2026-11-02 - City Council Regular Meeting

17:21Good evening everyone. I'm going to call

17:23to order the November 2nd, 2026 meeting

17:26of the PaloAlto City Council. Uh would

17:30you please call the role?

17:32>> Council member Rectal

17:34>> here.

17:35>> Council member Lith Cotes

17:36>> here.

17:37>> Vice Mayor Stone

17:38>> here. Mayor Binker

17:40>> here.

17:41>> Council member Lou

17:42>> here.

17:43>> Council member Lowi

17:44>> here.

17:45>> Council member Bert

17:46>> here.

17:47>> All present.

17:49>> All right. Thanks very much. So with

17:50that, we will move on to our first order

17:52of business, which is a close session

17:54conference with city attorney about

17:56potential litigation. Do we have any

17:58public comment on this item?

18:04>> We do not have any requests to speak and

18:05there are no hands raised in Zoom.

18:07>> Okay. Very well.

18:09All right, colleagues, may I have a

18:11motion to move into close session?

18:13>> So move a second.

18:15>> Okay, excellent. Um, yes, we'll just

18:18take a vote. Oh, we can do it on screen

18:20perhaps.

18:26I remembered

18:30my my votes not coming up.

18:43So Ed, that's your mic. She hasn't put

18:44the books yet up yet. [laughter]

18:46No.

19:11Motion carries unanimously.

19:12>> All right. Thanks very much. All right.

19:14We will recess into close session and be

19:16back in approximately uh 45 minutes.

1:29:03All right, I'm going to call the meeting

1:29:04back to order. We have no reportable

1:29:07action from our closed session. So, we

1:29:09will move on to agenda changes,

1:29:11additions, and deletions. Mr. City

1:29:13Manager,

1:29:13>> thank you, mayor. No changes to your

1:29:14agenda this evening.

1:29:16>> Okay, great. So, let's move to in-person

1:29:19public comment on matters not on the

1:29:21agenda. Madam clerk, how many requests

1:29:23to speak do we have?

1:29:25>> We currently have four requests to

1:29:27speak. Our first speaker is Ken H.

1:29:44It's so difficult to make sure you get

1:29:45all your words in in three minutes. So,

1:29:47I have five images that I want to share

1:29:49with the with the council and also to

1:29:52anybody that's listening that hasn't yet

1:29:54voted. Um, the first image is um the

1:29:59amendment, the second amendment that the

1:30:01city and the school district signed off

1:30:05in regards to the measure J. And I

1:30:08wanted to point out that should this

1:30:10measure fail,

1:30:12either party can determinate this

1:30:15agreement. And so this may be our only

1:30:17chance. So don't blow this opportunity.

1:30:21Um the school district does have their

1:30:24issues and uh you know they may even

1:30:26want a better price. So number one uh

1:30:29this is for the schools. My second image

1:30:34uh that you'll see on the screen there

1:30:36is some of the words that um have been

1:30:39used in this campaign and I talked about

1:30:41this last time. hustled

1:30:44um conceiving

1:30:46uh

1:30:48etc. And um this is language that's used

1:30:51in Washington DC. This is not language

1:30:53that's used here in uh PaloAlto. And so

1:30:57I mentioned last time this is a campaign

1:30:59that's based on fear and not on facts.

1:31:04My third image. This is a beautiful

1:31:07image that I don't know if was sent out

1:31:09to the residents, but it just shows how

1:31:11beautiful this Coverly Center is going

1:31:13to be. I mean, just look at this

1:31:16picture. Look at all the wonderful

1:31:18things we have in Palo Alto and what a a

1:31:21benefit that Measure J is going to give.

1:31:24My fourth image

1:31:28is just these are the facts. Vote yes on

1:31:30Measure J.

1:31:33This is these are the facts and this is

1:31:35what the people are voting on. And my

1:31:38last image

1:31:40and this is for

1:31:42Dave Price and the PaloAlto Post. Take a

1:31:46look at these two ads.

1:31:48And in one of the ads there's what we

1:31:51call a a fair practice political

1:31:54committee uh number associated with it.

1:31:59In the second act, you will see there is

1:32:01no such number. We have in California

1:32:05what they call the California political

1:32:07act.

1:32:09And so I'm asking Dave Price cuz he's

1:32:12been asking us for for months to where's

1:32:14the appraisal? Where's the appraisal?

1:32:17Dave,

1:32:20let us see the information you have

1:32:23regarding the campaign that no on

1:32:25measure is run. In fact, in today's um

1:32:30postgate

1:32:35price

1:32:41certainly, it raises a few questions.

1:32:44What are the questions that you're going

1:32:45to ask Tate Price regarding their act?

1:32:47Thank you.

1:32:48>> Thank you. Your time is up.

1:32:52Our

1:32:57next speaker is Raymond G.

1:33:07Good afternoon, council members. My name

1:33:09is Ron Goens

1:33:11and I'm here as a resident um to address

1:33:14concerns of mine. Um so I have friends

1:33:17that have been on um the Valley

1:33:19Transportation Agency board and there's

1:33:22members of this council um inadvertently

1:33:25um spoke to one of my friends uh Chuck

1:33:28Contrell and told Chuck Catrell that I

1:33:30was being disingenuous about my claims

1:33:32that redlinining impacted me and my

1:33:34family and went and went as far as said

1:33:36to Chuck Contrell that rail lining was

1:33:39only a government thing. and it wasn't

1:33:41passed on through policies or other

1:33:43people doing it on their own personal

1:33:44opinion. Um, the fact that I was being

1:33:47claimed as being disingenuous with my

1:33:49current uh status in the city. Um, and

1:33:52to use somebody using their elected

1:33:55position to discredit anything that I'm

1:33:57saying about my family's history in Palo

1:33:59Alto. I find really harmful as somebody

1:34:01who was an elected leader. Um, this lead

1:34:04this person is Pat Bert. I'm speaking

1:34:06directly to you because you are the

1:34:07person that um said this and sir my

1:34:10family was impacted by red lining. My

1:34:13family my grandma's house was on verbina

1:34:15in East Palatoto which is a direct

1:34:17impact from red lining in Palo Alto

1:34:19because black folks couldn't buy houses

1:34:21in Palo Alto.

1:34:23So I think when you to be an informed

1:34:25decision maker here in Palatoto about

1:34:27housing practices and what's best for

1:34:29Palatoto, you have to understand what

1:34:30the history of Palo Alto is and

1:34:32recognize that the history of Palatoto

1:34:34here has been racist.

1:34:37There's a reason why there's a lot of

1:34:38people who's running for political

1:34:39office here in Palatoto that are not

1:34:42black because we are not we weren't

1:34:43allowed to be here in Palato.

1:34:46So to say that I'm being disingenuous

1:34:49about running for a seat in office, that

1:34:51wasn't even my plan. I'm doing it

1:34:54because I want to fight for people and

1:34:55help people and to help and bring

1:34:57advocate and cultivate a better Palatoto

1:34:59that recognizes the history of Palatoto.

1:35:03So at some point, I would like for you

1:35:04to apologize to me and my family the

1:35:07same way you try to discredit me behind

1:35:08my back for what redlinining has meant

1:35:11to me and my family. Thank you.

1:35:17Our next speaker is Matt S.

1:35:30My name is Batch Legel. I'm a Powalto

1:35:34resident. I'm concerned about mass

1:35:36surveillance system block that is being

1:35:40operated by our city. And I urge this

1:35:43council to cover the flock cameras to

1:35:46protect our privacy, to eliminate the

1:35:49city's exposure to a civil rights

1:35:51lawsuit, and to prevent our data from

1:35:54being used to terrorize us. Mass

1:35:58surveillance is a tool of fascism, and

1:36:01the federal government is now controlled

1:36:04by fascists. This federal government has

1:36:07formed a violent domestic army, ICE,

1:36:11that is terrorizing and abducting our

1:36:14neighbors.

1:36:16Recently, ICE agents have been staging

1:36:19at the Elmwood Detention Center in

1:36:23Militus in violation of Santa Clara

1:36:27County's our county's anti-ICE staging

1:36:30policy.

1:36:32I urge this council to condemn ice

1:36:35staging at Elmwood and to ma and to

1:36:38demand that the county enforce its

1:36:41policy to prevent ice from staging on

1:36:45county property. Further, I urge the

1:36:48council to cover the flock cameras

1:36:50immediately. You could do this in just

1:36:53one week. As I explained last Monday, we

1:36:57do not want the flock data our city is

1:37:00collecting to be used by ICE to

1:37:03terrorize us. Agendaize covering the

1:37:06flock cameras.

1:37:08Take the decision to cover the cameras

1:37:12and cover the flock cameras. Thank you.

1:37:19>> Our next speaker is Aram F.

1:37:26So, uh, Raymond, you've already run one.

1:37:29You ran one hell of a campaign. I want

1:37:31to congratulate that you for that. Um,

1:37:34and if anybody's insulted you or claimed

1:37:37that your statements about redlinining

1:37:38were false, then whoever they are should

1:37:40apologize. Uh, Raymond, thank you. And

1:37:43Matt, thank you for running the

1:37:45campaign.

1:37:47Tireless campaigner for Raymond. Uh, so

1:37:50both of you, my hats off to you. So, um,

1:37:53you know, I think I got AI calls last

1:37:55night. Um, one of them was from a voice

1:37:58that sounded just like Ed Shicadas,

1:37:59excuse me, Ed Lowing. Uh, and they asked

1:38:03me to bring back Ed wanted to see yet

1:38:05again the Stop USA to Israel piece,

1:38:08okay, that you all have, uh, the one

1:38:10that shows the IDF killing Palestinians

1:38:12in an abstraction. So, Ed, thank you. I

1:38:15brought this back for you personally.

1:38:17And of course, Keith, I know you your

1:38:21voice was on an AI voice. I can't

1:38:23imagine it was a coincidence last night

1:38:24that I got a call from you and you

1:38:26wanted to get back the US bombs Gaza and

1:38:30you've yet to tell me whether at

1:38:32Lockheed for the 25 or 30 years that

1:38:34you've been employed there, whether

1:38:35you're potentially a war criminal.

1:38:37Thanks for looking me in the eye when

1:38:38I'm speaking to you, brother. Yeah,

1:38:41that's really good. And you know, Ed,

1:38:42you're a real deep thinker. I want you

1:38:45to think about what you said. A man in

1:38:48an RV's got a a a boat behind his RV.

1:38:52And you somehow to figure that that man

1:38:54must be too wealthy to be in PaloAlto.

1:38:57You have you got a boat, man. You like

1:38:59me. You're a rich Jew, brother. You

1:39:02embarrassed the hell out of us when you

1:39:03talk like that. He might just not have

1:39:05wanted to store that boat. Okay, you're

1:39:07a deep thinker, right? Maybe he didn't

1:39:09want to have to pay the storage. Maybe

1:39:11that's the last vestage of middle classm

1:39:13that he has and he wants to hang on to

1:39:15that. So you want to strip him of that

1:39:17dignity too, Ed? You a real real

1:39:20scoundrel. And you is what makes Jews

1:39:22like us be embarrassed and sick that you

1:39:24claim to be a Jew. You're an

1:39:26embarrassment, man. Okay. And then

1:39:31your partner, you're running with Reena,

1:39:34a straightup racist. So yeah, you

1:39:36probably will get your way. We're going

1:39:37to have you the Zionist and and the

1:39:40little racist uh Reena Chang up here

1:39:42next year. Uh, so you can run your

1:39:45little Zionist routine on the on the

1:39:47city of Palo Alto. And of course, you're

1:39:48you got you're such a coward that you

1:39:50won't even speak. Remember, you were the

1:39:52one that refused to allow us to even

1:39:55have a discussion about a ceasefire

1:39:57resolution. That's how much respect you

1:39:59have for the First Amendment. Okay. You

1:40:01had I guess you had the Palestinian

1:40:02exception to the First Amendment. You

1:40:04got your people, your Zionist fools, to

1:40:06keep us from being able to speak the

1:40:08truth about the fact that we need a

1:40:10ceasefire. Still need a ceasefire three

1:40:12years later.

1:40:13Can you say ceasefire? We need a

1:40:15ceasefire and stop the damn genocide in

1:40:18Gaza, Ed. Yeah, don't look at me, bro.

1:40:21Yeah, you you ain't got the guts to look

1:40:23me in the face, man. Thank you.

1:40:28>> That concludes um in-person public

1:40:31comment on items not on the agenda.

1:40:35>> Thank you, Madame Clerk. Uh let's move

1:40:37on to council member questions,

1:40:39comments, and announcements.

1:40:48colleagues, does anybody have anything

1:40:50they'd like to share?

1:40:56All right. Well, I just have one thing

1:40:59I'd like to mention,

1:41:02and that is um that I'd like to uh

1:41:05comment on a significant loss uh to our

1:41:09uh community, our state, our nation uh

1:41:13in the loss of Dolores Werta. Um, you

1:41:16know, I went to uh the website of her

1:41:20foundation uh to to read a little more

1:41:22about her and there is a obituary that

1:41:25her daughters wrote and put on there and

1:41:28I've been trying and trying to edit it

1:41:30down. It's just extraordinary how much

1:41:34she did uh on this earth and in this

1:41:37country. And uh I've popped it way back.

1:41:41There's still a bit though I want to

1:41:42share with you because um I just think

1:41:46it's such an inspirational life that she

1:41:48led. So,

1:41:50and I encourage you to go read the whole

1:41:52thing. So, here's just some excerpts. Uh

1:41:54Dolores Werta inspired generations with

1:41:56three words.

1:41:58Yes, we can. In her hands, those words

1:42:01became a rallying cry for workers,

1:42:03women, immigrants, and people fighting

1:42:05for justice around the world. She gave

1:42:08people the courage to recognize their

1:42:09own power and showed them how to use it.

1:42:12Through historic labor contracts,

1:42:14groundbreaking legislation, and

1:42:15campaigns that helped women claim

1:42:17political leadership, she turned a

1:42:19declaration of possibility into lasting

1:42:21change.

1:42:25She came of age at a time when women,

1:42:26especially Mexican-American women, were

1:42:28rarely expected to lead political

1:42:30movements, negotiate with powerful

1:42:31businessmen, or challenge elected

1:42:33officials. Dolores did all three. Her

1:42:36fight began in the agricultural

1:42:38communities around Stockton, California.

1:42:40She began her career as a teacher where

1:42:42she saw children coming to school hungry

1:42:44and without proper clothing because

1:42:46their parents worked long hours in the

1:42:47fields for poverty wages. She decided

1:42:50she could do more to help them by

1:42:51organizing their parents than by

1:42:53teaching their children.

1:42:56In 1962, she joined Caesar Chavez in

1:42:59building the National Farm Workers

1:43:00Association, which merged in 1966 with

1:43:02the Filipinoled Agricultural Workers

1:43:05Organizing Committee to form the

1:43:07organization that became the United Farm

1:43:09Workers. Her advocacy helped win passage

1:43:12of California's landmark Agricultural

1:43:14Labor Relations Act in 1975, giving farm

1:43:17workers the right to organize and

1:43:18bargain collectively.

1:43:21And then they address an aspect that I

1:43:24often overlook. Dolores was also an

1:43:26environmentalist who placed workers and

1:43:28their families at the center of

1:43:29environmental protection. She understood

1:43:31that the dangers of agricultural

1:43:33chemicals began with the people required

1:43:35to work among them. She fought pesticide

1:43:37exposure through organizing, boycotss,

1:43:39and contract negotiations.

1:43:42It goes on. But the Smithsonian later

1:43:45recognized her among the figures who

1:43:47shaped American environmentalism.

1:43:49She took that experience directly into

1:43:51the women's movement. And after hearing

1:43:54her speak at a national organization for

1:43:56women convention, uh, feminist majority

1:43:58founder Eleanor Smeil recruited her to

1:44:00join a national effort to get more women

1:44:02elected to office. She did a lot of

1:44:04things I won't recite, but helped

1:44:06produce the historic year of the woman

1:44:08in 1992.

1:44:13It's just so much. Um, she marched with

1:44:15young people demanding action on climate

1:44:16change and environmental injustice. She

1:44:18defended LGBTQ plus equality. She

1:44:22remained an outspoken defender of a

1:44:23woman's right to make decisions about

1:44:25her own body.

1:44:28Her authority came at considerable

1:44:30personal cost. She endured arrests,

1:44:33threats, and violence. In 1988, a San

1:44:35Francisco police officer severely

1:44:37injured her during a demonstration.

1:44:39She also lived through painful

1:44:41contradictions within a movement led by

1:44:43imperfect people, including sexual

1:44:45violence she experienced herself. And in

1:44:47March of 2026, Dolores disclosed that

1:44:49Caesar Chavez had sexually assaulted her

1:44:51in the 1960s.

1:44:53So in 2003, Dolores returned to the

1:44:56place where her organizing life began,

1:44:58California's Central Valley, and with

1:45:00her three daughters, she created the

1:45:02Dolores Werta Foundation to teach a new

1:45:04generation the organizing lesson she had

1:45:06spent a lifetime learning. In 2012,

1:45:09Dolores received the Presidential Medal

1:45:11of Freedom from President Obama. Perhaps

1:45:14the most important part of her legacy is

1:45:16not simply that she was ahead of her

1:45:18time, is that she helped change the

1:45:20times. So at the end of the evening, I

1:45:23will adjourn this meeting in memory of

1:45:25Dolores Werta.

1:45:30Okay.

1:45:31So with that, we will move on to our

1:45:33next item, which is a study session on

1:45:36the 2025 greenhouse gas inventory and

1:45:39escap KPIs. So, Director Egleston, I

1:45:42expect I will be turning it to

1:46:17Well, good evening, Mayor Vinker and

1:46:19city council. I'm Brad Eaglesen, the

1:46:22director of public works, and tonight we

1:46:25are pleased to be here to present the

1:46:272025 greenhouse gas emissions inventory,

1:46:31uh, and an update on the status of your

1:46:33SCAP performance indicators. So, with me

1:46:37here at the table are Jonathan

1:46:38Avenshine, assistant director of climate

1:46:40action, and Christine Wong,

1:46:43sustainability manager. And I'm going to

1:46:45turn it over to Christine, who will give

1:46:47our presentation tonight. Thank you,

1:46:49Director Egleston. Um, as Director

1:46:52Egleston said, I'm Christine Long,

1:46:54sustain sustainability manager.

1:47:01>> Um, next slide, please.

1:47:06And okay,

1:47:10and you did. So, next slide, please.

1:47:14Um, so as Director Eglesston mentioned,

1:47:17one of our objectives this evening is to

1:47:19discuss our 2025 greenhouse gas

1:47:21emissions inventory. Next slide, please.

1:47:24Um, in order to track progress on our

1:47:26sustainability and climate action goals,

1:47:29we measure emissions through our

1:47:30greenhouse gas inventory. Uh, the main

1:47:33sources of PaloAlto's city emissions are

1:47:35very simple. About twothirds come from

1:47:38gasoline and diesel vehicles and about

1:47:40one-third comes from natural gas

1:47:42consumption in buildings. Transportation

1:47:45and mobile sources, the big red section

1:47:48is uh PaloAlto's largest source of

1:47:50emissions at about 64% and within this

1:47:53sector onroad transportation accounts

1:47:56for almost 59% of total emissions

1:47:58primarily from internal combustion

1:48:00engine passenger vehicles. I would like

1:48:03to note that Cal Train fully electrified

1:48:06in September of 2024 and now powers it

1:48:10um with 100% carbon-f free electricity.

