by Palo Alto Weekly editorial board / Palo Alto Weekly
Uploaded: Fri, Oct 7, 2022, 6:51 am 32 Time to read: about 8 minutes
From left, Palo Alto City Council candidates Vicki Veenker, Ed Lauing and Julie Lythcott-Haims. Photos by Magali Gauthier.
Two years ago, with the city largely shut down during the frightening pre-vaccine days of the pandemic and most city residents sticking close to home, the 2020 Palo Alto City Council election attracted the most diverse group of 10 candidates in history, including two incumbents, for four available seats.
The campaign focused on the city's COVID-19 response, racial justice, police reform, housing affordability and whether the City Council was exercising adequate oversight of City Manager Ed Shikada and his staff. (Read our 2020 endorsement editorial for more analysis of the candidates and issues back then.)
This year, it's a smaller field of seven candidates but with no incumbents. Three are currently serving on city commissions (Lauing, Summa and Forssell), one (Veenker) previously ran unsuccessfully for state Assembly, and three have no prior electoral or government experience (Lythcott-Haims, Comsa and Hamachek.)
This is only the third time in Palo Alto history (the last being in 2007) when no incumbent was on the ballot, in part because of the larger size of previous councils. With the current smaller, seven-member council, only three seats are up for election this year. Councilmembers Tom Dubois and Eric Filseth are termed out after serving for eight years and Alison Cormack chose not to seek reelection to a second term.
The last four years have seen a calming of political divisions on the council and, we believe, in the community. With strong commercial development caps and other restrictions now in place, and with a growing consensus that the city's biggest challenge is how and where , not whether , to create more affordable housing, the current council has seen little of the bickering and political jockeying so common in years past. With the abundance of empty office space and the likelihood that remote working will continue for the foreseeable future, combined with the pressures and requirements the state has placed on the city to get more housing built, the overly simplistic growth/no growth debate has subsided. And there is widespread agreement that new housing growth must not be offset by a growth in jobs.
Help sustain the local news you depend on.
Your contribution matters. Become a member today.
Strikingly, the seven candidates offer mostly nuanced differences over the important issues of housing, grade crossings, sustainability and public safety. "Area plans," in which specific areas of the city are studied and zoning changes adopted that allow for increased density, and in some cases, building heights that go beyond the current 50-foot height limit, while also spelling out desired amenities are being promoted by every candidate.
The similarity of views means voters must focus more on the qualities each candidate will bring to the council and who is best suited to crafting the policies residents will find the most compatible with community values and character.
The council's biggest challenge may be to learn to operate at a quicker pace of decision making. No one was happy with the six years it took for a decision on the Castilleja School redevelopment application, and inaction on the future of the Cubberley Community Center and long, drawn-out debate over rail crossings, among other issues, led to public frustration with their government. Too many issues get bogged down for years, causing all but the most patient and committed homeowners to tune out, while virtually excluding renters from the conversation. That must change, as must the inclination of past councils to keep striving for perfect solutions when none exist.
On the bright side, the council has approved multiple housing projects and incentives to attract more, giving hope that faster progress can and will be made to address the housing needs, especially for low and very low income residents who are valued service workers in our community.
With some major exceptions and misjudgments, such as City Manager Ed Shikada's improper use of a COVID-19 emergency powers resolution to declare a citywide curfew and his police chief's unilateral decision to begin encrypting all radio communications, the staff and council did a commendable job of navigating through the darkest days of the pandemic. Turnover, staff shortages, budget cuts and remote working has taken its toll, however, and among the council and staff priorities must be to stabilize the city workforce.
Find out what's on the ballot in the Palo Alto area.
Find out what's on the ballot in the Palo Alto area.
With the pandemic response largely behind us, we're also hoping to see the three new members of the council join the efforts being made by Mayor Pat Burt, Vice Mayor Lydia Kou and Councilmember Greer Stone to increase transparency and the council's oversight of the city manager.
As our recommendations show, our interest is in selecting candidates for their varied talents, perspectives, diversity and ability to communicate effectively. While the community discussion around housing has evolved, other major issues loom: climate-action programs that require supersizing the capacity of the city's electrical grid, the ambitious Fiber to the Premises plan to provide high-speed internet access across the city, and the need to get out in front of the growing infrastructure pains that will come with the addition of thousands of new residences. The seven council members must be able to work together quickly and seamlessly to turn these and other big city visions into effective implementation that anticipates and prevents unintended consequences.
Behind our picks: collaboration skills, experience and inclusion
Our top two choices are Vicki Veenker and Ed Lauing. Veenker is a former patent litigation attorney turned professional mediator who has brought opposing sides together on issues as complex as health care and trade policy, while working at the local level to support the underserved. She was narrowly defeated by Marc Berman in the 2016 state Assembly race, after which she founded Sibling Cities USA, a nonprofit that aims to pair up similarly sized cities in different parts of the country to share best practices and perspectives on issues in common. A 30-year resident of Palo Alto, she served for 20 years on the board of the Law Foundation of Silicon Valley, which represented residents of the Buena Vista mobile home park. Veenker believes her mediation and policy expertise will help the city to get "unstuck and move forward" on incentives for more affordable housing development, a decision on rail crossings and the future of Cubberley as a south Palo Alto community center. Her collaboration and mediation skills and focus on outcomes will add immensely to the collective skill set of the current council.
In 2020 Ed Lauing narrowly missed being elected to the council, finishing a close fifth behind incumbent Greg Tanaka. His 15 years of service on the Planning and Transportation Commission (currently as chair) and on the Parks and Recreation Commission have given him the deepest familiarity on local issues of any of the candidates. With planning and zoning always a large part of the council's work, Lauing will be a critical resource and leader in addressing all the key land use and transportation issues facing the community. He has repeatedly demonstrated on the planning commission his ability to calmly, unemotionally and patiently stay focused on the task at hand and design a fair outcome, even when dealing with a divided community, such as he did with the Castilleja project.
