HomeMy Public PortalAbout2022-01-31 City Council Summary MinutesCITY COUNCIL
DRAFT SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 1 of 20
Special Meeting
January 31, 2022
The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in virtual
teleconference at 5:00 P.M.
Participating Remotely: Burt, Cormack, DuBois, Filseth, Kou, Stone,
Tanaka
Absent: None
Closed Session
1. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS City Designated
Representatives: City Manager and his Designees Pursuant to Merit
System Rules and Regulations (Ed Shikada, Kiely Nose, Rumi Portillo,
Sandra Blanch, Nicholas Raisch, Tori Anthony, Molly Stump, and
Terence Howzell); Employee Organization: Service Employees
International Union (SEIU) Local 521, Utilities Management and
Professional Association of Palo Alto (UMPAPA), Palo Alto Police
Officers' Association (PAPOA), Palo Alto Police Management Association
(PMA), International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF) Local 1319,
Palo Alto Fire Chiefs' Association (FCA), Management and Professional
Employees (MGMT); Authority: Government Code Section 54957.6 (a).
MOTION: Council Member Filseth moved, seconded by Council Member
Cormack, to go into Closed Session.
Council Member DuBois stated Council passed by a 9-0 vote in 2018 an
intention to move to open and transparent labor negotiations, and he hoped
that would be implemented soon. While closed session would still be held to
discuss negotiations, written offers would become public 2 days after being
received. Decisions on wages, benefits, and future pensions are significant
to the community from a fiscal perspective and to the ability to recruit and
retain employees. The goal of this policy was appropriate transparency to
provide timely and meaningful data while protecting the fairness and
integrity of the bargaining process.
MOTION PASSED: 7-0
Council went into Closed Session at 5:05 P.M.
DRAFT SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 2 of 20
Sp. City Council Meeting
Draft Summary Minutes: 01/31/2022
Council returned from Closed Session at 7.22 P.M.
Mayor Burt announced no reportable action.
Agenda Changes, Additions, and Deletions
There were none.
Public Comment
Ivan Kissiov of Altaire Walk stated his neighborhood has been experiencing a
crime wave, with 3 different occurrences in January. He stated there are
over 100 families affected by their property being attacked and their safety
being compromised. He urged the Council to put safety as a priority in the
City.
Bill Burch asked the Council how engaged citizens should proceed regarding
comments on Castilleja. He suggested directing citizens to submit
comments regarding Castilleja in written form to be included in the weekly
packets on those nights the school is not on the agenda, in order to allow
the Council to focus on other important decisions.
James Dai, also of Altaire Walk, proposed that these were not random
crimes and described ransacking of bike cages, theft from the mailroom and
mailboxes, suspected identity theft. He urged the City Council to put more
urgency to public safety and not just improving the businesses in the
community. He supported raising public funding for the police and giving
the community more public safety.
Scott Yoo, also a resident of Altaire Walk, related an incident in which his
wife found a stranger sitting in the driver's seat of her vehicle with mask on,
in the parking lot of the complex. The man ran when confronted. Mr. Yoo
stated the police were unable to do anything because of a lack of resources
and information. He echoed comments by the neighbors urging the City Council to take strong measures to stop this crime and felt those stealing
from the community were confident they would not be caught because of a
lack of resources.
Andrew, also living at Altaire, stated the safety of the complex has changed
in the past 2 years. He stated the community has been victimized by
thieves and added that it has been getting worse as the criminals have
become confident they will not face consequences. He described robberies
from the mailroom 3 consecutive weeks and break-ins even when there was
nothing in the mailroom to steal. He also urged the City Council to make
safety a top priority.
DRAFT SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 3 of 20
Sp. City Council Meeting
Draft Summary Minutes: 01/31/2022
Paige Cook, resident of Altaire Walk, described an incident on January 6 at
7:40 a.m. while preparing to walk her children to school in which an
individual took 2 packages from the locked mailroom and then begin to look
at the bicycles. Two days later at 2:30 in the afternoon, the same
gentlemen were upstairs in a locked portion in the community. She asked
for an increased investment in safety for the community and an increased
presence.
Chase Garber, another resident of Altaire Walk Complex, related that his
son's bike had recently been stolen. He stated properties crime can very
easily escalate into violent crime and that the greater harm is not the loss of
property but the loss of the psychological safety of the community. He
urged the Council to prioritize investing in solving the problem and giving
the police the resources they need to try to improve the situation.
Rebecca Eisenberg quoted California Government Code Section 54959, "A
public official who intentionally deprives the public of information that he has
reason to know the public is entitled to is guilty of a misdemeanor," and
discussed that City Manager Ed Shikada has been providing 2 city manager
updates, one to the City Council for their only and the other for the
community at large. She felt this was worthy of an investigation.
