Los Altos City Council
January 23, 2024

SEC. 2. Section 66016.5 is added to the Government Code, to read:
66016.5. (a)  On and after January 1, 2022, a local agency that conducts an impact fee nexus study shall follow all of the following standards and practices:
(1)  Before the adoption of an associated development fee, an impact fee nexus study shall be adopted.
(2)  When applicable, the nexus study shall identify the existing level of service for each public facility, identify the proposed new level of service, and include an explanation of why the new level of service is appropriate. (3)  A nexus study shall include information that supports the local agency’s actions, as required by subdivision (a) of Section 66001. (4)  If a nexus study supports the increase of an existing fee, the local agency shall review the assumptions of the nexus study supporting the original fee and evaluate the amount of fees collected under the original fee.
(5)  (A)  A nexus study adopted after July 1, 2022, shall calculate a fee imposed on a housing development project proportionately to the square footage of proposed units of the development. A local agency that imposes a fee proportionately to the square footage of the proposed units of the development shall be deemed to have used a valid method to establish a reasonable relationship between the fee charged and the burden posed by the development.
(B)  A nexus study is not required to comply with subparagraph (A) if the local agency makes a finding that includes all of the following:
91 Ch. 347 — 4 —
232
Agenda Item # 7.
(i)  An explanation as to why square footage is not appropriate metric to calculate fees imposed on housing development project.
(ii)  An explanation that an alternative basis of calculating the fee bears a reasonable relationship between the fee charged and the burden posed by the development.
(iii)  That other policies in the fee structure support smaller developments, or otherwise ensure that smaller developments are not charged disproportionate fees.
(C)  This paragraph does not prohibit an agency from establishing different fees for different types of developments.
(6)  Large jurisdictions shall adopt a capital improvement plan as a part of the nexus study.
(7)  All studies shall be adopted at a public hearing with at least 30 days’ notice, and the local agency shall notify any member of the public that requests notice of intent to begin an impact fee nexus study of the date of the hearing.
(8)  Studies shall be updated at least every eight years, from the period beginning on January 1, 2022.
(9)  The local agency may use the impact fee nexus study template developed by the Department of Housing and Community Development pursuant to Section 50466.5 of the Health and Safety Code. (b)  This section does not apply to any fees or charges pursuant to Section 66013.
(c)  For purposes of this section:
(1)  “Development fee” has the same meaning as defined in subdivision (b) of Section 66000.
(2)  “Large jurisdiction” has the same meaning as defined in subdivision (d) of Section 53559.1 of the Health and Safety Code.
(3)  “Public facility” has the same meaning as defined in subdivision (d) of Section 66000.
(4)  “Local Agency” has the same meaning as defined in subdivision (c) of Section 66000.
(d)  Nothing in this section shall be construed to relieve a local agency of the requirement that it comply with Chapter 5 (commencing with Section 66000), the California Constitution, or applicable case law when calculating the amount of a fee.

SEC. 3. Section 66019 of the Government Code is amended to read:
66019. (a)  As used in this section:
(1)  “Fee” means a fee as defined in Section 66000, but does not include any of the following:
(A)  A fee authorized pursuant to Section 66013.
(B)  A fee authorized pursuant to Section 17620 of the Education Code, or Sections 65995.5 and 65995.7.
(C)  Rates or charges for water, sewer, or electrical services. (D)  Fees subject to Section 66016.
(2)  “Party” means a person, entity, or organization representing a group of people or entities.
91 — 5 — Ch. 347
233
Agenda Item # 7.
(3)  “Public facility” means a public facility as defined in Section 66000. (b)  For any fee, notice of the time and place of the meeting, including a general explanation of the matter to be considered, and a statement that the data required by this subdivision is available shall be mailed at least 14 days prior to the first meeting to an interested party who files a written request with the city, county, or city and county for mailed notice of a meeting on a new or increased fee to be enacted by the city, county, or city and county.

Any written request for mailed notices shall be valid for one year from the date on which it is filed unless a renewal request is filed. Renewal requests for mailed notices shall be filed on or before April 1 of each year. The legislative body of the city, county, or city and county may establish a reasonable annual charge for sending notices based on the estimated cost of providing the service. The legislative body may send the notice electronically. At least 10 days prior to the meeting, the city, county, or city and county shall make available to the public the data indicating the amount of cost, or the estimated cost, required to provide the public facilities and the revenue sources anticipated to fund those public facilities, including general fund revenues. The new or increased fee shall be effective no earlier than 60 days following the final action on the adoption or increase of the fee, unless the city, county, or city and county follows the procedures set forth in subdivision (b) of Section 66017.
(c)  If a city, county, or city and county receives a request for mailed notice pursuant to this section, or a local agency receives a request for mailed notice pursuant to Section 66016, the city, county, or city and county or other local agency may provide the notice via electronic mail for those who specifically request electronic mail notification. A city, county, city or county, or other local agency that provides electronic mail notification pursuant to this subdivision shall send the electronic mail notification to the electronic mail address indicated in the request. The electronic mail notification authorized by this subdivision shall operate as an alternative to the mailed notice required by this section.
(d)  (1)  Any member of the public, including an applicant for a development project, may submit evidence that the city, county, or other local agency’s determinations and findings required pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 66001 are insufficient or that the local agency otherwise failed to comply with this chapter. Evidence submitted pursuant to this subdivision may include, but is not limited to, information regarding the proposed fee calculation, assumptions, or methodology or the calculation, assumptions, or methodology for an existing fee upon which the proposed fee or fee increase is based.
(2)  The legislative body of the city, county, or other local agency shall consider any evidence submitted pursuant to paragraph (1) that is timely submitted under this chapter. After consideration of the evidence, the legislative body of the city, county, or other local agency may change or adjust the proposed fee or fee increase if deemed necessary by the legislative body.

SEC. 4. Section 50466.5 is added to the Health and Safety Code, to read:
91 Ch. 347 — 6 —
234
Agenda Item # 7.
50466.5. (a)  On or before January 1, 2024, the department shall create an impact fee nexus study template that may be used by local jurisdictions.

The template shall include a method of calculating the feasibility of housing being built with a given fee level.
(b)  The department may contract with nonprofit or academic institutions to complete the template.

SEC. 5. No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California Constitution because a local agency or school district has the authority to levy service charges, fees, or assessments sufficient to pay for the program or level of service mandated by this act, within the meaning of Section 17556 of the Government Code.

O
91 — 7 — Ch. 347
235
Agenda Item # 7.

INCLUSIONARY HOUSING AND IN-LIEU FEE

FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY STUDY

CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION

CITY OF LOS ALTOS
December 12, 2023
bae urban economics
236
Agenda Item # 7.

PRESENTATION OVERVIEW
Purpose of Inclusionary and In-Lieu Fee Study
Overview of current requirements
Overview of relevant development trends in Los Altos
Overview of methodology
Findings
237
Agenda Item # 7.

PURPOSE OF STUDY - HEU
 Program 2.A: Continue to implement and enhance inclusionary housing requirements.
 Continue to implement inclusionary housing requirements  Evaluate inclusionary requirements, specifically:
 Inclusionary housing rates (e.g., 15 and 20 percent).  Affordability levels, with the potential for an alternative mix of affordability to meet housing policy objectives (e.g., deeper affordability, units for special needs groups)  Affordability terms, including requiring the longest term allowable  Develop strategies and amendments to support the production of affordable housing more effectively through inclusionary housing
 Objective: Inclusionary housing unit production of at least 50 moderate-income units, 40 lowincome units, and 10 very low-income units. 238
Agenda Item # 7.

PURPOSE OF STUDY - HEU
 Program 2.B: Establish an affordable housing in-lieu fee and commercial linkage fee
 Conduct a feasibility analysis to support the establishment of an affordable housing in-lieu fee for residential developments and a commercial linkage fee for affordable housing  Adopt fees based on the analysis
 Analysis will ensure that the in-lieu fees are not a constraint to housing development  City will conduct outreach to all stakeholders including residents, property owners, and housing and commercial developers
 Time Frame: Adopt housing in-lieu fee by the end of 2023; begin commercial linkage fee for affordable housing by end of year 2025.
239
Agenda Item # 7.

PURPOSE OF STUDY
Evaluate feasibility of new residential development
Inclusionary ordinance requires some units in new residential developments to be affordable
Analyze options for in-lieu fee rates and identify fee options Can provide an option for developers to pay a fee instead of building inclusionary units
240
Agenda Item # 7.

CURRENT INCLUSIONARY REQUIREMENTS
Rental
(10+ units)
Ownership
(10+ units)
5-9 units
(own or rent)
20% low-income
- or -
15% very lowincome
15%
majority moderateincome, remaining
very low-income
15%
very low-, low, or
moderate-income
241
Agenda Item # 7.

CURRENT INCLUSIONARY REQUIREMENTS
Study includes a summary of inclusionary requirements in 8 nearby jurisdictions for comparison purposes
Most require 15% affordability (in most cases)
By comparison, Los Altos:
Requires either more units or deeper affordability for rental developments
Is unique in requiring very low-income for ownership (may encourage or facilitate use of Density Bonus)
242
Agenda Item # 7.

Photo by Tolu Olubode on Unsplash
Recent projects have included condos and townhomes; almost no market rate multifamily rental development
Current zoning designations support relatively low-density development
 E.g., up to 38 dus/acre, height limits of 30-35 feet
Housing Element Update commits to increasing allowable densities and height limits in some areas

MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT TRENDS
243
Agenda Item # 7.

Photo by Tolu Olubode on Unsplash

MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT TRENDS
Recent projects have exceeded base densities using the State Density Bonus Ordinance (DBO)
Additional density, other waivers of development standards for projects with affordable units
Larger bonuses for more affordable units, deeper affordability Inclusionary units count toward affordability requirements for DBO Projects have also sought discretionary approvals to exceed max additional density provided by the DBO
244
Agenda Item # 7.

METHODOLOGY
Financial proforma modeling to evaluate the financial feasibility of new residential development in Los Altos
Assumptions based on developer interviews, information on recent projects, published data sources
Evaluated multifamily rental, condominium, and townhome developments
Based on current development standards and hypothetical increase in allowable density to 70 du/acre
245
Agenda Item # 7.

RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT FEASIBILITY

FINDINGS
Multifamily Rental Multifamily Ownership
Townhouse Higher-Density Current
Standards Higher-Density Current Standards
Density
(base) 70 du/acre 38 du/acre 70 du/acre 38 du/acre 14.5 du/acre Density
(w bonus) 105 du/acre 57 du/acre 84 du/acre 57 du/acre 17.5 du/acre Total Units 105 57 42 57 35
Affordable
Units 11 6 6 10 5
Feasible? No No Yes No Yes 246
Agenda Item # 7.

RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT FEASIBILITY

FINDINGS (CONTINUED)
Higher density condos & townhouses are financially feasible Multifamily rental & low-density condos face feasibility challenges
Consistent with recent development trends in Los Altos and current challenges in the broader market
Changes in City policies & market conditions necessary to produce significant quantities of new rental units
247
Agenda Item # 7.

INCLUSIONARY HOUSING IN-LIEU FEE OVERVIEW
Inclusionary in-lieu fees: option for developer to pay a fee instead of providing inclusionary units
May be allowed only in certain situations (e.g., small projects or fractional unit req’s)
May be allowed only with discretionary approvals
Rates influence developers’ decisions regarding paying fees vs. providing units
Lower fees encourage developers to pay in-lieu fee
 Higher fees encourage developers to provide units
248
Agenda Item # 7.

IN-LIEU FEE POLICY CONSIDERATIONS
In-Lieu Fees vs. Inclusionary Units
In-Lieu
Fee
Pros
• Fees can be combined with other sources to create more units • May achieve deeper affordability
• Fund units in 100% affordable developments, facilitating service provision
In-Lieu
Fee
Cons
• Not integrated with market-rate units/less equitable
• Requires site acquisition & planning of separate project, meaning increased risk and delay in affordable unit production
• City burden to collect/distribute fees
• Need to generate enough revenue to have a significant impact 249 Agenda Item # 7.

IN-LIEU FEES IN NEARBY JURISDICTIONS
For Sale Rental For Sale Rental
Cupertino $20-$27/sq. ft. $27-34/ sq. ft Palo Alto $61-$92/sq. ft. $25/sq. ft.

