HomeMy WebLinkAbout2026-08-24 City Council Agenda PacketCITY COUNCIL
Special Meeting
Monday, August 24, 2026
Council Chambers & Hybrid
5:30 PM
Amended Agenda
Amended agenda items appear below in RED
City Council meetings will be held as “hybrid” meetings with the option to attend virtually or in
person. Information on how the public may observe and participate in the meeting is located at
the end of the agenda. Translation services are available upon request at least 24 hours before
the meeting. The meeting will be broadcast on Cable TV Channel 76, live on
YouTube https://www.youtube.com/c/cityofpaloalto, and streamed to Midpen Media
Center https://midpenmedia.org.
VIRTUAL PARTICIPATION CLICK HERE TO JOIN (https://cityofpaloalto.zoom.us/j/362027238)
Meeting ID: 362 027 238 Phone:1(669)900-6833
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Public Comment for items not on the agenda will be accepted for up to 3 minutes or an amount
of time determined by the Chair. In-person comments will be heard at the beginning of the
agenda and remote comments will be heard at the end of the agenda. In-person general public
comment will be heard for 30 minutes. Additional in-person public comments, if any, will be
heard at the end of the agenda. Public comments for agendized items will be accepted both in
person and via Zoom for up to 3 minutes or an amount of time determined by the Chair.
Requests to speak will be taken until 5 minutes after the staff’s presentation or as determined
by the Chair. Written public comments can be submitted in advance to
city.council@PaloAlto.gov and will be provided to the Council and available for inspection on
the City’s website. Multiple individuals wishing to speak on the same item may designate a
spokesperson. Spokespeople must be representing 5 or more verified individuals who are
present in person or via Zoom. Spokespeople are allowed up to 10 minutes, at the discretion of
the Chair. Speaking time may be reduced if the Chair reduces the speaking time for individual
speakers. PowerPoints, videos, or other media to be presented during public comment are
accepted only by email to city.clerk@PaloAlto.gov at least 24 hours before the meeting. Once
received, the Clerk will share them at public comment for the specified item. To uphold strong
cybersecurity management practices, USB’s or other physical electronic storage devices are not
accepted. Signs and symbolic materials less than 2 feet by 3 feet are permitted provided that:
sticks, posts, poles or similar/other type of handle objects are strictly prohibited; the items do
not create a facility, fire, or safety hazard; and persons with such items remain seated when
displaying them and must not raise the items above shoulder level, obstruct the view or passage
of other attendees, or otherwise disturb the business of the meeting.
TIME ESTIMATES
Listed times are estimates only and are subject to change at any time, including while the
meeting is in progress. The Council reserves the right to use more or less time on any item,
change the order of items and/or continue items to another meeting. Items may be heard
before or after the time estimated on the agenda. This may occur in order to best manage the
time at a meeting or to adapt to the participation of the public.
1 August 24, 2026
Materials submitted after distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection at www.paloalto.gov/agendas.
CALL TO ORDER
SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY (5:30 - 5:45 PM)
1.Review Applications and Select Candidates to Interview for Vacancies on the Historic
Resources Board (HRB); CEQA Status – Not a Project
AGENDA CHANGES, ADDITIONS AND DELETIONS
IN-PERSON PUBLIC COMMENT (5:45 - 6:15 PM)
Members of the public may speak to any item NOT on the agenda. 1-3 minutes depending on number of speakers. In-person
comments will be heard at the beginning of the agenda and remote comments will be heard at the end of the agenda. In-person
Public Comment is limited to 30 minutes. Additional in-person public comments, if any, will be heard at the end of the agenda.
COUNCIL MEMBER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, ANNOUNCEMENTS (6:15 - 6:25 PM)
Members of the public may not speak to the item(s).
STUDY SESSION (6:25 - 7:25 PM)
2.Semi-Annual City Council Discussion with the Independent Police Auditor (IPA)
CONSENT CALENDAR (7:25 - 7:30 PM)
Items will be voted in one motion unless removed from the calendar by three Council Members.
3.Approval of Minutes from August 10, 2026 Meeting
4.Approval of Response to Civil Grand Jury Report “Pothole Damage: Improving Claims
Processes within Santa Clara County”
5.Approval of Five-year Memorandum of Agreement with Stanford University to Provide
Traffic Control Services during Stanford Stadium Events; CEQA status – not a project. Item
Removed Off Agenda
6.Approval of a Purchase Order with Pivot Interiors Inc. in the Amount of $441,056 for
Furniture for the New Laboratory and Environmental Services Building Project (WQ-
14002); CEQA Status – Not a Project
7.Approval of Amendment No. 2 to Contract No. C22182372 with CSWST2 to Add
$170,450, Increasing the Not-to-Exceed Amount to $360,302 and Extending the Contract
2 August 24, 2026
Materials submitted after distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection at www.paloalto.gov/agendas.
Term to December 31, 2028 for Preliminary Design Services to Support Assessment
District Planning and Stakeholder Engagement for the University Avenue Streetscape
Capital Improvement Program Project, PE-21004; CEQA Status – Not a Project
8.SECOND READING: Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Section
2.28.240 [Settlement of Claims and Actions] and Chapter 2.30 [Contracts and Purchasing
Procedures] of the Palo Alto Municipal Code to increase the thresholds for solicitation of
goods and services, increase contract approval and settlement authority, and to make
other technical changes. (FIRST READING: August 10, 2026; PASSED: 7-0)
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS (7:30 - 7:40 PM)
BREAK (15 MINUTES)
ACTION ITEMS (Item 9: 7:55 - 8:40 PM; Item 10: 8:40 - 10:40 PM)
Include: Report of Committees/Commissions, Ordinances and Resolutions, Public Hearings, Report of Officials, Unfinished
Business and Council Matters.
9.Authorization for the City Manager to Execute New and Amended Regulatory
Agreements for the Buena Vista Mobilehome Park Redevelopment/3980 El Camino Real.
CEQA Status: Exempt Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3).
10.Recommendation from the Oversized Vehicles (OSV) Ad Hoc Committee to Launch Two
Pilot OSV Parking Programs, Including Adoption of an Ordinance Establishing an OSV
Parking Permit Program, an Ordinance Amending the Municipal Fee Schedule to Add an
OSV Parking Permit Fee, Resolutions Establishing OSV Parking Permit Districts on
Embarcadero Road and Coyote Hill Road, a Resolution Prohibiting OSV Parking on
Numerous Streets in Palo Alto; a Resolution Adding Related Penalties to the
Administrative Penalty Schedule; and Related Amendments to the FY 2027 Operating
and Capital Budget; CEQA status – categorically and statutorily exempt.
VIRTUAL PUBLIC COMMENT
Members of the public may speak to any item NOT on the agenda. 1-3 minutes depending on number of speakers. In-person
comments will be heard at the beginning of the agenda and remote comments will be heard at the end of the agenda. In-person
Public Comment is limited to 30 minutes. Additional in-person public comments, if any, will be heard at the end of the agenda.
ADJOURNMENT
INFORMATION REPORTS
Information reports are provided for informational purposes only to the Council and the public but are not listed for action or
discussion during this meeting’s agenda.
3 August 24, 2026
Materials submitted after distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection at www.paloalto.gov/agendas.
A.Monthly Investment Report - July 2026 (Unaudited)
B.Semi-annual Reports of Contracts Awarded by the City Manager, Procurement Officer or
Other Designated Employees for the period of January 1, 2026, through June 30,2026;
CEQA Status- Not a Project
C.Surveillance Technology Report for Fiscal Year 2026; CEQA Status- Not a project
OTHER INFORMATION
Standing Committee Meetings this week
Economic Development Committee August 26, 2026
City Schools Liaison Committee August 27, 2026
Public Comment Letters
Schedule of Meetings
AMENDED AGENDA ITEMS
5.Approval of Five-year Memorandum of Agreement with Stanford University to Provide
Traffic Control Services during Stanford Stadium Events; CEQA status – not a project. Item
Removed Off Agenda
4 August 24, 2026
Materials submitted after distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection at www.paloalto.gov/agendas.
PUBLIC COMMENT INSTRUCTIONS
Members of the Public may provide public comments to teleconference meetings via email,
teleconference, or by phone.
1.Written public comments may be submitted by email to city.council@PaloAlto.gov.
2.For in person public comments please complete a speaker request card located on the
table at the entrance to the Council Chambers and deliver it to the Clerk prior to
discussion of the item.
3.Spoken public comments using a computer or smart phone will be accepted through the
teleconference meeting. To address the Council, click on the link below to access a Zoom-
based meeting. Please read the following instructions carefully.
◦You may download the Zoom client or connect to the meeting in- browser. If using
your browser, make sure you are using a current, up-to-date browser: Chrome 30 ,
Firefox 27 , Microsoft Edge 12 , Safari 7 . Certain functionality may be disabled in
older browsers including Internet Explorer. Or download the Zoom application onto
your smart phone from the Apple App Store or Google Play Store and enter in the
Meeting ID below.
◦You may be asked to enter an email address and name. We request that you
identify yourself by name as this will be visible online and will be used to notify you
that it is your turn to speak.
◦When you wish to speak on an Agenda Item, click on “raise hand.” The Clerk will
activate and unmute speakers in turn. Speakers will be notified shortly before they
are called to speak.
◦When called, please limit your remarks to the time limit allotted. A timer will be
shown on the computer to help keep track of your comments.
4.Spoken public comments using a phone use the telephone number listed below. When
you wish to speak on an agenda item hit *9 on your phone so we know that you wish to
speak. You will be asked to provide your first and last name before addressing the Council.
You will be advised how long you have to speak. When called please limit your remarks to
the agenda item and time limit allotted.
CLICK HERE TO JOIN Meeting ID: 362-027-238 Phone: 1-669-900-6833
Americans with Disability Act (ADA) It is the policy of the City of Palo Alto to offer its public
programs, services and meetings in a manner that is readily accessible to all. Persons with
disabilities who require materials in an appropriate alternative format or who require auxiliary
aids to access City meetings, programs, or services may contact the City’s ADA Coordinator at
(650) 329-2550 (voice) or by emailing ada@PaloAlto.gov. Requests for assistance or
accommodations must be submitted at least 24 hours in advance of the meeting, program, or
service.
5 August 24, 2026
Materials submitted after distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection at www.paloalto.gov/agendas.
California Government Code §84308, commonly referred to as the "Levine Act," prohibits an
elected official of a local government agency from participating in a proceeding involving a
license, permit, or other entitlement for use if the official received a campaign contribution
exceeding $500 from a party or participant, including their agents, to the proceeding within the
last 12 months. A “license, permit, or other entitlement for use” includes most land use and
planning approvals and the approval of contracts that are not subject to lowest responsible bid
procedures and have a value over $50,000. A “party” is a person who files an application for, or
is the subject of, a proceeding involving a license, permit, or other entitlement for use. A
“participant” is a person who actively supports or opposes a particular decision in a proceeding
involving a license, permit, or other entitlement for use, and has a financial interest in the
decision. The Levine Act incorporates the definition of “financial interest” in the Political Reform
Act, which encompasses interests in business entities, real property, sources of income, sources
of gifts, and personal finances that may be affected by the Council’s actions. If you qualify as a
“party” or “participant” to a proceeding, and you have made a campaign contribution to a
Council Member exceeding $500 made within the last 12 months, you must disclose the
campaign contribution before making your comments.
6 August 24, 2026
Materials submitted after distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection at www.paloalto.gov/agendas.
City Council
Staff Report
Report Type: SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY
Lead Department: City Clerk
Meeting Date: August 24, 2026
Report #:2605-6350
TITLE
Review Applications and Select Candidates to Interview for Vacancies on the Historic Resources
Board (HRB); CEQA Status – Not a Project
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council review applications, select all three (3) candidates to
interview for the Historic Resources Board, and provide direction on continuing HRB
recruitment efforts.
BACKGROUND
The Spring 2026 Boards & Commissions recruitment opened on January 13, 2026, and closed on
February 18, 2026. Three full-term positions on the HRB were included in the recruitment, and
three applications were received for the HRB during the initial recruitment period. Recruitment
for the Historic Resources Board was extended to remain open until a sufficient number of
qualified applications were received.
The City Clerk’s Office has continued additional recruitment efforts, including additional
outreach and advertising. Two applicants from the initial recruitment period are still under
consideration, and one applicant has since withdrawn. One additional application was received
during the extended recruitment period, totaling three applications currently under
consideration.
Staff recommends moving forward with interviews for the three current applicants to avoid
further delays in filling the HRB vacancies, and to allow timely consideration of applicants who
have been awaiting the next steps in the recruitment process.
Council may direct staff to continue the extended recruitment. Ordinance 55291 allows for
commissioners with expired terms to continue serving on a temporary basis until appointments
are made. Two commissioners have continued to serve on expired terms while recruitment is
1 Ordinance 5529 https://recordsportal.paloalto.gov/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=47708&dbid=0&repo=PaloAlto
Item 1
Item 1 Staff Report
Item 1: Staff Report Pg. 1 Packet Pg. 7 of 254
open, though only one of these commissioners is seeking reappointment. One commissioner
with an expiring term chose not to continue serving during extended recruitment. While the
holdover provision provides continuity during the recruitment process, relying on
commissioners to serve beyond their appointed terms is intended to be temporary and may not
be sustainable through continued recruitment extensions. Further delay in appointments may
result in lack of quorum for the HRB.
3. Per the approved process, Councilmembers will vote on whom to
interview, with each Councilmember allotted twice as many votes as openings. Candidates
must receive a threshold of two votes to be interviewed4. The candidates receiving the top
number of votes are interviewed. The number of candidates interviewed is based on the
number of vacancies as follows:
Interview all candidates if there are 6 or fewer applicants
Interview up to 6 candidates when there are 1-2 openings
Interview up to 8 candidates when there are 3 openings
Interview up to 10 candidates when there are 4 openings
ANALYSIS
3 City Council, May 5, 2025; Agenda Item #11, SR# 2504-4537
https://recordsportal.paloalto.gov/Weblink/DocView.aspx?id=83381
4 October 6, 2025, City Council Action Minutes; Agenda Item #2
https://recordsportal.paloalto.gov/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=83755&dbid=0&repo=PaloAlto
Item 1
Item 1 Staff Report
Item 1: Staff Report Pg. 2 Packet Pg. 8 of 254
Historic Resources Board (HRB)
Vacancies and Term
Dates
Seat Numbers Number of
Applicants
Number of Candidates
to Interview
3 Full Terms
4/1/26 – 3/31/29
1, 2, 3 3 3 (Interview all
candidates per Council’s
approved process7)
HRB Eligibility Requirements8:
Palo Alto residency is not required
All members shall have demonstrated interest in and knowledge of history, architecture
or historic preservation.
Two members shall be professionals in the disciplines of architecture, architectural
history, planning, landscape architecture, or related disciplines, or pre-historic and
historic archeology, folklore, cultural anthropology, curation, or conservation.
o This requirement is currently fulfilled by three members of the commission, two
of which do not have expiring terms. Therefore, this requirement will remain
fulfilled regardless of applicant selection in this recruitment.
At least one member shall possess academic education or practical experience in history
or a related field such as American studies, American civilization, or cultural geography.
o This requirement is currently fulfilled by three members of the commission, and
all three have expired terms in this recruitment. At least one new appointment
must meet this requirement.
FISCAL/RESOURCE IMPACT
None.
STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT
City staff publicized the recruitment through the City’s Uplift Local community newsletter, City
Clerk’s Office newsletters, the City’s website, the City’s social media channels, as well as
LinkedIn advertising. The recruitment was advertised in both print and online in the Palo Alto
Daily Post, and the Palo Alto Weekly print. Recruitment information was posted at Palo Alto
7 City Council, May 5, 2025; Agenda Item #11, SR# 2504-4537
https://recordsportal.paloalto.gov/Weblink/DocView.aspx?id=83381
8 Palo Alto Municipal Code 2.27.010 https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/paloalto/latest/paloalto_ca/0-0-0-
61517
Item 1
Item 1 Staff Report
Item 1: Staff Report Pg. 3 Packet Pg. 9 of 254
libraries, City Hall, and public facing facilities. Information was emailed to previous applicants,
community-based organizations, and businesses related to the commission’s issue areas.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
ATTACHMENTS
APPROVED BY:
Item 1
Item 1 Staff Report
Item 1: Staff Report Pg. 4 Packet Pg. 10 of 254
Historic Resources Board Application
Submitted on 18 May 2026, 6:52pm
Receipt number 21
Related form version 20
Name Aleksandar Patrick Dusan Rakicevic More
Cell Phone Number
Home Phone Number
Email Address
Are you a Palo Alto resident?Yes
Address
City Palo Alto
Postal Code 94306
Do you have any relatives or members of your household
who are employed by the City of Palo Alto, who are
currently serving on the City Council, or who are
Commissioners or Board Members?
No
Are you available and committed to complete the term
applied for?
Yes
Fair Political Practices
California state law requires board/commission members to file a
disclosure of financial interests (Fair Political Practices Commission,
Conflict of Interest, Form 700).
Do you/your spouse have an investment in, or do you or your spouse
serve as an officer or director of, a company doing business in Palo Alto
which you believe is likely to:
1. Engage in business with the City;
2. Provide products or services for City projects; or
3. Be affected by decisions of this Board or Commission?
No
Personal Information
1 of 5
Item 1
Attachment A - HRB
Applications - Redacted
Item 1: Staff Report Pg. 5 Packet Pg. 11 of 254
Excluding your principal residence, do you or your spouse
own real property in Palo Alto?
No
How did you learn about the vacancy on the Historic
Resources Board?
Email from the City
Read the code, and check only ONE option below:I request that the City of Palo Alto redact my home address, phone
numbers, and email address from the attached Board and
Commission Application prior to posting to the City’s website.
Consent to Publish Personal Information on the City of Palo Alto Website
2 of 5
Item 1
Attachment A - HRB
Applications - Redacted
Item 1: Staff Report Pg. 6 Packet Pg. 12 of 254
Occupation Architectural Designer
Please list your relevant education, training, experience,
certificates of training, licenses, and professional
registration. If describing work experience, please include
company/employer name and occupation.
I graduated from Pratt Institute School of Architecture in Brooklyn,
New York with a Bachelor of Architecture degree. My academic
work focused on architectural history, preservation, and adaptive
reuse, through research and international study programs in Rome,
Berlin, and Argentina.
My professional experience began at RMW Architecture and
Interiors during the summer of 2024, where I later returned
following completion of my thesis in September 2025 as an
Architectural Designer. My work at RMW has included the
restoration and reactivation of the landmark 1920s Bank of Italy
Building in San Jose, and work involving an 1884 residence.
From May - August 2025, I was an Architectural Intern at CAW
Architects, contributing to the restoration of the Castro Theatre in
San Francisco, the Berkeley Community Theater restoration and
addition project, and renovation work involving the 1930s
Stanford Graduate School of Education building and a classical
passive-house enclosure update.
Please describe your involvement in community activities,
volunteer and civic organizations, including dates and any
offices held.
Growing up in Palo Alto, I volunteered at the Lucie Stern
Community Center as a theater technician, actor, camp counselor,
and announcer for the Palo Alto May Fete Parade. I also assisted
in archiving historic photographs for the Palo Alto Historical
Association website from the Palo Alto Children’s Theatre from
the 1940s through the 1980s.
I have participated in community and industry volunteer events
through RMW Architecture and Interiors, including volunteering at
the AIA Conference on Architecture 2026 and participating in
California National Parks restoration efforts focused on the
removal of invasive species and restoration of indigenous coastal
landscapes.
Additionally, I have volunteered at the Architecture Industry
Culinary Challenge event and have been involved with AIA Silicon
Valley chapter meetings, Stanford lecture series, and the
Emerging Professionals Program. I am currently working toward
NCARB licensure and am a member of the American Institute of
Architects.
Please select all that apply to you.I have demonstrated interest in and knowledge of history,
architecture or historic preservation
I am a professional in the discipline of architecture, architectural
history, planning, landscape architecture, or related disciplines, or
pre-historic and historic archeology, folklore, cultural
anthropology, curation or conservation
I possess academic education or practical experience in history or a
related field such as American studies, American civilization, or
cultural geography
Personal and Job Experience
3 of 5
Item 1
Attachment A - HRB
Applications - Redacted
Item 1: Staff Report Pg. 7 Packet Pg. 13 of 254
1. Why are you interested in serving on the Historic
Resources Board and what experience would you bring to
the position?
I am interested in serving on the Historic Resources Board because
Palo Alto’s architectural history and neighborhood character
played a major role in inspiring me to pursue architecture as a
career. As the city continues to grow through increased downtown
development and higher-density housing along El Camino Real
and the Baylands area, I have seen many historic structures
disappear or become increasingly vulnerable to insensitive
renovation and demolition.
At the same time, I have been encouraged by recent restoration
and rehabilitation efforts involving historic homes and buildings
throughout Palo Alto and would value the opportunity to support
similar preservation-minded projects in the future. I would
continue to bring both academic and professional experience in
preservation, restoration, and adaptive reuse projects throughout
the Bay Area.
2. Please describe an issue that recently came before the
Board that is of particular interest to you and describe why
you are interested in it.
Archived video meetings are available from the Midpen Media Center.
One recent Historic Resources Board project that particularly
interested me was the October 10, 2024, review for the
rehabilitation and restoration of the historic residence at 1023
Forest Avenue. I was excited to come across the project while
reviewing previous Board meeting footage because it is a home I
have admired for many years while walking through the
neighborhood.
What interested me most was the careful and thoughtful
restoration of the home’s original exterior historic features, while
still allowing for sensitive contemporary improvements. It is
increasingly rare to see historic homes preserved with such
attention to craftsmanship, ornament, and architectural character,
especially as many older homes are heavily altered or demolished
entirely.
Projects like this are important because they help preserve Palo
Alto’s architectural identity and cultural memory while
demonstrating how historic structures can continue to adapt and
remain relevant within the community.
3. If appointed, what specific goals would you like to see the
Historic Resources Board achieve, and how would you help
in the process?
If appointed, I would hope to support the preservation of the vast
diversity of architectural history and movements, neighborhood
character, as well as cultural identity that originally inspired me to
pursue architecture as a career growing up in Palo Alto. I would
bring both my recent academic background in architectural history
and preservation, as well as my professional experience working
on restoration and adaptive reuse projects throughout the Bay
Area.
I believe it is important to encourage thoughtful preservation that
respects the original craftsmanship and historical significance of
buildings while allowing them to remain active and relevant parts
of the community. I would also hope to contribute a distinct
professional perspective while continuing to learn from the great
knowledge and involvement of fellow Board members,
preservation professionals, and community voices.
4. Historic Resources Board Members work with the
documents listed below. If you have experience with any of
Thus far, I have become familiar with historic preservation
guidelines, adaptive reuse strategies, zoning review processes,
Application Questions
4 of 5
Item 1
Attachment A - HRB
Applications - Redacted
Item 1: Staff Report Pg. 8 Packet Pg. 14 of 254
these documents, please describe that experience.
Experience with these documents is not required for
selection.
Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element (2017)
Palo Alto Municipal Code Chapter 16.49
Secretary of the Interiors Standards for the Treatment of Historic
Properties (2017) California Environmental Quality Act
The Professorville Historic District Design Guidelines (2016)
Other documents listed on this website as well.
and design standards related to historic structures. My work on
restoration and rehabilitation projects at RMW Architecture and
Interiors and CAW Architects has required coordination with
existing building conditions, historic architectural elements, code
requirements, and preservation considerations.
Additionally, my studies and professional experience have
involved review of zoning documents, land use considerations, and
environmental review processes related to renovation and
adaptive reuse projects. As I continue pursuing architectural
licensure and preservation-related work, I look forward to further
strengthening my understanding of Palo Alto-specific preservation
guidelines and municipal review processes.
5. Please identify a project or projects that you find to be
examples of good historic architecture, and explain why.
You may attach samples, identify project addresses, or
provide links.
Some of the best examples of historic architecture in Palo Alto are
buildings inlcude the the 1936 Lucie Stern Community Center. Its
Spanish Revival architecture, arcades, gardens, wrought iron
detailing, carved wood beams, and modest yet grand proportions
create a warm and timeless civic environment. The late 90s
addition of the outdoor theater was integrated tastefully through
compatible materials and detailing that respected the original
character of the complex.
Another remarkable example is St. Thomas Aquinas Church,
completed in 1902. Its Carpenter Gothic Victorian architecture,
preserved wood structure, stained glass, and exposed ornamental
trusses make it an increasingly rare surviving example of its kind.
Another unconventional style in a low-density residential context
is the Streamline Moderne residence at 450 North California
Avenue. The home is a rare surviving example of a once-influential
1930s architectural movement that catches my eye every time I
pass it.
If you'd like to provide any additional documents, please
upload below.
PaloAltoForsite.jpg
Hotel-President_2.jpg
106902_original.webp
St._Thomas_Aquinas_Church,_751,_Waverley_Ave.,_Palo_Alto,_CA_5-
27-2012_5-35-22_PM.jpg
98782_original.webp
Please confirm that you have read the Boards and
Commissions Handbook.
View the Boards and Commissions Handbook.
Yes
Signature Name of signatory: Aleksandar Rakicevic-More
Link to signature
Date Completed 05/18/2026
5 of 5
Item 1
Attachment A - HRB
Applications - Redacted
Item 1: Staff Report Pg. 9 Packet Pg. 15 of 254
Item 1
Attachment A -
HRB
Applications -
Redacted
Item 1: Staff Report Pg. 10 Packet Pg. 16 of
254
Item 1
Attachment A - HRB
Applications -
Redacted
Item 1: Staff Report Pg. 11 Packet Pg. 17 of 254
Item 1
Attachment A -
HRB Applications -
Redacted
Item 1: Staff Report Pg. 12 Packet Pg. 18 of
254
Item 1
Attachment A - HRB Applications - Redacted
Item 1: Staff Report Pg. 13 Packet Pg. 19 of 254
Item 1
Attachment A - HRB Applications - Redacted
Item 1: Staff Report Pg. 14 Packet Pg. 20 of 254
Historic Resources Board Application
Submitted on 23 January 2026, 10:26am
Receipt number 17
Related form version 20
Name Alisa Eagleston-Cieslewicz
Cell Phone Number
Home Phone Number
Email Address
Are you a Palo Alto resident?Yes
Address
City Palo Alto
Postal Code 94301
Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are
employed by the City of Palo Alto, who are currently serving on the
City Council, or who are Commissioners or Board Members?
No
Are you available and committed to complete the term applied for?Yes
Fair Political Practices
California state law requires board/commission members to file a disclosure of
financial interests (Fair Political Practices Commission, Conflict of Interest, Form
700).
Do you/your spouse have an investment in, or do you or your spouse serve as an
officer or director of, a company doing business in Palo Alto which you believe is
likely to:
1. Engage in business with the City;
2. Provide products or services for City projects; or
3. Be affected by decisions of this Board or Commission?
No
Excluding your principal residence, do you or your spouse own real
property in Palo Alto?
No
How did you learn about the vacancy on the Historic Resources
Board?
Other: Former Council Member
Personal Information
Consent to Publish Personal Information on the City of Palo Alto Website
1 of 3
Item 1
Attachment A - HRB
Applications - Redacted
Item 1: Staff Report Pg. 15 Packet Pg. 21 of 254
Read the code, and check only ONE option below:I request that the City of Palo Alto redact my home address, phone numbers,
and email address from the attached Board and Commission Application
prior to posting to the City’s website.
Occupation Art Conservator
Please list your relevant education, training, experience, certificates of
training, licenses, and professional registration. If describing work
experience, please include company/employer name and occupation.
I have served as a member of Palo Alto’s HRB since January 2022 when I
filled a partial term. I have since served a full term, including two years as
chair.
I also have relevant professional experience from my career in art
conservation, where I work with the preservation of art and historical objects.
I am a Professional Member of the American Institute for Conservation and
my work includes documentation of art and historic works, understanding of
object life-cycles, and balancing trade-offs between object use and
preservation. I also have experience as a consultant on architectural projects,
where I have worked on items including original woodwork, built-in
furniture, and stonework. I have previously held positions at The Fine Arts
Museums of San Francisco and SFO Museum. I am currently an art
conservator in private practice in Palo Alto at Mayfield Art Conservation and
Consulting LLC.
Please describe your involvement in community activities, volunteer
and civic organizations, including dates and any offices held.
In addition to my previous service on the HRB (2022-present, with 2 years
as chair), I am a member of the board of the Bay Area Art Conservation Guild
and the board of a local independent school. I also write a regular regional
news column for the Western Association for Art Conservation newsletter.
Please select all that apply to you.I have demonstrated interest in and knowledge of history, architecture or
historic preservation
I am a professional in the discipline of architecture, architectural history,
planning, landscape architecture, or related disciplines, or pre-historic and
historic archeology, folklore, cultural anthropology, curation or conservation
Personal and Job Experience
1. Why are you interested in serving on the Historic Resources Board
and what experience would you bring to the position?
I am interested in continuing to serve on the HRB because I think that the
HRB does important work in the community. Palo Alto has excellent historic
architectural resources and input from the HRB provides a valuable tool for
the preservation of Palo Alto’s heritage. I very much value the community
engagement aspect of the HRB, which serves to not only raise awareness of
historic preservation in the city, but also to connect with community
members who may have questions about how the principles of historic
preservation apply to their own properties. As a professional art conservator,
I understand and value historic preservation, and I am enthusiastic about
sharing this with the community.
2. Please describe an issue that recently came before the Board that is
of particular interest to you and describe why you are interested in it.
Archived video meetings are available from the Midpen Media Center.
Recently the HRB has been working to establish a preservation awards
program. This has been an interesting process because it has required
discussion of what types of projects we would like to highlight to the
community as outstanding examples, how we structure the program to be
achievable for the HRB and staff, and how we avoid duplication or
redundancy with community groups that also give awards in this space. It
has been interesting to visit award candidate properties in person because
this allows me to see different approaches to projects such as renovations
and additions and it is always enjoyable to see historic properties in the city
that I was not familiar with previously. Historic preservation relies on
community engagement and support and I am excited to be developing an
HRB awards program as a way to connect with Palo Alto residents and
businesses.
Application Questions
2 of 3
Item 1
Attachment A - HRB
Applications - Redacted
Item 1: Staff Report Pg. 16 Packet Pg. 22 of 254
3. If appointed, what specific goals would you like to see the Historic
Resources Board achieve, and how would you help in the process?
I am very enthusiastic about the HRB awards program that is under
development and that I discussed in Question 2. I am currently supporting
this initiative by reviewing and visiting individual projects and properties.
I also think that the routine project reviews that the HRB does for historic
properties is important ongoing work. These reviews give property owners
important information and guidance about their proposed projects and help
maintain the character of historic properties, while also giving owners the
opportunity to make historic properties functional for modern needs. I look
forward to participating in this process and facilitating partnerships between
the City and property owners.
Finally, it would be wonderful to work with City Council to develop a pilot
program giving property owners access to the Mills Act. The Mills Act is an
important tool for encouraging historic preservation in California and it
would be wonderful to make it available in Palo Alto.
4. Historic Resources Board Members work with the documents listed
below. If you have experience with any of these documents, please
describe that experience. Experience with these documents is not
required for selection.
Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element (2017)
Palo Alto Municipal Code Chapter 16.49
Secretary of the Interiors Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties (2017)
California Environmental Quality Act
The Professorville Historic District Design Guidelines (2016)
Other documents listed on this website as well.
I am a familiar with all of these documents through my previous work as a
member of the Historic Resources Board. I am particularly familiar with the
Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties
because these standards are often invoked for historic house museums. As
an owner and resident of a Category 2 historic home in Professorville, I am
also particularly familiar with the Professorville Historic District Design
Guidelines.
5. Please identify a project or projects that you find to be examples of
good historic architecture, and explain why. You may attach samples,
identify project addresses, or provide links.
One of the wonderful things about Palo Alto is the historic architecture that
is present throughout the city. It is hard to discuss architecture in Palo Alto
without mentioning the work of architect Birge Clark and developer Joseph
Eichler. The Norris House at 1247 Cowper St. is an outstanding example of
Birge Clark’s work in the Spanish Colonial Revival style. The ironwork and
light on the entrance gate are particularly striking and the PAST award that
the home won in 2004 is a testament to its thoughtful preservation. Its
history as the Newman Center also speaks to the often fascinating use
histories of significant buildings. The designation of the Greenmeadow
Eichler neighborhood on the National Register of Historic Places is a
wonderful acknowledgment of the contributions of mid-century architecture
to Palo Alto’s landscape. I also think that the Theophilus Allen House at 601
Melville Ave. is an outstanding example of Craftsman architecture in Palo
Alto.
If you'd like to provide any additional documents, please upload
below.
Please confirm that you have read the Boards and Commissions
Handbook.
View the Boards and Commissions Handbook.
Yes
Signature Name of signatory: Alisa Eagleston-Cieslewicz
Link to signature
Date Completed 01/23/2026
3 of 3
Item 1
Attachment A - HRB
Applications - Redacted
Item 1: Staff Report Pg. 17 Packet Pg. 23 of 254
Historic Resources Board Application
Submitted on 17 February 2026, 7:51pm
Receipt number 19
Related form version 20
Name Nandini Ramamurthi
Cell Phone Number
Home Phone Number
Email Address
Are you a Palo Alto resident?Yes
Address
City palo alto
Postal Code 94303
Do you have any relatives or members of your household who are
employed by the City of Palo Alto, who are currently serving on the
City Council, or who are Commissioners or Board Members?
No
Are you available and committed to complete the term applied for?Yes
Fair Political Practices
California state law requires board/commission members to file a disclosure of
financial interests (Fair Political Practices Commission, Conflict of Interest, Form
700).
Do you/your spouse have an investment in, or do you or your spouse serve as an
officer or director of, a company doing business in Palo Alto which you believe is
likely to:
1. Engage in business with the City;
2. Provide products or services for City projects; or
3. Be affected by decisions of this Board or Commission?
Yes
Excluding your principal residence, do you or your spouse own real
property in Palo Alto?
No
How did you learn about the vacancy on the Historic Resources
Board?
City Website
Personal Information
Consent to Publish Personal Information on the City of Palo Alto Website
1 of 3
Item 1
Attachment A - HRB
Applications - Redacted
Item 1: Staff Report Pg. 18 Packet Pg. 24 of 254
Read the code, and check only ONE option below:I request that the City of Palo Alto redact my home address, phone numbers,
and email address from the attached Board and Commission Application
prior to posting to the City’s website.
Occupation Senior Designer, Arcanum Architecture
Please list your relevant education, training, experience, certificates of
training, licenses, and professional registration. If describing work
experience, please include company/employer name and occupation.
I have over twenty years of professional experience in architecture, focused
primarily on residential design, including custom single-family homes,
additions, remodels, and small multifamily projects. Since 2021, I have
practiced at Arcanum Architecture, managing projects through design,
permitting, and construction. Previously, I worked at several firms in Palo
Alto and the Bay Area, where I led residential projects and coordinated
closely with consultants, contractors, and local agencies. I also served as
Planning Staff for the City of Palo Alto, reviewing development applications
for zoning compliance and advising applicants on municipal codes and
procedures. This combination of private practice and public service has given
me a strong understanding of Palo Alto’s regulatory framework, residential
design standards, and neighborhood context. I hold a Master of Architecture
from University of Southern California.
Please describe your involvement in community activities, volunteer
and civic organizations, including dates and any offices held.
Although I have not held formal positions in preservation-focused
organizations, I have been consistently engaged in the Palo Alto community
through both my professional work and prior public service. As an architect
practicing locally for many years, and as a former Planning Staff member for
the City of Palo Alto, I have participated in public hearings, Architectural
Review Board meetings, and neighborhood discussions concerning
residential development, zoning compliance, and neighborhood character.
My work frequently involves projects within established neighborhoods,
where sensitivity to scale, context, and architectural heritage is essential.
These experiences have deepened my appreciation for Palo Alto’s history
and the importance of preserving its urban fabric while allowing thoughtful
and well-considered change. I am motivated to contribute more directly to
the community through service on the Historic Resources Board.
Please select all that apply to you.I am a professional in the discipline of architecture, architectural history,
planning, landscape architecture, or related disciplines, or pre-historic and
historic archeology, folklore, cultural anthropology, curation or conservation
Personal and Job Experience
1. Why are you interested in serving on the Historic Resources Board
and what experience would you bring to the position?
I am interested in serving on the Historic Resources Board because I care
deeply about Palo Alto’s architectural heritage and the role thoughtful
preservation plays in shaping the city’s identity. Having practiced
architecture in Palo Alto for many years, and having previously served as
Planning Staff for the City, I bring a unique vantage point: I understand both
the creative aspirations of designers and homeowners and the regulatory
constraints that guide development.
While I value maintaining and protecting the city’s historic fabric, I am also
interested in how the decisions we make today will become the history of
the future. This period of growth and change will ultimately define another
chapter of Palo Alto’s story. I believe the HRB has an important role in
establishing clear, thoughtful guidelines that not only preserve significant
resources but also ensure that new interventions contribute meaningfully to
the city’s evolving architectural narrative.
2. Please describe an issue that recently came before the Board that is
of particular interest to you and describe why you are interested in it.
Archived video meetings are available from the Midpen Media Center.
I am interested in the HRB's role in reviewing and updating Palo Alto’s
historic inventory. A few cases that stood out to me are 1680 Bryant Street,
411 and 431 - 433 Kipling Street.
Most interestingly, I thought 261 Hamilton Avenue was a fantastic example
of a building worth preserving and an applicant pushing for stronger historic
Application Questions
2 of 3
Item 1
Attachment A - HRB
Applications - Redacted
Item 1: Staff Report Pg. 19 Packet Pg. 25 of 254
protection which is not usually the case. It has turned out to be a fantastic
project!
3. If appointed, what specific goals would you like to see the Historic
Resources Board achieve, and how would you help in the process?
I would like to see the HRB continue to advance its thoughtful stewardship
of the Professorville Historic District. Professorville represents an important
chapter in the city's early residential development, and its character
contributes significantly to the it’s identity.
At the same time, properties within the district face evolving needs. I believe
the Board can play a constructive role in clarifying guidelines that allow
sensitive, well-designed development while maintaining the district’s
defining features of scale, massing, materials, and streetscape rhythm.
I would contribute by bringing my experience designing residential projects
within Palo Alto’s regulatory framework, understanding both the constraints
property owners face and the importance of preserving neighborhood
character. My goal would be to help facilitate solutions that respect historic
context while acknowledging that careful change, when thoughtfully guided,
can strengthen the long-term vitality of the district.
4. Historic Resources Board Members work with the documents listed
below. If you have experience with any of these documents, please
describe that experience. Experience with these documents is not
required for selection.
Palo Alto Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element (2017)
Palo Alto Municipal Code Chapter 16.49
Secretary of the Interiors Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties (2017)
California Environmental Quality Act
The Professorville Historic District Design Guidelines (2016)
Other documents listed on this website as well.
I am very well versed in Palo Alto Municipal Code Chapter 16.49 and The
Professorville Historic District Design Guidelines (2016).
My experience in the Planning Department has exposed me to several of
these documents.
5. Please identify a project or projects that you find to be examples of
good historic architecture, and explain why. You may attach samples,
identify project addresses, or provide links.
Ramona Street is one of the most charming and architecturally cohesive
blocks in the City. The courtyard typology makes Ramona Street naturally
suited to restaurants and street life.
The Lucie Stern Community Center, designed by Birge Clark, exemplifies
Palo Alto's civic identity through its Spanish Colonial Revival architecture.
Unlike many civic buildings that outlive their original purpose, I love how
Lucie Stern was designed for community life in all its variety and it shows in
how naturally it still functions today.
The Eichler neighbohoods also represent a very unique and significant
architectural chapter.
And finally the Palo Alto Post Office! It will be interesting to see what the
future holds for this building!
If you'd like to provide any additional documents, please upload
below.
Please confirm that you have read the Boards and Commissions
Handbook.
View the Boards and Commissions Handbook.
Yes
Signature Name of signatory: nandini ramamurthi
Link to signature
Date Completed 02/17/2026
3 of 3
Item 1
Attachment A - HRB
Applications - Redacted
Item 1: Staff Report Pg. 20 Packet Pg. 26 of 254
City Council
Staff Report
From: City Manager
Report Type: STUDY SESSION
Lead Department: City Manager
Meeting Date: August 24, 2026
Report #:2606-6456
TITLE
Semi-Annual City Council Discussion with the Independent Police Auditor (IPA)
RECOMMENDATION
This Study Session is a semi-annual opportunity for City Council discussion with the
Independent Police Auditor. There is no recommended action.
BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS
This is the study session with the City’s Independent Police Auditor (IPA) from the
representatives of the OIR Group, the City’s contracted consultant for the Independent Police
Auditor function. It is the first discussion in this calendar year. The previous discussion took
place with the City Council in 2025.
Discussion Purpose: In the amended contract scope with the OIR group, it states the following
related to the IPA meetings with the City Council:
Beginning in the second half of 2021, CONSULTANT shall meet with the City Council two
times per year to discuss trends in criminal justice and policing, policy and training
matters, recommendations made by CONSULTANT, and other City Council concerns.
CONSULTANT’S conferences with City Council are not for the purpose of elaborating on
published reviews of specific incidents and shall not include discussion of personnel
matters prohibited by law. Semi-annual conferences shall be scheduled after publication
of the CONSULTANT’S report, according to availability of City Council and the
CONSULTANT.
Consistent with the description above, the City Council discussion with the IPA is based on City
Council agenda availability and is not focused on the most recent report from OIR Group.
Item 2
Item 2 Staff Report
Item 2: Staff Report Pg. 1 Packet Pg. 27 of 254
However, for ease in reference, the most recent OIR Group report was issued as an
Informational Report in the June 15, 2026 City Council packet.1
Additionally, the City Council, on June 1, 2026 asked the next IPA discussion to also include a
discussion with the IPA about an independent assessment scope related to Flock automated
license plate recognition (ALPR).2 The June report shared that the goal of the IPA’s review will
be to conduct an operational assessment of Flock’s policies and procedures around security,
transparency, sharing compliance, and reporting of system features and changes. In addition,
though the Police Department (PAPD) has training, a surveillance use policy, 30-day data
retention period, and a requirement of an MOU for each agency with which it shares data, the
IPA will also assess PAPD’s internal policies and procedures with an eye toward areas where it
may be able to do even better. The City Council asked for more information about the scope
and asked to discuss this with the IPA at this study session. OIR reviewed the June City Council
meeting and heard the public comments. Attachment A provides OIR‘s proposed assessment
topics. OIR will begin the work identified in the scope of work after the City Council discussion,
incorporating any agreed upon scope changes.
FISCAL/RESOURCE IMPACT
No additional funds are needed for this study session.
STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT
The discussion with the City Council is an opportunity for the public to also share feedback
related to issues covered by the IPA. Members of the public interested in this discussion may
have submitted comments to the City Council inbox for consideration.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Not a project.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A: OIR Group Review of Palo Alto ALPRs - Proposed Topics
APPROVED BY:
Ed Shikada, City Manager
1 June 15, 2026 staff report: https://www.paloalto.gov/files/assets/public/v/1/police-
department/accountability/ipa-reports/november-2025-independent-police-auditor’s-report-and-papd-use-of-
force-report.pdf
2 June 1, 2026 City Council meeting, Item #2:
https://cityofpaloalto.primegov.com/Portal/Meeting?meetingTemplateId=18727
Item 2
Item 2 Staff Report
Item 2: Staff Report Pg. 2 Packet Pg. 28 of 254
TO: Palo Alto City Council
CC: City Manager Ed Shikada
Chief James Reifschneider, PAPD
FROM: Michael Gennaco, Stephen Connolly & Teresa Magula
Auditing Team for ALPR Review
DATE: August 11, 2026
RE: City of Palo Alto’s Review of Automated License Plate Recognition
Program
Background
OIR Group has been advised that Council intends to hold a session on August 24,
2026, and potentially request us to conduct an audit of PAPD’s use of its Automated
License Plate Recognition (ALPR) Program. We have been also advised of the
Council’s intention to provide input on the scope of that audit.
To assist in that process, we have framed potential topics that could be considered as
the audit’s parameters are discussed at that meeting. These suggestions are based on
our familiarity with issues of concern and our related review projects involving ALPR
systems for the Counties of Santa Clara and Santa Cruz, the City of Pasadena, and
other jurisdictions with which we have been engaged. We look forward to the
discussion and Council’s ultimate direction.
6510 Spring Street #613
Long Beach, CA 90815
323-821-0586
OIRGroup.com
Item 2
Attachment A - OIR Group
Review of Palo Alto ALPRs -
Proposed Topics
Item 2: Staff Report Pg. 3 Packet Pg. 29 of 254
OIR Group – Proposed Topics for Palo Alto ALPR Review
Page 2 of 4
Potential Focus Areas for Audit Review
1. Concerns About the Current ALPR System in Palo Alto
How PAPD arrived at the current situation
Data sharing concerns
Other concerns about ALPR installation, placement, and use
Concerns regarding Flock’s remediation efforts
2. Internal Access and Appropriate Use
Who has access to the system and whether access is appropriately restricted
Whether queries are tied to a legitimate law enforcement purpose
Use of case numbers and offense types to validate searches
How the system is used in practice (e.g., investigative tool vs. broader
exploratory use)
3. Data Sharing and External Access
Which outside agencies have access to Palo Alto data and under what
agreements
Whether current MOUs adequately define and limit access and use
Whether partner agencies are conducting their own audits or oversight
Whether additional safeguards (e.g., reciprocal audit requirements) are feasible
What searches are outside agencies conducting using Palo Alto data
4. Data Retention and Storage
Current retention period and whether it aligns with policy and best practices
How and where data is stored (e.g., cloud environment)
Whether data deletion practices are automatic, verified, and consistently applied
Item 2
Attachment A - OIR Group
Review of Palo Alto ALPRs -
Proposed Topics
Item 2: Staff Report Pg. 4 Packet Pg. 30 of 254
OIR Group – Proposed Topics for Palo Alto ALPR Review
Page 3 of 4
5. System Security and Auditability
What security controls are in place to protect data (e.g., authentication, access
restrictions)
Whether audit logs are complete, reliable, and sufficient to monitor system use
Whether the system allows for identifying and addressing errors or misuse
6. Vendor Governance and Platform Evolution
Significant platform changes, upgrades, and new features implemented during
the review period
How product changes may have affected data sharing, access controls,
retention, auditing, or security
How Flock communicates product updates, policy changes, identified issues, and
compliance-related developments to customers
Whether Palo Alto has adequate processes for reviewing and responding to
vendor communications
Review of contracts, amendments, and other agreements related to:
o Data ownership
o Retention
o Audit rights
o Security requirements
o Notification obligations
o Compliance with California law
Evaluation of vendor-provided reporting, auditing, and oversight tools available to
the City
Review of significant vendor-identified issues, corrective actions, and resulting
safeguards
Assessment of whether City governance practices keep pace with platform
changes and evolving capabilities
7. Policy, Procedures, and Oversight
Whether existing policies and procedures adequately govern system use,
access, and sharing
Item 2
Attachment A - OIR Group
Review of Palo Alto ALPRs -
Proposed Topics
Item 2: Staff Report Pg. 5 Packet Pg. 31 of 254
OIR Group – Proposed Topics for Palo Alto ALPR Review
Page 4 of 4
Whether training, supervision, and internal audit practices are in place and
effective
Alignment with applicable legal requirements and best practices
8. Effectiveness and Value
How the system is being used across different types of cases
Whether it contributes meaningfully to investigative outcomes (e.g., arrests,
recoveries)
Distinction between cases where ALPR use is central vs. supplemental
Overall assessment of the system’s value relative to its use and impact(s)
9. Best Practices and Benchmarking
Identification of opportunities to strengthen safeguards, accountability, and
effectiveness
Item 2
Attachment A - OIR Group
Review of Palo Alto ALPRs -
Proposed Topics
Item 2: Staff Report Pg. 6 Packet Pg. 32 of 254
City Council
Staff Report
Report Type: CONSENT CALENDAR
Lead Department: City Clerk
Meeting Date: August 24, 2026
Report #:2608-6626
TITLE
Approval of Minutes from August 10, 2026 Meeting
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council review and approve the minutes.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A: August 10, 2026 Draft Action Minutes
APPROVED BY:
Mahealani Ah Yun, City Clerk
Item 3
Item 3 Staff Report
Item 3: Staff Report Pg. 1 Packet Pg. 33 of 254
CITY COUNCIL
DRAFT ACTION MINUTES
Page 1 of 6
Regular Meeting
August 10, 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, Stone, Veenker
Present Remotely: Keith Reckdahl Remote Call In Teleconference Location: Holiday
Inn Huntsville Research Park, 5903 University Drive, Huntsville,
Alabama 35806
Absent:
Agenda Changes, Additions and Deletions
In-Person Public Comment
Council Member Questions, Comments and Announcements
Consent Calendar
MOTION: Councilmember Lythcott-Haims moved, seconded by Councilmember Lauing to
approve Agenda Item Numbers 1-18.
