HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-02-22 City Council Agenda PacketCITY OF PALO ALTO
CITY COUNCIL
February 22, 2016
Special Meeting
Council Chambers 6:00 PM
Agenda posted according to PAMC Section 2.04.070. Supporting materials are available in the
Council Chambers on the Thursday preceding the meeting.
1 February 22, 2016
MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA
PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE.
DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Members of the public may speak to agendized items; up to three minutes per speaker, to be determined by the presiding officer. If you wish to address the Council on any issue that is on this agenda, please complete a speaker request card located on the table at the entrance to the Council Chambers, and deliver it to the City Clerk prior to discussion of the item. You are not required to give your name on the speaker card in order to speak to the Council, but it is very helpful. TIME ESTIMATES
Time estimates are provided as part of the Council's effort to manage its time at Council meetings. Listed times are estimates only and are subject to change at any time, including while the meeting is in progress. The Council reserves the right to use more or less time on any item, to change the order of items and/or to continue items to another meeting. Particular items may be heard before or after the time estimated on the agenda. This may occur
in order to best manage the time at a meeting or to adapt to the participation of the public. To ensure participation in a particular item, we suggest arriving at the beginning of the meeting and remaining until the item is called.
HEARINGS REQUIRED BY LAW Applicants and/or appellants may have up to ten minutes at the outset of the public discussion to make their remarks and up to three minutes for concluding remarks after other members of the public have spoken.
Call to Order
Closed Session 6:00-7:00 PM Public Comments: Members of the public may speak to the Closed Session item(s); three minutes per speaker.
1. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS
City Designated Representatives: City Manager and his Designees
Pursuant to Merit System Rules and Regulations (James Keene, Molly
Stump, Suzanne Mason, Rumi Portillo, Dania Torres Wong, Alison
Hauk)
Employee Organizations: Palo Alto Police Officers Association (PAPOA);
Palo Alto Police Managers’ Association (PAPMA); Palo Alto Fire Chiefs’ Association (FCA); International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF),
Local 1319; Service Employees International Union, (SEIU) Local 521;
Management, Professional and Confidential Employees; Utilities
Management and Professional Association of Palo Alto (UMPAPA)
Authority: Government Code Section 54957.6(a)
2 February 22, 2016
MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA
PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE.
DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS.
Agenda Changes, Additions and Deletions
City Manager Comments 7:00-7:10 PM
Oral Communications 7:10-7:25 PM
Members of the public may speak to any item NOT on the agenda. Council reserves the right to limit the duration of Oral Communications period to 30 minutes.
Minutes Approval 7:25-7:30 PM
2. Approval of Action Minutes for the January 30, February 1 and 8, 2016 Council Meetings
Consent Calendar 7:30-7:35 PM Items will be voted on in one motion unless removed from the calendar by three Council Members.
3. Utilities Advisory Commission Recommendation That the City Council
Adopt a Resolution Approving the City of Palo Alto Utilities Legislative
Policy Guidelines
Action Items 7:35-10:00 PM
Include: Reports of Committees/Commissions, Ordinances and Resolutions, Public Hearings, Reports of Officials, Unfinished Business and Council Matters.
4. Comprehensive Plan Update: Discussion Regarding Development of a
Fifth Scenario With an Improved Jobs / Housing Balance for Inclusion
in the Environmental Impact Report and the Overall Project Schedule
Inter-Governmental Legislative Affairs
Council Member Questions, Comments and Announcements
Members of the public may not speak to the item(s)
Adjournment
AMERICANS WITH DISABILITY ACT (ADA)
Persons with disabilities who require auxiliary aids or services in using City facilities, services or programs or who would like information on the City’s compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990, may contact (650) 329-2550 (Voice) 24 hours in advance.
3 February 22, 2016
MATERIALS RELATED TO AN ITEM ON THIS AGENDA SUBMITTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL AFTER DISTRIBUTION OF THE AGENDA
PACKET ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC INSPECTION IN THE CITY CLERK’S OFFICE AT PALO ALTO CITY HALL, 250 HAMILTON AVE.
DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS.
Additional Information
Standing Committee Meetings
Sp. City Council Meeting February 23, 2016
Rail Committee Meeting Cancellation Notice February 24, 2016
Schedule of Meetings
Schedule of Meetings
Tentative Agenda
Tentative Agenda
Informational Report
Update on Energy/Compost Technologies, Measure E, and Organics
Processing
Palo Alto Airport - 2015 Annual Aircraft Noise Complaints Report
Mayor Patrick Burt State of the City Address Invitation
Public Letters to Council
Set 1
CITY OF PALO ALTO OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
February 22, 2016
The Honorable City Council
Palo Alto, California
Approval of Action Minutes for the January 30, February 1 and 8, 2016
Council Meetings
Staff is requesting Council review and approve the attached Action Minutes.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A: 01-30-16 DRAFT Action Minutes (DOC)
Attachment B: 02-01-16 DRAFT Action Minutes (DOC)
Attachment C: 02-08-16 DRAFT Action Minutes (DOC)
Department Head: Beth Minor, City Clerk
Page 2
CITY OF PALO ALTO CITY COUNCIL
DRAFT ACTION MINUTES
Page 1 of 4
Special Meeting
January 30, 2016
The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the El Palo Alto
Room, Mitchell Park Community Center, 3700 Middlefield Road Palo Alto at
9:05 A.M.
Present: Berman, Burt, DuBois, Filseth, Holman, Kniss, Scharff, Schmid,
Wolbach
Absent:
Mayor’s Welcome and Overview of the Day
Study Session
1. FY 2016 Performance Report and National Citizen Survey (Continued
From January 25, 2016).
Council took a break from 10:19 A.M. to 10:31 A.M.
Action Items
2. Council Annual Priorities Settings.
MOTION: Vice Mayor Scharff moved, seconded by Council Member Berman
to adopt the following Council Priorities for 2016:
A. The Built Environment: Infrastructure, Housing, Parking, and
Livability; and
B. Mobility; and
C. Healthy City, Healthy Community; and
DRAFT ACTION MINUTES
Page 2 of 4
City Council Meeting
Draft Action Minutes: 1/30/16
D. Completion of the Comprehensive Plan 2015-2030 Update with
increased focus from Council.
SUBSTITUTE MOTION: Council Member Schmid moved, seconded by
Council Member Kniss to adopt the following Council Priorities for 2016:
A. The Built Environment: Infrastructure, Housing, Mobility, Parking, and
Livability; and
B. Healthy City, Healthy Community; and
C. Completion of the Comprehensive Plan 2015-2030 Update with
increased focus from Council.
INCORPORATED INTO THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION WITH THE
CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to add at the end of Part 1 of
the Motion, “Mobility, with a particular emphasis on Mobility” and add to the
Motion, “Infrastructure.” (New Part B)
SUBSTITUTE MOTION RESTATED: Council Member Schmid moved,
seconded by Council Member Kniss to adopt the following Priorities for 2016:
A. The Built Environment: Housing, Parking, Livability, Mobility, with a
particular emphasis on Mobility; and
B. Infrastructure; and
C. Healthy City, Healthy Community; and
D. Completion of the Comprehensive Plan 2015-2030 Update with
increased focus from Council.
SUBSTITUTE MOTION AS AMENDED PASSED: 5-4 DuBois, Filseth,
Holman, Kniss, Schmid yes
Council took a break from 12:22 P.M. to 12:53 P.M.
3. Priorities and Staff Work Plan: Getting the Work Done.
DRAFT ACTION MINUTES
Page 3 of 4
City Council Meeting
Draft Action Minutes: 1/30/16
MOTION: Council Member Wolbach moved, seconded by Council Member
Kniss to delegate further planning on the Work Plan and the topics for
Committee of the Whole Meetings to the Mayor, Vice Mayor, and City
Manager to generate proposals for Council approval.
MOTION RESTATED: Council Member Wolbach moved, seconded by
Council Member Kniss to schedule a Committee of the Whole Meeting, with
preparatory work to be conducted by the Mayor, Vice Mayor, and City
Manager.
INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE
MAKER AND SECONDER to add at the end of the Motion, “to address the
Work Plan, and other areas of focus for the Council for the year.”
INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE
MAKER AND SECONDER to add to the Motion, “prior to the end of March”
after “Whole Meeting.”
INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE
MAKER AND SECONDER to add to the Motion, “(to reconcile Council
project priorities)” after “Work Plan.”
INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE
MAKER AND SECONDER to add to the Motion, “Council efficiency” after
“project priorities.”
MOTION RESTATED: Council Member Wolbach moved, seconded by Council Member Kniss to schedule a Committee of the Whole Meeting prior
to the end of March, with preparatory work to be conducted by the Mayor,
Vice Mayor, and City Manager, to address the Work Plan (to reconcile
Council project priorities), Council efficiency, and other areas of focus for the
Council for the year.
MOTION AS AMENDED PASSED: 9-0
4. Resolution 9574 Entitled “Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto
Setting the Council’s Summer Break and Winter Closure.”
MOTION: Vice Mayor Scharff moved, seconded by Council Member Kniss to
schedule the Council’s Summer Break from July 5 to August 12.
DRAFT ACTION MINUTES
Page 4 of 4
City Council Meeting
Draft Action Minutes: 1/30/16
AMENDMENT: Council Member Holman moved, seconded by Council Member
XX to replace in the Motion, “July 5 to August 12” with “June 27 to August 5.”
AMENDMENT FAILED DUE TO THE LACK OF A SECOND
INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE
MAKER AND SECONDER to replace in the Motion, “July 5” with “July 2.”
MOTION RESTATED: Vice Mayor Scharff moved, seconded by Council
Member Kniss to schedule the Council’s Summer Break from July 2 to
August 12.
MOTION AS AMENDED PASSED: 9-0
5. Wrap-Up and Next Steps.
Council Member Kniss left the meeting at 2:38 P.M.
Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 2:41 P.M.
CITY OF PALO ALTO CITY COUNCIL
DRAFT ACTION MINUTES
Page 1 of 10
Regular Meeting
February 1, 2016
The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Council
Chambers at 6:04 P.M.
Present: Berman, Burt, DuBois, Filseth, Holman, Kniss, Scharff, Schmid,
Wolbach arrived at 6:25 P.M.
Absent:
Study Session
1. Study Session on National, State and Local Trends on the Impact of
Arts and Culture.
Special Orders of the Day
2. Community Partner Presentation: West Bay Opera at the Lucie Stern
Community Theater.
Agenda Changes, Additions and Deletions
Staff requests Council hear Agenda Item Numbers 13- Approval of a Twenty
Five (25) Year Lease… and 14- PUBLIC HEARING: Adoption of an Emergency
Ordinance… before Agenda Item Number 12- Adoption of an Ordinance to
add Section 10.50.085…
Consent Calendar
MOTION: Vice Mayor Scharff moved, seconded by Council Member DuBois,
third by Council Member Holman to pull Agenda Item Number 10-
Agreement with Empowerment Institute… to be moved to a date uncertain.
DRAFT ACTION MINUTES
Page 2 of 10
City Council Meeting
Draft Action Minutes: 2/1/16
MOTION: Vice Mayor Scharff moved, seconded by Council Member DuBois
to approve Agenda Item Numbers 3-9 including corrections contained in the
At Places Memorandum for Agenda Item Number 3.
3. Budget Amendment Ordinance 5378 Entitled, “Budget Amendment
Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Closing the Fiscal Year
2015 Budget, Including Authorization of Transfers to Reserves, and
Approval of the Fiscal Year 2015 Comprehensive Annual Financial
Report (CAFR).”
4. Approval of the Fifth Amendment to Extend the Lease With Thoits
Bros., Inc. at 285 Hamilton Avenue, Suite 100 for a Period of
14 Months and Approval of the Second Amendment to Extend the
Sublease With Thoits Bros., Inc., 285 Hamilton Avenue, Suite 200 for a
Period of 14 Months for use by the City Development Center.
5. Finance Committee Recommendation for Council to Review and Accept
Information on the new Government Accounting Standards Board
Pension Reporting Standards Known as GASB 68.
6. Approval of Police Department Purchase of Multi-Band Portable Radios
for the Police and Fire Departments in an Amount not to Exceed
$625,000.
7. Amend the Fiscal Year 2016 Adopted Municipal Fee Schedule to add a Secondhand Dealer Licensing Fee.
8. Adoption of Annual Amendments to the Employment Agreements
Between the City of Palo Alto and Council Appointed Officers (City
Manager, City Attorney, City Auditor and City Clerk).
9. Ordinance 5379 Entitled, “Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo
Alto Amending Palo Alto Municipal Code Chapter 4.60 (Business
Registration Program) to Exempt Very Small Businesses, Very Small Non-Profits, and Religious Organizations With no Ancillary Business on
Site From the Business Registration Program (FIRST READING:
January 19, 2016 PASSED: 8-0 Kniss absent).”
10. Agreement with Empowerment Institute on Cool Block Small Pilot
Program (Continued From January 25, 2016).
MOTION PASSED: 9-0
DRAFT ACTION MINUTES
Page 3 of 10
City Council Meeting
Draft Action Minutes: 2/1/16
Action Items
11. Approval of 2016 Basement Construction Dewatering Program
Changes and Other Related Issues.
MOTION: Vice Mayor Scharff moved, seconded by Council Member Kniss
to:
A. Approve the five “Group 1” Basement Construction Dewatering
Program changes for the 2016 construction season on a pilot basis;
and
B. Continue working with the Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD) in an effort on developing a further understanding of the north county
groundwater systems, impacts of groundwater pumping, and
opportunities for enhanced groundwater recharge. Direct Staff to
provide an update on the work plan for this effort to the Policy and
Services Committee in the first quarter of 2016; and
C. Direct Staff to prepare a report for the Policy and Services Committee
in the first half of 2016 to discuss Group 3 matters and the
development of a potential recommendation to Council to direct
additional work in one or more of these areas.
AMENDMENT: Council Member Schmid moved, seconded by Council
Member XX to add to Part A of the Motion, “add a sixth change, ‘each site
will be metered and there will be an excess charge for water not used over
3.5 million gallons at a rate of $.02 per gallon.’”
AMENDMENT RESTATED AND INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION
WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to add to Part A of
the Motion, “add a sixth change, ‘dewatering flow will be metered.’”
AMENDMENT: Council Member Schmid moved, seconded by Council
Member XX to add to the Motion, “replace in Draft Requirements for
Submittal of a Determination… ‘avoidance measures are also to be employed
to the extent practical’ with ‘above 6 million gallons per household avoidance
measures will be employed in someway practical.’”
AMENDMENT FAILED DUE TO THE LACK OF A SECOND
DRAFT ACTION MINUTES
Page 4 of 10
City Council Meeting
Draft Action Minutes: 2/1/16
MOTION RESTATED: Vice Mayor Scharff moved, seconded by Council
Member Kniss to:
A. Approve the five “Group 1” Basement Construction Dewatering
Program changes for the 2016 construction season on a pilot basis and
add a sixth change, “dewatering flow will be metered”; and
B. Continue working with the Santa Clara Valley Water District (SCVWD)
in an effort on developing a further understanding of the north county
groundwater systems, impacts of groundwater pumping, and
opportunities for enhanced groundwater recharge. Direct Staff to provide an update on the work plan for this effort to the Policy and
Services Committee in the first quarter of 2016; and
C. Direct Staff to prepare a report for the Policy and Services Committee
in the first half of 2016 to discuss Group 3 matters and the
development of a potential recommendation to Council to direct
additional work in one or more of these areas.
MOTION AS AMENDED PASSED: 7-2 Holman, Schmid no
At this time Council heard Agenda Item 13.
13. Approval of a Twenty Five (25) Year Lease Agreement Between the
City of Palo Alto and the Museum of American Heritage (MOAH) for the
City Owned Property at 351 Homer Avenue, Palo Alto.
MOTION: Council Member Holman moved, seconded by Council Member Filseth to authorize the City Manager or his designee to negotiate and enter
into a new twenty five (25) year lease agreement between the City of Palo
Alto and Museum of American Heritage (MOAH) for the City owned property
at 351 Homer Avenue, Palo Alto upon expiration of the current lease
agreement in 2017.
MOTION PASSED: 9-0
14. PUBLIC HEARING: Adoption of an Emergency Ordinance of the Council
of the City of Palo Alto Adding Chapter 9.16 (Medical Marijuana
Cultivation and Delivery) to Title 9 (Public Peace, Morals and Safety) of
the Palo Alto Municipal Code to Prohibit Medical Marijuana Cultivation
and Delivery in Palo Alto Pursuant to California Assembly Bills 243 and
DRAFT ACTION MINUTES
Page 5 of 10
City Council Meeting
Draft Action Minutes: 2/1/16
266 and Senate Bill 643. This Action is Exempt Under Section
15061(b)(3) of the California Environmental Quality Act.
Public Hearing opened at 10:00 P.M.
Public Hearing closed at 10:06 P.M.
MOTION: Council Member DuBois moved, seconded by Council Member
Kniss to continue this Agenda Item to a February Council Meeting if
necessary.
MOTION PASSED: 9-0
12. Adoption of an Ordinance to add Section 10.50.085 (Eligibility Areas) and to Amend Section 10.50.090 (Modification or Termination of
Districts) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code Relating to Residential
Parking Programs; Adoption of a Resolution Amending Resolution 9473
to Implement Phase 2 of the Downtown Residential Preferential
Parking (RPP) District Pilot Program; Approval of Contract Amendment
to SP Plus for $94,000 for Additional Services for Parking Permits and
On-Site Customer Service, Approval of Contract Amendment to SERCO
for $60,000 for Enforcement of Expanded Area of Downtown RPP
District, Approval of Contract Amendment to McGuire Pacific
Constructors for $154,500 for Construction Services for Expanded Area
of Downtown RPP District, Approval of Budget Amendments in the
General Fund, Residential Parking Permit Fund, and Capital Improvement Fund, Approval of the RPP Administrative Guidelines.
These Actions are Exempt From the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) Pursuant to Sections 15061(b)(3) and 15301 of the CEQA
Guidelines.
Molly Stump, City Attorney advised Council Members Filseth, Holman, and
Kniss live within the Residential Preferential Parking Permit (RPP) District
and Vice Mayor Scharff owns a business property within the RPP District,
requiring their recusal from this Agenda Item.
