1 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
April 16, 2025
Town of Los Altos Hills
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
Thursday, April 16, 2026, 2026 at 5:30 P.M.
Council Chambers, 26379 Fremont Road, Los Altos Hills, California,
Present: Mayor Rajiv Bhateja, Vice Mayor Bhateja George Tyson, Council Member Stanley Mok, Council Member Linda Swan, and Council Member Kavita Tankha
Absent: None
Staff: Acting City Manager Cody Einfalt, Community Development Director Jay Bradford, City Attorney Steve Mattas, and City Clerk Arika Birdsong-Miller CALL TO ORDER (5:30 P.M.)
Mayor Bhateja called the meeting to order at 5:41 P.M.
ROLL CALL
Mayor Rajiv Bhateja, Vice Mayor Tyson, Council Member Stanley Mok, Council Member Linda Swan, and Council Member Tankha were present.
PUBLIC COMMENT
There were no public comments.
CLOSED SESSION
A. CLOSED SESSION - Public Employment
(Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957)
Title: City Manager
B. CLOSED SESSION - Conference With Legal Counsel—Existing Litigation Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1)Name of case: California Housing Defense Fund v. Town of Los Altos Hills (Case No. 26CV491087)
Mayor Bhateja adjourned to Closed Session.
REPORT OUT OF CLOSED SESSION
Attorney Mattas reported that the City Council met in Closed Session regarding labor negotiations for the City Manager position. During Closed Session, the Council appointed an ad hoc subcommittee to work with the recruiter on negotiation of the City Manager’s contract. The members of the ad hoc subcommittee are Councilmember Swan and Vice Mayor Tyson. This was the only reportable action.
Approved May 14, 2026
2 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
April 16, 2025
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Bhateja reconvened the meeting in Open Session for the Regular Meeting of the Los Altos Hills City Council at 6:01 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Mayor Rajiv Bhateja, Vice Mayor Tyson, Council Member Stanley Mok, Council Member Linda Swan, and Council Member Tankha were present.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE – Recited
1. AGENDA REVIEW
Community Development Director Jay Bradford requested that Item 5J, Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Contract with Selectron Technologies, Inc. to Purchase an Automatic Notification and Online Inspection Scheduling Software for a Total Purchase Price of $100,000, be removed from the Consent Calendar and continued to a future meeting.
There was consensus among the Council to remove the item from the agenda.
2. PRESENTATIONS AND APPOINTMENTS
A. Appointment as the Los Altos Hills Poet Laureate
Council Member Swan made a motion to appoint William Manche as the 2026 Poet Laureate for the Town of Los Altos Hills. Mayor Bhateja seconded the motion. APPROVED, VOTE 5-0 B. Los Altos Hills County Fire District Discussion on Emergency Management, Shared Services, and Tree Hazard Assessment and Rebate Program
Los Altos Hills County Fire District General Manager J. Logan presented the 8th Monthly Fire District Report and outlined a proposed partnership between the Fire District and the Town to develop programs aligned with the Town’s priority work plan goals. Two key focus areas were identified: (1) enhancing emergency preparedness and resiliency through a shared emergency management services model, and (2) developing a tree hazard assessment and rebate program to address fire risk.
Logan reported that coordination is underway with Town staff, the Fire Department, and Santa Clara County to explore staffing, budgeting, and implementation strategies for these programs.
He noted that both initiatives will require further analysis, including development of operational plans, timelines, and funding sources.
Logan requested Council feedback on these program areas and indicated that updates will be provided at future Council and Fire District Commission meetings as the programs are further developed.
C. Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority – Regional Transportation Revenue Measure VTA’s Strategy and Transformation Director Sam Sargent provided an overview of the Regional Transportation Revenue Measure and VTA’s role. He explained that the proposed fivecounty measure would generate funding through a 1.5% sales tax over 14 years, with a portion allocated to Santa Clara County for transit-related investments.
Sargent noted that funds would primarily support public transit operations and roadway improvements on transit-served corridors. He outlined VTA’s focus on three key outcomes:
increasing ridership, improving efficiency, and enhancing the customer experience, including safety and reliability.
3 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
April 16, 2025
He described potential investment categories, including maintaining core transit services, improving service frequency and efficiency, and advancing new technologies and infrastructure. Sargent emphasized that VTA is currently seeking input from local agencies and the public to help guide funding priorities and project types, with a final investment plan expected to be considered by the VTA Board in June.
3. PRESENTATIONS FROM THE FLOOR
1. Jim Waschura, a Los Altos Hills resident, summarized recent Planning Commission discussions regarding amendments to the Town’s Housing Element in response to comments from HCD. Mr.
Waschura explained that HCD requested the Town reduce the minimum multifamily lot size from
3.5 acres to one-half acre, reduce the proposed 60-foot setbacks for multifamily housing to approximately 30 to 35 feet, and eliminate the 750-square-foot maximum average unit size requirement.
Mr. Waschura stated that the Planning Commission generally supported reducing the minimum lot size and setbacks, but expressed concern about fully eliminating the average unit size limitation.
Mr. Waschura commented that without any size controls, developers would have little economic incentive to construct lower-income housing and instead could maximize unit sizes while remaining financially competitive. He stated that the Planning Commission developed an alternative approach intended to replace the average unit size limitation with another regulatory mechanism and noted that the City Council would receive additional information on the proposal at a future meeting. Mr.
Waschura encouraged the Council to review the Planning Commission meeting record in advance of its upcoming discussion.
2. John O’Connell, a Los Altos Hills resident, commented regarding concerns related to the previously submitted SB 330 development application and a subsequent development application submitted on January 31. Mr. O’Connell expressed concern about the scale of retaining walls and hillside grading proposed in the applications and stated that some residents felt distressed and uncertain about the potential impacts of the project. Mr. O’Connell stated that he believed the Town was not taking the applications seriously enough and referenced correspondence challenging claims that portions of the project may be exempt from CEQA. Mr. O’Connell further stated that additional research was being conducted regarding aspects of the August 2023 application and expressed concern that information regarding those issues may not be reaching the Council. Mr. O’Connell urged the Town to take stronger action regarding the SB 330 application and stated that residents wanted assurance that the Town was working to protect the community’s interests.
3. Michael Grady, a Los Altos Hills resident, commented regarding HCD’s February letter certifying the Town’s Housing Element while identifying certain multifamily development standards as potential constraints to development, including the Town’s 750-square-foot average unit size requirement. Mr. Grady expressed concern regarding the recommendation to eliminate the average unit size limitation and stated that doing so could allow substantially larger multifamily developments that he believed would be inconsistent with the character of Los Altos Hills.
Mr. Grady further referenced a survey conducted by Michael Baker International of nearby multifamily developments, which he stated found an average unit size of approximately 825 square feet. Mr. Grady also stated that HCD reportedly did not receive feedback from developers identifying the 750-square-foot average unit size requirement as a development constraint. Mr.
Grady expressed disagreement with the Town’s negotiating approach with HCD and stated his opinion that the Town should pursue a different strategy regarding the proposed multifamily standards.
4 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
April 16, 2025
4. INFORMATIONAL REPORTS (item provided solely for informational purposes only) A. Treasurer’s Report - This item is provided solely for informational purposes.