1:48:13So there are no more emissions

1:48:15associated with Cal Train commuter rail

1:48:18and natural gas consumption. The blue

1:48:20section represents the second largest

1:48:23source of emissions at about 32%. Next

1:48:26slide please.

1:48:29Um, so in 2025, PaloAlto emitted an

1:48:33estimated 403,593

1:48:36metric tonses of carbon dioxide

1:48:37equivalent. Compared to the 1990

1:48:39baseline, this is a 49.5%

1:48:42decrease in total community emissions

1:48:44despite a 20.5% population increase

1:48:47during the same time period. So our

1:48:50inventory follows the GPC uh protocol.

1:48:54However, ARB, the California Air

1:48:58Resources Board, uh, recently updated

1:49:00their emissions factor model, also

1:49:02called MFAC, which we use to calculate

1:49:05on-road transportation emissions. So,

1:49:08the 2021 through 2024 inventories were

1:49:11updated from MAC 2021 to the latest

1:49:14version, MAC 2025, to be consistent uh

1:49:18with the 2025 inventory. Um so in 2025

1:49:22total greenhouse gas emissions decreased

1:49:245.2%

1:49:26compared to 2024 driven primarily by

1:49:29decreases in transportation emissions.

1:49:32Transportation and mobile sources

1:49:33emissions decreased 8.7% between 24 and

1:49:372025 and decreased 22.9%

1:49:40relative to 1990. Next slide please.

1:49:45So to achieve our 80% reduction goal, uh

1:49:49we must meet a greenhouse gas emissions

1:49:51target of about 160,000 metric tonses of

1:49:55carbon dioxide equivalent. Next slide,

1:49:57please.

1:49:58So, put another way, um, emissions in

1:50:012025 equate to about 6 metric tons of

1:50:05carbon dioxide equivalent per PaloAlto

1:50:07resident compared to 14.3 metric tonses

1:50:10per resident in 1990, which is a 58.1%

1:50:15reduction in per capita emissions from a

1:50:171990 baseline. Um, and CRB recommends a

1:50:21goal for local governments of 6 metric

1:50:23tons of carbon dioxide per capita by

1:50:252030, which we've already met. and two

1:50:28metric tonses per capita by 2050. Next

1:50:31slide please.

1:50:33Um so focusing on electric vehicles,

1:50:37electric vehicle adoption grew

1:50:38significantly in 2025 across all vehicle

1:50:41categories. This table shows the number

1:50:44of electric vehicles registered in

1:50:46PaloAlto and the percentage of new car

1:50:48sales that are EVs. Um I would like to

1:50:51note that in 2025 an outlying large

1:50:54purchase of 2,170

1:50:56vehicles for a commercial fleet was made

1:50:58by one entity. Um so those vehicles are

1:51:02included in the total amount of EVs but

1:51:05they are excluded for the from the

1:51:07percentage of new car sales that are

1:51:09EVs. Next slide please.

1:51:12Um, the EV vehicle miles traveled or VMT

1:51:16share of passenger vehicles that have an

1:51:19origin and destination within PaloAlto

1:51:22doubled from approximately 10% in 2024

1:51:26to 20% in 2025.

1:51:29um the EV VMT share of passenger

1:51:31vehicles that have an origin or

1:51:34destination inside PaloAlto and a

1:51:37destination or origin outside of

1:51:39PaloAlto increased from about 13% to

1:51:4216%. Um commercial EV BMT share also

1:51:46grew from less than 1% to 2% and bus EV

1:51:50BMT share increased from 2% to 7%. So

1:51:54the increase in the number of EVs in

1:51:56PaloAlto and the accompanying doubling

1:51:58of passenger EV VMT share within

1:52:00PaloAlto was the primary driver of the

1:52:03on-road transportation emissions

1:52:05decrease between 2024 and 2025. Next

1:52:08slide please.

1:52:10Um natural gas uh methane combustion

1:52:12emissions increased slightly 2.2% in

1:52:152025 compared to 2024. This was driven

1:52:19by an 8.1% increase in commercial

1:52:21natural gas emissions. However,

1:52:24residential natural gas emissions

1:52:26decreased by 1.5% and industrial

1:52:29decreased by 11.6 compared to 2024. For

1:52:33commercial natural gas use, the increase

1:52:35is attributable to weather. Um, since

1:52:382025 was a colder winter than 2024. In

1:52:42comparison, residential gas use

1:52:44decreased, which suggests that the

1:52:46decrease could be due to energy

1:52:48efficiency improvements,

1:52:49electrificationdriven fuel switching

1:52:52away from gas fuels, occupant behavior,

1:52:54or declining number of service accounts.

1:52:57Um, in addition, the city's

1:52:59electrification programs have also

1:53:01contributed to the decrease in

1:53:02residential natural gas emissions. Next

1:53:05slide, please.

1:53:07Um so carbon neutrality focuses on

1:53:10balancing the amount of greenhouse gas

1:53:12emissions emitted against the amount of

1:53:14greenhouse gas emissions removed from

1:53:16the atmosphere. Um the city strives for

1:53:19net zero emissions which is reducing

1:53:22greenhouse gas emissions to as close to

1:53:24to zero as possible and then offsetting

1:53:27the remaining emissions. So offsets are

1:53:30actions taken to reduce or offset the

1:53:33amount of greenhouse gas emissions

1:53:35emitted. Um the city currently purchases

1:53:38carbon offsets to balance emissions from

1:53:40natural gas use. Um these offsets are

1:53:43only included for the purpose of

1:53:44estimating progress towards achieving

1:53:46carbon neutrality. So if we include

1:53:48those offsets, then we're currently at

1:53:5066% reductions. Um, and as you can see

1:53:55on the chart, these are the targets

1:53:56needed to meet our 80% reduction goal.

1:53:59Um, we want to continue to reduce

1:54:02emissions to 80% and then offset the

1:54:04rest to get to a carbon neutrality. And

1:54:07if we continue to purchase natural gas

1:54:08offsets, um, they're going to decrease

1:54:11as natural gas consumption decreases.

1:54:13So, we'll need to invest in future

1:54:15offsets or carbon removal to meet our

1:54:17carbon neutrality by 2030 goal. Next

1:54:20slide, please.

1:54:22Um so switching gears um we're going to

1:54:26cover just a some of the progress that

1:54:29we've made in our key performance

1:54:30indicators or KPIs. Uh we defined the

1:54:33KPIs in our sustainability and climate

1:54:36action plan. The full 2025 KPI progress

1:54:40can be found in attachment D and is

1:54:42summarized in attachment E. Uh we'll

1:54:45continue to report out on our progress

1:54:47and look for ways to improve how we

1:54:49collect data to report on our KPIs. Next

1:54:51slide, please.

1:54:54Um so natural gas use can be affected by

1:54:57the weather as I mentioned um and if

1:54:59it's hotter or colder one year compared

1:55:01to the previous. However, emissions from

1:55:03natural gas use have decreased 33% since

1:55:071990, which the city's electrification

1:55:09programs have contributed to. And the

1:55:12city estimates that 2.5% of single

1:55:15family homes or 390 single family homes

1:55:18have no gas connections. Next slide

1:55:20please.

1:55:22Um in 2025 the share of trips taken by

1:55:26solar solo drivers in automobiles was

1:55:2951.5%.

1:55:31Which has increased since 2020 but is

1:55:34less than 2019 when it was 61.2%.

1:55:37The share of trips taken by PaloAlto

1:55:39residents driving in carpool has

1:55:41increased all years and the share of

1:55:44PaloAlto residents taking public

1:55:46transportation has not returned to

1:55:48pre-COVID 19 levels but is slowly

1:55:50increasing. Um and the share of PaloAlto

1:55:54residents biking and walking has

1:55:56increased since 2019. Uh next slide

1:55:59please.

1:56:01Um so

1:56:03one for on-road transportation emissions

1:56:06they decreased 7.4% between 2024 in 2025

1:56:11the primary driver for overall emissions

1:56:13reductions in 2025. Um and our progress

1:56:18on EVs has just been uh remarkable. Next

1:56:21slide please.

1:56:24Um, so the near-term focus for water is

1:56:28reducing water consumption while

1:56:30exploring ways to capture and store

1:56:32water and increase the availability and

1:56:34use of recycled water. And while it's

1:56:37not possible to directly measure indoor

1:56:39water consumption and outdoor

1:56:40residential water use separately, these

1:56:42indicators are estimated based on

1:56:44seasonal water uses and both indoor and

1:56:46outdoor water use has in has decreased

1:56:49significantly um since 2025. Next slide,

1:56:53please.

1:56:55Um, so the city is nearing completion of

1:56:58the undergrounding of electric lines in

1:57:00the foothills region and removing

1:57:02deenergized lines and poles and has made

1:57:05significant progress since 2023. Plans

1:57:09to harden utilities infrastructure from

1:57:11wildfire in this region are also under

1:57:13development. And the city is also

1:57:15conducting ongoing work to reduce

1:57:17flammable vegetation and other fuels in

1:57:19the foothills as part of a multi-year

1:57:21management plan. Next slide, please.

1:57:24Um, so as a result of the city's

1:57:26efforts, the diversion rate for 2025 was

1:57:2988%. Um, so diversion includes all waste

1:57:33prevention, reuse, recycling, and

1:57:35composting activities that divert

1:57:37materials from landfills. The city uses

1:57:40the diversion rate to measure progress

1:57:41on waste reduction and resource

1:57:43conservation goals. Uh the diversion

1:57:45rate of 88% is an improvement from the

1:57:4864% rate in 2007

1:57:52and 84% rate in 2020 and 2021 20 sorry

1:57:562020 and 2021. In fiscal year 2025,

1:58:00PaloAlto recycled or composted

1:58:02approximately 52,300

1:58:05tons of material. Next slide please.

1:58:09Um, so the staff report focuses only on

1:58:12our progress in 2025, but we wanted to

1:58:15share some successes that we've had in

1:58:182026. Uh, next slide, please. So, as you

1:58:22saw in our greenhouse gas inventory,

1:58:24we've come a long way, but we still have

1:58:26a ways to go. Um, but we've had a lot of

1:58:29successes to date. We launched programs

1:58:31and built community awareness around

1:58:33electrification. We did studies to learn

1:58:35about the community's infrastructure

1:58:37needs, electrification opportunities in

1:58:39the multif family and non-residential

1:58:40sectors, and we built tools and data to

1:58:43develop policy options on funding and

1:58:45financing communitywide electrification.

1:58:47Um, over 900 PaloAlto homeowners have

1:58:51installed or scheduled to install heat

1:58:53pump water heaters through our programs,

1:58:56which is 10 times the rate in previous

1:58:58years and five to time 5 to 10 times as

1:59:01much per capita as any other program

1:59:03that we're aware of. And when combined

1:59:06with new all-electric homes, nearly 10%

1:59:09of single family homes have an electric

1:59:11water heater. Next slide, please.

1:59:14Um, Palo Alton are participating in our

1:59:17programs more and more. Nearly 300 heat

1:59:20pump HVAC units have been installed

1:59:22since the start of the HVAC rebates la

1:59:25last year. And with the addition of the

1:59:27direct install program, we have seen

1:59:29over 200 units installed in just the

1:59:32first nine months of this year alone.

1:59:34That represents 40 to 50% of annual

1:59:37space heating turnover in single family

1:59:38homes and 25 to 35% of total space

1:59:42heating turnover in PaloAlto, both

1:59:44single and multifamily homes. On the

1:59:47commercial side, HVAC installations are

1:59:49increasing and the city is reaching out

1:59:51to major employers to help them

1:59:53electrify. Our pilot program did 13

1:59:56installations, about 20% of annual

1:59:58turnover. And our new commercial HVAC

2:00:01program already has three applications

2:00:03before we've even ramped up marketing.

2:00:05Next slide, please.

2:00:09Um, so we have EV charger access in

2:00:11multif family buildings representing 15%

2:00:14of multif family units in PaloAlto. This

2:00:17is really important because EV adoption

2:00:19in PaloAlto is close to the rate it

2:00:21needs to be to meet the 80% emissions

2:00:23reduction goal. And to sustain the pace,

2:00:26we need to make sure there's EV charging

2:00:28for our residents that don't have easy

2:00:30access to home charging. Next slide,

2:00:32please.

2:00:34Um, what we've learned is that

2:00:36electrification has become mainstream.

2:00:38One in four households in PaloAlto has

2:00:40an EV. One in 10 have electrified

2:00:43something in their home. and 44 single

2:00:46family homes have completely removed

2:00:48their gas meters, which is an

2:00:49accelerating trend that has helped us

2:00:51reach over 400 homes with no gas

2:00:53connections in PaloAlto, if you include

2:00:56new construction. Um, the city is

2:00:58turning the lessons learned from our

2:01:00successes in early electrification

2:01:02programs into longerterm viable

2:01:04strategies to achieve 80% emissions

2:01:06reductions and long-term carbon

2:01:08neutrality. Uh the climate action and

2:01:11sustainability committee will be meeting

2:01:13next month um to talk about the

2:01:15preliminary results of analysis of

2:01:17various policy options for long-term

2:01:19community electrification.

2:01:21Um and to avoid the worst effects of

2:01:23global warming, the intergovernmental

2:01:25panel on climate change says we need to

2:01:28achieve carbon neutrality by midentury.

2:01:31Um and with the enthusiastic response um

2:01:34from PaloAltos in taking climate action

2:01:37um we know that we can get there. Thank

2:01:40you.

2:01:41>> Well, thank you. Delightful to hear a

2:01:44report like that. So terrific. Um I'm

2:01:47going to turn first to public comment. U

2:01:49Madame Clerk, do we have any public

2:01:51commenters?

2:01:53>> We have no requests to speak and no

2:01:55hands are raised on Zoom.

2:01:56>> Oh, okay. Terrific. All right. Well,

2:01:58I'll bring it back to the deis for

2:02:00discussion. Uh, I will note that we had

2:02:03a similar report at the climate uh and

2:02:05sustainability uh committee meeting

2:02:08recently. So, council members Bert um

2:02:12Lou and I have heard this and it's nice

2:02:15to hear it a second time. Anyway,

2:02:17[laughter]

2:02:18um I will just make just one comment

2:02:20before I turn it over to others. Um you

2:02:23mentioned it. I think you use the word

2:02:25remarkable with the 60% of new vehicle

2:02:28purchases by PaloAltons are EVs. That is

2:02:32remarkable, but not only remarkable

2:02:34gives us some levers and some things we

2:02:36can do going forward to try to sustain

2:02:39and improve our presence. I I won't

2:02:40delve into I mean our progress. I won't

2:02:44delve into those right now, but um this

2:02:46just, you know, good news on our

2:02:48accomplishments, but also good news on

2:02:50what we've learned because we know we

2:02:52have more to do. So, I was stalling to

2:02:54see if any lights would come on. I

2:02:56haven't seen any.

2:02:59Somebody All right, Vice Mayor.

2:03:03>> Thank you, Madam Mayor, and thanks to

2:03:04staff for the presentation and all the

2:03:06incredible work being done here. Yeah,

2:03:09I'll follow up on on just a couple of of

2:03:11questions. First one really related to

2:03:13the transportation numbers really kind

2:03:16of tell almost two very different

2:03:19stories. I mean, one of incredible

2:03:21success related to EV adoption that

2:03:24that's wonderful. We're making some

2:03:26progress with multifamily housing. I I

2:03:29continue to hope and that we're finding

2:03:32additional ways as well with with older

2:03:35multifamily housing to be able to get in

2:03:37and offer incentives to be able to

2:03:40incorporate EV charging in in those

2:03:42since such a large stock of our

2:03:44multifamily housing stock uh is aging.

2:03:48And like I know I know my own apartment

2:03:50complex, we don't have any EV charging

2:03:53stations there. I know this stuff's

2:03:55expensive. So love to see the city kind

2:03:57of invest more. But I I guess one thing

2:04:01that kind of surprised me was that total

2:04:02vehicle miles traveled has increased

2:04:06from 598

2:04:08million miles in 2023 to two to 614

2:04:11million in 2025. And so I'm curious how

2:04:14much of our transportation strategy is

2:04:17effectively relying on replacing

2:04:20gasoline vehicles with EVs versus

2:04:23actually reducing the VMT.

2:04:27>> Um so it's both. Um in the SAP we have

2:04:31both the focus on the EVs and the focus

2:04:33on the mobility side. They're separate

2:04:35and they have different um

2:04:39uh they're different prongs to the same

2:04:41issue. Um, so yes, on the EV side, we're

2:04:44doing a remarkable job with um, new car

2:04:47sales and one in four households now has

2:04:49an EV. On the VMT side, I will note that

2:04:53th that VMT number is modeled. So

2:04:58normally we get um real time VMT data

2:05:02from Google environmental insights

2:05:04explorer but they did not provide

2:05:06updated VMT for 2025

2:05:09um due to uh data privacy issues. Um so

2:05:13they are redoing the way that they

2:05:16gather their VMT um and they have

2:05:19promised us that they will provide 2026

2:05:22VMT. So we will see the true VMT numbers

2:05:26in 2026. The 2025 are just modeled based

2:05:29on population growth.

2:05:31>> Okay, that's that's that's good to to

2:05:34hear.

2:05:36Um

2:05:42was there anything else from staff on

2:05:43that?

2:05:44>> Um I would just say so the last time

2:05:46that we had real BMT um not model data

2:05:49was 2023. Um, and that was significantly

2:05:52less than our 20 2019 VMT.

2:05:56>> Okay.

2:06:00one. So, one one thing I'm concerned

2:06:02about, um, if the regional transit

2:06:05measure fails tomorrow,

2:06:09praying it does not, but if it does, do

2:06:11we have any idea the impact that that

2:06:14will have on our on our SAP goals given

2:06:17the catastrophic impact that will have

2:06:19on public transportation options in the

2:06:22Bay Area? Have we modeled that?

2:06:25Um we haven't modeled that but it would

2:06:28probably be quite catastrophic um

2:06:31because we are still struggling to get

2:06:33our public transit ridership up um to

2:06:38precoid levels. Um our on the EV side

2:06:41we're doing great but on the public

2:06:43transit side uh we could use some help

2:06:45and if there are transit cuts that's

2:06:48going to completely decimate um our

2:06:51transit ridership. Yeah, I'm I'm really

2:06:54worried about that.

2:06:56And then um and then kind of switching

2:06:58gears, one thing that stands out to me

2:07:00in the KPI report is how many important

2:07:02measures still have no no data or or

2:07:06data forthcoming. I mean things like I

2:07:08guess uh gasoline sales, several transit

2:07:11and mosh share measures, storm water

2:07:13reuse,

2:07:15etc. And I guess as we get closer to

2:07:172030,

2:07:19I'd like to see our dashboard our

2:07:21dashboard increasingly telling I guess

2:07:24um tell C council not simply what

2:07:28activities we're undertaking, but

2:07:30whether we're actually on pace to

2:07:33achieve each of our each of our adopted

2:07:37outcomes and maybe what changes the

2:07:40staff recommend to the KPI so council

2:07:42can more readily distinguish between

2:07:45areas that are on track, off track, or

2:07:48really simply just not measurable with

2:07:51the data that we're currently

2:07:52collecting, if that makes sense.