Los Gatos 6% of building permit valuation Saratoga N/A; no inclusionary ordinance Menlo Park
3% of sale price
for each unit for
which BMR units not
provided
Cost to build &
maintain a unit
Santa
Clara
Difference b/t the
market value and
the affordable sale
price
$22/sq. ft.

Mountain
View $59-$135/sq. ft. $104/sq. ft. Sunnyvale 7% of sale price $14-$29/sq. ft.

Most jurisdictions shown allow the in-lieu fee payment option only for specific types of projects, fractional units, and/or with City Council approval 250 Agenda Item # 7.

INCLUSIONARY IN-LIEU FEE APPROACH
Construction cost: Cost to construct an affordable unit, less income from the unit
Point of indifference: Fee rate that is equivalent in cost to providing inclusionary units
Fees in comparison jurisdictions also provide insight
251
Agenda Item # 7.

IN-LIEU FEE FINDINGS (IN-LIEU FEE PER SQ. FT.)
Multifamily Rental Multifamily Ownership
Townhouse Higher-Density Current
Standards Higher-Density Current Standards
Construction
Cost
Approach
$120 $146 $139 $148 $211
Point of
Indifference
Approach
$32 $28 $74 $74 $19
252
Agenda Item # 7.

RECOMMENDATIONS

1. Increase residential densities, FAR standards, and/or height limits in multifamily areas to increase the
allowable residential development capacity (Completed)

2. Consider additional changes to development standards and permit processing procedures, reductions in City fees to facilitate multifamily rental development
(Study Underway)
253
Agenda Item # 7.

RECOMMENDATIONS

3. Consider reducing inclusionary requirements for rental developments if Recommendations 1 and 2 are not fully implemented (Reduction in Inclusionary Requirement by 5% across the board, or modify to affordability only at low-income threshold)

4. Adopt in-lieu fees based on City objectives with respect to the inclusionary program and the point of indifference calculations (Adopt appropriate inclusionary in-lieu fee based on financial feasibility) Higher than the point of indifference to incentivize unit production, lower to incentivize fee payment
254
Agenda Item # 7.

NEXT STEPS
Based on tonight's direction City staff will return with final recommendations in January 2024 for adoption of in-lieu fee. Should the City Council provide necessary direction staff will return with amendments to Inclusionary Ordinance affordability requirements. 255
Agenda Item # 7.
256
Agenda Item # 7.

Reviewed By:

City Manager
GE

AGENDA REPORT SUMMARY
Meeting Date: January 23, 2024
Subject Tree Protection Ordinance
Prepared by: Nick Zornes, Development Services Director Approved by: Gabriel Engeland, City Manager
Attachment(s):

1. Draft Ordinance

2. Appendix A

3. Draft Resolution – Establishment of New Fee Schedule Initiated by:

City Council
Previous Council Consideration:

May 24, 2022, November 28, 2023
Fiscal Impact:

A certified arborist was contracted in February of 2023, for a fee of $10,000. Funds were used in Fiscal Year 22/23 from the Sustainability Fund.

Environmental Review:

This Ordinance is exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the State Guidelines implementing the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970.

Summary:
 The City’s Tree Protection Ordinance (Los Altos Municipal Code Chapter 11.08) provides regulations regarding the removal of certain types of trees within the City of Los Altos.  The Ordinance was last updated in 2007 and required updating to remain relevant and reflect the changing environment and current policies.
 On May 24, 2022, the City Council tasked the Environmental Commission to work with City staff to review the Ordinance and recommend changes as needed.  Following the hiring of new Sustainability staff in October 2022, staff began conducting research and peer review with the Environmental Commission’s continued support on the policy level.
257
Agenda Item # 8.

Subject: Tree Protection Ordinance
January 23, 2024 Page 2
 In February 2023, staff began working with a certified arborist to engage in and provide technical and policy recommendations to inform the update.  In August 2023, Staff presented the final policy updates to the Environmental Commission for review and comment.
 On November 28, 2023, the City Council considered the first iteration of the amended Tree Protection Ordinance
Staff Recommendation:

Introduce and waive further reading of an ordinance of the City Council of the City of Los Altos amending Chapter 11.08 Tree Protection Regulations and find that this ordinance is exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the State Guidelines implementing the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970.

Purpose
To update the City’s Tree Protection Ordinance to reflect current policies and procedures, protect the City’s vibrant urban forest, maintain tree canopy that contributes to carbon sequestration, and provide clear tree removal criteria for both residents and city staff.

Background
The City’s Tree Protection Ordinance provides regulations regarding the removal of certain types of trees within the City of Los Altos. The Ordinance was last updated in 2007 and required updating to remain relevant and reflect the changing environment, current policies, and best management practices.

Staff worked with a consultant for technical expertise who provided policy recommendations that were based on an analysis of current policies and procedures. To incorporate the recommendations into the ordinance, staff collaborated with the Planning Division (the Division within the City that reviews Tree Removal Permits) and the Environmental Commission.

Discussion/Analysis
Staff is proposing amendments and additions to the ordinance in the following areas to remain in alignment with the tree policies of neighboring jurisdictions, to preserve the City's vibrant tree canopy, and to help meet our climate adaptation goals:
• Definition of a protected tree
• Criteria for removal
• Replacement requirements
Definition of a protected tree: In order to protect more existing trees, staff recommends that all trees to be protected at a smaller diameter of 12 inches rather than the previous diameter of 15 258
Agenda Item # 8.

Subject: Tree Protection Ordinance
January 23, 2024 Page 3
inches. This also includes protecting native trees at a diameter of 10 inches as natives require less care, have a better chance of survival, provide food and shelter for local wildlife, and can withstand California’s drought conditions.

Criteria for removal: Tree protection ordinances have a number of key elements, including circumstances under which a tree may be removed. Clear decision-making criteria can often reduce misunderstandings and conflicts later in the process. In collaboration with the certified arborist, staff updated and clarified the current language. Arborists met with staff from various departments and discussed operational impressions of the ordinance in its current form. They reviewed relevant materials and benchmarked with surrounding cities on key issues and identified areas for improvement. To align with the CAAP, which calls for preserving, protecting, and growing the urban forest as a key element in sequestering carbon, the updated decision-making criteria and replacement system integrate these goals and focus on preserving and growing a healthy tree canopy.

Tree replacement: A section in the updated ordinance has been added to include tree replacement guidelines as follows: trees approved for removal shall be replaced in-kind, with some exceptions.

In cases or at sites where smaller trees at maturity are proposed, more trees will be required. For example, if a 45-inch diameter tree is removed, and the applicant is proposing to replace it with a species that would reach 20 inches at maturity, two additional trees would be required. Applicants will be required to work with an arborist to determine appropriate tree replacement and develop a tree replacement plan. In cases where no tree can be replaced on-site, the applicant will be required to pay an in-lieu fee in an amount set by council. The City will utilize these funds to purchase, plant, maintain and monitor trees on public lands, or support the City’s urban forestry management goals. In-lieu fees vary amongst jurisdictions, below is a table summarizing various in-lieu options mainly in Santa Clara County.

Jurisdiction In Lieu Fee
Los Altos No
Campbell
Yes: In-lieu fee is equal to the fair market value of a standard City street tree (delivered and installed).

Cupertino Yes
Gilroy
Yes: In lieu fee is equal to the value of the replacement trees required as specified. The in-lieu payment shall include funds sufficient for the care of the replacement tree during their establishment period.

Los Altos Hills Not specified
259
Agenda Item # 8.

Subject: Tree Protection Ordinance
January 23, 2024 Page 4
Los Gatos
Yes: in-lieu fee $250 for each 15 gallon and each 24" Box Replacement Tree In-Lieu Fee* $500 for each36" Box Replacement Tree In-Lieu Fee*
Menlo Park $100-$7,000 based on trunk diameter.

Milpitas Not specified
Monte Sereno Not specified
Jurisdiction In Lieu Fee
Morgan Hill Not specified
Mountain View $750.00
Palo Alto $650.00
San Jose $775.00
Santa Clara Not specified
Saratoga Not specified
Sunnyvale
Yes: In -lieu fee shall be paid in accordance with the City’s adopted Fee Schedule.

Tree Removal Application Fees: Staff conducted research on cities in Santa Clara County to compare tree removal application fees. Research showed that the City of Los Altos’ fee is significantly lower than the surrounding cities. Staff recommend increasing the application fee, including a fee per tree. Below is a table showing tree permit removal fees in the county:

Jurisdiction Permit Fee Additional Tree Fee
Los Altos $75.00 No
Campbell $249.00 $78.00
Cupertino $328.00 $165.00
Gilroy $313.00 No
Los Altos Hills $250.00 No
Los Gatos $250.00 $125.00
Milpitas $247.00 no
Monte Sereno $100.00 no
Morgan Hill $120.00 no
Mountain View $116.00 $58.00
Palo Alto $472.00 no
San Jose $268.00 $33.00
260
Agenda Item # 8.

Subject: Tree Protection Ordinance
January 23, 2024 Page 5
Santa Clara $295.00 no
Saratoga $130.00 no
Sunnyvale $373.00 no
November 28, 2023 – City Council Consideration
At its regularly scheduled meeting on November 28, 2023, the City Council considered the first iteration of the Tree Protection Ordinance. After receiving a Staff Report, Presentation and Public Testimony the City Council discussed the item in depth and provided City Staff with direction on additional modifications to the draft ordinance. Due to the nature of the modifications directed by the City Council the draft ordinance necessitates a reintroduction. The following modifications to the ordinance and resolution have been made:
 Reiteration of the ordinance Purpose and Intent language as a Whereas within the Draft Ordinance
 Modification of Section 11.08.110 for the removal of dead or diseased trees to not require a permit
 Modification of Section 11.08.110 for hazardous trees to not require a permit  Modification of Section 11.08.120(C)(2) to clarify the thirty (30) days from the date of planting to when the area is ready
 Addition of Section 11.08.120.(D) to not require replacement trees when existing trees have caused direct damage of property
 $0.00 Fee for Tree Removal Permit for Invasive Species Recommendation
Introduce and waive further reading of an ordinance of the City Council of the City of Los Altos amending Chapter 11.08 Tree Protection Regulations to update current policies. 261
Agenda Item # 8.
1 ORDINANCE NO. 2024-__

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LOS ALTOS AMENDING CHAPTER 11.08 OF TITLE 11 MISCELLANEOUS PROPERTY

REGULATIONS OF THE LOS ALTOS MUNICIPAL CODE FOR TREE PROTECTION

REGULATIONS
WHEREAS, the City Council requested that the Environmental Commission work with City Staff to amend the City’s Tree Protection Ordinance to further implement the adopted Climate Action and Adaptation Plan (CAAP); and
WHEREAS, the City of Los Altos looks to protect and promote the growth of a healthy and sustainable tree canopy in Los Altos. Trees in Los Altos are highly valued by the community and provide several benefits, including shade and climate resilience, habitat for wildlife, carbon sequestration and improved air quality, protection against wind and flood hazards, and aesthetic quality; and
WHEREAS, the amendments was processed in accordance with the applicable provisions of the California Government Code and the Los Altos Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the City Council held a duly noticed public meeting on November 28, 2023, and directed staff to incorporate changes to the draft ordinance and return to the City Council to reintroduce the ordinance for consideration; and
WHEREAS, the City Council held a duly noticed public meeting on January 23, 2024, and February 13, 2024; and
WHEREAS, this Ordinance is exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the State Guidelines implementing the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended; and
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Los Altos does hereby ordain as follows:

SECTION 1. AMENDMENT OF TITLE 11 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE. Chapter 11.08 is hereby amended of the Los Altos Municipal Code as set forth in Appendix A to this Ordinance.

SECTION 2. CONSTITUTIONALITY; AMBIGUITIES. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions hereof. Any ambiguities in the Los Altos Municipal Code created by this Ordinance shall be resolved by the Development Services Director, in their reasonable discretion, after consulting the City Attorney.

SECTION 3. PUBLICATION. This Ordinance shall be published as provided in Government Code Section 36933.

