News

'Meet this moment': Growing coalition calls for Palo Alto to expand access to Foothills Park

City Council urged to abolish decadesold law restricting access to residents

Dozens of residents, including former mayors and religious leaders, submitted a petition to the City Council on June 7, urging the council to repeal a law that restricts non-residents from visiting Foothills Park. Weekly file photo by Veronica Weber.

Calling it an "outdated" policy that sends a terrible message, dozens of Palo Alto residents and community leaders are petitioning the City Council to immediately abolish a law that keeps residents who live in other cities from visiting Foothills Park.

More than 90 supporters submitted a letter to the City Council on Sunday, calling for the city to end the long-standing policy. The list of co-signers includes U.S. Rep. Anna Eshoo, state Assemblyman Marc Berman and the majorities of the city's Parks and Recreation Commission and Human Relations Commission. It also includes former City Councilwoman and retired Judge LaDoris Cordell, a longtime proponent of opening up access to Foothills Park, and the Rev. Kaloma Smith, pastor at University AME Zion Church and chairman of the Human Relations Commission.

Smith is joined on the petition by Rabbi David Booth and Rabbi Sarah Graff, both of Congregation Kol Emeth, Rabbi Jonathan Prosnit of Congregation Beth Am and the Rev. Terry Gleeson, rector at All Saints Episcopal Church.

All of them signed a June 7 letter that calls for the city to repeal a law that was enacted shortly after the city purchased Foothills Park from the family of Russell V. Lee in 1959. Because other neighboring cities didn't want to chip in for the purchase, the City Council agreed at the time to ban non-residents from visiting the park unless they were accompanied by a resident.

The policy has been subject to significant debate in recent decades, though every effort to abolish it has ultimately floundered. Opponents of expanding access have argued that letting more people into the park would effectively tarnish the pristine nature of the preserve located in the hills above Palo Alto off Page Mill Road.

Help sustain the local news you depend on.

Your contribution matters. Become a member today.

Join

Last year, the push gained some momentum when the Parks and Recreation Commission voted to launch a pilot program that would eliminate the ban on non-residents while still limiting the total number of visitors. Despite the commission's vote last November to move ahead with the program, the council has not taken up the issue and the 1,400-acre preserve remains the exclusive domain of local residents.

Ryan McCauley, a member of the Parks and Recreation Commission who helped craft the pilot program, said the recent wave of protests demanding justice and racial equality underscore the need for the city to lift the ban.

"For me personally, it's certainly is a time when we're all called on to reflect on the ways that we can do better, particularly when our own community has fallen short of the mark in some regards," McCauley told this news organization. "And this is just one small piece of the way we need to be a more inviting community, particularly for people with diverse backgrounds and diverse economic situations."

Ryan McCauley, a member of Palo Alto's Parks and Recreation Commission, talks with Weekly staff about the proposal to open up the city's pristine and exclusive Foothills Park to non-residents in this Nov. 15, 2019 episode of "Behind the Headlines."

The letter calls for the city to "meet this moment" and repeal the ordinance that makes visits to Foothills Park a misdemeanor for non-residents. It also asks the council to direct the Parks and Recreation Commission to craft "a 21st Century policy that demonstrates our City's commitment to equality, openness and resource protection."

"This policy sends a terrible message to our neighboring communities — particularly those which do not enjoy the same sociologic advantages that Palo Alto does — and leaves a bad taste in the months of thousands of would-be visitors who are prohibited by uniformed City staff from entering a public park," the letter states.

Stay informed

Get daily headlines sent straight to your inbox in our Express newsletter.

Stay informed

Get daily headlines sent straight to your inbox in our Express newsletter.

The letter was submitted one day after thousands of people took to Palo Alto streets for a rally to support social justice and racial equality in the aftermath of the May 25 killing of George Floyd by Minneapolis police. The peaceful demonstration was one of hundreds of protests that have unfolded across the nation over the past two weeks, prompting calls for police reform and accountability.

The Palo Alto City Council plans to approve Monday night a resolution pledging to review police practices and "implement measure that reflect no tolerance for police violence, prejudice, discrimination and harm."

The letter states that the Foothills Park ordinance "is only a small piece of the much larger policy choices that we need to make at this time, but it is a long-simmering issue that we can and should address now."

