Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025-03-17 City Council Summary MinutesCITY COUNCIL SUMMARY MINUTES Page 1 of 22 Regular Meeting March 17, 2025 The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Council Chambers and by virtual teleconference at 5:30 p.m. Present In Person: Burt, Lauing, Lu, Lythcott-Haims, Reckdahl, Stone, Veenker Present Remotely: None Absent: None Call to Order Mayor Lauing called the meeting to order. The clerk called roll and declared all were present. Special Orders of the Day 1. Recognition of Sister City Tsuchiura, Japan and Palo Alto Student Exchange Participants NO ACTION Mayor Lauing commented that the 15-year anniversary of exchange students had been celebrated last year, and he stated that they may soon be on Neighbors Abroad and looking back on those years. Neighbors Abroad President Sarah Burgess hoped they would be on Neighbors Abroad. With joy, she presented the 2025 class of student ambassadors from Tsuchiura, Japan, as well as Palo Alto middle school students who would go to Tsuchiura in June. The program of exchange went back 32 years. She thanked Council and the City for their support in the exchange. Tsuchiura Representative Kayoko Ozeki stated that the program would not have been possible without the contribution of Neighbors Abroad members over the years. She was grateful to the current and former vice president who had made significant contributions for a successful program. She was pleased to have met with former Mayor Greer Stone and City Clerk Mahealani Ah Yun the other day. She expressed gratitude to Mayor Ed Lauing, the President of SUMMARY MINUTES Page 2 of 22 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 03/17/2025 Neighbors Abroad, and all who had worked on the friendship. She hoped the next generation would work to have a thriving friendship in the future. Neighbors Abroad VP for Tsuchiura Evelyn introduced the student ambassadors who were hosting Tsuchiura this week and the Tsuchiura students who were visiting Palo Alto this week and who would be hosting Palo Alto in June. Mayor Lauing read the proclamation in honor all of the students introduced by the Neighbors Abroad Vice President. He welcomed the students to the dais for the official presentation of the proclamation and a photo. Closed Session 2. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS City Designated Representatives: City Manager and his Designees Pursuant to Merit System Rules and Regulations (Ed Shikada, Kiely Nose, Sandra Blanch, Nick Raisch, Tori Post, Molly Stump, Lauren Lai, Paul Harper, and Jennifer Fine) Employee Organization: Service Employees International Union, (SEIU) Local 521 Hourly Unit, Utilities Management and Professional Association of Palo Alto (UMPAPA), Palo Alto Peace Officers’ Association (PAPOA), Palo Alto Police Management Association (PMA), International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF) local 1319, Palo Alto Fire Chiefs’ Association (FCA); Authority: Government Code Section 54957.6 (a) MOTION: Vice Mayor Veenker moved, seconded by Councilmember Lythcott-Haims to go into Closed Session. MOTION PASSED: 7-0 There were no requests to speak. Council went into Closed Session at 5:45 p.m. Council returned from Closed Session at 7:00 p.m. Mayor Lauing announced no reportable action. Agenda Changes, Additions and Deletions City Manager Ed Shikada announced that there were no changes to the agenda. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 3 of 22 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 03/17/2025 Public Comment 1. Avram F. discussed art pieces titled “U.S. Bombs Gaza” and “Touting Free Speech.” He spoke of not agreeing with the politics of some councilmembers, and he wanted those individuals to speak out against genocide. 2. Melinda M. stated that catalytic converters had been stolen from her 5 times, and the Police Department suggested she speak with Council. She had learned that in the past 5 years there had been 663 catalytic converter thefts in Palo Alto. She had requested that the Police Department inform her of what was being done, and she had received no response. She asked Council for their help. 3. John M. was in favor of establishing quiet zones in all Palo Alto level crossings, not just Palo Alto Avenue, and he requested that other crossings be made a priority in this budget year. He was leading an ad hoc group of citizens called Quiet Zones for Palo Alto. 4. Mora O., Executive Director of Youth Community Service and part of the Planning Committee, requested that Council join them in honoring the life and legacy of former Palo Alto City Manager June Fleming on March 20. 5. Mike U. discussed the Media Center being a platform of bipartisan politics, art, religion, etc. He spoke of National Women’s Month and invited all to commemorate with them the women of the past. 6. Dr. D. invited Council to attend the showing of a film titled No Other Land on Saturday. She had sent emails to councilmembers. Council Member Questions, Comments and Announcements Councilmember Burt shared that the VTA Ad Hoc Committee on the University Avenue Mobility Hub had had a meeting, and there was a tentative endorsement for a joint initiative to bring in the Urban Land Institute to provide a focused effort in moving forward with a design framework for the work, which would probably happen this fall. It would need to return to the 6 partner agencies for their full endorsement. Caltrain would be installing a standalone automated toilet system on the east side of the tracks, which should happen shortly. He wanted to clarify that the Rail Committee and the City had moved forward on quiet zone examination of Churchill, Meadow, and Charleston, not just Palo Alto Avenue. It had been set as a priority last year. Meetings were happening with the Federal Rail Authority and the California Public Utilities Commission, which must provide feedback on measures needed to turn it into a quiet zone, and nothing could go further until receipt of that feedback. Councilmember Lythcott-Haims voiced that the Cubberley process was underway. The consultants would be convening the first community meeting on March 19, and she invited all SUMMARY MINUTES Page 4 of 22 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 03/17/2025 interested to attend. There would also be 2 additional sessions. She was excited to celebrate June Fleming and to reflect on Women’s History Month. There would be a celebration and facility tour of the Geng Road Safe Parking Lot expansion on March 21. Vice Mayor Veenker mentioned that on March 7 she and Councilmember Burt had attended the State of the County address. President Otto Lee mentioned that the County was reliant on federal funding and perhaps vulnerable to some of the changes in policy, which they were watching closely. She was looking forward to the June Fleming and the Women’s History Month event. She stated that the Board of Supervisors was majority AAPI and supermajority women, which she found fun to notice in this Women’s History Month. Study Session 3. Study Session with Palo Alto Youth Council NO ACTION Palo Alto Youth Council Youth Advisor Chris Sanchez thanked Council for the opportunity to attend the meeting. Palo Alto Youth Council President Natya Chandrasekar displayed slides and discussed the make- up of PAYC. Palo Alto Youth Council Outreach Specialist Vin Bhat furnished slides and stated that they had a new outreach specialist to help with outreach, events, and initiatives. President Chandrasekar mentioned that they had chosen mental health, civic education and engagement, and climate change as themes for the year. Palo Alto Youth Councilmember/Secretary Maddie Park spoke of the mental health resource guide, which had been digitized to ensure that all Palo Alto teens would be able to access resources. They had interviewed mental health experts and included some of their insights on wellness, etc. They also had an initiative on substance abuse, and they had created an informational video, which could be found on the website. Palo Alto Youth Councilmember McKenna Chang spoke of the Final Study Cram Slam that had been hosted in December. Palo Alto Youth Council Public Information Officer Camille Chu stated that the Civil Impact Summit was held last month. They were excited to host guest speakers, including political science professors, and to showcase some of PAYC’s work. They hoped to continue it as an annual event in the future. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 5 of 22 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 03/17/2025 Public Information Officer Malcolm Ginwalla discussed the Movie Night objective to increase community bonding, mental health, and outreach. Palo Alto Youth Councilmember Natalie Goler stated that they had hosted a College Admissions Panel. They had done Q&A and provided strategies to make the process more approachable. Palo Alto Youth Councilmember Member Melinda Huang remarked that Pancakes and Pickleball was a new event that would occur on March 29, which would connect City Council and teenagers in policy conversations. She invited City Council to attend the event. Palo Alto Youth Councilmember Charlie Zeitlin voiced that they had distributed the Youth Issues Census to better understand youth experience in Palo Alto and what they wanted City leaders to pay attention to. He presented a slide with the takeaways (the report had also been shared with City Council), which included almost 99 percent of Palo Alto youth feeling safe. Biking was a critical mode of transportation and they bike lanes expanded and safer, a push on sustainability and climate action, and to be engaged with City Council. He looked forward to City Council’s feedback. President Chandrasekar mentioned that they would be at the Earth Day Rally, and they would collect more data via the Issues Census. The Palopalooza Event would bring community youth in for some fun bonding, and they would collaborate with the Teen Advisory Board to plan an activity for that. She thanked City Council and Parks and Rec representatives for their support. She especially thanked Advisor Chris Sanchez. She appreciated the Mitchell Park Community Center, which most of their events were held at. She asked City Council how collaboration could be furthered, what they wanted PAYC to do, how the PAC could help City Council, and how City Council could help PAYC. Councilmember Lythcott-Haims was proud to be the City Council Liaison to PAYC. As for collaboration between PAYC and City Council, she thought PAYC more frequently attending meetings would be a great improvement. She hoped there could be a more regular cadence of updates. She addressed the survey and the percentages of youth knowing little to nothing about City Council’s work, not thinking their voice could make a difference in the Palo Alto government, and wanting City Council to spend resources combatting climate change. She stated that it needed to be determined how to engage youth in conversations about what was happening. She asked what format PAYC wanted to see to help more inform youth on climate change. President Chandrasekar expressed that PAYC had made a new initiative for PAYC members to attend more City Council meetings. They agreed to work together to educate youth about the happenings in Palo Alto. She and others had attended a meeting that had addressed bike safety, and upon learning some of the planned initiatives, they posted an Instagram about it. In the future they hoped to continue such a trend, definitely with climate change. They hoped to partner with other organizations that specialized in climate, such as PASCC. She wanted to collaborate with other youth groups and utilize their social media platform. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 6 of 22 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 03/17/2025 Councilmember Stone thought more representation from PAYC at City Council meetings would be great, and he recommended monitoring City Council agendas for topics they could weigh in on, having a set time at PAYC meetings to discuss such, and appointing a representative to speak on behalf the group. He suggested that PAYC provide City Council with written semiannual reports. He added that the events were incredible. He wanted to see a combination of youth mental health and college admission events. He wanted to break down the stigma of community colleges and the different paths to success other than attending top schools. He suggested there be speakers who had taken alternative paths. He asked what PAYC needed to better do their job and reach more students. He wanted Council to be more engaged in the new teen center, and he wanted PAYC’s insight on programming and designing the space. He felt it would be beneficial to get PAYC’s feedback on several topics. He would follow up with PAYC’s president with other questions. Advisor Sanchez noted that they were planning the Career Structure Event for May. The goal would be to promote different paths away from STEM-related jobs. They planned to invite plumbers, electricians, etc. They hoped to have a Q&A panel and booths for schools to provide information on such careers. They planned to have a resume-building or an interview workshop for young adults and teens at the event. Councilmember Reckdahl stated that it would be best to get youth program ideas from youth, so he wanted PAYC to provide ideas for recreation programs and activities that would attract the teen audience. Mayor Lauing mentioned that the communication channel for that would be the Chair of the PRC or Community Services Director Kristen O’Kane. Vice Mayor Veenker noted that one of PAYC’s priorities was civic education, and she mentioned iCivics as a potential resource. She stated that resources could be found at the UCLA Center for the Developing Adolescent website, and she thought her daughter would be happy to provide insight about it. Her daughter worked for NIDA, and she was sure she could provide PAYC with information if they wanted to follow up more on their video. She mentioned that SVYCA did annual summits in August, and she would be happy to provide PAYC information related to that. She asked what had been the most surprising thing PAYC had learned about government, City Council, and Palo Alto. Regarding Climate, the committee would post agendas and meet regularly and public comment was welcome. President Chandrasekar stated that she started learning how the government system worked when she started on PAYC. She had not been in City Council chambers until then. She found that City Council did a good job giving teenagers skills that they would not necessarily build in other places. Council empowered her to learn to plan events, to confidentially communicate with City officials, to work with and lead a team, and to advocate for herself. She added that she had had a lot of personal growth. