Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025-02-24 City Council Summary MinutesCITY COUNCIL SUMMARY MINUTES Page 1 of 22 Regular Meeting February 24, 2022 The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Council Chambers and by virtual teleconference at 5:31 p.m. Present In Person: Burt, Lauing, Lu, Lythcott-Haims, Reckdahl, Stone, Veenker Councilmember Burt arrived at 5:52 p.m. Present Remotely: None Absent: None Call to Order Mayor Lauing called the meeting to order. The clerk called roll and declared there was a quorum. Special Orders of the Day 1. Proclamation Expressing Appreciation for June Fleming Vice Mayor Veenker read the proclamation, which she was honored to do. Sandra McMahan expressed that she and June Fleming had been friends for over 50 years. She had been an amazing mentor. With great pleasure, she accepted the proclamation on behalf of June Fleming’s family. She thanked Council for the wonderful honor and for giving June Fleming special recognition. Vice Mayor Veenker commented that she had the good fortune of meeting June and Roscoe Fleming in 1992. She thanked the members of June Fleming’s church for attending the meeting. June Fleming had been an inspiration. Councilmember Lythcott-Haims offered gratitude to June Fleming for her historic leadership. She announced that Maura Oman with YCS was putting on an event to honor June Fleming on March 20. Details of the event would be provided at a later date. Mayor Lauing appreciated Sandra McMahan attending the meeting on behalf of June Fleming. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 2 of 22 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 02/24/2025 Agenda Changes, Additions and Deletions City Manager Ed Shikada announced that there were no changes. Public Comment There were no requests to speak. Council Member Questions, Comments and Announcements Mayor Lauing discussed Valley Water’s proposal to move $23M from the North County Sea Level Rise project to San Jose. The City Manager had been in contact with Valley Water requesting that Item 3.4 be deferred without any substantive actions. In that regard, an ad hoc committee, consisting of Councilmembers Burt, Reckdahl, and Stone, had been set up to discuss what could be done about the issue. The first Mayor’s press and community briefing would be held at Rinconada Library on Thursday at 5 p.m. The goal was to have mutual dialogue with the press and the public. He asked folks to let him know of any items they wished to receive updates on. Council would be sponsoring a big celebration for Joe Simitian, and he and the Vice Mayor wished to authorize the use of Council contingency funds up to about $10K, and that would be the decision unless Councilmembers wanted to debate it. Councilmember Lythcott-Haims announced that there would be a Cubberley Master Plan community meeting on March 19 at 6 p.m. She invited all who were interested in Cubberley to participate. She mentioned that Council and others in the community attended a conversation this past weekend regarding 80 Willow Road, which was a proposed builder’s remedy project in Menlo Park. She thought it would be a community conversation for some time, and she encouraged folks to be aware of the potential development, which would impact Palo Alto. The HRC would be sponsoring a Know Your Rights workshop or seminar at Mitchell Park on Thursday, February 27, at 5:30. She encouraged folks to become educated and to be informed in order to protect people. Vice Mayor Veenker announced that the Bay Area Air District had appointed her to the Bay Area Regional Collaborative (BARC). She discussed the work of BARC. She reported on the Northern California Power Agency Commission and the Legislative and Regulatory Committee meetings that took place last week. Various general service agreements and a cost allocation model for the next fiscal year had been approved. She had accepted an appointment to the NCPA Executive Committee. She provided an update related to the happenings at the Legislative and Regulatory Committee meeting. There had been State legislation to create a Western states energy market, called the Pathways Initiative. They received concerning updates at the Federal level, which included the Pathways energy market having a tough battle SUMMARY MINUTES Page 3 of 22 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 02/24/2025 ahead and executive orders potentially negatively impacting the Central Valley Project, which she elaborated on. Consent Calendar 2. Approval of Minutes from February 3, 2025, February 4, 2025, and February 10, 2025 Meetings 3. Authorize Transmittal of the 2024 Comprehensive Plan Annual Progress Report to the Office of Planning and Research and the 2024 Housing Element Annual Progress Report to the Department of Housing and Community Development. 4. Approval of two Professional Services Contracts 1) Fairbank, Maslin, Maullin, Metz and Associates (C25193598) in an Amount Not to Exceed $126,225 for Cubberley Project Public Opinion Research Services for a Period of 20 Months, 2) The Lew Edwards Group(C25193673) in an Amount Not to Exceed $138,375 for Public Communication Consulting Services related to the November 2026 General Obligation Bond Ballot Measure for a Period of 20 Months, and Approval of Budget Amendments in the General Fund and the Cubberley Property Infrastructure Fund; CEQA Status - Not a Project 5. Authorization to Execute an Amendment to Legal Services Contract Number S23186556 with Law Office of Clare Gibson in the Amount of $75,000 for Construction Claims Dispute Resolution and Defense regarding the Public Safety Building, for a Total Not-to-Exceed Amount of $310,000; CEQA Status – Not a Project. 6. Approval of Use of City Facilities and Staff Time to Support Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Palo Alto Mobility Hub Meetings and Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board/Caltrain Board of Directors Meeting; CEQA status – not a project. 7. SECOND READING: Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Section 18.08.040 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code (The Zoning Map) to Change the Classification of Property Located at 3265 El Camino Real from Service Commercial (CS) Zone to Planned Community Zone (PC) for the Construction of a 100 Percent Affordable Housing Project (FIRST READING: February 10, 2025, PASSED 7-0) Public Comment: 1. Scott O’Neil addressed Item 2, the Annual Progress Report to HCD, and he discussed the metric choice for the housing pipeline and RHNA. He wanted to ensure that the reforms would not just be delivered but that they would go far enough. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 4 of 22 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 02/24/2025 MOTION: Councilmember Lythcott-Haims moved, seconded by Councilmember Reckdahl to approve Agenda Item Numbers 2-7. MOTION PASSED: 7-0 City Manager Comments City Manager Ed Shikada displayed slides and noted that the Mayor’s press and community briefing would be held on Thursday, February 27, from 5 to 6 p.m., at Rinconada Library. It would be streamed on YouTube, but only in-person questions would be taken. Details could be found at cityofpaloalto.org/mayorbriefing. Staff had expanded the Advanced Heat Pump Water Heater Program to a broader range of electrification opportunities. Information could be found at cityofpaloalto.org/electrification. He looked forward to the community taking advantage of the resource and providing feedback. The HRC would host an Immigrants Rights Workshop at 5:30 p.m., on Thursday, February 27, at Mitchell Park Community Center. Translation services would be available. Upcoming Council meetings would include a study session on the Draft Safe Streets for All Safety Action Plan and an action item related to the Housing Element, Housing Incentive Program on March 3. On March 10, there would be a study session related to the Special Events Workplan, and the action agenda would include the Comprehensive Plan Amendment for Car-Free Streets and an ordinance amendment to allow early demolition under certain circumstances. On March 17, there would be a study session with the Palo Alto Youth Council, and the action agenda would include the Professional Services Agreement for synthetic turf studies and an item related to the proposed development at 70 Encina. On April 7, the Dark Sky and Bird-Friendly Design ordinances would be addressed. He presented a slide showing the items for April 14 and beyond. Action Items 8. Colleague’s Memo: Proposed Adoption of a Resolution Underscoring Council’s Commitment to Sustaining Palo Alto Values and Interests in the Face of Trump Administration Actions Deputy City Clerk Christine Prior distributed two At-Places Memos to Council and the public. Councilmembers took a few minutes to read the memos. City Manager Ed Shikada noted that the memos had been posted to the City’s website and added to this evening’s agenda. Mayor Lauing asked the City Attorney to discuss how this should be processed. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 5 of 22 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 02/24/2025 City Attorney Molly Stump outlined the process. She noted that the original draft submitted by the authors, the authors’ revised draft, and the additional draft provided by three other councilmembers could be discussed at this meeting. Mayor Lauing discussed the origin and purpose of the Colleagues’ Memo as it was formulated. It had been suggested to him that there should be a statement to the City that Council would continue to lead from the standpoint of Palo Alto’s adopted values, which was precisely the intent stated in the key driver of the resolution. He recited the introduction of the Colleagues’ Memo. He and the Vice Mayor had received thoughtful comments from residents, so an amended version of the original memo had been proposed, which he detailed. He noted that State and Federal laws would be followed. Vice Mayor Veenker spoke of executive orders impacting Palo Alto. She believed it was important to stand united to protect residents, provide desired services, and be transparent. She stated that a mechanism was needed to be responsive when issues required a fast response. She discussed and furnished slides related to the possibility of legal action with examples of joining a litigation and an amicus brief. She wanted to honor the rule of law and keep the new administration from wreaking havoc on Palo Alto and its residents. Councilmember Burt was glad to see the rewritten memo. He noted that legislative guidelines would be needed for the action part Vice Mayor Veenker described. He encouraged colleagues to look at the memo put forward by himself and Councilmembers Reckdahl and Stone in response to the original one. He thought the revised memo moved in the direction of what they were advocating for, although there were places that needed to go further. He wanted to ensure that the language used would not be counterproductive to Palo Alto’s interests. Councilmember Lu commented that in general he was in favor of the updates made, which he considered to be productive, clear as it related to values, and less confrontational. He did not think it was possible to calculate the federal funding that might be at risk, and given the uncertainty and the risk there, he preferred to adopt either version. Regarding balance, he preferred the version issued by Councilmembers Burt, Reckdahl, and Stone. He explained why he thought Part B under the recitals needed to be removed. As for bringing issues to closed session for more discussion, he thought choosing three to move the full Council into closed session on a litigation matter was a reasonable and thoughtful threshold. In Councilmembers Burt, Reckdahl, and Stone’s version, he believed the point about immigration and workers’ social status should be modified to immigration status. Councilmember Lythcott-Haims appreciated the revision to the initial resolution proposed and what Councilmembers Burt, Reckdahl, and Stone offered. She voiced that Council was obligated to protect the City and the residents, particularly the most vulnerable residents. She asked if the work of the Palo Alto Police Department, specifically its role and response to ICE, was adequately covered by the notion of protecting the legal rights and human rights of all residents and workers. She wondered if it should explicitly address the Police Department. She found healthcare missing from both memos, and she wanted to see language added with a SUMMARY MINUTES Page 6 of 22 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 02/24/2025 specific reference to gender-affirming care and other forms of healthcare, although it may need to be more vague, but she did not want people to be denied needed healthcare. She would propose that as an amendment to whichever resolution won the day. Councilmember Stone was grateful to see the revised memo addressing the concerns he had in the initial memo. It was important to send a message to the community that Council would protect them from executive overreach and unlawful acts threatening the City’s residents and workers and Palo Alto’s way of life. He discussed the president being problematic. He wanted to protect the community, and he thought the proposed resolutions were headed in the right direction. He supported Councilmember Lythcott-Haims’ healthcare recommendation. As for social status, he wanted to symbolize to the community that Council was here to protect and defend them, but he did not want to use confrontational language. He suggested creating an ad hoc, with members from both drafts, to bring the drafts together, which may come back on consent or an action in the future. He thought it was important to have a unanimous vote, and he embraced having an additional meeting if needed. Mayor Lauing stated that he and Vice Mayor Veenker were not trying to be exhaustive in citing every example. He thought the focus should be on what action should be taken if a prompt decision was needed legally or otherwise. He agreed that trigger words should not be used, so they had avoided words such as ICE and DEI. Regarding immigration, they were addressing illegal and inhumane immigration enforcement. Councilmember Reckdahl expressed that they had been cautious about using trigger words and inflammatory language. Vice Mayor Veenker inquired if legislative guidelines had been passed not long ago, and, if so, she requested that such be provided at this meeting. They wanted to update the guidelines with the other points they included in the memo. Public Comment: 1. Cindy N. emphatically supported the City’s resolution to publicly state and engage in ongoing, strong support for the rule of law and values that kept the city safe and peaceful and in line with the U.S. Constitution. She supported Stanford Hospital offering gender-affirming care. 2. Winter D. thanked the Mayor and Vice Mayor for this. She wanted policies, protocols, and articles to keep with Palo Alto values, and she requested updating any that needed to be updated. She wanted this to be smart and strategic. She suggested removing identifiers that might be alienating. 