SECTION 4. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall be effective upon the commencement of the thirty-first day following the adoption hereof.
262
Agenda Item # 8.
2 The foregoing Ordinance was duly and properly introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Los Altos held on January 23, 2024, and was thereafter, at a regular meeting held on February 13, 2024, passed and adopted by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
___________________________________
Jonathan Weinberg, MAYOR
Attest:
____________________________
Melissa Thurman MMC, City Clerk
263
Agenda Item # 8.

APPENDIX A
AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 11.14
264
Agenda Item # 8.
265
Agenda Item # 8.

APPENDIX A
Los Altos, California, Code of Ordinances Created: 2022-04-12 13:01:44 [EST] (Supp. No. 37)

Chapter 11.08 TREE PROTECTION REGULATIONS

11.08.010 Purpose and Intent.

The purpose of this chapter is to protect and promote the growth of a healthy and sustainable tree canopy in Los Altos. Trees in Los Altos are highly valued by the community and provide several benefits, including shade and climate resilience, habitat for wildlife, carbon sequestration and improved air quality, protection against wind and flood hazards, and aesthetic quality.

This chapter establishes standards for proper tree removal and replacement, preservation, and protection during construction.

11.08.0120 Definitions.

The following words and phrases when used in this article shall have the meaning set forth herein, except where the context clearly indicates a different meaning:
"Damage" means any intentional action or negligence which causes injury, death or disfigurement of a tree.

Actions include, but are not limited to, cutting, girdling, poisoning, overwatering, unauthorized relocation or transportation of a tree or trenching, excavating, altering the grade or paving within the dripline of a tree. “Certified Arborist” – means a person having expertise in the care and maintenance of trees, who is certified by the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) or the American Society of Consulting Arborists (ASCA). "Development review application" means application for land alteration or development, including but not limited to tentative subdivision map, design review, variance, use permit, rezoning, planned unit development and tree removal.
"Dripline" means the outermost line of the tree's canopy projected straight down to the ground surface. As depicted in a plan view, the dripline generally appears as an irregularly shaped circle. "Heritage tree" means any tree so designated by the historical commission, based on the finding that the tree has character, interest, or value as part of the development of, and/or exemplification of, the cultural, educational, economic, agricultural, social, indigenous, or historical heritage of the city. “Native Species” – as defined by list on file with the Development Services Department.

Protected Tree (See Section 11.08.040).
"Significant Pruning" means the cutting or taking away of more than thirty-three percent of the living foliage material (including branches) of a tree in any twelve (12) month period such that it damages a tree as determined by a certified arborist or as otherwise determined by the Development Services Director planning director. (See the definition for tree removal in this section.)
"RI" means any single-family residential zoning district, for example, Ri-b, Rl-20. Ri-H, R1-40. "Remove" (See the definition for tree removal in this section). "Tree" means a woody perennial plant characterized by having a main stem or trunk or a multi-stemmed trunk system with a more or less definitely formed crown and is usually over ten (10) feet high at maturity. "Tree removal" means the removal of a tree, including significant pruning. (See the definition for significant pruning in this section).
266
Agenda Item # 8.

Created: 2022-04-12 13:01:44 [EST]
(Supp. No. 37)

“Undesirable/Invasive Species” - as defined by list on file with the Development Services Department. (Prior code § 10-2.26501)

11.08.0230 Application of chapter.

This chapter shall apply to every owner of real property within the city and to every person responsible for removing a tree regardless of whether such person is engaged in a tree removal business. (Prior code § 10-2.26502)

11.08.0340 Actions prohibited.

A. It is unlawful to damage or kill any protected tree; and B. It is unlawful to remove any protected tree from private or public property in any zoning district without first obtaining a tree removal permit.
(See Section 11.08.160 for violation/penalties).
(Prior code § 10-2.26503)

11.08.0450 Protected trees.

A protected tree is any of the following:

A. Any tree that is forty-eight) (48) thirty-eight (38) inches in circumference (12 inches in diameter) measured at forty-eight (48) inches (4-feet) above grade; B. Any tree of a native species that is ten (10) inches in diameter or greater measured at forty-eight (48) inches above grade;
CB. Any tree designated by the historical commission as a heritage tree or any tree under official consideration by the historical commission for heritage tree designation; C. Any tree which was required by the city to be either saved or planted in conjunction with a development review application.
(Ord. 07-314 § 2 (part); prior code § 10-2.26504)

11.08.0560 Heritage tree designations.

A. Applications. Applications for designation of a heritage tree may be filed by the owner of the property on which the tree is located. The city council or planning commission or zoning administrator may also, by resolution or motion, refer a proposed designation to the historical commission, or the historical commission may also consider a proposed designation upon its own initiative. Applications by property owners shall be prepared in accordance with instructions provided by the planning director Development Services Director.

B. Study. The historical commission shall conduct a study of the proposed heritage tree, based upon such information or documentation as it may require from the applicant, the commission staff, or from other available sources.

C. Property owner notification. The historical commission shall notify the owner of the property on which the tree is located of the meeting at which the commission will consider the tree for designation. The notice shall 267
Agenda Item # 8.

Created: 2022-04-12 13:01:44 [EST]
(Supp. No. 37)

be mailed to the recorded owner(s) as shown on the last equalized assessment roll and shall be mailed at least thirty (30) days prior to the meeting unless the property owner(s) agree in writing to a lesser notification period. Failure to receive notice shall not invalidate any proceedings under this chapter.

D. Action on designation. The historical commission may either recommend denialy or approvale ofr designation based on the criteria outlined in Section 12.44.030 of this code. (Prior code § 10-2.26505)

11.08.0670 Tree removal permits required.

In order to remove any protected tree, a tree removal permit must be obtained. All applications for a tree removal permit shall be prepared in accordance with instructions provided by the Development Services Director planning director, and when the application is filed independent of any other development review application, it shall be accompanied by a fee which shall be established by city council resolution. (Prior code § 10-2.26506)

11.08.0780 Approval authority.

Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 11.08.100 of this chapter, the approval authority for tree removal requests shall be as follows:

A. For heritage trees: the approval authority shall be the historical commission.

B. For all other protected trees:

1. The approval authority for tree removal requests filed independent of any other development review application shall be the planning director Development Services Director.

2. The approval authority for tree removal requests filed in conjunction with another development review application shall be the same approval authority as established by this code for the accompanying development review application.
(Prior code § 10-2.26507)

11.08.0890 Notification.

When a tree removal application involves a tree(s) which was designated for preservation at the request of a neighboring property owner(s) in conjunction with a development review application, the current owner(s) of said neighboring property(s) shall be notified of the meeting at which the approval authority will consider the tree removal. The notice shall be mailed to the recorded owner(s) as shown on the last equalized assessment roll and shall be mailed at least ten (10) days prior to the meeting. Failure to receive notice shall not invalidate any proceedings under this chapter. Once the City issues a Tree Removal Permit, city staff or, at their discretion, the applicant, shall post notice of the decision on the application for such permit on the subject property and shall be legible from the public right-of-way. Such notice shall state the decision on the application and shall provide information on the appeal process pursuant to this Chapter. (Prior code § 10-2.26508)
268
Agenda Item # 8.

Created: 2022-04-12 13:01:44 [EST]
(Supp. No. 37)

11.08.09100 Determination on permit.

A. Criteria. Each application for a tree removal permit shall be reviewed and determined on the basis of based on the following tree removal criteria:

1. The tree is dead, in poor health (as defined in the most recent edition of the Guide for Plant Appraisal), or has a risk rating of moderate, high, or extreme which cannot be mitigated through sound arboricultural practices to a low-risk rating.

2. The tree species is identified as an invasive or undesirable species (as defined by list on file with the Development Services Department).

3. The tree is interfering or will interfere with a utility, public transportation, waterway, or other public infrastructure system.

4. The tree is causing damage to an enclosed structure which cannot be mitigated in another way.

5. Preservation of the tree will impede the use of real property and no reasonable or feasible alternative (as determined by the Development Services Director) exists to preserve the tree in the current location.

1. The condition of the tree with respect to disease, imminent danger of falling, proximity to existing or proposed structures and interference with utility services;

2. The necessity to remove the tree for economic or other enjoyment of the property;

3. The topography of the land and the effect of the tree removal upon erosion, soil retention and the diversion or increased flow of surface waters;

4. The number, species, size and location of existing trees in the area and the effect the removal would have upon shade, privacy impact, scenic beauty, property values and any established standards of the area;

5. The number of healthy trees the property is able to support according to good forestry practices;

6. The approximate age of the tree compared with average life span for that species;

7. Whether there are any reasonable and feasible alternatives that would allow for the preservation of the tree.

B. Additional recommendations. The approval authority may refer the application to another department, commission or person for a report and recommendation. The approval authority may also require the applicant to furnish a written report from an independent tree expert certified arborist acceptable to the approval authority,; such report shall to be obtained at the expense of the applicant.

C. Action. Based on the criteria outlined in subsection A of this section, the approval authority shall either approve, conditionally approve, or deny the application. Conditions of approval may require any of the following:

1. One or more replacement trees be planted as outlined in section 11.08.120 Tree Replacement Criteria;

2. Payment of an in-lieu fee in compliance with section 11.08.120;

3. A combination of replacement trees and in-lieu fees that in total provide for the number of replacement trees as outline in section 11.08.110.of a species and size and at locations as designated by the approval authority. When deciding upon replacement tree(s), the approval authority will take into consideration: (1) the cost of replacement trees; and (2) the wishes of the property owner 269
Agenda Item # 8.

Created: 2022-04-12 13:01:44 [EST]
(Supp. No. 37)

relative to the species of tree to be planted. Any such replacement trees shall be obtained and planted at the expense of the applicant.
(Prior code § 10-2.26509)

11.08.10110 Emergency wWaivers and exemptions.

A. In case of emergency caused by hHazardous or dangerous condition of a tree requiring immediate action for the safety of life or property, a tree may be removed upon the order of the planning director Development Services Director, the director of public works Public Works Director or any member of the police or fire department without the necessity of applying for a tree removal permit.;

1. In the event that a protected tree is thought to be dead or diseased and warrants the removal, a property owner can submit photographs of the subject tree to the Development Service Department for review and consideration of an exemption from the requirement of a Tree Removal Permit. a. Trees removed pursuant to the provisions of section 11.08.110(A)(1) are subject to field verification and onsite inspection by the Development Services Department.

B. Employees of the city may take such action with regard to trees on city-owned property as may be necessary to maintain the safety of city operations and/or the safe conditions on city property, without the necessity of applying for a tree removal permit.; and C. Public utilities subject to the jurisdiction of the public utilities commission of the state of California may also take such action as may be necessary to comply with the safety regulations of said commission and as may be necessary to maintain a safe operation of their facilities without the necessity of applying for a tree removal permit.

Prior code § 10-2.26510)

11.08.120 Tree Replacement.

A. Trees approved for removal (including dead trees) shall be replaced based on the number and size of trees approved for removal as follows:

1. Replace the tree 1:1 with a tree of a similar size canopy at maturity.

2. Where 1:1 replacement in kind is not feasible, replace the tree with two (2) or more trees, such that the replacement trees (combined) provide a similar size canopy at maturity.

3. Replacement tree shall be a minimum of 24-inch box size container unless a smaller container is recommended by the Certified Arborist based on tree species or planting location.

B. The Development Services Director shall have the authority to approve an increase in the number of the onsite replacement trees and reduce the required size of the trees, when appropriate.

C. Replacement Plan. A tree replacement plan prepared by a Certified Arborist shall be made a requirement of the Tree Removal Permit and be provided with the Tree Removal Application. It shall include and adhere to the following:

1. The number, species and site plan of the proposed location of replacement trees;

2. Replacement trees shall be planted within thirty (30) days from removal of the tree when the site is ready for planting and area is suitable for new planting, unless accepted arboricultural practices dictate a preferential planting period based on the species chosen as the replacement tree and seasonal factors;
270
Agenda Item # 8.

Created: 2022-04-12 13:01:44 [EST]
(Supp. No. 37)

3. Any person who is required to plant replacement trees as a condition of a tree removal permit shall maintain such trees in a healthy condition to ensure their long-term survival;

4. Replacement trees shall be obtained and planted at the expense of the applicant.

D. No replacement tree shall be required when it is determined that the existing tree is or has caused direct damage to an existing structure or property.

