HomeMy WebLinkAbout2026-06-15 City Council Summary MinutesCITY COUNCIL
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 1 of 32
Regular Meeting
June 15, 2026
The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Council Chambers and by virtual
teleconference at 5:30 p.m.
Present In Person: Burt, Lauing, Lu, Lythcott-Haims, Reckdahl, Stone, Veenker
Present Remotely: None
Absent: None
Special Orders of the Day
1. Proclamation Expressing Appreciation to Bill Gutoff Upon His Retirement
Councilmember Lauing read a proclamation expressing appreciation to Bill Gutoff upon his
retirement. Mayor Veenker thanked Mr. Gutoff for his contributions to the community and Mr.
Gutoff expressed appreciation to Junior Museum staff and supporters.
NO ACTION
Agenda Changes, Additions and Deletions
City Manager Ed Shikada announced that Item 18 was removed from the agenda to allow for
minor corrections and that Item 23 regarding SB 79 was revised to separately identify the 3
related actions.
Public Comment
1. Charlotte L., co-president of the Teen Arts Council (TAC) and a student at Palo Alto High
School, thanked the City for supporting the organization's programs and described its
mission of providing free arts events for teens. The commenter outlined the council's
role in planning and operating events for local youth and noted that a City grant helped
support programming that served more than 350 teens during the 2025-2026 school
year. The commenter requested use of the new Bryant Street Teen Center and
summarized the events held during the school year.
2. Mateo M., graphic designer for the TAC and a Los Altos High School student, discussed
the organization's origins and emphasized the importance of providing supportive,
inclusive spaces for teen mental health and well-being. The commenter described TAC's
goals of offering free arts programming, fostering a noncompetitive community, and
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 2 of 32
City Council Meeting
Summary Minutes: 06/15/2026
creating accessible leadership opportunities for youth. A dedicated space for teens was
requested.
3. Amanda A. of the TAC requested use of the Bryant Street Teen Center for the 2026-2027
school year, citing the organization's experience providing arts programming for teens.
The commenter stated that a dedicated teen space would better support meetings and
events than the group's current shared facility and noted the TAC's involvement in
creating the center's first mural. The commenter requested extended operating hours,
transportation assistance from local high schools, and continued funding to support
programming and initiatives.
4. Melissa D., speaking on behalf of Linda B., Jim K., Mike S., Helen C., Emily B., and Gabi K.
and representing Indivisible Palo Alto Plus and SOS Palo Alto, expressed concerns
regarding the City's use of Flock ALPR cameras, citing potential impacts on civil liberties,
privacy, and immigration enforcement. A request was made to cover the cameras while
Council evaluates the program, noting that other jurisdictions have paused or
terminated Flock contracts. Additional requests included engaging community members
in defining the scope of the planned audit, incorporating community-proposed audit
parameters, and assisting with public outreach regarding a community forum. The
commenter further stated that more than 1,000 members of the Stanford community,
including more than 100 faculty members, had signed a petition calling for removal of
the cameras.
5. Linda F., speaking on behalf of Tim M., Austin M., Siobhan S., Matt S., David W., and
Justin G., expressed concerns regarding the City's use of Flock ALPR cameras and the
potential for surveillance technologies to be used for immigration enforcement and
other purposes beyond their original intent. The commenter emphasized the
importance of community trust, stating that public safety should be addressed through
broader community discussion rather than reliance on surveillance technology.
Additional concerns included future expansion of camera capabilities, data sharing, and
data security risks. A request was made to discontinue use of the cameras.
6. Luis R., an East Palo Alto community organizer, expressed concerns that data collected
through the City's Flock ALPR cameras could be shared with federal and out-of-state law
enforcement agencies, potentially affecting East Palo Alto residents. The City was urged
to protect East Palo Alto residents by terminating its contract with Flock and consider
concerns raised by community members regarding the program.
7. Sven T. thanked the City for its induction stove rebate program and for emphasizing
health benefits in its public messaging. The commenter encouraged stronger public
education regarding the potential health impacts of natural gas stoves and referenced
tobacco warning campaigns in other countries as an example.
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 3 of 32
City Council Meeting
Summary Minutes: 06/15/2026
8. Valen V., a student at Los Altos High School, urged the Council to redesign the Buena
Vista Mobile Home Park utility upgrade as a fully electric project. The commenter cited
health concerns associated with gas appliances, including childhood asthma and
respiratory disease, and argued that installing new gas infrastructure is inconsistent with
California's long-term carbon neutrality goals and planned transition away from natural
gas.
9. Peter R., a Palo Alto High School student and Eagle Scout, urged the Council to pursue
full electrification at Buena Vista Mobile Home Park rather than a dual gas and electric
utility system. The commenter emphasized the importance of considering the long-term
impacts of environmental decisions on younger generations and argued that an all-
electric approach would better serve the community's future.
10. Xenia H., representing the San Francisquito Creek Neighborhood Group, thanked the
City for advancing the Newell Bridge replacement and Hamilton storm drain projects.
Concern was expressed regarding flood risks associated with a forecasted strong El Niño
season and the Valley Water Board's scheduled July 14 consideration of changes to its
commitment to Reach 2 flood protection. The commenter stated that a viable path to
achieving 70-year flood protection has been identified and urged the City to encourage
Valley Water to maintain its commitment to the project.
11. Seamus A. expressed concerns regarding the City's use of Flock ALPR cameras, citing the
potential for misuse of collected data, broad data-sharing capabilities, and warrantless
location tracking. The commenter argued that the technology raises significant privacy
and civil liberties concerns.
12. Justine B., Executive Director of the Palo Alto Transportation Management Association,
urged the Council to continue allowing bicycles on California Avenue. It was observed
that the corridor serves as an important route for students and commuters traveling to
nearby schools, Caltrain, and employment centers. The commenter suggested managing
bicycle speeds through measures such as speed limits rather than prohibiting bicycle
access and expressed concerns regarding alternative bicycle routes such as Cambridge
Avenue.
Council Member Questions, Comments and Announcements
Mayor Veenker announced that Northern California Power Agency (NCPA) had selected Tony
Zimmer as its new General Manager following a nationwide search and noted his potential visit
to Palo Alto in the coming months. Mayor Veenker further reported that the City had endorsed
a global data center pact being launched by C40 Cities during London Climate Week and stated
that the initiative promotes sustainable, high-performing urban data centers with an emphasis
on equity, sustainability, and local benefits.
Action Items
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 4 of 32
City Council Meeting
Summary Minutes: 06/15/2026
2. PUBLIC HEARING & PROPOSITION 218 HEARING: Finance Committee Recommends
Adoption of Seven Resolutions: 1) Approving the Fiscal Year 2027 Water Utility Financial
Forecast, Reserve Management Practices and Reserve Transfer, and Amending Water
Rate Schedules W-1, W-2, W-3, W-4, and W-7; 2) Approving the Fiscal Year 2027
Wastewater Collection Utility Financial Forecast and Reserve Management Practices,
and Amending Wastewater Collection Rate Schedules S-1, S-2, S-6 and S-7; 3) Amending
Refuse Utility Rate Schedules R-1 and R-C; 4) Approving the Fiscal Year 2027 Electric
Utility Financial Forecast and Reserve Transfer, Amending the Electric Reserve
Management Practices and Electric Rate Schedules E-1, E-1 TOU, E-2, E-2-G, E-4, E-4-G,
E-4 TOU, E-7, E-7-G, E-7 TOU, E-14, E-16, E-EEC-1, and E-NSE-1, and Directing the Use of
Up To $225,000 in Renewable Energy Certificate Exchange Net Revenues in Fiscal Year
2027 to Reduce Electric Customers’ Photovoltaic Generation and Energy Storage System
Installation Costs; 5) Approving the Fiscal Year 2027 Gas Utility Financial Forecast,
Reserve Transfer, and General Fund Transfer, and Amending the Reserve Management
Practices and Gas Rate Schedules G-1, G-2, and G-3; 6) Amending Utility Rate Schedules
EDF-1, and EDF-2; 7) Amending Storm Water Utility Rate Schedule D-1; CEQA Status: Not
a project under CEQA Guidelines Sections 15378(b)(4) and (5) and Exempt Under
Section 15273(a)
Note: Resolutions are included in the packet as Attachments A – G, Attachment H reflects the
Table of URLs for the Exhibits to Attachments A – G.
Mayor Veenker outlined the hearing process for the proposed utility rates and financial
forecasts. It was noted that Proposition 218 hearings would be conducted for the proposed
water, wastewater collection, and refuse rate changes before Council considered the remaining
utility rate and financial forecast actions.
Utilities Director Alan Kurotori introduced Assistant Director of Resource Management Lisa Bilir,
noting that the presentation would address utility affordability programs, including proposed
expansion of residential discounts and eligibility.
Assistant Director of Resource Management Lisa Bilir reviewed the purpose of the City's utility
systems, ongoing infrastructure investments, electrification efforts, and utility financial
management. Recently expanded affordability programs were highlighted, including broader
eligibility for utility bill discounts, increased electric bill assistance for income-qualified
customers, continued gas bill discounts, water bill assistance, home weatherization services,
efficiency programs, rebates, advanced metering infrastructure (AMI), and leak detection tools
designed to help customers reduce utility costs. Proposed water, wastewater collection, and
refuse rate increases were summarized and the Finance Committee's unanimous
recommendation for approval was noted. Water rate increases were attributed to wholesale
water cost increases from the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC) and local
investments in aging water infrastructure, main replacements, and seismic upgrades.
Wastewater collection rate increases were described as necessary to address deferred capital
projects, replace aging sewer infrastructure, upgrade collection facilities, and fund Palo Alto's
share of Regional Water Quality Control Plant (RWQCP) improvements. Refuse rate increases
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 5 of 32
City Council Meeting
Summary Minutes: 06/15/2026
were attributed to higher collection, processing, contract, and regulatory compliance costs.
Assistant Director Bilir reported that the combined impact of the proposed utility rate increases
on the average residential utility bill would be approximately 8 percent, or $35.20 per month,
and concluded by presenting the recommendation to approve the proposed financial forecasts
and rate schedules for the water, wastewater collection, and refuse utilities.