He co-chairs the Housing Element Working Group, a citizens' group that created a plan for meeting the state mandate to plan for 6,086 new housing units by 2031. As an executive recruiter and former CEO of three software companies, Lauing will bring valuable corporate leadership and HR experience as the council undertakes to improve city staff performance and build more accountability into the council-manager relationship.
■ Editorial: Veenker, Lauing, Lythcott-Haims for Palo Alto City Council
■ California homeless population grew by 22,000 over pandemic
■ School matters: Four Board of Education candidates seek to refocus district priorities as pandemic wanes
■ Big money flows in to Santa Clara County sheriff race
■ Palo Alto's Homekey project gains $4M from Challenge Grant program
■ Editorial: Veenker, Lauing, Lythcott-Haims for Palo Alto City Council
■ California homeless population grew by 22,000 over pandemic
Our choice for the third council seat came down to Lisa Forssell and Julie Lythcott-Haims. Forssell is a Stanford University-educated computer scientist turned creative and technical director at Pixar Animation Studios. She is now on the design team at Apple. She has served on Palo Alto's Utilities Advisory Commission for the last six years and has become passionate about sustainability, renewable energy projects and the ultimate conversion from natural gas to an all-electric utility system. If elected to the council, her utility commission experience and knowledge would immediately make her the leader on city policies on sustainability and climate change.
Lythcott-Haims has lived or worked in Palo Alto for almost 30 years, first as an attorney, then as a Stanford administrator and dean of freshmen. In addition to degrees from Stanford and Harvard University, she earned an MFA in writing and has authored three nonfiction books since 2015. She has served on many local nonprofit boards and advisory groups, including the Foundation for a College Education, YWCA of the Mid-Peninsula, Palo Alto Community Fund, Partners in Education and the Community Working Group. She is a nationally recognized speaker and, by her own description, a "pretty agressive liberal Democrat." She is an unabashed advocate for racial justice and equity and takes every opportunity to prod others into honest discussions about race, discrimination and how to create a more just society.
Passionate advocates like Lythcott-Haims, whose interests in equity and human relations reach well beyond her hometown, rarely offer themselves up as candidates for local office. When they do, we think they should be supported. Palo Altans have the chance to elect a second woman of color to the city council who has repeatedly shown her dedication to this community and to improving the lives of struggling residents, whether young people in need of mental health services or people of color experiencing discrimination in housing, policing or employment. She is uniquely suited to educate her council colleagues, staff and the public about the implicit bias that courses through city institutions and practices and propose ways to correct it.
We hope Forssell, if unsuccessful, returns in two years to run again. She'll make an even better candidate after two more years of service on the Utilities Advisory Commission. But we don't think voters should pass up the opportunity to elect Lythcott-Haims while she is motivated to serve Palo Alto.
The remaining three candidates are Planning Commissioner Doria Summa, Realtor Alex Comsa and software engineer Brian Hamachek. Summa has been a Palo Alto resident for more than 35 years and a neighborhood leader and has served on the Planning and Transportation Commission for the last five years. She is a fierce defender of neighborhood interests and as a result is frequently the sole dissenter on projects before the commission. We admire her advocacy but don't believe she will be as effective at building consensus on the council as her colleague, Ed Lauing.
Alex Comsa's creative vision for Palo Alto is for large, higher density housing projects at city-owned locations such as the Palo Alto Airport and city parking lots and on Stanford land, including at Stanford Shopping Center. He points out that the city has no one with real estate expertise on either the council or city staff and is therefore ill-equipped to negotiate with developers over development project proposals. We agree but don't believe the council is the best place for such expertise.
As a born and raised Palo Altan, software engineer Brian Hamachek has focused his campaign on preserving the character of the city. He was inspired to run because he is a neighbor of Castilleja School who felt "bullied" and ignored by the school during its effort to gain city approval of its redevelopment plan. He believes developers have too much power in the city. He applied unsuccessfully three times to serve on the Planning and Transportation Commission, most recently in 2016.
We recommend voters support Vicki Veenker, Ed Lauing and Julie Lythcott-Haims for Palo Alto City Council.
Craving a new voice in Peninsula dining?
Sign up for the Peninsula Foodist newsletter.
Follow Palo Alto Online and the Palo Alto Weekly on Twitter @paloaltoweekly, Facebook and on Instagram @paloaltoonline for breaking news, local events, photos, videos and more.
