City Council Meeting Page 1 of 28 June 8, 2026
*
City of Lafayette
City Council Minutes
Lafayette Library and Learning Center – Don Tatzin Community Hall June 8, 2026 3491 Mount Diablo Boulevard, Lafayette, California 7:00 p.m.
As a courtesy, and technology permitting, members of the public may participate virtually. However, the City cannot guarantee that the public’s access to teleconferencing technology will be uninterrupted, and technical difficulties may occur from time to time. Unless required by the Brown Act, City Council/Board meetings will continue despite technical difficulties for participants using the teleconferencing (Zoom) option. To participate virtually in the City of Lafayette’s public meetings and provide public comment, please follow these steps:
1. Watch or Listen: Meetings are broadcast on the City of Lafayette’s YouTube Channel:
http://bit.ly/LoveLafayetteYouTube.
2. Submit Comments Before the Meeting: Members of the public can provide public comment by sending an e-mail to [email protected] for City Council meetings no later than noon the day of the meeting. Those e-mails will be distributed to City Council, the City Manager, and the City Attorney, and will be posted as part of the public record.
3. Live Remote Public Comments: Technology permitting, members of the public may submit live public comment via Zoom conferencing by using the link below. You must download the Zoom app or software. Zoom meetings can be accessed by telephone, computer, or smart device. When the Mayor invites public comment for the item on which you would like to comment, please use the "raise hand" feature (or press *9 if connecting via telephone only) to alert staff you have a public comment to provide. Each speaker is allowed three (3) minutes to speak.
4. At the time and date of the meeting, please click this URL to join the webinar:
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/89008805648?pwd=ODQxRGxzaGNHSWVITUVFalFuUHBIZz09 Passcode: 426199 Or join by phone: Dial 1 669 900 9128
Webinar ID: 890 0880 5648 Passcode: 426199
City Council Meeting Page 2 of 28 June 8, 2026
-
1. CALL TO ORDER – 7:00 P.M.
Mayor Anduri called the Regular City Council meeting to order at 7:02 p.m.
2. ROLL CALL
Present: Mayor Anduri, Vice Mayor McCormick; Councilmember Candell, Cervantes, and Wotherspoon
Absent: None
Staff Present: Niroop Srivatsa, City Manager; Tracy Robinson, Assistant City Manager; Lt. James Williams; Greg Wolff, Planning and Building Director; Mike Moran, Engineering and Public Works Director; Jonathan Katayanagi, Parks and Recreation Director; Arly Cassidy, Senior Planner; Mala Subramanian, City Attorney; Joanne Robbins, City Clerk
3. Disclosure and/or Take Action on Remote Participation due to Just Cause or Emergency Circumstances Pursuant to AB 2449 (Gov. Code section 54953(f).)
4. ADOPTION OF AGENDA
ACTION: It was M/S/C (McCormick/Candell) to adopt the agenda, as amended to remove Item 5. Roll Call Vote: 5-0 (Ayes: Anduri, McCormick, Candell, Cervantes, Wotherspoon; Noes: None).
5. CLOSED SESSION – None.
6. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE – Mayor Anduri led in the Pledge of Allegiance.
7. MAYOR ANDURI – Land Acknowledgement Statement
We acknowledge that Lafayette is part of the unceded, ancestral homeland of the Bay Miwok people. The Bay Miwok and neighboring Ohlone people have lived in and moved through this place for thousands of years. They stewarded and shaped this land for hundreds of generations. We express our appreciation and gratitude for this profound legacy, which enhances and contributes to our lives to this day. We will strive to honor this land and strengthen our ties with the Indigenous communities that continue to live and work in our East Bay region as our neighbors and community members. We acknowledge and honor them and their ancestors, elders, and next seven generations.
8. PUBLIC COMMENTS (For items not on the agenda)
ELIOT HUDSON referenced the Council’s January 12, 2026 direction to refine the Objective Design Standards for multifamily and mixed-use development to better reflect Lafayette’s small-town and semirural character. He noted that a working group met on March 5 to further discuss the standards and urged the Council to avoid additional delays in adopting them, expressing concern that ongoing revisions could postpone implementation.
City Council Meeting Page 3 of 28 June 8, 2026
He acknowledged several improvements in the March 5 draft, including clearer purpose language and a prohibition on flat roofs. However, he identified three remaining concerns: (1) the continued allowance of butterfly and shed roofs, which he believes are incompatible with Lafayette’s desired character; (2) window standards that still permit large single-pane openings above the ground floor and do not adequately limit the continuous placement of large windows across façades; and (3) a glazing allowance of up to 45% of exterior wall area, which he argued remains excessive compared with existing local developments. He encouraged the Council to further strengthen these standards to ensure future development is consistent with community design objectives.
HALDEN SMITH, a student at Springhill Elementary School, expressed concerns about pedestrian safety while walking to and from school. He noted the absence of a traffic signal and crossing signage and said he does not feel safe traveling home, particularly given the presence of younger students. He urged the Council to retain the crossing guard, stating that removing the position could increase the risk of accidents at nearby intersections and negatively impact student safety.
Kaitlin Smith, mother of Halden Smith, spoke in support of maintaining the school crossing guard position.
She explained that her family moved to Lafayette because of its strong sense of community, safety, and walkability, and noted that the school encourages students to walk or bike to campus. Her children must cross the intersection of Springhill Road and San Reliez Court, where there is no traffic signal or stop sign, and that they would not feel safe crossing without the assistance of the crossing guard.
She also raised concerns about traffic conditions at the intersection, including limited driver visibility due to sun glare, frequent speeding above the posted limit, and instances of motorists crossing double yellow lines to bypass traffic. She stated that these conditions create significant safety risks for students and emphasized the importance of retaining the crossing guard to help ensure safe passage for children traveling to and from school.
LYNDA ROTUNDO, 3163 Stanley Boulevard, said she has long been involved in community improvement efforts, including leading the Acalanes Valley and Ridge Initiative nearly 20 years ago to improve walkability and create safer routes for students and residents traveling to Springhill Elementary, Acalanes High School, Springbrook Pool, and surrounding destinations. Through a partnership between residents and the City, sidewalks and traffic-calming measures were added to encourage safe walking. She also assisted the Springhill Road neighborhood in securing sidewalk connections and has served as the crossing guard at Springhill Road and San Reliez Court.
While recognizing the City's budget challenges, she urged the Council to reconsider eliminating crossing guard coverage at this location. Based on more than a decade of experience at the intersection, she believes removing this safety measure would increase the risk of pedestrian accidents and undermine community efforts to encourage children to walk safely to school.
She further emphasized that Springhill Road serves as the neighborhood’s sole access point, resulting in significant congestion during school dismissal periods as residents and parents converge in the area. The primary concern is not the number of pedestrians crossing, but the traffic conditions that increase safety risks, including congestion, limited visibility, unpredictable driver behavior, and distracted children.
City Council Meeting Page 4 of 28 June 8, 2026
Drivers frequently stop within crosswalks, forcing children to navigate around vehicles and enter the roadway. She noted that she often directs motorists to clear the crossings so students can cross safely.
She also expressed concern that traffic backups reduce visibility for both drivers and pedestrians and that, despite prior City improvements, motorists continue to cross into opposing traffic lanes. Based on these ongoing safety concerns, she urged the Council to reconsider the proposed removal of the crossing guard at this location.
Vice Mayor McCormick asked crossing guard Ms. Rotundo whether she had been contacted by the School District regarding the impacts of its funding reductions. Ms. Rotundo replied that she had not received any official communication. She added that pedestrian volume is not the primary concern at the Springhill Road and San Reliez Court crossing and noted that a one-day pedestrian count conducted at the location did not accurately reflect typical usage or safety conditions.
Councilmember Wotherspoon sought clarification regarding reports of drivers crossing double yellow lines and entering opposing traffic lanes. Ms. Rotundo explained that, due to traffic congestion, drivers increasingly remain in the opposing lane for extended distances and accelerate to avoid oncoming vehicles. She stated that this behavior creates significant safety concerns because children attempting to cross cannot see approaching vehicles and do not expect traffic to be traveling in the opposite lane.
According to Ms. Rotundo, these conditions occur in both directions as motorists attempt to bypass gridlock.
Councilmember Candell thanked Ms. Rotundo for her years of service as a crossing guard. Ms. Rotundo expressed appreciation for the families she serves and stated that it has been an honor to help keep the neighborhood and its children safe.
9. CITY MANAGER’S UPDATE
City Manager Niroop Srivatsa gave the following report:
• The Public Art Committee invites residents to a Downtown Murals Program Workshop on Wednesday, June 24th. Attendees will learn about the program, meet project partners, and have an opportunity to provide input on the selection of Lafayette’s next downtown mural artist.
