Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025-12-09 Policy & Services Committee Summary MinutesPOLICY & SERVICES COMMITTEE SUMMARY MINUTES Page 1 of 18 Regular Meeting December 9, 2025 The Policy & Services Committee of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in Council Chambers and by virtual teleconference at 6:05 p.m. Present In-Person: Lu, Stone, Veenker (Chair) Absent: None Public Comment There were no requests to speak. Action Items 1. Office of the City Auditor Presentation of the Contract Solicitation & Authority Levels Advisory Report City Auditor Kate Murdock delivered a presentation. The City’s procurement rules and regulations outlined in the City’s Municipal Code were last amended in 2016. Since then, the costs of goods and services have increased substantially, resulting in a loss of purchasing power. Updating the City’s procurement procedures will improve purchasing processes, eliminate administrative inefficiencies and better align the City with peer and industry best practices. Compared to Palo Alto’s $85,000 threshold, many peer Cities had higher contract solicitation and signature authority thresholds, and most Cities had updated their procurement policies within the last 5 years. Approximately half of the 15 benchmarked cities had adopted the California Uniform Public Construction Cost Accounting Act (CUPCCAA), which set the formal bidding threshold for construction projects at $220,000 and updated thresholds annually. Fremont, Redwood City and Sunnyvale had exemptions for items that do not benefit from the competitive bidding process, such as IT services, specialized professional services or software renewals. In October of 2025, the Federal Acquisition Regulation raised its $10,000 micro- purchase threshold to $15,000. City Auditor Murdock made the following recommendations: Increase bid and related signature authority levels to reflect cost increases and align with peer agencies. Incorporate an annual CPI adjustment into the code. Consider the pros and cons of adopting CUPCCAA. Expand SUMMARY MINUTES Page 2 of 18 Policy & Services Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 12/09/2025 exemptions in areas where competitive bidding processes were not helpful. Increase p-card thresholds to restore card purchasing power. Incorporate a standard review process to revise procurement procedures on a regular schedule. City Manager Ed Shikada agreed with the recommendations. Staff will proceed with next steps after Committee recommendation and Council approval of the audit. Public Comment: None. Councilmember Stone was in support of the audit findings and recommendations. Councilmember Stone asked if other Cities automatically increased thresholds based on inflation each year or every other year. Councilmember Stone inquired if staff’s next steps included making an adjustment based on inflation or CUPCCA. Councilmember Lu voiced support for the audit. Councilmember Lu wanted to better understand the benefits and tradeoffs of increasing thresholds versus public bids. Councilmember Lu would miss the transparency provided by public bids but acknowledged the benefits of increasing thresholds were more flexibility and efficiency. Councilmember Lu wanted Council to review the results after the first couple years of making the change, for example, how many millions of dollars of spending was expedited. City Auditor Murdock recalled that half of the benchmarked Cities had adopted CUPCCA and 1 City had an annual CPI adjustment. CUPCCA had an annual threshold adjustment set at the State level that City Auditor Murdock believed was based on CPI. City Manager Shikada explained that the recommendation included staff coming back to Council for approval of changes in dollar thresholds. The benefits of informal solicitation were the ability to negotiate as well as reduced administrative burden, process and time versus formal bidding. City Manager Shikada expected staff to regularly report to the Council the informal agreements that had been entered into, which he thought would be semiannually in a batch instead of a memo for every item. Vice Mayor Veenker concurred with her colleagues in happily supporting the audit. Vice Mayor Veenker believed it was appropriate and respectful to allow staff to use their professional discretion and judgment up to a certain threshold. Vice Mayor Veenker requested an example of other Cities’ exemptions for specialized services. Vice Mayor Veenker queried when staff would come back to Council with proposed recommendations. City Manager Shikada reiterated that informal processes opened the ability for staff to negotiate price as opposed to the structured, formal process in which the City was limited to the bid(s) that had been received, making it more difficult for staff to exercise market power. City Manager Shikada thought that some of the specialized services that the City did not use the typical solicitation process included contracts for City attorneys and for personnel investigations. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 3 of 18 Policy & Services Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 12/09/2025 City Attorney Molly Stump stated that for City contracting, often the authority to select was separately regulated from the authority to approve based on amount. Selecting legal services providers was up to the discretion of the City Attorney for all amounts. City Attorney Stump had contract authority up to $85,000; above that amount, Council approval was needed. David Ramberg, Assistant Director of Administrative Services, noted the report mentioned that staff would come back in 2026 with some proposals. MOTION: Councilmember Lu moved, seconded by Councilmember Stone, to recommend the City Council accept the results of the Contract Solicitation & Authority Levels Advisory Report. MOTION PASSED: 3-0 2. Recommend City Council Adoption of a Local Policy to Implement the Foundational Principles of the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) - Ordinance Adoption; CEQA – Not a Project Deputy City Manager Chantal Cotton-Gaines stated this topic was Item 3.4 in the Equity Action Plan and had been through the Human Relations Commission (HRC), Policy & Services Committee (P&S) and City Council. The Council directed staff to write an ordinance. The proposed ordinance captured CEDAW equity principles within the City’s jurisdiction. CEDAW addressed healthcare but was not included in the proposed ordinance because it was not under the City’s authority. Deputy City Manager Cotton-Gaines read the CEDAW principles reflected in the proposed ordinance in Section 2, beginning on Packet Page 35, which included the categories of economic development, housing and homelessness, political and civic engagement, access to services, and climate action and sustainability. Upon recommendation from the Committee this evening, the ordinance would be forwarded to the City Council for approval and staff would keep the ordinance as a foundation for the City’s wellness and belonging work. Public Comment: 1. Steve L. first got involved with CEDAW around 2016/2017, when he was on the HRC. The HRC spent about 7 or 8 months working on it and unanimously recommended CEDAW to the City Council. The Council addressed CEDAW about a year later, after it had been rescheduled 3 or 4 times. Steve L. stated that the quicker the City could move forward with the ordinance, the faster the City could start working on the systemic changes needed within the City’s purview. 