Mayor Burt advised he would not participate in this Agenda Item because he
lives within 500 feet of the proposed RPP District expansion.
Following random selection pursuant to California Code of Regulations
Section 18705 (Legally Required Participation), Council Member Filseth will participate in this Agenda Item.
DRAFT ACTION MINUTES
Page 6 of 10
City Council Meeting
Draft Action Minutes: 2/1/16
At this time Council heard Council Member Questions, Comments and
Announcements.
Council Member Questions, Comments and Announcements
Vice Mayor Scharff announced the California State Assembly formed a
committee titled Regional Planning in the San Francisco Bay Area that will
address the planned merger of Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG)
and the Metropolitan Transit Commission (MTC), the lack of affordable
housing, the environment, transportation, and other regional issues. He
suggested this Committee may have some influence over local control regarding these issues.
Council Member Holman announced four Council Members attended an event
led by Lieutenant Governor Gavin Newson regarding a potential initiative
relating to gun and ammunition safety.
Council Member DuBois announced he will be working on a Colleagues
Memorandum relating to parking permitting in the Evergreen Park
neighborhood.
Mayor Burt attended the 85th anniversary of the Palo Alto Players. He
learned that the Lucie Stern Community Theater was built for the Palo Alto
Players and the group was the first community theater group on the
Peninsula.
At this time Council returned to Agenda Item 12.
12. Adoption of an Ordinance to add Section 10.50.085 (Eligibility Areas)
and to Amend Section 10.50.090 (Modification or Termination of
Districts) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code Relating to Residential
Parking Programs; Adoption of a Resolution Amending Resolution 9473
to Implement Phase 2 of the Downtown Residential Preferential
Parking (RPP) District Pilot Program; Approval of Contract Amendment
to SP Plus for $94,000 for Additional Services for Parking Permits and
On-Site Customer Service, Approval of Contract Amendment to SERCO
for $60,000 for Enforcement of Expanded Area of Downtown RPP
District, Approval of Contract Amendment to McGuire Pacific
Constructors for $154,500 for Construction Services for Expanded Area
of Downtown RPP District, Approval of Budget Amendments in the General Fund, Residential Parking Permit Fund, and Capital
Improvement Fund, Approval of the RPP Administrative Guidelines.
DRAFT ACTION MINUTES
Page 7 of 10
City Council Meeting
Draft Action Minutes: 2/1/16
These Actions are Exempt From the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) Pursuant to Sections 15061(b)(3) and 15301 of the CEQA
Guidelines.
Mayor Burt, Vice Mayor Scharff, Council Member Berman, and Council
Member Holman left the meeting at 10:15 P.M.
MOTION: Council Member DuBois moved, seconded by Council Member
Wolbach to:
A. Adopt an Ordinance to add Section 10.50.085 (Eligibility Areas) and
amend Section 10.50.090 (Modification or Termination of Districts) of Title 10 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code relating to Residential Parking
Programs; and
B. Adopt a Resolution amending Resolution 9473 to implement Phase 2 of
the Downtown Residential Preferential Parking (RPP) District Pilot
Program; and
C. Adopt the RPP Administrative Guidelines; and
D. Approve and authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute a
Contract Amendment with SP Plus for $94,000 for Additional Services
for Parking Permits and On-Site Customer Service; and
E. Approve and authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute a
Contract Amendment with SERCO for $60,000 for Enforcement of
Expanded Area of Downtown RPP District; and
F. Approve and authorize City Manager or his designee to execute a
Contract Amendment with McGuire Pacific Constructors for $154,500
for Construction Services for Expanded Area of Downtown RPP District;
and
G. Amend the Fiscal Year 2016 Budget Appropriation Ordinance for:
i. The Capital Fund by:
a. Increasing the transfer from the General Fund by $64,329;
and
DRAFT ACTION MINUTES
Page 8 of 10
City Council Meeting
Draft Action Minutes: 2/1/16
b. Increasing the Residential Preferential Parking Project
(PL-15003) in the amount of $64,329; and
ii. The Residential Parking Permit Programs Fund by:
a. Increasing the transfer from the General Fund by $94,000;
and
b. Increasing the Downtown Residential Preferential Parking
Contractual Services budget by $94,000; and
iii. The General Fund by:
a. Increasing the transfer to the Capital Fund by $64,329;
and
b. Increasing the transfer to the Residential Parking Permit
Programs Fund by $94,000; and
c. Decreasing the Transportation Contingency fund by
$158,329; and
H. Decrease Employee permits by 200 per year for ten years; and
I. Return to Council with a program to meter non-resident hang tags,
daily scratchers, and five day scratchers distributed by zones both in
streets and parking garages; and
J. Sell no employee decals outside of the Phase 1 boundaries initially and
return with a discussion of hangtags and scratchers.
INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE
MAKER AND SECONDER to add to the Motion Part G, “direct Staff to return
with a Resolution to” and remove Part B.
AMENDMENT: Council Member Schmid moved, seconded by Council
Member XX to add to the Motion, “report back to Council quarterly.”
AMENDMENT WITHDRAWN BY THE MAKER
DRAFT ACTION MINUTES
Page 9 of 10
City Council Meeting
Draft Action Minutes: 2/1/16
SUBSTITUTE MOTION: Council Member Kniss moved, seconded by
Council Member XX to continue this Agenda Item for two weeks.
SUBSTITUTE MOTION FAILED DUE TO THE LACK OF A SECOND
INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE
MAKER AND SECONDER to replace in the Motion Part G, “with” with
“within approximately two weeks with.”
MOTION RESTATED: Council Member DuBois moved, seconded by Council
Member Wolbach to:
A. Adopt an Ordinance to add Section 10.50.085 (Eligibility Areas) and amend Section 10.50.090 (Modification or Termination of Districts) of
Title 10 of the Palo Alto Municipal Code relating to Residential Parking
Programs; and
B. Adopt the RPP Administrative Guidelines; and
C. Approve and authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute a Contract Amendment with SP Plus for $94,000 for Additional Services
for Parking Permits and On-Site Customer Service; and
D. Approve and authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute a
Contract Amendment with SERCO for $60,000 for Enforcement of
Expanded Area of Downtown RPP District; and
E. Approve and authorize City Manager or his designee to execute a
Contract Amendment with McGuire Pacific Constructors for $154,500
for Construction Services for Expanded Area of Downtown RPP District;
and
F. Amend the Fiscal Year 2016 Budget Appropriation Ordinance for:
i. The Capital Fund by:
a. Increasing the transfer from the General Fund by $64,329;
and
b. Increasing the Residential Preferential Parking Project
(PL-15003) in the amount of $64,329; and
DRAFT ACTION MINUTES
Page 10 of 10
City Council Meeting
Draft Action Minutes: 2/1/16
ii. The Residential Parking Permit Programs Fund by:
c. Increasing the transfer from the General Fund by $94,000;
and
d. Increasing the Downtown Residential Preferential Parking
Contractual Services budget by $94,000; and
iii. The General Fund by:
d. Increasing the transfer to the Capital Fund by $64,329;
and
e. Increasing the transfer to the Residential Parking Permit
Programs Fund by $94,000; and
f. Decreasing the Transportation Contingency fund by
$158,329; and
G. Direct Staff to return within approximately two weeks with a
Resolution to:
i. Decrease Employee permits by 200 per year for ten years; and
ii. Return to Council with a program to meter non-resident hang
tags, daily scratchers, and five day scratchers distributed by
zones both in streets and parking garages; and
iii. Sell no employee decals outside of the Phase 1 boundaries
initially and return with a discussion of hangtags and scratchers.
MOTION AS AMENDED PASSED: 5-0 Berman, Burt, Holman, Scharff not
participating
Inter-Governmental Legislative Affairs
None.
Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 12:38 P.M.
CITY OF PALO ALTO CITY COUNCIL
DRAFT ACTION MINUTES
Page 1 of 6
Special Meeting
February 8, 2016
The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Council
Chambers at 4:34 P.M.
Present: Berman arrived at 4:37 P.M., Burt, DuBois, Filseth, Holman
arrived at 4:37 P.M., Kniss, Scharff, Schmid arrived at 4:36
P.M., Wolbach arrived at 4:40 P.M.
Absent:
Closed Session
1. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS
City Designated Representatives: City Manager and his Designees
Pursuant to Merit System Rules and Regulations (James Keene, Molly
Stump, Suzanne Mason, Dania Torres Wong, Alison Hauk)
Employee Organizations: Palo Alto Police Officers Association (PAPOA);
Palo Alto Police Managers’ Association (PAPMA); Palo Alto Fire Chiefs’
Association (FCA); International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF),
Local 1319; Service Employees International Union, (SEIU) Local 521;
Management, Professional and Confidential Employees; Utilities
Management and Professional Association of Palo Alto (UMPAPA)
Authority: Government Code Section 54957.6(a).
2. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS
Authority: Government Code Section 54956.8
Property: Palo Alto Post Office, 380 Hamilton Avenue, Palo Alto, CA
94301
Agency Negotiators: James Keene, Lalo Perez, Hamid Ghaemmaghami
Negotiating Parties: United States Postal Service and City of Palo Alto
Under Negotiation: Purchase and Leaseback – Price and Terms of
Payment.
DRAFT ACTION MINUTES
Page 2 of 6
City Council Meeting
Draft Action Minutes: 2/8/16
MOTION: Council Member Wolbach moved, seconded by Council Member
Kniss to go into Closed Session.
MOTION PASSED: 9-0
Council went into Closed Session at 4:46 P.M.
Council returned from Closed Session at 7:26 P.M.
Mayor Burt announced no reportable action.
Agenda Changes, Additions and Deletions
None.
Minutes Approval
3. Approval of Action Minutes for the January 19 and 25, 2016 Council
Meeting.
MOTION: Council Member Holman moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Scharff
to approve the Action Minutes for the January 19 and 25, 2016 Council
Meetings with changes to the January 19 Action Minutes as outlined in the At
Places Memorandum.
MOTION PASSED: 8-0 Kniss not participating
Consent Calendar
MOTION: Vice Mayor Scharff moved, seconded by Mayor Burt, third by
Council Member Filseth to pull Agenda Item Number 6- Approval of
Amendment to Table of Organization… to be heard as Agenda Item
Number 7b.
MOTION: Vice Mayor Scharff moved, seconded by Council Member Holman
to approve Agenda Item Numbers 4-5, 7, and 7a.
DRAFT ACTION MINUTES
Page 3 of 6
City Council Meeting
Draft Action Minutes: 2/8/16
4. Resolution 9575 Entitled, “Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo
Alto Approving the “2016 Procedures for Customer Identity and Credit
Security.””
5. Approval and Authorization for the City Manager to Execute a Contract
With Celerity Integrated Services Inc. in an Amount Not-to-Exceed
$122,500 for Fiber Optic System Review Services for a Term Through
April 30, 2016 With a 15 Percent Contingency of $18,375 for Related
Work, for a Total Authorized Amount Not-to-Exceed $140,875, Capital
Improvement Program Project FO-16000.
6. Approval of Amendment to Table of Organization by Adding 1.0
Management Analyst in the Development Services Department.
7. Appointment of 2016 Emergency Standby Council.
7a. Approval of a Contract With Freytag & Associates in the Amount of
$237,500 for Airplane Noise Assessment & Mitigation; and Approval of a Budget Amendment in the General Fund for Fiscal Year 2016, Offset
by a Reduction of $237,500 from the General Fund Budget
Stabilization Reserve.
MOTION PASSED: 9-0
Action Items
7b. (Former Agenda Item 6) Approval of Amendment to Table of
Organization by Adding 1.0 Management Analyst in the Development
Services Department.
MOTION: Vice Mayor Scharff moved, seconded by Council Member Holman
to refer this Agenda Item to the Finance Committee.
MOTION PASSED: 9-0
8. Review and Discussion Regarding the Draft Community Services and
Facilities Element Recommended by the Comprehensive Plan Update
Citizens Advisory Commission (CAC).
DRAFT ACTION MINUTES
Page 4 of 6
City Council Meeting
Draft Action Minutes: 2/8/16
NO ACTION TAKEN
9. Adoption of Administrative Guideline for Implementation of the Interim
Office/R&D Annual Limit in Fiscal Years 2016 and 2017.
MOTION: Council Member DuBois moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Scharff
to:
A. Adopt the administrative guidelines proposed by the Director of
Planning and Community Environment in conformance with Section
18.85.208 of the Ordinance establishing an interim annual limit on the
amount of Office/R&D space that can be approved each fiscal year;
and
B. Direct Staff to add clarification to descriptions to allow for increased
variation in scoring to highlight successful programs.
INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE
MAKER AND SECONDER to add to the Motion, “replace 1. Impacts (b) Considerations for Each Criterion with, ‘projects will receive up to 20 points if
they result in the lowest traffic impacts.’”
INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE
MAKER AND SECONDER to add to the Motion, “replace 2. Design (c)
Consideration for Each Criterion with, ‘receive up to 20 points for the highest
quality design.’”
INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE
MAKER AND SECONDER to add to the Motion, “remove from 5. Uses (c)
Consideration for Each Criterion, ‘than four.’”
AMENDMENT: Council Member Schmid moved, seconded by Council
Member XX to add to the Motion, “replace in 5. Uses (c) Consideration for
Each Criterion, “10 points” with “20 points.”
AMENDMENT FAILED DUE TO THE LACK OF A SECOND
DRAFT ACTION MINUTES
Page 5 of 6
City Council Meeting
Draft Action Minutes: 2/8/16
AMENDMENT: Council Member Holman moved, seconded by Council
Member XX to add the end of Part B of the Motion, “and code required
parking without reductions.”
AMENDMENT FAILED DUE TO THE LACK OF A SECOND
MOTION RESTATED: Council Member DuBois moved, seconded by Vice
Mayor Scharff to:
A. Adopt the administrative guidelines proposed by the Director of
Planning and Community Environment in conformance with Section
18.85.208 of the Ordinance establishing an interim annual limit on the
amount of Office/R&D space that can be approved each fiscal year;
and
B. Direct Staff to add clarification to descriptions to allow for increased
variation in scoring to highlight successful programs; and
C. Replace 1. Impacts (b) Considerations for Each Criterion with,
“projects will receive up to 20 Points if they result in the lowest traffic
impacts;” and
D. Replace 2. Design (c) Consideration for Each Criterion with, “receive
up to 20 points for the highest quality design;” and
E. Remove from 5. Uses (c) Consideration for Each Criterion, “than four.”
MOTION AS AMENDED PASSED: 9-0
10. Envision Silicon Valley County Sales Tax Measure: North County and
West Valley Cities Position Advocacy.
MOTION: Vice Mayor Scharff moved, seconded by Council Member Kniss
to:
A. Approve advocacy direction to City representatives regarding the
proposed Santa Clara County sales tax, including general funding
levels within expenditure categories, as developed in coordination with
other North County and West Valley cities; and
DRAFT ACTION MINUTES
Page 6 of 6
City Council Meeting
Draft Action Minutes: 2/8/16
B. Authorize the Mayor and City Manager or their designees to engage
with Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) and other stakeholders and
refine the City’s position and maintain consensus with other cities
while supporting maximum regional funding for rail grade separations
and congestion relief.
AMENDMENT: Council Member DuBois moved, seconded by Council
Member XX to add to the Motion, “direct City representative to work towards
increasing the percentage to at least 15 percent for Caltrain grade
separation and cap Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) to San Jose funding at 20
percent.”
AMENDMENT FAILED DUE TO THE LACK OF A SECOND
MOTION PASSED: 9-0
Inter-Governmental Legislative Affairs
None.
Council Member Questions, Comments and Announcements
Council Member Schmid reported the Bay Area Water Supply and
Conservation Agency (BAWSCA) Annual Report listed year end reservoir
levels including Hetchy Dam at 70 percent and San Pedro Dam at 30 percent
of capacity.
Vice Mayor Scharff reported his involvement as an Executive Board Member
of the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) in how ABAG can
successfully merge with the Metropolitan Transit Commission (MTC) or the
transfer of planning staff from ABAG to MTC. He reported Santa Clara
County Cities Association is considering the creation of a sub-region.
Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 11:47 P.M.
City of Palo Alto (ID # 6563)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Consent Calendar Meeting Date: 2/22/2016
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Summary Title: Utilities Legislative Guidelines
Title: Utilities Advisory Commission Recommendation that the City Council
Adopt a Resolution Approving the City of Palo Alto Utilities Legislative Policy
Guidelines
From: City Manager
Lead Department: Utilities
Recommendation
Staff and the Utilities Advisory Commission (UAC) recommend that the City Council adopt a
resolution (Attachment A) approving amendments to the Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines.
Executive Summary
The Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines (Exhibit A to Attachment A) include proposed updates
to the guidelines last amended by Council on March 2, 2015 to respond to recent legislative and
regulatory trends to: 1) provide direction to staff in evaluating and responding to legislative
action involving Utilities issues, and 2) clarify approved policy and advocacy direction when
active involvement of Palo Alto elected officials is required. At its January 13, 2016 meeting,
the UAC reviewed and voted unanimously to recommend that Council approve the amended
guidelines.
The guidelines are grouped in six sections: the first addressing legislative policy guidelines that
are common to all utilities (electric, fiber optics, gas, wastewater collection, and water), and the
following five sections addressing those guidelines that are specific to electric, fiber optics, gas,
wastewater collection, and water. Each section includes a set of goals for the utility and
guidelines for Palo Alto staff and elected officials when taking action to achieve the goals.
Background
The utility industry is a high-profile and heavily regulated industry subject to continuous
legislative action at both the state and federal levels. Such legislation can influence, among
other things, the reliability and security of the supply and distribution infrastructure,
commodity procurement practices, customer service and billing, program design, rate design,
and activities and costs associated with climate protection. Representatives of the City
(appointed and elected officials and staff) participate in Federal and State legislative forums to
City of Palo Alto Page 2
advocate positions on issues facilitating the City’s current strategic objectives, as adopted in the
Utilities Strategic Plan: ensuring a reliable and safe supply of utility resources, providing
customer service excellence, managing costs, and ensuring environmental sustainability. The
City also participates in joint action efforts to advocate for goals and objectives shared by other
publicly-owned utilities.
At the state level, hundreds of bills focused on the utility industry can be introduced each year.