From Engineering:
• Both PG&E and EBMUD are working throughout Lafayette but primarily on Moraga Road, School Street, Topper Lane, and Brook Street. Notices for the start of the 2026 Road Paving Project have gone out to directly impacted residents and preliminary work is planned to start later this week. • She reminded the community that the City is still accepting applications for 3 at-large positions on the new Multi-Modal Mobility Advisory Committee. This committee will help provide community input on the Mt. Diablo Corridor Multi-Modal Mobility Study as well as several related transportation and mobility projects that will be underway over the next couple of years. All information can be found on the City’s website.
Mayor Anduri opened the public comment period, and there were no speakers.
10. PRESENTATIONS
A. Kathryn Ishizu and Suzy Pak – Lamorinda Village
City Council Meeting Page 5 of 28 June 8, 2026
Lafayette Civic Values: Lifelong Learning and the Arts
Recommendation: Receive and file.
Mayor Anduri provided introductory remarks regarding the City’s ongoing commitment to lifelong learning and the arts, noting that Lafayette’s mission statement emphasizes both values. He explained that, through the City’s Public Art Committee and its expanded focus, the City is working to further integrate arts and educational opportunities into civic life. As part of this effort, an organization that promotes lifelong learning or appreciation of the arts will be featured at the first Council meeting of each month throughout 2026 and 2027.
Mayor Anduri introduced this month’s featured organization, Lamorinda Village, which supports older adults in remaining independent and engaged in their homes and communities. He highlighted the organization’s services, including transportation assistance, home maintenance support, technology assistance, wellness check-ins, grocery delivery, and short-term meal preparation help. He also emphasized the organization’s role in fostering lifelong learning opportunities and building community connections for older adults. He then welcomed Executive Director Kathryn Ishizu and Community Outreach Manager Suzy Pak to present information about the organization’s educational and community programs.
Kathryn Ishizu, Executive Director of Lamorinda Village, described the organization’s mission of helping older adults remain independent, connected, and engaged as they age. While many residents are familiar with the organization’s volunteer-based support services, she emphasized that an equally important aspect of its work is creating opportunities for lifelong learning, creativity, social connection, and active engagement. She noted that Lamorinda Village has evolved into a comprehensive healthy aging organization offering wellness programs, educational opportunities, arts and cultural experiences, and community partnerships that support the physical, cognitive, and emotional well-being of older adults.
She explained that a recent strategic planning process identified meaningful intellectual engagement as a top priority among older adults and credited the City of Lafayette’s support, along with community partnerships developed by Community Outreach Manager Suzy Pak, for enabling the expansion of these programs.
Suzy Pak, Community Outreach Manager for Lamorinda Village, highlighted the organization’s healthy aging initiatives and lifelong learning opportunities. She described the Healthy Aging Lecture Series, which brings experts together with community members to discuss topics such as healthcare navigation, caregiving, Medicare, fraud prevention, mental wellness, healthy living, and strategies for maintaining independence. She noted that these programs help older adults make informed decisions, advocate for themselves, and navigate complex systems. Ms. Pak also discussed weekly online Village Conversations, which provide opportunities for seniors to engage in discussions on current issues, community resources, and cultural topics while fostering both learning and social connection.
Ms. Pak further outlined the organization’s technology support programs, including individualized assistance with smartphones, tablets, computers, and online tools, as well as classes offered through the Lafayette Community Center. Additional educational offerings include a brain enrichment series for adults age 65 and older, intellectual and social activities such as bridge and Mahjong, a writers’ group, a book club, and classes in areas such as photography and flower arranging. She emphasized that many programs are led by volunteers and community experts and are designed to promote cognitive stimulation, creativity, and lifelong learning.
City Council Meeting Page 6 of 28 June 8, 2026
She also highlighted the importance of arts and cultural programming, including music salons, symphony and opera outings, holiday sing-alongs, and hula lessons. She stated that these activities reinforce the idea that learning and personal growth continue throughout life while also addressing one of the most significant challenges facing older adults—social isolation. She concluded by thanking the City of Lafayette for its ongoing support and partnership, noting that the collaboration has strengthened over the past four Mayor Anduri thanked Kathryn Ishizu and Suzy Pak for their presentation and invited comments from the Council.
Councilmember Cervantes praised Lamorinda Village and shared that he first learned about the organization through Don Jenkins while serving together on the General Plan Advisory Committee. After learning more about its mission and services, he became a member. He highlighted the organization’s personal attention to members, including recognition of birthdays and other milestones, and stated that these efforts contribute to what makes the community special. He thanked the organization for its remarkable work.
Councilmember Candell expressed appreciation for the leadership of Kathryn Ishizu and Suzy Pak, describing them as important community pillars. She commended the significant time and energy invested by staff and volunteers and recalled reaching out to Lamorinda Village at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic to help support isolated older adults. She noted that the organization responded quickly and effectively to meet community needs and thanked them for their service.
Vice Mayor McCormick echoed the positive comments and emphasized the importance of the organization’s technology assistance programs. He noted that rapidly evolving technology can contribute to social isolation for those who are uncomfortable using digital tools and observed that technology education can also help protect older adults from scams. He thanked Lamorinda Village for its broad range of programs and community support.
Councilmember Wotherspoon also thanked Ishizu and Pak for their work and remarked on the impressive breadth of programs offered by the organization. She stated that she was familiar with some of the services but learned about many additional opportunities through the presentation. She highlighted the value of the organization’s consistent programming and social activities, noting their importance in creating opportunities for connection and engagement for older adults throughout the community.
Mayor Anduri opened the public comment period, and there were no speakers. He then thanked Ishizu and Pak again for their presentation and for the contributions of Lamorinda Village to the community.
B. Lt. James Williams
Annual Police Department Update
Recommendation: Receive and file.
Police Chief Lt. Williams presented the 2025 annual Police Department update, describing the year as focused on partnership, prevention, and proactive policing. Lafayette remains one of California’s safest cities due to collaboration between the City Council, residents, businesses, regional partners, and police staff.
City Council Meeting Page 7 of 28 June 8, 2026
• The department handled 16,113 calls for service, issued 2,088 traffic citations, and recorded 273 FBI Part I crimes, down from 329 in 2024. Despite increased workload, crime declined, reflecting strong community reporting and proactive enforcement efforts. • Calls for service averaged approximately 1,342 per month (about 44 per day). Staffing included 17 sworn personnel, five professional staff, and three part-time parking enforcement officers, supporting patrol, investigations, and specialized functions. Person crimes remained at a 10-year low, with seven robberies and two assaults.
• Per capita crime rates remained well below state and national averages. Property crimes totaled 259 incidents, with burglary, larceny, and auto theft rates significantly lower than California and U.S. benchmarks.
• Traffic enforcement increased, with citations rising from 1,499 to 2,088, contributing to reduced traffic collisions. In 2025, there were 43 total collisions, including 20 injury crashes, 31 hit-and-run incidents, and zero fatalities.
• The department expanded community engagement through initiatives such as Coffee with the Cops, the Citizens Academy, vacation house checks, and public safety events. It also supported emergency preparedness efforts led by the Emergency Services Coordinator, including town halls, Firewise outreach, Community Warning System education, and employee training, as well as coordination with state and federal partners.
• Personnel highlights included the return of the Officer of the Year award, presented to Detective Poland, and the retirement of Parking Enforcement Officer Sharen Lloyd, with recruitment underway for her replacement.
Looking ahead to 2026, priorities include continued proactive policing, increased enforcement related to e-bikes and e-scooters, expanded public education on traffic safety, and strengthened disaster preparedness and community engagement. The Chief concluded that 2025 outcomes reflected improved safety, reduced crime, stronger traffic compliance, and sustained community partnership aligned with departmental values.
Mayor Anduri thanked Chief Williams, citing the great report and results.
Vice Mayor McCormick thanked Chief Williams and noted that most public safety metrics have declined from 2023–2025, with the exception of traffic citations, which he characterized as a positive trend supporting safer streets. He also praised the City’s use of communication tools such as social media and Nixle, along with community engagement efforts like Coffee with the Cops, saying they have strengthened public awareness and trust. He highlighted four consecutive years with zero traffic fatalities as a significant achievement.
Councilmember Wotherspoon echoed appreciation for the overall downward trends in crime and asked about residential burglary patterns. Chief Williams attributed reductions to deterrence from home security cameras, increased remote work, and effective enforcement that holds offenders accountable, including repeat offenders being warned off returning to Lafayette. He also noted support staff contributions, including parking enforcement officers who help maintain camera systems.
City Council Meeting Page 8 of 28 June 8, 2026
Regarding e-bike enforcement, Councilmember Wotherspoon asked whether the City was shifting from education to enforcement. Chief Williams responded that while education remains important, enforcement is increasingly necessary to address unsafe behavior and prevent broader regional trends.
He emphasized a balanced approach focused on safety, especially for juveniles, with citations often involving diversionary or educational consequences through a Traffic Commissioner process and parental accountability.
Councilmember Candell thanked the Chief and supported stronger action on e-bike safety, noting concerns about weakening legislation at the state level and offering City support for potential local measures.