B. Disbursement Report - This item is provided solely for informational purposes.
5. CONSENT CALENDAR
Council Member Tankha made a motion to approve the Consent Calendar, removing ITEM 5J.
Council Member Swan seconded the motion. APPROVED, VOTE 5-0 MOTION PASSED 5-0
AYES: Bhateja, Tyson, Mok, Swan, Tankha
NOES: None
RECUSE: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None
A. Approval of the City Council Special Meeting Minutes March 19, 2026 APPROVED, VOTE 5-0 B. Approval of the City Council Regular Meeting Minutes March 19, 2026 APPROVED, VOTE 5-0 C. Approval of the City Council Special Meeting Minutes March 30, 2026 APPROVED, VOTE 5-0 D. Consideration of Adding a Regular City Council Meeting on Thursday, May 14, 2026, at 6:00 p.m., and Canceling the Scheduled Regular City Council Meeting on Thursday, May 21, 2026, at 6 p.m.
APPROVED, VOTE 5-0
E. Resolution Approving the Plans and Specifications for 2026 Sanitary Sewer Repair and Replacement Project, and Authorizing Staff to Advertise the Project for a Formal Bid APPROVED, VOTE 5-0
F. Resolution Authorizing Staff to Submit 2026 Valley Water Standard Grants Program Applications for Byrne Preserve Restoration and Heritage House Native Garden APPROVED, VOTE 5-0 G. Resolution Adopting the 2026 Sewer System Management Plan Update APPROVED, VOTE 5-0 H. Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Auction or Donate the 2003 Dodge Dakota and 2008 Ford Ranger, and to Procure Two Electric Vehicles for Maintenance Services in an Amount Not to Exceed $190,000, Funded Through FY26 and FY27 Vehicle and Equipment Replacement Capital Projects APPROVED, VOTE 5-0
I. Waive Reading and Adoption of an Ordinance Amending Title 10, Chapter 1 of the Municipal Code Regarding the Town's Accessory Dwelling Unit Regulations APPROVED, VOTE 5-0 J. Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Contract with Selectron Technologies, Inc. to Purchase an Automatic Notification and Online Inspection Scheduling Software for a Total Purchase Price of $100,000 (Staff: J. Bradford)
This item was removed from consideration on this agenda. 5 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
April 16, 2025
K. Review and Accept the 2025 General Plan Annual Progress Report APPROVED, VOTE 5-0 L. Review and Accept the 2025 Housing Element Annual Progress Report APPROVED, VOTE 5-0 M. Notification of Fast Track Approval at 26918 Dezahara Way - File # SD25-0066 - Lands of Yuen APPROVED, VOTE 5-0
6. ONGOING BUSINESS
A. Discussion and Direction on Housing Element Implementation Standing Committee Charter, Membership, Meeting Logistics, and Reporting Structure
City Clerk Arika Miller presented the staff report regarding the proposed amendment to the Town’s Standing Committee Resolution to establish a Housing Element Implementation Committee. Mrs.
Miller explained that the proposed committee was being recommended following direction provided by the City Council at its March 19, 2026, meeting to create a committee focused on Housing Element implementation and future housing planning efforts.
Mrs. Miller stated that the proposed committee would serve as a standing committee of the Town and would support ongoing compliance with State housing requirements, implementation of Housing Element programs and policies, and preparation for future housing cycles. Mrs. Miller further explained that the proposed committee would consist of five to nine members, with appointments made from different geographic areas of Town whenever feasible, and that a member of the Planning Commission would serve as a non-voting liaison.
Mrs. Miller described the proposed responsibilities of the committee, including reviewing Housing Element programs and policies, evaluating housing sites and development standards, participating in regional housing discussions, providing input on objective design standards, facilitating community engagement, and making recommendations to the Planning Commission on a semi-annual basis. Mrs.
Miller explained that the committee would serve in an advisory capacity, with recommendations ultimately considered by the Planning Commission and City Council.
Mrs. Miller further noted that if the Council approved the establishment of the committee, staff would begin advertising committee vacancies and coordinate with the Planning Commission regarding the appointment of a non-voting liaison.
Public Comments:
1. Jim Waschura, a Los Altos Hills resident, commented regarding the proposed Housing Element standing committee and stated that many residents had expressed strong interest in having greater public participation and information sharing on housing-related issues. Mr. Waschura expressed concern that the proposed standing committee structure may not fully address community desires regarding geographic representation and input on where multifamily housing may be located within Town. Mr. Waschura stated that he believed there should ideally be a more formal mechanism to provide geographic representation on the committee, while also acknowledging that the Planning Commission and City Council would continue to review and evaluate any recommendations.
Mr. Waschura further suggested that the Town establish both a long-term standing committee focused on broader housing policy issues and additional working groups or ad hoc committees to address more immediate or site-specific concerns. Mr. Waschura stated that housing-related issues would likely remain a long-term challenge for the Town and that separate groups could help balance short-term concerns with longer-term planning efforts.
2. John O’Connell, a Los Altos Hills resident, commented in support of the proposed Housing Element Standing Committee and thanked the Council for moving forward with the discussion 6 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
April 16, 2025
in a collaborative manner. Mr. O’Connell referenced prior discussions regarding the development of the committee charter and suggested that the Council provide general guidance while allowing the committee to help define its own priorities and structure once formed.
Mr. O’Connell further stated that if the Town’s Housing Element implementation does not proceed as anticipated, the Town may face additional challenges related to accommodating lower-income housing requirements. Mr. O’Connell expressed the opinion that a standing committee should be empowered to address difficult issues and stated that, in his experience, teams perform best when given significant challenges and responsibility. Mr. O’Connell encouraged the Council to allow the committee flexibility in defining its work program and stated that doing so could improve the committee’s effectiveness.
3. Ann Duwe of Cupertino expressed strong support for the creation of a Housing Element standing committee. Ms. Duwe stated that many residents do not fully understand the state laws affecting housing and land use planning and commented that a standing committee could help educate the community regarding those issues. Ms. Duwe further stated that some residents may have unrealistic expectations regarding the Town’s ability to maintain existing zoning patterns and semi-rural development standards under current state housing laws. Ms. Duwe encouraged the Council to establish the largest standing committee feasible in order to support broader community participation and understanding.
4. Cheryl Evans, a Los Altos Hills resident, thanked the Council for establishing the committee structure and stated that she believed it was important not to dilute the committee’s efforts through the use of separate ad hoc committees operating outside of the Brown Act process. Ms. Evans emphasized the importance of transparency and stated her support for the use of a standing committee subject to Brown Act requirements.
Mayor Bhateja made a motion to approve the Amended Resolution to “Establishing Standing Committees and Adopting General and Special Rules Pertaining Thereto. Council Member Tankha seconded the motion. APPROVED, VOTE 5-0
MOTION PASSED 5-0
AYES: Bhateja, Tyson, Mok, Swan, Tankha
NOES: None
RECUSE: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None
B. Consideration and Direction on Next Steps Related to Draft Initiatives Measure Regarding the “Green Sheets”
City Attorney Steve Mattas presented the staff report regarding a draft initiative measure related to the Town’s “Green Sheets” land use principles. Mr. Mattas explained that the City Council had previously directed the City Attorney’s Office to work with an ad hoc committee consisting of Council Members Tankha and Swan to prepare a draft initiative incorporating portions of the Green Sheets into the General Plan through voter approval.