3. Celia P. was in favor of creating a resolution showing the values of Palo Alto, which she considered this resolution to do. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 7 of 22 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 02/24/2025 4. Mora O. was grateful that the proposed resolution began with Palo Alto values. She stated that knowing the values helped in knowing what action to take to protect them. 5. Tom H., Pastor at First Presbyterian Church Palo Alto, a member of the Steering Committee of Multifaith Voices for Peace and Justice, and a member of the Board of Stanford’s University Christian Campus Ministry, supported the resolution. He remarked that immigrants needed to be treated humanely and with dignity and respect. He advocated for DEI in the nation’s workforce, the protection of transgender people, and protecting the planet. He hoped Council would support the resolution in whatever form it should come. 6. Samina S. thanked Council for the gesture. She suggested folks open their minds, hearts, souls, and arms to new immigrants. She invited all to their annual interfaith Iftar Dinner on Sunday, March 9. 7. Diana G., Convener of Multifaith Voices for Peace and Justice, thanked the Mayor and Vice Mayor for bringing this important and needed resolution to Council and the community. They did not want to hurt the most vulnerable in the community or hurt the earth. They supported inclusion, compassion, and common good. 8. Jim K. strongly supported the action and he commended the City for bringing it forward. He opined that there should not be concerns about retribution. He quoted the Governor in his recent State of the State related to tyranny requiring fear, silence, and compliance and democracy requiring courage. 9. Annette R. associated herself with Winter D’s comments. 10. Burke O., Pastor of First United Methodist Church, thanked Council for creating and considering the resolution. He would support whatever version might be cobbled together. He requested that it be reworked and returned ASAP. 11. Aram J. mentioned that he did not have all the drafts. He had written a response and read it to the Council. He disagreed with Council not addressing the ceasefire resolution. 12. Nadia N. thanked Council for addressing this. She encouraged the formation of an hoc to discuss it and bring it back to Council. 13. Kristen S. strongly supported this action to protect Palo Alto’s values, community, and environment, and she thanked Council for their leadership. 14. Michelle H. appreciated the concern with trigger words, but she quoted Timothy Snyder as it related to authoritarianism and repressive government. She opined that the resolution was the right thing to do and that it would empower other cities to stand up on behalf of targeted communities. She thanked Council for considering taking a strong SUMMARY MINUTES Page 8 of 22 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 02/24/2025 stance in solidarity with the LGBT community. She suggested there be language supporting trans healthcare as a fundamental human right, not negotiable in Palo Alto. 15. Uzma thanked Council for bringing this important resolution forward. She considered it to be a reaffirmation of what Palo Alto was as a community. She spoke of Council’s disassociation with certain Silicon Valley executives who may support some of the executive orders, which she opined could be a personal struggle for many community members who were employed in tech. 16. Elliott M. supported the Colleagues’ Memo and looked forward to a good resolution coming out of it. He was in favor of leaving the language related to joining lawsuits. Mayor Lauing thanked the public for their attendance and correspondence, and he assured them that their voices were heard. He noted that there was a discrepancy in the sort of committee that would be evaluating some of the potential opportunities for litigation, one being P&S and the other being a new committee, ad hoc, or other. He requested comments related to that. Vice Mayor Veenker discussed why they had suggested this go to P&S. She mentioned that some cities had given their city attorneys authority to sign on to amicus briefs, which she was not suggesting, and she considered what was being presented a nice middle ground that would give the City nimbleness. She addressed the suggestion that three councilmembers request a closed session, and she asked the authors of the other proposal to speak to the process they had in mind. Councilmember Burt stated that there might be a couple mechanisms used to act efficiently and effectively. He did not want to inflict harm on the City or the most vulnerable residents. He wanted to be focused, strategic, and deliberate as issues arose. Mayor Lauing asked if the suggestion of three councilmembers had a structure in mind, such as a standing committee or an ad hoc, and if they saw downsides with P&S doing it with revised legislative guidelines. Councilmember Burt answered that it would be like an abbreviated Colleagues’ Memo. Currently the procedures and protocols did not address councilmembers initiating closed session items on legal matters. It was intended that three councilmembers would be able to request a closed session on individual occasions. He stated each path needed to be flushed out better. He did not necessarily see downsides on P&S doing it, with revised legislative guidelines, although two paths may be desired on a circumstance. He noted that going to P&S and then coming to full Council many not be expeditious or the best path for issues needing more rapid action. Vice Mayor Veenker clarified that the idea was that Council would be noticed as quickly as possible but there might be a screening with the City Attorney without returning to Council. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 9 of 22 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 02/24/2025 Councilmember Burt did not know if he was comfortable with that. Councilmember Lu questioned if referrals to P&S would mainly come from staff. Mayor Lauing answered that referrals from Council would go to a standing committee and they would have a set of guidelines for matching a particular amicus brief with legislative guidelines and a recommendation would be made back to Council. There would not be a Colleagues’ Memo. Vice Mayor Veenker stated that they were contemplating a subject matter referral. Limiting it to a Colleagues’ Memo could be an extra step. Councilmember Lu asked if there could be options for staff directly making referrals to P&S and the full Council asking P&S to fine tune legal points. Vice Mayor Veenker thought that was correct, but she requested that the City Attorney comment. City Attorney Stump understood that Councilmember Lu was asking about the mechanism for placing an item on P&S’s agenda that a councilmember might like their colleagues to consider