News

Eshoo introduces bill requiring presidents, candidates to release tax returns

Bill requires Secretary of the Treasury to release copies if the candidate/president refuses

Rep. Anna G. Eshoo introduced a new bill in Congress on Thursday that would require presidents and presidential candidates to publicly release their tax returns.

The Presidential Tax Transparency Act would require sitting presidents and nominees for the office of major parties to disclose three prior years of federal tax returns annually. Presidential nominees would have to show their returns within 15 days of their party nomination. "Major parties" are defined in the tax code as parties with a candidate who received more than 25 percent of the popular vote in the previous presidential election.

The bill comes after the refusal of president-elect Donald Trump to release his tax returns prior to the election. Trump has periodically said he would make his returns available after an IRS audit is completed, but there is no law prohibiting the release of the returns while an audit is ongoing, IRS officials have said. Trump also told ABC's Good Morning America interviewer George Stephanopolis that his tax returns are "none of your business."

Eshoo introduced similar legislation in June 2016 with the last Congress, with 39 bipartisan cosponsors. The bill is a companion to legislation authored by Senator Ron Wyden, an Oregon senator and ranking Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee. He introduced a presidential tax-return-disclosure bill in May 2016 that amends the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971. The senate read the bill twice and referred it to the Committee on Rules and Administration.

Wyden announced in November a plan to reintroduce the legislation in 2017.

Every president since 1976 has released tax returns prior to taking office, but the practice is not required by law, according to the Tax History Project, Eshoo's office noted in a Jan. 5 statement.

"The American people justifiably expect those who seek or hold the highest office in the land to be open and transparent about their tax returns. Tax returns contain vital information, such as: were any taxes paid; were any charitable contributions made; were tax loopholes taken advantage of; and are any assets kept offshore," Eshoo said in the statement.

"For decades, presidents and candidates have disclosed their tax returns but this bipartisan practice has never been required by law. The Presidential Tax Transparency Act writes this important disclosure tradition into law. As former presidential candidate Mitt Romney stated last year, 'Tax returns provide the public with its sole confirmation of the veracity of a candidate's representations regarding charities, priorities, wealth, tax conformance, and conflicts of interest.'"

Under the act, the returns must be filed with the Office of Government Ethics or Federal Election Commission. If a president or candidate fails to disclose his/her tax returns, the Secretary of the Treasury would be required to provide redacted copies for public review.

The text of the Presidential Tax Transparency Act can be found here.

---

Follow the Palo Alto Weekly/Palo Alto Online on Twitter @PaloAltoWeekly and Facebook for breaking news, local events, photos, videos and more.

Comments

7 people like this
Posted by David
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jan 5, 2017 at 4:45 pm

[Post removed.]


21 people like this
Posted by Curmudgeon
a resident of Downtown North
on Jan 5, 2017 at 5:17 pm

"The poor libtards lost the election and now we are going to make sure we get our way."

Awww, c'mon. Wouldn't you like to know who you really voted for: a true self-made American billionaire, or a chump buried in debt to his Russian handlers?

You do know that the peek we did get at Trump's taxes showed he mismanaged his way to a nearly thousand-million dollar loss in 1995, when everyone else was making more money than they could count.

Enjoy your illusions.


48 people like this
Posted by Land Grab
a resident of Green Acres
on Jan 5, 2017 at 5:33 pm

A more useful bill would require the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial office holders to release their tax returns. Perhaps Ms. Eshoo could amend her bill so that we can see all the federal lawmakers incomes and investments.


58 people like this
Posted by Nate
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jan 5, 2017 at 5:53 pm

Democrats need to engage in some realistic self-assessment, and make some serious changes or they are going to lose the next election as well. Clinton didn't lose because Trump didn't release his tax return, or because Putin "hacked" the election, or because the votes in swing state were miscounted.

The democratic leadership (wrongly) thought they could win the election without their traditional base of working people, and gave these voters to Trump.


19 people like this
Posted by Curmudgeon
a resident of Downtown North
on Jan 5, 2017 at 6:13 pm

"Democrats need to engage in some realistic self-assessment, and make some serious changes or they are going to lose the next election as well."

What loss? Did you know that Democrats won the popular vote in 5 of the past 6 presidential elections? Americans want Democrats.