1. When a replacement tree is not required pursuant to section 11.08.120(D) a field inspection shall be completed by the Development Services Department to verify any damage onsite.

E. Where replacement is not possible on site as determined by the Certified Arborist, the applicant shall pay an in-lieu fee in an amount set forth by the City Council and shall be paid to the Street Tree Fund.

11.08.1130 Appeals.

Any action of the approval authority may be appealed by the applicant or any interested party to the city council. Said appeal shall be in writing, shall state the reasons for the appeal, shall be accompanied by a fee which shall be set by city council resolution and shall be filed with the city clerk within ten (10) calendar days of the decision.
(Prior code § 10-2.26511)

11.08.1240 Tree protection during construction.

Protected trees designated for preservation shall be protected during development of a property by compliance with the following, which may be modified by the planning director Development Services Director:

A. Protective fencing shall be installed no closer to the trunk than the dripline, and far enough from the trunk to protect the integrity of the tree. The fence shall be a minimum of five four feet in height and shall be set securely in place. The fence shall be of a sturdy but open material (i.e., chainlink), to allow visibility to the trunk for inspections and safety. There shall be no storage of any kind within the protective fencing. The fence shall be in place until construction has been completed.

B. The existing grade level around a tree shall normally be maintained out to the dripline of the tree.

Alternate grade levels may be approved by the Development Services Director planning director.

C. Drain wells shall be installed whenever impervious surfaces will be placed over the root system of a tree (the root system generally extends to the outermost edges of the branches).

D. Trees that have been damaged by construction shall be repaired in accordance with accepted arboriculture methods. If a tree is damaged beyond repair, damage shall be categorized as a violation in accordance with Section 11.08.160 and shall require replacement tree(s) in accordance with Section

11.08.120.

E. No signs, wires, or any other object shall be attached to the tree. (Ord. 07-314 § 2 (part); prior code § 10.2.26513)

11.08.1350 Delegation of functions.

The planning director and director of public works Development Services Director may delegate any or all of the administrative duties authorized by this chapter to one or more staff members. (Ord. 07-314 § 2 (part); prior code § 10-2.26514)
271
Agenda Item # 8.

Created: 2022-04-12 13:01:44 [EST]
(Supp. No. 37)

11.08.1460 Violations—Penalties.

The violation of any provision contained in this chapter is hereby declared to be a misdemeanor and shall be punishable as prescribed in Chapter 1.20 of this code. Violations pursuant to this section of the code shall incur a penalty fine for each tree removed without proper authorization. In addition thereto, any person unlawfully removing or destroying any protected tree without a permit shall be penalized as follows:

A. Replacing the unlawfully removed tree with one or more new trees which, in accordance with section

11.08.120 or in the opinion of the planning director Development Services Director, will provide equivalent aesthetic quality in terms of size, height, location, appearance and other characteristics of the unlawfully removed tree.

B. Where replacement trees will not provide equivalent aesthetic quality because of the size, age or other characteristics of the unlawfully removed tree, the planning director Development Services Director shall calculate the value of the removed tree in accordance with the latest edition of the Guide for Establishing Values of Trees and Other Plants, as prepared by the council of tree and landscape appraisers. Upon the determination of such value, the Development Services Director planning director may require either a cash payment to the city to be added to the Street Tree Fund street tree fund, or the planting of replacement trees as designated by the planning director Development Services Director, or any combination thereof, in accordance with the following:

1. To the extent that a cash payment is required for any portion or all of the value of the removed tree, such payment shall be doubled to reflect the estimated installation costs that would be incurred if replacement trees are planted; and

2. To the extent that the planting of replacement trees is required, the retail cost of such trees, as shown by documentary evidence satisfactory to the planning director Development Services Director, shall be given for transportation, installation, maintenance and other costs incidental to the planting and care of the replacement trees.

C. Any person who is required to plant replacement trees pursuant to subsection A or B of this section shall maintain such trees in a good and healthy condition, as determined by the Development Services Director planning director. The planning director Development Services Director may require a maintenance bond or other security deposit approved by the city finance department which shall be provided to the city by the person required to plant replacement trees. The bond shall be in an amount of money and for a period of time determined by the planning director Development Services Director. (Ord. 07-314 § 2 (part); prior code § 10-2.26515)
272
Agenda Item # 8.
1 RESOLUTION NO. 2024-XX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LOS ALTOS

AMENDING TREE REMOVAL PERMIT FEE STRUCTURE
WHEREAS, the Los Altos Municipal Code specifies that certain fees and charges shall be set by Resolution of the City Council; and
WHEREAS, these fees and charges should be in amounts sufficient to recover the costs incurred by the City with respect to the functions to be performed by the City; and WHEREAS, in the event that the replacement tree as required by ordinance is not feasible an applicant may make payment of an in-lieu fee as established by this resolution.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Los Altos hereby adopts the following fees:

FEE
Tree Removal Permit (1 tree) $300.00
Tree Removal Permit (each additional tree) $150.00
Tree Removal Permit (Invasive Species) $0.00
In-Lieu Tree Replacement $1,200.00
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that all other fees previously established by other City Council Resolution or Ordinance remain in effect.

I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of a Resolution passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Los Altos at a meeting thereof on the XX day of January 2024 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
___________________________________
Jonathan Weinberg, MAYOR
Attest:
____________________________
Melissa Thurman MMC, City Clerk
273
Agenda Item # 8.

AGENDA REPORT SUMMARY
Meeting Date: January 23, 2024
Subject City Council salary and benefits
Prepared by: Jon Maginot, Assistant City Manager
Approved by: Gabriel Engeland, City Manager
Attachment(s):

1. Government Code Section 36516

2. Comparison of neighboring cities (to be distributed prior to Council meeting) Initiated by:

City Council
Previous Council Consideration:

None
Fiscal Impact:

Unknown at this time; should Council elect to increase Council salary or benefits, this will cause an increase in General Fund expenditures
Environmental Review:

Not applicable
Policy Question(s) for Council Consideration:
 Does the Council wish to provide direction to staff regarding potentially increasing Council salary and/or benefits?
Summary:
 Currently, Council members receive a salary of $300 per month. This number is based on previous State law
 A new State law has gone into effect increasing the amount Council members may receive up to $950 per month (compensation is based on city population). In addition, the Council can make future increases to Council salaries by ordinance Staff Recommendation:

Provide direction to staff regarding Council salary and benefits 274
Agenda Item # 9.

Subject: City Council salary and benefits
January 23, 2024 Page 2
Purpose
To consider changes to Council salary and benefits
Background
California Government Code Section 36516 outlines guidelines related to Council member salaries and benefits. Currently, Los Altos Council members receive a salary of $300 per month and are eligible to receive certain benefits. This was the highest amount previously allowed under State law for a city the size of Los Altos.

Discussion/Analysis
SB 329 went into effect January 1, 2024 and provided amendments to GC Section 36516. Cities with a population of up to 35,000, such as Los Altos, may now offer City Council salaries of up to $950 per month. This amount is to be set by Council ordinance. In addition, SB 329 allows cities to adopt increases in Council salaries in future ordinances.

As well, cities can also provide benefits to the Council members. These benefits do not count towards the salary amount so long as the same benefits are provided to employees. The City currently allows Council members the option of receiving health, dental and vision benefits.

Council members may be reimbursed for up to $2,119 of dental/vision expenses. Dependents are not eligible for this benefit. Funds are provided on a reimbursement basis and unused funds are not given to the individual Council member. Council members may also sign up for one of the City’s Health Plans. Council members may enroll eligible dependents, but the City does not contribute toward the premium for dependents.

Staff has researched what certain neighboring cities provide to Council members. Cities selected are typical comparators to Los Altos that have a population of less than 35,000. This comparison will be distributed to the Council and public prior to the Council meeting.

Recommendation
Staff recommends Council provide direction to staff regarding Council salary and benefits 275
Agenda Item # 9.

State of California

GOVERNMENT CODE
Section 36516
36516. (a)  (1)  A city council may enact an ordinance providing that each member of the city council shall receive a salary based on the population of the city as set forth in paragraph (2).
(2)  The salaries approved by ordinance under paragraph (1) shall be as follows:
(A)  In cities up to and including 35,000 in population, up to and including nine hundred fifty dollars ($950) per month.
(B)  In cities over 35,000 up to and including 50,000 in population, up to and including one thousand two hundred seventy-five dollars ($1,275) per month. (C)  In cities over 50,000 up to and including 75,000 in population, up to and including one thousand six hundred dollars ($1,600) per month. (D)  In cities over 75,000 up to and including 150,000 in population, up to and including one thousand nine hundred dollars ($1,900) per month. (E)  In cities over 150,000 up to and including 250,000 in population, up to and including two thousand five hundred fifty dollars ($2,550) per month. (F)  In cities over 250,000 population, up to and including three thousand two hundred dollars ($3,200) per month.
(3)  For the purposes of this subdivision, the population of a city shall be determined by the last preceding federal census, or a subsequent census, or estimate validated by the Department of Finance.
(4)  The salary of council members may be increased beyond the amount provided in this subdivision by an ordinance or by an amendment to an ordinance, but the amount of the increase shall not exceed the greater of either of the following:
(A)  An amount equal to 5 percent for each calendar year from the operative date of the last adjustment of the salary in effect when the ordinance or amendment is enacted.
(B)  An amount equal to inflation since January 1, 2024, based upon the California Consumer Price Index, which shall not exceed 10 percent for each calendar year. (5)  No ordinance shall be enacted or amended to provide automatic future increases in salary.
(b)  Notwithstanding subdivision (a), at any municipal election, the question of whether city council members shall receive a salary for services, and the amount of that salary, may be submitted to the electors. If a majority of the electors voting at the election favor it, all of the council members shall receive the salary specified in the election call. The salary of council members may be increased beyond the amount provided in this section or decreased below the amount in the same manner.

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

AUTHENTICATED

ELECTRONIC LEGAL MATERIAL
276
Agenda Item # 9.
(c)  Unless specifically authorized by another statute, a city council may not enact an ordinance providing for compensation to city council members in excess of that authorized by the procedures described in subdivisions (a) and (b). For the purposes of this section, compensation includes payment for service by a city council member on a commission, committee, board, authority, or similar body on which the city council member serves. If the other statute that authorizes the compensation does not specify the amount of compensation, the maximum amount shall be one hundred fifty dollars ($150) per month for each commission, committee, board, authority, or similar body.
(d)  Any amounts paid by a city for retirement, health and welfare, and federal social security benefits shall not be included for purposes of determining salary under this section, provided that the same benefits are available and paid by the city for its employees.
(e)  Any amounts paid by a city to reimburse a council member for actual and necessary expenses pursuant to Section 36514.5 shall not be included for purposes of determining salary pursuant to this section.
(f)  A city council member may waive any or all of the compensation permitted by this section.
(g)  (1)  For the purposes of this section, a city council shall consider the adoption of an ordinance to increase compensation in open session during at least two regular meetings of the city council.
(2)  At the first meeting, the city council shall present the proposed ordinance, which shall include findings demonstrating the need for the increased compensation.

The ordinance shall not be adopted at the first meeting. (3)  At least seven days after the first meeting, the city council shall hold a second meeting to consider whether to adopt the ordinance.
(Amended by Stats. 2023, Ch. 27, Sec. 2. (SB 329) Effective January 1, 2024.) 277
Agenda Item # 9.