2:07:55>> Um, yes, that makes a lot of sense. Um,

2:07:58I would say,

2:08:00um, some of the things like the mobility

2:08:04commute mode share, that really is just

2:08:07we haven't gotten the data yet, so that

2:08:09one's fine. Um, we're just waiting on

2:08:11the data. Um and the um gas sales data

2:08:17that is something that used to be

2:08:19available and it is no longer available.

2:08:22So we have not found another data source

2:08:24for that. Um

2:08:27and in terms of storm water that is

2:08:29something that is in progress and we

2:08:30hope to have data for you by next year.

2:08:33>> Okay. Thank you.

2:08:34>> But to your point Vice Mayor, there are

2:08:36several of these where it's been a

2:08:38couple years now and we don't expect

2:08:40data to be available. So that could be

2:08:43something we could probably take on in

2:08:44the next year is to take another look at

2:08:46those and see if there's any we might

2:08:49want to remove or substitute something

2:08:52else for.

2:08:53>> Yeah. Because I just it's incredible in

2:08:562027. Our 2030 goals coming up. We've

2:08:58made such incredible advancements that

2:09:01we should all be incredibly proud of a

2:09:03as a city, but also at the same time

2:09:05we've taken care of, I guess, the more

2:09:07lowhanging fruit. And it seems that last

2:09:10bit is going to be the most challenging

2:09:12one. And I I'm I'm I'm concerned without

2:09:16without all that that data, how do we

2:09:18then make those informed decisions to

2:09:19make some of those really challenging

2:09:22upcoming decisions in order to be able

2:09:24to get us over that over that finish

2:09:26line. So I'm I'm over time, but thanks

2:09:28again for all the work.

2:09:31>> Council member Rectal.

2:09:33>> Okay. Yeah. Thank you for the very good

2:09:34work. You all are very dedicated and

2:09:37also very uh enthusiastic. That's good

2:09:39to see. Uh how did we get the EV VMT

2:09:43numbers? What was the source for that?

2:09:46>> Um that is Google Environmental Insights

2:09:49Explorer. It is a free resource that

2:09:52Google provides to cities. You just have

2:09:54to sign up for it.

2:09:55>> And how do they gather it? um a

2:09:58combination of big data and um cell

2:10:03phone data and

2:10:06Google maps data and ways data. Um

2:10:09>> and are they are people self-reporting

2:10:12that they have an EV versus a gas? When

2:10:14their cell phone drives around, how does

2:10:16Google know whether that's an EV or a

2:10:18gas?

2:10:19>> So the EV data we don't rely completely

2:10:22on Google. Um uh we use the carb mAC

2:10:29model um which [snorts]

2:10:32uses both DMV data and model data to try

2:10:36to assess how many EVs are on the road

2:10:38at a given time.

2:10:39>> Okay. You're looking the TVs and trying

2:10:41to figure out what's happening. Yeah. Uh

2:10:44I was really impressed with 15% of of

2:10:47multif family units now have chargers.

2:10:49Was that driven by demand or was that

2:10:52driven by our subsidies?

2:10:59>> Um, it's a combination. Uh, there's been

2:11:03for a long time just a a lack of

2:11:06charging at multifamily

2:11:08um buildings and when we've surveyed

2:11:10people that has been the leading uh

2:11:13reason why people have have not adopted

2:11:16EVs when they're living in multif family

2:11:18buildings. Um so our incentive programs

2:11:20have been the driver of that 15%.

2:11:24Um but it's to fulfill that demand for

2:11:27charging that we have in the multif

2:11:28family sector.

2:11:30>> Do we know how many employers provide

2:11:33electric charging?

2:11:35>> Um I don't have good data on that. We do

2:11:37have several uh workplace charging

2:11:40installations in PaloAlto. Um but we

2:11:43don't have a full inventory of those.

2:11:45>> Okay. So when you look at slide four,

2:11:48there's a lot of red there, the

2:11:50transportation, and that's going to be

2:11:51the harder,

2:11:53and we don't have quite as much leverage

2:11:54on the transportation. Now, EVs are

2:11:57being accepted, but that's going to be a

2:11:59slow time for people to replace. What

2:12:01other levers are we looking at to try

2:12:03and encourage

2:12:04transportation to decrease?

2:12:11Um so as you said it's half of it is

2:12:15getting people out of gas vehicles into

2:12:16electric vehicles and then the other

2:12:18half is whatever we can do to reduce

2:12:21vehicle miles traveled. So getting

2:12:23people even if it's getting out of solo

2:12:25driving into car pools or walking more

2:12:28taking transit more um encouraging

2:12:31businesses to provide more

2:12:33transportation commute options for their

2:12:36employees.

2:12:37um working from home,

2:12:40um bike infrastructure,

2:12:43all all of the above

2:12:45>> and anecdotally at least these the PATMA

2:12:50transit passes seem very successful.

2:12:52Have we looked at and quantified how

2:12:55successful they are? You know, how much

2:12:57improvement do we get per dollar

2:12:58compared to let's say when we do a hot

2:13:00water heater? What's the better bang for

2:13:01the buck? um that I don't know precisely

2:13:04but um Justine Bert has provided me all

2:13:07the data. I don't remember it exactly

2:13:09off the top of my head but it is a very

2:13:11successful program. Um but also noting

2:13:14that the PATMA programs really target um

2:13:19incomequalified

2:13:20participants

2:13:22>> um so it's a different pool.

2:13:26>> Yeah, understood. But still

2:13:29do we have opportunities to expand that

2:13:30program?

2:13:34Good. Um

2:13:37I think so. Um it just comes down to

2:13:40funding I believe

2:13:44like that. Is that the amount of money

2:13:45we're

2:13:46>> actively um we have actively uh expanded

2:13:51that program this year? Um

2:13:54and the the costs for those programs um

2:13:58tend to be lower. the cost for

2:14:00transportation programs generally

2:14:01whether EV or VMT VMT is the absolute um

2:14:05lowest cost opportunity that we have and

2:14:08we have seen Palton's adopt quite a bit

2:14:12um in our 2019 inventory I think we

2:14:15registered 740 million vehicle miles

2:14:18traveled based on Google EIE data um and

2:14:21then that had dropped to 600 million by

2:14:242023 so between telecommuting and and

2:14:27other forms of um transit adoption.

2:14:31There has been quite a bit of progress

2:14:33already.

2:14:34>> I don't have numbers to back this up,

2:14:36but my gut is that free transit passes

2:14:38is a win for everybody because it

2:14:39reduces traffic. It also reduces uh

2:14:42greenhouse gases and it also improves

2:14:45the the quality of life of the people

2:14:46who are using them. So, I think it's a

2:14:48win-win and I really would want to look

2:14:49at can we expand that somehow.

2:14:52Okay, that's all. Thank you,

2:14:57>> Council Member Bert.

2:14:59Thank you. Um, so first following up on

2:15:02Council Member Rectal's uh point, uh, I

2:15:06fully agree that, uh, the the, uh, PATMA

2:15:10program is, uh, both very effective and

2:15:14actually a model regionally. Now, uh,

2:15:16Cal Train and M now MTC are really

2:15:20recognizing,

2:15:22um, that it's it's probably the one of

2:15:24the most innovative programs in the

2:15:27area. In particular, it's not only low

2:15:29income, but as of now, it's low-income

2:15:32workers and the uh, a potential to

2:15:36expand it is lowincome residents. at

2:15:39VTA. Um, I was able to get 500 uh VTA

2:15:45smart passes uh to mitigate impacts on

2:15:49uh our El Camino bike uh uh uh uh

2:15:55uh bike

2:15:57path on El Camino. Um, and that was a

2:16:00pilot program at VTA, but we're talking

2:16:03about expanding that and and really the

2:16:06the opportunity to do a partnership

2:16:08between uh the transit agency, whether

2:16:12it be Cal Train or VTA, the city,

2:16:15philanthropics,

2:16:17uh, contributions, and grants can really

2:16:20drive down the cost by just sharing it

2:16:22those multiple ways. And I think there's

2:16:24great opportunity there. Um, and as far

2:16:28as the the overall approach, we have our

2:16:30mobility strategic plan, which

2:16:33originally was looking at an EV

2:16:34strategic plan, but it's been expanded

2:16:36to mobility and all the things that um

2:16:39have been explained this evening on on

2:16:43the the various aspects. Um, and so

2:16:48really looking at what types of chargers

2:16:51we will need in 2030 and 2035 at what

2:16:55locations is something that we hadn't

2:16:58done before and we're now getting a

2:16:59grasp on. We have a plan, but it's a

2:17:02plan that will evolve because every one

2:17:04of these things uh is is something that

2:17:07we're learning from. But we now have a

2:17:09strategic plan to look at what do we

2:17:11think we need to get to the goal that we

2:17:14have here. Um and uh I will add that at

2:17:18Cal Train we're already above 80% of

2:17:21precoid ridership but that greatest

2:17:25growth is in the weekends and the the

2:17:28shoulder hours not the peak commute

2:17:31hours. Those are the very things that

2:17:33would get cut if the regional transit

2:17:35measure um does not pass. Um I will say

2:17:40that we're still as as uh Christine had

2:17:43said getting a handle on some of the

2:17:45data is difficult. We have um 20% of the

2:17:49internal to internal trips are in this

2:17:53report to uh projected to be EVs. 16% of

2:17:59trips originating from Palo Alto

2:18:01outside. I'm I'm skeptical of that. Um

2:18:05and I'm also skeptical about the

2:18:08projections on what portion of our trips

2:18:11are actually EV.

2:18:14Anecdotally,

2:18:16uh the families that I know that have an

2:18:18EV and an internal combustion car, it's

2:18:21the EV that's doing 80% of the driving.

2:18:24And yet that's not yet reflected in the

2:18:26data. and we're still struggling to

2:18:27figure out some of that. Um, I did want

2:18:30to say that, you know, as we look at

2:18:33where we are on our 8030 goal, um, on

2:18:37the one hand, we're going, oh, gee, uh,

2:18:39we've made great progress, but we are

2:18:44only what about 60% of the way to the

2:18:47goal. And that can be construed as lack

2:18:51of success until you look at it in a

2:18:54context. first when we and other leading

2:18:57cities and only a limited number of

2:19:00cities globally had adopted an 8030 goal

2:19:03when we did um nobody knew how anybody

2:19:07would get there. This was a goal that

2:19:10was an undefined path. So, where do we

2:19:13stand today when we're self-critical and

2:19:16saying, "Gee, we're only 60% of our goal

2:19:18and we're almost to 2027."

2:19:22Um, San Francisco

2:19:24uh has achieved in 41% reduction.

2:19:28London, a global leader, is a 48%

2:19:31reduction.

2:19:33Um, New York City 25 to 30% reduction.

2:19:38These are leading cities in this. And

2:19:41the outlier is Copenhagen. They've got

2:19:43an 80% reduction. But we have made

2:19:46amongst the highest progress of any

2:19:49city. And I think we need to really

2:19:53establish that because otherwise there

2:19:56is a a potential for our community to

2:20:00say we've failed rather than succeeded.

2:20:03We set a very aggressive goal that

2:20:05nobody knew uh what could be met. Um and

2:20:10um and we actually are seeing that by

2:20:13comparison we're exceptional but we're

2:20:15exceptional within a group of no almost

2:20:17no one is meeting the goal. Um that

2:20:20means we just then recalibrate and uh

2:20:23learn from what we've done. Also if you

2:20:26look at the state's goal that's um a 48%

2:20:30reduction as opposed to our 80. Um so

2:20:34it's really important to look at that.

2:20:36The other thing is we set a 1990 goal

2:20:39based upon absolute numbers not per

2:20:42capita and most cities had done absolute

2:20:46numbers who had established these goals

2:20:47but they're also starting to realize

2:20:50that there's this second metric that's

2:20:52even probably more appropriate which is

2:20:54per capita. We've actually grown 20% in

2:20:58population since our baseline period.

2:21:00So, as the staff report points out, uh

2:21:03we're at um 59 or so percent on a per

2:21:08capita basis. So, I think we should

2:21:12actually be looking at two a couple of

2:21:15additional things. Not we're we're going

2:21:18to have to reset the 8030 goal. And we

2:21:21we need to be frank about that. But we

2:21:24also should be looking at well do we set

2:21:27dual goals of an absolute number and a

2:21:29per capita. Um and um

2:21:34and uh and then we have our our carbon

2:21:37neutrality goal uh which is also one

2:21:40that leading cities have adopted and

2:21:43it's become more widely uh adopted than

2:21:46the a goal like an 8030. I still think

2:21:50that our our absolute number is the more

2:21:52important goal, but both of those are

2:21:55very important. So, we don't want to be

2:21:58buried with multiple too many multiple

2:22:00goals, but we need to recognize that

2:22:03each of them have their own merit and

2:22:07are being widely adopted. Um and that

2:22:10overall uh we are achieving exceptional

2:22:14success even if we have to double down

2:22:18to um to continue to make the important

2:22:20progress we're seeking.

2:22:25>> Council member Liths.

2:22:26>> Thank you, Mayor. Um appreciate Council

2:22:29Member Bert giving us a little bit more

2:22:31of the context um and suggesting ways we

2:22:35might more effect even more effectively

2:22:36tell our terrific story. and I join my

2:22:38colleagues in thanking you for your

2:22:40tremendous work and for giving us this

2:22:42update. Um when I looked at the charts I

2:22:46was curious that it shows 1990 big high

2:22:49bar and then we get 2019 2020 21 up to

2:22:52the present and it made me wonder well

2:22:55when did we implement this 80 by30 so I

2:22:56went online and looked and it looks like

2:22:58council voted on it in April of 2016 and

2:23:01already then in 2016 we had reduced from

2:23:04our 1990 numbers by about 35%.

2:23:07I think it might be helpful if you're

2:23:09willing to put a bar in that shows us

2:23:11like where were we when we made this

2:23:13commitment in 2016 or when the work

2:23:16began in 2017, whatever it was. Um, just

2:23:18so that we can get a little bit more

2:23:20granular granularity on what was

2:23:22happening when. Um,

2:23:26I think it might just help us be a

2:23:27little bit more transparent about what's

2:23:29what was going on. Um, I also appreciate

2:23:33Council Member Burke's point about you

2:23:35don't necessarily know what the driving

2:23:36habits are just because you know what

2:23:38the vehicles are or what's being sold.

2:23:40Certainly in my family, one of us drives

2:23:43a internal combustion engine and we have

2:23:46a hybrid and we have a electric. Um, and

2:23:49we always use the uh hybrid. um and uh

2:23:54my partners and our son drives the

2:23:55electric. So we rarely use uh the other

2:23:59one for anything lengthy. And so it's

2:24:01it's important I think to try to get a

2:24:03little bit more of the color commentary

2:24:05on on usage. It brings to mind also the

2:24:08fact that as much as we would like

2:24:10everyone to get a permit whenever they

2:24:11make a change in their home, not

2:24:12everybody does. And so we don't have an

2:24:16absolute number of uh the number of heat

2:24:20pump water heaters for example cuz some

2:24:22people will have managed to get those

2:24:23without a permit. And I wonder you know

2:24:27is there a way for us to find the truer

2:24:29numbers um because if we're predicting

2:24:32our emissions reduction based on things

2:24:34like permits or car sales um we aren't

2:24:38you know it's a good projection but it's

2:24:40not as accurate as it might be.

2:24:42>> Yeah. So, um, with respect to the water

2:24:45heaters, uh, we're we're working on

2:24:47finishing up a data project, uh, with

2:24:49our IT IT department this year. Um, it's

2:24:53in the SAP work plan and, uh, we're

2:24:56tying together a bunch of different data

2:24:58sets to be able to, um, look at usage,

2:25:03um, you know, against things like home

2:25:05size and be able to estimate, you know,

2:25:07what what sort of equipment are people,

2:25:10uh, you know, do people have Um it's not

2:25:13going to be perfect, but that can

2:25:16potentially be a validator. It's

2:25:18something that we've needed to do for

2:25:19gas uh for gas system planning um as

2:25:23electrification starts to take hold,

2:25:25understanding the impact on different

2:25:27mains and different transformers. And so

2:25:29that may be an avenue. When we've done

2:25:32investigations so far, um it does appear

2:25:34that there are um more

2:25:38pieces of electrical equipment out there

2:25:40than we're aware of and they're most

2:25:41likely resistance. Um so even with those

2:25:46pieces of equipment, switching them to

2:25:48heat pump water heaters will, you know,

2:25:50allow for energy efficiency and to

2:25:53reduce strain on our electric grid as

2:25:54well.

2:25:56>> Thank you.

2:26:01And I will just add thank you for

2:26:02pointing out that we have no context of

2:26:05where we were at in 2016. Um, however,

2:26:08part of the reason why is we didn't

2:26:10start following the GPC protocol until

2:26:13our 2019 inventory. Um, so we can go

2:26:17back and correct our 2016 inventory.

2:26:21It's just that our 2016 inventory was

2:26:23missing airport emissions, off-road

2:26:26vehicle emissions, Cal Train commuter

2:26:28rail emissions, composting, landfill gas

2:26:31flaring. Um, I think that's it. It was

2:26:34missing all of those. Um, so we could go

2:26:37back and correct it, but it was an

2:26:39incomplete inventory. I appreciate that

2:26:41clarification and I think I can begin to

2:26:44appreciate the complexity inherent in

2:26:46then trying to tell an accurate story

2:26:48when you had different metrics. At the

2:26:50same time, I think as a matter of

2:26:52historical accuracy, it would be lovely

2:26:55to know if staff and council managed in

2:26:58April of 2016 to get the city to a point

2:27:01to make this pretty audacious goal. It

2:27:04would be nice to know what where they

2:27:05felt they were such that they thought

2:27:08that this was the the right goal or the

2:27:10the the goal worth getting behind.

2:27:17All right, I'm going to jump in here.