Mr. Mattas stated that the draft initiative proposed amendments to several General Plan elements, including the Noise Element, Land Use Element, Pathways Element, and Open Space and Recreation Element. He explained that the initiative would strengthen existing policies related to Town noise standards, animal keeping, preservation of open space and conservation areas, and pathway easements, while also adding new policies prohibiting certain industrial, large-scale commercial, and retail uses, as well as restricting the vacation of pathway, open space, and conservation easements 7 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
April 16, 2025
without comparable replacements. Mr. Mattas further explained that the initiative proposed requiring voter approval for future amendments or rescission of those provisions and included a conforming zoning amendment to the Open Space Reserve zoning district.
Mr. Mattas advised that the City Council could direct additional committee review and public outreach prior to further Council consideration of the initiative and noted that the initiative would need to return to the Council for action by August 6, 2026 in order to qualify for placement on the November 2026 ballot. Mr. Mattas recommended that the item return to the Council in June to allow sufficient time for revisions and finalization.
Mr. Mattas also stated that the item was not subject to environmental review under CEQA because the agenda item involved only discussion and direction regarding potential next steps and did not constitute a project approval or final decision
Public Comments:
1. John O’Connell, a Los Altos Hills resident, commented regarding the proposed ballot initiative and referenced the novel The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy as an analogy for broader concerns about unintended consequences and decision-making authority. Mr. O’Connell expressed concern about placing additional land use decisions before voters rather than allowing future City Councils to retain discretion over such matters. Mr. O’Connell stated that initiatives may pass with limited voter participation and questioned the long-term benefits of restricting future Council authority, particularly if portions of the initiative could ultimately conflict with state law. Mr. O’Connell also referenced prior discussions regarding pathway easements and acknowledged concerns that future Councils could approve changes to easements with a simple majority vote, while stating that he remained uncertain about the appropriate balance between voter approval requirements and Council decision-making authority.
2. Allan Epstein, a Los Altos Hills resident, commented regarding the proposed ballot initiative and stated that he believed the measure would place excessive restrictions on future City Councils. Mr.
Epstein expressed the opinion that elected officials should retain flexibility to respond to changing circumstances and community needs over time. Mr. Epstein further stated that he did not believe there was sufficient public necessity or interest to justify the proposed restrictions and expressed concern regarding the potential costs associated with placing the initiative on the ballot. Mr. Epstein concluded by stating that he opposed the initiative and would vote against it if placed before voters.
3. Eric Bredo, a Los Altos Hills resident, expressed support for the proposed ballot initiative and stated that his family had been involved in the Town since its incorporation. Mr. Bredo commented that he values the Town’s longstanding character and expressed concern regarding what he viewed as a gradual erosion of community protections, including the loss or abandonment of pathway easements over time. Mr. Bredo stated that he believed the proposed measures were reasonable and important for preserving the Town’s values and character.
Mr. Bredo also raised concerns regarding recurring aircraft noise from planes associated with the Palo Alto Flying Club flying over his property and neighboring areas. Mr. Bredo stated that he believed there appeared to be limited regulatory oversight over the issue and expressed interest in the Town exploring possible ways to address such concerns in the future. Mr. Bredo concluded by encouraging the Council to preserve the proposed protections, which he stated could otherwise be gradually diminished over time.
4. Jim Waschura, a Los Altos Hills resident, commented that he was concerned the proposed Green Sheets restrictions could unintentionally limit future single-family residential development while potentially being preempted or invalidated by state laws governing multifamily housing. Mr.
Waschura stated that he was uncertain whether that outcome would occur legally, but expressed 8 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
April 16, 2025
concern that the restrictions could disproportionately affect single-family development while offering limited control over multifamily housing requirements imposed by the State.
5. Carol Gottlieb, a Los Altos Hills resident, expressed support for placing the initiative on the ballot and commented regarding the proposed vacating of easements that are not currently included on the Master Path Plan. Ms. Gottlieb stated that the Master Path Plan is subject to change over time and that easements retained by the Town could potentially be incorporated into future pathway routes as additional studies or opportunities arise. Ms. Gottlieb further commented that retaining easements may also help preserve wildlife corridors, even if the easements are not ultimately used for public pathways. Ms. Gottlieb encouraged the Council to move forward with placing the initiative on the ballot.
6. John Swan, a Los Altos Hills resident, commented in support of codifying the Town’s Green Sheets policies and stated that doing so was important to preserve local land use protections and the Town’s character. Mr. Swan stated that significant land use changes could currently occur with approval by a simple majority vote of the City Council following public hearings and expressed concern that future Councils could substantially alter core community policies without broader voter approval.
Mr. Swan further stated that while state or federal law could ultimately override local regulations, codifying the Green Sheets would help establish stronger local protections and provide a basis for defending local land use authority. Mr. Swan referenced prior efforts in 2020 to codify the Green Sheets before the adoption of more recent state housing laws and encouraged the Council to move forward with the initiative now.
7. Cheryl Evans, a Los Altos Hills resident, stated that she believed taxpayer funds could be better spent on other priorities rather than on the proposed ballot initiative.
8. Kjell Karlsson, a Los Altos Hills resident, commented that he did not view placing the initiative before voters and continuing broader community discussions as mutually exclusive actions. Mr.
Karlsson stated that presenting the measure to voters could help generate additional public dialogue and increase community engagement regarding local land use issues and state housing policies. Mr.
Karlsson further stated that public participation in the election process was important and encouraged residents to remain engaged regarding state and local policy decisions. Mr. Karlsson encouraged the Council to continue working with the community on the proposal and, if possible, provide residents with the opportunity to vote on the measure at a future election.
9. Michael Grady, a Los Altos Hills resident, commented that development proposals such as a Walmart or industrial project would require a zoning ordinance amendment and questioned whether such zoning changes would be subject to a citizen referendum. In response, City Attorney Steve Mattas confirmed that zoning changes are legislative acts and are therefore subject to referendum under state law.
Council Member Swan made a motion to move the Draft Initiative Measure Regarding the “Green Sheets” forward to the next meeting on May 14, 2026. Council Member Mok seconded the motion.
FAILED, VOTE 2-3
MOTION FAILED 2-3
AYES: Mok, Swan
NOES: Bhateja, Tyson, Tankha
RECUSE: None
ABSTAIN: None
9 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
April 16, 2025
ABSENT: None
Mayor Bhateja made a motion to pursue a ballot initiative that would eliminate or prevent new industrial, large-scale commercial, or retail land uses, except on Town-owned property, with the inclusion of provisions related to animals. Council Member Swan seconded the motion.
APPROVED, VOTE 3-2
MOTION PASSED 3-2
AYES: Bhateja, Mok, Swan
NOES: Tyson, Tankha
RECUSE: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None
7. NEW BUSINESS
A. Discussion of Notification Methods and Outreach to Residents Regarding Town Projects and Meetings
Acting City Manager Cody Einfalt presented the staff report regarding notification methods and outreach to residents for Town projects and meetings. Mr. Einfalt explained that the City Council had previously directed staff to review opportunities to improve both the quality and quantity of public notifications, including consideration of expanding the Town’s existing 500- foot noticing radius for development projects.