Atul stated that if crime was not stopped, it was only a matter of time that it
will spread and impact every Palo Alto resident and family. Not taking swift
action erodes trust in the public system and elected resources. He believed
this sent a message that it was okay to commit petty thefts and also
emboldened thieves who may not hesitate to escalate because they believe
it is their right to take others' property. He asked to make crime fighting a
top priority for the City.
Sharon Lee-Nakayama spoke about the need for crime prevention at Altaire
Walk. Since 2020, there have been seemingly weekly or daily thefts and
break-ins, including the theft of a set of duplicate keys to all of Altaire Walk,
requiring replacement all of door locks and residence keys. Thieves have
jumped over the gates as well as cut holes in the metal fences to gain
access into Altaire, terrorizing residents. Alta Torre, the senior residence
next door, has also experienced higher amounts of theft. She urged the
Council to consider providing funds and resources to combat the level of
crime at Altaire and Alta Torre.
Chuck Jagoda stated Palo Alto is quite advanced in many ways and hoped
the protections for renters and residents would be passed as a permanent
condition. He described a regulation in San Jose that people who buy or
own guns are responsible for self-indemnifying and have an insurance policy
DRAFT SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 4 of 20
Sp. City Council Meeting
Draft Summary Minutes: 01/31/2022
in case something happens as a result of it. He stated police violence is a
problem and suggested requiring police to get insurance policies on
themselves.
Lynn Chiapella requested that the council packets, including the
informational reports, be distributed to at least 2 libraries. She stated for
those who still read the printed page, it is very difficult to go through these
packets online. She stated the housing report was very difficult to read
online and very hard to compare information to previous reports.
Mayor Burt stated that the Council was not able to discuss items that were
not agendized but asked the City Manager to speak on the issues discussed
in public comment.
City Manager Ed Shikada did not have information available on the packets
being sent to libraries. He stated that the Palo Alto Police Department had
reviewed the circumstances at Altaire Walk and were in communication with
at least 1 resident. Residents were welcome to contact Mr. Shikada at
citymgr@cityofpaloalto.org for more information about the police
department review and recommendations. This was an evolving issue, and
he wanted to ensure communication lines remain open. He appreciated the
difficult issues residents were experiencing and would bring all existing
resources to bear.
City Clerk Lesley Milton confirmed that Staff stopped sending council packets
to the libraries because of COVID. The library staff had kept track of how
many times people came in to look at the packets previously, and the
number was not significant enough to continue it. She would be meeting
with the library director the next day and would discuss possibly reinstating
this and return back with an answer.
City Manager Shikada stated the library computers were another means by
which to review the packets and felt the librarians would be happy to assist
patrons to access the system.
Consent Calendar
2. Foothills Fire Mitigation and Safety Improvement Strategies, Staff
Recommendations to City Council.
Vice Mayor Kou, Council Member Stone, and Mayor Burt registered a no vote
on Agenda Item Number 2, and it will be agendized for a future meeting.
Jonathan Erman was frustrated that tonight's meeting had not kept to the
schedule because it was difficult to determine when public comments would
DRAFT SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 5 of 20
Sp. City Council Meeting
Draft Summary Minutes: 01/31/2022
be allowed. He stated the labor negotiations should not be a surprise and
that Staff should be able to handle it in under the expected time. He felt
this poor time management made it hard to have confidence in how the City
is run.
Mayor Burt noted that Council had scheduled a break coming out of the labor
session and deferred that because important discussion matters in closed
session took longer than the scheduled time.
City Manager Comments
City Manager Ed Shikada provided an update on COVID-19 testing options
and availability of test kits. He described a new website in beta with near-
real-time information to provide community awareness of ongoing police
response to calls for service. He listed several upcoming Lunar New Year
celebrations and some tentative upcoming council items, including a virtual
City Council retreat, midyear budget review, street closures, Cubberley
update, Pets in Need, and the Grand Jury response on affordable housing.
Action Items
3. PUBLIC HEARING: Adoption of an Emergency Ordinance and Regular
Ordinance Amending Palo Alto Municipal Code Section 9.68 (Relocation
Assistance for No-Fault Evictions) by Reducing the Threshold for
Applicability from 50 Units to 10 Units or a Lower Threshold.
Environmental Assessment: Exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines
Section 15061(b)(3).
Council Member Stone recused himself from the item.
City Attorney Molly Stump suggested the recused member turn off his
camera until the item is over.
Partnership for the Bay’s Future Fellow Lauren Bigelow stated this was a simple amendment changing 1 number, and there was a demonstrated need
in the community. The PTC recommended the City Council adopt the
proposed ordinance to amend tenant relocation assistance to apply to
structures or lots containing 10 or more units instead of 50 or more units.