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 7 of 22 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 03/17/2025 Councilmember Burt addressed the youth community not having a strong grasp of local government and the role of elected officials, and he asked how City Council could better integrate an understanding and collaboration between the student population and the role of the City on climate initiatives, mental health issues, etc. He requested the link to the survey so he could forwarded it to some folks. He discussed community colleges providing great education and career paths. He found it to be a better alternative than a 4-year college. Councilmember Lu was looking forward to the Pancakes and Pickleball event and playing pickleball for the first time. He was happy to hear about programs for mental health, substance abuse, and climate and that an event was being planned to address community colleges and trades. He requested that PAYC let him know if he could help in referring speakers to address community colleges and trades. He inquired how City Council could better support PAYC. He found it amazing that PAYC consisted of 30 students, and he asked if they needed anything to stay at that level and what they needed to plan more movie nights, etc., that could bring value to PAYC and the student community. He addressed the action section at the end of the survey, and he was interested in general perspectives and more details as it related to bike transportation and homelessness and how City Council could help PAYC address those issues. Palo Alto Youth Councilmember Charlie Zeitlin stated that at the end of the survey students were asked want they wanted addressed at a Council meeting. They highlighted the main themes, but there were more answers, and they would be happy to curate another list of more concrete solutions they had thought of. Mayor Lauing was impressed with the survey. He noted that not only were a lot of youth not involved but that a lot of adults were not involved, so he did not want PAYC to worry about that but to also not lose their enthusiasm because there was much work to do. He added that the youth could influence their parents and friends to be better activists on climate change and mental health issues. He requested that PAYC expand their group. The clerk announced that PAYC wanted to take a photo with City Council. Public Comment: 1. Bing W., the Youth Liaison for Palo Alto Park and Rec, commended PAYC for their phenomenal work. She thanked City staff, especially Christopher and the team, and the leadership of Community Services Director Kristen O’Kane for their work. She was delighted to meet the Japanese delegation. As a board member of Neighbors Abroad, she was looking forward to the downtown youth center opening. She spoke of the need to address youth mental health more. She had been contemplating how to take youth and seniors to nature spaces and queried if the budget would allow for free shuttle service for such to happen on a monthly or weekly basis. Mayor Lauing invited PAYC to the dais for a photo. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 8 of 22 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 03/17/2025 Consent Calendar 4. Approval of Minutes from March 3, 2025 Meeting 5. REINTRODUCED FIRST READING: Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Various Chapters of Title 18 (Zoning) and Title 21 (Subdivisions and Other Divisions of Land) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code to Clarify Existing Regulations and to Implement Recent State Land Use Laws from 2023 and Earlier, Including AB 2097. CEQA Status – Exempt Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3). 6. Adoption of Memorandum of Agreement with SEIU, Local 521 for a Term of Three Years Expiring December 31, 2027; CEQA Status - Not a Project 7. Approval of Professional Services Contract Number C25191558 with Life Insurance Company of North America, a wholly owned subsidiary of New York Life Insurance Company, in an Amount Not to Exceed $2,369,216 to Provide Group Life Insurance, Accidental Death and Dismemberment and Long-Term Disability to City of Palo Alto Employees for a Period of Three Years; CEQA Status - Not a Project. 8. Authorization to Execute Amendment to Legal Services Agreement S23187569 with Howard Rome Martin Ridley & Master LLP dba Ridley Master to Increase Amount by $60,000 for Total Not-to-Exceed Amount of $315,000; CEQA Status – Not a Project. 9. PUBLIC HEARING / QUASI-JUDICIAL. 4335 and 4345 El Camino Real [24PLN-00153]: Applicant’s Request for Approval of a Vesting Tentative Map to Allow for a Condominium Subdivision to Create Eight Units on a 17,406 Square Foot Parcel and to Create 21 Units on a 41,370 Square Foot Parcel to Facilitate Construction of 29 New Residential Units in Five Buildings (24PLN-00152). CEQA Status: Exempt from CEQA in Accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 (In-Fill Development). There were no requests to speak. MOTION: Councilmember Lythcott-Haims moved, seconded by Councilmember Reckdahl to approve Agenda Item Numbers 4-9. MOTION PASSED: 7-0 City Manager Comments City Manager Ed Shikada addressed Item 6 and thanked Council, the labor organization, and staff for the partnership moving forward. He noted that mosquito treatment was planned for March 20, and there would be onsite signage and advanced notifications. There would be a Cubberley community meeting on March 19. There was to be an open house on March 21 for the Geng Road Safe Parking Facility. A BPTP session was scheduled for April 2, which would be SUMMARY MINUTES Page 9 of 22 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 03/17/2025 an in-person opportunity for community members. They would connect with PAYC and hopefully get their involvement at the session and the effort more broadly. Council would have interviews and a consent calendar next week. On April 7, there would be an action item related to the proposed Dark Sky Ordinance and the scope of work for the synthetic or natural turf study. April 14 would include the Fair Chance Rental Protection Policy, downtown parking garage design next steps, and the proposed development at 70 Encina. On April 21, the independent police auditor would have a session with Council and the proposed development at 660 University and the Wireless Communication Ordinance would be addressed. The initial release leading into the budget season would be on May 5. Action Items 10. Approval of Professional Service Contract Number C25192988 with Lloyd Consulting Group, LLC., in the Amount Not to Exceed $160,825 to Conduct a Comprehensive Turf Study for a Period of Six Months; CEQA Status – exempt under CEQA regulations 15262 and 15306. Item Removed Off Agenda AA2. Approval of the 2025 City Council Priority Objectives, as well as Committee Objectives and Workplans. CEQA Status -- Not a Project. (Item Continued from February 24, 2025 and March 10, 2025 City Council Meetings) NO ACTION City Manager Ed Shikada recognized that at the last discussion there was an interest in having more of a strategic view on some of the items rather than a list of tasks. He expressed that there was an economic development strategy, which may not have been sufficiently reflected on. Staff would look at organizing the individual objectives along the strategies identified in the economic strategy. To a certain extent, the same was true with climate action work. There was a Climate Action Work Plan in place, which would be reviewed this year. While discussing 70- some discrete items, there were broader existing policy frameworks for Council to consider. Staff was happy to accommodate having strategic discussions. Assistant to the City Manager Lupita Alamos recapped what had been covered at the last Council meeting. The priorities to address at this meeting included implementing housing strategies for social and economic balance and public safety, wellness, and belonging. Following that, there would be discussion on the committee objectives, which was Attachment C, and then Finance Committee and P&S work plans would be addressed, which were Attachments D and E. Mayor Lauing asked for comments on implementing housing strategies for social and economic balance. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 10 of 22 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 03/17/2025 Councilmember Lythcott-Haims noted that Items 53 and 58 checked all 4 boxes of Council priorities, and she suggested that greater attention be paid to the items that did that. She was excited about Item 55. She noted that 16 items did not make the cut and that 9 of the 16 belonged solely to Priority 3, which she considered disproportionately represented on the list. Very often the reason stated for the 8 Housing Strategy items not making the cut was due to limited staff to manage it given prioritization of Housing Element programs. She queried how housing-related issues would be handled if the Housing Element was taking up much staff time. She understood that the department had a 19.05-percent vacancy rate. She wanted staff to have the needed resources to get things done. She questioned what would happen to the Attachment B objectives that were not recommended. She was in favor of holding on to them and continuing the conversation next year. Planning and Development Services Director Jonathan Lait stated that the vacancy rate seemed high for his department, and he noted that it probably spanned across the different programs he was responsible for. For the Long-Range Planning Program on planning, they had 9 positions and a manager overseeing it, which would be largely responsible for carrying out a lot of the Council priorities on the list. There were a couple vacancies in that program. He explained that a lot of the Housing Element programs were frontloaded, so they could achieve the opportunity for greater production early in the 8-year housing cycle, which he explained was different from previous cycles. HCD had been adamant about which programs they wanted frontloaded. Part of the challenge was the complexity of some of the work being done. About one-third of the priorities related to the priorities of the 4 programs. Other work would start, but it would not have that same demand and would be staggered. Staff was committed to accomplishing the plan, which was ambitious. As for those that did not make the cut, staff had tried to decide which ones were more in line with Council priorities. City Manager Shikada stated that it was at Council’s discretion what to do with objectives on Attachment B that were not recommended. They could hold them as items that would not be addressed now, which he thought was what was done last year. He was open to suggestions. Councilmember Stone questioned how much money was in the Affordable Housing coffers. As for the items that were left off, he was concerned with not working on ways to raise and identify funding for affordable housing. He did not see how 3,000+ BMR units would be met without raising additional funds, which he wanted prioritized. Director Lait stated that Council authorized $5M to be dedicated to Charities Housing, which he believed left a balance of $1.5M to $2.5M. He thought they explored a number of possible revenue-generating sources to supplement the funding. What would move the needle would probably involve bonds or tax initiatives that would have a sustained revenue source. He could work with the City Manager’s office, the City Attorney’s office, and other departments to advance anything along those lines. City Manager Shikada remarked that generating new revenue was significant and, in all likelihood, would be a decision involving the community. It may be time to start community SUMMARY MINUTES Page 11 of 22 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 03/17/2025 conversations to address what type of revenue would be desirable, what measures might be needed, and how something leading to a ballot measure might take shape. Councilmember Stone thought it was a priority that needed to be started sooner rather than later. He inquired why recommendations related to ghost houses were not moving forward. He expressed that there were about 2,000 vacant homes in Palo Alto, which represented a significant percentage of the total housing stock. He felt it was a valuable tool and that it could tie into the Affordable Housing piece. He stated that a vacancy tax would disincentivize folks from having vacant homes. He felt the 2 issues he raised were more important than several of the other priorities. City Attorney Molly Stump thought not moving forward with recommendations as it related to ghost houses had to do with general resource in her office and in Planning to support a community outreach effort. Councilmember Lu wanted to return with the some of the items that were not prioritized. He echoed the point about exploring funding. He wanted something to address California Avenue housing options, more in the vein of Bullet K, and something actionable and reasonable in a medium-term period rather than Option L, which would be more involved. He thought it was critical to know if the City was on track with the goals and to follow through with the City’s best practices on SMART goals. He noted that there were 5 ongoing programs, which included initiating the San Antonio Area Plan, and he did not know if Council would hear back on a study session, if a report needed to be generated, if there needed to be planning for environmental milestones, or if a transportation plan or the plan for a park would be finalized by end of year. He wanted it to be articulated further than just “ongoing.” He felt similarly about the Downtown Housing Plan. As for the housing project on downtown surface parking lot, he stated that staff could come to Council to find a timeline and some deliverable. He understood that Buena Vista was tricky but that there was opportunity to do some outreach to the Housing Authority to try to get it reprioritized. He knew that there was a timeline for development impact fees to come back, so he did not think it should say just ongoing but that there should be more information about it. He wanted to have SMART goals for the big projects that were vaguely specified, and he wanted updates to come back to Council. City Manager Shikada responded that staff had some initial suggestions for specific milestones/goals for those specific examples. Assistant to the City Manager Alamos noted that for the Downtown Housing Plan staff planned to present a community assessment to Council and seek direction, which would happen in Q2, and there would be policy development and continued community engagement throughout targeted for Q4 conclusion. For the San Antonio Road Area Plan, they planned to have a contract before Council by Q2 and establishment of a Community Advisory Committee in Q2 and community outreach and engagement through Q3. For the Advanced Affordable Housing Project on downtown surface parking on Lot T, there was a milestone to have an exclusive negotiating agreement with Alta Housing to Council in Q2, a revised design for consideration in SUMMARY MINUTES Page 12 of 22 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 03/17/2025 Q3 or Q4, and there would be some follow-up on the update development impact fees, and they had to issue an RFP for consultant selection in Q2 to initiate the project in Q3. When the objectives come back for an update, they would be flushed out with a lot of the milestones. Vice Mayor Veenker was excited to see Item 55. She requested more information on the Buena Vista interim goals. She was eager to move that forward. She addressed Item 44 and queried if, upon achieving the construction, there should be a priority around running Homekey or beginning to invite residents in. Deputy City Manager Chantal Cotton Gains answered, regarding Buena Vista, that they were in conversations with the Housing Authority and trying to understand their next steps. They were committed to maintaining affordability and improving the conditions. They were trying to assess what was affordable given the current funding environment, and they were relooking at the plan in a way that would be manageable for the Housing Authority while still maintaining those goals. They could continue conversations and set a specific milestone with the Housing Authority if Council wanted to pursue it. She did not think the change in the federal funding climate could be understated in this situation, so part of that was determining where funding was available and the scope of the project they could afford to build. They would be encouraged to continue to work on what they could while coming up with a large project. Assistant to the City Manager Melissa McDonough replied that when starting Homekey