The number of bills introduced, the pace at which bills change and new language is negotiated,
and the often surprising speed at which bills can be placed for a vote during the legislative year
requires staff and elected officials to respond quickly if the City is to have any influence on the
resulting legislation. Often, a response to an amended bill is required in a matter of a day or
two. These timing constraints preclude a return to the UAC and Council for approval each time
a response is required. Therefore, a set of policy guidelines is developed each year that
identifies the goals and priorities for the City to be applied by staff when evaluating and
responding to legislation. While the guidelines are used by staff for evaluating legislation, any
advocacy positions taken in alignment with these guidelines will be subject to the approval of
the Utilities Director or City Manager per the City’s legislative advocacy process. Although it is
impractical to return for approval each time a letter is sent in response to a bill amendment,
the issues under debate are known to the UAC and Council through their participation in
legislative committee meetings, and updates from the City Manager, the Utilities Director and
City staff. Formal letters responding to legislative bills or amendments will be distributed to the
UAC and Council.
Discussion
The proposed Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines have been updated to respond to recent
legislative and regulatory trends. Exhibit A, attached to the resolution, shows the proposed
revised guidelines, with the changes from the last approved set of guidelines highlighted in
Attachment B. The priorities are grouped in six sections: the first listing goals, trends and
priorities that are common to all utilities, and the following five sections identifying goals,
trends and priorities that are specific to electric, fiber optic, natural gas, wastewater collection
and water services.
Attachment C provides a summary of key legislative action from 2015 and a look forward at
anticipated issues that have a good chance of reappearing in the second year of California’s
2015/2016 legislative session. Some of these are bills that were held back in 2015 and may be
taken up again this year, others are approved statutes that staff anticipates will have follow up
legislation.
Staff returns every year with an update to the guidelines and is proposing the guidelines, if
adopted by Council, remain in effect from February 22, 2016 until the next approved update.
City of Palo Alto Page 3
Commission Review and Recommendation
The Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines were presented to the UAC at its January 13, 2016
meeting. The Commission discussed public disclosure of customers’ utility usage data, and
Commissioner Foster asked that staff acknowledge that there were different opinions on the
issue of energy and water use disclosure.
The UAC discussed the proposed changes to “All Utilities” Goals 1 and 3 and determined that
the proposed changes to those goals be discarded and the original language retained. The UAC
voted unanimously (6-0 with Commissioner Hall absent) to recommend that Council approve
the guidelines, without the changes to the “All Utilities” Goals 1 and 3. Draft excerpted minutes
from the UAC’s January 13, 2016 meeting are provided as Attachment D.
Staff revised the “All Utilities” Goals 1 and 3 in the guidelines to revert to the original language
such that the proposed guidelines, provided as Exhibit A to Attachment A, are consistent with
the UAC’s recommendation.
Resource Impact
There is no direct resource impact associated with adoption of the proposed legislative policy
guidelines. However, actions taken that support the efficient use of the City’s assets and
resources will help control costs, implement the Council’s policies and goals, and protect utility
customers.
Policy Implications
The recommendation is consistent with Council policy and supports the Utilities Strategic Plan’s
objectives of: ensuring a reliable and safe supply of utility resources, providing customer service
excellence, managing costs, and ensuring environmental sustainability.
Environmental Review
Approval of a resolution adopting the Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines does not meet the
definition of a project pursuant to Section 21065 of the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA), thus, no environmental review is required.
Attachments:
Attachment A: Resolution to Amend Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines (PDF)
Attachment B: Utilities Legislative Policy Guidlines (in redline strikeout text) (PDF)
Attachment C: 2015 Legislative Activity Summary (PDF)
Attachment D: Excerpted Draft Minutes of January 13, 2016 (PDF)
NOT YET APPROVED
160128 jb 6053661
Resolution No. _____
Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Approving the City
of Palo Alto Utilities’ Legislative Policy Guidelines
A. The City of Palo Alto Utilities Strategic Plan (“Strategic Plan”), approved by the
Palo Alto City Council on July 18, 2011, [Staff Report #1880], and amended on August 5, 2013
(Staff Report #3950), provides a set of Strategic Objectives for the City of Palo Alto Utilities
Department (CPAU) to follow in ensuring a reliable and safe supply of utility resources,
providing customer service excellence, managing costs, and ensuring environmental
sustainability.
B. CPAU annually identifies Utilities’ Legislative Policy Guidelines that facilitate the
Strategic Plan’s Strategic Objectives, and advocates for utility-related issues at Federal and
State legislative forums in furtherance of those objectives.
C. Action on some of these issues may require active involvement of Palo Alto
elected and appointed officials.
D. The Utilities’ Legislative Policy Guidelines were presented to the UAC at its
January 13, 2016 meeting, and the UAC voted unanimously (6-0 with Commissioner Hall absent)
to recommend that the City Council approve the Guidelines, without the changes to the “All
Utilities” Goals 1 and 3. Staff revised the “All Utilities” Goals 1 and 3 in the Guidelines to revert
to the original language, such that the proposed guidelines, provided as Exhibit A to this
Resolution, are consistent with the UAC’s recommendation.
The Council of the City of Palo Alto hereby RESOLVES as follows:
SECTION 1. The Council hereby adopts the resolution approving the Utilities
Legislative Policy Guidelines, effective February 22, 2016. All prior versions of the City of Palo
Alto Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines, including the Legislative Policy Guidelines adopted by
Council on March 2, 2015 (Resolution No. 9498) are hereby repealed and replaced in their
entirety by the Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines, attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A.
SECTION 2. Staff will review the Guidelines annually and any proposed changes will
be approved by City Council.
//
//
//
//
ATTACHMENT A
SECTION 3. The Council finds that the adoption of this resolution does not constitute
a project under Section 21065 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the CEQA
Guidelines, and therefore, no environmental assessment is required.
INTRODUCED AND PASSED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
ATTEST:
___________________________ ___________________________
City Clerk Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED:
___________________________ ___________________________
Senior Deputy City Attorney City Manager
___________________________
Director of Utilities
___________________________
Director of Administrative Services
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines February 2016 Update
6053662
Included as Exhibit A to Resolution
Exhibit A
Utilities’ Legislative Policy Guidelines
Formal advocacy positions taken in alignment with these guidelines will be subject to the
approval of the Utilities Director or City Manager as per the City’s Legislative Program Manual
ALL UTILITES
Goals
1. Preserve/enhance local accountability in the control and oversight of matters impacting utility
programs and rates for our customers while balancing statewide climate protection goals.
2. Support efforts to maintain or improve the reliability and security of the supply, transmission,
storage, distribution/collection, and data infrastructures.
3. Support legislation that makes bold progress in cost effectively reducing greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions, and recognizes early voluntary action.
4. Maintain the City of Palo Alto Utilities’ (CPAU’s) ability to provide safe, reliable, sustainable, and
competitively-priced utility services.
Goals
Legislative Policy
Guidelines
Venue
1. Local
Accountability
2. Reliability,
Security
&
Infrastructure
3. Climate
Protection
4. Service &
Cost
Control
1. Advocate goals through active
participation in joint action
efforts.
Federal,
State, and
Regional
2. Support legislation that allows
local evaluation and design of
more efficient energy solutions,
fuel switching, and demand
control programs.
Federal,
State, and
Regional
3. Promote utility legislation and
regulations that support
effective and consistent
compliance and reporting
requirements. Ensure such
legislation and regulations
have received stakeholder
review and cost benefit
analysis.
Federal,
State, and
Regional
Reliability
Councils
4. Oppose unreasonable and
inequitable financial burdens
through active participation in
CMUA and NCPA legislative
activities.
Federal,
State, and
CPUC
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines February 2016 Update
6053662
Goals
Legislative Policy
Guidelines
Venue
1. Local
Accountability
2. Reliability,
Security
&
Infrastructure
3. Climate
Protection
4. Service &
Cost
Control
5. Advocate for state and federal
grants for local and regional
energy efficiency and
conservation measures,
renewable resources, fiber
optic, fuel switching,
wastewater collection systems
and recycled water projects.
Federal
and State
6. Maintain right of way access
for utility infrastructure.
Federal
and State
7. Protect the financial and
operational value of utility
assets and contracts;
preserve local regulatory
control of both.
Federal
and State
8. Enhance utility customer
protections for data security
and confidentiality.
Federal
and State
9. Maintain existing low cost
municipal financing options for
infrastructure projects and
advocate for new federal and
state programs that recognize
critical infrastructure needs.
Federal
and State
10. Promote legislation and
regulations supporting
reasonable and consistent
requirements for utility
notifications, , safety,
services, public
communications, billing,
payments, and customer
assistance.
Federal
and State
11. Support Proposition 26
reform efforts to provide
ratemaking flexibility to
balance conservation,
revenue sustainability, and
low income assistance
programs.
State
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines February 2016 Update
6053662
Goals
Legislative Policy
Guidelines
Venue
1. Local
Accountability
2. Reliability,
Security
&
Infrastructure
3. Climate
Protection
4. Service &
Cost
Control
12. Seek state and regional
funding to enhance the
efficiency, security, and
reliability of infrastructure
that maintains utility
customer data security and
confidentiality.
Federal
and State
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines February 2016 Update
6053662
ELECTRIC
Goals
1. Preserve/enhance the ability of municipal utilities to exercise local accountability and oversight over
matters impacting customer service, programs (such as demand side efficiency and conservation
programs), and rate structure.
2. Preserve/enhance the reliability and security of infrastructure.
3. Support legislation that recognizes early voluntary action in reducing GHG emissions and
specifically exempts a municipality from burdensome requirements that could result from
the early action.
4. Preserve just and reasonable utility rates/bills established by local governing bodies.
Goals
Legislative Policy Guidelines
Venue
1. Local
Accountability
2.
Reliability
3. GHG
Reduction
4. Cost
Contro
l 1. Advocate goals through Northern California
Power Agency (NCPA), California Municipal
Utilities Association (CMUA), American Public
Power Association (APPA), Transmission
Agency of Northern California (TANC), and Bay
Area Municipal Transmission Group (BAMx)
with support from Palo Alto staff; strive to
present the same or substantially the same
message
Federal and
State
2. Support NCPA in its continued efforts to
streamline the state regulatory reporting
responsibilities, to eliminate duplicative data
and report submittals to multiple state
regulatory agencies, including the CEC, CARB,
and the California Independent System
Operator (CAISO).
State
3. Advocate for legislation/regulations that
provide local accountability and design
of:
• Net Energy Metering (NEM) successor
programs designed to fit local
conditions and priorities;
• Electric Integrated Resource Plans
• cost-effective renewable distributed
generation and cogeneration projects,
and standards and permitting
requirements for connecting such
resources to the local distribution
system;
• balancing state and local policy
implementation and ratepayer
Federal and
State
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines February 2016 Update
6053662
Goals
Legislative Policy Guidelines
Venue
1. Local
Accountability
2.
Reliability
3. GHG
Reduction
4. Cost
Contro
l equity;
• equitable rate design and tariffs;
• cost-effective electric efficiency
programs;
• implementation of renewable
portfolio standards;
• cost-effective storage integration;
• direct access requirements;
• smart meters and smart grid design and
implementation; and
• use of public benefit funds (as allowed
in AB 1890 (1996)
4. Support cap-and-trade market designs
that:
• protect consumers from the
exercise of market power;
• allocate allowances that help mitigate
impacts to Palo Alto customers while
providing incentives for utilities to
lower GHG emission portfolios;
• provide flexible compliance
mechanisms such as banking and
borrowing of allowances; and
• allocate funds generated from cap-and-
trade markets to cost-effective GHG-
reduction related activities, not as a
revenue source for state or federal
general funds.
Federal and
State
5. Support legislation for renewable
portfolio standards that:
• maintain local compliance authority;
• avoid mandates for technology or
source specific carve outs, and
minimum term requirements;
• allow utilities to pursue all cost-
effective resources available to meet
portfolio needs including use of
Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs);
• ensure uniform application of RPS
standards, avoiding punitive and/or
duplicative non-compliance penalties;
• restrict new regulations expanding
CEC jurisdiction over publicly owned
utilities;
Local and
State
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines February 2016 Update
6053662
Goals
Legislative Policy Guidelines
Venue
1. Local
Accountability
2.
Reliability
3. GHG
Reduction
4. Cost
Contro
l • allow local distributed generation
to count in full towards RPS; and
• prioritize the use of existing
transmission system assets over
building new transmission.
6. Support/encourage transmission,
generation, and demand-reduction
projects and solutions including
advocating for financing or funding
solutions/options for projects that:
• enhance/ensure reliability;
• ensure equitable cost allocation
following beneficiary pays principles
(including protection against
imposition of state- owned electric
contract costs on municipal utility
customers);
• improve procurement flexibility (e.g.
resource adequacy rules that ensure
reliability and provide flexibility in
meeting operational requirements or
flexibility in meeting State renewable
portfolio standards);
• support the continuation of federal
and state financial incentives that
promote increased renewable
development;
• improve market transparency
(particularly transparency of IOU’s
transmission and procurement
planning and implementation
activities); and
• reduce negative environmental
impacts on the Bay Area and the
Peninsula.
Local, State,
and Federal
7. Advocate for Congressional, legislative,
or administrative actions on matters
impacting costs or operations of the
Western Area Power Administration
(Western) such as:
• support of Congressional Field
Hearings to explore modernizing flood
control strategies, river regulation and
Federal,
State and
Regional
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines February 2016 Update
6053662
Goals
Legislative Policy Guidelines
Venue
1. Local
Accountability
2.
Reliability
3. GHG
Reduction
4. Cost
Contro
l generation strategies at Central Valley
Project (CVP) plants to enhance
generation, water delivery, flood
control and fisheries;
• protection of the status of Western
Power Marketing Administration and
cost-based rates;
• provisions for preference customers’
first take at available land with
economic potential for wind farms;
• balancing efforts for competing
environmental improvements in rivers
and Delta conditions with water supply
and hydropower impacts;
• support grid modernization without
compromising the primary mission of
Western and recognizing the
achievements already made in
California without adding duplicate
costly efforts;
• monitoring and evaluating impacts of
Delta conveyance proposals on
Western Base Resource allocation;
• advocating for an equitable
distribution of costs between water
and power customers of the Central
Valley Project; and
• advocating for clear product
provisions, fair allocation of Base
Resource Capacity and fair contract
terms under Western’s 2025 Power
Marketing Plan and new Western
Base Resource contracts.
8. Advocate for Congressional or administrative
actions on matters relating to overly
burdensome reporting and compliance
requirements established by the North
American Reliability Corporation (NERC), the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)
or the Western Electricity Coordinating
Council (WECC).
Federal,
State and
Regional
9. Support fair and reasonable application of grid
reliability requirements established by NERC,
WECC, or FERC and seek appropriate remedies
Federal and
Regional
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines February 2016 Update
6053662
Goals
Legislative Policy Guidelines
Venue
1. Local
Accountability
2.
Reliability
3. GHG
Reduction
4. Cost
Contro
l (if needed) for inequitable or punitive
application of fees and fines.
10. Work with CAISO and/or FERC:
• to give buyers of renewable
intermittent resources relief from
imbalance penalties;
• to promote financial and operational
changes that result in timely and
accurate settlement and billing; and
• to provide critical input on the need for
various transmission projects in light of
the escalating costs to the City to
import power using the bulk
transmission system.
Federal and
State
11. Work with NCPA, CMUA and NERC to ensure
that:
• Federal, state and regional designations
of “critical cyber assets” are
appropriately applied to only truly
critical local distribution infrastructure;
and
• CPAU retains local control over
implementation of utility industry cyber
security standards, policies and
procedures.
Federal and
Regional
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines February 2016 Update
6053662
FIBER OPTIC
Goals
1. Preserve and enhance the authority of local government to (1) develop broadband solutions that
align with community needs and (2) expand consumer choice for competitive Internet connectivity
and other advanced services delivered over fiber-optic networks.
2. Encourage the competitive delivery of broadband services by permitting the use of public rights-of-
way and Utilities infrastructure in a responsible manner, provided that local rights of way authority
and management is preserved and contractual or other use does not compromise the City’s existing
utility safety, service, and operational s obligations.
3. Support local government authority over zoning-related land use for communications infrastructure
in accordance with reasonable and non-discriminatory regulations.
4. Support the Council’s Technology and the Connected City initiative of 2013, to fully
leverage the City’s fiber-optic and infrastructure assets such as public rights-of-way, utility
poles and conduit for the broadband expansion.
Goals
Legislative Policy Guidelines
Venue
1. Support
Municipal
Delivery
2. Competitive
Delivery
3. Local
Authority
over Land
Use
4. Support
Council
Initiatives
1. Advocate for these goals through the
American Public Power Association
(APPA), California Municipal Utilities
Association (CMUA), National
Association of Telecommunications
Officers and Advisors (NATOA),
National League of Cities (NLC), and the
Next Century Cities initiative (NCC),
with support from City staff.
Federal
and State
2. Support legislation and regulations that
preserve and enhance municipal
delivery of conventional and advanced
telecommunication services as
prescribed by the Telecommunications
Act of 1996.
Federal
and State
3. Support the goals of the Federal
Communications Commission’s (FCC),
National Broadband Plan to improve
Internet access nationwide.
Federal
and State
4. Oppose legislation and regulations that
benefit the incumbent cable TV,
telephone, and telecommunications
companies at the expense of
community-owned fiber-optic and
wireless networks.
Federal
and State
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines February 2016 Update
6053662
Goals
Legislative Policy Guidelines
Venue
1. Support
Municipal
Delivery
2. Competitive
Delivery
3. Local
Authority
over Land
Use
4. Support
Council
Initiatives
5. Support legislation and regulations that
preserve and enhance utility customer
data security and confidentiality
protections by the providers of
telecommunication services.
Federal
and State
6. Support the Council’s directive to
concurrently pursue the findings and
recommendations in the Fiber-to-the-
Premises Master Plan and Wireless
Network Plan and continue discussions
and negotiations with third parties
considering new service deployments
in Palo Alto.
Local
7. Support legislation and
regulations that::
• Permit the contractual use of
public right-of- way and
Utilities infrastructure;
• Preserve local rights-of-way
authority and management;
• Preserve local government
zoning and siting authority for
wireless and wireline
communication facilities;
• Support local “dig once”
policies to ensure conduit and
fiber are available for lease on
reasonable terms; and
• Oppose legislation and
regulations that arbitrarily
reduce compensation received
by local governments from
other entities for the economic
use of the public rights-of-way
and other public properties
required for communication
infrastructure (e.g., utility poles,
streetlight poles, ducts and
conduits).