The PTC additionally suggested adding the definitions of "at-fault" and "no-
fault" evictions from AB 1482 to the ordinance. The existing language was
part of Chapter 9.68, Rental Housing Stabilization, which includes
requirements for offering a 1-year written lease and relocation assistance for
no-fault evictions. Tenant relocation assistance was currently applicable to
lots with 50 or more units and was defined as monies paid to tenants who
have been evicted through no fault of their own. She presented a chart
DRAFT SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 6 of 20
Sp. City Council Meeting
Draft Summary Minutes: 01/31/2022
showing the amount of rental units covered with the current versus draft
ordinance. Amending this ordinance fall into alignment with several policy
goals. Renter protections are an example of Affirmatively Furthering Fair
Housing (AFFH), which has been named as a priority for the Housing and
Community Development Department (HCD), and increasing community
stability is a goal of the Comprehensive Plan. Tenant relocation assistance
provides greater community stability by incentivizing keeping tenants in
their homes. The PTC and Staff recommend the Council adopt the
emergency and/or permanent ordinance lowering the threshold for
relocation assistance from 50 units per property to 10 units per property for
qualifying tenants as defined in the municipal code.
Mayor Burt asked City Attorney Stump to provide clarification on the voting
requirements for passage of an emergency ordinance.
City Attorney Stump stated that under the municipal code, an emergency
ordinance requires 4/5 of council members present and voting. With 6
members present, the Council would need 5 affirmative votes to pass the
emergency ordinance. That would go into effect immediately. The regular
ordinance was identical, and it was recommended, if Council was interested
in these policies, to adopt both. The regular ordinance would act as a
backstop if the emergency ordinance did not pass or if there were found to
be a technical challenge to the emergency ordinance. It required a simple
majority of all council members, which was a vote of 4, and a second
reading in 30 days to go into effect.
Public Comment
Liz Gardner asked who at the City would oversee the rent ordinance and
whether the City Council would review the progress of this ordinance yearly. She explained her difficulty in moving to a new rental because of strict
requirements by landlords who claim to accept Section 8 renters. She
stated she and her 2 school-age sons were active in the community, but the
oppressive cost of rents in Palo Alto prohibited her family from evolving out
of their current low-income demographic situation. She wanted the Council
to understand what it is like to be very low income and trying to find safe,
fair housing in Palo Alto.
Anil Babbar of the California Apartment Association stated the California
Apartment Association was opposed to this shortsighted policy. Over the
past 2 years, owners have suffered from a great amount of loss, and this
proposal would compound an already difficult financial situation. He stated
the PTC recommended the proposal reluctantly due to the lack of data
DRAFT SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 7 of 20
Sp. City Council Meeting
Draft Summary Minutes: 01/31/2022
demonstrating the need for this program, and he urged the Council to reject
this measure.
Rebecca Eisenberg stated she is a landlord renting out a single-family home
and strongly supported this ordinance and urged the Council to extend the
ordinance to single-family homes, which constitute as many as 25% or more
of the City's current tenants. This ordinance supports stability in
communities. She objected to the requirement that Council Member Stone
recuse himself. She stated a tenant finally exists on City Council and was
removed from the ability to deliberate on and vote on the very issues he was
elected for. She felt all council members who were landlords should also
recuse themselves in that case.
Emily Ann Ramos spoke on behalf of SV@Home in support for the
recommendation to adopt both the emergency and permanent ordinance.
SV@Home advocated for a similar ordinance in 2018 when the residents of
the President Hotel faced eviction without adequate relocation support and
for a local urgency ordinance during the implementation of AB 1482. They
were excited that this is the first of many tenant protection ordinances
Council moved forward from November's council meeting and looked forward
to seeing many more.
Julie Beer stated she was a disabled senior living in a 1-bedroom apartment
with her husband. She favored the adoption of the relocation assistance
program for no-fault evictions. She asked the Council to consider going
down to 6 units instead of 10.
Christian Beauvoir, Palo Alto Renters Association, stated policies like this
ordinance were a statement of values. Last week, hundreds of people rallied
around a Palo Alto teacher who was getting evicted at no fault of his own because policy did not go far enough. Many people wished they could do
more, and this vote was an opportunity to do more. Waiting on this could
force more people out of the community away from their children's school,
childcare that they have a waiver for, support systems, doctors, families,
neighbors. In previous public comments, people said it was important that
they felt safe in their community, but it was not possible to feel safe when
the housing situation is insecure.
Winter Dellenbach supported the reduction to 10 units and felt an owner of
10 apartments could well afford relocation payments to no-fault tenants.
She felt this would probably be more needed in the future and felt 50 units
was way too much.
Katie Causey, renter and organizer for the Palo Alto Renters' Association,
supported tenant relocation assistance. She stated it was not just urgently
DRAFT SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 8 of 20
Sp. City Council Meeting
Draft Summary Minutes: 01/31/2022
needed but was the appropriate and pragmatic next step for supporting the
Palo Alto community.
Anna Toledano spoke in favor of renter protection and supported reducing
the number of required units in the building to be covered. She thanked Ms.
Bigelow for the work she has done for Palo Alto.
