What are the priorities you would like to see the City Council adopt for 2017?

Affordable housing has to be the top priority for us Palo Altans. My concern is that there are several topics with feedback that seem to have been gathered since 2015 on this tool, but don't seem to have had any action taken. We are well into 2017, and I am wondering how can we use this feedback for 2017?
Where can I see how this open city hall effected decisions taken?

More emphasis on non-automotive transportation, including better public transportation (Caltrain electrification and increased service frequency; reversing the VTA bus service cuts; improving our own shuttle system), bike lane improvements, and finishing the Adobe Creek bike bridge over 101 on a reasonable timescale.

Priorities:
Affordable housing (for all income levels)
Rent Control
Reduction of airplane noise - flight paths are low, and directly over home

Thank you for putting an emphasis on Housing and Livability in the City. By being on the Caltrain line, Palo Alto has the opportunity to reduce traffic in and outside of CPA by putting more housing in places that have easy access to our two Caltrain stations. We need to figure out how to build up rather than out, and by reviewing our City statutes we can add more housing sensibly and cost effectively, for example by easing our current 50 foot height restriction -- not to build massive skyscrapers, but to provide just one extra floor of housing in our multi-unit buildings. As a City, we need to figure out how to help neighbors work together to reduce individual car trips and support our aging population stay in their homes. And, we need to continue to invest to make it safe to ride bicycles around our Cities, which reduces traffic as well. Our city is unaffordable to our first responders, our teachers, or other City employees and to most Millenials. Without the energy of these groups, we will be a less safe and vibrant community. I look forward to hearing about your plans and progress on this critical issue for Palo Alto.

Please focus on the jobs:housing ratio, as that drives quality of life issues for us all. While doing so, please consider that for our community to thrive, we would benefit from heterogeneity; please take actions which make this a home for people of all backgrounds and work at all types of jobs. Please speak out for inclusion. #ourmandate #wagelove

What I care about is living in a beloved community, as Martin Luther King described. He describes a beloved community as a place with social and economic inclusion. So I want to ask, with each policy, is this inclusive or exclusive? is it leading to greater or less inequality? If we do not adhere to certain social values, whatever 'quality of life' or beautiful front yards we have maintained will be wasted. Check out College Terrace and our small lots. We can have more people and still have a quiet beautiful neighborhood. Let's encourage shared, smaller housing, since this will offer housing at better rates and also improve our neighborhoods.

Please consider building more high density housing near the Caltrain stops. I understand the concerns over traffic and parking than many current residents have. Would it be possible to have a special class of housing that you can only live in if you do not own a car? By building housing for non-car owners near Caltrain stops, we can increase the amount of available housing while also reducing traffic at the same time.

Currently I drive to work in Mountain View, but if it were more affordable to live within walking distance of Caltrain (near University Ave or Cal Ave) I would gladly get rid of my car and commute by Caltrain.

This also could be a great option for retired residents who no longer need to commute daily to work and would allow them to more affordably live within walking distance of more shops and businesses.

Affordable housing is the biggest problems that Palo Alto faces today. The only way to combat skyrocketing prices is to increase supply by increasing density. This means allowing more apartment buildings to be built, allowing buildings to be taller, and more multi-use zoning. While the expensive housing market may be good for individual home owners, it is not good for the community as a whole. It forces the majority of those who work here to live elsewhere, contributing to traffic and pollution. It also means that although they work in this community, they have very little stake in it, which means they will not contribute to its well being. A healthier community can be attained if city council really pushes for more affordable housing.

Almost everyone understands how difficult it is for City Council and Staff to assess public opinion. Peak Democracy is one new channel. Its strengths and weaknesses are both unknown and untested. For example, how do we all know who is participating? Is a bias created by non-resident participating? Non-voters? Non-citizens? Are organized special interest groups able to game the submission by actively promoting their members to participate.
The potential for bias is the same for each public meeting. Councilpersons and Commissioners have no way to evaluate who is actively speaking publicly or sitting passively in the audience.
The vehicles for communication to public officials have been and will be imperfect. The loudest and most frequent voices are often the more effective. Therefore, the test of of good Council governance is how well 9 Palo Alto Councilperson integrate torrents of public communication.

I ask the Council to discuss how they integrate the three major submissions of public input.
#1 Citizen participation at the Annual Retreat (dependent upon who shows up)
#2 Peak Democracy input (often coming at the last moment)
#3 Annual Citizens Survey and its multi-year trends

I would like the City of Palo Alto to pass a 15% tax on foreign buyers of homes in Palo Alto. People who buy homes here but don't live in them or rent them out are essentially taking valuable property off the market and driving up the prices for the rest of this. One year after Vancouver passed this, housing prices fell by 26%.

Please see this Bloomberg article: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-09-22/foreign-buying-plummets-in-vancouver-after-new-property-tax