The Battle for City Hall: The Incumbents

Of the 12 candidates making a bid for Palo Alto City Council this Nov 4., three are incumbents

Watch video interviews with the candidates at 2014 Election Central: Palo Alto City Council

Editorial: See who the Palo Alto Weekly is endorsing, and why

When Karen Holman, Greg Scharff and Nancy Shepherd took their oaths of office five years ago, budget deficits, the future of compost and high-speed rail were the issues dominating City Hall.

The city was squabbling with its labor unions over benefit reforms and fighting with businesses over a proposed business-license tax. Parking shortages had not yet made their transition from a general nuisance to a full-fledged crisis. "For Lease" signs blighted storefronts throughout downtown.

These days, as the three seek fresh terms, two of them -- Scharff and Shepherd -- emphasize the council's success in dealing with these challenges. Scharff touts the fact that city revenues are on the rise and that after years of talk, the council finally has both the strategy and the resources needed to tackle the city's infrastructure backlog. Shepherd recalls the council's success in fighting high-speed rail's proposed "Berlin Wall" and its approval of Stanford University Medical Center hospital expansion.

Both makes no bones about it: Despite a few missteps, they are proud of the council's record and more than willing to defend it. Though the global recovery from the Great Recession had much to do with the city's recent uptick in hotel- and sales-tax revenues, both believe the council deserves some credit for balancing the city's books.

"We're out of the financial crisis and we're moving forward," Shepherd said at an Oct. 2 candidates forum.

But if Scharff and Shepherd are running on the council's record, Holman is in many ways running against it. As the stalwart voice of residentialist skepticism on the council (and before that, on the Planning and Transportation Commission), Holman spends almost as much time talking about what the council should do better as she does in recapping its accomplishments. She is a staunch critic of most major developments that have received approval in recent years; she voted against almost all of them. And while she does not officially belong to the citizens group Palo Altans for Sensible Zoning, she's had a "meeting of the minds" with its leaders. In recent weeks, the group officially endorsed her, effectively cementing her status as the one incumbent running against the incumbency.

On most issues, her views and interests are aligned with those of the citizens group. Last week, Palo Altans for Sensible Zoning released a survey that considered each council member's vote on 20 land-use issues and rated them based on whether they are "pro-resident" or "anti-resident." Not surprisingly, Holman and Councilman Greg Schmid scored the highest, with 85 percent (29 percent more than the next highest council member).

Much has been made in the current election climate about the two camps currently vying for council supremacy: the residentialists and the "establishment." But while the former camp, as epitomized by Holman, generally opposes dense developments and (more broadly) the urbanization of Palo Alto, Shepherd and Scharff both demonstrate that the latter is harder to define. The former was a PTA volunteer who was propelled to the greater stage by anxieties over high-speed rail. The latter was a virtual unknown at City Hall before running an energetic campaign in opposition to the business tax. True, Scharff and Shepherd mayors in 2013 and 2014, respectively -- presided over the council at a time of rapid growth and, consequently, rising tensions and intense debates. Scharff served as mayor during the Maybell revolt, while Shepherd took the helm just in time to deal with the repercussions. Both participated (along with the rest of the council) in non-disclosed meetings with developer John Arrillaga in 2012 -- meetings that were the subject of a scathing report from the Santa Clara County Grand Jury in June. These controversies have shaken up the council, prompting criticisms, apologies and promises of reform.

Even though critics often lump Scharff and Shepherd together in the ill-defined "establishment" camp, they have not been in accord on every issue. Scharff, for example, led the city's successful effort to eliminate binding arbitration for public-safety workers from the City Charter; Shepherd opposed placing the change on the ballot. Shepherd proposed placing on this year's ballot initiatives to reduce the size of the council and extend term limits; Scharff opposed both.

Palo Altans for Sensible Zoning has given each low scores on its scorecard of "pro-resident" votes, which is devoted exclusively to land-use and transportation issues and which penalizes both Scharff and Shepherd for supporting recent projects such as 101 Lytton Ave., 3159 El Camino Real and the redeveloped Edgewood Plaza (Holman voted against all three).

