Author: Lisa McLain

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court on Thursday agreed to hear an expedited argument in a case challenging the state’s congressional map, setting the stage for a potential decision on the constitutionality of the map ahead of the 2018 midterm elections.

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court on Thursday agreed to hear an expedited argument in a case challenging the state’s congressional map, setting the stage for a potential decision on the constitutionality of the map ahead of the 2018 midterm elections.

The League of Women Voters and nearly 20 Pennsylvania voters filed the lawsuit against the state in Commonwealth Court in June. They claim the state’s Republican-drawn congressional map violates the state constitution’s protections on freedom of expression and equal protection, because it deliberately dilutes the influence of Democratic voters in the political process. The Brennan Center for Justice has described the map as one of the most egregious examples of a political party drawing a map for its own benefit ― a process often called gerrymandering. In 2012, Republicans were able to win 13 of the state’s 18 congressional seats, and were able to retain a similar share of seats in 2014 and 2016 even though the party’s share of the statewide vote only went up by a few points.

The plaintiffs in the state want the court to block officials from using the plan in future elections and require the legislature to draw a new plan.

“We will leverage this expedited process to ensure the map is struck down and a new map that complies with the constitution is created in time for the 2018 election,” Mimi McKenzie, legal director of the Public Interest Law Center, one of the groups representing the plaintiffs, said in a statement.

The case is one of two redistricting lawsuits challenging Pennsylvania’s congressional map. The other suit is moving through federal court.

In October, the U.S. Supreme Court heard a challenge to Wisconsin’s state electoral map in which plaintiffs alleged that the map violates the U.S. Constitution. The case is being closely watched because the high court has never articulated a standard for judging whether a map is unconstitutional. The case moving through the Commonwealth Court does not depend on the outcome of that case, because it deals with alleged violations to the Pennsylvania constitution, not the U.S. Constitution.

• This article originally appeared on HuffPost.

For the past year the City of Los Altos has been studying various ideas to improve the level of activity and vibrancy in the downtown area.

The City’s consultant team recently released an economic analysis and 4 possible scenarios to transform the downtown, gradually, over the next 10-20 years. Each scenario reflects a different level of vibrancy from very little change in Scenario 1 to the most change in Scenario 4. The scenarios also include different approaches to connect the downtown to the Civic Center and Lincoln Park. At a recent public meeting, the consultant team explained that none of the scenarios are exclusive and they want the community to pick and choose among features and land uses they would most like to see in the final plan.

The scenarios were developed recognizing the transition of retail to on-line shopping and the changing focus of American downtowns. Today, downtowns are less about shopping and more about recreation, dining, events and community gathering. These trends are likely to continue into the future.

From the League perspective it is important to note that some of the scenarios call for workforce/affordable housing on City-owned parking lots, which the League has long supported. As the City process progresses, the League will be reviewing the scenarios from the perspective of its positions on housing, comprehensive planning, transportation, environmental sustainability and healthy schools and communities.

Information about the various scenarios is on the City website along with background materials. The City will be posting an on-line community survey to see what possible features and ideas resonate with residents. It will be important for all Los Altos League members to participate and encourage their friends and neighbors to do the same.

And finally, it is important to remember that this exercise is not really about us, but rather about creating a healthy future for the City and its future generations.

Below is a link to the city website where you can review the scenarios and background materials.

https://www.losaltosca.gov/communitydevelopment/page/downtown-vision

Here is a link to the survey on the subject. You do not have to be a Los Altos resident to take it.

https://www.losaltosca.gov/community/page/open-city-hall#peak_democracy

California Assembly Blue Ribbon Commission on Early Childhood Education — Highlights of Nov 17th meeting

Ellen Wheeler and Julie Cates of the League of Women Voters attended the November 17th California Assembly Blue Ribbon Commission on Early Childhood Education in Oakland.   The Commission includes five high ranking Assemblymembers – Attending the meetings and making public comments is a good way to connect with them and show them the good work underway in Santa Clara County and the Strong Start Commission.