2. Since February 2018, Cherrill Spencer had been addressing the Committee and Council about the need for an ordinance based on CEDAW. Ms. Spencer noted this ordinance was shown as uncodified, which made it harder to find and people forget about it. Ms. Spencer pleaded for this to be made a codified ordinance. Santa Clara County and San SUMMARY MINUTES Page 4 of 18 Policy & Services Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 12/09/2025 Francisco’s ordinances based on CEDAW were codified. Ms. Spencer heard staff mention the proposed ordinance was based on Santa Clara County’s ordinance; however, the proposed ordinance was 3 pages compared to the County’s 13-page ordinance that was more specific and addressed vendors. To avoid delaying the ordinance. Ms. Spencer suggested forwarding the ordinance as-is, codifying it and revising it after it had been adopted by the Council. 3. Roberta A. felt that the proposed 3-page ordinance was not very substantive. Roberta A. noted Berkeley and San Francisco’s ordinances were much stronger than the proposed ordinance. Roberta A. wanted the ordinance codified. Codification meant it was permanent and implied that the City took it seriously. Santa Clara County’s ordinance addressed 3 crucial aspects: equal remuneration and benefits for work of equal value; protection of health, safety and working conditions within the County as a workplace and among its vendors, which included supporting efforts to not purchase sweatshop goods and regular inspection of work premises; and protection from all forms of harassment, retaliation, hostile work environments and violent acts in the workplace. Robert A. urged quick modification of the ordinance to include the 3 parts she mentioned from Santa Clara County’s ordinance as well as codification. 4. In support of his mom’s work with NAACP and feminism, Aram James (Zoom) was in support of an ordinance but wanted it expanded to bring the best ordinance forward to Council. Mr. James mentioned the genocide of Palestinians. Mr. James commented on women’s rights as well as the need to have equal wages and more women in politics, especially people of color. 5. Michele Dauber (Zoom), Professor of Law at Stanford Law School, spoke in support of the Committee and Council passing the ordinance but thought the ordinance should be stronger. Ms. Dauber opined that women’s rights were under attack by the Trump Administration and the Supreme Court. Ms. Dauber believed the ordinance section on housing was very important, particularly in addressing gender-based violence and domestic abuse. The proposed ordinance did not mention the mistreatment of women who were survivors of sexual violence in the criminal system as San Jose’s ordinance did, nor did it address workplace sexual harassment or call for an examination of gender equity in all services as Santa Clara County’s ordinance did. Ms. Dauber noted the proposed ordinance did not provide any mechanism for ongoing monitoring, reporting and transparency of how the City was doing. The proposed ordinance did not ensure equal access or address sexual harassment and violence in youth sports and recreation programs, which Ms. Dauber felt was an important oversight in light of national and local issues. 6. Rebecca Eisenberg (Zoom) wanted to incorporate the comments made by Ms. Dauber and the other advocates who spoke in support of the City Council passing an ordinance for women’s equality. Ms. Eisenberg agreed that the ordinance should include provisions of transparency, equal pay and access. Ms. Eisenberg encouraged the SUMMARY MINUTES Page 5 of 18 Policy & Services Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 12/09/2025 Committee to put back some of the provisions that were changed or removed. Ms. Eisenberg did not want to inhibit progress, so she suggested presenting the ordinance to the City Council in its modified and original forms. Ms. Eisenberg was Palo Alto’s elected Water District representative but she spoke entirely in her personal capacity, not on behalf of the Water District. Ms. Eisenberg hoped that everyone would keep these discussions positive and not make personal attacks on other people, especially those that go against ethnicity. Vice Mayor Veenker mentioned she was part of a small team of women who were working to launch a gender equity accelerator aimed at promoting balance in business. Using the link to the City website provided in the staff report, Vice Mayor Veenker saw that 61 percent of City employees were male, 39 percent were female. Vice Mayor Veenker spoke about her personal experience attending law school in the 1980s where the classes were about 50/50 men and women but it did not persist when entering the workforce. Vice Mayor Veenker was the only woman when she was a summer associate in a New York law firm and was the first and only woman partner during her tenure at that law firm once an office was opened here. Vice Mayor Veenker went to another firm with offices all over the world that had a women’s partner group; however, she was the only woman in a room of 40 litigation partners at a meeting in New York. Today, 22 percent of equity partners in law firms were women and only 12 percent were managing partners. Vice Mayor Veenker wanted the Committee to discuss and reach an agreement on adding certain things to the ordinance before making a recommendation to the Council tonight. The ordinance could be further refined when it comes back to Council after reflecting further on some of the public comment. Under the Economic Development portion of the ordinance, Vice Mayor Veenker