Each also took a hit for supporting the idea of jointly developing a downtown garage with developer Charles "Chop" Keenan, though whether this really qualifies as an "anti-resident" vote is debatable. And Scharff and Shepherd are more than willing to debate these points and defend themselves against their slow-growth critics.

"Every vote I took was with the intention of increasing the livability of Palo Alto and making sure our neighborhoods, schools and community are a fabulous place to live," Scharff said at the Oct. 2 debate.

Of the 12 people running for City Council, here are the incumbents.

Click on the names of the candidates below for profiles on each.

Karen Holman

Greg Scharff

Nancy Shepherd

• To read about where the Incumbents stand on issues including development, transportation and housing, see the Weekly's PDF edition.

Read about the Residentialists and the Challengers.

What is democracy worth to you?
Support local journalism.


6 people like this
Posted by Resident
a resident of Barron Park
on Oct 10, 2014 at 12:23 am

I am shocked that you endorsed Greg Scharff after the 27 University mess. I don't think that is even plausibly defensible. I am also surprised that you are endorsing 5 white candidates and not endorsing the only minority candidate in the race. You are also endorsing 4 men and 1 woman. If your selections are elected, the Council will have 2 women (Kniss and Holman) and 7 men. How do you think that makes sense? 9 white people, 10 men, 2 women. Seriously?

I am not a shill for the Kou campaign. I'm sure she has things to learn. But she's certainly competent and capable of learning. And diversity is itself an important value particularly in a city that is rapidly changing demographically. This is a narrow and shortsighted list. It also gives Scharff a bye that he in way deserves.

Like this comment
Posted by Resident
a resident of Barron Park
on Oct 10, 2014 at 12:24 am

Sorry, typo 7 men, 2 women. Still wretched.

1 person likes this
Posted by Greenacres
a resident of Green Acres
on Oct 10, 2014 at 1:56 am

Greenacres is a registered user.

Very good points resident. Kou is capable of learning, and she knows Palo Alto neighborhoods from north to south like no one else on the Council. I am not on her campaign but I *am* a shill for her because I know her and know she would be an honest, hardworking Councilmember.

On a separate note, this article doesn't take any stock of just how hard Bob Moss and others worked on that scorecard, how difficult it was because not everything is clearcut, and how careful they were to ensure it was a fair assessment. Bob has endorsed Kou, Dubois, Filseth, Holman, and Scharff, which includes 2 incumbents, one who didn't score so well even per his own assessment on that scorecard. It's one consideration.

1 person likes this
Posted by Dan
a resident of Community Center
on Oct 10, 2014 at 5:21 am

Scharff [portion removed] loves development. He immediately reinvented himself for the election into a latter day residentialist. If we elect him, we deserve what we get - someone trying to be all things to all people in order to get re-elected. If elected he will revert to type. Don't vote for a political chameleon.

3 people like this
Posted by sea REDDY
a resident of College Terrace
on Oct 10, 2014 at 6:59 am

I am one of the candidates. It is besides the point.

I endorse Kou. She is soft spoken and thinks through; she is well connected with all the real estate people.
She adds female representation and diversity. She is well educated.

I sort of want to be like Greg SCHMIDT. He is thoughtful; studies a lot of things and respectful. I would like to sit next to him

We will let the voters read our material and decide.

PAweekly + DailyPost + Daily news all have their likes and wants
But, you the voter has more power than all.

You have the power and use it.

Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.

Stay informed

Get daily headlines sent straight to your inbox.

Why is it becoming increasingly impossible to open a restaurant on the Peninsula?
By Elena Kadvany | 27 comments | 4,937 views

Firing Judge Persky as a tennis coach was a big mistake
By Diana Diamond | 23 comments | 2,755 views

Electric Buses: A case study
By Sherry Listgarten | 2 comments | 2,120 views

It just takes time
By Cheryl Bac | 0 comments | 506 views

Helping Partners Become Couples (vs. Helping Couples Become Partners)
By Chandrama Anderson | 0 comments | 271 views



On Friday, October 11, join us at the Palo Alto Baylands for a 5K walk, 5K run, 10K run or half marathon! All proceeds benefit local nonprofits serving children and families.

Register now