Agency Population
(2020 Census)
Council Member
Annual Pay Rate
Approx Employer
Share of CalPERS
Contribution
Annual Health
Insurance
Maximum
Annual Dental Insurance
Maximum
Annual Vision Insurance
Maximum
Council Member
Total Compensation
CalPERS Retirement
Participation Other Benefits
Belmont 28,335 $4,680 $363 $31,868 $2,000 $360 $39,271 Optional CalPERS Enrollment
$75K Basic Life and AD&D Insurance (City Paid)
Long-Term Disability (City Paid)
East Palo Alto 30,034 $7,200 N/A $12,257 $0 $0 $19,457 N/A Supplemental Life Insurance Foster City 33,805 $5,952 N/A $29,376 $0 $0 $35,328 N/A Los Gatos 33,529 $6,840 $530 $29,907 $1,414 $128 $38,818 Optional CalPERS Enrollment
Menlo Park 33,780 $7,680 TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
San Carlos 30,722 $6,720 $521 $26,804 $1,272 $171 $35,488 Optional CalPERS Enrollment
$200K Basic Life and AD&D Insurance (City Paid)
EAP Participation
Long Term Disability
Average 31,701 $6,512 $471 $26,042 $937 $132 $33,672
Los Altos 31,625 $3,600 N/A $10,978 $16,697 No
Morgan Hill 45,483 $3,756 $462 $24,660 $0 $0 $28,878 Optional CalPERS Enrollment or PARS City Paid Worker's Compensation Plan Campbell 43,959 $8,611 $979 $31,868 $2,148 $342 $43,949 Optional CalPERS Enrollment $50K Basic Life and AD&D Insurance (City Paid) Gilroy 59,520 $11,811 $915 $32,819 $2,111 $0 $47,657 Optional CalPERS Enrollment
EAP Participation
$20K Basic Life Insurance (City Paid)
Cupertino 60,381 $8,917 $691 $31,868 $1,521 $179 $43,177 Optional CalPERS Enrollment $16K Basic Life and AD&D Insurance (City Paid) $2,119
278
Agenda Item # 9.

AGENDA REPORT SUMMARY

Meeting Date: January 23, 2024
Subject: Los Altos Legislative Body Travel Request
Prepared by: Anthony Carnesecca, Assistant to the City Manager Reviewed by: Jon Maginot, Assistant City Manager
Approved by: Gabriel Engeland, City Manager
Attachment(s):

1. Completed Legislative Body Travel Pre-Authorization Form

2. City of Los Altos Policy – Training and Travel Expense Policy for Members of Legislative Body
Initiated by:

City Council
Previous Council Consideration:

None
Fiscal Impact:

This item is not earmarked in the amended FY24 adopted legislative bodies travel and meeting budget (1110-5180), however, the City will cover the $1,997 estimated cost with City Manager contingency fund upon approval.

Environmental Review:

Not applicable
Policy Question(s) for Council Consideration:
 Does the City Council wish to approve the attached travel request for Councilmember Lee Eng to attend the 2024 Congressional City Conference in Washington, DC from March 11- 13, 2024 sponsored by the National League of Cities?
Summary:
 City Council has a policy for the authorization and administration of public funds for travel expenses and reimbursements for official City business, including a meeting, seminar, training, or conference.
 City staff received the completed Legislative Body Travel Pre-Authorization Form for Councilmember Lee Eng to attend the 2024 Congressional City Conference in Washington, DC from March 11-13, 2024 sponsored by the National League of Cities. 279
Agenda Item # 10.

Subject: Los Altos Legislative Body Travel Request
January 23, 2024 Page 2
Purpose
Review the attached travel request for Councilmember Lee Eng to attend the 2024 Congressional City Conference in Washington, DC from March 11-13, 2024 sponsored by the National League of Cities.

Background
At the August 23, 2023 meeting, City Council approved the Legislative Body Travel Policy which provides guidelines for the authorization and administration of public funds for travel expenses and reimbursements for official City business as they apply to members of legislative bodies, including the Council and Commissions.

This process requires the submission of a completed Legislative Body Travel Pre-Authorization Form for review and approval by the City Council.

Discussion/Analysis
City staff received the attached request from Councilmember Lee Eng to attend the 2024 Congressional City Conference in Washington, DC from March 11-13, 2024 sponsored by the National League of Cities.
280
Agenda Item # 10.
281
Agenda Item # 10.
282
Agenda Item # 10.

CITY OF LOS ALTOS POLICY AND PROCEDURE

TRAINING AND TRAVEL EXPENSE POLICY

FOR MEMBERS OF LEGISLATIVE BODY

PURPOSE AND SCOPE
The purpose of this policy is to provide guidelines for the authorization and administration of public funds for travel expenses and reimbursements for official City business as they apply to members of legislative bodies. For ease of reading, members of legislative bodies refers to Mayor, Vice Mayor, Council members, and Commission members in the following policy. Additionally, meetings can refer to any meeting, seminar, training, or conference in the following policy.

All travel paid by the City shall be for business and training purposes that is of value to the City and its residents. All expenses incurred while on City business shall constitute actual and necessary expenses that are reasonable and justified use of public funds. When traveling, members shall choose the most cost efficient, direct and economical travel options available. This policy shall be consistent with AB 1234.

City officials shall keep in mind that some expenditures shall be subject to reporting under the Political Reform Act and other laws. All agency expenditures are subject to disclosure under the Public Records Act.

POLICY
The purpose of this policy is to establish business travel guidelines for members that are fair, accountable and transparent. This policy addresses the criteria for City payment of travel expenses and/or advances incurred by the member. Only the authorized members are eligible for reimbursement.

This policy supplements the definition of actual and necessary expenses for purposes of state laws relating to permissible uses of public resources. This policy also supplements the definition of necessary and reasonable expenses for purposes of federal and state income tax laws.

City funds, equipment, supplies, and staff time must only be used for authorized City business and shall not exceed the adopted budget appropriation.

The Council's training and travel budget shall include a separate appropriation for all Council members to attend the League of California Cities Legislative Annual Conference and Expo & League of California Cities City Leaders Summit. Additionally, new Council members and Mayors may attend the New Council Members and Mayors Academy through Cal Cities.
283
Agenda Item # 10.

Any travel under this policy must be compliant with Assembly Bill 1887, which prohibits governmentfunded and government-sponsored travel to certain states to “avoid supporting or financing discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people.”

INTERNAL CONTROLS
In order to safeguard public funds, all of the following internal controls shall be followed by all members that incur expenses while traveling on City business:
• All members are responsible for reading and complying with this policy;, • All training and travel expenses shall be properly authorized by the legislative body in advance of travel, except in emergency by the City Manager;,
• The duties between the travel authorization and reimbursement payment shall be properly segregated;,
• All training and travel expenses shall be properly supported by adequate documentation;, • All reimbursement claims shall be filed in accordance with the policy;, • If an advance check is provided, the member shall make certain the amount corresponds to the total estimated expenses minus any prepayment;,
• It shall also be the responsibility of the member to be aware of and understand the estimate of expenses established by the estimate. The member shall monitor expenses to ensure they are within the estimated amount unless unusual circumstances exist and if so, document such circumstances;, • Prior to any travel during which reimbursable expenses will be incurred, the member shall estimate the expenses which will be incurred as a direct result of the travel and attendance at the training or conference;, and
• It shall be the responsibility of the member incurring the expenses to provide the proper documentation for each expense, including receipts as required.

GENERAL GUIDELINES
Allowable Expenses

1. Allowable expenses are those that are properly authorized and shall include, but are not limited to, authorized business expenses incurred while engaging and/or participating in the following activities and/or events, which meet the criteria listed below:
 The meeting is mandatory and/or necessary to accomplish key City goals and objectives. Such activities include, but are not limited to:
• Participating in and attending meetings of regional, state and national organizations whose activities affect the City’s interests;,
• Attending educational seminars designed to improve skill and information levels that may be benefit to the City;, and
• Attending business meetings, functions of local civic or community organizations where there is a clear nexus between the event and their official City duty, i.e., not purely social events.
284
Agenda Item # 10.
 If the training location requires an overnight stay, efforts shall be made to ensure no local option is available. Government rates shall be used when available. Attendance at conferences and travel time to and from the conference shall receive prior approval from the legislative body.  Registration fees will be fully paid by the City via check or credit card. Any discounts offered for early registration or attendance by additional persons shall be obtained whenever possible.

PROHIBITED EXPENDITURES

1. The following are examples, but are not all inclusive, of personal expenses for which the City shall not reimburse the member, even when incurred in conjunction with other approved reimbursable expenses:
• Receipts that are not itemized;,
• Any expenses that have not been properly authorized;, • Double-dipping of expenses (submitting the same expense for reimbursement more than once through the same or various means);,
• Expenses incurred as a result of supplemental personal travel;, • Political or charitable contributions or events;,
• Family or companion expenses, including those related to child or pet care;, • Entertainment expenses;,
• Meals for any person other than the member;,
• Non-mileage personal automobile expenses, including repairs, traffic citations, insurance or gasoline;, air flight upgrades
• Personal losses incurred while on City business;,
• Inaccurate receipts that are greater than the reimbursable cost of the item;, • Alcohol and gambling expenses;,
• Traffic and toll violations;, and
• Any expenses incurred by individuals that are not members;.

2. Payments for travel and expenses shall be requested as an advance, prepayment or reimbursement of appropriate expenses for lodging, food, transportation and incidental expenses. Reimbursement of expenses shall be made only for members; no reimbursement is allowed for non-members accompanying the attendee.

3. All reimbursement claims or advances for travel and expenses (including registration) shall be accompanied by sufficient supporting documentation including properly approved Request for Travel Authorization Form, original receipts, copies of registration forms, invoices, cancelled checks or notation for any receipts that are lost. An exception to this requirement is listed under section entitled Meal Costs.

LODGING, MEALS AND TRANSPORTATION

Airfare

1. Use of air, train, private automobile, or other mode of transportation shall be selected on the basis of the least expensive option for the City. Government and group rates shall be used when available. 285
Agenda Item # 10.

2. Transportation costs to and from the authorized destination shall not exceed advance purchase economy class airfare unless such fare is not available. Members shall inquire as to any government discount the airlines may provide. The City shall not pay for upgrades (e.g. seat upgrades or early boarding options) without prior approval from the legislative body.

3. Members shall receive reimbursement for additional expenses (checked bags, travel insurance, etc.) with prior authorization.

Automobile

1. Automobile mileage shall be reimbursed at the rate set by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) in effect at the time of travel and will be reimbursed for the distance between home and the destination or work and the destination, whichever is less. The Finance Division shall be responsible for determining the applicable rate at the time of travel. This amount does not include bridge and road tolls, which are reimbursable at actual rates. Mileage reimbursement shall be submitted within thirty (30) days of travel.

2. If a personal vehicle is used to and from the airport, the actual mileage shall be reimbursed. If a personal vehicle is left at the airport, the reimbursement shall be the lesser of the following: round trip and parking costs compared with shuttle transportation.

3. The necessity for a rental car must be established and authorized in advance by the legislative body.

Only economy car models shall be rented, unless the upgrade is provided at no additional cost to the City. Prepaid gas is not to be selected, but optional insurance is required and shall be reimbursed. The member is required to notify the City’s Risk Manager immediately in the event of any incident or accident related to the rental vehicle.

Taxis/Shuttles

1. Whenever possible, hotel courtesy buses or local shuttle services shall be used. Taxi service shall be used only when no other convenient, less costly transportation is available.

Lodging

1. No lodging expenses incurred by members within a 50-mile radius of Los Altos City Hall shall be reimbursed unless there are extenuating circumstances with prior legislative body approval.

2. The number of nights in the hotel shall be equal to the number of days at the conference unless prior legislative body approval for an additional night prior or afterward for necessary and legislative body related activities.

3. Lodging expenses shall be prepaid directly to the hotel or reimbursed. Prepayment or reimbursement shall be limited to single occupant room rates. Lodging reimbursement shall not exceed conference hotel cost or host group rate with the exception the conference lodging is not available. No reimbursement shall be made when lodging is at a family/friend’s residence.

Meal Costs
286
Agenda Item # 10.

1. The City shall reimburse for documented meal expenses including gratuity (not to exceed 15%), according to the daily Maximum Federal Rate. For per diem rates within the US, the member shall use rate listed on http://www.gsa.gov/. If the destination city is not listed, then the rate for the county applies. If there is no rate for the city or county, the lowest rate applies.

2. Meal expenses, including gratuity, in excess of the daily Maximum Federal Rate shall not be reimbursed without approval of the legislative body.

3. The per diem rates are to be reimbursed only for full days of travel (travel away from City overnight). If there is a partial day of travel, the City shall reimburse meal based on the Federal Meal Rate.

4. If any meal is included in the registration fee or the hotel fee, the member shall not receive reimbursement for the included meal. For example, if lunch is included in the registration fee, then the full day per diem will be less the per diem allocated for lunch.