suggested childcare be listed as a known barrier, include the concept of equal pay and add “with vendors and others” at the end of the sentence after “public contracting.” Vice Mayor Veenker thanked staff for including climate. Vice Mayor Veenker was in Brazil last month at the United Nations Conference on Climate and there was a lot of focus on the impact of climate change on women and girls and how those needs could be addressed. Vice Mayor Veenker asked about codification, whether there were any limitations on implementation or follow-up and why the choice was made to propose an uncodified ordinance. City Attorney Molly Stump said codifying was up to the Council’s discretion. Codifying an ordinance gives it a section number and the City’s code publisher places it within the City’s Municipal Code, making it accessible and searchable on the City’s website. Uncodified ordinances were the law and of equal dignity as codified ordinances but could be more difficult to locate by someone searching through the City website. City Attorney Stump remarked that staff considered codification but brought forward an uncodified ordinance because it was an aspirational and thematic ordinance that did not immediately regulate third-party conduct and it would be built on in the future; however, if Council wanted to codify it, staff could do so. Councilmember Stone inquired if the City’s public outreach and listening sessions on this topic had identified other barriers. Councilmember Stone believed that childcare was one of the SUMMARY MINUTES Page 6 of 18 Policy & Services Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 12/09/2025 most challenging barriers and a huge burden for women in the workplace. Councilmember Stone’s AP government and AP microeconomics classes did deep dives into the wage gap and progress within the business and public sectors. When Councilmember Stone was on the County HRC, there was the opportunity for free childcare for commissioners. Councilmember Stone wanted to know if the City’s pilot childcare program was successful, its ability to maintain young parents in the workforce and if it could be expanded to encourage greater diversity in the commissions and Council. Councilmember Stone had observed a dramatic decrease in his generation having children and felt that no one should have to make that decision based on cost and not being able to live off a single salary if one parent stayed home, especially in this region where there was an affordability crisis. Councilmember Stone focused on housing when on the County HRC and thought housing should be prioritized. The County will face incredible deficits over the next several years and Councilmember Stone worried that may have an impact on the number of available County shelter beds. Councilmember Stone asked what local shelters were available only for women and children and how the City could help address this need instead of relying on local nonprofits or the County, especially in providing support for women experiencing threats. Councilmember Stone was disappointed in the lack of specificity in how this ordinance would achieve its intended goals and agreed with the frustration voiced from some members of the public tonight. Councilmember Stone wondered why the City did not embrace the County’s stronger ordinance and if legal limitations from Proposition 209 Supreme Court cases prohibiting affirmative action and administrative changes of grant conditions were inhibiting the City’s ability to do more. Deputy City Manager Cotton-Gaines viewed the ordinance as foundational principles, so there were not specific areas pointed out. Childcare was identified as an issue of concern among City staff. The pilot childcare program ran in recent years in recognition of the high cost of childcare and the importance of having employees fully focus on their work. Deputy City Manager Cotton-Gaines did not know the details but thought the Heart and Home shelter was specifically for women and families. Deputy City Manager Cotton-Gaines could not speak to the County shelter issues without looking further into it. Staff had heard from the nonprofit community that the congregate shelter environment was not conducive to someone fleeing domestic violence or other situations. The Homekey site was a non-congregate shelter that would provide more flexibility and stability. City Attorney Stump recognized this ordinance was a starting point. In the Committee’s recommendation tonight to recommend that the Council adopt this ordinance, the Committee could include a referral to the HRC to do additional work on effectuating this ordinance and provide recommendations, conditioned upon the ordinance passing the City Council. City Attorney Stump thought codifying made sense because it was important for people to find and access this ordinance online. City Attorney Stump highlighted the following 3 differences between the City and County. (1) The County had additional significant areas of jurisdiction that were not part of the City’s purview, including running the criminal justice system and public health system. In this initial statement of values and direction, staff tried to focus on thematic SUMMARY MINUTES Page 7 of 18 Policy & Services Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 12/09/2025 areas that were most relevant to the City’s work. (2) There were state and federal laws with respect to many of the areas of interest mentioned by commenters and Council Members. The City could have local requirements but it would require navigating those preemptive established laws at the state statutory and constitutional level as well as federal level. (3) Many wonderful ideas raised by commenters and Council Members were resource intensive in staff time and programmatic elements. City Manager Shikada explained that staff had focused on implementation and setting a foundation when developing this ordinance while being mindful of not overcommitting. In addition to administrative complexities, an ordinance that was not crafted appropriately would obligate the City to perform analyses and studies that had not been undertaken, imply ongoing monitoring and reporting systems, and set expectations for process requirements on purchasing, employment decisions and programmatic design. It was within the prerogative of the Committee and the Council to make a referral to the HRC. City Manager Shikada expected the HRC would need analysis, reporting and tracking, so he wanted clear expectations in the referral. Nicholas Raisch, Assistant Director of