by Palo Alto Weekly editorial board / Palo Alto Weekly
Uploaded: Fri, Oct 7, 2022, 6:51 am Two years ago, with the city largely shut down during the frightening pre-vaccine days of the pandemic and most city residents sticking close to home, the 2020 Palo Alto City Council election attracted the most diverse group of 10 candidates in history, including two incumbents, for four available seats. The campaign focused on the city's COVID-19 response, racial justice, police reform, housing affordability and whether the City Council was exercising adequate oversight of City Manager Ed Shikada and his staff. (Read our 2020 endorsement editorial for more analysis of the candidates and issues back then.) This year, it's a smaller field of seven candidates but with no incumbents. Three are currently serving on city commissions (Lauing, Summa and Forssell), one (Veenker) previously ran unsuccessfully for state Assembly, and three have no prior electoral or government experience (Lythcott-Haims, Comsa and Hamachek.) This is only the third time in Palo Alto history (the last being in 2007) when no incumbent was on the ballot, in part because of the larger size of previous councils. With the current smaller, seven-member council, only three seats are up for election this year. Councilmembers Tom Dubois and Eric Filseth are termed out after serving for eight years and Alison Cormack chose not to seek reelection to a second term. The last four years have seen a calming of political divisions on the council and, we believe, in the community. With strong commercial development caps and other restrictions now in place, and with a growing consensus that the city's biggest challenge is how and where , not whether , to create more affordable housing, the current council has seen little of the bickering and political jockeying so common in years past. With the abundance of empty office space and the likelihood that remote working will continue for the foreseeable future, combined with the pressures and requirements the state has placed on the city to get more housing built, the overly simplistic growth/no growth debate has subsided. And there is widespread agreement that new housing growth must not be offset by a growth in jobs. Strikingly, the seven candidates offer mostly nuanced differences over the important issues of housing, grade crossings, sustainability and public safety. "Area plans," in which specific areas of the city are studied and zoning changes adopted that allow for increased density, and in some cases, building heights that go beyond the current 50-foot height limit, while also spelling out desired amenities are being promoted by every candidate. The similarity of views means voters must focus more on the qualities each candidate will bring to the council and who is best suited to crafting the policies residents will find the most compatible with community values and character. The council's biggest challenge may be to learn to operate at a quicker pace of decision making. No one was happy with the six years it took for a decision on the Castilleja School redevelopment application, and inaction on the future of the Cubberley Community Center and long, drawn-out debate over rail crossings, among other issues, led to public frustration with their government. Too many issues get bogged down for years, causing all but the most patient and committed homeowners to tune out, while virtually excluding renters from the conversation. That must change, as must the inclination of past councils to keep striving for perfect solutions when none exist. On the bright side, the council has approved multiple housing projects and incentives to attract more, giving hope that faster progress can and will be made to address the housing needs, especially for low and very low income residents who are valued service workers in our community. With some major exceptions and misjudgments, such as City Manager Ed Shikada's improper use of a COVID-19 emergency powers resolution to declare a citywide curfew and his police chief's unilateral decision to begin encrypting all radio communications, the staff and council did a commendable job of navigating through the darkest days of the pandemic. Turnover, staff shortages, budget cuts and remote working has taken its toll, however, and among the council and staff priorities must be to stabilize the city workforce. With the pandemic response largely behind us, we're also hoping to see the three new members of the council join the efforts being made by Mayor Pat Burt, Vice Mayor Lydia Kou and Councilmember Greer Stone to increase transparency and the council's oversight of the city manager. As our recommendations show, our interest is in selecting candidates for their varied talents, perspectives, diversity and ability to communicate effectively. While the community discussion around housing has evolved, other major issues loom: climate-action programs that require supersizing the capacity of the city's electrical grid, the ambitious Fiber to the Premises plan to provide high-speed internet access across the city, and the need to get out in front of the growing infrastructure pains that will come with the addition of thousands of new residences. The seven council members must be able to work together quickly and seamlessly to turn these and other big city visions into effective implementation that anticipates and prevents unintended consequences. Behind our picks: collaboration skills, experience and inclusion Our top two choices are Vicki Veenker and Ed Lauing. Veenker is a former patent litigation attorney turned professional mediator who has brought opposing sides together on issues as complex as health care and trade policy, while working at the local level to support the underserved. She was narrowly defeated by Marc Berman in the 2016 state Assembly race, after which she founded Sibling Cities USA, a nonprofit that aims to pair up similarly sized cities in different parts of the country to share best practices and perspectives on issues in common. A 30-year resident of Palo Alto, she served for 20 years on the board of the Law Foundation of Silicon Valley, which represented residents of the Buena Vista mobile home park. Veenker believes her mediation and policy expertise will help the city to get "unstuck and move forward" on incentives for more affordable housing development, a decision on rail crossings and the future of Cubberley as a south Palo Alto community center. Her collaboration and mediation skills and focus on outcomes will add immensely to the collective skill set of the current council. In 2020 Ed Lauing narrowly missed being elected to the council, finishing a close fifth behind incumbent Greg Tanaka. His 15 years of service on the Planning and Transportation Commission (currently as chair) and on the Parks and Recreation Commission have given him the deepest familiarity on local issues of any of the candidates. With planning and zoning always a large part of the council's work, Lauing will be a critical resource and leader in addressing all the key land use and transportation issues facing the community. He has repeatedly demonstrated on the planning commission his ability to calmly, unemotionally and patiently stay focused on the task at hand and design a fair outcome, even when dealing with a divided community, such as he did with the Castilleja project. He co-chairs the Housing Element Working Group, a citizens' group that created a plan for meeting the state mandate to plan for 6,086 new housing units by 2031. As an executive recruiter and former CEO of three software companies, Lauing will bring valuable corporate leadership and HR experience as the council undertakes to improve city staff performance and build more accountability into the council-manager relationship. Our choice for the third council seat came down to Lisa Forssell and Julie Lythcott-Haims. Forssell is a Stanford University-educated computer scientist turned creative and technical director at Pixar Animation Studios. She is now on the design team at Apple. She has served on Palo Alto's Utilities Advisory Commission for the last six years and has become passionate about sustainability, renewable energy projects and the ultimate conversion from natural gas