Key Take-Aways:

• This was the third quarterly meeting for the Commission.  The topic for this “learning session” was “Sustaining an Early Learning Workforce.”   
• The presenters and research pointed out the dismal wages (minimum wage level) and low educational attainment of today’s child care and preschool educators.    
• Many of the public comment speakers stated need for collective bargaining and union membership as way to secure higher wages for early learning educators.
• The Commission has started four subcommittees on finance, access, workforce and family engagement.     
• The Commission and its subcommittees will continue to meet quarterly with a goal of publishing its recommendations by mid 2019.

Ellen and Julie each made comments in the Public Hearing section of the meeting.   To view the comments go to the video 2:10 (2 hours, 10 minutes).  

•      Ellen commented that her school district, Mountain View Whisman, has been able to provide preschool slots to 3- and 4-year olds, but the staff face the issues of low pay and low educational supports discussed by the presenters.   
•     Julie provided the Santa Clara County Early Learning Master Plan Abstract to each of the Commissions and asked the Commissioners to look at its recommendations.   

Building a Sustainable Mountain View

The City of Mountain View formed a Task Force this year to analyze and document the likelihood that the City will meet its greenhouse gas reduction goals. Due to growth in both residential and daytime population, and even with the benefit of Silicon Valley Clean Energy, now providing clean electricity, the City is expected to be 12% above its 2020 target.

This Task Force, the Environmental Sustainability Task Force 2 (ESTF-2) is a Council Advisory Body of appointed community members who live or work in Mountain View, and it expects to provide a ranked list of priority actions and the metrics to measure them in an effort to get the City on track with its climate protection goals. It has 30+ members, generally meets on the first Thursday of the month, and will disband in June after making its recommendations to Council.

A similar Task Force was created in 2008 and delivered a large number of recommendations to the Council. About 8-10 members formed a new group called Green Mountain View, later rebranded as the Mountain View Coalition for Sustainable Planning. This group weighs in on proposed new developments and tracks the progress of ESTF-2. Their website is http://www.mvcsp.org/, and they generally meet on the second Thursday of the month. The location varies – see the Calendar for meeting details. If you are interested in being added to the mailing list or attending a meeting, send an email to mvcsp.info@gmail.com.

The Invisible Housing Crisis in Los Altos, Nov. 15th at Silicon Valley Community Foundation

This discussion was planned by the Los Altos Women’s Caucus and co-sponsored by our LWV, along with our local AAUW, Los Altos Community Foundation and GreenTown Los Altos.  Perhaps because of this wide sponsorship, the room at the SVCF was filled to its capacity of 125 people.

The program began with “Making It Real & Personal”, comments by Sharif Etman, Admin. Services Director for the City of Los Altos and Sam Oden, Executive Director of The Terraces.  Both gave their personal stories as well as startling data on their difficulties in hiring and retaining employees, due to the high cost of living in or near Los Altos.  For example, out of 130 employees last year, the City of Los Altos had 20 vacancies.  Only 3 live in Los Altos and more than 100 don’t live in a neighboring city.  These long commutes mean that Los Altos is having a harder and harder time recruiting and keeping good talent, as when applicants/employees see opportunities closer to where the live, they opt for a better quality of life/shorter commute.

Next, Mayor Mary Prochnow gave a grim assessment of how dire the affordable situation is in Los Altos, pointing out that progress towards its Regional Housing Needs Allocation, sometimes called its “fair share”, Los Altos has already produced 218 above moderate income units out of its 97-unit allocation, but only 2 moderate income out of a 99-unit allocation, 20 low income out of its 99-unit allocation, and 4 very-low income and extremely low income, out of its 169-unit allocation.  She raised 3 questions: what are we doing to meet the needs of the workforce, such as described by Sharif and Sam?; What do we do to make progress? And finally, should we be focusing less on above-moderate income housing? (note: income definitions and more information about RHNA is on the LWV website)

Then Joe Simitian, County Supervisor, explained that the jobs/housing imbalance has been created mainly because cities have not wanted to say no to jobs.  Should we try to reduce the demand by not allowing as many jobs?  He pointed out that the free market may work for some housing, but it will never work to create housing for those with lower incomes. He offered three basic, but significant conditions to create this housing: land, money and community will.  He also pointed out three important local successes:  Measure A, which was passed last Nov., mainly to address needs of homeless or near homeless; Stanford’s request in 2000 for additional square footage which had to be mitigated by building additional housing, (a new request is now being debated); and saving Buena Vista Mobile Home Park in Palo Alto, a collaboration over 2 1/2 years between the City of Palo Alto, the County, the Housing Authority, and Caritas, a nonprofit housing provider.