MOTION PASSED: 7-0
1. Approval of Minutes from June 8 and June 15, 2026 Meetings
2. Recommend City Council Approval to Extend Certain FY 2026 City Auditor Task Orders
with No Impact to Task Order Budgets
3. Recommend City Council Approval of the City Auditor Annual Risk Assessment and FY
2027 Audit Plan and Corresponding Task Orders. CEQA Status: Not a Project.
Item 3
Attachment A - August 10,
2026 Draft Action Minutes
Item 3: Staff Report Pg. 2 Packet Pg. 34 of 254
DRAFT ACTION MINUTES
Page 2 of 6
City Council Meeting
Draft Action Minutes: 08/10/2026
4. Approve Program Guidelines for a Public Agency Electric Vehicle Charging Hub Grant
Program; CEQA Status - Under CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, Projects Consistent with
an Existing General or Comprehensive Plan do not Require Additional CEQA Review
5. Adoption of a Resolution Establishing the FY 2027 Property Tax Levy for City of Palo Alto
General Obligation Bonds (2008 Measure N Library Projects); CEQA Status: Not a Project
6. Adopt a Resolution Making Required Findings in Support of Acceptance of Funding from
Vehicle Registration Fee-Intelligent Transportation Systems (VRF-ITS) Cycle 5 Grant
Program; and amendment of the FY 2027 Budget in the Capital Improvement Fund.
CEQA Status – Categorically Exempt (CEQA Guidelines section 15301b Existing Facilities).
7. Adoption of a Resolution Approving a NAESB Base Contract for Sale and Purchase of
Natural Gas with JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. and Authorizing the City Manager or Their
Designee to Transact Under the Contract for a Portion of the City’s Natural Gas
Requirements; CEQA Status: Not a Project, CEQA Guidelines 15378(b)(5)
8. Adoption of an Ordinance Amending Section 2.38.240 [Settlement of Claims and
Actions] and Chapter 2.30 [Contracts and Purchasing Procedures] of the Palo Alto
Municipal Code, as accepted by the Policy and Services Committee, to increase the
thresholds for solicitation of goods and services, increase contract approval and
settlement authority, and to make other technical changes.
9. Approval of Purchase Order with JAM Services, Inc. for the purchase of Traffic Signal
Network Switches for a Total Not-To-Exceed Amount of $714,639 for 2 years; and
amendment of the FY 2027 Budget in the Capital Improvement Fund. CEQA Status –
Categorically Exempt (CEQA Guidelines section 15301).
10. Approval of Contract C27197195 with High Point Power Systems in the Amount of
$286,660 for the Repair and Refurbishment of a Load Tap Changer Located at Adobe
Creek Substation; and Authorization for the City Manager or Their Designee to Execute
Change Orders in an Amount Not-to-Exceed $28,666, for a Total Contract Not-to-Exceed
Amount of $315,326. CEQA Status –Categorically Exempt Under CEQA Guidelines
Sections 15301 and 51302.
11. Approval of Contract No. C27196740 with Blackhawk Painting Inc. in the Amount of
$735,500 Over a Period of 18 Months for Electric Substations Equipment and
Mechanical Structures Painting Services; Authorization for the City Manager or Their
Designee to Execute Change Orders in an Amount Not-to-Exceed of $73,550, for a Total
Not-to-Exceed Contract Amount of $809,050; and Approval of a Budget Amendment in
the Electric Fund; CEQA Status: Categorically Exempt Under CEQA Guidelines Section
15301.
Item 3
Attachment A - August 10,
2026 Draft Action Minutes
Item 3: Staff Report Pg. 3 Packet Pg. 35 of 254
DRAFT ACTION MINUTES
Page 3 of 6
City Council Meeting
Draft Action Minutes: 08/10/2026
12. Authorization to Execute Amendment to Legal Services Contract S25194587 with
Atkinson Andelson Loya Ruud & Romo to Increase Amount by $100,000 for Total Not-to-
Exceed Amount of $285,000; CEQA Status – Not a Project.
13. Approval of Amendment No. 1 to Contract No. C24189086 with Carollo Engineers, Inc.,
to Increase the Contract Amount by $551,755 for a Revised Total Not-to-Exceed Amount
of $3,294,529, and to Extend the Contract Term by Six Months through December 2027,
for the Long Range Facilities Plan Update for the Regional Water Quality Control Plant
(WQ-19002); CEQA Status – Not a Project
14. Approval of Contract Amendment No. 1 to Contract No. C25191297 with Kittelson &
Associates to Extend the Term through September 9, 2028, and Update the Scope of
Services and Schedule of Rates for the South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity Project
(Southern Palo Alto Bicycle and Pedestrian Railroad Crossing Study), with No Increase to
the Previously Approved Not-to-Exceed Compensation; CEQA Status – Categorically
Exempt
15. SECOND READING: Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Section
18.18.120 of Title 18 (Zoning) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code to Allow Greater
Flexibility for Noncomplying Facilities in the Commercial Downtown District (FIRST
READING: June 15, 2026; PASSED: 7-0)
16. SECOND READING: Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Various
Chapters of Title 18 (Zoning) and Chapter 16.59 (Citywide Transportation Impact Fee of
the Palo Alto Municipal Code, and the Zoning Map, to Implement Retail Vitality
Measures (FIRST READING: June 15, 2026; PASSED: 7-0)
17. SECOND READING: Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Chapter
12.32 (Water Use Regulations) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code to Incorporate Additional
Water Use Regulations (FIRST READING: June 8, 2026; PASSED: 7-0)
18. SECOND READING: Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending the
College Terrace Residential Parking Program (RPP) at PAMC Section 10.46.060 to
Remove Fixed Permit Terms, Sale and Grace Periods (FIRST READING: June 15, 2026;
PASSED: 7-0)
City Manager Comments
Ed Shikada, City Manager
Item 3
Attachment A - August 10,
2026 Draft Action Minutes
Item 3: Staff Report Pg. 4 Packet Pg. 36 of 254
DRAFT ACTION MINUTES
Page 4 of 6
City Council Meeting
Draft Action Minutes: 08/10/2026
Action Items
19. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Objections for Weed Abatement Assessments; and
Adoption of Resolution Confirming the Weed Abatement Report and Ordering
Abatement Costs to be a Special Assessment on the Properties Specified in the Report;
CEQA status – categorically exempt.
Councilmember Lu, Mayor Veenker, and City Manager Ed Shikada recused from Stanford-
related portions of the item.
MOTION: Councilmember Burt moved, seconded by Councilmember Lythcott-Haims to:
1. Hold a public hearing to hear and consider objections from affected property owners of
proposed assessments related to completed weed abatement work at 3500 Deer Creek
Rd., and
2. Adopt a resolution confirming the report and ordering abatement costs to be a special
assessment on the 3500 Deer Creek Rd. property specified in the report (Attachment A)
MOTION PASSED: 5-0, Lu, Veenker Recused
MOTION: Vice Mayor Stone moved, seconded by Councilmember Lauing to:
1. Hold a public hearing to hear and consider objections from affected property owners of
proposed assessments related to completed weed abatement work, and
2. Adopt a resolution confirming the report and ordering abatement costs to be a special
assessment on the properties specified in the report (Attachment A)
MOTION PASSED: 7-0
20. Approval to Proceed with Final Design for the Permanent Installation of the Crescent
Park Traffic Calming Project including a Bulb-out on Southwood Drive and East Crescent
Drive; CEQA status – categorically exempt.
MOTION: Councilmember Burt moved, seconded by Councilmember Lythcott-Haims to
approve the final concept design and proceed with Option 1: Permanent Traffic Calming, which
includes the permanent installation of the bulb-out at Southwood Drive and East Crescent Drive
as part of the Crescent Park Traffic Calming Project with the modification that the bulb-out at
Crescent and Southwood be reduced in size to the minimum necessary to support the turning
radius.
Item 3
Attachment A - August 10,
2026 Draft Action Minutes
Item 3: Staff Report Pg. 5 Packet Pg. 37 of 254
DRAFT ACTION MINUTES
Page 5 of 6
City Council Meeting
Draft Action Minutes: 08/10/2026
MOTION PASSED: 5-2, Lauing, Reckdahl no
21. Adoption of a Resolution Authorizing the Borrowing of Funds on an Interim Basis for
Improvements to the City's Regional Water Quality Control Plant and Authorizing the
Execution and Delivery of a Revolving Credit Agreement, Fee Letter and Related Note;
CEQA Status - Not a Project
MOTION: Mayor Veenker moved, seconded by Vice Mayor Stone to adopt the attached
resolution (Attachment A) authorizing the borrowing of funds on an interim basis for
improvements to the City's Regional Water Quality Control Plant and authorize the execution
and delivery of a Revolving Credit Agreement and related Note for a total not to exceed $31
million for five years and a Fee Letter.
MOTION PASSED: 7-0
22. Adoption of a Resolution to Reduce the Membership of the Stormwater Management
Oversight Committee and Direction Related to an Amendment to the Palo Alto
Municipal Code to Streamline the Functions of the Historic Resources Board; CEQA
Status - Not a Project
MOTION: Council Member Burt moved, seconded by Mayor Veenker to:
1. Adopt a Resolution to reduce the membership of the Stormwater Management
Oversight Committee (SWMOC) from seven (7) members to five (5) members.
2. Direct staff to receive input on the proposed changes from the Historic Resources Board
(HRB), along with staff input for future Council consideration. Direct staff to explore
what other jurisdictions have done relating to the HRB concerns. Return to Council with
an evaluation of relaxing term limits for the HRB and SWMOC.
MOTION PASSED: 7-0
AA1. Removal of Planning and Transportation Commissioner Forest Olaf Peterson Item
Removed Off Agenda
Agenda Item Number AA1 not heard.
Virtual Public Comment
Item 3
Attachment A - August 10,
2026 Draft Action Minutes
Item 3: Staff Report Pg. 6 Packet Pg. 38 of 254
DRAFT ACTION MINUTES
Page 6 of 6
City Council Meeting
Draft Action Minutes: 08/10/2026
Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 9:10 P.M.
ATTEST: APPROVED:
____________________ ____________________
City Clerk Mayor
NOTE: Action minutes are prepared in accordance with Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC)
2.04.160(a) and (b). Summary minutes (sense) are prepared in accordance with PAMC Section
2.04.160(c). Beginning in January 2018, in accordance with Ordinance No. 5423, the City Council
found action minutes and the video/audio recordings of Council proceedings to be the official
records of both Council and committee proceedings. These recordings are available on the
City’s website.
Item 3
Attachment A - August 10,
2026 Draft Action Minutes
Item 3: Staff Report Pg. 7 Packet Pg. 39 of 254
City Council
Staff Report
From: City Attorney
Report Type: CONSENT CALENDAR
Lead Department: City Attorney
Meeting Date: August 24, 2026
Report #: 2606-6490
TITLE
Approval of Response to Civil Grand Jury Report “Pothole Damage: Improving Claims Processes
within Santa Clara County”
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that Council approve the following response to the 2025-2026 Santa Clara
County Civil Grand Jury Report entitled, “Pothole Damage: Improving Claims Processes within
Santa Clara County.”
BACKGROUND
On June 12, 2026, the Civil Grand Jury of Santa Clara County released a report entitled “Pothole
Damage: Improving Claims Processes within Santa Clara County.” The Grand Jury Report
examined how the County of Santa Clara and the 15 cities and towns within the County,
including Palo Alto, receive, investigate, and resolve claims filed by residents seeking
reimbursement for vehicle damage caused by potholes.
The Grand Jury found that 92% of pothole claims filed countywide from 2020 to 2025 were
rejected, most commonly because a claim was filed with the wrong jurisdiction, the agency had
no prior notice of the pothole, or the claim was untimely or incomplete. The Grand Jury also
believes that claims websites across the County generally lack clear information about which
jurisdiction is responsible for a given road, and that most jurisdictions do not offer claim forms
in languages other than English or explain the specific reason for a claim’s rejection.
The report made four findings and four recommendations applicable to the City of Palo Alto. A
copy of the Grand Jury Report is included as Attachment A.
The following tables summarize the City of Palo Alto’s responses to street condition-related
claims and, more specifically, pothole claims during the approximately five-year period covered
by the Grand Jury Report.
Item 4
Item 4 Staff Report
Item 4: Staff Report Pg. 1 Packet Pg. 40 of 254
All Claims Related to Street Condition (January 20, 2020 Through October 31, 2025)
Insufficient 31 29 due to jurisdiction; 2 due
to incomplete information
Rejected 26
Late 2
Settled 2
TOTAL 61
Insufficient 19 18 due to jurisdiction; 1 due
to missing supporting
documentation
Rejected 6
Late 1
Settled 0
TOTAL 26
During the five-year period, the City settled two of 61 street condition-related claims received.
With respect to pothole claims, the City found 19 of the 26 claims insufficient and denied the
seven remaining claims.
The City Attorney’s Office is primarily responsible reviewing and responding to government
claims received by the City. The Office has reviewed the Grand Jury’s findings and
recommendations and has provided a draft response to the Grand Jury in Attachment B. The
recommended response to the Grand Jury is summarized below.
25.
Jurisdictions within Santa Clara County rejected 92% of pothole claims from 2020 to 2025 due to
reasons including missed deadlines, incorrect jurisdiction, and lack of prior notice.
The City of Palo Alto agrees with this finding to the extent reflects
the disposition of pothole claims submitted to the City of Palo Alto. Claimants are required to
follow the Government Claims Act (Gov. Code § 900 et seq.), which requires anyone seeking
money damages from a California public entity to first file a written claim with that entity
within six months of the incident for claims involving death, personal injury, or damage to
personal property—which includes vehicle damage from potholes.
Item 4
Item 4 Staff Report
Item 4: Staff Report Pg. 2 Packet Pg. 41 of 254
The Act’s purpose is to give the agency a chance to investigate and pay or settle without
litigation and to budget for possible future liabilities. The entity then has 45 days to accept,
reject, or fail to act on the claim. If the claim is rejected, the claimant has six months to file a
lawsuit. Suing without first complying with this claim-presentation process generally bars the
case.
Civil Grand Jury Finding 2: Jurisdictional Confusion
Claims are often rejected because the claimant filed with the incorrect jurisdiction, which can
happen because jurisdictional lines are often unclear or poorly communicated. The claims
websites of all jurisdictions within Santa Clara County lack information about how to determine
if a road is in its jurisdiction.
City of Palo Alto Response: The City of Palo Alto agrees with the finding in part. It is the
claimant’s responsibility to determine the jurisdiction in which an incident took place. However,
it is common for claims to be submitted to multiple jurisdictions because claimants and/or their
attorneys fail to conduct a diligent investigation before filing their claims, and find it is easier to
submit claims to multiple jurisdictions without evaluating where the incident actually occurred.
During the reporting period January 20, 2020 through October 31, 2025, 26 pothole damage
claims were submitted to the City of Palo Alto, and 18 were sent back as insufficient due to
jurisdiction (69%).
Item 4
Item 4 Staff Report
Item 4: Staff Report Pg. 3 Packet Pg. 42 of 254
Civil Grand Jury Recommendation 2a
All jurisdictions within Santa Clara County should include a link to a map or list of roads they
maintain on their claims website. The jurisdictions should implement this by December 15, 2026.
The City of Palo Alto will implement this recommendation in
modified form. The City will update its website to direct claimants to a publicly available online
mapping or search tool, such as Google, to help them confirm whether a given road is
maintained by the City by December 15, 2026.
All jurisdictions within Santa Clara County should update their claims websites to identify roads
that are commonly mistaken as being in their jurisdictions. The jurisdictions should implement
this by December 15, 2026.
The City of Palo Alto will implement this recommendation. By
December 15, 2026, the City will add guidance to its claims webpage identifying roads
commonly mistaken for City jurisdiction, including portions of US-101, I-280, and El Camino Real
(SR-82) (which are maintained by Caltrans), and Page Mill Road, Oregon Expressway, and
Foothill Expressway (which are maintained by the County).
Fifteen jurisdictions – the County, Campbell, Cupertino, Gilroy, Los Altos, Los Altos Hills, Los
Gatos, Milpitas, Monte Sereno, Morgan Hill, Mountain View, Palo Alto, San José, Santa Clara,
and Saratoga – have websites with deficiencies that make it difficult to file a claim.
The City of Palo Alto disagrees with the finding as it applies to Palo
Alto. Palo Alto’s claims webpage already provides clear instructions on how to file a claim, a
direct link to the claim form, and a translation tool that lets users translate the claims-process
webpage and instructions into multiple languages. The City agrees, however, that the claim
form itself cannot currently be translated through this tool. As discussed in the City’s response
to Recommendation 3b below. the need to submit a claim in English is not a ”deficiency”.
Fourteen jurisdictions – the County, Campbell, Cupertino, Gilroy, Los Altos, Los Altos Hills, Los
Gatos, Milpitas, Monte Sereno, Morgan Hill, Mountain View, Palo Alto, San José, and Santa
Clara – should incorporate useable software on their websites that can translate claim forms
Item 4
Item 4 Staff Report
Item 4: Staff Report Pg. 4 Packet Pg. 43 of 254
into multiple languages or provide claim forms in multiple languages based on the
demographics they serve. The jurisdictions should implement this by December 15, 2026.
City of Palo Alto Response: The City of Palo Alto will not implement this recommendation. As
noted in the City’s response to Finding 3, the City’s website already provides a translation tool
that allows claimants to translate the claims-process webpage and instructions, including the
instructions on how to file a claim, into multiple languages. However, the City will not translate
the claim form itself. All claims have the potential to result in litigation, and the claim form is
evidence that the plaintiff complied with claim submission requirements, a mandatory
prerequisite to filing a lawsuit. The claim form is the best evidence of that compliance with that
requirement and would need to be translated into English to be considered in court.
Translation of non-English language forms into English creates unnecessary costs and risk of
evidentiary disputes. The costs, risks, and burdens imposed by this process outweigh the
limited benefit of providing non-English language claim forms, particularly where translated
instructions for completing the English-language form are already available.
Civil Grand Jury Finding 4: Vague Rejection Notices
City of Palo Alto Response: The City of Palo Alto agrees with this finding in part. Palo Alto’s
current rejection notice includes the statutory language required by Government Code section
913 but does not specify the reason for the denial or provide dedicated contact information for
follow-up questions, which is addressed in the City’s response to Recommendation 4 below.
Civil Grand Jury Recommendation 4
City of Palo Alto Response: The City of Palo Alto will partially implement this recommendation.
The City is not legally required to state the reason a claim is rejected, but in practice the City
conveys some information to claimants regarding the reasons for rejection. Claims rejected as
untimely receive a late claim notification, and claims rejected as insufficient because the road
Item 4
Item 4 Staff Report
Item 4: Staff Report Pg. 5 Packet Pg. 44 of 254
falls outside City jurisdiction are noted as such. Claimants may also call the City Attorney’s
Office for more information about the disposition of a claim.
Policy Implications
FISCAL/RESOURCE IMPACT
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
ATTACHMENTS
APPROVED BY:
Item 4
Item 4 Staff Report
Item 4: Staff Report Pg. 6 Packet Pg. 45 of 254
2025-2026 Santa Clara County Civil Grand Jury
Pothole Damage:
Improving claims processes within Santa
Clara County
June 12, 2026
Item 4
Attachment A - Civil Grand
Jury Report Pothole
Damage Improving Claims
Processes within Santa Clara
County
Item 4: Staff Report Pg. 7 Packet Pg. 46 of 254
Page 1 of 20
POTHOLE DAMAGE
T ABLE OF CONTENTS
SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................... 2
BACKGROUND ........................................................................................................................... 3
Who Is Responsible for Pothole Damage ................................................................................ 3
Why So Many Claims Are Rejected ........................................................................................ 3
The California Government Claims Act ................................................................................. 4
Why the Civil Grand Jury Conducted This Investigation .................................................... 4
METHODOLOGY ....................................................................................................................... 5
INVESTIGATION ........................................................................................................................ 6
How Jurisdictions Investigate Claims ..................................................................................... 6
Two Common Reasons for Rejection ...................................................................................... 7
Rejection Notices are Often Vague .......................................................................................... 8
Filing a Claim: Determining which Jurisdiction is Responsible .......................................... 9
Filing a Claim: Obtaining and Submitting a Claim Form .................................................. 10
CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................................... 13
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................. 14
REQUIRED RESPONSES......................................................................................................... 16
APPENDIX A: Reporting a Pothole ......................................................................................... 17
REFERENCES............................................................................................................................ 18
Item 4
Attachment A - Civil Grand
Jury Report Pothole
Damage Improving Claims
Processes within Santa Clara
County
Item 4: Staff Report Pg. 8 Packet Pg. 47 of 254
Page 2 of 20
POTHOLE DAMAGE
SUMMARY
If you hit a pothole within Santa Clara County and damage your vehicle, chances are that your
local government will decline to reimburse you for repairs. According to data analyzed by the
2025-26 Santa Clara County Civil Grand Jury (Civil Grand Jury), 92% of pothole claims filed with
the County of Santa Clara (County) and the 15 cities and towns in Santa Clara County from 2020
to 2025 were rejected.
People who file claims may find this high rejection rate disappointing. They may also be frustrated
by the state law that establishes the claims process, which can often be complex and opaque.
For example, in some jurisdictions, it’s not easy to figure out how to file a claim. Also, while the
City of Palo Alto (Palo Alto) and the City of Saratoga (Saratoga) offer e-filing options, claims
filed in other jurisdictions must be mailed in or returned in person. And when a claim is denied,
the rejection notice often provides little or no explanation.
The County, cities, and towns can and should do better. Specifically, they should:
• Make online claim forms available or easier to find, and include clearer instructions and
timelines;
• Provide forms in multiple languages that reflect their specific demographics;
• Make it easier for claimants to determine which jurisdiction is responsible for a given
roadway;
• Update their rejection letters to specify why claims were denied.
Implementing these changes would make the claims process simpler and more accessible. It would
also minimize at least one source of frustration for residents who are already burdened by
unexpected repair costs.
Item 4
Attachment A - Civil Grand
Jury Report Pothole
Damage Improving Claims
Processes within Santa Clara
County
Item 4: Staff Report Pg. 9 Packet Pg. 48 of 254
Page 3 of 20
POTHOLE DAMAGE
BACKGROUND
For the purposes of this report, a pothole is defined as a depression or hole in the road that forms
when pavement breaks apart due to traffic stress and weather conditions.
Potholes can cause severe damage to tires and the underside of vehicles, with a particular risk to
two-wheeled vehicles. If drivers believe the local government is responsible for their damage, they
can file a claim seeking reimbursement.
According to local media reports, Bay Area drivers in 2022 filed more than 1,000 claims for
potholes and other road damages. According to data that the California Department of
Transportation (Caltrans) provided to CBS News, it rejected more than 95% of Bay Area claims
(Feingold and Manthey, 2024; Manthey and Watts, 2024).
Who Is Responsible for Pothole Damage
Claims for road-related damage must be filed with the state, county, or city agency that has
jurisdiction over the road where the damage occurred.
For example:
• Caltrans is generally responsible for major freeways and highways, such as US-101, I-280,
and State Route 87.
• The County is responsible for expressways and county roads, such as Capitol and Lawrence
Expressways.
• Cities and towns are generally responsible for local streets within their boundaries,
including residential neighborhoods.
Why So Many Claims Are Rejected
The Civil Grand Jury requested and received claims data from the County and the 15 cities and
towns in Santa Clara County covering the period from 2020 to 2025. The Civil Grand Jury’s
analysis of that data revealed that only 9% of pothole claims across Santa Clara County were
settled.
Under the California Government Claims Act (Cal. Gov. Code §§ 810 et seq.), local agencies have
wide discretion to reject a pothole claim for reasons including but not limited to:
• The claim form was incomplete or not filed by the required deadline;
Item 4
Attachment A - Civil Grand
Jury Report Pothole
Damage Improving Claims
Processes within Santa Clara
County
Item 4: Staff Report Pg. 10 Packet Pg. 49 of 254
Page 4 of 20
POTHOLE DAMAGE
• It was filed in the wrong jurisdiction;
• The responsible county, city, or town either was not aware of the pothole or was aware but
had not had sufficient time to repair it.
These laws make it difficult for a claimant to dispute a denial. For example, if an agency rejects a
claim on the grounds that it was not aware of the pothole, the law does not require it to provide
evidence to back up its assertion.
In addition, because different agencies can have jurisdiction over different sections of the same
road, it can be difficult for a claimant to determine which agency is responsible for the specific
location where the damage occurred. If the person files with the wrong jurisdiction, the agency can
reject the claim with no obligation to specify the reason or redirect the claimant to the correct
jurisdiction.
If a claim is rejected, the claimant can pursue legal action according to the California Government
Claims Act.
The California Government Claims Act
The California Government Claims Act (Cal. Gov. Code §§ 810 et seq.) establishes timelines and
procedures for filing lawsuits seeking money or damages from a public entity.
In general, the Government Claims Act specifies that a claim must be filed no later than six months
from the date of the incident. The claim must include what happened, what harm occurred, and the
amount of compensation requested.
Once the public entity receives the claim, it has 45 days to review, investigate, and decide whether
to settle or reject it. If a claim is rejected, the claimant has six months to file a lawsuit.
Why the Civil Grand Jury Conducted This Investigation
The Civil Grand Jury believes that claims processes should be consistent, accessible, and
transparent. It also believes the public interest is served by highlighting when processes fall short
of that standard.
The Civil Grand Jury conducted this investigation to:
• Examine how local government agencies manage pothole claims;
• Understand why so many claims are denied;
Item 4
Attachment A - Civil Grand
Jury Report Pothole
Damage Improving Claims
Processes within Santa Clara
County
Item 4: Staff Report Pg. 11 Packet Pg. 50 of 254
Page 5 of 20
POTHOLE DAMAGE
• Recommend how jurisdictions can make it easier for potential claimants to engage in the
process.
METHODOLOGY
The Civil Grand Jury requested data from all 16 jurisdictions responsible for road maintenance
within Santa Clara County. The data excluded state routes and interstate highways because
Caltrans, a state agency, is not subject to Civil Grand Jury review. Jurisdictions provided data
about all claims filed against them for road-related damages between 2020 and 2025. Information
provided included the number of pothole claims, the amount claimed, the resolution, and the reason
for rejection. Three jurisdictions provided response letters sent to claimants.
The Civil Grand Jury reviewed the websites of the following 16 agencies to analyze what content
was included and how clearly it was presented:
• County of Santa Clara (County)
• City of Campbell (Campbell)
• City of Cupertino (Cupertino)
• City of Gilroy (Gilroy)
• City of Los Altos (Los Altos)
• Town of Los Altos Hills (Los Altos Hills)
• Town of Los Gatos (Los Gatos)
• City of Milpitas (Milpitas)
• City of Monte Sereno (Monte Sereno)
• City of Morgan Hill (Morgan Hill)
• City of Mountain View (Mountain View)
• City of Palo Alto (Palo Alto)
• City of San José (San José)
• City of Santa Clara (Santa Clara)
• City of Saratoga (Saratoga)
• City of Sunnyvale (Sunnyvale)
The Civil Grand Jury also interviewed representatives from four jurisdictions that together account
for about two-thirds of the roads in Santa Clara County. These interviews provided further insight
into the agencies’ processes and decision‑making practices.
Item 4
Attachment A - Civil Grand
Jury Report Pothole
Damage Improving Claims
Processes within Santa Clara
County
Item 4: Staff Report Pg. 12 Packet Pg. 51 of 254
Page 6 of 20
POTHOLE DAMAGE
INVESTIGATION
There are over 10,000 miles of locally maintained lanes in Santa Clara County (Metropolitan
Transportation Commission, 2026). Between 2020 and 2025, the agencies received exactly 400
claims specifically due to potholes.
Of the pothole claims, the Civil Grand Jury determined that the jurisdictions collectively settled
34 claims, or 8.5%. The percentage of settlements for damages varied among the individual
entities. The data showed that during that five-year period:
• Gilroy and Saratoga each settled 50% of claims filed (however, they each averaged 1-2
claims per year, among the smallest sample sizes in Santa Clara County).
• Four jurisdictions paid at least 10% of claims: Morgan Hill (17%), the County (11%), Santa
Clara (11%), and Milpitas (10%).
• The remaining jurisdictions paid 9% of claims or fewer.
The Civil Grand Jury acknowledges that the significance of this data is limited; if an entity received
a high volume of claims filed in the wrong jurisdiction, it will not settle those claims.
How Jurisdictions Investigate Claims
Jurisdictions within Santa Clara County generally follow a similar process for receiving and
evaluating a claim.
First, the claim gets submitted to a city clerk, city manager, or equivalent official, who logs it along
with any accompanying documents. Next, the official notifies the local public works department
so it can investigate the incident site as needed.
In the meantime, the official assigns the claim to an investigator, usually in the city attorney’s or
county counsel’s office. The investigator verifies whether the agency has jurisdiction, ensures the
form was filled out correctly, and reviews any photographs and receipts that were submitted.
If the jurisdiction agrees to pay out the claim, it will often mail a check. But if the claim involves
injuries or death, or the claimant is seeking tens of thousands of dollars, the settlement may need
approval from the respective city council or the County Board of Supervisors.
If the jurisdiction rejects the claim, it will inform the claimant via a form letter or email. The
California Government Claims Act does not require jurisdictions to specify the reason for denial.
Item 4
Attachment A - Civil Grand
Jury Report Pothole
Damage Improving Claims
Processes within Santa Clara
County
Item 4: Staff Report Pg. 13 Packet Pg. 52 of 254
Page 7 of 20
POTHOLE DAMAGE
Two Common Reasons for Rejection
According to the data provided to the Civil Grand Jury, claims are frequently denied for one of
two reasons: The claim was out of the entity’s jurisdiction, or the County, city, or town had no
prior notice of the pothole.
Out of Jurisdiction
A claim must be filed with the agency that has jurisdiction over the specific location where the
incident occurred. According to interviews conducted by the Civil Grand Jury, claims that are filed
with the wrong jurisdiction will almost certainly be rejected as outside of jurisdiction.
A road’s location within an agency’s boundaries does not necessarily mean that agency is
responsible for receiving or resolving related claims. Jurisdiction over road maintenance can shift
multiple times as roads cross between state, county, and municipal boundaries. This patchwork of
responsibility can be confusing, making it hard for claimants to figure out which agency has
jurisdiction over the specific location of their incident.
Agencies typically verify their jurisdiction by consulting their local public works, utilities, or roads
departments.
No Prior Notice
The Government Claims Act also establishes limits to the public entities’ liability for the condition
of its roadways. One of those limitations is the issue of notice to the public entity. The Civil Grand
Jury found this was one of the two most common reasons pothole claims are rejected.
Notice typically requires evidence that at least one of four circumstances exists:
1. The public entity created the condition;
2. The pothole had been reported prior to an incident in which a vehicle was damaged;
3. An agency’s employee observed the pothole and reported it;
4. The pothole existed long enough that the jurisdiction should have known about it through
regular inspections.
If none of these circumstances applies, the agency can declare it had no prior notice and deny the
claim.
When an agency receives notice of a pothole, state law allows for a reasonable period to address
the hazard. It does not specify what constitutes a reasonable timeframe.
Item 4
Attachment A - Civil Grand
Jury Report Pothole
Damage Improving Claims
Processes within Santa Clara
County
Item 4: Staff Report Pg. 14 Packet Pg. 53 of 254
Page 8 of 20
POTHOLE DAMAGE
Drivers can help ensure that a jurisdiction receives prior notice by promptly reporting any potholes.
All jurisdictions have a mechanism for reporting potholes and other issues (see Appendix A).
Rejection Notices are Often Vague
As noted above, it is not unusual for an agency to withhold its reason for rejecting a claim. A
rejection notice would contain this language, in part, which is required by the California
Government Claims Act (Cal. Gov. Code § 913):
NOTICE OF REJECTION OF CLAIM
Dear Claimant,
Notice is hereby given that the claim you presented to (insert title of board or
officer) on (date) was rejected on (date).
WARNING
Subject to certain exceptions, you have only six (6) months from the date this notice
was personally delivered or deposited in the mail to file a court action on this claim.
See Government Code Section 945.6.
You may seek the advice of an attorney of your choice in connection with this
matter. If you desire to consult an attorney, you should do so immediately.
Agencies may provide further information, such as the reason for rejection. A notice of denial can
be aggravating enough, but when it is written in minimal legalistic terms, claimants may feel even
more frustrated. The Civil Grand Jury learned about rejection letters from the County, Los Altos,
Los Gatos, Mountain View, Palo Alto, and San José and found that some but not all rejection
letters provide a reason for rejection. Rejection letters from other jurisdictions may follow this
same approach.
In Civil Grand Jury interviews, one agency official suggested that people who receive a letter like
this contact the agency and see if it will share the reason for rejection. Although the reason for
rejection is recorded by the agency, there is no legal obligation to provide this information, and
agencies may limit this information.
Item 4
Attachment A - Civil Grand
Jury Report Pothole
Damage Improving Claims
Processes within Santa Clara
County
Item 4: Staff Report Pg. 15 Packet Pg. 54 of 254
Page 9 of 20
POTHOLE DAMAGE
Filing a Claim: Determining which Jurisdiction is Responsible
Caltrans Jurisdiction
If a pothole is located on a state route or interstate highway, the claim would generally fall under
Caltrans’s jurisdiction. These routes, which, according to Caltrans, cover about 250 miles
throughout Santa Clara County (California Department of Transportation, 2025) include:
• U.S. Route 101 (US-101)
• Interstate 280 (I-280)
• Interstate 680 (I-680)
• Interstate 880 (I-880)
• State Route 17 (SR-17)
• State Route 35 (SR-35)
• State Route 82 (SR-82), which includes El Camino Real
• State Route 85 (SR-85)
• State Route 87 (SR-87)
• State Route 130 (SR-130), which includes part of Alum Rock Road and Mount Hamilton
Road
• State Route 152 (SR-152)
• State Route 237 (SR-237)
Residents may not realize that some common local routes fall under Caltrans jurisdiction. These
include SR-82, a large part of which includes El Camino Real; Mount Hamilton Road; and SR-
130, which is part of Alum Rock Avenue.
When a local road crosses or overlaps a state route or interstate, that portion is generally under
Caltrans jurisdiction.
County Jurisdiction
Expressways and many county roads are maintained by the County Roads and Airports
Department.
Major roads include:
• Almaden Expressway
• Capitol Expressway
• Central Expressway
• Foothill Expressway
• Lawrence Expressway
Item 4
Attachment A - Civil Grand
Jury Report Pothole
Damage Improving Claims
Processes within Santa Clara
County
Item 4: Staff Report Pg. 16 Packet Pg. 55 of 254
Page 10 of 20
POTHOLE DAMAGE
• Montague Expressway
• Oregon Expressway
• San Tomas Expressway
• Southwest Expressway
Complicated Exceptions
Further complicating efforts to determine which agency has jurisdiction over a particular area,
cities, Caltrans, the County, and even the federal government (such as near Moffett Federal
Airfield) have maintenance agreements that specify which agency is responsible for certain
roadway segments – such as onramps, offramps, and other defined areas (City of Mountain View,
2019). It is not always easy to determine which agency is responsible for which segments.
Complicated Maps
Some jurisdictions have no public maps indicating which roads they are responsible for. The
County and some cities, including San José, Campbell, and Mountain View, do post searchable
maps online that can help the public narrow down which jurisdiction is responsible for a particular
road. However, the maps often use complicated interfaces rather than a simple image or printout,
and many maps are not specific to just the roads maintained by the jurisdictions.
San José, which maintains more than 4,000 miles of locally maintained lanes within its borders,
has its own mapping website (Metropolitan Transportation Commission, 2026; City of San José,
2020). It shows whether a particular street within its boundaries is maintained by San José, the
County, a private entity, or another agency. The website provides a large amount of information,
although it is complicated for the average user to navigate.
An alternative source of information is pavement management plans that some agencies make
available. These plans may list all roads maintained by the jurisdiction and can be used as a
reference. As an example, Morgan Hill has a link to its latest 2024 Pavement Management Report
with a list of streets at the end. However, there is no direct link from the claim forms webpage, so
claimants would not be aware of this reference (AMS Consulting, 2025).
Filing a Claim: Obtaining and Submitting a Claim Form
Once a person has found the proper jurisdiction, the next step is to download the claim form from
the local agency’s website.
Of the 16 jurisdictions, the Civil Grand Jury found that only Gilroy, Los Gatos, Palo Alto, Santa
Clara, and Sunnyvale provide adequate claims process information on their webpages or on the
claim form itself.
Item 4
Attachment A - Civil Grand
Jury Report Pothole
Damage Improving Claims
Processes within Santa Clara
County
Item 4: Staff Report Pg. 17 Packet Pg. 56 of 254
Page 11 of 20
POTHOLE DAMAGE
Most jurisdictions provide forms only in English. This is an omission that could potentially
disenfranchise community members who have limited proficiency in English.
The Civil Grand Jury identified three cities that took the helpful step of providing additional
language options:
• Morgan Hill provides a PDF of its claim form in English and Spanish.
• Sunnyvale has a translation feature that allows claimants to translate the form into one of
200+ languages. Users can either fill out the translated form online and print a copy or print
out a blank translated form and fill it out by hand.
• Saratoga’s website uses a third-party widget to translate its website in addition to an online
form to many other languages.
The Civil Grand Jury also investigated how easy it is to find claim forms on each jurisdiction’s
website by searching for the term “claim form.”
The Civil Grand Jury could not find any information about submitting a pothole claim in four
entities: Campbell, Los Altos, Los Altos Hills, and Monte Sereno.
Cupertino provides a claim form, but users must use the website’s search function to find it.
Gilroy does not link directly to a claim form, although it does provide instructions on how to
request a form by email or in person.
Item 4
Attachment A - Civil Grand
Jury Report Pothole
Damage Improving Claims
Processes within Santa Clara
County
Item 4: Staff Report Pg. 18 Packet Pg. 57 of 254
Page 12 of 20
POTHOLE DAMAGE
Table 1: Access to online claim process instructions and link to claim form
(See References for links)
Jurisdiction Online Claims Process
Instructions
Link to
Claim Form
Caltrans Yes Yes
County of Santa Clara No Yes
Campbell No No
Cupertino No Yes
Gilroy Yes No
Los Altos No No
Los Altos Hills No No
Los Gatos Yes Yes
Milpitas No Yes
Monte Sereno No No
Morgan Hill No Yes
Mountain View No Yes
Palo Alto Yes Yes
San José No Yes
Santa Clara Yes Yes
Saratoga No Yes
Sunnyvale Yes Yes
Many jurisdictions recommend that claimants deliver the claim form in person, including all
relevant information, such as photos, receipts, and witness statements. The claimant should retain
a signed copy.
Some agencies allow for email submission, but this is the exception. Alternatively, a claimant
could submit the claim by mail to the city or town clerk (or, for the County, the Clerk of the Board).
According to the California Government Claims Act, the agency has 45 days from the date the
claim form was mailed or delivered in person to respond to the claimant.
Item 4
Attachment A - Civil Grand
Jury Report Pothole
Damage Improving Claims
Processes within Santa Clara
County
Item 4: Staff Report Pg. 19 Packet Pg. 58 of 254
Page 13 of 20
POTHOLE DAMAGE
CONCLUSION
Even though state law sets strict rules for filing and reviewing claims, local government agencies
retain significant discretion over their processes. By offering clearer online information, improving
access to claim forms, expanding language options, and providing more detailed explanations
when claims are denied, jurisdictions can significantly improve public trust, reduce frustration,
and increase fairness.
Implementing the recommended updates is not only feasible, but it also aligns with the spirit of
responsive and transparent public service. The Civil Grand Jury urges all jurisdictions to adopt
these improvements by the recommended deadlines to ensure that the claims process is fairer, more
consistent, and easier for the public to navigate.
Item 4
Attachment A - Civil Grand
Jury Report Pothole
Damage Improving Claims
Processes within Santa Clara
County
Item 4: Staff Report Pg. 20 Packet Pg. 59 of 254
Page 14 of 20
POTHOLE DAMAGE
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Finding 1
Jurisdictions within Santa Clara County rejected 92% of pothole claims from 2020 to 2025 due to
reasons including missed deadlines, incorrect jurisdiction, and lack of prior notice.
Recommendation 1
No recommendation.
Finding 2
Claims are often rejected because the claimant filed with the incorrect jurisdiction, which can
happen because jurisdictional lines are often unclear or poorly communicated. The claims websites
of all jurisdictions within Santa Clara County lack information about how to determine if a road is
in its jurisdiction.
Recommendation 2a
All jurisdictions within Santa Clara County should include a link to a map or list of roads they
maintain on their claims website.
The jurisdictions should implement this by December 15, 2026.
Recommendation 2b
All jurisdictions within Santa Clara County should update their claims websites to identify roads
that are commonly mistaken as being in their jurisdictions.
The jurisdictions should implement this by December 15, 2026.
Finding 3
Fifteen jurisdictions – the County, Campbell, Cupertino, Gilroy, Los Altos, Los Altos Hills, Los
Gatos, Milpitas, Monte Sereno, Morgan Hill, Mountain View, Palo Alto, San José, Santa Clara,
and Saratoga – have websites with deficiencies that make it difficult to file a claim.
Recommendation 3a
Eleven jurisdictions – the County, Campbell, Cupertino, Los Altos, Los Altos Hills, Milpitas,
Monte Sereno, Morgan Hill, Mountain View, San José, and Saratoga – should update their
websites to provide clear instructions and information about how to file a claim in addition to a
link to the claim form.
The jurisdictions should implement this by December 15, 2026.
Item 4
Attachment A - Civil Grand
Jury Report Pothole
Damage Improving Claims
Processes within Santa Clara
County
Item 4: Staff Report Pg. 21 Packet Pg. 60 of 254
Page 15 of 20
POTHOLE DAMAGE
Recommendation 3b
Fourteen jurisdictions – the County, Campbell, Cupertino, Gilroy, Los Altos, Los Altos Hills, Los
Gatos, Milpitas, Monte Sereno, Morgan Hill, Mountain View, Palo Alto, San José, and Santa Clara
– should incorporate useable software on their websites that can translate claim forms into multiple
languages or provide claim forms in multiple languages based on the demographics they serve.
The jurisdictions should implement this by December 15, 2026.
Finding 4
When pothole claims are rejected, claimants filing claims against the County, Los Altos, Los
Gatos, Mountain View, Palo Alto, and San José receive a notice that provides little or sometimes
no explanation for the rejection. Although jurisdictions within Santa Clara County are not legally
obligated to provide a reason for rejection, the lack of clarity in the decisions made on the claims
can add to a claimant’s frustration.
Recommendation 4
The County, Los Altos, Los Gatos, Mountain View, Palo Alto, and San José should update their
rejection letters to specify whether the decision was due to lack of timeliness, incorrect jurisdiction,
lack of prior notice, or other reason and to provide a specific contact to call or email if the claimant
has further questions about the reason for rejection.
The jurisdictions should implement this by December 15, 2026.
Item 4
Attachment A - Civil Grand
Jury Report Pothole
Damage Improving Claims
Processes within Santa Clara
County
Item 4: Staff Report Pg. 22 Packet Pg. 61 of 254
Page 16 of 20
POTHOLE DAMAGE
REQUIRED RESPONSES
Pursuant to California Penal Code section 933(a) et seq. and California Penal Code section
933.05, the 2025-2026 Santa Clara County Civil Grand Jury requests responses from the
following governing body:
Responding Agency Findings Recommendations
County of Santa Clara 1, 2, 3, 4 2a, 2b, 3a, 3b, 4
City of Campbell 1, 2, 3 2a, 2b, 3a, 3b
City of Cupertino 1, 2, 3 2a, 2b, 3a, 3b
City of Gilroy 1, 2, 3 2a, 2b, 3b
City of Los Altos 1, 2, 3, 4 2a, 2b, 3a, 3b, 4
Town of Los Altos Hills 1, 2, 3 2a, 2b, 3a, 3b
Town of Los Gatos 1, 2, 3, 4 2a, 2b, 3b, 4
City of Milpitas 1, 2, 3 2a, 2b, 3a, 3b
City of Monte Sereno 1, 2, 3 2a, 2b, 3a, 3b
City of Morgan Hill 1, 2, 3 2a, 2b, 3a, 3b
City of Mountain View 1, 2, 3, 4 2a, 2b, 3a, 3b, 4
City of Palo Alto 1, 2, 3, 4 2a, 2b, 3b, 4
City of San José 1, 2, 3, 4 2a, 2b, 3a, 3b, 4
City of Santa Clara 1, 2, 3 2a, 2b, 3b
City of Saratoga 1, 2, 3 2a, 2b, 3a
City of Sunnyvale 1, 2 2a, 2b
Item 4
Attachment A - Civil Grand
Jury Report Pothole
Damage Improving Claims
Processes within Santa Clara
County
Item 4: Staff Report Pg. 23 Packet Pg. 62 of 254
Page 17 of 20
POTHOLE DAMAGE
APPENDIX A: Reporting a Pothole
Residents who see a pothole can report it so the jurisdiction can repair it in a timely manner.