"The democratic leadership (wrongly) thought they could win the election without their traditional base of working people, and gave these voters to Trump."

Who anticipates mass delusion? Interestingly, those same people are now pleading with the Democrats to save them from Trump and his Swamp Rats. They realized they like ObamaCare.


38 people like this
Posted by Paul
a resident of Walter Hays School
on Jan 5, 2017 at 6:40 pm

This is how Eshoo is spending her time? This bill has no chance of passing. But when was the last time she wrote a bill that became law? I consider myself to be a Progressive and I'm really disappointed that my congressperson is so ineffective.


14 people like this
Posted by resident
a resident of Portola Valley
on Jan 5, 2017 at 6:48 pm

Just another liberal plot to scare crooked rich guys away from government offices. Next thing you know, the liberals will try to prevent crooked rich guys from bribing government officials.


11 people like this
Posted by Curmudgeon
a resident of Downtown North
on Jan 5, 2017 at 7:34 pm

Man, I just figured it out. The Russians hacked into the IRS, got Trump's tax returns, and made him an offer he didn't refuse. Either he carries their water for them, or they hand over the returns to Wikileaks.

It's time for all-America patriot hackers to step up and rescue our next president from his bondage. Preempt Putin's Cozy Bears and Fancy Bears. Get The Donald's 1040 packages and publish them preemptively.


32 people like this
Posted by Sanctimonious City
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jan 5, 2017 at 9:54 pm

Sorry but Article II, Section I of the constitution defines the requirements to hold office as the President and publishing tax returns is not one of them. Good luck getting this politically motivated grandstanding by the Supreme Court.

Maybe Democrat efforts would be better spent on sponsoring new laws to prohibit using a private email server for government business or accepting political money from foreign governments. Oh wait, we already have laws for those crimes.

Given that, how about working with the FAA to re-route all of these planes away from flying over Palo Alto? If you are really looking for a bi-partisan issue I am sure that is something all Palo Alto constituents can agree upon :-)


26 people like this
Posted by zdr931
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jan 6, 2017 at 1:54 am

Good try diverting from the discussion. In case you hadn't noticed, the election is over and we are now faced with serious and very real concerns about the financial conflicts of interest of the PEOTUS. He said he would turn over his returns when the audit was complete so presumably he has no trouble turning them over now, since his brilliant legal team has vetted them and the IRS says he doesn't have to wait. And yet he has not. He has also not made any attempt to distance himself from his business interests.

Trump won a narrow electoral college victory, a minority of the voters and fewer than his opponent. People wanted what the party claims they do well, which is a good economy. What the Democrats need to do is get better about getting the facts across to people, which is that the economy does better under Democrats, and the vast majority of recessions in the last century have been courtesy of Republican administrations. Even Trump is on record as having noticed that Dems are better for the economy.

Trump Pence will end up yet another data point showing what a wreck Republicans make of the economy and the nation. Republicans only know how to boost economies through massive deficit soending and putting debt on overdrive. They never notice until a Dem gets into office and balances the budget (Clinton, Brown, etc), though. Republicans seem to only know how to win elections by lying. Makes sense, they have long ago lost any sense of what it means to be fiscally responsible.


22 people like this
Posted by Phyllis Glass
a resident of Professorville
on Jan 6, 2017 at 7:22 am

I'm a staunch Progressive. Even I can see that Eshoo's bill is a waste of time.

If she wants to do something productive, she should co-sponsor a term limits bill. Ms. Eshoo has been in Congress since January 1993 (she took office in the waning days of the George HW Bush presidency).

How 'bout some fresh blood?


20 people like this
Posted by zdr931
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jan 6, 2017 at 9:12 am

Without commmenting on your own claim, it is a pretty common lie that rightwing trolls use, first to claim they are on the other side politically, to lend some kind of credibility to a subsequent attack. (Lend being the operative word since we are about to go into deep deficit spending again with a rightwing administration. Don't worry, they'll come up with some rationale to make you believe debt is good, or a bunch of ordinary citizens to attack and scapegoat, a war to distract you. In the end, the ideology will be yet another fiscal failure for the US but they'll just blame it all on "government" again. Komrade.)