supporting. Councilmember Stone stated it was a highly complex and nuanced issue, but he felt Council was aligned. He did not think the necessary detail and wordsmithing could be done at this meeting. He suggested creating an ad hoc that could be a balance of the groups that created the resolutions. Mayor Lauing thought unanimity was important and that an ad hoc was a great idea. Vice Mayor Veenker liked the idea of an ad hoc. She thought there should be at least one ad hoc member from each draft. She believed the balance between bravery and practicality needed to be determined. She wanted to understand why certain language was changed or omitted, which she felt could be addressed by an ad hoc. MOTION: Vice Mayor Veenker moved, seconded by Councilmember Stone to create an ad hoc committee to draft a resolution that combines aspects of each draft and return to City Council as soon as possible. MOTION PASSED: 7-0 Mayor Lauing wanted this to return to Council next week. Councilmember Reckdahl thought it made sense to have two routes through. He voiced if there were no time pressures that an issue could go through P&S. He felt going directly to a closed session was the right answer if time was of the essence. He discussed both having Brown Act issues, and he suggested there be two ad hoc members. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 10 of 22 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 02/24/2025 Vice Mayor Veenker thanked all who attended the meeting. [Council took a 20-minute break] 9. Discuss the FY 2025 Mid-Year Budget Review and Approve 1) FY 2025 Budget Amendments in Various Funds and 2) Amendments to the FY 2025 Table of Organization to add 2.00 Full Time Equivalent (FTE) Positions and Eliminate 1.00 FTE Position and 3) Authorize overstrength of 1.00 FTE Fire Captain. CEQA Status – Not a Project. Administrative Services Dept Director/CFO Lauren Lai stated that most of the budgetary adjustments in a mid-year report were typically technical in nature with very few funding appropriations or recommendations. There was an emphasis on Fire Station 4. The sales tax revenue was coming in lower than estimated, which was the second largest revenue source for the General Fund. The adopted budget for FY2025 had a General Fund deficit of about $6M and the LRFF had a projected General Fund deficit of about $12M. Budget Director Paul Harper provided a slide with the mid-year budget review overview. Expenses were tracking higher than in FY2024, although they were still within budgeted levels until the end of the second quarter. Revenues were tracking in alignment with the 2026 through 2035 LRFF. Revenues were overall tracking in line with the FY2025 budget, although adjustments were needed due to the sales tax decline. Citywide vacancy levels at the end of the second quarter were around 11.5 percent. The report recommended a net addition of one FTE across the city while addressing urgent needs for staffing for a fire engine at Station 4, repairs to storm irrigation pumps at the golf course, increased customer support staffing at the JMZ, and enhanced cleaning services for University and California avenues. The report reserved one- time funds in the Uncertainty Reserve to address near-term deficits identified in the LRFF. The report would add a fire engine to the current ambulance at Fire Station 4, add a shift position on overtime to cover 3 shifts 24/7, and activate cross staffing at Station 4 through the end of FY2025. It would allow the City to use existing resources for a near-term solution starting in the next 30 to 60 days. The model was consistent with prepandemic staffing levels at Station 4. One of the two reserve engines would also be put into service. Staff would return to the Finance Committee in April to evaluate mid- and long-term Fire services and staffing to incorporate these solutions into the FY2026 budget process. Staff would evaluate the purchase of a fire engine to maintain the City’s fleet. He shared a slide that focused on actions in the General Fund that would impact the BSR. Other actions that had net zero impacts to the fund could be found in Attachment A of the report. He detailed what reduced the BSR by $9.1M. He shared slides related to the FY2025 General Fund reserve status and technical adjustments in other funds, which he elaborated on. In March and April, the UAC and the Finance Committee would review the Utility financial plans and recommended rates for FY2026. The Finance Committee was also reviewing the Planning and Development Fee Study, the Citywide Municipal Fee Study, and continuing the Fire services from the fall of 2024. In May, the FY2026 proposed Operating Capital budgets would be released, and the Finance Committee would have budget hearings to SUMMARY MINUTES Page 11 of 22 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 02/24/2025 review the budgets and make adjustments before Council adoption. In June, the FY2025 third quarter Fiscal Analysis Report would be released, and Council would adopt the FY2026 Operating and Capital budgets and the utility rates and municipal fees for 2026. Staff recommended that Council approve amendments to the FY2025 budget appropriation for various funds and capital projects as identified in Attachment A, Exhibits 1 and 2, which required a supermajority or two-thirds approval; approve amendments to the FY2025 Table of Organization consistent with budget amendments in Attachment A, adding one FTE senior buyer and one FTE program assistant and eliminating one FTE contract administrator; and authorize an overstrength one FTE fire captain position. Councilmember Burt supported the way staff had framed the item. He remarked that the budget needed to be closely monitored. He discussed the vacancy rate and dollars saved by not filling positions. He noted that the budget sometimes went to overtime, outside services, and surpluses. He requested that Fire Chief Geo Blackshire provide an overview on staffing and comment on the historic service at Station 4. He voiced that last fall the Finance Committee discussed addressing the next step in staffing and that there were two models, which would come up in the budget cycle. There had been mention of consideration being given to purchasing a replacement water truck in the upcoming budget cycle. He discussed the long lead times and questioned if an order should be placed now as it would probably not be received until the end of FY2025. He assumed it would not go on the 2025 budget. Fire Chief Geo Blackshire replied that Station 4 had four beds but it could accommodate three personnel staff and an apparatus. Before they cross staffed, they had one fire engine with three personnel and no ambulance. Going forward with the adjustment, they would have one fire engine, one ambulance, and three staff members. They were originally going to eliminate five positions due to COVID and they were awarded a SAFER grant, which allowed those positions to be maintained, but to supplement that, they had to brown out a fire engine, which he explained. They set goals, he believed in August 2021, to improve the system, so they had a two-person squad and an ambulance at Station 2, an ambulance but not an engine at Station 4, and they had done away with cross staffing. The goal was to have a fire engine in every station, and they wanted to eliminate cross staffing and