Based on a Civil Grand Jury review, here is a list of contacts (as of April 15, 2026) where potholes
or other needed street repairs can be reported:
Jurisdiction Website to report a pothole
Caltrans https://csr.dot.ca.gov/index.php/Msrsubmit
County of Santa Clara https://roads.santaclaracounty.gov/services/service-requests
Campbell https://www.campbellca.gov/requesttracker.aspx
Cupertino https://cupertinoca.citysourced.com/servicerequests/create
Gilroy https://seeclickfix.com/gilroy
Los Altos https://www.losaltosca.gov/FormCenter/Public-Works-6/
Maintenance-Service-Request-46
Los Altos Hills https://www.losaltoshills.ca.gov/requesttracker.aspx
Los Gatos https://www.losgatosca.gov/FormCenter/PPW-15/Report-a-
Parks-Public-Works-Concern-87
Milpitas https://seeclickfix.com/web_portal/
chZ2d7WdKoe4V2BriJxUCFqd/report/category
Monte Sereno https://www.montesereno.org/forms.aspx?FID=80
Morgan Hill https://www.morganhill.ca.gov/509/Maintenance
Mountain View https://www.mountainview.gov/our-city/departments/public-
works/roads-and-transportation/street-maintenance
Palo Alto https://www.paloalto.gov/Residents/Services/Report-an-Issue
San José https://311.sanjoseca.gov/
Santa Clara https://www.santaclaraca.gov/our-city/government/mayor-and-
council/contact-city-council
Saratoga https://www.saratoga.ca.us/FormCenter/Report-a-Concern-
6/Fix-It-Form-45
Sunnyvale https://sunnyvale.dynamics365portals.us/neighborhood-
complaints/
Item 4
Attachment A - Civil Grand
Jury Report Pothole
Damage Improving Claims
Processes within Santa Clara
County
Item 4: Staff Report Pg. 24 Packet Pg. 63 of 254
Page 18 of 20
POTHOLE DAMAGE
REFERENCES
Bibliography
AMS Consulting. “Pavement Management Technical Assistance Program (P-TAP) Round 25,
2024/2025 Pavement Management Report.” March 21, 2025.
(https://www.morganhill.ca.gov/DocumentCenter/View/53950/Updated-Morgan-Hill-
PTAP-25-Rev01-for-Web). Accessed April 16, 2026.
Cal. Gov. Code § 810 et seq.
Cal. Gov. Code § 913 et seq.
California Department of Transportation. “California Road Data 2024.” November 2025.
(https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/programs/research-innovation-system-
information/documents/hpms/hpms-2024-prd-a11y.pdf). Accessed April 28, 2026.
California Department of Transportation. “Submit Damage Claim.” n.d. (https://dot.ca.gov/
online-services/submit-damage-claim). Accessed April 15, 2026.
City of Cupertino. “Claim Form.” September 2022.
(https://cupertinoca.prelive.opencities.com/files/assets/city/v/1/your-
city/documents/claim-form-rev-102523.pdf). Accessed April 29, 2026.
City of Gilroy. “How to File a Claim.” n.d. (https://www.cityofgilroy.org/966/How-to-File-a-
Claim). Accessed April 15, 2026.
City of Milpitas. “Helpful Links.” n.d. (https://www.milpitas.gov/188/Helpful-Links). Accessed
April 15, 2026.
City of Morgan Hill. “Claim for Damages Form.” n.d. (https://www.morganhill.ca.gov/1411/
Claim-for-Damages-Form). Accessed April 15, 2026.
City of Mountain View. “Claim Form.” n.d. (https://www.mountainview.gov/our-city/
departments/city-attorneys-office/claim-form). Accessed April 15, 2026.
City of Mountain View. “GIS/Mapping Portal, Map Road Centerline” July 18, 2019.
(https://data-mountainview.opendata.arcgis.com/search?q=roads). Accessed April 28,
2026.
Item 4
Attachment A - Civil Grand
Jury Report Pothole
Damage Improving Claims
Processes within Santa Clara
County
Item 4: Staff Report Pg. 25 Packet Pg. 64 of 254
Page 19 of 20
POTHOLE DAMAGE
City of Palo Alto. “Submit a Claim Against the City.” n.d. (https://www.paloalto.gov/
Departments/City-Attorney/Submit-a-Claim-Against-the-City). Accessed April 15, 2026.
City of San José. “File Claim Against City Form.” n.d. (https://www.sanjoseca.gov/your-
government/appointees/city-clerk/forms-filings/file-claim-against-city-form). Accessed
April 15, 2026.
City of San José. “Streets.” August 27, 2020. (https://gisdata-
csj.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/CSJ::streets/about). Accessed April 16, 2026.
City of Santa Clara. “Frequently Asked Questions.” July 23, 2015.
(https://www.santaclaraca.gov/our-city/departments-a-f/city-attorney-s-office/frequently-
asked-questions). Accessed April 15, 2026.
City of Saratoga. “Claims Against Saratoga.” n.d. (https://www.saratoga.ca.us/FormCenter/
Claims-Form-37/Claims-Against-Saratoga-102). Accessed April 15, 2026.
City of Sunnyvale. “File a Claim Against the City.” n.d. (https://www.sunnyvale.ca.gov/your-
government/city-clerk/file-a-claim-against-the-city). Accessed April 15, 2026.
County of Santa Clara. “File a claim of loss against the County.” n.d.
(https://cob.santaclaracounty.gov/services/file-claim-loss-against-county). Accessed
April 15, 2026.
Feingold, Lindsey and Manthey, Grace. “Less than 4% of Bay Area Caltrans pothole, other
damage claims approved in recent years: data.” KGO-TV. January 25, 2024. (https://
abc7news.com/post/bay-area-potholes-caltrans-claims-car-damages/14359988/).
Accessed April 14, 2026.
Metropolitan Transportation Commission. “Pavement Conditions of Bay Area Jurisdictions
2024.” January 5, 2026. (https://mtc.ca.gov/digital-library/5099739-pavement-condition-
bay-area-jurisdictions-2024). Accessed April 15, 2026.
Town of Los Gatos. “File a Claim.” n.d. (https://www.losgatosca.gov/2422/File-a-Claim).
Accessed April 15, 2026.
Watts, Julie and Manthey, Grace. “California freeways with the most potholes and car damage
claims.” CBS News California. May 23, 2024.
(https://www.cbsnews.com/news/california-freeways-most-potholes-damage-claims/).
Accessed April 14, 2026.
Item 4
Attachment A - Civil Grand
Jury Report Pothole
Damage Improving Claims
Processes within Santa Clara
County
Item 4: Staff Report Pg. 26 Packet Pg. 65 of 254
Page 20 of 20
POTHOLE DAMAGE
This report was ADOPTED by the 2025-2026 Santa Clara County Civil Grand Jury on this 12th
day of June, 2026.
______________________________
Dinesh Ramde
Foreperson
Item 4
Attachment A - Civil Grand
Jury Report Pothole
Damage Improving Claims
Processes within Santa Clara
County
Item 4: Staff Report Pg. 27 Packet Pg. 66 of 254
Attachment B
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY
250 Hamilton Avenue, 8th Floor
Palo Alto, CA 94301
650.329.2171
September __, 2026
Honorable Julie A. Emede
Presiding Judge
Santa Clara County Superior Court
191 North First Street
San Jose, CA 95113
RE: City of Palo Alto Response to 2025-2026 Santa Clara County Civil Grand Jury Report,
“Pothole Damage: Improving Claims Processes within Santa Clara County”
Dear Judge Emede:
The City of Palo Alto responds as follows to the above-received Grand Jury Report pursuant to
California Penal Code sections 933(c) and 933.05(a) & (b).
Civil Grand Jury Finding 1: Countywide Claim Rejections
Jurisdictions within Santa Clara County rejected 92% of pothole claims from 2020 to 2025
due to reasons including missed deadlines, incorrect jurisdiction, and lack of prior notice.
City of Palo Alto Response:
The City of Palo Alto agrees with this finding to the extent it reflects the disposition of pothole
claims submitted to the City of Palo Alto. Claimants are required to follow the Government
Claims Act (Gov. Code § 900 et seq.), which requires anyone seeking money damages from a
California public entity to first file a written claim with that entity within six months of the
incident for claims involving death, personal injury, or damage to personal property—which
includes vehicle damage from potholes.
The Act’s purpose is to give the agency a chance to investigate and pay or settle without
litigation and to budget for possible future liabilities. The entity then has 45 days to accept,
reject, or fail to act on the claim. If the claim is rejected, the claimant has six months to file a
lawsuit. Suing without first complying with this claim-presentation process generally
bars the case.
For a California public entity to be liable for property-related injuries like pothole damage, a
claimant must prove: (1) the entity owns or controls the property at issue; the property was in a
dangerous condition at the time of injury; (2) the condition proximately caused the injury; (3) the
condition created a reasonably foreseeable risk of the kind of injury that occurred; and either (a)
a public employee's negligent or wrongful act created the dangerous condition, or (b) the entity
had actual or constructive notice of the condition long enough before the injury to have taken
Item 4
Attachment B - Response to
Civil Grand Jury Report Civil
Grand Jury Report- Pothole
Damage Improving Claims
Processes within Santa Clara
County
Item 4: Staff Report Pg. 28 Packet Pg. 67 of 254
protective measures and failed to do so. (Gov. Code § 835.) A “dangerous condition” is a
condition of public property that creates a substantial risk of injury—as opposed to a minor,
trivial, or insignificant risk—when the property (or adjacent property) is used with due care in a
way that's reasonably foreseeable. (Gov. Code § 830.)
If a pothole claim received by the City of Palo Alto does not meet the requirements for liability
under Government Code section 835, the City rejects the claim. Conversely, where a claimant
meets the burden of establishing a dangerous condition of property existed, the City will
reimburse the claimant for substantiated damages caused by the dangerous condition. Claims are
investigated and evaluated on a case-by-case basis.
Civil Grand Jury Finding 2: Jurisdictional Confusion
Claims are often rejected because the claimant filed with the incorrect jurisdiction, which
can happen because jurisdictional lines are often unclear or poorly communicated. The
claims websites of all jurisdictions within Santa Clara County lack information about how to
determine if a road is in its jurisdiction.
City of Palo Alto Response:
The City of Palo Alto agrees with the finding in part. It is the claimant’s responsibility
to determine the jurisdiction in which an incident took place. However, it is common for claims
to be submitted to multiple jurisdictions because claimants and/or their attorneys fail to conduct a
diligent investigation before filing their claims, and find it is easier to submit claims to multiple
jurisdictions without evaluating where the incident actually occurred. During the reporting
period January 20, 2020 through October 31, 2025, 26 pothole damage claims were submitted to
the City of Palo Alto, and 18 were sent back as insufficient due to jurisdiction (69%).
Civil Grand Jury Recommendation 2a
All jurisdictions within Santa Clara County should include a link to a map or list of roads
they maintain on their claims website. The jurisdictions should implement this by December
15, 2026.
City of Palo Alto Response:
The City of Palo Alto will implement this recommendation in modified form. The City will
update its website to direct claimants to a publicly available online mapping or search tool, such
as Google, to help them confirm whether a given road is maintained by the City by December
15, 2026.
Civil Grand Jury Recommendation 2b
All jurisdictions within Santa Clara County should update their claims websites to identify
roads that are commonly mistaken as being in their jurisdictions. The jurisdictions should
implement this by December 15, 2026.
Item 4
Attachment B - Response to
Civil Grand Jury Report Civil
Grand Jury Report- Pothole
Damage Improving Claims
Processes within Santa Clara
County
Item 4: Staff Report Pg. 29 Packet Pg. 68 of 254
City of Palo Alto Response:
The City of Palo Alto will implement this recommendation. By December 15, 2026, the City will
add guidance to its claims webpage identifying roads commonly mistaken for City jurisdiction,
including portions of US-101, I-280, and El Camino Real (SR-82) (which are maintained by
Caltrans), and Page Mill Road, Oregon Expressway, and Foothill Expressway (which are
maintained by the County).
Civil Grand Jury Finding 3: Website Deficiencies
Fifteen jurisdictions – the County, Campbell, Cupertino, Gilroy, Los Altos, Los Altos Hills,
Los Gatos, Milpitas, Monte Sereno, Morgan Hill, Mountain View, Palo Alto, San José, Santa
Clara, and Saratoga – have websites with deficiencies that make it difficult to file a claim.
City of Palo Alto Response:
The City of Palo Alto disagrees with the finding as it applies to Palo Alto. Palo Alto’s claims
webpage already provides clear instructions on how to file a claim, a direct link to the claim
form, and a translation tool that lets users translate the claims-process webpage and instructions
into multiple languages. The City agrees, however, that the claim form itself cannot currently be
translated through this tool. As discussed in the City’s response to Recommendation 3b below.
the need to submit a claim in English is not a ”deficiency”.
Civil Grand Jury Recommendation 3b
Fourteen jurisdictions – the County, Campbell, Cupertino, Gilroy, Los Altos, Los Altos Hills,
Los Gatos, Milpitas, Monte Sereno, Morgan Hill, Mountain View, Palo Alto, San José, and
Santa Clara – should incorporate useable software on their websites that can translate claim
forms into multiple languages or provide claim forms in multiple languages based on the
demographics they serve. The jurisdictions should implement this by December 15, 2026.
City of Palo Alto Response:
The City of Palo Alto will not implement this recommendation. As noted in the City’s response
to Finding 3, the City’s website already provides a translation tool that allows claimants to
translate the claims-process webpage and instructions, including the instructions on how to file a
claim, into multiple languages. However, the City will not translate the claim form itself. All
claims have the potential to result in litigation, and the claim form is evidence that the
plaintiff complied with claim submission requirements, a mandatory prerequisite to filing a
lawsuit. The claim form is the best evidence of that compliance with that requirement and would
need to be translated into English to be considered in court. Translation of non-English language
forms into English creates unnecessary costs and risk of evidentiary disputes. The costs, risks,
and burdens imposed by this process outweigh the limited benefit of providing non-English
language claim forms, particularly where translated instructions for completing the English-
language form are already available.
Item 4
Attachment B - Response to
Civil Grand Jury Report Civil
Grand Jury Report- Pothole
Damage Improving Claims
Processes within Santa Clara
County
Item 4: Staff Report Pg. 30 Packet Pg. 69 of 254
Civil Grand Jury Finding 4: Vague Rejection Notices
When pothole claims are rejected, claimants filing claims against the County, Los Altos, Los
Gatos, Mountain View, Palo Alto, and San José receive a notice that provides little or
sometimes no explanation for the rejection. Although jurisdictions within Santa Clara County
are not legally obligated to provide a reason for rejection, the lack of clarity in the decisions
made on the claims can add to a claimant’s frustration.
City of Palo Alto Response:
The City of Palo Alto agrees with this finding in part. Palo Alto’s current rejection notice
includes the statutory language required by Government Code section 913 but does not specify
the reason for the denial or provide dedicated contact information for follow-up questions, which
is addressed in the City’s response to Recommendation 4 below.
Civil Grand Jury Recommendation 4
The County, Los Altos, Los Gatos, Mountain View, Palo Alto, and San José should update
their rejection letters to specify whether the decision was due to lack of timeliness, incorrect
jurisdiction, lack of prior notice, or other reason and to provide a specific contact to call or
email if the claimant has further questions about the reason for rejection. The jurisdictions
should implement this by December 15, 2026.
City of Palo Alto Response:
The City of Palo Alto will partially implement this recommendation. The City is not legally
required to state the reason a claim is rejected, but in practice the City conveys some
information to claimants regarding the reasons for rejection. Claims rejected as untimely receive
a late claim notification, and claims rejected as insufficient because the road falls outside
City jurisdiction are noted as such. Claimants may also call the City Attorney’s Office for more
information about the disposition of a claim.
Going forward, the City will update its notices to specify when a claim is rejected because the
road at issue is outside Palo Alto’s jurisdiction. The City will not otherwise expand its notices
to state the basis for rejections made on other grounds, such as lack of prior notice, because it is
not legally required to do so. This City will update its notices as described by December 15,
2026.
Sincerely,
_____________________________
Vicki Veenker
Mayor, City of Palo Alto
Item 4
Attachment B - Response to
Civil Grand Jury Report Civil
Grand Jury Report- Pothole
Damage Improving Claims
Processes within Santa Clara
County
Item 4: Staff Report Pg. 31 Packet Pg. 70 of 254
City Council
Staff Report
From: City Manager
Report Type: CONSENT CALENDAR
Lead Department: Police
Meeting Date: August 24, 2026
Report #:2608-6638
TITLE
Approval of Five-year Memorandum of Agreement with Stanford University to Provide Traffic
Control Services during Stanford Stadium Events; CEQA status – not a project.
This item report will be a late packet publication on 8/20/26.
Item 5
Item 5 Staff Report
Item 5: Staff Report Pg. 1 Packet Pg. 71 of 254
9
9
6
5
City Council
Staff Report
From: City Manager
Report Type: CONSENT CALENDAR
Lead Department: Public Works
Meeting Date: August 24, 2026
Report #:2605-6348
TITLE
Approval of a Purchase Order with Pivot Interiors Inc. in the Amount of $441,056 for Furniture
for the New Laboratory and Environmental Services Building Project (WQ-14002); CEQA Status
– Not a Project
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council approve and authorize the City Manager or their
designee to execute a Purchase Order with Pivot Interiors, Inc. for the New Laboratory and
Environmental Services Building Project (WQ-14002) utilizing a cooperative purchase
agreement via OMNIA, in an amount not to exceed $441,056. This total includes $400,960 for
basic materials and services and a 10% contingency of $40,096 to address minor scope
adjustments, installation modifications, and potential storage costs.
BACKGROUND
On May 19, 2025, the Council approved a lease at 2470 Embarcadero Way for office and
laboratory space.1 The building will provide modern laboratory and engineering group
workspaces directly across the street from the Regional Water Quality Control Plant (RWQCP).
Staff completed the design of the tenant improvements and began construction in mid-2026,
with occupancy expected by late 2026 / early 2027.
During design, staff worked with project stakeholders to identify furniture, storage, and
workspace requirements necessary to support laboratory operations, engineering functions,
administrative activities, collaboration spaces, and records management.
Following substantial completion, staff will complete furniture installation, IT and laboratory
equipment commissioning, and relocation of staff. The move-in phase is expected to continue
up to four months after substantial completion.
1 City Council, May 19, 2025; Agenda Item #9; SR #2501-4063
Item 6
Item 6 Staff Report
Item 6: Staff Report Pg. 1 Packet Pg. 72 of 254
9
9
6
5
ANALYSIS
The furniture package was developed to furnish offices, conference rooms, huddle rooms,
engineering workstations, hoteling stations, laboratory support areas, locker areas, document
storage rooms, and shared collaboration spaces throughout the facility. Furniture finishes and
materials were selected to provide durability, flexibility, and ease of maintenance while
supporting the long-term operational needs of the RWQCP.
The proposed purchase from Pivot Interiors, Inc. (Pivot) includes Herman Miller systems
furniture and related furnishings, seating, storage units, conference room furniture, and height-
adjustable workstations.
Based on the furniture plan, the City will be purchasing approximately:
5 furnished private offices
10 office cubicles and hoteling workstations
3 laboratory sit/stand workstations
20 staff lockers
3 meeting tables
33 chairs for conference rooms, collaboration areas, and offices
22 document storage bookcases
Multiple storage cabinets, pedestals, and communal storage units
Technology accessories including table power modules and workstation power
connections
Per Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 2.30.360(j), the City may utilize cooperative purchasing
agreements provided: (i) the services are solicited using methods substantially similar to those
required under the Municipal Code, as determined by the Procurement Officer; and (ii) the
contract is consistent with the requirements under the Municipal Code.
OMNIA Partners (OMNIA) provides discounts for government entities purchasing furniture from
brands such as Herman Miller. The cooperative purchasing agreement contracts were
competitively solicited and publicly awarded through the cooperating purchasing organizations
and the purchase orders are consistent with the requirements of the Municipal Code.
Cooperative purchasing programs allow government organizations to use a single solicitation
with the best value and favorable terms and conditions. Staff has determined that use of the
cooperative purchasing agreement is consistent with City procurement requirements and
represents the best value for the City.
The proposed purchase order includes material costs for furniture and accessories, project
management, technical design services, delivery, and installation. The proposed purchase order
components are summarized below:
Item 6
Item 6 Staff Report
Item 6: Staff Report Pg. 2 Packet Pg. 73 of 254
9
9
6
5
Table 1: Purchase Order Summary
Item Amount Amount
Furniture and Accessories $350,705
Project Management & Technical Design Services $18,366
Sales Tax (estimated)$31,889
10% Contingency $40,096
Total $441,056
The 10% contingency is recommended to address minor scope adjustments, unforeseen
installation modifications, and potential storage costs should project completion or occupancy
schedules change.
FISCAL/RESOURCE IMPACT
The RWQCP treats combined wastewater from Palo Alto, Los Altos, Los Altos Hills, Mountain
View, Stanford University, and East Palo Alto Sanitary District (partners). This project is funded
through the RWQCP partner-funded structure, with costs shared by the City and its regional
partners consistent with established partner agreements and related amendments. Palo Alto’s
share of this project is approximately 38%, with the remaining 62% funded by the partners
based on wastewater flows and strength contributions.
Funding for the purchase order is available in the New Laboratory and Environmental Services
Building Project (WQ-14002). Any additional funding needed in subsequent fiscal years (e.g.
future maintenance and/or replacement costs) would be subject to the City’s standard budget
appropriation process.
STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT
The five partner agencies are regularly updated on both the need for and the progress of
RWQCP projects. Updates are provided each year at an annual meeting and at other periodic
meetings established to inform partner agency staff. With respect to Palo Alto itself, the City's
budget process provides the primary opportunity for public review of capital projects and
associated rate impacts.
For this purchase order, staff coordinated furniture planning and workspace layouts with
RWQCP Laboratory and Engineering Group representatives to ensure the furnishings meet
operational and functional requirements.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The furniture procurement is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15378(b)(2), Continuing administrative or
maintenance activities.
ATTACHMENTS
None
Item 6
Item 6 Staff Report
Item 6: Staff Report Pg. 3 Packet Pg. 74 of 254
9
9
6
5
APPROVED BY:
Item 6
Item 6 Staff Report
Item 6: Staff Report Pg. 4 Packet Pg. 75 of 254
1
0
3
0
4
City Council
Staff Report
From: City Manager
Report Type: CONSENT CALENDAR
Lead Department: Public Works
Meeting Date: August 24, 2026
Report #:2607-6550
TITLE
Approval of Amendment No. 2 to Contract No. C22182372 with CSWST2 to Add $170,450,
Increasing the Not-to-Exceed Amount to $360,302 and Extending the Contract Term to
December 31, 2028 for Preliminary Design Services to Support Assessment District Planning and
Stakeholder Engagement for the University Avenue Streetscape Capital Improvement Program
Project, PE-21004; CEQA Status – Not a Project
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Approve and authorize the City Manager or their designee to execute Amendment No. 2
to Contract No. C22182372 with CSWST2 for the University Avenue Streetscape Capital
Improvement Program Project (PE-21004);
2. Increase the total not-to-exceed amount by $170,450, consisting of $154,955 for basic
services and $15,495 for additional services, establishing a revised total not-to-exceed
amount of $360,302; and
3. Extend the contract term to December 31, 2028.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Council approval of the proposed amendment will enable the next phase of the University
Avenue Streetscape project, which includes developing the preliminary design to an extent
required to provide necessary technical information for an assessment district feasibility
analysis and to gather feedback from the stakeholders for a refined concept.
The preferred concept plan presented to Council in December 2024 established a broad
conceptual framework for sidewalks and travel lanes configuration, and integrated street
amenities, lighting, landscaping, and signage elements. The plan had a total estimated project
cost of approximately $40 million in 2029 dollars. Some stakeholders expressed concerns
regarding the overall cost and level of support for the project. In response, staff performed a
Item 7
Item 7 Staff Report
Item 7: Staff Report Pg. 1 Packet Pg. 76 of 254
1
0
3
0
4
value engineering analysis to identify alternatives to reduce the project costs by incorporating
additional field data and further refining the design concepts while upholding the vision and
goals of the preferred concept plan. The total project costs for three feasible alternatives were
estimated to be in the range of $30-$32 million in 2029 dollars. Staff has since conducted
additional outreach, and stakeholders have expressed support for the project proceeding with
the next phase.
BACKGROUND
1 as part of the workplan for Community and Economic Recovery2, allocating
$150,000 for this study. On September 13, 2021, Council directed staff to proceed with the
University Avenue Streetscape Design Request for Proposals (RFP)3 and on February 28,
2022, Council approved a contract4 with CSWST2 for design services for the project. The
project consists of four phases:
1 City Council, March 1, 2021; Agenda Item #8; SR #11872
2 City Council, January 19, 2021; Agenda Item #4; SR #11877
https://recordsportal.paloalto.gov/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=81429&dbid=0&repo=PaloAlto&searchid=ff36507a-
ddcb-403a-ba5e-010bb91e2495
3 City Council, September 13, 2021; Agenda Item # 8; SR #13540
https://recordsportal.paloalto.gov/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=81601&dbid=0&repo=PaloAlto&searchid=837e5cdd
-ba7c-4f83-a109-7b2795abd0cf
4 City Council, February 28, 2022; Agenda Item # 10; SR #13609
Item 7
Item 7 Staff Report
Item 7: Staff Report Pg. 2 Packet Pg. 77 of 254
1
0
3
0
4
At the time of contract award to CSWST2, Council approved the scope and funding for Phase
1 services only. On December 18, 2023, Staff presented a streetscape feasibility study to
Council providing concept plans developed based on the community and stakeholder
input.9,10 On June 3, 2024, staff presented an update to Council regarding the project vision,
design elements, and stakeholder engagement strategy.11 On December 2, 2024, Council
approved Contract Amendment No. 112 with CSWST2 in the amount of $25,000 for
additional analysis, concepts refinements, and outreach to address the Council-directed
items in the December 2023 and June 2024 meetings. Contract Amendment No. 1 also
extended the contract term through December 31, 2027.
13 which completed the
scope of services under Phase 1. Council provided the following direction:
9 University Avenue Streetscape Feasibility Report, December 2023
10 City Council, December 18, 2023; Agenda Item # 21; SR #2310-2189
11 City Council, June 3, 2024; Agenda Item # 16; SR # 2404-2904
https://recordsportal.paloalto.gov/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=82865&dbid=0&repo=PaloAlto&searchid=ebd04c10
-7679-485f-906e-208f5bfdefaf
12 City Council, December 2, 2024; Agenda Item #10; SR #2410-3623
13 City Council, December 9, 2024; Agenda Item # 16; SR # 2408-3338
Item 7
Item 7 Staff Report
Item 7: Staff Report Pg. 3 Packet Pg. 78 of 254
1
0
3
0
4
funded through a public financing mechanism such as an assessment district (i.e. proportionate
share of project costs attributable to special benefits to be paid by property owners versus
costs attributable to general benefits to be paid by the City).
ANALYSIS
17.5-foot-wide sidewalks with extended curbs at crosswalks along University Avenue
between High and Cowper streets, while retaining the existing curb alignment between
Cowper and Webster streets. This expanded space would allow uses like outdoor dining,
retail displays, landscaping, street furnishings, and a generous pedestrian walkway.
Decorative paving on sidewalks along University Avenue between High to Webster
Streets and in key gathering spaces.
Gathering spaces within the public right-of-way (e.g., Lytton Plaza, Centennial Alley).
Pavement between High and Webster streets.
Two-lane vehicular traffic with shared bike lane.
Re-location of utilities and storm water improvements.
New landscaping while maintaining existing street trees.
New streetlights, traffic signals, and wayfinding signage.
New street amenities
Collaboration with Public Art program to install artwork at focal gathering spaces.
Item 7
Item 7 Staff Report
Item 7: Staff Report Pg. 4 Packet Pg. 79 of 254
1
0
3
0
4
The conceptual design of all blocks based on topographic survey and design refinements
allowed for better quantification, reduced assumptions and contingencies, and a more accurate
estimate. Staff presented the findings of the value engineering evaluation in the downtown
stakeholders’ meetings in April and May of 2026 and generally received positive feedback.
Phase 2 – Preliminary design, environmental assessment, and engineering support for
the assessment district feasibility. Staff proposes a two-step approach to complete Phase 2
scope of services, consisting of Phase 2A and Phase 2B, as described below.
FISCAL/RESOURCE IMPACT
Item 7
Item 7 Staff Report
Item 7: Staff Report Pg. 5 Packet Pg. 80 of 254
1
0
3
0
4
STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
ATTACHMENTS
APPROVED BY:
Item 7
Item 7 Staff Report
Item 7: Staff Report Pg. 6 Packet Pg. 81 of 254
Vers.: Aug. 5, 2019
Page 1 of 11
AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO CONTRACT NO. C22182372
BETWEEN THE CITY OF PALO ALTO AND CSWST2
This Amendment No. 2 (this “Amendment”) to Contract No. C22182372 (the “Contract” as
defined below) is entered into as of August 24, 2026, by and between the CITY OF PALO ALTO, a
California chartered municipal corporation (“CITY”), and CSWST2, a California corporation, located
at 504 Redwood Boulevard Suite 310, Novato, CA 94947 (“CONSULTANT”). CITY and CONSULTANT
are referred to collectively as the “Parties” in this Amendment.
R E C I T A L S
A. The Contract (as defined below) was entered into by and between the Parties hereto
for the provision of repurposing University Avenue to facilitate people-centric activities and
community programming and developing a preferred concept through a community outreach
process for the University Avenue Streetscape project (PE-21004), as detailed therein.
B. The Parties now wish to amend the Contract in order to (1) revise the Scope of
Services to include advancements to the concept design to support an assessment district
feasibility analysis, explore subsurface conditions, and gather stakeholder feedback ; and (2)
increase compensation by One Hundred Seventy Thousand Four Hundred Fifty Dollars ($170,450),
from One Hundred Eighty-Nine Thousand Eight Hundred Fifty-Two Dollars ($189,852) to a new not
to exceed total compensation of Three Hundred Sixty Thousand Three Hundred Two Dollars
($360,302); and (3) extend the term by one year to December 31, 2028, as detailed herein.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants, terms, conditions, and provisions of
this Amendment, the Parties agree:
SECTION 1. Definitions. The following definitions shall apply to this Amendment:
a. Contract. The term “Contract” shall mean Contract No. C22182372
between CONSULTANT and CITY, dated February 28, 2022, as amended by:
Amendment No.1, dated November 18, 2024
b. Other Terms. Capitalized terms used and not defined in this Amendment
shall have the meanings assigned to such terms in the Contract.
SECTION 2. Section 2. “TERM” of the Contract is hereby amended to read as follows:
The term of this Agreement shall be from the date of its full execution through December 31, 2028,
unless terminated earlier pursuant to Section 19 (Termination) of this Agreement.
SECTION 3. Section 4. “NOT TO EXCEED COMPENSATION” of the Contract is hereby
amended to read as follows:
Docusign Envelope ID: E4231870-F965-8969-8191-9DFD4738DD13
Item 7
Attachment A - CSWST2;
Contract C22182372;
Amendment No. 2
Item 7: Staff Report Pg. 7 Packet Pg. 82 of 254
Vers.: Aug. 5, 2019
Page 2 of 11
The compensation to be paid to CONSULTANT for performance of the Services shall be based on
the compensation structure detailed in Exhibit C, entitled “COMPENSATION,” including any
reimbursable expenses specified therein, and the maximum total compensation shall not exceed
Three Hundred Twenty-Nine Thousand Eight Hundred Twenty-One Dollars ($329,821). The hourly
schedule of rates, if applicable, is set out in Exhibit C-1, entitled “SCHEDULE OF RATES.” Any work
performed or expenses incurred for which payment would result in a total exceeding the maximum
compensation set forth in this Section 4 shall be at no cost to the CITY.
Optional Additional Services Provision
In addition to the not-to-exceed compensation specified above, CITY has set aside the not -to-
exceed compensation amount of Thirty Thousand Four Hundred Eighty-One Dollars ($30,481)
for the performance of Additional Services (as defined below). The total compensation for
performance of the Services, Additional Services and any reimbursable expenses specified in
Exhibit C, shall not exceed Three Hundred Sixty Thousand Three Hundred Two Dollars
($360,302), as detailed in Exhibit C.
“Additional Services” means any work that is determined by CITY to be necessary for the proper
completion of the Project, but which is not included within the Scope of Services described at
Exhibit A. CITY may elect to, but is not required to, authorize Additional Services up to the
maximum amount of compensation set forth for Additional Services in this Section 4.
CONSULTANT shall provide Additional Services only by advanced, written authorization from
CITY as detailed in this Section. Additional Services, if any, shall be authorized by CITY with a
Task Order assigned and authorized by CITY’s Project Manager, as identified in Section 13
(Project Management). Each Task Order shall be in substantially the same form as Exhibit A-1,
entitled “PROFESSIONAL SERVICES TASK ORDER”. Each Task Order shall contain a specific scope
of services, schedule of performance and maximum compensation amount, in accordance with
the provisions of this Agreement. Compensation for Additional Services shall be specified by
CITY in the Task Order, based on whichever is lowest: the compensation structure set forth in
Exhibit C, the hourly rates set forth in Exhibit C-1, or a negotiated lump sum.
To accept a Task Order, CONSULTANT shall sign the Task Order and return it to CITY’s Project
Manager within the time specified by the Project Manager, and upon authorization by CITY
(defined as counter-signature by the CITY Project Manager), the fully executed Task Order shall
become part of this Agreement. The cumulative total compensation to CONSULT ANT for all
Task Orders authorized under this Agreement shall not exceed the amount of compensation set
forth for Additional Services in this Section 4. CONSULTANT shall only be compensated for
Additional Services performed under an authorized Task Order and only up to the maximum
amount of compensation set forth for Additional Services in this Section 4. Performance of and
payment for any Additional Services are subject to all requirements and restrictions in this
Agreement.”
Docusign Envelope ID: E4231870-F965-8969-8191-9DFD4738DD13
Item 7
Attachment A - CSWST2;
Contract C22182372;
Amendment No. 2
Item 7: Staff Report Pg. 8 Packet Pg. 83 of 254
Vers.: Aug. 5, 2019
Page 3 of 11
SECTION 4. The following exhibit(s) to the Contract is/are hereby amended or added, as
indicated below, to read as set forth in the attachment(s) to this Amendment, which is/are hereby
incorporated in full into this Amendment and into the Contract by this reference:
a. Exhibit “A” entitled “SCOPE OF SERVICES”, AMENDED, REPLACES PREVIOUS.
b. Exhibit “B” entitled “SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE”, AMENDED, REPLACES
PREVIOUS.
c. Exhibit “C” entitled “COMPENSATION”, AMENDED, REPLACES PREVIOUS.
SECTION 5. Legal Effect. Except as modified by this Amendment, all other provisions of the
Contract, including any exhibits thereto, shall remain in full force and effect.
SECTION 6. Incorporation of Recitals. The recitals set forth above are terms of this
Amendment and are fully incorporated herein by this reference.
(SIGNATURE BLOCK FOLLOWS ON THE NEXT PAGE.)
Docusign Envelope ID: E4231870-F965-8969-8191-9DFD4738DD13
Item 7
Attachment A - CSWST2;
Contract C22182372;
Amendment No. 2
Item 7: Staff Report Pg. 9 Packet Pg. 84 of 254
Vers.: Aug. 5, 2019
Page 4 of 11
SIGNATURES OF THE PARTIES
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have by their duly authorized representatives executed
this Amendment effective as of the date first above written.
CITY OF PALO ALTO
City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Attorney or designee
CSWST2
Officer 1
By:
Name: Robert Stevens
Title: President / CEO
Officer 2
By:
Name: Linda Schmid
Title: CFO
Attachments:
Exhibit “A” entitled “SCOPE OF SERVICES, AMENDMENT NO. 2”, AMENDED, REPLACES
PREVIOUS.
Exhibit “B” entitled “SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE, AMENDMENT NO. 2”, AMENDED, REPLACES
PREVIOUS.
Exhibit “C” entitled “COMPENSATION, AMENDMENT NO. 2”, AMENDED, REPLACES PREVIOUS.
Docusign Envelope ID: E4231870-F965-8969-8191-9DFD4738DD13
Item 7
Attachment A - CSWST2;
Contract C22182372;
Amendment No. 2
Item 7: Staff Report Pg. 10 Packet Pg. 85 of 254
Vers.: Aug. 5, 2019
Page 5 of 11
EXHIBIT A
SCOPE OF SERVICES, AMENDMENT NO. 2 (AMENDED, REPLACES PREVIOUS)
CONSULTANT’s duties and services under this agreement shall not include preparing or assisting
City with any portion of City’s preparation of a request for proposals, request for qualifications,
or any other solicitation regarding a subsequent or additional contract with City. City shall
at all times retain responsibility for public contracting, including with respect to any
subsequent phase of this project. CONSULTANT’s participation in the planning, discussions, or
drawing of project plans or specifications shall be limited to conceptual, preliminary, or
initial plans or specifications. CONSULTANT shall cooperate with City to ensure that all
bidders for a subsequent contract on any subsequent phase of this project have access to the
same information, including all conceptual, preliminary, or initial plans or specifications
prepared by CONSULTANT pursuant to this agreement.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
CONSULTANT shall provide the services detailed in this Exhibit A, entitled “SCOPE OF SERVICES”
under Contract Amendment No. 2. The University Avenue Streetscape Project uses a phased
approach, as described in the Request for Proposals (RFP#182372) and as noted below.
1. Phase 1 – Conceptual design and preferred concept plan development
2. Phase 2 – Preliminary design, environmental assessment, and engineering support for
the assessment district planning
3. Phase 3 – Final design, construction documents, and bid support
4. Phase 4 – Construction administration
Phase 1 scope of services defined a preferred concept streetscape plan that was approved by the
City Council in December 2024. A value engineering analysis was completed in spring 2026 to
identify opportunities to reduce the total project cost while maintaining the intent and aspects of
the preferred concept plan approved by Council.
This contract amendment establishes a two-step approach for Phase 2 scope of services, consisting
of Phase 2A and Phase 2B. Phase 2A scope of services focuses on developing the concept design to
the extent necessary to support an assessment district feasibility analysis, confirm subsurface
conditions, and gather stakeholder’s feedback as detailed in this scope of services.
If the outcome of Phase 2A demonstrates stakeholders support and funding feasibility, Phase 2B
may be authorized through a future contract amendment. Phase 2B will include completion of the
remaining Phase 2 services identified in the RFP, including advancement of preliminary design,
additional public outreach, environmental assessment, and preparation of the Engineer's Report to
support assessment district planning.
The scope of services for future phases as described in the RFP, if any such future phases are to
Docusign Envelope ID: E4231870-F965-8969-8191-9DFD4738DD13
Item 7
Attachment A - CSWST2;
Contract C22182372;
Amendment No. 2
Item 7: Staff Report Pg. 11 Packet Pg. 86 of 254
Vers.: Aug. 5, 2019
Page 6 of 11
proceed, would be developed and refined through future contract amendments. The CONSULTANT
shall complete the following tasks under Phase 2A scope of services:
PHASE 2A – PRELIMINARY DESIGN AND SUPPORT FOR ASSESSMENT DISTRICT FEASIBILITY
The scope of services described below builds on the preferred concept plan approved by Council in
December 2024, which was subsequently valued engineered to identify lower cost opportunities.
This phase is intended to confirm the technical and design assumptions that most influence project
cost and constructability including confirming subsurface pavement conditions, verifying the
corridor’s stormwater treatment approach, advancing the streetscape’s defining design elements,
and validating the updated cost estimate resulted from the value engineering analysis. This phase is
also intended to establish the preferred direction of staff regarding a standard, variable height, or
curb less condition along the corridor. The resulting documents will support an approach to public
financing for the project’s development. Phase 2A Scope of Services includes the following tasks:
Task 1 - Storm Water Treatment Strategy. The Consultant shall investigate storm water
treatment options and finalize the corridor’s stormwater treatment strategy for compliance
with Provision C.3 of the Municipal Regional Permit (MRP). Given the corridor’s expansive Class
D clay soils, the Consultant shall evaluate bioretention sizing and distribution along with
potential off-site or alternative treatment measures and recommend a preferred approach to
carry forward into preliminary design.
Task 2 - Vertical Refinement. The Consultant shall prepare a profile of each curb line and
cross sections of the corridor confirming street cross slopes to support definition of the
alternative design options including a standard, variable, and no curb options .
Task 3 - Subsurface Potholing. The Consultant shall retain a contractor to pothole
University Avenue at six (6) locations to confirm the thickness of the existing asphalt and
underlying concrete pavement section. As determined during the value engineerin g
analysis, segments of the corridor may consist of deep -lift asphalt rather than concrete.
Confirming these conditions will refine the extent of pavement reconstruction (asphalt
plugging) required to match the proposed sidewalk and gutter elevations and will reduce a
significant source of cost uncertainty in the estimate. During this assessment, the
consultant shall obtain several samples of the underlying soils to acquire the R -Value of
soils. The consultant’s contractor shall patch the pavement per the City ’s Standard.
Task 4 - Pavement Restoration. Based upon the pavement thickness, traffic index, and R -
value of subsurface soils, the consultant shall develop the minimum structural section for
the roadway using the Caltrans empirical method for flexible pavement defined in Chapter
630 of the Highway Design Manual.
Task 5 - Urban and Landscape Design. Building on the refined concept plan, the consultant
shall advance the corridor's urban and landscape design concepts, including refining the
Docusign Envelope ID: E4231870-F965-8969-8191-9DFD4738DD13
Item 7
Attachment A - CSWST2;
Contract C22182372;
Amendment No. 2
Item 7: Staff Report Pg. 12 Packet Pg. 87 of 254
Vers.: Aug. 5, 2019
Page 7 of 11
form of potential gateways at each end of the corridor, their design intent, character, and
approximate footprint. The consultant shall also develop landscape and hardscape design
concepts, including a materials palette for the streetscape that identifies paving materials,
finishes, and treatments for sidewalks, crosswalks, and key gathering spaces to establish a
consistent design language along the corridor. The consultant team shall establish several
concepts for the bioretention planting areas. This effort should also focus on the use of
curb-extensions to include bicycle parking, gathering areas, and/or landscape planting
spaces. A key component of this effort will be identifying opportunities to integrate public
art into the streetscape, such as at gateways, in tree grates, or as inset panels within the
hardscape.
Task 6 - Public Financing Support. City will be retaining a public financing consultant to
develop strategies to fund the project’s development, likely using an Assessment District.
The Consultant team shall coordinate with the City’s public financing consultant to provide
cost data as well as identification of general and special benefits. The outcome will be a
concept plan to fund the project including a planning level cost per parcel.
Task 7 - Stakeholder Meetings. The consultant shall participate in up to four (4) focused
stakeholder meetings to present the advancing concept, gather feedback, refine direction
regarding curb height, and build support in preparation for the City Council approval. In
addition, the consultant shall attend five (5) meetings with staff to review the project’s
development and coordinate activities.
Task 8 - Community Meeting. At the City’s request, the consultant shall support a
community meeting to review the project and solicit feedback on design concepts.
Task 9 - City Council Presentation. The consultant shall prepare and support staff in
presenting the outcome of work completed under this phase to Council.
Deliverables:
1. Updated plans incorporating roadway profiles, sections, and typical sections as well
as planting and hardscape plans.
2. Updated cost estimate.
3. Preliminary storm water quality plan consistent with the guidelines of the Santa
Clara County C.3 guidelines.
4. Memorandum summarizing pavement and subsurface soils assessment
including pavement restoration recommendations.
5. Data exchange to support the public financing strategy.
6. Meeting agendas, presentations, and minutes.
Assumptions
Docusign Envelope ID: E4231870-F965-8969-8191-9DFD4738DD13
Item 7
Attachment A - CSWST2;
Contract C22182372;
Amendment No. 2
Item 7: Staff Report Pg. 13 Packet Pg. 88 of 254
Vers.: Aug. 5, 2019
Page 8 of 11
1. The Consultant shall prepare up to three refinements to the plans to support staff’s
decision making regarding the curb height.
2. Potholing will occur during the hours approved by t he City. The Contractor will need a
street work permit from the City before conducting any potholing activities. The contractor
will establish traffic control in accordance with a traffic control plan prepared by the
Consultant and as approved by the City.
3. The final product will serve as the project description for a CEQA document as
well as serve the basis for future coordination with City’s Boards, Commissions and
Committees.
Docusign Envelope ID: E4231870-F965-8969-8191-9DFD4738DD13
Item 7
Attachment A - CSWST2;
Contract C22182372;
Amendment No. 2
Item 7: Staff Report Pg. 14 Packet Pg. 89 of 254
Vers.: Aug. 5, 2019
Page 9 of 11
EXHIBIT B
SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE, AMENDMENT NO. 2 (AMENDED, REPLACES PREVIOUS)
CONSULTANT shall perform the Services so as to complete each milestone within the number
of days/weeks specified below. The time to complete each milestone may be increased or
decreased by mutual written agreement of the Project Managers for CONSULTANT and CITY
so long as all work is completed within the term of the Agreement. CONSULTANT shall
provide a detailed schedule of work consistent with the schedule below within 2 weeks of
receipt of the notice to proceed (“NTP”) from the CITY.
Milestone Completion
Number of Days (as specific below) From
NTP of Amendment No. 2
Task1: Storm Water Treatment Strategy 100 working days
Task 2: Vertical Refinement 100 working days
Task 3: Subsurface Potholing 40 working days
Task 4: Pavement Restoration 80 working days
Task 5: Urban and Landscape Design 150 working days
Task 6: Public Financing Support 150 working days
Task 7: Stakeholder Meetings 150 working days
Task 8: Community Meeting 150 working days
Task 9: City Council Presentation 180 working days
Optional Schedule of Performance Provision for On-Call or Additional Services
Agreements. (This provision only applies if checked and only applies to on-call agreements
per Section 1 or agreements with Additional Services per Section 4.)
The schedule of performance shall be as provided in the approved Task Order, as detailed
in Section 1 (Scope of Services) in the case of on-call Services, or as detailed in Section 4 in the
case of Additional Services, provided in all cases that the schedule of performance shall fall
within the term as provided in Section 2 (Term) of this Agreement.
Docusign Envelope ID: E4231870-F965-8969-8191-9DFD4738DD13
Item 7
Attachment A - CSWST2;
Contract C22182372;
Amendment No. 2
Item 7: Staff Report Pg. 15 Packet Pg. 90 of 254
Vers.: Aug. 5, 2019
Page 10 of 11
EXHIBIT C
COMPENSATION, AMENDMENT NO. 2 (AMENDED, REPLACES PREVIOUS)
CITY agrees to compensate CONSULTANT for Services performed in accordance with the terms
and conditions of this Agreement, and as set forth in the budget schedule below.
Compensation shall be calculated based on the rate schedule attached as Exhibit C-1 up to
the not to exceed budget amount for each task set forth below.
CITY’s Project Manager may approve in writing the transfer of budget amounts between any of
the tasks or categories listed below, provided that the total compensation for the Services,
including any specified reimbursable expenses, and the total compensation for Additional
Services (if any, per Section 4 of the Agreement) do not exceed the amounts set forth in
Section 4 of this Agreement.
CONSULTANT agrees to complete all Services, any specified reimbursable expenses, and
Additional Services (if any, per Section 4), within this/these amount(s). Any work performed
or expenses incurred for which payment would result in a total exceeding the
maximum amount of compensation set forth in this Agreement shall be at no cost to the
CITY.
BUDGET SCHEDULE NOT TO EXCEED AMOUNT
Original Contract
Task 1: Goals and Objectives $7,630
Task 2: Data Collection $49,960
Task 3: Alternatives for University Avenue $46,520
Task 4: Costs, Funding, and Assessment Planning $11,116
Task 5: Outreach $32,580
Subtotal of Services (original contract) $147,806
Contract Amendment No. 1
Additional Outreach and Concepts Refinement $25,000
Contract Amendment No. 2
Task1: Storm Water Treatment Strategy $15,090
Task 2: Vertical Refinement $20,182
Task 3: Subsurface Potholing $15,000
Task 4: Pavement Restoration $8,142
Task 5: Urban and Landscape Design $75,000
Docusign Envelope ID: E4231870-F965-8969-8191-9DFD4738DD13
Item 7
Attachment A - CSWST2;
Contract C22182372;
Amendment No. 2
Item 7: Staff Report Pg. 16 Packet Pg. 91 of 254
Vers.: Aug. 5, 2019
Page 11 of 11
Task 6: Public Financing Support $1,964
Task 7: Stakeholder Meetings $13,104
Task 8: Community Meeting $3,491
Task 9: City Council Presentation $2,982
Subtotal for Services (Contract Amendment No. 2) $154,955
Reimbursable Expense (original contract) $2,060
Total for Services and Reimbursable Expenses $329,821
Additional Services (if any, per Section 4) $30,481
Maximum Total Compensation $360,302
REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES
CONSULTANT’S ordinary business expenses, such as administrative, overhead,
administrative support time/overtime, information systems, software and hardware,
photocopying, telecommunications (telephone, internet), in-house printing, insurance and
other ordinary business expenses, are included within the scope of payment for Services and
are not reimbursable expenses hereunder.