Councilmember Cervantes asked about public feedback on coordinated traffic enforcement efforts with other agencies. Chief Williams said feedback is generally positive and aligned with the goal of reducing speeding and collisions, noting improved safety outcomes and a four-year streak of zero fatalities. He also identified specific roadway areas needing attention.
Mayor Anduri noted that traffic citation revenue is minimal, and Chief Williams confirmed financial impact is negligible.
Mayor Anduri opened the public comment period.
ROB STURM, speaking as a community member and Lafayette School District Governing Board member, expressed appreciation for the ongoing partnership between the City, Police Chief Williams, and staff, noting strong collaboration across multiple areas.
He raised concerns about an increase in vandalism at school sites over the past year, including approximately six incidents, one of which involved a hate crime at Stanley Middle School and additional damage to facilities such as the newly built Burton Valley campus. He noted the Board had considered but ultimately did not pursue a reward-based approach for reporting vandalism, instead reaffirming support for continued collaboration with the City and police to strengthen awareness and community accountability. He expressed concern about the financial and operational burden of repairing repeated damage to school property.
Mr. Sturm also emphasized the importance of bicycle and e-bike safety education, reinforcing alignment with City efforts. He noted strong district support for improved education on traffic laws and safe riding practices, particularly given that students lack driving experience and may not fully understand roadway dynamics. He encouraged continued and expanded partnership on safety education for both traditional bicycles and e-bikes.
11. CONSENT CALENDAR
Mayor Anduri asked if the Council or the public wished to remove any items, and there were no requests or public comments.
A. May 26, 2026 Minutes
Recommendation: Approve.
City Council Meeting Page 9 of 28 June 8, 2026
B. Resolution 2026-38 Ordering a General Municipal Election to be Held on Tuesday, November 3, 2026, Requesting and Consenting to Consolidation of Elections and Setting Specifications of the Election Order.
Recommendation: Adopt Resolution 2026-38.
ACTION: It was M/S/C (Wotherspoon/Cervantes) to approve Consent Calendar Items A and B. Roll Call Vote: 5-0 (Ayes: Anduri, McCormick, Candell, Cervantes, Wotherspoon; Noes: None).
12. OLD BUSINESS
A. Mala Subramanian, City Attorney
Settlement Agreement between Housing Action Coalition and the City of Lafayette Regarding Litigation on the City’s Housing Element
Recommendation: Authorize the City Manager to execute the Settlement Agreement to settle Housing Action Coalition. vs. City of Lafayette, Contra Costa Superior Court, Case No. C25-0512.
City Attorney Mala Subramanian reported that the City’s 2024 Housing Element was certified by HCD but subsequently challenged in March 2025 by the Housing Action Coalition (HAC), which alleged issues with the City’s site inventory and RHNA capacity. In response, the City engaged in settlement discussions amid evolving housing law and case law that could pose legal risk.
The proposed settlement would resolve the lawsuit if the City meets specified conditions, including targeted upzoning in the downtown area (increasing densities from 60–65 du/acre on certain parcels and 35–45 du/acre on others), as well as upzoning approximately two acres of the De Silva South property to 35 du/acre. The agreement also requires payment of approximately $120,000 in attorneys’ fees and excludes faith-based organization properties from “no net loss” calculations.
If the City completes these obligations by year-end, HAC would dismiss the lawsuit. The settlement allows the City to offset lost capacity through other identified parcels and does not require amendments to the already certified Housing Element, which would remain intact. Staff recommended Council authorization for the City Manager to execute the agreement.
Councilmember Cervantes noted that the Council had received correspondence on the item and questioned how the Housing Action Coalition (HAC), as an outside Bay Area organization, had standing to sue the City. City Attorney Subramanian explained that under housing law, any interested party has the legal ability to enforce Housing Element requirements, and therefore HAC does have standing.
Councilmember Wotherspoon requested clarification on the “no net loss” provisions in the Housing Element. The City Attorney explained that the Housing Element identifies opportunity sites assumed to provide certain levels of housing capacity. If those sites are later developed at lower densities than assumed, the City must maintain a buffer to stay in compliance with its Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) obligations. If the City falls below that required buffer, it must identify additional sites or upzone properties to make up the difference. She further explained that the settlement would remove faith-based organization properties from the City’s no net loss calculations but allow substitution with other identified parcels, thereby preserving and increasing the City’s overall buffer capacity.
Mayor Anduri opened the public comment period.
City Council Meeting Page 10 of 28 June 8, 2026
ELIOT HUDSON stated he would not weigh in on whether the City should approve the settlement, but instead focused on two concerns regarding its provisions. He noted his background as a litigation attorney with extensive experience drafting complex settlement agreements, including housing-related cases.
First, he argued the agreement lacks a “change in law” or escape clause that would allow the City to adjust if state housing laws change in the future. He cautioned that without such protection, the City could be contractually bound to maintain higher-density zoning even if state requirements are relaxed, limiting municipal flexibility.
Second, he expressed concern that the agreement does not include exemptions for historic areas of the City. He specifically referenced the Park Theater, noting concern that historic or recently invested sites could be subject to upzoning to residential use under the settlement framework.
Mayor Anduri, City staff, and Council members discussed and responded to concerns raised about the proposed Housing Action Coalition (HAC) settlement agreement related to the City’s Housing Element.
City Attorney Subramanian clarified that Lafayette does not currently have historic preservation protections that would automatically exempt properties from upzoning; however, such exclusions would require additional negotiation and modification of the settlement. Planning staff confirmed that the Park Theater and surrounding areas, including the Wayside Inn district, are not included in the proposed upzoning and would remain unchanged.
In addressing concerns about a potential “escape clause,” the Mayor and City Attorney explained that if state law were to change, the City would still be bound by the zoning actions it adopts under the settlement at the time they are implemented. Any future zoning changes would need to comply with then-current state law and maintain RHNA compliance through equivalent adjustments elsewhere in the City’s housing inventory.
Councilmembers further clarified that the settlement does not prevent future zoning changes but requires that any adjustments continue to meet state housing obligations, including maintaining required capacity buffers. City staff emphasized that the agreement is structured around compliance with existing law and would not operate as a permanent restriction independent of future legal requirements.
Vice Mayor McCormick noted the Council had spent months evaluating the litigation risk and emphasized the importance of maintaining housing progress while avoiding costly and uncertain legal exposure.
Councilmember Cervantes reflected on the multi-year effort to adopt the Housing Element and expressed disappointment that it resulted in litigation, while highlighting the Council’s efforts to mitigate risk, avoid exposure to the builder’s remedy, and protect single-family residential areas by concentrating upzoning in commercial corridors. He stated support for the settlement as a practical resolution that avoids significant financial and legal risk.
Mayor Anduri concluded by thanking staff and participants for their extensive work on the Housing Element and stated his intent to move the item forward for Council action.
ACTION: It was M/S/C (Candell/McCormick) to authorize the City Manager to execute the Settlement Agreement to settle Housing Action Coalition. vs. City of Lafayette, Contra Costa Superior Court, Case No.
C25-0512. Roll Call Vote: 5-0 (Ayes: Anduri, McCormick, Candell, Cervantes, Wotherspoon; Noes: None).
City Council Meeting Page 11 of 28 June 8, 2026
Mayor Anduri provided ending remarks, thanking BBK, City staff, the Planning Department for the incredible amount of work that went into this. Part of suing the wrong city is that so much work went into this that staff had not been able to do what they should be doing in terms of planning for housing. It is really unfortunate how much effort has been taken up by this over the last year. It was not helpful and it has not brought them to a better place.
B. Arly Cassidy, Senior Planner
Update on Objective Design Standards (Phase 2) – Adoption Timing.
Recommendation: Adopt most of ODS Phase 2 provisions this summer, and delay certain provisions to the fall.
Senior Planner Arly Cassidy presented the timing options for adoption of the Objective Design Standards (ODS) Phase 2, noting it is closely tied to the Council’s prior action on the Housing Element settlement and potential downtown upzoning.
She explained that Phase 1 of the ODS remains in effect, while staff continues refining Phase 2 with the City’s consultant. However, several Phase 2 provisions—relating to building massing, parking standards, and open space requirements—could reduce development intensity and therefore trigger state “no net loss” requirements. As a result, those sections cannot be adopted unless they are paired with concurrent zoning increases that offset any potential loss in residential capacity.
Given the pending settlement and anticipated rezoning later this year, staff outlined two implementation options. Option 1 would delay adoption of all Phase 2 components until the upzoning is completed, allowing the full document to be adopted at once. Option 2 would allow partial adoption of compliant sections of Phase 2 now, while deferring the remaining provisions until the rezoning occurs, at which point the full document would be completed.
Staff noted that Option 1 would maintain a single, unified adoption later in the year, while Option 2 would allow earlier implementation of portions of the plan but require a second adoption phase following rezoning.