Mr. Einfalt reviewed the Town’s current notification methods, including mailed notices, the Town website, Nixle and AlertSCC notifications, social media platforms, newsletters, publications, and opt-in email groups. He explained that staff had identified opportunities to improve the clarity and specificity of public notices by providing more detailed descriptions of proposed projects and policy changes. Mr. Einfalt presented several examples comparing prior notices with revised versions intended to provide residents with clearer explanations regarding multifamily housing standards, tentative subdivision maps, grading impacts, retaining walls, and Housing Element amendments.
Mr. Einfalt also discussed options for expanding the geographic scope of noticing beyond the Town’s current 500-foot radius. He explained that increasing the noticing radius to 1,000 feet or 1,500 feet would broaden outreach to additional residents but would also increase mailing costs, staff time, and administrative workload.
Mr. Einfalt further discussed additional communication tools available to the Town, including Nixle notifications, electronic subscriptions, Constant Contact, and potential townwide postcard mailings for major projects or policy matters. He explained that the Town currently pays approximately $17,000 annually for Nixle services and that future townwide postcard mailings could involve approximately $1,000 in design costs and approximately $3,000 to $3,500 per mailing. Mr. Einfalt stated that if the Council wished to pursue expanded notification methods, staff recommended establishing clear criteria regarding when townwide mailings would be appropriate.
Public Comments:
1. Jim Waschura, a Los Altos Hills resident, commented that he viewed the discussion regarding public notifications and outreach as primarily a tactical communications issue rather than a strategic policy matter requiring extensive City Council involvement. Mr. Waschura expressed the opinion that professional public relations expertise may be more effective in developing modern communication strategies and outreach methods for the Town. Mr. 10 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
April 16, 2025
Waschura acknowledged that traditional mailed notices remain important for some residents, but stated that the Town should also utilize internet-based and mobile communication methods more effectively to reach the community. Mr. Waschura further commented that the City Manager’s weekly newsletter had significantly improved Town communications and encouraged the Town to continue modernizing its outreach efforts through more comprehensive communication strategies.
Mayor Bhateja directed staff to develop a matrix of different notification solutions to the residents for different types of events. He also requested that staff return to the council to inform them of their notification solutions.
Acting City Manager Einfalt stated that he could save Council meeting time and share that information directly with councilmembers and Mayor agreed that would work.
B. Fire Hazard Severity Zone (FHSZ) Designations and Enforcement Framework for Mixed FHSZ Parcels
Community Development Director Jay Bradford presented the staff report regarding Fire Hazard Severity Zone (FHSZ) designations and the proposed implementation and enforcement framework for parcels containing mixed FHSZ classifications. Mr. Bradford explained that the Town adopted its FHSZ map by ordinance in June 2025 as part of a broader wildfire mitigation strategy and that the City Council had directed staff to return with additional analysis regarding implementation and enforcement for properties containing multiple hazard designations.
Mr. Bradford reviewed the Town’s layered wildfire mitigation framework, which includes Municipal Code vegetation management and defensible space requirements, town-wide WildlandUrban Interface (WUI) construction standards, and mapped FHSZ designations identifying Moderate, High, and Very High fire hazard areas. Mr. Bradford explained that WUI construction standards apply town-wide to applicable new construction and qualifying alterations regardless of FHSZ designation, while Title 4 defensible space and vegetation management standards apply within mapped Fire Hazard Severity Zones.
Mr. Bradford further explained that the primary implementation issue involved determining how defensible space obligations and additional hazard-based requirements would apply to parcels containing multiple FHSZ classifications or parcels partially located within mapped FHSZ areas.
Mr. Bradford reviewed examples of mixed-designation parcels and explained that the Town’s proposed enforcement approach would apply town-wide WUI standards uniformly while applying additional defensible space and hazard-based requirements only where triggered by the mapped FHSZ areas affected by a proposed activity or development project.
Mr. Bradford also explained that Very High FHSZ areas may involve additional requirements related to real estate disclosures, subdivision review, emergency access, infrastructure review, vegetation management verification, and CEQA hazard review when triggered by specific development activities. Mr. Bradford concluded by stating that staff would finalize the enforcement framework and implementation guidance following City Council policy direction and would continue coordinating with the Los Altos Hills County Fire District and Santa Clara County Fire Department regarding consistent application and enforcement.
Councilmember Mok asked for clarification on what the ask was for this item and Director Bradford noted that there was no ask.
Mayor Bhateja noted that the ask was that the planning department revisit this topic at a council meeting to share how the Town planned to handle parcels with mixed fire hazard severity zones. 11 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
April 16, 2025
Vice Mayor Tyson noted that previous concerns were mainly about people feeling they were losing control over decisions and disclosures related to real estate. They noted that the current language made clear that individuals remained responsible for their own disclosure decisions, rather than being directed by others. Mr. Tyson also acknowledged ongoing public concerns about insurance coverage but emphasized that this issue was separate from the matter being discussed and that the proposal did not worsen those insurance concerns.
Public Comments:
1. Allan Epstein, a Los Altos Hills resident, asked questions regarding how the Town’s proposed enforcement framework would apply to parcels containing only small portions of mapped Fire Hazard Severity Zones. Mr. Epstein sought clarification regarding whether a property with only a small portion located within a higher hazard area would be subject to additional defensible space requirements. During the discussion, staff explained that the Town’s proposed framework would apply the 100-foot defensible space requirement when the defensible space area around a structure intersects a mapped Fire Hazard Severity Zone, regardless of whether only a portion of the parcel is within the mapped area.
Mayor Bhateja clarified for Mr. Allen that the Town was not deviating from what the state map indicated but stating that the Town’s municipal code would reflect the requirement of a 100-foot radius around the house be defensible space for any property in the three fire hazard severity zones of moderate (yellow), high (orange), and very high (red).
2. Jim Waschura, a Los Altos Hills resident, questioned how the Town’s standards would apply to properties primarily located outside mapped Fire Hazard Severity Zones but containing a small area within a mapped hazard zone. Staff clarified that the Town’s Municipal Code defensible space requirements could apply in situations where the 100-foot defensible space area intersects a mapped Moderate, High, or Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone, even if only a small portion of the parcel is within the mapped area. Additional discussion occurred regarding how the Town’s standards compared to CAL FIRE mapping requirements and whether the Town’s proposed defensible space approach would differ from state requirements.
Mayor Bhateja clarified to Mr. Waschura that there were several requirements if a property was in a fire hazard severity zone and they were just discussing the defensible space issue. So, if the space within 100-feet of your structure falls within any of the three zones (moderate, high, very high), then that area needed to satisfy the defensible space requirements.
Councilmember Tankha noted that this appeared to be different from the CalFire maps’ requirements and Mayor Bhateja stated that she recused herself from the council meeting that discussed this, and the direction from the council to staff was to include that requirement. He also noted that the building itself was not subject to the higher requirement, but the defensible space around it.
