Facing budget shortfall, Palo Alto agrees to cut more than 70 positions | Town Square | Palo Alto Online |

Town Square

Post a New Topic

Facing budget shortfall, Palo Alto agrees to cut more than 70 positions

Original post made on May 27, 2020

Facing a public outcry about recent proposals to cut funding for popular art and teen programs, the Palo Alto City Council moved Tuesday to restore some funding for these programs while cutting dozens of City Hall positions.

Read the full story here Web Link posted Tuesday, May 26, 2020, 11:37 PM

Comments (38)

71 people like this
Posted by common sense
a resident of Midtown
on May 27, 2020 at 5:39 am

Politicians will inflict the maximum pain possible when cutting budgets
Politicians will return the next year asking for additional taxes

Voters were told that the Hotel Tax was to fund infrastructure improvements (bike bridge, etc). Hotel tax revenue has dropped, but instead of cutting infrastructure improvements, the politicians cut resident services.

99 people like this
Posted by Just wondering...
a resident of Old Palo Alto
on May 27, 2020 at 7:24 am

Why does the City of Palo Alto need 230 management employees making six digit salaries to manage less than a 1000 regular employees?

24 people like this
Posted by Resident
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on May 27, 2020 at 8:35 am

There is some good progress here if these 70 positions are redundant.

But eliminating the shuttle is not a good idea. Many seniors and school children will have no other option but to use a car, either Uber or parent. It will ultimately put more traffic on the road particularly during school commute times. The argument of course is that school commute times will look different, but that will not be the case for ever.

We have lost VTA service because of the shuttles. Now without shuttle service we have lost public transport. CC should remember this when they talk about traffic problems and parking problems.

41 people like this
Posted by S_mom
a resident of Community Center
on May 27, 2020 at 8:43 am

When are they going to explain why they don't want to postpone capital projects? Why do they need to redo Rinconada Park anytime soon? I wasn't able to watch but thanks to Greg Tanaka for being willing to think for himself and go against the grain.

32 people like this
Posted by Online Name
a resident of Embarcadero Oaks/Leland
on May 27, 2020 at 10:06 am

Another person wondering about the capital projects, whether they'll be cut and if not, why not.

As for the argument that construction costs are cheaper now so the projects should proceed, I'd like to see some hard data on that claim. You've got months of pent-up demand for construction work on projects partially finished and those in the works.

39 people like this
Posted by Juan byrge
a resident of Charleston Gardens
on May 27, 2020 at 10:08 am

OR hey could stop buying multi million dollar houses for city council members. One of those houses is enough to pay salaries for 50 people for a year.

10 people like this
Posted by community member
a resident of Community Center
on May 27, 2020 at 10:19 am

In case you want to take a final look at some of the many groups who are to be kicked out of Cubberley Community Center, according to the latest plans...
Web Link

6 people like this
Posted by chris
a resident of University South
on May 27, 2020 at 10:30 am

Where is the list of which groups will stay at Cubberley and which groups will have to relocate or cut a separate deal?

13 people like this
Posted by chris
a resident of University South
on May 27, 2020 at 10:34 am

If the schools like the shuttle, let them pay for it. PAUSD is far less impacted by the revenue shortfall than the city. Let them pay for crossing guards too. PAUSD has also been milk I HPE the city for substandard buildings at Cubberley. What other landlord could get away with that?

51 people like this
Posted by Pat Burt
a resident of Community Center
on May 27, 2020 at 11:15 am

Under the cloak of the COVID shutdown and without engagement with the Cubberley tenants and the community that relies on them, the city has abruptly abandoned much of the Cubberley that has been the primary community center for south Palo Alto for over 30 years. Put bluntly, it is a radical, half-baked, poorly thought out, and needless action.
Citywide, the most drastic cuts to our public safety and community services are unnecessary. If this year’s record-setting capital spending plans were reduced by just 5%, most of the valued services and programs could be retained. Instead of preserving our police and fire staffing, the council majority chose to retain $1.7 million this year for public art in new public buildings.
Rather than keep our parks, libraries, and the Children’s Theatre open, the city will spend $2.5 million to rush forward with non-essential Rinconada Park improvements.
Those of us who created the Infrastructure Plan, and built the funding for it, intended for it to be done in addition to retaining our city services and not instead of those services, but somehow the priorities have been turned on their head.

