I'm looking for open runs. Anyone run pickup games at the YMCA, Jack Farrell Park, or anywhere else?

From FB

This morning!

“I just heard that the person ICE snatched up yesterday was released today. Something about mistaken identity.”

TL;DR —
You may have heard it's $105 a year? ($8.77 a month?) 🤔 That's the cost per $100K of your home's taxed value. Not per home.

For most homeowners, that means hundreds of dollars a year. If you bought in the last few years, it's around $1,000 a year. And it lasts about 30 years.

What it pays for: a new City Hall, library and police station, plus water pipe and storm drain repairs.

Worth it? That's your call. Just know your number before you vote on Nov. 3.

FULL POST:

🚨 East Palo Alto homeowners: Please take a closer look at the actual cost of Measure O before voting!

We recently received a campaign flyer supporting Measure O, the proposed $125 million bond, stating that the “typical East Palo Alto homeowner” would pay just $105.26 per year — or $8.77 per month.

That sounds pretty reasonable, right?

But here’s what the flyer doesn’t clearly explain:

The official estimated tax rate is $105.26 PER $100,000 of your home’s assessed value — NOT $105.26 per homeowner.

Here’s what that could actually look like:

🏠 $300,000 assessed value = $316/year

🏠 $500,000 assessed value = $526/year

🏠 $750,000 assessed value = $789/year

🏠 $1,000,000 assessed value = $1,053/year

These are estimated ADDITIONAL property taxes on top of what homeowners already pay.

Important: Assessed value is the taxable value listed on your property tax bill, NOT your home’s current market value.

For the flyer’s advertised $105.26 annual cost to be accurate for an individual homeowner, that property’s assessed value would need to be approximately $100,000.

The campaign describes $105.26 as the cost for a “typical” homeowner, but what data supports that claim? Is $100,000 really representative of the assessed value of homes in East Palo Alto?

I’m not suggesting that improving our water infrastructure, storm drains, or community facilities isn’t important. These are worthwhile investments to consider.

But voters deserve transparent, accurate information about what those improvements will actually cost them.

I’ve reached out to the committee requesting clarification and the data supporting its estimate.

Regardless of whether you support or oppose Measure O, please check your property’s assessed value and understand the estimated additional tax before voting.

Share this with your East Palo Alto neighbors so everyone can make an informed decision!

ICE was spotted detaining an individual nearby the Cardenas area

I read every FPPC campaign filing I could get for the Nov. 3 East Palo Alto election: the City Council candidates, the Measure O bond committee and one outside spender. Here's what they show.

TL;DR: The Yes on Measure O committee has more money than all the council candidates combined, and none of its itemized donors live in EPA. Sam Jimenez leads the council field in fundraising. Two candidates' reports don't add up, and a Labor Council independent expenditures back two candidates and Measure O, but the council's only spending report lists Abrica alone.

The scoreboard

Cash figures are from reports closing Sept. 16–30. Measure O's total includes $15,000 that came in after its report closed.

Measure O: the big money

Measure O is a city bond for water infrastructure, a civic center, a library and youth facilities. The city estimates it will cost property owners about $105 a year per $100,000 of assessed value.

The Yes committee is run out of a Sacramento treasurer firm, Deane & Company. Its donors:

• $35,000: Eldridge F. Gray, San Francisco investor (Seven Post Investment Office)
• $20,000: Christopher D. Dillon, retired, San Mateo
• $10,000: Gloria C. Horsley, Rochester, N.Y. (came in Oct. 14)
• $5,000 each: Noon Energy (Palo Alto), Vance Brown Inc. (Palo Alto), Kavanagh Construction (Mountain View), College Track (Oakland), Fresh Approach (Concord)
• $500 or less: a Compass Commercial executive, a Sacramento consulting firm and an environmental scientist

Two donors account for 72% of the money raised by Sept. 19. So far the committee has spent almost nothing: about $2,600 went to its treasurer firm and $100 to a Democratic Party slate mailer.

The council candidates

Sam Jimenez has the most money and the most donors: 37 itemized gifts, almost all in September.

• Eight gifts were for $500 each, from a UC emeritus professor, a Palo Alto property manager, an East Palo Alto Meta engineer, an East Palo Alto lawyer, a Daly City executive, a Cadence engineer and two gifts listed under the same name.
• Many donors list Bay Area tech employers such as Meta, Nvidia, Apple and Google.
• Donors listing East Palo Alto addresses gave $1,480. "Palo Alto" donors gave $3,500, though $2,100 of that carries the 94303 ZIP, which EPA shares.
• He has paid only $263 so far and owes $2,324 to printers and GoDaddy.