Jennifer Michel supported Mr. Beauvoir's comments and agreed with
adopting the emergency ordinance and extending it to single-family
dwellings. She stated not being able to come back into these neighborhoods
was disappointing and devastating. Regarding previous comments, she
stated that public engagement was time consuming and messy, required
attention, and should not be taken for granted. She stated she has also
been impacted by local crime increase but felt that the historically
exclusionary practices of the City led to an increase of crime.
Vice Mayor Kou thanked Ms. Bigelow, Ms. Tanner, and Staff for the work
done on this ordinance. She asked how criminal activity mentioned in Items
F and I in AB 1482 would apply in the case of something allowed under state
law but not federal law, for example marijuana use, when the tenant could
be arrested and the property seized.
City Attorney Stump suspected mere use of marijuana, which was lawful
under California law, would not allow a landlord to evict a tenant and avoid
paying relocation. She was not aware of a situation in which a rental
property owned by another party not involved in the alleged criminal activity
would be seized.
Vice Mayor Kou wanted to have assurances for owners regarding risk of
losing property due to somebody else's action. She asked someone from the
PTC to speak about their discussion about evictions for which there is no
specified cause.
Planning and Transportation Commission Chair Doria Summa stated there
was a robust discussion because the PTC members needed clarification on
many issues.
Assistant Director Tanner thought the way the ordinance was currently set
up was that no specified cause would be considered a no-fault eviction. She
noted that the reasons for an at-fault eviction were broad and quoted, "The
tenant has violated a lawful obligation or covenant of the tenancy." If a
DRAFT SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 9 of 20
Sp. City Council Meeting
Draft Summary Minutes: 01/31/2022
tenant breaks any local, state, or federal laws, it could be grounds for an at-
fault eviction.
Vice Mayor Kou wanted to discuss 5 units instead of 10. She gave the
example of eviction proceedings under way for some residential properties
located at Lane Court, 3 of which have 6 or 7 units. In the lending world, a
lot of 1 to 4 units is considered residential, while anything above 5 units is
considered a commercial property and qualified under different guidelines.
Council Member Cormack asked for clarification on the recommendations
from the staff memo.
Assistant Director Tanner stated there was concern at the PTC regarding
possible conflict on the definitions of "at-fault" and "no-fault" between the
state level and local ordinance. A landlord may have an eviction considered
at fault at the state level but no fault under the local ordinance or vice versa.
The PTC thought there might be a benefit in aligning the definitions.
Council Member Cormack asked for examples of something that is not
covered under the proposed ordinance but would be covered under AB 1482
definitions.
City Attorney Stump stated the words of the state and local ordinance were
not identical but the intent and the topics covered were very similar. She
stated the PTC might have been concerned about a situation in which a
tenant decided at the end of a lease that they were ready to move and also
tried to collect relocation assistance, claiming a no-fault eviction. It was
difficult to see that any court would agree that relocation assistance would
be owed by the owner in a situation in which the tenant was offered a new
lease and elected to leave instead. She felt it was more straightforward to
simply change the number and that the difference in language did not make
a difference. There was no conflict between AB 1482 and this ordinance.
Council Member DuBois stated 1482 talks about minor versus substantial
remodeling and asked what would constitute a residence being
uninhabitable.
Assistant Director Tanner stated it would be that someone was unable to live
there and the landlord was asking them to leave. It would tend to be larger-
scale renovation related to the major systems or a level of safety.
DRAFT SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 10 of 20
Sp. City Council Meeting
Draft Summary Minutes: 01/31/2022
Council Member DuBois asked about the reverse situation of something
minor like painting taking more than the 31 days in the ordinance.
City Attorney Stump stated this ordinance set up a regulatory requirement
for everyone's behavior but did not make the City an administrative
investigator and enforcement agency of this set of rules. The tenant needed
to inform themselves about their rights, communicate with the landlord, and
get assistance when they felt they needed it. She stated the City maintains
a list of available resources to help tenants who are in distress or who have
questions.
Mayor Burt asked about potentially financially strong landlords requiring
each tenant to individually go through the courts to protect their rights.
City Attorney Stump stated the inequities and imbalance in resources,
power, and knowledge were an issue. Cities can enter this with investigative
and enforcement resources, involving a department with multiple staff
people, investigators, attorneys, and administrative law judges. It was a
resource question, and the resources could be somewhat intensive.
Mayor Burt suggested engaging with the County to prospectively provide
resources and/or building into the ordinance a way in which tenants can
group their cases together if they are being subjected to the same action by
the same landlord.
City Attorney Stump stated landlord-tenant disputes were individual
contractual matters and the City could not change the rules of civil
procedure that govern what happens in court. A class action might be
possible if the prerequisites were satisfied. That sometimes happens in large
jurisdictions, but Palo Alto does not have that authority.
Assistant Director Tanner stated the County offers a similar mediation to
that mandated through the City of Palo Alto, but Staff could see if the
County has any resources available to Palo Alto residents.
Mayor Burt mentioned a case with a landlord flouting the current regulation
regarding what constitutes a major remodel and was concerned that a
stronger regulation that a landlord still flouts would not give much protection
for tenants. He was interested in collaborating with the County to
strengthen enforcement.
