Town Square

Post a New Topic

East Palo Alto may launch RV parking program

Original post made on Jul 12, 2018

The first program in Silicon Valley to house and support RV dwellers on government land could start as soon as November, if approved by the East Palo Alto City Council on July 17.

Read the full story here Web Link posted Thursday, July 12, 2018, 4:23 PM

Comments (32)

Posted by ABC
a resident of Downtown North
on Jul 12, 2018 at 4:46 pm

Before you do something - think about exit strategy.
You can't get rid of them very easy (if you want to)
Those RV tennants will sue h...ll out of City in case something happened. I don't want my tax $ to go for settlement with tennants


Posted by Hmmm
a resident of East Palo Alto
on Jul 12, 2018 at 6:13 pm

ABC - if you're not in our city how would your tax dollars go toward a tenant settlement?


Posted by ABC
a resident of East Palo Alto
on Jul 13, 2018 at 8:54 pm

To Hmmm: Im in MY city (if i posted Downtown North does not meem anything, next time i will be more accurate).
And I DO NOT want my tax $ to be spend on obligations which city will get in to with this mobile park (including seeer, garbage ec). I DO NOT want my tax $ to be spend on lawers and payoff to tennants.
I WANT my tax $ to be spend on library, street improvement and needs of ELDERLY



Posted by Resident
a resident of College Terrace
on Jul 13, 2018 at 11:20 pm

ABC - the article states that the RV folks will have to sign a waiver acknowledging that the permission to park there overnight does not grant them any legal rights of tenancy. So your tax dollars are safe.


Posted by rsmithjr
a resident of Duveneck/St. Francis
on Jul 14, 2018 at 3:38 pm

rsmithjr is a registered user.

Regarding the issue of tenancy: I am not sure that these tenancy rights can be waived.

In Palo Alto, the state and Palo Alto laws became the wedge that basically made it impossible for the Buena Vista owners to repurpose their land.

There are public-interest law firms that would be happy enough to take the cases of people who stay there for the permitted 90 days and want to stay longer.

East Palo Alto needs to be careful lest they make a trap for themselves.


Posted by musical
a resident of Palo Verde
on Jul 14, 2018 at 9:14 pm

... no good deed goes unpunished.


Posted by rsmithjr
a resident of Duveneck/St. Francis
on Jul 15, 2018 at 5:46 pm

rsmithjr is a registered user.

I thought I remembered something in CA code about waivers.

The CA R.V. Park Rent Laws may be found here:

Web Link


Here is the section that would appear to invalidate waivers:


799.42. No occupant registration agreement or tenant rental agreement shall
contain a provision by which the occupant or tenant waives his or her rights
under the provisions of this chapter, and any waiver of these rights shall be
deemed contrary to public policy and void.


There are also health and safety standards that the city might find itself liable for.


Posted by EPAMom
a resident of East Palo Alto
on Jul 15, 2018 at 8:30 pm

This is only going to work well if police presence is constant. Already that corner is a hotbed of drug dealing and crime. While the rest of EPA improves, all the problems are being concentrated in one area. Not good for decent residents!


Posted by Maurice
a resident of another community
on Jul 16, 2018 at 2:19 am

"There are also health and safety standards that the city might find itself liable for."

How about general liability? Suppose someone is injured or their R.V. is vandalized on city property? If someone falls and breaks their hip on city property, they'll find a do-gooder attorney who will work on a pro-bono basis to haul the city into court in the blink of an eye, your tax dollars at work.

"Mark Dinan, whose yard backed up to the Weeks Street RV encampment, said the dwellers brought human waste, drugs, trash and prostitution."

Enough said.

The presence of security guards doesn't inspire confidence. In Palo Alto, railroad crossing guards wound up burglarizing surrounding residences.

The more amenities you provide for these R.V. dwellers, the more of a magnet EPA (or whatever city) becomes for them.

I don't see this working as well in practice as the pipe dream the proponents envision, and I don't see it as being a temporary stopgap until these people find permanent housing.


Posted by Rob
a resident of Atherton
on Jul 16, 2018 at 5:55 am

[Post removed.]