City Attorney Christopher Jensen reviewed the Proposition 218 hearing procedures applicable
to the proposed water, wastewater collection, and refuse rate increases. City Attorney Jensen
explained the protest process, noted that written protests would be accepted until the close of
public input, and stated that the proposed rate increases could not be imposed if a majority
protest were received for any utility.
Public Comment: None.
Mayor Veenker closed the public hearing on the proposed water, wastewater collection, and
refuse rates and directed staff to tabulate written protests. City Clerk Mahealani Ah Yun
reported that 7 written protests had been received regarding the proposed water rate increase.
Mayor Veenker determined that the number of protests did not constitute a majority protest
under Proposition 218 and announced that Council could proceed with consideration of the
proposed water rates and financial forecast.
Vice Mayor Stone asked about the extent to which the proposed water rate increase was driven
by wholesale water cost increases from the SFPUC. Director Kurotori and Assistant Director Bilir
explained that approximately half of the proposed increase is attributable to the 7.4 percent
increase in SFPUC wholesale water costs, with the remainder associated with the City's water
distribution system costs and infrastructure investments.
Councilmember Reckdahl inquired about the depletion of wastewater utility reserves shown in
the financial forecast. Assistant Director Bilir explained that reserves were reduced due to an
accelerated sewer main replacement project, higher-than-projected utility costs, and lower-
than-projected revenues, including impacts associated with the COVID-19 pandemic. It was
indicated that some of those factors were not anticipated when the forecasts were developed.
Councilmember Reckdahl asked about the tradeoffs between rate increases and debt financing
for wastewater utility capital needs and inquired about the relative contribution of treatment
plant costs and sewer main replacement projects to the proposed rate increase. Director
Kurotori explained that wastewater rates are being driven by investments in the RWQCP, debt
service obligations, increased operating costs, reserve replenishment, and the need to proceed
with deferred sewer main replacement projects. Assistant Director Bilir stated that debt
financing is generally more appropriate for one-time capital projects than for recurring
infrastructure replacement needs and indicated that treatment costs and reserve
replenishment are the primary drivers of the current increase. Councilmember Reckdahl asked
whether reserve levels had been sufficient in prior years. Director Kurotori stated that reserves
were significantly affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, inflationary pressures, and major
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 6 of 32
City Council Meeting
Summary Minutes: 06/15/2026
infrastructure investments and noted that reserve policies and future capital investment needs
would be evaluated through upcoming UAC workplan discussions and future Council
consideration.
MOTION: Councilmember Lauing moved, seconded by Councilmember Burt, to adopt the
Water Utility Resolution (Attachment A):
a. Approving the FY 2027 Water Utility Financial Forecast and Reserves Management
Practices; and
b. Approving the transfer of up to $5.5 million from the Operations Reserve to the CIP
Reserve in FY 2026; and
c. Amending the Water Utility Rate Schedules effective July 1, 2026 (FY 2027):
i. W-1 (General Residential Water service),
ii. W-2 (Water Service from Fire Hydrants),
iii. W-3 (Fire Service Connections),
iv. W-4 (Residential Master-Metered and General Non-Residential Water
Service), and
v. W-7 (Non-Residential Irrigation Water Service).
MOTION PASSED: 7-0
City Clerk Ah Yun reported that 7 written protests had been received regarding the proposed
wastewater collection rate increase. Mayor Veenker determined that the protests did not
exceed 50 percent of affected customers and therefore did not constitute a majority protest
under Proposition 218. Council then proceeded with consideration of the proposed wastewater
collection financial forecast and rate increase.
MOTION: Councilmember Lauing moved, seconded by Councilmember Lu, to adopt the
Wastewater Collection Utility Resolution (Attachment B):
a. Approving the Fiscal Year (FY) 2027 Wastewater Collection Utility Financial Forecast
and Reserves Management Practices; and
b. Amending the Wastewater Collection Utility Rate Schedules effective July 1, 2026 (FY
2027):
i. S-1 (Residential Wastewater Collection and Disposal),
ii. S-2 (Commercial Wastewater Collection and Disposal),
iii. S-6 (Restaurant Wastewater Collection and Disposal), and
iv. S-7 (Commercial Wastewater Collection and Disposal – Industrial Discharger).
MOTION PASSED: 7-0
City Clerk Ah Yun reported that 4 written protests had been received regarding the proposed
refuse rate increase. Mayor Veenker determined that the protests did not exceed 50 percent of
affected customers and therefore did not constitute a majority protest under Proposition 218.
Council then proceeded with consideration of the proposed refuse financial forecast and rate
increase.
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 7 of 32
City Council Meeting
Summary Minutes: 06/15/2026
MOTION: Councilmember Burt moved, seconded by Councilmember Lu, to adopt the Refuse
Resolution (Attachment C):
a. Amending the Refuse Rate Schedules effective July 1, 2026 (FY 2027):
i. R-1 (Domestic Refuse Collection), and
ii. R-C (Commercial Refuse Collection).
MOTION PASSED: 7-0
Mayor Veenker concluded the Proposition 218 proceedings and outlined the process for
consideration of the proposed electric, gas, fiber, and stormwater management rates and
financial forecasts, including a staff presentation, public comment, Council discussion, and
action.
Assistant Director Bilir summarized the proposed electric, gas, fiber, and stormwater utility rate
actions. A 4.5 percent electric rate increase was recommended and unanimously supported by
the Finance Committee. Electric utility costs were attributed to grid modernization investments,
an anticipated $85M bond issuance, reliability and resiliency improvements, electrification-
related capacity upgrades, increasing renewable energy requirements, and rising power supply
costs. Assistant Director Bilir noted a proposed $225,000 local decarbonization rebate program
to reduce building permit fees for photovoltaic generation and energy storage systems, funded
with non-rate revenues. A 9 percent gas rate increase was recommended following review by
the UAC and Finance Committee. Staff reported that reserves were not available to offset the
increase and noted that the Finance Committee discussed, but did not recommend, extending
recovery of the gas price spike mitigation reserve to reduce near-term customer impacts.
Assistant Director Bilir stated that the fiber proposal includes a 3 percent inflationary increase
affecting a limited number of legacy dark fiber customers and certain engineering fees. The
stormwater management proposal includes a 3 percent inflationary increase authorized under
the 2017 voter-approved funding measure for storm drain capital improvement projects.
Public Comment: None.
Councilmember Reckdahl asked whether the electric utility's "when-and-where" infrastructure
investment strategy affects system reliability and inquired about the projected 14 percent
increase in electric consumption identified in the staff report. Director Kurotori explained that
the strategy focuses distribution system upgrades in areas experiencing electrification and load
growth, allowing the utility to meet demand while managing costs. Aging transformers, poles,
and substations are being replaced or upgraded as needed. The current pace of capital
investment was described as appropriately balancing reliability, resiliency, projected load
growth, and long-term bonding costs. Director Kurotori further explained that the projected
increase in electric demand is primarily driven by growth in commercial electricity use from
technology businesses with on-site computing needs rather than residential electrification.
Councilmember Reckdahl asked about the drivers of the proposed gas distribution rate
increase. Assistant Director Bilir explained that the increase is associated with gas main
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 8 of 32
City Council Meeting
Summary Minutes: 06/15/2026
replacement projects and lower projected gas sales resulting from recent mild winter weather.
Director Kurotori noted that the City received a $16.5M federal grant to support gas main
replacement work. Assistant Director Bilir stated that electrification may be contributing to
reduced gas demand, although weather-related variations currently have a greater impact on
annual consumption levels. Councilmember Reckdahl expressed support for the City's AMI
program and its potential to improve future analysis.
Mayor Veenker asked whether proposed allocations of cap-and-invest revenues were affected
by recent actions of the California Air Resources Board (CARB) that are expected to increase
future Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF) revenues. Assistant Director Bilir explained that
the proposed reserve allocation is based on existing City policy and is not related to the recent
State action. Director Kurotori stated that the utility expects increased cap-and-invest revenues
as a result of the CARB decision and noted that those funds may be used for eligible customer
programs, including energy efficiency, renewable energy, and S/CAP initiatives. Assistant
Director Bilir added that staff will return to Council during FY 2027 with an update on the
carbon-neutral plan and Renewable Energy Certificate exchange revenues, providing an
opportunity to evaluate future use of those funds. Mayor Veenker indicated that the
anticipated increase in revenues may warrant future policy discussion.
MOTION: Councilmember Reckdahl moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Stone, to approve:
1. The Electric Utility Resolution (Attachment D):
a. Approving the FY 2027 Electric Utility Financial Forecast, and Amending the
Electric Utility Reserves Management Practices; and
b. Approving the transfer of up to $5 million from the Electric Utility Distribution
Operations Reserve to the Electric Utility Capital Reserve in FY 2026; and
c. Amending the Electric Utility Rate Schedules effective July 1, 2026 (FY 2027):
i. E-1 (Residential Electric Service),
ii. E-1 TOU (Residential Time of Use Electric Service)
iii. E-2 (Small Non-Residential Electric Service),
iv. E-2-G (Residential Master-Metered and Small Non-Residential Green
Power Electric Service,
v. E-4 (Medium Non-Residential Electric Service),
vi. E-4-G (Medium Non-Residential Green Power Electric Service),
vii. E-4 TOU (Medium Non-Residential Time of Use Electric Service),
viii. E-7 (Large Non-Residential Electric Service),
ix. E-7-G (Large Non-Residential Green Power Electric Service),
x. E-7 TOU (Large Non-Residential Time of Use Electric Service),
xi. E-14 (Street Lights),
xii. E-16 (Unmetered Electric Service),
xiii. E-EEC-1 (Export Electricity Compensation),
xiv. E-NSE-1 (Net Surplus Electricity Compensation); and
d. Directing the Use of Up To $225,000 in Renewable Energy Certificate Exchange
Net Revenues in Fiscal Year 2027 to Reduce Electric Customers’
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 9 of 32
City Council Meeting
Summary Minutes: 06/15/2026
Photovoltaic Generation and Energy Storage System Installation Costs, as local
decarbonization efforts, via:
i. Changing the funding mechanism for the Cap-and-Invest Reserve to allocate
up to $225,000 less in Cap-and-Invest auction revenues in FY 2027 to the
City’s Cap-and-Invest Reserve and instead allocate these funds for other local
decarbonization efforts; and, as a related matter:
1. Directing staff to review existing HVAC incentive levels including
consideration of financial offsets to lower the cost of related work
including panel upgrades, electric utility service upgrades, or the cost
of building permit fees; and
2. Directing staff to return to City Council within FY 2027 to review the
Electric Supply Portfolio Carbon Neutral Plan and use of revenues
derived from the REC Exchange program.