3. Eric Evans, a Los Altos Hills resident, commented that there appeared to be confusion regarding what constitutes compliant defensible space and vegetation management requirements.
Mr. Evans stated that guidance materials and diagrams provided by fire agencies could be difficult to interpret and expressed concern that some residents may believe extensive tree removal is required in order to comply with defensible space standards. Mr. Evans noted that the Town’s Municipal Code appeared to provide more flexibility by allowing pruning, dead wooding, and vegetation maintenance measures rather than requiring the wholesale removal of mature trees. Mr. Evans also shared concerns regarding inconsistent guidance provided during fire 12 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
April 16, 2025
inspections and suggested that clearer diagrams and educational materials would help residents better understand defensible space requirements and expectations.
Vice Mayor Tyson recommended the Los Altos Hills County Fire District’s free Home Inspection Zone (HIC) service, where an expert reviews properties privately and advises homeowners on useful fire-safety improvements and unnecessary measures. He noted the program also offers matching rebates for recommended work completed by licensed contractors.
Tyson clarified that continuous tree canopy was not considered a fire hazard; instead, the main concerns were “ladder fuels” like shrubs and low tree branches. He described a continuous canopy as beneficial because it served as a shaded fuel break.
Mayor Bhateja asked Director Bradford if the 100-foot defensible space requirement applied to existing homes or for new constructions and remodels and Director Bradford explained that the 2015 fire hazard severity zone ordinance applied to all structures and helped maintain consistency with existing WUI inspections on the west side of town. By extending the same inspection and fuel reduction process to the hazard zones through the municipal code, the town preserved roughly 2,000 fire department inspections that otherwise could have been lost.
3. John O’Connell stated he may have misunderstood the proposal and asked whether any changes beyond defensible space requirements were being made. He specifically asked if building standards were being changed to match very high fire hazard severity zone requirements and sought confirmation that no such changes were occurring.
Director Bradford explained that, with the adoption of the building code, the Town applied wildland-urban interface standards townwide. He said the standards required new construction to use enhanced materials and methods to better resist wildfires by hardening the building’s exterior shell. He also clarified that when parts of the exterior were replaced, only those specific elements needed to be upgraded, not the entire wall or exterior system.
Mayor Bhateja confirmed that all new construction townwide, including properties outside designated hazard severity zones, were required to meet the updated wildfire-resistant building standards. He explained that the policy was intended to gradually improve the town’s overall fire resistance, noting that areas like Altadena had suffered severe wildfire damage despite not being in hazard severity zones. He clarified that the requirements applied only to new construction, remodels, or projects involving exterior work, and not to existing homes untouched by construction.
C. Discussion of Inclusionary Housing, Residential Impact Fee, and Related Policy Direction Under Housing Element Programs A-6 and E-11
Community Development Director Jay Bradford and consultant Derek Braun of Strategic Economics presented the staff report regarding potential inclusionary housing policies and implementation of Housing Element Programs A-6 and E-11. Mr. Bradford explained that the Housing Element directs the Town to evaluate a local inclusionary housing ordinance supported by a feasibility analysis in order to expand affordable housing opportunities while remaining consistent with the Town’s development patterns and regulatory framework.
Mr. Bradford and Mr. Braun reviewed the purpose of inclusionary housing ordinances, which generally require certain residential developments to provide affordable housing units or alternative 13 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
April 16, 2025
compliance measures such as in-lieu fees. The presentation discussed legal and economic considerations associated with inclusionary housing programs, including state law limitations, feasibility requirements, and the need to avoid creating standards that would constrain housing production.
The presentation also summarized feedback previously received from the Planning Commission and Finance and Investment Committee regarding potential program structures. Mr. Bradford explained that there was limited support for a broad residential impact fee program, while there was support for continuing evaluation of an inclusionary housing program tailored to the Town’s unique development context, particularly for multifamily rental and ownership housing projects.
Mr. Bradford and Mr. Braun further reviewed policy issues currently under evaluation, including applicability thresholds, affordability targets, compliance options, program flexibility, and strategies for addressing extremely low-income housing opportunities. The presentation emphasized that the Town’s limited number of multifamily opportunity sites and primarily low-density development pattern required careful calibration of any inclusionary housing requirements to maintain economic feasibility while supporting Housing Element goals.
Mr. Bradford concluded by stating that staff and Strategic Economics would continue refining the inclusionary housing framework, conduct additional public outreach and feasibility analysis, and return to the Planning Commission and City Council with draft ordinance options and supporting materials for future consideration.
Mayor Bhateja made a motion to approve Inclusionary Housing, Residential Impact Fee, and Related Policy Direction Under Housing Element Programs A-6 and E-11, including: (1) Rental Inclusionary:
Include extremely low-income to low-income requirements and (2) Ownership Inclusionary: Include low-income and moderate-income requirements. Vice Mayor Tyson seconded the motion.
APPROVED, VOTE 5-0
MOTION PASSED 5-0
AYES: Bhateja, Tyson, Mok, Swan, Tankha
NOES: None
RECUSE: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None
D. Resolution Approving a Hybrid Public Meeting Disruption Policy Pursuant to Senate Bill 707 and Allowing for Committee Remote Participation Consistent with City Council Practices City Attorney Steve Mattas presented the staff report regarding adoption of a Hybrid Public Meeting Disruption Policy pursuant to Senate Bill 707 and proposed amendments to the Town’s remote participation rules for committees. Mr. Mattas reviewed the history of Brown Act teleconferencing rules, including the traditional teleconference requirements and the more flexible remote participation provisions established under AB 2449 during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Mr. Mattas explained that Senate Bill 707 made many of the AB 2449 teleconferencing provisions permanent and expanded remote participation flexibility for legislative body members. He further explained that SB 707 requires eligible legislative bodies beginning July 1, 2026 to provide public access through two-way audio-visual or telephonic meeting participation unless internet or telephone service is unavailable. Mr. Mattas stated that the legislation also requires agencies to adopt a policy regarding disruptions to telephonic or internet services during public meetings, including procedures for recessing meetings, restoring service, and determining whether meetings may continue following service interruptions.
14 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
April 16, 2025
Mr. Mattas also reviewed additional SB 707 requirements related to public outreach and accessibility, including electronic agenda requests, maintenance of accessible meeting webpages, and outreach efforts intended to encourage participation from underrepresented communities.
Mr. Mattas further explained that the proposed Hybrid Public Meeting Disruption Policy would also revise the Town’s existing teleconferencing policy for committees. He stated that while committee members currently must attend meetings in person in order to participate and vote, the proposed policy would allow Town committee members to participate remotely pursuant to Brown Act teleconferencing provisions up to two meetings per calendar year, consistent with existing limits applicable to the City Council and Planning Commission. Mr. Mattas noted that committee members would still be required to comply with all Brown Act requirements and applicable laws.
Mr. Mattas concluded by stating that the proposed policy would become effective on May 1, 2026 to allow staff sufficient time to make any necessary operational and technical arrangements.