Federal,
State and
Local
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines February 2016 Update
6053662
NATURAL GAS
Goals
1. Preserve/enhance the ability of municipal utilities to develop and implement demand side
efficiency and conservation programs, alternative gas supplies, and rate structures.
2. Increase the security and reliability of the gas supply and transmission infrastructure. This includes
retaining access to intra- and interstate gas transmission systems to reliably serve customers.
3. Support efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and protect the environment.
4. Preserve just and reasonable utility rates/bills established by local governing bodies.
Goals
Legislative Policy Guidelines Venue 1. Local
Accountability
2. Reliability of
Infrastructure
3. Environ-
ment
4. Cost
Control
1. Advocate most of these goals
mainly through the American
Public Gas Association (APGA) with
minor support from Palo Alto staff.
Primarily
Federal with
minor
advocacy at
State level
2. Work with Northern California
Power Agency (NCPA) and
California Municipal Utilities
Association (CMUA) to the extent
that the City’s goals as a gas
distributor align with generators’
use of natural gas.
Federal and
State
3. Support cost effective renewable
gas supplies from in or out of state
sources. In case of mandated
renewable portfolio standards,
advocate for controls and off-
ramps similar to the electric RPS
that minimize customer cost
impact.
Federal and
State
4. Advocate for financing or funding
for cost-effective natural gas
efficiency and solar water heating
end uses.
Federal and
State
5. Support market transparency and
efforts to eliminate market
manipulation through reasonable
oversight.
Federal
6. Support municipal utilities’ ability
to enter into pre-pay transactions
for gas supplies.
Federal
7. Support efforts to improve pipeline
safety.
Federal and
State
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines February 2016 Update
6053662
Goals
Legislative Policy Guidelines Venue 1. Local
Accountability
2. Reliability of
Infrastructure
3. Environ-
ment
4. Cost
Control
8. Work with partners to discourage
extension of CPUC regulatory
authority over municipal gas
operations.
State
9. Support cap-and-trade
market designs that:
• protect consumers from
the exercise of market
power;
• allocate allowances that
mitigate impacts to Palo
Alto customers while
preserving City
environmental goals;
• advocate for an allowance
allocation methodology that
provides flexibility for Palo
Alto to structure rates to
align GHG costs and
revenues;
• provide flexible compliance
mechanisms such as
banking and borrowing of
allowances; and
• allocate funds generated
from cap-and-trade markets
to GHG related activities,
not as a revenue source for
state or federal general
funds.
Federal and
State
10. Support legislation that aims to
protect public health and
encourages transparency regarding
the practice of hydraulic fracturing
or “fracking” for natural gas
development, while opposing
blanket moratoriums that aren’t
supported by science.
Federal and
State
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines February 2016 Update
6053662
WASTEWATER COLLECTION
Goals
1. Support ability of municipal utilities to develop and manage their own conservation and efficiency
programs and retain authority over ratemaking, including the imposition of non-volumetric
customer meter or infrastructure charges for wastewater collection service.
2. Encourage efforts to increase the reliability of the local wastewater collection systems.
3. Maintain the provision of reliable and sustainable wastewater collection service at a fair price.
4. Support equal comparisons of wastewater collection systems by regulatory agencies in order to
minimize and reduce onerous, costly, time-intensive reporting requirements and improve value
and accuracy of information reported to the public.
Goals
Legislative Policy Guidelines Venue 1. Local
Accountability
2. Reliable
Infrastructure
3. Maintain
service
4. Valuable
reporting
1. Advocate goals through active
participation in the Association of
Bay Area Governments (ABAG).
Local,
Regional
& State
2. Support regulations of
wastewater collection systems
that recognize:
• local jurisdictions’ proactive
efforts to replace and
maintain wastewater
collections systems;
• the need to provide
affordable and cost based
collection service; and
• the unique characteristics
of each collection system.
Local,
Regional
& State
3. Support regional agencies in
their pursuit of:
• environmentally
sustainable, reliable
wastewater collection
service at a fair price; and
• regional comparisons of
wastewater collection
projects for future state
grant funding.
Local and
Regional
5. Advocate for funding and local
regulations for wastewater
collection system projects and
requirements that reduce
overflows and improve collection
system efficiency.
Regional,
State and
Federal
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines February 2016 Update
6053662
WATER
Goals
1. Support the ability of public utilities and districts to develop and implement their own water
efficiency and conservation programs while retaining authority over ratemaking, including the
ability to optimize volumetric, fixed, and drought-related pricing and balance the goals of revenue
certainty and water use efficiency.
2. Increase the security and reliability of the regional water system owned and operated by the San
Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC).
3. Support efficiency and recycled water programs in order to minimize the use of imported supplies.
4. Provide environmentally sustainable and reliable supplies of high quality water.
Goals
Legislative Policy Guidelines Venue 1. Local
Authority
2. Reliable
Infrastructur
3. Minimize
imports
4. Supplies
at fair cost
1. Advocate goals through active
participation in the Bay Area Water Supply
and Conservation Agency (BAWSCA),
California Urban Water Conservation
Council (CUWCC), and California
Municipal Utilities Association (CMUA),
with support from Palo Alto staff for
BAWSCA
Local,
Regional
and State
2. Participate in CUWCC Best Management
Practice (BMP) revisions and development
to ensure that aggressive and cost-
effective efficiency goals are incorporated
and operating proposals are reasonable,
achievable, and cost-effective.
State
3. Advocate to ensure that legislative
actions regarding the Hetch Hetchy
Regional Water System include:
• timely rebuilding of the regional
water system;
• maintenance of the quality of
delivered water;
• minimization of any increase in
the cost of water;
• no additional exposure to
more frequent or severe
water shortages;
• increased real-time
monitoring data availability to
ensure water quality;
• support for the existing water
system and its operation;
Local,
Regional
and State
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines February 2016 Update
6053662
Goals
Legislative Policy Guidelines Venue 1. Local
Authority
2. Reliable
Infrastructur
3. Minimize
imports
4. Supplies
at fair cost
• SWRCB responsiveness to SFPUC
water quality issues;
4. Advocate for interpretations or
implementation of Water Code provisions
that maintain or reinforce the authorities
and protections available to the City and
BAWSCA members outside of San
Francisco.
Local,
Regional
and State
5. Support BAWSCA to enable it to
advocate for:
• an environmentally sustainable,
reliable supply of high quality
water at a fair price;
• for Wholesale Customers’ rights
under the Water Supply
Agreement for water from SFPUC
that meets quality standards;
• a SFPUC rate structure that is
consistent with the Water
Supply Agreement and is
based on water usage;
• preservation of Palo Alto’s
existing contractual water
allocation and transportation
rights on the SFPUC Hetch
Hetchy system; and
• regional planning for conservation,
recycled water, and other water
supply projects.
Local and
Regional
6. Advocate for actions that:
• preserve Palo Alto’s
existing contractual
rights; and
• preserve local control over water
use and limit encroachment from
outside jurisdictions.
Local and
Regional
7. Support infrastructure security and
reliability including an interconnection
between the SCVWD West Pipeline with
the SFPUC’s Bay Division Pipelines 3 and 4.
Regional
and State
8. Support notification requirements that
inform residents/customers but do not
inflict undue or unobtainable requirements
on the utility.
State
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines February 2016 Update
6053662
Goals
Legislative Policy Guidelines Venue 1. Local
Authority
2. Reliable
Infrastructur
3. Minimize
imports
4. Supplies
at fair cost
9. Support local control of public benefit
funds, funding levels and program
design.
State
10. Support beneficiary pays methodologies to
prevent taxes or fees imposed on SFPUC
customers to fund infrastructure
improvements and costs of water sources
that do not serve Palo Alto customers.
State and
Regional
11. Advocate for financing or funding for water
conservation programs and recycled water
projects that meet end-use needs and
conserve potable water and oppose
legislation that would reduce such funding.
State,
Regional
and
Federal
12. Support infrastructure security and
reliability that includes equitable allocation
of funds for increasing the security of
infrastructure and that protects the City
from unnecessary regulations.
Local,
State and
Federal
13. Support legislation that promotes
responsible groundwater management
while recognizing Palo Alto’s existing and
historical groundwater extraction
practices.
State
14. Support Proposition 218 reform efforts to
provide ratemaking flexibility to balance
conservation, revenue sustainability, and
low income assistance programs.
State
15. Advocate for reasonable statewide water
conservation efforts (both drought
response and long term) that achieve
required water savings while minimizing
customer and commercial impact,
protecting the City’s urban canopy and
minimizing the City’s enforcement costs.
State
16. Protect the City and County of San
Francisco’s water rights as well as those
of the co-grantees of the Raker Act.
State
17. Support legislation that would protect the
City’s infrastructure and treatment
investments from future state-wide cuts
in water use.
State
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines February 2016
Update
Page 1 of 19
Utilities’ Legislative Policy Guidelines
Formal advocacy positions taken in alignment with these guidelines will be subject to the
approval of the Utilities Director or City Manager as per the City’s Legislative Program
Manual
ALL UTILITES
Goals
1.Preserve/enhance local accountability in the control and oversight of matters impacting utility
programs and rates for our customers while balancing statewide climate protection goals.
2.Support efforts to maintain or improve the reliability and security of the supply, transmission,
storage, and distribution/collection, and data infrastructures.
3.Support legislation that makes bold progress in cost effectively reducing greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions, and recognizes early voluntary action.
4.Maintain the City of Palo Alto Utilities’ (CPAU’s) ability to provide safe, reliable, sustainable, and
competitively-priced utility services.
Goals
Legislative Policy
Guidelines
Venue
1.Local
Accountability
2. Reliability,
Security
&
Infrastructure
3. Climate
Protection
4. Service &
Cost
Control
1. Advocate goals through active
participation in joint action
efforts.
Federal,
State, and
Regional
2.Support legislation that allows
local evaluation and design of
more efficient energy solutions,
fuel switching, and demand
control programs.Support
legislation that will result in the
most cost-effective reduction
of GHG emissions, recognition
of early action, and inclusion of
more efficient solutions, fuel
switching, and demand control
programs, in integrated
resource plans.
Federal,
State, and
Regional
3.Promote utility legislation and
regulations that support
effective and consistent
compliance and reporting
requirements. Ensure such
legislation and regulations
have received stakeholder
review and cost benefit
Federal,
State, and
Regional
Reliability
Councils
ATTACHMENT B
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines February 2016
Update
Page 2 of 19
Goals
Legislative Policy
Guidelines
Venue
1. Local
Accountability
2. Reliability,
Security
&
Infrastructure
3. Climate
Protection
4. Service &
Cost
Control
analysis.Promote utility
legislation and regulations
that have undergone
stakeholder review and
applicable cost benefit
analysis to support reasonable
reliability standards and
compliance requirements, and
effective and consistent
reporting requirements,
customer communications,
and goal-setting.
4. Oppose cost shifts from Federal
or State budgets and California
Public Utilities Commission
(CPUC) jurisdictional utilities
unreasonable and inequitable
financial burdens through
active participation in CMUA
and NCPA legislative activities.
Federal,
State, and
CPUC
5. Advocate for sState and
fFederal grants for local and
regional measures regarding
energy efficiency and ,
conservation measures,
renewable resources, fiber
optic, fuel switching,
wastewater collection systems
and recycled water projects.
Federal
and State
6. Maintain right of way access
for utility infrastructure.
Federal
and State
7. Protect the financial and
operational value of existing
utility assets and contracts;
and localpreserve local
regulatory approvals control
of sameboth.
Federal
and State
8. Enhance utility customer
protections for data security
and confidentiality.
Federal
and State
89. Maintain existing low cost
municipal financing options for
infrastructure projects and
advocate for new federal and
Federal
and State
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines February 2016
Update
Page 3 of 19
Goals
Legislative Policy
Guidelines
Venue
1. Local
Accountability
2. Reliability,
Security
&
Infrastructure
3. Climate
Protection
4. Service &
Cost
Control
state programs that recognize
critical infrastructure needs.
910. Promote utility legislation
and regulations that
supporting reasonable and
consistent requirements for
utility notifications,
compliance, and reporting
requirements for safety,
services, public
communications, billing, and
payments, and customer
assistance.
Federal
and State
11. Support Proposition 26
reform efforts to provide
ratemaking flexibility to
balance conservation,
revenue sustainability, and
low income assistance
programs.
State
12. Seek state and regional
funding to enhance the
efficiency, security, and
reliability of infrastructure
that maintains utility
customer data security and
confidentiality.
Federal
and State
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines February 2016
Update
Page 4 of 19
ELECTRIC
Goals
1. Preserve/enhance the ability of municipal utilities to exercise local accountability and oversight over
matters impacting customer service, programs (such as demand side efficiency and conservation
programs), and rate structure.
2. Preserve/enhance the reliability and security of infrastructure.
3. Support legislation that makes bold progress in cost effectively reducing GHG emissions and
encourages recognizes early voluntary action in reducing GHG emissions and specifically
exempts a municipality from burdensome requirements that could result from the early
action.
4. Preserve just and reasonable utility rates/bills established by local governing bodies.
Goals
Legislative Policy Guidelines
Venue
1. Local
Accountability
2.
Reliability
3. GHG
Reduction
4. Cost
Contro
l
1. Advocate goals through Northern California
Power Agency (NCPA), California Municipal
Utilities Association (CMUA), American Public
Power Association (APPA), Transmission
Agency of Northern California (TANC), and Bay
Area Municipal Transmission Group (BAMx)
with support from Palo Alto staff; strive to
present the same or substantially the same
message to speak with a coordinated voice.
Federal and
State
2. Support NCPA in its continued efforts to
streamline the state regulatory reporting
responsibilities, to eliminate duplicative data
and report submittals to multiple state
regulatory agencies, including the CEC, CARB,
and the California Independent System
Operator (CAISO).
State
3. Advocate for legislation/regulations that
provide local accountability and support
fordesign of:
Net Energy Metering (NEM) successor
programs designed to fit local conditions
and priorities;
Electric Integrated Resource Plans
cost-effective cleanrenewable distributed
generation and cogeneration projects,
and standards and permitting
requirements for connecting such
resources to the local distribution system;
balancing state and local policy
implementation and ratepayer equity;
Federal and
State
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines February 2016
Update
Page 5 of 19
Goals
Legislative Policy Guidelines
Venue
1. Local
Accountability
2.
Reliability
3. GHG
Reduction
4. Cost
Contro
l equitable rate design and tariffs;
cost-effective electric efficiency programs;
implementation of renewable portfolio
standards;
cost-effective storage integration;
direct access requirements;
smart meters and smart grid design and
implementation; and
use of public benefit funds (as allowed in
AB 1890 (1996)
4. Support cap-and-trade market designs that:
protect consumers from the exercise of
market power;
allocate allowances that help mitigate
impacts to Palo Alto customers while
providing incentives for utilities to move to
lower GHG emission portfolios;
provide flexible compliance mechanisms
such as banking and borrowing of
allowances; and
allocate funds generated from cap-and-
trade markets to cost-effective GHG-
reduction related activities, not as a
revenue source for state or federal general
funds.
Federal and
State
5. Support legislation for renewable portfolio
standards that:
promote the 33% goal for the state;
maintain local compliance authority;
avoid mandates for technology or source
specific carve outs, and minimum term
requirements;
allow utilities to pursue all cost-effective
resources available to meet portfolio
needs low cost alternatives by utilizing the
existing transmission system to access
out-of-state resources, including use of
Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs);
ensure fair uniform application of RPS
standards, that avoiding punitive and/or
duplicative non- compliance penalties;
restrict extension new regulations
expanding of CEC jurisdiction over
pPublicly oOwned uUtilities;
consolidate GHG reduction goals and
Renewable Portfolio Standards under one
Local and
State
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines February 2016
Update
Page 6 of 19
Goals
Legislative Policy Guidelines
Venue
1. Local
Accountability
2.
Reliability
3. GHG
Reduction
4. Cost
Contro
l clean energy standard;
allow the counting of local distributed
generation to count in full towards
RPS; and
prioritize the use of the existing
transmission system assets over
building new transmission.
6. Support/encourage transmission,
generation, and demand-reduction
projects and solutions including
advocating for financing or funding
solutions/options for projects that:
enhance/ensure reliability;
ensure equitable cost allocation following
beneficiary pays principles (including
protection against imposition of state-
owned electric contract costs on municipal
utility customers);
improve procurement flexibility (e.g.
resource adequacy rules that ensure
reliability and provide flexibility in meeting
operational requirements or flexibility in
meeting State renewable portfolio
standards);
support the continuation of federal and
state financial incentives that promote
increased renewable development;
improve market transparency (particularly
transparency of IOU’s transmission and
procurement planning and implementation
activities); and
reduce the negative environmental
impacts on the Bay Area and the
Peninsula.
Local, State,
and Federal
7. Advocate for Congressional, legislative, or
administrative actions on matters impacting
costs or operations of the Western Area
Power Administration (Western) such as:
support of Congressional Field Hearings to
explore modernizing flood control
strategies, river regulation and generation
strategies at Central Valley Project (CVP)
plants to enhance generation, water
delivery, flood control and fisheries;
protection of the status of Western Power
Marketing Administration and cost-based
Federal,
State and
Regional
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines February 2016
Update
Page 7 of 19
Goals
Legislative Policy Guidelines
Venue
1. Local
Accountability
2.
Reliability
3. GHG
Reduction
4. Cost
Contro
l rates;
provisions for preference customers’ first
take at available land available with
economic potential for wind farms;
balancing efforts for competing
environmental improvements in rivers and
Delta conditions with water supply and
hydropower impacts;
achieving the
support grid modernization goals of
Secretary Chu’s March 16, 2012 memo
without compromising the primary
mission of Western and recognizing the
achievements already made in California
without adding duplicate costly efforts;
monitoring and evaluating impacts of Delta
conveyance proposals on Western Base
Resource allocation; and
advocating for an equitable distribution
of costs between water and power
customers of the Central Valley Project;
and.
advocating for clear product provisions,
fair allocation of Base Resource Capacity
and fair contract terms under Western’s
2025 Power Marketing Plan and new
Western Base Resource contracts.