to an all-electric utility system. If elected to the council, her utility commission experience and knowledge would immediately make her the leader on city policies on sustainability and climate change. Lythcott-Haims has lived or worked in Palo Alto for almost 30 years, first as an attorney, then as a Stanford administrator and dean of freshmen. In addition to degrees from Stanford and Harvard University, she earned an MFA in writing and has authored three nonfiction books since 2015. She has served on many local nonprofit boards and advisory groups, including the Foundation for a College Education, YWCA of the Mid-Peninsula, Palo Alto Community Fund, Partners in Education and the Community Working Group. She is a nationally recognized speaker and, by her own description, a "pretty agressive liberal Democrat." She is an unabashed advocate for racial justice and equity and takes every opportunity to prod others into honest discussions about race, discrimination and how to create a more just society. Passionate advocates like Lythcott-Haims, whose interests in equity and human relations reach well beyond her hometown, rarely offer themselves up as candidates for local office. When they do, we think they should be supported. Palo Altans have the chance to elect a second woman of color to the city council who has repeatedly shown her dedication to this community and to improving the lives of struggling residents, whether young people in need of mental health services or people of color experiencing discrimination in housing, policing or employment. She is uniquely suited to educate her council colleagues, staff and the public about the implicit bias that courses through city institutions and practices and propose ways to correct it. We hope Forssell, if unsuccessful, returns in two years to run again. She'll make an even better candidate after two more years of service on the Utilities Advisory Commission. But we don't think voters should pass up the opportunity to elect Lythcott-Haims while she is motivated to serve Palo Alto. The remaining three candidates are Planning Commissioner Doria Summa, Realtor Alex Comsa and software engineer Brian Hamachek. Summa has been a Palo Alto resident for more than 35 years and a neighborhood leader and has served on the Planning and Transportation Commission for the last five years. She is a fierce defender of neighborhood interests and as a result is frequently the sole dissenter on projects before the commission. We admire her advocacy but don't believe she will be as effective at building consensus on the council as her colleague, Ed Lauing. Alex Comsa's creative vision for Palo Alto is for large, higher density housing projects at city-owned locations such as the Palo Alto Airport and city parking lots and on Stanford land, including at Stanford Shopping Center. He points out that the city has no one with real estate expertise on either the council or city staff and is therefore ill-equipped to negotiate with developers over development project proposals. We agree but don't believe the council is the best place for such expertise. As a born and raised Palo Altan, software engineer Brian Hamachek has focused his campaign on preserving the character of the city. He was inspired to run because he is a neighbor of Castilleja School who felt "bullied" and ignored by the school during its effort to gain city approval of its redevelopment plan. He believes developers have too much power in the city. He applied unsuccessfully three times to serve on the Planning and Transportation Commission, most recently in 2016. We recommend voters support Vicki Veenker, Ed Lauing and Julie Lythcott-Haims for Palo Alto City Council.
Two years ago, with the city largely shut down during the frightening pre-vaccine days of the pandemic and most city residents sticking close to home, the 2020 Palo Alto City Council election attracted the most diverse group of 10 candidates in history, including two incumbents, for four available seats.
The campaign focused on the city's COVID-19 response, racial justice, police reform, housing affordability and whether the City Council was exercising adequate oversight of City Manager Ed Shikada and his staff. (Read our 2020 endorsement editorial for more analysis of the candidates and issues back then.)
This year, it's a smaller field of seven candidates but with no incumbents. Three are currently serving on city commissions (Lauing, Summa and Forssell), one (Veenker) previously ran unsuccessfully for state Assembly, and three have no prior electoral or government experience (Lythcott-Haims, Comsa and Hamachek.)
This is only the third time in Palo Alto history (the last being in 2007) when no incumbent was on the ballot, in part because of the larger size of previous councils. With the current smaller, seven-member council, only three seats are up for election this year. Councilmembers Tom Dubois and Eric Filseth are termed out after serving for eight years and Alison Cormack chose not to seek reelection to a second term.
The last four years have seen a calming of political divisions on the council and, we believe, in the community. With strong commercial development caps and other restrictions now in place, and with a growing consensus that the city's biggest challenge is how and where , not whether , to create more affordable housing, the current council has seen little of the bickering and political jockeying so common in years past. With the abundance of empty office space and the likelihood that remote working will continue for the foreseeable future, combined with the pressures and requirements the state has placed on the city to get more housing built, the overly simplistic growth/no growth debate has subsided. And there is widespread agreement that new housing growth must not be offset by a growth in jobs.
Strikingly, the seven candidates offer mostly nuanced differences over the important issues of housing, grade crossings, sustainability and public safety. "Area plans," in which specific areas of the city are studied and zoning changes adopted that allow for increased density, and in some cases, building heights that go beyond the current 50-foot height limit, while also spelling out desired amenities are being promoted by every candidate.
The similarity of views means voters must focus more on the qualities each candidate will bring to the council and who is best suited to crafting the policies residents will find the most compatible with community values and character.
The council's biggest challenge may be to learn to operate at a quicker pace of decision making. No one was happy with the six years it took for a decision on the Castilleja School redevelopment application, and inaction on the future of the Cubberley Community Center and long, drawn-out debate over rail crossings, among other issues, led to public frustration with their government. Too many issues get bogged down for years, causing all but the most patient and committed homeowners to tune out, while virtually excluding renters from the conversation. That must change, as must the inclination of past councils to keep striving for perfect solutions when none exist.
On the bright side, the council has approved multiple housing projects and incentives to attract more, giving hope that faster progress can and will be made to address the housing needs, especially for low and very low income residents who are valued service workers in our community.
With some major exceptions and misjudgments, such as City Manager Ed Shikada's improper use of a COVID-19 emergency powers resolution to declare a citywide curfew and his police chief's unilateral decision to begin encrypting all radio communications, the staff and council did a commendable job of navigating through the darkest days of the pandemic. Turnover, staff shortages, budget cuts and remote working has taken its toll, however, and among the council and staff priorities must be to stabilize the city workforce.
With the pandemic response largely behind us, we're also hoping to see the three new members of the council join the efforts being made by Mayor Pat Burt, Vice Mayor Lydia Kou and Councilmember Greer Stone to increase transparency and the council's oversight of the city manager.