Since the Right no longer has any principle, except the reduction of taxes on the wealthy and getting power and keeping it - no matter how anti-democracy or un-fiscally sound - good luck getting term limits past them, unless it disadvantages Progressives temporarily. Speaking of suggesting something unproductive.

This is a needed rule to protect the American system and public. If Trump has nothing to hide, why hasn't he provided his tax returns? If he had been required to provide them, the squeaker election may very well have had a different outcome. Trump is less of a concern than the extreme political appointee administration. We all remember what happens when incompetent ideologhue appointees take over (Katrina, FEMA) - again, no one remembers the efficient, competent government agency that came before, but blames the inevitable gross failures on "government" aka incompetent rightwing political appointee ideologues. Since Trump's claims about his business acumen were the most cited reason for voter support, and since he clearly plays fast and loose with the truth for gain in other aspects of life, it is essential for the public to know whether the core claims are true. If they are not, it's not even out of the realm of possibility for ultra-rightwibg politicians to have struck a deal to promise amnesty for tax evasion in exchange for power they could never have gotten from the voting booth.

Let's hope the rational Republicans who care about the important core values of sound fiscal management, personal freedom, and protection against government intrusion in the lives of ordinary people, if they still exist (which is a real doubt, but that's another issue) will see the importance of this bill for the good of the nation.


12 people like this
Posted by Me 2
a resident of Old Palo Alto
on Jan 6, 2017 at 9:57 am

I'm ok with it - if everyone in congress has to do it as well.

Sauce for the goose....


11 people like this
Posted by Barbara
a resident of Downtown North
on Jan 6, 2017 at 11:30 am

ABSOLUTELY NO on releasing ANYONE'S personal tax returns to the public. It's NOBODY'S business, period!!


10 people like this
Posted by Curmudgeon
a resident of Downtown North
on Jan 6, 2017 at 12:29 pm

"How 'bout some fresh blood?"

Then vote for fresh blood. Convince as majority of voters to vote for fresh blood.

Eshoo is in Congress because every two years the voters voted to put her there. Term limits counter the wishes of the voters and are therefore anti-democracy.

Did you know that the notion of congressional term limits originated from an effort to get rid of Adam Clayton Powell, a very long serving African-American congressman from Harlem?


9 people like this
Posted by Resident
a resident of Crescent Park
on Jan 6, 2017 at 2:26 pm

Seeing how -- these days -- government throws money down the drain -- then declares they need to raise taxes to "save the environment" or to "save poor people" or what have you -- I commend anyone who doesn't pay taxes, because the money can be put to better use -- like getting a huge private jet with your name emblazoned on it -- until government becomes fiscally responsible.


14 people like this
Posted by Debbie Mytels
a resident of Midtown
on Jan 6, 2017 at 3:17 pm

I say, "Bravo, Anna!" It's outrageous that Trump has not come clean about his financial dealings. It does lead to the supposition -- and indeed, to as strong suspicion as "Curmudgeon" suggests -- that the Russians found out info about his financial situation and are now in a position to pull some strings.

Knowing how dependent the Russian economy is on its oil and natural gas reserves, it's no wonder that they want a president that has appointed Putin's buddy Rex Tillerson as Secretary of State. Meanwhile, 2016 is now the year that Earth is at the hottest level in recorded history -- and a big chunk of Antarctic ice is poised to calve off into the ocean.

When will the American voters realize that our country is in the hands of "pushers" who are preying on our addiction to fossil fuels?


12 people like this
Posted by Online Name
a resident of Embarcadero Oaks/Leland
on Jan 6, 2017 at 3:44 pm

How about introducing a bill to abolish the Electoral College since our votes count for way less than the underpopulated states like Wyoming. If nothing else, it will call attention to the fact that Hillary won the popular vote by 3,000,000 and undercut the Trumpers' lies.


4 people like this
Posted by 38 year resident
a resident of Old Palo Alto
on Jan 6, 2017 at 5:02 pm

@ zdr932....304 to 227 is hardly a narrow margin of victory in the electoral college count. Clinton balanced the budget with a Republican Senate and House, who had that as one of their goals. If the Brown you refer to is the Governor of California, our budget is not balanced unless you use fuzzy math. Kind of like the unemployment numbers democrats use to falsely portray a vibrant hiring environment.