6 people like this
Posted by mjh
a resident of College Terrace
on May 27, 2020 at 11:19 am

The document that the city manager prepared for the council presenting their options for cutting the budget, plus the rules the council agreed to for structuring their decision making at the outset, appeared in to end up limiting their options for grappling with and prioritizing the capital expenditures (bricks, mortar, asphalt) budget vs safety and community services budgets. While I can't be sure, in the end I came away from watching most of their hours of public discussion wondering if this appearance of manipulating the outcome was intended or not. And whether a different council and/or mayor would have made a difference. That being said, impressed with Ed Shikada's mastery of so many details and aspects of the complicated city finances, the mayor's ability to keep meetings moving along, and the incredible number of hours individual council members dedicated to devoted to tackling this problem.

37 people like this
Posted by mjh
a resident of College Terrace
on May 27, 2020 at 11:31 am

"the council majority chose to retain $1.7 million this year for public art in new public buildings."

Unfortunately a council decision some years ago stipulated that a (1%?) percentage of a building's construction be earmarked for public art. To remove this restriction will require the council to hold a second vote to overturn the first one.

Also, unfortunately, a staff member told the council that the "public art" for the new police station had already been approved and finished and was being stored in a warehouse! This before any bids or financing for the proposed police station, let alone putting one shovel in the ground.

Let's hope the council will revisit this rule because while it's always fun to spend someone else's money, should it be the our money? Especially since there seems to be a lack of widespread enthusiasm for the taste exhibited by the so-called art experts who council appoints to this small group who makes these decisions.

7 people like this
Posted by mjh
a resident of College Terrace
on May 27, 2020 at 11:44 am

"230 management employees"

The large proportion of employees titled "manager" was explained to the council as consisting of many who manage a single function and don't actually manage other people. I think the person in charge of contracts was mentioned as an example.

"stop buying multi million dollar houses for city council members."

Completely erroneous. There's never been a single house bought for a council member. What the council has done for this and the past two city manager's is buy them a house. The past two with ownership and costs split but the most recent to be owned outright by the city. In each case the city has recoups their investment when the house sells.

64 people like this
Posted by Pat Burt
a resident of Community Center
on May 27, 2020 at 11:57 am

The council policy of 1% for public art on new city projects can be readily reversed. It was a reasonable, but not essential, policy when revenues were flush and construction costs were not inflated, but it is not critical, even though the city manager described all of the remaining infrastructure projects as being so. The policy could just be suspended for two years as Vice-mayor Dubois proposed.
City staff did surprise the council yesterday by countering a proposal to suspend this program by stating that the $750K artwork for the new public safety building is already complete, two years ahead of the building being constructed. But this year's budget still includes $1.7 million for public art while severely cutting police and the arts. If given a choice, which is more important to the community, the public art or the services? I haven't heard anyone, other than a council member, who thinks the new statues are the higher priority today.

21 people like this
Posted by Spot on, Pat.
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on May 27, 2020 at 12:06 pm

It was disturbing watching Council yesterday. Sadly, I think more cuts are coming. Most experts say we can expect a second wave of Covid, which may be worse.

45 people like this
Posted by Online Name
a resident of Embarcadero Oaks/Leland
on May 27, 2020 at 1:12 pm

Why is Ms. Cormack so insistent on redoing Cubberly and keeping most of the big-ticket "infrastructure" projects while we're in this situation? Why not wait until better times? Why is it so urgent to replace the fire station at Middlefield and Meadow? Who's benefiting from these construction projects?