8. Advocate for Congressional, legislative, or
administrative actions on matters relating to
overly burdensome reporting and compliance
requirements established by the North
American Reliability Corporation (NERC), the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)
or the Western Electricity Coordinating
Council (WECC).
Federal,
State and
Regional
9. Support fair and reasonable application of grid
reliability requirements established by NERC,
WECC, or FERC and seek Congressional
appropriate remedies (if needed) for
inequitable or punitive application of fees and
fines.
Federal and
Regional
10. Work with CAISO and/or through FERC:
to give buyers of renewable intermittent
resources relief from imbalance penalties;
to promote financial and operational
changes that result in timely and accurate
Federal and
State
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines February 2016
Update
Page 8 of 19
Goals
Legislative Policy Guidelines
Venue
1. Local
Accountability
2.
Reliability
3. GHG
Reduction
4. Cost
Contro
l settlement and billing; and
to provide critical input on the need for
various transmission projects in light of the
escalating costs to the City to import power
using the bulk transmission system.
11. Work with NCPA, CMUA and NERC to ensure
that:
Federal, state and regional designations
of “critical cyber assets” are
appropriately applied to only truly
critical local distribution infrastructure;
and
CPAU retains local control over
implementation of utility industry cyber
security standards, policies and
procedures. Monitor cyber security
issues to ensure that CPAU, which
currently does not have critical cyber
assets, retains local control over its cyber
security needs while remaining exempt
from NERC cyber security standards.
Support NCPA to protect it and its
member agencies from unnecessary
cyber security regulations.
Federal and
Regional
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines February 2016
Update
Page 9 of 19
FIBER OPTIC
Goals
1. Preserve and enhance the authority of local government to (1) develop broadband solutions that
align with community needs and (2) expand consumer choice for competitive Internet connectivity
and other advanced services delivered over fiber-optic networks.
2. Encourage the competitive delivery of broadband services by permitting the use of public rights-of-
way and Utilities infrastructure in a responsible manner, provided that local rights of way authority
and management is preserved and the contractual or other use does not compromise the City’s
existing utility safety, and service, and operational s obligations.
3. Support local government authority over zoning-related land use for communications infrastructure
in accordance with reasonable and non-discriminatory regulations.
4. Support the Council’s Technology and the Connected City initiative of 2013, to fully leverage the
City’s fiber- optic and infrastructure assets such as public rights-of-way, utility poles and conduit
for the broadband expansion.
Goals
Legislative Policy Guidelines
Venue
1. Support
Municipal
Delivery
2. Competitive
Delivery
3. Local
Authority
over Land
Use
4. Support
Council
Initiatives
1. Advocate for these goals through the
American Public Power Association
(APPA), California Municipal Utilities
Association (CMUA), National
Association of Telecommunications
Officers and Advisors (NATOA),
National League of Cities (NLC), and the
Next Century Cities initiative (NCC),
with support from City staff.
Federal
and State
2. Support legislation and regulations that
preserve and enhance municipal
delivery of conventional and advanced
telecommunication services as
prescribed by the Telecommunications
Act of 1996.
Federal
and State
3. Support the goals of the National
Broadband Plan, issued in 2010 by the
Federal Communications Commission’s
(FCC), National Broadband Plan to
improve Internet access in the United
Statesnationwide.
Federal
and State
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines February 2016
Update
Page 10 of 19
Goals
Legislative Policy Guidelines
Venue
1. Support
Municipal
Delivery
2. Competitive
Delivery
3. Local
Authority
over Land
Use
4. Support
Council
Initiatives
4. Oppose legislation and regulations that
benefit the incumbent cable TV, and
telephone, and telecommunications
companies at the expense of
community-owned fiber-optic and
wireless networks.
Federal
and State
5. Support legislation and regulations that
preserve and enhance consumer utility
customer data security and
confidentiality protections when
dealing with by the incumbent
providers. of telecommunication
services.
Federal
and State
6. Support the Council’s directive to
concurrently pursue the findings and
recommendations in the Fiber-to-the-
Premises Master Plan and Wireless
Network Plan and continue discussions
and negotiations with third parties
considering new service deployments
in Palo Alto.
Local
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines February 2016
Update
Page 11 of 19
Goals
Legislative Policy Guidelines
Venue
1. Support
Municipal
Delivery
2. Competitive
Delivery
3. Local
Authority
over Land
Use
4. Support
Council
Initiatives
6.7. Support legislation and regulations
that: encourage the competitive
delivery of broadband services by
permitting the use of public right-of-
way and Utilities infrastructure:
Permit the contractual use of
public right-of- way and Utilities
infrastructure;
Support legislation and regulations
that Ppreserve local rights-of-way
authority and management;
Support legislation and regulations
that Ppreserve local government
zoning and siting authority for
wireless and wireline
communication facilities;
andSupport local “dig once”
policies to ensure conduit and
fiber are available for lease on
reasonable terms; and
Oppose legislation and regulations
that arbitrarily reduce
compensation received by local
governments from other entities
for the economic use of the public
rights-of-way and other public
properties that required for
support communication
infrastructure (e.g., utility poles,
streetlight poles, ducts and
conduits).
Federal,
State and
Local
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines February 2016
Update
Page 12 of 19
NATURAL GAS
Goals
1. Preserve/enhance the ability of municipal utilities to develop and implement their own demand
side efficiency and conservation programs, alternative gas supplies, and rate structures.
2. Increase the security and reliability of the gas supply and transmission infrastructure. This includes
retaining access to intra- and interstate gas transmission systems to reliably serve customers.
3. Support efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and protect the environment.
4. Preserve just and reasonable utility rates/bills established by local governing bodies.
Goals
Legislative Policy Guidelines Venue 1. Local
Accountability
2. Reliability of
Infrastructure
3. Environ-
ment
4. Cost
Control
1. Advocate most of these goals
mainly through the American
Public Gas Association (APGA) with
minor support from Palo Alto staff.
Primarily
Federal with
minor
advocacy at
State level
2. Work with Northern California
Power Agency (NCPA) and
California Municipal Utilities
Association (CMUA) to the extent
that the City’s goals as a gas
distributor align with generators’
use of natural gas.
Federal and
State
3. Support cost effective renewable
gas supplies from in or out of state
sources. In case of mandated
renewable portfolio standards,
advocate for controls and off-
ramps similar to the electric RPS
that minimize customer cost
impact.
Federal and
State
4. Advocate for financing or funding
for cost-effective natural gas
efficiency and solar water heating
end uses.
Federal and
State
5. Support market transparency and
efforts to eliminate market
manipulation through reasonable
oversight.
Federal
6. Support municipal utilities’ ability
to enter into pre-pay transactions
for gas supplies.
Federal
7. Support efforts to improve pipeline
safety.
Federal and
State
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines February 2016
Update
Page 13 of 19
Goals
Legislative Policy Guidelines Venue 1. Local
Accountability
2. Reliability of
Infrastructure
3. Environ-
ment
4. Cost
Control
8. Work with partners to discourage
extension of CPUC regulatory
authority over municipal gas
operations.
State
89. Oppose legislative proposals
resulting in unreasonable costs for
Palo Alto’s customers.
Federal and
State
9. 9Support cap-and-trade
market designs that:
protect consumers from the
exercise of market power;
allocate allowances that help
mitigate impacts to Palo Alto
customers while providing
incentives for natural gas
utilities to move to lower GHG
emission portfoliospreserving
City environmental goals;
advocate for an allowance
allocation methodology that
provides flexibility for Palo Alto
to structure rates to align GHG
costs and revenues;
provide flexible compliance
mechanisms such as banking
and borrowing of allowances;
and
allocate funds generated from
cap-and-trade markets to GHG
related activities, not as a
revenue source for state or
federal general funds.
Federal and
State
10. 11. Support legislation that aims to
protect public health and
encourages transparency regarding
the practice of hydraulic fracturing
or “fracking” for natural gas
development, while but not
blanketopposing blanket
moratoriums that aren’t supported
by science.
Federal and
State
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines February 2016
Update
Page 14 of 19
WASTEWATER COLLECTION
Goals
1. Support ability of municipal utilities to develop and manage their own conservation and efficiency
programs and retain authority over ratemaking, including the imposition of non-volumetric
customer meter or infrastructure charges for wastewater collection service.
2. Encourage efforts to iIncrease the reliability of the local wastewater collection systems.
3. Maintain the provision of reliable and sustainable wastewater collection service at a fair price.
4. Support equal comparisons of wastewater collection systems by regulatory agencies in order to
minimize and reduce onerous, costly and, time-intensive reporting requirements and improve
value and accuracy of information reported to the public.
Goals
Legislative Policy Guidelines Venue
1. Local
Accountability
2. Reliable
Infrastructure
3. Maintain
service
4. Valuable
reporting
1. Advocate goals through active
participation in the Association of
Bay Area Governments (ABAG).
Local,
Regional
& State
2. Support future regulations of
wastewater collection systems that
recognize:
local jurisdictions’ proactive
efforts to replace and maintain
wastewater collections
systems;
the need to provide affordable
and cost based collection
service; and
the unique characteristics of
each collection system.
Local,
Regional
& State
3. Support provision of sufficient
resources for regional agencies to
enable them to advocate forin
their pursuit of:
environmentally sustainable,
reliable wastewater collection
service at a fair price; and
regional comparisons of
wastewater collection projects
for future state grant funding.
Local and
Regional
4. Support infrastructure security and
reliability including equitable
allocation of funds for increasing
the security of infrastructure.
Regional,
and State
5. Advocate for funding and local
regulations for wastewater
Regional,
State and
Federal
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines February 2016
Update
Page 15 of 19
Goals
Legislative Policy Guidelines Venue
1. Local
Accountability
2. Reliable
Infrastructure
3. Maintain
service
4. Valuable
reporting
collections system projects and
requirements that reduce
overflows and improve collection
system efficiency.
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines February 2016
Update
Page 16 of 19
WATER
Goals
1. Support the ability of municipal public utilities and districts to develop and manage implement
their own conservation and water efficiency and conservation programs and while retaining
authority over ratemaking, including the ability to optimize volumetric and, fixed, and drought-
related pricing charges to and balance the goals of revenue certainty and water use efficiency.
2. Increase the security and reliability of the regional water system owned and operated by the San
Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC).
3. Support efficiency and recycled water programs in order to minimize the use of imported supplies.
4. Provide Maintain the provision of an environmentally sustainable, and reliable supply supplies of
high quality water at a fair price.
Goals
Legislative Policy Guidelines Venue 1. Local
Authority
2. Reliable
Infrastructur
e
3. Minimize
imports
4. Supplies
at fair cost
1. Advocate goals through active
participation in the Bay Area Water Supply
and Conservation Agency (BAWSCA),
California Urban Water Conservation
Council (CUWCC), and California
Municipal Utilities Association (CMUA),
with support from Palo Alto staff for
BAWSCA
Local,
Regional
and State
2. Participate in California Urban Water
Conservation Council (CUWCC) Best
Management Practice (BMP) revisions and
development to ensure that aggressive
and cost-effective efficiency goals are
incorporated and operating proposals are
reasonable, achievable, and cost-effective.
State
3. Advocate to ensure that legislative actions
regarding the Hetch Hetchy Regional
Water System include the following
requirements:
timely rebuilding of the regional water
system;
maintainmaintenance of s the
quality of delivered water;
minimizminimization of es any
increase in the cost of water;
creates no additional exposure to
more frequent or severe water
shortages;
increased real-time monitoring
data availability to ensure water
quality;
Local,
Regional
and State
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines February 2016
Update
Page 17 of 19
Goals
Legislative Policy Guidelines Venue 1. Local
Authority
2. Reliable
Infrastructur
e
3. Minimize
imports
4. Supplies
at fair cost
support fors the existing water system
and its operation.;
SWRCB responsiveness to SFPUC water
quality issues;
4. Advocate for interpretations or
implementation of Water Code provisions
(such as those enacted by AB 1823 (2002),
AB 2058 (2002) and SB 1870 (2002)) that
maintain or reinforce the authorities and
protections available to the City and
BAWSCA members outside of San
Francisco.
Local,
Regional
and State
5. Support provision of sufficient resources
for BAWSCA to enable it to advocate for:
an environmentally sustainable,
reliable supply of high quality water at
a fair price;
for Wholesale Customers’ rights
under the Water Supply Agreement
for water from SFPUC that meets
quality standards;
a SFPUC rate structure that is
consistent with the Water Supply
Agreement and is based on water
usage;
a contract amendment to modify the
drought time water allocation
between the SFPUC and the BAWSCA
agencies for a fairer allocation of the
burden of water shortages;
preservation of Palo Alto’s existing
contractual water allocation and
transportation rights on the SFPUC
Hetch Hetchy system; and
regional planning for conservation,
recycled water, and other water supply
projects.
Local and
Regional
6. Advocate for actions that:
preserve Palo Alto’s existing
contractual rights; and
preserve local control over water use
and limit encroachment from outside
jurisdictions.
Local and
Regional
7. Support infrastructure security and
reliability including an interconnection
between the SCVWD West Pipeline with
the SFPUC’s Bay Division Pipelines 3 and 4.
Regional
and State
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines February 2016
Update
Page 18 of 19
Goals
Legislative Policy Guidelines Venue 1. Local
Authority
2. Reliable
Infrastructur
e
3. Minimize
imports
4. Supplies
at fair cost
8. Support notification requirements that
inform residents/customers but do not
inflict undue or unobtainable requirements
on the utility.
State
9. Support local control of public benefit
funds, funding levels and program
design.
State
10. Support beneficiary pays methodologies to
prevent taxes or fees, in particular those
imposed on SFPUC customers, to fund
infrastructure improvements and costs of
other water sources such as the
Deltawater sources that do not serve Palo
Alto customers.
State and
Regional
11. Advocate for financing or funding for water
conservation programs and recycled water
projects that meet end-use needs and
conserve potable water and oppose
legislation that would reduce such funding.
State,
Regional
and
Federal
12. Support infrastructure security and
reliability that includes equitable allocation
of funds for increasing the security of
infrastructure and that protects the City
from unnecessary regulations.
Local,
State and
Federal
13. Support legislation that promotes
responsible groundwater management
while recognizing Palo Alto’s existing and
historical groundwater extraction
practices.
State
14. Support Proposition 218 reform efforts to
provide ratemaking flexibility to balance
conservation, revenue sustainability, and
low income assistance programs.
State
15. Advocate for reasonable statewide water
conservation efforts (both drought
response and long term) that achieve
required water savings while minimizing
customer and commercial impact,
protecting the City’s urban canopy and
minimizing the City’s enforcement costs.
State
16. Protect the City and County of San
Francisco’s water rights as well as those
of the co-grantees of the Raker Act.
State
17. Support legislation that would protect the
City’s infrastructure and treatment
investments from future state-wide cuts
State
Utilities Legislative Policy Guidelines February 2016
Update
Page 19 of 19
Goals
Legislative Policy Guidelines Venue 1. Local
Authority
2. Reliable
Infrastructur
e
3. Minimize
imports
4. Supplies
at fair cost
in water use.
ATTACHMENT C
1
Review of Legislative Activities in 2015
2015 was year one of California’s two-year 2015-2016 legislative session, and it was an active
energy and water year. Much of the energy legislation targeted GHG emissions and
renewables, while much of the water legislation focused on the drought and conservation
efforts. Of the state bills City of Palo Alto (CPAU) staff tracked in 2015, ten were signed into
law, sixteen never passed the legislature (ie: the bills “died”), and two passed the legislature,
but were vetoed by the Governor. Of the bills that died, we expect at least four to return in
2016.
Following is a summary of the state legislation and federal issues CPAU staff followed in 2015,
along with any positions taken by the Northern California Power Agency (NCPA) and California
Municipal Utilities Association (CMUA), two associations with active CPAU staff involvement.
State Legislation
Energy Related Bills
AB 88 (Gomez) – Sales and use taxes: exemption: energy or water efficient home appliances:
The bill would have established a sales and use tax exemption for any "energy or water efficient
home appliance" purchased by a "public utility" that is provided at no cost to a "low-income
participant" in a federal, state, or ratepayer-funded energy or water efficiency program.
Status: Passed the legislature, vetoed due to the Governor’s concern about new tax exemptions
during times of financial uncertainty
AB 645 (Williams) – California Renewables Portfolio Standard: This bill mirrored SB 350 regarding
changes to the Renewables Portfolio Standard (RPS) program to require the amount of electricity
generated per year from eligible renewable energy resources be increased to at least 50% by
December 31, 2030. While SB 350 was signed into law, the legislature did not pass AB 645.
Status: Died in the Senate
AB 802 (Williams) – Energy efficiency: (1) Requires the CPUC to authorize IOUs to provide
incentives and assistance for measures that conform to the California Energy Commission’s (CEC)
energy efficiency standards for existing buildings and allows IOUs to recover the reasonable
associated costs through their rates. (2) Requires utilities to maintain records of the energy usage
data of all buildings to which they provide service for at least the most recent 12 month period
and, upon the request and authorization of the owner (or owner's agent), provide aggregated
energy usage data to the owner or to the owner's account in the ENERGY STAR Portfolio Manager.
AB 802 expands the scope of buildings covered under existing benchmark requirements, and
removes some of the customer privacy requirements. Palo Alto does not have an automated
system for providing energy use data so the expansion of the program requires more resources to
ATTACHMENT C
2
either continue the manual process or automate. Staff are currently reviewing and working with
NCPA on customer privacy issues.
Status: Signed into law
AB 1110 (Ting) – Greenhouse gases emissions intensity reporting: Current law requires electric
utilities to disclose their electricity sources as a percentage of annual sales (the Power Content
Label or PCL). This bill would have required electric utilities to also disclose the greenhouse gas
(GHG) emissions intensity associated with their electricity sources. Palo Alto’s concern with this
bill was that it would prohibit an adjustment in the calculation of GHG emissions through the
application of renewable energy credits (RECs); i.e., the market purchases the City’s electric utility
makes to cover shortfalls in the portfolio not met by hydro or renewable resources will have a
GHG emission factor assigned to them that would not be “neutralized”, or netted out, by the REC
purchases. While this bill was focused on certain Community Choice Aggregators who, according
to bill proponents, were not fully disclosing the electrical sources, it had obvious impacts on the
City’s messaging for its carbon neutral electricity portfolio. NCPA worked with the bill’s author to
allow for the inclusion of additional information in the PCL, along with the emissions factor.