Reimbursable expenses, if any are specified as reimbursable under this section, will be
reimbursed at actual cost. The expenses (by type, e.g. travel) for which CONSULTANT will be
reimbursed are Travel and Printing up to the not-to-exceed amount of $2,060.00.
Travel outside the San Francisco Bay Area, including transportation and meals, if specified as
reimbursable, will be reimbursed at actual cost subject to the City of Palo Alto’s policy for
reimbursement of travel and meal expenses.
All requests for reimbursement of expenses, if any are specified as reimbursable under this
section, shall be accompanied by appropriate backup documentation and information.
Docusign Envelope ID: E4231870-F965-8969-8191-9DFD4738DD13
Item 7
Attachment A - CSWST2;
Contract C22182372;
Amendment No. 2
Item 7: Staff Report Pg. 17 Packet Pg. 92 of 254
City Council
Staff Report
Report Type: CONSENT CALENDAR
Lead Department: City Clerk
Meeting Date: August 24, 2026
Report #:2608-6629
TITLE
SECOND READING: Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Section 2.28.240
[Settlement of Claims and Actions] and Chapter 2.30 [Contracts and Purchasing Procedures] of
the Palo Alto Municipal Code to increase the thresholds for solicitation of goods and services,
increase contract approval and settlement authority, and to make other technical changes.
(FIRST READING: August 10, 2026; PASSED: 7-0)
BACKGROUND
The City Council heard this item on August 10, 2026, for a first reading and approved it on a 7-0
vote. No changes were made to the ordinance, and it is now before the City Council for a
second reading.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A: Ordinance Amending PAMC Section 2.28.240 and Chapter 2.30
APPROVED BY:
Mahealani Ah Yun, City Clerk
Item 8
Item 8 Staff Report
Item 8: Staff Report Pg. 1 Packet Pg. 93 of 254
1
0015_20260720_mv30
*NOT YET APPROVED*
Ordinance No. _____
Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending Section
2.28.240 [Settlement of Claims and Actions] and Chapter 2.30 [Contracts
and Purchasing Procedures] of the Palo Alto Municipal Code to increase
the thresholds for solicitation of goods and services, increase contract
approval and settlement authority, and to make other technical changes.
The Council of the City of Palo Alto ORDAINS as follows:
SECTION 1. Section 2.28.240 (Settlement of claims and actions) of Chapter 2.28 (Fiscal
Procedures*) of Title 2 (Administrative Code*) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code is amended to
read as follows (additions underlined; deletions struck-through; unchanged text omitted by
bracketed ellipses):
2.28.240 Settlement of claims and actions.
As provided in Section 935.4 of the Government Code of California, the city attorney is
designated to perform the functions of the city council relative to claims and actions against the
city or any of its officers or employees under the provisions of Division 3.6 of the Government
Code, as follows:
(a) Where the city has insured itself against liability for the claimed injury, the city attorney
shall forward to the insurance carrier without prior council approval a written
recommendation as to acceptance, settlement, or rejection of such claim, provided
that the amount of any recommended allowance, compromise or settlement does not
exceed $35,000.00;
(b) Where the city is uninsured, the city attorney shall be authorized to accept, settle or
reject without prior approval of the council, claims against the city, provided that no
allowance, compromise or settlement shall exceed $35,000.0050,000.00. Upon the
written order from the city attorney, the director of administrative services shall cause
to be issued a warrant upon the treasury of the city in the amount for which a claim
has been allowed, compromised or settled;
(c) The city attorney is further authorized to compromise or settle, without prior approval
of the council, except on a matter of policy, any actions which the city is either plaintiff
or defendant and which are not covered by insurance, provided that the amount of
such compromise or settlement shall not exceed $35,000.0050,000.00;
(d) The city attorney shall make biannual reports to the council on action taken on claims
and actions against the city;
(e) A recommendation under subsection (a) above shall constitute "action" upon such
claim within the meaning of Government Code Section 945.4.
Attachment A
A - 1
Item 8
Attachment A - Ordinance
Amending PAMC Section
2.28.240 and Chapter 2.30
Item 8: Staff Report Pg. 2 Packet Pg. 94 of 254
*NOT YET APPROVED*
2
0015_20260720_mv30
SECTION 2. Chapter 2.30 (Contracts and Purchasing Procedures*) of Title 2
(Administrative Code*) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code is amended to read as follows (additions
underlined; deletions struck-through; unchanged text omitted by bracketed ellipses):
Chapter 2.30
CONTRACTS AND PURCHASING PROCEDURES*
Sections:
[…]
PART 2 -- CONTRACT TYPES
2.30.100 Public works contract.
2.30.110 Contract for goods.
2.30.120 General services contract.
2.30.130 Professional services contract.
2.30.140 Contracts for wholesale utility commodities and services.
2.30.150 Contracts for dark fiber optics licensing services.
2.30.155 Information Technology services contracts.
2.30.160 Emergency contracts.
PART 3 -- CONTRACTING AUTHORITY
2.30.200 Procurement officer contract award authority.
2.30.210 City Manager contract award authority.
2.30.220 City Attorney contract award authority.
2.30.221 Periodic automatic adjustments to contract award authority.
2.30.225 Wholesale utility commodity transactions.
2.30.230 Designated employee purchases of $10,000.0015,000.00 or less.
2.30.240 Designated employees’ use of petty cash, P-card or other credit card.
2.30.250 Council approval or award of contracts.
2.30.260 Contracts with terms exceeding one year — Appropriation.
Attachment A
A - 2
Item 8
Attachment A - Ordinance
Amending PAMC Section
2.28.240 and Chapter 2.30
Item 8: Staff Report Pg. 3 Packet Pg. 95 of 254
*NOT YET APPROVED*
3
0015_20260720_mv30
2.30.270 Delegations of authority to contract.
2.30.280 Authority to modify and terminate contracts not approved or awarded by the
Council.
2.30.290 Authority to modify contracts awarded by the Council.
2.30.295 Limitations on contract authority; authority otherwise conferred.
PART 4 — COMPETITIVE SOLICITATION REQUIREMENTS
2.30.300 Public works contracts.
2.30.310 Contracts for goods.
2.30.320 General services contracts.
2.30.330 Professional services contracts.
2.30.335 Information Technology services contracts.
2.30.340 Contracts for wholesale utility commodities and services.
2.30.345 Periodic automatic adjustments to solicitation thresholds.
2.30.350 Contract splitting prohibited.
2.30.360 Exemptions from competitive solicitation requirements.
PART 5 – COMPETITIVE SOLICITATION PROCEDURES
2.30.400 Informal invitation for bids, request for quotes or requests for proposals.
2.30.410 Formal request for proposals.
2.30.420 Formal invitation for bids or request for quotes – Notice, submittal, opening.
2.30.430 Combined request for proposals and invitation for bids.
2.30.440 Determination of lowest responsive/responsible bidder.
2.30.450 Tie bids.
2.30.460 Correction or withdrawal of bids or proposals.
2.30.470 Cancellation of solicitations -- Rejections of bids/proposals.
2.30.480 Waiver of minor irregularities, defects and informalities.
Attachment A
A - 3
Item 8
Attachment A - Ordinance
Amending PAMC Section
2.28.240 and Chapter 2.30
Item 8: Staff Report Pg. 4 Packet Pg. 96 of 254
*NOT YET APPROVED*
4
0015_20260720_mv30
2.30.485 Delegation of awarding authority determinations.
2.30.490 Design-build contract procurement procedures.
[…]
PART 1 — GENERAL
[…]
2.30.040 Centralized purchasing.
All acquisitions and purchases shall be made by and through the Procurement Officer,
except:
(a) Purchases of goods and services made from petty cash funds made in conformance with
this chapter and pursuant to control procedures approved by the City Manager and
contained in the administrative policies and procedures manual maintained by the City
Manager;
(b) Emergency purchases made in conformance with this chapter and Federal Emergency
Management Agency (“FEMA”) Public Assistance Program’s procurement orders, or
other similar rules, regulations, guidelines and control procedures for cost
reimbursement purposes approved by the City Manager and contained in the
purchasing manual;
(c) Contracts for legal services;
(d) Purchases of goods and services, and payment of public works services, by city
procurement card (“P-card”) or other credit card, made in conformance with this
chapter and pursuant to control procedures approved by the City Manager and
contained in the purchasing manual;
(e) Purchases where the total expenditure by the city does not exceed
$10,000.0015,000.00, made in conformance with this chapter and pursuant to control
procedures approved by the City Manager and contained in the purchasing manual;
(f) Transactions negotiated under master contracts for wholesale utility commodities and
services, as described in Section 2.30.140 made in conformance with Section 2.30.340;
(g) Mutual aid agreements; and
(h) Delegations made according to Section 2.30.230.
[…]
Attachment A
A - 4
Item 8
Attachment A - Ordinance
Amending PAMC Section
2.28.240 and Chapter 2.30
Item 8: Staff Report Pg. 5 Packet Pg. 97 of 254
*NOT YET APPROVED*
5
0015_20260720_mv30
2.30.110 Contract for goods.
(a) A contract for goods includes a contract or purchase order for the purchase of supplies,
materials or equipment, including, without limitation, office supplies, janitorial supplies,
furnishings, equipment, machinery, tools, vehicles, computer hardware and software and other
personal property, materials, or goods. A contract for goods includes a blanket purchase order
contract, where a specified quantity of units to be purchased is not established at the time the
contract is executed. A blanket purchase order contract must establish a maximum dollar amount
of expenditure for the contract and set forth pricing terms for the items to be purchased. A
contract for goods may include labor incidental to the purchase of goods, including any set-up,
installation, and testing services.
(b) A contract for goods includes a contract or purchase order for the purchase of information
technology equipment and computer hardware including, without limitation, desktop
computers, laptops, mobile devices, tablets, peripherals, servers, and physical data storage
infrastructure. This definition includes bundled service contracts that provide for the installation,
support, and maintenance with the acquisition of computer hardware. Standalone maintenance
and service agreements for computer hardware are excluded under this definition and are
governed under Section 2.30.155.
2.30.120 General services contract.
A general services contract includes a contract providing for work, labor or services not
requiring specialized experience, knowledge or training with or without the furnishing of goods,
materials, supplies or equipment, including, without limitation:
(a) Maintenance of public buildings, streets, parks and playgrounds and other public
improvements;
(b) Repair, modification and maintenance of equipment or other goods;
(c) Licensing, installation and maintenance of or relating to information technology property,
goods and services, including, without limitation, computer hardware and software, and
data storage services, unless the information technology services would require
specialized certification, knowledge, expertise, or training are needed and provided;
(dc) Janitorial services, uniform cleaning, tree trimming, street sweeping, power washing and
landscape maintenance;
(ed) Leasing or licensing of goods and other personal property for use by the city; and
(fe) General class instruction, including, without limitation, recreation class instruction
services.
2.30.130 Professional services contract.
Attachment A
A - 5
Item 8
Attachment A - Ordinance
Amending PAMC Section
2.28.240 and Chapter 2.30
Item 8: Staff Report Pg. 6 Packet Pg. 98 of 254
*NOT YET APPROVED*
6
0015_20260720_mv30
A professional services contract includes a contract for services which involves the exercise
of professional discretion and independent judgment based on specialized certification,
knowledge, expertise or training. These services may include, without limitation, those provided
by accountants, actuaries, auditors, appraisers, architects, attorneys, engineers, financial
advisors, information technology experts, instructors, and environmental and land use planners.
[…]
2.30.155 Information technology services contracts.
(a) An information technology services contract includes a contract for information
technology experts and the acquisition, licensing, installation, maintenance, or support of
computer software.
(b) For the purposes of this Section, computer software includes, without limitation:
(1) cloud-based, hosted, or managed subscription software;
(2) electronic data storage and processing services;
(3) telecommunications and network services;
(4) vendor-provided standard-form agreements for software purchase or licensing; and
(5) standalone computer hardware maintenance or service contracts.
(c) This Section does not apply to the purchase of computer hardware as defined under
Section 2.30.110(b) or public works contract as defined under Section 2.30.100.
(d) The contracts referred to herein shall be subject to the City's information security policies,
terms, conditions and other requirements established by the chief information officer
with the concurrence and approval of the City Attorney.
[…]
PART 3 – CONTRACTING AUTHORITY
2.30.200 Procurement officer contract award authority.
The Procurement Officer may award and sign the following contracts:
(a) Public Works Contracts. Public works contracts, where the term does not exceed three
years, and the contract price and any price contingency established for change orders, but
excluding sales tax or use tax, do not exceed $85,000.00150,000.00 in the first contract
year, and do not exceed the sum of $85,000.00150,000.00 and any unexpended monies
carried forward from a prior contract year, in any subsequent contract year.
Attachment A
A - 6
Item 8
Attachment A - Ordinance
Amending PAMC Section
2.28.240 and Chapter 2.30
Item 8: Staff Report Pg. 7 Packet Pg. 99 of 254
*NOT YET APPROVED*
7
0015_20260720_mv30
(b) Contracts for Goods. Contracts to purchase goods, where the term does not exceed three
years, and the contract price and any price contingency established for change orders, but
excluding sales tax or use tax, do not exceed $85,000.00150,000.00 in the first year, and
do not exceed the sum of $85,000.00150,000.00 and any unexpended monies carried
forward from a prior contract year, in any subsequent contract year.
(c) General Services Contracts. General services contracts, where the term does not exceed
three years, and the contract price and any price contingency established for change
orders or additional services, but excluding sales tax or use tax, do not exceed
$85,000.00150,000.00 in the first contract year, and do not exceed $85,000.00150,000.00
and any unexpended monies carried forward from a prior contract year, in any
subsequent contract year.
(d) Professional Services Contracts. Professional services contracts, where the term does not
exceed three years, and the contract price, and any price contingency established for
additional services, but excluding sales tax or use tax, do not exceed the sum of
$85,000.00150,000.00 in the first contract year, and do not exceed the sum of
$85,000.00150,000.00 and any unexpended monies carried forward from a prior contract
year, in any subsequent contract year.
(e) Software and Hardware Purchase, Licensing, Maintenance and Support Information
Technology Services Contracts. Notwithstanding Subsection 2.30.200(c), the. The
Procurement Officer may award and sign Information Technology services contracts other
than general services agreements, including, without limitation, vendor-based standard
form hardware and software purchase and licensing contracts, for the purchase of
hardware and software, the licensing of software, and the maintenance and support of
hardware and software where the term of licensing or maintenance and support services
does not exceed five years and the contract price, excluding sales tax or use tax, does not
exceed $85,000.00150,000.00 per year in the first contract year and does not exceed the
sum of $85,000.00150,000.00 and any unexpended monies carried forward from a prior
contract year, in any subsequent contract year. The contracts referred to herein may
include contracts for data storage services, which shall be subject to the city's information
security policies, terms, conditions and other requirements established by the chief
information officer with the concurrence and approval of the City Attorney.
2.30.210 City Manager contract award authority.
The City Manager may award and sign the following contracts:
(a) Public Works Contracts. Public works contracts, where the term does not exceed three
years, and the contract price and any price contingency established for change orders, but
excluding sales tax or use tax, do not exceed $250,000.00350,000.00 in the first contract
year, and do not exceed the sum of $250,000.00350,000.00 and any unexpended monies
carried forward from a prior contract year, in any subsequent contract year.
Attachment A
A - 7
Item 8
Attachment A - Ordinance
Amending PAMC Section
2.28.240 and Chapter 2.30
Item 8: Staff Report Pg. 8 Packet Pg. 100 of 254
*NOT YET APPROVED*
8
0015_20260720_mv30
(b) Contracts for Goods. Contracts to purchase goods, where the term does not exceed three
years and the contract price and any contingency established for change orders, but
excluding sales tax or use tax, do not exceed $250,000.00350,000.00 in the first contact
year, and do not exceed the sum of $250,000.00350,000.00 and any unexpended monies
carried forward from a prior contract year, in any subsequent contract year.
(c) General Services Contracts. Contracts for services associated with the leasing or licensing
of personal property other than hardware or software, where the term does not exceed
seven years, and the contract price and any price contingency established for change
orders, but excluding sales tax or use tax, do not exceed $85,000.00150,000.00 in the first
contract year, and do not exceed the sum of $85,000.00150,000.00 plus any unexpended
monies carried forward from a prior contract year, in any subsequent contract year.
[…]
(g) Contracts to Rent, Lease, License, Acquire, Transfer or Purchase Interests in Real Property
from Other Parties. Contracts for the rental, leasing, licensing, or purchase by installment
interests in real property from other parties for a term of seven years or less, where the
contract price does not exceed $85,000.00150,000.00 per year, or to encumber or
transfer any interest in real property from other parties for any term of years. The City
Manager may enter into and sign a contract to acquire or purchase an interest in real
property, where the contract price does not exceed $85,000.00150,000.00.
[…]
(l) Software and Hardware Purchase, Licensing, Maintenance and Support Information
Technology Contracts Services Contracts. Notwithstanding Subsection 2.30.210(c),
Information Technology service contracts the City Manager may award and sign contracts
other than general services agreements, including, without limitation, vendor-based
standard form hardware and software purchase and licensing contracts, for the purchase
of hardware and software, the licensing of software, and the maintenance and support of
hardware and software, where the term of licensing or maintenance and support services
does not exceed seven years and the contract price, excluding sales tax or use tax, does
not exceed $85,000.00150,000.00 per year in the first contract or fiscal year and does not
exceed the sum of $85,000.00150,000.00 and any unexpended monies carried forward
from a prior fiscal year, in any subsequent contract or fiscal year. The contracts referred
to herein may include contracts for data storage services, which shall be subject to the
city's information security policies, terms, conditions and other requirements established
by the chief information officer with the concurrence and approval of the City Attorney.
(m) Contracts with a business operator implementing business tax offsets under Section
2.37.080.
(n) Other Contracts. All other types of contracts for which the contract term does not exceed
three years and the total expenditure by the city does not exceed $85,000.00150,000.00
Attachment A
A - 8
Item 8
Attachment A - Ordinance
Amending PAMC Section
2.28.240 and Chapter 2.30
Item 8: Staff Report Pg. 9 Packet Pg. 101 of 254
*NOT YET APPROVED*
9
0015_20260720_mv30
in the first contract or fiscal year, and does not exceed the sum of $85,000.00150,000.00
and any unexpended monies carried forward from a prior fiscal year, in any subsequent
contract or fiscal year.
(o) Fleet Vehicles. Contracts for the purchase or retrofitting of fleet vehicles within the
amount appropriated for such purchases by the Council.
2.30.220 City Attorney contract award authority.
The City Attorney may award and sign contracts for legal services, including, without
limitation, services provided by outside counsel, investigators, consultants and other experts
needed for litigation or other administrative and legal proceedings, to be provided to the city
for any time period, where the contract price and any contingency established for additional
services, but excluding sales tax or use tax, do not exceed the sum of $85,000.00150,000.00 in
the first contract or fiscal year, and do not exceed the sum of $85,000.00150,000.00 and any
unexpended monies carried forward from a prior fiscal year, in any subsequent contract or
fiscal year. In addition to the authority described herein, the City Attorney may sign contracts,
where the contract price exceeds the amounts set forth above, provided the Council has first
approved the use of such services.
(a) Notwithstanding the foregoing, the City Attorney may use any funds under a legal services
contract when necessary to pay for services related to active litigation or administrative
proceedings.
(b) The City Attorney is authorized to enter into and execute on behalf of the city, without
the prior approval of the Council, any amendment or change order to a contract,
previously approved by the Council, that does not increase the compensation payable
under the contract and to accomplish the following:
(1) To extend the term of the contract for a period not to exceed twelve consecutive
months from the last Council-approved contract expiration date;
(2) To make minor revisions to the scope of services or delivery schedule;
(3) To reduce the scope of services, the term, or the compensation of a contract; or
(4) To make clerical corrections.
2.30.221. Periodic automatic adjustments to contract award authority.
(a) For the purposes of this Section, "CPI" means the Consumer Price Index, All Urban
Consumers, published by the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics for the
San Francisco-Oakland-Hayward area, with all items included. In the event the CPI is no
longer published, the Procurement Officer shall use another index published by either the
State of California or a federal department or agency that is charged with the
Attachment A
A - 9
Item 8
Attachment A - Ordinance
Amending PAMC Section
2.28.240 and Chapter 2.30
Item 8: Staff Report Pg. 10 Packet Pg. 102 of 254
*NOT YET APPROVED*
10
0015_20260720_mv30
responsibility of measuring the cost of living in the geographical area that includes the
City of Palo Alto.
(b) For the purposes of this Section, “Contract Award Authority Thresholds” means the
monetary amounts set forth in Sections 2.30.200, 2.30.210, and 2.30.220.
(c) Beginning on July 1, 2031, and continuing every five years thereafter on July 1st, the
Contract Award Authority Thresholds will increase based on the percentage increase from
the CPI published most recently preceding July 1st of the applicable adjustment year. The
increase in the Contract Award Authority Thresholds shall be rounded to the nearest ten
thousand and this amount will serve as the Contract Award Authority Thresholds for the
next five years. If there is no increase in the CPI, then the Contract Award Authority
Thresholds are unchanged.
(d) The Procurement Officer shall perform the foregoing calculations and report the adjusted
Contract Award Authority Thresholds to the Council as soon as practical.
[…]
2.30.230 Designated employee purchases of $10,000.0015,000.00 or less.
Employees authorized, in writing, by their department heads may award and sign contracts
for the purchase of goods and the procurement of general services, where the contract price
does not exceed $10,000.0015,000.00 and the contract term does not exceed one year. All
purchases and procurements shall be made in accordance with the contracting procedures and
requirements contained in this chapter and in the purchasing manual. The written
authorizations of department heads shall be kept on file by the Procurement Officer.
[…]
2.30.270 Delegations of authority to contract.
This Section establishes the exclusive source of authority to delegate any authority to contract
granted by this chapter. The authority to delegate contracting authority shall not be implied
from any other provision of this municipal code.
(a) Procurement Officer Delegations. The Procurement Officer may delegate the authority
granted under Section 2.30.200, as follows: a city employee holding the position of
contract manager administrator or senior buyer may be authorized to award and sign any
contract in an amount of $50,000.0075,000.00 or less per year with a term not to exceed
three years; and a city employee holding the position of buyer may be authorized to
award and sign any contract in an amount of $25,000.00 or less per year with a term not
to exceed three years.
[…]
Attachment A
A - 10
Item 8
Attachment A - Ordinance
Amending PAMC Section
2.28.240 and Chapter 2.30
Item 8: Staff Report Pg. 11 Packet Pg. 103 of 254
*NOT YET APPROVED*
11
0015_20260720_mv30
2.30.280 Authority to modify and terminate contracts not approved or awarded by the
Council.
(a) Each employee with contracting authority conferred by this chapter may authorize and
sign amendments or change orders to contracts he or she they awarded under the
authority granted in this chapter subject to the following:
(1) All modifications to contracts, including, without limitation, changes to the scope of
work, quantity of goods, price or term shall be made in writing and accomplished
executed in accordance with the terms of the original contract;
(2) The amendment or change order to a contract shall not cause the contract, as
modified, to exceed the monetary or term limits of that city employee's contracting
authority, as described in this chapter, except that the city employee may extend the
term of a contract, with no increase in the compensation payable, for a period not to
exceed six twelve consecutive months beyond the term limits of his or her contracting
authority; and
[…]
2.30.290 Authority to modify contracts awarded by the Council.
[…]
(b) The City Manager is authorized to enter into and execute on behalf of the city, without the
prior approval of the Council, any amendment or change order to a contract, previously
approved by the Council, that does not increase the compensation payable under the
contract or and to accomplish the following:
(1) To extend the term of the contract for a period not to exceed six twelve consecutive
months from the last Council-approved contract expiration date;
(2) To make minor revisions to the scope of services or delivery schedule;
(3) To reduce the scope of services, the term, or the compensation of a contract; or
(3 4) To make clerical corrections.
(c) The City Manager may approve and sign assignments of contracts, including, without
limitation, leases and licenses, previously approved by the Council when he or she the City
Manager has determined that the proposed assignee has the ability, capacity, experience
and skill and is otherwise qualified to perform the contract.
(d) Notwithstanding any other provision in this Section, the City Manager is authorized to
enter into and execute on behalf of the city, without prior approval of the Council, a one-
Attachment A
A - 11
Item 8
Attachment A - Ordinance
Amending PAMC Section
2.28.240 and Chapter 2.30
Item 8: Staff Report Pg. 12 Packet Pg. 104 of 254
*NOT YET APPROVED*
12
0015_20260720_mv30
time amendment or change order to a professional services, information technology
services, or general services contract, previously approved by Council, provided that:
(1) The change does not to exceed ten percent (10%) of the amount of the original
contract amount or $100,000, whichever is lower;
(2) the change is reasonably related to the scope of the work authorized under the
original contract; and
(3) funding is available and appropriated for the work.
[…]
PART 4 – COMPETITIVE SOLICITATION REQUIREMENTS
2.30.300 Public works contracts.
Public works contracts that are not exempt from the competitive solicitation requirements
under Section 2.30.360 or by Council action shall be solicited, as follows:
(a) In addition to any exemption under Section 2.30.360, public works contracts providing
for an estimated expenditure less than the limit set forth in California Public Contract
Code Section 22032(a), as may be amended, and not otherwise required to be formally
bid by the Charter, may be performed without undergoing a competitive solicitation.
(ab) Public works contracts, providing for an estimated expenditure less than the limit set
forth in California Public Contract Code Section 22032(b), as may be amended of
$85,000.00 or less, and not otherwise required to be formally bid by the Charter, shall be
solicited by informal invitation for bids in accordance with Section 2.30.400.
(1) In lieu of the solicitation requirements set forth in this subsection (b), public works
contracts may be awarded from a list of qualified contractors, identified according to
categories of work, to be created and maintained by the Procurement Officer, so long
as the list is created and the award of contract to a contractor on the list is in
compliance with procedures contained in this chapter and in the purchasing manual.
(b c) Public works contracts, providing for an estimated expenditure exceeding the limit set
forth in California Public Contract Code Section 22032(b), as may be amended
$85,000.00, shall be solicited by formal invitation for bids in accordance with Section
2.30.420.
(c d) Article VII, Section 6 of the City Charter requires formal bidding for public works
contracts funded by bonded indebtedness of the city or by assessment against particular
property in Palo Alto. Section 2.30.300 requires the formal bidding of all public works
Attachment A
A - 12
Item 8
Attachment A - Ordinance
Amending PAMC Section
2.28.240 and Chapter 2.30
Item 8: Staff Report Pg. 13 Packet Pg. 105 of 254
*NOT YET APPROVED*
13
0015_20260720_mv30
contracts exceeding $85,000.00, unless an exemption is provided by Section 2.30.360 or
is otherwise authorized by Council under Section 2.30.300(d).
(d e) Design-build contracts, to the extent debt financing limitations do not apply, that
provide for an expenditure of more than the limit set forth in California Public Contract
Code Section 22032(b), as may be amended $85,000.00, shall be solicited by requests for
proposals in accordance with Section 2.30.490. Despite any law to the contrary, the
design-build method of delivery may be used for any public works contract, including,
without limitation, any design-build-operate contracts, where the City Manager
determines, in writing, the delivery method will best fulfill the requirements of the public
works project.
(e f) The Council may determine that a particular public works project may be solicited and
contracted for by using alternate project delivery methods, including, without limitation,
construction manager at risk or competitive negotiation. Any Council action authorizing an
alternate project delivery method shall set forth the reasons and factual basis supporting
the use of the alternate project delivery method for the project and describe the
solicitation method to be used and the criteria for determining the successful bidder, to
whom the public works contract should be awarded.
2.30.310 Contracts for goods.
Contracts for goods, not exempt from the competitive solicitation requirements under Section
2.30.360 or by Council action, shall be solicited, as follows:
(a) Contracts for goods, providing for an estimated expenditure by the city of
$50,000.00100,000.00 or less, shall be solicited by informal request for quotes informal
invitation for bids in accordance with the provisions of Section 2.30.400; and
(b) Contracts for goods, providing for an estimated expenditure by the city exceeding
$50,000.00100,000.00, shall be solicited by formal request for quotes formal invitation
for bids in accordance with the provision of Section 2.30.420.
2.30.320 General services contracts.
General services contracts, not exempt from the competitive solicitation requirements under
Section 2.30.360 or by Council action, shall be solicited, as follows:
(a) General services contracts, providing for an estimated expenditure by the city not
exceeding $50,000.00100,000.00, shall be solicited by informal request for quotes
invitation for bids or informal request for proposals in accordance with Section
2.30.400.
Attachment A
A - 13
Item 8
Attachment A - Ordinance
Amending PAMC Section
2.28.240 and Chapter 2.30
Item 8: Staff Report Pg. 14 Packet Pg. 106 of 254
*NOT YET APPROVED*
14
0015_20260720_mv30
(b) General services contracts, providing for an estimated expenditure by the city exceeding
$50,000.00100,000.00 shall be solicited by formal invitation for bids request for quotes
in accordance with Section 2.30.420 or by formal request for proposals in accordance
with Section 2.30.410.
(c) The Procurement Officer shall determine, after consideration of whether the needs of
the city or the circumstances require that a contract should be awarded based on
significant factors in addition to price, whether the services subject to a general services
contract shall be solicited by request for quotes bid or request for proposals.
2.30.330 Professional services contracts.
Professional services contracts, not exempt from the competitive solicitation requirements
under Section 2.30.360 or by Council action, shall be solicited, as follows:
(a) Professional services contracts, providing for an estimated expenditure by the city not
exceeding $85,000.00150,000.00, shall be solicited by informal request for proposals in
accordance with Section 2.30.400.
(b) Professional services contracts, providing for an estimated expenditure by the city
exceeding $85,000.00150,000.00, shall be solicited by formal request for proposals in
accordance with Section 2.30.410.
[…]
2.30.335 Information Technology services contracts.
Information technology services contracts, not exempt from the competitive solicitation
requirements under Section 2.30.360 or by Council action, shall be solicited as follows:
(a) Information technology services contracts, providing for an estimated expenditure by
the city not exceeding $150,000.00, shall be solicited by informal request for proposals
in accordance with Section 2.30.400.
(b) Information technology services contracts, providing for an estimated expenditure by
the city exceeding $150,000.00, shall be solicited by formal request for proposals in
accordance with Section 2.30.410.
(c) In lieu of the solicitation requirements set forth in Subsections (a) and (b), Information
Technology services contracts in any amount may be awarded from a list of qualified
professionals to be created and maintained by the Procurement Officer, so long as the
list is created and the award of contract to an entity on the list is in compliance with
procedures contained in this chapter and in the purchasing manual.
2.30.340 Contracts for wholesale utility commodities and services.
Attachment A
A - 14
Item 8
Attachment A - Ordinance
Amending PAMC Section
2.28.240 and Chapter 2.30
Item 8: Staff Report Pg. 15 Packet Pg. 107 of 254
*NOT YET APPROVED*
15
0015_20260720_mv30
(a) Solicitation of Contracts.
(1) Contracts for the purchase or sale-incidental-to-purchase of wholesale utility
commodities and services, providing for an estimated expenditure not exceeding
$85,000.00150,000.00, shall be solicited by informal invitation for bids or informal
request for proposals in accordance with Section 2.30.400. Contracts for the
purchase or sale-incidental-to-purchase of wholesale utility commodities and
services, providing for an estimated expenditure exceeding $85,000.00150,000.00,
shall be solicited by formal invitation for bids, formal request for proposals or
combination thereof, in accordance with Section 2.30.410, 2.30.420 or 2.30.430 or
through solicitation of counterparties enabled to transact under a Council-approved
master agreement in accordance with Section 2.30.340(a)(3).
[…]
2.30.345 Periodic automatic adjustments to solicitation thresholds.
(a) For the purposes of this Section, "CPI" means the Consumer Price Index, All Urban
Consumers, published by the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics for the
San Francisco-Oakland-Hayward area, with all items included. In the event the CPI is no
longer published, the Procurement Officer shall use another index published by either the
State of California or a federal department or agency that is charged with the
responsibility of measuring the cost of living in the geographical area that includes the
City of Palo Alto.
(b) For the purposes of this Section, “Solicitation Thresholds” means the monetary amounts
set forth in Sections 2.30.310, 2.30.320, 2.30.330, 2.30.335, and 2.30.340.
(c) Beginning on July 1, 2031 and continuing every five years thereafter on July 1st, the
Solicitation Thresholds will increase based on the percentage increase from the CPI
published most recently preceding July 1st of the applicable adjustment year. The
increase in the Solicitation Thresholds shall be rounded to the nearest ten thousand and
this amount will serve as the Solicitation Thresholds for the next five years. If there is no
increase in the CPI, then the Solicitation Thresholds are unchanged.
(d) The Procurement Officer shall perform the foregoing calculations and report the adjusted
Solicitation Thresholds to the Council as soon as practical.
[…]
2.30.360 Exemptions from competitive solicitation requirements.
[…]
Attachment A
A - 15
Item 8
Attachment A - Ordinance
Amending PAMC Section
2.28.240 and Chapter 2.30
Item 8: Staff Report Pg. 16 Packet Pg. 108 of 254
*NOT YET APPROVED*
16
0015_20260720_mv30
(b) Whenever solicitations of bids or proposals would for any reason be impracticable,
unavailing or impossible, provided that in the case of a public works project, the project is
not otherwise required by the charter to be formally bid. These situations are those where
solicitations of bids or proposals would not be useful or produce any operational or financial
advantage for the city. Situations where solicitations of bids or proposals would be
impracticable, unavailing or impossible, include, without limitation, the following:
(1) Contract specifications cannot be drawn in a way that would enable more than one
vendor, consultant or contractor to meet them;
(2) Due to circumstances beyond the control of the city, the time necessary to use the
competitive solicitation process, procedures and requirements would result in a
substantial economic loss to the city or the substantial interference with a required
city operation;
(3) Special conditions attached to a grant, donation or gift requires the use of particular
goods and/or services.
(4) A vendor, consultant or contractor possesses specialized knowledge, experience or
familiarity with a city project, operation, or ongoing matter such that a competitive
solicitation would not produce a materially better result or would result in added
cost, delay, or disruption to city operations.
[…]
(e) Contracts for goods where, pursuant to Section 2.30.900, the City Manager has
determined that standardization of the supplies, materials, services, or equipment is
permissible.
[…]
(i) Professional services and Information Technology services contracts, where the estimated
total expenditure by the city, regardless of term, does not exceed $50,000.00100,000.00.
The dollar threshold in this subsection shall be adjusted in accordance with Section
2.30.345.
(j) Cooperative purchases, with one or more other public agencies or through a cooperative
purchasing agency, provided: (i) the services are solicited using methods substantially
similar to those required by this chapter, as determined by the Procurement Officer the
underlying purchase was made through a competitive solicitation; and (ii) the contract is
consistent with the requirements specified in this municipal code.
(k) The use of another governmental or public agency's contract or substantially the same
contract terms provided: (i) the agency uses a solicitation method substantially similar to
the method required by this chapter the underlying purchase was made through a
competitive solicitation ; (ii) the contract is consistent with the requirements specified in
Attachment A
A - 16
Item 8
Attachment A - Ordinance
Amending PAMC Section
2.28.240 and Chapter 2.30
Item 8: Staff Report Pg. 17 Packet Pg. 109 of 254
*NOT YET APPROVED*
17
0015_20260720_mv30
this municipal code; and (iii) the Procurement Officer determines that the city will realize
overall value to utilizing the other agency's contract or contract terms compared to the city
performing its own solicitation.
[…]
(r) Contracts, where the estimated total expenditure by the city does not exceed
$10,000.0050,000.00. The dollar threshold in this subsection shall be adjusted in
accordance with Section 2.30.345.
[…]
(u) Contracts for services where selection is based on a unique personal accomplishment or
characteristic such as guest speakers, performers, artists, recreation instructors, trainers,
and facilitators.
(v) Contracts with another government agency, including a joint powers authority, to
purchase goods or services.
PART 5 – COMPETITIVE SOLICITATION PROCEDURES
2.30.400 Informal invitation for bids, request for quotes or requests for proposals.
(a) An informal invitation for bids, request for quotes, or requests for proposals may be
solicited by any reasonable means, including, without limitation, mail, telephone,
facsimile transmission, e-mail or posting to the city's web site. Quotations shall be
solicited from a minimum of three bidders or proposers; if quotations from three bidders
or proposers cannot be obtained by the exercise of due diligence, quotations shall be
solicited from less than three bidders or proposers, as practicable. The Procurement
Officer shall maintain a record of all informal invitations for bids, informal request for
quotes, and informal requests for proposals received by the city for a period of time in
compliance with California law and the city's records retention schedule.
(b) An informal invitation for bids and informal request for quotes shall be awarded to the
lowest responsive and responsible bidders, as described in Section 2.30.440.
[…]
2.30.420 Formal invitation for bids or request for quotes – Notice, submittal, opening.
(a) Advertising. Contracts that must be solicited by formal invitation for bids or request for
quotes shall be solicited by notices inviting bids by advertising the notices inviting bids on
the City's website for no fewer than five days prior to the date set for receiving bids. As
practicable, bids shall be solicited from a minimum of three bidders.
Attachment A
A - 17
Item 8
Attachment A - Ordinance
Amending PAMC Section
2.28.240 and Chapter 2.30
Item 8: Staff Report Pg. 18 Packet Pg. 110 of 254
*NOT YET APPROVED*
18
0015_20260720_mv30
(b) Notice. The notices inviting bids shall generally describe the goods and/or services to be
purchased or acquired or the public works to be constructed, identify the place where
the bid proposal form, specifications and other contract documents may be obtained,
and specify the date, time and place when and where bids will be opened.
(c) Bid Submittal. All bids shall be sealed. All bids shall be submitted at the place, and at or
before the date and time, specified in the notice inviting bids. Bids received after the
specified date and time shall not be accepted and shall be returned to the bidder
unopened unless the opening is necessary for identification purposes.
(d) Bid Opening. Bids timely received shall be opened in public, at the date, time and place
specified in the notice inviting bids, and the aggregate bid of each bidder shall be
announced.
[…]
PART 6 – CONTRACT TERMS AND CONDITIONS
2.30.500 Bid security, bonds and insurance.
[…]
(b) Bid Security. Bid security shall be submitted with the bid and shall be in the form of a
certified check, cashier’s check or surety bond. Any surety bond shall be issued by an
admitted surety authorized to conduct business in the State of California and shall be in
a form acceptable to the City Attorney and as specified in the solicitation for bids
document. If a bidder fails to submit the required bid security with the bid, the bid shall
be deemed nonresponsive. After bids are opened, bid security shall be irrevocable for
the period specified in the invitation for bids. If the successful bidder fails to execute the
contract within the time specified, the total amount of the bid security shall be forfeited
to the city. The bid security of an unsuccessful bidder shall be returned to the bidder by
no later than sixty days from the date of contract award. Bids for public works projects
costing in excess of the limit set forth in California Public Contract Code Section
22032(b), as may be amended $85,000.00 shall require the submission of bid security in
an amount equal to at least ten percent of the bid. On public works projects costing less
than the limit set forth in California Public Contract Code Section 22032(b), as may be
amended $85,000.00, and all other procurements of goods and services without regard
to price, the Procurement Officer is authorized to determine whether any bid security in
any amount shall be required on a project-by-project basis.
[…]
PART 10 – STANDARDIZATION
2.30.900 Standardization.
Attachment A
A - 18
Item 8
Attachment A - Ordinance
Amending PAMC Section
2.28.240 and Chapter 2.30
Item 8: Staff Report Pg. 19 Packet Pg. 111 of 254
*NOT YET APPROVED*
19
0015_20260720_mv30
Where the City Manager has determined that it is required by the health, safety or welfare of
the people or employees of the city, or that significant costs savings have been demonstrated,
the standardization of supplies, materials, services, or equipment, including, without limitation,
information technology property or services, for purchase or to be used in a public works
project is permitted and the supplies, materials or equipment specifications may specify a
single brand or trade name. The City Manager may consider the following factors in
determining to standardize on a single brand or trade name:
(a) Repair and maintenance costs would be minimized;
(b) User personnel training would be facilitated thereby;
(c) Supplies or spare parts would be minimized;
(d) Modifications to existing equipment would not be necessary;
(e) Training of repair and maintenance personnel would be minimized; and
(f) Matching existing services, supplies, materials or equipment is required for proper
operation of a function or program.
SECTION 3. If any section, subsection, clause or phrase of this Ordinance is for any
reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion or
sections of the Ordinance. The Council hereby declares that it should have adopted the
Ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase thereof irrespective of the
fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared
invalid.
SECTION 4. The Council finds that this project is exempt from the provisions of the
California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), pursuant to Section 15061 of the CEQA
Guidelines, because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the ordinance
will have a significant effect on the environment.
//
//
//
//
//
//
Attachment A
A - 19
Item 8
Attachment A - Ordinance
Amending PAMC Section
2.28.240 and Chapter 2.30
Item 8: Staff Report Pg. 20 Packet Pg. 112 of 254
*NOT YET APPROVED*
20
0015_20260720_mv30
SECTION 5. This ordinance shall be effective on the thirty-first day after the date of its
adoption.
INTRODUCED:
PASSED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
ATTEST:
____________________________ ____________________________
City Clerk Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED:
____________________________ ____________________________
Assistant City Attorney City Manager
____________________________
Director of Administrative Services
Attachment A
A - 20
Item 8
Attachment A - Ordinance
Amending PAMC Section
2.28.240 and Chapter 2.30
Item 8: Staff Report Pg. 21 Packet Pg. 113 of 254
City Council
Staff Report
From: City Manager
Report Type: ACTION ITEMS
Lead Department: City Manager
Meeting Date: August 24, 2026
Report #:2408-3340
TITLE
Authorization for the City Manager to Execute New and Amended Regulatory Agreements for
the Buena Vista Mobilehome Park Redevelopment/3980 El Camino Real. CEQA Status: Exempt
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3).
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that Council authorize the City Manager to execute the new and amended
regulatory agreements and related documents to facilitate improvements to the Buena Vista
Mobilehome Park.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This memorandum provides an update on the status of the Buena Vista Mobilehome Park
redevelopment project at 3980 El Camino Real and recommends approval of updated
regulatory agreements with the Santa Clara County Housing Authority (the Housing Authority)
and the County of Santa Clara (the County). The project was slated to begin earlier in the year
but was moved back to respond to the State Department of Housing and Community
Development (HCD), which is the agency providing the funding for infrastructure improvements
on the mobilehome site (Parcel B). The project is now on course to commence construction in
mid-September, with residents beginning to relocate in August or early September. This
timeline is dependent on permits and HCD approval.
Staff from the City, the County of Santa Clara, and the Housing Authority worked to address
HCD’s requirements and to finalize regulatory agreements for Parcels A and B. The result is two
regulatory agreements, with the 2017 regulatory agreement amended to apply only Parcel A
and a new agreement for Parcel B, acknowledging the parcel split approved in June 2026.1 The
1 June 8, 2026 City Council meeting, Item #12. Link:
https://cityofpaloalto.primegov.com/Portal/Meeting?meetingTemplateId=18733
Item 9
Item 9 Staff Report
Item 9: Staff Report Pg. 1 Packet Pg. 114 of 254
amended and new regulatory agreements maintain the intent of the original regulatory
agreement.
BACKGROUND
3 HCD, as a condition of providing $24.5 million for the upgrade project, is
requiring separate regulatory agreements for each parcel instead of the existing single
regulatory agreement covering both parcels. The City will need to subordinate its 2017 loan to
the new HCD loan. The new and amended tri-party regulatory agreements, however, will
remain senior to the HCD loan documents ensuring that these affordability requirements will
retain the highest priority among various encumbrances on the land.
ANALYSIS
-Maintain the requirement that there be no less than 100 affordable units across both
parcels
3 June 8, 2026 City Council meeting, Item #12. Link:
https://cityofpaloalto.primegov.com/Portal/Meeting?meetingTemplateId=18733
Item 9
Item 9 Staff Report
Item 9: Staff Report Pg. 2 Packet Pg. 115 of 254
-Maintain the affordability requirements for both parcels
-Revise the unit count under the Tri-Party regulatory agreement for Parcel B to provide a
minimum of 46 units, reflecting the number of existing units on the parcel, but
acknowledging that the number of units may increase over time as new mobilehomes
are added to the site following the completion of infrastructure improvements. The
agreement for Parcel B is consistent with the original 2017 regulatory agreement, with
the exception of the unit count minimum now proposed to be split between the two
parcels.
-Establish the unit count for Parcel A, the apartment site, at 54. As with the agreement
for Parcel B, the agreement for Parcel A includes the same requirements as the 2017
agreement but with a unit count and provision that acknowledges that the Housing
Authority cannot currently meet a 100-unit total requirement since there is insufficient
space to accommodate the 54 units on Parcel A without the development of the
apartment site. To account for this, the regulatory agreement for Parcel A will state that
the unit count minimum would not take effect until seven years after the effective date
of the agreement. The agreement includes interim steps for engagement to provide
assurances that the apartment building on Parcel A is still being actively pursued and
that the 100-unit goal for both parcels remains intact.
In order to start construction, the regulatory agreements must be approved by the three
parties. The County plans to obtain authority from the Board of Supervisors to execute the
agreements at its August 25, 2026 meeting. The Housing Authority will bring the agreements
before its Board of Commissioners for approval on September 3. Any delay in approvals can
impact the total project timeline and cost and jeopardize the HCD Manufactured Opportunity
and Revitalization (MORE) Program funding. The MORE loan is providing $24.5 million for the
infrastructure improvements on Parcel B, is expected to close in mid-September, with
construction starting thereafter. All MORE funds must be drawn down by June 30, 2027.
FISCAL/RESOURCE IMPACT
Approving the amended and new regulatory agreements do not have a fiscal impact to the City.
The funding for this project is managed by the Housing Authority.
STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT
The Housing Authority has provided notification to the residents that construction will soon
begin so they can prepare for temporary relocation. Housing Authority staff and relocation
consultants held on-site office hours and scheduled meetings to respond to questions. On July
31 residents received 30-day notices to temporarily relocate for the duration of the Parcel B
utilities upgrade project.
Item 9
Item 9 Staff Report
Item 9: Staff Report Pg. 3 Packet Pg. 116 of 254
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
ATTACHMENTS
APPROVED BY:
Item 9
Item 9 Staff Report
Item 9: Staff Report Pg. 4 Packet Pg. 117 of 254
4899-8152-4673 v9
RECORDING REQUESTED BY
AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:
County of Santa Clara
150 W. Tasman Dr.
San Jose, CA 95134
Attention: HCD Manager
EXEMPT FROM RECORDING FEES PER
GOVERNMENT CODE §§6103, 27383
Space above this line for Recorder’s use.