Human Resources, reiterated some of the points that City Attorney Stump outlined. There were 3 laws (1 federal and 2 at the state level) governing equal pay that required all agencies to not use prior wages in determining future wages. As a government agency, the City had transparency on pay and a structured merit-based approach to how people move through set steps. Equity analysis was done every time someone was placed in a range, which included looking at the demographic data of everybody in that range and whether there were any disparities between level of experience, skills or other bona fide criteria that could differentiate individuals. In March of 2025, the policy against discrimination, harassment and retaliation was updated to reflect everything codified in California’s laws and included more protective statuses than the State had. Inclusive language was used in job descriptions and postings. About 2 years ago, Council adopted the recruitment strategic plan focused on having more inclusive and engaging processes, and that work was continuing and had been very effective. Councilmember Lu mentioned the YWCA facility opened downtown several months ago and could be a significant resource for everyone in the community. Councilmember Lu wanted the Committee to move this forward tonight as a codified ordinance. Councilmember Lu viewed this ordinance as a symbolic reaffirmation that could be taken to the Council priority-setting meeting or direct the HRC to recommend some ideas for next year’s Council priority-setting meeting. Councilmember Lu liked that the ordinance was focused and contained clear bullet points. Councilmember Lu suggested explicitly mentioning childcare and other terminology to make the bullet points punchier but wondered if it would necessitate further legal review. City Attorney Stump outlined the following options to the Committee: Staff could make note of the Committee’s suggestions tonight and go directly to the Council. If the Council directed staff to do more work, staff could do the work and either go back to the Council or come back to this Committee, at the discretion of the Committee. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 8 of 18 Policy & Services Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 12/09/2025 Vice Mayor Veenker emailed the City Clerk a draft resolution that was shown on the screen. Even though an uncodified ordinance had equal dignity, it may not be perceived that way. For something of this import, Vice Mayor Veenker believed this ordinance should have a perception of equal stature and the ability to find it, so she wanted to recommend to Council that it be codified. Councilmember Stone seconded the motion and proposed a friendly amendment to add a referral to the HRC contingent on Council’s adoption of the ordinance. Councilmember Stone felt it was important for the HRC to start engaging in conversations about how this could be further effectuated. Initial conversations did not require a full staff analysis. Then, staff could work with the HRC or come back to P&S if it was a more resource-intensive process. Vice Mayor Veenker accepted Councilmember Stone’s amendment. There were multiple topic areas; therefore, to achieve a more satisfactory process, City Attorney Stump suggested either here or at Council to consider giving guidance to the HRC about what the Council was looking for. For example, request the HRC to provide specific implementable first steps, something comprehensive or to focus on certain areas. City Manager Shikada was concerned about the wording in the motion “and support survivors of sexual and gender-based violence, including with appropriate housing options,” which could be interpreted as providing a new service that did not currently exist to his knowledge. City Manager Shikada suggested the Section D amendment be part of the referral to the HRC to better understand the implications and have the HRC’s recommendations on how it might be best framed rather than adopting it as part of the ordinance at this time. The police provided support at intake but City Manager Shikada wanted to be intentional about the implications for housing options and to have clarity on the expectations of our police department. Deputy City Manager Cotton-Gaines agreed with City Manager Shikada. Deputy City Manager Cotton-Gaines previously spoke in reference to unhoused individuals seeking services through the hotline, which was a particular portion of the larger housing discussion. Vice Mayor Veenker proposed “including with appropriate housing options” because it seemed that the City had been thinking about where and how such individuals might be most appropriately housed to meet the particular special needs of survivors. Vice Mayor Veenker felt that the City should aspire to provide informed, compassionate and appropriate support to these particular residents within the rendering of our services. Vice Mayor Veenker did not want to exclude the entire Section D amendment from the motion. When talking about supporting women and girls and with the unfortunate prevalence that sexual and gender-based violence occurred, Vice Mayor Veenker wanted to name it somewhere appropriately in this ordinance. Vice Mayor Veenker said the HRC could look at it more carefully and identify specific things that were appropriate for the City to do within our purview. City Manager Shikada suggested the part of the sentence referring to appropriate housing options could be referred to the HRC. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 9 of 18 Policy & Services Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 12/09/2025 Vice Mayor Veenker and Councilmember Stone accepted the amendment to remove “including with appropriate housing options” from the motion. Deputy City Manager Cotton-Gaines emphasized there was not a dedicated person tasked to this, so staff would figure it out amid the other priorities that Council had in the tight budget. MOTION: Vice Mayor Veenker moved, seconded by Councilmember Stone, to recommend the City Council adoption of the attached CEDAW Ordinance, and that it be codified with the following amendments: 1. In Section (a) Economic Development a. Add “such as lack of childcare, workplace harassment, and equal pay” after known barriers b. Add “with vendors and others” after public contracting 2. In Section (d) Community, Library and Transportation Services, add at end of Subparagraph 1, “and support survivors of sexual and gender-based violence" 3. A referral to the HRC for consideration of strategies and policies to implement the City’s CEDAW ordinance, contingent upon Council’s adoption of the ordinance. MOTION PASSED: 3-0 Since it was a unanimous vote, the ordinance could go directly to Council on consent. Deputy City Manager Cotton-Gaines wanted clarity on the Committee’s preference. Vice Mayor Veenker preferred to make it an action item because there may be some evolution of thought amongst the Council. Regardless, after 10 years, Vice Mayor Veenker believed it should have a public moment. 