No on Palo Alto Measure F, and leave our clocks alone! | An Alternative View | Diana Diamond | Mountain View Online |

Local Blogs

An Alternative View

By Diana Diamond

E-mail Diana Diamond

About this blog: So much is right — and wrong — about what is happening in Palo Alto. In this blog I want to discuss all that with you. I know many residents care about this town, and I want to explore our collective interests to help ...  (More)

View all posts from Diana Diamond

No on Palo Alto Measure F, and leave our clocks alone!

Uploaded: Oct 11, 2018
If you haven’t seen enough “No on F” signs in town, or read all the editorials against Measure F (e.g., The Palo Alto Weekly’s “No, no, no on Measure F,”) let my voice join the chorus on this local Nov. 6 ballot measure

This was sponsored and funded by the SEIU (Service Employees International Union – e.g., city and government workers) and the United Healthcare Workers West), this dastardly measure would require Palo Alto city officials to permanently monitor and supervise all hospital and medical clinics and individual patients bills. The measure implies patients will pay less for medical services and if they pay too much they will get money back.

That’s a lie. If a patient has any insurance at all, any so-called rebate will go directly to their insurance company, and there is no mandate that the insurer would refund any money to the patient.

Measure F would cost the city millions to monitor health care. Specifically (and please read the following carefully), Measure F “would require cities to appropriate sufficient funds to implement, administer and enforce this regulator program. The city’s new obligations would include receiving and maintaining cost records from the health care providers foreach patient foreach year (italics mine); evaluating the costs; determining required billing reductions or rebates; evaluating petitions for additional costs; issuing notices of violation and receiving payment of fines,” according to a report from the League of Women Voters.

Stanford Health Care reps say this will cost them millions of dollars and force the hospital to cut back on services and programs. And Measure F would also apply to Palo Alto Medical Foundation, all dentists in town, independent solo practitioner doctors, psychiatrists and optometrists in the city.

And the city is supposed to evaluate the charges to each and every patient. How? Of course, we taxpayers will inevitably pay whatever costs the city incurs.

Yes, health care costs are escalating and need to be controlled, but Measure F is absolutely no way to solve this problem. So no, no, no, no, no, no.

Leave our clocks alone!

Proposition 7 on the state ballot, if approved, would make daylight savings time permanent in this state. Most of us probably enjoy the wonderful light summer evenings we experience with daylight savings time, and those will continue. But making DST permanent is a bad idea.

If we have daylight savings time last all year round, have you thought about what happens on winter mornings? During summer months, it begins to get light at 5 a.m. but right now, sunrise is closer to 7 a.m. If we had daily savings time in the winter months, sunrise will occur as late at 8:10 a.m.

How does this affect our kids, who would have to walk or bike to school in the dark? Would school starting times change to a 9 a.m.? If so, what would parents do if their jobs still begin at 8 a.m? And California’s time would be an hour off from the rest of the country (except Arizona) so people flying out on EST or CST would arrive in California’s DST an hour later (e.g., not 10:30p.m. but 11:30 p.m.) Telephone callers would have to remember California businesses are on a different clock – and call an hour later.

Some people complain it’s too hard to turn their clocks forward in the spring and push them back in the fall. Get over it, I say to them. If it takes a day or two to adjust, just do it. Our spring, summer and fall months of DST are wonderful, but let’s keep falling back in the late fall to standard time.

Our clocks aren't broke, so let's not fix them. Vote No in Prop 7. Please,
What is it worth to you?


Posted by Anon, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood,
on Oct 11, 2018 at 5:23 pm

I'm torn regarding Prop 7. A good outcome would be that California establishes year-round "Daylight Savings Time", and, everyone just moves everything 1 hour later. Don't get up at 6:30, get up at 7:30. Don't leave for work/school at 8:00, leave at 9:00. Don't start at 8:30, start at 9:30. Work until 6:00 or 6:30. Works for me.

BTW, Daylight Savings Time wastes energy.