Councilmember Candell said Mr. Hudson brought up two pieces with the window size and the flat roofs, and she asked if those have changed since the review the Council had.
Ms. Cassidy said the Council last reviewed the document in January and then the DRC working group and Council liaisons also reviewed the document. She did not have the draft in front of her but can look it up; some changes have been made to the document and the Council will be able to review the document again later in the approval process.
Mayor Anduri opened the public comment period.
ELIOT HUDSON said these standards have taken too long to write. Every day that goes by without them results in buildings that go up and they are wrong and will never come down in their lifetime. He asked to do what the City can as fast as they can. He supports bifurcation and hopefully by the time the City gets the sections of the ODSs that do not need to wait for rezoning, they will fix the three flaws he outlined earlier.
None of those affect the density and they could all be fixed in this first draft.
ROB LAVOIE stated he also supports the bifurcation option.
City Council Meeting Page 12 of 28 June 8, 2026
Mayor Anduri asked and confirmed that Councilmembers favored Option 2.
13. STAFF REPORTS
A. Joanne Robbins, City Clerk
Resolution 2026-26 Adoption of Policy on the Disruption of Telephonic or Internet Service During City Council Meetings (SB 707 Compliance)
Recommendation: Adopt Resolution 2026-26, establishing a Policy on the Disruption of Telephonic or Internet Service During City Council Meetings (attached as Exhibit A).
City Clerk Joanne Robbins said before the Council is Resolution 2026-26 to adopt a policy on the disruption of telephonic or internet service during City Council meetings. This is an update to the Brown Act, compliant with SB 707. Staff will continue to do what they have always done. Some cities have stopped their virtual option, but Lafayette has not, so there is no change for Lafayette. If they lose internet service, IT staff will have to notify her and, in turn, she will notify the Council and the meeting will be stopped.
They will try for at least one hour to get internet service back and when they do, they will notify the public, allow time for people to get back onto the meeting, and they can continue the meeting. If, after one hour, they cannot re-establish the internet service, it is up to the Council to either continue or continue items to a future meeting.
Mayor Anduri said if the internet goes out, according to the policy, they must spend one hour waiting. He asked if this is generally in state law, and Ms. Robbins said confirmed and noted the Council cannot make the decision earlier than one hour.
Mayor Anduri opened the public comment period, and there were no speakers.
ACTION: It was M/S/C (Cervantes/Wotherspoon) to adopt Resolution 2026-26, establishing a Policy on the Disruption of Telephonic or Internet Service During City Council Meetings (attached as Exhibit A). Roll Call Vote: 5-0 (Ayes: Anduri, McCormick, Candell, Cervantes, Wotherspoon; Noes: None).
B. Niroop Srivatsa, City Manager and Tracy Robinson, Assistant City Manager Department Work Plans for FY26-27
Recommendation: Approve work plans as presented. Conduct mid-year review in January in conjunction with the adoption of the Final Budget.
City Manager Niroop Srivatsa presented the City’s draft departmental work plans, developed following the Council’s February 2026 priority-setting workshop. The Council identified three multi-year priorities: 1) wildfire prevention and emergency preparedness, 2) the Mt. Diablo Corridor planning, and 3) long-term planning for recreation facilities and funding.
Staff subsequently held an internal workshop to align departmental work plans with these priorities while maintaining core municipal services, including public safety, infrastructure maintenance, planning, regulatory compliance, financial management, and response to emergent community needs. The work plans also incorporate state-mandated requirements, unfunded obligations, and ongoing multi-year projects, funded through the General Fund, grants, and other designated sources.
Staff recommends the Council approve the work plans with a mid-year review scheduled for January to assess progress and adjust as needed ahead of the final budget adoption.
City Council Meeting Page 13 of 28 June 8, 2026
Councilmember Cervantes noted that some wildfire-related initiatives depend on potential state funding, including a legislative proposal by Senator Grayson for evacuation and traffic management infrastructure.
He indicated funding outcomes may not be known until after the state budget process concludes later in the summer and suggested revisiting the issue at mid-year if funding is not secured.
City Manager Srivatsa confirmed that budget-related items may be brought back to Council at any time during the fiscal year for further consideration.
Mayor Anduri opened the public comment period, and there were no speakers.
ACTION: It was M/S/C (McCormick/Candell) to approve work plans as presented. Conduct mid-year review in January in conjunction with the adoption of the Final Budget. Roll Call Vote: 5-0 (Ayes: Anduri, McCormick, Candell, Cervantes, Wotherspoon; Noes: None).
14. PUBLIC HEARING
A. Niroop Srivatsa, City Manager and Tracy Robinson, Administrative Services Director Resolution 2026-40 Adopting the Proposed Budget/Workplan; Appropriating Revenue and Expenses; Confirming the City’s Investment Policy; Determining the Appropriate Limit for Fiscal Year 2026-27; Determining Fees for All City Services and Authorizing Transfers and Expenditures Including the 2026 Capital Improvement Program and Related CEQA Findings.
Recommendation: Discuss and continue to June 22nd for adoption of Resolution 2026-40.
Assistant City Manager Tracy Robinson presented the proposed budget, characterizing it as a “good news budget, but not a blank check budget.” She reported that Lafayette is in a strong fiscal position, with Measure H revenues outperforming projections, stable core revenues, and a five-year forecast showing balanced budgets with reserves remaining above the Council’s 60% minimum through FY 2031—an improvement from prior years.
Despite this strength, she emphasized fiscal discipline. The proposed budget maintains existing service levels, supports the Council’s adopted priorities (wildfire preparedness, Mt. Diablo Corridor planning, and recreation planning), and avoids significant expansion of new programs.
A key focus is long-term asset management, particularly the Community Center. A recent facilities assessment estimates over $16 million in repair needs over 20 years, significantly higher than the City’s current annual reserve allocation of approximately $125,000. Staff recommends increasing contributions by about $500,000 annually, bringing total annual set-asides closer to $625,000, to prepare for future options including renovation, replacement, or relocation. The increase is intended as flexible capital planning rather than a commitment to the existing facility.
The budget also advances ongoing initiatives including the Mt. Diablo Corridor Study, Housing Element implementation, Objective Design Standards, a comprehensive fee study, community events support, a compensation study ahead of labor negotiations, and continued infrastructure assessment work that may identify additional future funding needs.
Staff requests Council consideration of several specific allocations: $350,000 for a Recreation Master Plan and Needs Assessment, $100,000 for an ADA Transition Plan, up to $250,000 in Measure H funding for fire safety projects, and $25,000 for AARD.
City Council Meeting Page 14 of 28 June 8, 2026
She concluded that while Measure H has strengthened the City’s fiscal outlook, available reserves should be viewed as necessary planning capacity rather than discretionary surplus, given significant known future obligations.
Mayor Anduri asked if Mr. Moran could discuss the crossing guard request, noting that in last year’s budget the City allocated $120,000 for crossing guards. This budget increases that amount by $44,000 to $164,000. He asked Mr. Moran to go through the metrics that were reviewed in coming to that recommendation.
City Manager Srivatsa provided background on the matter, stating that last fall the City Schools Subcommittee met. The subject of crossing guards has been a point of discussion with the school board as well as with the City for the last few months. Transportation Program Manager Patrick Golier was charged with looking at the 11 crossing guard locations and applying technical and professional criteria to evaluate whether they met the test of being necessary at that location.
It has taken some time to gather data, and Mr. Golier has worked closely with the School District, particularly Superintendent Brent Stevens. Mr. Stevens has also shared the information with principals to obtain their input, and, Mr. Golier evaluated using the criteria that Mr. Moran will explain today to prioritize the locations. Given the City has contributed $120,000 in the past and considering their own fiscal challenges, they were shooting for somewhere around that as a contribution to the program. An added issue is that they would be taking over the management of the program since the school board had made the decision that they would no longer fund or manage the crossing guard program. So, they had the list of locations, met with the City Schools Subcommittee of the Council, did a further assessment and what is before the Council in the budget is what was being proposed.
Engineering and Public Works Director Mike Moran stated there were 11 existing crosswalk locations. One of those locations at Pleasant Hill Road at Springhill has multiple crossing guards. The proposal from the City would be to retain 2 of those crossing guards at that location. They looked at retaining 7 possible locations, one of those being Pleasant Hill Road at Springhill and having 2 guards there. So, they would preserve 8 crossing guards as opposed to 12 crossing guards, which was the configuration when the School District and City shared the expenses.
The objective criteria for the analysis were crossing volumes, traffic volumes, traffic speeds, the distances of the crossing such as number of lanes and other related issues such as visibility, the 5-year safety record, existing controls at the intersections. Over the last several years, the City has made $1.3 million of upgrades near schools so all locations have some improvements, which Mr. Moran described. The Council has made substantial efforts protecting children to and from schools. With that objective criteria, staff came up with 7 locations to maintain and 4 locations to discontinue -- First Street at Monroe, St. Mary’s at Solana where there is a redundant crossing just east of it that also has a flashing beacon and crossing, Springhill Road at San Reliez Court, and Merrywood at Indian Way.