3. Discussion and Recommendation to City Council Regarding the 2026 City Council Priority-Setting Process Lupita Alamos, Assistant to the City Manager, said this was a continuation from the November 19 P&S Committee meeting. The staff report reflected some of the Committee’s recommendations for a focus on midlevel goals during the retreat, ad hoc conversations and KPIs, if applicable. City Manager Ed Shikada mentioned a study session was scheduled for January 12 for staff to report the progress of the 2025 objectives, preview the agenda for the retreat on the 24th, and finalize what was being discussed tonight. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 10 of 18 Policy & Services Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 12/09/2025 Public Comment: There were no requests to speak. Councilmember Lu did not have a strong opinion about the priorities. Councilmember Lu thought it was more important to define ambitious objectives that were achievable and realistic. Councilmember Lu had stronger feelings about tiers, having a system to grade ourselves and making sure we always worked on the most important things. Councilmember Lu had experience using priority-ranking systems or tier systems. Councilmember Lu suggested voting on or coalescing a preference to categorize objectives into tiers of cannot fail, must do, nice to have and monitoring. It was important to be very clear about the objectives that cannot fail because they were major accomplishments that had to happen this year or would become issues if not done right. For example, the Cubberley bond was community-defining, time limited, an opportunity for huge success and cannot fail. The must do were top-level, clearly defined priorities with many opportunities, such as S/CAP goals or Housing Element implementation. The nice to have may have been pulled from previous years into future years. The last category included things that the Council would monitor but were not Council objectives. For example, Council’s current objective list included Hamilton Avenue storm drains or preliminary engineering for the transit center, which were milestones in bigger infrastructure plans but not Council objectives. Councilmember Lu stressed the importance of committing most of the effort to the categories of cannot fail and must do. Councilmember Stone liked Councilmember Lu’s suggestion of a tiered approach, which allowed the Council to be intentional and strategic. Councilmember Stone wanted to try the policy passed last year for a 2-year priority cycle. Councilmember Stone was excited about the opportunity to have a more streamlined and beneficial retreat to get work done instead of debating and wordsmithing the language of Council’s priorities. Councilmember Stone hoped the Council could get into the work plan in more depth. Last year, the work plan was not approved until May. Vice Mayor Veenker agreed with her colleagues. Vice Mayor Veenker wanted to keep the same priorities as last year to try the 2-year cycle and she did not see a good reason to change the 4 priorities as they were still appropriate for 2026. Vice Mayor Veenker thanked staff for including the retreat outline draft in the staff report. Vice Mayor Veenker suggested starting with an overview and orientation about the focus because it was different than in years past, to remind everyone that the Council spent a lot of time in prior years to determine those 4 priorities. Then, move on to the discussion of midlevel goals, prioritization and assigning things into the categories Councilmember Lu described. Ms. Alamos, Assistant to the City Manager, said the Q3 update was on the November 3 agenda, which included a table with subheadings and a quarterly update summary listing each objective in more depth. City Manager Shikada noted the distinction between subheadings as opposed to goals. City Manager Shikada welcomed having a more high-level discussion with a specific goal statement within each of the broad priorities. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 11 of 18 Policy & Services Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 12/09/2025 Vice Mayor Veenker suggested sharing the headings and groupings to help her colleagues on the Council formulate and prioritize the goals. After the January 12 update, Council Members could be asked to come to the retreat prepared with their thoughts around the midlevel goals where Council Members would be provided an opportunity to offer their version or turn it in upon arrival so it could be displayed on the screen. Vice Mayor Veenker asked if staff would propose the corresponding objectives. City Manager Shikada said the study session on January 12 was an opportunity for the Committee to share their thoughts on the retreat. City Manager Shikada confirmed that staff would propose the corresponding objectives. As Council had expressed not wanting iterations causing delays until May, staff’s goal was to accomplish as much as possible on the day of the retreat to reduce or eliminate the back and forth or the need to have a lot of staff follow-up. On that day, the Council could identify midlevel goals and staff would voice their thoughts on what might be accomplished during the year. The body of work did not need to come back to Council for approval. Staff could provide an information report to inform the Council how staff planned to proceed. Ms. Alamos, Assistant to the City Manager, suggested the Committee make a motion to recommend the retreat reflect the outline as discussed and that the Council keep last year’s priorities as this was the second year in the cycle. City Manager Shikada invited the Committee to give staff specific direction or recommendation. Alternatively, staff would take the feedback expressed tonight and report back to the full Council as part of the study session on January 12. Vice Mayor Veenker preferred that staff take the feedback expressed tonight and report this to the full Council as part of the study session on January 12. Vice Mayor Veenker liked the retreat outline