Status: Died in the Senate
AB 1236 (Chiu) – Electric vehicle charging stations: This statute requires cities and counties to
adopt an ordinance, with certain specific elements, that creates an expedited permitting process
for electric vehicle (EV) charging stations. For a local government with a population the size of Palo
Alto’s (less than 200,000), the ordinance must be passed by September 30, 2017.
Status: Signed into law
AB 1330 (Bloom) – Demand Response: The bill would have CPUC establish annual goals for
demand response and require POUs to achieve the goals. The language would have the
unprecedented impact of having the CPUC dictate program requirements for POUs.
Status: Died in Senate
AB 1448 (Lopez) – Personal energy conservation/real property restrictions: This statute permits
tenants, as well as owners in a homeowners association, to use clotheslines and drying racks if
certain conditions are met, including that the clothesline or drying rack will not interfere with the
maintenance of the property. CMUA supported this bill.
Status: Signed into law
AB 1453 (Rendon) – Electrical corporations: underground electrical facilities: worker safety: This
bill sought to prohibit work directly on energized underground electrical equipment and required a
qualified electrical worker to determine that underground electrical equipment has been de-
energized and is in a mode that would make the equipment safe to be worked on.
Status: Died in Senate
ATTACHMENT C
3
SB 32 (Pavley) – California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006: emissions limit: This bill would
have required the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to approve statewide GHG emissions
limits equivalent to 40% below the 1990 level by 2030 and 80% below the 1990 level by 2050. It
would also prohibit CARB from implementing the next update of the California Global Warming
Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32) Scoping Plan until it had taken specified actions, including submitting
the Scoping Plan to the Legislature for review. CMUA supported this bill.
Status: Died in the Assembly
SB 119 (Hill) – Protection of subsurface installations: The Dig Safe Act of 2015 would have
modified the laws relating to excavations near substation instillations. SB 119 was supported by
CMUA.
Status: Vetoed as the bill created a new enforcement committee within the State Licensing
Board and the Governor believed excavation safety authority rests with the CPUC.
SB 180 (Jackson) – Emissions of greenhouse gases: This bill would have replaced the GHG
emission performance standards for base-load generation with standards for both non-peaking
and peaking generation. Both NCPA and CMUA took opposing positions on the bill over concern
that the very low emission standards proposed would effectively block further investment in
natural gas generation and impact grid reliability.
Status: Died in the Senate
SB 272 (Hertzberg) – The California Public Records Act: local agencies: inventory: In implementing
the California Public Records Act, this statute requires most local agencies to create a catalog of
enterprise systems, make the catalog publicly available upon request, and to post the catalog on
the local agency's Internet Web site. CMUA opposed the bill on the grounds of cost impact to local
agencies and cybersecurity concerns with making information available about utility control
systems. The bill explicitly exempts infrastructure and mechanical control systems that control or
manage street lights, electrical, natural gas, or water or sewer functions. However, general cost
impacts and security concerns remain.
Status: Signed into law
SB 350 (De León) – Clean Energy and Pollution Reduction Act of 2015: By December 31, 2030, 50
percent of energy must come from renewables and the energy efficiency of existing buildings must
double. Palo Alto successfully negotiated accommodations for our hydro portfolio during high
hydro years (when hydro exceeds 50% of our portfolio, CPAU’s RPS requirement will be reduced).
The bill also mandates the preparation and submission of integrated resource plans (IRPs). While
preparing an IRP per se is not a burden for Palo Alto, the language is very prescriptive, hastily
constructed, introduces redundant reporting requirements and requires the IRP to be submitted
to, and reviewed by, the CEC. Despite a coordinated attempt to remove or fix the IRP language,
the momentum to pass SB 350 was unstoppable. There will be a concerted effort by NCPA and
CMUA in 2016 to pass legislation to fix the more erroneous sections of the IRP requirements, as
well as to modify language holding POUs responsible for IOU duties.
ATTACHMENT C
4
Status: Signed into law
SB 550 (Hertzberg) – Net energy metering: This bill would, for POUs such as Palo Alto, redefine
“aggregate customer peak demand,” for the purposes of calculating the 5% net energy metering
(NEM) program limit as the highest sum of the non-coincident peak demands of all the customers
of that utility in any calendar year, potentially doubling the MW cap.
Status: Died in the Senate
SB 687 (Allen) – Renewable gas standard: This bill would have required CARB, by June 2016, to
adopt a renewable gas standard (RGS) requiring all gas sellers to provide specified percentages of
renewable gas to retail end-use customers for use in California.
Status: Died in the Senate
Water Legislation
AB 349 (Gonzalez) – Common interest developments: property use and maintenance: This statute
voids any attempt by a common interest development to prohibit use of artificial turf or any other
synthetic surface that resembles grass. CMUA supported.
Status: Signed into law
AB 585 (Melendez), AB 603 (Salas) and AB 1139 (Campos) – Personal income tax credits: outdoor
water efficiency and turf removal: Three similar bills providing tax credits for outdoor water
efficiency. AB 585, for taxable years 2016-2020, would allow a credit equal to 25% of the amount
paid by a qualified taxpayer for water-efficiency improvements made to outdoor landscapes, up to
$2,500 per taxable year. AB 603 and AB 1139 would have allowed a credit to a taxpayer
participating in a lawn replacement program, in an amount equal to $2 per square foot of
conventional lawn removed from the taxpayer's property. CMUA supported the three bills.
Status: All died in the Assembly
AB 606 (Levine) – Water conservation: This statute requires, when feasible, state agencies to
reduce water consumption and increase water efficiencies when building on state-owned
property, purchasing property, or replacing landscaping or irrigation. State property leased to a
private party for agricultural purposes is exempted. CMUA supported.
Status: Signed into law
AB 723 (Rendon) – Plumbing fixtures: WaterSense standards: This bill was gutted and amended
to require property owner disclosure of their responsibility to replace all noncompliant plumbing
fixtures in newly or renewed leased properties by a certain date.
Status: Died in the Senate
ATTACHMENT C
5
AB 786 (Levine) – Common interest developments: property use and maintenance: This statute
clarifies that during drought conditions, when a homeowner in an HOA receives recycled water
from a retail water supplier to use in watering lawns or vegetation, the HOA may levy a fine or
assessment if that homeowner does not use the recycled water for landscape irrigation. CMUA
supported.
Status: Signed into law
AB 1164 (Gatto) – Water conservation: drought tolerant landscaping: This statue prohibits cities
and counties from enacting or enforcing any ordinance or regulation prohibiting the installation of
drought tolerant landscaping, synthetic grass, or artificial turf on residential property. CMUA
supported.
Status: Signed into law
AB 1173 (Williams) – Water equipment: backflow prevention devices testing: certification: This
bill attempted to mandate the hiring of a certified individual to test backflow prevention devices if
a local health officer did not already have such a backflow device testing program. CMUA’s
position was “oppose unless amended”.
Status: Died in the Senate
AB 1315 (Alejo) – Public contracts: water pollution prevention plans: delegation: This bill would
have prohibited a charter city from delegating to a contractor the development of a plan used to
prevent or reduce water pollution or runoff on a public works contract, with certain exceptions.
While not limited to water utilities, CMUA does not favor this bill.
Status: Died in the Assembly
AB 1531 (Committee on Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials) – State Water Resources
Control Board: The statute makes technical changes to provisions of the Water Code and the
Health and Safety Code. Specifically, among other things, it eliminates outdated legal provisions,
corrects mistaken cross references, and provides authority to conform drinking water and water
quality requirements to federal requirements. It also makes several statutory changes to improve
the efficiency and effectiveness of the Safe Drinking Water Regulatory Program.
Status: Signed into law
SB 7 (Wolk) – Housing: water meters: multiunit structures: This bill would have mandated the
instillation of individual water meters (ie: submeters), on all new multifamily residential units or
mixed commercial and multifamily units built on or after January 1, 2017. It also required landlords
to bill residents for the increment of water used by unit residents.
Status: Died in the Assembly
ATTACHMENT C
6
SB 471 (Pavley) – Water, energy, and reduction of greenhouse gas emissions: planning: This bill
attempted to allow reductions of GHG emissions associated with the water sector, including water
use, supply, and treatment, to be eligible for AB 32 cap and trade revenue.
Status: Died in the Assembly
Looking forward
In 2016, we expect to see new state legislation addressing stormwater funding and short-term
GHG emissions as well as continued legislation addressing Power Content Label reporting (AB
1110), demand response goals (AB 1330), water conservation (SB 7), and GHG emission limits
(SB 32). We will also work with NCPA and CMUA on cleaning up SB 350 language.
Federal Issues
Following their August recess, Congress returned with a short amount of time before the
November elections and a number of priority issues to contend with. Narrowly avoiding a
government shutdown, Congress passed its financial package on December 18th. At one point,
this financial “omnibus” bill contained language from a California Representative regarding the
drought, but that language was dropped in final negotiations.
EPA Emission Standard
The Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) has proposed rules intended to significantly
reduce the amount of greenhouse gas emissions across the nation, under section 111(d) of the
Clean Air Act. These rules apply to electric generating units as well as other sources of GHG
emissions. Preliminary analysis indicates the new rules will likely have minimal impact in
California, though the treatment of hydropower remains uncertain and questions remain how
the EPA’s proposal will be incorporated into the State’s existing GHG policies and regulations.
California’s regulatory agencies believe that the emissions reductions can be achieved through
the cap-and-trade program, the existing renewable portfolio standard mandates, and the
additional measures addressed in the scoping plan update currently underway at the Air
Resources Board.
Grid Reliability
In 2015, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) approved the North American
Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) Risk-based Registration Initiative. This initiative uses a
consistent approach to risk assessment and registration to implement changes aimed at
ensuring the right entities are subject to the right set of reliability standards. Palo Alto supports
efforts to rationalize the registration process so that resources, at all levels, can be focused on
those issues that have a material impact on grid reliability. Palo Alto’s distribution system, in
particular, does not impact the bulk grid reliability.
ATTACHMENT C
7
Drought
Two key measures, one in the House carried by a Republican and the other in the Senate
authored by a Democrat, failed to pass in 2015. Senator Feinstein intends to push her bill in
2016.
CFTC swap dealer definition
On September 24, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) granted the relief sought
by public power systems, and exempted utility operations-related swaps from the $25 million
“special entity” swap dealer threshold. With approval of this rule, public power systems will be
on equal footing with private utilities and should regain access to counterparties for swap
transactions.
ATTACHMENT D
EXCERPTED DRAFT MINUTES OF THE JANUARY 13, 2016
UTILITIES ADVISORY COMMISSION MEETING
ITEM 6. ACTION: Staff Recommendation that the Utilities Advisory Commission Recommend
that the City Council Adopt a Resolution Approving the Amended City of Palo Alto Utilities
Legislative Policy Guidelines
Compliance Manager Debbie Lloyd introduced Senior Resource Planner Heather Dauler who is
taking over the management of the Utilities’ legislative and regulatory program.
Lloyd and Dauler presented a summary of the written report including a brief review of
legislative activity in 2015, expected legislative activities in 2016, and the proposed changes to
the Utilities legislative policy guidelines.
Chair Foster asked why the City would advocate for privacy concerns with respect to AB 802,
the building benchmarking bill, and that he was in favor of energy use disclosure, Commissioner
Schwartz agreed. Commissioner Danaher stated that he may have a different opinion since he
was aware that certain commercial customers, such as server farms, were sensitive that their
energy profile could provide competitors with insight on their operations. Commissioner
Schwartz said that aggregated customer information would not disclose any useful/sensitive
information. Commissioner Eglash said he understood customer privacy concerns. Chair Foster
asked that staff acknowledge that there were different opinions on the issue of energy and
water use disclosure.
Commissioner Eglash asked what we are advocating for with respect to a Net Energy Metering
(NEM) successor program. Lloyd replied that the goal is for local agencies such as Palo Alto to
have the ability to develop and design their own programs that make sense for their customers.
The commissioners discussed the proposed changes to “All Utilities” Goals 1 and 3and
recommended the original language be retained as the reference to environmental goals
carried more weight in goal #1.
Chair Foster said that the new overall guideline #8 with respect to customer data security
should still allow that anonymized customer data. He said that there is a balance and that
there are companies that can use usage data for good reasons, including those that lead to
energy efficiency and climate protective improvements. Lloyd stated that guideline #8
addresses security of data such as personal credit card info, etc. Commissioner Eglash noted
that there is clearly a diversity of opinions on the matter of customer use data.
Commissioner Schwartz noted that the issue of privacy is being worked by many bodies and no
one is advocating releasing personal customer data. She suggested that the City’s legislative
guidelines will not influence this debate.
ACTION:
Vice Chair Cook made a motion that the UAC recommend that the City Council approve the
revised guidelines after discarding the proposed changes to “All Utilities” Goals 1 and 3.
Commissioner Danaher seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously (6-0) with Chair
Foster, Vice Chair Cook, and Commissioners Ballantine, Danaher, Eglash, and Schwartz voting
yes and Commissioner Hall absent.
City of Palo Alto (ID # 6592)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Action Items Meeting Date: 2/22/2016
Summary Title: Comp Plan Draft EIR and Scenario 5
Title: Comprehensive Plan Update: Discussion Regarding Development of a
Fifth Scenario With an Improved Jobs Housing Balance for Inclusion in the
Environmental Impact Report and the Overall Project Schedule
From: City Manager
Lead Department: Planning and Community Environment
Recommendation
Staff recommends that Council provide guidance on the following aspects of the
Comprehensive Plan Update:
a) potential development of a “fifth scenario” for analysis in a supplement to the Draft
Environmental Impact Report, including potential mechanisms to address the ratio of
jobs to employed residents; and
(b) the schedule and topics of Citizen Advisory Committee and City Council meetings.
Executive Summary
On January 18th, 2015, the City Council and the Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) held a joint
meeting to review the upcoming release of the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR or
Draft EIR) for the Comprehensive Plan Update. The DEIR, which is available for public review at
http://www.paloaltocompplan.org/eir/ , analyzes four planning scenarios at an equal level of
detail, describing a range of potential land use and transportation policy decisions, and
assessing the impacts they would have on traffic, greenhouse gas emissions, and other
environmental resources.
At the conclusion of this meeting, the Council adopted a motion (Attachment A) asking staff to
return with a fifth scenario aimed at improving the ity’s ratio of jobs to housing, which is
commonly expressed as the ratio between jobs and employed residents. At a high level, this
goal can be addressed by increasing the amount of housing, decreasing the amount of jobs
projected between now and 2030 or some combination of the two.
Tonight’s discussion is an opportunity to discuss how the policies and regulatory changes
assumed in each of the four planning scenarios could be supplemented or modified to stimulate
housing growth or to decrease job growth (or to do both things), and to talk about the next
City of Palo Alto Page 1
steps/schedule for development of a fifth scenario and completion of the Comprehensive Plan
Update.
Background
Palo Alto has long had an imbalance between jobs and housing, with almost three times as
many jobs and employed residents in 2014, as shown in Table 1.
Table 1. Existing Jobs and Employed Residents (2014)
Jobs Employed Residents Ratio
City of Palo Alto 95,460 31,1651 3.06
City + SOI2 100,830 36,004 2.80
Santa Clara County 988,278 865,822 1.14
Bay Area 3,613,052 3,491,584 1.03
Notes:
(1) US Census Bureau, American Community Survey, Demographic and Housing Estimates 2011-2013 3-Year
Estimates, Table DP03, Selected Economic Characteristics
(2) SOI = Sphere of Influence (includes a portion of Stanford lands)
Sources: Data extrapolated from ABAG Projections 2013 except where noted.
The ity’s imbalance between jobs and employed residents contributes to local and regional
traffic, greenhouse gas emissions, and other impacts, as some workers travel long distances
between their residence and workplace. The imbalance is projected to grow if the City does not
take affirmative steps to address the issue. Scenario 1 in the Draft EIR depicts what is expected
under a “business as usual” scenario if there are no policy changes and the current
Comprehensive Plan and implementing regulations remain in place, as shown in Table 2.
Table 2. ity of Palo !lto Projected Jobs & Employed Residents in 2030 “usiness as Usual”
City of Palo Alto
2030 “usiness as Usual”
(Draft EIR Scenario 1)
Jobs Employed Residents Ratio
110,9401 34,6972 3.20
Notes:
(1) ABAG Projections 2013 for the year 2030. ABAG forecasts jobs based on their understanding of the
ay !rea economy as well as adopted general plans and zoning. While planning staff believes !!G’s
projection is high, we do not have a basis for our own projection of future job growth, particularly
because job growth is not solely dependent on the addition of new non-residential square footage.
(2) 48% of total population projected based on the number of new dwelling units expected by 2030.
(Palo !lto relies on its own projection of housing growth rather than !!G’s, and bases that
projection on the long term average of new dwelling units produced per year. The percentage of
48% is derived from ABAG Projections 2013 for the year 2030.)
The other three planning scenarios in the Draft EIR test potential policy changes that are
projected to result in incremental changes as summarized below in Table 3 below. The
assumed policy changes are not meant to be directive or exclusive of other possible policy
changes and scenarios, but illustrate some affirmative steps that could be taken to encourage
housing, slow job growth, or both. Table 4 in Attachment B contains a further comparison of
City of Palo Alto Page 2
the quantitative characteristics and impacts of the four scenarios as presented in the Draft EIR.
It’s expected that the preferred scenario that is ultimately selected for adoption in the form of
the Comprehensive Plan Update will not be identical to any one of these scenarios, but will
draw from them and the data/analysis provided in the Draft EIR.
As noted during the staff presentation on January 19th, development of the DEIR began in June
of 2014 with the notice of preparation and initial “scoping” of the document and the scenarios
were developed using input from public workshops in the summer of 2014. In December of
2014, the City Council authorized preparation of an impacts study in the form of a Draft EIR to
assess the potential impacts and trade-offs associated with the policy choices that will have to
be made as the Comprehensive Plan Update planning process moves forward this year. The
DEIR was introduced to the Council on January 19th and was released on February 5th.
Members of the public are encouraged to review and comment on the Draft EIR, and it’s hoped
that the information contained in the document and the companion fiscal study will inform the
ity ouncil’s discussion of key policy issues like the jobs/housing balance, growth management
strategies, the location and density of housing sites, prioritization of transportation
investments, and desired sustainability measures for inclusion in the Comprehensive Plan.