Based on objective criteria, the 7 locations proposed to remain are Moraga Road at Brook Street, St.
Mary’s Road at Acampo Drive, School Street at Avalon, School Street at Paradise Court, Happy Valley Road at Panorama Drive, and First Street at School Street. The City would do 100% of the funding and 100% of the management of the program.
City Council Meeting Page 15 of 28 June 8, 2026
Vice Mayor McCormick said when the Council talked about this over the last couple of years one of his concerns when they had equal funding from the School District and City Council, who was minding the question of whether it was the “best bang for their buck.” It seems expensive on the surface for what they are getting, and he asked if they have done that analysis yet to ensure the City is getting the best value for their dollar.
Mr. Moran said he would say they did more of a rubric arbitrary cut-off. Staff has done some research about whether you could have parent volunteers be crossing guards and the answer is “no.” You can have them be something else, but they cannot be out there with a stop paddle. They need training, insurance, and part of what is so expensive is you are going through a company that has that training, has them wearing their vests, has the right stop paddles, when they call in sick they send a replacement person, so we are paying for a service as well as an hourly rate to a person that is splitting their day and working only a few hours. It is similar to the school bus program where it is very expensive, so you try and utilize it as best you can but it is a lot of money.
Vice Mayor McCormick asked if staff believes it is the best the City can do because he wonders about the quality versus quantity. Mr. Moran said he does not know whether could cut that rate, but they have not shopped that yet.
Vice Mayor McCormick said the one advantage of having a single group that can manage this is it would be easier to hold them accountable and ensure the City gets the best value for its dollar. Regarding parent volunteers, Mr. Moran said Burton Valley had that 7 years ago, but it is disbanded. 5th graders are now scared to go to school, but 5th graders used to be the guards at Roher and Merriewood. So, those happened in the past and have worked. But now, the only option is paid, insured and trained crossing guards per the MUTCD recommendations (Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices). He thinks it is more about liability and insurance.
Councilmember Candell said hypothetically, if they were going to add 2 more back in, what was the difference in cost. She asked and confirmed it is approximately $20,000 per guard.
Councilmember Wotherspoon said she remembers seeing in the data that First and Monroe actually had the largest number of crossings and it was also ranked highly by the principal of LES. Mr. Moran said this number is not accurate. He has the numbers with him --it was 487 and he does not know how those numbers were obtained the first time. They were actually shared with staff by the school, and staff knows they were not accurate. There are not near that many crossings, but the highest location of crossings is likely at School Street at Paradise Court in either morning or afternoon. This was re-evaluated by Mr.
Golier. Again, he is not saying no one crosses there, kids do cross there and more of those kids cross with their parents also because they are mostly going to the elementary school. If they were going to the middle school, they would probably stay on the 10-foot-wide path on First Street and not need to cross First Street. They would cross Monroe, but that is a controlled stop, as is the crossing at First Street.
Councilmember Wotherspoon said her understanding is that Mr. Golier went out on a Wednesday morning and he was able to observe just the LES pedestrian traffic because it is a different time they start.
Mr. Moran confirmed and said Patrick was trying to isolate the elementary school.
City Council Meeting Page 16 of 28 June 8, 2026
Councilmember Wotherspoon said there is also a Stanley component and what they have seen is there are a lot of them doing the remote drop off at the library and then they are using the 10-foot-wide path.
What she read in some of the public comments and heard is that some of the kids on bikes go very fast and so it is a bit of a dangerous situation with the traffic on Monroe because it is coming out and turning left to go onto First Street and the guard essentially is the traffic controller in that situation. So, she had seen the number of 413 in the spreadsheet and knows Mr. Golier was going out to look at it. He did, but he only saw the elementary school portion, so they do not have a good count.
Mr. Moran said staff would have to do a recount during school. After looking at it again, there may be some objective reason to to include that location or to include that instead of somewhere else. In looking at it objectively, Monroe did not make the cut even when it had the highest number of crossings..
However, there are other reasons to possibly include it but they tried to make the analysis as objective as possible and not influenced by heart strings.
Mayor Anduri said the Council received many comments about Springhill and San Reliez Court. He asked if staff had numbers to share that indicate why that was put on the list to be discontinued. Mr. Moran said San Reliez Court had lower crossing volumes, lower traffic volume with 26 kids at each time at the peak hour. Whichever one spiked the highest whether it was morning or afternoon, they went with the highest hour they could find which would include the entire commute to and from school. So, the highest volume was 192 vehicles at its peak. The speed at the 85th percentile was 26 mph in a 25-mph zone, and it is a shorter distance to cross two lanes.
Vice Mayor McCormick said with testimony heard earlier, there was mention that the observation happened on some sort of cloudy and rainy day and it was not representative. Mr. Moran said these are streetlight data driven, other than the counts provided by schools, and the Monroe was a separate visit and so he is confident in the numbers especially as they compare to one another.
Mayor Anduri asked if factors such as facing into the sun in the morning or evening is taken into consideration. Mr. Moran said it was not for this, which is strictly the data. Obviously, sunlight can affect a driver considerably.
Councilmember Wotherspoon asked if turning movements at intersections were part of the analysis, or whether people were making right or left turns. Mr. Moran said no they were not isolated out; but they would be picked up as going through the crosswalk whether it was after a turn or going straight.
Vice Mayor McCormick asked if the Council will be getting a formal staff report on this. City Manager Srivatsa said they would be happy to prepare a staff report for the next meeting.
Mayor Anduri asked for any additional questions on the budget for staff. He then wanted to start first with the items on page 3 under budget changes. He asked if there is anything under budget changes anyone wants to discuss because those are already reflected in the numbers. Once finished with that, they can go to budget requests where there are 4, and the Council can discuss each of those, so they may or may not make a decision at this meeting.
Vice Mayor McCormick said the two on law enforcement on page 65 when looking at the Sheriff’s contractual number on police services -- Contract Sheriff Services has a pretty significant 30% increase.
City Council Meeting Page 17 of 28 June 8, 2026
Ms. Robinson said it is an anomaly because as she mentioned in the Manager’s memo, they actually had police services in three different places—two programs within the General Fund, but they also had two officers budgeted in Supplemental Law Enforcement and that was outside of the General Fund. This is an artifact from long ago where the City gets COPS money from the federal government. They kept it in a separate fund to show the City was in fact funding two officers with that money. There is no longer a need to do that, so she moved all Police Services into one program so they can see actually what the cost of police officers together are.
She explained that the City only used to show the ones charged to the General Fund and she moved those that were outside into the General Fund. It is really the same amount of money because she was transferring money from the General Fund to the other fund. It looks like it is an increase, but it is actually not. There were big increases in services and supplies, and these are numbers charged from the Sheriff’s Office that is bundled into the number, but separated on page 210. Only a couple of years ago it was under $20,000 and this year it is $133,000. Th City is paying significantly more because of technology, body cams, vehicle cams, the data processing, etc.
Vice Mayor McCormick returned to crossing guards and on page 71 and he asked if there is additional staff time required to manage this as well.
Ms. Srivatsa said there are two aspects to the management of the crossing guard program—one is paying the bills, reviewing invoices, and this is something Ms. Robinson will be doing. The other is what happens on a day-to-day basis if someone does not show up. They have spoken with the Superintendent and asked that each school be responsible for that aspect of the management because staff has no idea or control over what goes on. The District agreed to that verbally.
Staff also spoke to the vendor to indicate the same thing. While they would like to be copied on the correspondence, as the City takes this on, they will not be handling the day-to-day management of the program. It is each individual school that will be doing that.
In speaking to the Superintendent and his colleague, staff was told that currently it is operating quite smoothly; that the vendor replaces an absent crossing guard with another guard. They are still informed.
If there is no crossing guard at a location, they are also told that. This is a function the City really cannot take on because they are so far removed from it. So, they are going into this with the understanding that this aspect of the program will continue to be the school’s responsibility and be managed.
Vice Mayor McCormick said on page 33, line 631.2, they talk about parking meter revenue that will be almost 8% higher. He asked why would parking meter revenue be higher because they are not installing new ones or changing the rates. Ms. Robinson explained that looking back to 2024/25 the City got $374,000 and it actually dipped a bit, so she is bringing it slightly back up to $350,000.
Councilmember Candell asked what is covered under the $350,000 for the Community Center Study.
Parks and Recreation Director Jonathan Katayanagi said this number is based on reaching out to other local Parks and Recreation Directors regarding similar studies. Typically, it is a needs assessment as well as an update to plans. Some of the other cities did multiple needs assessments and this may have an architectural component as well because they are looking at the Community Center. As he looked at other communities, including Moraga, that has a meeting tonight for outreach, theirs was about $350,000 which also includes a comprehensive update to their facilities plan as well.
City Council Meeting Page 18 of 28 June 8, 2026
Mayor Anduri opened the public comment period.