DRAFT SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 11 of 20
Sp. City Council Meeting
Draft Summary Minutes: 01/31/2022
Assistant Director Tanner stated the Council directed Staff to work on
supporting tenant right to counsel efforts at the county level. That is not in
place but is being pursued.
MOTION: Vice Mayor Kou moved to:
A. Adopt the emergency ordinance lowering the threshold for relocation
assistance from 50 units per property to 5 units per property for
qualifying tenants as defined in the municipal code
B. Adopt the permanent ordinance lowering the threshold for relocation
assistance from 50 units per property to 5 units per property for
qualifying tenants as defined in the municipal code
C. Add AB 1482 definitions of at-fault and no-fault evictions to the
ordinance.
MOTION STALLED for lack of a second.
MOTION: Council Member DuBois moved, seconded by Council Member
Cormack, to:
A. Adopt Emergency Ordinance 5543 lowering the threshold for
relocation assistance from 50 units per property to 10 units per
property for qualifying tenants as defined in the municipal code
B. Adopt the permanent ordinance lowering the threshold for relocation
assistance from 50 units per property to 10 units per property for
qualifying tenants as defined in the municipal code.
Council Member DuBois thought 10 units was a reasonable level. Respecting
the City Attorney's opinion, he was comfortable with the current language.
Council Member Cormack looked forward to more data from the rental
registry to help Council arrive at a different threshold. In the supplemental
report, the PTC believed the ordinance was balanced in considering landlord
and tenant concerns by choosing this number of units.
Vice Mayor Kou supported the motion. She did not want to see less stability
for tenants in the City, even those in properties with lower numbers of units.
She commented on an owner holding 3 different parcels with 6 or 7 units each being able to evict even though the total amount of units was more
than 10 but felt 10 was better than 50. She hoped to revisit this in the
future.
DRAFT SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 12 of 20
Sp. City Council Meeting
Draft Summary Minutes: 01/31/2022
Mayor Burt stated that the struggle with the threshold of 10 or 5 units is due
to not wanting to impact mom-and-pop landlords and attempting to draw a
line that would make that distinction. In other instances, large corporate
entities own many units but some in individual properties. He asked if it
would be permissible legally to require relocation assistance for individual 5-
unit properties if the property owner owns, in aggregate, a defined number
of units.
Assistant Director Tanner stated the law was currently structured around the
number of units per property, and that suggestion would be both the per-
property unit number and per owner. Sometimes owners of rental
properties have an LLC for each property, and it could be a challenge.
City Attorney Stump did not want to regulate based on the identity or
characteristics of the owner but did not have an answer regarding the
aggregate number of units in the jurisdiction. She suggested Staff could
look at it from a legal authority and administrative ability standpoint.
Mayor Burt asked if that could be done at the second reading of the
permanent ordinance.
City Attorney Stump stated the municipal code allows no substantive change
to the topic or coverage of the ordinance between the first and second
readings. She asked Assistant Director Tanner to add that to the list of
things for Staff to look at before coming back to Council.
Council Member Tanaka was concerned that, in the face of an affordable
housing supply issue, this would actually raise the cost of housing.
Landlords have mortgages and maintenance expenses and will necessarily
pass the cost of the renter protection along. This would not increase the
supply of affordable housing in the City and actually make it difficult for new families to come in. He did not see much outreach done to landlords and
asked what has been done in terms of reaching out to property owners.
Assistant Director Tanner responded the understanding was Staff would
come back expeditiously with this item and additional outreach would be
carried out for the other items, several of which specifically indicated more
outreach. Staff made sure that everyone who emailed the Council or gave
contact information was aware this was coming to the PTC and to Council.
Council Member Tanaka felt if more people knew about this, there would
have been more people calling and was concerned there was not good public
outreach done. He wanted to hear from the smaller landlords. He asked
when the ordinance would go into effect and asked what recourse landlords
would have on this.
DRAFT SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 13 of 20
Sp. City Council Meeting
Draft Summary Minutes: 01/31/2022
Assistant Director Tanner stated the urgency ordinance would go into effect
immediately if passed and the regular ordinance would go into effect 30 days
after the second reading. She suggested people could lobby their council
members to have the law reversed and the Council could agendize that or
not pass the second reading.
Council Member Tanaka stated there was not a lot of data on the need to go
down to 10 units and felt this was premature. He wanted to hear from both
sides and make a better decision rather than rushing into it.
Council Member Filseth thanked Staff and Ms. Bigelow for their work on this.
Mayor Burt responded to Council Member Tanaka's concerns. He stated a
property with 10 one-bedroom units would generate $360,000 around a year
in gross, not survival income. This ordinance only applied to landlords doing
major remodels and evicting good tenants not in violation and warranting
legal eviction. There was no expense to a landlord unless they wished to
evict tenants, upgrade the property, and, in doing so, make the property
less affordable. This had gone through multiple public hearings and been
widely publicized, with letters and public comments from both tenants and
property owners.