The call to discard the policy is far from new. Former City Councilman Cory Wolbach has characterized to the ban on non-visitors as an example of "institutional racism." Former Mayor Leland Levy and Cordell have been urging for the policy's abolition for years. In September, Cordell told the Parks and Recreation that it's time to "bring the park into the 21st century."

"Enough of this elitism and the exclusionism," Cordell told the commission at the Sept. 23 meeting.

Most Viewed Stories

Most Viewed Stories

In addition to Levy, the list of former mayors who co-signed the letter includes Pat Burt, Gail Woolley, Dena Mossar, Betsy Bechtel, Vic Ojakian, Peter Drekmeier and Nancy Shepherd. The letter also has picked up the endorsement of the NAACP of San Jose/Silicon Valley, McCauley said.

McCauley noted that the situation has changed since November, when the commission approved the pilot program by a 6-1 vote, with Commissioner Jeff Greenfield dissenting. For example, given the COVID-19 pandemic, it's no longer clear whether it's a good idea to have rangers check the driver's licenses of every visitor to the park. The city should take a "broader look" at the policy, he said.

He also rejected the notion that allowing more people to visit Foothills Park would diminish the park.

"Any sort of idea that there has to be tension between providing access to the outdoor opportunities for all people, regardless of what ZIP code they might live in, and the idea that we might not be able to preserve and protect our environment is I think a false tension," McCauley said. "We can find the right way to balance making sure that Foothills Park remains a very special place and that we share it."

Read the full letter here:

This browser does not support PDFs. Please download the PDF to view it: Download PDF.

This browser does not support PDFs. Please download the PDF to view it:
Download PDF

Craving a new voice in Peninsula dining?

Sign up for the Peninsula Foodist newsletter.

Sign up now
Gennady Sheyner
 
Gennady Sheyner covers the City Hall beat in Palo Alto as well as regional politics, with a special focus on housing and transportation. Before joining the Palo Alto Weekly/PaloAltoOnline.com in 2008, he covered breaking news and local politics for the Waterbury Republican-American, a daily newspaper in Connecticut. Read more >>

Follow on Twitter @mvvoice, Facebook and on Instagram @mvvoice for breaking news, local events, photos, videos and more.

'Meet this moment': Growing coalition calls for Palo Alto to expand access to Foothills Park

City Council urged to abolish decadesold law restricting access to residents

Calling it an "outdated" policy that sends a terrible message, dozens of Palo Alto residents and community leaders are petitioning the City Council to immediately abolish a law that keeps residents who live in other cities from visiting Foothills Park.

More than 90 supporters submitted a letter to the City Council on Sunday, calling for the city to end the long-standing policy. The list of co-signers includes U.S. Rep. Anna Eshoo, state Assemblyman Marc Berman and the majorities of the city's Parks and Recreation Commission and Human Relations Commission. It also includes former City Councilwoman and retired Judge LaDoris Cordell, a longtime proponent of opening up access to Foothills Park, and the Rev. Kaloma Smith, pastor at University AME Zion Church and chairman of the Human Relations Commission.

Smith is joined on the petition by Rabbi David Booth and Rabbi Sarah Graff, both of Congregation Kol Emeth, Rabbi Jonathan Prosnit of Congregation Beth Am and the Rev. Terry Gleeson, rector at All Saints Episcopal Church.

All of them signed a June 7 letter that calls for the city to repeal a law that was enacted shortly after the city purchased Foothills Park from the family of Russell V. Lee in 1959. Because other neighboring cities didn't want to chip in for the purchase, the City Council agreed at the time to ban non-residents from visiting the park unless they were accompanied by a resident.

The policy has been subject to significant debate in recent decades, though every effort to abolish it has ultimately floundered. Opponents of expanding access have argued that letting more people into the park would effectively tarnish the pristine nature of the preserve located in the hills above Palo Alto off Page Mill Road.

Last year, the push gained some momentum when the Parks and Recreation Commission voted to launch a pilot program that would eliminate the ban on non-residents while still limiting the total number of visitors. Despite the commission's vote last November to move ahead with the program, the council has not taken up the issue and the 1,400-acre preserve remains the exclusive domain of local residents.

Ryan McCauley, a member of the Parks and Recreation Commission who helped craft the pilot program, said the recent wave of protests demanding justice and racial equality underscore the need for the city to lift the ban.