ROB STURM, speaking in multiple roles including School Board President, expressed appreciation to the City Council and staff for advancing the City’s assumption of the school crossing guard program. He thanked the Council for its willingness to apply technical expertise to determine service needs and allocate resources in a way that prioritizes student safety.
He acknowledged his past advocacy on the issue, noting it was at times passionate but rooted in concern for appropriate fiscal responsibility and alignment of duties between the City and School District. He emphasized appreciation for the collaborative process and the City’s efforts to manage public safety within financial constraints, underscored the importance of the City–School District partnership, noting both entities serve the same families and community, referenced strong community support reflected in the Measure H parcel tax, and thanked the Council and residents for their continued commitment to Lafayette students and families.
GRACE DIXON highlighted what she described as a significant opportunity for downtown civic engagement and community impact through a shared public space. She emphasized the value of volunteer-led initiatives such as All Ages Recreation and the importance of public participation in supporting City programs through advocacy, engagement, and voting on local measures.
She referenced the City’s reliance on sales tax revenue—approximately 20% of the General Fund—and cited 2019 figures of roughly $3.3 million in sales tax contributions. She suggested that even a modest 1% improvement in economic activity tied to a downtown civic/art space could yield meaningful revenue gains, framing the concept as a potential return on investment for the City. She argued that art and civic space should be viewed as contributors to municipal outcomes rather than standalone amenities, noting that volunteers are currently providing services at personal expense and effort. She pointed to the current allocation of less than 1% of 20-year capital funding toward downtown investment as insufficient relative to its economic and civic potential.
In conclusion, she encouraged consideration of a downtown space as a platform for communication and engagement, noting current early visitation levels averaging 110 people per day and envisioning expanded opportunities for public information, programming visibility, and community connection through physical displays and interactive civic messaging.
KATY FOREMAN thanked the Council for its partnership and support of Measure H. She noted recent coordination with Parks and Recreation staff, including participation in a webinar with Director Katayanagi, and highlighted the City’s role as a strong partner in addressing afterschool care needs.
She also expressed appreciation for the Council’s work on the crossing guard program, commending the data-driven approach and flexibility in implementation. Foreman emphasized that student safety is a shared priority and recognized the Council’s focus on informed, safety-oriented decision-making.
City Council Meeting Page 19 of 28 June 8, 2026
ROB LAVOIE said he had a question and was not sure if he heard Ms. Robinson correctly that what the City is paying for the crossing guards is $120,000 and the proposal is for $220,000. Also, he asked someone to remind him of the history of the City partnership with the schools. It seems like the schools used to pay all of it and a few years ago, they came to the City and asked for help. It seems like the City paid all of it and went down to paying half of it most recently. His thinking is that the school passed a substantial increase in the temporary parcel tax from $290 to $575 and would this have been something requested to be paid by the City if they had known they would have the additional income from the parcel tax that just passed.
Ms. Robinson responded and clarified the number in the budget is $160,000. To fully fund all of the crossing guards would be about $245,000. Last year, the City paid $120,000 and they have $164,000 in the budget.
Ms. Srivatsa said the Council will recall when they had 2 crossing guards on Springhill Road and maybe Moraga Road and the City managed and paid for them as part-time positions. It then grew and she believes the City managed the crossing guard program until between-2010 and 2015 when the management was transferred to the School District. The City continued to pay 50%. It was at that time that each partner paid about $50,000 so the cap was around $100,000. More recently around 2019/20, the School District approached the City and said the costs were coming in higher than $100,000 and therefore asked the City to increase their contributions as well. The City Council said they would cap their contributions at $100,000. That happened for a couple of years, but costs continued to rise. Fast-forward to this current year, the City paid $120,000. The budget shows $164,000 with a reduced number of crossing locations.
Mayor Anduri noted 3 years ago the discussion was whether they go above the $100,000 cap and the Council decided they would on a one-time basis. He asked and confirmed there were no further public comments and suggested a break at 9:10 p.m.
BREAK
Mayor Anduri called for a 5-minute break at 9:10 p.m. and, thereafter, reconvened the meeting at 9:15 p.m.
Mayor Anduri suggested going to page 3 and asked if there is anything in that section a Councilmember wishes to discuss. They will then go one by one through the budget requests that start on page 5.
Mayor Anduri said last year, one of the Council’s priorities was to see where they are financially. There were three things they said they would do. They are coming to the end of the fiscal year with new goals for the next fiscal year. But, under the financial goal #1, they said they would provide the services provided in the 2025/26 budget they had approved at the time of the 2024 sales tax vote and that they would not add additional services, and they have provided those services and have not added more services.
Second, they said they would see how much the half cent sales tax actually brought in and now, after a full year they know. It has been good news about what has come in. Third, they said they would carry out an assessment to see if they were putting aside enough in their sinking funds to be able to repair/replace existing assets over a 20-year period. They did that and they found out they were not putting enough in and low and behold, the difference between the additional sales tax they did not expect almost exactly matched what they needed to add to the sinking funds—basically another million dollars.
City Council Meeting Page 20 of 28 June 8, 2026
Moving onto another general observation, while Measure H has put the City in a much better position than they would have been in, they still are in a very precarious financial situation because they have the Community Center, which is a large, important asset and they need to figure out what they are going to do with it. They have the M3 project which will reimagine the downtown. They were going to go through that process and have allocated the money for it, but they do not have any money to carry out any of the solutions that may be identified.
Back to the recreation front, in addition to the Community Center, they know they do not have enough recreational facilities. So, somehow, they must figure out what to do about that, and that situation will only get more difficult as they add more housing. So, he is very grateful that citizens passed Measure H, that the citizens passed the school’s Measure H, which is basically the heart of the community, but they still have a long way to go. There is a lot they need to do and plan for in order to be where they want to be.
Councilmember Wotherspoon said she wanted to note for the record that she no longer serves on the AARD Board.
Councilmember Cervantes said in echoing Mayor Anduri’s comments, they are in a good place financially all because of Measure H. This would be a very different set of conversations had the voters not approved that when they did in 2024. You read news accounts across the country of cities struggling to make budgets meet, and it is the same thing in Massachusetts as in California, and lucky for Measure H for the School District as well because schools are dealing with issues across the board too. He gives a lot of gratitude to voters because of the place the city is in. He saluted staff and thinks staff has taken the priorities the Council set back in January and there is a nice through-line he can see in this budget to what the Council approved as their priorities. He thinks staff has done a good job of translating the 20,000 foot view down to the grass through the tree tops, and he can see it in this.
He is also very conscious of these looming capital question marks they have which the Mayor walked through well. So, he is cautious on this and he will talk about the crossing guards and has mixed feelings.
Overall, he thinks staff has done a great job in pulling all these pieces together to implement the discussion they had back early this year, and he thanked them.
Mayor Anduri turned to page 3 of the staff report under budget changes, and he asked if there were any items aside from crossing guards that anyone wants to discuss. These amounts are in the budget now and he asked if anyone wanted to revisit any of those items. For crossing guards, the Council needs to discuss with what is here or asked if anyone wants to take a different approach.
Vice Mayor McCormick said he thinks they are all in favor of crossing guards and they want the best bang for their buck for it. He personally would like to see the staff report to look at it before making a good decision and look at the analysis. He is happy to talk about it but does not know what the number should be at this point.
City Council Meeting Page 21 of 28 June 8, 2026
Councilmember Wotherspoon said she understands that and wishes they had that data in a report that got into the details they heard Mr. Moran talk about. She will not be at the next meeting nor the one after it, so this is concerning to her. She has some perspective on the program, the ask, and the recommendation. She is not sure she should take the opportunity now to make a case. She thinks the Council should find a way to add First and Monroe and Springhill and Reliez to go to 10 positions at 9 locations. This is an additional +$40,000 and the reasons are that they all want safer roads, but they have a Vision Zero policy the Council adopted and they want to encourage more walking and biking to school, get cars off the road, they are building more facilities at great costs to enable walking and biking to school like the School Street pathway as the biggest one.
There is always a risk even when they build these more protected pathways of intersections. This is where cross traffic is and this is where the crossing guards protect kids at intersections. They have a circular problem where they want kids to bike and walk to school, but if they do not feel it is safe, then parents will drive them to school. She thinks crossing guards help incentivizing and making parents and kids feel safer. The guard discourages unsafe driver behavior because they have authority with a stop sign paddle and vest and so she thinks adult drivers are likely to be on better behavior. The other thing guards do is they perform traffic control, which she described, and if a traffic signal could be put in at many of the locations which she thinks they cannot because there is no warrant for it, it would cost $1 million for signal which is 50 years’ cost of a crossing guard.