5. If a member returns home after 1:00 p.m., the member will receive the per diem for breakfast and lunch.

If a member returns home after 6:00 p.m., the member shall receive the full day’s per diem.

Miscellaneous Expenses

1. Expenses related to City business shall be reimbursed for actual telephone, fax, parking expenses, tolls, tipping (non-meal related as this falls under the Maximum Federal Rates), taxi, hotel wireless charges, or other reasonable expenses. Miscellaneous expenses shall be itemized and receipts shall be provided.

Where receipts are not available, a signed declaration of expenditures shall be accepted by the City Manager or designee at their discretion.

2. Incidental expenses incurred for fees and tips given to porters, baggage carriers and hotel staff shall be reimbursed up to General Service Administration (GSA) limit (currently at $5 per day). If the member receives a full day’s per diem, no additional incidentals shall be provided, as this is already included in the GSA daily rate.

3. Personal expenses (e.g. shoe shine, in-room entertainment, personal phone calls, traffic fines, etc.) shall not be reimbursable.

4. If a personal side trip is planned, the City shall reimburse not more than the advance purchase economy class airfare to and from the original destination. Any additional costs related to personal travel shall not be reimbursed by the City.

5. If a companion accompanies a member, only the business cost incurred by the member shall be reimbursed. All costs incurred in addition to the member’s costs shall not be reimbursed by the City.

Business Meeting Expenses

1. Prior to any business meeting, the legislative body shall approve any meal expense based on the Federal Meal Rate or in excess. The itemized receipt shall include the amount of the expense, the date and place of the expense, the business purpose, and who attended the business meeting. 287
Agenda Item # 10.

2. Meals shall only be reimbursed for the cost(s) of the eligible item on the meal receipt. Overcharged amounts shall not be reimbursed.

3. Meal reimbursement shall be submitted within 30 business days of the meeting.

PROCEDURE
Member shall comply with the following procedures:

1. Complete the Request for Travel Authorization for City staff and Finance Department with all information regarding meeting, travel dates, travel plan, hotel information, estimated costs, and justification for the event at least sixty days before registration for the meeting closes.

2. The relevant parties shall agendize the request as early as feasible for legislative body review.

3. Legislative body shall approve or deny the proposed travel expenses.

4. Submit requests for registration and any advances or prepaid items within the standard disbursement time period.

5. Members are responsible for turning in all receipts to the Finance Division within 60 business days of returning from travel in the same fiscal year as the event. Only expenses approved prior to travel shall be reimbursed by the City.

6. Within 60 business days after the member’s return from a trip in the same fiscal year, a Statement of Travel Expenses (travel and expense report), supported by the Approved Request for Travel Authorization Form, shall be filed with the Finance Division complete with the proper signing authority.

7. All Statement of Travel Expenses shall include copies of documentation of previous prepayments or advances made, including registration, airfare, hotel, training agenda, etc.

8. Following an event for which a reimbursement claim has or will be submitted, the official seeking reimbursement shall briefly report on the event during the next regular meeting of the legislative body and no more than 30 days after the claim has been fulfilled. If multiple officials attended, a joint report shall be made. This report shall be made verbally, or provided as a written report to be included as information in the agenda packet.

Finance Division shall comply with the following procedures:

1. Receives completed Statement of Travel Expenses with the Approved Request for Travel Authorization Form from member.

2. Receives the required backup documentation: Meeting agenda, receipts for airfare, hotel, tax/transit, map to and from if mileage is used, per diem rate of the travel destination from GSA website or meal receipts with details if actual meal expenses is used.
288
Agenda Item # 10.

3. Reviews requested prepayments, advances and reimbursements related to travel. Checks the budget for consistency with budgeted funds.

4. Process Statement of Travel Expenses and provides payment for advances, prepayments or reimbursements.
289
Agenda Item # 10.

City of Los Altos 2024 Tentative Council Agenda Calendar All items and dates are tentative and subject to change unless a specific date has been noticed for a legally required Public Hearing.

Items may be added or removed from the shown date at any time and for any reason prior to the publication of the agenda.

February 13, 2024
Study Session: Joint Meetings with Commissions (Financial, PARC, History, PC) – 5:00 p.m.

AGENDA TITLE: DEPARTMENT:

SPECIAL ITEMS:

CONSENT:

Adoption of Amended Tree Protection Ordinance Dev. Svcs.

Acceptance of Annual Audit Finance
LAYC Approval of Contract Award Parks & Rec
PUBLIC HEARING:

HEU Parking Standards Dev. Svcs.

DISCUSSION ITEMS:

Discussion of Transportation Services Council
Discussion on Electronic Voting Council
290
Agenda Item # 11.

City of Los Altos 2024 Tentative Council Agenda Calendar All items and dates are tentative and subject to change unless a specific date has been noticed for a legally required Public Hearing.

Items may be added or removed from the shown date at any time and for any reason prior to the publication of the agenda.

February 27, 2024
Study Session: Joint Meetings with Commissions (Senior, EC, CSC, Library) – 5:00 p.m.

AGENDA TITLE: DEPARTMENT:

SPECIAL ITEMS:

CONSENT:

Waive Second Reading and Adopt HEU Parking Standards Dev. Svcs.

Investment Policy Updates Finance
EOC Contract Award Parks and Rec
Approve Heart Sculpture Parks and Rec
PUBLIC HEARING:

Military Equipment Policy Update PD
DISCUSSION ITEMS:

Mid-Year Budget Finance
Waive First Reading and Introduce and Ordinance for Property Frontage Improvements
Dev. Svcs.

Remaining 2024 City Council agenda calendar items are pending and will be published at a later date. 291
Agenda Item # 11.

PROGRAM SUB PROJECT INITIATION DATE HEU COMPLETION DATE STATUS Program 2.D: Encourage and streamline Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs).

Budget & Hire Planning
Technician December 31, 2022 COMPLETED
Program 2.D: Encourage and streamline Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs).

Amend ADU Ordinance
based upon HCD's letter 6 months or less
Program 3.H: Amend design review process and
requirements.

Eliminate 3rd Party
Architectural Review February 28, 2023 COMPLETED
Program 3.H: Amend design review process and
requirements.

Dismiss Design Review
Commission February 28, 2023 COMPLETED
Program 3.L: Eliminate the requirement of story poles. March 31, 2023 COMPLETED Program 2.E: Conduct annual ADU rental income surveys.

Budget & Hire Housing
Manager March 31, 2023 IN-PROGRESS
Program 4.J: Facilitate alternate modes of transportation for Adopt VMT Policy & June 30, 2023 COMPLETED Program 2.D: Encourage and streamline Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs).

RFP-Permit Ready ADU
Plans July 31, 2023

PLANS IN

DEVELOPMENT
Program 1.H: Facilitate housing on City-owned sites. Financial Analysis July 1, 2023 December 31, 2023 DEVELOPING RFP Program 3.D: Evaluate and adjust impact fees. August 1, 2023 December 31, 2024 IN-PROGRESS Program 1.H: Facilitate housing on City-owned sites. Release RFP December 31, 2023 Program 6.C: Target housing development in highest
resource areas. Initial Outreach September 31, 2023
Program 6.D: Promote Housing Choice (Section 8) rental
assistance program. September 31, 2023
Program 2.A: Continue to implement and enhance
inclusionary housing requirements. December 31, 2023 IN-PROGRESS Program 2.B: Establish an affordable housing in-lieu fee and commercial linkage fee. Housing in-lieu fee. December 31, 2023 IN-PROGRESS Program 2.F: Water and Sewer Service Providers. December 31, 2023 COMPLETED Program 3.B: Modify building height in mixed-use zoning districts. Downtown Districts December 31, 2023 IN-PROGRESS Program 3.E: Ensure that the density bonus ordinance
remains consistent with State law. December 31, 2023 ONGOING Program 3.H: Amend design review process and
requirements. Code Amendments December 31, 2023 COMPLETED 292
Agenda Item # 11.

Program 3.K: Standardize multimodal transportation
requirements.

Bicycle Storage and
Charging Regulations December 31, 2023 COMPLETED
Program 3.K: Standardize multimodal transportation
requirements.

Remove CSC Review of
Housing Developments December 31, 2023 COMPLETED
Program 4.C: Allow Low Barrier Navigation Centers
consistent with AB 101. December 31, 2023 COMPLETED
Program 4.D: Allow transitional and supportive housing
consistent with State law. December 31, 2023 COMPLETED
Program 4.E: Allow employee/farmworker housing
consistent with State law. December 31, 2023 COMPLETED
Program 4.F: Reasonably accommodate disabled persons’
housing needs. December 31, 2023 COMPLETED
Program 6.B: Maintain and expand an inventory of
affordable housing funding sources. Prepare Inventory. December 31, 2023 Program 6.E: Prepare and distribute anti-displacement
information. December 31, 2023
Program 1.A: Rezone for RHNA shortfall. January 31, 2024

TO BE COMPLETED
BY 1/31/2024
Program 1.G: Rezone housing sites from previous Housing Elements. January 31, 2024

TO BE COMPLETED
BY 1/31/2024
Program 3.G: Amend Conditional Use Permits findings
applicable to housing developments. March 31, 2024 IN-PROGRESS Program 3.I: Allow residential care facilities consistent with State law. March 31, 2024

TO BE COMPLETED
BY 1/31/2024
Program 3.J: Explicitly allow manufactured homes consistent with State law. March 31, 2024

TO BE COMPLETED
BY 1/31/2024
Program 3.F: Reduce Conditional Use Permit requirement for residential mixed-use and
multi-family. September 31, 2024 IN-PROGRESS
Program 1.B: Facilitate higher density housing in the
Commercial Thoroughfare (CT) District. December 31, 2024

TO BE COMPLETED
BY 1/31/2024
Program 1.C: Allow housing in the Office Administrative (OA) District. December 31, 2024

TO BE COMPLETED
BY 1/31/2024
293
Agenda Item # 11.

Program 1.E: Update the Loyola Corners Specific Plan. December 31, 2024

TO BE COMPLETED
BY 1/31/2024
Program 2.D: Encourage and streamline Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs).

Adopt-Permit Ready ADU
Plans December 31, 2024
Program 3.A: Prepare a Downtown parking plan and update citywide parking requirements. December 31, 2024 CONTRACT SIGNED Program 3.B: Modify building height in mixed-use zoning districts.

Commercial
Neighborhood (CN)
District December 31, 2024 IN-PROGRESS
Program 3.C: Remove floor-to-area ratio (FAR) restriction at Rancho Shopping Center and
Woodland Plaza. December 31, 2024 IN-PROGRESS
Program 3.M: Modify parking requirements for emergency
shelters consistent with State
law. December 31, 2024
Program 2.B: Establish an affordable housing in-lieu fee and commercial linkage fee. Commercial linkage fee. December 31, 2025 Program 1.D: Allow housing on certain Public and
Community Facilities District sites and
facilitate housing on religious institution properties. December 31, 2025 Program 1.F: Rezone Village Court parcel. December 31, 2025

TO BE COMPLETED
BY 1/31/2024
Program 4.H: Provide additional density bonuses and
incentives for housing that accommodates special needs
groups. December 31, 2025
Program 4.I: Allow senior housing with extended care
facilities in multi-family and mixed-use zoning districts. December 31, 2025 Program 1.I: Incentivize Downtown lot consolidation. July 31, 2026 Program 4.G: Assist seniors to maintain and rehabilitate their homes. July 31, 2026
Program 6.C: Target housing development in highest
resource areas. Follow-up Outreach September 31, 2026
Program 1.H: Facilitate housing on City-owned sites. Entitlement Review December 31, 2026 294
Agenda Item # 11.

Program 3.N: Modify standards in the R3 zoning districts. December 31, 2026 IN-PROGRESS Program 4.J: Facilitate alternate modes of transportation for residents.