And only Republicans lie to win elections? Hillary didn't lie? C'mon.


9 people like this
Posted by Nancy
a resident of Old Palo Alto
on Jan 6, 2017 at 6:51 pm

Anna...please... you are better than this.

Is this really what you spend your (our) time on?


17 people like this
Posted by Curmudgeon
a resident of Downtown North
on Jan 6, 2017 at 8:06 pm

"@ zdr932....304 to 227 is hardly a narrow margin of victory in the electoral college count."

Oh yes it is. Percentage-of-the-electoral-vote-wise it ranks 46-th out of 58 elections. Four of each five elected presidents did better than The Donald.

Then there's that pesky 3 x 1,000 x 1,000 lead for Hillary Clinton in the people's vote count.


8 people like this
Posted by Sunshine
a resident of Barron Park
on Jan 6, 2017 at 9:51 pm

Go for it Anna. They should all provide tax returns in full.
Of course we know anyway that Trump paid no taxes for many years while taking in many millions. We should all get his tax breaks.


16 people like this
Posted by Curmudgeon
a resident of Downtown North
on Jan 6, 2017 at 10:02 pm

"Of course we know anyway that Trump paid no taxes for many years while taking in many millions. We should all get his tax breaks."

I think there's a backstory here: Trump somehow lost nearly a billion (1,000 x 1,000 x 1,000) dollars in 1995, which was a good financial year for almost everybody else. That gave Trump a loss carryover which he exploited to pay almost no tax in several following years, in effect milking us chumps the ordinary taxpayers to reimburse him for his losses.

Now here's the kicker: the chumps in his Base loved hearing about it. Go figure.


21 people like this
Posted by Sanctimonious City
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jan 6, 2017 at 11:14 pm

I know liberals love taxes but you need to have a fundamental understanding of basic accounting first. Despite your ravenous never ending desire to take what others earn, a business must first have income or profit to be taxed. Government is the only place where losses don't matter.


17 people like this
Posted by Curmudgeon
a resident of Downtown North
on Jan 7, 2017 at 2:39 pm

"I know liberals love taxes but you need to have a fundamental understanding of basic accounting first. ... Government is the only place where losses don't matter."

Someone should have told that to Ronald Reagan, who raised taxes eleven times, presided over the largest non-military federal workforce in history, and doubled the national debt.


Like this comment
Posted by POTUS
a resident of Green Acres
on Jan 7, 2017 at 5:07 pm

I liked Carters "Malaise" speech.
I also liked Fords "WIN" buttons.


2 people like this
Posted by Curmudgeon
a resident of Downtown North
on Jan 7, 2017 at 9:53 pm

"I also liked Fords "WIN" buttons."

Me too. Remember how his press secretary Ron Nessen often wore his WIN (Whip Inflation Now) button upside down so it read NIM (No Immediate Miracles)?


11 people like this
Posted by Nayeli
a resident of Midtown
on Jan 8, 2017 at 1:29 am

So, Trump followed the law and was able to avoid taxes due to a business loss that was able to be carried over? I suppose that this makes Ms. Eschoo very sad. Think of all of the reckless spending that she and her fellow left wing politicians could have done with all of that tax money!


4 people like this
Posted by Plane Speaker
a resident of Crescent Park
on Jan 8, 2017 at 11:25 am

-- Clinton didn't lose because Trump didn't release his tax return, or
-- because Putin "hacked" the election, or because the votes in swing
-- state were miscounted.

Mostly that is exactly what it was, but true, there was a lot more as well.

There is a lot to be said about HC running an incompetent campaign and
not addressing the people, and that contributed to what really lost the
election for Democrats, and is almost always THE major factor, voter
turnout.

The weird news and misinformation consisted of enough confusion to
keep a lot of people from voting. Thinking that HC had it locked up, or
being curious to see what Trump would do after all the talk, or just being
fatigued from over a year of a terrible campaign.

BUT, even after all of that, if one thinks the the tax returns did not influence
the election, that's a good thing, then the vote would be with a cool head
about whether it should be a requirement to see what economic conflicts of
interests ANY candidate has and if the people need to know that in an age
of multi-billionaires and global interests. How can you say no to that?