As our recommendations show, our interest is in selecting candidates for their varied talents, perspectives, diversity and ability to communicate effectively. While the community discussion around housing has evolved, other major issues loom: climate-action programs that require supersizing the capacity of the city's electrical grid, the ambitious Fiber to the Premises plan to provide high-speed internet access across the city, and the need to get out in front of the growing infrastructure pains that will come with the addition of thousands of new residences. The seven council members must be able to work together quickly and seamlessly to turn these and other big city visions into effective implementation that anticipates and prevents unintended consequences.
Behind our picks: collaboration skills, experience and inclusion
Our top two choices are Vicki Veenker and Ed Lauing. Veenker is a former patent litigation attorney turned professional mediator who has brought opposing sides together on issues as complex as health care and trade policy, while working at the local level to support the underserved. She was narrowly defeated by Marc Berman in the 2016 state Assembly race, after which she founded Sibling Cities USA, a nonprofit that aims to pair up similarly sized cities in different parts of the country to share best practices and perspectives on issues in common. A 30-year resident of Palo Alto, she served for 20 years on the board of the Law Foundation of Silicon Valley, which represented residents of the Buena Vista mobile home park. Veenker believes her mediation and policy expertise will help the city to get "unstuck and move forward" on incentives for more affordable housing development, a decision on rail crossings and the future of Cubberley as a south Palo Alto community center. Her collaboration and mediation skills and focus on outcomes will add immensely to the collective skill set of the current council.
In 2020 Ed Lauing narrowly missed being elected to the council, finishing a close fifth behind incumbent Greg Tanaka. His 15 years of service on the Planning and Transportation Commission (currently as chair) and on the Parks and Recreation Commission have given him the deepest familiarity on local issues of any of the candidates. With planning and zoning always a large part of the council's work, Lauing will be a critical resource and leader in addressing all the key land use and transportation issues facing the community. He has repeatedly demonstrated on the planning commission his ability to calmly, unemotionally and patiently stay focused on the task at hand and design a fair outcome, even when dealing with a divided community, such as he did with the Castilleja project.
He co-chairs the Housing Element Working Group, a citizens' group that created a plan for meeting the state mandate to plan for 6,086 new housing units by 2031. As an executive recruiter and former CEO of three software companies, Lauing will bring valuable corporate leadership and HR experience as the council undertakes to improve city staff performance and build more accountability into the council-manager relationship.
Our choice for the third council seat came down to Lisa Forssell and Julie Lythcott-Haims. Forssell is a Stanford University-educated computer scientist turned creative and technical director at Pixar Animation Studios. She is now on the design team at Apple. She has served on Palo Alto's Utilities Advisory Commission for the last six years and has become passionate about sustainability, renewable energy projects and the ultimate conversion from natural gas to an all-electric utility system. If elected to the council, her utility commission experience and knowledge would immediately make her the leader on city policies on sustainability and climate change.
Lythcott-Haims has lived or worked in Palo Alto for almost 30 years, first as an attorney, then as a Stanford administrator and dean of freshmen. In addition to degrees from Stanford and Harvard University, she earned an MFA in writing and has authored three nonfiction books since 2015. She has served on many local nonprofit boards and advisory groups, including the Foundation for a College Education, YWCA of the Mid-Peninsula, Palo Alto Community Fund, Partners in Education and the Community Working Group. She is a nationally recognized speaker and, by her own description, a "pretty agressive liberal Democrat." She is an unabashed advocate for racial justice and equity and takes every opportunity to prod others into honest discussions about race, discrimination and how to create a more just society.
Passionate advocates like Lythcott-Haims, whose interests in equity and human relations reach well beyond her hometown, rarely offer themselves up as candidates for local office. When they do, we think they should be supported. Palo Altans have the chance to elect a second woman of color to the city council who has repeatedly shown her dedication to this community and to improving the lives of struggling residents, whether young people in need of mental health services or people of color experiencing discrimination in housing, policing or employment. She is uniquely suited to educate her council colleagues, staff and the public about the implicit bias that courses through city institutions and practices and propose ways to correct it.
We hope Forssell, if unsuccessful, returns in two years to run again. She'll make an even better candidate after two more years of service on the Utilities Advisory Commission. But we don't think voters should pass up the opportunity to elect Lythcott-Haims while she is motivated to serve Palo Alto.
The remaining three candidates are Planning Commissioner Doria Summa, Realtor Alex Comsa and software engineer Brian Hamachek. Summa has been a Palo Alto resident for more than 35 years and a neighborhood leader and has served on the Planning and Transportation Commission for the last five years. She is a fierce defender of neighborhood interests and as a result is frequently the sole dissenter on projects before the commission. We admire her advocacy but don't believe she will be as effective at building consensus on the council as her colleague, Ed Lauing.
Alex Comsa's creative vision for Palo Alto is for large, higher density housing projects at city-owned locations such as the Palo Alto Airport and city parking lots and on Stanford land, including at Stanford Shopping Center. He points out that the city has no one with real estate expertise on either the council or city staff and is therefore ill-equipped to negotiate with developers over development project proposals. We agree but don't believe the council is the best place for such expertise.
As a born and raised Palo Altan, software engineer Brian Hamachek has focused his campaign on preserving the character of the city. He was inspired to run because he is a neighbor of Castilleja School who felt "bullied" and ignored by the school during its effort to gain city approval of its redevelopment plan. He believes developers have too much power in the city. He applied unsuccessfully three times to serve on the Planning and Transportation Commission, most recently in 2016.
We recommend voters support Vicki Veenker, Ed Lauing and Julie Lythcott-Haims for Palo Alto City Council.