draft but wanted flexibility. Vice Mayor Veenker did not remember Council approving the retreat agenda previously and did not think it needed Council approval. Ms. Alamos, Assistant to the City Manager, confirmed that staff would come back on the study session to reflect some of the feedback heard from the Committee for full Council review and discussion. City Manager Shikada added that the feedback would be related to the format of the retreat. MOTION: Councilmember Veenker moved, seconded by Councilmember Lu, to recommend the City Council keep the 2025 priorities for 2026, consistent with prior policy. MOTION PASSED: 3-0 4. Review and Recommendation to the City Council on Suggested Changes for the City Council Procedures and Protocols Handbook SUMMARY MINUTES Page 12 of 18 Policy & Services Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 12/09/2025 Deputy City Manager Chantal Cotton-Gaines noted it had been a couple of years since staff brought forward the City Council Procedures and Protocols Handbook. The Committee and Council did a lot of work in 2023 into early 2024 for this comprehensive overhaul. A summary of staff’s suggested changes was on Packet Page 41. The Council consent agenda for December 15 included the Committee’s recommendation to Council to amend the handbook to allow Committee chairs the discretion to call for a January meeting and to change the frequency of handbook review to every other year. Staff suggested updating the handbook based on Senate Bill (SB) 707 to reflect changes in state law regarding teleconferencing. Details on SB 707 were in the agenda packet with the staff report, some initial proposed changes and the timing for making the rest of the needed changes. At Council’s direction, the City Clerk’s Office updated the proclamation language in the draft handbook included in the packet; the proposed redline language was shown in 3.2, Paragraphs B and C. Deputy City Manager Cotton-Gaines summarized the list of changes proposed by Council Members as of December 1 found on Packet Page 103: Mayor Lauing suggested language to clarify a Mayor could serve multiple terms including consecutive terms. Councilmember Burt had suggestions regarding the consent calendar, City Council meeting schedule, referrals to standing committees, clarification on the role of Council liaisons to boards, City event sponsoring policy, staff’s role supporting Council representatives on regional bodies, Council committees, clarifying the process for creating a blue ribbon task force, formalizing the conclusions from Council in study sessions and maybe listing them as action items, provide boards and commissions with training for making motions, and time limits for Council Member comments. Public Comment: There were no requests to speak. The redline language looked good to Councilmember Lu. Councilmember Lu thought that allowing speakers to comment for maybe 1 minute on issues they planned to vote no on or pull from the consent calendar would be useful for the Council to understand the rationale. Vice Mayor Veenker suggested the following revision of consent calendar practices to address items the same night in an efficient manner. A Council Member could speak for 1 minute on why they recommended pulling an item. If the item was pulled with the required 3 votes, Council could have the option to add it as the first item on that evening’s action agenda and allot it 10 minutes. This would allow discussion amongst the Council or staff could make clarifying comments and the item could be resolved and voted on that night. If the item could not be dealt with quickly, then it was necessary to add it to a future agenda. Vice Mayor Veenker had seen this happen in other bodies where a voting member had a question, asked staff for clarity, received the clarity and no longer had an objection, and the item could be approved. Otherwise, the item needed to be added to a future agenda, which may result in staff performing unnecessary work. Public comment was allowed on consent items. Councilmember Stone wondered if a consent item that was pulled and added to the agenda as an action item needed to be open for SUMMARY MINUTES Page 13 of 18 Policy & Services Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 12/09/2025 additional public comment. Councilmember Stone thought Vice Mayor Veenker’s suggestion seemed like a complicated process. Councilmember Stone believed Council Members should seek clarification from staff to avoid having to add an action item. City Attorney Molly Stump answered it was not necessary to do public comment twice as long as the Council’s procedures were clear that there was only one opportunity for public comment. Vice Mayor Veenker’s suggestion was based on the process used many times at the Air District. Vice Mayor Veenker wanted to voice her suggestion to the full Council. Councilmember Stone agreed there were some situations where it made sense to have flexibility to further explore an item, if staff could word the policy in a way that gave the Mayor the discretion to do so. City Manager Ed Shikada said the handbook did not need to be modified to accomplish what Vice Mayor Veenker described; there only needed to be a common expectation. When a consent item was pulled and there were questions that could be easily answered and the Mayor was in concurrence, staff could say “we would be happy to have a brief discussion this evening.” If not, the item would be agendized for another meeting. City Manager Shikada saw no concerns and acknowledged that modifying the handbook was a good way to ensure common understanding of what would be done but he wanted to clarify that modifying the handbook was not a necessary step. Another option was phrasing the question to staff on the Wednesday or Thursday prior to the Monday meeting in a way that communicated any concerns. For example, I am concerned that this item may lead to some unintended consequence, is that true? Vice Mayor Veenker said the key was being ready to communicate in advance on all the consent items in addition to being well prepared on the action items, which was challenging if there were many consent items. If a consent item was pulled, Vice Mayor Veenker wanted to hear a 1-minute comment on the rationale and see if could be resolved quickly. MOTION: Vice Mayor Veenker moved, seconded by Councilmember Lu, to recommend the City Council make staff’s suggested changes for the City Council Procedures and Protocols Handbook, as well as: a. For Procedures Section 3.8: If an item is pulled from consent, hear it as the first action item for brief discussion (limited to 10 minutes) at that meeting if feasible, and continue it to another meeting if it is not resolved within that timeframe. MOTION PASSED: 3-0 This year, Councilmember Stone noticed at times there had been lengthy comments. Councilmember Stone suggested a time limit for City Council Member comments, which he did not have a strong preference for the specific length but between 3 to 5 minutes. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 14 of 18 Policy & Services Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 12/09/2025 MOTION: Councilmember Stone moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Veenker, to recommend the City Council Procedures and Protocols Handbook, in Procedures Section 3.6, limit Council Member comments to 3 minutes per Council Member. MOTION PASSED: 3-0 Councilmember Stone asked if there was a policy related to not taking up new agenda items after 10:30 or 10:00 p.m. and whether it required a Council vote. The Mayor and Vice Mayor no longer received additional compensation because of the adjustment but Councilmember Stone noticed it was in the handbook and wondered if it was worth keeping it in case there was a change in State law. The City Clerk answered the cutoff for new agenda items was 10:30 p.m. City Attorney Stump added that the Council generally did not start discussion of new matters after 10:30 p.m. Before 10:00 p.m., the Council would decide and announce whether it would begin consideration of any agenda item after 10:30 p.m. and if so, which items would be taken up. City Attorney Stump thought the additional compensation for Mayor and Vice Mayor had to be removed from the handbook because it could not lawfully be implemented after Council moved the salary to the maximum allowable; however, City Attorney thought it could be adjusted every year, so staff will research whether enough time had passed that the salary was no longer at the maximum allowable and therefore could be implemented now. Deputy City Manager Cotton-Gaines read Protocol Section 4.1: The Mayor shall receive $150 monthly and the Vice Mayor $100 monthly to defray additional expenses of those offices. Staff will verify the dollar amounts and note whether it should be removed from the handbook. Vice Mayor Veenker recalled a conversation about creating a committee or task force of citizens to consider recommending further compensation. City Manager Shikada stated that staff emailed a request a couple of times about 2 years ago for each Council Member to identify a member for that committee to be established but there were no nominations. Councilmember Stone had no recollection about the discussion on additional compensation for the Mayor and Vice Mayor and suggested revisiting it in 2026. Vice Mayor Veenker suggested addressing it at the retreat and talk about how to find someone to nominate. There had been a Council referral for discussion on the creation of an advisory committee regarding Council compensation, which led to a Committee conversation and the follow-up was the request that City Manager Shikada referenced. If it is of interest to the Committee, Deputy City Manager Cotton-Gaines suggested the Committee could bring up the topic of compensation in the next agenda item related to Council referrals. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 15 of 18 Policy & Services Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 12/09/2025 Vice Mayor Veenker knew it was usually clarified whether someone needed to be a City resident but was curious if there was an issue regarding a requirement for U.S. citizenship to be a member of a City board or commission. City Attorney Stump said that staff could research this but she assumed it was lawful for the Council to appoint folks to advisory bodies who were permanent residents or had other lawful non-citizenship status. It would be a policy question for Council whether there was interest in addressing this topic. City Attorney Stump knew there had been policy choices made by Council to allow some non-Palo Alto residents to serve on at least 1 highly specialized board, possibly the HRB or ARB, and it was specified in the code. Regarding staff’s role in supporting City Council representatives on regional bodies, Vice Mayor Veenker felt well supported. It was a judgment call on the nature and volume of staff support, depending on other responsibilities, the relationship to City business, the particular need and other factors, so Vice Mayor Veenker did not think it was necessary to add more detail to the manual. Vice Mayor Veenker appreciated the Clerk’s Office for their efforts in supporting remote meetings, for example, the NCPA. Vice Mayor Veenker did not need this put into the manual but she wanted thoughts on best practices with respect to the role of staff liaison to City Council committees and the development of agendas in collaboration with the committee chairs. Council Members might hear more about the views of the community than staff as well as political and other factors, so Vice Mayor Veenker desired a healthy conversation in the agenda-setting process. Vice Mayor Veenker thanked Deputy City Manager Cotton-Gaines for spending a lot of time on the phone discussing P&S agendas. Balancing all the factors and talking through it together was informative and resulted in smarter agendas. City Manager Shikada stated the goal was for the staff liaison to the committees to develop agendas in collaboration with the chair. There could be debates over the scope of the committee that come up as part of that process. Councilmember Lu asked if the red, yellow and green buttons could be used to vote quickly and easily without going through roll call, saving time and momentum, or could votes be done by voice or raise of hands. City Attorney Stump explained it was a legal issue during the pandemic to require a voice vote when members participated remotely, which she believed was the current rule but would need to verify. City Attorney Stump did not know if the buttons could be used to vote if everyone was present in person. Staff did not know if the requirement for a voice vote had been updated since COVID but did not believe the buttons worked. Staff was exploring a meeting management system that might include a feature for electronic voting. Within the next few months, the implementation of the meeting management system will be rolled out. Staff will check if there was a requirement to read the vote, especially if someone was remote. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 16 of 18 Policy & Services Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 12/09/2025 Vice Mayor Veenker noted that the order of voice voting could result in a cliffhanger and she wondered if that could lead someone to change their vote. City Attorney Stump said the procedures and protocols discouraged abstention but allowed for it, which was recorded in the minutes as an abstention but it functioned as a vote with the majority. To avoid contributing to what some might characterize as gamesmanship, the Council could make a rule about allowing people to pass. There was a rule on reconsideration of a vote. City Attorney Stump believed the rule provided that a Council Member could change their vote at any time before the next item was called but she would have to verify. Deputy City Manager Cotton-Gaines mentioned that staff would summarize the items that the Committee was recommending for the Council and share the other items that were not pushed forward. Typically, that discussion was brought to the Council early in the year. Vice Mayor Veenker commended her colleagues and staff on their work this year. Deputy City Manager Cotton-Gaines said the Committee’s meeting was on the calendar for January 14, assuming the Committee’s recommendation was passed by the Council on consent this upcoming Monday to give the chair of an existing committee the discretion to have a January meeting. 5. Report Out on Status of Policy & Services Committee Referrals; CEQA – Not a Project Deputy City Manager Chantal Cotton-Gaines summarized the referral items that had come to this Committee from Council over the last couple years. Outside of what was included in the memo, the Committee had done a lot of work on items that were Council priority objectives. Packet Page 98 listed the referrals completed in calendar years 2024 and 2025. Deputy City Manager Cotton-Gaines pointed out Item 7 on the completed list was discussion of the creation of an advisory committee regarding Council compensation. The pending referrals for this Committee were on Packet Page 97. Staff planned to bring the seismic ordinance update to this Committee in early 2026, likely February or March. This Committee had expressed interest in changing how referrals get to committees and requested additional staff analysis on the Council Member referral process; staff anticipated bringing that item back to the Committee in early 2026. Deputy City Manager Cotton-Gaines flagged 2 older referrals to see if the Committee desired to keep them on the work plan going forward: a referral on joint City Council and board/commission member meetings and a referral to support neighborhood programs. The Mayor and Vice Mayor have met with board and commission chairs over the last years. There were some work plan discussions at Council in the last year. The Committee was asked to review and make recommendations for initiatives to support and strengthen neighborhood programs. Since then, the Council had a priority focused on health, community, safety, wellness and belonging. Town Hall programs were held over the last year. There had been increased SUMMARY MINUTES Page 17 of 18 Policy & Services Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 12/09/2025 funding for Know your Neighbors grants. Staff wanted clarification from the Committee whether the efforts that were taking place had met the intent of those 2 referral items and therefore could be marked as completed or if there was anything else the Committee wanted to further explore. Vice Mayor Veenker said Item 7 had not been done. Deputy City Manager Cotton-Gaines explained Item 7 was marked as completed because the Committee had discussion and staff did as many follow-up steps as possible to create an advisory committee regarding Council compensation but there was no further action on it. If there was Committee interest, Item 7 could be put on the pending list and included on this Committee’s work plan for next year. Councilmember Stone wanted a more formalized process for Youth Council to participate and have at least an annual joint meeting. Mayor and Vice Mayor meetings with board and commission chairs and vice chairs have been effective and a good way to share concerns. Councilmember Stone did not think that joint City Council and board/commission member meetings needed to be a referral that came back to P&S but he was not against it. The referral to support neighborhood programs did not need to continue because Councilmember Stone felt that staff had been doing a great job and wanted them to continue what they were doing. Councilmember Lu liked the idea of meeting with the PTC and HRC. Councilmember Lu wanted to hear ideas, thoughts and priorities and share the Council’s priorities; however, a full joint meeting between Council and PTC as well as Council and HRC in addition to the Council’s normal schedule was too much. Work plans were pulled off consent recently and that provided an opportunity to have a one-way conversation within Council. City Manager Ed Shikada expected at least the Chair but the Vice Chair and any other chosen representative would be invited to participate in a discussion about work plans. Staff said the ARB, HRB, PTC and UAC were scheduled tentatively for February 2. Other Commissions were tentatively scheduled for March. Vice Mayor Veenker believed that joint meetings needed to come to P&S and did not need to take a long time. Vice Mayor Veenker thought the board and commission chairs came once to P&S. This year, the Mayor and Vice Mayor Veenker sat down with the board and commission chairs. Vice Mayor Veenker agreed with giving the Youth Commission an audience either with this Committee or the full Council. Vice Mayor Veenker said the nature of the referral on neighborhood programs was fulfilled. Vice Mayor Veenker wanted to bring back Item 7 and suggested that staff could reach out to former Council Members to see who was interested in serving on an advisory committee on Council compensation. Deputy City Manager Cotton-Gaines will use tonight’s feedback to create the draft for next year, which would include the couple remaining referral items left over from this year. SUMMARY MINUTES Page 18 of 18 Policy & Services Committee Meeting Summary Minutes: 12/09/2025 NO ACTION Future Meetings and Agendas Deputy City Manager Chantal Cotton-Gaines announced 2 items for the January meeting, a follow-up on the nonprofit work plan and the audit on Utilities reserves. Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 8:53 p.m.