Vice Mayor Kou commented that there was a way for landlords to request a
waiver should they have a hardship and asked Staff to elaborate on that.
Assistant Director Tanner replied the waiver allows a property owner to
assert there has been a taking of their property in certain circumstances.
She believed it would be a court proceeding with the landlord providing
evidence indicating the amount of relocation assistance reaches the level
that is an unconstitutional taking of their property.
City Attorney Stump stated that providing an avenue for a waiver makes sure that if a landlord intends to make that argument in an extraordinary
case, they make it first to the City, which then has an opportunity at the
Council level to make an adjustment on a one-off basis. If there was still a
dispute, they could go to court.
MOTION PASSED: 5-1-1, Tanaka no, Stone abstain
4. Parks and Recreation Commission (PRC) Recommends that Council
Direct Staff and the PRC to Assess and Conduct Public Outreach on a
New Community Gymnasium Project in Palo Alto
This item was continued to March 7, 2022.
DRAFT SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 14 of 20
Sp. City Council Meeting
Draft Summary Minutes: 01/31/2022
5. Colleagues Memo: Consider sale of up to 1 millions gallons per day
(MGD) of Individual Supply Guarantee (ISG).
Council Member Cormack, representative for the City of Palo Alto at the Bay
Area Water Supply and Conservation Agency, stated the ISG was an
agreement the 26 member agencies have amongst themselves, not a
contract with the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission. Palo Alto's ISG
was over 16 MGD, meaning the City could purchase up to that amount each
year from the SFPUC. She presented a chart showing Palo Alto's has
decreased water usage over time, with the projected usage for the future
well below the ISG, demonstrating that the City will have enough water even
with selling up to 1 MGD of the ISG. There was interest from multiple
parties in BAWSCA if the City chooses to sell some of this. Expensive things
will be required at the regional water quality control plant for the City to
become more self-sufficient, and this was an opportunity to consider a policy
allowing the City to make an investment in those things.
Mayor Burt addressed some concerns raised. In droughts, there are
statewide mandates and directives to reduce water use, which apply whether
or not Palo Alto's water supply system has ample water. The Hetch Hetchy
system has the strongest drought resiliency of any water system in the
state. Regarding the consideration of how the water would be used, he
stated that cities have development plans and he welcomed using as an
aspect of screening prospective acquirers that it not be predominantly for
office development and not exacerbate the jobs-housing imbalance. He
would welcome that as one aspect of how to screen prospective acquirers of
the ISG.
Council Member Filseth stated the RHNA target calls for an increase in housing in the next 8 years of between 20% and 25% and asked how it is
possible to grow the population that much and not use any more water.
Council Member Cormack explained that extending the trend for the
reduction in conservation that continues to happen, there was an
assumption that the per-capita use of water will continue to go down.
Mayor Burt pointed out that the graph shows a fairly significant reduction in
water use following the last significant housing growth period around 2005
to 2008. A change to the architectural review ordinance in 2016 mandated
that any major remodels or new development would have low-water-use
indigenous landscaping as the preferred alternative. Those trends have led
to significant decline in water use. The rebuild of the Hetch Hetchy system
drastically increased water costs per gallon.
DRAFT SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 15 of 20
Sp. City Council Meeting
Draft Summary Minutes: 01/31/2022
Assistant Director of Utilities Karla Dailey agreed that per-capita water use
was going down and overall water use was going up because of added
population. The water use for landscaping becomes a smaller percentage of
overall water demand in the more densely populated future.
Vice Mayor had concerns that building and RHNA will continue to increase.
Even with reassurances, she worried about a shortage of water in the future.
Mayor Burt asked Staff for clarification on the graph on what assumptions
are made past the current RHNA period.
Assistant Director Dailey stated the graph was based on Comp Plan
population numbers. For 2030 and beyond, the graph was extended linearly
from what was in the Comp Plan.
Mayor Burt clarified that it assumes the Comp Plan housing growth rate
would continue at that growth rate all the way through 2045.
Assistant Director Dailey added that even if the full RHNA allocation were
realized in Palo Alto, there would still be quite a bit of ISG left over.
Council Member DuBois asked if this was anticipated to be a permanent
transfer for a one-time price.
Council Member Cormack stated that was the initial concept but added that
no one has done this before and Staff might learn something while
negotiating. There was further discussion about past transfers to East Palo
Alto and Mountain View.
Council Member Stone asked if other agencies in California were doing this
and could be used as a model.
Assistant Director Dailey stated the contract the agencies have with San
Francisco requires that any transfer of ISG be permanent. She added that
ISG was a unique feature and not a common tradable asset. There were not many players in California or across the country that can negotiate for this.
Council Member Stone was concerned about the permanency. He asked if
Palo Alto's ISG would possibly be reduced in the future. because according
to the chart, it had already been reduced one time.