2. The Gas Utility Resolution (Attachment E):
a. Approving the FY 2027 Gas Utility Financial Forecast, and Amending the Gas Utility
Reserves Management Practices; and
b. Approving the transfer of up to $1.5 million from the Gas Utility Operations Reserve
to the Distribution Rate Stabilization Reserve in FY 2026; and
c. Transferring up to 18% of gas utility gross revenues received during FY 2025 to the
General Fund in FY 2027; and
d. Amending the Gas Utility Rate Schedules effective July 1, 2026 (FY 2027):
i. G-1 Residential Gas Service,
ii. G-2 Residential Master-Metered and Commercial Gas Service, and
iii. G-3 Large Commercial Gas Service; and
3. The Fiber Optics Utility Resolution (Attachment F):
a. Amending the Dark Fiber Optic Utility Rate Schedules, consistent with the
applicable Consumer Price Index, effective July 1, 2026 (FY 2027):
i. EDF-1 (Dark Fiber Licensing Services), and
ii. EDF-2 (Dark Fiber Service Connection Fees); and
4. The Storm Water Management Resolution (Attachment G):
a. Amending the Storm Water Management Fee Rate Schedule, consistent with the
applicable Consumer Price Index, D-1 effective July 1, 2026 (FY 2027):
i. D-1 (General Storm and Surface Water Drainage)
MOTION PASSED: 7-0
3. PUBLIC HEARING: Adoption of an Ordinance Adopting the Operating and Capital
Budgets, Revised Table of Organization, and Municipal Fee Schedule for Fiscal Year
2027; Adoption of a Resolution Proposing the Appropriations Limit for Fiscal Year 2027 -
State Law/ City Charter; Accept the Bi-Annual Actuarial Valuation Report of Palo Alto's
Retiree Healthcare and Other Post-Employment Benefits (OPEB) as of June 30, 2025 and
Approve Annual Actuarially Determined Contribution for Fiscal Years 2027 and 2028;
Authorize the City Manager or their Designee to Negotiate and Execute a Memorandum
of Understanding and Funding Agreement (or Lease Agreement Amendment) with the
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 10 of 32
City Council Meeting
Summary Minutes: 06/15/2026
Palo Alto Museum to Provide Cost Sharing for Repairs to the Basement and
Waterproofing in the Roth Building and Improvements to Heritage Park Drainage
Mayor Veenker outlined the hearing process for consideration of the FY 2027 budget and
related actions. It was explained that, due to conflict-of-interest requirements under the
California Political Reform Act, Councilmember Lu, City Manager Ed Shikada, and Mayor
Veenker would recuse themselves from discussion and voting on certain Stanford-related
budget items before rejoining the meeting for consideration of the remaining budget actions.
Chief Financial Officer Lauren Lai reviewed the FY 2027 budget development process and
presented slides summarizing the proposed operating and capital budgets. The FY 2027 General
Fund budget totals approximately $312M, the citywide budget totals approximately $1B, the FY
2027 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) budget totals $316.8M, and the 5-year CIP totals
approximately $1.2B. A slide was presented showing projected General Fund Budget
Stabilization Reserve (BSR) levels of $53.7M, or 17.2 percent of expenditures, and a net
reduction of 21.25 positions citywide to address the structural deficit. A slide was presented
summarizing the Finance Committee's budget recommendations and final balancing actions.
CFO Lai reported that technical revenue adjustments allowed the budget to be rebalanced
while preserving core services and capital investments. CFO Lai highlighted a proposed
Assistant Engineer position in the Office of Transportation (OOT) supported in part by OSV
program funding and noted that the recommendations include approximately $939,000 in
additional General Fund appropriations offset through new revenues, Measure K funding, and
reduced capital transfers. CFO Lai stated that favorable sales tax adjustments could increase the
BSR to approximately $55.7M, approaching the City's 18.5 percent reserve target.
A slide was presented showing the City's long-range financial forecast (LRFF). CFO Lai reported
that a projected $17M FY 2027 General Fund deficit had been eliminated through primarily
ongoing solutions and that projected deficits of approximately $1.7M in FY 2028 and $3.2M in
FY 2029 remain manageable. CFO Lai noted that future projections assume continued cost-
sharing partnerships with the PAUSD and incorporate the actuarially determined retiree
healthcare funding requirements. CFO Lai reviewed the utility rate actions approved under Item
2 and presented a slide showing projected residential monthly utility bill impacts. Additional
actions recommended for approval included the FY 2027 CIP budget, 5-year CIP plan, revised
Table of Organization, Municipal Fee Schedule, appropriations limit, retiree healthcare funding
requirements, and authorization for the City Manager to negotiate and execute agreements
with the Palo Alto Museum regarding Roth Building repairs and Heritage Park drainage
improvements. CFO Lai noted that a letter supporting the CIP plan had been received from the
PTC and concluded by reviewing the proposed motion for budget adoption.
Councilmember Lu asked about the projected $2M favorable sales tax adjustment, whether it
had been incorporated into the budget assumptions and whether it represented a one-time or
ongoing revenue change. CFO Lai explained that the adjustment relates to a one-time prior-
year sales tax reconciliation, while the FY 2027 budget incorporates the revised ongoing sales
tax baseline approved at midyear. CFO Lai noted that the estimate continues to be refined and
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 11 of 32
City Council Meeting
Summary Minutes: 06/15/2026
may result in additional one-time revenue beyond what was previously anticipated.
Councilmember Lu observed that the information became available late in the budget process
and stated that, because the adjustment is one-time in nature, it would not have materially
changed the budget decisions that had been made.
Councilmember Lauing commended CFO Lai and finance staff for balancing the FY 2027 budget
and eliminating the projected structural deficit while largely maintaining City services.
Councilmember Lauing highlighted the proposed OOT Assistant Engineer position as an
example of staff identifying a service need during the budget process and recommending the
addition of resources for transportation-related services. Councilmember Lauing further
highlighted an estimated $500,000 increase in transient occupancy tax (TOT) revenues and
stated that the City's diverse revenue sources help provide financial stability despite
fluctuations in individual revenue categories.
Councilmember Lythcott-Haims referenced a letter received from the Palo Alto Museum
regarding the proposed cost-sharing agreement for Roth Building repairs and Heritage Park
drainage improvements. The letter questioned potential increases in project costs, timing of
City reimbursements, waiver of permit and inspection fees, and measures to expedite
approvals before the winter season. CFO Lai explained that the proposed budget includes
approximately $325,000 in available funding for the project and that additional appropriations
would require future Council authorization. City Manager Shikada added that staff is working
closely with museum representatives and expressed confidence that the parties would be able
to resolve outstanding issues, while noting that future cost-sharing arrangements remain under
discussion.
Public Comment:
1. Herb B. expressed concerns regarding the proposed cost-sharing arrangement for
repairs to the Roth Building and Heritage Park drainage improvements. The commenter
stated that insufficient project information had been made available to the public prior
to the meeting and questioned whether actions related to the Roth Building were
consistent with requirements associated with historic preservation grant funding and
parkland designation. The commenter urged the Council to defer action on the
proposal.
2. Bruce G. expressed support for the Palo Alto Museum and its leadership, describing the
museum as an important community asset and gathering place. The commenter stated
that the museum's vision balances preservation of local history with a focus on
innovation and the future and encouraged continued City support for the project. The
commenter noted that the Palo Alto Rotary Club had provided grant funding in support
of the museum.
3. Marguerite H., inaugural President and CEO of the Palo Alto Museum, expressed
appreciation for the collaboration and support provided by City staff and
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 12 of 32
City Council Meeting
Summary Minutes: 06/15/2026
Councilmembers. The commenter described the museum's vision as a community
gathering place that will showcase local history, innovation, sustainability, and
community perspectives while strengthening civic connections. The commenter noted
that flooding had delayed the museum's planned opening and required relocation of
collections and requested continued City support to help address the resulting
challenges and advance the museum's opening.
4. Bill R. expressed support for the Palo Alto Museum and its leadership, describing the
museum as a civic institution worthy of public investment. The commenter stated that
donor contributions should support museum programs, exhibitions, and operations
rather than repairs to City-owned facilities. A request was made for the City to assume
responsibility for drainage and waterproofing improvements, address any funding gaps
as project costs become known, and expedite approvals so construction can be
completed before the rainy season and the museum can open.
Mayor Veenker explained the conflict-of-interest requirements applicable to certain Stanford-
related budget items identified in Attachment C to the staff report and noted that those items
would be considered separately pursuant to the California Political Reform Act. Mayor Veenker
disclosed a conflict of interest because Stanford University is a client of her law firm and
recused herself from consideration of the Stanford-related budget items. Councilmember Lu
recused himself because his spouse is employed by Stanford University. City Manager Shikada
recused himself because his spouse is employed by Stanford Health Care.
Vice Mayor Stone noted that Mayor Veenker, Councilmember Lu, and City Manager Shikada
had left the room due to conflicts of interest and announced that Council would proceed with
consideration of the Stanford-related budget items identified in Attachment C to the staff
report.
MOTION: Councilmember Lythcott-Haims moved, seconded by Councilmember Burt, to
approve the Stanford-related items for the Fiscal Year 2027 Budget.
MOTION PASSED: 5-0-2, Veenker and Lu recused
Following Council action on the Stanford-related budget items, Mayor Veenker, Councilmember
Lu, and City Manager Shikada rejoined the meeting, and Vice Mayor Stone returned the gavel
to Mayor Veenker. Mayor Veenker then resumed consideration of the remaining FY 2027
budget items and opened Council discussion.
