Battle rages anew over fate of residents-only Foothills Park
The decadeslong debate has led to the resignation of one park commissioner
PALO ALTO >> An exclusive park that has banned nonresidents since it first opened nearly 60 years ago is again at the center of controversy.
Activists have resurrected a decadeslong conflict over the 1,400-acre Foothills Park, a massive nature preserve believed to be the only publicly owned park in California that excludes nonresidents unless they’re guests accompanied by Palo Altans.
Those entering the park without proof of Palo Alto residency even can be charged with a misdemeanor — a punishment that hundreds of local activists, former mayors and council members say should be struck from the city’s code.
In a letter sent to the city attorney June 22, former Santa Clara County Judge Ladoris Cordell, who decades ago served on the Palo Alto City Council, threatened legal action, noting a Connecticut Supreme Court decision that analyzed a “residents-only” ordinance similar to Palo Alto’s and found it to be unconstitutional.
“That decision, which is factually indistinguishable from this circumstance, reaffirmed that parks (including open space parks) are quintessential public forums where First Amendment rights are at their zenith,” Cordell said. “As a longtime resident of Palo Alto, there is nothing that I want more than for my city leaders to have the political will to place themselves on the
right side of history. However, our leaders have failed time and again to do so.”
Cordell continued, “I intend to pursue litigation and to seek emergency injunctive relief … I regret that this is the only avenue remaining to redress this ongoing constitutional violation, but I am resolved to ensure that this ordinance and the city’s systematic exclusion of nonresidents is relegated to the dustbin of history.”
Others are calling for an end to the exclusion as well. In a letter sent to the Palo Alto City Council, local officials and current Congresswomen Anna Eshoo, D-Palo Alto; Jackie Speier, D-San Mateo; and Zoe Lofgren, DSan Jose, urged the council to repeal the ordinance.
“This policy sends a terrible message to our neighboring communities — particularly those which do not enjoy the same socioeconomic advantages that Palo Alto does — and leaves a bad taste in the mouths of thousands of would-be visitors who are prohibited by uniformed city staff from entering a public park,” the letter says. “At this historic time, civic leaders across America are being challenged to reassess the policies and systems we’ve ensconced in law to find more equitable ways to achieve our communities’ goals and values.”
Even before the park opened in 1962 in the foothills of the Santa Cruz Mountains, it stirred controversy. The city bought the land in the late 1950s, and after neighboring communities declined its request for contributions to convert it to a nature preserve, Palo Alto decided only residents should be the beneficiaries. The park’s streams and creeks, lake, woods and open spaces have become a popular venue for weddings, funerals, graduations and leisurely strolls.
Proposals to open the park to the general public have come and gone through the decades, thanks in part to rancorous opposition by longtime Palo Alto residents who want to keep it to themselves.
But the debate has become so heated again recently that it prompted city
Parks and Recreation Commissioner Ryan McCauley to resign after the City Council decided to postpone discussion about it until members return from summer break.
The council voted 5-2 last week to revisit the issue in August, nearly 10 months after McCauley forwarded recommendations for a pilot program to open the park for nonresidents — a plan he had worked on for nearly three years.
Under McCauley’s plan, nonresidents could buy passes online and visit the park on less busy days. The city could adjust the number of nonresident passes it gives out on busier days.
Upset that the topic had been kicked down the road yet again, McCauley quit the commission and blasted the council for not considering “common sense” reforms. He said the changes would go a long way to both “reasonably accommodate people” and ensure the city has a nondiscriminatory policy.
Fewer visiting
Attendance numbers are down from its peak of 370,000 annual visitors in the 1970s, McCauley said. Now there are only about 50,000 annual visitors.
Mayor Adrian Fine, who supports opening the park to nonresidents, said Tuesday that another discussion is necessary, noting that nearly 3,000 cars are turned away every year.
Fine said that there’s a way for Palo Alto residents to still enjoy the secluded and quiet Foothills Park they love while letting nonresidents visit as well.
“Do we really want a park that’s only open to rich people? That’s effectively what it is,” Fine said. “I really think we can maintain that preserve as a clean place to go, but we have to be a good neighbor and share it with community members.”