The public review period for the Draft EIR will last 90 days (twice the required period), or until
the close of business on May 5, 2016. All substantive comments received on the Draft EIR will
be responded to in a Final EIR, which must be certified before a final decision can be made to
adopt an updated Comprehensive Plan.
Table 3. City of Palo Alto Projected Jobs & Employed Residents in 2030 with Comprehensive Plan Draft EIR
Planning Scenarios 2-4
Policy Changes Assumed Jobs Employed
Residents Ratio
Sc
e
n
a
r
i
o
2
Sl
o
w
i
n
g
G
r
o
w
t
h
To encourage housing:
Housing Element implementation
Policies to encourage smaller units
To slow job growth:
Citywide annual limit on new office/R&D square footage
Reduce Commercial FAR in the CC-2 zoning district by 25%
Possible adjustments in zoning to reduce commercial FAR
downtown
Require CUP for new office/R&D to regulate employment
densities
105,310 34,697 3.04
City of Palo Alto Page 3
Policy Changes Assumed Jobs Employed
Residents Ratio
Sc
e
n
a
r
i
o
3
Ho
u
s
i
n
g
T
e
s
t
e
d
To encourage housing:
Housing Element implementation
Policies to encourage smaller units
Eliminate housing sites on San Antonio/South El Camino in
exchange for increased densities near Cal Ave and
downtown, possibly based on PTOD zoning “by right’
Heights of 55 or 60 feet allowed downtown for residential
units.
To slow job growth:
Continue current interim annual limit on new office/R&D
square footage in a portion of the City
108,215 35,578 3.03
Reduce Commercial FAR in the CC-2 zoning district by 25%
Possible adjustments in zoning to reduce commercial FAR
downtown
Require CUP for new office/R&D to regulate employment
densities
Sc
e
n
a
r
i
o
4
S
u
s
t
a
i
n
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
T
e
s
t
e
d
To encourage housing:
Housing Element implementation
Policies to encourage smaller units
Eliminate housing sites on San Antonio/South El Camino in
exchange for increased densities near Cal Ave and
downtown, and add new housing sites along the El
Camino Real frontage of the Stanford Research Park and
Stanford Shopping Center
Heights of 55 or 60 feet allowed downtown for residential
units.
To slow job growth:
Require CUP for new office/R&D to regulate employment
densities
110,940 36,547 3.041
Notes: (1) Projected jobs, housing, and employed residents in the City of Palo Alto under Scenario 4 are derived from
ABAG Projections 2013.
Source: Comprehensive Plan Update Draft EIR, February 2016 (Section 4.11).
Discussion
The term “jobs/housing balance” relates to the ratio between the number of jobs and housing
opportunities in a given geographic area. Because there may be more than one job holder in
any given household, this ratio is best examined using employed residents rather than housing
units.
The existing number of jobs and employed residents in a given area are derived from US Census
data. Projections of future employed residents are based on the number of housing units
expected at a given point in time, and the expected number of job holders per household,
which may change over time due to changes in demographics, housing costs, etc.
As noted in the Background section above, the City of Palo Alto has an existing ratio of jobs to
employed residents of around 3.06 and this ratio is expected to increase to 3.20 by 2030 unless
City of Palo Alto Page 4
affirmative policy changes are made to address the issue.1
Typically there are three ways to improve the ratio of jobs to employed residents (assuming
that there are more jobs than employed residents as in Palo Alto):
Increase the rate of housing production
Decrease the rate of job growth
A combination of the two
Any decisions made to increase the rate of housing production or decrease the rate of job
growth can be highly contentious because of fears they will affect a community’s character, its
place in the larger region, and/or other economic and social concerns. As a result, Scenarios 2-
4 in the Draft EIR were crafted to illustrate the potential outcomes and impacts associated with
possible policy changes, and inform policy discussions like this evening’s.
As shown in Table 3, above, some of the possible policy changes were assumed to generate
more housing (and therefore employed residents) than the “business as usual” projection for
2030, and some were assumed to slow the rate of job growth, resulting in fewer jobs than
ABAG projected for 2030. The potential policy changes included in the scenarios were derived
from public workshops in mid-2014 and City Council discussions over the course of 2014 and
early 2015 and include those listed in Table 5, below.
Table 5. Potential Policy Changes Tested in Draft EIR Scenarios 2-4
To encourage housing To slow job growth
Housing Element implementation Adopt a citywide annual limit on new
Policies to encourage smaller units office/R&D square footage -or -continue
Eliminate housing sites on San current interim annual limit on new
Antonio/South El Camino in exchange for office/R&D square footage in a portion of
increased densities near Cal Ave and the City
downtown (may include PTOD zoning “by Reduce Commercial FAR in the CC-2 zoning
right”) district by 25%
Possible new housing sites along the El Possible adjustments in zoning to reduce
Camino Real frontage of the Stanford commercial FAR downtown and replace
Research Park and Stanford Shopping with residential FAR
Center Require CUP for new office/R&D to regulate
Heights of 55 or 60 feet allowed downtown employment densities
for residential units.
Source: Comprehensive Plan Update Draft EIR, February 2016
1 Because the number of employed residents in 2030 is derived from the projection of housing units in 2030, the
fact that Palo Alto has developed and uses its own lower projection of housing growth than ABAG, means that the
ity’s projection of the ratio between jobs and employed residents for 2030 (3.20) is worse than !!G’s (3.04).
The City does not have its own projection of job growth, but may be able to develop one in the future based on
data collected through the new Business Registry.
City of Palo Alto Page 5
The idea of perpetuating the ity’s limit on non-residential development in “monitored areas”
of the City (Comprehensive Plan Policy L-8) does not appear on this list, but is inherent in
Scenarios 1 & 2. The ity’s recent history has shown that job growth is not solely dependent on
new square footage. Nonetheless, the Council will be discussing this policy in upcoming
meetings, and in both that discussion and tonight’s could choose to perpetuate the limit and/or
consider implementing regulatory (zoning)changes.
Tonight’s policy discussion is an opportunity for the Council to provide direction on other
potential policy changes that should be considered. In addition, Council may wish to articulate
a particular ratio of jobs to employed residents they would like to incorporate into the
Comprehensive Plan Update as an objective for 2030.
As described in the DEIR orientation booklet and the January 19th Council meeting, the DEIR
scenarios are not intended to be static or stand alone- instead, it was staff’s expectation that a
preferred scenario would take ideas from each and incorporate new ideas. As such, the
preferred scenario that is ultimately crafted for adoption in the form of the Comprehensive
Plan Update may have a somewhat different jobs/housing ratio than the DEIR scenarios. Also,
the Comprehensive Plan Update may articulate a more aspirational objective than is
conservatively projected in the EIR.
For example, choosing the “slow job growth” tools in Scenario 2, and combining them with
“encourage housing” tools in Scenario 4, would result in a lower ratio of jobs to employed
residents (2.88) than any of the scenarios, as shown in Table 6, below.
Table 6. City of Palo Alto Jobs & Employed Residents in 2030 with a Hybrid of Draft
EIR Scenario 2 & 4
City of Palo Alto
2030 “Hybrid Scenario”
Jobs Employed Residents Ratio
105,311 36,547 2.88
Source: Comprehensive Plan Update Draft EIR, February 2016
Staff’s analysis has confirmed the difficulty in reducing the ratio in a much more significant way,
because so much of the ratio is determined by existing land use patterns (the base of existing
jobs and housing), rather than by changes (new jobs and housing) that may occur over the next
15 years. To illustrate this point, staff took the average number of employed residents for each
of the four Draft EIR scenarios, and assumed that there would be no job growth in the City over
the life of the updated Comprehensive Plan. The result was a jobs to employed residents ratio
of 2.66.
City of Palo Alto Page 6
A discussion of the desired ratio of jobs to employed residents should not lose sight of the fact
that making more dramatic changes over the next 15 years than illustrated in Table 6 would
require significant commercial downzoning2 and/or more and denser housing opportunities. As
described at the start of this section, potential policy changes necessary to meaningfully affect
the projected ratio of jobs to employed residents is a difficult conversation. Potentially
controversial concepts necessary to improve beyond the ratio of 2.88 in 2030 (as shown in
Table 6) include the following:
Increased housing densities -The ity’s zoning provides for a maximum of 40 units/acre
in its R-40 zones (not including density bonuses, the use of PTOD zoning, or other tools).
Council could consider creating new zoning districts with higher units per acre, change
allowable density increases under the bonus or in PTOD overlays, or other tools to allow
much higher densities.
Increased areas under existing maximum zoning rules – The Council could expand those
parts of the City under the R-15, R-30 and R-40 zones, to expand increases in housing
units.
Additional regulation of employment densities – Councilmembers have asked if there is
a way to regulate the number of employees per square foot. Scenarios 2-4 suggest
requiring a conditional use permit for new uses, which would allow the City to place
conditions on projects regarding the number of jobs. The City Attorney is reviewing
whether there are other mechanisms that could be used to regulate employment in new
(or even existing) uses.
Additional commercial downzoning – As noted above, Scenario 2 and 3 contemplate
limited changes in commercial FAR in addition to annual limits on new office/R&D
development. Council could consider downzoning to reduce allowable non-residential
densities more broadly in the City of Palo Alto. If this is something that the Council
would like to consider, staff will have to conduct an analysis of possible adjustments,
including the parcels potentially affected, quantitative reductions in development
potential, and likely impacts on job growth.
Timeline
Per the request of Council, staff has prepared an updated master schedule for the
Comprehensive Plan update (Attachment C). This updated schedule incorporates ouncil’s
desire for additional meetings to discuss broader issue areas, a reflection of the need to move
certain items to better accommodate those discussions, and other changes. Staff would
welcome the ouncil’s input on this schedule and would like to pass on the ommunity
!dvisory ommittee’s desire for more joint meetings with the Council, particularly as it relates
to the topic of housing.
2 As noted in Table 3 and 5, Draft EIR Scenarios 2 and 3 include modest adjustments in the CC-2 zoning district
(25% reduction in FAR) and suggest that some (unspecified) commercial FAR in Downtown could be converted to
residential F!R. Other than these examples, the scenarios do not propose “downzoning” per se, but rely on
growth control measures like an annual limit on new office/R&D to slow job growth.
City of Palo Alto Page 7
Also, staff has tentatively identified April 11 for a public hearing on the Draft EIR, and the public
comment period is scheduled to end on May 5, 2016. Assuming that the Council would like to
consider public comments prior to deciding on their preferred scenario, one or more additional
meetings will be needed to refine the fifth scenario and/or an alternative preferred scenario.
The ity’s consultant, Placeworks, has indicated that an estimated six to eight months will be
necessary to provide a level of analysis for any additional scenario(s) that is similar to that
provided in the Draft EIR. This analysis can be completed concurrent with review and
finalization of the elements of Comprehensive Plan Update and circulated for a 45 day public
comment period prior to preparation of the Final EIR. Based on the current schedule, the Final
EIR and the Final Comprehensive Plan Update would be considered for adoption by the Council
around May of 2017.
Resource Impact
Analysis of an additional scenario(s) in the form of a supplement to the Draft EIR will require
additional resources. Placeworks, the consultant working with the City on the Comprehensive
Plan Update and the DEIR, estimates the need for an amendment to their contract for at least
$150,000 to cover the cost of analyzing a new scenario at the same level of detail as other
scenarios in the Draft EIR. Also, approximately $50,000 would be required for each additional
scenario after that.
ased on ouncil’s direction this evening, staff will bring forward an amendment to the
Placeworks contract including additional funds for the required anaysis and for increased staff
support needed due to Jeremy Dennis’ impending departure.
If the Council would like to make changes to the project schedule and add meetings of the
Council and/or CAC, these will require a further assessment of staff and consultant resources.
Also, if the Council requests an analysis of potential zoning changes beyond those currently
being considered, staff will have to assess the time and cost to prepare this analysis.
Policy Implications
The ity’s current omprehensive Plan contains policies that support measured non-residential
growth appropriate to the scale and character of the City (Policies L-8 and L-5), new housing
(Policy H-2.1), and Palo !lto’s image as a business-friendly community (Policy B-10). One
question before the City Council this evening, is whether they wish to consider an aspirational
goal or objective related to the ratio between jobs and employed residents in the
Comprehensive Plan Udpate, and how such a goal could be supported through policy changes
and implementing programs (i.e. changes in zoning regulations).
Environmental Review
This agenda item seeks ouncil’s direction on potential policy changes for future analysis and
ouncil’s direction does not constitute a project requiring review under the alifornia
City of Palo Alto Page 8
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The Comprehensive Plan Update is the subject of a Draft
Environmental Impact Report (EIR), which can be found at
http://www.paloaltocompplan.org/eir/. Public comments are welcome until the end of the
comment period on May 5, 2016.
Attachments:
Attachment A: City Council Action Minutes for January 19, 2016 (PDF)
Attachment B: Summary of DEIR Key Characteristics & Impacts (PDF)
Attachment C: New Comprehensive Plan Update Timeline/Schedule (DOCX)
City of Palo Alto Page 9
ACTION MINUTES
6. Joint Session With the Citizens Advisory Committee for the
Comprehensive Plan Update: Introduction to the Comprehensive Plan
Update Draft Environmental Impact Report & Review of Next Steps in the Planning Process.
Council Member Kniss left the meeting at 10:54 P.M.
MOTION: Council Member DuBois moved, seconded by Council Member
Holman to:
A. Direct Staff to present an updated schedule of Citizens Advisory
Committee for the Comprehensive Plan Update (CAC) and Council
meetings relating to the Comprehensive Plan Update, as soon as
possible with check ins in April, May and September with a goal of
delving into key decision areas on job and population growth
assumptions, growth management, traffic, and a final Draft
Environmental Impact Report (DEIR); and
ACTION MINUTES
B. Direct Staff to move forward with a Draft Environmental Impact Report
(DEIR) of various scenarios, replacing Scenario Four “Sustainability
Tested” with a scenario which shifts the jobs/housing balance by
limiting office expansion and replacing some commercial use with
housing.
INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE
MAKER AND SECONDER to replace Part B of the Motion with, “direct Staff
to move forward with a Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) of various
scenarios, adding a fifth scenario which shifts the jobs/housing balance by limiting office expansion and replacing some commercial use with housing.”
INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE MAKER AND SECONDER to add to the Motion Part A, “as Action Items”
after “May and September.”
INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE
MAKER AND SECONDER to replace Part A of the Motion with, “direct Staff
to come to the City Council Retreat with a more definitive schedule of when
the variety of issues discussed this evening will be scheduled for Council
consideration.”
INCORPORATED INTO THE MOTION WITH THE CONSENT OF THE
MAKER AND SECONDER to replace Part B of the Motion with, “direct Staff
to return to Council with the DEIR as well as a possible fifth scenario which lowers the jobs/housing ratio and the implications that will have on the
timing and process of completing the Comprehensive Plan Update.”
AMENDMENT: Council Member Wolbach moved, seconded by Council
Member XX to add to the Motion, “Council empowers the Citizens Advisory
Committee for the Comprehensive Plan Update (CAC) if it so chooses to
establish small sub-committee meetings that do not require Staff support.”
AMENDMENT WITHDRAWN BY THE MAKER
MOTION AS AMENDED PASSED: 8-0 Kniss absent
MOTION: Council Member Wolbach moved, seconded by Council Member
XX to add to the Motion, “council empowers the Citizens Advisory Committee
for the Comprehensive Plan Update (CAC) if it so chooses to establish small
sub-committee meetings that do not require Staff support.”
City of Palo Alto (ID # 6503)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Informational Report Meeting Date: 2/22/2016
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Council Priority: Environmental Sustainability
Summary Title: Update on Energy/Compost Technologies
Title: Update on Energy/Compost Technologies, Measure E, and Organics
Processing
From: City Manager
Lead Department: Public Works
Recommendation
This report is provided for information only and requires no Council action.
Executive Summary
Programs developed and implemented in 2015 as part of Council’s direction to
extract energy and compost from the City’s organic residuals (wastewater solids,
food scraps and soiled paper, and yard trimmings) include: 1) 90% design level
reached on the sludge dewatering facility needed to phase out the wastewater
solids incinerators; 2) the July 2015 establishment of a new residential food scraps
collection program; and 3) the diversion of commercial and residential food
scraps, food-soiled paper and yard trimmings to a new dry anaerobic digester
(DAD) facility in north San Jose where energy and compost are recovered. All of
the City’s collected food and yard residuals are now sent to the type of facility
contemplated by Measure E. As part of the annual update to Council, staff has
continued to track emerging technologies for consideration on the Measure E
site. While no fundamentally new type of technology has emerged, staff will
monitor the development of gasification and pyrolysis type processes.
Background
City of Palo Alto Page 2
In May 2014, Council approved a four component Organics Facilities Plan (OFP)
(Staff Report #4744) to direct the processing of wastewater biosolids, food scraps,
and yard trimmings.
Component One: Biosolids Dewatering and Truck Haul-Out Facility.
Component Two: Wet Anaerobic Digestion Facility utilizing the thermal
hydrolysis process.
Component Three: Food Preprocessing Facility; preprocessed food scraps
would be fed into the anaerobic digester (component
two above).
Component Four: The pursuit of technologies to harness the energy and
resource potential of yard trimmings.
Council directed staff to look first at component four as a composting option for
yard trimmings on the 10-acre Measure E site. Council approved using existing
facilities to process food scraps and yard trimmings (Staff Report #5182) and
directed staff to return to Council annually with an update on new organics
processing technologies and opportunities. This report is that annual update.
Discussion
No New Technologies
Staff regularly review new organics processing technologies and opportunities
and receive information from technology providers. The main constraint that
prevented the development of a cost-effective facility on the Measure E site is still
the key factor – the site is too small to provide an economy of scale to process
enough material. Other factors that limit the development of new cost-effective
processing technologies include the low price of energy, high cost of construction
and permitting challenges. Staff will continue to investigate new technologies and
will prepare a long-term recommendation as part of a future update to the Zero
Waste Operational Plan in preparation for a new solid waste hauling and
processing contract in 2021.