Councilmember Burt discussed the proposed cost-sharing arrangement for repairs to the Roth
Building and Heritage Park drainage improvements. Funding sources identified by the Finance
Committee were described as initial allocations rather than a cap on potential City participation
and support was expressed for the museum as a valued community asset. Councilmember Burt
suggested that the City consider assuming responsibility for costs associated with park runoff
impacts while sharing the cost with the museum on building waterproofing repairs and other
project needs. Councilmember Burt further noted the City's history of waiving certain fees for
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 13 of 32
City Council Meeting
Summary Minutes: 06/15/2026
nonprofit organizations and expressed support for exploring additional measures to facilitate
timely completion of the repairs before the winter season. More broadly, appreciation was
expressed for staff's efforts to address the projected budget deficit and improve the City's long-
term fiscal outlook.
Councilmember Reckdahl questioned the proposed cost-sharing approach for repairs to the
Roth Building and Heritage Park drainage improvements, noting that the building is City-owned
and expressing concern that the museum could bear costs associated with preexisting
conditions and City infrastructure. City Manager Shikada clarified that the City has invested
approximately $10M in the facility renovation and noted that renovation work included
modifications to park areas later identified as contributing to drainage issues. It was further
noted that any revised financial arrangements would require amendments to existing
agreements with the museum. Councilmember Reckdahl expressed concern about the financial
burden on a nonprofit partner during the museum's startup phase. City Manager Shikada and
CFO Lai emphasized the City's ongoing collaboration with museum representatives, noted that
approximately $325,000 has been appropriated for the project to date, and stated that
sufficient funding is available to address immediate needs during the Council recess while staff
continues negotiations and returns to Council if additional action is required.
Councilmember Lauing acknowledged the uncertainty surrounding the final scope and cost of
the Roth Building and Heritage Park drainage improvements and expressed support for
continuing efforts to advance the museum's opening. Councilmember Lauing asked whether
any final agreement with the museum would return to Council for approval. CFO Lai stated that
Council action would authorize the City Manager to execute an agreement and that any
agreement executed during the Council recess could return for ratification. City Manager
Shikada clarified that Council would be authorizing him to negotiate remaining terms and make
expenditures within the appropriations approved through the budget.
Councilmember Lu emphasized the City's commitment to supporting the Palo Alto Museum
while acknowledging that project costs and final agreement terms remain under development.
Councilmember Lu suggested a broader review of the City's approach to leases for City-owned
properties and nonprofit partners, expressed support for restoring approximately $15,000 in
funding for Canopy, and discussed ongoing conversations with PAUSD regarding cost sharing for
crossing guards and track monitors. CFO Lai clarified that the proposed FY 2027 budget assumes
full-year funding for Canopy, crossing guards, and track monitor services, with anticipated
revenue contributions from PAUSD to be evaluated as additional information becomes
available.
Vice Mayor Stone expressed appreciation for CFO Lai, finance staff, and the Finance Committee
for balancing the FY 2027 budget and minimizing service reductions. Support was expressed for
Councilmember Lu's proposal to restore approximately $15,000 in funding for Canopy. CFO Lai
stated that the additional funding could be accommodated through a corresponding reduction
in the CIP transfer. City Manager Shikada noted that discussions are underway regarding
potential philanthropic funding support for Canopy.
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 14 of 32
City Council Meeting
Summary Minutes: 06/15/2026
Vice Mayor Stone expressed support for continued collaboration with the Palo Alto Museum
and stated that the City should consider assuming responsibility for drainage-related costs
associated with Heritage Park while maintaining an appropriate cost-sharing approach for
building-related repairs. Vice Mayor Stone suggested that any museum contribution toward
park-related costs should reflect the extent to which museum-related improvements
contributed to the drainage issues. Support was expressed for staff's efforts to address the
project and help advance the museum's opening.
Mayor Veenker expressed appreciation to staff and the Finance Committee for balancing the FY
2027 budget and improving the City's fiscal outlook. Regarding the Palo Alto Museum, support
was expressed for continuing staff negotiations and advancing necessary repairs during the
Council recess, with the expectation that Council would revisit any remaining issues upon its
return. Mayor Veenker was supportive of restoring approximately $15,000 in funding for
Canopy and asked that Council receive a midyear update regarding potential philanthropic
support and future funding needs. City Manager Shikada agreed to continue monitoring
fundraising efforts and CFO Lai noted that the matter could be revisited during the midyear
budget process.
Councilmember Lythcott-Haims expressed support for allowing discussions regarding potential
philanthropic support for Canopy to continue and indicated support for addressing any
remaining funding needs if necessary. Regarding the Palo Alto Museum, confidence was
expressed that staff and museum leadership could reach an appropriate agreement on cost-
sharing responsibilities during the Council recess so the museum could open as soon as
practicable.
During discussion of the motion, CFO Lai clarified that fee waivers would result in a
corresponding reduction in City revenue. City Manager Shikada noted that fee waivers for
nonprofit organizations are typically absorbed by the General Fund. Councilmember Burt
clarified that the intent of the cashflow support provision was to ensure that the museum
would not be required to front the City's share of project costs while managing the repair work.
Councilmembers and staff continued to discuss and refine the motion language.
Councilmember Lythcott-Haims proposed a friendly amendment to clarify that expedited
processing of the museum repairs should support completion of the work before the rainy
season. Councilmember Burt and Councilmember Reckdahl accepted the amendment.
MOTION: Councilmember Burt moved, seconded by Councilmember Reckdahl, to:
1. Adopt the Fiscal Year 2027 Budget Ordinance (Attachment A), which includes:
• City Manager’s Fiscal Year 2027 Proposed Operating and Capital Budgets, previously
distributed at the May 4th City Council Meeting (Attachment A, Exhibit 1)
• Amendments to the City Manager’s Fiscal Year 2027 Proposed Operating Budget
(Attachment A, Exhibit 2)
• Amendments to the City Manager’s Fiscal Year 2027 Proposed Capital Budget
(Attachment A, Exhibit 3)
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 15 of 32
City Council Meeting
Summary Minutes: 06/15/2026
• Fiscal Year 2027 City Table of Organization (Attachment A, Exhibit 4)
• Fiscal Year 2027 Municipal Fee Changes (Attachment A, Exhibit 5)
2. Accept the Fiscal Year 2027 – 2031 Capital Improvement Program (CIP)
3. Adopt a Resolution determining the Appropriations Limit for Fiscal Year 2027
(Attachment B)
4. Accept the June 30, 2025 actuarial valuation of Palo Alto's Retiree Healthcare Plan and
fund the annual Actuarially Determine Contribution (ADC) for Fiscal Year 2027 and 2028
5. Authorize the City Manager or their designee to negotiate and execute a Memorandum
of Understanding and Funding Agreement (or Lease Agreement Amendment) with the
Palo Alto Museum to provide cost sharing for repairs to the basement and
waterproofing in the Roth Building and improvements to Heritage Park drainage in an
expedited efforts to try to make sure that accomplished before the next rain season.
a) City to waive the permitting and inspection fees for the Museum.
b) Direct staff to move forward with cashflow support for the museum toward
repairs and to support the continued expedited process that staff is already
pursuing.
c) The City cover the expenses for the park repair to the extent that it can be
determined that it is principally the city's responsibility, and the City Manager
negotiate a cost-sharing on the building repairs.
6. Direct staff to return at mid-year or sooner to review whether there are any remaining
Canopy budgetary requests or if resolved through donations.
MOTION PASSED: 7-0
Consent Calendar
Public Comment:
1. Scott E., on behalf of the University South & Professorville Neighborhood Association,
urged Council to retain Item 23 on the Consent Calendar and approve the proposed
option without amendment. The commenter stated that residents had not been
adequately consulted regarding the proposal, expressed a preference for maintaining
existing conditions until additional community engagement occurs, and indicated a
willingness to participate in future discussions with the City.
2. William O., speaking as a private citizen, described personal challenges finding housing
near transit while living in Palo Alto and stated that access to housing near transit can
reduce reliance on automobiles. The commenter expressed support for SB 79, citing the
need for additional housing along transit corridors, and opined that the City's proposed
approach is inconsistent with the intent of the legislation.
3. Erica S., speaking on behalf of the proposed project at 414 California Avenue, urged
Council to reconsider the proposed urgency ordinance. The commenter argued that the
ordinance is inconsistent with the City's pursuit of a Prohousing Designation and stated
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 16 of 32
City Council Meeting
Summary Minutes: 06/15/2026
that SB 79 would permit moderate-density housing near transit rather than large-scale
development. It was asserted that application of the ordinance to the site would reduce
project feasibility and hinder development of a mixed-use infill project.
4. Scott L. G., a land use attorney representing 414 California Avenue, urged Council not to
adopt the proposed urgency ordinance. The commenter questioned whether the
findings necessary to support an urgency ordinance had been established and argued
that the action is inconsistent with the City's housing goals and pursuit of a Prohousing
Designation. Council was encouraged to continue evaluating transit-oriented
development (TOD) policies without adopting the proposed urgency measure.
5. Scott O. expressed support for allowing SB 79 densities to be implemented more
broadly and argued that higher-density housing near transit would increase housing
supply and improve affordability over time. The commenter contended that limiting
development intensity would result in fewer housing opportunities and encouraged
Council to remove Item 23 from the Consent Calendar for further consideration.
6. Jeremy L. expressed support for the City's pursuit of a Prohousing Designation and cited
examples of other Peninsula cities pursuing different approaches to implementation of
SB 79. The commenter encouraged Palo Alto to build on those examples in a manner
consistent with its prohousing goals.
7. Amie A. expressed support for the City's recent housing planning efforts and described
SB 79 as an important tool for expanding housing opportunities. The commenter stated
that existing housing production mechanisms may be insufficient to meet future
housing needs and that additional housing near transit would benefit local businesses,
the environment, and the community. Support was expressed for fully implementing SB
79 and continuing the City's prohousing efforts.
8. Patty I., a resident of Channing House, described the benefits of living in a walkable area
with access to nearby services and expressed support for additional housing density in
transit-served areas such as California Avenue and University Avenue. The commenter
stated that concentrating housing in areas with existing infrastructure is more efficient
and would provide greater opportunities for people to live near jobs and services.
9. Shani K., speaking as an individual, commented on Item 9 and urged Council to ensure
that proposed trail resurfacing work near Adobe Creek remain limited to the approved
project area and existing trail width. The commenter referenced a prior paving project
at Foothills Park and expressed concern about changes that occurred beyond the
originally approved scope. Regarding Item 23, the commenter expressed support for the
City's proposed approach to implementation of SB 79.