Mayor Bhateja made a motion to approve the Resolution Approving a Hybrid Public Meeting Disruption Policy Pursuant to Senate Bill 707 and Allowing for Committee Remote Participation Consistent with City Council Practices. Council Member Mok seconded the motion. APPROVED, VOTE 5-0
MOTION PASSED 5-0
AYES: Bhateja, Tyson, Mok, Swan, Tankha
NOES: None
RECUSE: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None
8. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Waiver of Reading and Introduction of an Ordinance Amending Title 2, Chapter 1 "Councilmembers Salaries" of the Los Altos Hills Municipal Code to Increase the Councilmembers' Salaries to Nine Hundred Fifty Dollars a Month Management Analyst Joram Parcutilo presented the staff report regarding a proposed ordinance to increase City Councilmember salaries pursuant to Senate Bill 329. Mr. Parcutilo explained that Government Code Section 36516 authorizes general law cities to establish Councilmember salaries by ordinance and that SB 329 updated the population-based salary limits for City Council compensation beginning in 2023.
Mr. Parcutilo stated that the City Council previously discussed potential compensation increases at its February 10, 2026, meeting and directed staff to prepare an ordinance to increase Councilmember salaries from $300 per month to $950 per month, which is the maximum amount currently authorized for cities with populations under 35,000. Mr. Parcutilo also noted that a prior ordinance considered at the March 19, 2026, meeting did not pass due to a tie vote and had been returned for reconsideration.
Mr. Parcutilo reviewed the procedural requirements established under SB 329, including the requirement that salary ordinances be introduced and adopted at separate regular City Council meetings and that any salary increase apply prospectively upon the commencement of a new Councilmember term of office.
Mr. Parcutilo further explained that the proposed salary increase reflected the increasing workload and complexity associated with local governance, including City Council meetings, study sessions, committee assignments, review of agenda materials, community outreach, regional coordination, housing law compliance, and other responsibilities. Mr. Parcutilo stated 15 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
April 16, 2025
that the proposed compensation level would remain within statutory limits and generally consistent with neighboring jurisdictions.
Mr. Parcutilo also reviewed the projected fiscal impact of the proposed increase, stating that annual Councilmember compensation would total $11,400 per Councilmember and approximately $57,000 annually for all five Councilmembers, exclusive of payroll taxes and optional benefits.
Councilmember Tankha requested to review the survey and asked who had conducted it.
Mayor Bhateja explained that he had originally started the survey and that it was now being managed by a group of volunteers. He stated that he would share that survey after other councilmembers had a chance to speak.
Vice Mayor Tyson said he took responsibility for bringing the proposal forward and reflected on a past law change allowing council salary adjustments, which he had originally voted against. He explained that although the proposed increase had difficult optics and the council salary had been unchanged since the 1980s or early 1990s, the adjustment would essentially reflect long-term inflation. He noted that while health benefits were a significant form of compensation, they were uneven and still left him paying substantial out-of-pocket costs.
He also said the council’s workload had significantly increased compared to the past, making the role more demanding than it once was. He argued that low compensation could discourage younger and more diverse candidates from serving, citing conversations with residents interested in civic involvement but constrained by time or financial barriers. He referenced survey feedback showing both criticism and support for raising compensation and noted that other cities had already adjusted their pay. Ultimately, he said these factors led him to support moving forward with the proposal.
Councilmember Mok said that, in his fifth year on the council, the time commitment had more than doubled and now involved a high number of meetings each month. He explained that balancing council duties with running a business had become increasingly difficult compared to when he first started. He noted that council compensation had not changed since around 1984 and argued that councilmembers should not serve without pay.
He said the work required significant effort and responsibility, and that modest compensation would make service more accessible, particularly for younger people entering public life or older residents on fixed incomes who might otherwise be unable to afford to serve.
Mayor Bhateja asked Vice Mayor Tyson to clarify whether the proposal would apply to current Council members. Vice Mayor Tyson responded that it would not apply to anyone currently serving, and that the change would take effect only at the start of a member’s next term. He added that only Council members who were re-elected would be affected in their subsequent term, and that individuals elected for the first time in 2026 would be eligible.
Councilmember Swan asked the City Attorney to confirm whether the proposal would take effect at the next election. City Attorney Mattas responded that it would take effect following the next election, noting that an election would occur this year.
Vice Mayor Tyson asked who would receive the benefit in 2027. City Attorney Mattas responded that it would apply to the two new council members and also to the other three sitting council members.
16 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
April 16, 2025
Councilmember Tankha asked whether the proposal would apply to Councilmembers Linda, Stan, and Rajiv. She questioned whether the Council should be making decisions that would financially impact its own members, noting that such actions are often criticized when done by Congress, and said she was uncertain about whether that approach was appropriate.
Mayor Bhateja said the proposal had poor optics and resembled self-dealing, arguing that any pay increase should be decided by voters rather than the Council itself. He emphasized the town’s volunteer tradition and noted that other volunteers and Planning Commissioners often contributed more time with little or no compensation. He also questioned claims that higher pay would increase access for lower-income candidates and cited projected budget deficits as another concern. He concluded that he did not support the proposal.
Mayor Bhateja then presented survey results on Council compensation, explaining the projected cost increases and summarizing arguments for and against the proposal. He reported that about 135 respondents participated, with 61% opposing the increase and another 17% favoring a reduction, totaling 78% expressing opposition. He also cited written comments largely criticizing the proposal as excessive and questioning whether Council should decide its own compensation.
Councilmember Swan noted that this survey was available online as part of the packet and Mayor Bhateja noted he felt strongly about this item and continued sharing the survey results.
Councilmember Swan said the survey was not a statistically valid poll because it was not a random sample and was distributed through the Mayor’s compiled mailing list. She also questioned the neutrality of the questions and the representativeness of the 134 responses out of about 4,500 recipients.
Mayor Bhateja responded that the mailing list consisted of town residents compiled over time and argued that it was sufficiently broad to be considered representative. He disputed her characterization of the poll as non-random and stated that the survey questions and responses had been fully shared. Councilmember Swan maintained that, in her view, the results did not constitute a valid statistical poll.
Councilmember Tankha said the Council should not decide its own compensation, especially given projected fiscal deficits, and that such decisions should be left to voters. She acknowledged Councilmembers’ workload but noted that volunteers and the Planning Commission also contributed significant time. She added that the after-tax benefit appeared modest and argued the Council should rely on consistent peer comparisons.
Public Comments:
1. John O’Connell, a Los Altos Hills resident, commented regarding the proposed community survey process and expressed concern about the optics of involving Council Members and the Mayor in distributing the survey to a large number of residents. Mr. O’Connell stated that he believed the appearance of the survey distribution process raised greater concerns than the previously discussed Council stipend item. Mr. O’Connell also referenced earlier discussions regarding improving public outreach and resident engagement and noted that the Town’s weekly email distribution list currently reaches approximately 1,000 residents.
17 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
April 16, 2025
2. Jim Waschura, a Los Altos Hills resident, commented regarding the proposed Councilmember salary increase and stated that he believed the Town often spends significant amounts on other initiatives while being reluctant to appropriately value compensation for elected officials. Mr.