Another reason to maintain the program level is that they are proposing dropping 2 positions but keeping
10. She asked if this is in the Safety Around Schools report the City had commissioned. It states “Continue crossing guard cost-sharing program” which she interprets as continuing however they can. Also, on September 8, 2021, Ashely Diaz pushed children out of the way and those kids who were 8th graders on that day thankfully graduated Acalanes 11 days ago, which is significant. Further, she agrees completely with Councilmember Cervantes on Measure H, as she co-chaired that campaign. She felt strongly about it and was aware it was critical to maintain City services, but in their own campaign materials it states, “How will the money be spent? Ensuring traffic safety on streets and pathways for all users including those driving, biking, walking.” So, she knows in the report there is a $250,000 to emergency preparedness for wildfire safety which she supports and she feels the same way about the crossing guards, even though they are an existing program. Inflation could have also increased program costs and the City would still be paying more.
Councilmember Wotherspoon totally understands the fiscal challenge—that revenue cost has risen dramatically since she was a parent advocate in this room in 2019 with Rob Sturm and Kenny Tuckerman at that time, and she was asking the City to resume that 50/50 cost share arrangement. At that point, the information on cost increases had not been passed onto the City, so it was a request to go back to 50/50.
But, the cost of the contract at that time was $180,000 and now it is $240,000. There is no doubt that this has experienced huge inflation and price increases, and she thinks this will continue, given it is completely human labor and insurance, liability, etc. She knows it is not tenable and they need to look for alternatives and she fully appreciates $1.3 million the City put in for safety around schools improvements which she has been advocating for since 2014 and those improvements are critical, but she does not think the City can rely solely on them at pickup / drop-off times.
City Council Meeting Page 22 of 28 June 8, 2026
A way to eliminate some crossing guards is to restrict vehicular traffic which is a bold proposal, but if they were not to have cars on School Street and First Street during pickup and drop-off times, they could probably remove 3 crossing guards out of the mix, and it would need a robust traffic analysis to see what consequences for mobility would be in the surrounding area. So, they need to think creatively and analytically. But, she thinks they need to maintain the protection at those 10 locations and agrees with Director Moran that Solana and St. Mary’s is fairly redundant where people can walk to the other location and use it. She believes Merriewood was ranked low by the principal which she trusts, but she thinks the other 2 on First and Monroe and Springhill and San Reliez are needed.
Vice Mayor McCormick asked and confirmed that Councilmember Wotherspoon would support the idea of Measure H funds because the Council is careful in how those are allocated and as crossing guards being in the scope of Measure H.
Vice Mayor McCormick said he is constantly pushing on the cost issue. He appreciates what the City Manager said but is frustrated with the plan going forward on how they will manage the program. They are relying on schools to give them feedback. They do not have a stake in the game because they are not paying for it. It is creative thinking on how they get the best out of their money for the safety of the kids, and this is one of his hesitations. They were paying $240,000 before. They would be paying $240,000 now and just let it rise with inflation and he is sure it is doing well, but without thinking about the best use of their money to have the safest conditions for the kids, he questioned whether they should look at other ways to shrink traffic, which is a better way to save money. So, he would hate to say they just turn on the full-time spigot and let it run for 10 years. He thinks they just need active management. He thinks they don’t have a choice, but loves the idea of digging into it to see how they get the best bang for their buck for the safety of the kids and the best value for the dollar.
Councilmember Wotherspoon said she would advocate for making a continuation for the next year but also incorporating an analysis at that level of what radical change can they do and would it help.
Councilmember Candell asked if they could re-negotiate the contract and all these things but agreed they are kind of in a bind. She thinks all of these things should happen and she agrees with Councilmember Wotherspoon on the analysis of adding the other 2 guards. They pulled them off to be honest, saying they will try and pull all 4 off and see what happens and see which ones the community knows which ones to let the City know what is going on, and they did. It is an uncontrolled crosswalk, and Linda does the two streets and it is well-needed in that neighborhood.
Vice Mayor McCormick asked if she endorsed the ones kept even under this current contract, and he asked if she agrees keeping the 7 are more important than the 4 taken off. Councilmember Candell said yes; each of those have high volumes and all the right conditions, and this will be justified when they get the staff report in the analysis. She thinks they need to do the long-term study to figure out how better they can do it to cut the number of crossing guards if there is a way to do that. She said Lafayette, on the flip side, has more crossing guards, than Walnut Creek. You hear from the community and they are relying on it, so she suggested re-thinking this but to re-think it quickly now, maybe they do it as a work in progress.
City Council Meeting Page 23 of 28 June 8, 2026
Councilmember Cervantes said he appreciates this and admires the logic behind Councilmember Wotherspoon’s comments. His bent is to be more of a fiscal conservative, and his instinct is to hold the line in the budget as best they can. He said earlier that he referenced the City Measure H and what that meant for their budget, but part of their duty is to make sure they are mindful of that—that they honor the trust voters put in them. But, when he was thinking of this, this is a Measure H item because this is transit and so his struggle was to be budget-conscious but at the same protect time kids’ safety. If he will err on any side, he will err on the side of protecting kids crossing the roads. He does not have a scientific perspective on this, does drive down Springhill Road and you see a lot of kids walking there in the afternoons and mornings getting to and from school, and you really want to protect that population.
Perhaps what Councilmember Wotherspoon suggested is a good approach to it, which is instead of dropping 4, drop 2 but then spent a lot of time on how to best optimize this. So, he likes the approach she offered.
Mayor Anduri said one comment made is that the schools subcommittee will drop the 4 and see what the reaction is. He asked if it is fair to say the community is accepting of not having a crossing guard at Merriewood. Councilmember Wotherspoon said yes; they have not heard any public comment on that.
Mayor Anduri said then what he is hearing on this issue is that no Councilmembers feel comfortable in making any decision until they can see the data and so this can be presented at the next meeting. He appreciates all Council comments and will return at the next meeting to talk about it. But, where they are heading for next week is either to reinstate 2 or reinstate all 4 and leave this open. But, again, they say this each year, for this year only and not making any decisions for subsequent years and with the commitment next year to look into whether they can renegotiate the contract, whether there is a better approach, and he would add that keeping in mind the total amount involved here right now is $80,000 which is a lot of money, but a lot of staff time can be taken in doing other things which they must be mindful of as well.
He did not hear any other items to discuss under budget changes so now they are under budget requests.
The first item is up to $ 350,000 for a Master Plan Needs Assessment or just generally looking at what they need to do in the recreation area to meet the needs of residents over the next 20-year period. He asked if anyone has questions or comments on that.
Vice Mayor McCormick said much of the year was taken up with ballfields. He asked if this includes the Community Center analysis and the ballfields.
Director Katayanagi said starting with a needs assessment and considering an advancement towards a facilities plan, this allows them to address those needs in the community. The existing facilities master plan is from 2009. The needs of the community have changed such as after school care, the ballfields, and the need for additional softball facilities. They still have unmet needs for neighborhood parks, for fields in general, the dog park, bike park, and these were all in the last master plan, but this is an opportunity to do a needs assessment for the full community and look at these spaces, their locations, and what will need to serve at those various facilities.
City Council Meeting Page 24 of 28 June 8, 2026
Vice Mayor McCormick said the number gave him a surprise, noting what the City is getting with the mobility study which he views as much more comprehensive which is $300,000, so this seemed high. He asked on the estimate of when the Council would see results from the study. Director Katayanagi said in talking with other communities, it is a 2-3 year process. You start with a needs assessment and then roll into the master plan.
Vice Mayor McCormick asked if it will also include funding options, and Director Katayanagi said yes, and they will be able to put together a RFP and work with various companies and bring that back to Council for approval.
Mayor Anduri said he thinks what they need to do is put a 2-year timeframe on this to be able to know what it is that the community wants to consider and a proposal for how they might finance it because that will be 2028 and their Measure H goes away. So, he thinks the target time is 2 years for this project.
Director Katayanagi said it is in their best interests based on the life expectancy of some at the Community Center as well as each rainy season, they see more and more water come into the roof of the Community Center, so it is finding more about the state of that building and what the future of it is so they can address the needs of the community, so time is of the essence.
Mayor Anduri referred to the cost at $350,000, stating in looking at the big picture, they kind of hit an equilibrium with the increased revenues and then their increased needs and to see a $350,000 chunk go away, but they need to spend that in order to be able to plan responsibly what they do in order to meet recreational needs.
Vice Mayor McCormick asked if it is the entire $350,000 for the year or split. Director Katayanagi said staff would have to look at this carefully and make adjustments in mid-year. They could start with half just in the way it would roll out, but they would have to work with the consultants on how they would need to frontload any of the needs assessment versus the heavier work and working out the timing.
City Manager Srivatsa recommended allocating up to $350,000 because you never know how much they will spend each fiscal year. As an example, when the Council allocated money for the Housing Element, it straddled many fiscal years, but they kept that money and used it down.
Regarding the ADA Transition Plan of $100,000, Mayor Anduri asked and confirmed the Council supported this.
Regarding going to the Emergency Preparedness Commission and asking the Commission to prioritize projects up to $250,000, he sees the crossing guards as being more important than this amount. This could be left open until they vote for the crossing guards at the next meeting.