10. Joe F., speaking as a private citizen, described relocating to Palo Alto for employment
and stated that many people seek opportunities to live in Silicon Valley but face housing
affordability challenges. The commenter expressed support for additional housing near
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 17 of 32
City Council Meeting
Summary Minutes: 06/15/2026
transit and stated that housing costs can affect the ability of individuals and families to
remain in the community.
11. Leela H., a longtime Ventura neighborhood resident, urged Council to remove Item 23
from the Consent Calendar and opposed delaying full implementation of SB 79. The
commenter stated that additional housing is needed to improve affordability for low-
and middle-income households and expressed support for maintaining a community
with residents from a range of income levels and life experiences.
12. Adam S., a University South resident, urged Council to remove Item 23 from the Consent
Calendar and allow SB 79 to take effect in areas designated for additional housing
growth. The commenter cited housing affordability challenges affecting friends and
family members and argued that increasing housing opportunities near transit would
help address those pressures.
13. Steven T., a Palo Alto resident of 43 years, urged Council to remove the proposed SB 79
urgency ordinance from the Consent Calendar and consider the matter through a
separate public discussion. The commenter described housing affordability as a
significant community challenge and encouraged the City to support housing
opportunities for teachers, workers, and lower- and middle-income households rather
than delaying implementation of SB 79.
14. Abbie Y., a Stanford University student living on campus, described difficulties finding
affordable housing off campus and cited housing affordability challenges affecting
young adults and working professionals. The commenter urged Council to remove Item
23 from the Consent Calendar and support implementation of SB 79.
15. Jeff L. expressed support for the proposed SB 79 actions on the Consent Calendar and
thanked Council for its prior deliberations on the issue. The commenter stated that
alternative approaches previously under consideration could have jeopardized the long-
term viability of retail uses at Town & Country Village and urged Council to approve the
item as proposed.
16. Doria S. expressed support for the City's proposed approach to implementation of SB 79
and thanked Council and staff for their work on the issue. The commenter stated that
the approach approved by Council on June 1 provides a lawful path to compliance with
SB 79, expressed concern about potential impacts on retail uses under alternative
approaches, and urged Council to approve the item as proposed.
17. Deborah G. (Zoom) expressed opposition to placing the SB 79 item on the Consent
Calendar and stated that the issue warrants separate public discussion. The commenter
cited declining property values, declining school enrollment, and budget reductions and
criticized what was characterized as the City's longstanding failure to build sufficient
housing.
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 18 of 32
City Council Meeting
Summary Minutes: 06/15/2026
18. Halle G. (Zoom), a former Palo Alto resident and case manager for unhoused adults at
the Opportunity Center, expressed support for the City's Prohousing Designation
application and encouraged the City to strengthen its approach to addressing
homelessness. The commenter described challenges faced by unhoused individuals
seeking housing and shelter, including lengthy waitlists, and encouraged the City to
continue expanding access to housing and shelter opportunities for unhoused residents.
Councilmember Lu disclosed a conflict of interest related to Item 12 because his spouse is
employed by Stanford and stated that he would recuse himself from consideration of that item.
Councilmember Lu further disclosed a conflict of interest related to Item 23 because he owns a
condominium within the SB 79 radius and stated that he would recuse himself from
consideration of that item.
Councilmember Lythcott-Haims requested that Item 23a be removed from the Consent
Calendar. City Attorney Christopher Jensen clarified that Item 23a consisted of 2 temporary
ordinances introduced on June 1, including an ordinance excluding certain historic resource
sites from SB 79 and an ordinance establishing interim development standards for certain
properties affected by SB 79. City Clerk Mahealani Ah Yun noted that copies of the materials
were available in the Council Chambers for public review. Councilmember Lythcott-Haims
stated support for protecting historic resources but expressed concern that the proposed 50
percent density standard would reduce housing capacity in areas planned for additional growth
and may be inconsistent with the City's pursuit of a Prohousing Designation.
Councilmember Lythcott-Haims requested that Item 23b be removed from the Consent
Calendar. It was stated that the record does not appear to contain findings supporting adoption
of an urgency ordinance and concern was expressed that proceeding with the item could
expose the City to legal risk.
Councilmember Lythcott-Haims requested that Item 23c be removed from the Consent
Calendar. Concern was expressed that the proposed ordinance could affect the viability of the
414 California Avenue mixed-use housing project, expose the City to legal risk due to the
proposed urgency findings, and undermine the City's pursuit of a Prohousing Designation.
Councilmember Lythcott-Haims stated a desire to consider potential amendments to the
ordinance and indicated support could be considered if meaningful revisions were made.
Vice Mayor Stone supported removal of Item 23c from the Consent Calendar.
Councilmember Reckdahl disclosed a conflict of interest related to Item 23 due to the proximity
of his residence to the San Antonio Caltrain station and stated that he would recuse himself
from consideration of the item.
Mayor Veenker disclosed a conflict of interest related to Item 12 because Stanford is a client of
her law firm and stated that she would recuse herself from consideration of that item.
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 19 of 32
City Council Meeting
Summary Minutes: 06/15/2026
Mayor Veenker requested that Item 23c be removed from the Consent Calendar. Referring to
concerns raised by public commenters, Mayor Veenker stated that she was not comfortable
making the findings required to support an urgency ordinance absent amendment and
expressed concern regarding potential impacts on the City's Prohousing Designation application
and related grant funding opportunities.
Mayor Veenker stated that Item 23c had been removed from the Consent Calendar in response
to 3 requests to pull the item and confirmed that Items 23a and 23b would remain on the
Consent Calendar. Council proceeded with the remaining Consent Calendar items before
returning to Item 23c separately.
Councilmember Lythcott-Haims clarified that she intended to vote no on Items 23a and 23b,
which she had requested to remove from the Consent Calendar.
MOTION: Vice Mayor Stone moved, seconded by Mayor Veenker, to approve Agenda Item
Numbers 4-17 (Item Number 18 Removed Off Agenda), 19-23a-b, and to pull off the Consent
Calendar Agenda Item Number 23c for Action.
MOTION PASSED ITEMS 4-11, 13-17, 19-22: 7-0
MOTION PASSED ITEM 12: 5-0-2, Lu and Veenker recused
MOTION PASSED ITEM 23a-b: 4-1-2, Lythcott-Haims no, Lu and Reckdahl recused
4. Approval of Minutes from June 1, 2026 Meeting
5. Approve Submittal of the 2026 Annual Water Shortage Assessment Report; CEQA status:
exempt.
6. Approve Conceptual Design for Alma Street-Charleston Road Railroad Crossing Near-
Term Section 130 Safety Improvement Project – Direct Staff to Complete Final Design,
Environmental Analysis, Project Specifications, and Engineering Cost Estimates based off
of the Conceptual Design as Recommended by Rail Committee; CEQA status:
Categorically Exempt under Section 15301-Class 1 minor alternations to existing
facilities.
7. Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Submit the City’s Prohousing
Designation Program Application to the California Department of Housing and
Community Development. CEQA Status: Not a Project.
8. Adoption of Amended Salary Schedules for Service Employees‘ International Union,
Utilities Management and Professional Association of Palo Alto, International
Association of Fire Fighters, and Unrepresented Management and Professional
Employees and Limited Hourly groups; and Adoption of Side letters for the International
Association of Fire Fighters, Fire Chiefs‘ Association, and Palo Alto Police Officers‘
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 20 of 32
City Council Meeting
Summary Minutes: 06/15/2026
Association and Amendments to the FY 2027 Table of Organization to Reclassify 1.0
Economic Development Manager and 1.0 Treasury Manager - CEQA Status - Not A
Project.
9. Approval of Construction Contract Number C26197272 with O’Grady Paving, Inc. in the
Amount of $3,802,573 for the Fiscal Year 2026 Street Resurfacing Project, Capital
Improvement Program Projects PE-86070, PO-12001, PG-06001, PO-11001, and OS-
09001; and Authorization for the City Manager or Their Designee to Execute Change
Orders in an Amount Not-to-Exceed $910,258 for Related, Additional but Unforeseen
Work Which May Develop During the Project; CEQA Status – Exempt under CEQA
Guidelines Section 15301(c)
10. Approval of Amendment Number 1 to Purchase Order C26195416 with Carahsoft in the
Amount of $375,246 for Additional SAP Business Data Cloud Capacity Units and Related
Non-Productive Memory Extension; CEQA Status - Not a Project
11. Approval of a First Amendment to Lease With 1900 Embarcadero Property Owner, LP, to
Continue Occupying an Approximate 5,469 Square Foot Portion of the Office Building at
1900 Embarcadero Road, Through June 30, 2031, at a Total Base Rent of $1,306,605;
CEQA Status – Exempt under CEQA Guidelines Section 15301
12. Approval of Amendment No. 4 to Contract Number C23184827 with Nomad Transit, LLC
(Via) in the Amount of $152,000 for a total not to exceed $5,053,550 to Extend the City
of Palo Alto On-Demand Transit Service for Four Months through October 31, 2026;
Approval of Amendment No. 3 to extend the Cost Sharing Agreement with Stanford
University to Partially Fund Palo Alto Link Service up to $200,000 in FY 2027 through
October 31, 2026; and Approval of a three-year Contract with the Palo Alto
Transportation Management Association (PATMA), in the Amount of $500,000; CEQA
status – not a project.
13. Approval of Contract Amendment Number 5 to Contract S20178065 with OIR Group, in
the Amount of $40,000 and for a one-year extension to continue Independent Police
Auditing Services in Palo Alto. CEQA Status – Not a Project.
14. Approval of Professional Services Contract Number C26195541 with HDA Architects, Inc.
in an Amount Not-to-Exceed $221,650 to Provide Architectural Design Services for the
Animal Shelter Renovation – Capital Improvement Program Project PE-19002; CEQA
Status – Exempt under CEQA Guidelines Section 15301(e)
15. Approval of Professional Services Contract Number C26196545 with Michael Baker
International (MBI) for $116,000 in FY 2027 and a Not-to Exceed Amount of $464,000 to
Provide Administration and Consulting Services for the City’s Community Development
Block Grant (CDBG) Program for a Term of Four-Years Through June 2030. CEQA Status:
Exempt in Accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3).