I also reject the claim that they must be done now because construction costs are so much lower when construction firms/workers are trying to finish their projects cancelled during shelter-in-place as well as taking on new ones?

Just today the state upped the cost of the high-speed rail by one BILLION dollars, $1,000,000,000. Doesn't sound like a lower cost to me.

9 people like this
Posted by Anon
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on May 27, 2020 at 1:13 pm

Posted by mjh, a resident of College Terrace

>> "the council majority chose to retain $1.7 million this year for public art in new public buildings."

All they have to do is defer the new public building, and, the art allocation will be deferred also.

Like this comment
Posted by Resident
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on May 27, 2020 at 1:38 pm

To whomever asked about the schools liking the shuttle and paying for them.

Forget it. The schools do not care about how the students get to school. It is not their problem. If it was something they cared about, they would have done many different things in the past. It is only the parents who have to be concerned about how the kids get to school.

14 people like this
Posted by Amy Brown
a resident of Green Acres
on May 27, 2020 at 3:04 pm

The proposed cuts to the Children's Theatre will cut staff, making it impossible for the Theatre to continue to provide the programming they have created to keep kids involved, virtually and in person until things are safer. It will make it very hard for them to recover. We don't need expensive public art. We need places for our kids to create art and experience joy in their lives now and in the future.

16 people like this
Posted by Online Name
a resident of Embarcadero Oaks/Leland
on May 27, 2020 at 3:06 pm

Remember that the schools decided it was too costly for them to run school buses so they stopped and shifted the burden to the city. The city in turn couldn't get it together to coordinate its shuttle schedule with school times but they could find the time and the money to preach incessantly for us to get out of our cars. I guess they couldn't figure out there's a correlation between school times, parent drive-time and rush hour.

Yet they have no problems inconveniencing us and asking us to spend $450,000 -- formerly $750.000 to pay the commuting expenses of the commuters occupying the offices they so love and that keeps their donors happy..

35 people like this
Posted by Resident
a resident of Downtown North
on May 27, 2020 at 3:23 pm

Re: the council majority chose to retain $1.7 million this year for public art in new public buildings.

Why in the world is this a good decision? We're cutting the arts programs for children after many kids speak up about the benefit of these programs, but the city council continues to buy art worth almost 2 million? How is this logical?

Thank you to Councilor Tanaka for standing up for community interests. I also agree with Pat Burt. Why are these huge construction projects being bull dozed through and approve during a huge budget deficit? Is there no one on the city council (who voted yes) to the budget with a finance degree? Our economy is tanking right now, and we're buying art works that total almost 2 million dollars?

Who are these folks?
Follow the money. Who is the money going to? By this, I mean follow which contractors and bids have been approved for these construction projects. Do they have any connection with our city? If any of our city councilors approving these budgets are connected in any way or form to anyone or company with bids or potential bids on these huge infrastructure projects, these City Council members need to not vote due to conflict of interest issues.

During a time of financial hardship, Pat Burt's approach makes the most sense.
So does Councilman Tanaka's. Mayor Fine and his movement to push development at the cost of bankrupting our city in the midst of pandemic and financial crisis seems really reckless.

46 people like this
Posted by Pat Burt
a resident of Community Center
on May 27, 2020 at 4:14 pm

Some other aspects of the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) are, at best, mystifying.
Two weeks ago, over the mayor’s objections, a majority of the council directed staff to reduce the CIP by $2.6 million. $1.6 million of those funds were designated toward the pension trust and $1.0 million toward the restoration of a small fraction of the services on the chopping block.
Surprisingly, without telling the council or the public, the staff cut $10.8 million, rather than the $2.6 million, from various capital projects. They returned $2.8 million to the General Fund, but the other $8 million was actually added back to other capital projects, Web Link, (Attachment A, Exhibit 2). Staff made no mention of these big changes and it required a careful reading of the report to figure out what was done.
The city manager then asserted that each item in the CIP was the “minimum required investment in essential infrastructure”, claiming that $8 million in funding for various capital projects suddenly became essential over the past two weeks. That $8 million is approximately the amount needed to restore almost all of the key service cuts.
In my 18 years of reviewing the city’s capital plans, this year is far and away the largest budget ever with the least transparency and accountability.