Web Link

Web Link

Posted by Resident, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood,
on Oct 11, 2018 at 6:02 pm

We need to use our hours of daylight wisely. There is little wisdom in having it so dark in the mornings that children will be walking to school in the dark. As Diana says, at present it is still not light at 7.00 am and in December and January it would not be light at 8.00 am. There is wisdom in the change.

If those in the tropics don't change it is because they don't have the many hours difference in daylight hours between summer and winter. The further north, the bigger the difference.

Another thing to take into account is that we already are skewed because of time zones. The sun moves (technically the earth moves) more than one hour between time zones. They are already not as accurate as a sundial would confirm.

Posted by I agree with Diana, a resident of Atherton,
on Oct 11, 2018 at 7:01 pm

It makes no sense to save daylight all year. Why don't we just take all that daylight we saved on daylight saving time in the summer and use it in the winter when it gets dark so early?

Posted by No Kidding, a resident of Midtown,
on Oct 11, 2018 at 8:15 pm

No Kidding is a registered user.

Prop F is an attempt by the SEIU to intimidate Stanford for not agreeing to their demands. By showing that they can initiate a proposition that would raise costs to Stanford and the city, SEIU is showing that they are not to be ignored. And never mind the collateral damage to Palo Alto taxpayers to pay for all this monitoring. Note also that Palo Alto is supposed to establish and negotiate contested charges. What a huge bureaucracy will have to be developed to do that!

F is a total loser. Tell SEIU how you feel about them spending your tax dollars for no return. You'll pay for the process and get nothing in return.

Posted by Waiting, a resident of Crescent Park,
on Oct 11, 2018 at 11:49 pm

Yes on F.

And don't mess with clocks.

Posted by DIana Diamond, a resident of Midtown,
on Oct 12, 2018 at 12:40 pm

DIana Diamond is a registered user.

Resident --

I may have confused you. Right now, with daylight savings time, it doesn't get light until 7 a.m. (If we were on standard time right now, it would get light at 6 a.m.) IF WE CONTINUE ON DAILY SAVINGS TIME, as Prop 7 calls for, then in December and January it wouldn't get light until 8 am. If we fall back to Standard time, it would get light at 7 a.m. in December and January. I prefer the lighter mornings in the winter -- and I think it makes it easier (and safer) for kids to get to school.

Posted by Resident, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood,
on Oct 12, 2018 at 2:48 pm

Diana, I'm not confused, I just expressed myself poorly. Thanks for underscoring the concerns. I am worried about what would happen if we remained on Daylight Savings Time with dark winter mornings, and I also happen to like long summer evenings. The only way we can have that is by continuing to spring forward/fall back.

Posted by JonParsons, a resident of Duveneck/St. Francis,
on Oct 13, 2018 at 12:18 pm

I agree with I Agree With Diana - it is just a matter of tax incentives (like for rainwater storage) for people to install at-home facilities to store up some of those excess summer hours and then tap into them during the dark winter days.

Posted by iii, a resident of Midtown,
on Oct 15, 2018 at 11:31 am

iii is a registered user.

Clocks. Yes leave alone. Over the past 23 yrs have had 3 dogs.
Take them out weekends and vacations 7am sharp. They wake up
6:20am knowing since I have not gone to work (in 6:30am past 30yrs),
it is their run/walk at a field morning.
Well when we change clocks backwards and forwards. Now they start
earlier via the Fall Back (right :----)?) and is a nightmare as
fussing at 5:20am....
Yes leave clocks alone please :--------.....
Above in fun, but seriously, its time to change. Leave the clocks alone.
Not sure what good really does....

Posted by wayne douglass, a resident of another community,
on Oct 15, 2018 at 1:13 pm

wayne douglass is a registered user.

Diana Diamond's urging everybody to vote against these propositions only reinforces my own rule against voting for ANY propositions in California. It's simply too easy for a proposition to get on the ballot, so any schmuck with a lot of money can put his "idea" before the voters whether it is a proposal to divide California into 2 or 3 states or some other number (there are lots to go around, pick one) or some other cockamamie scheme to make our lives "better." When a union supports ANY scheme, it is suspect automatically, especially if it costs money, in taxes, in profits, or mere inconvenience. Vote against them all, unless they're cleverly worded so that NO means YES.