2:27:19Um,

2:27:21so

2:27:23one of the reasons I'm excited about the

2:27:25uh 60%

2:27:28purchasing of new vehicles being EVs is

2:27:31that it's not a perfect correlation

2:27:34necessarily one to one, but in many at

2:27:38least perhaps most of those cases, it's

2:27:40replacing a nice vehicle. So it's kind

2:27:42of a double ad. And you can see that

2:27:45when you look at the percentage of EVs

2:27:47we believe are owned in town versus the

2:27:50So if you look at the percent change

2:27:51year-over-year of the purchases of new

2:27:54vehicles, the purchases owned is an even

2:27:57greater change. And so I think we can

2:27:58accelerate our our uh progress uh with

2:28:02that. So that's that's an exciting

2:28:04thing. Um, yeah, I want to pick up on

2:28:07something that council member Bert said

2:28:09because we discussed uh the, you know,

2:28:12carbon neutrality, but in particular the

2:28:14per capita measure at the committee

2:28:16meeting and and so we ask that you take

2:28:19a harder look at that and bring it back

2:28:20and you have and uh you know, as we

2:28:23hoped um it's it does provide further

2:28:26encouragement and so uh I do think

2:28:28that's a very fair way to look because

2:28:30the city can provide all of these

2:28:33programs and incentives and support and

2:28:37um but really it's our residents, our

2:28:40our homeowners, our businesses, our the

2:28:43people who come to work here, people who

2:28:45drive cars, they're the ones that have

2:28:47to make the change. Um and we can do

2:28:49things with the city fleet and city

2:28:50owned buildings, but we really need um

2:28:52for people out there to do it. So when

2:28:54we see a per capita change like that, we

2:28:57know that the behavior patterns are

2:28:59beginning to change. And that's really

2:29:00good because you you get to these

2:29:02tipping points where uh heat pump uh

2:29:06appliances are more acceptable and and

2:29:09EVs are the norm and and those are the

2:29:12kinds of things we're going to need in

2:29:14attitudes and behaviors to really get

2:29:15there. And we're we're seeing it happen.

2:29:18So I think that's partly why uh I'm

2:29:21encouraged. Um

2:29:24and uh you know it is kind of funny

2:29:27because it's it's that whole uh you

2:29:29can't be a hometown hero. Uh we are hard

2:29:32on ourselves and we should be because we

2:29:34have high aspirations. We have uh you

2:29:36know high resources for uh climate

2:29:40action uh relative to many communities.

2:29:42Um, but we are doing some pretty

2:29:45remarkable things and I do think that

2:29:48that's why um, you know, you get outside

2:29:50of this town and they really do notice

2:29:52and look and wonder and want to hear

2:29:55what we're doing. Um in fact um I just

2:29:59this morning the air district was going

2:30:01over the requests for me to speak at the

2:30:04United Nations climate conference and

2:30:05it's extraordinary how many places want

2:30:07to hear from us not from Vicki from the

2:30:10mayor of PaloAlto because of the

2:30:12programs that have been built over years

2:30:14because of what we're hearing in this

2:30:15report and uh you know I'm just really

2:30:18proud to share that and I think what's

2:30:20nice is then since it is a global issue

2:30:24um the synergies of new um approaches.

2:30:29Um many of those cities, I think all of

2:30:31those cities that council member Bert

2:30:32mentioned will be represented there and

2:30:35uh trading best practices. I'll try I'll

2:30:37try to bring something home that's

2:30:38that's helpful. Um

2:30:42but uh I did want to you know when you

2:30:44went through uh sort of the KPIs uh the

2:30:47SAP progress it it is really quite

2:30:49extraordinary. So I believe you said 10%

2:30:52and I know it's in the staff report. I

2:30:54just am not nimble enough to grab it.

2:30:57But 10% of single family homes have

2:30:59electric water heaters. And and remind

2:31:01me what percent of turnover annually is

2:31:03is that

2:31:07>> it can be tough to estimate but

2:31:08somewhere in the um 1100 to 1300 uh per

2:31:14per year

2:31:15>> and right but then

2:31:18>> I'm sorry.

2:31:19>> So so this is the 10% have them I

2:31:21thought but then what percent of

2:31:22turnover annually? Oh yeah, we're we're

2:31:24doing about 20% of turnover annually

2:31:26based on that 1100 to300 per year number

2:31:30>> and that's a nice number. Um and I think

2:31:32that also is is something to brag about.

2:31:34We want to get it higher. Um but uh and

2:31:38we'll see on Wednesday what kind of

2:31:40rules there are going to be around

2:31:41getting that higher. Um but um you know

2:31:45that's exciting. But then when we moved

2:31:46on to the um space heating in single

2:31:49family homes, I believe you said 40 to

2:31:5150%. For electric,

2:31:54>> yeah, we've seen an enormous um adoption

2:31:57rate in the last year since we put the

2:31:59incentives out and adding the direct

2:32:00installation program has only helped

2:32:02further.

2:32:03>> Yeah, I mean that that's a big deal. And

2:32:06so, you know, directionally we're doing

2:32:10well, but you know, actually legit

2:32:12numbers um objective numbers. It's it's

2:32:14it's quite amazing. Um

2:32:18I did want to ask about um the vice

2:32:20mayor had mentioned um um EV chargers in

2:32:25multif family homes and hoping we could

2:32:26do better. I know we were hopeful that

2:32:29we could do something with the school

2:32:31districts and try to to use some of

2:32:33those spaces and that didn't work out

2:32:34for a variety of reasons. What what what

2:32:36are some of the alternatives we're

2:32:38thinking about in terms of having things

2:32:40near multif family? I know there's

2:32:42there's efforts still to get them in the

2:32:44multif family complexes, but sometimes

2:32:46also having them nearby is is helpful.

2:32:49So, what are some options we're

2:32:51considering? Yeah. So, we have a a

2:32:53strong focus on low-income complexes

2:32:55right now in part because of some

2:32:57compliance requirements around some of

2:32:58the funding sources we use. Um, we're

2:33:01also looking at um financing uh

2:33:06uh ways to do ways to do um charging

2:33:10through financing as opposed to

2:33:12incentives. We've been able to make

2:33:13great progress using the funding sources

2:33:15we have and incentives, but we don't

2:33:17have enough to to um uh to help the

2:33:21entire city. And so we want to develop

2:33:23more scalable uh approaches. And then we

2:33:26also want to be costefficient. We don't

2:33:28want to go in and put charging in every

2:33:30single space when only one or two people

2:33:34have electric vehicles.

2:33:35>> We want to make sure that there's

2:33:36charging nearby. Um so that could be uh

2:33:40mobility hubs like the um uh the um

2:33:45school sites that you that that you

2:33:47talked about which we we are uh pursuing

2:33:50city sites uh for the use of that grant

2:33:53funding at this point. um

2:33:56[clears throat]

2:33:58as well as partnerships with um

2:34:00employers or places of worship um or

2:34:04other nonprofits uh looking for

2:34:07opportunities near multif family

2:34:08buildings. Uh we are exploring on street

2:34:10charging as well as uh continuing to

2:34:14look at shared charging in multif family

2:34:16complexes.

2:34:18>> Yeah, that's great. And I I think what

2:34:20you said at the beginning of that

2:34:22comment was really wise that we don't

2:34:23want to uh put in infrastructure that

2:34:26goes unused. Um we've been pretty lucky

2:34:28in the city because of the high adoption

2:34:30rate. We don't have that as a big

2:34:31problem, but that's been reported back

2:34:33sometimes. Um you know, I sit on a grant

2:34:36making committee for EV chargers around

2:34:38the bay and in certain areas you think

2:34:40you put them in, it's going to be great,

2:34:41it'll help. Um but then people don't

2:34:43have the vehicles to use them. So, um,

2:34:46that's really wise to be doing that up

2:34:48front.

2:34:49>> I can also note that we've done a lot

2:34:51with, uh, chargers on city sites and

2:34:54some of the data that we're looking at

2:34:55shows them, um, have a have a many of

2:34:59them having a fair amount of, uh,

2:35:00overnight usage. Um,

2:35:03>> that points to potentially multifamily

2:35:06use uh, near those near those sites,

2:35:08>> right? Yes. Thank you for that. Um, and

2:35:11just one last comment. Um the um this is

2:35:14sort of back on the the heat pump space

2:35:17and water heating. Um just as we'd hoped

2:35:20a few years ago when we started talking

2:35:22about this um the market really has

2:35:25evolved and it's just going to keep

2:35:27evolving. I mean we have more and more

2:35:29options coming on the market. They're

2:35:31getting smaller. They're getting

2:35:33cheaper. They're getting smarter.

2:35:35They're getting more variable. Um and so

2:35:38I think that um you know this the market

2:35:42driving and the push that has been done

2:35:43in this city and and elsewhere has

2:35:45really shown manufacturers that there's

2:35:47there's something to to to help with

2:35:49here and it's in their interest to do

2:35:51so. So um that bodess well for the

2:35:53future as well. Thank you.

2:35:56>> Council member Rectal

2:36:01I'm super quick. So

2:36:04>> member Lou.

2:36:05>> Yeah. Sorry. I just wanted to I was

2:36:07originally withholding comments because

2:36:08I've already offered many in uh the

2:36:11committee, but um as Mayor Vinker

2:36:14described the MTC grant that would fund

2:36:18uh community charging at school sites

2:36:20and how we transition that with a uh

2:36:24focus on city sites. Can we just confirm

2:36:28if the grant was extended and also just

2:36:31confirm hopefully again that Ventura

2:36:33Community Center is a prioritized

2:36:36location to bring uh EV charger to that

2:36:39EV charging to that community?

2:36:40>> Yes, with respect to Ventura, we are

2:36:42still in talks with the MTC about

2:36:44changing the grant scope.

2:36:45>> Okay, thank you.

2:36:49Yeah, I do have concerns about unused

2:36:51chargers, but the turnover of cars is so

2:36:54slow that an unused charger may

2:36:55incentivize someone who's in multif

2:36:57family to buy an EV and then down the

2:37:00road it will be used. So just we can't

2:37:02look at it in in a short term and say

2:37:04it's a it's wasted money. Uh can clerk

2:37:08can you bring up uh pay packet page 22?

2:37:12We have some comparisons of different

2:37:13cities there. I want to talk to that

2:37:17just that you can zoom in at the top

2:37:18half of the page back at page 22.

2:37:29And so we we have a pretty good showing

2:37:32there, but there's some San Francisco is

2:37:34better, although San Francisco may have

2:37:36better transit. Uh but we have Sunnyvale

2:37:40and Belmont. Are these apples to apples

2:37:42comparisons or are we measuring

2:37:44something that's different?

2:37:51>> I can't remember off the top of my head

2:37:53if they follow the GPC protocol. If they

2:37:56do follow the GPC protocol, it would be

2:37:58an apples to apples comparison. Um,

2:38:01especially since they have the same 1990

2:38:03baseline year.

2:38:05>> Okay. So, what are they doing different?

2:38:14Um well considering that their baseline

2:38:16per capita is so much lower than ours

2:38:19were um my guess is they have different

2:38:25um

2:38:25>> but if you look on the far right column

2:38:26the per capita greenhouse gas that's

2:38:29absolute right per capita. So I would

2:38:32think that that that would be an apples

2:38:34to apples comparison regardless of where

2:38:36they started.

2:38:40Ye. Yes. Well, um

2:38:46yes, except if they're starting at 8 8.5

2:38:49and 5 8.57 and 5.08 in 1990.

2:38:54Um they their reduction isn't

2:38:57as much as ours was to go from 14 to

2:39:00six.

2:39:01>> But I'm looking at the am I misreading

2:39:03that? The right hand column. Isn't that

2:39:05how many how much greenhouse gas each

2:39:07person produces and so wouldn't that be

2:39:11independent of where you started?

2:39:15>> It would be council member rectal. I I

2:39:17think um I think we don't have the

2:39:20detailed answer to that question but

2:39:22it's a good one and and we can check

2:39:25>> to see whether they're using the same

2:39:27protocol and they're these numbers are

2:39:28truly apples to apples. No, I ju I just

2:39:31want to note here that and Christine

2:39:33correct me if I say anything wrong here,

2:39:35but the per capita GHG is the entire

2:39:37community greenhouse gas emissions

2:39:39divided by the population and um not

2:39:43every city has the same um commercial

2:39:46and industrial base that Palo Alto does.

2:39:49So that's part of it and so that may the

2:39:52and we are starting from a higher

2:39:54baseline and so the combination of those

2:39:56two things means that these in these

2:39:59improvements on a per capita basis may

2:40:01even be more extensive in PaloAlto than

2:40:04in some of these other cities that on

2:40:06the face of it look like they have a

2:40:07lower per capita rate and I can I can

2:40:09speak as a San Franciscan that um in a

2:40:13multif family build you know with all of

2:40:15the multif family buildings that energy

2:40:17the I mean the energy use is just

2:40:19smaller um per person. So some of it has

2:40:22to do do with climate and uh building

2:40:25stock as well.

2:40:26>> Okay. But what I would really love is on

2:40:30the right hand column I think there is

2:40:32some apples to oranges here. They have

2:40:34different amount of industry, different

2:40:35amount of retail. Can we find some KPs

2:40:38that are apples to apples to really say

2:40:41oh if you look [clears throat] at the

2:40:42single family houses in Palo Alto, how

2:40:44do they compare to the single family

2:40:45houses elsewhere?

2:40:47And that's it's hard to dig up that

2:40:50data, but that really would be a much

2:40:52better than lumping everything together

2:40:54and then just dividing by the

2:40:56population.

2:40:58Uh so that's one thing better KPPS. Uh

2:41:01and the other is look at these that have

2:41:03look at these cities that have low

2:41:05numbers. Are they doing something

2:41:06different than we are? And can we steal

2:41:09from them? And that I would um I have no

2:41:13pride. I will happily steal good

2:41:15programs. So those would be the two

2:41:16points there. Uh the next question is

2:41:19the regional water quality plant that

2:41:21had a lot of natural gas use. Uh how do

2:41:24we use natural gas at the at the plant?

2:41:29Uh I I believe the natural gas use was

2:41:31actually fairly slight and the the

2:41:35report on the municipal emissions was

2:41:37indicating that it was nitrous oxide

2:41:39emissions that uh come from the

2:41:42treatment process. I thought they also

2:41:44mentioned ethane. Okay. Anyway, short

2:41:47answer is do we have an electrification

2:41:49opportunity down at the plant if they

2:41:52there?

2:41:52>> A relatively small one. There is some uh

2:41:55natural gas use. It uh at this point is

2:41:58only used for a small amount of space

2:42:01heating.

2:42:02>> Okay.

2:42:02>> The very large use was the sludge

2:42:05incinerator

2:42:07uh that had been the city's largest

2:42:09single natural gas used until 2019.

2:42:13Okay. And then the packet also talks

2:42:15about we're changing over and we're

2:42:17going to reduce the amount of nitrous

2:42:18oxide that we're producing. And so we're

2:42:21is that we're changing the ammonia and

2:42:23it's we're breaking the ammonia down

2:42:25into something else other than nitrous

2:42:27oxide. Is that how we're reducing that?

2:42:31So uh traditionally the the treatment

2:42:34process for nitrogen

2:42:36has oxidized ammonia to nitrate. So NH3

2:42:41to NO3, which is what nitrifying

2:42:43bacteria do. Uh we're we're now having

2:42:46to adapt and doing this large secondary

2:42:49treatment upgrades project at the

2:42:51treatment plant

2:42:52>> that will actually remove nitrogen

2:42:56entirely.

2:42:57>> Okay. And so what the report is

2:42:59indicating is because we're essentially

2:43:02in the middle or approaching 3/4s of the

2:43:04way through that project and there's

2:43:07some odd things about the way we're

2:43:09operating in this kind of interim mode.

2:43:12We've seen these increases in nitrous

2:43:14oxide but that's expected to stabilize

2:43:18and then decrease. Okay. Thank you. Uh

2:43:21and finally the last one is gasoline

2:43:24sales. Back of page 56, you talk about

2:43:25that we don't have any gasoline sales

2:43:27data. That would be really nice to know

2:43:29with all these EVs, are we selling less

2:43:31gas in the city?

2:43:34Do you have any

2:43:37any estimate?

2:43:39And can't we just collect sales tax and

2:43:42look at how much sales tax is collected

2:43:43at the various gas stations and have a

2:43:46pretty good idea?

2:43:51That's probably something we need to

2:43:53look into. But, uh, since gas prices

2:43:55change pretty regularly, some there'd

2:43:57have to be some matching of the

2:43:59percentages to the to the gasoline

2:44:02prices to be able to get the volumes.

2:44:05Um, it's it's a sticky problem and one

2:44:09that we've been looking at for a while,

2:44:10but we can keep looking.

2:44:12>> Okay. In in big picture, both EVs and

2:44:16hot water heaters, heat pump water

2:44:17heaters are both cheaper to own. So, the

2:44:20market's helping us. Usually, you have

2:44:22to convince people pay a little extra

2:44:24for your organic orange or whatever. Uh

2:44:27here, we're actually saying pay less.

2:44:28And so, I think we have an opportunity

2:44:31with a little leverage, we can actually

2:44:32make a lot of progress. Okay. Thank you.

2:44:36>> You're right. It's a little easier for

2:44:37us though because our electricity is

2:44:38cheaper. [laughter]

2:44:40Council member Bart.

2:44:41>> Yeah. Uh so first just following up on

2:44:43the gas sales. I think in our 20 late

2:44:472022 we actually adopted that as one of

2:44:50the KPIs we wanted to quantify. We just

2:44:53haven't been able to. Uh but it's

2:44:55something we're clearly uh uh think

2:44:58would be a good one. Um I I did want to

2:45:02follow up on kind of the question of uh

2:45:05how do you compare city to city? And as

2:45:09John pointed out, we are a city that um

2:45:13has a relatively high proportion of

2:45:15single family homes about uh is about

2:45:1855% or so. Um and as he pointed

2:45:23inherently multif family homes use less

2:45:26energy. uh our new homes than per capita

2:45:30are assumed to be lower energy consuming

2:45:34and almost all electric and so the the

2:45:38impact from the stationary that the the

2:45:42structures will be nominal will still

2:45:46then have the question of uh their uh

2:45:49transportation impacts. Um but on the um

2:45:54the multifamily charging uh I I did want

2:45:58to note that there have been real

2:46:00advancements the last several years on

2:46:01the technologies for multifamily home

2:46:04charging and the cost of those. So they

2:46:07are putting in units that are adaptive

2:46:10to whether you want level one or level

2:46:12two charging and that uh can can light

2:46:16up different stations uh as the demand

2:46:20increases. So the investment is lower

2:46:23both for that and the triggering on uh

2:46:26some of these are smart systems. So uh

2:46:29one of the problems is triggering the

2:46:31need for a panel upgrade at multif

2:46:32family and that's diminished. It's not

2:46:35solved, but there's real great progress

2:46:36that's going on there. Um,

2:46:40and oh, and then on our city is not only

2:46:42the multif family, but we have over

2:46:45three times as many workers as employed

2:46:48residents. And as was implied there, we

2:46:51that is a significant factor. And I

2:46:54don't know if we break down the GHG on

2:46:59average per worker. Do we have that

2:47:00data?

2:47:09No, I don't think we've done that

2:47:10breakdown, but we may be able to.

2:47:12>> Yeah, because that really fills in that

2:47:14that blank. How much of it is our per

2:47:17capita of residents versus what's being

2:47:20influenced by the number of workers that

2:47:22we have. Um, and then, oh, I did want to

2:47:25note Christine, you said that the VMTS

2:47:28since 2023 were because of population

2:47:31change, but that's actually, isn't it

2:47:33the number of workers we have returning

2:47:36to jobs in the city? Uh, more than the

2:47:39population change.

2:47:40>> Um, no, the the VMT in 2023 was the last

2:47:45like true VMT measurement we had. Um,

2:47:48and because we didn't have that for 2024

2:47:51or 2025, we used um the population as a

2:47:57proxy for how much it would increase,

2:48:00>> but we really haven't had much

2:48:02population change since 2023.

2:48:07>> Slight, but yeah, we it was based on

2:48:09population.