7 people like this
Posted by Bob
a resident of Barron Park
on May 27, 2020 at 5:42 pm

I believe the infrastructure funds have strict rules for how they can be spent possibly due to the city charter?

But who cares, those rules need to be changed!

For example, do they stipulate exactly when the project must take place ? If not, just delay the project until another year. Filseth tried to make the argument that this doesn’t save money. Well, it might save someone’s life!

I’m certain the firefighters would rather keep their jobs and stay on duty (not close stations temporarily) than have one new station built. It would be better for all of us.

11 people like this
Posted by DTNResident
a resident of Downtown North
on May 27, 2020 at 9:56 pm

This hit us when the weather was already warming up in March. What will happen in November of next year when the second wave hits much much harder in colder weather? It's going to be twice as bad then and there's no workable plan. Cut another 144 positions? Let the grass just grow as far as it wants in the parks?

When my lease is up in a few months, I'll be shutting down a long time business in downtown PA, and moving out of state. I know they'll be coming to me to pay for their salaries and pensions and I won't be participating, nor will I bend over waiting around for the far worse second wave, when captain shutdown, Sara Cody, tells me the only solution is to shut down again, when no one at my facility caught it and she can't quite figure out how to balance guidelines for different types of high risk businesses and individuals against the costs of shutting all of them down.

20 people like this
Posted by ElectionIsComing
a resident of Professorville
on May 27, 2020 at 10:16 pm

Please remember how our City Council has handled (or mis-handled if you are of that opinion) the budget in November when four council seats are up for election. Adrian Fine, Greg Tanaka and Lydia Kou are eligible to run for a second terms. I think Tanaka and Kou are on the side of common sense and the interests of the people of Palo Alto. Fine, I think less so, unless your are supporter of large commercial developments and allowing large apartment/condo projects in areas zoned for single-family housing.
Liz Kniss is termed-out so her seat will be up for grabs. Be careful when you vote for whomever runs for that seat. Ignore what they say and follow the money to make an educated guess what their policies will really be after they are elected. Oh, I forgot. It's hard to follow the money since the big contributions are timed to appear in the final campaign funding reports that don't come in until after the election.

10 people like this
Posted by Cut the Council
a resident of Midtown
on May 28, 2020 at 10:41 am

The council needs should be cut down again... Even 7 members is 2 too many, extremely inefficient with so many bureaucrats.

20 people like this
Posted by Frankie
a resident of another community
on May 29, 2020 at 6:55 am

How many positions in the City Managers office were eliminated? ZERO! unbelievable. Quit cutting public safety, budget after budget they see cuts while budget after budget the City Mangers office adds positions.

15 people like this
Posted by Anneke
a resident of Professorville
on May 31, 2020 at 12:42 pm

The present budget situation in Palo Alto has led me to do quite a bit of research on the subject of compensation for the city's employees' compensation and the possible causes of the city's budget shortfall.

1. With regard to cutting 70 positions from the city's payroll, it would be good to know the present costs (severance pay, cash pay-outs for unused sick and vacation hours) and the future costs (pension and benefits.)

2. From census data in 2020, it shows that the average salary in Palo Alto is $107,000.
Web Link

3. When I look at salaries for the city's employees, especially police and firemen, I find that their salaries lie way above the average citizens' salaries. When I then add the health benefits and pension costs, the total compensation is extremely high.

4. I also did research on surrounding cities, such as San Jose and Redwood City.
San Jose: Web Link
Redwood City: Web Link

5. Allow me to be shocked, as I did not expect to see these high salaries for policemen and firemen at all.

6. The above information tells me that we have a major issue with the Unions representing these employees.

How can we continue to pay these kinds of compensation packages?