Anaerobic Digestion at ZWED
All residential and commercial organics (food scraps and yard trimmings)
collected in green containers are now processed at the Zero Waste Energy
City of Palo Alto Page 3
Development (ZWED) Facility in north San Jose. These compostables are first
placed in large bunkers as part of a dry anaerobic digestion process where
methane is created and then combusted in engines to generate renewable
energy. The material from the digester is then cured and composted and
ultimately used as a soil amendment.
The residential curbside food scrap collection program started on July 1, 2015,
allowing residents to place food scraps and soiled paper in the green cart with
yard trimmings. Residents are using the program. Preliminary hauler data show
that the amount of material collected from July through October 2015 in the
green cart increased by 10 percent as compared to the same four months in 2014.
Additionally, GreenWaste of Palo Alto, the City’s contract solid waste hauler,
continues to add new commercial customer participants to the compost program.
On January 25, 2016, Council amended the Municipal Code, Chapter 5.20 (Staff
Report #6340), to require all businesses to subscribe to recycle and compost
services and comply with refuse sorting requirements. This “Recycling and
Composting Ordinance” could increase the commercial tons processed at ZWED
by 33%, diverting an additional 15,000 tons per year.
Dewatering and Anaerobic Digestion of Wastewater Biosolids
Staff continues to move forward with components one and two of the OFP at the
Palo Alto Regional Water Quality Control Plant (RWQCP). The 90% design
documents have been completed for the sludge dewatering and truck loadout
facility (i.e., Component One). This facility will allow the incinerators to be
decommissioned and the dewatered solids to be hauled to other facilities for
energy recovery and/or compost creation. An application for the Site and Design
Review process has been submitted to the Planning Department. A study session
and first meeting with the Architectural Review Board (ARB) has been held; the
project was also presented to the Planning and Transportation Commission. The
project is scheduled to go out to bid in the spring of 2016, with construction
completed in 2018.
The preliminary design of the anaerobic digesters at the RWQCP (i.e., Component
Two) has been prepared, resulting in the estimated cost rising from around $57.4
million to approximately $75 million plus. The next step is to re-evaluate the
planning and preliminary design and identify opportunities to lower costs,
City of Palo Alto Page 4
including continued evaluation of gasification and pyrolysis type processes.
Currently, staff is fully engaged in completing Component One.
City of Palo Alto (ID # 6571)
City Council Staff Report
Report Type: Informational Report Meeting Date: 2/22/2016
City of Palo Alto Page 1
Council Priority: Land Use and Transportation Planning
Summary Title: 2015 Airport Annual Noise Report
Title: Palo Alto Airport - 2015 Annual Aircraft Noise Complaints Report
From: City Manager
Lead Department: Public Works
Recommendation
This is an informational report only and no Council action is required.
Discussion
The purpose of the Palo Alto Airport Annual Aircraft Noise Complaints Report is to
identify noise trends in the surrounding areas and determine compliance with
established voluntary noise abatement procedures. Attachment A is the first
report prepared by Public Works Department’s Airport Division staff on the
aircraft noise complaints received during its first year of operation and includes
the last quarter of 2014.
The Palo Alto Airport (PAO) receives noise complaints via e-mail at
pao@cityofpaloalto.org and a designated hotline, 650-329-2405. Staff review and
respond timely to all complaints ascertaining from complainants their contact
information and the date, time and description of the offending occurrence. Staff
review and compile the data to determine flying activity trends. Staff contact
pilots when violations are observed or reported, advising them of established
procedures, requesting compliance and reminding them about our neighborly
commitment to the community.
This report will be generated in January on an annual basis and posted to the
airport’s webpage: www.cityofpaloalto.org/PAO.
City of Palo Alto Page 2
Courtesy copies to: Palo Alto Airport Association
Attachments:
Palo Alto Airport - 2015 Annual Aircraft Noise Complaints Report (DOCX)
PALO ALTO
AIRPORT
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
2015
ANNUAL NOISE
COMPLAINTS REPORT
(*August 2014 to
December 2015)
AUG 2014 – SEPT 2015
(Q4 2014 – Q3 2015)*
Vision: Palo Alto Airport strives to balance the
rights of pilots to fly with the rights of neighbors to
a peaceful living environment. This document is a
report of the noise complaints received by the
airport during its first year of operation. Airport
staff uses this information to identify trends in
neighboring communities. These trends inform
communications between airport staff and pilots on
the issue of noise.
This report will be generated annually in January.
*This report includes the last quarter of 2014.
Introduction:
The following is a report of noise complaints received by Palo Alto Airport (PAO) during the first year of
operation by the City of Palo Alto. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) defines air travel routes
and procedures, including defining separation distances between aircraft, determining hazards to
aviation and all other safety criteria for aircraft, and is responsible for directing and enforcing the
movement of aircraft in flight. Although organizations can petition the FAA regarding flight procedures,
the FAA has the final say in what is safe and acceptable. The Airport Noise and Capacity Act (ANCA) of
1990 federally prohibits public-use airports from restricting airspace in anyway.
The FAA measures noise based on the Yearly Day and Night Average Sound Level (DNL) and the
Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL). While both are essentially the same, airports in California use
the CNEL method to measure noise. CNEL is a method of averaging single event aircraft noise into a
weighted 24-hour average. The system adds penalties to all events occurring during the evening (7pm –
10pm) and the night (10pm – 7am). The Santa Clara County Airport Land Use Commission (SCC ALUC)
performed a noise study for the Palo Alto Airport using the CNEL to determine the noise contours for 55,
60, 65, and 70 decibels. The contour map is included as Attachment A.
Regarding safety and altitude, the FAA has in place Federal Aviation Regulations (FARs) that establishes
Minimum Safe Altitudes (MSAs) for aircraft. For fixed wing aircraft, the minimum is 1000 feet above
ground when over congested areas and 500 feet when not over congested areas. These minimum
altitudes apply to all fixed wing aircraft except when necessary for landing and takeoff operations.
Helicopters are exempt from these altitude restrictions due to the nature of their flight. These minimum
altitudes are enforced by the FAA Flight Standards District Office in San Jose and not Palo Alto Airport.
Although, Palo Alto Airport cannot tell pilots when or where to fly; the airport, however, does have
voluntary noise abatement procedures that Palo Alto Airport recommends that pilots follow. (See the
Noise Abatement Procedures section below.)
The airport receives noise complaints via email at pao@cityofpaloalto.org and a noise complaint hotline
650-329-2405. Airport staff review and timely respond to all complaints ascertaining as much
information from complainants, including contact information, date, time and description of the
occurrence. Various flight trackers can be used in an attempt to help identify the aircraft involved and
verify if FAA regulations or Palo Alto Airport procedures were violated. The airport staff reviews and
compiles all data to determine trends with flying activities.
Purpose:
The purpose of the Palo Alto Airport Annual Noise Report is to identify noise trends in the surrounding
areas and determine compliance with
established voluntary noise abatement
procedures.
Airspace:
The Palo Alto Airport airspace is unique. The
congested Bay Area airspace is dominated by
SFO Class Bravo airspace, which encompasses a
30 nautical mile radius around SFO.
Palo Alto Airport Sectional Map
Palo Alto Airport in Green
PAO Airspace highlighted in Red
Source: http://vfrmap.com/?type=vfrc&lat=37.461&lon=-122.115&zoom=10
Underneath the Class Bravo airspace lays the Class Charlie airspace of Oakland and San Jose
international airports. Finally, Moffett Airfield lies approximately 4 nautical miles to the southeast of
Palo Alto Airport.
As a result, Palo Alto Airport airspace ends only 1.5 nautical miles southeast of Runway 31’s final
approach. To land at Palo Alto Airport, aircraft must turn before entering Moffett’s airspace, resulting in
aircraft having to space themselves in traffic patterns over the peninsula when take-off/landing volumes
peak. The FAA’s Air Traffic Control Tower (ATCT) at Palo Alto Airport has a letter of agreement with
Moffett’s ATCT providing Palo Alto Airport aircraft with extensions into Moffett airspace when Moffett
airfield is not in use. The additional airspace is a useful mitigation tool during busy times.
Further restrictions in Palo Alto Airport airspace come from San Jose Class C airspace, starting at 1500
feet Mean Sea Level, just southeast of Palo Alto Airport and SFO Class B airspace, starting at 2500 feet
Mean Sea Level, just northeast of the Palo Alto Airport. Both are identified on the Palo Alto Airport
Sectional Map: San Jose Class C is shown with thick magenta lines and SFO Class B is shown with thick
blue lines. These restrictions play a vital role in aircraft departures, in turn influencing noise abatement
procedures for the Palo Alto Airport.
Noise Abatement Procedures:
Noise abatement procedures are voluntary procedures that the airport asks pilots to follow. The airport
is prohibited from restricting airspace. Palo Alto Airport staff will speak with individual pilots and
educate them about the voluntary noise abatement procedures. The Palo Alto Airport cannot levy fines
on pilots that violate the voluntary noise procedures. For illustrated noise abatement procedures
reference Palo Alto Airport Pilots Handout included as Attachment B.
Pilots are asked to fly over the bay whenever possible. If pilots must fly over the peninsula, they are
asked to reduce power and fly at or above 1500 feet above ground before crossing Highway 101. Staff
also asks that aircraft not make a left crosswind departure, but instead make a “Left Dumbarton
Departure” (fly to the Dumbarton Auto Bridge before making a left turn and flying over East Palo Alto) or
a right 270 degree turn whenever departing to the south or west from Runway 31. When aircraft are
using Runway 13, pilots are asked to make a left 270 departure before flying west over Palo Alto.
For arrivals, it is standard practice and necessary for pilots to descend to pattern altitude before
entering the traffic pattern around PAO, sometimes requiring aircraft to descend below the 1500 feet
minimum over Palo Alto. As these aircraft are descending to land the engines are generally powered
back and quieter than ascending aircraft.
Airport staff continuously engages with tenants and pilots about the voluntary noise abatement
procedures, always noting that safety always supersedes noise.
Findings:
The Palo Alto Airport remains the third busiest airport in the bay area with an average of 172,000
operations per year since 2010, significantly less than the average of 198,000 operations per year
between 1990 and 2009 (Table 1). An operation is defined as either a takeoff or a landing and a touch-
and-go procedure will account for two operations.
Table 1. Airport Operations
Air Taxi Military Total
Air Taxi Military Total
1990 8 18 183635
2003 17 1 212981
1991 0 0 230526
2004 619 12 199453
1992 0 0 232789
2005 2397 28 184821
1993 243 38 212303
2006 1932 17 176570
1994 313 0 207404
2007 1440 318 181883
1995 261 16 187650
2008 1697 280 174332
1996 60 0 197582
2009 1650 301 155556
1997 1 0 205311
2010 2077 6 158217
1998 8 12 192093
2011 1572 8 170389
1999 13 8 205436
2012 1700 16 176564
2000 2 0 197283
2013 1628 14 172653
2001 29 370 216483
2014 1518 22 179900
2002 62 1 208755
2015 1082 118 172132
Since the City of Palo Alto assumed operational control of the airport, 179 noise complaints from 53
households have been logged. Table 2 shows the number of complaints by quarter.
In 2015, forty three complaints involving non-PAO associated aircraft were logged. This means the
aircraft were neither based at nor landing/taking off from PAO. These flights were simply passing
through PAO airspace and have included CHP, Coast Guard, Air Taxi’s, survey and/or banner towing
operations. Charter operations, angel flights, and life flights are considered Air Taxi’s. Table 3 shows
aircraft noise association by quarter.
In the cases of the two unknown aircraft operations, airport staff were not able to identify the aircraft
from the information provided and attempts to learn more went unanswered.
Table 2. Total Complaints
Q4 2014 Q1 2015 Q2 2015 Q3 2015 Q4 2015 Total
Complaints 17 62 24 39 37 179
Households 10 12 9 26 12 53
Table 3. Aircraft Association
Q4 2014 Q1 2015 Q2 2015 Q3 2015 Q4 2015 Total
PAO 15 51 21 21 26 134
Non-PAO 2 10 3 17 11 43
Unknown 1 1 2
Total 17 62 24 39 37 179
City C H C H C H C H C H C H
Atherton 1 1 1 1
Burlingame 1 1 1 1
East Palo Alto 10 3 27 2 7 2 4 2 1 1 49 4
Fremont 4 1 4 1
Los Altos 2 2 2 2
Los Altos Hills 1 1 1 1
Los Gatos 16 2 16 2
Menlo Park 1 1 3 1 3 3 1 1 8 4
Mountain View 2 2 2 2
Newark 1 1 1 1
Palo Alto 4 4 34 9 12 4 16 8 11 4 77 22
Pleasanton 1 1 1 1
Portolla Valley 3 2 3 2
Redwood Shores 3 1 2 1 5 1
San Jose 1 1 1 1
Stanfod 1 1 1 1
Sunnyvale 1 1 1 1
Watsonville 1 1 1 1
Unknown 1 1 3 3 4 4
* C is number of Complaints / H is number of households
Total
Table 4. Palo Alto Airport Noise Complaints by City
Q4 2014 Q1 2015 Q2 2015 Q3 2015 Q4 2015
Table 4 provides a detailed breakdown of complaints by city. Most complaints came from Palo Alto, with
77 complaints logged from 22 households and more than half of those received in the first quarter of
2015. East Palo Alto was the second most impacted city, with 49 from four households. Together the
two cities accounted for 80% of all noise complaints.
The high rate of winter 2015 complaints could be due to the dense air caused by colder weather
amplifying sound levels. Alternately, the third quarter of 2015 was the second highest quarter for
complaints, which may be attributable to households being more open in the warm evening hours of
summer.
While airport staff attempts to collect all information possible, some residents choose to remain anonymous.
The majority of all complaints emanated from the Midtown neighborhood, with 49 logged from four
households (Table 5). Attachment C is the map Palo Alto Airport staff used to identify Palo Alto
neighborhoods. Eighteen of the aircraft associated with Palo Alto city complaints were not associated
with the Palo Alto Airport.
Neighborhood C H C H C H C H C H C H
Baron Park 1 1 1 1
Community Center 2 1 2 1 4 1
Cresent Park 2 1 2 1
Greenmeadow 2 1 1 1 3 1
Leland Maner 1 1 1 1 2 1 4 3
Midtown 1 1 26 3 7 1 7 2 8 2 49 4
Old Palo Alto 1 1 1 1
Palo Verde 3 2 1 1 4 3
St Francis 1 1 2 1 5 3
Ventura 1 1 1 1
Unknown 2 2 1 1 3 3
Table 5. Palo Alto Complaints by Neighborhood
* C is number of Complaints / H is number of households
Q4 2014 Q1 2015 Q2 2015 Q3 2015 Total Q4 2015
Following is a noise contour map for PAO, adopted by the Santa Clara County Airport Land Use
Commission (SCC ALUC) in their 2008 Comprehensive Land Use Plan, reflecting the forecasted noise
contours for Palo Alto Airport in 2022.
SCC ALUC used the Integrated Noise Model which considers airport altitude, mean temperature, runway
configuration, aircraft flight track definition, aircraft departure and approach profiles, aircraft traffic
volume and fleet mix, and flight track utilization by aircraft types. All data is entered into the CNEL
formula to prepare the noise contours for Palo Alto Airport.
Refer to https://www.sccgov.org/sites/dpd/DocsForms/Documents/ALUC_20081119_PAO_CLUP.pdf,
for a more detailed description of how the SCC ALUC prepared this map.
The 65 decibel (db) noise level of the airport extends beyond the airport boundaries, but is only over
Palo Alto Golf Course, Palo Alto Baylands Nature Preserve, and the salt marshes in San Mateo County
and is the threshold at which FAA requires noise mitigation programs.
Attachment A
PAO Noise Contour Map
2022 Forecasted Palo Alto Airport Noise Contour Map
Attachment B
PAO Pilot Handout
Santa Clara County created a Pilot Handout for Palo Alto Airport that described the noise abatement
procedures. When the City of Palo Alto assumed control of the airport, the existing noise abatement
procedures were adopted, with one exception, “pilots must maintain 1500 feet or above across Highway
101” was replaced with “Aircraft are asked to climb to and maintain at least 1500 feet before crossing
Highway 101.” The change is consistent with the voluntary nature of noise abatement procedures as
airports are federally prohibited from instructing pilots how to fly.
Bayside Pattern
Left
270
Right
270
Peninsula Side
Pattern
Left
Dumbarton
Departure
Not to be used
for navigation
Safety First
Be Aware Palo Alto
Airport Lies under SFO
Class B Airspace
Key
Pattern
Noise Abatement Departures
RWY 31
RWY 13
Noise Abatement Procedures
Please fly neighborly and be aware of the surrounding
communities. There are noise sensitive areas to the west
and south of the Airport. Aircraft are asked to climb to and
maintain at least 1500 feet before crossing Highway 101.
Fly over the bay whenever possible.
Please use reduced power setting whenever possible to
reduce noise impacts. Even a reduction in a 200 RPM can
significantly reduce noise.
Safety Always Supersedes Noise Abatement
Palo Alto Airport General Information
Bayside Pattern Alt - 800 feet
Peninsula Side Pattern Alt – 1000 feet MSL
ATCT hours of operation – 0700 – 2100 hrs
ATC / CTA Frequency – 118.600
ATC Ground Frequency – 125.000
Airport Office Phone # – (650) 329-2444
320
Preferred Departures
Runway 31
Left Dumbarton Departure
When departing runway 31 turn right 10 on takeoff and climb over the bay. Fly straight to
Dumbarton Auto Bridge before making a left turn to fly over the peninsula or to the south. Cross
Highway 101 at or above 1500 feet.
Left 270 Departure
After takeoff climb over the bay while making a 270 turn and heading west or south over the
peninsula. Cross Highway 101 at or above 1500 feet.
Runway 13
Right 270 Departure
After takeoff turn right over and climb over the bay while making a 270 turn and heading west
or south over peninsula. Cross Highway 101 at or above 1500 feet.
Palo Alto Airport asks for your
cooperation in reducing the
noise impact of aircraft on the
neighboring communities.
Attachment C
Map of Palo Alto Households
4
38
Note: There were 18 calls from Palo Alto that did not involve aircraft
from the Palo Alto Airport and are not included on this map.
The number in each
circle represents the
number of calls or
emails from a single
household.
MAYOR PATRICK BURT
Cordially Invites You to His
State of the City Address
Wednesday, February 24, 2016
7:00 PM
Mitchell Park Community Center
3700 Middlefield Road
Palo Alto
Reception Immediately Following