Waschura stated that, in his opinion, the proposed increase was not excessive when considered in the context of inflation and the amount of time since Council salaries were last adjusted. Mr. Waschura further stated that compensation for public service sends an important message regarding the value the community places on civic participation and suggested that reasonable compensation may help encourage participation from a broader range of residents, including younger individuals or those with more limited financial means.
3. Kjell Karlsson, a Los Altos Hills resident, commented that he did not support compensation for City Councilmembers and stated that public service should be performed for the right reasons rather than for financial compensation.
4. Allan Epstein, a Los Altos Hills resident, commented that he did not believe individuals seek City Council service for financial compensation and stated that the primary concern regarding the proposed salary increase was the public perception and optics associated with the increase.
Vice Mayor Tyson made a motion to Waive the Reading and Introduce an Ordinance Amending Title 2, Chapter 1 "Councilmembers Salaries" of the Los Altos Hills Municipal Code to Increase the Councilmembers' Salaries to Nine Hundred Fifty Dollars a Month beginning with the seating of City Council in December 2028. Council Member Mok seconded the motion. APPROVED, VOTE 3-2 MOTION PASSED 3-2
AYES: Tyson, Mok, Swan
NOES: Bhateja, Tankha
RECUSE: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None
B. Waiver of Reading and Introduction of an Ordinance Amending Title 10, Chapter 3 of the Municipal Code to Adopt Reasonable Accommodations Procedures for Land Use and Zoning Decisions Consistent with Housing Element Program B-9
Community Development Director Jay Bradford presented the staff report regarding a proposed ordinance establishing reasonable accommodation procedures for land use and zoning decisions consistent with Housing Element Program B-9. Mr. Bradford explained that the proposed ordinance was intended to codify the Town’s existing reasonable accommodation practices and establish a clear administrative process to ensure individuals with disabilities have equal opportunity to use and enjoy housing in compliance with federal and state fair housing laws.
Mr. Bradford explained that the proposed ordinance would allow applicants to request reasonable accommodations related to zoning standards, development standards, parking requirements, setbacks, permit procedures, and operational requirements affecting housing. He stated that requests could be submitted by individuals with disabilities, property owners, housing providers, or representatives acting on behalf of a person with a disability.
Mr. Bradford further reviewed the proposed administrative review process, explaining that applications would be reviewed administratively by the Community Development Director using objective criteria and findings, with decisions required within 30 days of a complete application whenever feasible. Mr. Bradford noted that requests could be approved, conditionally approved, or 18 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
April 16, 2025
denied and that any decisions could be appealed to the Planning Commission pursuant to the Municipal Code.
Mr. Bradford also summarized recommendations previously made by the Planning Commission, including annual check-ins to confirm continued need for accommodations and periodic reporting to the Planning Commission regarding approved, denied, and concluded accommodation requests. Mr.
Bradford explained that these recommendations had been incorporated into the proposed procedures.
Mr. Bradford reviewed the objective decision matrix and required findings for approval, which include verification of disability-related need, demonstration of necessity, reasonableness, consistency with zoning regulations, and avoidance of adverse public safety impacts. He also noted that the proposed ordinance would maintain confidentiality protections for disability-related information, would not waive building or fire code requirements, and would not eliminate the need for permits or other applicable approvals.
Mr. Bradford concluded by stating that, if introduced, the ordinance would return to a future meeting for adoption and would become effective 30 days after adoption.
Public Comments:
1. John O’Connell, a Los Altos Hills resident, commented regarding the proposed reasonable accommodation procedures and expressed concern about allowing requests to be approved administratively by the Community Development Director without Planning Commission review.
Mr. O’Connell stated that he believed some applicants may attempt to maximize development potential under existing regulations and then seek additional exceptions through the reasonable accommodation process. Mr. O’Connell acknowledged that reasonable accommodations are important for individuals with legitimate disability-related needs, but expressed concern about potential misuse of the process in connection with larger development projects. Mr. O’Connell suggested that requests associated with new development projects involving additional development intensity or deviations from standards such as MDA or MFA should be referred to the Planning Commission for review.
Council Member Swan made a motion to Waive the Reading and Introduce an Ordinance Amending Title 10, Chapter 3 of the Municipal Code to Adopt Reasonable Accommodations Procedures for Land Use and Zoning Decisions Consistent with Housing Element Program B-9 Adding a required check-in to verify if accommodation is still required every 3 years. Council Member Mok seconded the motion. APPROVED, VOTE 5-0
MOTION PASSED 5-0
AYES: Bhateja, Tyson, Mok, Swan, Tankha
NOES: None
RECUSE: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None
9. REPORTS FROM COMMITTEES, SUB-COMMITTEES, AND COUNCILMEMBERS ON
OUTSIDE AGENCIES
A. Report Out for Community Survey Ad Hoc Committee
Mayor Bhateja and Vice Mayor Tyson presented a report from the Community Survey Ad Hoc Committee regarding development of future resident surveys focused on Town services and policy issues. Mayor Bhateja explained that the ad hoc committee was previously directed to evaluate community survey options and initially considered conducting both a broad community-wide 19 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
April 16, 2025
survey and several smaller issue-specific surveys. Following prior City Council feedback, the committee shifted its focus toward shorter, targeted surveys addressing specific subject areas.
Mayor Bhateja stated that the committee was proposing that future surveys be conducted internally by Town staff using Google Forms, which would minimize additional costs beyond staff time. The committee proposed beginning with a survey focused on planning and building services due to the significant level of recent community interest and feedback regarding permitting and development processes.
Mayor Bhateja further explained that future surveys could potentially address additional topics such as housing, open space, and community recreation. The proposed planning and building survey would include questions related to project types, permitting timelines, discretionary review processes, responsiveness of Town staff, clarity of application requirements, overall customer experience, and recommendations for improving Town services.
Mayor Bhateja also stated that the committee proposed first reviewing the survey questions and structure with the Planning Commission before returning the survey to the City Council for additional review and feedback at a future meeting. Once finalized, the survey would be distributed through multiple outreach methods, including email, postcards, the Town website, and community events such as the Town Picnic.
B. Report Out for Mayoral Rotation Ad Hoc Committee
Vice Mayor Tyson presented the findings and recommendations on behalf of the Mayoral Rotation Ad Hoc Committee, which included himself and Councilmember Tankha, regarding a proposed policy for selecting the Town’s Vice Mayor and Mayor. The ad hoc committee explained that the proposed policy was intended to establish an orderly and consistent rotation process that balanced continuity and experience with opportunities for all Councilmembers to serve in leadership positions.
The proposed policy established minimum eligibility requirements of one year of Council service to serve as Vice Mayor and two years of service to serve as Mayor. The proposal further recommended that the Vice Mayor automatically advance to Mayor at the annual reorganization meeting unless the Vice Mayor was no longer serving on the Council.
Vice Mayor Tyson and Council Member Tankha also reviewed the proposed criteria for selecting future Vice Mayors, prioritizing Councilmembers who had not previously served as Vice Mayor or Mayor, followed by Councilmembers who had served as Mayor only once. Additional tiebreaking criteria included length of Council service and number of votes received in the most recent election.
The ad hoc committee further explained proposed procedures for addressing mid-year vacancies in the office of Mayor and clarified that former Councilmembers returning after a break in service would re-enter the rotation process without consideration of prior service before the break. The committee noted that the City Council would retain discretion to suspend or modify the policy if extraordinary circumstances arose.