operations staff would return to Council with a revised revenue agreement in a couple weeks. The agreement was with Santa Clara Office of Supportive Housing, which will manage the contract with LifeMoves for facility operations. Part of the specifications in the agreement would be to receive regular reports and to monitor performance indicators. She thought the City’s role was in some way tertiary to the County’s role, and staff would be more in a monitoring role. It did not need to be prioritized. It would happen as a part of fulfilling the contract that would come to Council soon. Mayor Lauing voiced that resources were limited but that money for affordable housing had to be on the list. He noted that there was hope from the State Legislature for bonds, which would go to the voters, but he thought something needed to happen before that. He questioned how much time Homekey would take with the City’s role being advisory and how urgent SOFA was. He believed it was highly questionable whether Buena Vista would have money to do anything and, unless that changed, he suggested not doing a lot of work on Buena Vista for the next 6 months. He asked if updating the ADU Ordinance could wait for 6 or 12 months. He felt there needed to be tradeoffs. Assistant to the City Manager McDonough thought the administrative lift for Homekey would be intermittent but heavy when it happened, and she hoped that close monitoring would be done. Director Lait replied that the SOFA item was in the Housing Element, and it was a Q4 item. He stated that the process would start this year, which would not take a lot of time. He thought SUMMARY MINUTES Page 13 of 22 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 03/17/2025 the conclusion of the task would be the end of next year. HCD had some concerns with the ADU Ordinance, so staff committed to making those changes to ensure consistency by the end of June, and staff members working on that were not focused on this year’s core Council priorities. Mayor Lauing questioned if non-fixed-cost resources could be considered to work on some of these things. Director Lait was open to options, but he did not know what they would be. City Manager Shikada thought there were a few different ways to respond to the issues raised. Focusing on funding for affordable housing would be a significant lift for staff, Council, and the community. If there was to be a ballot measure, a new tax, staff would want to work with Council on the needed timing. He thought it would largely be his office with some support from Planning rather than removing ADUs from the list. If there were things not on the list that Council thought should be on the list and vice versa, he requested that staff come back to let Council know what could be done to balance the workload. Councilmember Burt discussed funding affordable housing. He noted that in all likelihood a housing bond and a transportation bond could not be put on the same ballot measure. There was a focus on the transportation bond for 2026 because of the urgency to keep transportation agencies operating at current levels. He stated that brought it back to doing something locally. The County was not planning on bringing back Measure A, but he thought that needed to be considered and that County initiatives should be focused on rather than regional or relying on the State. He spoke of the myriad of mandates placed by the legislature, and he do not know how cities would be able to succeed. He requested that folks talk to their legislators. He felt that a vacancy tax should be considered. He was anxious to get something done with Cal Ave housing. He stated that a future coordinated area plan may flush out the details, and he suggested considering doing an interim measure for safe upzoning for housing in the Cal Ave area as a discrete initiative that may not go as far in a subsequent area plan. As for ongoing items, he requested that milestones be listed for each quarter. He noted that it was not noted where an initiative would fulfill priorities, which he felt would be helpful information for Council and the community. He remarked that new housing would support economic develop as a secondary benefit and transient-oriented development would help fulfill climate initiatives. Councilmember Reckdahl supported a vacancy tax. He thought housing on California Avenue should be taken advantage of and that there should be a focused area plan. He stated that San Antonio should be broken up by milestones. He voiced that Finance should consider funding parkland for that area. He added that the Transportation Department needed to consider bike lanes now, not later. He thought the near-term results needed to be prioritized for San Antonio. Mayor Lauing was not focused on the RHNA number as the goal but actual more affordable housing units for social and economic balance. He stated that there was almost zero in the Affordable Housing Fund to help with more projects. He did not want to just leave it there with SUMMARY MINUTES Page 14 of 22 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 03/17/2025 expectations of it dribbling in from business tax, etc. What the legislature was discussing could take a while and it could be too small, if it happened at all. He wanted to put effort into something that would raise money for affordable housing, which could be ghost housing, bond measures, etc. He wanted feedback on what to remove. He asked if additional staff should be hired and if there were areas outside of housing that the City Manager wanted to cut back on. He did not think there could be a bond in 90 days, but he thought the process should be started to look at the alternatives. He echoed the need for strong milestones. He did not know what ongoing meant in terms of a deliverable. He commented that builders had not come in substantially for affordable units yet. The answer was money and he did not think it could be backed away from. City Manager Shikada replied that staff needed to come back, at a minimum, on consent to finalize the direction. He understood that staff should come back with a plan for how to incorporate Item N from the not recommended list. As a part of that, flexibility needed to be identified on other items, if there was any. Vice Mayor Veenker asked if staff would come back with changes on the economic development and the climate portions. She noted that at the last meeting when she used the term microgrid that it took Council a little sideways from what she was trying to articulate when she discussed battery storage. She voiced that she had mentioned BESS, which was usually utility scale, and that was what she had in mind. There was a bullet point related to the Reliability and Resiliency Plan, and she discovered after that meeting that the Utilities Department was working on a PPA with respect to BESS going on through NCPA. She wanted some coordination effort to analyze what would be needed, whether DERs around neighborhoods, a microgrid at the airport, a BESS in Northern California that Palo Alto was getting power from, or if one should go near the substations. She clarified that it was not just the smaller microgrids. She thought there should be a coordinated plan because sometimes there was not complete communication between Public Works and Utilities. City Manager Shikada answered that staff would come back with changes on the economic development and the climate portions. Public Works Director Brad Eggleston thanked Vice Mayor Veenker for the clarification. He had captured that in his notes when discussed last week and understood that she was speaking about the potential for larger scale battery installations or looking at that in some way in addition to smaller microgrids separate but related things. Vice Mayor Veenker added that it would also depend on what would be done through NCPA, so what was within the City, without the City, etc. [Council took a 15-minute break] Mayor Lauing stated that Module Number 4 – Public Safety, Wellness, and Belonging – would be addressed. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 15 of 22 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 03/17/2025 Councilmember Stone addressed Objective 72 and thought it should be more specific. He commented that there was a fierce urgency as it related to youth suicide. He wanted to allocate the necessary resources and time to the issue. He explained that addressing the crisis in silos was not working. He had been working with Board President Shana Segal to develop an action plan for the City and school district to work together. He proposed including a 3-way partnership with the Jed Foundation in the priorities. The foundation was willing to offer their services to Palo Alto, which appeared to be a sweetheart deal and a fraction of what other contractors were paid to work on far less important issues. He believed the clerk had printed copies of the proposal from Jed, which he detailed. He added that it was possible that the work of Jed may be modified based on the scope of Palo Alto University’s work or Jed may be able to supplement the university’s work. Jed was interested in what the university and the City were already doing and making sure there would be no unnecessary redundancy. He and President Segal intended to present this partnership at the City/School Committee meeting on April 1. If it received positive feedback, she would take the Jed proposal to their board for approval – a completely separate proposal for the school district. He hoped that it could be incorporated into Objective 72 at this meeting or a separate objective to direct staff to engage with the foundation on Phase 1. He understood there could be hesitancy since Council was only now seeing the proposal. If there was hesitation in entering into a contract with Jed at this meeting, he suggested referring it to City/Schools Committee where it could be vetted, and if that committee made a recommendation, it could return to Council possibly on consent. He believed timing was critical. He wanted it to be a priority for the year. Councilmember Lythcott-Haims expressed gratitude to Councilmember Stone. She was delighted to see the proposal coming forward. She knew the work of Jed, which had a sterling national reputation. She believed they had worked with a couple municipalities already. She found it appealing because a comprehensive approach was needed. She was happy to support the right path for it. She found the opportunity to collaborate with them exciting and affordable. Councilmember Burt thanked Councilmember Stone for bringing it forward. He found it to be an interesting proposal. He wanted a chance to better understand how it would knit with and complement other capabilities and initiatives. He remarked that this could potentially fill a void. He spoke of there possibly being a good synergy potential with Project Safety Net. Rail Committee would be doing some updates on what was happening there. He supported exploring it. He addressed a number of areas being listed as ongoing, and he wanted milestones to be listed. He noted that unleaded gas at the airport was listed in Safety and Wellness, but he stated that it also had an environment sustainability aspect. He thought the abbreviation of CA for climate action should be expanded to S/CAP, so environmental sustainability and climate action programs would be thought about. He expressed that unleaded fuel may belong foremost under Climate Action and Sustainability. He referenced the Equity Action Plan, under 65, and he wanted to consider the same outcomes and intentions and avoid the terms used through algorithms and otherwise to pinpoint excellent programs or nullify them. He noted that the Defense Department had removed a webpage for an African-American Medal of Honor winner because he had worked on diversity matters. He did not want to change Palo Alto’s SUMMARY MINUTES Page 16 of 22 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 03/17/2025 focus or efforts but to protect the City as best as possible. Regarding 67, he thought supporting visible police presence by maintaining full police officer staffing through recruiting and retention was important and ongoing, but he did not find it to be a 2025 focus item. City Manager Shikada stated that at the appropriate time Assistant to the City Manager Alamos could offer suggestions on additional work staff had done to tie down milestones. Mayor Lauing thought certain things were business as usual and that maintaining full police officer staffing through recruiting and retention was one of them. He did not find it to be a specific objective. He did not understand what the plan was for the airport, which showed double dollar signs. Director Eggleston responded that the dollar signs had to do with not having funding designated for lead monitoring. They were also looking into the possibility of subsidizing the cost of unleaded fuel, which was more expensive than leaded fuel. To do that in a way that would make a difference would have a significant cost. Mayor Lauing wanted to consider the subsidy idea. He asked if there was an end date to seismic hazards. Regarding 72, he stated that supporting community health was a perfect goal but that it needed substance, and he thought what Councilmember Stone pointed out was a terrific way to go, so he thought the Jed resource could be included in planning of resources as there was more specificity about what would be accomplished. He added that maybe it should be paced by the School Committee and vetted there first. City Manager Shikada answered that seismic hazards was a discrete project underway. Jonathan Lait added that staff had not gotten to the seismic project, but it was funded and ready to go. Councilmember Lu was glad that the ongoing items would be followed up on and that there would be more concrete priorities. He thought the Jed foundation was encouraging. He explained that it was useful but not sufficient to execute. He wanted to do more and address the intake process for the County, Palo Alto, and PAUSD resources, which he explained. He supported the Jed Foundation’s work and scope based on what he had read, but thought it would be a mistake in this moment to limit it to that or not pursue the other goals or projects in the Suicide Prevention Policy or other novel initiatives that could be taken up. He asked what the difference was between the Community Wildfire Protection Plan and the Foothill’s Plan. Perhaps not this year, but he wanted to think more generally about wildfire plans that might affect San Francisquito Creek or the Baylands. He inquired if the wellness and infrastructure projects were being provided ongoing support by staff or if they were assumed to be business as usual. For example, the pickleball community had floated different plans for expanding the courts at Mitchell Park, etc., and he thought some of the plans had been taken to staff. He asked if anything to advance those plans would happen without them being a Council priority. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 17 of 22 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 03/17/2025 Assistant Fire Chief Kevin McNally replied that the Community Wildfire Protection Plan and the Foothill Fire Management Plan were separate plans with the same ideas. The newest update was adding in the fire severity zone maps released by CAL FIRE. They were trying to approach it more as a community-wide plan rather than just Foothill’s Fire Management Plan.. Community Services Director Kristen O’Kane replied that things such as the pickleball community plans could advance without Council priority. Using pickleball as an example, there was an ad hoc of the Parks and Rec Commission working with the pickleball group. She believed the commission would discuss the status of pickleball and some proposals in April. Staff was frequently in dialogue with the pickleball group. She thought that was generally the model for other things of community interest, like the skate park, etc. Staff or the commission would come to Council if needed, but she did not think it needed to be a priority. Vice Mayor Veenker thanked Councilmember Stone for bringing the Jed proposal forward and Councilmember Lythcott-Haims for connecting Palo Alto with them. She noted that the folks at Jed were trained and skilled, which she found important. She wanted to see it meshed with some of the things ongoing, so that 1+1=3. It appeared to her that concrete things would occur in with Phase 1, and she understood that Phase 2 would be more carefully defined later. She was generally positively inclined toward it. She was glad to have the Fire Management Plan, and she wanted to take due care in Foothills Park. She questioned what was expected this calendar year for the seismic analysis. Assistant to the City Manager Alamos responded, regarding the seismic analysis, that there would be reassessment of the prior study and potential eligibility of buildings would be updated. Jonathan Lait added, concerning the seismic analysis, that they had a prepared report, and they would go through the report to see if any information needed to be updated as it related to seismically vulnerable structures, which he thought would be completed by Q2 or Q3. The reassessment of prior study and updating potential eligibility buildings sounded like the milestones for this year. Vice Mayor Veenker was glad to hear that it was moving along at due speed because it was important. Concerning Line 75, regarding phasing out leaded fuel at the Palo Alto Airport, she thought there was some issue around the kind of fuel certain types of planes and engines could use, so she did not know how much could be done. As for lead monitoring, she would be happy to try to find support, grant work, etc., through the Air District. Director Eggleston commented that Airport staff had been in meetings with the Air Quality Management District, but they had not yet located anyone to do the monitoring, so any contacts Vice Mayor Veenker could provide would be helpful. Councilmember Reckdahl supported the Jed concept, and he thought it should be referred to P&S or the City/Schools. He was concerned with how it would mesh with what the City currently had. He added that there were also some financing issues, but he thought the money SUMMARY MINUTES Page 18 of 22 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 03/17/2025 could be found. Wildfire protection seemed to be bigger than a one quarter issue. He thought new things should be considered, such as expanding the distance from the roadway when clearing brush. He wanted to expand the scope of Number 61. He felt Number 63 was an easier problem. He questioned whether the ambulance should be single or firefighter/paramedics, which he thought would be more work than putting a fire engine back in Station 4. He wanted to continue the work with fire zones, but he realized that FRA and CPUC would be slow, so he wanted to have things queued up to turn it around as quickly as possible when it returned to Council. Councilmember Lythcott-Haims’ sensed that the Jed Foundation knew that their first move would be to learn what was happening in Palo Alto and then to join and strengthen that effort moving forward. City Manager Shikada stated that Council could discuss the ad hoc committee objectives and the standing committee work plan or staff could just start the work. Mayor Lauing expressed that there was always some possibility of those evolving as issues arose, so they were not chipped in stone. As Council had already reviewed them, he thought they could move forward. He noted that Cubberley going back to an ad hoc had already been covered. Councilmember Burt questioned if Council needed to weigh in on any decision points, unresolved issues, or new additions. City Manager Shikada did not believe Council needed to weigh in on any decision points, unresolved issues, or new additions, but he wanted to give Council an opportunity to provide feedback. In the absence of any specific thoughts, staff would start the work, and it could return to Council if there was a need for revisions during the year. Staff would bring back revisions based on Council feedback, and he suggested it be put on consent. A motion was not needed at this meeting. Public Comment: 1. Anne M. (Zoom) suggested that Item H, an unrecommended item under Housing, be rolled into Item 56, Municipal Code text amendment changes, in 2025. If not, she hoped it could be added to the list for consideration in 2026. She added that she had written to Council about a number of other items. 2. Aram J. (Zoom) wanted Fire Station 4 to be a priority and to have an engine, an ambulance, and adequate staffing. He wondered if Fire staff performing inspections of apartment dwellings had been looked into and if it was a priority. 3. Jennifer (Zoom) stated that she had submitted comments on Objective 68 and requested that Council continue to explore a goal to evaluate how the City could address nighttime overflights. She suggested grouping objectives for the modules for SUMMARY MINUTES Page 19 of 22 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 03/17/2025 the committee work plans, and she provided an example. She supported the quiet zones initiative. AA1. Adoption of a Resolution Responding to Federal Actions Vice Mayor Veenker noted that this resolution was step one and a platform for action. The purpose was to set the City up to respond as quickly as possible to policy changes. Section 2 outlined how that would be done. She suggested that the City Manager include any notable concerns in his weekly report to Council and that the Mayor include them in the monthly press conferences. They would continue to share the resolution with lobbyist and electeds. They would monitor what the lobbyists were hearing and encourage State and Federal representatives to pursue legislation that would protect Palo Alto and to oppose that that could hurt Palo Alto. To litigate, it would need to be decided whether to file friend-of-the court briefs or join lawsuits. There were 2 packs outlined to get such before Council to be able to move nimbly. They missed the opportunity for the NIH funding suit and for a friend-of-the-court brief on cutting grants to jurisdictions not cooperating with ICE, but there would be more. The packs were to do that directly through Council or through P&S, and it could be done by staff or by 2 or 3 councilmembers. The first section somewhat translated preexisting Palo Alto values and legislative guidelines into the context of what was currently coming out of Washington, so there would be scope-like guidance going forward. She hoped this would pass so that action could be taken when needed. Councilmember Stone was happy with the revised resolution as it reaffirmed Palo Alto’s values, spoke out against the indefensible, and articulated an action plan to respond to federal actions that could harm Palo Alto. He did not think it would place a political retribution target on Palo Alto. He was confident that the resolution would protect Palo Alto. He encouraged his colleagues to unanimously support it. Councilmember Burt understood that this would be a streamlined version of a Colleagues’ Memo to request a closed session on an item and that it would then return to Council promptly. He considered that to be a good proposal, but he voiced that that was not what was outlined in the document. There was an established procedure for a Colleagues’ Memo, and the document did not address the streamlined one, so he thought the streamlined procedure should be stated if that was the intent, and he hoped that was the intent. He addressed Section 2, which read “pursuant to a recommendation from P&S, which would consider such items in a closed session committee meeting,” and he stated that P&S would conduct a closed-session meeting if the City Manager or any 2 councilmembers brought forward a recommendation, but it was not clear how councilmembers would bring that forward to initiate a closed session by P&S rather than a closed session by Council. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 20 of 22 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 03/17/2025 Vice Mayor Veenker responded that it stated any 2 councilmembers so they could go directly to P&S. She thought the committee would need Council to bless a closed session, so they were categorically blessing that here. Councilmember Burt asked how 2 councilmembers would initiate P&S going into a closed session. Vice Mayor Veenker answered that they would need to bring it forward. It could say in writing/X days ahead, etc., but it was not thought that there should be the full Colleagues’ Memo process. The idea was to create a parallel path similar to a Colleagues’ Memo, which she explained. Any 2 councilmembers would be able to request an item be taken up in closed session. Councilmember Burt stated it needed to be determined how 2 councilmembers would request an item be taken up in closed session. He suggested it be done publicly under councilmember comments. He voiced that a new procedure needed to be created. He wanted there to be clear language on one or more paths. He added that per existing Colleagues’ Memo practices, a regular Colleagues’ Memo would be done and it would not go to P&S, which was the alternative path. The expedited process needed to be clarified. Vice Mayor Veenker wanted it to be broad, so it could be through councilmember comments or in writing. Mayor Lauing added that it would eventually go in the handbook. Vice Mayor Veenker commented that meetings could be noticed on an expedited basis, and she questioned if doing that needed to be clarified here. City Attorney Molly Stump thought Councils’ intention was to expedite it to the maximum extent possible, so she believed there needed to be a sentence stating that, which would apply to Number 1 and 2. She explained that an agenda could be amended. If not amending an agenda, a special meeting would need to be scheduled, which would take 24 hours and a majority of the body – 4/7 councilmembers and 2/3 P&S members. Councilmember Burt wanted the document to be streamlined. Vice Mayor Veenker stated that the councilmembers would identify the opportunity and any associated documents and request that it be agendized. City Attorney Stump stated that all they would need would be the name of a case or enough of a description that they could find the name, whether the opportunity would be to join as a party or to sign on to an amicus brief, and perhaps the source of the knowledge with some background information, which could be forwarded as a document or an email. They would not need a writeup. They would provide information in closed session. Depending on the time available, supporting the item could be in writing or an oral report. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 21 of 22 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 03/17/2025 Councilmember Burt asked if the resolution should be adopted at this meeting but to direct staff to return with changes to the Policy and Procedures Manual that would reflect the intent, which could then be discussed and voted on by Council. Mayor Lauing expressed that it would probably take 2 weeks to get it back. Councilmember Burt was willing to address the resolution language at this meeting. Under Section B, he wanted to clarify that it pertained to federal executive orders. He noted that mostly executives orders had been seen but it was actually federal actions, and the City may also want to participate in legislative actions, so he supported a broader statement to give latitude. Also in Section B, he thought the phrase “likely illegal” should be read “potentially,” etc., illegal. Regarding promoting Palo Alto’s values, the fourth bullet under Section 2, he stated that it was actually Palo Alto’s interests, not values. He discussed not agreeing with some of the wording under the recitals of the values, and he wanted it to be as clear and concise as possible. Councilmember Stone was receptive to some of the language amendments as brought up by Councilmember Burt. Vice Mayor Veenker suggested that Item B read an unprecedented number of executive orders and other federal actions. She explained why they had used the term “likely illegal.” Public Comment: 1. Jim K. attended the meeting as a Palo Alto resident and as a member of the Indivisible Palo Alto Plus leadership team and wholly supported the resolution. He stated that it may not be perfect but it was good enough. 2. Aram J. (Zoom) voiced his dissatisfaction with Councilmember Stone and Vice Mayor Veenker as it related to the First Amendment. 3. Winter D. (Zoom) found the new draft of the resolution to be on track. She agreed with putting a finer point on the process and allowing this to be nimble when action was needed. She encouraged Council to get this done quickly. Councilmember Reckdahl mentioned it was good enough. Regarding B, he suggested it read many or a large number, not an unprecedented number. He stated that even if something was legal, he would push back if it violated Palo Alto’s values. He thought the word illegal made it narrow, and he wanted it to be broader. He did not want it limited to executive orders. He asked if there was a current method for 2 councilmembers making a referral to P&S. City Attorney Stump explained how 2 councilmembers could currently make a referral to P&S. Councilmember Reckdahl suggested there be a mechanism for 2 councilmembers to rush something to P&S. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 22 of 22 City Council Meeting Summary Minutes: 03/17/2025 City Attorney Stump replied that Number 2 was intended to get something rushed to P&S, which could be an email to the City Manager or the P&S Chair, copying a second councilmember, asking that a lawsuit be reviewed. If it was a legal matter, it could only be a closed session if the Brown Act allowed it, and if Council was considering initiating litigation, it would qualify under the Brown Act. If it related to legislation or losing a grant, it would be an open meeting unless litigation to challenge it in court was being considered. Councilmember Reckdahl suggested it read any session of P&S, not just a closed session, depending on the mechanism to be achieved. Councilmember Lu pointed that there was a possible typo in the recitals area in Section B, and he suggested language to clear up what was being described as likely illegal or in conflict with Palo Alto’s values. Councilmember Lythcott-Haims found the term illegal to narrow Palo Alto’s concerns. She was concerned that Bullet 7 was not going far enough to describe the concerns about science and that there was not enough to protect transgender and nonbinary people. She discussed why she was proposing that Bullet 7 begin with “Support for science, scientific research, and public health data, including the need…” She did not think the term “access to healthcare” went far enough to protect those seeking gender-affirming care. She recommended that it read, “Support for individuals to have access to healthcare offered in the City” or “Support for individuals to have access to healthcare.” Vice Mayor Veenker voiced that she had sent language to the clerk and the City Attorney, which she requested be displayed on the screen. Discussion ensued related to the language and format of the resolution. It was decided that the value statements would be streamlined when doing the handbook update. MOTION: Vice Mayor Veenker moved, seconded by Councilmember Burt to approve the amended resolution with the incorporated changes discussed. MOTION PASSED: 7-0 Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 11:25 p.m.