"We're seeing some office vacancies now. The office market is clearly showing signs of over building"

We desperately need to convert offices to housing and cap office building.

With the large companies owning now, they will make life impossible for the little guys, residents, small businesses, and startups. They are the giant industrial monoculture bulldozing everything and creating significant risks for the whole region if (when) something goes wrong. Just look at Tokyo.

And the rust belt.

Why should Pausd need an expensive parcel tax on top of the very generous property taxes it already receives from Palo Alto properties? Tax revenues keep going up and up and up. Pausd enrollment is going down and down and down.

"half a trillion in property taxes" - that is the assessed value, the taxes on that are at most 2% of that? I'd imagine otherwise we'd be able to afford a teacher per student?

Property taxes have been going up at a clip greater than 5% for a number of years. 42% over the past 5 years cumulatively. Why isn't that sufficient for the schools, when inflation has been completely subdued, with 2.1% the highest rate over the last 5 years? Why do they need another $1000 on top of what we already pay? Just because they're used to getting it, and just because they want to keep their jobs, even when they're not needed, are not good reasons to tax us extra over and above the steadily rising property taxes, especially when enrollment is declining, and projected to continue to decline --- and when PAUSD already pays the highest salaries in the state for a unified school district of its size.

The new office building in the Assessor's report that says is 'owned' by Stanford is likely the four building campus in the Research Park built by Sand Hill Property.

Sand Hill is also constructing two office buildings at 3251 Hanover. The latter is the former site of a Lockheed technology complex. It had employed 300 persons; the new buildings, leased to a financial services company, are estimated to employ 1000 persons.

Sand Hill is responsible for bringing more workers to Palo Alto and worsening the job- housing imbalance. But it appears that Sand Hill is not satisfied, and determined to build even more office buildings! They own the lease on 3300 El Camino (near Hansen Way) and the frontage of the CPI site. Sand Hill's website suggests they are planning to build yet another office building there.

Palo Alto needs housing desperately and few sites are available and none are as attractive as 3300 El Camino, with its frontage on a road with public transit. Council needs to take action NOW to rezone the 3300 El Camino parcel from Research Park (RP) zoning to one on which housing can be built.

This site is exactly the type that has been the focus of SB50's proposal, which would give the State of California the authority to override local zoning codes. If Council doesn't take action, it will signal that Palo Alto is not serious about increasing housing and will give them good reason to pass legislation that will have the effect of overriding Palo Alto's zoning codes.

Additional: Sand Hill has created controversy at Palo Alto’s Edgewood Shopping Center and in Cupertino, see: Vallco Mall redevelopment plans.
I’m concerned about the power of the huge companies here: Google and facebook. The former is the largest, most powerful landowner in Silicon Valley, no? Influential in government at all levels.
Meanwhile, Stanford, with one of the very highest endowments in the world, pays virtually no property tax. WE little homeowners pay a LOT!! I don’t wan5 more assessments for the community colleges (enrollment is way down) OR the wealthy Palo Alto SchoolDistrict (PAUSD). Enough.

>> Why should Pausd need an expensive parcel tax on top of the very generous property taxes it already receives from Palo Alto properties?

Great question.

What's the difference between the special assessment and property taxes? It is that the special assessment is the same for everyone if you own a little condo, or a tiny cottage and have zero students in school or ether you own a huge mansion in the hills. It is a rip-off of most Palo Altans.

> Why should Pausd need an expensive parcel tax on top of the very generous
> property taxes it already receives from Palo Alto properties?

Because "Palo Alto pays lowest effective property tax in state" thanks to
prop 13, 0.42%.

How about some relief for those who got crushed by the 2017 tax increases onBlue State homeowners? Those at the bottom sometimes saw increases in their taxes equal to what they live on. I don’t know what is normal about this, I have never seen so many houses on the market in December in my and nearby neighborhoods in decades.

> Property taxes have been going up at a clip greater
> than 5% for a number of years.

Property tax rates have stayed constant since the passage of Prop.13. Property tax revenues can go up, or down, based on the market value of property changing hands in the State. Locally, the PAUSD is comprised of three independent revenue sources--Palo Alto, Stanford Campus Residential Area and Los Altos Hills (PAUSD section).

Homes in Los Altos show a medican price of over $3M (today, Zillow). Some homes in Los Altos have sold for $20M-$30M--which generates a lot of sales tax. Homes in Palo Alto are also selling in the $2.8M-$3+M--which will generate upwards of $30,000 per home, of which about 46% goes to the PAUSD. Price of homes on the Stanford campus are a little harder to access--since this is a closed market. However, the sale prices and accessments of these homes can be obtained from the County Assessor's Office.

^ Sneaky to claim property tax RATES have stayed constant.
My bill is more and more dollars absolutely every single year.

> My bill is more and more dollars absolutely every single year.

Yes, because there is a 2% yearly assessment increase. That's how Prop.13 works. Oh, and then there are all of the add-ons, for which many Palo Altans vote every time they appear on a ballot. Palo Altans LOVE paying taxes!

^ Whoa, 2%? But my social security check is only going up 1.6%.

> ^ Whoa, 2%? But my social security check is only going up 1.6%.

There are no structural restraints on SS yearly increases.

Yearly SS COLAs:
Web Link

There are also no restrictions on how you invest your assets.

"County's assessment roll totaled $516 billion — that's over half a trillion dollars, and a 6.79% increase over the previous year." 2% winners take all is not norma! And yet there is no construction of affordable housing to date, Charity non-profits are suffering, the Christmas Funds donations for low-income PA families is down. A couple of mega corps are raking it in while others suffer in broken down RV's, in tents, on the streets or crowd into one two bedroom apartments. Appalling by the numbers.