the brown out at Station 2. Those goals had been accomplished with the way they currently deployed. In the current fiscal year, Council approved adding three FTEs to put Station 2 back in service. They were trying to get the engine at Station 4 back in service. If they ordered a diesel engine today, it would take about four years to get it in service. It would be closer to two years for a hybrid, but it would be $1.8M versus $1.2M. Public Works Director Brad Eggleston added that the current fiscal year’s Capital Program included a Pierce Volterra hybrid engine and they were in the midst of finalizing the specifications to place the order. Their placeholder in the Capital Plan needed to be evaluated for FY2026, but they were looking at an additional Pierce Volterra replacement for next year. Multiple options to again have two reserve engines would be discussed with the Fire Department. The simplest way may be to place in reserve the engine that would be replaced by SUMMARY MINUTES Page 12 of 22 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 02/24/2025 the one being ordered now. They were planning to place orders for new engines this year and next year. Councilmember Burt wanted the plan going forward to be clear to the public. He understood that the reserve truck would be an older truck but that it would not get the wear and tear of an active truck and maybe its life could be extended. Councilmember Stone queried how much it would cost to fully staff a fire engine in District 4. Fire Chief Blackshire responded that it would take 10 firefighters to fully staff a fire engine in District 4, which he believed would be about $2.5M to $2.7M. City Manager Ed Shikada believed the estimates were as high as $4M annually, so he thought there was variability on the cost estimate in addition to the time required to recruit, train, and onboard additional firefighters, which he believed had been estimated at one year. To add a fire engine, based on current Station 4 capacity, the assumption was that the ambulance would need to be relocated to a different station. Fire Chief Blackshire added that a peak hour ambulance had also been discussed when it was presented. Councilmember Stone requested clarity on the cost. He questioned how long it would take to implement full staffing at Station 4 and what the short-term cost implications would be to the mid-year budget cycle. Fire Chief Blackshire answered that it would take about a year to implement full staffing at Station 4. City Manager Shikada replied that if 10 firefighters were to be pursued now with the additional engine and the ambulance, the near-term strategy would be overtime, but he questioned whether that would be feasible with the existing staffing. If recruitment should be started as a part of the mid-year, the $12M deficit would grow significantly and in the range of $3M to $4M annually. Presuming a projected deficit of $16M, as part of the proposed budget, he would bring to Council cuts in other departments to accommodate the level of additional investment. Councilmember Lythcott-Haims requested more information on the single-role staffing model bringing on the FTE staffing level versus hiring firefighters. Fire Chief Blackshire responded that the concept behind the single-role staffing model was to hire civilians to staff ambulances and the firefighters currently on the ambulances would transfer to fire engines. More personnel would be hired but at a lower rate. It would cost about 30 percent less to hire the civilians needed for ambulances. It would take more time to run the single-role model, as it was essentially a new division. It would cost about $2.5M. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 13 of 22 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 02/24/2025 Councilmember Lythcott-Haims wanted to compare the higher costs with what was currently in the mid-year adjustment. She asked if overtime to fully staff that engine and keep the current ambulance in service was a sustainable method to provide the needed coverage. She asked where in Attachment A she could find information related to the enhanced cleaning of the downtowns. Administrative Services Dept Director/CFO Lai responded that what was in the mid-year adjustment was overtime for the balance of the year, so activating within 30 to 60 days 3 personnel to complete the 3-person staffing for 3 shifts. City Manager Shikada added that it would be at a cost of $300K for the remainder of this fiscal year and an estimated $1M annually. Fire Chief Blackshire discussed why he did not think it would be sustainable to have three overtime positions per shift fully staffing that engine. He added that it would adversely impact staff. Public Works Director Eggleston responded that information related to the enhanced cleaning of the downtowns could be found on Packet Pages 165 and 166. Councilmember Lu questioned when construction for Station 4 would be completed and why a fire engine but not an ambulance would be in the temporary Station 4. Public Works Director Eggleston answered that the current plan was to award a construction contract for Station 4 before Council’s summer break. If that schedule was adhered to, they anticipated construction to be completed in early 2027. City Manager Shikada stated that not putting an ambulance in the temporary Station 4 was due to a bed capacity issue. Fire Chief Blackshire explained why a fire engine but not an ambulance would be at the temporary Station 4. The new station that would be completed in 2027 would accommodate five personnel, and the goal was to have an engine and an ambulance at that station. Mayor Lauing inquired if there were any projections on the auto-related sales and if they were being conservative because car sales were down tax. He asked how Toyota moving from Palo Alto and Mercedes opening would factor in. He requested that staff address adding fixed cost FTE for a customer service agent. He understood that there was one vacancy in the JMZ. He requested comments on revenues relative to budget. Management of Treasury, Debt & Investments Tarun Narayan replied that he had looked at both analyses. Mercedes-Benz was operational. It would potentially be several years or longer before Toyota exited. He discussed the estimated tax revenues. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 14 of 22 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 02/24/2025 Administrative Services Dept Director/CFO Lai discussed the trends they were seeing in the auto and the leasing sectors, which was forecasted to continue. Community Services Department Director Kristen O’Kane replied that the position approved in June had been filled. She outlined what the second position would focus on. The vacancy rate in their department had dropped significantly. They were close to getting all the JMZ positions filled. Revenues had increased from last year, which was a combination of more visitors and higher ticket prices. They were not exceeding the revenue forecasted in the budget. City Manager Shikada added that the net cost for the program assistant was roughly one-tenth of the cost of the fire captain position. Councilmember Reckdahl referenced Slide 5 and noted there was a target of $54.4M but they chose to go to $54M, and he questioned why more was not pulled from the Uncertainty Reserve to make that the target. He asked how it was decided what would go where between the two reserves. He inquired if eventually the Uncertainty Reserve would be exhausted and if it would then be mothballed. He asked what would happen when the $12M ran out. He queried if the $12M on the slide assumed cross staffing at Station 4. He addressed Packet Page 173 and asked how many vacancies were actually being intervened for. Administrative Services Dept Director/CFO Lai stated that the amount in the Uncertainty Reserve was basically action taken by Council when they presented the FY2024 ACFR, the audited report. She added that the $12M in the Uncertainty Reserve was earmarked toward FY2026’s deficit. She explained that the interplay between BSR and the Uncertainty Reserve was flexible. She confirmed that eventually the Uncertainty Reserve would be exhausted and that it would then be mothballed. They were worried about the $12M running out. She discussed the current strategy for using the Uncertainty Reserve. The $12M on the slide did not include any cross staffing. Cross staffing would increase that by $1M. If fully funded, it would be about $3M to $4M. Human Resources Director Sandra Blanch replied that they were currently actively recruiting for most positions. Councilmember Reckdahl asked if all the positions should be pursued. He spoke of the economy, and he did not want to hire folks and then have to lay them off. He struggled to determine what positions should be filled and not filled. He inquired if there should be a freeze in some of the positions now. City Manager Shikada responded that the first step in a weakening economy would be a hiring freeze. He explained that a hiring freeze could be an option. If the time came, value judgements would need to be made in terms of a hiring freeze versus reductions, which would be a discussion in the May time frame for the annual budget. Regarding a hiring freeze, depending on Council’s decision at this meeting, he suggested the next decision point for actions along the lines of a hiring freeze be addressed in the May time frame when considering the upcoming fiscal year budget. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 15 of 22 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 02/24/2025 Councilmember Reckdahl was concerned that by that time positions may be filled and then the problem would be harder to solve. City Manager Shikada noted that many positions would be filled and others would open, so there was an ongoing turn with hires and separations. Vice Mayor Veenker inquired if the hope was that the JMZ position would generate enough revenue to pay for itself and more and, if so, if it was reflected in the go-forward budgets. She noted that reclassifying one FTE in the Utilities Department was associated with an expense reduction, but she queried if it moved to another budget. Community Services Department Director O’Kane answered that the revenue estimates for the JMZ position would exceed the cost of the position itself. Budget Director Harper replied that reclassifying one FTE in the Utilities Department would be a savings across the City, so Utilities would pay more than their share of that. However, it was intended that the position would strictly do Utilities’ work, so it more closely aligned with that funding source than the General Fund. Vice Mayor Veenker considered it to be a more appropriate alignment of expenses as opposed to an absolute reduction. She looked forward to the recommendation for funding with respect to the Geng Road safe parking, which she thanked staff for. Public Comment: 1. Troy J. discussed Fire Station 4 and cross staffing possibly being an issue. He supported staffing the station, and he requested that public safety to be supported. 2. Chris J. was concerned about removing Station 4. He wanted the City to evaluate the definition of an emergency and to think about the people of Palo Alto. 3. Bill R. opposed cross staffing and hiring civilian paramedics and supported cross training. He encouraged Council to refer this to the Finance Committee for additional funds to finance full staffing, meaning personnel and apparatus. He asked why there was not a tag-on review of other bids and agencies and purchasing an OES engine. 4. Greg S. found that the budget needed a budget amendment to meet the needs of basic fire protection services. He discussed the HCD growth mandate. He requested that Council hold an open public discussion related to how the budget would address the increased need for a range of vital City services. 5. Cecil K. thanked Council for addressing her concerns. She wanted firefighters to be protected from abusive overtime, and she urged Council to schedule 10 firefighter positions. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 16 of 22 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 02/24/2025 6. Annette R. voiced that it was critical to fully equip and properly staff each fire station, which became important in meeting RHNA required housing development. She spoke of the financial risk for not funding the fire stations properly and quickly. She requested that the Staff Analysis include information related to the high fire hazard zones in Palo Alto. 7. Sunny J., Captain at Palo Alto Station 1, thanked all who supported the Fire Department. He requested that Engine 64 be fully funded as a standalone unit, not as a cross staff. He did not want Fire staff to experience uncertainty in their jobs. 8. Joe P., Firefighters Local 1319 President, stated that this was a good year to invest in public resources. He spoke of Measure K being passed. He discussed the model not decreasing response times or improving strength. He was frustrated with what he considered to be inaction taken on a regular basis. He wanted the tools to do his job. 9. Adam K., Palo Alto Firefighter Paramedic, requested that the engine be staffed properly and funded fully. He opposed cross staffing, which he commented would not fix the problem. He and his family hated forced overtime. 10. Ardan B. encouraged Council to put the priority where there was a human demand. He asked why funding was not being discussed for Police emergency response to fire incidents. 11. Forest P. supported the modified approval of the item. He agreed with the comments of Chris J., Bill R., and Annette R., related to unpredictable fire behavior. He asked if a temporary ADU could be added to Fire Station 4. He supported Fire Station 4 staffing a fire engine and an ambulance or a modified motion eliminating cross staffing. 12. Nicholas P., Palo Alto Firefighter, discussed that the claim at a recent Town Hall meeting that Palo Alto had 114 firefighter personnel was misleading. He indicated that there had been a 23-percent reduction in emergency response personnel over the last 17 years. He asked that emergency response be prioritized over budget savings. He discussed Measure K being passed. He requested that Engine 64 be fully funded, not with overtime or cross staffing. 13. Daniel F., on behalf of Firefighters Local 1319, spoke of the impact of operating during emergency responses with decreased available resources. He indicated that the City’s fire response times were 20 percent higher than the City’s goal. He did not support cross staffing Engine 64, and he stated that it would not fix the problem. He requested the resources to do the job. Mayor Lauing asked if dollars from business tax contributions to date had been spent and how much the revenues from the business tax might possibly increase in a year. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 17 of 22 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 02/24/2025 Administrative Services Dept Director/CFO Lai confirmed that the dollars from business tax contributions to date had been spent. She noted that Packet Page 148 had a table delineating the business tax revenue by designated spending categories. She did not have at the meeting numbers related to revenues from the business tax in a year. City Manager Shikada thought the current estimate was about $7.5M total. Management of Treasury, Debt & Investments Narayan added that in 2026 there was about $6.5M and they were estimating maybe $6.7M to $6.8M in 2027, although the program was still being implemented, so it potentially could be a little higher. Budget Director Harper clarified that those dollars had been incorporated into the LRFF numbers. Councilmember Stone requested that the firefighters in the room raise their hand if they considered cross staffing as a semi-permanent solution to be a safe a sustainable model. Firefighters Local 1319 President Joe Penko thought firefighters would consider a temporary cross staffing model if there was a route to a permanent solution. Councilmember Stone asked firefighters to raise their hand if they would be comfortable with a temporary stop-gap measure while building the station to full staffing. He then asked firefighters to raise their hand if they found cross staffing to be a permanent solution and a sustainable, safe model instead of full staffing. He noted that no firefighters considered it to be a sufficient model. He asked what the average turnaround time was for an ambulance when transporting a patient to the hospital. Fire Chief Blackshire responded that the turnaround time for the entire call for an ambulance transporting a patient to the hospital was 45 minutes to 1 hour. Councilmember Stone asked if that downtime was the same for a firetruck arriving on scene while waiting for the ambulance and if there was an automatic aid agreement with Mountain View and/or Menlo Park. Fire Chief Blackshire stated that downtime was not the same for a firetruck arriving on scene while waiting for the ambulance. There was an auto aid agreement with Menlo Park. The automatic aid agreement with the City of Mountain View was specific to confirmed structure fires and responses. He defined automatic aid and mutual aid. Councilmember Reckdahl referenced Packet Page 173 and queried how many of the 10 vacancies were for firefighters and how many were for non-firefighter employees. He questioned if there would immediately be forced overtime if cross staffing was done. If the position was filled with overtime, he asked if in parallel they would try to hire a full-time person or if overtime would be indefinite. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 18 of 22 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 02/24/2025 Fire Chief Blackshire believed that all 10 vacancies were firefighters, which were being recruited. It would take almost a year to do a full recruitment in hiring. He stated that there were six firefighter vacancies now, although he would have to reference the report. The last time they had a hiring, they had about 800 applicants. If cross staffing was done, there would be overtime and if no one accepted the overtime, then mandatory overtime would be done. As for the position being filled with overtime, he stated that it was not for that particular job. They had nine firefighters in an in-house academy that would be online next month, but they still had vacancies. They had 6 firefighter vacancies, 3 trainees, and 1 assistant fire marshall, which was the complete 10 vacancies being discussed. Councilmember Reckdahl asked if with cross staffing an extra person should be added to the department to start recruiting tomorrow to add a full-time firefighter to eliminate the cross staffing overtime. City Manager Shikada answered absolutely. The specific position to be authorized here was for a captain. This action would not authorize filling the captain position permanently going forward. They were recommending overtime funding for the purpose of providing immediate staffing while the Finance Committee and Council considered the better long-term strategy through the budget process. Councilmember Reckdahl asked if the options would be to privatize; if there were solutions to not hire extra firefighters for the cross staffing; if there were long-term options to get a fire engine in Station 4 without additional firefighters; and why a firefighter would not be funded if cross staffing was to be done, so there would be cross staffing without overtime. City Manager Shikada replied that it was the single role ambulance, privatization, and the current staffing model for the ambulance and the like and a transition plan to get to get to the alternative staffing. As for solutions to not hire extra firefighters for the cross staffing, he voiced that the cross staffing added complexity. There were options for the future complement of staffing. He could not say there were long-term options to get a fire engine in Station 4 without additional firefighters. If the longer-term decision was to go with a civilianized ambulance system, there would be a question as to what complement of firefighter staff would be necessary. Councilmember Reckdahl asked why there was reluctance to hire another firefighter. City Manager Shikada responded that staff did not know for sure whether another firefighter would be needed. Councilmember Burt remarked that the cross staffing being considered now was an interim approach at one station. He asked if there had been cross staffing at three stations previously, which was stressful on the system and the firefighters. He wanted to compare one station being cross staffed on an interim basis versus the three stations being cross staffed previously. He declared that Measure K dollars were being spent as had been committed to the voters. He discussed what was included in the $1.2B budget. He thought the General Fund budget was SUMMARY MINUTES Page 19 of 22 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 02/24/2025 $307M, which was the budget being discussed at this meeting. He asked when the seventh station was closed. He noted that the current coverage area could not be compared to the previous coverage area. He explained that the 20-something percent more firefighters was not the actual number. He was happy to hear that two firetrucks were budgeted for. He stated there had never been two crews at Station 4. He spoke of coverage being a network. Fire Chief Blackshire responded that there had been cross staffing at three stations previously. He believed the seventh station was closed in 2011/2012. Mayor Lauing commented that the current adopted budget was about $55M this year for Fire; that the total Fire staff was about 115; that there had been serious investment in salaries, benefits, and personnel; and that close to 20 percent of the entire fund for everything was for Fire. Vice Mayor Veenker questioned, in terms of hires, if it would be appropriate to multiply by 3 to think of shifts, so 6 X 3 positions. She understood that there