7 people like this
Posted by ABC
a resident of Downtown North
on May 31, 2020 at 1:26 pm

Wait - Palo Alto usually has a budget of $200M usually? And a decline of 40M is catastrophic? Can someone tell me how the 200M actually get spent? Maybe then we can assess which cuts make sense and which don't. Also cutting a paltry 70 positions just seems insufficient.

15 people like this
Posted by Resident
a resident of Downtown North
on Jun 1, 2020 at 8:57 am

4 CC Positions are coming up for election. 3 City Councilors are running again.
Fine, Kou and Tanaka. Go back and listen to the past recordings for the past budget meetings and see how the past 3 CC voted and what motions they supported.

Who stood up for our community values and common sense desires to efficiently fix budget shortfalls? Who stood up for ongoing large capital infrastructure projects that cost tens of millions of dollars per project?

Who is pushing for large commercial developments and allowing large apartment/condo projects in areas zoned for single-family housing without common sense to quality of living for Palo Alto residents.
Do they care about green space? Community programs? Do they care there is enough hospitals, shopping and parks around before approving big developments or do they not even care?

Who really stands for the developers? Who is really standing for the neighborhoods and residents?

Who is making this place a horrible place for seniors, and places for families with children even though city budget costs for those services are already on a shoestring budget compared to construction projects?

Who wants to close libraries that service all groups of people across all walks of life even though it was on a shoestring budget already? Who wants to keep large construction projects going even even though the expense is immense and acting like we're in an economic boom period?

Who is saying we can't re-negotiate with the unions and want to cut into public safety and police and fire budgets instead because it's easiest?

Shakida makes his suggestions to cut into community programs while preserving his bloated city administrative budgets and jobs, but which City Councilor is supporting Shakida's suggestions of cutting fire, safety, libraries and community programs and not cutting into Shakida's administration staff saying they're unionized so not possible to re-negotiate salaries?

Figure out who is standing for community interests because Shakida is not representing residents right now. The time of crisis shows everyone's true colors. From the City manager Ed Shakida to each City Councilor.

Who during these unprecedented times, is wasting our tax payer dollars on needless items? Who is trying to make excuses to keep the status quo of spending on big budget line items? Vote responsibly.

Follow the money and when you can't follow their votes and motions they made or supported. Who didn't ever want any city ordinance reading and wanted to wave in all sorts of outside construction and buildings to come through without even thinking of aesthetics?

10 people like this
Posted by A PA resident
a resident of South of Midtown
on Jun 1, 2020 at 1:07 pm

It's shameful that city employees aren't asked to chip in and accept a pay cut. How in the world is this justified. They also have every other Friday off.
That's 26 days off a year, by default. How in this world is this justified. When Palo Altans are facing pay cuts and layoffs, they are now asked to sustain these ridiculous benefits of a bloated city administration. I urge everyone to elect city council members who represent the actual people who live here, not city employees' ridiculous benefit packages.
Remember that city services will be cut. Employee's salaries won't. What a joke.

Like this comment
Posted by Sylvie
a resident of The Greenhouse
on Jun 2, 2020 at 12:25 am

Enact a 3-6-month budget cycle during these unique times, that overall cuts staff but enables flexibility with where/how those staff are deployed. Yes, understood that it is not easy, but with the brain trust in Palo Alto it is not impossible. No point providing budget to services that cannot be rendered during the Covid-19 pandemic. Why provide budget to the Children's Theatre, Libraries, and park maintenance when no one can use those services? Cut park maintenance to a minimum while we are dealing with this crisis.

Police and fire services should not be cut no matter what.

Adopt a mindset that provide flexibility in the budgeting in these continually changing times.

7 people like this
Posted by Green Gables
a resident of Duveneck/St. Francis
on Jun 2, 2020 at 1:18 pm

The 70 positions being cut by the lovely City of Palo Alto are probably those people who are either retiring or quitting. No big deal.