Public Comments:
1. Jim Waschura, a Los Altos Hills resident, commented that he believed leadership positions such as Mayor and Vice Mayor should be based primarily on experience, qualifications, and demonstrated leadership ability rather than solely on a rotational system.
2. Allan Epstein, a Los Altos Hills resident, commented that he was surprised the proposed mayoral rotation policy was being discussed and expressed concern that the proposal could be viewed as revising or redefining the Town’s historical practices regarding selection of the Mayor and Vice Mayor positions.
20 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
April 16, 2025
3. John O’Connell, a Los Altos Hills resident, commented regarding the proposed mayoral rotation policy and stated that he did not believe a minimum one-year waiting period on the Council necessarily created substantially greater qualifications or leadership ability for service as Mayor or Vice Mayor. Mr. O’Connell expressed the opinion that many individuals seeking elected office already possess significant professional or leadership experience prior to serving on the Council. Mr. O’Connell further stated that he supported allowing newer Councilmembers to move into leadership positions more quickly and suggested that Councilmembers receiving the highest level of voter support could reasonably be considered for those positions. Mr. O’Connell stated that he did not favor the proposed one-year delay requirement contained in the draft policy.
4. Kjell Karlsson, a Los Altos Hills resident, commented regarding the proposed mayoral rotation policy and stated that he believed the Council-Manager form of government has historically relied on an established rotational process for selecting Mayor and Vice Mayor positions. Mr. Karlsson stated that, in his opinion, the Town’s existing practices had generally functioned well and referenced prior discussions regarding mayoral rotation in Los Altos Hills. Mr. Karlsson further stated that he did not believe a one-year waiting period before serving as Vice Mayor was necessary and expressed the opinion that the Town should continue following its historical rotational practices rather than adopting new restrictions or qualifications for leadership appointments.
Council Member Swan made a motion to approve Selection Policy of Vice Mayor and Mayor as presented. Council Member Tyson seconded the motion. APPROVED, VOTE 4-1 MOTION PASSED 4-1
AYES: Tyson, Mok, Swan, Tankha
NOES: Bhateja
RECUSE: None
ABSTAIN: None
ABSENT: None
10. STAFF REPORTS
A. City Attorney Steve Mattas had no report.
B. City Clerk Arika Miller provided an update on the records management project, noting that approximately 300 boxes have been relocated from the Corporation Yard to a secure, fireproof and waterproof storage facility. She shared progress photos and commended the maintenance crew and consultant for their outstanding work, noting their efforts were instrumental in the successful execution of the project.
C. Planning Director Jay Bradford provided an update on the upcoming April 22 Planning Commission meeting and the April 29 special City Council meeting. He also reported that interviews for the Assistant Planner position are scheduled for May.
D. Finance Director Thomas Leung reported that the Accounting staff completed the March bank reconciliation using new software, reducing processing time by over 90 percent. Staff are continuing to refine processes to streamline reconciliations and reporting.
A joint meeting of the City Council and the Finance and Investment Committee is scheduled for May 15 to review the FY 2025–26 Proposed Budget. A preliminary budget will be presented to the Committee on May 4, with an additional meeting tentatively scheduled for May 11. Staff also met 1:1 with Council over the past two weeks to review projections and gather input on 21 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
April 16, 2025
priorities for the budget.
Staff has developed a five-year financial forecast. The FY 2026–27 budget is close to balanced, with a smaller cushion than in prior years. A structural deficit emerges in the later years of the forecast, driven primarily by an approximately $800,000 increase in the law enforcement contract. The Town has also released a budget survey seeking community input on how to balance the budget given rising law enforcement costs, resident priorities, and how the Town should allocate its resources. The survey link is available in the City Manager’s Weekly.
E. Public Works Director WooJae Kim provided an update on the Council Chambers HVAC project, noting that Fuse Services replaced two failed gas furnaces with heat pump units last week. As the work was a like-for-like replacement, the building permit process was streamlined, and both units are now operational. He added that the remaining gas furnace in the Council Chambers will be replaced with a heat pump unit before the end of the year.
Director Kim also provided an update on the Magdalena Road Pathway Project, stating that staff plan to bring finalized plans and specifications to Council in May for a project that includes approximately 1,500 linear feet of roadside pathway from Camino Hermoso Drive to Blandor Way. Staff is currently conducting outreach to residents along Magdalena Road to inform them of the project, noting that some screening vegetation within the public right-of-way may need to be removed. Notices have been sent, and staff plans to visit impacted properties. The project will also be discussed at the Pathways Committee meeting on April 27.
Director Kim further reported that the contractor, G. Bortolotto, for the FY26 Road Rehabilitation Project is scheduled to begin the dig-out repair work on Corbetta Lane and Elena Road on May 4, with work on Fremont Road to begin in mid-May. Construction is anticipated to be completed by June or July, and residents should expect one-lane road closures during the work.
F. City Manager Cody Einfalt provided an update on several ongoing initiatives and projects. He reported that approximately 50 applications were received for the Summer Internship Program.
He also discussed emergency management efforts, noting exploration of a part-time shared services model with the County Fire District.
Einfalt shared that the speed feedback signs continue to rotate every two weeks through identified hotspots in Town. He provided an update on targeted traffic enforcement, stating that citations have decreased since January and that many violations involve out-of-town drivers, such as delivery and construction vehicles. He noted that staff are evaluating reducing enforcement presence back to normal levels.
Regarding recent wire thefts, Einfalt reported that he has met with AT&T and Comcast. AT&T is offering a reward for information leading to an arrest, and Comcast is partnering on proposed legislation (AB 1941) addressing issues related to recycling agencies. Sheriff patrols remain increased at this time.
Einfalt also provided an update on the Sheriff’s contract, noting a Town Hall is scheduled for Tuesday, and he is continuing discussions with representatives, including a meeting with James, to review proposals and pursue cost negotiations. He reported that the Town will be issuing a new Request for Proposals for private security services, with the goal of having a contract in place by the end of the fiscal year, and that staff are working with neighborhood leaders to evaluate service needs.
He further noted that the Environmental Programs and Resources Committee selected Genesis to conduct the Town’s sound study, which is expected to be completed by the end of the fiscal year.
Lastly, Einfalt highlighted upcoming events, including the 24th Annual Los Altos Hills Pathways Run/Walk scheduled for May 9 at 9:00 a.m.
22 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
April 16, 2025
11. COUNCIL INITIATED ITEMS
Councilmember Swan raised the upcoming 250th anniversary of the United States and inquired about the status of the De Anza plaque installation, noting the History Committee’s interest in completing the project. She also mentioned that a 250th anniversary flag has been procured and expressed interest in flying it in July. Additionally, she referenced a nationwide initiative to read the Constitution aloud on July 8 at 3:00 p.m. Pacific Time and suggested coordinating with the City of Los Altos, noting that Mayor Meadows has expressed interest in participating.
12. ADJOURN
Mayor Bhateja adjourned the meeting at 11:58 PM.
Respectfully submitted,
Arika Birdsong-Miller