Capital Improvement
Project for above head
pedestrian crossing
signals on San Antonio
Road near Downtown Los
Altos December 31, 2027
Program 5.F: Incentivize the creation of play areas for multifamily housing projects. December 31, 2027 Program 1.K: Participate in regional housing needs planning efforts. Ongoing
Program 1.L: General Plan amendments. Ongoing
Program 1.M: SB 9 implementation. Ongoing
Program 1.N: Facilitate and monitor pipeline housing
projects. Ongoing
Program 2.C: Assist in securing funding for affordable
housing projects. Ongoing
Program 2.D: Encourage and streamline Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs). Ongoing
Program 2.E: Conduct annual ADU rental income surveys. Annual Survey Annually Program 4.A: Support efforts to fund homeless services. Ongoing Program 4.B: Continue to participate in local and regional forums for homelessness,
supportive, and transitional housing. Ongoing
Program 5.A: Monitor condominium conversions. Ongoing
Program 5.B: Continue to administer the City’s affordable housing programs. Ongoing
Program 5.C: Restrict commercial uses from displacing
residential neighborhoods. Ongoing
Program 5.D: Implement voluntary code inspection program. Ongoing 295
Agenda Item # 11.

Program 5.E: Help secure funding for housing rehabilitation and assistance programs. Ongoing
Program 6.A: Assist residents with housing discrimination and landlord-tenant
complaints. Ongoing
Program 6.B: Maintain and expand an inventory of
affordable housing funding sources.

Inform, Evaluate
Apply/Submit Ongoing
Program 6.F: Affirmatively market physically accessible units. Ongoing Program 7.A: Promote energy and water conservation and
greenhouse gas reduction
through education and awareness campaigns. Ongoing
Program 7.B: Monitor and implement thresholds and
statutory requirements of climate change legislation. Ongoing 296
Agenda Item # 11.
1 North San Antonio Road
Los Altos, California 94022-3087

M E M O R A N D U M
DATE: January 18, 2024
TO: City Council
FROM: Nick Zornes, Development Services Director
SUBJECT: PROJECT STATUS – 330 DISTEL CIRCLE
On January 9, 2024, the City Council requested that the Development Services Director make contact with the development team EAH Housing regarding the project status of 330 Distel Circle a 100% affordable housing project to find out how the City of Los Altos can contribute or support moving this project across the finish line and break ground for construction.

On January 11, 2024, the Development Services Director made contact Welton Jordan, Chief Real Estate Development Officer of EAH Housing. The following information helps to provide a high-level overview of the discussion and information received:
 EAH Housing applied for a Super NOFA (Notice of Funding Availability) in July 2023 o The release of the Super NOFA was delayed by the State of California o Showing good signs and responsiveness to the application for 330 Distel Circle o Full award of monies from Super NOFA would be Feb. 2024  330 Distel Circle is in need of $25-30 million for construction of the project at this time.  EAH Housing will already be pursuing the Property Tax Welfare Exemption as allowed by State law and frequently approved by the County Assessors office.

EAH Housing did make clear that the project is still moving forward, but the funding sources are required to be multi-prong for the creation of affordable housing.

Additional discussion regarding “what else could the City of Los Altos do to help 330 Distel Circle progress” was also had. One idea that was discussed is that the City of Los Altos could reduce the required parking for the project, which would significantly reduce the overall construction cost of the project and the ongoing operation and maintenance for 330 Distel Circle once open for occupancy. The approved project included 82 parking stalls provided by a double stack mechanical parking lift system. As a way to help close the funding gap the City of Los Altos could reduce the approved parking from 82 to 41, plus the existing approved 8 stalls that were not approved utilizing mechanical lifts.

The Development Services Director is prepared to return to the City Council to discuss the project modification in reducing the required parking which would include how to make it happen, what the reduction would entail fully, and how this is supported by State law. 297
Agenda Item # 12.

The following is a Summary of Council Actions.

Minutes from the meeting will be posted once adopted by Council.

For more information, contact the City Clerk’s Office at 650-947-2720.

TUESDAY, JANUARY 23, 2024

SUMMARY OF COUNCIL ACTIONS
7:00 P.M. – REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Items for Consideration

1. The City Council approved the draft regular meeting minutes of January 9, 2024.

2. The City Council adopted a resolution for the Sewer System Repair Program, Project WW01001 Acceptance.

3. The City Council adopted a Resolution accepting completion of the City Hall Permit Counter Project and authorized the Development Services Director to Record a Notice of Completion as Required by Law.

4. The City Council disbanded the ad hoc police facility subcommittee.

5. The City Council continued this item to a future meeting.

6. The City Council adopted a Resolution affirming the City Council Strategic Goals.

7. The City Council adopted a Resolution establishing an Inclusionary Housing In-Lieu Fee and integrating the fees into the Municipal Fee Schedule.

8. The City Council introduced and waived further reading of an ordinance of the City Council of the City of Los Altos amending Chapter 11.08 Tree Protection Regulations. Second reading and adoption tentatively scheduled for February 13, 2024.

9. The City Council directed staff to draft an ordinance increasing Council member salary as well as providing a list of benefits offered to staff for consideration.

10. The City Council took no action on a travel request from Councilmember Lee Eng to attend the 2024 Congressional City Conference in Washington, DC from March 11-13, 2024 sponsored by the National League of Cities.

COUNCIL/STAFF REPORTS AND DIRECTIONS ON FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS ADJOURNMENT 10:50 P.M.

DATE: 1/23/24
TO: COUNCILMEMBERS
FROM: CITY MANAGER’SOFFICE
SUBJECT: COUNCIL Q&A FOR JANUARY 23, 2024 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING Study Session:
• Does the entire library commission endorse the position of the subcommittee presenting on Tuesday?
Answer: The Library Commission unanimously approved the recommendations at their January 4, 2024 regular meeting.
• Can the Council provide direction at the study session for the library agencies to move forward, or is a resolution at a regular meeting required? Are there any other requirements the Council must satisfy to allow a proposal to proceed beyond giving direction at the study session? Answer: Council would provide direction at the meeting for next steps, which could include a presentation to North County Library Authority for consideration. • If the Council approves any of the options presented by the Subcommittee, what is the timeline to move forward with the library improvements?
Answer: The timeline would be dependent upon the amount of funding and scope of improvements, as well as the required agreements of other stakeholders. Once an architect has completed the drawings, staff will better understand a timeline for improvement. • It is my understanding that Council does not take actions during Study Sessions. Will Council be putting this as a Discussion agenda item and decision at the next Council meeting for action? Answer: Council can provide direction at this Study Session for next steps. There is no action requiring a resolution.
• Please clarify what we are evaluating regarding this library remodel. (E.g. the use of the city’s owned building for a remodel within the current square footage of the library?) Answer: The proposal is to renovate the existing main library building within the current square footage.
• Please clarify whether this is a private project on public land/public building. Will the remodel be handled as a private project or a public project using private funds? Answer: This would be a public project completed on a City facility and will have to adhere to the Santa Clara County Procurement Policy/Process.
• Who will be involved in making the decisions after city approves the application and puts out an RFP?
Answer: There is currently no application for approval. This project would follow standard processes for remodels of existing facilities and procurement will adhere to the Santa Clara County Procurement Policy/Process.
• Will this project be returning to Council like all public land and public building projects? What specific steps will be followed by the City and Library through the planning process including those identified in the Design and Transportation Review municipal codes 14.78.020, 14.78.030, and 14.78.040?
Answer: This project is an interior remodel only and is exempt from Design Review Pursuant to 14.78.020.
• How much staff time will it take and cost to review, study, and analyze the project pre and post RFP?
Answer: The Santa Clara County Library District will refer the final RFP to the appropriate procurement staff with the county for release and review of the responses received for the bid of the project.
• Will there be adequate public outreach and input? If so, what steps will be taken and who will conduct gathering this input?
Answer: This project will incorporate public input through the process. The presentation and proposed recommendations utilize existing needs assessments from 2008 and 2018 that indicated the biggest needs for the main library facilities.

Agenda Item 3 (Acceptance of City Hall Permit Counter Project):
• The mayor’s name is misspelled on the proposed resolution.

Answer: Noted, this will be changed prior to signature of the Mayor. • The Resolution will be signed by Mayor Weinberg.

Answer: That is correct.

Agenda Item 5 (PCI):
• Staff’s recommendation is for “the City [to] continue to manage PCI in a manner consistent with the City Council’s Strategic Priority-Assets goal of achieving a PCI of 76 by 2027.” PMP scenarios 2 and 5 both lead to this result. Which scenario is staff recommending the Council approve? Answer: Since both scenarios 2 & 5 lead to a PCI of 76 by 2027 based on the PMP report, staff recommends scenario 2, based on previous Council direction. • Scenario 2 will increase our PCI by 2 points, but increase our deferred maintenance from $9.8 mm to $12.1 mm. Scenario 5 will increase our PCI by 2 points, but increase our deferred maintenance to $11.5 mm. How does staff anticipate the City will address its PCI needs in the next 5, 10, and/or 15 years (etc.) given the added budget constraints of the increased costs of deferred maintenance?
Answer: During the next cycle, the new Transportation Division team will work with the consultant, who will prepare the next PMP report with the revised PCI. Then, staff will ask the consultant to run scenarios with a higher preventive maintenance budget and determine the impact on the overall PCI.

PCI is one measure of health for roads, but a focus on an overall PCI number will not adequately capture the overall condition of how the City’s network of roads are operating.

Deferred maintenance with regards to PCI does not address other critical needs of the roadways including Complete Streets Principles, Safe Routes to Schools, ADA, or other considerations.
• In the current fiscal year, the City has budgeted $2.6 mm (TS-1001 and TS-1004). Those figures include no expenditures of general funds. In each of the next four fiscal years, that amount is anticipated to rise to a total of $4.075 mm which includes an expenditure of $1.85 mm of general funds each year. (FY 23-24 budget, pp. 168 and 170 of 228.) Are these numbers accurate? If not, why not? If so, then can’t the City commit to a different PMP scenario which would minimize our deferred maintenance costs?
Answer: The new Transportation Division team did not work with the consultant who prepared the PMP report in January 2023 and therefore, cannot speak to the accuracy of the numbers. During the next cycle, the new Transportation Division team will work with the consultant, who will prepare the next PMP report with the revised PCI. Then, staff will ask the consultant to run scenarios with a higher preventive maintenance budget and determine the impact on the overall PCI.

The current budget does include expenditures from the General Fund on Council priorities for road improvements, but they are not captured in TS-1001 or TS-1004. • Has the CSC opined which scenario the City should adopt? Answer: The CSC provides input and recommendations on the Complete Streets Master Plan, Safe Routes to Schools, and other improvements when the design of a complete street is presented.

The Transportation Division will follow the general guidelines of CSMP in future street selection, and the goal is to add more streets related to the various streets included in the Safe Routes to School (SR2S) while maintaining or exceeding the PCI goal, as directed by Council.
• On the second chart of page 3 of the staff report, a “weighted average PCI” is used. Why is a weighted average used instead of the actual average? How is it weighted? Answer: The different distress types (e.g., various types of cracks, potholes, etc.) may have different impacts on the overall performance and safety of streets. Therefore, assigning weights to these distress types allows for a more accurate representation of the pavement condition, which helps develop effective maintenance and rehabilitation strategies. • What is the basis for StreetSaver using an inflation rate of 3% and an interest rate of 2%? These seem low. Are there PMP scenarios using other assumptions? Answer: MTC uses these standard rates for inflation and interest rates for analysis of budget scenarios. The PMP scenarios use the same assumed rates. • The staff report says that staff’s goal is to maintain a PCI of 74 in FY 23-24. (Staff Report, p. 7).

However, scenarios 2 and 5 both indicate expected PCI’s greater than 74 in 2023 and 2024. (In fact, each of the other three scenarios do as well.) Why is the City expecting to maintain a PCI lower than that indicated by all of the scenarios in the staff report (and Pavement Management Budget Options Report).

Answer: These scenarios are dependent upon minimum budgets set for each of the scenarios and consistently used each year, which is different from the actual budget available to the department depending on the priorities needing funding from the General Fund. • Our FY 23-24 budget sets a “Strategies & Goals for FY2023-24” for the PW Department to reach a PCI of 75 by 2026. (FY 23-24 budget, p. 97 of 228.) Won’t the proposed resolution undermine that strategy and goal?
Answer: The proposed resolution supports the strategy and goal of FY 23-24 for achieving PC 76 by 2027. Achieving a PCI of 75 the year prior is an important milestone in reaching the overall goal.
• The CAPS’ 2023 PMP Report assesses the City’s PCI as of September of 2022. Since that time, the City experienced major storms with flooding and related challenges. Haven’t those circumstances seriously degraded our roads such that the PMP Report is out of date? What would be involved in acquiring a new PCI report and should the City obtain a new report before committing to a PMP scenario?
Answer: The PMP PCI report is created every two years, the next one will be in 2025. The changes in PCI due to last year's heavy storms will be reflected in this report. • Please explain how the “Decision Tree” included in Appendix B of the expert’s report works.