9 people like this
Posted by Plane Speaker
a resident of Crescent Park
on Jan 8, 2017 at 11:38 am

-- Someone should have told that to Ronald Reagan, who raised
-- taxes eleven times, presided over the largest non-military federal
-- workforce in history, and doubled the national debt.

Not quite the whole story on Reagan and taxes. Reagan had to raise
taxes because the whole "Laffer Curve" thing of lowering taxes to
increase revenue never worked, and that fairy-tale is not a fair model
of how taxes and revenue works except in one special imaginary case
where taxes are so draconian it drags the whole economy down. The
US has really never been in the situation.

Reagan, even after his tax cuts, left us with $6 trillion in debt that stayed
with us all through the 80's and 90's until Bush was elected and more
than doubled that. What Reagan began with tax cuts and deregulation
has led directly to the era of plutocrats and oligarchs and the funneling
of 90% of profits to the top and overseas. The problem is easy to see
and would be easy to fix if the plutocrats and their grip on corporate
control and profits did not pull every string of the government.

-- Think of all of the reckless spending that she and her fellow left wing
-- politicians could have done with all of that tax money!

Think of all the necessary spending we should have done in terms of
infrastructure, regulation to avoid banking scandals, health care and
educational options that might have let up keep up with the rest of the
developed world if we were not paying interest on $14 trillion every
year of debt that the Republicans keep dumping on the people through
their tax cuts for the rich. And why have not all these tax cuts already
made America great if that is still the plan? Why are we falling farther
and farther behind the rest of the developed world?


Like this comment
Posted by Anonymous
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jan 8, 2017 at 5:29 pm

The Republicans control Congress so this bill won't even get to the floor of the House for a vote. Make the requirement a state by state bill.


9 people like this
Posted by Curmudgeon
a resident of Downtown North
on Jan 8, 2017 at 5:37 pm

"So, Trump followed the law and was able to avoid taxes due to a business loss that was able to be carried over? ... Think of all of the reckless spending that she [Eshoo] and her fellow left wing politicians could have done with all of that [uncollected Trump] tax money!"

Yup. Coulda bought a small fleet of Hummvees with it. Or paid down the national debt. But instead The Donald got reimbursed for his business incompetence, courtesy of your 1040. Neat little law there, huh?


"Reagan had to raise taxes because the whole "Laffer Curve" thing of lowering taxes to increase revenue never worked, ..."

I saw Dr. Laffer interviewed on CNN the other night. He seems to be in close with Trump. Wonder of the good doctor ever tried enhancing his personal revenue by lowering his paycheck.


9 people like this
Posted by Press for Ethics Committee compliance
a resident of Duveneck/St. Francis
on Jan 9, 2017 at 12:12 pm

Press for Ethics Committee compliance is a registered user.

I am more concerned about the lack of compliance with the existing Ethics Committee requests and requirements. Please, Anna and all of Congress, do your job and make sure that proper review is completed BEFORE hearings.

This weekend's Sunday NY Times was terrifying to read. I worry that that due process is being brushed aside by over-eager Trump supporters.

With all due respect, I am willing to accept he won the Electoral College election, but he must comply with the rules that have been set up to protect the American people from abuse of power as his predecessors have done.


5 people like this
Posted by CHRIS BROWN
a resident of Professorville
on Jan 9, 2017 at 1:50 pm

Can she first focus on moving the low flying airplanes that have made PA too noisy? Its more relevant in my day to day life.


26 people like this
Posted by Jetman
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jan 23, 2017 at 10:06 pm


Anna Eshoo's would do a much better job of serving her constituents by working on the airplane noise problem, than this silly grand-standing which will accomplish nothing.

Anna Eshoo has been working on the aircraft noise issue for close to two years now, and has nothing to show for her effort except a series of meetings structured to put the formidable bureaucratic power of the FAA in a position to wage a war of attrition on opponents of aircraft noise.


3 people like this
Posted by Better Life
a resident of Green Acres
on Jan 25, 2017 at 9:55 am

I have been working with JetAir to add commuter flights to/from Palo Alto and Portland. Please don't fight that effort. The airports are necessary (SFO, SJO, Oakland, Palo Alto, etc..) If you didn't want airplane noise, you should never have moved into the Bay Area.


3 people like this
Posted by Mvresident2003
a resident of Mountain View
on Jan 25, 2017 at 12:26 pm

Mvresident2003 is a registered user.

