Palo Alto Councilmen Greer Stone and Keith Rechdahl told the New York Times about a proposal that attempts to stop the wealthy from assembling homes to create a compound.
The proposal is in response to Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg buying 11 homes in the Crescent Park neighborhood to create a compound. Neighbors have complained about the constant noise of construction, unmarked security vehicles and a loss of parking and privacy.
(Read Stone and Reckdahl’s memo to council proposing new legislation.)
The city rejected Zuckerberg’s proposal to buy neighboring homes in 2017, but he resubmitted his plans in a piecemeal way, and it was approved.
“To see other people take housing out of the housing stock in such a flippant way is frustrating,” Stone is quoted as saying in the Times story. “The growing discrepancy between the top 1 percent and the rest of us has never been more clear.”
Stone, who along with his wife is a school teacher who rents a one-bedroom apartment in Palo Alto, does not ever foresee being able to own a home himself in Palo Alto, the article points out. But he’s hoping that his legislation will help improve life for Zuckerberg’s neighbors.
According to the Times, Stone and Reckdahl are proposing:
• to outlaw the buying of property in order to leave it empty;
• require property owners to give the city detailed schedules for any construction projects lasting more than six months;
• prevent new construction from beginning less than three years after any major project was complete.
The law would leave the enforcement responsibility up to neighbors of a compound. That would force residents neighbors to go to court and face the lawyers of a billionaire.
Stone was elected in 2020 and re-elected in 2024, and is a lame duck. Rechdahl was elected in 2024 and is eligible to run for re-election in 2028.
If you wanted to chase the wealthy out of your town, this is a good way to start.
The New York Times reporter said Zuckerberg’s compound is in the “Crescent Hills” part of town. Never heard of that place. It’s Crescent Park. Where does the Times get these people!
Socialism is in control of the Palo Alto City Council
The idea of outlawing the purchase of property if it’s going to be ‘left empty’ is incredibly difficult to enforce and a slippery slope for government overreach.
If the city wants more housing, they should focus on upzoning and building new units rather than micromanaging the consolidation of a few existing luxury lots.
I completely agree new units is the way forward. Greer blocks all forms of development. He once told me he thinks the real solution to housing is killing jobs. That may be one of his goals here. Our council is dysfunctional and out of touch.
If Greer were in complete control, we would still all be living under covid lockdowns, schools and businesses shutdown permanently, everyone in face masks, curfews, no leaving the home unless it’s an emergency, travel bans, and any essential items – whatever is left to consume – delivered by the national guard until human existence ends. Oh, and martial law too.
Yeah, they are doing that too. I wish all the building would stop. It adds more traffic every time they add a monster building of units.
Bastille day or summon the inner Luigi Mangione in the common folk in PA.
The comment by Councilman Stone that this is an issue between “the top 1% and the rest of us” is not correct. The unhappy neighbors are way into the top 1% themselves, as is anyone who has owned a home in Palo Alto for a long time. They in turn are unhappy with the wealth and behavior of the top .01%
Just a couple weeks back, the city finance staff projected annual multimillion dollar deficits going forward. It’s easy for council members to virtue signal how much they dislike two extremely wealthy residents but focusing on the unpleasant task of balancing spending priorities with available resources should be a more important priority.
Wow, Priscilla looks attractive here.
Zuck’s neighbors will get double or triple their home’s value because he wants their property so badly. That’s not a bad thing for them. They can take that money and buy a nice house somewhere else, and have millions of dollars left over. You’re set for life.
(Greer Stone is such a staunch socialist he wouldn’t understand the benefits of this situation to the neighbors. All he can think about is life in his miserable tiny apartment, trying to make a living as a public school teacher. Of course he’s depressed and is lashing out at those who are doing better than he is through class warfare. It’s sad that he wants to bring the rest of the town down that hellhole he’s been traveling.)
The point that Stone is making here is beyond the “benefit” of Zuck’s neighbors, who can sell their homes for way too much, but the fact that the working class can never buy their way back into Palo Alto with price gauging like this. Minimum wage in Palo Alto is what, $18something, but houses are 3-4 million? Good luck affording rent, let alone qualifying for a mortgage.
Palo Alto is not just for multi-millionaires and billionaires to hoard.
A funny/sad story: Some time ago (without the New York Times photographer being involved), Greer Stone—the very same one who is virtue signaling—went fully missing in action when emailed about getting thermal blankets to homeless people downtown in the middle of a cold winter some years back.
I remember when Greer set up that phony think tank — I think it was called the Embarcadero Institute — that basically was an echo-chamber for all the crazy stuff he said during his campaign. There was no “institute,” no headquarters building or army of fellows. It was just a couple of people gathered around a kitchen table trying to find ways to bring socialism to Palo Alto.