Please explain how staff will use the decision tree in support of whichever PMP scenario is adopted by the City.

Answer: Staff would need to contact the consultant for an in-depth discussion of the consultant’s work.
• Why is the city using a different PCI categorization (consultant’s report, table 3, p. 5) than is used by the VTA? See: 2022-TSMP-Report (vta.org)
PCI Los Altos’ Consultant’s Class VTA (MTC) Class
100-90
Very Good
Excellent
89-80 Very Good
79-70 Good
69-60 Good Fair
59-50 At Risk
49-25 Poor Poor
24-0 Very Poor Failed
Since our PCI was established by MTC, shouldn’t we be using their nomenclature? Wouldn’t that also allow us to compare how Los Altos is performing as compared to our neighboring Cities?
Answer: Staff would need to contact the consultant to find out why the PCI categorization from MTC/VTA was not used for the January 2023 PMP report. • Regarding the “Current PCI Condition” map printed on 2/27/2023: what is the difference between a road that is “Good (Non-Load)” vs. a road that is “Good (Load)?” What is “Non-Load” vs. “Load?”
Answer: “Non-Load” vs. “Load” refers to the type of pavement distress. “Non-load” distresses are caused by environmental causes. “Load” distresses are caused by traffic loads. • The staff report says (on page 3), "The PCI rating of 74 places the City’s Street network condition in the upper position of the “Very Good” category but the table showing functional classifications shows that the total weighted average of 74 is only rated “Good”. This seems inconsistent, please explain.

Answer: Staff would need to contact the consultant to find out why the PCI categorization from MTC/VTA was not used for the January 2023 PMP report. • The Resolution appears to be inconsistent, the 3rd Whereas says, "Staff recommends the City continue to manage PCI in a manner consistent with the ... goal of achieving a PCI of 76 by 2027”, but the 4th Whereas and the Now Therefore say, “ … maintain the current PCI of 74”. In fact, none of the scenario tables show a PCI of 74 in 2023. Please clarify.

Answer: Maintaining the PCI of current improved roadways and improving the PCI of selected roadways are both consistent with achieving the overall Council goal of a PCI of 76 by 2027.

Agenda Item 7 (Establishment of an Inclusive Housing in Lieu Fee):
• Is it worthwhile to offer other alternatives to developers? For example, could we allow developers to buy an existing unit whose inclusivity restriction is about to expire for the purpose of renewing the restriction?
Answer: This is an alternative compliance measure the City Council could take up, however that would require a specific Zone Text Amendment to the Municipal Code. The in-lieu fee option is already established within the Zoning Code, this only creates the fee itself. • AB 1505 requires that we provide developers with at least one alternative for complying with the inclusionary ordinance, such as an in-lieu fee payment, land dedication, or off-site construction of affordable units. This program defines an in-lieu payment but no other potential options. Is it possible/feasible to say we’d consider other alternatives in addition to an in-lieu fee if an alternative is presented to Planning Commission (or Council) but not define what those other options are, just that we would consider them?
Answer: This is an alternative compliance measure the City Council could take up, however that would require a specific Zone Text Amendment to the Municipal Code.

Agenda Item 8 (Tree Protection Ordinance and Fee Schedule):
• § 11.08.060: Why does the ordinance list both the circumference and diameter of a tree in subsection “A,” but only lists its diameter in subsection “B?” Answer: Staff can incorporate the circumstance as a minor modification to the ordinance for the second reading.
• If a tree is removed for any of the reasons set forth in §11.08.100.A. 3, 4, or 5, does the removed tree have to be replaced? If not, where does the ordinance so indicate? If so, then how will the City ensure that the same interference with a utility line, etc. will not re-appear? Answer: A replacement tree is still required. As a part of the new process a planting plan would identify the appropriate location and species of tree which would ensure that the same issue or interference does not reoccur; it is highly unlikely that the replanting would occur in the exact location or include the same species.
• What are a property owner’s obligations if a replacement tree dies before the replacement tree reaches heritage status?
Answer: A tree does not automatically reach Heritage Tree status because of age. As defined by Ordinance, a "Heritage tree" means any tree so designated by the historical commission, based on the finding that the tree has character, interest, or value as part of the development of, and/or exemplification of, the cultural, educational, economic, agricultural, social, indigenous, or historical heritage of the city. If a tree is determined to be a Heritage Tree then the City would require it to be replaced should it die. • Please provide the list of Native Tree Species.

Answer: This will be attached to the meeting information where Q&A is found. • Should the list not be available, when will it be available? Answer: The planting list of trees is subject to change as discussed at the last City Council meeting. As with other lists maintained by respective departments it is updated as appropriate.

Agenda Item 9 (Council salary and benefits):
• If salaries for cities our size are set by law, why do the other comparable cities shown have higher Councilmember salaries?
Answer: State law allows cities to raise Council members salaries by ordinance. Previously, this was capped at 5% each year. The comparable cities each raised the salaries of Council members at one point or another while Los Altos City Council has not given that direction.

City of Los Altos-Tree Species
Scientific name Common
name
Native
to SF
Bay
Area
Evergreen/
Deciduous
Typical
Height
(feet)
Typical
Width
(feet)
Growth
Rate
(UFEI)
Aesculus californica California
buckeye x deciduous 10-25 23-30 moderate
Aesculus x carnea Red horse
chestnut deciduous 35-50 35-50 slow,
moderate
Afrocarpus falcatus Yellowwood evergreen 40-65 20-40 moderate, fast
Agonis flexuosa Peppermint
tree evergreen 25-30 15-30 fast
Arbutus menziesii Madrone x evergreen 50-60 50 moderate Arbutus unedo Strawberry
tree evergreen 15-35 20-35 slow, moderate
Arbutus x 'Marina' Marina
madrone evergreen 20-30 20-30 slow, moderate
Melaleuca vimincalis, syn.

Callistemon viminalis
Weeping
bottlebrush evergreen 20-30 15-20 fast
Betula nigra ‘BNMTF’ Dura-Heat
river birch deciduous 30-40 25-35 fast
Banksia integrifolia Tree
banksia evergreen 45-65 15-30 slow
Carpinus betulus European
hornbeam deciduous 40 20-30 slow, moderate
Carpinus betulus ‘Fastigata’
Pyramidal
European
hornbeam
deciduous 35-45 25-40 moderate
Cedrus deodara Deodar
cedar evergreen 60-80 20-40 fast
Cercis occidentalis Western
redbud x deciduous 10-20 10-20 moderate,
fast
Chionanthus retusus Chinese
fringe tree deciduous 10-20 6-12 moderate
Cinnamomum camphora Camphor
tree evergreen 45-65 50-60 moderate
Corymbia citriodora
Lemonscented
gum
evergreen 60-100 50-100 fast
Corymbia ficifolia
Red
flowering
gum
evergreen 15-40 15-60 moderate
Cotinus coggygria Smoke tree deciduous 15 10-20 moderate Eriobotrya deflexa Bronze
loquat evergreen 20-25 15-25 fast
Eucalyptus viminalis Manna gum evergreen 80-120 25-50 fast Ginkgo biloba 'Princeton
Sentry'
Maidenhair
tree deciduous 40-55 15-20 moderate,
fast
Gymnocladus dioica Kentucky
coffee tree deciduous 60-75 40-50 moderate,
fast
Heteromeles arbutifolia Toyon x evergreen 20-25 8-15 slow, moderate
Hymenosporum flavum Sweetshade evergreen 25-40 15-20 slow, moderate
Jacaranda mimosifolia Jacaranda semideciduous 25-50 20-50 fast Koelreuteria bipinnata Chinese
flame tree deciduous 20-40 15-30 slow,
moderate
Koelreuteria paniculata Golden rain
tree deciduous 20-35 25-40 slow,
moderate
Laurus nobilis 'Saratoga' Saratoga
laurel evergreen 15-30 15-25 slow
Lophostemon confertus Brisbane
box evergreen 30-50 10-30 fast
Lyonothamnus floribundus
asplenifolius
Catalina
ironwood evergreen 25-50 15-25 moderate
Maleleuca ericifolia Heath
melaleuca evergreen 15-25 12-24 fast
Melaleuca linariifolia Flaxleaf
paperbark evergreen 20-25 20-40 fast
Melaleuca quinquenervia Cajeput tree evergreen 20-40 15-25 moderate Melaleuca styphelioides Prickly
melaleuca evergreen 20-40 10-20 fast
Metrosideros excelsa Pohutukawa evergreen 30-35 30-35 moderate Parrotia persica Persian
ironwood deciduous 20 30 slow, moderate
Pinus canariensis Canary
Island pine evergreen 50-70 20-35 fast
Pinus eldarica Mondell
pine evergreen 30-80 15-25 fast
Pistacia chinensis Chinese
pistache deciduous 30-40 25-35 moderate, fast
Pittosporum undulatum Victorian
box evergreen 40 30-40 moderate, fast
Platanus racemosa Western
sycamore
x deciduous 30-80 20-50 fast
Platanus x hispanica
'Columbia'
London
plane deciduous 85 50-70 fast
Quercus agrifolia Coast live
oak x evergreen 20-70 20-70 moderate
Quercus buckleyi Texas red
oak deciduous 40-50 30-50 moderate, fast
Quercus canbyi Chisos oak semideciduous 30-50 30-50 moderate Quercus coccinea Scarlet oak deciduous 60-80 40-70 moderate, fast
Quercus douglasii Blue oak x deciduous 50-65 25-40 slow Quercus frainetto ‘Schmidt’ Hungarian
oak deciduous 40-50 30 fast
Quercus lobata Valley oak x deciduous 50-70 50 moderate, fast
Quercus macrocarpa Burr oak deciduous 70-80 40-80 moderate, fast
Quercus muehlenbergii Chinquapin
oak deciduous 40-50 50-60 moderate, fast
Quercus robur English oak deciduous 40-70 40-80 fast
Quercus robur ‘fastigata’ Upright
English oak deciduous 50-60 10-20 moderate
Quercus rubra Red oak deciduous 60-80 50-70 moderate,
fast
Quercus shumardii Shumard
red oak deciduous 30-40 50-70 moderate, fast
Quercus suber Cork oak evergreen 70 70 moderate,
fast
Quercus tomentella Island oak evergreen 30-50 25-40 moderate Searsia lancea syn. Rhus
lancea
African
sumac evergreen 20-30 20-35 moderate
Styphnolobium japonicum Japanese
pagoda tree deciduous 50-70 40-70 slow,
moderate
Tilia cordata Little leaf
linden deciduous 40-60 35-50 slow, moderate
Tilia tomentosa Silver linden deciduous 40-60 25-40 slow, moderate
Tipuana tipu Tipu tree semideciduous 30-50 25-50 moderate, fast
Tristaniopsis laurina 'Elegant' Elegant
water gum evergreen 20-35 15-30 slow
Ulmus davidiana var japonica
'Emerald Sunshine'
Emerald
Sunshine
elm
deciduous 35 25 fast
Ulmus x ‘Morton’ Morton elm deciduous 50-60 25-40 fast
Vitex agnus-castus Chaste tree deciduous 15-20 15-20 moderate x Chitalpa tashkentensis
'Morning Cloud' Chitalpa deciduous 20-30 20-30 fast
Zelkova serrata Sawleaf
zelkova deciduous 50-65 50-65 fast
Zelkova serrata ‘JFS-KW1’
City Sprite
sawleaf
zelkova
deciduous 20-25 15-20 fast
Zelkova serrata 'Musashino’
Musashino
sawleaf
zelkova
deciduous 40-45 10-15 fast
Zelkova serrata 'Wireless’
Wireless
sawleaf
zelkova
deciduous 20-25 25-35 fast