Palo Alto sued for barring non-residents from park

The city of Palo Alto was sued Tuesday over its apparently unique policy of prohibiting non-residents from using Foothills Park under the threat of fines or jail time,

While criticizing the policy as a legacy of the city's racist past that its leaders refuse to change, attorneys with the American Civil Liberties Union and Munger, Tolles & Olson LLP are citing other legal arguments to bolster their case the policy is unconstitutional.

The complaint, filed in Santa Clara County Superior Court, argues the city is violating the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause protection of right to travel.

ACLU attorney William S. Freeman and Munger Tolles partner Achyut T. Phadke cite a century-old U.S. Supreme Court case, which states "all persons enjoy "the fundamental right, inherent in citizens of all free governments, peacefully to dwell within the limits of their respective states, to move at will from place to place therein..." U.S. v. Wheeler, 254 U.S. 281, 283 (1920).

Phadke also said the restriction violates First Amendment rights of freedom of speech by Californians who oppose the policy. "The park is a public forum," he said in a telephone interview.

According to the complaint, the city "aggressively enforces" the restriction on non-citizens, posting prominent signs and staffing the main gate to enforce the statute at a cost of $89,000 a year.

Freeman said no non-resident has been arrested in decades for using the park but that the policy has been very effective at keeping non-residents out because there is only one main entrance to the 1,400-acre park, which was sold to the city without any restrictions, the attorneys said. The non-resident policy has been in place since 1969, according to the complaint.

A Palo Alto city spokesperson could not be reached for comment Tuesday. The City Council has resisted efforts over the years to eliminate the residents-only policy at the park.

A city website about the park emphasizes that non-residents cannot use the park, specifically citing residents of neighboring East Palo Alto, which has a much higher percentage of Black residents, as well as residents of tony Los Altos Hills and Stanford.

Freeman said the city's policy does not pass state or national constitutional muster. "You don't get to build a wall around 10% of your city and call it a private club," he said.

-- Craig Anderson