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 21 of 32
City Council Meeting
Summary Minutes: 06/15/2026
16. PUBLIC HEARING / QUASI-JUDICIAL. 929 Laurel Glenn Dr [25PLN-00005]: Adoption of a
Record of Land Use Action Approving a Major Site and Design Application for the
Construction of a New 6,581-Square-Foot Single-Family Residence and Associated Site
Improvements on a Vacant 4.23-Acre Site. CEQA Status: Exempt Per CEQA Guidelines
Section 15303. Zoning District: Open Space (OS).
17. QUASI-JUDICIAL. Approval of a Record of Land Use Action to Add the Property Located
at 855 Hamilton Avenue to the City’s Historic Resources Inventory as a Category 2
Resource Based on Owner Interest Identified Through the 2023 Reconnaissance Survey.
CEQA Status: Not a Project.
18. QUASI-JUDICIAL. 3200 Park/340 Portage: Final Map and Street Naming [26PLN-00009]:
Request for a Final Map to Subdivide One Existing 3.92-Acre Parcel for Condominium
Purposes, Consistent with the Approved Development Agreement, and to Name the
New Private Streets. Zone District: PC 5597. CEQA Status: Council Adopted Resolution
10123 Certifying the EIR for the Project on September 12, 2023 (SCH # 2021120444).
Item Number 18 Removed Off Agenda
19. FIRST READ: Adopt an Ordinance to Amend College Terrace Residential Preferential
Parking Program Fixed Permit Terms, Sale and Grace Periods in PAMC 10.46.060; CEQA
status: categorically exempt.
20. FIRST READING: Adoption of an Ordinance to Amend Palo Alto Municipal Code Title 18
(Zoning) Section 18.18.120 (Noncomplying Uses and Facilities) to Allow Existing Floor
Area to be Replaced in New Buildings Without Increasing the Degree of Existing Non-
Compliance as Recommended by the Economic Development Committee. CEQA Status:
Exempt from CEQA per Section 15061(b)(3) (Common Sense Exemption).
21. FIRST READING: Adoption of an Ordinance to Amend Various Sections of Title 16
(Building Regulations) and Title 18 (Zoning) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code to
Implement Retail Vitality Policies in the Comprehensive Plan, Including Changes to the
Zoning Map for Parcels Zoned CN(GF) as Recommended by the Economic Development
Committee. CEQA Status: The Ordinance is Consistent with and Represents
Implementation of Adopted Policies in the Comprehensive Plan, for Which an
Environmental Impact Report (Comprehensive Plan EIR) was Certified on February 5,
2016.
22. SECOND READING: Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending the Sign
Code (PAMC section 16.20.160) to Allow Certain Signs in Conjunction with Parklets
(FIRST READING: June 1, 2025; PASSED: 6-1, Lu no)
23. SECOND READING and Adoption of Temporary Ordinances Implementing Senate Bill (SB)
79, and Introduction and Adoption of Interim Urgency Ordinances Excluding Certain
Historic Resource Sites and Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) Eligible Sites from
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 22 of 32
City Council Meeting
Summary Minutes: 06/15/2026
Government Code Section 65912.157 and Authorizing Corresponding Zoning Map
Updates. CEQA Status: Exempt Under Government Code Section 65912.160(c)(2).
a. SECOND READING and Adoption of Temporary Ordinances Implementing SB 79
(Staff Recommendations 1 & 2)
b. Introduction and Adoption of Interim Urgency Ordinances Excluding Certain Historic
Resource Sites from Government Code Section 65912.157 (Staff Recommendation 3)
c. Introduction and Adoption of Interim Urgency Ordinances Excluding Certain Transit-
Oriented Development (TOD) Eligible Sites from Government Code Section
65912.157 (Staff Recommendation 4)
Action Item
23c. Introduction and Adoption of Interim Urgency Ordinances Excluding Certain Transit-
Oriented Development (TOD) Eligible Sites from Government Code Section 65912.157
Councilmember Lythcott-Haims expressed appreciation for the opportunity to reconsider the
proposed interim urgency ordinance and raised concerns that it could prevent housing
development in areas where Council has supported additional density, including the proposed
414 California Avenue project and other transit-served corridors. Concerns were expressed
regarding the legal basis for the required urgency findings, the potential for legal challenges,
and possible impacts on the City's Prohousing Designation application. Councilmember
Lythcott-Haims stated that recent housing development patterns do not suggest an imminent
influx of projects requiring emergency action and supported considering carve-outs for selected
transit-oriented areas while directing staff to return with a plan to revise zoning in those areas.
Mayor Veenker summarized the actions previously taken on the SB 79 ordinances and
explained that temporary ordinances approved earlier in the meeting would take effect July 16,
while the urgency ordinance addressing historic resource sites would take effect July 1. Mayor
Veenker stated that the interim urgency ordinance under consideration would require 4 votes
for adoption and could be approved, amended, or rejected. It was explained that, if the
ordinance were not adopted, SB 79 standards would apply beginning July 1 until the temporary
ordinances take effect on July 16.
Vice Mayor Stone stated that, upon further review, he could not support the proposed interim
urgency ordinance because he did not believe the record supports the findings required to
establish a current and immediate threat to public health, safety, or welfare. Although he
supported the underlying policy approach, including the 50 percent development standards for
certain SB 79 sites, Vice Mayor Stone stated that infrastructure and service impacts should be
addressed through the planning process rather than through an urgency ordinance and
supported accelerating planning efforts for higher-density areas.
Mayor Veenker expressed concern that the legal risks associated with adopting the urgency
ordinance outweighed the risks of allowing SB 79 standards to apply during the 15-day period
before the temporary ordinance becomes effective. Mayor Veenker stated that the likelihood
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 23 of 32
City Council Meeting
Summary Minutes: 06/15/2026
of a significant number of applications being filed during that period appeared low and noted
that concerns previously discussed regarding the 414 California Avenue project were not
necessarily affected by the SB 79 decision. Concern was expressed that adoption of the urgency
ordinance could negatively affect the City's Prohousing Designation application, expose the City
to legal challenges, and affect future interactions with HCD. Mayor Veenker indicated a
willingness to consider amendments, including carve-outs for certain areas and direction for
staff to return to Council with proposed zoning revisions to support additional housing
production.
Councilmember Burt distinguished between the legal findings required for the urgency
ordinance and broader planning policy considerations. It was observed that the City has
undertaken extensive planning efforts for housing growth through the Housing Element, area
plans, and TOD initiatives and concern was expressed that immediate application of SB 79
standards could bypass those planning processes. Prior Council support for the 414 California
Avenue project was described as independent of SB 79 and concerns were noted regarding
potential impacts on retail uses and existing market-rate affordable housing in certain transit-
oriented areas. Support was expressed for TOD and additional housing while advocating for a
deliberate planning process to evaluate future zoning changes and development impacts. Public
characterizations that the City's proposed approach reflected opposition to TOD were strongly
disputed.
Councilmember Lauing stated that the 50 percent development standard is expressly
authorized under SB 79 and is intended to provide time for the City to evaluate potential
alternative planning approaches. Skepticism was expressed regarding assertions that SB 79
would substantially increase affordable housing production, noting that most units would
remain market-rate under the law's affordability requirements. It was further stated that the
proposed 414 California Avenue project has alternative pathways to proceed under existing City
programs and that additional zoning changes are likely to be considered in areas such as
California Avenue. Support was expressed for evaluating future rezonings while balancing
housing planning efforts, including implementation of the Housing Element and Downtown
Housing Plan.
Councilmember Lauing asked about the potential effects of not adopting the urgency ordinance
during the period between July 1, when SB 79 takes effect, and July 16, when the temporary
ordinance becomes effective. Planning and Development Services Director Jonathan Lait stated
that staff was not aware of any pending applications expected to be submitted during that
period, although some projects could potentially file preliminary applications. City Attorney
Christopher Jensen clarified that the Council's decision concerned the 15-day period between
July 1 and July 15. Mayor Veenker noted that a limited number of Builder's Remedy projects
had been filed during a substantially longer period and suggested that could provide some
context when considering the likelihood of applications being submitted during the interim
period.
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 24 of 32
City Council Meeting
Summary Minutes: 06/15/2026
Councilmember Lythcott-Haims expressed concern that the City could face challenges meeting
its RHNA obligations without additional housing tools such as SB 79 and highlighted potential
consequences if housing production targets are not achieved. It was contended that SB 79
preserves local inclusionary housing requirements, limits displacement of renters, and could
increase housing production without increasing building heights. Support was expressed for
allowing SB 79 to take effect in selected transit-oriented areas through targeted carve-outs,
including California Avenue and portions of El Camino Real. Councilmember Lythcott-Haims
noted that she was seeking a narrower set of carve-outs than she had sought previously.
Councilmember Burt questioned whether SB 79 would affect allowable building heights and
asked for clarification of the height standards discussed at the prior meeting. Director Lait
stated that allowable heights under SB 79 would be approximately 65 feet, 75 feet, and 85 feet
depending on distance from transit, compared with existing height limits that vary by zoning
district and are generally lower. Councilmember Burt stated that SB 79 would therefore affect
height standards, including in R-1 neighborhoods.
Councilmember Lythcott-Haims clarified that her comments regarding building heights were
intended to compare SB 79 standards with heights contemplated in the El Camino Real Focus
Area and reiterated support for maintaining the 50 percent development standards in most
areas while allowing SB 79 to take full effect in selected locations. Councilmember Burt
responded that consideration of location-specific zoning changes was contemplated through
the previously approved referral process but noted that Council's immediate decision
concerned the proposed urgency ordinance.
Mayor Veenker stated that she did not recall suggesting that the 414 California Avenue project
was dependent on SB 79. Openness was expressed to considering amendments, including
potential carve-outs, but absent such changes she indicated she would likely oppose the
urgency ordinance. Emphasis was placed on determining whether sufficient support existed for
amendments that could secure the votes necessary for adoption.
