From: Phyllis Brown
To: Council, City
Subject: January 12 meeting, item 14
Date: Monday, January 12, 2026 8:52:26 AM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Be cautious of opening attachments and clicking on links.
Mayor Veenker and City Council Members,
I read with interest the Staff Report re: the 2025 annual report of the nonprofit Palo Alto Public Improvement Corporation use of COPs (Item 14, Council agenda for January 12, 2026), noting that projects funded with COPs dating back to 2018 were located north of Oregon Expressway/Page Mill Road. These include:
Improvements to Civic Center and the Municipal Golf Course Commercial space adjacent to the new parking structure at Bryant/Florence (referred to as the “Downtown Parking Improvement bonds or 2002B COP,” now the new Bryant Street Community Center)
Public Safety Building (250 Sherman Avenue)
California Avenue Parking Garage
Question: Have COPs been considered at any point as a funding source for some portion of the Cubberley purchase and renovation in south Palo Alto or for any other city project south of Oregon Expwy/Page Mill?
I have only heard of a bond measure discussed as well as vague references to other private funding sources for Cubberley. Discussion at a December Council meeting let me know that the Council expects to scale back expectations of what can be accomplished even in the first phase of Cubberley renovation. I hope Council will consider allocating more resources to Palo Alto's southern neighborhoods, especially Cubberley, given the
upzoning for expansive, high-density housing
growth in this area.
City bond measures I recall in that same timeframe as these COPs were Measures D and N—meant to fund Mitchell Park Library. Each of these measures had north Palo Alto projects attached to them to entice north PA votes. Improvements to the Children’s Library were attached to Measure D which primarily was for replacement of south Palo Alto’s only library (Mitchell Park Library) which had reached the end of its useful life. Measure D failed in 2002. A second attempt in 2008 (Measure N), which provided funds for south Palo Alto’s one library and the four libraries north of Oregon Expressway/Page Mill, passed. This tells me reliance on a bond measure for Cubberley may be doomed.
Now, after years of private- and city-funded improvements to the Art Center, Lucie Stern, Junior Museum & Zoo, and a new Palo Alto History Museum, south Palo Alto is asked to drive another bond measure for Cubberley. Cubberley is an important community hub, but it currently is only partially city-owned, so investment in basic maintenance has been limited. It is woefully neglected and dilapidated. A functional Cubberley is needed now, but it will be needed more soon--to serve thousands of new Palo Alto residents. If the city is committed to this project, it might consider using COPs and/or millions earmarked for Fiber (which also will be implemented in north Palo Alto first, then midtown, with south Palo Alto last). Note this is the same order that was promised for undergrounding of electric utilities which never reached south Palo Alto.
As south Palo Alto is asked, again, to drive another bond measure, I wonder when north Palo Alto will be asked to do the same. What’s left that we can add to this measure to sweeten the pot to entice them to vote for funding Cubberley? When will COPs be used for something in south Palo Alto? When will it be south Palo Alto’s time to come first? Phyllis Brown