APNs: [______]
AMENDED AND RESTATED AFFORDABLE HOUSING REGULATORY
AGREEMENT
AND
DECLARATION OF RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS
by and among
POCO WAY HDC, INC.,
THE CITY OF PALO ALTO,
and
THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA
Item 9
Attachment A - Parcel A,
Apartments Regulatory
Agreement
Item 9: Staff Report Pg. 5 Packet Pg. 118 of 254
2
This Amended and Restated Affordable Housing Regulatory Agreement and
Declaration of Restrictive Covenants (this “Agreement”) is entered into effective as of
______________, 2026 (“Effective Date”) by and among the Poco Way HDC, Inc., a
California nonprofit public benefit corporation (“Owner”), the City of Palo Alto, a
chartered city and municipal corporation (“City”), and the County of Santa Clara, a
political subdivision of the State of California (“County”). The City, the County, and the
Owner are collectively referred to herein as the “Parties.”
RECITALS
Park”), known as Assessor’s Parcel Nos. [_____________], and more particularly
described in Exhibit A attached hereto (the “Property”). Owner is a supportive
organization of the Housing Authority of Santa Clara County and 100% of the board
members of Owner are employees of the Housing Authority of Santa Clara County.
Financing”). [
HUD”) that apply to housing authorities participating
in the Moving to Work demonstration program, and those additional conditions required
by the City and County in connection with the Financing.
Existing Regulatory
Agreement”). The obligations of Borrower under the Existing Regulatory Agreement
with respect to Assessor’s Parcel No [. _]_shall be replaced by the obligations of
Borrower as set forth in this Agreement.
Item 9
Attachment A - Parcel A,
Apartments Regulatory
Agreement
Item 9: Staff Report Pg. 6 Packet Pg. 119 of 254
3
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing, and other valuable
consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the
Parties incorporate the above Recitals into the Agreement and hereby agree as follows.
1. Definitions. The following terms have the meanings set forth in this Section
wherever used in this Agreement.
“Actual Household Size" means the actual number of persons in the applicable
household.
“Adjusted for Family Size Appropriate for the Unit” shall be determined
consistent with the Santa Clara County Housing Authority’s Housing Quality Standards
(HQS) and 24 CFR 982.401 (i.e, assumed household size of two (2) persons per
bedroom).
"Affordable Rent" means the following amounts, less a utility allowance and other
fees and charges required to be paid by Resident Households on a non-optional basis:
Affordable Rent will be defined to mean the following amounts, less a utility
allowance and other fees and charges required to be paid by Resident Households
on a non-optional basis:
(i) for Dwelling Units and Mobilehomes/Mobilehome Spaces occupied by
households with incomes of not more than thirty (30%) of AMI (“30% Units”), a
monthly rent that does not exceed one-twelfth of thirty percent (30%) of thirty
percent (30%) of Area Median Income, Adjusted for Family Size Appropriate for
the Unit, (ii) for Dwelling Units and Mobilehomes/Mobilehome Spaces occupied by
households with incomes of greater than 30% AMI, but not more than fifty percent
(50%) of AMI (“50% Units”), a monthly rent that does not exceed one-twelfth of
thirty percent (30%) of fifty percent (50%) of Area Median Income, Adjusted for
Family Size Appropriate for the Unit,
(iii) for Dwelling Units and Mobilehomes/Mobilehome Spaces occupied by
households with incomes of greater than 50% AMI, but not more than eighty
percent (80%) of AMI (“80% Units”), a monthly rent that does not exceed one-
twelfth of thirty percent (30%) of sixty percent (60%) of Area Median Income,
Adjusted for Family Size Appropriate for the Unit; and
(iv) for Dwelling Units and Mobilehomes/Mobilehome Spaces occupied by
households with incomes of greater than 80% AMI, but not more than one hundred
twenty percent (120%) of AMI (“120% Units”), a monthly rent that does not exceed
one-twelfth of thirty percent (30%) of one hundred ten percent (110%) of Area
Median Income, Adjusted for Family Size Appropriate for the Unit.
For Resident Households who own and occupy a Mobilehome for which the
Resident Household is making Mortgage Payments, the following charges will also
be deducted in determining Affordable Rent: Mortgage Payments and property
taxes, assessments, and insurance premiums payable by the Resident Household
Item 9
Attachment A - Parcel A,
Apartments Regulatory
Agreement
Item 9: Staff Report Pg. 7 Packet Pg. 120 of 254
4
for the Mobilehome.
"Area Median Income" or "AMI" means the median income for Santa Clara
County, California, adjusted for Actual Household Size, as determined by the U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”) pursuant to Section 8 of the
United States Housing Act of 1937 and as published from time to time by the State of
California Department of Housing and Community Development (“HCD”) in Section 6932
of Title 25 of the California Code of Regulations or successor provision published
pursuant to California Health and Safety Code Section 50093(c).
“Authority” means the Santa Clara County Housing Authority, a public body
corporate and politic.
“Dwelling Unit” means (i) one (1) single family home, and any future
replacement or other apartments or stick built homes, and (ii) any Mobilehome that is
rented by a Resident Household from Owner, Owner’s Agent, or the Authority, or any
Mobilehome that is owned by the Resident Household and placed on a Mobilehome
Space, which space is rented by a Resident Household from Owner, Owner’s Agent, or
the Authority.
“Eligible Household” means a household whose Gross Income does not exceed
eighty percent (80%) of Area Median Income.
“Existing Residents” means Resident Households who resided on the Property
as of September 29, 2017.
“Fiscal Year” means the reporting period commending on January 1 and ending
on December 31 of any year.
“Government Code” means the Government Code of the State of California.
“Gross Household Income” means the total anticipated annual income of all
persons in a household, as calculated in accordance with Section 6914 of Title 25 of the
California Code of Regulations as such Section may be revised from time to time, or
pursuant to a successor State or federal housing regulation that utilizes a reasonably
similar method of calculation of household income.
“Income and Occupancy Certification” shall mean the initial and/or annual
income certification documentation required pursuant to Section 2 of this Agreement.
“Manufactured Home” means a mobilehome a park trailer or trailer coach
(regulated by the California Department of Motor Vehicles) located on the Property that
was constructed on or after June 15, 1976 and in compliance with the criteria set forth in
California Health and Safety Code section 18007.
Item 9
Attachment A - Parcel A,
Apartments Regulatory
Agreement
Item 9: Staff Report Pg. 8 Packet Pg. 121 of 254
5
“Mobilehome” means a mobilehome located on the Property that was
constructed prior to June 15, 1976 and in compliance with the criteria set forth in California
Health and Safety Code section 18008 or a Manufactured Home.
“Mobilehome Space” means a space located on the Property upon which a
Mobilehome is placed.
“Mortgage Payment” means the monthly principal, interest, and mortgage
insurance premiums (if any) payable by a Resident Household for a mortgage payable to
a commercial financial institution and secured by the Resident Household’s Mobilehome
located on the Property as of the Effective Date. To qualify as a Mortgage Payment, any
new or additional mortgage, including any refinancing of an existing mortgage must be
approved by Owner or Owner’s agent.
“MPA” means the Mobilehome Park Act, California Health and Safety Code
sections 18200 et seq. and related regulations, as amended or its successor.
“MRL” means the Mobilehome Residency Law, California Civil Code sections 798
et seq, and related regulations, as amended or its successor.
“New Resident” means a Resident Household first residing on the Property after
the Effective Date.
“Owner Mobilehome” means any Mobilehome owned by the Owner or Owner’s
Agent, located on the Property, and rented to a Resident Household.
“Rent” means the total of monthly payments payable by a Resident Household
for the use and occupancy of a Dwelling Unit and/or a Mobilehome Space.
“Resident Household” means a household, including Existing Residents, that
resides in a Mobilehome or a Dwelling Unit located in the Park.
2. Use and Affordability Restrictions. Owner hereby covenants and agrees, for
itself and its successors and assigns, that the Property shall be used solely for the
operation of affordable housing in compliance with the requirements set forth herein.
2.1 Affordability Requirements. For a term of seventy-five (75) years
commencing upon the Effective Date, all of the Dwelling Units and Mobilehome Spaces
located on the Property (with the exception of those designated for property managers)
shall be restricted for occupancy at Affordable Rents by Eligible Households. At all times
during the term of this Agreement, when a Dwelling Unit or Mobilehome Space becomes
vacant, such Dwelling Unit or Mobilehome Space shall be made available to, rented and
occupied by households to satisfy the following: (a) no less than 40% of the total number
of Dwelling Units and Mobilehome Spaces (with the exception of those designated for
property managers) shall be made available to, rented and occupied by households with
incomes of not more than thirty (30%) of AMI, (b) no less than 40% of the total number of
Dwelling Units and Mobilehome Spaces (with the exception of those designated for
property managers) shall be made available to, rented and occupied by households with
Item 9
Attachment A - Parcel A,
Apartments Regulatory
Agreement
Item 9: Staff Report Pg. 9 Packet Pg. 122 of 254
6
incomes of not more than fifty (50%) of AMI, and (c) the remainder of the Dwelling Units
and Mobilehome Spaces (with the exception of those designated for property managers)
shall be made available to, rented and occupied by households with incomes of not more
than eighty percent (80%) of AMI. The Parties agree to meet and confer regarding
potential modifications to the requirements set forth in this Section 2.1 if Owner
demonstrates that such modification is necessary to maintain the financial feasibility of the
Property. City and County agree to consider such requests in good faith and will not
unreasonably deny consent if Owner demonstrates that the modification is necessary for
financial feasibility. Under no circumstances shall the affordability requirements exceed
80% of AMI.
Item 9
Attachment A - Parcel A,
Apartments Regulatory
Agreement
Item 9: Staff Report Pg. 10 Packet Pg. 123 of 254
7
2.7 Annual Income and Occupancy Certification Requirement. Each Resident
Household shall be required to provide an Income and Occupancy Certification annually
while residing at the Property.
2.8 Failure to Comply with Initial or Annual Income and Occupancy Certification.
A Resident Household’s failure and/or refusal to provide an initial or annual Income and
Occupancy Certification will be considered a breach of such household’s lease or rental
agreement, and may result in the loss of the right to occupancy within the Property.
2.9 Income and Occupancy Certification. Each Resident Household shall
provide an initial and an annual Income and Occupancy Certification that at a minimum
contains the information and documentation described in this Section for each household
member over the age of eighteen years old residing on the Property. For the initial and
the annual Income and Occupancy Certification, Owner shall verify each Resident
Household’s income by requesting and reviewing the following: (i) pay stubs for the most
recent four (4) consecutive pay periods; (ii) if self-employed, Tax Form 1040, including
Schedule C and other attachments from the prior year, (iii) an income verification form
from the Social Security Administration and/or the California Department of Social
Services if Resident Household members receives assistance from either of such
agencies; (iv) history of the last 12 months of child support payments, if any, (v) if anyone
in the Resident Household is unemployed, a form of independent verification; (vi) the most
recent of any and all bank account statements and/or any other financial account
statements; and (vii) other verification and documentation as required by the Owner.
2.10 Increased Income of Household After Recertification.
(a) If the Gross Household Income of a Resident Household is
determined to have increased to be more than eighty percent (80%) but less than one
hundred twenty percent (120%) of Area Median Income, such household shall be
permitted to continue to rent or lease a Dwelling Unit or Mobilehome Space on the
Property at Affordable Rent until: a) the household voluntarily vacates the Dwelling Unit
or Mobilehome Space, or b) the tenancy is terminated consistent with the requirements
of the MRL.
(b) If the Gross Household Income of a Resident Household is
determined to have increased to be equal to or more than one hundred and twenty
percent (120%) of Area Median Income, such household shall be permitted to continue
to rent or lease a Dwelling Unit or Mobilehome Space on the Property until: a) the
household voluntarily vacates the Dwelling Unit or Mobilehome Space, or b) the tenancy
is terminated consistent with the requirements of the lease agreement or MRL, whichever
is applicable; provided however, upon written notice in accordance with Section 2.12 of
this Agreement, Owner may adjust the rent charged to such household to up to fair market
rent.
2.11 Determination of Rental Amounts. The Owner shall determine the Rent
payable by each Resident Household. Upon determination of the rental amounts, the
Owner shall provide the calculations and the amounts for each household to the City and
Item 9
Attachment A - Parcel A,
Apartments Regulatory
Agreement
Item 9: Staff Report Pg. 11 Packet Pg. 124 of 254
8
County for its review. The City and County shall have thirty (30) days to review the rental
amounts and either, in writing, object to the amounts or question the amounts. All Parties
agree to resolve any issues related to the rental amounts as expeditiously as possible.
However, failure to object shall not be deemed a waiver of the rights of the City and
County to proceeds from rental amounts due, if any.
Item 9
Attachment A - Parcel A,
Apartments Regulatory
Agreement
Item 9: Staff Report Pg. 12 Packet Pg. 125 of 254
9
4.1 Owner shall obtain all necessary permits and approvals for rehabilitation or
construction or improvements to the Property, as required by federal and state law, and
local zoning and other applicable regulations. City maintains and reserves full authority
and discretion under state and local law in the processing of entitlements and permit
applications.
5. Relocation.
5.1 Due to the physical condition of the Property, including without limitation,
common area improvements, the Dwelling Units, and Mobilehomes, it is anticipated that
repairs, replacements, maintenance and improvements will be required. The impact of
the improvements on the ability of Resident Households to remain on the Property is not
known as of the Effective Date but may require the relocation of Resident Households for
varying periods of time.
5.2 Persons residing on the Property as of the Effective Date shall not be displaced
before suitable replacement housing is available. Owner or Owner’s agent shall be solely
responsible for ensuring that all such persons receive all notices, benefits and assistance
to which they are entitled in accordance with California Relocation Assistance Law
(Government Code Section 7260 et seq.); Government Code sections 65863.7 and
65863.8; MPA section 798.56, the state and local regulations implementing such laws,
and all other applicable local, state and federal laws, regulations and policies, including
but not limited to the Uniform Relocation Act (42 U.S.C. §4601 et seq.) and implementing
regulations (collectively “Relocation Laws”) relating to the displacement and relocation
of eligible persons as defined in such Relocation Laws. All costs incurred in connection
with the temporary and/or permanent displacement and/or relocation of occupants of the
Property, including without limitation payments to a relocation consultant, moving
expenses, and payments for temporary and permanent relocation benefits pursuant to
Relocation Laws shall be paid by Owner. County and City shall have no responsibility for
payment therefor.
5.3 Resident Households first residing on the Property after the Effective Date but
prior to delivery of any notice relating to displacement shall receive all notices, benefits
and assistance to which they are entitled as set forth in Section 5.2 hereinabove.
5.4 All Resident Households shall have the right to return to the Property after any
temporary relocation necessary for the repair, replacement, maintenance, or
improvement of the Property.
5.5 Following the expiration or termination of this Agreement, persons residing
on the Property on the date of such expiration or termination shall receive all notices,
benefits and assistance to which they are entitled as set forth in Section 5.2
hereinabove. This provision shall survive the expiration or termination of this
Agreement until full performance thereof.
6. Owner’s Reporting Obligations to the City and County.
Item 9
Attachment A - Parcel A,
Apartments Regulatory
Agreement
Item 9: Staff Report Pg. 13 Packet Pg. 126 of 254
10
6.1 An Annual Report, as described below, shall be submitted to the City and
the County no less than sixty (60) days prior to the close of each Fiscal Year.
(a) Annual Report. The Owner shall submit to the City and the County
an Annual Report which includes the following:
1) A listing of all occupied Mobilehome Spaces and Dwelling Units,
the income and size of each Resident Household occupying a
Mobilehome Space or Dwelling Unit, the actual rent paid and the
projected rent increase for the Mobilehome Space or Dwelling
Unit;
2) A listing of all Mobilehome Spaces and Dwelling Units occupied
by Resident Households whose Gross Household Income is
equal to or more than one hundred twenty percent (120%) of Area
Median Income;
3) The initial and annual certification and recertification of each
Resident Household’s Gross Household Income, cost verification
and rent calculations;
4) The annual primary residence occupancy verification, if separate
from the income certification and recertifications;
5) List of all New Residents, the income and household size, ages
and relationships of such households, and copies of the income
certifications and certification that the New Residents intend to
occupy the Mobilehome Space or Dwelling Unit as their principal
place of residency; and
6) The report shall state, in addition to the above, the date the
occupancy commenced, the initial rental rate, if a Mobilehome
was purchased, then the purchase price paid by the New
Resident for the Mobilehome (if said information is available) and
such other information as the City or the County may be required
by law to obtain.
6.2 Financial Audit. The Owner is responsible for obtaining a financial audit
annually and shall provide the same to the City and County within one-hundred twenty
(120) after the end of the Fiscal Year.
6.3 Additional Information. The Owner shall provide any additional information
reasonably requested by the City or County. The City or County shall have right to
examine and make copies of all books, records or other documents of the Owner
pertaining to the Property.
6.4 Retention and Inspection of Documents.
(a) The Owner shall maintain complete, accurate and current records
pertaining to the Mobilehome Spaces, Dwelling Units and the Property, and shall permit
any duly authorized representative of the City or County to inspect records, including,
Item 9
Attachment A - Parcel A,
Apartments Regulatory
Agreement
Item 9: Staff Report Pg. 14 Packet Pg. 127 of 254
11
without limitation, records pertaining to household income and household size of Resident
Households; provided however, confidential and sensitive information relating to any
Resident Household (such as account numbers, social security numbers, driver’s license
numbers) may be redacted or marked out to protect the confidentiality of such information.
Item 9
Attachment A - Parcel A,
Apartments Regulatory
Agreement
Item 9: Staff Report Pg. 15 Packet Pg. 128 of 254
12
subtenants, sublessees or vendees in, of, or for the Property or part thereof. Owner
shall include such provision in all deeds, leases, contracts and other instruments
executed by Owner, and shall enforce the same diligently and in good faith.
Item 9
Attachment A - Parcel A,
Apartments Regulatory
Agreement
Item 9: Staff Report Pg. 16 Packet Pg. 129 of 254
13
only loss, injury or damage caused by the negligence or willful misconduct of the County
and City. The Owner, and its assigns, shall reimburse the County and City for all costs,
attorneys’ fees, expenses and liabilities incurred with respect to any litigation in which
the Owner is obligated to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the County and City
under this Agreement.
. In the
event that the Property is sold to a third party that is not an affiliate of the Authority and
in connection with such sale the Property will continue to be used for affordable
housing, the Parties agree that a) fifty-two percent (52%) of the total appreciation of the
value of the Property since the Effective Date shall be applied as a reduction to the
purchase price of the Property and b) the Owner shall cause to repay to the City and
County any loan amount outstanding or the loan shall be assigned to the next Owner of
the Property. For the purposes of this paragraph, an “affiliate of the Authority” shall
mean any entity that, directly or indirectly, controls, is controlled by, or is under common
control with Authority. For the purposes of this paragraph, “affordable housing” shall
mean the Property is subject to occupancy and affordability restrictions which are
substantially similar, including in length and levels of affordability, to the restrictions
Item 9
Attachment A - Parcel A,
Apartments Regulatory
Agreement
Item 9: Staff Report Pg. 17 Packet Pg. 130 of 254
14
imposed under this Agreement and to which the City and County are parties.
Owner’s default in the performance of any term,
provision or covenant under this Agreement and failure to cure such default within
ninety (90) days following receipt of notice of default to Owner, or if the nature of any
such non-monetary default is such that it cannot be cured within ninety (90) days,
Owner’s failure to commence to cure the default within ninety (90) days and thereafter
prosecute the curing of such default with due diligence and in good faith shall constitute
an Event of Default hereunder. Upon the occurrence of an Event of Default and its
continuation beyond any applicable cure period, City or County may bring an action for
equitable relief seeking the specific performance of the terms and conditions of this
Agreement, and/or enjoining, abating, or preventing any violation of such terms and
conditions, and/or seeking declaratory relief, or pursue any other remedy allowed under
law or in equity.
Item 9
Attachment A - Parcel A,
Apartments Regulatory
Agreement
Item 9: Staff Report Pg. 18 Packet Pg. 131 of 254
15
16.1 Amendments. This Agreement may be amended or modified only by a
written instrument signed by all of the Parties.
16.2 Notices. Except as otherwise specified herein, all notices to be sent
pursuant to this Agreement shall be made in writing, and sent to the Parties at their
respective addresses specified below or to such other address as a Party may
designate by written notice delivered to the other parties in accordance with this
Section. All such notices shall be sent by: (i) personal delivery, in which case notice is
effective upon delivery; (ii) certified or registered mail, return receipt requested, in which
case notice shall be deemed delivered upon receipt if delivery is confirmed by a return
receipt; or (iii) nationally recognized overnight courier, with charges prepaid or charged
to the sender’s account, in which case notice is effective on delivery if delivery is
confirmed by the delivery service.
City: City of Palo Alto
250 Hamilton Avenue
Palo Alto, CA 94301
Attention: Ed Shikada, City Manager
With a copy to:
City of Palo Alto
250 Hamilton Avenue
Palo Alto, CA 94301
Attention: Mahealani Ah Yun, City Clerk
City of Palo Alto
250 Hamilton Avenue
Palo Alto, CA 94301
Attention: Jonathan Lait, Director of Planning and
Development Services
County: County of Santa Clara
70 W. Hedding Street, East Wing, 10th floor
San Jose, CA 95110
Attention: County Executive
With a copy to:
County of Santa Clara
70 W. Hedding Street, East Wing, 10th floor
San Jose, CA 95110
Attention: County Counsel
County of Santa Clara
Office of Supportive Housing
Item 9
Attachment A - Parcel A,
Apartments Regulatory
Agreement
Item 9: Staff Report Pg. 19 Packet Pg. 132 of 254
16
150 W. Tasman Dr.
San Jose, CA 95134
Attention: HCD Manager
Owner:
Poco Way HDC Inc.
505 W. Julian Street
San Jose, CA 95110
Attention: Flaherty Ward, Vice President/Treasurer
16.3 Further Assurances. The Parties shall execute, acknowledge and deliver
to the other such other documents and instruments, and take such other actions, as
either shall reasonably request as may be necessary to carry out the intent of this
Agreement.
16.4 Parties Not Co-Venturers. Nothing in this Agreement is intended to or
shall establish the Parties as partners, co-venturers, or principal and agent with one
another. The relationship of the Parties shall not be construed as a joint venture, equity
venture, partnership or any other relationship.
16.5 Headings; Construction. The headings of the sections and paragraphs of
this Agreement are for convenience only and shall not be used to interpret this
Agreement. The language of this Agreement shall be construed as a whole according
to its fair meaning and not strictly for or against any Party.
16.6 Governing Law; Venue. This Agreement shall be construed in accordance
with the laws of the State of California without regard to principles of conflicts of law.
Any action to enforce or interpret this Agreement shall be filed and heard in the Superior
Court of Santa Clara County, California or in the Federal District Court for the Northern
District of California.
16.7 Entire Agreement. This Agreement contains the entire agreement of the
Parties with respect to the subject matter hereof, and supersedes all prior written or oral
agreements, understandings, representations or statements of the Parties with respect
thereto.
16.8 Severability. If any provision of this Agreement is held invalid, illegal, or
unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the validity, legality, and
enforceability of the remaining provisions shall not be affected or impaired thereby.
16.9 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in multiple counterparts,
each of which shall be an original and all of which together shall constitute one
agreement.
16.10 Assignment. Owner, with the written consent of the City and County
(which may not be unreasonably withheld), may assign all rights and obligations under
this Agreement to either (a) a limited partnership whose general partner is a nonprofit
Item 9
Attachment A - Parcel A,
Apartments Regulatory
Agreement
Item 9: Staff Report Pg. 20 Packet Pg. 133 of 254
17
public benefit corporation or a limited liability company that is controlled by or affiliated
with Owner, or (b) a nonprofit public benefit corporation controlled by or affiliated with
Owner. The City and County shall have the right to review and approve the formation
documents of the transferee and the executed assignment and assumption agreements
between Owner and the transferee prior to the execution of any assignment agreement.
Assignment of this Agreement by Owner is otherwise prohibited and any purported
assignment shall be null and void.
SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGES.
Item 9
Attachment A - Parcel A,
Apartments Regulatory
Agreement
Item 9: Staff Report Pg. 21 Packet Pg. 134 of 254
18
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Affordable Housing
Regulatory Agreement and Declaration of Restrictive Covenants as of the date first
written above.
CITY:
COUNTY:
OWNER:
Item 9
Attachment A - Parcel A,
Apartments Regulatory
Agreement
Item 9: Staff Report Pg. 22 Packet Pg. 135 of 254
18
Item 9
Attachment A - Parcel A,
Apartments Regulatory
Agreement
Item 9: Staff Report Pg. 23 Packet Pg. 136 of 254
19
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
State of California )
) ss
County of Santa Clara )
On , before me,___________________________________________,
(Name of Notary)
notary public, personally appeared _________________________________________________
who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are
subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same
in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument
the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.
I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the
foregoing paragraph is true and correct.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
(Notary Signature)
A notary public or other officer completing this
certificate verifies only the identity of the
Item 9
Attachment A - Parcel A,
Apartments Regulatory
Agreement
Item 9: Staff Report Pg. 24 Packet Pg. 137 of 254
19
Item 9
Attachment A - Parcel A,
Apartments Regulatory
Agreement
Item 9: Staff Report Pg. 25 Packet Pg. 138 of 254
20
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
State of California )
) ss
County of Santa Clara )
On , before me,___________________________________________,
(Name of Notary)
notary public, personally appeared _________________________________________________ who
proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to
the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their
authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity
upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.
I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing
paragraph is true and correct.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
(Notary Signature)
A notary public or other officer completing this
certificate verifies only the identity of the
Item 9
Attachment A - Parcel A,
Apartments Regulatory
Agreement
Item 9: Staff Report Pg. 26 Packet Pg. 139 of 254
20
Item 9
Attachment A - Parcel A,
Apartments Regulatory
Agreement
Item 9: Staff Report Pg. 27 Packet Pg. 140 of 254
21
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
State of California )
) ss
County of Santa Clara )
On , before me,___________________________________________,
(Name of Notary)
notary public, personally appeared _________________________________________________ who
proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to
the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their
authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity
upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.
I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing
paragraph is true and correct.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
(Notary Signature)
A notary public or other officer completing this
certificate verifies only the identity of the
Item 9
Attachment A - Parcel A,
Apartments Regulatory
Agreement
Item 9: Staff Report Pg. 28 Packet Pg. 141 of 254
21
Item 9
Attachment A - Parcel A,
Apartments Regulatory
Agreement
Item 9: Staff Report Pg. 29 Packet Pg. 142 of 254
22
Exhibit A
PROPERTY
The land is situated in the County of Santa Clara, City of Palo Alto, State of California, and
is described as follows:
Real property in the City of Palo Alto, County of Santa Clara, State of California, described as follows:
Being a portion of PARCEL 1 as shown and described on that certain Final Map filed on September 7,
2017 as File No. 23747216 in Book 906 of Maps at Pages 29 through 35, inclusive, in the Office of the
County Recorder of Santa Clara County, more particularly described as follows:
COMMENCING at the southerly corner of PARCEL 2 as shown on said Final Map (906 M 29-35) being
also a point on the northwesterly line of Los Robles Avenue;
Thence along said northwesterly line South 33°08'00" West, 361.57 feet to a point on said northwesterly
line being the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING of this description;
Thence leaving said northwesterly line the following three (3) courses:
1. North 56°53'30" West, 311.59 feet;
2. South 33°06'30" West, 26.47 feet;
3. North 56°39'49" West, 27.17 feet to the northwesterly line of said PARCEL 1;
Thence along said northwesterly line South 33°06'30" West, 193.38 feet to the westerly corner of said
PARCEL 1;
Thence along the southwesterly line of said PARCEL 1 South 56°53'30" East, 338.67 feet to the southerly
corner of said PARCEL 1 being also a point on the northwesterly line of Los Robles Avenue;
Thence along said northwesterly line North 33°08'00" East, 219.74 feet to the TRUE POINT OF
BEGINNING.
Containing 73,711 square feet or 1.692 acres, more or less.
END OF DESCRIPTION.
Item 9
Attachment A - Parcel A,
Apartments Regulatory
Agreement
Item 9: Staff Report Pg. 30 Packet Pg. 143 of 254
RECORDING REQUESTED BY
AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:
Santa Clara County
150 W. Tasman Dr.
San Jose, CA 95134
Attention: HCD Manager
EXEMPT FROM RECORDING FEES PER
GOVERNMENT CODE §§6103, 27383
Space above this line for Recorder’s use.
APNs: [_________]
AFFORDABLE HOUSING REGULATORY AGREEMENT
AND
DECLARATION OF RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS
by and among
POCO WAY HDC, INC.,
THE CITY OF PALO ALTO,
and
THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA
Item 9
Attachment B - Parcel B,
Mobilehome Regulatory
Agreement
Item 9: Staff Report Pg. 31 Packet Pg. 144 of 254
2
This Affordable Housing Regulatory Agreement and Declaration of Restrictive
Covenants (this “Agreement”) is entered into effective as of ______________, 2026
(“Effective Date”) by and among Poco Way HDC, Inc., a California nonprofit public
benefit corporation (“Owner”), the City of Palo Alto, a chartered city and municipal
corporation (“City”), and the County of Santa Clara, a political subdivision of the State of
California (“County”). The City, the County, and the Owner are collectively referred to
herein as the “Parties.”
RECITALS
Park”), known as Assessor’s Parcel Nos.
[___________] and more particularly described in Exhibit A attached hereto (the
“Property”). Owner is a supportive organization of the Housing Authority of Santa
Clara County (“SCCHA”) and 100% of the board members of Owner are employees of
SCCHA.
Financing”).
HUD”) that apply to housing authorities participating
in the Moving to Work demonstration program, and those additional conditions required
by the City and County in connection with the Financing.
Amended
Regulatory Agreement”) that terminates, amends, and restates the Affordable Housing
Regulatory Agreement and Declaration of Restrictive Covenants among Santa Clara
County Housing Authority, City and County and recorded on September 29, 2017 as
Document Number 23766007 (“Existing Regulatory Agreement”). As a result of the
Amended Regulatory Agreement, the Property is released from the Existing Regulatory
Agreement and the obligations of Borrower under the Existing Regulatory Agreement
Item 9
Attachment B - Parcel B,
Mobilehome Regulatory
Agreement
Item 9: Staff Report Pg. 32 Packet Pg. 145 of 254
3
with respect to the Property shall be replaced by the obligations of Borrower as set forth
in this Agreement.
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing, and other valuable
consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the
Parties incorporate the above Recitals into the Agreement and hereby agree as follows.
Actual Household Size" means the actual number of persons in the applicable
household.
Adjusted for Family Size Appropriate for the Unit” shall be determined
consistent with the Santa Clara County Housing Authority’s Housing Quality Standards
(HQS) and 24 CFR 982.401 (i.e., assumed household size of two (2) persons per
bedroom).
Affordable Rent" means the following amounts, less a utility allowance and other
fees and charges required to be paid by Resident Households on a non-optional basis:
30% Units”), a
monthly rent that does not exceed one-twelfth of thirty percent (30%) of thirty
percent (30%) of Area Median Income, Adjusted for Family Size Appropriate for
the Unit,
50% Units”), a monthly rent that does not exceed one-twelfth of
thirty percent (30%) of fifty percent (50%) of Area Median Income, Adjusted for
Family Size Appropriate for the Unit,
80% Units”), a monthly rent that does not exceed one-
twelfth of thirty percent (30%) of sixty percent (60%) of Area Median Income,
Adjusted for Family Size Appropriate for the Unit; and
120% Units”), a monthly rent that does not exceed
one-twelfth of thirty percent (30%) of one hundred ten percent (110%) of Area
Median Income, Adjusted for Family Size Appropriate for the Unit.
Item 9
Attachment B - Parcel B,
Mobilehome Regulatory
Agreement
Item 9: Staff Report Pg. 33 Packet Pg. 146 of 254
4
For Resident Households who own and occupy a Mobilehome for which the
Resident Household is making Mortgage Payments, the following charges will also
be deducted in determining Affordable Rent: Mortgage Payments and property
taxes, assessments, and insurance premiums payable by the Resident Household
for the Mobilehome.
"Area Median Income" or "AMI" means the median income for Santa Clara
County, California, adjusted for Actual Household Size, as determined by the U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”) pursuant to Section 8 of the
United States Housing Act of 1937 and as published from time to time by the State of
California Department of Housing and Community Development (“HCD”) in Section 6932
of Title 25 of the California Code of Regulations or successor provision published
pursuant to California Health and Safety Code Section 50093(c).
“Authority” means the Santa Clara County Housing Authority, a public body
corporate and politic.
“Dwelling Unit” means any Mobilehome that is rented by a Resident Household
from Owner, Owner’s Agent, or the Authority, or any Mobilehome that is owned by the
Resident Household and placed on a Mobilehome Space, which space is rented by a
Resident Household from Owner, Owner’s Agent, or the Authority.
“Eligible Household” means a household whose Gross Income does not exceed
eighty percent (80%) of Area Median Income.
“Existing Residents” means households who were lawfully residing on the
Property as of September 29, 2017.
“Fiscal Year” means the reporting period commending on January 1 and ending
on December 31 of any year.
“Government Code” means the Government Code of the State of California.
“Gross Household Income” means the total anticipated annual income of all
persons in a household, as calculated in accordance with Section 6914 of Title 25 of the
California Code of Regulations as such Section may be revised from time to time, or
pursuant to a successor State or federal housing regulation that utilizes a reasonably
similar method of calculation of household income.
“Income and Occupancy Certification” shall mean the initial and/or annual
income certification documentation required pursuant to Section 2 of this Agreement.
“Manufactured Home” means a mobilehome, a park trailer or trailer coach
(regulated by the California Department of Motor Vehicles) located on the Property that
was constructed on or after June 15, 1976 and in compliance with the criteria set forth in
California Health and Safety Code section 18007.
Item 9
Attachment B - Parcel B,
Mobilehome Regulatory
Agreement
Item 9: Staff Report Pg. 34 Packet Pg. 147 of 254
5
“Mobilehome” means a mobilehome located on the Property that was
constructed prior to June 15, 1976 and in compliance with the criteria set forth in California
Health and Safety Code section 18008 or a Manufactured Home.
“Mobilehome Space” means a space located on the Property upon which a
Mobilehome is placed.
“Mortgage Payment” means the monthly principal, interest, and mortgage
insurance premiums (if any) payable by a Resident Household for a mortgage payable to
a commercial financial institution and secured by the Resident Household’s Mobilehome
located on the Property as of the Effective Date. To qualify as a Mortgage Payment, any
new or additional mortgage, including any refinancing of an existing mortgage must be
approved by Owner or Owner’s agent.
“MPA” means the Mobilehome Park Act, California Health and Safety Code
sections 18200 et seq. and related regulations, as amended or its successor.
“MRL” means the Mobilehome Residency Law, California Civil Code sections 798
et seq, and related regulations, as amended or its successor.
“New Resident” means a Resident Household first residing on the Property after
the Effective Date.
“Owner Mobilehome” means any Mobilehome owned by the Owner or Owner’s
Agent, located on the Property, and rented to a Resident Household.
“Rent” means the total of monthly payments payable by a Resident Household
for the use and occupancy of a Dwelling Unit and/or a Mobilehome Space.
“Resident Household” means a household, including Existing Residents, that
resides in a Mobilehome or a Dwelling Unit located in the Park.
2. Use and Affordability Restrictions. Owner hereby covenants and agrees, for
itself and its successors and assigns, that the Property shall be used solely for the
operation of affordable housing in compliance with the requirements set forth herein.
2.1 Affordability Requirements. For a term of seventy-five (75) years
commencing upon the Effective Date, all of the Dwelling Units and Mobilehome Spaces
located on the Property (with the exception of those designated for property managers)
shall be restricted for occupancy at Affordable Rents by Eligible Households. At all times
during the term of this Agreement, when a Dwelling Unit or Mobilehome Space becomes
vacant, such Dwelling Unit or Mobilehome Space shall be made available to, rented and
occupied by households to satisfy the following: (a) no less than 40% of the total number
of Dwelling Units and Mobilehome Spaces (with the exception of those designated for
property managers) shall be made available to, rented and occupied by households with
incomes of not more than thirty (30%) of AMI, (b) no less than 40% of the total number of
Dwelling Units and Mobilehome Spaces (with the exception of those designated for
property managers) shall be made available to, rented and occupied by households with
Item 9
Attachment B - Parcel B,
Mobilehome Regulatory
Agreement
Item 9: Staff Report Pg. 35 Packet Pg. 148 of 254
6
incomes of not more than fifty (50%) of AMI, and (c) the remainder of the Dwelling Units
and Mobilehome Spaces (with the exception of those designated for property managers)
shall be made available to, rented and occupied by households with incomes of not more
than eighty percent (80%) of AMI. The Parties agree to meet and confer regarding potential
modifications to the requirements set forth in this Section 2.1 if Owner demonstrates that
such modification is necessary to maintain the financial feasibility of the Property. City and
County agree to consider such requests in good faith and will not unreasonably deny
consent if Owner demonstrates that the modification is necessary for financial feasibility.
Under no circumstances shall the affordability requirements exceed 80% of AMI.
Item 9
Attachment B - Parcel B,
Mobilehome Regulatory
Agreement
Item 9: Staff Report Pg. 36 Packet Pg. 149 of 254
7
2.7 Annual Income and Occupancy Certification Requirement. Each Resident
Household shall be required to provide an Income and Occupancy Certification annually
while residing at the Property.
2.8 Failure to Comply with Initial or Annual Income and Occupancy Certification.
A Resident Household’s failure and/or refusal to provide an initial or annual Income and
Occupancy Certification will be considered a breach of such household’s lease or rental
agreement, and may result in the loss of the right to occupancy within the Property.
2.9 Income and Occupancy Certification. Each Resident Household shall
provide an initial and an annual Income and Occupancy Certification that at a minimum
contains the information and documentation described in this Section for each household
member over the age of eighteen years old residing on the Property. For the initial and
the annual Income and Occupancy Certification, Owner shall verify each Resident
Household’s income by requesting and reviewing the following: (i) pay stubs for the most
recent four (4) consecutive pay periods; (ii) if self-employed, Tax Form 1040, including
Schedule C and other attachments from the prior year, (iii) an income verification form
from the Social Security Administration and/or the California Department of Social
Services if Resident Household members receives assistance from either of such
agencies; (iv) history of the last 12 months of child support payments, if any, (v) if anyone
in the Resident Household is unemployed, a form of independent verification; (vi) the most
recent of any and all bank account statements and/or any other financial account
statements; and (vii) other verification and documentation as required by the Owner.
2.10 Increased Income of Household After Recertification.
(a) If the Gross Household Income of a Resident Household is
determined to have increased to be more than eighty percent (80%) but less than one
hundred twenty percent (120%) of Area Median Income, such household shall be
permitted to continue to rent or lease a Dwelling Unit or Mobilehome Space on the
Property at Affordable Rent until: a) the household voluntarily vacates the Dwelling Unit
or Mobilehome Space, or b) the tenancy is terminated consistent with the requirements
of the MRL.
(b) If the Gross Household Income of a Resident Household is
determined to have increased to be equal to or more than one hundred and twenty
percent (120%) of Area Median Income, such household shall be permitted to continue
to rent or lease a Dwelling Unit or Mobilehome Space on the Property until: a) the
household voluntarily vacates the Dwelling Unit or Mobilehome Space, or b) the tenancy
is terminated consistent with the requirements of the lease agreement or MRL, whichever
is applicable; provided however, upon written notice in accordance with Section 2.12 of
this Agreement, Owner may adjust the rent charged to such household to up to fair market
rent.
2.11 Determination of Rental Amounts. The Owner shall determine the Rent
payable by each Resident Household. Upon determination of the rental amounts, the
Owner shall provide the calculations and the amounts for each household to the City and
Item 9
Attachment B - Parcel B,
Mobilehome Regulatory
Agreement
Item 9: Staff Report Pg. 37 Packet Pg. 150 of 254
8
County for its review. The City and County shall have thirty (30) days to review the rental
amounts and either, in writing, object to the amounts or question the amounts. All Parties
agree to resolve any issues related to the rental amounts as expeditiously as possible.
However, failure to object shall not be deemed a waiver of the rights of the City and
County to proceeds from rental amounts due, if any.
Item 9
Attachment B - Parcel B,
Mobilehome Regulatory
Agreement
Item 9: Staff Report Pg. 38 Packet Pg. 151 of 254
9
5.2 Persons residing on the Property as of the Effective Date shall not be displaced
before suitable replacement housing is available. Owner or Owner’s agent shall be solely
responsible for ensuring that all such persons receive all notices, benefits and assistance
to which they are entitled in accordance with California Relocation Assistance Law
(Government Code Section 7260 et seq.); Government Code sections 65863.7 and
65863.8; MPA section 798.56, the state and local regulations implementing such laws,
and all other applicable local, state and federal laws, regulations and policies, including
but not limited to the Uniform Relocation Act (42 U.S.C. §4601 et seq.) and implementing
regulations (collectively “Relocation Laws”) relating to the displacement and relocation
of eligible persons as defined in such Relocation Laws. All costs incurred in connection
with the temporary and/or permanent displacement and/or relocation of occupants of the
Property, including without limitation payments to a relocation consultant, moving
expenses, and payments for temporary and permanent relocation benefits pursuant to
Relocation Laws shall be paid by Owner. County and City shall have no responsibility for
payment therefor.
5.3 Resident Households first residing on the Property after the Effective Date but
prior to delivery of any notice relating to displacement shall receive all notices, benefits
and assistance to which they are entitled as set forth in Section 5.2 hereinabove.
5.4 All Resident Households shall have the right to return to the Property after any
temporary relocation necessary for the repair, replacement, maintenance, or
improvement of the Property.
5.5 Following the expiration or termination of this Agreement, persons residing
on the Property on the date of such expiration or termination shall receive all notices,
benefits and assistance to which they are entitled as set forth in Section 5.2
hereinabove. This provision shall survive the expiration or termination of this
Agreement until full performance thereof.
6. Owner’s Reporting Obligations to the City and County.
6.1 An Annual Report, as described below, shall be submitted to the City and
the County no less than sixty (60) days prior to the close of each Fiscal Year.
(a) Annual Report. The Owner shall submit to the City and the County
an Annual Report which includes the following:
1) A listing of all occupied Mobilehome Spaces and Dwelling Units,
the income and size of each Resident Household occupying a
Mobilehome Space or Dwelling Unit, the actual rent paid and the
projected rent increase for the Mobilehome Space or Dwelling
Unit;
2) A listing of all Mobilehome Spaces and Dwelling Units occupied
by Resident Households whose Gross Household Income is
Item 9
Attachment B - Parcel B,
Mobilehome Regulatory
Agreement
Item 9: Staff Report Pg. 39 Packet Pg. 152 of 254
10
equal to or more than one hundred twenty percent (120%) of Area Median Income;
3) The initial and annual certification and recertification of each
Resident Household’s Gross Household Income, cost verification
and rent calculations;
4) The annual primary residence occupancy verification, if separate
from the income certification and recertifications;
5) List of all New Residents, the income and household size, ages
and relationships of such households, and copies of the income
certifications and certification that the New Residents intend to
occupy the Mobilehome Space or Dwelling Unit as their principal
place of residency; and
6) The report shall state, in addition to the above, the date the
occupancy commenced, the initial rental rate, if a Mobilehome
was purchased, then the purchase price paid by the New
Resident for the Mobilehome (if said information is available) and
such other information as the City or the County may be required
by law to obtain.
6.2 Financial Audit. The Owner is responsible for obtaining a financial audit
annually and shall provide the same to the City and County within one-hundred twenty
(120) after the end of the Fiscal Year.
6.3 Additional Information. The Owner shall provide any additional information
reasonably requested by the City or County. The City or County shall have right to
examine and make copies of all books, records or other documents of the Owner
pertaining to the Property.
6.4 Retention and Inspection of Documents.
(a) The Owner shall maintain complete, accurate and current records
pertaining to the Mobilehome Spaces, Dwelling Units and the Property, and shall permit
any duly authorized representative of the City or County to inspect records, including,
without limitation, records pertaining to household income and household size of Resident
Households; provided however, confidential and sensitive information relating to any
Resident Household (such as account numbers, social security numbers, driver’s license
numbers) may be redacted or marked out to protect the confidentiality of such information.
(b) The Owner shall also maintain records which include copies of
income certificates, cost verifications and rent calculations for all Resident Households
as well as all Property financial, management and maintenance records.
(c) The City or County or any duly authorized representative thereof
shall have the right to review and request copies of documents. In either the City or
County’s discretion, it shall have the right to audit such records, to determine the Owner’s
compliance with the requirements of this Agreement.
Item 9
Attachment B - Parcel B,
Mobilehome Regulatory
Agreement
Item 9: Staff Report Pg. 40 Packet Pg. 153 of 254
11
7. Operation of the Property.
7.1 Residential Use. The Property shall be operated only for residential use;
however, this restriction shall not prohibit the operation of community, recreational,
educational, or similar facilities that are open to the public, provided that these uses are
consistent with applicable zoning.
7.2 Compliance with All Agreements. The Owner and Owner’s agent shall
comply with all the terms and provisions of this Agreement.
7.3 Non-Discrimination; Compliance with Fair Housing Laws.
7.3.1 Fair Housing. Owner and Owner’s agent shall comply with state
and federal fair housing laws in the marketing and rental of the Dwelling Units and
Mobilehome Spaces located on the Property. Owner shall accept as tenants, on the
same basis as all other prospective tenants, persons who are recipients of federal
certificates or vouchers for rent subsidies pursuant to the existing Section 8 program or
any successor thereto.
7.3.2 Non-Discrimination. Neither Owner nor Owner’s agent shall restrict
the rental, sale, lease, sublease, transfer, use, occupancy, tenure or enjoyment of the
Property, or any portion thereof, on the basis of race, color, religion, creed, sex, sexual
orientation, disability, marital status, ancestry, or national origin of any person. Owner
covenants for itself and all persons claiming under or through it, and this Agreement is
made and accepted upon and subject to the condition that there shall be no
discrimination against or segregation of any person or group of persons on account of
any basis listed in subdivision (a) or (d) of Section 12955 of the Government Code, as
those bases are defined in Sections 12926, 12926.1, subdivision (m) and paragraph (1)
of subdivision (p) of Section 12955, and Section 12955.2 of the Government Code, in
the sale, lease, sublease, transfer, use, occupancy, tenure or enjoyment of the Property
or part thereof, nor shall Owner or any person claiming under or through Owner
establish or permit any such practice or practices of discrimination or segregation with
reference to the selection, location, number, use or occupancy of tenants, lessees,
subtenants, sublessees or vendees in, of, or for the Property or part thereof. Owner
shall include such provision in all deeds, leases, contracts and other instruments
executed by Owner, and shall enforce the same diligently and in good faith.
8. Property Management and Maintenance
8.1 Management Responsibilities. The Owner and Owner’s agent shall be
responsible for all management functions with respect to the Property including, but not
limited to, the selection of Resident Households, certification of household income and
size, certification of the ages of all household members, evictions, collection of rents and
deposits, maintenance, landscaping, routine and extraordinary repairs, replacement of
capital items, security and management of household relocation, if required. The Owner
shall retain a professional property management company initially approved by the City
Item 9
Attachment B - Parcel B,
Mobilehome Regulatory
Agreement
Item 9: Staff Report Pg. 41 Packet Pg. 154 of 254
12
and County in their reasonable discretion to perform its management duties hereunder. A
resident manager shall also be retained, if required by law or by Owner. The City and the
County hereby approve the engagement of the John Stewart Company, a California
corporation, as a property management company for the Property.