2:48:10>> But what what BMT increase did we have

2:48:13since 2023? What were we projecting? I

2:48:16thought it was significantly more than

2:48:19our actual population increase.

2:48:23>> Uh I don't I think it was

2:48:28it was based on

2:48:31I have to go back and look, but it was

2:48:32based on population and um driving

2:48:37trends and um where people were

2:48:40commuting from.

2:48:42like Ringcon looked at all of the above

2:48:44to do a guest.

2:48:46>> All right. Um and then um

2:48:51uh All right. So that that really sums

2:48:53up my remaining comments. Thank you.

2:48:57>> Right. Well, thank you. And uh seeing no

2:48:59further lights, I think that actually

2:49:01sums up this this item. So, thank you so

2:49:04much for coming and presenting. And uh I

2:49:08think we're ready to move on from that.

2:49:10All right.

2:49:14Okay. So, with that, we will move on to

2:49:17our consent calendar. And madame clerk,

2:49:20let me first ask if there are any public

2:49:23comments on the consent calendar.

2:49:27>> We have no request to speak and no hands

2:49:28are raised on Zoom.

2:49:30>> Okay. So, colleagues, do you have any um

2:49:34no votes or requests to pull or

2:49:36recusals?

2:49:37Council member Lou,

2:49:40>> I need to recuse from item number eight

2:49:42because that property is owned by

2:49:44Stanford and my wife is an employee of

2:49:47the uh Slack Stanford Linear Accelerator

2:49:49Center.

2:49:54>> I have a similar recusal um from item

2:49:57eight given by uh legal work for

2:49:59Stanford.

2:50:03>> All right.

2:50:04>> I move the consent calendar.

2:50:06>> Thank you. I second.

2:50:08>> Second.

2:50:09>> All right. Don't see any lights for

2:50:11further discussion. So, we can vote.

2:51:04Uh motion carries unanimously.

2:51:06>> All right. Thank you. So we'll move to

2:51:09city manager comments.

2:51:12>> Thank you, mayor. City clerk, would I

2:51:14request your assistance with a few

2:51:16slides?

2:51:23All right, let's go to the next slide,

2:51:25please.

2:51:29Uh, first off, want to thank and

2:51:31acknowledge uh both uh community members

2:51:34and our city staff from several

2:51:36departments that participated in our

2:51:38fire or fire storm prep uh open house uh

2:51:42last week at fire station 3 on New Road.

2:51:46Uh we had an uh over a hundred uh

2:51:48community members in attendance, several

2:51:50council members as well. Thank you for

2:51:52attending and uh excellent discussion on

2:51:56storm preparedness. Uh and a variety of

2:51:59tools made available for community

2:52:01members. Uh additional resources are

2:52:04available on our city's uh website

2:52:06pelto.gov/stormupdate.

2:52:10Next slide, please.

2:52:13And speaking of fire, uh do want to

2:52:14provide a quick update on fire staffing

2:52:17as our uh fire department uh is

2:52:21continuing to make progress on

2:52:23implementation of the new single role uh

2:52:26emergency medical services program. I

2:52:29understand they are currently in the

2:52:31process of extending office offers uh to

2:52:34these new employees for four full-time

2:52:37paramedics and three part-time uh

2:52:39paramedics. This will uh enable the

2:52:42first uh single roll uh EMS unit uh to

2:52:46be in uh service later this spring

2:52:49following uh the completion of their

2:52:51internal academy. Uh really a a

2:52:54remarkable next phase for our fire

2:52:56department. Uh that will uh continue to

2:52:59build our capacity. Uh really uh uh

2:53:02generating additional confidence in the

2:53:05department. noted here. Also, fire

2:53:07station 4 uh project uh construction is

2:53:11underway, including a pro uh separate uh

2:53:15staffing quarters for both the uh engine

2:53:18and future uh uh fully staffed uh medic

2:53:22uh 64 as well. Also want to take an

2:53:25opportunity here with fire on the topic

2:53:28that I was reminded recently that we

2:53:30have our new fire foundation Palto Fire

2:53:33foundation that's now been established

2:53:35here in uh town uh really a separate

2:53:39organization nonprofit established to

2:53:41provide support uh to the mission of our

2:53:44Pela fire department. So, uh,

2:53:46appreciation and, uh, really, uh,

2:53:48welcome community members to learn more

2:53:50about the fire foundation as an

2:53:52opportunity to support the work of our

2:53:54fire department. Next slide, please.

2:53:58Uh, also news uh, for today, the federal

2:54:03community development block grant or

2:54:05CDBG uh, grant program as it's known uh,

2:54:09just started its uh, period of a notice

2:54:12of funding availability. This is really

2:54:14geared toward local uh nonprofits, other

2:54:17community organizations that uh provide

2:54:20direct community services and uh so this

2:54:23grant program uh is uh now underway with

2:54:26application deadline of January 13th uh

2:54:30in a number of uh specific focus areas

2:54:33as listed here. There will be a virtual

2:54:35information session on November 12th,

2:54:37next week at 11:00 a.m. Again, this is

2:54:40really geared toward local nonprofits uh

2:54:42for this uh key funding program uh

2:54:46administered through the city. Next

2:54:49slide, please. Oh, actually before we go

2:54:51to the next slide somewhere on here

2:54:54I understand oh it's not shown here but

2:54:56we do expect this year's cycle for this

2:55:00July 27th to 28th u year is uh expected

2:55:04to generate or have available about

2:55:07$500,000.

2:55:09So quite a bit of funding available for

2:55:11local progress. Next slide please.

2:55:15Then uh looking forward to next week uh

2:55:18we are having our annual uh veterans day

2:55:21uh program in uh cooperation with our uh

2:55:26both Stanford University as well as the

2:55:29office of military affiliate affiliated

2:55:31communities the American Legion uh local

2:55:34post 375

2:55:37and the South Bay blue star mobs in

2:55:39order to honor local veterans. This uh

2:55:42program will be next Monday, November

2:55:449th at 3 p.m. at MacArthur Park, similar

2:55:47to events that have been held in prior

2:55:49years. Really look forward to this and

2:55:52uh hope uh community members uh can join

2:55:54us. Again, this is Monday afternoon,

2:55:56November 9th at 3 p.m.

2:55:59Next slide, please. And finally, looking

2:56:02forward to agendas for the upcoming

2:56:04weeks. Next week we have uh two study

2:56:07sessions, one on 720 San Antonio Road,

2:56:10another on the Corey Road Transit

2:56:12Connection uh project and an action item

2:56:15related to the Bryant Lincoln uh Avenue

2:56:19traffic calming uh effort. Then the

2:56:21following week on November 16th, looking

2:56:24forward to a joint study session with

2:56:26the utilities advisory commission on

2:56:29water supply uh issues. uh return of the

2:56:32action item on 470 Olive Avenue and the

2:56:36council appointed officer employment

2:56:38agreements November 30th uh public

2:56:41hearing on the affordable housing

2:56:43development on our lot ti of 4550 Linton

2:56:46Avenue. Then a number of items uh shown

2:56:49here on the December 7th and beyond date

2:56:53uh that are being finalized uh really

2:56:56through the end of the year. And with

2:56:58that, that completes my comments. Back

2:57:00to you, mayor.

2:57:01>> All right. Thank you, Mr. City Manager.

2:57:03And I think um there was also a

2:57:05colleague's memo that last week you'd

2:57:06mentioned that I don't think is noted

2:57:09here, but

2:57:10>> Right. that is in the works for our

2:57:13November 16th agenda. This is the

2:57:16colleague's memo on childcare um uh uh

2:57:19approvals and land use around town. And

2:57:21that will be part of our packet this

2:57:23Thursday.

2:57:24>> All right. Thank you so much. Okay.

2:57:27Well, we are pretty much on time. Uh we

2:57:29will take our break now and be back in

2:57:3015 minutes.

3:15:35All right, I'm gonna call this meeting

3:15:37back to order.

3:15:39We're going to move on to our action

3:15:40items, starting with item nine, which is

3:15:44a public hearing

3:15:46with a long title.

3:15:48So, I'll turn it over to Director Lake.

3:15:52>> Good evening, uh, Mayor and and City

3:15:53Council, uh, Jonathan Le, director for

3:15:55planning and development services. I'm

3:15:57going to ask Emily Gallas, our senior

3:15:59planner, to, uh, present this item.

3:16:03>> Good evening. Uh this is uh the public

3:16:07hearing for the adoption of an ordinance

3:16:10to amend various uh PaloAlto municipal

3:16:13code uh sections of title 16 18 and 21

3:16:19uh to implement SB9 SB 450 and other

3:16:24state housing laws. Slide please.

3:16:30In terms of background for this uh draft

3:16:33ordinance, on January 13, 2025, the city

3:16:37council adopted interim ordinance

3:16:40uh 5645 amending the PaloAlto municipal

3:16:44code title 16 building regulations title

3:16:4618 zoning and title 21 subdivisions of

3:16:49land. This ordinance um implemented uh

3:16:53SB450

3:16:54and other state housing laws um other

3:16:57state laws and adopted objective design

3:17:00standards for twostory houses. On

3:17:03January 12th of this year, the city

3:17:06council voted to extend that ordinance

3:17:08until December 31st, 2026.

3:17:11And on September 30th, the Planning and

3:17:14Transportation Commission unanimously

3:17:17recommended the um approval of this

3:17:20ordinance with a couple of changes.

3:17:27The PTC supported the draft ordinance.

3:17:29Uh they identified some minor revisions

3:17:33such as um typos or minor

3:17:35inconsistencies in the draft ordinance.

3:17:38Uh and also um recommended a change to

3:17:43um modify one of the objective design

3:17:45standards which would increase the

3:17:47allowable second floor area to be um 40%

3:17:52of the total allowable floor area um or

3:17:56the property which would be an increase

3:17:59from 35% in the current adopted

3:18:01standards. Um this would not increase

3:18:04the allowable F on the site. This would

3:18:07just um increase the proportion of the F

3:18:13that would be allowed to be on the

3:18:15second floor.

3:18:17And then the PTC also recommended that

3:18:20council consider directing staff to

3:18:22develop objective design standards for

3:18:25professor bill as a future council

3:18:27objective. Um this was related to um a

3:18:31different state law that um allowed for

3:18:35new objective standards to be created um

3:18:38to preserve historic districts

3:18:42and uh staff will present this to

3:18:43council for consideration um next year.

3:18:50The proposed ordinance this evening

3:18:53would clarify the objective design

3:18:55standard process for twotory houses,

3:18:57which is an alternative to the

3:18:59individual review process. It would make

3:19:02some minor changes to the objective

3:19:04design standards themselves,

3:19:07um, and would make permanent other

3:19:09regulations from ordinance 5645.

3:19:17And so in terms of what those um process

3:19:20changes and clarifications would be,

3:19:22currently any two-story home application

3:19:25may choose to meet the objective design

3:19:27standards or apply for the individual

3:19:30review process. This ordinance would um

3:19:34rephrase some of those sections to put

3:19:37the objective design standard option

3:19:39first and frame the individual review as

3:19:43an alternative process to opt into if um

3:19:48it was not desired to meet the objective

3:19:50design standards.

3:19:52It would also update all references to

3:19:56individual review throughout the zoning

3:19:58code. Um those sections are R2 um single

3:20:04family. It's the R1 zone, the R2 and RMD

3:20:08zone and then the um RM zones uh for

3:20:12consistency

3:20:14um throughout in terms of referencing

3:20:17the objective design standard process as

3:20:20the um primary process and individual

3:20:23review as an alternative process. Um it

3:20:26also would add the objective design

3:20:27standards directly to the code. They are

3:20:30currently incorporated by reference and

3:20:32need to be located as a separate um

3:20:35document.

3:20:37um by adding it directly to the code, it

3:20:39also becomes more clear that the um

3:20:43regular

3:20:44development standards already in the

3:20:46code also apply and the objective design

3:20:50standards are in addition to um the

3:20:53development standards in the code.

3:20:58Additionally, it would clarify for SB9

3:21:01projects specifically how ADUs may be

3:21:04incorporated. Um again this is a

3:21:07clarification so there's no change to

3:21:09the current um implementation of

3:21:13allowing um ADUs where required to be

3:21:17allowed by state law for SB9 projects.

3:21:20It also would not change that uh SB9

3:21:24projects that are result of an urban lot

3:21:25split have a maximum of two units um per

3:21:30property.

3:21:32Next slide.

3:21:35And then in terms of changes to the

3:21:37objective design standards and the urban

3:21:39lots split standards, um some of the

3:21:42changes would assist in streamlining

3:21:44review for the um applicants designing

3:21:48their plans as well as staff reviewing

3:21:50the plans. This includes removing

3:21:53redundant and overly restrictive

3:21:55standards.

3:21:56uh providing more clarification and

3:21:59flexibility for corner lots and

3:22:01oversized lots and allows for a wider

3:22:05range of architectural styles and

3:22:06finishes. It also increases usability

3:22:10through um targeted minor changes to

3:22:13roof uh the maximum allowable roof

3:22:15height for low pitched roofs um which

3:22:18would increase from 22 feet to 23 feet.

3:22:22um

3:22:24allow for garage widths and driveway

3:22:28widths that are consistent with the rest

3:22:31of the R1 zone. Um,

3:22:34and then allow for a slightly larger

3:22:37second floor size as I described on a

3:22:39previous slide and would also allow for

3:22:43small um second floor balconies as that

3:22:46was identified as one of the items where

3:22:49um residents are frequently choosing

3:22:52individual review over the objective

3:22:55design standard process.

3:22:59Next slide.

3:23:04The ordinance is exempt from the

3:23:06California Environmental Quality Act in

3:23:09accordance with guideline section

3:23:1115061B3

3:23:14which is um implementation of state laws

3:23:19and the recommendation is for the city

3:23:21council to adopt the draft ordinance

3:23:23included in the S report as attachment

3:23:26A.

3:23:29Thank you. This concludes my

3:23:30presentation.

3:23:32>> All right. Well, thank you. Oh, more.

3:23:34Thank you very much, Miss Callus.

3:23:36Appreciate the presentation. Um, let's

3:23:40go first to public comment. Do we have

3:23:41any on this item?

3:23:45>> We currently have one request to speak.

3:23:48>> Okay.

3:23:50Our first speaker is Hmed.

3:23:54Hmed, you should now be able to unmute

3:23:56yourself.

3:24:02Mohamad, we cannot hear you if you're

3:24:04speaking, but you should be able to

3:24:06unmute yourself now.

3:24:07>> Can you hear me? Can you?

3:24:08>> Yes, we can hear you now.

3:24:09>> Okay, great. Thanks. So, uh, I'm

3:24:13starting my request now. So, uh, my name

3:24:16is Hamid Mirai and I'm a homeowner at

3:24:20Emerson Street in Palo Alto. We have

3:24:22been working on plans to rebuild our

3:24:24home for actually almost two years now.

3:24:28And first of all, I want to thank you

3:24:30for proposing this ordinance and for the

3:24:32opportunity for me to speak tonight. I

3:24:34have one specific request which I also

3:24:37raised in my written comment and the

3:24:39email that I sent to the council

3:24:41members. It's about the contextual

3:24:44garage placement restriction. Actually,

3:24:47we have invested uh consider

3:24:50considerable

3:24:52uh time and effort designing our home

3:24:56with a front-facing attached garage

3:24:58using the twostory objective design

3:25:01standards. And since it was a little bit

3:25:03unclear, this caused significant

3:25:06uncertainty revisions and delays for us.

3:25:10Our lot is 50 by 100 ft and requiring

3:25:14the garage in the rear half of the house

3:25:16significantly affects our entire floor

3:25:19plan. Uh actually it requires a longer

3:25:23driveway

3:25:25in the side of the property and taking

3:25:27away valuable space that we could

3:25:29otherwise actually plant several trees.

3:25:33As a matter of fact, we planted like 15

3:25:35trees in our previous home. So we would

3:25:37love to bring that same commitment to

3:25:39this property. I strongly support

3:25:42preserving neighborhood character but I

3:25:43believe neighborhood character depends

3:25:46on many other factors like the scale of

3:25:48the house architecture setback

3:25:50landscaping and overall design not

3:25:53simply the garage placement. In fact,

3:25:54our immediate nextdoor neighbors already

3:25:57have front-facing garage and the houses

3:25:59directly across the street, most of them

3:26:01have have frontfacing garage. And more

3:26:05importantly, I'm not asking for garages

3:26:08without restrictions.

3:26:10The objective standard already regulates

3:26:13it with height, width, facade placement,

3:26:16and appearance, which actually dominates

3:26:19the street uh view. So my concern is

3:26:22that this additional constraints

3:26:25determines garage placement based on the

3:26:28neighboring properties which have some

3:26:30garages and and and in some cases the

3:26:32corner case the corner houses don't

3:26:34count and all that. But I believe

3:26:37homeowners could benefit from this

3:26:39flexibility if if for specifically for

3:26:42objective design standards. I was

3:26:45wondering if we could amend the proposed

3:26:48ordinance so that the contextual garage

3:26:50placement does not apply to projects

3:26:53complying with two twostory objective

3:26:56design standards. So I'm respectfully

3:26:59asking the council members to consider

3:27:01this a amendment before adopting the

3:27:04ordinance. Thank you.

3:27:09>> That concludes public comment on item

3:27:11nine.

3:27:14All right. Well, thank you very much.

3:27:16Um,

3:27:17all right, colleagues, uh, staff is

3:27:20looking to see if we would recommend

3:27:22adopting this ordinance, uh, that would

3:27:24implement these certain, uh,

3:27:27sorry, objective design standards and

3:27:29process changes. So, I will open it up

3:27:31to, uh, any comments, questions,

3:27:35motions.

3:27:46Council member Lou, maybe just to start

3:27:49with a couple of questions. Can you

3:27:51firstly address the public commenters

3:27:53point about garage placement and to what

3:27:56extent uh and just how prescriptive we

3:27:59are sort of before and after this set of

3:28:01changes and how individual review

3:28:04process works for a situation like that.

3:28:12Uh the there is no proposed change to

3:28:15the contextual garage placement

3:28:17requirement. Um and as noted

3:28:23uh everything that is in in this case

3:28:27PaloAlto Municipal Code 18.12.040

3:28:31040

3:28:32um which is the development standards

3:28:34including the contextual garage

3:28:36placement is applicable to all projects

3:28:39that are opting to use the objective

3:28:41design standards which would um then

3:28:44become in the draft ordinance 182045.

3:28:51>> And so they in this case the public

3:28:55commenter could use individual review

3:28:57and can you sort of or or could they

3:28:59not? Can you talk sort of about what

3:29:01that looks like?

3:29:02>> The contextual garage placement standard

3:29:05um applies to um all R1ZONED properties.

3:29:11I don't know the details um for this

3:29:15particular one, but um if the garage

3:29:19placement standard applies um based on

3:29:22the uh placement of rear or um front

3:29:29garages along the block. Um that would

3:29:32apply

3:29:34whether they were going through the

3:29:36individual review process or the

3:29:37objective design standard process.

