Town Square

Post a New Topic

As referendum falters, Palo Alto prepares to open Foothills Park to all

Original post made on Dec 16, 2020

Palo Alto's exclusive Foothills Park will officially open up to residents from other cities on Thursday after a referendum petition failed to gather the needed signatures to maintain the park's long-standing "residents-only" rule.

Read the full story here Web Link posted Wednesday, December 16, 2020, 4:54 PM

Comments (5)

Posted by Donald
a resident of Cuernavaca
on Dec 16, 2020 at 7:54 pm

Donald is a registered user.

One hopes Mountain Lions count as non-residents of Palo Alto that will soon be admitted to the park. The restriction that the park can be visited but not slept in impacts different folks differently. That rule, someone will next claim, violates state and federal constitutional guarantees of "equal protection" of the law. Palo Alto residents should demand access to the State Capitol building and Levy's stadium to protest their closure. Then they could threaten to sue based on the First Amendment or like provisions in the California Constitution. This rather reminds me of a movie titled "The gods must be crazy."


Posted by Elna
a resident of Monta Loma
on Dec 17, 2020 at 3:10 pm

Elna is a registered user.

I am so very glad the park will be open to non-Palo Alto residents. As a former resident of both Palo Alto and Portola Valley, I loved my visits to the park and walks along its trails. I have missed being able to gather a few friends for a potluck summer Sunday morning brunch followed by a leisurely hike near the lake or a fall exploration of other trails. Thank you for letting me back in.


Posted by Mon Dieu!
a resident of another community
on Dec 17, 2020 at 3:31 pm

Mon Dieu! is a registered user.

God forbid the residents of Shallow Alto should have to co-mingle with the rest us peasants. Interesting history... In 1959 Palo Alto council asked the neighboring communities of Portola Valley and Los Altos Hills to share in the cost, but they declined. Santa Clara County offered to cover about 40% of the cost ($500,000) in 1964, on the condition that the park be opened to all, but Palo Alto declined. So Palo alto would have welcomed participation from affluent communities west of 280, but refused county funding in order to keep the riffraff out, those days are over. Lots of Pearl clutching happening in PA right now. LOL


Posted by Steven Nelson
a resident of Cuesta Park
on Dec 18, 2020 at 7:45 am

Steven Nelson is a registered user.

Thank you French poster for the 'more complete' political history! Petitioner Beylin is glad the democratic process is involving more people. US TOO! It involved the PA City Council (5:2 Vote) and lots and lots of hours of Park and Recreation Commission meetings and a VOTE (favorable to "open") - AND IT WAS GOING to involve A JUDGE (if Beylin was successful with petition).

That's the democratic process! In our state it is the State that is sovereign NOT the cities. That is our Republican form of government / guaranteed by the US Constitution (sorry - it is Capitalized in Article IV Section 4.)!


Posted by Riff-raff
a resident of Cuesta Park
on Dec 18, 2020 at 2:19 pm

Riff-raff is a registered user.

I'm excited that riff-raff like me will finally be allowed to mingle with our faux-liberal overlords! I hope they're prepared for the unwashed masses of Mountain View, with our advanced degrees, boba teas and khaki pants. That'll show em.


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

Email:


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..

Stay informed.

Get the day's top headlines from Mountain View Online sent to your inbox in the Express newsletter.