Councilmember Cervantes said he is mindful that they set emergency preparedness as their top priority. $250,000 is great and is a meaningful amount. The wildcard for him is Senator Grayson’s proposal for staging boxes on evacuation routes, and how that does. If he is not successful, they could use a chunk of that for this purpose, and it may be that they will not spend $250,000 in one year necessarily on that. He thinks they need to make some kind of commitment that is meaningful for wildfire preparedness and he questioned whether it needs to be $250,000.
City Council Meeting Page 25 of 28 June 8, 2026
Vice Mayor McCormick said in the meetings, as far as he knows there is not a punch list of a way to go.
Personally, he would like to see some design-ready projects lined up to fund versus just a number to back into. Councilmember Cervantes said for emergency preparedness, there is a community guide to wildfire safety which needs to be done and other things, and it is probably less than $50,000 right now.
Vice Mayor McCormick agreed, and he thinks Measure H is the right place to fund it from, but at the moment, absent what he hears, $150,000 or $200,000 would still make a big effort. Then, part of next year would be to get some projects set up there.
Councilmember Cervantes said if they had $100,000 in this, it would be a meaningful start. If the Senator is not able to get funding for the boxes, at least the City could perhaps get a pilot study going.
Councilmember Candell agreed that is a good way to look at this—to have it there to be a backdrop. She asked if wording could be included in here depending on what they get from the State. If they do $100,000, then it is safe.
Assistant City Manager Robinson said there is a much more comprehensive list that was generated by Andy Comly and this was not included in the packet, but staff can include next week or the next time because there are many ideas where the Council could see they could have the Emergency Preparedness Commission look through that if they have a budget. It does have some rough costs.
Vice Mayor McCormick said they should treat it a little like the crossing guards. On the surface, he agrees with the Mayor; that if they were going to shove a little bit, he would be willing to trade off the emergency preparedness items, absent of seeing the list.
Councilmember Wotherspoon said this was her question—similar to looking at the analysis for the crossing guards. She is supportive of wildfire preparedness and safety, but he would like to see the list.
She also confirmed she had no other comments on the wildfire items given she would not be attending the next meeting.
Vice Mayor McCormick said he is still slightly confused about the conversation with the $350,000 or the $175,000 and how they allocate the money over the years. He would only wants to put in the money that they can actually spend the next fiscal year. There will be a punch list of items, but he said what they put in there has to be the items they would spend the next year.
Ms. Robinson said not necessarily. They have had the M3 study on the budget for the full amount for many years. They spend it down and she thinks if the Council is going to spend the money and they know it is a project that will cost that, you should put it there so that you do not get halfway through and forget they had another half to go. It would hit the whole thing this year and she would roll it forward into the next budget. She does not think the City gains anything by spreading it out. It does not affect the 5-year outlook too much.
Mayor Anduri said the difference is they do not do a detailed budget beyond the next year. So, he thinks it is better to put all of the money they plan to spend in the next year’s budget.
The fourth item on the list is: The AARD request for $25,000 which they received today. He asked for comments.
City Council Meeting Page 26 of 28 June 8, 2026
Vice Mayor McCormick asked for staff’s comments on this. He asked if it has the same scrutiny of the three items that are in there.
City Manager Srivatsa said she and Mr. Katayanagi have been talking to AARD over the last month or so about potential part-time use of that facility for recreation, youth and seniors so that the City would establish a downtown presence for a limited period of time. That gives them some experience about how a downtown facility might work. Staff has not finalized how much, how many classes, and the terms of the agreement. Their initial thought was about $12,000 taken from the three budgets—Recreation, Seniors, and Youth so that Mr. Katayanagi can continue to service those three cohorts in the downtown.
Staff is still working on it and they are not ready to come to the Council right now with an agreement because they need one before they enter into an arrangement.
Mayor Anduri asked if it would be possible to have something in the next set of Council materials. Ms.
Srivatsa said she did not believe so, noting this will take a little longer. They would need to finish up in one week. This is something they could add and the Council can amend the budget at any time during the fiscal year.
Mayor Anduri said in conclusion, the items are $350,000 for the Recreation Master Plan Needs Assessment, $100,000 for the ADA Transition Plan, $250,000 for wildfire, and this adds up to $700,000.
He asked that if the Council were to add those, what impact would that have on the 5-year outlook.
Ms. Robinson said at the end of the 5th year, the reserve would be down to 63%.
Mayor Anduri concluded the item and said the Council will resume this item on June 22nd, and he thanked staff and Councilmembers.
ACTION: It was M/S/C (Candell/Wotherspoon) to continue to June 22, 2026. Roll Call Vote: 5-0 (Ayes:
Anduri, McCormick, Candell, Cervantes, Wotherspoon; Noes: None).
15. ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT – None.
16. COUNCIL / COMMISSION REPORTS
A. Councilmembers report on activities and consideration of matters a Councilmember wishes to initiate for placement on a future agenda.
Councilmember Cervantes reported that he and Vice Mayor McCormick recently met with EBMUD representative Luz Gomez and walked portions of the Aqueduct Pathway to discuss potential improvements and extensions. He provided her with a detailed map outlining envisioned segments of the trail, including areas behind Brandt, along Dolores, and up to the crest overlooking the BART parking lot.
He noted the discussion was productive, with Ms. Gomez appearing receptive to continued coordination.
She is scheduled to meet with the EBMUD General Manager, and the City provided materials to support further internal discussion. Cervantes emphasized the City’s intent to continue collaborative planning with EBMUD to advance what he described as an ambitious but feasible vision for the pathway.
Vice Mayor McCormick reported on his attendance at the recent Mayors’ Conference, where he received updates from the ABAG Executive Board regarding the upcoming Housing Element cycle. He noted that Lafayette’s next Housing Element will be due January 31, 2031, with HCD allocating RHNA targets through ABAG to jurisdictions across the Bay Area.
City Council Meeting Page 27 of 28 June 8, 2026
He highlighted anticipated changes in the next allocation cycle, including new considerations related to homelessness and fire risk, as well as the addition of new income categories for “acutely low” and “extremely low” income housing. He expressed uncertainty about how fire risk mapping would be applied locally and noted that overall housing allocations are expected to increase significantly, characterizing the outlook as challenging.
He also referenced recent regional developments, including the City of Clayton’s delayed Housing Element approval and financial concerns among counties and agencies, including potential budget impacts tied to failed sales tax measures and BART’s fiscal outlook. He concluded by noting his participation, on behalf of the Mayor, in the Spirit Van 20th Anniversary celebration, where he presented a proclamation alongside representatives from Moraga and Orinda.
Councilmember Candell reported on SWAT, stating the Youth Ride Free program will happen again this summer which was voted upon and funded. She also reported she and Councilmember Cervantes will go on a trip to Sacramento on Wednesday to advocate for all things Lafayette, especially wildfire.
Councilmember Wotherspoon reported attending the Spirit Van 20th Anniversary event, describing it as a positive celebration and noting strong community appreciation for the program and its impact on participants. She also delivered a welcome address at the Move Bay Area Summit hosted in Lafayette, which brought together transit advocates focused on funding and service expansion. She observed that a key theme of the summit was the central role of BART in the regional transit network, with multiple agencies emphasizing that their systems depend heavily on connections to BART, underscoring its importance as a foundational component of Bay Area transit.
Mayor Anduri reminded there is a special Council meeting on June 29th for the State of the City address and recognition of volunteers. On July 2nd, they will have a 250th Anniversary program focusing on the Marquis de Lafayette and his role in the revolution and family activities and other things people will hear more about. On July 30th is the second Hello Lafayette event, and all Councilmembers are invited to attend a participate in that.
Councilmember Cervantes asked and confirmed the Park Development fees will be discussed at the next meeting, which is backup material to adjustments to the fees that were included with the budget.
B. Councilmember Cervantes and Vice Mayor McCormick
Resolution 2026-41 Appointing one member to the Crime Prevention Commission Recommendation: Adopt Resolution 2026-41 Appointing one member to the Crime Prevention Commission.
Councilmember Cervantes said he and Vice Mayor McCormick and Traci Reilly, Chair of the Crime Prevention Commission, held interviews a few weeks ago. There were two candidates with good discussion after the interviews and they recommended Bill Fraser to take on the vacancy.
Mayor Anduri opened the public comment period, and there were no speakers.
ACTION: It was M/S/C (Cervantes/McCormick) to adopt Resolution 2026-41 appointing Bill Fraser to the Crime Prevention Commission. Roll Call Vote: 5-0 (Ayes: Anduri, McCormick, Candell, Cervantes, Wotherspoon; Noes: None).
City Council Meeting Page 28 of 28 June 8, 2026
17. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS – None.
18. ADJOURNMENT – 10:10 p.m.
APPROVED:
__________________________________
Carl Anduri, Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________
Joanne Robbins, City Clerk