By Paul Losch
E-mail Paul Losch
About this blog: I was a "corporate brat" growing up and lived in different parts of the country, ending in Houston, Texas for high school. After attending college at UC Davis, and getting an MBA at Harvard, I embarked on a marketing career, mai...
(More)About this blog: I was a "corporate brat" growing up and lived in different parts of the country, ending in Houston, Texas for high school. After attending college at UC Davis, and getting an MBA at Harvard, I embarked on a marketing career, mainly in the Bay Area with different companies. My former wife went back to medical school after we had been married a few years, and we moved into married student housing at Stanford, had our two now adult children while she was a medical student, and moved into Palo Alto when she started her Residency. Been here ever since. As my kids were going through the Palo Alto schools, I was actively involved in their activities, most notably head umpire for Palo Alto Little League and 9 years as a member of the Parks and Recreation Commission, among other activities. My kids both are grown, my son teaches 5th grade locally, and my daughter, fluent in Mandarin, is working in China. I sold the business I owned and ran for 8 years in 2012, worked on the Obama campaign, and am consulting for non-profit organizations, which gives me a nice, flexible schedule. Lots of stamps in my passport, and for fun, I like live performances &emdash; theater and music - and of course the Giants!
(Hide)View all posts from Paul Losch
Should there continue to be the practice in Palo Alto that local issues and choices of City and School District candidates take place on odd numbered years, rather than being included in the even numbered years general ballots that include candidates from the President of the United State on down?
As best as I can tell, the people favoring Prop S, which would move the local issues and candidates voting to be part of the larger ballot such as what we are about to deal with, are advocating it as a cost savings measure.
As best as I can tell, those opposing Prop S are providing the point of view that voters will be better focused and able to get more information is they are not also dealing with all the stuff that we get in even numbered years, from General Election information.
I lean with the opponents.
I get accused at times as being a Palo Alto insider. I may be guilty as charged, but I lived here for many years before I got to know those people who do paid and sworn volunteer work on behalf of Palo Alto.
The more I learn, the more I take the point of view that too many of us were like me, not really knowing the issues Palo Alto faces. We live in a wonderful community, and also in an important globally significant City.
It may cost CPA a little more money, and I think it is worth it. NO on S