"For me personally, it's certainly is a time when we're all called on to reflect on the ways that we can do better, particularly when our own community has fallen short of the mark in some regards," McCauley told this news organization. "And this is just one small piece of the way we need to be a more inviting community, particularly for people with diverse backgrounds and diverse economic situations."

The letter calls for the city to "meet this moment" and repeal the ordinance that makes visits to Foothills Park a misdemeanor for non-residents. It also asks the council to direct the Parks and Recreation Commission to craft "a 21st Century policy that demonstrates our City's commitment to equality, openness and resource protection."

"This policy sends a terrible message to our neighboring communities — particularly those which do not enjoy the same sociologic advantages that Palo Alto does — and leaves a bad taste in the months of thousands of would-be visitors who are prohibited by uniformed City staff from entering a public park," the letter states.

The letter was submitted one day after thousands of people took to Palo Alto streets for a rally to support social justice and racial equality in the aftermath of the May 25 killing of George Floyd by Minneapolis police. The peaceful demonstration was one of hundreds of protests that have unfolded across the nation over the past two weeks, prompting calls for police reform and accountability.

The Palo Alto City Council plans to approve Monday night a resolution pledging to review police practices and "implement measure that reflect no tolerance for police violence, prejudice, discrimination and harm."

The letter states that the Foothills Park ordinance "is only a small piece of the much larger policy choices that we need to make at this time, but it is a long-simmering issue that we can and should address now."

The call to discard the policy is far from new. Former City Councilman Cory Wolbach has characterized to the ban on non-visitors as an example of "institutional racism." Former Mayor Leland Levy and Cordell have been urging for the policy's abolition for years. In September, Cordell told the Parks and Recreation that it's time to "bring the park into the 21st century."

"Enough of this elitism and the exclusionism," Cordell told the commission at the Sept. 23 meeting.

In addition to Levy, the list of former mayors who co-signed the letter includes Pat Burt, Gail Woolley, Dena Mossar, Betsy Bechtel, Vic Ojakian, Peter Drekmeier and Nancy Shepherd. The letter also has picked up the endorsement of the NAACP of San Jose/Silicon Valley, McCauley said.

McCauley noted that the situation has changed since November, when the commission approved the pilot program by a 6-1 vote, with Commissioner Jeff Greenfield dissenting. For example, given the COVID-19 pandemic, it's no longer clear whether it's a good idea to have rangers check the driver's licenses of every visitor to the park. The city should take a "broader look" at the policy, he said.

He also rejected the notion that allowing more people to visit Foothills Park would diminish the park.

"Any sort of idea that there has to be tension between providing access to the outdoor opportunities for all people, regardless of what ZIP code they might live in, and the idea that we might not be able to preserve and protect our environment is I think a false tension," McCauley said. "We can find the right way to balance making sure that Foothills Park remains a very special place and that we share it."

Read the full letter here:

Comments

Shari Emling
Martens-Carmelita
on Jun 10, 2020 at 2:56 pm
Shari Emling, Martens-Carmelita
on Jun 10, 2020 at 2:56 pm

I owned a home in Los Altos Hills for 35 years and thought it was not only odd, but laughable that this park was open exclusively for Palo Alto residents - when the ONLY access to it was on Page Mill Road in Los Altos Hills. Should LAH have prohibited Palo Alto residents all use of Page Mill Road, and thus access to their private park?
What a hideous message this exclusion gives to the rest of the population - and how very shameful and outdated.


Frederick M
Another Mountain View Neighborhood
on Jun 10, 2020 at 3:00 pm
Frederick M, Another Mountain View Neighborhood
on Jun 10, 2020 at 3:00 pm

Elitist Policy. Just terrible! Every other city welcomes non-residents but not Palo Alto. Is that why they call it Shallow Alto! Foothills Park would make a great County Park or a Palo Alto Park for everyone.


Rossta
Waverly Park
on Jun 10, 2020 at 3:31 pm
Rossta, Waverly Park
on Jun 10, 2020 at 3:31 pm

Long overdue. Just imagine if any city tried to create such a restriction now. How would that be received? I live in Mountain View, a city that has put in a great many parks and trails. Palo Altons haven't chipped in money for any of those. What if Shoreline specifically excluded Palo Alto residents? It's ridiculous and I am sure the current city council will recognize that and respond appropriately. My friends in Palo Alto have shared similar sentiments with me for years, suggesting that Palo Alto turn over the property to county parks or Midpen.