Councilmember Lauing sought clarification regarding the effect of not adopting the urgency
ordinance. After confirming that failure to secure 4 affirmative votes would allow SB 79 to take
effect during the interim period before the temporary ordinance becomes effective,
Councilmember Lauing stated that he would not support the urgency ordinance.
Councilmember Lauing did not believe the 15-day interim period would materially affect future
planning decisions and supported allowing additional time to evaluate appropriate locations
and development standards through the City's planning processes.
Vice Mayor Stone suggested that discussion should remain focused on the proposed urgency
ordinance rather than revisiting the temporary ordinance adopted earlier in the meeting and
asked whether Council needed to take formal action to withdraw the urgency ordinance. City
Attorney Jensen reiterated that if Council took no action, the urgency ordinance would take
effect immediately while the temporary ordinances adopted on second reading would take
effect July 16. Councilmember Lauing asked whether separate Council action on the item was
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 25 of 32
City Council Meeting
Summary Minutes: 06/15/2026
necessary given the apparent lack of sufficient support for adoption. Mayor Veenker suggested
providing direction for staff to return within the previously contemplated 6 to 12-month
timeframe with proposed zoning revisions rather than limiting the effort to further study.
Councilmember Burt sought clarification regarding whether Mayor Veenker's proposed
direction to staff was intended as an amendment to the urgency ordinance. Mayor Veenker
explained that the suggestion was separate from the ordinance and was intended to clarify
expectations that staff return to Council with proposed zoning revisions following evaluation of
opportunities to accelerate housing production in California Avenue and adjacent El Camino
Real areas. Councilmember Burt expressed support for the existing direction and timeframe
while noting uncertainty regarding the sequencing of future PTC and Council review. Director
Lait indicated that the proposed additional direction would be acceptable if so directed by
Council.
Councilmember Burt sought clarification regarding the relationship between the motion and
the proposed urgency ordinance. Mayor Veenker indicated that the urgency ordinance would
not move forward if no action were taken. City Attorney Jensen advised that the motion
appeared to be within the scope of the agenda item and suggested explicitly referencing the
urgency ordinance in the motion. Mayor Veenker accepted that clarification as a friendly
amendment. Councilmember Burt requested that the portion addressing the urgency ordinance
and the direction to staff be considered separately to allow separate votes. Mayor Veenker
declined the request.
Councilmember Lauing expressed support for the motion while noting that the additional
direction would increase staff workload. It was suggested that flexibility may be needed
regarding the timing and process for returning with recommendations, including potential
review by the PTC.
Councilmember Burt renewed his request to divide the motion into separate actions addressing
the urgency ordinance and the proposed direction to staff. Following discussion regarding the
applicable Council procedures, including City Council Procedures Rule 4.3(c), Councilmember
Lythcott-Haims expressed support for dividing the motion and Mayor Veenker agreed to revise
the motion accordingly. Councilmembers and staff worked together to develop language for 2
separate motions.
Public Comment: Herb B. commented on the Council's discussion of urgency ordinances and
questioned whether the vote threshold referenced during the meeting was consistent with City
Charter or Municipal Code requirements. The commenter suggested verifying the applicable
provisions governing urgency ordinances and effective dates and acknowledged that his
understanding of the requirements may be incorrect.
MOTION: Mayor Veenker moved, seconded by Councilmember Lythcott-Haims, to direct staff
not to proceed with adopting the interim urgency ordinance of 23c.
MOTION PASSED: 5-0-2, Lu and Reckdahl recused
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 26 of 32
City Council Meeting
Summary Minutes: 06/15/2026
MOTION SPLIT FOR THE PURPOSE OF VOTING
MOTION: Mayor Veenker moved, seconded by Councilmember Lythcott-Haims, to direct staff
to explore opportunities to accelerate housing production on California Avenue and adjacent
areas of El Camino Real and bring back to Council a proposal for zoning revisions to effectuate
such production within the next 6 to 12 months.
MOTION PASSED: 4-1-2, Burt no, Lu and Reckdahl recused
Closed Session
AA1. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL—POTENTIAL LITIGATION (one case)
Subject: Initiation of litigation in one case
Authority: Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(4) New Item Added
MOTION: Councilmember Lu moved, seconded by Councilmember Reckdahl, to go into Closed
Session.
MOTION PASSED: 5-0-2, Lauing and Stone absent for vote
Council went into Closed Session at 9:46 p.m.
Council returned from Closed Session at 10:18 p.m.
Mayor Veenker announced that the City Council authorized the City Attorney to join an amicus
brief in support of the plaintiff's position in County of Santa Clara versus U.S. Immigrations and
Customs Enforcement, Case Number 26CV5604.
City Manager Comments
City Manager Ed Shikada noted that materials had been distributed with the agenda packet and
indicated that, given the late hour, he would forgo additional comments.
Action Items
24. Adopt a Resolution Approving the 2026 Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan
(BPTP); CEQA Status: Exempt Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080.20.
Senior Transportation Planner Ozzy Arce presented the final 2026 Bicycle and Pedestrian
Transportation Plan (BPTP) for Council consideration. The BPTP serves as the City's 10-year
strategic framework for developing a safe and connected active transportation network and
supports the City's competitiveness for regional and state infrastructure funding. The planning
effort began in 2023 and included a 4-phase public engagement process that generated more
than 1,000 community comments. Key community priorities included improving safety,
particularly for students, and expanding a continuous low-stress network accessible to users of
all ages and abilities. Planner Arce reviewed revisions made in response to Council feedback
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 27 of 32
City Council Meeting
Summary Minutes: 06/15/2026
provided in December 2025. Updates included expanded strategies addressing e-bikes and e-
cycles, integration of the BPTP with other City planning efforts, additional direction to evaluate
policies that may limit implementation of safety improvements, prioritization of Safe Routes to
School projects, and expanded capital programming for pedestrian improvements. Attachment
C to the staff report provided additional detail regarding incorporation of Council feedback.
Planner Arce summarized the core elements of the BPTP, including a focus on neighborhood
bicycle boulevards as the foundation of the bicycle network and a 10-year implementation
framework prioritizing near-term improvements. The plan identifies priority bicycle projects,
intersection and pedestrian crossing safety enhancements, and policies and programs intended
to improve walking and bicycling conditions citywide. It was noted that the BPTP establishes
pedestrian districts in areas including University Avenue, California Avenue, San Antonio Road,
and the Mitchell Park/Cubberley corridors, with strategies focused on sidewalk continuity,
crossing visibility, and placemaking improvements. Additional elements include programs
addressing the growth of e-bikes and e-cycles and coordination with other City planning efforts
and capital projects. Planner Arce outlined next steps following adoption of the BPTP, including
publication of the final plan document, development of an e-bike and e-cycle strategy for future
Council consideration, and continued educational, enforcement, and outreach efforts related to
micromobility and youth safety. Additional efforts include evaluation of potential
improvements along Bryant Street, updates to the City's traffic calming policy, pursuit of grant
funding for priority bicycle and pedestrian projects, and development of recommendations
regarding PABAC reform.
Chief Transportation Official Ria Lo thanked community members and staff who contributed to
development of the BPTP and reviewed prior Council direction regarding bicycle access on
California Avenue. It was noted that Council had previously directed staff to pursue low-speed
bicycle access on California Avenue while enhancing Cambridge Avenue as a supplementary
route and had more recently expressed concerns regarding e-bike use in connection with
California Avenue Outdoor Activation discussions. It was reported that staff is working with
PAUSD and PAPD on education, outreach, and enforcement efforts related to e-bikes and other
micromobility devices. Regarding California Avenue, Chief Transportation Official Lo presented
options to either adopt the BPTP as proposed, with future discussion of the Community Street
approach, or direct revisions to align the plan with more recent Council direction regarding
California Avenue and Cambridge Avenue. Staff recommended adoption of the BPTP as
proposed.
Councilmember Burt inquired about student use of California Avenue as a school travel route
and potential PAUSD restrictions on e-bike use. Chief Transportation Official Lo indicated that
California Avenue serves as an access route for Greene Middle School students, although staff
did not have specific usage data. It was reported that PAUSD is considering restrictions on Class
2 and Class 3 e-bikes and may expand restrictions to all classses in future years.
Councilmember Burt asked whether staff had reexamined extending the bidirectional bicycle
facility near Greene Middle School from California Avenue to Garland Drive to address a gap in
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 28 of 32
City Council Meeting
Summary Minutes: 06/15/2026
connectivity to the Ross Road bicycle boulevard. Assistant Transportation Director Sylvia Star-
Lack indicated that staff had not revisited the issue.
Public Comment:
1. Derek G. stated that his child uses California Avenue as a biking route to school and
urged the City not to prohibit bicycle access without first providing a safe, attractive
alternative. The commenter expressed the view that pedestrians and cyclists can safely
share California Avenue.
2. Sahana M. (Zoom), a parent, encouraged the City to prioritize bicycle and pedestrian
safety improvements in Downtown areas identified in the BPTP as having higher safety
concerns, particularly for students and children.
3. Jeanette S. (Zoom), speaking as a resident and parent of an Addison Elementary School
student, expressed concern that the BPTP does not adequately address safe bicycle
routes for students traveling from North Palo Alto to Addison Elementary School, Walter
Hays Elementary School, and Greene Middle School. The commenter urged the City to
prioritize improvements on hazardous routes, including in the Downtown area, citing a
recent near-miss involving her daughter on Webster Street.
4. Brandley (Zoom), speaking as a resident and parent, opposed making California Avenue
bike-free, stating that his daughter's route to Greene Middle School would instead
require travel on Cambridge Avenue with vehicle traffic. The commenter contended that
concerns regarding pedestrian safety were primarily related to higher-speed or illegal e-
bikes and expressed the view that prohibiting bicycles on California Avenue would
create greater safety risks for children and other cyclists.
5. Amie A. (Zoom) expressed support for maintaining bicycle access on California Avenue,
describing it as a critical part of the City's bicycle network. The commenter supported
staff's June 1 proposal and contended that Cambridge Avenue is not a suitable
alternative route. Opposition was expressed to time-based bicycle restrictions on
California Avenue and Council was encouraged to adopt an approach that balances the
needs of pedestrians and cyclists.