8 people like this
Posted by Bob
a resident of Midtown
on Jun 2, 2020 at 7:07 pm

Eight million dollars wasted on a bike boulevard on Ross that neighbors opposed... how about stop squandering our tax money in order to stay within budget?

10 people like this
Posted by Rick
a resident of Adobe-Meadow
on Jun 3, 2020 at 9:47 am

I'm with Bob,

Shakida has wasted -millions- on projects the residents of this town did not want and has made no move to scrape that unwanted infrastructure from our previously wide, leafy, and safe streets. Are we continuing to build that bike bridge and waste yet more of OUR money? Ridiculous!

13 people like this
Posted by Resident
a resident of Downtown North
on Jun 5, 2020 at 12:50 am

Palo Alto residents should be concerned about how City of Palo Alto and Mayor Adrian Fine have decided to cut deeply and get rid of it's rental space at Cubberly. By removing their contract with Cubberly, PAUSD Superintendent has supported a budget where current non-profit tenants at Cubberly are all kicked out.

All under the excuse of COVID budget deficit, Mayor Adrian Fine supported getting rid of the Cubberly agreement that City Manager Ed Shakida suggested, which then allowed PAUSD superintendent to approve of a budget which got rid of all the remaining tenants at Cubberly.

Think through the impact. All those wonderful services at Cubberly serving our community, from Seniors, to families, to children, to youth, are all kicked out.

Is this the type of City we want? Getting rid of non-profits and their presence in Palo Alto, where they serve the city residents? But big infrastructure projects are continuing.

Take a look at last year's salary (The list was endless so only copied a little bit of it).
Salaries of public employees are all public and listed on the internet.
Check it out.

Web Link

Mayor Adrian Fine refuses to renegotiate the contract and City Manager Ed Shakida certainly won't. But if every overpaid City of Palo Alto employee who makes over $250,000 per year took a 10% pay cut, Cubberley rental space and agreement would be in place with PAUSD and nonprofits would not be kicked out unceremoniously by PAUSD.

Look at the list of overpaid city employees who do a job that is barely acceptable at best (if you agree with 10 day curfews that cross into our civil liberties):

Palo Altans need to take a closer look at the salaries and union contracts our Mayor Adrian Fine signed off on and approved and refuse to re-negotiate during time of crisis and deficit.
Web Link

The salaries are all public and online from last year onwards.

Web Link

Follow the money. We're being taken for a ride.

City manager earned $569,799.60

City Attorney earned $460,604.29 (did she do her job with 10 day curfew that we all loved?)

Battalion Chief made $457,648.08 including OVERTIME PAY of $112,965.28
Police Sarg. made $454,780.86 including OVERTIME PAY of $145,745.68
Police Agent made $449,623.23 including OVERTIME PAY of $164,175.73
Police CHIEF JONSEN made $417,065.24
Fire Chief made 406,942.06
Police Captain made $403,020.36
Police Captain made $399,666.65
Police Sarg. made $391,021.05 including OVERTIME PAY of $50,461.27
Battalion Chief made $390,814.87 including OVERTIME PAY of $85,838.40
Police Sarg. made $380,594.01 including OVERTIME PAY of $33,927.78
Police Lieut. made $379,682.31
Utilities Director made $379,360.70
Police Agent made $378,232.17 including OVERTIME PAY of $79,975.23
Deputy Chief Fire Marshall made $375,850.65
Police Lieut. made $373,788.52
EMT made $372,534.76 including OVERTIME PAY of $106,408.73
Police Sarg. made $371,889.54 including OVERTIME PAY of $46,840.40
Fire Inspector/EMT made $371,038.09 including OVERTIME PAY of $78,579.18
Fire Captain/EMT made $364,537.28 including OVERTIME PAY of $78,070.25
Battalion Chief made $364,203.82 including OVERTIME PAY of $3,189.12
Police Lieut made $363,180.45
Police Sarg made $361,349.34 including OVERTIME PAY of $26,760.76
Police Sarg made $359,941.40 including OVERTIME PAY of $39,183.51