Assistant Director Dailey answered it was guaranteed to remain at the same
level unless the City transferred some. The dip on the graph was because of
the 2017 transfer executed to East Palo Alto. This transfer would allow
another party to buy more water from San Francisco; Palo Alto would be
transferring the right to buy more water, not the water itself.
DRAFT SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 16 of 20
Sp. City Council Meeting
Draft Summary Minutes: 01/31/2022
Council Member Stone asked what the City could expect to make from the
transfer. of 1 MGD.
Assistant Director Dailey explained that would be part of the research Staff
would undertake and come back to Council with.
Council Member Cormack believed tens of millions of dollars was a ballpark
for this pristine, high-quality water.
Council Member Tanaka asked how much water Mountain View transferred
to East Palo Alto and how much they sold it for.
Assistant Director Dailey stated they sold 1 MGD for $5M but that Mountain
View has a different arrangement, with a minimum take obligation. They
use less than that requirement and pay for water they cannot use, so that
$5M was to make up for some of the fees paid to San Francisco.
Council Member Tanaka inquired about the cost of the 120 hours of senior
resource planner time needed, in order to assess the potential return on
investment.
Mayor Burt stated at a rough level, it would be thousands of dollars in
expense to potentially get tens of millions of dollars in income.
Council Member Tanaka stated that in 2018 when the City transferred 0.5
MGD to East Palo Alto, it was not worth anything. He wanted to understand
how 1 MGD was now worth tens of millions of dollars.
Council Member Cormack stated the transfer to East Palo Alto was to rectify
a problem that existed from decades before and was the neighborly thing to
do. There was not a value at the time because there were no interested
parties. Price will be determined by supply and demand, with demand
potentially quite different now. Multiple BAWSCA agencies are interested in
purchasing ISG. Much of the work involved in addressing the ISG transfer would be complementary to what the senior resource planner is already
doing on One Water.
There was further discussion on the current and past value of the ISG.
Public Comment
Bill Ross stated it was difficult to comment on this colleagues memo because
it did not have enough detail. He felt there was a need for full
correspondence on the RHNA issue to make it accurate. He cited Code
56133, that a city may provide new or extended services outside its
DRAFT SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 17 of 20
Sp. City Council Meeting
Draft Summary Minutes: 01/31/2022
boundaries only if it first requests and receives approval from the
commission of the county in which the affected territory is located. He
asked for the list of potential water supply projects to understand what is
actually proposed and felt residents did not engage in water conservation
practices only to have the water transferred to another jurisdiction for
mixed-use development.
Keith Bennett stated he has made significant financial efforts over the years
to reduce personal water consumption in order to leave more water available
for environmental needs, such as the Bay-Delta water flows and protection
of fisheries, not supporting development somewhere else. He felt this one-
time transaction was not sustainable and that the City had no recourse to
get the water back if needed. He believed it was a bad idea and should end
here.
Rebecca Eisenberg felt there were many other options for revenue
generation beyond this. She believed water usage in the City was
increasing, not decreasing. She felt if the Council encouraged using more
low-water irrigation systems for landscaping, there would be a public policy
to reward it. With the obligation to increase housing by 25% over the next
years, demand will go up, which would also decrease supply, and she asked
if this would increase cost for residents.
Lynn Chiapella wondered if water rates would go down or continue to go up
and believed the increased rates have made people more conservation
conscious than they would have been. She discussed trees being cut down
and not replaced, faux grass going in to avoid paying for water, and trees in
the City dying from lack of watering. She would not support this until the
City dealt with the current water problems.
Assistant Director Dailey listed some things contributing to water
conservation in Palo Alto, the water landscape ordinance, water conservation
requirements built into the Green Building code, and water conservation
programs administered by Valley Water, including a landscape replacement
program.
Mayor Burt reiterated that the colleagues memo was a referral to begin to
study deeper, not a comprehensive evaluation offering conclusions. He
stated the only way this would impact water rates was if the dollars were
used to further invest in the capital funding for advanced water recycling,
which would potentially then reduce water costs modestly.
DRAFT SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 18 of 20
Sp. City Council Meeting
Draft Summary Minutes: 01/31/2022
Assistant Director Dailey added that Staff communicates frequently with
Canopy and makes sure to include messaging about proper care of trees
when putting out calls for using water efficiently. She explained that the
water rates were driven by the need to maintain and upgrade the
distribution system (not affected by ISG sale) and the rate paid for actual
water from SFPUC. The more water San Francisco sells to the 26 agencies,
the lower the commodity rate is. Buying less water from San Francisco
actually results in higher rates.
Mayor Burt emphasized that the canopy and lawns in the parks had nothing
to do with this. This proposal did not affect those things in any way.
Council Member Cormack added that in the event Palo Alto sold 1 MGD and
it was used by someone else, that would increase the amount of water the
SFPUC is selling, meaning the fixed costs were spread over a larger base,
but it would be a minor change. She described some conservation programs
noted on the City's website.