3:29:41Okay, I see. Uh, I'll Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

3:29:46I might have to do some reading and sort

3:29:48of rethink my thoughts about that. I

3:29:50guess the other thing that sort of jump

3:29:52out jumped out to me because it was not

3:29:53a very big change is how there was the

3:29:56staff reported a bit of discussion about

3:29:57how for sloped roofs 22 feet is too

3:30:00restrictive. And then the next line it

3:30:03comes back and says, "So, we're

3:30:05proposing 23 feet." And to me, I can't

3:30:09possibly imagine how that practically

3:30:11makes a difference in very many cases

3:30:14like I can

3:30:17see it's, you know, it is an

3:30:19improvement. Um, so I guess I have that

3:30:22specific question. Can you comment on

3:30:23that in the broader question of uh are

3:30:26there any other areas that we considered

3:30:30further liberalizing our standards uh

3:30:33but not that we should potentially

3:30:36consider as a council or consider in

3:30:37future iterations um at the PTC level

3:30:41for example.

3:30:45So in terms of the first question for

3:30:47roof heights um this

3:30:51um

3:30:53we have had um the current heights for a

3:30:57number of years and um we have seen them

3:31:01work in particular when we're looking at

3:31:04neighborhoods the um 22 to 23 ft is um

3:31:10contextually appropriate for those

3:31:11neighborhoods.

3:31:13Um, and then I'm sorry, can you remind

3:31:16me what the second?

3:31:17>> I can jump. Yeah. So, so I think the 23

3:31:2020 22 and 23 sheet also came out as part

3:31:22of the survey and and getting feedback

3:31:24from uh those who had participated in

3:31:26that exercise and the difference in the

3:31:29um that space between the the ceiling

3:31:32and the floor above uh was uh impacted.

3:31:36And so that even that additional foot

3:31:38was enough to make a project go from,

3:31:41you know, uh, questionable to actually

3:31:43doable.

3:31:45Do we want to have a greater height?

3:31:46This ties into your second question. Um,

3:31:50it's a policy call for the city council.

3:31:52our uh uh perspective throughout this

3:31:56whole process when SB9 came into effect

3:32:00um was one to just recognize that the

3:32:02city has had a long-standing process

3:32:04with the individual review um

3:32:06application and it has uh you know I

3:32:10believe it's received a fair amount of

3:32:12um uh there was a uh engaged community

3:32:15process to enact that program. There's

3:32:19been discussion over the years about,

3:32:20you know, is the city applying it

3:32:22correctly? Are we leaning into design

3:32:24review? Are we focusing in on the

3:32:26contextual standards that are set forth

3:32:28in the IR guidelines? And so we've had a

3:32:30little bit of this sort of over time.

3:32:32When SB9 came into effect, um, uh, we

3:32:37needed to come up with objective

3:32:38standards. And so what we were trying to

3:32:39do initially was mirror the types of

3:32:42applications that we were able to

3:32:44approve administratively through the IR

3:32:46process. Our first cut was really tight

3:32:51and did not leave a lot of room and it

3:32:53was different from the standard R1 uh

3:32:57requirements in our code. State law

3:32:59changed again and said you can't have

3:33:01two different standards. You can't have

3:33:03one for the SB9 projects and one for

3:33:05your R1 zones. So that's when um Emily

3:33:08and the team went through a process of

3:33:09more engagement with the community to

3:33:11find out how do we balance this. So, we

3:33:14now feel like with the proposed changes,

3:33:17there's going to be a lot more

3:33:18applications that go through this

3:33:20process and not go through the IR

3:33:23process. Um, your question more

3:33:26specifically, are there other areas

3:33:28where we can be more liberal in our

3:33:30standards? Yes, you can. You could

3:33:33absolutely be more liberal. Uh, the this

3:33:36process does not allow us to go to 31 ft

3:33:40for instance. Yes. um without going

3:33:42through the IR process. This that's a

3:33:44policy decision about how far the

3:33:46council wants to go. You you could

3:33:49decide that you don't want any IR

3:33:51process at all. Yeah, understood. But

3:33:53there wasn't anything else on the short

3:33:54list or anything else that got a lot of

3:33:56PTC discussion that we should

3:33:58potentially be flagging for this

3:33:59conversation there. Uh there is not any

3:34:03obvious next option that we could

3:34:06consider. this is sort of what we have

3:34:08and

3:34:10uh any further liberalization would just

3:34:12be a separate project under different

3:34:13scope for the future.

3:34:14>> Right. I I think there's dialogue still

3:34:17about the privacy issue. This is one of

3:34:19those most contentious aspects. We felt

3:34:21like we balanced it, but that's another

3:34:23area where the council could decide.

3:34:25>> Sure.

3:34:25>> Okay. Thank you,

3:34:29>> Council Member Lowing.

3:34:35>> Thank you. appreciate the the slides the

3:34:37heads up about why Professorville was

3:34:39singled out there that it's an upcoming

3:34:42situation and not u not right away but

3:34:44it's a good good heads up to know that

3:34:46you're looking forward on that. Um I

3:34:48really appreciate the fact that uh you

3:34:50looked into this seeing not much use of

3:34:52the objective standards as is. You asked

3:34:55your customers how come uh and the

3:34:57customers gave you feedback that you

3:34:59know actually we didn't even know about

3:35:01that really well and also could you

3:35:03clarify it. So now they're engaged and

3:35:05you know that'll that'll spread. So um

3:35:07you know salute you for for doing that.

3:35:10[clears throat] I I think this report

3:35:12coming back from is just a another great

3:35:14example like like last week frankly of

3:35:17how uh I mean there's a lot more work

3:35:19here than than just in these few bullet

3:35:21points. I recognize there's a lot of

3:35:22work sort of beneath the beneath the

3:35:25surface here but um you guys did a

3:35:27really good job working collaboratively

3:35:29um together to figure out you know

3:35:31what's the best solutions here. couple a

3:35:33couple of them are significant with

3:35:35respect to extra f on the second floor

3:35:37[clears throat] um and the the new kind

3:35:39of garage that you're proposing for for

3:35:43a two-car garage but um you worked it

3:35:46and you came out with a quite reasonable

3:35:48solution. So I think that that helps us

3:35:50uh that you've worked at that hard

3:35:52together and come up with the same uh

3:35:54same opinions on this. So, I think it

3:35:56it's a it's a really good a really good

3:36:00uh decision and and solution for the the

3:36:02changes that you made here uh including

3:36:04the SB uh uh 79. So, I'm very

3:36:06supportive. SP9, excuse me,

3:36:13>> council member Rectal.

3:36:15Yeah, speaking of the contextual

3:36:17designs, I'm not a big fan of making

3:36:20everyone follow everyone else, but

3:36:22that's a bigger discussion at PTC

3:36:24probably should chew on that and see for

3:36:26example setbacks or contextual a garage

3:36:28or contextual and is that necessarily

3:36:31appropriate? Are the good designs that

3:36:33would still would be neighborhood

3:36:34friendly? But that is a difficult

3:36:36problem we're not going to solve

3:36:38tonight. Um

3:36:40when I looked at the surveys I have not

3:36:42heard of objective standards was quite

3:36:44often said is this a marketing issue

3:36:47that people that we're not communicating

3:36:50well enough that there's the second

3:36:51option that people can have.

3:36:57So the objective design standard process

3:37:00was essentially created as a result of

3:37:05um SB 450 and through um the interim and

3:37:11previous ordinances mentioned in the

3:37:14report. And so I think

3:37:18there was a combination of it being um

3:37:23new as well as um

3:37:28you know some of the feedback that I had

3:37:30received especially from architects who

3:37:32were very very familiar with individual

3:37:34review was that they just didn't want to

3:37:38kind of learn something new. They were

3:37:41pretty comfortable doing what they had

3:37:43been doing and felt like they had um you

3:37:46know had both kind of the rapport with

3:37:50staff and were able to have certainty

3:37:53for their applicants um or for their

3:37:55homeowners for what it took to get

3:37:58through that process. And there was a

3:38:00learning curve with the objective design

3:38:02standards. But our goal with the

3:38:05objective design standards is because

3:38:07they are objective to be even um

3:38:12more predictable for the homeowners and

3:38:16um ultimately a smoother process than

3:38:19having some of the objective or some of

3:38:21the subjective aspects of individual

3:38:23review.

3:38:24So, do we think that we're going to do a

3:38:27better job going forward explaining you

3:38:28have two options of doing this or is I

3:38:32mean do we prefer as from a staff

3:38:34standpoint objective standards or is it

3:38:38or do we prefer the old way?

3:38:40>> Well, so yeah, we we can certainly do

3:38:42more. I know that's um across the board.

3:38:44There's probably more messaging that we

3:38:45can be doing about all the you know the

3:38:47good work that we're we're you know uh

3:38:49accomplishing. uh and so we can add this

3:38:52one to that list of of promoting I I do

3:38:54think that it was buried in the in the

3:38:56code and in fact the standards were on a

3:38:58resolution that was not even embedded a

3:39:00part of the code. So the now with the

3:39:02proposed change, all of that's together

3:39:05and I think the privacy change about the

3:39:07the balconies was a big complaint that

3:39:09we were getting and a lot of people did

3:39:11not want to go through the process

3:39:12because of that. And so striking that

3:39:14balance between what's a reasonable

3:39:15expectation of privacy between neighbors

3:39:17is embedded in this. Um

3:39:21the staff doesn't have a preference on

3:39:23uh what the p the application type is.

3:39:26We're here to advance the council's um

3:39:28uh interests and make sure that um to

3:39:31the extent that we have a discretionary

3:39:33process such as IR that there's that

3:39:35contextual compatibility, but at the

3:39:36same time following state law and

3:39:38allowing homes to um to be processed

3:39:42more efficiently. Uh that's now the

3:39:44avenue that exists. It saves uh more

3:39:46staff time um on uh when you do the

3:39:50objective development standards and

3:39:52that's reflected [clears throat] in the

3:39:53the fiscal analysis section of the

3:39:54report. Uh some of that gets moved from

3:39:57the front end of the process, the IR

3:39:59process to the building permit process.

3:40:01Um there's pros and cons with that. Um

3:40:04but it's it's an application to process

3:40:06and we're just happy to process it

3:40:08either way that the council wants us to

3:40:09to do that.

3:40:11>> Okay. Uh now speaking of balconies,

3:40:13right now it says 30 ft or more away

3:40:15from a property line. You don't need

3:40:17shielding then. Uh we do have some

3:40:21properties that have alleys in the back

3:40:22and or we have creeks in the back.

3:40:25Should we be saying 30 ft from the

3:40:26neighboring to the next parcel as

3:40:29opposed to the end of our property?

3:40:39So, so that's that's an area where the

3:40:41council can engage in a in a discussion

3:40:43if you wanted it to be uh if you wanted

3:40:46to take the alley uh into consideration.

3:40:48There certainly are some properties that

3:40:49have that separation. Right now, it's

3:40:51measured from the property line.

3:40:52>> Okay. I mean, I think that would be

3:40:54reasonable. I'm sure if if we want to do

3:40:57it tonight or we want uh PTC to work on

3:41:01that. Uh and then finally we have these

3:41:04utility easements

3:41:07and we can't plant a screen in the

3:41:09utility easement which means that you

3:41:10may have this no man's land between

3:41:14properties where you have a screening so

3:41:16you can have a balcony but then you have

3:41:18this kind of dead area in the back. Is

3:41:20there any good solution for that?

3:41:24>> So continuous screening is not a

3:41:27requirement. the the screening

3:41:30requirement in the objective design

3:41:32standards is one um tree or three large

3:41:36shrubs um per 25 linear feet of the

3:41:41property line. And so although this um

3:41:45could occur if an individual homeowner

3:41:47chose to have a continuous hedge shrub

3:41:52um that's not the only option

3:41:56um that would meet the objective

3:41:58standards.

3:41:59>> I guess we still have a 5ft wall, right?

3:42:01You could put a 5ft wall in the back of

3:42:02your balcony and then you don't need any

3:42:03screening.

3:42:07>> They are two separate standards. Um and

3:42:10so the uh the higher privacy wall would

3:42:13allow for the um balcony to be closer to

3:42:17the um typically side property lines. Um

3:42:21there is a separate requirement for the

3:42:24one per 25 linear feet screen tree.

3:42:27Yeah.

3:42:28>> Okay. Thank you,

3:42:31>> Council Member Lithcott HS.

3:42:33>> Thank you, Mayor. Thank you so much for

3:42:34the presentation.

3:42:36My I'm very inclined to support the

3:42:38recommendation. Um my only question is

3:42:41we've seem to have received a number of

3:42:43complaints recently from members of the

3:42:45public who have said the thing that's

3:42:48going up next to my house is an

3:42:51abomination.

3:42:52Uh it doesn't comply with this that and

3:42:55the other. And it made me wonder in

3:42:57reading this report, is there any

3:43:00concern that moving in the direction of

3:43:02objective standards and less individual

3:43:04review has resulted in these sort of

3:43:08complaints from neighbors or are they

3:43:10unrelated?

3:43:12>> They're not related to the individual

3:43:14review process or SB9. They are related

3:43:16to ADUs.

3:43:19>> Okay. Thank you,

3:43:24>> Council Member Bert.

3:43:26>> Thank you. Um, I did want to follow up

3:43:28with with a question on this balcony

3:43:30wall. So, uh, by a wall, does that I

3:43:34mean that the objective is so that

3:43:36people on the balcony are not staring

3:43:38down the window of neighbor. Is that

3:43:39correct? So would it allow a uh kind of

3:43:44a translucent

3:43:46or opaque uh portion that that basically

3:43:50still lets light in but um but it's not

3:43:54a wall per se? What what's the

3:43:55definition of a wall in this context?

3:44:04>> Okay. So we'll take a look at how it was

3:44:05defined. But the but you're you're

3:44:07right. concept is again trying to

3:44:10restrict view. Uh so um I think a

3:44:13parapit wall is typically what we see

3:44:15there, a solid wall. Um but that doesn't

3:44:19necessarily I wouldn't think preclude

3:44:20I'd be interested because I could very

3:44:23much envision folks have a three-foot

3:44:25wall and then have 2 feet of just some

3:44:27kind of uh translucent material that

3:44:30that protects the neighbors privacy but

3:44:34doesn't create this. a five- foot wall

3:44:35on a balcony is pretty claustrophobic.

3:44:40>> So, this is something that is um

3:44:42currently implemented in individual

3:44:44review projects and there have been um

3:44:48times through that review where we've

3:44:50allowed both solid walls or um opaque

3:44:53glass. Um I think that

3:44:57yeah the way that it is written doesn't

3:45:00specifically speak to that at the moment

3:45:02but as we've implemented the um

3:45:04individual review guidelines that this

3:45:07is based on we have allowed for opaque

3:45:09glass.

3:45:10>> So are you saying therefore that if this

3:45:13is an objective standard though you're

3:45:16going to go to something that we've

3:45:18subjectively approved without stating

3:45:21so? No, I'm explaining that we have

3:45:24allowed for the um that we've already

3:45:28allowed for obscured glass as an um

3:45:32interpretation of what a privacy wall

3:45:34is.

3:45:35>> But my question is, does that mean

3:45:37that's necessarily the interpretation

3:45:40that would be there for an objective

3:45:42standard?

3:45:44So, if it is the council's interest to

3:45:47establish an uh obscure glazing or wall,

3:45:50uh that should be articulated in the

3:45:52motion.

3:45:52>> Okay, great. Thank you.

3:46:01>> And anyone who would like to articulate

3:46:02a motion is welcome. welcome to

3:46:12tell you what I let me just quickly say

3:46:14um that uh I really want to uh associate

3:46:18myself with the comments of council

3:46:19member Lowing. Um I do appreciate that

3:46:22you did look to investigate you know why

3:46:26was this option not taken have now

3:46:28brought to PTC and now hear solutions to

3:46:32try to um

3:46:35you know adjust behavior after listening

3:46:36to people's wise. So, just uh thank you

3:46:39for that. Uh appreciate uh these uh

3:46:44revisions and uh I'll tell you what, I

3:46:48will go ahead and move the staff report

3:46:50knowing that there will likely be

3:46:51friendly amendments, but just to move

3:46:53the conversation along. So, uh I will

3:46:56move the staff recommendation.

3:46:58There a second.

3:47:01>> Second.

3:47:02>> Thank you.

3:47:04Further comments,

3:47:07council member Bert.

3:47:08>> Yeah, I would um offer an amendment that

3:47:11allows the balcony wall to be

3:47:15translucent

3:47:17is that and let me just ask director Le

3:47:20is that the best verbiage or

3:47:24>> to achieve the intent that we were

3:47:26discussing.

3:47:26>> Yeah, I think in other parts of the code

3:47:28we say opaque, but yeah, that would work

3:47:30fine as well.

3:47:33Finally,

3:47:37anything else from anybody?

3:47:47>> All right. Well, so let's see uh the

3:47:49language of the motion when you get a

3:47:51chance with the friendly amendment in it

3:47:54and then if no one has further

3:47:57comment, we can vote.

3:48:13work.

3:48:17Instead of allowing, would it be to

3:48:23uh satisfy the balcony wall requirement

3:48:28to allow a maybe

3:48:33allow

3:48:35opaque walls to satisfy the balcony wall

3:48:38requirement?

3:48:54Are you happy with that,

3:48:56[clears throat]

3:48:57>> Council Member Bert? You happy with

3:48:59that?

3:48:59>> Yeah.

3:49:01>> Yeah. Um, specifically, it's a it's the

3:49:03it's a solid privacy wall. That's the

3:49:06term used in the ordinance.

3:49:08>> Oh, thank you. You want to say solid

3:49:12privacy wall instead of opaque.

3:49:15>> No,

3:49:16>> for the second half. Yeah.

3:49:18>> Sorry.

3:49:22>> Okay. I'm happy with that. If the maker

3:49:24is

3:49:24>> I'm good.

3:49:26>> Okay.

3:49:29All right.

3:49:54We're waiting for one more one more

3:49:55vote.

3:50:05>> Motion carries unanimously.

3:50:08>> Okay, great. Then we'll move on to our

3:50:12thank you to uh director light, Miss

3:50:15Callus. We will move on to our last item

3:50:18uh action item 10

3:50:21to the uh annual calendar for council

3:50:24and standing committees.

3:50:55Good evening. I'm Christine Prior, the

3:50:57assistant city clerk, and I'm joined by

3:50:58Shantel Cotton Gains, deputy city

3:51:00manager. And um tonight we are bringing

3:51:04forward the 2027 city council calendar

3:51:07and dates of significance for city

3:51:09council's consideration and feedback.

3:51:11Next slide, please.

3:51:15So the purpose of the item is uh or the

3:51:19recommendation

3:51:20um we are asking the city council to

3:51:23provide feedback on the date for the

3:51:25annual retreat and priority setting

3:51:27meeting. Secondly, we are asking the

3:51:29council to adopt a resolution. Um

3:51:33establishing the council calendar of

3:51:36meetings, recesses, and events. And

3:51:39lastly, we are asking for a review and

3:51:41any input of the dates of significance,

3:51:44which is an attachment B. Next slide,

3:51:47please.

