BY ELAINE GOODMAN
Daily Post Correspondent
Palo Alto City Council has scheduled a closed-door session tonight (Oct. 5) on the purchase of land at Cubberley Community Center, raising the possibility that an appraisal of the property will finally be released to the public.
The closed session is scheduled for 10:15 p.m., following the rest of the council meeting.
The potential release of the appraisal comes just weeks before Palo Alto voters decide the fate of Measure J, a half-cent sales tax to fund the city’s plans for Cubberley. The city and the Palo Alto Unified School District reached a deal in which the city would buy seven acres of the Cubberley property for $65.5 million, contingent on voter approval of a tax measure in 2026.
But the public has not yet seen the appraisal for the property, so voters don’t know if the sale would be a good deal. The city in July rejected the Post’s California Public Records Act request for the appraisal. Officials said they’re not required to release the document because appraisals ahead of buying a property are exempt from the CPRA.
The Palo Alto Unified school board had a closed-door session on the Cubberley land sale on Sept. 30.
Mayor Vicki Veenker told the Post on Friday that there may be a reportable action “shortly.” A reportable action is when council reveals a decision made in a closed-door meeting.
What the tax will do
Measure J is expected to bring in $15.6 million per year. The money would go into the city’s general fund, which pays for day-to-day operations of the city. Council approved a resolution with spending guidelines for Measure J, saying funds would go toward the land purchase and completing the first phase of a Cubberley master plan.
Measure J supporters say the city has a good track record of spending tax revenues as it has promised for previous measures.
Measure J is “the most realistic path to a safe, renovated Cubberley,” the Yes on J campaign said. The measure needs a majority vote to pass.
‘Mystery appraisal’
Measure J opponent Jeanne Fleming offered a quick comment on what she called the “mystery appraisal.”
“If it made the case for passing J stronger, they would have tied it up in red-white-and-blue ribbon and hand-delivered it to (Daily Post Editor)Dave Price the first time he requested the document,” Fleming said in an email.
Another possibility is that council members and school board members have been renegotiating the Cubberley land deal in their closed-door sessions. Former school board member Todd Collins has suggested that the city could ask for a lower price or better terms, like a payment plan rather than cash upfront.
Collins said yesterday that a renegotiation would help Measure J’s chances of approval.
Whether releasing the appraisal would help Measure J depends on a few factors, he said.
An appraised value close to the price the city agreed to pay would reassure voters who are worried the city is overpaying. Releasing the document might also boost voters’ trust in the city, Collins said.
Don’t we own this already?
Other voters might still feel that with the new sales tax, they’d be paying “to move something from our left pocket to our right pocket,” Collins said, since the Cubberley land would be transferred from one local government to another.
And an appraised value less than the agreed-upon sales price would give ammunition to Measure J opponents, he said.
Even though releasing the appraisal might benefit Measure J, he said, doing so earlier would have been more helpful. Ballots will go out in the mail today.
“It’s hard to adjust the narrative,” Collins said.
Still, releasing the appraisal is “the right thing to do,” he added.
Former Palo Alto Mayor Lydia Kou, who opposes Measure J, said releasing the appraisal “will be a start.”
But the measure still has a number of shortcomings, she said.
Sales tax revenue from Measure J will go to the city’s general fund, where it won’t necessarily be spent on Cubberley, she said, noting the $17.1 million general fund deficit that the city had to plug in its 2026-27 budget.
Tax has no sunset
Kou pointed out that the sales tax has no end date. The ballot language says it will continue “until ended by voters,” which Kou said would be a labor-intensive and expensive task for residents to pull off.
Although the ballot question outlines repairs and safety upgrades to Cubberley that the tax could pay for, council-adopted spending guidelines said funds would be used to buy the land.
“So what is it?” Kou said. “There’s all sorts of messages out there.”
Kou said Palo Altans are being overwhelmed with new taxes. Santa Clara County Measure A, passed in November 2025, increased the sales tax by 0.625% for five years to fund health care.
Another ballot measure this November is Measure RTM, a half-cent sales tax increase in Santa Clara, San Mateo, Alameda and Contra Costa counties to fund BART, Caltrain and other mass transit systems. The sales tax increase would be one cent in San Francisco.
I’m tired of people with plenty of money complaining about a half cent tax.
I’m tired of people who can’t comprehend the city doesn’t own the 7 acres so must buy it from pausd.
Im tired of the unfounded paranoia that tax proceeds won’t be spent on Cubberly despite the city’s track record of doing so over and over for other general tax measures.
I’m tired of Lydia Kou asserting a future vote to end the tax is prohibitive given she led the voting measure that prevented building 60 below market rate apartments for seniors.
I’m tired of the BS. We need an expanded and refurbished community center especially given the 20% population increase when state required housing is built, mostly in S. Palo Alto.
Why do you assume people opposing another sales tax hike “have plenty of money” when you could easily look up the fact that a growing percentage of PA residents/ taxpayers are retirees and/or in need of affordable housing (not the “market rate” units the deep-pocked lobbyists have forced on us)?
As for paranoia, go read the language on J and you’ll see there’s no commitment to spending the money on Cubberley.
As for South Palo Alto, I’d prefer the city FINALLY provide this fast-growing area with fire protection, something they’ve lacked since the pandemic.
So basically, my neighbors are idiots, they should just do what I tell them. Very persuasive!
Thank you, Jeanne Fleming and Lydia Kou for continuing to push for transparency on this incredibly misleading and flawed money grab that will be used for purposes other than Cubberley.
Shame on the mayor and city council for stalling and for yet again thinking it’s fine to withhold information from taxpayers who are already stretched being OVERCHARGED $26M+ a year for utilities plus the horrendous annual rate hikes, demands that we spend THOUSANDS of dollars to convert to electrical just as rates are soaring to support the data centers, the consultants with no local knowledge etc etc
Just vote NO.