Excellent article, Diana.

Too many lofty ideas, and no walk the talk!

I suggest that Palo Alto select one goal at the time, bring that goal to fruition, and keep Palo Alto's citizens informed of the progress.

"It's a bunch of crock, to put it bluntly."

Excellent and timely. So tired of their lack of concrete achievements and failure to address / fix real problems while spouting nonsense about "21st century" this and "leading edge" that and "car-light" fairy tales.

I said my bit elsewhere. Mobility means nothing, a skateboard and roller blades are mobile, so are mobility scooters. This means nothing about traffic, parking, public transport or shuttles. It could mean more Ross Roads, Arastradero/Charleston and rental bikes. It does not mean coordinating with Mountain View or Menlo Park, signage or easier payment for parking, satellite parking lots or getting kids to schools or workers from points east or west.

Housing of any description means nothing unless the City is going into the rental or construction business.

As for the others, been there, done that, no change.

My favorite was "Civic Engagement". I don't think anyone ever knew what that was, and one year, it was one council's Top Priority.

Best I could guess was that staff would come up with an idea, everyone would be invited to a few gatherings to give feedback, then residents & average businesses would pay for it, exempting all big businesses from spending $$.

No one could ever define Civic Engagement, as far as I know. But it sounded good.

I remember "civic engagement" also -- and I asked what it meant. Best I could come up with is that a resident was concerned that not enough people were attending city council meetings and they were not taking a big interest in what the council was debating every Monday (even if it was only sexy topics like easements and property lines or zoning changes in the Baylands), so he thought we needed to get more people interested. The reality was that people came to council when something interested them -- like undergrounding or height limits in town.

But even then, there were no clues as to what to do, and no measurements as to whether anything got done or if civic engagement improved.

"I remember former City Manager Frank Benest telling the Palo Alto City Council after priorities were selected that year, that his staff would focus on these areas, maybe to the exclusion of some other needs, but it these are the city's priorities he would reassign staff to make sure city attention was directed on the three or four most important issues facing the staff and council."

That happened because Benest would dictate to the councilmembers--in advance and out of sight--what the city priorities would be. Then he'd graciously let them pretend they set them and of course he agreed to accomplish them. Joy and good feelings everywhere.

Shikada has streamlined the process. He coaches the council to set high-sounding goals whose attainment is impossible to measure, and Presto! Staff achieves the city's priorities effortlessly. Kudos all around at the end of the year.

"The reality was that people came to council when something interested them -"

Like many other council watchers, unless I want to speak or support someone else who is speaking during the public comment time, I often watch all or of the council meeting at home in the comfort of my armchair.

Until fairly recently Councilmember Kniss would sometimes make a point of asking people in the chamber to put their hands up if the agenda topic was of interest, it seems to make a point that few residents were interested in the outcome, and then use lack of attendance to justify her comments and vote that might benefit a few at the expense of many.

Does anyone have a chart of prior priorities and what was achieved with them year over year? No

I would rather have 3 big titles which obviously will have specific projects for each, and then have a way to look to the left of a sheet of paper (specific project) then to the right (results). If anything this means the city may be willing to have more transparency.

They should ask the individual council members what their priorities are. Lydia Kou would say her priority is to vote no on any and every housing or development matter.

Last night at Stanford Theatre, Kurosawa's 1952 film "Ikiru" keenly illustrated city government bureaucracy. Appropriate snickering in the sizable audience, obviously familiar with local politics.

Have to agree with the opinions expressed.
Climate Change - what is that suppose to mean? We do not have the budget or outstanding issues to affect that topic. Think that is a signal to vote for a bond on that topic. Not going to happen. Join in to prevent the Oakland port being a shipping point for Coal going to China from Utah.

Do not let oil trains travel through residential areas on their way to Central CA for shipment to where?

How about infrastructure? Our local cities are now on the hook for aging sewer systems which are allowing raw matter into the bay. It is measurable.

Political Hype is being used to push bond issues and hopefully grab some of that money for the city. To do what? Note to city - the British Commonwealth and the European Union control their member states and their funding. We are not an ATM card for what they are up to. And we are not an ATM card for China and India and their coal burning energy systems. But it is so much fun to go to meetings and swap stories.

Re: "It's a bunch of crock", I'd like to suggest there's a big difference between insignificant virtue signaling (a straw?) and major virtue signaling (rooftop solar panels?). No one can contribute more than they are able. However, if whatever we do helps shift cultural norms - via a social contagion effect - than we're accomplishing more than the actual amount of pollution we reduce. Much of this depends on visibility, i.e., solar panels.

As to why: In George Marshall's book, carbon detox (2007, Gaia/Octopus) he writes about a speculative "emissions-death ratio" (pg. 25) as suggested by Craig Simmons of the UK, "one person could die, be made homeless...or face starvation for every 102 tonnes of carbon dioxide we add to the air."
 
That's in addition to the millions of deaths per year due to "local" air pollution.

If there are positive ripple effects from your, your neighbor's, or the city council's, behavior - it's no crock.