3:51:50The purpose of this process is for the

3:51:52city council to have a council meeting

3:51:55calendar that recognizes holidays and

3:51:58cultural days of significance that could

3:52:00prevent the public from participating in

3:52:02city council meetings. This um is an

3:52:05annual item that comes to the city

3:52:08council to provide an opportunity for

3:52:11consistent and iterative review and

3:52:13discussion so we aren't just stuck doing

3:52:16the same dates over and over again.

3:52:19And it also provides an opportunity to

3:52:22um hear from residents directly on

3:52:25different days that are important to

3:52:27them and expand awareness and

3:52:29visibility.

3:52:31This calendar setting process implements

3:52:33wellness and belonging action plan item

3:52:361.3

3:52:38which directs staff to create a process

3:52:41that includes the HRC for annual

3:52:43calendar setting related to holidays and

3:52:46heritage months. So, in line with this

3:52:49um action plan item, this

3:52:53uh the 2027 council calendar went to the

3:52:56HRC on October 8th of this year and the

3:53:01um HRC did not recommend any changes to

3:53:04the calendar. Next, please.

3:53:09So, when creating um the calendar,

3:53:13we have um crafted a list of dates that

3:53:17we want to avoid scheduling city council

3:53:19meetings. And these dates fall into two

3:53:22large categories. The first are dates on

3:53:25which the city offices are closed in

3:53:27observance of holidays. So, for example,

3:53:30Veterans Day next week. Um, the second

3:53:33set are certain religious or cultural

3:53:36dates of significance that could fall on

3:53:38a Monday and whose main celebrations

3:53:41begin in the evening, which would

3:53:43prevent individuals celebrating or

3:53:45observing that day from participating in

3:53:47city council discussions.

3:53:50When a regular city council meeting

3:53:52conflicts with one of these dates, we

3:53:55reschedu those meetings. I do want to

3:53:58flag that this calendar only reschedules

3:54:01city council meetings that conflict with

3:54:03these dates, not council committee

3:54:05meetings. And that is because um council

3:54:08committee meeting items generally go to

3:54:11the full city council for final

3:54:13consideration and review before um

3:54:16action is taken. So, individuals who

3:54:19might not be able to attend a council

3:54:21committee meeting due to a conflict

3:54:23would still have an opportunity to speak

3:54:25to the whole city council

3:54:29um and staff. There are no changes to

3:54:33the list of dates based um from last

3:54:37year's list. And if next slide, please.

3:54:42So, this is the list of dates to avoid.

3:54:45The ones highlighted in yellow

3:54:48are dates that would conflict with a

3:54:50regularly scheduled city council meeting

3:54:53in 2027.

3:54:55And also included are the dates that

3:54:57staff is proposing we re we re reschedu

3:55:00those meetings. So, it's usually a

3:55:03fourth Friday of the month, sometimes

3:55:06it's a Wednesday. And this table um can

3:55:10be found on packet page 301

3:55:14if for reference.

3:55:17Uh next slide please.

3:55:21So this item also talks about the

3:55:23council events. Um and so I'd like to

3:55:26just go briefly over those. So, first is

3:55:28the city council reorganization and

3:55:30annual priority

3:55:33annual sorry, city council retreat and

3:55:35annual priority setting meeting. This is

3:55:38typically

3:55:39um in late January and staff is seeking

3:55:44the city council's input on which date

3:55:46they would like to schedule this meeting

3:55:48because it has um varied from year to

3:55:50year.

3:55:52Um, I also do want to note um a couple

3:55:56changes

3:55:58to meetings that uh fall right before

3:56:02right at the beginning or end of the

3:56:04summer recesses, summer recess or winter

3:56:06recess.

3:56:09So, um,

3:56:11at the end of the summer recess,

3:56:16the city council actually is not going

3:56:18to be meeting the first August, the

3:56:21first Monday in August. The first Monday

3:56:23in August is August 2nd, but staff

3:56:26recommends rescheduling that meeting and

3:56:28having the first meeting back be August

3:56:319th, which is the second Monday of the

3:56:33month. And similarly um around the

3:56:37winter recess,

3:56:40the third Monday of December is December

3:56:4420th. Staff recommends not having a

3:56:46meeting that day and instead having a

3:56:50special city council meeting on Monday,

3:56:52November 29th.

3:56:56All right. Um next slide, please.

3:57:00We did have some questions about the

3:57:02city the dates of the city council

3:57:04recess. Um and I do see that it could be

3:57:08confusing that our dates say July and

3:57:11December. Um one reason for this is that

3:57:14these dates in the 2027 proposed

3:57:17calendar use business days. So these are

3:57:20Fridays normally whereas other years

3:57:22have used um weekends and it just

3:57:24appears to be an inconsistency. So, we

3:57:26are happy to adjust that if you'd like.

3:57:30Um, again, the first city council

3:57:32meeting after the summer recess would be

3:57:36um August and 9th. There is a regularly

3:57:40scheduled finance committee meeting on

3:57:43Tuesday, August 3rd, but in the past

3:57:45several uh past previous years, that has

3:57:49been can cancelled because it often

3:57:50conflicts with National Night Out. But

3:57:54um staff did not want to presuppose that

3:57:56that meeting would be cancelled without

3:57:57council's input.

3:58:01Um next slide, please.

3:58:06Staff is also recommending that the that

3:58:09we schedule standby city council meeting

3:58:12dates. These were dates that we would

3:58:14just hold on the city council's calendar

3:58:17in case they were needed to conduct um

3:58:20additional special meetings.

3:58:22We would recommend having one date set

3:58:25aside um per month and these would only

3:58:28be scheduled if staff in consultation

3:58:30with the mayor and the vice mayor

3:58:33thought they were necessary um to

3:58:36conduct the city business

3:58:45on this slide just really briefly

3:58:47speaking about the dates of significance

3:58:49there's a long list as attachment be in

3:58:52your staff report and we bring this to

3:58:54city council each year after we've gone

3:58:56to the HRC. This is where we have tried

3:59:00to continue this iterative process of

3:59:02making sure that we have awareness of

3:59:04dates that are celebrated in our

3:59:06community. And so the purpose is for us

3:59:08to expand awareness and visibility of

3:59:10the observances in Palo Alto. We have

3:59:13many things organized by the library or

3:59:17nonprofit organizations or the city

3:59:19related to these uh particular holidays

3:59:21and we just want to make sure that we

3:59:22are aware of all of them. There are not

3:59:25celebrations for every holiday on this

3:59:26list but this helps us have that um

3:59:29guidance for some of the other work that

3:59:30we're doing. It's part of our larger

3:59:32wellness and belonging work. And we

3:59:35really like to emphasize that the list

3:59:37is iterative, that it is possible things

3:59:40are missing on the list or things

3:59:42change. Uh maybe the names of some

3:59:44holidays have changed over the years,

3:59:46for example, and we're always trying to

3:59:48update it and bring it to you so that

3:59:50you have the list that we know is our

3:59:51working list. And we use that for

3:59:54guidance for the dates to avoid which

3:59:56Miss Prior has already spoken about. And

3:59:58I'll give it back. Next slide.

4:00:03And this is the um staff recommendation

4:00:07again and that concludes our

4:00:09presentation. We're happy to answer any

4:00:11questions.

4:00:14>> All right. Well, thank you both very

4:00:15much. Um do we have any public comment

4:00:17on this item?

4:00:21>> There are no requests to speak and no

4:00:23hands raised on Zoom.

4:00:24>> All right. Thank you.

4:00:26All right. Um, I'm gonna ask a

4:00:29preliminary question. Um, just looking

4:00:32at January. Um, and I'm actually looking

4:00:37at the the calendar count the physical

4:00:40calendar on packet page uh 308. Um, so

4:00:45we would have the city council in reorg

4:00:47on January 4. There's a city council

4:00:50meeting on the 11th.

4:00:52The next week is MLK day. So it is

4:00:55skipped.

4:00:56And then there's a city council meeting

4:00:58on the 25th. The reason I go through

4:01:01that is um the the option one for the

4:01:04retreat is the 30th, but then we have a

4:01:08council meeting on February 1st, which

4:01:10is just two days later. We have the week

4:01:13of MLK day um where we have no council

4:01:18meeting.

4:01:20Is it too early to go ahead and have the

4:01:22retreat? I guess we I guess it's a

4:01:24holiday week and people would be gone.

4:01:25I'm just trying to space things out

4:01:27better. Um,

4:01:29>> yeah, we recommended the 30th just given

4:01:32the amount of time that's necessary to

4:01:34pull together all the materials needed

4:01:36for the retreat. With the new mayor

4:01:40selected around January 4th, the packet

4:01:43for um a January 23rd retreat would go

4:01:48out soon thereafter. And so just

4:01:51recognizing that there's some

4:01:52conversation that typically happens with

4:01:54the new mayor in preparation for the

4:01:56retreat, we wanted to build a little

4:01:58more time in if we could.

4:02:01>> Okay.

4:02:01>> But we do recognize there's a meeting to

4:02:03meeting and I know that's less.

4:02:05>> Yeah. I just thought with a break right

4:02:06there in the middle, it'd be nice to

4:02:07kind of spread things out a little more.

4:02:09All right. Well, we'll see what my

4:02:10colleagues think. Um,

4:02:14yeah, I thought about the 16th, but most

4:02:16people take a three-day weekend. Yeah.

4:02:19So I guess that would go back to the

4:02:2123rd

4:02:22>> in addition to really getting a packet

4:02:24out on the 6th. So yeah or the 7th. So

4:02:27which is yeah pretty challenging.

4:02:29>> Yeah.

4:02:32>> But then I I guess it would be

4:02:35okay. Colleagues, any comments?

4:02:40Council member Rectal,

4:02:43>> can you bring up packet page 310?

4:02:50And I understand the logic of we have so

4:02:52many holidays and we're we don't want to

4:02:55over constrain ourselves. The clerk uh

4:02:58had a lot of work to to find these

4:03:00dates. Um, but this really bothers me is

4:03:04that Idel Fritar, uh, I'm probably

4:03:07mispronouncing that, uh, Eden, sorry,

4:03:12uh, that starts sundown on the 9th,

4:03:14right on top of our policy and services.

4:03:16And policy and service sometimes does

4:03:18have consequential,

4:03:20uh, material that people really want to

4:03:22be part of that conversation.

4:03:24[clears throat] And also sometimes

4:03:25things go on consent and so this really

4:03:27is their only shot. And so that in

4:03:30practice, this may be the only shot to

4:03:32talk about policy and services, but also

4:03:35there's this level of respect. If you

4:03:38there's a major meeting and we're saying

4:03:40we're going to put this right on a major

4:03:42holiday,

4:03:44I would bump that two weeks to the 23rd

4:03:46where that's open. That gives more

4:03:48respect and more chance for our

4:03:50residents to to participate.

4:03:54understand we can't necessarily always

4:03:55do this, but I checked through the other

4:03:56ones and this is the only holiday where

4:03:58we stomped on a an evening holiday. So,

4:04:01I would want to move the policy and

4:04:04services from the 9th to 23rd.

4:04:10>> Do you see any issues with that or

4:04:13>> No, no, no issues with that. And from

4:04:15your just uh perspective, is it

4:04:17typically easier to move it a couple

4:04:18weeks than to move it a couple days like

4:04:20to a different date or I mean you can

4:04:22always work that out with the chair next

4:04:23year, but it would be nice to at least

4:04:25start it on a different date.

4:04:29>> I would have to check the calendar to

4:04:30see when the boards and commissions

4:04:32meet. I don't know off the top of my

4:04:33head, but um we can definitely make it

4:04:35work where we will not have it on the

4:04:379th.

4:04:39>> Great.

4:04:41Council member Bird.

4:04:43Um, yes. So, on slide six, you had a

4:04:48there or a couple things. First, on the

4:04:50beginning of the summer recess, you have

4:04:52June 25th, which is a Friday. And we

4:04:56normally um have the council meeting on

4:04:59the Monday and then a placeholder

4:05:01Tuesday in case we need an extra council

4:05:04meeting. And then we would have

4:05:08designated the following day as the

4:05:10beginning of the recess so people can

4:05:11make vacation plans if they are going

4:05:14right out. Should we be stating that

4:05:17it's June 23rd is the beginning of the

4:05:19recess?

4:05:21>> Happy to do that if that's the council's

4:05:23wish. We left it as the 25th because

4:05:27based on the current city school liaison

4:05:29committee schedule that meeting would be

4:05:31on June 24th. Although the June city

4:05:35school meetings are often cancelled.

4:05:38>> Okay. Um

4:05:39>> so we

4:05:40>> I'll wait to see what colleagues think

4:05:42on that, but I I think I'd favor

4:05:45clarifying it as the 23rd. And then you

4:05:48have to be determined on the state of

4:05:50the city. Um and I'll say that, you

4:05:55know, we there's a lot a number of

4:05:57things that like nationally we have

4:05:59norms that we've not codified until they

4:06:02get changed. we go, oh wait, there were

4:06:04reasons why we had these norms. And the

4:06:07state of the city uh for as long as I

4:06:10recall, 20 plus years, has really been

4:06:13to frame the year going forward and the

4:06:17council's goals that they had just

4:06:19established and to really look forward

4:06:21to how we're going to achieve them. And

4:06:24so I would uh uh support cottifying that

4:06:27that it's it's in February or March,

4:06:31which is my memory that that that's when

4:06:33it has historically occurred. Um so that

4:06:37would be my recommendation as well.

4:06:42>> Council member Stone,

4:06:44>> thank you. Um I I I agree with the June

4:06:4823rd start. I I don't think I've been on

4:06:51city schools where we've met in in June

4:06:54and there's general um a real dislike of

4:06:58having late June meetings on the school

4:07:00district side as well. So, I don't see

4:07:02any problem with the June 23rd change. I

4:07:05appreciate Council Member Rectal's um

4:07:07request on the policy and services

4:07:09committee changing that. So, glad he

4:07:12raised that. I I agree with that. And I

4:07:15I do recall I feel like over the last

4:07:17couple years to the mayor's concern

4:07:18about the the later

4:07:22um our later retreat that we've been

4:07:24able to kind of find ways to then not

4:07:26have a meeting on that Monday

4:07:29afterwards.

4:07:32Has that been kind of practice last

4:07:33couple of the last couple years?

4:07:37So, I believe the last couple years it's

4:07:40been it has been earlier in the year

4:07:42where it was

4:07:46the week before or the week of Martin

4:07:49Luther King Jr. Day, I believe off the

4:07:52top of my head, but um as deputy city

4:07:54manager pointed out, there are some

4:07:56logistical concerns with pulling the

4:07:57packet together that quickly.

4:08:00>> Yes. And I believe it was uh two years

4:08:02ago, we did one on a Monday evening uh

4:08:05because there was an extra Monday that

4:08:07month and the council did not uh want to

4:08:10have it that late because it just was a

4:08:12different I think overall vibe with who

4:08:15can attend. And so then the next year we

4:08:18it's typically been the last um Saturday

4:08:21of January or the 1st of February. It's

4:08:23typically teetered around there, not

4:08:25necessarily earlier in January on

4:08:27average.

4:08:28>> Yeah. Yeah, I mean I'd be curious if we

4:08:30could see if we can move then that

4:08:32Monday council meeting to to another

4:08:35time. I mean I think that's always it's

4:08:37really challenging to be able to prep

4:08:39for a retreat on Saturday council

4:08:41meeting on Monday as well as just having

4:08:44the stamina to be able to kind of get

4:08:46through both within such a short time

4:08:48frame.

4:08:50>> Yeah. But my only my my only request to

4:08:53change B beyond what has already been

4:08:55discussed. Thanks.

4:08:56>> What I'm

4:08:58>> No, no. And I was just gonna say I and I

4:09:00appreciate the clerk's office being

4:09:02proactive and looking at kind of our

4:09:04past practices on that first meeting in

4:09:07August and the last couple years we've

4:09:09made that modification. So I appreciate

4:09:11that recommendation already and

4:09:13sensitivity to that as well as the the

4:09:15late December meeting. So, um,

4:09:18>> yeah.

4:09:18>> Um, what I might offer, um, for

4:09:20consideration on February is if the

4:09:24council is interested in not having a

4:09:26council meeting the weekend after the

4:09:29retreat,

4:09:31we could not meet on February 1st, and

4:09:35if the council wanted, they could

4:09:36instead meet on Wednesday, February 3rd.

4:09:40Um, we also one of the standby dates,

4:09:43the standby date in February is

4:09:45Wednesday, February 17th, which is the

4:09:48week of President's Day. So, those could

4:09:50be possible options if the council is

4:09:52interested in either of those.

4:09:55>> Yeah, I would say no to the 17th, but

4:09:57the third would be think the Wednesday I

4:10:00think would be fine to at least give us

4:10:02a little a little breathing room. Thank

4:10:04you. Before I go to council member

4:10:07Lowing, I just want to mention I did

4:10:09look around um at prior state of the

4:10:13city dates and they were always in the

4:10:15first half of the year, but they were in

4:10:17April, March. I think one even lofted

4:10:19into May. Let me tell you why I actually

4:10:23think there's a substantive reason to

4:10:26not just do a norm and put it at the

4:10:28midway mark of the year. Um, somebody

4:10:31said to me at the time of the state of

4:10:33the city this year, well, should be the

4:10:35mayor's vision for going forward. And I

4:10:37thought, no, not the mayor's vision.

4:10:39This is council's vision about where we

4:10:41want to go with the year. So, in

4:10:44January, if you do it right away, you're

4:10:46basically just regurgitating this

4:10:48council retreat that happens at the end

4:10:50of January where council spoke and said,

4:10:52"Here are our priorities for the year."

4:10:55And then staff takes some, you know,

4:10:57some time and fills in how we want to do

4:10:59it. It's all laid out. It's all public.

4:11:03What's nice is if you check in six

4:11:05months later, that's when it's the state

4:11:07of the city thus far. How have we done

4:11:10against what council as a whole said?

4:11:13And that's how I structured it. So it

4:11:15wasn't about the speech giver. It was

4:11:18about how the different city departments

4:11:20were doing. and everybody sort of

4:11:21checked in and gave an update so we knew

4:11:24how we were doing against council

4:11:26priorities and and goals and what we had

4:11:28left to do which was even more important

4:11:30at the at with six more months so we

4:11:32could adjust and it's like halftime so

4:11:35you come back from halftime and you got

4:11:37the second half of the year and the

4:11:38coach can make those second half

4:11:40adjustments and so I actually think it

4:11:43performs a function because then six

4:11:44months later then you say once again

4:11:47what are our priorities now so it's like

4:11:50council speaks and then there's this six

4:11:52months report and then six months later

4:11:54council speaks again. So I you know but

4:11:57mayors can do what they want but I think

4:11:59there's a very strong objective case to

4:12:01make it a helpful useful thing and not

4:12:03just sort of a performative thing. So

4:12:07that that's what I think. Council member

4:12:10Lowi.

4:12:11>> Yeah. I was I'm still back in January.

4:12:14Um cuz I still I'm still concerned about

4:12:18uh using up the whole month uh until we

4:12:21sit down and start talking about it. Um

4:12:23cuz every year in my last four um we

4:12:27always felt like we wanted to get it

4:12:29done sooner and then it went to like the

4:12:30end of February before we even had the

4:12:33objectives and everyone all on the same

4:12:35page. So, I would really try to figure

4:12:37out a way to move it up at at least a

4:12:39week to that 23rd and respecting the

4:12:42dates that the packet has to go out.