were nine firefighters in line for next month. She noted that those 9 firefighters plus the 6 firefighters equaled 15, and she asked what she was missing. Fire Chief Blackshire answered that that would get them up to what they were budgeted for now. If they kept staffing as it was and had the fire engine fully staffed, that would take an additional 10 firefighters for that particular unit. Vice Mayor Veenker was trying to reconcile having a number of approved firefighters in the pipeline with the need for an additional 10. She understood that 15 new firefighters would get the department close to previous staffing levels. Fire Chief Blackshire answered that the nine were filling vacancies and not adding to current staffing. He mentioned that there was a revolving door of vacancies. If they were to hire the nine and the additional six, it would fill what they were currently budgeted for, but it would not suffice to put a separate engine in service as a standalone unit. Vice Mayor Veenker questioned if it was a steady state function that they would not catch up. Fire Chief Blackshire explained reflex time. He discussed the business model they had presented to the Finance Committee as an option in November 2024. He added that there were vacancies within the 24 they had and that some of the positions were currently filled with overtime. Councilmember Stone asked what would happen if three FTEs were authorized with hopes to build over the next year or two. Fire Chief Blackshire answered that the authorization for three would allow the overtime captain to be a permanent position as opposed to overtime to cross staff that unit. If not approved, that particular FTE would fill just one of the vacancies they currently had, and then they would have nine vacancies. The three would not fill a full company for one particular shift. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 20 of 22 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 02/24/2025 They needed 10, 3 per shift, and 1 factored in for backfill and if there should be vacancies for those positions. Mayor Lauing understood that one captain was needed. Fire Chief Blackshire confirmed that they needed one captain whether it be on overtime or an FTE. Councilmember Stone commented that Palo Alto residents needed the same level of emergency and response in every part of the city. He felt the current plan for South Palo Alto fell short and that budget constraints were being prioritized over community safety. He believed government was responsible for keeping folks safe. He wanted to move toward full staffing for Engine 64 without using cross staffing as a permanent solution. He would be comfortable authorizing cross staffing as a stop-gap measure if there was a commitment to bring on the additional 10 FTEs for a permanent solution moving forward. City Manager Shikada stated that the current proposal before Council was the overtime funding. If as a part of that direction Council wanted to proceed with filling that position or including it as part of the proposed budget, it would mean including the three FTE captains as a part of the proposed budget, which would allow staff to include that in what they would bring back to Council in late April. It would not preclude Council from making a contrary decision, but it would set that as a baseline. Councilmember Stone thought it was important to do that. He asked if overtime was being used or would be used for the engine in College Terrace. Fire Chief Blackshire confirmed that overtime was still being used for the engine in College Terrace. MOTION: Councilmember Burt moved, seconded by Councilmember Reckdahl to: 1) Approve Amendments to the Fiscal Year 2025 Budget Appropriation for various funds and various capital projects, as identified in Attachment A and Attachment A, Exhibit 1 and 2 (requires a supermajority, 2/3 approval); 2) Approve Amendments to the FY 2025 Table of Organization consistent with the budget amendments in Attachment A, adding 1.00 FTE Senior Buyer and 1.00 FTE Program Assistant I and eliminating 1.00 FTE Contract Administrator; and 3) Approve authorization of an overstrength 1.00 FTE Fire Captain position. 4) Direct staff to present alternative options in the FY26 budget process for staffing the additional position at Station 4 with 3 FTE as part of the proposed budget Councilmember Lu thought creating a full-time position was the least to be done. He added that fully staffing Station 4 was inevitable. He did not feel the value of reliable medical and fire SUMMARY MINUTES Page 21 of 22 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 02/24/2025 services in a timely way could be underestimated. He felt fully staffing Station 4 would be an extra expense and that it would not provide material safety improvements. He thought there needed to be a plan to clear the budget for 2027/2028 once Station 4 was online. He considered the motion to be a bridge until that point. Vice Mayor Veenker seconded the comments of Councilmembers Stone and Lu. She believed the firefighters were agreeable to the stop-gap. She thought Council should provide the tools for firefighters to have the response times and the services they desired. Councilmember Reckdahl asked if there should be direction to fully staff the fire engine and the ambulance for the fire station once completed. Councilmember Burt voiced that different scenarios would be considered. He did not want to prematurely determine one outcome for 2027. MOTION PASSED: 7-0 10. Approval of the 2025 City Council Priority Objectives, as well as Committee Objectives and Workplans. CEQA Status -- Not a Project. City Manager Ed Shikada suggested starting with the economic development piece and seeing if it could be completed. Councilmember Burt wanted to make sure the public had a chance to speak at this meeting and that public comment would also be continued at the next meeting for those who did not have an opportunity to speak at this meeting. City Manager Shikada clarified that the item would come back to Council on March 10. Mayor Lauing declared that the decision of Council was to take public comment and to start the debate on March 10. Public Comment: 1. David C. discussed why he hoped Council would make the bike and pedestrian infrastructure and the Safe Streets for All Safety Action Plan higher priorities. 2. Dashiell L., Conservation Coordinator for the Sierra Club Loma Prieta Chapter, asked Council to add the development of an ordinance to curtail the use of plastic land cover for landscaping to the list of priorities. They were aware that the City was considering the use of plastic in public spaces, so the newly requested ordinance may be limited to landscaping only. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 22 of 22 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 02/24/2025 3. Anne M. stated that she had sent a letter to Council yesterday with attachments related to sections of the municipal code she was requesting modification of. She suggested that language be added in two sections to provide residential protection for fully residential properties not zoned residential. She asked if it could be put on the schedule to be considered for the workplan in 2026. City Manager Shikada would bring Item 10 back to Council on March 10. NO ACTION Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 10:15 p.m.