Posted by Annette, a resident of College Terrace,
on Oct 15, 2018 at 5:41 pm

About Daylight Savings: I feel the impact acutely twice a year and have long wished it would go away. But in reading about this we have only two choices: all in or all out; we cannot ease our way out of it by adjusting our clocks one last time and for only 30 minutes. FWIW, the arguments I've read for doing away with it focus on health impacts and the increase in strokes and heart attacks. The arguments for keeping it focus on child safety and energy savings. I suspect it is here to stay.

Posted by RickMoen, a resident of Menlo Park,
on Oct 15, 2018 at 6:04 pm

Ms. Diamond, I'm sorry, but you are incorrect in saying that state Proposition 7 would make daylight savings time permanent in this state. No, it wouldn't. That's not what it says. It would not make any modification to current time changes.

What it would do is repeal a blanket 70-year-old prohibition on the Legislature making certain sorts of time changes, and instead permit the Legislature to make them after voting with a 2/3 supermajority as long as such changes are consistent with Federal law.

The proposition is trickily worded, so it's easy to misunderstand. For further information, I would recommend Pete Stahl's voter guide site about California ballot initiatives, . I also do online analyses of the entire ballot (as seen at my Menlo Park precinct) at each election, and publish them on my Web site (

Best Regards,
Rick Moen

Posted by Different Take, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood,
on Oct 15, 2018 at 9:45 pm

I appreciate your perspective on these propositions. I will probably vote yes on F because I'm that sure it's going to lose but I want there to be a few votes for it as a protest of exorbitant medical costs at Stanford.

As for daylight savings time... I actually prefer things to be light later, so that I can take a walk, garden, and do other things in the late afternoon/early evening. In our household, everyone gets up and goes before sunrise anyway. If sunrise is 8am, that doesn't mean it's dark at 8am, twilight will mean it's lighter earlier than that. Kids will still have light for going to school.

I don't think this is one that can ever be resolved for everyone, because different people have different internal clocks that are in part related to our genes (according to the latest book on sleep from that UCB sleep clinic researcher - Walker?). I think it will probably be defeated because people don't like change unless there is a clear advantage. But I would love it if California were only two hours behind the East Coast part of the year. Just think of all the money Californians will save because they don't miss their credit card deadlines...

Posted by Different Take, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood,
on Oct 15, 2018 at 9:47 pm

@Rick Moen,
Thanks for the clarification. Now I really think I will vote yes.

Posted by StarSpring, a resident of Adobe-Meadow,
on Oct 16, 2018 at 11:01 am

StarSpring is a registered user.

@Different Take, Don't vote yes on F as a "protest vote". That's the kind of thing that got Trump elected!

and, yes, I'm in favor of giving control of the clock back to the legislature. I'd actually prefer standard time all year. I believe that can be done -without- getting Congress involved.

Posted by Resident, a resident of Barron Park,
on Oct 16, 2018 at 11:49 am

On prop 7: I wouldn't mind seeing a YES vote here. But if we want to stop changing the clocks lets opt out of DST, which existing Federal law permits. The sun should be at its zenith around noon not 1 PM.

Posted by DIana Diamond, a resident of Midtown,
on Oct 16, 2018 at 12:41 pm

DIana Diamond is a registered user.

Rick Moen --

You are right about what Prop 7 actually states. But please keep on mind that if our legislators deal with this issue, they will look to see what the results of Prop 7 were in 2018, and may vote accordingly. So in a sense, we are voting in spirit on whether this state should go to year-round Daily Savings Time.
I guess I don't like turning off my house lights and then going to bed, and getting up in the morning and turning back on those same lights for another hour or two.