4:12:44There is this thing we've used before

4:12:46called the late packet once or twice

4:12:49that if we could uh you know amend it as

4:12:52we're going forward as it gets planned

4:12:53and do it on the 23rd, it just gets us a

4:12:56little bit further ahead um to

4:12:58[clears throat]

4:12:59to report out uh for the

4:13:04well for the whole conclusion because

4:13:06it's going to take you know a couple

4:13:07weeks after that. [clears throat]

4:13:09Um,

4:13:12so I just wanted to figure out if I if

4:13:14I've heard this right. U, Christine,

4:13:16we're we're trying to for the summer

4:13:17break, it's going to be more like June

4:13:2323rd

4:13:26would be the start and the ending. You

4:13:28said that the August meeting is going to

4:13:31be moved. So, it's going to be the 9th.

4:13:34>> Yes, the first council meeting will be

4:13:36the 9th. There is a there would be a

4:13:39finance committee meeting on August 3rd.

4:13:42However, in previous years that often

4:13:44gets cancelled because it's conflicts

4:13:47with national night out, but we wanted

4:13:49to leave that there as an option in case

4:13:51the committee next year wanted to have

4:13:54the meeting on August 3rd.

4:13:56>> Yeah. Um that's so soon after the budget

4:13:59though that might not be a crucial

4:14:01meeting. So this is fairly low

4:14:03probability. I think we would agree on

4:14:05that.

4:14:06>> [clears throat]

4:14:06>> Um,

4:14:09let's see.

4:14:17Oh. Oh, on this um state of the city.

4:14:21Um,

4:14:23if it seems like some I whatever we do,

4:14:28I just think we should be aligned as a

4:14:30council and just sort of vote on what we

4:14:32want. I I I'm not sure it my initial

4:14:34thought is I'm not sure it should be at

4:14:36the discretion of the mayor, but we can

4:14:37decide that decide that too. I just

4:14:39think we should be um sort of

4:14:41consistent. Um I understand I understand

4:14:44that reasoning of basically doing a

4:14:47almost like a midyear review. Um but

4:14:49then maybe maybe it's a titling change

4:14:51then you know.

4:14:55So um to me to me the the advantage as

4:14:58I've seen it over over many many years

4:15:00is you know if it's done by Marchish you

4:15:03know that really aligns with our

4:15:05analysis and um yes we've just decided

4:15:09that but you know not that many people

4:15:12go to the retreat uh to see what we do

4:15:15there so I'm not sure how much of that

4:15:16gets communicated and even if there are

4:15:18a lot it's not communicated in the same

4:15:20way as the current state of the city

4:15:22goes with you knowlight slideshows and

4:15:25lots of data and so on. That's different

4:15:27than creation of the objectives. So that

4:15:30process I think is different and the

4:15:31output is different. Um so I I've just

4:15:35felt like that was good. Um I could get

4:15:39behind the midyear review if it's called

4:15:41something else, but I think it at that

4:15:43point it's it's still a council

4:15:46perspective, not a mayor's perspective.

4:15:48So uh so that's okay, too. But I' I'd

4:15:51like to hear comments from from others

4:15:52on that.

4:15:54I just want to clarify something I said.

4:15:59Yeah, that's it was actually because it

4:16:00was supposed to be the state of the city

4:16:02was the whole point of putting it when

4:16:04it was. If it's at the beginning, it's

4:16:06the plan for the city as articulated by

4:16:08council. To have it be the state to

4:16:11report on something, you need more than

4:16:125 minutes to report on. that was why it

4:16:15was supposed to be a state what has been

4:16:19done and what is left to do and not

4:16:21anything about the deliverer.

4:16:24Council member Bert.

4:16:27>> Yeah. Uh so first um on this issue of

4:16:30the whether we have a meeting on

4:16:33February 1st,

4:16:36we right now in February we have um the

4:16:40president's day that is off and we could

4:16:45have a special meeting on a Wednesday

4:16:48but um it if we don't have a meeting on

4:16:52the Monday, there's a good chance we

4:16:54only have two meetings that month. I

4:16:56don't have a problem of you know we have

4:16:59a meeting on a Saturday and coming for a

4:17:01regular council meeting on on the Monday

4:17:04it wouldn't be at that council meeting

4:17:06reflecting the retreat it would just be

4:17:08a normal council meeting so I think we

4:17:10ought to just stay with the first um as

4:17:13far as um the the time period for the

4:17:17state of the city um I I I don't agree

4:17:21that that it is um a reflection on a

4:17:26midyear year first this year we had on

4:17:29August 19th so that's uh over twothirds

4:17:32the way through the year uh if we

4:17:37thought of it as a a midpoint which I

4:17:40don't really favor that means that we we

4:17:44either that midpoint's during our uh

4:17:46summer vacation

4:17:48and so if it's before that it's in the

4:17:50budget season and so the natural reason

4:17:54second natural reason that it's and in

4:17:57that earlier maybe it's fe uh March to

4:18:00April rather than I think sometimes

4:18:03February as well but I'm not certain um

4:18:06uh is also that natural cadence but I do

4:18:10think the importance as council member

4:18:12Lowing had indicated is taking what came

4:18:16out of the retreat and that it is the

4:18:18presentation to the city of what we do

4:18:22plan on doing the retreat is to

4:18:24formulate

4:18:26but not to make the presentation.

4:18:29And and I think there's another reason

4:18:31to avoid having it as late as um as uh

4:18:36late summer, which is to avoid any

4:18:38perception that it is overlapping with a

4:18:42political campaign.

4:18:44And I think that is important. Um and um

4:18:48and I think that's something that uh we

4:18:50should avoid.

4:18:54I just want to point out on the math

4:18:56that

4:18:58the very end of um January is basically

4:19:02the beginning of February which is a

4:19:04second month plus six is the eighth

4:19:06month. So it's about two weeks after the

4:19:08midpoint from there. But uh Vice Mayor

4:19:11Stone,

4:19:14>> thank you Madam Mayor. Um still think

4:19:16mid uh meeting after the

4:19:21Sorry. Do we do we have a meeting

4:19:22scheduled for that? We do for the last

4:19:25Monday in January or is that then the

4:19:2824th?

4:19:28>> We do. That's January 25th. And that is

4:19:31because the 3rd Monday the 18th is

4:19:33Martin Luther King Jr. Day.

4:19:34>> Right. Okay. I still prefer the the

4:19:37Wednesday after whatever February 3rd. I

4:19:41mean, I know especially I think for

4:19:43council members who have full-time jobs,

4:19:45often times we are preparing for council

4:19:48meetings on the on the weekends and so

4:19:51having to prepare for two council

4:19:53meetings within such a short time frame

4:19:56can be can be challenging. So I still

4:19:59think the the Wednesday afterwards give

4:20:00us a little bit of breathing room to be

4:20:02able to prepare for that is great. on

4:20:05this issue of of state of the the city

4:20:09addressed. I I know Miss Cons will be

4:20:13surprised by this answer, but I I think

4:20:15this might actually be better suited for

4:20:17a uh procedures and protocols discussion

4:20:20for policy of services. I I think this

4:20:23is a more substantive discussion. I

4:20:26think there have been strong policy

4:20:28arguments raised by by the mayor and by

4:20:32others as far as when is the appropriate

4:20:34timing it is for something like this. I

4:20:37I like the the mayor's vision for it to

4:20:40be a a m midyear check. Um also like to

4:20:44point out that the criticism of the

4:20:47meeting of of that mid-year check being

4:20:50in August. I I think criticism I think

4:20:53the mayor would then be criticized if

4:20:54she had it truly at the midyear point

4:20:56when we were on summer break and

4:20:58everybody is is gone. So I understand

4:21:00the timing of August given that that

4:21:02summer break and wanting to make sure

4:21:04people are back from their summer

4:21:05travels and back to school and routine.

4:21:07So I think that late August date made

4:21:10sense. But I I think this is a longer

4:21:12discussion that we can really get off

4:21:15track tonight if we are trying to have

4:21:16that as a as a policy discussion

4:21:18tonight. So I would refer that to policy

4:21:21to policy and services for that longer

4:21:25discussion.

4:21:30With that, the mayors and I I'll I'll

4:21:32move the staff recommendation

4:21:36with

4:21:38some of the modifications that was that

4:21:41was discussed with the

4:21:44change of the summer recess to June

4:21:4623rd.

4:21:48And then catch me if I get any of these

4:21:49dates wrong. Uh the Eid

4:21:53the the policy and services meeting the

4:21:55day before Eid to move that back. I

4:21:58believe it was two weeks. Um, I will

4:22:02make the I I will put in the requested

4:22:04change for the changing the first

4:22:07meeting in February to that Wednesday, I

4:22:11guess February 3rd, and refer the

4:22:14discussion of

4:22:17date of the state of the city address to

4:22:19policy and services. I think that

4:22:21captures it all.

4:22:22>> I'll second.

4:22:23>> Thank you.

4:22:25And if I might seek, I apologize, uh,

4:22:28clarification on the June dates. So, in

4:22:31the past several years, um, we have had

4:22:36the final two council meetings. We've

4:22:38had a Monday and a Tuesday meeting.

4:22:40Right now, we don't have that, uh, June

4:22:4322nd as a city council meeting. Would

4:22:46the council like us to add that

4:22:50I

4:22:50>> as a standby? So, the standby meeting in

4:22:52June is uh June 16th. Should we just

4:22:55move it to June 22nd, given past

4:22:57practice has often been to have that the

4:23:00two um backto-back council meetings?

4:23:02>> I think I'd keep the the 16th, but also

4:23:05add the 22nd in in case I mean it's my

4:23:08birthday. I prefer not to, but I've been

4:23:10here before and

4:23:13thank you.

4:23:14>> What a gift.

4:23:17>> Yeah. City holiday. Thank you.

4:23:24All right. I don't see any more lights.

4:23:26>> 22nd as standby dates.

4:23:39Just clarification. You're you're

4:23:41staying with the 30th for the reorg. I'm

4:23:44sorry, for the retreat.

4:23:49Oh, I'm I'm fine.

4:23:53You want it on the 30th where it's where

4:23:55it is now? I I mean I' I'd prefer the

4:23:58the earlier date. Yeah, me too.

4:24:01>> Me, too.

4:24:02>> Okay. Well,

4:24:05okay.

4:24:06>> Let's just go for it. Then we don't need

4:24:09to

4:24:12Oh, then can Okay, then.

4:24:15So if it's January 23rd,

4:24:19>> so um if I may, if you would like to

4:24:21have the retreat on the 23rd,

4:24:25what we have done in previous years is

4:24:28rather than have a meeting that Monday,

4:24:30which is the 25th, we have a meeting on

4:24:34Tuesday, the day after MLK day,

4:24:39the 19th. So on the week of MLK day,

4:24:41you'd have um a Tuesday city council

4:24:45meeting, Saturday retreat, and then no

4:24:48city council meeting the following week.

4:24:52>> And that that's so so that special city

4:24:55council meeting would be on January

4:24:56what?

4:24:57>> 19th, Tuesday.

4:24:59>> Yeah, I I like that change if the

4:25:01secondary is fine with it.

4:25:04>> Yes. Thank you. That's better.

4:25:08>> Yeah, I'm good with that.

4:25:12And that would mean that number five on

4:25:15your list in your motion would not be

4:25:17necessary at this point.

4:25:19>> Correct.

4:25:22We I guess we would do we need to add

4:25:24then the the day after MLK.

4:25:27>> Yes, I think that's what's being added

4:25:28right now is number two.

4:25:29>> Perfect. Thank you.

4:25:46Nicole, on number one, would you please

4:25:48delete the or another date thereafter?

4:25:51Thank you.

4:25:55This may just be a footnote, but uh by

4:25:58moving the retreat date up to the 23rd,

4:26:01that may put some pressure on the new

4:26:04mayor to set the committee assignments

4:26:07prior to that date because it's

4:26:09typically been helpful to have the

4:26:12committee assignments set when you meet

4:26:14for your retreat.

4:26:25I think that'd be a plus as well, but uh

4:26:29I'm not sure that was always the case.

4:26:31>> I was thinking I'm not sure we managed

4:26:33that.

4:26:33>> I I think you have because we've had

4:26:35well at least this year the retreat was

4:26:37on the 30th and I believe the year

4:26:39before as well.

4:26:40>> One day if the clerk's office can kind

4:26:43of get the requests out to council

4:26:45members earlier with a sooner deadline.

4:26:50I think in the past that's been a bit of

4:26:51a delay to getting responses back from

4:26:54every council member.

4:26:55>> We're happy to do it as soon as we can.

4:26:58I would have to um I don't know off the

4:27:00top of my head the deadlines we've

4:27:02previously given out to council members

4:27:04for their preferences.

4:27:07>> Always been a challenge to just get that

4:27:10done in whatever time is available.

4:27:18>> Yeah, looks good to me. So I just as

4:27:21this uh if it goes if the discussion

4:27:25does get referred to if this passes to

4:27:27the uh policy and services I will say

4:27:30that one of the comments that I got back

4:27:32because I don't know if I'll be here

4:27:33next year or I'll be on that committee

4:27:36um after the state of the city in the

4:27:38middle of the year was gosh I didn't

4:27:41know that the council does so much

4:27:43because I organized it around our to-do

4:27:45list nor did I know that the council has

4:27:48that the city has done so much this

4:27:50year. So, it was it was kind of nice to

4:27:52be able to talk about what all we'd even

4:27:55accomplished thus far because it really

4:27:57impressed people. And I think this city

4:27:59is a full-ervice city that does an awful

4:28:01lot and it was kind of nice to be able

4:28:03to go department by department um

4:28:07through all the things that we wanted

4:28:08and and that were actually happening.

4:28:11So, you can talk about that next year,

4:28:13but uh yeah, I just wanted that to be uh

4:28:16part of the conversation.

4:28:20All right. Council.

4:28:22>> Yeah. Um, so I had thought we had

4:28:25settled on the um the uh

4:28:31uh the 30th for the retreat. Now it got

4:28:35changed. And I will say that going back

4:28:38until recent years, it was in February

4:28:41is my recollection and staff really

4:28:43worked to move it forward. I just think

4:28:45that's a real scramble to have it on the

4:28:4723rd and we heard that from staff. So, I

4:28:50would um I would move uh an amendment to

4:28:55go back to the the 30th for the um for

4:28:59the retreat and therefore uh have it u

4:29:04the special meeting council meeting

4:29:06being on February 3rd.

4:29:13So, just to clarify, you're requesting a

4:29:16friendly amendment to the motion that's

4:29:18on the table.

4:29:18>> Yeah.

4:29:19>> Well, I'm requesting amendment. That's

4:29:22>> you. Yeah. I mean, your other option

4:29:24would be to

4:29:25>> That's right.

4:29:26>> move to amend or make a substitute.

4:29:27>> I think he's asking us if we'll go with

4:29:29it and then he'll do the latter.

4:29:30>> That's the procedure.

4:29:32>> Um, I'd like to stick with the 23rd.

4:29:36I think I would as well, but so I assume

4:29:39you want to make your motion.

4:29:41>> Yep.

4:29:41>> Is do we have a second for the council

4:29:44member Bert's amendment to the motion?

4:29:51>> I'll second. I want some discussion on

4:29:53this from staff.

4:29:55Uh what does staff think? Is is 23rd

4:29:59tight for you or

4:30:03>> Yes, it would be. uh and at the same

4:30:06time I think we can make it once again

4:30:09as mentioned uh I do believe the the

4:30:12committee assignments is helpful to have

4:30:15in place. Uh Miss Cotton Gains, are

4:30:18there other materials from the council

4:30:20that we need for the retreat?

4:30:23Yes, we also have um typically spoken

4:30:27with the mayor just to also get

4:30:30clarification if there are any

4:30:31particular things that the mayor's

4:30:33interested in for the retreat uh format.

4:30:36And so we will not know that until

4:30:39January 4th. And so if there are any

4:30:41tweaks that we need to make with the

4:30:42facilitator, that's just a really tight

4:30:44squeeze. And additionally, we pull

4:30:46together um survey materials and other

4:30:49things just to make sure you have that

4:30:50substantive background information uh

4:30:52for discussion. So you may recall that

4:30:54in prior year's retreats that we've had

4:30:56the information on priorities as well as

4:30:59a community survey around priorities and

4:31:01things like that.

4:31:13any any thoughts from I mean this I've

4:31:15only been on the council two years. Any

4:31:17thoughts about

4:31:19what other people think?

4:31:21>> I can just speak to this last year. Um I

4:31:25thought you know staff was responsive

4:31:27and good and good thought partners. I

4:31:30think what ended up taking a little time

4:31:32was procuring the facilitator and trying

4:31:35to get sort of on the same page with

4:31:36her. And in retrospect, um I would bet

4:31:40there's some folks we know around here

4:31:42that we could deal with in a more

4:31:43efficient way, but part of it she was

4:31:45down in SoCal and I don't think knew our

4:31:48community as well as we'd hoped. And so

4:31:50I think we could uh maybe streamline

4:31:52that piece of it.

4:32:00All right. Uh, so let's go ahead and

4:32:02vote on the, uh, amendment. Motion to

4:32:04amend, I believe.

4:32:06>> That's correct.

4:32:08>> Council member Burke, could you confirm

4:32:10if your intention was also to reschedule

4:32:12the February 1st city council meeting to

4:32:15the third?

4:32:16>> Correct.

4:32:16>> Okay, let me add that in.

4:32:40Uh, let me know when we're ready for a

4:32:42vote with those changes made.

4:32:43>> Think we're ready.

4:33:00This is just on the motion to amend.

4:33:02>> Correct.

4:33:25Motion fails.

4:33:2852

4:33:30with council members

4:33:33sorry two five with council members Bert

4:33:35and Rectal voting yes and the remainder

4:33:37of the council voting no.

4:33:39>> Okay. Thank you. So we'll go back to the

4:33:41main motion and see if there's any

4:33:44further discussion. If not, we'll just

4:33:45go ahead and vote on that. Can't see

4:33:47though.

4:33:54Can you clear the screen of the vote

4:33:55that just happened?

4:34:03Yeah.

4:34:12Okay. [clears throat]

4:34:14All right. I don't see any further

4:34:15lights. So, I think we can go ahead and

4:34:16vote on the main motion.

4:34:19I guess they're not lights anymore. What

4:34:20What do we call them on the screen?

4:34:24>> Request to speak. It's three words.

4:34:46Motion carries unanimously.

4:34:48>> All right. Thank you. Um and I guess

4:34:51that completes this item. So, thank you

4:34:54very much, Madame Clerk and Deputy City

4:34:56Manager. Appreciate it. So, with that,

4:34:58we will move to virtual public comment.

4:35:02Do we have any?

4:35:04>> There are no virtual requests to speak.

4:35:07>> Okay. So then with that we will move to

4:35:09adjournment and I will say that it is

4:35:11with deep gratitude and respect that I

4:35:15adjourn this meeting in memory of an

4:35:16inspirational leader and change maker

4:35:19Doloresa. We're adjourned.