8.2 Performance Review. The City and County reserve the right to conduct
jointly or separately an annual (or more frequently, if deemed reasonably necessary by
the City or County) review of the management practices and financial status of the
Property. The purpose of the performance review will be to enable the City and County to
determine if the Property is being operated and managed in accordance with the
requirements and standards of this Agreement. The Owner shall cooperate with the City
and County in such reviews.
9. Indemnification. In lieu of and notwithstanding the pro rata risk allocation, which
might otherwise be imposed between the Parties pursuant to Government Code Section
895.6, the Parties agree that all losses or liabilities incurred by a Party shall not be
shared pro rata but, instead, the Owner, County and City agree that, pursuant to
Government Code Section 895.4, each of the Parties hereto shall fully indemnify and
hold each of the other Parties, their officers, board members, employees, and agents,
harmless from any claim, expense or cost, damage or liability imposed for injury (as
defined in Government Code Section 810.8) occurring by reason of the negligent acts
or omissions or willful misconduct of the indemnifying party, its officers, employees or
agents, under or in connection with or arising out of any work, authority, or jurisdiction
delegated to such party under this Agreement. No Party, nor any officer, board member
or agent thereof shall be responsible for any damage or liability occurring by reason of
the negligent acts or omissions or willful misconduct of the other Parties thereto, their
officers, board members, employees, or agents, under or in connection with or arising
out of any work authorized or delegated to such other Parties under this Agreement.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Owner, and its assigns, shall indemnify, defend, and
hold harmless the County and City, its officers, agents and employees from any claim,
liability, loss, injury or damage arising out of, or in connection with, the acquisition of the
Property, relocation of Property tenants, temporary relocation and construction of
improvements on the Property, and operation or maintenance of the Property, excepting
only loss, injury or damage caused by the negligence or willful misconduct of the County
and City. The Owner, and its assigns, shall reimburse the County and City for all costs,
attorneys’ fees, expenses and liabilities incurred with respect to any litigation in which
the Owner is obligated to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the County and City
under this Agreement.
Each Party agrees that all obligations under this Section 9 shall survive the termination
or assignment of this Agreement and shall remain binding on all Parties notwithstanding
the Agreement’s termination or assignment.
10. Term of Agreement.
Item 9
Attachment B - Parcel B,
Mobilehome Regulatory
Agreement
Item 9: Staff Report Pg. 42 Packet Pg. 155 of 254
13
10.1 Term of Restrictions. This Agreement shall remain in effect through
____________, 2101, which date is the 75th anniversary of the Effective Date.
10.2 Effectiveness Succeeds Conveyance of Property. This Agreement shall
remain effective and fully binding for the full term hereof regardless of any sale,
assignment, transfer, or conveyance of the Property or any part thereof or interest
therein.
10.3 Reconveyance. Upon the termination of this Agreement, the Parties
agree to execute and record appropriate instruments to release and discharge this
Agreement; provided, however, the execution and recordation of such instruments shall
not be necessary or a prerequisite to the termination of this Agreement upon the
expiration of the term.
11. Reinvestment of Proceeds from Sale of Property. The Parties acknowledge and
agree that a material consideration for the City and County to approve the financing
described herein is for the proceeds of any subsequent sale of the Property to be
reinvested in the City to create affordable housing. In the event that the Property is sold
to a third party that is not an affiliate of the Authority and in connection with such sale
the Property will not be required to be used for affordable housing, the Parties shall
cause an amount equal to: a) the amount not repaid to the City and County for any
loans made by the City and County that are secured by the Property, and b) at least
fifty-two percent (52%) of the total appreciation of the value of the Property since the
Effective Date, to be reinvested in the City to create additional affordable housing. In the
event that the Property is sold to a third party that is not an affiliate of the Authority and
in connection with such sale the Property will continue to be used for affordable
housing, the Parties agree that a) fifty-two percent (52%) of the total appreciation of the
value of the Property since the Effective Date shall be applied as a reduction to the
purchase price of the Property and b) the Owner shall cause to repay to the City and
County any loan amount outstanding or the loan shall be assigned to the next Owner of
the Property. For the purposes of this paragraph, an “affiliate of the Authority” shall
mean any entity that, directly or indirectly, controls, is controlled by, or is under common
control with Authority. For the purposes of this paragraph, “affordable housing” shall
mean the Property is subject to occupancy and affordability restrictions which are
substantially similar, including in length and levels of affordability, to the restrictions
imposed under this Agreement and to which the City and County are parties.
Each Party agrees that all obligations under this Section 11 shall survive the termination
or assignment of this Agreement and shall remain binding on all Parties notwithstanding
the Agreement’s termination or assignment.
12. Binding Upon Successors; Covenants to Run with the Land. Owner hereby
subjects its interest in the Property to the covenants and restrictions set forth in this
Agreement. The Parties hereby declare their express intent that the covenants and
restrictions set forth herein shall be deemed covenants running with the land and shall
be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the heirs, administrators, executors,
successors in interest, transferees, and assigns of the Parties, regardless of any sale,
Item 9
Attachment B - Parcel B,
Mobilehome Regulatory
Agreement
Item 9: Staff Report Pg. 43 Packet Pg. 156 of 254
14
assignment, conveyance or transfer of the Property or any part thereof or interest therein.
Any successor-in-interest to Owner, including without limitation any purchaser, transferee
or lessee of the Property shall be subject to all of the duties and obligations imposed
hereby for the full term of this Agreement. Each and every contract, deed, ground lease
or other instrument affecting or conveying the Property or any part thereof, shall
conclusively be held to have been executed, delivered and accepted subject to the
covenants, restrictions, duties and obligations set forth herein, regardless of whether such
covenants, restrictions, duties and obligations are set forth in such contract, deed, ground
lease or other instrument.
Owner’s default in the performance of any term,
provision or covenant under this Agreement and failure to cure such default within
ninety (90) days following receipt of notice of default to Owner, or if the nature of any
such non-monetary default is such that it cannot be cured within ninety (90) days,
Owner’s failure to commence to cure the default within ninety (90) days and thereafter
prosecute the curing of such default with due diligence and in good faith shall constitute
an Event of Default hereunder. Upon the occurrence of an Event of Default and its
continuation beyond any applicable cure period, City or County may bring an action for
equitable relief seeking the specific performance of the terms and conditions of this
Agreement, and/or enjoining, abating, or preventing any violation of such terms and
conditions, and/or seeking declaratory relief, or pursue any other remedy allowed under
law or in equity.
Item 9
Attachment B - Parcel B,
Mobilehome Regulatory
Agreement
Item 9: Staff Report Pg. 44 Packet Pg. 157 of 254
15
City: City of Palo Alto
County: County of Santa Clara
th floor
th floor
Owner:
Item 9
Attachment B - Parcel B,
Mobilehome Regulatory
Agreement
Item 9: Staff Report Pg. 45 Packet Pg. 158 of 254
16
16.4 Parties Not Co-Venturers. Nothing in this Agreement is intended to or
shall establish the Parties as partners, co-venturers, or principal and agent with one
another. The relationship of the Parties shall not be construed as a joint venture, equity
venture, partnership or any other relationship.
16.5 Headings; Construction. The headings of the sections and paragraphs of
this Agreement are for convenience only and shall not be used to interpret this
Agreement. The language of this Agreement shall be construed as a whole according
to its fair meaning and not strictly for or against any Party.
16.6 Governing Law; Venue. This Agreement shall be construed in accordance
with the laws of the State of California without regard to principles of conflicts of law.
Any action to enforce or interpret this Agreement shall be filed and heard in the Superior
Court of Santa Clara County, California or in the Federal District Court for the Northern
District of California.
16.7 Entire Agreement. This Agreement contains the entire agreement of the
Parties with respect to the subject matter hereof, and supersedes all prior written or oral
agreements, understandings, representations or statements of the Parties with respect
thereto.
16.8 Severability. If any provision of this Agreement is held invalid, illegal, or
unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the validity, legality, and
enforceability of the remaining provisions shall not be affected or impaired thereby.
16.9 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in multiple counterparts,
each of which shall be an original and all of which together shall constitute one
agreement.
16.10 Assignment. Owner, with the written consent of the City and County
(which may not be unreasonably withheld), may assign all rights and obligations under
this Agreement to either (a) a limited partnership whose general partner is a nonprofit
public benefit corporation or a limited liability company that is controlled by or affiliated
with Owner, or (b) a nonprofit public benefit corporation controlled by or affiliated with
Owner. The City and County shall have the right to review and approve the formation
documents of the transferee and the executed assignment and assumption
agreement(s) between Owner and the transferee prior to the execution of any
assignment agreement. Assignment of this Agreement by Owner is otherwise prohibited
and any purported assignment shall be null and void.
SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGES.
Item 9
Attachment B - Parcel B,
Mobilehome Regulatory
Agreement
Item 9: Staff Report Pg. 46 Packet Pg. 159 of 254
17
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Affordable Housing
Regulatory Agreement and Declaration of Restrictive Covenants as of the date first
written above.
CITY:
COUNTY:
OWNER:
Item 9
Attachment B - Parcel B,
Mobilehome Regulatory
Agreement
Item 9: Staff Report Pg. 47 Packet Pg. 160 of 254
17
Item 9
Attachment B - Parcel B,
Mobilehome Regulatory
Agreement
Item 9: Staff Report Pg. 48 Packet Pg. 161 of 254
18
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
State of California )
) ss
County of Santa Clara )
On , before me,___________________________________________,
(Name of Notary)
notary public, personally appeared _________________________________________________
who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are
subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same
in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument
the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.
I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the
foregoing paragraph is true and correct.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
(Notary Signature)
A notary public or other officer completing this
certificate verifies only the identity of the
Item 9
Attachment B - Parcel B,
Mobilehome Regulatory
Agreement
Item 9: Staff Report Pg. 49 Packet Pg. 162 of 254
18
Item 9
Attachment B - Parcel B,
Mobilehome Regulatory
Agreement
Item 9: Staff Report Pg. 50 Packet Pg. 163 of 254
19
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
State of California )
) ss
County of Santa Clara )
On , before me,___________________________________________,
(Name of Notary)
notary public, personally appeared _________________________________________________ who
proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to
the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their
authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity
upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.
I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing
paragraph is true and correct.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
(Notary Signature)
A notary public or other officer completing this
certificate verifies only the identity of the
Item 9
Attachment B - Parcel B,
Mobilehome Regulatory
Agreement
Item 9: Staff Report Pg. 51 Packet Pg. 164 of 254
19
Item 9
Attachment B - Parcel B,
Mobilehome Regulatory
Agreement
Item 9: Staff Report Pg. 52 Packet Pg. 165 of 254
20
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
State of California )
) ss
County of Santa Clara )
On , before me,___________________________________________,
(Name of Notary)
notary public, personally appeared _________________________________________________ who
proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to
the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their
authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity
upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.
I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing
paragraph is true and correct.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
(Notary Signature)
A notary public or other officer completing this
certificate verifies only the identity of the
Item 9
Attachment B - Parcel B,
Mobilehome Regulatory
Agreement
Item 9: Staff Report Pg. 53 Packet Pg. 166 of 254
20
Item 9
Attachment B - Parcel B,
Mobilehome Regulatory
Agreement
Item 9: Staff Report Pg. 54 Packet Pg. 167 of 254
21
Exhibit A
PROPERTY
The land is situated in the County of Santa Clara, City of Palo Alto, State of California, and
is described as follows:
Real property in the City of Palo Alto, County of Santa Clara, State of California, described as follows:
Being a portion of PARCEL 1 as shown and described on that certain Final Map filed on September 7,
2017 as File No. 23747216 in Book 906 of Maps at Pages 29 through 35, inclusive, in the Office of the
County Recorder of Santa Clara County, more particularly described as follows:
COMMENCING at the southerly corner of PARCEL 2 as shown on said Final Map (906 M 29-35) being
also a point on the northwesterly line of Los Robles Avenue;
Thence along said northwesterly line South 33°08'00" West, 361.57 feet to a point on said northwesterly
line being the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING of this description;
Thence leaving said northwesterly line the following three (3) courses:
1. North 56°53'30" West, 311.59 feet;
2. South 33°06'30" West, 26.47 feet;
3. North 56°39'49" West, 27.17 feet to the northwesterly line of said PARCEL 1;
Thence along said northwesterly line South 33°06'30" West, 193.38 feet to the westerly corner of said
PARCEL 1;
Thence along the southwesterly line of said PARCEL 1 South 56°53'30" East, 338.67 feet to the southerly
corner of said PARCEL 1 being also a point on the northwesterly line of Los Robles Avenue;
Thence along said northwesterly line North 33°08'00" East, 219.74 feet to the TRUE POINT OF
BEGINNING.
Containing 73,711 square feet or 1.692 acres, more or less.
END OF DESCRIPTION.
Item 9
Attachment B - Parcel B,
Mobilehome Regulatory
Agreement
Item 9: Staff Report Pg. 55 Packet Pg. 168 of 254
22
Item 9
Attachment B - Parcel B,
Mobilehome Regulatory
Agreement
Item 9: Staff Report Pg. 56 Packet Pg. 169 of 254
1
0
1
9
0
City Council
Staff Report
From: City Manager
Report Type: ACTION ITEMS
Lead Department: City Manager
Meeting Date: August 24, 2026
Report #:2606-6479
TITLE
Recommendation from the Oversized Vehicles (OSV) Ad Hoc Committee to Launch Two Pilot
OSV Parking Programs, Including Adoption of an Ordinance Establishing an OSV Parking Permit
Program, an Ordinance Amending the Municipal Fee Schedule to Add an OSV Parking Permit
Fee, Resolutions Establishing OSV Parking Permit Districts on Embarcadero Road and Coyote Hill
Road, a Resolution Prohibiting OSV Parking on Numerous Streets in Palo Alto; a Resolution
Adding Related Penalties to the Administrative Penalty Schedule; and Related Amendments to
the FY 2027 Operating and Capital Budget; CEQA status – categorically and statutorily exempt.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Approve a pilot OSV parking permit program on Embarcadero Road and Coyote Hill
Road for an initial term of 12 months, substantially as described in this report. This
includes adoption of the following:
a. An ordinance adding new PAMC Chapter 10.49 to establish an OSV Parking
Permit Program and amending PAMC section 10.60.010 allowing civil penalties
for parking violations of several chapters of the PAMC;
b. An ordinance amending the FY 2027 Municipal Fee Schedule to add an OSV
parking permit fee of up to $15 per month;
c. A resolution establishing an OSV Parking Permit District on a section of
Embarcadero Road. This will prohibit parking except for vehicles with permits;
d. A resolution establishing an OSV Parking Permit District on a section of Coyote
Hill Road. This will prohibit parking except for vehicles with permits; and
e. A resolution amending the Administrative Penalty Schedule to add penalties for
violations of PAMC Chapter 10.49.
2. Approve a pilot to prohibit OSV parking on alternating sides of the street, for an initial
term of 12 months, substantially as described in this report
Item 10
Item 10 Staff Report
Item 10: Staff Report Pg. 1 Packet Pg. 170 of 254
1
0
1
9
0
a. This includes adoption of a resolution prohibiting OSV street parking on
alternating sides of the following street segments: 4000 block of Transport
Street, 900 block of Commercial Street, 900 Block of Industrial Avenue, 100 block
of Page Mill Road, 2800-3200 blocks of Park Avenue, 200-400 block of Olive
Avenue, 2900 and 3200 blocks of Ash Street, 200-400 block of Lambert Avenue,
2400 block of Faber Place, 2400 block of Embarcadero Way, 1000 block of
Corporation Way, 1000 block of Elwell Court, and 1000 block of East Meadow
Circle.
3. Approve amendments to the Fiscal Year 2027 budget appropriation for the General
Fund (2/3 vote required) by:
a. Increasing the City Manager’s Office contractual services appropriation by
$194,300, and
b. Decreasing the Business Tax Reserve for Housing Affordability and Services for
the Unhoused by $194,300.
4. Amend the Fiscal Year 2027 Budget Appropriation for the Capital Improvement Fund
(requires a 2/3 vote) to:
a. Increase the Parking Infrastructure Improvements project (PL-12000) in the
amount of $524,500; and
b. Decrease the infrastructure reserve ending fund balance by $524,500.
5. Direct the City Manager or their designee to return to Council in March and September
2027 with status reports and any recommendations regarding continuation,
modification, expansion or termination of the pilot programs.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report presents the Oversized Vehicles (OSV) Ad Hoc Committee’s recommendation that
the City Council approve the launch of two pilot programs intended to address ongoing
neighborhood, business, public health, and safety impacts associated with OSVs used for
habitation while also providing a more structured and humane response for individuals living in
those vehicles. The first pilot permits eligible OSV dwellers to park in designated segments of
specific streets. The second pilot prohibits OSV parking on specific sides of identified streets
during designated six-month periods of the year.
Item 10
Item 10 Staff Report
Item 10: Staff Report Pg. 2 Packet Pg. 171 of 254
1
0
1
9
0
The recommendation builds on the Phase I implementation, previously approved by Council1,
including enforcement, towing, cleanup, and service coordination measures, as well as
subsequent OSV Ad Hoc Phase II development, including consideration of enhanced services,
additional safe parking strategies, a pilot permit framework, and regional coordination. The
February 23, 20262 study session materials specifically identified a pilot OSV permit program as
a pragmatic next step because off-street safe parking expansion is constrained by land
availability and cost.
BACKGROUND
1 Council Staff Report, October 20, 2025
https://recordsportal.paloalto.gov/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=83666&dbid=0&repo=PaloAlto&searchid=7bf9966e
-7dd8-4189-b428-086b2b158f4f
2 Council Staff Report, February 23, 2026
https://recordsportal.paloalto.gov/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=86646&dbid=0&repo=PaloAlto&searchid=d1be7c39
-257a-48d3-8ad3-c90298681508
Item 10
Item 10 Staff Report
Item 10: Staff Report Pg. 3 Packet Pg. 172 of 254
1
0
1
9
0
comparatively high share relative to the Countywide rate of 53%. The City has experienced
increasing impacts to parking, traffic safety, on-street parking availability for other uses (e.g.,
residents, business employees and visitors) and necessitating outreach services, additional
street cleaning, and waste disposal in relation to oversized vehicle habitation on public streets.
5 regarding progress related to OSVs and the work of the OSV Ad Hoc.
The update noted that there was a decline in OSVs from 191 to 133 between January 15 and
May 6, 2026. The report also noted that substantial staff effort across departments during
Phase I reduced impacts, improved compliance, and provided insights for Phase II.
ANALYSIS
Current Conditions and Policy Context
5 Council Staff Report, June 8, 2026
https://recordsportal.paloalto.gov/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=887100&dbid=0&repo=PaloAlto&searchid=eb20f96
d-f928-4d49-a57e-abd6ccc0a99b
Item 10
Item 10 Staff Report
Item 10: Staff Report Pg. 4 Packet Pg. 173 of 254
1
0
1
9
0
parking on heavily impacted streets. This program design balances the need to address impacts
of OSVs with legal, practical, and humanitarian considerations. In addition, the pilots will allow
for adjustments to real world conditions. Staff plans to return to Council with status reports
and recommendations for next steps at six months and again at 12 months.
OSV Parking Permit Pilot
7
and would permit OSV parking on a portion of Coyote Hill Road within the City’s jurisdiction and
a portion of Embarcadero Road near the Wastewater Treatment Plant. The City is in ongoing
discussions with the County of Santa Clara for the Coyote Hill Road pilot and is seeking to
extend the program to parking spaces closer to Page Mill Road; however, pending agreement,
this pilot would be limited to the segment of Coyote Hill Road within the City’s jurisdiction.
7 Both pilot programs’ authorizing legislation are structured to allow them to continue until Council takes action
otherwise.
Item 10
Item 10 Staff Report
Item 10: Staff Report Pg. 5 Packet Pg. 174 of 254
1
0
1
9
0
consistent participant engagement, help individuals develop and follow individualized housing
plans, coordinate documentation and benefit needs, connect participants to appropriate
housing pathways, and maintain forward progress toward permanent or more stable housing.
This dedicated support is intended to improve the pilot’s effectiveness as a transition toward
housing stability and to reduce the likelihood that participants cycle back into unsheltered
homelessness.
Landscaping to reduce fire risks along Coyote Hill Road
Temporary restriping of Embarcadero Road to allow for OSVs to park without blocking
the bike lane
Signage installation that clearly states ’parking by permit‘ only
Outreach to current OSV dwellers to gain participants for the permit program
Case management and program support through a formal solicitation process
Onsite port-a-potties and hand-washing stations
Waste management bins (via Greenwaste of Palo Alto)
Signage installation
Road restriping design and labor
Item 10
Item 10 Staff Report
Item 10: Staff Report Pg. 6 Packet Pg. 175 of 254
1
0
1
9
0
Site Configuration Rendering for Coyote Hill Road (total OSV capacity, up-to 20)*
*This number is an approximation of capacity for the space and takes into account larger OSVs
plus one personal vehicle per OSV.
Item 10
Item 10 Staff Report
Item 10: Staff Report Pg. 7 Packet Pg. 176 of 254
1
0
1
9
0
Site Configuration Rendering for Embarcadero Road (total OSV capacity, up-to 17)**
**This number is an approximation of capacity for the space and takes into account larger OSVs
plus one personal vehicle per OSV.
Under current estimates, the OSV parking permit pilot will have an approximate capacity of 37
permitted OSVs. Actual number of permits issued will be dependent on OSV size and remaining
space in the permitted areas. A lower number of permits may be issued at the start of the
program to allow staff to work out any issues that may arise.
Each permit will be valid for a period of one month. At the end of the one-month period, the
permit may be renewed for an additional one month should the permit holder be actively
engaging in case management, working toward the goals of moving into permanent housing,
and causing no ongoing issues or safety concerns. Permits will expire at the close of the OSV
parking permit pilot, and renewals will not be granted beyond the scope of the program.
Qualifications to participate in the parking permit pilot include:
A valid vehicle registration,
Item 10
Item 10 Staff Report
Item 10: Staff Report Pg. 8 Packet Pg. 177 of 254
1
0
1
9
0
Active insurance,
Agreement to sign, and abide by, a good neighbor agreement,
Agreement to participate and engage with outreach workers to receive support to
transition into permanent housing,
Priority to Palo Alto connections,
Restriction to low-income households, and
The ability to pay a $15 permit fee, per month.
Staff propose using the following metrics to gauge program success:
A reduction in complaints about OSVs
From residents
From businesses
Overall reduction of warnings, citations and calls for services
Number of participants complying with good neighbor agreement and ability to meet
other eligibility requirements
Consistent engagement with case management services
With the addition of these OSV parking spaces on Coyote Hill Road and Embarcadero Road, a
complementary pilot will simultaneously be implemented to assist in reducing the impact of
OSVs parked elsewhere. The OSV parking prohibited on alternating sides pilot is explained
below.
OSV Parking Prohibited on Alternating Sides of Street
The OSV parking prohibited on alternating sides of street pilot would launch as a 12-month pilot
beginning by January 2027. This pilot is intended to complement the OSV parking permit pilot,
which will allow up to approximately 37 OSVs to park in dedicated spaces in the city.
There will be some logistical functions that arise as OSV dwellers, businesses, and surrounding
neighborhoods adapt to the changes.
On identified-as-impacted streets, OSVs will be prohibited from parking on one side of the
street for six months of the year and will then need to relocate for the remaining six months of
the year. In the remaining six months of the year, parking will be available on the other side of
the street. Permits will not be required to participate or park on these streets during this pilot.
However, compliance with posted signage will be required. Noncompliance can and will be
enforced with towing. Given this new restriction on the streets where OSVs predominantly park
in Palo Alto, there is likely to be spillover onto other streets in the city. By implementing this
pilot incrementally, staff will be able to better closely monitor and address potential impacts to
other areas, especially during street sweeping days. One anticipated impact is an increase in
Item 10
Item 10 Staff Report
Item 10: Staff Report Pg. 9 Packet Pg. 178 of 254
1
0
1
9
0
OSVs parked on streets adjacent to parks near the pilot area. To address this potential impact,
signage will be installed to enable enforcement of no OSV overnight parking on the streets
adjacent to those parks.
Proposed Signage Rendering for Alternating Sides of the Street OSV Parking Prohibition
Staff recommend:
The below streets for OSV parking prohibited on alternating sides of the street:
4000 Block of Transport Street
900 Block of Commercial Street
900 Block of Industrial Avenue
100 Block of Page Mill Road
2800-3200 Block of Park Boulevard
200-400 Block of Olive Avenue
2900 & 3200 Block of Ash Street
200-400 Block of Lambert Avenue
1000 Block of Elwell Court
1000 Block of Corporation Way
1000 Block of East Meadow Circle
2400 Block of Embarcadero Way
Item 10
Item 10 Staff Report
Item 10: Staff Report Pg. 10 Packet Pg. 179 of 254
1
0
1
9
0
2400 Block of Faber Place
The above list does not include the 900 block of San Antonio Road, 4000 block of
Transport Street, 900 block of Industrial Avenue, and 1800-1900 block of Embarcadero
Road because parking is already prohibited or unavailable on one side of the street on
these blocks.
Red tips (no parking) painted along curbs on both sides of all impacted streets (i.e.,
including segments of San Antonio, Transport, Industrial, and Embarcadero Road) with
about five feet (5') adjacent to driveways to aid with visibility for vehicles
entering/exiting parking lots
Daylighting at intersections (20 feet of red curb paint) on streets included in the
program
Street sweeping frequency to remain consistent at current twice per month frequency
Installing no overnight OSV parking signage on streets adjacent to nearby parks (i.e.,
streets adjacent to Ramos Park and Greer Park)
Staff propose using the following metrics to gauge success:
Feedback from businesses: does it continue to be negative, manageable, or did feedback
change altogether?
Spillover parking concerns from other streets, including residential areas
Before launching the two pilots, staff would conduct outreach and address feedback, finalize
the remaining administrative and operational details necessary to implement the Council-
approved pilot structure, such as application materials, verification process, signage,
communications, data tracking, and enforcement coordination.
Basis for Recommending Launch of Two Pilot Programs
The Ad Hoc Committee recommends the launch of two pilot programs to move from concept
development into limited-duration operational testing. The OSV parking permit pilot, when
coupled with the prohibiting OSV parking on alternative sides of the street pilot, provide a
necessary step to establish conduct monitoring (e.g., permit holders adherence to standards,
good neighbor conduct); optimize sanitation scheduling; evaluate impacts on pilot streets,
adjacent streets, and adjacent parks; streamline permit eligibility verification; and evaluate
success. Together, the pilots are intended to:
Reduce immediate neighborhood and business impacts,
Improve sanitation, safety, and accountability,
Item 10
Item 10 Staff Report
Item 10: Staff Report Pg. 11 Packet Pg. 180 of 254
1
0
1
9
0
Test structured standards and eligibility requirements,
Strengthen service engagement and pathways towards housing,
Evaluate operational feasibility and staff workload, and
Provide Council with measurable results prior to any longer-term program or policy
decision.
Benefits of Launching the Pilots
Approving launch of two pilot programs at this stage offers several benefits. First, a pilot-based
launch gives the City a structured way to test whether these innovative approaches can reduce
impacts more effectively than cleanup and enforcement alone. Additionally, these pilots set
conduct standards and provide a greater level of support for the community, while also offering
more dignity and predictability to participants. Second, the pilots advance the phased strategy
already initiated by Council. Third, a limited pilot structure may reduce legal and operational
risk relative to immediate permanent or citywide implementation because it allows the City to
test processes on a manageable scale, monitor cost effectiveness and impacts closely, and
return to Council before expanding the approach.
Performance Measures and Return to Council
If Council approves the launch of the pilots, staff recommends evaluating them using
measurable criteria and returning to Council with a formal assessment. Recommended
performance measures include:
Number of issued permits;
Compliance, and non-renewal rates;
Number and type of neighborhood and business complaints before and during the
pilots;
Outreach contacts and service-engagement rates;
Housing, shelter, or safe-parking referrals and placements;
Staff time and operating costs;
Enforcement actions associated with pilot and non-pilot areas; and
Feedback from affected neighborhoods, businesses, service providers, and participants.
Staff anticipates returning to Council by Fall 2027 with a midpoint evaluation and Spring 2028
with a final evaluation and recommendations regarding continuation, modification, expansion,
or termination.
Risks, Constraints, and Implementation Challenges
A pilot will not fully resolve impacts outside the pilot geography. For example, unpermitted
OSVs could move from pilot areas into non-pilot areas. The Palo Alto Police Department
continues to provide proactive enforcement and response to enforceable violations that are
reported. However, implementation of the pilot programs may increase the number of calls for
Item 10
Item 10 Staff Report
Item 10: Staff Report Pg. 12 Packet Pg. 181 of 254
1
0
1
9
0
service, response needs, and follow-up enforcement activity. The Public Works team continues
to divert their staff and resources to install signage throughout the identified streets. The Office
of Transportation has delayed other projects to support Public Works in sign design and other
associated tasks.
FISCAL/RESOURCE IMPACT
Item 10
Item 10 Staff Report
Item 10: Staff Report Pg. 13 Packet Pg. 182 of 254
1
0
1
9
0
Item 10
Item 10 Staff Report
Item 10: Staff Report Pg. 14 Packet Pg. 183 of 254
1
0
1
9
0
OSV Parking Permit Pilot
Services/Capital Improvements Funding
Source
Pilot
Year*
Ongoing
Annual Cost**
Engineering; road restriping designs,
labor, materials
Capital Reserves $190,500
Signage Capital Reserves $16,000
Outreach and Case Management Business Tax Reserve $161,000 $177,000
*August 2026-March 2027 allows staff time to configure the permit program.
Permit program would operate March 2027-March 2028; this spans FY 2027 and FY 2028
** Ongoing costs include an approximate 10% annual increase
OSV Parking Prohibited on Alternative Sides of Street Pilot
Services/Capital Improvements Funding
Source
Pilot
Year
Ongoing
Annual Cost*
Signage Capital Reserves $283,000
Red Curb Paint (20’ from intersections,
5’ on each side of driveway)
Capital Reserves $35,000 $20,000
Community Services Officer (CSO)FY 2027 Budget $105,000 $115,000
*Ongoing costs are for curb paint touch ups
OSV Parking Permit Pilot Totals $400,800 $213,000
OSV Parking Prohibited on
Alternative Sides of Street Totals
$423,000 $135,000
Combined Pilot Totals $823,800 $348,000
If the City Council approves the budget amendments associated with this item, the remaining
balances will be $3.2 million in the Business Tax Reserve for Housing Affordability and $7.2
million in the Capital Infrastructure Reserve.
STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT
Staff continue to monitor and respond to correspondence submitted to Council, engage the
local service-provider network, meet with local businesses and the Chamber of Commerce, and
meet with individuals and groups requesting discussion on this topic. Additionally, staff and the
Ad Hoc participate in a regional convening hosted by Supervisor Margaret Abe-Koga regarding
safe parking and regional collaboration.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The parking pilot programs as detailed in this staff report are exempt under CEQA regulations
15301 (existing facilities), 15304 (minor alterations to land), and Public Resources Code section
21080.10(c).
Item 10
Item 10 Staff Report
Item 10: Staff Report Pg. 15 Packet Pg. 184 of 254
1
0
1
9
0
ATTACHMENTS
APPROVED BY:
Item 10
Item 10 Staff Report
Item 10: Staff Report Pg. 16 Packet Pg. 185 of 254
*NOT YET APPROVED*
1
168_20260813_ts24
Ordinance No. ____
Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Adding Chapter
10.49 (OSV Parking Permit Districts) to the Palo Alto Municipal
Code and Amending PAMC Section 10.60.010
The Council of the City of Palo Alto does ORDAIN as follows:
SECTION 1. Findings and Declarations. The City Council finds and declares as follows:
A. California Vehicle Code section 22507 authorizes preferential parking permit programs.
B. The City Council desires to regulate the parking of oversized vehicles through a permit
program to mitigate the health, safety, and traffic impacts of such vehicles by creating an
Oversized Vehicle Parking Permit Program in new Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) Chapter
10.49.
C. The City Council also desires to amend PAMC section 10.60.010 to clarify that civil penalties
can be imposed for parking violations of several chapters of the PAMC.
SECTION 2. New Chapter 10.49 (Oversized Vehicle Parking Permit Program) is hereby
added to Title 10 (Vehicles and Traffic) of the Palo Alto Municipal Code to read as follows:
Chapter 10.49
Oversized Vehicle Parking Permit Districts
10.49.010 Definitions.
For the purpose of this Chapter, the following words and phrases shall have the
following meanings:
(a) “OSV Parking Permit District” or "District" shall mean a geographical area in which the
City Council has established an OSV Parking Permit District to regulate the parking of Oversized
Vehicles. A District may also regulate the parking of other types of vehicles not classified as
Oversized Vehicles.
(b) “Oversize Vehicle”, “Oversized Vehicle” and “OSV” shall all have the same definition as
the term “Oversized Vehicle” does as defined in PAMC section 10.44.015.
10.49.020 Establishment of OSV Parking Permit Districts.
A District shall be established by adoption of a resolution of the City Council. The
resolution shall specify the following:
Item 10
Attachment A - Ordinance
Adding PAMC Ch. 10.49
(OSV Parking Permit
Program)
Item 10: Staff Report Pg. 17 Packet Pg. 186 of 254
2
(a) The boundaries and name of the District.
(b) Hours and days of enforcement of parking regulations and other restrictions that shall be
in effect for permit holders and non-permit holders. This may include, but is not limited to, time
limits, reparking restrictions, parking prohibitions, or any other parking regulation or restriction
authorized by law.
(c) Such other matters as the council may deem necessary and desirable.
10.49.030 Administration of districts.
(a) No permit will be issued to any applicant until that applicant has paid all applicable permit
fees.
(b) All permits shall be displayed as directed by the City.
(c) No Guarantee of Availability of Parking. A parking permit shall not guarantee or reserve to
the permit holder an on-street parking space within the designated District unless explicitly
stated in writing.
(d) Restrictions and Conditions. Each permit issued pursuant to this Chapter shall be subject to
each and every condition and restriction set forth in this Chapter, in the resolution
establishing the respective District, and in any applicable administrative regulations, as
may be amended from time to time. The issuance of such permit shall not be construed to
waive compliance with any other applicable law, regulation or ordinance.
(e) Exemptions.
The following vehicles are exempt from District parking restrictions in this Chapter:
(1) A vehicle owned or operated by a public or private utility, when used in the course of
business.
(2) A vehicle owned or operated by a governmental agency, when used in the course of
official government business.
(3) A vehicle for which an authorized emergency vehicle permit has been issued by the
Commissioner of the California Highway Patrol, when used in the course of business.
(4) A vehicle parked or standing while actively delivering materials or freight.
(5) A vehicle displaying an authorized exemption permit issued by the City of Palo Alto.
(6) A vehicle displaying a State of California or military-issued disabled person placard or
license plates.
Item 10
Attachment A - Ordinance
Adding PAMC Ch. 10.49
(OSV Parking Permit
Program)
Item 10: Staff Report Pg. 18 Packet Pg. 187 of 254
3
(f) Authority of Staff.
(1) The City Manager or designee is authorized to promulgate administrative regulations
that are not inconsistent with the purposes of this Chapter. This includes, but is not
limited to, administrative regulations on permit eligibility, permit sales processes, and
health and safety requirements. The administrative regulations may be different for
each District and may impose additional restrictions not in conflict with this Chapter.
(2) A private parking enforcement contractor approved by the City shall have the
authority to enforce any parking restriction and administrative regulations
established pursuant to this Chapter.
10.49.040 Violations and Penalties.
(a) No person shall park a vehicle adjacent to any curb in a District in violation of any posted or
noticed prohibition or restriction, unless the person has a valid and current parking permit
for that vehicle, or is otherwise exempt. A parking permit must be properly displayed or
affixed pursuant to any applicable administrative regulations to be valid. Use of any permit
issued under this chapter shall be subject to the provisions of this chapter and the
administrative regulations. Violations of this subsection shall be punishable by a civil
penalty under PAMC Chapter 10.60.
(b) No person shall sell, rent, or lease, or cause to be sold, rented, or leased for any value or
consideration any permit issued under this chapter. Upon violation of this subsection, all
permits issued to for the benefit of the permittee for which the sold, rented, or leased
permit was authorized shall be void. Violation of this subsection (b) shall be punishable as
an infraction and/or as an administrative penalty.
(c) No person shall buy or otherwise acquire for value or use any permit issued under this
Chapter, except as provided for in this chapter. Violation of this subsection (c) shall be
punishable as an infraction and/or as an administrative penalty.
(d) No person shall fail to abide by the administrative regulations authorized by this Chapter.
Violation of this subsection (d) shall be punishable as an infraction and/or as an
administrative penalty.
(e) Each separate day or any portion thereof during which any violation of this Chapter occurs
or continues shall be deemed to constitute a separate offense.
(f) Where not inconsistent with the U.S. Constitution or other applicable law, vehicles parked
in violation of this Chapter are subject to tow.
10.49.050 Revocation of permit.
In addition to all other remedies, the City Manager or designee may suspend or revoke a
permit issued under this chapter of any person found to be in violation of this chapter or its
administrative regulations by providing written notice of the suspension or revocation to the
permittee. Such written notice shall include a statement outlining the grounds for revoking the
permit.
Item 10
Attachment A - Ordinance
Adding PAMC Ch. 10.49
(OSV Parking Permit
Program)
Item 10: Staff Report Pg. 19 Packet Pg. 188 of 254
4
A person may appeal a suspension or revocation by requesting a hearing under the
procedures in PAMC Section 1.12.060. The hearing shall be conducted under the procedures in
PAMC Chapter 1.12.
SECTION 3. Section 10.60.010 of Chapter 10.60 (“Parking Violations”) of Title 10
(“Vehicles and Traffic) is hereby amended to read as follows (new text underlined):
10.60.010 Parking violations punishable as civil penalties.
Except as otherwise provided, violations of any provision of Chapters 10.36, 10.40, 10.44,
10.46, 10.47, 10.48, 10.49 and 10.50 of this Title 10 and parking related violations in PAMC
Chapter 22.04 (hereinafter referred to as a "parking violation") shall be punishable by a civil
penalty (hereinafter referred to as a "parking penalty"). These parking penalties, together with
any late payment penalties, administrative fee, and other related charges shall be established
by ordinance or resolution of the city council.
SECTION 4. Severability. If any provision, clause, sentence or paragraph of this
ordinance, or the application to any person or circumstances, shall be held invalid, such
invalidity shall not affect the other provisions of this Ordinance which can be given effect
without the invalid provision or application and, to this end, the provisions of this Ordinance
are hereby declared to be severable.
SECTION 5. Effective Date. This ordinance shall be effective on the 31st day after
adoption.
//
//
//
//
//
//
//
//
//
//
Item 10
Attachment A - Ordinance
Adding PAMC Ch. 10.49
(OSV Parking Permit
Program)
Item 10: Staff Report Pg. 20 Packet Pg. 189 of 254
5
SECTION 6. CEQA. The City Council finds and determines that this categorically
exempt under CEQA regulation 15301 (existing facilities) and 15304 (minor alterations).
INTRODUCED:
PASSED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTENTIONS:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
____________________________ ____________________________
City Clerk Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED:
____________________________ ____________________________
Assistant City Attorney City Manager
____________________________
Chief Transportation Official
Item 10
Attachment A - Ordinance
Adding PAMC Ch. 10.49
(OSV Parking Permit
Program)
Item 10: Staff Report Pg. 21 Packet Pg. 190 of 254
*NOT YET APPROVED*
1
166_20260812_ts24
Resolution No. ____
Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Establishing the Embarcadero
Road OSV Parking Permit District
R E C I T A L S
A. California Vehicle Code Section 22507 authorizes the establishment, by City Council action,
of permit parking programs.
B. Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) Chapter 10.49 establishes the procedures for Oversized
Vehicle Parking Permit Districts (OSV Parking Permit District) within the City.
C. On August 24, 2026, the City Council desired to establish an OSV Parking Permit District on a
portion of Embarcadero Road through this Resolution and as permitted by PAMC section
10.49.020.
D. The City Council determines that the use of the permits will not adversely affect parking
conditions for residents or merchants in the area pursuant to California Vehicle Code section
22507(b).
NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Palo Alto RESOLVES, as follows:
SECTION 1. Definitions.
A. “Oversized Vehicle” or “OSV” shall have the same meaning as in PAMC section 10.49.010.
B. “Embarcadero OSV Parking Permit District” or “District” shall consist of three segments
on Embarcadero Road as follows and as generally shown in Exhibit A to this Resolution:
a. Segment 1: From the northern corner of the intersection of Embarcadero Road
and Embarcadero Way, the start point of the segment is 20 feet northeast from
the northern corner of the intersection and continues for an additional 220 feet
to the northeast on the north side of Embarcadero Road.
b. Segment 2: From the western edge of the driveway of the Palo Alto Wastewater
Treatment Plant on Embarcadero Road, the start point of the segment is 100 feet
to the west and continues for an additional 250 feet to the west on the south side
of Embarcadero Road.
c. Segment 3: From the eastern edge of the driveway of the Palo Alto Wastewater
Treatment Plant on Embarcadero Road, the start point of the segment is 50 feet
to the east and continues for an additional 275 feet to the east on the south side
of the Embarcadero Road.
SECTION 2. Parking Restrictions within the District.
A. Permit Parking Only. Within the District, no person shall park a vehicle adjacent to any
curb. This restriction shall be in effect everyday at all times, except holidays as defined
Item 10
Attachment B - Resolution
Establishing an OSV Parking
Permit District on section of
Embarcadero
Item 10: Staff Report Pg. 22 Packet Pg. 191 of 254
*NOT YET APPROVED*
2
166_20260812_ts24
in PAMC section 2.08.100(a) (but holidays shall not include Saturdays and Sundays, on
which days this restriction shall be active). Vehicles properly displaying a valid parking
permit as described in Section 4 of this Resolution are exempt from these restrictions.
B. Exempt vehicles. Vehicles described in Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 10.49.030(e)
are exempt from the parking restrictions in this Resolution.
C. Tow Authority. Where not inconsistent with the U.S. Constitution or other applicable
law, vehicles parked in violation of this Resolution are subject to tow.
SECTION 3. Parking Permits.
The City may issue parking permits for use by a person needing to park an OSV, plus an additional
vehicle(s) if allowed pursuant to administrative regulations.
A. Duration. Parking Permits shall be available in any duration as determined by the City
Manager or designee, up to a maximum of one year.
B. Form of Permit. The City may issue Parking Permits in any form it deems practicable.
C. Maximum Number of Permits Issued. The number of permits issued shall be determined
by the City Manager or designee.
SECTION 4. Parking Permit Fees. The fee for Parking Permits in the District shall be set
by the City’s Municipal Fee Schedule.
SECTION 5. Authority to Promulgate Regulations. The City Manager or designee is
authorized to promulgate regulations for this District pursuant to PAMC section 10.49.030(f). The
regulations may have additional restrictions on permit eligibility or permit requirements beyond
those in this Resolution.
SECTION 6. Conflicting Restrictions. In the event the City should, at a later time,
discover conflicting parking restrictions within the District that conflict with the restrictions of
this resolution, but are not expressly rescinded, the restrictions of this resolution shall control.
However, existing parking restrictions indicated by painted curbs and implemented pursuant to
Vehicle Code section 21458 are not superseded by this Resolution and remain in effect.
SECTION 7. CEQA. This Resolution is exempt from the requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant Section 15301 and 15304 in that this proposed
resolution will have a minor impact on existing facilities and could result in a minor impact to
land.
//
//
//
Item 10
Attachment B - Resolution
Establishing an OSV Parking
Permit District on section of
Embarcadero
Item 10: Staff Report Pg. 23 Packet Pg. 192 of 254
*NOT YET APPROVED*
3
166_20260812_ts24
SECTION 8. Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect upon the effective date of
the Ordinance adopting new PAMC Chapter 10.49.
INTRODUCED AND PASSED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
ATTEST:
__________________________ __________________________
City Clerk Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED:
_______________________ ___________________________
Assistant City Attorney City Manager
___________________________
Chief Transportation Official
Item 10
Attachment B - Resolution
Establishing an OSV Parking
Permit District on section of
Embarcadero
Item 10: Staff Report Pg. 24 Packet Pg. 193 of 254
*NOT YET APPROVED*
4
166_20260812_ts24
Exhibit A
The black lines with white dots represent the approximate locations of the three street
segments that compose the District.
Item 10
Attachment B - Resolution
Establishing an OSV Parking
Permit District on section of
Embarcadero
Item 10: Staff Report Pg. 25 Packet Pg. 194 of 254
*NOT YET APPROVED
1
167_20260813_ts24
Resolution No. ____
Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Establishing the Coyote
Hill Road OSV Parking Permit District
R E C I T A L S
A. California Vehicle Code Section 22507 authorizes the establishment, by City Council action,
of permit parking programs.
B. Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) Chapter 10.49 establishes the procedures for Oversized
Vehicle Parking Permit Districts (OSV Parking Permit District) within the City.
C. On August 24, 2026, the City Council desired to establish an OSV Parking Permit District on a
portion of Embarcadero Road through this Resolution and as permitted by PAMC section
10.49.020.
D. The City Council determines that the use of the permits will not adversely affect parking
conditions for residents or merchants in the area pursuant to California Vehicle Code section
22507(b).
NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Palo Alto RESOLVES, as follows:
SECTION 1. Definitions.
A. “Oversized Vehicle” or “OSV” shall have the same meaning as in PAMC section 10.49.010.
B. “Coyote Hill OSV Parking Permit District” or “District” shall be the following segment of
Coyote Hill Road as follows and as generally shown in Exhibit A to this Resolution:
a. The segment starts at the border of the County of Santa Clara and the City of Palo
Alto on Coyote Hill Road and continues east for 1,105 feet on the north side of the
road.
SECTION 2. Parking Restrictions within the District.
A. Permit Parking Only. Within the District, no person shall park a vehicle adjacent to any
curb. This restriction shall be in effect everyday at all times, except holidays as defined
in PAMC section 2.08.100(a) (but holidays shall not include Saturdays and Sundays, on
which days this restriction shall be active). Vehicles properly displaying a valid parking
permit as described in Section 4 of this Resolution are exempt from these restrictions.
B. Exempt vehicles. Vehicles described in Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 10.49.030(e)
are exempt from the parking restrictions in this Resolution.
C. Tow Authority. Where not inconsistent with the U.S. Constitution or other applicable
law, vehicles parked in violation of this Resolution are subject to tow.
Item 10
Attachment C - Resolution
Establishing an OSV Parking
Permit District on section of
Coyote Hill Road
Item 10: Staff Report Pg. 26 Packet Pg. 195 of 254
*NOT YET APPROVED
2
167_20260813_ts24
SECTION 3. Parking Permits.
The City may issue parking permits for use by a person needing to park an OSV, plus an additional
vehicle(s) if allowed pursuant to administrative regulations.
A. Duration. Parking Permits shall be available in any duration as determined by the City
Manager or designee, up to a maximum of one year.
B. Form of Permit. The City may issue Parking Permits in any form it deems practicable.
C. Maximum Number of Permits Issued. The number of permits issued shall be determined
by the City Manager or designee.
SECTION 4. Parking Permit Fees. The fee for Parking Permits in the District shall be set
by the City’s Municipal Fee Schedule.
