It finally makes sense

The Los Altos City Council spent September caricaturing itself, first by ensuring that First Street remains inconvenient for bicyclists and then by putting the brakes on a proposed link to the Stevens Creek Trail.

Here is a sampling of quotes from the meetings, helpfully provided by the Town Crier.

Councilman Ron Packard:

"We want to encourage bicycling on the whole Peninsula. On the other hand, do we want to become part of a bigger community?"

Resident David Lambourne:

"It’s hard to support any plan in which a path runs in and out of our city."

Mayor Val Carpenter, paraphrased:

Mayor Val Carpenter said the project had already eliminated multiple street parking spaces, and that she was loath to remove more for a bike lane, noting that she observed many cyclists using downtown as a launching point for regional travel rather than a family-oriented destination.

Packard again, paraphrased:

City Councilman Ron Packard referenced the city’s Fremont Bridge remodel as a project that sacrificed charm for bicycle friendliness, and suggested that he didn’t want to make the same choice for First Street.

The takeaway from all of this: the City Council finds parking spaces charming, but not bicycle facilities, especially if they somehow connect to places outside of Los Altos.

Yes, Los Altos has a proud history of treating bicyclists like they were Gypsies. Perhaps that is what the Town Crier was getting at.

Actually, I think we have a law against this

Big news out of Mountain View this week: police rounding up suspects in July's double murder; NASA stepping up with money to restore Hangar One; an 18-year-old (?) girl disappearing from the Monte Carlo.

By contrast, over in Los Altos, this typo is really funny.

Let them eat tacos

Note to self: speaking at city council meetings may be more effective than wearing a paper bag over your head.

The taco truck survived, for now, as Megan Satterlee and David Casas joined Ron Packard in opposing an ordinance to force mobile food vendors away from school property. Mayor Val Carpenter and Council member Lou Becker were silent on the issue.

MVLA Superintendent Barry Groves presented the problem to the combined city council and school board, and seemed perplexed that people would see this as an issue of social justice. I followed by reminding the council of the last time it got in the business of telling people where they could stand and pointing out that cities with laws against gypsies need to be extra careful when passing discriminatory ordinances.

Los Altos's anti-gypsy ordinance

Article IV, Section 2 of the Constitution of the United States guarantees citizens certain "privileges and immunities." The Supreme Court has interpreted this to mean that neither states, counties nor cities can discriminate against non-residents' economic activities without a "substantial reason" for doing so.

All of this leads to the following question:

What could possibly be the substantial reason Los Altos has for limiting fortune-telling and palm-reading permits to residents of the county? (See Title 4, chapter 16). Was there a huge problem with gypsies blowing into town and ... doing what exactly?

The offending part of the law reads:

No person shall practice the business of palmistry, fortune-telling, astrology, prediction of the future, or any similar practice for a fee or any other item of value without first having obtained a permit from the city manager.

...

Any person holding a permit pursuant to this chapter shall be a citizen of the United States, of good character, over the age of twenty-one (21) year, a resident for one year last past of the county, and have a city address wherein operations will alone be lawful.

Another part of the law excludes would-be fortunetellers who have previously been convicted of trickery or deceit.

If any non-residents out there are interested in applying for such a permit and bringing a federal court challenge when the city refuses, I am your lawyer.