The following comment was originally posted by PaloAltoVoter on Oct. 7: Doria Summa’s dedication and hard work for our community compared to someone whos been uninvolved locally and says they want density in the middle of our neighborhoods and that they love SB9 (which Julie has said) makes my choice clear. I’m voting for Summa, Lauing and Veenker.
The following comment was originally posted by resident3 on Oct. 7: This Editorial is pretty tone deaf making an assumption that everything is about housing but given that it’s their first opinion for as long as I can remember, maybe they are out of practice. The “collaborator” issue or shortening decision making time or meetings (ie reducing Council size from 9 to 7) has never helped because minds are usually made up - what wastes our time is when they are learning on the job. Picking an author and an attorney without any relevant experience (on housing for that matter) is irresponsible at this juncture when the City has made many pre-Covid miscalculations. I found the Diana Diamond analysis much more “real” with a vote for Summa, Lauing and Venkeer and while 3 will eventually get elected, I hope people will vote only for those they really know.
I too find Diana Diamond's endorsements much more credible Several of us we betting last night on PAO's likely picks in view of their past endorsements and we called it. Unfortunately/ Congratulations on endorsing Julie who has the most donations from outside Palo Alto. Also congrats for endorsing two of the "Three Great Candidates" whose daily saturation ads are paid for a "Committee to Support" claiming to have "no ties to a candidate or a campaign organization" without investigating who's paying big bucks for all those 1/2 page ads. Great that PAO supports candidates backed by unknown groups whose interests the candidates will serve instead of Palo Altans but unfortunately typical of the history of backing slates like "The Kniss Kids" favoring commercial developers over residents so we're over-run with commuters 4:1 and now are paying the price in jobs-based housing mandates. Remind me again why PA's business-based economy has been slower to recover than surrounding comnunities Here's a link to Diamond's endorsement which is well worth reading along with the comments Web Link
I support Forssell and Veenker, because I believe they know how to build coalitions and get things done. Lauing and Summa are supported by NIMBY groups like "Palo Altans for Sensible Zoning", enough said. Note that you do not have to vote 3 candidates even though you are allowed to, not voting for your 3rd choice means better chances for your 1st and 2nd choices to win.
Endorsing Julie LH is to throw a sop to the 'equity' etc movement.
@Anon123456m, do you mean deep-pocketed NIMBY's like Mark Andreesen and his wife who fund the YIMBY's et al but who were recently caught protesting Atherton City Council's proposal to build multi-family housing in their fair city near their $16.600,000 Atherton manse? The hypocrisy of their YES In YOUR BACK YARD but Never Near Mine has been in the national business press for weeks, showing just how meaningless labels like YIMBY and NIMBY are. Here's one of the many articles Web Link entitled "Billionaire Marc ‘It's Time to Build' Andreesen Is a NIMBY" Now can we get back discussing real issues and drop the mindless labels even though tossing them around is so much easier?
I am voting for Doria Summa who actually has a lot of experience with City issues and who is one of the best prepared and knowledgeable people around. I take her over someone who has never before been involved with Palo Alto governance and is very naive about the issues any day. We have had enough of people who have no track record beforehand, and end up being disasters. To dismiss Doria as simply a "residentialist" is inaccurate and misleading. She does listen to residents -- which I frankly find refreshing and needed. She approves good housing projects and objects to those that aren't. In other words, she actually thinks about all aspects of various proposals and understands that "build, build, build" won't automatically provide affordable housing (just see Alto Locale) and won't necessarily build the diverse community we desire. I'm voting for Summa.
The DP had a great profile of Doria today noting she supports affordable housing, not the market rate housing the developers and lobbyists like Steve Levy is pushing in his blog here. Also key is that she wants housing built on Stanford land instead of having them keep removing housing from the community which only creates more housing shortages, competition for current housing stock AND pushes up prices. Both no brainers and not policies that can objectively be called NIMBY.
I saw today's Palo Alto Daily Post profile of Summa which was informative and unlike the smorgasbord of political repetitions made by others. They also announce a candidate forum on Thursday 13 at Mitchell Park which will have questions brought up by the candidates themselves for other candidates, if I saw that correctly. Those who are not looking to build a Noah's ark by taking political bets on people without relevant experience may want to tune in.
Anyone know if that forum will be streamed? Thanks in advance.
@online name, "Anyone know if that forum will be streamed?" The announcement had a MidPen Media logo, so it will be streamed, I am not 100% sure but, it's at 7 pm.
Thanks, Resident3. I saw the MidPen Media logo but wasn't sure about the streaming.
If experience matter and proven work -- leave Lauing and Suma where they are on the PTC and HEWG. Why move up the ladder when they are performing such great work at the commissions and working groups now? Finish the jobs they are committed doing from start to finish. After all we are not out of the woods with the un-homed and equitable, QUALITY planned low-income housing. Or maybe they want to ensure by being on the CC next term, these homes are designated and built in a flood zone and far away from their R1zones as possible and from transit etc. Vote for the decisions that matter for the sake of our future's future: Vote Lythcott-Haims, Forrsell and Veenker !
"The DP had a great profile of Doria today noting she supports affordable housing, not the market rate housing the developers and lobbyists like Steve Levy is pushing in his blog here. Also key is that she wants ****housing built on Stanford land*** instead of having them keep removing housing from the community which only creates more housing shortages, competition for current housing stock AND pushes up prices." "Or maybe they want to ensure by being on the CC next term, these homes are designated and built in a flood zone" Hah?! When did Stanford and Stanford Research Park and Stanford Shopping Center become flood zones?? Another laughable canard. Speaking of Stanford, both Veenker and Lythcott-Haims were affiliated with Stanford. Will/ can they be objective on Stanford issues? Will they be recusing themselves?