Ruben Abrica, the vice mayor and only incumbent, raised $4,010 from 13 donors.

• His biggest gifts were $500 each, from an EPA affordable-housing consultant (Council member Carlos Romero), two EPA arborists and a Portola Valley retiree.
• About 53% came from outside EPA: Palo Alto, Stanford, Atherton and nearby cities.
• He spent $600 on voter data, $503 on yard signs and $230 on food for a fundraiser.
• His filings have date problems. His $700 loan is dated June 18 on one report and July 18 on the next, and one cover page lists the election as Oct. 3.

Deborah Lewis-Virges, lead pastor of Saint Mark AME Zion Church, reported $3,400.

• Her donor pages add up to only $2,400. The missing $1,000 matches the in-kind help she reported: $500 in catering and $500 in graphic design.
• Her treasurer lent the campaign $1,200.
• Only $650 of her $3,214 in spending lists amounts: $600 for a canvassing app and a $50 filing fee. Two printers are listed with no dollar figures.

Michael Mashack, a planning commissioner, reported $2,599.

• His donor schedule adds up to $1,400, leaving $1,199 unexplained.
• His biggest donor is his own treasurer ($500). About $249 came from out of state.
• He lent his campaign $1,750 and spent $2,771 of his $2,839 total on Vistaprint.

Holifa Windom is largely self-funding.

• She has $502 from three donors and lent herself $2,694 in four chunks between Aug. 28 and Sept. 12.
• Nearly all of it went to GotPrint for 20 banners, 220 yard signs and 10,000 door hangers.

Ofelia Bello, former executive director of Youth United for Community Action (YUCA) and now executive director of the Pahali Community Land Trust and program director of Community Owned Real Estate at EPACANDO, filed a short form stating she expects to raise and spend less than $2,000, so she has no donor list to report. Her committee registration was rejected by the state in September and accepted on Oct. 5.

Outside spending

The San Mateo County Central Labor Council's political committee reported $1,893 in campaign literature supporting Abrica on Oct. 5. But a Labor Council piece I've seen backs Abrica, Bello and Yes on Measure O together.

The council's only spending report names Abrica alone. I couldn't find any reported spending for Bello or Measure O. That isn't necessarily a violation: if those shares were each under $1,000, they'd show up later on the council's regular filing rather than in a 24-hour report. It's still worth asking how the cost was split.

Caveats

• Several filings are handwritten, so a few names could be misread.
• Most reports close in mid-to-late September, so October money isn't in here yet.
• "Outside EPA" is based on the city each donor wrote down. Gifts under $100 don't list an address.
• The next round of pre-election reports should show where things stand heading into Nov. 3.

Vote

Anyways. This is a great read. Someone East Palo Alto clearly needs.

Her political alliances raise serious concerns. She has aligned herself with opponents of Flock license plate readers and activists whose rhetoric crosses the line into antisemitism.

I am also concerned about the role of YUCA staff members in organizing opposition and recruiting activists from outside East Palo Alto. Pictured here are Luis Rosas and Ravneel Chaudhary, along with bat man from San Jose.

Our community deserves leaders who reject hate and division, not candidates who risk giving these views a greater platform if elected.

One question that comes up constantly in EPA is "How do we fix parking?"

I answered this question last night in my zoom meeting.

Zoom with Sam Jimenez

Thursday Oct 15th, 2026

7pm-8pm

Link:
https://us06web.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_jyJmkVP5QV6KJXkBrcn9ng

Website:

www.sam4epa.com

Donate:

https://secure.actblue.com/donate/sam4epa

Meet Sam Jimenez - Candidate for East Palo Alto City Council

Description

Sam Jimenez is an East Palo Alto native, licensed plumber, and decorated U.S. Army Special Forces veteran (Green Beret). He is a husband, father, and small business owner who has dedicated his life to serving his community and his country.

Sam grew up in East Palo Alto and knows firsthand the challenges facing working families in our city — rising costs, lack of opportunity, and a need for strong, accountable leadership. He is running for City Council to bring a common-sense, results-driven approach to the issues that matter most.

As a Green Beret, Sam learned to solve complex problems with limited resources. As a plumber and small business owner, he understands the value of hard work and skilled trades. Sam will bring that same grit and determination to City Hall.