6. Cedric d.l. B. (Zoom), speaking as an individual PABAC member, urged Council to adopt
the BPTP and incorporate all PABAC recommendations, including those not supported
by staff. The commenter opposed a bike-free California Avenue, describing it as a critical
bicycle connection and community destination, and instead encouraged education,
outreach, and enforcement to address unsafe e-bike behavior.
7. Ken K. (Zoom), a local bicycle advocate, expressed support for the BPTP and
recommended that staff provide periodic implementation updates, including safety and
ridership data, to allow for regular evaluation of the plan. The commenter encouraged
targeted enforcement and data collection to address illegal e-motos rather than
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 29 of 32
City Council Meeting
Summary Minutes: 06/15/2026
restricting bicycle access on California Avenue and requested continued coordination
with Caltrans and neighboring jurisdictions on El Camino Real bicycle improvements.
8. Peter R. (Zoom), speaking on behalf of the College Terrace Residents Association,
expressed support for improved bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure and requested
marked pedestrian crossings on Stanford Avenue to improve safety for neighborhood
residents and students. The commenter opposed a bicycle ban on California Avenue,
describing it as an important route for students, commuters, and residents, and
encouraged the City to address unsafe riding behaviors directly rather than prohibit
bicycle access.
9. Alan W. (Zoom), speaking as an individual PABAC member, urged Council to adopt all of
PABAC's requested revisions to the BPTP, particularly Items 1b and 1c in Attachment B.
The commenter encouraged greater recognition of the broader roadway network as
part of the bicycle system and expressed concern regarding potential conflicts
associated with Class IV separated bikeways at intersections and driveways.
Councilmember Lu asked how future updates to the BPTP and implementation priorities could
be considered over time. Chief Transportation Official Lo explained that major projects and
policy changes would return through future public engagement and Council processes,
including planned updates to bicycle-related ordinances. Councilmember Lu expressed support
for adopting the BPTP while encouraging periodic review of the plan, continued evaluation of
public and PABAC recommendations, and ongoing refinement of the bicycle network and
related policies.
Councilmember Lu expressed appreciation for public comments regarding bicycle access on the
car-free portion of California Avenue and reiterated support for improving safety through
measures such as speed management, enforcement of illegal e-motos, and street design
changes rather than prohibiting bicycle access. Although generally reluctant to revisit a recent
Council decision, Councilmember Lu indicated openness to modifying the prior direction
regarding a bike-free California Avenue and stated that he may propose an amendment.
Councilmember Reckdahl asked about future Caltrans reporting on bicycle lane usage along El
Camino Real. Assistant Director Star-Lack explained that Caltrans is expected to report usage
data and confirmed that the information would be shared with Council.
Councilmember Reckdahl questioned whether the Bicycle and Pedestrian High Injury Network
map in Attachment A could be normalized using bicycle volume data to better identify locations
with higher injury rates rather than simply higher bicycle usage. Planner Arce explained that the
City relied on Replica data and limited bicycle counts conducted during the planning process
but does not maintain comprehensive route-specific bicycle counts because of the cost of
collecting such data. Assistant Director Star-Lack acknowledged the value of the requested
analysis but explained that the necessary volume data are generally unavailable and noted that
Palo Alto has not invested in bicycle counting infrastructure such as eco-counters.
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 30 of 32
City Council Meeting
Summary Minutes: 06/15/2026
Councilmember Burt agreed that additional bicycle volume data would be valuable for
evaluating comparative safety risks and observed that collision totals may nevertheless help
identify locations where safety improvements could benefit the greatest number of riders. It
was further noted that anticipated bicycle use along El Camino Real is expected to increase with
planned housing development and potential expansion of protected bicycle lanes into
neighboring jurisdictions.
Councilmember Burt questioned staff's decision not to incorporate PABAC's proposed
clarification regarding Policy T-4.1 and neighborhood modal filters. While agreeing with staff's
current interpretation that modal filters do not constitute street closures, Councilmember Burt
observed that former staff had interpreted the policy differently and suggested that
incorporating PABAC's proposed language would eliminate potential ambiguity.
Councilmember Burt stated that, after hearing additional public testimony, he better
understood the importance of California Avenue as a route for students and commuters. While
expressing continued concern regarding safety issues associated with higher-speed e-bikes,
Councilmember Burt indicated support for exploring time-based bicycle restrictions, together
with signage and traffic-calming measures, as a potential alternative to a full bicycle ban.
Councilmember Burt requested that staff evaluate potential safety improvements at the Newell
Road and Embarcadero Road intersection, citing visibility concerns for northbound motorists
and bicyclists.
Councilmember Burt expressed support for prioritizing Class I and Class IV bicycle facilities over
sharrows and unbuffered bicycle lanes, citing research suggesting that the latter may be less
effective in improving safety. Support was expressed for incorporating buffered bicycle lanes
where feasible.
Councilmember Burt expressed support for PABAC's recommendation to add language
regarding bicycle and pedestrian access between the San Antonio area and the Caltrain station.
Mayor Veenker expressed interest in research regarding the effectiveness of sharrows and
supported evaluating safety improvements at the Newell Road and Embarcadero Road
intersection. While acknowledging ongoing concerns about bicycle and pedestrian interactions
on California Avenue, Mayor Veenker stated that public testimony highlighted the corridor's
importance as a school commute route and expressed openness to reconsidering the prior
direction regarding bicycle access.
Councilmember Lauing expressed support for the BPTP, highlighting its strategic approach and
the inclusion of initiatives such as the Near-Miss Reporting Program. Support was expressed for
periodically updating the plan to incorporate new safety priorities and neighborhood
improvements.
Councilmember Lauing discussed potential time-based bicycle restrictions on California Avenue
and asked why implementing the Council's June 1 direction would require additional funding.
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 31 of 32
City Council Meeting
Summary Minutes: 06/15/2026
Chief Transportation Official Lo explained that additional funding would be needed to redesign
the corridor. Councilmember Lauing observed that, if bicycle access were prohibited on
California Avenue, improvements to Cambridge Avenue would likely be necessary to safely
accommodate diverted bicycle traffic.
Councilmember Reckdahl requested that staff evaluate additional intersection controls at
crossings of bicycle lanes, citing safety concerns regarding cross traffic on Wilkie Way and
suggesting stop controls where appropriate.
Councilmember Reckdahl questioned the feasibility of adding a buffered bicycle lane on El
Camino Way, citing potential impacts on on-street parking. Planner Arce responded that
repurposing some parking spaces would be one option considered during the design process,
along with other design considerations. Councilmember Reckdahl expressed support for
buffered bicycle lanes generally but reiterated concern about implementing them where on-
street parking is limited.
Councilmember Reckdahl expressed support for adding neighborhood modal filters to the
Bryant Street bicycle boulevard to improve bicycle safety and reduce vehicle traffic. Planner
Arce responded that improvements to the Bryant Street bicycle boulevard between
Embarcadero Road and Homer Avenue are underway as part of the plan's near-term
implementation, consistent with similar feedback received from residents.
Councilmember Reckdahl asked whether bicycle theft data should be incorporated into future
planning efforts and suggested expanding secure bicycle parking facilities similar to the Caltrain
station bike hub in commercial areas. Planner Arce indicated that bicycle theft data is
maintained by PAPD and stated that staff could coordinate on the issue. Planner Arce further
noted that the proposed Hamilton Avenue parking garage includes a secure bicycle room.
Councilmember Reckdahl further inquired about plans for daylighting and opportunities to add
bicycle parking in daylighted areas. Chief Transportation Official Lo responded that staff plans
to prioritize daylighting along school routes and bicycle boulevards and would consider adding
bicycle parking where appropriate.
Councilmember Reckdahl requested that the maps in the BPTP be updated to include the
Bryant Street Community Center.
Councilmember Burt asked whether Council could adopt the BPTP with specific amendments.
Chief Transportation Official Lo confirmed that amendments could be incorporated before
adoption. Councilmember Burt then indicated that he was prepared to make a motion.
Councilmember Burt asked whether the BPTP shifts emphasis from sharrows and unprotected
bicycle lanes toward protected bicycle facilities. Chief Transportation Official Lo explained that
the plan prioritizes bicycle boulevards with traffic-calming measures while expanding protected
bicycle facilities along major corridors. Councilmember Burt observed that the BPTP places
greater emphasis on Class I and Class IV bicycle facilities than previous plans.
SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 32 of 32
City Council Meeting
Summary Minutes: 06/15/2026
Councilmember Burt suggested locating the proposed Class I shared-use path between Stanford
Research Park and Chimalus Drive along the commercial side of the corridor and incorporating
fencing to address neighboring residents' security concerns. It was further encouraged
assigning the path a more descriptive name. Planner Arce indicated that staff would give
further consideration to the path's name.
Councilmembers and staff collaborated to refine the motion language and incorporate the
amendments discussed during deliberations.
MOTION: Councilmember Burt moved, seconded by Councilmember Reckdahl, to adopt a
Resolution Approving the Final 2026 Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Plan (BPTP)
(Attachment A), including staff-recommended changes from the Pedestrian and Bicycle
Advisory Committee (PABAC) (Attachment B) with the following amendments and additions:
a) Evaluate extension of the two-way bike track on Middlefield between California
Avenue and Garland,
b) Look at safety improvements for Newell/Embarcadero intersection,
c) Add language from public commenter on access to the San Antonio station,
d) Add PABAC language or equivalent to it, that clarifies what staff is already
embraced on the interpretation of T-4.1 regarding filters not being closures,
e) Evaluate stop signs or other protections when roadways cross bike boulevards
and bike routes,
f) Complete Streets policy within the bike plan including bicycle-friendly street
design and the PABAC recommendation on bicycle-friendly street design,
g) Refer staff the evaluation of reconciling bike access along car-free portion
California Avenue particularly for school and other commutes with pedestrian
safety during peak use hours including the possibility of time-of-day restrictions,
h) Council supports PAUSD pursuing restrictions of class two and three e-bikes.
MOTION PASSED: 7-0
Adjournment:
Mayor Veenker noted that the next regular Council meeting would be held on August 10
following the Council recess. Mayor Veenker adjourned the meeting at 11:44 p.m. in memory of
longtime Palo Alto resident Clarence B. Jones, recognizing his contributions to the Civil Rights
Movement and the Palo Alto community.