SECTION 5. Authority to Promulgate Regulations. The City Manager or designee is
authorized to promulgate regulations for this District pursuant to PAMC section 10.49.030(f). The
regulations may have additional restrictions on permit eligibility or permit requirements beyond
those in this Resolution.
SECTION 6. Conflicting Restrictions. In the event the City should, at a later time,
discover conflicting parking restrictions within the District that conflict with the restrictions of
this resolution, but are not expressly rescinded, the restrictions of this resolution shall control.
However, existing parking restrictions indicated by painted curbs and implemented pursuant to
Vehicle Code section 21458 are not superseded by this Resolution and remain in effect.
SECTION 7. CEQA. This Resolution is exempt from the requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant Section 15301 and 15304 in that this proposed
resolution will have a minor impact on existing facilities and could result in a minor impact to
land.
//
//
//
//
//
//
Item 10
Attachment C - Resolution
Establishing an OSV Parking
Permit District on section of
Coyote Hill Road
Item 10: Staff Report Pg. 27 Packet Pg. 196 of 254
*NOT YET APPROVED
3
167_20260813_ts24
SECTION 8. Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect upon the effective date of
the Ordinance adopting new PAMC Chapter 10.49.
INTRODUCED AND PASSED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
ATTEST:
__________________________ __________________________
City Clerk Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED:
_______________________ ___________________________
Assistant City Attorney City Manager
___________________________
Chief Transportation Official
Item 10
Attachment C - Resolution
Establishing an OSV Parking
Permit District on section of
Coyote Hill Road
Item 10: Staff Report Pg. 28 Packet Pg. 197 of 254
*NOT YET APPROVED
4
167_20260813_ts24
Exhibit A
The black line with white dots represents the approximate location of the District on Coyote Hill
Road.
Item 10
Attachment C - Resolution
Establishing an OSV Parking
Permit District on section of
Coyote Hill Road
Item 10: Staff Report Pg. 29 Packet Pg. 198 of 254
*NOT YET APPROVED*
1
164_20260812_ts24
Ordinance No. ___
Ordinance of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending the Fiscal Year
2027 Municipal Fee Schedule to Add a Permit Fee for the OSV Parking
Permit Program
The Council of the City of Palo Alto ORDAINS as follows:
SECTION 1. Findings and Declarations. The City Council finds and declares as follows:
A. On June 15, 2026, the City Council adopted an ordinance approving the City’s budget for fiscal
year 2027 (FY27). The ordinance included the FY27 Municipal Fee Schedule.
B. The City Council now desires to amend the FY27 Municipal Fee Schedule through this
Ordinance to add a new fee for the OSV Parking Permit Program.
SECTION 2. The Council of the City of Palo Alto amends the Fiscal Year 2027 Municipal
Fee Schedule by adding the following fee:
Office of Transportation
Parking Permit – OSV
OSV Parking Permit $0-15 per month (rate may be prorated depending on permit duration)
SECTION 3. The fee in this Ordinance is for a specific government service provided
directly to the payor that is not provided to those not charged and which does not exceed the
reasonable costs to the local government of providing the service or product. In addition, the fee
is imposed for use/lease of local government property. Pursuant to Art. XIII C, Section 1(e),
subsections (2) and (4) of the California Constitution, this fee is not a tax.
SECTION 4. The Council finds that this ordinance is not a “project” under CEQA
because it has no potential for resulting in either a direct or reasonable foreseeable indirect
change in the environment.
//
//
//
//
//
//
Item 10
Attachment D - Ordinance
Adding a OSV Parking
Permit Fee to the FY27
Municipal Fee Schedule
Item 10: Staff Report Pg. 30 Packet Pg. 199 of 254
*NOT YET APPROVED*
2
164_20260812_ts24
SECTION 5. This ordinance shall be effective upon adoption as an amendment to the
City’s FY27 budget.
INTRODUCED:
PASSED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
ATTEST:
____________________________ ____________________________
City Clerk Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED:
____________________________ ____________________________
Assistant City Attorney City Manager
____________________________
Director of Administrative
Services
____________________________
Chief Transportation Official
Item 10
Attachment D - Ordinance
Adding a OSV Parking
Permit Fee to the FY27
Municipal Fee Schedule
Item 10: Staff Report Pg. 31 Packet Pg. 200 of 254
*NOT YET ADOPTED*
1
169_20260813_ts24
Resolution No. ____
Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Establishing Oversized
Vehicle Parking Restrictions on Several Street Segments in Palo Alto
R E C I T A L S
A. California Vehicle Code section 22507 and Palo Alto Municipal Code section 10.44.010 allows
the City Council to establish parking, stopping, standing and parking restrictions or
prohibitions.
B. The City Council seeks to restrict oversized vehicle parking on specific street segments
detailed below. Parking will be restricted to one side of each street segment at a time, and
will switch every six months to the other side of the street.
C. As used in this Resolution, the terms “oversized vehicle,” “trailer,” and “camper shell” shall
have the same meaning as defined in Palo Alto Municipal Code (“PAMC”) section 10.44.015,
as may be amended.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Council of the City of Palo Alto RESOLVES, as follows:
SECTION 1. No person shall park an oversized vehicle, trailer, camper shell, tow truck as
defined by California Vehicle Code section 615, or special construction equipment as defined by
California Vehicle Code section 565, adjacent to the curb as follows:
Street Segment
Parking Prohibition Active
on this Side of the Street
Segment from January
through June
Parking Prohibition Active
on this Side of the Street
Segment from July through
December
4000 Block of Transport Street Side closest to 101 Side farther from 101
900 Block of Commercial Street East West
900 Block of Industrial Avenue East West
100 Block of Page Mill Road Side closest to Sheridan Ave Side closest to Olive Ave.
2800-3200 Block of Park
Boulevard
Side closest to Alma St Side closest to Birch St
200-400 Block of Olive Avenue Side closest to Page Mill Rd Side closest to Lambert Ave
2900 & 3200 Block of Ash Street Side closest to Park Blvd Side closest to El Camino
Real
200-400 Block of Lambert
Avenue
Side closest to Olive Ave Side closest to Fernando
Ave
2400 Block of Faber Place Side closest to E. Bayshore Side closest to Embarcadero
Way
Item 10
Attachment E - Resolution
Prohibiting OSV Parking on
Alternating Sides of Several
Street Segments
Item 10: Staff Report Pg. 32 Packet Pg. 201 of 254
*NOT YET ADOPTED*
2
169_20260813_ts24
2400 Block of Embarcadero Way Side closer to Faber Place Side further from Faber
Place
1000 Block of Corporation Way Side closer to Elwell Ct Side further from Elwell Ct
1000 Block of Elwell Court Side further from
Corporation Way
Side closer to Corporation
Way
1000 Block of East Meadow
Circle
Outer ring (direction of
traffic going
counterclockwise)
Inner ring (direction of
traffic going clockwise)
SECTION 2. The following vehicles are exempt from the parking restrictions in this
Resolution:
(1) A vehicle owned or operated by a public or private utility, when used in the course of
business.
(2) A vehicle owned or operated by a governmental agency, when used in the course of
official government business.
(3) A vehicle for which an authorized emergency vehicle permit has been issued by the
Commissioner of the California Highway Patrol, when used in the course of business.
(4) A vehicle parked or standing while actively delivering materials or freight.
(5) A vehicle displaying an authorized exemption permit issued by the City of Palo Alto.
(6) A vehicle displaying a State of California or military-issued disabled person placard or
license plates.
SECTION 3. Violations of this Resolution shall be a violation of PAMC section 10.44.010 or
any other applicable law. Pursuant to Vehicle Code section 22651(n), vehicles parked in violation of
this Resolution may be removed when not inconsistent with the United States Constitution or other
applicable law.
SECTION 4. This Resolution does not supersede any other parking regulation, restriction,
or prohibition (“parking regulation”). If this Resolution overlaps with another parking regulation(s),
the City Manager or designee may choose which parking regulation(s) to enforce in compliance with
the California Vehicle Code and any other applicable law.
SECTION 5. This resolution is exempt from the requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15301 and 15304 in that this proposed
resolution will have a minor impact on existing facilities and could result in minor alterations to
land.
//
//
Item 10
Attachment E - Resolution
Prohibiting OSV Parking on
Alternating Sides of Several
Street Segments
Item 10: Staff Report Pg. 33 Packet Pg. 202 of 254
*NOT YET ADOPTED*
3
169_20260813_ts24
SECTION 6. Effective Date. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its
passage. Enforcement shall commence when signage is posted.
INTRODUCED AND PASSED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
ATTEST:
__________________________ __________________________
City Clerk Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED:
_______________________ ___________________________
City Attorney or designee City Manager
___________________________
Chief Transportation Official
Item 10
Attachment E - Resolution
Prohibiting OSV Parking on
Alternating Sides of Several
Street Segments
Item 10: Staff Report Pg. 34 Packet Pg. 203 of 254
*NOT YET APPROVED*
165_20260812_ts24 1
Resolution No. _____
Resolution of the Council of the City of Palo Alto Amending and Restating the
Administrative Penalty Schedule and Civil Penalty Schedules for Certain
Violations of the Palo Alto Municipal Code
The Council of the City of Palo Alto RESOLVES as follows:
SECTION 1. Administrative Penalties. The administrative penalty schedule for
violations of the Palo Alto Municipal Code established by Resolution No. 10272 is hereby
amended and restated to read as follows (edited sections underlined):
Standard penalty unless otherwise indicated below. $50
Second violation within 36 month period 150% of listed penalty
(unless otherwise specified)
Third & subsequent violations within 36 month period. 200% of listed penalty
(unless otherwise specified)
Delinquency penalty. 10% per month, simple interest, on
delinquent amount
4.04.020 License or permit required. 300
4.04.100 Display of license or permit. 300
4.10.045 License fees for pushcart vendors. 300
4.10.050 Regulations for solicitors and peddlers. 350
4.10.055 Identification cards for solicitors. 250
4.10.057 Regulations for pushcart vendors. 300
4.10.070 License required - circus etc. 300
4.10.120 Arcade prohibited. 250
4.10.200 Pawn brokers prohibited. 250
4.10.230 Daily report of second hand dealers. 250
4.10.240 Maintaining reports - second hand dealers. 250
4.10.260 Failure to make report - second hand dealers. 250
4.10.270 Second hand goods held for inspection. 250
4.18.040 Unlawful dog or cat kennel. 250
4.30.010 Soliciting without a permit. 250
4.30.100 Conduct of solicitations. 250
4.32.020 Soliciting without a permit. 250
4.32.060 Investigation of records of solicitor. 250
4.32.090 Acts required during solicitation. 250
4.32.100 Restriction of solicitation. 250
4.32.110 Hours of solicitation. 250
4.34.020 Permit required - closing out sale. 250
4.39.030 Audible alarms. 250
4.39.040 Limitation on automatic dialing devices. 250
4.39.060 Registration of alarm. 250
4.39.110 Alarm violations. 100
4.42.020 Certificate of public convenience. 1000
Item 10
Attachment F - Resolution
Amending the
Administrative Penalty
Schedule to Add Penalties
for Violations of PAMC
Chapter 10.49
Item 10: Staff Report Pg. 35 Packet Pg. 204 of 254
*NOT YET APPROVED*
165_20260812_ts24 2
4.42.085 Controlled substance and alcohol testing. 500
4.42.090 Taxi owners permit. 5000
4.42.100 Taxi drivers permit expired. 250
4.42.130(b) Taxi drivers permit not displayed. 250
4.42.190 Taximeters. 500
4.42.200 Taxi cab operating regulations. 250
4.42.210(a) Interference with inspection. 500
4.42.210(b) Inspection of vehicles. 500
4.42.220 Operating regulations. 500
4.42.230 Maintenance of vehicles. 500
4.51.030 License required - bingo. 250
4.51.050 Minors restricted - bingo. 50
4.51.080 Staffing and operations - bingo. 250
4.51.110 Physical presence required - bingo. 250
4.52.020 License required - billiards and bowling. 1000
4.52.040 Minors restricted - billiards and bowling. 250
4.52.060 Offensive conduct - billiards and bowling. 250
4.52.070 Interference w/emerg. Access -billiards/bowling. 250
4.54.060 CAMTC cert. required - massage tech. 250
4.54.080(a) Permit required - massage establishment. 1000
4.54.080(b)-(d) Prohibited conduct – massage establishment 250
4.54.130 Failure to amend massage estab. permit 100
4.54.140 Massage establishment facilities. 250
4.55.030 License required - adult entertainment. 1000
4.56.030 License required - hot tub and sauna. 1000
4.56.120 Business name - hot tub and sauna. 250
4.57.020 Permit required - firearms sales. 1000
4.57.095 Firearms dealers – business and security. 500
4.58.020 Minors restricted - narcotics paraphernalia shop. 750
4.58.030 Regulations - narcotics paraphernalia shop. 750
4.59.010 Pet shop requirements. 250
4.59.020 Pet shop sanitation. 250
4.59.030 Pet shop food. 250
4.59.040 Pet shop notification. 250
4.59.050 Pet shop - sale of dangerous or wild animals. 250
4.59.070 Dead animals. 250
4.59.080 Permit required - pet shop and kennel. 250
4.59.090 Permit required - grooming shop. 250
4.59.095 Sales of kittens and puppies. 250
4.59.100 Sales of raccoons. 250
4.59.105 Sales of rabbits, chicks, ducklings. 250
4.60.030 Business registration required 250
4.60.060 Business registry application required 250
4.60.120(a) Business registry fee delinquency 50% of registry fee if 1-30 days late
100% of fee or 31+ days late
5.12.010 Permit required - refreshment stand. 250
5.20.030 Discarding solid waste. 250
5.20.040 Accumulation of garbage. 250
5.20.050 Unauthorized bins, boxes, containers-first violation. 500
Second and subsequent violations. 1000
5.20.080 Number of containers required. 250
5.20.090 Collection of recyclable materials. 250 for Commercial Premises
50 for Residential Premises
Item 10
Attachment F - Resolution
Amending the
Administrative Penalty
Schedule to Add Penalties
for Violations of PAMC
Chapter 10.49
Item 10: Staff Report Pg. 36 Packet Pg. 205 of 254
*NOT YET APPROVED*
165_20260812_ts24 3
5.20.100 Collection of compostable materials. 250 for Commercial Premises
50 for Residential Premises
5.20.105 Contamination of containers. 250 for Commercial Premises
50 for Residential Premises
5.20.108 Multifamily properties/Commercial premises. 250
5.20.109 Requirements for special events. 100
5.20.111 Self-haul in violation of code 100
5.20.120 Improper container condition. 250
5.20.130 Maintenance of bins and boxes- first violation. 250
Second and subsequent violations. 500
5.20.160 Spillage or leakage of solid waste. 250
5.20.180 No accumulation of solid waste. 250
5.20.190 No burning, burial, or dumping of solid waste. 250
5.20.200 Hazardous waste. 500
5.20.220 Scavenging prohibited. 100
5.30.020 Polystyrene & Non-Recyclable Plastic. 500
5.30.025(a)-(d) Limitation on use of Disposable Foodware items 100
and other Disposable products.
5.30.025(e) Prohibition of third-party vendors providing utensils 350
or condiments unless requested by customer.
5.35.020 Bags at retail establishments. 500
5.35.030 Bags at supermarkets. 500
6.08.020(b) Interference with animal control officer. 250
6.16.010 No dog license. 50
6.16.080 Number of dogs allowed. 100
6.16.100 Leash Law. 100
6.20.010 Animals at large. 100
6.20.020 Animals on unenclosed premises. 100
6.20.030 Animals kept in enclosures. 100
6.20.035 Tying animals to bicycle racks or trees. 100
6.20.040 Nuisance on sidewalk. 100
6.20.045 Animal waste removal - first offense. 25
6.20.045 Animal waste removal - second offense. 50
6.20.045 Animal waste removal - third offense. 125
6.20.055 Animals in vehicles. 250
6.20.060 Bees close to property line. 100
6.20.080 Permit required - livestock. 100
6.20.090 Maintaining birds, goats, pigs and rabbits. 100
6.20.110 Number of cats kept. 100
6.20.120 Permit required - breeding animals. 100
6.20.130 Cat or dog in heat. 100
6.20.140 Barking dogs. 100
6.20.150 Vaccination required - animals. 100
6.20.160 Sanitary enclosures. 100
6.20.170 Slaughter of animals. 500
6.24.020 Permit required - construction of stable. 250
6.24.050 Maintenance of stable. 250
6.28.040 Possession of dangerous or wild animals. 500
6.32.010 Keeping diseased animals. 500
6.32.020 Confining animals with rabies. 500
6.32.050 Dead animals in public. 500
6.36.010 Sales of certain animals. 250
Item 10
Attachment F - Resolution
Amending the
Administrative Penalty
Schedule to Add Penalties
for Violations of PAMC
Chapter 10.49
Item 10: Staff Report Pg. 37 Packet Pg. 206 of 254
*NOT YET APPROVED*
165_20260812_ts24 4
8.04.020 Unauthorized removal of public trees 5000 per tree or reproduction cost
up to 10,000, whichever is greater
8.04.020(a) Failure to comply with permit 500 per tree
for work on public trees.
8.04.020(a) Damage to public trees 150 per inch diameter of damaged
tree part
8.04.020(b) Fasten a sign, wire, or injurious material 250 per tree
to any public tree.
8.04.020(c) Excavate or pave near public trees 500 per tree
8.04.080 Interference with tree enforcement. 500
8.08.010 Weeds as public nuisance. 250
8.10.040 Failure to disclose protected tree 500 per tree
8.10.050 Unauthorized removal of protected tree 5000 per tree or reproduction cost
up to 10,000, whichever is greater
8.10.055 Failure to comply with tree replacement. 750 per tree
8.10.070 Failure to care for protected trees. 500 per tree
8.10.080(b) Failure to comply with development conditions. 500 per condition
9.04.010 Open container in business district. 100
9.04.020 Open container in City parking lot. 100
9.04.030 Open container near liquor store. 100
9.04.040 Social host. First violation 250
Second violation 500
Third & subsequent violation 1000
9.06 (All sections) Vanlording prohibited 500
9.07.020 Safe Storage of Firearms 1000
9.08.010 Discharge of firearms/fireworks. 1000
9.09.010(a) Urinating/defecating on street or public place. 250
9.09.010(b) Igniting or maintaining outdoor fire. 250
9.10.030 Residential property noise limits. 100
9.10.040 Commercial property noise limits. 100
9.10.050 Public property noise limits. 100
9.10.060(b) Construction noise signs. 250
9.10.060(c) Construction noise. 250
9.10.060(d) Construction equipment noise. 100
9.10.060(e) Residential power equipment noise. 100
9.10.060(f) Leaf blower noise- first violation. 250
Leaf blower noise- second violation 500
Leaf blower noise- third and subsequent violation 1000
9.10.060(g) Street sweeping noise. 100
9.10.060(h) Refuse collection noise. 100
9.10.060(i) Safety device noise. 100
9.10.060(k) Public parking lot cleaning noise. 100
9.10.060(l) Business district street cleaning noise. 100
9.12.010 Loudspeakers. 150
9.14.020 Smoking prohibited - enclosed places. 250 (2nd violation in 1 year: $300;
3rd and subsequent violations
in 1 year: $500)
9.14.025 Smoking prohibited – unenclosed areas. 250 (2nd violation in 1 year: $300;
3rd and subsequent violations
in 1 year: $500)
9.14.030 Smoking prohibited - city cars. 250 (2nd violation in 1 year: $300;
3rd and subsequent violations
in 1 year: $500)
Item 10
Attachment F - Resolution
Amending the
Administrative Penalty
Schedule to Add Penalties
for Violations of PAMC
Chapter 10.49
Item 10: Staff Report Pg. 38 Packet Pg. 207 of 254
*NOT YET APPROVED*
165_20260812_ts24 5
9.14.035 Smoking prohibited – public parks and public events 250 (2nd violation in 1 year: $300;
3rd and subsequent violations
in 1 year: $500)
9.14.040 Smoking prohibited - child care facilities. 250 (2nd violation in 1 year: $300;
3rd and subsequent violations
in 1 year: $500)
9.14.050 Smoking prohibited – commercial areas
and public events. 250 (2nd violation in 1 year: $300;
3rd and subsequent violations
in 1 year: $500)
9.14.080 Location of tobacco vending machines. 1000
9.14.090 Display of tobacco products. 500
9.14.100 Failure to post “No Smoking” signs. 50
9.22.010 Impersonating public officials. 500
9.26.020 False representation as police officer. 250
9.28.010 Hotel guest register required. 250
9.28.020 Use of false name by hotel guest. 50
9.40.020 Landing aircraft at other than airport. 1000
9.44.010 Solicitation prohibited - public parking lot. 100
9.48.010 Displaying goods on sidewalk. 50
9.48.025 Sitting or lying on University Avenue sidewalks. 100
9.48.030 Operation of sidewalk elevator. 500
9.48.040 Throwing rubbish on streets. 250
9.48.050 Obligation to clean sidewalk. 200
9.50.010 Graffiti prohibited on public property. 500
9.56.030 Abatement of public nuisance. 500 unless otherwise specified
9.56.030(a)(5) Thirty-five foot site triangle. 200
9.56.030(a)(8) Foliage/branch obstruction. 200
9.56.030(a)(10) Excessive planting strip vegetation height. 150
9.60.030 Blocking entrances to City Hall. 500
9.60.050 Placing signs or climbing on City Hall. 500
9.60.060 Bicycles and skateboards at City Hall. 50
9.60.070 Alcoholic beverages prohibited - City Hall. 100
9.64.010 Overnight use of community facilities 250
9.74.030 Discrimination in housing. 250
9.78.020 Mosquito breeding places. 500
9.79.100 News rack violations. 100
10.49.040(b)-(d) Transfer OSV permit; violation of regulations 100
12.08.010 Permit required - public right of way. 500
12.08.100 Removal of City Engineer monuments. 500
12.11.010 Building parklet on public right-of-way without 1000
permit
12.11.060 Violation of Chapter 12.11, permit, or regulations 500
12.12.010 Building on public easement without or in violation 1000
of encroachment permit
12.12.020 Failure to obtain or violation of commercial 500
sidewalk encroachment permit
12.16.030 Overhead wires in underground districts. 500
12.16.090 Property owner responsibility. 500
12.20.010 Utility rules and regulations 500 unless otherwise specified
12.20.010 Emergency water conservation regulations 100 (2nd violation in 1 year: $250;
(Reso. Nos. 9509, 9460, 9449) 3rd and subsequent violations
in 1 year: $500)
Item 10
Attachment F - Resolution
Amending the
Administrative Penalty
Schedule to Add Penalties
for Violations of PAMC
Chapter 10.49
Item 10: Staff Report Pg. 39 Packet Pg. 208 of 254
*NOT YET APPROVED*
165_20260812_ts24 6
12.20.020 Providing false information to City Utilities. 500
12.32.010 Water use regulation. 100
15.04.070 Violations of Uniform Fire Code. 500 unless otherwise specified
16.04.050 Violations of California Building Code as amended. 500 unless otherwise specified
16.05.040 Violations of California Mechanical Code as amended500
16.06.050 Violations of California Residential Code as amended.500
16.08.040 Violations of California Plumbing Code as amended. 500
16.09.200 Violations of Sewer Use Ordinance 1000
16.10.020 Construction of private sewer system. 750
16.10.050 Permit required - private sewage system. 500
16.11 (All Sections) Violations of the Stormwater Pollution
Prevention Ordinance 1000
16.13 (All Sections) Violations of the Food Facilities Ordinance 1000
16.14.040 Violations of California Green Building 500
Standards Code as amended
16.14.260 Failure to meet diversion requirements. $150 per ton of waste not
diverted or $3000, whichever is
greater
16.14.370 Failure to meet diversion requirements. $150 per ton of waste not
diverted or $3000, whichever is
greater
16.16.060 Violations of California Electrical Code as amended. 500
16.17.020 Violations of California Energy Code as amended. 500
16.18.020 Violations of International Pool and Spa Code as 500
amended
16.20.020 Design review required - signs. 500
16.20.090 Prohibited signs. 250
16.20.100 Prohibited locations - signs. 250
16.20.110 Fuel price signs required. 250
16.20.210 Non-compliance with sign ordinance. 250
16.20.230 Abandoned signs. 250
16.20.250 Parking of advertising vehicles. 250
16.24.080 Fence violation. 250
16.28.060 Permit required - excavation and grading. 500
16.28.330 Protection of adjacent property. 500
16.28.340 Deposits of earth, rock, etc. 500
16.32.010 Permit required - moving a building. 250
16.36.050 Curb painting without a permit. 100
16.36.060 House numbering required. 100
16.38.020 Certificate of occupancy – community housing. 500
16.40.040 Dangerous and substandard buildings. 500
16.40.090 Non-compliance with order of building official. 500
16.40.180 Interference with repair or demolition work. 500
16.42.090 Failure to submit seismic report. 250
16.45.070 Failure to pay fee - Stanford Research Park. 250
16.46.060 Failure to pay fee - San Antonio - West Bayshore. 250
16.47.050 Failure to pay housing impact fee. 250
16.49.050 Exterior alteration of downtown historic structures 10000
or a significant structure outside the downtown
without or in violation of permit
16.49.060 Demolition of a significant downtown building 10000
without or in violation of permit
16.49.070 Demolition of a contributing downtown structure 10000
Item 10
Attachment F - Resolution
Amending the
Administrative Penalty
Schedule to Add Penalties
for Violations of PAMC
Chapter 10.49
Item 10: Staff Report Pg. 40 Packet Pg. 209 of 254
*NOT YET APPROVED*
165_20260812_ts24 7
or significant structure outside the downtown
without or in violation of permit
16.49.080 Maintenance of downtown historic structure. 10000
16.49.090 Demolition of downtown historic structure. 10000
16.52.070 Construction - flood hazards. 500
16.59.090 Failure to pay fee- Citywide Transportation Impact. 250
16.60.090 Failure to pay fee- Charleston/Arastradero. 250
16.62.020 Maintenance of expired building permit 200 for 31st through 60th day
400 for 61st through 120th day
800 for 121st day and thereafter
16.66 (All Sections) Violations of Hauled Liquid Waste 1000
Ordinance
17.04.020 Violations of hazardous materials storage. 500, unless otherwise specified
17.04.030 Specific obligation - hazardous materials. 500
17.10.010 General obligation - underground storage tanks. 750 unless otherwise specified
17.10.040 Permit required - underground storage. 500
17.10.140 Financial responsibility - underground storage. 500
17.10.150 Monitoring underground storage tanks. 1000
17.10.170 Unlawful abandonment - underground storage tanks.1000
17.12.010 Permit required - hazardous materials storage. 750
17.12.020 New hazardous materials storage facilities. 750
17.12.060 Hazardous materials storage facilities. 750
17.16.010 Hazardous materials management plan. 250
17.20.010 Hazardous materials inventory statement. 250
17.24.010 Hazardous materials discharge report. 750
17.32.010 Permit required - storage of hazardous materials. 1000
18.01.080 Violation of zoning laws. 500
18.16.060(d)Hotel stay in excess of 30 days. 200
18.38.020 Planned Community zoning (unless otherwise 500
specified in PC ordinance) 2500 beginning the 181st day
following notice of violation
Violations of Ordinance 5069 shall be subject to the penalties listed above except that the penalty
for violations of Sections 4(b)(1),
(2), (6), and (7) of Ordinance 5069
shall not be subject to the
penalties above or to the
escalators for second, third and
subsequent violations, but shall be
$2157 per day, for each and every
day that a grocery store is not in
operation within College Terrace
Centre in accordance with the
terms of Ordinance 5069. (The City
Council intends to adjust this
penalty amount periodically in
future updates to this
administrative penalty schedule to
account for periodic increases in
the Consumer Price Index for All
Urban Consumers.) In calculating
the penalties for such violations,
the City will allow for a grace
Item 10
Attachment F - Resolution
Amending the
Administrative Penalty
Schedule to Add Penalties
for Violations of PAMC
Chapter 10.49
Item 10: Staff Report Pg. 41 Packet Pg. 210 of 254
*NOT YET APPROVED*
165_20260812_ts24 8
period for any daily violations that
do not exceed six (6) cumulative
months in any five (5) year period.
However, this grace period was
previously applied to violations
from 1/10/18 through 7/10/18, so
there is no entitlement to any
further grace period prior to
1/10/23.
18.42.060(a)Incompatibility of home occupations. 200
18.42.060(b) Employees of home occupation. 200
18.42.060(c) On site advertising of home occupation. 200
18.42.060(d) Floor area of home occupation. 200
18.42.060(e) Traffic related to home occupation. 200
18.42.060(f) Home occupation as nuisance. 200
18.42.060(g) Outdoor storage related to home occupation. 200
18.42.070 Servicing vehicles in residential zone. 250
18.52.050 Transportation demand management conditions 1000
4000 beginning the 181st day
following notice of violation
18.84.200 Temporary uses. 250
22.04.030 Compliance with park regulations. 46 for violation of regulation R1-6
requiring payment of Foothills Park
entry fee; 250 for violation of all
other Park & Open Space
Regulations.
22.04.040 Failure to obtain use permit. 300
22.04.150(b) Entry at unapproved location - Foothills Park 50
22.04.150(c) Person in park after hours - Foothills Park. 250
22.04.150(d) Speed limit 20MPH - Foothills Park. 250
22.04.150(e) Vehicles in Foothills Park after hours. 100
22.04.150(f) Skateboards and motorcycles - Foothills Park. 250
22.04.150(g) Smoking on trails - Foothills Park. 1000
22.04.150(h) Fires in Foothills Park. 1000
22.04.150(i) Use of trails - Foothills Park. 100
22.04.150(l) Unleashed dog - Foothills Park. 250
22.04.155 Restraint of dogs in City parks. 250
22.04.160 Permit required - sales in parks. 250
22.04.170 Violation of park use permit. 250
22.04.180 Sound in parks. 250
22.04.190 Unauthorized golf and other games in parks. 250
22.04.200 Unauthorized models and kites in parks. 100
22.04.210 Parking in parks. 100
22.04.215 Launch and takeout from ramp or dock. 250
22.04.220 Bicycle not permitted on trails. 250
22.04.230 Dumping in park. 1000
22.04.240 Interference with park use permit. 250
22.04.250 Park regulations . 250 unless otherwise specified
22.04.260 Discharge of weapons in park. 500
22.04.270 Removal of flora or fauna. 500
22.04.280 Removal of turf or soil. 500
22.04.290(a) Damaging, defacing, etc., property. 1000
22.04.290(b) Marking, writing or printing on property. 1000
Item 10
Attachment F - Resolution
Amending the
Administrative Penalty
Schedule to Add Penalties
for Violations of PAMC
Chapter 10.49
Item 10: Staff Report Pg. 42 Packet Pg. 211 of 254
*NOT YET APPROVED*
165_20260812_ts24 9
22.04.290(c) Attaching sign, etc., without permit. 500
22.04.290(d) Entering, etc., structure after posted hours. 250
22.04.290(e) Bringing portable tables without a permit. 100
22.04.300 Unlawful fire in city park. 1000
22.04.310 Enid Pearson Arastradero, Esther Park closure. 250
22.04.315 Byxbee Park and Baylands closed. 250
22.04.320 Parks closed. 250
22.04.321(a)Skateboarding in park after hours. 50
22.04.322 Trespass at Rinconada Park pool. 50
22.04.330 Alcohol in Cogswell Park. 250
22.04.331 Alcohol in Lytton Plaza. 250
22.04.332 Alcohol in Johnson Park. 250
22.04.333 Alcohol in Boulware Park. 250
22.04.334 Alcohol in Scott St. Minipark. 250
22.04.335 Alcohol in Greer Park. 250
22.04.336(a)Alcohol in Rinconada Park. 250
22.04.337 Alcohol in Mitchell Park. 250
22.04.338 Alcohol in Robles Park. 250
22.04.339 Alcohol in Hopkins Park. 250
22.04.340 Vehicles in park. 250
22.04.341 Alcohol in El Palo Alto Park. 250
22.04.342 Alcohol in Heritage Park. 250
22.04.343 Alcohol in Pardee Park. 250
22.04.350 Consumption of alcoholic beverage in vehicles. 250
22.04.360 Open container in park - alcoholic beverage. 250
22.04.370 Reckless driving in park. 250
22.04.380 Unlawful riding and towing in parks. 250
22.04.390 Duck pond. 100
SECTION 2. Municipal Code Civil Penalties. The civil penalty schedule for violations of
the Palo Alto Municipal Code established by Resolution No. 10272 is hereby restated to read as
follows*:
Standard penalty unless otherwise indicated below. $46
10.36.020 No parking in parkways. 46
10.36.030(a)Storage on the street (72 hours). 86
10.36.040(a)(1)Vehicle for sale on street. 46
10.36.040(a)(2)Repairing vehicle on street. 46
10.36.050 Not w/in 18” of left curb--One-way street. 46
10.36.090 Removal of chalk markings. 111
10.40.020(a)(1)Parking violation – red curb. 46
10.40.020(a)(4)Parking violation – green curb. 46
10.40.020(a)(5)Parking violation – blue curb. 308
10.40.020(b)Parking in violation of sign (except blue curb). 46
10.40.020(b)Unlawful disabled parking - signs (blue curb). 308
10.40.040(b)Commercial vehicle double parking. 46
10.40.050 Unlawful parking in yellow loading zone. 46
10.40.060 Unlawful parking in passenger loading zone. 46
10.40.070 Unlawful alley parking. 46
10.40.100(g)Parking in a bus zone. 46
10.44.010(b)Overtime parking (limited time zone). 41
10.44.010(c)Additional violation of time limited or no 44
Item 10
Attachment F - Resolution
Amending the
Administrative Penalty
Schedule to Add Penalties
for Violations of PAMC
Chapter 10.49
Item 10: Staff Report Pg. 43 Packet Pg. 212 of 254
*NOT YET APPROVED*
165_20260812_ts24 10
parking zones.
10.44.020 Oversized vehicle parking 46
10.44.040(b)Not in space marking. 46
10.44.050 Parking violation. 46
10.44.060 Dealers--parking for sale or repair. 46
10.44.070(b)Parking in violation of posted sign. 46
10.44.080 Vehicle obstruction of roadway or lot. 46
10.44.090 Unattended vehicle, engine running. 111
10.45.110 Parking in on-street valet parking space. 46
10.46.110 Overtime residential parking permit (CT) 53
10.48.030 Truck route violation. 211
10.49.040(a)Violation of posted OSV permit sign 46
10.50.100(a)Violation of posted RPP permit sign 53
10.60.070(c)Permit not properly displayed. 41
10.60.070(d)Overtime permit parking in City lot. 41
10.60.070(e)Parking without permit in permit area. 46
22.04.150(e)In Foothills Park after hours. 111
22.04.210 Parking in parks. 111
Late payment penalty. 35
Collection cost penalty. 35% of listed penalty
*All penalties include state-mandated assessments pursuant to Gov’t. Code 76000, S.B 1407(2008), and
Government Code 76000.3 (S.B. 857, 2008) totaling $12.50.
SECTION 3. Vehicle Code Civil Penalties. The civil penalty schedule for violations of
the California Vehicle Code established by Resolution No. 10272 is hereby restated to read as
follows*:
5200 No front license plate. $78
(If corrected within 31 days) 10 (state mandated)
5204(a) No registration tabs on license plate. 78
(If corrected within 31 days) 10 (state mandated)
21113(a) Parking on public grounds. 46
22500(a) Parking in an intersection. 46
22500(b) Parking in a crosswalk. 46
22500(d) Parking w/in 15 feet--fire station driveway. 46
22500(e) Blocking driveway. 46
22500(f) Parking on sidewalk. 46
22500(g) Parking or stopping--excavation site, etc. 46
22500(h) Double parking on roadway. 46
22500(i) Parking in a bus zone. 261
22500(l) Parking in front of accessible curb. 303
22500.1 Parking in a fire lane (public or private). 46
22502 Right hand wheels not w/in 18” of rt. curb. 46
22505(b) Parking on state highway violation. 46
22507.8(a-b)Unlawful parking in handicapped space. 303
22507.8(c)(1-2)Straddling Lines/Cross hatched, disabled. 303
22511.57(a) Parking/standing of vehicle in disabled parking $753
stall or space with invalid license/placard.
22511.57(b) Unauthorized use of license/placard for vehicle $753
parking/standing in disabled parking stall or space.
22511.57(c) Parking/standing of vehicle in disabled parking $753
Item 10
Attachment F - Resolution
Amending the
Administrative Penalty
Schedule to Add Penalties
for Violations of PAMC
Chapter 10.49
Item 10: Staff Report Pg. 44 Packet Pg. 213 of 254
*NOT YET APPROVED*
165_20260812_ts24 11
stall or space with counterfeit, forged, altered or
mutilated license/placard for disabled.
22514 Parking within 15 feet of fire hydrant. 46
22515 Unattended vehicle, engine running. 111
22516 Person locked in vehicle. 111
22521 Parking within 7 1/2 feet of railroad tracks. 46
22522 Parking near sidewalk access ramp. 303
22523(a) Unlawful abandonment of vehicle on highway. 131
22523(b) Abandoned vehicle--public/private property. 131
22526 Entering/blocking intersection – anti-gridlock. 131
22951 No street, alley parking--patron vehicles. 46
*All penalties include state-mandated assessments pursuant to Gov’t. Code 76000, S.B 1407(2008), and
Government Code 76000.3 (S.B. 857, 2008) totaling $12.50.
SECTION 4. The Council finds that the adoption of this resolution does not meet the
definition of a project under Public Resources Code Section 21065, thus, no environmental
assessment under the California Environmental Quality Act is required.
SECTION 5. The changes made in this Resolution shall be effective upon adoption.
INTRODUCED AND PASSED:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTENTIONS:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
________________________________ ________________________________
City Clerk Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED:
_______________________________ ________________________________
City Attorney or Designee City Manager
________________________________
Chief Transportation Official
Item 10
Attachment F - Resolution
Amending the
Administrative Penalty
Schedule to Add Penalties
for Violations of PAMC
Chapter 10.49
Item 10: Staff Report Pg. 45 Packet Pg. 214 of 254
City Council
Staff Report
Report Type: INFORMATION REPORTS
Lead Department: Administrative Services
Meeting Date: August 24, 2026
Report #:2602-6003
TITLE
Monthly Investment Report - July 2026 (Unaudited)
RECOMMENDATION
This is an Information Report. No Council action is required.
ANALYSIS
The City’s Investment Policy (Policy)1 and California Government Code Section 53607 requires
that a report of transactions (investments, reinvestment, sold, and exchanged securities) be
made available to the Council on a monthly basis. This reporting requirement is separate and
distinct from the quarterly investment report submitted under California Government Code
Section 53646 that includes portfolio composition, a detailed list of all securities, performance
compared to the Policy, overall compliance with the Policy, and the City’s ability to meet
expenditure requirements over the next six months.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A: Investment Portfolio Transaction Ledger – July 2026
APPROVED BY:
Lauren Lai, Administrative Services Director
1 Investment Policy Fiscal Year 2025-2026 (Adopted February 9, 2026)
https://www.paloalto.gov/files/assets/public/v/1/administrative-services/investment-policies/1-39-asd-
investment-policy.pdf
Item A
Item A Staff Report
Item A: Staff Report Pg. 1 Packet Pg. 215 of 254
Buy
Call Redemption
Maturity
CUSIP Security Description Security Type Transaction
Type
Settlement Date Quantity Price Acq/Disp Yield Amount Purchased/Sold Interest Total Amount
67066GAR5 NVIDIA CORP 4.5
06/15/2031
CORP Buy 07/15/2026 2,500,000.00 98.800 4.776 -2,470,000.00 8,437.50 -2,478,437.50
47800VAD6 JDOT 26B A3 4.88
11/15/2030
ABS Buy 07/22/2026 2,295,000.00 99.988 4.935 -2,294,713.35 0.00 -2,294,713.35
14041NGJ4 COMET 2026-1 A 4.48
07/16/2029
ABS Buy 07/16/2026 5,365,000.00 99.977 4.530 -5,363,753.17 0.00 -5,363,753.17
---------Buy 07/17/2026 10,160,000.00 ---4.682 -10,128,466.52 8,437.50 -10,136,904.02
CUSIP Security Description Security Type Transaction
Type
Settlement Date Quantity Price Acq/Disp Yield Amount Purchased/Sold Interest Total Amount
697379TV7 PALO ALTO CALIF UNI
SCH DIST 5.862 07/01/2027
MUNI Call
Redemption
07/01/2026 -1,485,000.00 100.000 4.752 1,485,000.00 0.00 1,485,000.00
45906M5K3 INTERNATIONAL BANK
FOR RECONSTRUCTION
AND DEVELOPM 4.75
07/30/2029
CORP Call
Redemption
07/30/2026 -3,500,000.00 100.000 4.190 3,500,000.00 0.00 3,500,000.00
45906M5H0 INTERNATIONAL BANK
FOR RECONSTRUCT 5.17
04/24/2029
CORP Call
Redemption
07/24/2026 -2,000,000.00 100.000 3.664 2,000,000.00 0.00 2,000,000.00
---------Call
Redemption
07/22/2026 -6,985,000.00 100.000 4.159 6,985,000.00 0.00 6,985,000.00
CUSIP Security Description Security Type Transaction
Type
Settlement Date Quantity Price Acq/Disp Yield Amount Purchased/Sold Interest Total Amount
91282CCP4 UNITED STATES
TREASURY 0.625
07/31/2026
US GOV Maturity 07/31/2026 -1,500,000.00 100.000 0.901 1,500,000.00 0.00 1,500,000.00
912797TN7 UNITED STATES
TREASURY 07/16/2026
T-BILL Maturity 07/16/2026 -5,000,000.00 100.000 3.654 5,000,000.00 0.00 5,000,000.00
89235MLC3 Toyota Financial Savings
Bank 0.95 07/15/2026
CD Maturity 07/15/2026 -249,000.00 100.000 0.950 249,000.00 0.00 249,000.00
802498VW2 SANTA MONICA-MALIBU
UNIFIED SCHOOL
FACILITY IMPROV 0.989
07/01/2026
MUNI Maturity 07/01/2026 -650,000.00 100.000 0.890 650,000.00 0.00 650,000.00
797356DF6 SAN DIEGO UNIFIED
SCHOOL DISTRICT 1.201
07/01/2026
MUNI Maturity 07/01/2026 -260,000.00 100.000 4.112 260,000.00 0.00 260,000.00
45780PAQ8 Institution for Savings in
Newburyport and Its Vic 0.9
07/29/2026
CD Maturity 07/29/2026 -249,000.00 100.000 0.803 249,000.00 0.00 249,000.00
39573LBM9 GreenState Credit Union
0.95 07/21/2026
CD Maturity 07/21/2026 -249,000.00 100.000 0.950 249,000.00 0.00 249,000.00
27004PBV4 Eaglemark Savings Bank
0.85 07/07/2026
CD Maturity 07/07/2026 -249,000.00 100.000 0.932 249,000.00 0.00 249,000.00
13124MCB9 CALLEGUAS CALIF MUN
WTR DIST WTR REV 1.097
07/01/2026
MUNI Maturity 07/01/2026 -770,000.00 100.000 2.010 770,000.00 0.00 770,000.00
---------Maturity 07/16/2026 -9,176,000.00 100.000 2.585 9,176,000.00 0.00 9,176,000.00
Palo Alto Monthly Transactions
07/01/2026 - 07/31/2026
1
ATTACHMENT A
Item AAttachment A - InvestmentPortfolio TransactionLedger - July 2026
Item A: Staff Report Pg. 2 Packet Pg. 216 of 254
Sell
Summary
CUSIP Security Description Security Type Transaction
Type
Settlement Date Quantity Price Acq/Disp Yield Amount Purchased/Sold Interest Total Amount
912797UF2 UNITED STATES
TREASURY 09/10/2026
T-BILL Sell 07/15/2026 -1,500,000.00 99.426 3.739 1,491,396.56 0.00 1,491,396.56
797272RT0 SAN DIEGO CALIF CMNTY
COLLEGE DIST 2.113
08/01/2031
MUNI Sell 08/04/2026 -500,000.00 91.197 2.150 455,985.00 -88.04 0.00
797272QS3 SAN DIEGO CALIF CMNTY
COLLEGE DIST 2.407
08/01/2027
MUNI Sell 08/04/2026 -255,000.00 98.606 1.021 251,445.30 -51.15 0.00
---------Sell 07/21/2026 -2,255,000.00 ---3.099 2,198,826.86 -139.19 1,491,396.56
CUSIP Security Description Security Type Transaction
Type
Settlement Date Quantity Price Acq/Disp Yield Amount Purchased/Sold Interest Total Amount
------------07/18/2026 -8,256,000.00 ---3.756 8,231,360.34 8,298.31 7,515,492.54
Palo Alto Monthly Transactions
07/01/2026 - 07/31/2026
2
ATTACHMENT A
Item AAttachment A - InvestmentPortfolio TransactionLedger - July 2026
Item A: Staff Report Pg. 3 Packet Pg. 217 of 254
City Council
Staff Report
From: City Manager
Report Type: INFORMATION REPORTS
Lead Department: Administrative Services
Meeting Date: August 24, 2026
Report #:2512-5703
TITLE
Semi-annual Reports of Contracts Awarded by the City Manager, Procurement Officer or Other
Designated Employees for the period of January 1, 2026, through June 30,2026; CEQA Status-
Not a Project
RECOMMENDATION
This is an informational report and no action is required
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC) Section 2.30.710(a)1 requires the City Manager to provide a
semi-annual report to Council consisting of contracts awarded by the City Manager,
Procurement Officer or other designated employees for:
1. Goods contracts $85,000 through $250,000 per year (Attachment A), and
2. Professional and General Services $25,000 through $85,000 and Public Works Contracts
$85,000 through $250,000 per year (Attachment B).
The contracts in Attachment A consist of fourteen (14) distinct awards for goods, and the
contracts in Attachment B consist of fifty-four (54) distinct awards for a range of services. These
awards are a core element of the efficient and effective provision of services by the City to our
community and reflect extensive coordination and prudent decision-making. The PAMC section
that sets forth the authority designated by Council to the Procurement Officer to award and
sign contracts is PAMC 2.30.2002 and to the City Manager to award and sign contracts is PAMC
2.30.2103.
1 Palo Alto Municipal Code 2.30.710 City Manager reports
2 Palo Alto Municipal Code 2.30.200 Procurement officer contract award authority
https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/paloalto/latest/paloalto_ca/0-0-0-61873
3 Palo Alto Municipal Code 2.30.210 City Manager contract award authority
https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/paloalto/latest/paloalto_ca/0-0-0-61881
Item B
Item B Staff Report
Item B: Staff Report Pg. 1 Packet Pg. 218 of 254
Item B
Item B Staff Report
Item B: Staff Report Pg. 2 Packet Pg. 219 of 254
Summary of Contract Definitions Per PAMC Chapter 2.30. The contracts included in this report
are defined as follows:
1.Public Works (PAMC 2.30.100): Contracts for the construction, repair, or improvement
of public buildings, utilities, streets, and parks.
2.Goods (PAMC 2.30.110): Purchase orders for supplies, equipment, and technology. This
includes blanket purchase orders with set expenditure limits and labor incidental to the
purchase, such as installation.
3.General Services (PAMC 2.30.120): Services not requiring specialized training, such as
maintenance of public facilities, janitorial work, tree trimming, street sweeping and
street sweeping.