Posted by Mark Weiss, a resident of Downtown North,
on Oct 16, 2018 at 12:41 pm

Way ahead of you, sister:
I recommend doing as The Big Lebowski (Jeff Bridges) and quitting the day job and put the Swiss watch on Ebay and just going with the flow timewise. Time is a construct, peoples. Even Einstein said that. God doesn't play dice with the universe but he says Palo Alto (and therefore the planet) would be better off if more people played dominos in public places and fewer people sat in cafes hustling next phase for their world changing app. Be the change means hit snooze and sleep in.
That's the tea.

Posted by Resident, a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood,
on Oct 16, 2018 at 2:58 pm

The reality is that dark mornings will be more dangerous for children going to school, particularly if they walk or use bikes. I suspect more parents will drive them to school if daylight has not occurred in the same way they drive them to school when it rains.

The reality is that more crime occurs in the dark than in daylight. It is also true to say that juvenile crime occurs more often in summer when school is out. Making darkness occur earlier in the evening when younger criminal types are out of the constraints of school with homework and other organized evening activities will provide more hours of darkness for them to hide their crimes before their supposed curfew.

Most countries in the world have some type of DST. There are good reasons to have such mechanisms particularly the farther north or the farther south of the equator they are positioned. Some places only 30 minutes, during WW2, there was 2 hours in some places.

History and common sense is on the side of DST. Everyone likes the extra hour of sleep in fall. The inconvenience of a couple of days during spring forward is a fact of life that has been dealt with successfully all our lives.

Posted by RickMoen, a resident of Menlo Park,
on Oct 17, 2018 at 3:59 pm

Ms. Diamond, I of course respect your view. (You're one of the bloggers here I eagerly look forward to reading.)

If you have time, I do recommend looking at what Pete Stahl ( has to say about this measure; he includes a sprightly bit of amusing doggerel verse about it parodying Joyce Kilmer's "Trees" and concluding:


Don't fear the Legislature will
Enact an ill-considered bill

Adopting a new paradigm
Of year-round Daylight Saving Time.

That would require a two-thirds vote,
The odds of which are quite remote.

Poems are made by fools like me,
But this won't alter DST.


All the best,
Rick Moen

Posted by Rick, a resident of Adobe-Meadow,
on Oct 17, 2018 at 4:01 pm

@Resident, History and common sense are on the OPPOSITE side of DST. It is a recent invention in the last 100 years and has always been a point of contention. It doesn't save energy. Either morning people -or- evening people will be pleased, but not both. Most crime occurs during the hours it would be dark regardless of the DST/ST setting - i.e. 11:00pm or 3:00am.

Standard time - all year round!

Posted by trees more trees, a resident of Greendell/Walnut Grove,
on Oct 18, 2018 at 3:21 pm

Can Measure F's backers explain how requiring government officials to go over our private medical bills isn't a HIPPAA violation?

Posted by Jessica H., a resident of Community Center,
on Nov 6, 2018 at 12:50 pm

Measure F, which will inevitably increase patient costs by forcing practitioners out and impose unreasonable and expensive burdens on local taxpayers by forcing the city with the need to hire a staff of experts to oversee the charges being made by almost all medical professionals practicing in Palo Alto including individual practitioners, dentists and orthodontists. This will directly reduce access and increase costs for families in Palo Alto, and is totally inappropriate for local regulation. Structural issues with heath insurance costs should be properly regulated at the federal or state level.

I encourage all to vote NO on measure F.

Follow this blogger.
Sign up to be notified of new posts by this blogger.



Post a comment

Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.

Stay informed.

Get the day's top headlines from Mountain View Online sent to your inbox in the Express newsletter.

Boichik Bagels is opening its newest – and largest – location in Santa Clara this week
By The Peninsula Foodist | 0 comments | 2,608 views

I Do I Don't: How to build a better marriage Page 15
By Chandrama Anderson | 0 comments | 1,214 views

By Laura Stec | 13 comments | 1,097 views

Which homes should lose gas service first?
By Sherry Listgarten | 0 comments | 787 views


Support local families in need

Your contribution to the Holiday Fund will go directly to nonprofits supporting local families and children in need. Last year, Voice readers and foundations contributed a total of $84,000.