Posted by AllYouCanEat
a resident of Mountain View
on Jul 16, 2018 at 9:19 am

[Post removed.]


Posted by Hmmm
a resident of East Palo Alto
on Jul 16, 2018 at 12:40 pm

[Post removed.]


Posted by Homeless in PA
a resident of Barron Park
on Jul 16, 2018 at 1:43 pm

I've got an Air Stream trailer that I've been planning to have transported to friend's empty lot in South Palo Alto.

Can I reside there without getting hassled? My friend says that I can live on the property for free.


Posted by Rob
a resident of Atherton
on Jul 16, 2018 at 8:26 pm

^ I don't see why that would be an issue...then again, it's Palo Alto. PAPD loves harassing people.


Posted by Riding a Swing at Peers Park
a resident of Southgate
on Jul 17, 2018 at 8:18 am

^^^^ Trailer probably OK if parked in a private driveway or in the backyard.

>>>The presence of security guards doesn't inspire confidence. In Palo Alto, railroad crossing guards wound up burglarizing surrounding residences.

It doesn't 'inspire' much confidence in HR regarding the hiring/screening process.


Posted by LivesNearElC
a resident of Adobe-Meadow
on Jul 18, 2018 at 10:51 am

@Maurice, I really like this idea over the current blight of all the RVs lined up on El Camino. I mean, it has really gotten out of control!

I was just driving through Ventura neighborhood and noticed the new signage around the Park that prohibits parking from 2am - 6am specifically for RVs, tent trailers, cabover campers, etc. Guess what, no RVs are parked there anymore.

I'm really happy to see that a solution is being provided and hope that El Camino Real can be allowed to adopt a similar time limit on parking.

Web Link


Posted by Midlander
a resident of Midtown
on Jul 18, 2018 at 10:54 am

Midlander is a registered user.

If I understand the numbers correctly, that's $300,000 for 20 RVs for one year. So $15,000 per RV per year.

To me that seems kind of high for the very limited assistance being provided. Is it a problem of scale? If the city supported 50 RVs, would the cost per RV be much lower?

Or to look at it differently, is there another way of spending $15,000 per RV per year that would help the owners more effectively?


Posted by Ravenswood
a resident of East Palo Alto
on Jul 18, 2018 at 11:44 am

This is great - Remember all we are dealing with Human Beings! And for those who cite security concerns, the EPA Police Station is literally 200 yards away down the street.


Posted by REMINDER
a resident of College Terrace
on Jul 18, 2018 at 1:21 pm

[Post removed.]


Posted by Asphalt Mafia
a resident of Adobe-Meadow
on Jul 18, 2018 at 2:42 pm

Open the gates and get those vehicles off our streets!


Posted by Riding a Swing at Peers Park
a resident of Southgate
on Jul 18, 2018 at 2:56 pm

> "Please make sure ALL of those RVs and junky vehicles from El Camino Real and other streets move into this new location."

Space permitting, some of them are welcome to park in my neighborhood. It's fun watching some of my 'newbie' neighbors gloat about their aspiring RE valuations while complaining about the excessive property taxes.

Prop 13 baby...my house = $1500/year to the county. My yuppie neighbors = roughly $30K. The joke's on them. Welcome to the new PA.






Posted by Michael Vilain
a resident of Crescent Park
on Jul 18, 2018 at 3:22 pm

If East Palo Alto can do this for the RVers, why can't SF's transit agency do this for their drivers who live in RVs during the week (and drive home to Sacto and beyond)?


Posted by Paly Grad
a resident of Leland Manor/Garland Drive
on Jul 18, 2018 at 4:49 pm

The Santa Clara County Transportation Authority drivers are facing a similar problem:

Web Link


Posted by Riding a Swing at Peers Park
a resident of Southgate
on Jul 18, 2018 at 5:35 pm

>If East Palo Alto can do this for the RVers, why can't SF's transit agency do this for their drivers who live in RVs during the week (and drive home to Sacto and beyond)?

>The Santa Clara County Transportation Authority drivers are facing a similar problem:

Uh...maybe it's because our local elected officials aren't all that visionary when it comes to solving & addressing 'real' issues/problems.