4.Professional Services (PAMC 2.30.130): Services requiring professional discretion and
specialized certification or expertise, such as engineering, architectural, financial, or
information technology consulting.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
ATTACHMENTS
APPROVED BY:
Item B
Item B Staff Report
Item B: Staff Report Pg. 3 Packet Pg. 220 of 254
ATTACHMENT A
Goods Contracts Awarded $85,000 through $250,000 per year
Contract Awarded To Award Date Award Amount
Bidding Exemption or
Number of Bids
Sent/Received
*PAMC 2.30.360
Description
ANIXTER INC 4/23/2026 $110,537.68 3787/3 Various Electrical Equipment
CDW GOVERNMENT 4/14/2026 $201,437.53 2.30.360(j)Vertiv Liebert UPS Hardware
CITY OF SANTA CLARA 4/29/2026 $121,277.26 2.30.360(d)
Foothills Underground, Underground Rebuilds and Electric System
DASHER TECHNOLOGIES INC 1/29/2026 $189,428.28 2.30.360(j)
DASHER TECHNOLOGIES INC 2/25/2026 $189,140.37 2.30.360(j)
ONESOURCE SUPPLY SOLUTIONS LLC 1/21/2026 $210,357.39 3683/3
ONESOURCE SUPPLY SOLUTIONS LLC 3/20/2026 $96,259.04 3741/4
Contract Type Count Total Award Amount
*PAMC 2.30.360
https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/paloalto/latest/paloalto_ca/0-0-0-61990
Page 1 of 1
Item B
Attachment A - Goods Contracts Awarded $85,000
through $250,000 per year.
Item B: Staff Report Pg. 4 Packet Pg. 221 of 254
ATTACHMENT B
Services Contracts Awarded
Professional Services and General Services $25,000 through $85,000 per year and Public Works Contracts $85,000 through $250,000 per year
Contract Awarded To Award Date Award Amount
Bidding Exemption or
Number of Bids
*PAMC 2.30.360
Description Contract Type
CARAHSOFT TECHNOLOGY CORP 5/5/2026 $50,463.00 2.30.360(j)Envisio Enterprise Software Subscription Renewal General Services
DASHER TECHNOLOGIES INC 2/18/2026 $84,664.32 2.30.360(j)Rubrik Security Cloud Software Licesne Renewal General Services
DYNAMIC SYSTEMS INC 3/9/2026 $70,683.80 2.30.360(j)Oracle Database Standard Edition General Services
EV SPORTLINE 5/13/2026 $75,000.00 876/1 Outfitting For 2 Rivian PD Vehicles General Services
GLOBAL RENTAL COMPANY INC 6/16/2026 $26,653.61 2.30.360(b2)Bucket Truck Rental For UTL General Services
GRANICUS LLC 2/23/2026 $73,471.14 2.30.360(j)AzureAD Software Licensing for City's Website and Intranet Platforms General Services
SAVANT SOLUTIONS INC 2/17/2026 $44,080.21 2.30.360(j)Renewal of cybersecurity software/subscriptions and support for existing firewalls General Services
SAVANT SOLUTIONS INC 4/22/2026 $43,654.92 2.30.360(j)Purchase of new Firewall hardware plus the security subscriptions, components, and support services
General Services
General Services
Hall Professional Services
6/4/2026 $39,950.00 2.30.360(i)
Professional Services
*PAMC 2.30.360
https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/paloalto/latest/paloalto_ca/0-0-0-61990 Page 1 of 2
Item B
Attachment B - Professional and General Services $25,000 through
$85,000 per year and Public Works Contracts $85,000 through
$250,000 per year.
Item B: Staff Report Pg. 5 Packet Pg. 222 of 254
ATTACHMENT B
Services Contracts Awarded
Professional Services and General Services $25,000 through $85,000 per year and Public Works Contracts $85,000 through $250,000 per year
Contract Awarded To Award Date Award Amount
Bidding Exemption or
Number of Bids
*PAMC 2.30.360
Description Contract Type
MICHAEL BAKER INTERNATIONAL IN 2/17/2026 $32,000.00 2.30.360(h)Entitlement Support and Design Review- 808 San Antonio Road
Professional Services
MICHAEL BAKER INTERNATIONAL IN 2/17/2026 $32,000.00 2.30.360.(h)Entitlement Support and Design Review-788 San Antonio Road - 25PLN-0 Professional Services
PALO ALTO RECREATION FOUNDATIO 5/12/2026 $40,000.00 2.30.360(b3)Outreach Services for California Ave Programming, Specifically Tursday Life Series Professional Services
R3 CONSULTING GROUP, INC.6/10/2026 $84,720.00 2.30.360(b2)Refuse Cost of Service Study Professional Services
RINCON CONSULTANTS, INC.4/30/2026 $79,009.00 2.30.360 (h)800-808 San Antonio Road-Mixed-Use Project Environmental Impact Report (EIR)Professional Services
SHUSTER ADVISORY GROUP LLC 5/21/2026 $50,000.00 2.30.360(i)457 Retirement Plan Consulting Services Professional Services
Professional Services
Contract Type Count
General Services 14 $749,993.43
Professional Services 32 $1,515,312.38
Public Works 8 $ 1,191,268.50
Grand Total 54 $3,456,574.31
*PAMC 2.30.360
https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/paloalto/latest/paloalto_ca/0-0-0-61990 Page 2 of 2
Item B
Attachment B - Professional and General Services $25,000 through
$85,000 per year and Public Works Contracts $85,000 through
$250,000 per year.
Item B: Staff Report Pg. 6 Packet Pg. 223 of 254
City Council
Staff Report
From: City Manager
Report Type: INFORMATION REPORTS
Lead Department: City Manager
Meeting Date: August 24, 2026
Report #:2607-6594
TITLE
Surveillance Technology Report for Fiscal Year 2026; CEQA Status- Not a project
RECOMMENDATION
This is an informational report about the City's use of surveillance technology in Palo Alto
during Fiscal Year 2026. No City Council action is required.
BACKGROUND
In September 2019, the City Council adopted the Surveillance and Privacy Protection Ordinance,
establishing criteria and procedures for the protection of personal privacy when considering the
acquisition and use of surveillance technologies by the City.1 Codified in the Municipal Code at
Chapter 2.30, Part 6A, the ordinance also outlines ongoing monitoring and annual reporting of
such technologies. Annual reporting must include the following information pursuant to PAMC
section 2.30.680(a):
1. A brief description of how each City Council-approved surveillance technology was used,
including whether it captures images, sound, or information regarding members of the
public who are not suspected of engaging in unlawful conduct;
2. Whether and how often data acquired through the use of surveillance technology was
shared with outside entities, the names of any recipient entity, the types of data
disclosed, and the reason for disclosure;
3. A summary of any community complaints or concerns about surveillance technology;
4. Non-privileged and non-confidential information regarding the results of any internal
audits, information about violations of the surveillance use policy, and any actions taken
in response;
5. Whether the surveillance technology has been effective at achieving its identified
purpose;
1 City Council Meeting 09/18/2018, Agenda Item#8,
Item C
Item C Staff Report
Item C: Staff Report Pg. 1 Packet Pg. 224 of 254
6. The number and nature of Public Records Act requests relating to the surveillance
technology;
7. Annual costs for the surveillance technology and for compliance with this surveillance;
and
8. Other relevant information as determined by the City Manager.
ANALYSIS
Pursuant to the Surveillance and Privacy Protection Ordinance, the following departmental
activities are summarized in this report.
Information Technology (IT) Department
Council Chambers Security Cameras. In April 2025, City Council approved the purchase of
security cameras to enhance the safety and security of the Council Chambers.3 Equipment
necessary for facilitating public meetings, including computers, monitors, and microphones, is
kept in the Council Chambers and the general area. The public can access Council Chambers for
public meetings or authorized special events. Outside of public meetings, room use is limited to
staff in order to minimize tampering and the risk of damage to City property and equipment. In
the past, there have been incidents of vandalism, theft, and interference with A/V equipment
that is essential in supporting public meetings in Council Chambers. This surveillance system
captures audio and video, which is required to be retained for 1 year by the City. Since camera
installation there have been no additional incidents, indicating successful deterrence
Surveillance will also assist should an incident occur. Additionally, no data was shared externally
during the reporting period.
The total contract cost is $4,886, which includes acquisition of surveillance cameras, monitoring
systems, storage, maintenance, and personnel for oversight. During this reporting period, there
have been no formal complaints, no reported use violations, and no Public Records Act
requests. This project also includes a one-time cost of $5,400 for installation and an annual
$605 licensing fee. The IT department funds this contract.
Police Department
Body Worn, Vehicle, and Interview Cameras. On June 18, 2024, City Council approved the
contract with LensLock, a technology system that is used to document police contacts with the
public.4 This Digital Evidence Management System (DEMS) is fully integrated with in-car,
interview, and body-worn cameras used to capture video and audio. This technology is used for
3 City Council Meeting 04/21/2025, Agenda Item#10
4 City Council Meeting 06/18/2024, Agenda Item #AA1,
Item C
Item C Staff Report
Item C: Staff Report Pg. 2 Packet Pg. 225 of 254
law enforcement activities including, but not limited to, traffic stops, parking enforcement,
suspect interviews, witness interviews, and other public contact in response to a call for service.
It is also used when investigating criminal activity through police user-activated audio and video
recordings. The system’s metadata is automatically uploaded into the evidence management
system application, where the video assets are verified as original or exact duplicates (non-
edited data) and managed as evidence. This technology has successfully achieved its purpose,
enabling greater transparency and accountability. The Police Department also worked with the
vendor to improve their Digital Evidence Management System DEMS. These updates delayed
the body-worn and in-car systems implementation. Vehicle installation began in August 2025,
and the fleet was fully upgraded to Lenslock in December 2025.
GPS Vehicle Tracking. On April 15. In 2025, the City Council approved the contract with
Starchase LLC for GPS vehicle-tracking implementation to track vehicles that may have been
used in the commission of a crime.7 This technology is able to be launched from a patrol vehicle
onto a fleeing vehicle to capture the vehicle’s GPS location. Tracking implementation has been
successful, and many suspect vehicles have stopped once they notice a tracking device has
been deployed. The total cost of a three-year term is not to exceed $224,657.
eCitation Devices. On March 14, 2022, City Council approved the acquisition of handheld
citation devices with Optical Character Recognition (OCR) technology for traffic violations by
police officers.8 When used by officers, the device’s camera captures license plate images,
which are processed through OCR to retrieve vehicle make and model information. This
eliminates the need for manual entry into the records management system (RMS). In FY 2026,
the total contract and maintenance costs to the General Fund was $23,714.
7 City Council Meeting 04/15/2024, Agenda Item#11,
8 City Council Meeting 03/14/2022,
https://recordsportal.paloalto.gov/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=81706&dbid=0&repo=PaloAlto
Item C
Item C Staff Report
Item C: Staff Report Pg. 3 Packet Pg. 226 of 254
The Police Department issued over 1,500 electronic citations in FY 2026. By implementing
electronic citations, the data is automatically uploaded to the Police Records Management
System (RMS), reducing staff time required to manually enter citations. This improves
efficiency, thereby successfully achieving its intended purpose. Also, citations are electronically
uploaded to the Santa Clara Traffic Court System. To date, there have been no formal
complaints, no reported violations of use, and no Public Records Act requests related to this
system.
Fixed Automatic License Plate Recognition (ALPR). On April 3, 2023, City Council approved the
contract with Flock Safety to implement fixed Automated License Plate Recognition as well as
approve a surveillance use policy for the new camera equipment.11 In December 2024, City
Council approved the deployment of 10 additional Automated License Plate Recognition
cameras.12 ALPR technology uses a combination of cameras and computer software to scan
license plates of passing vehicles and other details such as make, model, type, and color. The
technology provides real-time alerts when stolen or wanted cars enter an area and provides
enhanced investigative capabilities when a crime has already occurred. The contract cost in FY
2026 was $83,500. This was paid for using a combination of the General Fund and a State grant.
Attachment A, where data is shared for law
enforcement investigative purposes related to a specific criminal investigation. The Department
has taken steps to minimize any potential misuse by limiting data sharing strictly with local law
enforcement agencies per the MOU, and requiring them to abide by California law, which
prohibits sharing data with Federal or out-of-state agencies.
13 This allowed out-of-state or federal law
enforcement to query data from over 6,000 cameras across 400 agencies, including 10 in Palo
Alto. All searches required articulation of legitimate law enforcement purpose. Palo Alto
became aware of the issue in December 2025 and later learned the feature had already been
disabled for Palo Alto by late October 2025 and for all other California agencies by March 2025.
11 City Council Meeting 04/03/2023, Agenda Item #11,
12 City Council Meeting 12/02/2024, Agenda Item #11,
13 City Council Meeting 06/01/2026
Item C
Item C Staff Report
Item C: Staff Report Pg. 4 Packet Pg. 227 of 254
federal agencies. Community members also expressed concerns about whether the
Department should continue its relationship with the vendor. This surveillance technology has
provided significant public safety benefits. It has contributed to the recovery of stolen and
wanted vehicles, and arrests of wanted people. Investigative searches have also contributed to
the safe recovery of missing persons and assisted law enforcement in ongoing criminal
investigations. Below are a few examples to illustrate the successful application of this
technology:
An elderly man, who suffers from dementia, was discovered to have taken his
caregiver’s vehicle without permission and was missing. Flock data was used to
determine his path of travel and, ultimately, locate him safely within the hour;
A despondent teenager suffering from a mental health crisis had made threats of suicide
before leaving home in a vehicle. Flock data was used to determine their path of travel,
and a Flock real-time alert allowed officers to locate them safely and ensure they
received appropriate care;
Two suspects committed an armed robbery in Palo Alto after having just committed an
armed robbery in another city. A Flock real-time alert allowed officers to locate the
vehicle’s direction of travel within minutes, and additional Flock alerts in another city
aided officers as they pursued the vehicle, apprehended the suspects, and recovered
multiple firearms; and
Two suspects committed a robbery at a shopping center and injured a police officer
during their escape. Palo Alto Flock data was used to identify the suspects and Flock
data in other cities enabled PAPD detectives to locate the suspect vehicle and,
ultimately, arrest both suspects within 24 hours.
Attachment B. The City has enlisted the independent Police Auditor
to address this topic in a special report, which staff anticipated will be presented to Council
later this year.
Transportation
Automatic License Plate Recognition (LPR) for Parking Enforcement. In February 2021, City
Council approved the use of license plate recognition technology and corresponding LPR
surveillance policy to be used for parking enforcement and permit management.17 LPR
technology captures license plate images to identify vehicles and track parking time.
17 City Council Meeting 02/22/21,
Item C
Item C Staff Report
Item C: Staff Report Pg. 5 Packet Pg. 228 of 254
During the reporting period, there have been no formal complaints filed, use violations, or
Public Records Act requests. ALPR has been successful in supporting City Residential
Preferential Parking (RPP) programs by providing both enforcement and permit management
efficiencies. Images of license plates are utilized as supporting documentation to verify parking
time limits were exceeded. All other images are routinely purged in compliance with City
surveillance policy adopted for this program. No data was shared externally during this
reporting period. Ongoing costs are included in combined Duncan, LAZ and Turbodata contract
costs. The total contract is $750,000, funded by the General Fund and Parking Program Funds.
Traffic Signal Detection Hardware. On February 6, 2023, City Council approved the contract
with Iteris for traffic signal operations.19 These devices are designed solely to detect when a
vehicle is approaching an intersection to provide the vehicle with a green light phase. Data
collection is used to support traffic control measures, roadway improvements, signal timings,
pedestrian and bicycle roadway improvements. Together, these systems enhance traffic signal
operations. The feature of this technology to capture images, sound, or any other identifying
information is turned off. Live or sample video feeds may be used during configuration and
testing to ensure detection capabilities are set up and operate correctly. After completion of
configuration, the live video feed would be turned off. The technology has been effective in
detecting vehicle presence and allowing for optimal traffic signal operations. In the past, staff
have used live video feeds to observe real-time traffic conditions and to adjust traffic signal
operations. In upcoming years, Staff may use technology for vehicle count and time of day data
to assist with operations and programming of signal timing
Traffic Data Collection Cameras. In April 2021, Council approved the use of technology for
traffic data collection.20 The video technology is used solely to capture bicycle, pedestrian,
parking occupancy, and vehicle turning-movement counts. This data helps inform appropriate
traffic control measures, roadway enhancements, signal timing adjustments, and pedestrian
and bicycle safety improvements. This technology does not collect visual, audio, location, or any
personal identifiable information of individuals or vehicles. Office of Transportation works
19City Council Meeting 02/06/2023, Agenda Item #9,
20 City Council Meeting 04/05/2021, Agenda Item #4
Item C
Item C Staff Report
Item C: Staff Report Pg. 6 Packet Pg. 229 of 254
with the vendor Data Service CA LL on projects where cameras are used. Below are some
examples of projects used in FY26. This data collection method is highly effective and provides
precise counts of vehicles, pedestrians, and bicycles, as well as accurate vehicle speed data.
Video technology was used in February 2026 at Old Trace Rd and Arastradero Rd to determine
whether traffic volumes met criteria for installing a Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB).
Video technology was used in March 2026 at 21 intersections in the Midtown neighborhood as
part of the South Palo Alto Bike/Ped Connectivity Project.
During the reporting period, there have been no formal complaints filed, use violations, or
Public Records Act requests. Additionally, no data was shared externally. Cameras are installed
only during the data-collection period and are accompanied by visible hand-tags labelled
“Traffic Data Camera,” including the service provider’s name and contact phone number.
This technology has been successful by providing the Office of Transportation with data that is
expensive to collect manually, while reducing the potential for error. The total cost for a 4-year
term is not to exceed $200,000, funded by the Capital Improvement Program and the General
Fund.
Tenants on City Property
Ada’s Café Security Cameras. On June 16, 2025, Council approved the Surveillance Use Policy
for security cameras at Ada’s Café at Mitchell Park Community Center and Library.23 Incidents
of vandalism to Ada’s property had increased, and the owners had an interest in installing
cameras to deter such incidents. According to the owners, some of the vandalized items include
the café’s outdoor furniture and equipment. The goal of this technology is to enhance safety
and security both inside and outside Ada’s café. This surveillance captures real-time video and
audio of the interior and exterior areas. Cameras are positioned to monitor key entry points to
monitor key entry points and café seating areas.
Staff at Ada’s café have reported feeling safer with the camera installations. Surveillance
footage will be accessible only to designated café management and City police personnel for
law enforcement purposes. According to Ada Cafe‘s staff, there have been no formal
complaints filed, violations, or Public Records Act requests during the reporting
period. Additionally, no data was shared externally. This technology is paid for by Ada’s café
and there is no cost to the City for this project.
23 City Council Meeting 06/16/2025, Item #9
Item C
Item C Staff Report
Item C: Staff Report Pg. 7 Packet Pg. 230 of 254
Palo Alto Museum. In December 2025, City Council approved the installation of security
cameras to enhance the safety and security of the Palo Alto Museum (PAM) at the Roth
Building located at 300 Homer Avenue.25 Security cameras have been installed on the exterior
and interior of the building to prevent incidents of vandalism or theft. The surveillance
system captures video, audio (if permitted by law), and associated metadata, including date,
time, and camera location. The footage obtained from the cameras can provide evidence to the
Palo Alto Police Department (PAPD) if an incident should occur inside or outside the building.
Any technology that collects information exclusively on or regarding City employees or
contractors;
Any technology used as part of the Foothill Fire Early Warning System to detect fire
within the following area:
o West Side: Skyline Blvd (Hwy 35) from Route 84 (Woodside Rd/La Honda Rd.) to
Hwy 9
o North Side: Route 84 from Skyline to Alameda de la Pulgas
o East Side: Alameda de las Pulgas to Santa Cruz Avenue to Junipero Serra Rd. to
Foothill Expwy
o Southside Side: Draw a line from the intersection of Hwy 9 and Hwy 35 to the
intersection of Foothill Expwy at Magdalena.
Foothill Fire Safety Cameras. As part of the improvement to the Foothills Management
Plan, the Office of Emergency Services deployed several AlertWildfire cameras in the
Foothills for early detection of wildfires as part of an interagency and countywide effort.
25 City Council Meeting 12/15/2025, Agenda Item#7
Item C
Item C Staff Report
Item C: Staff Report Pg. 8 Packet Pg. 231 of 254
STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
ATTACHMENTS
APPROVED BY:
Item C
Item C Staff Report
Item C: Staff Report Pg. 9 Packet Pg. 232 of 254
ATTACHMENT A
Data is shared with the below entities, pursuant to MOU, on an on-going basis. Data is shared for
legitimate law enforcement investigative purposes if responsive to a specific query made by an entity
relating to a specific criminal investigation.
Alameda County CA SO
Albany CA PD
Belmont CA PD
Benicia CA PD
Berkeley CA PD
Burlingame CA PD
California Highway Patrol
Campbell CA PD
Capitola CA PD
Carmel CA PD
Central Marin CA PD
Citrus Heights CA PD
Clayton CA PD
Colma CA PD
Concord CA PD
Danville CA PD
Dixon CA PD
Dublin CA PD (ACSO)
East Palo Alto CA PD
Elk Grove CA PD
Fairfield CA PD
Folsom CA PD
Foster City CA PD
Fremont CA PD
Gilroy CA PD
Hayward CA PD
Hillsborough CA PD
Lincoln CA PD
Livermore CA PD
Los Altos CA PD
Marin County CA SO
Menlo Park CA PD
Mill Valley CA PD
Milpitas CA PD
Monterey County CA SO
Monterey County District Attorney's Office
Napa County CA SO
Newark CA PD
Oakland CA PD
Oakley CA PD
Pleasant Hill CA PD
Pleasanton CA PD
Redwood City CA PD
Rohnert Park Department of Public Safety (CA)
Roseville CA PD
Sacramento CA DA
Salinas CA PD
San Bruno CA PD
San Francisco CA PD
San Joaquin County CA SO
San Jose CA PD
San Leandro CA PD
San Mateo CA PD
San Mateo County CA SO
San Pablo CA PD
San Rafael CA PD
Santa Clara CA PD
Santa Rosa CA PD
Seaside CA PD
Solano County CA SO
Stanford University CA PD
Suisun City CA PD
Sunnyvale CA PD
Town of Los Gatos CA
Tracy CA PD
Turlock CA PD
Union City CA PD
Vacaville CA PD
Vallejo CA PD
Walnut Creek CA PD
Watsonville CA PD
West Sacramento CA PD
West Valley Mission College Dist Campus (CA)
Item C
Attachment A - Other Law
Enforcement Agencies Data
Is Shared With
Item C: Staff Report Pg. 10 Packet Pg. 233 of 254
ATTACHMENT B
Date of
Request
Information Requested Information Provided
7/22/2025 1. Organization Audit in
Flock.
2. Network Audit in Flock.
3. A list of network share
settings that include:
https://transparency.flocksafety.com/palo-alto-ca-pd
https://www.paloalto.gov/Departments/Police/Public-Information-Portal/Automated-License-Plate-Recognition-ALPR
https://www.paloalto.gov/News-Articles/Police-Department/Police-Receive-State-Grant-for-5M-to-Combat-Organized-Retail-
Theft#:~:text=You%20Are%20Here%20:%20Home%20/%20Police, vehicles%20while%20committing%20their%20crimes.
https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/v/1/administrative-services/budget-adjustments-and-monitoring/fy-2024-budget-
adjustments/december/december-4th-ccm-item-4-staff-report.pdf
9/20/2025 1. Organization Audit in
Flock.
2. Network Audit in Flock.
https://transparency.flocksafety.com/palo-alto-ca-pd
11/5/2025 Name: C. Per
Org Name: Miami-Dade
FL SO
Total Networks Searched:
5889
Time Frame: 12/24/2024,
03:28:29 PM UTC
01/23/2025, 03:28:29 PM
UTC
Search Time:
01/23/2025, 03:28:36 PM
UTC
Name: T. Hut
Org Name: Palos Heights
IL PD
Total Networks Searched:
5927
Time Frame: 01/21/2025,
01:28:31 PM UTC
01/28/2025, 01:28:31 PM
UTC
Search Time:
01/28/2025, 01:28:38 PM
UTC
Name: L. Gut
Org Name: Marshall
County AL SO
https://transparency.flocksafety.com/palo-alto-ca-pd
Item C
Attachment B - Public Records Act Requests
Item C: Staff Report Pg. 11 Packet Pg. 234 of 254
Date of
Request
Information Requested Information Provided
Total Networks Searched:
6076
Time Frame: 01/30/2025,
02:26:12 PM UTC
01/31/2025, 02:26:12 PM
UTC
Search Time:
01/31/2025, 02:26:17 PM
UTC
11/11/2025 All images and/or video
recordings taken between
11/08/2025 and
11/10/2025 by the Flock
cameras at the following
two intersections: (1)
Alma Street and Palo Alto
Avenue (2) Middlefield
Road and Everett
Avenue.
https://transparency.flocksafety.com/palo-alto-ca-pd
Item C
Attachment B - Public Records Act Requests
Item C: Staff Report Pg. 12 Packet Pg. 235 of 254
Date of
Request
Information Requested Information Provided
11/11/2025 all of the images and data logs
created by all of the Flock Safety
cameras installed in the city
between 7:30 AM and 8:00 AM
on November 6, 2025
https://transparency.flocksafety.com/palo-alto-ca-pd
2/27/2026 1. Comprehensive Audit Logs
(CSV/Excel Format)
2. Aggregate Administrative
Reports
3. Directives on Redaction &
Data Integrity
The City has reviewed its files and has located records responsive to the request. Beginning this week, recognizing public
interest on this topic, the Police Department will begin proactively posting on a monthly cadence partially redacted Flock
search logs on the City’s ALPR website. These logs include information concerning ALPR queries performed by PAPD users,
as well as queries performed by other agencies, that has not previously been released pursuant to a legal exemption.
Additionally, the City continues to use best practices to secure Palo Alto ALPR data, including a 30-day limit on data
retention, requiring MOUs with other agencies for data sharing, and internal policy controls.
The audits have been published in a way that does not compromise law enforcement efforts of the Palo Alto Police
Department and other law enforcement agencies. Certain data has been excluded from these audits to protect these interests
pursuant to California Government Code sections 7922.000 and 7923.600. The City will not release any additional information
beyond what has been published in these audit logs. Please access the Records Center at the following LINK to access
records responsive to your request. You can also find this information by visiting the City's ALPR Website
3/4/2026 Attachments included in the
Council Bundle - February 23,
2026FW Avoiding Caltrain
suicides in Palo Alto.msgFW
Utilities analysis of 3606 el
Camino Real development.
msgFw DHS contracts in Palo
Alto.msgFW CPAU Fee.
msgFlock Surveillance.msgFW
WIRED inquiry Palantir. msgRE
Urgent Ongoing Health Harm
and Unequal Housing
Response.msgRE Palo Alto Link
- please replace it.msg
The City has reviewed its files and has located records responsive to your request. Please log in to the Records Center at the
following LINK to retrieve the appropriate response. Some records have been redacted to protect nonpublic contact
information and/or other sensitive personal data pursuant to Gov. Code section 7922.000. Some records are exempt from
disclosure pursuant to Evid. Code sections 1040 and 1041 and Gov. Code section 7927.705, under the official information
privilege and/or confidential informant exemptions.
Item C
Attachment B - Public Records Act Requests
Item C: Staff Report Pg. 13 Packet Pg. 236 of 254
Item C
Attachment B - Public Records Act Requests
Item C: Staff Report Pg. 14 Packet Pg. 237 of 254
Date of
Request
Information Requested Information Provided
3/6/2026 1. A log of all queries by
outside police agencies into
the city's Flock Safety
database since the ALPR
cameras were turned on,
including the date of the query,
the reason for the query, the
date the query was fulfilled
and the name of the
requesting agency.
2. A list of settings that are
offered by Flock Safety
showing whether the police
department has enabled them
or not. Please show the
settings that were enabled on
March 1, 2026, and on March
1, 2025, to compare the two
dates.
3. Any audit reports on Flock
Safety and the ALPR data.
4. All emails between police
department employees and
Flock Safety employees since
Jan. 1, 2026.
“The City has reviewed its files and has located records responsive to the request. Beginning this week, recognizing public
interest on this topic, the Police Department will begin proactively posting on a monthly cadence partially redacted Flock search
logs on the City’s ALPR website. These logs include information concerning ALPR queries performed by PAPD users, as well
as queries performed by other agencies, that has not previously been released pursuant to a legal exemption. Additionally, the
City continues to use best practices to secure Palo Alto ALPR data, including a 30-day limit on data retention, requiring MOUs
with other agencies for data sharing, and internal policy controls.
In late 2023, unbeknownst to many users including PAPD, Flock added a new “Nationwide Lookup” search feature. Using this
feature, an out-of-state local law enforcement or federal agency could perform a broad search of data from Flock’s entire
nationwide network of over 6000 cameras, including the 20 cameras then-deployed in Palo Alto. The feature did not enable
targeted searches of any specific agency’s data. These searches could only be performed system-wide when a full 7-digit
license plate number was known and only based on the articulation of a legitimate law enforcement purpose.
PAPD was first made aware of this issue in December of 2025 and subsequently learned that Flock had already disabled the
feature for PAPD by late October 2024 and for all California law enforcement agencies by March 2025.
While its data was included in the “Nationwide Lookup” searchable dataset during this period, PAPD has worked with Flock to
confirm that no PAPD data (i.e., license plates captured by Palo Alto cameras) was actually received by any out-of-state agency
or federal agency as a result of any “Nationwide Lookup” search. In other words, PAPD had no records that matched the
“Nationwide Lookup” searches performed by out of state or federal agencies.
Even though no PAPD data was shared, PAPD reviewed the searches performed by out-of-state local law enforcement and
federal agencies via the “Nationwide Lookup” feature and found no instances where a search appeared to have been performed
for an improper purpose. Additionally, PAPD found that no searches had been performed by ICE, Customs and Border Patrol,
or the Department of Homeland Security, and that no searches appeared to be associated with immigration enforcement or
reproductive rights enforcement.
In January 2026, the Department added initial information on this issue to its ALPR webpage and previously updated the
information in February of 2026.
PAPD has been in contact with Flock’s executive leadership to express our concerns and, in response to PAPD’s suggestion,
Flock has expressed a strong
Item C
Attachment B - Public Records Act Requests
Item C: Staff Report Pg. 15 Packet Pg. 238 of 254
Date of
Request
Information Requested Information Provided
willingness to pursue third party verification that this issue has been resolved. While the City’s Auditor is unable
to perform this task, work is underway to identify an alternate auditor. Our goal in this review would be to
conduct a technical as well as operational review to confirm that Flock’s practices address the City’s
expectations for security, transparency, and reporting of system features and changes.
The Department is confident that its training, Surveillance Use Policy, 30-day data retention period, and
requirement of an MOU for each agency with which it shares, meet or exceed industry standards. With that, as
recommended by the City Council’s Policy & Services Committee, PAPD has discussed with the Independent
Police Auditor a review of its internal policies and procedures with an eye toward areas where we may be able
to do even better.
Staff anticipates reporting to Council in early June with further updates on this topic.
James Reifschneider, Chief of Police”
The audits have been published in a way that does not compromise law enforcement efforts of the Palo Alto
Police Department and other law enforcement agencies. Certain data has been excluded from these audits to
protect these interests pursuant to California Government Code sections 7922.000 and 7923.600. Please
access the Records Center at the following LINK to access records responsive to your request.
Item C
Attachment B - Public Records Act Requests
Item C: Staff Report Pg. 16 Packet Pg. 239 of 254
Date of
Request
Information Requested Information Provided
3/10/2026 The monthly network audit
and organization audit from
Flock Safety for each month
from Jan. 1, 2025, until March
10, 2026.
“The City has reviewed its files and has located records responsive to the request. Beginning this week, recognizing public
interest on this topic, the Police Department will begin proactively posting on a monthly cadence partially redacted Flock search
logs on the City’s ALPR website. These logs include information concerning ALPR queries performed by PAPD users, as well
as queries performed by other agencies, that has not previously been released pursuant to a legal exemption. Additionally, the
City continues to use best practices to secure Palo Alto ALPR data, including a 30-day limit on data retention, requiring MOUs
with other agencies for data sharing, and internal policy controls. In late 2023, unbeknownst to many users including PAPD,
Flock added a new “Nationwide Lookup” search feature. Using this feature, an out-of-state local law enforcement or federal
agency could perform a broad search of data from Flock’s entire nationwide network of over 6000 cameras, including the 20
cameras then-deployed in Palo Alto. The feature did not enable targeted searches of any specific agency’s data. These
searches could only be performed system-wide when a full 7-digit license plate number was known and only based on the
articulation of a legitimate law enforcement purpose. PAPD was first made aware of this issue in December of 2025 and
subsequently learned that Flock had already disabled the feature for PAPD by late October 2024 and for all California law
enforcement agencies by March 2025. While its data was included in the “Nationwide Lookup” searchable dataset during this
period, PAPD has worked with Flock to confirm that no PAPD data (i.e., license plates captured by Palo Alto cameras) was
actually received by any out-of-state agency or federal agency as a result of any “Nationwide Lookup” search. In other words,
PAPD had no records that matched the “Nationwide Lookup” searches performed by out of state or federal agencies. Even
though no PAPD data was shared, PAPD reviewed the searches performed by out-of-state local law enforcement and federal
agencies via the “Nationwide Lookup” feature and found no instances where a search appeared to have been performed for an
improper purpose. Additionally, PAPD found that no searches had been performed by ICE, Customs and Border Patrol, or the
Department of Homeland Security, and that no searches appeared to be associated with immigration enforcement or
reproductive rights enforcement. In January 2026, the Department added initial information on this issue to its ALPR webpage
and previously updated the information in February of 2026. PAPD has been in contact with Flock’s executive leadership to
express our concerns and, in response to PAPD’s suggestion, Flock has expressed a strong willingness to pursue third party
verification that this issue has been resolved. While the City’s Auditor is unable to perform this task, work is underway to identify
an alternate auditor. Our goal in this review would be to conduct a technical as well as operational review to confirm that Flock’s
practices address the City’s expectations for security, transparency, and reporting of system features and changes. The
Department is confident that its training, Surveillance Use Policy, 30-day data retention period, and requirement of an MOU for
eac
Item C
Attachment B - Public Records Act Requests
Item C: Staff Report Pg. 17 Packet Pg. 240 of 254
Item C
Attachment B - Public Records Act Requests
Item C: Staff Report Pg. 18 Packet Pg. 241 of 254
Date of
Request
Information Requested Information Provided
h agency with which it shares, meet or exceed industry standards. With that, as recommended by the City
Council’s Policy & Services Committee, PAPD has discussed with the Independent Police Auditor a review of its
internal policies and procedures with an eye toward areas where we may be able to do even better. Staff
anticipates reporting to Council in early June with further updates on this topic.James Reifschneider, Chief of
Police”The audits have been published in a way that does not compromise law enforcement efforts of the Palo
Alto Police Department and other law enforcement agencies. Certain data has been excluded from these audits to
protect these interests pursuant to California Government Code sections 7922.000 and 7923.600. Please access
the Records Center at the following LINK to access records responsive to your request.
3/13/2026 1. Organization Audit in Flock.
2. Network Audit in Flock.
3. A list of network share settings
The City has reviewed its files and has located records responsive to your request. Please log in to the Public
Records Center at the following LINK to retrieve the appropriate response. In addition, the records mentioned in
your request may also be found here: www.paloalto.gov/PAPDalpr
Item C
Attachment B - Public Records Act Requests
Item C: Staff Report Pg. 19 Packet Pg. 242 of 254
Item C
Attachment B - Public Records Act Requests
Item C: Staff Report Pg. 20 Packet Pg. 243 of 254
Date of
Request
Information Requested Information Provided
3/13/2026 All correspondence (email, text or otherwise) between March 1, 2024 and the date of this request between representatives of the Palo Alto Police
Department and Flock Safety.
Various email messages
3/17/2026 Network Audit in Flock for the specific dates
below:12/02/2024,12/04/2024,12/13/2024,01/15/2025,12/30/2024,01/24/2025,01/27/2025,01/08/2025,10/17/2024,11/09/2024,12/14/2024,05/20/20
25,04/29/2025,
The City has reviewed its files and has located
responsive records to your request. This request
is very similar to your request referenced
R000487-031326 and the records in this request
have been released in that request. Please log
in to the Public Records Center Portal at the
following LINK to retrieve the appropriate
responsive documents. The records mentioned
in this request may be found here
www.paloalto.gov/PAPDalpr
4/13/2026 The location of the Flock Camera within the city The City has reviewed your request and has
determined that the records requested are
exempt from disclosure under the California
Public Records Act for the following reasons:
The City considers records showing the
locations of Flock ALPR cameras exempt from
disclosure pursuant to Gov. Code sections
7923.600 (Investigatory Records) and 7922.000
(Public Interest). The Palo Alto Police
Department considers these files exempt under
GC sec. 7923.600 because they are “records
of… investigations conducted by” PAPD,
”records of intelligence information” of PAPD,
and “investigatory… files” of PAPD. Releasing
the location of the ALPRs would severely
compromise ongoing investigations conducted
by the Department and are contained in records
of investigations conducted by PAPD. Releasing
ALPR locations publicly would allow suspected
criminals to evade areas monitored by PAPD’s
ALPRs, thus defeating their purpose. For the
Item C
Attachment B - Public Records Act Requests
Item C: Staff Report Pg. 21 Packet Pg. 244 of 254
Date of
Request
Information Requested Information Provided
same reasons, records detailing the locations of
ALPRs are exempt from disclosure pursuant to
GC sec. 7922.000 because the public interest in
not disclosing the locations significantly
outweighs the public interest in disclosure.
There is a high public interest in stopping
criminal activity that occurs within the City of
Palo Alto and releasing ALPR locations would
severely hinder that public interest. For more
information on the City’s use of ALPRs, please
visit the City’s website
(https://www.paloalto.gov/Departments/Police/P
ublic-Information-
Item C
Attachment B - Public Records Act Requests
Item C: Staff Report Pg. 22 Packet Pg. 245 of 254
Item C
Attachment B - Public Records Act Requests
Item C: Staff Report Pg. 23 Packet Pg. 246 of 254
Date of
Request
Information Requested Information Provided
Portal/Automated-License-Plate-Recognition-ALPR) or the City’s Flock Transparency Portal
(https://transparency.flocksafety.com/palo-alto-ca-pd)
4/20/2026 PAPD Flock Organization and Network
Audit Reports 2023 to 2026
“The City has reviewed its files and has located records responsive to the request. Beginning this week, recognizing
public interest on this topic, the Police Department will begin proactively posting on a monthly cadence partially
redacted Flock search logs on the City’s ALPR website. These logs include information concerning ALPR queries
performed by PAPD users, as well as queries performed by other agencies, that has not previously been released
pursuant to a legal exemption. Additionally, the City continues to use best practices to secure Palo Alto ALPR data,
including a 30-day limit on data retention, requiring MOUs with other agencies for data sharing, and internal policy
controls. In late 2023, unbeknownst to many users including PAPD, Flock added a new “Nationwide Lookup” search
feature. Using this feature, an out-of-state local law enforcement or federal agency could perform a broad search of
data from Flock’s entire nationwide network of over 6000 cameras, including the 20 cameras then-deployed in Palo
Alto. The feature did not enable targeted searches of any specific agency’s data. These searches could only be
performed system-wide when a full 7-digit license plate number was known and only based on the articulation of a
legitimate law enforcement purpose. PAPD was first made aware of this issue in December of 2025 and
subsequently learned that Flock had already disabled the feature for PAPD by late October 2024 and for all
California law enforcement agencies by March 2025. While its data was included in the “Nationwide Lookup”
searchable dataset during this period, PAPD has worked with Flock to confirm that no PAPD data (i.e., license plates
captured by Palo Alto cameras) was actually received by any out-of-state agency or federal agency as a result of any
“Nationwide Lookup” search. In other words, PAPD had no records that matched the “Nationwide Lookup” searches
performed by out of state or federal agencies. Even though no PAPD data was shared, PAPD reviewed the
searches performed by out-of-state local law enforcement and federal agencies via the “Nationwide Lookup” feature
and found no instances where a search appeared to have been performed for an improper purpose. Additionally,
PAPD found that no searches had been performed by ICE, Customs and Border Patrol, or the Department of
Homeland Security, and that no searches appeared to be associated with immigration enforcement or reproductive
rights enforcement. In January 2026, the Department added initial information on this issue to its ALPR webpage
and previously updated the information in February of 2026.
Item C
Attachment B - Public Records Act Requests
Item C: Staff Report Pg. 24 Packet Pg. 247 of 254
Item C
Attachment B - Public Records Act Requests
Item C: Staff Report Pg. 25 Packet Pg. 248 of 254
Date of
Request
Information Requested Information Provided
PAPD has been in contact with Flock’s executive leadership to express our concerns and, in response to
PAPD’s suggestion, Flock has expressed a strong willingness to pursue third party verification that this issue
has been resolved. While the City’s Auditor is unable to perform this task, work is underway to identify an
alternate auditor. Our goal in this review would be to conduct a technical as well as operational review to
confirm that Flock’s practices address the City’s expectations for security, transparency, and reporting of system
features and changes. The Department is confident that its training, Surveillance Use Policy, 30-day data
retention period, and requirement of an MOU for each agency with which it shares, meet or exceed industry
standards. With that, as recommended by the City Council’s Policy & Services Committee, PAPD has
discussed with the Independent Police Auditor a review of its internal policies and procedures with an eye
toward areas where we may be able to do even better. Staff anticipates reporting to Council in early June with
further updates on this topic.James Reifschneider, Chief of Police”The audits have been published in a way that
does not compromise law enforcement efforts of the Palo Alto Police Department and other law enforcement
agencies. Certain data has been excluded from these audits to protect these interests pursuant to California
Government Code sections 7922.000 and 7923.600. Please access the Records Center at the following LINK
to access records responsive to your request.
Item C
Attachment B - Public Records Act Requests
Item C: Staff Report Pg. 26 Packet Pg. 249 of 254
Item C
Attachment B - Public Records Act Requests
Item C: Staff Report Pg. 27 Packet Pg. 250 of 254
Date of
Request
Information Requested Information Provided
4/28/2026 For the time period of January 1, 2023
to present:
1. Documents showing compliance with
Section 7 of the City’s Surveillance Use
Policy
2. The annual audits of the City’s Flock
system as required in Paragraph 7 of
the Surveillance Use policy and the
annual memos to Police Chief
prepared pursuant thereto;
3. For each search by an unauthorized
outside agency (defined as out-of-state
or federal or non public agency),
please submit the reason for the
search. (Note the search column in
previously produced audits was
improperly redacted in that the
searches did not appear to relate to
ongoing Palo Alto or even California
investigations.)
4. All communications between
representatives of PAPD and any Palo
Alto city councilmember regarding
Flock.
The Palo Alto Police Department has reviewed its files and has located responsive records to your request. The City
will not be releasing the reason listed in the network Flock audit pursuant to Cal. Gov. Code § 7923.600(a) as the
records are exempt from from the CPRA ad investigation conducted by any state or local police agency. Please direct
your question to the agency you would like to obtain "reason for the search" information. The City is searching for
records listed in your request #4 and will respond on or before May 26, 2026. Please log in to the Public Records
Center at the following LINK to retrieve the appropriate responsive documents.
4/29/2026 Email correspondence related to a
webinar conducted by Flock Group Inc.
DBA Flock Safety with the subject line
containing "How to Speak to City
Councils: Meeting the Moment with
Confidence" and/or "Thank you for
registering" with
"do_not_reply@on24event.com" in any
of the email headers.For this request,
please include records from the
following date range:March 1, 2026
through May 28, 2026.
The City has reviewed your request and has determined that the records requested are exempt from disclosure under
the California Public Records Act for the following reasons: The City considers records showing the locations of Flock
ALPR cameras exempt from disclosure pursuant to Gov. Code sections 7923.600 (Investigatory Records) and
7922.000 (Public Interest). The Palo Alto Police Department considers these files exempt under GC sec. 7923.600
because they are “records of… investigations conducted by” PAPD, ”records of intelligence information” of PAPD, and
“investigatory… files” of PAPD. Releasing the location of the ALPRs would severely compromise ongoing investigations
conducted by the Department and are contained in records of investigations conducted by PAPD. Releasing ALPR
locations publicly would allow suspected criminals to evade areas monitored by PAPD’s ALPRs, thus defeating their
purpose. For the same reasons, records detailing the locations of ALPRs are exempt from disclosure pursuant to GC
sec. 7922.000 because the public interest in not disclosing the locations significantly outweighs the public interest in
disclosure. There is a high public interest in stopping criminal activity that occurs within the City of Palo Alto and
releasing ALPR locations would severely hinder that public interest. For more information on the City’s use of ALPRs,
please visit the City’s website (https://www.paloalto.gov/Departments/Police/Public-Information-Portal/Automated-
License-Plate-Recognition-ALPR) or the City’s Flock Transparency Portal (https://transparency.flocksafety.com/palo-
alto-ca-pd)
Item C
Attachment B - Public Records Act Requests
Item C: Staff Report Pg. 28 Packet Pg. 251 of 254
Item C
Attachment B - Public Records Act Requests
Item C: Staff Report Pg. 29 Packet Pg. 252 of 254
Date of
Request
Information Requested Information Provided
5/28/2026 Email correspondence related to
a webinar conducted by Flock
Group Inc. DBA Flock Safety with
the subject line containing "How
to Speak to City Councils:
Meeting the Moment with
Confidence" and/or "Thank you
for registering" with
"do_not_reply@on24event.com"
in any of the email headers.
For this request, please include
records from the following date
range:
March 1, 2026 through May 28,
2026.
The City has reviewed its files and has located records responsive to your request. These are all records the City has
related to this Webinar. No staff member attended the webinar, so the invitations are the only relevant records. Please log in
to the Records Center at the following LINK to retrieve the appropriate response.
6/4/2026 1. All Surveillance Reports as
required under PAMC Section
2.30.670 for Flock Safety ALPRs.
2. All documents related to a
webinar conducted by Flock
Group Inc. DBA Flock Safety
titled "How to Speak to City
Councils: Meeting the Moment
with Confidence", including an
Updated social toolkit for PIOs,
Chief-to-Council guide with added
trust and compliance guidance
and Objection-handling playbook,
including: Clear ways to reframe
common concerns and respond
to misinformation.
For this request, please include
records from the following date
range:
March 1, 2026 through May 28,
2026.
The City has reviewed its files and has located records responsive to your request. These are all records the City has
related to this Webinar. No staff member attended the webinar, so the invitations are the only relevant records. Please log in
to the Records Center at the following LINK to retrieve the appropriate response.
Item C
Attachment B - Public Records Act Requests
Item C: Staff Report Pg. 30 Packet Pg. 253 of 254
Date of
Request
Information Requested Information Provided
6/15/2026 1. Organization Audit in Flock.
2. Network Audit in Flock.
The Palo Alto Police Department has reviewed its files and has located responsive records to your request. Please log in to
the Public Records Center at the following Link
https://paloaltoca.mycusthelp.com/WEBAPP/_rs/(S(sfh1dmqmcw0w21dmxzr2rum3))/RequestEdit.aspx?sSessio… to retrieve
the appropriate responsive documents. The City will not be releasing the reason data listed in the Network Flock audit
pursuant to Cal. Gov. Code § 7923.600(a) as the data is exempt from the CPRA as investigation conducted by any state or
local police agency. Please direct your question to the agency you would like to obtain "reason for the search" information.
Item C
Attachment B - Public Records Act Requests
Item C: Staff Report Pg. 31 Packet Pg. 254 of 254