I am supporting Mr. Lauing whose work on the Planning & Transportation Commission and Parks & Recreation Commission is excellent preparation for City Council. I have collaborated successfully with him on policies that support integrating bike/walking routes connecting neighborhoods and schools to after-school destinations in our parks, like playing fields, libraries, and community centers, for instance. I found him to be thoughtful and forward thinking, and fiscally conservative--a combination I appreciate. Ms. Veenker has the right temperament for Council. She doesn't get ruffled easily. She knows how to bring parties with different views together to solve problems. She has experience working effectively with government. That's important. I will vote for her. Ms. Lythcott-Haims is a practiced public speaker and writer, but she has not demonstrated deep knowledge of land use and transportation, utilities, community services or the city budget-- the primary work of City Council. She needs to get her feet wet in city government before she will be ready for this role. Ms. Forsell's work on the Utilities Advisory Commission has been good, but I'm not seeing deep knowledge or even serious interest from her on land use and transportation beyond building housing. BALANCE is key in land use and transportation planning. We need Council Members who understand comprehensive land use and transportation planning and don't just pay lip service to area planning. Ms. Summa has a strong grasp and surprisingly good memory for land use and transportation policies, code, regulatory constraints, budget. That knowledge would serve her well on Council. I can't vote for Comsa, Hamachek. Their values don't align with mine, and they have no experience in government. Serve on a commission or committee. Learn the ropes.
@onlinename both Suma and Lauing live in the center protected R1Zones are they going to objective about infill, cluster housing of mixed incomes at all economic tiers? Their affiliation w their R1 neighbors fiercely protective of their SFH ownerships that they think extends beyond property lines. Hmmm. Will they recuse themselves when it comes to more or less R1Zone protections?
@consider your options, "I can't vote for Comsa, Hamachek. Their values don't align with mine.." The Editorial makes the same case when it proposes voting for "who is best suited to crafting the policies residents will find the most compatible with community values and character." This is where outside money matters a lot. The San Jose Mercury News made the same recommendation as the Weekly and I saw it before the Weekly's. My reaction was - well sure, the Mercury News picks people who they like and expect can learn on the job and why would they care about outside money and interests (who benefit from having less-than-qualified or unqualified on our Council). I expected better from the Weekly and though not holding my breath I hope that voters will follow the money because that is the biggest indicator of community "values and character."
Best of luck and success to all the candidates. It takes certain skills to sit on the CC, and the most important skill... the ability to be an effective leader. Otherwise, you're ineffectual, and it's been going on for years. Step up to the plate, be decisive, take action and get the job DONE.
Remind me again why smart, capable people donate their time to serve on city commissions. Of the seven candidates, ONLY 3 have dedicated YEARS of service to Palo Alto. Those three are Lauing, Summa, and Forssell. I am disappointed that this endorsement overlooks that and instead endorses two candidates who do not have a history of PA involvement and will be learning on the job. Worse, the candidates they overlooked have years of exactly the knowledge that is going to be needed by CC members over the next several years.
Echoing Annette. I'm not only disappointed but also amazed at the objection to Summa "She is a fierce defender of neighborhood interests and as a result is frequently the sole dissenter on projects before the commission. We admire her advocacy but don't believe she will be as effective at building consensus on the council as her colleague, Ed Lauing." Not "effective at building consensus" after all her effective work on the PTC? She often was the "sole dissenter" BECAUSE she'd done her homework and had her facts in hand to defend us, the residents re "neighborhood interests " which you make sound like a bad thing? Would you prefer she defend developer and outside interests? Re consensus-building skills, you endorsed Mayor Fine who had none. Council meetings and personal attacks got so out of control PAW felt compelled to publish several editorials denouncing the intolerable and calling for good manners, his conduct as inappropriate and intolerant. Who can forget his famous exit speech declining to run again because "There's no one here I want to work with or enjoyed working with." Pretty amazing PAO endorsed Adrian Fine but not Doria, a well-mannered lady who respects and listens to others, who does her homework and isn't known for her public temper tantrums. Sort of a double standard in your endorsements
@online name “Re consensus-building skills, you endorsed Mayor Fine who had none. Council meetings and personal attacks got so out of control PAW felt compelled to publish several editorials denouncing the intolerable and calling for good manners, his conduct as inappropriate and intolerant. “ The Weekly’s endorsement, author of How to Raise an Adult Lythcott Haims came on the Palo Alto Council candidacy scene with an F bomb, so I suppose that’s not a double standard. But given the Weekly’s apparent fear of a “fierce” neighborhood advocate, the standard for collaboration looks arbitrary.
@jennifer. You said it! Good effective, decisive, honest, efficient, leaders. Fortunately we have three amazing candidate that check every box on the above: Lythcott-Haims, Veenker and Forrsell. over 50% of our population are women, near 50% residents are renters -- How about skilled, strong, transparent CC at the dias. 50/50 representative of our PA residents: renters and women. I so do not feel secure when those on current City commissions and boards steer conversations like: Not everyone can live here. Really? Why not? Isn't this our America too? We can live anywhere we desire with good intentions, where the jobs are, the transit, the independent utility, better quality of life. Vote Veenker, Forrsell, Hythcott-Haims. These dames are the "start-up" of innovative, trailblazing, change for the better for all.