For many of them, these elected positions are merely a 'stepping stone' to higher political aspirations (i.e. city councilmember --> county supervisor --> state assemblyman and so on).

The banquet circuit has its rewards & one makes a lot of connections along the way.







Posted by Sanctimonious City
a resident of Barron Park
on Jul 18, 2018 at 11:43 pm

Sanctimonious City is a registered user.

RV actually stands for recurring votes.

Rather than be accountable to current residents, the political class will just import new voters. An RV park gives the tenants a permanent address and the politicians a permanent, highly scalable, forever-dependent block of constituents.

For those that live in single family homes, they will soon never be able to generate a large enough majority to pass growth limiting referendums.

Developer money + RV tenant dependency = permanent incumbency

It's brilliant. Basically the same strategy the globalists came up with for open borders but at a local level.


Posted by No Wise
a resident of East Palo Alto
on Jul 19, 2018 at 12:47 am

“If East Palo Alto can do this for the RVers”

That’s an enormous IF. Let’s revisit this discussion in December, then again in April and next October. Will this location become a magnet for vehicle-dwellers throughout the peninsula?




Posted by Not the solution
a resident of Duveneck/St. Francis
on Jul 19, 2018 at 1:01 pm

I was not permitted to like some of the above comments.

I doubt this is a real solution, sadly. Likely this will attract numerous persons who refuse to abide by standard shelter rules, doubt this will benefit EPA.....


Posted by Anon
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jul 19, 2018 at 1:40 pm

I love the idea of all those RVs moving north to a neighboring county.

If I were a resident of that county, however, I would love for those RVs to move to a different county. RVs are "the pestilence that walketh in darkness".

Sadly, RVs seem to be the future of BMR housing. Perhaps we should be thinking about some other way to provide affordable housing.


Posted by Maurice
a resident of another community
on Jul 20, 2018 at 2:37 am

"I really like this idea over the current blight of all the RVs lined up on El Camino."

Of course you like the idea. Palm the RV dwellers off to an abandoned lot in EPA and let somebody else deal with the squalor. They don't pay property tax so they contribute nothing to the Santa Clara County tax base.

"The Santa Clara County Transportation Authority drivers are facing a similar problem"

It's not just bus drivers who can't afford to live here. It's basically anyone who isn't a Silicon Valley tycoon.

I still think EPA is asking for more trouble with this idea than they reckon on.


Posted by Aquamarine
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Oct 5, 2018 at 12:02 pm

Given that most calls for police and medic services at the current de facto RV camp (not this proposed site) involve alcohol and/or hard drugs, especially heroin, how long before the city enforces the 72 hour parking law or passes an ordinance requiring over-sized vehicles to get permits? Other questions:

How much money has the city spent on these calls for service?
How much money has the city spent on cleaning up the dumping, the storm drain clean up and other public health issues?
How many of the RV dwellers are comprised of families with children?
How many resided in EPA before they moved into RVs?
How many are gainfully employed?

Residents of EPA need answers in order to make decisions about how they spend their time and money on the RV dwellers and what they want city leaders to do. Currently it's a public health scare just waiting to happen.


Posted by Eradicate RV Blight
a resident of Barron Park
on Oct 5, 2018 at 1:48 pm

[Post removed.]


Posted by Gaby
a resident of East Palo Alto
on Oct 6, 2018 at 7:19 am

[Post removed.]


Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.

Email:


Post a comment

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

Stay informed.

Get the day's top headlines from Palo Alto Online sent to your inbox in the Express newsletter.

James Beard Award winning chef Traci Des Jardins' restaurant el Alto abruptly closes its doors in Los Altos months after highly anticipated opening
By The Peninsula Foodist | 10 comments | 8,252 views

Palo Alto's bold proposal to jumpstart home electrification
By Sherry Listgarten | 17 comments | 4,613 views

San Bruno Wins Food Trend Craze with First Plant-Based Gas Mart
By Laura Stec | 2 comments | 2,553 views

The Benefits of Adding Market-Rate Housing in Palo Alto
By Steve Levy | 13 comments | 1,870 views

How Much Time do You Spend Outdoors?
By Chandrama Anderson | 0 comments | 1,852 views