Sorry, but that makes as much sense as someone moving to the country then being told they should have known airlines would increase flights here, it's empty airspace and won't bother anyone. .??

I think people understand when moving within a certain proximity to major airports that there's going to be noise. But when we chose to move to a SUBURB fairly removed from the BIg Cities we have the right to expect certain considerations. And when flight paths are changed to effect drastic increases in noise we have the right to complain, protest and expect change.


1 person likes this
Posted by resident
a resident of Charleston Meadows
on Jan 25, 2017 at 1:40 pm

Our California contingent made a big play to revolt against the inauguration ceremonies. You all had a seat at the table but did not show up. You are paid to represent the bay area and show your willingness to do the job we voted you in to do - and that includes showing up to show your support for America as a whole and a willingness to discus any opinions. So now you want tough talk? Sorry - you will not have a job in the next go around. It is not about tough talk - it is about showing up and participating in the discussions.
The Democratic Party is now shooting itself in the foot and stumbling around.
And the California contingent is leading the charge in bad behavior.


2 people like this
Posted by Curmudgeon
a resident of Downtown North
on Jan 25, 2017 at 4:20 pm

"Our California contingent made a big play to revolt against the inauguration ceremonies."

They are doing their job. They will bring a clean personal record of opposition to Trump's impeachment.


1 person likes this
Posted by resident
a resident of Charleston Meadows
on Jan 25, 2017 at 8:33 pm

The DOW reached it's highest point ever today and Trump is moving ahead with the goals established in his program. For the pipeline projects he is going to rebuild the American Steel industry. So all of your 401K's are now ahead of the game and Calpers has received a shot in the arm. Why don't you enjoy the gains. As to HRC California was very into Bernie but the DNC screwed him royally. So "everyone" did not go for HRC.
I am a registered D and received a Official 2017 Democratic Party Survey from the DNC - Donna Brazile to input data for the 2017 year. I will explain to the DNC the points at which they screwed up.


23 people like this
Posted by Jetman
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jan 25, 2017 at 10:57 pm


@Better Life,

If you wanted to have easy access to jet service you should have never moved into Palo Alto.

There are some great neighborhoods in San Mateo and San Jose under the normal westerly flow departures that are very inexpensive for the Bay Area, and only minutes away from regular jet service from SFO or SJC.




2 people like this
Posted by resident
a resident of Charleston Meadows
on Jan 26, 2017 at 10:53 am

Better Life - why the Palo Alto Airport? You have a private section in San Jose set up directly for your type services with all new facilities and good parking. All of that was set up for the events at Levi Stadium. That section also has the required security requirements. So what is your problem with that option? Too much security? Too expensive? The idea that we are going to expand which will require more storage for airplane fuel is an accident waiting to happen as we do not have the required security for the PAO. Sorry - not a good option for a small city / county airport.


1 person likes this
Posted by resident
a resident of Charleston Meadows
on Jan 29, 2017 at 12:33 pm

This has somehow morphed into the airplane controversy. Santa Monica is going to shut down their airport in the long term. In the short term they are shortening their runway so that Jets are prevented from landing and taking off at that location. Translate that to the PAO which is sitting in a flood zone that is being rebuilt, and also is in a conservation location. We can control the type of planes by the length of the runway. Great Idea.


8 people like this
Posted by Jetman
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jan 29, 2017 at 5:28 pm

@resident,

Good thought but, the PACC has authorized City Manager Keene to apply for as many FAA Airport Improvement Grants as possible. These grants will be used to continue the improvement of PAO's runway, and the aircraft industry has been toying with the idea of microjets capable of landing and take-off from shorter runways.

"Cheap microjets take to the skies"
CNET ~ April 28, 2006 Web Link


Like this comment
Posted by resident
a resident of Charleston Meadows
on Jan 29, 2017 at 7:07 pm

That must be thrilling for the Facebook group who are building in East Palo Alto area. Maybe we need the Zuck to help out here. His facilities are at he north area of the flight path. Also his new hotel. Not so appealing to have a giant facility that has a lot of open space under a flight path.