Joe’s response to those who ask “what’s in it for me?”, first, necessary for the economic vitality of the community, improvement of traffic due to shorter commutes for workers, and public safety argument as some city employees and other key workers would live in our area.

These opening comments were followed by a panel including Mary and Joe, and also Leslye Corsiglia, Ex. Dir. of SV@Home, and Julie Mahowald, CFO of Housing Trust Silicon Valley, who answered questions from the audience.

Highlights of the question and answer period:  Mary would like to see land dedicated as an all affordable housing development; otherwise she sees the small number of below-market-rate units being created as just a drop in the bucket in terms of meeting the need in Los Altos.  She also suggested supporters of affordable housing jump in with something positive when they see some of the many negative comments on NextDoor.  Mary then expressed frustration regarding the long time it was taking the Council to adopt new rules regarding accessory dwelling units (ADUs, also calledgranny units, second units), stating she believes that these should be allowed on all lots as existing zoning and setback laws should be sufficient to protect neighbors.  She asked for people to come to Council meeting when this issue comes back to show their support.

Leslye agreed re ADUs, commenting that neighboring cities had relaxed their rules, requiring no minimum lot size.  She also asked that we support junior ADUs.

Joe stated that the County is starting to explore homesharing, which has been quite successful in San Mateo County. With regard to building higher, Joe suggested we focus on the quality of the projects and not support all developments that are higher, but support good projects, as these don’t affect the quality of life. Joe also suggested that we try to impact the demand side by creating jobs further away, perhaps in the Central Valley, with a “virtual bridge” to the employment centers here.

All the speakers are upbeat about increased collaboration on a regional level; Leslye referred us to CASA on the SV@Home website.  Mary commented that Los Altos tends to be pretty insular, not collaborative.  Joe indicated that there was a possibility that in the future perhaps cities with money but no land (Los Altos Hills?) could be given RHNA credit if they gave their money to nearby cities with land.

There will be a follow-up meeting on solutions at Hillview Community Center, Rm. 2, Dec. 11th at 7 p.m.  Also, Robin Abrams is organizing a video shoot the third week of January, which will show video vignettes on how the lack of housing is impacting our friends and neighbors.  Everyone is invited to suggest folks who might be highlighted in this video, about two minutes per person, to be filmed at the Neutra House/LACF. (robin@abrams4.com).

As a footnote, our LWV housing group has sent letters endorsing no minimum lot size for ADUs; Mtn. View has adopted such an ordinance.  We have also supported the idea of the City contributing City-owned land for an all-affordable housing development, in particular, a City-owned parking lot. As Joe stated, to build affordable housing, you need land, money and community will.  Because Los Altos has no money to contribute, the main opportunity for an all-affordable development would be a long-term lease of City property, either at the Civic Center or on a downtown parking lot.  But is there community will?

On September 28th, the Steering Committee for Voter’s Rights, met to establish a working committee of the Los Altos –Mountain View League.  The main purpose was to determine our direction, discuss the programs we would work on, and our next meeting date.  

1)  We decided to change our name to Voter Services Steering Committee as we felt that better described our scope of proposed work.  

2)  Settled on the following program options –

a)  New Citizens Registration – 2018 dates will probably be the same, February 22 and July 26

b)  Pursue finding a contact person at Registrar of Voters (ROV) for information and training on how and what our League can do to continue registering new voters. 

c)  Work with County Council and develop at Chapter Level the “How and What” of the Voting process.   

d)  Volunteer with programs at ROV where our League can volunteer

3)  Create a program where our League works at a polling place for the 2018 and 2020 elections.  Compensation can go directly to our League as donation

4)  Gather more information about SB450 (California Voter’s Choice Act – vote by mail), and how it affects Santa Clara County.

5)  Continue to reach out to Mountain View High School. Voter Registration at the high school level.

6)  Learn more about the voter registration program at Foothill Collage.

New Meeting:  January 18th, 2pm to 4pm, at home of Vicki Gilfix (gilfix@att.net)