Council Member asked for Staff's opinion on the value of water rights
currently and also asked how much the 120 hours of senior resource planner
time would cost.
City Manager Ed Shikada stated the market is developing and it was
unknown how this would ultimately play out.
Staff Utilities Director Dean Batchelor estimated it would be roughly $12,000
to $15,000 just for labor.
Council Member Tanaka stated this could be a very valuable asset given the
increase in value over 4 years. With the current inflation rate and the
systemic drought situation, he believed water would become even more
valuable. He would only be in favor of this if there were an option to take it
back, which he realized was not possible. He felt it was important to be
cautious and felt less water was being used because it was a less
comfortable environment.
Council Member DuBois asked if there would be a reduction in allocation
during a drought.
Assistant Director Dailey stated that was correct and that during a water
supply shortage, there was only a certain amount of water to be divided
among the 26 agencies.
DRAFT SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 19 of 20
Sp. City Council Meeting
Draft Summary Minutes: 01/31/2022
Council Member DuBois felt it was important to look at what happens in a
severe drought. This would be a permanent transfer, and he felt having this
insurance in the case of a severe drought was important. He also felt the
value might increase over time and did not see the urgency when there were
already discussions about staff workload. He felt this should be deferred.
this and not spend staff time on it right now.
Council Member Cormack explained that selling this and using the money to
invest in recycled water would allow the City to prepare for future droughts.
She did not think that 120 hours, 3 weeks of work, was a reason not to do
this tonight. She did not see a scenario under which the City would get to
this ISG level.
Council Member Stone questioned if this was the correct time to be selling
water, especially in perpetuity, with population on the rise and a mega
drought likely in the near future. He thought it was important to look long
term, 50 to 100 years from today, especially given mandates that will
continue to add greater demand and growth without any additional state
resources to help cities accommodate that growth. He thought it was wise
to be prudent with the water supply, not selling those rights.
Vice Mayor Kou felt that what Palo Alto residents see is they are conserving
water, yet water rates continue to go up. Regarding the sale of water to
East Palo Alto that allowed them to build more, she wondered how much of
it was office space, how much their land increased, and what that did to
displacement in East Palo Alto. She felt it was important to take care of Palo
Alto and its residents first.
Mayor Burt stated the transfer of water to East Palo Alto was a social and
racial justice decision. He believed the use of the water was East Palo Alto's
decision to make. He thought the long-term future in water would be based
on efficient use in agriculture, landscaping, and homes and in reuse from
recycling and advanced recycling, which was an identified prospective use of
these funds. That opportunity would remain out there if this did not move
forward tonight. In a severe drought scenario, a 25% reduction would leave
Palo Alto with 12.375 MGD. During the last drought, use was down to 8
MGD because use goes down in a drought, so the allocation was still 50%
above the use in that severe drought. He felt this was an emotional issue
and that lot of the concerns were not connected to the pragmatic impacts
but more emotional associations. Palo Alto utilizes its water allocation at a
lower percentage than any of the other BAWSCA agencies, so every one of
DRAFT SUMMARY MINUTES
Page 20 of 20
Sp. City Council Meeting
Draft Summary Minutes: 01/31/2022
them would be in trouble before Palo Alto would. He stated it was clear this
was not the time to move forward on this and would not request a vote at
this time. at which this would be well received by the Council or the
community, so he would not support moving forward with requesting a vote
on the colleagues memo at this time.
The Council deferred action on this item for future consideration.
Council Member Questions, Comments and Announcements
Council Member Cormack appreciated the Staff's informational report for
Item 6 and felt it would be more helpful if it included a map. She mentioned
order of voting as something for the Mayor, City Manager, and Clerk to
consider making a decision on now that the Council is back remote.
Mayor Burt would work with the Clerk on that.
Council Member Tanaka wished everyone a Happy Chinese New Year.
Mayor Burt stated he represented Palo Alto at the Santa Clara County Cities
Association and proposed that climate protection be one of the priority areas
this year, with unanimous support. One thing this could mean for Palo Alto
was looking at collaborations on different programs and efforts the City
could do with other cities in the county. It could also mean collaborating on
pursuing state legislation. An issue that has recently come up was that the
City and Greenways do not have the leverage to force brokers to disclose
the uses and final destiny of recycled materials, but the State would have
such an ability as well as the ability to build in-state capacity for recycling
and diminish the off-shoring of those materials. He shared concern on the
violence and burglaries occurring in the community. The police department
was being asked to respond to a significant uptick in incidents with
significantly less staffing, which was a constraint on their ability for
investigations and preventative measures. Mayor Burt asked the City
Manager for a more in-depth report on the response to this ongoing wave of
serious incidents and what it would take to have resources to respond more
effectively. He finally spoke about Leonard Mello of the Public Works
Department, who passed away this weekend. Mr. Mello will be greatly
missed, and condolences were offered to his family.
Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 11:11 P.M in Honor of Public
Works Engineering Department Staff Leonard Mello.