3 people like this
Posted by Better Life
a resident of Green Acres
on Jan 29, 2017 at 8:12 pm

" the PACC has authorized City Manager Keene to apply for as many FAA Airport Improvement Grants as possible. These grants will be used to continue the improvement of PAO's runway, and the aircraft industry has been toying with the idea of microjets capable of landing and take-off from shorter runways."

So you understand that the airport is a vital part of out city's infrastructure and supports the bay area. I don't understand why so many of you fight the aircraft. This is the most expensive, populated and high tech area in the world. pushing transportation away is foolish.


6 people like this
Posted by Jetman
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jan 29, 2017 at 9:25 pm

@BL,

The human resources in Palo Alto, Eastern Menlo Park, and East Palo Alto are a much more important to the bay area than PAO. When these human resources are sleep deprived, and their thoughts and conversations are constantly interrupted by aircraft noise, we all lose. I think a pilot or even a real-estate developer should be able to under that.


1 person likes this
Posted by Reality check
a resident of Mountain View
on Jan 30, 2017 at 9:15 am

Classic. The discussion on the "Gunn staff address conflicts following MLK Day talk" article has been closed for further discussion".

As a previous poster pointed out, "We have both in Palo Alto now: effective censorship on conservative or libertarian ideas, and official endorsement of progressive stances."

To @Open, I would love to respond to your post however it appears my views are shut down.


1 person likes this
Posted by Reality check
a resident of Mountain View
on Jan 30, 2017 at 9:44 am

Wow, not only that but the discsssion on the "Stanford University issues international travel warning" has been closed for discussion as well. With only three comments, nothing even remotely close to objectionable on either side. Why is this that thread closed? Are you afraid people just might be hearing more truth than the misrepresented info that most news I see reporting?????

What is with all this censorship?


Like this comment
Posted by resident
a resident of Charleston Meadows
on Jan 30, 2017 at 6:38 pm

Back to the PAO. The Santa Monica Airport is being closed due to the residents objecting to the noise and potential for an accident. That is a fairly affluent area. The arguments they provided are the same for the residents of Mountain View, Palo Alto, Menlo Park, and East Palo Alto who object to the noise of small planes which is compounded by SJX, SFO, Oakland, and San Carlos. We do not have a lack of choices for jets. SJX has the capability for private jets. That is the appropriate place for them to be. And they are a profit making resource which should not be competing with the PAO for business. Maybe the right thing to do here is kick SJX in to claim ownership of planes beyond a specified size. The Board of Supervisors should be looking out to the county revenue points.


Like this comment
Posted by Curmudgeon
a resident of Downtown North
on Jan 30, 2017 at 9:27 pm

"For the pipeline projects he [Trump] is going to rebuild the American Steel industry."

Trump is following in the exact footsteps of Hugo Chavez, the late Socialist president of Venezuela, who dictated in detail how each of Venezuela's industries would do business.

Venezuela was one of the most prosperous nations on the continent when Chavez took over. It is now an economic basket case. And that's on a good day.

Now Trump's doing that to America.


3 people like this
Posted by resident
a resident of Charleston Gardens
on Jan 31, 2017 at 9:07 am

I am so happy to have the Wall Street Journal which presents FACTS concerning the current goings on with historical data. The SJM and SFC continually create spin and the use of terminology to inflame with historical "analogies" which have no actual relevance. As to the current hold on refugees it is for 90 days so the proper vetting can be performed. Hardly a crises for the Googles and Facebook. At FB they have listing of the prior holds by almost all presidents so this is not a unique concept. As to Hollywood - having grown up there - they are dependent on production funding from the cartels and are heavy users of their products. Obviously a financial and emotional problem for them. The SFC continually reports on the use of hard drugs so why not cut back the drug flow? San Jose group has reported gangs and their locations and a reduced police force. No one is connecting the dots here. The flow of drugs and cartel funding is an under current that goes unreported.


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

Burger chain Shake Shack to open in Palo Alto
By Elena Kadvany | 16 comments | 4,524 views

The Cost of Service
By Aldis Petriceks | 1 comment | 1,025 views

This time we're not lying. HONEST! No, really!
By Douglas Moran | 6 comments | 612 views

Couples: When Wrong Admit It; When Right; Shut Up
By Chandrama Anderson | 0 comments | 506 views

One-on-one time
By Cheryl Bac | 0 comments | 434 views