@Native to the Bay, "You said it! Good effective, decisive, honest, efficient, leaders." Leadership can be defined by many things but trust isn't a skill. A person either has earned trust or not. And to be effective, the most powerful trait you can bring is trust. The Weekly always calls for collaboration yet their endorsements have resulted in some of the most acrimonious combos on the dais. Much talk about community values and character but we always end up with people who fight and attack residents who have been the most vocal about paying attention to people not just square footage. Then there's the fail in assuming that everyone in Palo Alto is rich. The rich throwing money at people who have no relevant experience likely aren't the Winter Wellenbachs who were present in Council chambers for Buena Vista, or the President Hotel and speaking for what regular people think about. Leadership is also about respect, also earned and nothing tests that more than time. If you want to get things done, you don't experiment with people which have not been tested for the very decisions you need to make and move forward.
@Native to the Bay. I also agree w/Jennifer that it takes certain skills to be on CC and on the importance of having the ability to get things done. Palo Alto tends to discuss issues "forever" and that so often leads to increased expenses and possibly lost opportunities. The grade separation issue is a good example. I think electing candidates with solid knowledge about the PA Municipal Code is critical this time around b/c housing is going to be on the Council agenda over and over and over. For me, that means voting for Summa and Lauing. Following that logic, the other candidate that would bring helpful knowledge and experience to the Council is Forssell rather than Veenker or Lythcott-Haims, regardless of their capabilities. As for the "not everyone can live here" comment, I take that as a statement of an unfortunate fact, not a position of exclusion. Past Councils supported a level of commercial development that resulted in an enormous jobs:housing imbalance. I doubt that can ever be remedied, but I hope it can be improved. What housing is available here is expensive; getting in is prohibitive for many (arguably most) and down-sizing can be similarly prohibitive for seniors, which limits the sort of turnover that was more common in the past. But even with the many challenges, Palo Alto will be adding housing; the big questions will be: what type, where, and for whom. Doria Summa is a strong advocate for affordable housing. You also mention transit. When I hear that I always think IF ONLY. The transit-oriented district idea is predicated on the existence of a robust transit system. Palo Alto does not have that, though it should. Hopefully the shuttle system will return someday; that would be a step in the right direction that would make commuting by train more feasible for those who need to get across town after arriving here and for those who live here but need to get across town for work or myriad other reasons.
So PA Weekly believes we should not vote for Doria because she listens to resident concerns unlike Julie who wants to heavily upzone single family neighborhoods and build high density buildings with no parking onsite (SB10) in the middle of them. I’ll take Doria and Ed who have served and care about the existing community and will address affordable housing in a more thoughtful way.
Doria Summa seems like a smart cookie and I'm glad that the commenters here are trying to speak her case. But I wish that you would not denigrate other council hopefuls while doing that.
NativetotheBay needs to fact check PA zoning. Summa does not live in a R1 district zone. She lives in RMD (NP). She is professional and does her homework. She has put in years of service to Palo Alto residents and is the most qualifief of candidates running for council.
@resident3 . Well if it were MLK running for City Council I would certainly trust his leadership from the skill in which he changed an African American's life for the better during a time when it was so bad and certainly vote for him. Though I don't think he ever served on a planning or a housing element working group. And for his leadership that many in the US Presidency trusted for he proved that through a educated, strong faith based, leadership he was able to reach a level of trust with many across many platforms and multiple levels of Government. In fact, maybe the few in civil service who did not "trust" him was the FBI. My point is not a semantic one, yet candidates are worthy beyond commissions, committees and boards. These commitments are good for the resume for sure, yet it does not follow it makes someone "qualified" for any job especially one that requires, trust and leadership.
@Native to the Bay, "And for his leadership that many in the US Presidency trusted for he proved that through a educated, strong faith based, leadership he was able to reach a level of trust with many across many platforms and multiple levels of Government." That is a fact, MLK reached a level of trust with many and he was also highly qualified on all the issues that he worked on, on the many platforms that he gained trust on. It has to be the hardest thing to do, to run, and I wish everyone well but it is a competition, and I think it's fair to point out that relevant qualifications will make Council more effective to achieve greater progress than having two people learning on the job.
"Palo Altans have the chance to elect a second woman of color to the city council . . ." I believe this is inaccurate. Hillary Freeman and LaDoris Cordell, also women of color, served on the Palo Alto City Council, each for one term. There's an interesting news article dated July 21, 2005 in which Freeman commented on why she was not seeking a second term. “Explaining her decision, Freeman said the present structure of city governance . . . leaves council members with only two options: rubber stamping staff recommendations or opposing the majority. I’ve been rowing against the current . . . what we really need is to change the riverbed so that the current flows differently.” Further, she said “the solution is to have a directly elected mayor who has more power over the city manager.” Things have not improved during the intervening 17 years. Now we have the opportunity to elect a candidate who will challenge the status quo, who will go out on a limb, who will row against the current, and who knows well the city’s municipal code and land use history. That candidate is Doria Summa and we would be remiss if we didn’t elect her.
Don't miss out on the discussion! Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.
In order to encourage respectful and thoughtful discussion, commenting on stories is available to those who are registered users. If you are already a registered user and the commenting form is not below, you need to log in. If you are not registered, you can do so here.
Please make sure your comments are truthful, on-topic and do not disrespect another poster. Don't be snarky or belittling. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.
See our announcement about requiring registration for commenting.
Home News TownSquare Blogs A&E Community Calendar Sports Home & Real Estate Visitor Info
Send News Tips Subscribe Print Edition/Archives Express / Weekend Express Promotions Special Pubs Obituaries Circulation & Delivery
About Us Contact Us Advertising Info Terms of Use Privacy Policy Mountain View Voice The Almanac TheSixFifty.com Redwood City Pulse Redwood City Pulse
© 2022 Palo Alto Online All rights reserved. Embarcadero Media PR MediaRelease Sponsored content Mobile site
© 2022 Palo Alto Online. All rights reserved.