Kjell
Castro City
on Jun 10, 2020 at 6:35 pm
Kjell, Castro City
on Jun 10, 2020 at 6:35 pm

I would love to be able to bring scouting troops to learn how to camp and enjoy the great outdoors at Foothills! Palo Alto please do the right thing!


Steven Nelson
Cuesta Park
on Jun 11, 2020 at 11:30 am
Steven Nelson, Cuesta Park
on Jun 11, 2020 at 11:30 am

The above comment about MV's Shoreline Park is extremely on-point. Shoreline is funded from a special property tax diversion district that yearly diverts tens of millions of General Fund tax revenue dollars from the schools, county, and CITY General Funds! Palo Alto residents - using Shoreline Lake for instance, have paid collectively $0 in taxes to support Our Park!
- So, PA City Council: please listen to your own Parks & Rec current majority and the majority of past mayors.


Former PA resident
Another Mountain View Neighborhood
on Jun 11, 2020 at 11:56 am
Former PA resident, Another Mountain View Neighborhood
on Jun 11, 2020 at 11:56 am

Contrast the comments above vs. many of those on the Palo Alto copy of the same article: Web Link

Reluctance to share; dire predictions for consequences of non-Palo-Alto hordes; various old arguments against it. "I haven't seen a single rational argument yet for opening the park further to non-residents." "not impressed by the "growing coalition" of dozens of residents [calling to expand park access]...Sounds like a vocal and annoying minority." "No to opening the park to LAH residents unless the city of LAH agrees to pay 50+ years of use fees, with interest. LAH residents have been sneaking in all along."

This happens on the Palo Alto website each time the subject comes up. Some of the arguments come across (to anyone outside PA and many inside) as strained, selfish rationalizations.

Five current comments there, from people claiming Palo Alto addresses, even complain about experiencing crowding at Rancho San Antonio Preserve (located in Cupertino and Los Altos), which has never excluded visitors from Palo Alto (none of those 5 commenters appears conscious of the irony).

I like Shari Emling's comment on this page, that the Park's road access is through Los Altos Hills, which has never questioned Palo Altans' use of it. (Even those who now gripe that "LAH residents have been sneaking in all along."


MtnViewMomTryingToFindParksWithParking
Another Mountain View Neighborhood
on Jun 11, 2020 at 6:21 pm
MtnViewMomTryingToFindParksWithParking, Another Mountain View Neighborhood
on Jun 11, 2020 at 6:21 pm

I went to Heritage Oaks Park in Los Altos yesterday and it had all the parking blocked off saying the park was closed (though I did then see locals walking and biking to the park and using the grassy area) - is parking blocked off at all Los Altos parks?


Exclusion
Martens-Carmelita
on Jun 11, 2020 at 7:40 pm
Exclusion, Martens-Carmelita
on Jun 11, 2020 at 7:40 pm

[Post removed due to disrespectful comment or offensive language]


Exclusion
Martens-Carmelita
on Jun 12, 2020 at 3:27 pm
Exclusion, Martens-Carmelita
on Jun 12, 2020 at 3:27 pm

I'm sorry, I stated this respectfully and without any offensive language. It is deeply important to point out the hypocrisy of Shari Emling above; she has worked hard to overturn Measure V and to roust our unhoused neighbors in this city. These are facts, stated dispassionately. She has chosen to be a vocal proponent of those policies of exclusion, and then has the audacity to decry our neighbors when they exclude her.


Peter Parker
Rex Manor
on Jun 13, 2020 at 7:58 pm
Peter Parker, Rex Manor
on Jun 13, 2020 at 7:58 pm

FYI Shoreline Park was originally purchased partially with county funds and so there's a requirement that MV not restrict access like Palo Alto does. Sunnyvale charges admission to Baylands Park but MV can't do that without permission from the county.


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

Post a comment

On Wednesday, we'll be launching a new website. To prepare and make sure all our content is available on the new platform, commenting on stories and in TownSquare has been disabled. When the new site is online, past comments will be available to be seen and we'll reinstate the ability to comment. We appreciate your patience while we make this transition.