Assistant CITY Manager made $359,819.05
Fire Captain made $356,305.92 including OVERTIME PAY of $68,896.37
Police Sarg made $354,694.14 including OVERTIME PAY of $31,700.15

Director PLANNING made $353,083.18

Utility System Operator made $352,383.20 incl. OVERTIME PAY of $110,723.44

Police Sarg made $352,032.89 including OVERTIME PAY of $36,229.71
Fire Captain made $348,988.54 including OVERTIME PAY of $71,929.88

DIRECTOR of HR made $347,843.99
Fire Captain made $347,788.46 including OVERTIME PAY of $60,378.95
Police Lieut made $347,618.80
Battalion Chief made $347,259.32 including OVERTIME PAY of $33,638.05

CHIEF assistant CITY Attorney made $341,829.79 (did THIS Person look at the 10 day curfew that City Attorney apparently didn't look at???!!)

Attorney + Chief assistant City attorney salaries combined together are
460K + 340K = over $700,000 yet we had a 10 day curfew put in and none of these Attorneys did a once over of the 10 day curfew?!

This speaks to the level of spending and non-accountability of tax payer funds.

The Mayor Adrian Fine and City Manager Ed Shakida, full compliance with PAUSD's Superintendent have ensured all the non-profit organizations are being kicked out of Palo Alto.

Remember this when you go to vote for CC in November or PAUSD Board of Trustees who hired the Superintendent.

Go to this website and check out the city employee salaries.

Web Link

Then consider who is blasting Diana for writing up a city employee perk.
Follow the money.

the salaries continue on for pages for people who made more than $300,000 per year.

Even if every single person took a 5% or 10% pay cut, our deficit likely would disappear given the salaries.

Guess who is not suggesting that. Oh. Our city manager Ed Shakida who was compensated for OVER HALF A MILLION dollars in salary LASST YEAR.

But we tolerate gaffes and incompetence and "inexperience"

7 people like this
Posted by Resident
a resident of Old Palo Alto
on Jun 6, 2020 at 12:02 pm

It is time for residents of every city in the U.S.A. to protest where their taxes are being wasted. Overgenerous pensions reform is a must in this country. There are employees who retired from cities at age 55 and are receiving almost as much as when they were working. It's a corrupt system. We, the residents and taxpayers, have to make up any losses of the union's funds. High property and sales tax, especially in California, are eating up the American dream. In Alameda, the sales tax is 9.75%.
To buy a car outside of the county, the purchase would still be based on the residential address tax rate. There's no escape. Most people who work hard in private sectors will never be able to get ahead.

20 people like this
Posted by Stewart Carl
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Jun 6, 2020 at 1:08 pm

Sell the art the city has in storage for the proposed new police building and use the proceeds to fund arts programs for children.

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


Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online. Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *

Select your neighborhood or school community: * Not sure?

Comment: *

Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.

*Required Fields

Get fact-based reporting on the COVID-19 crisis sent to your inbox daily.

The Nut House is back -- with a self-taught chef and Palo Alto native in the kitchen
By Elena Kadvany | 14 comments | 6,005 views

Some of your comments on nuclear energy
By Sherry Listgarten | 21 comments | 4,997 views

My bystander's experience with PAPD
By Jessica Zang | 29 comments | 3,041 views

Public statues: Up or down? But does the historical importance of the individuals represented matter?
By Diana Diamond | 31 comments | 2,901 views

Pride Month / "Trans New York"
By Chandrama Anderson | 2 comments | 2,449 views


Who is your local hero?

Whether they're grocery shopping for a neighbor or volunteering for a nonprofit, you can spread the joy and support our journalism efforts by giving them a shout-out.

Learn More