceived and factually groundless objection to an essential community infrastructure project they acted as arrogant nouveau riche are stereotypically expected to act. Tru is particularly egregious though, being both belligerent and ignorant. Sort of like a drunken fool without even needing to take a drink, it's sadly just a permanent state. Thank goodness they moved to Los Altos, and good riddance. It won't be long before they are picking fights there too, so brace yourself, Los Altans.


If you were a member and logged in you could track comments from this story.

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 and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *

Select your neighborhood or school community: * Not sure?

Comment: *

Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.

*Required Fields

See Me. Hear Me. Donít Fix Me.
By Chandrama Anderson | 2 comments | 1,859 views

Foothills Park: a world away
By Sally Torbey | 14 comments | 1,767 views

Universal Language
By Cheryl Bac | 3 comments | 1,432 views

On Tour at Selective Schools: Chapman, La Verne, Redlands, Whittier
By John Raftrey and Lori McCormick | 0 comments | 1,382 views

Two Days to Save This Dog?
By Cathy Kirkman | 10 comments | 711 views